A one-week program titled “SOUTHEAST EUROPE IN THE 20TH CENTURY: BETWEEN CONFLICT AND COOPERATION” was held from October 13–18, 2025, in Iași, Romania, hosted by the Faculty of History at Alexandru Ioan Cuza University as part of the Erasmus+ Blended Intensive Programme (BIP). The program included 20 students and academic staff members Arş. Gör. Dr. Ahmet Sezgin and Arş. Gör. Dr. Seren Çelebi from the Department of History at Çankırı Karatekin University, 5 students and 2 academics from the University of Macedonia (Greece), 5 students and 2 academics from Szczecin University (Poland), and 5 students and 7 academics from Alexandru Ioan Cuza University.
The opening ceremony took place on Monday, October 13, at the Casa Universitarilor building, with speeches by Vice-Rector Prof. Nicoleta Popa, Vice Dean of the Faculty of History Prof. Laurențiu Rădvan, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Adrian-Bogdan Ceobanu, and Lecturer Dan-Alexandru Săvoaia. On the same day, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Teodor Moga gave a lecture titled “Elusive Westernisation: Security, Nationalism, and State-Building in Southeast Europe”; afterwards, Prof. Renata Nowaczewska discussed the role of U.S. exchange programs in bridging the two sides of the Iron Curtain, focusing on public-private partnerships. The program started on October 10 with an online session, where Prof. Yorgos Christidis presented a lecture on “Greek Foreign Policy and Southeast Europe from 1949 to 1999.”
Throughout the week, lectures were primarily held at the Alexandru Ioan Cuza University Museum. In the “Diplomatic Ties” sessions, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Adrian-Bogdan Ceobanu explored Romania’s diplomatic and consular networks in Southeast Europe at the beginning of the 20th century, while Assoc. Prof. Dr. Adrian Vițalaru discussed the transformation of the Balkan network during the interwar period under the title “A School for Diplomats.” Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ionuț Nistor addressed the regional challenges of Romanian diplomacy during the 1939–1945 wartime period. On Wednesday, Lecturer Alexandru-Dan Săvoaia presented Romania’s multilateral diplomatic opportunities and limitations in post-1918 Europe, while Prof. Anna Szczepańska-Dudziak discussed public-cultural diplomacy and regional cooperation within the socialist bloc (from Poland-Czechoslovakia to Southeast Europe). On the same day, at the Vasile Pogor Museum, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mircea-Cristian Ghenghea evaluated Romania’s options during World War I under the title “Between the Hammer and the Anvil.”
On October 16, an archaeological research field trip to the “Acad. Mircea-Petrescu Dîmbovița” Cucuteni-Băiceni-Cotnari research base was organized, where Lecturer Andrei Asăndulesei shared his work on “War Zone Archaeology” focusing on World War II tragedies in the Iași region. The cultural program included a city tour, Erasmus Gastronomy Workshop, visit to the Turkish Bath Center for Contemporary Arts, and a tour of The House of Museums.
The contributions from ÇAKÜ were highlighted on the final day of the program. On October 17, Arş. Gör. Dr. Seren Çelebi gave a lecture titled “Romania in World War II,” and Arş. Gör. Dr. Ahmet Sezgin presented his lecture on “Nationalist Mobilization and Cooperation in the Post-Ottoman Balkan Nation-States in the 20th Century.”
Dr. Seren Çelebi presented the interwar regime transformation and World War II experience in Romania, focusing on the transition from a parliamentary monarchy to King Carol II’s “royal dictatorship” in 1938, the rise and suppression of the Legionary Movement, and the successive territorial losses in the summer of 1940 (Bessarabia–North Bukovina, North Transylvania, South Dobruja). Çelebi discussed Romania’s participation in the Axis powers during Antonescu`s regime, its antisemitic policies, and internal violence, as well as the military progression from the recovery of Bessarabia on the Eastern Front to heavy losses at Odessa and Stalingrad. The presentation emphasized Romania’s break from the Axis with King Mihai’s coup on August 23, 1944, and Romania`s participation in the Allied battles for 260 days with 38 divisions. Çelebi integrated the “Sovietization” process, including the return of North Transylvania under the Paris Peace Treaty, Soviet occupation, and the abolition of the monarchy in 1947, within the triangle of borders–regimes–society.
Dr. Ahmet Sezgin’s presentation deepened the 20th-century Balkan story by focusing on “nationalist mobilization and forced cooperation.” Sezgin emphasized that the rising desire for nation-states in the 19th century, driven by the goal of ethnic homogeneity, fueled violence. In response, smaller states had to form temporary, pragmatic alliances for survival. The presentation began with a critique of the concept of Balkanization (including Todorova’s reading of “Balkanism” and its differences with Orientalism), leading to the dissolution of the Ottoman millet system and the historical meaning of Lord Curzon’s expression “unmixing of peoples” at the Lausanne Conference. Sezgin illustrated how irredentist projects (such as Greece`s Megali Idea, Serbia`s “Greater Serbia,” Bulgaria’s “Greater Bulgaria,” and Albania’s quest for ethnic integration) turned borders into permanent sources of tension. He showed how solidarity in the first phase of the Balkan Wars (1912) against a common enemy quickly turned into conflict during the sharing of spoils in 1913. Sezgin also discussed the dramatic break in the 1923 Greek-Turkish population exchange, where the logic of nation-states transformed into the “liquidation of pluralism.” After World War I, he argued, the postwar order was built on an imbalance between victors and the defeated, exemplified by the foundation of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia as a tense synthesis of Serbian centralism and the “South Slavic unity” ideal. Sezgin characterized the 1930s’ tools of nation-building—such as historiography, language purification, and authoritarian leadership practices—and explained how Turkey, Greece, Yugoslavia, and Romania’s participation in the 1934 Balkan Pact aimed to preserve the status quo, but the pact was weak due to the lack of binding security guarantees against the threats of Italy and Germany. He pointed out that in World War II, local nationalisms resurfaced violently, and during the Cold War, ideological polarization did not suppress nationalism but rather “froze” it. Sezgin also reminded the audience of the fragile balance in Tito’s Yugoslavia, dependent on leadership, and its collapse after the economic crisis of the 1980s. He read the wars of the 1990s as a tragic result of the political mobilization of 19th-century narratives. In the final part of his presentation, Sezgin highlighted how EU/NATO integration goals in the post-Cold War period provided a strong framework for cooperation, and regional platforms such as SEECP and CEFTA laid the institutional foundations for lasting peace. However, he emphasized that issues around identity, borders, and historical narratives, as seen in the post-Dayton structure of Bosnia-Herzegovina, have not been completely resolved, and therefore, both European-Atlantic integration and local reconciliation mechanisms need to operate together.
The closing sessions of the program, held from October 13–18, 2025, presented Sezgin’s framework as a comprehensive analytical line that explains the “conflict-cooperation” pendulum in the region.
After certificates were awarded to the participants on October 18, a farewell reception was held at the Casa Universitarilor building. All in-person sessions during the program were complemented by online meetings on October 3 and 22.
By viewing contemporary Balkan history through lenses such as security, diplomacy, cultural diplomacy, and war archaeology, the BIP program strengthened mutual understanding among students and academics while addressing the complex history of Southeast Europe in the 20th century through a multifaceted approach.