<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Zobec, Miha</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Kin-State and Sending-State Policies of Interwar Yugoslavia: The Issue of Julian March Immigrants in Their Yugoslav ‘Homeland’ and the Return of the ‘Tenth Banovina’</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Central and Eastern European Migration Review</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Croats and Slovenes/Yugoslavia</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">kin-state and sending-state policies</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">nation- and state-building</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Kingdom of Serbs</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Yugoslav diasporas</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2025</style></year></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">14</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">17-35</style></pages><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;This contribution analyses the ways in which interwar Yugoslavia addressed two different diasporas, one comprising the emigrants and the other encompassing the external kin of Slovenes and Croats living in the Italian region of Julian March/Venezia Giulia. In addition, it examines how, on the one hand, the emigrants who &amp;lsquo;returned&amp;rsquo; and, on the other, the Julian March migrants who fled the region to settle in Yugoslavia, were integrated into the Yugoslav nation-building project. It suggests that Yugoslavia&amp;rsquo;s diaspora-building was importantly linked to overcoming internal divisions in a complex country and restoring political legitimacy. Furthermore, it argues that diaspora-building was more part of a discourse than carried out in earnest, since Yugoslavia, occupying an unfortunate position in the international system, was ill-equipped to provide emigrant care or serve the return migrants and Julian March immigrants.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue><custom2><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;19 September 2024&lt;/p&gt;</style></custom2><custom3><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;7 May 2025&lt;/p&gt;</style></custom3><custom4><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;25 July 2025&lt;/p&gt;</style></custom4></record></records></xml>