Worldwide events; zarb e jamhoor newspaper; 196 issue; 05 11 oct, 2014

Republic Day Portugal - Oct 05

The Portuguese First Republic (Portuguese: Primeira República) spans a complex 16 year period in the history of Portugal, between the end of the period of constitutional monarchy marked by the 5 October 1910 revolution and the 28 May coup d'état of 1926. The last movement instituted a military dictatorship known as Ditadura Nacional (national dictatorship) that would be followed by the corporatist Estado Novo (new state) regime of António de Oliveira Salazar.

republic The The Portuguese First Republic

has, over the course of the recent past, lost many historians to the New State. As a result, it is difficult to attempt a global synthesis of the republican period in view of the important gaps that still persist in our knowledge of its political history. As far as the October 1910 Revolution is concerned, a number of valuable studies have been made, first among which ranks Vasco Pulido Valente’s polemical thesis.

This historian posited the Jacobin and urban nature of the revolution carried out by the Portuguese Republican Party (PRP) and claimed that the PRP had turned the republican regime into a de facto dictatorship. This vision clashes with an older interpretation of the First Republic as a progressive and increasingly democratic regime which presented a clear contrast to Salazar’s ensuing dictatorship.

A republican Constitution was approved in 1911, inaugurating a parliamentary regime with reduced presidential powers and two chambers of parliament. The Republic provoked important fractures within Portuguese society, notably among the essentially monarchist rural population, in the trade unions, and in the Church. The republic established wasanticlerical and had a "hostile" approach to the issue of church and state separation, like that of the French Revolution, and the future Spanish Constitution of 1931 and Mexican Constitution of 1917. Even the PRP had to endure the secession of its more moderate elements, who formed conservative republican parties like the Evolutionist Party and the Republican Union. In spite of these splits the PRP, led by Afonso Costa, preserved its dominance, largely due to a brand of clientelist politics inherited from the monarchy. In view of these tactics, a number of opposition forces resorted to violence in order to enjoy the fruits of power. There are few recent studies of this period of the Republic’s existence, known as the ‘old’ Republic. Nevertheless, an essay by Vasco Pulido Valente should be consulted, as should the attempt to establish the political, social, and economic context made by M. Villaverde Cabral (1988).

The Republic repelled a royalist attack on Chaves in 1912.

See also: Portugal in World War I The PRP viewed the outbreak of the First World War as a unique opportunity to achieve a number of goals: putting an end to the twin threats of a Spanish invasion of Portugal and of foreign occupation of the colonies and, at the internal level, creating a national consensus around the regime and even around the party. These domestic objectives were not met, since participation in the conflict was not the subject of a national consensus and since it did not therefore serve to mobilise the population. Quite the opposite occurred: existing lines of political and ideological fracture were deepened by Portugal's intervention in the First World War. The lack of consensus around Portugal’s intervention in turn made possible the appearance of two dictatorships, led by GeneralPimenta de Castro (January–May 1915) and Sidónio Pais (December 1917-December 1918).

Sidonismo, also known as Dezembrismo (Eng. Decemberism), aroused a strong interest among historians, largely as a result of the elements of modernity that it contained.António José Telo has made clear the way in which this regime predated some of the political solutions invented by the totalitarian and fascist dictatorships of the 1920s and 1930s. Sidónio Pais undertook the rescue of traditional values, notably the Pátria (Eng. Homeland), and attempted to rule in a charismatic fashion. A move was made to abolish traditional political parties and to alter the existing mode of national representation in parliament (which, it was claimed, exacerbated divisions within the Pátria) through the creation of a corporative Senate, the founding of a single party (the National Republican Party), and the attribution of a mobilising function to the Leader. The State carved out an economically interventionist role for itself while, at the same time, repressing working-class movements and leftist republicans. Sidónio Pais also attempted to restore public order and to overcome, finally, some of the rifts of the recent past, making the Republic more acceptable to monarchists and Catholics.

The vacuum of power created by Sidónio Pais' assassination on 14 December 1918 led the country to a brief civil war. The monarchy’s restoration was proclaimed in the north of Portugal on 19 January 1919 and, four days later, a monarchist insurrection broke out in Lisbon. A republican coalition government, led by José Relvas, coordinated the struggle against the monarchists by loyal army units and armed civilians. After a series of clashes the monarchists were definitively chased from Porto on 13 February 1919. This military victory allowed the PRP to return to government and to emerge triumphant from the elections held later that year, having won the usual absolute majority.

It was during this restoration of the "old" Republic that an attempted reform was carried out in order to provide the regime with greater stability. In August 1919 a conservative President was elected –António José de Almeida (whose Evolutionist party had come together in wartime with the PRP to form a flawed, because incomplete, Sacred Union) – and his office was given the power to dissolve Parliament. Relations with the Holy See, restored by Sidónio Pais, were preserved. The President used his new power to resolve a crisis of government in May 1921, naming a Liberal government (the Liberal party being the result of the postwar fusion of Evolutionists and Unionists) to prepare the forthcoming elections. These were held on 10 July 1921 with victory going, as was usually the case, to the party in power. However, Liberal government did not last long. On 19 October a military pronunciamento was carried out during which – and apparently against the wishes of the coup's leaders – a number of prominent conservative figures, including Prime Minister António Granjo, were assassinated. This event, known as the "night of blood" left a deep wound among political elites and public opinion. There could be no greater demonstration of the essential fragility of the Republic's institutions and proof that the regime was democratic in name only, since it did not even admit the possibility of the rotation in power characteristic of the elitist regimes of the nineteenth century.

A new round of elections on 29 January 1922 inaugurated a fresh period of stability, since the PRP once again emerged from the contest with an absolute majority. Discontent with this situation had not, however, disappeared.

Numerous accusations of corruption, and the manifest failure to resolve pressing social concerns wore down the more visible PRP leaders while making the opposition’s attacks more deadly. At the same time, moreover, all political parties suffered from growing internal faction-fighting, especially the PRP itself. The party system was fractured and discredited. This is clearly shown by the fact that regular PRP victories at the ballot box did not lead to stable government. Between 1910 and 1926 there were forty-five governments. The opposition ofpresidents to single-party governments, internal dissent within the PRP, the party's almost non-existent internal discipline, and its constant and irrational desire to group together and lead all republican forces made any government's task practically impossible. Many different formulae were attempted, including single-party governments, coalitions, and presidential executives, but none succeeded. Force was clearly the sole means open to the opposition if it wanted to enjoy the fruits of power.

By the mid-1920s the domestic and international scenes began to favour another authoritarian solution, wherein a strengthened executive might restore political and social order. Since the opposition's constitutional route to power was blocked by the various means deployed by the PRP to protect itself, it turned to the army for support. The armed forces, whose political awareness had grown during the war, and whose leaders had not forgiven the PRP for sending them to a war they did not want to fight, seemed to represent, to conservative forces, the last bastion of "order" against the "chaos" that was taking over the country. Links were established between conservative figures and military officers, who added their own political and corporative demands to the already complex equation. TheRevolution of 28 May 1926 enjoyed the support of most army units and even of most political parties. As had been the case in December 1917, the population of Lisbon did not rise to defend the Republic, leaving it at the mercy of the army.

There are few global and up-to-date studies of this turbulent third phase of the Republic’s existence. Nevertheless, much has been written about the crisis and fall of the regime and the 28 May movement;. The First Republic continues to be the subject of an intense debate which is impossible to summarise in these paragraphs. Nevertheless, one can distinguish three main interpretations. For some historians, the First Republic was a progressive and increasingly democratic regime. For others, it was essentially a prolongation of the classical liberal regimes of the nineteenth century. A third group, finally, chooses to highlight the regime's revolutionary, Jacobin, and dictatorial nature.

Teacher's Day Worldwide - Oct 05

World Teachers' Day, held annually on October 5th since 1994, commemorates teachers’ organizations worldwide. Its aim is to mobilise support for teachers and to ensure that the needs of future generations will continue to be met by teachers.

According to UNESCO, World Teachers' Day represents a significant token of the awareness, understanding and appreciation displayed for the vital contribution that teachers make to education and development.

Education International (EI) (the global union federation that repr e s e n t s education professionals worldwide) strongly believes that World Teachers' Day should be internationally recognized and celebrated around the world. EI also believes that the principles of the 1966 and 1997 Recommendations should be considered for implementation in all nations.

Over 100 countries observe World Teachers' Day. The efforts of Education International and its 401 member organisations have contributed to this widely spread recognition. Every year, EI launches a public awareness campaign to highlight the contributions of the teaching profession.

A r m e d For c e s D a y Egypt - Oct 06

Egypt celebrates Armed Forces Day on October 6 to commemorate the Egyptian Army’s successful crossing of the Suez Canal which led to the capture of the Bar Lev Line during the 1973 October War.

History Shortly after midday on Saturday, October 6,

1973, the October War began when Egypt and Syria launched a combined surprise military assault on Israel. They timed the attack on Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the Jewish calendar.

During Yom Kippur, most Israelis were in synagogues praying and fasting. Due to the surprise attack, Egypt successfully crossed the Suez Canal on October 7 and Syrian forces advanced on the Golan Heights. However, after suffering heavy losses, Israeli forces succeeded in turning the tide of battle in the North by October 10. During the next three days, Israeli forces advanced into Syrian territory well beyond the 1967 ceasefire lines.

On October 14, Israeli forces succeeded in crossing the Canal and surrounded the Egyptian Third Army. Despite a cease-fire agreement on 22 October, fighting continued which almost brought the USSR and the US to confrontation.

On October 26, all parties involved in the war accepted a US-Soviet backed Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire.

Peace talks between Egypt and Israel continued for two months. US Secretary of State Kissinger actively participated in the said talks, which concentrated mainly on an Israeli withdrawal to post-Six Day War lines. Israel later agreed to pull back some 20 km from the Canal. On January 18, 1974, a Disengagement Agreement was signed between Israel and Egypt.

Celebrations Armed Forces Day celebrations typically include parades and other activities, as well as songs, and fireworks dis-

plays. In 1981, President Sādāt was assassinated during an Armed Forces Day parade in Cairo.

The Egyptian Navy in October 2008 launched the largest exercise in its history to commemorate the Egyptian Armed Forces Day.

National German-American Day U.S. - Oct 06

German-American Day is a holiday in the United States, observed annually on October 6. The holiday, which celebrates German American heritage, commemorates the date in 1683 when 13 German families from Krefeld near the Rhine landed in Philadelphia. These families subsequently founded Germantown, Pennsylvania, the first German settlement in the original thirteen American colonies. Originally celebrated in the nineteenth century, German-American Day died out in World War I as a result of the anti-German sentiment that prevailed at the time. The holiday was revived in 1983.

In 1983, President Ronald Reagan proclaimed October 6th as German-American Day to celebrate and honor the 300th anniversary of German American immigration and culture to the United States. On August 6, 1987, Congress approved S.J. Resolution 108, designating October 6, 1987, as German-American Day. It became Public Law 100-104 when President Reagan signed it on August 18. A proclamation (#5719) to this effect was issued October 2, 1987, by President Reagan in a formal ceremony in the White House Rose Garden, at which time the President called on Americans to observe the Day with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

R e m e m br a nc e D a y Tu r k m e n i s t a n - O c t 0 6

During Earthquake Remembrance Day, Turkmenistan pays its respects to those who were killed in the earthquake of 1948 in Ashgabat.

History

Ashgabat is Turkmenistan’s capital city. It sits between the Karakum Desert in the northeast and the picturesque Kopet Dag Mountains in the southwest. Ashgabat (also known as Ashkhabad) quickly grew in the nineteenth century thanks to a railway that reached the area in 1885. Soon the small village transformed into a small town.

On the night of October 5, 1948 an earthquake shook Ashgabat and its surrounding communities. The earthquake lasted only 10 seconds, but it devastated the entire city. All of the hospitals, government buildings, offices, apartments, factories, schools, and theaters collapsed to the ground as most of them were made of bricks. Communication to the outside world was cut off as power lines, telephone lines, telegraphs, radio stations, railway stations, and the airport were all damaged.

The next day, the people of the Soviet Union were surprised by the news of the heavy damage Ashgabat had sustained due to the quake. The Soviet Union sent in cargo aircraft to bring in relief goods and take wounded people back for immediate medical attention.

Damage and casualties were also recorded in the Darreh Gaz area of Iran. Fault lines were later observed in the northwest and southeast areas of Ashgabat. Preliminary reports pegged the total casualties at 10,000. However, on December 9, 1988, new information was released correcting the death toll to 110,000. In 2007, the State News Agency of Turkmenistan reportedly gave the total number of up to 176,000 who perished in the earthquake.

Celebrations Wreaths are laid on the earthquake memorial at Ashgabat and Gypjak, while government officials offer a sacrificial

meal at the Gypjak mosque. Visits to graveyards and offers of prayers to those affected still are common more than 60 years after the event.

Our Lady of the Rosary Spain - Oct 7

Our Lady of the Rosary (also Our Lady of the Holy Rosary or Our Lady of the Most Holy Rosary) is a title of the Blessed Virgin Mary in relation to the rosary.

In 1571 Pope Pius V instituted "Our Lady of Victory" as an annual feast to commemorate the victory of Lepanto. The victory was attributed to the Blessed Virgin Mary, as a rosary procession had been offered on that day in St. Peter's Square in Rome for the success of the mission of the Holy League to hold back Muslim forces from overrunning Western Europe. In 1573, Pope Gregory XIII changed the title of this feast-day to "Feast of the Holy Rosary". This feast was extended by Pope Clement XII to the whole of the Latin Rite, inserting it into the Roman Catholic calendar of saints in 1716, and assigning it to the first Sunday in October. Pope Pius X changed the date to 7 October in 1913, as part of his effort to restore celebration of the liturgy of the Sundays.

Prior to the battle of Lepanto, in thanks for the victory of the Battle of Muret, Simon de Montfort, 5th Earl of Leicester built the first shrine dedicated to Our Lady of Victory.

Our Lady of the Rosary is the patron saint of several places around the world and María del Rosario is a common female Spanish name (colloquially abbreviated to Rosario or Charo). Rosario can also be used as a male first name, particularly in Italian.

Navy Day Peru - Oct 8

Navy Day in Peru is a national holiday celebrated on October 8 to commemorate the Battle of Angamos in 1879 and it is also the anniversary of the creation of the Peruvian Navy in 1821.

History

The Peruvian ironclad Huascar continued after the Naval Battle of Iquique to make several incursions attacking Chilean ports along its entire coast and capturing transports and challenging Chilean naval dominion.

Chile’s plan was to achieve naval supremacy before invading Peru so the Huascar had to be eliminated or captured because it is thwarting Chile’s plans. So the government of Chile made a decision to advance the naval campaign in order to achieve sea domination. Once sea domination was achieved the land operations with the logistic support can commence.

The Huascar opened fire at the Chilean battleship Cochrane on October 8, 1879 at 09:25 hrs at Punta Angamos, but the Cochrane did not fire back until it closed in on the Huascar. Upon reaching its effective cannon range it began to shell the ironclad. One shot pierced the artillery turret wounding the crews of the cannons and another shot punctured the armor cutting the left rudder. Another shot from the Cochrane pierced the Huascar bridge instantly killing its admiral and another officer.

The Chilean war ships noticed that the Huascar was slowing down so they began preparations to board it. The Peruvian Navy’s fire power was drastically reduced with capture of the Huascar. This brought the sea campaign of the War of the Pacific to an end. The Chilean Navy soon used the Huascar as one of its own ships.

The significant victory at Angamos permitted the Chilean Army to decide the best way to attack the Allies.

Celebrations Navy Day celebrations typically include military parades and other activities, such as speeches from politicians and navy leaders.

Independence Day Uganda - Oct 09

Uganda officially the Republic of Uganda, is a landlocked country in East Africa. Uganda is also known as the "Pearl of Africa". It is bordered on the east by Kenya, on the north by South Sudan, on the west by the Democratic Republic of the Congo, on the southwest by Rwanda, and on the south by Tanzania. The southern part of the country includes a substantial portion of Lake Victoria, which is also bordered by Kenya and Tanzania.

Uganda takes its name from the Buganda kingdom, which encompassed a portion of the south of the country including the capital Kampala.

The people of Uganda were hunter-gatherers until 1,700 to 2,300 years ago, when Bantu-speaking populations migrated to the southern parts of the country. Uganda gained independence from Britain on 9 October 1962.

The official languages are English and Swahili, although multiple other languages are spoken in the country.

History

The Ugandans were hunter-gatherers until 1,700 to 2,300 years ago. Bantu-speaking populations, who were probably from central Africa, migrated to the southern parts of the country. These groups brought and developed ironworking skills and new ideas of social and political organization. The Empire of Kitara covered most of the great lakes area, from Lake Albert, Lake Tanganyika, Lake Victoria, to Lake Kyoga. Its leadership headquarters were mainly in what became Ankole, believed to have been run by the Bachwezi dynasty in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, who may have followed a semi-legendary dynasty known as the Batembuzi. Bunyoro-Kitara is claimed as the antecedent of later kingdoms; Buganda and Ankole. The Nilotic Luo invasion is believed to have led the collapse of Chwezi empire. The twins Rukidi Mpuuga and Kato Kimera are believed to be the first kings of Bunyonro and Buganda after the Chwezi Empire collapsed, creating the Babiito and Bambejja Dynasty. Nilotic people including Luo and Ateker entered the area from the north, probably beginning about A.D. 120. They were cattle herders and subsistence farmers who settled mainly the northern and eastern parts of the country. Some Luo invaded the area of Bunyoro and assimilated with the Bantu there, establishing the Babiito dynasty of the current Omukama (ruler) of Bunyoro-Kitara. Luo migration continued until the 16th century, with some Luo settling amid Bantu people in Eastern Uganda, with others proceeding to the western shores of Lake Victoria in Kenya and Tanzania. The Ateker (Karimojong and Iteso) settled in the northeastern and eastern parts of the country, and some fused with the Luo in the area north of Lake Kyoga.

Arab traders moved inland from the Indian Ocean coast of East Africa in the 1830s. They were followed in the 1860s by British explorers C o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e O w e n searching for the source of the Nile. Protestantmissionaries entered the country in 1877, followed by Catholic missionaries in 1879. The F a l l s D a m i n J i n j a . C o n occurred beUnited Kingdom placed the area under the charter of the British East s t r u c t i o n Africa Company in 1888, and ruled it as a protectorate from 1894. t we e n 1 9 5 1 a nd 1 9 5 4 As several other territories and chiefdoms were integrated, the final protectorate called Uganda took shape in 1914. From 1900 to 1920, a sleeping sickness epidemic killed more than 250,000 people, about two-thirds of the population in the affected lake-shore areas.

Uganda gained independence from Britain in 1962, maintaining its Commonwealth membership. The first post-independence election, held in 1962, was won by an alliance between the Uganda People's Congress (UPC) and Kabaka Yekka (KY). UPC and KY formed the first post-independence government with Milton Obote as executive Prime Minister, the Buganda Kabaka (King) Edward Muteesa II holding the largely ceremonial position of President and William Wilberforce Nadiope, the Kyabazinga (paramount chief) of Busoga, as Vice President.

In 1966, following a power struggle between the Obote-led government and King Muteesa, the UPC-dominated Parliament changed the constitution and removed the ceremonial president and vice president. In 1967, a new constitution proclaimed Uganda a republic and abolished the traditional kingdoms. Without first calling elections, Obote was declared the executive President.

After a military coup in 1971, Obote was deposed from power and the dictator Idi Amin seized control of the country.

Amin ruled Uganda with the military for the next eight years and carried out mass killings within the country to maintain his rule. An estimated 300,000 Ugandans lost their lives at the hands of his regime. Aside from his brutalities, he forcibly removed the entrepreneurial South Asian minority from Uganda, which left the country's economy in ruins.

Amin's atrocities were graphically accounted in the 1977 book, "A State of Blood," which was written by one of his former ministers after he fled the country.

Amin's reign was ended after the Uganda-Tanzania War in 1979 in which Tanzanian forces aided by Ugandan exiles invaded Uganda. This led to the return of Obote, who was deposed once more in 1985 by General Tito Okello. Okello ruled for six months until he was deposed after the so called "bush war" by the National Resistance Army (NRA) operating under the leadership of the current president, Yoweri Museveni, and various rebel groups, including the Federal Democratic Movement of Andrew Kayiira, and another belonging to John Nkwaanga.

Museveni has been in power since 1986. In the mid to late 1990s, he was lauded by the West as part of a new generation of African leaders. His presidency has included involvement in the civil war in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and other conflicts in the Great Lakes region, as well as the civil war against the Lord's Resistance Army, which has been guilty of numerous crimes against humanity including child slavery and mass murder. Conflict in northern Uganda has killed thousands and displaced millions.

Leif Erikson Day U.S. - Oct 09

Leif Erikson Day is an annual American observance occurring on October 9. It honors Leif Ericson (Old Norse: Leifr Eiríksson or the Norwegian: "Leiv Eiriksson"), the Norse explorer who brought the first Europeans known to have set foot in North America.

History America Not Discovered by Columbus by Rasmus B. Anderson was published in 1874. This book helped popularize

the now familiar idea that Vikings were the first Europeans in the New World. During his appearance at the NorseAmerican Centennial in 1925, President Calvin Coolidge gave recognition to Leif Erikson as the Discoverer of America due to research by Norwegian-American scholars such as Knut Gjerset and Ludvig Hektoen. In 1930, Wisconsin became the first U.S. state to officially adopt Leif Erikson Day as a state holiday, thanks in large part to efforts by Rasmus Anderson. A year later, the state of Minnesota followed suit. By 1956, Leif Erikson Day had been made an official observance in seven states (Wisconsin, Minnesota, South Dakota, Illinois, Colorado, Washington, and California) and one Canadian province (Saskatchewan).

In 1963, the U.S. Representative from Duluth, John Blatnik, introduced a bill to observe Leif Erikson Day nationwide.

The following year Congress adopted this unanimously. In 1964, theUnited States Congress authorized and requested the President to create the observance through an annual proclamation. Lyndon B. Johnson and each President since have done so. Presidents have used the proclamation to praise the contributions of Americans of Nordic descent generally and the spirit of discovery. In addition to the federal observance, some states officially commemorate Leif Erikson Day, particularly in the Upper Midwest, where large numbers of people from the Nordic countries settled.

Date

October 9 is not associated with any particular event in Leif Erikson's life. The date was chosen because the ship Restauration coming from Stavanger, Norway, arrived in New York Harbor on October 9, 1825 at the start of the first organized immigration from Norway to the United States.

Moi Day Kenya - Oct 10

October 10 of each year is recognized as a public holiday since the year 1989 when it was passed into law by parliament. On this day every year, Kenyans take a break from work to honor their former president’s accomplishments since he took office exactly 29 years go.

History Kenya, as an independent country, was a constitutional

monarchy at the outset, the British monarch being its nominal head of state and the prime minister as the head of government. Kenya became a republic on December 1964 with Kenyatta was as the country’s first president.

Moi assumed the presidency of Kenya when Kenyatta died in 1978. Moi’s leadership motto was taken from the Swahili word nyayo meaning “footsteps” to assure Kenyans that he was following the legacy of the beloved Kenyatta. At the outset of Moi’s leadership he adopted a more populist approach by releasing political prisoners and traveling to the country side among the nation’s people. Kenya’s economic growth began to slowdown in the 1980s as Moi’s rule became increasingly dictatorial in nature. The Moi government in 1982 changed the constitution to make Kenya a one-party state. Beginning in the 1980s, Kenya’s economic woes worsened as it experienced several debilitating droughts and the price of coffee dropping several times. Kenya fell into debt, and unemployment numbers rose significantly.

Moi’s new term was marked by recurring economic difficulties and calls for more reform. In late 1997 Moi consented to the repeal of repressive antiopposition laws in response to the mounting demonstrations calling for electoral. Despite the divided opposition to Moi’s rule he was reelected president in December.

Celebrations

Since Moi’s retirement in 2002, Moi’s day has been observed event without the traditional military marches, fly-overs and traditional choirs.

October Revolution War Syria, Egypt - Oct 06

The Yom Kippur War, Ramadan War or October War (Hebrew: ‫םירופיכה םוי תמחלמ‬‎ Milẖemet Yom HaKipurim or ‫רופיכ םוי תמחלמ‬ Milẖemet Yom Kipur; Arabic:‫برح‬ ‫ربوتكأ‬‎ ḥarb ʾUktōbar or ‫برح‬ ‫ نيرشت‬ḥarb Tišrīn), also known as the 1973 Arab-Israeli War and the Fourth Arab-Israeli War, was fought from October 6 to 25, 1973, between Israel and a coalition of Arab states led by Egypt and Syria. The war began when the coalition launched a joint surprise attack on Israel on Yom Kippur, the holiest day in Judaism, which coincided with the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. Egyptian and Syrian forces crossed ceasefire lines to enter the Israeli-held Sinai Peninsula and Golan Heights respectively, which had been captured and occupied since the 1967 Six-Day War. The conflict led to a near-confrontation between the two nuclear superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union,both of whom initiated massive resupply efforts to their allies during the war.

The war began with a massive and successful Egyptian crossing of the Suez Canalduring the first three days, after which they dug in, settling into a stalemate. The Syrians coordinated their attack on the Golan Heights to coincide with the Egyptian offensive and initially made threatening gains against the greatly outnumbered Israelis. Within a week, Israel recovered and launched a four-day counter-offensive, driving deep into Syria. To relieve this pressure, the Egyptians went back on the offensive, but were decisively defeated; the Israelis then counterattacked at the seam between two Egyptian armies, crossed the Suez Canal, and advanced southward and westward in over a week of heavy fighting. An October 22 United Nations-brokered ceasefire quickly unraveled, with each side blaming the other for the breach. By 24 October, the Israelis had improved their positions considerably and completed their encirclement of Egypt's Third Army. This development led to tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union. As a result, a second ceasefire was imposed cooperatively on October 25 to end the war. At the conclusion of hostilities, Israeli forces were 40 kilometres (25 mi) from Damascusand 101 kilometres (63 mi) from Cairo.

The war had far-reaching implications. The Arab World, which had been humiliated by the lopsided rout of the Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian alliance in the Six-Day War, felt psychologically vindicated by early successes in the conflict. In Israel, despite impressive operational and tactical achievements on the battlefield, the war effectively ended its sense of invincibility and complacency. The war also challenged many American assumptions; the United States initiated new efforts at mediation and peacemaking. These changes paved the way for the subsequent peace process. The Camp David Accords that followed led to the return of the Sinai to Egypt and normalized relations—the first peaceful recognition of Israel by an Arab country. Egypt continued its drift away from the Soviet Union and left the Soviet sphere of influence entirely.

Background

The war was part of the Arab-Israeli conflict, an ongoing dispute which included many battles and wars since 1948, when the state of Israel was formed. During the Six-Day War of 1967, the Israelis captured Egypt's Sinai Peninsula all the way to the Suez Canal, which became the cease-fire line, and roughly half of Syria's Golan Heights.

According to Chaim Herzog: On June 19, 1967, the National Unity Government of Israel voted unanimously to return the Sinai to Egypt and the Golan Heights to Syria in return for peace agreements. The Golan would have to be demilitarized and special arrangement would be negotiated for the Straits of Tiran.

The government also resolved to open negotiations with King Hussein of Jordan regarding the Eastern border.

The Israeli decision was to be conveyed to the Arab states by the U.S. government. The U.S. was informed of the decision, but not that it was to transmit it. There is no evidence it was conveyed to Egypt or Syria. The decision was kept a closely guarded secret within Israeli government circles and the offer was withdrawn in October 1967.

Egypt and Syria both desired a return of the land lost in the Six-Day War. In September 1967, the Khartoum Arab Summit issued the "three no's", resolving that there would be "no peace, no recognition and no negotiation with Israel". In the years following the war, Israel erected lines of fortification in both the Sinai and the Golan Heights. In 1971, Israel spent $500 million fortifying its positions on the Suez Canal, a chain of fortifications and gigantic earthworks known as the Bar Lev Line, named after Israeli General Chaim Bar-Lev. President Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt died in September 1970. He was succeeded by Anwar Sadat, who resolved to win back the lost territory. In 1971, Sadat, in response to an initiative by UN intermediary Gunnar Jarring, declared that if Israel committed itself to "withdrawal of its armed forces from Sinai and the Gaza Strip", to "achievement of a just settlement for the refugee problem", to "the withdrawal of the Israeli armed forces from all the territories occupied since 5 June 1967", and to implementation of other provisions of UN Security Council Resolution 242 as requested

by Jarring, Egypt would then "be ready to enter into a peace agreement with Israel." Israel responded that it would not withdraw to the pre-June 5, 1967 lines.

Sadat hoped that by inflicting even a limited defeat on the Israelis, the status quo could be altered. Hafez al-Assad, the leader of Syria, had a different view. He had little interest in negotiation and felt the retaking of the Golan Heights would be a purely military option. After the Six-Day War, Assad had launched a massive military buildup and hoped to make Syria the dominant military power of the Arab states. With the aid of Egypt, Assad felt that his new army could win convincingly against Israel and thus secure Syria's role in the region. Assad only saw negotiations beginning once the Golan Heights had been retaken by force, which would induce Israel to give up the West Bank and Gaza, and make other concessions.

Sadat also had important domestic concerns in wanting war. "The three years since Sadat had taken office... were the most demoralized in Egyptian history.... A desiccated economy added to the nation's despondency. War was a desperate option." In his biography of Sadat, Raphael Israeli argued that Sadat felt the root of the problem was in the great shame over the Six-Day War, and before any reforms could be introduced he felt that shame had to be overcome. Egypt's economy was in shambles, but Sadat knew that the deep reforms that he felt were needed would be deeply unpopular among parts of the population. A military victory would give him the popularity he needed to make changes. A portion of the Egyptian population, most prominently university students who launched wide protests, strongly desired a war to reclaim the Sinai and was highly upset that Sadat had not launched one in his first three years in office.

The other Arab states showed much more reluctance to fully commit to a new war. King Hussein of Jordan feared another major loss of territory as had occurred in the Six-Day War, in which Jordan lost all of the West Bank, territory it had conquered and annexed in 1948-49 which had doubled its population. Sadat was also backing the claim of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to the West Bank and Gaza and in the event of a victory promised Yasser Arafat that he would be given control of them. Hussein still saw the West Bank as part of Jordan and wanted it restored to his kingdom. Moreover, during the Black September crisis of 1970, a near civil war had broken out between the PLO and the Jordanian government. In that war, Syria had intervened militarily on the side of the PLO, estranging Hussein.

Iraq and Syria also had strained relations, and the Iraqis refused to join the initial offensive. Lebanon, which shared a border with Israel, was not expected to join the Arab war effort because of its small army and already evident instability. The months before the war saw Sadat engage in a diplomatic offensive to try to win support for the war. By the fall of 1973, he claimed the backing of more than a hundred states. These were most of the countries of the Arab League, Non-Aligned Movement, and Organization of African Unity. Sadat had also worked to curry favour in Europe and had some success before the war. Britain and France for the first time sided with the Arab powers against Israel on the United Nations Security Council.

A nwa r Sa da t

Upon learning of the attack, impending Pr im e M inis t e r of Is Golda Meir rael m a de t he c ont r ov e r sial decision not to launch a pre-empt iv e s t r ik e .

Events leading up to the war:

Following Israel's rejection of Sadat's peace initiative, which had proposed a full Israeli withdrawal to the pre-67 borders in exchange for a non-belligerency pact, Sadat declared that Egypt was prepared to "sacrifice a million Egyptian soldiers" to recover its lost territory. From the end of 1972, Egypt began a concentrated effort to build up its forces, receiving MiG-21 jet fighters, SA-2, SA-3, SA-6 and SA-7 antiaircraft missiles, T-55 and T-62 tanks, RPG-7 antitank weapons, and the AT-3 Sagger anti-tank guided missile from the Soviet Union and improving its military tactics, based on Soviet battlefield doctrines. Political generals, who had in large part been responsible for the rout in 1967, were replaced with competent ones.

The role of the superpowers, too, was a major factor in the outcome of the two wars. The policy of the Soviet Union was one of the causes of Egypt's military weakness. President Nasser was only able to obtain the material for an anti-aircraft missile defense wall after visiting Moscow and pleading with Kremlin leaders. He said that if supplies were not given, he would have to return to Egypt and tell the Egyptian people Moscow had abandoned them, and then relinquish power to one of his peers who would be able to deal with the Americans. The Americans would then have the upper hand in the region, which Moscow could not permit.

One of Egypt's undeclared objectives of the War of Attrition was to force the Soviet Union to supply Egypt with more advanced arms and matériel. Egypt felt the only way to convince the Soviet leaders of the deficiencies of most of the aircraft and air defense weaponry supplied to Egypt following 1967 was to put the Soviet weapons to the test against the advanced weaponry the United States had supplied to Israel.

Nasser's policy following the 1967 defeat conflicted with that of the Soviet Union. The Soviets sought to avoid a new conflagration between the Arabs and Israelis so as not to be drawn into a confrontation with the United States. The reality of the situation became apparent when the superpowers met in Oslo and agreed to maintain the status quo.

This was unacceptable to Egyptian leaders, and when it was discovered that the Egyptian preparations for crossing the canal were being leaked, it became imperative to expel the Soviets from Egypt. In July 1972, Sadat expelled almost all of the 20,000 Soviet military advisers in the country and reoriented the country's foreign policy to be more favorable to the United States. The Syrians remained close to the Soviet Union.

The Soviets thought little of Sadat's chances in any war. They warned that any attempt to cross the heavily fortified Suez Canal would incur massive losses. Both the Soviets and the Americans were then pursuing détente, and had no interest in seeing the Middle East destabilized. In a June 1973 meeting with U.S. President Richard Nixon, Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev had proposed Israel pull back to its 1967 border. Brezhnev said that if Israel did not, "we will have difficulty keeping the military situation from flaring up"—an indication that the Soviet Union had been unable to restrain Sadat's plans.

In an interview published in Newsweek (April 9, 1973), President Sadat again threatened war with Israel. Several times during 1973, Arab forces conducted large-scale exercises that put the Israeli military on the highest level of alert, only to be recalled a few days later. The Israeli leadership already believed that if an attack took place, the Israeli Air Force (IAF) could repel it.

Almost a full year before the war, in an October 24, 1972 meeting with his Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, Sadat declared his intention to go to war with Israel even without proper Soviet support. Planning had begun in 1971 and was conducted in absolute secrecy—even the upper-echelon commanders were not told of war plans until less than a week prior to the attack, and the soldiers were not told until a few hours beforehand. The plan to attack Israel in concert with Syria was code-named Operation Badr (Arabic for "full moon"), after theBattle of Badr, in which Muslims under Muhammad defeated the Quraish tribe of Mecca.

Israeli F-4E Phantom of the type present in the dogfight Lead-up to the surprise at- o v e r S h a r m e l - S h e i k h . S m a l l Egyptian roundels on nose tack: The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Directorate of Military Intelligence's (abbreviated as "Aman") Re- c r e d i t t h e a i r c r a f t w i t h t h r e e search Department was responsible for formulat- a e r ia l v ic t or ie s . ing Israel's intelligence estimate. Their

assessments on the likelihood of war were based on several assumptions. First, it was assumed correctly that Syria would not go to war with Israel unless Egypt did so as well. Second, the department learned from a high-level Egyptian informant, Ashraf Marwan, that Egypt wanted to regain all of the Sinai, but would not go to war until they were supplied MiG-23fighter-bombers to neutralize the Israeli Air Force, and Scud missiles to be used against Israeli cities as a deterrent against Israeli attacks on Egyptian infrastructure. Since they had not received MiG-23s, and Scud missiles had only arrived in Egypt from Bulgaria in late August and it would take four months to train the Egyptian ground crews, Aman predicted war with Egypt was not imminent. This assumption about Egypt's strategic plans, known as "the concept", strongly prejudiced the department's thinking and led it to dismiss other war warnings.

The Egyptians did much to further this misconception. Both the Israelis and the Americans felt that the expulsion of the Soviet military observers had severely reduced the effectiveness of the Egyptian army. The Egyptians ensured that there was a continual stream of false information on maintenance problems and a lack of personnel to operate the most advanced equipment. The Egyptians made repeated misleading reports about lack of spare parts that also made their way to the Israelis. Sadat had so long engaged in brinkmanship that his frequent war threats were being ignored by the world. In May and August 1973, the Egyptian army conducted military exercises near the border, and the Israeli army mobilized in response both times at considerable cost.

For the week leading up to Yom Kippur, the Egyptian army staged a week-long training exercise adjacent to the Suez Canal. Israeli intelligence, detecting large troop movements towards the canal, dismissed these movements as mere training exercises. Movements of Syrian troops towards the border were puzzling, but not a threat because, Aman believed, they would not attack without Egypt and Egypt would not attack until the weaponry they wanted arrived.

On September 27 and 30, two batches of reservists were called up by the Egyptian army to participate in these exercises. Two days before the outbreak of the war, on October 4, the Egyptian command publicly announced the demobilization of part of the reservists called up during September 27 to lull suspicion on the Israeli side. Around 20,000 troops were demobilized, and subsequently some of these men were given leave to perform the Umrah (pilgrimage) to Mecca.

The obvious reason for choosing the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur to stage a surprise attack on Israel was that on this specific holiday (unlike any other) the country comes to a complete standstill. Yom Kippur is the holiest day in the Jewish calendar; both religiously observant Jews and most of the secular majority fast, abstain from any use of fire, electricity, engines, communications, etc., and all road traffic ceases. Many soldiers also go home from military facilities for the holiday, and Israel is more vulnerable with much of its military on leave.

The war coincided that year with the Muslim month of Ramadan, when many Arab Muslim soldiers also fast. Other analysts believe that the attack on Yom Kippur actually helped Israel to more easily marshal reserves from their homes and synagogues, because the nature of the holiday meant that roads and communication were largely open and this eased mobilizing and transporting the military.

Despite refusing to participate, King Hussein of Jordan "had met with Sadat and [Syrian President] Assad in Alexandria two weeks before. Given the mutual suspicions prevailing among the Arab leaders, it was unlikely that he had been told any specific war plans. But it was probable that Sadat and Assad had raised the prospect of war against Israel in more general terms to feel out the likelihood of Jordan joining in."

On the night of September 25, Hussein secretly flew to Tel Aviv to warn Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir of an impending Syrian attack. "Are they going to war without the Egyptians, asked Mrs. Meir. The king said he didn't think so. 'I think they [Egypt] would cooperate.'"Surprisingly, this warning fell on deaf ears. Aman concluded that the king had not told anything that was not already known. "Eleven warnings of war were received by Israel during September from well placed sources.

But [Mossad chief] Zvi Zamir continued to insist that war was not an Arab option. Not even Hussein's warnings succeeded in stirring his doubts." He would later remark that "We simply didn't feel them capable [of War]." Finally, Zvi Zamir personally went to Europe to meet with Marwan at midnight on October 5/6. Marwan informed him that a joint Syrian-Egyptian attack was imminent.

It was this warning in particular, combined with the large number of other warnings, that finally goaded the Israeli high command into action. Just hours before the attack began, orders went out for a partial call-up of the Israeli reserves. Ironically, calling up the reserves proved to be easier than usual, as almost all of the troops were at synagogue or at home for the holiday.

The attack by the Egyptian and Syrian forces caught the United States by surprise. According to the future CIA Director and Defence Secretary Robert Gates, he was briefing a US arms negotiator on the improbability of armed conflict in the region when he heard the news of the outbreak of war on the radio. On the other hand, KGB learned about the attack in advance, probably from its intelligence sources in Egypt.

A n Is r a e li M 6 0 Pa t t on t a nk de s t r oy e d in t he Sina i

Lack of Israeli pre-emptive attack:

The Israeli strategy was, for the most part, based on the precept that if war was imminent, Israel would launch a pre-emptive strike. It was assumed that Israel's intelligence services would give, in the worst case, about 48 hours notice prior to an Arab attack.

Golda Meir, Moshe Dayan, and General David Elazar met at 8:05 a.m. the morning of Yom Kippur, six hours before the war began. Dayan opened the meeting by arguing that war was not a certainty. Elazar then presented his argument in favor of a pre-emptive attack against Syrian airfields at noon, Syrian missiles at 3:00 p.m., and Syrian ground forces at 5:00 p.m. "When the presentations were done, the prime minister hemmed uncertainly for a few moments but then came to a clear decision. There would be no preemptive strike. Israel might be needing American assistance soon and it was imperative that it would not be blamed for starting the war. 'If we strike first, we won't get help from anybody', she said." Other developed nations, being more dependent on OPEC oil, took more seriously the threat of an Arab oil embargo and trade boycott, and had stopped supplying Israel with munitions. As a result, Israel was totally dependent on the United States for military resupply, and particularly sensitive to anything that might endanger that relationship. After Meir made her decision, at 10:15 a.m. she met with US ambassadorKenneth Keating in order to inform the United States that Israel did not intend to preemptively start a war, and asked that US efforts be directed at preventing war. An electronic telegram with Keating's report on the meeting was sent to the US at 16:33 GMT (6:33 p.m. local time). A message arrived later fromUnited States Secretary of State Henry Kissinger saying, "Don't preempt." At the same time, Kissinger also urged the Soviets to use their influence to prevent war, contacted Egypt with Israel's message of non-preemption, and sent messages to other Arab governments to enlist their help on the side of moderation. These late efforts were futile. According to Henry Kissinger, had Israel struck first, they would not have received "so much as a nail."

David Elazar proposed a mobilization of the entire Air Force and four armored divisions, a total of 100,000 to 120,000 troops, while Dayan favored a mobilization of the Air Force and two armored divisions, totaling around 70,000 troops.

Meir chose Elazar's proposal.

Casualties

Israel suffered between 2,520 and 2,800 killed in action. An additional 7,250 to 8,800 soldiers were wounded. Some 293 Israelis were captured. Approximately 400 Israeli tanks were destroyed. Another 600 were disabled but returned to battle after repairs. A major Israeli advantage, noted by many observers, was their ability to quickly return damaged tanks to combat. The Israeli Air Force lost 102 aircraft: 32 F-4s, 53 A-4s, 11 Mirages and 6 Super Mysteres. Two helicopters, a Bell 205 and a CH-53, were also shot down. According to Defense Minister Moshe Dayan, nearly half of these were shot down during the first three days of the war. IAF losses per combat sortie were less than in the preceding Six Day War of 1967.

Arab casualties were known to be much higher than Israel's, though precise figures are difficult to ascertain as Egypt and Syria never disclosed official figures. The lowest casualty estimate is 8,000 (5,000 Egyptian and 3,000 Syrian) killed and 18,000 wounded. The highest estimate is 18,500 killed in action of which 15,000 were Egyptian and 3,500 Syrian. Most estimates lie somewhere in between the two, with the Insight Team of the London Sunday Times claiming combined Arab losses of 16,000 killed and yet another source citing a figure of some 15,000 dead and 35,000 wounded. Some 8,372 Egyptians and 392 Syrians were captured. Thirteen Iraqis and six Moroccans were also captured. Arab tank losses amounted to 2,250though Garwych cites a figure of 2,300. 400 of these fell into Israeli hands in good working order and were incorporated into Israeli service. Between 341 and 514 Arab aircraft were shot down.

According to Herzog, 334 of these aircraft were shot down by the Israeli Air Force in air-to-air combat for the loss of only five Israeli planes. The Insight Team of the London Sunday Timesnotes Arab aircraft losses of 450. At sea, 19 Arab naval vessels, 10 of which were missile boats, were sunk for no Israeli losses.

effects Long-term The peace discussion at the end of the war was the first time that Arab and Israeli officials met for direct public discussions since the aftermath of the 1948 war.

Response in Israel:

Though the war reinforced Israel’s military deterrence, it had a stunning effect on the population in Israel. Following their victory in the Six-Day War, the Israeli military had become complacent. The shock and sudden reversals that occurred at the beginning of the war inflicted a terrible psychological blow to the Israelis, who had hitherto experienced no serious military challenges.

A protest against the Israeli government started four months after the war ended. It was led by Motti Ashkenazi, commander of Budapest, the northernmost of the Bar-Lev forts and the only one during the war not to be captured by the Egyptians. Anger against the Israeli government (and Dayan in particular) was high.

Shimon Agranat, President of the Israeli Supreme Court, was asked to lead an inquiry, the Agranat Commission, into the events leading up to the war and the setbacks of the first few days.

The Agranat Commission published its preliminary findings on April 2, 1974. Six people were held particularly responsible for Israel's failings: 1) Though his performance and conduct during the war was lauded, IDF Chief of Staff David Elazar was recommended for dismissal after the Commission found he bore "personal responsibility for the assessment of the situation and the preparedness of the IDF." 2) Intelligence Chief, Aluf Eli Zeira, and his deputy, head of Research, Brigadier-General Aryeh Shalev, were recommended for dismissal.

3) Lt. Colonel Bandman, head of the Aman desk for Egypt, and Lt. Colonel Gedelia, chief of intelligence for the Southern Command, were recommended for transfer away from intelligence duties.

4) Shmuel Gonen, commander of the Southern front, was recommended by the initial report to be relieved of active duty. He was forced to leave the army after the publication of the Commission's final report, on January 30, 1975, which found that "he failed to fulfill his duties adequately, and bears much of the responsibility for the dangerous situation in which our troops were caught."

Rather than quieting public discontent, the report—which "had stressed that it was judging the ministers' responsibility for security failings, not their parliamentary responsibility, which fell outside its mandate"—inflamed it. Although it had absolved Meir and Dayan of all responsibility, public calls for their resignations (especially Dayan's) intensified.

On April 11, 1974, Golda Meir resigned. Her cabinet followed suit, including Dayan, who had previously offered to resign twice and was turned down both times by Meir. Yitzhak Rabin, who had spent most of the war as an advisor to Elazar in an unofficial capacity, became head of the new government, which was seated in June.

In 1999, the issue was revisited by the Israeli political leadership to prevent similar shortcomings from being repeated.

The Israeli National Security Council was created to improve coordination between the different security and intelligence bodies, and the political branch of government.

Hafez al-Assad (right) with s oldie r s , 1 9 7 3 .

Response in Egypt and Syria:

For the Arab states (and Egypt in particular), the psychological trauma of their defeat in the Six-Day War had been healed, allowing them to negotiate with the Israelis as equals. Due to the later setbacks in the war (which saw Israel gain a large salient on African soil and even more territory on the Syrian front), some believe that the war helped convince many in the Arab world that Israel could not be defeated militarily, thereby strengthening peace movements and ending the old Arab ambition of destroying Israel by force.

General Shazli had angered Sadat for advocating the withdrawal of Egyptian forces from Sinai to meet the Israeli incursion on the West Bank of the Canal. Six weeks after the war, he was relieved of command and forced out of the army. Ultimately, he went into political exile for years. Upon his return to Egypt, he was placed under house arrest. Following his release, he advocated the formation of a "Supreme High Committee" modeled after Israel's Agranat Commission, to “probe, examine and analyze” the performance of Egyptian forces and command decisions during the war. His requests were ignored. His book, which candidly described Egyptian military failings and sharp disagreements he had with Ismail, Sadat and others in connection with the prosecution of the war, was banned in Egypt.

The commanders of the Second and Third Armies, Generals Khalil and Wasel, were likewise dismissed from the army. The commander of the Egyptian Second Army at the start of the war, General Mamoun, suffered a heart attack or alternatively, a breakdown after the 14 October Sinai tank battle and was replaced by General Khalil.

The Seventh Division commander, Gen. Omar Abash, who failed to break through Col. Avigdor Ben-Gal's brigade, was alternatively reported to have been killed in the fighting or to have died of a heart attack.

Camp David Accords:

The Yom Kippur War upset the status quo in the Middle East, and the war served as a direct antecedent of the 1979 Camp David Accords.

Rabin's government was hamstrung by a pair of scandals, and he was forced to step down in 1977. The right-wing Likud party, under the prime ministership of Menachem Begin, won the elections that followed. This marked a historic change in the Israeli political landscape: for the first time since Israel's founding, a coalition not led by the Labor Party was in control of the government.

Sadat, who had entered the war in order to recover the Sinai from Israel, grew frustrated at the slow pace of the peace process. In a 1977 interview with CBS News anchorman Walter Cronkite, Sadat admitted under pointed questioning that he was open to a more constructive dialog for peace, including a state visit. This seemed to open the floodgates, as in a later interview with the same reporter, the normally hard-line Begin – perhaps not wishing to be compared unfavorably to Sadat – said he too would be amenable to better relations and offered his invitation for such a visit. Thus, in November of that year, Sadat took the unprecedented step of visiting Israel, becoming the first Arab leader to do so, and so implicitly recognized Israel.

The act jump-started the peace process. United States President Jimmy Carter invited both Sadat and Begin to a summit at Camp David to negotiate a final peace. The talks took place from September 5–17, 1978. Ultimately, the talks succeeded, and Israel and Egypt signed the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty in 1979. Israel withdrew its troops and settlers from the Sinai, in exchange for normal relations with Egypt and a lasting peace.

Many in the Arab community were outraged at Egypt's peace with Israel. Egypt was expelled from the Arab League.

Until then, Egypt had been "at the helm of the Arab world." Egypt's tensions with its Arab neighbors culminated in 1977 in the short-lived Libyan–Egyptian War. Sadat was assassinated two years later on October 6, 1981, while attending a parade marking the eighth anniversary of the start of the war, by Islamist army members who were outraged at his negotiations with Israel.

Oil embargo:

In response to U.S. support of Israel, the Arab members of OPEC, led by Saudi Arabia, decided to reduce oil production by 5% per month on October 17. On October 19, President Nixon authorized a major allocation of arms supplies and $2.2 billion in appropriations for Israel. In response, Saudi Arabia declared an embargo against the United States, later joined by other oil exporters and extended against the Netherlands and other states, causing the 1973 energy crisis.

Commemorations:

October 6 is a national holiday in Egypt called Armed Forces Day. It is a national holiday in Syria as well, where it is called "Tishreen Liberation Day". Marking the 35th anniversary in 2006, Hosni Mubarak said that the conflict "breathed new life" into Egypt. He said Egypt and Syria's initial victories in the conflict eased Arab bitterness over Israel's victory in the 1967 Six-Day War and ultimately put the two nations on a path of peaceful coexistence.

In Egypt, many places were named after the October 6 date and Ramadan 10, its equivalent in the Islamic calendar.

Examples of these commemorations are the 6th October Bridge in Cairo and the cities 6th of October City and 10th of Ramadan City.

The "Museum of 6 October War" was built in 1989 in the Heliopolis district of Cairo. The center of the museum is occupied by a rotunda housing a panoramic painting of the struggle between Egyptian and Israeli armed forces. The panorama, the creation of which was outsourced to a group of North Korean artists and architects, is equipped with engines to rotate it 360° during a 30-minutes presentation accompanied by commentary in various languages. A similar museum, which was also built with North Korean assistance—the October War Panorama—operates in Damascus.

Korean Alphabet Day South Korea - Oct 09

Hangul Day — also called Hangul Proclamation Day or Korean Alphabet Day — is a Korean national commemorative day marking the invention and the proclamation of hangul ( 한글), the native alphabet of the Korean language, by King Sejong the Great. It is observed on October 9 in South Korea and on January 15 in North Korea. In North Korea, the day is called Chosun-gul Day. According to the Sejong Sillok (세종실록;世宗實 綠 ), King Sejong proclaimed publication of Hunmin Jeongeum (훈민 정음;訓民正音), the document introducing the newly created alphabet which was also originally called by the same name, in the ninth month of the lunar calendar in 1446. In 1926, the Hangul Society celebrated the octo-sexagesimal (480th) anniversary of the declaration of hangul on the last day of the ninth month of the lunar calendar, which is on November 4 of the Gregorian calendar. Members of the Society declared it the first observance of "Gagyanal (가갸날)". The name came from "Gagyageul (가갸글)", an early colloquial name for hangul, based on a mnemonic recitation beginning "gagya geogyeo (가갸거겨)". The name of the commemorative day was changed to "Hangullal" in 1928, soon after the term "hangul," coined originally in 1913 by Ju Si-gyeong, became widely accepted as the new name for the alphabet.

The day was then celebrated according to the lunar calendar.

In 1931, the celebration of the day was switched to October 29 of the Gregorian calendar. In 1934, arose the claim that they must assume that the Julian calendar was used in 1446, so the date was again changed to October 28.

The discovery in 1940 of an original copy of the Hunmin Jeongeum Haerye, a volume of commentary to the Hunmin Jeongeum that appeared not long after the document it commented upon, revealed that the Hunmin Jeongeum was announced during the first ten days (sangsun; 상순; 上旬) of the ninth month. The tenth day of the ninth month of 1446 of the lunar calendar in 1446 was equivalent to October 9 of the Julian calendar. After the South Korean government was established in 1945, Hangul Day was declared as a legal holiday to be marked on October 9, on which governmental workers are excused from work.

Its legal status as a holiday was removed in 1991 because of pressure from major employersto increase the number of working days, along with the introduction of the Korean United Nations Day. However, Hangul Day still retains a legal status as a national commemoration day. The Hangul Society has campaigned to restore the holiday's former status, but with little impact.

North Korea celebrates the equivalent Chosŏn'gŭl Day on January 15 to mark the day in 1444 (1443 in lunar calendar), which is believed to be that of the actual creation of Hunmin Jeongeum.

Battle of Angamos Peru - Oct 8

The Battle of Angamos (Combate naval de Angamos) was fought on October 8, 1879, during the naval stage of the War of the Pacific (Guerra del Pacífico). The Chilean Navy, commanded by Captain Galvarino Riveros and Captain Juan Jose Latorre surrounded and captured the ironclad Huáscar, commanded by Rear Admiral Miguel Grau Seminario, who died in combat. After the battle, the crippled Peruvian Navy was unable to prevent the invasion of its territory. The Huascar was repaired and served under the Chilean flag until its decommission, and now sits as a floating museum in the port of Talcahuano.

Background

After the Naval Battle of Iquique, the Peruvian ironclad Huascar made several incursions into Chilean waters, challenging the Chilean navy's domination along its entire coast; the Huascar attacked ports and captured transports.

Chile's plan was to achieve naval supremacy prior to invading Bolivian and/or Peruvian territory to establish the logistic advantage needed to launch a terrestrial campaign. No attempt to disembark troops could be made by the Chileans, because the Huascar was preventing the entire Chilean Navy from taking control of the sea; the Chilean fleet was in a diminished state of readiness after a long campaign away from its base. In order to initiate the naval stage of the compaign the Huascar had to be eliminated or captured.

The Chilean government accelerated their naval campaign to secure the logistic support for the planned land invasion of Peru. On September 20, the Chilean fleet sailed north, escorting an important convoy with troops bound for Antofagasta. Once at the port of Mejillones, Captain Galvarino Riveros reorganized the fleet into two divisions: 1st Division—Commodore Galvarino Riveros.

I. Ironclad Blanco Encalada : Commodore Galvarino Riveros II. Schooner Virjen de Covadonga : Lt. Captain Manuel Orella Transport Matias Cousiño : Lt. Captain Augusto Castleton.

2nd Division—Commander Juan Jose Latorre III. Ironclad Almirante Cochrane : Commander Juan Jose Latorre IV. Corvette O’Higgins : Lt. Captain Jorge Montt Alvarez Transport Loa : Lt. Captain Javier Molinas Gacitua.

Chilean strategy:

Commander in Chief Galvarino Riveros on October 1 summoned his officers to a council, where it was decided to hunt down the Peruvian vessel at Arica. The same day Grau in his flagship Huascar gave orders to sail along the Chilean coast as far south as Coquimbo, accompanied by the corvette Union. Because the Chilean fleet sailed close to the shore and the Peruvian fleet was farther out in the open sea, the formations passed in opposite directions without seeing each other.

Chilean Minister of War Sotomayor conceived a plan that called for Latorre’s division to cruise perpendicular to the coast at Mejillones, while Riveros’ division sailed to Antofagasta to observe and to defend the city. So, if the Huascar tried to attack the port, it would be surrounded by the Blanco Encalada and the heavier warships. On the other hand, if Grau passed by, Riveros could follow, keeping him from escaping southward and forcing the Peruvian admiral northward toward Latorre's division.

In Mejillones, on October 7, a plan was approved to deceive the Peruvian ships. Riveros would wait for Grau at Antofagasta while Latorre would set up an east-west barrier-like formation about twenty miles (36 km) from shore. If Riveros spotted the Huascar, he would follow and keep it from retreating to the south until Latorre engaged the Peruvian fleet.

During the night the Peruvian warships were sailing off the Chilean coast northward toward Arica when they saw the light of Antofagasta. Admiral Grau decided to engage any Chilean vessel in port, intending to inflict some damage.

At 01:10 hrs on October 8, the Huascar searched the bay without encountering any targets. She came up with the Union at 03:00 hrs, and the two warships resumed their northward heading. At the same hour lookouts on the Chilean Blanco Encalada saw two smoke columns on the horizon. Simultaneously, Grau was informed that there were three columns of smoke to the north; he decided to investigate.

Both fleets spotted each other and the Peruvian ships turned back to the south. Riveros ordered a reduction in speed of the Chilean ships to make Grau think it was possible to turn back north and sail for Peru. At 05:40 hrs indeed the two Peruvian ships began to slowly turn once again to the north. The Blanco Encalada increased speed and began closing on the Peruvians to discourage Grau from again turning back to the south.

At 07:15 hrs, steaming northward, the two Peruvian vessels spotted smoke columns ahead; it was Latorre’s division approaching. Since the Peruvian Union could manage 13 knots, she was able to sail northeastward and escape, but the Huascar had to stay the course and fight.

N a v a l B a t t le of A nga m os

The Struggle

Off Punta Angamos at 09:25 hrs the Huascar opened fire on the Cochrane. The latter did not return fire but continued to close. She reached her effective cannon range of 2,200 meters 15 minutes later. The Cochrane, Captain Latorre, began to shell the Peruvian ironclad. One of the Chilean shots pierced the Huascar's turret, wounding the twelve crew members manning the 300-pound cannons. Another shot perforated the armour just above the Huascar's waterline, cutting her left rudder chain and leaving her temporarily adrift. The Huascar now was listing hard to starboard and was hampered also by a deformation in the hull acquired when she rammed the Esmeralda during their engagement at Iquique five months earlier. Barely ten minutes later an emergency rudder had been set by the Huascar's crew.

At 10:00 hrs another shell from the Cochrane hit the Huascar, piercing the bridge cabin and killing Admiral Grau and his adjunct, Diego Ferre. Command then fell to Lt. Captain Elías Aguirre. The explosion also shattered the vessel's rudder wheel. Lt. Captain Gaona’s gunners caused heavy casualties among the Peruvian crew: the Chileans were using Palliser type armor-piercing rounds, which exploded right after penetrating the hull.

At 10:10, the Huascar flag was bring down from its hoist by the intense gunfire. Latorre ordered a halt to the fire, thinking that the ship was surrendered. However, the monitor kept his pace and within minutes an unidentified officer hoisted again, resuming the combat. Meanwhile, the Huascar crew had again repaired the rudder wheel.

At 10:22 hrs, with the Blanco Encalada and the Covadonga at close range, a shot from Blanca Encalada, Commodore Riveros, perforated the Huacar's artillery tower, killing almost all of the sailors within and damaging the rightmost cannon. Another shot, from the Cochrane, passed through the officers' quarters and wrecked the emergency rudder station, which had been disabled already twice before. The Huascarnow could sail only in a wide semicircle to starboard.

Once rudder control was regained, Captain Aguirre of the Huascar tried to ram the Cochrane. Latorre was also manoeuvring to ram the Huascar, but the Peruvian ironclad, whose steering was again enabled, suddenly veered to port and both ships passed by each other. Another shell pierced the Huascar's artillery tower 12 minutes later, killing all within, including Captain Aguirre. Command of the ship went to Lt. Pedro Garezon, who in conference with the remaining officers to scuttle the ship rather than allow it to be captured. At 10:54 hrs the order was given to evacuate the wounded from the engine room and open the seacocks to scuttle the ship and hence prevent its capture.

At 10:55 hrs Huascar flag was bring down for second time. The Chilean warships, noticing that the Huascar was decreasing speed, mustered their boarding parties. At 11:08 hrs, 14 to 20 Chileans sailors boarded the Huascar, without encountering any resistance. They closed the seacock valves (with 1.2 meters of water in the engine room) and extinguished several fires while the now captured Peruvian crew was being transported to the Chilean vessels as prisoners of war.

Consequences

With capture of the Huascar, plus the previous neutralization of the Independencia at Punta Gruesa, fire power of the Peruvian Navy was drastically reduced, bringing the sea campaign of the War of the Pacific to an end. From now on, the Chilean Navy was able to use the Huascar as one of its own ships.

The decisive victory at Angamos allowed the Chilean Army to freely decide the course of action to attack the Allies, and the land invasion of Peru and Bolivia began.

Death of Henri Christophe Haiti - Oct 8

Henri Christophe (who chose for himself an anglicized name Henry Christopher) (6 October 1767 – 8 October 1820) was a key leader in the Haitian Revolution, winning independence from France in 1804. On 17 February 1807, after the creation of a separate nation in the north, Christophe was elected President of the State of Haiti. On 26 March 1811, he was proclaimed Henry I, King of Haïti. He is also known for constructing the Citadelle Laferrière.

Early life

Born Christopher Henry probably in Grenada, the son of Christophe, a freeman, Christophe was brought to Saint Domingue as a slave in the northern region. In 1779 he may have served with the French Forces as a drummer boy in the American Revolution in the Chasseurs-Volontaires de Saint-Dominigue, a regiment composed of gens de couleur. They fought at the Siege of Savannah.

As an adult, Christophe worked as a mason, sailor, stable hand, waiter, and billiard maker. He worked in and managed a hotel restaurant in CapFrançais, the capital of the French colony of Saint-Domingue, where he became skilled at dealing with the grand blancs, as the wealthy white French planters were called. Such political skills also served him well when he became an officer in the military and leader in the country. He was said to have obtained his freedom as a young man, before the Slave Uprising of 1791. Sometime after he had settled in Haiti he brought his sister Marie there, where she married and had issue.

Beginning with the slave uprising of 1791, Christophe distinguished himself in the Haïtian Revolution and quickly rose to be an officer. He fought for years with Toussaint Louverture in the north, helping defeat the French, the Spanish, British, and finally French national troops. By 1802 he was a general under Toussaint Louverture.

Independent Haiti

After the French deported Toussaint Louverture to France, and fighting continued under Rochambeau, Jean Jacques Dessalines recognized they wanted to reenslave the blacks. He led the fight to defeat French forces. As leader, Dessalines declared Saint-Domingue's independence and the new name of Haiti in 1804.

In 1806 Christophe was aware of a plot to kill Dessalines; seeing an opportunity to seize power for himself, he did not warn the self-proclaimed Emperor. The plot was said to involve Alexandre Pétion, a competing "gens de couleur"; as a half-white, Pétion held a weak position among the majority of black leaders and population and possibly viewed assassination as the surest way of removing Dessalines. However, this allegation has not been proven; other sources clear Pétion's name from the plot and say that he has been tied to it only on the basis of such conjectures. In any case, Dessalines was assassinated, and Christophe was elected to the newly created position of president, but without real powers.

State and kingdom of Haiti Feeling insulted, Christophe retreated with his followers to the

Plaine du Nord and created a separate government there.

Christophe had suspected that he would be next to be assassinated. In 1807 Christophe declared himself président et généralissime des forces de terre et de mer de l'État d'Haïti (English: President and Generalissimo of the armies of land and sea of the State of Haïti). Pétion became President of the "Republic of Haïti" in the south backed by General Boyer who had control of the southern armies.

In 1811 Henry made the northern state of Haïti a kingdom, and was ordained King by Arch Bishop of Milot Corneil Breuil. The edict of 1 April 1811 gave his full title as Henri, par la grâce de Dieu et la Loi constitutionelle de l'État Roi d'Haïti, Souverain des Îles de la Tortue, Gonâve, et autres îles adjacentes, Destructeur de la tyrannie, Régénérateur et bienfaiteur de la nation haïtienne, Créateur de ses institutiones morales, politiques et guerrières, Premier monarque couronné du Nouveau-Monde, Défenseur de la foi, Fondateur de l'ordre royal et militaire de Saint-Henri.

Henry, by the grace of God and constitutional law of the state, King of Haiti, Sovereign of Tortuga, Gonâve, and other adjacent islands, Destroyer of tyranny, Regenerator and Benefactor of the Haïtian nation, Creator of her moral, political, and martial institutions, First crowned monarch of the New World, Defender of the faith, Founder of the Royal Military Order of Saint Henry.

He renamed Cap Français Cap-Henri. It is now called Cap-Haïtien.

Christophe named his legitimate son, Jacques-Victor Henry, heir apparent with the title Prince Royal of Haïti. Even in documents written in French, the king's name was usually given an English spelling. He had another son who was a colonel in his army.

Christophe built for his own use six châteaux, eight palaces and the massive Citadelle Laferrière, still considered one of the wonders of the era. Nine years later, at the end of his monarchy, he had increased the number of designated nobility from the original 87 to 134.

Politically, in the North, Christophe was caught between reinforcing a version of the slave plantation system in an attempt to increase agricultural production, or handing out the plantation land for peasant cultivation (the approach taken

by Alexandre Petion in the South). King Henry took the route of enforcing corvee plantation work on the population in lieu of taxes alongside his massive building projects. As a result, Northern Haiti during his reign was despotic but relatively wealthy. He preferred trading with English merchants and American merchants than both French and Spanish merchants which did not recognize Haiti as independent country, he ordered that extra Africans be brought to Haiti to work on his vast projects instead of being traded to other Caribbean countries where they would be held as slaves.

As a result, numerous Africans who were originally brought by the French as slaves came to Haiti. He made an agreement with Britain that Haiti would not be threat to their Caribbean colonies in return that the British Navy would warn the Kingdom of Haiti of any imminent attack from French troops, in 1807 the British Parliament passed the Slave Trade of 1807 which did not outlaw slavery, but abolishing the importation of African slaves in British territory, because of this increased bilateral trade, he had gathered an enormous sum of British pounds for his treasury. By contrast, Petion's Southern Haiti became much poorer because the land-share destroyed agricultural productivity.

Nobility and heraldry

One of Christophe's first acts as king was to create a Haïtian Peerage, with four princes, seven dukes, 22 counts, 40 barons and 14 chevaliers. Christophe also founded a College of Arms to provide armorial bearings to the newly ennobled.

Christophe's kingship was modelled in part on the enlightened absolutism of Frederick the Great. Thomas Clarkson, the English slave abolitionist, held a long written correspondence with Christophe which gives insights into his philosophy and style of government (Griggs and Prator). The king sought an education for his children along the lines of the princelings of Enlightenment Europe.

End of reign

Despite his efforts to promote education and establish a legal system called the Code Henry, King Henri was an unpopular autocratic monarch. In addition, his realm was constantly challenged by that of the South, which was ruled by gens de couleur. Toward the end of Christophe's reign, public sentiment was sharply against what many perceived to be his feudal policies, which he intended to develop the country. Ill and infirm at age fifty-three, King Henry shot himself with a silver bullet rather than face the possibility of a coup. He was buried within the Citadelle Laferriere.

Pierre Nord Alexis, President of Haiti from 1902–1908, was Christophe's grandson.

Michèle Bennett Duvalier, First Lady of Haiti from 1980 to 1986, was Christophe's great-great-great-granddaughter.

Independence Day Croatia - Oct 08

Croatia officially the Republic of Croatia (Croatian: Republika Hrvatska), is a country in Central Europe and Southeastern Europe at the crossroads of the Pannonian Plain, the Balkans, and the Adriatic Sea. Its capital and largest city is Zagreb. Croatia borders Slovenia to the northwest, Hungary to the northeast, Serbia to the east, Bosnia and Herzegovina to the southeast, and has a comparatively small stretch of border with Montenegro at its southernmost tip along the Adriatic coast.

The Croats arrived in the early 7th century in what today is Croatia. They organized the state into two dukedoms. The first king, King Tomislav was crowned in AD 925 and Croatia was elevated into the status of a kingdom. The Kingdom of Croatia retained its sovereignty for almost two centuries, reaching its peak during the rule of Kings Peter Krešimir IV and Demetrius Zvonimir.

Croatia entered a union with Hungary in 1102.

In 1527, the Croatian Parliament elected Ferdinand from the House of Habsburg to the Croatian throne. In 1918, Croatia was included in the short-lived State of Slovenes, Croats, and Serbs that declared independence from Austria– Hungary and co-founded the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. A Croatian state briefly existed during World War II, but it was a Nazi/Fascist puppet-state. After World War II, Croatia became a founding member of the Second Yugoslavia. On 25 June 1991, Croatia declared independence and became a sovereign state.

Since the fall of communism and the end of the Croatian War of Independence, Croatia has achieved high human development and income equality, and ranks highly amongst Central European nations in terms of education, health, quality of life and economic dynamism. Croatia is a member of the United Nations, the Council of Europe, NATO, the World Trade Organization and CEFTA. Croatia is an acceding state of the European Union, with entry expected in July 2013, and is a founding member of the Union for the Mediterranean. Croatia is classified as an emerging and developing economy by the International Monetary Fund and a high income economy by the World Bank.

History

Prehistory and antiquity:

The area known as Croatia today was inhabited throughout the prehistoric period. Fossils of Neanderthals dating to the middle Paleolithic period have been unearthed in the areas of Krapina and Vindija in northern Croatia. Remnants of the Starčevo, Vučedol and Hvar cultures, all dating from the early Neolithic period, were found in other parts of the country. The Iron Age left traces of the Hallstatt culture (early Illyrians) and the La Tène culture (Celts).

Much later the region was settled by Liburnians and Illyrians, and Greek colonies were established on the islands of Vis (by Dionysius I of Syracuse) and Hvar. In 9 AD the territory of today's Croatia became part of the Roman Empire. Emperor Diocletian built a massive palace in Split where he retired from politics in AD 305. During the 5th century the last Roman Emperor Julius Nepos ruled his small empire from Diocletian's Palace before he was killed in AD 480.

Early history of Croatia ends with the Avar invasion in the first half of the 7th century and the destruction of almost all Roman towns. Roman survivors retreated to strategically better defended points on the coast, islands and mountains.

The modern city of Dubrovnik was founded by those survivors.

Ethnogenesis of Croatian people (called White Croats before the migration) started with their emigration from the territory of White Croatia, located in central Europe, to the area of the present day Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Oton Iveković, The arrival of the Croats at the shores of A dr ia t ic .

Medieval Croatia:

According to the work De Administrando Imperio written by the 10th-century Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII Croats had arrived in what is today Croatia probably in the early 7th century. They soon formed two dukedoms; the Duchy of Pannonia in the north and the Duchy of Littoral Croatia in the south. The Christianization of Croats first began in the 7th century when Pope John IV (640–642) sent Christian teachers and missionaries to Croatian Provinces, and was mostly complete by the 9th century. In the late 8th century both duchies became Frankish vassals before regaining independence in the following century. The first native Croatian ruler recognized by thePope was duke Branimir, whom Pope John VIII referred to as Dux Croatorum ("Duke of Croats") in 879.

Duke Tomislav of Littoral Croatia was the most prominent member of the House of Trpimirović, a dynasty which ruled Croatia between the 9th and 11th century. Tomislav annexed parts of Pannonian Croatia and merged the two duchies into a single kingdom in 925, which is assumed to have been delimited by the Adriatic Sea, the Drava river, the Raša river and the Drina river. The medieval Croatian kingdom reached its peak in the 11th century during the reigns of Petar Krešimir IV (1058–1074) and Zvonimir (1075–1089). Following the extinction of the Croatian ruling dynasty in 1091, Ladislaus I of Hungary – brother of Helen II, the last Croatian queen – became king of Croatia. Croatian nobility of the Littoral opposed this crowning which led to a 10-year war and the subsequent recognition of the Hungarian ruler Coloman as king of Croatia and Hungary in the treaty of 1102 referred to as Pacta conventa. In return, Coloman promised to maintain Croatia as an autonomous kingdom headed by a viceroy, titled Ban. For the next four centuries, the Kingdom of Croatia was ruled by Sabor (parliament) and Bans appointed by the Hungarian king. The Kingdom of Croatia and Slavonia remained a legally distinct constitutional entity, but the advent of a Hungarian king brought about other consequences such as: the introduction of feudalism and the rise of native noble families such as the Frankopans and the Šubićs. The 1273Congregatio Regni tocius Sclavonie Generalis, the oldest surviving document written by the Croatian parliament, dates from this period.Subsequent kings sought to restore some of their previously lost influence by granting certain privileges to towns. The first period of personal union between Croatia and Hungary ended in 1526 with the Battle of Mohács and the defeat of Hungarian forces by the Ottomans.

After the death of King Louis II, Croatian nobles at the Cetingrad assembly chose the Habsburgs as new rulers of the Kingdom of Croatia, under the condition that they provide the troops and finances required to protect Croatia against the Ottoman Empire.

Dalmatian cities:

While the Kingdom of Croatia controlled much of the hinterland of what was once the Roman province of Dalmatia, the fortified cities of Dalmatia, at the time the economic and cultural centres of the region, still with a substantial amount of Romance-speaking population, mostly remained under nominal Byzantine control, with the Kingdom of Croatia and the Republic of Venice vying for control over them. These included Zadar, Šibenik, Split and Dubrovnik (at the time known as Ragusa). Dubrovnik had originally been founded in the 7th century, and evolved into an independent maritime republic. During the Fourth Crusade (1202–1204) the city fell under the control of Venice, which lasted until the 14th century and the 1358 Treaty of Zadar when Venetians' defeat at the hands of the Kingdom of Hungary caused them to lose control of Dalmatia.

By the 15th century Venice again brought much of Dalmatia under its control but the Republic of Ragusa, under protection of the Ottomans and Habsburgs, enjoyed independence and became rich through trade. At a time when inland Croatia was embroiled in a series of devastating wars against the Ottoman Empire, Dubrovnik flourished and became the most important centre for Croatian literature during the Renaissance and Baroque periods. In 1797 Napoleon's forces occupied the entire eastern Adriatic coastline as well as a substantial part of the hinterland, ending both the Venetian and the Ragusan republics and establishing the French-controlled Illyrian Provinces. Along with the large Slavic (Croatian) majority, Dalmatia retained large Italian communities along the coast. According to the 1816 AustroHungarian census, 22% of Dalmatian population was Italian-speaking. Since the 19th century, most Dalmatian Italians and Morlachs (speakers of the Istro-Romanian language) were gradually assimilated by the prevailing Croatian culture and language.

Habsburg Monarchy and Austria-Hungary:

In 1529 the Ottoman army captured Buda and besieged Vienna in an event which brought turmoil to Croatian border areas. After the failure of early military operations the Kingdom of Croatia was split into civilian and military units in 1553. The latter eventually became known as the Croatian Military Frontier, a territory directly controlled by Vienna.

Ottoman raids on Croatian territory continued until the 1593 Battle of Sisak which resulted in Ottoman defeat and after which the borders stabilised for a time. During the Great Turkish War (1667–1698), Slavonia was regained but western Bosnia, which had been part of Croatia since before the Ottoman conquest, remained outside Croatian control. The present-day crescent-shaped border between the two countries is a historical remnant of this outcome. Dalmatia, the southern part of the crescent, was created by Venetian conquests which ensued following the 13th-century Siege of Zara and was eventually defined by the 17h- and 18th-century wars with Ottomans.

Over the course of the two centuries of Ottoman wars Croatia underwent great demographic changes. Croats who had inhabited the areas of Lika, Moslavina and north-west Bosnia migrated towards Austria and the present-day Burgenland Croats are direct descendants of these settlers. To replace the fleeing Croats the Habsburgs called on the Orthodox populations of Bosnia and Serbia to provide military service in the Croatian Military Frontier. Serb migration into this region, which had started in the 16th century, peaked during the Great Serb Migrations of 1690 and 1737– 39.

Fuelled by the ideas of romantic nationalism which became popular throughout Europe in the 19th century, a national revival in Croatia, called the Illyrian movement, began gaining ground in the 1830s. The movement was a political and cultural campaign initiated by a group of Croatian intellectuals who advocated for unity of all South Slavs within the Habsburg Monarchy and their most important focus was the establishment of a standard language as a counterweight to Hungarian and the promotion of Croatian literature and culture. Prominent members of this movement were writers Ivan Mažuranić and Petar Preradović, poet Antun Mihanović, composer Vatroslav Lisinski and Ljudevit Gaj who published the first standardized orthography of the Croatian language. Due to the popularity of the Illyrian movement Croatian became official language in the Kingdom of Croatia in 1847, replacing Latin.

During the Hungarian Revolution of 1848 Croatia sided with Austrian and Russian forces who defeated the Hungarian army in 1849, which ushered a period marked by a policy of Germanization. By the 1860s its failure became apparent, which resulted in the Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867 and the creation of amonarchic union between the crowns of the Austrian Empire and the Kingdom of Hungary. The treaty left the issue of Croatia's status unresolved. The kingdoms of Croatia and Slavonia were eventually united following the Croatian–Hungarian Settlement of 1868. The sovereignty over the port city of Rijekaremained contested between Croatia and Hungary, while Kingdom of Dalmatia remained under Austrian control. After the Ottoman Empire had lost control over Bosnia and Herzegovina in the 1878 Treaty of Berlin, Austria-Hungary abolished the Croatian Military Frontier and restored the territories to Croatia in 1881.

In the late 19th century pro-Hungarian and pro-Austrian political parties played Croats against Serbs with the aim of controlling the parliament. This policy failed in 1906 when the Croat-Serb Coalition won the elections. This political situation remained unchanged until the advent of World War I.

Kingdom of Yugoslavia and World War II:

On 29 October 1918 the Croatian Sabor (parliament) declared independence and decided to join the newly formed State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs, which in turn entered into union with Kingdom of Serbia on 1 December 1918 to form the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes. In 1921 the kingdom adopted a new constitution which envisioned the country as a unitary state governed under a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary system. In 1922 historical provinces were abolished and the country was divided into 33 oblasts.

These decisions effectively put an end to state autonomy and were met with public outcry in Croatia. A movement for the restoration of state autonomy thus began gaining ground under the leadership of the Croatian Peasant Party (HSS). As the adoption of the 1921 constitution sparked tensions among ethnic groups, the already unhealthy political situation became even worse after Stjepan Radić, the president of HSS, was assassinated during a Yugoslav Parliament session in June 1928 by a Serb ultranationalist deputy Puniša Račić. Following the political crisis triggered by the shooting, in January 1929 King Alexander abolished the constitution, dissolved the parliament, and declared a royal dictatorship, officially renamed Kingdom of Yugoslavia. In October oblasts were replaced by a system of nine banovinas, with most of Croatian territory split into the northern Sava Banovina (with seat in Zagreb) and Littoral Banovina(with seat in Split).

Vladko Maček, who had succeeded Radić at the helm of HSS and who continued to call for greater autonomy for Croatia, was imprisoned in 1933 and sentenced to three years in jail for treason. However, Maček was released following Alexander's assassination in Marseille in October 1934 which had been organized by foreign-based Macedonian and Croatian nationalist groups, the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO) and the Ustaše. Upon his release, Maček continued to be a vocal proponent of greater federalization of Yugoslavia, which eventually resulted in the Cvetković–Maček Agreementof August 1939 which created the autonomous Banovina of Croatia. Its borders were in part historical borders of Croatia, and in part based on the application of the principle of ethnicity according to which the territory in Bosnia and Herzegovina with a majority ethnic Croat population was annexed to the Banovina.

The Banovina would be governed in internal matters by the Croatian Sabor (parliament) and a crown-appointed Ban. In April 1941 Kingdom of Yugoslavia was invaded and occupied by Germany and Italy in little more than ten days. Following the invasion the territory of Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and the region of Syrmia were incorporated into Independent State of Croatia (NDH), a Nazi-backed puppet state. Parts of Dalmatia were occupied by Italy and northern Croatian regions of Baranja and Međimurje were occupied by Hungary. The newly installed NDH regime was led

by Ante Pavelić and members of his ultranationalist movement Ustaše. The Ustaše regime introduced anti-semitic laws and conducted a brutal campaign of ethnic cleansing against Serb and Roma inhabitants of NDH, exemplified by concentration camps such as the one at Jasenovac and Stara Gradiška where opponents of the Ustaše regime and other 'undesirables' were held. The Jewish Virtual Library estimates that between 45,000 and 52,000 Croatian Serbs were killed at Jasenovac and that between 330,000 and 390,000 Serbs were victims of the entire genocide campaign.

A resistance movement soon emerged and in June 1941 the 1st Sisak Partisan Detachment was formed nearSisak, as the first military unit formed by a resistance movement in occupied Europe. This sparked the beginning of the Yugoslav Partisan movement, a communist multi-ethnic anti-fascist resistance group led by Josip Broz Tito. Initially fighting as a guerrilla force, the movement grew rapidly and by late 1944, the Partisans numbered 800,000 men and women organized in four field armies and 52 divisions which engaged in conventional warfare. The Partisans' goal was to create a communist statein Yugoslavia and to this end they attempted to appeal to all the various ethnic groups within Yugoslavia by adopting a policy of brotherhood and unity. Following the Tehran Conference in December 1943 Partisans gained recognition from the Allies. With their support in logistics, equipment, training and air power, and with the assistance of Soviet troops in the November 1944 Belgrade Offensive, they eventually gained control of the entire country and the border regions of Italy and Austria by the end of WWII in May 1945. Post-war estimates have put the number of WWII casualties in present-day Croatia at around 270,000.

Modern era:

Modern Croatia was founded on AVNOJ anti-fascist partisans' principles during World War II, and it became a constitutional federal republic of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. A single-party socialist state was established but, because of the Tito-Stalin split, economic and personal freedom were better than in the Eastern Bloc. From the 1950s, the Socialist Republic of Croatiaenjoyed an autonomy under the rule of the local Communist elite, but in 1967 a group of influential Croatian poets and linguists published a Declaration on the Status and Name of the Croatian Standard Language.

After 1968, the patriotic goals of that document morphed into a generic Croatian movement for more rights for Croatia, greater civil rights and demands for the decentralization of the economy. In the end the Yugoslav leadership interpreted the Croatian Spring as a restoration of Croatian nationalism, dismissed the movement as chauvinistic and arrested most of its important leaders. In 1974, a new Yugoslav federal constitution was ratified that gave more autonomy to the individual republics, thereby basically fulfilling the main goals of the Croatian Spring.

Nationalistic sentiment, which would bring an end to the Yugoslav federation, had been widespread among various ethnicities for some years. Albanian demands in 1981 for Kosovo to be removed from Serbia and transformed to a constituent republic within Yugoslavia led to riots,and similar attitudes surfaced among other nations with the Serbian SANU Memorandum in 1986; Croatia and Slovenia also responded negatively in 1989 after Serbia's leader Slobodan Milošević organized coups in Vojvodina, Kosovo and Montenegro to install authorities who would be loyal to his cause.

Croatia declared independence from socialist Yugoslavia in 1991. War broke out in 1991 with Yugoslav National Army open attacks on Croatia. At the end of 1991 there was full-scale war in Croatia. The war was between the Serbs, in what had been the Republic of Serbia in the former Yugoslavia, and Croats in the newly independent Croatia. The reasons for the war are quite complex. To greatly simplify, while Croatia and Slovenia wanted to separate from Yugoslavia, Serbs were largely unwilling to allow this to happen, probably largely for economic reasons.

Franjo Tuđman's election win further inflamed the situation. Croatian Serbs left the Croatian parliament and created the Association of the Municipalities of Northern Dalmatia and Lika in Knin. This was later to become the Republika Srpska Krajina. On the events of 1990–92, Milan Babić, Serbian leader and president of Republika Srpska Krajina, was later to declare that he had been "strongly influenced and misled by Serbian propaganda."

These events culminated in the full scale Croatian War of Independence between 1991 and 1995. The war ended with Croatian victory with Operation Storm (known in Croatian as Oluja) in the summer of 1995. The events of August 1995 remain the subject of several cases before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, regarding the conduct of the victorious Croatian Army and the exodus of ethnic Serbs.

Croatia was internationally recognized on 15 January 1992 by the European Union, and subsequently the United Nations. During that time, Croatia controlled less than two thirds of its legal territory.

Military

Croatian Armed Forces (CAF) consist of the Army, Navy and Air Force branches in addition to the Education and Training Command and Support Command. The CAF is headed by the General Staff which reports to the Defence Minister, who in turn reports to the President of Croatia. According to the constitution, the President is commander-inchief of the armed forces and in case of immediate threat during wartime he issues orders directly to the General Staff.

Following the 1991–95 war defence spending and CAF size are in constant decline. As of 2005 military spending was an estimated 2.39% of the country's GDP, which placed Croatia 64th in a ranking of all countries. Since 2005 the budget was kept below 2% of GDP, down from the record high of 11.1% in 1994. Traditionally relying on a large number of conscripts, CAF also went through a period of reforms focused on downsizing, restructuring and professionalisation in the years prior to Croatia's accession to NATO in April 2009. According to a presidential decree issued in 2006 the CAF is set to employ 18,100 active duty military personnel, 3,000 civilians and 2,000 18–30 year-old voluntary conscripts in peacetime.

Compulsory conscription was abolished in January 2008. Until 2008 military service was compulsory for men at age 18 and conscripts served six-month tours of duty, reduced in 2001 from the earlier scheme of nine-month conscription tours. Conscientious objectors could instead opt for an eight-month civilian service.

As of April 2011 the Croatian military had 120 members stationed in foreign countries as part of United Nations-led international peacekeeping forces, including 95 serving as part of UNDOF in Golan Heights. As of 2011 an additional 350 troops serve as part of NATO-led ISAF force in Afghanistan and another 20 with KFOR in Kosovo.

Croatia also has a significant military industry sector which exported around US$120 million worth of military equipment and armament in 2010. Croatian-made weapons and vehicles used by CAF include the standard sidearm HS2000 manufactured by HS Produkt and the M-84D battle tank designed by the Đuro Đaković factory. Uniforms and helmets worn by CAF soldiers are also locally produced and successfully marketed to other countries.

D o u b l e Te n t h D a y Ta i w a n - O c t 1 0

Double Ten Day (traditional Chinese: 雙十節; simplified Chinese: 双十节; pinyin: Shuāng Shí Jié) is the national day of the Republic of China (ROC) and celebrates the start of the Wuchang Uprising of October 10, 1911, which led to the collapse of the Qing Dynasty in China and establishment of the Republic of China on January 1, 1912. It is therefore designated by the government as National Celebration Day (traditional Chinese: 國慶日; simplified Chinese:国庆日; pinyin: Guóqìng Rì).

As a result of the Chinese Civil War, the Government of the Republic of China lost control of mainland China and relocated to Taiwan in 1949. The National Celebration Day is now mainly celebrated in the Free Area which remains under control of the Republic, but is also celebrated by some Overseas Chinese.

in Taiwan Celebration In Taiwan, the official celebration starts with the raising of the flag of the Republic of China in front of the Presidential

Building, followed by public singing of the National Anthem of the Republic of China. It is then followed by celebrations in front of the Presidential Building, including a military parade. Festivities displayed also include many aspects of traditional Chinese culture, like the lion dance and drum teams. Later in the day, the President of the Republic of China addresses the country and fireworks displays are held throughout the major cities of the island. During the Double Ten Day of 2009, all government sponsored festivities were canceled, and the money intended for the festivals (NT$ 70 million) were reallocated for reconstruction of the damage done by Typhoon Morakot.

National Day Military Parade In the past, the Military of the Republic of China has traditionally put on a military parade. During this parade, troops

and equipment are marched past a reviewing platform in front of the Presidential Building. Typically, foreign ambassadors, military officers, and other representatives and dignitaries are invited to view the parade.

The parade has been held intermitently during the period of the Republic of China on Taiwan. On October 10, 1949 the first public military parade was held in Taiwan by the Nationalist Government with Chen Cheng serving as the Grand Review Officer. The 1964 National Day parade was struck by tragedy when a low flying airforce F-104 Phantom fighter aircraft struck a Broadcasting Corporation of China tower, causing the plane's fuel tank to fall and kill three people including a woman and her baby in front of the Central Weather Bureau building in downtown Taipei. The other two remaining F-104 aircraft were ordered to look for the crashed aircraft and accidentally collided and crashed in Tucheng City, Taipei County (now New Taipei City) killing both pilots. The parade was not held again until 1975. When Chen Shui-bian became President, the parade was not held until 2007 and then it was entitled a "Celebration Drill" and not a traditional military parade. Since Ma Yingjeou became president, no parade has been held.

outside of Taiwan Celebration Overseas Chinese played a key role in the birth of the ROC since

the nation’s founding father Sun Yat-sen, a medical doctor by training, received financial support mainly from the overseas Chinese communities abroad to overthrow the imperial Qing dynasty and establish the second republic in Asia in 1912. Outside of Taiwan, Double Ten Day is also celebrated by many Overseas Chinese communities. Sizable Double Ten Day parades occur yearly in the Chinatowns of San Francisco and Chicago.

On mainland China, it is celebrated as the anniversary of the Xinhai Revolution and the Wuchang Uprising.

Before the sovereignty of Hong Kong was transferred to the PRC in 1997, many ROC supporters there would display patriotic and colorful flags (mainly the national flag of ROC) to celebrate Double Ten Day. Taiwan agencies such as the Kwang Hwa Information and Culture Center in Hong Kong have annually held a public ceremony to celebrate Double Ten with members of pro-ROC private groups. The day continues to be celebrated in Hong Kong after the transfer of sovereignty to the mainland, but the national flags publicly shown have been removed by Police of Hong Kong ever since July 1997.

ROC President Chiang Kai-shek presiding over the 1966 Double Te n c e le br a t ions .

Party Foundation Day North Korea - Oct 10

According to North Korean sources, the origins of the Workers' Party of Korea can be traced to the Down-WithImperialism Union, which was supposedly founded on October 17, 1926 and led by Kim Il-sung, then 14 years old. It is described in these sources as "the first genuine revolutionary communist organization in Korea." The Workers' Party of North Korea was formed on 29 August 1946 from a merger between the Communist Party of North Korea and the New Democratic Party of Korea.

On June 30, 1949, the Workers Party of North Korea and the Workers Party of South Korea merged, forming the Workers' Party of Korea, at a congress in Pyongyang.

Both parties traced their origins to the Communist Party of Korea. Kim Il-sung of the Workers Party of North Korea became the party Chairman and Pak Hon-yong, who had been leader of the Workers Party of South Korea as well as the earlier Communist Party of Korea, and Alexei Ivanovich Hegay becoming deputy chairmen. There were a total of ten members of the first DPRK Politiburo.

The other members were Yi Sung-yop, Kim Sam-yong, Kim Ch aek, Kim Tu-Bong,Pal Il-u, and Pak Chong-ae. Most were later purged by Kim Il-sung.

However, official North Korean sources consider October 10, 1945 as the 'Party Foundation Day', citing a founding meeting of the 'North Korea Bureau of the Communist Party of Korea' founded under Soviet guidance. Foreign historians, however, dispute that date and claim that the meeting was in fact held on October 13. The party considers itself as a direct continuation of the North Korea Bureau and the Workers Party of North Korea, considering the two congresses of the Workers Party of North Korea as its own. This version of events can be seen as a move to downplay the importance of the communists from South Korea, who were purged in the 1950s.

The first five years of the WPK's rule were dominated by the Korean War. By October 1950, United Nations forces had occupied most of the DPRK and the WPK leadership had to flee to China. Many believe that if it had not been for Chinese intervention, the Korean communists would have been militarily defeated at that point. But in November, Chinese forces entered the war and threw the U.N. forces back, retaking Pyongyang in December and Seoul in January 1951. In March U.N. forces retook Seoul, and the front was stabilised along what eventually became the permanent "Armistice Line" of 1953. The WPK was able to re-establish its rule north of this line.

Mental Health Day Worldwide - Oct 10

World Mental Health Day (October 10), is a day for global mental health education, awareness and advocacy. It was first celebrated in 1992 at the initiative of the World Federation for Mental Health, a global mental health organization with members and contacts in more than 150 countries. This day, each October thousands of supports come to celebrate this annual awareness program to bring attention to Mental Illness and its major effects on peoples' life worldwide.In some countries this day is part of the larger Mental Illness Awareness Week.

Antifascist Uprising Day M a c e d o n i a - O c t 11

The Republic of Macedonia marks the Day of Anti-fascist uprising today, the National Uprising Day. October 11 marks the anniversary of the beginning of the Macedonian people's uprising against fascism during World War II. This holiday is observed through formal ceremonies at which the prime minister and other dignitaries deliver addresses acknowledging the significance of this revolt to the spirit of Macedonian independence. In conjunction with this holiday, the Macedonian Parliament recognizes accomplishments in the areas of science, culture, art, and journalism through the "October 11" life achievement awards.

On October 11, 1941, the people of Macedonia began to organize and mount an armed insurrection against their Bulgarian and Italian occupiers with an attack on the local Axis-power headquarters in the city of Prilep, located in the Vardar region of Macedonia.

Partisans staged a simultaneous uprising against the fascists in the city of Kumanovo. The October 11 rebellion launched the war for liberation from fascist occupation, which coincided with the rise of the communist movement in Macedonia.

N a t iona l C om ing Out D a y U . S . - O c t 11

National Coming Out Day (NCOD) is an internationally observed civil awareness day for coming out and discussion about gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender (LGBT), and asexual people. It is observed by members of the LGBT communities and their supporters (often referred to as "allies") on October 11 every year, or October 12 in the United Kingdom.

History

NCOD was founded in 1988 by Robert Eichberg, a psychologist from New Mexico and Jean O'Leary, an openly-gay political leader from Los Angeles, on behalf of the personal growth workshop The Experience and National Gay Rights Advocates. The date of October 11 was chosen because it was the anniversary of the 1987 National March on Washington for Lesbian and Gay Rights.

The first headquarters was located in the West Hollywood, California offices of the National Gay Rights Advocates.

18 states participated in the first NCOD, which was covered in the national media. In its second year, the headquarters moved to Santa Fe, New Mexico and participation grew to 21 states. After a media push in 1990, NCOD was observed in all 50 states and seven other countries. Participation continued to grow and in 1990 NCOD merged their efforts with the Human Rights Campaign Fund.

Observance Events are held annually to celebrate coming out and to raise awareness of the LGBT community and LGBT rights

movement. Participants are encouraged to wear pride symbols, such as the pink triangle (gays), Bisexual pride flag (bisexuals) & the black triangle (lesbians), the Greek letter lambda, and rainbows in jewelry and on clothing.

International observance:

In the United States, the Human Rights Campaign manages the event under the National Coming Out Project, offering resources to LGBT individuals, couples, parents and children, as well as straight friends and relatives, to promote awareness of LGBT families living honest and open lives. Candace Gingrich became the spokesperson for the day in April 1995.

Despite its name, National Coming Out Day (so called because it originated as an event in the United States) is in fact observed in many countries, including Australia, Switzerland, Germany, Canada, New Zealand, Croatia, Poland and the United Kingdom (in the UK it is celebrated on October 12). As of 2008, the Netherlands also has Coming Out Day on October 11.