Defining who “the other” is within a context of ideological and geographical tension such as the Cold War is a complex exercise.
“The other” can assume multiple identities: it may be the distant geopolitical enemy, symbolized by the Russian bear; it may be the neighbor across the border, perceived with suspicion or, conversely, experienced as a close relative; or it may even be a fellow serviceman who, despite wearing the same uniform, speaks a different language.
The answer to this question is neither simple nor self-evident, as it varies according to geographical perspective, ideology, and military role.
In this section, we explore how “the other” was perceived by those who wore an Italian or Yugoslav uniform, listening to the voices of individuals who experienced these ambiguous and often contradictory realities firsthand.
An invisible and distant enemy
For Italian military personnel stationed far from the border, the threat posed by “the other” was often abstract—an invisible and distant pressure that occasionally translated into moments of extreme alert.
During the Cuban Missile Crisis, for example, soldiers were subjected to intense tension: weapons and ammunition were issued, they were required to sleep fully dressed, and all vehicles were kept ready in the parade ground for immediate deployment.
In this context, “the other” was a potential yet massive invasion force, a global enemy that was invisible but ever-present.
In direct contact with the Soviets
If for some the threat remained distant, for others—especially in the maritime domain—“the other” was a physical and clearly identifiable target.
The primary task of Italian naval crews was to monitor and keep under surveillance all Soviet activities in the Mediterranean.
Here, contact with “the other” was direct and tense.
The immediate threat does not come from the East
For conscripts and reserve officers, the possibility of an attack coming from the East was often perceived as remote.
By contrast, the tensions of the 1960s in Alto Adige/South Tyrol represented a far more tangible reality. Soldiers deployed in that region experienced a climate of tension: the threat was considered immediate, and relations with the civilian population remained strained and distant.
And beyond the border? The testimony of a centenarian
The story of Franc Primožič reveals the shifting—and often imposed—nature of military identity in border regions.
After serving during the Second World War first in the German Army and later with the Soviet forces, Primožič arrived in Trieste in May 1945 with the tanks of the Yugoslav 2nd Armoured Brigade.
His military experience, however, continued into the very early years of the Cold War, precisely along the border with Italy.
The border question for those born on the border
For a soldier native of Trieste such as Maurizio Berquier, the issue of the border was experienced very differently from his fellow servicemen from other parts of Italy.
For some of them, it was surprising that part of Berquier’s family could live on the other side of the frontier.
This highlights the discrepancy between a local reality marked not only by confrontation but also by strong cross-border permeability, and a much more rigid and schematic perception of the concept of the border.
Patrolling the border behind Trieste
In units recruited mainly on a local basis and deployed in a territorial context such as that of Trieste, alterity could be encountered not only among the populations of the villages along the border, but also among fellow servicemen.
The situation was complex and multifaceted.
Emblematic in this regard is the testimony of Pierpaolo Donvito, a native Italian-speaking Triestine, who served in a unit that also included soldiers of Slovene language and culture.
Guarding the border to prevent escape
The primary mission of Yugoslav border units was not so much to prevent a foreign army from entering the country, but rather to stop individuals from clandestinely leaving Yugoslavia.
From this perspective, “the other” was not only the Italian counterpart—represented by the soldiers encountered or observed during patrols—but also the would-be escapee, often coming from other countries, who sought better living conditions across the border.
Conclusions
This narrative path shows how the identity of “the other” during the Cold War was a fluid concept, one that changed radically depending on the observer’s point of view.
The collective experience of those who wore a uniform thus resembles a fragmented mosaic, in which the pieces of the same geographical reality—the Italian eastern border—are reassembled into different and sometimes contradictory images, shaped by physical proximity to the frontier, personal fears or ideological preconceptions, and cultural and linguistic identity.
