The Full Wiki

Yugoslavia: Wikis

Advertisements
  
  
  
  

Note: Many of our articles have direct quotes from sources you can cite, within the Wikipedia article! This article doesn't yet, but we're working on it! See more info or our list of citable articles.

Encyclopedia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

General location of the political entities known as Yugoslavia. The precise borders varied over the years.

Yugoslavia (Serbo-Croatian, Macedonian, Slovene: Jugoslavija; Serbian Cyrillic: Југославија; literally in English: "South Slavia" or "Land of the South Slavs") is a term that describes three political entities that existed successively on the western part of Balkan Peninsula in Europe, during most of the 20th century.

The first country to be known by this name was the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, which before 3 October 1929 was known as the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. It was established on 1 December 1918 by the union of the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs and the Kingdom of Serbia (to which the Kingdom of Montenegro was annexed on 13 November 1918, and the Conference of Ambassadors in Paris gave international recognition to the union on 13 July 1922[1]). The Kingdom of Yugoslavia was invaded by the Axis powers in 1941, and because of the events that followed, was officially abolished in 1943 and 1945.

The second country with this name was the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia, proclaimed in 1943 by the Yugoslav Partisans resistance movement in World War II. It was renamed to the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia in 1946, when a communist government was established. In 1963, it was renamed again to the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY). This was the largest Yugoslav state, as Istria and Rijeka were added to the new Yugoslavia after the end of World War II. The constituent six Socialist Republics and two Socialist Autonomous Provinces that made up the country, were: SR Bosnia and Herzegovina, SR Croatia, SR Macedonia, SR Montenegro, SR Slovenia and SR Serbia (including the autonomous provinces of SAP Vojvodina and SAP Kosovo who after 1974 were largely equal to the other members of the federation[citation needed]). Starting in 1991, the SFRY disintegrated in the Yugoslav Wars which followed the secession of most of the country's constituent entities.

The last country to bear the name Yugoslavia was the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) established on March 27, 1992. It was a federation on the territory of the two remaining (non-secessionist) republics of Montenegro and Serbia (including the autonomous provinces of Vojvodina and Kosovo). On February 4, 2003, it was renamed to the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro, and officially abolished the name "Yugoslavia". On June 3 and June 5, 2006 respectively, Montenegro and Serbia declared independence, thereby ending the Yugoslav state. Kosovo declared independence in 2008. Its statehood is, however, still disputed.[2]

Contents

Background

Yugoslavia was the idea for a single state for all South Slavic intelligentsia and emerged in the late 17th and gained prominence in the 19th century Illyrian Movement, that culminated in the realization of the ideal with the 1918 collapse of Habsburg Austria-Hungary at the end of World War I and the formation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. However, the kingdom was better known, colloquially as well as even on maps, as Yugoslavia (or Jugo-Slavia in the rest of Europe); in 1929 it was formally renamed the "Kingdom of Yugoslavia".

Kingdom of Yugoslavia

The Kingdom of Yugoslavia and its banovinas in 1929
Advertisements

1918–1928

Yugoslavia was formed after World War I as what was commonly called at the time a "Versailles state".

King Alexander's period

King Alexander I banned national political parties in 1929, assumed executive power and renamed the country Yugoslavia. He hoped to curb separatist tendencies and mitigate nationalist passions. However, Alexander's policies later encountered opposition from other European powers stemming from developments in Italy and Germany, where Fascists and Nazis rose to power, and the Soviet Union, where Stalin became absolute ruler. None of these three regimes favored the policy pursued by Alexander I. In fact, Italy and Germany wanted to revise the international treaties signed after World War I, and the Soviets were determined to regain their positions in Europe and pursue a more active international policy.

Alexander attempted to create a centralized Yugoslavia. He decided to abolish Yugoslavia's historic regions, and new internal boundaries were drawn for provinces or banovinas. The banovinas were named after rivers. Many politicians were jailed or kept under police surveillance. The effect of Alexander's dictatorship was to further alienate the non-Serbs from the idea of unity.[3] During his reign the flags of Yugoslav nations were banned, Communist ideas were banned also.

The king was assassinated in Marseille during an official visit to France in 1934 by an experienced marksman from Ivan Mihailov's Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization in the cooperation of the Ustaše, a Croatian fascist revolutionary organization. Alexander was succeeded by his eleven year old son Peter II and a regency council headed by his cousin Prince Paul.

1934-1941

The international political scene in the late 1930s was marked by growing intolerance between the principal figures, by the aggressive attitude of the totalitarian regimes and by the certainty that the order set up after World War I was losing its strongholds and its sponsors were losing their strength. Supported and pressured by Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, Croatian leader Vladko Maček and his party managed the creation of the Banovina of Croatia (Autonomous Region with significant internal self-government) in 1939. The agreement specified that Croatia was to remain part of Yugoslavia, but it was hurriedly building an independent political identity in international relations. The entire kingdom was to be federalized but World War II stopped the fulfillment of those plans.

Prince Paul submitted to the fascist pressure and signed the Tripartite Treaty in Vienna on March 25, 1941, hoping to still keep Yugoslavia out of the war. But this was at the expense of popular support for Paul's regency. Senior military officers were also opposed to the treaty and launched a coup d'état when the king returned on March 27. Army General Dušan Simović seized power, arrested the Vienna delegation, exiled Paul, and ended the regency, giving 17 year old King Peter full powers. Hitler then decided to attack Yugoslavia on April 6, 1941, followed immediately by an invasion of Greece where Mussolini had previously been repelled.[4]

Yugoslavia during World War II

Partisan fighter Stjepan Filipović shouting "Death to fascism, freedom to the people!" (the Partisan slogan) shortly before his death in 1942.

Invasion of Yugoslavia

At 5:12 a.m. on April 6, 1941, German, Italian and Hungarian forces attacked Yugoslavia. The German Air Force (Luftwaffe) bombed Belgrade and other major Yugoslav cities. On April 17, representatives of Yugoslavia's various regions signed an armistice with Germany in Belgrade, ending eleven days of resistance against the invading German Army (Wehrmacht Heer). More than three hundred thousand Yugoslav officers and soldiers were taken prisoner.

The Axis Powers occupied Yugoslavia and split it up. The Independent State of Croatia was established as a Nazi satellite state, ruled by the fascist militia known as the Ustaše that came into existence in 1929, but was relatively limited in its activities until 1941. German troops occupied Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as part of Serbia and Slovenia, while other parts of the country were occupied by Bulgaria, Hungary, and Italy. From 1941-45, the Croatian Ustaše regime murdered around 500,000 people, 250,000 were expelled, and another 200,000 were forced to convert to Catholicism, the victims were predominantly Serbs, but include 37,000 Jews.[5]

See: Jasenovac concentration camp

Yugoslav People's Liberation War

From the start, the Yugoslav resistance forces consisted of two factions: the communist-led Yugoslav Partisans, and the royalist Chetniks. With the former receiving Allied recognition only to the Tehran conference (1943). The heavily pro-Serbian Chetniks were led by Draža Mihajlović, while the pan-Yugoslav oriented Partisans were led by Josip Broz Tito.

The Partisans initiated a guerrilla campaign which was developed into the largest resistance army in occupied Western and Central Europe. The Chetniks were initially supported by the exiled royal government as well as the Allies, but soon focused increasingly on combating the Partisans, rather than the occupying axis forces. By the end of the war, the Chetnik movement transformed into a collaborationist Serb nationalist militia, completely dependent on Axis supplies.[6] The highly mobile Partisans, however, carried on their guerrilla warfare with great success. Most notable of the victories against the occupying forces were the battles of Neretva and Sutjeska.

On November 25, 1942, the Anti-Fascist Council of National Liberation of Yugoslavia (Antifašističko vijeće narodnog oslobođenja Jugoslavije) was convened in Bihać, modern day Bosnia and Herzegovina. The council reconvened on November 29, 1943, in Jajce, also in Bosnia and Herzegovina and established the basis for post-war organization of the country, establishing a federation (this date was celebrated as Republic Day after the war).

The Yugoslav Partisans were able to expel the Axis from Serbia in 1944 and the rest of Yugoslavia in 1945. The Red Army provided limited assistance with the liberation of Belgrade and withdrew after the war was over. In May 1945, the Partisans met with allied forces outside former Yugoslav borders, after taking over also Trieste and parts of Austrian southern provinces Styria and Carinthia. However, the Partisans withdrew from Trieste in June of the same year.

Western attempts to reunite the Partisans, who denied supremacy of the old government of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, and the emigration loyal to the king, led to the Tito-Šubašić Agreement in June 1944, however Marshal Josip Broz Tito was seen as a national hero by the citizens, and was elected by referendum to lead the new independent communist state, starting as a prime minister. The official Yugoslav post-war estimate of victims in Yugoslavia during World War II is 1,704,000. Subsequent data gathering in the 1980s by historians Vladimir Žerjavić and Bogoljub Kočović showed that the actual number of dead was about 1 million.

SFR Yugoslavia

Numbered map of Yugoslav republics and autonomous provinces.
Marshal Josip Broz Tito.

On November 29, 1945, while still in exile, King Peter II was deposed by Yugoslavia's Constituent Assembly. However, he refused to abdicate.

On January 31, 1946, the new constitution of Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia, modeling the Soviet Union, established six People's Republics, an Autonomous Province, and an Autonomous District that were part of SR Serbia. The federal capital was Belgrade. Republics and provinces were (in alphabetical order):

Name
Capital
Flag
Coat of Arms
Location
Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo
Flag of SR Bosnia and Herzegovina.svg
SR Bosnia and Herzegovina coa.png
SFRY Bosnia and Herzegovina.png
Socialist Republic of Croatia Zagreb
Flag of SR Croatia.svg
CoA of SR Croatia.png
SFRY Croatia.png
Socialist Republic of Macedonia Skopje
Flag of the SR Macedonia.svg
Coat of arms of Macedonia.svg
SFRY Macedonia.png
Socialist Republic of Montenegro Titograd*
Flag of SR Montenegro.svg
SR Montenegro coa.png
SFRY Montenegro.png
Socialist Republic of Serbia
Socialist Autonomous Province of Kosovo
Socialist Autonomous Province of Vojvodina
Belgrade
Priština
Novi Sad
Flag of SR Serbia.svg
SR Serbia coa.png
SFRY Serbia.png
Socialist Republic of Slovenia Ljubljana
Flag of SR Slovenia.svg
SR Slovenia coa.png
SFRY Slovenia.png

* now Podgorica.

In 1947, negotiations between Yugoslavia and Bulgaria were led and finalized with the Bled agreement. The aim of the negotiations was to include Bulgaria in Yugoslavia or to form a new union of two independent countries. After the intervention of Stalin this agreement was never realized.

Yugoslavia solved the national issue of nations and nationalities (national minorities) in a way that all nations and nationalities had the same rights. The flags of the republics used versions of the red flag and/or Slavic tricolor, with a red star in the centre or in the canton.

In 1974, the two provinces of Vojvodina and Kosovo-Metohija (for the latter had by then been upgraded to the status of a province), as well as the republics of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro, were granted greater autonomy to the point that Albanian and Hungarian became nationally recognised minority languages and the Serbo-Croat of Bosnia and Montenegro altered to a form based on the speech of the local people and not on the standards of Zagreb and Belgrade. In Slovenia the recognized minorities were Hungarians and Italians.

Vojvodina and Kosovo-Metohija formed a part of the Republic of Serbia but those provinces also formed part of the federation, which led to the unique situation that Central Serbia did not have its own assembly but a joint assembly with its provinces represented in it. The country distanced itself from the Soviets in 1948 (cf. Cominform and Informbiro) and started to build its own way to socialism under the strong political leadership of Josip Broz Tito. The country criticized both Eastern bloc and NATO nations and, together with other countries, started the Non-Aligned Movement in 1961, which remained the official affiliation of the country until it dissolved.

Demographics

Yugoslavia had always been a home to a very diverse population, not only in terms of national affiliation, but also religious affiliation. Of the many religions, Islam, Catholicism, Judaism and Protestantism as well as various Orthodox faiths composed the religions of Yugoslavia, comprising over 40 in all. The religious demographics of Yugoslavia have changed dramatically since World War II. A census taken in 1921 and later in 1948 show that 99% of the population appeared to be deeply involved with their religion and practices. With postwar government programs of modernization and urbanization, the percentage of religious believers took a dramatic plunge. Connections between religious belief and nationality posed a serious threat to the post-war Communist government's policies on national unity and state structure. After the rise of communism, a survey taken in 1964 showed that just over 70% of the total population of Yugoslavia considered themselves to be religious believers. The places of highest religious concentration were that of Kosovo with 91% and Bosnia and Herzegovina with 83.8%. The places of lowest religious concentration were Slovenia 65.4%, Serbia with 63.7% and Croatia with 63.6%. Religious differences between Orthodox Christian Serbs, Catholic Croats, and Muslim Bosniaks and the rise of nationalism contributed to the collapse of Yugoslavia in 1991.[7]

Government

On 7 April 1963, the nation changed its official name to Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Tito was named President for Life. In the SFRY, each republic and province had its own constitution, supreme court, parliament, president and prime minister. At the top of the Yugoslav government were the President (Tito), the federal Prime Minister, and the federal Parliament (a collective Presidency was formed after Tito's death in 1980). Also important were the Communist Party general secretaries for each republic and province, and the general secretary of Central Committee of the Communist Party.

Josip Broz Tito was the most powerful person in the country, followed by republican and provincial premiers and presidents, and Communist Party presidents. Slobodan Penezić Krcun, Tito's chief of secret police in Serbia, fell victim to a dubious traffic incident after he started to complain about Tito's politics. The Interior Minister Aleksandar Ranković lost all of his titles and rights after a major disagreement with Tito regarding state politics. Sometimes ministers in government, such as Edvard Kardelj or Stane Dolanc, were more important than the Prime Minister.

The suppression of national identities escalated with the so-called Croatian Spring of 1970–1971, when students in Zagreb organized demonstrations for greater civil liberties and greater Croatian autonomy. The regime stifled the public protest and incarcerated the leaders, but many key Croatian representatives in the Party silently supported this cause, so a new Constitution was ratified in 1974 that gave more rights to the individual republics in Yugoslavia and provinces in Serbia.

Ethnic tensions and the economic crisis

The post-World War II Yugoslavia was in many respects a model[citation needed] of how to build a multinational state. The Federation was constructed against a double background: an inter-war Yugoslavia which had been dominated by the Serbian ruling class; and a war-time division of the country, as Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany split the country apart and endorsed an extreme Croatian nationalist faction called the Ustaše which committed genocide[citation needed] against Serbs. A small faction of Bosniak nationalists joined the Axis forces and attacked Serbs while extreme Serb nationalists engaged in attacks on Bosniaks and Croats.

The ethnic violence was only ended[citation needed] when the multiethnic Yugoslav Partisans took over the country at the end of the war and banned nationalism from being publicly promoted. Overall relative peace was retained under Tito's rule, though nationalist protests did occur, but these were usually repressed and nationalist leaders were arrested and some were executed by Yugoslav officials. However one protest in Croatia in the 1970s, called the "Croatian Spring" was backed by large numbers of Croats who claimed that Yugoslavia remained a Serb hegemony and demanded that Serbia's powers be reduced. Tito whose home republic was Croatia was concerned over the stability of the country and responded in a manner to appease both Croats and Serbs, he ordered the arrest of the Croat protestors, while at the same time conceding to some of their demands. In 1974, Serbia's influence in the country was significantly reduced as autonomous provinces were created in ethnic Albanian-majority populated Kosovo and the mixed-populated Vojvodina. These autonomous provinces held the same voting power as the republics but unlike the republics, they could not legally separate from Yugoslavia. This concession satisfied Croatia and Slovenia, but in Serbia and in the new autonomous province of Kosovo, reaction was different. Serbs saw the new constitution as conceding to Croat and ethnic Albanian nationalists. Ethnic Albanians in Kosovo saw the creation of an autonomous province as not being enough, and demanded that Kosovo become a constituent republic with the right to separate from Yugoslavia. This created tensions within the Communist leadership, particularly amongst Communist Serb officials who resented the 1974 constitution as weakening Serbia's influence and jeopardizing the unity of the country by allowing the republics the right to separate.

An economic crisis erupted in the 1970s which was the product of disastrous errors by Yugoslav governments, such as borrowing vast amounts of Western capital in order to fund growth through exports. Western economies then entered recession, blocked Yugoslav exports and created a huge debt problem. The Yugoslav government then accepted the IMF loan.

In 1989, according to official sources, 248 firms were declared bankrupt or were liquidated and 89,400 workers were laid off. During the first nine months of 1990 directly following the adoption of the IMF programme, another 889 enterprises with a combined work-force of 525,000 workers suffered the same fate. In other words, in less than two years "the trigger mechanism" (under the Financial Operations Act) had led to the lay off of more than 600,000 workers out of a total industrial workforce of the order of 2.7 million. An additional 20% of the work force, or half a million people, were not paid wages during the early months of 1990 as enterprises sought to avoid bankruptcy. The largest concentrations of bankrupt firms and lay-offs were in Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia and Kosovo. Real earnings were in a free fall and social programmes had collapsed; creating within the population an atmosphere of social despair and hopelessness. This was a critical turning point in the events to follow.

Approaching the breakup

Though the 1974 Constitution dampened the institutional and material powers of the federal government, Tito's authority substituted for this weakness until his death in 1980.

Breakup

Breakup of SFR Yugoslavia.
Serbian President Slobodan Milošević's unequivocal desire to uphold the unity of Serbs, a status threatened by each republic breaking away from the federation, in addition to his opposition to the Albanian authorities in Kosovo, further inflamed ethnic tensions.
Croatian President Franjo Tuđman refused to partition Croatia on ethnic lines, which angered the Serb population of Croatia who had wished to remain in union with Serbia-proper. This resulted in the outbreak of violence and war between Croats and Serbs ahead of Croatia's independence.
Bosnian President Alija Izetbegović pushed for independence of Bosnia, claiming that he would not allow Bosnia and Herzegovina to become part of what he called "Greater Serbia" which he accused the Serbian government of sponsoring. As head of Bosnia's government, Izetbegović would wage war on three fronts: against Bosnian Serbs, Bosnian Croats and also against a rebel faction of Bosniaks in northern Bosnia led by Fikret Abdić. The Bosnian state he initially wished to build was both against the Serbs' desire for their territory to remain in Yugoslavia, and one which would disenfranchise non-Bosniaks.
State entities on the former territory of Yugoslavia, 2008.

After Tito's death on 4 May 1980, ethnic tensions grew in Yugoslavia. The legacy of the Constitution of 1974 was used to throw the system of decision-making into a state of paralysis, made all the more hopeless as the conflict of interests had become irreconcilable. The constitutional crisis that inevitably followed resulted in a rise of nationalism in all republics: Slovenia and Croatia made demands for looser ties within the Federation, the Albanian majority in Kosovo demanded the status of a republic, Serbia sought absolute, not only relative dominion over Yugoslavia. Added to this, the Croat quest for independence led to large Serb communities within Croatia rebelling and trying to secede from the Croat republic.

In 1986, the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts drafted a memorandum addressing some burning issues concerning position of Serbs as the most numerous people in Yugoslavia. The largest Yugoslav republic in territory and population, Serbia's influence over the regions of Kosovo and Vojvodina was reduced by the 1974 Constitution. Because its two autonomous provinces had de facto prerogatives of full-fledged republics, Serbia found that its hands were tied, for the republican government was restricted in making and carrying out decisions that would apply to the provinces. Since the provinces had a vote in the Federal Presidency Council (an eight member council composed of representatives from six republics and two autonomous provinces), they sometimes even entered into coalition with other republics, thus outvoting Serbia. Serbia's political impotence made it possible for others to exert pressure on the 2 million Serbs (20% of total Serbian population) living outside Serbia.

Serbian communist leader Slobodan Milošević sought to restore pre-1974 Serbian sovereignty. Other republics, especially Slovenia and Croatia, denounced this move as a revival of great Serbian hegemonism. Milošević succeeded in reducing the autonomy of Vojvodina and of Kosovo and Metohija, but both entities retained a vote in the Yugoslav Presidency Council. The very instrument that reduced Serbian influence before was now used to increase it: in the eight member Council, Serbia could now count on four votes minimum – Serbia proper, then-loyal Montenegro, and Vojvodina and Kosovo.

As a result of these events, the ethnic Albanian miners in Kosovo organized strikes, which dovetailed into ethnic conflict between the Albanians and the non-Albanians in the province. At around 80% of the population of Kosovo in the 1980s, ethnic-Albanians were the majority. The number of Slavs in Kosovo (mainly Serbs) was quickly declining for several reasons, among them the ever increasing ethnic tensions and subsequent emigration from the area. By 1999 the Slavs formed as little as 10% of the total population in Kosovo.

Meanwhile Slovenia, under the presidency of Milan Kučan, and Croatia supported Albanian miners and their struggle for formal recognition. Initial strikes turned into widespread demonstrations demanding a Kosovan republic. This angered Serbia's leadership which proceeded to use police force, and later even the Federal Army was sent to the province by the order of the Serbia-held majority in the Yugoslav Presidency Council.

In January 1990, the extraordinary 14th Congress of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia was convened. For most of the time, the Slovenian and Serbian delegations were arguing over the future of the League of Communists and Yugoslavia. The Serbian delegation, led by Milošević, insisted on a policy of "one person, one vote", which would empower the plurality population, the Serbs. In turn, the Slovenes, supported by Croats, sought to reform Yugoslavia by devolving even more power to republics, but were voted down. As a result, the Slovenian, and eventually Croatian delegation left the Congress, and the all-Yugoslav Communist party was dissolved.

Following the fall of communism in the rest of Eastern Europe, each of the republics held multi-party elections in 1990. Slovenia and Croatia held the elections in April since their communist parties chose to cede power peacefully. Other Yugoslav republics – especially Serbia – were more or less dissatisfied with the democratization in two of the republics and proposed different sanctions (e.g. Serbian "customs tax" for Slovenian products) against the two of the union but as the year passed other republics communist parties saw the inevitability of the democratization process and in December as the last member of the federation – Serbia held parliamentary elections which confirmed (former) communists rule in this republic. The unresolved issues however remained. In particular, Slovenia and Croatia elected governments oriented towards greater autonomy of the republics (under Milan Kučan and Franjo Tuđman, respectively), since it became clear that Serbian domination attempts and increasingly different levels of democratic standards were becoming increasingly incompatible. Serbia and Montenegro elected candidates who favoured Yugoslav unity. Serbs in Croatia wouldn't accept a status of a national minority in a sovereign Croatia, since they would be demoted from a constituent nation of Croatia and this would consequently diminish their rights.

Yugoslav Wars

The war broke out when the new regimes tried to replace Yugoslav civilian and military forces with secessionist forces. When in August 1990 Croatia attempted to replace police in the Serb populated Croat Krajina by force, the population first looked for refuge in the JNA caserns, while the army remained passive. The civilians then organised armed resistance. These armed conflicts between the Croatian armed forces (“police”) and civilians mark the beginning of the Yugoslav war that inflamed the region. Similarly, the attempt to replace Yugoslav frontier police by the Slovenian police provoked regional armed conflicts which finished with a minimal number of victims. A similar attempt in Bosnia and Herzegovina led to a war that lasted more than 3 years (see below). The results of all these conflicts are almost complete emigration of the Serbs from all three regions, massive displacement of the populations in Bosnia and Herzegovina and establishment of the 3 new independent states. The separation of Macedonia was peaceful, although the Yugoslav Army occupied the peak of the Straža mountain on the Macedonian soil.

Serbian uprisings in Croatia began in August 1990 by blocking roads leading from the Dalmatian coast towards the inland almost a year before Croatian leadership made any move towards independence. These uprisings were more or less discretely backed up by the Serbian dominated federal army (JNA). The Serbs proclaimed the emergence of Serbian Autonomous Areas (known later as Republic of Serb Krajina) in Croatia. Federal army tried to disarm the Territorial defence forces of Slovenia (republics had their local defence forces similar to Home guard ) in 1990 but wasn't completely successful. Still Slovenia began to covertly import arms to replenish its armed forces. Croatia also embarked upon the illegal import of arms, (following the disaramament of the republics armed forces by the federal JNA) mainly from Hungary, and were under constant surveillance which produced a video of a secret meeting between the Croatian Defence minister Martin Špegelj and the two men, filmed by the Yugoslav Counter Intelligence (KOS, Kontra-obavještajna Služba). Špegelj announced that they were at war with the army and gave instructions about arms smuggling as well as methods of dealing with the Yugoslav Army's officers stationed in Croatian cities. Serbia and JNA used this discovery of Croatian rearmament for propaganda purposes. The film was spiced by distorting sounds and fabricated voice of the Croatian minister.

Also, guns were fired from army bases through Croatia. Elsewhere, tensions were running high.

In the same month, the Yugoslav People's Army (Jugoslovenska Narodna Armija, JNA) met with the Presidency of Yugoslavia in an attempt to get them to declare a state of emergency which would allow for the army to take control of the country. The army was seen as a Serbian service by that time so the consequence feared by the other republics was to be total Serbian domination of the union. The representatives of Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo, and Vojvodina voted for the decision, while all other republics, Croatia (Stipe Mesić), Slovenia (Janez Drnovšek), Macedonia (Vasil Tupurkovski) and Bosnia and Hercegovina (Bogić Bogićević), voted against. The tie delayed an escalation of conflicts, but not for long. Slobodan Milošević installed his proponents in Vojvodina, Kosovo and Montenegro during Yogurt Revolutions.

Following the first multi-party election results, in the autumn of 1990, the republics of Slovenia and Croatia proposed transforming Yugoslavia into a loose confederation of six republics. By this proposal republics would have right to self-determination. However Milošević rejected all such proposals, arguing that like Slovenes and Croats, the Serbs (having in mind Croatian Serbs) should also have a right to self-determination.

On March 9, 1991, demonstrations were held against Slobodan Milošević in Belgrade, but the police and the military were deployed in the streets to restore order, killing two people. In late March 1991, the Plitvice Lakes incident was one of the first sparks of open war in Croatia. The Yugoslav People's Army (JNA), whose superior officers were mainly of Serbian ethnicity, maintained an impression of being neutral, but as time went on, they got more and more involved in the state politics.

On June 25, 1991, Slovenia and Croatia became the first republics to declare independence from Yugoslavia. The federal customs officers in Slovenia on the border crossings with Italy, Austria and Hungary mainly just changed uniforms since most of them were local Slovenes. The border police were mostly already Slovenian before Slovenia's declaration of independence. The following day (June 26), the Federal Executive Council specifically ordered the army to take control of the "internationally recognized borders". See Ten-Day War .

The Yugoslav People's Army forces, based in barracks in Slovenia and Croatia, attempted to carry out the task within the next 48 hours. However, because of the misinformation given to the Yugoslav Army conscripts that the Federation was under attack by foreign forces, and the fact that the majority of them did not wish to engage in a war on the ground where they served their conscription, the Slovene territorial defence forces retook most of the posts within several days with only minimal loss of life on both sides. There was a suspected incident of a war crime, as the Austrian ORF TV station showed footage of three Yugoslav Army soldiers surrendering to the Territorial defense, before gunfire was heard and the troops were seen falling down. However, none were killed in the incident. There were however numerous cases of destruction of civilian property and civilian life by the Yugoslav Peoples Army – houses, a church, civilian airport was bombarded and civilian hangar and airliners inside it, truck drivers on the road Ljubljana – Zagreb and Austrian journalists on Ljubljana Airport were killed. Ceasefire was agreed upon. According to the Brioni Agreement, recognized by representatives of all republics, the international community pressured Slovenia and Croatia to place a three-month moratorium on their independence. During these three months, the Yugoslav Army completed its pull-out from Slovenia, but in Croatia, a bloody war broke out in the autumn of 1991. Ethnic Serbs, who had created their own state Republic of Serbian Krajina in heavily Serb-populated regions resisted the police forces of the Republic of Croatia who were trying to bring that breakaway region back under Croatian jurisdiction. In some strategic places, the Yugoslav Army acted as a buffer zone, in most others it was protecting or aiding Serbs with resources and even manpower in their confrontation with the new Croatian army and their police force.

In September 1991, the Republic of Macedonia also declared independence, becoming the only former republic to gain sovereignty without resistance from the Belgrade-based Yugoslav authorities. Five hundred U.S. soldiers were then deployed under the U.N. banner to monitor Macedonia's northern borders with the Republic of Serbia, Yugoslavia. Macedonia's first president, Kiro Gligorov, maintained good relations with Belgrade and the other breakaway republics and there have to date been no problems between Macedonian and Serbian border police even though small pockets of Kosovo and the Preševo valley complete the northern reaches of the historical region known as Macedonia (Prohor Pčinjski part), which would otherwise create a border dispute if ever Macedonian romantic nationalism should resurface (see VMRO). This was despite the fact that the Yugoslav Army refused to abandon its military infrastructure on the top of the Straža Mountain up to the year 2000.

As a result of the conflict, the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted UN Security Council Resolution 721 on November 27, 1991, which paved the way to the establishment of peacekeeping operations in Yugoslavia.[8]

In Bosnia and Herzegovina in November 1991, the Bosnian Serbs held a referendum which resulted in an overwhelming vote in favour of forming Serbian republic in borders of Bosnia and Herzegovina and staying in a common state with Serbia and Montenegro. On January 9, 1992, the self-proclaimed Bosnian Serb assembly proclaimed a separate "Republic of the Serb people of Bosnia and Herzegovina". The referendum and creation of SARs were proclaimed unconstitutional by the government of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and declared illegal and invalid. However, in February-March 1992 the government held a national referendum on Bosnian independence from Yugoslavia. That referendum was in turn declared contrary to the BiH and Federal constitution by the federal Constitution court in Belgrade and the newly established Bosnian Serb government. The referendum was largely boycotted by the Bosnian Serbs. The Federal court in Belgrade did not decide on the matter of the referendum of the Bosnian Serbs. The turnout was somewhere between 64–67% and 98% of the voters voted for independence. It was not clear what the two-thirds majority requirement actually meant and whether it was satisfied. The republic's government declared its independence on 5 April, and the Serbs immediately declared the independence of Republika Srpska. The war in Bosnia followed shortly thereafter.

The end of the Second Yugoslavia

Various dates are considered as the end of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia:

  • June 25, 1991, when Croatia and Slovenia declared independence
  • September 8, 1991, following a referendum the Republic of Macedonia declared independence
  • October 8, 1991, when the July 9 moratorium on Slovenian and Croatian secession was ended and Croatia restated its independence in Croatian Parliament (that day is celebrated as Independence Day in Croatia)
  • January 15, 1992, when Slovenia and Croatia were internationally recognized by most European countries
  • April 6, 1992, full recognition of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s independence by the United States and most European countries
  • April 28, 1992, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is formed
  • November 1995, Dayton Agreement is signed by leaders of FR Yugoslavia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia
  • June 14, 1996, the Agreement on Sub-Regional Arms Control is signed, limiting the military equipment of FR Yugoslavia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia
  • 1996–1999, Clashes between Yugoslav army and KLA
  • March 24-June 10, 1999, NATO bombing of FR Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)
  • June 1999, UN and NATO administration arrived in Kosovo
  • February 5, 2003, State Union of Serbia and Montenegro constituted
  • June 5, 2006, After referendum in Montenegro, Montenegro declared their independence and Serbia stated it is the successor of the State Union.
  • February 17, 2008, Kosovo declared independence from Serbia

Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia consisted of Montenegro and Serbia

The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) was formed on April 28, 1992, and it consisted of the former Socialist Republic of Serbia and Socialist Republic of Montenegro. The new constitution of Yugoslavia was voted by the rest of MPs, elected on federal one-party elections in 1986.

The war in the western parts of former Yugoslavia ended in 1995 with U.S.-sponsored peace talks in Dayton, Ohio, which resulted in the so-called Dayton Agreement.

In Kosovo, throughout the 1990s, the leadership of the Albanian population had been pursuing independence with a non-violent resistance in order to achieve independence for the province. In 1996, Albanians formed Kosovo Liberation Army. The Yugoslav reaction involved the indiscriminate use of force against civilian populations, and caused many ethnic-Albanians to flee their homes. Following the Racak incident and unsuccessful Rambouillet Agreement in the early months of 1999, NATO proceeded to bombard Serbia and Montenegro for more than two months, until an agreement was brokered between NATO and Milošević's government, with Russia acting as intermediary. Yugoslavia withdrew its forces from Kosovo, in return for NATO retracting their pre-war demand for NATO forces to enter Serbia, resulting in 250 000 Serbian and other non-Albanian refugees. Since June 1999, the province has been governed by peace-keeping forces from NATO and Russia, although all parties continued to recognize it as a part of Serbia until 2008. Kosovo declared independence in February 2008, but is not yet a member of the United Nations and is only recognised by 60 governments.

Milošević's rejection of claims of a first-round opposition victory in new elections for the Federal presidency in September 2000 led to mass demonstrations in Belgrade on October 5 and the collapse of the regime's authority. The opposition's candidate, Vojislav Koštunica took office as Yugoslav president on October 6, 2000. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was afterwards admitted to the United Nations, at the end of 2000.

On Saturday, March 31, 2001, Milošević surrendered to Yugoslav security forces from his home in Belgrade, following a recent warrant for his arrest on charges of abuse of power and corruption. On June 28 he was driven to the Yugoslav-Bosnian border where shortly after he was placed in the custody of SFOR officials, soon to be extradited to the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. His trial on charges of genocide in Bosnia and war crimes in Croatia and in Kosovo and Metohija began at The Hague on February 12, 2002, and he died there on 11 March 2006, while his trial was still ongoing. On April 11, 2002, the Yugoslav parliament passed a law allowing extradition of all persons charged with war crimes by the International Criminal Tribunal.

In March 2002, the Governments of Serbia and Montenegro agreed to reform the FRY in favour of a new, much weaker form of cooperation called Serbia and Montenegro. By order of the Yugoslav Federal Parliament on February 4, 2003, Yugoslavia, at least nominally, ceased to exist. A federal government remained in place in Belgrade but assumed largely ceremonial powers. The individual governments of Serbia and of Montenegro conducted their respective affairs almost as though the two republics were independent. Furthermore, customs were established along the traditional border crossings between the two republics.

On May 21, 2006, 86 percent of eligible Montenegrin voters turned out for a special referendum on the independence of Montenegro from the state union with Serbia. They voted 55.5% in favor of independence, reaching the 55% threshold set by the European Union. On June 3, 2006, Montenegro officially declared its independence, with Serbia following suit two days later, effectively dissolving one of the last vestiges of the former Yugoslavia.

Legacy

New states

Countries created from the former Yugoslavia:

Name
Capital
Flag
Coat of Arms
Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo
Flag of Bosnia and Herzegovina.svg
Coat of arms of Bosnia and Herzegovina.svg
Croatia Zagreb
Flag of Croatia.svg
Coat of arms of Croatia.svg
Kosovo[2] Pristina[2]
Flag of Kosovo.svg
Coat of arms of Kosovo.svg
Macedonia Skopje
Flag of Macedonia.svg
Coat of arms of the Republic of Macedonia.svg
Montenegro Podgorica
Flag of Montenegro.svg
Coat of arms of Montenegro.svg
Serbia Belgrade
Flag of Serbia.svg
Coat of arms of Serbia.svg
Slovenia Ljubljana
Flag of Slovenia.svg
Coat of Arms of Slovenia.svg

The first former Yugoslav republic to join the European Union was Slovenia, which applied in 1996 and became a member in 2004. Croatia applied for membership in 2004. Macedonia applied in 2004, and will probably join by 2010–2015.[9]. Montenegro presented its official application to the European Union, with the hopes of gaining EU candidate status by 2009, although it has yet to be accepted.[10]. The remaining three republics have yet to apply so their acceptance generally is not expected before 2015. These states are signatories of various partnership agreements with the European Union. Since 1 January 2007, they have been encircled by member-states of EU (and Albania, which is encircled with them). The Assembly of Kosovo declared independence from Serbia in February 2008. Its independence is recognised by 65 UN member states and the Republic of China (Taiwan). On 8 October 2008, upon request of Serbia, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution asking the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion on the issue of Kosovo's declaration of independence.[11] This process is currently ongoing.

Remaining cultural and ethnic ties

The similarity of the languages and the long history of common life have left many ties among the peoples of the new states, even though the individual state policies of the new states favour differentiation, particularly in language. The Serbo-Croatian language is linguistically a unique language, with several literary and spoken variants and also was the imposed means of communication used where other languages dominated (Slovenia, Macedonia). Now, separate sociolinguistic standards exist for the Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian languages. Although the SFRY had no official language, technically there had been three official languages, along with minority languages official where minorities lived, but in all federal organs only Serbo-Croatian or Croato-Serbian was used and others were expected to use it as well.

Remembrance of the time of the joint state and its perceived positive attributes is referred to as Yugo-nostalgia (Jugonostalgija). Many aspects of Yugonostalgia refer to the socialist system and the sense of social security it provided. There are still people from the former-Yugoslavia who self-identify as Yugoslavs, and commonly seen in demographics relating to ethnicity in today's independent states.

Miscellaneous

See also

References

Notes

  1. ^ http://www.orderofdanilo.org/en/family/index.htm
  2. ^ a b c Kosovo is the subject of a territorial dispute between the Republic of Serbia and the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo. The Assembly of Kosovo unilaterally declared its independence on 17 February 2008, a move that is recognised by 65 of the 192 UN member states and the Republic of China (Taiwan), but not by other UN member states. Serbia claims it as part of its own sovereign territory.
  3. ^ The Balkans since 1453. p. 624. http://books.google.com/books?id=xcp7OXQE0FMC&pg=PA624. 
  4. ^ http://www1.yadvashem.org.il/about_holocaust/month_in_holocaust/april/april_chronology/chronology_1941_april_06.html
  5. ^ "Croatia". Shoah Resource Center - Yad Vashem. http://www1.yadvashem.org/odot_pdf/Microsoft%20Word%20-%205930.pdf. Retrieved 4 January 2010. 
  6. ^ 7David Martin, Ally Betrayed: The Uncensored Story of Tito and Mihailovich, (New York: Prentice Hall, 1946), 34.
  7. ^ http://atheism.about.com/library/world/KZ/bl_YugoReligionDemography.htm
  8. ^ "Resolution 721". N.A.T.O.. 1991-09-25. http://www.nato.int/ifor/un/u911127a.htm. Retrieved 2006-07-21. 
  9. ^ http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/2008/12/montenegro-applies-for-eu-membership/63428.aspx
  10. ^ Montenegro files EU membership application
  11. ^ "U.N. backs Serbia in judicial move on Kosovo | International". Reuters. 2008-10-08. http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE49780C20081008. Retrieved 2009-07-20. 

Further reading

  • Allcock, John B.: Explaining Yugoslavia. New York: Columbia University Press, 2000
  • Anne Marie du Preez Bezdrob: Sarajevo Roses: War Memoirs of a Peacekeeper. Oshun, 2002. ISBN 177007031
  • Chan, Adrian: Free to Choose: A Teacher's Resource and Activity Guide to Revolution and Reform in Eastern Europe. Stanford, CA: SPICE, 1991. ED 351 248
  • Cigar, Norman, : Genocide in Bosnia: The Policy of Ethnic-Cleansing. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1995
  • Cohen, Lenard J.: Broken Bonds: The Disintegration of Yugoslavia. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1993
  • Conversi, Daniele: German -Bashing and the Breakup of Yugoslavia, The Donald W. Treadgold Papers in Russian, East European and Central Asian Studies, no. 16, March 1998 (University of Washington: HMJ School of International Studies) http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/conversi/german.html
  • Dragnich, Alex N.: Serbs and Croats. The Struggle in Yugoslavia. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1992
  • Fisher, Sharon: Political Change in Post-Communist Slovakia and Croatia: From Nationalist to Europeanist. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006 ISBN 1 4039 7286 9
  • Glenny, Mischa: The Balkans: Nationalism, War and the Great Powers, 1804-1999 (London: Penguin Books Ltd, 2000)
  • Glenny, Mischa: The fall of Yugoslavia: The Third Balkan War, ISBN 0-14-026101-X
  • Gutman, Roy.: A Witness to Genocide. The 1993 Pulitzer Prize-winning Dispatches on the "Ethnic Cleansing" of Bosnia. New York: Macmillan, 1993
  • Hall, Brian: The Impossible Country: A Journey Through the Last Days of Yugoslavia. Penguin Books. New York, 1994
  • Harris, Judy J.: Yugoslavia Today. Southern Social Studies Journal 16 (Fall 1990): 78–101. EJ 430 520
  • Hayden, Robert M.: Blueprints for a House Divided: The Constitutional Logic of the Yugoslav Conflicts. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000
  • Hoare, Marko A., A History of Bosnia: From the Middle Ages to the Present Day. London: Saqi, 2007
  • Jelavich, Barbara: History of the Balkans: Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, Volume 1. New York: American Council of Learned Societies, 1983 ED 236 093
  • Jelavich, Barbara: History of the Balkans: Twentieth Century, Volume 2. New York: American Council of Learned Societies, 1983. ED 236 094
  • Kohlmann, Evan F.: Al-Qaida's Jihad in Europe: The Afghan-Bosnian Network Berg, New York 2004, ISBN 1-85973-802-8; ISBN 1-85973-807-9
  • Lampe, John R: Yugoslavia As History: Twice There Was a Country Great Britain, Cambridge, 1996, ISBN 0 521 46705 5
  • Owen, David: Balkan Odyssey Harcourt (Harvest Book), 1997
  • Ramet, Sabrina: The Three Yugoslavias: State-building and Legitimation, 1918-2003. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2006
  • Sacco, Joe: Safe Area Gorazde: The War in Eastern Bosnia 1992-1995. Fantagraphics Books, January 2002
  • Silber, Laura and Allan Little:Yugoslavia: Death of a Nation. New York: Penguin Books, 1997
  • West, Rebecca: Black Lamb and Gray Falcon: A Journey Through Yugoslavia. Viking, 1941
  • White, T.: Another fool in the Balkans - in the footsteps of Rebbecca West. Cadogan Guides, London , 2006
  • Time homepage: New Power

External links


Travel guide

Up to date as of January 14, 2010

From Wikitravel

The country of Yugoslavia broke up after civil war during the 1990's. It now consists of the following seven countries:

This article is a disambiguation page. If you arrived here by following a link from another page you can help by correcting it, so that it points to the appropriate disambiguated page.

1911 encyclopedia

Up to date as of January 14, 2010

From LoveToKnow 1911

"YUGOSLAVIA, or Jugoslavia. - The " Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes " (Kraljevina Srba Hrvata i Slovenaca), more commonly known as Yugoslavia, came into being in the closing months of 1918 as a result of the collapse of AustriaHungary and the voluntary union of its Yugoslav territories with the former Kingdoms of Serbia and Montenegro. In point of international law, its existence may be said to date from Dec. I 1918, when the Prince-Regent Alexander of Serbia formally complied with the invitation of the Yugoslav National Council to assume the regency over the sister provinces also. That the Great Powers were so long in according official recognition to the new state was due to purely political reasons connected with the Adriatic dispute.

Yugoslavia consists of the former independent Kingdoms of Serbia and Montenegro; the triune Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia-Dalmatia (of which the first two enjoyed special autonomy under the Kingdom of Hungary, and sent 40 delegates from their own Parliament in Zagreb to that of Budapest, while the third was one of the 17 provinces of the Austrian Empire, with a local diet at Zara); parts of the Banat, Backa and Baranja (which were integral portions of Hungary proper); Slovenia (consisting of portions of Carniola, Carinthia, Styria and Istria, each holding a position in Austria analogous to Dalmatia); and Bosnia-Herzegovina (which was from 1878 to 1918 under the joint administration of Austria and Hungary and had its own diet since 1910). Fiume, which from 1867 to 1918 had been an ti j Scale,1: 5,000,000 0 to = Frontier of' 1921 Yugoslavia N 5 e7 es of s,, G rmain,1® 1; Neuilly,Triano??,&RePallo Other International Frontiers 1921 International Frontiers 1914 Boundaries between Austria,Hungary, Croatia & Bosnia 1914

-

_ Railways autonomous unit under Hungary, has by the Treaty of Rapallo been constituted as an independent State. Italy has acquired almost all the Slovene and Croft districts of Gorizia and Istria.

A census of the new State was taken in the spring of 1921, the total pop. being 12,162,900.

Table of contents

Early Tendencies Toward Unity

The Yugoslav movement was by no means a recent one, as is often assumed. Despite the different traditions of culture due to the rival ecclesiastical influence of Rome and Byzantium, a sense of kinship had survived throughout centuries of separation, and was strengthened by continual migration. The two most notable cases were the formation of the Uskok pirate settlements along the Dalmatian coast in the 16th century, and the settlement of the Serbian patriarch and many thousand Serb refugee families in Slavonia and S. Hungary, at the invitation of the Emperor Leopold I. in 16 9 0. Ivan Gundulic and the brilliant group of poets that gathered round him at Ragusa in the early 17th century, reflected in their writings the little Slav Republic's intimate connexion with its kinsmen of Serbia and Bosnia. The first advocate of the Pan-Slav idea in Russia itself was Krizanic, a Croat Catholic priest from Dalmatia, and early writers in favour of Slavonic racial and literary unity were the Slovene schoolmaster Bohoricz (1584) and the Dalmatian Croat Orbini, who wrote in Italian (Il regno degli Slavi 1601). The Franciscan friar Kacic, who did so much for the revival of popular poetry in Bosnia and Dalmatia in the mid-18th century, shows similar traces of Serbophil feeling, and the achievements of Dusan and other Serbian Tsars have bulked almost as largely in the modern literature of the Croats as of the Serbs themselves. .

The first active impulse toward political unity was given by Napoleon, when after Wagram he erected the Slovene districts and most of Croatia and Dalmatia into a separate Illyrian State, incorporated in the French Empire, but having its administrative capital at Laibach. This short-lived experiment, which inspired the muse of Vodnik, the first Slovene poet of real mark, had its aftermath in the Illyrian movement of the forties, which centred in Zagreb, the Croatian capital. Its real motive force was supplied by Ljudevit Gaj, who combined to a remarkable degree the qualities of author, philologist and political agitator. His two newspapers, the Illyrian National Gazette and the Danica Ilirska (Illyrian Daystar) provided a literary focus for the rising generation; while his reform of Croat orthography, planned on parallel lines with Vuk Karadzic's epochmaking philological work in Serbia, assured to modern SerboCroat literature a definitely unitary development. The fact that linguistically Serb and Croat had thus become interchangeable terms, only to be distinguished by the respective use of the Cyrillic and Latin alphabets, inevitably reacted upon the political situation, and served as an incentive to the movement for unity. In somewhat sensational and affected but prophetic words Gaj compared Illyria to a lyre, " a triangle between Skutari, Varna and Villach. Its strained and inharmonious chords are Carinthia, Gorizia, Istria, Croatia, Slavonia, Dalmatia, Ragusa, Bosnia, Montenegro, Herzegovina, Serbia, Bulgaria and Lower Hungary," and " on the great lyre of Europe they must harmonize once more." He saw in the Magyars the chief obstacle to the realization of his dream, and openly warned them that they were " an island in the Slav ocean," which one day might easily engulf them. The alienation of Croat and Magyar - for centuries close allies in the struggle against the Turk - grew rapidly in the 'forties, mainly owing to the aggressive legislation passed by successive Hungarian diets, and tending to curtail Croatia's ancient liberties and extend the sway of the Magyar language. It was a fertile soil for Gaj's agitation, and in 1848 the Croatian nation found in Baron Jelacic a military leader who voiced the Illyrian idea and hoped to realize it in union with the Habsburg Dynasty and the other subject nationalities of Hungary. It is highly significant that Jelacic as Ban of Croatia went hand in hand with the newly elected Serb-patriarch Rajacic: that Croats and Serbs, including many volunteers from the principality of Serbia, fought side by side against Hungary, and that the poet-prince-bishop Peter II. of Montenegro wrote to Jelacic, expressing his solidarity with the movement.

Croatia after 1848. - After the collapse of the Hungarian revolution in 1849, the Croats, in the words of Pulszky, received as reward the same absolutist regime which had been imposed upon the Magyars as punishment. Jelacic and Gaj died as disappointed men, and the very general resentment aroused by the ingratitude of Francis Joseph vented itself also against the name of Illyria, which rapidly disappeared from the political arena. But its place was taken more and more by Yugoslavia, which, it should be remarked, was then still used to denote all the territories inhabited by any southern Slav tribe, and so to include the Bulgars no less than the Serbo-Croats and Slovenes. On the intellectual side the new movement found its champion and its Maecenas in Bishop Strassmayer, who for over 50 years devoted the surplus revenues of the wealthy see of Dya Kovo (Djakovo) to national purposes, and was mainly instrumental in founding at Zagreb the southern Slav Academy (1867), the first Croat university (1874) and a modern gallery and school of arts. Historical research and literary criticism flourished under Racki, the first president of the Academy, and his pupils: while Strassmayer did much to revive the Glagolitic, or ancient Slavonic liturgy, and to win for it the favour of Pope Leo XIII. Close relations linked the great Bishop with Prince Michael, Serbia's ablest modern ruler, and with Prince Danilo of Montenegro who assured Michael, " Form the Kingdom of Serbia, and I will mount guard before your palace." The Dual System. - In the late 'sixties the Yugoslav idea met with a serious set-back. Prussia's victory forced Austria to come to terms with the Magyars: and the bargain was sealed by the Ausgleich, or Dual System, at the expense of the lesser nationalities. Within certain limits Croatia's autonomy was respected, but so far from Zagreb being consulted, the terms of the new settlement were in effect dictated from Budapest and only submitted pro forma to a carefully " packed " Croatian Diet, after the bargain between Budapest and Vienna had already made of them an accomplished fact. Meanwhile the murder of Prince Michael in the same year deprived Serbia of a great statesman and the movement for unity of a possible head. During the 'seventies Austro-Hungarian policy was increasingly successful in checking intercourse between the Yugosla y s of the monarchy and those outside its bounds. Meanwhile the newly constituted " Party of Right," resting upon a narrow Catholic clerical basis, aimed at the reunion of Dalmatia with CroatiaSlavonia in the so-called Triune Kingdom, within whose bounds it affected to deny the very existence of Serbs. This Pan-Croat ideal was favoured in Vienna as a convenient rival to Pan-Serbism with its centre in Belgrade; but its natural effect was to drive the Serbs of Slavonia and S. Hungary into the arms of Budapest. The insurrection of Bosnia against the Turks only served to increase party discords: for though it aroused the keenest sympathy of all Serbs and Croats, and thus furthered the sense of racial affinity, it gave rise to rival claims upon Bosnia which could be exploited in the interest of Vienna and Budapest. The official policy of Baron Kallay, for 20 years the administrator of Bosnia, was to taboo the name of Serb in the hope of creating a distinct " Bosnian " nationality.

The period between 1883 and 1903 is the most humiliating in the modern history of the southern Sla y s. Count KhuenHedervary, as Ban of Croatia, reduced political corruption to a fine art and governed by playing off Croat and Serb against each other, and fanning the dying flames of religious bigotry: while at the same time Serbia under King Milan was reduced to the position of a mere satellite of Vienna. The humiliating secret treaty concluded between Austria-Hungary and Serbia in 1881 had specially pledged the latter to repress any nationalist agitation against the Dual Monarchy, even in respect of that Bosnia for which Serbia had risked her existence four years earlier. Disunion had reduced the Yugosla y s to an almost negligible quantity in Balkan politics.

The National Revival in Croatia

After the turn of the century, however, a new generation arose both among Croats and Serbs, which had received its education abroad, and especially in Prague, where the ethical and political teachings of Prof. Masaryk exercised a remarkable influence over the progressive youth of all Slav countries. All thinking men were increasingly conscious that no progress was possible until Croat and Serb presented an united front against German-Magyar predominance. The first signs of reviving solidarity came in 1903, when Khucn's rigorous suppression of rioting in Zagreb and several country districts of Croatia, led to demonstrations of protest throughout Dalmatia and Istria. Thirty Croat deputies of those provinces resolved to lay their kinsmen's grievances before the Emperor, and his refusal of an audience played a material part in alienating Croat sympathies from the Crown. It is not uninstructive to note that as the same year 1868 witnessed a setback in both Croatia and Serbia, so the same year 1903 marks a parallel revival in national consciousness in both countries, coincident with the fall of Khuen-Hedervary and the removal of the Obrenovic dynasty. Abroad the new King's position was prejudiced by the hideous crime which led to his accession, but among his own people this was from the first atoned for by the introduction of a real constitutional regime and increased political stability. The Serbian court, instead of being a centre of perpetual scandal and misrule, resumed its true position as a focus of national aspirations, and this change was not lost upon the Yugosla y s of " the other side." Resolution of Fiume. - The advocates of political cooperation between Serb and Croat saw their opportunity in the constitutional conflict which broke out between Crown and Parliament in Hungary: and on Oct. 4 1905 40 Croat deputies from Croatia, Dalmatia and Istria formulated in the so-called " Resolution of Fiume " a complete programme of political reform, and defined the basis upon which solid friendship between Croats and Magyars seemed attainable. The prime movers in this action were Dr. Trumbic, a leading Dalmatian advocate and mayor of Spalato, and Mr. Supilo, also a Dalmatian, the editor of the Novi List at Fiume. Ten days later 26 Serb deputies from the various provinces of the monarchy, met at Zara, indorsed the principles embodied in the Resolution of Fiume and declared in favour of joint political action between Croats and Serbs. It is worthy of note that the Resolution of Fiume anticipated the modern doctrine of self-determination by the very explicit assertion that " every nation has the right to decide freely and independently concerning its existence and its fate." On Nov. 14 the Croat and Serb parties in the Diet of Dalmatia publicly affirmed the principle that " the Croats and Serbs are one nation ": and this standpoint has never since been abandoned. The Serbo-Croat coalition, formed on the basis of the Fiume Resolution, at once acquired the mastery in Croatia, and even when its short-lived alliance with the Hungarian coalition - in power in Hungary since April 1906 - was replaced by acute conflict in the summer of 1907, no amount of repression from Budapest could destroy its solid majority in the Croatian diet. Baron Paul Rauch, the Magyar nominee as Ban, failed, with all his official apparatus, to secure a single seat for his creatures at the general election of 1908, and therefore proceeded to govern without Parliament, by an elaborate system of administrative pressure, press persecution and espionage. Under his regime Magyar intolerance of Croat national aspirations joined hands with the designs of the Ballplatz against Serbia in connexion with the impending annexation of Bosnia.

Friedjung Trial

The treason trial which opened at Zagreb in March 1909 pursued the parallel aims of intimidating the Serbs of Croatia, of splitting the new-found unity of Serb and Croat and of proving to the outside world the existence of a dangerous Pan-Serb movement organized from Belgrade inside the monarchy and amply justifying the countermove of annexation. None of these aims were attained; for the trial, which turned on the evidence of the police spy Nastic (already chief witness in the doubtful Cettinje bomb trial of 1908) degenerated into a public scandal, owing to the conduct of the judges and public prosecutor, and rallied Croat public opinion in defence of the S3 Serb victims. Serbo-Croat solidarity became still more apparent when the Austrian historian Dr. Friedjung, in the Neue Freie Presse of March 25 1909, openly charged the leaders of the Serbo-Croat coalition with being in the pay of Serbia. This article, which was based upon a mass of incriminating documents supplied to Friedjung by the Austro-Hungarian Foreign Office, had been timed to coincide with the outbreak of hostilities against Serbia, and was to have been the first of a series convicting the Serbian Government and dynasty of aggressive and even murderous designs. When at the last moment war was averted by the surrender of Serbia and Russia, an attempt was made to withdraw the article, but the first copies had already been issued: and Count Aehrenthal now had the double embarrassment of the Zagreb trial, which no longer served any purpose of foreign policy, but suited the aggressive game of Budapest against Zagreb, and of a libel action brought against Friedjung by those leaders of the Serbo-Croat coalition whose honour he had impugned. Despite the Ballplatz's efforts at postponement, the trial took place in Vienna in Dec. 1909, and revealed the documents upon which Friedjung had relied, as impudent forgeries concocted by subordinate officials of the Austro-Hungarian legation in Belgrade, with the connivance of the minister, Count Forga.cs. The responsibility was finally brought home to Forgacs by Prof. Masaryk in a famous speech before the Austrian delegation: and Aehrenthal preserved an embarrassed silence when his minister was bluntly compared with Azev, the Russian agent provocateur. The Cuvaj Dictatorship. - The triumphant vindication of Mr. Supilo and his colleagues of the Serbo-Croat coalition gave a fresh incentive to the idea of unity throughout the southern Slav provinces of Austria-Hungary. Rauch's position had become untenable, and he was succeeded by the more moderate Dr. Tomasic, who brought with him from Budapest the concession of a somewhat extended franchise (260,000 instead of 50,000 electors). His attempt to emancipate himself from the control of the coalition at the general elections of Oct. 1910 failed miserably, and after a year of temporizing, he suddenly threw off all pretence at legal forms, dissolved the Diet almost before it had met, and in Dec. 1911 ordered new elections. But in spite of wholesale terrorism he only succeeded in wrenching five more seats from the coalition, and on Jan. 19 1912 was replaced as Ban by a little known official Mr. Cuvaj, who promptly dissolved the Diet before it had even met, and proceeded to muzzle the press, to close the university and to arrest several prominent politicians. On April 3 the Croatian constitution was completely suspended by royal decree, and Cuvaj invested with far-reaching dictatorial powers. An attempt on his life by the student Jukic (June 8) was followed by still more reactionary measures, and on July 11 the autonomy of the Serbian orthodox church in Slavonia and Hungary was also suspended.

The Cuvaj regime had a magical effect in furthering the movement for Yugoslav unity. Specially significant were the Memorandum addressed to the throne by 55 deputies of the Croat party of Right, in the Croatian, Bosnian, Dalmatian and Istrian Diets, and the political strike organized by the pupils of both sexes in almost all the middle schools of the Slavonic South. This gave rise to sympathetic demonstrations in many Dalmatian and Bosnian towns, and to a series of interpellations and speeches by the Yugoslav and Czech deputies in the Parliament of Vienna. The Slovenes - clericals no less than progressives - became increasingly active in the Yugoslav movement, and their press began to demand the abandonment of the distinctive Slovene dialect as a hindrance to unity..

Balkan War. - It was peculiarly unfortunate for AustriaHungary that the Cuvaj regime should have been at its very height when the Balkan League achieved its dramatic victory over the Turks. The battle of Kumanovo in particular was greeted with indescribable enthusiasm throughout the Yugoslav provinces. The Serbian and Bulgarian anthems were sung on the streets, collections were made in every village for the Balkan Red Cross funds, and when Austria-Hungary mobilized, protests were heard on every side against the bare possibility of war with Serbia, which to the Yugosla y s would be a veritable civil war. The Austrian Government committed the grave blunder of answering these demonstrations by press confiscations and by the dissolution of the town councils of Spalato and Sebenico. This, however, was promptly countered by a monster meeting of protest at Zara on Nov. 24, attended by all but three of the Serbo-Croat deputies of Dalmatia, and delegates of almost every municipality in the province. Doctor Drinkovic, leader of the Dalmatian clericals, openly declared that " in the Balkan sun we see the dawn of our day!" and the Catholic Bishop of Cattaro greeted the news from Monastir by reciting the Nunc Dimittis. On all sides Serbia was now regarded as the southern Slav Piedmont: and the Dual Monarchy's consistently hostile policy toward Belgrade, and its only too successful efforts to set Serbia and Bulgaria by the ears, intensified the excitement and resentment among its Yugoslav subjects. The Trialist solution (which would have united the Yugoslav provinces of Austria-Hungary in a third state enjoying equality with the two existing partners) rapidly lost popularity, even among the clerical parties, which had been attracted by the prospect of Catholic predominance in such a State.

On Dec. 27 1912 Cuvaj was replaced by a colourless official, Dr. Unkelhausser, who marked time until a fresh candidate for the post of commissary or dictator was forthcoming in the person of Baron Skerlecz (July 23 1913). This appointment, at a moment when Austria-Hungary was again contemplating war with Serbia, naturally increased the ferment, and on Aug. 18, a determined attempt was made upon the life of Skerlecz by a young American Croat. At length on Nov. 30 Skerlecz was made Ban, the illegal decrees of Cuvaj revoked, and general elections ordered - the fifth since 1906. The coalition maintained its majority, the Government only obtaining ten seats: but though this time the Diet was allowed to meet, no attempt was made to satisfy Yugoslav aspirations or to solve the real issues at stake between Hungary and Croatia. More and more the situation in the south of the monarchy was allowed to drift. The political leaders were far more conscious than either Vienna or Budapest of the volcanic state of public opinion: but when in genuine alarm and from a sense of impotence they attempted to restrain their followers, the only result was a loss of influence over the younger generation, which had become increasingly infected by revolutionary ideas. Among the Yugosla y s the students had always dabbled unduly in politics, and this tend-. ency was accentuated by the widespread unrest and excitement which followed upon the Balkan upheaval. On the eve of war the university and middle-school students had five or six newspaper organs of their own - notably Jugoslavija in. Prague, Val in Zagreb and Jedinstvo in Spalato - which advocated more radical action alike in politics and literature. Nor is it surprising that the hotheads among them, fired by the example of Jukic and other would-be assassins of Varesanin, Cuvaj and Skerlecz, should have indulged in terrorist projects. From this group came the young Bosnian Serb students Princip, Cabrinovic, Graben and others, who murdered the Archduke Francis Ferdinand and the Duchess of Hohenberg at Sarajevo on June 28 1914, and thus lit a spark in the European powder magazine.

The World War. - Immediately on the outbreak of the World War measures of extreme severity were taken by the civil and military authorities of Austria-Hungary throughout their Yugoslav provinces. The exact number of persons arrested or interned will probably never be known, but that the Yugoslays were regarded, and treated, as a hostile population, is abundantly proved by the three following facts, which could be mul tiplied indefinitely. Doctor Tresic-Pavicic, the DalmatianCroat deputy, was informed by one of the judges who examined him that over 5,000 had been imprisoned in Dalmatia, Istria and Carniola. In the single internment camp of Arad there were 3,400 deaths among the victims from Bosnia alone; and Father Nikolic, a Catholic priest from Istria, testified to having himself buried over 2,000 Istrian victims, and Doctor Martinovic to a knowledge of 8,000 fatal cases in the Styrian camps. In Dalmatia the leading deputies (e.g. Smodlaka, Cingrija, Tresic, Drinkovic) and many priests, advocates, doctors and other intellectuals were arrested, some being used as hostages and forced to accompany railway patrols, under the threat of instant death in case of sabotage by the population. All the municipal councils in Dalmatia (with the solitary exception of Zara, which had an Italian majority) were dissolved at an early stage in the war. Among the Slovenes of Istria and Carniola there were also numerous arrests, and the Matica Slovenska, the chief Slovene literary society, was dissolved and its funds confiscated. Press censorship was of course very rigid throughout the Dual Monarchy, but many Yugoslav newspapers were suppressed altogether. It was perhaps natural that repression should be specially severe in Bosnia. There were wholesale internments, conducted with the utmost brutality: and the horrors of the camps of Doboj, Mostar, Arad, Thalerhof, Mollersdorf, Gmiind, were early in 1918 revealed by Doctor Tresic in the Austrian Reichsrat. After the Archduke's murder the headquarters of various Serbian institutions in Sarajevo had been sacked by mobs, with the open connivance of the police: after the outbreak of war practically all Serb societies and schools were closed in Bosnia. At a later stage the Orthodox calendar and the Cyrilline alphabet were prohibited, and this was actually enforced in Serbia itself during the Austrian occupation, and in the Serbian districts of Hungary from July 1916 onward. Bosnia was also the scene of a succession of monster political trials. In March 1915, 28 schoolboys of Banjaluka were sentenced to terms varying from two years to four months for founding a local Yugoslav society. In July 65 schoolboys from Sarajevo and Travnik received similar sentences, and again in Oct. 38 more boys from Tuzla were condemned to a total of 156 years. In Nov. 1915 at Banjaluka 151 prominent Bosnian Serbs - including 5 deputies and 20 orthodox priests - were put on trial for treason: and eventually 16 death sentences were passed, and terms of imprisonment totalling 858 years and a collective fine of 14 million crowns, were passed. Worse even than this was the system of wholesale expatriation adopted as a punishment for those who had shown a friendly attitude to the invading Serbian army. During the spring of 1915 the official organ at Sarajevo published list after list of Bosnian-Serb families who were thus declared to have forfeited their citizenship: and many thousands of women and children were driven across the Montenegrin frontier, often with only the clothes in which they stood. The motive was avowedly the same which in the Middle Ages led a medixval garrison to drive the civil population of a town into the camp of its would-be deliverers. With every year of war the number of confiscations of property increased in the Yugoslav provinces, as in Bohemia and Transylvania - vengeance upon the families at home being widely used in order to deter Slav, Italian or Rumanian prisoners from enlisting in the various volunteer corps in process of formation on the Russian, Balkan and Italian fronts. In Croatia alone was there even a semblance of constitutional government. The diet of Zagreb was allowed to meet, and the Serbo-Croat coalition pursued a policy of pure opportunism, avoiding any pronouncement on matters of high policy, but buying a certain relaxation of regime in Croatia by supporting the Budapest Government and its nominee Skerlecz. But even this subservient and cautious House sometimes asserted itself: and on one occasion its vicepresident Doctor Magdic proclaimed " the nation's constant desire for unification in a single and independent political body." Yugoslav Propaganda Abroad. - Meanwhile a certain number of Yugoslav leaders had managed to reach foreign soil before the outbreak of war, and during the winter of 1914 constituted themselves as the Yugoslav Committee. Its two foremost leaders were Doctor Trumbic and Mr. Supilo (two of the makers of the Resolution of Fiume) and it also included Doctor Hinkovic (known as the chief advocate in the Zagreb treason trial), Ivan Mestrovic the sculptor, the Slovene deputies Gregorin and Trinajstic, the Bosnian Serb deputies Stojanovic, SrSkic and Vasiljevic, publicists of repute such as Marjanovic and Banjanin, and prominent representatives of the Yugoslav colonies in North and South America, such as the scientist Pupin and the shipping magnate Baburica. Their original centre was Rome, but in view of the hostile attitude of the Salandra-Sonnino Government they transferred their activities to Paris and London early in 1915. They were in close and cordial contact with the Serbian Government, but rightly insisted on retaining entire independence of action, their funds being derived from their wealthy S. American supporters, who had long been enthusiasts for the Yugoslav idea. Their first public pronouncement was an appeal to the British Parliament and nation (May 1915) for sympathy with the cause of Yugoslav unity and the dissolution of Austria-Hungary. This formed a natural complement to the unanimous declaration of the Serbian Skupstina in Dec. 1914 for a union of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes in one State.

Secret Treaty of London

The entry of Italy into the war was a serious set-back to the Yugoslav cause, for under the Treaty of London (April 27 1915) she was to obtain, in the event of an Entente victory, wide districts in Gorizia, Carniola, Istria and Dalmatia, peopled by not less than 700,000 Yugosla y s. The frontier was to follow the watershed of the Julian Alps from Tarvis as far east as the Snjeznik (Schneeberg) and to reach the sea just east of Volosca, Fiume being expressly reserved to Croatia. To Italy was assigned the northern half of the Dalmatian mainland as far as Cape Planka, and all the islands save Krk (Veglia) and Rab (Arbe) in the N., Solta and Brazza in front of Spalato, and the few which lie to the south of Meleda. The jealously guarded secret was discovered by Mr. Supilo in Petrograd within a few days of the signature of the treaty, and the main facts becoming known in Austria-Hungary, were skilfully exploited by her to rally the Croats and Slovenes in defence of their national territory. It was easy to represent the Entente as having betrayed the interests of Serbia and her kinsmen: and as for a time the Pasic Cabinet, in deference to the narrowly Orthodox influences then all powerful at Petrograd, was prepared to limit its claims to the mainly Serb and Orthodox provinces of Bosnia and Slavonia, and to leave the Catholic Croats and Slovenes to their fate, there was during the summer a certain revulsion of feeling in favour of Austria-Hungary, who appointed a Serb Orthodox frontiersman (Granicar), General Boroevic, to the chief command on the Isonzo front. The conquest of Serbia, however, once more closed the ranks of the Yugosla y s, who saw in unity their sole hope for the future: and the desertions to the Entente which were so marked a feature of the first winter, became so rife as to render necessary a drastic revision of the Austro-Hungarian regimental system. Henceforth the various corps lost more and more their territorial character, one nationality was set to watch and control the other, and espionage and delation prevailed.

The Yugoslav Legions

During the winter of 1915 delegates of the Yugoslav Committee, with the Tsar's special permission, began enrolling volunteers from among the prisoners on the Russian front; and by March 1916 a division of 23,000 men had been concentrated at Odessa, and a second was formed later. Serbian officers under General Livkovic were sent out, and many officers of the future Czechoslovak legions first saw service in this corps. The Yugosla y s greatly distinguished themselves during the Dobruja campaign (Nov. 1916), and their wounded shot themselves or each other on the battle-field, rather than fall as traitors or deserters into the hands of Austria. It was with this corps that Dr. Elsie Inglis and a detachment of the Scottish Women's Hospitals served as medical unit. After the Russian collapse most of the survivors were gradually drafted through Murmansk, England and France to the Salonika front: one brigade was cut off by the Bolshevik Revolution and had to be evacuated through Siberia. In 1916 the Yugoslav Committee had also set itself to recruiting among its compatriots in America, but in this case its success was hampered by many cross currents of republican, clerical, Austrian and Montenegrin feeling: and those who did actually volunteer showed considerable lack of discipline and were not always treated with the necessary tact by the Serbian military authorities.

The Yugosla y s inside Austria-Hungary

The accession of the Emperor Charles, and the ferment aroused by the Russian Revolution, led to considerable political changes in both halves of the Dual Monarchy, the most notable being the dismissal of Count Tisza from the Hungarian premiership (May 23 1917), the grant of a general political amnesty, and the summons of the Austrian Reichsrat, which had not been allowed to meet since March 1914. No sooner was political life thus resumed than all the Slovene, Croat and Serb deputies of Austria united to form a " Yugoslav parliamentary Club," which entered into close alliance with the Czech Club. At the opening sitting (May 30) Czechs, Poles and Ruthenes defined their national attitude in formal resolutions, and the Slovene leader, Father Korosec, in the name of the Yugoslays, demanded " the union of all the Yugoslav territories of the Monarchy in an independent state organism, free from the rule of any foreign nation, and resting on a democratic basis, under the sceptre of the Habsburg-Lorraine Dynasty." The last phrase was treated in some quarters as a proof of confirmed Austrophilism: in reality it was a minimum concession to the existing order, without which its framers could not have continued their activity. By this time it was sufficiently obvious that the Yugosla y s were tacitly if not explicitly agreed upon a triple parallel policy, framed for all contingencies. In Croatia the coalition was more opportunist than ever, and sent its delegates to the coronation of Charles as King of Hungary: by its compliance it obtained the appointment of its own nominee, Mr. Mihalovic, as Ban, and was thus able to husband Croatian resources and on occasion to practise passive resistance. It accepted the status quo as a working basis, but no amount of pressure could wring from it a disavowal of Trumbic and his colleagues. Meanwhile the opposition parties openly allied themselves with the Yugoslav Club in Austria, which agitated for complete national unity, but saved itself from prosecution by occasional references to the dynasty and absolute silence regarding Serbia. It was left to the Yugoslav Committee abroad to claim independence as well as unity, to repudiate the Habsburgs (in a manifesto on the eve of the Budapest coronation) and to exalt the achievements of Serbia and the Karagjorgjevic dynasty. The three groups communicated secretly through Switzerland, and it was felt that the time had come for the exiles to take a fresh step forward, in view of the prominence given to the doctrine of self-determination since the Russian Revolution and America's entry into the war. Moreover the collapse of Tsarism had deprived Mr. Pasic of his strongest support abroad, and forced him to abandon his narrowly Orthodox basis and bring his policy more into line with modern democratic tendencies.

Declaration of Corfu. - After some weeks of negotiation the so-called " Declaration of Corfu " was signed on July 20 1917, between Pasic as Serbian Premier (and in this case as the mouthpiece of all the Serbian parties) and Dr. Trumbic as president of the Yugoslav Committee. The signatories were careful to disclaim all idea of a pact or treaty, and to define the declaration as a mere statement of ideals and principles which could not acquire binding force until ratified by elected representatives of the nation as a whole. It may however be regarded as the birth certificate of the future Yugoslavia, and as fixing the lines of future development. After affirming that the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes constitute a single nation and appealing to the right of self-determination, it declared in favour of complete national unity under the Karagjorgjevic dynasty, " a constitutional democratic and parliamentary monarchy, equality of the three national names and flags, of the Cyrilline and Latin alphabets, and of the Orthodox Catholic and Mussulman religions, equal rights for all citizens, universal suffrage in parliamentary and municipal life, and the freedom of the Adriatic to all nations." The future constitution was to be established after the conclusion of peace by a constituent assembly, which " will be the source and consummation of all authority in the State." A week later Trumbic and his colleagues were welcomed on the Balkan front by the Voivode Misic with an impassioned speech in favour of unity. The Declaration of Corfu made a profound impression in Austria-Hungary, which was heightened by Mr. Lloyd George's speech in honour of Serbia at a luncheon given by the Serbian Society of Great Britain to Pasic (Aug. 8). The Zagreb press could only comment indirectly, but conveyed its meaning by insisting that the Reichsrat programme of May 30 was an absolute minimum. The growing self-confidence of the Austrian Sla y s was shown by the bluntness of their refusal to cooperate with the new Premier, Doctor von Seidler, whose offer of portfolios to their leaders drew from Count Tisza a strong protest in the Hungarian Parliament. Under Magyar pressure Seidler explicitly condemned all schemes of federalism, and pledged the Government and even the crown itself not to adopt any reforms which did not leave untouched the existing provincial boundaries. The Czechs and Yugosla y s, finding the door thus shut in the face of their national aspirations, even in the modified Habsburg form, naturally stiffened in their opposition. On Dec. 18 they went so far as to demand national representation of their own at the peace negotiations with Bolshevist Russia at Brest Litovsk.

Pact of Rome. - During 1916-7 Italian public opinion, encouraged by Sonnino and his press organs, had been definitely hostile to the Yugosla y s, whom it denounced as mere Austrian agents. The facts regarding the Yugoslav legions and the services rendered by Yugoslav deserters at Gorizia and in the Trentino were simply suppressed. The disaster of Caporetto (Nov. 1917) had a sobering effect, and the need for solidarity on the part of all the subject nationalities of Austria-Hungary, - a category which included also Italians, - if Italy's chief enemy was to be overthrown, became increasingly apparent. Further causes for alarms were the secret meeting between General Smuts and Count Mensdorv, to discuss a separate peace between Austria and the Entente (Dec. 1917) and the public pronouncements of President Wilson and Mr. Lloyd George in favour of " autonomy " for the subject races, instead of the independence held out to them by the Allied pronouncement of Jan. 1917. In Dec. 1917 Mr. Wickham Steed succeeded in bringing together Trumbic and his colleagues first with General Mola and Signori Emanuel and Chiesi (of the Corriere and Secolo), and then with the Italian Irredentist Socialist leaders. Their informal discussions laid the basis for more serious negotiations between Trumbic and Signor Torre, representing an influential committee of Italian deputies and senators. The agreement signed between them in London on March 7 1918 laid down the basis of ItaloYugoslav cooperation: it recognized each of the two nations to be equally interested in the completion of the other's national unity, and in the liberation of the Adriatic. It left territorial questions to be decided amicably after the war, " on the basis of the principle of nationality and self-determination," and mutually guaranteed the rights of national minorities. This agreement is known as the Pact of Rome, because it was publicly proclaimed at a " Congress of the Oppressed Nationalities of Austria-Hungary," held on April 8 in the Roman Capitol. The Yugosla y s were represented by Trumbic and his Committee and by 12 deputies of the Serbian Skupstina, the Czechoslovaks by Benes and Stefanik, the Poles by Zamorski, Skirmunt and Seyda, the Rumanians by Draghicescu, Lupu and Mironescu. Baron Sonnino held aloof, but Premier Signor Orlando, greeted the congress with enthusiasm, and the first result was a combined propaganda on the Italian front, organized by Allied delegates and members of all the national committees. The effect of the congress and of this propaganda was to hasten the disintegration in the Austro-Hungarian army, and the High Command (in a communiqué of July 27) admitted that wholesale defections of the Czechoslovaks and the Yugosla y s had. materially contributed to Italy's brilliant stand against the last Piave offensive in June. Unfortunately, while the new Czechoslovak army was recognized by Italy and took its place in the front line, Baron Sonnino, for political reasons, vetoed the formation of similar Yugoslav legions, though General Diaz had consented, and though the Yugoslays interned at Nocera and elsewhere were clamouring to be enrolled.

Collapse of Austria-Hungary

Meanwhile the Roman congress was deliberately imitated by an imposing congress at Prague (May 16), at which Czech, Polish, Italian, Rumanian, Slovak and Yugoslav delegates attended. Among the latter were the mayor of Zagreb, the poet Vojnovic, and prominent Serb, Croat and Slovene deputies of all parties, including the peasant leader Stephen Radic and the future minister Pribicevic. Their resolutions, though necessarily vague, amounted to a pledge of mutual support in the cause of unity and independence. During 1918, the initiative among the Yugosla y s of the Monarchy fell more and more into the hands of the Slovenes, led by Father Korosec since the premature death of Monsignor Krek. The official recognition accorded to the Pact of Rome by ]vIr. Lansing in the name of America (May 31) was a fresh encouragement: and Korosec, after constituting a Yugoslav National Council for the furtherance of unity, convoked a new Slav congress at Lyublyana (Ljubljana) on Aug. 18. The demonstrative part taken by the prince-bishop Jeglic and the leading Catholic clergy, and the fact that the Emperor's birthday was entirely disregarded, was intended as an answer to those who claimed the Slovene Catholics as a bulwark of the Habsburg throne. The central authority in Austria was steadily breaking down, and the food crisis was rendered still more acute by the widespread formation of " Green Cadres " - well organized armed bands which held positions in the mountains and defied capture. As early as Feb. a mainly Yugoslav revolutionary committee had almost gained control of the Cattaro naval base, which would have fallen into Entente hands if the ringleaders, who crossed the Adriatic for help, had not been detained by subordinate Italian subordinates until the Pola squadron had time to crush the mutiny. Moreover the High Command viewed with alarm the growth of " Septembrist " doctrine among the troops - i.e. the insistence upon " peace by September " and a refusal to face a fifth winter in the trenches.

During the late summer the authorities in Vienna and Budapest keenly debated rival plans for solving the southern Slav question - in every case, however, in accordance with Austrian or Hungarian rather than Yugoslav interests. Strangely enough the only attempts to consult the Yugosla y s themselves were an audience to which the Emperor Charles summoned Father Korosec and a journey undertaken by Count Tisza in Sept., with the crown's approval, to Zagreb, Sarajevo and Dalmatia. This last attempt to win support for the Magyar solution was everywhere met with a blank refusal, and in Bosnia especially the Orthodox, Catholic and Moslem leaders united in a manifesto assuring him of their adherence to the full programme of Yugoslav unity. The surrender of Bulgaria (Sept. 30) naturally rendered the nationalities indisposed to concessions, and the Austrian Premier's admission that national autonomy was now inevitable was icily received. The Czech and Yugoslav spokesmen in the Reichsrat insisted upon separate representation at the peace negotiations, and the absolute right to decide their own future State allegiance (Oct. 1).

Events now followed each other with lightning speed. On Oct. 4 Austria-Hungary, in a note to America, accepted President Wilson's speeches as a basis of discussion, and on the 8th Baron Hussarek admitted that the Monarchy's internal structure must be modified, and " full-grown nations " determine their own future. This only precipitated the collapse, and while Count Tisza voiced Hungarian public opinion in declaring the basis of the Dual system to be shattered, the Yugoslav National Council was transplanted from Ljubljana to Zagreb and strengthened by the inclusion of representatives of all parties (Oct. io). On the 16th the Hungarian Government declared in favour of personal union, and next day Hussarek published an imperial proclamation, dividing Austria (not Austria-Hungary) into four federal units (German, Czech, Yugoslav and Ukrainian) and leaving the Poles to make their own decision. This project was stillborn and pleased no one. Korosec in the name of the Czech and Yugoslav Clubs unreservedly rejected it and claimed that the future of both nations was an international problem which only the future Peace Conference could solve. Henceforth the Yugosla y s acted independently of both Vienna and Budapest: and when on Oct. 21 the news of President Wilson's answer to Count Burian's final peace note (refusing to negotiate save on the basis of a recognition of Czechoslovak and Yugoslav national claims) became generally known, the old regime vanished almost as if by magic. Extraordinary scenes took place in many towns, the troops tearing off their military badges with the Habsburg arms, and trampling them underfoot. National councils were speedily formed in Dalmatia and Bosnia, which arranged for the disarmament of the troops pouring northward from the broken Albanian and Macedonian fronts. As early as the 23rd a Croat regiment stationed in Fiume disarmed the Magyar militia and took possession of the town. On the 24th Count Andrassy was appointed joint foreign minister, but the machinery of State had ceased to work, and both the Austrian and Hungarian Cabinets were in statu demissionis. On the 28th (the same day on which the Czechoslovak Republic was born in Prague) the military command in Zagreb handed over its authority to the National Council, and next day the diet proclaimed the independence of Croatia from Hungary, and assumed control of Fiume. The arsenals of Pola and Cattaro were already in the hands of the insurgents; and the Emperor Charles, in the hope either of winning the favour of the new regime in Zagreb or of throwing an apple of discord between it and the Entente, signed a decree on Oct. 31 making over the whole Austro-Hungarian fleet to the Yugoslav State. This was not unnaturally interpreted by the Italian Nationalists as a proof of collusion between Zagreb and Vienna; nor was it generally known that as early as Oct. 4 Stepanek and Giunio, as delegates of the Czech and Yugoslav revolutionary committees, reached Italy in a fishing-boat, to concert with the Allies a general rising along the coast, but were closely imprisoned in Rome and not allowed to communicate with Doctor Benes and Doctor Trumbic till nearly three weeks had been lost. But for this delay the fleet might have been in the Entente's hands a fortnight before the final Italian offensive opened on the Piave. Unhappily every step led to a fresh misunderstanding. The action of the Supreme Council in Paris in prescribing the frontier line of the secret treaty of London as the line of occupation under the Austro-Hungarian armistice was keenly resented by the Yugosla y s as a breach with Wilsonian principles. The Allies very properly insisted that the fleet must be surrendered into their hands, but before this could take place a deplorable incident occurred in Pola harbour, the " Viribus Unitis " being blown up by an Italian mine, with a Yugoslav admiral and crew on board. In Italy Baron Sonnino's frankly anti-Slav attitude threw the Pact of Rome into the shade: and the Consulta worked hard to prevent Yugoslavia's recognition by the Allies.

Rival " Great Serb" and "Yugoslav" Programmes

That this recognition had not already been accorded before the collapse of the Central Powers began was due to disunion among the Yugosla y s themselves. During the summer America gave a lead to the Allies by accepting the Yugoslav programme, and after Austria's failure on the Piave there was a growing disposition on the part of the western Powers to fall into line with Mr. Lansing's very clear pronouncements. But Pasic, free from the restraints of a coalition and from all parliamentary control, had reverted to his original pan-Serb standpoint, and steadily declined to reconstruct his Cabinet on a wider Yugoslav basis. Trumbic on his part could not enter a purely Serbian Cabinet without prejudicing that freedom of choice of his compatriots in the Dual Monarchy, upon which the moral case of the Yugosla y s depended. A series of incidents proved the difference of outlook to be not merely personal but fundamental. In July Mr. Mihajlovic, the Serbian minister at Washington, was summarily dismissed. by Pa g e, .the reason, being his refusal as a good Yugoslav to transmit to the American Government a project assigning Bosnia to Serbia as " compensation " in the event of a patched-up peace. On July 25 at the London Mansion House Mr. Balfour publicly indorsed the full Yugoslav programme, as formulated by the Serbian minister, Mr. Jovanovic: but the latter's full report to his home Government was answered by a severe snub, and during the winter he too was dismissed for his Yugoslav sentiments. When on Aug. 9 Mr. Balfour officially recognized the Czechoslovak National Council as " trustee of the future Czechoslovak Government," he was ready to extend a similar recognition to the Yugoslav cause, but as a preliminary condition he very reasonably insisted upon unanimity between those who claimed to represent the two groups of Yugoslays. Pasic adhered to his standpoint, and even the efforts of Venizelos and Take Jonescu to bring him and Trumbic together were unavailing. When in the last week of Oct. the rival statesmen moved from London to Paris, all hope of Yugoslav recognition before the opening of the Peace Conference had vanished, owing to the stiffening in the attitude of Italy.

Zagreb declares Independence

One of the first steps of the new Zagreb Government was to recognize Trumbic and his committee as its representatives abroad, and to send delegates to Switzerland to discuss the measures for consummating national unity. On Nov. g the Declaration of Geneva was signed by Pasic as Serbian Premier, Father Korosec, Doctor Cingrija (mayor and deputy of Ragusa) and Doctor Zerjav (a Slovene Progressive) for .the Zagreb Council, Trumbic and four others for the Yugoslav Committee, and Trifkovic, Draskovic and Marinkovic as chiefs of the Serbian opposition parties. " By this act," it was laid down, " the new State appears and stands from to-day as an indivisible state-unit and as a member of the Society of Free Nations. The former frontiers no longer exist." The Governments of Belgrade and Zagreb were to retain their former spheres until a constituent assembly, elected by universal suffrage, could draw up a new constitution. Yielding to the unanimous desire of the other delegates, Pasic officially requested the Entente to recognize the Zagreb Council as the supreme authority in the ex-Austro-Hungarian provinces, and Trumbic as its accredited representative in the West, until unification could be completed. The repeated efforts made by Pasic to avert so distasteful a decision were held to disqualify him from the leadership of the new united Cabinet, but in order to secure his renunciation it was found necessary to exclude the other party chiefs. This arrangement, however, never really came into force, for the simple reason that telegraphic communications between the West and Serbia were hopelessly irregular, and that events continued to move, with the advance of the Serbian army and civil authorities from the South and of the Italians from the West. On Nov. 8 Gen. Franchet d'Esperey received at Belgrade a Hungarian peace delegation under Count Karolyi, and concluded with them an armistice whose provisions still further complicated the situation. No orders were given for the evacuation of Slovakia; in Transylvania an impossible shaped line was drawn, such as left Cluj (Kolozsvar) and many pure Rumanian districts in Magyar hands; while the Rumanians were incensed by the assignment of Temesvar (Temisoara) and the whole Banat to Serbia. The Serbian army was also allowed to occupy the Backa, Syrmia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, but no territory farther west: and for a moment it seemed as though an attempt was being made to leave the Croats and Slovenes to their fate and to form an aggrandized Serbia on the lines advocated by Pasic and Petrograd in the summer of 1915. Any such development was, however, averted by the advance of the Italian army beyond the Armistice line, in the direction of Ljubljana. For to meet this danger, the Zagreb Government urgently invited the assistance of the Serbian army, which during the final advance contained a large proportion of Yugoslav volunteers. The first Serbian troops entered Fiume on Nov. 18, and a most dangerous situation arose between them and the Italians in Istria and Dalmatia, which was only very partially mitigated by the dispatch of American military and naval forces to Trieste and Fiume. Much of the blame falls upon the Supreme Council, which shrank from the only effective means of allaying friction - immediate Allied occupation of the disputed zone, pending the decision of the Peace Conference. The Council's occasional outbursts against Italy only rendered Baron Sonnino still more intractable, and irritated Italian public opinion. No satisfactory solution was possible unless the Treaty of London was abrogated, and this involved the abandonment of other secret treaties to which Paris and London clung. America pointedly defined the Adriatic problem as a test case, but amid the pressure of other affairs it was allowed to drift.

Union proclaimed at Belgrade

The equivocal attitude of the Entente toward the new State naturally hastened the process of union. On Nov. 23 the Zagreb National Council proclaimed the union of the territories under its control with the Kingdoms of Serbia and Montenegro, and invited the PrinceRegent of Serbia to assume the regency of the new State. This decision (passed with only one dissentient voice, but that unhappily Stephen Radic, the peasant leader) took formal effect on Dec. 1, when Prince Alexander, at the formal request of 24 delegates from Zagreb, proclaimed the union and repeated their cry " Long live free and united Yugoslavia." Meanwhile on Nov. 26 a hurriedly convoked national assembly at Podgoritsa had proclaimed the deposition of King Nicholas and his dynasty, and the union of Montenegro with Serbia in the new united State. The first Yugoslav Cabinet was constituted ?tinder Protic as Premier and Father Korosec as vice-Premier: Trumbic became foreign minister, and the other portfolios were diyided more or less equally between Serbia and the new territories. Pa s ic was appointed principal delegate at the Peace Conference, with Trumb16, Vesnic (minister in Paris) and Zolger (a Slovene professor who had held office under Seidler in Austria).

I I I

The Adriatic Crisis. - Apart from agrarian riots in Slavonia and Bosnia, the transition to the new regime was accomplished with remarkable ease. Italy's claims upon Istria and Dalmatia rallied the Yugosla y s to the cause of national unity, and intense indignation was aroused by the action of the Entente in drawing an armistice line against Austria-Hungary almost identical with that prescribed by the secret treaty of London, and in sanctioning Italy's prompt occupation of the disputed territory. Friction was increased by a whole series of incidents along the coast, by the deportation of prominent Yugosla y s to Italy and by the entry of Italian troops into Fiume, despite the protests of the Yugoslav civil and military authorities (Nov. 18).' Meanwhile the whole Nationalist press of Italy, actively ,encouraged by Sonnino and his entourage, opened a fierce campaign against the Yugosla y s and their western supporters, which rapidly developed into agitation against the Allies. By the close of the year the situation had become so envenomed that Bissolati, the foremost Italian advocate of conciliation, found it necessary to withdraw from the Orlando Cabinet, and on Jan. I I 1919 was howled down at a great meeting in Milan. At the Paris Conference there was from the first a deadlock in the Adriatic dispute. Clemenceau and Lloyd George found themselves between two irreconcilable standpoints - between Sonnino, who claimed the liberal fulfilment of their treaty pledges, with the addition of the port of Fiume, and President Wilson, 'who refused all cognizance of the secret treaties and regarded them as expressly abrogated by the Allies when they accepted his successive notes as the basis of the Armistice. The three western Powers were in the impossible position of judges in a dispute to which one was a party, while the other two were accessories: the only Great Powers from whom an impartial verdict could be expected were Japan, who resolutely held aloof from purely European quarrels, and America, who quite logically regarded the Adriatic as a test case for the application of the new order in Europe. It was on these grounds that the Yugosla y s, from whom the treaty had always been carefully concealed and who had of course never recognized its validity, offered to submit the whole dispute to the arbitration of President Wilson (Feb. II). On March 3, however, Italy, who had steadily refused to recognize the accomplished fact of Yugoslav unity and insisted on the Conference only admitting the Yugosla y s as a " Serbian " delegation, declined American arbitration and threatened to withdraw altogether from Paris unless their territorial demands were conceded. This in turn strengthened the hands of the extreme section among the Yugosla y s, who now advanced the full ethnographic claim, involving Trieste and Gorizia as well as Dalmatia and Istria, and at the same time increased their demands against Bulgaria, Austria and Albania. Nor was it very easy for the Serbs and Croats to show moderation toward Italy, without appearing to desert the Slovenes, at whose expense, for obvious geographical reasons, the main amputations must inevitably take place. The bad impression made by the claims now submitted to the Supreme Council was only partially removed by a speech of Trumbic and by his proposal to leave the settlement of frontiers to a plebiscite (April 16). This offer was made in the knowledge that the memorandum addressed by President Wilson two days previously to Orlando and Sonnino had met with rejection, and was indeed well calculated to heighten the contrast between the outlook of the two rival nations toward Wilsonian principles. The American note reaffirmed these principles as the accepted basis of armistice and peace, and insisted on applying the same methods toward Austria-Hungary as Germany. It accepted the Brenner as a fair strategic line on the north, but argued that the Treaty of London was no longer applicable in respect of Italy's eastern frontier, since the line which it traced was designed to secure Italy against future Austro-Hungarian aggression, and AustriaHungary had by now ceased to exist. It then defined what came to be known as " the Wilson Line," which assigned to Italy Gorizia, Trieste and Istria west of the river Arsa, but not Fiume, which must become an international port, nor any points south of it, save perhaps Lissa and Valona: it also advocated the dismantling of the whole eastern Adriatic coast. On April 23 President Wilson followed up this private memorandum by a public manifesto to the Italian nation, in which he repudiated the Pact of London and appealed for the application of the same principles on the Adriatic as those enforced against Germany. Fiume, he declared, must be the outlet, not of Italy, but " of Hungary, Bohemia, Rumania and Yugoslavia." Unhappily, despite its warm assurances of American friendship, this document met with a most hostile reception in Italy, where it was interpreted as an attempt to undermine the position of her spokesmen and so mete out to her a different measure from that prescribed by France and Britain. Thus the proposal entirely failed of its effect, and as Italy, Yugoslavia and America each adhered to its standpoint, and the two western Powers shrank from any constructive policy, a fresh deadlock ensued. At the end of May, however, M. Tardieu suggested a compromise by which the port and district of Fiume with most of eastern Istria and a total population of over 200,000 (mainly Yugosla y s) would form a small buffer state between Italy and Yugoslavia, under the guarantee of the League of Nations. President Wilson adhered to his own scheme, but made it clear that he would not oppose any direct agreement, whatever might be its terms: while the Yugosla y s, though accepting the idea of a buffer state, insisted upon their enjoying at Fiume a status analogous to that of Poland at Danzig, and added the impossible condition of a plebiscite after three years. During the final stages of the German treaty the Adriatic problem was once more shelved, until on June 29 and July 6 armed conflicts took place in the streets of Fiume between Italian and French soldiers, resulting in several deaths. A commission of inquiry was then at last appointed by the Allies, and ordered elections under inter-Allied control and the dissolution of the terrorist " League of Volunteers." But on Sept. 12, the very day on which American and British police were to be installed, D'Annunzio and his Arditi occupied the town, with the open connivance of the Italian naval and military authorities though to the embarrassment of the Roman Cabinet. The Allies, so far from attempting to restore order, withdrew their forces and allowed their authority to be flouted. The fresh deadlock that ensued was by no means distasteful to Rome, which drew encouragement from Wilson'.s,; ,.ncreasing impotence at :;home and, therefore played for time. At last on Dec. 9 1919 the Supreme Council (Clemenceau, Polk and Crowe) addressed a memorandum to Italy, outlining new terms of settlement - viz. the Wilson line (modified so as to leave Albona in Italy), a demilitarized buffer state, a special r gime for Zara, cession of Pelagosa, Lissa and Lussin to Italy: Valona in full sovereignty, and an Italian mandate in Albania, under the League of Nations. The Italian claim of territorial continuity with Fiume was definitely rejected. Italy in her reply (Dec. io) insisted on continuity (the real if unavowed motive of which was to control the port of Fiume in the interests of Trieste and Venice, and so retain some hold over Yugoslavia's commercial development), demanded the island of Cherso and the neutralization of the Yugoslav coast, and suggested a triple division - the corpus separatum of Fiume to Italy, the port to the League of Nations, and the rest of the buffer state to Yugoslavia. On Jan. 6 1920 Nitti, meeting with no response, wrote to Lloyd George to demand the execution of the Pact of London. At this stage the Yugoslav delegation committed a grave tactical blunder, * Trumbic's views being overridden by the Balkan imperialistic aims of Pasic., While pleading for a plebiscite against Italy and doing lip service to an independent Albania within the frontiers of 1913, it added that in the event of any revision of those frontiers Yugoslavia would claim Skutari and all territory north of the river Drin (Drim). The sole justification for such a claim lay in the terms of the Treaty of London, which the Yugosla y s could not adopt as a basis without stultifying their whole position against Italy. But Italy, in her next memorandum to the Conference (Jan. 9) thus found it easier to reaffirm the validity of the treaty, while arguing that as it had envisaged the creation of three separate states (Serbia, Montenegro and Croatia) rather than of a big Yugoslavia, the clause regarding Fiume could no longer be upheld. On Jan. 13 Clemenceau and Lloyd George addressed new proposals to the Yugosla y s, in the form of a scarcely veiled ultimatum. The buffer state was now abandoned, the corpus separatum (with territorial continuity) falling to Italy, Susak to Yugoslavia and the port of Fiume to the League of Nations: Italy was also to receive Lussin, Lissa and the Albanian mandate, while Zara was to be independent under the League. In originating this impromptu scheme, Lloyd George was influenced by secret indications that the Serbian reactionaries, if promised Skutari in return for Fiume, might throw over Trumbic and abandon the Wilson Line and American principles generally. As however Trumbic rallied the Yugoslav delegation to refuse the Franco-British project, Clemenceau the very next day introduced the important modification that Fiume should be an independent state under the League. When the Yugoslays placed various conditions upon their acceptance, they were bluntly informed that unless they accepted within four days, France and Britain would authorize the literal execution of the Treaty of London, thus leaving Fiume to Yugoslavia, but all northern Dalmatia in Italian hands (Jan. 20). But this ultimatum was rendered invalid by a wire from Lansing, protesting against any settlement without the participation of America. Paris and London having assured Washington that neither concealment nor lack of courtesy was intended, Belgrade found it quite safe to reject the note of Jan. 20, which it pointedly described as " a friendly proposal, not as an injunction." It further expressed its inability to believe that the Powers wished to impose " a treaty concluded unknown to it by third parties, and whose clauses have never been communicated to it." (Jan. 28.) This incident led President Wilson to address to the Allied Cabinets a series of three notes (Feb. 10 and 25 and March 6) which will remain the classic documents of the controversy, and reduced his opponents to silence, though not to surrender. After their passage the Adriatic question was again allowed to stagnate, the Powers resuming their negative attitude, while advocating direct discussion between the two parties. At last on April 25 Trumbic, having obtained the special sanction of the Belgrade Cabinet, informed Nitti of his readiness to negotiate, and a meeting between the two statesmen did actually take place at.Pallanza on May in: the commercial experts had already reached agreement. But the prospect of a settlement roused the Italian Nationalists to a final effort: the Nitti Cabinet fell, and D'Annunzio, repeating his defiance of Europe, attempted a further raid upon Dalmatia. The continued presence of American warships on the Dalmatian coast alone prevented a series of brawls between Italian sailors and the Croat population from developing into open warfare. Fortunately the new Giolitti and Vesnie Cabinets showed equal moderation and skill in restraining the hotheads on both sides, and the new Foreign Minister, Count Sforza, was assisted by a personal knowledge of Serbian and Balkan problems all too rare among western statesmen. It was not however till the autumn that direct negotiations could be resumed, and by that time the eclipse of President Wilson placed Italy at an advantage. By the Treaty of Rapallo (Nov. 12 1920) Italy acquired a frontier considerably farther east than the Wilson Line, and including the quicksilver mines of Istria, the watershed of the Julian Alps as far as Snjeznik (Monte Nevoso), almost all Istria with Abbazia and Volosca, and a narrow strip of shore connecting it with Fiume. The corpus separatum became an independent unit under the League of Nations, the Croat suburb of Susak remaining in Yugoslavia and the Baros port being added as an outlet for Yugoslav trade. Zara became a free city under Italian sovereignty, but as a tiny isthmus without hinterland or islands. Italy renounced all claims to Dalmatia, and of the islands retained only Lussin and Cherso. Special linguistic and other privileges were assured to the Italian minority in the Dalmatian towns, but no corresponding charter was granted to the four to five hundred thousand Slovenes and Croats annexed to Italy. The settlement, though far from ideal, involved concessions on both sides: and Italy, though still forgetful of the principles enunciated at the Roman congress, could at least claim to be the only victorious Power which had relinquished its hold upon conquered territory. One practical result of the treaty was that Italy tacitly abandoned the cause of King Nicholas and accepted as inevitable Montenegro's incorporation in Yugoslavia.

The New Frontiers

The consolidation of the new State was seriously delayed by the prolonged dispute with Italy and by the fact that for nearly two years after the Armistice the danger of an armed conflict could not be overlooked. But in five other directions also the frontiers were unregulated. (i). By the Armistice concluded at Belgrade on Nov. 12 1918 the Serbs were allowed to occupy Temesvar and most of the Banat, the east of which is overwhelmingly Rumanian and which was claimed in its entirety by Rumania, in right of her treaty of Aug. 1916 with the Allies. At the Paris Conference Rumania's enforced conclusion of peace with Germany was treated as absolving the Allies from obligations which were admitted in the parallel case of the Italian treaty: and the necessity of a partition on mainly ethnographic lines was from the first admitted. The special commission, after hearing the views of Trumbic and Bratianu, recommended a line which as nearly as possible balanced the Serb and Rumanian minorities left to Rumania and Yugoslavia respectively, and secured to the latter the essentially Serb districts of Torontal county: but at the instance of the French this line was modified to include Vrsac (Versecz) and Bela Crkva (Weisskirchen) in Yugoslavia. This has the disadvantage that while the Serbs are stronger than any other single race in the two towns, their cession involved the loss of many purely Rumanian villages by Rumania, and also her loss of the important railway line connecting Temesvar southward with the Danube. (2). The regulation of the new Yugoslav frontier with Austria proved very thorny. Thanks to the efforts of Trumbic and the Slovene experts in Paris, Marburg (Maribor), a town with a German majority but surrounded by a purely Slovene district, was assigned to Yugoslavia: but under the Treaty of St. Germain a roughly triangular district north of the Karawanken range was referred to a popular plebiscite. The Inter-Allied Commission entrusted with the details was ordered to divide the disputed area into Zone A, mainly south of the river Drava (Drau) and Zone B,. consisting of Klagenfurt and its basin, and to hold the plebiscite in the latter, only in the event of Zone A voting for Yugoslavia. After a keen contest between the rival Slovene and Pan-German propagandists, voting took place in Oct. 1920, and resulted in a majority of 12,747 for Austria. The fact that many Slovenes voted against Yugoslavia was largely due to a desire to escape from all military service. Zone B, with Klagenfurt, now automatically passed to Austria. (3). Against Bulgaria the Yugoslav delegation claimed considerable frontier rectifications - (a) the Strumnica salient, which threatened the Vardar railway from the east, (b) the district of Kochana (Tocana) and the Bregalnitsa (Bregalnica), (c) a strip of territory running parallel with the old Serbo-Bulgarian frontier the whole way from Zajecar to Kyustendil, and (d) the town of Vidin on the Danube and the salient between it and the Timok. These claims were regarded by the Peace Conference as excessive, and under the Treaty of Neuilly only the two first were allowed, though in place of the third the town and district of Tsaribrod were assigned to Yugoslavia, and thereby the main strategic key to Sofia. This decision is so patently unjust that it has been very widely ascribed to a deliberate design to keep the two countries apart. (4). The Pan-Serb section of opinion in Belgrade, encouraged in this instance by some of the army chiefs for strategic reasons, has always coveted northern Albania: and the Montenegrin Unionists, led by Radovie, made every effort to secure the adoption of their full claim by the Yugoslav delegation. This was opposed by Trumbie and all the more progressive elements in the new State, who realized that the claim to Skutari knocked the bottom out of the whole Yugoslav case against Italy and Austria. Thus the advocates of an unscrupulous " deal " on the lines of " Skutari for Fiume " failed to assert themselves, and Yugoslavia pronounced in favour of an independent Albania, merely reserving her right to share the spoils if it came to a general partition. After Giolitti's renunciation of a mandate in Albania the claim to Skutari became untenable, and at last in 1921 the Supreme Council sanctioned the frontiers assigned to Albania in 1913. Yugoslavia's relations with Albania, though simplified by this decision, have been affected by the Albanian counterclaim to Pee, Djakovo and the plain of Kosovo, where since the middle of last century the Albanian element had grown steadily stronger at the expense of the Serbs. The murder of Essad Pasha (June 1920) deprived the Serbs of their chief supporter in Albania: and friction was increased by the bad administration in the Sanjak and Macedonia, by the inability of the Durazzo Government to prevent continual armed raids against Serbian territory, and by the encouragement given from some Serbian quarters to the Mirdite rising in the summer of 1921. (5). The frontier w ith Hungary was the last to be regulated. The Treaty of Trianon satisfied the most essential claims of Yugoslavia, by dividing the whole Banat (save a small Magyar triangle opposite the city of Szeged) between her and Rumania, and by assigning to her the whole Backa (except Baja and district), part of the Baranya (forming the angle between Drave and Danube) and the Medjumurje (between Drava and Mur). Thus, in order to secure the town of Subotica (Szabadka) with its large Bunjevac (or Catholic Serb) population, she was allowed to annex not less than 250,000 Magyars. Her claim to Pecs (Fiinfkirchen) was disallowed, but owing to the long delay in ratifying the treaty, Yugoslav troops remained in occupation of this district and its valuable coal-mines till Aug. 1921, when at the instance of the Supreme Council it was handed over to Hungary. Meanwhile Pecs had become a centre of the exiled Magyar progressives, who preferred a provisional Yugoslav regime to the white terror of Adml. Horthy. On the eve of evacuation an attempt was made in Pecs to reestablish the Hungarian Republic under Count Karolyi, but owing to the communist views of some of its promoters the Belgrade Government withheld all support, and the movement promptly collapsed.

Internal Politics

So long as vital frontier disputes were unregulated, the central Government in Belgrade held that elections could not be held, and governed for the first two years through a provisional Parliament, for which no one could claim a really representative character. The deputies for Serbia held mandates which had actually expired as long ago as June 1914, but whose renewal war and invasion had effectually prevented: those for Croatia had been elected in Jan. 1914, those for Montenegro were delegated by the revolutionary assembly of Podgorica in Nov. 1918. But in Bosnia and most of the other provinces the deputies had no popular mandate whatever, beyond being members of the self-constituted local committees which had sprung up amid the ferment of the revolution. Meanwhile the union of so many distinct political organisms had reduced the party system to chaos, and the first two years were taken up by a process of regrouping, the dominant issue being Centralism versus Federalism. In accordance with the Declaration of Corfu, the decision regarding the actual form of the State was left to a constituent assembly: but as the machinery of Belgrade was naturally quite inadequate to the task of administering a country three times the size of the Serbia of 1914, the provincial Governments of Croatia (with the Ban at its head), Slovenia, Dalmatia and Bosnia continued to function, though the local diets were no longer summoned.

During 1919 internal politics centred in a struggle between the Radicals, who still possessed the best party machine and stood for a narrowly Serbian as opposed to a Yugoslav programme, and the newly constituted Democratic party, which absorbed most of the Serbian Opposition parties, the old Serbo-Croat coalition of Zagreb, and the Slovene Liberals. The Radicals of Serbia being conservative in all but name, made a working alliance with the clericals of Zagreb and Ljubljana, and under the leadership of Protic favoured decentralization, combined with concessions to the expropriated landowners. But in the land question the Radical party was paralyzed by its Bosnian wing, which sided with the peasantry: and thus in Sept. Protic was replaced by Davidovic, the Democrat leader, and though the Government remained a coalition, its weight was transferred farther to the Left. An internal trial of strength continued throughout the winter between the rival governmental groups, until in May 1920 a breach was only averted by a reconstruction of the Cabinet under Vesnic, who as Serbian minister in Paris since 1904 enjoyed wide prestige, and though a Radical, stood aloof from party dissensions. Under his weaker but more neutral guidance, and aided by the unifying force of the Adriatic crisis, the parties reached agreement upon a new parliamentary franchise, based on universal suffrage. Though otherwise progressive, this law committed the injustice of temporarily disfranchising the nonYugoslav minorities, on the convenient pretext that they could not claim the vote until the expiry of the two years during which the Treaty of Trianon secures their right to choose citizenship in a neighbouring State. This law was the last serious act of the provisional Parliament, which had shown itself singularly barren in legislation, and contrasts most unfavourably with the first assemblies of all the other " Succession States." The elections to the Constituent Assembly (Nov. 1920) did not clear up the situation as had been expected. No party secured an absolute majority, and the two strongest, the Radicals and Democrats, being almost exactly balanced, were forced to strengthen still further their unnatural alliance. In open opposition stood (I) Stephen Radic, the Croat peasant leader whom the Democrats had. unwisely imprisoned in 1919-20, and who now swept the boards in Croatia with a Republican and Federalist programme and induced his party of 50 to absent itself from the Constituent: (2) the Croat and Slovene clericals, who strongly opposed centralization, and (3) the 58 Communists, led by a small group of extreme theorists, but owing their strength to the subversive elements in the Backa, Macedonia and Montenegro and the secret aid of the Carlists in Vienna and Budapest. As the coalition lacked the necessary majority, it was reduced to gathering support piecemeal among the more neutral groups: and for this task Pa g e, who became Premier in Jan. 1921, was specially qualified. By the promise of loo million dinars to the expropriated Begs, he won over the Moslems of Bosnia, and by similar methods he detached the Slovene section of the newly founded Agricultural party (Zemljoradnici). But though he was thus able to carry the first reading of the new constitution by 227 to 93 votes, he was faced by the passive resistance of the great majority of Croats and Slovenes, who regarded with suspicion his " Great Serbian " and centralizing aims. It is significant that Protic, hitherto Pasic's most intimate associate, withdrew from the Radical party and from Parliament rather than sanction a constitution so inimical to provincial interests: while Trumbic, the foremost advocate of full national unity, recorded his vote against it. In many quarters it was openly accepted on the ground that any constitution was better than none, and that further delays and discussions would arrest the new State's development and discredit it abroad: but the settlement could not be regarded as definitive. On June 28 (Kosovo Day) the Prince Regent took oath to the new constitution, but the ceremony was marred by an attempt to assassinate him and the premier, by a bomb thrown as they drove back to the palace. This outrage, which was traced to the Communists, provided fresh proof that the Democratic leader Draskovic, as Minister of the Interior, was justified in his charges of widespread terrorist conspiracy and even in the much debated Decrees (Obznane) by which he sought to combat them. When then on July 21 Draskovic was murdered by a young Bosnian Communist, Parliament resolved on reprisals, and io days later passed by 190 to 54 laws of extraordinary severity for "the Defence of the State," terrorist agitation being made punishable by death, prolonged penal servitude or heavy fines. The mandates of the 58 Communist deputies were annulled, and eight arrested as privy to the attempt on the Regent. No less an authority than the ex-premier Protic publicly challenged the constitutional validity of such action.

Despite acute party dissensions and bad administration the new State was in 1921 steadily consolidating itself. Separatism was non-existent, for the cogent reason that there was no point toward which a new irredenta could gravitate: the Habsburg cause had no adherents, save a few discredited traitors who congregated in Graz and Vienna: and communism, which was quite alien to an agrarian and peasant-owned State, owed its passing success to the aftermath of war and the blunders of the middle class rather than to its own attractions. There was general agreement on foreign policy, whose pivots were close alliance with Czechoslovakia, the series of bilateral agreements which made up the Little Entente (Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia Aug. 14 1920: Czechoslovakia and Rumania April 23 1921: Yugoslavia and Rumania June 7 1921), and the anti-Habsburg agreement concluded with Italy simultaneously with the Treaty of Rapallo (Nov. 12 1920). Yugoslavia's economic recovery had been surprisingly rapid, and the chief problems which confronted her in the autumn of 1921 were how best to exploit her vast undeveloped mineral and agricultural resources, improve her very faulty communications, and root out the illiteracy which was a legacy of alien rule.


BIBLIOGRAPHY.-V. Klaic, Povjest Hrvata (5 vols., 1901 - Ii); F. Sisic, Geschichte der Kroaten (to 1,102, 1917) and Hrvatska Povijest (3 vols., 1911-4); R. W. Seton-Watson, The Southern Slav Question (1911; much enlarged German ed., 1913); V. Zagorsky, Francois Racki et la renaissance de la Croatie (1909); T. G. Masaryk, VasicForgdch-Aehrenthal (1911); A. H. E. Taylor, The Future of the Southern Sla y s (1916); M. Kossitch, Die Siidslavenfrage (1918); L. V. Stidland, Die Sa dslavische Frage and der Weltkrieg (1918, Austrophil); J. Duhem, La question yougoslave (1918); V. Kuhne, Ceux dont on ignore le martyre (1917) and Les Bulgares peints par euxmemes (1917); F. Barac, Croats and Slovenes Friends of the Entente (1919, contains important original documents); The Southern Slav Library (8 pamphlets published by the Yugoslav Committee 1915-8). On Bosnia, see A. Fournier, Wie wir zu Bosnien kamen (1909); J. Cvijic, L'Annexion de Bosnie (1909); F. Schmidt, Bosnien-Herzegovina (1914). On Banat, see Radonic, Histoire des Serbes de Hongrie (1919, with documents). On Dalmatia, see G. Prezzolini, La Dalmazia (1915); Lujo Vojnovic, Dalmatia (1920); Dalmaticus, La question de la Dalmatie (1918). On Adriatic questions, see C. Maranelli and G. Salvemini, La Questione dell' Adriatice (2nd ed., 1919); Angelo Vivanti, L'Irredentisme adriatique (1917, Itaiian original published 1912); F. Sisic, History of Fiume (1919); L. Hautecoeur, L'Italie sous Orlando (1919); two collections of documents, viz. F. Sisic, Jadransko Pitanje (1920) and Adriaticus, La question adriatique (1920). On the new constitution, see published text and also S. Protic, Nacrt Ustava (1920); J. Smodlaka, Nacrt Jugoslovenskog Ustava (1920). (R. W. S.-W.)


<< Nikolai Yudenich

Yukon Territory >>


Wiktionary

Up to date as of January 15, 2010

Definition from Wiktionary, a free dictionary

Contents

English

Wikipedia-logo.png
Wikipedia has an article on:

Wikipedia

Etymology

From Serbo-Croatian jugo (south) and slavija (slavia, the land of the Slavs). Literally, the land of the south Slavs.

Alternative spellings

Proper noun

Yugoslavia

  1. Former country on the Balkan Peninsula. In addition to Serbia and Montenegro, Republic of Macedonia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Slovenia, and Croatia were also part of the Yugoslav Federation prior to the 1990s.

Translations

Related terms

See also


Simple English

[[File:|thumb|right|200px|General location of Yugoslavia. The precise borders varied over the years]]

Yugoslavia was a country in Europe, mostly in Balkan Peninsula, its meaning South Slavs deriving from Slavs who came from area what is now Poland. It existed twice from 1918 to 1992. From 1918 until 1928 it was called the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes. From 1928 until World War II it was the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. After the WW 2 it was renamed to the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia with six republics, 2 autonomous provinces: Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Slovenia and two autonomous provinces in Serbia: Vojvodina in the north, and Kosovo, next to Albania. North Kosovo always had majority serbian, christian population. It remains to this day under full Serbian/Belgrade defacto control. In 1991, came the independence of Slovenia, Croatia, in 1992, Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, causing the end of the country. Serbia and Montenegro, were the last two republics in the Socialist Yugoslavia. In 1992, they formed a new Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY). On February 3 2003, the FRY became the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro. In mid 2006, the state union ended when Montenegro decided to be independent, 55% of voters voted yes.

Now, Yugoslavia has been split up and made into these countries:

Error creating thumbnail: sh: convert: command not found


Advertisements






Got something to say? Make a comment.
Your name
Your email address
Message