YUGOSLAVISM AS AFIRST CHAPTER IN THE BREAKING OF SERBIAN NATIONAL IDENTITY

Abstract

In order to comprehend the urge for breaking of Yugoslavia, one must take into account the circumstances of first and second Yugoslav state, as well as the historical law of creation of modern states. The formation of both first and second Yugoslav state is characterized by the striking asymmetry of position and status of certain nations. Serbs and Montenegrins liberated themselves from the centuries-long Ottoman rule and in 1878 had already gained international recognition. Croats lived under Austro-Hungarian rule continuously since the year 1102. Serbs and Montenegrins were victorious in the First World War, with their army decisively contributing to the military collapse of Austria-Hungary. On the other hand, Croats and Slovenes spent the war on the opposite side, and by the year 1918 they were faced with the possibility of paying the war reparations, losing a large part of Adriatic coast (which was promised to Italy as a reward for entering the war against the Central powers, under the provisions of London treaty) and probable social revolution, already in motion in Hungary, Bavaria and Berlin. The Allied states did not accept the attempt of Croats to establish the State of Croats, Slovenes and Serbs in November 1918. Therefore, Croatian and Slovenianconsent to the creation of Yugoslavia was only in small part the expression of old Illyrian and Yugoslav aspirations, but even more the pragmatic gesture – the choice of lesser evil, a cunning project of using Yugoslavia as an instrument in gaining the independent national state. The attempt of King Alexander to build Yugoslav identity through the administrative divisions was doomed in advance for various reasons, especially because of the open foreign encouragement of different nationalist movements in Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Macedonia and in Kosovo and Metohija. Croats continuously prepared for realization of their long awaited dream, accomplished in the Nazi-puppet Ustasha creation of Independent State of Croatia.Unlike them, Serbian communist were convinced that the national problems are less important than issues of class relations. On the other hand, the communist believed that Serbs in second (socialist) Yugoslavia solved their national question through inter-state border drawing between the republics, which were, in their view, connections between the Yugoslav nations. However, the reality revealed this as a fallacy, as evidenced by the words of EdvardKardelj, who considered socialist Yugoslavia only a stopover for Slovenia. One can ask whose interests did Nikola Pasic and other Serbian politicians through history advocated. What caused this persistent altruistic politics of Serbian leadership? Apparently, they did not think as the statesmen, but were blinded by some sort of current short-sited political ideology. Nobody can understand why Serbia abandoned its national interests in favor of Croats and Slovenes. On the other hand, if Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes had internal and international continuity of the Kingdom of Serbia, could that country adopt the name Yugoslavia? In the opinion of this author, this new country, if it has already been created, had to derive its name from the term Kingdom of Serbia.