WI: Alexander I of Yugoslavia no assassinated in 1934?

[maverick]

Alexander I of Yugoslavia was not exactly taking a turn for the better after the Great Depression and the rise of European Fascism, but he was nevertheless more or less competent.

What if Vlado Chernozemski is unable to go through the crowd to shoot at Alexander or something?

This of course means that both Alexander and French Foreign Minister Louis Barthou survive, and that the infant Peter II of Yugoslavia doesn't take the throne under his pro-fascist father Paul as the regent.

[grdja83]

Pro Fascist policy of Yugoslav government was just pragmatism and survival instinct. While our "glorious victories against Germans and Austrians" in WWI were greatly celebrated and inflated to mythical proportions, rulers were extremely aware of how much WWI devastated Serbia, and really didn't want to fight Germany again.

And after world had seen how well UK and French guaranties helped Czechoslovakia and Poland...

It is actually more likely that if king is still ruling the country, UK sponsoered national suicide inducing coupe de etat might not happen.

[abc123]

Originally Posted by grdja83

Pro Fascist policy of Yugoslav government was just pragmatism and survival instinct. While our "glorious victories against Germans and Austrians" in WWI were greatly celebrated and inflated to mythical proportions, rulers were extremely aware of how much WWI devastated Serbia, and really didn't want to fight Germany again.

And after world had seen how well UK and French guaranties helped Czechoslovakia and Poland...

It is actually more likely that if king is still ruling the country, UK sponsoered national suicide inducing coupe de etat might not happen.

It's a shame that the asasination didn't come in 1929. or 1930. Maybe then prince Pavle would take over the trone, and maybe, if giving Banovina Hrvatska to Croatians in 1930. Yugoslavia would be semi-healthy state in 1941.

[grdja83]

Creating Banovina Hrvatska was a terrible terrible suicide move for the state. It gave Croats Bosnia for no god damn reason, and made all other ethnic groups in Yugoslavia, not just Serbs, suddenly feel disenfranchised.

You can't create national states within national state, it failed historically in every single instance.

[abc123]

Originally Posted by grdja83

Creating Banovina Hrvatska was a terrible terrible suicide move for the state. It gave Croats Bosnia for no god damn reason, and made all other ethnic groups in Yugoslavia, not just Serbs, suddenly feel disenfranchised.

You can't create national states within national state, it failed historically in every single instance.

Yes, but: Yugoslavia was not a national state.
Alexander's wet dreams are something another. And even he has seen Yugoslavens as a super-Serbs. So just a disguise for serbian supermacy.
If Serbs, Croats and Slovenians are one nation, then Banovina Hrvatska would not be created.
How is that Podrinjska banovina never was made? ( Podrinje region in Serbia, not the Drinska banovina )?
Simply, because Serbs are one nation.

Yugoslavens or Serbs, Croats, Slovenians are not.

So, Banovina Hrvatska is a excellent idea.