Independent Slovenia earlier?

Is there any plausible way to have an independent Slovene state after either of the World Wars, completely separate from Yugoslavia?
 

Hendryk

Banned
The independence of Slovenia in 1945 is one of the butterflies in my "Superpower Empire" TL, but I haven't worked out the details. I assume the country goes through the Cold War as a neutral buffer zone between the Western and Soviet blocs, much like Austria and Finland.
 
I was thinking along these lines, please correct if you find serious problems with plausibility.

Yugoslavia doesn't come about by the thirties OR breaks down in couple of years after establishment, not least due to machinations by surrounding nations (especially Italy), that carry out much more concentrated campaigns to disrupt the formation of Yugoslavia. Let's say the Serbian king is assassinated and a Croat nationalist is implicated in the act.

Unrest ensues. Croatia and Slovenia (plus maybe 1-2 smaller entities) declare independence. To outdo their weakness (esp. vis a vis Croatia), the provisional Slovenian leadership strikes a Devil's bargain to gain Italian support (some, especially in Zagreb, speculate slovene leaders are Italian agents to begin with).

The thirties seems Slovenia becoming even more an Italian vassal. Late in the decade, maybe not to be outdone by the Anschluss, Mussolini annexes the country outright. The Ustasha gains power in Croatia and she aligns with the Axis.

WWII rolls along. Serbia, previously a more or less stable kingdom, is occupied and brought to the Axis camp. The slovenian territory sees partisan action, especially by leftist partisans led by one Josip Broz Tito, operating from Croatian territory. In Serbia the Royalist resistance is stronger than the leftists.

In 1943, the Allies declare their intention to restore "a free Slovenia" after the Axis is defeated.

Tito never gains as big a position as in OTL, and dies in battle late -43, leaving the resistance weak and divided.

The war progressess more or less as per OTL. In 1945 Western Allies occupy the slovenian territory from Italy, whereas Soviets "liberate" Serbia and much of Croatia. In a scene later seen to signify the end of the war in Europe, US troops meet Soviet advance scouts at the pre-war Italian-Croatian border near Novo Mesto.

As the domestic resistance is weaker in Serbia and Croatia as it was in OTL, the Soviets gain a strong foothold in the area. Both sides settle down to occupy their gains "from Stettin to the Adriatic", as decided at a Jalta-equivalent.

In 1949, as the German Federal Republic is proclaimed, the Soviets answer by setting up the German Democratic Republic and the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia, comprising all of OTL Yugoslavia except Slovenia.

In 1955, as stipulated in a Declaration in 1943, all occupying troops leave Austria and Slovenia. The neutral Republic of Slovenia is seen as a buffer between NATO-country Italy and FPYR.
 
Last edited:
I don't see Tito wanting to give up Slovenia.

Perhaps Yugoslavia struggles less if the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes is formed without the latter group?
 
Is there any plausible way to have an independent Slovene state after either of the World Wars, completely separate from Yugoslavia?

in a word, no. There simply was no chance of country that small (considering portion of it was already occupied by Italy post WW1) surviving at that time and more importantly no interest in independance by the people. The demands for independance didn't start until 1970s-80s, prior to that there were demands for greater autonomy within A-H and within various forms of Yugoslavia.
 
The circumstances given may, nonetheless, be problematic.

There are many problems, true.

aktarian said:
in a word, no. There simply was no chance of country that small (considering portion of it was already occupied by Italy post WW1) surviving at that time and more importantly no interest in independance by the people. The demands for independance didn't start until 1970s-80s, prior to that there were demands for greater autonomy within A-H and within various forms of Yugoslavia.

That's the problem I also encountered when I started to think about it. Because of a lack of interest in independence and a strong local power base, Slovenia was IMO as likely to gain independence after either of the wars as Karelia was (an example closer to home to me). In my post above I tried to circumvent this problem to have the country get independent under covert Italian protection, which I think could be within certain (if very, very slim) limits of possibility. And even that would require the presence of a nationalist movement of sorts. The Italian connection would, of course, not mean very good ifor the country later.

A recognized independence between the two world wars is, in my view, pretty much required for a free Slovenia to get reconstituted after 1945 (it would not survive the war independent), otherwise it will quite likely get incorporated in a Yugoslavia or a Croatia or divided between different countries after the war.

In my view, a independent Croatia is a much more plausible option.
 
There are many problems, true.



That's the problem I also encountered when I started to think about it. Because of a lack of interest in independence and a strong local power base, Slovenia was IMO as likely to gain independence after either of the wars as Karelia was (an example closer to home to me). In my post above I tried to circumvent this problem to have the country get independent under covert Italian protection, which I think could be within certain (if very, very slim) limits of possibility. And even that would require the presence of a nationalist movement of sorts. The Italian connection would, of course, not mean very good ifor the country later.

A recognized independence between the two world wars is, in my view, pretty much required for a free Slovenia to get reconstituted after 1945 (it would not survive the war independent), otherwise it will quite likely get incorporated in a Yugoslavia or a Croatia or divided between different countries after the war.

In my view, a independent Croatia is a much more plausible option.

Uhm. Both Croatia (in OTL) and independent Slovenia (in this ATL) are a bit tarnished by their cooperation with the losers. So maybe a Slovenian vassal state of Italy might just come into being in the interwar period, but having it survive after the war? Difficult.
I agree one stands better chances with Croatia. Distinguishing between Slovenians and Croatians won't be particularly easy for harried Western diplomats in Paris, which are the people one has to deal with to get this through, in 1919. But Croatia, including Slovenia... that may be, and not necessarily as an Italian puppet from the very start.
 
I really doubt Croatia could ever hold on to Slovenia, the relations between the two peoples are... problematic to say the least.

Slovenia was very nationalistic in during this period and in particular held a great disdain towards the rest of the Balkans, considering themselves rather Central Europeans, which they actually are, they're more closely culturally and linguistically related to the Czechs and Slovaks (via former Greater Moravia) than Croats and Serbs.

I can only see this happening if the Partisan resistance breaks apart, either through Tito's premature death or something else, and the spheres of influence held, to the word, from the Baltic to the Adriatic.

Slovenia wasn't as weak as it may have appeared, it just suffered from a weak Germano-Italo-phile government. They still had a small, but professional army, and excellent defensive terrain (kinda like Switzerland, but not as many mountains). With Allied help, I'm sure they could hold their ground quite well, though Communist groups could pose a threat. Then again, with 'a little Allied help', this can be taken care of too.
 
I really doubt Croatia could ever hold on to Slovenia, the relations between the two peoples are... problematic to say the least.

Actually they aren't. Sure troubles persist since 1991 but nothing really big

Slovenia was very nationalistic in during this period and in particular held a great disdain towards the rest of the Balkans, considering themselves rather Central Europeans, which they actually are, they're more closely culturally and linguistically related to the Czechs and Slovaks (via former Greater Moravia) than Croats and Serbs.

OTOH Serbia was a beacon of sorts (being independant and all that). sure religion and lingo was a bit problematic. OTOH there are few differences with Croats (both being catholics and all)

I can only see this happening if the Partisan resistance breaks apart, either through Tito's premature death or something else, and the spheres of influence held, to the word, from the Baltic to the Adriatic.

However population will generally not favor independance and if given a say would choose yugoslavia

Slovenia wasn't as weak as it may have appeared, it just suffered from a weak Germano-Italo-phile government. They still had a small, but professional army, and excellent defensive terrain (kinda like Switzerland, but not as many mountains). With Allied help, I'm sure they could hold their ground quite well, though Communist groups could pose a threat. Then again, with 'a little Allied help', this can be taken care of too.

Actually no. Partisans were unified force. Sure, locals operated on local terrain but they were single movement.

Probably, even better if they get a stronger local government which will be able to control the fascist elements in the country, such as the Home Guard.

Seeing how it was local government (in bed with RCC) that organised them and went out of their way to kiss Italian asses I find that improbable.
 
Actually they aren't. Sure troubles persist since 1991 but nothing really big

Well, the 'Slovenia-Croatia rivalry' actually has origins in WWII, where both vied for the affections of the Germans and Italians, often coming at odds, as Slovenians considered themselves more 'Aryan' in culture than the Croatians, while the Croatians thought of Slovenia as nothing more than a tiny speck (I might be grossly exaggerating, but it was kind of like that).

OTOH Serbia was a beacon of sorts (being independant and all that). sure religion and lingo was a bit problematic. OTOH there are few differences with Croats (both being catholics and all)

Well, the problem there was that many in both Croatia and Slovenia (especially the Peasant and forbidden nationalist parties) considered Yugoslavia to be a Serbian dominion where Serbs were unfairly given greater privileges than everybody else which was essentially true, especially during king Alexander's reign, which proved to be the reason for why he got capped in Marseilles later on.

However population will generally not favor independance and if given a say would choose yugoslavia

The fact that they considered Yugoslavia itself to be Serbia's 'war booty' handed to it by the Allies at the end of WWI was one of the reasons for such high support of the Axis during WWII, because the Slovenians hoped to have an autonomous state within the Reich, which they considered treated them more fairly than the Serbs.

Actually no. Partisans were unified force. Sure, locals operated on local terrain but they were single movement.

Actually... not quite. The Partisans only became 'The' partisans after the AVNOJ convention, where Tito took leadership of the various Anti-Fascist movements that sprung up in the Balkans, most of whom were Socialist/Communist in nature. The Greeks also and their partisans, but they were unlinked to the Yugoslav Anti-Fascist movements, and later-on the unified Partisan movement.

Seeing how it was local government (in bed with RCC) that organised them and went out of their way to kiss Italian asses I find that improbable.

True, but there were leaders, mostly Social-Democratic leaning fellows, which opposed the growing fascists movements in the country, but they were pretty much gone after the Anschluss.

I mean, the Slovenes could become part of an independent Croatia, but they would, quite early, demand their autonomy within the state, which if not handled properly, could lead to unrest, something that's not really good for any state during the Cold War, if you get my jist.
 
Well, the 'Slovenia-Croatia rivalry' actually has origins in WWII, where both vied for the affections of the Germans and Italians, often coming at odds, as Slovenians considered themselves more 'Aryan' in culture than the Croatians, while the Croatians thought of Slovenia as nothing more than a tiny speck (I might be grossly exaggerating, but it was kind of like that).

not Aryan (that is race rather then culture) but central-european. Being part of Austria (in various forms) rather under Turks and catholic rather then orthodox.

Well, the problem there was that many in both Croatia and Slovenia (especially the Peasant and forbidden nationalist parties) considered Yugoslavia to be a Serbian dominion where Serbs were unfairly given greater privileges than everybody else which was essentially true, especially during king Alexander's reign, which proved to be the reason for why he got capped in Marseilles later on.

Now we are talking about inter war period. I'm talking about early 20th century, WW1 and immediate post-WW1 situation. things changed later sure. Same as feeling weren't same in 1945 as they were in 1990

The fact that they considered Yugoslavia itself to be Serbia's 'war booty' handed to it by the Allies at the end of WWI was one of the reasons for such high support of the Axis during WWII, because the Slovenians hoped to have an autonomous state within the Reich, which they considered treated them more fairly than the Serbs.

after Hitler's speech in Maribor that would be foolish belief indeed. But main reason existing structures jumped in bed with Italians and Germans was to keep power.

Actually... not quite. The Partisans only became 'The' partisans after the AVNOJ convention, where Tito took leadership of the various Anti-Fascist movements that sprung up in the Balkans, most of whom were Socialist/Communist in nature. The Greeks also and their partisans, but they were unlinked to the Yugoslav Anti-Fascist movements, and later-on the unified Partisan movement.

And even prior to that they all considered themselves part of Yugoslav movement rather then local.

True, but there were leaders, mostly Social-Democratic leaning fellows, which opposed the growing fascists movements in the country, but they were pretty much gone after the Anschluss.

exactly.

I mean, the Slovenes could become part of an independent Croatia, but they would, quite early, demand their autonomy within the state, which if not handled properly, could lead to unrest, something that's not really good for any state during the Cold War, if you get my jist.

That would depend on when and how this new state would develop.

I'm surprised nobody mentioned surviving State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs
 
Top