WI Yugoslavia survives?
- Thread starter SlideAway
- Start date
- Status
Apology accepted. I know tensions are high whenever something about the Balkans is mentioned, cause there is so much conflicting data and misinformations about the subject its crazy.
And most of the expats here in Vancouver, for some reason, young and otherwise.
Like others said, Czech Republic is a far better comparison.
Presumably they are either happier with the current situation or simply unable to leave.
I think it's an appropriate level of detail when responding to the original question you posed, and no less dismissive then "some old partisans and an occasional student are the only people who are Yugoslavia-nostalgic" which if I remember correctly was what you said.
yugoslavia statistics
In 1989, with Yugoslavia's gdp per capita held at 100, the republics gdp levels went like this:
Slovenia: 180
Croatia: 128
Serbia: 93
Vojvodina: 129
Central Serbia: 96
Kosovo: 33
Montenegro: 78
Bosnia: 69
Macedonia: 65
So basically if you want to estimate roughly what Yugoslavia's gdp would be today, all you have to do is take what Slovenia's GDP is today, which is as of 2010 27,650, and then hold that as 180% above the Yugoslav average and calculate the rest of the regions accordingly. Since Slovenia barely had a war occur there and escaped all the conflicts, you can use that as a base to calculate what the other regions would have been had there been no war. Basically the figure's you get are as follows.
Slovenia: 27,650
Croatia: 19,660
Serbia: 14,280
*Vojvodina: 19,810
*Central Serbia: 14,750
*Kosovo: 5,070
Montenegro: 11,980
Bosnia: 10,690
Macedonia: 9,980
Yugoslavia: 15,360
What's most interesting about these figures and see how the different regions in Yugoslavia suffered because of the war and which republic's economies suffered the most from the conflicts in the 1990's. Here are the 2010 gdp per capita's of the countries of the former yugoslavia today.
Slovenia: 27,650
Croatia: 17,710
Bosnia: 7,750
Macedonia: 9,350
Montenegro: 10,430
Serbia is a bit complicated. Technically its gdp per capita today is 10,810 but that is not including Kosovo which is much poorer. Basically if you use these figures you realize that Serbia was absolutely devasted in the 1990's by 10 years of sanctions, and more critically the NATO bombing. Their economy which today including Kosovo is around 8,500 per capita would have been 14,280. Bosnia and Croatia obviously also suffered. You can also see how this comparison is relatively accurate because macedonia's gdp which escaped the conflicts of the 1990's is relatively the same.
So basically what we find is that had Yugoslavia survived and there was no war, its gdp per capita would be 15,360 today. If you compare it with the rest of Eastern Europe you'll see that, while its not necessarily amazing, the region would undoubtedly be much richer and prosperous had there been no war and had the country stayed together.
Czech Republic: 24,980
Slovakia: 22,270
Poland: 18,840
Hungary: 18,820
Estonia: 18,270
Lithuania: 16,990
Yugoslavia: 15,360
Latvia: 14,330
Belarus: 13,860
Bulgaria: 12,050
Romania: 11,770
Albania: 7,380
Ukraine: 6,670
Hope this information helps all yugo-nostalgics out there, and all those who believe that Yugoslavia should never have broken up...
In 1989, with Yugoslavia's gdp per capita held at 100, the republics gdp levels went like this:
Slovenia: 180
Croatia: 128
Serbia: 93
Vojvodina: 129
Central Serbia: 96
Kosovo: 33
Montenegro: 78
Bosnia: 69
Macedonia: 65
So basically if you want to estimate roughly what Yugoslavia's gdp would be today, all you have to do is take what Slovenia's GDP is today, which is as of 2010 27,650, and then hold that as 180% above the Yugoslav average and calculate the rest of the regions accordingly. Since Slovenia barely had a war occur there and escaped all the conflicts, you can use that as a base to calculate what the other regions would have been had there been no war. Basically the figure's you get are as follows.
Slovenia: 27,650
Croatia: 19,660
Serbia: 14,280
*Vojvodina: 19,810
*Central Serbia: 14,750
*Kosovo: 5,070
Montenegro: 11,980
Bosnia: 10,690
Macedonia: 9,980
Yugoslavia: 15,360
What's most interesting about these figures and see how the different regions in Yugoslavia suffered because of the war and which republic's economies suffered the most from the conflicts in the 1990's. Here are the 2010 gdp per capita's of the countries of the former yugoslavia today.
Slovenia: 27,650
Croatia: 17,710
Bosnia: 7,750
Macedonia: 9,350
Montenegro: 10,430
Serbia is a bit complicated. Technically its gdp per capita today is 10,810 but that is not including Kosovo which is much poorer. Basically if you use these figures you realize that Serbia was absolutely devasted in the 1990's by 10 years of sanctions, and more critically the NATO bombing. Their economy which today including Kosovo is around 8,500 per capita would have been 14,280. Bosnia and Croatia obviously also suffered. You can also see how this comparison is relatively accurate because macedonia's gdp which escaped the conflicts of the 1990's is relatively the same.
So basically what we find is that had Yugoslavia survived and there was no war, its gdp per capita would be 15,360 today. If you compare it with the rest of Eastern Europe you'll see that, while its not necessarily amazing, the region would undoubtedly be much richer and prosperous had there been no war and had the country stayed together.
Czech Republic: 24,980
Slovakia: 22,270
Poland: 18,840
Hungary: 18,820
Estonia: 18,270
Lithuania: 16,990
Yugoslavia: 15,360
Latvia: 14,330
Belarus: 13,860
Bulgaria: 12,050
Romania: 11,770
Albania: 7,380
Ukraine: 6,670
Hope this information helps all yugo-nostalgics out there, and all those who believe that Yugoslavia should never have broken up...
Barry Bull
Donor
Welcome to the board. Please be reminded that thread necromacy is considered bad taste here. Perhaps you can start a new thread?
Nevermind the bad taste.
I mean - frequently, other people are asked to "use the search function, for God's sake".
I really appreciated your statistical efforts, I should have gotten the idea myself! And I found it much more sensible to add this as a bonus to an existing thread than inviting people to start the discussion all over again.
I mean - frequently, other people are asked to "use the search function, for God's sake".
I really appreciated your statistical efforts, I should have gotten the idea myself! And I found it much more sensible to add this as a bonus to an existing thread than inviting people to start the discussion all over again.
abc123
Banned
And why wouldn't they recognise the Croatia?
Croatia had ( per yugoslavian Constitution ) right to secede.
They choose to use that right.
Why do you think that you, Germany, Austria or some other country has something with that? And who are you to say that some country has right to seceede or not? If they choose to do that ( 94% of Croats voted for seceeding in referendum ) why not recognise that?
Or democracy is only for you, and not for others?
abc123
Banned
That's right.
Get rid of Milosevic and introduce democracy in Yugoslavia ASAP.
Than, MAYBE, after fall of Berlin Wall, will not be such pressure to seceede.
abc123
Banned
De jure it surely was a federation: but when you have six central banks, and republican self defens armies, along with veto power on almost every issue, I don't think we are that far from extreme decentralization
Problem with decentralisation of Yugoslavia was that she was excellent on paper, but in reality it didn't existed because of Communist Party monopoly on power. The principle of "democratic socialism" prevented any real decentralisation of Yugoslavia.
That means that after some descision was brought in central ( federal = Party level in Belgrade, she had to be followed in republic and other lower lewels. And in ALL levels CP was the ruling party.
abc123
Banned
Killing dozens of thousands of people AFTER the War, without any trial, isn't a good thing even if you are a Communist and even if your opponents have done similar things before.
It does make you just one genocydal leader/army more.
Problem with decentralisation of Yugoslavia was that she was excellent on paper, but in reality it didn't existed because of Communist Party monopoly on power. The principle of "democratic socialism" prevented any real decentralisation of Yugoslavia.
That means that after some descision was brought in central ( federal = Party level in Belgrade, she had to be followed in republic and other lower lewels. And in ALL levels CP was the ruling party.
This in theory, in practice during the 80s each regional communist leadership behaved like its own feudal domain, and this prevented any possible sane economic policy !
Kudos to the new user for the GDP calculation, really interesting !
abc123
Banned
This in theory, in practice during the 80s each regional communist leadership behaved like its own feudal domain, and this prevented any possible sane economic policy !
Kudos to the new user for the GDP calculation, really interesting !
I know.
Problem was that after Tito, nobody could/should become new Tito. And Milosevic tried to do that. between the other things.
Other republics had no strong party leaders like Serbia, because Milosevic was running a policy good for Serbia, and people in other republics didn't had a perception that their party leaders are making a policy good for them. ( maybe in Slovenia )
So, democratisation was the only option.
And with fall of Iron Curtain, the fall of Yugoslavia was imminent.
GDP
Wow sorry for the late reply, I don't usually use forums like this I just posted that information on GDP because I felt like it related to the subject. I myself am half Serbian half Croatian and greatly regret the break-up of Yugoslavia. I am pursuing a degree in Political Science and History and most the papers I have written for school I have related in one way or another to Yugoslavia its history and politics in the region today.
I've done a lot of 'side' research on my own concerning Yugoslavia and have lots of statistical information I've compiled over the years trying to gain a better picture of what Yugoslavia would have looked like today had it stayed together. I have information for instance on the GDP per capita (Yugoslav average = 100) for the different cities of Yugoslavia and if anyone is interested I can post that info as well.
Regarding the break up itself, in my view it was entirely possible for the country to stay together in the 1990's and it is truly tragic not only that it broke up, but that it did so violently. I think it's really easy for us to look back in hindsight after Yugoslavia broke up and then find reasons justifying why such a break up was inevitable. In my opinion however the country could easily have stayed together and it was really due to a few critical events between 1989 and 1991 and the mistakes of the leaders at the time that made the break-up inevitable.
First and foremost, I think Serbia's constitutional changes in 1989 under Milosevic which reduced Kosovo and Vojvodina's autonomy from its 1974 level to its 1967 level were a huge mistake on the part of the Serbian leader at the time. On paper these amendments technically did not abolish Kosovo and Vojvodina's autonomy since both provinces still retained their votes in the 8 member federal presidency, however de-facto all the previous state affairs which had been handled at the provincial level were now transferred to the Serbian republic. Basically this gave Serbia 3 votes in the presidency whereas each other republic had only 1, and if one counted Montenegro who often voted with Serbia on federal issues, in effect this gave Milosevic control of half the presidency. This increased fears in the other republics of Serbian domination and greatly increased their desires for separatism. In my view Milosevic should have abolished the autonomy of the provinces out right so that Vojvodina and Kosovo would no longer half seats on the presidency, and votes on federal issues would then be determined with 6 votes rather than 8. This would have satisfies Serbian national desires to finally unify their republic, and it also would have been acceptable for the other republics since the fundamental balance of power in Yugoslavia would have remained the same.
The next biggest mistake came during the 14th Congress of Yugoslav League of Communists in January 1990. One cannot understand the importance of this session without a broader context of what was going on in Eastern Europe at the time. In November 1989 the Berlin Wall fell, and every single country in Eastern Europe besides Yugoslavia (and Albania) had overthrown their communist governments and announced their desire to conduct free elections in the coming year. This session in January 1990 was called precisely to determine how free elections would be conducted in Yugoslavia and whether or not the communist party should relinquish its hold on power and allow multi-party elections. All the delegates from different republics and their leaders (milosevic included) agreed that the communist party should give up its hold on power and that multi-party elections in the the year of 1990 should be organized. What they could not agree on, however, was whether multi-party elections should be held at the national level for Yugoslavia as a whole, or at the republican level with separate elections for each republic. As is well known, the Slovenes insisted on elections on the level of republics and after their proposals were voted down 1,032 against and only 169 in favor they simply walked out of the Congress refusing to take part in the proceedings. This was a huge mistake, and in my opinion, made more than any other event, the break-up of the country much more likely. Instead of national elections in which the entire country would vote for one president, as was the case in Poland, Romania, Hungary, Czechoslovakia and every other country in Eastern Europe, elections were held at the republic level which meant that in order to get elected one had to appeal to separate Croat, Serb, Slovene etc. nationalist sentiments rather than Yugoslavs as a whole. Just think about it for a second. Milosevic could not hope to win elections in Serbia by promoting 'Brotherhood and Unity' and Yugoslavism, when his opponents were Serbian nationalists. The same is true of Croatia where in order to get the popular vote of Croats one had to brand himself as defending the interests of Croats not the interests of Yugoslavs. In my opinion, had national elections been held in April 1990 then Ante Markovic would most likely have won the vote and the separatist leaders which eventually came to power in Croatia Slovenia and Bosnia would never have come to power.
The final event which I believe was most crucial in brining about the break-up of Yugoslavia comes in fact when war had actually started following the declarations of independence by Slovenia and Croatia on June 25th 1991. Basically as we all know this started off a short ten day war in Slovenia as well as a longer sustained conflict in Croatia. I think it was the biggest mistake of the JNA at the time to accept the independence of Slovenia and withdrawal the army units from the republic. After the JNA withdrew from Slovenia the conflict ceased being a Yugoslav conflict and turned into Serb-Croat conflict. It was much harder to convince the other republics to remain in Yugoslavia once the JNA decided to let one secede.
But yea sorry for the long post. There's my two cents if anyone bothers to read through it. If anyone wants more statistical information on what Yugoslavia might have looked like today let me know and I can show you what I have.
Wow sorry for the late reply, I don't usually use forums like this I just posted that information on GDP because I felt like it related to the subject. I myself am half Serbian half Croatian and greatly regret the break-up of Yugoslavia. I am pursuing a degree in Political Science and History and most the papers I have written for school I have related in one way or another to Yugoslavia its history and politics in the region today.
I've done a lot of 'side' research on my own concerning Yugoslavia and have lots of statistical information I've compiled over the years trying to gain a better picture of what Yugoslavia would have looked like today had it stayed together. I have information for instance on the GDP per capita (Yugoslav average = 100) for the different cities of Yugoslavia and if anyone is interested I can post that info as well.
Regarding the break up itself, in my view it was entirely possible for the country to stay together in the 1990's and it is truly tragic not only that it broke up, but that it did so violently. I think it's really easy for us to look back in hindsight after Yugoslavia broke up and then find reasons justifying why such a break up was inevitable. In my opinion however the country could easily have stayed together and it was really due to a few critical events between 1989 and 1991 and the mistakes of the leaders at the time that made the break-up inevitable.
First and foremost, I think Serbia's constitutional changes in 1989 under Milosevic which reduced Kosovo and Vojvodina's autonomy from its 1974 level to its 1967 level were a huge mistake on the part of the Serbian leader at the time. On paper these amendments technically did not abolish Kosovo and Vojvodina's autonomy since both provinces still retained their votes in the 8 member federal presidency, however de-facto all the previous state affairs which had been handled at the provincial level were now transferred to the Serbian republic. Basically this gave Serbia 3 votes in the presidency whereas each other republic had only 1, and if one counted Montenegro who often voted with Serbia on federal issues, in effect this gave Milosevic control of half the presidency. This increased fears in the other republics of Serbian domination and greatly increased their desires for separatism. In my view Milosevic should have abolished the autonomy of the provinces out right so that Vojvodina and Kosovo would no longer half seats on the presidency, and votes on federal issues would then be determined with 6 votes rather than 8. This would have satisfies Serbian national desires to finally unify their republic, and it also would have been acceptable for the other republics since the fundamental balance of power in Yugoslavia would have remained the same.
The next biggest mistake came during the 14th Congress of Yugoslav League of Communists in January 1990. One cannot understand the importance of this session without a broader context of what was going on in Eastern Europe at the time. In November 1989 the Berlin Wall fell, and every single country in Eastern Europe besides Yugoslavia (and Albania) had overthrown their communist governments and announced their desire to conduct free elections in the coming year. This session in January 1990 was called precisely to determine how free elections would be conducted in Yugoslavia and whether or not the communist party should relinquish its hold on power and allow multi-party elections. All the delegates from different republics and their leaders (milosevic included) agreed that the communist party should give up its hold on power and that multi-party elections in the the year of 1990 should be organized. What they could not agree on, however, was whether multi-party elections should be held at the national level for Yugoslavia as a whole, or at the republican level with separate elections for each republic. As is well known, the Slovenes insisted on elections on the level of republics and after their proposals were voted down 1,032 against and only 169 in favor they simply walked out of the Congress refusing to take part in the proceedings. This was a huge mistake, and in my opinion, made more than any other event, the break-up of the country much more likely. Instead of national elections in which the entire country would vote for one president, as was the case in Poland, Romania, Hungary, Czechoslovakia and every other country in Eastern Europe, elections were held at the republic level which meant that in order to get elected one had to appeal to separate Croat, Serb, Slovene etc. nationalist sentiments rather than Yugoslavs as a whole. Just think about it for a second. Milosevic could not hope to win elections in Serbia by promoting 'Brotherhood and Unity' and Yugoslavism, when his opponents were Serbian nationalists. The same is true of Croatia where in order to get the popular vote of Croats one had to brand himself as defending the interests of Croats not the interests of Yugoslavs. In my opinion, had national elections been held in April 1990 then Ante Markovic would most likely have won the vote and the separatist leaders which eventually came to power in Croatia Slovenia and Bosnia would never have come to power.
The final event which I believe was most crucial in brining about the break-up of Yugoslavia comes in fact when war had actually started following the declarations of independence by Slovenia and Croatia on June 25th 1991. Basically as we all know this started off a short ten day war in Slovenia as well as a longer sustained conflict in Croatia. I think it was the biggest mistake of the JNA at the time to accept the independence of Slovenia and withdrawal the army units from the republic. After the JNA withdrew from Slovenia the conflict ceased being a Yugoslav conflict and turned into Serb-Croat conflict. It was much harder to convince the other republics to remain in Yugoslavia once the JNA decided to let one secede.
But yea sorry for the long post. There's my two cents if anyone bothers to read through it. If anyone wants more statistical information on what Yugoslavia might have looked like today let me know and I can show you what I have.
abc123
Banned
OK:
1. Evreything is possible. But, is it plausible?
2. if it was so easily- why they didn't stayed together?
3. Yeah, the other republics hardly accepted ANY touching of 1974 Constitution, and you think that they will tolerate blantant breaking of Constitution like that?
4. What was a mistake? Descision of Slovenes to leave the Congress?
Would you stay there if all your proposaly are simply refused in a country where you are one of founders, one of suposedly equal nations/states?
5. With exception of Czechoslovakia, all other countries in Eastern Europe are with one nation and they were no federations/confederations like Yugoslavia.
So, hardly a example.
6. Well, if Yugoslavian electorate wanted Brotherhood & unity, what prevented Ante Marković and his Party apparatchik dream team to win elections in all of republics?
Or you want to say that it isn't important what people of Yugoslavia really want ( you know that better than them ? ) only survival of Yugoslavia is important?
Very interesting points. Though I would say that not anything leading to the break-up is a "mistake", because the break-up apparently in a lot of cases was the core interest of those purporting the "mistakes".
The recollection of events is very interesting, because from a German point of view, Yugoslavia is a blind spot until war was imminent in 1992. It is interesting to see, how many of the decisions you mention, already disbanded the idea of a united Yugoslavia but really fit to a loose confederation.
On letting Slovenia secede; yes, the more I read about it, the more audacious the gamble of these heavily outnumbered and outgunned folks seems. And all they got since 1992 were rewards for their behaviour.
On the presidential election, I agree with yugo-aesop. A different election would lead to different voting patterns giving the silent true "Yugoslavs" a better chance to articulate. I.e., even if a "Unity" candidate would only get 30% in a first presidential round nationwide, he would still be able to outnumber single seperatists, even if they would e.g. have 60% of e.g. the Serbian vote.
So, if a second round means that the "Unity" candidate runs against a Serbian or Croat separatist, he is likely to pick up the votes of the separatists which don't share the ethnicity of the Separatist-candidate.
- Status