Yugoslavia(1980 -2011) takes a different path

abc123

Banned
It is a bit more complicated than abc123 puts it. Both scripts were considered equal and both had the right to be used equal but it was an unwriten rule (that later got turned into a writne one) that in Croatia and Slovenia people use latin in official documents, in Bosnia they used both and further east it was cyrillic. Then in some serb dominated areas in Croatia people in local goveremnt decided they will write documents in cyrillic for what ever reason rather than in latin as was usual which resulted in complaints, which in return result in those same officials reporting the people that were complaining for antirevolutionary activities, often settling personal local enmities through the state aparatus.

That's right.
 
I agree with Marko, Second Yugoslavia was doomed from the start.
Well, if you call country that would lock you in a jail because of singing of Croat patriotic song ( that has nothing against Serbs or against any other nation ) a "quite liberal" than your idea of liberalism isn't the same as mine.

About punishing of Ustashes, the trouble was that very large number of Chetniks after seeing that they will loose did only change uniform and became Partisans, and later continued with the same buesiness as before, killing as many non-Serbs as possible.
Also, if you kill 100 000+ people without trial ( not even bother with Kangaroo court ) that hardly puts you as moraly superior to Ustashes and Chetniks. Saying that they were war criminals or collaborationists isn't enough to kill someone, at least not in civilised country or if you wan't to be better than those "war criminals or collaborationists".
The fact that you are ally of Soviet Union/USA/UK and that they have won the war doesn't mean that such things are good. It only means that you won the war.

Serbs dominated Second Yugoslavia too, by having majority of officers in JNA, militia and UDBA and SKJ. And that are the most important branches of Government in totalitarian regime like Yugoslavia.
Example, in SR Croatia ( where Serbs were 12-14% of population ) Serbs were about 40% of members of Militia ( Police ) and about 50-60% of command personell in police.
In JNA Serbs and Montenergins ( they had about 45% od population of Jugoslavija ) had about 70% of officers cor.
In diplomacy, same thing.
In SKJ ( Communist Party ) in Croatia they had about 1/3 of members.
Etc.


Constitution of 1974 did somewhat reduce such things, but that was the main reason why Serbs did want to change it.

I hate to be that guy but... source for this?
 
Yes, but the problem is... your information very often isn't the same as mine.

In any case, what Balkans need is a, or better yet, several credible and neutral historians to finally write/find out what really happened in the 20th century, on all sides.
 

abc123

Banned
Yes, but the problem is... your information very often isn't the same as mine.

In any case, what Balkans need is a, or better yet, several credible and neutral historians to finally write/find out what really happened in the 20th century, on all sides.

It's fine with me.
Until now you know very well that our history was/is written mostly by communist historians...

I'm not quite sure on what exactly in my post do you have objection, but I relly don't lie here, it isn't my intention at least, I may say incorrect things, but not because I made them up.
 

Angel Heart

Banned
I agree with Marko, Second Yugoslavia was doomed from the start.
Well, if you call country that would lock you in a jail because of singing of Croat patriotic song ( that has nothing against Serbs or against any other nation ) a "quite liberal" than your idea of liberalism isn't the same as mine.

About punishing of Ustashes, the trouble was that very large number of Chetniks after seeing that they will loose did only change uniform and became Partisans, and later continued with the same buesiness as before, killing as many non-Serbs as possible.
Also, if you kill 100 000+ people without trial ( not even bother with Kangaroo court ) that hardly puts you as moraly superior to Ustashes and Chetniks. Saying that they were war criminals or collaborationists isn't enough to kill someone, at least not in civilised country or if you wan't to be better than those "war criminals or collaborationists".
The fact that you are ally of Soviet Union/USA/UK and that they have won the war doesn't mean that such things are good. It only means that you won the war.

Serbs dominated Second Yugoslavia too, by having majority of officers in JNA, militia and UDBA and SKJ. And that are the most important branches of Government in totalitarian regime like Yugoslavia.
Example, in SR Croatia ( where Serbs were 12-14% of population ) Serbs were about 40% of members of Militia ( Police ) and about 50-60% of command personell in police.
In JNA Serbs and Montenergins ( they had about 45% od population of Jugoslavija ) had about 70% of officers cor.
In diplomacy, same thing.
In SKJ ( Communist Party ) in Croatia they had about 1/3 of members.
Etc.


Constitution of 1974 did somewhat reduce such things, but that was the main reason why Serbs did want to change it.

I second that. But do you happen to have the source of numbers of Serbs in the Croatian police (especially from 1990 and 1991)? I heard from Dojise navijači (around 3:51) that most of the cops were Serbs.
 
Last edited:

abc123

Banned
I second that. But do you happen to have the source of numbers of Serbs in the Croatian police (especially from 1990 and 1991)? I heard from Dojise navijači (around 3:51) that most of the cops were Serbs.

Well source are many policeman in Croatian police that were working for Yugoslavian Milicija before, and now have continued to work in Croatian Police.
About exact numbers of Serbs from 1990/91 on, I really don't know numbers. Maybe 5%?
 
Isn't it amazing how the various war criminals from those Balkan wars seem to get on extraordinarly well together now that they are incarcerated!
 

Angel Heart

Banned
Isn't it amazing how the various war criminals from those Balkan wars seem to get on extraordinarly well together now that they are incarcerated!

It's this typical "Us versus Them" mentality. Back then in the 90s they may have been enemies on the battlefield but in the Hague they are all being judged by Westerners. I wouldn't be surprised if Perišić and Gotovina turn out to be best pals.

I remember a lot of Serbs who hated Milošević to death but cheered for him during his trial. The episode of Mile vs tranzicije (sadly no English subtitles :() explains this phenomenon. Here is a significant quote from this clip:"What? A black guy and a Chinese should judge him?! (...) to make one thing clear: I do not belong to any party. I watch this as a patriot who cheers for his own countryman. I like Partizan but I'm not one of those who cheers for the Germans when they play against Zvezda."
 

abc123

Banned
It's this typical "Us versus Them" mentality. Back then in the 90s they may have been enemies on the battlefield but in the Hague they are all being judged by Westerners. I wouldn't be surprised if Perišić and Gotovina turn out to be best pals.

"

Something like that. Also, both sides see in that trial sign of hypocrisy of the West... ( washing hands after they did/did not done something while in the same time making war crimes in other parts of the world )
 
As far as numbers go, I have those lying somewhere around the house, if you guys are paitent enough I should post them after I do my exam in 10 days time and will have time to search for it in the books.
 
I agree with Marko, Second Yugoslavia was doomed from the start.
Well, if you call country that would lock you in a jail because of singing of Croat patriotic song ( that has nothing against Serbs or against any other nation ) a "quite liberal" than your idea of liberalism isn't the same as mine.

About punishing of Ustashes, the trouble was that very large number of Chetniks after seeing that they will loose did only change uniform and became Partisans, and later continued with the same buesiness as before, killing as many non-Serbs as possible.
Also, if you kill 100 000+ people without trial ( not even bother with Kangaroo court ) that hardly puts you as moraly superior to Ustashes and Chetniks. Saying that they were war criminals or collaborationists isn't enough to kill someone, at least not in civilised country or if you wan't to be better than those "war criminals or collaborationists".
The fact that you are ally of Soviet Union/USA/UK and that they have won the war doesn't mean that such things are good. It only means that you won the war.

Serbs dominated Second Yugoslavia too, by having majority of officers in JNA, militia and UDBA and SKJ. And that are the most important branches of Government in totalitarian regime like Yugoslavia.
Example, in SR Croatia ( where Serbs were 12-14% of population ) Serbs were about 40% of members of Militia ( Police ) and about 50-60% of command personell in police.
In JNA Serbs and Montenergins ( they had about 45% od population of Jugoslavija ) had about 70% of officers cor.
In diplomacy, same thing.
In SKJ ( Communist Party ) in Croatia they had about 1/3 of members.
Etc.


Constitution of 1974 did somewhat reduce such things, but that was the main reason why Serbs did want to change it.

Um your an idiot. Serbs formed 40% of Yugoslavia's population but were given only 1 of 8 votes in the federal presidency (12.5%). The sole reason why Slovenia and Croatia wanted to seperate from Yugoslavia in 1990 and 1991 after the end of communism in Europe was because implementing a democratic system in Yugoslavia (i.e. one man = one vote) would finally give Serbs true representation in the political system. If the country had held national elections to elect a Yugoslav president, the way Poland, Romania, Bulgaria and ALL of the rest of Eastern Europe had done, then Serbs who formed 40% of the population would obviously have the biggest say in who got elected. That's why Slovenia and Croatia never agreed to true elections to form a federal government and simply walked out of meetings concerning constitutional reform, because they knew that a democratic capitalist Yugoslavia would FINALLY put an end to the political and economic monopoly they enjoyed.

And your arguments about the second yugoslavia being dominated by Serbs are laughable. If anything it was the Croats and Slovenes who dominated with the Serbs being suppressed. Who cares if the majority of cops in Croatia were Serbs. THE FUCKING LEADER OF THE COUNTRY WAS JOSIP BROZ TITO, and he was half Croatian half Slovenian. A Serbian dominated Yugoslavia would never have killed the Chetnik leader Draza Mihailovic while allowing Ante Pavelic the leader of the Ustashe to flee the country and live the rest of his life in Argentina. A Serbian dominated Yugoslavia would never have created seperate 'Montenegrin' 'Macedonian' and Bosnian Muslim nationalities to reduce the influence of Serbs, or created two autonomous provinces in Serbia while creating no similar provinces in Croatia for Dalmatia, Krajina or Istria. Just look at how many Serbs were left outside the borders of Serbia in comparison to all the other Yugoslav peoples.

And if Yugoslavia was truly Serbian dominated, then why is it that Slovenia and Croatia were the richest republics in Yugoslavia?? Why would a Serbian dominated Yugoslavia move all the main industries and profitable companies in the only NON-Serbian regions of the country? If Yugoslavia was truly dominated by Serbs, Belgrade would have been the richest city in Yugoslavia and Serbia the richest republics

The problem with Yugoslavia, contrary to popular belief, was not Serbian hegemonism or Serbian ambitions to dominate Yugoslavia, but rather Croat and Slovenian seperatism. They enjoyed an economic monopoly over the rest of the country for nearly 50 years, and when the opportunity came to finally reform the system in a way that would develop the poorer regions of the country like Kosovo, Macedonia, and Bosnia through IMF reforms and democratization, they simply declared independence illegally and brought civil war to a country that had been one of the most promising and impressive of Europe.

In my view, a truly democratic Yugoslavia could definetly have emerged if the West had decided to back the Serbs in 1991 instead of the Croats and Slovenes. Serbs wanted to preserve Yugoslavia and reform it into a modern, democratic federation with national presidential and parliamentary elections. In such a case, Serbs who formed 40% of the population would naturally have 40% influence and greater influence in the country. However you can't say that's Serbian domination, that's simply democracy. Democracy means majority rule and Serbs just happened to be the majority
 
Come now, just because you disagree with his opinions doesn't mean you should call him names.

Yugoslavia was a complicated thing that oppressed prety much everyone that was against the main current of the party and Tito. On the federal level Serbs were under represented considering the numbers in the country but on local levels it was usualy the serbs that ran things especially in mixed areas. It was a sort of politics that tried to balance the situation by trying please every one but in the end leaving everyone unhappy.

Also your suggestion about 40% Serbs runing the show once the west supports Democracy could dangerously backfire. Sure it might have passed on the first election but on the next one everyone else would gang up against the Serbs and instead of 1990/1 with Croatia and Slovenia leaving Yugoslavia we would have few years down the line Serbia and Serb majority areas trying to leave Yugoslavia.

It was a lose-lose situation.


Cheers
 
Come now, just because you disagree with his opinions doesn't mean you should call him names.

Yugoslavia was a complicated thing that oppressed prety much everyone that was against the main current of the party and Tito. On the federal level Serbs were under represented considering the numbers in the country but on local levels it was usualy the serbs that ran things especially in mixed areas. It was a sort of politics that tried to balance the situation by trying please every one but in the end leaving everyone unhappy.

Also your suggestion about 40% Serbs runing the show once the west supports Democracy could dangerously backfire. Sure it might have passed on the first election but on the next one everyone else would gang up against the Serbs and instead of 1990/1 with Croatia and Slovenia leaving Yugoslavia we would have few years down the line Serbia and Serb majority areas trying to leave Yugoslavia.

It was a lose-lose situation.


Cheers

Actually you're absolutely right that was uncalled for, should not be resorting to name calling. And I actually do tend to agree with your analysis here, that national elections could go both ways. In fact elections in such a case would probably be characterized by Serbs attempting to play off one of the other nationalities against each other like MAcedonians against Albanians or Bosniaks against Croats or Croats against Slovenes so that the non-Serb vote would be divided, while Croats, Slovenes, Bosniaks, Albanians etc would probably work to form concesus and coalittions agaisnst the Serb majority. It would be pretty complicated but also kind of interesting to watch...A more exciting version of today's Bosnia lol

But I still do think that a democratic Yugoslavia could have emerged in in 1990. I think the biggest mistake for the country was not to conduct natioanl elections for the country as a whole PRIOR to conducting elections in all of the republics. If such elections had been held Ante Markovic would most likely have been elected president, and he would have acquired teh support from the West and implemented the necessary economic reforms that would have transformed Yugoslavia quickly into a market economy.
 
A deeper liberal serbian democratization and negotatiated settlements with other former yugoslav states might have resulted in some sort of more benign type of arrangement of single currency and a customs union along with a common defense policy.


Lets assume Milosevic doesnt come to power and Ivan Stambolic is president of serbia.
 

WeisSaul

Banned
A big issue with Yugoslavia is language. While core Yugoslavia, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia, and Montenegro, was all Serbo-Croatian speaking, you have a big issue with Slovenia, Macedonia, and parts of Kosovo.

Kosovo needs to be immigrated into subservience quite frankly, and Slovenia tended to be relatively homogenous, unlike Kosovo which had quite a few Serbs.

You need to use the dictatorship to brainwash everyone into giving up their various nationalistic tendencies and to support the united country, and promote ethnic mixing and integration, and the promotion of the Yugoslav language.

Yugoslavia was a country with great opportunity, and if anything really messed it up though, it was Croatia. It was the first to secede, and the Germans were the first to recognize them, so shame on Germany.I also think the Yugoslav government should have told the Italians that if things go to hell the refugees will be their problem. That would likely keep the Italians trying to preserve Yugoslavia. This might sound like a bit of a wank, but the Italians may counter-blackmail a weakening Yugoslavia to cede Istria, Fiume, and parts of Dalmatia in exchange for helping to keep the peace. If Croatia and Slovenia were quelled quickly with some possible Italian assistance, I think Yugoslavia, under a united language and a single nationalism, could have lasted.
 
Last edited:
A big issue with Yugoslavia is language. While core Yugoslavia, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia, and Montenegro, was all Serbo-Croatian speaking, you have a big issue with Slovenia, Macedonia, and parts of Kosovo.

Kosovo needs to be immigrated into subservience quite frankly, and Slovenia tended to be relatively homogenous, unlike Kosovo which had quite a few Serbs.

You need to use the dictatorship to brainwash everyone into giving up their various nationalistic tendencies and to support the united country, and promote ethnic mixing and integration, and the promotion of the Yugoslav language.

Yugoslavia was a country with great opportunity, and if anything really messed it up though, it was Croatia. It was the first to secede, and the Germans were the first to recognize them, so shame on Germany.I also think the Yugoslav government should have told the Italians that if things go to hell the refugees will be their problem. That would likely keep the Italians trying to preserve Yugoslavia. This might sound like a bit of a wank, but the Italians may counter-blackmail a weakening Yugoslavia to cede Istria, Fiume, and parts of Dalmatia in exchange for helping to keep the peace. If Croatia and Slovenia were quelled quickly with some possible Italian assistance, I think Yugoslavia, under a united language and a single nationalism, could have lasted.

Actually both Slovenia and Croatia secede at the same time, just to clarify. But regardless, Germany's role in the Yugoslav crisis is absolutely shameful and shares much of the responsbility for both breakup up Yugoslavia and the war that ensued. It's also important to note that almost all of Europe with the exception of Germany, Austria (and i think one more state, not sure who) were against the unilateral declarations of independence and supported the preservation of Yugoslavia all the way up until December 1991 when Germany agreed ot the Maachrist Treaty in exchange that Slovenia and Croatia be recognized. And in January 1992 the EC recognized Croatia and brought an end to Yugoslavia.

Basically, France, Britain, Spain and the rest of Europie should not have agreed to Germany's demands. I think that the best solution to the conflict was the so called Gligorov-Izetbegovic plan offered at the beginning of June 1991 about three weeks before Slovenia and Croatia declared independence on June 26th. Basically, this plan made Montenegro an integral part of Serbia (so Serbia had 3 autonomous provinces: Kosovo, Vojvodina, and Montenegro). Serbia then formed a federation with Serbia, Bosnia, and Macedonia which would remain Yugoslavia with its capital in Belgrade but in which Bosnia, Serbia, and Macedonia as three republics had equal status and equal veto power at the federal level. The presidency also switched each year between a Bosnian, Macedonian, and Serbian representative. And the plan was then to have this mini Yugoslavia form a confederation with Slovenia and Croatia, each of which would be independent states with seperate seats in the UN. So basically this plan would have allowed a peaceful seperation of Slovenia and Croatia from Yugoslavia similar to how Slovakia left Czechoslovakia. The rest of the republics would remain in Yugoslavia.

An alternative to the plan would have been instead of making this mini yugoslavia a union of three republics by incoporating Montenegro into Serbia, you would keep Montenegro as a republic and maybe add Kosovo also as a republic and maybe even Vojvodina. This would then satisfy the Kosovo Albanians.

In any case, Yugoslavia should have stayed together. ITs a shame that it broke apart and EVERYbody from the region, even those that deny it, know it to be true.
 
Top