Was the Collapse of Yugoslavia Inevitable - Coursework Example

Introduction The word Balkanization “is a modern term describing the fragmentation and re-division of countries and nations in the Balkan Peninsula,as well as a dynamic meaning "the Balkan way of doing things."” (Grumeza, 2010 p1). This word has been use in normal English to mean the artificial creation of human groups and societies that are significantly different with the view of giving it some kind of a centralized control or leadership. Balkanisation is a classical case of the bringing together of people of different ethnic, cultural and religious backgrounds into a single state where harmony was always preserved through some international manipulation or force. Perhaps, the concept of Balkanisation is epitomised by the idea of the state of Yugoslavia, which became a state throughout most of the 20th Century which was always controlled by parties that had links with the potentates of European and Global politics. The definition of the nation of Yugoslavia is perhaps one of the most difficult. Arguably, the borders of Yugoslavia were shifted much more often than any other country in the past century. The famous footballer, Davor Sucker is reputed to be the only footballer who has played for two countries (Yugoslavia and Croatia) in the history of the FIFA World Cup. This shows that the whole idea of Yugoslavia was a very delicate, complicated and prone to continuous change and modifications. This paper examines whether the original Yugoslavia, created by the League of Nations after the First World War was destined to break up or not. It analyses the history of the Balkans in relation to European history and to an extent, global history. It therefore gives an insight into the volatile situations and conditions that gave some grounding to the final disintegration of Yugoslavia, which eventually occurred in the 1990s after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Thus it looks at the 70 year history of Yugoslavia and seeks to identify the inherent causes of friction and eventual collapse of the nation of Yugoslavia. The objectives of the paper are as follows: 1. To analyse the inherent problems in the Yugoslav Confederation when it was formed between 1918 and 1945 2. Identify the reason why Socialist rule dominated the nation and allowed the Soviet influence to prevail in the country after the Second World War. 3. Examine the effects of the Collapse of the Communism on the Yugoslav Republic and the influence of the West and the European Union on the eventual disintegration of Yugoslavia. The First Yugoslavia After the First World War (1913 - 1919), Britain and its Allies (primarily the French) divided up the world under the supervision of the newly formed League of Nations in June 1919(Anderson, 2009). The Treaty of Versailles was effective in dividing up the entire world amongst the various parties that supported the Allies in the World War against the German-led Central Powers (Anderson, 2009). Although Russia Monarchy had played a significant role in defeating the Central Powers, the Monarchy was overthrown by the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917 and as a new government that was supported by the Germans, the new Russian government (which eventually became the Soviet Union) did not make claims for territory in the Treaty of Versailles (Brown, 2010). This treaty, under the supervision of the League of however became the main factor the the distribution of power and sovereignty around the world, including the Balkans. “As the First World War came to an end, the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovanes was proclaimed in Belgrade on 1st December, 1918” (Redzic, 2005 p4). The Serbs were Allied with the British and Russia during the war and they made a lot of sacrifice in defeating the Germans, Bulgarians and Austro-Hungarians in the War (Van Den Heuvel, 1992). As a form of pacification, it can be observed that the Serbs were given the mandate by the League of Nations to rule the whole area. This was common throughout Europe because there were many instances where numerous territories were given to nations and groups that supported the Allied course in the war. With the support of the League of Nations the Serbs established the monarchy which became the main controlling force in the Balkans. The Serbian-led monarchy that controlled the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovanes which became the foundation for the formation of Yugoslavia sought to create a Serbian hegemony over they region. They embarked on an expansionist policy which was in the spirit of the concept of Pan-Slavism which sought to unite Slavs (an ethnic group of southern Europeans who were distinct from the Ottomans and other Western Europeans) (Riasanovsky, 2006). So they declared the nation Yugoslavia to encompass all the Slavic people in the Balkan region. However, in spite of the efforts, there were people of distinct ethnic and national orientiations who had the right to self-determination under contemporary rule in the 1920s. There was the Montenegrins, Slovanes, Macedonians and Croats who all had distinct identities and systems that separated them from the Serbs who sought to unite the nation under a pan-Slavic banner (Crnobrnja, 1996). The Montegrins had an independent country that had been under a patriarchal rule for generations. The Slovanes and Macedonians were different socially yand ethnically but had no political institutions (Crnobrnja, 1996). On the other hand, the Croats had old institutions and a developed political style and were the largest population in the Yugoslav nation and were the biggest threat to Serbian domination (Crnobrnja, 1996). Aside the nationalistic and ethnic differences, the Balkans had a diverse religious mix. There were diverse Christian groups, Catholics, Protestants and Greek Orthodox who were ethnic and had their creeds institutionalized in their ethnic and social groups (Parkovic, 2000). Also, there were Muslims (most of them in Bosnia Herzegovina) who had strong connections and inclinations to the centuries of Ottoman influence (Ramet, 2006). The level of diversity in the Balkans was really large. However, in spite of the differences, the Serbian-led liberators of the Balkans from Central Powers controls gave the newly established monarch some legitimacy before the League of Nations which had enormous influence in global politics at that time. In the earlier years after the war, regional governments had been formed by Serbs, Croats and Muslims in 1919 (Redzic, 2005). In 1924, the Central Yugoslav Authority, which was mainly dominated by Serbs abolished the Bosnian Herzegovinan government and weakened other regional governments (Redzic, 2005). In 1929, the Royal dictatorship established the banorines (administrative courts) which replaced the regional courts and forced the various ethnic and social groups to recognize the Centralized authority. This was something that sought to promote a Serbian hegemony. All the suppressed groups naturally consolidated to demand more self control and autonomy. This was a sentiment that could be traced the the effort to suppress the various distinct peoples who were forced to cede their power to the centralized Yugoslav monarchy which lacked legitimacy before these people. “In 1934, elements against the Central Yugoslav government assassinated King Alexander... ” who was the ruler of the country at that them (Johnson, 2003 p25). This was a big blow to the effort to keep the nation united under the Serbian dominated government. “The Council of the League of Nations passed a resolution establishing a committee for the Internal Repression of Terrorism” (Johnson, 2003 p28). This external effort gave legitimacy to a monarchy that was not recognized as representative of the various ethnic groups. This therefore shows that the consolidation of the various nations was one that was not favoured by all the ethnic groups in the Balkans and with the option to choose, most of them would have abandoned the Central Yugoslav government to form their independent nations, even as far back as in the 1930s. However, the external support and the linkage of the Central Yugoslav authority to the most influential authorities in Europe at that time gave the government the needed power and legitimacy to control the various ethnic groupings in the Balkans. This therefore confirms the artificial nature of the concept of Balkanisation and the nation of Yugoslavia. With the support of the League of Nations, the Central Yugoslavian government used the rule of terror and continued to entrench Serbian hegemonity and relegated the minorities to the background (Johnson, 2003). This kept a fragile peace that existed throughout the nation within the time of the League of nations. Europe Between the Two World Wars Elsewhere in Europe, tensions began to mount as the principles of the League of Nations were openly violated by Russia (now the Soviet Union) and Germany who had been treated unfairly by the Treaty of Versailles (Anderson, 2009). France captured the Ruhr in 1923 and the Germans could not really react to that effort. The treaty of Versailles had allowed the German monarchy and government officials who were primarily responsible for causing the 1st World War to enjoy comfortable lives in exile whilst the ordinary Germans were made to pay heavy taxes for the war (Axelrod, 2008). This created a vacuum for Adolf Hitler and his nationalist ideas and concepts to flourish when he came to power in 1933. The Italians under Mussolini invaded Ethiopia (then called Abyssinia) against the League of Nations mandate (Axelrod, 2008). Hitler, who was closely building Nazi Germany on the ideas and concepts of Mussolini. In this wise, he sought to increase his popularity, make Germany a one-party state and build the German military. When he realized that the League of Nations could not do much about the Italian invasion of Ethiopia, he annexed Austria in 1938 (Chaurasia, 2009). The League of Nations, led by Britain responded with an appeasement which sought to give the League of Nations face. However, in the eyes of the Germans, this really despised the League of Nations and the British control of mainland Europe. Hitler however continued to build his army and promised his people to give them a Lebensraum which was a living space in the rest of Europe where Germans could have a comfortable life (Axelrod, 2008). In 1938, the Soviet Union invaded Finland and against the principles of the League of Nations (Chaurasia, 2009). The League of Nations could not take military action against the Soviet Union and this weakened their positions further before the various groups in Europe that were suppressed by the League of Nations like the Germans and others in Yugoslavia like the Croats. In 1939, Hitler invaded Poland, a nation which had a protection pact with Britain: Britain declared war on Germany and the Second World War began (Chaurasia, 2009). Naturally, the various ethnic groups and nationalities that were suppressed by the Central Yugoslav authority found some promise in the German defiance of the League of Nations. This is because the distinct nationalities that were being forced to accept Serbian dominance were in concord with the Germans, who were questioning the legitimacy of the League of Nations. The Second Yugoslavia An election in 1935 had show complete dissatisfaction of the existing political system so local and international pressure came upon the Yugoslav government to rule the country with a federal system (Frucht & Ellington, 2004). A new cabinet was therefore formed and political prisoners were freed, most of them Croats thus creating what became known as the Croat Question (Frucht & Ellington, 2004). These freed Croats formed the group known as Ustace which aimed at liberating Yugoslavia from Serbian control. The Ustace were supported by Mussolinis Fascist Italy. Between 1936 and 1939, Yugoslavia imported 34.1% of its total imports from Germany (Vucinich & Tomasvich, 1969). Statistics also show that Germany was receiving all of Yugoslavias bauxite exports and 40% of its copper exports (Hehn, 2005). Thus, although the government was supported strongly by the League of Nations, they could not declare war on Germany which was a major trading partner. Yugoslavia remained neutral between 1939 and 1941. However, after the effort of Germany and Italy began to expand throughout Europe, Yugoslavia had to seek allies. It signed a non-aggression treaty with the Soviet Union in 1940 and this was looked at positively by the pro-communist groups in the country like the Partisans. The Government of Yugoslavia joined the Tripartite Pact of Germany which ensured that the Germans would not violate the sovereignty of Yugoslavia. The Yugoslavian government was overthrown by a Serbian-led military officers who re-installed the Serbian monarchy in March 1941 (Frucht & Ellington, 2004). This government was looked at with contempt by the Germans and their allies because they had overthrown a friendly government so Hitler ordered an invasion of Yugoslavia (Dunn, 1989). German, Italian, Bulgarian and Albanian soldiers participated in the invasion and Yugoslavia was fragmented amongst these nations and nation was fragmented along ethnic lines. The pro-Soviet group (Partisans) supported the invasion since the Soviets had a non-aggression pact with Germany at that time (Dunn, 1989). However, Serbian nationalists (most of whom were remnants of the military officers who led the coup against the government in March 1941) and royalists formed the Chetzniks which resisted German and Axis occupation of Yugoslavia (Ramet, 2006). After Germany breached the non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union, the Partisans who were the Yugoslav Communist group also went to the underground and began to oppose German-led occupation of Yugoslavia (Ramet, 2006). In filling up the vacuum, the Germans empowered the Ustace, which was the Croatian rebel group that existed in the mid-1930s. This set the stage for the renewal of tensions that existed between the various ethnic groups in Yugoslavia. The Partisans initiated a guerilla warfare against the Axis forces occupying Yugoslavia with some support from the Soviet Union (Daniels, 1986). On the other hands, the Chetzniks sought support from the Allies and operated against the Axis under instructions from the exiled Royal Government (Klemaneic & Zagar, 2004). In the middle of the war, the Chetzniks failed to continue the resistance to the end. However, the Partisans remained strong and resolute to the end. They eventually expelled the Axis from Serbia in 1944 and the leader, Josip Broz Tito was seen as a national hero and this caused the royal government to lose credibility (Pavkovic, 2000). Final Yugoslavia Tito maintained strong links with the Soviet Union. He dissolved the government institutions that existed before the war ended and formed a constituent assembly (Vicinich & Tomasevich, 1969). National and ethnic identities were collapsed in favour of a national identity that was built on strong socialist ideals (Vicinich & Tomasevich, 1969). Religious activities were suppressed and national identities were banned. This continued from the end of the World War till the 1970s. In 1970-71, a Croatian Spring which was a set of protests meant to seek the division of the country was suppressed and there was a further banning of national identity (Parkovic, 2000). Within this time, laws were passed that made it illegal for ethnic identity to be encouraged and like the Soviet Union, ethnic groups were moved to settle in other areas that had different ethnic majorities. When Josip Broz Tito died in 1980, ethnic tensions, built on the social differences began to rise. Old wars were re-ignited and there were various calls for the breakup of the country and the breakaway from Communism. Eventually, the Soviet Union collapsed and Croatia and Slovenia claimed independence in June 1991 (Grumeza, 2010). The Republic of Macedonia was declared in September 1991. Croatia and Slovenia got Western recognition in 1992 and this set the stage for membership to the European Union and NATO. Slovenia joined NATO in 2004 whilst Croatia joined NATO in 2009 and is invited to join the European Union in 2013. Bosnia & Herzegovina also declared independence shortly afterwards and this led to the civil war which spanned through the mid-1990s. Conclusion The whole idea of Pan-Slavism seems to be one that was artificial which was not very much ingrained into the various units of societies in the Balkans. Although the idea seem to resonate quite well in the international community, it appears that the whole idea of Pan-Slavism was not accepted by individuals and societies in the Balkans. However, due to the convenience of running the nation as a single unit, the idea of Yugoslavia was entrenched in the international community. This started in the period after the First World War where the supporters of the victorious Allies thought of compensating their allies in the region, the Serbs by giving them the whole area to rule. This was never accepted by the non-Serbs particularly the Croats. The defiance of the Allied formed League of Nations by the Germans and Russians gave renewed hopes for the various ethnic groups subjected to the Central Yugoslav authority to gain their independence. This led to various internal strive which were exploited after the Germans invaded Yugoslavia in the Second World War and divided it up. However, the Partisan group fought and expelled the German-led invaders and with their links to the Soviet Union, the Partisans, under Josip Broz Tito was able to maintain the nation of Central Yugoslavia. The eventual disintegration of the Soviet Union led to the break up of the Yugoslavia along national and ethnic lines. It is therefore conclusive that the whole idea of Yugoslavia is an abstract concept that never resonated well with the individual states and ethnic groups of the Balkans. However, the Central Yugoslavia survived because of international politics. This international politics was first led by the League of Nations and the USSR which was a vetoing power in the United Nations, the predecessor of the League of Nations. It can therefore be said that although international political figures gave legitimacy to the Yugoslav state, the individual ethnic groups and nationalities never gave their full allegiance to the state. This means that the collapse of Yugoslavia was inevitable right from the time it was established after the First World War. References Anderson, Perry (2009) The New Old World Verso. Axelrod, Alan.(2008) The Real History of World War Two: A New Look At the Past. Sterling Publishing Company Inc Brown, Archie (2010) The Rise and Fall of Communism London: Vintage Publishing. Chaurasia, Radhay Shayam (2009) History of Europe Atlantic Publishers Crnobrnja Mihaijlo (1996) The Yugoslav Drama IB Taurius Publishers Daniels Robert (1986) Documentary History of Communism OKP Publishing Dunn, John (1989) Modern Revolutions: An Introduction to the Analysis of Political Phenomenon Cambridge University Press Frucht, Richard & Ellington, Lucien (2004) Eastern Europe: An Introduction to the People ABC CLIO Grumeza Ion (2010) The Roots of Balkanization : Eastern Europe CE 500 – 1500 University Press of America. Hehn Paul, 2005 A Low Dishonest Decade: The Great Power, Eastern Europe the Economic Causes of World War II Continuum International Publishing. Johnson, Sterling (2003) Peace Without Justice: Hegemonic Instability & International Criminal Law? London: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. Klemaneic Matjaz & Zagar Mitja (2004) The Former Yugoslavias Diverse Peoples: A Reference Source Book. Baton Publishing. Parkovic Aleksandar (2000) The Fragmentation of Yugoslavia: Nationalism & War in the Balkans Berlin: Springer Verlag Ramet, Sabrina (2006) The Three Yugoslavias: State Building & Legitimisation 1918 – 2005 Ashgate Publishing. Redzic Enver (2005) Bosnia & Herzegovina in the Second World War London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Riasanovsky Nicholas Valentine (2006) A History of Russia Oxford University Press Van Den Heuvel Martin (1992) The Disintegration of Yugoslavia The Netherlands: Kluwer Publishing. Vicinich Wayne & Tomasevich Jozo (1969) Contemporary Yugoslavia: 20 of Socialist Experiment Stanford University Press. Read More