Yugoslavia. R.I.P.

[CollegeTillIDie]

I think Kosovo is de facto seperate from Serbia anyway.

It's administered by the UN and will probably become independent or merge with Albania.

I read somewhere that the goalie is the only Montenegrin in the Serb & Mont team.

De jure citizens of Kosovo are still entitled to Serbian citizenship and are entitled to travel on passports of the current Serbia-Montenegro

[dfx-]

Then there'd be shag all attractive women left in the Republic!

Now you see what I'm prepared to go through just for the peace and quiet......

[Poor Student]

It could get pretty farcical now, with every other province wanting independence for the sake of it. Serbia could yet lose 2 more provinces, Vojvodina and Kosovo, and sometime in the future, Bosnia and Herzegovina may go their seperate ways.

Montenegro is a country, not a Serbian province.

[dcfcsteve]

Rump Yugoslavia 1992-2003 was pressurised into changing it's name by outside forces with promises of a closer rapprochment with the EU for one example. As we all know they need to hand over Mladic and Karadzic before any more progress will occur on that front.
Once a referendum for Montenegro was pencilled in for 2006 I couldn't see the point in changing to the interim name Serbia-Montenegro personally. Anyway there is no mass unrest in Vojvodina nor is there a groundswell of opinion looking for change. What is there is a demand for the restoration of the autonomous status they had pre-Milosevic which would address most of the issues anyway.
Midfielder Albert Nadj ( Serbian spelling of a Hungarian surname[Nagy] for the record) is an example of the co-existence that exists between both communities. Many ethnic Hungarians, like Albert's family, have Serbianised the spelling of their names to ensure that the pronunciation remained intact. Smart move in my view.

So it is the formal end of Yugoslavia (1919-2006) which was one of the few good ideas in the Treaty of Versailles and was a nice concept, the idea that people who had cultural and linguistic links could live together in a harmonious federal type state. The Bosnians, Croats, Macedonians, Montenegrins, Serbs, Slovenes were all Southern Slavs which is where the name Yugoslavia meaning country of the Southern Slavs came from. They were linked by Slavonic culture and also ethnicity.

Say for example, to give an example closer to home , if there had been Celtonia established where Bretons, Cornish, Irish, Manx, Scottish and Welsh all lived under rule from Dublin had been established, and you get the idea behind Yugoslavia. The Celts like the Slavs would have had Religious differences. The predominantly Catholic Bretons and Irish and the predominantly Methodist Welsh, Presbyterian Scots and Anglican/Episcopalian Cornish , would compare favourably with the mainly Orthodox Serbs, Macedonians and Montenegrins, predominantly Catholic Slovenes,Croats, and Vojvodina Hungarians , mainly Muslim Bosnians and ethnic Sandzak, Albanian minorities.

It was a shame about the implementation of Yugoslavia in the late 1980's though, where maniacs like Milosevic and Tudjman were in positions of authority.

I think you're way off the mark here CTID. There has never been an underlying history of animosity and sheer hatred between the various Celtic nations, which cannot be said about the elements that made up the b@stard state of Yugoslavia.

Conversely, there have been centuries of conflict between the numerous elements that made up the former Yugolsavia. This continued even after the country was formed - right from the start it had problems with inter-ethnic tension, political and physical in-fighting, assasinations etc. What made Yugoslavia last as long as it did was exactly the same thing that has allowed that other great b@stard nation of Iraq to survive as long as it did - strong central leadership that, through differing methods, managed to keep a lid on the inherent and simmering rivalries. Once that leadership (Tito and Communism and Saddam and Ba'athism) were removed, the artifically created countries have started to come apart at the seams.

Yugoslavia was yet another classic example of Europe's large powers playing with the map of the world for their own benefit. In the Treaty Of Versaiiles, they were preoccupied with splitting-up the Austro-Hungarian empire in a way that helped them first and foremost e.g. by stopping the Italians from expanding their territory in that area. After WWII it was all about creating a buffer zone bwteen the 2 world powers. If any genuine attempt had been made to do what was right for the people of the Balkans, they would've accepted form the start that the things that divided them were greater than the things that united them, and acted accordingly. Instead - as we've seen in places like Ireland, Palestine, Iraq, Cyrpus etc - the major powers at the time created yet another makey-uppy country largely to meet their own needs, and thereby doomed it to failure from the start.

The elements within the former Yugoslavia were indeed united by shared history and ethnicity. But the things that divided them were of bigger importance - namely religion and language. When 2 parts of the same ethnic group living side by side use completely different alphabets for the same language, that begins to give you an idea of how different they are in terms of history, allegiances and world view, and how complex the situation is.

We have struggled for centuries now to find a workable solution to ethnic conflcit in northern ireland, where the only thing that really divides us is religion (or at least culture that is delineated primarily along religious lines). That is despite our common language and shared history. Add another 5 or so ethnic groups into the mix, 3 more languages, another religion, and years of complicated inter-group rivalry and you begin to get a feel for how massively complex the Balkans is and always will be.

I for one am glad that Yugoslavia no longer exists. It was always going to be this way, so there is no RIP as far as I am concerned. Big powers need to stop forcing their own unworkable and unrealistic solutions upon peoples. A lot of countries are thoroughly artifical entities that don't reflect the genuine nature of on-the-ground ethnic, religious or linguistic groups, or fundamental politics. Countries do not have any form of sacred right or need to exist - if they don't work, we should not be afraid of recognising that and letting them change.

Even in 'established' areas like Western Europe we have such situations - i wouldn't be at all surprised if Belgium didn't last another 25 years in its current form, or of Spain fragmented partially in the next 50 years.

[Dotsy]

Excellent post Steve. Prior to Versailles the history of the Balkans was one of near continuos conflict for hundreds of years. Trying to artifically join these conflicting nations into one country was always going to fail in the long run.

[Poor Student]

Pan Slavic and pan Yugoslav movements and thought did exist long before the 20th century. Napoleon joined roughly the area of Slovenia and Croatia into one satellite state called the Illyrian provinces. For a while there was a belief that the peoples of that region descended from the ancient people of Illyria and had a common linguistic and cultural heirtage. There was a strong enough Illyrian movement in Slovenia and Croatia in the first half of the 19th century. The Stokavski dialect of Croatia was chosen for the official Croatian language as it was the one which was most similar to Serbian, with some sort of possible unity in mind. It wasn't entirely some madey uppey idea, but an experiment which ultimately proved to be a failure, and a bloody and costly one.

[dcfcsteve]

Pan Slavic and pan Yugoslav movements and thought did exist long before the 20th century. Napoleon joined roughly the area of Slovenia and Croatia into one satellite state called the Illyrian provinces. For a while there was a belief that the peoples of that region descended from the ancient people of Illyria and had a common linguistic and cultural heirtage. There was a strong enough Illyrian movement in Slovenia and Croatia in the first half of the 19th century. The Stokavski dialect of Croatia was chosen for the official Croatian language as it was the one which was most similar to Serbian, with some sort of possible unity in mind. It wasn't entirely some madey uppey idea, but an experiment which ultimately proved to be a failure, and a bloody and costly one.

So that's 2 parts that may have had some previous positive history and connection. Then compare that to the centuries of ethnic conflict between the Catholic Croats, Orthodox Serbs, Muslim Bosnians and Albanian Kosovans and you'll see that the majority of Yugoslavia was indeed makey-uppey.

If you created a single state consisting of Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Italy and France - the fact that Austria and Germany were briefly united during WWII wouldn't make the state any less made-up and unlikely to work.

Yugoslavia wasn't experiment, as the outcome was nigh-on guaranteed. Disparate ethnic, religious and/or linguistic groups living on top of each other with centuries of shared animosity should not be forced to combine and 'get-on' just to make life easier for the powers that be at that particular time.

[Paddy Ramone]

Say for example, to give an example closer to home , if there had been Celtonia established where Bretons, Cornish, Irish, Manx, Scottish and Welsh all lived under rule from Dublin had been established, and you get the idea behind Yugoslavia. The Celts like the Slavs would have had Religious differences. The predominantly Catholic Bretons and Irish and the predominantly Methodist Welsh, Presbyterian Scots and Anglican/Episcopalian Cornish , would compare favourably with the mainly Orthodox Serbs, Macedonians and Montenegrins, predominantly Catholic Slovenes,Croats, and Vojvodina Hungarians , mainly Muslim Bosnians and ethnic Sandzak, Albanian minorities

I'd love to see the United Kingdom split up. We'd get more votes in Eurovision then.

[Partizan]

For all you armchair Yugo detracters.

http://antiwar.com/malic/

Especially read the last 2 paragraphs.

Looks like things wont be so rosy for the crook Djukanovic.

[dcfcsteve]

For all you armchair Yugo detracters.

http://antiwar.com/malic/

Especially read the last 2 paragraphs.

Looks like things wont be so rosy for the crook Djukanovic.

There is nothing in that article that in anyway asserts that the former Yugoslavia should've existed or been maintained, so it's difficult to see what your point is.

All new countries face an incredibly difficult future - our own needed a Civil War and 7 decades of economic failure to get to the strong-footing we're on now. There is no amazing revelation to point out that a small new nation like Montenegro will also face a difficult future. And more importantly - doing so does not confer the slightest bit of legitimacy upon the former Yugoslavia.

[Partizan]

Lighten up Steve, the article by Mr Malic was in regard to the referendum in Crna Gora and its long term implications. I really do think that the Montenegrins have royally shot themselves in the foot and will down the road rue the day they seperated from Serbia. NATO's/EU/US quest of dividing and destroying Yugoslavia which began in 1991 is now near complete. ironic in that where the Axis failed to do so in 1941-45, NATO/EU will succeed in 2006.

Montenegro had more independence as part of Yugoslavia than it will as an EU-Nato protectorate
Neil Clark
Tuesday May 23, 2006

Guardian

'Montenegro votes for independence", the headlines declared at the result of the referendum in the Balkan republic. But is independence really what lies in store? My dictionary has independence as: "completely self-governing; not subject to or showing the influence of others". By this definition, independence is not what they will be getting.
The most important political and economic decisions, which will affect the everyday lives of citizens in the republic, will not be made in its capital, Podgorica, but in Brussels, Geneva and Washington and the boardrooms of the multinational companies which now dominate the country's economy.

It is ironic that EU and WTO membership has been most enthusiastically supported by the prime minister, Milo Djukanovic, and the pro-independence faction - for it's hard to think of an easier way for a small country to lose national independence than by surrendering control of trade and economic policy to unelected bureaucrats miles away.

Nato membership, which Montenegro is also expected to pursue enthusiastically, has similar consequences: the commanders of Montenegro's new army and navy will have to get used to taking orders from those who planned the 78-day bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999.

Then there is the role of the IMF and the World Bank. These two unelected bodies have, with the EU, sought to impose Thatcherite neo-liberal solutions on Serbia-Montenegro, ever since the fall of Yugoslavia's Socialist-led government in 2000. Thousands of socially owned enterprises have already been privatised, but the west is still not satisfied - the IMF has made further economic help dependent on Belgrade selling off the valuable NIS oil company.

Montenegro's tiny economy is even more dominated by foreign capital than Serbia's, with the privatisation process having started much earlier. The selling off of nationally owned assets will have serious implications for the country's future economic viability and even with the tourist potential of its attractive coastline, it is difficult to see how Montenegro can afford to pay its way, without further surrender to western financial institutions. In doing so, it will be following the path of its neighbours.

For all the novelties of statehood, the brutal truth is that today's "independent" Balkan republics had, if anything, more independence when they were autonomous republics inside the Yugoslav Federation. In place of one militarily strong, internationally respected, non-aligned nation, there now exists a number of weak, economically unviable EU/IMF/Nato protectorates.

The dismantling of Yugoslavia, with its alternative economic and social model, has suited western capitalism fine. But for the people of the region, the benefits have been harder to discern. Little wonder then that nostalgia for Tito's Yugoslavia is on the rise. The website "Titoville" has received over 1m visitors and in Rakovice, a suburb of Sarajevo, an anti-nationalist Serb named Jezdimir Milosevic (no relation) has proclaimed "The Republic of Titoslavia", a state "without territory, without international recognition, destined to live in the hearts of its citizens". Passports are available for €10.

Over 65 years ago, on the eve of the attack on Yugoslavia by the Axis powers, the Serbian jurist Slobodan Jovanovic argued that a single, south Slav state was the best way the people of the Balkans could guarantee their independence and protection. It still is - and that logic seems likely to make itself felt in the years to come. When the victory parades are over, the only real difference Sunday's narrow vote will make is that Montenegro will be able enter Eurovision.

[paudie]

For all you armchair Yugo detracters.

http://antiwar.com/malic/

Especially read the last 2 paragraphs.

Looks like things wont be so rosy for the crook Djukanovic.

Whatever about the rights and wrongs of Montenegrin independence its seems clear Djukanovic has had a "colourful past" (supporting Milosovic's war against Croatia, alleged Mafia links with cigarette smuggling).

[dcfcsteve]

Whatever about the rights and wrongs of Montenegrin independence its seems clear Djukanovic has had a "colourful past" (supporting Milosovic's war against Croatia, alleged Mafia links with cigarette smuggling).

He'll be looking to invest in Shelbourne next.......!

[LeixlipRed]

maybe someone who knows more about economics than myself could tell me how montenegro is going to survive seeing as its such a small economic unit? does it have the ability to actually be self sufficient or is this split just in name and they'll be maintaing econmic links with serbia?

[dcfcsteve]

maybe someone who knows more about economics than myself could tell me how montenegro is going to survive seeing as its such a small economic unit? does it have the ability to actually be self sufficient or is this split just in name and they'll be maintaing econmic links with serbia?

Part of the reaosn for their split was the fact that Serbia are struggling to get EU accession talks off the ground. It's clear that Montenegro want to get into the EU as quickly as possible, and they already use the currency.

If they do join the EU then they'll be a low-cost part of the largest economic block in the world, so their relationship with Serbia will fast become irrelevant.

However - further EU expansion is far from set-in-stone, and will hit a road-block by Turkey's application at the latest. So they'd need to get a proverbial wriggle-on...

[CollegeTillIDie]

Part of the reaosn for their split was the fact that Serbia are struggling to get EU accession talks off the ground. It's clear that Montenegro want to get into the EU as quickly as possible, and they already use the currency.

If they do join the EU then they'll be a low-cost part of the largest economic block in the world, so their relationship with Serbia will fast become irrelevant.

However - further EU expansion is far from set-in-stone, and will hit a road-block by Turkey's application at the latest. So they'd need to get a proverbial wriggle-on...

A bit of perspective here. There has never been a history of animosity at all between Serbia and Montenegro. On previous occasions when Montenegro was independent and Serbia under foreign rule, the Montenegrins provided a welcome haven from foreign domination for Serbs. When Serbia had it's independence it enjoyed neighbourly relations with it's coastal cousins. Under Yugoslavia (1919 - 1992) Montenegro was the benificiary of hefty financial investments in it's infrastructure. Investments I would wager, that an independent Montenegro given it's miniscule population ,( 650,000 current estimate) would have been incapable of doing. 45% approximately of the Montenegrins themselves did not wish to see the break up of the federation. It is also significant that the Montenegrins allowed emigres to return home and vote. And this is a crucial thing I am against emigres having the right to vote on issues such as constitutional status or choosing a government for one simple reason! THEY DO NOT HAVE TO LIVE UNDER THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR DECISION! But those unfortunates left behind after the plebiscite on the other hand Do!

In the final Yugoslavia ( 1992 to date) Montenegro was an equal partner in the federation, punching above it's weight. It had self-determination in most areas. The only thing the Federal government actually effected in Montenegro was it's defence and it's consular and foreign affairs representation.
And you can be sure that the Montenegrins will most like rent a floor in the Serbian Embassies currently in place around the world.
Belgrade continued to bankroll projects proposed by the Podgorica administration, that source of income will now be cut off. They will still receive Serbian tourists and receive revenue from them but it will not compensate them for the loss of " Federal Funding" .

I fail to see how a country with a population less than the North side of Dublin can hope to launch itself into the 21st Century without serious amounts of foreign aid. ( For the record I do acknowledge that Luxembourg and Liechtenstein and Andorra have been independent for centuries)

[CollegeTillIDie]

There is nothing in that article that in anyway asserts that the former Yugoslavia should've existed or been maintained, so it's difficult to see what your point is..... There is no amazing revelation to point out that a small new nation like Montenegro will also face a difficult future. And more importantly - doing so does not confer the slightest bit of legitimacy upon the former Yugoslavia.

The former Yugoslavia had more legitimacy than the United Kingdom!

[CollegeTillIDie]

Partizan

Thanks for posting that article and I for one am a bit wistful.
I feel for my friends over there who liked being in "Jugoslavija" and were most put out when the 2 republic version was forced by international pressure to change it's name in 2003.

[CollegeTillIDie]

Oh and here's another thing. We more than any nation on earth understand the sense of well being a country derives from it's successful sportsteams and athletes.

As part of Yugoslavia , Montenegrins were in the 1968 European Championship Final in soccer and qualified for World Cups including the current one about to take place in Germany. Given that even in 2 republic Yugoslavia the highest number of Montenegrins to feature in a starting eleven was 3, that should indicate the glory days of football may not return for Crna Gora. Especially given that 2 of it's leading clubs only participated in the First Federal League last season ( Buducnost Podgorica and Zeta Golubvoci).

They also were World Champions in Basketball ( 2003 before the name change) and won many European titles and Olympic medals .
Those days too are gone forever.I suppose they always have the Eurovision Song Contest...........

[CollegeTillIDie]

I'd love to see the United Kingdom split up. We'd get more votes in Eurovision then.

Yes Free Wales, Free Cornwall and Free the Isle Of Man now.
Vive L'Ecosse Libre!