Book: Alan Fogelquist, Politics and Economic Policy in Yugoslavia, 1918-1929

Politics and Economic Policy in Yugoslavia, 1918-1929

By Alan Fogelquist

View this Author’s Spotlight

Paperback, 502 pages

320

Preview

List Price:
$29.50

Price:
$22.13

You Save:
$7.37 ( 25% )

 

Ships in 3–5 business days

This study, based on the author’s doctoral dissertation at UCLA, examines Yugoslav economic policy from 1918 to 1929, how it was made, and how it was affected by political developments of the time. It studies the activities of Yugoslavia’s regional political and business elites, political groups, and corporations, their reactions to Yugoslav economic policy and their efforts to influence it. The study contains a detailed analysis of party politics and the manner in which the political process affected economic policy. The study uncovers and explains relationships between state, elite, class, national-confessional groups, and territorial regions in the determination of social and economic policy in the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, later renamed Yugoslavia, and the relationship between these groups and the Yugoslav state.

Support independent publishing: Buy this book on Lulu.

Product Details

ISBN
978-1-257-94299-2

Copyright
Alan F. Fogelquist, Ph.D (Standard Copyright License)

Publisher
Global Geopolitics Net

Published
July 27, 2011

Language
English

Pages
502

Binding
Perfect-bound Paperback

Interior Ink
Black & white

Dimensions (inches)
6.0 wide × 9.0 tall


Once, There Was Yugoslavia

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

By Vesna Peric Zimonjic

BELGRADE, Jun 24, 2011 (IPS) – For decades, the former Yugoslavia was a communist country with a human face, whose nations enjoyed high standards of living compared to other Eastern Europeans, visa-free travel abroad, and participatory government. Twenty years ago, on Jun. 25, all that ended.

It ended for a country where private property was allowed, be it homes or small business. Education and healthcare were free, jobs were secure, and Yugoslavia had a firm reputation as one of the leaders of the non-aligned movement.

On Jun. 25, 1991, the most developed republics of Croatia and Slovenia made unilateral declarations of independence. They saw the Serbian leader at the time, Slobodan Milosevic, as the incarnation of evil who wanted their nations to remain under what they saw as the iron rule of Belgrade in a world that had changed after the fall of Berlin wall in 1989.

Milosevic was acting as the protector of all Serbs, who lived outside present day Serbia in hundreds of thousands in Croatia and Bosnia. He publicly declared "the need for all Serbs to live in one country."

"Those two things set the stage for the wars of the 90s," historian Predrag Markovic tells IPS. "After the human loss of some 150,000 people and enormous economic losses, it is hard to say what the benefit of independence was for some 24 million people who lived in former Yugoslavia. Yes, they are proud of having their own countries, but the essential substance of serious states is lacking in almost all when compared to former federation."

Slovenia with a population of two million, Croatia with 4.6 million, Bosnia-Herzegovina 4.2 million, Serbia 7.5 million, Montenegro 650,000 and Macedonia with two million people are quite different places now. The three leaders that led nations in wars of the 90s, Croatian president Franjo Tudjman, Bosniak leader Alija Izetbegovic and Milosevic are all dead.

The most developed Slovenia is so far the only member of the European Union (EU), since 2004. Croatia stands next in line for membership in 2013. Montenegro and Macedonia are candidates; Serbia awaits its status by the end of the year, while Bosnia-Herzegovina is unable to recover from the 1992-95 wars.

"The EU was our only and natural choice," Slovenian economist Joze Mencinger tells IPS. "But we have a tiny say in the EU, smaller than ever in former Yugoslavia."

Apart from human losses and direct war damages in the 1991-95 period, sociologist Milan Nikolic singles out "the collapse of values such as empathy, solidarity, intolerance of crime – organised or other etc…But the world has also changed so much since 1991. We all have to look into future."

Of the many devastating effects of the disintegration of former Yugoslavia, the economic crisis is striking. The debt crisis is hitting all former Yugoslav nations hard due to the economic consequences of the war (particularly in Bosnia), as production is low, imports are high and transition into a market economy has taken its toll in a massive loss of jobs. A lack of substantial foreign investments since the global economic crisis is also hitting hard.

Unemployment in Slovenia is the lowest – around 10 percent. It reaches a staggering 40 percent in Bosnia.

The foreign debt of the six new nations is 171 billion dollars, compared to former Yugoslavia’s debt of 24 billion dollars. Macedonia has the lowest, 2.5 billion dollars, and Croatia the highest, 64 billion dollars.

Production level (except in Slovenia) has not reached the level of 1989, the best year prior to wars. All former Yugoslav statisticians use that as a benchmark.

"Had we not fought in wars, Yugoslavia would have been in the EU long ago and the development level could have been at least double compared to 1989," Nikolic says.

But for many people, such ideas mean little. Many young people are almost unaware there was a Yugoslavia once, as history books differ and give only a superficial overview of the past.

"I don’t know what Dubrovnik is," 22-year-old Bojan Stancic from Kraljevo in Serbia tells IPS, when asked about the most prominent tourist spot on the Croatian Adriatic coast. "It’s Croatia? Well, that’s a foreign country I plan to visit one day."

Many older people still have connections that date to the days of former Yugoslavia.

"I have family in Belgrade and we go to visit," says Dara Buncic (65), a pensioner from Zagreb in Croatia. "It still has the outlines of the capital of a big country. We are all small now (new nations) but I tell friends to go and see it (Belgrade)…it’s part of our common history no matter how proud we are being independent Croatia."

"Until 20 years ago, I spent two months each year on Croatian coast since the age of two," says Belgradian Sasa Jaksic (55). "We had family there. So, in the 35 years of former Yugoslavia I can say I spent a total of almost six years living in Croatia. No one can take that from me, or the memories of good times we had in former Yugoslavia."

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2011.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


BALKANS: Yugoslavia Tribunal Faces Uncertain Legacy

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

By Aprille Muscara

UNITED NATIONS, Jul 16, 2010 (IPS) – On the eve of World Day for International Justice, launched to recognise the emerging body of international criminal law, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) faces an uncertain legacy. Initially slated to finish its work in 2008, the ICTY is two years behind schedule and at least four years from the final thump of its gavel.

The ICTY is regarded as a groundbreaking model for the trial and prosecution of individuals responsible for crimes against populations and has been a pioneer in the development and application of international law. However, the tribunal has also been criticized for its slow pace, inconsistent sentencing patterns and long-lasting impunity – all concerns reflected in an Open Society Justice Initiative report launched here Thursday.

The report, titled "That Someone Guilty Be Punished", and authored by Diane F. Orentlicher, Deputy for the Office of War Crimes Issues for the U.S. Department of State, examines the effects of the ICTY in Bosnia.

At a panel discussion at the report’s launch, Refik Hodzic, Outreach Expert and former official of the ICTY and the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, referred to the publication as one of the most important of its kind because it is the first to examine the tribunal’s impact on the main constituents for whom the tribunal was created: the people who witnessed and survived the atrocities of the 1990’s Balkan wars.

Despite the overall support given to the tribunal by those interviewed, the publication also chronicles dissatisfaction with the ICTY’s performance. The report, said Hodzic, shows that "The tribunal has to fight for its legacy."

Ambassador Ivan Barbalic, Permanent Representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina to the U.N., told IPS that the concerns raised about the tribunal’s lengthy and complex process don’t change the significance of its judgments.

"In ten, fifteen years, twenty years, the rulings of the ICTY are going to be the bricks of the house that the region will build together, and move toward a better future," Barbalic told IPS.

Established as a temporary institution in 1993 by a U.N. Security Council resolution, the tribunal’s lifespan has been extended twice since its inception. The ICTY was initially set to finish all trials by 2008, but this target date was pushed back to 2010 two years ago. At Thursday’s panel discussion, U.N. Assistant Secretary-General for Legal Affairs Peter Taksoe-Jensen said that according to the most recent estimates, "it will take until 2014 to complete all outstanding trials and appeals."

To date, the ICTY has closed 55 cases involving a total of 83 defendants. It has handed down approximately 926 years of jail time, with sentences ranging from two years to one life sentence. Eight defendants have been acquitted. Cases against 14 individuals have been terminated – 13 as a result of the defendant’s death prior to a verdict being reached (including the case of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic) – and one as a result of an appeal.

Currently, the ICTY has ten active cases with 25 named defendants. Three cases with 11 defendants are before the appeals court, and two fugitives remain at large: Goran Hadzic, who was the Serb political leader in Croatia; and Ratko Mladic, military leader of the Bosnian Serbs during the wars. Mladic is accused of crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide – including the July 11, 1995 Srebrenica Genocide, a massacre of 8,000 innocent men and boys considered to be the worst crime committed on European soil since World War II. The Srebrenica 15-year anniversary was commemorated Monday.

The fugitive status of Hadzic and Mladic – and the question of their capture in the near future – has the international community looking beyond 2014.

According to Taksoe-Jensen, the U.N. Security Council’s informal working group on the ICTY’s completion strategy is currently considering a draft resolution for a potential residual mechanism to assume the outstanding duties of the tribunal. These would include the continued protection of witnesses, the enforcement of sentences, the management of archives and the prosecution of any high-level criminals captured after the ICTY’s closure.

However, Takso-Jensen said, "any residual mechanism that is established should be small, efficient and a new institution," instead of just a downsized tribunal.

This entails the transference of cases, evidence and expertise to domestic courts – a process that has already begun, notably with the establishment of the War Crimes Chamber in Bosnia’s state court, which began operations in early 2005, and a Special Department for War Crimes in the State Prosecutor’s office.

The Bosnian War Crimes Chamber has been touted as a model of a "hybrid" court, with both international and national judges and prosecutors. The continued functioning of international judges and prosecutors has been the subject of some scrutiny in the country, however, with some groups questioning their role in the chamber. Ambassador Barbalic, however, told IPS that he saw benefit in their presence.

"I believe that in this period, [international judges and prosecutors] still play an important role, but obviously, it wouldn’t be appropriate that they stay forever," Barbalic told IPS. "In termination, their work should part of… a strategy that would take into consideration sufficiently building capacities of domestic judges."

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2010.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


‘Tito-nostalgia’ Reigns 30 Years After His Death

Global Geopolitics Net Sites / IPS

By Vesna Peric Zimonjic

BELGRADE, Apr 30, 2010 (IPS) – For many former Yugoslavs, May 4 will be a day to reflect on the 30 years since their charismatic but controversial leader, Josip Broz Tito, died.

Tito steered a plural country for 35 years after the end of World War II and, whether they liked him or not, most people above 45 in Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Macedonia – that were created out of Yugoslavia by the wars of the 1990s – know that the Tito era was the best part of their lives.

"We were moving forward in each and every way since 1945," said Tanja Dokmanovic, 75, a retired elementary school teacher from Belgrade. "Our living standards were great compared to what we have now, we were welcome everywhere we went," she told IPS. "But since the wars, Serbs have become pariahs and poverty is constantly knocking on ordinary people’s doors,’’ Dokmanovic added.

Like many ordinary people, Dokmanovic cannot understand how and why the Tito magic, that lasted a decade after his passing, turned into bloodshed.

However, for historians and analysts, the answers are pretty simple.

"Tito was a master of enchantment," history professor Predrag Markovic told IPS. "On the one hand, he enchanted the West with his anti-fascist liberation movement in the WW II; on the other, he enchanted the developing countries in the early 1960s by creating the non-aligned movement.

”At home, people lived comfortable lives under his liberal dictatorship, as socialism takes care about all your needs…when people say they are nostalgic about his era, they are practically nostalgic about the safety and security of the past".

For analyst and sociologist Aleksa Djilas, Tito was also popular due to his "resistance to [former Soviet dictator Josef ] Stalin, as Yugoslavia never went into his orbit and people lived different lives from other communist nations."

According to Djilas, the achievements of Tito’s rule were also about "social justice, participation of workers in the production process and profit distribution and undoubted anti-fascism".

On the other hand, some of the achievements of modern 20th century were not cherished under Tito, Djilas told IPS, "most importantly, the rule of law and building of a society with real human rights."

Tito was relatively mild towards dissidents. He either put them into prison for several years or removed them from the political scene when they were seen to be a danger to his undisputed popularity or publicly defied his official communist party policy.

Aleksa Djilas’s father, Milovan, one of Tito’s aides during WW II and for several years afterwards, became a prominent dissident who spent years in jail due to his criticism of Tito’s rule. Aleksa Djilas had to live in exile for years due to his father’s activities.

Yet he thinks that disintegration would not have been the destiny of Yugoslavia had there been the adequate modern policy and democratisation after Tito’s death rather than the "hegemonic rule of [communist] party where proper, democratic institutions were never created."

"Yugoslavia was not an artificial creation, it disintegrated in bloodshed that should have never happened, but I’m still Yugo-nostalgic, yet not Tito-nostalgic," he said.

Being Yugo-nostalgic or Tito-nostalgic is a controversial issue in parts of former Yugoslavia even today.

In Croatia, this amounts to heresy as the nation forged its independence in the war against federal troops that came from the Serbian (and former Yugoslav) capital of Belgrade. However, what goes for official policy does not go for ordinary people.

"Compared to what we have now, Tito’s era was the time when God walked the earth," said Nives Lucev, 65, a retired shopkeeper.

"I like to live in independent Croatia, of course, but there’s a big difference between then and now. We can’t afford what we could easily have in previous times and pensioners barely survive if they don’t have children to support them,’’ Lucev said.

‘’I support my mother who is 85, and the time is coming when my daughter will have to support me. And we see people getting richer on our backs simply by stealing the property created in the past, and mostly in Tito’s time," Lucev told IPS over phone from Zagreb.

Social injustice and the hardships of adapting to capitalism have not spared Tito’s kin.

Tito’s grandson Josip Broz, 63, inherited nothing from his grandfather. ‘’He [Tito] wanted everything to go to his people, to the state. He is better remembered in the non-aligned nations now than among former Yugoslavs…When Serb officials now travel to those countries trying to revive membership, they are greeted with the words ‘Yugoslavia, Tito’, I know that for sure," he told IPS.

"I’d like everything that Tito collected or that belonged to him while he was alive to be put into exhibition at one place, so that people can see what he left to them…I know that there’s a ‘Tito’s villa’ in each of the former republics, but those were premises owned by people and not by him. Now they’re shamefully usurped by local leaders or by tycoons who simply took them over for themselves.’’

For the younger generation, there is little to know about Tito apart from what their parents tell them. Mention of Tito in the history texts depends on the level of odium against him in each of the successor states.

The views of the young on Tito can be summed up by what Hajra Smajlovic, 22, from Sarajevo, said: "That’s something my parents or grandparents talk about. I don’t know what to think about Tito…I often think that it’s their talk, about their youth and better times and nothing else.’’

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2010.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.