ILIJA GARASANIN (1812-1874)
Ilija Garasanin was one of the most active Serbian politicians in the 19th century. He was a minister in several ministries of the Obrenovic dynasty and the Karadjordjevic dynasty, thus just this fact shows his political ingenuity. He became famous for his "Nacertanije" which originated in 1844, but was published at a much later date. In his "Nacertanije" he outlined a plan for the creation of Greater Serbia which was to include not only the territories that once belonged to Serbia, but also the lands he thought should belong to Serbia. Garasanin knew that Serbia would need the aid of neighbouring countries for the realization of these plans and he counted on the weakening of the Balkan states by the fall of the Turkish Empire, thus enabling Serbia to grab certain territories more easily.
VUK STEFANOVIC KARADZIC (1787-1864)
Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic was a linguist and writer who traveled throughout the Balkan lands studying and collecting folk songs. He wrote widely on linguistic subjects and problems, and published a grammar book and dictionary of what he considered to be the Serbian language. The Serbs consider him to be the founder of the Serbian language reform and Serbian culture in general. One of the main themes of his work is that all those speaking the Stokavian dialect are Serbian (even though most Croatians speak a form of this dialect as well). This line of thinking is evident quite frequently in Karadzic's work, and it influenced Serbian attitudes toward other Balkan nations.
Karadzic's article "Serbs All and Everywhere" was published for the first time in the book "Treasure Box for the History, Language and Customs of Serbians of All Three Faiths" in 1849. This work is a typical example of Karadzic's views on the language and ethnicity of Serbia's neighbours. He also attempted to negate the existence of any significant number of Croatians, distorting historic and linguistic facts to prove his theories.
While Garasanin in his "Nacertanije" from 1844 outlines ideas how to Serbianize other nations, Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic had already in 1836 integrated all neighbouring nations into the Serbian nation. This can be concluded from his text written in 1836.:
"It is known for certain that Serbs now live in present-day Serbia (between the Drina and Timok rivers, and between the Danube and Sar mountains), in Metohija (from Kosovo over the Sar mountains, where Dusan's capital Prizren, the Serbian patriarchate of Pec, and the Decani monastery are located), in Bosnia, Herzegovina, Zeta, Montenegro, Banat, Backa, Srijem, the western Danube region from Osijek to Sentandrija, Slavonia, Croatia (Turkish and Austrian), Dalmatia, and in the entire Adriatic littoral from Trieste to Bojana. I said at the start that it is known for certain that Serbs live in these regions, while it is still not known how many Serbs are Albania and Macedonia. Along the Cetina river (in Montenegro) I was talking with two men from Dibra, who were telling me that in those places there are many Serbian villages, in which Serbian is spoken the way they speak it, that is, a cross between Serbian and Bulgarian, but always closer to Serbian than Bulgarian. In the aforementioned places there are at least five million people who speak the same language, but by religion they can be split into three groups: it can be estimated roughly that about three million are Greek Orthodox, and of this one million in Serbia (with Metohija), one million in the Austrian provinces (Banat, Backa, Srijem, western Danube, Slavonia, Croatia, Dalmatia and Boka), and one million in Bosnia, Herzegovina, Zeta and Montenegro; of the remaining two million it can be said that about two-thirds are Muslim (in Bosnia, Herzegovina, Zeta etc.) and one-third are Roman Catholic (in the Austrian provinces, and in Bosnia, Herzegovina and the Bar nahija). Only the first three million call themselves Serbs, the rest will not accept the name. Those of the Islam faith think that they are real Turks, and call themselves that, although only one in a hundred can even speak Turkish. Those of the Catholic faith use the name of the place in which they live: for example Slavonian, Bosnian (or Bosniak), Dalmatian, Dubrovnian, etc., or, as is common among writers they use ancient names such as Illyrian or Illyrianist. However, in Backa they are called Bunjevacs, in Srijem, Slavonia and Croatia they are called Sokacs, and around Dubrovnik and in Boka they are called Latins. Bunjevacs possibly get their name from the Herzegovinian river Buna, from where these people, as it is told, migrated some time ago..."
"All of the wiser people among the Orthodox and Catholic Serbs recognize that they are one people and strive to totally uproot or at least lessen the hatred because of different religions as much as they can. Even so, those of the Catholic faith still have a hard time calling themselves Serbians, but they will adjust to this in their own time, because if they do not want to be Serbs, then they have no national name at all. To say that one is Slavonian, another Dalmatian, still another Dubrovnian is useless, because all these are place names and do not describe any nation. To say that they are Slavs is too general, as Russians, Poles, Czechs and all other Slavic peoples fall under that name. To say that they are Croats, I would say that in truth only the Cakavian speakers could use this name. They are the descendants of Constantine Porfirogenitus? Croats whose language is a little different from Serbian, but still closer to Serbian than any other Slavic dialect. Today's Croatians in the Zagreb, Varazdin and Krizevci districts, whose land was called Croatia after the Battle of Mohacs in 1526 (and was until then called upper Slavonia), speak a language which is a cross-over from Slovenian into Serbian. I do not know how the name Croatian can be used for our Catholic brothers who live in Banat, Backa, Srijem, Slavonia, Bosnia, Herzegovina or in Dubrovnik, who speak the same language as the Serbs."
NIKOLA STOJANOVIC (1880-1964)
Nikola Stojanovic, a lawyer and politician, was born in Mostar. Before World War I, he was a prominent opponent of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy and the founder of an opposition paper called "Narod" (Nation). During the World War I he was a member of the Yugoslav Committee, which worked on the unification of the South Slavs. He was considered an expert on Bosnia and Herzegovina, and was an adviser for that region during the Peace Conference of 1918-1919.
He wrote an article that was first published in "Srbobran" (a Serbian periodical based in Zagreb), number 168/169, in 1902. In the article titled "To Extermination: Ours or Yours", he judges the Serbians and the Croatians as though it were merely a matter of two different parties, and not as if it were a matter of different nations, one of which had to win and eliminate the other (Croatia, in reality).
He said the following:
"... Serbs and Croats are, according to some, two tribes of the same nation; the others, two separate nations (nationalities); still to others, one nation, one tribe."
"A tribe originates in the time before the formation of a state, a nation emerges in a state at the initiative of one tribe. In our history, this role was filled by the tribe of Stevan Nemanja, but after this we have many examples showing that Serbian leaders did not want or did not comprehend the union of interests of all religions, without which there can be no talk of a political union. The Serbs were politically united during the defense of Kosovo and by the subsequent shared fate of slavery under the same authority. Cultural unity, founded by Saint Sava, was at its best in this magnificent defense and in the later amalgamation of the Serbian aristocracy with democracy into one indivisible, wonderful whole-democracy with aristocratic pride. In this lies the importance of the Battle of Kosovo, in this sense the Serbian defeat in Kosovo meant one great victory."
It is a fact that the Serbs turned many defeats in history into victory. He continued to say:
"The Croatians have neither a separate language, nor unified customs, nor a firmly unified lifestyle, nor, most importantly, a sense of mutual affiliation, and because of this cannot be a distinct or separate nation."
"The Croatians are thus neither a tribe nor a separate nationality. They are now something between a tribe and a nationality, but without hope of ever becoming a separate nationality."
"Their wandering in the 19th century from Gaj's Illyrianism to Strossmayer's Yugoslavism to Starcevic's Croatianism proves this quite well. Their leaders, who wanted to create a nationality to fit the needs of others, forgot that a nation as a product of history is not created overnight, and that various myths cannot destroy the Serbian pride in their past, expressed in the epic poetry, and be replaced by pride in the 'shining Croatian past?'"
"Croatians often assert that they have some sort of cultural advantage over the Serbians. Those who do not have a distinct view of the world (in religion, customs, education etc.), no national art nor literature, dare to speak of Croatian culture."
"Croatians, therefore, are not and cannot be a separate nationality, but they are on the way of becoming part of the Serbian nationality. Taking on Serbian as their literaty language."
"The process of blending is unstoppable, as these are masses speaking the same language, and by the same token we must reject without any declamation of unity a battle between the intelligentsia and the middle class; as the Serbs and Croats in today's form are two political parties. The struggle going on between liberalism and ultramontane cosmopolitanism is personified in the struggle between the Serbs and the Croats. The contrast between the historical state right, which serves as the basis for the programmes of all Croatian parties, not one of which is liberal (certainly unique in Europe), and the natural rights expressed in the Serbian national thought, which is the basis for Serbian political party programmes, none of which show any trace of clericalism or conservatism, is the best proof of this."
"The proud people of Dubrovnik decided on Serbianism, although the other Dalmatian cities, which were under the influence of the same Italian culture, decided on Croatianism. Dubrovnik was a free republic, but the remaining cities were under the domination of the Republic of Saint Mark (Venice). The liberated people decided to go with the liberated and progressive Serbian nation, the subjugated people chose subservient and regressive Croatia. This is the best proof that only concepts of freedom separate us, that we are simply two political parties. In the struggle between these parties there can be no talk of unity, as their principles come from a separate foundation, and because the Croatians are somebody else's avant-garde, whereas the Serbians represent the principle of 'the Balkans for the Balkan people'. On the basis of this principle the Serbs must unite with other Balkan nations, leaving internal Balkan questions for another time. Croatians, as the representatives of foreign expansionist desires, are totally excluded from this, not because of their national characteristics, but rather because this nation allowed its fate to be managed by a few cliques who were obviously serving the interests of foreign governments. This struggle must lead to an extermination of 'ours or yours'. One side must submit. That this will be the Croats is assured by their small size, geographic location, surroundings (as they are mixed in with Serbs everywhere) and the general process of evolution, where the Serbian ideal means progress. Through the education of the masses and their participation in politics, the reactionary clericalist idea will finally subside. The fall of clericalism in our nation means the fall of Croatianism."
JOVAN CVIJIC (1865-1927)
Jovan Cvijic is an eminent ideologist of the Greater Serbian idea. He is considered the founder of modern geographic science in Serbia. He researched and wrote extensively about Balkan geography. He had a great knowledge not only of the geography of Serbia and the surrounding regions but also of the history and current events in those areas. He was also interested in Serbia's political advancement and because of this he often lost his scientific impartiality when writing about Serbia or the Balkans in a geographic context. Much of his work was and is used as a 'scientific justification' for Greater Serbian politics. All of these statements reflect the assertions of present Greater Serbian ideologists, and it is evident that Cvijic's work, since he was a reputable geographer, is used as 'scientific proof' of their territorial claims:
"The Serbian problem must be resolved through violent means. Both Serbian states must chiefly prepare themselves militarily and educationally, sustain their national energy in the military portions of the Serbian population, and use the first possible opportunity to debate Serbian questions with Austro-Hungary."
"Outside of the Morava-Vardar depression (South Serbia and Macedonia) there are no territories in the western half of the Balkan Peninsula suitable for forming a permanent state able to live an economic and political life."
He goes on to say:
"The economic and trading interests of certain Dinaric regions (the following are listed by name: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Dalmatia and the 'Dinaric' Croatia) even now aim for the Morava-Vardar depression; these lands cannot acquire life and importance unless they join with the Morava-Vardar state..."
"... it is widely known that Bosnia and Herzegovina are lands settled entirely by people who are purely Serbian in race..."
"... as an unassailable minimum for the principle of nationality it must stand that one cannot relinquish that central dominion and the heartland of the nation to another country, a foreign state; this is what Bosnia and Herzegovina represent to the Serbian people."
"... for economic independence, Serbia must acquire access to the Adriatic Sea and one part of the Albanian coastline: through the occupation of the territory or by acquiring economic and transportation rights to this region. Therefore, this implies occupying an ethnographically foreign territory, but one that must be occupied due to particularly important economic interests and vital needs. Such occupation might be called an anti-ethnographic necessity and in such a form it is not against the principle of nationality. In this case it is all the more justified because the Albanians of northern Albania came about through a merging of the Albanians and Serbs."
This is what Cvijic says about Dubrovnik and Dubrovnians:
"It seems that the Slavs who settled in these lands in the 6th and 7th centuries first settled on the steep cliffs above where the town is located today, on the cliffs that used to be wooded with an oak forest, known then as 'dubrava'. This, then, is the origin of the Serbian name for the city of Dubrovnik which replaced the earlier Greek-Roman name (Ragusa)."
STEVAN MOLJEVIC (1888-1946)
Stefan Moljevic was the chief advisers to the chetnik leader, Draza Mihajlovic. The ideas advocated by him and the kind of Greater Serbia he hoped for, are best shown in his memorandum called "The Homgenous Serbia" which was released in Niksic on 30th June 1941. He wrote the following in this manifesto:
"The sense and love of nation and independence can only be reached in a homogeneous Serbia."
"In this regard, the Serbs today have a primary and basic duty to create and organize a homogeneous Serbia which must consist of the entire ethnic territory on which Serbs live, and to ensure the necessary strategic and transportation lines and centres, as well a economic areas which would enable and secure free economic, political and cultural life and development for all times."
The continuation of the manifesto Stevan Moljevic elaborated the question of the borders of GREATER SERBIA, and he wrote the following:
"The basic mistake of our state administration was that in 1918 the boundaries of Serbia were not firmly set up. This mistake must be corrected immediately, for tomorrow it will be too late. These borders must be struck now, and they must include the entire ethnic territory on which Serbs live with unhindered access to the sea for all Serbian districts that are in the vicinity of the coast.
1) In the east and southeast (Serbia and South Serbia), the Serbian borders are the result of wars of liberation, and it is only necessary to reinforce them by adding Vidin and Custendil. In the south (Montenegro and Herzegovina), the Southwest Serbian province should include not only the Zeta Banovina (Royal Province) but:
a) all of eastern Herzegovina with a railroad tie from Konjic to Ploce, including a land belt that would protect this line, so that in this area the entire Konjic district would be included; from the Mostar district the following municipalities: Mostar, Bijelo Polje, Blagaj and Zitomislici; the entire Stolac district; from the Metkovic district Ploce and all the areas south of Ploce, as well as Dubrovnik, which would have a special status
b) the northern part of Albania, that is in case Albania does not acquire autonomy.
3) In the west, the Western Serbian province should include, apart from the Vrbas Banovina, Northern Dalmatia, the Serbian part of Lika, Kordun and Banija and a part of Slavonia, so that the railroad from Plaski to Sibenik and the northern rail connection from Okucani over Sunja to Kostajnica belong to this region. This province would include one part of the Bugojno district except for Gornji Vakuf, and from the Livno district: Livno and Donje Polje, and on the other side from the Sibenik district: the municipalities of Sibenik and Skradin; from the Knin district: the city of Knin and the Serbian part of the Drnis municipality with its territory through which the Knin-Sibenik railroad passes, and eventually the Serbian part of Vrlika in the Sinj district; the entire Benkovac district; the entire Biograd district; the entire Preko district; so that the borders of the Western Serbian province go along the Velebit Channel and include Zadar with all the islands around it; from the Gospic district: Gospic, Licki Osik and Medak; the eastern part of the Perusic district through which the railroad passes; from the Otocac district: Dabar, Skare and Vrhovine; from the Ogulin district: Dreznica, Gomirje, Gornja Dubrava and Plaski; the Vojnic district except the municipality of Barilovic; the entire Vrginmost district; the Glina district except the municipalities of Bucice and Stankovac; from the Petrinja district: the municipalities of Blinja, Gradusa, Jabukovac and Sunja; the Kostajnica district without Bobovac; from the Novska district: Jasenovac and Vanjska Novska, but these places should be abolished so that the railroad stays on the territory of these two municipalities; the entire Okucani district; the Pakrac district without: Antunovac, Gaj and Poljana; Velic Selo from the Pozega district; the districts of Daruvar, Grubisno Polje and Slatina; then the Bosnian districts of Derventa and Gradacac. It is understood that all other districts within these borders will be included in this region. For this Western Serbian province, which would have 46 districts and nearly 1.5 million inhabitants, on which the entire Sipad enterprise falls, as well as the iron mine at Ljubija, and over which the Adriatic railway Valjevo-Banja Luka-Sibenik runs, it will be necessary to secure the Zadar area and the surrounding islands to ensure its outlet to the sea.
4) The Northern Serbian province should get, in addition to the territory of the Danube Banovina, the dispossessed Serbian districts of Vukovar, Sid and Ilok, and from the Vinkovci district: the municipalities of Vinkovci, Laze, Mirkovci and Novi Jankovci; the entire district and city of Osijek. This district should be secured with Baranja with Pecuj and eastern Banat with Temisvar and Resice.
5) The Central Serbian province - the Drina Banovina - should have the following dispossessed Bosnian districts returned to it: Brcko, Travnik and Fojnica. Dalmatia, which would include the Adriatic coast from Ploce up to Sibenik, as well as the Bosnian-Herzegovinian districts: Prozor, Ljubuski, Duvno; the western parts of the Mostar and Livno districts, and the northern parts of the Knin and Sibenik districts, must become part of Serbia but has to be granted a special autonomous position. The Roman Catholic church in Dalmatia will be recognized and receive state aid, but the work of the church and the Catholic clergy among the people must be favourable to the state and under its control."
In chapter II "Relations with other Yugoslav and Balkan States", Moljevic wrote:
"With the conviction of its past and its mission in the Balkans, Serbia must also in the future be the bearer of the Yugoslav idea as well as the first defender of Balkan solidarity and Gladstone's principle of 'the Balkans for the Balkan people'. Time demands that smaller states must combine in larger communities, unions and blocks, and Serbia's friends will expect this of her. Serbia will gladly respond to these expectations, for this is at the heart of her historical mission in the Balkans. The Serbs already started on this path when they created Yugoslavia, and they will continue on this path. However, the first step on this path was taken incorrectly in that the Serbs and the Montenegrins allowed themselves to be immediately melted into Yugoslavia, while the Croatians, Slovenes and Muslims took a different course and take all they can from Yugoslavia without giving anything in return. This mistake must be corrected and it can only be done if the Serbs, with the resurrected Yugoslavia, immediately and unhesitatingly create a homogeneous Serbia within the borders previously outlined. Only after this has been achieved will we approach all other questions relating to the Slovenes and Croats. Yugoslavia would thus be arranged on a federal basis with three federal units: the Serbian, Croatian and Slovene units (Serbia, Croatia and Slovenia, my own remark). Only when this state of affairs is settled, when all Serbian regions are united in a homogeneous Serbia, can a limited rapprochement with Bulgaria be conceived... The Serbs must exercise hegemony in the Balkans, therefore they must previously gain hegemony in Yugoslavia."
Source
No comments:
Post a Comment