Yugoslav Committee

South Slavic unification ad-hoc body

Yugoslav Committee photographed in Paris in 1916
  • v
  • t
  • e
Dissolution of
Austria-Hungary
Czechoslovak nationalism

German/Austrian nationalism

  • Provisional National Assembly
  • Republic of German-Austria
  • Republic of Heinzenland (1918)
  • First Austrian Republic (1919)

Hungarian nationalism

Italian nationalism

Polish nationalism

  • Republic of Zakopane
  • Polish Liquidation Committee (1918)

Romanian nationalism

Ukrainian nationalism

Yugoslav nationalism

Other important events

The Yugoslav Committee (Croatian: Jugoslavenski odbor, Slovene: Jugoslovanski odbor, Serbian: Југословенски одбор) was a World War I-era unelected, ad-hoc committee largely consisting of émigré Croat, Slovene, and Bosnian Serb politicians and political activists, whose aim was the detachment of Austro-Hungarian lands inhabited by the South Slavs and unification of those lands with the Kingdom of Serbia. The group was formally established in 1915, and it last met in 1919, shortly after the breakup of Austria-Hungary and the establishment of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (later renamed Yugoslavia). The Yugoslav Committee was led by the Croat lawyer Ante Trumbić as the committee president, and Croat politician Frano Supilo as its vice president (until 1916).

The members of the Yugoslav Committee had different positions on topics such as the method of unification, the desired system of government or the constitution of the proposed union state. The bulk of the committee members espoused various forms of Yugoslavism – advocating either a federation where various lands constituting the new state would preserve a degree of autonomy, or a centralised state. The committee was financially supported by donations from the Croatian diaspora and by the government of the Kingdom of Serbia led by Nikola Pašić. Serbia made efforts to use the Yugoslav Committee as a propaganda tool in pursuit of its own policies including territorial expansion or the creation of a Greater Serbia.

Representatives of the Yugoslav Committee and Serbian government met at the Greek island of Corfu in 1917. There they discussed the proposed unification of South Slavs and produced the Corfu Declaration, outlining some elements of the future union’s constitution. Further meetings took place at the end of the war in Geneva in 1918. Those discussions resulted in the Geneva Declaration, determining a confederal constitution of the union. The declaration was repudiated by the government of Serbia shortly afterwards. The State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs, formed as Austria-Hungary was breaking up, treated the Yugoslav Committee as its representative in international affairs. However, it soon came under pressure to unify with Serbia, and proceeded to do so in a manner that ignored the earlier declarations. The Committee ceased to exist shortly afterwards.

Background

Kingdoms and countries of Austria–Hungary:
Cisleithania (Empire of Austria[1]): 1. Bohemia, 2. Bukovina, 3. Carinthia, 4. Carniola, 5. Dalmatia, 6. Galicia, 7. Küstenland, 8. Lower Austria, 9. Moravia, 10. Salzburg, 11. Silesia, 12. Styria, 13. Tyrol, 14. Upper Austria, 15. Vorarlberg;
Transleithania (Kingdom of Hungary[1])): 16. Hungary proper 17. Croatia-Slavonia; 18. Bosnia and Herzegovina (Austro-Hungarian condominium)

The idea of South Slavic political unity predates the creation of Yugoslavia by nearly a century. First developed in Habsburg Croatia by a group of Croat intellectuals organised as the Illyrian movement in the 19th century, the concept developed through many different forms and proposals.[2] They argued Croatian history is a part of a wider history of the South Slavs and that Croats, Serbs, as well as potentially Slovenes and Bulgarians were parts of a single 'Illyrian' nation, choosing the name as a neutral term. The movement began as a cultural one, promoting Croatian national identity and integration of all Croatian provinces within the Austrian Empire,[3] usually in reference to the Habsburg kingdoms of Croatia, Slavonia, and Dalmatia, and a part or all of Ottoman Bosnia and Herzegovina.[4] A wider aim was to gather all 'South Slavs', or Jugo-Slaveni[a] for short, in a commonwealth within or outside of the Empire. The movement's two directions became known as Croatianism and Yugoslavism[b] respectively, meant to counter Germanisation and Magyarisation.[3]

Fearing the Drang nach Osten ('drive to the east'), the Illyrians believed Germanisation and Magyarisation could only be resisted through unity with other Slavs, especially the Serbs. They advocated the unification of Croatia, Slavonia, and Dalmatia as the Triune Kingdom, expanded to include other South Slavs in Austria (or Austria-Hungary after the Compromise of 1867) before joining other South Slavic polities in a federation or confederation.[7] The proposed consolidation of variously defined Croatian or South Slavic lands led to proposals for trialism in Austria-Hungary accommodating a South-Slavic polity with a rank equal to the Kingdom of Hungary.[8] As the neighbouring Serbia achieved independence through the 1878 Treaty of Berlin, the Yugoslav idea became irrelevant in that country. Before the 1912 First Balkan War, Serbia was mono-ethnic and Serbian nationalists sought to include those they considered to be Serbs into the state. It portrayed the work of bishops Josip Juraj Strossmayer and Franjo Rački as a scheme to establish a Greater Croatia.[9] There was pressure to expand Serbia by a group of Royal Serbian Army officers known as the Black Hand. They carried out the May 1903 coup, installing the Karađorđević dynasty to power, and then organised nationalist actions in the "unredeemed Serbian provinces", specified as Bosnia, Herzegovina, Montenegro, Old Serbia (meaning Kosovo), Macedonia, Central Croatia, Slavonia, Syrmia, Vojvodina, and Dalmatia.[10] This echoed Garašanin's 1844 Načertanije – a treatise that anticipated the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and which called for the establishment of Greater Serbia to pre-empt Russian or Austrian expansion into the Balkans by unifying all Serbs into a single state.[11]

In the first two decades of the 20th century, various Croat, Serb, and Slovene national programmes adopted Yugoslavism in different, conflicting, or mutually exclusive forms. Yugoslavism became a pivotal idea for establishing a South Slavic political union. Most Serbs equated the idea with a Greater Serbia under a different name or a vehicle to bring all Serbs into a single state. For many Croats and Slovenes, Yugoslavism protected them against Austrian and Hungarian challenges to the preservation of their Croat and Slovene identities and political autonomy.[12]

Prelude

Florence meeting

Military alliances in Europe in 1914
  Triple Alliance

In October 1914, Serbian Prime Minister Nikola Pašić learned that the British were considering expanding the alliance against the Central Powers, at that time consisting of the German Empire and Austria-Hungary. The British intended to entice Hungary to secede from Austria-Hungary and to persuade the Kingdom of Italy to abandon its neutrality, so that both could join the alliance of Britain, France and Russia, known as the Entente Powers. Pašić found out that the British were considering guaranteeing Hungarian access to the Adriatic Sea through the Port of Rijeka and overland access to Rijeka over Croatian soil, as well as resolving the Adriatic Question satisfactorily for Italy. Pašić thought that those developments, coupled with potential British–Romanian alliance would jeopardise the Serbian objective of gaining access to the Adriatic, and threaten Serbia itself.[13]

In response, Pašić directed Bosnian Serb members of the Austro-Hungarian Diet of Bosnia Nikola Stojanović and Dušan Vasiljević. Pašić wanted them to contact the émigré Croatian politicians and lawyers Ante Trumbić and Julije Gazzari to resist the pro-Hungarian British proposals, and to create a Slavic alternative. The strategy Pašić proposed would be to establish a body which would cooperate with the government of Serbia on the unification of South Slavs in a state that would be created through the expansion of Serbia. The policy of expansion was to be set and controlled entirely by Serbia, while the proposed body would carry out propaganda activities on its behalf.[13] The four men met in Florence on 22 November 1914.[14] In January 1915, Frano Supilo, once a leading figure in the Croat-Serb Coalition, the ruling political party of the Austro-Hungarian realm of Croatia-Slavonia,[c] met with British foreign secretary Sir Edward Grey and Prime Minister H. H. Asquith providing them with the manifesto of the nascent Yugoslav Committee and discussing benefits of South Slavic unification with them.[16] The manifesto was co-authored by Supilo and British political activist and historian Robert Seton-Watson.[17]

Niš Declaration

Map of the Kingdom of Serbia before the World War I

The Serbian leadership considered World War I to be an opportunity for territorial expansion beyond the Serb-inhabited areas of the Balkans. A committee tasked with determining the country's war aims produced a programme to establish a single South-Slavic state through the addition of Croatia-Slavonia, the Slovene Lands, Vojvodina, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Dalmatia.[18] Pašić thought that the process should be implemented through the addition of new territories to Serbia.[19] On 7 December, Serbia announced its war aims in the Niš Declaration.[20] The declaration called on South Slavs to struggle to liberate and unify "unliberated brothers",[21] "three tribes of one people" – referring to the Serbs, the Croats, and the Slovenes.[20] This formulation was adopted instead of an explicit goal of territorial expansion as a way to attract support from South Slavs living in Austria-Hungary. The Serbian government wanted to appeal to fellow South Slavs as it feared that little material support would be delivered from its Entente Powers allies, as it became clear the war would not be short.[20] Thus Serbia assumed a central role in the state-building of the future South Slavic polity, with support from the major Entente Powers.[22]

Supilo initially assumed the Niš Declaration meant that Serbia was fully supportive of his ideas on the method of unification. He was convinced otherwise by Russian foreign minister Sergey Sazonov. He informed Supilo that Russia only supported creation of Greater Serbia.[23] As a result, Supilo and Trumbić did not trust Pašić and they considered him a proponent of Serbian hegemony.[24] Despite the mistrust, Supilo and Trumbić wanted to work with Pašić to further the aim of South-Slavic unification. Pašić offered to work with them towards the establishment of a Serbo-Croat state where Croats would be given some concessions – an offer which they declined.[19] Trumbić was convinced that the Serbian leadership thought of unification as a means to conquer neighbouring territories for Serbian gain.[25]

Trumbić and Supilo found another reason not to trust Pašić when Pašić dispatched envoys to address Sazonov's opposition to the addition of Roman Catholic South Slavs to the proposed South Slavic union. The envoys authored a memorandum claiming that Croats only inhabit north of the Central Croatia, and that the regions of Slavonia, Krbava, Lika, Bačka, and Banat should be added to Serbia (as well as the previously claimed Dalmatia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina).[26] Trumbić and Supilo became convinced that, due to the expansionist policy of the government of Serbia, the proposed unification would be perceived within the Croatian-inhabited areas of Austria-Hungary as a Serbian conquest, rather than as a liberation. They decided to proceed with caution, gather political support abroad, and to refrain from the establishment of a Yugoslav Committee until the Italian entry into the war became certain.[13]

Treaty of London

Territories promised to Italy by the Entente in the South Tyrol, the Austrian Littoral, and Dalmatia (tan), and the Snežnik Plateau area (green).

The Entente Powers ultimately concluded an alliance with Italy by offering it large areas of Austria-Hungary that were inhabited by South Slavs, largely Croats and Slovenes, along the eastern shores of the Adriatic Sea. The offer, formalised as the 1915 Treaty of London caused Trumbić and Supilo to reconsider their criticism of Serbian policies. This was because they saw potential Serbian war success against Austria-Hungary as the only realistic safeguard against Italian expansion into the Slovene and Croat-inhabited lands. Furthermore, Supilo was convinced that, if the Treaty of London were to be implemented, Croatia would be partitioned between Italy, Serbia and Hungary.[27]

The matter became closely related to simultaneous efforts to obtain an alliance with Bulgaria, or at least to secure its neutrality,[28] in return for territorial gains against Serbia. As compensation, Serbia was promised territories which were within Austria-Hungary at the time: specifically Bosnia and Herzegovina, and an outlet to the Adriatic Sea in Dalmatia. Regardless of the promised compensation, Pašić was reluctant to accede to all of the Bulgarian territorial demands, especially before Serbia had secured the new territories.[29] Specifically, Supilo obtained British support for plebiscites in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Dalmatia so that the peoples of the territories would themselves decide on their fate, rather than Britain supplying guarantees of westward territorial expansion to Serbia.[30] Crucially, however, Serbia received Russian support for its dismissal of the proposed land swap.[29]

Establishment

Photograph of Ante Trumbić
Ante Trumbić led the Yugoslav Committee in the run-up to creation of Yugoslavia

The Yugoslav Committee was formally founded in the Parisian Hôtel Madison on 30 April 1915, mere days after signing of the London Agreement ensuring Italian entry into the World War I.[31][32] The committee designated London as its seat. It was an unelected ad-hoc group of anti-Habsburg politicians and activists who had fled Austria-Hungary when World War I broke out. The work of the committee was largely funded by members of the Croatian diaspora,[14] including Gazzari's brother, the Croatian Chilean industrialist Remigio.[33] At least a portion of the costs was covered by the government of Serbia.[24]

Trumbić became the Yugoslav Committee president, and Supilo its vice-president. Other members were: Croatian Sabor members, namely sculptor Ivan Meštrović, Hinko Hinković, Jovan Banjanin, and Franko Potočnjak; Diet of Istria member Dinko Trinajstić; Diet of Bosnia members Stojanović and Vasiljević; Imperial Council member Gustav Gregorin [sl]; writer Milan Marjanović [hr], literary historian Pavle Popović, ethnologist Niko Županič, jurist Bogumil Vošnjak, Miće Mičić, and Gazzari.[34] Subsequently, the membership also included Milan Srškić,[35] Ante Biankini, Mihajlo Pupin, Lujo Bakotić, Ivan De Giulli, Niko Gršković, Josip Jedlowski, and Josip Mandić. Prominent non-member supporters included Rikard Katalinić Jeretov [hr] and Josip Marohnić, the latter being the president of the North American Croatian Fraternal Union, which collected money for the Yugoslav Committee.[36] The committee's central London office was led by Hinković and Jedlowski. Some sources indicate that Jedlowski used the title of the secretary of the committee, although it appears the position was an administrative one which entailed no particular authority.[37]

Members of the Yugoslav Committee believed that the Croatian question could only be resolved through the abolition of Austria-Hungary and unification with Serbia.[38] Trumbić and Supilo were proponents of a political unification of South Slavs within a single nation-state through the realisation of Yugoslavist ideas. They believed that the South Slavs were one people, entitled to a national homeland through the principle of self-determination, and advocated unification based on equality.[19] He advocated the establishment of a federal state within which Slovene Lands, Croatia (consisting of pre-war Croatia-Slavonia and Dalmatia), Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia (expanded to include Vojvodina), and Montenegro would become the five constituent elements.[24] Croat members of the Yugoslav Committee (except Hinković) thought that the federal units would ensure preservation of the historical, legal and cultural traditions of the individual parts of the new state.[39] Supilo proposed the new country be named Yugoslavia to avoid imposing the name of Serbia onto areas of the new country outside of the pre-war Serbian boundaries. He further suggested that Croatia should be given some protection against any future Serbian dominance, suggesting that Zagreb might be best suited as the capital of the new country. The Yugoslav Committee believed that the unification should be the result of an agreement between itself and the Serbian government.[19]

The Yugoslav Committee attracted support in Britain, especially by Seton-Watson, journalist and historian Wickham Steed, and archaeologist Arthur Evans. However, the Entente Powers did not initially consider breakup of Austria-Hungary as a war aim and did not support the work of the committee, whose activities could undermine the territorial integrity of Austria-Hungary.[27] The Yugoslav Committee worked to be recognised by the Entente Powers as the legal representative of South Slavs living in Austria-Hungary, but Pašić consistently prevented any formal recognition.[40] A further point of friction between Supilo and Trumbić on one side and Pašić on the other was the demand of the Serbian ambassador made to Britain to ask that the Yugoslav Committee omit mention of Dalmatia as being a part of Croatia since time immemorial because it might jeopardise Serbian territorial claims. Supilo and Trumbić were surprised, but they complied believing Croatia would be otherwise left defenceless against Italian claims.[41]

Supilo's resignation

Photograph of Frano Supilo
Frano Supilo co-founded the Yugoslav Committee with Ante Trumbić

Supilo thought that the Yugoslav Committee had to confront not only the Italian and Hungarian attempts to encroach on lands inhabited by South Slavs, but also the Greater Serbian expansionist designs pursued by Pašić. While most of the committee agreed with Supilo, they did not want to confront Serbia openly until the South Slavic lands were safe from Italian and Hungarian threats.[42] Following the Serbian military defeat in the 1915 Serbian campaign, Supilo, Gazzari, and Trinajstić concluded that the Serb members of the Yugoslav Committee believed that the proposed unification should primarily encompass ethnic Serbs in a centralised state. They saw no need for a federal system because they deemed differences between Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes to be the artificial result of Austrian rule. Supilo then made a protest, informing the Yugoslav Committee that he had sent a memo to Grey proposing that an independent Croatian state should be established, unless Serbia agreed to treat Croats and Slovenes as equal to Serbs. His principal complaint in this regard was that Croatia and other Austro-Hungarian territories were being thought of by the Entente powers as compensation to Serbia for the loss of Macedonia and concessions in Banat, instead of treating the populations of these areas as equal partners. For their part, Serb and Slovene members of the committee accused Supilo and his allies of separatism and favouring Croatian interests over Slovene ones.[43]

Trumbić believed that unification should be pursued at all costs, so long as Austria-Hungary was destroyed. In March 1916, Trumbić dismissed Supilo's idea to establish a Croatian Committee, fearing that it would lead to conflict with the Serbian government and weaken the Croatian's position against Italy. In early May 1916, Pašić declared Serbia recognition of Italian dominance in the Adriatic, causing Gazzari, Trinajstić, and Meštrović to ask for a meeting of the committee. In the meeting, Vasiljević and Stojanović once again attacked Supilo for his opposition to the policy of the Serbian government. Finally, Supilo left the Yugoslav Committee on 5 June 1916.[43] Believing that the piecemeal approach being taken was wrong, and that problems must be dealt with immediately in the open, Supilo abandoned integral Yugoslavism and unsuccessfully urged Croat members of the Yugoslav Committee to resign and join him in pursuit of an independent Croatia, as Serbia had prioritised uniting ethnic Serbs. He hoped to obtain Italian support for the idea, as Italy was displeased with the prospect of the unification of South Slavs close to its borders, and thereby pressure Pašić and the Serbs into giving into his demands.[42]

Relations between the Yugoslav Committee and Serbia did not improve after Supilo's departure. A new contentious issue was the designation of the South Slavic volunteer units established in Odesa. These consisted of prisoners of war that had been captured from Austria-Hungary, and now wanted to fight against them on the side of Slavic independence. While the Yugoslav Committee wanted the force to be called Yugoslav, Pašić successfully arranged through Serbian diplomatic mission in Russia to have the unit named the First Serbian Volunteer Division, commanded by officers of the Royal Serbian Army sent to Russia specifically for the task. While the committee hoped the force would help promote common Yugoslav identity, Yugoslavism was actively suppressed by the officers on instructions given by Pašić.[44] As a result, 12,735 volunteers out of 33,000 left the force in protest at its specifically Serbian identification, and recruitment of volunteers slowed down significantly.[45]

Corfu Declaration

See caption
Participants of the June–July 1917 talks that resulted in the adoption of the Corfu Declaration

The Serbian position was weakened following the loss of Russian support after the February Revolution,[46] as well as President of the United States Woodrow Wilson refusal to honour secret agreements that had promised territorial rewards.[45] At the same time, the Entente Powers were still looking for ways to achieve a separate peace with Austria-Hungary and isolate the German Empire in the war.[47] Moreover, South Slavic deputies on the Austro-Hungarian Imperial Council in Vienna presented the May Declaration, proposing the introduction of trialism in Austria-Hungary, allowing the South Slavs to unite in a single polity within the monarchy.[21] Finally, France and Britain appeared supportive of new Austro-Hungarian emperor Charles's efforts to restructure the empire and seek peace.[45] This presented a problem for the Serbian government exiled on the Greek island of Corfu. It increased the risk of a trialist solution for the Habsburg South Slavs if the separate peace treaty materialised, preventing the fulfilment of expansionist Serbian war objectives.[47]

Pašić felt he had to come to an agreement with the Yugoslav Committee in order to strengthen the Serbian position with the Entente Powers, while countering Italian interests in the Balkans. Trumbić and Pašić met on the Greek island of Corfu, where the Serbian government had been exiled since their military defeat.[48] The Yugoslav Committee was represented at the conference by Trumbić, Hinković, Vošnjak, Vasiljević, Trinajstić, and Potočnjak. Trumbić received no information on what was to be discussed, so the committee members were unprepared, and instead had to negotiate with Pašić individually. Trumbić prioritised securing assurances that Croatia would not be left within Austria-Hungary, and that Italian occupation of Dalmatia would not take place. He also opposed complete centralisation of the proposed union state.[49] The meeting resulted in the Corfu Declaration. It was a manifesto where the different groups declared the common objective of the unification of South Slavs in a constitutional, democratic, and parliamentary monarchy, headed by the Serbian ruling Karađorđević dynasty. Yugoslavia, the Yugoslav Committee’s preferred name for the unified country, was rejected, and the bulk of the constitutional matters were left to be decided later, as Trumbić felt some agreement was necessary in order to curb threats of Italian expansion.[48]

Pašić–Trumbić conflict

Photograph of Prime Minister Nikola Pašić
Nikola Pašić led the government of Serbia during the World War I

Relations between Pašić and Trumbić deteriorated throughout 1918, as they openly disagreed on several key demands made by Trumbić, including the recognition of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes living in Austria-Hungary as allied peoples, the recognition of the Yugoslav Committee as the representative of those peoples, and the recognition of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes Volunteer Corps (formerly called the First Serbian Volunteer Division) as an allied force drawn from Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes living in Austria-Hungary. After Pašić refused to support these positions, Trumbić was authorised by the Yugoslav Committee to bypass Pašić and present the Entente Powers directly with their demands.[50] The Serbian government denied that the Yugoslav Committee had any legitimacy, claiming it alone represented all South Slavs, including those living in Austria-Hungary.[51]

Pašić requested that the Entente Powers issue a declaration recognising that Serbia had the right to liberate and unify territories with Serbia, but this was unsuccessful. Pašić stated that Yugoslavia would be absorbed by Serbia and not the other way around, and that Serbia was primarily waging war to liberate Serbs, and that it was Pašić who created the Yugoslav Committee. He rebuffed Trumbić's claim that only one third of population of the future union lived in Serbia, and that the Corfu Declaration called for two partners, by stating that the declaration was only for foreign consumption, and was no longer valid. The French and British governments declined two Serbian requests for the authority to annex South Slavic Austro-Hungarian lands, and the British foreign secretary Arthur Balfour upheld the Corfu Declaration as an agreement of partners, demanding that Pašić align his views with those of the Yugoslav Committee.[52] On the other hand, the Entente Powers decided against the recognition of the Yugoslav Committee as an allied body in line with wishes of Serbia, informing the committee it would have to come to an agreement with Pašić.[53]

The potential preservation of Austria-Hungary also caused friction between Trumbić and Pašić.[54] The Entente Powers continued to pursue a separate peace with Austria-Hungary until early 1918,[55] regardless of the Corfu Declaration. In January 1918, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom David Lloyd George confirmed his support for the survival of Austria-Hungary. In his Fourteen Points speech, Wilson agreed, by advocating for the autonomy of the peoples of Austria-Hungary.[56] In October, Lloyd George discussed the potential preservation of a reformed Austria-Hungary with Pašić, observing that Serbia could annex any areas occupied by the Royal Serbian Army before an armistice.[57] In return, Trumbić asked Wilson to deploy US troops to Croatia-Slavonia to quell the disorder that had arisen associated with the Green Cadres, and stem the tide of Bolshevism, and not to allow Italian or Serbian troops into the territory. However, he was not successful.[58]

Geneva Declaration

Anton Korošec represented the National Council of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs in the Geneva conference

In the process of the dissolution of Austria-Hungary, following the monarchy's military defeat in 1918, the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs was proclaimed in the South Slavic-inhabited lands of the former empire. The state was governed by the Croat-Serb Coalition-dominated National Council,[59] and it authorised the Yugoslav Committee to speak on behalf of the Council in international relations.[60] In late October 1918, the Croatian Sabor declared the end of ties with Austria-Hungary and elected the president of the National Council, Slovene politician Anton Korošec, to the new position of President of the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs.[61]

Trumbić and Pašić met again in November in Geneva, joined by Korošec and representatives of Serbian opposition parties, to discuss unification. At the conference, Pašić was isolated and ultimately compelled to recognise the National Council as an equal partner to the Serbian government. Trumbić obtained agreement from the other conference participants on the establishment of a common government, in which the National Council and the government of Serbia would appoint an equal number of ministers to govern a common confederal state.[62] Pašić only consented after receiving a message from the President of France Raymond Poincaré stating that he wished Pašić to come to an agreement with the representatives of the National Council.[63] In return, the National Council and the Yugoslav Committee agreed to a speedy unification, and signed the Geneva Declaration.[64]

A week later, however, prompted by Pašić, the Serbian government renounced the Declaration, complaining that it limited Serbian sovereignty to its pre-war borders. The Vice President of the National Council, Croatian Serb politician Svetozar Pribičević, supported the repudiation of the Geneva Agreement and successfully swayed the National Council against the position negotiated by Trumbić. Pribičević persuaded the Council members to proceed with unification and accept that the details of the new arrangements would be decided afterwards.[62]

Aftermath

Delegation of the National Council of the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs received by Prince Regent Alexander on 1 December 1918

Confronted by civil unrest and a reported coup d'état attempt, the National Council requested help from the Serbian Army to quell the violence. At the same time, the council hoped that Serbian support would halt the Italian Army's advance from the west, where it had seized Rijeka and was approaching Ljubljana.[65] Having no legal means to stop the Italian advance as it had been authorised by the Entente Powers, nor having armed forces sufficient to stop it, the National Council feared that the Italian presence on the eastern shores of the Adriatic would become permanent.[66] Pressed by the combined threats, the National Council dispatched a delegation to Prince Regent Alexander to arrange an urgent unification with Serbia in a federation. The delegation ignored the instructions it had been given when it addressed the Prince Regent, omitting to secure any specific terms for the unification agreement. The Prince Regent accepted the offer on behalf of Peter I of Serbia,[67] and the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (subsequently renamed Yugoslavia) was established without any agreement on the nature of the new political union.[68] Mate Drinković, a member of the delegation, informed Trumbić in a letter that unification had been proclaimed accepting these terms, claiming that any other agreement would had been impossible to obtain.[69]

Trumbić appointed Trinajstić as his replacement at the helm of the Yugoslav Committee in early 1919. The newly appointed prime minister of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes Stojan Protić instructed the Yugoslav Committee to dissolve. On 12 February, Trinajstić convened a meeting, with Trumbić attending, where the majority of the committee members decided not to dissolve the body, despite Protić's instructions. Nonetheless, the Yugoslav Committee ceased to exist in March 1919.[70]

Czech historian Milada Paulová wrote a book examining the relationship between the Yugoslav Committee and the Serbian government, and its translation was published in 1925. She pointed out out that the committee had to fight for an equal position while Pašić's actions were guided by Serbian nationalism. Paulová's work had an impact on Yugoslav historiography, especially Slovene and Croatian, and contributed to the interwar period debate on the levels of Yugoslavism espoused by the Yugoslav Committee and the Pašić government. In Communist Yugoslavia, the work of the Yugoslav Committee started to be re-examined from late 1950s – and the results exhibited the first post-war disagreements between Croatian and Serbian historiographies. Specifically, at the 1961 congress of the union of historians in Ljubljana, Franjo Tuđman argued that the Serbian government had aspired to hegemony and criticised fellow historian Jovan Marjanović who had claimed otherwise. In 1965, the Zagreb-based Yugoslav Academy of Sciences and Arts published a book emphasising the Yugoslav Committee's contribution to creation of Yugoslavia.[71]

Notes

  1. ^ Coined by compounding Croatian nouns 'jug' and 'Slaveni', meaning South and Slavs, respectively.[3]
  2. ^ Some sources also refer to it as the Yugoslav nationalism,[5] or Yugoslavdom.[6]
  3. ^ Supilo co-founded the Croat-Serb Coalition with Svetozar Pribičević, but left it following the Agram Trial and especially the Friedjung Trial [hr] initiated by the coalition and Supilo disappointed in lack of support from the coalition. He was replaced by Ivan Lorković as co-chairman of the coalition. The move left Pribičević in effective control of the coalition.[15]

References

  1. ^ a b Headlam 1911, pp. 2–39.
  2. ^ Rusinow 2003, p. 12.
  3. ^ a b c Cipek 2003, p. 72.
  4. ^ Glenny 2012, p. 57.
  5. ^ Glenny 2012, p. 536.
  6. ^ Wachtel 1998, p. 242.
  7. ^ Cipek 2003, pp. 72–73.
  8. ^ Rusinow 2003, p. 23.
  9. ^ Rusinow 2003, pp. 16–17.
  10. ^ Pavlowitch 2003b, p. 59.
  11. ^ Ramet 2006, p. 37.
  12. ^ Rusinow 2003, pp. 25–26.
  13. ^ a b c Boban 2019, p. 17.
  14. ^ a b Banac 1984, p. 118.
  15. ^ Boban 2019, p. 9.
  16. ^ Boban 2019, p. 18.
  17. ^ Evans 2008, pp. 159–160.
  18. ^ Pavlowitch 2003a, p. 29.
  19. ^ a b c d Banac 1984, pp. 118–119.
  20. ^ a b c Lampe 2000, pp. 102–103.
  21. ^ a b Ramet 2006, p. 40.
  22. ^ Pavlović 2008, p. 70.
  23. ^ Boban 2019, p. 19.
  24. ^ a b c Ramet 2006, pp. 41–42.
  25. ^ Banac 1984, p. 119.
  26. ^ Boban 2019, pp. 19–20.
  27. ^ a b Banac 1984, pp. 119–120.
  28. ^ Robbins 1971, p. 574.
  29. ^ a b Robbins 1971, pp. 565–570.
  30. ^ Mastilović 2012, p. 277.
  31. ^ Boban 2019, pp. 20–21.
  32. ^ Machiedo Mladinić 2007, p. 138.
  33. ^ Leček 1998.
  34. ^ Boban 2019, p. 21.
  35. ^ Mastilović 2012, p. 286.
  36. ^ Antoličič 2020, p. 75.
  37. ^ Hameršak 2005, p. 107.
  38. ^ Stančić 2014, p. 93.
  39. ^ Boban 2019, pp. 21–22.
  40. ^ Banac 2019, pp. 21–22.
  41. ^ Banac 2019, p. 23.
  42. ^ a b Banac 1984, pp. 120–121.
  43. ^ a b Boban 2019, pp. 26–28.
  44. ^ Banac 1984, pp. 121–122.
  45. ^ a b c Boban 2019, p. 36.
  46. ^ Banac 1984, p. 123.
  47. ^ a b Pavlowitch 2003a, p. 33.
  48. ^ a b Banac 1984, pp. 123–124.
  49. ^ Banac 2019, pp. 37–39.
  50. ^ Janković 1964, pp. 229–230.
  51. ^ Evans 2008, p. 168.
  52. ^ Boban 2019, pp. 66–70.
  53. ^ Boban 2019, p. 75.
  54. ^ Janković 1964, p. 229.
  55. ^ Jelavich & Jelavich 2000, p. 300.
  56. ^ Sovilj 2018, p. 1344.
  57. ^ Sovilj 2018, pp. 1347–1349.
  58. ^ Janković 1964, p. 228.
  59. ^ Banac 1984, p. 127.
  60. ^ Matijević 2008, p. 50.
  61. ^ Ramet 2006, pp. 42–43.
  62. ^ a b Banac 1984, pp. 124–128.
  63. ^ Janković 1964, pp. 246–247.
  64. ^ Banac 1984, pp. 134–135.
  65. ^ Ramet 2006, p. 44.
  66. ^ Pavlović 2019, p. 275.
  67. ^ Ramet 2006, pp. 44–45.
  68. ^ Pavlović 2019, p. 276.
  69. ^ Krizman 1970, p. 23.
  70. ^ Machiedo Mladinić 2007, p. 154.
  71. ^ Sretenović 2021, p. 280.

Sources

  • Antoličič, Gregor (2020). "Avstro-ogrsko poveljstvo jugozahodne fronte in vprašanja politične drže na Hrvaškem med prvo svetovno vojno" [The Austro-Hungarian Command of the Southwestern Front and Questions concerning the Political Mood in Croatia during the First World War]. Pilar: časopis za društvene i humanističke studije (in Slovenian). 15 (29–30). Zagreb: Institut društvenih znanosti Ivo Pilar: 63–82. ISSN 1846-3010.
  • Banac, Ivo (1984). The National Question in Yugoslavia: Origins, History, Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. ISBN 0-8014-1675-2.
  • Banac, Ivo (2019). "The Dissolution of Yugoslav Historiography". In Ramet, Sabrina P. (ed.). Beyond Yugoslavia: Politics, Economics, And Culture In A Shattered Community. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-42972-232-5.
  • Boban, Branka (2019). "Stavovi hrvatske političke elite prema stvaranju jugoslavenske države" [Attitudes of Croatian political elite towards formation of the Yugoslav state]. Tragovi: časopis za srpske i hrvatske teme (in Croatian). 2 (2). Zagreb: Serb National Council: 8–98. doi:10.52328/t. ISSN 2623-8926.
  • Cipek, Tihomir (2003). "The Croats and Yugoslavism". In Djokić, Dejan (ed.). Yugoslavism: Histories of a Failed Idea, 1918-1992. London: C. Hurst & Co. pp. 71–83. ISBN 1-85065-663-0.
  • Evans, James (2008). Great Britain and the Creation of Yugoslavia, Negotiating Balkan Nationality and Identity. London: I.B. Tauris. ISBN 9780857713070.
  • Glenny, Misha (2012). The Balkans, 1804–2012: Nationalism, War and the Great Powers. Toronto: House of Anansi Press. ISBN 978-1-77089-273-6.
  • Hameršak, Filip (2005). "Josip Jedlowski – životopis (s bilješkama za transnacionalnu povijest jedne građanske obitelji)" [Josip Jedlowski: A Biography (Including Notes on a Transnational History of a Middle-Class Family)]. Časopis za suvremenu povijest (in Croatian). 37 (1). Zagreb: Croatian Institute of History: 101–128. ISSN 0590-9597.
  • Headlam, James Wycliffe (1911). "Austria-Hungary" . In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 3 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  • Janković, Dragoslav (1964). "Ženevska konferencija o stvaranju jugoslovenske zajednice 1918. godine" [Geneva Conference on Creation of the Yugoslav Community in 1918]. Istorija XX veka [History of the 20th Century] (in Serbian). Vol. V. Belgrade: Institute of Legal History of the University of Belgrade Faculty of Law. pp. 225–262. OCLC 67000822.
  • Jelavich, Charles; Jelavich, Barbara (2000). The Establishment of the Balkan National States, 1804–1920. Seattle: University of Washington Press. ISBN 0-295-96413-8.
  • Krizman, Bogdan (1970). "Vanjskopolitički položaj Kraljevine Srba, Hrvata i Slovenaca godine 1919" [The Position of the Monarchy of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes in the World in 1919]. Časopis za suvremenu povijest (in Croatian). 2 (1). Zagreb: Croatian Institute of History: 23–59. ISSN 0590-9597.
  • Lampe, John R. (2000). Yugoslavia as History: Twice There Was a Country (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-77357-1.
  • Leček, Suzana (1998). "Gazzari, Julije". Croatian Biographical Lexicon (in Croatian). Miroslav Krleža Institute of Lexicography. Retrieved 30 December 2023.
  • Machiedo Mladinić, Norka (2007). "Prilog proučavanju djelovanja Ivana Meštrovića u Jugoslavenskom odboru" [A Contribution to the Study of Ivan Meštrović's Activities on the Yugoslav Committee]. Časopis za suvremenu povijest (in Croatian). 39 (1). Zagreb: Croatian Institute of History: 133–156. ISSN 0590-9597.
  • Mastilović, Draga (2012). "Др Никола Стојановић између српства и југословенства" [Dr Nikola Stojanović between Serbia and Yugoslavia]. Зборник за историју Босне и Херцеговине (in Serbian) (7). Belgrade: Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts: 267–299. ISSN 0354-9461.
  • Matijević, Zlatko (2008). "The National Council of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs in Zagreb (1918/1919)". Review of Croatian History. 4 (1). Zagreb: Hrvatski institut za povijest: 51–84. ISSN 1845-4380.
  • Pavlović, Srđa (2008). Balkan Anschluss: The Annexation of Montenegro and the Creation of the Common South Slavic State. West Lafayette: Purdue University Press. ISBN 9781557534651.
  • Pavlović, Vojislav G (2019). "Italy and the Creation of Yugoslavia. Delenda Austria?". In Pavlović, Vojislav G. (ed.). Serbia and Italy in the Great War. Belgrade: Institute for Balkan Studies. pp. 245–278. ISBN 9788671791038.
  • Pavlowitch, Kosta St. (2003a). "The First World War and Unification of Yugoslavia". In Djokić, Dejan (ed.). Yugoslavism: Histories of a Failed Idea, 1918-1992. London: C. Hurst & Co. pp. 27–41. ISBN 1-85065-663-0.
  • Pavlowitch, Stevan K. (2003b). "Serbia, Montenegro and Yugoslavia". In Djokić, Dejan (ed.). Yugoslavism: Histories of a Failed Idea, 1918-1992. London: C. Hurst & Co. pp. 57–70. ISBN 1-85065-663-0.
  • Ramet, Sabrina P. (2006). The Three Yugoslavias: State-building and Legitimation, 1918–2005. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. ISBN 9780253346568.
  • Robbins, Keith (1971). "British Diplomacy and Bulgaria 1914–1915". The Slavonic and East European Review. 49 (117). London: Modern Humanities Research Association: 560–585. ISSN 0037-6795. JSTOR 4206453.
  • Rusinow, Dennison (2003). "The Yugoslav Idea before Yugoslavia". In Djokić, Dejan (ed.). Yugoslavism: Histories of a Failed Idea, 1918-1992. London: C. Hurst & Co. pp. 11–26. ISBN 1-85065-663-0.
  • Sovilj, Milan P. (2018). "About Yugoslavia on the Eve of Its Establishment: Nikola Pašić and British Prime Minister David Lloyd George About the Future Yugoslav State on 15th October 1918". Sociološki pregled Социолошки преглед. 52 (4). Belgrade: Serbian Sociological Society: 1335–1351. doi:10.5937/socpreg52-18428. ISSN 0085-6320.
  • Sretenović, Stanislav (2021). "The Invention of Yugoslav Identity: Serbian and South Slav Historiographies on World War I, 1918–2018". In Cornelissen, Christoph; Weinrich, Arndt (eds.). Writing the Great War, The Historiography of World War I from 1918 to the Present. New York City: Berghahn Books. pp. 263–301. doi:10.2307/j.ctv1tbhq0p.12. ISBN 9781800737273. JSTOR j.ctv1tbhq0p.12. S2CID 238095829.
  • Stančić, Nikša (2014). "Hrvatska politika i nastanak Jugoslavije: od Berlinskog kongresa 1878. do kraja Prvoga svjetskog rata 1918" [Croatian Politics and the Birth of Yugoslavia from the Congress of Berlin (1878) until the First World War (1918)]. Adrias: Zbornik radova Zavoda za znanstveni i umjetnički rad Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti u Splitu (in Croatian) (20). Split: Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Institute for Scientific and Artistic Work in Split: 93–103. ISSN 0352-9924.
  • Štambuk-Škalić, Marina; Matijević, Zlatko, eds. (2008). "Narodno vijeće Slovenaca, Hrvata i Srba u Zagrebu 1918–1919. (izabrani dokumenti)" [National Council of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs in Zagreb 1918–1919 (Selected Documents)]. Fontes: Izvori Za Hrvatsku Povijest (in Croatian). 14 (1). Zagreb: Croatian State Archives: 71–596. ISSN 1330-6804.
  • Wachtel, Andrew (1998). Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation: Literature and Cultural Politics in Yugoslavia. Redwood City: Stanford University Press. ISBN 978-0-8047-3181-2.
  • v
  • t
  • e
Yugoslavia articles
History
Breakup
  • v
  • t
  • e
Overview
Background
Events and actors
  • v
  • t
  • e
Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Independence referendums in Yugoslavia
Republics and provinces
Autonomy
Consequences
Nationalism
  • Category
Politics
Military
  • History
  • Army
    • 1918–1945
    • 1945–1992
      • Ground
  • Navy
    • 1918–1945
    • 1945–1992
  • Air Force
    • 1918–1945
    • 1945–1992
  • Ranks
    • 1918–1945
    • 1945–1992
      • Marshal
  • Territorial Defense
Economy
Society
Languages
Culture
Cuisine
Literature
Symbols
  • Category
Authority control databases Edit this at Wikidata
International
  • VIAF
National
  • United States
Other
  • IdRef