| Line 34: |
Line 34: |
| | each Government pledges itself to cooperate with the Governments signatory hereto."<ref>[http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/paw/274.html Declaration by United Nations, January 1, 1942], U.S. Department of State Bulletin, vol. VI, p. 3.</ref> | | each Government pledges itself to cooperate with the Governments signatory hereto."<ref>[http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/paw/274.html Declaration by United Nations, January 1, 1942], U.S. Department of State Bulletin, vol. VI, p. 3.</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | Within Yugoslavia, Colonel Draja Mikhailovitch, a Serb, organized a Serbian resistance army on behalf of the Yugoslavian government known in the press as the "Chetniks". Yet Mikhailovitch soon found it more important to fight Communism than the occupater and at the end of 1941 started collaborating with Germans. Although both were allied with Berlin, there were still fights between the chetniks and the [[Croatia]]n [[ustashe]] movement.<ref> Matteo J. Milazzo, ''The Chetnik Movement and the Yugoslav Resistance.'' (1975); Jozo Tomasevich, ''The Chetniks: War and Revolution in Yugoslavia, 1941-1945'' (1975) </ref> | + | Within Yugoslavia, Colonel Draja Mikhailovitch, a Serb, organized a Serbian resistance army on behalf of the Yugoslavian government known in the press as the "Chetniks". Yet Mikhailovitch soon found it more important to fight Communism than the occupater and at the end of 1941 started collaborating with Germans. Although both were allied with Berlin, there were still fights between the chetniks and the [[Croatia]]n [[ustashe]] movement.<ref>Matteo J. Milazzo, ''The Chetnik Movement and the Yugoslav Resistance.'' (1975); Jozo Tomasevich, ''The Chetniks: War and Revolution in Yugoslavia, 1941-1945'' (1975)</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | [[Tito]], led the communist [[Yugoslav Partisans]]. The Yugoslav government-in-exile in London continued to support Mikhailovitch. [[Franklin Roosevelt|President Roosevelt]] in 1942 paid tribute to Mikhailovitch and his men. But at the 1943 [[Teheran conference]], as part of the policy of appeasing Stalin, British Prime Minister [[Winston Churchill]] abandoned Mikhailovitch completely and agreed to support Tito. The U.S. sent arms to Tito and thus delivered Yugoslavia to communism, but also shortened the war as the Communist partisans were by then a much stronger force against the Nazis than the weak Mikhailovitch forces.<ref> Walter R. Roberts, ''Tito, Mihailovich, and the Allies, 1941-1945'' (1973) [http://www.questia.com/read/97541664?title=Tito%2c%20Mihailoviac%20and%20the%20Allies%2c%201941-1945 online edition] | + | [[Tito]], led the communist [[Yugoslav Partisans]]. The Yugoslav government-in-exile in London continued to support Mikhailovitch. [[Franklin Roosevelt|President Roosevelt]] in 1942 paid tribute to Mikhailovitch and his men. But at the 1943 [[Teheran conference]], as part of the policy of appeasing Stalin, British Prime Minister [[Winston Churchill]] abandoned Mikhailovitch completely and agreed to support Tito. The U.S. sent arms to Tito and thus delivered Yugoslavia to communism, but also shortened the war as the Communist partisans were by then a much stronger force against the Nazis than the weak Mikhailovitch forces.<ref>Walter R. Roberts, ''Tito, Mihailovich, and the Allies, 1941-1945'' (1973) [http://www.questia.com/read/97541664?title=Tito%2c%20Mihailoviac%20and%20the%20Allies%2c%201941-1945 online edition] |
| | </ref> | | </ref> |
| | | | |
| Line 43: |
Line 43: |
| | ===Ethnic battles=== | | ===Ethnic battles=== |
| | | | |
| − | Following the Axis invasion and partition in 1941, Yugoslavia became the scene of numerous interrelated ethnic and ideological conflicts fought by insurgents, occupiers, and various local bands and militias--in effect, a civil war fought within the wider context of global war. This view, now widely accepted, contrasts with the communists' black-and-white interpretation of the postwar period, which held that the war in Yugoslavia was merely an extension of a global anti-fascist struggle. | + | Following the Axis invasion and partition in 1941, Yugoslavia became the scene of numerous interrelated ethnic and ideological conflicts fought by insurgents, occupiers, and various local bands and militias—in effect, a civil war fought within the wider context of global war. This view, now widely accepted, contrasts with the communists' black-and-white interpretation of the postwar period, which held that the war in Yugoslavia was merely an extension of a global anti-fascist struggle. |
| | | | |
| | The Nazis also set up [[Croatia]] as a separate [[puppet state]] run by the fascist [[Ustashe]], providing yet another combatant to the ensuing confusion. | | The Nazis also set up [[Croatia]] as a separate [[puppet state]] run by the fascist [[Ustashe]], providing yet another combatant to the ensuing confusion. |
| | | | |
| − | During the war a bitter struggle was waged between two anti-Nazi forces, the Chetniks and the Communsit partisans under Tito. The defeat of the royalist and Serb nationalist forces, known collectively as the Chetniks, resulted from chronic disunity as well as their lacking appeal to non-Serbs. By contrast, their great rivals, Tito's Communists and the partisan movement they led, realized that they had to appear as a broader patriotic movement in order to acquire and retain the support of non-communist followers, all the while focused on establishing communist rule in postwar Yugoslavia. The Chetniks and their nominal leader, Mihailović, had been the first to take up the insurgency against the Axis occupiers. But they never developed either an effective central command structure or an ideological appeal that could transcend the boundaries of nationality, and thereby attract non-Serbs to their cause in significant numbers, even though they enjoyed official legitimacy for much of the war. In some regions there was a high degree of passive and sometimes even active cooperation of Chetnik forces--and others as well--with the Axis occupiers and their regional satrapies, such as "Serbian Residual State." The facts and | + | During the war a bitter struggle was waged between two anti-Nazi forces, the Chetniks and the Communsit partisans under Tito. The defeat of the royalist and Serb nationalist forces, known collectively as the Chetniks, resulted from chronic disunity as well as their lacking appeal to non-Serbs. By contrast, their great rivals, Tito's Communists and the partisan movement they led, realized that they had to appear as a broader patriotic movement in order to acquire and retain the support of non-communist followers, all the while focused on establishing communist rule in postwar Yugoslavia. The Chetniks and their nominal leader, Mihailović, had been the first to take up the insurgency against the Axis occupiers. But they never developed either an effective central command structure or an ideological appeal that could transcend the boundaries of nationality, and thereby attract non-Serbs to their cause in significant numbers, even though they enjoyed official legitimacy for much of the war. In some regions there was a high degree of passive and sometimes even active cooperation of Chetnik forces—and others as well—with the Axis occupiers and their regional satrapies, such as "Serbian Residual State." The facts and |
| − | perception of resistance and collaboration proved decisive not only to the military and diplomatic course of the war but also to the history of postwar Yugoslavia.<ref> Walter R. Roberts, ''Tito, Mihailović, and the allies, 1941-1945,'' (1987) [http://books.google.com/books?id=43CbLU8FgFsC&dq=intitle:Mihailovi%C4%87&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&num=30&as_brr=0 excerpt and text search]</ref> | + | perception of resistance and collaboration proved decisive not only to the military and diplomatic course of the war but also to the history of postwar Yugoslavia.<ref>Walter R. Roberts, ''Tito, Mihailović, and the allies, 1941-1945,'' (1987) [http://books.google.com/books?id=43CbLU8FgFsC&dq=intitle:Mihailovi%C4%87&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&num=30&as_brr=0 excerpt and text search]</ref> |
| | | | |
| | All parties assumed—falsely—that sooner or later the Allies would invade. Many optimistic plans were based on the assumption of Western Allied support, and on its magical power to put everything right. Historians are unsure why there was such universal faith among all parties in Allied invasion or intervention. Was it Nazi disinformation? Faulty intelligence? [[Wishful thinking]]? Or a combination of all three? Meanwhile there was an exiled royal government in London sponsored by Churchill. | | All parties assumed—falsely—that sooner or later the Allies would invade. Many optimistic plans were based on the assumption of Western Allied support, and on its magical power to put everything right. Historians are unsure why there was such universal faith among all parties in Allied invasion or intervention. Was it Nazi disinformation? Faulty intelligence? [[Wishful thinking]]? Or a combination of all three? Meanwhile there was an exiled royal government in London sponsored by Churchill. |
| Line 59: |
Line 59: |
| | | | |
| | ==Collapse== | | ==Collapse== |
| − | In 1991-1992 the internal republics comprising the country of '''Yugoslavia''' divided up and became five separate countries: [[Bosnia]] and [[Herzegovina]], [[Croatia]], [[Macedonia]], [[Slovenia]], and [[Yugoslavia]] ([[Serbia]] and [[Montenegro]]). In 2006 [[Montenegro]] became independent and in 2008 even [[Kosovo]], a former province of [[Serbia]], declared its independence. | + | In 1991-1992 the internal republics comprising the country of '''Yugoslavia''' divided up and became five separate countries: [[Bosnia]] and [[Herzegovina]], [[Croatia]], [[Macedonia]], [[Slovenia]], and Yugoslavia ([[Serbia]] and [[Montenegro]]). In 2006 [[Montenegro]] became independent and in 2008 even [[Kosovo]], a former province of [[Serbia]], declared its independence. |
| | | | |
| | It was said at the time that only Tito could have held the fractious nation together, although the monarchy had also managed tolerably well prior to the Nazi invasion. | | It was said at the time that only Tito could have held the fractious nation together, although the monarchy had also managed tolerably well prior to the Nazi invasion. |
| Line 66: |
Line 66: |
| | | | |
| | ==References== | | ==References== |
| − | <small><references/></small>
| + | {{Reflist}} |
| | | | |
| | ==Further reading== | | ==Further reading== |
| Line 94: |
Line 94: |
| | [[Category:Ottoman Empire]] | | [[Category:Ottoman Empire]] |
| | [[Category:World War II]] | | [[Category:World War II]] |
| − | [[Category:Cold War | + | [[Category:Cold War]] |