|
Causes
and Consequences of the Collapse of
Yugoslavian and Russian Federations L.V.
Tjagunenko LBF-Russian
Academy of Science, Moscow 1996
Destinies of Russian and Serb peoples are intermingled tight.
Three centuries that passed by say that explicitly. In the recent times
we became witnesses of collapse of two federative states- USSR and SFRY,
and now watch a kind of disintegration of Russian Federation. Process of
separatism, mutual distrust, open enmity, turning into the internecine
wars, is getting stronger, being almost the same. Yugoslavia forestalls
the USSR in 1,5-2 years. Even the stages of struggle for independence of
separate republics- is almost identical. This is a stage of the
proclamation of republican laws and constitutions over the state ones,
coming of the separatist, often chauvinist parties to power, refusal to
fulfill military duties and army services and creation of the own
national Guards; stage of the economic war between republics,
installation of their own money system, and at least unilateral
proclamation of their independence by almost all of the republics. In
the recent times it became fashionable to talk that collapse of the
federations is fatally inevitable, on so called global character of this
process. I suppose that we may talk not on the objectiveness of the
collapse of the federations, but on the absence of the necessary
subjective premises, that could prevent their decay. It’s really
possible that there were other alternatives to save federations, but
there were needed other political forces.
Universal experience reveals that conflicts between the peoples
living in one multinational state have no manifestation only when
authoritarian or totalitarian power exists. Up to the recent times as USSR as well as SFRY were not democratic, but unitarian
states with strong centralized power. Despite the declarations of the
people’s power, there existed dictatorship of the ruling parties in
them- CPSU and UCY. But SFRY was not a totalitarian state in whole sense
of this word. The level of development of democracy and self- government
was comparatively high in comparison with other
former socialist countries. Aspiration to the independence of the
republics and weakening of the center became stronger after the death of
I. Broz-Tito, whose strong hand deterred sharpening of the national
problems for four decades. Then contradictions burst out, inter
republican relations have much aggravated, there appeared a danger of
the transformation of Yugoslavian federation into confederation. In 1974
there was adopted a constitution in former Yugoslavia, giving a status
of the state to all six republics, restricting center by the functions
of just common character. Entire plethora of responsibility for their
economic, social and cultural development has been imposed on the
republics. In other words that meant that united economic system stopped
its existence. In the times when whole world went to integration, there
went a process of disintegration in Yugoslavia and USSR, followed by
political demagogy on the necessity of strengthening of the interests of
just own people and own republic by all possible means. Interethnical
conflicts started to be artificially swelled by mass media (as domestic,
as well as foreign) and corresponding political forces calling to gloomy
and heavy memories of the Second World War, to the echo of the past,
repeating in today’s massacre.
Sharp crisis of economy in the USSR and SFRY caused further
aggravation of interethnical relations. Ethnocrats, many of which headed
the republics, have used discontent of population, likely suffered from
the economic crisis, have put forth the ideas of separatism. In course
of aggravation of the crisis, there appeared an aspiration in the
republics to save themselves individually especially in the developed
regions (Baltic republics in the USSR and Slovenia and Croatia in SFRY).
Result is known: Slovenia and Croatia and after them Bosnia and
Herzegovina and Macedonia proclaimed their withdrawal from Yugoslavia in
unilateral manner, and Baltic republics, Ukraine and Moldova were in a
hurry to leave the USSR.
Failure of the putsch in the August, 1991 became crash of the
Soviet Union. Collapse of the Communist party and system of State
Security have broken two foundations of the Soviet Union. The third one-
army- has found courage not to impose responsibility for the
preservation of the USSR on itself.
Interference of the army into Lithuania caused mass protest of
progressive public in the country and army had to return.
Supreme Soviet of Russia adopts the first decision of Russian
federation on sovereignty in 1990 at 12th June, after the proposal of
its head B. Eltsin. This is the main paradox: Russia actually proclaims
independence from itself. From that time 12th June is being celebrated
as a Day of Independence of Russia.
Before the putsch in August, 1991 process of political
soverignization was slack and spontaneous. Republics except Baltic ones
were not in a hurry with the proclamations of their independence. The
reason is that majority of the republics have seen no danger to their
sovereignty; and moreover, mighty party structures that hindered such
course of events by all means and hampered processes of disintegration
still functioned.
Right after the putsch in August 1991, the process of
sovereignization became like an avalanche. Frightened by the possibility
of repetition of the putsch and being under the pressure of the
chauvinist parties and movements the parliaments of 7 republics have
voted for the declarations of state independence for seven days. At the
same time with the proclamations on the state independence there were
adopted the acts on economic sovereignty. This was a real “parade of
sovereignties”...
Right four years passed since the conclusion of separate
agreement on cessation of the action of the Union treaty of 1922 by the
heads of Russia, Belorussia and Ukraine (Boris Eltsin, Stanislav
Shushkevitch and Leonid Kravtchuk). According to this agreement the Union of
the Soviet Socialist Republics stopped its existence. Another document
proclaimed creation of the Commonwealth of the Independent States (CIS).
There have been formed fifteen independent states with their own
presidents, parliaments, governments and national banks on the territory
of the former USSR. United economic space has split apart.
It would not be right to connect the collapse of the Soviet Union
only with political decisions of the Autumn, 1991. Quite many factors
preceded the events that led to the proclamation of CIS in December,
1991. So, in the times of Stalinist “Union unbreakable” there have
been realized violations of the right of some peoples. So, it would be
enough to remember the destiny of so called “repressed peoples” of
the Crimea or the Caucuses, situation with persons of German nationality
and some others.
But unfortunately, many republics, having become independent,
based the foundations of their state structure on anti-Russian
feelings, resistance to any efforts of new Russia to organize
interstate communication. USSR is often called empire, and the label
“empire of evil” does not correspond to the truth. Often repeated
condemnation put forward against the Russians that this is imperialist
people with low culture- is totally incorrect. So called ruling Russian
nation suffered from totalitarism no less that others, but managed to do
so much for economic and cultural growth of national regions with the
loss of its own interests. even now, when all these republics became
independent states, they left for themselves the right to use cheap
Russian energetic resources and at the same time- to accept humanitarian
aid from the West.
Almost the same can be said on the Serbs, who composed more than
a half of the population of SFRY. Raising the level of low-developed
republics of former Yugoslavia (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia,
Chernogoria and autonomous region Kosovo, the Serbs went behind Slovenia
and Croatia in respect of their economic development. What
are the consequences of the collapse of federations?
Four years of new life in former Yugoslavia and former USSR
revealed many contradictions as inside independent states themselves as
well as on international level. So, CIS appeared artificial form of
state composition with unperfected mechanism of cooperation in the
frames of the Commonwealth. No state of the Commonwealth, including
Russia, were ready for the sovereignty neither politically, no
economically, nor psychologically. No state became guarantor of security
or prosperity of its citizens.
In Russia properly collapse of the Soviet Union caused an active
regionalization and reflections of separatism in the subjects of
federation. In essence, today’s CIS is comfortable just for the
presidents and leadership of the newly established states, but as to the
common people, this is just uncomfortable difference in money systems
and frontiers, and quite often, tragic break of the family and relative
ties; this is return of the national languages and traditions in the
regions that became “Russian”. In a particular respect this means
break of the habits, way of life, composed for so many years of the
Soviet power. Hence, nostalgia on USSR exists not only in Russia, but
also in other states. Creation of new national states, settling some
problems, revealed other unsettled problems, that can become mighty
generator of the growth of national conflicts.
I mean first of all the newest state borders and status of
national minority, i.e. situation of that part of population which after
the collapse of the federation has been turned into the national
minority. And outside the frontiers of Russia more than 25 millions
Russians live.
Problem of the refugees touched almost all the republics of the
former USSR and former SFRY. Here in Russia quite many boarding-houses,
holiday- houses and pioneer camps are changed into the houses for those
refugees. One may count some millions people of them. Avoiding the talk
on the suffering of those unfortunate people, processes of the forced
immigration imposes negative influence on the economic situation,
calling for a large part of the resources from the budget for the
financial help for the refugees.
After the crisis, caused by the separation of the republics of
the former Yugoslavia in 1991, started, a process of the forced
relocation of population, first of all the Serbs, who under the
pressures of different types left Slovenia and Croatia, has been
initiated. With the coming of the war into Bosnia and Herzegovina
refugees look for the shelter in UR Yugoslavia and in other countries.
The number of refugees who now are in Yugoslavia, exceeds 700 thousand
people.
In this connection one may put a question: are those casualties,
that newly established small states have to suffer, as a rule being in
enmity with each other, justified? Being pushed into the periphery of
international events, these new “provinces” became a burden for the
great powers. In the opinion of many researchers, inner reserves of all
the new states are not sufficient to maintain newly obtained
independence and aspiration to get closer to European level. No one of
them can go independently by the way they have once chosen and may be to
preserve state frontiers.
It a great pity to realize but former high authority of the
former Soviet Union and former Yugoslavia has fallen in the
international area. It’s difficult to foresee what kind of roles they
will play in the future- that of second or third level. There are the
chances to get up, mostly for Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and SRY but
only in case of the preservation of their entity. We may not say that
the dimensions of these new structures are obviously defined. Processes
of disintegration may go on, that pricks our eyes up.
The result of the foreign policy of Russia for the years of
independence is pitiful: our positions in Europe became much weaker as
well as on the Balkans, Middle East and Pacific region.
At least all the
republics of the former Soviet Union and Yugoslavia without any
exclusion- that are now independent states suffer industrial decay. The
most important causes that led to this were the brakes in industrial
ties, violation of the contract obligations on delivery of goods,
absence of coordination in the activity of the former republics.
For example the debt of Russia to the rest of the world is 130
billion dollars and this debt grows year after year.
So, what kind of consequences the split of the former federations
may have for the newly established states? Will not they have to pay
with their economic collapse the price of their obtaining the
independence? And at least
is the social explosion possible in the nearest future?
I hope that aggressive nationalism as in Yugoslavia as well as in
former republics of the USSR may be soon exhausted, having discredited
itself in the eyes of the wiser and tired peoples. Inevitable economic
laws and hard crisis, that conquered these regions will make (and do it
right now) the former republics re-animate broken industrial ties. “We
will be able to come out of the crisis only together”,- this idea is
being repeated more and more often. Now more than two thirds of the
population of Russia painfully deplore the split of the Soviet Union.
And Russian society is not against the integration with the republics,
that became independent states, but not paying with the infringement of
its own interests. Almost nobody is glad after the failures of the
neighbors; nobody is glad the Ukrainians and Belorussians live worse.
But citizens of Russia also do not want to sacrifice their own interests
for the good and prosperity of their former compatriots. It’s likely
that quite the same is going on in UR Yugoslavia, that too long
sacrificed itself in the name of the neighbors.
Now they say more often on the integration not as on the coming
back to the old ties, but as on establishment of the new connections
between the countries, which are in new quality and living in another
historic time. So, there has been created International Economic
Committee in CIS, Interparliamental Assembly, branch departments, joint
ventures and financial- industrial groups- are not these the first steps
to the unification?
The victory of the left forces in some of the countries of
post-socialist Europe does not mean coming back to the “Barracks”
socialism. This victory
means that a part of Europe is being more and more transformed in
direction of the socialism of the new type. And the need of those 10
years was that we started coming back to the socialist values, but not
necessarily to those realities, including sorrowful ones, that we had in
plenty in the past. We have to recognize that events of the last years have discredited the idea of the Slavonic entity. But we want to believe, that idea of Yugoslavian entity as well as that of Soviet has not died. It lives in minds of many people. Back to Moscow Conference Back to Home Page
|