The South Slav Journal, Vol. 21, No. 3-4 (2000).

BOOK REVIEW: USTA[A BY SRDJA TRIFKOVIC

Damir Mirkovi}*

The “Ustashism” as a political movement of Croatian extreme and exclusivistic nationalism and indigenous fascism in the 3^rd and 4^th decade of the 20^th century, has not been sufficiently researched by social scientists, particularly in its organizational and ideological content.  With recent revival of neo-ustashism in the past decade in Croatia, the study by Trifkovic gains an additional significance. It is primarily political and diplomatic history centered on Ustasa political leadership in the Croatian context. It is also more concerned with Ustasha ideology, and much less with the enormity of Ustasha crimes, by which their genocidal state known as the “Independent State of Croatia” (NDH), became infamous.

Although the NDH (Nezavisna Drzava Hrvatska) was undoubtedly created by Hitler and Mussolini, and is considered to have been their puppet state, Trifkovic shows that NDH was more than a puppet of its creators.  Pavelic - its Leader (Poglavnik) and undisputed dictator - was able to balance between Hitler and Mussolini and to ensure the NDH survival during the turbulent years of the bitter civil war.

There are two variations of this book: a Serbian version in Cyrillic subtitled Balkan heart of darkness on the European political scene, and an English version is provided with a foreword written by Thomas Fleming, and four maps. The Serbian edition has a foreword by Alex Dragnich, as well as an Epilogue (Pogovor) by Dimitrije Djordjevic. Although successful variations on the same theme, the two books are not the same, and the author should be credited for in fact writing two separate volumes and works for two different reader groups. […]

Of interest is the author’s conclusion that ustashism was not in fact a fascism, but something more primitive, a sort of indigenous fascism considerably removed from the original and developed Italian form.  While in Italy and Germany the cult of the nation had its roots in the liberalism and romanticism of the 19^th Century, in the case of ustashism the identity and belonging to the nation was defined through hatred directed at Serbs, says Trifkovic (p.27). Another difference is found in the close link of ustashism to the Roman Catholic Church. Trifkovic’s stance that ustashism was primitive, undeveloped native fascism is credible to the extent that every social event is historically specific. When viewed from a wider sociological perspective then the Ustasha fascist characteristics can hardly be denied. Pavelic’s Ustasha were fostered in Mussolini’s Italy.  They glorified the state and violence and cultivated the cult of the leader. Their state was totalitarian, militaristic, expansionistic and exterminatory genocidal. Finally, their salute was fascist and their uniforms were a variation on the Italian military outfit.

Noteworthy is also Trifkovic’s treatment of Pavelic’s dealings with Italians resulting in the cession of the Croatian Adriatic Littoral and a part of Dalmatia to Italy and formalized by the so-called Rome Agreements in May 1941. Hiding his initial dealings with Italian even from his close collaborators, Pavelic had in fact ceded a substantial part of Croatia to its former protector Mussolini and thus completed his quisling role as a traitor of the Croats.  In the course of the war Pavelic met with Hitler three times. The first meeting at Berghof on June 6, 1941, had most devastating consequences for Serbs, Jews and Gypsies who found themselves in the newly created NDH and was subjected to genocidal extermination in the course of the next four years. There at Berghof Hitler explicitly endorsed the mass persecution of the Serbs in the NDH with the following words: “After all, if the Croat state wishes to be strong, a nationally intolerant policy must be pursued for fifty years, because too much tolerance on such issues can only do harm” (p. 139, English ed.). Trifkovic is correct that the large-scale Ustasha terror and mass killings of Serbs had begun already in April and May (e.g. Bjelovar, 180 civilians were shot on the night of April 27-28; Glina, 345 men were shot on the night of May 12-13). Thus the author concludes: “Suffice to say, the Ustasha terror was without precedent in the history of the ‘part of Europe’ it was also the first total genocide in the Second World War,” (p. 144, English ed., underlined by the author). Trifkovic also draws some interesting comparisons between the Holocaust and the Ustasha genocide. First, he points out the temporal priority because the Nazis had reached the final decision on the Physical extermination of European Jews (Endloesung) at the Wannsee Conference on January 20, 1942. Relying on the doctoral thesis of Aleksa Djilas, the author describes the Ustasha terror as “primitive” and “traditional,” direct, personal, indulging literally in orgies of violence, in contrast to the Nazi terror which was mostly depersonalized bureaucratic, “modern” and technologically industrialized, with killing performed mostly in concentration camps in Poland.

Of particular significance is Trifkovic’s excellent documentation of German and Italian commanders’ negative assessment of Ustasha terror. The role of Genral Glaise von Horstenau, the first high-ranking German official in Croatia, as well as of his assistant Captian Haeffner, was prominent. Thus Haeffner has recorded the number of Serbs “who have fallen as victims of animal instincts fanned by Ustasha leaders exceeded 200,000 by the beginning of August, 1941.” (p.145, English ed.). General Glaise von Horstenau and Captain Haeffner were horrified by the scenes of ultimate horror and unimaginable bestiality on the occasion of their unscheduled visit to the concentration camp at Sisak, as well as to the devastated Serb-inhabited village Crkveni Bok on the banks of the river Sava.  They have recorded what they saw, and Trifkovic should be commended for including some of their shocking discoveries in his book (pp. 201-207, Engl. Ed.).

This study is focused primarily on political aspects of ustashism, on its ideology and diplomatic history. Trifkovic is aware that this could not be done successfully without consideration of the criminal consequences of this ideology by which consequences Pavelic and his Ustasha are most infamous. We could say that author has highlighted the genocidal nature of the Ustasha state quite well and effectively.  He fully understood that ideas could not be described and judged devoid of their consequences, and the consequence of ustashism was a major ideologically motivated genocide with at least 400,000 victims (Serbs, Jews, Roma), in the first Croatia of the 20^th Century.

On a critical note it could be said that the ideological components of ustashism are not sufficiently analyzed in the otherwise very successful study.  They are only briefly discussed (pp. 25-30, Serbian ed, and pp. 34-39 English ed.). An outline for such a project was done by legal historian Ferdo Culinovic in his book Okupatorska podjela Jugoslavije, (Belgrade, 1970), particularly pp. 22-42; 178-191, and still more needs to be done.

This successfully written scholarly work fills the gap on the topic of ustashism in Croatia.  The book is fluently written and well documented by the skilful and expert use of both primary and secondary sources that are listed in selected bibliography.  It is a must for every scholarly library and for everyone interested in the Balkans and its turbulent history, particularly in the modern Croatian history.

Back to Croatia Page                   Back to Home Page