"The South Slavs" by C. Michael McAdams and Vincent F. Bonelli Chapter 17: AMERICA’ S ETHNIC POLITICS EDITED BY JOSEPH S. ROUCEK AND BERNARD EISENBERG CONTRIBUTIONS IN ETHNIC STUDIES, NUMBER 5 GREENWOOD PRESS WESTPORT, CONNECTICUT • LONDON, ENGLAND
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Main entry under title: Americas ethnic politics. (Contributions in ethnic studies, ISSN 0196-7088 no. 5) Bibliography: I. Minorities--United States--Political activity--Addresses, essays, lectures. 2. United States--Politics and government--Addresses, essays, lectures. I. Roucek, Joseph Slabey. 1902-. Ii.
Eisenberg, Bernard. 1935- . III. Series. Copyright 1982 by Joseph S. Roucek Library of Congress Catalog Card Number:
81-986 First published in 1982 Greenwood Press
C. MICHAEL McADAMS and VINCENT F. BONELLI The South Slavs, Chapter 17
INTRODUCTION The exploration of South Slavic politics in America would seem to be a simple undertaking to the casual observer. One might begin by chronicling the arrival of the South Slavs in America; describing the formation of their communities, churches, and political organizations; listing their grievances and goals; and, finally, herald the arrival of political maturity by listing various elected officials of South Slav descent at the state and local levels. In view of the fact that fewer than one million South Slavs of all generations live in North America, there has been a sizable political contribution in the form of elected officials. As for political activity, few nationalities show more fervor for politics than do the South Slavs. Unfortunately, elected South Slavic officials and South Slavic political activity have almost nothing in common. Today’s best-known political figures of South Slavic descent were, for the most part, elected with little or no support from South Slavic political organizations. The recent mayor of Chicago, Michael Bilandic, a Croatian American, was supported primarily by the Irish "machine "of his predecessor, Mayor Richard Daley. Former Minnesota Governor Rudy Perpich, who came to office from the lieutenant governor’s seat, took much of his support from Scandinavians. Although Ohio Lieutenant Governor George Voinovich enjoys the support of a wide range of Slavic groups, he will directly challenge the controversial "Irish Croatian" Dennis Kucinich of Cleveland who was given his electoral edge by that city’s black community. With a South Slavic population of fewer than 120,000 out of twenty-two million, California may have the highest per capita South Slavic representation in politics with no fewer than six members of the state legislature during the 1970s. Yet California’s first woman senator, Rose Ann Vuich, was elected by farmers, not her fellow Serbian Americans. The dean of the legislature, Vincent Thomas, a Croatian, remained in office from 1940 until 1978 primarily by avoiding South Slavic politics in his district. And Assembly Minority Whip Michael Antonovich may well have lost the lieutenant governorship of the state because his fellow Croatian Americans would not cross party lines to vote for him in the primary election even though almost all planned to vote against his Democratic opponent in the general election of 1978. Men and women of South Slavic descent who have been elected to high office in the United States were elected for many of the same reasons Irish, Italian, or black candidates were elected: local political issues, personality, the drive to win, and, in the opinion of their opponents, sheer luck. From the "machine" politics of Chicago’s Bilandic to the populism of Cleveland’s Kucinich, each was elected as an individual based upon his or her own merits, the political climate of the time, the groundswell of popular support, or the precision of the media campaign. Few, if any, were elected because of ethnicity and very few, indeed, received inordinate support from members of their own ethnic group. Of the feverish political activity that takes place in the South Slavic communities of America, little has to do with American politics. The politically involved American of South Slavic descent is more likely to be concerned with the government’s attitude toward Yugoslavia than the city budget or the school busing debate. South Slavic politics in America is not an American institution born of a foreign seed, but rather a transplanted institution, ripe with the fruit of a thousand years’ history. Within it are all of the complexities, peculiarities, and myths that have come to be called "Balkan intrigue."
THE SOUTH SLAVS The exploration of any topic dealing with the South Slavs must be prefaced with a definition of South Slavic ethnicity. The South Slavs are not Austro-Hungarians, European Turks, Dalmatian Italians, "Sclavonians," or Yugoslavs. They are six separate and distinct nationalities linked by linguistic similarity and occasionally by political borders. Within the six nations, Bulgaria, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia, some have strong religious and cultural ties, such as the Serbians and the Montenegrins or the Bulgarians and the Macedonians. Others, notably the Croatians and Serbians, have strong religious and cultural differences. It is this chessboard pattern of affinity and divergency which forms the basis of the complex world known as South Slavic politics. 1 Since 1918 all of the South Slavic nations, with the exception of Bulgaria, have been linked by a single political state called Yugoslavia (South Slavia). It has since become acceptable to treat Bulgarians as distinct from those South Slavic nations within Yugoslavia and this study will not attempt to deal with the rich ethnic and political background of the Bulgars, which is a major topic in itself.2 It is probable that the South Slavs were never a single ethnic unit and the adaptation of the Slavic tongue to form the South Slavic group of languages is perhaps the only sustained link between these nations since the sixth century. When the South Slavs reached their present Balkan homelands during the seventh century, they were already well organized into the nations we know today. Indeed, there is great evidence of both Croatian and Serbian nation-states in north Central Europe long before the great southern migrations.3 The Croatians were the first to firmly establish themselves in the Balkans, occupying Dalmatia during the reign of Heraclius (610-641). Pope Agatho converted the entire nation to Christianity by treaty in 680 and the Croatians have remained a predominately Roman Catholic people.4 In 925 King Tomislav united all Croatian lands into a single state of some 100,000 square kilometers and two million people. The kingdom reached the peak of its power under Petar Kresimir (1058-1074) but declined rapidly thereafter. After a bloody civil war the crown passed to the king of Hungary in 1102 in a personal union which allowed Croatia to remain an independent kingdom while sharing a monarch with the Magyars.5 The Turks invaded Croatia in 1415 and had conquered Bosnia by 1463. When King Louis II died after the ill-fated battle of Mahcz in 1527, the Croatian nobility offered the crown to the Habsburgs who held it until 1918. 6 Like the Croatians, the Slovenians are a western-oriented, predominately Roman Catholic nation. With other Slavic tribes, they moved westward from their original homeland beyond the Carpathians during the sixth and seventh centuries and eventually moved south to occupy some 70,000 square kilometers of Lombard territory by the mid-ninth century. While enjoying a brief period of independence, constant attacks from outside forces led the Slovenian people to ask for the protection of Bavaria, which led to their eventual inclusion in the Holy Roman Empire.7 Although subjected to rule by German lords for much of their history, the Slovenians retained their heritage and ethnic identity. German exploitation and the lack of protection from the Turks led the Slovenes to formulate a number of revolts against individual landlords, the largest of which occurred in 1515. Habsburg rule over Slovenia was briefly interrupted hy the French occupation of Illyria and Dalmatia in 1806. Although short-lived, the occupation caused a national reawakening of Slovenian ethnic pride and a new sense of nationalism in both Slovenia and Croatia which would eventually lead to the formation of Yugoslavia.8 The Serbian tribes settled the lands southeast of Croatia during the seventh century but spent most of their history, up to the eleventh century, under the control of Bulgaria or Byzantium. From its earliest times Serbia was an eastern-oriented nation. Christianity came from the Byzantine Empire in the form of the eastern rite, which remains today as the Serbian Orthodox church. Eastern influence is also manifested in the Serbian use of the Cyrillic alphabet unlike the Croatian and Slovenian use of the Latin. By the twelfth century a single Serbian kingdom was formed under the leadership of the Grand Zupan Stephan Nemanja. Rapidly expanding in power, the Serbs took from Bulgaria what is now known as Serbia proper, including the site of the Serbian capital, Belgrade. Under the leadership of Tsar Stefan Dugan (1331-1355), Serbia defeated Bulgaria and Byzantium to become the most powerful state in the Balkans. But the empire was short-lived as Serbia was crushed on June 28, 1389 by the armies of Sultan Murad I at Kossovo. The date and place have become sacred to the Serbian people as reminders of their past glory and as a catalyst in their struggle for freedom. Although the Serbs were the first Balkan nation to revolt against the Turks, it was not until 1878 that Serbia gained complete independence from the Ottomans.9 Closely related to the Serbians by culture and history are the Montenegrins. As the Turks conquered one Balkan land after another, Montenegro ("Black Mountains") refused to fall during four hundred years of Turkish assaults. The tiny nation became a haven for fleeing Albanians and Serbs, as well as an international symbol of determination in the face of aggression. Early in the sixteenth century Montenegro became a theocracy ruled by a council of elected Orthodox bishops. In 1697 the succession was restricted to a single family, that of Danilo Petrovich Njegus. The principality became a kingdom in 1910 and remained so until 1918 although King Nicholas I was forced to abandon the country at the outbreak of war in 1914. 10 As a part of the Bulgarian nationality, the Macedonian people have their roots in southern Russia. Under the leadership of Simeon (893-927) and Tsar Samuel (976-1014), the Bulgarians became a powerful kingdom accepting their language and Christian rite from the Orthodox world. Macedonia’s location was to bring about centuries of suffering for her people as the Byzantines, the Serbs, and the Turks invaded and conquered. Into modern times Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece, and Turkey would all claim Macedonia while Austria, Russia, and even Britain would control her fate. In 1876, with the slogan "Macedonia for the Macedonians," a revolt was launched against the Turks which led to the formation of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO) in 1893. The Balkan wars of 1912-1913 saw a unified effort by the Montenegrins, Serbs, Greeks, and Bulgarians which succeeded in expelling the Turks from the Balkans. But the Macedonian people again saw their homeland become spoils of war as each of the "liberators" divided Macedonia among themselves. 11
SOUTH SLAVS IN AMERICA The tragic history of the South Slavic nations has led to massive immigration of their peoples throughout history. Due to their maritime heritage, the Croatians were the first to come to America and have been, by far, the most numerous of all South Slavs to come to North America. Dalmatian Croatians, especially the residents of the city-state of Ragusa (Dubrovnik), gained international reputations as sailors and navigators and crewed many early ships seeking trade routes to the Indies. 12 Early Croatian immigrants included Father Ivan Ratkaj (1647-1683) who served as a missionary in Mexico and Father Ferdinand Konscak (1703-1759) whose exploration of Baja California first proved that California was not an island. 13 Since then, Croatians have accounted for 75 percent of all South Slavic immigrants to North America. Of the remaining 25 percent, many were Serbians (persons of the Serbian Orthodox faith) from Croatia or Montenegro. The Slovenes, given their small population in Europe, have given America far more immigrants per capita than any other Balkan nation. Unlike many early immigrant groups, the South Slavs came as individuals, not colonies or companies. By the time of the American Revolution, there was only one sizable concentration of Croatian fishermen around New Orleans to represent the South Slavs in America. 14 Later, colonies would form in San Francisco, Pennsylvania, and northern Ohio. From these points the immigrants would move in all directions, leaving no state untouched. Those of the 1848-1900 period worked the coal fields of Pennsylvania and the gold fields of California, providing much of the backbone for the American mining industry. Their expertise as miners led to sizable South Slavic concentrations in such unlikely places as Bisbee, Arizona, Crested Butte, Colorado, Lewistown, Montana, and the Iron Range of Minnesota. In California, Nevada, and Pennsylvania there are few, if any, mining communities where the influence of these early immigrants cannot be found. It was with mining money that the first South Slavic organization in the New World, the Slavonic Illyric Mutual and Benevolent Society, was founded in San Francisco in 1857 by Dalmatian immigrants. In the Mother Lode town of Jackson, California, North America’s first Serbian Orthodox church was built to serve the miners in I894. 15 The period of 1880 to 1914 saw the greatest period of immigration growth for most nationalities, including Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes. Following in the footsteps of earlier groups, immigrants came to Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and a place just south of San Francisco called Watsonville but renamed "New Dalmatia" by Jack London. This wave brought not only the unskilled laborer and the fisherman, but also many talented and well-educated arrivals as well. A Serbian immigrant named Michael Pupin (1858-1935) arrived in New York in 1874 with five cents, the clothes on his back, and a mind for electronics. He studied at Columbia and became one of America’s leading electronic engineers.16 Ten years later Nikola Tesla (1856-1943), who described himself as a "Serbian from Croatia," arrived with one cent less than Pupin, a couple of poems, some technical articles, and a design for a flying machine. He would become one of America’s greatest, if least known, scientists. Seeking only knowledge and pure invention, he allowed such men as George Westinghouse and Thomas Edison to market his findings and reap the profits therefrom. The man who almost singly brought mass electrification to the North American continent with his polyphase current system would die a pauper in a New York hotel on January 7, l943. 17 This period also saw the arrival of Joe Vlasic and Martin J. Bogdanovic, both Croatians who would enter the food marketing business to become Vlasic and Star-Kist food giants. 18 One of the last arrivals prior to the beginning of World War I was a young Slovenian named Louis Adamic (1899-1951), who worked in factories, toiled in the mines, and served as a soldier just as thousands of other immigrants had before him. In 1928 he became one of the first South Slavic immigrants hired as an English-language journalist. His first book, Dynamite, was published in 1931. His second work, Laughing in the Jungle, earned him a Guggenheim Fellowship to study in his native Slovenia where he wrote his greatest work, The Native’s Return. He became one of America’s best-known writers during the interwar period and was by far the best-known Slavic-American author. Many of his dozen major books deal with some aspect of his native land, South Slavic ethnicity, or his own pronounced views on labor and socialism. He was a major supporter of the Communist takeover of Yugoslavia and was scorned by many of his own people during his latter years at the height of anti-Communist feelings in America . 19
THE POLITICS OF NATIONALISM The success of ethnic politics is determined by the degree of group unity. Among the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes in America, there were divisions based upon religious and cultural differences. Croats and Slovenes were influenced by the Austrian and Hungarian cultures while the Serbs had Turkish traditions. Religious differences also existed, with the Croatians and Slovenes principally Roman Catholic and the Serbs Eastern Orthodox. Added to this were European feuds brought to America-such as the Serb-Croatian, which further expanded the divisions of the South Slavs.20 Yet, Croatian and Serbian Americans, who today tell their children that they have been fighting each other for some time, actually dealt with each other in mutual respect and a sense of distant kinship prior to World War I. What does emerge, however, is a lack of cohesiveness which inhibits political action. During the great period of the South Slavic communities in America (1870s-1880s), the politics of the "old country" had little effect on the immigrant, who often had little, if any, knowledge of his own ethnic background other than very localized, regional loyalties. Most tended to associate with those who had some religious, cultural, or dialectic affinity, but not necessarily to the exclusion of those who did not. Participation in American political life is fairly recent due to the late naturalization of the South Slavs. 21 Further, coming from rural areas, speaking little or no English, and displaying a lack of familiarity with Anglo-Saxon traditions of American society, they had difficulty fitting into the urban setting. An important factor in assessing ethnic political activity of any group is an understanding of the group’s purpose. The South Slavs of the pre-World War I period were highly organized into a series of fraternal organizations. This trend began with a San Francisco-based society, a Slavonian fraternal organization, founded in 1857. From this beginning, the number of groups grew to several thousand.22 Their activities were oriented toward cultural and mutual aid programs.23 In the cultural areas, there were singing and dramatic clubs, as well as those for gymnastics and physical training. Other organizations concerned themselves with entertainment, spiritual needs, and assistance to relatives and friends.24 The Croatian Fraternal Union maintained an educational fund and also promoted Americanization. All organizations seem to have a vague political function, although economic reasons seem to be the major focus of their activities. These societies were formed as mutual benefit unions, as they combined the services of insurance companies and associations to assist unemployed and disabled workers.25 Significant here are the Carniolian Slovenian Catholic Union (1904), the Slovenian Workingmen’s Benefit Association (1908), and the Slovenian National Benefit Society (1904). Another force of influence in South Slavic communities was the press. Nationwide there were six Serbian, nine Croatian, and ten Slovene newspapers.26 Yet, they provided little political influence since their major concerns were commercial and social in nature, dealing with wedding announcements and visits of prominent individuals from their homeland.27 World War I was an important turning point in both the political activity and the unity of South Slavic groups. From the beginning of the war, President Woodrow Wilson’s concern for Eastern Europeans, encouraged Serbian, Croatian, and Slovenian leaders.28 In March 1915, representatives of Serb, Croat, and Slovene organizations in the United States met in Chicago and called for the union of the South Slav areas within the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the independent Serbian kingdom into a unified state. Although the convention was not able to unite all the South Slav groups, it at least gave them a basis of cooperation. From this effort came the Yugoslav National Council which was established under the leadership of Don Niko Grskovic and was affiliated with the London Yugoslav Committee. The purpose of the Yugoslav National Council was to inform and influence the American people, recruit for war, and raise money.29 This proved to be effective as thousands of South Slavs joined either the Serbian army or the American army.30 In fact, ten thousand Serbian immigrants returned from the United States, many of whom left $12-a-day jobs to fight for the Serbian cause. 30 World War I proved to be the breaking point for the Austro-Hungarian Empire and most Slavic peoples under its domain took advantage of the war to prepare for independence. Within each of the South Slavic nations there was a movement toward a single South Slavic (Yugoslav) state, although in most it remained a minority opinion. It was the South Slavs in exile or those who immigrated who would form the true "Yugoslav movement." Here we see the intense effort put forward by the South Slavic groups in America which marked the high point of their political activity, temporarily overcoming ethnic differences. The basis for this development was the emergence of their state- Yugoslavia-as Slovenians, Serbians, and Croatians helped prepare the way for its founding.32 Numerous rallies were held by these groups in the United States promoting the establishment of Yugoslavia.33 There was little discussion within the Yugoslav movement regarding the actual form the government would take upon unification. Such details were deemed divisive during wartime. The South Slavs, obviously, were interested in the future of their European homeland. To this end, an important role was played by the American group, the Croatian Alliance, established in 1912 by the Reverend Nikola Grskovic, who in 1909 assumed the important post of editor of Zajednicar (Unifier), the official organ of the National Croatian Union. The main purpose of the Croatian Alliance was to support the Croatian revolt against Austria-Hungary and an appeal was made to all Croats in America. Yet the Reverend Grskovic, also known as Don Niko, moved away from limited Croatian nationalism as he called for a union of Croats, Serbs, and Slovenes. 34 Added to this was the effort of the Yugoslav National Council which supported the concept of a united Yugoslavia on the basis of equality for all groups. Prominent South Slavic Americans, such as Columbia University Professor Michael Pupin, Dr. Ante Biankini, Don Niko, and Gabro Racki, all supported a fully independent Yugoslavia.35 At the same time, the Slovenian Republican Alliance was established by the Slovenes in America. Their primary objective was the establishment of a Yugoslav federal republic giving Slovenes not only political rights, but also specific boundaries according to ethnic origins. 36 A republican concept was well recognized by Slovenian immigrants who sought its achievement through the formation of a free and independent tripartite state.37 Etfin Kristan, chairman of the Slovenian group, carried the fight for Yugoslav rights to the floor of the United States Senate. In 1919 Kristan defended Yugoslav independence before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.38 Considering the views of the South Slavs, many supporters of the Yugoslav movement were shocked to learn in July 1917 that the Yugoslav Committee in London had promised all South Slavic lands to the Crown of Karageorgevich, the Serbian dynasty.39 The Serbian National Federation of Pittsburgh supported the post-World War I government. At the same time, a large group of American Croats supported the autonomy demands of most Croats in Yugoslavia.40 After World War I a split among American South Slavs emerged concerning the nature of the new state. 41 When the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes was formed in 1918, it included the Kingdom of Serbia and that part of Macedonia taken during the Balkan wars-the Kingdom of Montenegro, the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia, the Vojvodina, Slovenia, and Bosnia and Hercegovina. Additionally, there were dozens of national minorities, including thousands of Albanians and a sizable German population. The new state had three major languages, a half-dozen minor languages, three major religions, and two alphabets. Excluded from the new state were some 600,000 Croatians and Slovenians whose lands were given to Italy in November 1920 by the new Yugoslav government.42 From the beginning, all hopes of national equality were quashed as the Serbian king, Alexander (Karadjordjevic), ruled from Belgrade, the Serbian capital, with the automatic approval of the Serbian Parliament, the Skupstina. Serbian law became the law of the land and the Serbian constitution remained in effect until 1921 when it was replaced by a similar Yugoslav constitution on Saint Vitus Day (June 15), the Serbian national holiday. Serbia and other nations, including the League of Nations, continued to refer to all South Slavic lands as Serbia or "Greater Serbia." Croatian and Slovenian leaders were imprisoned for much of the period prior to 1928 when the Croatian Peasant party chief, Stephan Radic, first led his Croatian delegation into the Belgrade Parliament. On June 20 of that year a Serbian deputy opened fire on the floor of Parliament killing two Croatian deputies and wounding three more, including Radic who later died of his wounds. King Alexander followed this blow by declaring himself dictator, abolishing all political parties, freedom of the press, and all civil liberties on January 6, 1929. Those opposition leaders who were not arrested outright, fled the country. Among them were the leaders of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization and a new revolutionary group known as the Ustase-Croatian Liberation Movement who took their revenge in 1934 with the assassination of Alexander.43 Out of hatred for the Alexandrian dictatorship grew the Croatian Circle, the first of many American organizations devoted to the overthrow of any Yugoslav government. Formed in response to the murder of Radic, the Croatian Circle was organized on August 23, 1928 in New York and was dedicated to the establishment of an independent Croatian state. The movement quickly spread throughout the United States and led to the formation of a Croatian National Council of North America, which included Canada. By 1933 the organization had enough strength to present President Roosevelt with a memorandum bearing the signatures of 250,000 Croatians. The memorandum was received by the Pope on October 24 of that year and on October 26 the document was delivered to the League of Nations in Geneva.44 A major factor in the rapid success of the Croatian nationalists was the Yugoslav blunder of murdering Dr. Milan Sufflay, an internationally known intellectual. His death brought the Croatians public support from such figures as Albert Einstein and Thomas Mann and worldwide recognition of the Croatian struggle. Throughout the dictatorship of Alexander, the Croatian Peasant party and its leaders, Stephan Radic and his successor Vladko Macek, were the undisputed masters of the Croatian political arena. The hallmark of the Peasant movement was nonviolence and passive resistance to authority. The murder of Radic and the formation of the Ustase movement split the Croatian Circle in 1934 as many Croatians rejected pacifism for the militancy of a new American organization called the Domobrans (Home Defenders). The Domobrans actively supported the Ustase movement and their Macedonian allies who succeeded in ending the dictatorship, and the King, in 1934. The Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO) itself had a sizable following in the United States given the number of Macedonians (estimated to be 61,813 by 1920) in the country. IMRO leader Srebren Petrov arrived in the United States in 1921 and immediately set out to organize the Bulgarian community against Yugoslavia. In October 1922 a first national congress of Macedonian exiles was held in Indiana resulting in the formation of the Union of Macedonian Political Organizations (MPO) which was, like the Croatian National Congress, a blanket organization for a number of smaller groups. The MPO began publication of its Makedonska Tribuna in 1926 and today it remains the only Bulgarian-language weekly outside Bulgaria. 45 The most literate of all South Slavic peoples, the Slovenians quickly established a number of newspapers in America reflecting the diverse political spectrum within the country. Socialism, conceptually, took root in Slovenia at an early date often conflicting with clerical parties. Since clerical versus anti-clerical politics dominated the Slovenian scene, the question of Yugoslavism versus independence was less evident than in the Croatian or Macedonian communities. As a result, the Yugoslav movement remained active in the Slovenian-American community long after most other non-Serbs had abandoned all hope for a unified South Slavic state.46 Serbian Americans were, for the most part, happy with the Royalist government of Yugoslavia which had brought Serbia to the peak of its power and glory in modern times. A primary factor in the unified support of the Yugoslav government among Serbians was the Serbian Orthodox Church in America. As early as 1916 the Serbs had sought to separate themselves from the jurisdiction of the Russian Orthodox Church in America. In 1921 the Serbian Orthodox Church in America was founded owing its sole allegiance to Belgrade. This situation endured until 1963. Another pillar of Serbianism in America was the Serbian National Federation (Srpski Narodni Savez-SNF). Like the Croatian Fraternal Union (CFU), the SNF was founded as a union of smaller groups whose primary goals were social welfare, the preservation of culture, and fraternalism. But unlike the CFU, the SNF openly proclaimed its political and religious ties to Belgrade as the "Pillar of Serbianism in America and a fortress of the thoughts of St. Sava." Sometimes splitting the SNF were a number of leftist groups including the Yugoslav Section of the Socialist Workers’ party, the Workers’ party or even the Communist party whose Yugoslav section made its debut in 1935 under the leadership of Joso Rajnovich.
WORLD WAR II AND SOUTH SLAVIC POLITICAL ACTIVITY American South Slavs do not regard themselves as colonies of their European homeland, yet, they obviously kept in close touch with events there.47 Alexander’s dictatorship was followed by a regency which did little or nothing to improve the situation for Yugoslavia’s non-Serbian nations. World War II was to prove to be as divisive a factor as World War I, although there would be similar attempts to unify the various groups to achieve a unity among the South Slavs. This would not be an easy task, for Slovenians appeared indifferent, and Catholic Croats were hostile toward Orthodox Serbs.48 On the eve of World War II, South Slavic Americans were divided into antagonistic groups once again reflecting European conditions. But the growing might of Italy and Germany, as well as the power of the exiled Croatian and Macedonian liberation movements, brought about a realization within the Serbian leadership that Yugoslavia could not survive the coming war without the support of its people. After years of negotiation, the Croatians were finally granted full autonomy within the Yugoslav state in 1939. But this proved to be too little too late. The Croatians now demanded full independence and other nations within the country saw the Croatian victory as a first step toward their own autonomy from Belgrade. Yugoslavia joined the Axis on March 25, 1941 only to have the government overthrown by a coup d’etat led by Serbian Air Force officers and the British Special Operations Executive. Yugoslavia’s opposition to Nazi ambitions resulted from the pressures applied by various organizations of South Slavic immigrants in the United States and the British dominions. 49 The new government hoped to maintain good relations with the Reich and immediately sent envoys to Germany to avoid war. Hitler did not wait for the delegation, launching a full-scale invasion on the morning of April 6, 194l. 50 The Croatians seized the opportunity to proclaim an Independent State of Croatia which was divided into German and Italian zones of influence, while the remainder of Yugoslavia was divided among Germany, Italy, Bulgaria, and Hungary. Later a quasi-autonomous government was established in Serbia under strict German control. Within days of capitulation, fighting broke out between Serbian Royalists, known as Cetniks, and the new Croatian government. After the German attack on the Soviet Union, the Communist partisans joined the fray on the side of the Cetniks, but soon turned on them as well. At one point or another some twenty different military organizations were engaged in combat operations during World War II in what had been Yugoslavia. 51 There were bitter recriminations between the Pan-Serbian groups and the Croatians. The latter were blamed for Yugoslavia’s military collapse. This was the beginning of a concerted Pan-Serbian campaign against the Croatians which reached the United States through the Yugoslav legation headed by Konstantin Fotich.52 All this led "to the confusion of nearly a million Yugoslav Americans and to the detriment of the American war effort."53 Fotich brought antagonism between Serbian-American and Croatian-American communities to an all-time high as he went about denouncing leaders of the Croatian state as "quislings."54 He visited the Yugoslav communities in New York, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Los Angeles, and San Francisco, but most Serbian, Croatian, and Slovenian Americans avoided him.55 A career diplomat, Fotich’s aristocratic manner was not well received by American South Slavs. Only one immigrant group accepted him-the Serbian National Union-apparently the result of Fotich’s Pan-Serbian approach.56 What was Fotich seeking to accomplish? He was an opportunist and noted that he would resign if Yugoslavia accepted the Hitler pact. Fotich believed that if he resigned to protest the pact’s acceptance, the United States would recognize him as representative of Yugoslavia. He would then be in control of Yugoslavia’s millions in the United States and saw himself as the man-of-the-hour in the Balkans.57 His plan did not work because Yugoslavia did not capitulate to Hitler but revolted and forced out the pro-Hitler regime. Now Fotich was the minister of a new government and Yugoslav Americans were enthusiastic about the change. Fotich was more acceptable to groups which formerly had sought to avoid him.58 Although there was continued fragmentation of effort among the Serbian, Croatian, and Slovenian groups in the United States, there were also movements toward unification of activities. In 1943 the United Committee of South Slavic Americans was formed which brought together the majority of the Yugoslav element. This organization developed a ten-point program under the leadership of its president, Louis Adamic, to unite South Slavs behind President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s war effort, and to aid the partisan movement in the Balkans.59 Further, it took the lead in explaining to the government and the people of the United States the forces behind the struggle for Yugoslavia and control of the country between the pro-Axis forces and Tito’s Communist-backed partisans. The United Committee was also instrumental in selling $60 million in war bonds among the South Slavs.60 The Yugoslav Relief Committee also provided aid for its kinsmen in Europe. At the end of the war, the American Association for the Reconstruction in Yugoslavia (AARY) was established to continue the work of the Yugoslav Relief Committee. After 1945 the AARY continued its operation concerning the problems of the postwar period. It sought to foster unity among Americans of South Slavic descent with the intent of strengthening both the United States and the United Nations in their quest for world peace. Louis Adamic observed that Yugoslav Americans were politically progressive. This, he noted, was well-illustrated by Nikola Tesla, who stated in 1942 that the war had to result in a new world, in which the weak would not be exploited by the strong or good by evil; where the poor would not be abused by the rich; where the arts and sciences would be used for the betterment of mankind. The emerging new world, Tesla concluded, would be one of free nations all equal to each other. 61 It was the further goal of the AARY to encourage full participation of South Slavic Americans to foster political, social, economic, and ethnic democracy in the United States. Finally, the organization had the goal of promoting a better understanding of the South Slavic peoples in the United States. 62 Another effort toward unity of action was the American Slav Congress, which attempted to bring about, for the first time, a common understanding between Slavic groups.63 The First American Slav Congress was scheduled to meet in Pittsburgh, in November 1941, to unite the efforts of the Slavic groups during World War II. There was a delay, however, because some groups suspected the intentions of the Congress. The question was Communist infiltration. On this issue, the Serb National Federation withdrew. But finally the body was organized and the first session was held on April 25, 1942, composed of religious, cultural, fraternal, athletic, social, and trade union organizations. The South Slavs were represented in these areas by the Serbs and Croats.64 Later Slav congresses had a decidedly political flavor. For example, the Second, in 1944, worked for the reelection of President Roosevelt. The Fourth, in 1948, pledged to support Progressive presidential candidate Henry Wallace. By 1948 the American Slav Congress, apparently completely infiltrated by Communist supporters, witnessed the withdrawal of all major Slavic American organizations including those representing the South Slavs. The leaders of the Congress were not too concerned: they merely changed their claim from representing 15 million Slavic Americans to 10 million. 65 The failure of the American Slav Congress was the result of friction and differences arising from divisions of a political, social, or religious nature. These differences were evident even among the smallest groups such as the Serbs and Croats.66 This divisiveness continued through World War II and into the postwar period.67
NATIONALISM IN THE POSTWAR ERA When the war ended with Tito’s partisans riding into Belgrade on Russian tanks, only the pan-Slavic Congress and such leftists as Louis Adamic found themselves on the winning side of the multifaceted conflict. The Croatians, branded as traitors and allied with the Germans, again found themselves ruled from Belgrade. During World War II, Zajednicar of the National Croatian Union, in its English section, espoused the cause of Yugoslav freedom and unity while the Croat section apologized for Axis Croatia. The Croatian Home Defense, with headquarters in Pittsburgh, favored the fascist government of Dr. Ante Pavelich; but not the Serbs, who resented Pavelich’s anti-Serbian posture. The Serbs wanted a state under their direction excluding the Croats. On February 27, 1949, the United American Croatians held their Second Congress in Chicago and adopted a resolution, restating similar principles of the First Congress held on September 2, 1946, opposing fascism and communism while calling for a free state of Croatia.68 World War II left the Serbian-American community divided between Royalists and the supporters of Tito’s partisans. The Serbian National Federation, however, continued to support the crown throughout the postwar era as most of the openly pro-Communist groups died out due to the popular mood of the country. Its newspaper, American Srborbran, is America’s largest Serbian-language newspaper and is considered by many to be the only true voice of the Serbian community in North America. With the exception of a sensational series of bombings at six Yugoslav consulates and embassies in Washington, New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Ottawa, and Toronto, on the morning of July 29, 1967, aggressive political activity on the part of Serbian Americans was rare until the late 1970s. This was perhaps most graphically illustrated in March 1978 when Marshal Tito visited Washington, D.C. as the guest of President Carter. Some two thousand Croatians and Albanians protested at the White House while thousands more marched at other locations throughout the United States. Fewer than fifty Serbians appeared in Washington during the visit. The pockets of anti-Communist activists within the Serbian-American community have been subjected to the same intimidation and violence by the Yugoslav Secret Police as the Croatian exiles. Croatians suffered the brunt of postwar reprisals and for that reason postwar political activism among South Slavs has been exclusively the domain of the Croatians. In those countries where Croatian exiles resided, Spain or the United States, they were militant, militaristic, and violently anti-Communist. Because of this militancy, these exiles led the Croatian Liberation Movement well into the 1960s. Also because of their militancy, they were the primary targets of the Yugoslav Secret Police. It was the murders of a Serbian editor, Dragisa Kasikovic, and a nine-year-old girl who witnessed the killing, which brought the first reports in the American press that the Yugoslav Secret Police (U DBa) was, in fact, responsible. It was perhaps the brutality of the act, Kasikovic was bludgeoned beyond recognition and the child’s throat was slashed, that moved the press to investigate the June 1977 Chicago killings in more detail. Since that time a number of noted journalists, including Jack Anderson, Les Witten, and Martin Abend have exposed further UDBa activity in America. Finally, after years of denial, a secret U.S. Senate report was leaked by Jack Anderson on August 9, 1979 admitting that the State Department and the FBI had given the UDBa virtual license in dealing with anti-Yugoslav elements. 69
THE SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH SINCE 1963 There were two major factors accounting for the relative political quiet within the Serbian-American community during the 1960s and 1970s. The first was the nature of Serbian activism. Few Serbians, in America or elsewhere, wish to see Yugoslavia destroyed since Serbia has benefitted from the union more than any other nation. Serbian-American opposition to a particular leader or political party while supporting the continued concept of a Yugoslav federation can never be as militant or viewed as politically significant when compared to Croatian nationalist movements in America which seek to destroy every vestige of Yugoslavism. The second factor was an overwhelming preoccupation with the future of the Serbian Orthodox Church in America. By 1961 the Serbian Orthodox Church in America had grown to seventy-three parishes with over 130,000 members from Pennsylvania to California. In May 1963 the American Bishop Dionisije was suspended by the Assembly of Bishops in Belgrade for demanding autonomy for the North American Church. He refused to accept suspension and was unfrocked in March 1964. Three bishops replaced him, dividing the continent into three dioceses rather than one. All of the new bishops were graduates of the University of Belgrade and were loyal to the Belgrade hierarchy, which was, according to the followers of Dionisije, controlled by Communists. The Dionisije faction held a congress at Libertyville, Illinois in 1963 and officially announced the separation of the Serbian Orthodox Church in North America from the mother church in Yugoslavia. Taking some one-third of the faithful with him, Dionisije set out to build a new community complete with its own newspapers and church properties, including several properties claimed by the Belgrade church. Disputes over various properties became public when representatives of the Belgrade faction, primarily American-born citizens, took the dissident faction to court, beginning one of the most regrettable episodes in Serbian-American history. The primarily Yugoslav-born, postwar dissident faction filed counter suits and eventually violence erupted. After one incident the courts padlocked the beautiful Cathedral of St. Sava in Cleveland, Ohio so that none could make use of it. The dispute finally reached the United States Supreme Court in 1976, but little was solved as the Court ruled that civil courts could not interfere with internal church matters. In mid-1979 the last of the disputed properties was finally returned to the Belgrade-based church but a deep and lasting rift still scars the Serbian-American community. It affects every religious, political, and cultural organization and will leave the small Serbian-American community politically impotent until resolved.70
CONCLUSION Since the South Slavic peoples generally regard themselves as one of six distinct nationalities, there is no South Slavic body politic either in North America or abroad. At most there are a few individuals who have temporarily set aside cultural, religious, and linguistic differences to strive for what they consider to be a common good. 71 World War I and World War II did promote attempts at unity as the South Slavs fought for a common goal-an independent Yugoslavia. There were political motives attached to some organizational attempts, as illustrated by the American Association for the Reconstruction in Yugoslavia and the American Slav Congress. Group differences, however, prevented a realization of group political power. These divisions negate the influence of these people upon host countries such as the United States. While many Americans of South Slavic descent have been elected to various offices throughout the United States and Canada, South Slavic politics is, for better or worse, a truly international phenomenon. It will remain international as long as the majority of South Slavic Americans look to the Balkans as their main political arena and regard North America as the continent which gave them freedom but in which they have little political interest as an ethnic entity. That regard for their ancient homelands is unlikely to change as long as Yugoslavia retains its current system of government and centralized framework. The Croatian and Albanian peoples, especially, have shown themselves willing to settle for nothing less than independence from Yugoslavia. Should the disintegration occur, it will happen only with the assistance, if not the instigation, of American and Canadian emigres. A review of the existing material well substantiates the fact that the South Slavs have little interest or power as an ethnic group. A joint study by Mark R. Levy and Michael S. Kramer indicates the problem is a lack of recognition as a political group. They use the generic term "Slav" rather than ethnic identification. Thus, we are not conscious of the South Slavs as a political entity, and they are not mentioned as a factor in elections as are Poles (who are Slavic), Italians, Jews, blacks, and Hispanics.72 Perhaps the establishment of independent Croatian and Slovenian states would give Croatian-American and Slovenian-American communities the support now enjoyed by other nationalities, such as Greek- or Irish-American communities. And, as in the case of Israel, supported by the American Jewish community, Croatian Americans and Slovenian Americans would become a major factor in the life and political future of their homeland, as well as American policy toward such a nation-state. But for now, the complex world of South Slavic politics will remain, in the eyes of most Americans, "Balkan intrigue."
NOTES 1. Joseph S. Roucek, ed., Central-Eastern Europe: Crucible of World Wars (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1970); Roucek, The Politics of The Balkans (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1939). 2. See L.A.D. Dellin, ed., Bulgaria (New York: Praeger, 1957); Stanley G. Evans, A Short History of Bulgaria (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1960); Nikolay G. Altankov, The Bulgarian-Americans (Palo Alto, Calif.: Ragusan Press, 1979). 3. On early migrations see: Francis Dvornik, The Slavs in European History and Civilization (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1962); Vladimir Dedijer et al., History of Yugoslavia (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974); Francis R. Preveden, A History of the Croatian People (New York: Philosophical Library, 1955). 4. Stephan Gazi, A History of Croatia (New York: Philosophical Library, 1973), p. 20. 5. See Stanko Guldescu, History of Medieval Croatia (The Hague: Mouton, 1964). 6. See Stanko Guldescu, The Croatian-Slavonian Kingdom 1526-I792 (The Hague: Mouton, 1970). 7. John A. Arnez, Slovenia in European Affairs (New York: League of Czechoslovak Society of America, 1958), pp. 26-39. 8. Ibid., pp. 40-63; George J. Prpic, "French Rule in Croatia, 1806-1813," in Balkan Studies (Thessaloniki, Greece, 1964): 221—76; Carole Rogel, The Slovenes and Yugoslavism (Boulder, Co: East European Quarterly, 1977). 9. See Michael B.
Petrovich, A History of Modern Serbia, 2 vols. (New York: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich, 1977), an excellent history of the period from 1804— 1918; 10. Although much has been
written about this tiny nation, including poetry by Alfred Tennyson (such as
"Montenegro"), a modern writer for the English-speaking South Slavic groups is
the former vice president of Yugoslavia who was later jailed by Tito: Milovan Djilas, Land
Without Justice (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1958); Montenegro (New York: Harcourt,
Brace, 1963); and Niegos: Poet, Prince, Bishop 11. See Ivan Mihailoff, Macedonia: A Switzerland of the Balkans (St. Louis, Mo.: Pearlstone Publ., 1950); Elizabeth Barker, Macedonia, Its Place in Balkan Power Politics (London: Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1950). 12. The definitive work is Francis W. Carter, Dubrovnik (Ragusa) A Classic City State (New York: Seminar, 1972). 13.George J. Prpic, "Rev. Juan M. Ratkay, S.J.., First Croatian Missionary in America (1647-1683)," Radovi Hrvatskoga Po vyesnog Instituta u Rimu II I-by, (Studies of the Croatian Historical Institute in Rome) (Rome, 1971), pp. 180-221; Prpic, "Rev. Ferdinand Konscak, S.J., A Croatian Missionary in California," Croatia Press XIII (New York, 1959), pp. 2-9. 14. Frank M. Lovrich, "Croatians in Louisiana," Journal of Croatian Studies VII-VIII (New York, 1967), pp. 3 1-163. 15. See Adam S. Eterovich, Dalmatians from Croatia and Montenegrin Serbs in the West and South, 1800-1900 (San Francisco: R. & E. Research, 1971); Eterovich, Yugoslavs of Nevada (San Francisco: R. & E. Research, 1973); and Eterovich, Yugoslav Survey of California, Nevada, Arizona and the South (San Francisco: R. & F. Research, 1971). R. & E. Research, now known as Ragusan Press of Palo Alto, California has published more monographs concerning South Slavic Americans than all other sources combined and holds files on thousands of South Slavic pioneers. 16. Michael Pupin, From Immigrant to Inventor (New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1922). This book is an autobiography which won Pupin the Pulitzer Prize. 17. See A. J. Beckhard, Nikola Tesla, Electrical Genius (London: Dobson, 1966); I. Hunt, Lightning in His Hands: The Life Story of Nikola Tesla (Denver, Co: Sage, 1964); John O’Neill, Prodigal Genius: The Life of Nikola Tesla (New York: Ives Washburn, 1944). 18. See Curtis Stadtfeld, The Vlasic Story (Olivet, Mich.: Olivet College Press, 1977). 19. Other books by Louis Adamic include Two Way Passage (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1941); What’s Your Name? (New York: Harper& Brothers, 1942);A Nation of Nations (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1945); and The Eagle and The Roots (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1952). 20. Richard Krikus, Pursuing the American Dream: White Ethnics and the New Populism (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1976), p. 166. 21. Gerold Gilbert Govorchin, Americans from Yugoslavia (Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1961), p. 277. 22. Joseph S. Roucek, "Yugoslav Americans," in One America, eds. Francis J. Brown and Joseph S. Roucek (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1952), p. 173. 23. Federal Writers’ Project, New York Panorama (New York: Random House, 1938), p. 1 b3. 24. Govorchin, Americans from Yugoslavia. p. III. 25. Ibid., p. 110. 26. Louis L. Gerson, The Hyphenate in Recent American Politics and Diplomacy (Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, l964), p. 265, Appendix, Table II. 27. Krickus, Pursuing the American Dream, p. 141. 28. Gerson, The Hyphenate, p. 70. 29. Ibid. 30. Roucek, One America, p. 170. 31. Louis Adamic, My Native Land (New York: Book Find Club, 1931), pp. 303-4. 32. Krickus, Pursuing the American Dream, p. 143. 33. Leonard Dinnerstein et al., Natives and Strangers. Ethnic Groups and the Building of America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979), p. 174. 34. Govorchin, Americans from Yugoslavia, p. 124. 35. Ibid., p. b25. 36. Ibid., pp. 124-25. 37. Adamic, My Native Land, p. 305. 38. Govorchin, Americans from Yugoslavia, pp. 124-25. 39. See Alex N. Dragnich, Serbia, Nikola Pasic and Yugoslavia (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1974). 40. Roucek, One America. p. 173. 41. Ibid. 42. See Drager R. Zivojinovic, America, Italy and the Birth of Yugoslavia (Boulder, Cob.: East European Quarterly, 1977). 43. On the 1918— 1928 period see Charles A. Beard and George Radin, The Balkan Pivot: Yugoslavia (New York: Macmillan, 1929); R.G.D. Laffan, Jugoslavia Since 1918 (London: Jugoslav Society, 1929). 44. On the Croatian Circle and the full text of the Memorandum see: Joseph Kraja, "The Croatian Circle 1928-1946: Chronology and Reminiscences," Journal of Croatian Studies V-VI (New York, 1965), pp. 145-204. 45. Altankov, Bulgarian Americans, pp. 68—71. 46. Arnez, Slovenia, pp. 139-71. 47. Govorchin, Americans from Yugoslavia. p. III. 48. Gerson, The Hyphenate, p. 164. 49. Adamic, My Native Land, p. 371. 50. See Jerome B. Hoptner, Yugoslavia in Crisis, 1934-1941 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1962); Dragisa N. Ristie, Yugoslavia’s Revolution of 1941 (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1966). 51. The dozens of books written about the Yugoslav theater during World War II include: Milovan Djilas, Wartime (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1977); Ahmet Djonlagic, Zarko Atanackovic, and Dusan Plenca, Yugoslavia in the Second World War (Belgrade: Interpress, 1967); Matteo J. Milazzo, The Chetnik Movement and the Yugoslav Resistance (Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1975); Walter R. Roberts, Tito, Mihailovic and the Allies 1941-1945 (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1973); Jozo Tomasevich, War and Revolution in Yugoslavia: 1941—1945, 3 vols. (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1975), vol. I, The Chetniks. 52. Adamic, My Native Land. p. 380. 53. Ibid. 54. Typical of the books of that period were: Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese, Martyrdom of the Serbs (Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese for the United States and Canada, 1943); Ruth Mitchell, The Serbs Choose War (Garden City,N.Y: Doubleday and Doran, 1943). 55. Adamic, My Native Land, p. 399. 56. Ibid., pp. 399-400. 57. Ibid., p. 400. 58. Ibid., p. 401. 59. Govorchin, Americans from Yugoslavia, p. 126. 60. Adamic, A Nation of Nations (New York: Harper & Brothers, 194S), p. 247. 61. Ibid., p. 249. 62. Govorchin, Americans from Yugoslavia, pp. 126-27. 63. Gerson, The Hyphenate, pp. 170, 176. 64. Ibid., pp. 168, 174. 65 .Ibid., p. 176. 66. Govorchin, Americans from Yugoslavia, p. 126. 67. Gerson, The Hyphenate, p. 254. 68. Roucek, One America, p. 174. 69. New York Times, August 9-10, 1979. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee maintained that the Yugoslavian government conducted extensive intelligence gathering in the United States to spy on and harass their citizens in this country. This was supposedly part of the tacit approval granted by the FBI, CIA, and the State Department. President Carter denied the allegations as not substantiated. In the case of the Yugoslavian government, this goes back to 1969, when at that time a confidential source advised the U.S. government that UDBa agents based here sought to destroy anti-Communist emigre groups. The report further alleged that the Yugoslav consul general in San Francisco engaged in attempts to monitor and intimidate Yugoslav citizens living in the United States and waged "war of threats and blackmail." The State Department took no action and the Senate report does not indicate whether the agents are still active. 70. See Djuro J. Vrga and Frank J. Fahey, Changes and Socio-Religious Conflict in an Ethnic Minority Group: The Serbian Orthodox Church in America (Palo Alto, Calif.: Ragusan Press, 1975). 71. For further exploration of the South Slavs in America see: Wayne Charles Miller, A Handbook of American Minorities (New York: New York University Press, 1976); George J. Prpic, The Croatian Immigrants in America (New York: Philosophical Library, 1971). 72. Mark R. Levy and Michael S. Kramer, The Ethnic Factor: How Minorities Decide Elections (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1973), pp. 140, 256-69.
RECOMMENDED READINGS
|