State Anti-Fascist Council for the National Liberation of Croatia
State Anti-Fascist Council for the National Liberation of Croatia (ZAVNOH) Zemaljsko antifašističko vijeće narodnog oslobođenja Hrvatske | |
---|---|
Unicameral | |
History | |
Founded | 13 June 1943 |
Disbanded | 25 July 1945 |
Succeeded by | People's Sabor of Croatia |
Leadership | |
President | |
Seats | 112 (1943) 166 (1944) |
The State Anti-Fascist Council for the National Liberation of Croatia (Zemaljsko antifašističko vijeće narodnog oslobođenja Hrvatske), commonly abbreviated ZAVNOH, was first convened on 13–14 June 1943 in
In addition to performing day-to-day regulatory and government tasks in the territory held by
Its work, ideas and decisions contributed to the leadership programme of the League of Communists of Croatia, culminating in the 1971 Croatian Spring. ZAVNOH's decisions were then used to justify newly introduced policies seeking to reform the Yugoslav federation and promote Croatian interests. The 1990 Constitution of Croatia, adopted shortly before the declaration of Croatian independence, cites ZAVNOH in its preamble as a foundation of Croatian statehood.
Background
Axis invasion of Yugoslavia
Seeking retribution for their withdrawal from the
The Nazis turned to the
Partisan resistance
With defeat imminent, the
The Serb population living in the
Establishment of the AVNOJ
In November 1942, the Partisans captured the town of Bihać and secured a large part of western Bosnia, Dalmatia and Lika. [23] On 26 and 27 November,[24] the pan-Yugoslav Anti-Fascist Council for the National Liberation of Yugoslavia (Antifašističko vijeće narodnog oslobođenja Jugoslavije, AVNOJ) was established in Bihać at the urging of Tito and the KPJ. At its first session, the AVNOJ adopted a multi-ethnic federal state as the basis for the country's future government[25] but did not determine the post-war system of government.[26] The number of future federal units and their equality were ambiguous.[27]
The AVNOJ elected
Sessions
First session
During the first session of the AVNOJ, Tito tasked KPH central committee member
On 17 March 1943, the committee declared that it was assuming all popular authority in Croatia until the ZAVNOH was convened. A 26 May declaration emphasised that the national liberation movement in Croatia was part of the Yugoslav national liberation movement; Croats and Serbs would independently decide on internal matters and relations with other peoples after the country's liberation.[30]
After the successful spring 1943 offensive and recapture of most of the
The first ZAVNOH session recognised a "free Bosnia and Herzegovina", relinquishing control of Livno. In return, it received Dvor and the coast between the Neretva River and the Bay of Kotor originally assigned to the Bosnian or Herzegovinan Partisans.[33]
Second session
Between the ZAVNOH's first and the second sessions, the
The ZAVNOH's second session was held in Plaški from 12 to 15 October 1943. It expanded by 66 members, largely drawn from the HSS.[38] The HSS splintered early in the war. Vladko Maček led the party's most influential faction, adopting a policy of waiting for liberation by the Allies. Another group, which included former Ban of Croatia Ivan Šubašić, fled the country to join the royal government in exile. A third group joined the Ustaše;[39] a fourth group, led by Božidar Magovac (organised as the HSS executive committee), joined the KPH-dominated national liberation movement.[38] Magovac saw his HSS faction and the KPH as a coalition of equals. Although some Partisan fighters resented the acceptance of HSS members, the official KPH position was that the newcomers were welcome and free to maintain their political views. This position was taken in the (accurate) belief that a greater involvement of HSS members would lead to broader Croat participation in the Partisan struggle.[40] A group of Independent Democratic Party (Samostalna demokratska stranka, SDS) leaders also agreed to cooperate with the movement.[39] Peasant organisations and trade unions sent representatives to the ZAVNOH, which sought to represent as broad a segment of the population as possible. Participation of the organisations depended on their acceptance of the KPH's lead.[41]
The second session appointed a 15-member executive committee (led by a president and three vice-presidents) to discharge political functions, and a six-member secretariat selected from the executive committee members as a de facto Croatian government to perform day-to-day tasks. The secretariat retained its function until the People's Government was appointed in Split on 14 April 1945.[42]
In his speech to the second session, Hebrang urged the KPH to accept the popular "mass movement" instead of pursuing a leftist agenda.[43] He urged the party to ensure that the Partisan struggle was not perceived as exclusively communist, condemning "fanatics flying only the red flag" and extremism in the KPJ.[44] The ZAVNOH replied that it did not intend to radically change social life, and recognised the status of private property.[45]
On 12 January 1944, the Serbian Club of ZAVNOH Members was established in Otočac. It was chaired by Rade Pribičević, a member of the pre-war SDS' Main Committee.[46] Despite Pribičević's assertion that Croatian Serbs would pursue Croatia's interests in Yugoslavia, there was some resentment of their actual, perceived or expected position.[47] The principal complaints were that the Serbs were marginalised in Croatia, Ustaše atrocities were overlooked, Serbs were underrepresented in the ZAVNOH, and their Cyrillic script was discouraged. Although Hebrang insisted on teaching the Cyrillic script in all schools, he also said that Croatia Serbs had to accept their a minority status (albeit with equal rights) in a Croatian state.[48] Hebrang's efforts to emphasise Croat contribution to the Partisan struggle contributed to perceived Croatian Serb marginalisation.[49] As a result of this (and Chetnik propaganda), four ethnic-Serb Partisan commanders and about 90 subordinates defected to Germany in the Kordun region in 1944.[47] Hebrang's policies also increased KPJ leadership concern about his effects on Serb Partisan support.[49]
Third session
The AVNOJ's decision on the self-determination of all Yugoslav nations was meant to be confirmed by representative bodies of all future federal units. The ZAVNOH met for this purpose on 8–9 May 1944 in
The ZAVNOH adopted four fundamental constitutional acts. It approved the work of the Croatian delegates at the second session of the AVNOJ and, as the representative of the
The ZAVNOH declared itself the "true national assembly of democratic Croatia" and its highest authority as a federal unit in Yugoslavia.[53] Its assembly was designated as the legislature, and its 30-person executive committee as the highest executive body.[55]
The third document adopted at the session was the Declaration of the Basic Rights of Peoples and Citizens of Democratic Croatia.[55] In addition to the rights of ownership and property, private enterprise, and the freedom of religion and conscience, speech, the press, assembly, consultation, and association (the latter four within the Partisan movement for the duration of the war),[56] the document specified that the Croats and Serbs of Croatia were equal regardless of politics, ethnicity, race, and religion.[55] Worded in consideration of Ustaše repression against the Serbs, it was considered a contribution to improving Croat–Serb relations. The fourth constitutional decision determined the hierarchy of the regional national liberation committees.[57]
In his speech at the session, Hebrang declared that the struggle was not for communism, but for democracy and national liberation (displeasing the KPJ leadership).[58] A further point of conflict between Hebrang and the KPJ was support of the Magovac-edited HSS publication, Slobodni dom. Hebrang considered the newspaper a useful tool against Maček loyalists, but the KPJ feared the re-establishment of the HSS (although the publication was issued by the ZAVNOH).[59] Magovac wanted to pursue HSS independence from the KPH and, finding this objective unrealistic and receiving no support from other former HSS members, he resigned his editorial and political positions.[38]
Name | Position |
---|---|
Vladimir Nazor | President |
Franjo Gaži | Vice-president, HSS executive committee president |
Andrija Hebrang |
Vice-president, KPH secretary
|
Rade Pribičević | Vice-president, president of the ZAVNOH Serbian Club, AVNOJ executive committee member |
Pavle Gregorić | Secretary, AVNOJ executive committee member |
Dušan Čalić | Deputy secretary |
Stjepan Prvčić | Deputy secretary, HSS executive committee member |
Duško Brkić | AVNOJ delegate, secretary of the ZAVNOH Serbian Club |
Nikola Brozina | AVNOJ delegate, HSS executive committee member |
Tomo Čiković | HSS executive committee member |
Frane Frol | NKOJ member, AVNOJ delegate, HSS executive committee member |
Maca Gržetić | AVNOJ presidency member, AFŽ president for Croatia |
Aleksandar Koharević | HSS executive committee member |
Slavko Komar | Unified League of Anti-Fascist Youth of Croatia executive committee member
|
Ivan Krajačić | AVNOJ executive committee member |
Vicko Krstulović | AVNOJ executive committee member |
Ivan Kuzmić | HSS executive committee member |
Filip Lakuš | AVNOJ and HSS executive committee member |
Božidar Magovac | NKOJ vice-president, HSS executive committee vice-president |
Ante Mandić | AVNOJ executive committee member |
Karlo Mrazović-Cofek | AVNOJ delegate |
Stanko Ćanica-Opačić | AVNOJ executive committee member |
Kata Pejnović | AVNOJ executive committee member, AFŽ president for Yugoslavia |
Mile Počuča | AVNOJ delegate, secretary of the ZAVNOH Serbian Club |
Vanja Radauš | sculptor |
Svetozar Rittig | St. Mark's Church, Zagreb parish priest |
Zlatan Sremec | NKOJ commissioner, HSS executive committee secretary |
Marijan Stilinović | AVNOJ delegate |
Stanko Škare | AVNOJ delegate, HSS executive committee secretary |
Ante Vrkljan | AVNOJ and HSS executive committee secretary |
Rade Žigić | Commissar of the Main Staff of the National Liberation Army in Croatia, AVNOJ delegate |
Fourth session
The conflict between Tito and the KPJ, on one hand, and Hebrang, ZAVNOH and the KPH gradually deepened. In September 1944, Tito criticised the ZAVNOH regulation introducing religion as a mandatory educational subject in Croatia's Partisan-held territory. Days later, he accused Hebrang of nationalism for establishing the Croatian Telegraphic Agency as an independent news agency. By 20 October, Hebrang was replaced by Vladimir Bakarić as secretary of the KPH central committee. Due to his popularity in Croatia, however, he was called to recently captured Belgrade and appointed Yugoslav minister of industry.[61]
In early January 1945, the ZAVNOH moved its seat to Šibenik to prepare for the post-war period. Its executive committee met in Split on 14 April to proclaim the Decision on the People's Government, presided over by Bakarić.[62] The ZAVNOH moved to Zagreb on 20 May, holding its fourth session on 25 July at the Croatian Parliament building in St. Mark's Square. It renamed itself the National Parliament of Croatia (Narodni Sabor Hrvatske), emphasising the Croatian legislative body's continuity as representative of Croatian state sovereignty.[63]
Legacy
Croatian Spring
Twenty five years after the war, during the 1971 political upheaval known as the
The SKH leadership borrowed from the nation-related themes employed by the KPH leadership nearly three decades earlier: promoting Croatian unity and its culture, language and history, and acknowledging the role of the Catholic Church. They sought to address the over-representation of Serbs in public institutions such as the police, the league, and some state-owned enterprises.[67] Although the SKH leadership was forced to resign by Tito and many of their policies were reversed, their efforts to reform Yugoslavia were considered by a federal commission in 1971. The commission introduced constitutional amendments confirming the statehood of the Yugoslav republics which were retained in the 1974 constitution.[68]
Memorial
The Topusko spa restaurant building, where the ZAVNOH's third session was held, was converted into a memorial in 1984 to commemorate the session's 40th anniversary. According to news reports, the building was blown up on 14 September 1991 by the Croatian armed forces or police as they retreated[69] before the 7th Banija Division of the armed forces of the Republic of Serbian Krajina and the Yugoslav People's Army captured Topusko during the Croatian War of Independence.[70] Although an initiative to restore the building was launched in 2007 by the municipal government (supported by Parliament), it had produced no results by 2019.[69]
Constitution of Croatia
The ZAVNOH has been frequently noted as part of the foundations of Croatia as a republic in Yugoslavia and the independent Republic of Croatia. In its preamble, the Croatian constitution (adopted in 1990) cites decisions adopted by the ZAVNOH as part of the historical foundations of Croatian statehood and its right to national sovereignty. In a speech commemorating the fifth anniversary of the independence of Croatia, President Franjo Tuđman said that it was the ZAVNOH's work which allowed Croatia to declare its independence.[71]
In November 1991, the Arbitration Commission of the Peace Conference on Yugoslavia (also known as the Badinter Commission) was established to evaluate candidates for recognition as states after the breakup of Yugoslavia by providing opinions on a set of legal questions.[72] About the question of whether the Serbian populations in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina have the right to self-determination, acting president of the Presidency of Yugoslavia Branko Kostić said that the ZAVNOH gave the Croats and the Serbs of Croatia the position of "constituent nations". According to Kostić, the Croatian Constitution reduced the Serbs of Croatia to a national minority who should have the right to secede from Croatia if Croatian independence was recognised.[73] In January 1992, the Badinter Commission ruled that the Serbs living in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina were entitled to the rights attributed to minorities and ethnic groups under international law; however, it did not use the term "constituent nation".[74]
Footnotes
- ^ a b c Tomasevich 2001, pp. 47–48.
- ^ Tomasevich 2001, p. 64.
- ^ Tomasevich 2001, pp. 49–50.
- ^ a b Tomasevich 2001, pp. 51–52.
- ^ Tomasevich 2001, p. 235.
- ^ Tomasevich 2001, pp. 30–31.
- ^ Tomasevich 2001, pp. 58–59.
- ^ Degan 2008, p. 268.
- ^ Calic 2019, p. 125.
- ^ Calic 2019, p. 162.
- ^ Vukšić 2003, p. 10.
- ^ Tomasevich 2001, p. 88.
- ^ Vukšić 2003, pp. 13–15.
- ^ Ramet 2006, p. 113.
- ^ Vukšić 2003, pp. 10–11.
- ^ Banac 1988, p. 68.
- ^ Sirotković 1971, p. 21.
- ^ Hoare 2013, pp. 5–6.
- ^ Hoare 2013, p. 10.
- ^ Tomasevich 2001, pp. 250–251.
- ^ Tomasevich 2001, p. 237.
- ^ Hoare 2013, p. 5.
- ^ Calic 2019, p. 138.
- ^ Tomasevich 2001, p. 114.
- ^ Lukic & Lynch 1996, pp. 71–72.
- ^ a b Hoare 2013, p. 26.
- ^ a b Hoare 2013, p. 165.
- ^ Hoare 2013, p. 185.
- ^ Swain 2011, p. 50.
- ^ a b Sirotković 1971, pp. 26–27.
- ^ Banac 1988, p. 107.
- ^ Sirotković 1971, pp. 27–28.
- ^ Banac 1988, p. 106.
- ^ Sirotković 1995, p. 510.
- ^ Sirotković 1971, p. 28.
- ^ Swain 2011, p. 66.
- ^ Pirjevec 2018, p. 108.
- ^ a b c Sirotković 1971, p. 29.
- ^ a b Sirotković 1971, p. 22.
- ^ Tomasevich 2001, p. 363.
- ^ Bokovoy 1998, p. 19.
- ^ Sirotković 1971, p. 30.
- ^ Banac 1988, p. 86.
- ^ Bokovoy 1998, p. 20.
- ^ Banac 1988, pp. 86–87.
- ^ Tomasevich 2001, p. 368.
- ^ a b Banac 1988, p. 94.
- ^ Swain 2011, p. 77.
- ^ a b Irvine 2007, p. 158.
- ^ Jareb 2010, p. 290.
- ^ Sirotković 1995, pp. 510–511.
- ^ DNPH 1945, p. 19.
- ^ a b Sirotković 1971, p. 31.
- ^ Tomasevich 2001, p. 365.
- ^ a b c Sirotković 1995, p. 512.
- ^ Banac 1988, p. 88.
- ^ Sirotković 1971, p. 32.
- ^ Banac 1988, pp. 88–89.
- ^ Banac 1988, pp. 91–92.
- ^ DNPH 1945, pp. 57–59.
- ^ Banac 1988, pp. 96–98.
- ^ Sirotković 1971, p. 34.
- ^ Sirotković 1971, p. 35.
- ^ Irvine 2007, p. 155.
- ^ Sunajko 2012, p. 216.
- ^ Irvine 2007, pp. 155–156.
- ^ Irvine 2007, pp. 156–158.
- ^ Sunajko 2012, p. 211.
- ^ a b Prerad 2019.
- ^ CIA 2002, pp. 83–85.
- ^ Sirotković 1995, p. 519.
- ^ Silber & Little 1996, pp. 200–201.
- ^ Kostić 1994, pp. 475–479.
- ^ Badinter 1994, pp. 474–475.
References
- ISBN 978-0-79232-670-0.
- ISBN 978-0-8014-2186-0.
- Bokovoy, Melissa Katherine (1998). Peasants and Communists: Politics and Ideology in the Yugoslav Countryside, 1941-1953. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: ISBN 978-0-82294-061-6.
- Calic, Marie-Janine (2019). A History of Yugoslavia. West Lafayette, Indiana: ISBN 978-1-55753-838-3.
- ISBN 978-0-16066-472-4.
- Degan, Vladimir-Đuro (2008). "Pravni aspekti i političke posljedice rimskih ugovora od 18. svibnja 1941. godine" [Legal Aspects and Political Effects of the Rome Treaties of 18 May 1941]. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Splitu (in Croatian). 45 (2). Split, Croatia: ISSN 0584-9063.
- ISBN 978-0-231-70394-9.
- Irvine, Jill (2007). "The Croatian Spring and the Dissolution of Yugoslavia". In Cohen, Lenard J.; Dragović-Soso, Jasna (eds.). State Collapse in South-Eastern Europe: New Perspectives on Yugoslavia's Disintegration. West Lafayette, Indiana: ISBN 978-1-55753-461-3.
- Jareb, Mario (2010). Hrvatski nacionalni simboli [Croatian National Symbols] (in Croatian). Zagreb, Croatia: Alfa. ISBN 978-9-53297-230-6.
- ISBN 978-0-79232-670-0.
- Lukic, Renéo; Lynch, Allen (1996). Europe from the Balkans to the Urals: The Disintegration of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union. Stockholm, Sweden: ISBN 978-0-19829-200-5.
- ISBN 978-0-29931-770-6.
- Prerad, Danijel (13 July 2019). "Zgradu ZAVNOH-a, srušenu 1991. godine, Sabor je do 2019. 'zaboravio' obnoviti" [Sabor 'Forgot' to Restore the ZAVNOH Building Demolished in 1991]. Večernji list (in Croatian). Zagreb, Croatia. Archived from the original on 14 July 2019. Retrieved 11 March 2021.
- ISBN 978-0-25334-656-8.
- Sabor u Topuskom [Assembly in Topusko] (in Croatian). Zagreb, Croatia: Državno nakladno poduzeće Hrvatske. 1945. OCLC 439981094.
- ISBN 978-0-14026-168-4.
- Sirotković, Hodimir (1971). "Stvaranje federalne Hrvatske u narodnooslobodilačkoj borbi" [Creation of the Federal Croatia in the National Liberation Struggle]. Časopis za suvremenu povijest (in Croatian). 3 (2–3). Zagreb, Croatia: Croatian Institute of History: 15–36. ISSN 0590-9597.
- Sirotković, Hodimir (1995). "Državnopravno značenje odluka ZAVNOH-a za izgradnju državnosti Hrvatske u drugom svjetskom ratu" [Constitutional Meaning of the Decisions of Territorial Antifascist Council of National Liberation of Croatia for the Development of Croatian National Sovereignty in the World War Two]. Časopis za suvremenu povijest (in Croatian). 27 (3). Zagreb, Croatia: Croatian Institute of History: 507–520. ISSN 0590-9597.
- Sunajko, Goran (2012). "Hrvatsko proljeće i načela ustavnih reformi" [Croatian Spring and the Principles of Constitutional Reforms]. In ISBN 978-9-53568-751-1.
- Swain, Geoffrey (2011). Tito: A Biography. London, UK: I.B.Tauris & Co. Ltd. ISBN 978-1-84511-727-6.
- ISBN 978-0-8047-0857-9.
- Vukšić, Velimir (2003). Tito's Partisans 1941–45. Oxford, UK: ISBN 978-1-84176-675-1.