Talk:Democratic Federal Yugoslavia
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
It says at one point that it was created in 1943 and another point says it was created in 1944. Which date is it?
As asked above. When was it formed in 1943 or 1944?--R-41 (talk) 02:01, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Symbols
Since it was a provisional government supported by royalists and the communist Yugoslav Partisans, why would it exclusively use the Partisans' political symbols. The flag shown is the flag of the Yugoslav Partisans adopted in 1945.--R-41 (talk) 02:04, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- Since no response has been given to this. I have restored the previous version. The version with the communist Yugoslav symbols may be restored when clear evidence is presented that they were accepted as state symbols. I doubt that they were because this state was created as a provisional government between the royalists and the communist Partisans.--R-41 (talk) 00:43, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
- The situation there is rather unusual and complex, I don't have much time (its New Year's Eve! :)) so I'll lay it out in brief. There are a lot of problems in this article. The DFY was effectively proclaimed and defined by the AVNOJ in November 1943. It was merely recognized as such by the Allies (immediately) and the government-in-exile (June 1944). Both the DFY and the AVNOJ as its deliberative body were recognized by the Allies with the Tehran Conference, the government-in-exile essentially refused to follow in kind and its leadership was quickly changed (Tito also refused to negotiate with Chetnik-supporters in the government). This allowed for the NKOJ) basically recognized each-other and agreed to merge into a provisional government as soon as possible, which happened in November 1944 (between November 1943 and November 1944, the DFY had two recognized governments).
- The situation there is rather unusual and complex, I don't have much time (its New Year's Eve! :)) so I'll lay it out in brief. There are a lot of problems in this article. The DFY was effectively proclaimed and defined by the AVNOJ in November 1943. It was merely recognized as such by the Allies (immediately) and the government-in-exile (June 1944). Both the DFY and the AVNOJ as its deliberative body were recognized by the Allies with the Tehran Conference, the government-in-exile essentially refused to follow in kind and its leadership was quickly changed (Tito also refused to negotiate with Chetnik-supporters in the government). This allowed for the
- Regarding flags, the AVNOJ, the deliberative body of the DFY, defined the flag. Unsurprisingly the left-wing coalition assembly instituted a red star flag. This flag was of course used in Yugoslavia, where the Partisans (now the recognized Allied military of the DFY) held increasingly significant chunks of unoccupied territory (in fact they held most of Yugoslav territory, if not the major cities, by mid-1944). Outside Yugoslavia, however, very few people payed attention to such details and by-and-large simply used the old Yugoslav flag they had been using for decades. That fact, however, does not change the AVNOJ flag of the DFY or the fact that ot was used in Yugoslavia en masse. --TALK) 16:42, 31 December 2011 (UTC)]
- Regarding flags, the AVNOJ, the deliberative body of the DFY, defined the flag. Unsurprisingly the left-wing coalition assembly instituted a red star flag. This flag was of course used in Yugoslavia, where the Partisans (now the recognized Allied military of the DFY) held increasingly significant chunks of unoccupied territory (in fact they held most of Yugoslav territory, if not the major cities, by mid-1944). Outside Yugoslavia, however, very few people payed attention to such details and by-and-large simply used the old Yugoslav flag they had been using for decades. That fact, however, does not change the AVNOJ flag of the DFY or the fact that ot was used in Yugoslavia en masse. --
- How do you know that the flag in the picture is the flag of the DFY? It may just be the flag of the Yugoslav Partisans that was hoisted up in Split? After all the Yugoslav Partisans were the dominant Yugoslav armed force in the war. Besides just pointing out the photograph alone is WP:OR unless you have sources that can prove it, as you rightly criticized me for having lack of sources for the Ustase "U" symbol on the Talk:Ustaše discussion page. Just because it was used en masse by supporters of the Yugoslav Partisans, that doesn't mean it is the flag of Yugoslavia, today many Syrians associated with its major rising rebel faction against its government are using a historical Syrian flag - it is massively used but it is not the current legal flag of Syria. No, the DFY was not an acceptance by the Kingdom of Yugoslavia of AVNOJ, it was an agreement between the government of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia led by Subasic and AVNOJ led by Tito to create the provisional state of Democratic Federal Yugoslavia, allowing Tito to be head of government, Subasic to be foreign minister, and holding the position of head of state temporarily vacant until a referendum was to be held on whether Yugoslavia should be a monarchy or a republic. As I am aware of it, AVNOJ was not the legal deliberative body of the DFY, the Provisional Assembly was its legal deliberative body. If AVNOJ was in de facto control that still does not prove that the government legally adopted the Partisans' flag. Please present a source that states that the government of the DFY accepted the Yugoslav flag with a red star.--R-41 (talk) 15:25, 3 January 2012 (UTC)]
- R-41, please try to be a little less domineering. I do not like this "my way unless proven otherwise" attitude. Where is your evidence that the new state, proclaimed by the Partisan AVNOJ(!), used the royalist flag? And please remember that, as regards the flag, your edit is the new one and it is opposed: you were bold now please don't edit-war. (I am not basing my edits on the image, its just an illustration.)
- How do you know that the flag in the picture is the flag of the DFY? It may just be the flag of the Yugoslav Partisans that was hoisted up in Split? After all the Yugoslav Partisans were the dominant Yugoslav armed force in the war. Besides just pointing out the photograph alone is
"At the Historical 2nd Session of the Antifascist Council of National Liberation of Yugoslavia, held in Jajce on 29 November 1943, at which the foundations of the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia were laid, the State flag became the symbol of strength of all Nations of Yugoslavia. The five-pointed star on flags is the star that has shined to us and gave us strength and belief in hardest times of national uprising and enemy offensives, it instil unshakeable confidence that the Nations of Yugoslavia, under the leadership of the National Hero Marshal Tito will enjoy days of liberty, happiness and fortunate existence."
— Excerpt, Order No.1644, 26 May 1945, published 25 September 1945, Narodne novine No.30
- Contrary to the previous erroneous lede sentence, the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia was not a "coalition" (imagine that :)). It was, of course, a Second Session of the AVNOJand recognized at Tehran, I mean this is elementary school history. This country had a parliament in the same body that proclaimed it - the AVNOJ. The AVNOJ defined the flag of this state and naturally used its own red-star flag. In simple words, it uses the Partisan flag because the Partisans proclaimed it (and controlled it very effectively throughout, for that matter, in spite of the coalition of November 1944). Allied-recognized state had two governments between November 1943 and November 1944, two governments that agreed to merge with the Vis Agreement. This is all basic history, and, please forgive me, but you seem unfamiliar with what the DFY actually was.
- Contrary to the previous erroneous lede sentence, the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia was not a "coalition" (imagine that :)). It was, of course, a
- It also must be pointed out that this article likely qualifies as a TALK) 16:10, 3 January 2012 (UTC)]
- It also must be pointed out that this article likely qualifies as a
- That document is from from AVNOJ, and in May 1945, what about before then? And AVNOJ was not the government at this time from 1944 to 1945 - it wanted to be, but it was the Provisional Assembly that was the government. Following your criticism I will remove the plain Yugoslav tricolour as well - even though it was never officially a royalist flag - but a use of the Treaty of Vis in 1944 by an agreement between the royalist government under Subasic and AVNOJ under Tito to form a provisional government with the position of head of state remaining open, it began the operation of governing on 2 November 1944 and I have found no evidence to suggest that the DFY was officially communist as its successor, the SFRY was, so it is not a POV-fork - it was a different government, a provisional government that was as yet officially undetermined as to whether it would be a monarchy or a republic unlike its successor that was a republic.--R-41 (talk) 16:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)]
- Ufff... Obviously we need to clear a few things up here, but in the meantime please stop edit-warring to push your edit. I've restored the proper flag (that was originally there!). You have no sources for your edit so I would appreciate it if you did not edit-war
- That document is from from AVNOJ, and in May 1945, what about before then? And AVNOJ was not the government at this time from 1944 to 1945 - it wanted to be, but it was the Provisional Assembly that was the government. Following your criticism I will remove the plain Yugoslav tricolour as well - even though it was never officially a royalist flag - but a use of the
- The AVNOJ could not be a government and never aspired to a be a government. It aspired to be a parliament and it very much was, it was the only parliament of the DFY (and was explicitly recognized by the Allies at Tehran) until the provisional assembly was formed, a year after the DFY was proclaimed, by adding a number of dignitaries to the AVNOJ that were not members of the NKOJwas a government, and it very much was a government: one of the two governments (both recognized by the Allies) that existed between November 1943 and November 1944, when they merged (as agreed-upon at Vis).
- That document was not issued by the AVNOJ (why do you assume things like that?), it was issued by the Ministry of Internal Affairs. I certainly hope you realize there was no AVNOJ parallel in existence with the provisional assembly, in fact the provisional assembly was simply the AVNOJ plus a number of non-JNOF members, and it was actually still frequently called the AVNOJ regardless. In fact I think it did not even change its name into "the Provisional Assembly": the AVNOJ considered itself a provisional assembly and is often simply called a "provisional assembly" in sources because of its complex and alien name. While no source can suggest that the AVNOJ existed in parallel with the provisional assembly (that definitely did not happen), I wonder if your source is not simply referring to the AVNOJ by calling it "the Provisional Assembly"? Regardless, it betrays a lack of understanding to claim a deliberative assembly was a government.
- The DFY was proclaimed by the AVNOJ in Jajceon 29 November 1943. It was recognized by the Allied powers at the Tehran Conference. The government-in-exile did not actively recognize the DFY (keeping with the Kingdom of Yugoslavia), so its leadership was changed (in part also because Tito also refused to have anything to do with the previous leadership) and the new people agreed to recognize the AVNOJ and the DFY in June 1944. At Vis the DFY was only also recognized by the (powerless) government-in-exile, and Tito and Subasic agreed to merge their two governments, that's it, certainly no new countries were created there. And that's the whole story. It is basic history that the second Yugoslavia was founded with the Second Session of the AVNOJ etc... everybody knows that for heaven's sakes.
- The DFY was certainly not communist or royalist or anything officially, and there's no question there: it was a provisional state. It was, however, proclaimed and founded by the AVNOJ, an assembly (not a government!) that was made-up of National Liberation Front(JNOF) members. The JNOF included the KPJ and was dominated by it, but it also included socialists, republicans, federalists, and anyone who basically wanted a federal republic in general (and did not want a Serb-dominated monarchical state as before).
- The AVNOJ could not be a government and never aspired to a be a government. It aspired to be a parliament and it very much was, it was the only parliament of the DFY (and was explicitly recognized by the Allies at Tehran) until the provisional assembly was formed, a year after the DFY was proclaimed, by adding a number of dignitaries to the AVNOJ that were not members of the
- --TALK) 18:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC)]
- Please, don't say that this is an edit war. I just want to see a source from the DFY that it had a red star on the flag. You said yourself that it was not officially communist nor royalist - it was a provisional government, then there is good reason for it to be assumed that it is questionable that it would adopt the communist red star. You have stated that it was a federal republic - it was not a republic or a monarchy - it was neither at that time it was pending a referendum on the issue. Neither of us has sources for what the DFY stated its flag was, the AVNOJ was not the government so that is not a source for the flag of the state, just as the Syrian National Council's and Free Syrian Army's green-white-black horizontal tricolour with three red stars is not the legal flag of Syria, no matter how popular it is. Just because material like am image or text was there for some time before doesn't mean it is accurate - I have encountered plenty of articles - such as corporatism where material placed there for a long time was totally inaccurate. Let's work to find a source for what the DFY said its flag was.--R-41 (talk) 18:53, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Ok sorry, I always get ticked off when people don't keep the status quo version on while discussion is on. Lets not touch it and discuss.
- Ok sorry, I always get ticked off when people don't keep the status quo version on
- Please, don't say that this is an edit war. I just want to see a source from the DFY that it had a red star on the flag. You said yourself that it was not officially communist nor royalist - it was a provisional government, then there is good reason for it to be assumed that it is questionable that it would adopt the communist red star. You have stated that it was a federal republic - it was not a republic or a monarchy - it was neither at that time it was pending a referendum on the issue. Neither of us has sources for what the DFY stated its flag was, the AVNOJ was not the government so that is not a source for the flag of the state, just as the Syrian National Council's and Free Syrian Army's green-white-black horizontal tricolour with three red stars is not the legal flag of Syria, no matter how popular it is. Just because material like am image or text was there for some time before doesn't mean it is accurate - I have encountered plenty of articles - such as corporatism where material placed there for a long time was totally inaccurate. Let's work to find a source for what the DFY said its flag was.--R-41 (talk) 18:53, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- The DFY was nothing officially but it was really quite effectively controlled by Tito and the KPJ, by virtue of the fact that they controlled the military, the JNOF, and the government. Tito was prime minister and supreme commander of the army (=the Partisans), which grew to almost a million men. The government-in-exile, and its members in the joint government, were really quite powerless (and left the government in protest in the end if I recall correctly). I did not say the DFY was a republic, pleased read more carefully. I stated that the JNOF included factions who wanted a republic. They were clever and did not proclaim one though.
- The DFY had very little or nothing to do with the government-in-exile for the entire first year of its existence, until November 1944, and even afterwards the people who founded it very much continued to control it, so it is very reasonable to suppose the the KPJ-controlled AVNOJ would institute a red-star flag (in fact I remember they also had a coat of arms like the later one). Suppositions aside, you can read the source above explicitly praising the fact that flag had a red star in it. Do you have any argument, aside from a conclusion imho based on a rather incomplete picture, to support the idea that the AVNOJ instituted a royalist flag? I honestly think that is the more far-fetched supposition than the opposite, even if we had no source. --TALK) 19:15, 3 January 2012 (UTC)]
- The DFY had very little or nothing to do with the government-in-exile for the entire first year of its existence, until November 1944, and even afterwards the people who founded it very much continued to control it, so it is very reasonable to suppose the the KPJ-controlled AVNOJ would institute a red-star flag (in fact I remember they also had a coat of arms like the later one). Suppositions aside, you can read the source above explicitly praising the fact that flag had a red star in it. Do you have any argument, aside from a conclusion imho based on a rather incomplete picture, to support the idea that the AVNOJ instituted a royalist flag? I honestly think that is the more far-fetched supposition than the opposite, even if we had no source. --
Well it looks like I found the answer you were looking for :). I just found another way to find out if the state used communist symbolism, I looked up the state's name followed by "dinar" to see the state's currency. The currency I found was from 1944 that showed the communist-style coat of arms that was later modified in the SFRY to include more torches. You are correct, it did use communist symbolism as can be seen here: [1]. That's all I wanted to be sure of, I didn't intend to edit war. The issue is resolved, and we can now say that it is evident that this state was just one of many variations on the SFRY - now I will support this article being merged into the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia article.--R-41 (talk) 19:18, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Hardly an "edit-war", apologies for misusing that term :). The KPJ maintained very firm control over both the JNOF, the NKOJ, the AVNOJ, the military, and later the joint provisional government, and certainly did not plan to give up any power. This was really an "embryo" of the SFRY and belongs there. Lets leave the template for a few days and if noone objects we can redirect the thing... --TALK) 19:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC)]
Topic
There are a lot of overlapping (and hence confusing) topics regarding WWII Yugoslavia, but on reflection I think this should probably be a separate page. "Democratic Federative Yugoslavia" was not just a creation of the negotiations between the royal gov't and Tito, it was a creation of AVNOJ in late 1943 that ultimately was merged with the royal gov't. The resulting provisional gov't has its own article. When I changed this into a redirect target earlier today it was because (a) the newly created article was unsourced and (b) the old redirect target was wrong (it pointed to SFR Yugoslavia). Srnec (talk) 23:11, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Area
The area of SFR Yugoslavia was 255,804 square km[2] as is stated in the infobox. But in 1945 Istria peninsula, Fiume, and Zadar were not yet within the territory of DF Yugoslavia, so the area of DFY was smaller.
I tried to place a citation needed template into the area section, but then the conversion to sq miles fails and displays the ugly red error. We need a source for area, the current info is incorrect. --Matija (talk) 08:22, 11 May 2021 (UTC)