National Identity in Serbia

The Vojvodina and a Multi-Ethnic Community in the Balkans

Vassilis Petsinis

• Publisher: I.B. Tauris
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9781788317085
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Communism, Post-Communism & Socialism
• Index: Politics & International Relations

The autonomous province of Vojvodina in Serbia is little-known in the English-speaking world, even though it is a territory of high significance for the development of Serbian national identity. Vojvodina's multi-ethnic composition and historical experience has also encouraged the formation of a distinct regional identity. This book analyses the evolution of Vojvodina's identity over time and the unique pattern of ethnic relations in the province. Although approximately 25 ethnic communities live in Vojvodina, it is by no means a divided society. Intercultural cohabitation has been a living reality in the province for centuries and this largely accounts for the lack of ethnic conflict. Vassilis Petsinis explores Vojvodina's intercultural society and shows how this has facilitated the introduction of flexible and regionalized legal models for the management of ethnic relations in Serbia since the 2000s. He also discusses recent developments in the region, most notably the arrival of refugees from Syria and Iraq, and measures the impact that these changes have had on social stability and inter-group relations in the province.

1

Introduction: Setting the Conceptual and the Theoretical Frames

This book centres on the different layers of identity among the Serbs of Vojvodina and their implications for political preferences regarding the basic structure of the state, namely either for regionalization or for the centralized model of the nation-state. The main focus is on the period from the dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia until present day. Nevertheless, this topic requires a historical background to set the Serbs as an ethno-national group in context. Particular emphasis is laid on the national identity of the Vojvodinian Serbs and the process of its formation.

The regional identity of Vojvodina is also set in historical context. This firstly sets out the regional concept of Vojvodina as a ‘Serbian homeland’, which was developed by the Serb nationalist elites and the Serb intelligentsia within the Habsburg Monarchy during the nineteenth century. Subsequently, in the Communist era, Vojvodina’s regional character was redefined in terms of a socialist multicultural society and this requires a historical perspective. Reference to the broader historical context can clarify the complex relationship between centre and periphery and consequently the local understandings of the unitary model of the nation-state and the regionalist alternatives that have been proposed in Vojvodina since the year 2000.

The pattern of ethnic relations in this region is highly unique. Although Vojvodina hosts approximately twenty-five ethnic communities (including a sizeable and politically organized Hungarian minority), besides the Serbian majority, it is by no means an ethnically divided society. Alongside separate ethnic group cultures, a trans-ethnic cultural substratum, which manifests itself in the form of Vojvodinian regional identity, is present. Intercultural cohabitation has been a living reality in Vojvodina through time. This more ‘integrated’ pattern manifests through the lower impact of territorial segregation and ethnic distance, as well as the higher frequency of intermarriage in urban and rural settlements alike. This book explores in depth Vojvodina’s intercultural realities and illustrates how these have facilitated the introduction of flexible and regionalized legal models for the management of ethnic relations in Serbia since the 2000s. This regional monograph also casts its focus on fresh developments (most notably, the recent arrival of war refugees from Syria and Iraq) and measures the impact that these have been exerting on social stability and inter-group relations in the province.

Most importantly, perhaps, Vojvodina is a region that not much has been written about, especially by Western academics and in the English-language academic literature (e.g. Stjepanović 2018). This has created a black hole in the study of the society and politics of Central and Southeast Europe, since Vojvodina is one of these ‘small places with big issues’. The modern-day Serbian autonomous province of Vojvodina is situated exactly at the geographic area where the Balkan peninsula meets Central Europe. For centuries, this zone was the frontier that separated two contesting realms: the Ottoman and the Habsburg. Throughout the past century, the same area saw different political and administrative systems come and go. The combination of the aforementioned catalysts resulted in the, forced as well as organized, migrations of several ethnic groups towards modern-day Vojvodina and the subsequent formation of a varied mosaic of group identities in the region. This triggered the emergence of various political concepts regarding Vojvodina’s regional character among its inhabitants, the Serbian majority in particular.

The first main object of this book is the question of identity definition among Serbs in Vojvodina. The Serbian community in Vojvodina comprises three segments with different historic origins: the so-called ‘old Serbs’ who trace their ancestry back to the days of the Habsburg Monarchy; Serbs originating from other parts of the former Yugoslavia, who moved to Vojvodina after the two world wars (‘new settlers’/‘colonists’); and the latest refugee waves from Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina (1991–5). Each of these groups has its own grassroots perceptions of identity and this book analyses the way that these perceptions are communicated on the political level. The sources that this book has relied on are electoral data, public opinion polls and parliamentary/governmental reports. Especially electoral data can prove very helpful in regard with the assessment of the political tendencies and voting patterns of each segment. At the same time, the relations among the three segments are set in comparative perspective. Particular emphasis is laid upon the integration process of the colonists and, more recently, the refugees into the Vojvodinian society.

The second main object of this book is the interaction between identity-formation and political preferences for the constitutional and administrative framework in Serbia. Since the mid-1970s, Vojvodina, as one of the two autonomous provinces of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (the other was Kosovo), enjoyed broad administrative, legislative and economic autonomy. The centralization process, which was undertaken during the 1990s, caused the resentment of quite a few Vojvodinian Serbs towards the regime in Belgrade. Consequently, quite a few projects which demanded the concession of an ‘asymmetric’ administrative status to Vojvodina within Serbia were drafted by certain political and academic circles in the province. These projects were and are still contested up to date by the proponents of various forms of a unitary arrangement, in Vojvodina and Serbia in general. Therefore, this book also assesses the dynamics of the two aforementioned trends in Vojvodinian society, with specific focus on the post-Communist era. With respect to the Serbian majority, the degree (if any) to which the inclinations of Vojvodinian Serbs for or against their province’s asymmetric status within Serbia are conditioned by the segment that they originate from is assessed.

The third main object of this book is the theoretical definition of the pattern of multi-ethnic cohabitation that is observed in Vojvodina. In other words, an answer is sought to the question whether the Serbian majority and the numerous ethnic minorities form a coherent whole within the Vojvodinian society or if, on the contrary, social segregation along ethnic lines is the case. Particular emphasis is laid on the relations between Serbs and the most numerous and politically organized ethnic minority who live in Vojvodina, the ethnic Hungarians. Interethnic relations in the province are also viewed from a historical angle. In regard to its methodological scope, this book has largely relied on the notion of ‘situational identity’. The meaning of the term is that the construction (or reinforcement; even transformation) of collective identities and loyalties is highly influenced by socio-economic and political factors.

This notion is a dynamic one, in contrast to that of ‘fixed identity’. This mode of interpretation will help the reader comprehend the regional character of Vojvodina and the local standpoints for or against regional autonomy more adequately.

In the following pages, selected theoretical approaches with a direct relation to the scope and objectives of this book are outlined. Particular attention is paid to theoretical approaches that situate the operation of constituent myths of origin inside identity-construction processes (namely, ethnosymbolism) and to theoretical approaches in ethnopolitics beyond groupism and groupness. Then, the focus shifts to identity-formation processes under ‘special’ circumstances with a major stress on the cases of ethnic minorities and migrant groups. Finally, this chapter touches upon the subject-areas of regionalism and regionalization with case-specific references to Western Europe as well as to Central and Eastern Europe.

The ‘nation’ as a socio-psychological phenomenon

According to Anthony D. Smith, the modern nation can be summarized as ‘a named human population, sharing a historic territory, common myths and historic memories, a mass public culture, a common economy and common legal rights and duties for all its members’.¹ In this section, particular reference is made to the common myths and historic memories of the nation. These myths and memories usually form part of the collective experience of the core group around which the nation-building process takes or has taken place (e.g. Hungarians in Hungary, Greeks in Greece). A core group, or ethnos in Classical Greek, can be defined as ‘a named human population with myths of common ancestry, shared historic memories and one or more common elements of culture, including an association with a homeland and some degree of solidarity, at least among the elites’.² Perhaps the most powerful myths are those referring to the linear continuity of the group through the ages and also those pointing towards an older ‘golden age’ of the group. These myths acquire a poetic and mystical dimension when associated with an ancestral or ‘sacred territory’.

The ultimate objective of myths of origin is to create an overriding commitment and bond for the group. Such myths aim to forge an imagined continuity of the group through the ages. Roughly speaking, there exist two types of myths of origin: myths that point towards genealogical descent (‘biological continuity’ myths) and myths that cite an ancestry of a cultural–ideological variant. ‘Biological’ myths generate high levels of communal solidarity, since they regard the national community as a network consisting of interrelated kin groups descending from a common ancestor. In this case, imagined blood ties provide the basis for a strictly primordialist sense of belonging and identity (e.g. certain currents of Basque nationalism).

The other, and perhaps the most common, type of constituent myths of origin are those that rest on the cultural affinity with the presumed ancestors. In this case, we have to do with a spiritual type of kinship, which seeks to trace a ‘historical’ link between the present ideals and aspirations of the group and those of its presumed ancestors. Cultural–ideological myths of descent stress the persistence of certain types of collective virtue (e.g. the heroic spirit) or other distinctive cultural qualities, such as language, religion and customs through the ages. They also seek to draw a parallel between these old qualities and the present virtues and cultural qualities of the group in question. By locating the present in the context of the past of the group, myths of origin interpret social changes and collective aspirations in a way that satisfies the drive for meaning, by making up new identities that also seem to be very old. All myths of group descent have as focal point of reference an older ‘golden age’. Some examples of such ‘golden ages’ are respectively Periclean Athens in Modern Greek nationalism and the Nemanjid dynasty in Serbian nationalism. The reference to a ‘golden age’ is always linked with a ‘myth of decline’. The latter seeks to provide an explanation about how the community fell from its state of prosperity in the past, to its present state of alleged decay.³ On such occasions, the ‘golden age’ serves as a model for the regeneration of the community.⁴

Myths of origin are always associated with specific ancestral territories. Hence the importance attached to ‘sacred territories’ in all types of nationalist imagery. ‘Sacred territories’ are added a poetic dimension: these are the territories where the group flourished during its golden age and which have to be defended by all means and at any cost.⁵ To sum up, then, in Anthony D. Smith’s words, constituent myths of origin serve the following purposes:

1. They link past to present (or future) and act as models.

2. They possess external references of comparison, even implicitly.

3. They designate a space and time for action, a territorial programme.

4. They contain impulses for collective action, mobilizing people.

5. They are developmental, assuming the possibility of change.

6. They are partly voluntaristic, in that successive generations may add to the heritage and even regenerate themselves.⁶

Such core myths persist and are espoused through state rituals, even in states with a pronounced ‘civic’ character.⁷ As far as their mobilizing power is concerned, this has mainly to do with the fact that these myths pertain to the non-rational domain of the ‘nation’. Constituent myths endow the ‘nation’ with a near universality through the employment of certain images and phrases (e.g. home, forefathers, brothers, mother), which aim at forging a subconscious bond of integrity among its members. This is of vital importance for mass mobilization since, as Walker Connor phrases it, ‘people do not voluntarily die for things that are rational’.⁸ Even Marxist-Leninists have taken advantage of the mobilizing potential of constituent myths of origin, despite the philosophical incompatibility between nationalism and Communism.⁹

All these hint that the political and cultural–socio-psychological components of modern nations may in practice overlap with each other. The value of the ethno-symbolic approach (Connor 1993; Smith 1999 and 2000) for the purposes of this book consists precisely in that it seeks to situate the position of constituent myths of origin inside modern nations. This approach also positions the nationalist intelligentsias inside nation-building processes. The nationalist intellectuals are assigned with the task to recover each layer of the past and trace the origins and evolution of the nation from its rudimentary beginnings until present day. The intelligentsia responsible for creating the symbolic capital, from which a national culture is formed, derives from disciplines such as history, archaeology, linguistics, literature and folklore studies. Through its endeavours to elaborate core myths and create a standardized national culture, a rediscovered and authenticated past is ‘scientifically’ appropriated for present ends.

Ethnicity without groups and triadic configurations of ethnopolitics

Despite the academic value of ethno-symbolism, this book would also benefit from the complementary employment of an additional approach: one theoretical approach set beyond groupism. The term groupism addresses the tendency to view ethnic groups and identities as bounded, regards them as the leading protagonists of conflicts and treats them as the key units of social discourse. Of particular value for this book would be to rely on Rogers Brubaker’s concept of ‘ethnicity without groups’.¹⁰ Ethnic conflict is obviously the conflict between ethnic groups. But these groups should not be perceived as compact entities or ‘collective individuals’. Instead, group cohesion should be viewed as a continuous process that in some cases may be brought to completion but in others fail. Within this framework of interpretation, the notion of categories is of pivotal significance. For example, ‘Serb’, ‘Slovak’ or ‘Hungarian’ (as ethnic ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Halftitle Page
• Title Page
• Contents 
• List of Data-Tables and Figures
• Acknowledgements
• Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms
• 1 Introduction: Setting the Conceptual and the Theoretical Frames
• 2 Vojvodina through Time: From the Habsburg Era to the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
• 3 Vojvodina in the 1990s: From the Termination of Autonomy to the Fall of Slobodan Milošević
• 4 Vojvodina Going through Transition (the 2000s)
• 5 Vojvodina Today: Between New Challenges and Opportunities
• Bibliography and Other Sources
• Index
• Imprint