Between the “Tenth Banovina” and the “Seventh Republic”: States and Diasporas in the First and Second Yugoslavia

The research project explores the relationship between monarchical and socialist Yugoslavia and the emigrants. It is built on the premise that migration and diaspora policies in both countries were fundamentally similar, and that patterns of these arrangements can be traced in the successor states. Both the first and the second Yugoslavia emphasised the organic link between the population living abroad and the "homeland". In the context of the first Yugoslavia, emigrants were known as the "tenth banovina", in the second they became the "seventh republic". The two countries therefore continuously sought to control and engage "their people" abroad. At the same time, the emigrants cultivated contacts with the "old place". Even if these ties were mostly private and based on family ties, they also had an impact on the institutional and political reality of the societies of origin.

However, the impact of the immigration surroundings, coupled with the inability of the "homeland" to control and direct their connections, engendered tensions between the emigration and the two Yugoslavias. The state’s extraterritorial policies clashed with migrants’ transnational and translocal practices, thus increasing the gulf between the state and “its” migrants. Instead of mitigating social divisions the state looked to address by relaxing rules on emigration, social cleavage only magnified. The system of relationships and mutual influences was complex, and the “Yugoslav case” offers a springboard for broader comparative research. Particular features distinguished Yugoslavias from the countries which emerged in the post-imperial context or within the so-called Eastern Bloc.

These particularities are also reflected in the migration regulations: in the frame of the first Yugoslavia, forming relations with emigrants highlighted the difficulty of running a complex state, consisting of parts with different legal and political traditions. The idea of transborder Yugoslav community therefore did not increase the state’s unity – as was the aim of Yugoslavia’s diaspora policies – but only increased existing tensions. Meanwhile, labour migration put the second Yugoslavia on par with Mediterranean and set it apart from Eastern Bloc countries, where the Gastarbeiter phenomenon was unknown. By studying the Yugoslav case and bearing in mind the issues of shifting borders, it is therefore possible to go beyond the dichotomy dividing Western and Eastern Europe, and address the relationships between “homelands” and diasporas in the broader European context.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES:

1. To shed light on the system of controlling and maintaining ties with the diasporas in both Yugoslavias. By taking advantage of this system, the emigrants helped shape the transfer of mutual influences and affected the socio-political reality of the “homeland.”
2. To analyse the position and special role played by the Slovenia area within the Yugoslav context. In the Kingdom of Yugoslavia this was made possible thanks to the overlap of administrative borders and ethnic boundaries, while in socialist Yugoslavia it was partly the result of the federal system.
3. To prove that despite the different state forms, political systems and ideological underpinnings, there were important elements of continuity in states’ attitudes towards emigrants.
4. To evaluate the relevance the “emigration question” had in the two Yugoslavias, with a particular focus on Slovenia. To analyse how it affected the country’s economic and social development and the realisation of national policies. At the same time, the news about emigrants, contacts with them, their visits to the “homeland,” and their eventual “returns” provoked a shift in “homeland’s” mentalities. We will be guided by the question of the extent to which the “emigration question” succeeded in permeating the consciousness of Slovene and Yugoslav societies in the two states.
5. Evaluate the relevance of the “Yugoslav case” for understanding the broader European relations between “homelands” and diasporas. The two Yugoslavias belonged to the context of Central and Eastern Europe, but were at the same time different, so they offer a springboard for moving beyond the dichotomy between Eastern and Western Europe, which still predominates in historiography and the social sciences.
6. A reconceptualisation of historiography and dissemination of results both within Slovenia and internationally. By showing that transnational contacts with emigrants have represented an integral part of history, and illustrating how emigrants have also helped shape the country of emigration, the research will emphasise the need for a paradigm shift in historiography dealing with Slovene and Yugoslav areas.