ABSTRACT
Because of its distinctive and independent socialist route to modernity, Yugoslavia was considered a unique and stable multi-ethnic polity. Primarily because of its uniqueness, analysts were able to argue that ‘… the idea of some form of Yugoslav unity is stronger than the desire for national polarization and exclusiveness’ (Vucinich, 1969, p. ix). National problems, it was further contended, were at most likely to be restricted to competition for scarce economic resources (Vucinich, 1969). Even after Tito’s death and ethnic disquiet in the Kosovo region, Singleton (1985) was confident that more democratic debate had provided ‘a new point of departure for the creation of a more democratic but still socialist Yugoslavia’ (p. 285), although he did add the caveat that ‘if the present leaders do not recognise this, and if they attempt to silence debate by the imposition of a “firm hand”, possibly with the cooperation of the army, this may worsen the situation’ (p. 285). Smith (1986b) went even further in suggesting that Yugoslavia could be seen as a ‘real hope for the consolidation of the state and its institutions’, and as ‘a model for more intractable “state-nation” conflicts’ (pp. 261–262). Finally, as Binns observed as late as the late 1980s, ‘The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRJ) has developed in its federal institutions, “consociational” structures of conflict-resolution which have enabled it to survive the death of its founder and economic and political crisis’ (1989, 143).
