By Milan St. Protić, historian and diplomat
The struggle of the Serbs for their own statehood was long and arduous. Therefore, at the outset, a few essential historical facts.
Three-quarters of the nineteenth century were spent in this painstaking effort. Entirely in keeping with the broader European movements of the time towards the creation of nation states, liberation and unification, the Serbs too embarked upon that path.
Following two uprisings against Ottoman rule and successive diplomatic efforts, Serbia became an autonomous principality in 1830. In modern terms, this might be described as a self-governing entity. Sovereignty, however, formally still belonged to Turkey. Until 1856, Imperial Russia guaranteed Serbia’s status. After the Treaty of Paris, which ended the Crimean War, the Western powers became guarantors of Serbian autonomy, replacing Russia.
The Revolution of 1848 affirmed the principle of “one people – one state”, although it largely ended unsuccessfully. Italy and Germany achieved national unification in 1870 and 1871 respectively. For Italians, the key battle was Solferino in 1859, despite the fact that they did not directly participate in it. For the Germans, the decisive moment was victory over France at Sedan in 1870.
Eight years later, Serbia, together with Montenegro, received international recognition at the Congress of Berlin, chaired by the famous German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck. Excluding the Middle Ages, this was the moment of Serbia’s full international affirmation. Great credit for this achievement belongs to the then Prime Minister of Serbia, regent on two occasions and Liberal leader, Jovan Ristić. Serbia remained a principality for the next four years. It was proclaimed a kingdom in 1882 under Prince – later King – Milan Obrenović.
Step by step, Serbia advanced along a path of internal development in which efforts to establish democracy and parliamentarianism were paramount until the Balkan Wars and the First World War (1912–13, 1914–18). Following the May Coup of 1903 and the return of the Karađorđević dynasty to the Serbian throne through the election of Peter I of Serbia, Serbia spent a full decade operating under the parliamentary democracy of that era. Party rivalries, freedom of the press, multi-party elections, governments formed on the basis of parliamentary majorities. During that period (1903–1914), there were eight prime ministers from four different parties. Most governments were therefore either coalition or concentration governments. Political instability, as is well known, is a characteristic – if not a flaw – of most parliamentary systems.
Serbia entered the united Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes by transferring its internationally recognised sovereignty and its status as a victorious power in the First World War. Four or five days before the final act of Yugoslav unification, Vojvodina and Montenegro joined the Kingdom of Serbia. Together with Kosovo and Macedonia, which had been annexed to Serbia after the Balkan Wars, this constituted the territory of the Serbian state on 1 December 1918.
Despite the revolutionary internal transformation of 1944–45, Yugoslavia preserved international legal continuity from its creation until its final collapse in 1991–92. Thanks to the policies of Slobodan Milošević and his like-minded associates, Serbia continued its existence within the so-called Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, without restoring its former statehood that had been lent to Yugoslavia. Interestingly and tellingly, all the federal units of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia became independent through referendums in which overwhelming majorities voted for their own statehood. Serbia alone did not acquire that right. Again, by the will of those in power rather than by the decision of the people, it formed a short-lived provisional arrangement under the name “State Union of Serbia and Montenegro”, until ultimately Montenegro too chose to restore its statehood in 2006.
Thus Serbia became once again an independent state and an international subject through the will of others. Regardless of the fact that it was denied the status of exclusive successor to the SFRY, it still perceives itself in that role to this day. The incorrect term “becoming independent” is widely used instead of the accurate “restoration of statehood”.
Nor does Serbia’s current Constitution, also dating from 2006, specify the origins of Serbian statehood. It contains no historical preamble defining this issue and drawing a historical continuity from Stefan the First-Crowned to the present day. This is all the stranger given that the authors of this constitutional document persistently insisted on their Serbian patriotism, presenting themselves as authentic representatives of patriotic forces and defenders of Serbia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
At the same time, the controversy over the form of government has remained unresolved. From both a legal and democratic perspective, the monarchy was never abolished through the free expression of the citizens’ will, nor was the republic established with democratic legitimacy. Both decisions were imposed through the revolutionary authority of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia and its institutional representatives.
This state of mind – reinforced by an imposed narrative both in public discourse and in schools, suspended in an airless space between Serbian identity and Yugoslavism – still prevails today.
Most Serbs remain confused when faced with this very simple question of identity:
“Is Serbia, for you, the only homeland, more than eight centuries old, or is it merely the final surviving remnant of socialist Yugoslavia?”
The most common answer is silence. Many do not even understand the question. Some think the two are one and the same.
Believe me, dear readers, I have tested this at least a thousand times. In the end, you can verify it yourself. Ask the question first to yourself, then to others. You will see the reaction.
How and why did Serbia become hostage to Yugoslavism?
For the record, in the early years of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, Serbs were Serbs, while the South Slavs from the former Habsburg monarchy were, in Serbian eyes, Yugoslavs. Incidentally, Yugoslavism itself was an Austrian intellectual construct from the beginning of the nineteenth century.
Yet a hundred years later, Serbs themselves feel Yugoslav, remain attached to the Yugoslav legacy, and identify with Broz’s Yugoslavia, though not with Alexander’s. Former Yugoslavs, meanwhile, are now seen by Serbs as Slovenes, Croats, Bosniaks…
Indoctrination is indeed all-powerful. It turns out that people’s perception of themselves, their origins and their self-awareness can be manipulated. The old erased, the new injected.
People believe what authority serves them. Truth becomes whatever authority declares it to be. And so it continues from generation to generation, from era to era.
The creation of reality? The fabrication of facts? Monopoly over the interpretation of the past?
Absolutely.
Power is founded upon manipulation. It has always been so.
Supporting my argument is the fact that Serbia failed to mark eight centuries of Serbian statehood. It should have done so in 2017, but it did not. I do not recall anyone raising their voice about it. And if anyone did, that voice was isolated and faint. Evidently, those in power – those who have usurped the right to decide – saw no political interest in such a celebration. Nor did they identify themselves with the coronation of Stefan the First-Crowned. After all, that crown arrived from the West. Unpopular and unacceptable in the imposed atmosphere of anti-Western hysteria. Even the First-Crowned no longer suits us.
History is always the first target. Once, Serbian history was erased. Today, it is abused. Once, it was suppressed; now, it is falsified.
Why?
In both cases – the brainwashing of the nation.
That is why we no longer understand what Serbia truly is. Was it born in 1217, or in 1944? To which civilisation does it belong – Eastern or European? What are the greatest values of its existence, its achievements and accomplishments? What are its mistakes, and what its sins?
Serbia is at a crossroads. Undefined and torn apart. Wounded and defeated, but not innocent. Crimes were committed in its name. Many of them. Sadly and shamefully so.
In the name of which Serbia? Who took a monopoly over it? By what right do they claim ownership of it – of its history and its welfare? Those who openly present themselves as Yugoslavs and who dislike Serbian identity are at least honest. But those who beat their chests proclaiming Serbian patriotism are either ignorant or dishonest.
There are no genuine ones left. That is why there is no Serbian statehood. No dignity. No integrity.
And no truth either.
(Radar, 25.05.2026)
https://radar.nova.rs/misljenja/milan-st-protic-drzavnost-srbija-radar/