Manawatu Evening Standard. SATURDAY, MAR. 25. 1939. THE CROATS’ DEMANDS.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIX, Issue 98, 25 March 1939, Page 8

Manawatu Evening Standard. SATURDAY, MAR. 25. 1939. THE CROATS’ DEMANDS.

The Croats’ demand to the Serbians for home rule causes little surprise. It is the manifestation of a national feeling which has been exhibited prominently in Yugoslavian politics for some time past, and resisted by the Serb and Slovene majority who are prepared to try to hnd some way in which the Croats’ aims can be satisfied without causing internal dissension. Immediately following his success at the general election in December last, the Prime Minister (Dr. Stoyadinovitch) set himself the task of seeking to find a basis of agreement with Dr. Macliek, the Leader of the Croat Peasant Party, and the leading- figure in the Upjjosition. Dr Macliek triumphed in the Croatian and Dalmatian constituencies, in a manner equally impressive as the Prime Minister’s success iu the wider sphere. The election was not without bitterness, and Dr. Machek’s capture of SO per cent, of the seats in these constituencies was attributed by his opponents to the violent measures of his partisans. As leader of the Croats he wields a power the Government recognises and is wisely trying to turn to the advantage of the State. Some of his followers wish to see Croatia linked to the rest of Yugoslavia by the Crown but otherwise independent ; others have expressed contentment with a federal union. Now, however, Dr. Machek has made a public demand for home rule, and has been influenced no doubt by the latest,happenings in Europe. Such a demand cannot be without interest in Germany to whom a divided Yugoslavia might be an easy prey once Herr Hitler turns his eyes southwards. It may not inconceivably be that Dr. Machek anz his followers are receiving szine moral support from Berlin.

The time, it has been well said, is most unpropitious for experimental policies in Yugoslavia. That statement receives added emphasis now. For separatist or federal ideologies to gather strength would weaken the country internally and would arouse the Serbs and Slovenes to action against the Croats. Dr. Stoyadinovitch has fulfilled his pledge

to try to find some means whereby an agreement can be reached, but apparently has met with failure in view of the Croats’ demand for home rule. He is faced, however, with limits in which to make concessions. One of these is constitutional, as he claims that the Constitution cannot be changed until the young King comes of age. It is contended, too, that it would be unwise to place upon the King the ultimate responsibility for the conversion of a unitary State into a federation or a dual monarchy. With a full realisation of its responsibility the Serb Press lias generally expressed itself in favour of making concessions within constitutional limits. It would be singularly unfortunate were Ur. Machek determined to press claims for autonomy within the State to the utmost of the Croats’ power, for the Government at Belgrade would be compelled to seriously resist the demands which have come at a very awkward time, when it is necessary, in the national interests, to present a united front to danger that may threaten from another quarter. The Croats’ present policy is in sharp contrast to the years when they were anxious, as part of the Austrian-llungarian minority, to join with Serbs in a similar plight in union with Serbia, a national aim which was facilitated by the defeat of the Ilual Monarchy in the Great War. Though a minority still, it is difficult to see what can be gained by the Croats by dividing the Yugoslavian State.