Slobodan Antonic's Could A Confederation Have Saved Yugoslavia

The ties that bound the republics institutionally, politically, and economically were fraying at the seams, but can these incentives be linked to the overall demise of the Yugoslav state? The literature suggests yes, these institutionally motivated behaviors can be linked to processes that were triggers for state breakdown. The first corrosive process was the gridlock. Several constitutional amendment processes were started to no avail in the 80s. These included compromises that would reform Yugoslavia into such a loose confederation, as to be even less pressing then the then European Community, and those that rebound it tightly into a federation. In Slobodan Antonić’s 2007 paper “Could a Confederation Have Saved Yugoslavia” he outlines this process, in which each republic would propose reforms that would be unilaterally rejected by anyone who was not already a

He writes “Indeed, the transition from communism to democracy in Eastern Europe is marked by a direct use of nationalism as the source of the political legitimacy of regimes, … And if nationalism is the technology of rule in a society dominated by politics, … it is obvious that in such societies it is easy to produce … conflicts on a long-term basis” (Antonic, 478). The article points to the idea that when the ability of the elites to maintain control of the state through its institutions breaks down, nationalism becomes the tool of choice to hold on to power, not just in Yugoslavia but regionally. The severe gridlock that plagued the republics made even having a discussion about something as fundamental as the constitutional underpinnings and relationships in the state almost impossible to have, breaking down institutions, encouraging nationalism, and leaving behind a situation ripe for