How would Yugoslavia have turned out had Bulgaria also been part of it?

[-]

Maplelux@reddit

I don't remember much of what I read on this historical topic, but if I think for a moment, it wouldn't have been beneficial for USSR if Serbia and Bulgaria joined in one state. USSR had plans for both Y. And B. and no matter how it would go, it wouldn't have been good in regards to the USSR's politics against the West. Nevertheless both sides didn't want to participate in this.

[-]

Exotic_Talk_2068@reddit

It would be more balanced country nation-wise, without hegemony of one nation, but on the other hand, there would be no Macedonia, more strain on Albania from USSR to mess things up. Bulgarians also showed to be pro-Stalin so Tito would have problems there maybe even dictatorship would be ineffective. Problem years from end of WW2 until early 60s would be do-or-die for such Yugoslavia, dissolution would be faster with Soviet pressure.

[-]

hhanz0@reddit

Why do you think that there would be no Macedonia?

[-]

Exotic_Talk_2068@reddit

Most likely outcome is that Bulgaria would integrate it into it's own entity and not making it as a republic or autonomous province. Its independence and status as republic in current timeline Yugoslavia ows due to the fact it was not handed to or controlled by Bulgaria after Balkan Wars. As a nation it is distinguishable enough with its languague from Serbs to be easily assimilated but if the Bulgaria is in the mix assimilation into Bulgaria would be too easy to happen ,it specific situation would be different from Bosnia that avoided being incorporated into Serbia or Croatia because of Muslim Bosniak ethnic group that was not negligible. One of the reasons Bulgaria didn't entered Yugoslavia in our timeline was question of Macedonia also, and if the scenaario from question is achieved something has happened to lure Bulgaria in union, and this would be most likely lure for them to join.

[-]

Unable-Stay-6478@reddit

Turks would probably have their own autonomous province in Bulgaria.

[-]

abandonedtulpa@reddit

Considering Bulgaria was and still is similar in size and population to Serbia, it could’ve gone two ways. It might’ve acted as a counterbalance to Serbian influence and helped keep Yugoslavia more stable, or it could’ve led to even more bloodshed and further balkanization. Either way, it’s probably for the best it never happened.

[-]

cofi04@reddit

Is that "Serbian influence" currently in the room with us?

[-]

AndreiVid@reddit

No, luckily, Serbian influence doesn’t influence anything anymore

[-]

lesalesa23j@reddit

To be honest there was no “Serbian influence” until it was obvious that authoritarian regime days are numbered and that the first democratically elected president/PM would be Serb.

[-]

No_Search7380@reddit

What on are you on about? Like first democratically elected Serb president where? As in the who famously had members from each republic/autonomous province? With the president of the presidency rotating each year?

With the first person being blocked being Stjepan Mesić in May 1991, the Croatian member of the Presidency, who should have been president had it not been for said Serbian influence?

[-]

lesalesa23j@reddit

You misunderstood wat i wrote, with the inevitable downfall of the communist system it was clear that with democratisation and one-person-one vote Yu would have Serbs majority (with some other smaller nations) elect Serb president and Serb PM, no presidency from republics and APs, no rotation, and it was over just based on that fact.

[-]

nidorancxo@reddit

There were actual negotiations for this. It failed for two reasons: Bulgaria demanded that the center of power shift away from Belgrade and Yugoslavia become more multipolar which apparently wasn’t happening. Bulgaria was also much more USSR-oriented so when the USSR and Yugoslavia fell out the negotiations stopped.

I guess if it had succeeded it would have actually meant that Yugoslavia becomes a more decentralised country where no ethnicity is „in charge“ and this might have actually prevented the bloody dissolution. Maybe it would have also meant that Yugoslavia would be more like the USSR.

[-]

LenaLena93@reddit

Just why lol. Like we didn’t have enough diversity between countries that led to inevitable divisions and breakup.

Serbia has similarities with every ex YU country, more or less depending on the country, Bulgaria would’ve had even less so, plus it’s entirely different language.

[-]

PavelKringa55@reddit

Pretty close to Macedonian, so I see no big difference. Yugoslavia with Bulgaria? Maybe. Larger, more people, still a mess.

[-]

tamzhebuduiya@reddit

Bulgarians are much different than Macedonians, average Bulgarian mentality-wise is more similar with Ukrainaians and Russians than neighboring Macedonians.

[-]

Vulpes__Inculta@reddit

Veruj bugari su drugacij

[-]

determine96@reddit

gif

I'm sure "veruj" means that we are so much more awesome - right ?

[-]

Vulpes__Inculta@reddit

Its not about who is more awesome, its just that they are different.

[-]

determine96@reddit

I know I'm joking.

I communicate with Macedonians regularly and I also don't think they are that similar to us as some Bulgarians try to make them.

Way back in history they may have been, but as we say "A lot of water has leaked since then"

[-]

PavelKringa55@reddit

As the saying goes: a lot of water has leaked out of city pipe system since then.

[-]

LenaLena93@reddit

Samo su oni još falili

[-]

humanistazazagrliti@reddit

Bigger and either no war in the 90s, or a much messier war.

[-]

Ok_Eagle_3079@reddit

why would there be no war in th 90s ?

[-]

Beautiful-Dish-6275@reddit

Less serb dominance, big part of yugoslav instability.

[-]

No_Designer_8203@reddit

Sure, it wasn't the Croatian spring in 1970s nor the Bosniac Islamic radicalism also from the 1970d, but Serb dominance. How many Serb presidents or prime ministers in former Yugoslavia can you name?

[-]

Zrakoplovvliegtuig@reddit

Yes, it wasn't those things. It was the Serb dominance and increasing nationalism in Kosovo. Do you know how many Serbs were in high ranking military positions compared to other federal republics?

Where do you think movements for autonomy in these republics came from if not in resistance to political dominance from Belgrade?

[-]

Ujemegaz@reddit

Well, the facts prove you wrong. Serbia attacked Vukovar and tried to detach large swaths of lands in Croatia. As for Bosnian Islamic dominance, i never understood how that would be a threat to Serbians in Bosnia. Did the Bosnians intend to convert Serbians to islam?

[-]

No_Designer_8203@reddit

Alija Izetbegovic wrote in 1973 that there's no place for non muslims in Bosnia. You don't see an issue with that? Vukovar was a dominantly Serb city in 1991, it was not attacked but liberated. You honestly don't know what you're talking about. Please do some research before speaking out.

[-]

CmdrJemison@reddit

Vukovar was always a croatian city even before any Serbs settled there.

[-]

No_Designer_8203@reddit

We saw forgivness at Tompson's concert last August. When did the Serbs settle in Vukovar?

[-]

CmdrJemison@reddit

What happened at the Concert?

As far as I am aware Serbs settled in that area when the ottomans came.

[-]

No_Designer_8203@reddit

Tompson was celebrating the new Croatia, this is what happened. If serbs settled during ottoman times, why did the Nemanjic family build Serb orthodox monasteries in 14th century, like Krka and Krupa? For those that will come a few centuries later or for those that already lived there?

[-]

CmdrJemison@reddit

14th century? Nice. Yet it was already a croatian city before

[-]

No_Designer_8203@reddit

Krka and Krupa are not in Vukovar. You don't know what you're talking about.

[-]

CmdrJemison@reddit

I thought you were talking about Vukovar. Doesn't matter anyway as Vukovar is clearly a croatian city.

[-]

No_Designer_8203@reddit

I love new Croatia. I hear that Philipinos are 1/3 of population of Benkovac municipality. Why don't young Croats want to live there any more? When are you leaving?

[-]

CmdrJemison@reddit

I'm planing on coming back since I was born in germany ✌🏻 beautiful country. I heard many Serbs also going for work to Croatia.

[-]

No_Designer_8203@reddit

Oh ok. All clear. Take care, my dude.

[-]

CmdrJemison@reddit

Thanks. I will. It's time to move on and look ahead. The war was 35 years ago and the region needs stability instead of another hundred years of grudge towards each other.

[-]

alpidzonka@reddit

I can name a few leaderships of republics and pokrajinas toppled with the clandestine support of the leadership of the Serbian republic in the late 80s. Pretty sure that was more influential in pushing the country into war than Alija's big meanie manifesto from 15 years earlier.

[-]

No_Designer_8203@reddit

Please name the leadership of Yugoslavia including presidents and prime ministers that were Serbs and them list other nationalities. I can do it for you.

[-]

alpidzonka@reddit

Have you not read what I just said?

[-]

No_Designer_8203@reddit

You said you could name - please do. Use AI, whatever. Let's see how many were Serbs.

[-]

alpidzonka@reddit

Is this a language issue on your end? Maybe you need to reread that. I said I could name a few leaderships of republics and pokrajinas, not presidents or prime ministers of Yugoslavia.

Their names are less important but, in order of being "antibureaucratically revolutionized", here's some prominent examples. It goes Boško Krunić and Živan Berisavljević (Vojvodina), then Azem Vllasi and Kaqusha Jashari (Kosovo), then Radivoje Brajović and Vidoje Žarković (Montenegro). These were all toppled in the span of like 4 months, and it gave Milošević's faction four solid votes in the presidency for anything. This is what people typically mean when they say Serbian dominance, and not the ethnic backgrounds of the various prime ministers of the federation.

[-]

No_Designer_8203@reddit

So there were no Serb presidents or prime ministers in YU despite the Serb dominance?

[-]

alpidzonka@reddit

I mean technically Petar Stambolić was both prime minister in the 60s and president in the 80s (for a year, Yugoslavia had a rotating presidency, one for each unit and they rotated yearly).

Is your point just that you'll ignore my argument and repeat your stupid slobist DEI bullshit? Don't get me wrong, Yugoslavia tried to run DEI for the republics and pokrajinas. But alas, as in the 80s, so in this comment section, seems like Serbs want a bigger slice.

[-]

No_Designer_8203@reddit

Slobist DEI bullshit, really? When was the first monument to Jasenovac built? Should I answer that? 20 years after the war. Why? When will you wake up, sad girl?

[-]

alpidzonka@reddit

Wow that's crazy. Who was in power when it was built, the Chetniks?

[-]

No_Designer_8203@reddit

Why did they wait 20 years? You need to do more research about chetniks. https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0035729/

[-]

alpidzonka@reddit

Why did they wait 20 years?

Čekali da naprave ogromnu betonsku skulpturčinu, ti isti za koje si hteo pre sekund da impliciraš da su nešto gurali pod tepih? Šta mi tvrdiš, da pre toga nije bila spomen ploča, nije smelo da se spominje? Tako neke četničke fantazije? Smešno

You need to do more research about chetniks. https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0035729/

U jbt ako je Holivud snimio film mora da su good guys

Neću više odgovarati inače, od starta samo skrećeš temu sa ove AB revolucije. Jebiga, znam, nema mnogo šta tu da se doda.

[-]

No_Designer_8203@reddit

Naravno da su skrivali. Sve mi je jasno kad kazes -- cetnicke fantazije.nsma nista vise da se doda. Puno pozdrava.

[-]

ilijadwa@reddit

👏🏽👏🏽

[-]

pppktolki@reddit

The nationality of the leaders is not the decisive factor in this. Stalin was Georgian, but that didn't stop him from forcefully incorporating Georgia into the USSR, and brutally supressing the Georgians in favor of the Russians. Hitler was Austrian, but Austria was annexed by Germany, not as an equal partner, but merely as one of the provinces.

I find it ironic that you mention the Croatian spring -- which aimed to counter Serb dominance -- in order to totally negate the Serb dominance theory.

And what about pre-WW2 Yugoslavia (I don't see it being excluded from the question)? During that period all PM's, and heads of state were Serbs.

[-]

humanistazazagrliti@reddit

I'm not sure if there would be, that's why I wrote both. But if there wouldn't be, I'd say it's due to the Orthodox people being a majority and countries like Croatia and B&H not wanting to risk such an imbalanced war. But then again, Macedonians have historical debt with Bulgaria, too. Who knows.

[-]

Stealthfighter21@reddit

I'm not sure what Orthodoxy has to do with anything. Serbs have been some of our worst enemy throughout history.

[-]

humanistazazagrliti@reddit

My post didn't relate to issues between Bulgaria and Serbia, so I'm not sure how your reply relates to it.

[-]

Stealthfighter21@reddit

Yes, you implied that being Orthodox would scare Croatia and Bosnia from declaring independence. Meaning, Bulgaria would be on Serbia's side for religious reasons.

[-]

humanistazazagrliti@reddit

No, I think that Croatia and B&H might have been scared to declare independence forcefully and rather wait for another opportunity later. Maybe by negotiating their way out of the federal state. I didn't necessarily think that Bulgaria might be on Serbia's side, just that Croats and Bosniaks might be afraid that Orthodox people might stick together as Yugoslav ultra-nationalism largely exploited the traditional adherence of the individual groups to specific religions. But it might be that Bulgaria, which is a big country, could have changed the entire way nationalism is thought about in Yugoslavia. It might have had a more unifying effect, but it might have been much messier. Hence in my first post I mentioned that it either might have been a deterrent to war, but also we might have had a much messier war.

[-]

Connected_Scientist@reddit

I didn't know much about Bulgaria, but I recently read a bit about its history.

I thought Serbia was quite supportive in the time around when Bulgaria regained independence and the second state was founded.

I know there were also some conflicts, though. Still I'm surprised. Are there still tensions today? I would have thought there was some pan-slavic sympathy like with Russia?

[-]

Stealthfighter21@reddit

Oh yeah, they were so supportive that they declared war on Bulgaria after the unification with Eastern Rumelia.

[-]

Connected_Scientist@reddit

Yes and they lost.

But I think they hosted Vasil Levski and fought on the Russian side in the Russian -Ottoman war that led to the foundation of Bulgaria?

I'm just curious, I read a bit about it but maybe I got things wrong.

So what I'm getting, today's relationship with Serbia is still dominated by historical resentments?

[-]

Stealthfighter21@reddit

No, it's very much dominated by present day animosity.

[-]

_nzatar@reddit

Bulgaria would probably be the first to leave after the death of Tito thats for sure

[-]

humanistazazagrliti@reddit

Could be, yeah. It would have had the size and numbers to pull it off, maybe even without a war.

[-]

VladimirLogos@reddit

The control of the two seas would make the country a lot more economically prosperous and that would lead to better education, science and healthcare. It would however need to make the same decision regarding Stalin. There would be even more money pouring in from the West to act as a tampon zone against the USSR as the lack of Black Sea control would give the West incentive to project more power in that area through Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia would be even more allied with Greece, but possibly in a greater collision with Turkey as by the 90s it would have a far bigger population than the countries did on their own and would become a major rival to Turkey due to its size.

[-]

Mental-Book4148@reddit

Taking the fact that Yugoslavia was a Serbian centric federation, due to the bigger population and power projection Serbia had after WWI, the main idea of the country was to solidify the Serbian sphere of influence in the Balkans. Bulgaria on the other hand tried creating the same sphere of influence but was stopped due to defeats in the Second Balkan War and WWI, but I would still conceder Serbia and Bulgaria to have been equal when it comes to population, economy.(at the time) and military capability (Bulgaria having better military competence here) , with a slight advantage of Serbia as the de facto winners in the Second Balkan War and WWI. So I would still think that Bulgaria to join Yugoslavia, it would have joined as an equal to Serbia. That would mean that Bulgaria would want to have its own sphere of influence inside of Yugoslavia and for me that would be Macedonia and parts of south Serbia (mainly Torlakian land). So I would say that if hypothetically this happened, Macedonia would have kept its original Bulgarian culture, linguistics and would have been way more pro-Bulgarian than it is now as it wouldn't have gone thought the whole Serbianisation it went trough. We would have seen a more bulgarinased south Serbia as well. The Union wouldn't last long as Serbia would try to influence Bulgaria as it did with Croatia throughout the Union but Bulgarians wound't like that very much and would rebel agents it. It would eventually collapse very fast. I would have given ti 10-15 years max.

[-]

Capital-Driver7843@reddit

Vanco Mihailov would like to know more about this plan.

[-]

Lazy_Following3564@reddit

There were negotiations to create the Balkan federation. Bulgaria wanted to be 1+1, Bulgaria + Yugoslavia, but Yugoslavia wanted Bulgaria to be +1 into Yugoslavia. There were even preparations on Bulgarian side as to make Macedonian identity bigger, but once Georgi Dimitrov got killed everything was barred.

[-]

Kosovar_in_Canada@reddit

Serbia would have lost one more war than they did 😅

[-]

PavelKringa55@reddit

No clue why Bulgarians would want to be in the same state with Serbians.
I know that would never whish such a thing upon anyone.

[-]

Stealthfighter21@reddit

That's why it didn't happen.

[-]

moisthotdogg@reddit

I'm pretty sure some plans were made about this but it never happened? Good that it didn't though, probably would've meant more war during the collapse of Yugoslavia

[-]

deviendrais@reddit

Considering how much Tito liked to split up Serbia, Bulgaria would’ve probably gotten Macedonia and South-Eastern Serbia.

[-]

Th3Dark0ccult@reddit

Nope. We know his plans for Bulgaria if we joined. He was going to give southwestern Bulgaria to Macedonia and he was going to carve up the rest of Bulgaria into 3.

[-]

Unable-Stay-6478@reddit

Considering how much Tito liked to split up Serbia

This is laughable.

[-]

determine96@reddit

It was the opposite with Macedonia.

Even the Pirin region would have joined Macedonia and Bulgaria would've been given very small part of the Eastern Serbia, the one annexed from Serbia after WW1, Bosilegrad and Dimitrovgrad.

[-]

IdealJaded9298@reddit

I thought the deal was Pirin/Bulgarian Macedonia goes to Macedonia,Bulgaria gets some small part of eastern Serbia and then Thrace becomes autonomous inside Bulgaria but I could be wrong

[-]

Th3Dark0ccult@reddit

Very badly for Bulgaria. I'm glad we dodged that bullet after all the other dumb mistakes our country made in the previous years.

[-]

dobrits@reddit

It would either be still around and flourishing our the civil war would be legendary.

[-]

Ujemegaz@reddit

Probably a war for southern Serbia. I think Macedonia would still manage to jump boat, as Bulgaria considers Macedonians as their kin, and would not wage war to worsen their reputation, in the hopes they could extend influence later on. Even Milosevic took such approach regarding Macedonia, and Serbian influence there is still rocking.

[-]

villke@reddit

Macedonian identity was accepted by Tito, with Bulgaria in Yugoslavia, that wouldn't happen so probably repression to remove Macedonians as separate identity from Bulgaria. Probably guerrilla warfare and war even. Possibly greater success in Yugoslav approach to Albania as a member of Federation. As for war for southern Serbia that would be dependent how much issue would Macedonians cause for Bulgarians.

[-]

Ujemegaz@reddit

Albania was almost absorbed into Yugoslavia way back when Tito and Hoxha were buddies.

[-]

Unable-Stay-6478@reddit

It would have been awesome.

[-]

kezajan@reddit

The eventual breakup would've been a lot messier, because on top of serbian expansionism in bosnia and croatia you'd also have bulgarian interests in macedonia and southeastern serbia. So possibly another front in the 90s war

[-]

Unable-Stay-6478@reddit

You also had Croatian expansionism in Bosnia.

[-]

Altruistic-Board5322@reddit

Bulgaria had a massive military during Balkan wars on early 1900 (even if they lost both wars) i dont think that they would easily accept the Serbian ruling

[-]

RegionSignificant977@reddit

It wasn't massive. It was fierce.

[-]

Altruistic-Board5322@reddit

Yeap, mea culpa, i ment fierce, not massive.I remember a historian at school that said something like "the greatness of Greek army during Balkan wars can only be fully understood only if you see the capability of the Bulgarian one"

Tha comment was not into curriculum but i still remember it

[-]

RegionSignificant977@reddit

We had to fight Greece, Turkey, Serbia and Romania together in the second Balkan war. Bulgaria captured Edrine (Αδριανούπολη) during the first Balkan war, which was very modern fortification and was considered impossible to capture.

[-]

Altruistic-Board5322@reddit

I think your foreign policy skills were really bad.

A great army with bad politicans is way easier opponent than a bad army with great politicians.

[-]

RegionSignificant977@reddit

I don't think it's only a matter of local politics. It was great powers at the time that wanted influence on the Balkans and their views on Balkan countries as allies and balance of powers between them. We ended up right in the middle. It is a great political success that Bulgaria wasn't torn apart after WWI.

[-]