In 1971, there were Hollywood stars in Yugoslavia Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton for the movie Sutjeska, was held real bullfights at Tašmajdan in Belgrade, but the country was also shaken by serious political events.
Croatia was swept by a wave of reforms in politics, culture and society, with a bright national color.
It was demanded that the state, although socialist, should interfere less in the economy through the introduction of market principles, and that it should be decentralized - so that more powers would be given to the republics.
At the same time, the Croatian nation and language were talked about, hymns were sung, articles were written, and this charge spilled over from scientific gatherings to the streets.
In this "movement" of the people, later named Croatian spring or Mass Movement (Maspok) was attended by Matica Hrvatska and students, but was led by officials of the ruling party of the Alliance of Communists.
"Etatists, unitarists and Greater Serbian chauvinists offer us the kind of Yugoslavia we don't want, we don't want someone else's, we don't give ours, we are the masters and creators of socialism and our own future," said the leader of the Croatian communists. Savka Dabčević Kučar in front of tens of thousands of people in the center of Zagreb in 1971, which was greeted with a standing ovation.
At the end of the year, on December 1 and 2, in a villa in Karađorđevo, Vojvodina, at a meeting of the party leadership, it was decided that this movement is secessionist - party leaders such as Dabčević Kučar and her colleague Mika Tripala will leave their state and political positions, and many supporters were arrested and convicted.
Three actors Ivan Zvonimir Čičak and Žarko Puhovski, who were students in Zagreb during the turbulent 1971, and Stjepan Mesić, a young politician at the time, spoke about these events for the BBC.
- From the Croatian Spring to the partition of Bosnia: What agreements are hidden by the walls of Tito's villa in Karađorđevo
- Ivo Goldstein: What are the myths and what are the truths about the relations between Serbs and Croats in the Second World War
- Mesić told the BBC: "So much war has been fought and blood has been shed, and the borders have not changed even a millimeter."
Woke up the nation
In the multi-colored movement of the Croatian people, Čičak was the national option, Puhovski against the nationalists, but he supported liberalization and democratization, and Mesić, as a party cadre, supported the reform trend within the League of Communists.
When Croatia declared independence 20 years later and the breakup of Yugoslavia began, Puhovski and Čičak led the non-governmental organization Helsinki Committee for Human Rights, and Mesić was the last president of the Presidency of the SFRY and later of Croatia.
Ivan Zvonimir Čičak, then a student of the Faculty of Philosophy in Zagreb, who died on November 6 at the age of 77, said earlier that he was among those who stood for Croatian nationalism and secessionism.
"It is a legitimate political option until there is violence and hatred," he told me this spring in his home in Zagreb.
For him, the Croatian Spring was "completely anti-Yugoslav" and successful - it did what it needed to - it woke up the nation.
"In the short period of a year and a half that this movement rumbled through Croatia, so much literature, books, and magazines were published that people filled up their reserves," Čičak said.
Confederation or State
The Croatian Spring should be seen in the context of the system at that time and the debates that have been started around political, but also economic and cultural issues since the 1960s, says historian Petar Žarković.
"There are a lot of questions about what Yugoslavia will look like, how autonomous provinces will be constituted in Serbia, all of this has created an atmosphere that the party has never faced before.
"At the same time, one party and six republics," says a research associate at the Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory in Belgrade.
He sees reform processes as a result of social development, there were more literate people who read the press and books.
Speaking about the importance, Žarko Puhovski would not count the Croatian spring even among the five most important events of the 20th century in Croatia.
"It lost its significance in 1991, when what no one talked about in 1971 appeared, which is the state, because at that time they were talking about a confederation," says Puhovski, now a professor at the Faculty of Philosophy.
Although some 'springers' claim that they said "equality and thinking about independence" Hrvatske, then a student of political science, claims that this is not true.
"The only man who openly said that - Hrvoje Šošić - was considered a kind of madman," says Puhovski.
Economist Hrvoje Šošić proposed that Croatia should become a full member of the United Nations (UN).
While many in later interpretations said that Šošić's proposal was a clear sign of moving towards independence, historian Hrvoje Klasić points out that it was taken out of context.
Šošić's idea, he says, was for Yugoslavia to model itself on the Soviet Union, which as a huge country had three seats in the UN - Russia, Belarus and Ukraine.
"There were certainly intellectuals who thought that it would be better if Yugoslavia didn't exist, but neither did they have a small influence in society, nor did they say it clearly.
"With a strong Yugoslavia in 1971, and the strong authority of Tito, only someone who is a complete amateur could think about breaking up the state," says the professor at the Faculty of Philosophy in Zagreb.
How did it start?
The Croatian Spring, named after the Prague Spring of 1968, lasted longer than that season - almost two years.
"In history, this term is used for periods when nation states are created, such as the Spring of Nations in 1848.
"Prague Spring was an attempt to build socialism with a human face, many say that in Croatia it was an attempt to build an even more human socialism," says Klasić.
Later, the term Maspok was used more often with a negative connotation, especially in Serbia.
It was a "Yugoslav and communist movement, initiated and led by key people of the Union of Communists of Croatia, including Croats and Serbs from Croatia," adds the historian.
"No one - Slavka, Tripalo, Pero Pirker - never questioned Yugoslavia, communism and Tito," says Klasić.
At large rallies, the gathered carried the messages "Tito is ours", but also "Savka and Miko".
The Croatian Spring was preceded by years of controversy within the Party about how the country should develop.
A supporter of a strong central government - the vice president of Yugoslavia Aleksandar Ranković he was dismissed due to alleged accusations that he had eavesdropped on Tito in 1966.
In the general spirit of reform, greater freedoms are sought, especially in Croatia, but also "clean accounts", as they used to say, that is, money earned in more developed republics such as Croatia and Slovenia should remain there.
Stipe Mesić also wished for such a "fairer distribution of money" among the republics.
He supported, he says, the "progressive line" of the Central Committee of Croatia - embodied in Kučar and Tripala, with whom he was personally on good terms.
"Many of us thought that it was enough that you have the most important officials who demand more civil liberties and that the federation federates.
"The Croatian Spring is not one-dimensional, it is a movement in which there were many participants with different demands," says Mesić, at the time the president of the small municipality of Orahovica.
The diversity was contributed by the renewal of Matica Hrvatska, which opens hundreds of branches throughout Croatia, dealing with cultural issues and the Croatian literary language.
"Suddenly everyone is dealing with culture," laughs the 90-year-old Mesić.
"When the branch opens, the Croatian national anthem is played, vigils (patriotic songs) are sung, flags and coats of arms are carried.
"Individuals, whom we can freely call provocateurs and ignorant people, come forward with the view that Croatia should declare independence or form its own army," says Mesić, adding that this was far from reality at the time.
- Memorandum to SANU: "Dynamite under the foundations of Yugoslavia" or an attempt to "preserve" the federation
- Aleksandar Ranković, from the second man of Yugoslavia to the number one enemy of the state
- How the invasion ended the Prague Spring in 1968
Students and genie in a bottle
Puhovski points out that the pattern from 1948 was repeated when Tito said 'you in Moscow can't know what we need in Belgrade', the same was said 'you in Belgrade can't know what we need in Zagreb or Ljubljana'.
"I can't say that the Croatian Spring was wrong in itself, I was against massiveness and clapping and hysteria, as well as that Belgrade is considered to be a representative of evil, and Zagreb is good.
"But they dragged some things into the public that were not talked about until then - the topics of language and decentralization," says Puhovski.
In a state that ideologically propagated the brotherhood and unity of peoples and nationalities, nationalism also appears more and more clearly.
This was also seen during the strike at the University of Zagreb, where polemics about student life took on political contours.
"At the time when the conflict at the University was escalating on April 4, 1971, among students who were politically oriented, the ratio was 6:4 for nationalists, six months later I think it was 95:5, literally the two of us remained on this side.
"They led us from meeting to meeting like bears on a chain and it was like pluralism," says Puhovski.
Speeches at the University were often given by Čičak, whom the British media called "Cicero from Zagreb", the biography states.
He looked at Spring as a multi-year process, and he singles out the report of the writer Miroslav Krleža on the 130th anniversary of the Illyrian movement in May 1966, when the debate on the Croatian language begins, as an important date.
"That was a turning point in history when the national consciousness was liberated in Croatia and a spirit of freedom and liberalism was created, which was suppressed immediately in 1972, but it could no longer be put back in the bottle," said Čičak.
Connected
- How Ante Marković, the last prime minister of SFR Yugoslavia, was overthrown
- Milka Planinc - steel lady of Yugoslav politics and woman for times of crisis
- Korčula summer school: On vacation with philosophers
Tito both supported and condemned
It can be said that the Croatian Spring began in January 1970 with the Žanko case and ended in early December 1971 with the party session in Karađorđevo, says Klasić, co-author of the documentary TV series about the Croatian Spring and author of a book about that period in Sisak.
Miloš Žanko, a Croat from Split, was a communist and partisan, a first-time fighter, who held positions at the federal level and was critical of the ideas of the Croatian leadership to move towards decentralization.
At the session, which was the first to be televised, says Klasić, the party leadership condemned Žanko with a letter as someone who was ignoring the currents of reform.
"Tito gave the green light to deal with him," he adds.
Even in September 1971, Tito would praise the leadership for reforms and decentralization in the Esplanade, even though every slightest attempt at nationalism was cut at the root, he adds.
"Tito knew that nationalism - Croatian and Serbian - were the cancer of early Yugoslavia and that whenever they appeared, it would not end well."
These are in a Zagreb hotel said that the stories that there is no unity in Croatia and that chauvinism and nationalism are flourishing are absurd.
Along with the political turmoil and the flourishing of cultural events, students start a strike and these events take place on several tracks.
When the movement became massive, it was a "red signal for Tito", says Puhovski.
"He was an old routinist who knew very well that the rebellion in the Politburo was resolved in an hour and a half, but if it spilled out into the streets - all sorts of things would happen.
"At the same time, in all political systems, and especially such, paranoia is a professional disease of the political class, and here it was especially linked to the possibility of enemy emigration sneaking in," says the professor.
In April 1971, the Yugoslav ambassador to Sweden was assassinated Vladimir Rolović in the assassination of Croatian extreme nationalists, who lived in emigration.
Mesić also testifies how much the news from Zagreb "excited" Belgrade.
Savka Dabčević Kučar called him, she says, to help her and try to influence the students to end the strike, so that "excited" Belgrade would get the impression that the Croatian leadership was keeping things under control, but to no avail.
The Croatian party leadership was later accused in an affair of cooperating with the Ustasha emigration, which the historian also spoke about. Latina Perović, who at that time was the secretary of the Central Committee of the Union of Communists of Serbia.
A special session was held in Brioni full of polemics, where Tito told how Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev called him to ask what was happening in Yugoslavia.
It's three years later Prague Spring, when the Soviet Union violently suppressed an attempt to reform the party leadership, with the entry of Warsaw Pact troops into Prague.
"At that time, both the party and the state are at a crossroads, and the geostrategic context is important - Yugoslavia is surrounded by the states of the Warsaw Pact and the Eastern Bloc.
"They are aware that a form of reform socialism was suppressed by force in 1968," says Žarković.
The Croatian leadership responded with a statement, despite the position of the federal party, which was considered "blasphemy, scandal, separatism", described Latinka Perović.
Puhovski rejects the claims that the 'springers' were influenced by the then scattered Ustasha emigration as "an attempt at compromise".
The 1970s were closer to the Second World War than societies in the Balkans are today from the breakup of Yugoslavia, he reminds.
"Our generation was used to new things, we watched other movies, listened to new music and old stories nobody could bear as primitive.
"NDH and Jasenovac were not mentioned then, the anti-fascist character of the state was accepted," says Puhovski.
The Jasenovac Ustaše camp is the place where tens of thousands of Serbs, Jews and Roma suffered during the puppet fascist Independent State of Croatia during the Second World War.
Watch the video: Soviets and allies occupied the capital of Czechoslovakia in 1968 to stop liberalization
Repression and "Ustasha" labels
When the student strike at the University became radicalized, and various behind-the-scenes stories from Zagreb reached Tito, the generals exerted pressure that "something must be done," says Mesić.
This was followed by Tito's meeting with the Croatian leadership and the session of the Presidency of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia in Karađorđev 1-2. December 1971, after which the politicians resigned.
Tito accused the Croatian leadership of chauvinism and nationalism, which was the trigger for the beginning of repression.
Nevertheless, in the following 1972, no one from the first echelon of the Party ended up in prison for nationalism and secessionism.
"Savka, Tripal and the others were criticized for being too tolerant towards it, not because they were that, the same was true with the Serbian liberals - no one ended up in prison," says Klasić.
Latinka Perović and Marko Nikezić were at the head of the Serbian leadership of the party during the Croatian Spring, and they shared many views with the Croatian leadership on the need for democratization of society, and they were generationally close.
Perović later called the way in which Tripalo and Kučar were replaced "a mistake for the next 100 years" for the relations between Serbs and Croats, because the demand for autonomy and democratization was interpreted by Stalinists as treason.
Nine months after the 21st session of the Central Committee in Karađorđevo, where they also participated, Perović and Nikezić were replaced in 1972 in the so-called "liberal purge".
"Tito holds both the Serbian and Croatian leadership responsible for the unstable situation in the entire country, that's why we can talk about the Yugoslav spring of 1972.
"It was considered that the center of the counter-revolution was also in Belgrade, generals gathered who wanted to invite the Soviets, professors at the faculties were replaced, nationalism was rampant, that's why he calls both to be responsible," says Žarković.
The meeting in Karađorđevo was a turning point that Serbian leaders were aware of, he adds.
"Karađorđeva's language, the indictment that was written against the Croatian leadership, how their downfall was explained, was also an indictment against the Serbian leadership at the same time.
"At the end of the 1980s, it was said in Serbia that the Serbian liberals failed in order to create a balance, that is absolutely not true, they all failed on conceptual issues," says the co-author of the paper on Serbian liberals and Croatian spring.
After Karađorđev, student leaders, champions of Matica Hrvatska, were arrested, hundreds of people were convicted of political offenses, and purges were carried out of thousands of party members, he writes. Croatian encyclopedia.
Marko Veselica, Croatian economist and politician, leader of Matica hrvatska, Vlado Gotovac, editor of Hrvatski tjednik, and student leaders Čičak and Budiša received some of the biggest sentences.
Čičak was sentenced to three years of rigorous imprisonment, of which several months were spent in solitary confinement in Lepoglava, and he was banned from public engagement for three years.
That is not a big price for what has been achieved - he claimed that he would do it all again.
"There is no serious biography here without a few years in prison, but it was something that carried you, enthusiasm and the desire for freedom," he said.
For him, Proleće was "anti-communist, but not anti-Serbian".
"I know that in Belgrade it is seen that as soon as someone is anti-Yugoslav, that means they are anti-Serbian, and 'maspokovac' means Ustasha."
"Unfortunately, these are the matrices we still live in today, like in Croatia when you say Serb, it's like saying Chetnik," Čičak said.
Proceedings were also conducted against Mesić, but he defended himself at liberty.
They found him guilty and he was sentenced to one year in prison, which he served in Stara Gradiška.
They called him a Croatian nationalist, although he never felt that way.
"My father married a Serbian woman, I married a Serbian woman, there was never nationalism in my family, the Ustasha killed 11 members of my family, my grandfather and grandmother, my wife was killed all in Jasenovac".
Because of the label maspokovac, during the seventies and eighties, Mesić could neither work as a lawyer nor get a job in the civil service.
He went to more than 150 job vacancies, and would find a job for two or three months at a time in factories, hospitals, companies, until the workers' councils found out about the stain from the past.
His passport was returned to him only after 15 years, says the experienced politician relieved.
Croatia's silence and echoes in the spring of 1991.
Due to Maspok and repression, Croatia became one of the most rigid communist republics until the breakup of Yugoslavia, and Serbia often does not want to hear that, notes Klasić.
"There are no public manifestations of nationalism in Croatia until the appearance of Tuđman, unlike in Serbia.
"In the 1980s, we had the most Yugoslav politicians at the head of the party in Croatia - Stipa Šuvar, Ivica Račan, the boss was a Serb, Stanko Stojčević, at a time when Serbia had Milošević," says Klasić.
This, he adds, was also seen in the so-called White Book of Stipe Šuvar, which he produced in 1984 on the phenomena of nationalism in literature, where the largest part was dedicated to Serbian nationalist writers and intellectuals.
"Croatian nationalism was pushed under the carpet in 1971, and when the SANU Memorandum and events in Serbia started, Croatia remained silent - that's Croatian silence.
"Croatia became silent in 1972 and became very loyal," says Klasic, adding that he is convinced that Serbian nationalism was just fueled by Croatians in the late XNUMXs.
Draft Memorandum of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts (SANU) was written by 16 academics as a response to the economic and social crisis during the 1980s in socialist Yugoslavia, but many believe that the document deepened the crisis even more.
Although from Mothers of Croatia they say that this movement "paved the way for the independence of Croatia", there are polemics about this.
The Croatian spring was not a springboard in 1991, when Croatia declared independence, because the matter was taken over by (the first president of Croatia) Franjo Tuđman, who in 1971 was the "third league", points out Žarko Puhovski.
"He was not in the top 10 in Matica Hrvatska, neither by lyrics nor by reputation," he adds.
The key players from 1971 turned out to be extras in the whole story as unprepared, adds Klasić.
Student leaders who had more credibility or credit from 1971, primarily Dražen Budiša and Čičak, did not play an important role in the nineties, he adds.
"There was a reputation that the Croatian Spring was some kind of homogeneous movement in which everyone had similar goals, and as it was heterogeneous then, it became even more heterogeneous at the end of the eighties, when literally every prominent Springer founded his own party," says the historian.
Nevertheless, their ideas entered Statutory date: 1974. which gave the republics more powers.
"The Spring ideas won, but the Spring activists ended up outside politics, and some even in prison," concludes Klasić.
Connected
- Five things you should know about the 1974 Constitution of Socialist Yugoslavia.
- How the British lord's attempt to prevent war in Yugoslavia failed
- Vladimir Rolović, ambassador "killed to break up Yugoslavia"
- Three decades since the day Croatia decided to leave Yugoslavia
- What did Tito own: "Everything was Broz's and nothing was his"
Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube i Viber. If you have a topic suggestion for us, please contact bbcnasrpskom@bbc.co.uk
Bonus video:
