Sarajevo

Home > Other > Sarajevo > Page 19
Sarajevo Page 19

by R W Seaton-Watson


  (see D.D., i., No. 10, Griesinger to Bethmann Hollweg).

  Herr Wendel refers (Die Habsburger und die Südslawenfrage, p. 60) to another

  circular of 10 July, in which the Serbian Government undertakes to bring before

  the courts any Serbian subjects mixed up in the murder, and to introduce

  legislation against the misuse of explosives, But of this there is no trace in the

  Serbian Blue Book.

  135

  check

  propagandist

  excess.

  Despite

  warnings

  of

  its

  Minister in Vienna, Mr. Jovan Jovanovié,1 it remained

  inactive for three weeks, and when at last, on 20 July, it

  presented at Berlin a Note formally inviting the German

  Government to use its good offices at the Ballplatz and

  affirming a desire to meet Austria's demands wherever

  possible.1 It was already far too late to produce any

  effect either in Berlin or Vienna, and, in point of fact,

  merely brought down a severe snub from Jagow upon the

  head of the Chargé d'Affaires. The Note was unexcep-

  tional in tone, and concluded by promising compliance

  on every point save only where Serbia's " dignity and

  independence

  "

  might

  be

  threatened.

  Reading

  the

  ultimatum in the light of this document, one is instantly

  reminded of Berchtold's secretly expressed resolve to

  frame it in such a manner as would make acceptance

  impossible.» Moreover, unless the German Government

  had already identified itself with Berchtold's views, such

  a document would have provided ample ground for a

  peaceful settlement; for its terms could easily have been

  interpreted as committing Serbia to as stringent an

  enquiry as European opinion might desire. The only

  obscure point which it contains is the assertion that the

  Serbian Government had " at once declared its readiness

  to take legal proceedings " against any Serbian subject

  who might be implicated. It is quite true that Samou-

  prava, the official Government organ, gave abstract

  expression to such a view when deploring the murder;

  and there is no evidence, either in the Serbian Blue Book

  1 See Serbian Blue Book, Nos. 23, 25, 31.

  2 D.D., I., No. 86. The main portions of this Note, supplemented by other

  details not given in the Berlin copy, were also circulated to all Legations abroad

  (see Serbian Blue Book, No. 30). It is very strange that the version published in

  the Serbian Blue Book also contains the pledge to introduce " a more drastic

  law against the misuse of explosives," but that this does not occur in the Berlin

  version.

  Hermann

  Wendel

  (Die Habsburger und die Südslawenfrage, p. 60)

  quotes the former only, assigning to it the date of 10 July instead of 19 July —

  a very important discrepancy, due perhaps to a misprint.

  3 See infra, p.p. 187, 194.

  136

  or elsewhere, of any official action having been taken from

  Belgrade in this sense.

  In point of fact, this passive attitude was entirely in

  keeping with the character and political tactics of the

  Serbian Premier. Mr. Pasic has always preferred to wait

  upon events rather than commit himself to a definite line

  of action; and he has also always shown a truly Oriental

  indifference to public opinion both about himself and

  about his country. The repeated failure to make the most

  of Serbia's case before Europe, even when it most lent

  itself to favourable presentment and when its enemies

  were active in misstatement, must be ascribed in large

  part to this indifference. Of all the subsequent collec-

  tions of diplomatic documents the Serbian Blue Book

  holds a record for paucity of material and inadequacy;

  though it is but fair to add that in preparing it for

  publication the Government was seriously handicapped

  by its precipitate withdrawal from Belgrade to Nis, many

  documents having perforce been left behind.1

  Energetic action by Mr. Pasic during the week or even

  fortnight following the murder would not, of course,

  have led the war party in Vienna to renounce its aims;

  but it would undoubtedly have deprived it of its tactical

  position, and increased the chances of friendly mediation

  from the outside. To this extent, then, the Pasic Cabinet

  must share the responsibility for what befell. It could no

  doubt plead absorption in an electoral campaign which

  threatened the whole future of the Radical party; but a

  true grasp of European realities should have shown that

  infinitely more was at stake. Yet Pasic remained passive,

  took no steps to put himself in the right at Vienna, and,

  on the other hand, allowed the reservists to be dismissed,

  1 It is only in the year 1925, since the completion of a new and adequate

  Foreign Office in Belgrade and the recovery of the documents removed during

  the Austrian occupation, that it has been possible to reorganise the Serbian

  archives on modern lines. When this process is complete, the Serbian Government

  will at last be able to fulfil its promise, and publish an adequate collection of

  documents on the origin of the war.

  137

  took no measures for the defence of Belgrade, and left

  the Commander-in-Chief, Voivode Putnik, to pursue his

  cure unwarned in an Austrian watering-place. All this

  doubtless serves to show that Pasic was not preparing for

  war, or even expecting it, till the very end; but it convicts

  him of great remissness and lack of judgment.

  Pasic's passive attitude was shared by the officials of the

  Serbian Foreign Office. The British Chargé d'Affaires,

  Mr. Crackanthorpe, reports on 2 July to London that

  " high words " passed between Mr. Grujic and the

  Austrian Counsellor, Herr von Storck, when the latter

  broached the idea of an investigation.1 Much later, on

  19 July, he himself discussed with Mr. Grujic The Times's

  suggestion that Serbia would do well to institute a

  Voluntary enquiry, and so forestall Vienna. But he was

  "met by the doctrinaire view that until the Sarajevo

  proceedings

  were

  published

  the

  Serbian

  Government

  "had no material on which such an enquiry could be

  based." He added that while an influential party in

  Vienna " wished to press Serbia to extremes," his

  Government " had certain knowledge that restraint would

  be exercised on Austria from Berlin,"* but unfortunately

  he gives no indication as to the source of his infor-

  mation.

  This

  disastrous

  miscalculation

  of

  the

  per-

  manent officials combined with the political absorption

  of their chiefs, and a golden opportunity was wasted.

  There was, however, a further reason for the Serbian

  Government's inaction at this critical time,
namely, the

  rôle played by the " Black Hand."· This secret society

  had been founded in 1911 by survivors of the group of

  offeers which

  had assassinated King

  Alexander and

  Gheen Draga in 1903, and which had been broken up

  very largely by British diplomatic intervention. Its

  1 Unprinted British Documents, Crackanthorpe to Grey, 2 July.

  2 Unprinted British Documents, Crackanthorpe to Grey, 19 July.

  4 This nickname was first given to it during a campaign launched in the

  Belgrade Press by an Austrian Jew named Konitzer, at the instance of the

  notorious Count Forgâch, then Austro-Hungarian Minister.

  138

  real name was " Union or Death " (" Ujedinjenje ili

  Smrt "), and its adherents were drawn from those who

  frankly accepted murder and terrorism

  as the best

  propagandist weapons, and were not content with the

  more open and respectable methods of social and educa-

  tional agitation for which the Narodna Odbrana (or

  Society of National Defence) had been founded in 1909,

  after the Bosnian crisis. It may be pointed out in passing

  — as a proof of the unreliability of the Austrian Secret

  Service — that both before and after the Sarajevo outrage

  Vienna completely failed to distinguish between the two

  organisations, though anyone at all closely acquainted

  with conditions at Belgrade knew them to be not merely

  distinct, but directly antagonistic to one another, and to

  be conducted by persons who were poles apart in outlook

  and policy.1

  The Narodna Odbrana was founded on the initiative of

  the dramatist Nusic, with the blessing of such tried

  statesmen as Milovanovic and Ljuba Stojanovic and the

  active

  co-operation

  of

  young

  idealists

  like

  Skerlic,

  Bozo Markovié, and Marjanovic, and existed to combat

  illiteracy and encourage popular education, temperance,

  and hygiene, to establish village libraries, clubs, and

  lectures, and, above all, to spread information and

  interest regarding national questions in all sections of

  the Slav race. This brought it inevitably into conflict

  with the Austro-Hungarian authorities, but there was

  nothing secret or subversive in its programme or tactics,

  except in so far as all national movements are bound to be

  subversive in a mixed state.

  Very different was the " Black Hand." It was founded

  in the first instance as a kind of protest against the

  1 This crass blunder is repeated by Alfred von Wegerer in his elaborate

  treatise " Der Anlass zum Weltkriege " (Die Kriegsschiildfrage for June 1925,

  p. 356). He treats the " Black Hand " as " in connection with " the Narodna

  Odbrana,

  though

  the

  two

  were

  notoriously

  at

  enmity.

  He

  also

  prints

  quite

  imaginary details regarding a secret section of the latter " for the execution of

  terrorist acts."

  139

  Government's refusal to authorise an active terrorist

  campaign in Macedonia, and its members were avowedly

  conspirators who ignored scruples and did not stick at

  crime. This tendency was increased by the melodramatic

  method of admission to membership; the candidate had

  to appear in a darkened room before a table draped in

  black, and take a high-sounding oath by the sun and

  earth, by God, honour, and life, while the symbol of the

  conspirators was a rude representation of a death's head,

  banner, dagger, bomb, and poison glass, surmounted

  by the motto " Union or Death."1 The life and soul of

  this society was Dragutin Dimitrijevic, a man of good

  education

  and

  attractive

  personality,

  brave,

  energetic,

  and a fiery patriot, and possessing real powers of organisa-

  tion, but entirely lacking in balance or common sense,

  and ruthless in his ambition. Personal vanity and a love

  of adventure also seem to have played their part, and he

  possessed sufficient magnetism and plausibility to rally

  round him some of the more unruly and reckless of the

  younger officers.

  These were troublous times for Serbia, and quite a

  number of the group distinguished themselves in the two

  Balkan Wars, and came to play an increasing part in

  military circles. In 1913 Dimitrijevic himself, now a

  colonel, became head of the Intelligence Bureau of the

  General Staff, and all matters of espionage passed

  through his hands. How much the Government knew of

  the " Black Hand's " real organisation and aims it is

  very difficult to determine, but for every possible reason

  — -moral, political, and purely tactical — they looked upon

  it with disfavour and suspicion, and there was already

  acute friction between them early in 1913, because

  Dimitrijevic and his friends, being specially interested in

  1 For a full account of the " Black Hand " see S. Stanojevic, Die Ermordung

  des Erzherzogs (1923), pp. 46-56; H. Wendel, Die Habsburgéi- und die Südslawen

  Vx924); D. R. Lazarevic, Die schwarze Hand (Lausanne, 1917); and my own

  article, " Serbia's Choice," in the New Europe for 22 August, 1918; but above

  all, Tajna Prevratna Organizacija (the report of the Salonica Trial of 1917).

  140

  Bosnia, favoured concessions to Bulgaria. This friction

  developed after the Second War into a quarrel between

  the civil administration and the army commanders in

  Macedonia. The new officials appointed from Belgrade

  were quite unequal to an admittedly difficult task, and, as

  the Serbian Constitution was not at first extended to the

  new territories, there was a virtual interregnum in wThich

  all kinds of sharp practices were tolerated. The dispute

  sometimes assumed most petty forms, and early in 1914

  a number of officers associated with the " Black Hand "

  demanded that a ministerial order giving precedence to

  the civil authorities should be rescinded.

  By this time the Government was thoroughly alarmed

  by the aggressive tactics of the " Black Hand," and,

  though now seemingly near the end of its resources, made

  a last effort to reassert its authority. In the spring

  Protic, the masterful Minister of the Interior, seized the

  club premises of " Union or Death " — a step virtually

  equivalent to a declaration of war. He is said to have

  concentrated 3,000 gendarmes in Belgrade as a safeguard

  against possible action. Dimitrijevic on his side appears

  to have wished to accept the challenge and to attempt a

  sort of military coup d'état; and only the intervention of

  the Russian Minister, Mr. Hartwig, who induced the

  Government to withdraw the objectionable order, averted

  more serious trouble.1 Protic's action, however, deserves

  special emphas
is, as one of the many proofs that the

  Serbian authorities, so far from being in league with the

  terrorists, were in acute and open conflict with them.

  Not merely this, but " Apis " has been accused of plan-

  ning a military revolt and the overthrow of the Pasic

  Cabinet, and, though this cannot be regarded as proved,

  there is nothing in the least improbable in it.2

  1 Stanojevié, op. cit., p. 54.

  2 Herr von Wegerer, in the article already quoted {Kriegsschuldfrage, June

  1925), calmly ignores this and treats the " Black Hand " as " enjoying great

  prestige -with the Serbian Government at the outbreak of war! " Two such funda-

  mental misconceptions deprive him of the right to be taken seriously on the whole

  question.

  141

  On the other hand, it is necessary to bear in mind that

  " Union or Death " had the support of many officers who

  were not terrorists, and that Dimitrijevic only revealed

  his real aims and secrets to a small inner ring of tried

  conspirators. It has been alleged1 that as early as 1911

  he had sent an emissary to Vienna with instructions to

  attempt the life of Francis Joseph or Francis Ferdinand

  but the individual selected was in a highly consumptive

  state, and was never heard of again by the plotters in

  Belgrade. Hence, though widely known for his love of

  intrigue and reckless patriotism, " Apis," as Dimitrijevic

  was popularly called, had not yet embarked upon terrorist

  action, save for the encouragement given to Komitadji

  bands during the Balkan campaigns; and this, of course,

  falls rather under the category of guerrilla warfare. It was

  among these band-leaders that " Apis " found his chief

  assistant, a certain Voja Tankosic, who as a young

  lieutenant had taken part in the murder plot of 1903.

  Tankosic was not a man of high ability, but an ideal

  instrument; for he could keep his own counsel, and

  behind a calm and even insignificant exterior hid a savage

  and ill-disciplined nature.«

  His adventures in Macedonia had brought him a certain

  notoriety and attracted to him some of the wilder students

  in Belgrade. Among these were the two young Bosnians,

  Princip and Cabrinovic, who were already deeply infected

  by revolutionary doctrine, and whose abnormal state of

  health rendered them apt pupils in terrorism. Tankosic

  therefore provided them with weapons and trained them

 

‹ Prev