Page:The New Europe (The Slav standpoint), 1918.pdf/67

 is a clear connection; the weakening of Bohemia by Austria reached its climax under Maria Theresa and made the partition of Poland easier.

In the Austrian Parliament the Czechs and Poles frequently worked together; the accord was not complete, but this war must open the eyes of the leaders of both nations; the common danger of the present and the future must unite both nations in a common and well-defined policy.

50. The connection between the important Jugoslav question and the Czecho-Slovak and Polish questions is formed in the common danger caused by the Pangerman plan of Central Europe, which makes for the preservation of not only Austria-Hungary but also of Turkey. The Jugoslavs are in the South what the Czecho-Slovaks and Poles are in the North—the vanguard against German and Magyar aggression. The Slovaks no longer have any common frontiers with the Jugoslavs, but centuries ago they were immediate neighbours, until the incursion of the Magyars into the former Panonia separated the two nations; now Slovak islands extend all the way to the Serbian border, while Croatian colonies previously mentioned reach across German and Magyar territory along the Austro-Hungarian frontier as far north as Moravia, and besides, there are Czech colonies in Croatia. In spite of the fact that Czechs and Slovaks are no longer neighbours of the Jugoslavs, their political, literary, and cultural reciprocity, and more recently also their economic reciprocity, is very close. The common parliament gave opportunity for political co-operation.

The Jugoslavs have grasped fully the fact that an independent Czecho-Slovak State is for them also a vital question; for the Germans and Magyars press against them from the North to secure the domination of the Balkans and the Adriatic. This situation explains why Italy joined the Allies and why the Italians and Jugoslavs are driven toward a political understanding in spite of the disputes about Trieste and the Italian minority in Istria and Dalmatia. The Jugoslavs deserve the sympathies of democratic Europe. The Serbians in Serbia and Montenegro showed in their fight against the Turks for the defence of liberty a wonderful perseverance and ability; their cultural efforts are energetic and their endeavour to obliterate the traces of centuries-long Turkish pressure is sincere and effective. The Serbian nation, and that is true of the Croatians and Slovenes as well, is gifted and very able. The Slovenes excel in industry and idealism, little fearing German preponderance. Up to now the Jugoslavs more than any other nation suffered from being separated into many parts; they were partitioned among five States (Serbia, Montenegro, Austria, Hungary, Turkey, and a small fraction in Italy), and in these States into a dozen administrative provinces. Ecclesiastically, too, the nation is not united, there are Orthodox parts (Serbia), Catholic (Croatians and Slovenes, but there are Catholic Serbians in Ragusa) and Mohammedan (national consciousness—Serbia—is awakening only in recent days), but consciousness of nationality and a desire for unification does not suffer thereby.

The anti-Slav and anti-Serbian politicians of Vienna and Budapest used these differences (“Divide et impera”?); Aehrenthal’s scandalous diplomacy, that would not stop short of falsifying documents, revealed to the whole world the moral level of Austria. The unification and liberation of the entire Jugoslav nation is surely one of the principal demands of a future free Europe; Austria provoked this war by her anti-Serbian and 2em