Análisis FODA

It is al so a sig ni fi cant pi e ce of in for ma tion that the an ti-cle ri cal mo ves of Stje pan Ra dić led to his mur der. “Ac cor ding to the te sti mony of Ko ro šec’s Head of Ca bi net, Stan ko Maj cen, on the night be fo re the as sas si na tion, Pu ni ša Ra čić spent se ve ral ho -

urs tal king with Ko ro šec ‘be hind clo sed do ors’ in the Mi ni stry of Do me stic Af fa irs in Bel gra de. On the sa me day, 19 Ju ne 1928, P. Ra čić was al so seen in si de the Pa la ce, and ac cor ding to the hi sto rian Bog dan Kri zman, his fat her Hin ko Kri zman cla i med that Ko ro šec had war ned the mem bers of the Yugo slav Club not to sit be hind the mem bers of the Cro a tian Pe a sant Party on the Ju ne 20, whe re they re gu larly sat. Al - ready on the Ju ne 20, as Mi ni ster of Do me stic Af fa irs, Ko ro šec or de red all dis trict pre fects to sup press every new spa per that wo uld ‘un fa ith fully re pre sent the sad ca - se in the Na ti o nal As sembly’. In stead of a re sig na tion due to a se ri o us at tack on in - ter nal pe a ce in the co un try and the re spon si bi lity of the of fi ce of which he was in char ge, Ko ro šec, as the first non-Ser bian, be ca me Pre mi er on 27 July 1928” (p. 287). Ot her wi se, An ton Ko ro šec was a Ro man Cat ho lic pri est, a le a ding Slo ve nian cle ri cal and the le a der of the Slo ve nian Hu man Party. The ani mo sity of the le a ding Cat ho lic cir cles to wards Stje pan Ra dić re ac hed its cli max af ter his at tack on the pa - pal nun cio Pel le gri net ti in 1926. It was go ing so far that so me di stin gu is hed cle ri cals pu blicly de man ded Ra dić’s re mo val from po li ti cal li fe, or we re openly ple a sed af ter the mur der in the As sembly and the wo un ding of the chi ef le a ders of the Cro a tian Pe a sant Party. “In Hr vat ski List (The Cro a tian Pa per) of Osi jek, from No vem ber 1926, a cle ri cal mem ber, Dr Ke ru bin Še gvić, sharply cri ti ci zed S. Ra dić, ex pres sing the wish to see him re mo ved from po li ti cal li fe, but not mur de red. He cal led him ‘the le a der of the qu ar rel ling par ti es, the blind and the drunks’. His re mo val wo uld be ‘the most sig ni fi cant deed com mit ted in the en ti re Cro a tian hi story’. In Dra go ljub Jo va no vić’s vi ew, the ca se of Še gvić de mon stra ted the ha tred no u ris hed by the cle - ri cals to wards Ra dić, gi ving an exam ple of a fri ar in Dal ma tia, who af ter the as sas - si na tion in the As sembly, che e red: ‘Long li ve Pu ni ša Ra čić’, at the sa me ti me ha - ving high ho pes for Ko ro šec as the Mi ni ster of Do me stic Af fa irs” (p. 286-287). The Va ti can co uld ne ver for get the fact that Stje pan Ra dić him self, as Royal Yugo slav Mi ni ster, pre ven ted the ra ti fi ca tion of an al ready clin ched agre e ment in 1925. ‘Be - ca u se of Ra dić’s do mi na tion over the pe a san try in Cro a tia, Sla vo nia and Dal ma tia, the cle ri cals tho ught that if he di sap pe a red they wo uld win over the pe a san try for the ir cle ri cal and po li ti cal aims” (p. 287).

Ac cor ding to the vi ews of Va sa Ka zi mi ro vić as well, one of the best con no is se - urs of Yugo slav hi story bet we en the wars, “... it is mo re than cer tain that the ac cu sa - ti ons aga inst the King we re un fo un ded. The King had ne ver con si de red the mur der of Ra dić, even when the lat ter at tac ked and even of fen ded him in the most di rect man - ner. He only wan ted to de stroy him po li ti cally, and to win him over af ter wards – which con firms the fact that Ra dić was im pri so ned by his or der, and that he was the first to la ter get in to uch with Ra dić whi le im pri so ned, be fo re Ni ko la Pa šić. The fact that must be ta ken in to con si de ra tion is that, at the ti me when the as sas si na tion oc cur - red, the col la bo ra tion of Ra dić with King Alek san dar was at its clo sest. The King’s wish was his com mand. Ca rrying out the King’s or der, Ra dić had thre a te ned the re - pre sen ta ti ves of the ma jo rity that a ge ne ral wo uld soon co me to po wer and dis per se them, as they de ser ved. That was three months be fo re the bloody event in the Na ti o - nal As sembly, on 5 March 1928. So me twenty days la ter, on 26 April 1928, he again thre a te ned the re pre sen ta ti ves of the ma jo rity that a ge ne ral wo uld ta ke the po si tion as the pre mi er. ‘The me re idea that a ge ne ral will be a pre mi er is im por tant’, he said. ‘That me ans that the King gets a po si tion that he sho uld ha ve to be an ar bi ter, a jud -

ge bet we en two si des. What is mo re na tu ral than that a king, who re pre sents the gran - de ur of a mo narchy, ma kes a com pro mi se as an ar bi ter? Ac cor dingly, it is na tu ral that a ge ne ral, who is not a par ti san but a re pre sen ta ti ve of the king, co mes to po wer’” (Va sa Ka zi mi ro vić: Ser bia and Yugo sla via, Kra gu je vac 1995, p. 513). The aut hor qu - o tes Ra dić’s spe ech ac cor ding to the ste no grap hic no tes of the Na ti o nal As sembly on 26 April 1928.

12. The Cat ho lic Pri est, An ton Ko ro šec,