Introduction
In this essay I will explore the obstacles the Yugoslav delegation faced at the Paris Peace Conference and then evaluate how successful the delegation were in achieving their aims. The essay is divided into three sections: the first two subdivisions will be concerned with the internal and external obstacles the delegation faced. Like Auty, I believe internal and external obstacles are logical subdivisions, which can be used to indentify the various problems encountered.[1] Internal obstacles will be concerned with difficulties which were endogenous to the delegation and the newly formed state, whilst external obstacles is in regards to obstacles which were exogenous to the jurisdiction of the delegation or the state. The third section will be concerned with assessing how successful I believe the delegation was in achieving its aims.
A lively debate pervades the historiography concerning the obstacles the delegation faced at the Peace Conference. Mitrovic, a leading historian on the Paris Peace Conference, argues that the external complication of secret treaties made during the war were a particular obstacle for the delegation.[2] Although Mitrovic recognizes that the lack of recognition received by the new ‘Kingdom of Serbs Croats and Slovenes’ (KSCS) at the beginning of the Conference was an obstacle, it is treated as less significant than other factors.[3] I agree with this perspective as the delegation was tolerated, even if the official name was not originally accepted. Evans conversely argues that internal issues, namely the call for autonomy from Croatia and Montenegro caused significant problems to the delegation.[4]
Need an essay assistance?
Our professional writers are here to help you.
However, generally there is a harmony of opinion regarding the obstacles that existed. Research indicates that there is more contention in relation to the delegation’s success. For example Macmillan argues that the delegates failed to achieve their aims after considering the long-term impact of the delegation’s ‘achievements’.[5] However I agree with Lederer, who is less pessimistic and argues that the aims were accomplished; I do not feel that this is contradicted by the problems that arose later in the region.[6] Temperley believes the delegation’s aims were realized and is particularly complimentary of their achievements.[7] Temperley’s books were published in 1921 shortly after the convention concluded, so his views are arguably less biased due to the long-term view that often overshadows the KSCS delegation’s achievements.
Context
The two main aims of the delegation were to gain recognition and achieve their territorial ambitions.[8] The KSCS was officially declared on the 1 December 1918.[9] It comprised numerous sta
Order this paper