modern Croatian nation. The only difference was that these processes were not parallel with the creation of the national state. Indeed, Croatian nationalism of the nineteenth and early twentieth century for most part was not secessionist. It was neither state-reinforcing nor state-subverting. The most appropriate qualification for it would be that it was state-reforming. It aimed not at the establishment of an independent state of its own but at reforming the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy by replacing its constitutional dualism, which recognized the dominant position of the Austrian and Hungarian nations, with a federal state structure through which all nations within the Monarchy could achieve equal status. The claim for national self-determination was not translated into demands for outright independence but sought extensive political, administrative and cultural autonomy within a common state. That was the salient characteristic of Radić’s national program. He wanted Croatia to have a recognized political unit within reformed AustroHungarian state since he believed that democratic and federally arranged multinational states are superior to national states. The move towards secession came almost unwillingly. It was prompted by external factors – the First World War. The creation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes that was to be renamed Yugoslavia in 1929 was greeted by the major Croatian political forces of the time, but under the assumption that the new state would be based on the principle of equality of its constituent nations. Unfortunately, the political elites in Serbia disagreed and this discord was to have dire consequences. The royal dictatorship that followed the 1928 assassination of Radić and several other Croatian leaders by the Serbian extremist helped spawn the emergence of a chauvinist, fascist-prone Croatian nationalism. Represented by fringe and extreme political group – the Ustasha movement, that gained fame not by its wide popular support but by the horrendous crimes its members committed during the reign of their puppet Nazi regime – it was authoritarian, brutal and exclusive. To conclude, Croatian national identity as forged by nationalist opponents of the Monarchy was first couched in terms of historical political rights. They, however, soon found that they have to move beyond purely political/legal criteria and appeal to the culturally identity of the groups
16