Hubbry Logo
Podgorica AssemblyPodgorica AssemblyMain
Open search
Podgorica Assembly
Community hub
Podgorica Assembly
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Podgorica Assembly
Podgorica Assembly
from Wikipedia

Map showing Montenegro (green) and Serbia (blue) at the conclusion of World War I.

The Great People's Assembly of the Serb People in Montenegro (Serbo-Croatian: Велика народна скупштина српског народа у Црној Гори, romanizedVelika narodna skupština srpskog naroda u Crnoj Gori), commonly known as the Podgorica Assembly (Подгоричка скупштина, Podgorička skupština), was an ad hoc popular assembly convened in November 1918, after the end of World War I in the Kingdom of Montenegro. The committee convened the assembly with the aim of facilitating an unconditional union of Montenegro and Serbia and removing Nikola I of Montenegro from the throne. The assembly was organised by a committee supported by and coordinating with the government of the Kingdom of Serbia. The unification was successful and preceded the establishment of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes as a unified state of South Slavs by mere days. The unification was justified by Serbian irredentists by the need to create a single Serbian state for all Serbs, including Montenegro, where a part of the population believed that Montenegro belonged to the Serbian nation and supported the unification.[1]

Nikola I criticised the Podgorica Assembly's elections and resolutions, arguing both were illegitimate and unlawful while his government was in exile in France. Opponents of the unconditional union, known as the Greens for the colour of paper used for pro-independence candidates, supported either full independence of Montenegro or a federation or a confederation with Serbia and other South Slavs where Montenegro would be an equal partner.

Following the resolutions on the unification and the deposition of the Nikola I, the Greens resorted to insurrection to fight pro-unionist Whites, likewise named after the color of the paper used to print Podgorica Assembly pro-unionist candidate lists. The ultimately unsuccessful insurrection became known as the Christmas Uprising. Some of the Greens continued their political struggle for a federal common South Slavic state through the establishment of the Montenegrin Federalist Party in 1923. The issue of the legality and legitimacy of the Podgorica Assembly has been debated since its convening. The resolution of the Podgorica Assembly was annulled by the Parliament of Montenegro following the breakup of Yugoslavia and the 2006 Montenegrin independence referendum. In its resolution, the parliament declared the Podgorica Assembly unlawful and illegitimate, describing the unification resulting from the Podgorica Assembly as a coup d'état.

Background

[edit]

Montenegrin independence and alliances

[edit]
Nikola I ruled Montenegro as prince or king from 1860.

The Kingdom of Montenegro was an independent country in the Balkans until World War I, ruled by King Nikola, who wielded practically absolutist powers,[2] Nikola considered Montenegro the remnant of the medieval Serbian Empire left unconquered following the expansion of the Ottoman Empire in Europe. He viewed the Montenegrins as free Serbian people who would eventually defeat the Ottomans in the context of resolving the Eastern question and revive the Serbian medieval empire in the Balkans, with him as the supreme leader of the South Slavs inhabiting the area. Nikola firmly believed that Montenegro and the Kingdom of Serbia should unite,[3] a view shared by a slim majority of Montenegro's population.[4] The prevailing sentiment in Montenegro was that Montenegro should lead the unification. Contemporary Serb writers Simo Matavulj and Marko Car likened Montenegro's role in the South Slavic unification to the leading role of Piedmont in the unification of Italy.[3] Nikola's support for unification was tempered by his desire to ensure the continued rule of his Petrović-Njegoš dynasty and to expand Montenegro before any unification, the latter intended to ensure a better negotiating position for Montenegro as an equal partner to the territorially larger Serbia.[5]

Following the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the subsequent July Crisis, and the Austro-Hungarian declaration of war against Serbia, Montenegro witnessed widespread popular support for Serbia. In response, Montenegro entered into a military treaty with Serbia on 4 August 1914, just two days before declaring war on Austria-Hungary. According to the treaty, the Montenegrin Army fell under the command of the Royal Serbian Army's High Command, with Nikola I retaining a nominal position as supreme commander. The treaty mandated that two-thirds of Montenegro's forces be stationed in Pljevlja in the north to support a Serbian offensive aimed at capturing Sarajevo, while the remainder defended borders of Montenegro. Additionally, Serbia was to receive and distribute aid from the allied Entente powers.[6] Serbia outlined its war aims in the Niš Declaration, emphasizing the post-war unification of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, which marginalised Montenegro in the proposed state-building process.[7] In 1915, Montenegro sought support from the Russian Empire for its aspirations to expand along the Adriatic Sea and its hinterland between the Mat and Neretva rivers – encompassing Herzegovina, southern Dalmatia, and the city of Shkodër – but these efforts were unsuccessful.[8] The Entente pressured Montenegro to align its war aims with those of Serbia and abandon any separate ambitions.[7]

Military defeat

[edit]
Formal surrender of Montenegro to Austro-Hungarian forces in 1916

From the outset of the war, Montenegro faced shortages of equipment and food.[9] The first clash of interests between Montenegro and Serbia occurred in June 1915 when Nikola ordered the army to capture Shkodër. Although the Serbian government disapproved of this move, it refrained from confronting Nikola to avoid potentially increasing support for him among the Montenegrin population. After Serbia's military defeat in the 1915 Serbian campaign, the Royal Serbian Army suffered significant losses, reducing its size to a level comparable to that of the Montenegrin forces. To prevent the Montenegrin allies from becoming the senior Entente-allied fighting force in the area, Serbia sought to weaken the Montenegrin army similarly. Consequently, the bulk of the Montenegrin forces were ordered by the Royal Serbian Army's High Command to move to the north of Montenegro, concentrating around the Sandžak region. This left the southern border, including Lovćen Mountain between the Austro-Hungarian Bay of Kotor and the Montenegrin capital, thinly defended.[10]

In November–December 1915, while the Montenegrin forces were shielding the Royal Serbian Army during its Great Retreat from Serbia through Montenegro and Albania to Greece, Austro-Hungarian forces advanced across Lovćen in the Montenegrin campaign. Towards the end of December, anticipating the imminent loss of the city, the king, government officials, members of parliament, representatives of the Serbian High Command, and foreign embassies were evacuated from the nation's capital of Cetinje to Podgorica.[9] On 19 January, Nikola and most of the government left Monetenegro.[11] Acting against Nikola's instructions, the remaining government ministers declared themselves the new government and surrendered to Austria-Hungary. They later attributed the surrender to Nikola's departure.[12] Accusations regarding the surrender were exchanged between members of the government-in-exile and the king. Prime Minister Lazar Mijušković resigned from his post after one such dispute, expressing support for union with Serbia over the preservation of Montenegrin independence. Andrija Radović was appointed by Nikola I to succeed Mijušković.[13]

Throughout the war, most Entente powers did not completely trust Montenegro as an ally due to persistent rumours of covert diplomatic arrangements.[14] These rumours were encouraged by Serbia, which even used a forged agreement between Montenegro and Austria-Hungary.[15] Instead of confronting Nikola for fear of pushing Montenegro to the opposing camp, the Entente powers chose to work to channel their support through Serbia.[14] The Kingdom of Italy, despite being part of the Entente, supported Montenegrin independence, viewing the prospective unified South Slavic state as a threat to its interests in the Balkans and the Adriatic. Italy exploited the so-called Montenegrin question to extract concessions from Serbia.[16] The United States did not proactively engage in the issue of Montenegrin independence before the Paris Peace Conference of 1919,[17] failing to obtain international support for the restoration of Montenegro's independence. By 1918, Nikola shifted his approach to Yugoslavism, advocating first for a Yugoslav federation and then a confederation as the common South Slavic state, with Montenegro as one of its constitutive elements.[18] In an interview in the final days of the war, Nikola expressed hope that U.S. President Woodrow Wilson would ensure Montenegro's independent political future.[19]

Montenegrin Committee

[edit]
Former Prime Minister Andrija Radović established the Montenegrin Committee.

In August 1916, Radović drafted a memorandum to Nikola proposing the unification of Montenegro and Serbia, arguing that independent Montenegro could not sustain itself after an Entente victory.[20] Radović's plan suggested that Nikola renounce his throne in favor of Prince Regent Aleksandar of Serbia, who would then be succeeded by Nikola's son, Danilo, Crown Prince of Montenegro. The proposal envisioned alternating rulers from the Serbian and Montenegrin royal dynasties on the throne of the proposed union state. Initially hesitant, Nikola eventually received encouragement from Italy (whose king, Victor Emmanuel III, was his son-in-law) to reject the offer.[21]

Nikola ultimately declined to endorse the memorandum in January 1917, leading to Radović's resignation. Radović then emerged as a leading advocate for unification. Radović expressed his determination to sway Montenegrins against Nikola to Serbia's ambassador to Paris, Milenko Radomar Vesnić. Subsequently, Radović collaborated with Serbia to establish the Montenegrin Committee for Unification [sr]. Its inaugural proclamation was submitted for approval to Serbia's prime minister, Nikola Pašić, who advised Radović to avoid mentioning "Yugoslavia" as the new state and instead suggested using the term "other Serbian lands".[20] Initially, the committee comprised former government ministers Pero Vučković, Danilo Gatalo, and Janko Spasojević, along with district court member Miloš Ivanović.[22]

Adriatic Troops

[edit]
Breakthrough of the Entente powers at the Macedonian front in 1918

In September 1918, the Entente powers initiated their northward advance at the Salonica front, gradually displacing the Central Powers and reclaiming the territory of the occupied Kingdom of Serbia. Upon the insistence of General Louis Franchet d'Espèrey, the Royal Serbian Army was positioned on the western flank of the advance after reaching Skopje. This strategic maneuver aimed to ensure the army's arrival in Montenegro ahead of either supporters of Nikola or Italian forces,[23] perceived as a threat by Serbia due to Italy's demand for the establishment of an Italian condominium in Montenegro, excluding Serbian presence.[24]

The Royal Serbian Army contingent assigned Colonel Dragutin Milutinović [sr] the task of gaining control of Montenegro. Milutinović's force, initially known as the Scutari Troops (Skadarske Trupe), named after the city of Shkodër, later adopting the name Adriatic Troops (Jadranske Trupe).[23] The Adriatic Troops were composed of soldiers from the Yugoslav Division (recruited from Austro-Hungarian lands) and Serbian paramilitaries from the Kosovo region, under the leadership of Kosta Pećanac.[25] Milutinović, instructed by Prince Regent Aleksandar, was tasked with preventing the return of Nikola I to Montenegro by any means necessary. Accompanied by Spasojević, a member of the Montenegrin Committee, and Svetozar Tomić, head of the Montenegrin section of the Serbian Foreign Ministry, Milutinović established the Central Executive Committee for the Unification of Serbia and Montenegro in Berane on 28 October. This committee, comprising Spasojević, Tomić, and Berane mayor Milosav Raičević, was responsible for organizing a popular assembly and establishing the rules for the election of assembly delegates.[23]

In the latter part of October, while the Adriatic Troops were stationed in Berane, Montenegrin insurgents (komite) under the leadership of Jovan Radović [sr] gained control of much of the countryside. The Adriatic Troops advanced towards Podgorica, defeating an Austro-Hungarian force on the city outskirts between 30–31 October. Two days later, Radović's insurgents seized Nikšić. Austro-Hungarian forces abandoned the Montenegrin capital and withdrew from the country on 4 November, two days before the Adriatic Troops reached Cetinje. After securing Cetinje, they proceeded to Nikšić, Kolašin, and Bar. The tense atmosphere at political rallies promoting unification prompted Milutinović to request reinforcements to maintain order during the election.[26] Milutinović ordered the disbandment of the insurgents on 12 November.[27]

Election

[edit]

Rules

[edit]
Anto Gvozdenović raised objections to the assembly election rules during the Paris Peace Conference.

The legality and legitimacy of the election rules drafted by Tomić, as well as the election itself, were at the forefront of disagreement between unionists and independentists in Montenegro in early interwar period. The latter argued that the rules were unlawful because they were not formulated by any Montenegrin legislative body and because they contradicted then existing laws and the 1905 Constitution of Montenegro [sr]. They also considered them illegitimate due to the short preparation time provided, lack of oversight over voter registers or election results, and absence of a minimum voter turnout requirement. In contrast, the unionists saw the process and the popular assembly as a form of plebiscite that legitimised the new assembly.[28] At the time, this move was justified by the fact that two-fifths of pre-war parliamentarians were refugees abroad.[29] Critics have pointed out that the ad hoc institution of the Great People's Assembly, resembling a popular assembly, was borrowed from Article 129 of the 1903 Constitution of Serbia [sr].[30] Montenegrin ambassador to the United States, Anto Gvozdenović,[31] raised concerns at the Paris Peace Conference about the lack of proportional representation in the election rules.[32]

The election rules, adopted in Berane on 7 November 1918, outlined the process for selecting the popular assembly's delegates. It was stipulated that the elected delegates would convene in Podgorica a week later to deliberate on Montenegro's constitutional and legal status and appoint an executive body to enforce the assembly's decisions. Eligible delegates had to be over 25 years old and have no criminal record. The election process involved selecting a slate of electors in each province, municipality, and town. Each slate of electors then chose a predetermined number of assembly delegates. Larger towns with over five thousand inhabitants elected twice as many electors and delegates as smaller towns.[33] In total, 165 delegates were to be elected.[34] Podgorica was chosen as the assembly venue because committee members believed that the capital, Cetinje, was a stronghold of supporters of Nikola's supporters and therefore beyond control of the assembly organisers.[35]

Number of Podgorica Assembly electors and delegates per constituency type[33]
Constituency type Electors Delegates Notes
Province 10 2 Located in pre-First Balkan War territory
Municipality 15 3 Located in territories won in the First Balkan War
Towns over 5000 inhabitants 10 2 Cetinje, Đakovica, Peć, Pljevlja, Podgorica
Towns under 5000 inhabitants 10 1 Bar, Berane, Bijelo Polje, Kolašin, Ulcinj

Voting

[edit]

The election witnessed the emergence of two distinct camps. Unionists advocated for an unconditional and immediate merger with Serbia, while their counterparts, the independists, opposed the proposed union's terms.[36] The independents did not demand full independence of Montenegro.[37] Instead, they advocated for a partnership where Montenegro would maintain status equal to that of Serbia, constituting an integral part of the union state rather than merely a province of Serbia. Unionists framed their call for unconditional unification as a test of patriotism and moral obligation necessary to achieve longstanding state-building goals.[36] Financial support for the unionists came from Serbia.[38] Candidate lists were visually differentiated by being printed on different types of paper: white for the unionists and green for the independists. Consequently, they were commonly referred to as the Whites (Bjelaši) and the Greens (Zelenaši) respectively.[30] This division built upon existing political rifts within Montenegro, primarily revolving around the People's Party (known as the Klubaši) and the True People's Party (known as the Pravaši). These groups enjoyed varying levels of support across different regions of Montenegro. While urban populations predominantly backed the Whites, except in Cetinje, the Whites also garnered more support than the Greens among educated individuals, youth, craftsmen, tradesmen, and administrative staff.[39]

The election, held on 19 November, resulted in a significant majority for the Whites within the newly elected assembly.[39] There were allegations that the Royal Serbian Army obstructed supporters of independence from returning from abroad, thereby interfering with the electoral process.[28] Similarly, the French authorities prevented Nikola from returning to Montenegro from his exile in Neuilly-sur-Seine.[24] Voting did not take place in the town of Ulcinj, the nearby village of Vladimir, and the regions of Skadarska Krajina and Mrkojevići.[40]

Assembly resolutions

[edit]
Bishop Gavrilo Dožić was designated by the Podgorica Assembly to deliver the resolution to Serbian Prince Regent Aleksandar.

The Great People's Assembly convened in the hall of the Tobacco Monopoly in Podgorica on 24 November 1918. Initially, Savo Cerović and Lazar Damjanović were elected as its president and vice-president, respectively. The following day, the assembly appointed a twenty-member committee and charged it with preparing a draft resolution for the assembly's consideration and adoption, despite an already prepared draft by Tomić being distributed to the delegates. Concurrently, the assembly articulated the unification of Montenegro and Serbia as its primary objective.[41]

On 26 November, the assembly proceeded to read the proposed resolution, despite some individual complaints about the lack of debate on the resolution. The draft was read aloud, accompanied by occasional cheering and singing of the Serbian national anthem, "Bože pravde". The resolution comprised four points. First, it declared the removal of King Nikola I and the Petrović-Njegoš dynasty from the Montenegrin throne. Second, it specified that Montenegro and Serbia would be united under Serbia's ruling Karađorđević dynasty, joining the common state of the "three-named people" (Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes). The third point called for the election of a five-member executive committee to coordinate the unification efforts. Finally, the resolution stipulated sending notices of the resolution to Nikola, the Serbian government, as well as allied and neutral countries.[42] The decision was unanimously adopted, with three delegates absent from the vote.[39]

In four additional sessions held by 29 November, the assembly appointed Damjanović along with Vojvoda Stevo Vukotić (brother of Queen Consort Milena of Montenegro), Marko Daković, Spasoje Piletić, and Risto Jojić as the executive committee members. They debated the committee's tasks and appointed a fifteen-member delegation led by Bishop of the Serbian Orthodox Church Gavrilo Dožić, tasked with traveling to Belgrade and presenting the resolution to Prince Regent Aleksandar. There was also a discussion on the fate of the property of King Nikola I and the Montenegrin Orthodox Church,[42] which was confiscated in the immediate aftermath of the assembly meetings.[43] Finally, the assembly decided to confiscate Nikola's property and prohibit his family from returning to Montenegro. The assembly reconvened on 29 April 1919 in Podgorica to dismiss the executive committee and transfer its powers to Ivo Pavićević as the Serbian administrator for Montenegro.[42]

Aftermath

[edit]

Unification

[edit]
The "Big Four" could not agree on who should represent Montenegro at the Paris Peace Conference.

The unification of Serbia and Montenegro, based on the assembly's resolution, strengthened Serbia's political position shortly before the proclamation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (later renamed Yugoslavia) on 1 December 1918. However, the assembly's approach was later criticised by some unionists as overly forceful.[44] A month later, Nikola expressed a wish for Montenegro to preserve its autonomy and customs within the new state, emphasizing his call for a Yugoslav confederation.[45] The Montenegrin government-in-exile rejected the assembly resolutions, arguing that they were unlawful and the body itself illegitimate. Initially, the Entente powers generally overlooked the passing of the resolutions, tacitly allowing Serbia to establish the new status quo.[46]

The fate of Montenegro was discussed at the Paris Peace Conference, where the government-in-exile and Nikola were not involved in decision-making.[46] The conference only invited a representative of the government-in-exile to present their position,[32] at Nikola's insistence. Although Montenegro was formally granted a seat at the conference, it remained vacant due to disagreement over the selection of its representative. Montenegro's government-in-exile proposals were rejected by Serbia. The Serbian position prevailed because it was backed by France.[47] In early 1919, Montenegro was divided into French, British, Italian, American, and Serbian occupation zones. However, by mid-year, the entire territory came under control of Serbian forces, renamed the Yugoslav Occupational Forces in Montenegro.[43] France severed diplomatic ties with Montenegro on 20 December 1920 following the Constitutional Assembly election in the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. The United Kingdom and the United States followed suit in January 1921, effectively removing Montenegro from international affairs.[47]

Christmas Uprising

[edit]
Krsto Popović was one of the leaders of the Christmas Uprising in 1919.

A portion of Montenegro's population became dissatisfied with the political developments following the Podgorica Assembly, leading to an insurrection in January 1919. The ultimately unsuccessful rebellion, known as the Christmas Uprising, was instigated by the Greens and led by Krsto Popović and Jovan Plamenac. According to the British Military Mission to Montenegro, approximately one-fifth of the population supported the rebels.[48] Historian Ivo Banac suggested that the Greens enjoyed support from a larger proportion of the population but were comparably poorly organised, indecisive, and politically divided.[49] While some fought for full independence and the return of Nikola to the country, others supported union with Serbia, objecting only to Montenegro's unequal status in such a union.[50] Contemporary Western media reported heavy fighting during the uprising.[51] The Entente occupation troops in Montenegro pursued individual national interests and policies, with the French supporting Serbia, while Italian troops supported the rebels.[52] Italy initially supported the Montenegrin government-in-exile during negotiations over borders with the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes as part of the resolution of the Adriatic question. However, after the issue was settled by the 1920 Treaty of Rapallo, Italy agreed to withdraw its support.[53] In 1923, some of the Greens established the Montenegrin Federalist Party led by Sekula Drljević, shifting to political struggle and advocating for Montenegrin statehood within the proposed Yugoslav federation.[54]

Annulment of resolutions

[edit]

Following the collapse of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia in World War II and the subsequent establishment of the Communist-ruled federal Yugoslavia in 1945, the People's Republic of Montenegro was established as one of its constituent elements. According to some Serbian nationalists, all citizens of the People's Republic of Montenegro were to be recorded in censuses as Montenegrins, even though most of the population identified themselves as Serb-Montenegrins. This decision would have led to a series of censuses in which a higher part of the population of Montenegro would have declared themselves as Montenegrins.[55] It also led to accusations against Montenegrin Communist leader Milovan Djilas, alleging that he "invented the Montenegrin nation". Djilas was specifically targeted because he authored a paper titled "On the Montenegrin National Question" (O crnogorskom nacionalnom pitanju). The paper became well known in the general public because, in it, Djilas argued that Montenegrins are related to the Serbs of the South Slavic ethnic branch, but that they formed into a separate nation through the course of history.[56]

Following the breakup of Yugoslavia in 1991–1992, Montenegro and Serbia remained in a rump state known as the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (renamed Serbia and Montenegro in 2003). In 2006, Montenegro regained its independence through a referendum.[56] In 2018, the Parliament of Montenegro voted to annul the 1918 resolution of the Podgorica Assembly on union with Serbia. The annulment resolution stated that independent Montenegro became part of the Kingdom of Serbia through a coup d'état because the Podgorica Assembly was an illegal and illegitimate body that did not reflect the will of the population of Montenegro.[57]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Sources

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
The Podgorica Assembly was a national assembly convened in Podgorica, Montenegro, in November 1918, shortly after the Allied victory in World War I, which deposed King Nikola I Petrović-Njegoš and his dynasty before proclaiming the unconditional union of Montenegro with the Kingdom of Serbia under the Karađorđević dynasty. Comprising around 165 delegates from Montenegrin territories, the assembly represented pro-unification factions known as the Whites, who emphasized shared Serb ethnic and Orthodox Christian ties amid the collapse of Austria-Hungary and the push for a greater South Slavic state. The assembly's key resolutions, adopted between 24 and 28 November, integrated into the emerging Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, effectively ending the Kingdom of 's independence and subordinating it administratively to . This move, justified by proponents as fulfilling historical aspirations for Serb unity following liberation from Austro-Hungarian occupation, faced immediate opposition from royalist Greens loyal to , who decried it as unconstitutional and influenced by Serbian military presence. The ensuing in December 1918–January 1919 highlighted deep divisions, with rebels seeking 's restoration, though it was suppressed by Yugoslav forces. The 's legacy endures as a flashpoint in Montenegrin and , often portrayed in pro-independence narratives as an imposed merger eroding national , while union supporters view it as a voluntary act of . In 2018, Montenegro's annulled the assembly's decisions, declaring them invalid and contrary to the expressed will of the Montenegrin at the time, reflecting ongoing tensions over identity separate from . This annulment underscores persistent debates, informed by post-Yugoslav reevaluations that question the assembly's representativeness and legitimacy under the pressures of wartime exigencies.

Historical Background

Montenegrin Independence and Pre-War Alliances

Montenegro secured formal recognition of its independence from the Ottoman Empire through the Treaty of Berlin, concluded on July 13, 1878, following the Congress of Berlin convened from June 13 to address the outcomes of the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–1878 and the preceding Montenegrin–Ottoman War of 1876–1878. The treaty elevated Montenegro from a de facto autonomous principality under Prince Nikola Petrović-Njegoš, who had ruled since 1860, to a sovereign principality with defined borders, including territorial expansions such as the districts of Nikšić, Podgorica, and portions of the Sanjak of Novi Pazar. This recognition stemmed from the Ottoman Empire's weakening grip amid internal reforms failures and military defeats, creating a power vacuum that Great Powers—Britain, Austria-Hungary, Germany, France, Italy, and Russia—sought to manage through balance-of-power diplomacy, positioning the diminutive Montenegro as a buffer against Slavic irredentism and Austrian expansion in the Balkans. Under Nikola I, who proclaimed himself king in 1910 amid growing national prestige, Montenegro pursued a foreign policy balancing pan-Slavic solidarity with against dynastic preservation and territorial ambitions. While cultural and ethnic ties fostered informal cooperation with , including a pre-World War I military operations plan, Nikola resisted full union to safeguard his , viewing Serbia's Karadjordjević rulers as rivals. This tension played out in the of 1912–1913, where joined the —an alliance initially formed by and Bulgaria in March 1912, later incorporating Greece and —to exploit Ottoman decline. In the , declared by on October 8, 1912, Montenegrin forces captured key Ottoman holdings, resulting in territorial gains that nearly doubled the kingdom's size, including the annexation of Plav, , Rožaje, and areas around Lake Scutari (Shkodra), formalized partially by the Treaty of London in May 1913. These alliances aligned Montenegro tentatively with Entente powers like Russia and France, reflecting Nikola's strategy to leverage Great Power rivalries for security against Austria-Hungary, while Ottoman disintegration and Balkan nationalisms amplified Montenegro's role as a strategic pawn in the pre-war geopolitical chessboard. However, Nikola's ambitions for Adriatic access and personal rule often clashed with Serbia's unification goals, sowing seeds of intra-Slavic discord amid the broader causal dynamics of imperial collapse and power competition.

World War I Military Campaigns and Defeat

Montenegro entered on August 6, 1914, declaring war on in alignment with its ally , mobilizing an army of approximately 35,000 to 44,000 troops primarily composed of suited for mountainous terrain. These forces conducted limited offensive actions, including the occupation of parts of in , but their strategic role remained auxiliary to 's main efforts within the Entente's Balkan theater, lacking the scale to influence broader operations independently. From late , as Serbian forces retreated through Montenegrin territory amid the ' invasion, Montenegrin units provided rear-guard support, delaying Austro-Hungarian advances but suffering mounting attrition without altering the campaign's trajectory. The Austro-Hungarian Third Army launched a full-scale on January 5, 1916, exploiting the weakened position following Serbia's collapse, with coordinated assaults from multiple fronts overwhelming Montenegro's defenses despite initial resistance at key passes. In the on January 6-7, Montenegrin forces under Vojvoda repelled Austro-Hungarian attacks, inflicting around 20,000 enemy casualties while sustaining fewer than 2,000 losses of their own, yet this tactical success could not stem the overall offensive as superior ' numbers—exceeding 100,000 troops—encircled and isolated Montenegrin positions. By mid-January, Austro-Hungarian forces captured Mount Lovćen, Montenegro's primary defensive stronghold overlooking the Adriatic, and advanced on the capital , compelling a disorganized retreat southward toward . King Nicholas I refused initial armistice terms and fled Cetinje on January 19, 1916, escaping via Albania to Italy and subsequently establishing a government-in-exile in France, leaving the military command to negotiate surrender. Montenegro formally capitulated on January 25, 1916, resulting in the occupation of its entire territory—approximately 13,812 square kilometers—by Austro-Hungarian forces, who imposed administrative control and exploited local resources until the Armistice of Villa Giusti in November 1918. The campaign exacted heavy tolls, with Montenegrin military casualties estimated at over 3,000 killed and thousands more captured or deserted during the retreat, underscoring the small kingdom's forces' vulnerability to industrialized warfare despite prior Balkan victories. Allied liberation came swiftly in late November 1918, as Serbian troops from the Salonika front advanced northward, reclaiming Podgorica and other areas without significant resistance from retreating Central Powers units.

Post-Armistice Political Divisions

Following the on November 3, 1918, which ended hostilities on the Italian front, and the subsequent advance of Serbian forces into starting around November 5, a profound materialized after over two years of Austro-Hungarian occupation and the exile of King Nikola I since January 1916. This vacuum exacerbated preexisting tensions over national identity, pitting those who prioritized ethnic Serb solidarity—rooted in shared linguistic, religious, and historical resistance to Ottoman and Habsburg domination—against adherents of dynastic loyalty to the Petrović-Njegoš house, which had symbolized Montenegrin statehood since the . The resulting factions reflected causal pressures from wartime devastation, , and fears of renewed external predation, including Italian ambitions in the Adriatic. The Whites (Bjelaši), favoring unconditional union with Serbia under the Karađorđević dynasty, emerged as the dominant pro-integration group, arguing that incorporation would fortify Montenegro against isolation and bolster collective defense in a volatile . Serbian Nikola Pašić exerted significant influence by framing unification as a strategic imperative to preempt threats from defeated empires or opportunistic neighbors, aligning with his vision of a consolidated Serb state while leveraging Serbian military presence to channel local sentiments toward . Opposing them, the Greens (Zelenaši), comprising royalists and autonomists loyal to I, advocated retaining the dynasty through independence or a federal Yugoslav structure, emphasizing Montenegrin distinctiveness and decrying union as a loss of amid the power imbalance introduced by Serbian troops. Public sentiment tilted toward the Whites, as evidenced by spontaneous national gatherings and local resolutions in key districts during late October and early November 1918, including in Andrijevica, Berane, Cetinje, and Podgorica, where attendees acclaimed support for union with Serbia. These acclamations, often involving thousands and serving as preliminary endorsements before formal elections from to 19, underscored a grassroots preference for integration driven by pan-Serb affinity and practical security concerns, though Greens mustered resistance in royalist strongholds like parts of Old Montenegro. In Cetinje, for instance, the pro-union slate prevailed in early polling, signaling broad acquiescence to unification despite initial Allied hesitancy toward deposing Nikola. Royalist holdouts persisted, fueled by Italian financial backing and attachments to the dynasty's legacy, but lacked the organizational momentum of White-aligned groups amid the Serbian army's stabilizing role.

Preparations for the Assembly

Formation of the Montenegrin National Committee

Following the on November 3, 1918, which ended Austro-Hungarian occupation of , a governance vacuum emerged amid the collapse of central authority and the prolonged exile of King Nikola I since 1916. Pro-union leaders, including lawyer and politician , convened the Montenegrin National Committee in early November 1918 to assume temporary administrative control and coordinate local governance in key areas like and . This body, composed primarily of faction representatives who favored integration with , prioritized stabilizing the post-occupation order by organizing municipal committees and facilitating the entry of Serbian forces, thereby preventing anarchy or rival claims from royalist Greens or external powers. The 's formation was driven by causal necessities of dynastic instability and geopolitical risks: with King Nikola's in demonstrating pro-Italian leanings through negotiations for restoration aid that risked ceding Montenegrin territory to Italy's Adriatic ambitions, the deemed his authority illegitimate and a threat to national . Drljević and allies positioned the as a mechanism for popular , explicitly rejecting monarchical restoration in favor of union with to leverage shared ethnic ties, military protection, and economic recovery against isolation or foreign domination. This approach reflected first-principles recognition that Montenegro's small size and exhaustion necessitated alignment with stronger Slavic neighbors for viability, rather than illusory under a compromised dynasty. In practice, the committee served as the organizational nucleus for convening the Podgorica Assembly, issuing calls for delegates from White-dominated regions and establishing election protocols to ensure pro-union majorities, all while administering interim decrees on and anti-royalist purges to consolidate support. Its actions underscored a realist assessment that formal union via assembly resolutions would legitimize the power shift, filling the void left by the king's abdication-equivalent absence and averting factional civil strife.

Role of the Serbian Army and Adriatic Troops

In late October 1918, as Austro-Hungarian forces withdrew from Montenegro following the Entente's breakthrough on the Macedonian Front, Serbian Adriatic Troops under Colonel Dragutin Milutinović advanced northwest from Albania to secure the territory. Initially designated the Scutari Troops, this force reached Podgorica on 31 October, coordinating with local Montenegrin paramilitaries who had already engaged retreating enemy units in skirmishes. The troops completed the disarmament of Austro-Hungarian remnants, with the occupiers fully evacuating by 4 November, thereby averting immediate post-occupation chaos in a region destabilized by war exhaustion and fragmented loyalties. These Serbian units, numbering several thousand and including Montenegrin volunteers who had fought alongside them on Allied fronts, established control over key areas and supported provisional pro-union administrations formed by local committees. Their deployment under broader Allied auspices provided logistical and security backing, preventing banditry and factional violence while enabling the rapid organization of elections for the Podgorica Assembly. However, the heavily armed presence also exerted coercion on royalist elements, including the preemptive disarmament of Petrović-Njegoš loyalist detachments in and surrounding garrisons, which quelled potential disruptions but fueled grievances among Greens advocating dynastic continuity. Opposition petitions from royalist leaders, such as those issued in early , explicitly demanded the Adriatic Troops' withdrawal to ensure impartial proceedings, highlighting perceptions of the as an instrument favoring unification over autonomous . Despite such tensions, the troops' role in enforcing stability allowed to convene without armed interference, though their lingering influence underscored the assembly's conduct under Serbian strategic oversight rather than purely local initiative.

Election Rules and Conduct

The election of delegates to the Podgorica Assembly occurred indirectly through municipal councils across Montenegrin districts, with voting taking place between November 6 and 19, 1918. This process was coordinated by the Temporary Executive Central Committee, which established ad hoc regulations distinct from both existing Serbian and Montenegrin electoral laws, emphasizing free and public voting without detailed provisions for suffrage qualifications or exclusions specified in contemporary accounts. A total of 165 delegates were selected from districts including , Andrijevica, , , Kolasin, Niksic, , Bar, and . Pro-unification forces, referred to as Whites, secured dominance in delegate selection, including victories in key areas like where opponents aligned with the exiled King Nikola remained active. Widespread national gatherings preceding the elections provided evidence of grassroots mobilization in favor of union with , particularly in rural districts where local sentiments favored integration amid post-war instability. Critics, including King Nikola's partisans and later Yugoslav skeptics, contended that the process lacked broad representativeness due to the organizing committee's reliance on Serbian government backing, which allegedly shaped candidate slates and suppressed alternative voices, rendering an expression of elite rather than popular will. However, the absence of documented widespread irregularities, combined with the active participation of anti-union elements without outright boycotts, suggests that while external influence was present, the outcomes aligned with prevailing pro-union majorities in many municipalities. Empirical data on turnout remains sparse, but the decisive majorities indicate strong localized support rather than coerced uniformity.

Proceedings of the Assembly

Composition and Opening Sessions

The Assembly, formally known as the Great National Assembly of the Serbian People in , convened on 24 November 1918 in the Tobacco Monopoly building in . It comprised 165 delegates, selected indirectly through local assemblies in 's nahije (districts), with 169 initially elected but four mandates unconfirmed. These delegates were overwhelmingly from the faction, which supported unconditional unification with , reflecting the election rules established by the Montenegrin National Committee that favored pro-union candidates. Serbian military personnel, including officers from the stationed in after the Allied breakthrough on the Salonika Front, attended as observers, ensuring order amid political divisions between pro-union Whites and opposing Greens. The assembly's composition excluded significant Green representation, as opponents either boycotted or faced restrictions under the prevailing conditions. The opening session addressed procedural formalities, including verification—achieved with the requisite majority present—and the adoption of the agenda focused on Montenegro's future political status. Savo Cerović initially chaired the proceedings before the of Andrija Radović as president, with vice-presidents including Jovan Lipovac and Miloš Novović. Speeches at the outset underscored the shared Slavic heritage of Serbs and , attributing Montenegro's wartime defeats to King Nicholas I's alliances and capitulation to in January 1916.

Debates on Monarchy and Union

The debates on the monarchy in the Podgorica Assembly focused primarily on the deposition of King Nikola I Petrović-Njegoš, with proponents citing his abandonment of Montenegro after the Austro-Hungarian invasion and occupation on January 15, 1916, as a failure of leadership that left the nation without sovereign guidance during its darkest hour. Critics among the assembly delegates further highlighted Nikola's exile in Italy and the subsequent alignment of his supporters with Italian territorial ambitions, which included demands for Montenegrin coastal regions under pre-war agreements like the 1915 Treaty of London, arguing these actions betrayed national interests and justified dynastic change. Opponents to the deposition, largely absent from as part of the Green faction loyal to , maintained that the proceedings violated Montenegro's 1905 constitution by bypassing required electoral processes and excluding legitimate representation, rendering any vote on the illegitimate without broader consultation. Among the attending delegates, aligned with the White unionist movement, sentiment against retaining the was overwhelming, reflecting widespread resentment over the king's perceived wartime capitulation and the practical need to align with victorious under the Karađorđević house for post-war reconstruction. Discussions on union with pitted advocates of unconditional incorporation against a minority favoring federal arrangements that might preserve some Montenegrin . Unionists emphasized the shared Serb , Orthodox faith, language, and historical bonds between and Serbs, positing that separation was an artificial construct perpetuated by foreign powers and that merger was essential for mutual defense and economic viability in the unstable following the Central Powers' defeat. Proponents of , though few in number, argued for safeguards against absorption to maintain distinct institutions, but these views were overshadowed by strategic imperatives, including the presence of Serbian forces that had liberated Montenegrin and the broader imperative to form a unified South Slav state amid threats from and other neighbors. Voting patterns during the November 1918 sessions demonstrated near-unanimous support among participants for both dynastic shift and union. On November 26, the assembly recorded 163 votes in favor of deposing Nikola I with zero opposition, followed by acclamation for the Karađorđević dynasty's accession shortly thereafter. Approximately 165 delegates endorsed the unconditional union with in aligned proceedings, underscoring the dominance of unionist positions within the convened body.

Adoption of Resolutions

On November 26, 1918, the Podgorica Assembly adopted a resolution deposing King Nikola I Petrović-Njegoš and his dynasty from the Montenegrin throne, with all 163 attending delegates voting in favor and none opposed. This decision nullified the Petrović-Njegoš line's rule, citing Nikola's wartime failures and exile as justification for the act. The Assembly then passed a proclamation of union, annexing to the Kingdom of Serbia under King Peter I Karađorđević as sovereign, thereby forming a unified South Slav state encompassing both territories. The resolution specified immediate administrative integration, including the subordination of Montenegrin governance structures to Serbian oversight, and elected a five-member Executive National Committee to manage transitional affairs until full incorporation. Further measures abolished the Montenegrin Senate and existing bureaucratic institutions, redirecting their functions into the Serbian framework, while confiscating all movable and immovable properties of the deposed and dynasty to support state consolidation. These resolutions encountered no recorded among the pro-union delegates present, reflecting the Assembly's composition dominated by unionist majorities from prior elections.

Immediate Consequences

Unification with Serbia

The Assembly's resolutions of 26 1918, proclaiming the deposition of King Nicholas I and unconditional union with , were implemented through the election of a National Executive Council on 28 November to serve as a overseeing the merger. This council facilitated the administrative handover, integrating Montenegrin local governance structures into Serbian oversight without establishing as a separate , effectively dissolving its independent institutions. On 1 December 1918, the proclamation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes in formally incorporated as an undivided territory under the Serbian monarchy, with King Peter I Karadjordjević recognized as sovereign and the transfer of state authority centralized in . Military incorporation followed swiftly, as remaining Montenegrin forces were absorbed into the Serbian army, while royal assets of the — including movable property and real estate—were confiscated and redirected to support the unified state. Allied powers extended de facto recognition to the new kingdom, despite diplomatic protests from the exiled King Nicholas I, thereby endorsing the union's legal framework at the Paris Peace Conference and mitigating risks of territorial dismemberment, such as Italian claims on coastal areas or Albanian encroachments. This international acceptance preserved Montenegro's borders intact within the larger entity, providing a bulwark against post-war fragmentation observed in other defeated regions.

Christmas Uprising and Suppression

The Christmas Uprising, erupting on January 7, 1919—corresponding to Orthodox Christmas Eve—constituted a direct backlash against the Podgorica Assembly's November 1918 resolutions deposing King Nikola I Petrović-Njegoš and integrating Montenegro into the Kingdom of Serbia under King Peter I Karađorđević. Primarily orchestrated by royalist Greens (Zelenaši), the rebellion sought Nikola's restoration and rejection of the union, drawing on entrenched tribal loyalties in northern Montenegro's mountainous regions where Petrović dynasty support persisted amid post-war disarray. The assembly's unilateral decisions, perceived by rebels as overriding traditional Montenegrin sovereignty, ignited coordinated attacks on pro-union White (Bijeli) forces and Serbian garrisons, though the unrest remained confined to rural pockets rather than escalating into nationwide conflagration. Military leadership fell to Krsto Zrnov Popović, a former Montenegrin officer, with political direction from Jovan Plamenac, mobilizing irregular fighters from clans loyal to the dethroned king; estimates of participant numbers varied but centered on tribal contingents numbering in the low thousands, reflecting localized rather than broad-based mobilization. Clashes ensued in areas like and Andrijevica, where Greens ambushed Serbian patrols and seized minor outposts, but lacked or unified command to sustain operations against better-equipped opponents. Serbian army units, augmented by Montenegrin White militias, countered with rapid encirclements and village sweeps, leveraging superior organization and intelligence from union supporters to isolate rebel bands. Suppression unfolded over subsequent weeks through a combination of combat engagements, mass arrests, and judicial proceedings; Serbian forces dismantled Green strongholds by mid-January , exiling or executing key figures while dispersing remaining fighters into or . Documented fatalities numbered in the dozens during initial skirmishes, though broader reprisals from onward—including home burnings and detentions—escalated civilian tolls into the hundreds over the following years, per contemporary accounts of unrest suppression. The uprising's failure underscored the assembly's effective consolidation of unionist control, as rebel efforts faltered without external aid or urban backing, confining opposition to dynastic holdouts amid evidence of predominant acquiescence or active endorsement of unification elsewhere in . Following the resolutions of the Podgorica Assembly in November 1918, the Serbian government directed the dissolution of Montenegrin state institutions, including the national parliament and administrative bodies, by January 1919, effectively incorporating them into the administrative framework of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes. This process marked the formal end of independent Montenegrin governance, with local officials required to pledge allegiance to the Karađorđević dynasty and the unified state. Prime Minister Nikola Pašić's administration in Belgrade received multiple petitions from Montenegrin exiles, including those submitted by Nikola I's in , contesting the Assembly's legitimacy and demanding restoration of the Petrović-Njegoš . These appeals, lodged through diplomatic channels in early , were systematically dismissed by Pašić, who argued that the Assembly's decisions embodied the expressed will of Montenegrin representatives and precluded reversal. The Allied powers, maintaining occupation forces along the Adriatic coast, adopted a policy of non-intervention regarding the unification, framing it as an internal matter of South Slavic amid the post-war reconfiguration of the region. Despite diplomatic protests from Nikola and initial reservations—particularly from , Britain, the , and , which had earlier supported Montenegrin independence—the Allies withheld recognition of exile claims, prioritizing stability in the over reversal of the fait accompli. De facto resistance persisted through localized unrest and exile agitation, yet the de jure unification proceeded without external challenge, enabling short-term stabilization efforts such as administrative centralization and loyalty oaths, even as refugee movements strained border regions with and .

Legacy and Controversies

Integration into the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and

Following unification, contributed to the establishment of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and on December 1, 1918, as one of the constituent territories forming a pan-South Slav state designed to counter external revanchist pressures from powers like , which coveted Adriatic territories. This larger framework enhanced collective military capacity, integrating Montenegrin personnel and resources into the kingdom's armed forces for internal security and border defense, thereby providing a measure of stability absent under the prior isolated principality. Administrative reorganization in 1922 designated as the of , embedding it within the kingdom's centralized structure until further subdivision into the in 1929 under the new . The dissolution of the Petrović-Njegoš dynasty's addressed longstanding inefficiencies, including , administrative fragmentation along tribal lines, and vulnerability to internal factionalism that had hindered modernization before 1918. Integration enabled access to broader Yugoslav fiscal resources, supporting incremental infrastructure projects such as road extensions and port enhancements at Bar, which bolstered trade links within the kingdom despite patronage-driven allocation limiting equitable distribution. These changes facilitated a shift from princely isolation toward participation in a unified economy, reducing the risks of revanchist incursions by embedding in a state with superior defensive capabilities. Centralization under the 1921 Vidovdan Constitution, however, concentrated authority in , systematically diminishing Montenegrin administrative autonomy and prompting criticisms of Serbian dominance in governance. Cultural policies enforced uniform instruction in schools, eroding local linguistic and educational traditions, which Montenegrin federalists viewed as assimilationist and contributory to identity dilution. Economic hardships persisted amid uneven development, exacerbating as Montenegrins sought opportunities abroad, reflecting the trade-offs of stability gained at the expense of localized control.

Historical Debates on Legitimacy

Arguments in favor of the Podgorica Assembly's legitimacy emphasize its role in reflecting the popular will of Montenegrins amid post-World War I instability, following elections held on November 6, 1918, to select electors for the assembly, which convened to address the power vacuum after King Nicholas I's flight in 1916 and the kingdom's occupation. Proponents, including unionist factions, argued that the assembly's resolutions prevented anarchy by unifying Montenegro with Serbia under the Karađorđević dynasty, aligning with the ethnic and cultural affinities of the majority Serb-identifying population and averting fragmentation similar to that in other successor states. This view posits the assembly as a pragmatic expression of self-determination, an emerging principle in international relations post-1918, whereby peoples could choose unification without formal plebiscites if representative bodies acted decisively. Opposing claims contest the assembly's validity on grounds of procedural irregularities and external coercion, asserting that it breached Montenegro's 1905 Constitution by convening without royal sanction or proper convocation protocols, rendering its decisions unlawful under domestic law. Critics, including federalist "Greens" loyal to Nicholas I, highlighted a boycott by significant opposition groups, which undermined claims of broad representation, and accused Serbian Prime Minister Nikola Pašić of orchestrating delegate selection and deployment of Serbian forces to influence outcomes, as evidenced in Green manifestos decrying the process as annexationist. These arguments frame the assembly not as an organic Montenegrin initiative but as a Serbian-engineered merger, violating nascent self-determination norms by suppressing alternative paths like federation or restoration of the Petrović dynasty. Empirical scrutiny of representation reveals mixed evidence: while no minimum voter turnout was mandated for the 1918 elector elections, subsequent 1920 constituent assembly elections in the unified kingdom saw high Montenegrin participation, interpreted by some as retroactive endorsement of the union amid stabilized conditions. International validation bolstered pro-legitimacy positions, as Allied powers at the Paris Peace Conference implicitly accepted the unification through de-recognition of Nicholas I's exiled government by December 1920, prioritizing effective control and ethnic unity over procedural purity in applying self-determination, which lacked binding codification until later covenants. Anti-legitimacy advocates counter that divided public opinion, reflected in boycott scale and subsequent unrest, indicated non-consensual imposition rather than majority consent, though quantifiable data on 1918 participation remains sparse due to wartime disruptions. Overall, legitimacy hinges on weighing representative efficacy against procedural flaws, with primary evidence favoring functional outcomes over strict formalism in the chaotic transition from empire to nation-state.

Modern Interpretations in and

In , the Podgorica Assembly is predominantly viewed by historians and political commentators as a voluntary unification of two closely related South Slavic entities sharing a common Serbian ethnic core, language, and historical trajectory, undertaken to consolidate strength amid the instability of post-World War I . This perspective emphasizes the assembly's composition of locally elected delegates who reflected widespread sentiment for merger, as evidenced by pre-assembly petitions from Montenegrin communities favoring union over dynastic restoration, thereby refuting claims of Belgrade-orchestrated imposition as unsubstantiated revisionism driven by post-Yugoslav . Montenegrin interpretations remain sharply divided along ethno-political lines. Pro-independence advocates, particularly within the long-dominant Democratic Party of Socialists and aligned academics, frame the assembly as a foundational erasure of distinct Montenegrin statehood and identity, a narrative institutionalized through the Parliament's November 30, 2018, resolution annulling its decisions on the centenary, which critics attribute to efforts to delegitimize historical Serbian-Montenegrin continuity in favor of amid EU accession pressures. In contrast, unionist groups, including opposition parties such as the Democratic Front and affiliates, stress the assembly's alignment with the Serbian self-identification prevalent among Montenegro's population—as affirmed in recurrent censuses showing 28-45% declaring Serbian ethnicity—and portray as an elite-driven construct lacking deep ethnic roots, sustained by and educational reforms despite empirical linguistic and genetic homogeneity with Serbs. Recent scholarship, informed by archival reviews of assembly records and local correspondence, applies to argue that unification pragmatically shielded from absorption by expansionist neighbors like , whose Adriatic ambitions posed existential risks to a diminutive independent kingdom bereft of great-power guarantees post-Versailles. These studies highlight elite endorsements from Montenegrin military and intellectual leaders, who prioritized strategic viability over nominal , with the assembly's pro-union (over 90 delegates) indicating not but convergent interests in averting fragmentation, a view bolstered by the limited scale of subsequent resistance and long-term stability under the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and . Such interpretations challenge bias-laden accounts from Montenegrin state , which often amplify minority voices while downplaying unionist agency, as revealed in cross-referenced primary sources from the .

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.