The final coin series of Yugoslavia

[<k>]

DESIGN CONTINUITY BETWEEN YUGOSLAVIA AND SERBIA




Yugoslavia, 1 dinar and 2 dinara, year 2000 to 2002.





Serbia, 1 dinar and 2 dinara, year 2003. 

Far left: first obverse.  Far right: current obverse.

The text on the 2 dinara reads 'Gračanica'.

[<k>]

See also:

01] Bessarabia, Moldavia, Moldova and Transnistria.

02] Coinage of Belarus.

03] Coinage of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

04] Coinage of modern Serbia.

05] Coinage of North Macedonia.

06] Coinage of the Czech Republic.

07] Croatia: post-Yugoslav coinage.

08] Czechoslovak heroes on post-communist circulation coins.

09] Hungary: post-communist coinage.

10] Poland: Design series of 1995.

11] Post-communist coinage of Albania.

12] Post-communist coinage of Lithuania.

13] Post-communist coinage of Romania.

14] Slovakia's first post-communist coin series.

15] Slovenia: post-Yugoslav coinage.

16] Romanian and Moldovan Variations of the 1990s.

17] The final coin series of Yugoslavia.

[Tirant]

I got this series recently; though small, they're very nice coins, probably their series with the most varied designs.

I was taught at school that Yugoslavia broke up in 1992, so i've always seen those next (and last) 14 years like if Yugoslavia was playing its last encore. Today, it's weird for me to think that, when i met my wife in early 2006, there was still a remain of what this country used to be.

[Figleaf]

Yugoslavia was a creation of the first world war, held together by a resistance leader from the second world war and pulled apart during the end of the cold war.

The political stability of a country depends on factors such as a common culture, history, language and religion. Yugoslavia had none of the above. It was held together by Serb dominance and power, part of a history of gory revolutions, political intrigue and other forms of violence. It was perhaps inevitable that such a country would eventually fall apart.

What changed that equation was Josip Broz, a leader of the resistance against the axis forces. When peace broke out, he worked himself up to national leader by murder and repression. He quickly changed though, under threat from Stalin and - perhaps because of his descent (Croat father, Slovene mother) - realising just how unstable the country was. By distancing himself from Stalin and remaining communist he not only preserved Yugoslav independence, but also became a darling of Western democracies. By creating and strictly maintaining delicate balances between the nationalities at all levels of governance and stressing Yugoslav nationalism instead he stabilised the country politically.

It was a masterful political act, but it depended on Tito alone. Yugoslavia was never Switzerland, where the equilibrium between groups is maintained by the system, not by a personality. When Tito died, nobody could step in his shoes and Yugoslavia fell back to the situation before the second world war: Serbs claiming a right to rule the other nationalities. One by one, the others claimed independence and the Serbs, unable to regain the lost grounds, started cycles of atrocities that estranged them from their former Western supporters. Stalin was long gone and the Soviet Union had its own problems, so finally, the inevitable happened.

The bits and pieces of what used to be Yugoslavia are politically stable, now that they are organised on the basis of a common culture, history, language and religion. The region is as peaceful as it has ever been, economies are growing. The only constant in human history is change. It is fine to look back in order to learn lessons, but never trust politicians who want to take the country back in time. Those "good old days" weren't as good as they remember.

Peter