Makes sense considering Austria and Hungary... I do think the Danube would have symbolic importance to propaganda and the such though, even though that's not the case, at least in places like Greece, Western Europe and America.No and no.
Yes, and they definitely won't kill each other the moment the war is done...Why Yugoslav has a single government now. It also has two armies and de facto areas administered by AVNOJ and areas administered by the Royal government depending on who liberated them first but hey it's one government!
So is Montenegro under Tito or the Chetnik's control? I'm curious bc it'll affect the shipping situation quite a bit when we get a civil war in town.And Tito already directly controls large areas of Croatia and Bosnia. The map below from OTL September 1944 is indicative. The one notable difference in OTL is of course that TTL in Serbia it is Chetnik units that have grabbed the territory first. TTL they were under much closer outside scrutiny from early on given the active front in Greece. Which meant the Chetniks were strong armed to action and had Michailovic brought to Greece and replaced by people who would follow the orders from Athens in that regard.
Frankly, I see Greece (with American assistance) try to support Serbia with as much weapons as they could get. It'd be a good way to get soldiers back in the factories (and allow the war economy to be able to be ramped down instead of being shut down), and the infrastructure built in Macedonia beforehand would lend to Greece shipping weapons America and Europe to try to keep the Chetniks in Serbia and Macedonia.
Hmm that makes sense, and with Bulgarian crimes being a lot more well known (and Bulgarian resistance against Greece) there is a chance they get punished a lot more, especially since they'd be forced to be a neutral country too.I really doubt Romania was happy with it. It was part of the Vienna awards after all. True Antonescu concentrated on retrieving Moldavia and Transylvania but I'm pretty certain that after the Romanians were done with Hungary, and a Romanian-Hungarian war over Transylvania at some point would had been a certainty it would be Bulgaria's turn.
Sorry I meant it being 'someone who will listen' rather than 'an actual puppet'.Greece even the larger TTL one has comparable population with Serbia and considerably less than Yugoslavia. In GDP terms IMS Yugoslavia had a per capita income of $106 in 1938. Which meant a GDP of about $1.7 billion. TTL Greece was at about $1.5 billion. These are not numbers making it particularly easy for one to make a puppet of the other.
Frankly I think the split will be a Communist Croat-Bosniak state and a Royalist Serb-Montenegrinn-Macedonian state, with Slovenia being caught in between a rock and a hard place. I think they either become part of royalist Yugoslavia in a 'east-pakistan' situation or a UN 'we'll control it and the people will vote for it later' which would be interesting either way.The big loser in a split Yugoslavia is I suspect the Bosniaks. If Bosnia is part of the kingdom theit are a minority in what's effectively greater Serbia. If it is part of SFRY Tito will have reason to have a viable Serbian republic in his SFRY. The more practical way to have one is putting together Krajna and most of Bosnia with Herzegovina going to the Croats. The Bosniaks are at best getting an autonomous republic as part of either Serbia or Croatia...
Or they're part of communist Yugoslavia under Tito.