Tudjman frees Arkan; Arkan slaughters Croats and Muslims
michael a sells
Below is an excerpt from the transcript of the Report on
CNN/Impact (Sunday, June 1, 1997) on Zeljko Radznjatovic, the Serbian
religious nationalist and "ethnic cleansing" organizer known as Arkan.
The excerpt details the the arrest of Arkan by Croatian police,
his trial, conviction in a Croatian court, and then the mysterious and
murderous decision by the Croatian government of Franjo Tudjman to send
him back to Milosevic without serving his 20 month sentence. As a direct
result of Tudjman's freeing of Arkan, tens of thousands of Croats and
Muslims were killed, raped, tortured, and plundered, and hundreds of
thousands made homeless. Arkan's killing spree in Croatia began shortly
after Tudjman sent him home to Milosevic to get re-fitted and re-equipped
for "ethnic cleansing."
AMANPOUR: Milosevic chooses Arkan for the job.
August 1990, Belgrade. General Marko Negovanovic
of the Yugoslav national army signs the authority
allowing Arkan to form a special military force.
(on camera) The Croatian government here in Zagreb
had known about Arkan for years. They knew that
he'd joined the Serbian secret police in Belgrade
in 1973. They also knew that he'd been assigned to
carry out what they called "dirty jobs" throughout
Europe. And then, in the dawn hours of November 29,
1990, news reached them from a border town about
100 miles from here.
A hit team, calling themselves the "Serbian
Volunteer Guard," had been arrested. They were
armed to the teeth with explosives and weapons of
assassination. Their leader was Arkan. (voice-over)
In an office after the arrest, the Croatian police
videotaped Arkan and his men with their weapons:
submachine guns with silencers, special revolvers,
40-shot machine pistols, hand grenades, CS gas
canisters and 400 rounds of 0.9mm ammunition.
June 1991, Zagreb. After six months in custody,
Arkan and his men are convicted of planning armed
insurrection in the Krajina region of Croatia,
where the population is predominantly Serb. Arkan
draws 20 months in jail, but for reasons still
unclear, he is immediately returned to Serbia,
and walks into what is now an undeclared war.
SHAW: The Yugoslav military is on alert at this
hour.
AMANPOUR: Croatia had just seceded from Yugoslavia,
giving Milosevic the excuse he needed to invade
the newly independent nation, using the Yugoslav
national army. As a result, antiwar protesters
had taken to the streets of Belgrade, the Serbian
capital.
ALEKSANDER VASOVIC, BELGRADE JOURNALIST: People
constantly demanded, OK, fine, if we have to go
to war, please then, explain to us why are we
going there? What are our war goals?
AMANPOUR: Few wanted to fight for Milosevic's
Greater Serbia, and the Yugoslav army, by now
purged of most non-Serbs, was plagued by deserters,
poorly equipped, and demoralized.
VASOVIC: The basic question, what the hell are we
doing there?
AMANPOUR: The Serbian forces' first target was
Vukovar, on Croatia's far eastern front, 100 miles
from Belgrade. The campaign was a prolonged fiasco.
By the time they captured it, they had reduced
the city to rubble. When Arkan's volunteers -- now
calling themselves the "Tigers" -- opened a
training camp nearby, the contrast with the army
was stark. They brought discipline, purpose, and
privilege. Arkan sold videos of the Tigers to
drive the point home.
BASSIOUNI: The so-called "Tigers" were given brand
new uniforms by the army. They were given brand new
military equipment by the army.
AMANPOUR: They were also given the latest high-tech
gear from the Serbian secret police.
BASSIOUNI: So all of these things together clearly
indicate that they had a very special status.
AMANPOUR: That special status, and Arkan's
apparently high-level political clout, infuriated
many army officers.
VASOVIC: They had to live with Arkan, but they
didn't like him. Arkan was simply someone who was
not part of their idea of warfare, their idea of
how to solve national issues. I think they simply
hated his guts.
AMANPOUR: Arkan reported only to Belgrade, and
for good reason. His troops targeted civilians.
The task was to murder and terrorize men, women
and children. This was ethnic cleansing.
Paul Andrej Jurcic
In article <msells-0306...@s206.founders_academic.haverford.edu>,
mse...@haverford.edu says...
>
> Below is an excerpt from the transcript of the Report on
>CNN/Impact (Sunday, June 1, 1997) on Zeljko Radznjatovic, the Serbian
>religious nationalist and "ethnic cleansing" organizer known as Arkan.
>
> The excerpt details the the arrest of Arkan by Croatian police,
>his trial, conviction in a Croatian court, and then the mysterious and
>murderous decision by the Croatian government of Franjo Tudjman to send
>him back to Milosevic without serving his 20 month sentence. As a direct
>result of Tudjman's freeing of Arkan, tens of thousands of Croats and
>Muslims were killed, raped, tortured, and plundered, and hundreds of
>thousands made homeless. Arkan's killing spree in Croatia began shortly
>after Tudjman sent him home to Milosevic to get re-fitted and re-equipped
>for "ethnic cleansing."
>
brutal ethnic cleansing in Croatia and BiH will remain such as long as his
mentors in Serbia are tolerated by great powers with vested interest in Balkan
politics. However, one day we will know the truth.
As for release of Arkan by Croatian government in June 1991 we can only
speculate for now. My teory is that it was tradeoff for the elusive "peace",
which, of course, never materialized. Remember, at that time, in the middle of
1991, Croatian government was not capable to wage full scale war with
Yugoslavia. Just proclaimed Croatian independence was not yet recognized nor
favored by Europe and US. When war started Croatian government wasn't even
prepared to admit that country is in war, so overwhelming superiority of JNA
was in comparison with rag-tag Croatian army at that time. While at that time
it looked as irresponsible policy which frustrated many Croatians now is clear
that it was right. Croatia was liberated with relatively small casualities of
25,000 dead and only one "Vukovar style" destruction of the many Croatian
cities. Full war with Yugoslavia would cost much, much more.
To suggest that slaughter of Croatians in Vukovar and Bosnians in Bjeljina and
elsewhere is direct consequence of Croatian government action of freeing
convicted criminal Arkan is both naive and malicious. History doesn't unfold
that way. There are always more fundamental reasons for war then caprice of
one individual. It is obvious that if Arkan was put in jail, someone else would
do the job. Great Serbian war machine was already rolling and could not be
stopped. As for difference in number of killed in Croatia and BiH, this is
among other things also a consequence of mental preparedness for the war in
both countries. While both, Croatia and BiH, were inadequatelly armed to resist
Serbian agression there was, however, great difference in the mental attitude.
Great majority in Croatia was aware what Great Serbian nationalists would like
to accomplish and how far they would go to achieve their goals. However, many
ordinary Bosnias, including many in the government posts didn't believe that
JNA will attack Bosnia. Remember, while war was raging in Croatia, people in
Sarajevo were demonstrating for Yugoslav unity. Many of them still believed in
"brotherhood and unity" and that JNA is army of all peoples of former
Yugoslavia in spite of two wars this army was engaged in (Slovenija and
Croatia). It's why Croatians are not surprised a bit what happened in Vukovar.
It's why Vukovar defence was 3 months long and Bjelijna lasted only several
days. It's why so many more Bosnians were killed in comparison with Croatians.
Paul
>
Ivica Maric
Paul<5n2pb5$q...@elmo.cadvision.com>...
Dragi moj gospodine Paul. Nadam se da mi ne zamjerate sto vam pisem na svom
jeziku. To cinim jer nisam jeos uvijek tako dobar u engleskom.
U Sarajevu se 1991. demonstriralo za mir prvenstveno. Skoro svi govornici
su naglasavali da se mora naci mirno rjesenje za sva pitanja i niko nije
demonstrirao za "Yugoslav uniti" kako vi kazete. Isto tako je laz tvrditi
da su ljudi bili jos uvijek ubijedjeni u bratstvo i jedinstvo i ispravnost
JNA.
Medjutim, meni je jasno da se fama kojekakve zasljepljenosti naroda mora
provlaciti i da se tabu toga narodnog nezadovoljstava mora ozivljavati
ponovo jer su ljudi tada u Sarajevu trazili jedinu opciju koja je bila
postena, a to je da tadasnja vlast da ostavke. Ali ja znam da se vi
zgrazavate nad cinjenicom da ova vlast (jos uvijek je ista) moze dati
ostavku pa vi to zato tako drasticno presucujete.
Vi necete da shvatite da su sve vase drzave (Hrvatska, Srbija, Bosna, bivsa
Jugoslavija, sadasnja Jugoslavija) nebitne. Nijedna od njih nije vrijedna
jedne jedine djecije suze i sve su one vase izmisljotine da bi mogli da
zadovoljite vase bolesne umove. LJUDI HOCE MIR PA TAMAN I U ALBANIJI.
Andrew Varvel
In article <msells-0306...@s206.founders_academic.haverford.edu>,
michael a sells <mse...@haverford.edu> wrote:
[An excerpt from a quite interesting report about Arkan deleted.]
The special report about Arkan by CNN is interesting, not so much in the
narration, but in the pictures. It confirms other reports that Arkan
looks innocent as an infant (and as ruthless). I am fairly sure that
Arkan is devout, as far as he able to understand spirituality; I suspect
that his understanding is a veneration of the trappings of ceremony.
Most assassins have that characteristic worn look on the face (or the
eyes); Arkan doesn't. From the tone of his voice, he not only sounds
utterly remorseless -- he had a hell of a good time slaughtering people.
To him, it was great fun! And a pious event to boot. (He reminds me of
the small children who don't realize that it might be wrong to torture
animals; children must be taught many things.)
Finding him is even more tricky; I suspect that even if Slobo himself
signed a warrant for Arkan's arrest, he would be mysteriously found in
public in Belgrade and not found. He is regarded with fear by many, it is
true. But that is not all of it. In his "fun", over one millenium of
Orthodox theology is at stake. And it's quite an interesting dilemma for
the rest of us.
Justice is important for public safety; there is a strong ceremonial*
component to courts that is frequently ignored. In terms of public
safety, it appears certain beyond a shadow of an unreasonable doubt (let
alone a reasonable doubt) that Arkan is responsible for mass murder.
Based on evidence supplied by Arkan himself, it is seriously doubtful
whether he can be rehabiliatated. From my point of view, something must
be done to ensure that his previous behavior does not repeat itself.
Capturing him is nearly out of the question; he is too well defended, in
more ways than one. I strongly suspect that he will never understand what
he did wrong. (And how could he, with the examples of St. Irene, St Louis
(Roman but occasionally allied), and Zelea Codreanu to look up to?) He
can stay free, but that would risk repetition of the same behavior.
Perhaps he could be convinced by his spiritual advisors to study in a
monastery in order to be an even better Christian; I feel a bit strange
about this myself. The last possibility would be popular, but impolite to
consider.
Either one does something, or one does nothing. On some issues, there is
no middle ground. When one weighs omission against commission, the right
answer is not always evident. I do hope that it is evident to you from
your love and compassion for all, whether saint or sinner, and something
can be done to discourage further atrocities. Justice is an exercise in
sadness; justice without sadness would be improper ceremony.
As far as I can tell, the Church that could bless the butchery of Arkan is
descended from the Church that regards the Empress Irene as a "saint". It
doesn't matter what she did in life; she restored the images and that's
all that matters. And isn't Empress Theodora (ruling 842-856) regarded as
"Theodora the Blessed"?!? Under her supervision, all of the known works
of the iconoclasts were collected and burned.**
Until the Orthodox Churches stop praising Irene and Theodora as heroines,
any distance between the Churches and Arkan would be merely another
attempt at political expediency rather than a clear repentance.
Unfortunately, the twentieth and twenty-first centuries are in a curious
time warp; the iconoclasm seems to be back in full force, with the
Communists (and possibly some new ideology) playing the part of the
Iconoclasts and Milosevic, Yeltsin, and Iliescu playing the part of the
Iconodules, Pope John Paul II playing the part of Pope Gregory II, and the
Muslim Umma playing its part (especially with their nasty jokes about
Christian polytheism and iconographic idolatry...).*** Hopefully, we can
someday get out of this time recursion.
As far as I'm concerned, the Roman Catholic and the Orthodox Churches have
bloody hands, institutionally speaking (among *many* other religious
institutions....). They argue over the recipe for the Body of Christ,
beards, married clergy, calendars, language of the mass, and a host of
other petty issues; they don't accept each others' communions. However,
the real issue for over a millenium has been the power politics of the
clerical economy. And there's no repentence; no remorse.
[It would be interesting if the leaders of the main churches in
Christianity could repent for sins and merge into a loosely organized but
relatively whole Church led by a College of Scholars? Just a thought.
There's probably too much politics, though...]
BTW, here's a hypothetical question for future consideration. How does
one deal with a clever child with a biochemical imbalance that damages the
part of the brain responsible for a conscience? Is there anything that
can be done?
--Andrew Varvel--
*Genuine ceremony is not the same as the trappings of ceremony.
** Reference: LaMonte, John L. (Henry C. Lea Professor of Medieval
History, University of Pennsylvania) The World of The Middle Ages: A
Reorientation of Medieval History (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts,
Inc., 1949), 827 pp. (Specific reference: pp. 133-135.)
***Specific reference: Ibid., 126-127.
It is an old general textbook, but it is still useful. If you know of
better references that contradict this, please let me know so that I can
evaluate them. Thank you.
Martin Graiter
Michael,
Once again you show that you're like a castrated dog; You don't get it.
Martin
Michael Sells
In article <01bc7105$14225220$Loca...@algonet.se.news.algonet.se>,
"Martin Graiter" <mag...@algonet.se> wrote:
A castrated dog. That's good Martin. Please tune into the postings of
Vaso Todorovic of SAVA. You two write the same and think the same,
although I must tell you Vaso is far more creative than you are with his
sexual obssessions and hate fantasies. You can read the text of your
soul-mate Vaso in the posting I just made call SAVA/Twisted Soul of
Serbian Religious Nationalism.
Mike
Michael Sells
In article <5n2pb5$q...@elmo.cadvision.com>, jur...@cadvision.com (Paul
Andrej Jurcic) wrote:
> >"Mystery" of Arkan's criminal exploits including the last episode of
the most
> brutal ethnic cleansing in Croatia and BiH will remain such as long as his
> mentors in Serbia are tolerated by great powers with vested interest in
Balkan
> politics. However, one day we will know the truth.
Amen.
> As for release of Arkan by Croatian government in June 1991 we can only
> speculate for now. My teory is that it was tradeoff for the elusive "peace",
> which, of course, never materialized. Remember, at that time, in the
middle of
> 1991, Croatian government was not capable to wage full scale war with
> Yugoslavia. Just proclaimed Croatian independence was not yet recognized nor
> favored by Europe and US. When war started Croatian government wasn't even
> prepared to admit that country is in war, so overwhelming superiority of JNA
> was in comparison with rag-tag Croatian army at that time. While at that time
> it looked as irresponsible policy which frustrated many Croatians now is
clear
> that it was right. Croatia was liberated with relatively small casualities of
> 25,000 dead and only one "Vukovar style" destruction of the many Croatian
> cities. Full war with Yugoslavia would cost much, much more.
Paul, I suggest you read Yugoslavia: Death of a Nation. In 1991, Tudjman
and the HDZ were firing, in in one infamous case, assassinating Croat
policemen in Slavonia and Krajina who had made tentative truces with
Serbs. According to this very damning evidence, Tudjman and his HDZ were
stoking the war, not trying to prevent it. I'll provide some exact
references and evidence in a follow up.
> To suggest that slaughter of Croatians in Vukovar and Bosnians in
Bjeljina and
> elsewhere is direct consequence of Croatian government action of freeing
> convicted criminal Arkan is both naive and malicious. History doesn't unfold
> that way. There are always more fundamental reasons for war then caprice of
> one individual. It is obvious that if Arkan was put in jail, someone
else would
> do the job.
Yes, the war would have gone on. And of course there were many criminals
in Serbia only too glad to commit atrocities against Croats and Muslims,
with the support of Milosevic's army and secret police.
But in the first place, Arkan was unique in having such a strong tri-fold
power base, in the Serbian Church (Nikolaj, Vasilje, and others), in
organized crime, and in Milosevic's secret police (Jovica Stanisic, et.
all), so he was more effective, more quickly, than many other militia
leaders. Extreme nationalist Serbs recognize this and revere him all the
more for his efficiency in carrying out atrocities and taking territory.
The second point is that Tudjman and the HDZ didn't give a damn about the
Croatian people. That they would release a dangerous, sworn killer like
Arkan, shows a callous disregard for the lives Arkan would take. But
Arkan's crimes only helped them (Tudjman and the HDZ) politically. War
and atrocities were good for the HDZ. They were able to control discourse
and place themselves as the protectors of the Croatian people. Peace
would be bad for Tudjman politically. That is why those heroic Croatian
policemen who were getting in the way of conflict by establishing truces
with Serb police, were eliminated, no? That is why Tudjman got rid of
Stjepan Kljuic in Bosnia. If not, what is your explanation?
Great Serbian war machine was already rolling and could not be
> stopped. As for difference in number of killed in Croatia and BiH, this is
> among other things also a consequence of mental preparedness for the war in
> both countries. While both, Croatia and BiH, were inadequatelly armed to
resist
> Serbian agression there was, however, great difference in the mental
attitude.
> Great majority in Croatia was aware what Great Serbian nationalists
would like
> to accomplish and how far they would go to achieve their goals. However, many
> ordinary Bosnias, including many in the government posts didn't believe that
> JNA will attack Bosnia. Remember, while war was raging in Croatia, people in
> Sarajevo were demonstrating for Yugoslav unity. Many of them still
believed in
> "brotherhood and unity" and that JNA is army of all peoples of former
> Yugoslavia in spite of two wars this army was engaged in (Slovenija and
> Croatia). It's why Croatians are not surprised a bit what happened in
Vukovar.
> It's why Vukovar defence was 3 months long and Bjelijna lasted only several
> days. It's why so many more Bosnians were killed in comparison with Croatians.
>
> Paul
>
There is some truth to what you say. But the Bosnians were in a
particularly defenseless position, not only because they didn't expect the
genocide, but also because they had far few arms that even the Croatian
army. And then, at the end of 1992, Mate Boban and Dario Kordic, against
the wishes of most Bosnian Croats, made their ugly deal with Karadzic to
attack the Bosnians from the West, stabbing their vulnerable allies in the
back, and to carve up Bosnia between Croatia and Serbia. . . This deal
also resulted to utter misery to tens of thousands of innocent Croats and
Muslims, and shows, once again, how utterly unconcerned the HDZ is with
the Croatian people. It only wants its own power. That is why it
eliminated people like Stjepan Kljuic, the Croat elected by the Bosnian
Croats, and replaced them with criminals like Dario Kordic.
Mike
Vanja
> In article <msells-0306...@s206.founders_academic.haverford.edu>,
> mse...@haverford.edu says...
> >
> > Below is an excerpt from the transcript of the Report on
> >CNN/Impact (Sunday, June 1, 1997) on Zeljko Radznjatovic, the Serbian
> >religious nationalist and "ethnic cleansing" organizer known as Arkan.
> >
> > The excerpt details the the arrest of Arkan by Croatian police,
> >his trial, conviction in a Croatian court, and then the mysterious and
> >murderous decision by the Croatian government of Franjo Tudjman to send
> >him back to Milosevic without serving his 20 month sentence. As a direct
> >result of Tudjman's freeing of Arkan, tens of thousands of Croats and
> >Muslims were killed, raped, tortured, and plundered, and hundreds of
> >thousands made homeless. Arkan's killing spree in Croatia began shortly
> >after Tudjman sent him home to Milosevic to get re-fitted and re-equipped
> >for "ethnic cleansing."
> >
> >"Mystery" of Arkan's criminal exploits including the last episode of
the most
> brutal ethnic cleansing in Croatia and BiH will remain such as long as his
> mentors in Serbia are tolerated by great powers with vested interest in
Balkan
> politics. However, one day we will know the truth.
>
> As for release of Arkan by Croatian government in June 1991 we can only
> speculate for now. My teory is that it was tradeoff for the elusive "peace",
> which, of course, never materialized. Remember, at that time, in the
middle of
> 1991, Croatian government was not capable to wage full scale war with
> Yugoslavia. Just proclaimed Croatian independence was not yet recognized nor
> favored by Europe and US. When war started Croatian government wasn't even
> prepared to admit that country is in war, so overwhelming superiority of JNA
> was in comparison with rag-tag Croatian army at that time. While at that time
> it looked as irresponsible policy which frustrated many Croatians now is
clear
> that it was right. Croatia was liberated with relatively small casualities of
> 25,000 dead and only one "Vukovar style" destruction of the many Croatian
> cities. Full war with Yugoslavia would cost much, much more.
I wish I could agreed with you. At the time, I would have. But learning
now more and more about the Tudjman-Milosevic meetings that took place,
where the main topic was the carving of the Bosnia and exterminating
Bosniaks, I think that both needed Arkan to "catalyze" their apocalyptical
plans of creating "ethnicaly clean" states, even within the Bosnian
territories. Don't forget that Milosevic forst moves in Vukovar almost
backfired at him after peace-protests took place on the streets of
Belgrade, and while the JNA soldiers massively deserted from the army.
They both needed a man like Arkan to take them down the war-path. What are
the results? Too many dead and expelled people, but two big bosses still
firmly in power...
> To suggest that slaughter of Croatians in Vukovar and Bosnians in
Bjeljina and
> elsewhere is direct consequence of Croatian government action of freeing
> convicted criminal Arkan is both naive and malicious. History doesn't unfold
> that way. There are always more fundamental reasons for war then caprice of
> one individual. It is obvious that if Arkan was put in jail, someone
else would
> do the job. Great Serbian war machine was already rolling and could not be
> stopped. As for difference in number of killed in Croatia and BiH, this is
> among other things also a consequence of mental preparedness for the war in
> both countries. While both, Croatia and BiH, were inadequatelly armed to
resist
> Serbian agression there was, however, great difference in the mental
attitude.
> Great majority in Croatia was aware what Great Serbian nationalists
would like
> to accomplish and how far they would go to achieve their goals. However, many
> ordinary Bosnias, including many in the government posts didn't believe that
> JNA will attack Bosnia. Remember, while war was raging in Croatia, people in
> Sarajevo were demonstrating for Yugoslav unity. Many of them still
believed in
> "brotherhood and unity" and that JNA is army of all peoples of former
> Yugoslavia in spite of two wars this army was engaged in (Slovenija and
> Croatia). It's why Croatians are not surprised a bit what happened in
Vukovar.
> It's why Vukovar defence was 3 months long and Bjelijna lasted only several
> days. It's why so many more Bosnians were killed in comparison with Croatians.
As for the Bosnian defenses, please don't forget several crucial factorsa:
1. Croatia could and had imported arms illegaly from Germany and Hungary
for quite some time. Their geogrpahical and political position allowed
them to do so. Bosnia was between two hostile countries, and if Bosnia
tried to smuggle in arms like Croatia, it would provoke a war which
Bosnians desperately tried to avoid, knwoing what consequences of such a
war.
2. The knowledge Croatia possesed about the Milosevic's plans. Whike
Milosevic and Tudjman were ripping Yugoslavia apart and making plans for
their nationalist and ethnically pure states, Bosnia tried not to follow
the same path of nationalist franzy, and strived to preserve its
multi-ethnic society.. even more naively, for time Bosnia and Macedonia
were trying to preserve Yugoslavia itslef, but it was too late.
3. Vukovar was in the fall and winter of 1991, ath the beggining of the
war. Serb just started working on their goals, and were merely
"stretching" at Vukovar. When they attacked Bijeljina 6 months later, they
knew how to attack it. Besides, the lack of discipline and organization
which took place within the JNA forces in Vukovar was completely turned
into a highly organized and well-supplied army of experienced,
professional killers..
Now are these facts merely Bosnian naiveness? I think not! And I think
that Arkan served well as a person who could deliver quick escalation with
the terrible crimes he committed. Now thinking, it is not surprising at
all that he would engage in acts like gauging people's eyes, raping and
torturing. It is an excellent way to escalate the war, to boost your on
troops, and to show other Serbs that the "enemy" is real and should be
quickly and brutally dealt with... think about it
vanja
--
http://www.students.haverford.edu/vfilipov
http://www.BosNet.org
Martin Graiter
Michael Sells <mse...@haverford.edu> said:
: A castrated dog. That's good Martin. Please tune into the postings of
: Vaso Todorovic of SAVA. You two write the same and think the same,
: although I must tell you Vaso is far more creative than you are with his
: sexual obssessions and hate fantasies. You can read the text of your
: soul-mate Vaso in the posting I just made call SAVA/Twisted Soul of
: Serbian Religious Nationalism.
:
: Mike
The key expression was "you don't get it", and you still don't...
You're quite like your Serbian countrymen in the debating style, but you
lack their intelligence. Remember calling me "uniformed", saying "your god
Tudjman", calling for excommunication of Tuta, and always putting words in
other people's mouth, always making incredidible conclusions?
Your disregard for logic, your lack of respect for others, your
quasi-righteusness, all your prejudices and made up decisions about what
the one or the other meant, thought or wanted, all this makes you a poor
debater, a poor logician and an intellectual dwarf.
What on Earth is it you want here?
If you're tryin to promote some book you're writing, don't. Your style is
also boring. Always the same non-applicable analogies, the religious
undertones, the wild accusations. You remind me of Däniken, the Swiss
jester who claimed that everything bigger than a garage was made by
extraterrestrials. Lazy bums them Egyptians, Mayas and Aztecs!
Someone gave you a very good explanation as to why Arkan was released by
the croatian authorities. I remember that event and I also remember how
outraged I was when hearing it. But there were apparently other
considerations in those days?
Several years after it is no match telling what Tudjman should or shouldn't
have done, it's easier from an armchair.
(And no, I'm not a satanist, nazi, child-molester, cannibal, rapist,
massmurderer, etc. Nor do I support actions of other such people. This
disclaimer for Michael Sells only...)
Martin
michael a sells
Dear Paul,
The timing is really sad. Just a few days after I mentioned to you how
the Tudjman and company were stoking war in mid 1991, rather than trying
to avoid it (as you suggested in explaining the release of Arkan by
Tudjman), lo and behold, Croatia just released Ante Cugalj,the chief
symbol of how the war-mongers PROVOKED war with Milosevic even though the
KNEW the people of Slavonia were defenseless.
Cugalj was convicted for assassinating the Croatian hero Josip Reill-Kir
who had successfully resisted Milosevic's attempt to provoke war. For
this reason, the war-mongers in Croatia had him liquidated, even though
they knew that war at this time would be to the Serb army advantage and
that massive casualties to Slavonian Croats would ensue!
Arkan and Cugalj worked for the same end. They each wanted war. Neither
cared about his own people. Both worked for war-mongers who wanted war,
misery, destruction, and killing in order to keep their own power.
Cugalj was senteced to 20 years, but the courts showed what they believed
Reihl-Kir's life was worth, be releasing Cugalj with almost no time
served.
For a tribute to great heroes of the Balkans, which begins with a
testimony to Reihl-Kir, see our WEB page at
www.students.haverford.edu/vfilipov.
For an account of how Gojko Susak and HDZ extremists destroyed Reill-Kir's
efforts to save the people in the area of Borovo Selo, and how Reihl-Kir
was exterminated, and the crucial importance of this event in allowing
Serb army and militias to run rampage in Slavonia, see:
Laura Silber and Allan Little, Yugoslavia, Death of a Nation, 1995, 1996,
distributed by Penguin Books, pp.
Best wishes,
Michael
In article <msells-0506...@s209.haverford.edu>,
Y Rapido
Vanja wrote:
> I wish I could agreed with you. At the time, I would have. But
> learning
> now more and more about the Tudjman-Milosevic meetings that took
> place,
> where the main topic was the carving of the Bosnia and exterminating
>
> Bosniaks, I think that both needed Arkan to "catalyze" their
> apocalyptical
> plans of creating "ethnicaly clean" states, even within the Bosnian
> territories. Don't forget that Milosevic forst moves in Vukovar
> almost
> backfired at him after peace-protests took place on the streets of
> Belgrade, and while the JNA soldiers massively deserted from the
> army.
> They both needed a man like Arkan to take them down the war-path.
> What are
> the results? Too many dead and expelled people, but two big bosses
> still
> firmly in power...
rapido: This is as good moment as any to fully agree with Vanja's
statement.
Milosevic and Tudjman needed each other more than their living bread.
They are inseparable in many ways [perhaps not as inseparable as
the "Feral Tribune" weekly pictured them in a photo-montage -- in
bed :-), but on a metaphorical level even CLOSER than that!]. They
are partners in crime, and Arkan was almost as much of a tool of
Tudjman as he was a tool of Milosevic. Both Milosevic and Tudjman
needed the war. For example, Tudjman pushed Croatian Serbs into
Milosevic's arms by an open and criminal provocation of eliminating
Serbian nation from the constitution of the Republic of Croatia in
1990, which by itself was a strong contribution towards the war
scenario -- a provocation that was a part of a 'causus beli' that
Croatian
Serbs felt that they have on hands in 1990, 1991, etc.).
Freeing of Arkan was mutually agreed upon by Tudjman and Milosevic,
in order to acheve what they have achieved during the 1990's in
Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. No doubt about it !
Michael Sells
In article <01bc729c$04fa2be0$Loca...@algonet.se.news.algonet.se>,
"Martin Graiter" <mag...@algonet.se> wrote:
> Michael Sells <mse...@haverford.edu> said:
>
> : A castrated dog. That's good Martin. Please tune into the postings of
> : Vaso Todorovic of SAVA. You two write the same and think the same,
> : although I must tell you Vaso is far more creative than you are with his
> : sexual obssessions and hate fantasies. You can read the text of your
> : soul-mate Vaso in the posting I just made call SAVA/Twisted Soul of
> : Serbian Religious Nationalism.
> :
> : Mike
>
> The key expression was "you don't get it", and you still don't...
>
> You're quite like your Serbian countrymen in the debating style, but you
> lack their intelligence. Remember calling me "uniformed", saying "your god
> Tudjman", calling for excommunication of Tuta, and always putting words in
> other people's mouth, always making incredidible conclusions?
Try not to think in racial categories. As far as debating style is
concerned, there are two people on this newsgroup who like to use epithets
like "castrated dog": you and Vaso Todorovich of SAVA. It has nothing to
do with race, religion, or ethnicity.
As for excommunicating those who carry out atrocities in the name of the
Catholic faith, why not? Pope John Paul II was happy to excommunicate
liberation theologians for presenting ideas he thought were against the
proper Catholic doctrine. Is it Catholic doctrine to rape, torture, and
kill people? If not, Martin, what is wrong with the Pope saying: It is
against the Catholic faith to persecute people because of their religion,
and therefore, anyone who carries out such persecution in the name of
Catholicism will be excommunicated.
What is your objection? Do you think Catholicism demands persecution of
non-Catholics and dynamiting of sacral sites of non-Catholics?
The world will be a better place when religious leaders tell those who
carry out atrocities in the name of religion, that they are not acting in
the spirit of that religion, period.
> What on Earth is it you want here?
Clear, powerful, protest against persecution of people on the basis of
their religion; clear, powerful support of people who are persecuted on
the basis of their religion.
I hope I have been clear.
> Someone gave you a very good explanation as to why Arkan was released by
> the croatian authorities. I remember that event and I also remember how
> outraged I was when hearing it. But there were apparently other
> considerations in those days?
> Several years after it is no match telling what Tudjman should or shouldn't
> have done, it's easier from an armchair.
I suggest you read Allen and Little's book, The Death of Yugoslavic, pp.
140-143, on how Gojko Susak and the HDZ war-mongers led Croats into a
disasterous ambush in Borovo Selo, how he gave the war-mongers in Serbia a
perfect causa belli, and how his radicals in the HDZ set-up and then
assassinated the Croat police chief, Josip Reihl-Kir, who had kept Serbia
from successfully fomenting war in the region.
These events, as The Death of Yugoslavia make clear, led directly to a war
before the people of Slavonia were prepared for it, and this premature
operation cost the lives of thousands of Croats at Vukovar and elsewhere.
Just this week, the convicted assassin of Reihl-Kir, Ante Cugalj, was
freed, as Arkan was freed, just as he was beginning to serve his sentence.
Martin, there is nothing illogical about raising these questions. There is
nothing "space alien" about asking why Arkan and Cugalj, both convicted
criminals, are freed. And there is nothing wrong with seeing reality as
it is: and the horrible reality is that HDZ radicals have been provoked
and profitted from war, misery, and "ethnic cleansing" and still do.
> (And no, I'm not a satanist, nazi, child-molester, cannibal, rapist,
> massmurderer, etc. Nor do I support actions of other such people. This
> disclaimer for Michael Sells only...)
I never called you anything of the sort. You are just a guy who gets
angry if anyone asks valid and important questions about the current
policies of the HDZ, which foster religious persecution and openly refuse
to carry out the solemn, sworn agreements at Dayton, and which protect HDZ
war-criminals indicted by the International Tribunal at The Hague for
crimes against humanity.
To the extent that you refuse to acknowledge the evils committed by the
HDZ, and refuse to acknowledge the validity of questions raised about the
HDZ's religious persecution, its collaboration with Mladic and Karadzic
throughout 1993 in Bosnia, its war-crimes, and its disregard for the lives
of Croats and non-Croats alike in cases like Susak's Borovo Selo fiasco,
you can be said to "worship Tudjman."
This use of "worship" is a metaphor, Martin. It means that a person
refuses to allow the object of "worship" to be held accountable for his
actions, his sworn oaths and promises, and his words, as if this "object
of worship" were above all question, as if human beings should just accept
whatever he does and not question it ever.
This is sometimes called a "cult of personality." It is frequently
compared to other cults, as a form of worship, in a tragic sense.
If you are able to look at the ruins of Mostar, and truly understand that
this horrid destruction was not necessary, that there was no reason for
the HDZ, outside of its fanaticism and greed, to attack its Bosnian allies
and put Muslims in concentration camps, and blow up their mosques, and
carry out mass-murders, and bring about misery and chaos for Muslims and
Croats alike--
If you are able to look at the ruins of Mostar and understand that it is
not only proper, but necessary, to hold the HDZ accountable for its crimes
and the misery it brought, then you cannot be accused of worshiping
Tudjman.
Mike
Galina
Y Rapido wrote:
>
> The entire "search for the Serb war criminals", executors of
> mass murder against the citizens of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina,
> predominantly the Bosnian nation (a.k.a. "muslims") is actually
> a "dog and a pony show" launched by "the West".
>
> The truth is that none of those criminals is going to be
> apprehended; this is merely a hoax, a whitewash dedicated for
> pleasing the public in the West -- it is a "placebo" of sorts.
> People are satisfied to read that "something is being done",
> but, if it fails (as it was actually designed to fail", people
> can say "gee whiz, our governments at least tried" ...
>
> Besides, the Serb Republic is being rapidly fortified, established,
> "legitimized" and already now there is a talk of "three equal
> sides". One or two years from now Bosnian defenders shall
> be prosecuted for "harming the innocent Serbian people" -- just
> look out, it is coming ... it is already here ...
>
> Serb Republic is a finished project of war criminals, and, as such
> it almost does not matter who they are -- their bloody deed is
> being cemented for all future generations to benefit from this
> slaughter. That is the true nature of the Dayton "peace agreement":
> legitimization of genocide!
>
> Arkan, Church, ...? They were useful tools, they have done their
> bloody job and they are free as they ever were ...
Sven,
Think of the Arrest Mladich and Karadjic petition this way = A start,
only a start.
Galja
Y Rapido
Martin Graiter
Michael Sells <mse...@haverford.edu> wrote:
: Try not to think in racial categories.
Uuughh, I'm trying real hard. What race are you? A terrier?
: As far as debating style is
: concerned, there are two people on this newsgroup who like to use
epithets
: like "castrated dog": you and Vaso Todorovich of SAVA. It has nothing
to
: do with race, religion, or ethnicity.
Don't bullshit, Vaso's and my style are very different. And who spoke of
race, religion, ethnicity? It is a matter of culture.
: As for excommunicating those who carry out atrocities in the name of the
: Catholic faith, why not?
Because it is not apropriate for you to make such suggestions. Even if you
were Catholic it wouldn't be appropriate.
You don't understand the first thing about Catholicism, that's obvious.
Apparently you have mixed up the priciples of most penal systems and the
idea of belonging to the Catholic community. The penal system punishes
criminals by isolating them from the rest of the society, in prisons. If
the bad dude doesn't behave in prison, he gets punished again and in the
same manner, he gets solitary confinement. Yes?
In the Catholic community there are ideals, like the ten commandments, and
other. Most of us have at least once in our life done things in discord
with these ideals. For instance, we have lied or stolen. The Catholic
Church would be a poor institution if it would push sinners away from
itself. Only a few saints would remain. Not even the worst sinners,
mass-murderers, can be excommunicated because of their deeds. Cause for
excommunication is when someone is propagating against the ideals of the
Catholic faith and yet remaining a priest, monk, nun, or equivalent. Say
that I would tell everyone on the Internet that it is OK to worship the
Satan. This would still not render me an excommunication, since I'm not a
clergyman. And, if the question ever came up, a thorough investigation
would be needed. Was this a hoax? Is it a way of protesting? Is this
someone that just seeks attention?
: I suggest you read Allen and Little's book, The Death of Yugoslavic, pp.
: 140-143, on how Gojko Susak and the HDZ war-mongers led Croats into a
: disasterous ambush in Borovo Selo, how he gave the war-mongers in Serbia
a
: perfect causa belli, and how his radicals in the HDZ set-up and then
: assassinated the Croat police chief, Josip Reihl-Kir, who had kept Serbia
: from successfully fomenting war in the region.
Serbia didn't need a casus belli, they had already made up their minds. The
Borovo Selo incident was a croatian loss, so why should Serbia start a war
because of a bunch of Chetniks murdered a busload of croatian policemen?
: These events, as The Death of Yugoslavia make clear, led directly to a
war
: before the people of Slavonia were prepared for it, and this premature
: operation cost the lives of thousands of Croats at Vukovar and elsewhere.
So? What are you trying to say? That the croatian leadership deliberately
went into a war with well-armed Serbia?
Would you Michael, completely nude, without even a stick, provoke a fight
between you and two crooks with Uzis?
: I never called you anything of the sort.
So what were you implying when calling me "uniformed"? That I'm a bloody
Parking Attendant?
: To the extent that you refuse to acknowledge the evils committed by the
: HDZ, and refuse to acknowledge the validity of questions raised about the
: HDZ's religious persecution, its collaboration with Mladic and Karadzic
: throughout 1993 in Bosnia, its war-crimes, and its disregard for the
lives
: of Croats and non-Croats alike in cases like Susak's Borovo Selo fiasco,
: you can be said to "worship Tudjman."
No, I can't be said to worship Tudjman because of those reasons. I will not
acknowledge any faults on the croatian side that can't be proven beyond
reasonable doubt. Nor do I buy your (sci-fi) conclusions. Nor do I consider
myself a nazi because I won't accept various Serbian claims of millions of
murdered Serbs by the WW2 regime in Croatia. Hard evidence, please.
: If you are able to look at the ruins of Mostar, and truly understand that
: this horrid destruction was not necessary, that there was no reason for
: the HDZ, outside of its fanaticism and greed, to attack its Bosnian
allies
: and put Muslims in concentration camps, and blow up their mosques, and
: carry out mass-murders, and bring about misery and chaos for Muslims and
: Croats alike--
So what WAS necessary? The 100-year war between England and France? The
Hiroshima bomb? The Vietnam war? As the song goes: War, what is it good
for?
-Absolutely nothing!
Your trying to put all the blame on the Bosnian Croat side, I don't believe
that it was so, specially after reading the extremely hateful postings from
Sven Rustempasic and other Muslims here on scc.
Alija Izetbegovic has written and said things that would make me extremely
uneazy were I living in BiH as a Catholic, or Orthodox for that matter.
: If you are able to look at the ruins of Mostar and understand that it is
: not only proper, but necessary, to hold the HDZ accountable for its
crimes
: and the misery it brought, then you cannot be accused of worshiping
: Tudjman.
So both Mostar and Vukovar are Tudjmans fault?
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that you're pretendedly against
Tudjman and the HDZ just as a way of spewing out your anger and hate
towards Croatia?
There are many people who deeply resent a free Croatia and all it stands
for.
Not only Serbs, demi-Serbs and mad Muslims, but also Croatians, Yugoslavia
nostalgists, and those with communism "in the blood".
Tudjman, with his faults and sometimes wrong decisions, makes a perfect
hate object. "Oh, I'm not against the croatian people, I'm just agaist
Tudjman and HDZ". I could bet that the ancient Egyptians had nothing
against their Jewish slaves, as long as these behaved subordinately and
built pyramids for their masters...
Frankly, your accusations of me worshiping Tudjman, of me being like W.
Dorich, and other things you have said, are products of your poor
deductional abilities. Just like your non-understanding of Catholicism,
your strange and far away conclusions on the political happenings in the
Balkan, and finally, the reasons why I'm into these discussions with you.
Martin
Y Rapido
Galina wrote:
> Think of the Arrest Mladich and Karadjic petition this way = A start,
> only a start.
>
> Galja
rap: The petition (circulating for more than a year now?)
is an INTEGRAL part of the "dog and a pony show". It is
not "a start" because it is not starting anything. It is
a "placebo" ("we care") designed as something analoguous
to a photo opportunity for the public in the West. Gen.
Mladic and Radovan Karadzic are having jolly good time and
nothing can nor shall harm them. Actually, UN/NATO
is protecting them and the whole "Dayton process" is
actually cementing their major creation: the Serb Republic.
"Dayton process" (1995-1997 and ongoing ...) is actually
execution of Karadzic's Plan minus Karadzic. It is like
some boss (in this case Karadzic) creates and executes a
project and just before the full completion of a project
decides to go for a vacation, while the associates are
given the task of executing the final steps of the
project. Here is the "dramatization" of that ... for all
you devoted fans of liberal TV sit-coms ... here is the
script:
-- Boss (Karadzic) sez (to his associates): "OK fellas, we
have almost done this, now, you can finish this for
me, right ?"
-- Associates: "Sure, no sweat! We can do it boss"
-- Boss: "OK, I knew you could ... take care and do
everything as I told you ..." ...
off he goes to a well deserved holliday ... in Greece ...
(Greek music in the background ...)
Y Rapido
of he goes to a well deserved holliday ... in Greece ?!)
Zeljko Dakic
msells tvrdi da...
> Paul, I suggest you read Yugoslavia: Death of a Nation. In 1991, Tudjman
> and the HDZ were firing, in in one infamous case, assassinating Croat
> policemen in Slavonia and Krajina who had made tentative truces with
> Serbs. According to this very damning evidence, Tudjman and his HDZ were
> stoking the war, not trying to prevent it. I'll provide some exact
> references and evidence in a follow up.
When talking about criminals don't forget to mention that one of the
first so called special police troups created to support Tudjman regime
was also made of criminals, prematurely released from jails to help his
war machine.
So no one is innocent...
Well, thats a false claim, I'm innocent... :))
Zeljko Dakic a.k.a. Desireco - Duh Koji Hoda
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Emajl: desi...@theoffice.net desi...@setnet.co.yu <- prefer.
---------------------------------------------------------------
## CrossPoint v3.02 R ##
Galina
Amusing, Sven..............but..........
I suppose you think doing nothig preferable to doing osmething when it
comes to arresting international indicted war crimes defendants?
Michael Sells
I like your title, Martin, "over the hills and far away."
In article <01bc73bc$f757bee0$Loca...@algonet.se.news.algonet.se>,
"Martin Graiter" <mag...@algonet.se> wrote:
> Michael Sells <mse...@haverford.edu> wrote:
>
> : Try not to think in racial categories.
>
> Uuughh, I'm trying real hard. What race are you? A terrier?
First "castrated dog," now "terrier." You do think a lot about dogs, no?
>
> : As for excommunicating those who carry out atrocities in the name of the
> : Catholic faith, why not?
>
> You don't understand the first thing about Catholicism, that's obvious.
> Cause for
> excommunication is when someone is propagating against the ideals of the
> Catholic faith and yet remaining a priest, monk, nun, or equivalent. Say
> that I would tell everyone on the Internet that it is OK to worship the
> Satan. This would still not render me an excommunication, since I'm not a
> clergyman. And, if the question ever came up, a thorough investigation
> would be needed. Was this a hoax? Is it a way of protesting? Is this
> someone that just seeks attention?
Fine. Anyone propagating the idea that it is a right and duty of Catholics
to non-Catholics, detroying their churches or mosques, raping them,
torturing them, or putting them in Dretelj-like concentration camps, and
who continues to do so, should be liable for excommunication. As I
mentioned before, Pope John Paul II was quite vigorous in excommunication
priests who advocated liberation theology John Paul determined was at odds
with Catholic faith. You said the Catholic faith upholds the ten
commandments. I assume "thou shalt not kill" is one of them. So, if
Catholic clergy encourage, bless, sanction, praise, or condone crimes
against humanity, they should be liable, no? Of course there should be a
thorough investigation.
>
> : I suggest you read Allen and Little's book, The Death of Yugoslavic, pp.
> : 140-143, on how Gojko Susak and the HDZ war-mongers led Croats into a
> : disasterous ambush in Borovo Selo, how he gave the war-mongers in Serbia
> a
> : perfect causa belli, and how his radicals in the HDZ set-up and then
> : assassinated the Croat police chief, Josip Reihl-Kir, who had kept Serbia
> : from successfully fomenting war in the region.
>
> Serbia didn't need a casus belli, they had already made up their minds. The
> Borovo Selo incident was a croatian loss, so why should Serbia start a war
> because of a bunch of Chetniks murdered a busload of croatian policemen?
Before Susak's men led the Croat police into the ambush, Susak made an
earlier raid in which he fired indiscriminately into Borovo Selo. That
reckless act immediately played into the hads of Serbian radicals. Sure
Serbian radicals had made up there mind to fight. That's not the point.
The point is that most Serbs were not ready to follow them and they need a
good pretext. Susak's rash act gave more of them the pretext, according
to accounts of the incident.
>
> : These events, as The Death of Yugoslavia make clear, led directly to a
> war
> : before the people of Slavonia were prepared for it, and this premature
> : operation cost the lives of thousands of Croats at Vukovar and elsewhere.
>
> So? What are you trying to say? That the croatian leadership deliberately
> went into a war with well-armed Serbia?
>
> Would you Michael, completely nude, without even a stick, provoke a fight
> between you and two crooks with Uzis?
These are questions that should be posed to Gojko Susak. Clearly what he
did led to catastrophe for Croats. But it led to a very nice thing for
Susak: his own promotion to Minister of Defense, the most powerful
position in the Croatia after president! That's my point, Martin. Susak
wanted a polarized situation in which his kind of extremist could come to
power.
Did he forcast how much blood and carnage his gambit would cost innocent
Croats? Probably not. Did he care whether or not it hurt other Croats.
No evidence he cared. He thinks about himself, his aggrandizement, and
his "ideal" of a religiously pure society (that is, one with all
non-Cathlics out, out, or dead).
I will not
> acknowledge any faults on the croatian side that can't be proven beyond
> reasonable doubt.
Exact refrain of William Dorich when I ask him to consider the crimes of
Arkan and other Serb nationalists! If Prozor, the blatant, open, attack
on a defenseless Muslim community that started the war against Bosnian
Muslims by the HDZ and HVO isn't evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, there
is no such thing. Why don't you check out the leering grin of the HVO guy
standing in front of burnt-out Muslim homes in Prozor, dressed in WW2
German gear. It is on the WEB site home page at:
www.students.haverford.edu/vfilipov
> : If you are able to look at the ruins of Mostar, and truly understand that
> : this horrid destruction was not necessary, that there was no reason for
> : the HDZ, outside of its fanaticism and greed, to attack its Bosnian
> allies
> : and put Muslims in concentration camps, and blow up their mosques, and
> : carry out mass-murders, and bring about misery and chaos for Muslims and
> : Croats alike--
>
> So what WAS necessary? The 100-year war between England and France? The
> Hiroshima bomb? The Vietnam war? As the song goes: War, what is it good
> for?
> -Absolutely nothing!
>
> Your trying to put all the blame on the Bosnian Croat side, I don't believe
> that it was so, specially after reading the extremely hateful postings from
> Sven Rustempasic and other Muslims here on scc.
>
> Alija Izetbegovic has written and said things that would make me extremely
> uneazy were I living in BiH as a Catholic, or Orthodox for that matter.
Fine. Then work to make sure that the ideas that make you uneasy are not
enacted, rather than going out and burning mosques or putting Muslims
(most of whom do not subscribe to Izetbegovic's ideas of the 1970's) in
concentration camps.
> : If you are able to look at the ruins of Mostar and understand that it is
> : not only proper, but necessary, to hold the HDZ accountable for its
> crimes
> : and the misery it brought, then you cannot be accused of worshiping
> : Tudjman.
>
> So both Mostar and Vukovar are Tudjmans fault?
Mostar, definitely. Vukovar, insofar as Susak's behavior led to a war
that Croats in Slavonia were unprepared for, and that behavior was
rewarded by Tudjman, he is at least complicit in Susak's recklessness.
> I could be wrong, but it seems to me that you're pretendedly against
> Tudjman and the HDZ just as a way of spewing out your anger and hate
> towards Croatia?
> There are many people who deeply resent a free Croatia and all it stands
> for.
> Not only Serbs, demi-Serbs and mad Muslims, but also Croatians, Yugoslavia
> nostalgists, and those with communism "in the blood".
I support the full implementation of the Dayton accords, which call for a
free, independent Croatia with it full territorial integrity.
Among the Bosnian Croats who have a better vision than Tudjman is Cardinal
Vinko Puljic, a great man, a great Catholic, a great religious leader, and
someone who has never stooped to hate. For a tribute to Puljic and a copy
of one of his most moving declarations, see our WEB page at:
www.students.haverford.edu/vfilipov
Just click on the "heroes of peace in the Balkans" icon.
Ciao,
Michael
Nermin
I don´t thik that poor countries, where massmurder like Arkan, Mladic
and some thousends more are celebrated as national Heroes, has any
future.
Dragi Raos
Martin Graiter <mag...@algonet.se> wrote in article
<01bc73bc$f757bee0$Loca...@algonet.se.news.algonet.se>...
> Michael Sells <mse...@haverford.edu> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> I could be wrong, but it seems to me that you're pretendedly against
> Tudjman and the HDZ just as a way of spewing out your anger and hate
> towards Croatia?
> There are many people who deeply resent a free Croatia and all it stands
> for.
> Not only Serbs, demi-Serbs and mad Muslims, but also Croatians,
Yugoslavia
> nostalgists, and those with communism "in the blood".
>
>
Martin,
I am not sure about Michael's motives, but they don't matter. It is facts
we are trying to discuss.
Anyway, regardless of your current discussion, and merit of Michael's
arguments (or lack of it), please don't fall into usual HDZ knee-jerk
response: HDZ and Mr. Tudjman critics are NOT automatically anty-Croatian.
We are trying to become free, democratic society, and in free society
government is, more or less, free game.
--
Dragi Raos
Zagreb, Croatia
Martin Graiter
Dragi Raos <bo...@4mate.hr> wrote:
: Anyway, regardless of your current discussion, and merit of Michael's
: arguments (or lack of it), please don't fall into usual HDZ knee-jerk
: response: HDZ and Mr. Tudjman critics are NOT automatically
anty-Croatian.
You're quite right, but there is no automation the other way around either.
When did you last see an *openly* anti-Croatian posting? When you have, you
thought of it to be immature, idiotic... and completely toothless. Am I
right?
But postings that appear to be based on facts, writted in a "civilized" and
"cultivated" manner don't strike you as being moronic, yes? These can sow
seeds of guilt, passivity, let-go. The same tactic as the old SFRJ regime
applied. They hated us, whatever they said about "brotherhood and unity".
And believe me, there are many who hate us today.
Don't you believe that the criticizing and pressure on Croatia will stop as
soon as Tudjman looses his position, or when HDZ becomes a minority!
What would happen if, for instance, all those Krajina-Serbs were to return
to Croatia tomorrow? Mrs Albright would congratulate Tudjman on a good
decision? Mr Galbraight would promise swifter integration into Europe?
Not likely. New demands would stack up. Why aren't Serbs guaranteed
employment? Why haven't the Croatian authorities built up all their homes?
Why doesn't the army and police employ Serbs in their traditional
occupations, policeman and soldier? And on, and on...
: We are trying to become free, democratic society, and in free society
: government is, more or less, free game.
Not free game to lies and implications with little or no substance.
According to Mr Sells, Susak deliberately provoked a war with Serbia in the
moment when Croatia was defenseless and Serbia was armed to the teeth.
Not likely at all, in my opinion.
Mr Sells is also pushing the idea that Tudjman absolutely wanted a war with
the Muslims. For what reason? This time Mr Sells mentions no "provocations"
as in the conflict with the Serbs.
Wasn't it so that Alija Izetbegovic rejected a truce with the bosnian
Croats in the first place? His motive was that he thought that the Serbs
would target the Croatians and leave the Muslims be. Later, when he found
himself in dire straits he meant to simply "take over" the already formed
and organized croatian HOS forces. For what reason should the bosnian
Croatians put their lifes in such irresponsible and impotent hands?
Although I see it as most unlucky that the Croatians and Muslims fought
each other, I also see it as primarily the Muslim side's fault. When they
couldn't win over the Serbs, they tried the "meek" Croatians.
Michael Sells idolization of the Muslim side is hardly based on unbiased
facts and correct observations. And his style of promoting "peace love and
understanding" is questionable. He urges us all to go to this homepage with
a photography of a grinning Croatian in a Wehrmacht uniform? What would
that promote? Love for Croatians?
Don't fool with fools and keep good company.
Martin
Ivica Maric
Please Martin, read the Holy Bible first(specialy the New Testament, if you
are a christian). Then you have to give priority to something: Tudjman or
Jesus, nationality or religion and a state or a human life.
--
Puno pozdrava:
Ivica Maric
Duvgatan 14
554 64 Jonkoping
SWEDEN
Tel. (fax) +46-36-13 05 83
E-mail "ivica...@jonkoping.mail.telia.com"
HomePage "http://www.torget.se/users/t/tepih"
Martin Graiter <mag...@algonet.se> wrote in article
<01bc73bc$f757bee0$Loca...@algonet.se.news.algonet.se>...
Martin Graiter
Ivica Maric <ivica...@jonkoping.mail.telia.com> skrev i inlägg
<01bc74fc$aede0de0$9cfc...@FOO.telia.com>...
: Please Martin, read the Holy Bible first(specialy the New Testament, if
you
: are a christian). Then you have to give priority to something: Tudjman or
: Jesus, nationality or religion and a state or a human life.
How about you reading Aristoteles? It's quite refreshing! Or try Nietsche's
"Antichrist". Then you will have to give priority to something: Aeroplane
or cookie? Bicyclerepairman or spoon? Capitalism or Sacher-cake?
(If the above seems illogical, it's probably because you haven't read the
books I suggested...)
Hälsningar,
Martin
Martin Graiter
michael a sells <mse...@haverford.edu> wrote:
: Martin a few words in response to your earlier posting, first. All I
: really ask is that the Croatian government, as well as the Serbian and
: Bosnian governments, live up the agreements they solemnly pledged at
: Dayton.
What's so good about Dayton? The pledges were given under threats and
pressure. Had Dayton been right and fair, no pressure and no threats would
be needed. And everyone would keep their promises. Do you seriously believe
that the Dayton accord will be the final word in this mess?
If I was the Muslim leader, I'd see to resolve things on the battlefield.
If I was the Croatian leader, I'd simply ignore Dayton, but pretend I'm
going along with it.
If I was the Serb leader I'd uphold Dayton and try to rescue what's
rescuable.
Don't tell me I'm immoral, politics have very little to do with morality.
The only thing that counts is gain. The croatian and serbian leaders have
reacted logically, but I can't see why Alija is asleep?
: If Tudjman and the HDZ do that, then I have no problem with them. My
: postings are directed at their recent blatant refusal to do so,
: particularly in the area of refusing to allow refugees to return to HVO
: areas in Bosnia and to Southern Croatia, and in refusing to arrested
: Kordic and other indicted war-criminals.
Can you give a _good_ reason as to why Tudjman should allow those who
fought Croatia to return (and try again in 20 years)? Exept for sworn
Dayton promises, higher moral grounds, etc. I bet you can't. And he won't.
Believe it or not, but I've posted a discussion where I said that it
wouldn't necessarily be negative to let the Serbs return. This was in
Croatian, half a year ago or so. I'm beginning to think that I was wrong
and Tudjman right. These people have for centuries been used by different
regimes against the Croatians. Now there are tendencies that the West is
using them again in blackmailing Croatia.
Already now foreigners are complaining that the Serbs can't find jobs.
Neither can Croatians. Obviously things wouldn't end with the return of the
Serbs. We would have an eternal cuckoo's egg in our nest. Just recently
Serbs stoned the peace-train that visited Vukovar...
: The day the indicted war-criminals are handed over to The Hague, as
: stipulated in the sworn agreements at Dayton, (and the HDZ party has that
: power and has that obligation to apprehend those indicted war-criminals
: and sent them to The Hague), I will post bouquets of praise for that act.
: You have my promise!
No need for that. Sending people to the Hague is very stupid politically.
It is better to let them stand trial in Croatia. Mrs Elisabeth Rehn can sit
in and see to it that everything is done by proper procedure.
: I know what you are saying, that as the present pope interprets it,
: excommunication should only be used for certain cases (like Liberation
: Theologians who won't keep silent or bishops who advocate use of
: contraception), but I disagree, get it?
Really, this matter is not for you to agree or disagree with.
: OK, try this experiment. Take Prozor, the first major case of HVO
: ethnic-cleansing against Bosnian Muslims. Now take the explanation
: offered by the Croatian government: there was a battle between Muslims
: and Croats and unfortunately some homes and business were hit by shells.
:
: OK, now compare this to what dozens of reports and UN officials saw in
: Prozor: all the homes and business that were burned to the ground were
: homes and business of Muslims. In some cases, the burned remnants of
: homes and business stood right next to Catholic homes, that miraculously,
: were not touched by the fire!
I'm afraid UN officials have fucked up before, like Yasushi Akashi, Boutos
Boutros-Gali, Lewis McKenzie, therefore their word isn't good enough for
me.
However, I don't rule out that it could be as they've reported in this
particular case.
For 50 years the Yugoslav regime have been telling lies about us Croatians,
the whole world believes we're all nazis, no wonder almost everything
Croatian is interpreted in a negative way. Just think of the debates over
the currency's name ("kuna"), the flag, the crest. All these things were
"fascist".
: Then look at the picture of the leering, sneering HVO officer standing in
: front of burned out Muslim homes in Prozor.
: www.students.haverford.edu/vfilipov
Obviously you like this picture? Promoting love and peace this way?
: You wrote the above text about Izetbegovic in the context of discussing
: the HVO "ethnic cleansing" campaign against Bosnian Muslims. The "you"
: was not meant to refer to you, personally, literally, it was meant to
: refer to the persona your argument seemed to construct, who seemed to be
: arguing that because Izetbegovic wrote certain things, what was done to
: Muslims in Herzegovina was justified.
Not justified, merely explainable.
: > : I support the full implementation of the Dayton accords, which call
for a
: > : free, independent Croatia with it full territorial integrity.
: >
: > Aaah, refreshing to hear something sensible from you!
:
: I am truly thrilled we can agree on something, myself, Martin. I thought
: it had been you, but maybe it was someone else, who wrote that Tudjman
: should be held responsible for his sworn agreements on the Dayton
accords,
: because he signed them "with a gun at his head). At any rate, if we
agree
: on keeping Dayton agreements, we might agree with one another more than
: our previous posts would indicate.
The purpose of a debate is't that debaters end up agreeing on some matter.
Rather it's to try enlightening a matter from different perspectives, which
I believe the two of us have done?
By the way, I only agree with Dayton on the part of Croatia. When it comes
to BiH, I belive that Clinton got it all wrong. The theory looks fine, but
it's quite unrealistic. Since I mentioned what I'd do in different leader's
position, I might just as well include Clinton too.
Were I the american president I'd deploy 500.000 soldiers in BiH, not all
would have to be Americans, all armies would be disbanded, all military
equipment seized, no Republika Srpska, no Herceg-Bosna and no Islamic
Republic would exist. After that 490.000 soldiers could return home.
That would solve the first of BiH's problems...
However, that's a scenario we won't see, will we?
Martin
Mcleod Patrick M
Nermin (Ner...@metronet.de) wrote:
: I don´t thik that poor countries, where massmurder like Arkan, Mladic
: and some thousends more are celebrated as national Heroes, has any
: future.
The future is indeed dim if these animals are allowed to roam free, which
is all the more reason to yolk these evil, sick rapists NOW. Some
zenophobic Serbians will say "But what about the Muslims in the Ustashe?
What about Muslims who killed Serbs?"
All I can offer to that pathetic defense is this: You don't have to be
slaves to history. Look around you: This is not the Middle Ages...it is
the dawn of the 21st century. How do you honor the memory of Prince Lazar
by protecting and fawning over murdering degenerates like Arkan or
psychopaths like Karadizc?
Ivica Maric
Hej Martin
Ursäkta mig men jag visste inte att du kunde svenska, fast det inte spelar
någon roll. Var snäll och lämna Nietsche och Aristoteles åt sidan. De är
inte så viktiga när det gäller det här ämnet. Tudjman är en synonym till
det onda och du förstör säkert när jag påstor att man ska välja mellan det
onda och det goda. Jesus gärningar känner du till om du har läst Bibeln och
Tudjmans gärningar är jag och min familj. Vi är här på grund av att hans
parti, tillsammans med sina kompisar som sitter i makten, "befriade oss"
allt vi hade.
Jag ber gud förlåta honom och alla hans kompisar som hör till de tre
monsterna (SDA, SDS, HDZ) som mitt land till ödeland.
I mitt land fick man klart och tydligt välja mellan att ta till våldet i
nationens namn och att vägra döda genom att följa Jesus.
Man fick också antigen döda för att bevisa sin tro i landet eller låta bli
att döda och bli förräddare.
Jag ber dig en gång till läsa Bibeln så att du ver vad jag pratar om.
P.S. När det gäller de här böckerna du nämner så har jag faktiskt läst dem.
--
Hälsningar och
Puno pozdrava:
Ivica Maric
Duvgatan 14
554 64 Jonkoping
SWEDEN
Tel. (fax) +46-36-13 05 83
E-mail "ivica...@jonkoping.mail.telia.com"
HomePage "http://www.torget.se/users/t/tepih"
Martin Graiter <mag...@algonet.se> wrote in article
<01bc7527$24f2d680$Loca...@algonet.se.news.algonet.se>...
> Ivica Maric <ivica...@jonkoping.mail.telia.com> skrev i inlägg
> <01bc74fc$aede0de0$9cfc...@FOO.telia.com>...
> : Please Martin, read the Holy Bible first(specialy the New Testament, if
> you
> : are a christian). Then you have to give priority to something: Tudjman
or
> : Jesus, nationality or religion and a state or a human life.
>
Paul Andrej Jurcic
>Among the Bosnian Croats who have a better vision than Tudjman is Cardinal
>Vinko Puljic, a great man, a great Catholic, a great religious leader, and
>someone who has never stooped to hate. For a tribute to Puljic and a copy
>of one of his most moving declarations, see our WEB page at:
>
>Ciao,
>
>Michael
Are you sure what you said, or it is an error? You said that Vinlo Puljic
never stopped to hate. Em I correct?
Paul
Galina
Paul Andrej Jurcic wrote:
>
> >Among the Bosnian Croats who have a better vision than Tudjman is Cardinal
> >Vinko Puljic, a great man, a great Catholic, a great religious leader, and
> >someone who has never stooped to hate. For a tribute to Puljic and a copy
> >of one of his most moving declarations, see our WEB page at:
>
> >
> >
> >Michael
>
> Are you sure what you said, or it is an error? You said that Vinlo Puljic
> never stopped to hate. Em I correct?
>
> Paul
Paul,
stopped = ceased
stOOped = bent down
Paul Andrej Jurcic
>Martin wrote...
>Believe it or not, but I've posted a discussion where I said that it
>wouldn't necessarily be negative to let the Serbs return. This was in
>Croatian, half a year ago or so. I'm beginning to think that I was wrong
>and Tudjman right. These people have for centuries been used by different
>regimes against the Croatians. Now there are tendencies that the West is
>using them again in blackmailing Croatia.
>
>
>
Return of Serbs in Croatia is a non issue, only red herring. According to many
well informed (?) estimates only 10-15% of Serbs would like to return in
Croatia despite of the all advantages of being Croatian citizen. Serb from
Croatia (and many in Serbia too) were brainwashed to believe that any national
Croatian state is a fascist state, that Croatian coat of arms, regardless it
starts with white or red field, is always Ustasha symbol and that today
monetary currency kuna is just continuation of NDH economy.So why any
selfrespecting Serb would desire to live in such a state? Serbs have pride too.
For Croatian nationalists it is good news and for Croatians wictims of Serbian
insurrection and imposed war it is mental relief knowing that this kind of war
sufferings will never happened again.
Paul
Galina
Paul Andrej Jurcic wrote:
>
> >Martin wrote...
>
> >Believe it or not, but I've posted a discussion where I said that it
> >wouldn't necessarily be negative to let the Serbs return. This was in
> >Croatian, half a year ago or so. I'm beginning to think that I was wrong
> >and Tudjman right. These people have for centuries been used by different
> >regimes against the Croatians. Now there are tendencies that the West is
> >using them again in blackmailing Croatia.
> >
>
> >
> >
It is still a very important issue. What we do not hear about in any
large way is the number of internal refugees within the RS and in Serb
Bosnia and Kosovo. There is no reason for people not to be able to go
home anywhere in the former Yugoslavia. For when one ocnsiders the
number of internal refugees together with the external refugees being
returned, the infrastructures' ability to absorb the combined number of
refugees is immense.
only red herring. According to many
> well informed (?) estimates only 10-15% of Serbs would like to return in
> Croatia despite of the all advantages of being Croatian citizen.
As I recal from last year, there were specific apllications to be filled
out by those wishing return and those applications were in many cases
denied. Someone else will have to provide the data on this but I recal
reading that the very process discouraged returns.
Serb from
> Croatia (and many in Serbia too) were brainwashed to believe that any national
> Croatian state is a fascist state, that Croatian coat of arms, regardless it
> starts with white or red field, is always Ustasha symbol and that today
> monetary currency kuna is just continuation of NDH economy.
The Croatian state had almost a moral obligation, I personally think, to
remove these iconic images from its flag and currency. To remind people
in any way visually of the Ustache is a horror and there are
considerable choices out there from which to chose currency names. So
whatever the impulse beyond these acts, they comprise a nationalistic
statement which is distasteful if not incendiary and are not inclusive
in conceptualization.
So why any
> selfrespecting Serb would desire to live in such a state?
The discouraging of the same is a coherent point here.
Serbs have pride too.
The point is to get beyond pride to the 21st century? To inclusion?
> For Croatian nationalists it is good news and for Croatians wictims of Serbian
> insurrection and imposed war it is mental relief knowing that this kind of war
> sufferings will never happened again.
>
> Paul
>
>
It is not clear that these things do not happen again and these symbols,
the flag and the money, are not working toward healing.
Galina
Jason
In article <5nk54j$23...@elmo.cadvision.com>, marg...@cadvision.com
(Danijel Margetic) wrote:
> The currency and some military simbols do have their roots in the
> NDH, but if I have to kill if I have to steal, as god is my witness
> I will not let go of the flag. It has been the flag for a long time
> before WWII and it was also a part of the "grb" of the SR of Croatia.
> It's not really a continuance of NDH.
The currency also predates the NDH. Do some people want us to remove the
words "nezavisna" and "drzava" and even "ustasa" from the Croatian
language, or even change the name "Hrvatska" (Croatia) to something else?
Should the Germans stop speaking German because that was the language the
Nazis spoke?
michael a sells
In article <5njlms$3n...@elmo.cadvision.com>, jur...@cadvision.com (Paul
Andrej Jurcic) wrote:
> >Among the Bosnian Croats who have a better vision than Tudjman is Cardinal
> >Vinko Puljic, a great man, a great Catholic, a great religious leader, and
> >someone who has never stooped to hate. For a tribute to Puljic and a copy
> >of one of his most moving declarations, see our WEB page at:
>
> >
> >Ciao,
> >
> >Michael
>
> Are you sure what you said, or it is an error? You said that Vinlo Puljic
> never stopped to hate. Em I correct?
>
> Paul
When I look at the passage you quoted above, I read "stooped" to hate,
Paul. It is common expression in English to say: "Even in the worst
circumstances he would never 'stoop' to [hate, kill, rob, lie, torture,
whatever]."
Puljic is a hero to many precisely because he has steadfastly stood
against "ethnic cleansing," refused to justify or excuse atrocities any
side, and worked for a Sarajevo in which Catholics, Muslims, Serb
Orthodox, Jews, Gypsies, Protestants, and others would live and work and
cooperate side-by-side.
But I like your creative misreading (called by literary critic Harold
Bloom) a "misprision") as "stopped." When you are so busy working to help
human beings, and so busy creating, you do not have time to "stop" to
hate. Hate-mongers are often people without a life, who have too much
time on their hands. So they get together with other bored hate-mongers
and plot destruction. "Uh, let's blow up a mosque or a bell-tower or a
church or a bridge?" "Ok, cool."
Puljic never stops to hate. He's too busy involved with creating things
to have time to thing of ways to destroy.
I urge everyone to read Puljic's statement on our "heroes" page at:
Danijel Margetic
In article <5njlms$3n...@elmo.cadvision.com>, jur...@cadvision.com says...
>
>
>>Among the Bosnian Croats who have a better vision than Tudjman is Cardinal
>>Vinko Puljic, a great man, a great Catholic, a great religious leader, and
>>someone who has never stooped to hate. For a tribute to Puljic and a copy
>>of one of his most moving declarations, see our WEB page at:
>
>>
>>
>>Michael
>
>Are you sure what you said, or it is an error? You said that Vinlo Puljic
>never stopped to hate. Em I correct?
>
>Paul
>
Double o, one p. Stooped. As in stooped down.
D.
Danijel Margetic
The currency and some military simbols do have their roots in the
NDH, but if I have to kill if I have to steal, as god is my witness
I will not let go of the flag. It has been the flag for a long time
before WWII and it was also a part of the "grb" of the SR of Croatia.
It's not really a continuance of NDH.
D.
Paul Andrej Jurcic
>Mike wrote...
>But I like your creative misreading (called by literary critic Harold
>Bloom) a "misprision") as "stopped."
I wish it was creative misreading, but it was not. Just plain ignorrance. I
wonder if sintagma "creative misreading" is euphemism for illiteracy??
Paul
Davorin Dujmovic
Mcleod Patrick M (iy...@jove.acs.unt.edu) wrote:
: Nermin (Ner...@metronet.de) wrote:
The fact is that murderers are national heroes is not strange in
any society.
Say for example in USA. McVeigh (that is "safe" example) is constantly
presented as "Gulf War hero" turned radical. But the guy was just
an accepted murderer in Gulf War as well - he braged about about
decapitating Iraqi with artillery shell and was taking pictures
of dead Iraqis - that was accepted behaviour! Now he is a murderer
since he "confused the sides?"
Arkan was a scum all of his life, now he became a hero in Serbia.
I see nothing different here than a reversal of fortune for the people
of the same kind.
dr...@4mate.hr
In article <339D7E...@erols.com>,
sp...@erols.com wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> The Croatian state had almost a moral obligation, I personally think, to
> remove these iconic images from its flag and currency. To remind people
> in any way visually of the Ustache is a horror and there are
> considerable choices out there from which to chose currency names. So
> whatever the impulse beyond these acts, they comprise a nationalistic
> statement which is distasteful if not incendiary and are not inclusive
> in conceptualization.
>
>
> Galina
Galina,
I appreciate your kind intentions, but consider this: - Checkerboard was
part of Croatia's coat of arms when we were part of Yugoslav federation,
and no Serbs complained then. So why they are complaining now? The
chackerboard is not Ustasha symbol, it is Croat symbol. - Kuna was not
solely NDH currency. Actually, as far as I can recall it was first used
in 10th century Kiev principality or something like that. (By the way, I
was not happy with the choice of the name.) - So, Serbs are 'sensitive'
to those symbols. How about our sensitivity? Serbia attacked us, lost the
war, and now we should change our national symbols so that attackers are
not offended (yes, I know not every Serb took part in the aggression, but
still..). Galina, this is as if Germans living in Alsace request that
France give up its national symbols.
Regards,
Dragi Raos
Zagreb, Croatia
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Galina
Davorin Dujmovic wrote:
>
> com>
> Distribution:
>
> Galina (sp...@erols.com) wrote:
> : Davorin Dujmovic wrote:
> : > The fact is that murderers are national heroes is not strange in
> : > any society.
> : > Say for example in USA. McVeigh (that is "safe" example) is constantly
> : > presented as "Gulf War hero" turned radical.
>
> : Americans detest neoNazis.
>
> : People only think of one or two characters as Gulf War heros, in fact,
> : not even that, more like they respect a couple generals for having been
> : consistently on TV during the Gulf War.
>
> : But the guy was just
> : > an accepted murderer in Gulf War as well - he braged about about
> : > decapitating Iraqi with artillery shell and was taking pictures
> : > of dead Iraqis - that was accepted behaviour!
>
> : appreciate such an act.
>
> : Now he is a murderer
> : > since he "confused the sides?"
>
> : some of these lives were innocent children and mothers, killed in an
> : entirely premeditated crime..
>
> : > Arkan was a scum all of his life, now he became a hero in Serbia.
> : > I see nothing different here than a reversal of fortune for the people
> : > of the same kind.
>
>
> : Galina
>
> OK, I can push this further. How about Vietnam war, how many
> people in USA were persecuted for the war crimes there, how
> many of people on high positions? There was over 1,000,000
> killed Vietnamese, most of them civilians, in many cases
> knowingly, number of Vietnam villages were raided and people
> murdered for no other reason than suspicion of collusion
> or simpathy with Vietkong. I just watched PBS where a soldier
> described a murder as an act of "confusion." Would Arkan be
> allowed to claim the same?
>
> All what I am saying about McVeigh is that he was a hero for a
> Gulf War, while he is a murderer now for Oklahoma City bombing.
> That is the same person, it should have been obvious to his
> superiors in Gulf War, but then it was acceptable.
>
> And to the guy who wrote the posting I was answering a question: What
> makes you feel that Serbia is yet to suffer for the freedom of Arkan?
> Again, those people are all over the world, sometimes "national heros,"
> sometimes scum (what they really are), I don't see that any nation
> particularly suffers for their existence. Unless somebody powerfull
> decides so - as Iraq now because of its dictator Saddam. USA
> decided that, Saddam was perfectly "acceptable" before Kuwait.
>
> There is no "moral life of a nation," nobody cares about that, "heros"
> are always whitewashed in history of every nation, Serbia is
> particularly good example - they have Karadjorgdje, Mihajlovic,
> Obrenovic, all prime type murderers who became national heros and
> accepted historical figures whose life is a subject of study in
> schools. I can point out many of the same in USA, but that is a
> tricky subject, since all of us are "sensitive about historical
> and moral fabric of our nation."
BANJA LUKA-
ETHNIC CLEANSING PARADIGM
OR COUNTERPOINT TO A RADICAL FUTURE
TUESDAY, JUNE 11, 1995
Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe
Washington,
DC.
The Commission met, pursuant to adjournment, at 12:00 p.m., in room
2255, Rayburn House Office Building, Samuel Wise, International Policy
Director of
the Commission, presiding.
Mr. Wise. Good morning. We welcome you to another briefing of the
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe. I am the international
policy
director for the Commission. My name is Samuel Wise. I am here
representing not only the Commission, but our Commission leaders.
Our chairman, Mr. Smith, hoped to be here to do the introductions
and the opening himself this morning, but unfortunately, he was called
away on something
else that is also very important for him. We hope that sometime
during the course of the briefing, he'll be able to drop in, and we have
an indication that some
of our other members may be able to drop in. But as you all know,
on the Hill, during the middle of the week, there are a lot of competing
activities.
Since the adoption of the Dayton Agreement last December, the
Helsinki Commission has hosted several briefings on the elections in
Bosnia-Herzegovina
that are mandated by that agreement. The Commission has been
particularly interested in these elections, and not only because of its
past focus on the
Bosnian conflict and the atrocities associated with the conflict.
The OSCE, the multilateral European institution which includes the
United States and Canada as members, which has emerged from the
diplomatic process
created by the Helsinki Final Act, has been tasked with preparing
for elections in Bosnia by September, as well as with certifying that
conditions exist for free
and fair elections especially in regards to respect for human
rights like freedom of movement, freedom of expression, and freedom of
association.
There is now a much-publicized debate over whether the OSCE will be
able credibly to certify that such conditions exist in time for a
mid-September election
date, which is the subject of an International Relations Committee
hearing being held right now. It is therefore fitting that we have this
briefing today on Banja
Luka, as the political scene there will have a major impact on
Bosnia's future.
Banja Luka is the second largest city in Bosnia-Herzegovina and is
located in the northwest far from Sarajevo. Since the beginning of the
Bosnian conflict, the
city was firmly in the hands of the Bosnian Serb rebels, and Dayton
places the city in the Republika Srpska, the newly created Serbian
republic.
Nevertheless, the city and the region surrounding it has had
significant non-Serb population, Bosniacs or Muslim Slavs, Croats,
Ukrainians, not to mention a
significant percentage of ethnically mixed Yugoslavs. Much of this
population has been ethnically cleansed; in other words, forcibly
expelled, raped, tortured,
and often killed. While some instances of ethnic cleansing there
took the form of subtle measures, the most notorious concentration
camps, including
Omarska, were in the Banja Luka region.
Still, a determined number of non-Serbs remained and survived. As
far as the Serb inhabitants are concerned, it is not clear whether they
genuinely supported
the horrors being done in their name. Now the city is the scene of
apparent differences among Serb political activists with highly
divergent points of view.
Bosnia's future may well hinge on whether moderates or radicals win
in the elections in that region.
Our panelists today will shed some light on the current situation
there. First we have the Most Reverend Franjo Komarica, the Roman
Catholic Bishop of
Banja Luka. The bishop remained in his diocese throughout the war
despite threats and harassment. He was under house arrest for much of
1995. Bishop
Komarica is not only known for his strong commitment to his diocese
and its inhabitants, but is known among Croat leaders and society for
his moderate
views advocating reconciliation as well.
Our next panelist is Obrad Kesic of the International Research and
Exchanges Board, properly known as IREX. Mr. Kesic is a well-known
specialist on
Yugoslav affairs here in Washington, especially when it comes to
interpreting the latest developments being reported in the region. He
traveled extensively
throughout the region earlier this year.
Our third panelist is Diane Paul, a nurse from Baltimore, whose
commitment to humanitarian causes in the former Yugoslavia has made her
a regional
specialist as well. Last November, she authored a Human Rights
Watch/Helsinki report documenting ethnic cleansing in and around Banja
Luka and has
recently returned from a trip to the region.
I'd like to thank our panelists for coming here today, and I will
turn to each of them to make a short presentation, following which we'll
have an opportunity
for questions from you in the audience. So I will begin with Bishop
Komarica. I would just say that his interpreter is Mr. Vlasic, Father
Vlasic. Thank you.
Bishop Komarica. [Through interpreter] Honorable friends, I greet
you today as friends of peace and God-loving people. I would like to
thank you for your
interest specifically regarding Banja Luka, my home town. I would
like to thank you for this opportunity given to me to express my
concerns and my hopes
for my country. I would like to thank you on behalf of all the
citizens of my city, regardless of their national or state orientation.
You know that I'm a Catholic bishop and not a political
representative of any specific group. I'm not assuming the
representation neither of Croatian people
specifically, nor Bosnian Muslims or Serb people in this territory.
Regretfully, there is no politician available or existing right now to
represent the views of my
country, of my city, especially to represent the views of the
people, of tens of thousands of voiceless people who have no voice.
As a leader and a Christian, I have an obligation to help all the
people in their effort to be human and to be God-loving people. I would
like to help every
human being to affirm their human rights and their freedom and to
establish their right to existence. It is now 6 years that hundreds of
thousands of people
whose basic human rights have been taken away and denied.
That is the right to life, the right to professions, the right to
possess homes and live, the right to have a country, the right to work
and to secure a living, the
right to have a social and security support, the right of movement,
the right of freedom of religion, the right to raise your own children
in your own convictions,
the right of freedom of conscience, the right of equality of being
free to belong to a political or a different faith group.
We cannot talk at all about these rights for thousands of our
citizens. The denial of basic human rights has taken place without the
presence of any media or
any voice to publicly declare this. We had the impression that we
are forgotten in our corner of the world. We were strengthened only by
our faith in our
God, whom we trust that he has the potential to redeem us.
This thing that I once again mention is really the basis, that we
try to respect all our neighbors and not do any harm to any one of them.
As in other parts of
Bosnia there were confrontations, armed confrontations and clashes,
in this part of Bosnia there was no war and no open conflict between
different groups of
different nationalities or faiths.
We opted for a different option here. We rather accepted denial of
our basic human rights than to hurt our neighbors and to establish
conflict. We are talking
here about people who have been peaceful and made every single
effort to remain people who respect others and try to live together. The
only blame that
they receive is that they did not belong to a side or a group of
people who by all means and by all forces and by brutal approach has
tried to establish clean
ethnic territory.
The biggest number, the highest percentage, of the people in this
region, be they Serbs or Bosnian Muslims or Croatians, have desire to
remain in peaceful
coexistence in this region. The Catholic Croatians in this region
have shown by their behavior that they are capable and ready to live
together, capable to live
together in peace with the other two people, which is namely Serbs
and Bosnian Muslims.
This desire to live in peace is denied by the members of the
existing political structure, and despite all our efforts to live the
commandment of respect and love
for others, to love those who did so much evil to us, we are
brutally hurt again and again and punished for no reason, and not just
from the side of extreme
nationalists, but those by international democrats.
We ask all those who still crush our human rights: "Why are you
doing this to us? Are we people for you? Are we human beings for you? We
ask for the
basic human rights that you enjoy. If we are guilty, we would ask
you to prove it to us, and if we are not guilty, then you are doing
great injustice to us when
you are denying to us basic human rights."
I am taking this opportunity to tell you and to express to all
American peace-loving people, God has given you in this country a
generosity of the heart. Your
land is almost like a garden, that there are many wonderful plants
and beautiful flowers. You are a garden of different people, different
cultures, different
groups and religions.
The common characteristic of all of you is the freedom and love for
peace and respect. In this country, it is especially appreciated,
especially important human
rights and human honor and human dignity. These are the precious
gifts of our civilization as though a gift that you are emphasizing
multiculturalism and
multi-faced religion.
You are an ideal and an example for us, and you are a leader for so
many other people in the world. When we would like to affirm similar in
Banja Luka, we
are punished for that. You know that. Will you with clear
conscience allow, continue to allow, that the basic human rights are
still denied in my city and in my
country? And they are being punished just because they would like
to be like you--free, human and democratic people.
I expect an answer from you, which you have to give unto your
conscience first and then to your people and then to the world and then
hopefully to us as
well.
Regardless of how you look at us and for what you think of us, we
in Banja Luka are definitely fighting. With enormous efforts, we try to
protect and restore
civilization. I hope that we will not remain alone in this effort.
We hope that we'll find friends who will support us in this effort. We
hope to find these
supporters in Europe and especially here in the United States. I am
quite sure that I will not be disappointed in this expectation.
Thank you for listening.
Mr. Wise. Thank you very much, Bishop. Now let's turn to Mr. Kesic,
please.
Mr. Kesic. Thank you, Mr. Wise, and my thanks to the Commission for
allowing me this opportunity to be before you. I saw my role today as
trying to put in
context the political developments, the political battle that's
being waged, within the Republika Srpska surrounding the issue of Banja
Luka as the largest city,
largest urban center, and also, given what has happened over the
past few weeks, the fact that the international community and especially
the international
media have presented the developments, the political developments,
within the Republika Srpska as being along the lines or easily defined
between those that
are aligned with Banja Luka and those that are aligned with Pale.
I'm going to try to put all this into the context of a more broader
series of issues such as the elections and such as what our own policy
has been up to this
point and what it can be leading into the election.
Over the past few weeks, Banja Luka, the largest and only true city
in the Republika Srpska, has come to the forefront of international
attention as a result of
the political showdown between former Prime Minister Rajko Kasagic
and Radovan Karadzic. With this confrontation coming to a head, although
Banja
Luka had often been at the center of international attention during
the war in Bosnia as a result of human rights abuses and mass expulsions
committed in the
area.
Now, however, Banja Luka and its political leadership has been
transformed by an international community best fit for success into a
symbol of moderation
and cooperation. The truth, I argue, lies somewhere in between the
excesses committed during the war and the model of moderation that the
international
community and Carl Bildt have convinced themselves exists.
Today I intend to briefly examine the rivalry between Banja Luka
and Pale and to put this rivalry in context of the broader political
picture within the
Republika Srpska. I will not concentrate my remarks on the human
rights situation in Banja Luka as there are individuals on this panel
more familiar with this
situation than I am and as time is limited.
Pale versus Banja Luka. The recent showdown between Kasagic and
Karadzic was the culmination of a long process of disagreement and
rivalry between
certain political and intellectual elite within Sarajevo and Banja
Luka. Throughout the war in Bosnia, this rivalry has, on several
occasions, led the political
confrontation between these elite. However, it is important to
understand the true nature of this rivalry and not exaggerate the depths
of animosity between
these elite.
Traditionally and historically, Banja Luka has been a provincial
regional center, both economically and politically. It has also
historically been overshadowed
by other Bosnian cities, namely the capital of Sarajevo, and to
some extent, Tuzla.
Now as the largest and most important urban settlement within the
Republika Srpska, its leaders are coping with an identity crisis and
seek to have the city
firmly and confidently assume the role of a capital. On the other
hand, Karadzic and most of the other senior political and party
leadership in Pale come from
Sarajevo and continue to view Banja Luka in its historic provincial
role.
Up until last February, Karadzic and the rest of the Serbian
Democratic Party, the SDS leadership, hoped to claim a part of Sarajevo
as the capital of the
Republika Srpska. The mass exodus of Serbs from Sarajevo suburbs
ended this dream. Currently, the unresolved question of Brcko influences
the SDS
leadership to try and establish Brcko as a temporary capital,
although the debate on the capital is yet to be resolved.
Karadzic and the other senior Serb leaders believe that Pale or a
town along the Drina River need to be transformed, even if artificially,
into a second urban
center in order to give the Republika Srpska an economic and
political viability. In light of these aspirations in Banja Luka and
Pale, it is important to
remember that the political elite within both cities share the same
long-term goals of protecting the integrity and autonomy of the
Republika Srpska, to firmly
establish the Republika Srpska as a distinct political entity
within Bosnia and to eventually unite with the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia.
For the most part, this is a debate over tactics and not over
objectives. The Banja Luka leadership believes that the current
situation demands greater
cooperation with the international community in Belgrade and that
this would in no significant way affect the long-term goals of the
Republika Srpska. The
Pale leadership, having been isolated and in their eyes misled by
the international community, believe that cooperation should be strictly
limited to issues which
are not central to the establishment of greater links to the Bosnia
broad federation.
Also given that Banja Luka has been targeted by Serbia's president,
Slobodan Milosevic, as a center for his efforts at undermining opposing
leadership,
Karadzic and his inner circle do not trust the commitment of some
of the Banja Luka leaders to the National interests established by the
Republika Srpska
parliament.
It is also important to remember that the ideological and political
divisions between Banja Luka and Pale are not as black and white as made
up by many
outside observers, especially among the American media. The long
war and the significant population shifts during the war have served to
homogenize
people's political attitudes and politics within the Republika
Srpska.
During a recent visit to Banja Luka, I was told that the city's
population was currently over 220,000 people of which their official
estimates were that 70,000
and more were refugees and displaced persons. This complicates any
serious attempt to make political generalizations concerning Banja
Luka's role in politics
within the Republika Srpska.
Pale versus Belgrade, Banja Luka caught in the middle. Serbia's
president, Slobodan Milosevic, has been determined to rid himself of
Karadzic and the SDS
leaders since the spring of 1994 when he was publicly rebuffed and
humiliated by their refusal to accept his demands that they agree to the
Vance-Owen
peace plan.
Unlike in Krajina, Milosevic did not have a strong cadre of
politicians willing or able to take on the SDS leaders. Since 1994, he
has set out to create
challenges to the SDS. He has tried to exploit regional rivalries,
rivalries within the SDS, disagreements between the political and
military leaderships within
the Republika Srpska, and has tried to exploit his Socialist Party
with some success to the Republika Srpska.
So far, he has not been able to finish Karadzic and his inner
circle off, but it is not the result of a lack of trying. The Socialist
Party of the Republika Srpska
currently is the only serious challenger to the SDS. Recent polls
have the Socialist Party close to the SDS in popular support. A few
polls, including a recent
poll by USIA or authorized by USIA, show that the Socialists are
actually leading the SDS.
The Socialist Party, however, currently lacks charismatic
leadership and also lacks a strong party machine at the local level. It
interestingly has almost
completely adopted the political platform of the SDS and on some
issues, such as integrity of the Republika Srpska, has tried to
out-patriot the SDS. In fact,
the point of attack that the Socialists are using is a direct
attack on the leadership of the SDS leadership--namely Karadzic, to some
extent Mladic, but no
one has yet been able to take on Mladic directly--on the basis of
how they conducted the war.
The current argument and the vulnerability of the SDS leadership
centers around the issue of whether or not they undermined the military
capability and the
defense capability of the military, the Bosnian Serb military. On
this point, the Socialists are trying to make ground. But on issues that
the international
community has sought to see a split, such as the future integration
of the Bosnian Serb community with the Bosniac and the Croat communities
within Bosnia,
there is really no significant or major difference in policy
between the parties.
With the elections expected to be held in September, the SDS is
confident that it can fend off the Socialists and expects to win at
least the plurality of the
vote, but has already made overtures to political parties on the
right and even a coalition with the Socialists is not out of the
question and may hinge on
Milosevic's relationship with the international community and, to a
large extent, to his relationship with the U.S.
If, in Milosevic's eyes, he has not received enough from the U.S.
for the moves that he has made over the past several months, it is quite
conceivable that he
can once again push the Socialists within Bosnia to work more
closely together with the ruling SDS.
I want to say a little bit about the people, the Bosnian Serb
people. It is important to keep in mind that regardless of who the
political figure is, it is very
difficult for any political figure to go against the popular
thinking or the popular will of most of the Bosnian Serb people.
Recent surveys, again citing also the USIA survey in April, but
other surveys that were commissioned by various institutions in
Belgrade, show that the bulk of
the Bosnian Serb population is against integration with the
federation. They do support greater cooperation, especially on economic
issues, but when it comes
to questions on political integration or into some type of national
integration with the federation, they are against it. The USIA survey
put this over 90 percent
of those asked amongst the Bosnian Serbs were against integration.
The support for the political leadership is very strong and has
grown over the past few months. Karadzic's support remains within the 60
percent level in most
surveys; whereas, Mladic's support by almost every survey that's
been conducted within Bosnia shows that his level of support is well
over 90 percent. In
fact, when you travel throughout Bosnian Serb territory, it is very
clear that the most influential political personality is Mladic. In
fact, the opposition leaders
within Banja Luka, and at a meeting that we had in February, stated
that if Mladic were to become politically active or take on a political
role in the elections,
that he would determine who would rule in the Republika Srpska.
There is a growing but grudging support for Dayton, and I see this
as a positive, that over the past several months, from December, for
example, in the last
USIA poll that was conducted, to April, there was an increase in
the numbers of Bosnian Serbs who support the Dayton Agreement. This
support is grudging
in the sense that they do not see it as an ideal solution in most
of the problems that led to the war, but as long as it prevents the
outbreak of war or fighting,
they're willing to abide by it and are willing to see it enforced.
I think this is something that the international community and, in
particular, the government of the United States, can build on, is this
desire to see the Dayton
Agreement end the war and to see support for a stable and
long-lasting peace develop.
The No. 1 concern in most people's minds--and this is not limited
only to the Bosnian Serbs, but also can be ascribed to the Bosniacs and
to the Croats
within Bosnia--is economics. Economics and the current standard of
living are the No. 1 concerns. Most people are preoccupied with trying
to make ends
meet. The average salary within the Republika Srpska--if people
receive a salary because there's a high level of unemployment; in Banja
Luka, the estimate is
that 10 percent of the potential work force is employed--the
average salary is 60 marks and that is considered to be a very good
salary.
Most people have been forced to try to make ends meet through
activities such as smuggling, through reliance upon relatives who live
abroad to support them
with hard currency, and in some rare cases, they've found
employment with international organizations which pay better than local
employers. But economics
are clearly a concern.
Again, tying this into what we see with the growing support for the
Dayton Agreement, this is an area which can be built upon. The fact that
people across the
community divides are interested with economics gives me hope that
there is some area where we can build greater cooperation and perhaps
base hopes for
the future in respect to the relations between these three
communities.
Also in respect to the thoughts and the thinking of most Bosnian
Serbs, almost across the board there's a high level of insecurity
amongst Bosnian Serbs.
There is a great skepticism that the war has finally come to an
end. Most people see this current period as a cease-fire and they expect
the war to resume.
There's some very interesting information contained in the USIA
survey, and I suggest, since it is now public, that those of you who can
obtain a copy should
obtain a copy.
In respect to this phenomena, each of the communities were asked if
they thought that war could break out again and each of the
communities--the Bosniac,
the Croat and the Serb--responded in an overwhelming majority that
they feared that a war would break out again. Each were asked who would
cause the
war and interestingly in response, most Croats or most Serbs
thought it would be the Bosniacs, the Muslims; most Bosniacs thought
that it would be the
Croats; and most Croats in the survey thought that it would be the
Bosniacs.
So there's a great deal of apprehension and anxiety in respect to
the future. But at the same time that there's this fear of a new
outbreak of hostility, there is
also a tiredness of the war. People are truly tired of the war.
Most of these people have lost family members, have lost everything that
they've owned in one
way or the other, and all of them have an interest in seeing the
war end. The problem is, because of this remaining insecurity, it is
very difficult for them to
completely trust in the peace that is being arranged at this
current time under the framework of the Dayton Agreement.
In respect to the elections, I've already mentioned in my comments
that I thought that the Socialists, although they're near in the polls,
really do not pose a
Galina
Davorin Dujmovic wrote:
> There is no "moral life of a nation," nobody cares about that, "heros"
> are always whitewashed in history of every nation, Serbia is
> particularly good example - they have Karadjorgdje, Mihajlovic,
> Obrenovic, all prime type murderers who became national heros and
> accepted historical figures whose life is a subject of study in
> schools. I can point out many of the same in USA, but that is a
> tricky subject, since all of us are "sensitive about historical
> and moral fabric of our nation."
In respect to the elections, I've already mentioned in my comments that
I thought that the Socialists, although they're near in the polls,
really do not pose a
serious challenge to the SDS, and I really base this on something
that happened in 1990 in Bosnia, where I traveled throughout Bosnia
before the elections in
1990 and spoke to dozens of people and most of the people I spoke
with told me that they were supporters of the Reform Party of Ante
Markovic, that they
would vote for Ante Markovic and his party. When the election was
held and I came back to Bosnia shortly after the elections and spoke to
the same
people, I asked them who they voted for, and most of the people who
had told me that they would vote for Ante Markovic voted for their own
ethnic party.
When I asked them why that was, why did they tell me they were
going to vote for the reformist and then change their mind and vote for
the National parties,
they told me, "Well, I knew how I would vote, but I didn't know how
they were going to vote." There was this fear of dividing the National
vote, of
undermining national security.
I think going into these elections in September, that the same fear
will prevail when it comes time to fill the ballot or to mark the
ballot. I see this already in the
headlines in some Bosniac media in which banner headlines state,
will the Bosniacs be the only foolish ones to divide their vote or to
give themselves the
multi-pluralism. I think it is a deeply rooted fear and it is an
understandable fear and that any attempt to try to influence the
elections, that if people are thinking
in those terms, has to first and foremost deal with this fear that
it will drive people to vote for the party that they feel best able to
protect their national
interests.
In conclusion, a major swing in political power in Pale to Banja
Luka is highly unlikely in the near future. The clumsy attempts by Carl
Bildt to exploit the
tactical differences between Karadzic and Kasagic have served to
solidify the position of the SDS as the sole political power in the
Republika Srpska. The
international community should not waste its limited time in going
through the military success of IFOR's mission in trying to create an
artificial alternative to the
SDS. Instead, it should try to convince the Bosnian Serb people
that they are better off cooperating with the international community
and the Bosniac and
Croat neighbors. This can only be done through economic assistance
and an even-handed approach in supplying humanitarian assistance to
refugees and
civilians.
A recent USAID assessment mission to Bosnia found that the current
greatest humanitarian need in Bosnia was among the Serbian refugees in
the Republika
Srpska. But nonetheless, the Republika Srpska receives less than
one-fourth of all assistance sent to Bosnia. This type of biased
assistance tends to support
the natural suspicions and anxieties of most Serbs, and it helps
give credence to the political platform of the SDS.
All remaining territorial issues of dispute such as Brcko, Gorazde,
Mostar, and to some small extent, Sarajevo, should be resolved through
negotiations during
the presence of IFOR. If they remain unresolved, they undermine the
feelings of individual security of people and serve to push the people
toward political
parties who are committed to a nationalist agenda. For Banja Luka,
Brcko is extremely important. Any indication that the town may change
hands is seen as a
direct security threat to Banja Luka itself, once again forcing
people into the arms of the SDS.
I would also say that it is also very important, if there is a hope
to rebuild a multi-ethnic, multi-confessional coexistence among these
people, to concentrate
our assistance efforts on the people who remained in communities
where they are now a minority with their rights severely restricted and
with conditions so
difficult for everybody, let alone these minority groups, that it
is very difficult to foresee them staying there in the near future.
But it is very important to try to provide as much assistance,
humanitarian assistance as well as political support, for these small
communities of people who
find themselves, for lack of a better term, on the other side of
the dividing line. There has been a great deal of attention placed on
the hopes of sending people
back, but it is very difficult to see how this effectively will
work if the people who remained in these communities throughout the war
disappear. So, I see the
remaining communities within both the Republika Srpska and the
federation of these minority groups as being the building blocks for the
future, hopeful and
possible, multi-ethnic and multi-concessional coexistence.
Thank you.
Mr. Wise. Thank you, Mr. Kesic, very much.
Now Ms. Paul, please.
Ms. Paul. Thank you. I would like to thank the distinguished
members of the Commission for having me here today to talk about a
subject which has
captured my attention for some time, Banja Luka. I'm especially
honored to present alongside Bishop Franjo Komarica, a man I greatly
respect and someone
I have often thought of as not unlike Romero in El Salvador, in his
courage and unwavering fight for human rights.
I do not say that lightly. Bishop Komarica has endured incredible
hardships over the past 4 years and has been forced to watch as his
people, his churches,
and his clergy were systematically attacked. In all that time, he
has never uttered a word against the Serb people themselves, but has
directed his appeals for
reason to those responsible for carrying out policies against
non-Serbs.
He spoke not only for his own ethnic group, but for Muslims and for
ordinary Serbs who are suffering because of the war. Were it not for
Bishop Komarica,
I doubt that the mufti of Banja Luka would be alive today.
Throughout the war, Bishop Komarica stayed the course despite
abandonment by the international
community and the seemingly hopeless situation. He is now faced
with rebuilding a broken community and I hope that you'll do everything
in your power to
help him.
After a long period where foreign journalists and others were not
welcome, Banja Luka has become a vastly different city, open to the
press, open to change.
International visitors today may be taken in by the pleasant
avenues and the apparent calm which United Nations protection officer
Louis Gentile, a dear
friend, once referred to as the seduction of normality.
Louie recalled later his experiences in Banja Luka. Although I was
familiar with the sounds of battle, I was surprised during my first
night in Banja Luka to
hear the explosions of hand grenades and dynamite and frequent
automatic weapons fire. There had never been any war activity in the
area. I was hearing the
sounds I would hear for months to come, the sound of attack on
unarmed civilians, their homes and their places of worship.
With daylight would come the impression that the explosions in the
night were only a nightmare. The town of Banja Luka seemed so peaceful
and pleasant,
sidewalk cafes inviting, civilian and military authorities smiling
and polite. It would have been so easy if we had only shut our eyes to
the terror of an almost
invisible minority.
My own first visit to Banja Luka in 1994 ended with Banja Luka's
mayor, Radic, informing me that although I had entered illegally, he had
decided to allow
me to leave. On that visit, I met some of the most frightened and
desperate people I've ever come across, and the images of their faces
remain with me to this
day. I saw the places where the mosques once stood and having
worked with Holocaust survivors in the past, the significance of their
destruction, like the
synagogues destroyed in World War II, was clear. Ironically, a
tourist sign pointing to the location of their Hadia Pasha [sp] mosque,
a 400-year-old cultural
treasure, remained.
My last visit in April 1996 was deeply disturbing as well, for I
found a city newly populated with internationals who seemed to have
little concept of the
horrors which had happened there. It was as if the past had never
happened, as if the Dayton Agreement was the beginning of time.
The hundreds of elderly people mercilessly murdered in their own
houses, the men hiding in the woods in the dead of winter to escape
being press-ganged,
the mothers and children physically evicted from their houses, the
humiliated university professors forced to sweep the streets, the
disappeared priests, the
imprisoned leaders of decimated communities, all of these events
were swept away.
It is hard to describe the constant terror that Muslims and Croats
endured for almost 4 years in Banja Luka. Banja Luka has been referred
to as the heart of
darkness and the worst place in Bosnia in terms of human rights
abuses by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Yet, there
were no battles
waged in Banja Luka and there was no armed resistance by the
non-Serb population.
When I think of the deeds committed in Banja Luka by nationalist
Serbs determined to create an ethnically pure republican Bosnia, Hanna
Arendt's reference
to the banality of evil often comes to mind. While the ethnic
cleansing of non-Serbs conducted in and around Banja Luka was often
accompanied by violence
and terror, an efficient bureaucracy was established to justify and
carry out the policies of the Bosnian Serb leadership in a more orderly
manner.
The methods used, which could be described as a form of
low-intensity warfare, decimated the Muslim and Croat communities and
resulted in many deaths
and untold suffering and millions of dollars worth of cash and
property were robbed from the non-Serbs of the region. This is an issue
that's not often
discussed, what happened to those millions of deutsche marks.
As Nicholas Morris, the former UNHCR special envoy for the former
Yugoslavia, stated after a visit to Banja Luka in December of '93, it is
apparent that
the Banja Luka authorities want not only to cleanse the area of all
minorities, but to erase any trace that they ever lived here.
I'm here today because I believe that those who planned and carried
out these policies from the safety of their offices are just as
culpable, if not more so, than
those they incited to murder, rape and torture innocent people. But
they have got away with it. Some of them are now almost unbelievably
touted as
moderates by U.S. Government representatives and officials like the
high representative for the Dayton Agreement, Carl Bildt, who are
desperate to find
alternatives to the leadership of Radovan Karadzic.
I would question the logic of assuming that anyone who opposes
Karadzic must be a moderate. The wartime activities and connections of
so-called
moderates and the company that they still keep speak louder than
their sudden rebirth as people who espouse democratic principles.
Since '92, non-Serbs in Banja Luka and the surrounding smaller
towns and villages have been murdered, tortured, raped, and beaten. They
have been fired
from their jobs, denied medical care, intimidated, harassed. Their
legally owned businesses and properties, houses, have been confiscated
and their places of
worship destroyed. Muslim and Croat men were taken from their homes
in the middle of the night or kidnapped off the street in the light of
day and taken to
forced labor camps.
Their families often had no idea where they had been taken. Men
spent months hiding in the woods, even in the dead of winter, or
sleeping in a different house
every night hoping to escape the inevitable knock at the door.
Those taken for forced labor to the front lines were forced to dig
trenches in the line of fire and
many died.
The international community placidly accepted the ethnic cleansing
of Bosnian Serb territory as a fait accompli. After the concentration
camps near Banja
Luka and Prijedor were exposed in 1992, the world expressed horror
and measures were taken to close the camps. The attention shifted to
other areas of
Bosnia, but the oppression of non-Serbs in Banja Luka and other
towns never stopped, and the camps continued to operate.
1993 saw the destruction of the last of 16 mosques in the Banja
Luka town and the destruction of more Roman Catholic churches. 1994 was
equally hard
and oppression intensified on those who insisted on remaining. In
1995, following Croatian expenses in Slavonia and in the Croatian
Krajina, an ethnic
cleansing end game was carried out with more than 25,000 expelled,
mostly from Banja Luka, between August and October.
Those who wanted to leave had to visit numerous municipal offices
and pay fees at each one during certain periods. The fees and the rules
and regulations
changed all the time, and here again, I'm talking about the
finality of evil. It was necessary to go to numerous municipal offices
for telephones, electricity, to the
bank to certify that you didn't owe them anything each time you
went and obtain a receipt so that you would be permitted to be
ethnically cleansed.
The worst part for men involved going to the ministry of defense to
get a document that released them from military service because you
might just be taken
away there and then leaving your family desperate and with no way
to leave. The housing commission required you to certify that you didn't
own any
property. Even if you did, you signed your rights away in order to
be permitted to leave, and the price for release varied.
During some periods, it could cost thousands of German marks to get
a family out. Imagine one refugee told Human Rights Watch, we had to pay
them in
order to transfer all our possessions to them. They paid to be
ethnically cleansed. As a final outrage, people often had to pay the
so-called Serb Red
Cross--which by the way, is run by Liljana Karadzic, the wife of
Radovan Karadzic--large sums of money for transportation to the border.
In May 1995, an official survey of all the property of non-Serbs
was conducted in Banja Luka and other towns very systematically in a
final attempt to
identify and confiscate any assets left in non-Serb hands. I have
with me today a copy of that document which you can see afterward if you
would like.
In September, October of 1995, special forces under the command of
Arkan were called in by the Bosnian Serb authorities. The final phase of
ethnic
cleansing ended with an estimated 2,000 men brutally separated from
their families and sent to forced labor or detention camps. Many people
were brutally
killed. There's a confirmed mass grave outside of Sasina [sp]
containing at least two busloads full of people killed on the night of
September 21Ñ0922, and
there were women among the group, and yet there's been very little
attention to this event which occurred, I remind you, after Srebrenica.
Galina
Take a look at the borders before and after Dayton. Think again on who
won or lost the war.
Galina
Galina
Davorin Dujmovic wrote:
> There is no "moral life of a nation," nobody cares about that, "heros"
> are always whitewashed in history of every nation, Serbia is
> particularly good example - they have Karadjorgdje, Mihajlovic,
> Obrenovic, all prime type murderers who became national heros and
> accepted historical figures whose life is a subject of study in
> schools. I can point out many of the same in USA, but that is a
> tricky subject, since all of us are "sensitive about historical
> and moral fabric of our nation."
What happened in Banja Luka cannot be separated from the policies
carried out by Bosnian Serb authorities throughout the territory they
controlled. The
transfers of prisoners from camp to camp, prison to prison, the
sharing of forced labor, the similar bureaucratic procedures all
demonstrate linkages.
Some have estimated there are fewer than 15,000 non-Serbs remaining
in a region which once boasted non-Serb populations of over 500,000
people. In
Banja Luka, before the war, almost 60,000 non-Serbs lived in the
city and today there are only a few thousand left. Less than 10 percent
of the non-Serb
community remains.
While conditions in Banja Luka have improved since the war ended,
the situation remains tense and it is still not possible for non-Serbs
to live normally.
Evictions of non-Serbs from their houses have continued and Human
Rights Watch has information that in direct violation of the Dayton
Agreement, there are
still dozens of people being held in forced labor referred to as
working obligation by the Bosnian Serb authorities.
We also have reason to believe that some people are still
imprisoned, among them Father Tomas Loftonovic [sp], a Catholic priest
from Prijedor, and his
parents, and Nedim Filipovic [sp], head of the Muslim charity, Met
Hamid [sp] from Kljuc, rumored to be imprisoned in Banja Luka.
Non-Serbs in Banja Luka have little chance of being employed or of
participating in political life in any meaningful way. They still live
in fear. While the
presence of internationals provides some protection, they know that
if they leave before there's progress in human rights, the Serbs will
finish the job that they
set out to do.
I'd like to give you a sense of some of the people in Banja Luka, a
short, if you will, who is who, and I wanted to talk about the mayor,
Fedor Radic, who is
often touted as a liberal in the press today. Radic has been mayor
of Banja Luka since the elections held in 1990 and as mayor, has
continually denied having
any information about ethnic cleansing, the destruction of mosques
or churches in his own town, and other persecution of non-Serbs in Banja
Luka.
I've interviewed leaders within the Bosniac and Croat community in
Banja Luka, all of whom are tremendously disappointed in Radic, whom
they viewed
once as someone who might represent all citizens of Banja Luka. The
opinion now is that he was very involved in the development and
implementation of
policies designed to drive non-Serbs from the region, but he's
always managed to say the right things to members of the international
community and has
avoided saying too many things against non-Serbs in public forums.
In 1995, however, he personally telephoned one of the leaders of
the Croat community in Banja Luka telling him that every last Croat,
including him, would
have to leave. During that time, by the way, Radic's son was
attending university here in the United States.
Representatives of the Muslim community met with Radic many times
during the war to ask his assistance, but although he promised to help
them, he never
protected anyone, nor did he protest the treatment of non-Serbs. He
told them that Serbs and areas under Muslim control were, after all, in
danger and that
he would arrange for "the humane exchange of persons."
He promised to help the Muslim community in repairing damaged
mosques, but he inferred behind the scenes that this would never happen,
and a few weeks
after promising his help, the last mosque remaining in Banja Luka
was destroyed. In February, U.S. Government officials were prevented
from meeting with
Radic by the Pale authorities and they expressed their displeasure
openly. It was obvious that Radic had been selected as an acceptable
alternative to
Karadzic and other hard-liners.
On May 28th, the possible ouster of Radic as the mayor of Banja
Luka was predicted. It was rumored that he would be replaced by
hard-liner Savo Chuk
[sp], director of the water management company in Banja Luka. But
Radic so far has managed to fend off the pack.
If one can be judged by the company one keeps, then Radic's
position is made more clear. He recently announced that he would run in
the elections as leader
of the newly formed Democratic National Bloc, which encompasses the
People's Party, also sometimes called the National Party of Radoslav
Brcanin [sp],
the radical party of Nicola Pasic [sp], headed by Dubravka
Gustejevic [sp], the Serb Patriotic Party headed by Zhukinin [sp], and
the Democratic Center.
Two of these parties are extreme right-wing parties which support
the SDS and have leaders who are directly involved with or supported the
persecution of
non-Serbs. Brcanin's People's Party's policies do not deliver very
much from other recently emerged nationalist parties according to
European monitors and
claim close ties with Serbia and good relations with the SDS. By
their own admission, the party members state that their views are
closest to SDS.
They claim to accept Dayton and pledge to cooperate with other
parties against war and for a united Republika Srpska. Just a note about
Radoslav Brcanin.
He was formerly minister of city planning and urbanism for
Republika Srpska and former member of so-called Serb Assembly during the
war. He was the
unofficial, although official sanctioned, propaganda minister for
the Republika Srpska. He was a primary figure in the ethnic cleansing
operations conducted in
Banja Luka and throughout the Bosanska Krajina.
He was director of Banja Luka television and spoke many times in
the media about the need to "clean" the region of non-Serbs. He said
that no more than
2,000 elderly Muslims should remain in Banja Luka, about 3 percent,
"only enough to clean our streets and clean our shoes." Likewise, he
stated that only
7,000 ethnic Albanians should be permitted to remain in Kosovo.
He often incited violence against non-Serbs and it is believed that
he received orders directly from Karadzic. It is believed that he gave
instructions to the city
planner for Banja Luka, to civil police and to local paramilitaries
on how to conduct ethnic cleansing operations.
A word about Rajko Kasagic, recently ousted as prime minister:
There was a lot of concern expressed by Carl Bildt and the United States
bishop and others
about the ouster of Kasagic and he is assumed again to be a
moderate. However, he was recently president of the executive board of a
municipality of Banja
Luka and was responsible for expulsions of non-Serbs from
apartments and houses and for confiscation of property and businesses
owned by non-Serbs.
He issued the orders to directors of companies to fire people from
their jobs and then to take their apartments. He worked very closely
with Brcanin and was
often in the media supporting the same message.
An interview conducted by Human Rights Watch in '94 gives a
specific example of Kasagic's role. A woman told a Human Rights
representative, in June
1993, I got kicked out of my house. Someone in the town council
sent people with a truck to my house to take all my possessions. A wife
of the man who
wanted to take my house hit the wall of my house and said this is
mine. Rajko Kasagic had signed the permit allowing them to occupy my
apartment.
An interview conducted recently by OSCE monitors of a Bosniac woman
in Banja Luka whose business was confiscated produced a document also
signed
by Kasagic giving ownership of her cafe to the local basketball
club. Kasagic stated in an interview with a Serbian newspaper in October
1995 that the
district government in Banja Luka demonstrated that it is possible
to replace officials in state-owned companies whose performance was not
satisfactory.
"I will fight against resistance to dismissals if the authorities
establish that a civilian is culpable regardless of what he might be
responsible for. We'll just have to
appoint people who can work better." And he continued, "The
greatest contribution to this state would be to keep the criminals in
jail."
"Once the peace holds," the interviewer assures the reader,
"Kasagic will work for stronger ties with Mother Serbia and Yugoslavia,"
and the writer states,
"The trust implied in his appointment to the highest office in
government is the best indicator of his personal loyalty to Karadzic."
One Bosniac man exile said
that the difference between Kasagic and Karadzic is height and the
color of their eyes.
There are a number of recommendations that can be made and also a
number of major problems that are likely to arise in the next month. I
would like to
again, before I begin talking about the recommendations, raise the
case of Father Tomas Loftonovic [sp] because he must not be forgotten.
Arrested in
August in Prijedor, he disappeared with his parents in September.
He's about 34 years old. He's known for his outspokenness, sometimes
perhaps he was a
little bit too outspoken because he spoke up for human rights for
Muslims and Croats and Serbs and everyone.
He often spoke up to the authorities directly. There's a linkage to
Banja Luka because he is a priest from the Banja Luka diocese and was
previously head of
Caritas [sp], the Catholic humanitarian agency in Banja Luka. He
was rumored to be held in Prijedor, then in Banja Luka, and now again we
believe that he's
in Prijedor. We fervently hope that he's alive, but we've been
unable to get a straight answer from the Serb authorities.
Radovan Glogovac [sp], the person who is responsible for exchanging
human beings for Republika Srpska, and Dragan Davidovic, who is the
minister of
religion in Pale are believed to know the truth and yet, they're
not speaking. I would like to thank the Commission for its recent
efforts on behalf of Father
Leftonovic.
There's several issues and I would like to echo some of the things
that Mr. Kesic said, first of all, that Brcko is a very serious issue
and one that needs a lot of
attention, not in 6 months when the decision will be made, but now.
It is very important to begin very intense discussions about the future
of Brcko.
Secondly, there's an issue that's very important that Mr. Kesic
also raised and that's the issue of Serbs from the Krajina region of
Croatia and also, there are
Serbs who are from areas in the federation which are not controlled
by Croats, namely Dvor, the town of Dvor. These two groups of displaced
persons and
refugees are very important to the future of Banja Luka. The
Krajina Serbs are especially angry and militant. They insist that they
want to return to Croatia,
and yet, there's been little movement on Croatia's part to permit
them to return to their homes.
The Krajina Serbs have physically prevented the return of refugees
and displaced persons to Bosnian Serb territory and likewise, they have
threatened
physically to disrupt elections in the future, and I think that
they're fully capable of doing so.
Also, there are no human rights groups in Banja Luka today. An
important goal would be the establishment of a human rights group, but
it must have strong
linkages to the outside for obvious reasons. Anyone involved in
human rights work in Banja Luka is at great risk and they would need the
protection of those
linkages. The group must be multi-ethnic. Also, an ombudsman's
office for human rights must be set up as soon as possible in Banja Luka
and the resources
necessary to fully staff such an office should be provided.
Security issues for the election period must be discussed and plans
should be made about how to address security breaches, and this is
something that in
terms of studying the protection situation in Bosnia for the last
several years. It is never ceased to amaze me that very often plans are
not made on how
problems that can often be foreseen will be dealt with.
It should be made very clear to the authorities that they're
expected to prevent attacks on opposition leaders, if there were any,
and that there would be
serious consequences for their failure to do so. The international
community must send a strong message that ethnically oriented national
politics are not
acceptable. This means that access to the media is critical and
that true moderates must be supported and protected.
While Human Rights Watch believes that Carl Bildt has not taken a
strong enough stand on the issue of the apprehension of persons indicted
for war crimes,
freedom of movement, and other rights. He has been correct to
attempt to break the isolation of the Bosnian Serb people who approaches
to Banja Luka,
and again echoing what Mr. Kesic said, the involvement of the
international community in extending the hand of friendship to the Serb
people is very
important. But we warn Mr. Bildt to choose his allies wisely.
Finally, a word about elections. Human Rights Watch does not take
the position that the elections should not go forward at this time, but
believes that the
focus should be on creating the conditions for free and fair
elections so that they can go forward. Elections based on current
conditions, however, would be a
sham. So every effort must be made to ensure human rights, respect
for human dignity throughout Bosnia-Herzegovina. Thank you.
Mr. Wise. Thank you, Ms. Paul, and thank you all. I think you've
given a very vivid picture of the horrors and the problems facing people
of Banja Luka and
the people of Bosnia and laid a good basis for our question period.
I would ask anyone who has a question to raise their hand and after
being recognized, to
go to the microphone in the center to present the question because
we are transcribing the proceedings today.
I ask that anyone asking a question identify themselves and give
any organizational affiliation. Now, who would like to begin the
questioning?
Yes, in the back.
Galina
> are always whitewashed in history of every nation, Serbia is
> particularly good example - they have Karadjorgdje, Mihajlovic,
> Obrenovic, all prime type murderers who became national heros and
> accepted historical figures whose life is a subject of study in
> schools. I can point out many of the same in USA, but that is a
> tricky subject, since all of us are "sensitive about historical
> and moral fabric of our nation."
Questioner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm Dr. Jamosic [sp], executive
vice president of National Federation of Croatian-Americans.
Your excellency, Bishop Komarica, on behalf of Croatian-Americans,
I welcome you and salute you today.
Bishop Komarica. Thank you.
Questioner. I'm very proud that the Croatian people have a person
of your quality and your caliber. Your dear mother must be very proud of
you, to suffer
so much with you under very difficult circumstances. My question to
you and to the panel is that in light of this barbaric destruction and
carnage that was
taking place in your area, it seems that in the later period of the
war, the Croatian army had the capability to actually go into Banja Luka
and to more or less
liberate the Croatian people. Do you think, in your view, this may
have been a wise or prudent decision to go in or to stop as apparently
the international
community wanted President Tudjman to stop? Thank you.
Bishop Komarica. On this question, if I have to answer this
question, I have to ask you for understanding. I'm not competent to
answer this. I'm not a
politician or a military person nor a statesman here. I am a
brother to other people and I care for every life. The people who lead
wars, they have to be
responsible for their moves. We would like to remain steady in our
position, not to endanger anybody's life or anybody's property. That's
the end.
Mr. Wise. Thank you. Do either of you want to comment?
Mr. Kesic. I'd just very briefly add that at the time, if you
remember when the offensive was occurring, there had already begun to
develop some problems of
dispute within the cooperating forces, the Havel [sp], the Croatian
army, and the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the mostly Muslim army. Around
Jajce
particularly there were several incidents between these forces, and
also in the Bihac area there were several incidents.
There was concern within the U.S. Government that at the time of
the offensive, that if Croat forces were to enter Banja Luka, that would
expedite the
conflict between the Bosniacs and the Croats and that it would soon
lead to a breakdown of the federation itself over a dispute of
territory. So, there was a
push, even from Washington, to slow down the military offensive of
the Croat forces.
But at the same time, you have to remember that Assistant Secretary
of State Holbrook was also in the midst of negotiations with Slobodan
Milosevic in
Serbia and I think there was a hesitation, especially since the
United States had committed itself to a negotiated settlement, for the
Europeans, in order to get
European support for the use of force in August, at the end of
August, beginning of September in the air strike, that there was a
hesitancy to derail Holbrook's
negotiations as well.
So there were several issues which affected whether or not the
Croatian forces could enter the city, and if they entered the city, what
would that actually mean
in terms of the overall negotiation process.
Mr. Wise. Are there questions?
Questioner. My name is Pamela Taylor from Voice of America. You
three seem to be in basic agreement on two things, that the
international community
should do more to help the Bosnian Serb people and that there's not
that great of a difference amongst the various leaders of the Bosnian
Serbs. So my
question is twofold.
How does the international community extend its hand to the Bosnian
Serb people without extending its hand to the Bosnian Serb leadership
that exists
currently? Ms. Paul said that we should be encouraging more
moderate leaders, so my question is, who might they be? You've told us
who isn't.
Mr. Wise. Would you like to lead off, Ms. Paul?
Ms. Paul. OK, I'd be happy to. I think there are a number of ways
to extend a hand. One is to support democracy building efforts on human
rights efforts
within the Republika Srpska as much as possible. One pvery
important issue is the issue of free access to the media, so supporting
independent media
through things as mundane as providing newsprint to newspapers
struggling to survive and ensuring that there's a television station and
radio station that's
accessible to everyone. In Banja Luka, for example, it is a very
critical issue.
There are two persons in Banja Luka that I think could be regarded
as particularly moderate.
One of those persons is Miograd Givanovic [sp], the Social Liberal
Party. The party is quite well-organized and they've managed to retain,
although albeit
tenuous links, at least some links with liberals in Sarajevo and
Tuzla, and some connections with liberals outside former Yugoslavia, for
example, the young
liberals in Sweden. They are very much outspoken about the issue of
Bosnia, the future of Bosnia as a multi-ethnic society which naturally
makes them quite
unusual in Republika Srpska. During the war, the leaders of the
party were mobilized by the army and discouraged from voicing opposition
to ethnic cleansing
policies, et cetera. The party places an emphasis on human rights
and is one of the two parties that are all supported by non-Serbs, and
as Bishop Komarica
pointed out, non-Serbs in the region really have no political
voice. They also have a strong emphasis or a focus on reconstruction and
rebuilding of the
economy through linkages with foreign business, which is, of
course, a very positive view.
The other party is the Independent Social Democrats with the
leadership by Miroslav Dodic [sp] and they also place strong emphasis on
human rights and
ŽMD30Żcooperation, in fact, with the tribunal in the Hague.
So those are two parties. There are some other parties which are
viewed more or less as being in the center, but again, one has to be
careful because the
parties to the right, some of them have shifted a little bit toward
the center, but it doesn't mean that their views are necessarily
moderate. But those two
people, and, of course, while we don't, in Human Rights Watch, of
course, support any particular candidates, we are very interested in
political parties which
do speak to the issue of human rights for everyone.
Now, there are some moderate groups in Banja Luka which are,
although they seem on the surface to be somewhat open and moderate, when
you scratch a
little bit deeper, you find that there are some problems. For
example, there's the Serb Forum of Intellectuals led by Mladon Ivanic
[sp] who has stated, in
fact, that there's a threshold of a 20 percent non-Serb minority
that was acceptable in Banja Luka. Only as long, by the way, as those
people stayed under
Serb control.
The forum seems to take a very strong stand on human rights issues,
but their views are always stated in a more or less negative way in the
sense that well, if
the rights of Serbs and others in the federation territory are
respected, then perhaps Serbs here can respect the rights of non-Serbs.
So one always has to
consider how they're putting things.
They also view the indictments of Karadzic and Mladic the arming of
the federation and the failure of the international community to protect
the Serbs of
Sarajevo--and in fact, in that case, I think they do have a
point--as evidence that the international community is more or less
plotting against them.
So where Mr. Kesic was speaking previously, there is this climate
of fear and this perception that these events taking place within the
international community
and the federation are somehow threatening the Serb people. But the
threat of Serbs as victims rather than aggressors runs through most of
their rhetoric.
There are many parties, in fact, there's more than two dozen
parties in the Republika Srpska and it will really make your head spin
to try and figure out who
they all are and what they're doing. In fact, there are actually
very few parties that are viewed by the European community and OSCE as
being politically
viable parties for the long term. So I just wanted to mention a
couple.
Mr. Wise. Does the bishop have a comment?
Bishop Komarica. I would like to thank you for your truthful tragic
situation in--tragic situation in Banja Luka. This is truly true the way
you expect it. This is
not all. You cannot describe every single offense or situation of
all the horrible things that have happened, what has happened to
completely innocent people.
Permit me to just an observation that you mentioned on the end of
yours, that if Serbs rights would be respected in other areas, then the
non-Serb people will
be more tolerated in Banja Luka. About human rights of universal
meaning, there is no need for discussion. Those who are interested for
human rights have to
defend those under all circumstances in every situation.
I would like to ask all of you to consider all the consequences.
You have to be aware that the Serb leadership in that part of Bosnia
wanted to create
completely ethnic clean territory. One of the leaders of Serbs has
personally, ultimately has requested that I help with my influence over
Croatian people, that
I would recommend that all the Serbs would leave Mostar.
I have rejected this and I have asked for him not to expect from me
to be a criminal or involved in it. I have said if I can do anything
with politicians from the
Croatian side, then I would ask from them to protect all the human
rights for all the Serbs in Mostar and in Herzegovina and everywhere
where those rights
have been denied or taken away.
In other words, it is evident that the different politicians of
Serbian people in Bosnia, they have made their people in almost enormous
evil. I ask you that you
help all those who have been deprived, without conditions,
especially without any kind of reciprocal conditions. All these people
should receive basic human
rights.
Mr. Wise. I would just announce that our chairman has joined us,
Mr. Smith. Glad you could come. Please come up if you will. The chairman
of the
Commission. Would you like to say anything?
Mr. Smith. Just to welcome the bishop to our Helsinki briefing. I
apologize for being late. I had to testify myself on a human rights
issue in China and we also
had a full committee hearing on the upcoming elections in Bosnia
that I also had to participate in. But I just want to say that we had,
our Commission, myself,
and others had requested to go to Banja Luka and were denied by our
own State Department the opportunity to do so because we do want to be
as helpful
as we can, and know that our concerns are with you and I look
forward to looking at your statement and, you know, fully briefed as to
your comments.
Thank you so much for spending the time here.
Mr. Wise. Mr. Kesic, did you want to say a word?
Mr. Kesic. I wanted to, just for a second, come back to Pam
Taylor's question in respect to how to help the people without helping
the leaders. Really it is a
Catch22 situation. There's really no way of separating the people
from the leadership to the extent that we would like to see some kind of
sanitized corridor
between the two.
In reality, even humanitarian assistance helps the leadership
because it is one less concern for the political leadership in respect
to trying to deal with the
problems that beset them. But I think that we cannot make a
political issue of basic humanitarian needs of any of the people; that
it is important that when
people are in need, especially when the need is in respect to
access to food, that assistance be provided regardless of the benefits
that might incur to the
political leadership in not having to deal with this question.
Secondly, I think that in trying to direct our efforts to affect
the average person in contrast to the political leadership, I think
first of all it is important to show
that the international community and in particular, the government
of the United States, is concerned across the board for the situation,
not only the
humanitarian situation of all of the people, but also the situation
of human rights across the board.
So, although I also agree with the bishop that there cannot be a
reciprocal linkage between the respect for human rights, there does have
to be at least in
respect to perception of the Serbs, not only in Banja Luka, but
throughout the Republika Srpska, that the international community is
making a gesture in good
faith; that they're not, as Ms. Paul has suggested, playing to some
kind of broader conspiracy against the Serb people.
I come back to the point that as long as the insecurity and the
fear and the anxiety over the future influence public discourse and
political debate within the
Republika Srpska, it is very difficult to envision some kind of
democratic progress being made or some kind of new alternative
democratic institutions
springing up.
But I also think that we have to look long term. We have to be
concerned with the immediate short-term conditions, especially in
respect to human rights, but
in relationship to the region as a whole, to the relationship
between the three communities, we have to base our hopes on the
long-term prospects for
improving those relations and improving stability within the
region.
There, I think that there are some practical things that can be
done. One of the things is to play to the stated desire of the Bosnian
Serb leadership to privatize
and introduce free market. Now, we can dismiss them as being only
lip service and playing to the West, but I think it is important to put
them to the test and
to really push them on this issue.
I think that we can all agree that free markets will bring openness
and will bring, to some extent, an open public discourse. So I think in
this area, we shouldn't
debate whether or not we should assist in the transformation of the
economy.
Secondly, I think that it is very important to work with the
indigenous NGOs. Ms. Paul mentioned the Intellectual Forum. I'm a little
less pessimistic about the
Forum, I think--only because the Forum is really made up of diverse
groups, diverse individuals whose political affiliations vary. So you
have people, even
from Jevanovic's [sp] group as members of the forum, but you also
have people from the SDS and from the Socialists also members of the
forum.
There's probably a likelihood that the forum is going to split
because of this political division, but nonetheless, the forum has been
the sole vehicle in Banja
Luka and, I would argue, even in other areas of the Republika
Srpska, for opening or taking the first steps to beginning of public
discourse on such issues as
human rights, on the rights of minorities, the role of the
international community, the Serb perception of the international
community, and it is done at a time
that is very sensitive and delicate.
So, I think that the criticisms that Ms. Paul has leveled against
the forum are valid, but I also think that these people have really
tried to take an important step
and it is only natural that it is very difficult for them to really
make large strides given the fear that prevails.
Mr. Wise. Other questions? The gentleman in the back there.
Questioner. Thank you, sir. I have------
Mr. Wise. Would you identify yourself, please?
Questioner. My name is Hamdi Tiboravakan [sp] from Banja Luka, and
I had three questions, one for each of the panelists. Can I tell them
all and if they
would answer all of them.
Mr. Wise. All right.
Questioner. Thank you.
Bishop Komarica, I am honored to meet you here. I hope that some
day on this painful journey toward democracy in Banja Luka, all true
democrats will be
the winners some day. I've been in touch with many people from
Banja Luka in the last 5 years, so I'll talk to you later. OK.
My question for Ms. Paul is, my mother is 70 years old, very
religious, a religious Muslim. She cannot wear her Muslim
clothes--that's her identity--not
anymore. How would a Texan feel if he suddenly cannot wear his
cowboy hat? Is that some new law or something new, but to me, it is also
the news.
For Mr. Kesic, Banja Luka is a town established by Muslims
originally. All historians know that. It is the center of Bosnian
Krajina region which is much
more known than Krajina region in Croatia. Why does the news media,
especially international news media, ignore the meaning of Banja Luka to
the Bosnian
Krajina region and to the Bosnian Muslims otherwise? Banja Luka,
without Muslims, free Muslims, and all other democrats in Banja Luka, is
simply not
Bosnia. Simply, Banja Luka is very important to Bosnian Muslims as
well to other people, but Bosnia without free Banja Luka is not Bosnia.
Let's make it
clear.
Again, to you, Bishop Komarica, if you would be kind to say
something about tampering with elections on the part of Serbs in 1990. I
know some people
used to vote in two places and then the negotiations that took part
around Kotovaros [sp] in the fall of '92, my brother, his wife's brother
actually, got killed
up there.
Serbs clearly made the threats with certain death to all those
Bosnian fighters. Do they surrender or get captured? One way or other,
they'll be dead. So
many people were afraid to surrender or negotiate on their attempts
to reach central Bosnia. One hundred and sixty people are still missing.
So if you would
later on elaborate on that a little bit, please? Thank you.
Mr. Wise. All right. Let's begin in the order that the questions
were asked. Ms. Paul, if you'll begin?
Ms. Paul. I just wanted to say that I'm sorry to hear about your
mother's situation in that the pride of the elderly in Banja Luka has
been particularly difficult,
especially for minority elderly who often have been the subject of
harassment and attacks, have been thrown out of their homes, have been
murdered, elderly
women who have been raped, and all these things have gone on for
all these years without anyone stopping them, without anyone protecting
them.
I think it is very important to recognize the fact that there are
still non-Serbs remaining in Banja Luka. The campaign of ethnic
cleansing was not successful
thanks to the leadership of Bishop Komarica and the mufti of Banja
Luka, Grabnin Halilovic [sp], and others who have stayed, who vowed to
stay no matter
what to support their people, and that it is extremely important
not to forget the people that have endured so much and have remained at
Banja Luka and to
focus constantly on human rights in Banja Luka to make sure that
we're aware of what's happening there.
God forbid there should be renewed conflict at some point in the
future, but if there is or if the hard-line leadership succeeds in
maintaining its place, then
minorities in Banja Luka and throughout Bosanska Krajina will
continue to be at risk. The ethnic cleansing has not stopped. There's
still evictions going on. In
the town of Teslic [sp] recently more than 200 Bosniacs have been
evicted from their homes and villages around Teslic through a campaign
similar to what I
described happening in Banja Luka.
There's also a group of six to eight--eight actually, Bosnian
villages around in what's called the Sopna Sam [sp] near Zvornik
containing about 4,000 people
who are very frightened, and I think they're also at risk of being
forced to leave the region.
Then finally, as Mr. Kesic mentioned, the right to remain. At Human
Rights Watch, we feel very strongly that there's one serious problem
with the Dayton
Agreement and that's the words "right to remain" do not appear in
the agreement. All the focus, all the rhetoric has been focused on the
right to return, but not
the protection of minority communities in Banja Luka and west
Mostar and in Sarajevo where Serbs today are being evicted forcibly from
their houses still.
So it is very important to keep focus on those minority communities
and to protect the right to remain, and we have, in fact, called on
NATO, on IFOR
forces, and on the international police task force to take a much
stronger role, to increase their presence, for example, in the villages
around Teslic in the
southwest Sopna [sp] region and in other areas to prevent further
ethnic cleansing from being carried out.
Galina
Davorin Dujmovic wrote:
> decided that, Saddam was perfectly "acceptable" before Kuwait.
>
> There is no "moral life of a nation," nobody cares about that, "heros"
> are always whitewashed in history of every nation, Serbia is
> particularly good example - they have Karadjorgdje, Mihajlovic,
> Obrenovic, all prime type murderers who became national heros and
> accepted historical figures whose life is a subject of study in
> schools. I can point out many of the same in USA, but that is a
> tricky subject, since all of us are "sensitive about historical
> and moral fabric of our nation."
Mr. Wise. Mr. Kesic?
Mr. Kesic. A really accurate response and detailed response to your
question would take several hours in respect to the international media
and how it is
covered the conflict throughout the former Yugoslavia. But I think
that three basic rules apply. One is to simplify the story and one
Krajina is enough in terms
of trying to understand what's happening, at least for editors,
especially those sitting in offices in New York or Washington. So, I
know.
Even I've interviewed a reporter who was trying to make that
distinction between Krajina and Bosnian Krajina and the editor said,
well, what does this
mean? This is the same place. Then as the reporter tried to
explain, just said simply, don't use the word Krajina because it will
confuse the readers. Just drop
it completely. So, it is an effort to simplify.
Secondly, the media for the most part concentrated on Sarajevo and
the situation in Sarajevo, and this was also natural because the
facilities for transmitting,
especially the electronic media, were more suitable in Sarajevo
than in other cities and towns throughout Bosnia, and this concentration
on Sarajevo almost
totally excluded what was happening throughout the rest of the
country.
So that on many occasions, it seemed as though that what was
happening in Sarajevo was characteristic of what was happening
throughout the country, and
in some areas, it was much worse and in some areas, it was much
better, especially in respect to cooperation between the various
communities or even
hostilities between the various communities. So, the obsession and
the focus with Sarajevo determined how the Bosnian Krajina would be
covered, as it did
everything else.
The third explanation and probably an inadequate explanation at
that is that the reporters themselves really didn't understand the
distinction of the Bosnian
Krajina, what was the Bosnian Krajina, what is the Bosnian Krajina,
how does it differ from the Krajina in Croatia, and they themselves
couldn't come to
grips with this, and so they decided that for their own sake of
clarity and in trying to convey the story, that they would just simplify
it and that's what
happened.
Mr. Wise. Bishop?
Bishop Komarica. I would like to answer these questions. In regards
to elections, I really fear manipulation. If serious part of
implementation of Dayton
Agreement is sound, if this implementation will go as far as it is
going now, the elections will not be normal. The behavior of IFOR so
far, the behavior of
IFOR is really supporting ethnic cleansing more than supporting the
Dayton Agreement.
We can expect more credibility from the signers of the Dayton
Agreement. In regard to all the refugees from the region of Banja Luka,
all these people who
have been pushed out are completely innocent people who have not
done any harm. The difference might be a slight difference in case of
Mostar or Sarajevo.
I would like to express an opinion of these refugees and these
people who have lost. They feel punished by the contact group, by all
the major players in this
situation. They're supposed to return to the places, to the people
who basically took their rights in the first place. They are returning
to your attacker.
This is a hypocrisy of the international politics. These people
have a reasonable fear to return to their homes and if they don't
return, the international
community will say, "Well, we have tried to secure your return and
you didn't take this opportunity." I ask you, would you return if you
would be like a lamb
into the wolf's domain?
I would like to state that we are not as silly as we might be
thought of. Despite this very comic tragic situation, I still hope and
support and expect that all the
people, my people, are willing to return and cooperate in a
peaceful way. We are ready for forgiveness and reconciliation, but we
also expect from other side
where we are asking for reconciliation that they also extend their
hand.
I hope that we are not expecting the impossible. However, as long
as the leaders of this side are extreme politicians and as long as these
different parties with
extreme positions have a chance to be elected and receive votes,
then the peace will be endangered in this region and in the entire
Bosnia. I expect from
democratic media and some American people that exists under respect
of the principles on which our civilization is based--this is the first
of all respect for
basic human rights as I mentioned. Any party or any politician who
is not willing to include us should be--any politician who is not
willing to include us in their
program should be suspended from the elections. Otherwise,
everybody is bringing their credibility into question who are trying to
produce some quality
peace in Bosnia.
The real source of evil has to be named and against that evil you
have to apply specific measures. We expect this from the people who
claim to be democratic
and peace-loving people and who--we expect this from the people who
claim that they've tried to enforce that kind of credible peace. As long
as we who are
in Banja Luka cannot go to our homes, and these houses might be one
kilometer or three kilometers away from the place of living now, and if
we are not
allowed to do this, then every election is really a farce and it is
really a ridiculous situation.
How long my mother, 80 years old, will need to return to her native
home from which she was pushed out by official representatives of the
city of Banja
Luka, who came with a knife and if you are not leaving in 5
minutes, I will kill you. Is there a human being behind that mayor or
that official who can do such
an evil deed especially when he knows that these people are
completely innocent and have not done any wrong?
The quoted Mr. Radic specifically has expressed to the
representative of European Parliament in the assembly last year. The
member of the parliament asked
what these Croatians have done so wrong that about 80 of them have
been killed in Banja Luka specifically and more than quite a few
thousand forcefully
pushed out. He answered, Radic answered, that Croatians in his city
have not done anything wrong.
His truthful statement is true. Therefore, somebody has to carry
the consequences. I will make sure as the bishop that all my priests
that we, through all our
work, we will make sure that we are trying to do only good to all
the people that we meet.
Together with the representative of Serbian Orthodox Church Episkop
Efranam [sp] and with the Muslim representative, Halilovic, since 1992 I
and these
people have made six appeals together to different religious--if
somebody is interested, you can receive these copies of our common
approach to a peaceful
situation. I would like to thank God that people have listened to
him, and especially Catholics in his area, together with other bishops
and Catholics in Bosnia.
In a significant number of our statements in the last 4 years, we
have indicated and we have stressed consistently basic principles and
basic needs for human
rights and basic cultural heritage, protection of undeniable human
rights for all the people in Bosnia regardless of their nationality or
their faith. We have raised
our voice against every evil regardless of who did it and where it
happened. If you are interested, you can receive a copy to see what the
Catholic Church has
done in this area.
After the Dayton Agreement, the Dayton Agreement which is in many
ways, in our eyes, quite unjust for the Catholic community in Bosnia and
Herzegovina.
My diocese is completely destroyed, my diocese in the northwestern
part of Bosnia. This is my diocese that looks with all the places of
churches and
convents and monasteries and this is how it looks right now.
This is what I call ethnic cleansing or genocide or
"cultural-cide"--or ethnic cleansing. In this territory, there was no
war, and despite this, all the churches have
been destroyed or extremely damaged, and I can mention also all the
Muslim places of worship. This is Banja Luka. There was no war in this
area and there
is lots of evil there. Incredible destruction from the people who
basically themselves are ruining themselves. It is not that I wanted to
judge anyone. I wanted
to forgive and to pray for everyone and that all--to help all to
affirm in themselves their own human identity and being and this is what
happened to our
religious, that here is at work a real destruction of faith and God
and good in this society, in this particular area.
It is no doubt that communist atheism has destroyed the souls of
many of our contemporaries and this kind of a view has confirmed Serbian
Orthodox
Episkop Efranam. The responsible representative of one religious
group, together with the rest of the bishops in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
we have published a
letter in January of this year after documentation of all the
tragic happenings in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
It suggests to all faithful and to all the people of goodwill what
we as people and believers should do to assure peace and reconciliation
in this land. We are
convinced that the individual believers are called to be actors and
to save all these basic human rights. That is protection, to protect
human dignity and basic
human rights.
I am convinced that in our position, we are not alone and that all
those who have in their heart or on their heart that they will support
us in our effort to do all
possible to contribute to this peace in this area. I hope that this
contact with you today was not lost or is not without fruit. I thank you
very much.
Mr. Wise. Thank you very much, Bishop. That was a very impressive
and moving statement. I think it would be a note on which to end our
briefing. We're
already some minutes past our time. I would ask our other panelists
if they have any final things they would like to say at this point. If
not, I will close. All
right. They also think it is fitting that we end on the note that
the bishop has left with us.
Thank you all for coming. I think this has been one of our best
briefings that we've had in a long time and I think we all go away with
a much better
understanding of the situation in Banja Luka. Thank you.
[Whereupon at 2:00 p.m., the Commission adjourned.]
luos
Galina wrote:
>
> Paul Andrej Jurcic wrote:
> >
> > >Martin wrote...
> >
> > >wouldn't necessarily be negative to let the Serbs return. This was in
> > >Croatian, half a year ago or so. I'm beginning to think that I was wrong
> > >and Tudjman right. These people have for centuries been used by different
> > >regimes against the Croatians. Now there are tendencies that the West is
> > >using them again in blackmailing Croatia.
> > >
> >
> > >
> > >
>
> It is still a very important issue. What we do not hear about in any
> large way is the number of internal refugees within the RS and in Serb
> Bosnia and Kosovo. There is no reason for people not to be able to go
> home anywhere in the former Yugoslavia. For when one ocnsiders the
> number of internal refugees together with the external refugees being
> returned, the infrastructures' ability to absorb the combined number of
> refugees is immense.
>
> only red herring. According to many
> > well informed (?) estimates only 10-15% of Serbs would like to return in
> > Croatia despite of the all advantages of being Croatian citizen.
>
> As I recal from last year, there were specific apllications to be filled
> out by those wishing return and those applications were in many cases
> denied. Someone else will have to provide the data on this but I recal
> reading that the very process discouraged returns.
>
> Serb from
> > Croatia (and many in Serbia too) were brainwashed to believe that any national
> > Croatian state is a fascist state, that Croatian coat of arms, regardless it
> > starts with white or red field, is always Ustasha symbol and that today
> > monetary currency kuna is just continuation of NDH economy.
>
> remove these iconic images from its flag and currency. To remind people
> in any way visually of the Ustache is a horror and there are
> considerable choices out there from which to chose currency names. So
> whatever the impulse beyond these acts, they comprise a nationalistic
> in conceptualization.
>
> So why any
> > selfrespecting Serb would desire to live in such a state?
>
> The discouraging of the same is a coherent point here.
>
> Serbs have pride too.
>
> The point is to get beyond pride to the 21st century? To inclusion?
>
> > For Croatian nationalists it is good news and for Croatians wictims of Serbian
> > insurrection and imposed war it is mental relief knowing that this kind of war
> > sufferings will never happened again.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> It is not clear that these things do not happen again and these symbols,
> the flag and the money, are not working toward healing.
>
> Galina
Paul,
You have been brainwashed, so are the Croats in Croatia, Serbs in Serbia
and majority of all others in Former Yugoslavia. Remember Paul,
brainwash is always done with polluted water. LUOS
Galina,
Remarkable answers.
All the best, LUOS
Ivica Maric
Hej Peter
Vi blir grannar snart. På hösten börjar jag läsa teknisk fysik på Kungliga
Tekniska Högskolan. Hoppas vi kommer att träffas. Toliko za sada. Javi se
Peter.
--
Puno pozdrava:
Ivica Maric
Duvgatan 14
554 64 Jonkoping
SWEDEN
Tel. (fax) +46-36-13 05 83
E-mail "ivica...@jonkoping.mail.telia.com"
HomePage "http://www.torget.se/users/t/tepih"
Petar Sosic <peter...@mailbox.swipnet.se> wrote in article
<01bc7718$f9699d20$7069f482@s-38118>...
Ivica Maric <ivica...@jonkoping.mail.telia.com> skrev i inlägg
<01bc7595$d2dce4c0$a2fc...@FOO.telia.com>...
> Hej Martin
>
> Ursäkta mig men jag visste inte att du kunde svenska, fast det inte
spelar
> någon roll. Var snäll och lämna Nietsche och Aristoteles åt sidan. De är
> inte så viktiga när det gäller det här ämnet. Tudjman är en synonym till
> det onda och du förstör säkert när jag påstor att man ska välja mellan
det
> onda och det goda. Jesus gärningar känner du till om du har läst Bibeln
och
> Tudjmans gärningar är jag och min familj. Vi är här på grund av att hans
> parti, tillsammans med sina kompisar som sitter i makten, "befriade oss"
> allt vi hade.
>
> Jag ber gud förlåta honom och alla hans kompisar som hör till de tre
> monsterna (SDA, SDS, HDZ) som mitt land till ödeland.
>
> I mitt land fick man klart och tydligt välja mellan att ta till våldet i
> nationens namn och att vägra döda genom att följa Jesus.
>
> Man fick också antigen döda för att bevisa sin tro i landet eller låta
bli
> att döda och bli förräddare.
>
> Jag ber dig en gång till läsa Bibeln så att du ver vad jag pratar om.
>
> P.S. När det gäller de här böckerna du nämner så har jag faktiskt läst
dem.
> --
> Hälsningar och
>
> Puno pozdrava:
>
> Ivica Maric
> Duvgatan 14
> 554 64 Jonkoping
> SWEDEN
> Tel. (fax) +46-36-13 05 83
> E-mail "ivica...@jonkoping.mail.telia.com"
> HomePage "http://www.torget.se/users/t/tepih"
>
>
>
> Martin Graiter <mag...@algonet.se> wrote in article
> <01bc7527$24f2d680$Loca...@algonet.se.news.algonet.se>...
> > Ivica Maric <ivica...@jonkoping.mail.telia.com> skrev i inlägg
> > <01bc74fc$aede0de0$9cfc...@FOO.telia.com>...
> > : Please Martin, read the Holy Bible first(specialy the New Testament,
if
> > you
> > : are a christian). Then you have to give priority to something:
Tudjman
> or
> > : Jesus, nationality or religion and a state or a human life.
> >
> > How about you reading Aristoteles? It's quite refreshing! Or try
> Nietsche's
> > "Antichrist". Then you will have to give priority to something:
Aeroplane
> > or cookie? Bicyclerepairman or spoon? Capitalism or Sacher-cake?
> >
> > (If the above seems illogical, it's probably because you haven't read
the
> > books I suggested...)
> >
> > Hälsningar,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> >
>
Det var kul, det! Vad sägs om att köra på svenska i fortsättningen? Då kan
ingen annan läsa vad det står i inläggen?
Hälsar gör Peter från Stockholm
----------
Petar Sosic
Detta är ett multipart-meddelande i MIME-format.
------=_NextPart_000_01BC7729.BCF26D20
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> Puno pozdrava:
>
> Ivica Maric
> Duvgatan 14
> 554 64 Jonkoping
> SWEDEN
> Tel. (fax) +46-36-13 05 83
> E-mail "ivica...@jonkoping.mail.telia.com"
> HomePage "http://www.torget.se/users/t/tepih"
>
>
>
> Martin Graiter <mag...@algonet.se> wrote in article
> <01bc7527$24f2d680$Loca...@algonet.se.news.algonet.se>...
> > Ivica Maric <ivica...@jonkoping.mail.telia.com> skrev i inlägg
> > <01bc74fc$aede0de0$9cfc...@FOO.telia.com>...
> > : Please Martin, read the Holy Bible first(specialy the New Testament,
if
> > you
> > : are a christian). Then you have to give priority to something:
Tudjman
> or
> > : Jesus, nationality or religion and a state or a human life.
> >
> > How about you reading Aristoteles? It's quite refreshing! Or try
> Nietsche's
> > "Antichrist". Then you will have to give priority to something:
Aeroplane
> > or cookie? Bicyclerepairman or spoon? Capitalism or Sacher-cake?
> >
> > (If the above seems illogical, it's probably because you haven't read
the
> > books I suggested...)
> >
> > Hälsningar,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> >
>
Det var kul, det! Vad sägs om att köra på svenska i fortsättningen? Då kan
ingen annan läsa vad det står i inläggen?
Hälsar gör Peter från Stockholm
------=_NextPart_000_01BC7729.BCF26D20
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html><head></head><BODY bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF"><p><font size=3D2 =
color=3D"#000000" face=3D"Arial"><br><br><br><br>Ivica Maric <<font =
color=3D"#0000FF"><u>ivica...@jonkoping.mail.telia.com</u><font =
color=3D"#000000">> skrev i inl=E4gg <<font =
color=3D"#0000FF"><u>01bc7595$d2dce4c0$a2fc...@FOO.telia.com</u><font =
color=3D"#000000">>...<br>> Hej Martin<br>> <br>> Urs=E4kta =
mig men jag visste inte att du kunde svenska, fast det inte =
spelar<br>> n=E5gon roll. Var sn=E4ll och l=E4mna Nietsche och =
Aristoteles =E5t sidan. De =E4r<br>> inte s=E5 viktiga n=E4r det =
g=E4ller det h=E4r =E4mnet. Tudjman =E4r en synonym till<br>> det =
onda och du f=F6rst=F6r s=E4kert n=E4r jag p=E5stor att man ska v=E4lja =
mellan det<br>> onda och det goda. Jesus g=E4rningar k=E4nner du till =
om du har l=E4st Bibeln och<br>> Tudjmans g=E4rningar =E4r jag och =
min familj. Vi =E4r h=E4r p=E5 grund av att hans<br>> parti, =
tillsammans med sina kompisar som sitter i makten, "befriade =
oss"<br>> allt vi hade.<br>> <br>> Jag ber gud f=F6rl=E5ta =
honom och alla hans kompisar som h=F6r till de tre<br>> monsterna =
(SDA, SDS, HDZ) som mitt land till =F6deland.<br>> <br>> I mitt =
land fick man klart och tydligt v=E4lja mellan att ta till v=E5ldet =
i<br>> nationens namn och att v=E4gra d=F6da genom att f=F6lja =
Jesus.<br>> <br>> Man fick ocks=E5 antigen d=F6da f=F6r att bevisa =
sin tro i landet eller l=E5ta bli<br>> att d=F6da och bli =
f=F6rr=E4ddare.<br>> <br>> Jag ber dig en g=E5ng till l=E4sa =
Bibeln s=E5 att du ver vad jag pratar om.<br>> <br>> P.S. N=E4r =
det g=E4ller de h=E4r b=F6ckerna du n=E4mner s=E5 har jag faktiskt =
l=E4st dem.<br>> -- <br>> H=E4lsningar och<br>> <br>> Puno =
pozdrava:<br>> <br>> =
&=
nbsp; &n=
bsp; Ivica Maric<br>> =
&=
nbsp; &n=
bsp; Duvgatan 14<br>> =
&=
nbsp; &n=
bsp; 554 64 Jonkoping<br>> =
&=
nbsp; &n=
bsp; SWEDEN<br>> =
&=
nbsp; Tel. (fax) =
+46-36-13 05 83<br>> =
E=
-mail "<font =
color=3D"#0000FF"><u>ivica...@jonkoping.mail.telia.com</u><font =
color=3D"#000000">"<br>> =
H=
omePage "<font =
color=3D"#0000FF"><u>http://www.torget.se/users/t/tepih</u><font =
color=3D"#000000">"<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> Martin =
Graiter <<font color=3D"#0000FF"><u>mag...@algonet.se</u><font =
color=3D"#000000">> wrote in article<br>> <<font =
color=3D"#0000FF"><u>01bc7527$24f2d680$Loca...@algonet.se.news.algonet.=
se</u><font color=3D"#000000">>...<br>> > Ivica Maric <<font =
color=3D"#0000FF"><u>ivica...@jonkoping.mail.telia.com</u><font =
color=3D"#000000">> skrev i inl=E4gg<br>> > <<font =
color=3D"#0000FF"><u>01bc74fc$aede0de0$9cfc...@FOO.telia.com</u><font =
color=3D"#000000">>...<br>> > : Please Martin, read the Holy =
Bible first(specialy the New Testament, if<br>> > you<br>> > =
: are a christian). Then you have to give priority to something: =
Tudjman<br>> or<br>> > : Jesus, nationality or religion and a =
state or a human life.<br>> > <br>> > How about you reading =
Aristoteles? It's quite refreshing! Or try<br>> Nietsche's<br>> =
> "Antichrist". Then you will have to give priority to =
something: Aeroplane<br>> > or cookie? Bicyclerepairman or spoon? =
Capitalism or Sacher-cake?<br>> > <br>> > (If the above =
seems illogical, it's probably because you haven't read the<br>> > =
books I suggested...)<br>> > <br>> > H=E4lsningar,<br>> =
> <br>> > Martin<br>> > <br>> > <br>> =
<br><br>Det var kul, det! Vad s=E4gs om att k=F6ra p=E5 svenska i =
forts=E4ttningen? D=E5 kan ingen annan l=E4sa vad det st=E5r i =
inl=E4ggen?<br><br>H=E4lsar g=F6r Peter fr=E5n Stockholm</p>
</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></f=
ont></font></font></font></font></font></font></body></html>
------=_NextPart_000_01BC7729.BCF26D20--
Andrew Varvel
In article <5nlj34$s...@ultranews.duc.auburn.edu>,
Davorin Dujmovic <duj...@mail.auburn.edu> wrote:
>OK, I can push this further. How about Vietnam war, how many
>people in USA were persecuted for the war crimes there, how
>many of people on high positions? There was over 1,000,000
>killed Vietnamese, most of them civilians, in many cases
>knowingly, number of Vietnam villages were raided and people
>murdered for no other reason than suspicion of collusion
>or simpathy with Vietkong. I just watched PBS where a soldier
>described a murder as an act of "confusion." Would Arkan be
>allowed to claim the same?
>All what I am saying about McVeigh is that he was a hero for a
>Gulf War, while he is a murderer now for Oklahoma City bombing.
>That is the same person, it should have been obvious to his
>superiors in Gulf War, but then it was acceptable.
>And to the guy who wrote the posting I was answering a question: What
>makes you feel that Serbia is yet to suffer for the freedom of Arkan?
>Again, those people are all over the world, sometimes "national heros,"
>sometimes scum (what they really are), I don't see that any nation
>particularly suffers for their existence. Unless somebody powerfull
>decides so - as Iraq now because of its dictator Saddam. USA
>decided that, Saddam was perfectly "acceptable" before Kuwait.
>There is no "moral life of a nation," nobody cares about that, "heros"
>are always whitewashed in history of every nation, Serbia is
>particularly good example - they have Karadjorgdje, Mihajlovic,
>Obrenovic, all prime type murderers who became national heros and
>accepted historical figures whose life is a subject of study in
>schools. I can point out many of the same in USA, but that is a
>tricky subject, since all of us are "sensitive about historical
>and moral fabric of our nation."
And in an earlier article <5nl5j8$j...@ultranews.duc.auburn.edu>,
Davorin Dujmovic <duj...@mail.auburn.edu> wrote:
>The fact is that murderers are national heroes is not strange in
>any society.
>Say for example in USA. McVeigh (that is "safe" example) is constantly
>presented as "Gulf War hero" turned radical. But the guy was just
>an accepted murderer in Gulf War as well - he braged about about
>decapitating Iraqi with artillery shell and was taking pictures
>of dead Iraqis - that was accepted behaviour! Now he is a murderer
>since he "confused the sides?"
>Arkan was a scum all of his life, now he became a hero in Serbia.
>I see nothing different here than a reversal of fortune for the people
>of the same kind.
>
You are correct -- up to a point. Just because the US government does
something doesn't mean it is good. The Army Corps of Engineers built
Garrison Dam on the Missouri River and forcibly evacuated Mandan, Hidatsa,
and Arikara (as well as Lakota downriver and some nations upriver) on an
ethnic basis in the 1940's. It's still a crime, and not one of those
pooh-poohed "generations ago" crimes either. And all of the alligator
tears from people claiming they care* isn't going to bring the land back;
action does that.
People are getting forced out of their homes en masse along the Yangtze
River in China. I utterly oppose it as both an ecological nightmare and a
deprivation of human rights. But Madeleine Albright, that avowed matron
of human rights, understands that "constructive engagement" is necessary;
China has a veto on the Security Council. So construction goes on, and
people lose their homes, their jobs, their family cemeteries...
But to say that shit happens doesn't mean that shit is good or that people
should have to live in shit.
For example, I disagree with using the “Fighting Sioux” mascot at the
University of North Dakota. I can still be loyal to the institution while
wishing to change it -- and many people (mainly white people) feel
threatened by this. Although there is some Native American extremism
(which I strongly oppose) behind the push to get rid of the mascot, the
mainstream opinion among the Allied Nations (Lakota/Dakota/Nakota), the
Three Affiliated Tribes (Mandan/Hidatsa/Arikara(Sahnish)), and even some
Chippewa is against. Even a strong undercurrent of settler opinion wants
it to go, but most settlers fear being called “traitor”.
I disagree with having the “Star Spangled Banner” as the anthem of the
United States, because it is too anti-British and implicitly bigoted; I
much prefer “America the Beautiful”, which expresses an environmentally
based loyalty. I strongly disagree with the American flag, because it is
a flag of inequality and conquest. Those thirteen stripes are prison
stripes, representing the fact that the original thirteen states are more
important than the other thirty-seven and implying that the descendants of
those who were citizens in 1776 are more important than those whose
ancestors got citizenship later (such as 1848, 1865, 1928, 1997...). I
prefer to wave the American flag with the thirteen stripes cut out,
representing full equality. I would be very happy to change the flag of
my country. But I am still loyal to the Constitution, and the principles
on which the laws of the United States are founded (and the laws
themselves, even if I disagree with a few...), including the much-needed
amendments we currently have.
It should be possible for loyalists from the countries of eastern Europe
to set aside the crude nationalistic definitions that have emanated from
western Europe. One can be loyal to Croatia while opposing the HDZ; some
people might argue that loyalty to the HDZ and loyalty to Croatia are
contradictions in terms! If Croatia cannot mean more than a checkerboard
flag, a coat-of-arms, a few anthems, and a contrived dialect, then Croatia
has no more right to exist than the puppet bantustans in South Africa
under Separate Development. (Canada and South Africa could change their
flags...)
I do take a dim view of those, like the rivals Euthyphro and Bundmeister,
who refer to American citizens as “expatriates” and call for them to
support foreign countries on the basis of ethnicity. Personally, I regard
this as just as treasonous as the actions of a certain man responsible for
the deaths of innocent people in Oklahoma City. It is annoying to see
ethnic lobbies in cahoots with foreign embassies duking it out in American
elections in Chicago and the Iron Range; although I may have empathy for
such lobbies, my sympathy is mute.**
There is nothing wrong with supporting foreigners in various ways, but it
must be done for humanity, or for the country -- not as an appeal to a
foreign nationalism based on religion, culture, blood, or origin. One
should be able to be Hidatsa, Serb, Mexican, Black, Martian, Satanist,
WASP or anything else, speak any language, believe in anything, but
accepting citizenship means that one’s loyalty is to the United States of
America. It is for this reason that I think that the US should open its
doors further. It is also for this reason that I think that permanent
residents should have all of the rights, save for voting rights and
selective service, of citizenship; citizenship should never be degraded
into a meal ticket.
Is the Hague Tribunal unfair? Of course it is. I want to make sure there
is an well-funded, international, and independent Tribunal that can
command the respect of people throughout the world. Admittedly, I hardly
know where to turn to get the powers that be to advocate and implement
this; the “establishment” is as hard and brittle as glass on a cold day
and the opposition is so obviously self-serving that their arguments would
be ignored even when they are good (and they generally aren’t).
Genocide happens -- and no response. Genocide in Biafra -- nothing.
US-sponsored genocide in Cambodia (1970) -- nothing. US-sponsored
genocide in East Timor -- nothing. US-sponsored genocide in Central
America -- nothing. Genocide in Burma -- nothing. Technical genocide
(read the conventions) in Bulgaria -- nothing. Technical genocide in
occupied Tibet -- nothing. Technical genocide in Australia -- nothing.
Possible genocide in Angola and Zaire -- no investigation. Rumors of
genocide in 1997 against black Colombians in the northwest -- no
investigation. Genocide in Rwanda -- the perpetrators are well known but
the Tribunal is a farce. After this, it would be hard to imagine how
people from the ex-Yugoslavia couldn’t think there is a double standard.
(Criminals are learning that they can do the "big crime"; it's the petty
stuff that isn't tolerated.)
The idea of a truth commission would be good, but it is poor idea for the
ex-Yugoslavia in the present context. Truth commissions require
reconciliation. In Argentina, both the military and the revolutionaries
were shamed by the rest of the society before the truth commission went to
work. In South Africa, it was meant as a catharsis after the Broederbond
and the upper echelons of the ANC agreed to reconcile (they shamed
themselves after they saw what they were causing...) and have multi-party
elections in a united country; and yes, it was meant as a way to shame the
guilty. The equivalent today would be a loose confederation of the former
ex-Yugo “republics” (along with some outside countries to add some
balance), a reconstituted federal Bosnia, people getting their homes back,
and elections in an environment that doesn’t exist yet.
In the ex-Yugoslavia in the present context, a truth commission would
become a bragging session. I suspect that this is why the Hague Tribunal
is unwilling to subpoena Seselj (or Paraga!); it would find out more than
it wants to know. Rest assured that Karadzic and Mladic are scapegoats;
they may be guilty scapegoats who were collaborators and accomplices in
vile orders, but they are scapegoats all the same. (There are some people
behind the scenes who really planned a lot of this stuff -- and lobbied
for it... There always are....)***
The ITCY is simply not designed for accumulating evidence. It appears to
be a public relations ploy. All it would need to do is send teams to
military, intelligence, diplomatic, business, and church archives in
Zagreb, Ljubljana, Belgrade, Sarajevo, Pale, et cetera# with live
television feeds to viewers on CNN. After enough public relations
disasters showing the belligerents to be less than compliant with the
Dayton peace accords (just as the weapons researchers did in Iraq...), the
researchers would probably get more documents than they would really
want.## Let’s face reality. The Tribunals for the genocides in the
ex-Yugoslavia and Rwanda are institutionally half-hearted and incompetent
at best, despite whatever efforts valiant individuals might make.+
Am I suspicious of the UN? Of course. It must deal with rival
conspiracies that wish to drain its reputation (or temporarily enhance it)
to satisfy partisan objectives. But it is the only option out there; the
alternative to the UN is a new series of expansionist wars. At least
belligerents are forced into casuistry at the UN. Some long-term reform
of the UN should be done, but this will take decades. And yes, I do want
a real international tribunal to adjudicate genocide, not the fake variety
at the Hague. My faith in the official “Tribunal” is so low that I think
that it would be better to scrap it and start all over again with
competent staff, independence, adequate funding, and an understanding of
many different kinds of law. Defendants must have the right to decide if
the law of their own country is to be preferred or a standard
international code, and defendants have a right to be judged by a jury of
their peers.
The Dayton peace accords should not be confused with peace; they were
coerced measures to force a cease-fire in Bosnia. The continued war was
becoming a liability for the powers that be. Furthermore, there are
humanitarian reasons for enforcing a cease-fire; hopefully, it can allow
all of those who want to leave Bosnia a chance to get out before the real
killing begins again. The Bosnian government was on the verge of defeat;
the US government would never have intervened so publicly otherwise. The
Serbian government had leverage applied to it. The Croatian government
was duped into thinking it was "western" and had implicit leverage applied
to it.
Those who think that this war is over are deluding themselves. As I've
said before, much of the politics of war is canine politics. All that
matters is who's Alpha and the only part of any treaty that matters is the
boundary markings; just as dogs mark territory with urine, the politicians
of raw power mark pieces of paper. Not that the promises are worth
anything; they aren't. The notion of "solemn pledges" is nice for theater
and should probably be used as policy, but no watcher of the Balkan
warlords should take anything they say seriously; they have lied too many
times before.
But look on the bright side. There’s very little shooting right now in
Bosnia. The sun is probably shining over Bosnia. The US armed forces
should be commended for their “no fraternization” policy; at least it
won’t be the US government’s fault if Bosnia becomes Europe’s brothel.
And the head prosecutor for the ITCY should be commended for looking for
the legal responsibility of individuals rather than submitting to the
insidious doctrine of “collective responsibility” used so often by
genocide artists.
This has been a long post. But I want people to know that it is possible
to oppose these horrible deeds without being hypocritical,++ and without
needing to tow the conformist so-called “anti-genocide” line. It is
possible to oppose genocide without being forced into the rigid
ideological mold some self-righteous academics might wish to impose on
others. It should be possible to feel compassion for the genocide artist
and still oppose the genocide.+++
--Andrew Varvel--
*You know the type. The kind who will wail “genocide, genocide” while
lacking a real understanding -- or concern -- about what they are talking
about. And they will never try to come up with solutions for
reconciliation; they’re far more interested in rubbing peoples’ noses in
blood than they are in trying to solve anything.
**It was really saddening to see the extremists take over the
ex-Yugoslavia newsgroups six years ago. The moderates had strong
disagreements with each other and some were taken in by belligerent
propaganda -- but they were talking. It was weird to see the belligerents
(many of whom appeared to have connections with one or the other armies
involved) flame the moderates off the newsgroups, but generally leave each
other alone. I suppose that it is hard to oppose kitsch with anything
other than other kitsch, but it shouldn’t be impossible. (Sigh.)
***Their real crime was probably rejecting the Vance-Owen peace plan. The
Trilateral Commission -- and much of the NATO establishment -- had much of
its reputation riding on it. (Both Vance and Owen have been very
influential on the Commission -- just read the author lists and membership
lists over the years.)
#I suspect that, with the right references, the trail could lead right
back to outside countries as well. But uncovering the evidence may expose
connivance of powerful people outside of the ex-Yugoslavia that might very
well threaten the fragile international power establishment. The more one
finds, the more dangerous the work becomes.
##I do wonder when the “Tribunal” will need to resort to blind fundraising
-- setting up an organization to raise funds for the Tribunal but making
sure that nobody knows exactly where the money is coming from. It may
sound degrading to accept money from telethons, bake sales, and lotteries,
but it’s probably even more degrading to rely on the major powers that try
to manipulate it for their own tactical advantage for its funding.
+The real test for these half-hearted petitions for the arrest of certain
characters is to go beyond the internet. If one can’t convince thousands
of people to sign at the Pennsylvania State Fair, one certainly isn’t
going to be able to convince the powers that be. Besides, some birds
would be happy to sing if only they could fly....
++There may be a log in my eye, but there’s a speck in your own... (Grin.)
+++Although it’s not always easy to feel compassion for some of those
vicious assholes out there.
Michael Sells
In article <5nlj34$s...@ultranews.duc.auburn.edu>, duj...@mail.auburn.edu
(Davorin Dujmovic) wrote:
> OK, I can push this further. How about Vietnam war, how many
> people in USA were persecuted for the war crimes there, how
> many of people on high positions? There was over 1,000,000
> killed Vietnamese, most of them civilians, in many cases
> knowingly, number of Vietnam villages were raided and people
> murdered for no other reason than suspicion of collusion
> or simpathy with Vietkong. I just watched PBS where a soldier
> described a murder as an act of "confusion." Would Arkan be
> allowed to claim the same?
>
. . .
> There is no "moral life of a nation," nobody cares about that, "heros"
> are always whitewashed in history of every nation, Serbia is
> particularly good example - they have Karadjorgdje, Mihajlovic,
> Obrenovic, all prime type murderers who became national heros and
> accepted historical figures whose life is a subject of study in
> schools. I can point out many of the same in USA, but that is a
> tricky subject, since all of us are "sensitive about historical
> and moral fabric of our nation."
Davor,
Your points are all well-taken. From them I take the following question:
what conclusion do we draw? Yes, many war-criminals are considered heroes
and get away with what they do. Only a very small percentage are
successfully prosecuted.
But that is also the case with domestic criminals. Less than 1 in 100 men
in the world who commit rape are actually found, tried, and serve time for
it. Almost as bad a percentage for murderers. The friends of those in
power, the friends of judges, those who can afford to bribe, frequently
get away with murder time and time again. And of course those who are
caught complain bitterly about the unfairness of it all. "Why me?
Everyone else is doing it and getting away with it!"
There seem only two ways of responding: working always harder and more
effectively for an indepedent and successful police and judiciary system,
or giving up and becoming cynical. I don't assume any answer on your part,
since you haven't yet given your explicit position. But I would like to
give mine. To give up is to risk true disaster. Without the conviction
of a small percentage of criminals, there would be massive chaos, revenge,
and slaughter in our society beyond what we can possibly imagine now.
Same with international criminals. The word genocide was coined only in
the mid-20th century by Rafael Lemkin. It is a new fragile concept that
we should try to stop mass-killing. The Nuremberg trials only convicted a
few of the thousands of Nazi mass-murderers. But without them, with
Goering and Seyss-Inquart and Kalternbrunner, in power still in Germany,
Europe would be a vast prison. They were important.
So no, justice is imperfect, weak, ineffectual, inconsistent. But no, we
cannot and must not ever give up on it. Now that the International
Tribunal in The Hague is established, it is critical to support it. The
criminals will never investigate themselves. So there has to be an
independent tribunal. No, it cannot cover all cases in the world
immediately, or even all cases in the Balkans. It is selective, as is all
justice. We must strive to make it as fair and effective as possible.
As for nations not having a morality, the problem is not that nations do
not recognize that their "heros" are war-criminals; the problem is that
that recognition comes to late. For decades General Sheridan was a great
hero in the U.S. Now he is recognized throughout U.S. history books and
public school textbooks as the architect of the "Ethnic Cleansing" of
American Indians and is widely despised.
Of course that recognition came long after his death. In Germany, Nazis
were openly admired and Nazi atrocities ignored widely, until 1973 when an
American made-for-TV show, The Holocaust, stunned the German public and
changed the attitudes of many. Why and how this particular film had such
an impact where others had failed is now being studied. It didn't
transform Germany into a perfect society, but it had a major impact on
textbooks and the Holocaust was no longer ignored in German history
presentations. Stalin was a hero until Nikita started his
"DeStalinazation" campaign in the 1960's. So it goes. Raoul Wallenberg,
a true hero who saved thousands of Hungarian Jews from being killed at
Auschwitz, died in a Soviet concentration camp, ignored and unknown to
most of the world. Now he is recognized as the true hero he was.
How long will it take before the Arkans, Kordics, Mladics, and Karadzics
are no longer heroes? That depends on all of us. If it takes centuries,
then the people of the Balkans will suffer the price: oppresion, war,
revenge, hate, more hate, and more hate. If it takes less time, and there
is some justice -- never perfect, never total -- people can begin the task
of reconciliation and rebuilding.
Mike
Dragi Raos
> Dragi Raos <bo...@4mate.hr> wrote:
>
> : Anyway, regardless of your current discussion, and merit of Michael's
> : arguments (or lack of it), please don't fall into usual HDZ knee-jerk
> : response: HDZ and Mr. Tudjman critics are NOT automatically
> anty-Croatian.
>
> You're quite right, but there is no automation the other way around
either.
> When did you last see an *openly* anti-Croatian posting? When you have,
you
> thought of it to be immature, idiotic... and completely toothless. Am I
> right?
>
> But postings that appear to be based on facts, writted in a "civilized"
and
> "cultivated" manner don't strike you as being moronic, yes? These can sow
> seeds of guilt, passivity, let-go. The same tactic as the old SFRJ regime
> applied. They hated us, whatever they said about "brotherhood and unity".
> And believe me, there are many who hate us today.
Look, if those anti-Croat posts are just calling names, I ignore them. But
if they use or pretend to use facts (such as Y Rapido's), I say argue. It
should be easy to argue with seemingly objective post not based on facts,
shouldn't it?
>
> Don't you believe that the criticizing and pressure on Croatia will stop
as
> soon as Tudjman looses his position, or when HDZ becomes a minority!
No, because Tudjman and HDZ are not synonym for Croatia. That is exactly my
point.
>
> What would happen if, for instance, all those Krajina-Serbs were to
return
> to Croatia tomorrow? Mrs Albright would congratulate Tudjman on a good
> decision? Mr Galbraight would promise swifter integration into Europe?
>
> Not likely. New demands would stack up. Why aren't Serbs guaranteed
> employment? Why haven't the Croatian authorities built up all their
homes?
> Why doesn't the army and police employ Serbs in their traditional
> occupations, policeman and soldier? And on, and on...
Perhaps, but again, the fact is that our human rights record does leave
something to be desired, don't you think? It is in our best interest, as
civilized country, to have perfect human rights record, Abrihgt or no
Albright. Why should we give ammunition to those who 'hate us'? What is
there to be gained by human rights abuses (however minor)?
>
> : We are trying to become free, democratic society, and in free society
> : government is, more or less, free game.
>
> Not free game to lies and implications with little or no substance.
> According to Mr Sells, Susak deliberately provoked a war with Serbia in
the
> moment when Croatia was defenseless and Serbia was armed to the teeth.
>
> Not likely at all, in my opinion.
>
> Mr Sells is also pushing the idea that Tudjman absolutely wanted a war
with
> the Muslims. For what reason? This time Mr Sells mentions no
"provocations"
> as in the conflict with the Serbs.
>
> Wasn't it so that Alija Izetbegovic rejected a truce with the bosnian
> Croats in the first place? His motive was that he thought that the Serbs
> would target the Croatians and leave the Muslims be. Later, when he found
> himself in dire straits he meant to simply "take over" the already formed
> and organized croatian HOS forces. For what reason should the bosnian
> Croatians put their lifes in such irresponsible and impotent hands?
>
> Although I see it as most unlucky that the Croatians and Muslims fought
> each other, I also see it as primarily the Muslim side's fault. When they
> couldn't win over the Serbs, they tried the "meek" Croatians.
>
> Michael Sells idolization of the Muslim side is hardly based on unbiased
> facts and correct observations. And his style of promoting "peace love
and
> understanding" is questionable. He urges us all to go to this homepage
with
> a photography of a grinning Croatian in a Wehrmacht uniform? What would
> that promote? Love for Croatians?
OK, I agree with most of what you say here (see my replies to Y Rapido),
but again: you cannot dismiss Mr. Sells (or anybody else) by simply calling
him Croat-hater or whatever (I didn't check your original post). Answer
using arguments (as long as they at least pretend at using arguments).
(And, by the way, it seems that Mr. Sells is not any more popular among
Serbs on these groups, either).
>
> Don't fool with fools and keep good company.
>
> Martin
>
>
Thanks.
Davorin Dujmovic
Michael Sells (mse...@haverford.edu) wrote:
[...]
Well, I did not write with idea to quit chasing people responsible
for Bosnian catastrophy, no.
I just wanted to point out that, given general history of Balkans,
that goal will be hard to accomplish and even looks hipocritical
when recent history of the West is taken into account.
I have no solution, I am just getting a little bit resigned about
any prospect about civilized Balkan future. As Bosnia is concerned,
I find that there passions and hatred run too deep to overcome
and any solution might just be temporary before the next conflict.
Disastreous economic situation there will just fuel that bleak
prospect more.
I wish them luck, since those people deserve to have some break,
I just don't believe they'll have it. I might be wrong on that,
of course.
Have a good vacation, all of you.