The Binder article
Hrvoje J Hrgovcic
Regarding the last posting about Tudjman...
For an alternate view of the man, consider the following:
o David Phillips, the Executive Director of the Congressional
Human Rights Foundation, and advisor to the Croatian parliament's
human rights committee has stated in a report to HINA
``it is clear that Serbian hardlines have done
everything they could to provoke violent
confrontation. The statsmanship and commitment
to human rights and the domocratic process that
the Sabor (Parliament) and Croatian government
has exhibited suggest that there is a bright
future for democracy once this political
crisis is resolved.''
Phillips said this having been refused permission by a
pro-Milosevic (Serbian) politician of the Croatian `Krajina' region
from going to assess the human rights situation there. The refusal
was issued because Phillips wanted to have a representative of
the Croatian parliament along. Babic also refused to
participate ina goodwill meeting betyween the SDS,
representatives of the Democratic Opposition Forum from
Zagreb and representatives from the "terazije
Parliament" from Belgrade.
o Immediately after being elected president, Tudjman offers one of his
staunchest critics in the Serbian minority a prominent defese post
(and was rebuffed; New Yorker, March 18). The man in question,
Raskovic, was for many a symbol of the Serbian domination of Croatia's
police force (Serbs form eleven percent of Croatia's population, but
comprise a third of the republic's Communist party, half of the police
force, and almost three-quarters of the secret police.) When Tudjman
began acting out a pledge to give Croats proportional representation
in these postions, some Serbs---understandably alarmed at this power
shift---began complaining that the new uniforms contained ``fasicst
insignia'' (In fact, the red and white checkerboard has been a
symbol of Croatia used by political and cultural organizations of all
stripes for centuries; the silver ``U'' which *was* the
sign of the Ustashe, is of course absent from the uniform.)
o On a related issue, Tudjman has won praise from US Jewish leaders
for being one of the ``decent and courageous leaders [in Eastern
Europe] who...speak out against against anti-Semitism.'' (New York
Times, editorials/letters, 6/28/91). His party (acting on an proposal
by one of the Croatian Catholic newspapers) is advocating the rebuilding
of Zagreb's old synagogue, sothat it may be restored to its righful place
as one of the country's cultural treasures.
(Senate Hearings on `Civil Strife
in Yugoslavia' [102-12], Feb. 21)
o As Belgrade propagandists will be eager to confirm, Croat/Muslim
relations are also quite amicable. They might then go on to explain
this charitability by way of their belief the Vatican and
Islamic fundamentalists, along with Stalin's Comintern,
the CIA, freemasons, and other assorted bogeymen are
allies in a grand conspiracy to destroy Serbia
(New York Times, Feb. 18; Foreign Affairs, op. cit.)
In other words, to describe Tudjman as an extreme chauvinist is a piece
of propaganda on par with the rest of what the
Yugoslav-governemnt apologists on this net are issuing. This
is not to say that the government of Croatia does not need to
do more to assure its Serbian minority that their rights will
be fully respected, or that acts of discrimination against
them (or any other citizen of Croatia) will be properly
redressed. But it should be clear to anyone that Tudjman and
the vast majority of Serbs, in Croatia and elsewhere, are
willing to negotiate their differences in peace. Those who
are trying to justify the behavior of Chetnik terrorists--or
their masters in Belgrade--by saying Tudjman is some sort of
fascist bent on oppressing Serbs and other non-Croats will
therefore have to fabricate some other lie.
___________________________________________________________________
As for what Andrej said about Kucan's governmental power
structure being more like Austria's or Germany's than that of
the United States, the same can be said of Croatia.
As for the David Binder's article ``Tito's children'', I have
already commented before that the Tudjman=Kucan=Milosevic line
we get from the federalists is often simply tactic designed to
give more power to them, given that they claim to be
ideologically superior to the petty factionalism of their
rupublic counterparts. In some ways, their arguments are
similar to those of certain cold-war utopians, who would state
that the Western and Soviet systems of government were morally
equivalent, in order to then promote their own alternative
agendas as the only acceptable compromise, or `third way'.
That is worth keeping in mind whenever one sees the moral
equivalence approach being extended to Yugoslavia.
Indeed, David Binder, the author of the ``Tito's children''
article, has long been a proponent of a unified Yugoslavia,
and has become more and more irritable in the past few weeks
as he sees his instructions to the planet being
disregarded----in other words he's a lot like Dragan, at least
in that respect. I find it puzzling that when Tudjman and
Kucan exert authority on their own extremists they are praised
for being ``statesmanlike and courageous,'' but when they stand
up for what Binder doesn't like, they are criticized for being
power-hungry megalomaniacs.
As to whether or not Kucan and Tudjman are carrying out the
privatizing and other political reforms they promised, I will agree
that since being elected, they have put much of their time and
qresources into seeing they would have something more than words with
which to back up their governments' demends for more independence.
Given what the army has shown itself being capable of doing, I can't
say they were wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, for those on this net who are not speakers of Slavic
languages, let me point out that putting an `r' in Kucan's
name (as Dragan is so fond of doing) transforms it into something
like a pithy synonym for excrement, which says as much about
Dragan's wit as it does about his debating tactics.
Hrvoje H.
Mladen Victor Wickerhauser
I would like to add a document to Hrvoje's excellent analysis of the concrete
differences between Tudjman, Kucan, and Milosevic. Below is my translation
of an advertisement that was enclosed in "Gaudeamus," the journal of the
Alumni and Friends of Croatian Universities:
========================
The Government of the Republic of Croatia, office for coordinating
denationlization activities, extends this invitation:
On the basis of Chapter 4, Regulation on claims by previous owners and on
confiscated property ("People's News" number 23, from 20 May 1991), the
previous owners of confiscated property described by Chapter 2 of the
regulations are invited to give notice of their claims on forms EDN-0, EDN-1,
EDN-2, EDN-3, EDN-4, within 90 days from the date of the announcement in
"People's News."
Notices may only be sent by registered letter to Zagreb, 31 Ilica. Forms
may be purchased at news stands selling "People's News."
=======================
The orderly return of nationalized property is a major step out of the
economic mess in Croatia. I am interested in hearing what reforms are being
proposed in the other republics, particularly in Serbia.
Regards,
Victor
--
------
Mladen Victor Wickerhauser, vic...@math.yale.edu, (203)498-1011
Dept. of Mathematics, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520 (USA)
Dragan Curcija
>... (and was rebuffed; New Yorker, March 18). The man in question,
> Raskovic, was for many a symbol of the Serbian domination of Croatia's
> police force (Serbs form eleven percent of Croatia's population, but
> comprise a third of the republic's Communist party, half of the police
> force, and almost three-quarters of the secret police.)
Would you care please to give the sources of this info?
>
>In other words, to describe Tudjman as an extreme chauvinist is a piece
>of propaganda on par with the rest of what the
>Yugoslav-governemnt apologists on this net are issuing. This
What is the propaganda that the rest of Yugoslav-government
apologists are issuing?
>...willing to negotiate their differences in peace. Those who
>are trying to justify the behavior of Chetnik terrorists--or
>their masters in Belgrade--by saying Tudjman is some sort of
>fascist bent on oppressing Serbs and other non-Croats will
>therefore have to fabricate some other lie.
Listen to the language - Chetnik terrorists, masters in
Belgrade, non-Croats, fabricate some other lie. The problem
in parts of Croatia populated mainly by Serbs, can be described
using more civilized wording. This way it just sounds as an
ordinary pamflet, and will only provoke similar responses until
this group become no man land.
>Indeed, David Binder, the author of the ``Tito's children''
>article, has long been a proponent of a unified Yugoslavia,
>and has become more and more irritable in the past few weeks
>as he sees his instructions to the planet being
>disregarded...
One more person is put into the right file. I am
really puzzled to see your file cabinet.
>Finally, for those on this net who are not speakers of Slavic
>languages, let me point out that putting an `r' in Kucan's
>name (as Dragan is so fond of doing) transforms it into something
>like a pithy synonym for excrement, which says as much about
pithy synonym for excrement? ha ha ha. Let me explain
what does it mean. 'Kurciti se' means 'only balls, no brains',
and the root of the word is in men's sexual organ. So, what's
wrong with any sexual organ, are we some moralists and puritans?
Is this church's Sunday school?
>Dragan's wit as it does about his debating tactics.
You are the last one with the right to say that.
>
>Hrvoje H.
Pozdrav,
Dragan
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historia Magistra Vitae Est
___________________________________________________________________________