Tadić on "facing up past in Balkans"

Well when placed in comparision with the paltry attempts by its neighbors of owning up to the past, Serbia, however tenuously, has come to better grips with its past than anyone else in the region. Are there nationalist elements that refuse to accept the truth? Absolutely, and we see them all to often still. But when placed in comparison with Croatian, Bosnian, and Albanian historical memories, whose exclusionary nationalistic narratives of identity were validated by Western aid and support, and thereby making such reconciliation attempts unnecessary in their eyes, Serbia has been *forced* to examine its own past. Regardless of whether some interpret official apologies from heads of state in Belgrade as genuine or not, the fact remains that apologies were issued, whereas officials in Zagreb and Pristina not only feel they *don't* have to apologies for the state-sponsored crimes committed in their name, but that to do so insults the name and image of their collective identity. There will always be narratives of exclusionary nationalism in Serbian collective memory, but it will be, I think, far less potent and virulent than its Croatian and Albanian variants.

Unless I've been asleep for the past 10 years, I don't remember any Serbian president (including Tadic) apologizing to the Kosovo people for the crimes the Serbian state committed towards them. Stop with the misleadings Tadic and just tell the truth. I can't believe this guy...

“When Karadžić was caught [German] Chancellor Angela Merkel called me to congratulate me and asked whether I was pleased. I said I was not, and that I will only be pleased once Mladić has been arrested as well."
Ohhhhhhhh, Mr Tadic the epitome of a man lingering in his unhappy state for the good of humanity.
You wouldn’t be able to find a more distraught champagne sipping president than this one.

Tadić also said that "Serbs are the Balkan nation that has contributed the most to facing up the past in the Balkans". Talk is cheap while you continue on the path of destroying Republic of Bosnia i Herzegovina with Dodik of the quasi Srpska entity total sham.

"...the arrests of Slobodan Milošević and Radovan Karadžić were "much riskier than would be arresting Ratko Mladić today", Tadić wondered "why would someone is Serbia protect him now".

????????

'I said I was not, and that I will only be pleased once Mladić has been arrested as well'.
What a statement for a person who is president of Serbia since 2004 and let under his very eyes the prime minister of the country, Kostunica, support the denial of Mladic's extradition. Was he really that blind?????
Of course he may speculate that his words are heard in Europe, but some won't trust them. This Serbian policy is a remarkable example of opportunism.

The last phrase of the article is an indirect denial of Belgrade's-Serbia's decisive role in sending the JNA to Slovenia, the beginning of the slaughtering on the Balkans in 1991.

Lenard, what about destroying Serbian Republic by Silajdic and co. that lasts more than decade and continues to this very day? You dont make much noise about that fact. Inspite everything RS will survive if you want BiH to survive as soon you figure out that, the better

Does Mr. Tadic's idea to abolition the (post)Milosevic Socialists of all responsibility for the evils of the 1990s by signing the shameful "Declaration of Reconciliation" represent his way of confronting the past?

By god, I think I have the ability to read minds...or is it that the likes of roberto and village-bey always seem to have an unbelievable trait of filtering information to better suit their sense of perverted, non-existent justice; not to mention their love for the pile of crap that happens to be western idealism.

I suggest the both of you actually try to read the content within the article, rather than the title.

Serbia extradited 44 out of 46 indictees to the war crimes court in The Hague.

What about the croatians and the bosnian muslims, further more the albanians?

Croatia 1 - Gotovina - and he was captured by Spanish police. NOT extradited!!!

Bosnian Muslims - Where did all those Saudis disappear to???

Albanians - Running the 'kosova' government. birds of a feather stick together, i.e. pigeons.


Oh and Roberto, far be it from me to stand in the way of your strong sense of nationalism. But by all means, name one American who has ever faced war crimes?


Every 9.62 days, there is an equivalent amount of casualties in Iraq & Afghanistan as September 11th. There are 9.65 Virginia Tech shootings in Iraq & Afghanistan everyday. There are 1.61 Madrid bombings in Iraq & Afghanistan everyday. In... 11 days as many Iraqi & Afghani civilians are killed as the entire amount of American military personnel killed since the invasion of Afghanistan in 2002 and the invasion of Iraq

What an amazing and just world we live in. No matter how much Serbs try to put away war criminals (44 out of 46), they are always shunned.


Roberto and village-bey, it is about time the two of you got of your pedestals, that is unless they are lodged a little too far.

Tadic never should have apologized. For one thing Serbia doesn't owe anybody an apology. Secondly, apologizing hasn't bought Serbia any good will. At the end of this all, one simple fact remains: Serbia isn't the one who set-up paramilitary groups to attack Yugoslavia. Serbia didn't start any of those wars. The people who want Serbia to apologize are the same people who started the wars in the first place. They chose war, and as far as I'm concerned they own the consequences of that choice. Did Serbs commit war crimes during those wars? Undeniably crimes were committed. The difference is that the Serbs aren't the ones who chose to have a war. It strains credulity that the very people who started those wars are today claiming to be the victims. They don't deserve an apology, in fact an apology is counter-productive because it lends undeserved credence to their complaints. When they chose to start a war they forfeited any right to an apology. If they suffered as a result of their decision to wage an armed attack against Yugoslavia, then that's just too bad for them.

"so the question is not when will truth and reconciliation, as we used to term it, come to fruition. the question here is when will it ever commence? (roberto)"

-- Well, my assumption is whenever all sides realize their own incestuous collective memories perpetuate hostilities among groups. I'm sure you'll agree with me that almost every group in Southeastern Europe ascribes to an overly "sanitized" version of the past that paints their side in the noblest of goals, while castigating the "other" in the worst criminal offense. Has Croatia attoned from Operation Storm? Does it feel it needs to? Has Pristina attoned for March 2004? Does it feel it needs to? Is the basis for RS' existence any more or less justified than Kosovo's? Is Haradinaj any less of a "folk hero" than Arkan? Is Thaci any different from Karadzic? Is Gotovina less of a monster than Mladic? It's striking to see events be driven by the lowest dregs of the criminal underworld, but through the magic of state-sponsored commemorations of the past, such individuals become "founding fathers" of their nation. Historical memory can indeed be a dangerous tool in the hands of elites, and doubly dangerous when each narrative becomes entrenched from competing narratives.

I was just musing over this issue of facing up to the past crimes in the balkans.

so i was thinking, how long will it be here? and when will that process come to fruition, or better said, when will it even begin?

what i have read in this article is so utterly ridiculous one cannot even properly critique it. there are no apologies, there is no realization of guilt of the past, of the hell. there is only one thing, one consistent declaration from those circles, and that is relativism. everyone did bad things, it's the past, leave it alone, aren't we wonderful? it is the BIG lie, the way to cover up all crimes, and it was used in the most evil ways during the war(s) and it has continued to be used, by the same people, the same side. and aren't they the best?

so the question is not when will truth and reconciliation, as we used to term it, come to fruition. the question here is when will it ever commence? judging by this article, my guess is never.

roberto
very very far away frisco

…There will always be narratives of exclusionary nationalism in Serbian collective memory, but it will be, I think, far less potent and virulent than its Croatian and Albanian variants.
(Mike, 18 October 2009 17:40)
Narratives of national identity as seen from the logic of comparison!!! A wrongful act sponsored openly from a state while its people turn a blind eye to the atrocities committed in Kosovo!!! Are you saying that people in Belgrade were not aware of what crimes state of Serbia was committing against not the KLA, but innocent civilians. I would be happy if I believed that that was the case.

Dear Mike
I understand that all the sides committed great individual crimes. However, there is a difference between one act, versus some acts versus hundred of thousand of acts. Every person who has the courage to examine the facts will quickly come to realize that Serbs committed most of the acts against humanity in Kosovo. So, if you say that Albanians and Serbs both committed crimes, you are right. But please, I hope that you are not actually believing that they were in the same scale.

Interestingly though, a national narrative identity based on two medieval losses and the recent epilogue of Kosovo war. I would worry about that!!!!!!!! Not about trying to redeem crimes that were committed. The claim that Kosovo is Serbia is therefore loaded with irony.

“There will always be narratives of exclusionary nationalism in Serbian collective memory, but it will be, I think, far less potent and virulent than its Croatian and Albanian variants.”
C’mon Mike be fair here, modern exclusionary narratives were practically invented by Serbian intellectuals. There is a whole body of literature based on the countless Serbian models ranging from the holy to downright victim.
Prestigious Belgrade professors contemplating perfection of Cubrolovic’s memorandums are still publishing books.
That my friend sure is a frontrunner for the understatement of the century award.

Apologies are welcomed but the situation degenerated beyond apologies. You can't except to kill and slaughter and apologise and have everything right as nothing happened. None trusts Serbia, especially Albanians who according to Serbia shall live in a Serbian state forever.

Yes it was a civil war, but even a fool knows that Serbia had the power and the means to stop it and make it less violent. But the state aparatus of Serbia contributed to the butchery in the Balkans. That's why Milosevic was called the "Butcher of the Balkans".

We shall not forget that the Yugo army, and the main state institutions at the time of break up were under control of Serbia more than anyone else. And they were used in the most despicable manner to contribute to the wars and conflicts.

The last phrase of the article is an indirect denial of Belgrade's-Serbia's decisive role in sending the JNA to Slovenia, the beginning of the slaughtering on the Balkans in 1991.
(cees, 18 October 2009 17:51)

Sweet Jesus, what selective memory some of the Albanian nationalists have. In 1991 it was Yugoslavia (not Serbia) that sent in its army and border police into its northern republic of the SR Slovenia in a bid to restore Federal authority, as was its legitimate right as Slovenia was a constituent republic of Yugoslavia. It was 2 Croats, PM Ante Markovic and General Kadijevic who ordered the army to quash the Slovene nationalists. Not to mention that the first casualty of the Yugoslav civil war was an unarmed JNA Slovenian helicopter pilot who was shot down over Ljubljana.

It was Milosevic who overruled Kadijevic (Croat), Brovat (Slovene), Strugar (Montengrin) and Adzic (Serb) when the Generals wanted to send thousands of Federal troops into Slovenia which would have led to war breaking out in Croatia, Bosnia and Macedonia simultaneously.

"modern exclusionary narratives were practically invented by Serbian intellectuals. There is a whole body of literature based on the countless Serbian models ranging from the holy to downright victim.
(village-bey)"

-- Of course. I'm well aware of that rather large body of literature, and agree that it has formed a major part of recent Serbian political cultural discourse. However, I am also aware that exclusionary historical narratives comprised a significant part of the Croatian and Albanian national movements in the early to mid 1980s as well. As a K-Albanian (I presume), you are well aware of the early 1980s movements that were based less on Kosovo achieving republic status as it was eventually breaking away as an Albanian state long before Slobo made a name for himself.

"But please, I hope that you are not actually believing that they were in the same scale. (Kastrioti)"

-- I am comparing on crimes committed, not the scale of crimes. Obviously Serbia, as direct inheritor of Yugoslavia (though Yugoslavia was constantly branded as something that was designed to persecute Serbs), had access to the largest supply of JNA material. While I can't excuse the actions of the KLA, I have to be honest and say the KLA could not be compared to the size and scope of the JNA, which was used indiscriminantly by Milosevic. So yes, I share your critique.

But the point of my comment is that regardless of size and scope, the *intent* is visible and potent in the political culture of all sides. To say that the JNA was bigger, does not negate the strong belief that had Albanians had access to greater supplies and equipment (and we can argue that NATO was one of them), the scope of their own aggressive policies would have been more pronounced. The ideology and motives were significantly based on exclusionary national identities, selective memories of the past, and state-sponsored coercion of beliefs.

At the end of the day, the real battles continue in history books, editorials, journals, online chat sites, and pseudo-intellectuals who make an academic living off of this stuff. There is no doubt in my mind Serbia has been heavily influenced by these types of exclusionary narratives long after 2000, and continues to exert itself at Belgrade University and SANU, but at the same time, I still ask if other former Yugoslav societies, who have been equally defined by exclusionary narratives long before the breakup in 1991, have started to examine their past more objectively and start questioning the motives and reasons behind their actions? I don't have the complete answer, but I suspect they have not, and do not feel they need to if they base all their actions and motives on doing whatever is necessary in defending against the big, bad, immoral “other”.

cees,

I expect to see here your account of facts on which you base your claim "Serbia's decisive role in sending the JNA to Slovenia, the beginning of the slaughtering on the Balkans in 1991".

Or you rather offer fiction?

"...the arrests of Slobodan Milošević and Radovan Karadžić were "much riskier than would be arresting Ratko Mladić today", Tadić wondered "why would someone is Serbia protect him now".

These are empty and meaningless words that amount to nothing, just Tadic trying to appease the west.

Consider this situation for a moment. Does anyone really think that the Serb military officers were forcibly extradited to that mockery of a judicial institution in the Hague? If that had happen the next time there was a hint of conflict, the next generation of officers would in some instances resign from their positions, some would seriously consider selling out their country for a price or some would consider the permanent removal all politicians before taking any action. This is not a theory, but it would actually occur. Mladic is a huge headache for the west because he is not interested in compensation to go to the Hague!

The Serbs have nothing to apologise for and nor should they feel shame for their actions in either Bosnia or Kosovo – they were defending their lands. This a US tactic to try and bring about a sense of shame on a people, as with the Germans after WW11, and then it’s are easier to control them, just roll out the shame carpet when necessary. I could go on and on giving examples of where the US has attempted this with the Serbs and they are genuinely mystified why this has not worked - they honestly believe if it works on their citizens it will work on all.

The fact is that the US still today feels anger at how easily a small nation managed to make the only superpower look silly and helpless. Always remember that Josef Goebbels stated that in the war of propaganda if you tell a lie long enough and loud enough it becomes the truth.

Tadic does have a point.

To be fair, it's been established already that UCK committed war crimes too (2 convictions so far, 1 in Prishtina and 1 in Hague). Since many of the UCK leaders are now in government, they do owe an official apology as well to non-Albanian minorities that suffered any mistreatment at their hands during and after the war.

To those posters that don't seem to get it....even wars have rules.

Since Tadic brought up Germany, I would like to point out that Germany paid substantial WWII reparations to many of its enemies in addition to any apologies.
Japan did the same thing.

In contrast, Serbia's official policy is basically to make life as difficult as it can for the people it once committed crimes against, in Kosovo at least.

That makes any apologies sound pretty hollow. The same applies if the Kosovo government does not put its money where its mouth is when it comes to improving the lives of minorities in areas it controls.

Jan, "they" and "them" are obviously those who formed paramilitary groups and waged secessionist wars against Yugoslavia. Speaking in general terms, these are the Slovenes, Croats, Bosnian-Muslims, and Kosovo-Albanians. The political leadership of those ethnic groups chose to wage secessionist war against Yugoslavia. They chose to use armed violence as a means to obtain their political and territorial ambitions. Of course you're right, it wasn't the political leadership who suffered, it was the people that suffered.

There is a huge problem of misdirected anger in the Balkans. The Croats, Bosnian-Muslims, and Kosovo-Albanians all see how their people suffered at the hands of Serbian troops during those wars, but they fail to understand how their own political leaders, by opting for violence in the first place, provoked the violent retribution that was wrought upon their people by the Serbian troops.

This is the key issue, the Serbian side was retaliating. If anybody deserves blame for what happened during those wars, it's the people who started the wars in the first place.

i guess that´s why he excuses himself on behalf of even the reputable serbs for fake crimes and atrocities build by western & wahabi propaganda.

or was it someone else who made an excuse to greater croatia? not just the scum living on serbian krajina, in serbian houses?

Tadic is a lost cause. He seems to think that everyone will be fooled by his empty rhetoric. The simple facts are these: 1) Serbia does not mark July 11th as Srebrenica Genocide Remembrance Day while the EU and US do and 2) Mladic is still living freely in Serbia after years of promises from Serbian politicians that he will be arrested. Empty talk and historical revisionism is not what the world needs from Serbia, it expects Serbia to fulfill its legal and moral international obligations and so far we've all been disappointed.

every time I read news here, I am glad I moved from Serbia.

i think people are framing the question about facing up the past in a wrong way. there is no doubt that crimes were committed by all sides, but that's not the key question. during the ww2 allies committed war crimes even though they can't be compared to the nazi ones. but it was the nazis who started the war.

so, the key question is who can be considered responsible for the escalation of conflicts. did serbia impose war on its neighbours or did they themselves contribute to the escalation? from what i can tell they did. and it is precisely here that there is no consensus whatsoever and it is precisely here that the version of history that the west is trying to impose plays such a destructive role. the west did not intervene in the balkans for humanitarian reasons regardless of what some people think. they had their own reasons and serbia happens to have been their enemy. the west will paint serbia is the primary culprit and ignore the contribution of their allies to the conflict. and serbia's neighbours will enjoy the free ride they got and blame it all on serbia (this is reflected on this site by numerous pathetic expressions of hope that serbia is still isolated and expressions of joy when it is perceived that this is the case, which is of course nonsense). as a result there is indeed more contribution to facing up past from serbia than from others. at the same time refusal to accept a part of responsibility feeds the forces who insist on denying and relativising even more obvious war crimes and that on all sides. the result is just that the entire region remains stuck in the past and hatred lives on.

it is essential that all the people in the region agree on a version of history that's close to the truth. the west can afford to see things in this way or the other since the balkans is not central to the consciousness of the people in the west. the people in the region can't.

Mike,

what is happening today in Kosovo is the opposite of the "virulent nationalism" you are talking about. What society in the world would give so much power over their lives to foreigners (EULEX, KFOR)? Would Serbs accept to have somebody in Belgrade as powerful as EULEX is in Pristina?

On 18 October 2009 22:25, Allen wrote: "When they chose to start a war they forfeited any right to an apology. If they suffered as a result of their decision to wage an armed attack against Yugoslavia, then that's just too bad for them."

Allen, exactly who are "they" and "them" you are speaking of?

In my world, there is often a big difference between the people that decides to wage war, and those who end up suffering during the war as victims of war crimes.
--

This from the president of a country that is harboring the world's most wanted war criminals...

Allen wrote:Speaking in general terms, these are the Slovenes, Croats, Bosnian-Muslims, and Kosovo-Albanians. The political leadership of those ethnic groups chose to wage secessionist war against Yugoslavia. They chose to use armed violence as a means to obtain their political and territorial ambitions".Allen you forgot to mention that the SDS leadership of Jovan Raskovic and Babic in nearly 1990 were plotting to seceede from what you call YU (SAOKrajina). The Serbs had there own interests which we all know was a Greater Serbia. Yu was always a loose cannon ready to explode and the Serb leadership took full advantage of that.Nobody wanted to live in the fake state created by Tito's partizans. Also for the record Gen. Kadijevic is not a Croat as Niall O'Doherty claims but a Serbo-Croat who always claimed to be a Yugoslav. It's natural when a country loses a war it's citizens will point the finger of blame in the opposite direction.

“When Karadžić was caught [German] Chancellor Angela Merkel called me to congratulate me and asked whether I was pleased. I said I was not, and that I will only be pleased once Mladić has been arrested as well."
Ohhhhhhhh, Mr Tadic the epitome of a man lingering in his unhappy state for the good of humanity.
You wouldn’t be able to find a more distraught champagne sipping president than this one.

Unless I've been asleep for the past 10 years, I don't remember any Serbian president (including Tadic) apologizing to the Kosovo people for the crimes the Serbian state committed towards them. Stop with the misleadings Tadic and just tell the truth. I can't believe this guy...

Tadić also said that "Serbs are the Balkan nation that has contributed the most to facing up the past in the Balkans". Talk is cheap while you continue on the path of destroying Republic of Bosnia i Herzegovina with Dodik of the quasi Srpska entity total sham.

'I said I was not, and that I will only be pleased once Mladić has been arrested as well'.
What a statement for a person who is president of Serbia since 2004 and let under his very eyes the prime minister of the country, Kostunica, support the denial of Mladic's extradition. Was he really that blind?????
Of course he may speculate that his words are heard in Europe, but some won't trust them. This Serbian policy is a remarkable example of opportunism.

The last phrase of the article is an indirect denial of Belgrade's-Serbia's decisive role in sending the JNA to Slovenia, the beginning of the slaughtering on the Balkans in 1991.

I was just musing over this issue of facing up to the past crimes in the balkans.

so i was thinking, how long will it be here? and when will that process come to fruition, or better said, when will it even begin?

what i have read in this article is so utterly ridiculous one cannot even properly critique it. there are no apologies, there is no realization of guilt of the past, of the hell. there is only one thing, one consistent declaration from those circles, and that is relativism. everyone did bad things, it's the past, leave it alone, aren't we wonderful? it is the BIG lie, the way to cover up all crimes, and it was used in the most evil ways during the war(s) and it has continued to be used, by the same people, the same side. and aren't they the best?

so the question is not when will truth and reconciliation, as we used to term it, come to fruition. the question here is when will it ever commence? judging by this article, my guess is never.

roberto
very very far away frisco

Does Mr. Tadic's idea to abolition the (post)Milosevic Socialists of all responsibility for the evils of the 1990s by signing the shameful "Declaration of Reconciliation" represent his way of confronting the past?

Well when placed in comparision with the paltry attempts by its neighbors of owning up to the past, Serbia, however tenuously, has come to better grips with its past than anyone else in the region. Are there nationalist elements that refuse to accept the truth? Absolutely, and we see them all to often still. But when placed in comparison with Croatian, Bosnian, and Albanian historical memories, whose exclusionary nationalistic narratives of identity were validated by Western aid and support, and thereby making such reconciliation attempts unnecessary in their eyes, Serbia has been *forced* to examine its own past. Regardless of whether some interpret official apologies from heads of state in Belgrade as genuine or not, the fact remains that apologies were issued, whereas officials in Zagreb and Pristina not only feel they *don't* have to apologies for the state-sponsored crimes committed in their name, but that to do so insults the name and image of their collective identity. There will always be narratives of exclusionary nationalism in Serbian collective memory, but it will be, I think, far less potent and virulent than its Croatian and Albanian variants.

"...the arrests of Slobodan Milošević and Radovan Karadžić were "much riskier than would be arresting Ratko Mladić today", Tadić wondered "why would someone is Serbia protect him now".

????????

Tadic never should have apologized. For one thing Serbia doesn't owe anybody an apology. Secondly, apologizing hasn't bought Serbia any good will. At the end of this all, one simple fact remains: Serbia isn't the one who set-up paramilitary groups to attack Yugoslavia. Serbia didn't start any of those wars. The people who want Serbia to apologize are the same people who started the wars in the first place. They chose war, and as far as I'm concerned they own the consequences of that choice. Did Serbs commit war crimes during those wars? Undeniably crimes were committed. The difference is that the Serbs aren't the ones who chose to have a war. It strains credulity that the very people who started those wars are today claiming to be the victims. They don't deserve an apology, in fact an apology is counter-productive because it lends undeserved credence to their complaints. When they chose to start a war they forfeited any right to an apology. If they suffered as a result of their decision to wage an armed attack against Yugoslavia, then that's just too bad for them.

Lenard, what about destroying Serbian Republic by Silajdic and co. that lasts more than decade and continues to this very day? You dont make much noise about that fact. Inspite everything RS will survive if you want BiH to survive as soon you figure out that, the better

Apologies are welcomed but the situation degenerated beyond apologies. You can't except to kill and slaughter and apologise and have everything right as nothing happened. None trusts Serbia, especially Albanians who according to Serbia shall live in a Serbian state forever.

Yes it was a civil war, but even a fool knows that Serbia had the power and the means to stop it and make it less violent. But the state aparatus of Serbia contributed to the butchery in the Balkans. That's why Milosevic was called the "Butcher of the Balkans".

We shall not forget that the Yugo army, and the main state institutions at the time of break up were under control of Serbia more than anyone else. And they were used in the most despicable manner to contribute to the wars and conflicts.

This from the president of a country that is harboring the world's most wanted war criminals...

"...the arrests of Slobodan Milošević and Radovan Karadžić were "much riskier than would be arresting Ratko Mladić today", Tadić wondered "why would someone is Serbia protect him now".

These are empty and meaningless words that amount to nothing, just Tadic trying to appease the west.

Consider this situation for a moment. Does anyone really think that the Serb military officers were forcibly extradited to that mockery of a judicial institution in the Hague? If that had happen the next time there was a hint of conflict, the next generation of officers would in some instances resign from their positions, some would seriously consider selling out their country for a price or some would consider the permanent removal all politicians before taking any action. This is not a theory, but it would actually occur. Mladic is a huge headache for the west because he is not interested in compensation to go to the Hague!

The Serbs have nothing to apologise for and nor should they feel shame for their actions in either Bosnia or Kosovo – they were defending their lands. This a US tactic to try and bring about a sense of shame on a people, as with the Germans after WW11, and then it’s are easier to control them, just roll out the shame carpet when necessary. I could go on and on giving examples of where the US has attempted this with the Serbs and they are genuinely mystified why this has not worked - they honestly believe if it works on their citizens it will work on all.

The fact is that the US still today feels anger at how easily a small nation managed to make the only superpower look silly and helpless. Always remember that Josef Goebbels stated that in the war of propaganda if you tell a lie long enough and loud enough it becomes the truth.

…There will always be narratives of exclusionary nationalism in Serbian collective memory, but it will be, I think, far less potent and virulent than its Croatian and Albanian variants.
(Mike, 18 October 2009 17:40)
Narratives of national identity as seen from the logic of comparison!!! A wrongful act sponsored openly from a state while its people turn a blind eye to the atrocities committed in Kosovo!!! Are you saying that people in Belgrade were not aware of what crimes state of Serbia was committing against not the KLA, but innocent civilians. I would be happy if I believed that that was the case.

Dear Mike
I understand that all the sides committed great individual crimes. However, there is a difference between one act, versus some acts versus hundred of thousand of acts. Every person who has the courage to examine the facts will quickly come to realize that Serbs committed most of the acts against humanity in Kosovo. So, if you say that Albanians and Serbs both committed crimes, you are right. But please, I hope that you are not actually believing that they were in the same scale.

Interestingly though, a national narrative identity based on two medieval losses and the recent epilogue of Kosovo war. I would worry about that!!!!!!!! Not about trying to redeem crimes that were committed. The claim that Kosovo is Serbia is therefore loaded with irony.

Tadic is a lost cause. He seems to think that everyone will be fooled by his empty rhetoric. The simple facts are these: 1) Serbia does not mark July 11th as Srebrenica Genocide Remembrance Day while the EU and US do and 2) Mladic is still living freely in Serbia after years of promises from Serbian politicians that he will be arrested. Empty talk and historical revisionism is not what the world needs from Serbia, it expects Serbia to fulfill its legal and moral international obligations and so far we've all been disappointed.

Jan, "they" and "them" are obviously those who formed paramilitary groups and waged secessionist wars against Yugoslavia. Speaking in general terms, these are the Slovenes, Croats, Bosnian-Muslims, and Kosovo-Albanians. The political leadership of those ethnic groups chose to wage secessionist war against Yugoslavia. They chose to use armed violence as a means to obtain their political and territorial ambitions. Of course you're right, it wasn't the political leadership who suffered, it was the people that suffered.

There is a huge problem of misdirected anger in the Balkans. The Croats, Bosnian-Muslims, and Kosovo-Albanians all see how their people suffered at the hands of Serbian troops during those wars, but they fail to understand how their own political leaders, by opting for violence in the first place, provoked the violent retribution that was wrought upon their people by the Serbian troops.

This is the key issue, the Serbian side was retaliating. If anybody deserves blame for what happened during those wars, it's the people who started the wars in the first place.

The last phrase of the article is an indirect denial of Belgrade's-Serbia's decisive role in sending the JNA to Slovenia, the beginning of the slaughtering on the Balkans in 1991.
(cees, 18 October 2009 17:51)

Sweet Jesus, what selective memory some of the Albanian nationalists have. In 1991 it was Yugoslavia (not Serbia) that sent in its army and border police into its northern republic of the SR Slovenia in a bid to restore Federal authority, as was its legitimate right as Slovenia was a constituent republic of Yugoslavia. It was 2 Croats, PM Ante Markovic and General Kadijevic who ordered the army to quash the Slovene nationalists. Not to mention that the first casualty of the Yugoslav civil war was an unarmed JNA Slovenian helicopter pilot who was shot down over Ljubljana.

It was Milosevic who overruled Kadijevic (Croat), Brovat (Slovene), Strugar (Montengrin) and Adzic (Serb) when the Generals wanted to send thousands of Federal troops into Slovenia which would have led to war breaking out in Croatia, Bosnia and Macedonia simultaneously.

"so the question is not when will truth and reconciliation, as we used to term it, come to fruition. the question here is when will it ever commence? (roberto)"

-- Well, my assumption is whenever all sides realize their own incestuous collective memories perpetuate hostilities among groups. I'm sure you'll agree with me that almost every group in Southeastern Europe ascribes to an overly "sanitized" version of the past that paints their side in the noblest of goals, while castigating the "other" in the worst criminal offense. Has Croatia attoned from Operation Storm? Does it feel it needs to? Has Pristina attoned for March 2004? Does it feel it needs to? Is the basis for RS' existence any more or less justified than Kosovo's? Is Haradinaj any less of a "folk hero" than Arkan? Is Thaci any different from Karadzic? Is Gotovina less of a monster than Mladic? It's striking to see events be driven by the lowest dregs of the criminal underworld, but through the magic of state-sponsored commemorations of the past, such individuals become "founding fathers" of their nation. Historical memory can indeed be a dangerous tool in the hands of elites, and doubly dangerous when each narrative becomes entrenched from competing narratives.

By god, I think I have the ability to read minds...or is it that the likes of roberto and village-bey always seem to have an unbelievable trait of filtering information to better suit their sense of perverted, non-existent justice; not to mention their love for the pile of crap that happens to be western idealism.

I suggest the both of you actually try to read the content within the article, rather than the title.

Serbia extradited 44 out of 46 indictees to the war crimes court in The Hague.

What about the croatians and the bosnian muslims, further more the albanians?

Croatia 1 - Gotovina - and he was captured by Spanish police. NOT extradited!!!

Bosnian Muslims - Where did all those Saudis disappear to???

Albanians - Running the 'kosova' government. birds of a feather stick together, i.e. pigeons.


Oh and Roberto, far be it from me to stand in the way of your strong sense of nationalism. But by all means, name one American who has ever faced war crimes?


Every 9.62 days, there is an equivalent amount of casualties in Iraq & Afghanistan as September 11th. There are 9.65 Virginia Tech shootings in Iraq & Afghanistan everyday. There are 1.61 Madrid bombings in Iraq & Afghanistan everyday. In... 11 days as many Iraqi & Afghani civilians are killed as the entire amount of American military personnel killed since the invasion of Afghanistan in 2002 and the invasion of Iraq

What an amazing and just world we live in. No matter how much Serbs try to put away war criminals (44 out of 46), they are always shunned.


Roberto and village-bey, it is about time the two of you got of your pedestals, that is unless they are lodged a little too far.

On 18 October 2009 22:25, Allen wrote: "When they chose to start a war they forfeited any right to an apology. If they suffered as a result of their decision to wage an armed attack against Yugoslavia, then that's just too bad for them."

Allen, exactly who are "they" and "them" you are speaking of?

In my world, there is often a big difference between the people that decides to wage war, and those who end up suffering during the war as victims of war crimes.
--

“There will always be narratives of exclusionary nationalism in Serbian collective memory, but it will be, I think, far less potent and virulent than its Croatian and Albanian variants.”
C’mon Mike be fair here, modern exclusionary narratives were practically invented by Serbian intellectuals. There is a whole body of literature based on the countless Serbian models ranging from the holy to downright victim.
Prestigious Belgrade professors contemplating perfection of Cubrolovic’s memorandums are still publishing books.
That my friend sure is a frontrunner for the understatement of the century award.

i guess that´s why he excuses himself on behalf of even the reputable serbs for fake crimes and atrocities build by western & wahabi propaganda.

or was it someone else who made an excuse to greater croatia? not just the scum living on serbian krajina, in serbian houses?

Mike,

what is happening today in Kosovo is the opposite of the "virulent nationalism" you are talking about. What society in the world would give so much power over their lives to foreigners (EULEX, KFOR)? Would Serbs accept to have somebody in Belgrade as powerful as EULEX is in Pristina?

i think people are framing the question about facing up the past in a wrong way. there is no doubt that crimes were committed by all sides, but that's not the key question. during the ww2 allies committed war crimes even though they can't be compared to the nazi ones. but it was the nazis who started the war.

so, the key question is who can be considered responsible for the escalation of conflicts. did serbia impose war on its neighbours or did they themselves contribute to the escalation? from what i can tell they did. and it is precisely here that there is no consensus whatsoever and it is precisely here that the version of history that the west is trying to impose plays such a destructive role. the west did not intervene in the balkans for humanitarian reasons regardless of what some people think. they had their own reasons and serbia happens to have been their enemy. the west will paint serbia is the primary culprit and ignore the contribution of their allies to the conflict. and serbia's neighbours will enjoy the free ride they got and blame it all on serbia (this is reflected on this site by numerous pathetic expressions of hope that serbia is still isolated and expressions of joy when it is perceived that this is the case, which is of course nonsense). as a result there is indeed more contribution to facing up past from serbia than from others. at the same time refusal to accept a part of responsibility feeds the forces who insist on denying and relativising even more obvious war crimes and that on all sides. the result is just that the entire region remains stuck in the past and hatred lives on.

it is essential that all the people in the region agree on a version of history that's close to the truth. the west can afford to see things in this way or the other since the balkans is not central to the consciousness of the people in the west. the people in the region can't.

cees,

I expect to see here your account of facts on which you base your claim "Serbia's decisive role in sending the JNA to Slovenia, the beginning of the slaughtering on the Balkans in 1991".

Or you rather offer fiction?

"modern exclusionary narratives were practically invented by Serbian intellectuals. There is a whole body of literature based on the countless Serbian models ranging from the holy to downright victim.
(village-bey)"

-- Of course. I'm well aware of that rather large body of literature, and agree that it has formed a major part of recent Serbian political cultural discourse. However, I am also aware that exclusionary historical narratives comprised a significant part of the Croatian and Albanian national movements in the early to mid 1980s as well. As a K-Albanian (I presume), you are well aware of the early 1980s movements that were based less on Kosovo achieving republic status as it was eventually breaking away as an Albanian state long before Slobo made a name for himself.

"But please, I hope that you are not actually believing that they were in the same scale. (Kastrioti)"

-- I am comparing on crimes committed, not the scale of crimes. Obviously Serbia, as direct inheritor of Yugoslavia (though Yugoslavia was constantly branded as something that was designed to persecute Serbs), had access to the largest supply of JNA material. While I can't excuse the actions of the KLA, I have to be honest and say the KLA could not be compared to the size and scope of the JNA, which was used indiscriminantly by Milosevic. So yes, I share your critique.

But the point of my comment is that regardless of size and scope, the *intent* is visible and potent in the political culture of all sides. To say that the JNA was bigger, does not negate the strong belief that had Albanians had access to greater supplies and equipment (and we can argue that NATO was one of them), the scope of their own aggressive policies would have been more pronounced. The ideology and motives were significantly based on exclusionary national identities, selective memories of the past, and state-sponsored coercion of beliefs.

At the end of the day, the real battles continue in history books, editorials, journals, online chat sites, and pseudo-intellectuals who make an academic living off of this stuff. There is no doubt in my mind Serbia has been heavily influenced by these types of exclusionary narratives long after 2000, and continues to exert itself at Belgrade University and SANU, but at the same time, I still ask if other former Yugoslav societies, who have been equally defined by exclusionary narratives long before the breakup in 1991, have started to examine their past more objectively and start questioning the motives and reasons behind their actions? I don't have the complete answer, but I suspect they have not, and do not feel they need to if they base all their actions and motives on doing whatever is necessary in defending against the big, bad, immoral “other”.

Tadic does have a point.

To be fair, it's been established already that UCK committed war crimes too (2 convictions so far, 1 in Prishtina and 1 in Hague). Since many of the UCK leaders are now in government, they do owe an official apology as well to non-Albanian minorities that suffered any mistreatment at their hands during and after the war.

To those posters that don't seem to get it....even wars have rules.

Since Tadic brought up Germany, I would like to point out that Germany paid substantial WWII reparations to many of its enemies in addition to any apologies.
Japan did the same thing.

In contrast, Serbia's official policy is basically to make life as difficult as it can for the people it once committed crimes against, in Kosovo at least.

That makes any apologies sound pretty hollow. The same applies if the Kosovo government does not put its money where its mouth is when it comes to improving the lives of minorities in areas it controls.

every time I read news here, I am glad I moved from Serbia.

Allen wrote:Speaking in general terms, these are the Slovenes, Croats, Bosnian-Muslims, and Kosovo-Albanians. The political leadership of those ethnic groups chose to wage secessionist war against Yugoslavia. They chose to use armed violence as a means to obtain their political and territorial ambitions".Allen you forgot to mention that the SDS leadership of Jovan Raskovic and Babic in nearly 1990 were plotting to seceede from what you call YU (SAOKrajina). The Serbs had there own interests which we all know was a Greater Serbia. Yu was always a loose cannon ready to explode and the Serb leadership took full advantage of that.Nobody wanted to live in the fake state created by Tito's partizans. Also for the record Gen. Kadijevic is not a Croat as Niall O'Doherty claims but a Serbo-Croat who always claimed to be a Yugoslav. It's natural when a country loses a war it's citizens will point the finger of blame in the opposite direction.