From: pshane@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Ana M. Shane)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.europe.misc,soc.culture.yugoslavia,soc.culture.croatia,soc.culture.bosna-herzgvna
Subject: Re: Croatian dreams
Date: 27 Dec 92 23:29:04 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.europe.misc
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

josip@eng.umd.edu (Josip Loncaric) writes:

>In article <1992Dec26.110344.23069@enea.se> sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog) writes:

>[ they = Croatian leadership: ]
>>
>>Whatever they did, they did very little to get the Serbs in Croatia
>>on their side. Instead they, deliberately or by unskillness, alienated
>>the their Serbs from a Croatian state.
> 
>If you think that this is THE problem, you are wrong.  If you think that
>the Croatian leadership, in their struggle to protect Croatia from
>Milosevic, could have completely avoided alienating Croatian Serbs, 
>you are also wrong.  Furthermore, not all Croatian Serbs were 
>alienated, and in fact many of them had defended Croatia
>(in Vukovar, Sibenik, Dubrovnik, etc.).

Josip, the Croatian government motives to secede from Yugoslavia
were first and foremost concerned with their own power, and everything
else was in the function of this. Croatian government does not
particularly CARE about people - Serbs or Croats or any other. On top of that
they have as skillfully danced in this "dance macabre" together with
Milosevic, as anybody's worst nightmares. 

You are right when you say that the Croatian government could not have
completely avoided alienating some Croatian Serbs even if they
started creating a completely democratic country in which every individual
would have had basic human rights equal to everyone else and have felt
secure by the protection of the government!

But unfortunately the policies of the Republic of Croatia were not
even passively or remotely guaranteeing equality of Croatian citizens,
and the active Tudjamn's campaign was grounded on the most extreme
nationalism and chauvinism, the laws that were passed were discriminatory,
the "incidents" of nationalist crimes against Serbs were NOT punished
and their perpetrators not prosecuted. The country's regime today may
be characterized as a dictatorship with no freedom of speach and no free
media, and with intentional prevention of international communications
by post, telegraph, and telephone (which is against the international
laws even when two countries are in war).
> 
>You are on a false trail.  Even if the Croatian leadership had done
>a lot more than they did to get the Serbs in Croatia on their side,
>Belgrade policy would have been the same, and the outcome would
>have been the same.  

No the outcome would not be the same, since without Croatian Serbs
the Belgrade government could not have played the "protection-of-
Serbs" game, and would not get even the small support they have
now in Serbia.... (Yes, small : the electorial results are a complete
fraud).

>One thing which might have been different 
>is now seen in Bosnia:  by bending over backwards to prevent 
>alienating their Serbs, defense of the country might have been
>neglected.
> 
>Do not misunderstand me:  I think Croatian Serbs have legitimate
>concerns which must be addressed.  But, the first priority of
>any government is defense, and Croatia was under attack, politically
>and later militarily.  
>
If the Government of Croatia was really thinking of defense, the united
population within Croatia would have given it the BEST grounds to
build a defense. There is nothing contradictory between addressing the
concerns of the Croatian Serbs and building the defense.
 
>>Josip Loncaric (josip@eng.umd.edu) writes:
>>>A Wolf came upon a Lamb straying from the flock and felt reluctance
>>>...
>>>Erland would like Croatia to be the Lamb.  The moral of this story is
>>>"don't be the Lamb."  Bosnia-Herzegovina had the misfortune of finding
>>>out what it's like to be the Lamb.  The trouble is, Erland and many
>>>other observers had bought the Wolf's (Serbs') story.
>>
>>Being innocent lamb is not an excuse for being stupid. As I've said,
>>if I cross the street on green light, but is run owner by car driver
>>who ignores his red light, the fault is his and only his. But never-
>>theless I could have avoided the accident. And I am not less dead be-
>>cause I'm innocent.
> 
>Were the Croatian leaders stupid or simply without any good options?
>I would argue the latter.  If Erland is so much smarter than the
>Croatian leadership, why doesn't he propose (even with the benefit
>of hindsight) how Croatia could have defended itself from Milosevic
>without "being stupid"?  
> 
>>The lamb should have stayed with the flock. Croatia and B-H should have 
>>analysed the consequences of their plans before going ahead.
> 
>Aha.  So here it is, at last, Erland wants Croatia and B-H to submit
>to the Milosevic dictatorship.  This is simply unrealistic.  You can
>turn back the clock, but you cannot stop time.    Yugoslav idea
>was crushed by reality: the nations which came together to form
>Yugoslavia found it suffocating and had to get out.  Let me quote
>a Croatian (Dr. Slobodan Lang) who put it very clearly:
> 
>   "No matter how much one respects Yugoslavia's history,
>   in its current form it is an instrument of hate and people
>   will live more harmoniously if it breaks down.   For me,
>   personally, Yugoslavia in recent times is a symbol of
>   killing Albanians.  Now it is killing everybody.  To get
>   rid of Yugoslavia is to stop the killing."
> 
There were many different ways to "get rid" of Yugoslavia - or
if you wish: the opressive regime that was suffocating everyone
in Yugoslavia. It was in the interest of Croatian and of Slovenian and
of Bosnian and of Serbian and of Macedonian peoples TOGETHER to
"get rid" of the regime. Any partial nationalistic interests were
bound to create this horror. Because the real enemies were NOT the
nations but the RULERS of these nations, who each wanted more
power for him and only for himself. They were ready to push the
whole nation (their own and the others) into this quagmire JUST
to be the BOSS in their own little kingdom. The nationalist slogans
of each of these rulers, don't have naything to do with the real
interests of the common people who are their victims and their pawns.

>Staying in Yugoslavia simply isn't an option for Croatia, nor for
>anyone else even including some Serbs.  Yugoslavia has turned into
>a weird alloy of communism and fascism, united in their common 
>striving for power by their Serbian proponents over everyone.  No 
>wonder everyone else had to get out.

Staying together and changing the overall regime was the only option
for the people of Yugoslavia to avoid the war. Divided as they are
now, by nationalist hatreds, they are an easy game for their own and
other national dictators and criminals. 
> 
>>Just because Milosevic, Karadzic, Arkan etc are the worst crooks in
>>this sad affair, does not mean that whatever Croatian and Muslims
>>do, it is the right thing. Croatian and Muslim leaders have made many
>>severe mistakes in this tragic story, and their "innocence" does not
>>protect them.
> 
>Nobody argued that "whatever" Croats and Muslims do is the right thing.
>What I'm saying is that Croatia could not have avoided being attacked
>by being even more accommodating to its Serbian minority.  Simply put,
>bending over backwards to satisfy the Croatian Serbs was, as a strategy
>for defending Croatia from Milosevic, simply unworkable.  
> 
Could you please explain what do you mean by "bending over backwards
to satisfy Croatian Serbs". Don't you think that a country in which everyone
is equal, everyone guaranteed security by the government, is a better
country for everyone, than a country with discriminatory laws in which
a group of people has to fear and feel as second-rate citizens, or even
not be granted a citizenship because of their nationality?

What DO you consider "bending over back to stisfy Croatian Serbs"?

>Of the three republics attacked by Serbs (Slovenia, Croatia, B-H), Slovenes
>were the best prepared for armed defense and they suffered the least.

Please correct yourself. Slovenia was not attacked by Serbs but by
YUGOSLAV army in which the highest command was not only Serbian but
a mixture of many nationalities.

Second, how was Slovenia "best" prepared for armed defense against the
Yugoslav army (which is monstuously armed and powerful)?
  
>Croats wanted to avoid the war by diplomacy, but when Croatia was
>attacked anyway, they managed to create basic defenses.  B-H trusted
>negotiations the most and armed defense the least, but it was attacked
>anyway and suffered the most.  This tells me something: the key to
>stopping this carnage is capable self-defense.  

Could you also substantiate how did Croatian government want to
avoid the war by diplomacy? 

And also, how did B-H government trusted negotiations the most,
when they never completed negotiations, never resolved the
inner conflicts within B-H government, and yet went ahead with
the secession KNOWING that they are exposing ALL citizens of
Bosnia and Herzegovina to the hundred times more horrible fate
than if they stayed within Yugoslavia. That didn't automatically
mean being compltely subjugated to Milosevic, since they would
have many many occasions to work for the democracy, against nationalism,
and for the true interests of all the peoples in B-H.

They were maybe the only ones who could have relied on the interethnic
co-operation, and united their peoples by holding together. The
sad thing is that the falling apart of B-H started from the HEAD
and just as YUGOSLAV leadership had been busier with their POWER
struggles than with economic problems that they have created in the
first place, so the Bosnia and Herzegovina government (comprized of
all three main nations) virtually ceased to exist the moment that
Serbian faction seceded. 

If they had meant good to their peoples - they would have resigned.
That includes the Serbian leaders in Bosnia, not just the Muslem and
the Croatian ones. But no-one there was really concerned with the
people, no-one there was ready to give up their own struggle for
their own power for the sake of preventing the worst. 

Yes, I do think that staying within Yugoslavia under those circumstances 
would have been more honorable, and much more in the interest of the
people. The PEOPLE of Bosnia and Herzegovina had nothing to lose
but the Individuals in the government did! 

>>What is so depressing with reading s.c.yu & co is that so many
>>Serbo-Croat posters only can find the fault with the other side.
>>If everyone would concentrate on the mistakes committed by their
>>own side, this would be a much more constructive place.
> 
>Erland, if you'd like to talk about mistakes made by the Croatian side,
>we can do that.  But, "you-brought-war-on-yourselves-because-you-
>were-not-nice-enough-to-Serbs" is simply incorrect.  Moreover, it
>stinks of blaming the victim in order to exculpate those who
>contributed to this carnage by refusing the victim even the
>right of self-defense.

Josip, the truth is that the "Serbian question" (like the Jewish
question) was and is far from resolved. And you know why? Because
it is in the interest of all of the POWERMONGERS to make this an
ethnic war so that seemingly defending interests of their own ethnic
group they have an excuse, a justification for their ruthless
and criminal powerstruggles. NO ONE government in the countries of
former Yugoslavia had really worked in the interest of the PEOPLES of
Yugoslavia, but only in the interest of their personal (or class) holding
the power or becoming the powerholder.

I don't believe that waht is really good for one people is not good for
the other people. I don't believe that the interests of Croatian, Slovenian,
Serbian, Bosnian, Albanian, Macedonian, Mote-Negrian PEOPLES are in
any clash. The clashes were just on the level of the RULERS: who has
power, who has more power, who has the most power. Had anybody, 
in earnest considered the PEOPLE while so boldly declaring that they
are the saviors of their nations - we wouldn't have what we have, Yugoslavia
would have been far on the road to recovery from communism and with one
foot in the European democracy.
 
>Josip
 
 
Happy Holidays and with one great wish for the New Year:
let's work for

        __________  __________   _______          _________   __________
       /   ___   / /  _______/  /   __  |        /  ____  /  /  _______/
      /   /  /  / /  /         /   /  | |       /  /   /_/  /  /
     /   /__/  / /  /___      /   /___| |      /  /        /  /___
    /   ______/ /   ___/     /   _____  |     /  /        /   ___/
   /   /       /   /        /   /     | |    /  /    __  /   /
  /   /       /   /_____   /   /      | |   /  /____/ / /   /_____
 /___/       /_________/  /___/       |_|  /_________/ /_________/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ana M. Shane                               pshane@andromeda.rutgers.edu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~