From: boyle@kirkuk.berkeley.edu (Joseph Boyle)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.yugoslavia
Subject: Intervention?
Date: 22 Jan 1993 03:14:53 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: kirkuk.berkeley.edu

In article <Jan.21.16.18.05.1993.20370@andromeda.rutgers.edu> pshane@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Ana M. Shane) writes:
>YES: The support should be given to the ones who are the victims of the
>racist extremists! But these victims are not just of one nationality
>or religion. They are all the civilians in the former Yugoslav Republics.
>If this is not stated clearly as the goal of intervention (military
>or political), but, instead, the intervention falls into the same racist
>nationalist fascist rhetoric, it will be just taking sides with one
>kind of extremists (in this case Bosnian Muslims). And that will not
>really solve the problems in the area, just maybe postpone them for some
>moment in the future.

I agree that people of all groups are the victims.  Western intervention
so far, though, has tried so hard to be even-handed and purely humanitarian
that it hasn't accomplished anything.  I don't think Western countries 
would uncritically support anything that Bosnian Muslims did.  But the more
the West delays, the more other Muslim countries will get involved, probably
strengthening the extremist elements among the Bosnian Muslims.

>I cannot agree more. That is why it is of the paramount importance that
>the whole war in Yugoslavia be understood NOT as an ethnic/religious
>war, but as a mafia war between multiple warlords in which they throw their
>own people. In order to bring lasting peace to the region, the international
>community and the media have to launch a campaign against all chauvinism,
>nationalism and ethnic hatred and support only those who are willing
>to work for co-operation, civil understanding and laws which would
>guarantee civilian and human rights above national rights. And moreover,
>all those responsible for engineering, instigating and implementing
>this war should be punished for their deeds by an international
>tribunal composed of the representatives of all the victimized
>nations and other UN representatives!

I also hate the excuse that the war was inevitable due to "centuries of
hatred", as if the same wasn't true everywhere in the world.  I try to
explain this to people, but most Americans have the preconception that
most other countries can't handle democracy and human rights.

So far, though, the threat of war crimes trials seems to have done little
to stop the brutality by SRBiH forces.  They are still betting they can
hold their territory, establish their state, and go down in history as
heroes instead of criminals.  If anything, forcing other Serbs to commit
atrocities has served the SRBiH's purposes in alienating everyone else
from Serbs, and destroying any hope for Serbs other than a SRBiH victory.

If the war crimes trials are ever held, every Serb fighter will claim
he was forced to commit crimes, and every Serb official will disclaim
responsibility and blame his superiors.  It's unlikely that most of the
perpetrators can be punished, and the Serbs probably know this already.

>Please right to the president Clinton and help him understand that
>no solution can be just and lasting if it is not just for all the
>peoples, and that extreme chauvinism which per definition discriminates
>on the national/racist basis, cannot be a ground for peace. The war
>in Yugoslavian countries can  not be stopped by arming or disarming one
>of the warring extremists, or by a military intervention against one
>of the extreme nationalist armies. It can be stopped only when all
>the extreme nationalists are stopped and when the victimized peoples of all
>ethnic backgrounds open their eyes and see that devided they are
>an easy prey to the criminal leaders of all sides.

It would be best if the US or UN would launch a full scale intervention
with adequate force to disarm all parties and enforce human rights.
However, the US gov't and military estimated that 600-700,000 troops and
months of preparation would be needed, and then dropped the idea with
relief as unfeasible.  I will urge Pres. Clinton to reconsider, but am
not optimistic.

If we can't do this, should we just sit by as hundreds of thousands
more are killed?  I think we should at least discourage further
aggression, encourage serious negotiation, and gain leverage to
pressure each party to respect human rights.  We could provide
defensive arms (antitank weapons, small arms, communications
equipment) to the Bosnian government on condition that it make good on
its pledges to respect human rights and avoid ethnic chauvinism.

In addition, spot intervention at Sarajevo and Brcko would curb the
SRBiH's pretensions, facilitate aid delivery, and give crucial
leverage against all three parties.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.yugoslavia,soc.culture.bosna-herzgvna,soc.culture.croatia