From: simic@pollux.ccsf.caltech.edu (Petar Simic)
Subject: Re: Irony continues in our history
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 11:15:55 GMT

	Josip Loncaric writes:
 >>>
  All of these sources lead to the following conclusion: Serb losses in WWII
 (from all causes) account for about 500,000 of the total which is about one
 million...

 The conclusions of all of the above sources can be checked, unlike the
 unsubstantiated estimates quoted by Mr. Simic.
<<<
	
	The estimate I was quoting is conclusion of most of the books writen
 about the Holocaust in Croatia, and I claimed that this is the estimate most
 of the main-stream historians accept. This can be checked. I gave the
 reference to one French, three German, and four Yugoslav authors, and I
 could list tens of other studies which support the same conclusion. I will
 explain later (see bellow) what is the problem with Kocovic's estimate, but
 it should be pointed out that, reading the direct testimony of German and
 Italian officers in Croatia, one gets the feeling that the barbarisam and
 cruelty of Croats was such that plus or minus 250,000 victims does not make
 any difference.

	Here is some excerpt from "Encyclopedia of the Holocaust":
	----------------------------------------------------------  

	" Shortly after taking control, the Ustasa, with the support of many
 Croatians, embarked upon what is called "the purge of Croatia from foreign
 elements," which had as its main purpose the elimination of the Serbian
 minority. In a brutal terror campaign, more than half a million Serbs have
 been killed, a quarter-million expelled, and two hundred thousand forced to
 convert to Catholicism. The Ustasa regime in Croatia,... was one of the
 most horrendous episodes of World War II. The murder methods applied by
 the Ustasa were extraordinarily primitive and sadistic: thousands were
 hurled from mountaintops, others were beaten to death or had their throats
 cut, entire villages were burned down, women raped, people sent on death
 marches in the middle of the winter, and still others starved to death..."

	--------------- end of citation -------------------


	Josip writes:
>>>
 How do you reconcile your claims with the results of demographic studies,
 victim lists, and official government survey?...

 ... you have not explained why researchers who did the counting are
 less correct than your sources who quote estimates by various
 supposedly qualified individuals.  

 This reckless touting of the data promoted by Mr. Vojislav Seselj,...

<<<

 *	Most researchers studying the Holocaust in Balkans came with the
 estimates which are in the range of 750,000 - 1,000,000 for the total
 Serbian loss in the WWII. They had plenty of data available. A possible
 reason for discrepancy between this and the lower estimate (500,000)
 by one Serbian historian (Kocovic) is in that counting and statistical 
 interpretation of a Yugoslav demographic data is not straightforward, but
 depends on number of assumptions, any of which if not true can change
 the estimate dramatically. Illustrate one of the sources of uncerainty in
 demographic data are groups (such as Muslims, and "Yugoslavs") who had
 different options for declaring their ethnic origin before the war, when
 only orthodox Serbs were counted as Serbs, and imediatelly after the war,
 when large number of Muslims in Bosnia and Hercegovina declared themeseves
 as Serbs. This can be illustrated by looking at the census for 1961 and 1971,
 where the absolute number of Serbs in Bosnia and Hercegovina in fact
 declined while number of people who declared themeself as Muslims, jumped by
 enormous, 640,000. This is why most of the estimates of other Yugoslav 
 authors - dr. Dedier, dr. Bulatovic, dr. Kostic, dr. Djuretic, all of whom 
 had the available demographic data, victim lists, and "official government
 surveys"  - as well as foreign schoolars, can not be dismissed on the grounds
 of inconsistency with the basic demographic data. 
 
	My point related to this whole discussion is, however, that we can
 establish here only what is the dominant, that is, the main-stream historical
 fact, and if you or your fellow Croats have some original ideas about revising
 part of the Holocaust history, this net is not the appropriate nor qualified
 forum to attempt this. And what is the dominant, the leading order history of
 the Holocaust in independent state of Croatia, is known and well documented,
 and will not be changed just by writing long postings and mixing half-truths
 about history with half-truths about the present (which is different, but
 to some extent related question).

 *	I am bit puzzled why you keep bringing in dr.V. Seselj, as if he has
 anything to do with the books I gave as a reference; I do not like a guy,
 and I do not know what is he touting about, and I suspect that his estimates
 might be still higher (if I remember correctly his argument some time ago was
 that the territories on which Serbs were majority before the WWII genocide,
 should not be allowed to separate from Yugoslavia).

 *	My opinion, for what is it worth, is that Croats should, as a sign of
 good faight accept the fact of the Holocaust as they are presented in the
 most of the books on the Holocaust, even if this means that they would accept
 that their fascists killed 250,000 more Serbs then they are willing to
 believe, and they should as soon as possible approach the Serbs in Croatia,
 fall on their knees, and ask them for forgivness; and give serious and
 constitutionally garanteed assurance that Serbs will never again be treated
 as the foreign elements in this part of Balkans. I do not know how this
 might work, and if it is not too late now, but chanting about "Serbian
 communists", "Serbian domination", "outside agresson" will not help much,
 because it is not the way how Serbs in former Yugoslavia see the conflict;
 which means that there is no communication.

	Petar.

	--------------------------------------------------------------------
PS	I will be away for a while and probably will not be able to continue
 	this discussion.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish