From: jakhan@IASTATE.EDU (Javed Ahmed Khan)
Subject: Re: MUSLIM NATION (Re: Bosnia)
Reply-To: jakhan@IASTATE.EDU (Javed Ahmed Khan)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 01:01:19 GMT

I had a few comments on the interesting article by Harsh Varma.

In article <Dec.26.19.09.03.1992.8599@paul.rutgers.edu>, varma@paul.rutgers.edu
(not yet) writes:
> In article <1992Dec26.151136@IASTATE.EDU>, jakhan@IASTATE.EDU (Javed Ahmed
Khan) writes:
> 
> > The conflict in Bosnia however is not one of righting a historical wrong. It
is
> > one of territorial greed and fascist tendencies afflicting the Serbs
fighting
> > in Bosnia with wholehearted support from the leadership in Serbia. 
> > 
> > Citing the rule of the Ottomans or the events of WWII is a feeble attempt
by
> > many muslim-antagonists in Serbia and in the west to play down the crass
human
> > greed for territory and the atrocities being commited by the Serbs in
Bosnia.
> > 
> > The Serbs have now gobbled up 95% of the land in Serbia with another 2-3%
> > attached by Croatia leaving in their wake a refugee crisis with people (an
> > overwhelming majority of them muslims) dispossesed of their homeland.     
> 
> Comparing Muslims to Serbs is like comparing apples and oranges.
> Religion and ethnicity are not the same.
> 
> Muslims in Bosnia are Serbs who were converted during the Ottoman rule
> over Serbia. The were Orthodox Serbian Christians before conversion.
> Historically, that land has always been Serbian (not Christian or
> Muslim because the Christian Serbs do not confuse between religion
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> and politics), and now when the Serbs have failed to forge a Slav
                                  ^^^^^
> nation, they want to be Serbia again. The internal borders in the
          ^^^^

 
This should then read Christian Serbs because only the Christian Serbs want
to merge with greater Serbia.



> former Yugoslavia (South Slavs) was neither drawn on basis of any
> general consensus, nor does it have a historical basis. It was drawn
> by Tito, a Croat, to deny the Serbs any political advantage they could
> have by virtue of being the largest ethnic group in Yugoslavia. This
> is clearly reflected by the fact that only 70% of the Serbs lived in
> the Serbian state of Yugoslavia. Another 25% live in Bosnia and
> Croatia, whereas Croatia and Slovania had almost all of Croats and
> Slovanians.
> 
> Muslims in Bosnia do not have a majority, they are about 44% of the
> population. The Non-Muslim Serbs are 35%. Another 18% is Croat (mostly
> Catholic), When Bosnia voted on independence from Yugoslavia, the
> Croats and Muslim Serbs voted together. The popular vote was for
> independence. 
> 
> This situation was unacceptable to the non-Muslim Serbs because
> historically that land had been a part of Serbia. Just because some
> people converted did not mean that they could claim a part of Serbia.
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


 
The majority included Croats too apart from the muslims. The fact that
the majority vote was for independence means that the Christian Serbs in Bosnia
were in a minority on this issue.




> Bosnia had been conveniently carved out of Serbia in the former
> Yugoslavia so that it gave the Muslim Serbs a numerical advantage
> there and the non-Muslims Serbs were aware of that fact. That border
> has no historical significance but was only artificial.


This is possible.


> 
> Also, in Bosnia, the Muslims were concentrated in cities. The rural
> Bosnia was predominantly non-Muslim Serb. The non-Muslim Serbs in fact
> were in majority in over 70% of the area of former Bosnia. 


Can you backup this claim with some evidence?



> 
> If the Muslim Serbs claim that since Muslim population in Bosnia is
> the largest, and therefore Bosnia should be not a part of non-Muslim
> Serbia, by the same argument the 70% rural non-Muslim dominated
> Bosnia should not be a part of Muslim Bosnia. However, logic has thus
> far been successful to elude the Bosnian Muslim.



This is your opinion. How do you explain the majority vote for independence?



> 
> This blatant double standard is the cause of misery to Muslim
> Bosnians and the rest of the world. 




A major part of the world doesn't seem to think so.



> 
> > So the Muslims have been left to fend for themselves. They are being denied
the
> > right to defend themselves by the UN in spite of the abject inability of the
UN
> > to prevent the Serbs from arming themselves. 
> 

> This is not totally true. The Islamic nations are helping the Muslim
> Serbs in Bosnia. NYT, for example, has reported armed Muslims from Saudi
> Arabia and Pakistan in Bosnia.


And how many did come? A few ragtag fighters who are making it to Bosnia are not
making a difference. 

Its a fact that no arms or oil are reaching Bosnia because of the embargo. The
world cannot allow the massacre of people because they can't prevent one side
from acquiring arms while preventing the other side from defending itself. 



> 
> Serbs are more than willing for a cease fire: they have all the land
> they wanted. At the moment, it is the Muslim Serbs who wish to
> continue fighting so that they can have a bigger Islamic Republic of
> Bosnia. Lives are being lost for a petty political game being played,
> once again behind the garb of Islam. Perhaps, if the founders of the
> religion had known, they would have decided otherwise.


You're badly out of touch with reality. A major portion of the cease-fire
violations have been commited by the Serbs. This claim is made not by Bosnian
sources but by the western media and UN peace keepers there in Bosnia.

The allegation about Islam is purely yours and cannot serve to justify the 
killings of muslims by Serbs.



> -- 
> Harsh Varma
> Department of Computer Science
> Rutgers University
> 
> Disclaimer: None. Please, everyone adopt my opinion, I am right!
> 
> Postscript: Please dont flame me, and I get very scared by death
>             threats.




My intention of highlighting the plight of the muslims is that they are being
killed, women raped by the thousands, made homeless in a onesided war by a 
Serb army with fascist tendencies. Their atrocities have been documented by
your favourite western news agenceies and govts., so it is not necessarily
"Islamic" propaganda. 

Now that the rest of the world has recognised Bosnia as an independent country
it cannot sit and see an entire group of people killed because thet are
muslims.

The issue here is not whether an Islamic state will be created but the fact
that
the muslims are being killed, raped and driven out of their lands by a Serb
army
which gives two-hoots about the muslims being formally Christian SERBS or that
are now Muslim SERBS.


--Javed.


Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan