X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 24 Dec 1992 10:50:46 EST
From:         Thomas Varouhakis <varouhak@ICARUS.MONTCLAIR.EDU>
Subject:      On Bosnia, Serbia and a Potential "Third Balkan War," #800
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
Comments: cc: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
              23 Dec 1992 18:03:26 -0600
              <9212232244.AA02301@icarus.montclair.edu.montclair.edu>

>stated that Greece actually supported the Serbs in this, as they are
>opposed to Macedonia's existence.
>

Greece actually has no quarrel about whatever arrangements the
populations of former Yugoslavia decide to form, as long as its
national security is not in any danger. By insisting to call itself
the name of the northern part of Greece, the so called state of
"Macedonia" actually presents such a threat. Throughout history
Macedonia has always been a part of Greek history and culture from the
ancient times to now. That could have not been otherwise: one of the
most famous Athenian philosophers of the city-states of Greece,
Aristotle was in fact the teacher one of the most famous Macedonians
Alexander the Great.

The "Macedonia" province of the former Yugoslavia is an artificial
country created by Tito, the former communist ruler of Yugoslavia. A
"country" of 2 million with a large minority of both Serbs and
Albanians may feel compelled to find a common "cause", a symbolism
that will unite it together as a nation. Its choice and insistence of
the name "Macedonia" is just that. Countries bordering Greece have
always had territorial claims and aims for parts of Greece, and Greece
has paid dearly for it: more than 400 years under Ottoman rule, the
balkan wars and War Wolrd I and II. Obviously "Macedonia" is in no
position to be a threat to Greece now, but how about the future? If
Greece recognizes them as "Macedonia" doesn't that imply that it
accepts their claim of been just that? A legitimate contender of what
throughout history has been an indispensable part of Greece: Macedonia.

>However, as always in the Balkans, there is a complication. There are
>also a large number of Albanians, Bulgarians and Turks in Macedonia,

People who forget their history are deemed to repeat it. In the
colosal outcry about the atrocities of war, against the Serbs is all
over the media now (maybe a lot of people start to realize that wars
are not video games been played on the t.v. sets of their living rooms
-see Gulf war-), most people seem to forget how the conflict started
and what the roots of the problem have been. Serbs lost 700,000 to
1,000,000 in WW-II from the Croats and others who collaborated with the
Germans -talking about some ethnic cleansing- (quiz: Which was the
first country in a rush to recognize Croatia, when the "cunning"
English were arguing for a negotiated break-up of Yugoslavia? -that's
right: the best qualified: Germany). Ethnic animosity goes even
further back in history.

But if that whole area is taken over by Nationalism the American media
is taken over by sensationalism and drama. If they are shocked by what
can happen in a war (very poorly documented in my opinion anyway),
maybe they have never been to their inner cities. In a profession
dominated by mega-star million dollar journalists it's obviously hard
nowdays to distinguish facts from fiction, news from "drama and
entertainment" (it takes courage to be boring said Robert McNeil - how
much are really McNeil and Lehrer paid? -this is capitalism at its
best I guess). The general media loves to personalize the conflict,
because it's easier for people to hate and blame the "bad guy": it may
that be Sadam Husein one day, or Milosevic the next. The picture tube
only adds to the drama. At the end though skin deep analysis and
understanding brings in skin deep solutions, that only come back to
haunt everybody involved.

Thomas-
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU