From: pshane@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Ana M. Shane)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bosna-herzgvna
Subject: Re: Bosnian mistakes
Date: 23 Dec 92 21:24:48 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

faruk@bcars6f5.BNR.CA (Faruk od Bosne) writes:


>In Article 939 of soc.culture.bosna-herzgvna, pshane@andromeda.rutgers.edu 
>(Ana M. Shane) writes:

>>Wouldn't it have been less bloody if the Bosnian Government FIRST promoted
>>UNITY of all the Bosnia and Herzegovina people, decreasing separate
>>national interests and getting a more united population, BEFORE secession?

>(I must tell that you are such an ignorant that it is likely the waste of 
>time to discuss it with you. And ignorance is not an excuse.)

>Bosnian governement did exactly that. Remember: President of Presidency was 
>Muslim (majority of population), President of Parliament was a Serb (Koljevic),
>Prime Minister was Croat (Jure Pelivan). Presidency consisted of 2 Muslims
>(Izetbegovic and Abdic), 2 Serbs (Karadzic and Plavsic), and 2 Croats (Kljujic
>and ...), and 1 Yugoslav (Ganic). Lower posts were distributed as well accor-
>ding the national proportions. However from the very first day (and before)
>SDS (serbian party) began destabilizing the governement and arming serbian 
>population. Serbian army generals disobeyed governement orders. On several 
>occasions serbian "high officials" were implicated in arms smuggling (remember 
>"banana" affair in Sarajevo) etc. Serbian members of police refuse to obey 
>the orders, etc. As I told you earlier serbo-negro gangs start looting Bosnian 
>towns, intimidating Bosnian population, and threteaning the Bosnian officials. 
>Police and Army, the basic instrument of the authority against the mad gangs 
>did not work. Serbian policemen were with them as well as (serbian) army. 
>Yu generals openly threatened the population over the public radio. On the 
>other side SDS members of governement refused to go along with the democratic 
>governemental procedures. In summary SDS which were proportioanly represented
>in the governemental structure refused to participate in democratic political
>life of the Republic.

So there was no true UNITY in the Bosnian government! That is exactly
what I was talking about. Instead of building UNITY in the government
and therefore among the peoples, the divisions (national) STARTED in
the government. (In Yugoslavia and then in Bosnia and Herzegovina). And
all of the people watched in fear, organizing protests to divisions. And
when the GOVERNMENT finally broke, THEY (all of them) started the
war. Not the peoples! That was my only point.

>>Croatia had somehow been resolved and more stable? 

>Because the army was forcing Bosnians to join the serbian army against
>Croatia, Bosnian (together with Croatian, Slovenian, and Macedonian) 
>governements, adviced the youth to refuse to go. It would be much more
                                                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>difficult for Croatia to preserve the independence without Bosnia. 
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Exactly - the independence that Croatian government wanted was not
possible in the shape and form they wanted it: without the UNITY of
all the peoples in Croatia and with an open anti-Serbian stand. So
the Croatian government worked very hard to destabilize the unity
within Bosnian government and push it into the war. As a buffer in
the Serbian-Croatian war. (again, I am talking only about leaders,
on all the sides, not about the people). The Serbian government
added as much fuel as possible. NOBODY in the government of ex-YU
or in the subsequent republican governments worked toward
diminishing tensions, compromise, and letting the world know about
the situation which has become intolerable. Nobody in the governments
of ex-YU and in the Army, did anything to prevent the war, but on the
contrary: everybody was arming their own people and unleashing the
worst possible propaganda against other ethnic groups preparing or
if you want, preparating everybody for the war with hatred and arms.

How can you even talk, about Bosnian peoples as being ethnically
clear groups when there was about 40% intermarriage (mixing all
three or four or more ethnicities)? Who are these "Croats",
"Moslems" and "Serbs" when everybody has relatives among all three
and more? This kind of labeling, no matter from which side it comes
is a way of BRANDING people for slaughter. And continuing to use
these concepts only adds to the conflict and prolongs the war.

I know, Faruk, what was going on and what is going on. I am just
trying to show where the roots of the war are, and what other
possibilities could have been taken by the RULERS - if they thought
good to their people. I understand that the Bosnian government
was in a very difficult position, but the worst they had allowed
to happen is to let the rhetoric of national division take roots
and flourish. In the situation a year ago, there were NO conditions
for Bosnia and Herzegovina to peacefully secede.

>>There is an old story about a baby and two women who both claimed that
>>it was theirs. When they came with their dispute to king Solomon, he gave
>>them a choice to cut up the baby and each one take a half. The true
>>mother then said that the other woman can take the whole baby. Then
>>king Solomon knew who was the true mother.

>Your analogy here is naive. Solomon (if not Bosnian governement) was 
>supposed to be CSCE and UN as well as EC and USA. However SDS did not 
>listen to anybody. They precisely want to cut up another mother's babby, 
>as they did many times in this war.

True. My analogy goes one step further. The true mother should have
let go of the baby. The Bosnian people with their peace meetings
and collective unity were the last hope for everybody who was not
on the war path. 

>>Wouldn't the Bosnian government have been the true mother to the people
>>of Bosnia even if they accepted the alleged dominance of the leadership of 
>>Serbia for a few more years, 

>They had the serbian dominance since 1918. This dominance simply became 
>unbearable.

Could you, please document this Serbian dominance since 1918, and
especially since 1945 until the present war. Delineate dominance in politics, 
education, culture, economy. 

>>and in the mean time secured the more united 
>>people within Bosnia, who wouldn't start killing each other? 

>They did everything to persuade Bosnian Serbs that Bosnia is their only
>fatherland, the same way as she is the only fatherland of Boanian Muslims 
>and Bosnian Croats. Many Serbs understood, and fight for Bosnia. However
>some did not. Country is like a Company. Either you dedicate yourself
>to the benefits of your Company or you leave. How do you treat the i
>ndividuals who fight against their fatherland (for another country)? 

No they (The government) didn't do everything. But, yes, they did a lot.
The question was not whether Bosnia and Herzegovina is or is not the
fatherland, but WHO IS IN CHARGE of this fatherland. The issues got
twisted into a terminology of ethnic dominance - where ethnicity
didn't have anything to do with it (in reality). The federation within
Yugoslavia was already so loose, that any Republic had all the possibilities
of making their own political, economic, educational, cultural, and other
laws. Suppose the Government of Bosnia wished to change things for the
better of all of the people within Bosnia and within Yugoslavia (even
without Slovenia and Croatia). They could have done it much better
and without the war had they worked together with all the people who wanted
such changes (and there were many and still are in Serbia).

But of course, talking about what could have been doesn't help the situation.


>>Another point: the secession of Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia&Herzegovina,
>>and Macedonia, have in fact strengthened the regime of Milosevic, and the war 
>>has prolonged his and SPS's reign. 

>Remember, the only think Republics wanted from the ex-Yu was confederation:
>decentralized provincial governements with common defence (proportional army)
>and common market. Serbia was the only Republic which opposed. 

That is exactly so. Decentralization makes each government stronger.
That is the root: everybody (in the governments) ruthlessly pushed
for their own power, regardless of the horror that that caused!!!
(And I am not saying that Serbian government was "good" for not
accepting the confederation - for them it was their way of staying
in power. In other words: on all of the sides, the people who were
in charge, in control, and already had some power, started pushing for
their local interests, knowing that THEY (as individuals) would have
to be replaced if they continue to do what they were already doing to
the people (total economic ruin of the country). For all of them it
was the only way to stay in power in their little provinces. And all
of them knew that the horror of a war would cover up for their corruption
and criminality in the economic level! And so they continued on the war
path.

Faruk, you know as well as I do that only several years ago, there was
NO national hatred between the peoples in Yugoslavia (except some
incidents and smal fanatic groups - but overall? NO) ON the contrary: we 
could all agree about the idiotic and scandalous creatures that have
been leading the whole country into the abyss.

But they had the power. And they never let go of their power, destroying
anyone who was against them. When they couldn't anymore hold strong
together (as the "communist" party), they just devided the peoples
and continued in an even more vicious way. (Izetbegovic unfortunatelly
was not strong enough to avert these power-monsters).

>>Divided - we are all victims of the
>>same criminals who became rich sucking the last drops of the blood
>>of everybody.

>All evidence points that SDS does not want co-existence. It wants dominance
>of the worst kind - despotism.

>>I am here pointing to another possibility. I know that to many Bosnians
>>this will look like defending what the Serbian extremists have done.
>>I am not, they have already proven that they were not the "true mother
>>of the baby". The question is who is the "true mother" among the leaders
>>in this terrible war?

>Stil don't know? Don't worry. No one expects it from you.

>Faruk.

Be kind, Faruk, I am not in a war with you.

  With hopes for peace

               ___      ___
       ___   _/   \    /  //                                  
          \_/  @   \  /  //    _/////                         
          /|-\_     \/  //   _/   _/                          
           |   \     \__//__/   _/                            
        ()/     \           __ /                              
        / ()     \_    \____  |////<                          
      ()           \_       \_______\                         
                     \______/                                 


Ana M. Shane                              voice: (215)-843-2909
334 Winona St.
Philadelphia, PA 19144      e-mail: pshane@andromeda.rutgers.edu