Skip navigation.


Banka hrane

Srbija 2020

Is Serbia Guilty Of Genocide?

Serbian MUP About To Kill Srebrenica CiviliansSerbian MUP About To Kill Srebrenica CiviliansSince the ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Hague many in Serbia have rejoiced that the Serbian state was not found guilty of genocide. The failed, however, to note that the ICJ found Serbia guilty of violating the Convention on Genocide. Many have also failed to actually ask the question as to whether -- the ICJ verdict aside -- Serbia did in fact commit genocide.

An interesting article appeared in the International Herald Tribune and New York Times on 9 April discussing this issue. The link and text are below. Read them. Then ask the question question why official Belgrade still refuses to turn over the archives. Is Belgrade in fact guilty? If not, then what does it have to hide?


Genocide Court Ruled for Serbia Without Seeing Full War Archive


Published: April 9, 2007

THE HAGUE — In the spring of 2003, during the trial of Slobodan Milosevic, hundreds of documents arrived at the war crimes tribunal in The Hague marked “Defense. State Secret. Strictly Confidential.”

The cache contained minutes of wartime meetings of Yugoslavia’s political and military leaders, and promised the best inside view of Serbia’s role in the Bosnian war of 1992-1995.

But there was a catch. Serbia, the heir to Yugoslavia, obtained the tribunal’s permission to keep parts of the archives out of the public eye. Citing national security, its lawyers blacked out many sensitive — those who have seen them say incriminating — pages. Judges and lawyers at the war crimes tribunal could see the censored material, but it was barred from the tribunal’s public records.

Now, lawyers and others who were involved in Serbia’s bid for secrecy say that, at the time, Belgrade made its true objective clear: to keep the full military archives from the International Court of Justice, where Bosnia was suing Serbia for genocide. And they say Belgrade’s goal was achieved in February, when the international court, which is also in The Hague, declared Serbia not guilty of genocide, and absolved it from paying potentially enormous damages.

Lawyers interviewed in The Hague and Belgrade said that the outcome might well have been different had the International Court of Justice pressed for access to the full archives, and legal scholars and human rights groups said it was deeply troubling that the judges did not subpoena the documents directly from Serbia. At one point, the court rebuffed a Bosnian request that it demand the full documents, saying that ample evidence was available in tribunal records.

“It’s a question that nags loudly,” Diane Orentlicher, a law professor at American University in Washington, said recently in The Hague. “Why didn’t the court request the full documents? The fact that they were blacked out clearly implies these passages would have made a difference.”

The ruling — which was binding and final — was in many ways meticulous, and acknowledged that the 15 judges had not seen the censored archives. But it did not say why the court did not order Serbia to provide the full documents.

Two of the judges themselves criticized that failure in strongly worded dissents. One, the court’s vice president, Awn Shawkat al-Khasawneh of Jordan, wrote that “regrettably the court failed to act,” adding, “It is a reasonable expectation that those documents would have shed light on the central questions.”

As part of its ruling, the court said that the 1995 massacre of nearly 8,000 Muslim men and boys at Srebrenica, a designated United Nations safe haven in eastern Bosnia, was an act of genocide committed by Bosnian Serb forces, but that it lacked proof in this case that the forces were acting under Serbia’s “direction” or “effective control.”

The ruling raised some eyebrows because details of Serbian military involvement were already known from records of earlier tribunal cases. For instance, evidence showed that in late 1993, more than 1,800 officers and noncommissioned men from the Yugoslav Army were serving in the Bosnian Serb army, and were deployed, paid, promoted or retired by Belgrade.

These and many other men, including top generals, were given dual identities, and to help handle that development, Belgrade created the so-called 30th personnel center of the general staff, a secret office for dealing with officers listed in both armies. The court took note of that, but said that Belgrade’s “substantial support” did not automatically make the Bosnian Serb army a Serbian agent.

However, lawyers who have seen the archives and further secret personnel files say they address Serbia’s control and direction even more directly, revealing in new and vivid detail how Belgrade financed and supplied the war in Bosnia, and how the Bosnian Serb army, though officially separate after 1992, remained virtually an extension of the Yugoslav Army. They said the archives showed in verbatim records and summaries of meetings that Serbian forces, including secret police, played a role in the takeover of Srebrenica and in the preparation of the massacre there.

The lawyers spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they could be held in contempt of court.

The story of the blacked-out documents, pieced together from more than 20 interviews with lawyers and court officials and from public records, offers rare insight into proceedings in The Hague, where hearings can turn into closed sessions and deals often happen behind closed doors.

It took the tribunal prosecutors of Mr. Milosevic two years of talks, court orders and diplomatic pressure for Belgrade to hand over the documents — the much coveted minutes of the Supreme Defense Council. The council was created in 1992 when Serb-dominated Yugoslavia was fighting for more land for Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia.

When the documents were handed over, the lawyers said, a team from Belgrade made it clear in letters to the tribunal and in meetings with prosecutors and judges that it wanted the documents expurgated to keep them from harming Serbia’s case at the International Court of Justice. The Serbs made no secret of that even as they argued their case for “national security,” said one of the lawyers, adding, “The senior people here knew about this.”

Confidentiality rules to protect “national security interests” have often been invoked at the tribunal, including by the United States, which has privately provided intelligence like intercepts and satellite images to assist prosecutors.

When Belgrade’s lawyers met with tribunal judges to request secrecy for their archives, they produced a letter of support from Carla Del Ponte, the tribunal’s chief prosecutor.

In a recent interview, Mrs. Del Ponte confirmed that she had sent a letter in May 2003 to the former Serbian foreign minister, Goran Svilanovic, saying she would accept the sealing of “reasonable” portions of the records. “It was a long fight to get the documents, and in the end because of time constraints we agreed,” she said. “They were extremely valuable for the conviction of Slobodan Milosevic.” Mr. Milosevic died before his trial was over.

After the tribunal judges approved Belgrade’s request to keep sections of the military archives secret, Vladimir Djeric, a member of the Serbian team, told lawyers there that “we could not believe our luck.” Mr. Djeric, now a private lawyer in Belgrade, said by telephone that he could not discuss his former duties.

Tantalizing glimpses of the secrets of the Supreme Defense Council — whose agenda included the military budget, promotions and retirement of generals — can be gleaned elsewhere. Uncensored parts of the archives obtained by The New York Times include minutes of sessions between 1993 and 1995, when the war in Bosnia was in full swing.

Those meetings in Belgrade were attended by the presidents of then Yugoslavia, its constituent states of Serbia and Montenegro, and the top military command, including Gen. Ratko Mladic, the Bosnian Serb military leader twice indicted by the tribunal on charges that include genocide. He remains a fugitive.

A recent book, “Unspoken Defense,” by Momir Bulatovic, a former president of Montenegro who attended many sessions of the Defense Council, said that in 1994, when more than 4,000 men on Serbia’s payroll were fighting in Bosnia, the council discussed abolishing the 30th personnel center because its discovery might cause political problems.

Lawyers and human rights groups have searched with special interest for council records from the summer of 1995, when Srebrenica was overrun by soldiers and police officers, many of them, tribunal records show, in the pay of Serbia. After the massacre there, the council met three times, with General Mladic attending at least one session. Verbatim transcripts of those days are missing even from the secret archives, lawyers said.

Bosnia’s team at the International Court of Justice, also known as the World Court, was convinced that the archives and the military personnel files were central to their case. Before hearings opened in 2006, Bosnia asked the court to request that Serbia provide an uncensored version of the documents. The court refused, saying that “extensive evidence” was available at the war crimes tribunal. When Bosnia pressed during hearings, the court ignored the request.

In an interview, Rosalyn Higgins, the president of the World Court, declined to say why the uncensored archives were not subpoenaed. She said it was the court’s practice not to discuss its findings. “The ruling speaks for itself,” she said.

But the dissents from Judge Khasawneh and another judge criticized the court on that count. The second dissent, by Ahmed Mahiou of Algeria, said that judges had several reasons — “none of them sufficiently convincing” — including a fear of creating the impression that the court was taking sides, that it might intrude on the sovereignty of a state, or that it might be embarrassed if Serbia refused.

Phon van den Biesen, a lawyer on the Bosnian team, said the full documents would probably have demonstrated that the Bosnian Serb forces were agents of Serbia, controlled by Belgrade.

“This would have made Serbia liable for the Srebrenica genocide,” Mr. van den Biesen said. “We believe all this can be found in the documents. The cuts are made whenever the agenda turns to financing and to personnel matters. That’s why Serbia went to such lengths to hide them from us.”

William Schabas, a professor of international law at the University of Ireland in Galway, said the court might have wanted to avoid a diplomatic showdown with Serbia and that, as a civil rather than a criminal court, it was more used to relying on materials put before it than aggressively pursuing evidence.

Natasha Kandic, director of the Humanitarian Law Center in Belgrade, said she was shocked at the court’s inaction, in part because it blocked the Serbian public from understanding the reality of the war.

After the verdict, she said, she met with a leading member of the Serbian team. “He was very pleased,” she said, “but I confronted him. I said, ‘You did not tell the truth.’ ” The man, a scholar she said she could not name, replied: “It’s normal, every country will do everything possible to protect the state. Bosnia wanted a lot of money for damages.”

Ms. Kandic added: “I said that one day the truth will come out. And my friend said: ‘But that’s the future. Now it’s important to protect the state.’ ”

James Lyone ,

živo me interersuje kome Vi namenjujete ove vaše kolumne ovde, to jest postove!?

Evo zašto pitam?

Pišete ih na engleskom, dakle, nisu upućeni ovdašnjim komentatorima i gradjanima sa srpskog govornog područja!

Ako već znate da govorite srpski, da vidimo znate li i da ga pišete, bilo bi dobro da malo i vežbate isti jezik, vidim ja da će Srbija biti još dugo američka interesna sfera.

Ili Vi namerno svoje postove postavljate na engleskom, da bi imali što manje oponenata i kritičara, engleski vam je ko poručen da se zaštitite od kritika bilo koje vrste.

Video sam i pročitao da se bavite temama koje su direktno povezane sa Srbijom, a svoje postove pišete na engleskom, još jednom i na kraju pitanje osnovno glasi: sa kime Vi želite da polemišete o svojim vidjenjima stanja stvari u Srbiji i svetu!?

Pričaj Bre Engleski.....

...da te ceo svet razume.

Serbs are not the only ones who read this blog.

To Lyone,

vidim ja da Vi znate srpski, nego se Vi plašite da će vas neko kritikovati što se povladjujete srpskim lošim momcima, i tako počeli da pišete na njihov jezik...

Milutine Labude,

prije nekog vremena sam kao komentar na jedan post JL poslala pitanje/poziv istome da na blogu komunicira (i) na srpskom. James Lyon se odazvao pozivu, pokazao spremnost da nastavi na blogu komunicirati na jeziku zemlje domacina. Problem je bio da su mu se blogeri nastavili obracati na engleskom.

U zemljama ne-engleskog govornog podrucja je cest slucaj da ljudi kojima je materinji engleski, a daju si truda da nauce jezik zemlje domacina, cesto nemaju priliku da isti koriste. Njihovi domacini daju prednost usavrsavanju svog engleskog s "native speakers", nego da istima daju priliku da nauce i usavrse njihov jezik.

James, u izvornom znacenju rec BRE

U izvornom znacenju rec BRE znaci STOKA(govedo). Moj savet Vam je da je ne koristite iako je vrlo rasirena postapalica zato sto mnogi nemaju pojma sta ona u stvari znaci!

Pričaj Bre Srpski....

...da te ceo svet razume...

In case you missed it I was paraphrasing a legendary quote from Yugoslav cinematography.


То је широко раширена заблуда. Бре у турском значи тачно исто што и у српском - уопштена поштапалица.

Pise na vikipediji...

mora da je tacno :)


У питању је Викиречник. Свеједно сам проверио у Шкаљићевом Речнику турцизама.

"Bre" vuce korene iz

"Bre" vuce korene iz "brate", "brale"...


pobij covjekove stavove ili ne s***

It seems to be

some mystic power in the word "genocide". Massive ethnic cleansing with hundreds of deads, we seem to be ok with it, as long as you don\t name it "genocide".We all admit it happened - all we insist on is not to allow the name "genocide".


Some crimes are worse than other crimes (if you disagree, remember that crimes commited by Serbs are much worse than crimes commited over Serbs). Massive ethnic cleansing with hundreds of dead is smaller crime than genocide. This is why people insist on not calling it genocide.

The same way various organisations are using euphemism threadmills, they are creating dysphemism threadmills. In this particular case, they are using word "genocide" to describe something which really isn't, in order to make it look worse than it actually is. I don't see why would anyone subscribe to that.

Furthermore, the only thing which will be achieved in the long run, if the word "genocide" continues to be overabused, is that in future when you tell someone that "Jews suffered genocide in the Second World War" they won't see it as a very bad thing, as genocide will be equated with ethnic cleansings and massacres, so that to them it will sound as "Jews were massacred in the Second World War" would to us.

Or else we might call copyright infringement "theft" (wait, we already do that), call theft "murder", and then hang people for borrowing a book.


Any discussion on this subject is dooomed to failiure. No matter how many arguments you produce, no matter how many times you repeat them this is lost on the Serbian general public.The majority of the people are not going to accept the truth about the 90's in decades to come,and in the mean time we will just have to get used to all of those who gloat over this verdict, from SRS to (as we had the opportunity to hear at the weekend)SPC.

It has nothing to do with accepting the truth

Majority of the people do not want to think about that. It is an ostrich behaviour; people do not want to face the painful past.
It is a very natural reaction, also given the fact that most of the people had no idea that attrocities to that degree were happenning while they were happening.
Put yourself in their shoes. Imagine your father is an arsenist and he was responsible for burning down a neighbors house. How often would you like to be reminded that your family is a criminal family, that you should all pay for the behaviour of the head of the household the reparation to the neighbor. Not that it would not serve justice to pay up the neighbor, but would that be your favorite topic of conversation. Would you like to hang out with people that keep reminding you of your father's crimes? What would be your attitude towards those people?

Add to that that the

Add to that that the neighbour burned your shed, and the sheriff is looking the other way...


which one is more important
the verdict and the name or the truth?

Opet ovaj

Then ask the question question why official Belgrade still refuses to turn over the archives. Is Belgrade in fact guilty? If not, then what does it have to hide?

This must be the dumbest thing I've read in a decade. Since I highly doubt you are a dumb man, you must be trolling again.

If police stopped by tomorrow, without the warrant, to get a DNA sample from you, would you refuse? But...why? You must be guilty then. Or even better, would you turn over every piece of paper you have and all of your PCs, so they can fish for incriminatory evidence.

Get serious man. Why in the hell would anyone charged with anything voluntarily turn something over? I'm sure you of all people knows how the system works. This is straight out of the US government book, protecting "national interests" and all that. The court didn't subpoena the documents ("troubling" as it may be). The only people breaking the law here are these so-called lawyers divulging the information they really shouldn't.

I don't know if Serbia is guilty, but that would me a matter of a personal opinion now that the court has ruled she is not.

Are USA Guilty Of Genocide?

Japan, Korea , Vietnam, Iraq, Serbia (Nis, Aleksinac ...), Iraq 2, Avganistan ....


to je neshto drugo.. to se zove Demokratski Genocid i on je dozvoljen..

Noam Chomsky

appèle cela "terrorisme en gros" par rapport à l'Al Kaida qui pratique "le terrorisme au détail". Les USA organisent leur terrorisme comme une affaire, puis ceux qui se défendent ou qui s'opposent, ils sont considérés comme criminel. Les USA sont, depuis toujours, gouvernés par des raclures.

Malo na francuskom, bre, da se vidi da Srbi nisu samo nebeski narod i genocidari, nego i da pričaju razne jezike. Am I right?


According to commonly accepted definitions of genocide it would be extremely difficult to accuse the US of genocide in those places. It is entirely possible, however, to accuse it of numerous war crimes. If George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney were from Serbia it is entirely possible (and possibly desirable) that they would be in The Hague right now on trial for war crimes, torture, crimes against humanity, etc.

USA and genocide

you mean even after the use of napalm, defoliants and all those other goodies on civilian population. But that was the war against communism, so it's perfectly OK I guess...

2 million Vietanmese died during the war, so if we are talking about numbers, then the US was a stronger case for genoicide charges than Serbia is now.

As for intent, it is something very hard to prove, unless you have discovered a dozen death camps with gas chambers and such.

I guess in every war in the previous centrury, in which one force is not overwhelmingly stronger, each side tries to exterminate as much of the enemy as possible, without much heed whether the target is a civilian or a militant.

I am not trying to justify war crimes here. I wish all these beasts could get the punishment they desrve, but the campaign to pass genocide charges against Serbia did not have this as its goal. It was meant to condemtn a whole people for the duration of this century and simply did not correspond to what was and is real.

Stop the madness

Let's clarify a few things about Serbia's wars in the Balkans during the 1990s.

These were not simply wars for control of territory. These were wars to create ethnically clean territories that Serbia could control. Unfortunately the territories Serbia had in mind were ethnically mixed, and in many cases Serbs were not only not an absolute majority, but were in many cases a distinct minority.

This meant that the primary goal of Serbian policy was ethnic cleansing. It was not a by-product of the wars of the 1990s. Rather, it was one of the principle goals of these wars. This is where the behaviour of Serbia in the 1990s differs so dramatically from so many of the war crimes in previous conflicts that so many apologist like to cite as justification for Serbia's actions.


Would you believe me that what you wrote is pure madness to me? Serbia started wars in the Balkans to create ethnically clean territories it could control? Primary goal of Serbian policy was ethnic cleansing? Please.


Is it madness? Yes, it is madness, but when we examine the statements of the key political actors and participants, and when we look at how campaigns and battles were waged, then it becomes clear that conquering and holding territory was not enough. The territory had to be "clean". How many times did Bosnian Serb leaders discuss the necessity to cleanse the territory?

No. Your comments are

No. Your comments are madness. This Serbian policy you speak of simply never existed.

Denial.... ain't just a river in Egypt. You are denying something that has been already clearly been determined to be a matter of fact by all reputable historians studying the matter. A clear trail of statements exists by Serbian politicians throughout the early 1990s testifying to this. |There also exists a clear pattern of behaviour by Serbian forces working towards this goal. Ethnic cleansing was not a by-product of the wars. It was the main goal.

re: stop the madness

judging by the outcome of these wars and the history of ethnic conflict in the last 50 years (NDH, Maspok, persistence of Croat nationalism during SFRJ era), I think it was the Croats who had the strongest drive to create a culturally homogenous territory (culture encompassing ethnic, religious, national identities), a pre-requisite for building a Croat nation (consult Ernest Gellner: Nationalism (1997), a good explanation. And this did in fact happen. Croatia is the most ethnically clean republic of the former Yugoslav states. Serbia is the most diverse.

Re: Genocide - you are right

Legislators may be very ordinary men,for legislation is very ordinary work,it is but final issue of million minds.

Theory,in political science,is worthless,except for purpose of
being realized in practice.

Entrance into public service and promotion in it......
can only justly be made throgh the door of merit.
And whenever any one aspires to and attain such high post,especially if by unfair and desreputable and indecent means,and is afterword found to be signal failure, he shold at once be beheaded.He is worst among public enemies.

Cit: Albert Pike Brigadni General,advokat,počasni Ph.D.
Harwardskog Univerziteta.

Mason 33 rd. Degree,Soveren Grand Commander of Scotish Rite's Southern Masonic Jurisdiction.

Izvor: Moral i Dogma


What about native americans?

Nigde tu nije bilo ni pomena

Nigde tu nije bilo ni pomena od genocida. Nemoj da lupas.

Jamie, Jamie-boy,

Jamie, Jamie-boy, ... try a bit harder to get a life or at least a real job.

It 's been ten years since the war end. There is now a verdict; no matter how much you hate -- it it is the final one. This country should look forward not back...

The Mladic & Co. will be soon dead -- or in the Hague. Get over it.

Go for a new contract and a new country... the problems here are slowly (unfortunately not as fast as many of us would like) getting resolved and neither you have been helping people in Serbia, nor you can hinder more - so think about going home and don't come back...

Yet another one...

Well, verdict or not, historians will focus on finding the truth of what actually happened. Unfortunately for those who feel that they are Serbs first and human beings last, the archival records has already revealed (evidence the ICJ refused to review) that official Belgrade orchestrated the genocide at Srebrenica. And according to the ICJ ruling it was genocide. And according to the ICJ ruling Serbia is and was in breach of the Convention on Genocide. This is something Serbia will have to live with forever, until such time as it undergoes a process similar to Germany. This means you and your children and your children's children will be branded by the world as genocidal until such time as you and the broader political spectrum are willing to deal with the realities of past actions. Unfortunate but true.

As for the problems being resolved... ha ha ha ha ha...

let's see... Serbia doesn't have a gov't, doesn't have a functioning constitutional court, doesn't have a functional constitution, doesn't have a functional parliament, doesn't have a functional political system, is increasingly importing as domestic production falls, the birthrate is still below replacement level, security services and oligarchs play an unusually intrusive role in policy formation, there is little civil society to speak of, most everyone I speak with -- from taxi drivers to college graduates -- wants to leave the country....

Obviously you aren't living in Serbia, or you wouldn't claim that things are that good. Why don't you return here and try and change the country for the better. Then you will discover for yourself how the people from the diaspora are treated.


This means you and your children and your children's children will be branded by the world as genocidal until such time as you and the broader political spectrum are willing to deal with the realities of past actions. Unfortunate but true.


Wow... That is an argument of a genius... You should be ashamed of yourself for sayting that... Which world? Maybe the world of sick propagandists and Serb-haters?
How the hell my children, or I, or a great majority of Serbs have anything to do with it... No one in the right mind could hold responsible all people for criminal action of a group of people /some past government.. I am sure that many people can put libels on everyone and everything... The past government was responsible (look to the scope of the verdict) - the new Serbian governments will adhere to the letter and spirit of the verdict of the World Court... Keeping everyone in Serbia - or Serbs outside, born and unborn, responsible for something that they did not have any involvement, wishes, is... sorry to say but mean and sick... Glad that the World Court decision is not going in that direction.

As for the problems being resolved... ha ha ha ha ha...


I said that the problems here are "slowly (...) getting resolved" not they are resolved. There are - unfortunately - after the years of war and failed government so many problems on the table, I don't disagree with that, but the direction is broadly looking irreversible... About the third of the problems you had mentioned will be cleared with a formation of the new government in coming weeks.


James it is completelly wrong to compare Germany and Serbia. Germany had conquered whole the Europe and made or supported genocide of Jews, Gipsies and Serbs, all over the Europe.

Of course that I am deeply and sincerely sorry for the Bosnian people, but I do not feel any guilty and responsability what Milosevic and his bastards had done in Bosnia.

Civil war in Bosnia is something absolutelly different, as Serb ethnic side supported by Milosevic did not have any intetion and plan to made a genocyde and conquer all the Bosnia. Milosevic regyme is of course guilty of agression and war attrocities, but nevertheless, Milosevic reguime was accepted and supported all the time by EU and USA until 1998, when it was finally decided in USA and EU to overthrow him, when the Congress passed the Bill and financed $200 million for that purpose. And of course, he was overthrown in 2000. If USA decided to overthrow him earlier, it could had been done earlier - for sure.

Milosevic was a dictator, and he was staying in power only by oppression and election fraud all the time of his domination. Milosevic had never had more then 30%-40% of electorate.
It is an absolute truth, and I do not agree that the rest of 60%-70% of electorate, and hundreds of thousands of Serbs who fled the contry should have been responsible and compared with Germans who conquered all the Europe and really wanted to kill all Jews in the world. Don't tell me that the Serbs are same as Germans, that they wanted to kill all the Bosnians and take all the Europe and world, that's an absolute bullshit.

You must be kidding me, I am out of Serbia as from 1991. I was a disident and heavilly beatten by Milosevic police, thousands of people as well, some were killed. Hundreds of thousands of people did not agree with Milosevic policy and we got out of the country, because we did not want to be a part of that crime. Millions of people who stayed in Serbia, were oposition to Milosevic for all the time of his domination. Are you trying to say that we are supposed to feel responsible for that what he had done with his police, secret police and special security forces in Bosnia, are you trying to say that we have collective guilty as a nation, as Germans had after II World War.
YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND, WE COULD NOT STOP HIM. THERE WAS NO WAY. The only way was the way that he was practically overthrown, by the support of Western countries in period 98-2000. EU and USA must take the part of responsability for that what happened in Bosnia, because they could had stopped him.

Of course that you are aware that Milosevic secret police assassinated Zoran Djindjic, evrybody knows it. Nothing has changed in Serbia, Milosevic secret police is still in power, that is the only reason Serbia is still in troubles. And secret police is in every political party, because of that nothing can be changed in positive direction - and that is dictatorship, you may be pretty much sure about that.

Help with English please

What's English for "zluradost"? "Malice" just doesn't cut it...

Of course, it is natural for one to feel joy over results of own work. But despite all the problems you mentioned, it's the fact that people are living better in April 2007 then in April 2006 and, unless something is done, they will live better still in April 2008.

Mozda "venom"?

a moze i "malevolence". Kad je nesto iz ciste zlobe, onda je "out of pure spite"

Ма не вреди, то

Ма не вреди, то све вуче на "зло" али не помиње "радост". Пре би се превело као "злонамерност".

zluradost = malicious joy

zluradost = malicious joy


moze i 'gloating' a moze i tudjica 'schadenfreude'

Никола Смоленски

Malicious joy, hateful, venomous, mean...
Zlonamernost: ill intentions

you and your children and your children's children will be brand

James riba smrdi od glave a ne od repa.
Ne znam da se neko znacajno trzao u UN, Amerikanci, Englezi, Rusi...svi oni koji drmaju zemaljskom kuglom, pa cak ni sami austrijanci dok je predsednik Austrije bio fasista.
Jel su oni tamo imali demokratske izbore kad su bivseg fasistu, Kurta Valdhajma, izabrali za predsednika svoje drzave?

Gothsa, sreco moja...

... Kurt Valthajm je bio GENERALNI SEKRETAR UN!!!


P.S. Na dobronamerno insistiranje mnogobrojne
blogerice Krasici, skinuo sam potpis u svom
punom i duhovitom obliku koji su vec svi primetili...

kuku! A ja mislila da je bio predsednik Austrije!

Pre godinu dana sam gledala film Tears of Sun, a pocinje citatom koji otprilike ide ovako: Dovoljno je da samo jedan covek okrene glavu pa da zlo pobedi.

Gotsha, istorija ima dva tocka...

... i svaki se okrece na svoju stranu.

Ako hoces da se malo vise informises o SS Sec. Gen. of UN:

Ali ovo moram da izdvojim:

Operation Kozara

Much historical interest has centered around Waldheim's role in Operation Kozara, a particularly ferocious campaign against Tito's partisans in the summer of 1942, in which thousands of Croatian partisans and civilians died in battle and in the concentration camps as a result of so-called cleansing operations, in the aftermath of which corpses of civilian hostages were hung on makeshift wooden gallows positioned along the road from Kostajnica to Banja Luka. According to one post-war investigator, prisoners were routinely shot within only a few hundred yards of Walheim's office.[2], and the Jasenovac concentration camp where prisoners endured the most horrific of tortures was just a few miles away. Yet decades later Waldheim would maintain "that he did not know about the murder of civilians there."[2]

Waldheim's name appears on the Wehrmacht's "honor list" of those responsible for the miltarily successful operation, and from the Croatian side, Waldheim received a silver medal with an oak leaf cluster by the fascist Ustashi leader, Ante Pavelic.


P.S. Na dobronamerno insistiranje mnogobrojne
blogerice Krasici, skinuo sam potpis u svom
punom i duhovitom obliku koji su vec svi primetili


hvala al nebi. Nesto znam o njemu(valjda nije pogresno) a ovo da je bio GS of UN govori sve. Govori o svetu u kojem zivimo.
Kako promeniti ili pomeriti stvari nabolje za milimetar to ce ovi Veliki da vezbaju na Malima, Lovatori na Siromasima... i tako do sudnjeg dana.
Suze sam lila ceo dan kad sam pratila radio prenos S.Lukic iz Vukovara, a do pada Milosevica bila u dobrovoljnoj izolaciji. Tada sam shvatila sta je rat.Uzas za ljudsku dusu!
Za mene je svaki fizicki atak na coveka genocid.

PS Moram an posao


Tako je! Svako namerno zlo sa ciljem da unisti coveka je genocid. Genocid je kada jedna nacija iskljucuje, bukvalnim eliminisanjem, drugu naciju. Planski. Mislim da je u politickom smislu, Srbija nesposobna da uradi bilo sta planski. Sve se desavalo spontano, with the flow.


Tako je! Svako namerno zlo sa ciljem da unisti coveka je genocid. Genocid je kada jedna nacija iskljucuje, bukvalnim eliminisanjem, drugu naciju. Planski. Mislim da je u politickom smislu, Srbija nesposobna da uradi bilo sta planski.

Tako je. Moj otac tu

Tako je. Moj otac tu situaciju zove "genocid iz nehata".


je odgovorio kao oni Skorpioni na zavrsnom izlaganju: bio sam ali nisam pucao!
Poznavala sam mamu od mog prijatelja, kozarsko dete odrasla u sirotistu. Cudom prezivela.

Gothso, vratimo se na "lavlju glavu"!

Jezivo smrdi, ne mora ni usta da otvori!


P.S. Na dobronamerno insistiranje mnogobrojne
blogerice Krasici, skinuo sam potpis u svom
punom i duhovitom obliku koji su vec svi primetili...

Inteligentan covek. Kako je

Inteligentan covek. Kako je samo uspeo da isproziva sve DSS-ovce na blogu.

Znaci, dezeline...

...svako ko ima kritican komentar je DSS-ovac? Nema sta, on je inteligentan, ali vi ste apsolutno genijalni.

Mungose, ne daj potpis! Meni

Mungose, ne daj potpis! Meni su moj potpis ukinulu, mučki i bez prava žalbe...

To say that "your children

To say that "your children and your children's children will be branded by the world as genocidal," is just simply pathetic. When I read the mandate of "the International Crisis Group," supposedly it is "to prevent and resolve deadly conflict." How do comments of this nature sit with the goal of your employer, James?

Speaking of which, in light of what happened in March 2004, do you consider yourself a failure?

Oh, well...

I'm one of those who do not ever forget about what happened in Srebrenica, who do think there was a genocide there, who think it's a must for the citizens of Serbia to face it and acknowledge it, once and for all... The sooner, the better.
And I'm sick and tired of all the apologetics for nationalism and chauvinism in Serbia.


James Lyon wrote:
This means you and your children and your children's children will be branded by the world as genocidal until such time as you and the broader political spectrum are willing to deal with the realities of past actions. Unfortunate but true.

There isn't such a thing as "genocidal nation". The term itself has been coined by and for the use of those politicians who find it easier to express their opinions on other countries' policies by labeling entire nations.
Oooops! Isn't it George W. Bush describing Iran as a "suicidal nation" at this very moment? How (in)convenient!

Is it possible that it's never occured to you that your children and your children's children might just as well be treated guilty some day, for everything the government of their country is doing today?

James Lyon wrote:
As for the problems being resolved... ha ha ha ha ha...

Personally, I disagree with whoever says that the problems in Serbia are being resolved. I don't see any improvement here, only new reasons to worry.

But that sinister laugh, James...

First off, be careful - you might choke yourself! =P
Secondly, it's not a nice thing to do. Bad manners. No-no.
And thirdly, that specific line in your comment made me wonder if there was a good intention and any sincerety in what you wrote, particularly in the following words: "Unfortunate but true".

It's a shame, as I thought the article was good and I agree on many points... But now that I've read your comments, I'm no longer sure if I actually got the point in the first place.

Kad je potpisan Dejton

pomislila sam Boze, da li je moguce da ce se Srbija izvuci posle svega u cemu je ucestvovala?!
Naravno da nije. Pored bombardovanja ostalo je jos frustracija, nesvesti, besa, neodgovornosti ...
Kad li ce ozdraviti?
Znam da zavisi samo od gradjana ove drzave ali to ce ici polako jer nema stvarne volje. Mi kao jedinke, nepovezani sistemom, institucijama smo nemocne.

What a brilliant mind you've

What a brilliant mind you've got Mr. Tarkovski.

Dear Tarkovski

So you would like me to go home? Well, whenever I hear people say that, it makes me want to stay even longer... iz inata...

A ja vam mister James zelim

A ja vam mister James zelim bas da ovde ostanete zauvek i da radite to sto radite, kod istih poslodavaca. A kako vas placaju po ucinku mocicete sebi da "priustite" i srpski standard od 300 evra mesecno, doduse ako se malo vise potrudite :). Za prosecnog amera vise nego zadovoljavajuce. Zamislite kako bi vam bilo da ste ceo zivot proveli negde na Midwest-u. Ovo vam nekako dodje ko premija.


Then ask the question question why official Belgrade still refuses to turn over the archives. Is Belgrade in fact guilty? If not, then what does it have to hide?

1. Perhaps because the court never said that Belgrade had to, why they never put Belgrade in position to have no choice but to turn over the archives ? Do they want to hide something ?
2. In fact, that's for the court to decide, everything else is equal to gossip. I would like to know the truth, who should I trust: the court or the people who claim to know
3. I honestly don't know, I would like to, but I am just an ordinary citizen, and have no hopes to find out matters of national security

How is it in your country James ? Can ordinary people get to know something important for national security ?
And because

Serbs are not the only ones who read this blog
, I would like to take this opportunity to say:
I am guilty for being born here,
I am guilty for not killing Milosevic (before the genocide)- I most certainly should have sacrifice my own life so that following curse never be said
you and your children and your children's children will be branded by the world as genocidal

So here is the message to mothers all around the world: learn from my mistakes, don`t let your children to be cursed.

p.s. excuse my English, I haven't had a chance to practice lately

Quote:I am guilty for being

I am guilty for being born here,
I am guilty for not killing Milosevic (before the genocide)- I most certainly should have sacrifice my own life so that following curse never be said

You forgot that you are guilty for you are, while you should aren't.

Translate THAT! ;)

Why is ICJ ruling of any relevance?

Dress it in lawyerspeak all you want, but the gist is this: when FRY sued NATO, ICJ declared that FRY was not a UN member during the aggression, hence ICJ can't hear the matter. Fine. But when Bosnia sues Serbia, Serbia automagically retrobecomes a UN member, and ICJ can hear and decide on the matter. What?

By doing that, ICJ has shown that it is a kangaroo court like ICTY, and I don't see why would anyone believe their verdicts.

genocide - definition

i would be very interested to understand what of the following constitute genocide, and why so or why not so, under the criteria that massacre in srebrenica was judged to be a genocide:

-katyn forest massacre (1940) 20,000 shot
-kragujevac massacre (1941) 7,000 shot in 100 for one reprisal policy
-bleiburg massacre (1945) 10,000 shot (figure controversial)
-bombing of dresden, hiroshima, nagasaki
-nazi bombing of belgrade (1941) - 2500 killed
-allied bombing of belgrade (1944) - 1200 killed
-volksdeutscher massacres (1945) - unknown number shot
-my lai massacre, vietnam (1968) - hundreds of women and children shot
-carpet bombing of vietnam and use of agent orange
-massacre in ovcara '91 (250 killed)
-massacre in gospic '91 (120 killed)
-massacre of hundreds of elderly people in "oluja" (1995)
-fallujah massacre (1000 killed)

Mr. Mad Kitten...

... Serbs & Serbians had never thrown an A-bomb on anybody, neither on Hiroshima & Nagasaki, at least.

If you wish, I can start - not "Blogging", but writting a book - here, about the genocide you are commiting against your own people every single day! OK?

Enjoy hospitality there and don't behave as a (post)war-profiteer.

Mongoose, The

"I like Plato, but not as much as the thruth, itself!" (Aristotle)

P.S. ...If you know, by the chance, who they were...

mene zaista interesuje da li

mene zaista interesuje da li vi ljudi zaista mislite da je svet toliko glup da veruje da vi toliko brinete o dobrobiti Bosanskih muslimana? Ili mozda šiptara ? ili možda iračkog naroda ? Mada svet i veruje, što je najžalosnije.Vi ste se baš onako ljuuudski nasekirali što tamo neki obrezani iračanin sa brkovima živi teeeeeško 'pod sadamovom čizmom'pa ste pohrlili da ga oslobodite a?
Hajde da se ne zavaravamo, sve ovo vama dodje kao izvor zabave, arena u koju ubacite 'zveri' da se bore, pri tom ih naoružavate i nadjete zajednički cilj sa nekom od strana ( npr. mi vama nezavisno Kosovo, vi nama jednu od najvecih vojnih baza na Balkanu i slobodan pristup ili šta već-- meni laiku to liči na risiko strategijsku vojnu igru--postavljate baze ovde, pa onde , pa jos onde ??)i porobljavate svet ili se približavate nekom zacrtanom cilju. Mislim nemam ja ništa protiv da me porobi vaša čizma sve dok uživam u tome -- što bi rekla Erika Jong svaka žena obožava fašistu-- ali da mi pritom priča priče -- to već ne ide.
Tako da ono što pokušavam da kažem je --hajde da ne sitničarimo a? Koliko mi je poznato Naser Orić za koga se zna da je ubijao i ubijao i --obratite pažnju na ovu reč --UBIJAO--je išetao sa osmehom iz Haškog tribunala posle 2 godine ako se ne varam ili tako nešto (sporadično pratim politiku i svetska dogadjanja pa mi ne zamerite),dok Srbi iz Haga ne izlaze bez kazne od minimuma 10 godina ili mrtvi. A premijer Kosova je isto tako jedan ubica, znate premijer ovog Kosova za koje se borite.
Mmada, doduše, verovatno bih i ja sedela u čarapicama sa šiptarima kao Ričard Holbruk i borila se za nezavisno Kosovo da su mi platili odnosno pogodili cenu.
Hoću da kažem da su i Srbi progutali par nepravdi -- kolone izbeglica,dežurni krivci za sve, omiljena tema CNN-a, da ne zaboravimo da je Srbija bombardovana, da su ljudi svoje najmilije i njihova creva skupljali u kofama i da je ubijena jedna devojčica od 2 godine na noši dok je piškila dok je svet uživao u svojim sisatim ljubavnicama igrajući golf. Isti onaj svet koji toliko brine o dobrobiti svih. A sve to zato što je Billu, Monika isisala i to malo što je imao u glavi.

Naravno da su strašni snimci na kojima se vidi kako su Škorpioni ubijali i naravno da će svako ko ima imalo ljudskosti , bez obzira koje je vere i nacije da osudi takvo ponašanje ali činjenica je da je takvih scena bilo na obe strane i činjenica je da su to radili pojedinci.I zločin u Srebrenici je , čak iako je bio dirigovan iz Begrada bio dirigovan od jednog čoveka a nije izglasan na referendumu da bi se cela država osudila za genocid. Druga je stvar što Americi opet treba neki izgovor.

I naravno, interesuje me kako to da sada potežete u ovom trenutku to pitanje Srebrenice i krivice Srba kad se odlučuje o statusu Kosova? Da biste opravdali pred svetom otimanje jednog dela jedne suverene države? Opet Srbi --bad guys , dežurni krivci , jedu male bebe za doručak?
ja sam samo laik, koji zaključuje logički , ništa lično

Dear Angry Bloggers

In order to have a reasonable and rational discussion on the question of what happened in the former Yugoslavia during the 1990s, you must do several things:

1) Be a human being first and a Serb second;

2) Do not compare the 1990s to other tragedies or massacres in order to downplay or justify them;

3) Realise that whatever our government does in our name (be it the Serbian or American gov'ts) our children will bear the blame for it, unless we admit it and try to make amends;

4)Until the recent past is dealt with, Serbia will not have peace with its neighbours and will continue to be a factor of instability in the region.

How the world and Serbia's neighbours view Serbia and Serbs is at present dependent entirely on how Serbia behaved from 1990-2000. Serbia has done little to overcome that and is still considered a source of instability in the region. This will not change until Serbia changes. And new future conflicts may be unavoidable unless change occurs.

Pa ondak?

koji je vaš predlog?

Quote:And new future

And new future conflicts may be unavoidable unless change occurs.

Iz istog razloga (nesuocavanje s prosloscu, opsjednutost osvetom) su za neke na ovim prostorima ratovi ´90tih bili jednostavno nastavak II svj.rata.


thanks for providing us with a clear explanation of what you really meant to say! I'm not being sarcastic, honestly. I'm being serious.

As for the latest comment, I agree on everything you wrote there, whereas I didn't agree on some points of your previous comments and apparently I didn't like the way (and the 'tone') you presented them.
My apologies if I was rude.

I still hope, though, that you don't forget about what is being done today (what was done yesterday and will be done tomorrow)by the government of your own country, in your name, and that you're doing your best to support all the activists in their protests against all the wrong decisions and actions of the US government.

Da nisu po tebi ameri mozda

Da nisu po tebi ameri mozda krivi zato sto se iracani ubijaju medjusobno??

По мени јесу.

По мени јесу. Знали су шта ће се десити ако се Садам склони са власти, и ипак су га склонили.

Couple of notes

All those angry reactions are directed to you James, not to the war crimes, Bosnians, Albanians... If your name was Salih Muslimovic, a 17 year old orphan from Srebrenica, the tone would be very different. It is the hypocrisy of "dusebriznik" from the west, the self righteous seeker of justice, that ticks off people.

1. Treat us as humans, and you will get a human reaction on the war crimes. Keep talking to us as inhumane, war mongering, genocidal mob and you will have a violent response, just as if you really talked to inhumane, war mongering... Refer to "Expectancy Theory" by Victor Vroom and modify it a little bit.

2. Comparison with other tragedies is only to make us feel better and not uniquely inhumane for what happened in 1990's (a fact that you and people like you do not fail to remind us on a daily basis)

3. Children should not bear blame on anything their parents did. If you claim that, you are not very different from the instigators of the war crimes. Don't forget that Serbian war crimes during 1990's came as a reaction to WW2 war crimes committed against Serbs in Bosnia & Croatia. If anyone taught those people that the children of WW2 war criminals were not guilty...

4. Serbia is a factor of instability because it is economically underdeveloped, not because of war crimes committed over 10 years ago. Do not expect catharsis from hungry people whose lives are in disarray. Germans had their catharsis when Willy Brandt knelt in Warsaw to apologize for the genocide. That happened in December 1970, 25 years after the end of WW2, when Western Germany was an economic superpower with hundreds of billions of dollars invested in it in the meantime.


I agree with you that children should not bear the blame for the sins of their parents. However, in life humans tend to do exactly that. Think how many persons were killed during the 1990s because they were "Turks", even though the real Turks had left Bosnia more than 115 years earlier, or because they were "Ustase" or "Cetniks", even though the real Ustase and Cetniks were now pensioners or dead. And think how many of the crimes committed on all sides during the war occurred because people blamed the children for the sins of the parents. It is precisely because of human tendencies to blame children for the sins of their parents that Serbia (and other countries in the region) need to face up to the reality of what was done during the 1990s.

As for your argument about economic determinism, I disagree. There are lots of impoverished countries that are not factors of instability or a danger to their neighbours. What makes Serbia a factor for continuing instability is the degree to which the pan-Serbian idea continues to grip many of Serbia's politicians and voters, as seen in the strong showing by the SRS, SPS and DSS. Economic development alone will not erase those attitudes. It didn't succeed in erasing those attitudes under Tito's Yugoslavia. Germany was a success because it was forced to de-Nazify and because it was also forced to confront its past crimes through the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials and through a massive education program. And that all happened before the German economy took off.

That is why you, as an intelectual...

...should leave the children out of any discussion. Don't give it legitimacy. Responsibility lies on the ones who committed/instigated the crimes and the lesser extent to the ones who elected them/did nothing about to prevent/ did not protest/ silently supported them. My arguments was precisely the same thing you are saying; in the 1990's people went for each other's throats calling them the WW2 names (ustasa, balija, cetnik...)

As for economic development and factor of instability, here is where we disagree. I personally do not think that Serbia is a threat to the region. The popularity of SRS & SPS comes from "social populism" ("3 dinars for loaf of bread" - campaign promisses) and costant corruption talk - all internal issues. Majority of their popularity does not come from nationalism (I am not denying that some of it comes from there).
Take away the unemployment & poverty, and you take away SRS' message. Economic development is not the only factor, I agree, but the one that will best succeed.

By the way, as for Germany, even in 1970, 48% of them were against what Willy Brandt did. After the WW2 they were occupied people so they could not voice their opinion. That is why you believe that "de-nazification" worked. It did not until they became middle class society. It is more likely that you can have a civilized conversation about war crimes with Serbs who have jobs & comfortable lives. It gets increasingly more difficult down the economic ladder you go.

Constant reminders and conditioning the economic development on war crimes are actually counter productive to achieve what you want to achieve - the genuine remorse for what happened in the 1990s'.

Another word (sorry for being so long winded)

Finally, if my understanding serves me correctly, your goal is to denazify Serbia. In other words you want to change the behavior of the Serbs. This can happen in 2 ways:
1.Occupy them and force them to change (works only superficially, actually you aggravate the situation doing that)
2.Motivate them to change – this seems to be your only recourse

There are only 2 known motivators in the world:

Good recipe to de-nazify Serbia:
5 parts of economic opportunity (Carrot)
2 parts of education (soft stick)
1 part of guilt & shame (stick)
1 part of justice (war crimes tribunal - stick)
½ a part of praise for good Serbs (carrot)

Your recipe to de-nazify Serbia:
Shove as much guilt & shame, tribunals & courts down their throat until they all attempt to commit collective suicide (Stick, stick, stick & even bigger stick). Then and there, on the brink of the abyss, grab their hand and tell them: “It is ok, it is ok, it happens, but don’t do it again”
I appeal to your Americanism, to the best things they teach little Americans, and that is to be practical, pro-active, and constructive, to promote the good recipe. However if your only goal is to piss off as many people as you can, then you lived far too long in the Balkans.

If you really want to help, promoting the two pronged approach would work:
1. Make the politics unprofitable in Serbia – you want to remove the main motivator for scum to run for office. After all was said and done in the 90’s, the main goal of the leaders of the warring parties was to get rich quickly.
2. Make their populist message less effective – people with their lives together (middle class people) are less affected by the rallying cries of thugs who use them to get rich. Nationalism was just one of those rallying cries, a symptom of a disease, not the cause. Next time it may be socialism (like Hugo Chavez), corruption, etc.
Stop treating the symptom and treat the cause.
Good luck James!

Why is pan-Serbian idea a bad thing?

Seriously. I don't buy that "the pan-Serbian idea continues to grip many of Serbia's politicians and voters", but for the sake of argument, let's say that it's true.

Pan-Croatian idea also grips practically all Croatian politicians and voters. Unlike pan-Serbian idea, pan-Croatian idea is actually implemented, through a program of massive ethnic cleansing. Yet it somehow doesn't create instability in the Balkans. Pan-Albanian idea is the only ideology on Albanian political scene. It is in the process of being implemented, through violence, terrorism, and again, massive ethnic cleansing. Yet it, too, doesn't create instability in the Balkans. I simply don't see how is that possible.

This pan-Serbian idea refers to a concept that all territories inhabited by Serbs should be in Serbia. OK. But currently, all territories inhabited by Croats are in Croatia, and then some, including territories which were never inhabited by Croats (even if you would subscribe to Croatian history, not for centuries). This pan-Croatian idea apparently is nothing bad, or at least I never heard anyone saying that it is bad. Yet I oftenly hear that pan-Serbian idea is bad. Why?

Poenta je u tome sto ta

Poenta je u tome sto ta tvoja izmisljena Veliko-Hrvatska demagogija ne podrazumeva teritorije koje nisu sastavni deo Hrvatske. Srbi su hteli teritorije drugih drzava.

Херцег-Босна је

Херцег-Босна је у саставу Хрватске? Човек научи нешто ново сваки дан...

Могао бих се сложити да су РСК и РС друге државе, али оне су насељене Србима, који својевољно желе да се прикључе Србији.

Bad thing

It isn't a bad thing, provided it doesn't start encroaching on other people's territory.

How is territory of, say,

How is territory of, say, RSK, other people's territory?

OK James, 1. I am a human

OK James,
1. I am a human first, European the second, citizen of Serbia the third, Serb the fourth (no need to go further here)
2. I do not compare the 1990s to other tragedies or massacres in order to downplay or justify them, but sometimes I mention them in order not to be forgotten
3. with this I have a problem: I don't know WHAT to admit. I wasn't there. I heare people say this and that - but I am nor a spy neither in the goverment, I don`t have facts, I don't know facts, I've been lied by the media so long that I most certainly don't believe them, I've been lied by politcians, I've been bombed by those whom I believed- so I don't believe them either, I simply asked you earlier - why should I believe more some people I don`t even know - then the official court ?
Please, give mi an answer on that.
4. with this I agree

Dear James,

Dear James,

I agree with the comments of Oya, Mr. Bean and Vlad-Man, and also I would like to add one strong evidence more, that Serbia did not comit genocide, and should not be compared to Germany at all and Serbs should not be marked as genocidal nation. There is an area in southwest of Serbia called Sandzak, populated with hundrerds of thousands of Bosnian Muslims. Nobody was killed, there was no war and there was not ethnic cleansing. So, your comparison is wrong.

II WW is still not finished in peoples mind in ex Yugoslavia, you got to be aware of it. There are still lot of problem to be solved, I sincerelly hope without arms.

James, I am not trying here to justify, downplay and compare war crimes of Serb side - I am really sorry for Bosnian civilians, but I am trying to explain here that Serbia did not comit genocide, and especially that Serbs are not genocidal people and that collective guilt that you suggested is absolutelly wrong.

In II WW there was a genocide comitted on Serbs by Germany and NDH, and that is actually the key answer why
the war happened in Yugoslavia in 90's. I am not trying to justify Milosevic - who is to be blamed with his forces for the war and war crimes. But that genocide that actually occured in the period 41-45, instigated a hysteria in parts of Serbian nation - that the genocide will happen again, especially after Tudjman showed relation to Ustasa emigration and put a symbol of NDH (sahovnica) to the flag of Croatia.

I will tell you something else my friend James, my wife is of Croation nationality, I am not nationalist and I have never been. My opinion is that we are all same nation in Yugoslavia, Serbs, Croats, Bosnians and Montenegrians as our maternal language is absolutelly the same.


Dear James,
I've just been reading both your blog and the comments - it still amazes me how people refuse to face the past. I think that the ruling on genocide is shameful, as most people do know - whether they admit it even to themselves or not, that the state of Serbia with its organs did orchestrate most of what happened in all the recent wars. I do not believe that there really were paramilitary organisations - they were all part of some body or another (like special units or DB guys), unless we talk of the Serbian Orthodox Church.

People who lived in or near Auschwitz must have smelled the truth - they could not say they did not know. When they say big piles of shoes they must have known that their former owners will not be needing them any longer.

The same thing in Serbia - the very fact that so many frustrated people respond to your articles so angrily I think prove the point.

And what of Kosovo? I have not heard anybody saying anything positive like - Albanians are our neighbours and whether we like it or not we should learn more about them. How about people learning Albanian - I mean they know what the Serbs think, they speak the language. I haven't heard one single Serbian politician saying anything in Albanian at least as a curtesy thing. Correct me if I am wrong.

And I don't know what might happen with this continual pathological denial, I mean in people's heads there does not seem to be any space for anything else - denying the past takes up all the energy they have.

We do not need to hear any ruling to know that yes, the state of Serbia did draw maps (and is still dreaming of that) in blood (specially blood of other peoples)...

Krivica je iskljucivo pojedinacna -H. Arent

Regardless of any verdict out there, I, as an individual, will never accept the blame for the crimes "my" country committed.
While the war was raging across ex YU I was still a teenager who suffered under the war mongering politics and was strongly against it. The politicians are the ones who ought to accept our country's part in and apologise for the genocide or whatever one may choose to call it.

I feel sorry for all the casualties and victims but I cannot be blamed for monstrosities committed by someone else, even if it was in my name. I have never and will never approve of wars in the name of... and I disagree with the constant pressure to identify, as an individual, with the guilt of certain politicians and their military associates who represented the "Serbian interest". That was not my interest.

I am awaiting apologies as well.

What do you propose?

Now after the official verdict has been reached, what? An unofficial statement, like, e.g, when somebody ask me on the street: "Hey, man, did you commit a genocide?", I should say, "yes, yes, of course!". Or, "no, no, it wasn't me, but my country did it". Like this is different in the ears of normal people, not introduced to the arcane art of law. Yeah, right.

Somebody already said that this kind of conversation is futile.
Because, from my perspective this means that the prevailing number of people inside Serbia supported what happened in Srebrenica. In the time, most of us didn't even know. And like we were living in the state we could control. Like we were living in the state, for that matter.

You, on the other hand, at least I conclude (I admit the possibility of misunderstanding), will see the same situation as organised by our "government", and then project this intention to the entire state. And people. And not only you, but many others I suppose.

Most of the people from Serbia would never accept that kind of view.

Are you talking to me :))?

Are you talking to me :))?

Džejms, Nisu mi sasvim


Nisu mi sasvim jasni tvoji motivi za slanje brojnih, uglavnom tačnih a ipak vrlo provokativnih poruka. Nekako imam utisak da javno mnjenje ne može bitno izmeniti ni cile-mile pristup u kome se krajnje obazrivo (pa nekad i licemerno i fiškalski) objašnjava prosečnom građaninu Srbije zašto smo tu gde smo: omraženi, zaostali, izolovani, itd, niti pljuvanje pune istine, bezobrazno i bezobzirno, pravo u lice. Dok ne izraste potpuno nova generacija, poput one šezdesetosmaške u Nemačkoj, bojim se da neće biti potpunog shvatanja i osude svega što je u ime svih nas počinjeno tokom 1990-tih. Jer, savremenicima - koji su u ogromnom procentu urlali Slobo-slobodo i klicali, ili bar ćuteći odobravali, slanje tenkova na nama susedne narode - će uvek biti lakše da nalaze nova i nova opravdanja, izgovore i slično. Ali, da bi i nove generacije uopšte imale šansu da počnu misliti drugačije, tako danas treba, bez legalnog izuzetka, da misli politička i intelektualna elita. Tj. onaj ko nije spreman da obrazuje birače, odn. đake i studente, odnosno publiku bilo koje vrste, da prihvate istinu o dešavanjima 1990-tih, treba da bude lustriran i potpuno sklonjen sa javne scene.

Ko da ga skloni? Za početak, voleo bih da vidim da promoteri rata i ratnih zločina prestanu dobijati vize za USA i EU.

Hajde sad i ja (ipak, pripadnik srednje, a ne mlađe generacije) malo da tražim opravdanja na drugoj strani. Ja ni luk jeo ni luk mirisao (trust me!), nego se borio i protiv Miloševića i protiv svake miloševićevštine i svakog nacionalizma, pa opet čekam kao budala do besvesti za vizu, a VIPs srpskog nacionalizma kad god hoće idu na turneje po svetu. Ko im daje vize?! Šta?! Hoćeš da kažeš, da sam ja krivlji za rat od jedne Cece!? Uostalom, vašim državljanima ide na koncert!!! Koga ste to primali, kome ste davali državljanstva!? Pa teže je objasniti da je Karadžić zločinac prosečnom Srbinu iz Čikaga, nego prosečnom Srbinu iz Beograda! Veruj mi, pokušao sam!

Oprezno s njemackim primjerom

njemacki sezdesetosmasi su se osramotili ovih godina, prodali i sebe i ideale,... ali, sorry, nisam htjela o njima.

To njemacko suocavanje s prosloscu je tek zagrebano tih ´68., ´69. Ali onako stidljivo. Tu se vec zakuhavalo i definitivno pripremila pozornica za RAF (Rote Armee Fraktion, njemacki pandan talijanskim Brigade Rosse) i lijevi terorizam.

I dan danas, bas ovih mjeseci, kada se javno vode polemike oko prijevremenog pustanja na slobodu zadnjih RAFovaca (4 kom. josh), vlada generalna histerija i povici da se ti isti trebaju javno pokajati za ucinjeno. S druge strane, tek tu i tamo, u malom provjerenom krugu ljudi, odvaze se neki da kazu kako je teror ´70tih u Njemackoj DIREKTNA posljedica NEsuocavanja s vlastitom nacistickom prosloscu. Gdje su pitanja: "Tata/djede, sta si radio za vrijeme rata?" i dalje ostajala neodgovorena, a unutrasnja frustracija i otpor tadasnje mlade generacije establishmentu rastao. I onda se kod onih "najzescih" kanalizirao kroz (lijevi) teror...

Pa baš i nisam tako mislio

Naveo sam primer šezdesetosmaške generacije u Nemačkoj samo da bih istakao koliko je dugo trajalo dok se tamo javio neko ko je stvarno postavio neprijatna pitanja. O svemu ostalom vezanom za nemačku i drugu 1968. ne bih ovim povodom, osim da nema opravdanja ni za kakav pa ni levi terorizam.

Slazem se, sasvim.

Za terorizam i nasilje svake vrste nema opravdanja. Ja sam to spominjala kao uzrocno-posljedicnu vezu, koja se rado presucuje, jer je umijesanost vecine gradjana nacisticke Njemacke u zlocine pocinjene u njihovo ime i dalje (asesdesetih i sedamdesetih jos i vise) prilican tabu.

Taj dugi period koji je trebao proci da bi se uopce progovorilo o nacistickim zlocinima treba imati na umu kada se zahtijeva da se o zlocinima na Balkanu progovori zborno i bez (samo-)refleksije. Nesto mozemo nauciti iz gresaka, ali i uspjeha drugih.


E dobro, u pravu si svetionice, samo meni je malo problem da me stave u isti kos kao i sve ostale ljude iz Srbije, sto je ok kada imas neku ravnomernu raspodelu oko "prosecnog" gradjanina pa mozes da na osnovu tog proseka izvodis zakljucke.

Ipak, postoje dve stvari,posledicno vezane, usled kojih prosto ne mogu da prihvatim da se tag genocid zalepi na celu drzavu. Najpre, veliki deo naroda koji je '96/7, '00 maltretirao svoju obucu i zapostavljao normalne zivote radi toga da makne onoga koga je makao, uspeo je da odnese pobedu nad ostalim zbirom pasivnih, nerazumnih i zlikovaca.

Shodno jasnom raslojenju na dve grupe, od kojih je jedna u pocetku imala nadmoc i ugrozavala drugu, da bi potom bila porazena (mada ne spucana onoliko koliko bih ja to zeleo (posebno kategorija zlikovci)), to da je Srbija kao celina pocinila genocid je neprihvatljivo i odlicno se poklapa sa cuvenom presudom (iako su pravni razlozi za presudu mozda drugaciji).

Mada, pricati o ovako uzasnim stvarima promatrajuci ih hladnokrvno deluje gnusno i vampirski. Ne znam kako ljudi kojima je ovo profesionalna tema mogu da ostanu ljudska bica. Mora da svi odreda prolupate posle nekog vremena. OverNout

Nije Srbija kao celina

Nije "Srbija kao celina" počinila genocid. Kako nekoliko miliona ljudi može da počini genocid? Genocid su počinili državni organi, Republike Srpske, a koji su bili u vezi s organima Republike Srbije i SRJ. Kakvoj i kolikoj, upravo to pita James. Na stranu suđenje, dobro, izmakli smo maču stobilionske odštete koju ni tvoji i moji unuci ne bi mogli otplatiti, ali šta ćemo s političkom i moralnom odgovornošću? Tu odgovornost ima "Srbija kao celina" - ima odgovornost da svi koji su počinili genocid odgovaraju, da se politika zločina osudi i potpuno i trajno napusti, da niko u Srbiji ne može braniti ni minimizirati zločin i da celokupna društvena klima i javni diskurs daju osnove za veru da se tako nešto nikad više neće ponoviti.

Za početak, šta ćemo sa obavezom izručenja osumnjičenih? Pretpostavljam da ne glasaš za stranke koje su protiv saradnje s Hagom, pa te to ni ne pitam. Idemo dalje. Šta radiš kad vidiš sliku Ratka Mladića na zidu kafane ili prodavnice? Business as usual? Ili prosto izađeš napolje? Ili skreneš pažnju vlasniku da odmah skida tog zlikovca, ako misli da mu ikad ponovo uđeš u radnju? Kupuješ li tabloide koji promovišu ratne zločince? Kupuješ li muziku, ideš li na koncerte ljudi koji to rade? Jesi li za suđenje onima koji skrivaju Mladića, i za suđenje onima koji skrivaju one koji skrivaju i tako dalje sve dok god treba i koliko treba?


..Ima nas mnogo koji smo cepali cipele od '90-2000te...a jos uvek ispastamo zbog zlocinaca protiv kojih smo se borili tolike godine...Ceca za vize ne ceka bas kao ni Natasa Kandic koja trazi da se pregovori sa Srbijom ne nastave zbog onoga sto je radio Cecin muz...Svi ovi zlocinci sto su sad u zatvoru i kojima se sudi imali su sengen bez problema...malo ubijali a malo bili turisti u EU...a mnogi su imali i diplomatske pasose kao radnici DB......

Moram dodati:

ili su imali pasose "neprijateljskih" drzava s kojima su slobodno setali po svijetu (mislim na Legiju i njegove 2, bijase?, hrvatske putovnice).

Dan posle izricanja kazne

mogu samo da kažem da mi je žao što ne postoje veće kazne u našem tužilaštvu, pošto rekoše dobili su maksimalne kazne...
A koliko god me nešto teralo da branim moj narod, normalno , ne mogu da ne priznam šiptarima složnost i jedinstvo u postizanju zajedničkog cilja. Srbi su takvi da i da su dva oka u glavi posvadjali bi se, u čemu i leži šansa svakog neprijatelja. Šiptari imaju disciplinu i poštuju hijerarhiju, podsećaju na Nemce, što može da natera na ozbiljno razmišljanje, kod njih se zna ko koga sluša, ko je za šta zadužen i mora da obavi dok medju Srbima svi žele da budu na vrhu lestvice i svi misle da su baš oni Bogom dani da budu na vrhu.

I strašno me porazilo i juče kad sam slušala na b92 našeg dugogodišnjeg dopisnika iz Vašingtona koji je pričao o lobiranju šiptarske strane u Americi. Dali su minimum 200 000$ da bi im Klinton, dakle jedan bivši američki predsednik, otvorio svojim govorom izlaganje u Savetu bezbednosti ja mislim. Da ne pričamo koliko se senatora bori, odnosno koliko je njih i kojom sumom plaćeno da se bori za nezavisno Kosovo. I da ne pričamo da u Americi za lobiranje za srpsku stranu postoje 3 različite opcije...jedna Draškovićeva, jedna Tadićeva, jedna ovog tunjavog Koštunjavog ...mislim uobičajeno svako duva u svoju tikvu a posle se ljutimo što gubimo...
tako da mislim da ću se vratiti ispijanju kafe i čitanju dnevne štampe u mojoj kancelariji, pošto su neke stvari jednostavno beznadežne...