To hear the Imperial commentariat say it, Russia is not a democracy. It doesn’t matter that its presidential elections on March 4 were documented in real-time by nearly a hundred thousand webcams, or that it featured five candidates, or that the winning candidate legitimately got the sort of majority Western politicians can only dream of. Simply put, the Empire’s preferred candidate – an expatriate oligarch playboy – didn’t win, and therefore the vote is to be considered rigged, undemocratic and illegitimate.
On the other hand, the Empire considers the government in Serbia entirely democratic, even though it was never actually elected. The current regime is actually an alliance of two coalitions that ran against each other in May 2008. Following the intervention of foreign ambassadors, they decided to set aside their differences from old Communist days and divide the spoils of power. Empire’s favorite politicians in Serbia run the gamut from corrupt and treasonous to deranged bigots, but the man who translated the Federalist Papers is derided as a "hardline ultranationalist" – whatever that is supposed to mean.
How can this be? Well, a high-ranking EU official pretty much admitted - during a 2007 Serbian election, actually – that democracy means whatever he decides it means. Consider also that one previous American Emperor famously quibbled about the meaning of the word "is" – and then recall that his administration and ideology have been lovingly restored by the present one.
Proving Ground for Hubris
To believe that reality can be shaped with nothing more than will-to-power is clearly a delusion. The problem arises when such belief is embraced by Imperial policymakers, and they actually succeed – to some extent, at least – in bending reality to their will. The Balkans Wars of the 1990s provided the opportunity to create a myth of the chivalrous Empire riding to humanitarian rescue – and of the evil Serbs, in need of being redeemed by “democracy”.
Not actual democracy, mind you. That would be too dangerous. Instead, the Empire staged a “revolution” in October 2000, using techniques developed specifically for the purpose to whip up popular anger over a “stolen” presidential election. Lo and behold, in a simply amazing coincidence, the protests culminated in the torching of the Parliament and the ballots therein, thus conveniently making it impossible to ascertain who actually won the contested vote.
That particular pattern – create a crisis by challenging a vote and then either force a new election or simply seize power outright – has been repeated elsewhere since. The most highly publicized of these “theme revolutions” – Ukraine – has been rolled back, and attempts at regime change in Russia and Belarus have likewise failed. But so long as Serbia can be invoked as an example of success, the revolution business will continue to boom, and the Empire’s delusions about creating reality will have some purchase in fact.
The Cartoon Opposition
It isn’t just the government in Serbia that is unelected, but what passes for the main opposition party as well. The “Serbian Progressive Party” was established in 2009, when the interim leader and a number of parliamentary delegates seceded from the Serbian Radical Party. They style themselves the largest opposition party in the country, but they never actually stood for election.
Furthermore, they “oppose” the government by claiming they’d implement the same policies, only better (!). For example, Progressives’ leader Tomislav Nikolic argues: “We want to be a new EU member but without joining NATO and without giving up on Kosovo.”
Yet that pre-requisite for talks about the candidacy (let alone negotiations) with Brussels are that Belgrade “normalizes relations” with the separatist regime in its occupied southern province. In other words, don’t call it recognition, just abandon any claim to the territory and treat it as a sovereign, neighboring state. And war is not war, but “kinetic military action,” all depending on the definition of “is.”
Also, EU officials are already saying that no Eastern European country has joined without first joining NATO, so Serbia ought not expect special treatment. Neither the government nor the “progressive” opposition are willing to tell this to the public, though, preferring fairy tales and brazen lies. The media, controlled either by the government or by foreign interests, happily oblige in maintaining the blackout.
Candidacy Gambit
On March 1, Brussels officially gave Serbia EU candidate status. The decision came on the heels of an “agreement” between Belgrade and the Pristina regime to allow “Kosovo” to be represented internationally, yet another in a string of Serbia’s unconditional surrenders. The EU had everything to gain and nothing to lose. The candidacy itself means nothing for Brussels; for example, Turkey has been a candidate since 1999, and there is no sign of it ever joining the EU. Consider that in Imperial eyes Turkey can do no wrong, while Serbia can do no right, then try and calculate Serbia’s odds.
The simple truth is that the EU doesn’t really want Serbia. It wants the territory of Serbia, but not the Serbs, or the Serbian state, or Serbian history, culture, anything. This mirrors the attitude of Austria-Hungary and Germany a century ago, and then 30 years later. Given the origins of the EU, or its current leadership, that ought not come as a surprise.
The Tadic regime, however, has staked everything on servitude to Brussels and Washington. Belgrade may now have to cancel trade treaties with Russia, borrow more from international banksters, and implement the legion of stifling EU regulations. Surely that will give a boost to the economy thoroughly ruined by 12 years of “democratic” abuse that followed war and sanctions.
Rather than Tadic’s fantasy vindication of his policies, the candidacy play actually resembles the circus with the SAA in 2008, also an empty gesture designed to intervene in Serbian elections.
Slaying the Dragon
The pesky thing about democracy, both real and make-believe, is that it does require the show of obeisance to the ballot box every so often. Limited to a 4-year parliamentary mandate by the Constitution – which it wants to change, but lacks the required majority – the government has called a new general election for May 6 this year.
Last time around, the “democrats” and “reformers” promised a better life. This time they won’t bother, and campaign on nothing but fear: if you don’t vote for us, they tell the befuddled populace, your lives will get unimaginably worse. Once again, Serbia is facing Franklin’s choice. This time, ignorance is not an excuse.
In the reality-based community, where words have meaning regardless of political expediency and desires of power, it is clear that the government in Serbia has nothing to do with democracy, and is in fact a puppet regime lacking all legitimacy. But this is bigger than a small Balkans country: so long as it can impose its will so completely on Serbia, the Empire will have a reason to believe it can shape all reality, everywhere.
Then again, no amount of Imperial tantrums could conjure a “better” reality in Russia. And there is definite symbolism in the fact that the Serbian vote was scheduled for May 6. In the Orthodox calendar, that is the feast of St. George, the fabled dragonslayer and liberator of the pious from a treacherous ruler.
Perhaps it will prove appropriate.
Read more by Nebojsa Malic
- Victory Day – May 10th, 2013
- Consenting to Rape – April 25th, 2013
- An Unexpected Refusal – April 12th, 2013
- Lawless: An Oddly Exceptional Empire – March 28th, 2013
- Illusion of Triumph – March 21st, 2013





Serbophobe
March 10th, 2012 at 2:56 am
Serbia is nothing more than one among Eastern European banana republics trying to join the "exclusive" club of the "progressive West" (the only difference in relation to the other post-Communist banana republics being that most Serbs don't want to join "only" the EU, but not NATO). Serbs are no champions of resistance to the Empire. The reality belies Malic's fantasies.
conumishu
March 10th, 2012 at 7:18 am
The "reality belies…" ? So the article really hurts where it should.
Good job, Mr. Malic ! As always.
MichaelKenny
March 10th, 2012 at 7:49 am
Every two weeks, stir the pot. The author hijacks the Russian election to repeat (yet again!) his standard smear of the EU. Clearly, the EU is is going from strength to strength if it has to be smeared with mechanical reality every two weeks!
MoT
March 10th, 2012 at 8:37 am
If by being "progressive" means to get on your knees and do as you're told and not as you see your overlords act then YES they're doing their damnedest to be progressive. Standing up for ones sovereignty is so "yesterday" when it's easier to be a globalist slave.
MvGuy
March 10th, 2012 at 8:46 am
So again it seems to come down to whether the EU and it's Anglo French American & Italian anti Russian Fiat Money Neocon Gangsters.. can cow yet another piece of the former Eastern block yet again, as I see it. The EU and their American partners money still has value so the ability to bribe and punish remains intact… To illustrate to the economic beleaguered world their resolve and scope, they have undertaken vast new attacks worldwide into the heartland of the Muslim world, at the behest of their client mini-state… perhaps like Germany's push to Moscow during Nazi timez… The current scope of empires encroachments and forays is stunning and some of their very own tripwires seem suicidal… But isn't Empire always suicidal in practice, in that eventually it's widening circle of conflicts and costs strangle the very means by which the thing itself operates?
The empire has a tendency to have no perspective about any of it's undertakings and seems to approach even it's smallest endeavors as life and death efforts. In many, certainly most cases, empire will readily forgo any pretense of fairness, equality, even their own law to accomplish their desired momentary success. E.G. Libya.
There may be a new reality dawning though over the Eastern horizon compliments of NATO and their brutish over the top actions and rhetoric in Libya… along with Putin's win. It appears that Russia and China have had enough of the ever expedient empire and it's plastic agendas where a no fly zone became a kill and total obliteration zone. Where Freedom Fighters became Al Quaeta and where eighty tons of gold has gone missing….
Time will tell, but there is a fairly good chance this next chapter in empires Balkan adventure will run against a far less compliant Russia. By itself it may not be a deciding factor, but a reserve currency ample freshly elected Putin has every chance of being somewhat of a game spoiler this time around!
If so, look for hysterical commentaries by empire and ever more dangerous "solutions"..
conumishu
March 10th, 2012 at 10:31 am
As an unwilling subject of the EU empire I find your pro-EU propaganda almost insulting. Have the decency and abandon the boasting. Yes, the EU expands crushing any dissenting opinion. For now. Yes, the "progressive paradise" (when it isn't fascist corporatism – not so strange bedfellows if you think) is on the march. For now. But you won't brainwash anyone who isn't already braindead, so don't bother. Thanks.
Serbophobe
March 10th, 2012 at 12:20 pm
Is there any relevant anti-EU force in Serbia today? No. So, yes, this article does hurt. It hurts intelligence and common sense. Malic wants to present Serbia as a country ruled by a small cabal, a quisling cult, subservient to the Empire, against which the great majority of Serbian people are pitted in some kind of heroic anti-imperialist resistance, because they want to remain free, outside of the clutches of the imperial power. It is bullcrap, of course. I am not saying that being pro-EU is a good things, just stating the facts as they are.
Isidor
March 10th, 2012 at 1:28 pm
Reading your comments I take it you are only a tongue-in-cheek Serbophobe .
Mr. Malich writes rather well and has much of his argument reasonably well thought through. Emotions, though, do get in the way. If I am reading you correctly Mr. Malich's argument is somewhat contaminated by wishful thinking about the lack of legitimacy of the current Belgrade government. In any event I think that.
Another problem with Mr. Malich's argument against the Empire is that he – unwittingly? – has surrendered to the Empire logic. For example, throughout this article he refers to the Balkans and not to Yugoslavia. If one takes a critical look at the time-line of the events one cannot help noticing that "the Empire" burst on the scene concurrent with dismantling Yugoslavia. The Empire (US, EU, NATO) dismantled not just a sovereign country but an idea that millions found livable, and are more than nostalgic about it. It represented lives and reality of generations (roughly 70 years).
By reverting to "the Balkans" the Empire subtly, but very efficiently, has invalidated half a century of thinking, bankrupting beliefs of millions of people. The Empire evidently has no problem with the Balkans, petty narrow-minded chauvinism of the groups that live in the area. The Empire simply could not stomach the system that bothered nobody in particular and was beneficial to all that lived within it.
Mr. Malich may have his reasons to not particularly miss Yugoslavia, and that is his right. But, in my opinion, he is insufficiently aware of the service he renders to the Empire by acquiescing to the labels and concepts that prop up Empire's ghostly caricatures in place where once stood a sovereign state of Yugoslavia.
Sam
March 10th, 2012 at 5:03 pm
You are insane
conumishu
March 10th, 2012 at 5:10 pm
A lot of other people in Yugoslavia didn't seem to care much about those beliefs and I suspect many Serbs didn't like the subordinate role they were reserved when not outright humiliated – pushing even Milosevic, who wasn't a nationalist, to declare unacceptable the situation of the Serbs in Kosovo, for instance, who were facing the Albanian dominated "autonomous" republic's despotism. Years later nothing changed, another supranational concept persecutes the Serbs, only now in Kosovo they are almost ethnically cleansed.
Serbs have no right to defend themselves or their lands summarizes the whole story for the last 30 years or so. Who has the right to decide that ? No one. Those who nevertheless promote this kind of evil, imperialists of one or another internationalist ideology, should be met with resistance until they are defeated. Of course they thrive on inciting goups, be they ethnic, religious or otherwise, one against each other, it helps their strategy, but even if they couldn't succeed with divide they'd still try the impera, even resorting to war to enforce their dominance.
Sovietization, globalism, fascism, compulsory communitarism, coercive politically correctness, however you call the different manifestation which sometimes hides the true nature behind smooth wording it won't work. People need to be free to decide their destiny, they have a right to defend themselves and their property (national too) when attacked, without hatred and within some unwritten rules of humanity. Unnatural, even suicidal, is only sheepish submission.
And let's not fool ourselves, there's no such thing as benevolent empires, not in the least because their existence depends on the highest degree of statism. Some are worse than others, but that's all the difference.
paleo
March 10th, 2012 at 7:43 pm
I wonder if "Serbophobe" is Simon Saivil, a character that was seen about forums such as this one in the past.
Isidor
March 10th, 2012 at 7:55 pm
Might very well be, but I tend to doubt it. Are they similarly disguised, like, say, sporting devilish mustaches, black boots, and constantly fidgeting with their unlit pipe?
Bianca
March 10th, 2012 at 10:44 pm
Hmm. While you make some valid arguments, Yugoslavia as an entity was viable only for as long as the outside powers allowed it to live. Malich is right — Balkans, with all of its beauty and ugliness is reality. Elites in Belgrade have always adored the imperial ways. Once upon the time, Belgrade elite loved Turkish fashion, and ridiculed peasants that stuck to their ways. Then came the elites in love with Vienna and Paris. Anything new today? Where I disagree with Malich is the following. The strongest opposition party is the best hope. The Progressives will talk the prescribed mantra, to avoid having a target sign on the forehead. But it is very likely, should they win outright, that stock-taking will take place. There will be auditing, there will be reviews.reforms and course corrections. But the new breed of politicians need to be sure that the steps they take are sure-footed, not rash and abrupt. Voting for miriad small parties is a prescription for failure. Should Progressives fail to get power, expect rapid worsening of the situation, because if the regime survives in whatever reincarnation of party coctails, it will become merciless and ruthless towards the opposition.
Bianca
March 10th, 2012 at 10:51 pm
From strength to strength? Seriously, anyone past fourth grade knows what kind of trouble EU is in. The fact is, there will always be people who will not accept prescribed official narrative, and will think freely. Telling them, like you do, that it is a waste of time — will not change free thinkers. So, thanks, but no thanks!
Isidor
March 11th, 2012 at 5:50 am
"…Yugoslavia as an entity was viable only for as long as the outside powers allowed it to live…." interesting observation but unpersuasive argument. Chile's Allende was a harbinger. During the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia protestations of "might (does not) make(s) right" were repeatedly invoked. In any event you are right – and we, to that extent agree – Yugoslavia was (not) allowed to exist by the outside forces.
For more than two decades, preceding President Tito's death, West was preparing its own public for dismantling of Yugoslavia by constantly regurgitating nonsense about Tito holding Yugoslavia together and posing rhetorical question: What will happen when Tito dies? Consequently the narrative, its being patent nonsense notwithstanding, of Yugoslav peoples hating each other, the inevitability of the war, and the US being the protector of peace and human rights, goes unchallenged in the West.
As for the political parties in Serbia I am just about ignorant about. My impression is that their differences are so insignificant that it is perfectly reasonable to simply think in terms of personalities. Mr. Malich is correct in pointing out that it is Western ambassadors who have formed the current coalition.
Serbophobe is correct in pointing out that the populace is to blame to a very large degree. Serbs were easily bribed to riot against Milosevic, but have sheepishly taken the loss of Kosovo.
Why aren't they rioting?
Streets of Belgrade are starved for some decent violence against tyranny, but if God didn't want the Serbs to be sheered he wouldn't have made them sheep.
conumishu
March 11th, 2012 at 11:11 am
Those are not elites, those are welloff accomplices. If anything, real elite doesn't sell itself. Certainly, the common language deviation likes to depict as elite the in-fashion mouth pieces and symbols, be they political analysts, business "success stories", entertainers of some kind, university cabals, i.e. people who depend entirely on the centralized stipends, direct subsidies, tax exemptions or other kind of favoritism.
Yugoslavia was held together by Tito's prejudice against Serbs and strong arm rule. In fact, Yugoslavia broke with massive "help" from its highest political members (high ranked party members, generals, administration managers, secret services top brass). At some point, I thought it was almost comical to watch how obvious Serbophobes were mimicking they oppose Croat separatism, for instance.
There was a bloddy rift the WW2 caused inside Yugoslavia and between its major ethnic communities. It would be fallacious to believe a 35-45 years timespan completely healed the terrible wounds, more so when only one narrative was allowed. It might be a ruler's (all of them) wet dream to have a population without memory, but reality appears to periodically correct this misconception.
Fabled Tito's (and post Tito, while it lasted) Yugoslavia was also famous for its millions migrant workers, which was a sort of pre-Maastricht workforce delocalisation, now recognised as a growing cause for concern, an obvious tool to break sense of belonging, a source for widespread tensions all through EU-rope dominion. It did't speak too favourably about Yugoslavia's economy, even if it was only one aspect and the present looks probably gloomier.
Was Yugoslavia viable ? One of the obviously failed tests was exactly how well it could resist outside aggression. It couldn't. Worse, many from inside hurried to open the castle's gates.
As for trusting opposition or, for that matter, even parties in power, who'd parade imperial approved attitudes only to safer subvert the occupation and preserve national interests beneath the facade, I live in a country where this seemed to be the truth for some time, I sincerely believed it was so for a number of years. Now I am cured. What might have been possible decades ago, it isn't possible anymore. The occupation reacts almost in real time, the "sensors" are placed everywhere, the psychological aggression is all pervasive. There's need, probably more than ever, to speak out, to tell the truth out loud, to expose the naked emperor. Imo, mumbling compliance mixed with unproven dreams about some politicos acting as an insider soft resistance for your sake becomes increasingly self-deluding. The brutal continental directives which are immediately passed into laws by supposedly powerful countries says it all about how effective soft resistance is everywhere.
Nebojsa Malic
March 12th, 2012 at 8:14 am
I actually explained my reasoning concerning the nomenclature in the very first column, back in 2000. While the bulk of Imperial intervention has been directed at Yugoslavia, it also involves Albania. Imperial usage favors the cumbersome "Western Balkans" or "Southeastern Europe", which I avoid on principle.
As for Serbian politics, this isn't really the venue to discuss parties and personalities. I do have an article in the works that should clarify things for English-language readers. It should be up on my blog in a couple of days.
Karl
March 13th, 2012 at 11:00 pm
The Balkans have been an area of Western imperial meddling for 200 years (with pauses). Invoking the term when speaking about Western intervention is appropriate and helps place it in a larger context of long-standing interference of Western capitals in the region similar to that of the US in Latin America.
Isidor
March 14th, 2012 at 7:09 pm
Your claim is correct, but in a way the sophisms are. Western involvement in the Balkans, in the sense that we are discussing here, was on specific occasions, like Austro-Hungarians annexing Bosnia and Herzegovina from the Ottoman Empire, Axis Powers (Germany, Italy, Hungary, Bulgaria) taking parts of Yugoslavia, and the current dismantling of Yugoslavia by the US, NATO and EU.
In anticipation of the war (1990-91) US media was full of analogies of Yugoslav Army seizing power, much like Latin America's generals used to do. The comparison was without basis in fact, and as we now know, no general ever attempted it. But it did serve the Western propaganda purposes.
The fact remains that the main objective of the Empire was the dismantling of Yugoslavia and discrediting 70 years of history. There were more people who declared themselves as Yugoslavs than any other nationality (ethnicity.) There were upward of 2 million mixed marriages with as many children who "straddled" ethnic lines.
The "larger context" that you refer to is the Empire context, for it is the largest one under the current circumstances. The objective was, and is, to have the people of Yugoslavia understand themselves in terms forced upon them. Empire, naturally, is not going to offer the terms to its own detriment. Consequently, Empire profits in every conceivable way by the people understanding themselves in terms that imply Empire's benevolence and absolute necessity for its presence in the region.
Just as there are no parallels between Latin America and Yugoslavia, there is cleverly imputed similarity to the Balkans with Latin America: a mindless mob that needs to be told by the outsiders how to live. (Croats admitted to their lack of identity, by shamelessly singing Danke Deutschland, as they seceded from Yugoslavia. It doesn't get more Balkan than that, unless you count the Serbs sending Karageorge's head to the Port.)
That was my principal objection to Mr. Malich's use of the term Balkans, and I believe you have missed that.
Honza
March 15th, 2012 at 6:54 am
The above is one of the very best (at last!) analysis of Tito's Yugoslavia as well as of the current dynamic. Well, perhaps the best I have seen (even with kudos to the lonely and courageous/fearless Nebojsa). If you have more of this, please direct us to it.
Bianca
March 15th, 2012 at 11:51 pm
I am not sure what is meant by "unpersuasive argument". While I did not get into the details of Iron-Curtain strategy, the preparation of dismantling of Yugoslavia, you seem to agree with me.
Where I disagree with Malich is his assessment of opposition. Progressives are the only strong opposition party. For once, people should not fall for the emotional appeal of smaller parties. I know that people get dismayed when Progressives start mouthing off EU platitudes. That is what they MUST do. The public should be smart enough and not allow the regime to play EU distraction card — AGAIN. EU subject should be taken "ad acta", and focus on regime failures. Should Progressives get into power, without being chained by "coalition partners", a clean up in corridors of power will happen. What does not help is the emotional doom and gloom, claims that Progressives are "same" as the ruling cabal. That is same as urging people not to vote, as the resistance is futile! It is not futile. Catch a clue. Because if nothing changes, nothing changes.
Bianca
March 16th, 2012 at 12:31 am
I prefer the use of term Balkans, as this is the only way to speak of the region independent of thousands of years of foreign tramplings. The history of Balkans did not start with the mythical 'migration" of Slavs to Balkans. The history had to be obliterated for the purposes of evolving powers and their ambitions. The history of Western meddling goes to ancient Greece, through Rome and Constantinople, Saxon push of Slavs southward, Carl the Great and 40 wars with Slavs, Limes Sorrabicus, and more Slavs moving south. Vatican probably had by far the most divisive role in history of Balkans. The Turkish and Austro-Hungarian episodes are but the most recent episodes. People of Balkans still have official western scripts that pass for their history. Serbs in particular, are not to have any memory of their existence prior to Serbian kings. So, it is true, people of Balkans, not just Yugoslavia, understand themselves in terms forced upon them. The divining of the writings of Emperor Porphyrogenitius are comical, but they constitute the only "allowed' interpretation of the "arrival" to Balkans. Our history is fake, our reality grubby. But we probably know more about hubris of power then anybody on earth.
Isidor
March 16th, 2012 at 3:57 am
You are entitled to your preference, but your argument makes no sense. Balkan, allegedly, is a Turkish name for the region because of its mountains. There are no geopolitical underpinnings to the concept, except for the implied pejorative attitude that the Empire assumes, namely that the locals are to be condescended to.
Yugoslavia was born out of the locals' long struggle to rid themselves of the foreign overlords. Thus it was the Croats who were the early proponents of the united Slavs of the region. Ljudevit Gaj was the founder of the Illirian Renaissance in the 19th century.
I do not dispute much of what you said factually, but that is not the issue. The issue is simply that "the Balkans", as used currently by the West, implies certain attitudes and values (or rather the lack thereof) just as Yugoslavia did and does. Historically Balkans was an "open territory" and foreign powers felt entitled to come and rule over it. States (like Serbian Kingdom) interfered with that. Yugoslavia was a state that made it impossible for the outsiders to come in and bully the people at will.
This is the reason why the West and modern day Turkey seek to re-impose themselves in the region and resurrect "the splendor" of the past. Splinter groups appear to be welcoming them. Yugoslavia as an idea, still fresh in people's memories, is little short of being outlawed. In fact Croats under Franjo Tudjman did attempt to outlaw what they regarded as "Yugonostalgia." It is clear that Yugoslavia was not just a state but also an idea that embodied people's hopes, and a manifestation of their political will and independence.
I shall repeat it again: Mr. Malich's argument is well stated and argued. I simply pointed out that the use of the term Balkans lends a hand to his detractors, particularly to those who are obsessed with anti-Yugoslav ideas and views.
What you said may all be correct, but has little to do with what my point is.
Bianca
March 16th, 2012 at 1:41 pm
It is not that I do not see your point. Those who wanted Yugoslavia killed badly, insured that the maximum fear and mistrust rules. It is no coincidence that US tolerated Tudjman's flirting with Nazi and Ustasha symbols. Under any normal circumstances, Jewish lobby in US would have been all over it. In Bosnia the most instransigent of Bosnian leaders, enamoured with Ottoman empire, was raised by the West as the "recognized" leader. Here is my problem. It is not just Yugoslavia and its peoples that were/are manipulated. So were/are the rest of Balkans. Albanians, Bulgarians, Macedonians, Romanians, Hungarians — all continue to be manipulated and used against each other. This is why Imperial method works as a charm. We are forced to hate somebody, led into hate by our noses. Let's hate Albanians, Turks, Romanians, Bulgarians, Hungarians. By all means, let's continue the Croatian-Serbian hatred till doomsday, and have Bosnian Moslems feel like perpetual victims running to Big Transatlantic Mamma. If we do not reject the manipulation — we will live in a Balkan version of Ground Hog Day forever.
eric siverson
March 17th, 2012 at 7:08 am
I know I'am not suposed to change the subject , But than again maybe I'am not . I think of Yugoslavia a lot , I now see Yugoslavia in Syria . Where that brutal dictator Assad's army has now mudered 8000 of his own people . Really does anyone expect me to believe , that Assad's army has accidently murdered 3000 of his own police officers , while brutaly cracking down on the inocent protesters that are only desiring freedom and democracy . Mysteriously freedom seems to coming to evreyone ., The Christians in Egypt are free to leave like they did in Iraq , if they have enough money and can get out alive ? We were told our bombers should bring freedom to Libya . Does any one else think of freedom coming to Yugoslavia in much the same way as I do ?
Bianca
March 17th, 2012 at 3:31 pm
You did not change the subject, you hit the RIGHT subject. Former NATO General Clarke commenting on Kosovo, pointed out that NATO is relly modelling some very important principles there. So, nothing easier then arming a group of well known criminal families — formerly just minding their heroin and human slavery business — and transforming them into "freedom fighters" resisting evil dictator from Belgrade who is just bent on killing innocent civilians. Now, we are back to Clintonian method, with Libya being prime example. The plan for Syria, same. Get militants in, do some friendly bombing, and let the chaos do the rest. The only problem is, Syrians — including the majority Sunni population, do not support the Saudi Arabia sponsored Sunni "revolutonaries" the way ethnic Albanians supported their ethnic and religious kin. And since Shia and Christians are significant portion of population, Sunni extremists funded by Saudi Arabia — are not getting traction. Now, we are in the BIZZARELAND. With US President SUPPORTING Saudi-funded Sunni extremists —let's call them by their right name, Al-Qaeda — US is stuck with defending all the terrorist acts of these nutjobs.
eric siverson
March 17th, 2012 at 7:28 pm
Only problem is when the most violent elements take over in Islamic countries . Nobody not the Christians or the peace loving muslims will stand up and fight against them . They face no opposition , becuase they kill it . Totalitarian communists will kill them , but not peace loving muslims or Christians . Nazi's partnered with them , That may be why we are partnering with them right now all over the world . We just don't call ourselves national socialist yet .
Nina
March 27th, 2012 at 1:53 am
You hit the nail on the head, MichaelKenny. Imperial hubris. Imperial hubris. Yadda yadda. No new insight and no facts except regurgitating a highly slanted version of the Eastern European history and affirming his hardcore Serbian nationalism. Malich, some of us know how full of crap you are. Be glad this country would never kick you out due to free speech.
nina
March 27th, 2012 at 2:07 am
For people who have much to say about the "empire" sure like to live in it. Why don't you all move your armchair picketing to the "oppressed" countries and defend their cause from within? And, by the way, Bosnia and Kosovo was not yours to keep. But you managed to damage the lives of their people forever. And now you complain that someone had the balls to step in and help. You will never see any progress until you get your heads unstuck from 1389.
Bianca
March 27th, 2012 at 8:29 am
No matter how many times you say untruth, it will never become thruth. So, yadda yadda, to you — nobody is buying your kind of superior snarl any more. "…regurgitating highly slanted version of Eastern European history…". You are not adult enough to match Malich, his knowledge of the region, his contacts, his insights. All you have is your belowed imperial hubris. And when anyone challenges it, you lash out with — not so subtle threats. It is a losing game, dearest Nina. Neocons are poor historians, so I hope you read up on things that do not fit your world view. This is the ONLY way you will ever learn something.
Bianca
March 27th, 2012 at 9:54 am
I will help YOU. Everywhere "somebody steped in", the result was death and destruction of civilians by the millions. Stepping into Vietnam, for example. Fast forward to Rwanda, and the new and improved "humanitarian" model. US trained Tutsi militia in Uganda unleashed mayhem on numerically stronger, but unarmed Hutu. Tutsi, the story goes, were killed in genocidal bloodbath ten times their actual numbers. Somehow, they rose from the dead — seized power, and kill millions of Hutu. Tutsi leader who was FLOWN FROM US MILITARY BASE to "rearange" Rwanda, Burundi and Congo is still — the President of Rwanda! Millions dead. Same trick in Balkans. Uleash minority Croatian and Bosnian Moslem EXTREMISTS and declare them victims. Serbs, like Hutus, were not ALLOWED to defend themselves. Kosovo? Crime clans go on rampage, and NATO saves them. The same crime families still in power. Fine model. Copied perfectly in Libya and now pushed on Syria. YOU will never see any progress until you get your head unstuck from your Hollywood version of 1945. Patriots like this country, but YOU can go and live in your imperial possessions, and enjoy the products of your "balls".
nina
March 27th, 2012 at 1:40 pm
What contacts? Child, please. We from Sarajevo know what Malich is about and are rightfully pissed off. And you, Bianca, have nothing but drivel…and hubris.
nina
March 27th, 2012 at 1:47 pm
You are clueless about the war in Bosnia. Your ignorance is rude and hurtful to me and the other victims and survivors of that war.
Bianca
March 27th, 2012 at 10:00 pm
I am clueless? Can we compare resumes? From what all you wrote, you absolutely do not know anything about Bosnia. Or the rest of the world. You are repeating well known script, and that is all. My ignorance is "rude"? Now, ignorance can be anything — but it is never rude. Ignorance can be willfull — as in your case —or just an ordinary lack of information.
People who genuinely lack information, are willing to learn. Those who are willfully ignorant will defend their ignorance to the last fiber of their being.
As a person who has lost five relatives, the youngest 18, and the oldest 78 — I have a farily good idea of civilian suffering in Balkan wars. I am keenly aware of all the inocents that have suffered, and keenly aware of what brought about the suffering.
You are not only clueless, but also manipulative. You are hurt on behalf of victims and survivors? Those who really suffer, suffer in silence. In stark difference to real suffering, Empire pets are encouraged to elevate victimhood into an art form. And in the process, they have debased the blood of innocents by turning them into bumper stickers for cheap political gains.
nina
March 28th, 2012 at 12:43 am
You're so clearly describing your own self. Read everything you wrote here and you'll see. I AM a survivor. I was injured during the war you're so boldly speaking about. Why should I suffer in silence when there are so many Serb and other nationalists still spreading hatred? Suffering in silence is stupid anyway. You're not antiwar, you're pro-nationalist. You're what we Sarajevans call a papak. Judging from your broken English and the story about "civilian suffering in Balkan wars," I'm guessing you're from some part of former Yugoslavia. If so, you perfectly understand what I said. I don't care to compare resumes with you. Who says, "elevate victimhood into an art form"? Ridiculous syntax! You must be referring to Angelina Jolie. Truth hurts, doesn't it? Anyway, I'm proud to be an American and of everything it stands for!
ThreeofSpades
March 28th, 2012 at 3:35 am
Nina wrote:
"You're what we Sarajevans call a papak."
I remember the term being used when the war broke out. Am not sure what it means and meant in the context of Yugoslav civil war. Could you elaborate on the origin, meaning and use of the term?
Thanks.
nina
March 28th, 2012 at 8:49 am
ThreeofSpades, this term describes a person who has traded life in the country for the supposed benefits of living in a town but it's much more profound than just what the Americans call an outoftowner. It describes a person whose aspirations for higher learning and prestige are high but nothing can take the primitive style of thinking out of that person. They feel entitled to put you down, grub, and lie to get ahead. Yet, we were unprepared for the extent they were willing to go to get what they wanted. I have no doubt in my mind that a large percent of violent crime perpetrators in this war were papaks. A papak family moved into my grandmother's 100yo house in Republika Srpska, cut down her old orchard and antique furniture for wood and raised chickens in her gorgeous stonewalled back yard, We had to get the international police to evict them. You hear all of these Serb and other war criminals having PhDs but you look at their family background and they come from some godforsaken village. When something hadn't belonged to you and your family, it's easy to go in and tag and plunder, I guess.
ThreeofSpades
March 28th, 2012 at 5:15 pm
An interesting and sincere, albeit unintentionally so, I suspect, response.
From what I understand about the origin and the use of the term "papak" (a hoof of a goat, sheep, but not of a horse) is more of a "country bumpkin" than an "out of towner" in American English. It implies much of what you said, essentially provincialism.
From what I know all Yugoslav city dwellers have looked upon the rural population with an air of contempt. Zagreb natives (older generations) refer to themselves as "purgeri" (Buergers.)
Of course rural people don't think of city dweller much higher in return. American "country boys" refer to city population as "city slickers," a decidedly not a flattering term.
Semantic nuances aside, the broad truth is that your Sarajevans referring to the Serbs as "papak" is intended to offend and no apologies are offered. (It is essentially like the whites of America's South calling African American "niggers.") While your English is excellent you, evidently, have not – yet – sensed these nuances. You seem to be entirely innocently oblivious to the truth you blurted out. Yugoslav civil war, however much it may have been ethnic and religious it, evidently, was also a class war. Yugoslav social model was to a very large extent – like American – egalitarian. Regardless of one's origins one was allowed to advance, if personal merits warranted it. You, being a Sarajevan, thinking of yourself as a member of "raja" found it unacceptable that "papak" would practice that assumption.
It does not surprise me that you are such a bigot, it surprises me that you don't know how to disguise it.
nina
March 28th, 2012 at 8:03 pm
Love how patronizing you are. I find your comparison with the treatment of blacks very offensive, especially because some of my dearest friends are black and their history touches me to the core considering my own past. To say that the Yugoslav social model was egalitarian is very immature. My grandmother's family who founded a town in RS was declared bourgeois and given chump change for their confiscated properties. This was a norm in postwar Yugoslavia. I'll call papak ANYONE who displays the qualities I describe. I'm a Christian and my best friend is half Serb so check your own reasoning.
ThreeofSpades
March 29th, 2012 at 3:40 am
Were what I said off the mark you wouldn't have been nearly as much defensive.
Thank you for proving my point.
nina
March 29th, 2012 at 8:22 am
Wow! You don't need a collocutor; you already know all the answers :) But, as Dilbert says, "you're simply experiencing an illusion caused by the limits of your perception."
Isidor
March 29th, 2012 at 7:12 pm
Nina, why do you so heavily rely on anecdotal, personal evidence, such as your best friend who is half Serbian, your best friends who are African Americans, your grandmother who founded a town, you being a Christian? At the same time you argue ad hominem against the ThreeofSpades, only because he accused you of bigotry. You took offence to his using an epithet "nigger" and yet you declare that you will call "papak" anyone who thinks the way that rubs you wrong way.
I can't help observing how assigning the Serbs the role of the usual suspects is taken for granted, Mr. Malich included (by you.) It can be easily argued that the Serbs are no more different from the other Yugoslav nationalities than the Croats, Slovenes, Macedonians, Albanians, Muslims are from each other. Last Sunday CBS's 60 Minutes introduced a piece on Novak Djokovich saying that he came from Serbia, a small Balkan country that played a violent role in the dissolution of Yugoslavia. Everybody – conveniently! – keeps quiet about the fact that Serbia was the last remaining Yugoslav republic that kept the name Yugoslavia. When the war broke out in 1991/2 while Slovenes, Croats and Muslim fought for their own national/ethnic states, the Serbs fought for the preservation of Yugoslavia.
It is not a coincidence that they were – and are – targeted by NATO and the US, for these powers want to de-legitimise the existence of history, of a state in which many people lived. I find it rather telling that Bosnian Muslim and Croats in particular are exerting themselves to write, rather create, their own history and ethnic-cultural identity by primarily trying to distort, belittle and misrepresent Serbian people and their history. The Serbs may have not behaved particularly saintly during the last war, but they were no worse offenders than the rest of the belligerents. Their attachment to Yugoslavia, however, has earned them the ire of other fellow Yugoslavs who behaved dishonourably by not only renouncing the state that gave them all they had, but by also blaming the Serbs for the existence of that state.
The Serbs themselves aren't without blemish. Late bloomers that they are they embraced vulgar nationalism of the Croat-Muslim brand. By then, however, the gravy train was gone. At the beginning of the war they suffered for being faithful to the idea(l), now they suffer for being turncoats, and rightly so.
Bianca
March 29th, 2012 at 10:20 pm
Of course, ad hominem attacking is about all you can do. Clearly, something bothers you about FACTS being shared in this forum. If so, why haven't you elightened us with your KNOWLEDGE? Basically, your posts show that you do not respect people enough to engage in an exchange of information. You prefer your imagined world, the world in which you are entitled to walk all over people. Especially anyone who has information NOT in line with your scripted world. I personally cannot believe anything you have to say — people who do not respect others cannot be trusted. As someone who lived in Sarajevo in the nineties, you presume to lecture others, and claim superior knowledge about US, its language and politics! From your first post, you have shown yourself to be both arrogant and disrespectfull. Intelectually, you are out of your depth. I find you not credible on any level, and will not any further comment on your rude and coarse behaviour.
nina
March 30th, 2012 at 7:16 am
I rely on my experience because I actually lived through the war Mr Malich talks about regardless of the fact that he fled that place and didn't experience most of the war. I'm speaking out because what's being said is false. He vehemently denies the civilian deaths in Srebrenica even though he has probably seen the videos of piled up bodies in street clothes and pictures of mass graves with bones large and small. I'm speaking the actual truth because things I've experienced occurred at that place and at that time. I'm speaking on behalf of the children that were killed on the streets of besieged Sarajevo while playing football or waiting in the line for water. He'll say that they were killed by Bosnian Muslim forces even though there are videos and audio recordings of Serb forces commanding and firing rocket launchers at Sarajevo. When I talk about papaks I refer to ALL ethnic groups that were involved in plundering, burning, and other butchering of civilians. I haven't said anything that would exclude other ethnic groups. Serbs may have wanted to preserve Yugoslavia, but Bosnians wanted independence. We didn't expect to be shot at as we marched for independence. We didn't expect to see tanks and planes coming through. Yes, we were threatened with a war, but we didn't expect our children, women, and elderly to be torn to bits and pieces, our apartments to be blown through with grenades. Ask me again why I speak from experience? Open up your eyes and ears to the truth. All of you have no friggin clue or you don't friggin care.
nina
March 30th, 2012 at 7:19 am
You're spreading false information. How can you speak about something that you have no clue about??? Yeah, I don't respect people who lie. I don't care what you think about me. I will speak the truth.
nina
March 30th, 2012 at 11:59 am
I also can't understand the vile ignorance and abandon with which you use that blasted n word. You're friggin heartless. Papak is a word describing a person's character not ethnic group and you know it! All of you just keep on high-fiving each other and using your 100-dollar words. YOU are the reason I'd never go back home. You need to update your thinking and your vocabulary if you want to keep up with the nineties.
Isidor
March 30th, 2012 at 2:32 pm
"Serbs may have wanted to preserve Yugoslavia, but Bosnians wanted independence. We didn't expect to be shot at as we marched for independence. We didn't expect to see tanks and planes coming through."
So, are you implying that Bosnian Serbs are not Bosnian? Doesn't their wish count at all? What of Croatian Serbs? Let me give you a hint: When American South broke off from the North, a large part of Virginia did not want to go along with that and broke off from the secessionist South. That is how West Virginia came into existence? If it was Bosnian Muslims and Croatian Croats' right to break away from Yugoslavia, why wasn't it the right of the Serbs from Bosnia and Croatia to break away from these nascent states.
I suspect that you know the answer to this question but are loath to contemplate it.
Please spare me the crocodile tears about the children of Sarajevo. All wars are brutal and the weak suffer the most. Serbian children from Bosnia, Krajina, Kosovo and Belgrade during the NATO bombing, suffered as much as Sarajevo children.
You know very well that the Bosnia war was the war of choice. Izetbegovich kept reneging on all agreements that the Serbs – and Izetbegovich initially – accepted. But the old idiot thought that it is worth putting your Sarajevo through the paces to get what he wanted. And he got it – a dysfunctional state and a mini hell for those that live in it.
By the way, I remember Italian fashion house Beneton opening a boutique in Sarajevo at the height of what you call antique furniture burning to stay worm. So who was buying their pricey sweaters? Were they giving them free, like charity?
Isidor
March 30th, 2012 at 2:39 pm
"YOU are the reason I'd never go back home."
And you, and those like you, are the reason why many who WOULD, CANNOT go back home. You are offended by my quoting the ThreeofSpades who in turn put in quotes the word nigger. But you think nothing of calling papak those you dislike, you sanctimonious bitch.
nina
March 30th, 2012 at 3:46 pm
now all the readers can see you for what you are. when you strip all that propriety and haughtiness away you have just a vile monster of a man who doesn't care about human life. no, belgrade can't be compared to the 31/2 year siege of sarajevo. you're lying about all bosnian serbs wanting to separate. all of my friends who were bosnian serbs voted for bosnian independence and fought for bosnia in the ranks of the bosnian army. i can't wait to share with my bosnian serb friends what's been said here. you're putting it like we asked for it. well, you've got what YOU asked for. you need that 4s to remind you not to sell each other out and lose that last tiny piece of land.
nina
March 30th, 2012 at 3:50 pm
yep, you ARE a papak
nina
March 30th, 2012 at 4:04 pm
wait, so it seems like you think it was ok to burn my property just because i could buy a sweater at benetton? what! if that's what you were implying, you reason in the same proletarian vein of thinking that was popular in communist yugoslavia that made it ok to take my grandmother's property. i have to say i understand more now. yeah, i bought a sweater at benetton with the money I earned and not stole from someone because i thought they had more than enough. i worked for foreign reporters. they were on the bosnians' side. i guess they must have been muslim or croat.
Isidor
March 31st, 2012 at 4:28 pm
I am glad you readily admit that the foreign press was engaged in propaganda rather than reporting.
Nobody begrudges you what you earned except that it begs answers as to how were you able to earn money in the starving, besieged city, and, once you have earned it what sort of priorities were you running?
You argue you are all about humanitarian values but the bourgeois (Benetton) values just somehow, got in the way?
Good to know. Tell us more.
Isidor
March 31st, 2012 at 4:30 pm
Yep, I am, and, considering the source of the epithet, I wear it as a badge of honour.
nina
March 31st, 2012 at 5:04 pm
i was a translator and fixer for british and irish tv crews and my priority was to feed and clothe my family while dodging bullets and grenades. anything else you need to know? if you believe that this priority was somehow bourgeois, you must have an iq of room temperature.
nina
March 31st, 2012 at 5:11 pm
i have to applaud that
Isidor
March 31st, 2012 at 5:30 pm
"anything else you need to know?"
Yes, I asked you about the rights of the Serbs from Bosnia and Croatia, and whether the Serbs of Bosnia were (not) Bosnians. You semi-deftly attempted to derail the issue into your personal (mis)fortunes in Yugoslavia.
Why don't you re-read what I asked you and answer it?
nina
March 31st, 2012 at 6:36 pm
where did you ask that? and what exactly is the question? i have already stated that MY bosnian serb friends were FOR bosnian independence in which everyone regardless of their ethnic background would have the same rights. i believe in inalienable rights to life and property. i'm not excusing any wrongs by any side. you just don't take someone's life and property because you think you have some ancestral dibs on a piece of land!
Isidor
April 1st, 2012 at 5:22 am
Where did I ask that? A couple of posts above:
"So, are you implying that Bosnian Serbs are not Bosnian? Doesn't their wish count at all? What of Croatian Serbs? Let me give you a hint: When American South broke off from the North, a large part of Virginia did not want to go along with that and broke off from the secessionist South. That is how West Virginia came into existence? If it was Bosnian Muslims and Croatian Croats' right to break away from Yugoslavia, why wasn't it the right of the Serbs from Bosnia and Croatia to break away from these nascent states? "
Your friendship with Bosnian Serbs is contingent on your Serbian friends' support for Bosnian "independence." It would be interesting to know what percentage of Bosnian Serb population they are. Perhaps the case of Bosnian Serb Jovo Divjak is instructive: He was among the first Serbs to fight on the side of Bosnian Muslim forces until they decided he can't be trusted and relegated him to the margins. He was even counted among the "honourable Serbs" (chasni Srbi), the Serbs that proved their loyalty to Alija Izetbegovic.
As for your beliefs they are your private rights, although the "inalienable rights to life and property" sounds very much like Franjo Tudjman's historical theorizing. None of us are born with the title of ownership of even the spoon we are fed with.
As for taking someone's life for the ancestral dibs, are you talking of Jasenovac where your Muslims volunteered, or are you talking of the expulsion of Serbs in 1995?
You are born 75 years too late. Jo McCarthy's times are over!
nina
April 1st, 2012 at 7:16 am
the hard drive is spinning but the os hasn't been installed. life and property are basic rights but it seems like you prefer being handed things over instead of working for yourself or thinking with your own head. you're just so enamored with chetnik propaganda that you're too deaf to hear the truth. jasenovac is no different from auschwitz or manjaca and any kind of expulsion from a rightfully owned property is wrong. i'm talking about slaughtering an entire bosniak population as in visegrad or overrunning srebrenica.
Isidor
April 1st, 2012 at 7:59 am
What Chetnik?
When out of logical arguments resort to cliches?
By the way, what happened to your English?
Or have you ran out of capital letters?
nina
April 1st, 2012 at 10:15 am
weak!
Rad Vuckov
April 1st, 2012 at 12:46 pm
You just forgot to mention Ms. Amanpour and where she got the material for her 'war reporting fiction' from her hotel in Sarajevo. Little by little every lie has a life of its own.
By the way, excuse my English, I am just a war refugee from the other side of the conflict.
Bianca
April 3rd, 2012 at 10:41 pm
Yugoslav civil war was also a class war. The elites that lost influence after WWI and WWII had grievances that were often passed on to new generations.
Many of them nurtured a narrative in which they were the victims of communism — real and imagined. A segment of Bosnian Moslem community has never quite reconciled with the loss of Ottoman Empire. Segments of Catholic population throughout Balkans , supported by Vatican, were highly priviledged elties under Austro-Hungarian Empire. Serbian elite was dependent on closeness to royal dynasties. To their offspring, those were "the good old days". The anti-communist climate in the West reinforced their sense of entititlement. Some have with zeal embraced foreign-backed breakup of Yugoslavia, attaching themselves to the geopolitical goals of the foreign powers, expecting rewards in the shape of the new elite status. Others have chosen a different path by challenging Western doctrine that presumes to divide the world into the West and the Rest. There are today many "victiims of transition" accross former Yugoslavia. The new elite may be the shortest living phenomenon yet.
Nina
April 4th, 2012 at 7:43 am
there she goes again, making stuff up from generalized notions
Bianca
April 8th, 2012 at 4:25 pm
The self-described "Sarajevan" has been speaking here on behalf of all Sarajevans. "We Sarajevans" is my personal favorite. And now she tells us how she hates Bosnia, and her beloved Sarajevo so much — that she will never go back home! The first self-hating multi-cultural Bosnian?
Nina
April 9th, 2012 at 7:05 pm
i love my homeland, just despise the liars and halfwits who invent facts and resort to violence to get what doesn't belong to them and who will do the same s*** again if given the opportunity
Bianca
April 12th, 2012 at 7:28 pm
This is getting better and better. The "Sarajevan" loves her homeland, just despises people there! All the liars and halfwits! There must be so many of them there, that going back is out of the question! Bosnia-full of people who invent facts, still resort to violence to get what does not belong to them! No wonder, she does not want to go back. Imagine, those halfwits, having fought bitterly against each other — discovered who they are. Bosnian Moslems just became more sure that they are — Moslems, Bosnian Croats — discovered that they are Croats after all. And Bosnian Serbs — had the same amazing revelation. Makes one wonder what the fight was all about. Now that the halfwits rejected Bosnian fusion — the place must be really repugnant to those who lectured them all how to transcend their vile Balkan nature, and deny their identity.
Nina
April 12th, 2012 at 9:59 pm
you're doing this just to get a few thumbs up. you're not even making a sensible point. how does this discovery make you feel? i hate having to to spell things out for you but you know that i was referring to you and you your elk.