PDA

View Full Version : ENGLISH EXPERT CLAIMS: Yugoslavia would be world power, and Belgrade-Europe's capital



Garrick
30-07-16, 17:42
British expert for East Europe Phil Butler claims what we know. Federal Yugoslavia was much better then mini states - nations formed after it. But his expertise and perspicacity tell us a lot.

ENGLISH EXPERT CLAIMS: Yugoslavia would be world power, and Belgrade - Europe's capital


What would have happened if Yugoslavia survived? Surely the would would be entirely different place. First of all, because of the Non-Aligned Movement presence, European union would be much weaker and much less influential in the world. The whole Europe would come to Belgrade, and from there to all six republics that are now fighting over Brussels' crumbs - writes Phil Butler.


http://www.telegraf.rs/english/2265144-english-expert-claims-yugoslavia-would-be-world-power-and-belgrade-europes-capital-photo

(parts of text, the whole text can be found at the link)

We are all aware of the “facts”. First of all, Yugoslavia fell apart because of the West influence because they did not find it good for them to have a strong and powerful country in the heart of Europe. Second, Yugoslavia would have never fallen apart if the Yugoslav people did not have that seed of breakdown, if they weren’t fertile ground for downfall.



Taking in consideration those two things, we decided to show you the most interesting parts of the copyright work “How Yugoslavia was Syrianized 25 years ago” by Phil Butler, British expert for East Europe.


We believe that many chapters will surprise you, and some of them will amaze you because of the “what if” parts. Many of you, that have lived in former Yugoslavia would close your eyes and cry because you will understand that you lost much more than a common state. Lost in the light of the future it could have been.


“In the alternate universe, what would have happened if Yugoslavia still existed?” In this key moment of history, it is absolutely necessary to deal with the events in the past 25 years, and Yugoslavia and West intervention in it is maybe the best place to start.

Can you imagine Europe where Yugoslavia is one of the key players? I can. Yugoslavia was actually one of the biggest cultural and social experiments in the history.


It was formed and the border of Austro-Hungary monarchy and the Ottoman empire, Yugoslavia has connected the people from both cultural circles in a way that it was not seen since Alexander the Great.

Experiment lasted for more than half a century, and the idea was to create an unique state for all South Slavic nations. Although Yugoslavia was partially Britain and France’s geo-strategic project with the goal to restrain Germany, it was basically a reasonable and legal idea.

Corfu declaration called for constitutional monarchy similar to the one in England, even though king Alexander suspended the constitution and the elections in one moment, this project still seemed promising. War, political machinations, internal and external pressure have collapsed over this world power in its rise as it usually happens in these experiments, authoritative government became necessary, and even desirable.


When national hero, dictator, and global “celebrity” Josip Broz Tito came to power, Yugoslavia emerged to the world’s scene in all its glory. His role in founding of the Non-Aligned movement was both generous and extremely important, especially for the people of the Yugoslavia itself; besides, its foundations were laid in Belgrade 1961.
...

Yugoslavia became a pattern for Afghanistan, Iraq, Arab spring and Ukraine. The story about genocide in the name of democracy is too disgusting to talk about it. Majority of people in these nations were set back 200 years, in the type of medieval existence without hope. The only today former Yugoslavs see in, naturally, EU and NATO.

In the Kosovo conflict, both sides committed crimes of course, as well in other Yugoslavian wars. That is not the point of what i am talking about, but the totality of the disaster.


Primarily, the peoples of former Yugoslavia do not have their own voice anymore. Secondly, the downfall of the nation lead to the death and persecution of millions of people. That is the other story. My “fantasy” about Yugoslavia should enlighten.


Yugoslavia was build on the idea that South Slavs should stop being weak and divided. The united nation of Yugoslavia was not an easy target of imperialistic intentions that we see today.


The fact is that after the World War II, socialistic Yugoslavia became European story about success.

Between 1960 and 1980 that country experienced perhaps the most lively economical and social growth in the world: decent living standards, free health care and education, guarantied right for work, paid one month vacation, literacy rate over 90% and expected lifetime of 72 years.


As much as i know, non of the newly formed Balkan countries can boast with half of that prosperity. It was a progress that made West interest groups want to destroy Yugoslavia.


All of the Yugoslav peoples also enjoyed free apartments, accessible public transportation and utilities. Non profit companies were also in the public hands, which did not suit well with Western democracy.


That country was not allowed to compete with Germany, France, and especially not with Britain, and London and Luxembourg bankers could not pull out billions from the socialistic system.

...
But what would have happened if the Yugoslavia survived? What if that big ethnic and social experiment survived? Surely the would would be entirely different place today.

First of all, because of the Non-Aligned Movement presence, European union would be much weaker and much less influential in the world. The whole Europe would come to Belgrade, and from there to all six republics that are now fighting over Brussels’ crumbs.


In 1991 Yugoslavia was 24th in the world considering GDP. Bosnia and Herzegovina is 112th today and the situation is getting worse. Croatia is 76th although “Blumberg” recently put them on the list of World’s 10 worst. Macedonia is 130th, Montenegro 149th, Slovenia 81st, Serbia 87th, and it seems to be more stable than all the rest.
...

Phil Butler, is a investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe.

http://moderndiplomacy.eu/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=1257:how-yugoslavia-was-syrianized-25-years-ago&Itemid=569

...
Someone can agree or not, it is a fact that Yugoslavia was more advanced than the national mini-states today. Overall, federal states are better for their inhabitants than the separate states. Serbs have reputation to prefer federal state and there is truth, in a well-developed federal state 1+1+1>3, and everybody wins.

Too bad, Yugoslavia ended in this way and separatist forces were strong, although admitted or not at their own detriment. But Yugoslavia is good example for any future federal state which from Yugoslav experience has much to learn.

Taranis
30-07-16, 17:58
If you ask me, the premise is completely nonsensical. Yugoslavia - Socialist Yugoslavia post World War 2 that is, was a state was based around one simple factor - the personality of Tito himself. When Tito died, so did Yugoslavia. I really don't see how the breakup was not inevitable. Beyond that, the way (the glorification and idealization) this Phil Butler talks about Yugoslavia reminds me about the "Ostalgie" glorification of East Germany.

LeBrok
30-07-16, 18:34
Garric, your romantic view of Yugoslavia took you a hostage. Yugoslavia fell apart in a very common way many other countries fell apart. As Taranis mentioned, when a dictator is gone, his country is gone too, especially when it was held in place by his iron fist. When the country was made by few ethnicities and religions. The cause is overwhelmingly internal, and looking for external forces causing the breakup is misguided and not leading to understanding.
Yugoslavia fell apart for the same reason Soviet Union did, Syria or Iraq to give few modern examples. In all cases countries were build of variety of ethnic and religious groups hating each other. Syria is outlier in this group, because it fell apart when dictator is still in the office.

The main issue here is that a dictator (a person or a party) is going against natural grass root forces in population. When dictator is gone these forces become loud and unrestrained leading a country in new direction.

Judging by this observation, I'm predicting that when communist party is gone in China, Tibet will separate and other Western Provinces. Hopefully without a domestic war.
When Turkey becomes fully democratic it will lead to separation of Kurdistan from Turkey.
When dictator is gone in North Korea, people will change economic and political system and will unite with South Korea.

The grass roots forces already exist, and they get unleashed when dictator is gone.
Yugoslavia was actually a typical example of it.

bicicleur
30-07-16, 20:28
How Yugoslavia could stay so united, while appearantly there was so much hatred between ethnic groups, remains an enigma to me.
I guess Tito was a very charismatic leader.

Milan
30-07-16, 21:06
I will not agree with idea that others are responsible for dissolution of Yugoslavia and "we" are not,is common myth especialy the leaders that started the wars.We must face our problems.
It was good experiment but unfortunately the problem lies in it's constitution,foundation and basic ideas.Various ethnicities,nations,many were infected with nationalism by their leaders all towards prosperity,while prior Tito-iron fist was good at hunting them,in Yugoslavia even speaking the same language couldn't overcome the different culture influences during the history on various later republics.The problem is here; what people thought about it?could the republic survive based on such ideas,what should be done to survive,the experts should have think on that first if they wanted such republic,just one example;If America could gather all people under American flag of various different races,religions,nations,well what is their conception,is not only let's create republic then we gonna kill eachother,better not to create it at all.

Garrick
30-07-16, 21:19
Garric, your romantic view of Yugoslavia took you a hostage. Yugoslavia fell apart in a very common way many other countries fell apart. As Taranis mentioned, when a dictator is gone, his country is gone too, especially when it was held in place by his iron fist. When the country was made by few ethnicities and religions. The cause is overwhelmingly internal, and looking for external forces causing the breakup is misguided and not leading to understanding.
Yugoslavia fell apart for the same reason Soviet Union did, Syria or Iraq to give few modern examples. In all cases countries were build of variety of ethnic and religious groups hating each other. Syria is outlier in this group, because it fell apart when dictator is still in the office.

The main issue here is that a dictator (a person or a party) is going against natural grass root forces in population. When dictator is gone these forces become loud and unrestrained leading a country in new direction.

Judging by this observation, I'm predicting that when communist party is gone in China, Tibet will separate and other Western Provinces. Hopefully without a domestic war.
When Turkey becomes fully democratic it will lead to separation of Kurdistan from Turkey.
When dictator is gone in North Korea, people will change economic and political system and will unite with South Korea.

The grass roots forces already exist, and they get unleashed when dictator is gone.
Yugoslavia was actually a typical example of it.

This is a simplified, things are slightly different. Not every multinational country after the death of dictator was sentenced to break-up. We have example of Spain after the death of Franco. It is not disputed that Tito was dictator but he had positive aspects. Difference between Spain and Yugoslavia was what in time of transition Spain had Prince Juan Carlos. After the death of Tito Yugoslavia had Presidium who was collective head of state. And it would not be problem that Presidium led transition toward market economy and democracy. But unfortunately, Presidium hold one-party system and socialist economy. And it was big mistake. Presidium didn't have strength, courage and will to change old socialist system, which gave some results in period since start 60's till start of 80's but it was definitely outdated and required fundamental change. Yugoslavia lost ten years in the maintenance of unfit system, instead of that system had to be changed. That in this ten-year period introduced market economy and democracy federal Yugoslavia would have a big chance to survive.

I'm not romantic, very real, Yugoslavia could survive that implemented fundamental change. However English expert Butler rightly observes that Yugoslavia has survived (and transformed) it would be much better place for live than present mini states. Not to mention the much more opportunities for the individual in such state. The point of Butler's text is that federal state is better place with more opportunities than separate mini state. Federalism is good thing just needs a solid foundation.

LeBrok
30-07-16, 22:16
This is a simplified, things are slightly different. Not every multinational country after the death of dictator was sentenced to break-up. We have example of Spain after the death of Franco. It is not disputed that Tito was dictator but he had positive aspects. Difference between Spain and Yugoslavia was what in time of transition Spain had Prince Juan Carlos. After the death of Tito Yugoslavia had Presidium who was collective head of state. And it would not be problem that Presidium led transition toward market economy and democracy. But unfortunately, Presidium hold one-party system and socialist economy. And it was big mistake. Presidium didn't have strength, courage and will to change old socialist system, which gave some results in period since start 60's till start of 80's but it was definitely outdated and required fundamental change. Yugoslavia lost ten years in the maintenance of unfit system, instead of that system had to be changed. That in this ten-year period introduced market economy and democracy federal Yugoslavia would have a big chance to survive.Spain fits the mold, Catalans and Basques would like to separate, and possibly will, bringing end to Spain. However they are sort of satisfied in the existing union to the point of not wanting to die for independence, but rather use peaceful means like referendum. If they were of different religion they would have separated already.


I'm not romantic, very real, Yugoslavia could survive that implemented fundamental change. However English expert Butler rightly observes that Yugoslavia has survived (and transformed) it would be much better place for live than present mini states. Not to mention the much more opportunities for the individual in such state. The point of Butler's text is that federal state is better place with more opportunities than separate mini state. Federalism is good thing just needs a solid foundation.Good point.

LeBrok
30-07-16, 22:21
If America could gather all people under American flag of various different races,religions,nations,well what is their conception,is not only let's create republic then we gonna kill eachother,what is the problem and what not,better not to create it at all. I like it. It's better to part peacefully and be friends. This opens a door to be united in the future if all parties desire. I like how Czechoslovakia parted. They are still friends and good neighbors.

Milan
31-07-16, 00:40
I like it. It's better to part peacefully and be friends. This opens a door to be united in the future if all parties desire. I like how Czechoslovakia parted. They are still friends and good neighbors.
I agree if Yugoslavia parted as did Czechoslovakia would have been much better for us all.

Ike
31-07-16, 17:16
I agree if Yugoslavia parted as did Czechoslovakia would have been much better for us all.

Yes, but nazis around the world didn't let peoples of Yugoslavia get apart. This advisor guy is just whitewashing the crimes, terror and genocide western countries are responsible for. Their governments are responsible for tens of thousands of dead here. He is just spreading CIA propaganda on the internet, like everyone there does..

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-28/top-german-journalist-admits-mainstream-media-completely-fake-we-all-lie-cia

bicicleur
31-07-16, 17:26
I agree if Yugoslavia parted as did Czechoslovakia would have been much better for us all.

appearantly it was not possible
there was to much hatred among the different ethnicities, and I think not only from the Serbs, I think all parties were guilty
but I don't know much about the subject
can you tell me where the hatred came fom?
and why it was subdued under Tito? yes Tito was a totalitarian ruler, but I don't have the impression he was worse or better than other totalitarian rulers in eastern Europe after WW II

LeBrok
31-07-16, 18:14
Yes, but nazis around the world didn't let peoples of Yugoslavia get apart. This advisor guy is just whitewashing the crimes, terror and genocide western countries are responsible for. Their governments are responsible for tens of thousands of dead here. He is just spreading CIA propaganda on the internet, like everyone there does..

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-28/top-german-journalist-admits-mainstream-media-completely-fake-we-all-lie-ciaStyll seeing Nazis everywhere? I'm sure there is a name for this disorder, lol.

LeBrok
31-07-16, 18:18
appearantly it was not possible
there was to much hatred among the different ethnicities, and I think not only from the Serbs, I think all parties were guilty
but I don't know much about the subject
can you tell me where the hatred came fom?
and why it was subdued under Tito? yes Tito was a totalitarian ruler, but I don't have the impression he was worse or better than other totalitarian rulers in eastern Europe after WW II You are confused, because you think there are good, tolerant and peaceful dictators. You also believe that leaving Middle East under dictatorship was a good thing. That's the source of confusion.
Now let's listen to our friends from former Yugoslavia to enlighten us about the "good" dictator...

LABERIA
31-07-16, 18:24
appearantly it was not possible
there was to much hatred among the different ethnicities, and I think not only from the Serbs, I think all parties were guilty
but I don't know much about the subject
can you tell me where the hatred came fom?
and why it was subdued under Tito? yes Tito was a totalitarian ruler, but I don't have the impression he was worse or better than other totalitarian rulers in eastern Europe after WW II

Not all were responsabile. Serbs were responsabile for all what happened.
After the WWII, Yougoslavia was the most terrible communist dictature in East Europe, second only to the SU under Stalin. All this until middle 60s when the serb clan under Rankovic fell from the power. During this 20 years, serbs controlled what was called organs of oppression of dictatorship of the proletariat, secret services, police, etc.
After this started a proces of democratization of the country. Of course we can not speak about an democracy with western standarts. And this process was supported with money from west, big money. All this until the death of Tito. After his death, serbs started again to took power and after some years we know what happened. So the "secret" of Yougoslavia was keeping under control the ambitions of the serbs and the money invested from the west powers. Because without those money, the Yougoslav system proclaimed by Tito and his entourage as a third way, was destined to go bankrupt.

LABERIA
31-07-16, 18:28
You are confused, because you think there are good, tolerant and peaceful dictators. You also believe that leaving Middle East under dictatorship was a good thing. That's the source of confusion.
Now let's listen to our friends from former Yugoslavia to enlighten us about the "good" dictator...

There are enlighten dictators. Tito was one of them. I want to mention an another dictator, Pinochet. This people ruled with harsh metods, but their positive legacy is evident.

Garrick
31-07-16, 19:25
How Yugoslavia could stay so united, while appearantly there was so much hatred between ethnic groups, remains an enigma to me.
I guess Tito was a very charismatic leader.

Yugoslav system was specific. It was no socialist etatistic system as in East block, but socialist self-management system where companies were organizations of associated labor, something similar as workers are owner of companies in the West. This system had results, Yugoslavia had fast development and it was much better for life than countries in Eastern Europe.

It is ridiculous that Albanians here in forum criticize Yugoslavia, quite opposite, Albania under dictator Enver Hoxha was very very poor country and very closed and dozens if not more than hundreds of thousands of Albanians is due to a very poor life came to live in SFR Yugoslavia, mostly in SR Serbia and SR Macedonia. Yugoslavia was country with the highest standard of minority rights in the world. Among other things, this was one of reason why Yugoslavia was high appreciated in Non-Aligned movement.

Big contribution politics of brotherhood and unity which is promoted by Communist party was Federal state fund and Republic funds for the development of poor areas. Large budget was for SR Bosnia and Herzegovina, SR Macedonia and for Serbian province AP Kosovo and Metohiya. Some areas are for a short time skip centuries. Unfortunately after break up of Yugoslavia some of these areas are depleted again because there was no more funding.

People in Yugoslavia had much more freedom than people in East Europe or in Enver Hoxha's Albania. People of all Yugoslav six republics were friendly with each other, hatred was not allowed to manifest, country was very secure.

Yugoslavia had large production and most of things people bought from own Yugoslav production, but imports of western and world goods was allowed, and this goods were sold in Yugoslav market.

LeBrok is right, although more soft, it was dictatorship yet, although Tito as historical figure is for respect. The whole essence was that in 80s, after death of Tito, country implements reforms, and Presidium didn't do it, Presidium remained locked in Socialist system without seeing profound changes in the world. Yugoslavia had to implement democracy and market economy and country would survive. GDP in Yugoslavia per capita probably would be above the EU average, certainly much higher than in today's mini states.

Again, federalism is good thing. Example of Yugoslavia shows precisely the advantages of federalism. Separatists and nationalists do not want to understand that, but they can not offer a better alternative.

bicicleur
31-07-16, 19:44
You are confused, because you think there are good, tolerant and peaceful dictators. You also believe that leaving Middle East under dictatorship was a good thing. That's the source of confusion.
Now let's listen to our friends from former Yugoslavia to enlighten us about the "good" dictator...

where did I mention the word good?
my comment was very short
please read it before you reply
that shouldn't be that difficult

bicicleur
31-07-16, 19:55
Not all were responsabile. Serbs were responsabile for all what happened.
no offense, but this sounds more like an accusation from your part
please elaborate


After the WWII, Yougoslavia was the most terrible communist dictature in East Europe, second only to the SU under Stalin. All this until middle 60s when the serb clan under Rankovic fell from the power. During this 20 years, serbs controlled what was called organs of oppression of dictatorship of the proletariat, secret services, police, etc.
I don't know, I was not there. But I was in Roumenia in early 1995, 1 1/2 year after Ceaucescu. I'm pretty sure he was worse.


After this started a proces of democratization of the country. Of course we can not speak about an democracy with western standarts. And this process was supported with money from west, big money. All this until the death of Tito. After his death, serbs started again to took power and after some years we know what happened. So the "secret" of Yougoslavia was keeping under control the ambitions of the serbs and the money invested from the west powers. Because without those money, the Yougoslav system proclaimed by Tito and his entourage as a third way, was destined to go bankrupt.
yes, creating an illusion on borrowed money, happens all the time, even today in Europe

bicicleur
31-07-16, 20:00
Yugoslav system was specific. It was no socialist etatistic system as in East block, but socialist self-management system where companies were organizations of associated labor, something similar as workers are owner of companies in the West. This system had results, Yugoslavia had fast development and it was much better for life than countries in Eastern Europe.

It is ridiculous that Albanians here in forum criticize Yugoslavia, quite opposite, Albania under dictator Enver Hoxha was very very poor country and very closed and dozens if not more than hundreds of thousands of Albanians is due to a very poor life came to live in SFR Yugoslavia, mostly in SR Serbia and SR Macedonia. Yugoslavia was country with the highest standard of minority rights in the world. Among other things, this was one of reason why Yugoslavia was high appreciated in Non-Aligned movement.

Big contribution politics of brotherhood and unity which is promoted by Communist party was Federal state fund and Republic funds for the development of poor areas. Large budget was for SR Bosnia and Herzegovina, SR Macedonia and for Serbian province AP Kosovo and Metohiya. Some areas are for a short time skip centuries. Unfortunately after break up of Yugoslavia some of these areas are depleted again because there was no more funding.

People in Yugoslavia had much more freedom than people in East Europe or in Enver Hoxha's Albania. People of all Yugoslav six republics were friendly with each other, hatred was not allowed to manifest, country was very secure.

Yugoslavia had large production and most of things people bought from own Yugoslav production, but imports of western and world goods was allowed, and this goods were sold in Yugoslav market.

LeBrok is right, although more soft, it was dictatorship yet, although Tito as historical figure is for respect. The whole essence was that in 80s, after death of Tito, country implements reforms, and Presidium didn't do it, Presidium remained locked in Socialist system without seeing profound changes in the world. Yugoslavia had to implement democracy and market economy and country would survive. GDP in Yugoslavia per capita probably would be above the EU average, certainly much higher than in today's mini states.

Again, federalism is good thing. Example of Yugoslavia shows precisely the advantages of federalism. Separatists and nationalists do not want to understand that, but they can not offer a better alternative.

ok, things went wrong after Tito's death, but it does not explain where such deep and profound hatred between different groups came from

LeBrok
31-07-16, 20:56
where did I mention the word good?
my comment was very short
please read it before you reply
that shouldn't be that difficult Indead, I didn't read it right. Sorry.

bicicleur
31-07-16, 21:19
Indead, I didn't read it right. Sorry.

it's allright

Milan
31-07-16, 22:41
appearantly it was not possible
there was to much hatred among the different ethnicities, and I think not only from the Serbs, I think all parties were guilty
but I don't know much about the subject
can you tell me where the hatred came fom?
and why it was subdued under Tito? yes Tito was a totalitarian ruler, but I don't have the impression he was worse or better than other totalitarian rulers in eastern Europe after WW II
I will give my own explanation and opinion.
Hatred was fueled by the separatist and nationalists movements,the question here is how they appeared?It was generally a economic downfall as we know that communism lost,so changes were needed in this part of Europe too-apparently this nationalist and separatist movement had the solution for this,if one had the solution all people do is-follow,it is easy to manipulate the people with kind words they want to hear,so pointing fingers become usual thing to do.Took too much time to authorities to carry this changes,they simple couldn't find the solution whether willfully or not.There was even missunderstandings from which city the state to be ruled,First the Slovenians choose they can't stand the mess will take their independence and will go toward EU,followed by Croatia and other republics,the problem in some republics was that they had mixed population in some regions,the ideas clashed right there,leaders using the population "ethnicity" nationality for their political goals,the myths of nationalism were resurected again as in the 19th century,the wounds,the division of Yugoslav population from not long ago ww2 was again there,the first Yugoslav monarchy failed very easy on different ideas during ww2.There was no lesson learned.Under Tito all this was subdued cause he had his own mechanism of brotherhood and unity for Yugoslav people and any nationalist or separatist which doesn't fit in his system will be neutralized of course not to spread that.
Anytime you can have couple thousand that can carry atrocities or go to war,tell to the people you are attacked,tell them the Serbs want to kill Croats and opposite,add couple killings here,keep that on TV everyday,you have a war.However still many people loved and love the former country,whether one agree or disagree and not all hate eachother or the country Yugoslavia itself.. Nationalist being the loudest of all of course.
There was kind of solutions offered by EU i have heard not many talk about,Yugoslavia to be reformed with EU standards and in confederation to enter the EU to avoid the mess and war,but the leaders had other things to do.

Sometimes i think that the establishment,leaders,taykuns among many others wanted this to happen,majority of this families are still on top anyway in most of the republics,they still have their businesses to do,the one who lost was the middle class which is almost non-existent today in most of the countries,the victims that died for nothing,war that brought hatred and wounds for generations which need to be overcome.
For some then was a situation and a moment to be rich and on top.
Even the present day politicians use this retorics for political points on which they collect votes on election.
In that kind of situation you will of course have a world powers which will carry their own interests in the region too.Generally it was bad for the region later on from all sides.

LABERIA
31-07-16, 23:23
no offense, but this sounds more like an accusation from your part
please elaborate

I don't know, I was not there. But I was in Roumenia in early 1995, 1 1/2 year after Ceaucescu. I'm pretty sure he was worse.

yes, creating an illusion on borrowed money, happens all the time, even today in Europe
1)What you want from me to elaborate, that serbs are responsabile for what happened during 90s in Yougoslav wars?
2)You don't know because you was not there, but you are sure that Romania was worse. How i have to understand this sentence?

bicicleur
31-07-16, 23:48
1)What you want from me to elaborate, that serbs are responsabile for what happened during 90s in Yougoslav wars?
2)You don't know because you was not there, but you are sure that Romania was worse. How i have to understand this sentence?

1) there were also reports of cruelties and ethnic cleansing committed by others like Croats and Bosnians
2) Roumenia was completely exhausted by Ceaucescu to the point that the population was at the brink of starvation, and Ceaucescu had destroyed complete villages and towns, I don't think it was that bad under Tito ; were you in Yougoslavia at the time?

LABERIA
01-08-16, 00:13
1) there were also reports of cruelties and ethnic cleansing committed by others like Croats and Bosnians
2) Roumenia was completely exhausted by Ceaucescu to the point that the population was at the brink of starvation, and Ceaucescu had destroyed complete villages and towns, I don't think it was that bad under Tito ; were you in Yougoslavia at the time?

1)It's true. But you forget something that was serbs who attacked this people in their homes. And was serbs who decided the rules of the "game". Crimes are always terribile but there are causes and consequences.
We have read for example what the chief of French secret services said about the current situation in France. As a consequence of this terrorist attacks France is near a civil war. Think about what serbs did to other populations of Yougoslavia.
2)I think i was clear. Pls read again my post. I spoke for a period of time around 15-20 years after the WWII. In that period of time the communist dictature in Yougoslavia was second only to the SU during Stalin rule. And i am speaking about the situation of red terror in communist style. But you have also to take in consideration that the ethnic cleansing of Albanians and against other minorities continue during this period of time.
Later things changed.

Garrick
01-08-16, 01:43
ok, things went wrong after Tito's death, but it does not explain where such deep and profound hatred between different groups came from

Unfortunately deep hatred comes from religion, history but and foreign impact.

I will give here short only for Muslim - Christian. Ottoman empire since conquered Balkans ruled long in this region. During Muslim Ottoman rule one part of people in Bosnia, Albanians and Pomacs in Bulgaria converted to Islam. Yes and some other peoples but they were minor part of their nations.

Balkan Muslims were privileged, Ottoman empire was Sunni Islamic caliphate. Over time the largest part of Ottoman ruling and military forces in the Balkan consisted of Balkan Muslims, ethnic Turks were little. Unfortunately Christians were second order citizens, and during the five hundred years they were much suffered and were victims. Ottoman judge accuses and gives verdict was rule, human rights for non-Muslims didn't exist.

After battles of Balkan people for liberty and First Balkan war situation was almost different. Christian peoples, in First Balkan war Bulgarians, Greeks and Serbs, oppressed for hundred of years have won and became winners. Muslim thinkers from Balkans and Turkey think Christian people didn't respect human rights in battles for liberty. After Balkans war and World war I only Muslim territories in the Balkans where in majority ruled Muslim people were in European part of Turkey and in Albania. All other Balkan Muslims remained in Yugoslavia, Greece and Bulgaria.

What is more interesting, at time of rise of Ottoman empire and spreading in Europe privileged Balkan Muslims were wealthiest part of population of Balkans. But as Ottoman empire started to drop and became "sick man of Europe" and was losing the Balkan battles situation became different, Muslim areas were becoming poorer. After World war I the most backward areas in the Balkans were ones with Muslim majority.

And situation changed again in War World II. Greeks and Serbs were in the side Allied Powers against Axis Powers. Forces of Wehrmacht conquered Yugoslavia very fast. Muslims in Yugoslavia mostly sided with Axis powers, but one part became part of partisan movement. The parts of Yugoslavia were annexed by Germany, Italy, Hungary, Bulgaria. Most part of Serbian province Kosovo and Metohiya was annexed to Albania (as Italian protectorate), Montenegro was Italian protectorate, what left of Serbia was under German occupation, and Independent State of Croatia created as German and Italy ally. In that situation the best what could be was partisan movement, who fought against Axis powers and their domestic allies, and won

After World War II Yugoslav communists gave themselves very hard task, to develop very underdeveloped areas in SR Bosnia and Herzegovina, SR Macedonia and especially in Serbian province Kosovo and Metohiya. And large funds and investments brought positive results and progress. But communists could not solve all historical problems and tensions between religions and nations and it can be lack of communist access. Times again changed, now we have new situation with radical Islam. It is hard to say if communists could find solutions. Market economy and democracy would gave better results.

Yes LeBrok good noticed. Spain and Yugoslavia had similarities as multinational countries and countries which were in transition period after death of dictator. But Spain is country with one religion, and internal tensions were much smaller and without significant foreign impact. Yugoslavia had three religions and it seemed situation much more difficult plus foreign impact.

However, example of Yugoslavia shows that federal state is better than mini states. This is an important point. Federal state has more resources, gives more opportunities and makes life better.

VMRO1893
01-08-16, 03:19
European states like Great Britain, Belgium, Spain, Italy and perhaps others could also go the way of Yugoslavia if separatist regions in these states are recognized by neighboring states. The swift recognition by Germany and others of Croatia and Slovenia spelt the death of Yugoslavia. If there was a will by the West to keep it together, it would have survived.

Dinarid
01-08-16, 05:17
I know you would just love the idea of Yugoslavia being a superpower, but we, however, wouldn't. We always wanted freedom and independence and the right to self-determination. How dare you suggest that this was fueled by "hatred".

Dinarid
01-08-16, 05:31
Unfortunately deep hatred comes from religion, history but and foreign impact.

I will give here short only for Muslim - Christian. Ottoman empire since conquered Balkans ruled long in this region. During Muslim Ottoman rule one part of people in Bosnia, Albanians and Pomacs in Bulgaria converted to Islam. Yes and some other peoples but they were minor part of their nations.

Balkan Muslims were privileged, Ottoman empire was Sunni Islamic caliphate. Over time the largest part of Ottoman ruling and military forces in the Balkan consisted of Balkan Muslims, ethnic Turks were little. Unfortunately Christians were second order citizens, and during the five hundred years they were much suffered and were victims. Ottoman judge accuses and gives verdict was rule, human rights for non-Muslims didn't exist.

After battles of Balkan people for liberty and First Balkan war situation was almost different. Christian peoples, in First Balkan war Bulgarians, Greeks and Serbs, oppressed for hundred of years have won and became winners. Muslim thinkers from Balkans and Turkey think Christian people didn't respect human rights in battles for liberty. After Balkans war and World war I only Muslim territories in the Balkans where in majority ruled Muslim people were in European part of Turkey and in Albania. All other Balkan Muslims remained in Yugoslavia, Greece and Bulgaria.

What is more interesting, at time of rise of Ottoman empire and spreading in Europe privileged Balkan Muslims were wealthiest part of population of Balkans. But as Ottoman empire started to drop and became "sick man of Europe" and was losing the Balkan battles situation became different, Muslim areas were becoming poorer. After World war I the most backward areas in the Balkans were ones with Muslim majority.

And situation changed again in War World II. Greeks and Serbs were in the side Allied Powers against Axis Powers. Forces of Wehrmacht conquered Yugoslavia very fast. Muslims in Yugoslavia mostly sided with Axis powers, but one part became part of partisan movement. The parts of Yugoslavia were annexed by Germany, Italy, Hungary, Bulgaria. Most part of Serbian province Kosovo and Metohiya was annexed to Albania (as Italian protectorate), Montenegro was Italian protectorate, what left of Serbia was under German occupation, and Independent State of Croatia created as German and Italy ally. In that situation the best what could be was partisan movement, who fought against Axis powers and their domestic allies, and won

After World War II Yugoslav communists gave themselves very hard task, to develop very underdeveloped areas in SR Bosnia and Herzegovina, SR Macedonia and especially in Serbian province Kosovo and Metohiya. And large funds and investments brought positive results and progress. But communists could not solve all historical problems and tensions between religions and nations and it can be lack of communist access. Times again changed, now we have new situation with radical Islam. It is hard to say if communists could find solutions. Market economy and democracy would gave better results.

Yes LeBrok good noticed. Spain and Yugoslavia had similarities as multinational countries and countries which were in transition period after death of dictator. But Spain is country with one religion, and internal tensions were much smaller and without significant foreign impact. Yugoslavia had three religions and it seemed situation much more difficult plus foreign impact.

However, example of Yugoslavia shows that federal state is better than mini states. This is an important point. Federal state has more resources, gives more opportunities and makes life better.
I couldn't care less what you think "makes life better" and neither do any of the peoples who declared independence from Yugoslavia. You have no right to tell others how to live and infringe on our right to self-determination. Most Croats wanted independence, and we do not take kindly to anyone keeping it from us. Bosnian Croats will follow the Bosnian Serbs to brake free from the coming Bosnian Islamic sharia state. Not because of Catholic fanaticism (for the Serbs it may be Orthodox Christian fanaticism, but I wouldn't know), but because of our right to self-determination and freedom. We will never become part of some psychotic Russian project to annex the Balkan Slavs and claim it's "for our good" either. Anyone trying to bring foreign powers to the Balkans, be it the Bosnian Muslims inviting Turkey or the Serbs making overtures to Russia is up to no good.

VMRO1893
01-08-16, 06:51
I couldn't care less what you think "makes life better" and neither do any of the peoples who declared independence from Yugoslavia. You have no right to tell others how to live and infringe on our right to self-determination. Most Croats wanted independence, and we do not take kindly to anyone keeping it from us. Bosnian Croats will follow the Bosnian Serbs to brake free from the coming Bosnian Islamic sharia state. Not because of Catholic fanaticism (for the Serbs it may be Orthodox Christian fanaticism, but I wouldn't know), but because of our right to self-determination and freedom. We will never become part of some psychotic Russian project to annex the Balkan Slavs and claim it's "for our good" either. Anyone trying to bring foreign powers to the Balkans, be it the Bosnian Muslims inviting Turkey or the Serbs making overtures to Russia is up to no good.

I wish Bosnian Croats all the best in their quest for independence from Bosnia (and union with Croatia). Herceg-Bosna should have always been a republic like Republika Srpska. You were short-changed.

Dinarid
01-08-16, 07:17
I wish Bosnian Croats all the best in their quest for independence from Bosnia (and union with Croatia). Herceg-Bosna should have always been a republic like Republika Srpska. You were short-changed.
Many thanks, and we wish the same for all peoples living under the yoke of Islam. The Muslims backstabbed us after we kicked the Serbian Army out. Then the traitorous "Croatian" leaders of pro-Ustaša neo-Nazi battalions pledged allegiance to "Bosnia" and told us that unity with the Muslims was our destiny, and turned their guns on the Bosnian Croats who resisted this treason. They painted Bosnian Croat leader Mate Boban as some kind of rabid violent psycho bent on eliminating his opponents in order to consolidate personal power when in reality the Nazi thug Blaž Kraljević had it coming for his treason when he was assassinated. Then even Franjo Tuđman, the father of the Croatian state who led Bosnian Croat forces against the Muslims, capitulated to Islam and declared that Herzegovina was Bosnian (read: Islamic) land. That's how we were dragged quite reluctantly into the Dar al-Islam.

bicicleur
01-08-16, 08:32
I don't think we need federate states any more if independant states can join the EU.
Belgium has become a federal state. There are to many overlapping gevernment levels creating to high costs and absence of accountability.
There is government of the memberstates, there is Beglian government and EU government. To much. IMO Belgian state and government should dissapear (like Czech Republic and Slovakia did).
Independant states should harmonise their rules under EU flag.
I admit in Balkan it is more complicated, as you mention e.g. Croat enclave in Bosnia. Some solution is needed, but you cannot keep on splitting into ever smaller entities.

I am in favor of the EU project, it is a very good idea. It has lot of advantages.
I'm also very critical though. I think the EU is governed very bad right now. Many of the advantages of EU are destroyed by bad government.

Dinarid
01-08-16, 09:23
I don't think we need federate states any more if independant states can join the EU.
Belgium has become a federal state. There are to many overlapping gevernment levels creating to high costs and absence of accountability.
There is government of the memberstates, there is Beglian government and EU government. To much. IMO Belgian state and government should dissapear (like Czech Republic and Slovakia did).
Independant states should harmonise their rules under EU flag.
I admit in Balkan it is more complicated, as you mention e.g. Croat enclave in Bosnia. Some solution is needed, but you cannot keep on splitting into ever smaller entities.

I am in favor of the EU project, it is a very good idea. It has lot of advantages.
I'm also very critical though. I think the EU is governed very bad right now. Many of the advantages of EU are destroyed by bad government.
We will keep pushing through with independence until every people has fulfilled their right to self-determination. I am also in favor of the EU, but it should not be an "ever-closer union". European countries must maintain their independence. We shouldn't sink to the level of the Russians in terms of fascism and oppression of other peoples.

Garrick
01-08-16, 12:24
I couldn't care less what you think "makes life better" and neither do any of the peoples who declared independence from Yugoslavia. You have no right to tell others how to live and infringe on our right to self-determination. Most Croats wanted independence, and we do not take kindly to anyone keeping it from us. Bosnian Croats will follow the Bosnian Serbs to brake free from the coming Bosnian Islamic sharia state. Not because of Catholic fanaticism (for the Serbs it may be Orthodox Christian fanaticism, but I wouldn't know), but because of our right to self-determination and freedom. We will never become part of some psychotic Russian project to annex the Balkan Slavs and claim it's "for our good" either. Anyone trying to bring foreign powers to the Balkans, be it the Bosnian Muslims inviting Turkey or the Serbs making overtures to Russia is up to no good.

Nobody mentioned Russian federation, it does not in this analysis of British expert. For religiosity of Serbs, in time of Yugoslavia most of Serbs were atheists and today a lot of Serbs are only declarative Orthodox, or Protestant. But it has no connection with the main idea and why this article is important.

Conditions in Serbia are much different than you think. In Serbia people are convincingly for EU. Serbian parties won or lost elections because corruption and keeping the economy but almost all are for EU.

Serbs are European nation and it is natural to be for EU. Yes when we discuss about business every capital and investments are important, it is does not matter if they are Chinese, Arab, Russian etc.

Who reads between lines he or she can establish a very important point. European Union should be stronger and it should more integration.

Federal state makes life better, it gives more opportunities for individual and it is better for state, the reason is simple, it has much more resources. Small mini states have no such opportunities. And what is very important, small mini states cannot compete with giants in world scene.

Garrick
01-08-16, 13:02
That's how we were dragged quite reluctantly into the Dar al-Islam.

It is important point. I agree with you. Anyone can read what means Dar al-Islam.

Dinarid
01-08-16, 18:15
Nobody mentioned Russian federation, it does not in this analysis of British expert. For religiosity of Serbs, in time of Yugoslavia most of Serbs were atheists and today a lot of Serbs are only declarative Orthodox, or Protestant. But it has no connection with the main idea and why this article is important.

Conditions in Serbia are much different than you think. In Serbia people are convincingly for EU. Serbian parties won or lost elections because corruption and keeping the economy but almost all are for EU.

Serbs are European nation and it is natural to be for EU. Yes when we discuss about business every capital and investments are important, it is does not matter if they are Chinese, Arab, Russian etc.

Who reads between lines he or she can establish a very important point. European Union should be stronger and it should more integration.

Federal state makes life better, it gives more opportunities for individual and it is better for state, the reason is simple, it has much more resources. Small mini states have no such opportunities. And what is very important, small mini states cannot compete with giants in world scene.
I applaud the Serbs for all the reasons you mention. Again, we want no part of a federal state. I simply could'nt care less if you think it would make life "better".

Milan
01-08-16, 18:33
The behavior of the nationalists have always been interesting one,they do not care how they gonna live,their hobby,sport,dream,life is the imaginary picture created to them and is in their mindset.Behind every nation is a powerful myth that make them feel strong.Even though they will immigrate abroad for better life,the former still is more important to them,even the ones living abroad identify with this,some don't even know to speak their native language i have seen many of them on the internet mostly,still they are the biggest patriots,but for whom and for what? if you are willing to make worst to yourself with this and people around you.
Politicians also know this kind of mindset very good and they are good at manipulating it.
In exchange for economic progress they offer patriotism times again.Anytime there is problem,patriotism is here.

bicicleur
01-08-16, 19:04
In exchange for economic progress they offer patriotism times again.Anytime there is problem,patriotism is here.

this makes me think of Putin

I think the same of Erdogan though. In the end he will ruin his country.

LABERIA
01-08-16, 19:28
The behavior of the nationalists have always been interesting one,they do not care how they gonna live,their hobby,sport,dream,life is the imaginary picture created to them and is in their mindset.Behind every nation is a powerful myth that make them feel strong.Even though they will immigrate abroad for better life,the former still is more important to them,even the ones living abroad identify with this,some don't even know to speak their native language i have seen many of them on the internet mostly,still they are the biggest patriots,but for whom and for what? if you are willing to make worst to yourself with this and people around you.
Politicians also know this kind of mindset very good and they are good at manipulating it.
In exchange for economic progress they offer patriotism times again.Anytime there is problem,patriotism is here.

Nationalism and patriotism are two different concepts. Nationalism itself is perceived differently in different countries. French nationalism is different from British nationalism. Just an example.

Milan
01-08-16, 19:54
Nationalism and patriotism are two different concepts. Nationalism itself is perceived differently in different countries. French nationalism is different from British nationalism. Just an example.
The general topic here is former Yugoslavia.
It all depends how one look on a nation concept generally,to me personally Anderson explain it the best;"Imagined communities" is a concept coined by Benedict Anderson. He believes that a nation is a community socially constructed, imagined by the people who perceive themselves as part of that group. Anderson's book, Imagined Communities, in which he explains the concept in depth, was published in 1983.
To me is imagined community and political construct.

Thanks but i know the differences,here shortly from wikipedia.
Patriotism is an emotional (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotion) attachment to a nation which an individual recognizes as their homeland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeland). This attachment, also known as national feeling or national pride, can be viewed in terms of different features relating to one's own nation, including ethnic, cultural, political or historical aspects. It encompasses a set of concepts closely related to those of nationalism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism)

Garrick
01-08-16, 22:21
I applaud the Serbs for all the reasons you mention. Again, we want no part of a federal state. I simply could'nt care less if you think it would make life "better".

Thanks. Parties which are against EU, which are for Eurasian union, which are skeptical, or which want position Serbia similar as Norway, etc, all together, have no significant impact in Serbia today.

I think that a lot of important issues between Serbs and Croats are solved. If in Croatia someone wants flirting with Ustasha and Nazi ideology, it is internal Croatian issue. How it is good for Croatia it is another question. A lot of Serbs go to holiday to Greece, Spain etc. although Croatia is closer, because security concerns. Tourists are clients, everyone who pay for something wants to enjoy his or her holiday. A lot of Croatian firms works in Serbia and far less Serbian firms in Croatia because they have barriers, we know for that imbalance, but Serbian market is alive, investors come from different sides, and it is not easy to survive due to competition. Each investor (law-abiding) in Serbia is welcome, it doesn't matter if is from Europe, China, Russia, Arab countries etc. Yes we don't like why Croatia recognized Kosovo*, when it is not recognized in UN, but Croatia is no only. And it is not without significance Serbs and Croats have very similar haplogroups.

Problem which I see can be similar as problem which Croatia had with Slovenia, it is possible Croatian braking Serbia on its path to EU. But according EU officials bilateral issues should not be obstacles. For us in Serbia it is most important that we meet the standards, point by point.

Dinarid
02-08-16, 00:37
The behavior of the nationalists have always been interesting one,they do not care how they gonna live,their hobby,sport,dream,life is the imaginary picture created to them and is in their mindset.Behind every nation is a powerful myth that make them feel strong.Even though they will immigrate abroad for better life,the former still is more important to them,even the ones living abroad identify with this,some don't even know to speak their native language i have seen many of them on the internet mostly,still they are the biggest patriots,but for whom and for what? if you are willing to make worst to yourself with this and people around you.
Politicians also know this kind of mindset very good and they are good at manipulating it.
In exchange for economic progress they offer patriotism times again.Anytime there is problem,patriotism is here.
More propaganda in support of your beloved Yugoslavia, which we don't want and never will. You can dream on but it won't change anything.

Milan
02-08-16, 01:12
More propaganda in support of your beloved Yugoslavia, which we don't want and never will. You can dream on but it won't change anything.
That is my opinion if anyone see himself there in the comment is not my fault,Yugoslavia is not my beloved,surely not that Yugoslavia and by time i grow up there wasn't any Yugoslavia,you are free to choose your future.
People shouldn't have kill eachother in the 90's and neither die for creation of that Yugoslavia if there is no foundation is my point all the time.
People should be cooperative in the sake of next generations,giving advices at others without looking the past period of the region there is not so smart.

Dinarid
02-08-16, 06:03
That is my opinion if anyone see himself there in the comment is not my fault,Yugoslavia is not my beloved,surely not that Yugoslavia and by time i grow up there wasn't any Yugoslavia,you are free to choose your future.
People shouldn't have kill eachother in the 90's and neither die for creation of that Yugoslavia if there is no foundation is my point all the time.
People should be cooperative in the sake of next generations,giving advices at others without looking the past period of the region there is not so smart.
If by "be cooperative" you mean "give up their sovereignty and freedom to join a superstate", sorry, but that just won't happen. I do agree that European nations should cooperate which is why I support the idea of the European Union as an alliance, but the people do not want federalism. We will not give up our nationhood.

Garrick
02-08-16, 23:35
I don't think we need federate states any more if independant states can join the EU.
Belgium has become a federal state. There are to many overlapping gevernment levels creating to high costs and absence of accountability.
There is government of the memberstates, there is Beglian government and EU government. To much. IMO Belgian state and government should dissapear (like Czech Republic and Slovakia did).
Independant states should harmonise their rules under EU flag.
I admit in Balkan it is more complicated, as you mention e.g. Croat enclave in Bosnia. Some solution is needed, but you cannot keep on splitting into ever smaller entities.

I am in favor of the EU project, it is a very good idea. It has lot of advantages.
I'm also very critical though. I think the EU is governed very bad right now. Many of the advantages of EU are destroyed by bad government.

Federal bureaucracy does many useful things, for example it distributes from the funds to undeveloped regions.

Big advantage federal state or superstate in comparison to mini states is managing resources, nationalists, separatists, etc. can beat their breaths but after that their mini states are mostly poor and without funds.

About opportunities for individual, for example in America someone can work in Miami, continue career in Baltimore, after that in Seattle etc., in mini state opportunities are much less, in poor mini state often the best choice are foreign countries.

Nationalists, separatists, etc. like critique bureaucracy and technocracy in Brussels but they are necessary and how EU goes toward political union bureaucracy and technocracy can be greater and it is good, surely it is important to buid and improve appropriate structures, processes and mechanisms that institutions function in the optimal way.

When American analysts sought the advantages of China and why it has grown in global power for fast time they found big advantage Chinese bureaucracy and technocracy, education and choice of people in the government institutions and public services, whose procedures are developed even in the time of Chinese emperors, and improved till today's time.

Dinarid
03-08-16, 00:51
Federal bureaucracy does many useful things, for example it distributes from the funds to undeveloped regions.

Big advantage federal state or superstate in comparison to mini states is managing resources, nationalists, separatists, etc. can beat their breaths but after that their mini states are mostly poor and without funds.

About opportunities for individual, for example in America someone can work in Miami, continue career in Baltimore, after that in Seattle etc., in mini state opportunities are much less, in poor mini state often the best choice are foreign countries.

Nationalists, separatists, etc. like critique bureaucracy and technocracy in Brussels but they are necessary and how EU goes toward political union bureaucracy and technocracy can be greater and it is good, surely it is important to buid and improve appropriate structures, processes and mechanisms that institutions function in the optimal way.

When American analysts sought the advantages of China and why it has grown in global power for fast time they found big advantage Chinese bureaucracy and technocracy, education and choice of people in the government institutions and public services, whose procedures are developed even in the time of Chinese emperors, and improved till today's time.
Again, we don't care. We will keep our independence.

Milan
03-08-16, 02:03
If by "be cooperative" you mean "give up their sovereignty and freedom to join a superstate", sorry, but that just won't happen. I do agree that European nations should cooperate which is why I support the idea of the European Union as an alliance, but the people do not want federalism. We will not give up our nationhood.

Again, we don't care. We will keep our independence.

You can keep anything you like no one force you to the contrary.
We all had and have our decisions.I agree that right now EU is the best alternative.

Garrick
03-08-16, 16:28
Again, we don't care. We will keep our independence.

Today's world is interdependent.

And in the Union there are obligations, not just rights, objectively, independence as it existed in 19th and 20th century, is no longer possible.

Key issues in Union will be to what extent will deepen integration.

Theorists have long told about different extents of integration, from preferential trading area as the lowest level, through different levels, to the political union which is the highest level.

Practically political union is federal system.

DuPidh
03-08-16, 22:22
British expert for East Europe Phil Butler claims what we know. Federal Yugoslavia was much better then mini states - nations formed after it. But his expertise and perspicacity tell us a lot.

ENGLISH EXPERT CLAIMS: Yugoslavia would be world power, and Belgrade - Europe's capital


What would have happened if Yugoslavia survived? Surely the would would be entirely different place. First of all, because of the Non-Aligned Movement presence, European union would be much weaker and much less influential in the world. The whole Europe would come to Belgrade, and from there to all six republics that are now fighting over Brussels' crumbs - writes Phil Butler.


http://www.telegraf.rs/english/2265144-english-expert-claims-yugoslavia-would-be-world-power-and-belgrade-europes-capital-photo

(parts of text, the whole text can be found at the link)

We are all aware of the “facts”. First of all, Yugoslavia fell apart because of the West influence because they did not find it good for them to have a strong and powerful country in the heart of Europe. Second, Yugoslavia would have never fallen apart if the Yugoslav people did not have that seed of breakdown, if they weren’t fertile ground for downfall.



Taking in consideration those two things, we decided to show you the most interesting parts of the copyright work “How Yugoslavia was Syrianized 25 years ago” by Phil Butler, British expert for East Europe.


We believe that many chapters will surprise you, and some of them will amaze you because of the “what if” parts. Many of you, that have lived in former Yugoslavia would close your eyes and cry because you will understand that you lost much more than a common state. Lost in the light of the future it could have been.


“In the alternate universe, what would have happened if Yugoslavia still existed?” In this key moment of history, it is absolutely necessary to deal with the events in the past 25 years, and Yugoslavia and West intervention in it is maybe the best place to start.

Can you imagine Europe where Yugoslavia is one of the key players? I can. Yugoslavia was actually one of the biggest cultural and social experiments in the history.


It was formed and the border of Austro-Hungary monarchy and the Ottoman empire, Yugoslavia has connected the people from both cultural circles in a way that it was not seen since Alexander the Great.

Experiment lasted for more than half a century, and the idea was to create an unique state for all South Slavic nations. Although Yugoslavia was partially Britain and France’s geo-strategic project with the goal to restrain Germany, it was basically a reasonable and legal idea.

Corfu declaration called for constitutional monarchy similar to the one in England, even though king Alexander suspended the constitution and the elections in one moment, this project still seemed promising. War, political machinations, internal and external pressure have collapsed over this world power in its rise as it usually happens in these experiments, authoritative government became necessary, and even desirable.


When national hero, dictator, and global “celebrity” Josip Broz Tito came to power, Yugoslavia emerged to the world’s scene in all its glory. His role in founding of the Non-Aligned movement was both generous and extremely important, especially for the people of the Yugoslavia itself; besides, its foundations were laid in Belgrade 1961.
...

Yugoslavia became a pattern for Afghanistan, Iraq, Arab spring and Ukraine. The story about genocide in the name of democracy is too disgusting to talk about it. Majority of people in these nations were set back 200 years, in the type of medieval existence without hope. The only today former Yugoslavs see in, naturally, EU and NATO.

In the Kosovo conflict, both sides committed crimes of course, as well in other Yugoslavian wars. That is not the point of what i am talking about, but the totality of the disaster.


Primarily, the peoples of former Yugoslavia do not have their own voice anymore. Secondly, the downfall of the nation lead to the death and persecution of millions of people. That is the other story. My “fantasy” about Yugoslavia should enlighten.


Yugoslavia was build on the idea that South Slavs should stop being weak and divided. The united nation of Yugoslavia was not an easy target of imperialistic intentions that we see today.


The fact is that after the World War II, socialistic Yugoslavia became European story about success.

Between 1960 and 1980 that country experienced perhaps the most lively economical and social growth in the world: decent living standards, free health care and education, guarantied right for work, paid one month vacation, literacy rate over 90% and expected lifetime of 72 years.


As much as i know, non of the newly formed Balkan countries can boast with half of that prosperity. It was a progress that made West interest groups want to destroy Yugoslavia.


All of the Yugoslav peoples also enjoyed free apartments, accessible public transportation and utilities. Non profit companies were also in the public hands, which did not suit well with Western democracy.


That country was not allowed to compete with Germany, France, and especially not with Britain, and London and Luxembourg bankers could not pull out billions from the socialistic system.

...
But what would have happened if the Yugoslavia survived? What if that big ethnic and social experiment survived? Surely the would would be entirely different place today.

First of all, because of the Non-Aligned Movement presence, European union would be much weaker and much less influential in the world. The whole Europe would come to Belgrade, and from there to all six republics that are now fighting over Brussels’ crumbs.


In 1991 Yugoslavia was 24th in the world considering GDP. Bosnia and Herzegovina is 112th today and the situation is getting worse. Croatia is 76th although “Blumberg” recently put them on the list of World’s 10 worst. Macedonia is 130th, Montenegro 149th, Slovenia 81st, Serbia 87th, and it seems to be more stable than all the rest.
...

Phil Butler, is a investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe.

http://moderndiplomacy.eu/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=1257:how-yugoslavia-was-syrianized-25-years-ago&Itemid=569

...
Someone can agree or not, it is a fact that Yugoslavia was more advanced than the national mini-states today. Overall, federal states are better for their inhabitants than the separate states. Serbs have reputation to prefer federal state and there is truth, in a well-developed federal state 1+1+1>3, and everybody wins.

Too bad, Yugoslavia ended in this way and separatist forces were strong, although admitted or not at their own detriment. But Yugoslavia is good example for any future federal state which from Yugoslav experience has much to learn.

As soon as I saw the heading of this forum I made no efforts to read it at all.
The first thing went to my mind was; Crude English humor!

LABERIA
09-08-16, 16:11
Since there is too much disinformation about the Albanians in ex-Yugoslavia, i want to share with you the article of this serb author, Damjan Pavlica. Before you read it, i want to say that i consider in general an good article. I don't share with the author a couple of arguments, but i will explain better my point if there will be an discussion about this article.
Here is the original in Serb language: http://pescanik.net/savremena-istorija-kosova/
And here is an translation in English:
https://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=135344

Contemporary History Of Kosovo

Damjan Pavlica, Serbian author

This research focuses on the 20th century, on the period of the Yugoslav history of Kosovo, especially on the Serbian-Albanian conflict. I wanted to find out how Kosovo entered Yugoslavia and how it left it. I endeavoured to acquaint myself with the views of Serbian/Yugoslav, Albanian, Western and other authors. I discovered that, as is usual with ethnic conflicts, the truth is never on one side. Domination of Kosovo changed hands a few times, but the violence of the dominant group always bred more violence, often against the group that had lost its dominant position.

The goal of this work is to contribute to a greater understanding of the Kosovo problem in Serbia and shed light on certain lesser known aspects of its history.

Kosovo Vilayet of the Ottoman Empire

In the beginning of the 20th century, the Kosovo Vilayet was a province of the Ottoman Empire whose territory was significantly larger from the territory of today's Kosovo. It included the whole of Kosovo, Sandžak, Preševo Valley and Western Macedonia. The capital of the Kosovo Vilayet was Skopje. The majority of Kosovo were Albanians. Serbs were the majority in the Northern Kosovo, while they were a minority in other parts, and in the South a very small minority. The situation in Kosovo, like in other parts of Turkey, were especially difficult for the Christian minority.

The diplomacy of the Kingdom of Serbia began to portray the cases of violence and oppression against the Serbs in a way that would make the Albanians seem as savages which Serbia needs to subdue. In Serbia, people began to see the Albanians as usurpers of Serbian land, forgetting that the Serbs had moved massively from Kosovo during the Great Migration to Hungary. Serbia asserted its "historical right" to Kosovo because it was part of the Rascia State. From 1904 onwards Serbia began to send Chetnik units to Kosovo. Because of their clashed with Albanians, the Serbs living there suffered. The representatives of Kosovar Serbs opposed the sending of armed troops, asking the Serbian government to stop them as they were the cause of even more violence against their people. Serbia's Chetnik action also met strong resistance from Austria-Hungary which considered this policy as Great Serbian.

In the beginning of the 20th century, Kosovo was the center of the Albanian national revival and the fight for liberation from the Turks. From 1905 to 1912 Albanians organized a number of uprisings with the goal of acquiring cultural, economic and political autonomy. The Albanians' armed rebellions were regularly stifled in blood by the Turks. In 1908, the Young Turk Revolution occured which was at first supported by the Albanians, due to the promise of autonomy, decrease in taxes and improvement of general living conditions. But when they consolidated their power, the Young Turks established strict centralism, instituting Turkish as the only language of administration. This lead to an eruption of dissatisfaction and an armed rebelltion in Kosovo in June 1909. The first armed clashes with the new authorities happened in the vicinity of Đakovica. An uprising of larger proportions happened in the Kosovo Vilayet in the spring of 1910. The rebels were also supported by the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization which fought for Macedonian autonomy. Seeing that the rebellion was developing, the Young Turk authorities sent a punishment expedition from Skopje which stifled the rebellion with bloodshed in a 3-day battle from May 11 to May 13 in 1910, not sparing even women, children and elderly. Already in the beginning of 1911 there was a new armed rebellion in Kosovo as well as Northern Albania. The main demand of the rebels was the recognition of the Albanian nation, along with autonomy: economic, administrative, cultural and military. This rebellion was stifled in August 1911.

In the beginning of 1912 the Great Albanian Uprising took place under the leadership of the General Insurrection Committee in the areas of Drenica, Peć, Đakovica and Northern Albania. The leaders of the rebels were Isa Boljetinac, Hasan Prishtina, Bajram Curi and others. The rebels sought the establishment of an autonomous Albania, the retreat of Turkish officers and the introduction of Albanian as the official language. The rebels immediately took over many towns, including Đakovica, Mitrovica, Vučitrn and Prishtina in order to then quickly gain control of all of Kosovo, Northern Albania and also Skopje. Due to the success of the Albanian rebellion, the Young Turk government decided to retreat. After the Albanian rebels reached Thessaloniki, the new government was forced to meet all their demands. An autonomous Albania was recognized on August 18 1912 which included four vilayets: Kosovo, Skadar, Janjin and Bitolj. The neighbours saw this as the creation of a "Great Albania" as the inhabitants of these areas were not all Albanian. This threatened the national interests of the neighbouring countries which held pretentions to these areas, and they quickly went to war with Turkey.

Before the war itself, on October 19 1912 there was a meeting of leaders in Skopje, the seat of the Kosovo Vilayet. It was decided that the Albanians would defend the territories they considered theirs in the upcoming was, fighting on the side of Turkey.

To be continued.

LABERIA
09-08-16, 16:15
The annexation of Kosovo in the Balkan Wars

The Serbian and the Montenegrin armies attacked the Ottoman state in October 1912, penetrating to Kosovo and Metohija. Albanians resisted the taking of their settlements and organized volunteer units which carried out an armed resistance against the actions of the Serbian troops. A bigger battle happened at Podujevo as 15,000 volunteers under the command of Isa Boljetinac stood against the Third Serbian Army without success. The Serbian Army then conquered Prizren and a larger part of Albania with the Littoral.

During the Balkan Wars, Serbia annexed the areas of Sandžak, Macedonia, Kosovo and briefly also Albania. Serbs didn't form the majority in these areas which posed a problem for Serbian diplomacy which presented the conquest of Kosovo as liberation from Turks, disregargin the fact that the make-up of the population had changed over the ages. At the peace talks in London, Serbia refused to be satisfied with just Northern Kosovo, for which it would, by the irony of fate, be asking for a century later. After the end of the war, the Kosovo-Metohija areas came under Serbia and Montenegro, which Serbian historiography calls liberation, while Albanian one calls it occupation. From the viewpoint of political science, the appropriate term is annexation, as it was done without the agreement of national representatives and without a referendum for the population.

"Houses and whole villages have been turned to dust, unarmed and innocent inhabitants have been massacred on a large scale, unbelievable acts of violence, pillages and cruelties of every kind - these were the measures that were taken and are still being taken by the Serbian-Montenegrin Army, with the goal of the complete alteration of the ethnic character of areas populated exclusively by Albanians." - From the Report of the International Commission on the Balkan Wars

In those years there was plenty of talk on the "Kosovo Vengeance" for 1389 which was magically flown from the Turks to the Albanians. This policy met criticism from the European press which wrote about the crimes of ethnic cleansing done by the Serbian and Montenegrin troops during the occupation of Albanian settlements. According to reports, the suffering of the inhabitants of Prishtina, Ferizović (later Uroševac), Đakovica, Prizren and certain other towns was especially great. In Austria, the belief that Serbia had taken too much prevailed.

Serbian oppositionist Dimitrije Tucović warned that "an attempt at murder is taking place with the design against an entire nation" which is "a criminal act" for which "reparations must be made". Tucović was against the territorial expansion of Serbia and advocated that Kosovo enter the Balkan Federation with Serbia and other areas on an equal level. "The boundless hostility of the Albanian nation against Serbia is the first positive result of the Albanian policy of the Serbian government. The second, even more dangerous result is the strengthening of two great powers with the biggest interests in the Western Balkans.

Tucović meant Italy and Austria-Hungary, and the latter, with a good motive, attacked Serbia in order to conquer it in 1915. The drastic worsening of the relationship with the Albanians were paid dearly by the Serbian Army and the columns of refugees during the tragic withdrawal across Kosovo and Albania, remembered as the "Albanian Golgota".

But, due to very unusual unfolding of events, Serbia found itself on the winning side at the end of World War I, and it was granted not only the territorial expansions from the Balkan Wars, but also the right to create a great Yugoslav state. And while Serbs had fought for Kosovo to become part of Serbia, it became part of Yugoslavia.

The colonisation of Kosovo in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia

"Serbia gained Kosovo, but also a millstone around the neck of its development." - Lav Trocki, correspondent from the Balkan battlefield

After World War I, Kosovo became part of the newly-founded Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. Kosovo became a Serbian colony, and it was mostly governed by a military command. Serbian politicians had no plan whatsoever that would also include the interests of the Albanian population. The belief predominated that Albanians had to be relocated and Serbs moved in.

In the Inter-War period, the Belgrade government carried out a comprehensive plan of colonisation with the goal of changing the ethnic structure of Kosovo in favour of Serbs. An advantage in moving was given to ex-soldiers and memebrs of Chetnik units. By 1941, 60,000 colonists were moved there, often to properties taken from Albanians. Over 90% of the total number of colonists were Serbs from various parts of Yugoslavia (this also included Montenegrins then). Taking away the houses from Albanian peasants in order to give them to colonists caused a hatred towards the colonists, and left permanent consequences in the relations between Serbs and Albanians.

Colonisation by counties

Uroševac: 15,381 colonists
Đakovica: 15,824 colonists
Prizren: 3,084 colonists
Peć: 13,376 colonists
Mitrovica: 429
Vučitrn: 10,169
All: 58,263

With the colonisation, completely new settlements were also formed in Kosovo and Metohija, such as: Kosovo Polje, Obilić, Hercegovo, Orlović, Devet Jugovića, Lazarevo, Svračak, Novo Rujce, Staro Gracko, and many others.

In parallel with the Serbian colonisation, there was also a process of forced relocation of Albanian inhabitants. According to the data of the Historical Institute in Prishtina, from 1919 to 1940, 255,878 Muslims were relocated from Yugoslavia to Turkey, 215,412 of which were Albanian.

Albanian rebels, the kačaci, fought against the establishment of Serbian authority on territories populated with Albanians. There were plenty of them in woods and mountains, and they held actually authority over villages for years. Their political wing was the Kosovo Committee which advocated the secession of Albanian-majority areas from the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes and a unification with Albania. The most influence kačaci were Azem Bejta and his wife Shota Galica who became heroes for the Albanian population because of their fight against state terror. The Belgrade government carried out extremely harsh measures against the breakaway Albanians: their possessions were taken away and given to colonists, their relatives were interned, and whole villages punished if they had helped them. The taking of land led to rebellions of whole villages. The villages from which rebellion had erupted were taken by the Army with heavy artillery. According to the data of the Historical Institute of Prishtina, the Army set on fire and destroyed 320 Albanian villages between 1918 and 1938.

In the 1930s, the belief prevailed that the gradual colonisation of Kosovo was ineffective. Vasa Šaletić, the commissioner for colonisation claimed that Albanians had to be moved to Turkey immediately and that "moving of Serbs into the midst of half a million Albanians had been a mistake." The Yugoslav authorities held a meeting of certain ministries and the General Staff in 1935 at which the project of "moving non-Slavic elements from South Serbia to Turkey" was planned. In the beginning of 1936, Turkey expressed the willingness to make a deal with Yugoslavia on the relocation of 200,000 inhabitants "who have a similar mentality to the Turks and would easily assimilate".

In 1937, the Serbian academician Vaso Čubrilović created a project of a quick solution to the "Albanian problem" with the massive ethnic cleansing of Kosovo for Stojadinović's government: "The Arnauts are impossible to repress merely by gradual colonisation...The only method and the only measure is a brutal force of an organized state authority, in which we have always been above them."

Professor dr. Vaso Čubrilović planned in detail the methods of ethnic cleansing, which include the creation of a mass psychosis, giving weapons to colonists, sending armed Chetniks, state repression, arrests, unpaid labour, abolishing work permits, firing people from their jobs, cutting down woods, shrinking of cemeteries, burning settlements and similar.

From July 9 to July 11 1938 a meeting was held in Istanbul between Yugoslavia and Turkey on the preparation of the agreement on relocation of Albanians. The sides agreed to relocate 40,000 Albanian families from Kosovo, Macedonia and Montenegro into the barren lands of Anatolia within 6 years. According to the agreement, families could have more than 100 members, so 40,000 families could technically mean millions of people. The article of the 2. Convention assumed a complete repatriation of Albanians from towns such as: Prizren, Uroševac, Prishtina, Kačanik, Gnjilane, Preševo, Peć, Istok, Mitrovica, Đakovica, Vučitrn, Drenica and others.

In January 1939, Ivo Andrić, the ambassador of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia in Nazi Germany created the project of the division of Albania between Yugoslavia and Italy for Milan Stojadinović. Andrić tried to prove that the assimilation and relocation of Albanian will be easier if Albania is abolished:

"By dividing Arbania, an attractive center for the Arbanian minority in Kosovo would disappear, and it would assimilate more easily in the new situation. We would eventually get 200,000 to 300,000 Arbanians, but they are mostly Catholics whose relationship with Arbanian Muslims has never been good. The question of relocating Arbanian Muslims to Turkey would therefore take place in new circumstances, as there would be no stronger action to prevent it."

The Communist Party of Yugoslavia opposed the relocation of Albanians to Turkey, taking away their land, and carrying out terror against them. The Communists believed that the annexation of Albanian places has created a conflict with them, and supported their right to self-determination.

The ratification and introduction of the Yugoslav-Turkish Convention was disturbed by financial problems, an Albanian campaign against relocation and the break-out of World War II. With the Second World War the results of decades-long colonisation of Kosovo were annuled. The colonisation with which the "historical injustice" of the ethnic loss of Kosovo was tried to be made right not only failed, but showed itself to be extremely harmful to Kosovar Serbs.

The ethnic division of Kosovo in World War II

"The Serbian population of Kosovo must be moved as soon as possible...Serbian colonisors must be killed." - Occupation PM of Albania Mustafa Kruja in 1942

After the occupation and division of Yugoslavia in 1942, Italy joined the largest part of Kosovo with Albania, except the North which the Germans joined with occuied Serbia, and a smaller southwestern part which was taken by Bulgaria. The Italians portrayed themselves as liberators in Kosovo, introduced the Albanian language in administration and education, and allowed the use of the Albanian flag. They form Albanian quisling formations. The persecution of Serbs, mostly colonists, was cruel. The Serbian and Montenegrin colonists were driven back to Montenegro and Serbia, many were killed, their possessions stolen, and houses burnt. The Chetnik units of Kosta Pečanac carried out retaliations for killed Serbs against the Albanian populatin of border villages.

In the beginning of the war, Kosovar Partisan units were mainly formed of Serbs and Montenegrins, as the Albanians didn't want the revival of the Yugoslavia into which they had been forced. The first Albanian Partisan units were formed in the fall of 1942. The Kosovar Partisans Boro Vukmirović and Ramiz Sadiku who died in April 1943 later became symbols of Brotherhood and Unity. In January 1944, the Buje conference is held as which the National Liberation Council of Kosovo decides to join Kosovo with Albania. In the middle of 1944 there is a mass Partisan uprising and 7 Kosovo-Metohija brigades are formed.

The decision of Kosovar Partisans to join Kosovo with Albania of course wasn't carried out. After the withdrawal of the German Army, Yugoslav Partisans enter Kosovo in November 1944. Ten days after Partisan units enter Kosovo, in December 1944, there is a massive uprising of Albanians who saw this as another "occupation" of Kosovo. The Central Headquarters of the National Liberation Army of Yugoslavia send over 30,000 soldiers to stifle the "balistic uprising". In putting down the Kosovar revolt, two brigades of the National Liberation Army of Albania also cooperated, due to a deal of Broz with Hoxha. The hardest battles take place in Drenica, and after that in Uroševac, Gnjilan and Mitrovica. Many Albanian Partisans saw the new annexation of Kosovo to Serbia as the annihilation of their fight and a betrayal by the leadership of the National Liberation uprising.

To be continued.

LABERIA
09-08-16, 16:17
Double post.

LABERIA
09-08-16, 16:25
Post-war (Ranković) period in FNRJ

On February 8 1945 in Kosovo, a Military administration is established, in March the main resistance of Kosovar Albanians is broken, but fighting still continues over the next months. After the establishment of Yugoslav control of Kosovo, there is a chaotic return of the Serbian and Montenegrin colonists who were driven out, and vengeances and retributions are carried out. Because of this, the new authorities of the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia on March 6 1945 make the decision to temporarily forbid the return of colonists which was in effect until the implementation of the Law on revision of colonial relation in August in the same year, after which 3,352 "ex colonists" acquired the right of return to Kosovo and Metohija, while 306 settlers who lost the right of return, are directed towards Vojvodina.

On July 9 1945 the new Assembly of Kosovo and Metohija decided to declare the Autonomous Kosovo-Metohija Land, declaring that the population wishes that this land be annexed to "Federal Serbia" as its constituent part. Shortly after, at the third AVNOJ meeting on August 7 1945, Kosovo is annexed to the National Republic of Serbia. Professor Jovan Đorđević claims that Kosovar autonomy was not the creation of the National Republic of Serbia, but had been a category of the constitutional law of Yugoslavia from the very beginning, which is assumed and guaranteed by the federal constitution. Between Kosovo and Serbia there had been no hierarchical laws nor has there been any twofold responsibility. All Kosovar government organs executed their rights independently and were responsible for their work only to voters, respectively the Provincial Assembly and the Regional Council.

Even after 1945, there were groups of ballists who wouldn't recognize the decision to annex Kosovo to Serbia. Against them, the units OZNA and UDBA were engaged, they had factual authority over Kosovo. The situation of Albanians in the new Yugoslavia is drastically worsened after the Informbiro Resolution in 1948 when many Albanian intellectuals are locked up or liquidated on accusation of being Enver Hoxha's spies. In 1951 the question of relocation of Albanians is brought up again and new negotiations with Turkey takes place. It seems that the state security service pressured the Albanians to claim they are Turks at the census. Within only 5 years, there is a drastical increase in the number of people who claim they are Turks in Kosovo, from 1,315 (in 1948) to 34,583 (in 1953).

The Kosovo state security service treated Albanians as a suspicious element, and it was mostly made up of Serbs and Montenegrins. In 1955-1956, the state security service with Ranković as its head carried out an action of taking away arms and systematic raiding of homes, the harshness of which went beyond every reasonable line and ammounted to terror against the population. Under the excuse of seeking weapons, the organs of state security tortures thousands of people, as a result of which 100 people died from the torture. The repressive policy against Kosovar Albanian continues all the way until Aleksandar Ranković is replaced in 1966.

The development of Kosovar autonomy in SFRY

"During my youth, I believed that Yugoslavia could survive as a federative multiethnic state of equal nations. I was honestly a fan of the project of Yugoslavia according to the 1974 Constitution. We were somehow proud that Yugoslavia was different from all the countries with rigid communist regimes, with no freedom whatsoever, and with poor citizens. We citizens of Yugoslavia lived better lives in every sense. I thought that in the frame of such a project, my Albanian nation could also do well." - Kosovar politician Azem Vlasi

The chief of Yugoslav security Aleksandar Ranković is replaced at the Brioni Plenum in 1966. At the same time, the 1966 constitutional amendments recognises the provinces as "constituitive elements of the federation" with which Kosovo gains the elements of statehood. Despite the fact that Albanians were the majority population of the province, Serbs and Montenegrins held a disproportionately high number of state and party functions, including control over the local police and security forces. On November 27 1968 there was a mass student demonstration in Kosovo which started at the Faculty of Arts in Prishtina. Only after that, Kosovar Albanians gained certain autonomy, including the right to schooling in their own language. In November 1968 the name of the province is changed to Socialist Autonomous Province of Kosovo, with which Metohija (a monastic occupancy) is removed from its name.

With the Constitution of 1974, Kosovo gains wide autonomy and the status of a federal unit of the SFRY. With the acquisition of real autonomy, Serbs and Montenegrins cease to be the dominant minority. Albanians start taking over leading positions many Serbs in political bodies, administration and labour organizations are replaced. With the principle of ethnic representation, with which the percentage of the employed members of a certain nation had to be in alignment with the ethnic structure, many Serbs and Montenegrins lose their jobs. At the same time, many Albanians who were deported during the course of the Kingdom period return, and at the same time there is also immigration from Albania as life in Yugoslavia is better. Faced with losing their jobs, and often unfriendly milieu, Serbs begin massively leaving Kosovo. According to certain percentage data (New York Times, July 12 1982) during the 1970s around 70,000 Serbs moved from Kosovo. During these years, many Serbian monasteries complain about damage done by strangers, the illegal cutting of woods, and similar problems.

Protests of the Albanians and demands for a republic

After Tito's death, among Albanians, who formed the absolute majority of Kosovo's population (77.4% according to the 1981 census), the fear starts spreading that Kosovo could fall under Serbian administration again. There was a belief that the only way to prevent this was for Albanians to be granted the official status of a nation and their own republic which could never fall under Serbian rule again. Students of the University of Pristhina started peaceful protests in March 1981 which soon became nation-wide, demanding equal position of Albanians with the other, Slavic nations in Yugoslavia, which had their own republics. With the slogal "Kosovo Republika!" they wanted Kosovo to become the seventh republic of the Yugoslav federation and for the Yugoslav authorities to cease to treat them as a national minority (so-called nationality), but to recognize them as a nation.

The Yugoslav authorities responded to these demands by sending the Army to deal with the demonstrators. In the riots that followed, tens of Albanian pupils and students were killed, which the regime then hid from the public. After the bloody suppression of the demonstrations, there appeared a great division between Serbs and Albanians - Serbs demanded the abolisment of Kosovo's autonomy while Albanians demanded statehood. A certain type of military administration is established in Kosovo. Albanians are subject to repression and mass arrests. Likewise, there is violence against Serbs.

In the following years, many Albanians are sent to prison for numerous years, mostly because of expressing the demand for Kosovo to become a republic.

Protests of the Kosovar Serbs and a campain about genocide

After the Albanian demonstrations, Kosovar Serbs in 1982 (led by Kosta Bulatović, Miroslav Šolević and others) start to complain about "perfidious pressures from the positions of the state", and the center of the movement becomes Kosovo Polje, which used to be a Serbian colony. At the same time, an anti-Albanian campaign is started in Serbia whose central theme is "genocide" against Serbs in Kosovo, and which portrays the migrations of Serbs as planned ethnic cleansing carried out by the province's leadership. In April 1982, 21 priests of the Serbian Orthodox Church, among which were certain future episcopals (Anastasije Jeftić, Irinej Bulović, Amfilohije Radović) appeal to the highest church and state organs with the "Appeal for the protection of the Serbian population and its holy objects in Kosovo and Metohija", which speaks of the "planned genocide against the Serbian nation" and actualizes the Kosovar vow. In 1983 the church newspaper Orthodoxy publishes a feillton by Anastasije Jevtić called "From Kosovo to Jadovan" which describes cases of "brutal and bestial rapes of Serbian women, girls, elderly women and nuns by rampant Arbanians." and compares the suffering of Serbs in Kosovo with their suffering in the Independent State of Croatia. Writing about the Albanians, the clerics mostly describe them as rapists, desecrators, and violent people.

In 1985, representatives of the "Serbian resistance movement" from Kosovo hand in a petition to the state organs, which was also written with the help of Anastasije Jevtić and Dobrica Ćosić, in which they claim that the province is being ruled by "Great Albanian chauvinists" who have "occupied a part of Yugoslavia" and are committing genocide against Albanians. The Yugoslav authorities didn't see these accusations as benevolent, but as the enflaming of Serbian nationalism. Serbs have protests around various towns in these years, but on February 26, 1986, 100 of them go to the federal assembly, demanding state of emergency in Kosovo and the abolition of Kosovo's autonomy.

In 1986, the influential SANU Memorandum is published, which describes the demonstrations of the Albanian students as "neofascist aggression" and claims that there is a "physical, political, legal and cultural genocide against the Serbian population" being carried out in Kosovo. Noone except the Serbian authors called the problems genocide. The SANU Memorandum was later described by a professional commission of the UN as "a method of spreading anti-Albanian sentiment". According to the findings of the Human Rights Watch, the Serbian media in the 1980s were deliberately spreading disinformation about the wrongdoings against Serbs in Kosovo, including regarding rapes of Serbian women, and were leading a campaign of hatred with the goal of spreading a negative portrayal of Albanians.

To be continued.

LABERIA
09-08-16, 16:30
The rise of Milošević and the abolition of Kosovo's autonomy

"The situation is Kosovo, which is not being improved as quickly as desired and promised, is creating a dangerous atmosphere where anything that is said against Serbian nationalism is understood as nationalism. Passionate things can only bring flames." - Dragiša Pavlović

In April 1987 Serbs organize a meeting in Kosovo Polje against "anti-Serb discrimination" carried out by the Albanian-majority leadership of the province. On this wave of ethnic conflict, Slobodan Milošević swam to the top, expressing support for the Kosovo Serbs during a pre-planned conflict with the province police ("Noone should dare beat you!"), winning both the sympathies of the Church as well as nationalist circles of Serbia. Seeing where the wind is blowing, Milošević switches his communist rhetoric for a national one. Thanks to the problem of the Kosovar Serbs, Milošević shortly takes over control in Serbia, eliminating the more moderate competition, Dragiša Pavlović and Ivan Stambolić from the Communist Association of Serbia.

After connecting to the movement of the Kosovar Serbs, Milošević uses them as a "meeting" force for his "anti-bureaucratic revolutions" with which he carries out a certain sort of annexation of provinces and centralises his power. In the beginning of 1989, Milošević violently abolishes Kosovo's autonomy. The Yugoslav People's Army established martial law, while police units suppressed the general strike of Kosovar miners who opposed the abolition of autonomy. Hundreds of people are arrested and the Kosovar leadership is replaced by force. During the time of voting on amendments, the Kosovar Assembly building was surrounded by tanks. On March 23 1989 the Kosovar Parliament in an atmosphere of martial law, and often without a quorum, agrees with the constitutional amendments with which Kosovo loses its autonomy. During the demonstrations that followed on March 28 1989, according to the information of Human Rights Watch, 24 people were killed by the police.

Milošević's triumph was confirmed on June 28 1989 at Gazimestan, on the 600th anniversary of the Kosovo Battle. In his speech, Milošević called Kosovo the heart of Serbia which later became a widely used political parole. There, in front of 300,000 gathered people he claimed that "armed battles are not out of the question yet" which is today often interpreted as an annunciation of the Yugoslav Wars: "Again, we are before battles and in battles. These are not armed, but that is not to say that armed battles are out of the question."

Milošević's speech marked the end of the Yugoslav idea, and he turned from the communist leader of Serbia into the national leader of Serbs. After Milošević's Gazemistan triumph, Rugova (1989) uttered just about prophetic words: "Gazemistan is a chauvinistic manifestation. Not only the Serbs fought agains the Turks, but Albanians, and Croats, and Bosnians also took part in the battle. This is an event of all Yugoslav nations. My impression is that there are certain powers which want terrorist actions in Kosovo. I can only warn Serbs that whenever a small nation, and Serbs are a small nation, wanted to achieve domination in the Balkans, this always ended with that nation's tragedy."

Passive resistance and the development of parallel institutions

As a response to the counter-constitutional abolition of autonomy, in July 2, 1990, the Kosovar parliament passed a Constitutional declaration with which Kosovo declared itself a republic, equal to the other Yugoslav republics. Serbia reacted to this by abolishing the Kosovo parliament on July 5, and replacing the editors of the main Albanian media in Kosovo. Financing for Kosovar institutions was cut, among others the Academy of Science and Arts (in July 1992). Kosovar Albanians began building parallel institutions. On September 7 the MPs of the abolished Assembly met in Kačanik in secret and created a new Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo. A shadow government and an Assembly were chosen. In September 1991 Kosovar Albanians also held an unofficial referendum on independence. On the basis of the referendum, the unrecognized Republic of Kosovo declared itself independent from Yugoslavia. In reality, it didn't function as an independent state but as a parallel system of government. Throughout the whole of the Milošević period, the institutions of the Republic of Serbia called "Autonomous Provice of Kosovo and Metohija" and the institutions of the Kosovar Albanians called "Republic of Kosovo" functioned in parallel.

In the 1990s, Kosovo became a police state under the administration of Belgrade. After the Belgrade authorities took over the provincial authorities, hundreds of thousands of Albanians were fired from state institutions and social companies. Milošević's authorities closed down the majority of Albanian-language schools and quit paying salaries to Albanian high school teachers. The internationalization of the Kosovo question appears. Kosovar Albanians started to built their own parallel institutions such as education, health care and others. Albanian pupils and students spent their times in private homes, empty companies, and abandoned school buildings. Milošević's government wouldn't allow the development of parallel institutions in Kosovo, and the Serbian police constantly raided the educational and other institutions of Kosovar Albanians. Members of the security forces routinely harrassed and beat the teachers, students and managers of the Albanians schools. The police constantly broke basic human rights, and arbitrary arrests and torture became regular occurences. The Kosovar Albanian suffered the terror of Slobodan Milošević more than all other citizens of Serbia.

The leader of the Kosovar Albanians, Ibrahim Rugova, was known for his support of a nonviolent opposition to Milošević's regime, as a result of which he is called the "Balkan Gandhi". During 1991 and 1995, when war was raging in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, the mostly Albanian population of Kosovo supported a passive resistance, refusing to take part in the political structures of Serbia, boycotting elections and censuses. During the times of armed conflicts, Rugova's Democratic Union of Kosovo refused the offers of the Croatia and Bosnian leadership to open up one more war front against Serbia.

Up to 1995, Rugova's strategy of non-violent resistance had the wide support of the Albanian population. But after the end of the wars in Croatia and Bosnia, a nonviolent strategy started to be brought into question, and the number of those Albanians who supported armed resistance was increasing.

The Kosovo War and the eviction of population

In 1996, the thus-far unknown Kosovo Liberation Army started committing terrorist acts against against the carriers of the Serbian authorities in Kosovo and their collaborators in the Albanian middle. The attack on the Serbian police and civilians continued in 1997. The KLA criticized the "passive" approach of the leaders of the Kosovar Albanians, promising to fight for the liberation of Kosovo from Serbian rule. In the end of 1997, Kosovar Albanians declared the region of Drenice "liberated territory" due to the strong presence of KLA forces.

During the 1998, the KLA became stronger and started to engare in guerilla warfare against the Serbian security forces. In the regions of the conflict, the Serbian police and security forces non-selectively and cruelly acted against the civilian population. On March 5 1998, the special police units, during the chase after KLA leader Adem Jashari, in the village Donji Prekaz, levelled with the ground the house of the Jashari family, killing 20 fighters, several elderly men, 18 women and 10 children younger than 16 years. The massacre in Prekaz and other non-selective killings committed in those days in the Drenica area radicalized the Kosovar Albanians and strenghterened the KLA which grew into a mass armed resistance movement against the Belgrade government. Many of those who had until then supported Rugova's policy of non-violence decided for armed resistance.

The battles between the Serbian special MUP units and the KLA which had under its control a significant part of Kosovo were transformed into the Kosovo War in the middle of 1998. From August 1998 onwards, the Serbian security units started a massive campaign against the KLA. During these conflicts the Yugoslav Army and the Serbian MUP used "excessive force" (according to the International Crime Court), which resulted in the destruction of villages, relocation of population and death of civilians. The excessive use of state violence, massacres against civilians and the ethnic cleansing committed by the Serbian forces were the motive for NATO bombardment of Serbia in March 1999. In essence, Milošević had no choice but to either hand over or not hand over Kosovo to its inhabitants.

Milošević chose to change the population of Kosovo. After NATO had started the bombing, Milošević engaged all available forces in order to drive out Kosovar Albanians. During the NATO strinkes, from March 24 to June 10, the Serbian police, military and paramilitary began an "all-encompassing campaign of violence" (ICC) against the Albanian population of Kosovo, carrying out forced relocations and massive persecution on an ethnic basis, committin mass murders, pillages, rapes, destruction of religious objects, and whole settlements. Serbia MUP tried to conceal the killings of Kosovar Albanians by carrying the corpses into Central Serbia, where they were thrown into the Donau or buried in mass graves. During this brutal action of ethnic cleansing 862,979 registered Albanian refugees left Kosovo in a short period of time (data from UNHCR). While they were driving them out, the authorities also illegaly took away the ID from these citizens and destroyed it, carrying out a systematic deletion of identity.

"Results of the action: The last big groups have been broken. Around 2,000 liquidated, many more than in the previous operation. 900,000 have left the land. 1,000 terrorists remain, 300,000 civilians remain." - War Journal of the general Obrad Stevanović

Despite the seeming "final solution" of the Kosovo problem, Serbia was forced to withdraw from Kosovo after 78 days of NATO bombardment. In those days, the Albanians returned to Kosovo, and about 100,000 Serbs left the area. Many Serbs who remained were attacked by the furious Albanians who returned while their possessions were destroyed and pillaged. In the following years the number of Serbs and other non-Albanians who moved from Kosovo is about 200,000. Those who remained became easy prey for the KLA which carried out kidnapping and killings of Serbian civilians, and one of the most vile crimes they are accused of (still without a legal epilogue) is the killing of people for organ theft, and its selling on the black market.

The UN Administration and the declaration of independence

"Had Serbia been smarter, it would have agreed to the demand for Kosovo Republika in 1981 already. Had Serbia done then, perhaps there would be today a democratic and confederal state Yugoslavia in which all Serbs would live." - Slovenian politologist Anton Bebler

After the end of the bombardment, Serbia lost control of Kosovo. According to Resolution 1244, Kosovo remained part of FR Yugoslavia, but under control of the United Nations, meaning the KFOR forces. The Serbian minority in Kosovo turned from a privileged minority into a rightless minority. In March 2004, violent riots break out during which Albanian demonstrators attacked Serbian communities in Kosovo. In two days of ethnic conflicts, 19 civilians were killed (11 Albanians and 8 Serbs), hundreds of Serbian homes destroyed and around 35 Orthodox churches. More than 4,000 were driven out, during which certain settlements were left with no Serbs at all.

In February 2006 negotiations began on the status of Kosovo. The international arbitrator, the Finnish politicial Marti Ahtisaari recommended the plan of "controlled independence" which the Serbian side rejected, but the Albanian accepted. Serbia suggested that the status of Kosovo be regulated similary to that of Hong Kong in China or the Oeland in Finland, but the Kosovar Albanians rejected any proposition that would put Kosovo in Serbia's make-up.

In a deal with Western powers, the Assembly of Kosovo on February 17 2008 unilaterally declared independence of Kosovo, with all 109 present MPs, while 11 Serbian MPs boycotted the vote. This decision was in the same night declared illegal by the Government of Serbia, and from then on Serbian diplomacy has worked intensely against Kosovar independence.

Whether Serbia likes it or not, the majority of European states today recognises Kosovo as the youngest European state. Kosovar institutions control most of Kosovo, except for the north which is under the control of Serbs. While I am writing this, there are barricades on the north of Kosovo. Belgrade and Prishtina still cannot reach any sort of deal.
To be continued.

LABERIA
09-08-16, 16:33
Summary

After due to the Balkan Wars Kosovo became part of Serbia for a short period of time, the First World War broke out. After World War One, Kosovo became part of Yugoslavia, its permanent problem, and one of the major reasons of its break-up.

The Yugoslav period of the Kosovar history was, unfortunately, rather violent. During the majority of the Yugoslav period, Kosovo either had a state of emergency or martial law. All else being equal, there was the least violence in the period of the development of Kosovar autonomy, from the removal of Ranković in 1966 to the 1981 riots. And even the period of the genocide propaganda in the 1980s seems relatively mild compared to what happened later when the mass killing really begun.

The main demographic tendencies in the Yugoslav period was the planned migrations of the Serbs in the period of the Kingdom, and the chaotic movements in the period of SFRY. There are a lot less Serbs today in Kosovo statistically than 100 years ago. As a majority, Serbs now only exist in the North of Kosovo where they were also the majority in the beginning of the century. They even became the minority in the towns that were founded by colonisation like Obilić and Kosovo Polje. From many towns, they have completely been driven out.

How to proceed?

As we have seen, the problems with Kosovo didn't come into existence today or yesterday, they have existed since Kosovo entered our state. Many Serbs with whom I have talked to would love for the problem to be solved by all the Albanians there disappearing. I think that is not realistic, and most importantly, not humane.

Is the solution another conquest of Kosovo? That has been done for too many times already (1912, 1918, 1944, 1989, 1999), but we simply didn't know what to do with it. Belgrade has tried all the violent methods in the 20th century: gradual relocation, expulsions, martial law, colonisation, etc...But because of these policies, Kosovar Serbs always suffered. As if by a rule, every instance of Belgrade violence caused a worsening of the situation and the migration of the Kosovar Serbs.

Literature:


Izveštaj međunarodne komisije o balkanskim ratovima, Vašington, 1914.
Dimitrije Tucović, Srbija i Albanija, Beograd, 1914.
Dimitrije Bogdanović, Knjiga o Kosovu, Beograd, 1985.
Isterivanja Albanaca i kolonizacija Kosova, Istorijski institut u Prištini, 1997.
Noel Malcolm, Kosovo: A Short History, Macmilan, London, 1998.
Kosovo: kako viđeno, tako rečeno (Izveštaj OEBS-a), 1999.
Po naređenju: ratni zločini na Kosovu (Izveštaj Human Rights Watch-a), 2001.
Aleksandar Pavlović, Prostorni raspored Srba i Crnogoraca kolonizovanih na Kosovo i Metohiju u periodu između 1918. i 1941. godine, Baština br. 24, 2008.
Transkripti sa suđenja Miloševiću, Fond za humanitarno pravo, 2009.
Presuda Miloševićevim saradnicima za zločine na Kosovu, MKSJ, 2009.
Peščanik.net, 19.09.2011.


Thoughts?

Garrick
09-08-16, 17:21
Laberia

Do you really think that if any Serbian author writes something what you think it is good for you that it is so important to devote so much space?

But this shows extent of democracy in Serbia, around the same questions people may have diametrically opposed opinions and it is extraordinarily because it allows an open debate.

And it is good for development, in open debate where people give different suggestions and alternatives solutions will be better.

Is it possible in Albania we can find some Albanian writes similar for the benefits of Serbs, Macedonians, Greeks.

Garrick
09-08-16, 17:30
As soon as I saw the heading of this forum I made no efforts to read it at all.
The first thing went to my mind was; Crude English humor!

Unfortunately it can be only black humor.

Yugoslavia was ranked 24th on the world, it is for respect.

What we can see these years when there no Yugoslav federal and republican funds:

Poverty spurs mass migration from Kosovo

https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/poverty-spurs-mass-migration-from-kosovo/

Milan
09-08-16, 21:57
Kosovo case have largely been mythologized,and was not the core of Yugoslavia problems at all,the division among Yugoslavia as well as the wars happened between Serbs,Croats,Bosniacs by majority.
Kosovo was only a small province of Yugoslavia so to say and not very important.If this didn't happened i doubt that even Kosovo and Macedonia,Montenegro will secede from Yugoslavia.Many Serbs feel ties to Kosovo historically due to middle ages,"historical rights" as in every other side of Balkans,Albanians came to populate large parts of Kosovo, today there is almost no Serbs there.What was their solution,maybe to be friends and came at terms at very beginning of Ottoman dissolution instead to create endless hatred or third power to set your problems,but this seem today almost unimaginable to majority among the two sides ,right now i doubt Kosovo is good either,non-recognized by many even EU countries,economic problems etc.

Milan
09-08-16, 22:15
Here i found an funny known quote,good in this case Yugoslavia/Balkans since we disscused about nationalism prior;

A nation is a group of people united by a common error about their ancestry and a common dislike of their neighbors.

Dinarid
10-08-16, 01:51
Today's world is interdependent.

And in the Union there are obligations, not just rights, objectively, independence as it existed in 19th and 20th century, is no longer possible.

Key issues in Union will be to what extent will deepen integration.

Theorists have long told about different extents of integration, from preferential trading area as the lowest level, through different levels, to the political union which is the highest level.

Practically political union is federal system.
How dare you suggest we're obliged to give up our independence. We aren't. We do however seek a military alliance with Western nations and an economic union. We won't be a German province- the memories of WWII were too painful.

Garrick
10-08-16, 02:41
How dare you suggest we're obliged to give up our independence. We aren't. We do however seek a military alliance with Western nations and an economic union. We won't be a German province- the memories of WWII were too painful.

Nationalism and concept of (mini) state nation is somewhat rigid.

Also, Europe cannot be competitive with such concept.

You can see this century is Asian century.

Giants as China, and in not so distant future India, will have economic power in the world.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28911-European-amp-global-economy-who-is-getting-richer?p=486490#post486490

Dinarid
10-08-16, 02:46
Nationalism and concept of (mini) state nation is somewhat rigid.

Also, Europe cannot be competitive with such concept.

You can see this century is Asian century.

Giants as China, and in not so distant future India, will have economic power in the world.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28911-European-amp-global-economy-who-is-getting-richer?p=486490#post486490
For the third time, I don't care. We won't give up our independence, and there's nothing you can do about it.

Garrick
10-08-16, 03:07
For the third time, I don't care. We won't give up our independence, and there's nothing you can do about it.

I do nothing.

Trends and developments are beyond one's will.

Europe will have stronger integration what is good for European society and economy and competition with giants in the world, of course if nationalist and populist movements would be strong, thing would go more slowly.

LeBrok
10-08-16, 04:25
Here i found an funny known quote,good in this case Yugoslavia/Balkans since we disscused about nationalism prior;

A nation is a group of people united by a common error about their ancestry and a common dislike of their neighbors.Lol, so much truth in it.

Dinarid
10-08-16, 04:42
I do nothing.

Trends and developments are beyond one's will.

Europe will have stronger integration what is good for European society and economy and competition with giants in the world, of course if nationalist and populist movements would be strong, thing would go more slowly.
No, independence, self-determination, and freedom are actually pretty popular ideas these days, along with rising anti-globalist sentiment. Sorry to tell you that your Greater Yugoslavia dream would have failed anyway.

Garrick
12-08-16, 22:30
No, independence, self-determination, and freedom are actually pretty popular ideas these days, along with rising anti-globalist sentiment. Sorry to tell you that your Greater Yugoslavia dream would have failed anyway.

I don't dream about Yugoslavia, it is gone.

I like United states of Europe.

Dinarid
13-08-16, 02:59
I don't dream about Yugoslavia, it is gone.

I like United states of Europe.
Well we have no intention of joining a superstate. Not many people will be willing to be robbed of their national sovereignty.

Nik
14-08-16, 15:22
Well I dont know how true that is, but Serbs failed to coexist with others to the point that even the Orthodox Montenegrins refused to be united with them, not counting Catholic Croats, Muslim Bosnians, or Albanians even worse.

Dinarid
17-08-16, 00:48
Well I dont know how true that is, but Serbs failed to coexist with others to the point that even the Orthodox Montenegrins refused to be united with them, not counting Catholic Croats, Muslim Bosnians, or Albanians even worse.
True, but also the Bosnian Muslims seem to insist that we all "coexist" over here whether we want to or not.

Garrick
17-08-16, 04:18
Well I dont know how true that is, but Serbs failed to coexist with others to the point that even the Orthodox Montenegrins refused to be united with them, not counting Catholic Croats, Muslim Bosnians, or Albanians even worse.

It is not true.

First nation which wanted to leave Yugoslavia were Slovenians.

Serbs were in favor Yugoslavia.

Yugoslavia had six nations: Serbs, Croats, Slovenians, Bosniacs, Montenegrins and Macedonians.

Albanians in Yugoslavia are completely different story, they were not nation, they were national minority.

Garrick
17-08-16, 04:20
True, but also the Bosnian Muslims seem to insist that we all "coexist" over here whether we want to or not.

What is true, that Serbs wanted to leave Yugoslavia.

No, it is not true.

Dinarid
17-08-16, 04:32
What is true, that Serbs wanted to leave Yugoslavia.

No, it is not true.
I never said that, nor did he. Of course Serbs didn't want to leave because many wanted to make it Greater Serbia, as in the nationalists in opposition to Tito's multiethnic disaster.

LABERIA
19-08-16, 09:51
Kosovo case have largely been mythologized,and was not the core of Yugoslavia problems at all,the division among Yugoslavia as well as the wars happened between Serbs,Croats,Bosniacs by majority.
Kosovo was only a small province of Yugoslavia so to say and not very important.If this didn't happened i doubt that even Kosovo and Macedonia,Montenegro will secede from Yugoslavia.Many Serbs feel ties to Kosovo historically due to middle ages,"historical rights" as in every other side of Balkans,Albanians came to populate large parts of Kosovo, today there is almost no Serbs there.What was their solution,maybe to be friends and came at terms at very beginning of Ottoman dissolution instead to create endless hatred or third power to set your problems,but this seem today almost unimaginable to majority among the two sides ,right now i doubt Kosovo is good either,non-recognized by many even EU countries,economic problems etc.
Albanians are autochthonous in Kosova.

Nik
19-08-16, 10:36
Kosovo case have largely been mythologized,and was not the core of Yugoslavia problems at all,the division among Yugoslavia as well as the wars happened between Serbs,Croats,Bosniacs by majority.
Kosovo was only a small province of Yugoslavia so to say and not very important.If this didn't happened i doubt that even Kosovo and Macedonia,Montenegro will secede from Yugoslavia.Many Serbs feel ties to Kosovo historically due to middle ages,"historical rights" as in every other side of Balkans,Albanians came to populate large parts of Kosovo, today there is almost no Serbs there.What was their solution,maybe to be friends and came at terms at very beginning of Ottoman dissolution instead to create endless hatred or third power to set your problems,but this seem today almost unimaginable to majority among the two sides ,right now i doubt Kosovo is good either,non-recognized by many even EU countries,economic problems etc.

Actually its the other way around. Albanians from modern Kosovo and Southern Serbia came to populate Albania, mostly North and Central Albania obviously, as well as many mountainous region is Southern Albania by hugely affecting the Medieval local dialects and creating hybrid versions which exist today. The coastal towns of Montenegro kept mostly their Medieval original version which has similarities with Medieval version of Laberia (later affected by migration) and Arvanitika in Greece.

Similarly, North Western Albania (besides a Medieval Kosovo Albanian majority in Dukagjin, Shkodra) was populated by Albanians from Montenegro, while Montenegro itself by Albanians from Herzegovina. These distinct tribes nowadays live side by side and yet after 500 years speak different dialects which they carried from their original homeland.

Just consider that in the County of Shkodra, just to say "I have been", each village shows their origin by using "kam ken", "jam ken", "jam kan", "jom kon", "kam qan", "jam kjen", "kam qen", not to go into details about other dialectal differences within such a small community.

LABERIA
19-08-16, 13:06
Actually its the other way around. Albanians from modern Kosovo and Southern Serbia came to populate Albania, mostly North and Central Albania obviously, as well as many mountainous region is Southern Albania by hugely affecting the Medieval local dialects and creating hybrid versions which exist today. The coastal towns of Montenegro kept mostly their Medieval original version which has similarities with Medieval version of Laberia (later affected by migration) and Arvanitika in Greece.

Similarly, North Western Albania (besides a Medieval Kosovo Albanian majority in Dukagjin, Shkodra) was populated by Albanians from Montenegro, while Montenegro itself by Albanians from Herzegovina. These distinct tribes nowadays live side by side and yet after 500 years speak different dialects which they carried from their original homeland.

Just consider that in the County of Shkodra, just to say "I have been", each village shows their origin by using "kam ken", "jam ken", "jam kan", "jom kon", "kam qan", "jam kjen", "kam qen", not to go into details about other dialectal differences within such a small community.
No, you are wrong. I have explained this many times. Exactly the dialects of Arvanites in Greece are the prove that your theory is wrong. The dialects of Arvanites are Tosk subdialects. The similarity between an subdialect of Ulqin for example with an subdialect of Athens are explained from scholars. But to understand this process i invite you to find an documentary of Top Chanel about the Meshar of Gjon Buzuku. Profesor Emil Lafe explain in detail this linguistic process.
BTW, this discussion is of topic here. Find the map of Albanians dialects, i have posted it here, or search for it in Wikipedia, etc.

Garrick
19-08-16, 18:12
I never said that, nor did he. Of course Serbs didn't want to leave because many wanted to make it Greater Serbia, as in the nationalists in opposition to Tito's multiethnic disaster.

Tito's Yugoslavia was not Greater Serbia. And Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovens, Kingdom of Yugoslavia, too.

Base in SFR Yugoslavia was republic, in Kingdom of Yugoslavia "banovina".
...

Yes disaster occurred, you're right.

Very stupid thing, conflicts and battles between Southern Slavs.

There was three concepts:

SR Slovenia and SR Croatia wanted confederation

SR Serbia and SR Montenegro wanted federation (status quo).

SR Bosnia and Herzegovina and SR Macedonia wanted something between.

Surely solution could find, no insoluble situations.
...

Why did things go wrong?

What was tipping point?

My opinion is that tipping point was unprovoked attacks Slovenian formations on the Yugoslav army in Slovenia (1991), Yugoslav army had victims.

Who know theory of tipping points and chaos theory it can be logical conclusion.

Slovenians were impatient and selfish, they didn't think about consequences of their actions on other parts of the country.
...

What we (South Slavic people) have today is that we are trying to build a good relationships based on mutual respect and understanding.

European Union is the best framework for all of us.

Nik
20-08-16, 00:15
No, you are wrong. I have explained this many times. Exactly the dialects of Arvanites in Greece are the prove that your theory is wrong. The dialects of Arvanites are Tosk subdialects. The similarity between an subdialect of Ulqin for example with an subdialect of Athens are explained from scholars. But to understand this process i invite you to find an documentary of Top Chanel about the Meshar of Gjon Buzuku. Profesor Emil Lafe explain in detail this linguistic process.
BTW, this discussion is of topic here. Find the map of Albanians dialects, i have posted it here, or search for it in Wikipedia, etc.
Do u even know what I'm talking about?

Anyway, the dialect of the Arvanites is a Medieval version of Tosk before it got heavily influenced by Gheg. Laberia was pronouncing words such as miki, krushki, zogi, etc. which is the Kosovo (Easter Gheg) version. We know for a fact that Kuci of Kurveleshi has many settlers from Mati and Mirdita, Himara from Mirdita, Dhermiu from Kruja, Sinanaj of Tepelena from Malesia Lezhes, etc. Laberia also eventually lost the "isht" and replaced it with "esht", while some elders from remote villages still use "isht".

Long story short, my point is that North Albania is settled heavily by Kosovo Albanians since the Middle Ages and not the other way around.

I have the Meshar at home and know very well the dialect as Im a Malsor myself. Meshar and Malsor dialect is proof of a continuum interrupted by migration. I suggest u do research about the remnants of Gheg settlers in South Italy and their Malsor speech as well as the Arbanasi in Zadar. Furthermore, some Arvanite villages have a Gheg based dialect too, found especially in Boiotia.

LABERIA
21-08-16, 13:05
Laberia

Do you really think that if any Serbian author writes something what you think it is good for you that it is so important to devote so much space?

But this shows extent of democracy in Serbia, around the same questions people may have diametrically opposed opinions and it is extraordinarily because it allows an open debate.

And it is good for development, in open debate where people give different suggestions and alternatives solutions will be better.

Is it possible in Albania we can find some Albanian writes similar for the benefits of Serbs, Macedonians, Greeks.

This is not an argument. Tell us, what you don`t agree with the article.

LABERIA
25-08-16, 10:55
Unfortunately serbs never change.

SERBIAN YOUTH 2016 (this summer), center of Belgrade, celebrating win in waterpolo against Croatia, with ultra-nationalist songs and hatred for Croatia:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEiNmpTFM-o

The most common slogan and comment among this young serb in the square and serb youtube users is:
SRBIJAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA UBIIIIIII HRAVATA DA SIPTAR NEMA BRATA

can be translated like something:
Kill the Croats brothers of the Alb


In the second video the most important serb politician Vojslav Seselj, burn the Croatian flag last year:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mef6Sp6XQ38

Garrick
26-08-16, 01:52
Laberia

Are you love destruction?

First see situation of your people, there are tons of materials, unfortunately.

Muslim Albanians burn down Christian Church in Kosovo


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bn5SkGpIKDs

Garrick
26-08-16, 01:56
Albanians burn Greek buildings


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17AIMd5Hs6M

Garrick
26-08-16, 02:11
Albanians burn Macedonian flag


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BniSvfAQlHc

Laberia
Do you like more?

Ike
17-09-16, 23:30
Styll seeing Nazis everywhere? I'm sure there is a name for this disorder, lol.

Yep, I"m disordered, and you're normal when supporting high nazi officers revamping. Funny people here. This is Europe 1997:

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/04/12/world/fascists-reborn-as-croatia-s-founding-fathers.html?_r=0


The old fascist marching songs were sung, a moment of silence was observed for all who died defending the fatherland, and the gathering was reminded that today was the 57th anniversary of the founding of Croatia's Nazi-allied wartime government. Then came the most chilling words of the afternoon.

''For Home!'' shouted Anto Dapic, surrounded by bodyguards in black suits and crew cuts.
''Ready!'' responded the crowd of 500 supporters, their arms rising in a stiff Nazi salute.

The call and response -- the Croatian equivalent of ''Sieg!'' ''Heil!'' -- was the wartime greeting used by supporters of the fascist Independent State of Croatia, which governed the country for most the Second World War and murdered hundreds of thousands of Jews, Serbs and Croatian resistance fighters.

Axion
07-10-20, 23:47
Yugoslavia masonic experiment with expiration date, in every and in any case Serbia became victim as naive masonic vassal back in times of all the yugoslavian versions, simply it became pan(south)slavic utopia taht as such was deliberately formed and used earlier for the erupean and later in time of tito for usA interests! long story short in the end it was dismantled because YNA as army became so powerful that became threat to the western interests if anyhow later would align itself with Russia through slavic line thus as risk it was in time dismantled when for that was the right time!