President George Bush
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
August 5, 1991
Dear Mr. President:
As one of their staunchest supporters, it is with great trepidation that I write this
letter. For the past 40 years our foreign policy was characterized as championing
human rights, self-determination, and containing communism. Now that this policy, so
patiently followed in the past, is about to succeed in the near total collapse of
communism, you have abandoned these tenets in Yugoslavia.
Your administration only heeds a prime minister who was not elected by the
country’s citizenry. Ante Markovic, a communist apparatchik, is a holdover of the
communist regime that pre-existed the first free elections ever held in Yugoslavia. For
a first-time the individual republics were able to vote for their own destinies. Croatia
and Slovenia overwhelmingly elected an anti-communist slate, whereas in Serbia, the
Communists captured four of five seats in their parliament
If you are not aware that Yugoslavia’s realpolitik is equated with Serbians goals
then the blame must lie with your intelligence sources for not informing you. Serbia’s
actions blocking the normal rotative process for the federal presidency has brought
Yugoslavia to the brink of disaster. But what triggered today’s bloodshed and chaotic
situation in Yugoslavia were Baker’s statements in Belgrade. After separating the
rhetoric from the substance, the Serbs interpreted Baker’s message that Yugoslavia
must remain intact, no matter the cost-human-rights and self-determination be
damned. This was in agreement with America’s new policy as being the chief defender
of the global status quo. Baker’s speech gave a tacit approval to a putsch.
Perhaps it is your goal to keep Yugoslavia as a museum for communism since it is
now dead even in Albania and in extremis in Russia. I implore you to keep an open
mind and not be intimidated by Serbian pressure, but most importantly, continue to
honor the basic tenets of our foreign policy.
Sincerely,
=======================================================
Congressman Dana Rohrabacher
1039 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
August 25, 1991
Dear Congressman Rohrabacher,
In the August 24th 1991 the San Pedro News Pilot quoted you as saying: “Our
policies have unintentionally encouraged Serbia . . .” Surely you were misquoted,
because our policy has always been intentionally been pro-Serbian. It should be
emphasized that Yugoslav realpolitik is equated with Serbian goals. Ambassador
Zimmermann, appearing on Belgrade television and in an interview in NIN, a Serbian
periodical, went to great lengths expounding and reiterating our policy to keep
Yugoslavia unified. Most recently, Secretary of State Baker’s message, after
separating the rhetoric from the substance, was that Yugoslavia will remain intact, no
matter the cost-human rights and self-determination be damned. Since you are on the
anti-terrorism committee you must be aware of Serbia’s abominable record in the
region, particularly in Kosovo. Amnesty International cites Serbia as one of their worst
offenders. Yet t he State Department declines comment and appears oblivious to
Yugoslav realpolitik.
Our foreign policy for the last 40 years has been characterized in championing
human rights, self-determination efforts, and containing communism. Now that this
policy, so patiently followed in the past, is about to succeed in the total collapse of
communism, our State Department has abandoned these tenets in Yugoslavia. The
administration only heeds Prime Minister Ante Markovic, a communist apparatchik who
was not elected by its citizens. He is a holdover of the communist regime that pre-
existed the first free elections held in Yugoslavia. The most recent election in Serbia,
the Serbs freely voted for their destiny, and opted for communism. Thus, making them
and Cuba, the only remaining communist states in the Western Hemisphere. Perhaps
it is the goal of the State Department to keep yugoslavia (small y intended) as a
museum for communism.
You should bring the News Pilot to task, since there is a vast difference between
intentionally and unintentionally.
Sincerely,
_____________________________________________________________
March 10, 1992
American Medical News
515 North State Street
Chicago, Illinois 60612
Attention: Editor
Dear Editor:
Most readers are aware of the tragedy that’s being played out in Croatia. Thus far,
378 towns, 210 Catholic churches, and 160 historical buildings have been destroyed--
28 of which were designated by UNESCO as cultural monuments. Medieval
Dubrovnik, a city with no military value, continues in its sixth month under siege.
However, few readers are aware of the atrocities being committed upon the medical
community by the Yugoslav Army.
The army intentionally has violated all humanitarian provisions of international laws of
war. Helsinki Watch holds the Serbian government and Yugoslav army responsible for
violations of the rules of war. The latter has made hospitals and medical facilities
specific military targets. A whole litany of violations can be confirmed.
They include the kidnapping of physicians, firing on clearly marked medical vehicles
while transporting the wounded, killing and wounding medical personnel, and
destroying or damaging clearly marked medical facilities. For example, from September
14th-17th, Osijek General Hospital was hit 94 times by mortars, howitzers, rockets and
countless times by small weapons. This barrage, coming from an army base that is
located only 50 meters from the hospital, precluded the possibility that the mayhem
was caused by accident or chance error.
To help stop the senseless and vile attacks on innocent victims of this cruel war, I call
upon my colleagues in American medical community to join with 104 Nobel Prize
winners and use your influence to help stop the brutal action of the Serb forces on the
defenseless Croatians.
Initiated by Linus Pauling, never before have so many awardees of the Nobel Prize
have concurred on a common cause. The American medical community is highly
respected worldwide. Your collective humanitarianism would be filled in the place
where it’s most needed, war-ravaged Croatia.
Very truly yours,
_____________________________________________________________
April 13, 1992
Hon. Albert Gore, Jr.
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senator Gore:
Although I am not a member of your constituency, I believe the matter that I bring to
your attention extends far beyond parochial lines. It strikes at the heart of our national
conscience.
The enclosed article “YUGOBLUNDER” from The New Republic (Feb. 24, 1992) gives
a provocative explanation of the Bush administration’s disastrous policy toward
Yugoslavia. Additionally, the article also brings to light the financial connection
between former Secretary of State Kissinger, General Scowcroft, Deputy Secretary of
State Eagleburger, and Yugoslav government owned institutions
According to the New York Times (May 10, 1982), while serving as ambassador to
Yugoslavia, Eagleburger pressured U.S. banks to extend credits to communist
Yugoslavia. After he retired from the State Department in 1994, Eagleburger was
named to the board of a Yugoslav bank in New York, which benefited from the U.S.
loans. (1) He became a principal, along with General Scowcroft and Lord Carrington,
in Kissinger Associates. (2) It should be noted that Milosevic, who is now president of
Serbia, was on the board on a related bank in Belgrade.
Eagleburger also became president of Global Motors, a subsidiary of the Yugoslav
arms industry whose clients include Iraq and Libya.
The graduates of the Kissinger school did well for themselves. The only fly in the
ointment was “Operation Flying Kite,” a U.S. government sting operation directed
against the New York bank, which among others indicted a Yugoslav Consul. When
Eagleburger went back to the State Department as Deputy Secretary of State in 1989,
he received $1,114,110 in salary, bonuses and severance pay from Kissinger
Associates and its affiliate, Kent Associates. He also received between three to four
hundred thousand dollars from various other fees and dividends. (3) Scowcroft
became the president’s adviser and Carrington became a chief peace mediator in the
Yugoslav crisis.
After having been, and possibly still being on Kissinger’s payroll, it would be ludicrous
to believe that this trio could give objective advice about Yugoslavia. To the contrary,
their heeded advice, implemented by Secretary of State James Baker, gave the green
light for the Yugoslav military’s puhst. Kissinger, Scowcroft, and Eagleburger must
bear the lion’s share of the responsibility for the deaths and human suffering in
Yugoslavia. While some may blame it on ineptness and failure to anticipate, it more
likely can be attributed to old-fashioned greed. All the State Department’s subsequent
policies are prolonging the conflict and as a corollary, prove to be especially profitable
to Kissinger’s Yugoslav clients.
Kissinger represents Yugoslav interests that include Crvena Zastava, a major arms
producer. Almost on the eve of the Persian Gulf War, Bush supplied financial aid to
Hussein’s regime. Most was spent in Yugoslavia’s to buy arms. These arms, used
against Americans, increased profits to Kissinger and his associates. The role played
by Kissinger and his “ex-employees” in the administration helping Yugoslav
enterprises is analogous to how United Fruit Company, in the 1950’s manipulated our
government to enhance their commercial connection in Central America. .
I believe that an in-depth investigation should be undertaken on an obvious conflict of
interest issue. Thousands of lives of innocent Yugoslav victims could have been saved
if our State Department had not taken the self-serving recommendations of Kissinger,
Scowcroft, and Eagleburger. They should be called to account for their actions. I
would appreciate knowing what possible measures you can take to alleviate my
concerns.
Sincerely,
Jerry Blaskovich, M.D., M.A.
(1) Patrick Buchanan, “Who Owns Today’s GOP?” The Washington Times (2/15/89)
(2) “ H. Kissinger & Company. A Stately Approach to doing Business,” Wall Street
Journal (8/25/82) Dun’s Consultants Directory (1991)
(3) Hearings before the Committee on Foreign Relations in the United States Senate. (
3/15/89 and 3/16/89)
___________________________________________________________
August 8, 1992
Senator Mitchell McConnell
United States Senate
Washington, D.C.
Fax 202-224-2499
Dear Senator:
As a United States Senator your pontifications on the August 6, 1992, McNeil-
Lehrer News Hour regarding Bosnia-Herzegovina should at least have had a ring of
truth.
Citing Congresswoman Delich-Bentley, whose credibility and ethics are highly
questionable, gives low credence to your statements. The “... age old ethnic dispute”
you referred to and twice stating “Shooting at each other for centuries” perpetuates
the Serbian mythology. Until they were cobbled altogether with other Balkan peoples
in 1918 there had been a remarkable peaceful, symbiotic relationship between the
Croats and Serbs. Their first armed conflict between them did not occur until 1941.(1)
To be sure the groups did fight each other, but as part of great armies that fought in
the fault line between Christian Europe and the Ottoman Empire. Invariably the Croats
allied themselves with the Christian side, while the Serbs most often fought for the
Ottomans.
The Serbs and Croats again lived side by side in peace for 45 years after World
War II. It was until Milosevic divided Yugoslavia along ethnic lines that the peace was
shattered.
Serbia had negligible contact with Western ideas and civilization prior to the turn
of the twentieth century. Before the Ottomans conquered the Serbs they were
Byzantium orientated and after the conquest they had little contact with Western
civilization. When Serbia freed themselves from the Ottomans they directed territorial
aspirations toward Bosnia-Herzegovina. However, Austria was given Bosnia by
England in 1878 under treaty of San Stefano. Austria annexed it in 1908. Thus setting
up the Balkan wars. The Versailles Treaty gave Serbs dominance of the civil service
and the army in what became Yugoslavia.
Sincerely,
_________________________________________________________
October 9, 1992
MacNeill-Lehrer News Hour
3620 S. 27th St.
Arlington, VA 22206
Dear Mr. MacNeil,
The commentary regarding the Yugoslav story of October 6, 1992 was genuinely
astonishing and demands a rebuttal. What was truly surprising is that you allowed a
narrator, without a hint of skepticism on your part, to guide the audience through a
minefield of inaccuracies and historical manipulations. It would be an understatement
to say that your stance was not in keeping with your program’s usual high journalistic
standard.
Introducing the commentary, you alluded to Yugoslavia’s “long-standing ethic
struggle.” This cliché, which has been permeating unquestioningly from the media
should be laid to rest since is contrary to fact. Prior to 1918, there has been a
remarkable peaceful symbiosis between the Serbs and Croats. All battles waged in the
territory now called Yugoslavia were between the Christians (Roman Catholic) and the
Muslim Ottoman Empire—none were considered ethnic.
Once the disparate nationalities were cobbled into a kingdom after the First World
War, the Serbs imposed a tyrannical rule. To support their position, the Serbs favored
terrorist methods that included assassination of Croatian delegates in the Yugoslav
parliament in Belgrade. (I’ve enclosed a reprint from a November 11, 1934 Chicago
Tribune article which describes Croatian grievances that could well have been voiced
in 1989). The Serbian repression gave birth to the Ustashe, a radical Croatian group,
which culminated in the first armed conflict between the two nationalities during World
War II.[1]) After the war the nationalities lived side by side, until the demagoguery of
Milosevic divided Yugoslavia along ethnic lines.
Milosevic rekindled nationalism by whipping up a mythology that is believed by the
Serbs and continues to inflame a pathological, hysterical hatred toward the Croats.(2)
For example, Goran Mikic, a Reuters reporter made world headlines with his story, that
he witnessed 41 Serbian children who were slaughtered by the Croats. He related the
gory details on Serbian television, but a day later he admitted that the story was a
hoax. However, his retraction did not appear in Serbia, but his allegations are still
being quoted.
The narrator emphasized Ustashe atrocities during World War II, but was
conspicuously silent about Chetnik crimes that were greater in scope. It should be
noted that the Ustashe were comprised of radical exiles and its government was a
Nazi puppet state analogous to Vichy and Quisling governments of France and
Norway. In contrast, Serbia had a legitimate government who retained significant
civilian authority and openly collaborated with the Nazis. Harald Turner, Chief Nazi
Civil Administrator for Serbia, proudly proclaimed that Serbia was the only country in
which the Jewish question “was solved.” [3] Additionally, Belgrade was the first city
called “Judenfrei.” After the war, the Chetnik leader, Drazen Mihaljevic, was tried and
convicted as a Nazi collaborator.
The report stating that the Ustashe killed 700,000 Serbs was grossly inflated. A
figure of 346,740 was reported to German federal government in 1964 by the
Yugoslav government, who had inflated the figure to extract war reparations. The
number includes those who died of the hands of Germans, Partisans, Luftwaffe and
allied bombings, Soviets, and diseases such as typhus and typhoid, which were
endemic. The figure is in agreement with published scholarly works on the subject.[4]
The narrator lamented that Serbia lost territory under communist Yugoslavia. The
architects of this so called lost territory were Tito, a Slovene-Croat; Milovan Djilas, a
Montenegrin; and two Serbs—Alexander Rankovic and Moshe Pijade. The Serbian
‘loss’ of Kosovo and Vojvodina does not hold water, since these ‘autonomous’ areas
had been and are still under direct Serbian control.
The narrator raised an issue that the Croatian flag was modeled on the Ustashe
flag and waving it strikes fear in the hearts of Serbs. The Croatian flag is not an
Ustashe flag. The Croatian flag’s symbol is the traditional coat of arms dating from the
medieval period and is prominently displayed on the tile roof of a medieval church in
Zagreb dating from that period. It must be noted that the ‘flag waving’ that the narrator
was so fearful have occurred only on Croatian territory. Why waving a flag causes
such consternation is irrational. There has never been an instance in history that
Croatia had territorial aspirations for Serbian territory.
Your narrator’s thesis that a puppet government in German occupied Croatia over
50 years ago and ethnic rivalry could dictate the actions of the communist Yugoslav
govern today is ludicrous. Jeri Laber, Executive Director of Helsinki Watch succinctly
stated: “…the ethnic wars in the Balkans are not, as many want to believe, the results
of age old hostilities long suppressed by the communist…they are the result of a
relentless propaganda campaign, aimed at stirring of old tensions engineered by
Serbia’s irresponsible power mad leader, Milosevic.”
The Serbs disingenuously excused their aggression as an effort to keep
Yugoslavia from breaking apart, than they changed their tune as an effort to protect
ethnic Serbs living in Croatia. They now justify their attack on Bosnia to protect
Europe from the Islamic fundamentalism.
Portraying the Serbs as victims is ludicrous since all the destruction and deaths
have only been in Croatia and Bosnia. Not a shot was fired in anger in Serbia during
this war. The narrator glossed over the destruction of Catholic churches, mosques,
and historical buildings, many of which were designated by UNESCO as cultural
monuments, including the city of Dubrovnik. The Serb policy of ethnic cleansing, which
is analogous to the “final solution” by Nazi Germany, rampant human rights violations
in Kosovo, and abominable treatment of prisoners in the concentration camps were not
mentioned.
Internationally monitored elections in spring 1990, Croatia elected a non-
communist government, while Serbia renewed a communist position in their parliament
in December 1990. After all efforts by Croatia to become a confederation failed,
Croatia exercised its right to secede, as set forth in the first sentence of Yugoslav
constitution. Serbia, using the Yugoslav army, unleashed their attack.
The definition of war is combatants fighting each other, but facts are that it is an
army with all modern weapons of this disposal fighting mostly unarmed civilians whose
supreme motivation is to defend its own land where the war is being waged.
Since the one-sided perspective that appeared on your program and so obviously
biased I am suspicious that the report was financed by Serbian interests. If you
investigate and it confirms my suspicions, I will consider future reports on your
program to lack credibility and journalism at its worse.
Sincerely,
Jerry N. Blaskovich, M.D., M.A.
(1) “From a historical perspective, this area experienced little ethnic violence prior to
the 20th century and never witnessed the vicious religious wars as seen in western
Europe.” V.P. Gagnon: Prospects for Stability; Foreign Affairs (Summer 1991) p.31.
(2) Some examples that the Serb used to ferment anti-Croatian feelings were: “ The
Croats were building concentration camps for five hundred thousand ethnic Serbs;
driven thousands of Serbs living in Croatia from their homes and jobs; uncovered a
Vatican plot against Serb Orthodoxy; Austria and Germany were conspiring with
Croatia to form a Fourth Reich.” Carol J. Williams—Los Angeles Times Magazine
(November 24, 1991) The Last Days of Yugoslavia—Los Angeles Times Magazine p.
26-32
(3) Politika, Belgrade, April 29, 1989
Raul Hilberg: The Destruction of the European Jews. (Vol.2, New York: Holmes and
Meier, 1985) p. 692
(4) Dr. Bogoljub Kocovic, “Zrtve drugog svetskog rata u Jugoslaviji” (Victims of WW II
in Yugoslavia); London, 1985
Vladimir Zerjavic, “Gubici stanovnistva Jugoslavije u drugom svjetskon ratu” (Yugoslav
population losses in WW II); Yugoslavia Victimological Society, in cooperation with the
Zagreb Jewish Community, 1989
_____________________________________________________________
Vice President Elect Albert Gore Jr.
C/O of United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510 the or after
Dear Vice President Gore:
Kissinger, Scowcroft, Eagleburger, the “Three Stooges” for Serb interests have
done it again. The International Herald Tribune (11/09/ 92) stated our government
intends to make Belgrade the hub for Bosnian relief and American military personnel
will be stationed there. To implement this plan would require pledges for Milosevic and
Karadzic. But if this becomes fait accompli it would place the United States in a
precarious position of actively cooperating with a government who the international
community has condemned and severely crimp your administration’s future efforts to
resolve the Bosnian crisis.
Given Milosevic’s and Karadzic’s history of duplicity, to believe they would honor
any pledge is ludicrous. It must be remembered that The United Nations, of which
United States was a signatory, placed sanctions on Serbia.
Not only would our presence flaunt the sanctions it would be enormously help Serbia’s
economy. Since President elect Clinton did not serve in armed forces he is not aware
that, historically, all military staging areas are notorious for theft. No matter how tight
the security, goods invariably end up on the local black market. Consumables, such as
fuel, water and food are usually bought locally. Airport fees and our troops exchanging
dollars into the local currency are some examples of how our presence would help the
Serbian economy.
This proposal is the latest in a series the Bush advisers have come up with to
legitimatize Serbia. Your administration has enough problems to solve that will be left
over from Bush’ s failures in Eastern Europe without adding this one to your agenda of
damage control.
I’ve enclosed a copy of my letter (April 13, 1992) that briefly outlines the Kissinger,
Scowcroft, Eagleburger connection with the Serbian government.
Sincerely,
____________________________________________________________
November 17, 1992
United Nations Headquarters
New York City, NY 10017
Attention: Boutros-Boutros-Ghali -- Secretary General
Dear Secretary General:
According to a story in the Daily Telegraph of November 2, 1992 Bosnian officials
refused supplies, which arrived in Sarajevo, after learning the products originated in
Serbia. The UNHCR said it would distribute the goods in Serb held Bosnia. No
mention was made who would ultimately receive them. Given the history of Serb
chicanery, it is doubtful that the Moslems would benefit. However, the important aspect
of the story was UNICEF’s admitted purchasing the supplies from Serbian companies.
If true, UNICEF’s actions are unconscionable. To purchase anything from a country
that has UN imposed sanctions is nothing short of criminal. What makes matters
worse, UN sponsored organization use UN funds, which aids and abets the horrific
Serbian deeds.
There appears to be a pattern of UN complicity with Serbian policy. Until recently,
whenever Croats commit a minor infraction, the UN reacts with an irrational
consternation, but to major Serbian atrocities, the UN blames both sides. Even your
own spokesman publicly admitted on July 28, 1992: “The UN…not only [are] creating
refugees but of becoming a partner in Serbian ‘ethnic cleansing’.
Recently the UN Canadian contingent openly paid $41,000 to Serbian warlords. I hope
this dangerous precedent will not become UN policy. No matter how you define it, it is
pure and simple—bribery. With this action the UN aids and abets Serbian interests.
I would appreciate your response of how you justify these UN actions and ignoring its
own sanctions.
Sincerely,
__________________________________________________________
November 23, 1992
Hon. Henry B. Gonzalez
United States House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Gonzalez:
Although I am not one of their constituents, your efforts in trying to bring to light
the connection between the obvious chicanery of the BNL Bank, Iraq, and the Bush
administration’s cover-up is exemplary and needs to be applauded.
It was poignant to watch you on C-SPAN in what, often appeared to be an empty
room. It’s ironic that more good came on that empty chamber than a stadium full of
their colleagues. I only hope that you will continue in your efforts because I believe you
have just scratched the surface.
Further investigation will, most likely, reveal a connection with Kissinger, Eagleburger,
Scowcroft, Yugoslav banks, and the BNL. Because of this nefarious tie, the main
responsibility for the loss of lives and human misery taking place in the former
Yugoslavia lies with this connection. I have enclosed copies of several articles and a
letter sent to Senator Gore, which discusses the issues.
I only hope your investigation was not empty party politics. My concern is that I
have not seen anything in the media and in particular, The Los Angeles Times, since
the election regarding your continuing probe. To allay my fears I would appreciate your
response.
Sincerely,
___________________________________________________________
March 6, 1993
Rita Rogers, M.D.
36 Malaga Cove Plaza
Palos Verdes Estates, Calif. 90275
Dear Dr. Rogers.
Your article, “ History returns to Haunt the Present” (Los Angeles Times March 1,
1993) was outstanding except in areas you apparently have little knowledge of but
nonetheless wished to pontificate. Your misinformed comments were not innocent
because they perpetuate the historical revisionism that has characterized the Yugoslav
crisis.
Animosities between the Croats and Serbs did not predate World War I. To the
contrary, there had been a remarkable peaceable symbiosis between them until they
are cobbled with other groups into a kingdom after that war. (1) Previously, all conflicts
in the region were directed between the Ottoman Muslims and Christian Europe. No
battles could have been construed as being ethnic. The schism between the groups
occurred only after the kingdom that formed following World War I, when the Serbs
imposed tyrannical rule upon all non-Serbs. (2) I have enclosed an article from of the
Chicago Tribune (November 11, 1934), which describes grievance the Croats had
then and what could have been voiced in 1988.
Serbian draconian measures gave birth to the Ustashe that culminated it in the
first conflict between the Croats and Serbs during World War II. (3) After the war the
nationalities lived side-by-side in peace until Milosevic’s demagoguery divided
Yugoslavia along ethnic lines.
Some Croats did fight for Germany, but it was limited to the Ustashe, who were in
the same league with Quislings in Norway and Vichy in France. The Nazis replaced a
legitimate government with their puppets, who did not represent the Croatian
population at large. They never experienced the popularity the Vichy had with the
French.
Your article is in keeping with the media’s pattern of always mentioning the fascist
Ustashe but disingenuously omitting to mention connections the legitimate Serbian
government had with the Nazis during the war.
The Serbian government, headed by former minister of war, General Milan Nedic,
collaborated to an extent that Serbia was able to retain significant civilian authority.
The Serbian Orthodox Church openly supported Nazi policies and theologically
justified persecution of the Jews. These elements, working together caused the Nazi
civil administrator to claim Serbia the only country where the Jewish question was
solved and Belgrade, the first city “judenfrei.” (4) The infamous mobile gas vans, to
exterminate Jews, were first used in Belgrade.
Six months prior to the Nazi invasion, Serbia passed laws banning Jewish
participation in the economy and university. According to the Encyclopedia of the
Holocaust, the Chetnik, Drazan Mihailovic, hero to most Serbs, was a Nazi
collaborator as early as 1941. Serbian historical revisionism ignores its role with the
Nazis and successfully created an image that the Serbs were somehow allied with the
United States during the war.
Placing Milosevic and Tudjman in the same category is demeaning to Tudjman.
Tudjman was democratically elected in internationally monitored elections on a
platform that emphasized self-determination.
Americans cannot comprehend the amount of suppression in Croatia before fall of
the Berlin Wall. Croats had to live with an identity crisis for nearly 70 years. Often
times, calling oneself a Croatian overtly were grounds to be put into prison. After the
fall of the Wall, Slovenes and Croats, as well as all former captive nations, no longer
felt threatened by a Russian monolith, euphorically opted for self-determination. The
so-called Croatian “nationalism” is a product what Milosevic had set in motion.
The United States did not remain silent when Tudjman’s government pressed for
self-determination. To the contrary, the U.S. did everything in its power to negate it.
Responsibility for the war lies with the Bush administration when it gave tacit approval
to the Serb military that a Serb controlled Yugoslavia was the key to stability and
Belgrade “should use all means possible” to preserve its integrity. The U.S.
government orchestrated the media to report acts committed by the Serbs as
something the Croats deserved.
Your fear that war will spread to Kosovo is valid, but for a wrong reasons. Serbs
own Kosovo lock, stock and barrel. Under the supervision of the Serb army, with all
modern weapons, the Kosovars experienced ethnic cleansing, closing of their schools
and loss of civil rights since 1988.
I would appreciate your comments.
Sincerely,
Jerry Blaskovich
(1) Jerry Blaskovich: The Zagreb Mosques: A study of Non-Muslim Sponsorship of
Islamic Art in the Balkan Heart of Christianity (Theses UCLA-Islamic Art History, 1992)
p 6
(2) Ibid. , page 6
(3) Philip J. Cohen; Holocaust History Misappropriated” Midstream- A Monthly Jewish
Review (November 1992) p 18
(4) “From a historical perspective, this area experienced little ethnic violence prior to
the 20th century and never witnessed the vicious religious wars as seen in western
Europe.” V.P. Gagnon: Prospects for Stability; Foreign Affairs (Summer 1991) p.31
___________________________________________________________
May 8, 1993
The MacNeil-Lehrer News Hour
3620 South 27th Street
Arlington, Va. 22206
Dear Mr. MacNeal:
With the Balkan crisis so much in the news you have had former Secretary of
State Lawrence Eagleburger as a frequent guest. Normally a person of his experience
and background would make a valued informant. However, his statements must be
viewed with marked skepticism.
As near as can be determined, Eagleburger has never been questioned about his
business dealings in Yugoslavia. According to the New York Times (May 10th 1982),
while serving as ambassador to Yugoslavia, he pressured Western banks to advance
credits to communist Yugoslavia, in spite of it being contrary to American policy at the
time. After he left the State Department in 1982 Eagleburger was named to the board
of the Ljubljanska Banka, a Yugoslav bank in New York, which benefited from the
loans he orchestrated.
He became a principal along with General Brent Scowcroft and Lord Carrington in
Kissinger Associates, whose clients included the Yugoslav arms industry and
Yugoslav government run companies. It should be noted, Slobodan Milosevic was on
the board of a related bank in Belgrade. Eagleburger was also president of Global
Motors, a subsidiary of the Yugoslav arms industry, whose clients include Iraq and
Libya.
The graduates of the Kissinger school did well for themselves- Eagleburger
became secretary of state; Scowcroft was security advisor to President Bush and Lord
Carrington, “peace negotiator “ of the Yugoslav crisis.
When Eagleburger went back to the State Department as Deputy Secretary of
State in 1989 he received 1.114 million dollars in bonuses and severance pay from
Kissinger Associates. He also received close to $400,000 in fees and dividends.
Almost on the eve of the Gulf War Bush supplied financial aid to the Saddem Hussein
regime. Most of the money was spent in Yugoslavia to buy arms, which was used
against Americans and as a corollary, increased the profits to Kissinger Associates.
These men may be honorable, but to believe they would be able to give objective
advice about Yugoslavia, then one must believe in the tooth fairy.
Sincerely,
_________________________________________________________
This letter was sent sometime in May 1993
Robert D Kaplan
Contributing editor and Correspondents
c/o The Atlantic
745 Boylston
Boston, MA 02116
Dear Mr. Kaplan,
A friend gave me your article, “Why Yugoslavia Exploded” (Readers Digest,
March 1993) a few days ago. I found it loaded with a minefield of inaccuracies and half-
truths, which begged a response.
You failed to state that Djilas’ predicting his country will be like Lebanon has not
occurred. Not a structure was damaged or destroyed, not a weapon was fired in
anger, nor a citizen was displaced or became a refugee in Serbia since the war
started. The overwhelming number of refugees that Yugoslavia has accepted came
voluntarily. Prior to any Yugoslav offensive in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina the
indigenous Serbian population was forewarned. Those not having a death wish,
fled to safe areas. Despite the rhetoric, there are very few substantiated reports of
refugees fleeing because of Croatian or Muslim pressure.
Your labeling the situation in former Yugoslavia “A cataclysm fermenting for
centuries” is in the same league with that other Serbian ideological great lie, “ancient
ethnic conflicts.” These ideas, with no regard to authenticity, permeated the media and
have been quoted by every Secretary of State since the outset of hostilities.
The truth is, prior to this century, there had been a remarkable symbiosis between
Croats and Serbs. Any battles the Croats did fight were directed against the Ottoman
Turks – none of the battles were ethnic.
Although the “Yugoslav” concept was predominantly Croatian inspired, the disparate
nationalities felt threatened by the “forced marriage” into the kingdom. However, once
the marriage was consummated, their fears became justified for everyone except the
Serbs. The Western powers envisioned a loose confederation; instead the Serbs
formulated a constitution favoring themselves. After it became clear what the Serbian
designs were, the Croatian Sabor (Parliament) refused to ratify the union.
Nonetheless, the kingdom became a reality after Serbian troops were sent and
stationed in Zagreb. Thereafter all political and economic infrastructures became
Serb controlled.
Your article, by disingenuously omitting to mention the reasons that led to the
Ustashe and the Serbian government’s role during World War II makes the pedestrian
reader assume the Serbs were Simon-pure and the Croats deserve all the blame.
What fueled the Serb-Croat hatred was not the assassination of King Alexander,
but the Serbs imposing their will on all non-Serbs which started from the kingdom’s
very inception and the assassination of Croatian delegates, that included Stejpan
Radic, the Croatian leader, in Belgrade’s parliament by a member of the Serbian Black
Hand organization.
The King, instead of punishing the perpetrator, declared the kingdom a
dictatorship- renaming it Yugoslavia- and intensified the draconian methods on the
non-Serbs.
It was from this uterus that the Ustashe were delivered. Once “born” – like any
opposition – they were forced to live as exiles in Italy under Mussolini’s largesse. With
the German invasion the Nazis installed the Ustashe in Croatia. On a par with the
Vichy and Quisling governments, they never represented the Croatians at large and
did not enjoy the popularity the Vichy had with the French.
The Serbian government, headed by the former minister of war, Milan Nedic,
collaborated to such an extent with the Nazis that Serbia was able to retain significant
civilian authority. The Serbian Orthodox Church openly supported Nazi policy and
theologically justified persecution of the Jews.
These elements, working together, caused the Nazi civil administer to proclaim Serbia
the only country where the “Jewish Question” was solved and Belgrade the first city
“judenfrei.” It is noteworthy that six months before the war, Serbia enacted laws
prohibiting Jewish participation in the economy and the university.
Historical revisionism has created the idea that the Chetniks were somehow allied
with the allies. According to the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, resistance against the
Nazis stopped in 1941.
You, along with other journalists, most notably Dusko Doder and Misha Glenney
attempt to incriminate the Croatian and Serbian governments equally guilty for the
conflict and imply the government in Zagreb are “fascist.” The latter allegation, without
a scintilla of truth, excused the actions of the Serbs in Croatia. Despite its faults,
Tudjman’s government has as much in common with the Ustashe as Moshe Dyan had
with the PLO.
When Slovenia and Croatia made overtures for self-determination, nationalism played
a minor role. The ethnic groups lived in peace for 45 years after the war. It was not
until Milosevic divided Yugoslavia along ethnic lines that the peace was shattered.
Milosevic rekindled long dormant Croatian nationalism, particularly after his speech in
Kosovo. The HDZ and Tudjman were by-products of what Milosevic set in motion.
The Serbs living in Croatia became terrorized after they started to believe the
mythologies orchestrated by Milosevic that the Croats were building concentration
camps for its Serbian minority, driven thousands of Serbs from their homes, uncovered
a Vatican plot against Serb Orthodoxy and Germany and Austria were conspiring with
Croatia to form a fourth Reich. Even some of the Western media conspired with the
Serbian big lie.
For example, Reuters made world headlines after one its reporters said he had
witnessed 41 Serbian children that had been slaughtered by Croats. He related the
gory details on Serbian television, but the next day admitted the story was false.
However, his retraction never appeared in Serbia. His allegation continues to be a
rallying point for the Serbs.
I hope this information, that you were not aware of, will give your future writings a
different perspective. I would appreciate any comments.
Sincerely,
________________________________________________________
May 21, 1993
KABC Television
Eyewitness News
4151 Prospect Avenue
Hollywood, Calif. 90027
Attention: John Tunney
Dear Mr. Tunney:
From your days in Congress and television I have generally been in agreement
with your viewpoints. However, you made a number of unsubstantiated statements in
your commentary on the Bosnian crisis that must be rectified. Proclaiming, “Croatians
killed over 1 million Serbs during World War Two” and “centuries old ethnic battles” is
not only contrary to scholarly works on the subject, it helps perpetuate the rampant
disinformation that has pervaded this conflict.
In order to extract war reparations from the German Federal Government, the
Yugoslav government was able to come up with total of 346,740 Serbs that died in the
whole territory of Yugoslavia during World War two. The figure includes those that
died at the hands of the Germans and Ustashe, Partisans, Luftwaffe and allied
bombings, Soviets, killed by Serbs for political expediency and diseases like typhus
and typhoid, which was endemic and took an enormous number of lives.
To be sure, the area was the site of numerous battles, but you must remember
that the area was the demarcation zone between Christian Europe and the Islamic
Ottomans. Whenever the Croatians fought it was invariably on the Christians’ side,
whereas the Serbs frequently fought for the Ottomans. None of the battles could be
construed, by any stretch of the imagination, as being ethnic in origin. Until the Serbs
and Croats were cobbled together with other Balkan peoples following World War One
they had a remarkable, peaceful symbiotic relationship. The intent of the Allies was to
create a kingdom with a loose confederation. However, the Serbs made a Constitution
favoring them and imposed draconian measures against all non-Serbs that culminated
in the Serbs and Croats first armed conflict during World War Two.
For 45 years following the war the ethnic groups lived side-by-side in peace, but
the peace was shattered when Milosevic divided Yugoslavia along ethnic lines.
The media consistently mentioned the Ustashe, which was a Nazi puppet
government during the war, but for some strange reason the media disingenuously
never mentions the Serbian-Nazi connection. Serbia had a legitimate government
under the former Ministry of war, General Milan Nedic, who collaborated to the extent
that Serbia was able to retain significant civil authority. The Serbian Orthodox Church
openly supported Nazi policy and theologically justified persecution of Jews.
These elements, working together, caused the Nazis civil administer to proclaim
Serbia the only country where the Jewish problem was solved and Belgrade first city
“Judenfrei.” It’s noteworthy to mention that six months prior to the Germans invaded
Yugoslavia, Serbia enacted laws banning Jewish participation in the economy and
university.
According to the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, Drazen Mihalovic, the so-called
fascist fighter, became an overt Nazi collaborator as early as 1941. Serbian historical
revisionists have somehow painted a picture to show the Serbs were allied with the
United States during World War Two.
I would appreciate your reply. If you contact the history department at UCLA they
will substantiate my statements.
Sincerely