THE CROATIAN VOICE
Cleveland, Ohio January 22, 1993
“ Lest We Forget “
More than a year after the massacre the Croatian village of Vocin, the crime has yet to
receive the attention and international moral outrage it deserves. If there is any doubt
that Serbian forces have committed war crimes, one only has to look at to this village.
The report of the heinous atrocity received a tiny one-day squib in the press. One
must ask, who committed the greater crime—the perpetrators or those who ignore it.
The only positive feature of the incident is that provides the clearest example of the
Serbian policy of “ ethnic cleansing”, or more specifically the “ Final Solution “.
During the four months of Serbian occupation, Vocin’s non-Serb villagers were
inhumanly abused and harassed. However, evil incarnate descended on a cold
December day. Having received orders to retreat, the Serbian forces unleashed their
tanks, mortars, and grenades upon the town. Not one Croatian structure was spared.
A stump of masonry wall, standing among the rubble like a sentinel, was all that
remained of the 750 year-old Roman Catholic Church.
The destruction of the church had acted as a catalyst for the human mayhem that
ensued. Although 43 bodies were found, a great number of others, including children,
disappeared without a trace. Cursory examination of the bodies, later verified by
forensic studies, revealed torture and mutilation. Those shot were from extremely
close range, usually multiple times. Bullet pathways indicate many were lying down
when shot. Chemical analysis of the charred remains—in reality, nothing but chunks of
carbon—verify the victims were burned alive
Reverend Nikola Sanjkovic, the village priest, assisted in the identification of the
corpses. One victim, 70 year-old Marija Majdanzic proved to be an American. She,
thus far, is the only American casualty of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. Had
she been an oil company employee, maybe the American government would have
stirred to action.
Half of the victims were over 62-- the eldest was 84. By no stretch of the imagination
could they be considered Croatian soldiers, as the Serbs allege.
The Vocin slaughter was not a spontaneous events like Mai Lai, rather it was
calculated Serbian policy. Ethnic cleansing inexorably follows a pattern; preceded first
by a coordinated air strikes, rockets and heavy artillery, indicating a sophisticated
command structure. As the defense pulls back, Serbian infantry moves in. It should be
noted that prior to any offensive campaign the local Serb population are warned
beforehand to leave.
Once the objective is secure, the so-called Serbian irregulars start their cleansing
operation. EC monitors state that many Croatian villages have been bulldozed out of
existence. What happened in Vocin was only one example of a pattern that occurred in
Croatia and is now continuing in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
The atrocities committed at Cetekovac, Skrabrnja, and Vocin are no worse than what
the Serb forces committed elsewhere. But are better known because of eyewitness
documentation. Would makes the Vocin slaughter unique was that Serbs soldiers
confessed afterward.
According to a number of credible eyewitnesses, which the Serbs left behind in their
haste to retreat, the Serbian forces went on a drinking spree after the killing orgy. A
few passed out and were left behind in the evacuation. When the Croatian forces
arrived, there were captured. During interrogation they admitted their roles in the
slaughter and being members of Vojislav Seselj’s infamous “White Eagles”. But what
was most damning is that they stated they have acted under direct orders from
Belgrade.
Frank McCloskey, the United States Congressman from Indiana, was present at the
interrogation and saw the bodies firsthand. Summing up to the affair as “ ghastly,
beyond words “, Rep. McCloskey’s presence lends objective credence. The Texas
Court of Appeals Judge Bill Bass also witnessed the aftermath and described Vocin as
a “ mindless orgy of violence “. The judge and the congressman were on a fact-finding
mission close to Vocin. After learning of the slaughter they arrived at the scene.
A somewhat related incident occurred at Vukovar shortly before Vocin’s slaughter.
After Vukovar fell to Serb forces approximately 170 Croatian patients were evacuated
from the hospital by soldiers of the Yugoslav army. Confirming eyewitness reports, Dr.
Clyde Snow, a U.N. forensics medical specialist, on October 28, 1992, said all
evidence indicated that a mass grave found outside of Vukovar contained bodies of
the Croatians taken from the hospital. It is anticipated that further evacuations will find
at least 3,000 unaccounted for Croatians from Vukovar. Since Vocin and Vukovar are
in close geographic proximity and both occurred soon after the fall of Vukovar, it is
probable that the perpetrators were same.
The West and U.N. never explicitly condemned the Serbian war policy, the ethnic
cleansing, and their concentration camps in Croatia. By contrast, in Bosnia-
Herzegovina the West responded with consternation and hand wringing—but only
after a existence of the concentration camps was made public by the media.
The incidents however will not become a footnote in history because it is the most
documented Serbian atrocity in Croatia or Bosnia. Extensive eyewitness accounts,
photographs, forensic pathology reports are available for any potential war crimes
trials. The perpetrators of these atrocities must be held accountable because of
victims must not be forgotten. For they were flesh and blood, with human desires and
a hope for a future. Their only crime was to be born Croatian.
Jerry Blaskovich, M.D.
San Pedro, CA
=====================================================
Long Beach Press-Telegram
Long Beach, CA
Published March 28, 1993
George Bush's Foreign Policy was Nothing to Write Home About
George Bush’s Foreign Policy was Nothing to Write Home About
Although some political pundits praised George Bush’s foreign policy, it was no better
than his domestic policies that cost him the election.
President Bush inherited the final chapter of the fall of communism that Ronald
Reagan had set in motion. But Bush did not know what to do with it. Foreign policy lies
in preventing war and Bush failed in Iraq and former Yugoslavia.
The parallels between Iraq and former Yugoslavia are remarkable. A week before Iraq
invaded Kuwait, U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie assured Saddam Hussein that the
United States had no opinion on Iraq’s border dispute with Kuwait, and implied the
United States would not interfere. Secretary of State James A. Baker told Belgrade the
United States had “no position” on Yugoslavia’s border disputes and Yugoslavia
should use “all means possible to preserve the stability of the country.” The Serb
military took his statements as tacit approval that a Serb-controlled Yugoslavia was a
key to stability. Interestingly, Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic have survived Bush.
Since the end of World War II, the linchpin in U.S. policy was to contain communism,
encourage self-determination and champion human rights. Bush abandoned these
tenets in Russia, the very country for which these policies were specifically
formulated, and in Yugoslavia. But in Yugoslavia, Bush, seemingly unable to
comprehend “realpolitik,” continued his policy of status quo, snubbed Boris Yeltsin,
supported Mikhael Gorbachev, and most importantly, the survival of the communist
Soviet Union.
The unexpected fall of the Berlin Wall was the seminal event that reversed fear of the
Russian monolith into euphoria and bravado. Believing what the United States
verbalized, all of the former captive nations, without exception, looked to Washington
for approval and guidance in their self-determination efforts. However, they were
rudely awakened with U.S. “realpolitik. “
What transpired in Yugoslavia’s is a microcosm of a rude awakening. Bush ignored
highly credible CIA warnings in 1990 that Yugoslavia would break up spontaneously
within 18 months into a violent civil war. The Bush administration threw its diplomatic
weight against the idea of independence of any of the Yugoslav republics in the
mistaken concerns that succession and nationalism would become contagious and
destabilize the Soviet Union. Yet Bush’s proponents claims he deserves praise for
seizing the opportunity to promote democracy in the void created by the collapse of
Soviet communism.
Bush reverted to Henry Kissinger’s theses that status quo is the key to stability, which
was in sharp contrast to Reagan’s approach of a clear priority to self-determination
and human rights. In December 1991 Bush reiterated that states should neither be
created nor destroyed. Condemning “suicidal nationalism,” he begged Ukrainians to
remain in the Soviet Union and stick with reliable Gorbachev.
Following Secretary of State James Baker’s Belgrade’s speech, Serbs forces
unleashed their attack on the republics that opted for self-determination. Heeding his
advisers, the Bush administration consistently blamed the war on Croatia.
It is noteworthy that before being named advisers, Lawrence Eagleburger and General
Brent Scowcroft were principles and served on the board of Kissinger and Associates,
whose major clients included Yugoslav government-owned industries and banks.
When Eagleburger went back to the State Department as deputy secretary he
received $1.14 million in severance pay from his former employer.
Bush remained aloof about the Balkan crisis until presidential candidate Bill Clinton
called for armed protection of relief operations. Presidential spokesman Marlin
Fitzwater labeled Clinton’s idea “reckless,” but a few days later the administration
came out with basically the same statement.
Bush dismissed the Bosnian horror as a “hiccup” one month after the United Nations
Commission for Refugees said the conflict resulted in 2.2 million refugees. Not until
Bush lost the election did the administration start to make statesmanship like noises. It
was a little too late for millions of refugees, the wounded and the countless dead.
President Clinton certainly did not inherit a silver spoon. Facing a multitude of
problems - domestic and foreign - in his first real test he did not implicitly bow to Lord
Owen’s pressure. Rather, he appears to have stepped outside of U.N. guidelines and
is in the process of implementing strong economic sanctions against Yugoslavia.
Clinton wants the United States to take a more active role in the peace negotiations
and would back a plan with U.S. troops.
The cantonization of Bosnia is nebulous. Ultimately, what has been advocated by
Clinton in the presidential campaign - lift the arms embargo that prevents Bosnians
from effectively defending themselves, use American air power to counter Serbian
aggression and not to use American ground troops in any capacity may prove to be
the only feasible solution. It would take no Solomon to know what the Bosnians
choose if there had a choice - to have no “peacemakers” and the means to defend
themselves than be denied the means and be mired with peace-keepers who cannot
keep the peace.
====================================================
Long Beach Press Telegram May 16, 1993
Clinton Walking Right into Bosnia Quicksand?
Europeans Stance for Further Negotiations is Ringing Hollow
When that theater of the absurd in Greece ended, Lord Owen euphoric statements fell
short of nominating Slobodan Milosevic for the Nobel Peace Prize. Among his
statements, “no need for bombs,” Owen continued his condescending teaching of
foreign affairs to Bill Clinton. It is noteworthy that all bombs dropped thus far have
been Serbian, and since the Serbs have attained all their territorial goals, there is no
need for further bombings.
Even before the ink dried on Radovan Karadzic’s signature and his Cheshire-cat grin
faded, the slaughter of Muslim and Croatian civilians intensified. However, the real
drama came at Pale when Milosevic’s creations made their second mistake of the war
in former Yugoslavia.
The first occurred when the Serbs started the bombardment and siege of Dubrovnik.
The Balkan conflict, with its unpronounceable names, referred to by George Bush as
a mere “hiccup,” would have remained a backwater civil disorder.
The Serbs’ second mistake was not ratifying the Vance-Owen plan. Had the self
proclaimed Bosnia Serb “parliament” endorsed the plan, it would have played the way
the Vance Accord did in Croatia over a year ago: not one item has been implemented.
There has been no disarming of the Serb militia or recognition of the preexisting
borders.
After Milosevic signed the “peace” in Croatia, all the attention then focused on Bosnia.
The continuing daily shelling of towns and cities in Croatia with death, destruction and
ethnic cleansing of Croatians, has been ignored by media as a war that wasn’t.
The new Vance-Owen Plan, guaranteeing Bosnian Serbs a secure connection
between Serb-held land gave them better terms than the original one. Implementing
the plan by U.N. troops would have been de facto recognition of land that Serbs
captured. Muslim troops would not be allowed to enter Muslim areas. The U.N.
Russian troops, with their appalling record as peacekeepers in Croatia, will “enforce”
the U.N. mandate in Bosnia. The rejection would prove to be a blessing because its
implementation is, in reality, a dismemberment of the legitimate Bosnian government.
Serbian shrewdness correctly interpreted the West as trying to avoid action at all
costs. For the first time in the war, meaningful options were proposed - arming the
Muslims and Croatian Bosnian and launching air strikes.
Clinton’s proposals dismayed European diplomats. They hysterically lamented that
they would not stop the war, but escalate it and inflict more casualties. Their proposal
is further negotiations, which will only result in more dead Muslims and Croatians, who
are the real casualties of the war.
Ninety percent of the casualties have resulted from high visibility artillery and tank
guns. The U.S. Air Force has electronic surveillance capability of targeting and
neutralizing these threats within seconds. Serbian gunners may be savage but they do
not have a death wish. No rational person believes air strikes are going to stop the
war, but they would go a long way toward reducing the Muslim death rate and
destruction.
After lifting the arms embargo, casualties will then becomes Serbs, which for some
reason is repugnant to British and French diplomats. Is this an injustice? The
Bosnians had the misfortune when the war started to have Western leaders who were
wimps. George Bush, John Major and Francois Mitterand are the tragedians of this
history.
Clinton characterized the destruction of Bosnia as a smaller version of the Holocaust.
Doing nothing and allowing the slaughter to continue would condone Serbian policy.
Jerry Blaskovich
San Pedro
===================================================
The Daily Breeze
Torrance, California July 29, 1993
&
The Croatian Voice
July 29, 1993
The Anatomy for Anarchy
By Dr. Jerry N. Blaskovich
Human rights monitors were premature when they stated 1992 would go down in
history as the year the Muslims of Bosnia were extinguished. With apologies to Don
McLean’s “American Pie” July 1993 will be “the day the music died” for the Bosnian
state. We have learned two lessons from Bosnia—aggression pays and the “new
world order” is pretentious nonsense.
All U.N. actions in Bosnia were tantamount to complicity with Serbian goals. This
cooperation was succinctly stated by the Chief Liaison Officer for U.N. refugees, Jean-
Claude Concoloto: “ …the UN were not only creating refugees, but becoming a
partner in Serbia’s ethnic cleansing “
It appears to be a concerted effort to destroy the European survivors of the Ottoman
Empire dismembered some 50 years ago. Imposing an arms embargo that only
affected the Muslims and Croats, banning Serbian air flights but not enforcing the ban,
and the meaningless sanctions against Serbia are some overt examples—but the
covert ones were more destructive.
While under the protection of U.N. troops and officers in the U.N.’s zone, Hakija
Turajlic, Bosnia’s Deputy Premier, was murdered by the Serbs. The former
commander of the U.N. force in Bosnia, General MacKenzie, consistently blamed all
sides for the carnage, but never explicitly named the Serbs. However, his espoused
opinions to Congress, the media and think tanks, (like Heritage) must be viewed with
skepticism since he disingenuously never mentioned SerbNet, a Serbian lobbying firm,
paid him.
After the Bosnian government instituted investigative proceedings against MacKenzie
for sexually exploiting Muslim women prisoners provided by Serbian soldiers, he
evoked U.N. immunity.
Refugee camps typically (Muslim camps no exception) lack infrastructure of schools,
hospitals or civil administrations and are prey to epidemics. Its inmates suffer
humiliation caused by an endless existence and total dependence on aid dispensed
by U.N. agencies. What the U.N. has a ready done in Bosnia is a portent for the future.
Srebrenica and Zepa are under U.N. control where each person gets 530 grams of
food and 3 liters of water a day to drink, cook and wash with. Medicine delivered to
the Zagreb mosque for distribution had the expiration date of 1947. And, what may
have been a Machiavellian twist to ethnic cleansing; a planeload of condoms was
delivered last summer to Sarajevo at a time when there was no bread.
According to United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees there are over 2.5
million Bosnian refugees—almost half of Bosnia’s population. Those remaining will be
herded into disease-ridden ghettos. Now that the West magnanimously created “safe-
haven” Croatia, with 500,000-registered Bosnian refugees will be free to return them.
Western policy makers are unable to comprehend that Islam is not a monolith. They
put policies and beliefs of such disparate nations as Saudi Arabia and Iraq into one
kettle. Christian presuppositions and Western stereotypes imply a monolithic threat
that is nonexistent, but have forgotten that these states are the results of their
colonialism and imperialism. Regardless, the shortsightedness in Bosnia will poison
relations between Christendom and Islam for years.
The West should not be surprised when the next generation—if there is one—become
terrorists. Seeded by the West’s failure, and despite the Bosnian Muslims being the
most secularized in the Islamic world, the camps have ready become fertile grounds
for Islamic fundamentalism.
Muslims are painfully aware that the West’s concern for human rights in verbiage. The
West, while berating the Muslims to respect minorities, shamelessly refuses to protect
the largest Muslim community in Europe.
The Muslim children surviving in the twilight zone, forgotten by the rest of the world,
will not forget the 250,000 dead and how those in the West watched while their fathers
were wounded or killed, their mothers and sisters raped. The Trojan horse of
insurrection is already being built on the very doorstep of Europe.
If history teaches us anything, a settlement based on deeply felt injustices is by no
means a settlement. Rather it is a source of the even bigger and wider conflict. Victims
suffer, but never from amnesia.
Jerry Blaskovich is a San Pedro physician and an Associate Clinical Professor at USC
School of Medicine. He has visited Croatia and Bosnia several times since the war
began.
=====================================================
The Croatian Voice
Published July 29, 1993
To Be or Not to be in Bosnia
By Dr. Jerry Blaskovich
Special to the Croatian Voice
The surviving victims of Bosnia-Herzegovina received a false glimmer of hope after
President Bill Clinton announced he would use air power and lift the arms embargo.
This hope faded when Cyrus Vance’s protégé, Secretary of State Warren Christopher’
s unpersuasive arguments failed to sway the allies. How could Christopher be credible
when he downgraded the Serbian aggression as merely ‘misbehaving’?
Clinton’s decision contradicted the Joint Chiefs of Staff who were pragmatically
opposed against intervention anywhere. But after General Merrill A. McPeak stated U.
S. planes could attack Serbian forces with “virtually no risk” Clinton felt secure. It is
noteworthy, 90 percent of the casualties in Bosnia resulted from high visibility artillery
and tank guns. Our Air Force has the electronic capability to target and neutralize
these threats within seconds. A few well-directed hits would go a long way in keeping
the death count down. Serb gunners may be savage but they not have a death wish.
U.S. Marine Corps Captain, Scott Buren and military expert J.P. Mackley, recently
returned from a fact-finding mission and concluded that the Serbs are using tactics
last seen in the American Civil war. The Serbian military machine is vastly overrated.
Nonetheless, propaganda continues perpetuates the mythology of the Serbian fighting
ability.
In only took a few days after the onset of World War II for Germany to decimate the
entire Yugoslav army. The remaining royalist force, the Chetniks, under Drazan
Mihailovic’s command did fight, but it was mainly directed toward the Croatians rather
than the Germans. The communist Partisans, under Tito, did not participate in the war
until Germany attacked Russia. They became a force only after receiving vast
supplies and air support from the allies, late in the war—after the fall of Italy.
Serbian historical revisionism created a false image that somehow the Chetniks were
allied with the United States during the war. According to the Encyclopedia of the
Holocaust, resistance against the Nazis came to complete halt as early as 1941.
Serbian propagandists constantly decry the Croats’ dealing with the Nazis, but
disingenuously omit mentioning their own role.
During World War II, Serbia’s legitimate government headed by the former minister of
war, General Milan Nedic collaborated with the Nazis to an extent that Serbia was
able to retain significant civilian authority. The Serbian Orthodox Church openly
supported Nazi policy and theologically justified persecution of Jews.
These elements, working together, caused the Nazi civil administrator to proclaim
Serbia the only country where the ‘Jewish question’ was solved and Belgrade, the first
city “judenfrei”. Six months prior to the Nazi invasion, Serbia enacted laws prohibiting
Jewish participation in the economy and the university.
The Serbian army is a force without an effective infantry. They have a consistent
record of defeat when facing well-armed adversaries in parts of Croatia. What
happened in Vukovar is a prime example.
Approximately 1,500 ill-equipped, untrained, ragtag Croatian defenders were able to
hold at bay, for 89 days, 25,000 Yugoslavs equipped with tanks, artillery and aircraft.
Only after Croatians ran out of ammunition did Vukovar fall.
Besides giving the Bosnian Muslims and Croats a level playing field, air strikes and
lifting the arms embargo would reassert U.S.’s world leadership role that floundered
under George Bush. And once the Serbs realize that the war has become costly, they
will initiate negotiations. Ultimately, ending the war will be a political solution between
the antagonists.
Policy planners want a clear political mission. No cars run on Bosnian oil. What is
happening in Bosnia is far removed from our national interest. What is at stake is the
moral obligation that goes beyond national interest. When there is oil in the equation,
intervention is not a problem. Is saving lives less important than oil?
It would be comforting to think Clinton’s decision was based upon his disgust with the
UN inertia, European and Muslim countries complacency, and his moral outrage.
Or was Clinton moved by the embarrassment generated within the liberal wing of his
own Democratic Party, led by Congress when Frank McCloskey saw the atrocities
committed by the Serbs in both Croatia and Bosnia? It is noteworthy to point out that
Congressman McCloskey has not receive one cent in campaign contributions from
anyone involved in the conflict and has no expatriate Yugoslavs in his congressional
district. He is led by conscience—not politics. Would that depth leaders of all nations
be so led. ===================================================
The Times (Munster, Indiana) May 12, 1994
The Serbian Obfuscation
Apart from the deaths, human chaos and destruction “on the ground,” the main
casualty of any war is truth. New “truths” are manufactured for internal as well as
external consumption. The Serbs forte, manipulating propaganda, an art form
communism made it into a science, surpassed even Russia’s. Long before any
weapon was fired in anger in the former Yugoslavia, Slobodan Milosevic rekindled
dormant nationalism to justify future Serbian actions, after he mounted a
disinformation campaign based on who did what to whom and when.
The Serbs propaganda apparatus successfully implemented post-modern critic Jean
Baudrillard’s Simulations theses that “we live in an age where people no longer
produce or create their own opinions, but rather, where people reproduce opinions
presented in the media. “ Journalists, such as Alexander Cockburn, Misha Glenny and
A. M. Rosenthal, by juxtaposition facts and selectively omitting other facts, penalized
the victims, and inexorably clouded the issues and limited debate.
They projected images to the pedestrian audience that all sides are equally guilty; the
conflict is nothing more than an insoluble ethnic style; and the Croatian government a
reincarnation of the World War II Ustashe regime. While they extolled the invincibility
of the Serbian fighting prowess, they persistently reinforced a belief that the Croats
and Muslims fought against United States during World War II and that Serbia and
America have always been allies.
According to the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, Serbian resistance against the Nazis
stopped in 1941. The only viable force that fought the Germans was the Partisans,
who were comprised mostly of Croatians, Orthodox Croats and Bosnians, and
Slovenes. And that are occurred late in the war, after they received massive military
assistance from the Allies.
Serbian historical revisionism disingenuously ignores their own complicity with
Germany during World War II, but consistently censures Croatia as being synonymous
with the Ustashe. The Nazis replaced a legitimate government in Croatia with the
Ustashe, an exile group of Croatian radicals. On a par with the Vichy and Quisling
states, they did not represent Croatians at large, and never enjoyed popularity the
Vichy regime had in France.
In Serbia, by contrast, the Nazis kept the government headed by former Minister of
War, Gen. Milan Nedic. Serbia collaborated to such an extent that the Serbs were
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 administrator to proclaim Serbia the
only country where the “Jewish question” was solved, and Belgrade the first city
“judenfrei.” In is noteworthy that, six months prior to the war, Serbian enacted laws
prohibiting Jews to participate in the economy and the university.
But the coup of Serbian disinformation has been the acceptance of “Ancient ethnic
rivalry.” Both Presidents Bush and Clinton, and every secretary of state since the
conflict started, have given the American public the message of the futility of
involvement.
To be sure, the area witnessed numerous battles, since it was the fault line between
Christian Europe and the Islamic Ottoman Empire. But no battle, prior to this century,
could be construed as being ethnic. The Croats and the Serbs had a remarkable
symbiotic relationship until they were cobbled together with other Balkan people into a
kingdom in 1918. Animosity developed only after Serbs imposed draconian measures
against non-Serbs to solidify their position when they commandeered the political and
economic infrastructures of the country.
The historian Norman Stone destroyed the often-quoted myth that the campaign in
Yugoslavia “pinned down dozens of German military divisions in World War II,” after
he learned from the German Military Research Office that the actual number of
German divisions was six, two of which were manned by Croats. And only one was
that the front lines.
In Croatia, as well as in Bosnia, the Serbians have not engaged in what could be
called a normal military operation. All their vaunted “campaigns” have utilized siege
tactics. Yet, the Bush and Clinton administrations characterized the aggressors and
victims alike as “warring sides. “
A common thesis proclaims the Croatian and Serbian governments equally guilty for
the conflict and labels the government in Zagreb as “fascist. “ Tudjman’s government
has as much in common with the Ustashe as Moshe Dyan had with the PLO. 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 their
Serbian minority, had driven thousands of Serbs from their homes, a plot by the
Vatican against Serb Orthodoxy had been uncovered 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.
Jerry Blaskovich, M.D., M.A. (Islamic Art History-UCLA)
Carol J. Williams, “The Last Days of Yugoslavia” Los Angeles Times Magazine
(November 24, 1991) pp 26-70‘
Philip J. Cohen, “Holocaust History Misappropriated” Midstream- A Monthly Jewish
Review. (November 1992) pp 18-20
V.P. Gagnon “From the historical perspective, this area experienced little violence
prior to the twentieth century and never witnessed a vicious religious war as seen in
Western Europe.” Foreign Affairs (Summer 1991) p 31
=================================================
Long Beach Press-Telegram July 31, 1994
&
San Pedro News Pilot August 3, 1994
No Surprises in Bosnia
When will we learn?
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me three times, I’m
the fool. That epitomizes our diplomatic fiascoes with the Serbs.
Why do many pundits seem surprised by Radovan Karadzic’s rejection of the Bosnian
peace plan? Why are they now characterizing the Serb leaders as psychopaths and
demagogues? Every Serbian action, starting with the attack on Slovenia to the recent
one at Gorazade, was predictable. Their undeviating agenda are not symptoms of
madness, but reflect an all-too-sane calculating logic.
Before any offensive campaign, the indigenous Serbians are forewarned to leave.
Following incessant, coordinated tank and artillery bombardment, most of the terrified
non-Serb population flees and Serbian irregulars walk in. Those remaining non-Serbs
are beaten, murdered, and raped—wishing they had fled with the first wave. Thus, the
Serbs grab more territory that is now “ethnically pure.”
Separating the UN’s rhetoric from what is happening “on the ground,” the U.N. has
been in complicity with the Serbs. Jean-Claude Concoloto, head liaison officer for U.N.
refugees, admitted,”... the U.N. were not only creating refugees but becoming a
partner in Serbia’s ‘ethnic cleansing’. Jeane Kirkpatrick was correct when she stated:
“the West responds to the Serbian carnage only in ways that are acceptable to the
Serbs.”
Despite the West’s self-aggrandizement that followed the establishment of a “no
weapons zone” around Sarajevo, it was only a partial withdrawal. After Canadian U.N.
troops found a great number of tanks and military ordnance within the 20-kilometer
zone, Lt. Gen. Michael Rose’s statement, “the guns were not aimed at Sarajevo,” must
have given great comfort to the Sarajevans. The ordnance that was removed was
redeployed to other areas in Bosnia.
For 10 days preceding the Serbs’ destruction of Gorazde, there have been intensive
tank and artillery shelling. The U.N., however, labeled the attack as “tactical” and “not
serious.” NATO’s dud bombing did not intimidate the Serbs.
The U.N. showed no reluctance in sacrificing the 65,000 Muslims of Gorazde to insure
the safety of fewer than 200 “peace-keepers” the Serbs held hostage. In the eyes of
the U.N., it was a fair trade. And the Bosnian crisis entered a new phase.
It will accelerate the Serbs resolve to take the Muslim enclaves of Srebrenica and
Zepa. Once these cities fall, they will press that Sarajevo become an ethnically divided
city. Then and only then, will the Bosnian Serbs initiate armistice. Yet, the Bush and
Clinton administrations caricatured the aggressors and victims alike as “warring sides”
and only “when they tired of killing each other” peace will be accomplished. But this
peace, under Serbian terms, will only salve the West’s consciences
Aside from the West playing and losing the one-sided game of “I dare you, I double
dare you” with the Serbs, the seminal factor that will lead to the Serbian victory was
the West imposing the arms embargo on the victims. Shortly before the Yugoslav Army
evacuated from Bosnia, it left behind 80 percent of its weaponry to the Bosnian
Serbs—after the Bosnian Muslims naively had turned in their weapons to the same
forces. The flow of supplies from Belgrade was never compromised.
From the start of the conflict to the present, the only option is to lift the arms embargo.
Now that Karadzic is threatening to escalate the war, the arms embargo issue
becomes more meaningful. President Clinton’s foreign fallacy, coupled with the
inordinate pressure he exerted on the Senate to vote against unilaterally lifting the
Bosnian arms embargo, posits Clinton into a moral equivalence with the Serbs.
It will be interesting to see how the leader of a liberal wing of the Democratic Party
reacts. Congressman Frank McCloskey was the first person in our government to
articulate the situation in former Yugoslavia objectively. He is aware, despite the
smoke and mirrors, that everything is still being orchestrated from Belgrade.
The Serbs forte, manipulating propaganda, an art form communism made into a
science, surpassed even Russia’s. Long before any weapon was fired in anger in
former Yugoslavia, Slobodan Milosevic rekindled dormant nationalism to justify future
Serbian actions after he mounted a disinformation campaign based on who did what to
whom and when.
But the coup of Serbian disinformation is the West’s acceptance of the great lie of
“ancient ethnic rivalry.” By citing those three little words, both U.S. presidents, as well
as every secretary of state since the conflict started, inexorably confused the issue
and limited debate. To Americans, it implied the futility of involvement and
imperviousness to outside intervention.
Unanswered, real or perceived, injustices are the root of future conflict. For any
healing process to occur, those responsible for committing crimes against humanity
must be brought to justice.
It is ironic that more State Department career diplomats have resigned over our policy
in Bosnia then during the long protracted Vietnam War. Despite the palace upheaval
taking place at the State Department, the policy has remained same as it was under
the Bush administration. And we know where that has led us.
=====================================================
The American Croatian Review December 1994
Arcadia, California
The West’s Moral Equivalency with the Serbs
President Clinton’s October 15th deadline to the Bosnian Serbs came and went
without comment. Apparently, Clinton feels the “will and conscience of the
international community” has not been “defiled” enough to use military force that he so
clearly enunciated in his inaugural address.
Instead, Clinton opted to dance to the Contact Group’s tune of continuing the arms
embargo, even though it is contrary to the wish of the majority in the American
Congress.
After deviating from a just peace to just any peace, the Contact Group, comprised of
France, England, and Russia, gave up all pretense of honoring legal and moral
obligations that came with recognizing the sovereignty of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Interestingly, these are the same countries that asked United States for the tools to
stop the fascist juggernaut during World War II, but deny the same to Bosnia. The
Contact Group, added a new dimension to the Vance-Owen Plan. Aside from
segregating the Muslims into widely separated ghettos, they shamelessly want to
merge the territory they seized in Croatia and Bosnia to be contiguous with Serbia and
place Sarajevo and Mostar under United Nations control. Paradoxically, they eased
sanctions on Serbia at a time the Serbs escalated ethnic cleansing.
Since the onset of hostilities, after separating rhetoric from what has happened on the
ground, almost every Western gesture abetted the Serbian agenda. Lord David Owen
and Cyrus Vance, ingenuously fuelled the conflict and provided the rift between the
Serbs and Muslims with a Machiavellian stroke. They bypassed Stjepan Kljuic, an
elected Bosnian Croat, who espoused an indivisible Bosnia, with Mate Boban, a
politician with no legitimacy that epitomized a Croatian Bosnia merger with Croatia.
When the Yugoslav army “withdrew” from Bosnia in May 1992, it left behind 85% of its
troops and equipment to the Bosnian Serbs. The West smugly accepted this gesture
as a victory of their negotiating.
The West consistently responded to the Serbian carnage in ways acceptable to the
Serbs. The U.N. ignored its own resolution 836 - which reaffirms full sovereignty,
territorial integrity in recognizing pre-existing borders, and mandates those displaced
to return to their homes in peace. Nor did they chastise Russia’s flaunting the
sanctions imposed on Yugoslavia.
According to James Defence Weekly, Russia exported $4 billion of military ordinance
to Yugoslavia in 1992. In January, 1993, Russia agreed to sell T55 tanks, anti-aircraft
missiles and anti-missile missiles that have the capability of destroying targets 375
miles away.
The U.N., masters at flexibility in interpreting deadlines, always gave the benefit of the
doubt to the Serbs that showed nothing but contempt for Security Council resolutions,
NATO intervention, and world opinion. It is not surprising that the Serbs ignored every
accord, since Western responses signaled that there would be no intervention.
After the media started casting Serbian in villainous role, the U.S. had Milan Panic
appointed president of Yugoslavia to blunt and relieve the pressure on Serbia. During
Panic’s tenure, Serb aggression and ethnic cleansing increased; they captured more
territory; its airforce flew with impunity; and the concentration camps operated without
abatement. Apparently, Panich never confronted Milosevic about the atrocities.
In the last days of Bush’s administration, Vance secured a promise from Secretary of
State Eagleburger not to allow Bosnia’s President Alija Izetbegovic to meet with the
Bush administration to present his case. Only after the gentleman’s agreement
became known publicly, Eagleburger allowed the meeting to take place.
General Lewis Mackenzie, while serving as the highest ranking U.N. officer in Bosnia,
vehemently opposed flying humanitarian aid into Sarajevo’s airport and France’s
President Francois Mitterand visit to the Bosnian capital. McKenzie persistently
berated the Croatians and the Moslems for defending themselves and wanting to take
back their homes. Later, he was accused by the Bosnian government of sexually
exploiting Moslem women prisoners brought to his quarters. When he espoused
opinions to Congress, the media, and think tanks, he disingenuously never mentioned
that he was on the payroll of SerbNet, a Serbian lobbying firm.
So much for honor!
When the initial French contingency of troops arrived in Sarajevo they were fired
upon. Without a scintilla of evidence, the French commander scathingly accused the
Muslims. Later investigation, however, revealed that the Serbs were to blame. While
under protection of the same U.N. troops in the U.N. “protected” zone, Hakija Turajlic,
Bosnia’s Deputy Premier, was brutally murdered by the Serbs. In another example of
U.N. cooperating with Serbian ideals, Jean-Claude Concoloto, Head Liaison Officer
for U.N. Refugees said: “The U.N. were not only creating refugees but becoming a
partner in Serbia’s ethnic cleansing. “
Despite fulfilling every criterion of defining genocide, Washington has strenuously
avoided the word. The West has elected to treat genocide with the same standard
applied to Stalin’s murdering over 20 million Russians, Poles, Balts, and others. It too,
with time, will be questioned if it really happened. Hitler and Stalin used identical
methods—massacre and concentration camps—Stalin managed to kill twice as many.
Yet, Stalin sat at the negotiating table as man of honor in much the same way those
responsible for the same sort of crimes in Bosnia now sit.
The West should not be surprised when the next generation—if there is one—become
terrorist. Seeded by the West’s failure, and despite the Bosnian Muslims were the
most secularized in the Muslim world, the ghettos may become fertile ground for
instilling fundamentalism. The Muslims are painfully aware that the West’s concern for
human rights is mere verbiage. The West, while berating Muslims to respect
minorities, shamelessly refused to protect the largest Muslim community in Europe. If
Christians were facing annihilation, we know in our hearts how we would react. But
Muslims are not really are not our sort of people.
The Muslim children surviving in the twilight zone, forgotten by the rest of world, will
not forget the 250,000 dead. Nor will they forget how those in the West watched as
their fathers were maimed or killed and their mothers and sisters were raped. If history
teaches us anything, a settlement based on deeply felt injustices is by no means a
settlement; rather, it is the source of even bigger and wider conflict. Victims suffer, but
never from amnesia.
=====================================================
THE ZAJEDNICAR
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania January 11, 1995
Contact Group’s Moral Equivalency With The Serbs
Now that Bihac is no longer a threat to Serbian security, the Contact Group rewarded
the Bosnian Serbs the right to join into a federation with Yugoslavia. Their blessing in
establishing a Greater Serbia is an effort to appease the Serbs. Clearly, the Contact
Group has not read the Serbs’ Mein Kampf, The Memorandum. Only two items remain
to fully realize the Memorandum’s thesis - merging the Serb held territories in Croatia
to Serbia and access to the Adriatic. Inexorably, an attempt will be made with the
Contact Group’s complicity.
The Croatian coast already is within striking distance. When the Croats refuse to bow
to the Contact Group’s diplomatic pressure to actualize Serbian aspirations, the same
scenario will be played as it had in Bosnia. However, in defending their territory, the
Croats will ingeniously be labeled aggressors.
The Contact Group self-righteously will punish the “aggressors.” To rehabilitate a
reputation it had lost in the Bosnian debacle, NATO will respond with verve. Instead of
duds, real bombs will be used. The targets will be functioning ordnance and not scrap
heaps. And the Croats will not have the U.N. to forewarn them.
Now that the Contact Group has formally acknowledged Greater Serbia, the legitimate
Bosnian government has been dealt a Kevorkianesque solution. It will be much easier
to keep the Muslims in widely separated ghettos and place Sarajevo and Mostar
under United Nations control. Hypocritically, the Contact Group eased sanctions on
Serbia at a time the Serbs escalated ethnic cleansing.
After deviating from a just peace to just any peace, the Contact Group gave up all
pretense of honoring legal and moral obligations that came with recognizing the
sovereignty of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Interestingly, three of the countries in the Group;
France, England, and Russia asked fourth one, the United States, for the tools to stop
the Fascist juggernaut during World War II, but denied the same to Bosnia.
The Contact Group was aghast that the Muslims actually took back territory held by
the Serbs. As long as the causalities and refugees were limited to the non-Serbs it
was acceptable. When the Serbs became statistics, Lt. General Michael Rose
threatened real air strikes if it happens again.
The State Department’s worst fear - to obey Congress’s mandate rather than France’s
and England’s - almost came to realization. However, Secretary of State, Warren
Christopher, knew the Congress’ resolution was moot when he promised the allies the
U.S. would not break the U.N. arms embargo. To placate Congress, the administration
withdrew our three ships from the international blockade in the Adriatic. This was a
variation on the spin, since our presence there had little effect anyway. During the 17
months the blockade was in force, the 19 allied ships found only three, out of 42,000
vessels challenged, carried arms.
The West’s self aggrandizement after the massive NATO air armada attack that
resulted in five, easily repairable, craters at Udbina’s airfield was short lived. The raid
left intact ammunition dumps and fuel stores that are used against Bihac. The reason
given why the raid was not decisive is the U.N. wanted to “send a message” to the
Serbs. Just what message they wish to convey is unclear.
Although Bihac is a “UN protected zone,” the U.N. will buy the Serbs’ justification to
hammer Bihac as a defensive maneuver and the Bosnian casualties were
exaggerated, as they did at Gorazde.
Believing the smoke and mirrors that Slobodan Milosevic abdicated his influence is the
height of naiveté. For reasons that are unclear, since early November, the State
Department has initiated a campaign to whitewash Milosevic. They projected images
that Milosevic does not control events outside of Serbia and there are three distinct
groups of Serbs: Croatian, Bosnian and Serbian - as if there were different people.
This ethnic revisionism spin is reminiscent of Secretary of State Lawrence
Eagleburger’s days at the State Department. Yet, when there is active negotiation,
Belgrade continues in the key role.
Once the objectives annunciated in The Memorandum are attained, Milosevic will
declare the war is over. His reward—the Nobel Peace Prize.
Jerry Blaskovich, M.D.
=======================================================
THE ZAJEDNICAR April 5, 1995
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Quo Vadis, Christopher?
The spin has begun. After Croatia announced it will not renew the U.N. and
peacekeepers (UNPROFOR) mandate, Secretary of State Warren Christopher started
to weave a web of deceit that was reminiscent of his predecessor, Lawrence
Eagleburger.
More criticism was directed against Croatia following its announcement that had been
toward the Serbs during their four years of rampage. Christopher, the master of
understatement, who labeled the Serb genocidal acts as “naughty,” sharply rebuked
and warned Croatia’s President Franjo Tudjman, “will be sorry.”
The media’s frenzy, orchestrated by the State Department, never mentioned the
seminal reason for UNPROFOR’s presence was to implement Cyrus Vance’s peace
plan. After the Serbs had rescinded some 50-peace agreements with Croatia, the plan
was accepted. Among its provisions called for returning the displaced persons to their
homes, disarming the Serbs paramilitary rebels, and Croatia’s regaining sovereignty
over its territory. But after three years of U.N. inertia, not one of these stipulations was
realized.
Earlier this year, Boutrous-Boutrous Ghali, U.N. Secretary General, admitted to the
Security Council that UNPR0FOR was in no position to discharge its responsibility in
Croatia and its continued presence contributes to the stalemate.
The media shrilly castigated Croatia as upsetting the peace. Just whose peace they
were talking about is unclear. Certainly not the Croatians! They are subjected to
almost daily shelling from Serb artillery. Zagreb, Croatia’s capital is a mere 30 miles
from the front lines. The Serb ethnic cleansing continues unabated—all under the
watchful eye of UNPR0FOR.
The only group that enjoys peace are the Serbs that occupy one-third of Croatian
territory. Thus far, the Serbs in Croatia have not been part of the war’s statistics.
Rather than printing stories about Croatian victims that desire to return to homes the
Serbs confiscated, the media laments how the Serbs will be inconvenienced if the
Croats attempt to take back their territory.
The Serbs in Croatia are crossing the borders of Bosnia without impunity to fight in
Bihac. When Bihac falls, aside from the dire consequence for Croatia’s security, it will
realize the Bosnia Serbs ambition to join into Greater Serbia. Contrary to Strobe
Talbott’s statement that the United States will not accept the concept of Greater
Serbia, the Contact Group, led by the British, French and Russians, with the United
States and Germany in the role of camp followers, has all but de facto recognized
Greater Serbia as fiat accompli.
Aside from caring for displaced Croatians, Croatia has been inundated by Bosnian
refugees. To place only the Muslims that found refuge in Croatia into perspective,
Peter Galbraith, America’s ambassador to Croatia, said it would be equivalent to
United States taking 30 million people.
One of the carrots Tudjman accepted to extend the U.N.’s mandate, stationing
UNPROFOR on the borders between Bosnia and Croatia is nebulous, since it is
predicated on the goodwill of the Serbs. In the long term, America has placed Tudjman
in a precarious position. He must justify his waffling to parliament, who was never
noted to agree about anything, yet overwhelmingly endorsed his original decision. But
his greatest pressure will come from increasingly vocal hawks in the government.
However, continuing the status quo, Croatian victims and casualties mount; the
economy is faltering because the wartime readiness and financial drain caused by
caring for the enormous number of refugees
Originally, the U.N. set up its headquarters in Sarajevo to monitor the slaughter in
Croatia and keep out of harms way. They moved to Zagreb when the conflict erupted
in Bosnia. Now that the Serbs will be target Zagreb, it will be in everybody’s interest
for the U.N. to move to Belgrade. Besides not being subjected to danger there, they
would be able to get their orders directly—thus, avoiding the middleman.
===================================================
American-Croatian Review November, 1995
A Heroine of the Killing Fields of Bosnia
Now that the conflict in former Yugoslavia is winding down, it is appropriate to give the
horrendous statistics a human face. Fadila Zecic’s story is not unique, but is typical for
survivors of ethnic cleansing I’ve interviewed during eight fact-finding missions to the
devastated areas. Fadila’s terror started when Serb forces instituted their genocide in
the northern Bosnian town of Brcko. And even in the relative security of Paris, where
she found refuge, after she was exchanged “as a prisoner of war,” the demonic acts
she witnessed continue to torment her sleep as nightmares and as flashbacks while
awake.
At precisely 5:00 A.M. on April 30, 1992, after the Serbs deliberately disabled a vehicle
on Savski Most, one of two bridges over the Sava River that connected Bosnia with
Croatia, the resultant bottleneck of vehicles, including busses loaded with at least 150
commuters, were blown to smithereens. Following the explosions, which destroyed
both bridges, the Serbs placed barricades at strategic locations in the town and
systematically set out to destroy the one hundred or so houses around the bridges.
For the next three days and three nights there was an orgy of looting of non-Serbs
homes. A continuous stream of trucks and cars, predominantly with Belgrade
registrations, filled with booty, returned to Serbia to sell on Belgrade’s thriving black
market. Typically, following every Serbian offensive campaign, Serbs from Serbia
would come to conquered Bosnian or Croatian areas by the busloads and ransack
houses as on a shopping spree. On the fourth day the Serbs placed a large poster of
Tito, with a hand drawn beard, on the warehouse door in the port area called Lucko.
The warehouse became one of the Serbs’ most lethal slaughterhouses.
Another characteristic of every Serbian military campaign, the Serbs roundup and kill
the intellectuals-physicians, lawyers, teachers-or any one with potential in
organizational skills. Once they were no longer a threat, the Serbs would start their
systematic murdering frenzy. Several thousand Croats and Muslims were killed in two
days in Brcko. What was the left in Brcko were women and pensioners; all youths and
able-bodied males ultimately disappeared.
The prewar town of Brcko, an ancient Roman settlement situated on the Sava River,
with its picturesque blend of Turkish and Austrian architectural styles, was a
microcosm of ethnicity in Bosnia. Brcko, and its surrounding area, had 75,000
inhabitants- mostly Moslems and Croats and only 15 percent Serbs; the town had
three Mosques, and one of each: Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and 7th Day Adventist
churches. Even after hearing reports that Serbs were committing atrocities in other
parts of Bosnia and despite the town teemed with thousands of refugees that had fled
from the ethic cleansing at Foca, the citizens naively clung to the belief that Brcko
would be spared. Most of the Muslims in Bosnia believed in the concept of
Yugoslavia, whereas the Serbs hid behind the word. Brcko’s mayor erroneously called
the town an “oasis of peace.” Instead it was host to the seven furies.
Fadila lived in the area called Srbski Varos. A haut monde couturier of renown, her
creations were used extensively in the movie industry in former Yugoslavia. She felt
she was spared the tribulations other Muslim women were subjected to because the
Chetniks feared reprisals from her husband and brother-both well known to the
Chetnik forces. Before the war, her husband was a policeman but is now a
Commandant in a Bosnian army unit. He remains in Bosnia to defend what is left of
Bosnian territory. Her brother was a Commandant in the 108th brigade of the Bosnian
army. He, as well as 319 children in his charge was massacred during a Serbian tank
attack. However, what troubles Fadila most is her 19-year-old son, killed by a
grenade, but was “never buried.” Throughout the interviews she reiterated not
knowing the whereabouts of his remains was the bane of her existence.
Fadila’s house was strategically located. From her window she could observe all the
activities of Lucko, as well as the warehouse and yard housing the “prisoners.” She
looked down on the yard where the nightly slaughters took place.
Isak Gasi’s, one of the rare survivors of Brcko’s slaughterhouse, testimony given to
war crimes investigators from Washington, confirmed many of Fadila’s statements.
Fadila, however, had almost nightly witnessed the atrocities.
ike clockwork, the killings started at 11:00 P.M. and finished at 3:00 A.M. The main
supervisor was Monika Simonovic-a prostitute turned Chetnik. The favorite tool, she,
as well as others used, were to break the necks of glass bottles and proceed to gouge
the prisoners genitals and abdomens. She also participated in burning prisoners.
Fadila recognized most of perpetrators were local Serbs. Preamble to the slaughter
would begin with the Serbian songs the prisoners were forced to sing. Ending with:
“Tko kaze da je Srebija mala-tri puta rat-tri puta pobednik,” (Who said Serbia is small,
two times war, three times victors) then a shout. “Tisina!”(silence) Then the killings
commenced. In the mornings, Fadila saw body parts hanging from trucks leaving the
camps-many young people’s hair turned white overnight.
The rapes and killings she witnessed were under the direction of Zoran Pejic, the
head Chetnik in Lucko. All the perpetrators were in uniform, displaying the Red Star of
the Yugoslav army on their hats. The Chetnik headquarters was the Serbian Orthodox
Church. The “Glavna rijec” (main orders) came from Pop (Father) Slavko. On August
3rd all mosques were mined and destroyed. Although the Catholic Church was mined,
it was not destroyed because it was located too near the “Skladiste” a military storage
facility. All Catholic, Jewish and Muslim cemeteries were bulldozed out of existence.
The destruction of religious structures and graves, attempts to erase signs of a culture
and a people, were examples of barbarisms at its most gross.
In her darkest hour of hopelessness, after learning about the deaths of her son and
brother and witnessing the human mayhem being committed under her very nose, she
turned toward God. She was shocked to learn that she “did not know how to pray.”
The most often heard expression in Bosnia “Thank God” is usually uttered by those
who wore irreligious. Although Fadila professed to being a Muslim, she typified the
attitude of the overwhelming majority of the Muslims in Bosnia-identifying with the
Turkish customs but ignorant of Muslim theology. The “Muslims” atitude toward “their”
religion contradicts Serbs’ justification for war was to stem Muslim fundamentalism.
As a product of communism and secularism, Fadila’s only exposure to “Religion” was
what she witnessed from Catholic friends. She nonetheless sought out and got
“religious instruction” from a Catholic friend who had some knowledge of Islam—as
she knew it. In what was probably an admixture of Catholicism and Islamic mysticism,
using 110 peas as beads, she recited over and over “God watch over me.” On
Tuesdays, she fasted and meditated on a picture of St. Anthony given by a Catholic
friend. The prayers pulled her on her depths of despair and began to feel invincible.
She felt a glass dome enveloped and protected her home.
A married couple Fadila took in for forty days- the husband, a Croat had to witness the
gang rape of his wife, a Muslim, then he was hanged. Fadila had to move 15 times to
keep one step ahead of the terrorism inflicted by those who had been her neighbors.
Once when she had gone into hiding, her Serb neighbors opened the gas jet of her
stove. On her return they assumed she would light a match, since there was no
electricity, and cause a massive explosion. Gas asked in that area is odorless. Only a
strong sense of survival averted disaster.
Fadila noted numerous vehicles with Belgrade registrations bringing people who
moved into homes whose previous owners had disappeared without a trace. Most of
the cited events occurred in the presence of UNPROFOR forces. Apparently
UNPROFOR’s only functions were carousing, womanizing, and drinking. The Hotel
Golub, where they were billeted, pervaded with a holiday like atmosphere.
When Fadila received word that she was to be exchanged as a “prisoner of war” she
was given one-hour notice. In probable deference to her status she was allowed the
luxury of a small sack. Brazenly, she took some jewelry. Miraculously it escaped
notice. Normally “prisoners” were stripped and given tattered rags to wear. Aside from
humiliating the prisoners, it enabled guards to ransack the clothing for valuables that
may have been sewn in the lining.
The only satisfaction Fadila had during her captivity was her knowing that information,
such as minefields locations, she relayed to her brother saved
Will she go back to Brcko if peace is declared? And typical of all Muslims I interviewed
the answer is-YES! They all had the forgive but never, never forget attitude. As to
living next door to their known tormentors-NO! But surprisingly few said they would
seek revenge.
====================================================
International Journal of Dermatology
Vol. 14, No. 12
December 12, 1995
A Medical Odyssey To Dante’s Inferno—Bosnia
As American physicians agonized over what creature comforts Clinton’s health plan
will offer their patients, Bosnian physicians are resorting to washing bandages
removed from the dead to use on the living. Major trauma is managed under
unimaginable difficult conditions, often without anesthesia, but with caring, skilled
hands. Disposable items, which we take for granted, are reused ad infinitum. Is spite
of the frustrations, the physicians never seem to lose compassion and respect for
human life.
It is ironic that the 20th century was ushered in by a war that started in Sarajevo and
will exit in a war that is destroying Sarajevo. Aside from the staggering human toll, the
devastation has severely taxed the delivery of health care. The Serbs’ first targets in
Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina were medical facilities, so that basements, bunkers
and warrens created from destroyed buildings, became “new” medical centers,
reducing physicians and patients to a mole-like existence. Above ground they are
targets for snipers.
A team of American physicians was sent to the former Yugoslavia to evaluate the
medical needs.(1) Serbia and Montenegro were excluded because nothing was
damaged there and nobody has been wounded or lost a life in those republics.
\
The odyssey began in Zagreb, Croatia’s capital. Except for military uniformed men and
women in the streets, cosmopolitan Zagreb, which its Viennese-style architecture,
gave no hint that the front line is only 30 miles away.(2) But its hospital wards, filled
with civilians without extremities, with gaping visceral wounds, and blinded from
shrapnel, paint a picture of a medical infrastructure that has been stretched to the
breaking point.(3)
When the conflict was limited to Croatia, the Serbs destroyed a large number of
medical facilities. Destruction of 10 major hospitals in a country the size of Maryland
has had a devastating effect. The population not killed by Serbs’ ethnic cleansing
program contributed to hundreds of thousands of displaced persons, severely
straining the remaining medical facilities. But when the Serb forces unleashed their
attack on Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia became inundated with an enormous influx of
refugees—many suffering from major trauma—further jeopardizing an already fragile
medical-ecological system.
Leaving Zagreb, with its ultra-sophisticated medical facilities, the architectural
landscape increasingly took on an all-pervading gray monochromatic surrealism that
parallels the facilities where patients receive treatment.
A scant 100 miles away, but a circuitous six-hour drive skirting the Hungarian border,
around military barricades and checkpoints to avoid the battle lines and through
villages reduced to little more than rubble, lays the city of Osijek. Osijek’s General
Hospital, although sustaining damage to 80 percent of the building, continues to
function. From the onset of the conflict, all medical and surgical care has been
conducted in a maze of tunnels beneath the hospital.
The Yugoslav army (JNA) violated a number of provisions of the international laws of
war. During a one 3-day period, the hospital was hit 94 times by mortars, howitzers,
rockets, and countless by small weapons. The shelling originated from the JNA
garrison situated 50 meters from the hospital, precluding that the barrage was caused
by chance or accidentally.
The area around Osijek has borne the brunt of the Serbian onslaught in Croatia and
was a scene of the greatest atrocities. What’s happened in Vukovar and Vocin are
prime examples.
After Vukovar fell, many of the hospital’s staff was taken as “prisoners of war.” Despite
guarantees given by Yugoslav officers that the patients left behind in the hospital will
be protected according to the Geneva Conventions, the patients were evacuated and
summarily executed. Dr. Clyde Snow, an American forensic anthropologist,
subsequently confirmed reports that a mass grave outside of Vukovar contained
bodies of the patients taken from the hospital.
In Vocin, a Croatian village, 43 villagers were found massacred. Some were bond with
chains and burned. Tissue analysis revealed that they were still living when burned.
Others had skulls split open or chain sawed while alive. Since the slaughter in Vocin
was forensically the most extensively documented atrocity of the conflict, it will play a
prominent role in any future war crimes tribunal.
In Slavonski Brod, the normal population of 40,000 teemed with 60,000 Bosnian
refugees. Driving past buildings pockmarked from projectile hits, a death pall hangs
over the city. The hospital, surrounded by sandbags, functioned under shelling and air
attacks. Of the 100 patients it admitted daily, 95% were shrapnel related.
One day after we left Slavonski Brod, the sport stadium where approximately 6,000
refugees were billeted, was shelled by Serbian 155 mm artillery, leaving many dead
and an extremely large number of wounded. There is no doubt that the refugees were
specifically targeted since an airplane had circled the area a number of times that day.
Shortly after we left, Bosanski Brod, which is just across the river, fell. The fate of the
refugees is not known.
The material damage is incalculable, but nothing in comparison to the human
suffering. The countless haggard Bosnian refugees trying to cross into Croatia
emanated despair. The roads were dense with people fleeing; many packed like
sardines in the back of trucks and clinging to the roofs of tractors.
All that’s left in the town centers of Mostar and Turanj are grotesquely shattered
heaps of rubble. Not one building is considered salvageable. Broken glass from
windows blown out by mortars lie everywhere. Only ghosts of the former residents
walk among the chunks of asphalt ripped out of the ground were shells landed. The
surrealistic landscapes are like scenes from Dante’s Inferno.
Mostar’s city park, in a peaceful arbor setting, is now a cemetery. Unable to bury their
dead in the town cemetery because of Serbian snipers, the park has taken over this
function. To see nothing but fresh graves bearing crescents or crosses, all bearing
dates ending in 1992 to 1994 lends a poignancy to move even the most jaded.
Besides medical facilities, we visited numerous refugee centers. One such center was
Gasinci. A tent and barrack “city,” once a JNA base, now houses approximately 3,000
transient Muslim refugees, mostly women and children. Caring for the population is
one volunteer physician and several ancillary personnel. The clinic doors remain open
as long as there are people seeking help.
What impressed the American team about the refugee centers were the almost normal
mortality rates, low infection morbidity and the lack of epidemics; a reflection of good
hygienic conditions, nourishment and selfless medical management.
We have been inundated with TV images of the human mayhem taking place in
Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. The bread lines and the marketplace slaughters of
Sarajevo have been indelibly etched into our consciousness. How do we react? We
wring our hands a little, than go on with our lives. Physicians on the scene, however,
heed the crying and suffering of the wounded. When this all over, the medical
personnel will emerge as the only heroes of the conflict.
Report by Jerry Blaskovich, M.D.
Selca, Brac, Croatia
References
The team was comprised of the author, Jerry Blaskovich; Thomas Durant, Assistant
Director of Massachusetts General Hospital; and David A. Brandt, Attending
Physician, John Hopkins Hospital. Drs. Durant and Brandt are widely experienced in
evaluating refugee problems.
Glavina K., Tucak A.,Janosi K, et al. Deliberate military destruction in the city of
Osijek. Croatian Medical Journal 1992; 33 (War Issue): pp 61-69.
In early May 1995, the Serbs launched projectiles on Zagreb and a number of other
Croatian towns. Although cluster bombs are internationally banned, no Western
governments chastised nor condemned the Serb’s action. The downtown area of
Zagreb was specifically targeted.
===================================================
The Zajednicar, June 11, 1997:
Two Strikes Against Democracy
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA - Although Croatia’s regional elections of April took place
without a hitch, and, more importantly, were above board, the establishment media,
who always questioned Croatia’s legitimacy, persist in demonizing Croatia. Much to
their chagrin, the media’s hatchet job of Tudjman and his HDZ Party, a thinly veiled
attempt to influence the election, didn’t sway Croatia’s voters.
”Fascists,” the Communists favorite buzz word used to cast aspersions on real or
imagined enemies, appeared ad nauseum in headlines and editorial pages about
Croatia. Rather than being fascists, most Croatian politicians, incumbents and
opposition, are dyed-in-wool Bolsheviks and many fought the Nazis during World War
II.
Not satisfied with labeling the Croatian state “fascist”, the New York Times took its
crusade one step further when it commented, dblquote Croatia’s mainstream
politicians were even more dangerous than the neo-Nazis.” Doubtless, the media’s
character assassination will intensify prior to Croatia’s upcoming presidential elections
in June.
The establishment media was enamored with former Yugoslavia and what it stood for -
especially its politics. Many reporters and pundits were products of an era that denied
the realities and excesses of communism. While glamorizing Yugoslavia, they
conveniently ignored human rights organizations that identified Yugoslavia as the
leader in abuses. Yugoslavia had more political prisoners than all Eastern Bloc
countries combined. The media apparently doesn’t realize that they’ve been criticizing
adherents of an ideology they themselves held dear.
Soon after Croatia made self-determination overtures, every Croatian nuance was
scrutinized with microscopic diligence while its peccadilloes were telescoped. When t
he Yugoslav Army attacked poorly armed Croatian civilians, the media, rather than
questioning the issues, projected Yugoslavia’s agenda. The subsequent wholesale
mayhem was perceived as something the Croatians deserved.
Croatia recently was characterized as hindering the Dayton Accords. The turnabout of
the U.S.’s once cozy relationship toward Croatia may be retaliatory to Croatia’s
purchasing airplanes from Airbus instead of Boeing.
During the past six years there hasn’t been media account mentioning Croatia in a
positive light. Never mind that Croatia took care of 690,000 refugees and kept the
morbidity and mortality rates identical to the native population. Of those who found
refuge in Croatia, 280,000 were Bosnian Muslims. U.S. Ambassador to Croatia, Peter
Galbraith, although one of Croatia’s harshest critics, put the number of Bosnian
Muslim refugees in Croatia in perspective “...would be equivalent to the U.S. taking in
30,000,000 refugees.” The lion’s share of the maintenance cost is borne by Croatia’s
citizens, who can ill-afford it. Following Croatia’s regaining the Krajina region in 1995,
the media focused on the Serb exodus. The Serbs emigrated voluntarily or ordered by
their leaders, and not from fearing the Croats as the media alleged. Although these
Serbs don’t fit U.N. guidelines, the U.N. defined them as refugees.
A large number of Serbs did flee because of fear. Many moved into homes whose non-
Serb owners were displaced or slaughtered in 1991; others had participated in
atrocities, often before witnesses - a favorite method to speed up ethnic cleansing.
Since some of the owners and witnesses were
sure to return, the perpetrators absconded.
The media resoundingly criticized Croatia for allegedly sabotaging the Serbs’ return,
but remain silent on the Serbs’ total non-compliance in allowing non-Serb refugees to
return to areas under their control. The only stipulations Croatia’s government
imposed on resettlement were if one had committed war crimes or raised arms against
Croatia. But the media continues hastising Croatia for maltreatment of Serbs, despite
international human rights organizations refuting those claims. Meanwhile, U.N.
representatives tolerate no discussion about resettling the 200,000 displaced
Croatians who remain in limbo after having fled over six years ago from real terror.
Instead of castigating the young democracy, the media should, at the very least,
adhere to the basic tenet of journalism: objectivity.
Dr. Jerry Blaskovich
======================================================
American Croatian Review (June 1998 - Year V, No.1 & 2)
An abbreviated form of this same article was published in the June, 8, 1998 INSIGHT
Magazine as a Letter to the Editor.
Kosovo! Welcome to the Club
By Jerry Blaskovich, MD, MA
Now that Kosovo has joined Croatia and Bosnia in that rather dubious distinction of
membership in the Serbian killing fields pantheon, the boldest step the State
Department could come up with was to freeze foreign investments in Yugoslavia. If
history is any indication, fluffy sanctions only unifies the Serbs and increases their
resolve. Apparently, in the words of that great American philosopher Yogi Berra: “It’s
deja vu all over again.”
The pedestrian public is generally not aware that the non-Serbs in Kosovo have lived
under martial law since 1989. All human rights are denied them, including hospital
admissions and attending schools. After Albanian guerillas ambushed four Serbian
policemen in February, the Serb military, ordered by Slobodan Milosevic, slaughtered
80 villagers—women, children and the elderly—burying them in a mass grave, Nazi
style.
Although the State Department, which heretofore were mute about the rampant human
rights violations, this incident unequivocally erased its carefully drawn line in the sand.
Yet, Robert Gelbard, Washington’s special envoy to Belgrade, saw fit to characterize
the Albanians as terrorists. Meanwhile, the Serb brutality has been intensifying daily.
Gelbard’s declaration is not surprising, since he was following the State Department’s
pattern of pacifying genocidal leaders. Two almost identical statements: “The United
States will not interfere in the internal policies” preceded the bloodshed in Iraq and
Yugoslavia and typify this policy.
The one by U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, April Gilaspie, to Saddam Hussein opened the
door for Iraq to attack Kuwait. The other, by James Baker III, in Belgrade, triggered the
deaths of close to 250,000 souls in Croatia and Bosnia.
Lawrence Eagleburger, who succeeded Baker, sabotaged every rational
recommendation to settle the Balkan conflict if it disadvantaged Serbia. His successor,
Warren Christopher, sharpest rebuke to the Serbs, while they were committing war
crimes at its most grotesque, was that they “were naughty.”
Taking Gelbard’s cue, as he did with Baker’s in 1991, Milosevic unleashed his army
on Yugoslavia’s enemies. Despite the U.S.’s expensive political-social engineering on
the leadership in Serbian held Bosnia, no one in the “pro-democratic government”
protested. To the contrary, all Serbs, including our surrogates, rallied around the flag.
The State Department’s accommodation with Yugoslavia dates from the good old days
of Tito. Enamored with former Yugoslavia and what it stood for—especially its
politics—they ignored the Communist regime’s brutal terrorism of its citizens, who
showed no mercy to dissidents, and held more political prisoners than all the Soviet
bloc countries combined.
Perhaps Kosovo is the time and place to reflect on what happened in Croatia and
Bosnia and for the State Department to seriously consider another Berra truism: “We
made too many wrong mistakes.”
======================================================
Peter Klein
Producer, “60 Minutes”
CBS
524 W 57th Street
New York City, New York 10019
August 24, 1999
Dear Mister Klein:
It was, indeed, fortuitous that I found your letter in The New Republic (June 14, 1999).
I want to commend you for being the only mainstream journalist to publicly
acknowledge the media’s failings in the coverage of the conflict in the former
Yugoslavia.
In your response to Stacy Sullivan’s, “Milosevic’s Willing Executioners,” your well
reasoned statements: “… rarely do we [the media] have the courage to put our
thoughts into print. Maybe it’s a fear of blowing our Serbian contacts… [and]
journalists have continually failed to present an accurate analysis…” validated what
most of us out of Washington’s beltway thought were the reasons for the inaccurate
coverage. These inaccuracies were seminal to why the conflict lasted as long as it did.
If the media really rarely had the courage to put their thoughts into print, then
whose thoughts have reporters been putting out over the past ten years? Perhaps
they were the views of the editors’ or the Belgrade apologists at the State Department.
Or perhaps the media view came from the Serbian hired public relations contacts that
reporters were afraid to “blow.”
When the conflict was limited to Croatia, I cannot recall that the media ever used
a legitimate Croatian source who stated that the Croats, Slovenes, or Kosovars may
have had a grievance against Yugoslavia or Serbian hegemony. Was this a matter of
the media not having the contacts or being reluctant to use them? Instead, the
mainstream media relied only on Serbian sources.
If the purpose of journalism is to provide a modicum of objectivity, your profession
failed miserably. Until Kosovo heated up, the media bombarded the public with
Belgrade-spun phrases like: “ancient ethnic rivals,” “all sides equally guilty,” “the
Serbs defended Christendom,” “the Serbs were always allied with the U.S.” Then
there was the political spin helped along by the Belgrade supporters at State, which
held that the Croatian government of the 90s was somehow equivalent to the Nazi
quisling government of the 40s. The media, naively, or perhaps disingenuously,
persistently repeated the half truths and overt lies, and helped to perpetuate Serbian
propaganda.
Then suddenly like a Paulian revelation, the media started refuting the very same
phrases they had spoon fed us for nine years. Although the ‘new’ view that so-called
ethnic cleansing (read genocide) was an evil and central ambition of the Belgrade
government, the media acted as though it was a new discovery. Or maybe the media
had no choice but to say what the State department told them to. To the uninitiated, it
seemed the media relied only on government sources or “experts” who somehow
validated the Serbian agenda.
It was only after the word “genocide” became common currency at State
Department briefings that the mainstream media began using it in public in the Spring
of 1999. In other words, genocide was really allowed to go on for ten years and
intervention only became a viable option when the media stopped using the Serbian
public relations phrase “ethnic cleansing”. It is tragic that intervention didn’t come
earlier. Ten years of Belgrade’s ethnic cleansing produces close to 250,000 dead and
millions of displaced persons and refugees in Croatia, Bosnia and now Kosovo.
I once believed in freedom of the press, but I find it disconcerting and more than
coincidental that the “new” revelations about the Serbs came only after the United
States government quit labeling the KLA terrorists. They came after President Clinton
decided many years too late that Milosevic was responsible for the bloodshed in
Croatia and Bosnia.
In closing, I want to thank you for somewhat helping restore a measure of faith in
the media.
Sincerely,
Jerry N. Blaskovich, M.D.
====================================================
THE NEW GENERATION EDITION OF THE CROATIAN HERALD (Australia) Friday,
25th January, 2000
THE ODYESSY OF CARDINAL STEPINAC’S CAPE
As the images of Kosovo’s fleeing refugees and the news of mass grave sites fade
from memory, we are still haunted by the hard and unanswered questions about who
did what to whom during the 10 year conflict in disintegrating Yugoslavia. Although
few seem aware of it, what the Serbs did in Kosovo was no worse than what they’ve
done in Croatia and in Bosnia, where over a quarter of a million souls perished with far
less notice.
All of the slaughter and destruction were symptomatic of a disease carrier that didn’t
want to die: communism pretending to be Serbian nationalism. Few Western thinkers
can appreciate the evil that communism brought to the world. But even Adolph Hitler’s
tally sheet of murder does not come close to matching the 100 million who were
murdered in the name of communist progress. Certainly communism is a force that
affected more lives detrimentally than any other is during the 20th Century. And
Belgrade based communism was among the most notable in that regard.
According to human rights organizations, it had the distinction of having one of the
worst records among the world’s totalitarian communists, holding more political
prisoners than all the Eastern Bloc countries combined.
After World War II the Communists formed the new government in Yugoslavia. Since
the Party hierarchy perceived the Catholic Church as its arch-nemesis and greatest
threat to the regime, its first order was to set about to control it. Obviously the Church
didn’t cooperate, so the communists systematically persecuted and decimated the
clergy. For example, Yugoslav forces entered the Franciscan Monastery of Siroki
Brijeg, doused fourteen friars with petrol and set them afire. In another example, only
88 priests of Senj’s diocese survived of the 151 that were there before the war. Half
the parishes were left with no clergy.
The anti communist nature of the Church posed the most significant single threat to
the success of communist ideology. So the object of the murders was to destroy as
many priests as directly as possible and try to intimidate others into leaving. The idea
clearly was that if the shepherds were eliminated it would be easier to scatter the
flocks.
But the biggest thorn in the Communist side was Alojzijis Stepinac, the Bishop of
Zagreb. A smear campaign against him had little affect in Croatia, but tragically the
American press bought it, lock-stock- and barrel and published it as gospel. Although
there isn’t a shred of evidence that Stepinac was a collaborator, the propagandists
effectively painted him on the fascist canvas.
Prior to Stepinac’s Beautification, amidst an intensive negative media campaign the
media, including the Catholic press in the U.S., instead of focusing on his goodness,
the half-truths and lies about his role in World War II Croatia were resurrected. No less
a personage than Milovan Diljas, then in the communist hierarchy, admitted in his
book: “He would certainly not have been brought to trial for his conduct in the war...
had he not continued to oppose the new Communist regime.”
When Stepinac published a pastoral letter declaring 273 clergy had been killed, 169
imprisoned and 89 were “missing” since the communist takeover, it was the excuse
the regime was looking for. The authorities tried and sentenced Stepinac. Once
“freed” after sixteen years of imprisonment, the Cardinal was exiled to his home village
and never allowed to preside over his flock from Zagreb. He died in 1960. Rumor has
it—of poison.
It was recently brought to light that Stepinac was buried in a cape that had been
smuggled into Yugoslavia in 1954 by Frances Chilcoat, an American housewife.
The tale of the cape has all the elements of an Eric Ambler novel: an innocent caught
in a web of intrigue—the same exotic cities; Rome, Trieste, Zagreb; clandestine
meetings; a harrowing border crossing; and a refugee who triggered the affair. Ambler,
however, never had a saint as a main character. Truth, indeed, is stranger than fiction.
The odyssey of the cape started soon after the imprisoned Stepinac was named
Cardinal and shortly before Ivan Ivankovic, the refugee, escaped from Yugoslavia in
1947. Communism was at the apogee of its power and imposing its iron rule on
Yugoslavia. One of the first priests killed in the communist Yugoslavia’s campaign
against the Church was Medjugorje’s pastor. Ivan, who was also from Medjugorje,
perceived his life in danger, had no choice but to flee. Medjugorje today is the scene
where the Blessed Mother is appearing.
In retaliation, the authorities killed Ivan’s brother, Martin, and jailed his mother for 3
months. One of his sisters, Sima, also went into hiding. Another sister, Jela, was taken
ill and died soon after she was forced to search for Ivan in the hills. His father was
severely beaten and denied medical attention on the kitchen floor.
After 2 years in hiding, Ivan escaped to Italy, ending up in a refugee camp and was
finally freed when Father Ivan Tomas of the Croatian Radio Program of the Vatican
got him a job at the Croatian College of St. Jerome in Rome. Eventually, with Father
Tomas’ help, Ivan immigrated to America.
The Chilcoat’s in the San Francisco area opened their hearts and home to the
refugee. Treating him as a brother, they were present at one of Ivan’s proudest days—
his swearing in as American citizen.
When Frances Chilcoat was preparing for a trip to Yugoslavia, by way of Rome, Ivan
asked her to look up his spiritual advisor and mentor, Father Tomas. Little did Ivan
realize that simple request would set in motion, an international, potentially dangerous
intrigue.
Once in Rome, Frances met with Father Tomas a number of times. The evening
before she was to leave for Yugoslavia, Father Tomas approached Frances, in what
she thought, a surreptitious manner. He asked her to smuggle the cape of Cardinal
Stepinac, which was awarded by the Pope. Despite the danger, Frances reluctantly
agreed.
Her mission came to an end in a Yugoslav village, when a relative of Frances she was
visiting surprised her by asking about “bringing something from Rome.”
After she produced the package, they took a walk through the pitch-dark village. Out
of the gloom, they were approached by an unknown male, who took the package and
crept off into the night.
Skeptics may weave their own rationale but there are far too many coincidences in the
story of the cape for it to be completely attributable to less than divine intervention.
One incident stands out in particular. While a Yugoslav border guard was fumbling to
open Francis’ baggage, he cut his finger, yelled a few unprintable expletives and gave
up on opening the suitcase. Had he managed to open the clasp he certainly would
have found the cape, and the story would have had a tragic ending.
=======================================================
THE NEW GENERATION EDITION OF THE CROATIAN HERALD (Australia)
3 March 2000
&
The Zajednicar (Pittsburgh) 1 January 2000
CROATIA’S MEDICINE IS MORE THAN READY FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM
by Jerry Blaskovich M.D.
The 22 September 1998 opening of Croatia’s newest medical school in Osijek was an
event all Croatians should be justifiably proud of—regardless what part of the political
spectrum or temperament they may lie. Although the school’s opening was extensively
covered by Croatia’s media, few Croatians in Diaspora are aware of the school’s
existence or significance.
I was honored and fortunate to have been invited to the opening ceremonies of the
Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek School of Medicine, and saw that the
academic seeds planted then had blossomed into a healthy bumper crop of students,
when I visited one year later to be named lector in Dermatolgy.
As a physician, who “has been there-done that,” seeing bleary eyed students
frantically pacing the hallways with opened books for a last minute cramming session
prior to being quizzed by their professors, laboratories buzzing with activity, and the
familiar smells of the anatomy department was like a time warp. The beauty of these
sights, sounds and the savored senses was—everything seemed to be functioning as
a medical school should.
This newest jewel of the academic world could not have had a better setting.
Osijek is a city with a long tradition of intellectual curiosity. It produced two Nobel Prize
winners, which is equal to Switzerland’s output. What makes the coincidence even
more remarkable, the Croatian laureates, Leopold Ruzicka and Vladimir Prelog, not
only had worked in Switzerland; they were also products of the same high school in
Osijek.
The fact that Osijek was able to have a medical school borders on the miraculous,
since not so long ago its very status of remaining a city was in doubt. During the
Serbian led Yugoslav army aggression against Croatia’s independence effort, Osijek
was only second to Vukovar in taking the brunt of the Serb artillery, rocket fire, and air
attacks. One international news agency reported that Yugoslav shells rained on the
city’s center at a rate of one per minute. Its pre war population of 120 thousand shrunk
to 10-17 thousand. Most of those who remained lived a mole-life existence in
underground shelters. It was also a time when many in the Zagreb government had
pessimistically written Osijek off. But the brave fighting spirit of its citizens could not be
denied and the city’s defense prevailed.
Although one of the Serbs’ first targets was the hospital, the doctors and the staff
carried out their tasks with a bravado that defied logic. Patient care was never
compromised, despite the horrendous conditions. Medical and surgical care was
conducted in a maze of tunnels under the hospital, because eighty percent of the
superstructure was destroyed by Serbian weaponry. Not only was the hospital rebuilt,
a new medical school rose like the proverbial phoenix from the ashes.
The school’s inaugural was of such importance that the President of the Republic of
Croatia, Zlatko Matesa; Prof. Dr. Ivica Kostovic, Minister of Sciences and Technology;
Prof. Dr. Zeljko Reiner, Minister of Health, Prof. Dr. Branimir Jaksic, Advisor to
President Franjo Tudjman, as well as the deans of the medical schools of Zagreb,
Rijeka, Split and Mostar attended with other dignitaries.
It is fitting that the first dean named was Prof. Dr. Antun Tucak, for he was driving
force that lead to establishing the school. Against all odds, including political and
economic, Tucak’s personality, behind the scenes pressure and grass roots efforts—
and probably a lot of wining and dining—brought his dream to realization.
The opening of Osijek medical school unquestionably has readied Croatia for the next
millennium, especially if Professor Tucak remains at the helm.
===================================================
SPREMNOST Hrvatski Tjednik (Australia) 23 May 2000
Dr Jerry Blaskovich’s reply to Suzanne Brooks-Pincevic
Suzanne Brook-Pincevic’s [Spremnost (4/18/00)], “ET TU!” Dr. Jerry Blaskovich,”
accuses me of a number of sins against Croatian historical orthodoxy. First, she
suggests that I support “the biggest propaganda lie…” and “the cover-up… of the
NDH and Bleiburg tragedy”. I found her characterizations contemptuous and I think
they deserve a response to keep the unsuspecting from being confounded.
Certainly she confused Spremost’s editors. Even the headline projected that I’m guilty
of treason and treachery. In the context of Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar,” as we all
know, ET Tu!, defines such back stabbing acts. Despite the many blind allegations in
the article, I will respond to only a few because of space limitations. But it takes a lot of
water to wash off a little bit of mud.
Apparently Pincevic’s message was that I dared to trivialize and desecrate Bleiburg
and the NDH. Furthermore, she was particularly miffed that I didn’t make her thesis the
“highlight” of my book, Anatomy of Deceit. But the book was written to reveal truth
rather than satisfy Pincevic.
Its purpose was to deconstruct the rampant disinformation that has been, and
continues, to be spewed against Croatia by the establishment media of the U.S.,
England, and by the American State Department. Anatomy of Deceit‘s focus was to set
the record straight for those who had been brainwashed by those sources, and for
English readers, who, for the most part, haven’t the foggiest idea about the politics, let
alone being able to find it on the map, of the former Yugoslavia.
My chapter 2, the chapter Pincevic holds most notorious, was, by design, included to
give a bird’s eye view of who was who during the formative time of new Croatia. It
wasn’t written for Croatians, because they already know most of the score.
No purpose would’ve been served if I elaborated upon Radic and his colleagues’
murder in the Belgrade’s parliament, or if I had belabored incidents such as Sufflay’s
assignation and Goli Otok.
Despite its enormous toll, Bleiburg was but one of the many Serb horrors visited upon
the Croatian people. While Pincevic says I ‘virtually’ ignored Bleiburg and therefore
abetted in its cover up, your readers can decide from the excerpts taken from Anatomy
of Deceit.
“The Bleiburg slaughter became a truly black mark for England and the United States.
After the British guaranteed the safety of a large group of Croatian refugees, the
Croats ran up white flags in surrender. Apparently the flags signaled the Yugoslav
Army troops hidden in the surrounding forest. Despite having many ethnic Croats in its
own ranks, the Yugoslav Partisan Army opened indiscriminate machine gunfire on the
densely packed refugees. When they received no return fire, the Yugoslav Partisan
Army slaughtered the survivors with truncheons and knives. The British and
Americans had front row seats. Nicholai Tolstoy described the Bleiburg incident with
painstaking detail in The Minister of Massacres.”… “The British returned the few
survivors and other Croatian refugees who hadn’t been at Bleiburg to Yugoslavia
where they were forced into a death march and further mayhem.”
For some reason Pincevic finds ‘further mayhem’ and ‘death march’ “totally
inadequate.” It would behoove her to look them up in a standard dictionary. While she’
s there, she should also look up holocaust, a word she equated with Bleiburg.
Bleiburg wasn’t, by any stretch of the imagination, a holocaust. Perhaps the confusion
here is that it was most certainly an unequivocal mass murder of unarmed people.
While the memory of the murdered won’t allow decent people to ignore Bleiburg, it has
little relevance in any discussion of the events of 1990-91 and far less relevance in
understanding Croatia’s current bilateral foreign relations. It is the Serb’s favorite ploy
to try to use WW II to explain the dynamics of Serbian/communist aggression in
disintegrating Yugoslavia. To buy into all of that requires us to ignore a very great
deal. Those who for some reason want to weld Bleiburg to Croatia’s future in the EU
are making a far more serious mistake.
Every historian has a favorite pivot point that they think is seminal to history. From
what I gather from “Et Tu!” and “Do Not Bury Bleiburg,” Pincevic chose Bleiburg and
the NDH on which to build her seminal moment. God forbid if someone doesn’t agree
with her.
I hate to disillusion Pincevic, but until the 90s, decidedly few Croats living in Croatia
had heard of Bleiburg. The ruling Communists made the survivors who lived in Croatia
reluctant to talk about their harrowing experiences, even to their families. In addition, a
great number of the Partizans who participated were Croatians (which was in contrast
to the Maribor and Kocevje perpetrators, who were made up of purely Serb units).
The only point we agree on was that 1945 was not a vintage year for Croatia, but for
different reasons. In Europe, the Communists took over, what was recently called the
Eastern Bloc countries, and instituted a dogma that affected more lives detrimentally
than any philosophical force in history. But in the former Yugoslavia it played a
different scenario.
Except for Slovenia, the Serbs took command of all key positions of the country’s
infrastructure—police, military, Foreign Office—the same positions they held before
the war, but with infinitely more power. In effect—a Greater Serbia. When the
excesses of the draconian Serb policies, in the guise of communism, became too
intolerable, it led directly to the 1971 Croatian Spring.
It should be stated, many participants of the Croatian Spring also fought for Croatia’s
self-determination effort of the 90s and that not only the majority of HDZ members but
also the so-called opposition parties were also Communist Party members. Very few
knew anything about Bleiburg and certainly wasn’t in anyone’s thoughts in the 1971
movement. Contrary to Mrs. Pincevic’s contention, it definitely didn’t motivate or
influence those who brought about the stupendous results of the 1990s. Those party
people, who knew, kept it to themselves, since some participated at Bleiburg and in
the post-war reign of terror. So it was in their interest to keep it quiet.
Pincevic states that I “oddly” didn’t mention the NDH or the Domobrans. Perhaps her
zeal got in the way, since she didn’t notice that Ustashe was mentioned forty-eight
times. Why exactly the omission of the Domobrans had anything to do with the 90s is
indeed mysterious.
Pincevic romanticizing the Ustashe has made her blind to some of their faults. When
the UDH were installed, they annexed most of the Dalmatian coast and islands to Italy.
The Italians harsh rule and the Croatians’ loss of identity drove many to the Partizans.
They, more than any other nationality, became the backbone of Tito’s movement.
Inadvertently, the Ustashe were responsible for the Croatian exodus to the Partizans.
Contrary to Pincevic’s shrill denunciation, I gave the Partizans very little credit for their
war effort. As attested by the quote, I gave them short shrift.
“Tito’s Communist Partisans didn’t participate in the war until Germany attacked
Russia. The Partisans became a force only after receiving vast supplies and air
support from the allies late in the war—after the fall of Italy.”
Aside from Pincevic’s character assassination against me, Philip Cohen and Michael
McAdams were not exempt from her wrath. I cannot speak for them, but I found her
comments about them repugnant. Her statement “the only people who gained from
Cohen’s book were the Jews” borders on racism, and is simply not true. Had his book,
that focused on the NDH, been published earlier, editors of the major newspapers
would most certainly have had a different perception about Croatia. The editors’ only
knowledge of the former Yugoslavia came from Serbian sources. But the book was
published too late to do any real good. The following two paragraphs, excerpted from
my book describe, albeit superficially, the media’s take on Croatia.
“Just as the Tito regime labeled every Croatian misstep Ustashe inspired, the
international media has also equated, without a scintilla of substantiation, the Croatian
government under Tudjman with the Ustashe regime of 50 years ago.” “In order to
strengthen its position, the Yugoslav Communist Party exploited Nazi history in
Yugoslavia in much the same way Russia exploited Nazi atrocities in Eastern Europe.
The Serbian-led Communist Party, painting the Croats on the same canvas with the
Nazis, successfully suppressed knowledge of Serbian collaboration with the Germans.
The noun “Croat” became a euphemism for fascism to the people of Yugoslavia. Many
young Croats came to feel ashamed of their ethnic roots. The public relations firms
hired by SerbNet projected a fascistic image of Croats during the recent conflict.”
McAdams extremely valuable monograph systematically shattered most of the Serbian
mythologies. His monograph could have been the most important contribution for the
Croatian cause. But instead of promoting it to the American public and the movers and
shakers, it was promoted mainly to Croatian-Americans.
Whenever an Op-Ed of mine was published, there was an outpour of letters to those
publications from Serbs or their sympathizers. Interestingly, relatively few attacked the
substance of what I wrote (most likely they couldn’t find anything to refute); their
criticisms were directed at what I had failed to say, i.e., about alleged crimes against
Serbs by the Croats, and my failure to perpetuate their mythologies. And like Mrs.
Pincevic, who “cannot overlook (my) many inaccuracies” but failed to cite examples,
the Serbs’ protests were similar.
Pincevic let her imagination run wild when she said my book implied the Serbs “gave
up ambitions” to create a Greater Serbia. Even a cursory reading revealed a message
that the Serbs already had de facto a greater Serbia since they owned lock, stock and
barrel – all key positions, police, etc., and most importantly the economic wealth of
Croatia. While the cow was in Croatia, it was milked in Serbia. Their war on Croatia,
had it been successful, would’ve redefined the borders, which I believe the Western
powers would have de jure endorsed. The excerpt from the book briefly addresses the
issue.
“Contrary to the smoke and mirrors that appeared in the media, Serbia didn’t start its
war to prevent Croatia and Slovenia from seceding. Stated purely and simply, the
Serbs engaged in a land grab in order to create a Greater Serbia.”
It appears that Pincevic, to justify her shortcomings, cast aspersions on McAdams,
Cohen, and myself that we wrote to “curry favor with the West (and their Bankers)…
gain monetary and moral support.” Pincevic may not know it, but when one equates
bankers, monetary gain directed against implied enemies, it’s deju vu of a communist
tactic. While we were getting our letters to the editor and Op-Op pieces published,
when it was most needed—during the bloodshed and destruction, I wonder if Pincevic
had participated in a similar fashion.
Contrary to Pincevic’s allegations, and unlike her, who had sponsors and the backing
of the Croatian community from down under, I never received an iota of
encouragement, moral support, nor recognition from the Croatian government, or the
Croatian community in the United States. All my research, time, transportation costs
(except when I went to the front lines), and time spent away from my medical practice
were done at my expense.
Pincevic appears to be beside herself that Cohen received a medal. In the context of
the time, who else was more deserving? Perhaps Pincevic herself? Or does she
perceive us as competition for her book?
=====================================================
June 19, 2000 Croatian American Times
[New York]
Suzanne H. Brooks-Pincevic’s recently SPAMMED the Internet with:
“CROATIA IS DROWNING TRAPPED UNDER THE LIES OF ITS FASCIST
COMMUNISTS (PAST AND PRESENT).”
Although her obvious intent was to give us a glimpse of her immense wisdom, what
she actually demonstrated is that she is at best a Nazi apologist or at worse, a
psychological warfare instrument for Milosevic. Either way, what she puts out is
intellectually corrupt. Pincevic’s contention that the Ustashe era was the “one thing”
Croats actually have to be proud of and respected for is not only indefensible; it’s also
political lunacy.
It fits right in to the only internationally appealing issue that the Serb ultra-nationalists
have been able to effectively use to deflect attention away from their evil deeds. That
is what they did to cause Croatia so much diplomatic difficulty in 1990-91-92.
If Croatians choose to assemble around Pincevic’s intellectual dishonesty, the Serbs
can once again hire the public relations firm of Saatchi and Saatchi to publicize the
fact that Croatians are demonstrably proud of being Nazis. Before Croatians begin to
wax too nostalgic about her statements, they should consider how all of that fits into
the here and now. It is absolutely certain that, whether by intent or accident, the article
will provide fodder to the Serb propaganda apparatus, since it re-enforces their thesis
that Croatians equate with the Nazis. The thesis has been the linchpin of their psych-
op game plan, which the Western media bought lock, stock, and barrel. With friends
like Pincevic, who needs enemies? Pincevic’s seeing Tudjman as someone who rose
to meet the threat of extinction may serve her need to link him and 1991 Croatia to
Pavelic, but, once again, it is not only intellectually dishonest and ignores the facts.
Instead of examining the facts she has chosen the route of historical revisionism and
seems to want to romanticize the Ustashe movement. She bemoans the fact that the
Ustashe “DID NOT HAVE MUCH CHOICE” but obey the Nazis. The only merit in that
argument is that the Ustashe were not elected nor did they fight for the right to govern.
Rather they were a small group of exiles who were installed by Nazi Germany, under
the advice of fascist Italy, as a puppet state. The NDH’s power to govern was no
better or worse than Quisling Norway or Vichy France.
Pincevic appears to have been vexed by the democratic voting process that took
place recently in Croatia. Perhaps it is the concept of free elections that bothers her.
Certainly that is quite unlike the good old days of the Ustashe. We may not like the
election results, but the voters made their choices one at a time.
Pincevic’s ‘Sermon on the Mount’ statement ”IRONICALLY HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR
THE “BLEIBURG TRADEGDY”—THERE WOULD NOT BE A CROATIA TODAY!”
(her caps) was pure and fanciful imagination. While the memory of the murdered won’t
allow decent people to ignore Bleiburg, it has little relevance in any discussion of the
events of 1990-91 and far less relevance in understanding Croatia’s current foreign
relations. Those who rely on WW II to explain the dynamics of Serbian/communist
aggression in disintegrating Yugoslavia must ignore a very great deal. Those who link
Bleiburg to Croatia’s future in the EU are making an even more serious mistake.
Pincevic seems to believe everything she’s told. Croatians are not all “hospitable,
tolerant, righteous—forever turning the other cheek! —TOO FORGIVING!” as she
naively believes. Just look at what the Croatian CP did to their fellow Croatians. She
could start with Bleiburg and onward through 1989.
Jerry Blaskovich M.D.
====================================================
The Croatian American Times (Published September 26 and October 10, 2000)
To the editor:
John Prcela lost whatever credibility he had, when he defended Susan Brooks
Pincevic’s with the same misstatements she had used [Croatian-American Times
(7/25/00)]. His depiction that my “exchange” with Pincevic was ‘low and one-sided’ is
ridiculous. First of all, there was not an exchange. Rather it was something Pincevic
initiated in “Et Tu Dr. Jerry Blaskovich” (Spremnost). Her article, aside from being an
out of the blue character assassination against me, also grievously insulted Michael
McAdams and Philip Cohen in a manner that bordered on anti-Semitism.
My comments, which Prcela took so much umbrage with, were not directed toward her
personally, but to her intellectually corrupt statements in “Croatia is Drowning Trapped
Under the Lies of its Fascist Communists” (Spammed over the internet) and the
Spremnost article. It escapes me why Prcela went to such lengths to elucidate
Pincevic’s genealogy and spell out her art ability and personal qualities since that
knowledge had no bearing on his arguments. Unless, of course, they were meant to
excuse Pincevic’s lack of historiography fundamentals.
Interestingly, while Prcela tried to whitewash Pincevic by citing a number of my quotes
despairingly, nothing in his arguments refuted their substance.
Before Prcela commented on my statements, he should have spent time on research,
instead of relying on fantasy. Michael McAdams, who is a reliable source, despite
Pincevic’s contrary opinion, should settle some of the issues Pincevic and Prcela have
such problems reconciling with — namely, that the Ustashe were a small group of
exiles that Nazi Germany installed upon the advice of fascist Italy and how they came
to power.
After Germany attacked Yugoslavia it was doubtful who would govern Croatia: “... A
German news release of April 11th announced that Macek would head the new
Croatian government. In fact, the Germans had offered him the post and he refused.
He was asked again on October 10, 1941 after which the Ustasha imprisoned him
until March 1942 when he was put under house arrest for the remainder of the War. If
Prcela would refer to Ciano’s “War Time Diary,” he will note after Macek turned down
the post, Mussolini suggested and advised Hitler that, as an alternative, the Ustashe
could fit the bill.
“When Pavelic did arrive … he brought with him “a few hundred” … To be precise
“Kotar Duvno” arrived with 40 men; “Kotar Bugojno” with 16; “Kotar Livno” with 43;
“Kotar Kupres” with 7; “Hercegovina” with 25; “Lika” with 42; an additional 50 from
unknown groups; Five members of Poglavnik’s family; and seven Ukrainians, for a
total of some 235.” The latter number, I believe, is most accurate.
If Prcela paid attention to the context of my argument, he would have noted I did not
call the Ustashe traitors. I only said their power to govern was no greater than the
Quisling or Vichy governments. In Anglo-Saxon usage, Quisling has come to equate
with a puppet state. If Hitler wished, the NDH could have been replaced with the snap
of his fingers.
Prcela’s glowing statements about the goodness of the “intrepid defenders” was a
very subtle way to project images that the NDH were above reproach, committed no
atrocities and loved Jews like brothers. In the same context, Prcela’s tacitly implied
that Blessed Stepinac was an Ustashe. Since I am aware that some people in Prcela’s
thinking mode believe this to be the case, I hope that was not his intent. That would
carry his quest as a legitimate source too far.
It’s my understanding that one of the tenets of the Seventeen Principals, which Prcela
emphasized, was to fight to the death for the cause. If so, why are there so many NDH
survivors? Why did most of the hierarchy, who formulated the Principals, turn tail and
escape? Either all the principals should have been adhered to or none.
Prcela’s statements that the Ustasha contributed a great deal to the destruction of
Yugoslavia and that they had anything to do to destroy Yugoslavia some forty years
later were ludicrous. Contrary to his fantasies, Bleiburg, couldn’t have, by any stretch
of logic, inspired the Croatian Spring of 1971 and the war for Independence of the 90s.
It is doubtful that any pedestrian Croatian living in Croatia heard of Bleiburg before the
latter date. Certainly the slaughter wasn’t mentioned in any school textbook, never
lectured about in the schools, no articles were written about it in the media, nor did the
survivors who lived in Croatia talk it about. The survivors were reluctant to talk about
Bleiburg to their own families for the same reason those who spent time in Goli Otok.
They feared that the knowledge would jeopardize their families.
I’ve known a great number of Croats who had left Yugoslavia legally or illegally after
WWII. None knew anything about Bleiburg until individuals in émigré organizations
brought it to their attention.
It should be underscored, that most of the leaders of the Croatian Spring and the self-
determination effort of the 90s were committed Communists, who distanced
themselves from any overtones of the NDH’s philosophy. They all knew, and most
believed, the Communist Party’s version of the NDH’s history, but only very few knew
anything about Bleiburg. Those that did know kept it to themselves. For it was a
subject not to be openly discussed. Some had participated at Bleiburg and in the post-
war reign of terror. In the ‘71 and ’89 movements, many of those same individuals
were activists, often in high positions. So it was all the more reason to downplay the
issue-given the new political climate.
Regardless of Prcela’s sanctification of Pincevic, she manipulates facts to suit her
thesis. For example, she mentioned the NDH never fought the Allis, when in fact, the
NDH declared war on the U.S. and that the NDH sent soldiers to Russia to help Hitler’
s fight. As to her statement: “Just prior to WWII breaking out Albert Einstein in America
beseeched the Western governments to assist Croatia against the brutality of the
Serbs.” the facts show Einstein’s protest occurred in 1931. Although in the global
historical sense 1931 is close enough to WWII, but it was a decade early and a
decade after the Kingdom came into being. Her statements would fit in nicely in a
creative writing class.
While Prcela is in total denial, Pincevic disingenuously downgraded the excesses of
the Ustas