Interesting Book Review

[Mirko]

A new book on the Balkans:

See the reviw here:

living.scotsman.com/books.cfm?id=462982006

[irac]

It's a little ironic that the reviewer used the article to plug her own work, which, while laudable, is actually rather limited in it's scope. Sure she is informative and exposes the war and aftermath in Bosnia and Kosovo, she is not evenhanded to all sides and basically has removed, especially in her 2nd book, Croatia almost completely. Whether she only wrote about what she knows or experienced, then fine, but saying Tudjman is a war criminal and not addressing it, but going on to describe in detail her gastronomic adventures and drinking, doesn't help anything.

She does, however, write a very chilling story of a mountain trek with Kosovar refugees and it highlighted the madness of the region, but isn't it in her interest to knock down "rivals" and throw out little morsels that might inflame debate (the Croatian war crime element which is massively absent from her largely anti-Serb middle book).

[BrankoL]

Of course she is not evenhanded, as she is pro-Serb apologist.

In the review, she never mentioned that Serbs are guilty of terrible crimes, but she blames Croatia for almost everything.

She says: "Croatia still insists it did nothing wrong, even when its generals are marched before the war crimes tribunal"

And not a single one sentenced so far, as they brought to the Hague on trumped up charges.

Or: "the Croats, in particular, have re-written events in a frightening way"

She must be mad, what events?

Please, please somebody explain this to me.

[irac]

I hope to god that it's the Sunday vino writing there Branko, otherwise you must not have read anything she's written before, because if you had you'd better go back and re-read it! Tudjman and Milosevic apologists will never like to hear that their countries were led to war on the back of generated hysteria and lies, much the same as a small minority of Americans who are normally intelligent and open will believe they were right to invade Iraq, despite masses of lies and false information being peddled to support the countries need to avoid using up it's own natural resources.

So you don't believe Croatia did anything wrong? Hmm, sounds like more Serb propaganda to me, as the vast majority of educated locals here will admit that not everything was wine and roses and that all sides can grab a share of the blame. Then again, you only see what your mind wants you to and when you've been pumped full of lies and hate and false nationalism, well, it's easy to understand the fear of admitting that Snow White is a little dirty.

[BrankoL]

Irac, please you do not have to be so patronising. I do not drink alcohol, and I have read some stuff written by Di Giovanni, but not anything written in the last 2 or 3 years, as she is too pro-Serb for my taste (the book review is a good example of her views - I am sure you will agree with this!).

It is not true that Tudjman wanted a war, as Croatia had no arms, and Serbia was armed up to their teeth (400 jet fighters etc). Serbs started this war and Croatia had to defend itself.

And very little crimes were commited by Croats, as they were defending themselves. Please be fair in the future.

[irac]

Three paragraphs and three lies, 3 for 3, if this was baseball you'd be top of the batting averages branko. Di Giovanni has been virulently anti-Serb and anti-war, Memoir of Madness is massively evident of that, but then again, maybe it's a bridge too far for you. Tudjman cut a deal to get half of Bosnia, he traded off eastern slavonia and the area between Sibenik-Drnis-Knin as there was no way to fight with rebels, but he expected to get his dues in Bosnia. And the third lie, very little crimes committed, hmm, I reckon it's probably something stronger than vino then, because if you believe that, then you'll believe that there were no death camps in Bosnia run and executed by Croats and Tudjman backed militia.

It could be that you're reading only the extreme right propaganda from sources like the spectator (hey, according to them America should consider limited nuclear strikes on countries that they don't like, oh, and it's okay to "execute" abortion doctors and staff according to one of their "award winning" writers). But you see, that kind of nonsense doesn't wash with the educated and thinking majority here, the same goes for the folks from Bosnia and Serbia who actually READ articles and posts, who consider different sources and come to their own conclusions. Maybe Croatian Diaspora Times is a little out of step, it could be that 24 might be a tentative step towards getting to grips with what happened when the leaders in the regoin gained at those who they would govern and protects expense!

[Ribaric]

Irac, Do you have a recommendation as to how to get an even handed view, or at least, the view from each side? Maybe a couple of books by people you believe know about the key drivers and events? I've just driven the length of the country, twice in a week or so, and have seen the left-overs. It's not pretty is it.

[irac]

Hey Ribaric,

I guess it takes reading whatever comes to hand, Adam LeBor is decent, Di Giovanni has her good points but laboured, in her middle book, in trying to show what had changed since the war (I think she was trying to be too precise). Misha Glenny is good for a historian and would have not so many flaws other than being general (for example in his "History of the Balkans" when he covers a huge area).

James Lucas wrote some very good pieces on the area at the end of WWII, which lead to other sources. While Butler was stationed in and around here in the 2nd World War and while mainly a journo, he was slammed by British Authorities for sending reports of some not so nice things about Tito, Croatian activities (not directly Pavelic related), Slovenian side switching etc.

Living here, as you and I do, it's hard sometimes to get a grasp of it without full access to news and articles, you've to rely on internet, occasional papers from home and then the largely disappointing local papers. It seems that 24 has become a paper of choice, while Slobodna has become little more than a ratings driven tabloid, Jutarnji has it's good points, Vecernji is a right wing mouth piece, Hrvatski List is a decent publication but very right wing (though it does call some things as they are).

I suppose it's like going out in the morning and buying the Guardian and the Mail, reading them both and asking, are they both on the same planet? You were through this neck of the woods last week (it was sad not to see you for the do, but next year the invite's open!) and for the most part people see destruction, and depending on who you listen to, it's ALL Serb, or ALL Croat, whereas in actual fact the truth is somewhere in the middle, with a little bit of UN drunkeness thrown in (Zitnik an example of the latter). Unfortunately a lot of the "diaspora" are every bit as damaging and out of touch as the Irish ones who funded both sides of the terror divide in the 70's and 80's, but as the saying goes, in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king!

[sarah1]

One very good book about the 'Balkans' in general is by Maria Todorova 'Imagining the Balkans'.

[Ribaric]

Thanks folks. I have found it hard to get what I call a "balanced biassed" view. I'm always always asking myself why this or that attitude is present in people I meet and, having read a couple of historic accounts I was left with plenty of "what happened, where...etc". I still have little idea on why people are/were motivated to do the things they do/did. I've seen the pro-Serb, pro-Croat websites but these are generally laughable. I was looking for a work that debated the positions, I don't mind reasoned bias so long as it is clear that's what it is. I drove through the Medak 'pocket' a few days ago, consequently I feel the need to get an understanding of the mind-set that led to such events.

I am sorry I missed Knin but, for a retired bloke, I seem still to be hamstrung with obligations to be places at specific times. I think I'm doing something wrong.

Thanks for the PM Sarah.