Balkan Ⓐnarchist

Keslowena dhe Gernowyon ha Kernowesow!!!

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Fri, 25 Apr 2014 01:37:00 +0000

Congratulations to the Cornish people for finally being recognised as an equal nation within the UK! And congratulations to the British parliament for finally doing the right thing by their fellow Britons, the Cornish. It should've happened a long, long time ago, but better late than never! Kernow bys vyken!

NO TO PUTIN'S AGGRESSION; NO TO REPETITION OF HISTORY!!!

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Wed, 19 Mar 2014 23:34:00 +0000

I oppose Putin's aggression against the Ukraine; I oppose Aksyonov's mafia-style separatism, shamelessly supported by Moscow; and I oppose the recent sham referendum in the Crimea!

Why? Because I am a Croatian Serb, and the current situation in the Crimea reminds me of what happened in the former Yugoslavia. It reminds me of how the Krajina Serb rebels spuriously and maliciously claimed that Croatia's ethnic Serb population, of which I am one, was in danger of a "repeat genocide" to be committed by Croat nationalists fifty years after the original genocide committed by Ustashas during WW2. Personally, I don't like Serb or Croat nationalists; I think they're both a bunch of cynics, and I think their worldview is morally flawed! However, anyone who does thorough research into the wars of the former Yugoslavia – of course, taking into account both sides of the story, to begin with – will have to conclude that both sides were NOT equally guilty of starting the war; the wars were started by Milošević's régime in Belgrade, which sponsored Serb nationalist régimes in Croatia and Bosnia, providing them arms with which to commit REAL persecution against non-Serbs within their authority (authority they established thanks to the Yugoslav People's Army taking their side, even though that army was meant to protect all Yugoslavs). The wars he started in those two countries were brutal AGGRESSIONS, and not genuine interventions to protect ethnic Serbs from persecution.

As you can tell, I also don't buy Moscow's claims that Russian speakers or ethnic Russians in the Ukraine are under threat of being persecuted by Kiev, i.e. that they could become victims of systematic human rights abuses to be committed by the current interim Ukrainian government (formed following the overthrow of the country's previous president last month, now a fugitive wanted for mass murder) with the intent of causing them grave harm. About the recent controversial repeal of the 2012 regional language law in the Ukraine – which even I found rather troubling, being a supporter of multiculturalism, multilingualism, etc. – I'm relieved to have found out that it was vetoed by the interim president, which I think was a very decent move on his part. Nevertheless, looking at the bigger picture, whatever fault this interim government may have, it certainly cannot be equated with what Putin is doing to their country!

I am ashamed of the wars started by Slobodan Milošević against Croatia and Bosnia, based on false allegations of a similar nature; I am ashamed of his sponsorship of CRAZY Serb nationalist régimes in Croatia and Bosnia, which brought about distruction and misery to so many people! What Putin has done so far to the Ukraine is awfully remiscent of what Milošević did more than two decades ago in the Balkans, and I am so sad and fearful of what's coming next.

I will not keep quiet; I am choosing to be on the RIGHT side of history! That's why I say:

SHAME ON MILOŠEVIĆ! SHAME ON PUTIN!

Croatia versus Serbia at The Hague

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Mon, 03 Mar 2014 23:06:00 +0000

Hrvatska i Srbija počinju dokazivati tužbe za genocid | Al Jazeera Balkans

Katarina Drlja o početku suđenja za genocid | Al Jazeera Balkans

Hrvatska optužila Srbiju za plansku agresiju | Al Jazeera Balkans

The referendum that has prevented marriage equality

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Mon, 02 Dec 2013 18:07:00 +0000

Yesterday was a sad day for Croatia's LGBT population, as the results of the 1st December constitutional referendum show that 65.87% of voters have decided that the institution of marriage should only be between a man and a woman, thus effectively banning same-sex marriages from ever taking place in the country.

The be-all-end-all question was "Are you in favor of the constitution of the Republic of Croatia being amended with a provision stating that marriage is matrimony between a woman and a man?", and your choices were "za" if you're for it, and "protiv" if you're against it. As of 30th November 2013, article 62 of the Croatian constitution stated: "The family shall enjoy special protection of the State. Marriage and legal relations in marriage, common-law marriage and families shall be regulated by law." Thanks to 946,433 supporters (65.87% of all voters), as opposed to 481,534 (33.51%), that article is set to be amended.

This referendum came about thanks to the 749,316 signatures gathered by U ime obitelji ("In the name of the family"), whose most notable member claims that all the steps they took in their campaign were "not aimed against anyone". Yet by voting "for" this amendment in the Croatian constitution, 65.87% of referendum voters have given their approval to deny same-sex couples in their country access to marriage.

The legal effects of this referendum result will not seem obvious at first, since the law recognising same-sex unions, adopted in 2003, which grants such unions certain rights, still stands. And it's possible that the rights of same-sex couples could be enhanced, regardless of this referendum's outcome. But, needless to say, should Croatia's LGBT population and their straight allies in the more distant future seek once again marriage equality for same-sex couples, they will be constitutionally denied. And given how polarised the political climate in the country is between the left and right, supporters of this successful referendum (blatantly rightwing and conservative) will always be able to refer to the positive result therein in order to undermine, discredit and even disparage their mainly leftwing and liberal opponents.

I have no doubt that the social and legal consequences of this referendum, both in the near and distant future, will be seen both in Croatia and further afield. Even if the traditionalist groups do nothing to oppose enhancing the rights of same-sex couples in the country, the resulting amendment in the constitution will create a kind of two-tier system of unions, in which one type of couple can have their pairing recognised as a marriage, while a different type of pairing will have to use a different formula. And just outside Croatia, one should expect likeminded organisations and politicians in Serbia and nearby to be inspired by this result, even if they choose not to go down the route of calling for a constitutional referendum in their own countries. Instead, rightwing politicians in neighbouring countries may use the example of the recent constitutional referendum in Croatia to argue in their national parliament that the people of their country are similarly conservative re: marriage and related issues such as family, and in turn vote against recognising same-sex unions altogether!

There is a possibility that the effects of this referendum will not just affect the LGBT population, but also ethnic minorities, particularly the Serb minority, which has been collectively blamed and condemned by Croat nationalists because of the recent war in the country. As I reported earlier this year, there has been an initiative in Vukovar to remove bilingual signposts and placques (in Croatian Latin and Serbian Cyrillic) that have been put up around the city within the last two months. The main protagonist of this initiative is the Stožer za obranu hrvatskog Vukovara ("Headquarters for the defense of Croatian Vukovar"), who promote the view that local Serbs are collectively guilty (be it through active collaboration or passive complicity) for the attack on the city by the then Yugoslav People's Army and various Serb nationalist paramilitaries in 1991, and because of that, they don't don't deserve to see their alphabet officially around Vukovar, as that would, according to the Stožer and likeminded people throughout Croatia, represent an offence to the victims of the afore-mentioned attack and atrocities that took place at that stage of the Croatian war.

More recently, the same self-styled Stožer has started gathering as many signatures as it can, just like U ime obitelji before them (see here and here), to get a referendum to amend ethnic minority rights! Personally, at this point in time, I think they probably won't succeed in getting such a referendum, like U ime obitelji managed to achieve (see here), but I could be wrong. We'll find out soon.

Therefore, this referendum has put Croatia onto a slippery slope, leading to a situation in which disenfranchisement of any whole section of the country's population with a public seal of approval (like in this case, thanks to 65.87% of referendum voters) will be the norm. That's an example of "majority tyranny", a scary thought indeed. And let's be in no doubt about the possibility that neighbouring countries, and countries further afield too, will follow. The question here is: how far will all this go?

One last thing: let's look at the referendum question again: "Are you in favor of the constitution of the Republic of Croatia being amended with a provision stating that marriage is matrimony between a woman and a man?" To me, it's like pointing a gun at someone's head and asking them, "Do you want to live?" To which one would tremblingly answer, "Yes, but preferably not by your terms!"

Remembering Yugoslavia's First Lady Jovanka Broz, née Budisavljević (1924-2013)

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Sun, 20 Oct 2013 17:20:00 +0000

Jovanko, Ličanko, vječna ti slava!

Anarchist, Liberal, and Authoritarian Enlightenments: Notes From the Arab Spring

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Wed, 09 Oct 2013 14:07:00 +0000

Confirmatory yet insightful and revitalising article from 2011, written in the early days of the Arab Spring.

"Thus in these revolutionary experiments we encounter a rare combination of an anarchist method and a liberal intention: the revolutionary style is anarchist, in the sense that it requires little organization, leadership, or even coordination; tends to be suspicious of parties and hierarchies even after revolutionary success; and relies on spontaneity, minimal planning, local initiative, and individual will much more than on any other factors. On the other hand, the explicit goal of all Arab revolutions is the establishment of a liberal state—explicitly, a civic state--not an anarchist society."

Jadaliyya.com - Anarchist, Liberal, and Authoritarian Enlightenments: Notes From the Arab Spring

State or no state, but never without justice!

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Mon, 08 Jul 2013 22:58:00 +0000

"Ma kako se ona zvala - Crna Gora, Bosna i Hercegovina, Francuska ili Turska - država koja ne razumije da ljudi mogu bez države, ali ne mogu bez pravde, ne razumije ništa."

"However it is called - Montenegro, Bosnia & Herzegovina, France or Turkey - a state that doesn't understand that people can [live] without a state, but cannot [live] without justice, doesn't understand anything." - Andrej Nikolaidis

Source: Al Jazeera Balkans

Radical progress?

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 03:45:00 +0000

President Tomislav Nikolić of Serbia, ex-Radical turned pro-EU "progressive". For real?

Ever since he candidated himself for the position of president of Serbia the second time in 2008 on behalf of the Serb Radical Party (Srpska Radikalna Stranka), which once again ended in defeat, he broke away from the party he was a loyal and prominent member of for almost two decades and established a new one, the "Serb Progressive Party" (Srpska Napredna Stranka). This new, more moderate right-wing party doesn't advocate changing the borders of Serbia to include vast regions to its west, and unlike the Radical Party is supportive of EU membership for Serbia, which has been a major party policy for the Progressive Party since its inception.

However, can we really believe that the once long-term, far-right, Serb nationalist has all of a sudden become a more moderate, right-of-centre politician? Let's look at his recent rhetoric at the UN and his comments in an interview this past month alone, which should give every observer at least cause for concern, if not confirm long-held suspicions.

In a debate about the work of international criminal courts organised earlier this month by the youthful Serbian diplomat Vuk Jeremić at the United Nations in New York, but boycotted by the ambassadors of the USA, Canada and Jordan, President Nikolić took to the speaker's stand to question the ICTY's impartiality and objectivity, claiming there was "a systematic atmosphere of a lynch-mobbing of everything that is Serbian", accusing it of double standards in its approach towards Serbs compared to others, and he even compared the Hague trials to the Inquisition! As President Nikolić was delivering his speech, Munira Subašić, the president of the association Mothers of Srebrenica (Udruženje Majke Srebrenice) was taken away from the hall by security, when she tried to raise a banner with "Republika Srpska - genocidal formation" written on it in capitals. Subašić later explained how she felt "powerless" when listening to Nikolić accuse the ICTY of bias against Serbs. (Notice how at odds Nikolić's view of international justice regarding accused Serbs is with what Subašić actually lived through and continues to put up with, thanks to the ideology he personally professed at the time she lost 22 relatives in July 1995.)

Let me turn your attention to the phrase "everything that is Serbian", used by the Serbian president in New York. This is something I often come across on the Internet in articles on Serbian websites, in messages on Serbian messageboards, and in YouTube and Facebook comments by those of a nationalistic bent, often using it in an apocalyptic context. Although I would expect such rhetoric from the likes of Nikolić, given his entire career in politics, I would never have expected a serious head of state at an international conference at the United Nations in New York of all places to use phrases popular in online commentary to discuss very serious issues regarding justice in the region.

In an interview on the BHT channel, also reported on Al Jazeera Balkans, asked about the Srebrenica massacre, President Nikolić said, "Genocide needs to be proven". Asked to comment on the fact that the war crime in Srebrenica has all the characteristics of genocide, Nikolić told, "Everything that was happening in the wars of the former Yugoslavia has the characteristics of genocide". Nevertheless, Nikolić did say the following, "Because of that, here I am, on my knees seeking mercy for Serbia for the crime executed in Srebrenica. I apologise for the crimes, which were, in the name of our state and our people, committed by any individual from our people". (This interview came a couple of days after the Serbian president met with two members of Bosnia & Herzegovina's tripartite presidency, Nebojša Radmanović i Bakir Izetbegović (son of Bosnia's wartime president, the late Alija Izetbegović). The latter of the two members insisted that, "Genocide in Srebrenica should not be denied, and that what happened in BiH 20 years ago should not be relativised or minimised, nor Serbia's role in it".)

Putting aside his repentant statement, the President is either unaware of the mountains of evidence and research already done with regards to the Srebrenica massacre and the nature of the atrocity in question, or is deliberately ignorant of it. But what to make of his claim that "everything" that happened during the wars had genocidal characteristics? These words could easily be interpreted as moral equivalence; suggesting that all sides in the wars were up to the same thing. And according to distinguished historians, who've thoroughly researched the wars in the former Yugoslavia, claiming that "all sides were at it" misrepresents how things actually happened on the ground.

From the start, I was never convinced by Nikolić's apparent transformation from Radical Chetnik Vojvoda into pro-EU integrationist! That's not to say that I don't think people can change from one extreme to another, or perhaps change from an extremist to a moderate; I do believe that some people can change their views on life quite radically and fundamentally, and I believe many have already done so and many more will do so. However, Nikolić is not just any member of the Serb Radical Party; he is a man who dedicated his life to the Chetnik cause and fought for its ideals. He joined the Ravna Gora Chetnik Movement (Ravnogorski Četnički Pokret) before any of the wars even started, and he was even bestowed the title of "vojvoda" in a ceremony, filmed in Bosnia and broadcast on Bosnian Serb TV in 1993. So how does such a man, who has for years been the deputy leader of his party (effectively its frontman since 2003, when its actual leader (who also happens to be his kum) got extradited to the Netherlands), has even candidated for the post of Serbian president twice (both times frighteningly close to victory (see here for the 2008 election results)), then suddenly decide to kiss goodbye to his anti-EU views and irredentist rhetoric, become the leader of a new party, and then win the presidential election? Third time lucky, huh? But seriously, doesn't that just strike you as odd?

But think about it, to put oneself on the electoral ticket twice, and coming short of winning both times, and then he founds a new party and wins! Come on, you don't have to be a politics graduate to work out how much this guy wanted to be president of his beloved country! Of course, one could interpret this as pure self-interest, and no doubt there must be at least some of it there. But let's not forget that this is someone who had devoted a large part of his life to Serb nationalism, the unification of so-called "Serb lands", etc. And even though he doesn't openly advocate "Greater Serbia" any more (which remains an unfulfilled dream for him), he still doesn't shy away from voicing clearly nationalistic sentiments, as expressed recently at the UN (read above). Perhaps he's just voices such sentiments purely for "political marketing", which certainly got him enough votes last year to get him into this current position of authority? But personally, I think Nikolić is still the same pro-Chetnik, Serb nationalist he always was inside, despite the much publicised change of heart. The only difference now is that he's put aside the territorial claims (you remember the "Karlobag-Karlovac-Virovitica" line?) and replaced them with pro-EU rhetoric.

I remember suspecting Nikolić of deciding to found a new party in emulation of what Čeda Jovanović achieved following his expulsion from the Democratic Party (the party of the late prime minister Zoran Đinđić) with the founding of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), which aimed to go further than where the then Serbian President Boris Tadić was willing to go with the Democratic Party. Jovanović reached 5th place in the 2008 presidential elections on behalf of the LDP. So maybe Nikolić thought, "How about I leave my party and found a new one, just like Čeda did?" Who knows, maybe that's exactly what happened?!

However, for me as a Serb from Croatia, that this man became president of Serbia could never be good news. He has never denied being a Serbian volunteer in the Croatian war. However, worst of all, he is accused of personal involvement in the murder of elderly Croats in the village of Antin near Vinkovci (see here). So what would happen now if the current Serbian President were to decide to step onto Croatian soil; what would happen to him personally, and what kind of a reaction would such a visit provoke? Therefore, without any effort on his part, Nikolić's presidency has and will undermine relations between the two countries, which have otherwise been building closer ties over the past ten years, especially during Tadić's term in office, despite the brutal legacy of the war and the tensions that emanate from that era.

So these are the primary reasons why I, as a lay observer of Ex-Yu politics, take whatever Serbian President Tomislav Nikolić says with reserve: firstly, although "Greater Serbia" is no longer on the menu, by expressing popular nationalistic opinions in his capacity as head of state, as he did in New York, he gives credence to that worldview and to that interpretation of history, regardless of its accuracy or lack thereof; secondly, I suspect the whole transformation into a "Progressive" is a clever political stunt, designed to finally bring him to that coveted position of authority he now occupies; and thirdly, I fear his presidency will not only undermine relations with Croatia, as it already has done so far, but also discourage justice and reconciliatory efforts from moving quicker.

Just a guest here in my homeland

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 23:25:00 +0000

Ruža Tomašić, a member of the rightwing Croatian Party of Rights - Ante Starčević (Hrvatska Stranka Prava - Ante Starčević) and member of the Croatian parliament said that, "Croatia is for Croats", and that "everyone else is but a guest".

In response to such an inflammatory statement, Milorad Pupovac, deputy leader of the Independent Democratic Serbian Party (Samostalna Demokratska Srpska Stranka) and likewise a member of the Croatian parliament, yesterday brought a yellow band with the word "guest" in Serbo-Croat.

Give us a kiss!

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Thu, 14 Mar 2013 22:18:00 +0000

MSN.com: Croatian girl kisses Serb boy when asked how she dared walk with him

Gračac through Street View!

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 02:43:00 +0000

For a long time, all I and other Gračani in the diaspora could get was a bird's eye view of our hometown of Gračac in Lika, Croatia, not to mention how the zoomed in satellite images were rather blurred.

But now you can see it through Google Maps' Street View feature wherever you are! Just type "Gracac" and pick "Gračac, Croatia" from the list. You will first notice how this time, the zoomed in satellite images are in the highest definition ever! And along with that, you can drag the orange man on the left, under the compass, onto any street in town, and even on roads outside town (like the road to Knin), to see Gračac and its stunning surroundings in marvellous and breath-taking Street View! Milina!

PS: Check out the garavuša (i.e. dark-haired lady) on the bridge! ;-)

Balkan Anarchist on Anarchist News!!!

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 02:56:00 +0000

I've joined the open blog Anarchist News, and you can find my profile here, where all my articles published there will be found! I hope to post new articles and perhaps some old articles from this blog there, so watch this space!

Signposts that offend people!

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 02:51:00 +0000

As I've read here on Al Jazeera Balkans, 22 Croatian war veterans' associations have declared their intention to remove Serbian Cyrillic signposts and placques in Vukovar, and they're prepared to break the law to do so!

They don't get why their country's prime minister "has given up on the interests of the majority Croatian people, has given up on the truth of [their] recent history, and is selling [their] pride and sacrifice for just ten thousand votes from Vukovar Serbs!"

They also claim that the "policy of bilingualism and Cyrillics in Vukovar will give extra motivation for further the nationalist-chauvinistic plans and activities" of young local Serbs in the region of Vukovar, who allegedly go to military and para-military camps in Serbia for training. According to the undersigned, it is an "open secret" that this happens.

If you are reading this and wondering what on earth all the fuss is about, let me clear this up for you. The whole opposition Vukovar Croat veterans and supporters are raising to the enforcement of the law in favour of the local Serb minority (i.e. their rights as a demographically significant minority, amounting to over a third of the population of the wartorn city, to use their language and alphabet officially and in public) is down to the wounds of the war. Their hometown was devastated in the recent war by the JNA in 1991, and thousands of Croats (military and civilian) were killed. Although a couple of convictions have been achieved regarding at least one war crime near Vukovar (specifically Ovčara), most of the culprits of all the other war crimes are still unpunished and are probably walking freely in neighbouring Serbia.

Along with the grievances regarding the atrocities during that war, many local Croats see their ethnic Serb neighbours as collectively guilty for their suffering. In my humble opinion, I think collectivising guilt is a big problem here, so much so that any sign of Serbian culture and language is seen as an offense. As far as they're concerned, Cyrillics is the alphabet of the enemy and they don't want to see it in their beloved town, even though their Serb neighbours have the right to use it in public and see signs with it put up around town.

Some Croats, who are opposed to bilingualism being introduced in Vukovar and nearby, feel that it's too soon for it; the wounds are still fresh, but maybe in the distant future. Some are calling for a moratorium of ten to twenty years, while others are more resolute and don't think Cyrillics should ever be seen in Vukovar.

I find some of the arguments expressed by some of the estimated 20,000 protestors from an earlier protest shown in the clips of this report rather unconvincing and even disturbing. Supposedly, by introducing bilingualism, this will create deeper divisions between Croats and the Serb minority in the city; placing Cyrillics on an even level with the Roman alphabet will bring about inter-ethnic intolerance and threaten peace in Vukovar. One man among the demonstrators stated, "If they (Croatian government) give them (Serbs) Cyrillics, they'll give them everything they will ask for", the well-known "give them an inch, and they'll take a mile" line. While one veteran openly denounced and "exclusively" blamed the government in advance if any violence should occur in the city and surroundings, should they "blindly" approve of the enforcement of this law in the city of Vukovar.

(Notice how on one of banners held by those protestors, this fused Serbo-Croat flag was deliberately crossed out. I guess that's a sure sign of how much they value inter-ethnic relations, and perhaps what they think of equality between Croats and Serbs.)

I am also baffled by the assertion above that bilingualism, of all things, could have anything to do with nationalism and chauvinism! As for the allegation about young east Slavonian Serbs receiving military and para-military training in nearby Serbia, I have absolutely no idea if that's true or not, so I won't comment on it. But seriously, how is treating Serbian Cyrillics as equal to the Croatian Roman alphabet supposed to "motivate" such young men; assuming the accusation is true, surely there would be other things that would motivate such men much more than bilingual signposts?!

Personally, I'm supportive of the presence of bilingual signs etc. anywhere around the world; I'm a citizen of the world and I like languages and dialects thereof. In Wales, you have bilingual signs in Welsh and English, while in England you can find welcome signs at the entrances of schools and other institutions with greetings in other languages around the English greeting. However, not everyone considers themselves one as well, especially people from wartorn regions, where distrust and suspicion expectably abound.

I also believe in the rule of law, and minority rights are guaranteed in the Croatian constitution. However, if there is no desire to respect the constitutional law of the country, then maybe the consitution itself must be changed, as suggested by president Ivo Josipović himself. Nevertheless, the deputy leader of the largest ethnic Serb party in the country, Milorad Pupovac, explained that the constitutional law regarding the rights of national minorities is a component of Croatia's international obligations, which it accepted at the time of international recognition and accession into international institutions. He goes on to say, "One law cannot be accepted internationally but denied domestically, thus creating an image of Croatia for the outside world, where the rights of national minorities are respected, while trampling over them here".

Pupovac is of the opinion that, "…someone has obviously decided, for political reasons, to block it (the constitutional law) and turn it into a political question, which is harming inter-ethnic relations, inter-ethnic and political tolerance and is renewing wartime rhetoric and atmosphere". He also pointed out that after the protest attended by 20,000 people earlier this month, a 21 y.o. Serb from nearby Borovo got beaten up.

For me, this issue is very reminiscent of a smaller protest in Kistanje in 2010, when the local Croatian veterans' association dictated to local Serbs and their representatives which famous people should have street names in their honour and which shouldn't. Basically, such associations can come along to your hometown, lay down the law as they see fit, dictate to you how things should be according to their standards, and expect all politicians to bow down to their demands. How intimidating that must be for those on the receiving end!

Do I deny that they are voicing serious grievances that many Croats hold? Absolutely not. I condemn the crimes of Hague convicts Milan Martić and the late Milan Babić, and I believe that we, decent and honest Serbs, should be ashamed of what was done in the name of Serbdom during the '90s and condemn it all unequivocally! And I also agree that it's wrong that most Serb war crimes suspects have yet to be apprehended; it should not stay like that any longer. However, it's one thing to seek justice for serious offences that were committed in wartime, and a completely different thing to deny every sign of another culture and language in peace time, just because some dispicable members of that community did something horrible to you or a loved one. Those members have a name, and they should not assume that the wrong they did is of no consequence!

I honestly think this has everything to do with collectivising guilt; all Croatian Serbs, as far as such patriotic Croats are concerned, are suspected Chetniks, and as such, we offend them by simply making our presence known. On a bad day, they will accuse you of Greater-Serbian nationalism, while on a good day, they will expect not to have to see or hear from you. So how is an ethnic Serb living in Croatia supposed to feel? Condemned at worst, ignored at best.

Compensation for Jovan Berić and his sisters for their murdered parents in Varivode ‘95

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Wed, 23 Jan 2013 23:50:00 +0000

Some justice has been done in the form of compensation for Jovan Berić and his two sisters for the murder of their parents Radivoje & Marija Berić in their village of Varivode on 28^th September 1995. They originally sought 900,000 KN in damages, but instead received 540,000 KN in accordance with European conventions, whereby only 60% of the sought after sum can be awarded for terrorist acts.

Translated from Večernji list:

Jovan Berić, visibly shaken, said after the verdict how after so many years in court this comes as some kind of satisfaction, but added that he has less and less faith that the murderers of his parents will ever take responsibility for that crime. He pointed out that he believes that, after this verdict, the children of the other murdered seven from Varivode will seek reparations from the republic of Croatia.

Al Jazeera Balkans: Odšteta za djecu ubijenih Srba u Varivodama.

Večernji list: Djeci ubijenih supružnika Berić iz Varivoda 540.000 kn odštete

tportal.hr: Djeci ubijenih supružnika Berić iz Varivoda 540.000 kn odštete

Well considered and realistic

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 00:45:00 +0000

Every Theology and every Ideology, it seems to me, is an endeavor in hypnotism and self-hypnotism. If there is one thing that everybody knows in common sense — when they are in "their right minds" and not hypnotized — it is that "all generalizations are hazardous" and that individual cases are each unique. The function of Theological and Ideological hypnosis is to forget this common sense and follow a robot-program that evades the responsibility of thinking and feeling anew in each unique situation. It is not just the other gang's Theology or Ideology that is nefarious: all Theology and Ideology is nefarious. It is a form of sleep-walking in which we can do monstrous things because we are not alive, awake and aware of who we are, where we are and what is going on around us. — Robert Anton Wilson

Definitely something worth bearing in mind and pondering, whatever ideology or theology you may subscribe to.

Inspiring Anarchist quotes

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 00:32:00 +0000

Here are a couple of Anarchist quotes I found lately, which I think help to explain what Anarchism is essentially and fundamentally all about.

If your object is to secure liberty, you must learn to do without authority and compulsion. If you intend to live in peace and harmony with your fellow-men, you and they should cultivate brotherhood and respect for each other. If you want to work together with them for your mutual benefit, you must practice cooperation. The social revolution means much more than the reorganization of conditions only: it means the establishment of new human values and social relationships, a changed attitude of man to man, as of one free and independent to his equal; it means a different spirit in individual and collective life, and that spirit cannot be born overnight. It is a spirit to be cultivated, to be nurtured and reared, as the most delicate flower it is, for indeed it is the flower of a new and beautiful existence. — Alexander Berkman (What Is Anarchism?)

Anarchism is the attempt to eradicate domination. This includes not only such obvious forms as the nation-state, with its routine use of violence and the force of law, and the corporation, with its institutionalized irresponsibility, but also such internalized forms as patriarchy, racism, homophobia. Also it is the attempt to expose the ways our philosophy, religion, economics, and other ideological constructions perform their primary function, which is to rationalize or naturalize --make seem natural-- the domination that pervades our way of life: the destruction of the natural world or of indigenous peoples, for example, comes not from the result of decisions actively made and actions pursued, but instead, so we convince ourselves, as a manifestation of Darwinian selection, or God's will, or economic exigency. Beyond that, Anarchism is the attempt to look even into those parts of our everyday lives we accept as givens, as part of the universe, to see how they, too, dominate us or facilitate our domination over others... Most fundamentally, I would see Anarchism as a synonym for anti-authoritarianism. — John Zerzan

And here's one I found some time ago by a famous Anarchist revolutionary, which I think basically and honestly explains the primary goal of Anarchism:

The anarchists are not promising anything to anyone. The anarchists only want people to be conscious of their own situation and seize freedom for themselves. — Maria Nikiforova

I hope to post many more I find on the net, be it in Facebook groups or Anarchist websites.

Reflecting on the Gotovina case, a month later

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Mon, 17 Dec 2012 20:00:00 +0000

Last month, between the 16th and 17th, I got quite emotional, even though I prefer to do things as logically as possible, which is also how I wish, as a rule, to write my articles on this blog. I described the reversal of Markač and Gotovina’s convictions as a “disgraceful acquittal”, an “outrage” and an “insult to all the Serbs from the fallen Krajina, especially to those from the areas affected by ‘Operation Storm’”. I even went as far as to call it a “mockery of justice”. Perhaps these words were too strong, come to think about it. But perhaps, from a Krajina Serb perspective, it was appropriate at least at that moment in time. But like I say above, I prefer logic over emotion, and since that Friday morning, I’ve had time to consider and re-consider this issue with a clearer head, my feelings aside.

After careful consideration, I acknowledge that the Brijuni transcripts, which even I believed “proved” intent on the part of the Croatian state to ethnically cleanse Serbs, actually do not offer any concrete evidence of any ‘joint criminal enterprise’ (JCE) at the very least on the part of the Croatian military leadership, Gotovina included, with the intent to commit crimes against the Serb population of the then Republika Srpska Krajina (RSK) through ‘Operation Oluja’. Indeed, with regards to the subsequent exodus of Serbs, my relatives among those fleeing to Serbia, I came to the conclusion that just because Gotovina had predicted a greater exodus of Serbs following future military action by his army, as seen in those transcripts, that doesn’t mean he intended for such to happen. I personally thought that his foreknowledge of events made him guilty, but I now see that this line of reasoning is flawed on my part. I now realise that just because you know something is going to happen, don’t mean you want it to; there is a huge difference between predicting and intending, and that’s a big lesson to me.

(In fact, it was with the Brijuni transcripts that I, personally, had doubts about Markač and Gotovina’s convictions; there was a part of me inside that told me that Gotovina’s words in those transcripts did not constitute strong enough evidence against him or his colleague, with which to prove intent on their part to ethnically cleanse Serbs from the then RSK.)

However, what I find pretty strange, being a layman when it comes to artillery fire, is how the 200 metre margin of error (that whatever projectile landed outside that radius constitutes a criminal act, and thus not a legitimate military target) could’ve been designated the basis of any JCE in the first place! Even I accept that the imposition of 200m is rather arbitrary (why 200m; why not 100, or 20 or 10?). This margin of error was applied when examining the artillery fire upon towns like my hometown Gračac, Benkovac, Obrovac and Knin; the Trial Chamber established that the shelling “constituted an indiscriminate attack on these towns and an unlawful attack on civilians and civilian objects” on precisely that margin of error. However, since they rejected this standard, surely it’s worth asking why the Appeals Chamber did not proceed to consider a correct one; was it not allowed to do so, or was there perhaps no point to doing so?

As it turns out, Gotovina and his colleagues cannot be held legally responsible for the burning, looting and usurpation of Serb property in the fallen Krajina, as no evidence exists that proves either of them had the intent to achieve anything of the sort through ‘Operation Oluja’. The responsibility for burning Serb property lies with individual Croatian military personnel, the responsibility for looting Serb property lies with individual Croatian civilians (the extent to which Croatian police aided and abetted this needs to be clarified), while the responsibility for usurping Serb property lies with local councils and in turn the Croatian state.

However, a couple of Serbian legal experts have questioned why Gotovina and Markač were not handed lesser sentences; perhaps that might’ve been more appropriate than a complete vindication (see here in Serbian and here in English). And indeed, the evidence that was used, in its totality, to convict the two generals was re-considered in isolation from each other by the Appeals Chamber. I’m no legal expert, so I certainly don’t know which legal process should apply in such a case as this, nor shall I recommend any!

Nevertheless, what is most important for us Serbs from those areas of Croatia that were part of the short-lived RSK affected by ‘Oluja’, is that the acquittal does not dispute the heinous crimes committed by individual Croatian soldiers in various localities during and after that operation. Those crimes are still acknowledged, but the Appeals Chamber concluded that Gotovina and his colleague Markač were not responsible for any of them. This means that the real perpetrators are still walking free, and the families of those Serb victims still have no justice, still on square one. And I doubt very much that, without the political will of Zagreb, we will see all the perpetrators of crimes against Serbs, towards the end of the war, during it and prior to the outbreak, get prosecuted any time soon.

And I agree that courts — ICTY or any other — should not pander to public opinion outside of court, but solely focus on meting out justice on behalf of the victims of all sorts of crime. However, I do wonder what kind of precedent this verdict sets for future cases, regarding wars between state authority and rebel groups, and how the reasoning of this verdict will influence judges and juries. Like I say above, I don’t claim to be a legal expert in any shape or form, but what about cases in retrospect, for instance during WW2; could Gotovina’s acquittal influence how we view the actions of various warring sides in the past? Also, will this vindication help in any way to undermine the impunity of states and various régimes?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course, even though the ICTY should not be concerned with public opinion when making legal decisions, I can’t help but notice, as I have done so many times before, that at the end of the day, they usually do have an impact on public opinion in the Balkans and among diaspora populations, both in real life and online. And this acquittal is no exception. For Croats, it is not only a vindication of the two generals, it’s a vindication of their entire war effort, and in turn, perhaps exaggerated, a vindication of their nation, assuming that the original conviction condemned the whole nation with those two! While for Serbs, it reaffirms the alleged “anti-Serb” bias of the ICTY, “proving” that Serb victims don’t matter to outsiders, and another reminder of how Serbs should never trust the West! Any Croat or Serb, who dares to challenge these conclusions offered by “patriotic” Croats or Serbs, is deemed “naïve” at best, or branded a “traitor” at worst!

This brings me to the issue of emotional blackmail, a cynical ploy used by nationalists in the former Yugoslavia to silence dissent within their beloved nations. Let me explain how this works: an anti-Hague, anti-Croat Serb nationalist from the fallen Krajina claims how no Serb should be sent either to the ICTY, nor should any Serb be extradited to the “Ustasha” state, i.e. Croatia, to face war crimes charges there, and how Serbs like him fought bravely for our people and for everything Serbian! However, if I, as a Serb from a part of Croatia that was also part of the short-lived RSK (and as you know, I am one), raised my hand and declared that Croatian Serb war crimes suspects should be put on trial, tried fairly, and if proven guilty, should be sent down for their crimes against Croats and other non-Serbs during the war, I would be not only branded a “traitor”, I would not only be accused of speaking against and “spitting” on my people and everything Serbian (!), but also “spitting” on all Serb victims of Croat war crimes as well! Therefore, to avoid this unpleasantness, I just have to keep quiet, and thus silently consent to them doing whatever they think will “save” our people from God knows what! I strongly believe that this emotional blackmail, especially used by advocates and proponents of Serb and Croat nationalism, helps prevent justice from being served to any victim, and leaves people from all sides in the Balkan wars without justice in the long run.

Also, when it comes to the Croatian war, I've noticed more times than I care to remember this absolutistic condemnation by the Croatian media and by Croatian politicians of any equation, whether blatant or subtle, of “aggressors” with “victims”. It’s because their national narrative goes like this: Croats see themselves as ‘defenders’, who were fighting for their independent state against Serbian ‘aggression’ and ‘occupation’ of their territory, but see local Serbs as ‘rebels’ against the Croatian state, and Serbia or the (Socialist) Federal Republic of Yugoslavia as the ‘aggressor’, whose army, then the fourth strongest in the world, trampled upon Croatia’s sovereignty.

First of all, I do NOT deny that the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was deeply involved in the Croatian war, as that is an irrefutable fact, examples of which include the JNA’s infamous attacks on Vukovar and Dubrovnik, the first one being the most devastating of the two. And neither do I deny that Croats and other non-Serbs were persecuted by the régime of the late convict Milan Babić; his government and the forces under his namesake and fellow convict Martić showed no regard for the rights of ethnic minorities within the then RSK, and as far as I’m concerned, they were rightfully convicted at the Hague.

My problem is with the absolutistic nature of this condemnation of equating “aggressors” with “victims”, which I think can in a paradoxical way lead to precisely the very equation it vociferously condemns! This is what I mean: on the one hand, all Serbs from the fallen Krajina, and even other parts of Croatia, are by default “aggressors”, regardless of whether they were civilians during the war or whether they were themselves victims in any way; while on the other hand, all Croats, regardless of whether they were soldiers or whether they themselves caused any suffering to anyone, are automatically deemed “victims”! Here’s an example of this in a comment dated 16/11/2012, 13:13. Do you see how ironic and yet perverse this is? This absolutism leads to the irrational conclusion whereby Serb civilian victims are equated with Serb war criminals, while Croat war criminals are equated with Croat civilian victims!

As you can see, assuming you understood me well, I don’t wish to equate “aggressors” with “victims/defenders” either. All I wish for is that all those, who’ve suffered some form or some amount of injustice during the ‘90s, to receive at least some justice, be it via convictions, restitution or compensation or even a combination of these. Of course, no number of legal proceedings will ever bring back lost loved ones. But if only those responsible for such deaths faced justice for what they did, then at least we could say that some justice has been served.

Personally, what I resent the most is how we get lost in talk of conflicting territorial claims and worst of all let nationalist passion take over, thus losing sight of inalienable human rights, which were so blatantly trampled upon by participants of both sides against each other. That’s not to say that both were at it at the same level, or that they both had the same intentions. I believe justice should take into account all the relevant details, especially the ones others may miss through mere oblivion or with intent. Justice should never appease any government, any ideology and certainly not anyone’s sense of vengeance, but hold true to the facts and to reason. And I don’t think you need to be a legal expert to understand that!

So do I still consider last month’s acquittal at the Hague a “disgraceful acquittal”, an “outrage” and an “insult to all the Serbs from the fallen Krajina…”, and most importantly a “mockery of justice”? Well, I was upset by this vindication initially — not to the point of tears, hell no! — but somehow disturbed. I kept thinking of how to reason this decision with fellow Serbs and Croats; I was engaged in an internal dialogue trying to figure this all out. To be honest, that’s a bad habit of mine, but I suppose that’s what leads me to write articles like this one, examining and weighing up the finer details! However, I do concede that I lack the qualifications to brand any verdict a “mockery of justice” as an expert could; I am not qualified to use that term in any case and I regret using it in my previous article.

I’ll end this post with what I sincerely believe is right: I don’t want revenge; I just want justice for all victims. I want innocence to be highly regarded, and impunity to be completely condemned. But in a world of state authority and standing armies, I think this will always be compromised in one way or another.

Where’s the justice gone?!

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Sat, 17 Nov 2012 18:42:00 +0000

Note: Strikethrough added 9th October 2013 (should've done it sooner). Please refer to this article for my current opinion on this issue.
Yesterday was a sad day for Serbs from the short-lived Krajina. As I found out that morning, convicted Croatian generals Ante Gotovina and Mladen Markač, sentenced last year to 24 years and 18 years respectively, were completely acquitted, and now they are free! This reversal is an insult to all the Serbs from the fallen Krajina, especially to those from the areas affected by ‘Operation Storm’!
So many things keep going round my head about this outrage — a very appropriate word for this mockery of justice — that I feel compelled to share it. Last year, I was relieved to know that the suffering my people endured was at least beginning to be prosecuted. Now I’m just bemused; trying to make sense of it all, trying to find the words to describe how appalled I feel by this reversal. As you can see, I can’t be indifferent about this.
I saw last year’s verdict as a first step on the way to justice for Serb victims and their families. For a year and a half, I felt that we had that one small step, from where we could persist on getting justice for Serb victims of other war crimes before and after ‘Oluja’. Now thanks to yesterday’s verdict, we’re now back at square one! The justice I felt we had achieved last year, has been snatched from us. And I suppose, realistically speaking, the least amount of justice we can hope for now are some guilty verdicts for some of the perpetrators of some war crimes against some Serb victims, but even such cases will probably get dragged along before any justice is served to the families of the victims.
I don’t promote anti-Hague conspiracies or anything like that, but I do wonder on what basis they reached this disgraceful decision. I know it’s easy to just dismiss the whole court over this, and no doubt many of my fellow Serbs have done so long before yesterday. But being inquisitive as I am, I feel compelled to ask further questions as to how the court came to this devastating decision, especially how they came to the conclusion re: Gračac and other ethnic Serb towns not being civilian targets afterall. Why does the shelling of those towns no longer constitute “unlawful attack on civilians and civilian objects”? And what about the “destruction of a substantial part of Gračac on 5 and 6 August” committed by “Special Police members” acknowledged in last year’s verdict? All in all, what made them change their opinion from last year? Either way, it baffles me how those, who were initially punished for this, are now all of a sudden “un-punished”!
Of course, as a matter of principle, I don’t oppose any defendant’s right to appeal. But I still find this vindication disgraceful, and as a Serb from one of the towns listed in his initial conviction as being shelled by his forces, I’m outraged!
This verdict repudiates the whole “joint criminal enterprise”, and in some way vindicates Franjo Tuđman personally. But what is of great concern to me is how this plays to the self-righteousness on the Croatian side, while feeding into suspicion on the Serbian side. That is not going to help either side move forward, and will certainly dampen reconciliatory efforts.
However, if I must be honest, there was a part of me that would pop up once in a while, when thinking about Gotovina's conviction, that thought his conviction wasn’t strong enough. Funnily enough, something in me was saying that. So why am I so disappointed that this has been brought to light?
I will definitely read through the acquittal to understand this in greater detail. But at the end of the day, this kind of thing does make one wonder whether justice will ever be completely served for my people and our victims. It’s at times like these that many of my fellow Serbs hope for “Divine justice”, either in this life or the next, when injustice prevails here on earth.
I’ll end this unhappy post with this tragic reminder: justice has still not been served for the 106 Serb fatalities in the Gračac municipality alone (see the list of names here) during ‘Oluja’. Indeed, there are many other Serb victims from the Gračac area before August ‘95, who likewise don’t deserve to be forgotten. This disgraceful acquittal is an insult to the victims’ memory, their surviving relatives and to all of us from my hometown!

__________________________________________________________________________

~~You can also see this article on Britić here.~~

Dead link as of 10th February 2014

Britić in the Serbian press!!!

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 22:25:00 +0000

Yesterday, the British Serb online magazine Britić received some well-deserved attention from the Serbian media courtesy of Politika.rs on their article "Britić, a Briton with a surname ending in ić". The article relates the altruistic goals of the magazine's chief-editors Stan Smiljanić and Aleks Simić. Stan explains the concerns he and his colleague Aleks had regarding the state of the British Serb community, and how they began by handing out 20,000 printed copies of the magazine, which they posted to members of the Serb community around Britain (including me!). He also explains their website's predominant use of the English language, even though they originally planned it to be bilingual, and how Britić is at least attempting to bridge the cultural gap between two generations of Serbian emigrants, i.e. those who came to Britain after World War Two and the emigration which started arriving in the '90s.

Of course, I am one of Britić's many contributers, as you can see here. And without bragging, I've so far received a substantial number of responses to my articles in the form of comments, whether directly on those pages or via Facebook. Apart from that, I've even done my bit to help raise the site's ratings by taking part in an April Fool's joke (see here)! So, I am definitely glad to see our community's magazine and website receiving recognition from Serbia, which I think represents a huge success and a major milestone for Britić.

I've met the two chief editors of Britić in person, and I can tell you that they're both truly wonderful and a pleasure to be around; both are very enthusiastic in what they wish to achieve for their fellow Serbs here in Britain, and they're also very generous, hospitable, and they both have a great sense of humour. Hand on heart, Stan and Aleks are truly upstanding members of the British Serb community, and they both make me proud to say I'm a British Serb!

Films that offend people!

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 22:46:00 +0000

Hollywood actress and UN good will ambassador Angelina Jolie has recently released her first director's cut In the land of blood and honey (U zemlji krvi i meda), which depicts the Bosnian war through the eyes of a Bosnian Serb soldier and a Bosniak woman, whom he saves from rape at a detention camp. It received a standing ovation at its premiere in Sarajevo (see here and here), and positive reviews for how it managed to depict the suffering of the war (see here), with particular focus on the issue of rape during that war.

However, her directorial debut has received a lot of fervent criticism and even scorn from my fellow Serbs (see here), many of whom have deemed it as "biased" and even "anti-Serbian". Not surprisingly, very few people went to see its premiere in Serbia (see here). But why has a film, written and directed by one of the most famous women in the world, caused so much offense in one Balkan nation?

Well, there are two main reasons why a lot of us Serbs disapprove of Jolie's movie: one, many of us feel that this film once again portrays us as the "bad-guys", the main perpetrators of ethnically-motivated violence and wanton destruction in that conflict; and two, because of that reaffirmation, it continues to divert attention from our own people's suffering during the wars of the '90s, which even at that time received very little press coverage in the Western media.

Many of us Serbs feel that the film revamps that deeply negative, media image about our people, which Western viewers had become accustomed to during the '90s, that we are a nation of cruel, sadistic, war criminals, hell-bent on ethnic cleansing, and as such, we were as bad as the Nazis of World War Two! Now, I don't deny the seriousness and the gravity of all those allegations of war crimes etc. against a whole host of Serb leaders, both political and military, all of which has coloured people's negative views on us as a people. However, it must be borne in mind that all this negative press from that time left us Serbs, both back home and in the diaspora, feeling dehumanised and demonised, but most of all, misunderstood by the world. Nevertheless, since the '90s, we have been trying very hard to overcome that negative image of ourselves in the eyes of the international public, and I think the successes of our sportsmen and women (the world-famous Novak Đoković being a fantastic example) have helped to showcase us in a much more positive light, and I hope we continue to impress the world in sport and in other fields. Of course, even I think we still have a long way to go until we have completely overcome that "bad guy" image, which is why many of us are not that keen to see yet another film, after many that have been released before (like Behind Enemy Lines), that reminds us of what brought shame to our name in the world.

However, what really offends and frustrates a lot of us Serbs about Jolie's film, whether we've seen it in full or just clips of it, is how it mainly depicts the suffering of one side of the war, i.e. the Bosniak side. This doesn't mean that we object to the production of any film that may portray the Bosniaks as the main victims; after all, they did suffer greatly during that war from 1992 to 1995, and we shouldn't deny that at all. However, what bothers a lot of us Serbs is how very little is known about the suffering of our own people during that conflict and others in the '90s. As a result of those wars, Serbia provided a refuge to hundreds of thousands of ethnic Serbs from the Croatian, Bosnian and Kosovo wars (if my memory serves me right, it was about half a million refugees from Croatia and Bosnia altogether, along with over 200,000 internally displaced people from Kosovo). Of course, we Serbs are aware of war crimes committed by our own against others, and many of us do feel ashamed of all that. But we are also concerned about the fate of our own victims from those conflicts too, and it displeases us how even now very little is known about them.

I'm a Serb myself, but I don't hold anything personally against Angelina Jolie — in fact, I've NEVER had anything against her; from my teens onwards, I've always respected her as a woman and as an actress, and likewise, I've always respected her fellow actor and partner Brad Pitt. At a conference in Sarajevo last month, she openly denied being anti-Serbian (see here and here), and I don't see any reason why she would be; why on earth would anyone in her position waste their time being anti-Serb, especially since she has so many better things to do with her life and career? (And no, I don't think the fact, that her father went to a Catholic church named after a controversial Croatian cleric (see here), has any bearing on her views on us Serbs at all!) She is a Hollywood actress, who works for the UN, and I think she's just doing her job as a UN good will ambassador the way she knows best, and that's through film. Also, she's a renowned feminist, and the film focuses on the rape of women during that war. And in her own words, her film is a criticism of the international community for its poor response to the crisis in Bosnia at the time (see here).

However, I remember when I first heard that Ms. Jolie was planning to produce her directorial debut about the Bosnian war, and even back then I was quite wary of the possible reactions to it (see here). By embarking on this project, she must've known she was straying onto some very sensitive territory. After all, she hasn't produced a mere documentary about the Bosnian war, but a fictional re-telling of the war in that country, whose traumatised nations have still not resolved all their disputes from that time not very long ago. And let's not forget that she is an outsider, albeit one working on behalf of the UN, and it's easy for people on the side portrayed as the protagonists of most of the violence to feel singled out for it. The side that feels singled out is offended by what they see as a "black-and-white" depiction of a war they were themselves involved in, and are thus resentful of the outsider for producing such an "unbalanced" film. After all, so many lives have been destroyed on all sides, and many people, Bosniaks, Serbs, Croats and others, are still traumatised by what they lived through. Along with that, there are so many accusations of war crimes and crimes against humanity between all the sides of that conflict, that it doesn't surprise me how depiction of one side's view of the war is enough to offend the other side(s). But even if she had produced a film that focused mainly on the suffering of Serbs at the hands of Bosniaks or Croats, such a film would probably also receive huge disapproval, the likes of which we're seeing now with this one, and likewise spark a backlash from Bosniaks or Croats for not depicting their suffering at the hands of Serbs. Perhaps if she had, she would've been "the darling" of us Serbs, rather than becoming a "persona non-grata" in Serbia (see this Facebook group)?

I haven't seen the film myself; I've only seen clips of it on YouTube. And I'm not really sure I want to watch it — not because I'm afraid that I'll be deeply offended by it, but because I'm not that keen to see such an emotionally-charged war movie wherever it's set on the planet! And although I have no experience in producing movies like Ms. Jolie has, my only constructive criticism here is it would've been better if she had set the film in post-war Bosnia rather than in wartime Bosnia. I think such a format would be much more palatable for people on all sides in Bosnia and the wider region, thus receiving greater acceptance from all, and I doubt it would've caused even half as much anger and hysteria as this film has caused among the Serbian public.

Generally speaking, there is a tendency among all Balkan nations to feel offended by another nation's sense of victimhood. On many occasions while surfing the net, reading messages on various Ex-Yu forums, comments under YouTube videos and discussion pages of Wikipedia articles, I've seen how easily offended, for instance, my fellow Serbs can feel when they hear Croats accusing them of war crimes against them, and unsurprisingly, the same is the case the other way round! And it's not just the recent conflicts that cause heated disputes; even different interpretations of distant periods of history can rouse offense, such as the Serbian and Bosniak view of Ottoman rule in the Balkans! And as we can see with the reception of Jolie's In the land of blood and honey, even films by outsiders can offend local nations, and not just some YouTube comments!

__________________________________________________________________________

Related articles:

History that offends people

~~You can also see this article on Britić here.~~

Dead link as of 1st March 2014

WORKERS' SOLIDARITY IN LUTON!

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 14:42:00 +0000

This morning, there was a march through the centre of Luton town and a gathering at the other end of the town centre. Members of a number of trade unions (or syndicates) participated in the march, and there were featured speeches at the gathering. Flags were waving, placards were held, whistles blowing, even some bagpipes playing, and workers' solidarity was there for all to see and hear. And I was there to offer my mere presence and support to their worthy cause and struggle!

I saw these unions represented by their placards and/or banners:

Unison (they brought those long banners and some held triangular ones)

UCU

Unite the Union (they brought their red banner with their name on it in white)

Coalition of Resistance

ATL (they brought their wide, yellow banner)

TUC (they pinned up a wide, pink poster saying "Pensions Justice" on it) [Corrected 2nd December 2011]

NUT (National Union of Teachers Luton branch brought their own wide, navy blue banner with a white dove holding a branch in its beak)

PCS

GMB

Luton Trade Union Council (recognised by a wide, red banner with their name on it in yellow)

NAPO (I saw a couple of them holding FDA leaflets).

I saw a long line of people arriving in the march (I was merely a spectator of that). The bagpipes mentioned above, plus drums and kilts, were all courtesy of the Luton Irish Forum, who were at the front of the march. I saw Gavin Shuker, the MP for the Luton South constituency, somewhere in the middle of the initial march (his speech was read out at the gathering). I saw three Socialist Workers placards there. And I saw one guy wearing a flourescent jacket with the Green party logo on (there were a few others wearing flourescent jackets, some with symbols of the unions mentioned above).

Based on my observation, I estimated about 200 people present at the gathering to hear the various speakers. The speeches were mainly about public sector cuts and how unfair they were on public sector workers, who were not responsible for the economic crisis we are in, yet could lose their jobs if the government gets its way. Also, there were speeches about teachers (who are particularly on strike today) and pensions ("It's not our fault we're living longer", to quote one of the speakers). A few Tory politicians' names were mentioned in a not so favourable context, one of them being George Osborne MP, "hiding in Brussels". And there was one poignant speech by a 68 year old trade union member, who said he was hoping to retire at 65 but couldn't, and certainly won't be able to under this "bloody government"! Not only that, he said was hoping that his four grandchildren would look after him in his old age, but with things the way are, it looks like he will have to provide for them instead!

The speeches finished at 12:50pm and the crowds started to slowly disperse from then on. Returning to the scene of the gathering, I found a white unite balloon on the ground, and took it home as a souvenir of the day (I just felt like it at that moment)!

21,000 Kosovo Serbs and counting seek Russian citizenship — an Anarchist perspective

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Fri, 25 Nov 2011 03:12:00 +0000

Last week, we heard news that over 20,000 Serbs in Kosovo are seeking Russian citizenship (read here). This news has come about not long after recent clashes had occurred at the border posts between Serbia and Kosovo, which occurred after local Serbs in the mainly-Serb north of Kosovo had placed barricades in response to Priština's imposition of Kosovan state customs officers (read here). However, most of those Serbs applying to become Russian citizens live in various enclaves further south from the major clashes in the north (read here). Also, away from the border crossings, a shooting incident occurred between ethnic Serbs and Albanians in the divided city of Kosovska Mitrovica (or simply Mitrovica), in which two Serbs got injured and a third got killed (read here).

As far as Serb nationalists are concerned, this is a painful reminder of how the Serbian people are losing their country bit by bit. And what adds fuel to their anger is how the government in Belgrade seems to be doing nothing about it. For me as an Anarchist Serb, however, I view this as a failure on the part of both states: a failure on the Serbian state, that its own citizens have lost faith in the country they recognise as their own to the extent that they're seeking another country's citizenship; and a failure on the Kosovan state, for not being able — or perhaps willing — to integrate these people, who still don't consider that region to be outside of Serbia, let alone recognise it as a separate country! And generally speaking, I see this as another failure of the whole concept of the nation state, another in a long list of failures and disasters stretching back to the 19th century as far as the Balkans are concerned, and especially over the course of the last 20 years in the former Yugoslavia.

Nation states are supposed to be states for one specific ethnic group, whose leaders and army will protect them within defined borders, even though many people within those borders do not belong to the ethnic group that that state is named after, and thus represents foremost. These people are considered ethnic minorities in relation to the majority population in such a state. And as it happens, all Balkan states have numerous ethnic minorities living within their borders.

However, wars have occurred when, in one country, one ethnic minority, led by hardline nationalists, seeks to unite their home region, in which they constitute the majority, with the neighbouring state that bears their ethnic name, which they see as their mother country. By uniting their homeland with their mother country, they would be increasing its borders, landmass and population, while "liberating" themselves from the state their homeland is already a part of, which they usually accuse of having treated them really badly in the past on the basis of their ethnicity! What I've just described to you is often regarded as "irredentism", of which there are many examples in Balkan history, and Kosovo is one of them.

But — and this is a BIG but — even in such regions, in which one ethnic minority actually constitutes the majority, there will also be ethnic minorities, who live there among the majority population of that particularly region in that country. And quite often the case will be that one of those ethnic minorities in such regions may actually constitute the majority population in that country as a whole! And it's precisely that ethnic minority that will demonstrate strong allegiance to the country their home region belongs to, even though they don't consititute the majority population in the region they live in!

In Kosovo, there have been ethnic tensions between the majority Albanians and minority Serbs for decades, tensions that not even the former Communist régime at the time could properly resolve, yet caused many Serbs to leave their homes in the autonomous province for central Serbia. Following Tito's death, Kosovo Albanian students lead huge protests calling for Kosovo's status to be raised to that of a republic within the Yugoslav federaton. Then came Milošević, who practically revoked the province's autonomy and made life very hard for the majority population in that province, to say the least. And in time, came a war which caused two waves of ethnic cleansing: the first wave was experienced by Albanians, and the second by Serbs and other non-Albanians; each wave being traumatic for either group(s). And let's not forget the smaller wave of ethnic cleansing that occurred during the 2004 pogrom against Kosovo Serbs in the full view of the then KFOR, which should've protected them. And finally, Kosovo unilaterally declared independence from Serbia in 2008 (which I wrote about back then here), and has since been recognised as an independent and sovereign state by well over 80 states around the world. Needless to say, Serbia has refused to recognise Kosovo's independence since its proclamation.

_________________________________________________________

So have relations between Serbs and Albanians improved since independence? Well, I can't really answer that question, since I neither live there nor have I ever been there. Though from what I've heard, Serb and Albanian gangsters seem to be getting on really well there and have done so for years, despite Kosovo's political instability! (Read here)

In the sporting world, Kosovo Albanian sportspeople wish to showcase their sporting talents in internatonal competitions while representing Kosovo, though failing that, they may choose to represent Albania or another country — so long as it's not Serbia! (Read here)

Recently, we've had clashes at the border in the north, and now, there are 21,000 plus Kosovo Serbs, who wish to become citizens of Russia! This, in my Anarchist opinion, demonstrates a failure on the part of both the Serbian and Kosovan state, as explained above, but also as another example of the numerous failures that have come about due to the whole concept of the nation state, fuelled by ethnic nationalism. Nevertheless, nationalists under various banners will continue to justify the existence of their own native — or chosen — nation states, while dismissing others they bear a grudge against!

Commemorations in Varivode and Gošići, marking the 16th anniversary of the murder of Serb civilians following 'Oluja'

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Sat, 01 Oct 2011 23:40:00 +0000

See the original article on eBritić.com in English and in Serbian

Yesterday, representatives of Croatia's ethnic Serb minority came to the Dalmatian villages of Varivode and Gošići to show their respect to the mainly elderly Serb victims, murdered by Croatian forces after 'Operation Storm' (Operacija Oluja). Nine Serb civilians of advanced years in Varivode lost their lives on 28th September 1995, while seven Serbs were killed in the village of Gošići on 27th August 1995. Like other unfortunate elderly people in nearby villages and elsewhere in the former Republika Srpska Krajina, they chose to stay behind in their homes during Oluja, instead of joining their relatives in the refugee columns fleeing Krajina, believing they would be spared on account of their age.

Slobodаn Uzelаc, ethnic Serb vice prime minister for regional development, reconstruction and return, said, “The names of those who were killing Serb civillians are not known, but their profiles are known and who they are.”

“They usually say, and incorrectly so, that Croatian Defenders (hrvatski branitelji) did this. Those people did not defend Croatia, instead they disgraced it, [by] committing a crime for political and personal reasons!”, asserted Uzelac.

Milorad Pupovac, leader of the largest Serb minority party serving the interests of that ethnic group in Croatia and president of the Serb national assembly (Srpsko narodno vijeće) in that country, explained that, “those guilty have neither been apprehended nor punished, because there was no desire for it. Nevertheless, there was time and a desire to focus on those who weren't guilty [of anything], only so they can hinder them from returning to their homes!”

“They were killed only a month and a half after Oluja”, Pupovac said in Varivode. “But 16 years later, those guilty are still not apprehended or punished, just like [nobody has been apprehended or punished] for the murders in Gošići, Mokropolje, Biskupija i Golubić (near Knin).”

He also highlighted that, “Remembrance of the victims of the war cannot be prevented, nor can anyone deny [someone else] the right to commemorate.”

Read more in Serbian/Croatian:

Nacional.hr — Anonimnost i sloboda zločincima na dar

Blic.rs — Komemoracija pobijenim Srbima u Varivodama i Gošićima

Homophobia in the Balkans

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 14:35:00 +0000

It is widely accepted as a given by a lot of people in today's world, that in every nation on Earth, regardless of ethnicity, religion or social class, there will always be some men and women who are born homosexual or bisexual, and some people born transgendered or intersexed. It has been established by many scientists in the last century (see here), and observed and speculated for many centuries before by Buddhist thinkers (see here), that these sexual orientations, gender identities and physical conditions collectively represent gender non-conformity among humans.

Persecution of homosexual people has occurred on numerous occasions throughout human history, often religiously motivated, but also motivated by other ideals, such as national pride or racial supremacy. In the last one to two hundred years, however, understanding of the nature of homosexuality among humans has greatly increased, and its widespread presence in human societies and cultures has received greater acknowledgement in the field of anthropology and other sciences (see here). This scientific recognition, that homosexuality and other forms of gender non-conformity are inherently natural phenomena, has provided essential factual support for LGBT (Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender) activism all over the world, helping to tackle homophobic prejudices and attitudes in various societies.

One way of dealing with homophobia in society is to encourage more gay people to "come out of the closet" — or simply "come out" — by openly declaring themselves as "gay", "lesbian" or "bisexual". However, this can be a very difficult thing to do — if not extremely dangerous — depending on personal circumstances. Nevertheless, to encourage greater visibility for LGBT communities and its members, "gay pride parades" are organised in various cities in different countries around the world to gather as many gay, lesbian, bisexual, trans people and straight supporters in one place to show a united front against homophobia in a given society. But what gay pride marches or parades in countries like Serbia and Croatia have shown to have in common is the level of far-right counter-protest, whose participants arrive to create an unpleasant atmosphere — or a nasty scene — at such venues, and the level of police protection that has to be afforded to these manifestations to protect the participants of such gay pride events from excessive violence against them!

Last year in October, there were 1000 marchers in a gay pride parade in Belgrade, not all of them gay or lesbian. But there also arrived 6000 far-right, anti-gay protestors to disrupt that parade and cause violence! A ratio of 1 to 6! And to prevent those 1000 threatened, gay pride marchers from being physically attacked by the 6000 strong, anti-gay counter-protestors, there had to be around 6000 armed policemen stationed in between them! And even that armed contingent didn't prevent anyone from getting hurt or any buildings from being vandalised. (Read here and here, and see pictures here.)

But more recently in the Croatian city of Split this past June, the ratio between the gay pride marchers and anti-gay counter-protestors was even more stark. On the one hand, there were 300-400 peaceful marchers waving rainbow flags and holding placards promoting greater acceptance of homosexuals in society; on the other hand, there was a cordoned off crowd of an estimated 10,000 far-right, anti-gay counter-protestors, shouting homophobic abuse and even raising their arms to make the Nazi salute! A ratio of 3 or 4 to 100! (Read here in Croatian; read here and here in English.)

In this article, I wish to discuss the homophobic attitudes that I have encountered while sharing company with other people from the former Yugoslavia, where I come from, and while surfing the net visiting various Serbian and Croatian sites and forums. Although these attitudes are not unique to the Balkans, they are, nevertheless, very prevalent over there and among members of diaspora communities in more liberal Western countries, that are more "gay-friendly" than their home countries.

Scientifically natural, socially acceptable, or neither?

Around the world, there is a revulsion among many heterosexual people towards homosexuality, particularly towards male homosexuality due to health and hygiene concerns regarding anal sex, even though this sexual activity is not exclusively practiced by gay male couples. This revulsion encourages the opinion that homosexuality is inherently "unnatural", i.e. not supposed to occur, or that it is a "disease", specifically a mental one, which can cause harm to one's general health. This opinion of it being a "disease", even an "incurable" one, is still very common among people in Serbia and elsewhere in the Balkans, despite health organisations like the Serbian Medical Society (Srpsko lekarsko društvo) openly declaring in 2008 that homosexuality is NOT a disease (read here and here in Serbian).

Having said that, many homophobes do acknowledge that homosexuality is a natural phenomenon, i.e. some people are naturally predisposed to it, but nevertheless, they don't accept it as something normal, i.e. proper or appropriate. Moreover, homosexuality is considered by many homophobes to be a form of "sexual deviance". As such, you will hear many comments from many people in Balkan countries who compare it to paedophilia, and even to necrophilia, both of which are without a doubt abhorrent. However, the intention behind equating homosexuality with these two paraphilias and others is to create a moral parallel between homosexuality and the various paraphilias as being "equally repulsive", both physically and morally.

“No marriages for poufs or lezzas; no gays near my kids!”

A lot of people around the Balkans are morally quite conservative (some even nationalistic), and culturally quite traditional (some particularly patriarchal). And even though being homosexual is not a criminal offence in any Balkan country anymore, there is huge opposition towards giving gay couples the right to officialise their relationship through marriage. Such equal treatment for gay marriages, setting it on a par with straight marriages, opponents believe would undermine the foundation of traditional marriage between a man and a woman for reproductive purposes.

But more seriously, there is profound opposition towards allowing gays and lesbians to adopt children or have their own with the aid of surrogacy. Opponents believe that such a gay-friendly policy would go a step "too far", and would actually be highly "inappropriate" for children. In fact, many people think that gays should be kept away from children entirely, lest they "corrupt" them with their "immoral" lifestyle. Fot that reason, many parents actually would go as far as forbidding anyone, whom they knew was gay, from going anywhere near their children, even if it was a close relative, let alone their next-door neighbour! Therefore, it makes perfect sense to them that children should never be raised by gay or lesbian couples, as living with two fathers or two mothers constitutes an "improper" family setting for children to grow up in, which could "confuse" them in the long run. This fear that homosexuality can be "taught" or "spread" easily goes hand-in-hand with the strongly-held belief mentioned above that homosexuality is "unnatural" and/or a "disease". And the opinion that homosexuals should not be allowed around children can also go hand-in-hand with the belief that homosexuality is somehow "equal" to paedophilia.

Zero-tolerance towards “provocative” homos in their midst

A lot of heterosexual people in the Balkans are not homophobic at all; in fact, a lot of them do have gay friends and some even have gay relatives, whom they've accepted as such, instead of completely rejecting them. However, there are some straight people who are not actively homophobic as such, but rather passively so. For instance, they won't mind knowing that there are gay people living in close proximity to them, so long as they keep quiet about their "undesirable" sexual inclinations in public, i.e. they must always avoid discussing their love life and sex life with easily-offended straight people, who are "normal", and thus "acceptable", compared to them. This very common attitude among Serbs, Croats and others in the Balkans, is arguably more "moderate" compared to the more extreme views mentioned in this article.

Therefore, what gets on the nerves of these easily-offended straight Serbs, Croats etc. is when gays rights activists in their countries organise events like the Pride Parade and are actively seeking equal rights with the majority straight population, which they consider a "provocation", i.e. an "affront" to the accepted norms of society. Being so irritated as they are by these "provocative" gays, they wonder what the whole point of holding such "gay parades" is, considering that they as straight people don't hold corresponding "straight parades". In their own words, these easily-offended heterosexuals resent what they feel as having the gay lifestyle "rammed down their throats"; they don't want to hear about what gays "get up to in bed" or otherwise do when they're together, and they certainly don't want their children being "exposed" to such discourse either! As far as they're concerned, gays should just put up and shut up; they should keep their "undesirable" habits to themselves, and leave "normal" straight people out of it!

Suspicious foreign influence “promoting” homosexuality

Apart from the conservative morality, there is a stong sense of nationalism among the various Balkan nations, as alluded to further above, that has risen to fever pitch since the collapse of Communism in Europe, and has lead to a number of wars throughout the former Yugoslavia during the '90s. Therefore, it's quite easy for xenophobic attitudes to find their appropriate place in this populistic, far-right milieu, especially in Serbia, which has experienced foreign intervention on its territory at the end of the '90s.

With regards to gay rights issues specifically, the solidarity demonstrated by LGBT activists around the world, including those in Balkan countries, is perceived by far-right advocates and supporters in the Balkans as evidence of some kind of "concerted effort" by gays and other "sexual deviants" within a well-funded international "gay lobby" to infiltrate society, influence it to its detriment by "promoting" homosexuality as a natural and normal part of everyday life (something that they wholeheartedly reject), and even seeking equal rights with married straight couples, thus encouraging moral "decadence" and "degeneration" throughout society! (Read here (homophobic article) and here in Serbian.) But most "conclusive" of that suspicion of all, more so than those "provocative" gay rights activists within those various LGBT organisations active in Balkan countries, are: one, the human rights activists, who detail discrimination and attacks against LGBT people and speak up for their rights, as they are particularly suspected of being linked to and funded by liberal Western sources; and two, pro-EU liberal politicians in the region, who want their countries to follow the course of "Euro-Atlantic integration", who likewise defend gay rights activists' "freedom of expression" et al., and likewise are suspected of being linked to and funded by liberal Western sources themselves. Such support from human rights activists and pro-EU liberal politicians "confirms" the far-right's suspicion that there is detrimental foreign influence present in their countries, that "promotes" the toleration of "immorality" as something perfectly acceptable, and in so doing could undermine the fabric of society in their countries completely!

“Brave” patriots versus gay “pussies”!

It is well known that nationalism goes hand-in-hand with machismo, i.e. a sense of manliness. And given that there have been recent wars in the region, it's important for a man to be seen as a "true Serb" or "true Croat", who will be "brave" enough to fight for his people, i.e. be counted on to not let his people down should a conflict arise in the future. Therefore, being a "true Serb" or "true Croat" is equal to being a "true man". But for some reason, gay men are suspected of having no willingness to fight, and therefore considered "cowards", who can't be relied upon to fulfill vital patriotic duties. That's why, for a straight Serbian or Croatian man, to be considered "gay" by other men is like an "attack" on his manhood and personal pride. Any man who is considered "gay" is perceived to be not much of a man, and therefore not much of a Serb or Croat. So much so that to link "gayness" with one's highly-esteemed national identity is perceived as an "insult" to the nation's pride. Therefore, it's not surprising that websites with names like "Gay Serbia" (see here) are understandably offensive to anyone who considers himself a patriotic Serb! (There is a Croatian site that represents lesbians in Croatia called "CroL" (see here) . Perhaps patriotic Croats are likewise offended by that website's name?!)

Apart from "provocative" pro-gay websites, it's not difficult to find homophobic graffiti, posters and stickers on the walls of many buildings, containing hostile messages like: „Marš Pederi iz Srbije!“ ("Poufs, get out of Serbia!"); or morbid ones like: „Beogradom krv će liti, gej parade neće biti!“ ("[Through] Belgrade blood will pour, the gay parade will not be [held]!"). Other than messages on walls, among the far-right, Nazi-saluting crowd of protestors that gathered round to intimidate the small number of marchers during Split's recent gay pride mentioned above, there was one particularly threatening taunt being jeered at them: „Ubij, ubij, ubij pedera!“ ("Kill, kill, kill the pouf!"). But what is more shocking than the messages that are seen and heard in the region is how a lot of ordinary straight people in those countries consider the violent counter-protestors as the "good guys" in these stories, rather than the LGBT marchers, who bravely venture out to openly express a fundamental part of their personal identity.

Homophobic defense of the family and “sound reason”

In both Serbia and Croatia and elsewhere in the Balkans, there are very vocal right-wing and far-right individuals and organisations, that spread anti-gay rhetoric and promote negative views of LGBT people. One constant accusation they make against LGBT activism is how its promotion of their "alternative lifestyle" somehow constitutes an "attack" on the family as a pillar of society. Clerics from both the Serbian Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church in Croatia, and other right-wing organisations linked with them, have also voiced their religiously-inspired condemnation of homosexuality and gay marches, and have voiced their defence of the traditional family setting in the face of growing gay rights activism (read here in Serbian).

You will also find that a lot of very homophobic, right-wing straight people in Balkan countries feel "under attack" or "discriminated against" for being "normal" by gays and those of a liberal persuasion (read here in Croatian). In fact, homophobic outbursts and rhetoric are widely commended by such people as "healthy" and "reasonable" reactions to the "sick" and "immoral" promotion of LGBT "propaganda" and gay-friendly liberalism that supports it! And to top it all off, they resent any liberal politician from parties supportive of joining the European Union, who is vocally sympathetic to gay rights and promotes tolerance of homosexuals and other "sexual minorities" in their countries, with the intent of encouraging their societies to be more tolerant of diversity, and thus increase their countries' eligibility to join the EU. Homophobia, therefore, represents a morally-righteous defense to save the nation's "sound reason" (zdrav razum in Serbian and Croatian) from pro-EU, pro-gay, politically correct liberalism in their countries!

Not easy being a “sexual minority” in the Balkans

LGBT individuals enjoy a lot of acceptance in Western countries, and enjoy a strong presence in Western media. LGBT individuals in Balkan countries, on the other hand, are widely ignored, ridiculed or even demonised by much of the heterosexual majority population, and thus lack a strong presence in those countries' media. If they wish to openly disclose their sexual identity regardless of who's listening, they have to be very brave and have a lot of very supportive friends and/or relatives for comfort and security. Otherwise, they have to guard that aspect of who they are with their lives, and constantly be careful of what they say in public, be it around close friends and family or strangers.

Like much of life in the Balkans, politics permeates and divides people into two opposing camps: fervent nationalist currents against aspiring Euro-Atlantic integrationism. And the issue of homosexuality and LGBT rights likewise finds itself in this battle of ideas between right and left, that polarises Balkan society: between conservative nationalists (considered "primitives" by their opponents!), who play the homophobic card; and liberal pro-Europeans (considered "traitors" by their opponents!), who play the gay-friendly card! Nationalist and religious groups condemn left-leaning governments and organisations for sympathising with the "provocative" and "immoral" demands of "sexual minorities", when they could otherwise be dealing with far more "serious" issues(!); while pro-European and secular organisations condemn far-right groups for spreading homophobic intolerance branded "hate speech", that later leads to scenes of intimidation and violence branded "hate crimes". It is in this contentious political climate and tense social environment that LGBT people in Balkan countries find themselves, and without a doubt, it's not easy for them.

BEAUTIFUL FLAG!!!

noreply@blogger.com (Balkan Ⓐnarchist) — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 15:38:00 +0000

I'm an Anarchist, and I'm not particularly fond of state symbols. But I love this flag, which quite blatantly represents a thorn in the eye to all nationalist Croats and Serbs, who want to remain hateful of and separate from one another!

Read more about this bold flag of friendship here (in Croatian) and here (in English).