The War in Bosnia - part four

                      CHAPTER FOUR


                        THE WAR


                   The War in Slovenia


The clash between the JNA (Yugoslav Army) and the Slovenian Territorial
Defense started on June 27, 1991 and ended with the ruin of the JNA in a
war that lasted less than 10 days.  It was clearly demonstrated in
Slovenia that the JNA didn't have much chan ce of success in a fight with
well motivated fighters of the Territorial Defense who are fighting for
their freedom. 

We should mention here that Alija Izetbegovic didn't offer any resistance,
political or military, when the JNA was hauling away the weapons of the R
BH Territorial Defense, as opposed to the Slovenians who refused to hand
over their weapons to the JNA for "safe keeping."  The weapons of the R BH
Territorial Defense were hauled away in 1989, before the SDA assumed
power.  However, those weapons could have been prevented from leaving from
the places where the Bosnjaks were in the majority if they were only
encouraged to do so by their government, as was the case in Tuzla.  The
fact that there was no organized attempt to save the TO (territorial
defense) weapons from the Sarajevo's "Old Town," which was surrounded by
us, turned out to be a crucial "mistake"  by Alija Izetbegovic, a mistake
which will cost the citizens of Sarajevo around ten thousand lives. 
During those times, Alija Izetbegovic was meeting regularly with the JNA
General Kukanjac, while the Serbs were using bulldozer to open a new road
and cir cumvent the Bosnian Army.  Thanks to those Serbian tactics, they
succeeded in hauling away over 50 truck loads of weapons from TO Sarajevo,
weapons that Izetbegovic should have saved for the Bosnian Army. 

                    The War in Croatia

The war in Croatia started with the so called "Log" revolution in August
of 1990.  The Serbian population of certain Croatian regions revolted by
blocking the roads with cut trees, logs and ambush. 

The cause for that was the new Croatian constitution.  In the old,
"communist"  Croatian constitution, Croatia was a state of Croats and
Serbs living in Croatia.  Under the new, "Tudjman's" constitution, the
Serbs became an ethnic minority, and instead of the red star in the
middle, the Croatian flag returned the historical Croatian coat of arms,
or as the Serbs called it, "the chess board."  Knowing that a state is
defined and guided by its constitution and its borders, the Serbs knew
well what those cha nges meant, so was became the expected outcome.  The
war in Croatia would have started even without such constitutional
changes, it was just that the said changes made it easier for Milosevich
to mobilize the Serbs for war.  The holding of free elections in the
different Yugoslav states and the victories by the political parties whose
goals were independence for their states, signified the end of Yugoslavia
as the "Greater Serbia." The victory by Tudjman in the first free
elections held in May of 1990, should have signaled to Tudjman that Serbs
did no longer rule Yugoslavia.  If they did, they certainly would not have
allowed free elections in Croatia and the HDZ (the leading Croati an
political party: Croatian Democratic Union) to be formed.  It seems that
Tudjman didn't realize that Croatia was pretty much free from the Serbian
control.  If he did, he would have stabilized the situation until he
consolidated his victory, and insure d Croatia stays within its AVNOJ
borders (AVNOJ is the acronym the 1943 creation and mapping of the
Socialistic Federate Republic Yugoslavia).  Instead, Tudjman was again
changing the constitution in the moment most favorable to the Serbs and
Milosevic.  The almost fifty years of peace had an inertia of its own.  To
end this peace and to leave comfortable homes and apartments and go in to
the woods to fight needed something very provocative, something more
substantive then the vague Milosevic's dream of a "Greater Serbia." 
Tudjman offered them that by changing the constitution and waving the
"chess board" flag under their noses, which in the Serbia mythology was
synonymous with hell.  Serbia / Chetniks problems of recruiting Serb
rebels in Croatia ended when Tudjman tried to place the "chess board" flag
in Knin, the center of Serbian dissent. 

        Tudjman's creation of "logical" borders

Tudjman is trying to place himself on the pedestal of the father of modern
Croatia.  However, it should be clear that the beginning of the
independence came thanks to the Yugoslav Constitution from 1972 and the
amendments from 1974.  The credit for the movement to change the
constitution and the amendments goes to the "Mass Movement" of 1971, the
Croatian version of 1971 "spring" (referring to the Czechoslovakia Spring
of 1968, freedom movement). 

The credit for the start of those changes goes to the Croatians in power
at that time: Dr. Savka Dabcevic, Dr. Mika Tripalo, Drazen Budisa, Ivan
Cicak and other Croatia patriots, some of whom are still politically
active today.  Although they were removed from power by that time, Tito
and Kardelj have fulfilled the requests of the "Mass Movement." So that
those major changes in the Yugoslav constitution wouldn't end up being
just empty words on paper, we have to thank the effective battle by the
Slovenian communists, led by Milan Kucan, by Croatian Communists, led by
Ivica Racan, Macedonian communi sts, led by Kire Gligorov a part of the
Bosnian communists, led by Dr. Nijaz Durakovic.  They succeeded in
breaking up the "bonding cement" of Yugoslavia, the so called "democratic
centralism, in the communist league of Yugoslavia"  That fight eventually
led to the free elections in Yugoslav states (republics), which by
definition means freedom.  Tudjman's policy towards R BH maintained his
concept of a state.  In Tudjman's dissertation, he stated that a states
borders, which were usually derived through history, should be changed in
order to get "logical", ethnic borders.  That is why Tudjman was more
interested in parts of R BH than in the "AVNOJ" (legal and, hence,
internationally recognized) borders of Croatia.  Milosevic and the Serbian
Academy of Sc iences and Arts (SANU) knew real well that the "AVNOJ"
borders of the Yugoslav states and the "autonomous regions" and the
international laws about the unchanging borders, were the main obstruction
in the creation of the "Greater Serbia."  That is why Tud jman's stand on
"logical" borders was a real boost to the Serbian expansion plans.  There
shouldn't be any surprises than that Tudjman was prosecuted by Tito, the
creator of the 1974 constitution.  We should also remember that Tudjman
was undisturbed by t he police (which was Serbian controlled) prior to the
free elections.  The natural outcome of Tudjman's fondness for "logical"
borders was his meeting with Milosevic in Karadjordjevo at the start of
1991, when the division of Bosnia was agreed upon.  That meeting
eventually lead to Tudjman's alliance with Milosevic and Karadzic in their
war against R BH.  By doing that, Tudjman spat in the face of thousand
years of experience, which has lead to today's principles of unchanging
borders, and instead, he sta rted by experimenting with Croatia and R BH. 
The greatest victims of that experiment are the Croats of R BH.  They lost
the best and most productive Bosnian lands in the "Posavina" corridor, and
instead have gained the barren rocks of Herzegovina, just s o they could
recreate the old "Banovina Hrvatska". the pre W. W. II deal between
Cvetkovic(Serb)-Macek(Croat) of division of Bosnia-Herzegovina. 

The later association of Tudjman and Izetbegovic is not contrary to his
plan of partitioning R BH.  Actually, that alliance is also between two
people wanting to divide R BH. 

                         CHAPTER 5.

                "The New World Order"


Until the collapse of the Soviet Union, the world functioned in the order
characterized as the "cold war" and "mutual destruction."  Although the
world was politically divided between two tremendously well armed and
mutually opposed political "camps," dur ing that period, Europe enjoyed
the longest period of peace in its history.  Why?  because Europe was of
tremendous importance to both sides, and any military action there could
have signified the devastation of interests of one of the two "blocks," as
t he two superpowers, USSR and the USA were known.  One of the
characteristics of the "cold war" period was the lack of recognition of
any international norms and standards when the interests of one of the
blocks members were in question.  The best example of that was the
constant miss-use of veto power by the permanent members of the Security
Council of the UN.  There was no doubt that Soviets would veto any
resolution of the Security Council if it was directed against any Soviet
ally in the world, regardl ess whether the chastised country was at fault
or not.  On the other hand, the United States didn't hesitate to use its
veto power if it became necessary to defend Israel and its illegal
occupation of Arab territory.  When the Warsaw Pact was dissolved, a nd
soon afterwards the Soviet Union itself, the question arose as to how will
the world function when there no longer is a "parity" between the two
blocks.  Will the only remaining block, the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO), which economically d efeated the other side, take the
advantage of the situation?  Will NATO dominate the world?  Then the
President of the United States, Mr. George Bush, launched a new theory
about the "New World Order" (NWO).  The formula was very simple:  "the new
world o rder means governing according to the international norms and
laws.  That meant that all the members of the UN. were expected to follow
those rules and that breaking of those rules meant certain punishment. 
That meant that the old alliances and adversari es will be erased. 
Members of the UN. were supposed to behave towards a member nation
depending on how well it followers the international laws.  Just as in the
civil court where a judge is obliged to try the guilty, and protect the
victim regardless of the victims color, nationality and religion, the same
should apply in international relations.  It shouldn't matter whether a
state was an ally or not, whether it was Muslim or Catholic, whether the
population was black or white, or the political system c ommunist or
capitalist.  The only criteria should be whether a states is breaking (or
not) any norms and rules of international behavior. 

The New World order played a significant role in the Gulf War.  That war
was lead by the UN. as punishment of Iraq for aggression against Kuwait
and as protection of Kuwait's borders.  For us it is particular
interesting that the NWO played a significant role in the Yugoslav crisis. 
Thanks to the principals of the NWO, it so happened that Russian, France,
England and many other Serbian allies and historical friends recognize the
independence of R BH.  It was thanks to the NWO that Russia didn't impose
i ts veto on the economic sanctions that were imposed against Serbia, for
its aggression on an internationally recognized state of R BH.  During the
"cold war" and "mutual destruction" period it would have been unheard of
to hear Russia vote against one of its allies.  The Russian recognition of
R BH and its approving the sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro are the
best proof that the NWO was taken seriously.  It is precisely because of
those actions that R BH could have and should have gotten a much b etter
benefits from the NWO.  How and why did R BH miss that opportunity? That
question will be answered in a later chapter of this book, "The
Negotiations." 

                            The end of the part 4

[END OF PART FOUR]

[PART FIVE]