Dear visitors, readers, friends,
Thank you for visiting our homepage of YUGOSLAVOLOGY – An Independent Centre for the Yugoslav Studies!
We hope you will find here important and useful material for your education, studies and research. If you have any question or comment you can either use our comment system at the and of every post/page of the website or to contact us by e-mail at: firstname.lastname@example.org. We will do our best to answer you as soon as possible.
The Centre works from 2013…
This article by Michel Collon was first published by Global Research in December 2003. It outlines with foresight the strategy of the US, through covert intelligence operations, of breaking up Iraq into a number of separate states. The unleashing of a civil war with a view to deliberately breaking up Iraq was part of the US war agenda from the outset.
They have found the solution! Divide Iraq into three mini-states and then pit them against one another. Does that remind you of something else? Oh, yes! It’s not the first time something like this happened….
The New York Times published an editorial on November 25, 2003 carrying Leslie Gelb’s by-line. He’s an influential man who, until recently, presided over the very important Council on Foreign Relations, a think tank that brings together the CIA, the secretary of state and big shots from U.S. multinational corporations.
Gelb’s plan? Replace Iraq with three mini-states:
“Kurds in the north, Sunnis in the center and Shiites in the south.” The objective? “To put most of its money and troops where they would do the most good quickly — with the Kurds and Shiites. The United States could extricate most of its forces from the so-called Sunni Triangle, north and west of Baghdad…. American officials could then wait for the troublesome and domineering Sunnis, without oil or oil revenues, to moderate their ambitions or suffer the consequences.”
In short, starve the central state around Baghdad because the Sunnis have always spearheaded the resistance to U.S. imperialism…
Mass killings of Serbs for organs only boosted in Kosovo, but it started earlier: in Croatia, Vukovar
From the very beginning of organ trafficking crime discovery, the USA and UK sought to overturn Dick Marty’s report which indicated that their puppet Hashim Thaci, head of the mafia in Kosovo , and “Kosovo” PM has been involved in the trafficking of human organs . However , traces of the monstrous human organ business go back, far beyond the Dick Marty’s report, to the scariest and darkest discovery in the history of Wars:
These crimes didn’t start in Kosovo, but in all the territories of the SFRY weher NATO came into armed conflict with the Serbian people .
It started in the Republica Srpska Krajina (RSK) –
The bloody industry of death began in the RSK (Serbian territories in Lika, Banija, Kordun, Slavonia after 1995 illegaly occupied by Croatia) where the organs of captured and imprisoned Sers were extracted for the rich in the West and Petrol- monarchy ( i.e. Saudi Arabia) . There was a hospital in Vukovar led by drVesna Bosanac (between 30 July and 19 November 1991). That’s where, for the first time, took place serious abuses of medical ethics and international humanitarian law – the refusal to provide adequate medical assistance to wounded civilians of Serbian nationality (some of who where children), and sending Serb civilians to physical liquidation. Among the most serious crimes committed in Vukovar hospital was the forcible take of blood from Serbs civilians, till the last drop, and literally. For this purpose Serbs living in Vukovar were forcibly brought to the hospital by members of the Croatian National Guard. Testimonies from Vukovar: http://vukovar.50webs.com/CriminalPenalCode.html…
REMEMBERING SREBRENICA: Bosnian Muslim genocide over the Serbs in Srebrenica and her vicinity in 1992-1995 (Photo album)
A Serb from Bosnia, General Mladic, protected Muslims civilians and gave them buses, food and water for to leave fighting zones (as you can see). There was no genocide over Muslim population in Srebrenica like main stream media want you to believe – there was no genocide over Bosniaks because all Bosnian Muslims victims were jihad fighters who had been killed during fight (in war). Even the so called „tribunal“ in The Hague for ex-Yugoslavia admitted that there was no genocide!
Now, you can see here how djihadistes have treated the Serbian population – the content is very hard, not for sensible persons – there are photos of Srebrenica Serbian victims (use Google Translaton from Serbian language into your language).
In Srebrenica, there was a massacre over Serbian civilians: youngest victim was a 4 years old boy who was found with cut arms and a cross like open Intestinium wound; the oldest is an 84 old man – done by Naser Oric jihad army!
The English/US war manipulators will bring Srebrenica „genocide“ in next weeks into the mass media – so, the misinformation that is the pure war manipulation will go ahead! Please, study the question and find the Truth for yourself! Don’t let them manipulate you. Don’t let them create a new consent for new wars in The Balkans. Serbs can not hate their Muslim bothers in Bosnia because they know that those Muslims in The Balkans are Serbian children that Turkish invedors gave life through rapes, harems jail and In/voluntery conversion to Islam from 1389-1913 ! Unbelievable, but Bosniac nation does not exist because Bosniacs are called only those Serbs who were turned into Islam and who speak the same language like their Christian brothers – yes, Serbs from Bosnia speak the same language and have same origins and same culture like their Muslim brothers. It’s one people and one land…
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has recently sent a large task force into Yugoslavia, ostensibly to enforce a settlement of the Bosnian war arrived at in Dayton, Ohio at the end of 1995. This task force is said to consist of some 60,000 men, equipped with tanks, armor and artillery. It is backed by formidable air and naval forces. In fact, if one takes account of all the support forces involved, including forces deployed in nearby countries, it is clear that at least two hundred thousand troops are involved. This figure has been confirmed by U. S. defense sources. [ 1 ]
By any standards, the sending of a large Western military force into Central and lSastern Europe is a remarkable enterprise, even in the fluid situation created by the supposed end of the Cold War. The Ball:an task force represents not only the first major NATO military operation, but a major operation staged “out of area”, that is, outside the boundaries originally established for NATO military action.
However, the sending of NATO troops into the Balkans is the result of enormous pressure for the general extension of NATO eastwards.
If the Yugoslav enterprise is the first concrete step in the expansion of NATO, others are planned for the near future. Some Western powers want to bring the Visegrad countries into NATO as full members by the end of the century. There was resistance to the pressures for such extension among certain Western countries for some time. However, the recalcitrants have now been bludgeoned into accepting the alleged necessity of extending NATO.
The question is: why are the Western powers pressing for the expansion of NATO? Why is NATO being renewed and extended when the “Soviet threat” has disappeared? There is clearly much more to it than we have so far been told. The enforcement of a precarious peace in Bosnia is only the immediate reason for sending NATO forces into the Balkans.
There are deeper reasons for the dispatch of NATO forces to the Balkans, and especially for the extension of NATO to Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary in the relatively near future. These have to do with an emerging strategy for securing the resources of the Caspian Sea region and for “stabilizing” the countries of Eastern Europe — ultimately for “stabilizing” Russia and the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States. This is, to put it mildly, an extremely ambitious and potentially selfcontradictory policy. And it is important to pose some basic questions about the reasons being given for pursuing it.
For the idea of “stabilizing” the countries which formerly constituted the Socialist bloc in Europe does not simply mean ensuring political stability there, ensuring that the regimes which replaced Socialism remain in place. It also means ensuring that economic and social conditions remain unchanged. And, since the so-called transition to democracy in the countries affected has in fact led to an incipient deindustrialization and a collapse of living standards for the majority, the question arises whether it is really desirable.
The question is all the more pertinent since “stabilization”, in the sense in which it is used in the West, means reproducing in the former Socialist bloc countries economic and social conditions which are similar to the economic and social conditions currently prevailing in the West. The economies of the Western industrial nations are, in fact, in a state of semi-collapse, although the governments of those countires would never really acknowledge the fact. Nonetheless, any reasonably objective assessment of the economic situation in the West leads to this conclusion. And that conclusion is supported by official statistics and most analyses coming from mainstream economists…
The HDZ took power in Croatia after the spring parliamentary and presidential elections in 1990 according to the majoritarian electoral principle. Therefore, the party (est. in 1989) had an absolute majority in Croatia’s Parliament (Sabor) with Franjo Tudjman as both Croatia’s President and the party leader – a fact which allows the HDZ to establish a full scale of party’s dictatorship in Croatia for a decade (till 2000). A direct consequence of such electoral results in Croatia, inspired by the electoral results in Bosnia-Herzegovina too, there was election in Serbia of Slobodan Miloshevic and his Socialist Party of Serbia (the SPS) in December 1990 according to the same majoritarian electoral principle as in Croatia. In the other words, election of Miloshevic and his SPS in Serbia was in fact Serbia’s answer to the electoral results in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina – two Yugoslav republics in which the ultra-right political parties won power at the eve of the new civil war. It was clear for majority of the Serbs in ex-Yugoslavia that a neo-Nazi Croat Ustashi regime is established in Croatia followed by a regime of the Islamic fundamentalist Party of Democratic Action (the SDA) of Alija Izetbegovic in Bosnia-Herzegovina. That became the main reason for Serbia’s electorate to vote for its own strongman and nationalist who can above all protect their brethren Serbs in other Yugoslav republics (Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina) from the new Croat-Muslim-led holocaust as a continuation of the WWII Magnum Crimen against the Serbs. For Croatia’s Serbs (the “Survivors” of the WWII Ustashi-led holocaust), especially in the Krajina region, Franjo Tudjman was nothing else than a new Ante Pavelic (the WWII Nazi Croat leader) and the HDZ as democratically redressed the WWII Nazi Croat Ustashi movement.
A new HDZ’s authorities by using a propaganda pattern of creation of a Greater Serbia by Miloshevic’s regime, succeeded very soon to introduce a state-building construction that was in very odds to the idea of political liberal democracy and a society of multicultural and multiethnic coexistence. A state-building party’s policy was mainly based on traditional Croatian clerical right-wing nationalism what can be probably seen as the best in appropriation of the extreme Croat national movement’s insignia and rhetoric from the time of the 1941−1945 Independent State of Croatia (the NDH). A German Nazi NSDAP salutation, for instance, was used even in the Parliament in Zagreb by the HDZ’s members during the official parliamentary sessions. Nevertheless, in the HDZ’s Croatia a new political elite was much less interested in introducing of the western liberal model of political democracy based on the rights and role of the Parliament in the national political system and free media and speech than in continuation of the WWII policy of the “Final Solution” of the Serb Question in a Greater post-WWII Croatia with attempts to annex a greater part of Bosnia-Herzegovina as this Yugoslav republic was an integral part of Pavelic’s NDH. In such political atmosphere and based on traditional Croat Roman Catholic clericalism, the ultra-right and even Nazi ideologies found very proper ground in the post-socialist Croatia – a country directly supported by Vatican and western democracies but primarily by Germany. Among all ex-socialism East European countries, Croatia was the best example of transition from a state socialism to quasi-democracy by brutal nationalism and exclusivism…
Or Yugoslavia’s for that matter. The level of western cynicism on “territorial integrity” is far greater than you probably know. The Kosovo-Crimea discrepancy is just the tip of the iceberg
Earlier this month Obama gave an earful to Putin (from a G7 meeting held 2,000 kilometres away from Moscow) complaining that this day and age you just can’t go around violating the “territorial integrity” and “sovereignty” of other countries:
“Does he continue to wreck his country’s economy and continue Russia’s isolation in pursuit of a wrong-headed desire to recreate the glories of the Soviet empire? Or does he recognize that Russia’s greatness does not depend on violating the territorial integrity and sovereignty of other countries?”
That’s a rather strange statement I think because evidence Obama’s regard for sovereignty of other countries is in a rather short supply.
You’d think under Obama US military didn’t occupy Iraq and Afghanistan and bombed Libya (as well as drone bombed a bunch of others albeit with the consent of their notional governments.) Also there’s scarcely anyone who needs to be reminded of the fact that US helps the demise of governments and hand picks their replacements in foreign countries on a regular basis – not the least it did so in Ukraine itself.
Nor is there evidence of any principled regard of Obama, the US or the West for the notion “territorial integrity” of other countries. Under his presidency the US continues to pressure foreign governments and international bodies to accept the dismemberment of Serbia that it orchestrated under Clinton and Bush.
The hypocrisy of Washington and its lesser partners which severed Kosovo from Serbia, but “lambasts” Russia for incorporating Crimea is something that will not escape many. However, few are aware of the full extent of western cynicism and lack of principle on this matter.
Opportunistic western flip-flops on territorial integrity did not start with Kosovo and Crimea, but much earlier and accompanied the entire break up Yugoslavia…
Macedonia is about to experience Democracy American Style. The nation’s misfortune is simple. It occupies strategic territory of keen interest to the United States and Russia.
“Russia’s Stroitransgaz said on Thursday it will build a gas pipeline across Macedonia, which could eventually be used as part of a route to supply Europe with Russian gas via Turkey”. Reuters, Mar 12
In January, Russia fired Ukraine as its natural gas transit for Europe. The pipeline across Ukraine was ideally positioned for this function. However, Ukraine’s practice of failing to pay for the natural gas it used and the outright hostility of the Kiev junta toward Russia were simply too much. Russia gave notice that the spigot would be turned off permanently in 2019. (Image: WikiCommons)
As an alternative to the Ukraine pipeline, Russia struck a deal with Turkey to sell it all the natural gas it wanted. In addition, Turkey agreed to put a gas portal at the Greek border for interested European nations.
Enter Macedonia (on the northern border of Greece). The announcement of Russian pipeline deal on March 12 put the small nation in the cross hairs of the Obama administration and Congress. Allowing Russia a backdoor to sell Europe natural gas challenged the economic and political war against Russia. The U.S. and its puppet governments in London, Paris, and Berlin give lip service to free markets. But, when it comes to Russia, political goals trump commerce.
The last time a country started to cooperate with Russian natural gas commerce in 2014, the U.S. and it’s European Union puppets coerced Bulgaria to reverse course at great expense to the country and its people.
Will Macedonia get the message and fall in line?…
Transcript of presentation by the author at the Conference of Independent Journalists’ Association for Peace, Vienna, Austria, May 2015.
This year the twentieth anniversary of the massacre in Srebrenica is being observed. On July 11 a huge spectacle will take place at the Srebrenica Memorial center specially constructed for that purpose. It will feature the presence of most of the rather insignificant individuals purporting to be political leaders in the region and the Western-dominated world. Their speeches, which never vary substantially, will be infused with the predictable platitudes.
I propose to deal with some aspects of the Srebrenica narrative from the standpoint of the media. As I am sure there is no need to remind you, after two decades of conditioning at the mention of the word “Srebrenica” two memes immediately come to your mind: “genocide” and “8.000 executed men and boys.” If I am right, and if I have successfully read your minds even though this is the first time I have met most of you, that means that the Srebrenica media spin has been a resounding success. I would like to offer a few reflections on how that came about and why…
The export of the Kosovo revolution after 1999 as a direct outcome of the “Kosovo syndrome” to neighboring Macedonia is in direct connection with much serious regional problem of creation of a Greater Albania from 1878 up today. After June 1999 when the NATO’s troops occupied and divided Kosovo into five occupation zones, transforming this region into their colony,[x] West Macedonia became a stronghold for the rebel Albanian terrorist forces which in fact came from Kosovo.
The Macedonian Albanian separatism backed by the KLA paramilitary troops in the area of Tetovo, Kumanovo and Gostivar in the North-West Macedonia became directly encouraged by the fact that neighboring Kosovo Albanians finally succeeded to separate Kosovo from the rest of Serbia with direct NATO’s and EU military and diplomatic support. The same or very similar scenario was drawn now and for the West Macedonia with Skopje as a capital of the Albanian independent state of the Republic of Ilirida – a state proclaimed by the local Albanian nationalists twice after the destruction of ex-Yugoslavia: in 1992 and in September 2014. Of course, an ultimate goal is pan-Albanian unification with Tirana as a capital of a Greater Albania as it was during the WWII. Here it has to be stressed that between Kosovo, West Macedonia and Albania in fact there is no cross-border checking as it is formally controlled by the Albanians themselves, if it is controlled at all. Therefore, in practice a Greater Albania already exists. Furthermore, the traffic connections between Tirana and Prishtina are planned to be radically improved as the Kosovo Albanian government recently agreed with the government of Albania to connect their two capitals with a modern highway probably financially sponsored by the western economies…
As the saying goes, ‘birds of a feather flock together’, and this quip rings true when it comes to Western institutions and their de-facto subordinates. The joint message being conveyed is that the Macedonian authorities themselves are complicit in the destabilization, hence why “all actors” must “exercise maximum restraint” and why a follow-up “objective and transparent” investigation is necessary. Going even further, this implies that the state’s resistance in combating terrorism helped contribute to it, implying that the country should have just rolled over and allowed the terrorists to take control of the city, or even worse, the entire country for that matter.
The invocation of “community leaders” is designed to create the sense that this was some kind of grassroots, local uprising, which it wasn’t at all, and is meant to drive a wedge between the government and local municipalities with significant Albanian populations like Kumanovo. From the look of it, it appears as though the West and its puppet UN appendage don’t support anti-terrorist operations unless they’re the ones conducting them and they’re being initiated for pro-Western geopolitical purposes. After all, this rhetoric against the Macedonian government is eerily reminiscent of the same type of statements being made against the Syrian one, which is also the regional anti-terrorism leader for its home area…
Terrorists attacked the Macedonian city of Kumanovo on 9 May, but one wouldn’t know that by reading the Western media’s reaction to the tragedy, despite the fact that they typically mention that 8 police officers were killed and another 37 wounded during the firefight. The media’s disingenuous ‘reporting’ reeks of ulterior motives, which is evidenced most visibly by their reluctance to use the word terrorist without putting it in questionable quotation marks, but also takes more subtle forms such as casting suspicion on the government for complicity in the attack and/or inferring that the attack was some type of legitimate protest reaction.
Western institutions like the EU and NATO are actually worse since they confer equal responsibility for the violence on both the terrorists (which they don’t even refer to as) and the Macedonian security services, and even the UN has taken to echoing their sly sentiments with all three entities questioning the official course of events and demanding a “transparent investigation”. The US and its main Western European NATO allies escalate the rhetoric and actually engage in a form of victim shaming against the country during its official two-day period of mourning by questioning its commitment to “democracy” and not showing any solidarity with it whatsoever in its fight against terrorism. This shameless act (and lack thereof) shows that they and all the previously mentioned actors are in fact implicit supporters of Albanian terrorism against Macedonia and strong proponents of the state destabilization.
Part I of the research demonstrates how unipolar information sources purposely manipulate their coverage of the latest terrorist attacks in Macedonia, while Part II begins by showing how this is also the case for the Western and pro-Western institutions of the EU, NATO, and the UN. The series continues by addressing how the US and its allies have tried to shame and intimidate Macedonia, and then concludes by identifying probable scenarios for how they plan on punishing the proud country for resisting their aggression…
According to some officials and analysts the terrorist attack in Kumanovo is increasingly becoming associated with the idea of a so-called ‘Greater Albania.’ Many of them are afraid of the possible expansion of terrorist activities in the other regions of the country.In this ‘Greater Albania’ the area of Montenegro is also included which consists of about 5% Albanians.
Analysts believe that the recent events in Macedonia “do not resemble a total war but a rather intention to extend the line of confrontation between Russia and the West in the Balkans.”
“It is absolutely obvious that the agenda is the ‘Ukrainization of the Balkans’. It is quite similar to the Arab Spring and Ukraine,” said political analyst Dusan Janjic.
Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee of the Parliament of Montenegro Miodrag Vukovic told Sputnik that the Macedonian events are enough reason to increase alertness and the level of responsibility of state structures.
“Montenegro does not rely on chance. But at this moment the country is not facing any immediate danger,” Vukovic said in an interview with Radio Sputnik…
The book describes the activities of the Roman Catholic clergy in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, including their intention and attempts to become above the state, to control the state and eventually the everyday lives of the common people. It has two distinct parts. The first part consists of fifteen chapters, covering the Roman Catholic clericalism from the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the 20th century in Austria-Hungary, then in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. The second part, the last four chapters, covers the rise and fall of the Independent State of Croatia, and the active support of the Roman Catholic clergy.
The main doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia was that (a) the clergy shall be paid by the state as state officials; (b) the state cannot have any control over the Church; (c) the Church has right to be fully involved in the political life of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia; (d) the Church doctrine/religious education shall be a part of primary and secondary school curricula; and that (e) the Roman Catholic Church curricula in the schools shall be obligatory to all pupils whose at least one parent is a Roman Catholic.
Josip Juraj Strossmayer’s ideas, of which the most important one was that serving God is equal to serving the people, created close relations between Croats and Serbs by introducing the Old Slavonic language as the liturgical language of the Roman Catholic Church in the Balkans and were aggressively suppressed by the Roman Catholic clergy in Croatia and Slovenia.
Ante Pavelić’s nationalism identified Roman Catholicism with the Croat nation, which was actively supported and interpreted by the clergy.
The second part of this book focuses on the establishment of the Independent State of Croatia, the active support of this state by the Roman Catholic clergy, and their involvement and support in the extermination and/or forceful conversion of the Serbs and extermination of the Jews and the Roma people.
Archbishop Aloysius Stepinac is portrayed in this book as an ardent Roman Catholic crusader who publicly endorsed the establishment of the Independent State of Croatia, acknowledged the Ustashe as Croatian patriots, defended it before the Roman Pope and was responsible for the racist attitude and behavior of his clergy…
The issue of ethnic tension within Macedonia has gained global headlines after eight police officers and 14 others were killed during a two-day shootout between police and what the Macedonian government described as an armed paramilitary group of ethnic Albanians in the northern city of Kumanovo.
The incident is the latest and bloodiest in a string of clashes between Macedonians and ethnic Albanians, who make up approximately 30 percent of the country’s population.
These deaths have once again raised fears of rising ethnic tensions and concerns that the country may be heading for another civil war, similar to one fought between Macedonian forces and Albanian paramilitary groups in 2001…
“Separatist Fires” in Macedonia and the Virtues of Corruption. Kosovo Provides the Toxic Model of Rebellion
The town of Kumanovo itself demonstrates that dreary repetitiveness of factions seeking advantage and reward, flavoured by a hint of conspiracy and not so grand design. There are the separatists themselves, operating in various guises. There are the corrupt government officials who align themselves with status quo corruption while extolling the virtues of stability. Then there are the indigent civilians who simply wish to continue living in an ethnically mixed city, desperate as it might be. As a resident told the Balkan Insight, “We all know each other, we would have seen if there were any terrorists. Everything seemed normal until yesterday.”
The formidable Albanian presence in Macedonia has led to its fair share of scuffles and grief. But the very basis of the framework agreement in 2001 was based on two neat, if unfortunate delusions: the existence of a nourished, extant civil society, and the “harmonious” existence of the ethnic setting. Neither has come to pass, one feeding the other noxious, undermining gruel. In such a vacuum, nature has done its best to fill it with considerable nastiness.
Such acts of instability also take place in a country run by a government well versed in wire-tapping and profligate misrule. They, it can be said, provide the pretext and the incitement for those who prefer action to empty salutations to constitutional rule. The accord itself notes how, “A modern democratic state in its natural course of development and maturation must continually ensure that its Constitution fully meets the needs of all of its citizens and comports with the highest international standards, which themselves continue to evolve.” There are even suggestions filling the rumour mill that the attacks over the weekend were staged as efforts on the part of the government to retain power. Crisis breeds reactive crisis.
Since 2006, Prime Minister Gruevski has been in charge, leading the VMRO-DPMNE party in a series of coalition governments. Drunk on megalomania and revisionism, Gruevski has drained the public purse for enormous cultural projects, notably around the city of Skopje, emphasising the poorly made point that Macedonia gave birth to western civilisation. This form of “antiquisation” insinuates Disneyland practices into ritualised worship. Heads have invariably swollen in the process…