Pursuing UN objectivity – Stop Vuk Jeremic Steal What Rightfully Belongs to the Victims of War Crimes Worldwide

Vecernji List 24 February 2013

Vecernji List 24 February 2013

While only representatives of member countries of the United Nations (UN) – and not individual citizens – can make representations, put forth proposals etc. in the UN, at the end of the day every UN representative sitting there is there because ordinary citizens, like you or I, have voted at general elections in the countries we live in. Hence, you and I have an absolute right and responsibility to become involved with the work of the UN, albeit through the will of our parliamentarians.

For some months now, we have been informed that the current President of UN General Assembly, Vuk Jeremic, a citizen of Serbia, is planning on convening a thematic debate in the UN, on 10 April 2013, on the “Role of International Criminal Justice on Reconciliation”. Last week he has published a communiqué on the event (Please click on this link to read the communiqué and details for the debate).

In the Concept Note attached to Jeremic’s communiqué, he states: “we must be vigilant to ensure that international criminal justice serves in the best way its purpose. Operate within a neutral and impartial framework, and achieve its goals in a sustainable manner”.

While I personally believe that such a debate is a positive thing, especially because it seems that it will encompass (if not directly then indirectly) justice delivered through the tribunals regarding all countries that have been involved with UN International Tribunals of some kind, in the period after Nuremberg trials post-WWII  (e.g. Cambodia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, East Timor, Lebanon, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Rwanda…), indications are overwhelmingly against objectivity of such a debate if it puts forth at the lectern speakers who are not neutral and impartial in the issue of the debate.  Jeremic himself, a citizen of Serbia, speaks of “neutrality and impartiality” and yet he has shown no human decency to distance himself from leading this debate. Furthermore reconciliation and issues around it are set to be a focal point of the debate. Given all this, justice for humanity would tell us that victims of those horrid crimes are the ones who factor most highly in whether justice of the tribunals has or will steer reconciliation, and how.

Hence, as a subscriber to democracy and complete justice I was personally horrified in finding out that this UN debate will be convened, with the opening address delivered by a citizen of one of the countries involved with the very war crimes before the International Criminal Tribunal, Vuk Jeremic from Serbia. My horror had deepened to an even more unimaginable and insufferable level when I read in the media recently (from Serbia) that Serbia’s President Tomislav Nikolic (who was personally involved in Serbia’s politics of aggression and ethnic cleansing during early 1990’s on the territory of the Former Yugoslavia) is under consideration to deliver a keynote speech at the debate.   

My horror does not arise from any strong feelings I may, or may not have regarding the war in Croatia and the fact that the International Criminal Tribunal has already convicted Serbs of joint criminal enterprise against Croatian civilians, people and property. My feelings of horror arise from the fact that, even today, in the 21st century, the UN does not seem capable of organising such an important debate in a completely objective manner, ensuring that any role played during the debate (e.g. keynote speaking, opening statements) does not contaminate the victims’ rights to real and perceived objectivity. Indeed, the only way this can be achieved is to ensure that representatives of the countries where war crimes had occurred do not stand at the lectern and keynote speak to the participants. They can certainly participate in debates, as any other country can.

In my opinion, and I am certain in the opinion of many, the UN should appoint an independent coordinator and group (representatives from countries untainted by the very crimes and justice the debate is addressing) to facilitate and keynote speak for this event.

So, what do we do as citizens of the world? We quick smart write to our Prime Ministers, Presidents …the Opposition Leaders, or our local Member of Parliament or Congressman/Congresswoman… and ask that your country takes up the issue with the UN in ensuring the debate on 10 April 2013 is completely objective and, above all, fair to the multitudes of victims across the world whose wounds would undoubtedly be split wide open the instant a keynote speech or opening addresses are uttered by representatives from “involved-in-crime” countries.

There is no successful or long lasting reconciliation like the one that puts the rights and the feelings of victims up front.

I have personally written to the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition in Australia such a letter. The more people write the better – wherever you are. So get going please, write your letter. Please contact me if you need to see a sample letter.

I was pleasantly surprised to discover today that Croatian journalist Jadranka Juresko-Kero had written an article about my letter to the Australian Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition and that Vecernji List newspaper has published an article on these efforts of mine to ensure complete respect of victims of war crimes through the UN debate.

It is through such personal actions, by writing to our governments, that we may make a positive and meaningful difference in the lives and rights of victims of war crimes. To evidence this I am at this moment unpleasantly reminded of the Serbian Orthodox New Year concert at the UN General Assembly, beginning of January 2013, when Vuk Jeremic, served upon the UN a diplomatic prank that offended so many victims of the 1990’s war in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina.  The performance in the UN hall of the Serbian song “March on Drina”, which Serb aggressors hummed and chanted and sang as they went about killing innocent people and ethnically cleansing non-Serb population during 1990’s would have remained just a performance for entertainment had groups and organisations representing the victims not reacted immediately. UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon had no option but to apologise and express regret to the victims.

But the apology and the regret came too late. The victims had already been wounded. Let’s not allow a similar thing happening again at the very altar of human justice and humanity – at the UN, on 10th April.

As far as Croatia’s participation in this debate is concerned, it would seem that there are two main strands of opinion at this stage and in the corridors of political echelons.  One strand of thought is that the event be ignored in certain ways and to act, in parallel, with the so-called quiet diplomacy because “the loser has the right to feel angry, nothing else remains for him/her and Croatia has won in the ICTY, Hague”.  The other strand of thought is to be “loud”, that is, that Croatia sends an important or high-ranking politician such as the Minister of Justice, of Foreign Affairs or a President’s envoy who would, alongside other representatives of Croatian diplomacy, deliver the message to the UN that Croatia is a country which has cooperated with the work of the International Criminal Tribunal and throughout its court processes and that it has confirmed its innocence as well as the innocence of Croatian Generals, who had endured a very long Hague Calvary.

After the Croatian Generals Ante Gotovina and Mladen Markac returned home to Croatia (16 November 2012) from The Hague, free and acquitted of war crimes including joint criminal enterprise, Vuk Jeremic began “threatening”, from his UN position as President of UN General Assembly, that he was embittered by the ICTY verdict and that he would call for a meeting where “the truth will emerge”. There is no doubt in my mind that with such a style of manipulation Jeremic wanted to send a message to Serbia and to the Serbian diaspora that he has used his influence and position in the UN to initiate a meeting with the “symbolic” date of 10th April. Of course, knowing that 10th April (1941) is the date that signifies the founding of the World War II Independent State of Croatia – there is no doubt that Jeremic has once again “pulled a dirty” on the UN and its member states, just as he did at the Orthodox New Year’s concert.

Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Lebanon, Cambodia, Rwanda … all should enter this debate in the UN on equal footing and that can only be achieved that no keynote speakers, no opening or otherwise formally pivotal speakers come from any of these countries.
The debate will remain as an official documentary record for those who will write the history tomorrow. That is why that debate is important and why it is good that Serbia has found itself at this time in the function of presiding over the General Assembly and, hence, gained an opportunity to reply to that which has de facto been messaged to it by the decisions of the ICTY Appeal Chambers  – and that is, that only one guilty side exists, and only one criminal side and that that side is Serbian, said Vuk Jeremic to journalists in the UN.

Why the UN even permits Jeremic to advocate primarily for his country’s interests at the UN general debate, which will encompass several countries on issues of reconciliation and International Criminal Tribunal justice, is mind-boggling and profoundly distressing.
Surely, there are member states of the UN that can prevent such travesty of UN global interest and role in the issues to be debated! But I honestly believe that the receipt of letters from their own citizens will help further the cause – so, grab your pen, keyboard … write that letter this week! Ina Vukic, Prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Syd)


  1. Zeljko Marsic says:

    Možemo li vaše pismo slati skupštini UN kao naš prosvjed?
    Could we use your letter to UN as our protest letter also?
    Zeljko Marsic

    • Zeljko Marsic – da možete koristiti moj tekst, poslat ću vam presliku emailom, ali moje pismo australskim vlastima smatram da nije prikladno za tako nešto jer očekujem odgovor i potrebno je dati im priliku odgovoriti. Najefikasnije je mislim preko vlastitih državnih predstavnika jer pojedinci baš nemaju tako slobodan pristup UNu, udruge možda da. Yes you can use my text as sample, I will email it to you, but not my letter to Australian Prime Minister etc because I think that it is not suitable and they need to be given an opportunity to reply. The most effective way is to work through member country representatives as individuals I believe do not have such free access to UN, organisations are another thing, though.

  2. Arkan is Jeremic’s mentor.

  3. Ana Zagorac Kerscher says:

    Zovem se Ana Kerscher izu Beograda sam, a zivim u Minhenu . Mislim da gospodin Vuk Jeremic treba da govori u OUN o navedenoj temi jer zlocine treba osmotriti sa svih strana. On je dovoljno upucen i sigurno moze da da konstruktivan doprinos. Stice se utisak, da postoji strah od njegovog nastupa i onoga sto bi mogao reci. Da li je to razlog sto ga – po misljenju nekih – treba ucutkati ili je to samo vase uverenje da Jeremic podrzava zlocine?

    • Translation of Ana Zagorac Kerscher comment: My name is Ana Kerscher, I am from Belgrade but I live in Munich. I think that Mr Vuk Jeremic should speak in the UN about the set theme because crimes should be viewed from all sides. He is knowledgeable enough and can certainly give a constructive contribution. I get an impression that there is fear because of his appearance there and of what he might say. Is this the reason why – according to some – he should be silenced or is that only your conviction that Jeremic supports crimes?

      Reply” Ana Zagorec Kerscher – there is no suggestion in my article that Jeremic should not speak or contribute to the debate. My opinion is that he should not chair, he should not deliver main speeches or addresses nor anyone from any country where there have been war crimes because that offends the victims and it is not neutral or impartial, about which Jeremic claims should exist. He can and should participate in the debate as any other member of UN. The debate is set to cover war crimes from several countries and all must be given equal opportunities, so the facilitation of the debate, the keynote speaking should be left to representatives from countries that have not been touched by war crimes. As to your suggestion that Jeremic knows a great deal about the crimes, he may know that indeed but this UN debate is not a court, it is a place where reconciliation between people and nations affected by war crimes will be considered. If Jeremic knows about crimes then it is his duty as a human being to alert the proper authorities who prosecute crimes. If you believe that Jeremic should act as some higher judicial body (higher court than an International Criminal Tribunal which looks at evidence objectively) then I cannot accept that because, in democracy, which UN pursues, the word of the court is the last word and we must accept that whether we like it or not.

  4. Brave New World says:

    This is an ideal opportunity for the world to realize the truth – that Serbia was the aggressor in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, and if that happens then perhaps true reconciliation in that region can commence. I know that the debate is covering war crimes in other countries as well and it is just so unfair for Serbia to steal the limelight and attempt to justify their crime of aggression. Pushing the interests of Serbia though his position as President of UN General Assembly humiliates not only the UN but the whole world.

    • Further to the lack of historical truth in your comment and evident amount of raw unjust hatred toward Serbs, your ‘artistic’ name should be rightfully amended to Stupid New World. You and your ‘followers’ will identify yourselves by not liking or deleting my comment.

      • There is no hatred against Serbs, there is only care and respect for true objectivity in actual persons who lead the debate. No one said Serbs should not participate in the debate, but when you have that situation that justice regarding war crimes in several countries and reconciliation in several countries is to be debated then all countries that are affected by them should participate on equal footing. That is the ultimate justice. I can see Rada that you have little thought or regard for such matters.

  5. Communist Watch says:

    Serbia has the support of Russia and China in the UN and they are quite strong, so let’s not hold our breath to 10 April that the debate will be fair to all victims, or fair to International Criminal Court judges or justice. If the leader of that debate – Vuk Jeremic – carries grudges and bitterness because the Hague has convicted so many Serbs for war crimes in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina how can anyone in their right might expect neutrality and fairness. If it was up to me I would convene a special independent panel of independent persons to lead and facilitate the debate. Good luck!

  6. Judging by what Vuk Jeremic has blurted out about the International Criminal Tribunal from his position at UN General Assembly, brace yourselves – the Serbian Chetnik killing force may get its legitimacy in the UN. It is the responsibility of all who care even a little bit to stop this madness and get the UN to listen to the victims!

    • pathetic!

      • I agree, it’s pathetic that Vuk Jeremic as President of UN General Assembly has not removed himself from facilitating the debate and arranged for totally independent of war crimes countries to lead the debate. That way no conflict of interest for anyone and he would come out as a considerate man towards all victims, towards all countries members of UN. That would also be his responsibility as president of the Assembly.

    • Ina, do not twist my comment that ,clearly, marks Paddy A comment as pathetic. Your action is not ethical.
      Fact that Vuk Jeremic as President of UN General Assembly has initiated a revisit and investigation of the ‘work’ of Court in Hague should not intimidate you. After all, he is a president and it is only logical that he does his job accordingly. His nationality is irrelevant in this case, as his objective is clear and just. Besides it is his duty as the President of UN General Assembly, to make certain that all organizations assigned with executing international justice do their bit properly and in non-corrupted manner.

      • Sorry to disappoint you Rada, but had you read everything you would have found out the fact that the debate in UN General Assembly in April IS NOT ABOUT THE HAGUE COURT ONLY but about ALL INTERNATIONAL CRIMES TRIBUNAL – and there were several whose justice is to be debated. The UN criminal tribunals are established by the UN Security Council, not General Assembly and of course General Assembly can make recommendations to Security Council etc. How do you even imagine that General Assembly could assess or bring judgment as to the work of particular court, judgments etc without the benefit of assessing the evidence that was before the court who brought down certain decisions. So, while your wishful thinking that Jeremic will make certain “all organizations assigned with executing international justice do their bit properly and in non-corrupt manner” may sit well with you that is not what the debate is planned for. Oh, I’m certain that Jeremic and everyone else will have an opinion about the justice delivered by international tribunals and hopefully good recommendations might come out of it for reconciliation in Former Yugoslavia, Cambodia, Lebanon, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, East Timor…the countries UN debate will address.

  7. Sramota da se jos niste Buducnosti Okrenuli ,umesto da nudite Mir nebi li nasli mir ,zbog buducih generacija vi rasprsujete mrznju koja nece nikome doneti dobro,neka vam je bog na upomoc jer sa takvim razmisljanjem necete nikada imati Bozji Mir i izgubicete sebe i zdravlje sa tim sagjenjem mrznje,svaka rec je seme da vam nebi sudili na onom svetu Pazite sta sejete .

    • Translation of Darko comment (written in Serbian dialect/spelling: “It’s a shame that you haven’t yet turned to the future, instead of offering peace so you might find peace, for future generations you spread hatred, which will bring good to nobody, may God help you because with such thinking you will never have God’s peace and you will lose yourself and health with that hatred, every word is a seed so you won’t be judged in the other world Watch what you sow.”

      Reply: Well Darko – if wanting fairness and objectivity and respect for victims of war crimes (not only Croatian or Bosnian/Herzegovinian but also Siera Leone, Lebanon, Rwanda, East Timor, Cambodia is “sowing hatred” so be it! God, I am sure will not be as harsh or as biased as you. I am turning to the future and I would like that future to hold dear and respect the victims of crimes and punish all perpetrators, no matter who they are or where they come from.

      • Reply to reply:

        Your reply to Darko’s comment only reveled that you will continue sowing hatred but now in the name of justice of which you clearly know nothing about. What is worst, you show resentment towards the fact that justice is a right for all people and it cannot be selective or manipulated. Your texts prove contradiction between wanting and fighting for justice for all, yet you resent justice for certain groups of people. You obviously need to work a bit harder to comprehend the DEFINITION OF JUSTICE. Since you are sure that GOD is not that harsh and biased, maybe it will dawn on you some day.

      • Justice can only be delivered through independent, unbiased channels and certainly what’s happening there in the UN for the debate is manipulation. Wanting objectivity and inbiased approach to the issues planned for the UN debate is not sowing hatred, it actually utmost fair towards all.

      • Ina, looks like you forgot to mention that you want fairnes and justice for Serb victims as well.
        Just a reminder of your almost holistic approach to selective justice!

      • Oh no Rada, I want justice for all victims regardless of their nationality or country they come from. Hence, since the debate will discuss war crimes from several countries, not just former Yugoslavia, it is only appropriate that there is no real or perceived bias when it comes to keynote speakers and facilitation of the debate.

      • And where did you get and idea that there would be “real or perceived bias when it comes to keynote speakers and facilitation of the debate”?

      • From statements already made several times in public by Jeremic. Hence any reasonable person concludes that there is danger of bias.

      • Any reasonable person would conclude that Jeremic will not abuse the function. Maybe your perception of “bias” needs to be corrected..

      • Rada, when someone like Jeremic goes out publicly giving opinions and statements about a matter that are not neutral then every reasonable person can assume bias at a related debate if that person is in the function of facilitating or heading a debate. That’s all that is the case here, Jeremic or anyone like that who has gone publicly on a matter taking a certain “side” can express their opinion etc in the “body”of the debate but not steer the debate. It’s for same reasons for examples that when a court empanels jurors it makes certain that the juror’s prior exposure to information about a case etc is not affecting their ability to act without bias.

  8. Hi Ina,
    Could you please provide an outline or template of your letter for all readers of your blog to use for sending their own letters to our government reps?

    • Gladly, Sunman. I had also attached to my letter a copy of the communique about the debate that I downloaded from UN General Assembly website but it can be downloaded through the link on my post:

      Dear Prime Minister,

      With the understanding that only representatives of member states of the United Nations can make proposals to the UN on issues affecting the UN I ask you to please consider making representations as to the organisation of the upcoming interactive thematic debate “Role of International Criminal Justice in Reconciliation” to be held in UN General Assembly on 10th April 2013.

      I write to you as an Australian citizen, concerned for justice for both the victim and the perpetrator of crimes as an absolute right of humanity in general, which the UN Organization represents.

      In the Concept Note attached to President of UN General Assembly, Mr Vuk Jeremic’s communiqué dated 11 February 2013 (copy enclosed) on the interactive thematic debate “Role of International Criminal Justice in Reconciliation” to be held on April 10, 2013, it is stated that “we must be vigilant to ensure that international criminal justice serves in the best way its purpose. Operate within a neutral and impartial framework, and achieve its goals in a sustainable manner”.

      While I accept that the debate will be held and facilitated in a professional and objective manner, I, and, I am certain, many will find or perceive the debate as lacking neutrality and impartiality if any UN officials or representatives (including the President of the General Assembly) of member countries that have direct or vicarious connections to cases that have been or are before international criminal tribunals (e.g. Cambodia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, East Timor, Lebanon, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Rwanda, , etc.) either chair, facilitate or give keynote speeches. Such an eventuality will, although unintended, without doubt offend gravely those the debate is sure to refer to – the victims of horrific war crimes.

      I therefore ask you, dear Prime Minister, to please use Australia’s influence as a UN member state and seek for this special and important event that persons opening and delivering keynote speeches and addresses be truly neutral and impartial in the sense mentioned above. I believe that such an important and special UN event deserves special consideration for measures that ensure that chairing and keynote speakers do not come from member countries whose citizens have been before international criminal tribunals, or have been known to support political lines which led to massive crimes against humanity as dealt by those tribunals.

      Thanking you on your consideration
      With best regards,

      Ina Vukic

      c.c. The Hon Tony Abbott MHR
      Leader of the Opposition


  9. Just a brief scan of this page, and one gets a sense of that primitive Balkan mentality, tragic provincial nationalism and – hate. Despite the veil of “professor” and “tireless humanitarian volunteer”, anyone with more then two braincells (including, hopefully, the person the above text is intended for) will take one look at this page and realise that they are dealing with just another Balkan peasant who belongs in the stone age. On the subject of Croatia, let’s be honest here; all that was left after 1991 was a bunch of insignificant mickey mouse countries, none of which have provided anything significant to the world whatsoever.

    And by the way professor, there appears to be a typo in the title; I think the “steal” should actually be “stealing”. You welcome.

    • What has seeking objectivity for the organisation of a meeting got to do with nationalism. Absolutely nothing. But the fact the Jeremic has not removed himself from leading the debate, and just be an ordinary participant of it, has everything to do with nationalism and self-importance, utter neglect of victims’ rights to an impartial organisation of debate. When it comes to contributing to the world I believe that there are a relatively large number of individuals from all states of former Yugoslavia who have contributed a great deal to the world in their fields of expertise. There is no typo in the posts title, it was written as such on purpose, a practice often used in journalism when titling articles.But thank you on your keen observation, anyway.

  10. Victim of Balkan war says:


    First, I fully support your campaign. Anytime Jeremic talks, he delivers hate towards Croats, Bosnians, Albanians, and others.

    Have you reached out to other organizations in Bosnia, Kosovo, and maybe even other countries? I believe that your campaign would be supported by many, but I am unsure how many people know.


    • Yes Victim of Balkan Wars the matter has spread far and wide with positive responses. So let’s hope objectivity will win at the end of the day. Thank you.

  11. A zasto se plasite te rasprave? Da se ne cuje da je Hrvatska potplatila sve koje je trebalo da bi Gotovina bio oslobodjen, a da su placenici Ramusa Haradinaja pobili svedoke. Pa to zna ceo svet!

    • Translation of Slavica comment (in Serbian dialect/spelling): Why are you scared of the debate? So that it won’t be heard that Croatia had paid off everyone that needed to be paid off so that Gotovina could go freed, and that those paid off by Ramus Haradinaj had killed all witnesses. Well the whole world knows this.

      Reply: there is no fear for the debate, in fact I hold it very important for humanity but it should be managed completely objectively when it comes to main speakers, facilitators etc. Your comment is a classic example of people who do not accept the truth nor the fact that courts examine the evidence objectively to deliver verdicts. So, if I knew anyone had killed anyone I would see it as my duty as citizen and human being to report this to proper authorities. You evidently know of such things so, if they are not baseless rumours, what are you doing wasting valuable time commenting on my post, get going to the authorities and report your knowledge.

      • Yes, you do fear a debate, but you hide it under veil of your interpretation of good citizen and humanitarian. Sarcastic advise you gave to Slavica proves it.

      • Sarcasm is good Rada, besides there’s no hiding behind anything: if the debate will include war crimes committed in several countries and supported by some then healthy logic tells you that one of these countries cannot be leading the debate and rest not, so the best way is to have independent and unbiased leading of the debate while the others contribute or participate from the floor.

    • Zeljko Marsic says:

      Nitko se draga gospođo ne plaši. Samo ne želimo cirkus poput Marša na Drinu u UN. Naravno, i datum debate je izabran u kulturnom stilu. Bolje bi bilo da je odabran 05.08.

      • A zasto vam Zeljko smeta Mars na Drinu? Pa svi u ex-Jugoslaviji su svojevremeno slusali Danke Deutshland kao zahvalnicu koju je Hrvatska u toj muzickj noti uputila doticnoj zemlji, emitovano je Evropskim i svetskim TV kanalima.tada. Nicemu ne sluze opaske na kontu bilo koje pesme.

  12. Ina, would like to send a copy of the letter to the Canadian government.

  13. Lazar Bojanić says:

    Draga gospođo ,
    Demokratski i prirodno je da svako ko ima pravo na to , priča o temi , ma kako ona bila teška i bolna za sve sagovornike , a naročito za hrvate i bošnjake .
    Vuk Jeremić je predsednik skupštine UN-a i u skladu sa poslovnikom o radu skupštine će se naći vreme da i on kaže šta misli o temi , možda prvi u redu jednakih ili kako god , ali reč je samo reč i mišljenje i ništa više od toga .
    Stičem utisak da je ovde problem više to što Srbija kao njegova (Vukova) domovina ima veliki teret odgovornosti za zločine koji su se dogodili tokom (građanskog?) rata u bivšoj SFRJ … te zločine je NIJE počinio sam Vuk i on kao takav nema nikakvog tereta na svojim plećima koji bi mu smetao da iznese svoje mišljenje i zato molim Vas dozvolite mu da priča slobodono , bez obzira šta je poreklom !

    Izvinite me što na ovom mestu pišem svojim jezikom jer engleski čitam dobro ali pišem očajno .

    • Translation of comment by Lazar Bojanic: Dear lady, It democratic and natural that everyone who has a right to talk about a theme, talks about it, no matter how difficult or painful a theme is, and especially for Croats and Bosniaks. Vuk Jeremic is the President of the UN Assembly and according to its rules of operation time will be found for him to also say what he thinks about the theme, maybe first in line of equals or whatever, but word is only a word and thought is nothing more than that. I get the impression here that the problem here is that Serbia as his (Vuk’s) homeland has the big burden of responsibility for the crimes that happened during (civil?) war in former Social Federative Republic of Yugoslavia … those crimes were not committed by Vuk and he as such has no burden on his shoulders, which would interfere with his bringing out his thoughta and so, I ask you allow him to speak freely, regardless of what origin he is from.
      P.S. Please excuse me for writing this in my language as I read English well but write it badly.

      REPLY: Lazar Bojanic, no one is saying that Jeremic should not speak at the debate, just that he should not chair it nor make keynote addresses etc. The debate must not turn out as a platform to favour one “country’s” views over another – the debate is planned to address several UN Criminal Tribunals, not just the Hague, and how the judgments etc from those tribunals affect reconciliation etc. , which we all want throughout the world. And all countries involved with war crimes should have equal roles in the debate and that is only as participants and not leaders of debates. That is the only fair way of going about it.

  14. Ana Zagorac Kerscher says:

    Postovana gospodjo Ina,
    Da li ste sigurni da je to ono sto Hrvatskoj stvarno treba-da se eliminise g. Jeremic, pa da mnogi govore kako bi neki hrvatski lobi ustvari hteo da utice na nekog drugog Predsedavajuceg. Pa ako se ne varam, Jeremic je ovu raspravu i inicirao inace je danas ne bi ni bilo, a ona je svetu potrebna zbog istine, a ne zbog generala.Da ne govorim o buducnosti odnosa Srba i Hrvata, a taj odnos jedna generacija zasita treba da uvede u neki normalan tok, sto je u obostranom interesu. Ne bih rekla da smo mi ta generacija, ali uvek treba pokusati. Iskreno, ne vidim zasto je vazno u kom svojstvu ce gospodin Jeremic ucestvovati u toj raspravi. Deluje mi vise kao neko emocionalno pitanje nego racionalno. Sud u Hagu je uspostavljen od strane OUN, pa nije neobicno da OUN pokrene raspravu o valjanosti sudjenja i pokusa da sagleda da li su argumenti za to valjani ili ne, stoga nije neobicno da predsedavajuci da takvu inicijativu. U ovom slucaju predsedavajuci dolazi iz naroda koji je pogodjen i zlocinima – jer svi znamo da su mnoge zrtve zlocina Srbi, ne samo u ovom proslom ratu nego i u Drugom svetskom ratu.Pa ko ce drugi da kontrolise Sud, ako ne osnivac ? Pa ima li ista postenije ?. Mogao je Jeremic to da uradi i kao clan, ali je Predsedavajuci i tako je mogao da skrene paznju na nesto za sta mnogi veruju da je npravedno sudjenje (ipak iako presude treba prihvatiti-svi znamo da one nisu slovo Biblije i da su ih doneli ljudi, a ljudi su znate skloni greskama. Nije zloupotreba polozaja, krivica ni neobjektivnost ili izigravanje neutralnosti – pokrenuti pitanje objektivnosti sudske presude.G-din Jeremic dolazi iz zemlje koja je domovina vecine zatocenih u Hagu, ali on se na to nije zalio. On dolazi takodje iz zemlje koja je matica stotibnama hiljada ljudi koji su pobijeni i proterani u poslednjem ratu i u Drugom svetskom ratu i to od strane nekih ljudi u Hrvatskoj, ali za to niko izgleda nije kriv.Molim vas, pa kako je to moguce ? U Srbiji niko nije osporio presude koje su donete njenim drzavljanima, naprotiv te presude su prihvacene. Postoje indikacije da neke druge presude treba jos jednom sagledati. U najdubljem interesu Hrvata i Srba je da se sagleda istina.Nije bitno ko pokrece pitanje, bitno je da se dodje do istine. Srbija treba da se suoci sa nepravdama koje je nanela drugima, ali zlocini pocinjeni nad Srbima u poslednjem ratu, kao i u Drugom svetskom ratu ce biti rasvetljeni, pre ili kasnije, a bolje pre da bi oni koji su ih pocinili i naredili, mogli da odgovaraju i pred sudom, a ne samo pred istorijom. Vi i vas cenjeni blog po mom misljenju, trebalo bi da ucestvuju u razotkrivanju istine, u tome bismo kao ljudi svi trebali da saradjujemo, a takodje i vlada Australije.Verujem da je to i u najboljem interesu Hrvata i Hrvatske – da se sagleda i razotkrije istina, isto to je i interes Srba. Verujte zaista bih volela da ta dva naroda pronadju put do mira i spokoja,do boljeg razumevanja. Ne treba se plasiti ni da preispitamo sudske odluke, ni ono sto govore nase Crkve ni nasi istoricari – dodjimo do istine i recimo je javno. To sto radi Jremic po mom misljenju, nije usmereno protiv Hrvata.

    • Translation of Ana Zagorac Kerscher comment: Respected Ms Vukic, Are you certain that that is what Croatia really needs – to eliminate Mr Jeremic, so that many can say how some Croatian lobby really wanted to exert influence upon some other Chairperson. Well, if I’m not mistaken, Jeremic initiated this debate, otherwise there would be none, and the world needs it for the truth, and not for the generals. Let alone the future of relations between Serbs and Croats, a generation really needs to introduce a normal flow, which is of mutual interest. I wouldn’t say that we are that generation, but we must try always. Honestly, I do not see why it is important in which role Mr Jeremic will participate in that debate. It seems to me as more of an emotional than rational question. UN established the Tribunal in the Hague, and so it is not unusual for the UN to instigate a debate regarding the validity of trials and try and look into whether arguments for that are valid or not, given this it is not unusual for the President to make such an initiate. In this case the President comes from the people affected by crimes – because we all know that many victims of crimes are Serbs, not only in this war but also in WWII. So who else will control the debate if not the founder? Is there anything more honest? Jeremic could have done this as a member, but he is the President and as such he could turn the attention towards something for what many believe is an unjust trial (judgments). Nevertheless, although judgments should be accepted we all know they are not the word of the Bible and that people made them, and people are inclined to make mistakes. It is not an abuse of position, guilt or non-objectivity or cheating neutrality – to initiate the question of objectivity of court judgment. Mr Jeremic comes from the country that is the homeland of many of those held in the Hague, but he has not complained about that. He also comes from a country which is the parent body of hundreds of thousands of people who have been killed and deported in war and in WWII and from some people in Croatia, but it seems nobody is guilty for that. Please, how is that possible? Nobody in Serbia disputed the judgments brought against its citizens, on the contrary those judgments are accepted. There are indications that some judgments need to be looked at once more. It’s in the deepest of interest for Croats and Serbs to see the truth. It’s not important who initiates the question, it’s important to come to the truth. Serbia needs to confront itself with the injustices it had brought against others, but crimes perpetrated over Serbs in the last war, as in WWII will be illuminated, sooner or later, and better sooner so that those who have committed them or ordered them, could answer before the court, and not only before the history. You and your blog, to my thinking, should participate in the discovery of the truth, we all as people should cooperate in that, and also the government of Australia. I believe that that is in the best interest of Croats and Croatia – to look into and reveal the truth, the same is in Serbs’ interest. Believe me, I would truly like that those two people find a path towards peace and serenity, to better understanding. We should not be afraid to examine court decisions, nor that which our churches or historians say – and say it publicly. What Jeremic is doing is not directed against Croats, I believe.

      REPLY: Ana Zagorac Kerscher, it would seem that there is a huge problem accepting court judgments or processes enacted in law regarding examining Hague court judgments, in your comment and judging by what I have read from media the problem is quite prevalent in Serbia all the way to Mr Jeremic. No, judgments are not the word of the Bible (religion) but they are the word of the Bible written and accepted for democracy and justice as seen by human beings. It is a good thing that Jeremic has instigated the debate, but it is not a debate on what happened in former Yugoslavia only and what happened in Hague only (there were and are other International Criminal Tribunals set up by UN to be included in the debate) – and certainly, Jeremic should distance himself, as anyone else involved or associate, from chairing, keynote speaking etc. at the debate. Regarding your suggestion that no one has answered for crimes against Serbs that is totally untrue. Thousands of criminal cases are before courts of Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina against suspected perpetrators of such crimes, many have already been convicted and jailed; sadly only two cases have come before courts in Serbia because Serbia is using politics and has been avoiding charging former commanders, soldiers of Yugoslav Army, their citizens, who are suspected of and known to have committed crimes. Hopefully that will change. I do not think that a debate at UN such as this one can examine with any impartiality or legitimacy the evidence put before Hague courts and upon which the courts had ruled. This should not happen because such activities are done by completely impartial and independent bodies, where there are no conflicts of interest. WWII crimes are not the subject of this debate and they have been dealt with to certain extend, but there is still Communist crimes to address. I totally agree that the truth must be known but that truth must be established with objectivity and impartiality, unfortunately the world cannot trust what the historians wrote as history of WWII etc. because the historians of that time were largely writing the history from the perspective of the winners, facts that did not suit them or implicated crimes committed by the victors have often been concealed.

  15. Hello to all,
    I have been listening and reading about these silly and sick “he said, she said” issues. I am 50% Serb- 50% Croat. I live in the USA, but I still visit both of my families! I travel to Serbia and to Croatia as well. And, unlike you, people living 10,000 miles away, in a comfortable Australian, or American or New Zealand climate, those people living in Slavonija, Vojvodina, Zagorje, Dalmacija, Kvarner, Sumadija, Kosovo — most of them is sick and tired of you, 10,000 miles away telling Them HOW to LIVE. Hey, we ARE THE SAME PEOPLE – don’t you get it? We have the same names, the same family names, we look the same, we swore the same, the women in Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia are equally beautiful!! So, shut the Hell Up!! If you want to run your little War, go ahead…. How stupid we can all be not to realize that what is happening to us in the Balkans?? Is only because we hold the land so critical for the big powers and they want us divided (and hating each other) so they can do whatever they are pleased…. Hej Sloveni … wake up!!

    • Goran, I tend to disagree with you, if people living in Croatia, Serbia, Kosovo are sick and tired of those living abroad telling them how to live their lives then they would not aspire to be a part of UN, of EU, of NATO etc where collaboration is the key operative word as well as compliance with universal charters etc, especially human rights. Besides, the debate in UN IS NOT planned to be about issues of war crimes and reconciliation in former Yugoslavia only, it is to cover also other countries such as Lebanon, Cambodia, Rwanda, East Timor, Sierra Leone… and if you want, Australia, New Zealand, America etc have all received and cared for refugees from those countries, paid for out of Australian, American, New Zealand’s citizens tax money (not to mention Foreign aid those countries give to affected countries in need, which also comes out of tax we pay to the country) and this, if nothing else gives those citizens in democracy the right to take an interest at UN level as to how a debate on reconciliation could better be carried out, avoiding singular political agendas.

      • Your objective – to stop Vuk Jeremic from being what he wants to be is put up so high on your agenda is ONLY because he is from Serbia!! That is it – correct? Or, perhaps you will give me another reason, say… because he has short hair and wears glasses?
        If you are such big freedom and truth lover, how about putting some work in educating the Croats and the Serbs, and the Bosnians about the REAL reasons why the only country which was really theirs has been destroyed in such a brutal way? Can you guess the name of that country? Let me help you – it was known as Yugoslavia. And you know – I will not live long enough to see that, but that country will, like the Phoenix, revive itself and rise from the ash and exist again. It is very simple really – that is the only hope for our people. I hear this wish in Slavonski brod where I was born, in Opatija where I worked when I was 20 years old, in Belgrade, in Kragujevac…And again, our people are the Croats, the Serbs, and our mix known as the Bosnians. And those who serves the goals of our enemies, should get what they deserve.

      • Goran – I have no issues with Jeremic participating in the debate but I have an issue with how that debate is facilitated, who gives keynote addresses etc and that the debate gives a chance to all affected by war crimes to participate on equal footing. That is just simple democracy and fairness, no personal feelings there. As to Yugoslavia, well it was created in 1918 and then extended by Istria after WWII – it was created because Serbian monarchy wanted to expand territory after WWI and Allies agreed to give it reign over Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina etc. The Croatian Parliament never ratified any agreement to be joined with Serbia in 1918, 1919. And, to my view and to the view of universal human rights charter every nation has a right to self-determination, Yugoslavia was comprised of various different nations, who has existed as identifiable nations much before Yugoslavia was constructed.

      • Dear Ms.Vukic,

        ever heard of “Ilirski pokret”, or Pan-Slavism? Ever heard of Slavonia joining Vojvodina (1919) in order to join Serbia?
        And this sentence from your comment tells me all about you…

        “As to Yugoslavia, well it was created in 1918 and then extended by Istria after WWII – it was created because Serbian monarchy wanted to expand territory after WWI and Allies agreed to give it reign over Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina etc.”

        What an insult to history and millions of us who are product of that fabulous country…

        Enjoy in your little World, and please stay in it…


        Goran Radojevich
        Chicago, IL

      • http://www.academia.edu/1647077/CREATION_OF_THE_KINGDOM_OF_THE_SERBS_CROATS_AND_SLOVENES_1914-1918 just one overview of history. If millions are so proud of Yugoslavia why did millions vote to secede from it in early 1990’s? Or do you not accept the right of self-determination?

      • Goran – nothing you say changes the fact that Serbian monarch Karadjordjevic pushed for a Yugoslav Kingdom and there is no reason not to believe that his cousin, King of Britain, did lobbying with Allies on behalf of his cousin at end of WWI.

        You simply cannot in today’s terms talk about what had happened hundreds of years ago because what is important is that the modern man/woman is blessed with various human rights international Charters that recognize the right of people to self-determination. History wasn’t blessed with that when Illyrian Movement was afoot, well not even after WWI – the truth is that decisions were made for whole nations by several leading political etc figures and general elections or referendums were not held in Croatia in 1918 etc, few politicians decided that Croatia should join the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, with Serbian King at the helm but that decision WAS NOT RATIFIED BY THE CROATIAN PARLIAMENT THAT EXISTED THEN.
        Drawing its name from a Roman region in the Balkans and the Illyrian Provinces of 1809 – 13, the Illyrian Movement derived from a political party founded in 1841 which argued for the unification of all the ‘South Slavs’. The Illyrian’s believed these people shared a political, cultural and ethnic heritage which would form a working state in an area divided largely between the Ottoman, Austrian and Italian empires. The Illyrian Movement was created by intellectuals, and gave an intellectual justification for uniting Serbs with other South Slavs, so while there was an emphasis on escaping the neighbouring empires, in practice they were most concerned with forming a unified language and culture. The work of the movement is one reason why Serb and Croat are such similar languages…

    • Michael Silovic says:

      Goran, As a 2nd generation who is from Slavonian region I can say that I do not agree with your sentiments and anyone I talk to in Slavonia are happy that the Croat diaspora is also helping them in there newly found democracy.No one here is beating the war drum but it always seems that Serbs are quick to defend themselves with bullshit propaganda and lies but when the Croats stand united in telling the truth Serbs become enraged.I can tell you this however that if Serbia even thinks for a moment that they will get anything from engaging us in any manner that threatens our people they will lose more then just the last war. I think perhaps you should focus on Serbia as to this day they are involved with hostilities towards other countries and need people to help the Serbian goverment understand that they need to let it go and move on before Serbia loses what it already has. ~Za Dom Spremni!~

      • The end of your statement tells who you are. Unfortunately, that is not only your problem but mine as well. The ideology you are behind (Ustase) is nothing but a sick Fascism – the Balkans way. And that is sick to the end…..
        And, you are very wrong about Slavonia. I go there every year, at least once if not more often. Everybody from former Yugoslavia, except for a very small percentage of people (many of them a war profiter) today live much worst than in Yugoslavia. Croatia today, with 4,3 million people, has a national debt of close to 50 Billion Euro!!! In 1991 Yugoslavia had a debt of 16 Billion $ (when Ante Markovic was the Prime Minister). So, keep these stories for yourself! Perhaps you enjoy believing in them! I lived in Yugoslavia for 30 years, and I know how great that country was!

      • Regarding the situation in Croatia now and Yugoslavia then, Goran, let me just remind you that by late 1980’s inflation in Yugoslavia was close to 1000%; economy was false – fed on foreign loans without local profit from productivity; in 1974, 94% companies (all government owned) had to rely on loans and reloans to pay workers’ wages etc. It just had to break. Croatia inherited shambles from communist Yugoslavia as far as economy is concerned, the real picture on the ground not the one projected by Communists, and coupled with mismanaged privatisation and corruption (which, by the way is largely present in all former Yugoslav states) no wonder the economy is bad. So it’s not bad because Croatia became independent from former Yugoslavia, it’s bad because it inherited badness – besides assets etc of former Yugoslavia are still locked up and blocked and have not yet been divied up between former states according to some formula (the formula should favor Croatia because that was the state that contributed relatively a great deal to Yu Federal revenue).

      • Goran Radojevich says:

        As for the economy of Yugoslavia, that you are referring to, perhaps you want to include into this analysis the role of the IMF – the International Monetary Fond, owned by the US.
        If Yugoslavia had nothing good, how come the people were happy, the homes were being built… and at the end, only $16 Billion dept, VS (total today for all “countries” after murder of Yugoslavia) over 200 Billion Euro ($260 Billion)? Please, explain that to me, but give me fact, not a bag of empty talk

      • If Yugoslavia was murdered then the act was doen by its unhappy people – all states Slovenia, Croatia BiH & Macedonia that voted to secede did so by majority votes of over 90%. No doubt there were many happy people – many of whom were in the “Party” – many houses were built, that is many public housing too… $19 Billion was a lot of money in late 1990’s – in today’s comparison. No doubt there were people that lived well, many were retired e,g. on war pension at the age of 40 and then held jobs as well, not much if any income tax was paid etc. Jobs were secure for life whether one was productive or not etc. But as far as facts are concerned for Croatia: 94% voted to secede from Yugoslavia. That says it all, I believe.

      • Goran Radojevich says:

        Where were you in 1988 – 1991 period? In Australia? I was in Rovinj on the day of elections in Croatia when HDZ stole the elections, and when people of Istria were mad like Hell! You can certainly explain to me the weather in Australia, but not the political situation in Yugoslavia in the 90’s.
        And listen to this – on real life statistical fact. Today, Croatia and Serbia are the biggest “Brain drain” “countries” in Europe. Young educated people go out (Canada, USA, Germany) because they can not find jobs and live there. Perhaps, when you have next celebration on how great Croatia is today think of that. And do not forget to share copies of the “Washington Times” article on Croatia (October 30, 2010 if I am not mistaken) where they finish the article by saying “Every country has Mafia, but in Croatia Mafia has the country”. And needles to say, share few words of Mr. Ivo Sanader too. And… I almost forgot – non of this was happening in this terrible country known as Yugoslavia.

      • In the years you mentioned I was very active in promoting and lobbying for democracy. HDZ did not steal the elections – they did not tie-up anybody, they did not force anyone to vote one way or the other and if Istria fought against democracy, to stay in Yugoslavia, that was its right but majority wins in the end. People left Yugoslavia in droves when borders opened up in early 1960’s – majority for economic reasons by this stage, the ones who fled for political reasons did so before that time. As for corruption and mafia well to my knowledge most Croatian people do not subscribe to mafia and there just has to be continued battles to weed out the corrupt bastards. The same as in any country, no country is without corruption or mafia, as you call it, but somehow most even don’t get labelled with it like Croatia does. A bit unfair, to my view.

    • Goran, a i Ana…
      lupetate tipično “balkanski”…pa kako ne kužite da nitko nema namjeru (niti pravo) sprječavati tog vašeg Jeremića da govori. nije to point ove Inine inicijative. Radi se samo o tome da bi bilo logično da moderiranje te buduće diskusije radi netko neutralan a ne da taj vaš Jeremić (opet) napravi kakvu blamažu, na koncu vama, Srbima, kao što je i napravio s onim Maršem na Drinu. Ali, ako želite da vas još jednom osramoti, samo dajte…Hrvati se na tu razinu sigurno neće spuštati, jer, hej, IPAK nismo isti jer nismo se mi polakomili za Vašom zemljom i nismo mi – jučer sam baš čitala taj jedan report i došlo mi je da povraćam i plačem od muke – bušilicom bušili bedrene kosti ranjeniku kao što je to par srpskih vojnika radilo u Lovasu, selo u Slavoniji. Niti smo mi, tj. naši vojnici pucali TRUDNOJ ženi u vaginu, prije nego su je ubili i bacili u Ovčaru zajedno s ostalih dvjestotinjak ranjenika iz bolnice u Vukovaru (naravno, prvo su ih mučili na razne načine). Zato, nemojte, radije šutite…i da, najbolji dio mi je kad se pozivate na 2. svjetski rat, i opet Srbi bili jedine žrtve, ma sjajno, pa dajte onda razvucite priču još na balkanske ratove, koliko vas je tamo poginulo…bože..taj vaš vječni sindrom žrtve, pa to je upravo ono što vas koči da ne možete dalje…I, naravno koči vas još više i to što ne želite proći katarzu kao jedna Njemačka i priznati odgovornost za rat, tj. napad na Sloveniju, Hrvatsku, BH i Kosovo. Vi ste izgubljen narod, nema vam budućnosti sve dok ne prođete katarzu.

      • Translation Klara comment: Goran and Ana … you’re banging on typically Balkan … how is it possible you don’t understand that no one has the intention (nor the right) to prevent that Jeremic of yours to speak, that’s not the point of this initiative by Ina. It has to do with that it would be logical that moderation of that future discussion is done by a neutral person and not your Jeremic (again) causes another disgrace, eventually to you, the Serbs, just as he had done with March on Drina. But if you want him to shame you, go ahead … Croats surely won’t lower themselves to that level, because, hey, we are not the same after all as we had not expreessesd greed towards your territory and we had not – I read a report yesterday and I became nauseous and wanted to cry from pain – drilled through thigh bones of a wounded man as Serb soldiers did in Lovas, a village in Slavonia. Nor have we, i.e. our soldiers, shot at the vagina of a PREGNANT woman, before killing her and dumping her into Ovcara together with the rest of more than 200 wounded from the hospital in Vukovar (of course they tortured them first in various ways). So, don’t, be quiet … and oh yes, the best part is your recalling of WWII, and how Serbs were victims again, brilliant, go ahead stretch the story to Balkan wars, how many of you were killed there … Oh God … that victim syndrome of yours, that’s exactly what’s preventing you to get ahead …and …of course because you don’t want go through a catharsis like Germany did and admit responsibility for the war, i.e. attack against Slavonia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo stops you even more. You are a lost people, there is no future for you until you go through a catharsis.

      • An eye opener! Thank you so much! How smart of you! I cannot express enough my gratitude for such brilliant comment!!

    • Klara’s comment should be removed as inappropriate, offensive and hatefull.

      • Klara in her comment had actually specified what she read, heard in media etc while your comment that was moderated had a sweeping statement about alleged evidence of crimes that were not processed by prosecutors or courts without actually giving some details about those alleged crimes so that the information could be verified by readers of this blog.

  16. The Serbs posting here about the UN debate are funny. The whole purpose of the ICTY was to provide a fair, just and legal court for war crimes. There is no debate about who the victim is and who the aggressor is. The ICTY legally tried and convicted persons guilty of crimes in full review of the world to watch and supervise. Overwhelmingly Serbs were convicted…why, because their acts and the evidence proved their guilt. Even after an organized and very strong, robust and indeed biased plan by the prosecutors to equalize victim and aggressor for purely political purposes, there were fewer cases against non Serbs and some that were brought to court failed on merit and evidence. The reality is Serbia was the aggressor and territorial conquest and domination through ethnic cleansing was the means to achieve their goal of a Greater Serbia. Independent reports and ICTY records confirm that about 90% of crimes were committed by Serbs. Serbia needs to accept responsibility. For all the Serb peaceniks who now want a conference on peace, where the F were you when your brethren were murdering, raping and destroying Croatia and Bosnia? The truth has been determined through the ICTY. Anything else is an attempt at revisionism and politics. I can’t for a moment believe that the UN would allow the Serb president who took part in the destruction and aggression against Croatia to give a key note address…unbelievable and what a disgrace to the victims. What is Nikolic going to contribute to the debate of peace and reconciliation…will he tell other murders how to better conduct their wars? Serbia used the independence of Croatia as an opportunity to expand it’s borders. Serbia could have just as easily solved any ethnic issues with Croatia through dialogue and mutual agreements guaranteed through the EC / EU and UN. But as we know Serbia’s blood lust was just too great to give a peace a chance. That’s Karma for you.

    • Thank you Sunman for eloquently putting into words what most of us think.

      I also find it funny that we’re the ones being told to get over our “Balkan primitivism/hate”.

      Seems to me those were the ideals the Republika Srpska was created on.

      If we’re to “turn to the future” maybe the Serbs could make the first step by dissolving this entity created in blood and give up imperialism as a goal and learn to live in harmony with their neighbors.

      I’m not holding my breath…

      • Marko, thanks. You are right…until the Serbs renounce and are held accountable for their imperial dreams the war will continue through ‘5th’ column activities and beyond. Unfortunately the world powers always seem to appease the aggressor and reward their actions – certainly the Daytona Agreement and even the Slavonia peace deal rewarded Serbs for their brutality and ‘legitimized’ their territorial conquests and ethic ambitions regardless of prior demographic situation – well, when you kill or forcefully expel others I guess you become the demographic. Real justice and real peace would have demanded a reversal of all Serbs gains on the ground. In many ways the Serbs were lucky…the World powers actually saved them from ultimate defeat. By the time Daytona came around, Croats and Muslims had momentum and Serbs were spread thin and beginning to demoralize (after-all when you are ‘stealing’ your motivation is never as high as the actual owner protecting and wanting their regain their loss) …who knows what would have happened had the world powers not saved the Serbs and allowed them to achieve most of their conquest.

    • Michael Silovic says:

      (quote) The ideology you are behind (Ustase) is nothing but a sick Fascism – the Balkans way.

      I make no apologies for my views. I am a fascist and nationalist and will always be one until the day comes that Serbia admits its true agenda and corrects its wrongful past on the atrocities of our people and others and the war drumbeat that they continue on Kosovo. Goran I noticed that you avoided my comment that perhaps you should stand tall and tell the Serb goverment to let go of their mentality and to move forward as their rhetoric sure doesn’t seem like they are ready. I am Croat not Croat Serb so I can understand why you feel the way you do about the way Croats are standing united for our country.If you are hoping that as a Croat Serb that one day Serb will again control Croatia you are wrong.The truth is because you are a Croat Serb you are in a difficult position of trying to figure out what you really are and who you support as your ethnicity and goverment.It is like a poodle wanting to be a German Shepard even though it is a poodle.You can’t have it both ways.~Za Dom Spremni!~

    • Sunman, the whole point of bringing out this matter on revisiting and querying decisions of Court in Hague is the fact that Serbs were not the only ones with crimes. If you think that more Serbs were convicted because they have done more crimes, you are mistaken. Deleted by Admin as inappropriate

      • Rada, the UN General Assembly will not revisit Court of Hague decisions – you’re all muddled up. The fact that Jeremic and others from Serbia said that there were crimes against Serbs in Croatia after the Hague acquitted Croatian Generals, has nothing to do with those decisions because the crimes they are alleging have not been before the courts, certainly not as far as the cases against Croatian Generals are concerned. Serbia, I believe, still has a great deal of work to do to process their alleged war criminals, while Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina have been wading through cases quite diligently, given the resources.

      • Deleting parts of my comments as inappropriate does not assist you with your claim to be objective and honest.

      • Rada, it’s this site’s right to moderate comments especially those that give no information or direction to the reader as to how the information was obtained or where it could be checked for veracity so that basis of opinion is present.

      • And, where is my latest comment with the link to the picture of the young Serb and young Croatian girl kissing, while both have their National flags wrapped around them? A censorship in action? After all, you learned something from Tito, Kardelj, Bakaric and other champions who planned destruction of Yugoslavia by pushing for the 1974 Constitution?

      • Goran, your comment was deleted because it was offensive to this blog and so was a part of this comment to which I’m replying deleted for same reason. The link and the site to which it was linked was not offensive but your actual comment. was

  17. Jeremic is a stain on UN’s reputation.He is a fierce Serb nationalist and a declared ChetnikHe’s known for his propagandistic and hateful rhetoric.

    • In accordance with your so called moderation procedures that are applied if text is offensive or based on alleged evidence, kindly then proceed with moderation of ALL COMMENTS THAT ARE OFFENSIVE, starting with Comments of ‘No says’ and ‘Klara’.

      Let me kindly remind you in brief line:’ No says’ calls Jeremic a chetnik and klara openly expresses hateful attitude towards Serbs.

      Have they provided ” information or direction to the reader as to how the information was obtained or where it could be checked for veracity so that basis of opinion is present” ?????

      I can go on and list a number of awful crimes committed by Croats to Serbs (not alleged and certainly with evidence) and their families including raping and of Serbian women and raping of Serbian children by Croat paramilitary forces, with exact time and place of the murder. But, that would feed the hate and that is not the point here.
      Point is that crime was committed on both sides and holding just one side responsible is not justice.

      Someone wants to bring that up to the attention of the International community. Whatever the nationality of that someone, If his quest is valid, why do you object? Why does it bother you? Nationality is just a poor excuse!

      So lets look at the facts:
      Jeremic most certainly is not a chetnik but a bright educated young politician.
      All people suffered during war and all crimes should be persecuted.

      Kindly proceed with treating all comments here on equal basis.

      • Rada, when a comment gives details that can be checked then that comment is taken to be substantiated by true events. For instance before approving Klara’s comment regarding Serbs shooting a pregnant woman in the stomach then vagina etc that detail is so specific that we could research in fact etc and found it. http://www.hkv.hr/hrvatski-list/13498-davor-markobasic-ja-sam-danas-u-vukovaru-progonjena-i-izbezumljena-zvijer.html

        Regarding moderation of comments – this blog takes the right to moderate or delete any content that it deems necessary as it bears responsibility, which the commentator doesn’t.

      • Rada…Croatia has never opposed pursuing criminals from either ethnic group. But what you want to do is to equalized guilt regardless of proportionality. Do some research and you’ll find that anywhere from about 80% to 90% of war crimes committed in former Yugo were crimes committed by Serbs against non-Serbs. So, yes all war crimes should and will be prosecuted, but clearly there is NO equalization of guilt. It seems to me had the Serbs won there would be no war crime trials and no justice for the victims. Plus you missed my point – the war never should have been in the first place…Serbia could have easily negotiated ethnic rights in line with EU / UN standards…Croatia was willing and was seeking world approval for independence the leverage was clearly in Serbia’s favour…but Serbia chose violence and imperialism.

  18. Ina, thank you for providing your letter to the Prime Minister as a template. I will definitely try to send a letter of my own as soon as possible.

  19. Why don’t we wait and see what Jeremić says. Then we can all start arguing about what happened 100 years ago and waste our lives in so doing. He will probably spout a pro Serb/anti Croat diatribe but we live in hope.

    • Are you serious? What’s the point of waiting? Why should someone who most likely has a deep bias and a vested interest, be allowed to make key notes and opening statements? That’s not how a debate should be facilitated. No one should prevent Jeremic or anyone else from having their say, (even if it does turn out to be incredibly wrong, distasteful and stupid) but the issue here is the ROLE they are being given, which is not fair and most likely not neutral. And I don’t see why anyone should wait and see what sort of shitstorm could happen, rather than doing something now to ensure this important event is handled with fairness and care.

      In case you have not noticed, what happens 100 years ago does bloody matter. History shapes a nation into becoming what it is and if our history is not dealt with and acknowledged properly in a balanced manner, people cannot “just move on” or build a better future, when the mistakes of the past which put a nation at a disadvantage, are being repeated today.

      • I have a suspicion that Jeremic will have an eye on his political future outside of Serbia and will disappoint the knuckle dragging ultra nationalists with a more statesmanlike touch, we’ll see.
        I have “noticed” that what happened 100 years ago means zip, Keeping on about who did what before our grandparents were born serves only to perpetuate negativity and prolong the pain. It is the concern of the diaspora and pretty much nobody else.

  20. Jeremic also reffered to Kosovo Albanians as Orc’s!!!UN shame on you!

  21. Michael Silovic says:

    (quote) He will probably spout a pro Serb/anti Croat diatribe but we live in hope.
    (reply) there is no doubt that is exactly what he will do. The Serbian propaganda machine has not stopped spreading lies and will continue to tell them to anyone that will listen.You can tell by the Serbs who posted here that they still do not have a grip on reality by their comments and anger posted here because they know what we already know as Croats and that the truth always prevails and so far the truth has been on our side ~Za Dom Spremni!~

  22. Kevin Banovic says:

    It’s only common sense to have a neutral party host such a debate. I don’t see how so many posters can defend Jeremic’s neutrality on the subject matter.

    • Actually, It is common sense that all war criminals and criminals in general responsible for crimes are charged and prosecuted. Vuk Jeremic suggested just that. Serb or not, it is irrelevant! He wants the truth to come out and the ones who comitted crimes, behind bars. Whoever has a problem with that, respresents criminals who walk free! Period!!!

      • But Rada, international criminal tribunals do not have the jurisdiction to process all war crimes, most individual indictments are done in respective countries. If Vuk Jeremic has specific evidence of a crime then it is his duty to hand that over to prosecutors, wherever. It’s not the job of president of UN General Council to act as Judge, Jury and Executioner. It’s a shame that when Vuk Jeremic was foreign minister of Serbia he did nothing much to urge Serbian prosecutors and courts and all whose job it is there to bring alleged war criminals to justice who were/are living in Serbia. While Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina has processed thousands of cases of alleged crimes during the war Serbia has done so with, I belive only 2 cases – stalling, stalling and stalling with justice for victims, with truth.

      • But Ina, I have replied to Kevin’s comment and yet you have responded to mine. Very well then,let me correct you in your false thinking that people do not know what Vuk Jeremic is expected to do according to his International Function. It is not his job to ” to act as Judge, Jury and Executioner.” You easily assume, when convenient and sweep to different topic.
        Do you have a firm evidence that all war Croat and Bosnian criminals terrorizing Serbian and other population are prosecuted? Apparently there is evidence that was overlooked to say the least. International Community will be informed on that matter in April.
        And for your information, Serbia has exposed of all alleged criminals that were identified as such.

      • Rada, I replied to your comment as a matter of interest. Regarding the numbers of Croat, Serb and Bosnian individuals prosecuted you can easily research that information, but no one said that all have been just thousands in Croatia and B & H (e.g. Croatia has to date processed in court 2,800 people). It were actually your comments on this blog that make one believe you know everything about Vuk Jeremic and what he intends to do at the debate in the UN and that does not appear to match the Ägenda”released for the debate by the UN.

      • Interesting perception. However, it is incorrect. People believe what they want to believe or what suits their interests or the interests of people that pay them. Points made are very clear, but if one wants to perceive it differently , that is not my issue.

        You can keep your perceptions and stay in your little bubble.

  23. Goran, do you mean this photo? Nice thing to see in Mostar given the carnage there in B&H and the establishment of Serbian REpublic upon war crimes, ethnic cleansing and genocide. There is hope for humanity when we see these two young people embracing. Sadly, there is much more needed for true reconciliation nationwide, particularly in processing war crimes perpetrated by individuals and or groups on any side.

    • Martin, maybe future will offer just that ; reconciliation that will commence once all criminals from any and all sides are prosecuted. Naturally, valid evidence for all crimes should be equally treated and examined prior to judging in advance.

  24. Marko L. says:

    Goran your comment regarding censorship is very mean and it tells me you’re a person who doesn’t care much about rules. Reply/Comment Policy is kindly published on this website and anyone who writes things that are not allowed should expect to be censored. If you or anyone wishes to write what they like then I suggest you start your own blog and stick your own neck out, instead of expecting others to publish that which you yourself wouldn’t. And often, on the internet commentators do not put their real name and have false email addresses etc.

    So since you are correct why don’t you start your own blog and then see how you like it when someone writes things about someone that are not nice or are offensive.

    This blog is always correct, it always gives links to sources for truth and if you don’t agree with the opinion that’s OK too.

    The only things most Croats 94% learned from Tito, Kardelj and Bakaric is to get out of that hell-hole of communist totalitarianism. Judging from your comments you mourn the breakup of Yugoslavia – and that’s OK too. But majority people do not and democracy is all about majority votes.

    Many Serbs and Croats and Bosniaks and Slovenians and Kosovars and Macedonians get on well with each other but that does not remove the right of self-determination.

    • But Marko, you misjudged Goran’s comment. He never said that he ‘mourns’ for the fall of Yugoslavia because of the communist regime, but because people were equal and friendly and peaceful in the country that was once Yugoslavia. One that s likes it, wishes it back. Fortunately he is still holding onto this diverse friendships like myself.
      If your vision of democracy is what is happening now, than I must say that this kind might be called democracy but it is not such by definition.
      Secondly, what is the point of the blog if you do not let other people express their opinion? And if you don’t like their opinion, you call it offensive or whatever else without the true reason and simply delete it. if deleted, who’s to know if it was really offensive? My comment was also “moderated” – read deleted, even though it did not contain any offensiveness and did not contain “sweeping statements with alleged evidence”.
      In fact i can list some comments on this blog which ARE offensive but are still visible and are not moderated.
      Reply/Comment Policy should not be based on double standards.

      • What I am seeing on this site, and you will probably block this comment again, is the blunt exercise of the Communist ideology -“If you do not think like I do you are my enemy!” And, this is “Modern Croatian democracy?”, or forgive me “Modern Democracy from 10,000 miles away”? And, yes, Kardelj, Bakaric, Dolanc… those are the people who supported and executed Tito’s dictatorship!! During “their time” Croatia has experienced the highest economic growth in its history!! Almost everything that stands tall and high today in Croatia was built during Yugoslavia time?? The Germas were “leveling” and “rotten” Yugoslavia was fixing it – building it?? There is something wrong with the picture you want to paint. I can just feel sorry for the young people reading your comments and believing.
        And, REALLY , people like you will never be able to kill the (genetic) FACT that the Serbs, the Croats and the Bosnians – WE ARE THE SAME PEOPLE!!!

      • Goran, you left out Macedonians and Slovenians – all share lots of common traits but they are not the same people. As to things built in Croatia during Yugoslav times – yes that’s good – but Croatia after all was the state within Yugoslavia that contributed relatively more than other states to GDP etc, towards federal budget, so in a way they paid for the developments at least quite a bit. The young people of today need to understand why Yugoslavia broke up and the truth is that great majority of citizens in most states voted for democracy and secession from communist Yugoslavia. I am not trying to paint any picture I report on facts and give my opinion upon those facts.


    • Just a reminder for those who forgot and in relation to Ina’s comment that Croatia was contributing the most to Yugoslavia state budget, is false. let’s not forget that Croatia as an ally of Germany in the 2nd WW was not destroyed, but was spared as “cooperative”. Most of the Serbia was destroyed and needed a re-build as Serbia was opposing Germany in the War.
      Croatian war crimes were “washed” with Tito’s blessings after the war. Each Republic had a task. Most of Serbia ‘ s contributions went to agriculture, raw products sent to Croatia, Slovenia and elsewhere to finalize the product , packing and export. this could be discussed further. but it is silly o think that republics were not doing well. .Had to mention 2nd WW !
      It came to budgeting in ex-Yugoslavia!
      And we are all same people, tragically seduced into proving close to one world power or another , claiming different and sacrificing our good future instead of learning from mistakes that were made not so long ago!

      • Rada it is worrying how little you know or want to say about WWII. Serbia too was an ally of Nazi Germany under Milan Nedic’s government, by May 1942 Serbia was one of the first countries to declare itself “”Judenfrei” as it had eagerly assisted German forces to bring 94% of Serb Jews to the slaughter. And when you mention Tito – he made sure that only Croatia out of Yugoslavia is blamed for crimes against Jews. I did not say that Croatia contributed most of Yugoslav state budget but RELATIVELY (relative to other states) – which is a fact. We cannot move forward when history is still being misrepresented. Sorry but that’s a fact. Croatia too was very destroyed during WWII particularly Dalmatia – whole villages burned (including the one I was born in).

        As to Croatia’s contribution to Yugoslav economy here’s a Quote from a book by Marko Milivojevic, but you will find similar facts anywhere else: “By 1990 Croatia was thus by far the largest single generator of hard-currency income in Yugoslavia. Like nearby Slovenia, Croatia was then also a large net contributor of convertible currency and other financial resources to the rest of Yugoslavia” http://books.google.com.au/books?id=qmN95fFocsMC&pg=PA279&lpg=PA279&dq=yugoslavia+gdp+1980&source=bl&ots=6YIgRBInUr&sig=Bj2xL3qNzI0GVNhg_TTPxCbL4EE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=SaA_UaqEEMPniAeCvoGADQ&ved=0CGAQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=yugoslavia%20gdp%201980&f=false

      • What a ridiculous conglomerate of comments you have here, Rada. Although you profess friendship and good terms with Croatians, you obvious Serb nature does not let you respect their right to self-determination. You do not accept that 94% voted against living within Yugoslavia. You talk of WWII with the same crap that other Serbs do – hide and deny the fact that they took Jews to slaughter gladly and blame the Nazis for it. READ UP ON MILAN NEDIC WWII government. At least Croatia has not denied its crimes but your crap is what generally gives the Serbs a bad name. You have difficulty in accepting that it was Serbia who attacked Croatia and B & H in the 1990’s and try to reduce that guilt bu saying there were crimes against Serbs too. Of course there were, got knows what provoked such crimes during Croatia’s efforts to defend itself – things like shooting in vagina’s of pregnant woman would probably cause me to do all sorts of things to such an animal

        So. be a good girl and accept that if someone judges your comment offensive they have a good reason, legally. Don’t get all uptight thinking that others must publish everything you say. You can, but not others.

        And regarding your comments about Jeremic – if he truly plans to do at the UN Debate what you say then, my God, the initiative to ensure objectivity and reduce bias by having independent mediators, facilitators and key speakers COULD NOT HAVE COME AT A BETTER TIME. Because, what you say DOES spell bias and attempt to drive everything at the debate towards Serbia without regard to all the other countries to be represented at the debate. Your crap doesn’t stop there: you actually think that a debate at General Assembly has the jurisdiction to inspect the judgments delivered by courts!


      • And, here is what the “Christian Science Monitor” says. Perhaps another “cenzura” case from the children of Tito, Kardelj, Bakaric, Tudjman and other communist scam…

        The Christian Science Monitor
        By James Bissett / April 2, 2010

        Deleted by Admin

        So, another “stop” for this comment

      • Yes Goran, the opinion piece from James Bissett from April 2010 that you copy-pasted in your comment has been deleted BUT enough information from your comment is left for anyone who wants to, to search the net and get to that opinion piece, so it really is not deleted in the sense that readers can’t find out what you copy-pasted. The content of that opinion piece is outdated, in particular when we take into consideration the research done by Dr Esther Gitman on Aloysius Stepinac and the fact that now stands that he saved Jews – Bissett’s opinion piece leaves one believing that Stepinac was not against Nazi persecution and he was. The records were of course hidden and not accessible while Communist Yugoslavia existed, and one does not need to think too hard why. You would do well to read Dr Gitman’s 2011 book “When Courage Prevailed…”. As for other stuff from Bissett’s opinion piece you copy-pasted as comment it is also is rather very outdated – Croatian president did apologise for Holocaust when in Israel in 2012 (Bissett criticised Croatia for not having done so, but even before 2010 apologies have been recorded), Bissett goes on to speak as with credibility of estimates of victims in WWII Croatia and one wonders why he stuck to higher estimate numbers than the lower ones that were also available to him as they have been public for many years, Bissett talks of Nazi Germany occupation of Croatia and the ensuing Ustashi puppet state but appallingly fails to mention the same for Serbia only in Serbia it was Milan Nedic’s government that collaborated with the Nazis, Bissett praises Serbian parliament for apologising for mass killings in Srebrenica in 2010 and in 2012 Serbia’s president went on to deny Srebrenica was genocide … etc etc You obviously agree with 2010 Bissett’s opinion and that is your right but it is also my right not to publish it on this website particularly because it could be construed as reflecting the truth as it stands today, which it does not. And since you happily put forward such opinions, you should also be prepared for their censorship without attacking that censorship as biased. Oh no, no bias here, just the truth. Those who want to read Bissetts April 2010 opinion piece are welcome to do so…they have enough information to be able to google it successfully, just as our Admin has prior to deleting it as your comment on this site.

      • Shareni, do yourself a favor and try to generate some healthy reasoning. Some good manners would not hurt you too.

        My obvious Serb nature wishes the best of luck to whatever percentage of people wants their right to self determination, including yourself.
        To further correct you in you false judgments I do ‘ profess friendship and good terms with ” all good people in general, regardless of nationality.

        And as for this blog, it is obvious that people who have tried to express different opinion or share their experiences that differ to the intention of the creator of the blog, were … ‘moderated’
        In that process you have moderated history as well.
        No further comment.

      • Rada, your eagerness is amazing but it’s a shame that you actually cannot see reality nor distance your emotions from what you read. There is nothing in this blog that tell anyone that people who try to express different opinion etc were moderated because of a differing opinion. There are signs that some comments may have been offensive – the blog has a legal responsibility to moderate words etc that are offensive. In fact the blog like any other public portal etc makes no secret of possibility that comments may be moderated, hence the onus on the commenter to comment in line with policy etc.

        No need to say that I admire people like the creator of this blog when their put their name behind issues that are controversial, not liked by many but nevertheless true. Yes it is very difficult to expose oneself with such attempts that, I believe, are the only way to achieve peace. We can all pretend and spin our views but the social memory, which always remembers the truth because it is spread from generation to generation verbally by actual witnesses of events at least, is the one that keeps unrest going because history has not been properly reconciled – some crimes are condemned while others are justified! Double standards for political reasons.

        Don’t know what you are talking about when you say that the blog has moderated the history which is total rubbish. I take the liberty to assume that you don’t like the fact that this blog is saying that Serbia or Milan Nedic’s government were Nazi collaborators etc because a great deal of effort has been made since WWII to hide or minimize this fact. History books were written in such a way that many horrible truths were hidden and not written about. For example, Communist crimes that were across Europe much more numerous in victim numbers than Nazi crimes. But those still find it difficult to get into school textbooks about WWII and post WWII. It an absolute responsibility of all of us as human beings to make sure that the history is revised to reflect the truth as was and not as someone wrote it. You may not like that but that is something that no human being can argue against without appearing inhuman. Here is just one link that talks about WWII Serbia as Nazi puppet state (which you may not accept as it may not suit you, but it is the truth and of recent there has been an increased push to ensure this is reflected in history records)

  25. George Hammond says:

    The three stages of Truth:
    1) Ridicule
    2) Violent Opposition
    3) Acceptance
    No one is willing to get to the last stage with regards to Serbia; the behaviour of other countries towards Serbia and its people is a vicious cycle of Ridicule and Opposition – that is not my opinion ma’am, it is fact. In your own words, you stated ” the UN should appoint an independent coordinator and group (representatives from countries untainted by the very crimes and justice the debate is addressing) to facilitate and keynote speak for this event”. You cannot have “unbiased judges” with regards to Serbia as we have all just witnessed here on your petition site, and unfortunately on other websites where the issue of Serbia and Kosovo is in question. The US has gone through much pain to spread the hoopla that the Serbs are the villains who must be slain and/or punished for their atrocities so that we may have a “model platform”, if you will, of a case where we can repeat the same tactics on other countries across the pond without repercussions or much political resistance. Why else would you think our NATO aircraft bombed the headquarters of Radio Television Serbia (RTS)? This petition demonstrates the second stage yet again. Instead of trying to bring up unnecessary dust, which is getting in a lot of people’s eyes mind you, why not settle down and see how April 10th unfolds? Who knows, you might all be surprised.

    • Thank you George Hammond – no one is talking about Serbia as the point of debate alone – the debate will encompass several international crimes tribunals not just those for former Yugoslavia and independent facilitation, keynote speaking ensures to the optimum that all get a fair change in the debate. I am personally for the debate to occur and am awaiting for constructive ideas as to how better to achieve reconciliation everywhere, but you see when you deal with reconciliation regarding horrible war crimes you relate to the victims of those crimes and how to be most considerate towards their needs in the reconciliation process.

  26. Typical Serb denial and diversions. That Greater Serbia ideology is blinding and burns white hot in the consciousness of Serbs. Croatia will always have to be on the defensive and must be vigilant and constantly assertive against Serb ambitions and deceit. Individually Croats and Serbs can be friends and brothers/sisters, but collectively there will be no peace until Serbs nationally reject Greater Serbia and accept Croatia. Even in a close political, cultural and economic relationship such as Canada and the US boundaries and limits help sustain the relationship…in other words, fences make for great neighborly relationships!

    • To me, things could not be clearer than how you say it, Sunman. But when you have the situation where many Serbs face their demons by attacking Croatia’s WWII history and not accepting Serbia’s there is a great problem – they’re not really facing their demons.

  27. Objective thought says:

    I must admit that it is not polite to give opening word to the President of Serbia, but I am by oppinion that it is ok that president of UN assembly gives it. You may tell that he is a citizent of Serbia, but he is still the chairman. You are obviously from Croatia atleast by origin and no one is preventing you from giving your own oppinion so you schoulden’t do that to others. As for Hague tribunal, I as a lawer think that he is unjust. That is because he didn’t convict two croatian generals. It is a solid fact that in Croatia at ethnic cleansing of Serbs had happened. You may say that “Oluja” was a rightfull action to anect teritories under serbian rule, but that can not niglect a fact that about 300.000 serbs flead from Croatia and took refuge in Serbia. I think that this act of ethnic cleansing deserved a rightfull punishment! I am not defending serbs I know that a lot of people sang serbian national songs during war operations and commited war crimes. Croats did that wary thing, they sang fascist croatian songs and also did horbile war crimes. I think the bigest one is “Oluja”. Yes you may say that serbs made a mess in Srebrenica, yes that is right, but if you compare 5.000 killed in Srebrenica with about 4000 people killed and a litlle less than 300.000 people banished during operation “Oluja” you wil notice that sometning is not in order. Bosnian serbs generals were severely convicted and croatian generals were released of all charges. As a lawer i find this wery anoying for serbian victimes, wery unjust and unfare. Please do not tell me that there was no evidence of croatian crimes during “Oluja”, there were a lot of them! You should only look at separated oppinion of one of the judges that is longer and more quality than the decision. These generals had to be convicted in order to give some comfort for serbian victimes, and to develop normal relationship between Serbia and Croatia. THING ARE NEVER BLACK AND WHITE, THEY ARE MOSTLY GRAY, SO DO NOT BE SO VEHEMENT, PLEASE!!! Thank you for reading!

    • Objective thought – thank you for your comment but the fact that I am of Croatian OR any other origin HAS NOTHING to do with what I am saying – it has everything to do with rules of objectivity that apply everywhere in the world, and you are NOT objective as far as I’m concerned: Firstly you’ve reduced the known numbers of those killed in Srebrenica by thousands; Secondly you’ve increased the number of Serbs who fled from Croatia by tens of thousands, Thirdly you completely ignore the fact that Croatian Serbs fled Croatia also under directive from Belgrade to evacuate; Fourthly you, as Vuk Jeremic reject the rule of law which tells us that if a majority of judges in a panel bring a certain ruling then we need to accept that; Fifthly – just because Jeremic is the President of the body to auspice the debate in question does not mean that he must coordinate it etc, especially if he has given public statements that leads the public to believe that he will enter the debate with a biased/made up mind. He should in that case, organise for independent persons to coordinate and contribute to the debate as debater. As far as alleged Croatian crimes during or after Oluja perpetrated by individual, these are and have been coming before the courts in Croatia, while Serbia has been doing nothing much on this front. Serbia expects Croatia to process alleged criminals and it expects the world to keep their its mouth shut when it comes to Serbia not processing criminals, but actually protecting them. My opinion is that many people want reconciliation however this is hard to achieve when you see double standards like that, furthermore it is quite odd to say the least that to most Croatian Serbs it’s more important to be Serb than a citizen of Croatia and its been like that for hundreds of years. I just see that such stuff just does not wash in other democratic Western countries.

      • Objective thought says:

        First as for Srebrenica I agree that a war crime has occured, but the wary number of people that has been murdered hasen’t been proved. There are only estimates, because a lot of thooms were eshumated from surounding places and buried again on the memorial semetary. Also there has been a number of cases that a person that was alegably bured is still alive, Also if you count the number of buried bodies you would not get a number of 8000. Some western experts made some studies that shoved that exact number of murdured is about 5000. SO THESE FIGURES ARE NOT EXACT.

        As for croatial operation “Oluja” it was organised by croatian president, two previous mentioned generals and with a help of some western alies. If yu think that someone from Serbia organised that action than you must bee blind from haterade. Serbian defence was caught off guard, that is a fact, but that doesn’t give you right to say that serbs had made there own ehodus. If you realy want to do something good for Balkan region, than you should deal with real nowadays problems like haterade and discrimination of serbs in Croatia, or to tackle economic problems in whole region. AS FOR JUDICAL POIN OF VIEW HAGUE MADE A VERY PROBLEMATIC DECISION CONCERNING TWO CROATIAN GENERALS. If you want to make something good for that tormented region you should come to your sence and get rid of discriminating points of view, You have also pointed out that the majority of judges made that decision that is rihgt! But beare in mind that it wasn’t unonimes, and that it is problematic from the poin of view of previous judical decisions and international law! I MUST CONCLUDE THAT IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE SOMETHING START FROM YOUR OWN BACKYARD. First stop talkig in a Vehement way and try to give way for peace. TO CONVICT SOMEONE YOU MUST FIRST HEAR HIS POINT OF VIEW AND HIS STORY, THAN MEASURE ALL THE EVIDENCE RIGHTLY. SO LET US HEAR WHAT OTHER SIDE HAS TO SAY IN THERE DEFFENCE. THE PERFECT PLACE IS IN NEW YORK AND UN!

      • It is all to clear Objective thoughts that you like all other Serbs do not accept the fact that Serbs attacked Croatians and Croatian territory and Croatia defended itself, and as for Oluja that was organised to liberate Croatian territory that was ethjnically cleansed of Croatians prior to Oluja and destroyed, and every sovereign country has a right to defend and claim its territory. As for Srebrenica victim numbers I am aware that estimates are at foot but Serbs tend to reduce those estimates and belittle thye horror of Srebrenica. There is no hatred in telling the TRUTH, the hatred only develops when truth is twisted and hidden etc. Oh I do bear in mind that Hague decision was not unanimous but that is not important because unanimity IS NOT REQUIRED BY LAW ON JUSTICE. And you seem to think that Vuk Jeremic can be a law unto himself and that UN General Assembly has the jurisdiction to look at cases before a court with the same weight but without assessing the actual evidence in accordance with evidence rules laid down by law.THAT IS TRULY DISTURBING! BECAUSE IT MEANS THAT LAW DOESN’T MEAN ANYTHING. Oh, dear, no thank you. The UN debate is NOT only on former Yugoslavia but several other countries where war crimes have occurred, so to your and Jeremic’s thinking Serbia should be the one to set the tone and benefit the most from it? – no, no, victims from every country involved should have equal chances to be heard via representatives and that is why objective and independent coordination is needed.

        As far as Serb exodus in 1995 is concerned yes it was ordered from Belgrade – and Serbian defence there in Croatia WAS NOT DEFENCE BUT THE OCCUPYING BRUTAL FORCE OF CROATIAN SOVEREIGN TERRITORY. Sorry that’s fact and not hatred

  28. Objective thought says:

    If eny one wants peace on the Balkans HE MUSTN’T DENIE HIS OWN WAR CRIMES!! Accept them if you want to get to te bothom and find out an utimate truth.

  29. Objective thought says:

    THAT MEANS ALSO THAT CROATIA HAS TO ACCEPT THE FACT THAT “OLUJA” WAS AN EXODUS ORGANISED BY CROATIANS IN ORDER TO SOLVE THERE PROBLEM WITH SERBS ON A VIOLENT WAY!! This operation was conducted while peace negotiations where still in progres!I You must bear that on your mind when you say that it was completely legal! I PERSONALY THINK THAT THIS WAR WAS A NONSENCE AND THAT WAR HATCHETS MUST BE BURIED AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBILE! Also I am by oppinion that croatian public must be told some facts (by there own leaders) in order to stop discrimination of serbs that are still living in Croatia. EVERY ONE HAS TO BEAR THE BRUNT FOR THERE OWN SINS!!

    • You are truly not objective, nor just Objective thoughts. Oluja was to liberate occupied territory, territory stolen from sovereign Croatian territory, ethnically cleansed, mass murdered. The state cannot answer for crimes committed by individuals who did not follow orders – to liberate territory with as little damage as possible. The court in Hague ruled that there WAS NO Joint criminal enterprise during Oluja when it comes to deportation of Serbs – there was no deportation, Serbs were asked to stay but they chose to leave – probably afraid of what they had done before Oluja + orders to evacuate from Belgrade. Peace negotiations went on for years and majority of Serbs would not budge – they simply did not accept independent Croatia and did not want to live in it. Croatia did not attack Serbia, Serbia took it upon itself to retaliate against Croatian people’s vote for self-determination and secession from Yugoslavia. Croatians had no problems with Serbs until Serbs decided to attack, ethnically cleanse and murder Croatians and non-Serbs from the areas they wanted for themselves. The facts are these, you don’t accept them, that is your problem – you cannot deny someone the right to defend their home, and that is what you are doing.

      • Objective thought says:

        These teritories that were held by serbs vere inhebiteted by them for about 4 centuries and they were majority there this simle fact could be checkt by looking at last census in these municipals. So you are telling something that is not right. War it self broak up because croatians didn’t wont to give any autonomy for sers and because of that they were scared that they will become victimes of a genoside. I must recal you that during Second world war a genoside was comited by croatian fashist state which had a major support by croatian people. (there was also a fashist country in Serbia but it didn’t have support of serbs and was under direct govern of nazy Germany). Serbs were scared for there llives because new croatian authorities were starting to reise nazy simbols as sing fashist songs, because they had to defend themselves. Serbs did war crimes in croatia I admit that but croatians also made war crimes.
        As for negotiations, serbs accepted ageament…
        There is also a fact that croatia had separated from Yugoslavia on a not completely legislative way. TO CONCLUDE WAR IN CROATIA WAS HELD BETWEEN TWO NATIONS THAT LIVED ON THAT THERITORY AFTER BREAK DOWN OF JOINT COUNTRY.
        I would like we talk a litle bit about discrimination of serbs in today Croatia. They do not deserv such a bad possition after twenty years after war….


      • Objective thought – Serbs have never been a majority in Croatia, and the fact that they as minority form in some areas over 34% has actually to do with false census figures and the fact that those areas have been ethnically cleansed of Croats during early 1990’s who have not returned and some killed. The following are census figures for Croatia regarding Serb population.

        Population of Croatia 1931-2001
        Year Serbs % Total pop.
        1931 633,000 18.45% 3,430,270
        1948 543,795 14.39% 3,779,858
        1953 588,756 14.96% 3,936,022
        1961 624,991 15.02% 4,159,696
        1971 626,789 14.16% 4,426,221
        1981 531,502 11.55% 4,601,469
        1991 581,663 12.16% 4,784,265
        2001 201,631 4.54% 4,437,460
        2011 186,633 4.36% 4,284,899

        The fact that many Serbs did come to live on Croatian land centuries ago is not disputed, however it is sad that most to this day remain loyal to Belgrade government rather than Zagreb.
        Croatia did separate from Yugoslavia in “legislative” way because the Constitution of Yugoslavia provided for the states’ right to secede, and even if it did not the referendum held in Croatia in 1990 makes the separation legal because 94% of Croatian citizens voted Yes.

        I do not believe we could have any kind of constructive discussion on this matter because you make excuses for Serbian WWII fascist government and say it did not have support of the Serbian people (but it was Serbians who collaborated with occupying Nazi forces in exterminating 94% of Serbian Jews by May 1942) while you completely omit the fact that the WWII Croatian “fascist” (Ustashi) government also had huge opposition among Croatian people.

  30. Objective thought says:

    I was precise they were MAJORITY IN MUNICIPALS that were held by there army! I newer sead thet they were majority in whale country. It was not completely legal because before Croatia separated international law did’n approve separation of republiks within federation and right to secede was not an option. After Croatia was aknowledged by other countries this princip become a precedent. On that wary precedent serbs wanted to separate them selves from Croatia, but didn’t succed. So we can conclude that serbs had some right and that “Oluja” was not a legitimate act!

    As for referendum serbs didnt go out to wote!


    • Objective Thoughts, if there were Serb majority (over 50%) in some villages or areas does not mean that these are not parts of Croatia. Just imagine if ethnic minority groups in some Western country were a majority in some areas and they did what Serbs did in Croatia – it just would not be allowed.
      International law did approve Croatia’s secession from Yugoslavia – in 1992 Croatia became UN member state. Slovenia too, etc.and so forth.We cannot conclude that Oluja was illegitimate, only you can because you are delusional and do not accept reality and truth.
      Many Serbs did vote in Croatia’s referendum on secession, many didn’t. Many Serbs fought for Croatian independence, many fought against it.
      Serbs are not discriminated against in Croatia, many simply do not accept Croatia and still live like you say: “want to separate themselves from Croatia”! And out of that come many troubles, troubles Croatia should not, like every other sovereign country in the world, have to tolerate from its citizens. All citizens should respect the country they live in, respect its laws while practicing their own culture and religion and other benefits bestowed upon citizens, but to want to rip the country apart is simply something that is violence.
      As to legalities of secession her is some reminder for you and those who think like you:
      The right to self-determination, including the right to secession, was mentioned in of the Basic Principles I of the SFRY Constitution:

      “The nations of Yugoslavia, proceeding from the right of every nation to self­ determination, including the right to secession, on the basis of their will freely expressed in the common struggle of all nations and nationalities in the National Liberation War and Socialist Revolution, and in conformity with their historic aspirations, aware that further consolidation of their brotherhood and unity is in the common interest, have, together with the nationalities with which they live, united in a federal republic of free and
      equal nations and nationalities and founded a socialist federal community of working people- the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, in which, in the interests of each nation and nationality separately and of all of them together, they shall realize and ensure( …)”

      I further remind you on 1992 Badinter Peace Commission on Former Yugoslavia, which among other things, confirmed that state borders of constituent states of Former Yugoslavia cannot be changed, unless agreed upon.So you see, Serbs have no right to steal sections of a sovereign state. With this I will bring discussion on this matter at an end. Thank you.

  31. Sladjan Mastilovic says:

    It is ridiculous to assume UN courts as legitimate justice. This isnt even politics right now, this is pure logic. Any given UN court has no chance of presiding over such matters professionally. You have to know the details of every conflict within that region to come to a sound judgement. UN court of law doesnt have such knowledge in Yugoslavia, Gaza, Ruanda, or anywhere else. Now to the political aspect of it all. One must be living on Mars or be completely ignorant, to not realize that this particular court is a political instrument.


  1. […] I said in one of my previous posts, and in my letters to various heads of UN member states – there is a realistic and immediate […]

  2. […] court decisions would be significantly coloured by other than evidential factors. In February 2013 I wrote to the Prime Minister of Australia, the Hon Julia Gillard MP, seeking Australia’s intervention at the UN with view to ensuring that the “Jeremic” UNGA […]

  3. […] I’ve had plenty to say on this blog and elsewhere about Vuk Jeremic and his Presidency at the UN General Assembly and am especially proud to have been one of the initiators in questioning his motives and intentions around the organising of April 10 UNGA Thematic debate on “Role of International Criminal Justice on Reconciliation”. […]

Leave a Reply

Disclaimer, Terms and Conditions:

All content on “Croatia, the War, and the Future” blog is for informational purposes only. “Croatia, the War, and the Future” blog is not responsible for and expressly disclaims all liability for the interpretations and subsequent reactions of visitors or commenters either to this site or its associate Twitter account, @IVukic or its Facebook account. Comments on this website are the sole responsibility of their writers and the writer will take full responsibility, liability, and blame for any libel or litigation that results from something written in or as a direct result of something written in a comment. The nature of information provided on this website may be transitional and, therefore, accuracy, completeness, veracity, honesty, exactitude, factuality and politeness of comments are not guaranteed. This blog may contain hypertext links to other websites or webpages. “Croatia, the War, and the Future” does not control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness or completeness of information on any other website or webpage. We do not endorse or accept any responsibility for any views expressed or products or services offered on outside sites, or the organisations sponsoring those sites, or the safety of linking to those sites. Comment Policy: Everyone is welcome and encouraged to voice their opinion regardless of identity, politics, ideology, religion or agreement with the subject in posts or other commentators. Personal or other criticism is acceptable as long as it is justified by facts, arguments or discussions of key issues. Comments that include profanity, offensive language and insults will be moderated.
%d bloggers like this: