About Melbourne’s The Age Newspaper Picking On Croats In Australia 

Screenshot of Image in The Age, Melbourne Australia, 11 June 2023 – a politically twisted comparison and innuendo

Perusing the pages of the Australian “The Age” on 11 June 2023 an unsuspecting, politically naïve, or historically ignorant reader may get the idea that Croatia’s War of Independence/Homeland War (secession from communist Yugoslavia), fought in defence from brutal and bestial Serb aggression, during 1990’s, was a war led by the Nazi ideology. Why the article’s authors placed an image of the renowned (cleared of mounted war crimes charges at the Hague International Criminal Tribunal in 2012) Croatia’s 1990’s general Ante Gotovina next to the image of Ante Pavelic, Ustasha leader of World War Two Croatian independence fight, can easily be seen as an act of mean spirit, prostitution of history, and provocation for hatred. Definitely insulting to many. It also seems like a last-ditch attempt to give credence to falsified history when the article’s authors write: “… That state, ruled by a movement called the Ustasha, on conservative estimates killed 500,000 Serbs, Jews and Romani people during the war…” Wow! To what journalistic substandard and dark underground has The Age come to? Why regurgitate victim estimates (evidently constructed upon nothing but political pursuits) when there are credible research findings in Croatia (e.g. Blanka Matkovic, Stipo Pilic, Igor Vukic…) that for years have debunked these lies about World War Two Croatia victims, including the Jasenovac camp referred to in this article? Some, maybe even the authors of the article in The Age, guided by some political interests, might say that this latest research is all about attempts to minimise or undermine the Holocaust concept when in fact such research intends to shed a light on facts as they occurred, using historical documents as such w available in various state archives. 

Given WWII Serbia’s pursuits of a Jew-Free state (achieved by May 1942) it is most insulting to read this in the article after referring to celebration of what authors claim was a Nazi state of Croatia (instead of Nazi occupied) in parts of Croatian community: “The open celebration of that past is a source of tension with Serbian and Jewish Australians.” This kind of denial of Serbia’s extermination of 94% of its Jews by May 1942 we find in this The Age article is enough to drive any informed human being to despair! 

According to yesterday’s article in the Australian The Age newspaper, written by Ben Schneiders and Simone Fox Koob, titled “Symbols of hate: The lingering afterlife of Croatian fascism in Australia” it would seem that only World War Two Croatian fight for independence (from the oppressive and dictatorial Serb Monarchy in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, from any kind of Yugoslavia including the Post-WWII communist one) cannot justify the victims of this humanly acclaimed just pursuit! I have not read anything from these two journalists that would label as symbol of hatred anything to do with the terrible victims of British colonisation or imperialistic regime, of pain that preceded the American War of Independence, of the victims of Belgian King Leopold II in Congo, of “successful” WWII Serbia “Jew Free” (Judenfrei) pursuits which, by the way, WWII Croatia never had despite its regretful racial laws (by the by, Serbia also like Croatia was occupied by Nazi Germany but Croatia’s then leadership did not like Serbia lead 94% of its Jews to slaughter), of Joseph Stalin, of Mao Zetong …and all will agree these were the result of genocide, of obvious or written racial and/or politically coloured laws. The First Nations’ Voice in the Australian Parliament may yet give these two journalists plenty of fodder to feed their pens with. I am yet to see these two journalists writing about symbols of WWII Serbia as symbols of hate, and there would be plenty of those in Australia!

The above said is not to justify any crimes or horrors perpetrated by any totalitarian, dictatorial regime but it is an expression of loathing for the practiced double standards when it comes to victims in general. The 21st century should not be a carbon copy of the 20th when crimes of one regime were justified and crimes of another condemned.

One may think that the authors of this article are trying to justify the move to legislate the banning of Nazi symbols as symbols of hatred. But one cannot accept as well-meaning the singling out of one part of one community in such an endeavour. A biased one at that. The article waffles on about some bombings in Australia allegedly perpetrated by Croats but it gives no direction as to where a reader could find confirmation of those. What a reader could find, though, is a plethora of unsubstantiated finger-pointing at Croats during 1960’s and 1970’s terrorist activities in Australia. Undoubtedly all part of the communist Yugoslavia agenda to blacken the Croatian name in Australia. The article gives almost no due attention to the fact that a judicial review of 1981 criminal convictions for attempted terrorism against the Croatian Six men is currently afoot in Australia.

The authors of this article attempt to pin further credibility to their obviously biased claims about Nazi extremists in the Australian Croatian community by quoting the Croatian Ambassador in Canberra, Betty Pavelich: “there is no place for glorification of totalitarian regimes, extremism, or intolerance. We firmly believe that it behoves us all to ensure that disinformation, glorification and the mainstreaming of criminal, totalitarian ideologies, their symbols, and movements, do not take root in modern societies.” The authors, though, fail to dig into Croatian reality further, which would present and confront them with about 1700 mass graves, remains of more than 500,000 murdered innocents, so far unearthed (since independence from Yugoslavia in 1991) in Croatia and Slovenia – an undeniable horror of communist crimes and communist regime. Whose symbols would also amount to symbols of hate. And yet, no mention of that in the article!

The article’s authors further fail to comment or acknowledge that it was Croatian patriotic members of the Australian Croatian community, that included those they now, evidently tendentiously, implicate as Nazi extremists, who backed the fight against communism in 1990’s to achieve democracy and independence of Croatia. In January 1992 Australia recognised the sovereignty and independence of Croatia that was engulfed in war of defence against communist and Serb onslaught. It was the parts of Australian Croatian community that pride themselves in the true meaning of “For Home Ready” (Za dom spremni) chant, that for them had absolutely nothing to do with Nazism or Ustasheism, who lobbied and fought for this freedom. That should tell us a great deal about the bravery for freedom and democracy the chant had and has as its underlying force. It is now banned by law in Croatia but, then again, there is still a great deal of sacrifice to be had to rid Croatia of communist heritage and its oppressive ways.  The authors of this article in The Age evidently stay blind to the fact that the Croatia which spilled rivers of blood defending itself from Serb aggression in 1990’s is still fighting against the usurpation (via rigged elections) of power by the “camp” of former communist operatives.

Furthermore, the article talks of “For Home Ready” (Za dom spremni) chant heard at soccer games in Australia as the Ustashe or Nazi catchcry! The Ustashes had used that salute in World War Two but it stems from centuries back and Croatian fight for freedom. If one was to pay heed to statements like those found in this article in The Age regarding the chant, it comes to mind that World War Two “For Home and Country” slogans often seen in Britain may also have stemmed from Nazism as well! It needs to be said that any young person of Croatian descent using that chant at soccer games or in public it is above all a symbol of love for one’s ancestors who suffered greatly for freedom. They chanted it in the 17th century against the Habsburg absolute rule, they chanted it even in Australia during 19th century to First World War when Croatia was under the control Austro-Hungarian Empire, they chanted it during and post-World War One when Croatia was controlled by Serbian Monarchy, they chanted it during World War Two when Croatia fought to be free of Serb Monarchy and free of Josip Broz Tito’s communism, they chanted it in 1990’s while fighting off Serb and communist Yugoslavia. They always chanted “For Home Ready” to be free and sovereign people as they once were and were entitled to under self-preservation principles.    

As per a clearly palpable political agenda The Age has with this article coloured the entire Croatian immigration (community) to Australia with the same stroke of what tends to feel like harassment and vilification. The authors here unequivocally state that “Srecko Rover, (was) a man who would play a pivotal role in the emerging Croatian community in Australia.” This is an unforgivable lie and hateful innuendo! Have these journalists taken a good look at the fact and profile of Croatian community in Australia? Obviously not! The purpose of this article seems to me like many from the past in Australian media: serving a political agenda that has nothing to do with the truth or facts when it comes to Croats. For what reason I do not know but I guess many could take a gander and conclude there is an attempt to purposefully paint an ugly picture.

This article of mine, of course, is not to justify any actual crimes ever committed in pursuit of independence even though the world has upheld the right to self-determination of any people as a nation while individual crimes perpetrated in the process are detestable and abhorrent. The above said article in The Age does not itself present a clear reason as to why, seemingly out of nowhere, a part of the Croatian community is attacked for its WWII symbols and all others, like the Serbian community, are spared the abuse. I assume, that is, that the reason for writing this article may lie in the Australian recent legislature on banning Nazi memorabilia. Indeed, that is a good move by the government in my book but unless other totalitarian regimes’ symbols are also banned that legislation will not stop intolerance for unfairness and double standards.  I hope that the symbols of all totalitarian regimes, including the communist will be banned. After all, the latter has murdered more than a hundred million innocent people, who also deserve justice, not just the Holocaust victims. But then again, will various trade deals with communist regimes not “permit” such due justice? I, for one, would like to read an article in The Age on communist symbols of hate and how they affect members of Australian communities. There is certainly plenty of Australians who have fled the horrors of communism from various countries, not just Croatia.

The intended banning of the swastika begs the question: why is there no banning of the communist five-pointed red star or the ISIS flag? Both also symbolise hateful ideologies that led to genocide of politically undesirable millions or as in ISIS case the attempted genocide of minority communities – Yazidis and Christians. If we apply the same rationale behind the calls to ban Nazi symbols, then we should apply it to expressions of all violent so-called extremist movements.

Rather than banning only Nazi symbols and salutes, it seems to me that instead of just that, there is a dire need for a strong focus on education about Nazi, fascist and communist movements equally, and their horrible consequences. The generations of victims who lived through these horrors are slowly disappearing, dying, and their lived history is slipping from the grasp of younger generations. If we continue in a biased way, where, mildly said the pot is calling the kettle black, it is having and will have very real consequences for the future generations; this calling one evil – evil, and not the other (evil), will undoubtedly shape future generations into believing that evil can be acceptable. And it is not, no matter who perpetrates it. Ina Vukic

Servicing Serbia’s Propaganda Israel’s Gideon Greif Abuses Holocaust And Fabricates Parts Of Croatia’s History

Gideon Greif (L), Photo: N1

For years now I have been writing articles regarding the monstrous pursuits of Israel’s historians such as Efraim Zuroff and Gideon Greif that blacken Croatia and Croatians during World War Two. Suffice to say both are and have been on Serbia’s propaganda train against Croatia, maybe even its payroll, while attempting to cover up the fact that WWII Serbia was one of the first European countries to declare itself “Free of Jews” or “Judenfrei” having exterminated some 94% of its Jews to May 1942! Efraim Zuroff of Simon Wiesenthal Centre had appeared staunchly pro-communist, defending the atrocious communist crimes, or ignoring them for years and, yet, in victim numbers they counted many many more victims than the Holocaust itself! The numbers of people they claimed, together with Serbia, that perished in Croatian camps during World War Two, without a shred of evidence but with lots of hatred of Croats and Independent Croatia, are monstrous and abominable. And so I was truly happy at reading a recent article (11 May 2022) in Israels’ Haaretz.com portal by its highly-acclaimed journalist Sam Sokol on these matters of Holocaust abuse and fabrications of history by Gideon Greif, which I too pass onto you readers and followers of my blog articles. It is great article in support of the truth we all seek to cast out eyes upon sooner or later.

“Six months ago, Prof. Gideon Greif was on top of the world.

A respected Holocaust scholar, he was set to receive Germany’s highest civilian honor for his research on the Sonderkommandos, Jewish prisoners who were forced to dispose of bodies at the Nazi death camps. Years earlier his research was adapted into an award-winning feature film, ‘Son of Saul.’

But the civilian honor in Germany was soon rescinded amid allegations that Greif was a genocide denier who tried to whitewash the murder of 8,000 Bosnian Muslim men and boys by Bosnian Serb forces at Srebrenica in July 1995.

Now the 71-year-old scholar, who this year announced plans to revise a controversial war crimes report he co-wrote on behalf of Serb nationalists, again faces allegations of sacrificing historical accuracy to bolster a nationalist narrative.

He allegedly has inflated the death toll at Jasenovac, a Croatian death camp where, according to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, the German-allied Ustasha regime murdered between 77,000 and 99,000 people during the Holocaust.

The controversy relates to Greif’s cooperation with the Serbian government to produce an exhibit, and later a book, about Jasenovac. According to Greif, at least 700,000 people died at the camp, a figure repudiated by contemporary scholars and promoted by Serbian nationalists.

Both the exhibit and the book followed a number of cooperation agreements brokered by the Serbian Foreign Ministry and signed by Greif in 2016 and 2017 on behalf of two groups he was affiliated with, the International Group of Experts GH7-Stop Revisionism and Shem Olam, an Israeli Holocaust education and research institute. The Serbian signatories included civil society groups and the country’s Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development.

The result was a 2018 UN exhibit about Jasenovac curated by Greif and sponsored by the Serbian Foreign Ministry. It was soon followed by the 700-plus page book ‘Jasenovac: Auschwitz of the Balkans,’ where Greif said his efforts were part of a ‘Serbian-Jewish bastion against revisionism.’

In the book, Greif credited an Israeli Foreign Ministry official for his first meeting with the Serbs and stated that the Israeli ambassador to Belgrade was present when he signed a memorandum of understanding with Belgrade on behalf of Shem Olam.

Greif wrote that the Croat Ustashas even surpassed the German Nazis in their wickedness and in their bloodlust, juxtaposing statistics about Auschwitz and Jasenovac on facing pages and highlighting various death toll estimates in a way appearing to equate the two camps.

He also quoted estimates that the death toll at Jasenovac, where the majority of victims were ethnic Serbs, could be as high as 1.4 million, exceeding even Auschwitz, though the number he has promoted in a raft of media appearances is significantly lower.

‘I would say that the minimum number is 700,000 and maybe more,’ he said on Serbian television in 2019. ‘So this is the beginning number. Maybe about 800,000 Serbs, 40,000 Jews.’

But this estimate has been discredited by modern scholarship, said Yad Vashem historian Rob Rozett, who added that Greif’s estimate was based on inflated figures produced by the communist Yugoslav government following World War II.

The scholarly community, including Yad Vashem, ‘has rejected those numbers,’ and Greif’s conclusions ‘are way outside of what scholars consider to be legitimate discussion these days,’ Rozett said.

‘Serbian nationalist narrative’

Ernest Herzog, the World Jewish Congress’ Belgrade-born director of operations, recalled a visit by Greif in 2019 where the historian tried to win the Congress’ support for a Jasenovac event in Jerusalem. Herzog said he declined the offer because he believed that Greif only presented ‘the Serbian nationalist narrative.’

‘I wasn’t sure he was aware what he was getting into,’ Herzog said. ‘It’s not that I think he’s some kind of a crook, but I just think that he ended up on the wrong side of history when it comes to this because on Jasenovac he didn’t explore all the avenues and research, and completely dismissed all the work done in the ’80s and the ’90s.’

The Simon Wiesenthal Center’s Efraim Zuroff, referred to as an expert in Greif’s book, had a different take.

Referring to honors Greif has received from Serbia – including the country’s Gold Medal of Merit in 2019 – Zuroff said that while he couldn’t identify Greif’s motives, ‘it seems clear he has been given rewards of different sorts and perhaps it’s those rewards that motivated him to produce the kind of goods that the people who gave him the rewards want to see.

The question is what are you willing to do to receive those awards,’ Zuroff said, adding that ‘it’s sad to see what happened to this person.’

For his part, Greif seemed aggrieved by the criticism against him, complaining in a statement to Haaretz about ‘vicious incitement’ and ‘terrorist-like pressure’ that he said included 23 death threats in recent years.

‘I do not know another historian in the whole world who lives in the shadow of death threats just because he expresses his own opinions,’ Greif wrote, adding that his research on Jasenovac was not part of the cooperation agreements he signed, which were ‘standard agreements for academic, educational, pedagogical and research cooperation.’

His books ‘were not funded by any Serbian government office, and no one but me had any influence on their content,’ he added. ‘I received no payment, not even one shekel, not even one euro, not even one dollar.’

Dismissing the 1.4-million-victim number as unrealistic, Greif said that ‘statistical issues like the number of victims concern me less, and are secondary to me, firstly because my attention is given to the world of the victim.’ He said he based his work on a number of works published decades ago by Yad Vashem, which he considered the ‘most reliable and well-established sources.’

He added: ‘I have no interest in reducing or increasing the number of murders at Jasenovac. I try to choose the most realistic and authentic data available to me.’

One source he mentioned was the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, which he said put the death toll at Jasenovac at 500,000.

Emil Kerenji, a scholar at the museum, said that between 77,000 and 99,000 people were murdered at the Croatian camp, a number in line with an estimate by Ivo Pejakovic, the head of the Jasenovac memorial site in Croatia. He said his database currently contains the names of over 83,000 victims.

‘Dr. Greif didn’t make any research regarding the number of victims of Jasenovac camp. As far as I understand, he simply quoted estimation of 700,000 victims or more, which were the official numbers of victims during the period of Yugoslavia,’ Pejakovic wrote in an email.

‘So he disregarded all new research that was done in the last years and decades. There is no methodology or research to comment on.’

Ono Academic College, where Greif lectures on history, distanced itself from the controversial scholar’s book on Jasenovac. It said in a statement that even though its logo appeared on the cover of Greif’s book, it had nothing to do with it.

An Israeli official, meanwhile, disputed Greif’s claim that the Foreign Ministry facilitated his cooperation agreements with Belgrade.

‘We have no recollection of ever putting him in touch with the Serbs,’ the official said.”

Ina Vukic

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.