" In International Relations Theory, there's only one principle that I know of... That's the Mafia principle: International relations is very much like the Mafia, the Godfather does not accept disobedience..." -Noam Chomsky.
Mr Chomsky, when referring to Germany and Croatia in The Second World War, is referring to the religio-fascist *Ustaše* These people committed such horrid atrocities that the *Nazis* of all people objected to the brutality. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ustashe
My family was living in Hungary Milinsk at that time. Ustase was metioned by SS soliders as being brutal. My family were in the Soviet camps so many parished there. They were sold out in Operation keehaul, by the allied forces, who turned them back when fleeing tothe Austrian boarders, and allowed Russia to put them in camps once again an take thier land and give it to the Serbs. We were know as Danschwibian people. What a turbulent and horrible time for Eastern Europe. Read;"TheTolstoy Agreement" by: Lenard Tolstory
@@Myhasleful :: The unbelievable horrors of The History of US Slavery seems to pale by the side of what Europeans have done to other Europeans -- for so many, many Centuries.
@@cliffgaither you're missing one fact. Slavery in the US was one of Europe's crimes. Like the genocide of the Indigenous people whose land you live on. Or who I live on in Australia. Or the horrors of the Belgian Congo. The famines in India and China. The rape of Japan. The destruction of North Korea.
Yugoslavia was sold out from the inside, the war was that of the Oligarchies rise to power. Listen to Mikael Gorbachev BBC talk, its about the break up of the Soviet Union, they almost ended up in a civil war, for the same reason as Yugoslavia. The privatization of Socialist States means lots of money either to the people, who own everything or a lucky few, who steal everything.
@@abraxadabra4224 IMO it's because of modern tech, a much stronger system, and a streak of great leaders (Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao, Xi Jinping). China has managed to make a stable environment through the infamous Chinese firewall and surveillance state, inside a system in which the importance of merchants (billionaires) is almost non-existent while promoting a strong work ethic "Merchants were considered the lowest social class in Ancient China. People believed that they did not contribute to the good of the whole society but only worked for their own gain. ... The government looked down upon the merchants and tried to stop them from making big profits in times of shortages.". A view COMPLETELY IN OPPOSITION to American individualism where billionaires are job creators without whom the world would stop turning. And lastly, the country has had great leaders, great as in giving vision to the nation while prioritizing its development.
a sta bi drugo rekli kad njima duguju sve njima i vatikanu al vise duguju nemcima oni su ih i krtili i imenovali i dali im svoju drzavu a mi samo bogu hvala da kazemo sto smo RASKRSTILI s njima za vek i vjekova ako si srpkinja naravno zato kazem mi :D
I also go often as I have friends in all parts of Yugoslavia...People had mostly recovered after the bloody uncivil war and now have 7 different countries... I left there in 1971 after finishing University of Zagreb..
@@josipag2185 The Europeans have been a destructive force since the UK empire started to form,, long before WW2. And continuing. What an evil breed we are.
@@josipag2185 Josipa 1 BBBBB ShShSh .Big one.Talking like one who never heard of Marx !!!!!!!Yugoslavian people was the same tribe from Russia .Later various Satanic empires Divided them into Catholics Muslims Orthodox...Serbs Croats Slavonians...And Pitting them against each other....The same like tribes in Africa....Latin ''Divide et Impera'' German tribes were killing each other though centuries TOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!No one imposed ''divide'' on them YET .Hahahahahahahahahahaahah
@@josipag2185 Josipa 2 BS .....'''. And later they were allies with comunist Yugoslavia and with Russia '''----------------??????????????????????????????????????? The should have been allies of NAZIS??????????LIKE TODAY IN UKR!!!!!!!!!!!Are you USTASA?
My dad worked on Belgrade airport as simple mechanic in 80 and his salary was 2000$, in 80. Everyone who worked after 2 years have received apartment from the company day worked for. Army was 4 in Europe after USSR, UK and France. There was freedom you can't imagine.
Army was strong because USA gived weapons for army. Because Tito was against Stalin. Economy collapsed inflation started to rise there were no anymore credit to take.
Wow, so many wrong information and wrong asumptions. Spoken like a person who really doesnt know basic info about history of Balkans. Truly surprised Mr Chomsky is a university lecturer at all after this clip, let alone a famous one. Slovenia leaving or being made to leave was a big deal, because it changed the voting balance of the federal government so it was a big deal for everybody else. Plus short war started and people died. Serbs were a significant minority in Croatia, but it was a 12 percent of the population not 33 percent. Vance Owen plan was quite quite different than Dayton plan, quite impossible to accept to Serbs because of territorial discontinuity although including some towns important to Bosniaks,, very favorable to Croats including some Bosniak majority towns, and very difficult to accept for Bosniaks especially with Sarajevo being special area. Reffering to Germany and Croatia was just insulting, democratic country of Germany in 1991 had a large croatian minority and foreign worker population that was very vocal about war happening in Croatia, that influences german internal politics and a desire to help stop the war in Croatia. Equating this with the nazi occupation of balkans and local nazi supporters is horrible and ignorant for a profesor. If he was a random guy on the street it wouldnt be so shocking. I do not want to analyze any other mistakes.... others can comment on that...
lol so "Germany in 1991 had a large croatian minority and foreign worker population" (which was probably about 0.0005% german population) had stronger "democratic" voice in "democratic Germany" than EVEN 11% (as you say. but real number/proportion of Serbian population in Croatia was around 30%) of Serbs in Croatia? Good logic. like a true fascist.
zato smo danas gde jesmo i ja sam se rodio u jugoslaviji al 97 al tad je vec bila gotova tako da je nepamtim uopste a kamoli po lepom cale mi ptica stalno to sto ti kazes al ako hoces iskreno bila je osudjena na propast mnogo pre devedesetih a po meni je kriv kralj aleksandar posle prvog svetskog je imao odresene ruke da crta granicu svoje drzave i umesto da je nazove srbija kao sto je i bila pre istog on je hteo da bude kralj i hrvata i slovenaca a posle i ovih ostalih pa dodjosmo do te jugoslavije a posle drugog svetskog dodje i najveci srbomrzac i ubica srba na vlast al se zivelo lepo dok vise nije moglo tako da mozes da je zalis kolko oces a ja joj se popisam na grob i nedogodila se vise nikad jos samo samo onog vampira da izbacimo iz kuce cveca da se konacno oprostimo od vase bivse juge nzm ni dal si srbin al i da nisi ne bi trebao da je oplakujes
@@IwillEndureToTheEnd If i got your question right, you are asking how doas USA care about Serbia at all ? Thats really hard to understand if you know nothing about USA efforts in any region in the world let alone this one. All i will point you towards is a millitary base in Kosovo, that should be enough for a smart person. Now on how Yugoslavia collapesed. Noam has set a bit of a contradictory statement first " USA and NATO actually wanted stability in the region and supported stabilitzing efforts", totally not true. If he ment by that what they said officially then ok, but in practice there was plenty what they did to seperate country. Contradictory is with the fact and written concern that Serbia is a problem that doas not obay, but Yugoslavia wasnt a problem ? Makes 0 sense. As much as i understand to this day since i study this 20 years now, collapse of Yugoslavia is no accident at all, considering USA was involved almost in any collapsed system anywhere in the world why wouldnt it be in the case of the most influencial communism country right after China and Russia. 1st of all there are 3 economy hitmans that operated in Yugoslavia that we know of as they by themselves addmited this, who knows how many more were there. 2nd thing political oppositions in every Yugoslav state were proven to be having close relationship with Pentagon.3rd there are hundreds of documents and transcriptions of Catholic church involvement in propaganda and incitement of hate and dissatisfaction with regime. 4th muslim part of Bosnia had secret agreement and meetings with USA representatives (we dont have proof of this pre 80s), but its not hard to conclude their relationship was too strong to be appearing all of a sudden, also the position of radical demands. I can go on and on forrever. But even more then their involvement in collapsing Yugoslavia and spreading hatefull propaganda from opposition is what happened after that. Just like in Ukraine NATO made sure war will be devastating for the region and hate will live very long time just like they are making sure that is the case right now in Ukraine.
@@salonez91 I just saw the documentary The Weight of Chains. My take on it is that the deliberate dismantle of Yugoslavia on a super macro level, filtering away all the BS, was just a tactial move to ensure American worldwide dominance. With the Soviet collapse it makes sense to take out Yugoslavia as well because then there is only 1 power left, China. I'm not at all pro US. I see what they do. Libyan war because they couldn't take dollar hegemony competition. I also believe the war in Ukraine is another attempt to disturb the BRICS development by trying to weaken Russia.
Poor innocent people that died! May they Rest In Peace. As for the people that were in power on all sides shame on all of you for letting so many innocent people lose there life’s and all the people affected by the war itself. Pray that future generations can learn to live together in peace. Having hate in your heart is a very bad thing to live with.
0:34 "because I think about a third of the population of Croatia is Serbian." - It was actually 12.2.% of the population, which is about 1/8, not 1/3 of the population. 0:41 "so when Croatia pulled out, the Yugoslav army entered to try to protect the integrity of the country and the Serbian minority." - According to 1974 Yugoslav constitution: "Proceeding from the right of every nation to self-determination, including the right to secession, Yugoslavia is defined as a federal republic of equal nations and nationalities, freely united on the principle of brotherhood and unity in achieving specific and common interest. Holders of the sovereignty of nations and nationalities are the republics and provinces within its constitutional jurisdiction" -so, according to the Yugoslav constitution, individual republics had the right to secede ("Proceeding from the right of every nation to self-determination, including the right to secession... holders of the sovereignty of nations are the republics"), Croatia held a national referendum, with 83 % voter turnout, and 93% in favour of independence, so why the fuck is the Yugoslav army entering and violating the constitutional right of a republic to secede, if it is supposed that the nations are united freely, not forcefully.
Oh well, Croats and Slovenians could also said in 1918. before unification:”We still want to clean austrian horses shit and leave us alone.“ Croatia in that moment, was like, two districts around Zagreb, Slovenia devide by Italy and Austria. But no, they knew, if they said that, they will still stink on shit. And nobody like to stink as shit. Especially horse shit. So, they accept unification, knowing that one day they will be independent. So they played political games after they had their own guy in the top of republic and that is how Croats and Slovenians got the constitution 1974. I also blame Serbs, why they did not make their own country, 1918, rather that joining with nations, who are always on opposite sides, killing Serbs in no matter what conflict. So, root of conflict is not in 1974.constitution. It is in 1918 first, than in 1941-1945 when Croats killed 700.000 Serbs in Jasenovac, and then i 1966 when Croats communist persuade the Tito to remove Rankovic, who was defending Serbs interests. So, Croats overplayed. But, today, they do not clean austrain shit. They clean german shit. Croats hotels in Adriatic sea are mostly owned by Germans, their fisherman are dived by Italian fishermans. In last decade, 400.000 people runaway from homeland. At the end, it will resize by its own population as much as they deserved it aroun 100 years ago.
Nobody takes that legalistic argument seriously. Nobody. Why? Because it was, from the point of view of constitutional law, completely unclear how it would work in a republic where there was a large minority of another constitutive nation. And why was it unclear? Because it could only be resolved by ethnic cleansing. Who supported Croatian ethnic cleansing of its Serb and Roma minorities? The US. So tell me again how Chomsky doesn't have a point.
"It was Yugoslavia's resistance to the broader trends of political and economic reform-not the plight of Kosovar Albanians-that best explains NATO's war." John Norris - Collision Course ( the book Chomsky talks about )
On the contrary. Kosovo was the main trigger because of the refugees. The west knew that the majority of those refugees would have ended in EU and considering that about 2 millions of them, as a product of wars in Croatia and Bosnia, were already in EU, that scenario had to be prevented. They simply bombed Serbia just to prevent new refugee wave.
@@jackylaibach2351yes on humanitarian grounds only not because they supported the right of a people for self-determination. Also to prevent the conflict from escalating to Albania which would involve surely major powers into violent antagonists too. The way he simplifies this into mafia principle is downplaying the complicated history of the region. Sure mafia principle may be part of USA foreign interventions but not the sole drive on this case. It may have compounded into the other elements. And it's not like Serbia was not begging for that kind of principle either
@Cassius are you actually saying that number of refugees from Bosnia and Croatia after wars in those countries was minuscule? Again,there was already more than 2 million refugees from those countries in EU when bombing of Serbia started.
@Cassius am not confusing anything because in 99 there were still huge numbers of refugees from Bosnia and Croatia and my point was that bombing has been undertaken partly in order to avoid second huge wave of refugees this time from Kosovo.
It doesnt have anything with croat german union wtf and america didnt work to keep yugoslavia one country why did the president of the USA at that time made a law and forbid all investors not to give yugoslavia financial help unless countries seperate from the original goverment. You put way too much time and effort talking about war and not who made it possible and who actually started it. I'll give you a hint it aint one of the yugoslav countries
Well to be frank it wasn't Clinton who "made a law", it was the IMF who was promising the secessionist governments to be exonerated from Yugoslav national debt if they seceded... But what the secessionist governments didn't know was that in order to secede, they would have to spend money (i.e borrow from IMF) on resources for the military since the Serbs weren't dumb to just part away from their own military resources in the pursue of peace. I think the largest contributor to the conflict was former Yugoslav president Tito, because 1. He made a platform for the secessionist governments on which they can work on; 2. He didn't successfully resolve the post WWII wounds in the country; 3. He did the same thing Merkel does now with Germany (Funny how history repeats), by allowing large amount of Albanian immigrants to Kosovo and forcing the Serbs out (because they were more expensive than Albanians), and hoping that would improve the Kosovar economy (Just look at the stats of GDP in former Yugoslavia, Kosovo had the smallest economy before the breakup, lol), it was inevitable that the Kosovars rise after giving them partial Autonomy, because they lived in the poorest conditions in the country; 4. He also contributed in the Bosnian conflict, by giving the Muslim population an identity calling them "The Muslim population" (therefore giving them a platform to seek independence from Croats and Serbs as well); I do agree that US contributed to the war but not by stirring up the country to conflict, but rather by cutting the foreign aid the US was giving to Yugoslavia (Around $3 billion dollars in the period of the cold war, which boosted Yugoslavia's position in the region), just because the Cold war ended. The way to avoid conflict, is to wait for reforms in the country and gradually decrease the aid. Not just cutting it off, because the country went into hyper inflation after that (And the politicians were ready to make some reforms before it as well). I hope I made myself clear here. Have a nice day!
6 ปีที่แล้ว +4
This is an outstanding point, some of it I never heard of. How old are you and where are you from? I guess USA?
@IcantSeeReplies Milosevic did revive the nationalism, but only to gain power. He did not start the wars. In Slovenia, it was the Slovenians. In Croatia, it was Croats, and in Bosnia it was the Muslims. Just look at the Zadar crystal night in May 1991. Hundreds of Serbian shops, houses and apartments demolished and stolen. Serbs from Zadar were lucky to get out alive. And then 2 days later, protests in Split. The mob tries to pull out a soldier from a tank, and kill him. The fact that no civilian blood was spilt that day did not stop the war. Croats got what they wanted. An ethnically clean state. I just don't understand why they are still so hysterical. Could it be the guilt?
I wish that the different republics could have worked out their differences without violence. Depressing end to Yugoslavia and all the lives destroyed.
it was not possible any longer and that's why Slovenia and Croatia, the richest and western republics, parted ways from federation, or to put it bluntly, from the Serbs hungry for domination.
Got to love the dupes who support all the interventions always for "humanitarianism". At least we in Greece didn't get duped and we almost all of us (95%) supported Yugoslavia against the American and NATO slaughter.
Some Greeks did volunteer and fought with Serbia and our soldiers refused to aid in any way the Americans. For that they are honored by everyone who opposes imperialism and war. As for the despicable Clinton and America they didn't give a fuck about the Bosnians or anyone (which is a myth that they were in danger in the first place) they only wanted to destroy Yugoslavia to replace it with tinny puppet states which unfortunately came to pass.
The opposite happened, it was thrown to the wolfs who collaborated with the German and Italian fascists while those on the resistance were hunted down. The so called "democratic" western bourgeoisie embraced the fascists with open arms when faced with the possibility of people's rule. They took the political and economic leadership those who in the occupation were the black marketeers and black hooded collaborators who betrayed the heroes of the national resistance to the German firing squads. The absolute dregs of society which were dealt with by People's Justice in the rest of Europe in Greece they not only remained unpunished but they were rewarded as well. That is the truth about the so called "democratic" allies.
mate, whatever the Western news is feeding you is the actual propaganda 99% of the time. Whatever CNN, BBC, etc... are reporting on in a foreign country IS THE PROPAGANDA, so assume the exact opposite is the truth. @RichardMontauk
@@redgreekrevolution '' a myth that they were in danger '' say that to 100 000 dead Bosniaks you dunce, and greek volunteers participated in genocide in srebrenica btw.
@@manueldros :: I agree, not that it matters ! But just think of the exchanges people have ( had ) from all over the World. Learning about other people ; other histories ; other opinions ; other cultures ; other customs ... These kinds of Domestic & International Exchanges is one of the Great Advances of this Century. Massive Populations communicating -- all over the World -- it cannot sit well w / those who have had so much exclusive power for so long ...
@@cliffgaither Getting into a discussion and learning about the wonders of the world and people are two separate things I think. I've never seen a fruitful discussion on youtube where people respect each others character and thinking ways. Maybe somewhere else on the internet, some Reddit pages, but on TH-cam I havent found it sadly
@@manueldros :: Maybe I spend too much time on YT. I had a flip-up phone for a long time. I didn't want to end up like people I saw on the streets w / their phones. Then I got a "smart" phone & discovered YT had existed for 10yrs. before I discovered it. Now, w / so very many sources of information & opinions, I'm just like other people w / this damn phone ! I've found many respectable exchanges & opinions, especially the exchanges of historical events. People will be respectful if you meet them half-way, unless they are just unreasonable. You haven't found any yet ? Maybe you have better things to do than hold a phone up to your face -- 24 / 7. 😄
I strongly propose Mr Chomsky open an ASMR channel, since his voice is quite peaceful and well toned and maintained. Or maybe im simply tired of researching the Yugoslavia collapse background.
DOUBLESPEAK - "make war to stop war" - "put guns in schools to keep guns out of schools" - "give tax money and tax breaks to the rich to help the poor" - "patriot act (read it)" - "capital punishment to show that murder is wrong" - "get rid of the EPA and deregulate polluters to make the world a better place" - "get rid of ethics committees, they are not ethical" - "deregulate banks and companies so they can do BETTER, lol"
george orwell Give everyone a million dollars and we'll all be rich! Doublespeak goes both ways. Ironic considering your namesake, Animal Farm and 1984 were written as criticisms of Communism. Orwell coined terms like doublespeak to illustrate the way INGSOC controlled people through language, just like the Soviets who INGSOC is based upon. Things Soviets liked: high taxes, a disarmed and indoctrinated public Whats wrong with "making war to stop war"? If a neighboring country invades yours, the only way you can stop it is by warring back. Or surrending and hope you aren't slaughtered. Making war to stop war is pretty common throughout history. How would we have stopped Hitler without making war? I'm not sure what point you're making other than some vague sentiment against specific policies you dont like so you strawman them.
+ 200% SMUG How do you know that George Orwell wrote Animal Farm and 1984 as criticism of communism ?We live in 1984 right now and America has capitalism .
Chomsky 5:18 onwards: "With all the fancy talk in International Relations Theory, there's only one principle that I know of it seems to me to have any merit and that's the Mafia principle. International relations is very much like the Mafia. The Godfather does not accept disobedience." Analogy - "Suppose some small storekeeper that doesn't pay his protection money, well the Godfather doesn't just send out his goons to pick up the money, he sends out the goons to beat him to a pulp so that others will understand that disobedience is not acceptable."
Noam Chomsky analysis is quite a bit bizarre. The attack on Yugoslavia was not because of ethnic cleansing of Kosovo Albanians that produced hundreds of thousands of refugees? It is because Milosevic was not following American interests? Which interests ... as in not conducting ethnic cleansing? One of the things Chomsky is good at is twisting historical record to fit his worldview. I think a more honest approach (and he is a capable analyst) would be to be unbiased. Milosevic's attempt to get rid of Kosovo Albanians was well documented by human rights organizations. Producing hundreds of thousands of refugees into Macedonia and Greece was the main reason of bombing of rump Yugoslavia. Milosevic was on the course of committing a genocide. Another titbit of false information - Serbs did not comprise 1/3 of Croatian population, it was more like 12%. Serbs did comprise 1/3 of Bosnian population so this could be just an honest mistake by Chomsky.
You too kind friend. There’s an old saying; there is nothing as sad as an old fool! Only sensible thing Noam said was - 5.16 ‘I’m kind of simple minded person’! Cheers
Is this "ethnic cleansing" in room with us right now? Wanna hear something funny? Nato generals (from Norway, Ireland and Italy) actually confirmed there was ethnic cleansing on Kosovo. DONT BY ALBANIANS! But yeah... albanians poured millions into Clintons pockets.
Chomsky shameless lie... the Vance-Owen plan was rejected by the Serbs because in that moment they had the upper hand, so they did not see the need to compromise anything : "the "Vance-Owen peace plan", involved the division of Bosnia into ten semi-autonomous regions and received the backing of the UN. The President of the Republika Srpska, Radovan Karadžić, signed the plan on 30 April. However, it was rejected by the National Assembly of Republika Srpska on 6 May"
Thank you Noam for simplifying a complicated issue. I would just like to add that where you have a mix of different religious groups and ethnicity it is always easier to divide and conquer. One thing is for certain that what goes around comes around. The breakdown of international law is the greatest undoing of mankind and a horrific future will unfold.
It's actually oversimplified to the extent he said few straight forward lies. There was never 30% Serbians in Croatia. Not even Milosevic used that kind of lie as an excuse for war. There weren't even 10% except for many who settled in SR Croatia during Yugoslavia but without permanent residence.
Actually not so complicated... US have always been orchestrated every conflict since WW2. We can simply look at "who owns what" in former Yugoslavia, today.
when I hear people like NC to say that third of population of Croatia was Serbian, I just don't understand how that wrong info came out to public, and why someone like him would perpetuate such an obscure info?? last population census from 1991. (done by Yugoslavian, not Croatian, statistical institute) there were in Croatia cca 4.700.000 people in total, of which cca 3.700.000 Croats, 580.000 Serbs, 110.000 Yugoslavians, 45.000 Muslims, and so on... so there were 12% of population Serbs, so war wasn't because of how many Serbs were in Croatia...to say something like that is a joke, and I really didn't take NC as a joke... disappointed
Chomsky forgets to mention that no one wanted a Yugslavia with Milosevic in the top, he basically self proclaimed himself as the new Tito but was working for a big Serbia instead.
That is not actually true. Milosevic proposal was: - more centralized federation with Sarajavo as a new capital - Alija Izetbegovic as a new president But Franjo Tudjman, croatian leader steped out, with attitude: “That is historical moment for croatian nation to get their own republic!” After the offer from EU to Yugoslavia to implement economic reforms to get 5 bilion us dolars and imediatelly become a EU member. As west always do, applying as always Gebels propaganda: Blame others for what you are doing, so everybody blame Serbia/Milosevic for breaking down the Yugoslavia, but Franjo Tudjman did not want it, at first, and then Alija Izetbegovic right after to stay in the federation. So tell me, if I want to stay in good relation with you, and you hit me first, straight to head, how can it be that I am responsible and guilty for hostility?
That is exactly the stuff you got told by the media. If you listened to the man you would understand maybe that there was a big minority in Croatia 25% and they were left without rights, even under the habsburger empire they got rights. But please tell me more what you have heard on BBC, ZDF and CNN
@@Mislilac0302Slovenia and Macedonia you Don t mention 😂😂😂...Od they had right to go, Croatia had too. And it was shown on referendum. You could still make Jugoslavia with BiH, Montenegro, Serbia...
I generally agree with Mr. Chomsky, but he's over simplified this. Croatia's relationship with Germany isn't about WWII, that was just a blip in Croat-German relations. Germany and Croatia have a relationship that goes back hundreds of years through the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Yes, the austrians invited serbs to live on the border and keep their religion, but if a war come against the otomans, they would serve the ranks and logistics.
@@pioneirohill8493 No one invited anyone. First, the population from the east started moving in to Croatia somewhere around early and mid-18th century, after the failed rising in the Balkans following the liberation of Hungary and parts of Croatia (Slavonia) in 1698/99. Second, the orthodox population that moved westwards were mostly Vlachs not Serbs, which is why the statute that regulated their position within Habsburg Monarchy was called "Statuta Valachorum" (Vlach Statute) and this decree was to equalize their position with Croats and Hungarians who already lived and fought in the borderland regions and were treated as free citizens rather than serfs. The biggest mistake Habsburgs did was to allow the Serbian orthodox church to come in and literally "convert" these people to Serbs creating problems that would resonate for the next two centuries.
@joekerr9197 Educational system in SFRJ (ex YU) never ever promoted/published this version of the history. I guess historians in Croatia have been busy last 30 years ... We all know that fsiled uprising caused population move NORTH to Budapest area, not west. And folks that populted "Krajina" borderlands were definitely Orthodox faith. Vlachs or Serbs, doesn't really matter the origin. And the fact that Austrians officialy peovided them with big benefits and opportunities simply makes whole thing legal and your comment ridiculous and wrong. Your bosses decided to accept Vlachs/Serbs and that's the only historical truth. Those Orthodox folks (~500K) are gone today due to genocides of WW2 and 1995, but interestingly enough Croatia would very much love to adopt 1 (one) person of that origin - Nikola Tesla!! If that's not hypocrisy I don't know what is ....
Mr. Chomsky needs to educate himself better on the issue. There was unrest simmering in Yugoslavia since Serbia decided to abolish the autonomy of Kosovo. Slovenia was let go by the Serbs in order to control the federal state and subsequently the Army without which the Serbs would not have been able to perpetrate the crimes that the international organizations accuse them of. His explanation does not take into account so many other political factors. With all due respect but he sees this conflict from his small window of the so called "American Imperialism and Expansionism".
Education has nothing to do with it. Was Chomsky insufficiently educated when he wrote a slew of apologies and excuses for, and denials of, the Khmer Rouge massacres under Pol Pot? Was he insufficiently educated when he wrote that Holocaust-denier Faurisson was not antisemitic but just "an apolitical liberal"? It's just who the man is. He picks sides on the basis of who is anti-American or whom the U.S. or its allies are opposing, and that's the end of the analysis. The fake analysis which follows just amounts to twisting or suppressing any evidence or logic which contradicts the already adopted dogma.
@@thanlem2522 Clearly you are a Chomsky cult member who believes your guru is always right. It is you who is not familiar with Chomsky's obscene apologetics for the Khmer Rouge genocide, and prefer to believe the guru's lying account of what he did or didn't say. If you are genuinely interested - although I doubt it - try googling Steven Lukes Chomsky. Lukes article provides a concise summary of the outrageous, obscene things Chomsky said at the time. Since it is based almost entirely on quotes, Chomsky never replied. He likes venues where only he gets to speak, and is able to lie with impunity, as cult members like yourself applaud every sentence.
The Serb minority in Bosnia and Croatia weren't in any danger before the Serb controlled Yugoslav army attacked. They would've been citizens of these new countries and had full voting rights that come with that. The Serbs turned the breakup into a war of ethnic cleansing and genocide.
"The percentage of those declaring themselves as Serbs, according to the 1991 census in Croatia, was 12.2% (78.1% of the population declared itself to be Croat)" not one third as Chomsky says .... if you can't get that right then how much weight can you place on anything else Chomsky says on this issue? There was a vote and an overwhelming majority of people in Croatia voted for independence through parliamentary elections .... you either support democracy or you don't.
@@Untrus the census is different to the vote for independence. Even under old Yugloslavia in 1981, 531,502 or 11.6% identified as Serbs. Why would they not identify as serbs 10 years before the wars of independence? No, the reason is the pulation of serbs in Croatia was never one third. The land they seized trhough force was perhaps one third of croatia - for a while. Chomsky, as always, distorts the facts to suit his narrative. He is not a historian you know, just a linguist who happens to have loud opinions
@@jokersmith9096 yes they could have and they could have in abstained from tthe 1948, 1953, 1961, 1971, 1981. Why do that when it is your interest to increase your numbers I don't know. To do so would be quite stupid. I don't think Serbs are stupid.
Please, you guys who are not from the Balkan, don't pretend that you know what happened there. Seriously! You have no knowledge of our history, relationships between ethnic groups and so on. But you want to present yourselves as smart assess.
One small correction should be made and noted. Chomsky on 0:38 mentions that about one third of the Croatian population were Serbs. This is incorrect. One third of Bosnian and Hercegovian population were Serbs, and that resulted in many complications and problems which led the the subsequent war, genocide and massive forceful movement of refugees. Only 10-12% of the population of Croatia identified as Serbian at the time, as oppossed to around 33% which Chomsky claims.
bs, americans propped up every leader in balkans who wanted to separate. izmetbegović didn't reject the peaceful separation from yugoslavia on his own, he first agreed to it, as it was a great deal for him, he would have come out as a great leader of his people with that deal, but warren zimmerman, then ambasador of us to yugoslavia, took him to the side, and told him that if he backs out of the deal, us would back him, (similar to what boris johnson did to ukraine in march 2022) and that he'd become epic hero of his people. he foolishly agreed to american aid, got out of deal, vvar ensued, and eventually, when bill was up for reelection, he wanted to misrepresent himself as "peace president" so he just told izmetbegović to sign the current deal, which was actually much worse for bosnia than the one they originally had signed and then back pedaled out of. had usa wanted to maintain territorial integrity of yu, there'd still be yu. but the fact they ripped kosovo, serbian holy land, out of serbia, and proclaimed it "independent" - that tells you all about intention of usa
So, according to Mr. Chomsky separation of Slovenia was ok because it was "part of the west anyway" but in case of Croatia the federal army had to protect integrity of the country. I thought Mr. Chomsky was smarter. Probably old age kicks in.
Yeah, Chomsky really spew the imperialistic Serbian propaganda here. He even mentions ww2. Here is the the thing. Germany did support Croatia. Croatia did ensure constitutional right to ALL minorities and no Croatian threatened any Serb. Serbian national television however lied to their people that its an ustasha state, and they listened. The reason Serbs left Slovenia alone is because Slovenians answered with guns (Croatia wanted slow but steady leave, kinda like what UK did with Brexit), not diplomacy and they didnt let Serbs play the victim. So Serbs left. Croatians werent prepared at all for what was coming next.
Cyco Miles Yes and it’s not a consensus! The state that was to be Croatia has nothing to do with the Croatia listed here and absolutely nothing is cited! Nothing! I could claim that in 1981 Croatia had a population that was 80% gay men but where is the evidence?
Noam Chomsky should read the history books and see how the Serbs came to the Croatian lands in the first place and why. And after a couple of centuries they became a Trojan horse in the country that saved them from the Turks.
Ефендиа Вакуфац прочитај хрватског историчара Давор Маријан који каже за рат у Босну крив Еф Изетбеговић према томе Срби нису криви треба престати сатонизацију Србију
This is the first time I have seen the video and with deep respect I would like to refer to the part about relation Croatia - Germany. If we talk about the history of the Balkan Peninsula it is deeply complicated and not as simple as explained or commented on by some visitors - which shows ignorance. The war in 1991 has nothing to do with the past (WW2) but only with the fact that the Badinter Arbitration Committee confirmed the international recognition of the republic borders on the one side and the other fact in Croatia at that time was 15% of Serb population mixed with Croats in parts of Croatia. After the declaration of independence in June 91, Milosevic took the chance to start the long-planned occupation of most parts of Croatia, written in an official secret document of the Serbian Academy for Science and Art called "Memorandum SANU" signed by most Serbian intellectuals extremists. The main agenda according to the plan was the occupation of all territories where Serbs were represented in some percentage and providing ethnic cleansing. Serbia’s planned western border was Karlobag - Karlovac - Virovitica (Croatian cities), which would divide Croatia in half. Fortunately, the resistance of Croatian citizens was amazing even with very weak weapons. In the war, some accidents against the Serb minority occurred but it has to be clearly emphasized that in Defense forces of Croatia participated in over 15.000 Serbs. As a veteran of the Homeland War, I also had some friends Serbs. Also, it has to be noticed at the beginning that minority rights were part of the Croatia first State Constitution and from the beginning Serbian political Parties actively participated in Government. Even, after the peaceful reintegration of East Slavoina lot of Serbs who actively participated in war crimes in Vukovar and other parts of Croatia were abolished. As a consequence of the reintegration agreement lot of Serbian war criminals peacefully walk today on Vukovar streets and watch the victims, especially rapped women. One of them is Vojislav Stanimirovic. According to the dark history of WW2 Croatia was an ally of Germany and a lot of organized crimes were committed without doubt. But pull out Croatia from the context just to misuse the real character of wars in former Yugoslavia in 1991 is dirty propaganda whose aim is to relativize responsibilities for the war and the committed crimes. If we talk about the "achievements" made for the German Nazis then we have to mention the fact that the Serbia was the very proud first "Juden Frei" country. One of the leaders who participated in this shameful "accomplishment" was the leader of the Serbian royal army Draza Mihajlovic who was recently rehabilitated bay the Serbian government ond one month ago became a monument in the middle of the Serbian capital Beograd! The conclusion is every society has an extreme minority that has to be effectively controlled but Serbia is permanently led by national extremism and latent imperialism driven by the intellectual summit.
NATO launched a bombing campaign against Serbia in March 1999 ...The air war lasted 78 days. During more than three months of bombing, NATO targeted mostly military targets, but also destroyed much of Serbia's infrastructure, including several key civilian bridges.NATO bombed Serbia with depleted uranium..Against one sovereign, independent, small and proud country. The most powerful world power has ruined Serbia mercilessly.The Serbia was hit by the 19 most developed countries of the West - a member of the NATO Pact, led by the United States.Heroic defense and the struggle of the people of Serbia against attacks on its freedom, sovereignty, integrity and independence has universal value. It is a model for all peoples of the world who care about freedom and peace..
I would add just one more element that made the US decide against the Serbs, despite the fact that the Serbs have historically been American allies (in contrast to the Croats and Muslims - Bosniaks, from Bosnia, who were Hitler's allies), and that is the fact that Serbia at the time we are talking about, was the only remaining communist country (republic) with a one-party system!
Mr. Chomsky, how is it possible that one republic of a former SFRJ takes over the entire army (entire equipement and logistics of a former federation) and until this day theirs and your canon remains like: they were just "protecting" serbian minority in other republics of the former federation which was no more by killing and/or displacing people who weren't pro-big-serbia and destroying their cities?
Chomsky is a communist or extremely left oriented at best, so MIlosevic was in his opinion absolutely right to ethnically cleanse non Serbs whatsoever.
00:35 "Third of Croatia were serbs".Hell no,1/6 were Serbs.And Croatia had every right to become independent.Milošević wanted to dominate Yugoslavia and that was it for Slovenia and Croatia etc
The Vance-Owen peace plan was in 1993, not in 1992, the war was already raging when the plan was proposed in Geneva. And it was the Bosnian Serb assembly in Pale that rejected it. They even had a referendum on it. It would be important to get those facts straight.
I am disappointed by Mr. Chomsky. He has every right to believe whatever he wants, but he needs to tell the truth. He also didn’t mention anything about the civilians being killed in kosovo. He should have at least mentioned it.
@@kataz7786 he knows the facts. He only uses them selectively and selects those that fit his thesis. It is sad how much science suffers by elevating people of such harmful provenance to a pedestal.
He obviously mixed up names of the peace plans. He was referring to Carrington-Cutileiro plan, which was indeed in 1992, and Alija Izetbegovic withdrew his signature after meeting with US ambassador to Yugoslavia. You can check the "Peace plans proposed before and during the Bosnian War" wikipedia page for more information and sources.
Milošević worked and lived several years in the US and (what a coincidence?!?) then came to power with the "yogurt revolution" in Serbia (remember the orange revolution?), and tried to take absolute power and dethrone the mixed federal government. That is why the US wanted to keep "that new Yugoslavia" and during the whole war of ex-Yugoslavia they kept him as a respectable negotiator. And they limited themselves to playing the role of observers, eventually helping Croatia too, when they saw that Milosevic did not always obey. They let Yugoslavia be destroyed, and did not intervene in the Bosnian war, until the end, well after the genocide of Srebrenica, when they legalized the Serbian conquests and ethnic cleansing by creating the entity Republika Srpska, and thus rewarding the Serbs. Thus they broke Bosnia definitively, with the most absurd peace plan of the planet, giving half of the country to the Serbs. Indeed, it will be several years later that when they saw that Milosevic no longer obeyed them at all, they sided with the Kosovars and bombed Belgrade and Serbia... Mr. Chomsky, the Vence Owen plan is just the one responsible for Croatia's final attack on Bosnia and the Bosnian Muslim population. Those two British "negotiators" reminded me of the typical colonialist politicians who drew borders in Africa and Asia before withdrawing from their colonies and thus provoked wars and problems for their inhabitants that still persist.
There never will be as good of a country here on earth as was Yugoslavia. OK hunger after ww2, but after that, ppl were FREAKING HAPPY AND HOPEFULL. Pozdrav iz. SLOVENIJE!
Sir you completely wrong. Croatia was under control by Serbian minority who occupied high positions in Croatia region during Yugoslavia after the World War 2. Serbia was the only republic that was armed and had the military. Serbia started using heavy weapons and tanks against the Croatian citizens. To continue, the world watched while Croatians were getting killed. There was greater interest to have a a Yugoslavia opposed to stopping the war. The UN drafted a document that Croatia can not get any arms. Croatians had to use hunting guns and rifles against the third most strongest army in Europe at the time. However, it did get help from Germany to arm itself. Not sure where your getting your information. Serb minority in Croatia was maybe 12.5% and not 30% when Serbia started the war. Lets get the facts straight.
I stopped taking you seriously when you wrote "third most strongest army in Europe at the time". Please! 13th perhaps. "Not sure where your getting your information." Not sure where *you studied English* but you still don't understand the difference between *you're* and your. And another thing: There's a huge irony in that statement of yours because that sounds like the most biased nonsense I've ever heard. I don't trust anybody claiming any conflict was completely black and white. So that being said: Any modest and rational person would wonder were you got *your* information from. Most likely what you heard being spread in public or among whatever deeply nationalist groups you identify with. Perhaps you should look up more independent sources and not trust your the ignorant plebs you're working with in your factory or whatever h-ll your profession is. "your getting your information." Please, try passing as somebody who did study English for more than a semester. "Serbia was the only republic that was armed and had the military. " I'm going to call BS on that one. "Sir you completely wrong." You ARE completely wrong is how you say that. Poor grammar - always the hallmark of an uneducated pleb who never saw higher education yet you think you're smarter than one of the world's leading intellectuals? Priceless!! Keep flipping that burger Ivan or whatever you're named. At least you were polite with the "sir" part. Oh, and "completely wrong." Not part wrong. Or missing a few facts. Or even misguided or missing "the big picture". Nope, he is "completely wrong" As in 100% wrong. That's your view? Knew you were stupid. It's amazing how prevalent the false dichotomy thinking is among infantile chimps. A university professor is "completely wrong" but you, Ivan the burger flipping (whatever nationality you are) worker who never read a book in his entire life and can't find three countries on a world map *knows* what is right? Omg. Oh my frickin' god. Good thing people like you are never seen in any higher education. Well, mostly not. Even the most self-righteous American libertarian has a more grand view of politics - and American libertarians are selfish predators. You people (I am referring to the mental capacity of feeble minded simpletons irregardless of what nationality they have or whatever their social group might be) can only see things in completely black and white. Like kids. The world is way more gray than you are capable of understanding. But I'm afraid you'd be all confused with the diversity of such a word and all its details. Therefore you need the black-and-white world. Because you just know you're right. Self-scrutiny. That is the main difference between smart people and chimps. To chimps everything is a huge piss*ing game. Dolt.
3:42 ''Plight of Kosovo ALBANIANS''( don't they have their own state Albania ???????????????????)--------------- Plight that -They could not carry out Jihad and not ambush freely Serbian police cars!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
As the last war has shown, Serbs' behavior exemplifies the case of colonial minorities elsewhere-from French in Algeria & British in Zimbabwe to Russians in Chechnya & Central Asian Republics. They either rule as a privileged caste or flee to their motherland when the system of exploitation, which they have been so avid a part thereof, breaks.
@Genes It has nothing to do with "race", but with the defeat of expansionism & exploitation. The same happened to Germans in Poland, Czechoslovakia, English in Ireland, British in American revolutionary war, Russians in Estonia, Italians in Yugoslavia, ...and will happen to Castillans in future independent Catalonia.
@Jotaro97 Years 1991 & 1992: Serbs are 11% of Croatia’s & 33% of Bosnia & Herzegovina population. They support Slobodan Milošević’s pan-Serbian movement which took JNA/Yugoslav Army under Serbian control. This Army has been financed by all Yugoslav republics (Serbia plus Montenegro 36%, Croatia 28%, Slovenia 19%,..). So, Serbs literally “stole” all these planes, tanks, ships, rockets, guns, howitzers, … and, via their fifth column, first Croatian Serbs, then BiH Serbs, embarked upon their provincial imperial expansion: they wanted to occupy the entire Bosnia and Herzegovina & ca. 70% of Croatia. This was a combined aggression: Serbia proper + Montenegro +JNA + local Serbs. Had they not possessed/stolen all others’ arms, there would have been no war.
Yugoslavia was dominated by Croat Tito and Slo and Cro people in power. Serbs were victims of Croatoslavia. Why there was no autonomous provinces for Dalmatia and Slavonia? Why Jasenovac wasnt preserved and Serb Holocaust was silented? How come Serbs had no right to be independent from Croatia and Croats had from YU? Why Goli otok was for Serbs and not for Croats? Why Croats were not punished and answered for their genocide in ww1 and ww2? Why Serbia was poor while Croatia prospered from taking riches from Serbia and using it as cheap recources. . .
@@josipag2185 * during 1918-1939 period, Yugoslavia was basically a softer version of Greater Serbia, with all nations-except Slovenes- oppressed. Close to 400 Croats & ca. 2000 Muslims had been killed by Serbian paramilitaries & government forces during the “peaceful” period in the 1920s & 1930s. The turning point was assassination of Croatian leader Stjepan Radić, a sort of Croatian Gandhi, by a Serb nationalist in Yugoslav parliament in 1928. This convinced some Croats that any Yugoslavia was insufferable, and the most influential among them was future Poglavnik/”Leader” Ante Pavelić, who emigrated & founded a revolutionary terrorist organization ustaše (ca. 200-300 people). * after the collapse of Yugoslavia in the April war 1941, the situation in Croatia & Bosnia and Herzegovina was something like a vacuum. No Croatian politician wanted to become the head of state patronized by Nazi German authorities, but at the same time there was a sense of jubilation: Croats got independent (in theory) country, after decades of Serbian oppression. In this vacuum, Pavelić was installed by Hitler and Mussolini as a kind of puppet. In this country, ca. 50-60% were Croats & more than 30% were Serbs (the rest were Bosnian Muslims, considered to be Croats). * Pavelić assumed power on April the 10th 1941. But even a week before that, Serb paramilitaries had started killing Croats & some 200-400 people were killed in the interregnum. After he had been installed, Pavelić actually dissolved parliament & established a dictatorship; Croatia was crippled & many vital areas, especially in Dalmatia, were given to Mussolini’s Italy. Also, he introduced racial laws for Jews & started to persecute Serbs- both as a revenge for their participation in royalist Yugoslavia period terror & their atrocities during interregnum. In the next few months perhaps 5-20,000 Serbs were killed by ustaše in various areas of NDH/Independent State of Croatia.Basically, it was a terrorist regime & most Croats disapproved of it, but were expecting to get rid of ustaše in some future & retain statehood under democratic circumstances. So, Croats wanted a truly independent country. * Serbs, being persecuted (along with Jews & Gypsies) rebelled on a massive scale in the last quarter of 1941 & many areas of NDH had become virtually defunct. This resulted in further Pavelić’s dependence to Hitler. On the other hand, communist partisans, led by a Croat, Josip Broz Tito, after their defeat in Serbia fled with remnants of their army to the NDH territory. There, they found refuge among Serbs, while many of them defected to royalist Četniks led by Serbian colonel Mihailović. Četniks killed during 1941, ca. 12-15,000 Muslim & Croat civilians, mostly in the eastern Bosnia regions.From 1941-1945 there was a civil war in all of Yugoslavia, with various factions fighting for different aims. In Croatia, more Croats had been coming to partisans, especially after 1943 (fall of Italy) & thus partisans became a respectable force. For instance, Croatia had 5 partisan corpses (4 of them with a clear Croatian majority), while Slovenia had 2, Bosnia & Herzegovina 2, Serbia proper 2 etc. * in May 1945, the war was over & partisans had won. But, in 2- 6 weeks after the end of war, they committed mass atrocities, killing ca. 80,000-150,000 Croatian soldiers & civilians, perhaps 10,000 Serbian Četniks & up to 4,000 Slovenian white guards.Modern unbiased historical investigations have dispelled many myths, especially those re number of victims in Yugoslavia & NDH in particular. In sum, in all of Yugoslavia, ca. 500,000 Serbs had died unnatural deaths & this included some 300,000 Serbs in NDH. Of these, perhaps over 100,000 had been killed by ustaše, while others died of typhoid, were killed by Germans, Četniks etc. Among Croats, ca. 200- 250,000 died of unnatural causes, virtually all of them in NDH on various sides. Percentage-wise, the biggest losses were among Bosnian Muslims, over 80,000.
Chomsky was wrong here. The second world war's the biggest and the only resistance against German Nazism and Italian Fascism started in Croatia by Croatians. It was the only organised resistance in all Europe. Seven major offensives and battles were provoked by Croatian and later Yugoslav partisans. None of those offensives were success for the Germans or Italians...remember that.
@@josipag2185 yes, Italian insignificant resistance started end of 1943 but Croatian Partisans started fights 1941 when War started. The only resistance in Europe.
Have great respect for Chomsky but few things he got wrong. Surprisingly some very easy to check facts. There were 14.5 % Serbs in Croatia, not 1/3, (or 33%), they did't lose any rights after 1990 elections. 20% of Croatian parliament in 1991 was sited by Serbs (mostly two parties - Serbian SDS and ex communist party). They were asked, but they saw future totally different then Croats. War broke because Serbs want to stay in one country, either Great Serbia or small Yugoslavia (depends who you ask).
serbs were ethnically Cleansed from their houses where they lived for centuries. This is against the "European" idea of protecting minorities...isnt it?
But it was legal to displace and kill non-serbs, to bomb cities, take away 1/3 of the territory (even if the serb population in Croatia was only ~10%...there are also a lot of Croats and Hungarians in the Serbia- hey, let's take the Vojvodina away from the serbs 😆😉), be directly and indirectly guilty for 6 wars in the 90s?! Which rights do you mean? The ,,priviliged position" rights?! Info for non-ex YU people: If you would live in a city with 30.000 people, 29.000 were croats/bosniaks and 1000 serbs. Guess which ethnic group got 90% of the jobs... Even now, serbs have more rights (own cyryllic font, languages, schools, save places in the parlament...) in Croatia than minorities in most of the EU countries. Serbs were better connected to other governments in the world, because most of the diplomats Yugoslavia were Serbs. Guess who gave them a ,,Go" for the wars in the 90s... USA might not be perfect, but many thanks for the support in the mid and late 90s (even if the support could have started a few years earlier)!!!
Mr Chomsky, with all due respect, you are correct on most of your analysis , however as a former resident of Yugoslavia, can i just point out the break up of that wonderfull, majestic country had nothing to do with human rights, religious freedom, territorial disputes or even political differences. Plans for the break up and disenteration of of Titos Yugoslavia were drawn in the early 50 just after Tito told Stalin where to go with his Totalitarian schemes. Europe of today, the so called EU should be thankfull to marshal Tito for giving them the model on how to unite and work together. Its sad to see today that the current EU nations are so disenchanted and racist . They would would rather accept 5 million middle Eastern Refugees than accept smaller European countries in the EU. So much for logic.
We be,ieved in Brotherhood and Unity (Bratstvo i Jedinstvo). Chomkey is an old fool who does not understand that desinte3gration of Yugoslavia was mostlyg caused by Serbian communists, who transformed into nationalists and tbhen Serbian fascists...who initicated the war by using Yugoslav amry nmostly with Serbian officers, and thugs enmployed byt Milosevic, Karadzic and Mladic...
"EU should be thankfull to marshal Tito for giving them the model on how to unite and work together." What, he did exactly the same thing as any other communist, kill people until they shut up... One could say yugoslavia was a sort of a warcrime... order=borders, no order=no borders=migrations=chaos=salt on patriotism=lasting hate=chauvinism=war? unlikely, with all the great powers and shit, but tito/commies did fuck all, only cause suffering and decay, ffs serfdom was better than irl communism, if you add enough brainwash into the mix it will instead of proceeding to nationalism just stop at chaos and eventually lead to extinction of a nation and the worst thing, that brings with it is, lack of love... leads to decay...
@@rockrl98 Tito managed to keepo Yugoslavia from oiutside iraon curtain imposed by the Soviets, as Tito had enough snmarts to avoid being kiulled by Stalin and kept Yugoslavia in between West and East. AEconomy was mixed and farmers could keep their land and produce unlike in colective farms in USSR...and elsewhere.. People could also have small businesses..and travel freelhy to and from Yugoslavia. I KNOW, as I was born and lived in Yugoslavia untill leaving in 1971 for personal reasons...Tito promoted idea of Brotherhood and Unity...which was not such a bad idea...his main failure was to leave good successor mnechanism as he was a President for
Do not blame others for Serbian (and less Croatian) nationalism for the break up of Yugoslavia when Communism failed after 1989...MIiosevic and Serbs who supported him are guilty for this uncivil war while this time Muslims and Croatisain Bosnisa were main victims... EU and UN were total dunces in dealing with this stupid war...
@@vlastamolak1156 "Chomkey is an old fool" - Professor Chomsky is one of the smartest people out there, all of his scientific work and international recognition of his work speak in favor of that. Just because you disagree with his views on breakup of Yugoslavia doesn't make him an "old fool" and doesn't give you the right to slander him.
This is totally incorrect. He does not know the basic facts about the start of the war and has obviously no idea that the start of the war was based and the Yugoslav People's Army initiative against Slovenia and against the TO - 'Teritorijalna obrana' (the republic army) which was stripped of guns and ammo in May 1990 and is to be considered the start of the war in Croatia.
Hahahahahah You F. liars .I am glad you have seceeded. TO means homeland army (reservists dad's army) and is under command of the federal army (JNA).Like Homeland security is under command of US Army .Imagine homeland army in California starts shootng at US Army and starts blocking their barracs ?Hahahahahahahahh.They will be wiped in 2 seconds....Unless EU helps it happens in USA .Hahahahahahah.....And the were speedily and intesively Amed by BND (Germany)......But BND bribred Army officers and Milosevic big time and that was the end of USA, pardon Yugoslavia
Can anyone recommend some books/documentaries/podcasts/etc that they feel have a fair and unbiased as possible view of Yugoslavia and its war? From a leftist/socialist lens as well. Thank you!
I know this was from months ago, but how could something be unbiased, and also through a lens of leftist/socialism? I might be misinterpreting what you are saying though…
@@andon9561 yeah you’re right, I worded that really stupidly. I guess there’s no such thing as unbiased, so what I’m looking for is something presented through the lens I’ve already integrated into my life and trust after thinking critically about it. I don’t want to learn about the war through a capitalist’s lens, a conservative’s lens, etc. i would still be wary of any information I read, but it would save me time as opposed to reading other things. Idk if that makes sense
@@jacksnipe9640 good recommendation on the MR article, I didnt know much about the yugoslavian dissolution but knew it heavily involved NATO, so was looking for proper education on the subject (how i ended up at this video) and found it very helpful as further reading for cutting through the western hegemonic attitudes i likely wouldve found in mainstream explanations down into the actual realpolitik reasons for the dissolution.
@@ditchweed2275 Please notice that you are talking to a person who survived it and was there the whole time. Or you want to tell me that daily shelling, starving people to death, columns of refugees, and other attrocities beyond count are lies? I wish they were. But they are not. It is simple. It was an attempt of genocide in Croatia, a genocide in Bosnia, and attempt of a genocide in Kosovo. What I see here is a professor who is deliberately trying to neglect the facts and the context, in order to justify his theories.
Humans... Chomsky is anything but a charlatan and he speaks asnto exactly how it was. Nationalism was rampant on ALL sides and innoscent Serbs were murdered im large numbers and the genocide started against Serbs LONG TIME ago in Kosovo and systematic ethnic cleansing. Striping Kosovo from its autonomy was a retaliating measure. Then everything else was staged the exhodus, CNN anchor Christane Amanpour was looking for Albamians willing to cry infront of camera. Yes there were bad actors like Arkan and co. But Serbs were systematically being cleansed since Tito. In the very cradle of its own culture and history. With thousand year old monastaries. Ruined. Wome raped. People being kidnapped and shot and their organs sold on the black market. Look up a Vice eposode on that called albamian mafia operation called Yellow House. Again, Chomsky is not a charlatan. What happened in the balkans was a tragedy that affected everyone equally. With the exception of Slovenians. Now we're all just a bunch of third world countries andnthe fact that Croatia is in the EU makes no difference. Its more less the same s...hole as Serbia and the rest of the balkans. Not to mention Bosnia. Most people in the balkan provincial areas can barely read or write so to point fingers is just a narrative thats getting old and people will just have to move on and deal with the harsh realities of living in a third world country. Just move on.
The only thing that is a fact from what you wrote is that many Serbs were victims as well, including the destruction of their cultural heritage in Kosovo. It does not change the fact that many others were victims as well. Was it a genocide or not? Simple question, what would happen if Serbia won all the wars? Everyone else not agreeing with Milosevic would be banished and killed. How do I know that? From a pattern that repeated from Vukovar to Kosovo. There is the answer to your question and that is the fact that clearly demonstrates that professor is neglecting the facts to justify his own theories, in which he is using, so senselessly, events he did not try to fully comprehend.
Humans... Milosevic was horrible. I agree. Serbs started the conflict in Croatia by blocking roads. But as i mentioned earlier Croatians, not all ofcourse but there was a palpable nazi fascist atmosphere in Croatia and rasism towards Serbs prior to the start of the war that was justifiably terifying as in WW2 Croatia was a Nazi German puppet and massacred hundreds of thousands of Serbs, Jews and Roma(gypsies) . Actually Rabbis kept close account and records. The number circulates around half a million butchered people in the most monstruous imaginable ways. That was a real genocide. And Germans werent even aware of that and were shocked when they came and saw what they did. Chomsky is well aware of that. So yes, Serbs blocked roads and initiated the conflict. I actually liked Stipe Mesic and i thought he was good but unfortunately Tudjman was awful. So was Alija Izetbegovic. Milosevic too was a very deeply wounded and dark individual as his father an orthodox priest commited suicide when Milosevic was still a boy.
What a deranged world we live in! The saddest day of my life was when Yugoslavia went under, but still NOAM, with all due respect you are a north american and would rather or would also like to hear the account from the people themselves. Merci, Noam Chomsky, ana maria
Here's expose of French general who witnessed everything, for starting plans, to war. No one believes the Serbian people, propaganda is still going strong, punishing us for disobedience, and taking allies side in ww. Serbs made them lose the war in 41, so they needed, and are still being punished for it. twitter.com/JLPhpp/status/1287291421574287360?s=19
Here's Chomsky's take on 20th century history: everything that happened was either good or capitalism's fault. That's all you can learn from him. My recommendation: look for more OBJECTIVE takes on the matter.
Knows it better than most ex-Yugoslavs, who are often just brainwashed into thinking their side was just and committed no crimes. Croats, Serbs, and Bosniaks are all guilty chumps. A bunch of secret atheists fighting a fake religious war. Pathetic.
@@Fwazonly doesn't know it better than international lawyers and jurists who rendered ICTY and ICJ verdicts across multiple cases, showing your relativism to be a theology of its own, and actually consulted primary sources they could understand :)))))
You mean, the ICTY that makes previously documented evidence and witnesses disappear overnight? Yeah, they know and understand what happened, they just don't want the truth out for some reason.
@@thegreenknight7933 if evidence is "previously documented" then it can't disappear, might want to go to school kiddo. ICJ and ICTY unbiased international court Serbian "truth" = lies Serbian side guilty before 2 international courts: ICJ and ICTY, across multiple cases :)
The powerful voice of the wisest of Americans that The "Left" chooses to ignore at their peril. The Right knows how dangerous he is and if they haven't had him murdered yet is because Democrat politicians are either too afraid - or sold by pennies to those who own the country - to heed his message. Only a revolution of the discontent will shake them up. American who really love their country can learn from the lesson of Chile. When the discontent are pushed to the limit by the abuse of the Right they explode and there is hell to pay before politicians come to their senses and reconstruct a fairer society.
4 หลายเดือนก่อน +3
First was Slovenia. First war crime happened in Slovenia on JNA soldiers. Nobody ever talks about it today.
And what about the events that led to the breakup of Yugolsavia, mr. Chomsky? I would recommend you, and all the people who take all these statements from Chomsky as undeniable facts (just because it's Chomsky. If I wasn't Croatian, maybe I would also blindly believe everything Chomsky said about Yugoslavia) to read a little about the all the events that lead up to eventually wars. Under Tito, Yugoslavia was very centralised, since communists under Tito were hoping to create a one Yugoslav nationality that would erase all the existing ones. As time passed by, republics (SFR Yugoslavia consisted of 6 republics), especially more developed ones (Slovenia and Croatia) demanded for more decentralisation and greater autonomy, since they felt that profit which they generated was being invested in development of much poorer regions of Yugoslavia, like Kosovo. This long struggle for more autonomy and decentralisation finally resulted with a new constitution in 1974., approved by Tito himself, which gave all the republics greater autonomy and, most importantly, right to self-determine for every republic (any republic could from now on legally break away from Yugoslavia if population demanded it through referendum). Tito and his cult of personality was now the only thing glueing Yugoslavia together, and when he died in 1980. there was no one who could keep the "megalomaniac" Sebs in check. Almost everyone of influence in Serbia, be it academic community (read the SANU memorandum from 1984.) or polticians (placing their own puppets as presidents of Montenegro and autonomous regions of Kosovo and Vovodina, which would always give them 4/8 of vote for anything in Yugoslavia) now worked for unitaristic, centralised of Yugoslavia under the Serb rule, just like it was in first Yugoslavia. By the time the breakup finally hapens, Yugoslavia looked more like a fascist state than a socialist one, it is enough to listen to speeches from "communist" politicians in late 80's. This eventually lead to the breakup, when Slovenian and Croatian communists stormed out of CPY congress in protest of everything that was happening at the time. So, Serbian power-hungry, megalomaniac politics is the main reason for breakup of Yugoslavia. Also one more thing, since Chomsky said that Serbs were not given any rights in newly-formed Croatia. That's a lie, Croatian Serbs were the ones who boycotted the referendum on independence and ones who proclaimed their own breakaway country from Croatia, started with road blockades, insurgancies and deportation of Croatians who found themselves in their self-proclaimed country, which eventually lead to war. If they were not brainwashed into this idea of greater Serbia by their leaders, they could've all lived here in peace and more than a hundred thousand poeple would't lost their lives, nor would there be so much tension between our countries.
Well said. His position on this breakup shows he doesn't know all the details of what happened but seems more interested in giving criticism of the "Imperial West."
@@orm2799 I agree. This video gave me some perspective, because I love listening to Chomsky talk about Iraq etc., but as a Croat... He made our war seem like just a short chapter, filler story in the novel of the great West. While it's undeniable the West had a lot of influence over what was going on here, it's weird to be reduced to a pawn. We had our own shit going on, commiting atrocities of our own volition n stuff. Makes me think about all the other conflicts he paints as just a sidestory of the novel of the West.
@@dawnkeyy I agree. The American Noam Chomsky, while endlessly reviling America, shares with most of his compatriots an exclusvie interest in America. The rest of world is a side story as you say, which makes many of his analyses, although not totally worthless, terribly simplistic. (His tone of voice and delivery, as if calmly explaining the obvious, and kindly helping you see the utter simplicity of situations through the unnecessary fog, does not help).
Basically Yugoslavia was country that lived on distribution of stolen property and borrowed money, and it run out of funds as well as places to borrow it in late 80’s … In the late summer of 1991 when Yugoslav National Army ordered mobilisation to save YU even in Serbia and Mntenegro which were pro-Yugoslav republics, thay could not achieve response of more than 27% … + Mr. Chomsky got percentage facts wrong.
@Proudest Son of Terra What is universally accepted is what's fashionable to the masses at the time. If it's factual or not doesn't effect what is accepted at all.
wasn't it the Bosnian Serbs only who rejected the Vance-Owen plan(1993)? The Republic of Srpska parliament rejected it on a doubtable referendum.Serbs were never a third of Croatia's population either.
Many appear to have trouble placing Chomsky along ideological lines. I think there is a unifying principle to his public speech and writing - we are responsible for our own actions, we can choose to not do any evil. And as an American, he believes he has the responsibility to persuade other Americans to push for policy changes in that vein, since the US is a democracy.
1:16 the Serbs were a minority in Croatia (roughly around 12%, not 33% as Chomsky wrongly put it) and they were given the right to vote which they banned. So does Chomsky support the political elite and the minorities are allowed to rule over the other minorities and the majority?
What a bunch of bullshit, people should do their own research.🤣 First Croatia like others held a referendum in 1991 in which those 83% who voted, voted to leave Yugoslavia by 93% saying yes. After that we formally didn't do anything because EU asked us for a three month moratorium, its only then that the war happens because some Serbs were unhappy while others dreamt of Greater Serbia. Its a lie that anyone was for Croatian independence at the start, an embargo was even put on us. Also about the lie of no rights for Serbs google Plan-Z4 which would defacto give Serbs a country inside Croatia, they declined it because they though they would win 🤣 5:15 is the only time he speaks the truth
obozavam kad se prepirete na engleskom a svi znate isti jezik! Nego ko je na kraju pobedio i sta se dobilo pobedom on objasnjava kako je amerika drzava koja je pocinila i dan danas cini najvise genocida,a vi se uhvatili sto smo se mi sve skupa poubijali ni milion
He said that US's first response was not picking sides, probably trying to be in good terms with Yugoslavia to stablish future economic dominance (but just at first). When the EU backed up Croatia (and Germany), the US were forced to pick a side in order to be a stakeholder in the situation. But America doesn't know how to be a spectator, and fueled the conflict big time on the background.
@@fernando.tomina He has it with the US foreign policy in general otherwise if it wasn't for the USA intervening in this one the world would be learning about the consequences of WWIII by now
Sounds pro Serbian but ok... Lets clear this up: Serbs never fought for stability of Yugoslavia, they fought for the possibility that they will, (along the way, while they pretend to fight and care for Yugoslavia lol) establish their main goal - an "Greater Serbia". Greater Serbia is an doctrine, an idea that became almost official agenda, its roots are older than Yugoslavia itself (before YU there was an " Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenians" and from that era, are the very roots of "Great Serbia", that kingdom collapsed but idea survived and found its revival in political minds of serbian politicians inside YU-Yugoslavia). So we know that Serbs wanted to dominate even before Yugislavia ever existed, but once inside Yugoslavia, they couldnt and didnt know how to bare with the authority of Tito, who knew how to repel any kind of nationalism. Once he died, tables have turned, and old political ideas were about to emerge once more. Every other YU country knew what was always long term Serbian goal, and what will they try to do... So its not strange that Slovenia and Croatia decided to separate, it was not an act of rebelion, both countries had an legal right to do that. Inside Yugoslavian constitution it was written that every country had an open right to separate, and if they do, borders for that country (no matter which one) were also mentioned and well known inside of constitution. Of course, if they decide to separate, Communist party (the one and only political party inside YU) had to allow it, give its blessings, but the problem was - Communist party was disbanded so no real approval was needed for separation of any country. Slovenians and Croats did what they had an right to do. If Serbs were about to respect constitution of Yugoslavia, there would never be reason for war, constitution was written so that it alone can prevent any bigger dispute and war between countries. But that didnt go along with idea of Great Serbia because one of the main goals for them was having Adriatic coast under Serbian rule... Tito knew what could happen once he dies, and he probably hoped that constitution will prevent it, but it was not enough. And thats about it Mr. Chomsky. Im disappointed with a fact that you dont go enough deep into things when it comes to ex YU. YU needs to be observed through history of the "kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenians" (country before Yugoslavia) , Serbian goals were well known, and from its very beginning it was an dream of Great Serbia.
Proudest Son of Terra Nisi mogao bolje reci! Po medjunarodnom javnom pravu da bi drzava bila priznata mora da ispuni tri uslova kumulativno: 1. Teritorija 2. Stanovnistvo 3. Centralna vlast Zagreb nije imao vlast nad Sao Krajinom. Srbi jesu. Oni su mogli proglasiti nezavisnost samo na onoj teritoriji koju su u tom trenu kontrolisali, Krajinu nisu. Ovo je nacin na koji im uvek mozes zacepti usta. Poz!
You are wrong. Serbs were the ones to stupidly believe in brotherhood and unity. Croats only saw Yugoslavia as a way to escape and hide from their Nazi past. Croats organized the Croatian spring in 1971, Serbs never did that. Please stop with the myth of Great Serbia. This was coined by western powers to hide the Croatian expansionism. Dubrovnik became Croatian in 1939, under the threat of fascism. Dalmatia and Slavonia were never Croatian. Look at the Austro-hungarian population censuses of Kingdom of Dalmatia and Slavonia - 55% Serbs, 40% Croats and 15% others in both kingdoms. And then came the genocide.
wudzah You can not explain anything to western propaganda. Serbia chose brotherhood and unity even when they knew that they would get much bigger teritory(with whole bosnia, macedonia, and unification with montenegro, which at that time was calling itself partly serbia but due to dinasty war between petrovics and obrenovics they werent able to form united state). We now can see what serbia would have got at that time, if serbia accepted results of secret contract in London, so serbians didnt have any need for state with croats and slovenians, but you cant expalin something to idiots.
A province of Serbia was effectively stolen by a violent terrorist group trained and supported by a foreign power. The KLA were ruthless in their prolonged campaign of murder and intimidation which resulted in the ethnic cleansing of over 240,000 Serbs, Roma, Croats, Jews and numerous ethnic minorities from Kosovo. Kosovo has achieved its aim of becoming an ethnically pure state made up of Albanians.
The problem with Chomsky articulation is, that he doesn't see real people who had lived in those country (countries) and who made those decisions. He reject peoples will. USA or Germany had little to add to the conflict which was paused but not stopped by Josef Tito. These are hundreds of years of conflicts and actually creation of Yugoslavia only postponed activities towards independences of nations.
The breakup of Yugoslavia was a shame. The war didn't start because of people hating each other but of corrupt politicians and oligarchs trying to hide the corruption. It was a shame. My grandfather came from Serbia to Slovenia and married my grandmother. My father was born in Slovenia/Yugoslavia. I still remember our holidays - on the adriatic sea, the beautiful Dalmation islands, the mountians in Bosnia, Triglav. So many great memories. I still go and visit all the states-; Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia ... Although I haven't been birn in Yugoslavia there us this nostalgia in me...
Sometimes even Chomsky can be wrong (0:35). There is a big difference between 33%, what Chomsky claims, and 12%, what the actual percentage of the Serbian population in Croatia was before the war. OK maybe he got the info from serbian sources, but he should know better by now about the credibility of serbian sources. LOL. Now if he is wrong here, where else did he went wrong? (1:16) - what rights Chomsky is talking about? Rights to claim parts of someone else land? Exactly that type of right would lead to a conflict. (1:40) - Vance-Owen's plan like any other peace plan was rejected by serbs. So no there was no chance for any plan to succeed because one side wanted it all. Only force works in these situations and that is what happened. (3:30) - That line of reasoning means; NATO would have bombed serbia even if the conflict between serbians and albanians didn't occur. REALLY??? Right. Come on Chomsky you can do better.
I agree with you as a Croat the info he provides is false. Not sure where he got his sources from. The Serbs wanted 30% of Croat territory but failed and remember that not one bullet was fired at Serbia!
1:16 serbs wanted land where serbs lived. croats wanted land where croats lived. so croats get all the country since the region in yugoslavia was called croatia? in the same fashion kosovo and metohija should stay in serbia. 1:40 chomsky clearly states that clinton pressured muslims to reject the peace offer. karadzic accepted it. look it up. 3:30 quoting chomsky: "We know from the western documentation what it was(the genocide serbs commited on kosovo)... around 2000 people were killed and the killings were distributed. according to british government ... the majority of the killings were KLA guerrillas". NATO bombing killed between 1200 and 4000 civilians. So serbia did similar amount of genocide as the NATO did. im not saying that NATO would have bombed serbia even if the conflict between serbians and albanians didn't occur, just saying that the bombing wasn't justified. there are a lot more problems with the bombing
Noam, actually, did make mistake. It was not Vance-Owen plan turned down by Muslim leadership, but Cutiglero's plan. Izetbegovic signed the plan and eventually turned down his signature under the influence of Bush's administration. Plan was more and less something that resembles Bih after the war. See what general McCenzie says about that.
He's not talking about Vance-Owen's plan. That was the plan from 1993 when the war already started. He is talking about Carrington-Cutileiro plan from 1992. before the war. All sides agreed on it. And then US ambassador told Muslim representative to withdraw his signature and voila - the country is destroyed and under heavy influence of USA. Our leaders can't do anything without US permission. Not that they want to do anything in the first place.
Yugoslavia had the opportunity to solve it peacefully by creating a confederation and turning to democracy already in the late1980s. The proposal was made in 1990 by Croatia and Slovenia, it was basically a union of sovereign states like the EU . (Nacrt Ugovora o Jugoslavenskoj konfederaciji iz 1990. godine ) The Serbes were against it, they held all the key positions in economy that was going downhill and military dominating Yugoslavia. They simply had no reason and intention for change because they wanted socialism and the power structure which was in their favour to remain intact. ( hegemonic interests) Montenegro also didn’t want any change. Slovenia, Croatia and Macedonia were for confederation. Bosnia and Hercegovina were in the position to tip the balance in favour of the confederation but Izetbegović didn’t want it so it ended up in a stalemate. ( He was believed to have followed his own agenda of an Islamic state as he was know to be an Islamist according to his publications) This was a situation and continuation without a solution and something Slovenia and Croatia couldn’t accept so they pulled out. The Yugoslavian Military did what they were supposed to do to stop the Disintegration of Yugoslavia and the war started. Tito was the glue that held Yugoslavia together ( he actively suppressed and jailed nationalistic and Islamistic dissidents) and after his death the deeply rooted nationalism on all sides surfaced again, amplified by the failing economy and debt giving each other the blame. The Situation could have been avoided without bloodshed with Yugoslavia remaining a nation with more autonomous states but Izetbegović played the key role in the conflict to come and if its true that Clinton pressured him, he also played a key role and ends up being responsible for the war in Bosnia. I remember when I was a kid the Ethnies kept themselves mainly separated, so the problem was more in depth, it was history and also religion that played a role in the deeply rooted distrust especially between Serbia and Croatia. It’s shame and tragedy how it went down, especially because we are neighbours and in the end have to work together and get along. So yeah fuck nazis and islamists on all sides!
Nah read Parenti "the reational desctruction of yugoslavia". Most of the "genocide" is outright fake. "Serbia" or better to say serbian part of yugoslavia tried to keep yugoslavia together being an multi ethnic movement. On the other hand the separatists were led by a mix from islamic fundamentalists to fascists who defended Hitler. Read a bit more about the situation.
What genocide for gods sake, if you are talking of Srebrenica.. it was a horrific war crime that hapened in 48h. War lasted for 3 years! West is full of condeming "fake news" now in 2020's, imagine what could you do with CNN on your side in 30 years ago...
I guess you are talking about genocide over the Serbs, in the I world war, when Serbia lost 1,3 milion people or II world war when Serbia lost 1,2 milione people in the war and 700.000 killed in Jasenovac by Croatian Ustashe? That genocide, right?
" In International Relations Theory, there's only one principle that I know of... That's the Mafia principle: International relations is very much like the Mafia, the Godfather does not accept disobedience..." -Noam Chomsky.
The truth is usually simple,but hard to swallow for many
Mr Chomsky, when referring to Germany and Croatia in The Second World War, is referring to the religio-fascist *Ustaše*
These people committed such horrid atrocities that the *Nazis* of all people objected to the brutality.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ustashe
My family was living in Hungary Milinsk at that time. Ustase was metioned by SS soliders as being brutal. My family were in the Soviet camps so many parished there. They were sold out in Operation keehaul, by the allied forces, who turned them back when fleeing tothe Austrian boarders, and allowed Russia to put them in camps once again an take thier land and give it to the Serbs. We were know as Danschwibian people. What a turbulent and horrible time for Eastern Europe. Read;"TheTolstoy Agreement" by: Lenard Tolstory
@@Myhasleful ::
The unbelievable horrors of The History of US Slavery seems to pale by the side of what Europeans have done to other Europeans -- for so many, many Centuries.
Yes but so many people do not realise this fact.
holy shit ur death camps are such bad death camps >:( ours are much more humane
@@cliffgaither you're missing one fact. Slavery in the US was one of Europe's crimes. Like the genocide of the Indigenous people whose land you live on. Or who I live on in Australia. Or the horrors of the Belgian Congo. The famines in India and China. The rape of Japan. The destruction of North Korea.
Yugoslavia was sold out from the inside, the war was that of the Oligarchies rise to power.
Listen to Mikael Gorbachev BBC talk, its about the break up of the Soviet Union, they almost ended up in a civil war, for the same reason as Yugoslavia.
The privatization of Socialist States means lots of money either to the people, who own everything or a lucky few, who steal everything.
Interesting point of view. So what makes China different at this stage in history? Why do they seem to be able to have " the best of both worlds"?
@@abraxadabra4224 IMO it's because of modern tech, a much stronger system, and a streak of great leaders (Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao, Xi Jinping). China has managed to make a stable environment through the infamous Chinese firewall and surveillance state, inside a system in which the importance of merchants (billionaires) is almost non-existent while promoting a strong work ethic "Merchants were considered the lowest social class in Ancient China. People believed that they did not contribute to the good of the whole society but only worked for their own gain. ... The government looked down upon the merchants and tried to stop them from making big profits in times of shortages.". A view COMPLETELY IN OPPOSITION to American individualism where billionaires are job creators without whom the world would stop turning. And lastly, the country has had great leaders, great as in giving vision to the nation while prioritizing its development.
lmao Yugoslavia was already hemorrhaging due to Tito's Economic institution who relied much on Cold war tension
Yup,,, we tend to call that ownership "democaracy"
@@josipag2185 Josip. There is only one answer that will show you what was and is..
check who owns Croatia and Slovenia today. It is not who you think.
Croatia actually said 'Danke Deutschland'
a sta bi drugo rekli kad njima duguju sve njima i vatikanu al vise duguju nemcima oni su ih i krtili i imenovali i dali im svoju drzavu a mi samo bogu hvala da kazemo sto smo RASKRSTILI s njima za vek i vjekova ako si srpkinja naravno zato kazem mi :D
@@LazarSimovic-zt5po mešavina Balkana🙂...žalosno da sad prijeti poljoprivrednoj Srbiji uništenje u obliku 'litijuma'. Uništite SVE. Čitav Balkan.
Danke Deutschland, meine Seele brennt...
And we still do: Danke Deutschland!!!
@@9and7 divno! Uživajte kad Vam budu rasturali prirodna blaga.
USED TO LIVE AT YUGOESLAVIA. & STILL GO AND VISIT WHEN IT IS POSSIBLE!
PEOPLE I LOVE IS STILL THERE !
FEB 4, 2016
Nice nature, art and scenery. Everything else is crappy. Especially tribal and small minded people with small intelligence and big ego
I also go often as I have friends in all parts of Yugoslavia...People had mostly recovered after the bloody uncivil war and now have 7 different countries... I left there in 1971 after finishing University of Zagreb..
@@vlastamolak1156 Not 7 countries, 6 countries
Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia, Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia and KOSOVI .. . THAT IS SEVEN COUNTRIES
CHOMSKY IS TOTALLY WRONG ABOUT YUHOSLAVIA
@@vlastamolak1156 lol kosovo is a disputed territory between serbs and albanians nothing special there just poverty and crime
The book Chomsky is referring to at the 4 minute is called "Collision-Course-NATO-Russia-Kosovo", and the quote comes from the XXiii page.
Thank you
Subtitle ''Drunkard Yeltsin''
3:50 ''Serbia was not taking social and economic reforms''-----------They refused to take loan sharking credits and refused debt slavery
And..... that is absolutely NOT the way USA wants to se Europe. And certainly not a strong socialistic country called Yugoslavija in Europe.
@@protek5060 Because German -Nazi poodles were incensed by Yugoslavia, the land where communism (Yu version ) worked perfectly .
@@josipag2185 The Europeans have been a destructive force since the UK empire started to form,, long before WW2. And continuing. What an evil breed we are.
@@josipag2185 Josipa 1 BBBBB ShShSh .Big one.Talking like one who never heard of Marx !!!!!!!Yugoslavian people was the same tribe from Russia .Later various Satanic empires Divided them into Catholics Muslims Orthodox...Serbs Croats Slavonians...And Pitting them against each other....The same like tribes in Africa....Latin ''Divide et Impera'' German tribes were killing each other though centuries TOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!No one imposed ''divide'' on them YET .Hahahahahahahahahahaahah
@@josipag2185 Josipa 2 BS .....'''. And later they were allies with comunist Yugoslavia and with Russia '''----------------??????????????????????????????????????? The should have been allies of NAZIS??????????LIKE TODAY IN UKR!!!!!!!!!!!Are you USTASA?
My dad worked on Belgrade airport as simple mechanic in 80 and his salary was 2000$, in 80. Everyone who worked after 2 years have received apartment from the company day worked for. Army was 4 in Europe after USSR, UK and France. There was freedom you can't imagine.
Everyone who worked in the right place, and was part of the communist party (you forgot to mention)
Army was strong because USA gived weapons for army. Because Tito was against Stalin. Economy collapsed inflation started to rise there were no anymore credit to take.
Tell me more about the freedom I can't imagine.
@@IwillEndureToTheEnd Yugoslavia wasn't like North Korea. Or USSR under Stalin. People could fly abroad. Passport was good
@@hirotofy7653 Sure but saying "freedom you can't imagine" is a really strong statement. In the end of the day this means ordinary life?
Wow, so many wrong information and wrong asumptions. Spoken like a person who really doesnt know basic info about history of Balkans. Truly surprised Mr Chomsky is a university lecturer at all after this clip, let alone a famous one.
Slovenia leaving or being made to leave was a big deal, because it changed the voting balance of the federal government so it was a big deal for everybody else. Plus short war started and people died.
Serbs were a significant minority in Croatia, but it was a 12 percent of the population not 33 percent.
Vance Owen plan was quite quite different than Dayton plan, quite impossible to accept to Serbs because of territorial discontinuity although including some towns important to Bosniaks,, very favorable to Croats including some Bosniak majority towns, and very difficult to accept for Bosniaks especially with Sarajevo being special area.
Reffering to Germany and Croatia was just insulting, democratic country of Germany in 1991 had a large croatian minority and foreign worker population that was very vocal about war happening in Croatia, that influences german internal politics and a desire to help stop the war in Croatia. Equating this with the nazi occupation of balkans and local nazi supporters is horrible and ignorant for a profesor. If he was a random guy on the street it wouldnt be so shocking.
I do not want to analyze any other mistakes.... others can comment on that...
lol so "Germany in 1991 had a large croatian minority and foreign worker population" (which was probably about 0.0005% german population) had stronger "democratic" voice in "democratic Germany" than EVEN 11% (as you say. but real number/proportion of Serbian population in Croatia was around 30%) of Serbs in Croatia?
Good logic. like a true fascist.
Born in Yugoslavia, still mourn it to this day
I will never get over it till I die
It was the best country in the world
zato smo danas gde jesmo i ja sam se rodio u jugoslaviji al 97 al tad je vec bila gotova tako da je nepamtim uopste a kamoli po lepom cale mi ptica stalno to sto ti kazes al ako hoces iskreno bila je osudjena na propast mnogo pre devedesetih a po meni je kriv kralj aleksandar posle prvog svetskog je imao odresene ruke da crta granicu svoje drzave i umesto da je nazove srbija kao sto je i bila pre istog on je hteo da bude kralj i hrvata i slovenaca a posle i ovih ostalih pa dodjosmo do te jugoslavije a posle drugog svetskog dodje i najveci srbomrzac i ubica srba na vlast al se zivelo lepo dok vise nije moglo tako da mozes da je zalis kolko oces a ja joj se popisam na grob i nedogodila se vise nikad jos samo samo onog vampira da izbacimo iz kuce cveca da se konacno oprostimo od vase bivse juge nzm ni dal si srbin al i da nisi ne bi trebao da je oplakujes
Lol😂
Can you explain how Serbia was in the way of US neoliberal agenda?
@@IwillEndureToTheEnd If i got your question right, you are asking how doas USA care about Serbia at all ? Thats really hard to understand if you know nothing about USA efforts in any region in the world let alone this one. All i will point you towards is a millitary base in Kosovo, that should be enough for a smart person. Now on how Yugoslavia collapesed. Noam has set a bit of a contradictory statement first " USA and NATO actually wanted stability in the region and supported stabilitzing efforts", totally not true. If he ment by that what they said officially then ok, but in practice there was plenty what they did to seperate country. Contradictory is with the fact and written concern that Serbia is a problem that doas not obay, but Yugoslavia wasnt a problem ? Makes 0 sense. As much as i understand to this day since i study this 20 years now, collapse of Yugoslavia is no accident at all, considering USA was involved almost in any collapsed system anywhere in the world why wouldnt it be in the case of the most influencial communism country right after China and Russia. 1st of all there are 3 economy hitmans that operated in Yugoslavia that we know of as they by themselves addmited this, who knows how many more were there. 2nd thing political oppositions in every Yugoslav state were proven to be having close relationship with Pentagon.3rd there are hundreds of documents and transcriptions of Catholic church involvement in propaganda and incitement of hate and dissatisfaction with regime. 4th muslim part of Bosnia had secret agreement and meetings with USA representatives (we dont have proof of this pre 80s), but its not hard to conclude their relationship was too strong to be appearing all of a sudden, also the position of radical demands. I can go on and on forrever. But even more then their involvement in collapsing Yugoslavia and spreading hatefull propaganda from opposition is what happened after that. Just like in Ukraine NATO made sure war will be devastating for the region and hate will live very long time just like they are making sure that is the case right now in Ukraine.
@@salonez91 I just saw the documentary The Weight of Chains.
My take on it is that the deliberate dismantle of Yugoslavia on a super macro level, filtering away all the BS, was just a tactial move to ensure American worldwide dominance. With the Soviet collapse it makes sense to take out Yugoslavia as well because then there is only 1 power left, China.
I'm not at all pro US. I see what they do. Libyan war because they couldn't take dollar hegemony competition. I also believe the war in Ukraine is another attempt to disturb the BRICS development by trying to weaken Russia.
2:35 '' Serbia was a problem'' ------------Serbia is always a problem...Ask any occupator through eons of time
Serbia is geographicly doomed as it is located right at the centre where all major wars have passed through. They are a repeated casualty
@@humanoidy May be but we fucked up all aggressors.Hahahahahaha.Up to now.We need USA help with EU.
Or any neighboring populace :)
@@hysenndregjoni853 Only EU
No I moreso meant Croatia, Bosnia, Albania, among others.
Poor innocent people that died! May they Rest In Peace.
As for the people that were in power on all sides shame on all of you for letting so many innocent people lose there life’s and all the people affected by the war itself.
Pray that future generations can learn to live together in peace. Having hate in your heart is a very bad thing to live with.
John Lukic yeah they destroyed my child hood.
The only hate I have left is towards U.S. and its way to export their version of democracy.
Ameen 💞💞💞 you said it well
@@protek5060me too ❤
@@protek5060I fought with them yesterday
0:34 "because I think about a third of the population of Croatia is Serbian."
- It was actually 12.2.% of the population, which is about 1/8, not 1/3 of the population.
0:41 "so when Croatia pulled out, the Yugoslav army entered to try to protect the integrity of the country and the Serbian minority."
- According to 1974 Yugoslav constitution: "Proceeding from the right of every nation to self-determination, including the right to secession, Yugoslavia is defined as a federal republic of equal nations and nationalities, freely united on the principle of brotherhood and unity in achieving specific and common interest. Holders of the sovereignty of nations and nationalities are the republics and provinces within its constitutional jurisdiction"
-so, according to the Yugoslav constitution, individual republics had the right to secede ("Proceeding from the right of every nation to self-determination, including the right to secession... holders of the sovereignty of nations are the republics"), Croatia held a national referendum, with 83 % voter turnout, and 93% in favour of independence, so why the fuck is the Yugoslav army entering and violating the constitutional right of a republic to secede, if it is supposed that the nations are united freely, not forcefully.
thank you brother,thats real truth but Serbia doesnt wont admit their crimes in Croatia...thanky you from Split,Croatia
Oh well, Croats and Slovenians could also said in 1918. before unification:”We still want to clean austrian horses shit and leave us alone.“ Croatia in that moment, was like, two districts around Zagreb, Slovenia devide by Italy and Austria.
But no, they knew, if they said that, they will still stink on shit. And nobody like to stink as shit. Especially horse shit.
So, they accept unification, knowing that one day they will be independent. So they played political games after they had their own guy in the top of republic and that is how Croats and Slovenians got the constitution 1974.
I also blame Serbs, why they did not make their own country, 1918, rather that joining with nations, who are always on opposite sides, killing Serbs in no matter what conflict.
So, root of conflict is not in 1974.constitution. It is in 1918 first, than in 1941-1945 when Croats killed 700.000 Serbs in Jasenovac, and then i 1966 when Croats communist persuade the Tito to remove Rankovic, who was defending Serbs interests.
So, Croats overplayed.
But, today, they do not clean austrain shit. They clean german shit. Croats hotels in Adriatic sea are mostly owned by Germans, their fisherman are dived by Italian fishermans. In last decade, 400.000 people runaway from homeland.
At the end, it will resize by its own population as much as they deserved it aroun 100 years ago.
Nobody takes that legalistic argument seriously. Nobody.
Why? Because it was, from the point of view of constitutional law, completely unclear how it would work in a republic where there was a large minority of another constitutive nation. And why was it unclear? Because it could only be resolved by ethnic cleansing. Who supported Croatian ethnic cleansing of its Serb and Roma minorities? The US. So tell me again how Chomsky doesn't have a point.
it was before the WWII. Then you guys (ustashas) slaughtered all serbs to make ethnically clean croatia
"It was Yugoslavia's
resistance to the broader trends of political and economic reform-not the
plight of Kosovar Albanians-that best explains NATO's war."
John Norris - Collision
Course ( the book Chomsky talks about )
On the contrary. Kosovo was the main trigger because of the refugees. The west knew that the majority of those refugees would have ended in EU and considering that about 2 millions of them, as a product of wars in Croatia and Bosnia, were already in EU, that scenario had to be prevented. They simply bombed Serbia just to prevent new refugee wave.
@@jackylaibach2351yes on humanitarian grounds only not because they supported the right of a people for self-determination. Also to prevent the conflict from escalating to Albania which would involve surely major powers into violent antagonists too. The way he simplifies this into mafia principle is downplaying the complicated history of the region. Sure mafia principle may be part of USA foreign interventions but not the sole drive on this case. It may have compounded into the other elements. And it's not like Serbia was not begging for that kind of principle either
👍
@Cassius are you actually saying that number of refugees from Bosnia and Croatia after wars in those countries was minuscule? Again,there was already more than 2 million refugees from those countries in EU when bombing of Serbia started.
@Cassius am not confusing anything because in 99 there were still huge numbers of refugees from Bosnia and Croatia and my point was that bombing has been undertaken partly in order to avoid second huge wave of refugees this time from Kosovo.
It doesnt have anything with croat german union wtf and america didnt work to keep yugoslavia one country why did the president of the USA at that time made a law and forbid all investors not to give yugoslavia financial help unless countries seperate from the original goverment. You put way too much time and effort talking about war and not who made it possible and who actually started it. I'll give you a hint it aint one of the yugoslav countries
Well to be frank it wasn't Clinton who "made a law", it was the IMF who was promising the secessionist governments to be exonerated from Yugoslav national debt if they seceded... But what the secessionist governments didn't know was that in order to secede, they would have to spend money (i.e borrow from IMF) on resources for the military since the Serbs weren't dumb to just part away from their own military resources in the pursue of peace. I think the largest contributor to the conflict was former Yugoslav president Tito, because 1. He made a platform for the secessionist governments on which they can work on; 2. He didn't successfully resolve the post WWII wounds in the country; 3. He did the same thing Merkel does now with Germany (Funny how history repeats), by allowing large amount of Albanian immigrants to Kosovo and forcing the Serbs out (because they were more expensive than Albanians), and hoping that would improve the Kosovar economy (Just look at the stats of GDP in former Yugoslavia, Kosovo had the smallest economy before the breakup, lol), it was inevitable that the Kosovars rise after giving them partial Autonomy, because they lived in the poorest conditions in the country; 4. He also contributed in the Bosnian conflict, by giving the Muslim population an identity calling them "The Muslim population" (therefore giving them a platform to seek independence from Croats and Serbs as well);
I do agree that US contributed to the war but not by stirring up the country to conflict, but rather by cutting the foreign aid the US was giving to Yugoslavia (Around $3 billion dollars in the period of the cold war, which boosted Yugoslavia's position in the region), just because the Cold war ended.
The way to avoid conflict, is to wait for reforms in the country and gradually decrease the aid. Not just cutting it off, because the country went into hyper inflation after that (And the politicians were ready to make some reforms before it as well).
I hope I made myself clear here. Have a nice day!
This is an outstanding point, some of it I never heard of. How old are you and where are you from? I guess USA?
It definitely has to do with Germany. Germany and the Vatican are Serbia's No.1 enemies since the 19th century.
You are absolutely right in that the root of all the political problems in the balkans today is Tito. @@salecc9432
@IcantSeeReplies Milosevic did revive the nationalism, but only to gain power. He did not start the wars. In Slovenia, it was the Slovenians. In Croatia, it was Croats, and in Bosnia it was the Muslims.
Just look at the Zadar crystal night in May 1991. Hundreds of Serbian shops, houses and apartments demolished and stolen. Serbs from Zadar were lucky to get out alive. And then 2 days later, protests in Split. The mob tries to pull out a soldier from a tank, and kill him. The fact that no civilian blood was spilt that day did not stop the war.
Croats got what they wanted. An ethnically clean state. I just don't understand why they are still so hysterical. Could it be the guilt?
I wish that the different republics could have worked out their differences without violence. Depressing end to Yugoslavia and all the lives destroyed.
As a former Yugoslav I think exactly the same
You still believe in fairy tales
it was not possible any longer and that's why Slovenia and Croatia, the richest and western republics, parted ways from federation, or to put it bluntly, from the Serbs hungry for domination.
They had free healthcare and education. They had to go.
We still have free healthcare and education. Croatia at least.
@@kristijanpavlovic But your economy is controlled by American capital, unlike Serbia in the mid-90s
Ahh yes more Communist Conspiracy Theories
I don't see the attempt to do the same with the rest of Europe.
@@andrespolo2722 Look a little harder.
Got to love the dupes who support all the interventions always for "humanitarianism". At least we in Greece didn't get duped and we almost all of us (95%) supported Yugoslavia against the American and NATO slaughter.
Clinton supported Bosnia. What did you "Red Greek Revolutionaries" do; provide military aid, or just eat baclava and tzatziki?
Some Greeks did volunteer and fought with Serbia and our soldiers refused to aid in any way the Americans. For that they are honored by everyone who opposes imperialism and war. As for the despicable Clinton and America they didn't give a fuck about the Bosnians or anyone (which is a myth that they were in danger in the first place) they only wanted to destroy Yugoslavia to replace it with tinny puppet states which unfortunately came to pass.
The opposite happened, it was thrown to the wolfs who collaborated with the German and Italian fascists while those on the resistance were hunted down. The so called "democratic" western bourgeoisie embraced the fascists with open arms when faced with the possibility of people's rule. They took the political and economic leadership those who in the occupation were the black marketeers and black hooded collaborators who betrayed the heroes of the national resistance to the German firing squads. The absolute dregs of society which were dealt with by People's Justice in the rest of Europe in Greece they not only remained unpunished but they were rewarded as well. That is the truth about the so called "democratic" allies.
mate, whatever the Western news is feeding you is the actual propaganda 99% of the time. Whatever CNN, BBC, etc... are reporting on in a foreign country IS THE PROPAGANDA, so assume the exact opposite is the truth. @RichardMontauk
@@redgreekrevolution '' a myth that they were in danger '' say that to 100 000 dead Bosniaks you dunce, and greek volunteers participated in genocide in srebrenica btw.
International politics = mafia principle ;; so true. 5:30
@@vlastamolak1156 That first sentence made no sense, but ok.
@kiril marinov Almost never a good idea to get into a discussion on the internet
@@manueldros ::
I agree, not that it matters !
But just think of the exchanges people have ( had ) from all over the World. Learning about other people ; other histories ; other opinions ; other cultures ; other customs ...
These kinds of Domestic & International Exchanges is one of the Great Advances of this Century.
Massive Populations communicating -- all over the World -- it cannot sit well w / those who have had so much exclusive
power for so long ...
@@cliffgaither Getting into a discussion and learning about the wonders of the world and people are two separate things I think. I've never seen a fruitful discussion on youtube where people respect each others character and thinking ways. Maybe somewhere else on the internet, some Reddit pages, but on TH-cam I havent found it sadly
@@manueldros ::
Maybe I spend too much time on YT.
I had a flip-up phone for a long time. I didn't want to end up like people I saw on the streets w / their phones. Then I got a "smart" phone & discovered YT had existed for 10yrs. before I discovered it. Now, w / so very many sources of information & opinions, I'm just like other people w / this damn phone !
I've found many respectable exchanges & opinions, especially the exchanges of historical events.
People will be respectful if you meet them half-way, unless they are just unreasonable.
You haven't found any yet ? Maybe you have better things to do than hold a phone up to your face --
24 / 7. 😄
I strongly propose Mr Chomsky open an ASMR channel, since his voice is quite peaceful and well toned and maintained. Or maybe im simply tired of researching the Yugoslavia collapse background.
Thought the same for a long time. It's unintentional ASMR gold
It's an excellent source for falling asleep.
i am tired too
th-cam.com/video/j-d22gENSPg/w-d-xo.html
@@dhu1919 also justifying Genocide are not Genocides
Free Julian Assange
He is free now.
DOUBLESPEAK - "make war to stop war" - "put guns in schools to keep guns out of schools" - "give tax money and tax breaks to the rich to help the poor" - "patriot act (read it)" - "capital punishment to show that murder is wrong" - "get rid of the EPA and deregulate polluters to make the world a better place" - "get rid of ethics committees, they are not ethical" - "deregulate banks and companies so they can do BETTER, lol"
george orwell I'm dying 😂
Victor Stevenson stop
george orwell Give everyone a million dollars and we'll all be rich! Doublespeak goes both ways. Ironic considering your namesake, Animal Farm and 1984 were written as criticisms of Communism. Orwell coined terms like doublespeak to illustrate the way INGSOC controlled people through language, just like the Soviets who INGSOC is based upon. Things Soviets liked: high taxes, a disarmed and indoctrinated public
Whats wrong with "making war to stop war"? If a neighboring country invades yours, the only way you can stop it is by warring back. Or surrending and hope you aren't slaughtered. Making war to stop war is pretty common throughout history. How would we have stopped Hitler without making war?
I'm not sure what point you're making other than some vague sentiment against specific policies you dont like so you strawman them.
+ 200% SMUG
How do you know that George Orwell wrote Animal Farm and 1984 as criticism of communism ?We live in 1984 right now and America has capitalism .
""put guns in schools to keep guns out of schools" -" Nobody has suggested that. The rest of your screed is equally simplistic.
Chomsky 5:18 onwards: "With all the fancy talk in International Relations Theory, there's only one principle that I know of it seems to me to have any merit and that's the Mafia principle. International relations is very much like the Mafia. The Godfather does not accept disobedience." Analogy - "Suppose some small storekeeper that doesn't pay his protection money, well the Godfather doesn't just send out his goons to pick up the money, he sends out the goons to beat him to a pulp so that others will understand that disobedience is not acceptable."
Noam Chomsky analysis is quite a bit bizarre.
The attack on Yugoslavia was not because of ethnic cleansing of Kosovo Albanians that produced hundreds of thousands of refugees?
It is because Milosevic was not following American interests?
Which interests ... as in not conducting ethnic cleansing?
One of the things Chomsky is good at is twisting historical record to fit his worldview. I think a more honest approach (and he is a capable analyst) would be to be unbiased. Milosevic's attempt to get rid of Kosovo Albanians was well documented by human rights organizations. Producing hundreds of thousands of refugees into Macedonia and Greece was the main reason of bombing of rump Yugoslavia. Milosevic was on the course of committing a genocide.
Another titbit of false information - Serbs did not comprise 1/3 of Croatian population, it was more like 12%. Serbs did comprise 1/3 of Bosnian population so this could be just an honest mistake by Chomsky.
You too kind friend. There’s an old saying; there is nothing as sad as an old fool! Only sensible thing Noam said was - 5.16 ‘I’m kind of simple minded person’! Cheers
Is this "ethnic cleansing" in room with us right now?
Wanna hear something funny? Nato generals (from Norway, Ireland and Italy) actually confirmed there was ethnic cleansing on Kosovo. DONT BY ALBANIANS!
But yeah... albanians poured millions into Clintons pockets.
Didn't this guy deny the Bosnian genocide?
Can't deny what already isn't true.
Chomsky shameless lie... the Vance-Owen plan was rejected by the Serbs because in that moment they had the upper hand, so they did not see the need to compromise anything : "the "Vance-Owen peace plan", involved the division of Bosnia into ten semi-autonomous regions and received the backing of the UN. The President of the Republika Srpska, Radovan Karadžić, signed the plan on 30 April. However, it was rejected by the National Assembly of Republika Srpska on 6 May"
Thank you Noam for simplifying a complicated issue. I would just like to add that where you have a mix of different religious groups and ethnicity it is always easier to divide and conquer. One thing is for certain that what goes around comes around. The breakdown of international law is the greatest undoing of mankind and a horrific future will unfold.
It will be also simple when Military-Industrial complex starts WW 3
It's actually oversimplified to the extent he said few straight forward lies. There was never 30% Serbians in Croatia. Not even Milosevic used that kind of lie as an excuse for war.
There weren't even 10% except for many who settled in SR Croatia during Yugoslavia but without permanent residence.
Mosm Chomsky is an old Gaga out of touch with reality
Actually not so complicated... US have always been orchestrated every conflict since WW2.
We can simply look at "who owns what" in former Yugoslavia, today.
@@clansman89 There was almost 600 000 living there. (As far as we know)
when I hear people like NC to say that third of population of Croatia was Serbian, I just don't understand how that wrong info came out to public, and why someone like him would perpetuate such an obscure info??
last population census from 1991. (done by Yugoslavian, not Croatian, statistical institute) there were in Croatia cca 4.700.000 people in total, of which cca 3.700.000 Croats, 580.000 Serbs, 110.000 Yugoslavians, 45.000 Muslims, and so on... so there were 12% of population Serbs, so war wasn't because of how many Serbs were in Croatia...to say something like that is a joke, and I really didn't take NC as a joke... disappointed
Chomsky forgets to mention that no one wanted a Yugslavia with Milosevic in the top, he basically self proclaimed himself as the new Tito but was working for a big Serbia instead.
no he wasn't it's just racist anti-Serb propaganda, he was a communist and a monster.
Well said !!
That is not actually true. Milosevic proposal was:
- more centralized federation with Sarajavo as a new capital
- Alija Izetbegovic as a new president
But Franjo Tudjman, croatian leader steped out, with attitude: “That is historical moment for croatian nation to get their own republic!” After the offer from EU to Yugoslavia to implement economic reforms to get 5 bilion us dolars and imediatelly become a EU member.
As west always do, applying as always Gebels propaganda: Blame others for what you are doing, so everybody blame Serbia/Milosevic for breaking down the Yugoslavia, but Franjo Tudjman did not want it, at first, and then Alija Izetbegovic right after to stay in the federation.
So tell me, if I want to stay in good relation with you, and you hit me first, straight to head, how can it be that I am responsible and guilty for hostility?
That is exactly the stuff you got told by the media. If you listened to the man you would understand maybe that there was a big minority in Croatia 25% and they were left without rights, even under the habsburger empire they got rights. But please tell me more what you have heard on BBC, ZDF and CNN
@@Mislilac0302Slovenia and Macedonia you Don t mention 😂😂😂...Od they had right to go, Croatia had too. And it was shown on referendum. You could still make Jugoslavia with BiH, Montenegro, Serbia...
I generally agree with Mr. Chomsky, but he's over simplified this. Croatia's relationship with Germany isn't about WWII, that was just a blip in Croat-German relations. Germany and Croatia have a relationship that goes back hundreds of years through the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Yes, the austrians invited serbs to live on the border and keep their religion, but if a war come against the otomans, they would serve the ranks and logistics.
@@pioneirohill8493 No one invited anyone. First, the population from the east started moving in to Croatia somewhere around early and mid-18th century, after the failed rising in the Balkans following the liberation of Hungary and parts of Croatia (Slavonia) in 1698/99. Second, the orthodox population that moved westwards were mostly Vlachs not Serbs, which is why the statute that regulated their position within Habsburg Monarchy was called "Statuta Valachorum" (Vlach Statute) and this decree was to equalize their position with Croats and Hungarians who already lived and fought in the borderland regions and were treated as free citizens rather than serfs. The biggest mistake Habsburgs did was to allow the Serbian orthodox church to come in and literally "convert" these people to Serbs creating problems that would resonate for the next two centuries.
*from not drom. I have tipfelers due to mobile typing
@joekerr9197 Educational system in SFRJ (ex YU) never ever promoted/published this version of the history. I guess historians in Croatia have been busy last 30 years ...
We all know that fsiled uprising caused population move NORTH to Budapest area, not west. And folks that populted "Krajina" borderlands were definitely Orthodox faith. Vlachs or Serbs, doesn't really matter the origin. And the fact that Austrians officialy peovided them with big benefits and opportunities simply makes whole thing legal and your comment ridiculous and wrong. Your bosses decided to accept Vlachs/Serbs and that's the only historical truth.
Those Orthodox folks (~500K) are gone today due to genocides of WW2 and 1995, but interestingly enough Croatia would very much love to adopt 1 (one) person of that origin - Nikola Tesla!!
If that's not hypocrisy I don't know what is ....
They're NAZI, NAZI, USA ARE NAZI, PUTIN DID NOTHING WRONG
Don't forget the role of Türkey in the war they have been wanting to re-enter the Balkans for a long time
what role? they didnt play a role int he breakup of yugoslavia
@@citrine6469 they did, just like Arabia and Iran did... Financed and sent jihadists to support Bosnian Muslims. They did horrible crimes.
Mr. Chomsky needs to educate himself better on the issue. There was unrest simmering in Yugoslavia since Serbia decided to abolish the autonomy of Kosovo. Slovenia was let go by the Serbs in order to control the federal state and subsequently the Army without which the Serbs would not have been able to perpetrate the crimes that the international organizations accuse them of. His explanation does not take into account so many other political factors. With all due respect but he sees this conflict from his small window of the so called "American Imperialism and Expansionism".
Education has nothing to do with it. Was Chomsky insufficiently educated when he wrote a slew of apologies and excuses for, and denials of, the Khmer Rouge massacres under Pol Pot? Was he insufficiently educated when he wrote that Holocaust-denier Faurisson was not antisemitic but just "an apolitical liberal"? It's just who the man is. He picks sides on the basis of who is anti-American or whom the U.S. or its allies are opposing, and that's the end of the analysis. The fake analysis which follows just amounts to twisting or suppressing any evidence or logic which contradicts the already adopted dogma.
@@sheilamacdougal4874 You might want to look at his actual response to these allegations. th-cam.com/video/f3IUU59B6lw/w-d-xo.html
@@clickrush I'm extremely familiar with his lying bullshit on all these issues.
@@sheilamacdougal4874 Clearly you are not.
@@thanlem2522 Clearly you are a Chomsky cult member who believes your guru is always right. It is you who is not familiar with Chomsky's obscene apologetics for the Khmer Rouge genocide, and prefer to believe the guru's lying account of what he did or didn't say. If you are genuinely interested - although I doubt it - try googling Steven Lukes Chomsky. Lukes article provides a concise summary of the outrageous, obscene things Chomsky said at the time. Since it is based almost entirely on quotes, Chomsky never replied. He likes venues where only he gets to speak, and is able to lie with impunity, as cult members like yourself applaud every sentence.
The Serb minority in Bosnia and Croatia weren't in any danger before the Serb controlled Yugoslav army attacked. They would've been citizens of these new countries and had full voting rights that come with that. The Serbs turned the breakup into a war of ethnic cleansing and genocide.
When did Yugoslav army attack? What year?
"The percentage of those declaring themselves as Serbs, according to the 1991 census in Croatia, was 12.2% (78.1% of the population declared itself to be Croat)" not one third as Chomsky says .... if you can't get that right then how much weight can you place on anything else Chomsky says on this issue? There was a vote and an overwhelming majority of people in Croatia voted for independence through parliamentary elections .... you either support democracy or you don't.
According to him the Croats just wanted to be Nazis again. Its not like there were any other reasons they wanted independence right
Problem is that most Serbs refused to participate in any state census so that data was a very low estimated guess
Census aren't infallible. Serbs could abstain from participating
@@Untrus the census is different to the vote for independence. Even under old Yugloslavia in 1981, 531,502 or 11.6% identified as Serbs. Why would they not identify as serbs 10 years before the wars of independence? No, the reason is the pulation of serbs in Croatia was never one third. The land they seized trhough force was perhaps one third of croatia - for a while. Chomsky, as always, distorts the facts to suit his narrative. He is not a historian you know, just a linguist who happens to have loud opinions
@@jokersmith9096 yes they could have and they could have in abstained from tthe 1948, 1953, 1961, 1971, 1981. Why do that when it is your interest to increase your numbers I don't know. To do so would be quite stupid. I don't think Serbs are stupid.
Please, you guys who are not from the Balkan, don't pretend that you know what happened there. Seriously! You have no knowledge of our history, relationships between ethnic groups and so on. But you want to present yourselves as smart assess.
One small correction should be made and noted. Chomsky on 0:38 mentions that about one third of the Croatian population were Serbs. This is incorrect. One third of Bosnian and Hercegovian population were Serbs, and that resulted in many complications and problems which led the the subsequent war, genocide and massive forceful movement of refugees. Only 10-12% of the population of Croatia identified as Serbian at the time, as oppossed to around 33% which Chomsky claims.
He was prolly lookin at statistics pre WW2, before they all got genocided by the Croats.
@@alloydasufferer3803 even then it was 15 percent
@@alloydasufferer3803wrong
"Without any rights for the Serbian minority. Nothing". Totally false.
not correct...
,oluja.
The US certainly did want a military base in Yugoslavia, Camp Bondsteel. Serbia refused. Everything else is history.
bs, americans propped up every leader in balkans who wanted to separate. izmetbegović didn't reject the peaceful separation from yugoslavia on his own, he first agreed to it, as it was a great deal for him, he would have come out as a great leader of his people with that deal, but warren zimmerman, then ambasador of us to yugoslavia, took him to the side, and told him that if he backs out of the deal, us would back him, (similar to what boris johnson did to ukraine in march 2022) and that he'd become epic hero of his people. he foolishly agreed to american aid, got out of deal, vvar ensued, and eventually, when bill was up for reelection, he wanted to misrepresent himself as "peace president" so he just told izmetbegović to sign the current deal, which was actually much worse for bosnia than the one they originally had signed and then back pedaled out of. had usa wanted to maintain territorial integrity of yu, there'd still be yu. but the fact they ripped kosovo, serbian holy land, out of serbia, and proclaimed it "independent" - that tells you all about intention of usa
This man is talking load of nonsense!
So, according to Mr. Chomsky separation of Slovenia was ok because it was "part of the west anyway" but in case of Croatia the federal army had to protect integrity of the country. I thought Mr. Chomsky was smarter. Probably old age kicks in.
"A third of the population of Croatia is Serbian". Last Yugoslav census (1981): Serbs in Croatia = 11.6%
33% would be a third...11% is a nineth...today not they are not more than 4%
Yeah, Chomsky really spew the imperialistic Serbian propaganda here. He even mentions ww2. Here is the the thing. Germany did support Croatia. Croatia did ensure constitutional right to ALL minorities and no Croatian threatened any Serb.
Serbian national television however lied to their people that its an ustasha state, and they listened.
The reason Serbs left Slovenia alone is because Slovenians answered with guns (Croatia wanted slow but steady leave, kinda like what UK did with Brexit), not diplomacy and they didnt let Serbs play the victim. So Serbs left. Croatians werent prepared at all for what was coming next.
Roman Genzic
Accept that he cited nothing nor is this the Croatian boarders that they wanted as those boarders have a much larger Serb population!
@@miketheman4341 Last Yugoslav consensus. Thats quite a quote wouldnt you say...
Cyco Miles
Yes and it’s not a consensus! The state that was to be Croatia has nothing to do with the Croatia listed here and absolutely nothing is cited! Nothing!
I could claim that in 1981 Croatia had a population that was 80% gay men but where is the evidence?
Noam Chomsky should read the history books and see how the Serbs came to the Croatian lands in the first place and why. And after a couple of centuries they became a Trojan horse in the country that saved them from the Turks.
It's not the Bosniaks that rejected the Vance-Owen plan. It was the Serbs. What is Chomsky talking about?
Ефендиа Вакуфац прочитај хрватског историчара Давор Маријан који каже за рат у Босну крив Еф Изетбеговић према томе Срби нису криви треба престати сатонизацију Србију
@@432milton Lijep ti pravopis. Hajd sad za domaći popravi greške i još čitaj tog hrvatskog povjesničara.
This is the first time I have seen the video and with deep respect I would like to refer to the part about relation Croatia - Germany. If we talk about the history of the Balkan Peninsula it is deeply complicated and not as simple as explained or commented on by some visitors - which shows ignorance. The war in 1991 has nothing to do with the past (WW2) but only with the fact that the Badinter Arbitration Committee confirmed the international recognition of the republic borders on the one side and the other fact in Croatia at that time was 15% of Serb population mixed with Croats in parts of Croatia. After the declaration of independence in June 91, Milosevic took the chance to start the long-planned occupation of most parts of Croatia, written in an official secret document of the Serbian Academy for Science and Art called "Memorandum SANU" signed by most Serbian intellectuals extremists. The main agenda according to the plan was the occupation of all territories where Serbs were represented in some percentage and providing ethnic cleansing. Serbia’s planned western border was Karlobag - Karlovac - Virovitica (Croatian cities), which would divide Croatia in half. Fortunately, the resistance of Croatian citizens was amazing even with very weak weapons. In the war, some accidents against the Serb minority occurred but it has to be clearly emphasized that in Defense forces of Croatia participated in over 15.000 Serbs. As a veteran of the Homeland War, I also had some friends Serbs. Also, it has to be noticed at the beginning that minority rights were part of the Croatia first State Constitution and from the beginning Serbian political Parties actively participated in Government. Even, after the peaceful reintegration of East Slavoina lot of Serbs who actively participated in war crimes in Vukovar and other parts of Croatia were abolished. As a consequence of the reintegration agreement lot of Serbian war criminals peacefully walk today on Vukovar streets and watch the victims, especially rapped women. One of them is Vojislav Stanimirovic.
According to the dark history of WW2 Croatia was an ally of Germany and a lot of organized crimes were committed without doubt. But pull out Croatia from the context just to misuse the real character of wars in former Yugoslavia in 1991 is dirty propaganda whose aim is to relativize responsibilities for the war and the committed crimes. If we talk about the "achievements" made for the German Nazis then we have to mention the fact that the Serbia was the very proud first "Juden Frei" country. One of the leaders who participated in this shameful "accomplishment" was the leader of the Serbian royal army Draza Mihajlovic who was recently rehabilitated bay the Serbian government ond one month ago became a monument in the middle of the Serbian capital Beograd! The conclusion is every society has an extreme minority that has to be effectively controlled but Serbia is permanently led by national extremism and latent imperialism driven by the intellectual summit.
NATO launched a bombing campaign against Serbia in March 1999 ...The air war lasted 78 days. During more than three months of bombing, NATO targeted mostly military targets, but also destroyed much of Serbia's infrastructure, including several key civilian bridges.NATO bombed Serbia with depleted uranium..Against one sovereign, independent, small and proud country. The most powerful world power has ruined Serbia mercilessly.The Serbia was hit by the 19 most developed countries of the West - a member of the NATO Pact, led by the United States.Heroic defense and the struggle of the people of Serbia against attacks on its freedom, sovereignty, integrity and independence has universal value. It is a model for all peoples of the world who care about freedom and peace..
I would add just one more element that made the US decide against the Serbs, despite the fact that the Serbs have historically been American allies (in contrast to the Croats and Muslims - Bosniaks, from Bosnia, who were Hitler's allies), and that is the fact that Serbia at the time we are talking about, was the only remaining communist country (republic) with a one-party system!
Maybe Croats, but bosnians never, a lot of bosnians were at nazi camps, executed. A lot of them died under occupation.
Mr. Chomsky, how is it possible that one republic of a former SFRJ takes over the entire army (entire equipement and logistics of a former federation) and until this day theirs and your canon remains like: they were just "protecting" serbian minority in other republics of the former federation which was no more by killing and/or displacing people who weren't pro-big-serbia and destroying their cities?
Chomsky is a communist or extremely left oriented at best, so MIlosevic was in his opinion absolutely right to ethnically cleanse non Serbs whatsoever.
00:35 "Third of Croatia were serbs".Hell no,1/6 were Serbs.And Croatia had every right to become independent.Milošević wanted to dominate Yugoslavia and that was it for Slovenia and Croatia etc
The Vance-Owen peace plan was in 1993, not in 1992, the war was already raging when the plan was proposed in Geneva. And it was the Bosnian Serb assembly in Pale that rejected it. They even had a referendum on it. It would be important to get those facts straight.
I am disappointed by Mr. Chomsky. He has every right to believe whatever he wants, but he needs to tell the truth. He also didn’t mention anything about the civilians being killed in kosovo. He should have at least mentioned it.
@@JJ-zg7ug yes. i'm very disappointed that he doesn't know facts and still he talks about it.
@@kataz7786 he knows the facts. He only uses them selectively and selects those that fit his thesis. It is sad how much science suffers by elevating people of such harmful provenance to a pedestal.
@@blasteriroquai you are a neonazi, you made up lies and you hate him for saying the truth.
He obviously mixed up names of the peace plans. He was referring to Carrington-Cutileiro plan, which was indeed in 1992, and Alija Izetbegovic withdrew his signature after meeting with US ambassador to Yugoslavia. You can check the "Peace plans proposed before and during the Bosnian War" wikipedia page for more information and sources.
Milošević worked and lived several years in the US and (what a coincidence?!?) then came to power with the "yogurt revolution" in Serbia (remember the orange revolution?), and tried to take absolute power and dethrone the mixed federal government. That is why the US wanted to keep "that new Yugoslavia" and during the whole war of ex-Yugoslavia they kept him as a respectable negotiator. And they limited themselves to playing the role of observers, eventually helping Croatia too, when they saw that Milosevic did not always obey. They let Yugoslavia be destroyed, and did not intervene in the Bosnian war, until the end, well after the genocide of Srebrenica, when they legalized the Serbian conquests and ethnic cleansing by creating the entity Republika Srpska, and thus rewarding the Serbs. Thus they broke Bosnia definitively, with the most absurd peace plan of the planet, giving half of the country to the Serbs. Indeed, it will be several years later that when they saw that Milosevic no longer obeyed them at all, they sided with the Kosovars and bombed Belgrade and Serbia... Mr. Chomsky, the Vence Owen plan is just the one responsible for Croatia's final attack on Bosnia and the Bosnian Muslim population. Those two British "negotiators" reminded me of the typical colonialist politicians who drew borders in Africa and Asia before withdrawing from their colonies and thus provoked wars and problems for their inhabitants that still persist.
There never will be as good of a country here on earth as was Yugoslavia.
OK hunger after ww2, but after that, ppl were FREAKING HAPPY AND HOPEFULL.
Pozdrav iz. SLOVENIJE!
sloveniji gre boljs izven yugoslavije
@@figaroo4816 hmh. Vsak dan boljše.
Sir you completely wrong. Croatia was under control by Serbian minority who occupied high positions in Croatia region during Yugoslavia after the World War 2. Serbia was the only republic that was armed and had the military. Serbia started using heavy weapons and tanks against the Croatian citizens. To continue, the world watched while Croatians were getting killed. There was greater interest to have a a Yugoslavia opposed to stopping the war. The UN drafted a document that Croatia can not get any arms. Croatians had to use hunting guns and rifles against the third most strongest army in Europe at the time. However, it did get help from Germany to arm itself. Not sure where your getting your information. Serb minority in Croatia was maybe 12.5% and not 30% when Serbia started the war. Lets get the facts straight.
I stopped taking you seriously when you wrote "third most strongest army in Europe at the time". Please! 13th perhaps.
"Not sure where your getting your information." Not sure where *you studied English* but you still don't understand the difference between *you're* and your. And another thing: There's a huge irony in that statement of yours because that sounds like the most biased nonsense I've ever heard. I don't trust anybody claiming any conflict was completely black and white. So that being said: Any modest and rational person would wonder were you got *your* information from. Most likely what you heard being spread in public or among whatever deeply nationalist groups you identify with. Perhaps you should look up more independent sources and not trust your the ignorant plebs you're working with in your factory or whatever h-ll your profession is.
"your getting your information." Please, try passing as somebody who did study English for more than a semester.
"Serbia was the only republic that was armed and had the military. " I'm going to call BS on that one.
"Sir you completely wrong." You ARE completely wrong is how you say that. Poor grammar - always the hallmark of an uneducated pleb who never saw higher education yet you think you're smarter than one of the world's leading intellectuals? Priceless!! Keep flipping that burger Ivan or whatever you're named. At least you were polite with the "sir" part.
Oh, and "completely wrong." Not part wrong. Or missing a few facts. Or even misguided or missing "the big picture". Nope, he is "completely wrong" As in 100% wrong. That's your view? Knew you were stupid. It's amazing how prevalent the false dichotomy thinking is among infantile chimps. A university professor is "completely wrong" but you, Ivan the burger flipping (whatever nationality you are) worker who never read a book in his entire life and can't find three countries on a world map *knows* what is right? Omg. Oh my frickin' god.
Good thing people like you are never seen in any higher education. Well, mostly not. Even the most self-righteous American libertarian has a more grand view of politics - and American libertarians are selfish predators.
You people (I am referring to the mental capacity of feeble minded simpletons irregardless of what nationality they have or whatever their social group might be) can only see things in completely black and white. Like kids. The world is way more gray than you are capable of understanding. But I'm afraid you'd be all confused with the diversity of such a word and all its details. Therefore you need the black-and-white world. Because you just know you're right.
Self-scrutiny. That is the main difference between smart people and chimps. To chimps everything is a huge piss*ing game. Dolt.
@@paulallen8109 Wow, perhaps I did not check my grammar. However, your a dumb fuck.
Are you happy that you destroyed Yugoslavia?
3:42 ''Plight of Kosovo ALBANIANS''( don't they have their own state Albania ???????????????????)--------------- Plight that -They could not carry out Jihad and not ambush freely Serbian police cars!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You don't have your own state in Serbia??? Why create republika srpska ?? So you could perform your religious extremism
@@flameb8814 Germans do not have their Albanian state in Albania so they create Kosovo.....Serbs are Communists
They prepare 3 rd in Greece and 4rth in southern Italy
Noam Chomsky - The Disintegration of Yugoslavia
2017.2.4/5
USA: "I use war to end the war."
Long live USA. Mlloshevic did not listen when they told him to stop killing children. There was no way but to interfere.
USA was part of destruction of Yugoslavia. You think they are the heroes? :'D
@@erjonsinani2451 Hi did not kill children.
@@erjonsinani2451 He killed only muslim fundamentalist bandits in Kosovo And NATO killed All childern in YUgoslavia
@@erjonsinani2451 anyone who says “long live USA” is a degenerate
As the last war has shown, Serbs' behavior exemplifies the case of colonial minorities elsewhere-from French in Algeria & British in Zimbabwe to Russians in Chechnya & Central Asian Republics. They either rule as a privileged caste or flee to their motherland when the system of exploitation, which they have been so avid a part thereof, breaks.
@Genes It has nothing to do with "race", but with the defeat of expansionism & exploitation. The same happened to Germans in Poland, Czechoslovakia, English in Ireland, British in American revolutionary war, Russians in Estonia, Italians in Yugoslavia, ...and will happen to Castillans in future independent Catalonia.
@Jotaro97 Oh yes, it will. Just wait & see.
@Jotaro97 Years 1991 & 1992: Serbs are 11% of Croatia’s & 33% of Bosnia & Herzegovina population. They support Slobodan Milošević’s pan-Serbian movement which took JNA/Yugoslav Army under Serbian control. This Army has been financed by all Yugoslav republics (Serbia plus Montenegro 36%, Croatia 28%, Slovenia 19%,..). So, Serbs literally “stole” all these planes, tanks, ships, rockets, guns, howitzers, … and, via their fifth column, first Croatian Serbs, then BiH Serbs, embarked upon their provincial imperial expansion: they wanted to occupy the entire Bosnia and Herzegovina & ca. 70% of Croatia. This was a combined aggression: Serbia proper + Montenegro +JNA + local Serbs.
Had they not possessed/stolen all others’ arms, there would have been no war.
Yugoslavia was dominated by Croat Tito and Slo and Cro people in power. Serbs were victims of Croatoslavia.
Why there was no autonomous provinces for Dalmatia and Slavonia?
Why Jasenovac wasnt preserved and Serb Holocaust was silented?
How come Serbs had no right to be independent from Croatia and Croats had from YU?
Why Goli otok was for Serbs and not for Croats?
Why Croats were not punished and answered for their genocide in ww1 and ww2?
Why Serbia was poor while Croatia prospered from taking riches from Serbia and using it as cheap recources. . .
@@josipag2185
* during 1918-1939 period, Yugoslavia was basically a softer version of Greater Serbia, with all nations-except Slovenes- oppressed. Close to 400 Croats & ca. 2000 Muslims had been killed by Serbian paramilitaries & government forces during the “peaceful” period in the 1920s & 1930s. The turning point was assassination of Croatian leader Stjepan Radić, a sort of Croatian Gandhi, by a Serb nationalist in Yugoslav parliament in 1928. This convinced some Croats that any Yugoslavia was insufferable, and the most influential among them was future Poglavnik/”Leader” Ante Pavelić, who emigrated & founded a revolutionary terrorist organization ustaše (ca. 200-300 people).
* after the collapse of Yugoslavia in the April war 1941, the situation in Croatia & Bosnia and Herzegovina was something like a vacuum. No Croatian politician wanted to become the head of state patronized by Nazi German authorities, but at the same time there was a sense of jubilation: Croats got independent (in theory) country, after decades of Serbian oppression. In this vacuum, Pavelić was installed by Hitler and Mussolini as a kind of puppet. In this country, ca. 50-60% were Croats & more than 30% were Serbs (the rest were Bosnian Muslims, considered to be Croats).
* Pavelić assumed power on April the 10th 1941. But even a week before that, Serb paramilitaries had started killing Croats & some 200-400 people were killed in the interregnum. After he had been installed, Pavelić actually dissolved parliament & established a dictatorship; Croatia was crippled & many vital areas, especially in Dalmatia, were given to Mussolini’s Italy. Also, he introduced racial laws for Jews & started to persecute Serbs- both as a revenge for their participation in royalist Yugoslavia period terror & their atrocities during interregnum. In the next few months perhaps 5-20,000 Serbs were killed by ustaše in various areas of NDH/Independent State of Croatia.Basically, it was a terrorist regime & most Croats disapproved of it, but were expecting to get rid of ustaše in some future & retain statehood under democratic circumstances. So, Croats wanted a truly independent country.
* Serbs, being persecuted (along with Jews & Gypsies) rebelled on a massive scale in the last quarter of 1941 & many areas of NDH had become virtually defunct. This resulted in further Pavelić’s dependence to Hitler. On the other hand, communist partisans, led by a Croat, Josip Broz Tito, after their defeat in Serbia fled with remnants of their army to the NDH territory. There, they found refuge among Serbs, while many of them defected to royalist Četniks led by Serbian colonel Mihailović. Četniks killed during 1941, ca. 12-15,000 Muslim & Croat civilians, mostly in the eastern Bosnia regions.From 1941-1945 there was a civil war in all of Yugoslavia, with various factions fighting for different aims. In Croatia, more Croats had been coming to partisans, especially after 1943 (fall of Italy) & thus partisans became a respectable force. For instance, Croatia had 5 partisan corpses (4 of them with a clear Croatian majority), while Slovenia had 2, Bosnia & Herzegovina 2, Serbia proper 2 etc.
* in May 1945, the war was over & partisans had won. But, in 2- 6 weeks after the end of war, they committed mass atrocities, killing ca. 80,000-150,000 Croatian soldiers & civilians, perhaps 10,000 Serbian Četniks & up to 4,000 Slovenian white guards.Modern unbiased historical investigations have dispelled many myths, especially those re number of victims in Yugoslavia & NDH in particular. In sum, in all of Yugoslavia, ca. 500,000 Serbs had died unnatural deaths & this included some 300,000 Serbs in NDH. Of these, perhaps over 100,000 had been killed by ustaše, while others died of typhoid, were killed by Germans, Četniks etc. Among Croats, ca. 200- 250,000 died of unnatural causes, virtually all of them in NDH on various sides. Percentage-wise, the biggest losses were among Bosnian Muslims, over 80,000.
Chomsky was wrong here. The second world war's the biggest and the only resistance against German Nazism and Italian Fascism started in Croatia by Croatians. It was the only organised resistance in all Europe. Seven major offensives and battles were provoked by Croatian and later Yugoslav partisans. None of those offensives were success for the Germans or Italians...remember that.
@@josipag2185 yes, Italian insignificant resistance started end of 1943 but Croatian Partisans started fights 1941 when War started. The only resistance in Europe.
Mostly not true, most Croats were Ustashe
I WAS BORN IN JUGOSLAVIJA.QUESTION IS:"ARE WE PEOPLE ABLE TO LEARN FROM THE PAST?"
Strange how the USA sided with Kosovo,a country with rich mineral wealth.Some things never change.
Have great respect for Chomsky but few things he got wrong. Surprisingly some very easy to check facts.
There were 14.5 % Serbs in Croatia, not 1/3, (or 33%), they did't lose any rights after 1990 elections. 20% of Croatian parliament in 1991 was sited by Serbs (mostly two parties - Serbian SDS and ex communist party). They were asked, but they saw future totally different then Croats. War broke because Serbs want to stay in one country, either Great Serbia or small Yugoslavia (depends who you ask).
serbs were ethnically Cleansed from their houses where they lived for centuries. This is against the "European" idea of protecting minorities...isnt it?
It wasn't even 14.5% it was 12.2%but I agree with what you're saying
But it was legal to displace and kill non-serbs, to bomb cities, take away 1/3 of the territory (even if the serb population in Croatia was only ~10%...there are also a lot of Croats and Hungarians in the Serbia- hey, let's take the Vojvodina away from the serbs 😆😉), be directly and indirectly guilty for 6 wars in the 90s?! Which rights do you mean? The ,,priviliged position" rights?! Info for non-ex YU people: If you would live in a city with 30.000 people, 29.000 were croats/bosniaks and 1000 serbs. Guess which ethnic group got 90% of the jobs... Even now, serbs have more rights (own cyryllic font, languages, schools, save places in the parlament...) in Croatia than minorities in most of the EU countries. Serbs were better connected to other governments in the world, because most of the diplomats Yugoslavia were Serbs. Guess who gave them a ,,Go" for the wars in the 90s... USA might not be perfect, but many thanks for the support in the mid and late 90s (even if the support could have started a few years earlier)!!!
Mr Chomsky, with all due respect, you are correct on most of your analysis , however as a former resident of Yugoslavia, can i just point out the break up of that wonderfull, majestic country had nothing to do with human rights, religious freedom, territorial disputes or even political differences. Plans for the break up and disenteration of of Titos Yugoslavia were drawn in the early 50 just after Tito told Stalin where to go with his Totalitarian schemes. Europe of today, the so called EU should be thankfull to marshal Tito for giving them the model on how to unite and work together. Its sad to see today that the current EU nations are so disenchanted and racist . They would would rather accept 5 million middle Eastern Refugees than accept smaller European countries in the EU. So much for logic.
We be,ieved in Brotherhood and Unity (Bratstvo i Jedinstvo). Chomkey is an old fool who does not understand that desinte3gration of Yugoslavia was mostlyg caused by Serbian communists, who transformed into nationalists and tbhen Serbian fascists...who initicated the war by using Yugoslav amry nmostly with Serbian officers, and thugs enmployed byt Milosevic, Karadzic and Mladic...
"EU should be thankfull to marshal Tito for giving them the model on how to unite and work together." What, he did exactly the same thing as any other communist, kill people until they shut up... One could say yugoslavia was a sort of a warcrime...
order=borders, no order=no borders=migrations=chaos=salt on patriotism=lasting hate=chauvinism=war? unlikely, with all the great powers and shit, but tito/commies did fuck all, only cause suffering and decay, ffs serfdom was better than irl communism, if you add enough brainwash into the mix it will instead of proceeding to nationalism just stop at chaos and eventually lead to extinction of a nation and the worst thing, that brings with it is, lack of love... leads to decay...
@@rockrl98 Tito managed to keepo Yugoslavia from oiutside iraon curtain imposed by the Soviets, as Tito had enough snmarts to avoid being kiulled by Stalin and kept Yugoslavia in between West and East. AEconomy was mixed and farmers could keep their land and produce unlike in colective farms in USSR...and elsewhere.. People could also have small businesses..and travel freelhy to and from Yugoslavia.
I KNOW, as I was born and lived in Yugoslavia untill leaving in 1971 for personal reasons...Tito promoted idea of Brotherhood and Unity...which was not such a bad idea...his main failure was to leave good successor mnechanism as he was a President for
Do not blame others for Serbian (and less Croatian) nationalism for the break up of Yugoslavia when Communism failed after 1989...MIiosevic and Serbs who supported him are guilty for this uncivil war while this time Muslims and Croatisain Bosnisa were main victims... EU and UN were total dunces in dealing with this stupid war...
@@vlastamolak1156 "Chomkey is an old fool" - Professor Chomsky is one of the smartest people out there, all of his scientific work and international recognition of his work speak in favor of that. Just because you disagree with his views on breakup of Yugoslavia doesn't make him an "old fool" and doesn't give you the right to slander him.
This is totally incorrect. He does not know the basic facts about the start of the war and has obviously no idea that the start of the war was based and the Yugoslav People's Army initiative against Slovenia and against the TO - 'Teritorijalna obrana' (the republic army) which was stripped of guns and ammo in May 1990 and is to be considered the start of the war in Croatia.
Hahahahahah You F. liars .I am glad you have seceeded. TO means homeland army (reservists dad's army) and is under command of the federal army (JNA).Like Homeland security is under command of US Army .Imagine homeland army in California starts shootng at US Army and starts blocking their barracs ?Hahahahahahahahh.They will be wiped in 2 seconds....Unless EU helps it happens in USA .Hahahahahahah.....And the were speedily and intesively Amed by BND (Germany)......But BND bribred Army officers and Milosevic big time and that was the end of USA, pardon Yugoslavia
th-cam.com/video/EuXviI9YFbM/w-d-xo.html
Can anyone recommend some books/documentaries/podcasts/etc that they feel have a fair and unbiased as possible view of Yugoslavia and its war? From a leftist/socialist lens as well. Thank you!
I know this was from months ago, but how could something be unbiased, and also through a lens of leftist/socialism? I might be misinterpreting what you are saying though…
@@andon9561 yeah you’re right, I worded that really stupidly. I guess there’s no such thing as unbiased, so what I’m looking for is something presented through the lens I’ve already integrated into my life and trust after thinking critically about it. I don’t want to learn about the war through a capitalist’s lens, a conservative’s lens, etc. i would still be wary of any information I read, but it would save me time as opposed to reading other things. Idk if that makes sense
monthlyreview - the-dismantling-of-yugoslavia
To Kill a Nation: The Attack on Yugoslavia by Michael Parenti
@@AL-vq1mz You’re a dummy.
@@jacksnipe9640 good recommendation on the MR article, I didnt know much about the yugoslavian dissolution but knew it heavily involved NATO, so was looking for proper education on the subject (how i ended up at this video) and found it very helpful as further reading for cutting through the western hegemonic attitudes i likely wouldve found in mainstream explanations down into the actual realpolitik reasons for the dissolution.
6:28 ''Our noble efforts don't work lets try something else'' ---------------That else was URANIUM 235. Dust that flew from Serbia to the whole World.
Sir, I am amazed by your lack of knowledge of what was really happening in Yugoslavia. "Horse in a race?" There was a genocide on a massive scale.
That wasnt true. No genocide. It was all CNN lies/garbage. Not much different from what it is today. Lies and garbage.
@@ditchweed2275 Please notice that you are talking to a person who survived it and was there the whole time. Or you want to tell me that daily shelling, starving people to death, columns of refugees, and other attrocities beyond count are lies? I wish they were. But they are not. It is simple. It was an attempt of genocide in Croatia, a genocide in Bosnia, and attempt of a genocide in Kosovo. What I see here is a professor who is deliberately trying to neglect the facts and the context, in order to justify his theories.
Humans... Chomsky is anything but a charlatan and he speaks asnto exactly how it was. Nationalism was rampant on ALL sides and innoscent Serbs were murdered im large numbers and the genocide started against Serbs LONG TIME ago in Kosovo and systematic ethnic cleansing. Striping Kosovo from its autonomy was a retaliating measure. Then everything else was staged the exhodus, CNN anchor Christane Amanpour was looking for Albamians willing to cry infront of camera. Yes there were bad actors like Arkan and co. But Serbs were systematically being cleansed since Tito. In the very cradle of its own culture and history. With thousand year old monastaries. Ruined. Wome raped. People being kidnapped and shot and their organs sold on the black market. Look up a Vice eposode on that called albamian mafia operation called Yellow House. Again, Chomsky is not a charlatan. What happened in the balkans was a tragedy that affected everyone equally. With the exception of Slovenians. Now we're all just a bunch of third world countries andnthe fact that Croatia is in the EU makes no difference. Its more less the same s...hole as Serbia and the rest of the balkans. Not to mention Bosnia. Most people in the balkan provincial areas can barely read or write so to point fingers is just a narrative thats getting old and people will just have to move on and deal with the harsh realities of living in a third world country. Just move on.
The only thing that is a fact from what you wrote is that many Serbs were victims as well, including the destruction of their cultural heritage in Kosovo. It does not change the fact that many others were victims as well. Was it a genocide or not? Simple question, what would happen if Serbia won all the wars? Everyone else not agreeing with Milosevic would be banished and killed. How do I know that? From a pattern that repeated from Vukovar to Kosovo. There is the answer to your question and that is the fact that clearly demonstrates that professor is neglecting the facts to justify his own theories, in which he is using, so senselessly, events he did not try to fully comprehend.
Humans... Milosevic was horrible. I agree. Serbs started the conflict in Croatia by blocking roads. But as i mentioned earlier Croatians, not all ofcourse but there was a palpable nazi fascist atmosphere in Croatia and rasism towards Serbs prior to the start of the war that was justifiably terifying as in WW2 Croatia was a Nazi German puppet and massacred hundreds of thousands of Serbs, Jews and Roma(gypsies) . Actually Rabbis kept close account and records. The number circulates around half a million butchered people in the most monstruous imaginable ways. That was a real genocide. And Germans werent even aware of that and were shocked when they came and saw what they did. Chomsky is well aware of that. So yes, Serbs blocked roads and initiated the conflict. I actually liked Stipe Mesic and i thought he was good but unfortunately Tudjman was awful. So was Alija Izetbegovic. Milosevic too was a very deeply wounded and dark individual as his father an orthodox priest commited suicide when Milosevic was still a boy.
' The US applies "The Maffia Principle"* since the Second World War. '
* 05:00 That's all you need to know about International Politics.
What a deranged world we live in! The saddest day of my life was when Yugoslavia went under, but still NOAM, with all due respect you are a north american and would rather or would also like to hear the account from the people themselves. Merci, Noam Chomsky, ana maria
Here's expose of French general who witnessed everything, for starting plans, to war. No one believes the Serbian people, propaganda is still going strong, punishing us for disobedience, and taking allies side in ww. Serbs made them lose the war in 41, so they needed, and are still being punished for it. twitter.com/JLPhpp/status/1287291421574287360?s=19
Here's Chomsky's take on 20th century history: everything that happened was either good or capitalism's fault. That's all you can learn from him. My recommendation: look for more OBJECTIVE takes on the matter.
and yes its time for beter world ...
There was a consensus amongst the newly formed EU that there could not be another regional power and certainly not in the causus peninsula.
He does not know the topic
Knows it better than most ex-Yugoslavs, who are often just brainwashed into thinking their side was just and committed no crimes. Croats, Serbs, and Bosniaks are all guilty chumps. A bunch of secret atheists fighting a fake religious war. Pathetic.
@@Fwazonly doesn't know it better than international lawyers and jurists who rendered ICTY and ICJ verdicts across multiple cases, showing your relativism to be a theology of its own, and actually consulted primary sources they could understand :)))))
You mean, the ICTY that makes previously documented evidence and witnesses disappear overnight? Yeah, they know and understand what happened, they just don't want the truth out for some reason.
@@thegreenknight7933 if evidence is "previously documented" then it can't disappear, might want to go to school kiddo.
ICJ and ICTY unbiased international court
Serbian "truth" = lies
Serbian side guilty before 2 international courts: ICJ and ICTY, across multiple cases
:)
The powerful voice of the wisest of Americans that The "Left" chooses to ignore at their peril. The Right knows how dangerous he is and if they haven't had him murdered yet is because Democrat politicians are either too afraid - or sold by pennies to those who own the country - to heed his message. Only a revolution of the discontent will shake them up. American who really love their country can learn from the lesson of Chile. When the discontent are pushed to the limit by the abuse of the Right they explode and there is hell to pay before politicians come to their senses and reconstruct a fairer society.
First was Slovenia. First war crime happened in Slovenia on JNA soldiers. Nobody ever talks about it today.
And what about the events that led to the breakup of Yugolsavia, mr. Chomsky? I would recommend you, and all the people who take all these statements from Chomsky as undeniable facts (just because it's Chomsky. If I wasn't Croatian, maybe I would also blindly believe everything Chomsky said about Yugoslavia) to read a little about the all the events that lead up to eventually wars. Under Tito, Yugoslavia was very centralised, since communists under Tito were hoping to create a one Yugoslav nationality that would erase all the existing ones. As time passed by, republics (SFR Yugoslavia consisted of 6 republics), especially more developed ones (Slovenia and Croatia) demanded for more decentralisation and greater autonomy, since they felt that profit which they generated was being invested in development of much poorer regions of Yugoslavia, like Kosovo. This long struggle for more autonomy and decentralisation finally resulted with a new constitution in 1974., approved by Tito himself, which gave all the republics greater autonomy and, most importantly, right to self-determine for every republic (any republic could from now on legally break away from Yugoslavia if population demanded it through referendum). Tito and his cult of personality was now the only thing glueing Yugoslavia together, and when he died in 1980. there was no one who could keep the "megalomaniac" Sebs in check. Almost everyone of influence in Serbia, be it academic community (read the SANU memorandum from 1984.) or polticians (placing their own puppets as presidents of Montenegro and autonomous regions of Kosovo and Vovodina, which would always give them 4/8 of vote for anything in Yugoslavia) now worked for unitaristic, centralised of Yugoslavia under the Serb rule, just like it was in first Yugoslavia. By the time the breakup finally hapens, Yugoslavia looked more like a fascist state than a socialist one, it is enough to listen to speeches from "communist" politicians in late 80's. This eventually lead to the breakup, when Slovenian and Croatian communists stormed out of CPY congress in protest of everything that was happening at the time. So, Serbian power-hungry, megalomaniac politics is the main reason for breakup of Yugoslavia. Also one more thing, since Chomsky said that Serbs were not given any rights in newly-formed Croatia. That's a lie, Croatian Serbs were the ones who boycotted the referendum on independence and ones who proclaimed their own breakaway country from Croatia, started with road blockades, insurgancies and deportation of Croatians who found themselves in their self-proclaimed country, which eventually lead to war. If they were not brainwashed into this idea of greater Serbia by their leaders, they could've all lived here in peace and more than a hundred thousand poeple would't lost their lives, nor would there be so much tension between our countries.
Well said. His position on this breakup shows he doesn't know all the details of what happened but seems more interested in giving criticism of the "Imperial West."
@@orm2799 I agree. This video gave me some perspective, because I love listening to Chomsky talk about Iraq etc., but as a Croat...
He made our war seem like just a short chapter, filler story in the novel of the great West. While it's undeniable the West had a lot of influence over what was going on here, it's weird to be reduced to a pawn. We had our own shit going on, commiting atrocities of our own volition n stuff.
Makes me think about all the other conflicts he paints as just a sidestory of the novel of the West.
@@dawnkeyy I agree. The American Noam Chomsky, while endlessly reviling America, shares with most of his compatriots an exclusvie interest in America. The rest of world is a side story as you say, which makes many of his analyses, although not totally worthless, terribly simplistic. (His tone of voice and delivery, as if calmly explaining the obvious, and kindly helping you see the utter simplicity of situations through the unnecessary fog, does not help).
@@jean-francoisbrunet2031 Yeah, it's basically the same american imperialist mindset, but with a twist where he hates america.
Basically Yugoslavia was country that lived on distribution of stolen property and borrowed money, and it run out of funds as well as places to borrow it in late 80’s … In the late summer of 1991 when Yugoslav National Army ordered mobilisation to save YU even in Serbia and Mntenegro which were pro-Yugoslav republics, thay could not achieve response of more than 27% … + Mr. Chomsky got percentage facts wrong.
Proudest Son of Terra What the actual fuck? You make cryptic comment to a fact you do not like and call it propaganda. Must be so easy to be you.
@Proudest Son of Terra What is universally accepted is what's fashionable to the masses at the time.
If it's factual or not doesn't effect what is accepted at all.
NOT TRUE!YOU DIDN T LIVE IN YUGOSLAVIA SO SHUT UP
Shut your ass migrant your country 400 years old so shut the fuck up
Kosovo is Serbia just like UN says
wasn't it the Bosnian Serbs only who rejected the Vance-Owen plan(1993)? The Republic of Srpska parliament rejected it on a doubtable referendum.Serbs were never a third of Croatia's population either.
Did he make 7 minutes without mentioning US imperialism in Eastern Cuba?
Many appear to have trouble placing Chomsky along ideological lines. I think there is a unifying principle to his public speech and writing - we are responsible for our own actions, we can choose to not do any evil. And as an American, he believes he has the responsibility to persuade other Americans to push for policy changes in that vein, since the US is a democracy.
Chomsky is an anarchist.
He's a realist
Well.. is a country where money can give you the office,, a real democracy ?? I call it illusion of democracy.
Did you say AmeriCIA is a democracy !!!????lmfao 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
1:16 the Serbs were a minority in Croatia (roughly around 12%, not 33% as Chomsky wrongly put it) and they were given the right to vote which they banned. So does Chomsky support the political elite and the minorities are allowed to rule over the other minorities and the majority?
So many half-truths, insinuations and editorial quote dropping. Typical Chomsky.
What a bunch of bullshit, people should do their own research.🤣
First Croatia like others held a referendum in 1991 in which those 83% who voted, voted to leave Yugoslavia by 93% saying yes.
After that we formally didn't do anything because EU asked us for a three month moratorium, its only then that the war happens because some Serbs were unhappy while others dreamt of Greater Serbia.
Its a lie that anyone was for Croatian independence at the start, an embargo was even put on us.
Also about the lie of no rights for Serbs google Plan-Z4 which would defacto give Serbs a country inside Croatia, they declined it because they though they would win 🤣
5:15 is the only time he speaks the truth
It's all about racketeering
obozavam kad se prepirete na engleskom a svi znate isti jezik! Nego ko je na kraju pobedio i sta se dobilo pobedom on objasnjava kako je amerika drzava koja je pocinila i dan danas cini najvise genocida,a vi se uhvatili sto smo se mi sve skupa poubijali ni milion
All wrong. Good reminder why not to read your books
type 'weight of chains' by boris malagurski and see if what is said sounds logical
I listened Serbian nationalists in nineties all the time, populistic anti regime nationalist like Malagurski cant be much better
USA tried to keep Yugoslavia together 😂😂😂
I’m waiting for the next joke which is USA tried to keep USSR together.
He said that US's first response was not picking sides, probably trying to be in good terms with Yugoslavia to stablish future economic dominance (but just at first). When the EU backed up Croatia (and Germany), the US were forced to pick a side in order to be a stakeholder in the situation. But America doesn't know how to be a spectator, and fueled the conflict big time on the background.
Michael Parenti was right about Noam
@@fernando.tomina He has it with the US foreign policy in general otherwise if it wasn't for the USA intervening in this one the world would be learning about the consequences of WWIII by now
USA helped seperate Yugoslavia*
Sounds pro Serbian but ok... Lets clear this up: Serbs never fought for stability of Yugoslavia, they fought for the possibility that they will, (along the way, while they pretend to fight and care for Yugoslavia lol) establish their main goal - an "Greater Serbia". Greater Serbia is an doctrine, an idea that became almost official agenda, its roots are older than Yugoslavia itself (before YU there was an " Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenians" and from that era, are the very roots of "Great Serbia", that kingdom collapsed but idea survived and found its revival in political minds of serbian politicians inside YU-Yugoslavia). So we know that Serbs wanted to dominate even before Yugislavia ever existed, but once inside Yugoslavia, they couldnt and didnt know how to bare with the authority of Tito, who knew how to repel any kind of nationalism. Once he died, tables have turned, and old political ideas were about to emerge once more. Every other YU country knew what was always long term Serbian goal, and what will they try to do... So its not strange that Slovenia and Croatia decided to separate, it was not an act of rebelion, both countries had an legal right to do that. Inside Yugoslavian constitution it was written that every country had an open right to separate, and if they do, borders for that country (no matter which one) were also mentioned and well known inside of constitution. Of course, if they decide to separate, Communist party (the one and only political party inside YU) had to allow it, give its blessings, but the problem was - Communist party was disbanded so no real approval was needed for separation of any country. Slovenians and Croats did what they had an right to do. If Serbs were about to respect constitution of Yugoslavia, there would never be reason for war, constitution was written so that it alone can prevent any bigger dispute and war between countries. But that didnt go along with idea of Great Serbia because one of the main goals for them was having Adriatic coast under Serbian rule... Tito knew what could happen once he dies, and he probably hoped that constitution will prevent it, but it was not enough. And thats about it Mr. Chomsky. Im disappointed with a fact that you dont go enough deep into things when it comes to ex YU. YU needs to be observed through history of the "kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenians" (country before Yugoslavia) , Serbian goals were well known, and from its very beginning it was an dream of Great Serbia.
Croat propaganda!
Proudest Son of Terra Nisi mogao bolje reci!
Po medjunarodnom javnom pravu da bi drzava bila priznata mora da ispuni tri uslova kumulativno:
1. Teritorija
2. Stanovnistvo
3. Centralna vlast
Zagreb nije imao vlast nad Sao Krajinom. Srbi jesu. Oni su mogli proglasiti nezavisnost samo na onoj teritoriji koju su u tom trenu kontrolisali, Krajinu nisu.
Ovo je nacin na koji im uvek mozes zacepti usta. Poz!
You are wrong. Serbs were the ones to stupidly believe in brotherhood and unity. Croats only saw Yugoslavia as a way to escape and hide from their Nazi past. Croats organized the Croatian spring in 1971, Serbs never did that.
Please stop with the myth of Great Serbia. This was coined by western powers to hide the Croatian expansionism. Dubrovnik became Croatian in 1939, under the threat of fascism. Dalmatia and Slavonia were never Croatian. Look at the Austro-hungarian population censuses of Kingdom of Dalmatia and Slavonia - 55% Serbs, 40% Croats and 15% others in both kingdoms. And then came the genocide.
Idontgiveafuck, if you don’t give a f@k, then move on, I for sure don’t giveafuck about your Serbia ZDS
wudzah You can not explain anything to western propaganda. Serbia chose brotherhood and unity even when they knew that they would get much bigger teritory(with whole bosnia, macedonia, and unification with montenegro, which at that time was calling itself partly serbia but due to dinasty war between petrovics and obrenovics they werent able to form united state). We now can see what serbia would have got at that time, if serbia accepted results of secret contract in London, so serbians didnt have any need for state with croats and slovenians, but you cant expalin something to idiots.
A province of Serbia was effectively stolen by a violent terrorist group trained and supported by a foreign power. The KLA were ruthless in their prolonged campaign of murder and intimidation which resulted in the ethnic cleansing of over 240,000 Serbs, Roma, Croats, Jews and numerous ethnic minorities from Kosovo. Kosovo has achieved its aim of becoming an ethnically pure state made up of Albanians.
In order to make peace you need to stop the war
US and other great powers: well yes, but actually no
The problem with Chomsky articulation is, that he doesn't see real people who had lived in those country (countries) and who made those decisions. He reject peoples will. USA or Germany had little to add to the conflict which was paused but not stopped by Josef Tito. These are hundreds of years of conflicts and actually creation of Yugoslavia only postponed activities towards independences of nations.
Born in Yugoslavia, love Yugoslavia. Big brother destroyed our Country to get what ever they want from our beautiful and rich Country.
Diplomatic circles at the time would refer to the war as " Genscher's War ". That's all you need to know about it...
👍
The breakup of Yugoslavia was a shame.
The war didn't start because of people hating each other but of corrupt politicians and oligarchs trying to hide the corruption. It was a shame.
My grandfather came from Serbia to Slovenia and married my grandmother.
My father was born in Slovenia/Yugoslavia.
I still remember our holidays - on the adriatic sea, the beautiful Dalmation islands, the mountians in Bosnia, Triglav. So many great memories.
I still go and visit all the states-; Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia ...
Although I haven't been birn in Yugoslavia there us this nostalgia in me...
Sometimes even Chomsky can be wrong (0:35).
There is a big difference between 33%, what Chomsky claims, and 12%, what the actual percentage of the Serbian population in Croatia was before the war.
OK maybe he got the info from serbian sources, but he should know better by now about the credibility of serbian sources. LOL.
Now if he is wrong here, where else did he went wrong?
(1:16) - what rights Chomsky is talking about? Rights to claim parts of someone else land? Exactly that type of right would lead to a conflict.
(1:40) - Vance-Owen's plan like any other peace plan was rejected by serbs. So no there was no chance for any plan to succeed because one side wanted it all. Only force works in these situations and that is what happened.
(3:30) - That line of reasoning means; NATO would have bombed serbia even if the conflict between serbians and albanians didn't occur. REALLY??? Right. Come on Chomsky you can do better.
I agree with you as a Croat the info he provides is false. Not sure where he got his sources from. The Serbs wanted 30% of Croat territory but failed and remember that not one bullet was fired at Serbia!
1:16 serbs wanted land where serbs lived. croats wanted land where croats lived. so croats get all the country since the region in yugoslavia was called croatia? in the same fashion kosovo and metohija should stay in serbia.
1:40 chomsky clearly states that clinton pressured muslims to reject the peace offer. karadzic accepted it. look it up.
3:30 quoting chomsky: "We know from the western documentation what it was(the genocide serbs commited on kosovo)... around 2000 people were killed and the killings were distributed. according to british government ... the majority of the killings were KLA guerrillas". NATO bombing killed between 1200 and 4000 civilians. So serbia did similar amount of genocide as the NATO did. im not saying that NATO would have bombed serbia even if the conflict between serbians and albanians didn't occur, just saying that the bombing wasn't justified. there are a lot more problems with the bombing
Noam, actually, did make mistake. It was not Vance-Owen plan turned down by Muslim leadership, but Cutiglero's plan. Izetbegovic signed the plan and eventually turned down his signature under the influence of Bush's administration. Plan was more and less something that resembles Bih after the war. See what general McCenzie says about that.
He's not talking about Vance-Owen's plan. That was the plan from 1993 when the war already started. He is talking about Carrington-Cutileiro plan from 1992. before the war. All sides agreed on it. And then US ambassador told Muslim representative to withdraw his signature and voila - the country is destroyed and under heavy influence of USA. Our leaders can't do anything without US permission. Not that they want to do anything in the first place.
Of course the ustaša killed 2milion serbs during second world war and that would be really the 1:3 of Croatia popolation
Yugoslavia had the opportunity to solve it peacefully by creating a confederation and turning to democracy already in the late1980s. The proposal was made in 1990 by Croatia and Slovenia, it was basically a union of sovereign states like the EU . (Nacrt Ugovora o Jugoslavenskoj konfederaciji iz 1990. godine ) The Serbes were against it, they held all the key positions in economy that was going downhill and military dominating Yugoslavia. They simply had no reason and intention for change because they wanted socialism and the power structure which was in their favour to remain intact. ( hegemonic interests) Montenegro also didn’t want any change. Slovenia, Croatia and Macedonia were for confederation. Bosnia and Hercegovina were in the position to tip the balance in favour of the confederation but Izetbegović didn’t want it so it ended up in a stalemate. ( He was believed to have followed his own agenda of an Islamic state as he was know to be an Islamist according to his publications) This was a situation and continuation without a solution and something Slovenia and Croatia couldn’t accept so they pulled out. The Yugoslavian Military did what they were supposed to do to stop the Disintegration of Yugoslavia and the war started. Tito was the glue that held Yugoslavia together ( he actively suppressed and jailed nationalistic and Islamistic dissidents) and after his death the deeply rooted nationalism on all sides surfaced again, amplified by the failing economy and debt giving each other the blame. The Situation could have been avoided without bloodshed with Yugoslavia remaining a nation with more autonomous states but Izetbegović played the key role in the conflict to come and if its true that Clinton pressured him, he also played a key role and ends up being responsible for the war in Bosnia. I remember when I was a kid the Ethnies kept themselves mainly separated, so the problem was more in depth, it was history and also religion that played a role in the deeply rooted distrust especially between Serbia and Croatia. It’s shame and tragedy how it went down, especially because we are neighbours and in the end have to work together and get along. So yeah fuck nazis and islamists on all sides!
Posso dire, avendo ascoltato solo il primo minuto, che quì abbiamo a che fare con un vecchio rimbambito.
So genocide was just Serbia's resistance to economic and political norms?
Nah read Parenti "the reational desctruction of yugoslavia". Most of the "genocide" is outright fake. "Serbia" or better to say serbian part of yugoslavia tried to keep yugoslavia together being an multi ethnic movement. On the other hand the separatists were led by a mix from islamic fundamentalists to fascists who defended Hitler. Read a bit more about the situation.
What genocide for gods sake, if you are talking of Srebrenica.. it was a horrific war crime that hapened in 48h. War lasted for 3 years! West is full of condeming "fake news" now in 2020's, imagine what could you do with CNN on your side in 30 years ago...
I guess you are talking about genocide over the Serbs, in the I world war, when Serbia lost 1,3 milion people or II world war when Serbia lost 1,2 milione people in the war and 700.000 killed in Jasenovac by Croatian Ustashe? That genocide, right?
Who won the war? That one is easy... Just take a note in which language most comments are made by ex yugoslav nations commenters :-D
fun fact - they all sound and read more or less the same
The people who survived won
Who Won ? Nazi GERMANY
When was this recorded?