Positions of the Rainbow Party on the Yugoslavian Crisis
April 1999
Read this page in Greek
|
Read this page in Macedonian
The problem of Yugoslavia and the consequences of its
dissolution have affected not only our country and the Balkans,
but also Europe in general. The problem touched Greece in the
form of the Macedonian issue. When the independent and sovereign
state of Macedonia was declared in 1991, a swell of
anti-Macedonian hysteria in Greece provided anti-European and
anti-democratic forces with the opportunity to play a dominant
role on our country's political stage.
Today, the issue has been nearly forgotten. However, the
"positive" shift in attitude towards the Republic of
Macedonia is not due to an objective change in Greek policy, but
rather to the Kosovo crisis, the danger of expansion of which
has made Greek politicians - and others as well - look upon
their northern neighbor more "sympathetically." The
Republic of Macedonia is regarded more as a good shock absorber
of the rumblings from Kosovo and less so an equal neighbor. As
far as the Macedonian issue is concerned, the key to relations
of mutual friendship, cooperation and lasting peace in the
Balkans lies in the revision of the national myths of Greece and
Bulgaria. It also requires that both countries accept on a
social and political level the existence of a Macedonian nation
that is different from the Greek and the Bulgarian, and in
parallel provide recognition and respect for the rights of
ethnic Macedonians in Greece and Bulgaria, respectively. And the
sooner this is done the better.
Perhaps the epilogue of the Yugoslavian crisis will be played
out in Kosovo, a crisis that began in the early 1990s as the
former Yugoslavian republics were gaining their independence.
Unfortunately, throughout those years, the information that
Greek society received was manipulated and directed to a large
extent by the Orthodox-Christian-chauvinist fronts (such as with
the Macedonian issue). As a result, the average Greek citizen
has a blank memory of both the causes and the events of the
Yugoslavian drama.
When Greek television and mass media reported on the war in
Yugoslavia, the news was usually presented thusly:
"...Sarajevo was bombed again..."; "...Vukovar
was leveled by the bombing..."; "...mass graves were
found in Srebrenica...." While citizens elsewhere in Europe
heard their correspondents reporting that "...Sarajevo was
bombed again by the Serbs..."; "...Serb artillery
leveled Vukovar..."; "...mass graves of Bosnians were
found in Srebrenica...."
One can easily understand what the average Greek's collective
memory and perception is, as opposed to the average European's,
after nearly ten years of continuous misinformation. Certainly,
the European citizen received more objective information on the
events because, as it was proven, Vukovar was indeed leveled by
Serbian artillery, Sarajevo was indeed besieged by the Serbs,
and in Srebrenica Bosnians were indeed slaughtered by the Serbs.
This is also the primary cause of the anti-European and
anti-American hysteria that we are observing lately in Greece,
occasioned by the Kosovo crisis, which resembles that of the
Macedonian issue in the early 90s. After all, when in
demonstrations against Europe, the red flags of the
"left" wave alongside the black flags of fascism under
the wing of the double-headed Byzantine eagle of the Orthodox
Church, then surely "something is rotten in the state of
Denmark."
In Kosovo, Serbian hegemonic chauvinism is clashing with
primitive Albanian nationalism. The former is the main factor
responsible for the war in the former Yugoslavia and the latter
because the vision of a Great Albania is being promoted in the
name of human rights.
Albanian nationalism raised the issue of Kosovo as an internal
problem of the Albanian national state for the first time at the
end of the Hoxha period (late 1970s), in essence projecting the
vision of a Great Albania. In the early 1980s there were
demonstrations in Pristina demanding that the autonomous region
be given the status of Republic.
Concealed behind this demand was secession, given that with the
constitutional revision of 1974 the Yugoslav Republics achieved,
with some conditions, the right of self-determination.
Within the structure of the Yugoslav Federation, the Albanian
minority certainly had problems, particularly when the Serb,
Rankovic, held the position of the Internal Affairs Minister.
However, after the 1974 Constitution Kosovar Albanians enjoyed
more ethnic rights than perhaps any other minority in Europe,
with a status of regional autonomy, university education in the
Albanian language, etc.
On the other hand, after 1974 Serb nationalists felt their
hegemonic role challenged not only in Kosovo but also more
generally within the structure of the Yugoslav Federation.
Serbian nationalism awakened. Characteristic were the positions
of the Serbian Academy of Sciences, which, in 1986, long before
the crisis erupted, contained references to
"unalienable" national rights and the "historical
rights" of the Serbian people who have been
"underprivileged" by their role in the structure of
the Yugoslav Federation.
In other words, both the Albanians as much as the Serbs
established the grounds for expansionist ideologies by ignoring
the historical experiences of the Balkan region.
Thus through the dissolution of Yugoslavia and with the slogan
"all Serbs in one state" the Serbs were attempting to
construct the "Great Serbia." They exploited their
military might since the greater portion of the Yugoslav war
machine was under Serb control.
Upon seeing the Yugoslav Republics gain their independence,
Albanian nationalists on their part felt that the historical
opportunity had come to create an independent Kosovo en route to
the great Albania. So they then implemented the military tactics
of the KLA (Kosovo Liberation Army) with Rugova's policy of
non-violent resistance.
The international actor in the form of NATO intervened under the
doctrine that "human rights are mightier than the right of
sovereignty" at the wrong time, in the wrong place, and in
the wrong fashion. If it had to intervene, it should have done
so earlier, at the outset of the Serb campaign and especially in
Bosnia, to protect its civilians. If NATO had wanted to defend
the human rights of the Kosovar Albanians it should have
followed the suggestions of expert military analysts and carried
out a ground intervention in coordination with air strikes in
order to protect the Albanian population from the Serb ethnic
cleansing raids. This was the only way that the Albanian
population of Kosovo could have been effectively protected.
Fearful of the political costs (human losses in a ground
operation and negative public opinion in alliance-member
countries) the NATO commanders intervened with bombing missions
(inevitably causing civilian casualties) in a unsuccessful
attempt to have their pie and eat it too.
Another error was banning the KLA (Albanian extremists) from an
equal place at the table, which only served to nourish their
expansionist dreams. If the international community was asking
Milosevic to withdraw Yugoslav troops from Kosovo and to stop
the ethnic cleansing, then it had to simultaneously ask for the
total disarmament of the KLA, given that an international force
was undertaking to protect the population. The pressure at
Rambouillet was one-sided, exerted only on the Serbs. This also
left open the eventuality of a border change since the
provisions gave Kosovo a three-year transitional period followed
by a "non-status" regime without clear and explicit
reference to respecting the borders of the new Yugoslavia.
The bombings provided Milosevic's (para)military and
(para)governmental forces with the opportunity to wage
large-scale ethnic cleansings. The Albanian refugees did not
leave Pristina out of fear of the bombing raids, as some would
have us believe. Rather, the overwhelming majority of Kosovar
Albanians fled to the Republic of Macedonia and Albania because
of Serb persecution, resulting in a serious threat to the
stability of both these countries. Here the international
community made yet another mistake. It did not support these
countries' request for accession into the NATO alliance, nor did
it reinforce their relationship with the EU through a special
affiliation status.
A significant factor leading to the intervention of the
international community in Kosovo, and which the average Greek
does not know, is that the ethnic cleansing and persecution of
Albanians had begun long before the NATO intervention.
After Milosevic's abolition of the autonomy of Kosovo and
Vojvodina in 1989, many Albanians left Kosovo because of
political discrimination by the Serb authority. This intensified
over recent years, as corroborated by independent international
organizations and even by the UN. Just, of course, as the
average Greek is unaware of the thousands of charges (brought to
international organizations) of rape of Bosnian women by Serbian
soldiers and paramilitary troops during the operations in
Bosnia.
Certainly, the Croatians (in Kraina) and the Bosnians (to a
small extent) carried out ethnic cleansings against Serb
populations. But this came as a result of the Serb policy that
from the outset of the crisis was designed to expand the land of
the Serbian state. The Croatians expelled the Serbs from Kraina,
while flirting with the idea of incorporating the Bosnian lands
of Herzegovina into Croatia. But this was after the Serbs
expelled the Croats from Slavonia to create an ethnically clean
state for the "Great Serbia." In the regions of Bosnia
where the Serbs were the majority, they drove out the Bosnians
in order to create the conditions for ethnically cleansed
regions in Bosnia that could later be joined to Serbia. They
drove the Albanians out of Kosovo to "ethnically"
cleanse Serbia of an "annoying" foreign minority. In
other words, there was no general and indefinite
"civil" war in Yugoslavia in which everyone was
equally to blame, as some would have us believe.
In the past, Balkan expansionist "great" ideas drove
Greece into the Asia Minor disaster of 1921 and Bulgaria into
the annihilation of 1913. Unfortunately history was repeated
with the policies of the Serb nationalists in Bosnia and the
Albanians in Kosovo. The root of evil lies precisely in the idea
of creating a "Great Greece", a "Great
Bulgaria", a "Great Serbia", a "Great
Albania" or a "Great Macedonia".
It is unthinkable today, at a time when we are building a United
Europe, for an ethnic minority to wage a national-liberation war
to promote the vision of a Great Albania. But it is also
unthinkable, not to mention criminal for a state to carry out a
policy of ethnic cleansing on virtually an entire minority
population because one segment of it manifests extreme
separatist tendencies. And it is likewise criminal for a state
to encourage and support the secession of its fellow nationals
in another, independent sovereign state such as Bosnia or
Croatia on behalf of a Great Serbia. This is precisely what the
Serbs did in prior years starting in Croatia (eastern and
western Slavonia) and then again in Bosnia. Aware of the fact
that the ethnic minorities in the Balkans have been used in the
past and will probably be used in the future as destabilizing
factors, the Rainbow party has repeatedly proclaimed the
inviolability of existing borders.
At the same time, in the matter of a minority's civic conduct,
Rainbow has embraced the principle that this must be such as to
reassure the entire population of the country that it does not
aspire through the implementation of its rights to either
immediately or gradually dissolve any borders. In addition
Rainbow has pledged the following principles:
Ethnic minorities or ethnic groups must refuse to become the
objects in intergovernmental rivalries and interventions in the
internal affairs of the countries in which they live. They must
at the same time cultivate affiliations of friendship,
cooperation and solidarity with all citizens of the states in
which they reside.
Naturally, the requisite condition for the above is that the
governmental authorities condemn all political oppression of
ethnic minorities, safeguard their minority rights, and respect
their ethnic and cultural identity.
On the basis of the above, the civic conduct of democratic
Kosovar Albanians should have been directed towards creating
alliances with democratic Serbs in order to solve the problems
they encountered in Kosovo, rather than secession. The behavior
of the democratic Serbs should have been likewise. They should
have upheld the rights of the Albanian minority in Kosovo while
condemning Serbian nationalism, and thus contributing to the
democratization of their country. These are the principles on
which every democratic Balkan country must base its conduct so
that we may have true friendship, solidarity, cooperation and
peace in the region.
Rainbow upholds the principle that an ethnic minority or ethnic
group in the Balkans or in Europe can no longer wage a
national-liberation war.
All peoples of Europe have been nationally
"emancipated" through the founding of states - some
earlier, some later. Wherever this has not occurred (e.g.
Basques, Catalans, etc) these people enjoy a broad autonomy that
allows them to develop their particular ethnic characteristics.
We are now building a "post-national" model of social
organization in which the possibilities of communication (e.g.
Internet) give us the opportunity to become acquainted with
other cultures and languages, quickly and easily bringing us
closer as individuals and as peoples. It is therefore
anachronistic as well as dangerous to promote the issues of
respect and protection of the rights of a national minority or
ethnic group through the independence of the region it inhabits
(such as in Kosovo) and the creation of new borders in the
Balkans.
The Balkan states and the minorities living in them must utilize
the teachings of the European Union experience in their attempt
to gradually unite their states, with respect for
national-minority rights and the overcoming of national
prejudices and rivalries.
We are moving towards a United Europe of open borders, peoples
and cultures, of democracy and respect for cultural diversity.
In this Europe notions of alliances or divisions based on
religion or national identity, or "anti-western" or
"pro-eastern" views (which unfortunately have been
fervently promoted in Greece over the past decade) do not befit
a democratic society. On the one hand they lead back to a
political Middle Ages that distances our country from its
European course, while on the other they are particularly
dangerous to the peace of the Balkans since they can dynamite
our common European structure.
THE POLITICAL SECRETARI OF THE RAINBOW PARTY
|