|
|||||||||
Posted November 16, 2001
A Bit Frightening
[Regarding Nebojsa Malic's column of November 8, "Death by Protectorate":]
Wow! – your mindset it a bit frightening. However, I see you as a bit of a hypocrite. If you disagree with American policy and government so much, why did you choose to come here after leaving Bosnia? I find it interesting that out of 191 countries in the world, you picked the US. If you like the "western" style of living you could have gone to Europe, Australia, South Africa or any of the European controlled Pacific islands. Instead you chose the US, where your tax dollars go to support the government and its version of terrorism. In effect you are assisting the UCK "terrorists" by living here and contributing your tax dollars to the US foreign policy effort.
Nebojsa Malic replies:
I don't know what you mean by "frightening" in my mindset, or even whether that was a compliment. However, labeling me a hypocrite simply because of where I live is misguided. My residence in the United States is only temporary, at least until I can return home without being threatened with ethnic, religious and political persecution. My "choice" of the US was accidental; had I been offered a scholarship by an Australian or Canadian university, rather than an American private school, Balkan Express would likely have been written from Australia or Canada, not Washington DC. My criticism of American foreign policy is grounded in things I respect and admire because of my American experience – the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Old Republic and the idea of individual liberty. It is such an America I would not mind living in. Better yet, it is a Balkans incorporating the idea of liberty into its rich tradition to which I would gladly return.
Info
Please continue. Your site provides more alternative info, editorials, opinion on significant matters, including, obviously, the current "situation" in Afghanistan, than anyone.
Trial
[Regarding Nebojsa Malic's column of November 8, "Death by Protectorate":]
Though of course you are entitled to your opinion and others to theirs, I would just like to remind you of the World War II war crimes and what Hitler and his men did during that period of time. It is my opinion that those trials were justified.
I am a converted American Muslim. The Koran and Islam is a religion of peace unless some fanatic uses the name of Allah to his own advantage. It is the same in all religions when dealing with fanatics.
As an American, I do not believe that we are using Milosevic as a cover-up for a so-called "blundered" war in Afghanistan. It is not blundering, in fact it looks as though it is going quite well slowly but surely.
I pray that Milosevic and his men get a fair trial as all people should have that right. Did the people that were killed in Croatia and Bosnia get a fair trial before they were executed?
Thank
you for letting me voice my opinion
on this matter.
Nebojsa Malic replies:
I don't need reminding about Hitler's genocide. I lost family members and relatives to the Ustasha (Croatian Nazis) rampage in 1941-45. That is precisely why I regard with suspicion the claims of those who use Hitler's words and Hitler's strategies to target Hitler's victims (in this instance, the Serbs), while accusing them of being Nazis and Hitler incarnate. You are correct in that everyone should have the right to a fair trial. But I think many legal scholars – with arguments much more precise than mine – have proven that the ICTY is by definition incapable of fairness. Worse yet is the (ab)use of "justice" for political purposes, something the self-appointed humanitarians now openly admit to doing. The Muslims I have lived with understand this. I hope you will as well. Selaam aleikum.
Blame
[Regarding Nebojsa Malic's column of November 8, "Death by Protectorate":]
Your article was a link on Yahoo. I have read most of it. Your English is amazingly good. It's better than mine! And I have lived my entire life in English-speaking countries. My family is from Northern Ireland so I have a small understanding of the use of brute force and how hard it is to live underneath it.
I agree with your assertion that the former Yugoslavia is totally destroyed. I agree that this past 10+ years have been horrific for almost anyone living in the Balkans. I agree that placing all the blame on one person is rarely fair. Having said all that, here is my question: do you believe Milosevic is guilty and responsible for at least some of the horrific things that have taken place recently? Or do you believe he is innocent?
Nebojsa Malic replies:
As a historian and a survivor of two out of four Balkan wars, I have a natural desire to find out what really happened over the past decade. That includes Milosevic's responsibility, yes, as well as that of Croatia's Tudjman, Bosnia's Izetbegovic, and numerous Western leaders who incessantly interfered to exacerbate what was bad to begin with. I have no doubt Milosevic is responsible for some of the mess. I find it incongruous, though, that the people who carry a much greater responsibility (i.e.. NATO, the US and the EU) have given themselves the right to determine the extent of his guilt, while leaving not only themselves, but other local characters, out of the picture. I am all for justice, but not at missile-point. And as Richard Cohen confessed, this is not about justice; it's about public relations. I might also add, about power.
Justice
[Regarding Nebojsa Malic's column of November 1, "Perverted Justice:]
Your piece uses the term "perverted" justice. No where did you describe ordinary criminal justice and how it might be applied to Milosevic's case. As such, your piece is rank amateurism and you're wasting your time by preaching to the choir.
~ Cecil W.
Nebojsa Malic replies:
Had you bothered to run a simple internet search, you would have found a court in The Hague called the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which has the jurisdiction over disputes between UN member states. If justice is what the US/NATO were after, they would have sued Yugoslavia before the ICJ. Better yet, they could have requested that the new Belgrade regime – bitterly opposed to Milosevic – put him on trial for whatever crimes they claim he committed. But that would mean respect for national sovereignty, recognition of ICJ's jurisdiction and agreement to some code of conduct in international relations. The US rejects all of these, as demonstrated by just about anything it has done over the past decade, in the Balkans and elsewhere. Claiming that justice in an exclusive provenance of an ad-hoc, illegitimate "court," whose jurisdiction comes out of the barrels of American guns, now that is amateurism. It is also unprecedented arrogance, and – according to the UN Charter, the Geneva Convention and even the Nuremberg trials, a crime.