Yugoslavia: Death of a Nation

Yugoslavia: Death of a Nation is a sad and necessary book, one that still holds very well 15 years after its revised edition, which is the one I bought at amazon and read. There are problems, of course. It needed more maps to help readers unfamiliar with the terrain have a better idea of distances, geography, and communities. It needed more clarity in order to know exactly who is saying what, especially in the long quotes that the authors select to single out in self-contained paragraphs. Readers will know who the speakers are, but it could have been done differently. I liked "Burn This House" so much, that I expected many end-notes to describe in detail this or that aspect of the conflict, just like the end-notes in "Burn This House" do so well. The end-notes in "Yugoslavia: Death of a Nation" are good, but they should have been more and more detailed. Also, several typos could have been avoided.Still, this is a superb book. It takes a compassionate yet sober view of events. To those readers that may think it is too one-sided, think again. There are plenty of one-sided books on this subject that, although informative, must be taken with a grain of salt. This one, while far from perfect, gives us a devastating overview of the conflict that tore a country apart. Yes, the authors do state that there are guiltier parties and that guilt cannot be distributed equally. Yes, the guilt of the Serbs of Serbia, the Serbs of Bosnia, the Croats of Croatia and then the Croats of Bosnia, and, finally, the Muslims, in that descending order, is presented. Guilt in this crime that was the wars of Yugoslavia was not, and cannot be, spread equally. To do that would be tantamount to saying that a woman raped by one man and then a second one is as guilty as her attackers because she bit one and kicked the other in the groin. We can say that there was violence exerted by the victim against her assailants, but we cannot, in good conscience, state that all parties are equally guilty.I have reviewed plenty of books in which the Muslims of today, as well as those of the past, are not presented in a good light, and I have agreed with those books because I think that the imperialistic, triumphant Muslims of the past, and the not so-triumphant Muslims of today deserve to be exposed to the harsh light of rational inquiry. Therefore, readers that don't know my reviews may think that I approached "Yugoslavia: Death of a Nation" with a pro-Muslim bias. I did not. It's just that the Muslims of the former Yugoslavia were squeezed and pushed for a long time into extreme positions (extreme positions they did not have at the beginning) by their former neighbors, and even under the most pressing, harsh circumstances, only some Muslims resorted to pay back their tormentors with the same coin. If the Muslims of Bosnia are radicalized today (and I don't know whether they are or not), the Serbs, the Croats, and, yes, the West, are to blame for that.Read this book and reach your own conclusions. The BBC program, based on this book, is also illustrative. You won't find "neutrality" here because, when everything has been said and done, to be absolutely neutral would be to ignore one side's desperate plight in benefit of those who started and continued the crimes. Yes, those most responsible for the crimes and the violence also made their own peoples suffer, particularly Milosevic in Serbia proper and the duo Karadjic-Mladic in Srpska. And later the Serbs in both areas were bombed by NATO. None of those facts erases the previous fact that the Serbian leaders, with the almost total support of their peoples, waged war on their neighbors secure in the hardware of the Yugoslavian Army and knowing that those neighbors could not defend themselves adequately. When the neighbors eventually hit back, the Serbs cried foul.A good and necessary volume, to be read with others, like "Unholy Alliance," and "Burn This House." Also, Osprey has a slim, well-illustrated tome on the wars of Yugoslavia that makes a great complement to these titles.

This book is the standard faire at the time of the breakup of the six republics of the former nation of Yugoslavia, but opens with major distortions that shade all sections of the work. Journalist are not historians and often wander from day to day looking for publishable conclusions that, in best cases, reflect honest inquire but little else, and once they feel they have a workable thesis repeat it often.I lived in Yugoslavia in the mid-sixties when nationalist pride was extensive people would, with prodding, tell you their origins but more commonly identify themselves as Yugoslav not Serb or Croat, Macedonian or Slovenian, Bosnian or Montenegrin.Their pride was justified. The nation had been created after the WWI when the former Imperial power found themselves on the wrong side, the rough transition to nationhood followed with the turbulence of the twenties, thirties and the horror of WWII. England and the Western power lend their support and arms to the Partisans as an effective ally tying down five German divisions as Churchill cheered on Tito's forces although King Peter of Yugoslavia in exile was a neighbor in London.The Red Army did not liberate the country, the Yugoslavs did. And although technically behind the Iron Curtin of the Cold War, Tito's early break with Stalin created a third world force that prompted ambiguous reactions in the West as it, strengthened with Egypt and other independents, challenged America rising power and dominance.A gentle introduction to this nationalism is found in Tea Obreht's The Tiger's Wife: A Novel.The distortion that diminishes the authors work is found in their introductory sections where they claim that neither America nor the newly unified Germany played a role in Yugoslavia demise; wrong on both counts.As events unfolded Germany crosses the wiser elements in the European Union and Britain's diplomat Lord Carrington who could foresee what was to come. Looking for a reassertion of its `sphere of influence' in the Balkans Germany pushes hard for Croatian independence, while the United States, circumventing the United Nations' Arms Embargo, shipped weapons to Latin American ports that were in fact unloaded in Croatian ones. Why?Here is where a little more understanding of the movements of historical forces could have led Silber-Little to a richer analysis than demonizing the Serb leader Slobodan Milosevic as major causal factor. Once the destruction of the Nation was in full swing no heroes appear east or west, but villains were plentiful.Yugoslavia was a unique Economic System.Elements of its structure are reappearing today in the literature of writers like Gar Alperovitz and Dada Maheshvarananda attempting to answer the question After Capitalism -- what? The command economy that developed in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe was abandoned early in Tito's Yugoslavia and a workers' control model developed in which, within a decentralized market economy, enterprises were run by Managers selected by Management Boards elected by Workers Councils.It has been termed anarcho-syndicalism and it worked well. In America one could buy furniture and shoes for example made in Yugoslavia; Yugoslav companies carried out construction of numerous major infrastructural and industrial projects in Africa, Europe and Asia while the rest of Eastern Europe was submerge in Soviet Central Planning and control.The sad history of that nation did not just happen but was engineered by Washington with the assistance of Germany by reactivating ancient conflicts and why again?The Soviet Empire was coming apart and decentralized socialism, based on the Yugoslav model, would have been a very attractive choice in Eastern Europe over turning the economy over to vulture capitalism, with guidance of Chicago School advisors, as happened.The International Labor Organization has a rich library on that experience of workers management before the economy was destroyed by war and partition if anyone is interested.In the sixties workers would sometimes leave, go primarily to W. Germany and return with a used Mercedes to lord it over the local bureaucrats and government officials in bent pipe and canvas Fiats made by joint ventures in Yugoslavia with Italy. The boarders were quite open coming and going; not the common take on Communist systems.Need a Demon, try American policy makers obsessed with Anti-Communist Anti-Socialist Ideology; it was not enough to control the Americas the enemy was global then as now, just a different nomenclature. The authors point to the lack of involvement of President Bush I as testament to the USA lack of interest in Yugoslavia; wrong again.If you have read The Commanders by Bob Woodward you will find General Colin Powell, Chairman of the Joint Chief's of Staff (1889-1993), commenting that the launching of the first Iraq invasion was never taken up as a topic in the White House, just some loose comments by the President to the press and he had to draw the conclusion "we are going to war." The Bushes are good at that.

Excellent book on this topic. Better than the books from the extremes of both political sides that give revisionist history that excuse the perpetrators and justify their awful actions. Good use of historical sources, witnesses, the public record and context.

The book is good but the quality is awful, starting with the cover: it looks like the printer ran out of ink, the photos are almost all black you can barely see them, the font is extremely small, and the paper quality is very poor. I usually don't care much about that as long as the book is good but in this case it really bothered me. A bummer.

This book is quite interesting and paints a very detailed picture of the complex events of the Yugoslav war. The authors take you directly to the beginnings of the conflict, so if you're looking for more information about how Yugoslavia came to be, you need to get your background information somewhere else. The book is very detailed and at times descriptive but still manages to provide an interesting narrative. However it is quite wast and after 300 pages it is somehow difficult to keep the curiosity up. Nevertheless, a recommendable read for anyone who wants to find out more about the complexity of this conflict.

The book in itself is masterly, gives great insight into recent South East European history and politics.Unfortunately, the copy I bought off Amazon India's app had terrible paper quality. Definitely not worth the price they're selling it for (the tag on the back lists the book as being Rs. 500 lesser than Amazon's listing).

Read about half of this book before, when I borrowed it from the library. Wanted to finish it so bough it from Amazon. Foolishly went for the more recent edition. Just received this 'revised edition'. The text is microscopic. Don't know if I will be able to read this at all.