Account of the conflict in Croatia
Thesis: The World War II Croatian state’s extermination policy against Serbs is examined in terms of the history and structural logic of mutually exclusive 19th century Serbian and Croatian nation-state ideologies. The post0Titoist revival of these ideologies was involved with symbolic revivals of both the wartime Croatian state and the memory of genocide, but with contrary meanings for Serbs and Croats.
Question: What does she mean by “the history and structural logic of mutually exclusive 19th century Serbian and Croatian nation-state ideologies?”
Disjunctive Moment: when relations of power are transformed through reformulations of ideology that combine theory with myth. P. 382
Events (Pigeon Cave) occurred in Krajina, Dalmation mountains. Orthodox Christian Serbs and Roman Catholic Croats
WWII massacre by Croats of Serb villagers in Pigeon Cave
January 1992 – European Community recognized the indepdence of Croatia and Slovenia
1/3 of Croatia’s territory still controlled by pro-Serbian forces, incl. Yugoslav Army. à UN Peacekeeping forces
Between 1989 collapse of Soviet Union and 1992 – hopes for democracy replaced by ethnically-based civil war
Who are Serbs and Croats?
Serbo-Croatian speakers - +70% of population
"Both Serbian and Croatian leaders consciously revived the same nationalist ideologies that had been implicated in the wartime conflagration. Rather than establishing universalistic, egalitarian criteria for citizenship, these formulations vest statehood in a single ethnic 'nation,' from which nonmembers are excluded by definition. Insofar as Serbian and Croatian populations occupy overlapping territories, the location of boundaries is crucial in determining whether one belongs to the dominant ‘constituent’ nation, or to a marginalized ‘minority.’” P. 369
“symbolic presentations expressed nationalist ideologies to recall memories as collective representations, with opposite meanings for those identifying themselves as either Croats and Serbs.” 369
WWII – Over 1 million dead in Yugoslavia. Included genocide against Serbs.
How states handle memory:
Tito: Banished it.
· All become “victims” of fascism.
· Nationalism becomes enemy
· Suppressed institutions of civil society
Serbian nationalism revived as intellectual movement. Moved into political sphere with Slobodan Milosevic – took over CP of Serbia in 1987. Kosovo first cause.
Florescence of art, literature, and scholarship on nationalist themes – Serbian history of statehood rooted in medieval kingdom overthrown by Ottomans. P. 371
Serbs most widely dispersed ethnic group within Yugoslavia – Therefore most threatened by dissolution, sought stronger central control as other states sought greater autonomy.
Ideologies defining nationhood arose from the 18th-century Germanic philosophical premises of J.G. Herder, in which a “people” or a “nation” shares a primordial unity, defined by language and culture. South Slavic intellectuals translated the German Volk as narod, to mean both people and nation. It was the narod, the, that 19th century liberation movements from foreign rule perceived as entitled to have its own state, tantamount to a natural right. By linguistic criteria, speakers of various South Slavic dialects could be encompassed within the frame of a single literary language… Under the Herderian concept of nationhood, the ethnic mosaics that spread over much of the territory posed no obstacle to the formation of an eventual national state, embracing speakers of all Serbian andCroatian dialects regardless of their religious backgrounds or political history. P. 372
Serbian national state came into existence as an independent entitity during early 19th century – drawing on a "memory" of a Medieval kingdom (This site provides the dynastic narrative: http://www.kessler-web.co.uk/History/KingListsEurope/EasternSerbia.htm.) Serbs sought Serbian identity as hegemonic. At odds with views of Croatian intellectuals.
Late 19th-century – Ante Starcevic – countered “Greater Serbia” with “Greater Croatia” (also opposed to the “Yugoslav” alternative) BUT – weak historical basis for a singular Croatian identity. – Structural rather than empirical identity – Contrast with “Serb” (incorporated Muslims as “Croats”) -- “non-Serb = anti-Serb” p. 373
Serbs could convert to Catholicism and become Croat. 374
Issue of language (following Herder): Starcevic revived archaic usages and invented new words to artificially separate a Croatian literary language from the common Serbo-Croatian linguistic stock. P. 374
Post-WWI – Yugoslav state under Serbian dictatorship by King Alewksandarin Belgrade.
1941 – Nazi Conquest. Put Ustasha in charge of the “Independent State of Croatia” (Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, part of Serbia). “Final solution” to Serbian problem – purification, cleansing through
· Forced conversion to Roman Catholicism
· Expulsion to Serbia
· Physical annihilation
Answered by Serb Chetnik which sought the eradication of Croats
Tito: retained “narod” (different "nations"), with own land base
Revisionist history, beginning in 1960s – Croatians downplaying of the numbers killed in massacres. Tito repressed this move, but in 1980s Croatian historians revived debate.
Franjo Tudjman leader of this tendency of historical analysis
1990 – Formation of political parties. Tudjman’s HDZ
“the World War II Independent State of Croatia was not merely a ‘quisling’ formation, but an ‘expression of the historical aspiration of the Croatian people (nation) ofr its own independent state.” He sought to re-establish this state, resurrect the Ustasha and Starcevic territorial claims. P. 377
Mass rallies during campaign. Old symbols and songs revived.
Two memories reached into: Croat – nationalist victor; Serb – genocide
Reciprocal victimologies – mass graves, plus post-WWII privileging of Serbs, discrimination against Croats.
