CroatiaFocus.com

THE CASE FOR CROATIA

LIBERATOR issue 262

November 1999

Brian Gallagher calls for the reintegration of Croatia into the mainstream of Europe.

The war in Croatia between 1991-1995, where Serbia attempted to annex one third of the country as part of the "Greater Serbia" project appears to have been forgotten. Instead, the country is constantly vilified; its suffering forgotten. It is unfairly denied access to Euro-Atlantic structures, in which propaganda against the country has played its part. A reminder is needed of exactly what the country went through at the hands of the Serbs. Myths about Croatia need to be debunked and Croatia's case for access to Euro-Atlantic structures needs to be stated.

In 1991, rather than being part of a communist "Greater Serbia" Croatia declared its independence. The minority Serbs, (11.6% of the population according to the 1991 census) armed well in advance, with the assistance of the invading Yugoslav Federal Army had already started to carve out one third of Croatia, calling it "Krajina"; all for the purpose of creating "Greater Serbia". This is where ethnic cleansing began. Hundreds of thousands of Croats were forced out of their homes. Thousands were slaughtered, towns and villages destroyed. When Vukovar fell, Serbian troops massacred hundreds of hospital patients and dumped them into mass graves.

It is occasionally claimed that all this was to protect the Serbs against 'fascist' Croats. This is nonsense. In 1989, Slobodan Milosovic gave a speech in Kosovo that was effectively a call to arms to all Serbs. State controlled TV openly discussed establishing "Greater Serbia". In few of the occupied areas did the Serbs constitute any kind of majority - the majority of Croatian Serbs didn't even live in the occupied territories, they were spread out across the country. The Serbs were a minority in Eastern Slavonia, for example. The Serbs wanted far more than one third of Croatia. Dubrovnik was to be the Serbs main port according to a Bosnian Serb mayor. "Greater Serbia" was the clear ambition - a land grab.

Serbia, having control of the state news agency produced highly effective propaganda. Myths were created which were willingly believed and repeated in the West. For example, it's claimed that during the World War 2 Croatia backed the Axis whilst Serbia supported the allies, holding down vast amounts of Germans. There was a puppet regime in Croatia (as in France) called the Ustashe but it did not command mass support. Indeed, many thousands of Croats fought with the communist partisans, often forming the majority of brigades. When the Nazis rolled into Serbia the Serbs fell with barely a fight. Serb resistance - by the Chetniks - was poor, due to fear of savage Nazi reprisal but also because they were more interested in fighting communists. The Chetniks often collaborated with the Axis powers to this end. Never mentioned is the massacre of thousands of Croatian troops (handed over by the British to Yugoslavia) by communist death squads at the end of the war.

Serbia has also claimed that Croatia's red chequerboard symbol is a fascist symbol. It is in fact an ancient Croat symbol used for hundreds of years. However, rather more pertinent is the fact that the red chequerboard was central in the communist coat of arms for Croatia between 1945 and 1991. The Serbs were perfectly happy with it then. Yet, suddenly in 1991 it was a fascist symbol as hateful to Serbs as the Swastika is to Jews. Such propaganda was swallowed by credulous journalists and repeated by Western politicians to stay out of the conflict; a disastrous decision.

After the cease-fire at the end of 1991 the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) moved into the occupied territories (UN description). The idea was to protect the remaining Croats. It did nothing. Croats were ethnically cleansed in full view of UNPROFOR. Russian UNPROFOR troops even let the Serbs move in arms and troops. UN resolution 49/43 of 1994 called for the re-integration of the occupied territories into Croatia, for Yugoslavia to halt the integration of those territories into its own and for the "Krajina" Serbs to halt ethnic cleansing and obey UN resolutions. UNPROFOR did nothing to enforce this.

In 1995, the situation in Bosnia was deteriorating; the Bihac enclave that bordered occupied Croatia was under heavy assault by Bosnian Serbs and the "Krajina" Serbs who had invaded Bosnia. Had Bihac fallen, the inhabitants would have faced a Srebrenica style fate, and "Greater Serbia" established.

The Croats launched an offensive which re-took Croatian territory and saved Bihac. It was over in a few days. It is true that Serbs left the area. But it was in advance of the offensive and - significantly - under the orders of their own leadership. Some nasty incidents did happen. It is hardly surprising that such incidents (which cannot be condoned) occurred. If Britain had been subject to the same treatment Croatia had suffered, it's certain that some people would act the same. However, no Kosovo style ethnic cleansing took place during the offensive; the majority of Serbs left without incident (although there have been incidents since). Another factor in their flight was the atrocities many had committed; they left behind over 100 mass graves containing murdered Croatians. These graves are still being discovered.

The offensive was instrumental in stopping the "Greater Serbia" project - it led to the Serbs being rolled back in Bosnia, with the help of NATO air strikes. It was also the first time that Serbia had been defeated, destroying the myth of their military prowess - used as an excuse by the West to stay out of the conflict.

Without Croatia, there would be no Bosnia. Yes, there was a Bosnian-Croatian war, but it ended and the (uneasy) Muslim-Croat federation set up. During the war Croatia provided a haven for up to half a million Muslim refugees from Bosnia, a fact rarely mentioned. Croatia has also turned over Bosnian Croats accused of war crimes to The Hague.

The Kosovo war has resulted in a new round of Croatia bashing from the left, Serb sympathisers etc. The constant refrain is that NATO is hypocritical because Croatia "ethnically cleansed" Serbs (usually citing inflated numbers) from "Krajina" during its offensive in 1995. These critics never mention the occupation of one third of Croatia, the massacres and ethnic cleansing of Croats, the Serbs having fled ahead of the offensive under the orders of their leadership, the siege of Bihac etc. To do so of course would destroy their argument, which is why such inconvenient facts are left out - creating a complete distortion.

Croatia has difficulty in entering Euro-Atlantic structures, largely due to its poor image. As shown above, this image is often based on distortion and propaganda. There are indeed problems with Croatian democracy, which needs to develop somewhat. Human rights violations need to be properly investigated by the Croatian authorities. However, by leaving Croatia out in the cold, the West has little influence. Furthermore, as Western media is freely available in Croatia, Croatians can fully see the distortions and outright lies about them that so frequently appear, which hardly strengthens the West's credibility. Indeed, they are even given cause to fear; The Washington Post has run a couple of commentaries recently proposing the re-integration of the former republics of Yugoslavia into a new version to make the Serbs feel 'secure'. Such ideas are equivalent to suggest forcing back the Baltic states into a new Soviet Union to make Russians feel 'secure'.

The way forward is to encourage Croatian democratic and economic development with membership of Euro-Atlantic clubs, with the possibility of eventual NATO/EU membership. This, along with generous reconstruction aid is the way to go. It remains to be seen how effective the recent 'stability pact' will be in providing for this.

Croatia should be allowed to join the World Trade Organisation (WTO). This will give Croatia's industries better access to world markets, helping to develop its economy. Croatia should also be invited to join NATO's Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme. Croatia hosts large amounts of NATO personnel, in particular British troops, which uses the country as a staging post to Bosnia. Croatia also supported the recent NATO action in Kosovo. It is unfair to keep Croatia out of PfP when Russia, which has no NATO bases on its territory, is suspicious of NATO and did not support the Kosovo campaign is a member.

Membership of the WTO and PfP would signal the West's good intentions towards Croatia, which would assist in further democratic and economic development in the country. The current policy could produce the reverse.

For centuries, the Croatian nation has been dominated by one power after the other. In 1991 it at last became independent again, only to face possible annihilation at the hands of Serbia. Croatia arguably did more than any other nation to save Europe from the spectre of a "Greater Serbia" state, for which it has received precious little thanks. Croatia needs to be fully drawn into the democratic, economic and security structures of Europe, to the benefit of itself and Europe.