The News-Pilot (San Pedro, California)
Opinion
Friday, March 15th, 1991
Editorial on Yugoslav issue helps perpetuate problem
Editor:
Your February 26th editorial “Split in Yugoslavia” stating the ‘nationalist dominated
assembly voted to disregard federal laws that threaten the republics interests and
sovereignty’ only helps perpetuate Serbia’s divisive rhetoric regarding Croatia. To
the contrary, under the Yugoslav constitution a republic can secede as a matter of
right.
Serbian policy is to intimidate the Croatia’s exercise of that right through threats of
military force and the misuse of the judicial system.
On February 21st, I witnessed the debates in the Croatian Parliament that preceded
their voting unanimously, a resolution to secede. The delegates were democratically
elected and are from a broad political spectrum.
The federal government (read Serbia) response to Slovenia’s secession was given
tacit good riddance, while the Croatia resolution was greeted with consternation and
labeled nationalistic.
Jerry N. Blaskovich, M.D.
San Pedro
=======================================================
The Washington Post
Washington, D.C.
To the Editors:
Nora Beloff’s (November 22, 1991) article, while seeking to justify the Communist
Yugoslav army’s carnage in Croatia, was loaded with a minefield of inaccuracies.
While she holds the Ustashe responsible for the Serb deaths that occurred during
World War II, Beloff ignores the facts that the majority of the deaths came from the
hands of Germans; Partisans; Luftwaffe and Allied bombings; the Soviets; diseases
such as typhoid and typhus that was endemic at the time; and Serbs liquidating
other Serbs for political expediency.
The “backbone of the partisan movement” was not Serbs as Beloff alleges—but
Dalmatian Croats and Slovenes. The Serbs en masse deserted the Chetniks, who
had been collaborating with the fascists’ forces, and joined the Partisans in 1944,
which was relatively late in the war.
Beloff’s calling Tudjman’s blockade of federal units as justification for the Yugoslav
Army’s invasion is contrary to reality. The Army’s invasion preceded the blockade by
several months.
Prior to the Croatians’ vote for independence and before the communist Yugoslav
force unleashed its dogs of war, Milosevic’s propaganda apparatus started a
disinformation campaign that the Croats were building concentration camps for
300,000 ethnic Serbs: fired and driven thousands of Serbs from their homes:
uncovered a Vatican plot against Serb Orthodoxy; and Austria and Germany were
conspiring with Croatia to build a fourth Reich. These mythologies continue to whip
up a pathological hysterical hatred against the Croats.
Most recently, a headline Reuters news story captured the world’s imagination which
said its reporter saw 41 Serbian children that had been slaughtered by the Croats.
The reporter also related the gory details on Serbian television. Later the reporter
admitted that the story was a hoax, but his retraction never appeared in Serbia.
Beloff’s thesis,that a puppet government in power in German occupied Croatia 50
years ago, dictates the action of the communist Yugoslav government in 1991
against a democratically elected Croatian government was ludicrous.
Sincerely,
======================================================
April 27, 1992
The News Pilot
362 West Seventh Street
San Pedro, Calif. 90731
To the Editor:
The April 23, 1992 editorial, “Beyond the Pale” is commendable as being the first
objective article the News Pilot has published about Yugoslavia since Croatia and
Slovenia voted to secede. However, several of your statements were ludicrous. Your
“ethnic rivalries” statement is in keeping with the cliché, which, for some reason, has
permeated from the American media, only helps perpetuate a mythology. The facts
are, prior to World War Two there never has been an armed conflict between the
Serbs and Croats. *
Your statements that the Serbs are using the same methods and tactics that Hitler
used to unite the Germans in the 1930’s were preposterous. Hitler, while guilty of
other evils, never used tanks, planes or his navy against his own people nor
destroyed their churches and hospitals, which has been the Serb policy in Croatia.
Sincerely,
“From the historical perspective, this area experienced little ethnic violence prior to
the twentieth century and never witnessed a vicious religious war as seen in
Western Europe.” (V.P. Gagnon, “Yugoslavia; Prospects for Stability.” Foreign
Affairs, Summer 1991 page 31.)
=====================================================
November 21, 1992
The Independent
To: The Editor
For publication
Fax 071-962-0017
Dear Editor:
To be guided through the minefield of British visa nuances described in “ Caught in
Britain’s Visa Trap” (11-19-92) was truly a learning experience. The policies are from
the same government that reacted with consternation and teeth gnashing in August
1992, after atrocities in the Serbian concentration camps were made public.
However, it is doubtful that one inmate has found refuge in the U.K.. It is the same
government that made “double speak” synonymous with its policies in Croatia and
Bosnia.
On November 6. 1992 Kenneth Clarke, Home Secretary, slammed the door on
Bosnian refugees by imposing visa restrictions. This came shortly after Charles
Wardle, from the same office, reassured the UN High Commissioner for Refugees
that England would not raise visa barriers.
After Croatia closed its borders to Bosnian refugees recently, England, France, and
the United States, to excuse its own inactions, harshly criticized Croatia’s decision.
Croatia has already given asylum to 640,000 Bosnian refugees that fled from the
horrific Serbian human rights violations. Coupled with the 271,798 displaced
persons from the third of Croatia now occupied by Serb forces. Croatia does not
have the space nor the economic capability to absorb more.
The hypocrisy of countries most critical of Croatia’s new policy can be told in
numbers. England has taken 2,000; France 1,108; and the United States
magnanimously “offered” to take 1,000. In contrast, Germany has accepted 220,000;
Switzerland 70,520; Hungary 50,000, and Sweden 47,000. Sabaka Ogata of
UNHCR and Austria, which has already taken 57,000, justifiably berated the U.K. for
shirking humanitarian responsibility after the U.K. imposed, impossible to meet, visa
requirements on 175 refugees stuck at the Austrian border.
All figures cited were from the UNHCR report of September 1, 1992. Obviously they
are now higher as to the date of this letter.
Sincerely,
==================================================
The Times: For publication
Fax number 071 782-5046
November 21, 1992
Dear Sir:
Perhaps the participants described in “Serbs Celebrate Among The Ruins”
(November 21, 1992) would join in the somber anniversary of the slaughter at the
Croatian village of Vocin where 43 Croatian villagers were slaughtered in ways that
defy imagination. The Serbs could couple the event to celebrate the deaths of 175
Croatians who were evacuated from Vukovar Hospital by soldiers of the Yugoslav
army after Vukovar was captured. Since the two incidents occurred in same time and
place the Serbs could consider a joint celebration.
Confirming eyewitness accounts, Dr. Clyde Snow, a United Nations forensic medical
specialist, announced on October 28, 1992, that all evidence indicated a mass grave
found near Vukovar contained the bodies of the Croatians taken from the hospital. It
is anticipated that further excavations will find at least 3,000 more unaccounted for
Croatians from Vukovar.
All Serbian actions against civilians were planned policy and do not occur
spontaneously as the media wishes us to believe. The mayhem at Vocin was no
better or worse then what the Serbs have done elsewhere. But what made this
massacre unique was a series of coincidences that occurred in its aftermath.
In their haste to retreat, the Serbs left behind a large number of witnesses. Some of
the perpetrators of the heinous crimes were captured. Under interrogation, not only
did they talk about their roles in the slaughter, they admitted as acting under direct
orders and were members of Voljislav Seselj’s notorious “ White Eagles”
organization. The United States Congressmen, Frank Mc Closkey, who was present
at the interrogation and saw the bodies in situ, gave objective credence to the
slaughter.
The dead were not Croatian soldiers as the Serbs allege. Rather they were elderly,
male and female, local villagers who were killed in a variety of ways; torture, chain
sawed while still alive, axed, burned, and shot-usually numerous times-from close
range. Many of the bodies were found chained. After the bodies were identified and
photographed, extensive forensic studies were carried out. The charred bodies, as
evidenced by carbon monoxide into tissues, were burned while alive.
Of the countless crimes the Serbs committed in Croatia and Bosnia, the Vocin
massacre is the most extensively documented incident of the conflict.
Sincerely,
=====================================================
December 28, 1992
The Daily Telegraph
To the Editor-for publication
Dear Editor:
While the Daily Telegraph is quick to write disparagingly about Croatian alleged
misdeeds, it ignores stories of proven Serbian duplicity. The story, “Bosnia Aid
Supplies Plundered By Gangs” (November 22, 1992), failed to cite the source of the
allegations. Blind allegations have been the root of the Serb propaganda campaign
since the war started. Not citing who made the slur-Croatians consider Moslems
“Racially inferior”-is surprising journalistic practice and appears to be another in a
string of attempts to cast Croatia’s negatively. After having made the damaging
allegations, at the bottom of the article (and where few readers seldom get to) you
then stated no evidence was found about maltreatment of the refugees in the village
where the alleged improprieties occurred. In essence, your story was based in the
category of a non-event.
However, when there is a story about real Serbian involvement your newspaper
remains silent. Time Magazine recently stated, what has been common knowledge
for some time, that half of the one hundred million dollars of the aid shipments to
Sarajevo had been seized by Serbian troops with U.N. complicity. That this has
been happening for some time, without a peep from your newspaper, is indeed poor
journalism.
Sincerely,
====================================================
May 17, 1993
The Daily Telegraph
1 Canada Square
London E14 5DT
Fax number 071-538-6455
To the Editor- For publication
Reference: “ A Sorry Spectacle “ (May 13,1993)
I take exception with some statements in the Daily Telegraph’s A Sorry Spectacle.
Contrary to what was stated, the “devious and gutless Europeans” did have the
means to minimize the carnage in Bosnia. Simply enforcing the sanctions, which for
all intense purposes was a figment of someone’s imagination, would have helped
tremendously.
Only after Bill Clinton stepped in did the sanctions become meaningful. The Danube
River traffic has slowed to a trickle. Previously a blind eye had been turned toward
nations, such as Russia and Greece, who were supplying oil to Serbia with impunity.
Freezing Serbian bank accounts has done more the last two weeks than the
previous year of sanctions. Enforcing the sanctions and Clinton’s saber rattling has
pressured Slobodan Milosevic to at least pay lip service to a “peace endeavor”.
Senator Joseph Bidden calling the Europeans hypocrites was justified. The
Europeans, sanctimoniously refused to arm the Moslems but not defending them,
banned Serbian flights over Bosnia but not enforcing the ban, and denying asylum to
the refugees but failing to establish safe havens for them, was the height of
hypocrisy. The arms embargo only affected the Croats and Muslims. European
inaction let the carnage continue, while the rhetoric remains rhetoric. The ultimate
goal appears to be a concerted effort that the Moslems will be no longer a presence
in Europe.
Holding the Germans responsible is yet another example of French and British
hypocrisy. Before Germany recognized Croatia, British and French diplomats
hysterically warned that recognition would escalate the war. In reality, it brought
about the first ceasefire, after countless others were broken. Given Milosevic’s
history, Cyrus Vance and Lord Owen calling him a man of integrity and honor is the
epitome of hypocrisy.
France and England, the countries most critical of Croatia for not taking more
refugees, has taken 1,000 and 2,000 respectively. Whereas Croatia has 272,000
displaced persons from Serb occupied Croatia and 640,000 Bosnian refugees:
Germany 220,000, Switzerland 70,000, Austria 58,000, Hungry 50,000, and Sweden
47,000 refugees.
Sincerely,
===================================================
Sent August 7, 1993
The Economist
Fax number:071-839-2968
For publication
Attention: Helen Mann
Dear Mrs Mann:
Contrary to what was stated in “ A Quarter of a Blood Soaked Loaf (July 31, 1993), it
is the Croatian forces rather than the Bosnians who should avoid the “ punishment.”
Mr. Izetbegeovic’s Muslim forces, defeated in every military encounter with the
Serbs, turned to easy pickings—Croatian civilians. The Muslims have decisively
routed the Croatian Bosnians. One of the reasons Mr. Izebegovic has not signed the
peace agreement is that the Moslem forces have had an easy time capturing 3,647
square kilometers of territory that was held by the Bosnian Croats and want more.
The media continues focusing on Sarajevo, Zepa, Srebrenica and Gorazde but
disingenuously does not mention the Croatian towns of Konjica, Jablanica, Travnik,
Bogojno and Gornji Vukuk where the Muslim forces perpetrated the same sort of
atrocities that the Serbs committed on the Muslims.
Croatians have been accused of unsubstantiated ethnic cleansing in Mostar. Before
the war, the Croats were the majority while the Muslims comprised 42 percent of the
population. Because of the refugees and the fleeing Bosnian armed troops the
population is now 60 percent Muslim. They hold 50 percent of the Mostar area which
was their taken by force. In real numbers, from Croatian territories of Bosnia,
260,000 Croats have been expelled. The Muslim army with UNPROFOR protection
is doing most of the cleansing.
Sincerely,
But Published as
Balkan misery
THE ECONOMIST August 28th 1993
Sir—The media have focused all their attention on the plight of the Muslims (July
31st), but since the war began in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the biggest percentage
of casualties have been the Croats. The Croatians have lost 1.5% of their population
while 44 percent have become refugees or displaced persons. Most of Croatian
casualties came at April 16th this year, when the Muslims launched their attack on
the Bosnian Croats. So far, more than 150 Croatian towns and villages have been
ethically cleansed.
Jerry Blaskovich
==============================================
August 8, 1993
The Daily Telegraph
One Canada Square
London 145DT
Trafford Park Manchester M171SL
For publication
To the Editor:
The article “ Importance of being August “ (Aug. 4, 1993) made it sound like the
assassination of Archduke Ferdinand was a spontaneous event and the work of a
lone fanatic. The assassin, Gavrillo Princip, was one of 27 terrorists armed with
bombs and guns stationed at different points along the Archduke’s processional
route.
They were conspirators of the Serbian ultra nationalistic organization, the “Black
Hand’, whose goal was a Greater Serbia. Black Hand conspirators murdered the
King of Serbia, Alexander Obrenovic and his wife Draga in 1903. An exiled
Karadjordjevic, linked to the Black Hand, returned to Serbia and was crowned king.
In 1928 a Black Hand member shot and mortally wounded three members of the
Croatian delegation in the national parliament in Belgrade. King Alexander
Karadjordjevic, instead of punishing the perpetrator of this heinous crime, imposed
draconian measures against all non-Serbs, declared a dictatorship, and renamed the
kingdom-Yugoslavia. To carry out his mandate the king chose Prime Minister
Zivkovic.
Zivkovic was the individual who opened the gate to admit the assassins of King
Obrenovic and wife in 1903.
Sincerely,
=================================================
Insight Magazine
[Washingon, D.C.] October 18, 1993
Wrong to Spread the Blame for War Crimes in Bosnia?

Certain comments in “Jury Is Out on Bosnia War Crimes Tribunal”[Aug. 30] were not
consistent with Insight’s usual high journalistic standards. The casual reader couldn’t
notice that the article was a subtle attempt to dilute the Serbs’ responsibility for their
actions. Although the writer conceded there is no substantiation that Croats and
Muslims have committed war crimes, she implicated all parties equally. Most
important, she did not differentiate between Serb and non-Serb crimes. If Croats or
Muslims did commit atrocities, they were sporadic and spontaneous. Such incidents
which have occurred were in response to the indescribable horrors perpetrated by
the Serbs in their ethnic cleansing programs. In contrast, the Serbian actions were
an orchestrated policy of the war, rather than a by-product. The Croats have been
accused of many things, but they never participated with the Serbs in the siege of
any city, let alone Saraje vo, as the article alleges. By making all parties appear
guilty, extensively quoting Serbian victims and disingenuously avoiding mention that
Serbs have committed the same crimes in Croatia as they have in Bosnia, your
article reads like a press release from the Yugoslav news agency Tanjug.
Jerry Blaskovich
San Pedro, Calif.
=====================================================
November 5, 1993
The Times
For publication
Editor:
It is the media’s prerogative to publish what it wishes, but to deliberately misinform is
not, by any parameter, good journalism. For some reason, The Times’ reporting of
Bosnia has only focused on the Moslems, but disingenuously avoids mentioning the
Croats plight. Your article, “ Red Cross Reports New Bosnia Carnage “ (November
2, 1993) is part of that pattern.
To set the record straight, it was Croatian villagers that fled, not Moslems as you
stated. Since the war began in Bosnia, the biggest percentage of casualties has
been Croatians. They lost 1.5% of their population, while 44 percent became
refugees or displaced persons. What is noteworthy, most of the casualties came
after April 6th of this year, when the Moslems launched their attack on Bosnian
Croats.
Mr. Izetbegovic’s forces, defeated in every military encounter with the Serbs, turned
to be easier pickings-the Croatians. One of the reasons Mr. Izetbegovic has not
signed a peace agreement is that the Moslems had an easy time capturing Croatian
territory and want more.
Thus far—Konjica, Jablanica, Travnik, Bogojno, Gornji Vakuf-are part of a litany of
156 towns and villages where Moslem forces have been perpetuating the same sort
of atrocities the Serbs committed upon the Moslems.
Sincerely,
===================================================
News-Pilot (Letters to the Editor)
Published Monday November 1, 1993
San -Pedro doctors offer humanitarian aid

I wish to compliment the News-Pilot for its October 22nd article, “ Croatian soldier
gets new hip. “
Aside from the great humanitarian gesture extended by San Pedro Peninsula
Hospital, it was also ecumenicalism at its finest. The surgery on a Croatian patient,
brilliantly performed by Dr. Maleek Azali, a Muslim, in a Roman Catholic hospital
exemplifies what America is all about.
The humanitarian and ecumenical gesture was not an isolated incident by San
Pedro physicians. Dr. Milford Wyman, who is Jewish, participated in “Save the
Children of Croatia” program.
Not to be confused with “Mothers for Croatia” organization, Save the Children of
Croatia extends help to any child who has lost one or both parents in the war,
regardless of political party affiliation, ethnicity, or religion.
It is noteworthy that Dr. Wyman’s financial support was the only income his “child “
received during this past year.
Jerry Blaskovich, M. D.
San Pedro
=======================================================
February 14, 1994
The Los Angeles Times
Times Mirror Square
Los Angeles, Calif. 90053
Letters to the Editor:
“The Bosnia Trap” (February 13, 1994) by Walter Russell Mead, like too many other
authors, does not dare call Serbian “ethnic cleansing” what it is—genocide. Instead,
Mead neatly the downgraded the Bosnian Moslems’ plight as an acceptable “forcible
relocation.” The “peace” envisioned by Mead would give the Bosnians Muslims an
advantage. How lucky can they get?
Since the arguments used to advance Mead’s thesis were based on mythology, he
is either an innocent victim of historical revisionism or disingenuously elected to
perpetuate the mistaken notion of the ferocity and invincibility of the Serbian fighters.
There was no national resistance when the Germans invaded Yugoslavia. (1) It took
only a few days for the Germans to decimate the entire Yugoslav army. After most of
all the officers fled to England with their king, a nondescript officer took it upon
himself to form a small band, called the Chetniks, to fight the Germans. But most of
their energy was spent slaughtering Muslims and Croats.
According to the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, Chetnik resistance against the
German stopped in early 1940.(2) But Serbian historical revisionism created an the
image that somehow the Chetniks were allied with United states. The Partisans,
comprised mostly of Croatians, Croatian Serbs, and Slovenes, became a viable
force only after they received massive allied military aid, near the end the war (3)
Recently, the British War Ministry, while researching German war documents,
uncovered evidence that refuted the number of divisions tied down in Yugoslavia to
only half of what has been alleged and the importance of the Germans placed on the
Balkans.
Today’s Serbian aggressors did not conquer one-third of Croatia and two-thirds of
Bosnia though combat; rather they utilized all weapons of modern warfare to roll
over mostly unarmed civilians. If there were defenders, the Serbs wore them down
by siege tactics. They have a consistent record of defeat when facing well armed
adversaries in Croatia. What happened in Vukovar is a prime example. Although
they eventually conquered the city the Serb casualties and material loses were
enormous.
Approximate 1,500 ill equipped, untrained, ragtag Croatian defenders were able to
hold at bay, for 89 days, 25,000 Yugoslavs equipped with tanks, artillery and aircraft.
Only after the Croatians ran of ammunition, Vukovar fell.
The ”fuzzy minded” idealists that Mead disparages about believe that the war crimes
are an affront to values shared by mankind and tenets upon which Western
civilization is based. Instead of a just peace, Mead wants just any peace.
Airstrikes are not expected to change the military balance. Ninety percent of the
casualties in all of the former Yugoslavia have resulted from high visibility artillery
and tank guns. The US Air Force has electronic capability of targeting and
neutralizing these threats within seconds. Serbian gunners maybe savage but they
do not have a death wish. A few well direct hits would markedly reduce the death
rate and slowdown destruction.
The Moslem children of Bosnia—if there will be any—will not forget the 250,000
dead and how the West watched while the fathers wounded or killed—their mothers
and sisters raped.
If history teaches anything, a settlement based on deeply felt injustices is by no
means a settlement. Rather it will be the source of even bigger and wider conflicts.
The victims suffer, but never from amnesia
Sincerely,
Jerry Blaskovich, MD, MA
Mark Wheeler describes how the Yugoslav (read Serb) army fought the Germans:
“They resisted (occasionally), dispersed or mutined (more frequently), and
surrended (eventually on an ad hoc basis). “ Mark C.Wheeler, Britian and the War
for Yugoslavia 1940-1943 (Boulder: East Europe Monographs, 1980) p 14
Philip J. Cohen, “Holocaust-History Misappropriated” Midstream. November 1992
MacLean and Deakin writing in the fall of 1944 admitted that their estimate of
Partisan strengh was grossly exaggerated. “At the beginning of 1944, partisan
forces in Serbia were limited to a few scattered, ill equipped detachments of a few
hundred…” David Martin, The Web of Disinformation: Churchill’ Yugoslav Blunder
(New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1990) p xxvi
====================================================
February 25, 1994
Los Angeles Times
Sarajevo Cease Fire

Charles A. Kupchan (Opinion, Feb. 20) characterized President Clinton’s threat to
use NATO air power in Bosnia as the most significant leadership decision since
World War Two. Either he is not aware or has forgotten that other presidents, in that
time frame, implemented the Berlin airlift, defused the Cuban missile crisis and most
importantly - prevented an atomic holocaust. And there were the matters of wars in
Korea in Vietnam.
Kupchan misinterpreted Clinton’s clearly enunciated justifications for the air strikes -
to end the siege. What the air strike threat accomplished was to lessen the body
count temporarily and redeployed Serbian ordnance to other besieged areas of
Bosnia.
The Serbs continue to control all water and gas supplies and delivery of
humanitarian aid to Sarajevo. The Serbs continue to receive over half of the aid as
tribute for allowing it to enter the city. The citizens of Sarajevo still cannot leave the
city freely.
Jerry Blaskovich
===================================================
L.A. Weekly
Published May 6-12, 1994
Dear Editor:
Aside from performing a public service, Jim Crogan’s article on the mass exodus of
Councilman Rudy Svorinich’s staff was exemplary
(“Rudy-mentary Conditions,” L.A. Weekly, March 25th to 31). The media are our
only source of information about the shenanigans of those in the public trust. It is
surprising that other newspapers did not pick up on Svorinich’s slurs on blacks,
Latino, and Croatians. About the only ethnic groups Svorinich did not insult were the
Jews.
To set the record straight, Svorinich was not a past president of the Dalmatian-
American Club. Rather, it was the Yugoslav-American, which may explain his
characterizing Croatian-American Club members as radical, nationalistic, Nazis in
disguise. Svorinich, who studied the voter demographics, should not have stooped
to insult those who did not vote for him. If these bigoted statements were not true
then it is Svorinich’s duty, more for his constituency then himself, to correct them. If
left unanswered, this may reflect a pattern in Svorinich’s character that voters will
not forgive or forget.
Perhaps I am naive in believing that candidates should be like Caesar’s wife.
Character, conduct and integrity should be prime factors in selecting public officials.
Character is not some mysterious concept linked to politics but is deserving of our
confidence.
Jerry Blaskovich
Rancho Palos Verdes
==================================================
Published  The Zajednicar June 22, 1994
Dear Mr. Verlich- Editor
I second Mia Brozovich’s comments in her letter to the “Z” (3/9/94) except for one
proviso. She mentioned, but did not elaborate about one of the true heroes of
modern-day Croatia. When the definitive history is written about the bloody birth
pangs Croatia has been subjected to, one name will stand out- J. P. “Pat” Mackley.
Mackley has done more than any individual to project Croatia’s image to the western
world. Although not Croatian by blood, he is one by osmosis.
Apart for the deaths, human chaos and destruction “on the ground” the main
casualty of any war is truth. The Serbs forte, manipulating propaganda, an art form
they made into a science, surpassed even the Russia’s. Serbia ruled all political and
economic of the country infrastructure for 70 years. In the international arena, with a
preponderance of Serbs in the diplomatic corps, playing the world’s diplomats like a
fine violin, were able to project to the host countries a strictly Serbian agenda.
Croatia was at a distinct disadvantage in all parameters when the Yugoslav army
(read Serb) attacked Slovenia. Even then, with rare exception, Croatian politicians
still did not believe that the Serbs would turn on Croatia with the force it did. Lacking
realpolitik experience, the Croatian government naively believed the United States’
self-determination rhetoric and expected help, such as from the Sixth Fleet, would
come to their aid.
By design, the years under communism, as practiced by the Serbs, reined Croatian
political and information development. Once independent, Croatia made many
mistakes politically and did not have, even by the most primitive standards, an image
projecting body to combat the sophisticated Serbian apparatus.
With the onset of the conflict in Croatia, the international media—ignorant of the
history and the issues—instead of going to where the action was, descended on
Belgrade like locusts. Most media people, although erudite in articulating, are not,
contrary to what they want us to believe, the brightest individuals. They totally
swallowed Yugoslavia’s agenda as gospel that the actions in Croatia were justified
and the carnage was something the Croats deserved. Yugoslavia resoundingly won
round one in the media war.
To compound the tragedy, Croatia—by doing little to alter the Serb view—
inadvertently helped the Serbs in fostering disinformation. Croatia has been accused
the many things, but if they are guilty of anything, it is their stupidity in their handling
of the international press. Croatia has, and continues to have, little understanding of
the direct relationship between media reports and political actions.
Croatia, understandably, and the émigré groups, who should know better, cannot
comprehend that Western governments move only when they get pressure put upon
them by their citizens. And what stirs the citizens? It’s the perception gleaned from
the media. Croatia’s message has never gotten through to the American public.
Following Tudjman’s election, the émigré communities were struck with boundless
euphoria. Few questioned that it takes more than good will to implement self-
determination. Anyone that even suggested to look at, let alone debate, realpolitik
was treated as a pariah. What made matters worse, the steady stream of Croatian
VIPs visiting expatriate communities gave what the masses wanted to hear—
standard sloganisms—but not the truth. However, when Mackley addressed these
communities about the concept of the Foreign Press Bureau (FPB), he was the first
individual to give an honest appraisal about the situation.
Once funds were available, it took only 45 days for him to open the Bureau in August
1991 to become the only viable press operation in Croatia. He trained the virgin FPB
into becoming the best courtesan in the whorehouse that caters to their clients—the
media. Mackley turned a group of 70 dedicated second and third generation
Croatians from the United States, Canada and Australia, from all walks of life, it into
a cadre that gained respect from the world’s media.
Before the birth of the FPB, most of the news coverage on Croatia originated from
Belgrade or rehashed TANJUG press releases. Without exception, it gave the
Serbs’ viewpoints. HINA was looked upon by the world’s reporters as self-serving
and lacking credibility.
The FPB was able to get Croatia’s side of the story out to the international press,
warts and all. Although this attitude gained respect from the media—as well as
credibility—it made many in the Croatian government uncomfortable, since the FPB
staff’s expressing Western freethinking, offended the existing order. And that is
precisely what made the FPB successful. Although the Croatian government is
democratic, the prevailing thinking and mores are still communistic; many cannot
relate to the new system and are intolerant of any criticism, no matter how well
intentioned. But the international media saw the truth. The tenor of the coverage
turned against Yugoslavia.
It did not take long for Belgrade to correctly interpret why their carefully constructed
propaganda apparatus was in trouble. Despite their spending enormous amounts of
money and wining and dining journalists and hiring PR firms, they, more than the
Croatians, realized the impact the FPB had in the propaganda war. Yugoslavia went
even so far as attempting murder.
They tried to machinegun down a FPB staff member in Graz, Austria. And in the very
heart of Zagreb they fired at Mackley from a moving car. The Yugoslavs then
instituted a policy of specifically targeting any member of the press. In this relatively
short war, more reporters have been killed then in Vietnam and El Salvador over a
ten-year period.
If imitation is the severest form of flattery, then the FPB was a success. Although the
FPB was staffed by handful of volunteers, with negligible journalistic experience,
their resounding success caused Belgrade to emulate the “new kid on the block’.
Despite expanding its own propaganda section to 700 and hiring the most
prestigious PR firm in the world, the Serbs lost the second round and almost the
entire fight of the media war.
Once the initial funding dried up, the undercapitalized FPB, unable to get the
promised funds from expatriate groups, was on the ropes and became a shadow of
its former self. Certain Croatian officials in the United States, besides being grossly
ill equipped in handling diplomacy, knew nothing about media affairs. They sent
messages to Zagreb that were detrimental to the FPB and won the expenditures,
which were earmarked for the FPB. The FPB collapsed because of lack of funds.
The international press perceived the new FPB (without Mackley) as a mouthpiece
of the government and its releases, a rehash of HINA’s. With the FPB’s demise,
Croatia lost round three in the battle for the hearts and minds of the media. The
international media bought Serbia’s theses that the conflict is nothing more than a
unsolvable ethnic battle, which limited debate and clouded the issues, and Croatia
was in a moral equivalency with Serbia. As yet, the Croatians have done absolutely
nothing to explain their case in the United States.
Croatia was fortunate that it had some individuals with foresight to have hired
Mackley. During Mackley’s tenure he accomplished, with a pittance of the millions
Serbia spent, the formidable task of educating extremely skeptical reporters who had
preconceived notions, neutralized bad press, and attacked the Serbs’ credibility. All
his battles have been from a defensive stance. His next battle, going on the offense,
would have been a knockout.
Jerry Blaskovich, M.D., M.A.
(Islamic Art History UCLA)
Associate Clinical Professor- USC School of Medicine
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA
======================================================
Maryknoll Magazine Volume 88, Number 7
July/ August 1994 Issue
Dear Editor:
It is fitting that your first article (Pilgrimage to Sarajevo, “March 1994) concerning the
carnage in Bosnia cited Mustafa Ceric, Imam of the Bosnian Islamic community. I
count myself fortunate to have met with this saintly man a number of times. Once,
during the early stages of the war, he was asked if genocide was too strong a word
to use to describe the Serbia’s’ actions. After a long pause, he defined genocide as
one group destroying another group’s culture, traditions, and institutions - most
importantly, their lives. The term “genocide,” he said, was not harsh enough; rather,
he coined the word “humanocide,” since the Serb army doesn’t differentiate between
anyone who stands in the way of their ethnic cleansing program, be they Muslim,
Croat, or even Serb. Imam Ceric’s term “humanocide” may well become the
buzzword that best describes Serbian actions in Croatia and B osnia.
Jerry Blaskovich, M.D., M.A.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA
================================================
The New Republic-Published October 10, 1994
Brock Party
To the Editors:
Bravo for printing Charles Lane’s expose of Peter Brock’s complicity with the Serbs.
Brock joins General Lou Mackenzie and a caravan of opinion writers, such as
Alexander Cockburn and Misha Glenny, in promoting the Serb agenda. At one time,
Foreign Policy was considered the forum where ideas from the entire political
spectrum were exchanged; now it is an organ for Serbia propagandists.
Dr. Jerry N. Blaskovich
Rancho Palos Verdes, California
=================================================
Le Figaro October 27, 1994
Dear Mister Giesbert,
Minister Alain Juppe’s articulating the Contact Group thesis in “Ex-Yugoslavie: Une
volonte pour la paix “ (October 17, 1994) was loaded with a minefield of fantasy. It
disingenuously affronts those who believe in justice and humanism - traits inherent
in the French soul. Because I am not erudite in French I must use English.
M. Jappe pretentiously stating the EU ultimatum cooled the war is incongruous,
since it was the EU’s inertia that resulted in 250,000 dead Muslims and Croats and
3.5 million refugees or displaced persons. After deviating from a just peace to just
any peace, the Contact Group gave up all pretense of honoring legal and moral
obligations that came with recognizing the sovereignty of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Interestingly, these are the same countries that asked for the tools to stop the Nazi
juggernaut during World War II but deny the same to Bosnia.
The Contact Group has taken the Vance-Owen plan one step further. Placing the
Muslims into widely separated ghettos, the Group openly wants to merge territory
seized by the Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia to be contiguous with Serbia and place
Sarajevo and Mostar under United Nations control. Paradoxically, they eased
sanctions on Yugoslavia, at a time the Serbs escalated their ethnic cleansing
program.
Aside from rewarding Serbia, the Contact Group is pressing the victims to give
Serbia access to the Adriatic - territory which the Serbs have not been able to
conquer. The West, has elected to treat genocide with the same standard it applied
to Stalin’s murdering over 20 million Russians, Poles, Balts and others. With time, it
too will be questioned if it really happened. Hitler and Stalin used identical methods -
mass murder and concentration camps - Stalin manged to kill twice as many. Yet,
Stalin sat at the negotiating table as a man of honor in much the same way those
responsible for the same sort of crimes in Bosnia now sit.
==============================================
The New Republic July 3, 1995
Rogues’ Gallery
To the editors:
Robert Wright’s rogues’ gallery (“Who Lost Bosnia” May 29) had some glaring
omissions. First, more than anyone else, Lawrence Eagleburger and Brent
Scowcroft, as political architects and advisors to George Bush, bear the greatest
responsibility for the bloodshed. They abdicated our role in Europe when world
leadership was firmly in the hands of the United States and sabotaged any
meaningful suggestions about former Yugoslavia. Their financial ties with
Yugoslavia were exposed in TNR.
Also, General Lewis Mackenzie, the highest-ranking U.N. military officer, vehemently
opposed flying in humanitarian aid and Francois Mitterand visit to Sarajevo. He
consistently pontificated that “all sides were morally equivalent” and berated the
Muslims for defending themselves. He never mentioned that SerbNet, a Serbian
lobbying firm, had been paying him.
Jerry Blaskovich
Rancho Palos Verdes, California
=================================================
U.S. News and World Report
2400 “ N “ St., N. W.
Washington, D.C. 20037-1196
Dear Editor:
Despite a factual error and some critical omissions, “ Will Justice Be Done? “
(12/25/95) was the most credible analysis about the atrocities being committed in
former Yugoslavia to appear in the media. Contrary to what was stated, there were
no Muslims in Vukovar when the Serbs committed mayhem in that city. The victims
of the carnage were predominantly Roman Catholic Croatians citizens.
The U.N. and the West share responsibility in perpetuating the slaughter of the non-
Serbs. George Kenny and Marshall Harris, career diplomat officers who
subsequently resigned, said that Lawrence Eagleburger’s mandates at the State
Department contradicted and suppressed intelligence (CIA and INR [State
Department Intelligence Bureau]) reports that placed the blame for the atrocities
squarely on the Serbs. Eagleburger, by sabotaging any meaningful suggestions,
sowing disinformation, and blaming all sides, successfully clouded the issues and
projected images to President Bush about the futility of involvement. The non-Serb
victims suffered because President Bush’s inertia was based on sanitized reports
and false information. Interestingly, more career State Department officers resigned
over our Bosnia policy then had during America’s soul searching war in Vietnam.
U.N. officials admitting knowing the existence and conditions of the Serbian
concentration camps several months before the story broke in the media (RL
Rubenstein “U.S. Shouldn’t Aid Europe’s Holy War “Insight, February 28, 1994)
which is morally culpable as those officials in World War II who saw the lines of Jews
outside of the gas chambers and did nothing.
Jerry Blaskovich, M.D., M.A.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA
=======================================================
Insight June 3, 1996
Only the Cave People Could be Truly Blameless

In evaluating Bob Dole’s potential foreign advisors, the authors of “A Diplomatic
Dream Team” [April 22] are guilty of bigotry at its most base. Their sources branded
legislative assistant for foreign policy to Dole, a “controversial figure” not apparently
for what she did or did not do but for ethnic background: Her Croatian roots, which
are three generations removed.
Following this thesis further, should we suspect Colin Powell’s view on the island
states of the Caribbean?
For how many generations must one’s family live in America to be considered above
reproach?
Jerry Blaskovich
Rancho Palos Verdes
===================================================
Insight June 30, 1997
Bad Situations Made Worse by Kissinger’s Policy Wonks

To Paraphrase that great American philosopher, Yogi Berra, Timothy W. Maier’s
article describing Kissinger Associates’ (or KA’s), influence peddling was “deja vu all
over again” [”Lion Dancing With Wolves” April 21]. Inserting Yugoslavia wherever
China appeared in the article restates the same scenario, the same actors practicing
the same duplicities for the same clients and mounting the same justifications as KA
during the Bush administration. The only differences: KA hasn’t influenced China to
take a bloodbath as they did Yugoslavia, and the timing when the main actors were
paid. Alexander Haig received his pay after he left government service, whereas
[Lawrence] Eaglesburger, [Brent] Scowcroft and Lord Carrington (KA board
members) received their salaries before their involvement. But then again, Haig may
join the latter group, since U.S.-China relations haven’t yet reached the flash point
emdash which is a certainty if the way Kissinger directed his “three stooges” during
the Yugoslav crisis is any indication.
The article did understate the amount of blood money Eagleburger received from
KA. During the same Senate hearing Meier cited, Eagleburger admitted to receiving
$1.14 million; a figure, which probably is more accurate since he was testifying
under oath. He was received an additional $453,872 from Kent Associates. The role
played by KA for its clients in China and the former Yugoslavia is analogous to how
United Fruit manipulating our government in the 1950’s to enhance its commercial
position in Central America.
Jerry Blaskovich
Rancho Palos Verdes, Calif.
===================================================
INSIGHT June 8, 1998
Kosovo Article Presented “Minefield of Disinformation’

David Binder’s juxtaposing of facts and omitting key elements in “Ignorant ‘Albright
Doctrine’ Entangles U.S. in Ancient Disputes” (May 4) was a minefield of
disinformation.
Binder postulated that (Secretary of State) Madeleine Albright’s criticism of the
Serbs resulted from lack of knowledge about Serbian history. But the history lesson
he cleverly wove depicting Serbs as victims in Kosovo unravels when we remember
the past decade.
Obviously, Albright has not forgotten!
Binder didn’t mention that the non-Serb population has lived since 1989 under
martial law. All human rights were denied them, including hospital admissions and
schools.
And, following the deaths of four Serbian policemen last February, the Serb military
killed 80 Muslim villagers—including women and children, burying them in a mass
grave—Nazi style.
While Binder euphemistically called Albright’s statements a “doctrine,” his problem
was that her position is a departure from former Secretary of States James Baker’s
statement in 1991 in Belgrade: “The U.S. will not interfere in the internal policing”—
which gave the Serbs carte blanche to attack Slovenia and Croatia.
Lawrence Eagleburger, who succeeded Baker, sabotaged every recommendation to
settle the conflict if it disadvantaged Serbia. Warren Christopher’s sharpest rebuke
to the Serbs, when they were committing war crimes at their most grotesque, was
that they were “naughty.”
Jerry N. Blaskovich, M.D.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA
===================================================
Jutarnji List
Tomislav Wruss- Glavni Urednik
Odranska bb
10000 Zagreb
15 July 1999
To the editor:
CNN’s, “SLUCAJ SAKIC” [Jutarnji List (13.7.1999)] is another attempt to discredit
Croatia in the eyes of the world. From the time Croatia started its self-determination
efforts, CNN’s smear campaign against Croatia continues unabatedly. And, typically,
CNN chose a Yugoslav writer, whose works permeates with a thinly disguised
nostalgia for the good old days of communism and who cannot tolerate the success
of the Croatian dream—Slavenka Drakulic—to add insult to injury. On previous
occasion, Drakulic was especially aghast when the Croatian government (which she
has no obvious love for) renamed streets and removed Communist symbols and
monuments that she held sacred. As a visitor to Croatia, with a healthy appetite, I
believe I’ve dined in most of the restaurants in Zagreb. Nowhere did I see pictures of
Pavlevic and Tudjman together nor anything that could be construed as fascist
symbols—which Drakulic alleged  to be present in “many” restaurants. I challenge
Drakulic to provide the names of those restaurants and I would gladly pay for her
dinners in those establishments. Drakulic’s intolerance toward her former homeland,
after Croatia became a viable state, is understandable when one considers her
background. A product of the super-privileged Communist hierarchy, while she
enjoyed her status and freely traveled abroad, her father was responsible for
keeping those in power who were murdering innocent Croatians or sending them to
“Goli otok.” This was the Yugoslavia she still loves. So the next time Drakulic’s
disingenuous pontifications appear in the media, the audience should be aware of
her agenda.
Sincerely,
Jerry Blaskovich, M.D. (author of Anatomy of Deceit and Anatomija Prijevara)
===========================================
Peter Klein
Producer, “60 Minutes”
CBS
524 W 57th Street
New York City, New York 10019
August 24, 1999
Dear Mister Klein:
It was, indeed, fortuitous that I found your letter in The New Republic (June 14,
1999). I want to commend you for being the only mainstream journalist to publicly
acknowledge the media’s failings in the coverage of the conflict in the former
Yugoslavia.
In your response to Stacy Sullivan’s, “Milosevic’s Willing Executioners,” your well
reasoned statements: “… rarely do we [the media] have the courage to put our
thoughts into print. Maybe it’s a fear of blowing our Serbian contacts… [and]
journalists have continually failed to present an accurate analysis…” validated what
most of us out of Washington’s beltway thought were the reasons for the inaccurate
coverage. These inaccuracies were seminal to why the conflict lasted as long as it
did.
If the media really rarely had the courage to put their thoughts into print, then whose
thoughts have reporters been putting out over the past ten years? Perhaps they
were the views of the editors’ or the Belgrade apologists at the State Department. Or
perhaps the media view came from the Serbian hired public relations contacts that
reporters were afraid to “blow.”
When the conflict was limited to Croatia, I cannot recall that the media ever used a
legitimate Croatian source who stated that the Croats, Slovenes, or Kosovars may
have had a grievance against Yugoslavia or Serbian hegemony. Was this a matter
of the media not having the contacts or being reluctant to use them? Instead, the
mainstream media relied only on Serbian sources.
If the purpose of journalism is to provide a modicum of objectivity, your profession
failed miserably. Until Kosovo heated up, the media bombarded the public with
Belgrade-spun phrases like: “ancient ethnic rivals,” “all sides equally guilty,” “the
Serbs defended Christendom,” “the Serbs were always allied with the U.S.” Then
there was the political spin helped along by the Belgrade supporters at State, which
held that the Croatian government of the 90s was somehow equivalent to the Nazi
quisling government of the 40s. The media, naively, or perhaps disingenuously,
persistently repeated the half truths and overt lies, and helped to perpetuate Serbian
propaganda.
Then suddenly like a Paulian revelation, the media started refuting the very same
phrases they had spoon fed us for nine years. Although the ‘new’ view that so-called
ethnic cleansing (read genocide) was an evil and central ambition of the Belgrade
government, the media acted as though it was a new discovery. Or maybe the media
had no choice but to say what the State department told them to. To the uninitiated,
it seemed the media relied only on government sources or “experts” who somehow
validated the Serbian agenda.
It was only after the word “genocide” became common currency at State Department
briefings that the mainstream media began using it in public in the Spring of 1999. In
other words, genocide was really allowed to go on for ten years and intervention
only became a viable option when the media stopped using the Serbian public
relations phrase “ethnic cleansing”. It is tragic that intervention didn’t come earlier.
Ten years of Belgrade’s ethnic cleansing produces close to 250,000 dead and
millions of displaced persons and refugees in Croatia, Bosnia and now Kosovo.
I once believed in freedom of the press, but I find it disconcerting and more than
coincidental that the “new” revelations about the Serbs came only after the United
States government quit labeling the KLA terrorists. They came after President
Clinton decided many years too late that Milosevic was responsible for the
bloodshed in Croatia and Bosnia.
In closing, I want to thank you for somewhat helping restore a measure of faith in the
media.
Sincerely,
Jerry N. Blaskovich, M.D.
===========================================
Salon.com
David Talbot Founder,
Chairman and editor in chief
dtalbot@salon.com
October 11, 1999
Dear Mr. Talbot:
It’s truly surprising that the editors of your otherwise superb publication didn’t check
the gross inaccuracies and bigotry Christopher Hitchens disingenuously expressed
in “Our Lady of Lies.” The KKK’s newest poster boy, characterized Fatima, Lourdes,
and Medjugorje as racketeering religious hubs grievously insulted Catholics.
Hitchens has a major problem reconciling what is taking place in Medjugorje.
Instead, he implicated its ideas responsible for the evils of the bloody ethnic hatreds
and despairingly labeled the Virgin of Medjugorje as “Our Lady of the Ustashe.”
Hitchens’ blind hatred of Catholicism apparently confused his vision. The city had no
signs of war, for the simple reason that it was far removed from the war’s
mainstream. Furthermore, Croatian government forces didn’t “virtually destroy” nor
methodically level signs of Islam in the city. The city has neither mosques nor a
Muslim presence.
What he labels an “ugly new basilica,” is only an average sized Catholic Church,
which was completed in 1969. Hitchens argues that the Vatican hasn’t recognized
Medjugorje -all for wrong reasons. The Vatican is extremely prudent when it comes
to officially legitimating shrines. His imagination ran wild speculating the Pope’s
thought process of why the Pope constrained to utter a few words against genocide
and sectarianism regarding Cardinal Stepinac. The allegation that Stepinac was the
“clerical face of the wartime Croatian Nazi regime” is based on a communist smear
campaign. The “unbelievably awful souvenir shops” and the name of one of the
visionaries touched a raw nerve in Hitchens. Although the former are a far cry from
upscale yuppie New York shops-why the name, Ivanka Ivankovic, is “unoriginal” is
truly baffling. Given Hitchens’ anti-Catholicism, Americans should be gra teful that he
wasn’t around when JFK ran for president-JFK wouldn’t have stood a chance
against his vitriolic pen.
Jerry Blaskovich M.D.
=================================================
The letter below was sent to the Editor of the Washington Post
but was published in the Croatian American Times July 17, 2001
The failure of Dayton accord and inequitable UN policy toward Croats
A recent Washington Post article recently caused some annoyance by its biased
tone. Prominent Croat-American Jerry Blaskovich (author of “Anatomy of Deceit)
responded with the following

To: The Editor – Washington Post
Jeffrey Smith’s piece, “Criminal Gangs Challenging West in Bosnia Separatist Croat
Threat Alters Troops’ Mission” [6/24/01]) read like an OSCE press release and
excluded some troublesome facts. If the reaction to raiding the banks in Bosnia was
“the most serious crisis of the Dayton accords” why did Smith wait over eleven
weeks to serve up a rehashed version of a widely (and more accurately) reported
story.
Smith failed to mention that last November, when over 90% of the Croats voted
candidates into office Wolfgang Petritsch, High Representative of the United Nations
for the Implementation of the Dayton Accords, Petritsch voided the results and
appointed candidates whom he chose. Consequently Croats were disenfranchised
from executive and legislative branches of government.
A few days after Petritsch s personally accused the Catholic Bishop of Mostar of
“spreading hatred and supporting war criminals” he ordered British troops to the
Bishop’s bailiwick, Medjugorje. It was no coincidence that these hardened soldiers,
newly arrived from duties in Northern Ireland, were chosen and sent to the site
during Holy Week—the most holies of holy days of the Roman Catholic calendar.
Medjugorje is pilgrimage Shrine where the Virgin Mary supposedly had been
appearing. The show of force occurred a week after NATO’s bank raids.
According to Father Ivan Sesar, Pastor of Medjugorje’s St. James Parish Church,
military vehicles loaded with heavily armed soldiers and tanks with canons at the
ready entered the town. Without regard to pedestrian or vehicular traffic they drove
through the streets at a high rate of speed, stopping when they confronted potential
targets—a group of 1000 pilgrims armed only with rosaries.
The next day military vehicles and tanks drove several times around the Shrine,
increasing the apprehensions of villagers and pilgrims. Not satisfied with this
harassment, an armada of French helicopters buzzed the Sanctuary a number of
times. Interestingly, the attacks coincided during the scheduled the celebration of the
Mass or recitation of the Rosary. Thus, disrupting the Services.
The harassment at Medjugorje and bank raid are part of Petritsch’s campaign
against Croatian Roman Catholics. Although there haven’t been any indictments, his
office implies that Croatians are mostly criminals and Smith seems to try to advance
that notion.
To coerce and punish the Croatians who had the audacity to vote for politicians of
their choice and not UN backed ones, Petritsch ordered attacks on the banks and
Medjugorje. The closures effectively cut off 150,000 Croatian clients to access their
money. Many relied on those savings to sustain life. The bank was also the conduit
for monthly pension checks. NATO admitted it would take a year to sort out the
“evidence” before the “honest Croats” will get to their money.
Interestingly, the international community never launched a military operation against
the Serbs, even when justified. They had no qualms when they allowed the latter’s
slaughter of over 250,000 souls. Most recently the Serbs harassed and held hostage
high-ranking international officials in Banja Luka without even a hint of reprisal.
The marked discrimination of the Croats by the enforcers of Dayton prompted the
Bishop’s Conference of Bosnia-Herzegovina (B-H) to address the signatory states of
the Dayton Agreement on the issue. Clearly alluding to the military action in
Medjugorje the Bishops said: “the official representatives of the International
community in B-H have taken obvious unjust decisions and measures - especially
recently (which are well known to you)” . . . The un-democratic methods and the use
of force by the International community in B-H towards resolving the open political
problems of the Croats are completely unacceptable . . . [and] has frightened many
other Croats in B-H, thereby coercing them to emigrate.”
The failure of the Dayton accords in Herzegovina is mostly the fault of the UN’s
failed attempts to impose inequitable social engineering on the Croat minority.
=====================================================
Letters to the editor
The Washington Times
VIA email: letters@washingtontimes.com
10 October 2003

In his criticism of Jeff Kuhner’s commentary on Bosnia, U.N. High Commissioner
Paddy Ashdown shows that he has a remarkable talent for condescension even
when the obvious facts do not support his Lordship’s sense of superiority.
Ashdown says that contrary to Kuhner’s assertions the Dayton Accords have set
Bosnia Hercegovina “on the road to economic and political recovery.” The fact is
that Dayton brought a fragile peace to the country but not much more than that. After
eight years the billions invested in BiH (mostly U.S. taxpayer dollars) under Dayton
has mainly provided a meaty carcass for some 50,000 well paid international “nation
builders” to feed off of. Under Dayton there was supposed to be a one-year
transitional international administration expiring in 1996. Nonetheless Ashdown and
company are still being very well paid in a very poor country that has a 40 percent
unemployment rate. It seems that Dayton was a first step in the ongoing international
institutional involvement in Bosnia’s affairs
The fact is that despite its high cost Dayton has failed to achieve any of its stated
major goals much less impose democracy. Dayton’s main strategy was to integrate
the three armies of BiH into one and use it as a foundation for imposing a European
version of a multiethnic society. Of course that has failed, but that fact has not
stopped Ashdown from continuing to demand it in his speeches.
What Dayton has done is solidify Serbian real estate gains achieved through mass
murder under Slobodan Milosevic’s ethnic cleansing programs. The Serbs now
occupy 49 percent of the country of BiH and are not about to give up their army
which protects the borders of what they have defiantly named: the Republic of
Serbia.
Regarding the contention that BiH is not a breeding ground for Islamic
fundamentalism, his Lordship suggests that Kuhner should visit BiH to see for
himself. Perhaps someone should suggest to Ashdown that he take a look at the city
surrounding his very own office building. About two kilometers to the south of him the
al Queada linked Saudi Wahhabis have built a massive Islamic center to spread their
brand of fundamentalist Islam. They are building sparkling new mosques in nearly
every muslim village in the Bosnian countryside. In the middle of downtown
Sarajevo, about ten meters from the eternal flame of peace, a cultural center is
operated by the same Iranian government that has traditionally sponsored terrorism
against the west including the bombing of the Beruit US embassy. At least one high
ranking Muslim that Ashdown has appeared with in the press claims to be a close
friend of terrorist sponsor and Libyan dictator Moammar Ghadafi.
Nonetheless, Ashdown still argues that everything is under control in BiH. He says
quite boldly that “important steps have been taken to ensure that BiH could not in
any way be used as a platform for terrorist attacks of any sort..” Wow! Perhaps he
should share that remarkable methodology with Tom Ridge and the rest of the world.
There is of course a slight problem with that logic. If Ashdown sees BiH as tightly
controlled enough to thwart even the most secretive terrorist cells, why haven’t they
arrested Radovan Karadzic, Ratko Mladic and the other 100 or so war criminals who
are said to be residing comfortably in the country?
Dr. Jerry Blaskovich
Advisory Board Member, Center for Near East Studies
University of California Los Angeles