By Ljubiša Malenica for the Saker Blog
The Greater Albania project has its roots in the nineteenth century and idea of the Prizren League to unite in one territorial unit all areas that were allegedly originally inhabited by Albanians. The Prizren League itself can be seen as an extension of the Ottoman authorities, since it was founded in 1878, immediately after the end of the war between Russia, Serbia and Montenegro against Turkey.
Given that Turkey was defeated in the war, Istanbul had to look for other methods of protecting its own interests during the peace process. League was equipped with weapons and ammunition by the Porte, members of the organization were individuals well known for their loyalty to the Sultan, and Ottoman authorities took upon themselves the responsibility of paying for congress in Prizren. All these facts support the thesis claiming Prizren League was an organization created as expression of Ottoman interests in the Balkans.[1]
Turkey’s interests have been significantly undermined by the San Stefano Peace Treaty and the Berlin Congress, and, as might be expected, the Prizren League took a negative stance towards both peace conferences. Moreover, during the Berlin Congress, the League sent a memorandum to the major powers asking for recognition of the Albanian national identity, a very illustrative fact in itself, and the realization of autonomy within the Ottoman Empire for all territories that would compose the so-called “Greater Albania”.[2]
Simultaneously with these documents, an additional memorandum was sent to the Berlin Congress, called the Skadar Memorandum, requesting from Great Britain[3] to take upon itself the role of a guarantor for the creation of the Albanian state. Considering the role of London as a self-proclaimed balancer whose main goal was to maintain the status quo in continental Europe, the Albanian choice is not surprising.
In terms of political relations during the period in question, Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia and Montenegro have already been allies of Moscow on several occasions. The same could be expected if Greece became independent. The development of the situation at that moment was already, obviously, to the detriment of Istanbul, and any future conflict in the Balkans would mean a further liberation of the territories previously occupied by the Ottomans. The First and Second Balkan Wars are illustrative cases in point. Given that all Slavic countries in the Balkans, at that period, had an interest in preserving the alliance and cultural ties with Russia, the eventual withdrawal of Turkey from the Balkans and the re-establishment of Slavic statehood would create a situation in which most of the Balkan Peninsula would find itself within the Russian sphere of influence.
London could not afford such a development given the understandable, and on many previous occasions expressed, fear of a united continental Europe in whose presence the British Isles would be a negligible force, probably subordinated to cultural and political dictates of the continental center of power.
The realization of Albanian ambitions did not come with the Berlin Congress, but they did not have to wait long for creation of their own state, with the blessing of official London. After the end of the First Balkan War, the Ottoman Empire was completely expelled from the majority of Balkan Peninsula. Despite the fact that the Albanians did not play any role in liberation of the occupied territories from Ottoman rule, London Agreement of 1913 established the independent state of Albania.
In addition to earlier mentioned documents created by the Prizren League, Albanian pretensions towards the territories of the surrounding peoples can be seen in this period through the actions of Ismail Cemali. In the midst of the First Balkan War, Cemali gathers representatives of the Albanians in city of Vlora, where they proceed to adopt the declaration on independence of Albania.
If we take into account that representatives in question came from all parts of the four Ottoman provinces (vilayets), i.e. Kosovo, Skadar, Janjina and Bitola, back then inhabited by Albanians, it can be assumed that Albania, imagined by the present delegates, included the territorial totality of all four mentioned provinces. Claims on lands of others become clear when one realizes that Albanians represented a minority in a significant part of the four provinces. Representatives gathered in Vlora were not elected representatives, so it is unsurprising this declaration of independence was completely ignored by both the Ottoman Empire and the then great powers. The Albanian state established during the London Conference was defined within significantly more modest borders.
During the Second World War, Albania was known as Greater Albania in the period from 1939 until 1943, and had status of an Italian protectorate which incorporated, after the fall of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, parts of Serbia. During their rule, the Italians found a natural ally in the irredentist aspirations of the Albanian elite towards the territories of the neighboring peoples where Albanians lived, regardless of the numerical ratio between them and the domicile population. It is a historical fact that period of Italian occupation was accompanied by a large number of crimes committed by Albanians against the local population in the occupied territories.
After the collapse of Italy and defeat of Germany, the short-lived state project of “Greater Albania” ended like the Independent State of Croatia, but the aspirations remained. After the fall of communist regime in the early 1990s, irredentist claims again occupied a significant part of the political and intellectual thought within Albania.
Considering the influence of United States in the Balkans during the last three decades, there can be no doubt that activities in question, intentionally or not, were in favor of the idea of Greater Albania. Both during the conflicts in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia, and during war in Kosmet, Washington’s position was obviously in favor of Serbian enemies. The conduct of organizations under the influence or direct leadership of the United States, both during military operations and in peacetime, was undoubtedly directed against Serbian interest in any shape or form. This fact alone was enough to strengthen the position idea of Greater Albania had within Albanian population, given that over time its realization seemed to become more and more probable.
Ethnic cleansing of Serbs from the Federation of BiH and Croatia, carried out with silent blessing from the West, served as a pattern of behavior that Albanians could apply during the Kosovo conflict without fear of criticism or intervention. There was no trepidation Tirana could be bombed by NATO planes due to the ethnic cleansing of Kosmet by the KLA.
Revitalization of the idea of Greater Albania, in its core, is not so much about the American relationship with the Albanians as it is about US perception of the Serbs.
The statement of George Kenney, a former Yugoslavia desk officer at the US state department, is an illustrative example how was Yugoslavia perceived as a state, and by extension, Serbs as a people who were most interested in its preservation. In a 2008 statement to the British Guardian, Kenney pointed out that “In post-cold war Europe no place remained for a large, independent-minded socialist state that resisted globalization”.[4]
In addition to American interests, the role of Germany, which immediately after its unification took a hostile attitude towards Yugoslavia and the Serbs, should not be forgotten. Considering the last one hundred and twenty years of European history, one gets the impression that the desire for domination of the continent by Germany is the main catalyst for a significant part of the misfortune which befell Europe.
In a world characterized by the hegemonic role of the United States, after the disappearance of the Soviet Union, it was inevitable that the ideological features of the victor, in this case capitalism, globalism, free trade, multiculturalism, and democracy, would become a model for transformation of other countries, regardless of their wishes and desires of the domicile population.
The characteristics of the victorious ideology were, of course, largely beneficial to the United States themselves, given that the system was established with the aim of reproducing, into infinity, American, and to a lesser extent West European, global dominance. It is not surprising that all serious forms of opposition to the imposed system were seen as a danger, given that at the same time they represented a departure from the propagandist illusion there were no alternatives to the new state of affairs, that the system represented the best way to regulate social relations and that everyone benefited from it.
The fact that the new system quickly took on the outlines of a neocolonial model of behavior, especially towards Eastern European countries, with pronounced demographic and economic parasitism embodied in legal structures and norms of both the European Union and other world organizations such as the IMF and World Bank, was supposed to remain hidden behind an appropriate smokescreen of consumer culture and a general degradation of cultural standards in behavior and action.
The geopolitical interests of Washington, and of the West in general, in conjunction with their economic interests, were not to be called into question by opposition, especially by a state such as Yugoslavia or a people such as Serbs. Allowing the general narrative of globalization and the norms and quality of the Western model to be questioned by small states and peoples was unthinkable, given that it would simultaneously point to the existence of imbalances and problems within the model itself and would further give the impression that the model itself was subject to change through dialogue and consensus. As we have already mentioned, the very purpose of the model was contrary to this development and force, both in legal and physical terms, remained the only way to protect interests of the original creators of an ideology that until recently was considered irreplaceable.
The easiest way to deal with Yugoslavia and the Serbs was to encourage internal divisions and recruit non-Serb local elites into implementation of American goals. One obvious example was the influence of Warren Zimmerman[5] on the beginning of war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Gathering representatives of all three sides in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Portuguese Ambassador to Sarajevo at that time, Jose Cutileiro, and the British Lord Peter Carrington succeeded in creating a plan for the division and decentralization of Bosnia and Herzegovina that was, to an extent, satisfactory for all three sides.
The agreement, also known as the Lisbon Treaty, was signed by representatives of all three sides on March 18, 1992. Ten days later, US Ambassador Warren Zimmerman arrives in Sarajevo where he meets with Alija Izetbegovic. Soon after, Izetbegovic quickly withdraws his signature from the previously reached arrangement. Although there is no documentation, or other direct record, of what was said during this meeting between Zimmerman and Izetbegovic, sequence of events is far from accidental and indicates a high degree of connection between the encounter and the outbreak of war in BiH.
According to unofficial information, during the meeting, Zimmerman gave Izetbegovic a firm assurance that United States were ready to recognize Bosnia and Herzegovina as an independent country. The fact that Washington recognized BiH as an independent state only nine days after the meeting, on April 7, 1992, just as Zimmermann claimed, gives credence to the unofficial information about the nature of the Zimmerman-Izetbegovic meeting. Recognizing independence of a certain state, in itself as a process, is not something that happens spontaneously and quickly, especially due to the situation Bosnia and Herzegovina found itself in at that time. Given that it took the US administration less than ten days to make such a decision, implies that decision had already been made. US only awaited a suitable moment in order to make the decision public.
During a statement for Canadian CTVNews in 2012, former Canadian Ambassador to Bosnia and Herzegovina, James Bissett, gave additional weight to earlier claims regarding Zimmerman’s role in the beginning of the Bosnian civil war. Namely, during the conversation, Bissett pointed out without hesitation that “the trigger was really when the American ambassador persuaded Alija Izetbegovic, the Muslim leader in Bosnia, to renounce his signature and withdraw his signature from an agreement that had been reached earlier, negotiated by the Portuguese foreign minister…That meant that Bosnia could become independent, but there would be three autonomous regions. They all signed that, but my neighbor that lived across the street from me, Warren Zimmerman, the US ambassador convinced Alija Izetbegovic to renounce that agreement and declare unilateral independence, and that the United States would immediately recognize an independent Bosnia…”[6]
Events related to crisis in Kosmet followed a very similar pattern. Albanians in Kosovo served the interests of Washington in the same manner that Muslims did on the ground in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Just as Muslims were promised support and independence of a state which they saw exclusively as their own, so the Albanians were, in essence, offered the opportunity to realize the idea of a Greater Albania.
The August 1993 New York Times article, surprisingly professionally written, conveys the opinion of most US officials, who largely agree that Washington made a mistake in insisting on an independent and multicultural Bosnia and Herzegovina despite domestic leaders agreeing to divide the country. This view of the situation recently reappeared on the scene with the texts of Timothy Less, who proposes supporting the unification of the Republic of Srpska and Serbia as compensation for the recognition of independent Kosovo by Belgrade.[7][8]
Of course, Less looks at things from perspective of interests of the United States and expects Serbs, after American blessing of unification, to approach the United States and turn their backs on Moscow. Whether American diplomacy will accept these suggestion remains to be seen, but the fact that this option is being discussed at all should serve as a lesson to Serbian neighbors that in the last three decades they have not fought against Serbs so much for their own interests as they did for American ones.
As author stated earlier in the text, the Balkan problem of Washington, from the perspective of the United States, comes down to the question of Serbs. An illustration of this can be found in the New York Times article mentioned above. Namely, part of the article is dedicated to the statement of Warren Zimmerman, who, defending the earlier American policy, pointed out that “our view was that we might be able to head off a Serbian power grab by internationalizing the problem…Our hope was the Serbs would hold off if it was clear Bosnia had the recognition of Western countries. It turned out we were wrong.”[9]
Although a short statement, it is very indicative and leads to several important questions. If we take into account the nature of the Lisbon Treaty, which Ambassador Warren torpedoed during his conversation with Izetbegovic, why was the power takeover by the Serbs a problem? Moreover, since the territorial units envisaged by the Carrington-Cutilier plan were based on the national principle, Serbs, by taking power in their areas, would do the same as the other two groups in Bosnia and Herzegovina. On the other hand, why was the internationalization of the problem necessary? The problem was already, in large part, nearing a solution that was accepted by all three parties. Why were Serbs expected, almost by some kind of automatism, to give up their interests and demands in a situation where West recognized Bosnia and Herzegovina declaration of independence?
All these questions make sense and their answers are relatively obvious if we accept position that the moves of American diplomacy were not aimed at defusing the situation or achieving solution to crisis in BiH, but against the interests of Serbs. The language used by Zimmerman implies Serbs are the destabilizing factor and threat to the situation within the country at the time, despite all the facts to the contrary. The American vision of BiH, interpreted through Zimmerman’s statement, implied complete political domination of Sarajevo and the Muslim political leadership, a unitary state structure accompanied, for the sake of US internal propaganda, with labels of multiethnicity and multiculturalism. Serbs, and partly Croats, were expected to give up upon their own interests.
The irony of history is reflected in fact that the Dayton Agreement itself, which achieved peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, was relatively similar to the Lisbon Agreement.
For a better understanding of American policy towards Serbs during the 1990s and after conflict in the former Yugoslavia ended, it is necessary to pay attention to the previously mentioned victorious ideology which, after collapse of the USSR, gained status of a globally applicable template for shaping societies.
Due to the specifics of American history, a thread of racial relations between the inhabitants of the United States always ran through American society. Over time, this led to the development of complexes which were twisted by the political forces in United States, particularly the Democratic Party, into political and social power simultaneously encompassing both white and black population. Within the Hollywood dichotomy of guilt, whites in the US were assigned the role of malfeasants while blacks, along with other minorities, became victims. The former developed a guilt complex while in the latter, victim complex was encouraged. In both cases, the encouragement of these complexes took extreme forms and was from the very beginning completely divorced from historical facts. Resistance to these processes did exist in the United States, and still exists today, but the foundation of the future American society was laid.
Multiculturalism, as one element of the new world order, introduced a whole range of other minorities into the previously outlined social formula, which mostly referred to the American population of European and African descent. New minorities encompassed both minorities based on their nation and groups that became minorities because of a particular characteristic, such as sexual orientation or a specific view of one’s own gender. The artificial multiplication of minorities led to a specific development of the earlier abuser-victim relationship, and soon, in opposition to white “malfeasants”, a mass of “victims” appeared, diverse in their minority status but monolithic in their role of victims.
Globalism, as one of the key elements of American ideology, transferred the insane perception of racial relations within the United States to the global level, predefining “good and bad guys” without taking into account the local context events or their development.
The European left, by its very nature inclined to such ideological ramshackle, and itself without an original idea, accepted this view of history and society, thus providing support to the Americanization of European nations. In his book “Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt: Towards a Secular Theocracy”, Paul Gottfried points out that “for the Left, especially in Europe, the post-Cold War United States is the enforcer of “antifascist” and multicultural ideas that are triumphing in American society and among its human-rights allies. The long-demonized American capitalist empire no longer upsets the European Left as monolithically as it once did…For the Left, at least until the recent war against terrorism, the United States has become an indispensable partner in promoting its work, against obstinate European nationalists and antiglobalists.”[10]
In the early 1990s, America was seen by leftists as a utopia. The combination of leftist ideas and predatory capitalism, intertwined with the image of an “exceptional nation”, led Washington’s aggressive stance on the global field. Anyone opposed to the cultural and economic aggression in question eventually faced a military aggression.
American leftists, who managed by “long march through institutions” to install their cadres within a large number of important positions both in American society and American political structure, recognized Serbs as historical actors perfectly fitting the constructed stereotype of “bad guys”. As a white nation, the stigma of “white guilt” could be immediately applied to them, only in this case the “oppressed minority” were not the blacks or other minority populations within the United States, but the Muslim population in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosmet. As a nation aware of its history and national identity, and interested in preserving both, Serbs commit the additional sin of reflexive suspicion towards globalism and resistance to the processes associated with this phenomenon.
The desire of Serbian people for existence within a homogeneous nation-state, derived from historical experience which confirmed the unstable and violent tendencies of heterogeneous societies, was interpreted as a rejection of the multicultural framework for social organization and was thus branded as unwelcomed. From the perspective of the American administration, regardless of historical facts and specific circumstances of events in former Yugoslavia, a multicultural society had to be insisted on. If multiculturalism can work in the United States, then it can work in small Balkan countries. However, if there was to exist a place in the world where it is objectively quite clear that multiculturalism is neither possible nor desirable, it would be only a matter of time before someone within the US questioned why were American politicians, on the domestic scene, so insistent on multiculturalism and why does this phenomenon becomes a taboo subject when its more negative characteristics become apparent.
Lessons from disintegration of multicultural “brotherhood and unity” within Yugoslavia have not been learned by the creators of American policy, and events within the United States today are the fruits of those missed historical lessons.
Doug Bandow, a senior fellow of the well known Cato Institute, during his testimony before the congressional committee in March 1999, clearly points out that there are no objective reasons for NATO intervention in Kosmet against Serbs and in favor of Albanians. In a transcript of Bandow’s statement, he explains that “despite the administration’s best intentions, its proposal to bomb Serbia and initiate a long‐term ground occupation of Kosovo is misguided in the extreme. The administration would attempt to impose an artificial settlement with little chance of genuine acceptance by either side. It would attempt to micromanage a guerrilla conflict, likely spreading nationalistic flames throughout the region. It would involve America in an undeclared war against a nation which has not threatened the U.S. or any U.S. ally. It would encourage permanent European dependence on America to defend European interests with little relevance to America. It would turn humanitarianism on its head, basing intervention on the ethnicity of the victims, allied status of the belligerents, relative strength of the contending political interests, and expansiveness of the media coverage. Most important, it would put U.S. troops at risk without any serious, let alone vital, American interest at stake”.[11]
During his testimony, Bandow pointed out that NATO supporting KLA would only give additional impetus to the advocates of Greater Albania. Probably one of few American analysts from that period, Bandow warned involvement in the Balkans carried a risk of losing a much more important game related to Russia. Bandow emphasized that “Moscow’s future development remains worrisome and uncertain. Yet NATO attacks on and occupation of Yugoslavia, which shares longstanding Slavic ties with Russia, would exacerbate tensions already inflamed by the expansion of NATO”.[12]
Twenty years after the events in Kosmet, we live in a world that Bandow partially predicted. The aggression on Yugoslavia represented one of the turning points in Russian-American relations and influenced the shaping of the world as we know it today.
Support for a unitary Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Greater Albania project is undoubtedly present within American politics, given that planners in Washington recognize these projects as useful for their own interests. This is perhaps the most important reason for support. Serbophobia, as a derivative of Russophobia, exists within the American administration, but the question is to what extent does the phenomenon in question influences the shaping of Washington’s policies towards the Serbian people. Albanian politicians should have learned lessons from the history of Yugoslavia itself in the early 1990s. For a certain time, ex-Yugoslavia suited Americans and they supported its existence. As soon as the American interest changed, the US did not hesitate to take an active part in encouraging its disintegration. Even in the event where Albanian project is realized, it would be a creation with a limited lifespan. Formed with American blessing, Greater Albania would depend on the goodwill of “friends” from Washington and their backing.
In the treatise that made him famous, Niccolo Machiavelli points out that “auxiliary troops—armies borrowed from a more powerful state—are as useless as mercenaries. Although they often fight well, a prince who calls on auxiliaries places himself in a no-win situation. If the auxiliaries fail, he is defenseless, whereas if the auxiliaries are successful, he still owes his victory to the power of another.”[13]
This seems to be a lesson that none of the Serbian neighbors have learned. Today, Bosnia and Herzegovina is an international protectorate and a dysfunctional country. Croatia is a reservoir of labor reduced to the tourist destination of richer European countries, and at the beginning of the 2020, through intervention of the American military commander in political life of “independent” Kosovo, one could perceive real distribution of power on Kosmet. While Croats, Albanians and Muslims in Bosnia spent themselves in wars against “evil” Serbs, Western states imperceptibly placed a noose of economic and political dependence around their necks, all the while helping cultivate their victimhood narrative.
At this moment, the Serbian political leadership can act simultaneously in three directions. The first involves regional action towards countries also threatened by the idea of a Greater Albania. This raises the question whether there is political will among potential allies to take steps against the realization of the Albanian idea in the current conditions where the emergence of a larger Albanian state affects only Serbian interests. The political mood in the countries in question will most likely depend on the escalation of Albanian ambitions and actions.
The second course of action is to reject any recognition of Kosovo as an independent state and to insist on such a position within international institutions. The work of Serbian diplomacy has been somewhat successful in this regard in recent years, but the work of diplomats must be supported by efforts to strengthen Serbian institutions and influence in Kosmet itself.
The third set of activities concerns efforts to undo, within a seemingly increasingly multipolar world order, the Western-imposed status quo in the Balkans, almost entirely ranged against Serbian interests. This would entail an initiative for reconsideration of events which took place during the break-up of former Yugoslavia and to, furthermore, question the final results of those events, such as Kosovo’s self-proclaimed independence or the narrative of alleged Serbian guilt for various war crimes.
The idea and narrative of Greater Albania are a danger to Serbian statehood, but the very idea of Greater Albania bears the seeds of its disappearance. The full realization of Albania’s pretensions entails the creation of a hostile disposition within four neighboring states. The project of the Albanian irredentists was previously realized only in conditions of serious foreign support. As is usually the case with a hegemon that is slowly losing its status, the United States is facing growing challenges around the world, and support for Albanian interests by Washington is not assured. At the moment, it seems that time is working for Belgrade, which should use this opportunity to full extent and cease to react reservedly for the sake of EU membership, an illusion by this point.
- http://www.kosovo.net/sk/rastko-kosovo/istorija/knjiga_o_kosovu/bogdanovic-kosovo_2.html ↑
- http://www.rastko.rs/cms/files/books/474e828f5a0ad ↑
- http://www.rastko.rs/cms/files/books/474e828f5a0ad ↑
- https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/jan/14/itstimetoendserbbashing ↑
- https://nationalinterest.org/print/article/obituary-alija-izetbegovic-1925-2003-2458 ↑
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1QL1M8zycE ↑
- http://demostat.rs/en/vesti/analize/timothy-less-re-ordering-the-balkans/763 ↑
- https://balkaninsight.com/2020/02/28/bosnias-second-collapse-is-starting-to-look-inevitable/ ↑
- https://www.nytimes.com/1993/08/29/world/us-policymakers-on-bosnia-admit-errors-in-opposing-partition-in-1992.html ↑
- https://books.google.ba/books?id=0XvR-aKybuQC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false ↑
- https://www.cato.org/publications/congressional-testimony/us-role-kosovo ↑
- https://www.cato.org/publications/congressional-testimony/us-role-kosovo ↑
- https://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/prince/section6/ ↑
The “brain” drain in Kosovo is ongoing. Interestingly. The West supports Albanians in the political field, but the same West fears loads of Albanian immigrants and sees them as a danger on domestic security.
I remember in Switzerland early 2000‘s when the Albanian immigrants came, the situation was very dire and Albanian gangs attacked everything for fun, commited theft on a grand scale and killed people on the streets sometimes. Its not like the level in the Banlieues, but for our level it was terrible.
Today its curbed, but its still the case that decent people have aversion towards Albanians and avoid them. Also Albanians stick only with each other and are non cosmopolitan people.
Those people are also extremely dull, i always wonder how Albanians can not know anything about our society in Switzerland even when being born here and lived here their whole life. I rarely saw people that live here for decades but have no desire to blend in here, after taking them that they can flee the war. I can only imagine how it was for Serbia to deal with Albanians.
Meddler
“I remember in Switzerland early 2000‘s when the Albanian immigrants came, the situation was very dire and Albanian gangs attacked everything for fun, committed theft on a grand scale and killed people on the streets sometimes …”.
Nothing surprising about that, bearing in mind that during the Ottoman centuries the Albanians produced the Marmaluks, auxiliaries, who were used by the Turks for loot, pillage and rape.
One very amusing aspect in Albanian endeavors to create a Greater Albania is the Albanian theory that Albanians are descendants of illyrians, who resided in the Balkans during Roman times. This is laughable nonsense. There is not one Illyrian monument which confirms that Albanians are descendants of Illyrians. In fact Albanians are not even a European ethnic group. The first Albanians were brought from Asia to Europe in 1043 by Byzantines as mercenaries, and right until the middle of the 16th century spoke a mixture of Arabic and Asian languages, as attested by Turkish records. The current Albanian “language” is a compilation of European vocabularies appropriated by Albanians, as evident by numerous Greek words. The Byzantines settled the Albanian immigrants in certain regions of current Albania, and current Albania back in the 11th century was 100 % Serbian in ethnic composition. British maps from 1905 show Albania in the year 814 as being in Asia.
In 1999 NATO shamefully and illegally attacks the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, made up of Serbia and Montenegro. The US tries to create an independent “Republic of Kosovo”, which was not accepted by the UN. The current “Republic of Kosovo” was created by NATO on the territory of the Serbian Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija, invented by the communist Government in 1945. It had no reason to exist. The last time Kosovo and Metohija had any autonomy was in the 14th century, when it was a dukedom ruled by the Serbian duke Vuk Branković (Wolf Brankovich), and back then it was 100 % Serbian in ethnic composition.
The NATO attack against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999 was based on the strategy of encirclement of Russia. That was a huge mistake. It woke up Russian patriots, leading to the resignation of Boris Yeltsin and the arrival of Vladimir Putin on the political scene. Putin’s achievements are well known. Russia returned as a world power. As for NATO, it payed an unfortunate price. In 1999 it lost 137 combat aircraft and 25 helicopters, as well as providing Russian intel officers with an overview of it’s tactics and capabilities.
As for the Serbs, they understood the hard way Kissinger’s famous statement “To be an enemy of America can be dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal.” They assumed that being Americas allies in two world wars created some sort of friendship. The 1999 attack by NATO, instigated without declaration of war, taught them otherwise. Now Putin has immense prestige in Serbia. As for the “Republic of Kosova”, it has been reduced to the first narco state in Europe, becomig a conduit for Afghan heroin into Europe. Many countries have cancelled their recognition of this so-called “republic”, with the result that today a majority of countries do not recognize it, NATO countries excluded. In the same way that Russia reunited Crimea with Russia, so will Serbia – eventually – reunited it’s Province of Kosovo and Metohija with Serbia. The author is right. Time is working for Serbia.
What an interesting and comprehensive history of the Balkans, thank you Ljubiša: here’s to a happier future for the Serbian people.
Erdogan is currently pushing for Turkey companies to be concessionnaires of Albanian key infrastructure such as (future) airports or hospitals… any thoughts?
Turkey only builds mosques in Albania and Kosovo. There are literary no other investments done in Kosovo at all. Its avoided altougether. The only infrastructure that is build are NATO bases. Albania is a bit better due to having a coast. But Kosovo is indeed a wasteland as long as Albanians control it.
Heroin, Islam, and NATO go together surprisingly well—and not only in Kosovo…
Serbia and Montenegro had war with Ottomans in 1878? Could you, please, list the names of representatives of Serbia nad Montenegro, participating in this war?
I didn’t fact-check the source, but it will give you a quick overview anyhow:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Serbia
Some of them may be mentioned in this Wikipedia article; “Serbian–Turkish Wars (1876–1878).”
But another article “Russo-Turkish War (1877–1878)” might be even more interesting to you.
That’s the war where Russia finally freed Bulgaria from centuries of Ottoman occupation only to have Bulgaria side with Russia’s enemies in two world wars and now ally itself with Russia’s current enemy NATO.
I hope that helps.
Even better link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian%E2%80%93Turkish_Wars_(1876%E2%80%931878)
Hmm . . let’s see now.
Some of them may be mentioned in the Wikipedia article titled; “Serbian–Turkish Wars (1876–1878).”
But another Wikipedia article “Russo-Turkish War (1877–1878)” might be even more interesting to you.
That’s the war where Russia freed Bulgaria from centuries of Ottoman occupation only to have Bulgaria side with Russia’s enemies in two world wars and then ally itself with Russia’s present day enemy NATO.
I hope that helps.
It does not help. Serbs had their own wars with the Ottomans, greatly helped by others, mostly Russsians and Bulgarians. They did not move a finger in the Russian-Ottoman war in 1878. Not to mention their role in the Balkan wars. Because of their actions, Constantinopol is still in Turkish hands and Turks still occupy part of Europe.
I am speaking this as a descendant of a Russian officer, who lost his life in this war.
Serbians were greatly wronged by the West in the 90’s, however, it is amasing how they try to jump on the Russian wagon now, since they were the ones who enthusiastically helped the same West against Russia on the Balkans for 50 years. This matter might be left aside, but it is not forgotten.
Yes, you are correct. Serbian politicians of the late 19th century were largely Russophobic. However, the Serb people everywhere have never been so. King Milan Obrenovic (1854-1901) was an Austrian puppet. When Russian czar Alexander II asked for help from King Milan Obrenovic who promised it in 1877, King Milan did not oblige although in 1876 around 1000 Russian volunteers died in the 1876 Serbo-Turkish war (15% of all the fallen on Serbian side).
King Milan Obrenovic publicly stated that he hated Serbian people for the fact that his people loved Russia and Russians. He also used to say that Serbs are “unruly”, “deceitful” and generally “not ready for constitutional liberties”. King Milan promised to the Foreign Minister of A-H that with time that would be changed “as the enlighted in Serbia are pro-Austrian” – or pro-European in today’s lingo. In conversation with Ladislaus Hengelmüller von Hengervár, Austro-Hungarian ambassador to Belgrade, King Milan said that “if Serbia officially became part of Austro-Hungary, Russia would not dare to connive”.
With more or less variation, Serbian current “elites” have the same opinion of the people over which they rule. So, Russophobia also means Serbophobia.
All that being said, it may be an overstatement to say that because of the Serbs Constantinopol is still in Turkish hands. I believe the English, French, Austrians, Germans and more recently some – nominally – Russians (Lenin, Trocki) are more deserving of that attribute. Also, no Serb army ever took part in attacks on Russia during any of her iterations. The same cannot be said about Romanians, Bulgarians, Croatians, Pollacks, Albanians, the Russians themselves in the form of Ukrainian and Belarus Nazis, Bosniaks…
Thanks.
Serbian people have always loved Russia … and Serbian Church as well.
But Serbian political elites were never pro-russian.
Obrenovic dynasty was close to Germans and Austrians, Karadjordjevic dynasty pro-France and pro-British, in Yugoslavia communists were not pro-soviet at all.
After collapse of Yugoslavia before Vucic, Serbian rulers were everything but not pro-russian.
Vucic tries sitting on two chairs. Talking about friendship with Russia and China but going toward EU and the West.
I have noticed that Germany is his economic and political idol.
No more no less than Russian elite.
The Russian court and aristocracy had had German och French as official court language for periods which was never the case in Serbia.
Most of the Russian elite, including arisrtocrats from German origin like my ancestors were faithful to Russia, lived and died for Mother Russia. Including against the German fascists.
We’ve seen during the WW1 and WW2 whom many of the German ancestors sided with.
Besides for every Russian aristocrat who would die in the battle several thousands Russian peasants died.
Every aristocrat imprisoned by the enemy would have preferential treatment while ordinary people were just deplorable and died en masse.
Huge Russian losses in the wars were also in large part due to “aristocrats” given commanding positions not by the merit but by the social hierarchy.
Aristocrats mostly got huge material favors, land and surfs for participating in the wars while ordinary soldiers were happy if they would survive and without disability.
In Serbia most of the commanders were formed in the battles and not by the birth. This is not because we Serbs are something special but because of circumstances.
I admire and respect great people be it aristocrat or not of Russian or other origin who fought and died for Russia. Serbians, proportionately in considerable numbers, fought and died for Russia as volunteers too with a number of prominent names, and they got their reputation and position by the skill and almost never by the provenance.
One of them was general Mihail Andrejevic-Miloradovic https://rs.sputniknews.com/analize/201610161108487992-Miloradovic-Rusija-general/ only second after Kutuzov (some newer investigations claims that even Kutuzov could have been of Serbian origin from Serbian village in Herzegovina).
Prominent Cossack’s with Serbian origins: http://www.rasen.rs/2017/10/srbi-i-njihovi-potomci-u-kozackim-vojskama/
Use some online translator to find out more about connections between Russian and Serbian people throughout the history:
https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B8_%D1%83_%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%81%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B8
https://pravoslavie.ru/99292.html
And I’m really putting stop here.
I decided to write an additional comment:
Serbs were historically been surrounded by hostile nations/entities be it Rome, Italy, Venetians and Austrians, Vatican, Germans and recently Croats in the west, Hungarians in the north, Bulgarians in the east, Byzantine, Turks, Albanians in the south.
I’m not saying we are saints, but the hostility has been genuine whatever reason.
So Serbian elites have almost never had the possibility to choose, but they were forced to choose, and they mostly chose west when Russia was weak and Russia otherwise.
Unlike Russian elite that mostly chose west by own free will because they didn’t identify with Russian peasants (serfs), but with west elite and nobility.
Russian revolution didn’t happen without a reason.
It is good that some truths start to trickle.
” in Yugoslavia communists were not pro-soviet at all.”
Not openly anyway. If they knew what was good for them.
Two of my uncles who were with the partisans during the war were denounced and imprisoned on Goli Otok island in the late 1940’s for criticising Tito’s split with The Soviet Union.
Many other Serbian communists and former partisans would have shared their sentiments but wisely chosen to remain silent.
I know that I am correct. In the article the author is claiming the opposite. Again, Serbians did not participate in the Russian-Ottoman war of 1878. Serbia was represented and championed on the Berlin congress by Austro-Hungarian empire against the interests of Russian empire on the Balkans.
Constantinople is in Turkish hands today, Turkey is still occupying part of Europe today, and holding the Straits because Serbia started the so called Inter-allied war by occupying Macedonia and even went on the side of the Turks. As a consequence, the attack on Istanbul was halted and Odrin was given back to the Turks.
Excuses that the Serbian rulers were not the nation should be used for other nations, too, no?
RT: “I know that I am correct.”
What a premise for any discussion.
I am starting to believe that you are as Russian as Boris III of Bulgaria was.
You are delusional about Constantinople as someone can possibly be and your claims are contrary to any historical sources inclusive the Russian ones.
Don’t trust me check the Greek sources then … but you know you are correct.
Serbia is to be blamed for Constantinople remaining in Turks hands as much as for Russia losing the Crimean war (you’ll find there your main perpetrators for Constantinople, this includes both warring parties as well as those in background like Austria).
Claiming that Austria-Hungary was representing Serbian interests on Berlin congress is just preposterous.
First of all Serbia was represented by itself there.
Your beloved Bulgaria wasn’t represented because it didn’t exist at a time. Without Russia there wouldn’t be any Bulgaria and Serbia would have included Bosnia which was in majority populated by Serbs and basically all Christians there (Serbs are mostly Orthodox, but Bosnia had also considerable Catholic populations that nowadays considers themselves Croats plus considerable portion of the Muslim population that considered themselves as Serbs belonging to Islam religion) and part of Muslim population would vouch for parting with Serbia.
Serbia at a time was a paragon for all occupied Slavic nations in Europe and was considered as the greatest threat for Austria-Hungary empire which occupied a number of Slavic nations starting with parts of Ukraine, Pols, Czechs, Slovakian’s, Slovenians, Croats and Serbs. It was similar with the dying Ottoman Empire which straggled with keeping occupied Christian and Arabic areas under its rule.
The English didn’t want to have another strong nation in the east, so they lined up with Austria-Hungary (they took Cyprus also). France at a time still remember Napoleons faith and was deep anti-Russian, Germany “of course” sided with Austria and other west nations fearing Russia with the strong support in strong and big Serbia.
So Serbia had to be diminished and crashed.
Insinuating that Austria-Hungary would represent Serbian interests in 1878 is laughable. Serbia was the biggest looser at a conference among the winners due to the great losses in the wars and unfavorable position where all west great powers were against it and Russia not strong enough to support it.
Russia would’ve taking Constantinople if it had strength enough to stand against the united west. Serbia had no choice but to oblige and at least get formal recognition.
Serbia and Montenegro (another Serbian entity) were absolutely not to have territorial connection, so Austria-Hungary was given both Bosnia and Raska (old Serbia) as an occupying force.
Austria-Hungary’s annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1908 had basically triggered the WW1 which started in 1914 by Serbian insurgents (including both Christians and Muslims) killing Archduke Crown Prince Ferdinand of Austria.
I’m setting the stop here and ending history lesson. This was mostly in respect for other readers of the Saker blog and not for RT.
I won’t answer to any more posts by RT.
Yes, Serbia was paragon for other South Slavs.
All of them were running to unite with Serbia and Serbians
And after just several years all of them wanted OUT and to separate from Serbs.
And Serbs should ask themselves WHY
That is a complicated question. Serbia was a winner in WWI,and there was a question about what Serbia wanted.Did they just annex Bosnia,Montenegro, and Serbian populated areas of Croatia,which many wanted to do.Or,should they listen to other South Slavs that asked them to take them too.Slovenes and Croats were rightfully terrified that Italy would seize them unless Serbia annexed them.So they convinced the Serbs to form a South Slav union.But since the Serbs were the biggest population,and were the ones that fought and won the war.They wanted to be the ones to control the new state.While the Slovenes and Croats thought of themselves as a “higher class” Westernized people.And didn’t want to be ruled by “backward Balkan” Serbs.Something they should have thought about when they begged Serbia to annex them.Could the Serbs have acted with more discretion and showed more understanding of the others feelings,yes probably.But also the others could have understood how much Serbia had suffered during the war.And not looked down on the Serbs,and shown some gratitude for the Serbs sacrifice and agreeing to let them shelter against Italy with them.
Uncla Bob gave a pretty good answer, but I want to add a few more things:
First not all. Muslims in Bosnia didn’t want (the question is also whether they would be considered as Serbs with Islamic faith at a time or as a separate entity).
Secondly Slovenians and especially Croats were genuinely disloyal to the new state despite disproportional given range of the positions in the military and state hierarchy especially considering they fought for Austria-Hungary and participated in numerous atrocities in the occupied Serbia and Bosnia.
The Serbs even went so long to divide Yugoslavia to “banovine” (administrative entities with large independence) which were unfavorable to Serbs.
Yes Yugoslavian king of Serbian nationality reacted with increased repression and in the end proclaimed dictatorship but as I wrote it was a reaction to utter disloyalty of the new constituents as well as mortal threat from both east and west.
Add to it communist threat and very strong communist movement in Yugoslavia at a time with Croats taking the lead and communist proclaiming in Dresden 1928 that Yugoslavia were to be destroyed due to the largest threat to the communist ideas and the Serbs were described as oppressors to the other nations and obstacle to independence of other nations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_Congress_of_the_Communist_Party_of_Yugoslavia
We can have philosophical discussion about what should’ve been done, but you know what they say: it is easy to be general after the battle.
How mortal threat it was is illustrated by the assassination of the king in Marseille in 1934
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_I_of_Yugoslavia#Assassination
100% correct, RT. Serbian ellite are just backstabbers ready to sell their moms and paps. Their trickery and politics made irrelevant all the casualties the bulgarians suffered in the Odrin offensive and doomed the balkans for more than 100 years. Furthermore they started war with Bulgaria immediately after the Kingdom of Bulgaria announced its Union with Eastern Rumelia. Noone dared oppose this union, even the ottomans were totally ok with it (both territories were exclusively inhabited by bulgarians) but not the Serbian ellites.
” however, it is amasing how they ( the Serbs ) try to jump on the Russian wagon now, since they were the ones who enthusiastically helped the same West against Russia on the Balkans for 50 years.”
So why do most Russians, including President Putin, still support the Serbs?
Is it because they’re not as smart as yourself or not as stupid as you wish they were?
Why did the West side with Serbia’s enemies in the 1990’s, even bombing Serbia for 78 days non-stop, if the Serbs had been enthusiastically helping the West keep Russian influence out of the Balkans for the previous 50 years?
Why would the Serbs suddenly want to help the West keep Russian influence out of the Balkans after WWII when during WWI and WWII Serbia and Greece were Russia’s ONLY allies in the Balkans?
If Serbs are so anti-Russian why is Serbia the only country in the Balkans that is NOT a member of NATO?
By the way, you do realise that the man who led post WWII Yugoslavia for 35 of it’s 46 year existence, Josip Broz ( Tito ), was a Croat-Slovene, not a Serb, right?
Putin supports Serbia. Cautiously. I also support Serbia today, because “Greater Albania” should not emerge on the Balkans and Serbians should not be destryed as nation. This does not correspond with Russian interests. Such stand has nothing to do with historical facts, though.
No, Putin completely supports Serbia and especially because of historical facts.
But he is cautious when dealing with a mercurial and self-contradictory Serbian government.
Bulgarians??? Are you serious???? Ask your NATO Bulgarian brothers why they attacked Serbia in 2 Balkan War. You will find an answer about Constantinople. And yes, Russia helped Serbia and Serbs are always grateful for that, not like other Balkan so called nations.
Russia helped Serbia, yes, especially in the WWI. This led to the destruction of Russian empire. Good, that Russia was not dragged into war in the 90s. We need your gratitude like the dog needs a fifth leg.
Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary rarely had choice in these historical times, Serbia always had choice and always choose treachery.
Comment unworthy any answer.
Serbian and Russian people have always been brotherly people in true sense of the word and no grade of hateful trolling is going to change it.
Russia does not owe anything to Serbia and Serbians. There is no need to present imagined historical reasons for Russian politics.
Russia will continue to support Serbians against western attempts to destroy them because так надо, not because of some invented eternal brotherhood.
“Russia does not owe anything to Serbia and Serbians.”
That’s true. Russia does not owe anything to Serbia and Serbians.
And it owes Bulgaria and Bulgarians even less.
But it seems that having spent the thirty pieces of silver from WWI & WWII some Bulgarians now want to claim the crown of thorns for Bulgaria as well.
This even as Bulgaria betrays Russia yet again.
Russia was the biggest foreign project of the second bulgarian empire. Russia was Christians by constabtinople but the religious ellite who went to Russia was bulgarian. Their 1st patriarch was bulgarian, the Russian language is what was the language of the 2nd bulgarian empire. Furthermore Russia is in very big debt to Bulgaria. The soviet nuclear program was made possible because the uranus ore of Bulgaria. Furthermore even the stupidest bloke in nato knows Bulgaria is the trojan horse of Russia. Russians and bulgarians ellites have bought every square inch of land in the bulgarian black seaside, they owe all ski resorts, the biggest telecom, several banks and medias. They do business and they have shared interests. How many Russian business and money are in Serbia? Last time I was there (2016) I didn’t see any to be honest.
“the Russian language is what was the language of the 2nd bulgarian empire. Furthermore Russia is in very big debt to Bulgaria. The soviet nuclear program was made possible because the uranus ore of Bulgaria.”
Phew!
Lucky for Russians that the Bulgarians decided to teach them a slavic language.
They could have chosen to teach them their own Oghur Turkic language instead.
I’d first like to thank the Saker for providing a forum for people to learn about the historical perversions of the western cabal and the injustice perpetrated. It’s important to comprehend that present geopolitical policy is only the modern incarnation of a long-standing agenda. And the guys in charge are simply continuing the same war waged against the Slavs and other indigenous populations for millennia. Your incredibly welcoming policy to open the blog to any writer who wishes to intelligently discuss history, society and geopolitics, is a treasure to the vineyard community.
To Leo, thank you for providing comprehensive historical documentation on the origins of this made up nation called Albania. Why the author failed to include the fact that Albania is stolen ancient Serbian land and the Austro-“Germans” created the “Albanian” nation, to prevent the restoration of the Serbian nation, on territories inhabited by Serbs for thousands of year, is a bit puzzling. For the love of God, look at the map provided which is still filled with Serbian toponyms of rivers, mountains, towns and regions throughout “Albania”. While some have been completely rewritten, many of these names have survived In spite of the Austro-Vatican-German (The successors to the Roman Empire) centuries long campaign.
To anonymous and Rt and all the other sad trolls, new and old,
The fact that such filthy lies and egregious insults, propagated by trolls of Nazi descent, and those without the slightest bit of historical knowledge, are allowed under the watch of the new gatekeeper, is an assault too far. Congratulations, thanks to your campaign and some of these new “Serb” posters, I’m tapping out. God Bless!
For those “Serb” commenters whose contributions seem to only subjectively castigate Serbs….sad! Some commentators ONLY contribution is to vilify the Obrenovic dynasty without providing any objectivity, never mentioning the machinations of Russian policy against the Serbian Nation, (Complete fabrication of Bulgarian history) in the second half of the 19th century. The new gatekeeper welcomes your continued participation.
With all my heart, I pray you take the time to gain more knowledge and historical perspective. Please understand that some of us have been fighting for decades against the overwhelming assault against the Serbian people and with the help of the Saker, these last few years, at least at the vineyard, we’ve begun to correct this historic injustice. You are doing a great disservice to the Serbian people. Never helping to defend against unimaginable falsehoods and slander, while feigning objectivity, to appease the malicious and ignorant attacks, is truly sad. But have at it. I’m sure our enemies will welcome more Markos’ and no Epithet.
They attacked because the back stab Serbia delivered in 1985. Clear as that. You can simply read it in the official documents and memoirs of bulgarian politics from that era. Bulgarians are also very livid due to the Serbian politic toward the so called ‘Western border area’ (Bosilegrad and around it) which is genociding ethnic bulgarians for 100 plus years now. So please in order to keep the discussion in the lines of historical facts do tell what happened in 1895 and what Serbia is doing in the Western border area around Bosilegrad. I bet that the readers will be very interested.
There is no “genociding” Serbian politics around Bosilegrad or anywhere else, nor it has ever been.
There are 3 Bulgarian political parties in Serbia. According to the latest polls there are officially 18.543 registered Bulgarians in Serbia (0,27% of the population) mostly around Bosilegrad.
Serbian constitution has special guarantied protection rights for the minorities besides the common rights for all citizens.
Among other things right for minority National Assembly (there are 16 minority national Assemblies in Serbia).
Bulgarian National Assembly is financed from the National Budget (all minority assemblies are) in proportion to the number of registered members.
In three municipalities there are bilingual preschools with Serbian and Bulgarian languages and in one primary school monolingual (Bulgarian) all financed from the national budget.
Bulgarian language with elements of national culture is taught in 5 primary schools and on University of Belgrade Faculty of Philology is teaching Bulgarian language and culture.
“Bratstvo” (brothership) publishing company is printing books and newspapers on Bulgarian language even children books.
TV Caribrod in Dimitrovgrad is sending 3,5 hours in Bulgarian language every day, Radio Bosilegrad – 17 hours and Radio Dimitrovgrad – 4 hours daily.
Bulgarian language and script is in official use in Bosilegrad, Dimitrovgrad and Ivanovo.
And so on and so on.
(personal attack removed, mod)
https://www.danas.rs/nedelja/beg-od-svog-identiteta-ili-bugari-u-srbiji/
The only problem Serbs have had with Bulgarians is regarding Macedonians who we Serbs historically are considering as a part of the Serbian nation though since the communist period they are now formed as a separate nation and don’t consider themselves as Serbs anymore.
Serbia and Serbs in general has reconciled with that and respect their choice though we don’t allow them to steal our heritage and churches.
We experience them mostly as a child who abandoned its parents and hope that it will some day mature especially due to their potential problem with own aggressive Albanian minority.
So we love them and would never harm them in any way despite their recent years politics which has been to some degree hostile to Serbia and our interests.
This is unlike the Croats/Croatia who we (at last) lost all hope for where we don’t expect anything positive even in the middle term possible in the (very) long term.
Territory of current days North Macedonia has for centuries been part of Serbia (South Serbia) and historical documents, even Bulgarian has mentioned that as a Serbian territory
https://www.koreni.rs/da-li-je-makedonija-srpska-zemlja-30-cinjenica-koje-niste-znali/
I won’t go into the details about Serbian heritage there, but Bulgarian historians are claiming it is Bulgarians and the territory belongs to Bulgaria.
So Bulgaria has used every opportunity to attack Serbia, has had concentration camps all over Bulgaria for Serbs during WW2 (20.000 out of 150.000 died there) but even in the harshest situations Bulgarian prisoners of wars were treated humanly where Serbian solders were sharing the last piece of bread with them despite the Bulgarian atrocities against the Serbian civilians. This was recorded by the non Serbs (English and Swiss).
After the defeat of Bulgaria in WW1 all war prisoners were let free to return home.
There is one year that has doomed the Serbs to eternal hate from the bulgarians, the year was 1885. The versed in history know what happened in that year.
Serbia and Bulgaria have almost never been on the same side of the battlefield and we Serbs remember numerous Bulgarian atrocities against civilians during the Bulgarian occupations of parts of the Serbian lands. So putting Bulgarians help and Serbia in the same sentence is just shameful.
https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%97%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%87%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B8_%D0%B0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%83%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B5_%D0%B8_%D0%B1%D1%83%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B5_%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%98%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B5_%D1%83_%D0%A1%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B8_(1914%E2%80%941918)
http://www.zlocininadsrbima.com/Bugarski.aspx
https://balkanskapravila.com/bugari-su-posle-genocida-nad-srbima-poslali-svoje-svestenike-da-bugarizuju-prezivele
And unfortunately Russia has historically always favored Bulgarian interest when in conflict with Serbian and I can’t find any exception though Serbia has never participating in attacking Russia while Bulgaria has in WW1 and WW2. Bulgaria is also part of the NATO today and just expelled 2 Russian diplomats.
Find a single Bulgarian volunteer in Donbas. You can claim that there were around 300-400 Russian volunteers on the Serbian side in the recent wars (there is a Russian graveyard in Republika Srpska with fallen Russian solders) but Serbian population is 8 millions while Russian is 140 millions so there should be more than 17 times more volunteers on the Russian side if you take proportions in the account (I’m grateful for every single person helping us for whatever reason so don’t get me wrong).
D. Rogosin has Serbian ancestors and if you read War and Peace you can find some importan Serbian name too. Look even at the movie I believe Balkan Gambit is the name about war for Constantinopol.
After Informbyro resolution 1948 almost 16.000 (of at least 55.000 that were punished in other ways) ended up in the special prison on the “Naked island” (Goli otok) for Russian sympathies where they were humiliated by the prisoners who fought for fascists as capos, so all Russian sentiments were brutally crashed during those 50 years.
413 were registered as dead there.
Despite that my mother learned Russian in the school and Russian was most popular as secondary language in the Serbian parts of the Yugoslavia mostly in the rural areas.
Most of the weapons and military technology in former Yugoslavia was of Soviet origin.
Most officers educated in some foreign country were educated in Russia.
In 1878 Serbian has liberated some parts of the south of Serbia so claiming that no Serbians are fighting Turks that year is just false.
In Bosnia (which we Serbs consider as mostly Serbian territory) Serbian insurgents liberated some territories and formed a temporary government sent delegation asking for support to Serbia but was help was declined due to great losses in the previous years. In Moscow a delegation of “Славјанофил”s got the advice for Serbs to make peace with Turks hoping to achieve some kind of autonomy while Russia has concentrated forces to free Bulgaria.
That was the greatest disappointment and Serbs in Bosnia has suffered enormously after every insurgency even after the killing of Austrian prince Ferdinand in Sarajevo 1914. when Serbs were hanged en masse along most of the roads in occupied Bosnia (think of Spartacus with the difference that most of the hanged Serbs were either ordinary peasants or most prominent Serbian figures).
So you are very wrong on almost each and every point.
Yes, Tito and yugoslav communist leadership brutally crashed pro-soviet opposition
But to be honest, I remember people of Yugoslavia, if we had to chose between Tito’s Yugoslav model of socialism and Soviet rigid model, 99.9% of us would chose Yugoslav liberal model of socialism, and nobody cared about those 16 000 Yugoslav Stalinists imprisoned from 1948 to 1956 when that repression stopped.
I visited Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Poland and USSR in 1986 and 1987 as a student and I thanked God and Tito for keeping Yugoslavia out of then socialist block.
And as I said, 99.9% of Yugoslav people were of the same opinion at that time.
Soviet model of so-called real socialism was extremelly unpopular in Yugoslavia. Including Serbia of course.
I believe you are mixing things up.
Somebody could say I visited Yugoslavia in 1989 – 1991 as a student, and it was terrible. People had no gasoline, there were food shortages, a lot of tensions among the different ethnic groups and try to draw some conclusions about the system.
Yugoslavia had terrible periods like after the WW2 maybe up to the end of fifties.
Then there was a good period up to the end of the 1960s with growing discontent among younger generations that couldn’t get decent jobs.
Yugoslavia solved it by giving almost everybody who wished a pass (it was very difficult to get it prior) and many left for the west. That elevated the situation but also produced a fresh flow of money in the opposite direction.
During the 60s, 70s and 80s we had access to consumer goods from west, Yugoslavia could borrow the money, got a lot of help from both sides like military technology from Soviet that we produced with own brands and sold throughout the developing world. We were also cheap labor for western firms especially in textile industry (some of the goods that didn’t pass quality control was distributed to the local market). We had increasingly both western and eastern tourists mostly to the Adriatic coast.
Yugoslavia bought the licenses to produce a number of western car/trunk brands like Citroën, Volkswagen, Fiat, Opel, Mercedes, Iveco, but we didn’t develop almost any own strong brand. Those that were developed were destroyed soon after the disintegration.
And so on and so on.
Then steam started to build up again but this time the west had no interest anymore in keeping Yugoslavia afloat, quite the opposite they encouraged and helped in every possible way including intelligence and weapons disintegration and ethnical and religious divisions.
That led to wars, destruction, and we are where we are today: Fraction of the industry production, depopulation, brain drain, endemic corruption and criminal on every level (we are joking that some countries have mafia while in Serbia mafia has country).
People of East Europe participated in almost every war against the Russia, most recently during WW2.
In the beginning Soviets/Russians believed in the possibility to win their harts and souls but with time they probably realized how delusional that was.
Those mentioned countries remained disloyal and untrustworthy during the Soviet period and in the end the Soviets kept them mostly as a buffer zone against the existential threat in the west.
At a time you were visiting East Europe Soviet block is already been disintegrating.
I don’t think that system was good, but one need to put things in perspective.
I think that what Serbia done to Bulgaria in 1885 is what has put both countries in the adversary path. And as why Russia favors Bulgaria, it is because Russian ellites are very verse in historical discourse and truth. Russia is what it is today because of orthodox Christianity and although they were baotizwd by Byzantium their 1st patriarch was Bulgarian and all initial religious books were sent by Bulgaria. In fact Russian orthodox Church is using the so called Church slovonic which in 10c was the official bulgarian language. You will be amazed to see how many Russian generals were bulgarians before 1878. It is some kind of very strong spiritual and carmic connection between those two nations. Also I am pretty sure Bulgaria plays on the side of Russia in the nato/eu paradigm.
“the war between Russia, Serbia and Montenegro against Turkey”
The Russo-Ottoman war’s second most important contingent was that of the Principality of Rumania, Serbia, and Montenegro barely survived the ottoman onslaught of the previous year.
At Plevna the russians had their asses handed to them, and without rumanian support the war would have ended differently. Even the bulgarians had provided more for the victory than the serbians, and montenegrins.
You understand where Plevnen is … you know, deep within current days Bulgaria and just 20 km from Romania but approximately 150 km from territory held by Serbia. Besides that territory has never been Serbian nor claimed by Serbs.
Turkish forces were coming from the wars with Serbs in Serbia in 1876-1877.
As I previously wrote Serbia even had to refuse to help its people in Bosnia during insurgency in 1878 due to exhaustion in wars with Turks.
Serbia has been in insurgency against Turks in the whole 17th century and after every insurgency experiencing Turkish revenge on the population (you can imagine how brutal it was). Most often insurgency would die out when ammunition was finished and Serbs wouldn’t and couldn’t get help from outside not even from the Christian Austria-Hungary who was more worried about Serbian insurgency than Turks.
During the 16th century Serbs were punished with death penalty in current day Croatia by Austria-Hungary if they tried to escape to Russia. They were by the way used as border military units towards the Turks and Austria-Hungary didn’t want to lose such great warriors to Russia. Serbian units and officers were famous even in now days Hungary and north of Serbia and partially in Romania for their battles against Turks under the Hungarian and Romanian flags.
So Serbs are to be blamed for not liberating Bulgaria.
How many Bulgarians or for that matter Romanians were participating in the Serbian insurgency and Serbian wars with Ottomans at any period of time?
And for everybody’s information: The only Serbian neighbor that never attacked Serbia is Romania, on the contrary we have had historically good relationship despite Romanians not been Slavs and Romania been member of the Fascist Axel. During the German, Bulgarian, Hungarian and Italian attack on Yugoslavia Romania didn’t participate and unlike all the other participants chose not to occupy any Serbian territory, so this is just a cheap try to saw discontent between our people.
Bulgaria on the other side was a major participant in the German attack, occupied large parts of the eastern and southern Serbia with numerous atrocities against Serbian civilians during the occupation and as well helping the Germans to cut-off Serbian retreat to the Greece and prevent another “Solun front”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Plevna
You misunderstand, serbs are not to be blamed in any way.
It’s the author’s fault to name the war “between Russia, Serbia and Montenegro against Turkey”, completely forgetting the rumanians, and bulgarians.
The serbs, and montenegrin fought the ottomans practically alone in 1876, and lost badly. Just after the russians declared war, and finally captured Plevna, with rumanian help, the serbs, and montenegrin rejoined the war at the end of 1877, with limited contribution to the war as a whole (they liberated their own territory).
As soon as the USA gets busy consuming itself and has to return its soldiers to their homeland, The Serbs will reclaim their traditional lands – including Kosovo.
As for the Albanians, they are parasites who seem to have infested the criminal classes in much of Western Europe. They are heavily involved in the drug and human trafficking trades. The American import the drugs from Afghanistan and leave it to the ethnic-Albanians to distribute them.
No wonder. Black fascists like the former red communists are working on the same project. The communists created a Macedonian, Montenegrin and Muslim nation with a large M. Before them, Vienna and London worked on creating a nation of Croats and Albanians, turning Sops into Bulgarians. Modified fraternity, liberty, egality. The problem of Serbs or Russians is that they do not know that they are not allowed by the International atlantistic services to create a national wide base which was made f.e.in America, Turkey, France or Albania, Croatia and Bulgaria. All who live in Serbia are Serbs, period. All who live in Russsia are Russians. Among Serbs and Russians, the Big International deliberately encourages peoples, nations, nationalities, ethnicities, and fools admire that and wait for a new war and a new separation of the country.
Very well written piece to Mark another anniversary of the savage NATO bombardment of 1999 that lasted 78 days and killed thousands. Thank you. Sadly, Serbia too has been reduced to an object of exploitation by the Western genocidal capitalism. Serbs too are migrating on mass escaping compradores in power who more or less fulfil all Western diktat including the evil project of political homosexualism. But Serbs are in such state “thanks” to decades of sanctions and even a direct NATO “humanitarian” aggression peppered with depleted Uranium (DU) used against the Serbs nominally but which is killing everyone including Muslims protégés in Bosnia and especially Serbia’s Kosovo. It is worth mentioning that Albanians from Kosovo, although officially recognised by their Western and Turkish bosses, come to hated Serbia proper to seek treatment for cancers caused by their protector’s loving DU ammunition.
In this Serbian province temporarily occupied by NATO/US and their proxy human-organ harvesters and drug dealers (forebears of ISIL), all mining and power generating assets were stolen by the US Americans, ze Germans, some French and British entities including Wesley Clark (NATO commander during the aggression against the Serb in 1999) and current US administration adviser Madeline Albright. Some say that the Washington Agreement signed by the tall gelding (thanks Larch) in power in Belgrade in September last year was designed to give a veneer or legality for the wholesale theft of major natural resources and assets in Serbia’s Kosovo. The agreement amongst other monstrosities gives the Americans the right to manage a huge artificial lake that is vital for power generation and water supply for the mines in Kosovo currently usurped by the Americans.
Only a month or two ago ownership of Serbia Kosovo’s power distribution system built by Serbia (Albanians never paid for electricity in the former Yugoslavia) was illegally transferred to Albania whose own distribution system was bought by ze Germans. So ze Germans are hypocriticall paddling green energy whilst stealing power generating assets across their vassal states in order to balance out their unstable power grid. Mind you, power generation in Kosovo is done by way of coal burning. Off course, environmental laws in protectorates are either non-existing or very lax.
Sadly, this last instance of piracy was tacitly approved by the current Serbian puppet government who did not dare to question legalities of it at all. Instead, they are in the process of preparing another bone of contention in the form of a law on homosexual marriage which will be another nail in the coffin into which they and their masters hope to put the Serbs.
Greater Albania does not represent areas where Albanians live or lived, they claim half of present day Macedonia, regions they have never even lived in, not to mention vast swathes of southern Serbia & Montenegro where again, they have never lived. Additionally, there is no such thing as an Albanian nation or ethnos, Albanians are an amalgam of ethnic groups, some brought by the Ottoman Empire to the Balkans, such as the Cicassians. It is a curious fact of history that Circassians once resided within the Balkans in large numbers, especially in present day Macedonia & Kosovo, & then they allegedly left when the Turks were booted out by Serbian liberators. With the Circassians allegedly gone, Albanians suddenly appeared, as if from no where. This is a historical slight of hand, conducted mainly by British & German historians. As for what Serbia should do, Serbia should fight for & claim its ethnic territories, unapologetically, without a care for claims of Greater Serbian hegemony. Serbia should do this, & if it is to survive will have to. Unfortunately, to date, Serbia has been governed by cowards that accept the narrative of the enemy & do not believe that their own people have any rights to their own historic territory, but occupiers & invaders apparently do.
Great article! So it seems the Albanians have always been someone’s imperial tool, from the Ottoman Turkey to NATO.
As for “greater” Albania, the Albanians simply do not have the numbers to sustain such a project. It is an open secret that the tribal, nomadic Gheg Albanians (who are very different to the Tosk Albanians who live around Tirana) move freely across borders between Montenegro, Albania, Serbia & Macedonia providing an illusion of critical mass.
On cue, they stage violent provocations and false flags in order to justify an intervention by their sponsors for their rights/sovereignty/ whatever…
The entire Balkan region is in a very sorry state between the treasonous governments of the countries there, Albanian NATO proxies undermining territorial integrity and NATO itself with its subversive and aggressive policies.
@RT
Would you be able you elaborate on your statements? I would be interested to here how is it Serbian fault that Constantinopol is still Istanbull. Also Yugoslavia was not Serbia. Serbs were largely mistreated in Yugoslavia under the communist regime so you need to address your grievances to a predomonantly croatian and slovenian communist aparatus. Kosovo is but one of the examples of such neglect and mistreatment. The last one about 50 years of helping west in the balkans against Russians {which century} is a perl…. very hard to comment…
One quibble: Tito’s regime was never “communist.” It was fascist. Tito regularly collaborated with the wartime fascists against the Chetniks and did his best to sabotage the Red Army’s progress into Yugoslavia, making secret and not-so-secret deals with the West in this and sundry other regards. Being a Croat posing as a “Serb,” Tito was always a proxy for the Anglo-Saxons and the Vatican against Stalin. Stalin was initially sympathetic toward the Chetniks until the British fed him disinformation. Communism had nothing to do with Tito’s revisionist, anti-Serb regime.
True. Also Tito’s Yugoslavia was a de-facto NATO member with agreements with Greece and Turkey that in case of a Soviet invasion Yugoslavia would side with those NATO states.
Yugoslavia was not in NATO. Yugoslavia was out of any military blocks.
BUT, in critical situation in case of great war between NATO and socialist block, Yugoslavia would side with USSR and socialist block.
Because Yugoslavia would not have other choice. As a socialist country with communist government, would not be tolerated by the USA and the West in the case of USSR defeat in such war.
90% of weaponry of Yugoslav Army was of Soviet origin. Also, yugoslav military leadership no way that would side with the West against USSR.
Again, Yugoslavia would fight on Soviet side. I know it, I am from military family
For as long as God, and our mothers grace the Serbian people with pure and righteous souls, to guide and inspire, like our Даница Црногорчевић (Danica Crnogorcevic ), the Serbian people will survive.
Greater Albania and all the other fabricated ethnicities, built on lies, will disappear on their own, faster than they were created. If the evil in the West tries forcibly again to eliminate us, rest assured that djole will have many brace i sestra with him, defending Srbija, under the pear tree.
May my vineyard family, of all ethnicities and creeds, find peace, love and inspiration in the angelic voice of our Danica:
Сини јарко сунце са Косова (Shine bright sun from Kosovo)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dqygfoTl2j0
ВЕСЕЛИ СЕ СРПСКИ РОДЕ / VESELI SE SRPSKI RODE
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=50t-8B0v9CI
ПРАВОСЛАВЉЕ ЦРНОМ ГОРОМ БЛИСТА
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kvHNfSPo1x4
КО УДАРА ТАКО ПОЗНО (SVETI SAVA)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DdsDBmUnLtE
How very wonderful. What a voice! Thank-you for that. I don’t understand a word, but I understand the vibe.
You are most welcome. Happy to hear that you enjoyed listening. Full of positive energy, the vibe is incredible. The first video has built-in English captions. For some reason they don’t show up in full screen mode on my iPhone, but playing the video on other devices, they show up.
If you pull up her channel, she’s also performed, near flawlessly in Greek and Russian. Many wonderful comments from Orthodox Christian believers from all over the world. Even more enjoyable are the kind comments from Croatian, Bosnian muslim and Albanian fans.
An incredible role model (and awesome voice) whose devotion to God, family and nation, inspires both young and old.
i will reread when i am more awake and less tired, great article.
Kosovo is historically Serbian land, but Ottomans settled there Albanians who converted to Islam. But Turks always had problems with them.
So, Albanians live there in significant numbers for at least 300 years probably more, and became majority 150 or 200 years ago.
Two strong nationalism clash there and in my opinion only agreement about division of Kosovo to Albanian part and Serbian part can bring permanent peace.
But, at this moment it is impossible.
Problem with Serbs and Albanians … both peoples are experts in making enemies all around themselves
Experts in making enemies? Unfortunately, you, a Serb of Roman Catholic faith, were used by our enemies as their proxy forces. By calling you what you really are, I don’t hate you, I just said it as is weather you like it or not. You can pretend in front of rest of the world that you are Croat and I will respect that, but don’t make statements that Serbs like making enemies while trying to defend their home from all kind of foreign invaders. WW2 showed how you couldn’t handle the truth by murdering your brothers and by doing that, to erase who you really are. During 80′, I was on many islands in today’s Croatia and made a lot of friends. Do you know what was common thing they told me? That they are Serbs. They didn’t have to hide it, they were already isolated. Sad.
This is exactly excellent confirmation of that what I previously said – you Serbs are an experts in making enemies.
And about WWII you are here talking to somebody who lost three members of family who died fighting as partisans against occupators.
You Serbs have to change your entire mind set to be able to communicate normally with other peoples of ex-Yugoslavia.
Is it possible – I do not know. It is up to you Serbs to answer that question.
I sincerely apologize when I said “you”, meaning that somebody ( majority of Croats during WW2) did atrocities in your name.
And for your “domovinski rat”, better do analysis and admit to yourself that your independence was built on nazi demons from WW2 used to provocate your neighbors. West didn’t help you, cos you were “right”, but you already know that.
Majority of Croats were in Partisans. 80 000 died fighting on partisan side and about 20 000 on quisling side.
Strait BS BosnianC our 14.divison was there in Pliberk/Blajburg May1945 to prove you wrong..120.000 mainly croat ustaše were captured there..ok maybe 10-20% were chetnics and white slovenes,some civilians. Rewritting history and stealing land from Serbs, Slovenes and others is your countrys goal and Vatican order.
Our independence was built on Serbian agression
One more thing. Serbs were fighting against neoliberal, woke, unnatural and backwards western mindset that all you, serbian neighbors, accepted. In the end, you are here cos’ you feel that mindset you were talking about somehow stinks. Anyway, just open your eyes and connect dots, you are very close, my brother.
All your political elites were prowestern.
And there is not problem with the West. Problem is western imperialism.
Anonymous, please stop writing such things because you are just doing everybody disfavor whether you realize it or not.
First of all been Serb is not a matter of blood or religion though it can help.
Been a Serb is a common spirit, culture, conciliarity (I can’t find good english word for Serbian “саборност”), traditions and progressive freedom-loving mindset, rebellion against all oppression be it external or internal is what (should) bind us together.
Anybody who share our values, common beliefs, accept our culture and traditions is welcome to join and become one of us.
Those who either don’t feel that they are part of the Serbian nation or refuse to be that should be left alone.
Trying to “convince” (actually force) somebody to be something that he or she doesn’t consider/feel to be is just antagonizing them and as I wrote it just makes everybody disfavor.
In this case “Bosnian Croat” has for the most very positive sentiments toward the Serbs, so there is no reason to antagonize him.
If all Croats were like him, we would most probably lived like Swedes and Norwegians if not even in harmony as a part of some kind of the federation.
By the way half of my family on my fathers side are Catholics (Bosnia) and except for my father consider themselves to be Croats.
It has been so for hundreds of years, and you would never be able to convince them otherwise. In essence, they aren’t Serbs by all relevant parameters I highlighted above, and they belong to the Croatian nation.
It is puzzling to me why many Serbs still has desire to disrespect themselves when someone from other side sort of speaks nicely about them even though we all know what their side did it in their name. For example, if Serb in serbian soccer jersey (or wearing any other serbian insignia) accidentally meet a Croat or any other former Yugoslavian, he immediately has a filling of guilt.
Here we have discussions. Leave fillings for libtards and their shrinks.
As far as Albanian national project is concerned, they are absolutely relentless. And of same mind, there is basically no anti-nationalist groups in Kosovo or elsewhere. During war in Bosnia and Croatia you had Serbian and Croat antinationalist magazines, groups (Feral Tribune, Vreme). I simply do not see anything similar on Albanian side.
Just this single-minded drive to final target: Great Albania incorporating Kosovo, some parts of south Serbia, Western Macedonia, Albania, parts of Montenegro. Macedonia has absolutely no chance to remain in existence in present borders. They may lay down low for a while, they may wait. Sooner or later, opportunity will come (Biden presidency for example). It s interesting to read Albanian comments on internet sites- they truly deeply hate “Slavs”.
How do you deal with such natural disaster? For Serbs, there was window of opportunity after WWE I, somewhen between 1918-1930. It was lost unfortunately. And I am not talking about indiscriminate killing or something like that. But some kind of mass resettlement to Turkey, as part of anyhow ongoing population exchanges (Moslem-Christian) should have been made.