posted 06-02-99 11:26 AM ET        

At the same time, I feel it important to read what other people get to read, for the sake of knowing what info others come across. So, I read the article and thought some of you may want to read it too.

Source:
Page 5, Tamil Nesan, A Tamil daily published in Malaysia and is constrained by Malaysian laws and er.. guidance (Roland would know what I mean here, considering his expertise on Mahathir)

Date: Sunday 18 April 1999

(Malaysia has Islam as the official religion and the Prime Minister must be Muslim)

posted 06-02-99 11:52 AM ET            

Balkan is a very complex mixture of many languages, cultures and religions. With further political contradictions, this historic complexity had become even more volatile.

What should we know to understand this issue? 1. Balkan Geography, 2.Ethnic mixture of the Slavs. 3.Religions in the Balkans, 4.The Serb mentality and especially extremist S.Milosovic's attitude and how it affected the other ethnic groups.

If understanding the above, it is easy to realise the current problem is not one of occupation by the US/Nato. Furthermore one can easily understand the problem is caused solely by the extremist Serb intent to dominate other racial groups.

(Note by Chola3: in Tamil, 'race' and 'ethnicity' are interchangeable)

'Balkan' means 'mountains' in Turkish. In 19th century the word came to mean the lands that encompass the curreny Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Albania, Greece and the European part of Turkey.

However, even before these states existed, at 6-7000 BC the area was the cradle of European civilisation. It is in the nearby Mesopotamia-Egypt regions did the human civilisation began.

The Slav language is a part of the Indo-European family, consisting of the Russians, Belorussians, Ukranians, Bulgarians, Czechs, Slovaks, Poles, Serbs, Croats, Montnegrins and the small group of Kaspians. The ancient name of this area is Slavda.

posted 06-02-99 12:07 PM ET            

When Christianity broke due to the Latin factor Croatia and Slovenia embraces Roman Catholic. Serbia and Montnegro followed the Orthodox Church. Since this separation was when the Pope was heavily invested with political power, there is no doubt this separation was due to very deep feelings.

But in 15th century the situation changed. The ruling Ottoman Turks spread Islam relentlessly and was able to convert 70% of the Albanians. The tendency to embrace the religion of the Ruling class also happened in Bosnia and South Serbia. The Orthodox Slavs in Serbia and the Montnegro drew closer to the Russians since the leadership of the Orthodox church had more or less moved to Russia.

In 1774 Russia made a treaty with Ottomon rulers by which Russia become the voice of the Orthodox Christians' rights. The 'unique' relanship between Serbia and Russia continues till today.

posted 06-02-99 12:32 PM ET            

The 7th century saw the Serbs became a dominant power in the Balkans. This dominance further increased with the creation of the Serbian Empire on the 12th century. At the peak of this period, the Serb King declared himself emperor of the Serbs, Greeks and Bulgarians. This intilled in the Serbs a mentality that they are born to rule all the other Slav groups.

However in 1389 the Serbs received a great shock when they were defeated terribly by the Ottomon Turks Muslims. This is called the 1st Kosovo War. The turks ruled for the next 5 centuries.

Recently with the dis-integration of Marshall Tito's Yugoslavia and the ascendancy of S.Milosovic, the inherent mentality of the Serbs to dominate others worsed an already difficult situation. They could have followed two superb examples to deal with these problems. 1.Tito's policy of sufficient autonomy and the federation system. 2.The civilised manner by how their fellow slavs Czechs Slovaks separated. Instead, Milosovic disregarded both these methods and decided to unhold the dominance of the Serbs.

The American press project Milosovic as an enemy of the world people. The projections the Americans make of their enemies are never to be believed. Nevertheless, there can be no doubt about Milosovic's extremist policy of considering the entire Balkan as a Greater Serbia.

As his first attempt, he forced his theories on Bosnians, Croatians and Albanians in a systematic manner. All the govt and military powers were consolidated in Serb hands. The Serbs living as minorities in other areas were given Russian arms and encouraged to carve out military enclaves. The People's Army of Yuguslavia became a Serb Army. The albanian language in schools were banned. Albanians were refused places in Serbian schools. Serb alphabets were forced upon Croats and Slovenes. In the name of national and cultural unity the education system was changed to pave the way for Serb cultural dominance.

posted 06-02-99 01:01 PM ET            

The result: The Yugoslav Wars. Croatia and Slovenia seceded from the federation while still bleeding in 1991. Bosnia gained independance 1992 after a horrifying war. Then Macedonia went its own way. M.Tito's 6-republic Yugoslavi changed into a 2-republic federation. Even in this Montnegrins were opressed. Kosovo wishes to secede from Serbia since around 80% of them are Albanians. Most of them are muslims.

The Balkans had seen unspeakable horrors. in 1014 the Byzantine emperor won by blinding some 14,000 soldiers. In modern era, gunfires and murders had become a part of life. In 1928 a croat MP was shot and murdered by a Montnegrin MP in the parliment itself.

As such the scenes of horror in the wars in Croatia and Bosnia is not surprising. Serb leader R.Karadzik's crimes in Bosnia are barbaric. He was declared a war-criminal. 30,000 died in the Yugoslav Wars. 20,000 Muslim women were raped. The Croatian and Bosnian POWs shown in TV reminds of the Nazi concentration camps.

There is no use hoping for a long-sighted leader like Tito. The way the racial purifications are commited by Serbs, there doesn't seem to be any hope that non-Serbs will want to live again in the Serbian Yugoslavia. Thus the creation of independant mini-states seem unavoidable.

This area will remain an unstable area. Overall, due to Catholicsm and western culture Croatia and Slovene will slide towards the west. In the same vein Serbia will become a Russian ally. Kosovo would naturally be attracted to Albania. In total the area will become a board for the world powers to play.

In this Balkan issue the only duty of the international community is to halt human rights violations such as racial purifications. Only America & England lead the international community.

American is selfish and immoral. England cannot yet realise it had lost its empires and is just another 3rd world nation. The only intention of these two countries is to worsen the existing problems. This is the cause for the Balkan tragedy.

END OF TRANSLATION.

posted 06-02-99 04:45 PM ET         

What the F*CK????

Well, I think Tamils are a bunch of @#^*%&$^&%^%**^ terrorists, but I happen to keep my opinions to myself.

Maybe the selfish and "immoral" part about the US, but England being 3rd world?? Up yours, and your whole damn underground newspaper with you.

Well, maybe I didn't mean everything in there, but I would like to know what you agree with, and how DID they come to that last conclusion??

Seems like much worse propoganda than CNN.

posted 06-02-99 04:53 PM ET         

Is it true you guys never had a John II because of the bad rap placed on the first King John?

Sign me,

posted 06-03-99 08:00 AM ET            

So, sorry for overlooking that post.

posted 06-03-99 08:43 AM ET            

The facts are spinned in such a way to give a subtle, long-term message. Sometimes the given message is obvious in the article itself but at times, the article, by giving (selective) facts in a certain pattern, makes the READER form a certain type of conclusion. It is a conclusion not explicitly stated in the specified article but that te reader tend to form when deprived of other countering information.

For example, I came across this WTO thing for a few times, about it having not elected a leader. Then I came across a full-page article in The Star, an English daily in Malaysia. I wish I could type it back here but it is much larger than the article I gave here. (For those with no idea of the WTO issue), the US & most of Europe supports a candidate from NZealand while Japan, Malaysia etc support a candidate from Thailand. It seems the Thai initially had more support but the US wanted a consensous and not a vote. Then the US (naturally) influenced other countries to support the NZ candidate.

The article (in the Star) didn't explicitly state it but after reading the entire article, I came to a conclusion the US support is based on the fact the NZ candidate is a white man. Repeat:The article didn't state so! I just derived my conclusion.

I came close to asking Roland about it in on a thread in this forum - and making a fool of myself, I guess. Lucky I didn't. It was inconceivable the USA would be so stupid and European countries would follow such racism. So, I just waited for the AsiaWeek magazine and hoped it will carry the WTO issue.

The AsiaWeek carried the issue and I came to a line like this:
... the US government's bias towards the free-market advocating New Zealand candidate was ...
So, I hit on the truth. This aspect was something never mentioned in the Star article. I still think Thailand should have been given a chance but at least I don't feel any racism is involved here. However, I wonder how others made up their mind over that Star article.
*************

posted 06-03-99 09:41 AM ET            

In any case, it was my mistake to give my profile the way it was. I just changed my profile to
Location = Indian, currently in Malaysia.
************

To Dan S (also others): The guiding hand of government is needed in such a pluralistic society in Malaysia. They had just arrested a few guys for spreading rumours in the Internet. Some newspapers unguided by the info ministry found themselves banned by some other ministry years ago. (That includes the Star). So, I guess the info ministry wants to help these newspapers save themselves from getting banned. So, what is wrong with it? !!
(don't know how to make a smiley)

As a person working here, and also an idiot who had used Chola3 in all internet related things
Since it seems I am the only one in the whole world with the 'Chola3' username and thus easily traced,
Since I happen to be an abject coward when in foreign soil,
Since I have a low tendency to take ANY risks at this particular moment of my life (April-September 1999),

I have to admit I would sound silly at times when involving 'certain' issues.

posted 06-03-99 11:12 AM ET            

I was atracted to the part about
" It is in the nearby Mesopotamia-Egypt regions did the human civilisation began."

It may be an unimportant thing but when talking about Mesopotamia, a Tamil usually includes the Indus, at least as a side note. The inclusion of Egypt further re-inforces my doubts about the originality of the article. Such a mid-east centered article could be
1. written by a non-Hindu Tamil
2. a translation done by a non-historian of some other article.

I am of view the article is actually a translation by a half-brain Tamil of a same article in a Malay newspaper. At the same time, the article didn't give a source of the original article, thus aiming to project itself as the original.

I am actually not sure what are the article's intention. It is definitely aimed at someone who has very less knowledge of Balkans (about 90-95% of Malaysian Tamils). What does it project?

1. Serbs are historically brutal.
as Dan S said, the long 7th century history is irrelevant compared to the last 100 years. Note a)the sudden jump from 14th century to Marshall Tito.
Note b)The cruelty of Byzantine emperor is told but conveniently side-steps Turk occupation (and the accompanying atrocities)

2. Kosovo stands in similar legal terms with Croatia or Bosnia.
It makes no mention of the fact Kosovo is NOT a republic of the Yuguslavia but only a province of Serbia. So, it imprints a thinking that since all the other republics went away, it is NATURAL for Kosovo to secede.

3. A pre-made tactic to un-appreciate and de-grade anything the US may do to help the Albanians.
Since Andrew K wrote sometime ago about ingratitude of certain people to whatever help they get, I thought he would have been interested. (Or maybe it was Victor or someone else who said such things. Can't even remember the thread.)

An important Note: The 'IMMORAL' thing is not about the amoral bombing, but about Clinton's personal life from a religious viewpoint. In fact, Mahathir once made a statement about it. (If I were a PM, I would keep to myself my opinion of others' personal life.)

4. Honestly I don't know why Britain got hit in the article.
******************************

As I had said in the begining, these articles are what people are fed with. No wonder it is hard for me to find persons to have a political chat. A few years ago, I asked a person why they didn't vote for the opposition party. He said, "It the opposition got a majority of seats, they will sit in parliament and prevent the PM (Mahathir) from doing his job." I was stunned. Shouldn't the existing PM be resigning? Many in Malaysia couldn't differentiate party and govt. Now, with this Anwar issue it is better but I am not sure about it.

posted 06-04-99 04:52 AM ET            

Most of the facts are correct; some minor aspects are that in the 7th century, it's too early to talk about serbs, and that over some times, the Bulgarians dominated the balkans.

For the incomplete/slightly wrong stuff:

However, even before these states existed, at 6-7000 BC the area was the cradle of European civilisation. It is in the nearby Mesopotamia-Egypt regions did the human civilisation began.

That would be correct for Crete and Greece, but much later.

The Orthodox Slavs in Serbia and the Montnegro drew closer to the Russians since the leadership of the Orthodox church had more or less moved to Russia.

The leadership was a) the patriarch in constantinople and b) the local patriarchs, sometimnes supported by the Turks to break the greek influence in the orthodox clergy. Since the 15th century, Russia wanted to take the leadership (moscow as the 3rd Rome etc...), but with the decentralised structure of the orthodox church(es), this only worked via nationalism later, in the 19th century.

By numbers, the Serbs are not a majority among the Slavs although at 36%...

This should be about correct, but for the _southern_ slav group...

However, in all era of history the Serbs showed a dominating behaviour towards all other South Slavs.

As they were the only ones who got to rule over other slav groups... Bulgaria was pretty much Bulgarian only, Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia were part of Austria-Hungary.

This intilled in the Serbs a mentality that they are born to rule all the other Slav groups.

Unsupported conclusion.

Nevertheless, there can be no doubt about
Milosovic's extremist policy of considering the entire Balkan as a Greater Serbia.

Definatley noit the entire Balkan. Under the definition of that article, this would inlcude about 5 million albanians, 10 million Bulgarains, 10 million Greeks, 20 million Romanians etc... bit much for 10 million serbs...

The Balkans had seen unspeakable horrors. in 1014 the Byzantine emperor won by blinding some 14,000 soldiers.

Basileios II, also known as Bulgaraktonos (Slaughterer of Bulgarians). While this is a correct fact, it has to be added that this kind of horror was in no way limited to the balkans. Eg in the 30 year war, about 5-10 million people died in central europe as a result of disease, hunger etc, but also of massacres.

As such the scenes of horror in the wars in Croatia and Bosnia is not surprising. Serb leader R.Karadzik's crimes in Bosnia are barbaric. He was declared a war-criminal. 30,000 died in the Yugoslav Wars. 20,000 Muslim women were raped. The Croatian and Bosnian POWs shown in TV reminds of the Nazi concentration camps.

The usual estimates about the number of victims are higher... but the main point is that atrocities were not only committed by the serbs.

---------------------

chola: 2. Kosovo stands in similar legal terms with Croatia or Bosnia. It makes no mention of the fact Kosovo is NOT a republic of the Yuguslavia but only a province of Serbia.

On the other hand, Kosovo was a subject of the federation, represented in the collective presidency just like the republics. But the article is clearly oversimplifying.

Regarding WTO: I'd also think that this is more about how much free market the WTO chief would want. Also, I think many european countries supported the Thai candidate, but I'd have to check that.

posted 06-04-99 11:45 AM ET         

All right, I'll take that. I'd be happy if they just mentioned Clinton and not the whole US.

"So, what has that to do with whether England is 3rd world or not? I am sure China can win Sweden too."

Good point. I think I didn't make myself clear enough. England's per capita income is definately high enough to make them a 1st world nation.

Who cares about Sweden??

posted 06-05-99 04:14 AM ET            

Oh, for the Clinton / USA thing, the Clinton affair is used to potray all of the USA in the same vein, thus the 'immoral america' thing. I just wanted to explain that the 'immoral' in the article was NOT about the immorality in the bombing.

(BTW, while I can't stand certain American attitude, I won't say the US society is much more religiously immoral than most others. I think the divorce rates in Malaysia is 20-30% and in India, informal, non-legal-based divorce would be about 10-20%. As for adultery, I haven't seen any country which has insignificant adultery. Nevertheless, there is a sort of attitute in many East Asian countries (From Indonesia to Japan) that all American/Western women are less than decent and will start sleeping around after age 13. When my (ex)-girl from Montana came here, I preferred saying she is a Jew, which is only partially true.)