Letter to the Editors, New York Review of Books, November 2005
Alan Ryan's review of Tony Judt's history of post-war Europe, and perhaps the book itself, are partial in both main meanings of that word. The review lingers on eastern Europe, and gives short shrift to the evolution of European unity, from its origins in the "pointless" Coal and Steel Community to a United States of Europe "not remotely in prospect". There is no mention of what EC/EU membership has done for Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Greece... It is consistent with this partiality that Slobodan Milosevic should get all the blame for "the breakup of Yugoslavia and the nastiness that followed" and the Germans in Bonn be totally exonerated, although their recognition of Croatia and Slovenia so clearly pointed the way to that nastiness, by leaving Serbia/Yugoslavia out of the equation. Alan Ryan writes: ..."it is hard to believe that [Hans-Dietrich] Genscher in 1991 could have persuaded his colleagues in the German government to recognise Slovenia and Croatia as independent states if any of them had an inkling that the next step would be a prolonged civil war... But how was anyone to know?" he adds, after all, look how quiet was the breakup of Czechoslovakia two years later, and the relatively calm secession from the Soviet Union of the Baltic states and Ukraine. Isn't that the whole point, as no historian can pretend not to know? These were all satellites of the Soviet Union, with no true nationhood of their own, while Yugoslavia was a multi-ethnic state forged under independent Communist rule, that owed nothing to Stalin, was a thorn in his side, whose leader, Tito, was a "Croatian", ruling from Belgrade, in "Serbia". How many millions of Serbian and other resistance fighters were not killed by Nazi-supported Croatian forces through the war? For how many decades, under Tito and after, didn't Serbians and Muslim Bosnians and Croatians and Albanians mingle and intermarry, within the state of Yugoslavia? Germany's recognition of the rich northern statelet of Slovenia, and of the Croatia which had collaborated with Hitler, was a mad act, brought on perhaps by the euphoria of the wall coming down, of a country (West Germany) which had spent decades doing nothing untoward in foreign policy until then. Yet its first act has to be recognising a post-fascist secession. So many of us, Germans, ordinary observers, were appalled at the time at this break from progressive post war German foreign policy, and saw clearly the Serbian reaction it heralded. Even now, Croatian war criminals are getting off lighter than Serbs. Communism may be virtually dead in its old form. Anti-Communism is not.
Tony Hall
Alan Ryan's review of Tony Judt's history of post-war Europe, and perhaps the book itself, are partial in both main meanings of that word. The review lingers on eastern Europe, and gives short shrift to the evolution of European unity, from its origins in the "pointless" Coal and Steel Community to a United States of Europe "not remotely in prospect". There is no mention of what EC/EU membership has done for Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Greece... It is consistent with this partiality that Slobodan Milosevic should get all the blame for "the breakup of Yugoslavia and the nastiness that followed" and the Germans in Bonn be totally exonerated, although their recognition of Croatia and Slovenia so clearly pointed the way to that nastiness, by leaving Serbia/Yugoslavia out of the equation. Alan Ryan writes: ..."it is hard to believe that [Hans-Dietrich] Genscher in 1991 could have persuaded his colleagues in the German government to recognise Slovenia and Croatia as independent states if any of them had an inkling that the next step would be a prolonged civil war... But how was anyone to know?" he adds, after all, look how quiet was the breakup of Czechoslovakia two years later, and the relatively calm secession from the Soviet Union of the Baltic states and Ukraine. Isn't that the whole point, as no historian can pretend not to know? These were all satellites of the Soviet Union, with no true nationhood of their own, while Yugoslavia was a multi-ethnic state forged under independent Communist rule, that owed nothing to Stalin, was a thorn in his side, whose leader, Tito, was a "Croatian", ruling from Belgrade, in "Serbia". How many millions of Serbian and other resistance fighters were not killed by Nazi-supported Croatian forces through the war? For how many decades, under Tito and after, didn't Serbians and Muslim Bosnians and Croatians and Albanians mingle and intermarry, within the state of Yugoslavia? Germany's recognition of the rich northern statelet of Slovenia, and of the Croatia which had collaborated with Hitler, was a mad act, brought on perhaps by the euphoria of the wall coming down, of a country (West Germany) which had spent decades doing nothing untoward in foreign policy until then. Yet its first act has to be recognising a post-fascist secession. So many of us, Germans, ordinary observers, were appalled at the time at this break from progressive post war German foreign policy, and saw clearly the Serbian reaction it heralded. Even now, Croatian war criminals are getting off lighter than Serbs. Communism may be virtually dead in its old form. Anti-Communism is not.
Tony Hall
Comments
Post a Comment