Zionist IVO GOLDSTEIN stands for Serbian minorities in Croatia

Last week was the 75th anniversary of Tito's famous statement, "We will not give away our own." At that time, Tito made explicit reference to Rijeka, Istria and the Slovenian coast. Criticize D'Annunzi and at the same time have the streets of Ustasha Mile Budak, who also wrote books in a number of cities ...

 Professor of History at the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences in Zagreb, Ivo Goldstein, commented on our list of provocations of Italian fascists in Rijeka, but also about the rapid growth of the extreme right in Croatia. We started the interview by asking him to comment on the events of Thursday, which upset the people of Rijeka.

Is it an organized escalation of Italian fascism?

- From the information that is still to come, there is no doubt that the matter was organized, that neo-fascists were preparing to make a mess and that only timely intervention by our services prevented more trouble. This is an absolutely new thing in Croatian-Italian relations.

In past years and decades, there have been various anniversaries that neo-fascists could have celebrated, but such a powerful provocation has never taken place. Of course, this is scandalous for every condemnation, not only did these people come to Rijeka in an organized manner, but also that the monument in Trieste is being erected to D'Annunzi.

 Neither strength nor desire
Croatian authorities have unanimously condemned the incident?

 One has to wonder what our country has done to prevent such a provocation. As we have seen, all the representatives of the government made themselves known: the President of the Republic, the Prime Minister and the Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs. But it had been known for months before that a monument was erected in Trieste D'Annunzi.

They needed to talk to the authorities in Rome, they needed to ask for a statement, to demand that they publicly pledge their passions to calm down, to clearly state that Italy respects all agreements signed after World War II, including those key, Osimo agreements.

He also needed to press Antony Tajani for the pig he was cutting. One could also think positively - to make with the Italians a kind of manifestation to commemorate this anniversary together.

 Accordingly, more should have been done. However, our country does not know this and does not have the capacity to do such a thing. Because, to criticize D'Annunzi and at the same time in many cities have the streets of Mile Budak, who also wrote books ...

Of course, to be sarcastic, Budak's poetry is truly superb: his lyrics "Serbs on the Willows" and "Running Dogs across the Drina" are anthological values. Therefore, if we support Budak, then why complain about fascist poetry such as D'Annunzio?

 So we have a right-wing government that tolerates philosopher incidents, and it is hard to expect that they will wholeheartedly suppress the pro-fascist outbursts of neighboring nations, so are they dangerous for Croatia as well?

 - Exactly. How does our government defend the Italians from remembering that they once ruled Rijeka and Istria, when our president believes that calling Herceg-Bosna in Thompson's poem "Are You Beautiful" is no provocation? In the poem, therefore, in which "Herceg-Bosna" - whatever that means - is presented practically as part of Croatia. Therefore, we are not pure in this sense.

Our government is as it is - it has neither the credibility nor the strength nor the desire to invoke Joseph Broz Tito, who, while fighting for the Yugoslav northwestern border, said in Vis:

At the time, he explicitly mentioned Rijeka, Istria, the Slovenian Littoral and Carinthia and noted that "it is about correcting past injustices, Versailles, Rapallo and other treaties". Last week was the 75th anniversary of Tito's famous statement.

 Tito defended the northwestern border of Yugoslavia, but also the present-day borders of Croatia and Slovenia. Accordingly, these words of Tito should be repeated today, they should still be a light and a sign to say: "Hey, you stay there for a while: we will not go elsewhere, we will not give ours!"

New hysteria against Serbs

The SDSS president Milorad Pupovac also spoke about the threats of the Croatian extreme right in a different context these days.

 It is difficult for me to enter into relations in the ruling coalition. But what Pupovac said was not in dispute. He mildly pointed out, through diplomatic vocabulary, that there are some tendencies in today's Croatia that are reminiscent of NDH.

We are in a theater of the absurd, because those who attack him most severely, who are partly Ustasha nostalgics, should actually thank him and congratulate him. Namely, they think and speak their best about "endehasia", so following this logic, Pupovac said that NDH is the same as today's Croatia, in their eyes this should not be a problem. Of course, such people would catch Pupovac by any word, just to demonize him and make him a problem.

 There is a will to expel the SDSS, as a political party of Serbs in Croatia, from the ruling coalition and thus from a legitimate political space, and to send a clear message to Serbs in Croatia: "Don't answer."

 - That's right, there are these two dimensions to the problem. But it is part of a general political action in recent years that has intensified these days, and which, in some elements, has absolutely similarities to what has been happening in the NDH. I do not believe that today we can repeat what was happening in "endehasia", but I must warn, and I am allergic, to all tendencies that go in this direction, even if they are very far away.

What are the tendencies?

- Let those who want to push Pupovac and the SDSS out of power, and are Ustashtostalgic, say that any resemblance to what I will read now is accidental and unintentional. I will quote the "Principles of the Croatian Ustasha Movement" proclaimed by Pavelic in 1933: "In Croatian national and state affairs, in an independent, independent state, Croatia must not be decided by anyone who is not a knee and blood member of the Croatian people."

It is clear, then, that Serbs should not decide on these matters, and that this is an Ustasha principle. By what logic does the SDSS, after such a statement by Pupovac, want to be thrown out of government? Second, the hysteria that has been spreading all these months is reminiscent of the hysteria that spread in the spring and summer of 1941, in the first months of the NDH.

Such an atmosphere predated the mass atrocities of the summer of 1941. I will quote Milo Budak from that time: »Croatia has enemies who are not members of the Croatian national community. They are Serbs and Jews. ”He rushed for crime. "Eat only half a bowl with Vlach, and kill him on the head with half a bowl." And of course, "Either bow down or remove yourself."

Milovan Zanic, Minister-President of the Legislative Commission, said in a public speech in June 1941: “You get up, you know, I speak openly: this country, our homeland, must be Croatian and no one else, and therefore those who came here. you also need them to leave.

This has to be the land of Croats and no one else, and there is no such method that we as Ustasha will use to make this country truly Croatian, and to cleanse it of Serbs who have threatened us for hundreds of years and who would endanger us first. We do not keep it secret, it is the policy of this state, and when we do, we will only do what is written in the Ustasha principles.

HDZ Vice President Milijan Brkic told Milorad Pupovac that he should move if he is not satisfied. For seven years, I have been persistently trying to prevent the use of the Cyrillic script in Vukovar, and I remind you
- One of the first decisions made by the NDH authorities was to ban the Cyrillic alphabet, on April 25, 1941. Also, Serbs in the public space and in the NDH are still collectively demonized today by claiming that they never loved Croatia.


Ustashonostalgic people, like Thompson who sings about it, gladly remember the Jasenovac camp, knowing that it is massively killed - Thompson sings, "This is the house of Max's butchers." And there are more such examples. All this is reminiscent of 1941 and the preparatory steps for the mass Ustasha slaughter.
Ominous words

Can you comment on the physical attacks on Serbs in recent weeks?

- The way the Uzdol attack was organized - an organized group that traveled 75 kilometers to beat Serbs and smash around a coffee shop - is strikingly reminiscent of some events of 1941. These are detachments, squads of death.

Luckily no one was seriously injured, but anything could happen. Recalling such death squads again takes us back to 1941. I will recall the murder of a prominent Karlovac lawyer, Milan Vujicic, carried out by three nineteen-year-old Karlovac men, aggrieved by their elders. Vujicic was a Serb, but in opposition to the former monarchist dictatorship.

These Karlovac balavacs were told that "for our cause", Vujicic should be killed because he was a danger to the state, and they did so, despite being married to Anastasia, a Croat whose uncle Pero Blaskovic was even promoted in those days. NDH army generals. All this was not enough to protect Vujicic, but he was taken from Karlovac to a nearby forest and killed there.

The question is who made these people from Split hasty and organized them to go to work in Uzdolje. And why? Under what charge? Because someone, almost 30 years after Croatia gained independence, imagine, cheering for the Red Star. It has to do with fan violence in general, with organizing fan groups as militant units, and of course with the war, with fan groups and on the Serbian side.

That history is a little more complicated, but what happened in Uzdolje is a new dimension of violent behavior towards Serbs, not forgetting the horrific beating of Radoje Petkovic in Viskovo, which ended in his death.


These are all arguments that show that there are elements of fascist in this society. If not only the critical public, but also the authorities, oppose them, they could continue to strengthen. Who is not aware of this and is in high positions is absolutely irresponsible.

As a kind of warning, the President of the Republic repeated the letter from 2016, in which she practically stated that the minority victims of the attack were themselves to blame for what was happening to them, because they allegedly "offend the Croatian people"?

- It's a scandal in itself. To repeat a letter to Pupovac, as a disobedient student who you have to repeat twice to understand, is humiliating. The President of the Republic has constitutional powers that are completely contrary to what Kolinda Grabar-Kitarovic is doing. Another dimension of the problem is that what the constitution may not write, but liberal democracy requires, is the protection of the rights of all minorities.

Because, minorities - at this moment Serbian, and then others in Croatia - feel threatened. Pupovac and the Serbs have done nothing this month to harm Croatia. And it has been 25 years since aggression and war.

How much longer do we have to live this war in order to remove a mortgage from the Serbian community from the perspective of the Croatian ultra-rightist? The hatred of the Serbs seems to be a lasting "value" to which they are powered. The trains that Andrej Plenkovic needed to take to do something were long gone. It was to act in the manner of Ivo Sanader: when the Ustashas erected a monument, send a bulldozer overnight.

Well, here we are

It should be recalled that Tito's Yugoslavia defended the northwestern border, and more than that: in the spring of 1952, the governments of the United States and Great Britain decided that the administration in Zone A would surrender to Italy, sparking fierce protests by the Yugoslav side.

Demonstrated throughout Yugoslavia; rallies were held in businesses and schools, and the largest rally was organized on April 15 in Zagreb, where, at the time, the Republic Square - today Ban Jelacic Square - gathered, according to newspaper reports, about 200,000 citizens who "manifested their determination to defend our independence." and rights. "

It was "a magnificent mobilization in a unanimous vocation: 'we do not give Trieste', a document of the will and courage of a people who cannot be intimidated by anything." But, of course, this authority regards the reference to Tito and Yugoslavia as blasphemy. Well then, here we are. 

Kosovo Genocide Timeline

Timeline Description: The Kosovo genocide was part of the Kosovo conflict (1998 - 99), in which ethnic Albanians opposed ethnic Serbs and the Yugoslavian government in Kosovo. Part of the Serbs' strategy was a major ethnic cleansing of Albanians. The intervention of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) ultimately resolved the conflict.

Date	Event
December 1987	Slobodan Milošević becomes party leader of Serbia. Milošević's rising popularity helps him remove his former mentor Ivan Stambolić from leadership of the League of Communists of Serbia (LCS), and to become leader himself. As party leader, Milošević demands that the federal government restore the autonomous provinces of Vojvodina and Kosovo to Serbia's control.
March 1989	Milošević places Kosovo under Serbian control. As leader of the LCS, Milošević removes Kosovo and Vojvodina's provincial governments, and imposes a police state. Ethnic Albanians are removed from their jobs to make room for Serbians, and thousands of Albanians migrate to Western Europe and North America.
May 8, 1989	Slobodan Milošević becomes leader of the Serbian republic. Due to his popular support, the Serbian assembly removes the president and installs Milošević as president of the Serbian republic. He supports members of the Serbian minority of Kosovo, who object to the fact that Muslim Albanians are the majority in a region sacred to the Serbs.
1989	Academics form the Democratic League of Kosovo. In response to Milošević's crackdown in Kosovo, a group of academics form the Democratic League of Kosovo (LDK), with Ibrahim Rugova as their leader. They begin a series of non-violent protests against the Serbian government, but their ineffectiveness leads Rugova's opponents to call for more violent means.
May 1992	Pacificist Kosovars begin creating a shadow government. Kosovar Albanians hold unofficial elections, in which they elect Rugova as their president. He begins to create a shadow government.
November 21, 1995	The Dayton Accords convince Kosovar Albanians to look to violent means. After several republics attempt to secede from Yugoslavia, war breaks out. It is resolved with the Dayton Accords in 1995, but these agreements fail to clarify Kosovo's status. As a result, Kosovar Albanians begin to look for more violent means of resisting Serbian control.
April 22, 1996	The Kosovo Liberation Army launches coordinated attacks. Convinced that passive resistance is no longer sufficient to stop Serbian control, a group calling itself the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) launches a series of attacks on Serbian police stations. They most likely receive financial support from the Kosovo Albanian diaspora.
July 3, 1997	Milošević becomes president of Yugoslavia. As Milošević's second term as president of Serbia comes to an end, he changes his title to president of the Yugoslavian federation. This federation now consists only of Serbia and Montenegro.
November 28, 1997	The KLA declares its intentions. During a funeral for an Albanian teacher killed by Serbian police, the KLA makes its first public statement. It outlines the KLA's position and objectives, which include the secession of Kosovo from Serbia and the eventual creation of a "Greater Albania," encompassing Kosovo, Albania, and the ethnic Albanian minority of nearby Macedonia. The KLA is later classified as a terrorist organization.
January 22, 1998	Serb forces begin violent crackdowns on Kosovar terrorism. During an armed operation, Serb forces destroy a house in Prekaz, injuring two women, and they kill a man in Klina. While the Interior Ministry denies police involvement, this action effectively launches Serbia's violent crackdown on the Albanian population of Kosovo.
September 23, 1998	UN Security Council demands a ceasefire. After several meetings of the Contact Group (an informal coalition of the United States, Great Britain, Germany, France, Italy, and Russia), the UN Security Council demands a ceasefire in Kosovo. Despite agreeing to these demands, Milošević fails to implement them, and the KLA, Yugoslav, and Serbian forces resume ruthless attacks.
January 16, 1999	Massacre at Racak forces the West to act. Serbian forces massacre 45 civilians, mainly male, at Racak. While killings have continued since the outbreak of the conflict, the massacre at Racak forces the West to intervene.
February 6, 1999	Diplomatic interventions begin but ultimately collapse. The United States leads other members of the international community in diplomatic negotiations in Rambouillet, France, in an attempt to pressure Milošević to end the conflict.However, negotiations break down in March.
March 24, 1999	NATO begins air strikes against Serbian military targets. Following the failed peace negotiations, NATO launches a series of air strikes against Serbian military targets. In response, Yugoslav and Serbian forces drive out all of Kosovo's ethnic Albanians, displacing thousands of people into Albania, Macedonia, and Montenegro. The NATO campaign lasts 11 weeks and expands to Belgrade, where it significantly damages Serbian infrastructure.
June 10, 1999	NATO and Yugoslavia agree to withdraw troops. Following the adoption of a UN peace accord, NATO and Yugoslavia agree to withdraw troops from Kosovo. The UN moves into Kosovo to administer the peace and to oversee the repatriation of Kosovar refugees, including nearly one million ethnic Albanians. Most Serbs leave the region, and despite the peace there are occasional reprisals against those who remain.

The Destruction of Ethnic Germans and German Prisoners of War in Yugoslavia, 1945-1953

Author: Tomislav Sunic
INSTITUTE FOR HISTORICAL REVIEW

From the European and American media, one can often get the impression that World War II needs to be periodically resurrected to give credibility to financial demands of one specific ethnic group, at the expense of others. The civilian deaths of the war's losing side are, for the most part, glossed over. Standard historiography of World War II is routinely based on a sharp and polemical distinction between the "ugly" fascists who lost, and the "good" anti-fascists who won, and few scholars are willing to inquire into the gray ambiguity in between. Even as the events of that war become more distant in time, they seemingly become more politically useful and timely as myths.
German military and civilian losses during and especially after World War II are still shrouded by a veil of silence, at least in the mass media, even though an impressive body of scholarly literature exists on that topic. The reasons for this silence, due in large part to academic negligence, are deep rooted and deserve further scholarly inquiry. Why, for instance, are German civilian losses, and particularly the staggering number of postwar losses among ethnic Germans, dealt with so sketchily, if at all, in school history courses? The mass media -- television, newspapers, film and magazines -- rarely, if ever, look at the fate of the millions of German civilians in central and eastern Europe during and following World War II. [1]
The treatment of civilian ethnic Germans -- or Volksdeutsche -- in Yugoslavia may be regarded as a classic case of "ethnic cleansing" on a grand scale. [2]  A close look at these mass killings presents a myriad of historical and legal problems, especially when considering modern international law, including the Hague War Crimes Tribunal that has been dealing with war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Balkan wars of 1991-1995. Yet the plight of Yugoslavia's ethnic Germans during and after World War II should be of no lesser concern to historians, not least because an understanding of this chapter of history throws a significant light on the violent breakup of Communist Yugoslavia 45 years later. A better understanding of the fate of Yugoslavia's ethnic Germans should encourage skepticism of just how fairly and justly international law is applied in practice. Why are the sufferings and victimhood of some nations or ethnic groups ignored, while the sufferings of other nations and groups receive fulsome and sympathetic attention from the media and politicians?
At the outbreak of World War II in 1939, more than one and a half million ethnic Germans were living in southeastern Europe, that is, in Yugoslavia, Hungary, and Romania. Because they lived mostly near and along the Danube river, these people were popularly known "Danube Swabians" or Donauschwaben. Most were descendants of settlers who came to this fertile region in the 17th and 18th centuries following the liberation of Hungary from Turkish rule.
For centuries the Holy Roman Empire and then the Habsburg Empire struggled against Turkish rule in the Balkans, and resisted the "Islamization" of Europe. In this struggle the Danube Germans were viewed as a rampart of Western civilization, and were held in high esteem in the Austrian (and later, Austro-Hungarian) empire for their agricultural productivity and military prowess. Both the Holy Roman and Habsburg empires were multicultural and multinational entities, in which diverse ethnic groups lived for centuries in relative harmony.
After the end of World War I, in 1918, which brought the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Habsburg empire, and the imposed Versailles Treaty of 1919, the juridical status of the Donauschwaben Germans was in flux. When the National Socialist regime was established in Germany in 1933, the Donauschwaben were among the more than twelve million ethnic Germans who lived in central and eastern Europe outside the borders of the German Reich. Many of these people were brought into the Reich with the incorporation of Austria in 1938, of the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia in 1939, and of portions of Poland in late 1939. The "German question," that is, the struggle for self-determination of ethnic Germans outside the borders of the German Reich, was a major factor leading to the outbreak of World War II. Even after 1939, more than three million ethnic Germans remained outside the borders of the expanded Reich, notably in Romania, Yugoslavia, Hungary and the Soviet Union.
In the first Yugoslavia -- a monarchical state created in 1919 largely as a result of efforts of the victorious Allied powers -- most of the country's ethnic Germans were concentrated in eastern Croatia and northern Serbia (notably in the Vojvodina region), with some German towns and villages in Slovenia. Other ethnic Germans lived in western Romania and south-eastern Hungary.
This first multiethnic Yugoslav state of 1919-1941 had a population of some 14 million people of diverse cultures and religions. On the eve of World War II it included nearly six million Serbs, about three million Croats, more than a million Slovenes, some two million Bosnian Muslims and ethnic Albanians, approximately half a million ethnic Germans, and another half million ethnic Hungarians. Following the breakup of Yugoslavia in April 1941, accelerated by a rapid German military advance, approximately 200,000 ethnic Germans became citizens of the newly established Independent State of Croatia, a country whose military and civil authorities remained loyally allied with Third Reich Germany until the final week of the war in Europe. [3]  Most of the remaining ethnic Germans of former Yugoslavia -- approximately 300,000 in the Vojvodina region -- came under the jurisdiction of Hungary, which during the war incorporated the region. (After 1945 this region was reattached to the Serbian portion of Yugoslavia.)
The plight of the ethnic Germans became dire during the final months of World War II, and especially after the founding of the second Yugoslavia, a multiethnic Communist state headed by Marshal Josip Broz Tito. In late October 1944, Tito's guerilla forces, aided by the advancing Soviets and lavishly assisted by Western air supplies, took control of Belgrade, the Serb capital that also served as the capital of Yugoslavia . One of the first legal acts of the new regime was the decree of November 21, 1944, on "The decision regarding the transfer of the enemy's property into the property of the state." It declared citizens of German origin as "enemies of the people," and stripped them of civic rights. The decree also ordered the government confiscation of all property, without compensation, of Yugoslavia's ethnic Germans. [4]  An additional law, promulgated in Belgrade on February 6, 1945, canceled the Yugoslav citizenship of the country's ethnic Germans. [5]
By late 1944 -- when Communist forces had seized control of the eastern Balkans, that is, of Bulgaria, Serbia and Macedonia -- the German-allied state of Croatia still held firm. However, in early 1945, German troops, together with Croatian troops and civilians, began retreating toward southern Austria. During the war's final months, the majority of Yugoslavia's ethnic German civilians also joined this great trek. The refugees' fears of torture and death at Communist hands were well founded, given the horrific treatment by Soviet forces of Germans and others in East Prussia and other parts of eastern Europe. By the end of the war in May 1945, German authorities had evacuated 220,000 ethnic Germans from Yugoslavia to Germany and Austria. Yet many remained in their war-ravaged ancestral homelands, most likely awaiting a miracle.
After the end of fighting in Europe on May 8, 1945, more than 200,000 ethnic Germans who had remained behind in Yugoslavia effectively became captives of the new Communist regime. Some 63,635 Yugoslav ethnic German civilians (women, men and children) perished under Communist rule between 1945 and 1950 -- that is, some 18 percent of the ethnic German civilian population still remaining in the new Yugoslavia. Most died as a result of exhaustion as slave laborers, in "ethnic cleansing," or from disease and malnutrition. [6]  Much of the credit for the widely-praised "economic miracle" of Titoist Yugoslavia, it should be noted, must go to the tens of thousands of German slave laborers who, during the late 1940s, helped to build the impoverished country.
Property of ethnic Germans in Yugoslavia confiscated in the aftermath of World War II amounted to 97,490 small businesses, factories, shops, farms and diverse trades. The confiscated real estate and farmland of Yugoslavia's ethnic Germans came to 637,939 hectares (or about one million acres), and became state-owned property. According to a 1982 calculation, the value of the property confiscated from ethnic Germans in Yugoslavia amounted to 15 billion German marks, or about seven billion US dollars. Taking inflation into account, this would today correspond to twelve billion US dollars. From 1948 to 1985, more than 87,000 ethnic Germans who were still residing in Yugoslavia moved to Germany and automatically became German citizens. [7]
All this constitutes a "final solution of the German question" in Yugoslavia.
Numerous survivors have provided detailed and graphic accounts of the grim fate of the ethnic German civilians, particularly women and children, who were held in Communist Yugoslav captivity. One noteworthy witness is the late Father Wendelin Gruber, who served as a chaplain and spiritual leader to many fellow captives. [8]  These numerous survivor accounts of torture and death inflicted on German civilians and captured soldiers by Yugoslav authorities adds to the chronicle of Communist oppression worldwide. [9]
Of the one and a half million ethnic Germans who lived in the Danube basin in 1939-1941, some 93,000 served during World War II in the armed forces of Hungary, Croatia and Romania – Axis countries that were allied with Germany – or in the regular German armed forces. The ethnic Germans of Hungary, Croatia and Romania who served in the military formations of those countries remained citizens of those respective states. [10]
In addition, many ethnic Germans of the Danubian region served in the "Prinz Eugen" Waffen SS division, which totaled some 10,000 men throughout its existence during the war. (This formation was named in honor of Prince Eugene of Savoy, who had won great victories against Turkish forces in the late 17th and early 18th centuries.) [11]  Enlisting in the "Prinz Eugen" division automatically conferred German citizenship on the recruit.
Of the 26,000 ethnic Danubian ethnic Germans serving in various military formations who lost their lives, half perished after the end of the war in Yugoslav camps. Particularly high were the losses of the "Prinz Eugen" division, most of whom surrendered after May 8, 1945. Some 1,700 of these prisoners were killed in the village of Brezice near the Croat-Slovenian border, while the remaining half was worked to death in Yugoslav zinc mines near the town of Bor, in Serbia. [12]
In addition to the "ethnic cleansing" of Danube German civilians and soldiers, some 70,000 Germans who had served in regular Wehrmacht forces perished in Yugoslav captivity. Most of these died as a result of reprisals, or as slave laborers in mines, road construction, shipyards, and so forth. These were mostly troops of "Army Group E" who had surrendered to British military authorities in southern Austria at the time of the armistice of May 8, 1945. British authorities turned over about 150,000 of these German prisoners of war to Communist Yugoslav partisans under pretext of later repatriation to Germany.
Most of these former regular Wehrmacht troops perished in postwar Yugoslavia in three stages: During the first stage more than 7,000 captured German troops died in Communist-organized "atonement marches" (Suhnemärsche) stretching 800 miles from the southern border of Austria to the northern border of Greece. During the second phase, in late summer 1945, many German soldiers in captivity were summarily executed or thrown alive into large karst pits along the Dalmatian coast of Croatia. In the third stage, 1945-1955, an additional 50,000 perished as forced laborers due to malnutrition and exhaustion. [13]
The total number of German losses in Yugoslav captivity after the end of the war -- including ethnic "Danube German" civilians and soldiers, as well as "Reich" Germans -- may therefore be conservatively estimated at 120,000 killed, starved, worked to death, or missing.
What is the importance of these figures? What lessons can be drawn in assessing these postwar German losses?
It is important to stress that the plight of German civilians in the Balkans is only a small portion of the Allied topography of death. Seven to eight million Germans -- both military personnel and civilians -- died during and after World War II. Half of those perished during the final months of the war, or after Germany's unconditional surrender on May 8, 1945. German casualties, both civilian and military, were arguably higher in "peace" than in "war."
In the months before and after the end of World War II, ethnic Germans were killed, tortured and dispossessed throughout eastern and central Europe, notably in Silesia, East Prussia, Pomerania, the Sudetenland, and the "Wartheland" region. Altogether 12-15 million Germans fled or were driven from their homes in what is perhaps the greatest "ethnic cleansing" in history. Of this number, more than two million were killed or otherwise lost their lives. [14]
The grim events in postwar Yugoslavia are rarely dealt with in the media of the countries that emerged on the ruins of communist Yugoslavia, even though, remarkably, there is today greater freedom of expression and historical research there than in such western European countries as Germany and France. The elites of Croatia, Serbia and Bosnia, largely made up of former Communists, seem to share a common interest in repressing their sometimes murky and criminal past with regard to the postwar treatment of German civilians.
The breakup of Yugoslavia in 1990-91, the events leading to it, and the war and atrocities that followed, can only be understood within a larger historical framework. As already noted, "ethnic cleansing" is nothing new. Even if one regards the former Serb-Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevic and the other defendants being tried by the International War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague as wicked criminals, their crimes are trivial compared to those of Communist Yugoslavia's founder, Josip Broz Tito. Tito carried out "ethnic cleansing" and mass killings on a far greater scale, against Croats, Germans and Serbs, and with the sanction of the British and American governments. His rule in Yugoslavia (1945-1980), which coincided with the "Cold War" era, was generally supported by the Western powers, who regarded his regime as a factor of stability in this often unstable region of Europe. [15]
The wartime and postwar plight of Germans in the Balkans also provides lessons about the fate of multiethnic and multicultural states. The fate of the two Yugoslavias -- 1919-1941 and 1944-1991 -- underscores the inherent weakness of multiethnic states. Twice in the 20th century, multicultural Yugoslavia fell apart amid needless carnage and a spiral of hatreds among its constituent ethnic groups. One can argue, therefore, that it is better for diverse nations and cultures, let alone different races, to live apart, separated by walls, than to pretend to live in a feigned unity that hides animosities waiting to explode, and leaving behind lasting resentments.
Few could foresee the savage inter-ethnic hatred and killings that swept the Balkans following the collapse of Yugoslavia in 1991, and this among peoples of relatively similar anthropological origins, albeit different cultural backgrounds. One can only speculate with foreboding about the future of the United States and western Europe, where growing interracial tensions between the native populations and masses of Third World immigrants portend disaster with far bloodier consequences.
Multicultural Yugoslavia, in both its first and second incarnations, was above all the creation of, respectively, the French, British and American leaders who crafted the Versailles settlement of 1919, and the British, Soviet Russian and American leaders who met at Yalta and Potsdam in 1945. The political figures who created Yugoslavia did not represent the nations in the region, and understood little of the self-perceptions or ethnic-cultural affinities of the region's various peoples.
Although the deaths, suffering and dispossession of the ethnic Germans of the Balkans during and after World War II are well documented by both German authorities and independent scholars, they continue to be largely ignored in the major media of the United States and Europe. Why? One could speculate that if those German losses were more widely discussed and better known, they would likely stimulate an alternative perspective on World War II, and indeed of 20th century history. A greater and more widespread awareness of German civilian losses during and after World War II might well encourage a deeper discussion of the dynamics of contemporary societies. This, in turn, could significantly affect the self-perception of millions of people, forcing many to discard ideas and myths that have fashionably prevailed for more than half a century. An open debate about the causes and consequences of World War II would also tarnish the reputations of many scholars and opinion makers in the United States and Europe. Arguably, a greater awareness of the sufferings of German civilians during and after World War II, and the implications of that, could fundamentally change the policies of the United States and other major powers.