COUNTERACTING THE LIES, THE DAMN LIES AND THE BRITISH LIES ON SREBRENICA
If there are readers who are “tired” of articles on Srebrenica written by those who would like with arguments to refute the mendacious, western inspired “official” narrative, according to which the “genocidal Serbs” killed mercilessly “8,000 Muslim men and boys” – then let them not read the following. Only with one remark – this and similar articles are a drop in the sea in relation to the propaganda stream regarding this topic which is continuously advancing from the West, gaining additional support in the first half of every July, and especially at round jubilees of the Srebrenica Enclave break up, as this year’s one, the twentieth in series.
Hence, in the times when the Western “free and democratic media” have obviously adopted the Goebbels philosophy according to which a lie repeated a thousand times becomes truth – the only solution we have is to apply the same methodology to propagate truth, or critical thought, under the slogan that the more repeated the truth, or critical reexamination – the lie shall be overthrown more easily.
Let us not cheat ourselves – the battle around interpreting Srebrenica is only a continuation of the war against the Serbia and Serbian statehood led by other means. To the Western mind to which the pragmatic needs of effectiveness have overpowered every moral scruple, the factually ungrounded charges, even the worst ones – represent mere “ammunition” in the fight against the enemy. Nothing hinders the ruling English (and American as well as German) strata a million times to try and attribute the epithet of “genocidity” to the Serbian statehood on both sides of the Drina River and to slander an entire people and individuals. Their reasoning is that this is “only” a means which helps them do the job. In some other time, some other nastiness would also do the job, whose ultimate goal is unchanged in the degree the British interest is unchanged in our geopolitical area: never allow the possibility to an Orthodox civilization to jeopardize the Anglo-American marine domination in the Mediterranean and hinder their vital communication with the Middle East, central Asia and the Indian Ocean.
Hence, we are grappling with the issue, and even counteracting. The recent propaganda construction (British of course) which deserves to be answered is the one reported in even two articles published on July 04, in the London “Guardian” by the already known forgers of the Yugoslav tragedy, Ed Vulliamy and Florence Hartmann,[i] uncritically transmitted by local media.[ii]
Their basic thesis, supported by half-lies, is that the “ Srebrenica breakup was part of the policy of three great powers – Britain, France and the USA – and the United Nations leadership, in search of peace at any cost”. According to their spin, Srebrenica was “sacrificed” in essence for a noble wish of the western powers to reach peace, even at the cost of “massacre” (understandingly Serbian) in Srebrenica. However, as they have the habit, the Western propagandists exclude key factual elements when they are making their constructions. For instance, that the Srebrenica Enclave was never actually demilitarized.
Hence, the Srebrenica Enclave did not, as is suggested “break up” just like that as a victim of the combination of the western cynical pragmatism (of course – let us not forget – in the context of tireless Western longing for peace) and seemingly insatiable Serbian hunger for blood and territory. It was not a common enclave, but a clearly marked territory that was to be demilitarized as a “safe zone” under UN protection. But there is only a “petty” problem – it was not.
The Srebrenica Enclave was from spring 1993 to July 1995 only a “safe zone” for Naser Oric and to the armed to teeth Bosnian and Herzegovinian army he commanded, who were devastating the surrounding Serbian villages in true genocidal campaigns, and who did not spare either women, children, or elders.[iii] But, this is something that absolutely is of no interest to either Vulliamy, or Hartmann, who, referring to some, allegedly “trustful” data and documents – completely ignore the available data and reports which present the Srebrenica Enclave in quite a different, or rather true context. For instance the following three:
- UN General Secretary Report, May 30, 1995:
“ In recent months, government forces have considerably increased their military activity in and around most safe areas, and many of them, including Sarajevo, Tuzla and Bihac, have been incorporated into the broader military campaigns of the government side…The Government also maintains a substantial number of troops in Srebrenica (in this case, in violation of a demilitarization agreement)
- 2. Yasushi Akashi, former UN Representative in Bosnia, The Washington Times of 1 November 1995:
“It is a fact that the Bosnian government forces have used the ‘safe areas’ [that were supposed to be demilitarized] of not only Srebrenica, but Sarajevo, Tuzla, Bihac, Gorazde for training, recuperation and refurbishing their troops.”
- Report of the Netherlands Institute for War Documentation, April 2002:
“The supposed demilitarisation in the enclave was virtually a dead letter. The Bosnian army (ABiH) followed a deliberate strategy of using limited military actions to tie up a relatively large part of the manpower of the Bosnian Serbian army (VRS) to prevent it from heading in full force for the main area around Sarajevo. This was also done from the Srebrenica enclave. ABiH troops had no qualms about breaking all the rules in skirmishes with the VRS. They provoked fire by the Bosnian Serbs and then sought cover with a Dutchbat unit which then ran the risk of being caught between two fires.”
Let us add that in the brilliant Norwegian documentary “Srebrenica: A Town Betrayed” by Ola Flyum and David Hebditch, at 40:20, the following is clearly depicted:
“On the 26th of June 1995, President Alija Izetbegovic ordered an attack on the little Serb village of Visnjica. He wanted to divert the Serb focus on Sarajevo. Four Serbs were killed, sheep were stolen, and houses were torched. A lot of families were left homeless. The only thing the attackers left behind was a clue to who they were. A package with American manufactured first aid kits. There were no military targets connected to this place, only Serb families working on their farms. For the Serbs this attack became a marching order “.
Of course, no mention about this in Guardian’s two articles.
And for the end, let us take advantage besides this short, albeit far from exhaustive factual counteracting, to suggest, as done at the beginning of the text, our own propagandistic term. To use the word “breakup” for what had happened with the Srebrenica Enclave – as a counterpart to the terminology accustomed during the last two decades, speaking about “the fall of the enclave” , the “taking over of the enclave”, the “destruction of the enclave”, the “liquidation of the enclave”, the “trudging of the enclave”. As these are pretty suggestive terms aiding the factually unsustainable official narrative trying artificially to attribute the mortgage of “genocidity” to all of us.
Let us not forget that the Western powers which consciously and with an aim shattered the SFRY are continuously using the term “the breakup of Yugoslavia” – and this only when they are not using an even more false construction about the alleged “bloody breakup of Yugoslavia by Milosevic, or “Greater Serbian” factor – in order to suggest some kind of “historical objectivity” of that tragedy (“well, it happened, a state with 20 mil people broke up just like that, what had happened to her”) and thus distract attention from their dark and bloody role.
Аnd our using of the term “breakup” for what happened in the Srebrenica Enclave in July 1995 corresponds to truth far more. The Enclave that was to be a demilitarized zone under UN protection, and which not only was not demilitarized, but served as a base for bloodthirsty campaigns against the surrounding villages – broke up when its date expired, pursuant to the decision of the very Muslim authorities, with tacit consent of their Western patrons.
Until the next opportunity this much for our present counteracting against lies, damn lies and British lies on Srebrenica.[v]
[v] For those not familiar, an insignificant modification of a famous phrase populated by Marc Twain: “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics”.
Written by Aleksandar Pavić,
Fond strateške kulture
Translated by Jasmina Đekić