The course on the Western Balkans was a window to gain new knowledge in various areas of the Western Balkans, such as the history and future prospects of these countries. I have to admit that although I had read various articles on the events that have captured the Western Balkans or I had seen documentaries about them, in fact what I had read or heard was a little in relation to what I learned on my journey in this course . This is precisely thanks to your amazing project which did not remain just an idea but materialized and took a concrete form through discussions with colleagues from different parts of the world. I want to congratulate you for this wonderful project that I believe was successfully released and at the same time thank you for this golden opportunity that you gave me by making me part of this project. This course helped me learn about wars, state integration and different perceptions that the other Balkan citizens had for one-another and to see these differences in the locals’ eyes. I found the lecturers’ research papers very impressive and elaborative, and I would like to summarize one of lecturer’s presentations, which is Dejan Jovic.
- What was this lecture about ?
In this lecture the professor Dejan Jovic talked about the Croatia War of Indipendence 1991-1995 between Croat forces loyal to the Government of Croatia, which had declared independence from the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and the Serb controlled Yugoslav People’s Army and local Serb forces. A majority of Croats wanted Croatia to leave Yugoslavia and become a sovereign country, while many ethnic Serbs living in Croatia, supported by Serbia,opposed the secession and wanted Serb-claimed lands to be in a common state with Serbia . Most Serbs sought a new Serb state within a Yugoslav federation, including areas of Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina with ethnic Serb majorities or significant minorities, and attempted to conquer as much of Croatia as possible.
In January 1992, the first peace agreement between Croatia and Yugoslav forces was signed in Sarajevo, ending major hostilities in most of Croatia. At that time, Croatia had not been regognized internationally. This agreement was in fact the precondition for the international recognition of Croatia, which followed on 15 January 1992. The county was still divided. This means that approximately 25% of its territory was not under the control of the central government, and this territory is mainly inhabited by ethnic Serbs. The political leadership at that time was interested in seceding from Croatia. This represented a significant challenge for Croatia in terms of declaring itself internationally independent, but not really in full control of its territory. In addition, what Croatia agreed to in 1992 as a precondition for recognition was that an international force, called the United Nations Force, would come to maintain the peace signed in Sarajevo on January 2, 1992. This force protected the areas as long as until the final compromise between the countries involved will not be signed . And since this did not happen for the next 3 years, we had a stalemate, which did not involve open hostilities or wars, but was characterized by ethnic engineering by force, rather than outright ethnic cleansing. We can use the concept of ethnic cleansing also with many people who were in an ethnic minority position in this particular case, being forced to leave these secessionist territories to other parts of Croatia. 600,000 people were internally displaced. Some of them became refugees in other countries. The situation was not normal even though the country was regognized.
Many people moved, losing their home temporarily or permanently. Many houses were demolished. 12,000 Croats and 8,000 Serbs were dead, many of them civilian casualties, and about 140,000 homes and other industrial and other facilities were destroyed. The country’s GDP fell by about 40% due to the war. The conflict ended in 1995 through a combination of military means and diplomacy, such as agreement with the remaining territory that was not fully integrated into Croatia through the Erdut agreement of November 1995.
Another challenge that also has a long tail in contemporary Croatian history refers to the crimes committed during the war by both the secessionist Serbs and the Croatian army after the operation in 1995. And the Croatian had to deal somehow with the issue of transitional justice.
The general amnesty was also a challenge, for rebellion, that is, anyone who had participated in the armed forces of the secessionist Serbs. The army would not be treated as legally responsible for this, but it did not refer to the major crimes and some of the war crimes committed during the war in Croatia, which was similar to the case in Bosnia, tried by The Hague International Criminal Tribunal for crimes in Yugoslavia, which in total indicated about 170 people.
Later in the lecture, professor pointed out the fact that this war might might have been one possible option to gain indipendence, as when Croatia and Slovania declared indipendence in June 1991 there were nobody to regognze them. The international situation changed after the war, because they understood that the Yoguslavia could not secure peace and could not protect its citizens. It is true that the war end in battlefield but not in memory. The scars of it never heal.
- What were the most interesting remarks about this lecture in my opinion?
This lecture was a perfect interweaving of several fields such as history, international law and politics. Although the professor in the lecture spoke extensively about the war, giving an objective overview of how events unfold, he also emphasized the role of international organizations in maintaining and establishing peace in the world, such as the United Nations organization that operates with peacekeeping missions for the mitigation of conflict and the creation of peace. During this lesson the professor also spoke about some other important topics such as:
- the concept of international recognition and its challenges in the international arena, illustrating it with a concrete case.
- how the ongoing struggle for territories could end in a bloody disaster
- consequences of the war and the ways to end it
- post-war justice as a viable concept in the international arena
- the role of political leadership in improving or worsening the war
- the role of international justice.
As a law student it was important for me to highlight these topics because of the importance they have in international law. The fackt that the professor in one lecture perfectly dealt with such essencial topics was beyond of my expectactions.
