With the latest claim that Serbia’s WWI marching song that delivered the first Allied victory against the forces of the uncivilized world is “nationalist” the Western press continues at attempted pejoration of Serbs yet the banality of attacking a song of victorious Allies shows that the tactic Western governments use to stigmatize Serbs in the media are getting worn-off and, more importantly, add to the aggregate evidence that the objection is not the Serbian song, the Serbian church and the Serbian language… but, actually, Serbs themselves.
One could just imagine State Department officials, who have tasked the CIA to use the media stigmatization tactics, complain how their Balkan policy would be more effective if Serbs simply did not exist.
This is not the first time that a Serbian song was pejoratively declared “nationalist”. Prior to this particular song, used during Serbia’s WWI March on Drina against the Axis powers, the media in the West attacked Serbia’s innovative turbo folk genre as “nationalist” even though we increasingly hear such innovative 20-year-old Serbian techno-fuse in songs that appear only now in hits of Beyonce or Nicki Manaj.
Besides Serbian music, however, Western media finds pretty much anything Serbian to be “nationalist” thus objectionable. Here’s a partial list:
The language with which Serbs speak is objectionable to the western media because Washington supports all “ethnic” separatists in the Balkans who lay a claim on various Serbian language dialects to be their “ethnic” speak like the so-called bosniak, montenegrin and macedonian.
Washington and its media object to the existence of Serbia’s national Church because most of its Bishops, on occasion, complain that various separatists in the Balkans, whom Washington supports, destroy Serbian churches. Only some of the Bishops in the Serbian Church, those who are silent as the Church is decimated, are not termed “nationalist”.
Washington and its media object to the history of Serbs because it’s decisive and repetitive freedom-seeking is in the way of Washington’s proxy-killers in the Balkans whom it supports. Bosnian Muslims and Albanian Muslim proxy killers would have a much easier time at destruction of Serbs had Serbs been allies of the Axis and the Nazis in the past wars because Washington would have something intrinsically evil, rather than invented, to moniker Serbs with.
Serbian Territorial Integrity
For Washington, Serbia is a non-diplomatic entity and has been treating it as such since the late 1980s. Washington has violated a long list of international treaties and UN agreements of which it is a prominent signatory. In fact, Washington is working hard to pave the way for further chop-down of Serbia by promoting “Vojvodinians” and Muslims of Raska (Sanjak) as well as ethnic Bulgarians in the south-east and Vlachs in the north-east for possible separation and incorporation into Bulgaria and Romania, respectively.
The “nationalist” moniker is hoisted on general Serbian heritage as another favorite Washington method at media stigmatization of Serbs. The greats of literature, for example, are labeled “nationalist” with vintage authors like Ivo Andric deemed as demons of “Greater Serbia” while the entire modern cadre of poets, writers and movie-makers are dismissed as stooges for “Greater Serbia”. Serbia’s movie-maker Emir Kusturica, for example, is routinely belittled by the Western press because Kusturica abandoned Islam and embraced Serbia because that is what his forefathers were… and that, of course, is unusable stuff for the promotion of American diplomacy in the Balkans.
This partial list of things Washington finds “nationalist” about Serbs, thus objectionable, if taken in the aggregate, adds up to a great deal of evidence of what the American policy in the Balkans actually is – extermination of Serbs by proxy support of those who will actually do the killing.
Now, Washington often quips that the American media is “free” and that the demonization of Serbs has nothing to do with the government policy. That maybe true to the extent that the media is independent of the government but that does not necessarily imply that the government is independent of the media.
Like everything else, media is subject to government manipulation, and one can cite endless amount of cases where the independent American media has touted the government line.
For example, in the 1970s, Kissinger met with a so-called “40 Committee” where it was decided to increase propaganda against Chile’s dictator Allende.
Explains Walter Isaacson in his biography on Kissinger:
The 40 Committee that day decided to increase the covert propaganda effort to convince Chile’s Congress that the economy would be ruined if Allende was elected. More than twenty CIA-sponsored journalists from around the world were flown to Chile to produce anti-Allende stories, which they did.
A similar thing occurred in early 1990s, particularly after the fateful meeting James Baker had with the Bosnian Muslim politician Haris Silajdzic.
Recounts Baker in his The politics of diplomacy: Revolution, war and peace, 1989-1992:
“After the meeting, I had Larry Eagleburger take Silajdzic to see the EC troika political directors (who happened to be visiting the Department) and asked Margaret Tutwiler to talk to the Foreign Minister about the importance of using Western mass media to build support in Europe and North America for the Bosnian cause. I also had her talk to her contacts at the four television networks, the “Washington Post,” and the “New York Times” to try to get more attention focused on the story.”
20 years on, Washington is doing the same thing that James Baker has laid the groundwork in the US State Department back in 1992 but the crap against Serbs being spewed now is so at microbial dimensions that even songs, from the period when the US and Serbia were allegedly allies, are no longer sacred and, being so microb, are becoming worn-off.
Finally, this entire blog post could be construed as whining against the US except that the real criticism of it is aimed not against the US government but against the Serbian one.
For well over 20 years, US has been unleashing its forces against Serbia yet various Belgrade governments went on pursuing policies where it aims to “convince” the US and its various instruments that it means good things and wants the US friendship. The problem is that the US is not interested in what Serbia is aiming at but rather in forcing Serbia to comply with diplomatic objectives that the US State Department has set out which is making Bosnia independent under Muslim domination and declaring Kosovo an independent country under Albanian Muslim domination.
Now, we could debate where and why these objectives arouse in Washington’s diplomacy, but the fact that the media has been the blunt instrument with which Serbia is being pressured into accepting the US diktat is the unquestionable fact… and regrettably, successive administrations in Serbia and its entire diplomatic staff keeps clinging to reason, facts and rationality as a way to “convince” the US that its policy is wrong.
Steeped in sophistry, every diplomatic core, including the US one, can and always will find a rebuttal to any rational arguments that economically insignificant Serbia can throw at the big power like the United States. Instead of convincing the US, Serbia should have and still needs to mitigate the American media attacks against it.
There are numerous ways of doing that abroad whose success could vary depending on the amount of money Belgrade is willing to throw at the problem, but at home, Serbia is, regrettably, working hard so that these Western media minions have their anti-Serbian work unimpeded and as worry-free as possible.
For example, numerous alleged NGOs roam through Serbia with a sole aim at collecting dirt so that the Washington media could machinate with it. These NGOs, if not recruit but for sure identify individuals in Serbia who will speak and do things that are supportive of Washington’s policy. Many of such individuals in Serbia are willing to speak for as little a notoriety as an insignificant quote inside a Reuters story.
Yet, all these NGOs and these identified individuals are financially unobligated to Serbia. Making sure that a devastating scrutiny of the finances that are allowing these NGOs and individuals to operate in Serbia could quickly fix this venue of Washington’s attacks on Serbia.
There are, of course, many other ways that these “CIA-sponsored journalists” in Serbia could have more fun that could exclude full cavity searches that the likes of Cooper Anderson of CNN would like.
The problem, of course, is not the evil and its instruments that the Washington has designed for Serbia but Serbia’s pervasive inertness to mitigate these.