The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Ultra-right US politician on sa(side point)

>At the risk of being called an evil imperialist, I would suggest >that it 
>is a gross oversimplification to call every act of >interference in the 
>sovereignty of another country "colonial" guiding of poor "uncivilised" 
>non-westerners. The image of a world made of >cosy, defined, "sovereign" 
>states is illusory. President Wilson had a >vision of such a world for the 
>former Yugoslavia after world war one; >the ethnic conflict over the past 
>century are a testament to how that >vision failed.

A side point I know but it's important not to let things slip. The former 
Yugoslavia was a relative sea of calm in terms of ethnic conflict after 
world war one, save for the Croatian Ustasha set up by Nazi Germany. The 
resistance to the Ustasha was led by Tito's partisans who were comprised of 
all ethnic groups. In Bosnia, the most "ethnically mixed" area of FY there 
were 30-40% intermarriage between the "ethnic" groups. One third of the 
territorial defence force of Sarajevo in 1993 (well into the Bosnian 
conflict) was comprised of Serbs.

My point is: we shouldn’t characterise FY as an area of rampant ethnic 
conflict. IMO this is a gross oversimplification.


Get Your Private, Free Email at

This is a discussion list run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq
For removal from list, email
Full archive and list instructions are available from the CASI website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]