Customer Reviews

Serbs and Croats: The Struggle in Yugoslavia

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

Far from providing insight into the complexities of Serbian-Croatian relations in historical context, this book simply rehashes and highlights all of the major claims of the propaganda espoused by Serbian nationalists (indeed, only in this context can King Alexander, who proclaimed a royal dictatorship in Yugoslavia, be referred to as a 'democrat'). The book should definitely not be read as an introduction to Yugoslav or even Serbian history. Rather, it should be read to gain insight into the way nationalists present the history of their nation with all of the 'bad parts' censored out, while all of the faults of their neighbors and rivals (in this case the Croats, Macedonians,Bosnian Muslims and Albanians to name a few) are emphasized repeatedly. Also, the book provides an example of how many Serbs view their own history, which is, to say the least, not quite accurate. Rather than knowing too much about their own history (as is often claimed in the West when speaking of the Balkan people), they, not just the Serbs, are just as misinformed and unaware of the historical actual facts as most people in, say, the United States--and Dragnich's book is a perfect portrayal of this skewed version of history. In conclusion, I believe that this book should be read together with historian C. Michael McAdams' "Croatia: Myth and Reality" as it similarly highlights many of the major points of Croatian historical propaganda while glossing over some of the ugly realities of history.

It is almost impossible to give a balanced account of the history of Yugoslavia, because it is a history confused by a great many myths. In particular, many western journalists talk of centuries of hatred dividing the Serbs and Croats, but that has to be nonsense, because for centuries before 1920 Serbs and Croats barely knew one another. Croatia was part of the Habsburg Empire, whereas Serbia, independent since 1815, had previously been part of the Ottoman Empire. Politically conscious Croats only started visiting Serbia in the 19th century, where they discovered a people quite similar to themselves, and speaking the same language. They and the Slovenes were not hostile to the idea of forming a larger unit with the Serbs, in part because both Slovenia and Croatia were much too small to resist encroachment by Italy and Austria, two neighbours that differed far more from them than Serbia did. In no sense, therefore, were they brought by force into what was initially called the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes.

Nonetheless, cracks appeared immediately, because the different components had very different visions of how the country should be, and only during Tito's lifetime did Yugoslavia present anything resembling a united front. Probably it was inevitable that it would fall apart, especially after Italy and Austria no longer seemed to be the threat to Slovenia and Croatia that they had been before the Second World War. Alex Dragnich expains all this very clearly, and one needs to be strongly biassed towards the Croat point of view to see the book as "Great Serbian Garbage!", as an earlier reviewer entitled a review. In the last chapters particularly, the author perhaps shows somewhat more sympathy to the Serbian point of view than a totally neutral observer would do, but this is hardly evident in most of the book.

The break-up of Yugoslavia had started when the book was written, but the worst was still to come: Macedonia and Montenegro were still part of Yugoslavia, and most of the horrors of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo were still in the future.

The book is well written and it's title shows that the author is a learned person. The struggle which Serbs and Croats had to deal with was due to a contradicting regime and the coupeling of two nationalities that were not meant to live in the same borders. Dr.Dragnich clearly showed that the struggle between Serbs and Croats didn't just start in the early '90s, but as early as the signing of the Treaty of Versailles that merged the two together. The assasination of the Serbia king in spite, is enough to show that Croats never did want to live side by side with Serbs and that Tito's attempt at creating a country under the banner of " Brotherhood and Unity " failed on account that there was no brotherhood among Serbs and Croats, let alone unity. His book shows just how much one side gave and how much the other took mercilessly and in the end stabbed the other in the back. This painful lesson in Serbian history was been well documented by Dr.Dragnich, who deserves high praise for his endless work.

Bravo Dr. Alex!

One star is too much for this pathetic dribble from a "scholar" who has dedicated his life to proving that the good guys (ie the Serbs) are always good and the bad guys (ie non Serbs) are always bad.

Forget about the dribbler and his bib - read a real history book written by a real historian:

The National Question in Yugoslavia: Origins, History, Politics

Dragnich's view is that the Serbs were the victims since the Ottomon Turks conquered Serbia. People with common sense would say that this view is not based on facts. Dragnich defends the Serbs even though most of the facts don't back him up. He simply ignores those facts, and digs up what facts and statistics do make the Serbs look good.
For instance, Dragnich maintains the Serb government had nothing to do with the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Of course he ignores the facts that the Black Hand terrorist group was supported by the Serb intelligence group of the Army.
Dragnich states Princip was just a fanatical Bosnian Serb. He also blames Franz Ferdinand because he should not have ventured to Bosnia during the time because of the Serb national holiday.
This is just one instance where Dragnich ignores the facts and says the victims were the Serbs and not the Archduke and his wife.
For the remainder of the book, Dragnich portrays the Croats, Slovenes, and Muslims as benefiting from Serb rule. This would be like equating a colony as a good experience for those ruled.
Atrocities, well the Croats and Muslims were more guilty than the Serbs. This is the context of this book.
At the very least, one gains an idea of what the Serbs have in their heads. This explains what happened in Croatia, Bosnia, and Kosovo. The Serbs say let us take back what we gave them. It might not be true, but this is how they explain their actions.

I was given a copy of this book in Belgrade one summer by a friend who hadn't yet read it, and never one to turn down a free book gladly took it. After the first few chapters I couldn't take it anymore and skipped to the end. I have no ethnic ties to any Balkan country and consider myself relatively unbiased. One need not know all the facts firsthand to recognize the bias in this book; it is in the language of the book. Simply the adjectives chosen paint a picture of noble victimized Serbs and blood-thirsty fascist Croats. (Sorry I don't have the book on hand to give a few quotes.) Serbs were the initial aggressors in Croatia and Bosnia. But attrocities were committed by all sides, and against all sides. Unfortunately, all sides seem most interested in continuing to play the victim (as nicely exemplified by this book), and few seem willing to own up to the wrongs done by their own side. I would say the only useful purpose for this book is analysis of subtle and not-so-subtle means of incorporating personal bias into "scholarly" writing.

Recent events in the Balkans have shown that due to the ethnological, geopolitical and historical complexity of the region, in depth analysis is of paramount importance in understanding the truth.
Apart from the thousands that have died in the 1990's during the Yugoslav civil war, another victim of war has been the truth, as is the case in most wars, especially in the 20th century.
The truth is based on undisputed facts (dates, events etc), and in relation to opinion, the truth always lies somewhere in the middle. Unfortunately, the two previous "reviewers," instead of treating this book for what it is, i.e. a valuable primary source from the Serb point of view, they dismiss it on the grounds that is written by a University of Belgrade professor. A rather childish and yet dangerous reaction.
In a democracy all voices should be heard instead of being immediately disregarded on the basis of their origin. One cannot and should not silence another just because they disagree with them!
This book provides valuable and serious insight to the understanding of the Serbian psyche. It is a "must" for any serious historian or political analyst interested in the Balkan region.

Alex Dragnich is a Balkan expert who has written numerous books on this area of Europe. The book indeed does seem biased towards the Serbs,but this is beacuse they have always been the most dominant of the south slav people in the Balkans & there kingdoms or countries were always the most succesful......Alex Dragnich only points out these historical facts. This is a well written book that deserves a peek from European Historians & poeple interested in current events

...and were stabbed in the back."

Much of what? I hope the author of this statement doesn't try to imply that the Serbs brought a higher level of education, culture and improvement of living standards with them when the Yugoslav state was formed?

Stabbed by whom? The Serbs shot themselves in the foot tenfold when treating the 'newly acquired areas' as Serbian Lebensraum, the last phase of which unfolded right in front of international cameras in the 1990's.

Serbian propaganda has vehemently been trying to cast especially Croats as being genocidal by nature and responsible for the breakup of Yugoslavia, and at the same time casting the Serbs in the role of benefactor and perpetual victim. This book fits nicely together with other publications from pathological Serb propagandists - scholars or non-scholars. It should not be used as a reference to neither Yugoslav history nor as a guide to understand the reason behind the breakup of Yugoslavia.

This book purports to be objective, but is instead a Serb view of Yugoslav history. For a more detailed and scholarly assessment of this work than I can give, please look at the review of this book in the "Book World" section of the Washington Post for November 1, 1992. Written by Anna Husarska, the review is right on the money. Although Dragnich's book deserves a "1" for objectivity, as a propaganda piece it rates a "10."