There was actually a grad-level elective available in my M.A. program in Russian & East European Studies on that very subject. (See Viktor Tsoi and Kino for an example.)
And to the OP: sheesh, you think the Soviet Union came apart easily? You seem to have missed the violence in Nagorno-Karabagh, various parts of Central Asia, the Soviet invasion of the Baltics, and various other sporadic incidences of violece throughout the Soviet era, not to mention the hundreds of years previously as the Russian Empire took over the Caucasus and Central Asia. Many areas didn’t exactly come under Russian or Soviet control willingly.
Lou Reed interviewed Vaclav Havel in 1991. The Czech leader confirmed that this was indeed the case; the first resistance movements Havel joined/organized were focused on the right to listen to “alternative” music, especially music influenced by the Velvet Underground. This gradually morphed into more general anti-totalitarian resistance. In Havel’s words, Lou Reed played a special, special role in the fall of communist Czechoslovakia.
During the interview itself, this kind of freaked Lou out–he honestly had no idea. The two men continued corresponding, and Reed played the White House at Havel’s request during a state event. (There have been fewer thoughts more satisfying in my life than the mental image of Tipper Gore being forced to sit and listen to Lou Reed sing “Motherfucker”.)
I haven’t read it but I’ve read a lot of other books about Yugoslavia and a number of them are very critical of that book for an alleged tendency to sacrifice accuracy in favour of sensationalism. I’d go for Misha Glenny’s The Balkans instead.
The Russians lost millions of lives in WWII and that generation was determined not have thousand miles of warning space and not let it happen again. They didn’t care who the hell was feeling oppressed by it and that it was a useless gesture, it wasn’t going to happen again. As soon as the next generation came in they saw the reality differently and were not prepared to shoot everybody who got in the way of 1000 miles of useless buffer, which was costing too much anyway. They let it go.
It seems unlikely that the Germans are going to invade Russia in the next generation or two, so this might acceptable to the Russian people.
I concur on Kaplan. Glenny’s book is a decent enough general survey of the whole region over 190 years. If you want to focus on Yugoslavia, I recommend Allcock’s Explaining Yugoslavia.
It wasn’t really all that easy. Both sides were prepared for war.
What differences? As I understand it the Norwegians eat it much the same way as we Swedes, although they can’t spell the word. The proper way to write it is lutfisk.
Couple of correction, you know, to set the right context…
Actually, it was known as Bosnia prior to Turks coming over. Moreover, it was known as Kingdom of Bosnia. Small, unimportant, irrelevant and short-lived perhaps, but still.
Clarification - the "stemming of separatist tendencies” is a Serbian language construct that fed all the wars they initiated since 1900’s with the same self-delusional righteousness found in say, Bush Doctrine of “bringing democracy through war”.
A little subjective observation. It is known among people from former Yugoslavia that only Serbs considered all of Yugoslavia as theirs. All others would only refer to their little contribution to it. The main reason for an ugly break up is the grandiose self delusion of greatness that Serbs assigned to their nation and the perceived threat (or, a crime) from other ethnic groups was the idea of independent self-contained ethnic nucleus, that there can be purely a Croatian thought. Even today, in the Serbian intellectual circles it is a widely held view that no other ethnic group but Serbs is deserving of a country and the current situation is a Western conspiracy to destroy them and if only other ethnic groups would realize that, Yugoslavia would be still around.
In the case of Czechs and Slovaks one just does not see the presence of such hatred instigating force.
I’m seriously thinking that this forum does not need cites from members of Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences (infamous SANU) and I’m also somewhat skeptical that you are really all that interested.
Also, if you had any knowledge of at least one of the members of SANU and his work you would know what I’m talking about. If perhaps you are in fact of Serbian heritage then no amount of knowledge about academic research of SANU member would be sufficient for you to accept such a claim.
Just in case, I would recommend looking into Kosta Cavoski for example and his work on the subject of former Yugoslavia internal borders (which, in short, he denies and paints as artificial). It is also helpful to know that said “academic” has been publicly defending both Milosevic and Karadzic (whom he was visiting while Karadzic was in hiding) and he is legally prevented from visiting Bosnia (the least they could do). It would be actually much easier exercise to find a member of Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences who PUBLICLY agrees with ICTY view of Milosevic and Karadzic.
The fact that one Serbian intellectual thinks only the Serbs are deserving of a country (and I don’t know if that’s what he thinks, I haven’t looked him up) is a very different claim from saying “in the Serbian intellectual circles it is a widely held view that no other ethnic group but Serbs is deserving of a country”.
Well Milosevic sure thought so. I think he is being rather undervalued as a player in the breakup of Jugoslavija. Were not for his constant agitation of all other ethnicities in the SFRJ in favor of strengthening Serbia above the others it might have ended differently, or not at all.
