Comparing and contrasting propaganda in Serbia and Croatia from 1986 to 1999, this book analyses each group's contemporary interpretations of history and current events. It offers a detailed discussion of Holocaust imagery and the history of victim-centred writing in nationalist theory, including the links between the comparative genocide debate, the so-called Holocaust industry, and Serbian and Croatian nationalism. There is a detailed analysis of Serbian and Croatian propaganda over the Internet, detailing how and why the Internet war was as important as the ground wars in Kosovo, Croatia and Bosnia-Hercegovina, and a theme-by-theme analysis of Serbian and Croatian propaganda, using contemporary media sources, novels, academic works and journals.
of the humanitarian lens or its
subjects as racialised (‘race’ does not even appear in the index,
while ‘gender’ has ten entries). 2
Fehrenbach’s theme sets the stage for one of the most influential episodes in
the twentieth century iconography of humanitarianism: Biafra. Heerten’s essay
on Biafra and Holocaustimagery in Humanitarian Photography
provides one of the case studies, but it is only a glimpse into the much broader
take on Biafra provided by
: confronting relativism in Serbia and Croatia
root of conflict.
In trying to analyse the successes and failures of Serbian and Croatian
propaganda, we need to understand clearly whether or not any actual genocides took place in the Balkans, either in history, or during the more
contemporary period. This includes the general question of whether the
manipulation of Holocaustimagery is a useful means for nations to advance
their political agendas. I have argued that general Fall imagery and imagery
of the Holocaust have played an extremely important role in rallying
histories and legitimating state-building projects. As I
will demonstrate from Chapters 3 to 8, Serbs and Croats entered into this
timely and controversial debate. Both groups used claims of victimisation and
persecution to legitimate their own state-building or state-expanding projects,
with often violent consequences.
Both the Judaeo-Christian covenantal culture and the instrumentalisation of Holocaustimagery have been of central importance in structuring
Serbian and Croatian representations of the past and
Novick’s conclusion that the use of Holocaustimagery was ‘arbitrary’.
Rather, he contends that there have been consistent and deliberate attempts
to use Jewish suffering to justify human rights atrocities in Israel. As with
Novick, for Finkelstein 1967 is the crucial starting-point for the Holocaust
becoming a crucial part of modern Jewish identity. While before 1967 the
Final Solution was a horrible tragedy that was not often discussed, much less
invoked as a defence of Israeli interests, it later became a crucial means of
proving that Israelis were
party. The ‘heirs of the peace movement’ had been
overwhelmingly opposed to Bundeswehr participation in the Gulf
War. 52 Yet
Bosnia, and subsequently Kosovo, posed a completely different problem.
Because of the atrocities committed, and the Holocaustimagery related
to them, Bosnia came to be seen as a fundamental challenge to a
In the summer of