The 1999 NATO Intervention from a Comparative Perspective: An Introduction (original) (raw)
Related papers
Comparative Southeast European Studies, 2022
The author takes the 20th anniversary of the NATO intervention as a starting point to reflect on the commemorations of 24 March 1999, distinguishing three phases of memory politics: First, the Making of 24 March (1999-2000) by Slobodan Milošević, which initiated a hegemonic narrative of Serbian martyrdom; second, the Long Period of Ambiguity (2001-2014) shaped by the former democratic governments, who pursued a policy of reconciliation without questioning the one-sided memory in relation to the war in Kosovo; and third, the Return of 24 March with Aleksandar Vučić's rise to power, which describes the 78 days of air raids as a collective trauma of Serbian society, from which, however, strength and defiance can be derived. The author shows that memory politics in Serbia today continue to focus almost exclusively on Serbian sacrifices made due to the bombing, while the war in Kosovo remains silenced.
Rocznik Instytutu Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, 2020
The article aims to analyse the impact of historical memory on foreign and security policy using the example of the Serbia -Kosovo relations in the period of 2014-2019. Historical memory is a burden, challenge and opportunity for foreign and security policy, and has a considerable impact on bilateral relations between countries which used to be in conflict. Historical memory generates numerous research questions -who is the architect of memory? what are the actors? what are the mechanisms, tools and instruments of its creation? how is it used to maintain power and what are its effects? -to name but a few. In the example analysed, leaders use historical memory to create separate identities and gain power, whereas NGOs do it to commemorate victims. Historical memory is present in celebrating important dates, historical places, monuments and events, and creating national heroes. It also draws attention to the stereotypes in school textbooks and to transitional justice. The most important space for historical memory in the analysis is Kosovo and the role of an international organisation -the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Historical memory has an important function in the process of regional reconciliation, which is an essential condition for cooperation and security in the Western Balkans. Keywords: Serbia, Kosovo, historical memory, foreign and security policy, bilateral relations Streszczenie: Celem artykułu jest analiza wpływu pamięci historycznej na politykę zagraniczną i bezpieczeństwa na przykładzie relacji Serbia -Kosowo. Pamięć historyczna stanowi obciążenie, wyzwanie i szansę dla polityki zagranicznej i bezpieczeństwa oraz ma ogromny wpływ na stosunki dwustronne między państwami, które wcześniej były w konflikcie. Pamięć historyczna generuje liczne pytania badawcze, m.in.: kto jest architektem pamięci, jacy są aktorzy rządowi i pozarządowi, jakie są mechanizmy, narzędzia i instrumenty jej powstawania, jak jest wykorzystywana do utrzymania władzy oraz jakie są jej A. Jagiełło-Szostak, Links between foreign and security policy and historical memory: the case of Serbia -Kosovo relations,
Memory, the media and NATO: information intervention in Bosnia-Hercegovina
Memory and Power in Post-War Europe
If collective or social memory is power, then those engaged in the contest for control will seek to manage its production. One of the most important ways in which public or national memories have been nourished, shaped and limited in the twentieth century has been through broadcasting and, in the period since the late 1950s, more specifically through television. Television is one of the prime means by which to establish what Timothy Snyder in his chapter calls 'sovereignty over memory', and to provide both a national framework for collective memory and to shape individual memories of national events. In this chapter, I want to explore an important episode in the management of memory as an instrument of conflict prevention or resolution, namely the role played, in Bosnia-Hercegovina in the late 1990s, by the US-led NATO Stabilization Force (Sfor) and the Office of the High Representative (OHR). As Ilana R. Bet-EI shows in her chapter, the Bosnian context was one in which, for generations and centuries, memories were articulated, projected and raised as flags of combat. Television gave a whole new force to such articulations.
Still not worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenadier: the geopolitics of the Kosovo war 1999
Political Geography, 2002
The Kosovo war of 1999 brought the checkered legacies of Russian and Western geopolitics back to the forefront of international relations. Central to the discussions of the Balkans is its century-old legacy as a Shatterbelt or Crush Zone. Though not identified by Saul Cohen as a Shatterbelt during the Cold War, the region is now located where the maritime (Western) and land power (Russian) geostrategic realms come into contact. NATO expansion and Russian insecurities about the region's future have revised interest in geopolitical linkages and historical antecedents. The tradition of pan-Slavism, linking Russia to the Balkans cultural and political networks, has been uneven and is now subject to intensive debate within Russian political circles. In 1999, public opinion surveys showed consistent support in NATO countries for the bombing of Yugoslavia but strong opposition in Russia and other Slavic states. The surveys also question many stereotypes, especially the geopolitical visions of Russian citizens. Modern geopolitics is differentiated from classical geopolitics by the insertion of public opinion into the formation of geopolitical codes and foreign policy, in both the western countries and in Russia. In such an environment, the Balkans will remain central to the strategies of the great powers but public opinion, modifying geopolitical cultures, will ameliorate confrontations.
2020
Since 2012, when the Serbian Progressive Party came to power, the wars of the 1990s became the focal point of the official memory politics and crucial for the political legitimacy of the SNS government. The populist discourse of the return of the national pride is central to state-sponsored memory work, arguing that the previous governments and international community coerced the Serbian nation to feel ashamed about its heroes and victims of the 1990s wars. The current regime uses the fact that the previous governments did not focus on the 1990s in their memory politics as a demarcation line and source of legitimacy. Because of the SNS and their political allies, the Serbian people are finally allowed and able, as the dominant narrative claims, to remember their heroes and victims with pride. The government builds its political legitimacy on its commitment to the industry of memory, which involves large-scale commemorations, usage of media technologies, cultural production and new ways of disseminating the dominant narratives. This paper analyses the memory politics of the 1990s wars and outlines the problem of historical revisionism in contemporary Serbia from the overthrow of Slobodan Milošević until today. The first section of the paper offers an overview of the memory of the 1990s wars during the first decade after the fall of Milošević. The expectations from the democratic changes quickly turned into disappointment as the new state authorities showed the lack of willingness to confront the questions of guilt and responsibility of Serbia and its forces during the 1990s wars. Various patterns of denial and relativisations are analysed. The central part of the paper focuses on the period since 2012 and populist state-sponsored memory politics. To facilitate a better understanding of the war narratives, commemorative practices and the emergence of the 1990s wars in official memory politics, the paper explains the main characteristics of populist memory politics. The paper proceeds to analyse the interpretation of the 1990s as liberation wars, the national program of commemorations and the industry of memory, focusing mainly on Operation Storm, the Kosovo war and NATO bombing of Yugoslavia as the focal points of official memory politics. The final section concludes with a brief outlook on memory activism and its challenges in facing the industry of memory from above.
Memories of the 1999 NATO bombing in Belgrade, Serbia
A paper presented at the International Symposium: On the Receiving End of Intervention: Methods in Human Security Center for international intervention, University of Surrey June 16-17, 2014 This paper analyzes local memories of residents of Belgrade of the 1999 NATO bombing of Serbia (then still Yugoslavia). By focusing on the memories of this event, yet placing them in a broader context of the conflicts of the 1990s – the break-up of the country and the post-Yugoslav wars – this essay explores what international intervention has meant to respondents in Belgrade and documents memories of international intervention among older and younger generations, as well as active members of anti-war NGOs in Serbia, and citizens who were not engaged in activism in the period of the 1990s. By focusing on the memories of the 1999 NATO bombing this paper aims at extending the scope of the discussions on dealing with the past and transitional justice and place them in the context of social memory studies. Even more specifically as related to the case study of Serbia, the text contributes to the analysis of local mnemonic battles as part of the creation of the collective memories of the 1990s in Post- Milošević Serbia.