Milosevic, Castro and Peron
Joćo Paulo Monteiro: "I know Fidel Castro (etc., etc.). Let me tell you something: Milosevic is no Fidel Castro."
As from recent events, he may be a Peron as someone on the list (Carrol?) aptly proposed. In 1955, Peron caved in so that -later explanation by himself- there would take place no carnage. Milosevic has said "uncle", and like Peron he was isolated and Russia gave him no support at all (see my fwd from Maja from Belgrade). He had his limits, and could not struggle facing the eventuality that the whole of Yugoslavia was transformed into a wasteland (how many of us would dare do it, anyway?). But he will not be demonized for his limits, he will be demonized for his virtues instead.
And the process has already begun, just the same that happened in Argentina with Galtieri after the Malvinas war. From the news we have here, it seems that the "democratic" (that is, defeatist and objectively pro-imperialist) opposition has already begun to say that this war should never have been fought, that who did we think we are, and all the idiocies these worms begin to utter as long as others have struggled for dignity and independence, and lost.
In Argentina, this is known as the "demalvinization" process, and was enthusiastically followed by Gral. Bignone, Alfonsin and Menem (in fact, by the whole proimperialist clique) after the withdrawal of June, 1982.
I am not prone to predictions but allow me to do one prediction: while no bolder leader than Milosevic appears in Yugoslavia, Yugoslavs will secretly cherish his memory (or even support him) against the gang of hounds of the defeat that is already howling. Maja told me that an agreement for collaboration between CNN and the Serbian TV has been established (God knows how many millions invested), so that the process is fast!
No Castro. He did not dare face the carnage to the end. No Solano Lopez, either (whose homeland died with him after every male above 15 had been murdered in the Paraguay war).
Anything better to choose from? _This_ is the question. Instead of putting the blame on Milo, we should point our finger to Moscow.
This is Rhodes, jump now!
I'm not so sure about this, Nestor. Much more probably, Milosevic's limits will prove to be what will thoroughly demonize him in the end. That's the fate of all revolutionaries that only go half way. He could have been a national hero and an anti-imperialist icon (probably much to his surprise) for the next century. He will probably be remembered as... the butcher of the Balkans. Yugoslavia was not only fighting for Kosovo, it was fighting for its honor as a free and peace loving nation aggressed by a decade long smear campaign. It lost. Not by russian betrayal, which was entirely predictable. It lost by its leadership having chosen not to fight on the hour of truth. Now with NATO troops and C