Our interlocutor is Dragan Markovina, a famous Bosnian and Croatian historian and publicist, also an activist. Born in Mostar, lived on Korčula and in Split, today he is back in his hometown. Leftist, critic of nationalism, against war. We are talking about everything that is on the heads of ordinary, Balkan people.
"WEATHER" Here we are, facing the new year 2026.. year. We have marked the past three decades since the end of the wars in BiH and Croatia, and the beginning of hope that we will get out of the hell of nationalism, primitivism and hatred somewhat quickly. But here we are., after so long, stuck in hatred, only war is missing. Was what happened at the end of the eighties and during the nineties a tragedy?, and this now - just a farce?
DEAR MARKOVINA: A lot of it looks like a farce. I don't have to explain it to you in Serbia: every press conference of Aleksandar Vučić is a farce. The problem is that it is reflected in reality. Until a few years ago, as much as nationalism was the basis of life in these areas, as ordinary citizens we had spaces within which we could more or less decently exist - of course, except for the declassified ones. We also had a kind of cultural and public freedom. And now those spaces and freedoms are being tried to be suspended. The story is similar everywhere, every resistance in society that does not agree to a single mind is tried to be abolished, in order to remove with it those "small disturbances", normalization processes from two thousand years ago. So, it is a farce in performance, but which can turn into a tragedy.
When it comes to tragedy, it seems that we have formatted ourselves in these areas according to our ranges, that we have become an irrelevant margin of the world and Europe. Not only can't we seem to produce anything very good, but that we have diminished ourselves so much that we cannot even trouble the world, as it was in the nineties.
Of course, and that is precisely the most visible in Bosnia and Herzegovina. People have a continuous collision with reality, by inertia they think that we are more important than we are. First there was a terrible war, and then the West invested billions of euros in reconstruction, in non-governmental organizations, in an attempt to reconcile and create a normal state. He felt a kind of moral responsibility towards these areas, a desire to help, to find a model that is successful. But none of that exists anymore, it's all gone. With Trump and his attitude towards the region, it became quite obvious. No one really cares what is happening here, the war of 30 years ago is no longer in the focus of anyone, and how could it be without Ukraine and Gaza. Serious diplomats do not deal with us. Their only interest is that there is no shooting here and that the borders in Bosnia and Herzegovina do not change, and you do what you want inside.
Croatia and Slovenia are not very important, but they are still members of the EU. What I blame them for is that they don't get out of their selfish national interests and don't try to jointly formulate a regional policy that would resonate in Europe. Now, when the HDZ presents an initiative for BiH, it is clear to everyone in the EU that this is something that is only in the interest of its sister party - the HDZ BiH. However, I would be very happy if Montenegro entered the EU, it would be a sign that the region has not been completely abandoned.
Let's go back a little further into the past. Some say, that SFRY was not such a powerful country, it could not even fall apart so dramatically. Actually, both Yugoslavias fell apart with terrible crimes, and both are, especially the second one, brought a lot of good things. When you put both on the historical table, what prevails? Positive or negative?
Certainly, positively. Socialist historiography propagated the lie, probably with a noble aim, that here, together, the peoples of Yugoslavia, the working class and the like, fought for freedom against the occupiers and domestic traitors. No, it was a war against the occupier, but also a serious civil war. More or less, every Yugoslav nation was, approximately half and half, divided into partisans and collaborationist-nationalists. The problem of this last war, which we often talked about colloquially, is that there were no partisans.
Socialist Yugoslavia had a problem with an upside-down one-party system, which refused to upgrade to a liberal democracy, which would probably be the ideal framework for these areas. In addition, after the war there were mass murders and collective punishment, which is what I resent most about Tito's Yugoslavia, and I mean the attitude towards Germans and Italians. But despite this, the country has made an abnormal modernization leap. In the stories of Aleksandar Vučić, Serbia lives fantastically, no one built like him. A similar impression is being tried elsewhere. But the truth is different, the vast majority of infrastructure, roads, hospitals, schools, universities - all of this was built in Yugoslavia. A little bit in the first one, and a lot more in the socialist one. A huge step forward was also achieved in literacy, science, architecture... It is quite certain that this would not have happened if it was a capitalist society, or capitalist societies with dominating nationalism like today.
The first Yugoslavia, to put it in mythological terms, realized the "century-old" and logical dream of the South Slavs, to live in the same state, regardless of the fact that it was an absolute dictatorship in which everyone, more or less, was dissatisfied. Things broke both times on the vision of what Yugoslavia means for these peoples here. It turned out that everyone experienced her in a different way. As, after all, citizens now perceive their new states in different ways and have different visions of what they should be. If they could fall apart, they too would fall apart. Societies are so divided.
From this angle, it certainly seems that some kind of third Yugoslavia (we will forget about what was called FRY) can never be born, that it is illusory to even think about it. Many are, however, Yugonostalgic, Partisan songs are sung., mourns for a unique cultural space, who was rich, who produced, as you said, great value, developed competitiveness, broke provincialism. Whether, in the latter respect, the third Yugoslavia still survived?
The Yugoslav cultural space undoubtedly exists. It actually existed before Yugoslavia, and it will exist forever. This whole space is too small for us to be enough for ourselves. Second, we share a common language, with the exception of Macedonians, Slovenians and of course Albanians. But Slovenians and Macedonians, or a good part of them, follow closely what is happening in the culture of this language. There is, of course, a common past, which cannot be erased. The matter functions on different levels, and on the ground level, the so-called. cajki, and at the level of popular actors, series, co-production. Certainly, for example, the Croatian public is much more interested in student demonstrations in Serbia than in events in Italy. So it just exists.
But if we think of a unique cultural space that is conceptually aware, that is, a space that understands its deep significance, there are not many of us - who belong to some kind of intellectual, literary, journalistic, let's say activist scene, who participate in the social or cultural life of several countries. In my estimation, one 200-300. If we also count the audience, let's say 20-30 thousand. Practically, it is some kind of jazz scene, elitist, which exists and will exist. The problem is that it is an extremely small percentage. But still important.
And as for Yugonostalgia, it is dying out. People who gather on November 29 in Jajce or May 25 in Belgrade or elsewhere are slowly disappearing. The generation that has an active memory of Yugoslavia is disappearing. As nice as they are to us, the Yugonostalgics who get together and sing partisan songs have not brought anything fruitful in terms of restoring broken ties.
And who doesn't need that space? Who are these people who grab their guns when the word is heard "Yugoslavia"? What values do they stand for?, what is the culture they defend and produce?
There are various points of resistance. On the one hand, you have the street right, actually the mob, there's no better word for it. Resistance to Yugoslavia became their instinct, no one has to encourage and remind them anymore. They know very well what is allowed and what is not. Let's give an example: why is Bajaga a problem in Croatia, but Aleksandra Prijović is not? Because Bajaga is perceived as Yugoslav culture. And this and other singers are some kind of Serbian, Balkan culture, and that's fine with them.
At the national level, which is a political project, the Croatian Ministry of Culture persistently refuses to buy books by regional authors who are not Croats. That is chauvinism. There are a hundred barriers to the exchange of books in these areas, which is interesting. Related to this is the third branch of resistance. These are all those untalented or medium-talented who are not suited to competition. It's good for them because they are obsessed with the state, because they don't have to prove themselves elsewhere. They cannot look with their eyes on an Oliver Frljić, who tours all over Yugoslavia and does plays, or Boris Dežulović, whose texts and books are published and read everywhere. They want to eat themselves with jealousy. And damn it, the most talented do not share a nationalist set of values. Either they are aware or it is in their subconscious that everything that the nationalist culture produced in these areas in 30 years is completely inferior to what was created during Yugoslavia.
Some say that two new nationalisms have emerged in the meantime, besides these big ones, Serbian and Croatian. It means Bosnian and Montenegrin. Are they right or are they trying to create some kind of false balance??
Serbian and Croatian nationalism, precisely in that order, created by far the greatest horrors in these regions. I cannot help but notice that other nationalisms are also on the rise now. When it comes to Bosniaks and Montenegrins, they have really developed, we cannot pretend that the situation is the same as in 1990. But they are a consequence, they arose as a result of frustration and impotence. They would not have appeared in this volume if their causes, these two imperial nationalisms, primarily Serbian, had not been abolished. Besides, both Montenegrin and Bosniak nationalists are fundamentally powerless to influence anyone else regionally. They are powerless even within their own countries.
Generally, have nationalist narratives become so entrenched over time that we can never question them again?
That is an important question. I recently talked with Dubravka Stojanović about exactly that. Historiography has proven: when a big break happens, as it happened in the 1990s in our country, you have about ten years during which you can reinterpret events, demolish dominant narratives: this is the period in which it is decided how society will look at its past in the future. After ten years, things are cemented and you have no more chances.
Yet, I think there is hope.. But that won't happen in our lifetime, or it will happen when we are in our old age. The current young generation, from about twenty years old, they adopted existing narratives uncritically, but I think they will be in over their children's heads. If we are still in this area by then, if we don't perish or emigrate. And that's why what we do today is important, no matter how marginalized we are, that they have something to rely on.
No, it seems that maybe the time has come for all of us who are against the war to reconsider, fought against nationalism and hatred. Where did we go wrong?, Is there anything we could have done better?
I've been talking about it a lot in recent years. The project of dealing with the past has failed, the healing of these societies has failed, and we have to accept it. And why did it fail? Because all of us who were against the war and nationalism closed in our circles, encouraged each other, and failed to make any breakthrough into the majority discourses. The approach was wrong. We started from the assumption that people don't really know what happened, so at least the basically correct ones will change their attitude when they find out. Oh, we didn't know what was going on! But it's not true, it's a lie, they knew. There is no living person in Sarajevo and its surroundings, even if he was a Serb a hundred times, who did not know what was happening in this city. There is no one in Serbia who does not know what happened in Srebrenica. Therefore, the problem is not in ignorance but in support and acceptance.
In addition, there is a lack of serious political articulation. There is no political party, organization that would inherit this policy. We are divided into individuals, non-governmental organizations, and that is not politics. We lack the organization that the Communist Party had. Of course, it doesn't have to be called that, nor does it have to be communist. The communists did not win because they spoke well, but because they had a clearly hierarchical organization that said - let's go in this direction now, even if we all perish!
This is where we come to current events. In Croatia, we see outpourings of ultra-nationalism, in the context of Thompson "monumental" concert, but also new events directed against the Serbian community. Who are the generators of that, At least it seems that way from the outside., Unprovoked escalations? Where is the Church?, what role does the fact that the ultra-right Homeland Movement is part of the government in Croatia play in all of this??
It is not a process from yesterday, it only became more visible and massive after the entry of the Homeland Movement into power and after Thompson's concert in Zagreb. The concert encouraged them, they saw that they were there. HDZ goes after the eggs, for the sake of a coalition partner, but the fact is that a good part of HDZ basically has the same views as the Homeland Movement. Of course, there is also the influence of the Church and ultra-right organizations. The problem is similar to the one in Serbia, only Croatia is at a higher democratic level and there is a larger number of people who have been articulately fighting against nationalism for decades.
photo: almin zrno / liberation...
What do they want? Radical right-wing nationalists and the Church actually want the restoration of the Ustasha state. I don't think that implies a new Jasenovac, because such a thing is not possible in today's circumstances, and there are no more Serbs either. Their goal is to introduce spiritual, ideological and legal totalitarianism, a single-mindedness in which any different cultural expression or oppositional opinion will be forbidden. There is one more thing. And Europe has changed. It was easier when the EU was absolutely liberal-democratic and when there was such a context in which fascism was inadmissible. And now he's all over the place. And we are part of that world. However, there is a huge number of people in Croatia, in my opinion still a larger percentage, who do not want and do not approve of any restoration of the NDH, but the question is what will happen to the next generations who were raised on these narratives.
I would like to comment on the events in Serbia from several aspects. The first is the role of the international community, more precisely the West, who has supported the project so far "Vucic", and unequivocally. How smart was it to play the card of a politician with such a terrible past?
The West, in my opinion, is cynical and hypocritical. I would be happy if Montenegro and Bosnia and Serbia joined the EU, but I am not blind. The EU is a cynical political creation. And not only when it comes to our region. Angela Merkel played the worst role. It was frightening how uncritically she supported Vučić. However, one thing should be said: what they expected, Vučić delivered to them - an independent Kosovo. And that's a done deal.
The often repeated structural lie that Serbia is some kind of stability factor in the region - it affected me personally. Serbia was and remains a key factor in instability. A huge part of Serbian society has never fundamentally come to terms with Avnojeva's borders, nor with the independence of neighboring countries. That's a fact. HDZ leader in BiH Dragan Čović is an unquestionable nationalist, but you will never hear from him that Croats will leave that country. And you hear that from Dodik and Vulin every day. The same is true when it comes to Montenegro. The "Serbian world" project is not just a phrase, but has come to life in many documents. Then, the attitude towards Kosovo. I read the topic in a Belgrade weekly. Predrag Marković, historian, roughly says that Kosovo is currently independent, but that we should wait for more favorable historical circumstances. He does not say that Albanians should be persuaded to return to live in Serbia, but advocates the war option. I'm not sure that's a minority opinion.
If I lived in Serbia, I would go crazy because of the possible exploitation of lithium. I would go crazy to see how state treasures are sold off to maintain the Vučić regime. I am completely clear about everything that is happening. But these other things should also be discussed.
This is where we come to the student movement in Serbia. He managed a sleeping country, reconciled with "bad infinity", to awaken and restore hope. And young people too, who we thought had actually become completely lost to political and social activism. What is your opinion about him??
Students are not average, they can clearly see where Serbia is going under Vučić. They also saw hopelessness, they saw the sale of the land and realized that this type of government ultimately literally kills. If SNS stays in power, nothing will be left of Serbia. They also realized that they had the following choice: either to leave, or to join the ruling party, or to change society. In my opinion, the tragedy in Novi Sad was just a trigger, because things became clear to them a long time ago. I absolutely support their rebellion. He completely delegitimized Vučić's regime. In my opinion, thanks to them, Vučić is a political dead man.
What worries me is their militant war against opposition parties. Of course, the lack of a program, to check which line they are on, whether they inherit the same values that led Serbia to the current difficult situation. If that is so, I am afraid that their struggle will not produce the results they desire. I know they are under a lot of pressure, I am sure that the secret services work in three shifts, but they have to face all these challenges.
If the list of which they are actually the leaders wins power, the same issues will await them: relations with Russia, European integration, relations with neighbors. You have to have an attitude about it all. You can't say: give us a break from these topics until we solve things inside the country. It is clear to me that Vučić can be brought down by uniting a wide ideological spectrum against him and with rhetoric that will be acceptable to as many of the population as possible. But if you enter politics, the political ring, then you have to have politics.
For the end, Mostar. The city where you were born and where you currently live. He is a symbol of both post-war Yugoslavia and post-war BiH. Is this division eternal?? Is the division of Bosnia eternal?? Is there hope?? Is there room for some different, unspent policies?
Our curse, which is best seen in Mostar, but also our blessing lies in the fact that - fortunately - we are not like Israelis and Palestinians. We lived together for a long time: I am going back to both Yugoslavias, to the fact that many married and married other nations, that many believed in Yugoslavia and in the idea that we were all the same, that it was not crucial who you were by origin, and that we perceived each other as our own. That habit, that emotional and social reflex of living together - he survived. That is why today there is not only one reality. On the one hand, there is a majority – on both sides – buried in their own wartime nationalist narratives. Of course, the responsibility is largely asymmetric: the role of Croatian politics and the horrors that were committed, with the insistence that it be justified or relativized, remain an incomparably more difficult fact. But, on the other hand, there is also a solid percentage of people who inherit the tradition of Yugoslav Mostar; who function every day as if it is still a single city, cross "to this" and "to the other" side, live a normal life despite the division. We are a minority, but we are not an insignificant minority. We are not a statistical error - we are not one or two percent. There are, I would say, between 10 and 15, maybe up to 20 percent, but too few to fundamentally change the political dynamics of the majority.
The former Mostar still exists - it lives. There is also the former Sarajevo, and the former Belgrade - but as a minority energy. Which will not disappear. That is why it is impossible to "cut" the space to the end and to finish everything the way the nationalists wish. For this reason, the nationalist cramp is coming. They would so much like that minority, that common cultural and social reflex, to be gone - that it does not exist, that it does not survive - but they cannot fight against it. And that, paradoxically, is both our strength and our worst problem: we are a media- and publicly influential minority, numerous enough to be a nuisance, but not strong enough to turn things around.
