2013

HISTORY AND
POLITICS IN THE
WESTERN BALKANS
Changes at the Turn of the Millenium
At the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 20th centuries, the Balkans have,
on one side, seemed to have reached an impass. Not too many democratic
changes have been successfully implemented in most Balkans states, even
though Croatia is now a member state of the European Union. Old problems are
now combined with new ones. How do the Balkans states deal with their own
visions of their past? How are policies and state governance influenced by old
and new issues? In the first OPAL volume published by the Center for Good
Governance Studies (a double Open Access Library volume), several scholars
from various fields and geographical regions have joined forces to debate
current problems that the Balkan states are facing nowadays, as well as the
emerging issues of confronting the past and managing good governance in the
future.

Edited by Srđan M. Jovanović and Veran Stančetić

Center for Good Governance Studies – OPAL volume #1-2
10-Oct-13
Published by the Center for Good Governance Studies
In the OPAL edition (OPen Access Library)
Hilandarska 9, Belgrade
[email protected]
www.csdu.org.rs
Edited by Srđan M. Jovanović and Veran Stančetić
Design by CGGS/CSDU
ISSN: XXXX-XXXX
CIP: XXX

2
HISTORY AND POLITICS IN THE WESTERN
BALKANS: CHANGES AT THE TURN OF THE
MILLENIUM
A DOUBLE OPAL VOLUME

CONTENTS

* * *

(MIS)USES OF HISTORY:
HISTORY AS A POLITICAL TOOL IN THE WESTERN BALKANS (1986-2012)

War crimes as political tools:

Bleiburg and Jasenovac in history textbooks 1973-2012
Tamara Pavasović Trošt

The term ‘Western Balkans’ as a category of analysis in public and academic discourse: historical
perspective and modern applications (late 19th – early 21th centuries)
Panagiotis Paschalidis
3
 Invoking Kosovo mythological symbolism in Serbian public discourse from 1987 to 2012
Jovana Jezdimirović Ranito

Historical consciousness in Serbia’s lay population

Srđan M. Jovanović

Holocaust discourse as a screen memory: the Serbian case

Lea David

History as a tool of power in the Croatian newspaper Vjesnik before the outbreak of the war in
Yugoslavia (1990–1991)
Mariia Burtseva

TRANSITIONAL GOVERNANCE:
EU INTEGRATION AND THE WESTERN BALKANS

The Macedonian name dispute and the principle of conditionality

Židas Daskalovski

Enlargement and corruption in the EU: a race to the bottom or the top?
Dennis Nottebaum & Omer Gokcekus

Media impact on Serbia’s EU accession

Marko Miranović

4
 HOLOCAUST DISCOURSE AS A SCREEN
MEMORY: THE SERBIAN CASE
LEA DAVID

I A R G U E I N T HI S A R T I C L E T HA T H O L O C A U S T M E M O R Y D I S C O U R S E I N S E R B I A I S C U R R E N T L Y B E I N G
P R O M O TE D B Y TH E S TA T E A S P A R T O F I TS E F F O R TS TO C O N C E A L A N Y P O L I T I C A L S P A C E W H E R E A N
E N C O U N TE R B E T W E E N T H E S TA TE A N D T HE C I V I L S O C I E TY M A Y B E A B L E TO O C C U R A N D R E D I R E C T
P U B L I C D E B A TE R E G A R D I N G T H E W A R S O F TH E 1 9 9 0 S . T HU S , I N S TE A D O F D E A L I N G W I TH TH E I R R O L E S
A N D R E S P O N S I B I L I T I E S , S E R B I A N G O V E R N M E N T S A R E E N G A G E D I N R E F R A M I N G A N D O B S C U R I N G TH E
C O N T E S TE D E L E M E N TS O F T H E I R N A T I O N A L P A S T . I N S E R B I A H O L O C A U S T M E M O R Y I S B R O U G H T U P TO
T HE F O R E A S A P L A TF O R M F O R A R TI C U L A T I N G N A T I O N A L I N TE R E S T S A N D T H U S I S A C TI V A TE D A S A
S C R E E N - M E M O R Y . I W I L L S H O W HE R E HO W HO L O C A U S T D I S C O U R S E HA S S E R V E D T H E D O M E S T I C
P O L I T I C A L E L I TE I N T H E C O U R S E O F T HE L A S T D E C A D E S O T HA T S E R B I A N V I C TI M S C O N T I N U E TO B E
E Q U A TE D W I T H HO L O C A U S T V I C T I M S A N D T HE R I G HT E O U S N A TU R E O F T H E W A R S O F T H E 1 9 9 0 S I S
E S TA B L I S HE D . F U R T HE R M O R E , I WILL SHOW THAT HO L O C A U S T MEMORY DISCOURSE IS
I N S TR U M E N TA L I Z E D T O B E T T E R S E R B I A ’ S I M A G E O N T H E I N T E R N A T I O N A L S TA G E .

During the year 2012 at least four Serbian Human and Minority Rights. On 27 January
ministries participated in raising Holocaust 2012, on the International Holocaust
awareness through various projects Remembrance Day, under the sponsorship of
sponsored by: The Ministry of Education, the Government of the Serbian Republic and in
Science and Technological Development, The participation with the UN Educational,
Ministry of Labor and Social policy, The Scientific and Cultural Organization, the
Ministry of Culture, Information and Belgrade municipality and Savski Venac
Information Society, and The Ministry for district, the very first museum exhibition

64
named ‘The Holocaust in Serbia between 1941 occur and to redirect public debate regarding
and 1944’ was opened in the Museum of the wars of the 1990s.350 This however, also
Yugoslav History. The exhibition opening was goes hand in hand with Byford’s claims on the
followed by numerous discussions, panels and actual negligence of the Holocaust memory at
ceremonies and had been planned and official levels. I argue here that the official
prepared over several months. In Serbia’s attitude of simultaneously both neglecting and
President Tadić’s words, the exhibition embracing different segments of Holocaust
symbolized a culmination of the decade long memory is to be understood in the light of
post-war efforts towards achieving an open their instrumentalization of the Holocaust.
and democratic society in Serbia. Holocaust memory is employed by the
Just a little more than a decade earlier, political elites in modern day Serbia as a
during the Milošević regime, Holocaust means of dealing with the contradictory
memory discourse and Holocaust research had demands at the domestic and international
been none existent.348 Research on the levels and it is also used to enwrap any public
Holocaust was largely inseparable from debate on the wars of the 1990s.
research into anti-fascist struggles, while At the national level, singular political
Holocaust memory discourse was used solely actors embraced the Holocaust memory
as a rhetorical device for claiming Serbian discourse to claim their particular agendas,
victimhood. Thus, rather than discussing the among them, the Jewish community, the
dynamic that underpins the marginalization of Serbian Orthodox Church (SOC) and Human
the Holocaust in the current Serbian public Rights NGO’s. The Federation of Jewish
discourse, (as Jovan Byford successfully Communities in Serbia (and Montenegro until
does),349 I analyze here what may appear to be 2006), a small and powerless community,
the exact opposite phenomenon and ask how continued organizing ceremonies and
it is that in just in a few years the Holocaust commemorations at various sites of the
has been revived and embraced by the suffering from the Holocaust throughout the
domestic political elite? year, as it had also done during the Milošević
I argue in this paper that Holocaust regime. Throughout the decade after the
memory discourse in Serbia has been recently overturn of the Milošević regime NGO’s
promoted by the state in its efforts to conceal promoting democratic values, such as the
any political space where an encounter Belgrade Centre for Human Rights, the
between the state and the civil society may Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in

65
Serbia, the Youth initiative for Human Rights, words, looking from outside of the European
Women in Black and others, referred to the Union, embracing the Holocaust memory is
Holocaust as ‘a unit of moral measurement’ understood as a necessary step suitable for
(some also did so during the Milosevic regime) international display that adds extra points
and presented it exclusively in relation to and improves Serbia’s chances of getting
Human Rights violations.351 The SOC however, accepted into the EU.
proved to be a major actor in promoting the This article will address the threefold
commemoration of the Holocaust, especially process relating to the construction of
from 2003 when the Jasenovac Committee of Holocaust memory discourse in today’s Serbia.
the Synod of Bishops of the Serbian Orthodox Firstly, I analyze various agendas that brought
Church was founded. The Jasenovac the Holocaust to the fore through educational
extermination camp (1941-1945) was not and commemorative projects. Secondly, I
operated by the Germans but by the Croatian contrast the adoption of Holocaust memory
Ustasha, and had been among the largest discourse by the ruling political elite with
camps in Europe. It represents a symbol of other governmental practices that clearly
Serbian suffering and there is great suggest that Holocaust discourse is highly
controversy over the numbers of people killed instrumentalized and serves other purposes
there. The Jasenovac Committee aimed, first rather than that of promoting Human and
and foremost to claim Jasenovac as the new Minority rights. Thirdly, I suggest that these
Serbian Kosovo, as the ultimate place of official attitudes should be understood in the
Serbian suffering while the Holocaust was light of a ‘screen memory’, where Holocaust
used to provide a wider context.352 memory discourse represents another means
At the international level, the Holocaust for concealing an open debate between
proved to be a suitable device for gaining different segments in society about the
certain privileges and for claiming Serbian role in the wars of the 1990s and for
membership in the same moral community. insinuating that Serbia actually played a
Mixing and merging different and at times righteous role in those wars.
even contradicting agendas promoted at the
local and international level, the Holocaust
came in handy for the Serbian political elite as SCREEN MEMORY
a device for simultaneously satisfying both
domestic and international demands. In other

66
 memory: ‘cosmopolitan memory’.357 The
A screen-memory is a Freudian notion cosmopolitanization of memories refers to
that addresses a memory of something that is practices that shift attention away from the
unconsciously used to repress the recollection territorialized nation-state and the ethnically
of an associated but distressing event. The bound frameworks that are commonly
concept of screen memory is seen as a associated with the notion of collective
bracketing mechanism that draws attention to memory.358 In their view, as in Jeffrey
the complexities of social memory, as it Alexander’s,359 the Holocaust has escaped its
simultaneously produces and interrogates spatial and temporal particulars to emerge as
knowledge about the past as a way to both a common moral touchstone in the wake of the
conceptualize and trouble contemporary Cold War, and can thus provide the basis for
notions of social memory.353 an emergent universal Human Rights regime.
Having implications in a relatively There have been examples in America,
globalized world, across many nation-states, whereby fascination with the Holocaust may
the Holocaust is often used as a ‘screen have functioned as a screen memory
memory… remembered in order to displace, (deckerinnerung) in the Freudian sense,
repress or ‘screen’ other, perhaps more covering up a traumatic event that cannot be
traumatic, local events and histories’.354 As approached directly, thus creating an
already supplied with a stock series of ideological displacement,360 or conversely
metaphors, images, and symbols for good and thoughts about other traumatic recent events
evil, righteous and demonic, the Holocaust has may have served as ‘screen-memories’ for the
become increasingly influential in structuring Holocaust. There were attempts to compare
and re-scripting nationalist narratives, slavery or the Native American experience to
especially since the 1970s and 80s, when the the Holocaust, but these were vocally
Holocaust arguably became ‘industrialized’.355 suppressed before they gained a wider
This is due to the fact that the Holocaust, audience. In Bernard-Donals’ research on the
as a cosmopolitanized memory, can be Holocaust Museum in Washington (USHMM)
constitutive both for the European outlook, after the 9/11 attack, he showed a curious
but also for the more nationalistic conflation of memories where the attacks in
perspective.356 According to Daniel Levy and New York and Washington in September 2001
Natan Sznaider, the global spread of Holocaust and those events taking place in Afghanistan
discourse has generated a new form of were very much on the minds of visitors to the

67
Holocaust museum – as screen memories for emergence of survivor testimony as a
the Holocaust.361 powerful genre for exposing both forms of
Michael Rothberg has, however, harshly violence.364 Following this line of argument,
critiqued this approach of ‘competitive Levi showed that the Holocaust energized
memory—a zero sum struggle over scarce Australians to confront their own past with
resources’ preferring to ‘consider memory as regard to Aboriginal Australians, with a
multidirectional: as subject to ongoing number of historians producing impressive
negotiation, cross referencing, and borrowing’. comparative studies.365
362 He argued that claims that remembering Whether and under what conditions
one thing must come at the cost of another are memories of the Holocaust provide a platform
historically problematic, as well as politically for embracing national histories, or for
and ethically unproductive. Instead, according enabling their disappearance, is yet to be
to Michael Rothberg Holocaust consciousness theorized. I, however, find that the current
serves as a platform for articulating issues of Holocaust memory discourse in Serbia
national interest and thus is activated as a functions as a repressive force. It is a zero-sum
screen-memory which does not simply game used by the Serbian governments to shut
compete with other pasts but also provides a down debates on the role and responsibility of
greater level of comfort than that which Serbia in the wars of the 1990s and to redirect
confrontation with more local problems could this to a much more suitable discourse on
allow. Rothberg claims that the Holocaust WWII which also requires fewer resources and
memory is ultimately interconnected with can be adjusted to both domestic and
slavery, colonial domination and forms of international demands.
genocide across the globe, thus it necessarily
simultaneously furthers several discourses
relevant to the given national context.363 This THE SERBIAN CONTEXT AND THE
multi dimensional approach to the Holocaust PERCEPTION OF THE HO LOCAUST
as a screen memory is presented, for example,
in the late stages of the Algerian war for
Independence where the resonance between
the violence of decolonization and that of the In socialist Yugoslavia, as in other
Nazi genocide created a multidirectional communist countries, the suffering of Jews
network of memory that facilitated the was interpreted as a generic manifestation of

68
the broader terror regime instituted by the Muslims, Albanians - during WWII, as well as
Nazis against the civilian population.366 the hardships which the Serbs had been
Although by 1952 the Federation of Jewish undergoing in the overwhelmingly Albanian
Communities of Yugoslavia had erected five province of Kosovo.371 As Yugoslavia officially
major monuments to the Jewish victims of the started to break up in 1991, this date also
Holocaust, it was clear that Jewish suffering marked the shift in the Holocaust memory
was part of the larger carnage that had treatment in all former Yugoslav countries.
befallen the peoples of Yugoslavia during During the 1990s and early 2000s Holocaust
World War II.367 Nazi anti-Semitism was memory per se received almost no attention.
treated as an expression of racism directed not However, in Serbia, during the Milošević
just at the Jews but also at the Roma and the regime Jewish Holocaust imagery did play a
Slavs. As a result, Jewish victims of the key role372 and it was manipulated as a
Holocaust were, for the most part, subsumed rhetorical tool and ‘a symbolic prop whose
under the category of ‘victims of fascism’, and purpose is to draw attention to and augment
remembered only in the context of the broader the significance of the main focus of memory,
memorialization of the People’s Liberation namely Serbian martyrdom’.373 It is the
War and anti-fascist resistance.368 uniqueness of the Holocaust in a performative
The Post-Communist transition in the sense, as the reiterative and conational
region was accompanied by revisionist trends practice by and with discourse, which
in national historiographies and the revival of produces the effects it names. The unique
right-wing and anti-Semitic political ideas that performativity of the Holocaust is embedded
affected the public perception of the in the idea that maintaining the identity of a
Holocaust. After 1989, the systematic victim and portraying oneself as a victim is
suppression and organized forgetting of the sometimes difficult to discern for the simple
Holocaust, which had defined the decades reason that most people accept people, nations
under Communist rule, gave way to new forms and institutions according to how they present
of trivialization of Jewish suffering under the themselves.374 The availability and already
Nazis.369 The Serbian intellectual elite had developed performativity of the Holocaust has
already adopted ‘genocide’ discourse in the encouraged different national groups to adopt
1980s.370 It was used to emphasize both the its symbolism, imaginary and vocabulary as
‘forgotten’ Serbian suffering at the hands of means of articulating their own nation’s past
the various Yugoslav peoples – Croats, Bosnian history of victimization. Such performative

69
reinterpretation of the national histories the sixtieth anniversary of the liberation of the
allowed Serbia to justify the violent and Auschwitz death camp. Serbia and
illegitimate forms of statecraft they were Montenegro was the only European country
pursuing during the wars of the 1990s.375 that was not represented by a government
Apart from sporadic acts of official. The president of Serbia and
acknowledgement of the Holocaust, the Montenegro, Svetozar Marović, excused
general attitude of negligence toward both himself saying he had come down with flu;378
Holocaust memory and the Jewish community the plane of the minister of defense, Prvoslav
in Serbia in the 1990s reached its peak with Davinić, did not take off because of a
growing anti-Semitism during the NATO mechanical problem. Serbian president Boris
bombardment. The proliferation of the belief Tadić and prime minister Vojislav Koštunica
in Jewish conspiracy during the NATO never even considered going to Poland.379 This
bombardment brought in the aftermath of the is one of many examples that show the degree
Milošević regime numerous Human Rights to which official institutions, politicians, and
violations, including acts of increasing anti- discourses in Serbia were insensitive to any
Semitism.376 According to civil rights groups non-Serbian suffering; thus the question
and other NGOs which monitor instances of remains what motivated the officials to start
ethnic hatred in Serbia, the number of promoting Holocaust discourse?
threatening letters to Jewish households, The year 2005 was significant as two
attacks on Jewish owned property, as well as separate markers set processes in motion,
physical assaults on members of the Jewish processes that would over the years produce
community, all increased during the spring of and shape the official attitude towards the
2001.377 Those kinds of excesses contrasted Holocaust. The first was the UN Resolution
with the period after WWII when anti- whereby on the first of November, 2005 the
Semitism had been a marginal occurrence in UN General Assembly designated January 27,
Serbia. the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-
This ambiguous state attitude also Birkenau, as International Holocaust Re-
continued after the year 2000 and is best membrance Day. It meant, in practice, that
illustrated by the event attended by 25 heads every UN state member is obliged to
of state, delegations from 50 countries and commemorate the Holocaust at state level,
about 10,000 guests who had gathered with this already being in sharp contrast to the
together on 27 January 2005 to commemorate state’s avoidance of the 2005 the Holocaust

70
commemoration. Thus, just a year after EDUCATIONAL PROJECTS : THE
refusing to participate in the sixtieth HOLOCAUST UNDER THE AUSPICES OF
anniversary of the Auschwitz, in 2006, Serbia THE SOC (SERBIAN ORT HODOX CHURCH)
become obliged to commemorate Inter-
national Holocaust Day and, over night, the
official rhetoric became that of the Human
Ever since the breakup of Yugoslavia and
Rights Regime. The second event, that
the decline of communism, the role of the SOC
seemingly appeared to be of a minor rel-
has been constantly changing and over years
evance, was the Organization for Security and
the Church has begun to claim its pre-WWII
Cooperation (OSCE) recognition of the
power back. During WWII, the SOC had fought
Jasenovac Committee of the Synod of Bishops
against communism, as in other countries
of the Serbian Orthodox Church as an example
where it was becoming the prevailing
of good practice in the field of commemorating
ideology, giving its support to the monarchy
the Holocaust.380 This gave a momentous
and the Chetniks. In the period after WWII the
boost to continuing the Church agenda when
Church had been utterly marginalized. Many of
equating Serbian with Jewish victims.
its properties had been confiscated and some
Moreover, it proved that the Holocaust could
of its clerical elite had been forced into exile.
be used successfully as a platform to promote
The wars of the 1990s marked a revival of
‘the cult of the New Martyrs of Jasenovac’.381
the Church’s influence which increased
The OSCE recommendation, composed
significantly during the following years. By the
without understanding the context specificity
eve of Milošević’s fall, the Church enjoyed
of the Jasenovac Committee, gave official
relatively high levels of public trust and
legitimacy to the Serbian Orthodox Church to
instead of becoming a leading institution that
pursuing further reframing of the Holocaust,
could approach questions of responsibility,382
not in relation to the extreme forms of the
the Serbian Orthodox Church became a
Human Rights violation but as the framework
leading right-wing nationalist force. The rising
for claiming alliance between Jewish and
power of the Church, followed by the religious
Serbian suffering throughout the history.
and tradition resurgence, is an omnipresent
feature of both cultural and political life in
modern day Serbia. Thus, the Jasenovac
Committee of the Synod of Bishops of the
Serbian Orthodox Church, founded in 2003,
71
composed of respected Church repre- University (Bosnia and Herzegovina), at
sentatives, immediately claimed its source of Zagreb University (Croatia), and later on also
legitimacy in the SOC. The Committee studied theology at Belgrade University
developed a wide range of activities, whose (Serbia). He attended postgraduate studies in
primary aim was to create a local, ‘regional Jewish culture at the Yad Vashem Memorial
and international level of awareness of the Institute and at the Hebrew University in
suffering of the Serbian people and the Church Jerusalem; he was the winner of the 2004
in the Second World War and celebrating New Golda Meir Award.388 In addition to being
Martyrs of Jasenovac’.383 Though the main extensively educated, and fluent in several
purpose of the Jasenovac Committee was to languages among them English, Russian and
commemorate Serbian victims, Jews and Roma Hebrew, German, Greek and several Slavic
were included as ‘out brothers in suffering’.384 languages, Ćulibrk is especially appealing to
The Holocaust was perceived as the ‘historical the younger generations as a proclaimed
context in which Jasenovac took place’.385 rocker. Prior to becoming a priest, he wrote a
Thus, it was a part of the committee’s agenda few works on contemporary music and
to address the Holocaust. However, the culture, theory and practice of the con-
responsibility for shifting the uses of the temporary media and the question of post-
Holocaust beyond its performative and and supra-modernism in professional ma-
rhetorical framing lies in the hands of a single gazines and journals.389
person, the Hieromonk Archimandrite Jovan His relationship with Israel is not
Ćulibrk, recently inaugurated as Vicar Bishop restricted solely to the Holocaust studies.390
of Pec patriarchate in Kosovo. His perception that the act of sacrifice and the
Jovan Ćulibrk is a new kind of a monk, role of the victim are central to the spiritual
capable of appealing to a wide range of being of both fighter and priest guided Fr
audiences, who is currently a central public Ćulibrk in his search beyond the immediate
figure in Serbia’s religious and cultural life.386 attachment to a biblical spirituality of the Holy
He is also often called a ‘parachutist in Land.391 He thus also studied military-civil
priesthood’ when addressing his military relations in Israel.392 Furthermore in answer
career as a reserve officer of the 63rd to a request made by the Serbian Ministry of
Airborne Brigade.387 Born in Zenica in 1965 Defense, Jovan Ćulibrk coordinated the
(Bosnia and Herzegovina), he studied Serbian cooperation between the Military Archive of
language and literature at the Banjaluka Serbia and the Archive of Yad Vashem, as well

72
as several military delegation exchanges At the state level, however, the Serbian
between Israel and Serbia. political elite started to adopt and promote the
His major work, however, has been in Holocaust discourse more intensively after the
promoting the memory of the Holocaust in 2005 OSCE recognition of the Jasenovac
Serbia. From 2001 when Ćulibrk visited Israel Committee work on the Holocaust and the UN
as a member of the state delegation of the
resolution on International Holocaust day. The
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, he started
involvement and the commitment at the state
building close ties with the Yad Vashem
museum. Thus when in 2003 the Jasenovac level became official to a higher degree after
Committee was established, it was imme- December 2006, when the Serbian delegation
diately linked with Yad Vashem, as the headed by Zoran Popović, the Deputy Minister
institute embraced Fr Ćulibrk unreservedly. of Foreign Affairs, Jewish community repre-
However, both Yad Vashem and OSCE failed to sentatives and the Museum of Genocide
recognize the far-reaching consequences and representatives,394 became an observer at the
the malicious potential of shifting the framings TASK Force for international cooperation on
of the Holocaust from its universal meanings education about the Holocaust (ITF). This role
to serving the claims of a narrow Serbian
meant that education about the Holocaust
nationalist agenda.
became obligatory, in line with demands of the
The archive of the Jasenovac Committee
offers a clear picture of the type of contact international community, with the state being
maintained between the Committee and Yad committed to supporting and promoting it. In
Vashem. Under the title of ‘educational 2009 Serbia became an affiliated member of
seminars for teachers’ prior to 2006, it can be the ITF and in 2011 a permanent member
seen that the SOC clergy participated in six of which further reinforced its duty to develop
these seminars also ‘some forty of SOC education and research on Holocaust related
candidates studied since 2003, sixteen of them issues. However, it was not the Jewish
under the auspices of the Jasenovac Historical Museum, the Jewish Community or
Committee or in coordination with it’.393 The the History Department at the Belgrade
hieromonk Jovan Culibrk, as a protégé of Yad
University that was sponsored by the state to
Vashem, played a central role in all of the
promote Holocaust education, but the
seminars as a key note speaker and one of the
organizers. Jasenovac Committee, the organization under

73
the auspices of the Serbian Orthodox Church. At the seminar in 2008 ‘Teaching about the
This choice is understandable since the Shoah and anti-Semitism’ at the International
Jasenovac Committee promoted precisely the School for Holocaust Studies, organized and
framing of the Holocaust that served the ruling promoted by the Serbian Ministry of
political elite’s purposes: the Committee Culture398 the thirteen-member Jasenovac
Committee delegation (out of 20 Serbian
already had both well established connections
participants)399 participated by delivering
with Yad Vashem and had some previous
three workshops.400 Even though both before
international recognition, such as the OSCE and after the 2006 and 2008 seminars several
acknowledgment, and more importantly its Serbian delegations participated in various
promotion of the Holocaust was fitted to the educational frameworks at Yad Vashem
claim of Serbian victimhood. museum, those two seminars made the most
Thus, since 2006 the Serbian Ministry of serious impact. Both were published later on
Culture, joined later on by other ministries, as article collections and were incorporated
started sponsoring seminars at Yad Vashem into history books defining both thematic and
organized by the Jasenovac Committee. Two methodological approaches to the subject. The
seminars highly significant to the future first book, a collection of articles on the Serbo-
Holocaust memory development were held in Israel scientific exchange in the study of the
2006 and 2008. The first, the ‘Academic Holocaust was published and presented at the
exchange with Serbian scholars’395 was held in 2009 International Holocaust Day comme-
June 2006 at Yad Vashem and was sponsored morations. The second book, ‘A guide for
by the Serbian Ministry of Culture. Here for the teaching about the Holocaust’ was published
first time, the seminar was open to in 2010. It dealt with the subject from various
professionals and practitioners from the field disciplinary and methodological perspectives:
of the Holocaust.396 However, even then, composed of nine thematic examples adjusted
although the topic was the Staro Sajmište for Serbian lessons, five for civil rights lessons
memorial museum, a central place of Jewish and nine for history lessons. Though it is a
detention in Serbia, the necessity of the work of undoubtedly enormous value, once
museum’s creation and its future disposition again, in defining the aims of the importance of
was discussed in the context of the con- learning on the Holocaust, the authors directly
troversy regarding the new exhibition at paired it with the significance of revealing
Jasenovac, a concentration camp in Croatia.397

74
‘attempts to deny genocide conducted on vernments adopted already contextualized
Serbs’.401 Holocaust memory discourse from the Church
Already in January 2007, slightly after the that had framed it successfully for its own
2006 Yad Vashem seminar, the first seminar purposes. By placing the Holocaust in the
using the Yad Vashem methodology on the hands of and under patronage of the Church,
Holocaust for history teachers was held in the Serbian political elite found the way to
Novi Sad and was fully supported by the both address the domestic demands for
regional secretary for education.402 In the claiming Serbian victimhood and to satisfy
coming December 2007, representatives of the moral demands of the international
Serbian Orthodox Church visited the Yad community. This pact between the Serbian
Vashem museum and agreed upon further Orthodox Church and the state provides the
education for an additional 40 experts.403 In necessary legitimacy for the very particular
January 2009, another seminar for teachers framing of the Holocaust and for continuing to
across Serbia was conducted in Novi Sad, and claim Serbian righteousness and its
sponsored by the regional government of victimhood.
Vojvodina, based on the Holocaust knowledge
perceived and framed as a device for
supporting claims of genocide over Serbs. This COMMEMORATION PROJEC TS: ARENAS OF
resulted becoming in 2009 an affiliated THE COLLIDING AGENDA S
member of the ITF and in 2011 a permanent
member The lecturers were, among others,
the Israeli Ambassador, the director of the
Simon Wiesenthal Center, a Serbian rabbi, Apart from being implemented into the
Hieromonk Jovan Ćulibrk as the educational system, the Holocaust memory
representative from the Serbian Orthodox has been reinforced through three
Church and others. The regional government commemorative days: 1) The Day of
of Vojvodina sponsored the seminar with 800 Remembrance of the Victims of the Genocide
000 dinars.404 in WWII, (April 22) commemorated officially
All Serbian governments saw promoting since 1992; 2) The International Holocaust
Holo-caust memory as a device for gaining Day (January 27), commemorated officially
certain benefits at the international level. since 2006; and 3) and the International Day
Thus, without any questioning, the Serbian go-

75
against Fascism and anti-Semitism, (Septem- April 22 was to be observed as the National
ber 9) commemorated officially since 2007. Holocaust, WWII Genocide and other Fascist
Already in 1992, at the request of the Crimes Victims' Remembrance Day. Such
state-sponsored Museum of Genocide Victims pretentious framing empties it from the
founded by the Serbian parliament405, the Day content and leaves plenty of room for
of Remembrance of the Victims of the interpretations, since it commemorates every-
Genocide in WWII was established with its one and no one at the same time.
primal purpose being to ‘demonstrate the The second commemorative day, the
suffering of the Serbian people via the Jews’.406 International Day of Commemoration in
The Day of Remembrance of the Victims of the Memory of the Holocaust Victims, January 27,
Genocide in WWII is held on April 22, established by the UN resolution in 2005, was
commemorating the liberation of Jasenovac commemorated for the first time in Serbia in
extermination camp. This date represents 2006. On that occasion, the ‘Topovske Šupe’
continuity with the Milošević agenda, where memorial plaque, in the shape of a Torah with
the extermination of Serbs, Jews and Roma is the text engraved in English, Hebrew and
equated, a trend that didn’t change much in Serbian, was unveiled. In 1941 for a short
the course of the post 2000 democratization in period of time, a concentration camp had been
Serbia. The real ambition was to comme- located there, having been operated by Nazi
morate the Serbian victims executed in the Germany with the help of Milan Nedić's
Jasenovac camp, whereas the Jewish quisling government. At the opening event the
victimization was to be invoked only along president of the Belgrade assembly Milorad
with and in relation to the history of Serbian Perović said that ‘this event is especially
martyrdom at Jasenovac. Thus, the Holocaust significant today when Serbia is making huge
as a political device was above all used to efforts to join the European Union’408,
claim Serbian victimhood, a trend which suggesting the true character of the Holocaust
continued to exist also after the overthrow of commemoration. At that event, as in those in
Milošević regime in the year 2000.407 the coming years, the link between Jewish and
However, by including Jews and Roma victim Serbian suffering has been repeatedly
as well, it also aims to address international established when addressing ‘Auschwitz,
demands of the Human Rights regime, this fact Jasenovac and other concentration camps’ as
having been further expressed in the new law symbols of death where Serbia will never
from 2011. According to the alterations made,

76
forget those crimes…’409 again implying the as such it was largely nothing more than a
genocide of Serbs in Jasenovac. pretense.
The International Day against Fascism and
anti-Semitism has been marked in most
European counties (but not exclusively) since THE HOLOCAUST MEMORY DISCOURSE: A
1997, on September 9, the day that symbolizes PRETENSE
the beginning of the Nazi pogrom in 1938, also
known as the ‘Kristallnacht’. On its first
commemoration, in 1998 large demon-
strations took place in Belgrade with between At the same time as adopting Holocaust
1,000 to 3,000 people demonstrating to draw memory discourse, the Serbian political elite
attention to the murder of Dušan Jovanović, a was occupied with promoting a fundamentally
14-year-old Roma boy who had been killed by different agenda. In continuance with the
racist skinheads. The Jewish community promotion of the victimization agenda and
organizations cooperated with the Roma before the adoption of Holocaust discourse, on
organizations and with several other NGOs to December 21, 2004, the Serbian parliament
protest against the racial hatred.410 However, voted in favor of the Law on Amendments and
while in the coming years this date was Supplements to the Law Veterans’ Rights,
commemorated across Serbia through various better known as the Law on equating rights of
actions and with varying successes, the state, partisan struggle with that of the Ravna Gora
as an official organizer or promoter finally movement, i.e. Chetniks. The law is edited in
joined in only in 2007. such way that it directly ascribes the same
From all that has been mentioned above, it rights and privileges to the participants of the
would seem that around the year 2006 the partisan struggle and the participants of the
Serbian political elite adopted an agenda of Chetnik movement during WWII.411 One of the
promoting Holocaust memory discourse. hard core promoters of the academic historical
However, my argument is that, embracing the revisionism and state-sponsored revisionism
Holocaust was an instrument of the political of the past, Kosta Nikolić, a research associate
elite’s rule not only for addressing domestic at the Institute for the Contemporary History,
and international demands for promoting the stated that: ‘it is of utmost importance to free
values of a Human Rights regime, but also as a oneself from the stereotype according the
screen memory for the wars of the 1990s, and

77
partisans were liberators and heroes [….] and filed a request for rehabilitating Milan Nedić, a
stop acting as if Chetniks were traitors’.412 Serbian leader in the quisling government,
However, this was not an isolated event. who had been, among other things, in charge
Less than four months after the first officially of the execution of the 6000 Jews and Roma in
commemorated International Holocaust Day Topovske Šupe concentration camp, the very
when the government pro-mised ‘never to spot where both the International Holocaust
forget’ to fight against any kind of anti- Day and the Day of Remembrance of the
Semitism, racism and fascism, on April 16, Victims of the Genocide in WWII comme-
2006, the Serbian parliament adopted the Law morations takes place. On December 11, 2008,
on Rehabilitation. It was tailored in the spirit two quisling’ gendarmes were rehabilitated in
of the 1481 Resolution of the European the Šabac district court.414 Judges justified this
Committee, which aimed to acknowledge the decision by stating that ‘they [the gendarmes]
victims of various political persecutions. were executed without a judicial procedure
However, instead of condemning the prior to carrying out the order, and that their
communist regime as undemocratic and execution had been politically and ideo-
responsible for mass human rights violence logically motivated’. This act resembles a
after 1945413 the Serbian Law did not include rehabilitation of the quisling apparatus and
any criteria for establishing clear rights for demarcation of the partisan movement as an
rehabilitation. Instead, it provided a tool for oppressive and persecuting force.415 On
ethical and political disqualification of the September 16, 2011, the High Court in
communist partisan movement as the Belgrade adopted a request for the
liberation force in the WWII. The main aim of rehabilitation of Momčilo Jankovic and Milan
the Law for Rehabilitation was the political Aćimović, two members of the Government of
rehabilitation of the Serbian participants of National Salvation of Milan Nedić, who was
the quisling and royal corpus from the WWII. first to declare Serbia free of Jews. According
Thus, immediately after its adoption, a request to Radanović416 ‘this act represents an
for rehabilitation of Draža Mihailović, a example par excellence of historical revi-
Serbian Chetnik leader, was filed. In January sionism and reframing of historical facts
2007 the Belgrade district court opened the during the first year of the German occupation
first hearing for the rehabilitation of Draža in 1941’. Though in December 2011 some
Mihailović. In 2008 the Serbian Liberal Party alterations to the Law on Rehabilitations were
accompanied by ultra right-wing movements made, it still stayed unclear as to for whom the

78
rehabilitation was intended. On December 15, correspond and blend with the Holocaust
the High Court in Belgrade rehabilitated memory discourse?
Prince Pavle Karađorđević, head of state at the When taking a closer look at the ways by
eve of the WWII, who adopted policies of which Holocaust memory education was
accommodation to the Axis powers. The constructed by the SOC, and consequently
judges claimed that the Prince was charged adopted by the state, one can understand that
due to ideological and political reasons and is anything but naïve. The Hieromonk Jovan
thus has a right to be rehabilitated. Radanović Ćulibrk understood the potential of connecting
explains that the rehabilitation of Pavle the Church agenda to the Holocaust memory
Karađorđević indicates that the message being discourse, realizing that dealing with the
sent by the state is not that signing a treaty Holocaust would grant him with both budgets
with the fascist states was a mistake, but to the and a cover for the further promotion of
contrary, the uprising against it was. conservative, traditional and basically none
From the above, one can conclude that the democratic views. It was not by coincidence
strengthening of fascism was not only a that Fr Ćulibrk chose Yad Vashem. Not only is
marginal agenda in current Serbia. This Yad Vashem a source of supreme legitimacy
project of disconnecting from the communist for dealing with the Holocaust, but it is also a
and partisan legacy, reestablishing the preparation ground for providing specific
righteous character of the Chetnik movement settings for claiming victimization. The Yad
and, in wider sense, general Serbian Vashem architecture, semiotic sets incur-
victimization, were all backed up, first and porated in the exhibition, the museum
foremost, by the Serbian orthodox Church, but guidance to the garden and paths designs, all
also by the ruling political elite that is emphasize personal suffering and eternal
prevailingly right-wing oriented. Olivera Jewish victimhood.418 Thus, for the SOC and
Milosavljević417 and other critical historians the Jasenovac Committee the Holocaust serves
rightly pointed out that the rehabilitation as a wrapping or a wider context419 for the
presents yet another means of manipulation core matter: victimization of the Serbs. Both
claiming the continuity of the Serbian national OSCE and Yad Vashem, only carried out very
state and that it is directly motivated by the superficial research and observations of the
needs of the current political elite. But how activities of the Jasenovac Committee and did
does the rehabilitation of the Chetnik struggle not realize how the Holocaust was being
utilized as a cover for the nationalist, basically

79
right-wing agenda. When in 2006 the East and West’ that gathered rock and pop
Hieromonk Jovan Ćulibrk held a lecture about singers across Serbia. With the slogan ‘Also
the Yugoslavia breakdown and its con- rock music in service of God’, he produced a
sequences on interethnic relations at the music project based on the lyrics of Serbian
International Conference at the Hebrew Bishop Nikolaj Velimirović (1881-1956), a
University, he presented the argument for the Serbian Orthodox Christian philosopher
importance of naming both, the victims and whose writing includes overtly anti-Semitic
the perpetrators, demonizing and blaming passages. Bishop Nikolaj wrote openly on Jews
socialism for the wars of the 1990s as an as being the source of all evil, stating among
ideology that blurred those categories. other things, that ‘all the modern European
However, the Holocaust was again reduced to slogans have been made up by Jews, the
a wider context serving solely as a platform for crucifiers of Christ: democracy, strikes,
learning from the Israeli experience on how socialism, atheism, tolerance of all faiths,
Serbia should correctly commemorate its own pacifism, universal revolution, capitalism and
victims and perpetrators.420 communism. All of these are invention of the
The controversy over such framing of the Jews and their father, the Devil.422 Having been
Holocaust can be seen in the fact that Fr Jovan vilified by the communist authorities in
Ćulibrk’s best known work is an edited volume Yugoslavia as an anti-Semite, a traitor and a
from 1996 called ‘Lamb of God and the Beast fascist, over the past two decades Bishop
from the Abyss’421 on the philosophy of the Velimirović has come to be revered within
war with selected articles written by the hard Serbian Orthodox circles as the greatest
core Serbian nationalists including that of national religious figure since medieval
Radovan Karadžić, a former Bosnian Serb times.423 Yet, Ćulibrk’s open support of bishop
politician, currently being detained the UN and Nikolaj was not an obstacle to his becoming a
accused of being responsible for crimes leading figure in the promotion of the
committed against Bosnian Muslims and Holocaust education either for OSCE and Yad
Bosnian Croats during the Siege of Sarajevo, as Vashem nor for the ruling political elite. The
well as ordering the Srebrenica massacre. The local Jewish community had to make a
book aimed to justify the atrocities committed compromise and to support him, as the Jewish
by the Serbs during the wars in Croatia and Bosnia. community now received for the first time
In addition, he was also the creator and official support in commemorating their love
promoter of a rock music projectcalled ‘Above ones. When asked specifically on this issue,

80
one of the former presidents of the Jewish past and contested wars. Thus, I suggest that
community explained it saying: ‘We know that, Holocaust memory discourse is being used to
[Culibrk’s support of Bishop Nikolaj] but the reinforce state control over a political space,
State accepted him, the Church accepted him, where any collective and in-depth public
even Yad Vashem accepted him. There is reckoning with Serbia’s contested past would
nothing we can do’.424 be possible. Moreover, it is utilized to
indirectly construct and insinuate Serbian
righteousness and victimhood in the wars of
the 1990s and to simultaneously mask the role
played by them as well as their responsibility.
This attitude is easily recognizable in the
rhetoric used at all official occasions. Year by
year, and from one commemoration event to
the next, all of the official speeches look
WHAT IS OMITTED? AN ELEPHANT IN THE exactly the same. It is not only amazing that
ROOM identical wording is used but also that there is
a consistent absence of what should be the
closest and most relevant issue when one
Alongside historical revisionism,425 address human rights violations: the wars of
commemorative practices and the national the 1990s. For example, all speeches made by
calendar,426 the Holocaust discourse is just the governmental officials include phrases
another means for reframing the role and such as: ‘never to forget’, ‘denial is dangerous’,
responsibilities for crimes in the wars of the ‘Serbian governments will do everything
1990s where atrocities has been relativized, necessary to remember’, ‘we send from here a
trivialized and slowly sent to oblivion.427 It is message of peace and tolerance in accordance
meant to deflect discourse from the debate to the principles of a democratic Serbia’,
about the wars of the 1990s towards Serbian together with commonly heard sentences such
victimization throughout history. All as ‘we are proud Serbia doesn’t have any anti-
governments after the overthrow in 2000 are Semitism’, or ‘we are proud of our
closing any political spaces which may contribution in the field of the Holocaust
function as space for the nation-state and the education’. Serbian President Tadic, in the
civil society to jointly debate over a difficult presence of the Israeli and German

81
ambassadors claimed in his speech at the The evidence of the resistance to the
International Holocaust Day commemoration, government’s use of the Holocaust as a screen
2010, at Staro Sajmiste, that ‘Serbia will never memory that aims at redirecting the public
agree to destroy others just because they discourse of the wars in the 1990s is best seen
belong to another ethnic, national, religious or in talkbacks following the articles on
political group’.428 At a similar occasion, in Holocaust commemorations. It seems that the
2012, President Tadić said that: ‘Serbia is closure of the political spaces for debating on
eager to join the EU, thus, there is no place the wars of the 1990s makes virtual spaces
here for those who committed crimes against rather an open arena for settling historical
humanity…’429 accounts. Thus in talkbacks, people post their
Making such statements without reactions openly against this cover up, saying,
connecting them to the recent wars of the for example, that: ‘…the monument Eternal
1990s is purposeful and represents the Flame in Novi Beograd, dedicated to the
strategy of ‘sweeping the wars of the 1990s victims of NATO aggression has been
under the carpet’. This also proves to be neglected since October 5, 2000. It is shameful
consistent with the current national calendar that the monument has not been renovated.
that promotes the memory of Serbian You [Serbian governments] discriminate
victimhood during the 1990s and only between victims who deserve and those who
commemorates the NATO bombardment on don’t deserve to be remembered – it is
Serbia whereas other events are buried in shameful!’.430 ‘And after all those terrible
heavy silence. The incomprehensible fact that experiences from WWII, again genocide on the
none of the officials has ever addressed the European ground - in Srebrenica’.431 ‘If only
Major issue with capital M, – the Serbian there was a developed consciousness of the
responsibility for the atrocities in the wars of Holocaust among Serbs, Srebrenica would not
the 1990s – frequently pops up in talkbacks take place.’432 ‘And as if we [the Serbs] forgot
that follow the daily news articles that our concentration camps such as Keraterm,
summarize commemorations and official Omarska and others?’433 ‘As if they did not
speeches. Whether one supports a view exist at all…’434
according to which the Serbs were the Those commemorative speeches, with
ultimate victims or were those to be blamed, affirmative statements on Serbia’s dedication
the wars of the 1990 are immediately brought to fight against any historical revisionism,
up to the fore. anti-Semitism and to embrace a Human Right

82
regime are often directly confronted. For to a refusal of the ruling political elite in Serbia
example, one talkback commented: ‘While to deal with the crimes committed in its name
there is a debate on rehabilitating Draza during Milošević regime that further procreate
Mihailovic, the attention is moved from the fascist and neo-Nazi agendas, especially
crimes committed at the Ex-Yu territories among youngsters.438
between 1991 and 1995 and the genocide in
Bosnia, so as to avoid actual criminal
proceedings.’435 Or in a similar fashion: ‘The
whole rehabilitation issue has only one real
aim – to establish the righteous character of CONCLUSION
the wars in the 1990s.’436 Some talkbacks
explicitly relate to the absurdity of the
official’s speeches at the International
Holocaust Day: ‘This sentence says everything. All of the above teaches us that the
Ministry for Human and Minority rights of Serbian State, when sponsoring Holocaust
Serbia stated that ‘only honest and real facing memory discourse, actually has other ideas in
the past, conviction of crimes, punishment of mind rather than promoting Human and
those responsible and reparations to victims Minority rights issues. My argument presented
represents a healthy foundation for the nation’s here suggests that the Holocaust memory
progress and for preventing future crimes’. And discourse is utilized and tailored in such way
what did Serbia do on that matter? A that while in theory it preaches Human and
resolution on Srebrenica cannot be passed in Minority rights, in practice, it not only actually
the Serbian parliament. Ratko Mladić and promotes nationalism and Serbian victimhood
Goran Hadžić are still free. Reparation? Have but also disguises the discourse on the role of
we paid anything to anyone for the crimes Serbia in the wars of the 1990s.
committed in our name?’437 The current Holocaust memory discourse
Such voices, however, are often heard is eye-catching mostly because of what is
spoken out loud, as, for example, at the panel absent in the discourse. The Holocaust is not
dedicated to the International Day against supposed to be only a matter of the particular
Fascism and anti-Semitism. The president of experience of the Jewish people, but also a
the Independent Association of Journalists of force and an entrance point to a discussion
Vojvodina Dinko Gruhonjić said that it is due and education on the wider Human and

83
Minority right issues. This was also confirmed There are those who frame it as the
at the International Holocaust Day, 2010, culmination of a history of anti-Semitism that
when the Agency for fundamental rights of the only happened to Jews; or as the history of
EU stated that the Holocaust and Human racism that can happen to anyone who is
Rights issues are closely related topics and as different or as a crime against humanity that
such should be implemented into every considers a crime against the human
national educational curriculum, stressing that condition. In Serbia, the framing of the
the history of the Holocaust is by all means, a Holocaust is narrow and though the official
history of human rights violations.439 At the rhetoric is aimed at addressing the demands of
same commemorative event, the Serbian the Human Right regime, in practice,
minister of culture Nebojša Bradić, a head of whenever the Jews are mentioned they are
the international delegation, proudly shared used to frame perceptions of Serbian
the successful implementation of the victimhood. This role of victim turns out to be
Holocaust theme into Serbia’s educational a comfortable one for shutting down any
system. However, he omitted to say that the political spaces where open public discussions
Holocaust memory is only used as scenery for on the role of Serbia in the wars of the 1990
claiming Serbian victimhood and righte- would be possible: if I am a victim I cannot be
ousness: not only that Serbs were sacrificing responsible for anything, and no one can argue
their own lives by saving Jews but that they with me because it would be showing a lack of
were the real victims of WWII. Such a respect for a victim.443 It is actually a powerful
contextual setting where the Holocaust is used position and it is used to escape any
as a reference for victimization in the responsibility for the crimes in the wars of the
contemporary world,440 is a copy-paste of the 1990s.
Israeli Yad Vashem ideological framework that From this perspective, one can understand
is created in a way that embodies Jewish that Holocaust memory discourse serves, not
victimhood and as such provides a wider only to strengthen Serbian victimhood during
legitimacy for the current political actions, WWII but also to reframe the role of Serbia in
first and foremost toward Palestinians.441 the wars of the 1990s. The unspoken wars of
Levy and Sznaider recognized that the 1990s have become the enormous
different people at different places frame the elephant in the room that everyone keeps
Holocaust in different ways and whereas the pretending does not exist. But, is it even
difference might be subtle, it is crucial. 442 remotely possible to talk about killing,

84
suffering and human rights violations without
searching for justice and addressing the
victims of those recent wars?

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alexander C. Jeffrey 2009. “On the Social Construction of Moral Universals The ‘Holocaust’ from War Crime to
Trauma Drama.” in Remembering the Holocaust: A Debate by Jeffrey C. Alexander, with Martin Jay, Bernhard
Giesen, Michael Rothberg, Robert Manne, Nathan Glazer, Elihu Katz, and Ruth Katz. Oxford: Oxford University
Press. 3–102.
Bajford, Jovan. 2011. Staro Sajmište – Mesto sećanja, zaborava i sporenja, Beogradski centar za ljudska prava:
Beograd.
Barclay, Craig. 1996. “Autobiographic remembering: Narrative constraints on objective selves.” in Rubin David
(ed.) Remembering our past: studies in autobiographical memory. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
Bernard-Donals, Michael. 2005. “Conflations of memory; or, What They Saw at the Holocaust Museum after
9/11.” The Critical Centennial Review. 5, no. 2: 76-106.
Bieber, Florian. 2002. “Nationalist mobilization and Stories of Serb Suffering: Kosovo Myth from 600th
anniversary to the present.” Rethinking History 6, no.1: 95-110.
Byford, Jovan. 2003. “Anti-Semitism and the Christian Right in post-Milošević Serbia – from conspiracy theory to
hate Milošević.” Internet Journal of Criminology. 2-27.
Byford, Jovan. 2006. “Distinguishing “anti-Judaism” from “anti-Semitism” recent championing of Serbian Bishop
Nikolaj Velimirović.” Sociologija. 48, no.2 : 163-192.
Byford, Jovan. 2007. “When say “the Holocaust” mean “Jasenovac” - Remembrance of the Holocaust in
contemporary Serbia.” East European Jewish Affairs. 37, no. 1: 51-74.
David, Lea. 2012. “Dr avni pro ekat sećan a i zaborava Sreten e kao novi komemorativni narativ savremene
Srbi e.” in Ma storovic, Dani ela (ed.) Kritičke kulturološke studi e u post ugoslovenskom prostoru, Univerzitet u
Banja Luci, Banja Luka, 191-315.
Denich, Bette. 1994. “Dismembering Yugoslavia Nationalist deologies and the Symbolic Revival of Genocide.”
American Ethnologist. 21, no. 2: 367-390.

85
Dui zings Ger. 2007. “Commemorating Srebrenica Histories of violence and the politics of memory in eastern
Bosnia.” Xavier Bougarel, Elissa Helms, and Ger Dui zings (eds.) The New Bosnian Mosaic: Identities, Memories
and Moral Claims in a Post-War Society. Aldershot: Ashgate. 141-166.
Feldman, Jackie. 2007. “Between Yad ashem and Mt. Herzl Changing nscriptions of Sacrifice on Jerusalem`s
Mountain Memory.” Anthropological Quarterly. 80, no. 4: 1147-1174.
Finkelstein, Norman. 2000. The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering . Verso:
New York.
Franović, vana. 2008. “Dealing with the past in the context of ethnonationalism – The case of Bosnia
Herzagovina, Croatia and Serbia.” Bergof Occasional Paper 29.
Freeman, Lindsey, Nienass, Benjamin and Melamed, Lilav. 2013. “Screen memory.” International Journal of
Politics, Culture and Society 26: 1–7.
Fridman, Orli. 2015. Anti-war activism in Serbia after Milosevic: Remembering the wars of the 1990s. Memory
Studies, (forthcoming).
Gordy, Eric. 2013. Guilt, Responsibility and Denial, The Past at Stake in Post-Milošević Serbia University of
Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia.
Grinberg, L, Lev. 2010. Politics and Violence in Israel/Palestine, Democracy vs. Military Rule . London: Rutledge.
Kerenji, Emil. 2006. “The State of Holocaust Studies in Serbia, a paper presented at The State of Holocaust
Studies in South Eastern Europe.” Conference, Sarajevo 27-29 October.
Kis uhas, Alekse . 2008. “ stori ski revizionizam kao preudoistori a.” in Atanckivić, Petar. (ed.) Nacija kao problem
ili rešenje – istorijski revizionizam u Srbiji. Futura publikacije: Novi Sad. 99-103.
Kul ić Todor. 2002. “Prevladavan e prošlosti - uzroci i pravci promene slike istori e kra em XX veka.” Ogledi 3
Helsinški odbor za l udska prava u Srbi i Beograd.
Kuljić, Todor. 2009. “Remembering crimes – Proposal and reactions.” in u adinović, Dragica and Goati Vladan
(eds.) Between authoritarianism and democracy, Vol. III, Serbia at political crossroads. Friedrich Ebert Stifung
and Centar za demokratsku tranziciju: Belgrade. 197-213.
Levi, Neil. 2007. “No Sensible Comparison”? The Place of the Holocaust in Australia's History Wars.” History and
Memory. 19, no. 1: 124-156.
Levy, Daniel and Sznaider, Natan. 2002. “Memory Unbound The Holocaust and the Formation of Cosmopolitan
Memory.” European Journal of Social Theory 5: 87-106.
Levy, Daniel and Sznaider, Natan. (2010) Human Rights and Memory, The Pennsylvania State University Press:
University Park.

86
Levy, Daniel and Sznaider, Natan. 2004. “The institutionalization of cosmopolitan morality: The Holocaust and
human rights.” Journal of Human Rights. 3, no. 2: 143-157.
Levy, Daniel and Sznaider, Natan. 2005. The Holocaust and Memory in the Global Age . Philadelphia: Temple
University Press.
Lučić, esna. 2010. “Uvod.” Prirucnik za učenje o Holokaustu. Platoneum: Novi Sad. 11-15.
Macdonald, Bruce David. 2002. Balkan Holocaust?: Serbian and Croatian Victim Propaganda and the war of
Yugoslavia. Manchester University Press: Manchester.
Macdonald, Bruce David. 2005. “Globalizing the Holocaust – a Jewish usable past in Serbian nationalism.” Journal
of Multidisciplinary International Studies. 2, no. 2: 2-31.
Natan, Šna der. 2011. “ zrael.” in Andre i van van i (prev.) Podsećanje na zločine: Rasprava o genocidu i
ubistvu naroda. Platoneum: Novi Sad. 200-212.
Petrović, Miloš. 2008. “Nacionalizam i istori ski revizionizm kao posledice sloma drustevnih vrednosti i drustvenih
normi.” Atanckivić, Petar. (ed.) Nacija kao problem ili rešenje – istorijski revizionizam u Srbiji. Futura publikacije:
Novi Sad. 88-93.
Radanović, Milan. 2012. “ akonodavna politika lade Republike Srbi e (2004-2011) u slu bi revizije prošlosti:
akon o rehabilitaci i i n egova primena kao paradigma istori skog revizionizma u Srbi i.” in Beslin, Milivo and
Atanacković, Petar. (eds), Antifašizam pred izazovima sadašnjice, Alternativna kulturna organizacija – AKO: Novi
Sad. 84.
Radović, Srđan. 2009. “Gradski prostori od mesta do nemesta, i vice versa slučaj beogradskog Starog Sajmišta.”
Spomen mesta – istorija sećanja, Etnografski institute SANU: Beograd.
Rothberg, Michael. 2009. Multidirectional Memory: Remembering the Holocaust in the Age of Decolonization .
Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Šarić, L il ana. 2012. “Collective memory and media genres – Serbian Statehood Day 2002-2010.” in Šarić Lil ana,
Gammelgaard Karen and Ra Hauge (eds.) Transforming National Holidays, Identity discourse in the West and
South Slavic countries, 1985-2010. John Benjamins Publishing Company. 35-55.
Stojanović, Dubravka. 2001. “History textbooks and the creation of national identity.” Teaching the History of
Southeastern Europe. 26-32.
elizer, Barbara. 2000. “On isualizing the Holocausts.” in Barbara, elizer (ed.) Visual Culture and the
Holocaust. Rutgers: The state University. 1-13.

Other sources:
”Academic exchange of Serbian and Israeli scholars at Yad Vashem” 2006. www.jasenovac-info.com

87
“Dan sećanja na rtve Holocausta” 27.01. 2010. www.rts.rs
“Dan sećan a na rtve Holokausta” – komentari, 27.01.2009. www.b92.net
“Dan sećanja na rtve Holokausta” 27.01. 2012. www.glasamerike.net
“Dan sećanja na rtve Holokausta” 27.01.2010. www.vesti-online.com
“Dan sećanja na rtve Holokausta” 27.01.2011. www.b92.net
“Disadvantages, Discrimination, Detention – the Responsibilities of the States United against Racism” 1997.
http://www.unitedagainstracism.org
Intervju: Jovan Ba ford, “O sećanju na stradanje Jevreja u Srbiji” 30.10.2008. www.e-novine.com
nternational Seminar for Educators “Teaching about Shoah and anti-Semitism”, nstitut za novi u istori u Srbi e,
2008. www.inisbgd.co.rs
“ stori a ne mo e rehabilitovati četnike” Olivera Milosavl ević, 14.05.2012. www.e-novine.com
“ stori a ne mo e rehabilitovati četnike” Olivera Milosavl ević. – komentari, 14.05.2012. www.e-novine.com
“Jasenovac committee delegation at a conference in Jerusalem” 2008. www.jasenovac-info.com
“Jovan Ćulibrk postao ladika” 08.09.2011. www.pecat.co.rs
“Međunarodni dan sećan a na Holocaust” 27.01.2006. www.glasamerike.net
“Obele en dan sećan a na rtve Holokausta” – komentari, 27.01.2012. www.blic.rs
”Obrazovan e o Holokaustu 2006” http://holoedusrbija.blog.rs/blog/holoedusrbija
”OSCE report - Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights” 2005. Education on the Holocaust and on
anti-Semitism: Am Overview Analysis of Educational Approaches.43.
“Serbian Orthodox Church” www.spc.rs
“Slu beni glasnik Republike Srbi e“ 42/92
“Sudska rehabilitaci a ministra Momčila Jankovića kao va an korak u političko rehabilitaci i snaga srpskog
kvislinštva” nterv u sa Sveborom Mid ićem o rehabilitaci i Dra e Mihailovića, Milan Radanović, 30.03.2012.
www.starosajmiste.info
“Svetski dan borbe protiv fašizma” 09.11.2007. www.b92.net
“The Jasenovac Committee site” www.jasenovac-info.com
“U petak otvaran e spomen-parka Topovske šupe”, 25.01.2006. www.beograd.rs
“ a seminar 800,000 dinara” 16.01.2009. http://www.naslovi.net

88
89