Doctrine of Moral Equivalency

In the Melbourne Australia paper, "MX News" of 9.11.03, under the heading, "Apology for Evil Actions", the text briefly mentions the apologies of Presidents' Marovic and Mesic for all the evils committed by Croatia and Serbia-Montenegro during the bloody 1991-1995 conflict in which 250,000 people died. How is it that such a humiliation against innocent Croatian victims can occur?

The relatives of victims of "911" in New York two years ago have never been asked to apologize for their presence at the World Trade Centre. Why therefore should anyone apologize on behalf of unarmed Croatian people who were murdered, attacked, terrorized and ethnically cleansed, and were forced to take up arms to defend themselves? Not two or three buildings were destroyed as on September 11, 2001 but entire cities, towns and villages. It didn't happen on one day, but over a period of five years.

When Croatian citizens were being bombed in September 1991, a decade before the "911" terrorist bombing of the New York World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, the world refused to blame the aggressor. It should not have come as a surprise that another round of Serbian aggression then began in neighbouring Bosnia & Hercegovina and other parts of the former Yugoslavia. But, instead of containing Serbian-led terrorism the UN applied the policy of 'moral equivalency' and tens of thousands of innocent people died, were massacred, or were expelled or tortured. By far the greatest percentage of people to suffer were non-Serbs, specifically Croats or so-called 'Bosniacs'.

The approach taken by the international community in reaction to Serbian terrorism and intransigence from 1991 onwards was a clear signal to Croatian people that the so-called free world was seriously in trouble, losing its conscience, and showing signs of moral bankruptcy.

A decade after the war of aggression waged on Croatian people in Croatia, and Bosnia & Hercegovina, a growing number of books still propagate the theme of moral equivalency, or 'equal guilt'. When the Croatian president has to apologize in Belgrade for the alleged 'evils committed by his country' he has done so without a mandate of the Croatian citizens. When the Croatian president is pressured to arrest the generals who defended the citizens of Croatia from Serbian attacks from the land, sea and air, it is a shocking sign to Croatian people that these are indeed the times of terrorism.

As long as the free world allows this injustice to prevail it is only a matter of time before more terrorism in the 'free world' occurs. Increased terrorism should not come as such a surprise unless there is a concerted effort to stamp out apologies for terrorism which masquerade as journalism about the war in former Yugoslavia. Without a clear definition of terrorism in the world, to replace the suggestion that terrorism comes only from moslem extremists, the cost in destruction and human life in the 'free world' will continue to rise.