Mr. Davis:
It is commendable of you to side with a very unpopular cause in the West – the injustice done to the Serbs.
Stephen Schwartz is a man with an agenda. Most commentators of your article seem to have understood that.
One point that I find disconcerting about your, otherwise praiseworthy and bold article, are the assumptions about Mr. Milosevic. In that respect you yourself seem to be a victim of the “flat earth news.”
Nationalism, “greater-Serbia” ambitions, lack of democratic credentials, and such are taken granted about Mr. Milosevic. I think that all of these can, and to a large extent have been proven as charges without merit. In fact they are easily disproved.
The problem with defending the Serbs but agreeing with the West’s assesment of Milosevic leads nowhere but to where the West wants it to lead. That logic remind me of a crude anecdote:
Monied, good-looking man asks young female acquaintance:
-If I gave you $10,000 would you sleep with me?
-That’s a lot of money, yes I would!
-What if I offered you $100.00?
-Of course not! she snapped, What do you think I am? A slut?
-We’ve already established that. We are now haggling over the price, he answered calmly.
William Safire of NYT said that Milosevic was not a dictator who oppressed the Serbs but the one who led them. In other words Serbs were the opressors of the Balkans.
Agreeing apriori to the West’s characterisation of Mr. Milosevic deligitimizes much of your otherwise exceptional article.
Sincerely,
Simon Saivil
