Psychosocial Notebook - IOM Publications - International ...

Psychosocial Notebook, Volume 2, October 2001
More than anything else, they don’t feel they’ve done anything wrong;
they feel that they did what any honest Serb would have done, that they
did their duty, because if he kills a dog he’s got to face the responsibility,
but not if he kills an Albanian; more than anything, they don’t ask to be
pardoned today for what they’ve done… [Arben].
Their conscience tells them they acted properly; while there are thousands
of people who will never know if their relatives are dead or alive…
[Gjolek, Arben B.]
These points of view recurred in many of the interviews, from conversations
held with ex-fighters to the accounts of subjects who went into exile
early in the conflict, just as in the accounts of self-declared pacifists. This
sentiment is certainly understandable, and is to a certain extent a sign of
humanity, of participation in other peoples’ misadventures, even of empathy.
Nevertheless, these passages cannot be accepted or quoted uncritically,
as the feeling expressed is not a natural reaction, insofar as this
humanity is the only possible emotion in such a circumstance. It should,
because of this, be considered indisputable and unchangeable. This sentiment
should therefore be accepted by Kosovo political and civil society
only after it has been processed and worked-on. It should then be maintained
until the people who harbour this sentiment can confront it, in all of
its implications. The necessary corollary to these emotional shocks was
also expressed in the narratives, in the claims that the Serbian population
should make a public apology. This, in the view of many interviewees,
could change the situation both for Serbs in exile, and for those who, at
their own risk, have stayed in Kosovo. Here, therefore, begins to emerge
the idea of collective guilt, as it emerged in post-war Germany. This is not
an easy emotion to bear: in post-war Germany, the notion of collective
guilt only radiated through society via a great deal of suffering, and even
then, it left dark shadows behind. The implementation of this change in
Kosovo goes far beyond our contribution of gathering and interpreting testimonies,
and it also surpasses the direct responsibility of the people interviewed.
It is not our role to point to a solution or suggest how to transform
an indefinite and vague request, one that does however show a desire for
reconciliation, into realized fact. It must be pointed out, however, that this
feeling has taken root and spread that the attitude of the interviewees is not
significantly different from the declarations made in public by Kosovar
Albanian political and civilian leaders, and repeated in recent months. In
these circumstances, therefore, the way that should be followed for socalled
“repentance” must be defined, whether it be public or private,
whether symbolic and delegated to the political representatives or left to
meetings between people who were once neighbours and to the initiatives
of civil society.
159