yugoslavias implosion

316
ChApter 5
Greater Serbia, and to embrace modern values of democracy, decentralization,
and respect for minorities and human rights.
IN COMPLEX CONFLICTS, A PRECISE DEFINITION OF
CRISIS CAUSES AND AN ACCURATE ASSESSMENT OF
THE ROLES OF THE MAJOR ACTORS ARE CRUCIAL
One of the most valuable lessons of the international community’s
efforts to defuse the Yugoslav crisis is the crucial importance
of precisely assessing and defining the causes of a crisis and the roles
played by the major actors. The lack of a clear and objective analysis
and understanding of the long-standing policies and ideological
patterns that triggered the collapse of Yugoslavia seriously affected
international efforts to prevent the violence and contribute to an earlier
resolution of the crisis. The United States, the United Kingdom,
France, and Germany all had different interpretations of Serbian
motives and actions in the early 1990s, interpretations that were not
only colored by each country’s own national interests, but that were
also all off the mark.
This fundamental flaw in the approach to the Yugoslav crisis
also affected attitudes toward developments in Kosovo, which were
too often seen outside of the Yugoslav context and only in the light
of events since the nato intervention. The international community
took so long to decide how to resolve the issue of Kosovo’s final status
that it contributed to cementing the territorial division between
the north and south of Kosovo. Meanwhile, Belgrade did all it could
to prevent Serbs in the south from integrating themselves in Kosovar
institutions, generating an exodus of young Serbs from the south and
contributing to the slow death of the Serb community in the south.
To some extent, the international community was guilty of
wishful thinking. For example, Milošević was for a long time treated
as part of the solution to the problem instead of as a major part of
the problem itself. Many in the international community accepted all