I may go out on a limb here, but think this is one of those instances Revolucionar had in mind when he was mentioning that certain positions seem to be established here on the forum.
So if I may kindly ask, if Croatian propaganda is discouraged (and rightly so), that Serbian be discouraged as well.
Namely, it is not an established fact that only Tuđman was supported by CIA, the only fact is that CIA and PTB in general obviously worked hard on instigating the war (along with Yugoslavia splitting), and this wasn’t exactly like working one-sidedly against huge and powerful Russia, they had to work all sides, and they certainly had a lot of convenient material to pick and choose from to find the ones that would ignite the flame the most.
What is also a fact is that Milošević was ultimately uncooperative and chosen to take the blame and fall, taking all Serbia with him.
But it is not established that it was so from the start, especially in ‘91, when huge part of the fiercest fighting in Croatia was happening, quite the contrary, I would as objectively as I can say the whole world was standing aside with hands folded and arms embargos, white helmet here and there, watching who will prevail among those savages butchering each other.
Milošević’s fall happened sometime later on.
And can you honestly say that just like the media in Croatia was congested with propaganda inspiring the lowest of nationalistic tendences against Serbs prior to, and most significantly during the war, that Serbian media wasn’t exactly the same in regard to Croats? (I don’t have a real grasp of Serbian media of the time, nor of today, but I’ve seen some studies on media coverage in the Balkans during the conflict, which included all sides). Or dunno, you really think Croatian media was financed from the west, but Serbian somehow didn't at all, that was only and exclusively workings of Serbia?
And with all of the Tuđman’s grievous faults and doings, I am yet to see proof for a Serb (what you would call Serbian Croatian) in any way harmed in 1990, to be used as justification for starting Balvan revolution during that summer.
Yet I do see proof that Serbs started protesting possibility of separating from Serbia (or Yugoslavia technically, but still a country that’s separated from Serbia) and becoming part of Croatian state already in ’89, and later on refused authority of Croatian government and started a rebellion (I’m certain this is an undisputable fact, as records and footage of protests exist, and if even this is somehow controversial, I’m not aware).
And that is also the reason why I would never call them Croatian Serbs meaning ‘ours’ and somehow different from, not sure 'real?' Serbs.
Why I would most definitely call it a war is because fights weren’t limited to areas with ethnic Serbian majority, but lot of the areas fought for, some even eventually occupied, had Croatian majority, but the other side still wanted to take them and separate from Croatia with arms, and made non-Serbs flee in the process (to avoid going into all of those JNA discussions, or when was the exact moment Croatia was internationally recognized, don’t know enough how armies operate, don’t care enough).
As for the operation Storm, I consider that topic probably the most inflammatory one, and one of the mayor ones Serbs and Croats won’t ever be able see eye to eye completely, so I prefer not to discuss any aspect of it at all, other than recognizing the fact war crimes were commited and all those people left.
Of course that the West worked on all sides. On some more, on some less, depending on opportunities presented. On Croatian side more, just because there were more opportunities to do so.
Milosevic was cooperative, or tried to be, but that wasn't in the script. Actually whatever he would do, it would end up the same it did end up, because for the West that was the easiest way to dismantle Yugoslavia. If the West cooperate with Milosevic, it would end up in Serbia as smaller Yugoslavia, and that was a big no to the West. Which was shown later with continued destruction of Yugoslavia (or Serbia), even when it was already under West's dominance.
The "silence" of the world at the begining of the war could very well be just Croatian perception of it, which would fit the narratives they already been subjected to. Plus, the world (the West) needed martyrs (destruction of the city of Vukovar for example) to start with their campaign.
I wouldn't go into nuances, its tiresome and in a fact nonsense to do.
The main goals of the West in Yugoslavia were dismantling of big Yugoslavia and subjugating left over smaller countries to the West.
(all of that is just a part of the West's quest to destroy and control Russia, but lets focus locally on Yugoslavia).
Why the West on the end concentrated in destruction of Serbia, in all of that? As Joe pointed out, Serbia was "calling the shots" in Yugoslavia, and was the biggest, oldest, strongest, with the most potential, most natural resources and the biggest number of Serbs living outside of Serbia (BTW, all that remains the same to this day, but that's the story for the future, now we concentrate on the destruction of Yugoslavia and the past). So, for the destruction of Yugoslavia, you must go for a Serbia.
It was easy to amplify Serbian nationalism and the fear for Serbs outside of Serbia, especially correlating what happened with them during WW2. Then to amplify Croatian nationalism and their fear that they will loose their country. To install fear in Bosnian Muslims of Serbian revenge for WW2 and Muslims' total vanishing from Bosnia. And then literally and bluntly inject terrorist groups to Kosovo to instigate war, in first terrorising loyal Kosovo Albanians and then Serbs.
And Voila: War!
That was done through the specifically tailored narratives for the respective nations. All that narratives had some truth in them, as every good story of course. Because of that narratives even today, for example, Serb cant understand what Croat is talking to him when talking of war or Croatian operation Storm. They really have different perception of that.
So, no "love" of the West for "freedom" of Croatia, Bosnia, whatever. No "democracy", religion, "bad Serbia", just pure greed of the West, and naive people willing to do the parts which the West assign them.
Of course, that's in a nutshell. In reality it was much more complex, nuanced, layered. With many many players. And the main thing, it continues to this day. Mainly through the narratives that the new countries programming their youth.
As I'm living in Serbia, I think that the false narratives are the weakest in Serbia. In the same time, because I live in Serbia, I am aware that my opinion could be wrong and under the bias of serbian narratives.
As for Serbia, the West did its job partially. They destroyed the country physically and made it poor, but majority of Serbs are still collectively against the "collective West" and their ideas. And that's on all time high, and in collision with the Serbian government which is seen as traitors. In the same time the general stance of the people towards the government is: "Lets keep these clowns, at least we know where we at with them. And wait."
I think that in Croatia its totally opposite. So, total success of the West
Because of the same reason I mentioned, Serbia doesn't, (and didn't in the past), see Croatia, Bosnia, Kosovo (together with Albania now), as a real opponents and treath, but as a proxy for the West, who is the real enemy. (in plain language, Serbia is not afraid of the war with those countries each or all at once, but is afraid of the war with NATO. Sorry for being slightly of topic here)
But, with all that, I really don't think that any new war on Balkan is posible. We all had it enough for a good measure.
The paradox is that peoples of Yugoslavia (and it goes for all the Balkans too) in their fighting to show that they are different from each other, actually just showed that they are the same. That is something that the West, more precisely the Deep state of the West, are very well aware of. That's why they know what buttons exactly they need to push for desired reaction. Later, the Deep state performed all that on Ukraine.
