Day 16

On Sunday night Milos and his friend Nikola took me to an outdoor cafe nearby. We had a great time talking of everything from Serbian history to politics and I was even treated to a short discussion on game theory by Nikola who is a physicist (and it was indeed a treat-- I am fascinated by game theory). In the midst of our conversation, however, our conversation turned to the experience of the NATO bombing. They told me that the first week was the worse but after that things took on a quality such that the bombing could have kept going it didn't matter. Nikola told me of a book, The Berlin Diary, (please correct me Milos or Nikola if this is the wrong book), which discusses the bombing of Berlin. He said that the way the author describes people's reaction to the experience, the way you settle into being bombed as a new type of normalacy is identical to his feelings during the NATO bombing. He mentioned that several things he had read about Gaza suggested that there was also a commonality with their experience as well.

I was thinking of this all day yesterday and it reminded me of one of my dearest wishes when I was young-- to visit a city such as Belfast (this was of course in the 1990s during the Troubles) and experience what it was like to live in such a way. Visiting a market several hours before a carbomb goes off. Continuing to venture out into public, knowing that the line between life and death is simply a matter of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I wanted to visit Belfast (and later Jerusalem during the early 2000s) and ask those living there, "What are you thinking? What is important to you? Do you still have fun and if so what does fun look like given this situation? How do you get away mentally from this reality-- drugs/alcohol/fantasy/religion? Are you angry? Can you even feel sadness anymore? etc." Of course I did not plan to ask these questions directly rather I wanted to hear people's stories and see what came out. Such an existence has always struck me as the realest life can get, where, as Nikola mentioned, all that matters is the here and now.

I got my wish a little on Sunday night hearing Milos an Nikola talk frankly about the bombing. So then I asked myself-- why is this important? Why do you care so much about this type of scenario and how people deal with it?

I believe a partial answer comes from my experiences of the past 16 days. During my scheduled interviews I have heard two very different perspectives of the NATO bombing. On the one side I have heard that it is something that will shadow relations internationally forever. On the other I have heard that people are over it to the extent that it is no longer a political issue-- citing the overall lack of protest at the ten year anniversary of the bombings this year.
Then I speak with Milos and Nikola, and earlier I have spoken with Vesna, and I hear that the bombing has impacted their lives, that they are still upset with it-- sardonically joking about the cold phrase "collateral damage" which refered to their lives.
If we look at politics as an elite-driven process meaning that the public such as Milos, Nikola, and Vesna, have a say only by electing officials then no, the NATO bombing is no longer politically relevant. Yet if we broaden politics to include the formation of political culture and civil society organizations then collective trauma and experience are surely part of the political fabric and therefore remain germain to any analysis of Serbian politics following Milosevic. If you have been following my blog I am sure that you know that by now I favor the later view over the former.

Everyone has been asking me why I have come to Serbia, and better yet why am I interested in Serbia to begin with. In this lies the answer-- The protest of Serb people concerning issues such as Kosovo and the NATO bombing has prompted numerous outbursts of frustration from various political and international actors and been dismissed as coming from a radical nationalist place and proof of the so-called "culture of victimization". When utilized for political ends these twin issues can perhaps be analyzed according to such a superficial understanding. Yet the reason they can be utilized in such a way lies in the psyche of the Serbia populace (as democracy, Serbian politics should represent the wishes and goals of the populace, if the populace didn't care then Kosovo and NATO bombing would no longer be an issue to bank upon). It is therefore essential to open up an anlaysis of politics within Serbia to the wider issue of political culture formation which, as I said previously, occurs through collective experience.
To understand collective experience one must travel to the country of interest and have coffee with people, see the attitude within the city, observe where people congregate, and millions of other points of observation most of which are unconscious. At some point I hope to come here (although this time with Alec :)and travel to other points within Serbia and stay for a few days similarly observing and trying to understand.

I am reading "Travels with Herodotus" by Ryszard Kapuscinski right now. He quotes Herodotus's mission statement:

Here are presented the results of the enquiry carried out by Herodotus of Hilicarnassus. The purpose is to prevent the races of human events from being erased by time, and to preserve the fae of the important and remarkable acheivements produced by both Greeks and non-Greeks; among the matters covered is, in particular, the cause of the hostilities between Greeks and non-Greeks.

I am struck that Herodotus went about the final task-- understanding the cause of hostilities-- by visiting these places and talking to people and observing their habits and culture. Moreover that he takes as given that there was a cause-- rather than saying it is something ordained by a higher power or something that was fatefully inevitable. He takes over 700 pages (Oxford translation) to discuss this causality. Detail was important to his task. He did not choose to simply boil it down to desire for power or economic gain, although he notes that these exist of course but he finds it important to note down each event and the circumstances surrounding them. The context is essential for him.

When it comes to Serbia I believe the same argument holds true. Current popular analyses of Serbia fail to take the entire picture into account. They are written against something-- against the Serbian nationalist perspective, against the NATO bombing, against the independence of Kosovo, against the lack of recognition of Kosovo by Serbia, etc. A non-policy analysis needs to occur really looking at the dynamics within Serbia given these novel events of the NATO bombing and the sessession of Kosovo.

That's why I'm here... pointless to some perhaps but I at least want to give it a try.

I guess that's enough blabbering for one afternoon.

Here's a slideshow of my photos:

Click on the photo to enlarge and to turn on and off captions click the dialogue bubble on the left.
Enjoy