Military Review

War in Yugoslavia: who got the "Old gun"

43

Photo: UN


There was an embargo, but ...


Only a year and a half after the start of the interethnic war in Yugoslavia, the UN Security Council, discussing the situation in this country on September 22-24, 1991, adopted a resolution on the introduction of an embargo on the supply of arms and ammunition to the disintegrating SFRY from September 25, 1991.

But the UN Security Council never established a structure to monitor compliance with the imposed embargo. This is not surprising: the embargo has become nothing more than a formal cover for the arms supplies to the disintegrating Yugoslavia that have been growing since the beginning of 1990.

And they did not go to Serbia and Montenegro, or rather, not only there, but also to other regions of the destroyed federation. Moreover, in 1990-92. up to half of the volume of these supplies were from the countries of the former Warsaw Pact (VD), including the already former GDR.

Of course, it was in the West that they prepared in advance to accelerate the collapse of the SFRY. According to West German and British sources, through illegal channels to Croatia, Albanian areas of Kosovo, weapons and ammunition from NATO countries entered the Muslim and Croatian areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina since 1986-88.


The central bodies of the then SFRY, being already incapacitated, and for the most part also corrupt, actually connived at these supplies (On the ruins of Yugoslavia. Alien Tito's heirs).

As noted by Kiro Gligorov, one of the closest associates of Josip Broz Tito, the head of "Tito" and then independent Macedonia (in the 1970s - 90s):

“Yugoslavia, created by the efforts and authority of Tito, as a socialist antipode of the Soviet bloc and Stalinist Albania, was not needed by the West since the late 80s. Since the collapse of the USSR and the Soviet bloc accelerated at the same time, and Stalinism in Albania was abolished in 1990. Therefore, there was no need not only for a socialist, but in general for a stable united Yugoslavia. "

Former "brotherly" countries also helped the West in this policy. More precisely, import weapons and ammunition from the Warsaw Pact countries, for example, to Croatia - the "initiator" of the collapse of the SFRY - was recorded almost every day already at the end of 1991 and in 1992-93.

War in Yugoslavia: who got the "Old gun"

From the sales chronicle


Here are just some of the data from the specialized Internet portal "Art of War", based on Serbian, Croatian and Western European sources:

25.09 - 04.10.1991: A convoy of trucks arrived in Zagreb and the neighboring region of Croatia with Serbia and Bosnia from Bielefeld (ex-GDR). Anti-tank weapons, 40 thousand units of military uniform, army food rations arrived.

Early October 1991: Croatian Defense Ministry transferred $ 61 million to an Austrian bank (EOSKB) for the supply tanks T-72.

End of October 1991: 4 mobile military repair shops, 6 units of 155-mm guns, 40 units of 120-mm mortars, 70 Stinger MANPADS arrived at the port of Zadar from the East German port.

End of October 1991: The Croatian MoD paid $ 1,75 million to the Austrian firm Xandill International Ltd. Consulting for the supply of 3500 assault rifles and 30 hand grenades.

07.10.1991/9/XNUMX: DC-XNUMX "Adria Airways" from Klagenfurt, South Austria landed at Sarajevo airport. On board were Heckler & Koch assault rifles of West and East German production and pistols for Croatian and Muslim units of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of BiH.

19.12.1991/60/XNUMX: XNUMX East German "T" tanks of Soviet production arrived at the port of Rijeka.

Mid-January 1992: A cargo of weapons of 17,5 tons, worth DM 5 million, arrived at the port of Rijeka. These were night sights for small arms, radio stations (both mobile and for installation in armored vehicles), ammunition of various calibers - mainly of East German production.

Our people, let's count


In turn, Soviet and "joint" weapons produced or remaining in the formerly pro-Soviet Hungary, were supplied in batches to Croatia in 1991 on An-2 aircraft with towed gliders.

Such overflights of the Hungarian-Yugoslav border were recorded, for example, from 25.09.1991 to 27.09.1991 and from 06.10.1991 to 08.10.1991. ...

In the fall of 1991, the Hungarian company Universum SD mediated the purchase of Polish weapons for Croatia. Through this company, 200 RPG-7s, 2500 RPG-7 grenades, 2000 Kalashnikov assault rifles, 2000 hand grenades and 600 cartridges of 7,62-mm caliber were purchased.

In the same 1991, Croatia paid $ 90 million for the purchase of 120 T-72 tanks - presumably from Hungary. The intermediaries were the Swiss company Eram Bau Montage AG and Hong Kong FS International Ltd. These tanks were received during October 1991.

At the end of September of the following 1992, the Croatian firms INJA, Astra and Pliva received $ 1,5 million from the Croatian Ministry of Defense for the purchase of R-300 air defense systems in Hungary.

The disintegrating Czechoslovakia did not lag behind the Hungarians: Prague was the largest center for the purchase of weapons and military equipment for Croatia in the second half of 1991 and the first half of 1992. The deliveries included the Czech companies Omnipol, Unimex, as well as the Prague offices of the Swedish companies Scandinavia Invest and Abarent.

In addition, these were some Swiss firms (in particular, CGS) of the embassies and / or trade missions of some Arab countries in Prague - including the Syrian ones. Under these contracts, Croatia was sent, for example, 50 thousand AK-47 assault rifles, 20 thousand M-16 rifles, 70 million cartridges, 1 RPG-7s and 5000 grenades for them.

Another 100 guided missiles and 5 R-300 air defense systems were installed near the Croatian border with the Serbian region of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

And you, a Pole?


Only Poland was not much behind the "allies". Although it was there in 1980 that the political reaction to the death of Yugoslav leader Josip Broz Tito was very sharp. Even the notorious Lech Walesa considered the "Yugoslav choice" quite acceptable for Poland.


On November 16, 1991, 16 AK-500 assault rifles, 47 million cartridges, 5 RPG-175s, 7 M-150 mortars and 82 mines for them, M-3500 mortars were sent from the port of Gdansk to Croatia. Total cost - $ 120 million

In early January 1992, a batch of 250 ATGMs and 25 anti-aircraft guns arrived there from Poland, the carrier of which was the Nigerian company General and Aviation Services.

Croatian and "kindred" chauvinists were also supplied with Sofia and Bucharest. So, in November 1991, the Croatian transports Kumrovec and Kozara consistently delivered small arms and anti-tank weapons with main and additional ammunition from Bulgaria and Romania to several small ports.

On October 16, 1992, a cargo of Soviet-made weapons (25 tons), purchased from the Bulgarian company Kintex, arrived at the Croatian port of Split. This weapon was also used by the Muslim army of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

As you can see, the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact (We started with the main thing. On the 30th anniversary of the self-liquidation of the Warsaw Pact) was by no means accompanied by the organization of control over his military arsenal. Accordingly, the highly profitable business of transporting arms from the countries of the former Soviet bloc to Yugoslavia was organized very quickly.

The main thing is that, without much analysis, to whom and what was delivered specifically. And even then it became clear to many that the bloody disintegration of Yugoslavia was the work of not only the West, but also those who ruled in the early to mid-90s in all the countries participating in the liquidated Warsaw Pact.
Author:
Photos used:
rossaprimavera.ru, pinterest.ru
43 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, daily additional materials that do not get on the site: https://t.me/topwar_ru

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. solzh
    solzh 27 September 2021 18: 11
    +7
    The embargo became nothing more than a formal cover for the arms deliveries to the disintegrating Yugoslavia, which had been growing since the beginning of 1990.

    In Yugoslavia, there was an abundance of their own weapons in the warehouses. Tito, in anticipation of an attack by either NATO or the OVD, tried to fill the warehouses of the territorial defense forces of the SFRY to the fullest. This weapon became one of the instruments of genocide.
    1. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 28 September 2021 14: 42
      +2
      What happened in Yugoslavia shows what was in common with Hitler's policy during the drang nach Osten plan.
    2. garrett
      garrett 29 September 2021 13: 59
      +2
      In Yugoslavia, there was an abundance of their own weapons in the warehouses. Tito, in anticipation of an attack by either NATO or the OVD, tried to fill the warehouses of the territorial defense forces of the SFRY to the fullest. This weapon became one of the instruments of genocide.

      Exactly ... The only difference about our warehouses is that there were a lot of them and they were small. It was assumed that in the event of a threat of occupation, the citizens of Yugoslavia would massively partisan, respectively, a kind of caches (mini warehouses) were assigned to each administrative entity. All this was then actively used by all parties.
  2. Markus wolf
    Markus wolf 27 September 2021 18: 28
    +12
    Chaos ... But chaos is controlled and organized. All money transfers from Croatia have authors. And those have those who controlled and ordered them ... And it's no secret that many were from the United States ...
    And the greatest regret is that all these "guardians of freedoms and democracies" have gone unpunished and continue to be proud of their bloody past and achievements ...
    1. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 28 September 2021 14: 50
      0
      American military advisers secretly trained the Muslim and Croatian armies, and the Americans secretly dropped equipment for them by parachute. And the management seemed to know nothing about it.
      Later it turned out that the disintegration of the SFRY and Serbia was in their hands, but they tried to preserve the integrity of BiH and Croatia.
  3. pytar
    pytar 27 September 2021 18: 33
    -4
    The Yugoslav army had a huge amount of weapons. Both its own production and imported, including American. With the disintegration of the SFRY, most of the military reserves of the JNA went to the Serbs and they did not use it too late. Other republics, in order to protect themselves, were forced to look for suppliers wherever possible. In fact, the UN embargo created problems not for Serbia, but for other republics. They accordingly tried to bypass him.
    1. ABC-schütze
      ABC-schütze 28 September 2021 12: 55
      +1
      Don't lie ...

      in the SFRY, under Tito, "other republics" (EVERYTHING, EXCEPT the Serbian country "in the center") had a TERRITORIAL militia, in terms of armament and technical support, mobilization readiness, not inferior to the federal JNA (where "Serbs" were recruited, practically, only Ground Forces).

      They had, and aviation, heavy weapons (tanks and artillery) = To this, they also seized the arsenals of the SFRY located on their territory. What the military leadership of the federal JNA tried to prevent. And what could not be prevented (in 1991 - 1992). Due to the PRACTICALLY ANNUAL, PURPOSE policy of discrediting the JNA and demoralizing its personnel, in particular, the propaganda of mass desertion from its ranks of non-Serbian conscripts and their disobedience to the command ...
      1. pytar
        pytar 28 September 2021 14: 25
        -1
        Don't lie ...

        Take note!

        in the SFRY, under Tito, the "other republics" ... had a TERRITORIAL militia, in terms of armament and technical support, mobilization readiness, not inferior to the federal JNA ...

        For the sake of fairness, it should be noted that the weapons transferred to the territorial militia / TO / were for the most part obsolete and were samples of the Second World War. TO focused on small units of light infantry defending in areas well known to them. In aviation, artillery, heavy equipment, Serbia had a complete superiority!
        For example, in the battle for Vukovar that lasted for 87 days, 1800 lightly armed Croatian militias were seized from the cities. Against them, the JNA fielded 36 soldiers and Chetniks, armed with aviation, artillery and tanks. During the battle, the JNA fires against the city up to 000 missiles and shells per day! Vukovar is turned into ruins ... The Serbs eventually took the ego, but the "victory" was fatal for them.

        Due to the PRACTICALLY ANNUAL, PURPOSE policy of discrediting the JNA and demoralizing its personnel, in particular, the propaganda of mass desertion from its ranks of non-Serbian conscripts and their disobedience to the command ...

        You can't do that in a year ... The roots of the problem go far into the past. History repeated itself. While Tito ruled, he succeeded with "hedgehog gloves" to force these peoples to live in one state. The entire SFRY was based on his personal authority!
        And so no propaganda is needed, because you will not go against your people by serving in the army of a foreign state that is already hostile to it.
        1. ABC-schütze
          ABC-schütze 28 September 2021 14: 55
          0
          Again...

          Don't lie. The plans for the territorial defense of the SFRY envisaged repelling potential aggression EXACTLY from the WEST direction. THEREFORE, the territorial formations of Slovenia and Croatia, under Tito, had a level of weapons and military equipment equipment and a level of mobilization readiness, practically not inferior to the federal JNA.

          In which, by the way, the personnel of the Navy and Air Force, by the way, basically consisted not of Serbs at all ...

          As for "you can't do that in a year," don't make people laugh.

          Here, clean up at your place of residence, all the police and public order and state and public security bodies, AT LEAST for a MONTH. And declare, at the same time, officially, that they are "no longer needed", and their employees and employees, "in vain are eating their bread." And they must be "driven in the neck" ...

          And hitherto "civilized society", massive robberies, violence and looting will come "automatically" ... There are no options here ...

          While I take my leave ...
          1. pytar
            pytar 28 September 2021 15: 33
            -3
            THEREFORE, the territorial formations of Slovenia and Croatia, under Tito, had a level of weapons and military equipment and a level of mobilization readiness that was practically not inferior to the federal JNA.

            Are you seriously trying to convince me that TO = JNA with its planes, tanks, artillery, etc.? belay Something really got or taken away, but the Army is the Army! It is enough to look at the JNA columns moving along the routes of the BYU and by airplanes flying over the cities of the republics! Here on VO there are articles on the topic. Look, you will learn a lot of interesting things ... By the way, not long after the armistice, I visited these places.
            In which, by the way, the personnel of the Navy and Air Force, by the way, basically consisted not of Serbs at all ...

            Serbia does not have an entrance to the sea, the Navy participated occasionally, and did not have any special decisive influence in the battles. The Serbian Air Force took an active part in the first Yugoslavian war with complete superiority. Neither Croatia nor Slovenia nor Bosnia could boast with a strong air force!

            Here, clean up at your place of residence, all the police and public order and state and public security bodies, AT LEAST for a MONTH. And declare, at the same time, officially, that they are "no longer needed", and their employees and employees, "in vain are eating their bread." And they must be "driven in the neck" ...

            It would be surprising if Croatian, Slovenian and Bosnian soldiers, policemen, civil servants, in their own country and in the flaring conflict with Serbia, remained on the side of the Serbs!

            And hitherto "civilized society", massive robberies, violence and looting will come "automatically" ... There are no options here ...

            Questionable deviations can occur in every society. For Yugoslavia, this is not a new phenomenon. At the same time, all the participants distinguished themselves.
            1. ABC-schütze
              ABC-schütze 29 September 2021 11: 40
              0
              "Are you seriously trying to convince me that TO = JNA with its planes, tanks, artillery, etc.? Belay Something really got or taken away, but the Army is the Army! It is enough to look at the columns of the JNA moving along the routes of the BYU and flying airplanes over the cities of the republics! "
              ************************************************** **********************
              Are you seriously trying to convince the forum that the propaganda, anti-Yugoslav television picture is some kind of "proof" of something there? ..

              Duc of such "evidence" the world is already a lot, later seen enough ...

              These are state "pro-Siberians" with some "Iraqi WMD" in the UN Security Council ...

              This is the bombing by "Gaddafi's aircraft" of peaceful cities and population ...

              This is also the "chemical weapons" used by Bashar al-Assad. Against the civilian population, of course ...

              For this, I remind once again about the MASSIVE demoralization by the West and the separatists of the JNA personnel (conscript, command and ethnicity) ...

              In Slovenia, this resulted in the seizure of more than 300 units of JNA armored vehicles, most of them in a fully operational state. In particular, the Slovenes got 60 M-84 tanks (the Yugoslav version of the T-72), of which 54 became part of the Slovenian army. The losses of the Slovenes amounted to ONLY 19 people killed.

              And in Croatia, by September 1991, almost all the federal garrisons of the JNA on the territory of the republic were blocked by the separatists with impunity, moreover, together with PASSIVELY "standing" weapons and equipment: up to 500 armored vehicles, including more than 200 tanks (of which about 24 M-84), at least 800 guns, mortars and multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS), more than 200 self-propelled anti-aircraft guns (ZSU) and anti-aircraft guns.

              In addition, EXACTLY in "unarmed" Croatia there was a plant where the M-84 was produced, where the Croats captured another 60 tanks of this type, which were in varying degrees of readiness (some of them were put into operation after the war).

              The remnants of the JNA ground group, WITHOUT a fight, retreated to Serbian Krajina, a region of Croatia with a predominantly Serbian population ...
              1. pytar
                pytar 30 September 2021 09: 12
                -1
                Are you seriously trying to convince the forum that the propaganda, anti-Yugoslav television picture is some kind of "proof" of something there? ..

                I'm not going to convince the forum in any way! I am conducting a dialogue with you and I am not even trying to convince you! I put only the facts, and who will perceive them, that's his business.

                Duc of such "evidence" the world is already a lot, later seen enough ...

                Learn to weed out the fake ones from the real ones. Denying the real will make the wrong conclusions.

                ... MASSIVE demoralization by the West and separatists of the JNA personnel (draft, command and ethnicity) ...

                With the withdrawal of the republics from the SFRY, national states arose. In fact, Serbia became such from Montenegro, despite the fact that for some time it was formally painted with the name of the FRY / Federal Republic of Yugoslavia /.

                In Slovenia ... And in Croatia ... the Croats captured ...

                What they managed to do was captured. Not much compared to Serbia.

                The remnants of the JNA ground group, WITHOUT a fight, retreated to Serbian Krajina, a region of Croatia with a predominantly Serbian population ...

                Leaving the Krajina Serbs, a large amount of weapons. The same is in BiH. And we moved away avoiding further international complications, because this is the territory of another state.
            2. ABC-schütze
              ABC-schütze 29 September 2021 11: 46
              +1
              "It would be surprising if Croatian, Slovenian and Bosnian soldiers, policemen, civil servants, in their own country and in the flaring conflict with Serbia, remained on the side of the Serbs!"
              ************************************************** **********************
              Own country, for ALL mentioned, according to international law, it is only and exclusively the federal SFRY. Everything else is criminal separatist wishlist, it is illegal to "make" from the sovereign SFRY "their" countries ...

              And it would be surprising if the "democratic" West did not support these criminal separatist wishes in the context of the collapse of the REALLY SOVEREIGN SFRY ...
              1. pytar
                pytar 30 September 2021 09: 24
                -1
                Own country, for ALL mentioned, according to international law, it is only and exclusively the federal SFRY. Everything else is criminal separatist wishlist, it is illegal to "make" from the sovereign SFRY "their" countries ...

                Crimeans and LDNR would not like your "speculations" ... lol
                1. ABC-schütze
                  ABC-schütze 30 September 2021 10: 50
                  0
                  "Your" speculations "would not have liked the Crimeans and the LPNR ..."
                  *******************************************************************
                  Quite the opposite. It was the Crimeans who would loudly applaud me ...

                  After all, sadly suffering from "electoral-democratic" Eurosclerosis, you "forgot" that the Crimeans held their own referendum on independence AFTER the anti-constitutional coup d'etat in Kiev, and not BEFORE it, as it is UNILATERALLY and WRONGLY, in violation of the FEDERAL legislation of the SFRY, made Slovenian , Croatian and Bosnian separatists.

                  And, besides, the LEGAL power of the former united Ukraine, represented by its LEGAL President Yanukovych and LEGAL government Azarov, have never expressed ANY claims on the decision of the Crimeans and designating their actions as "illegal" ...

                  And the OPERATING Constitutional Court of the former united Ukraine was coup d'état, criminally dispersed. Which, BY DEFINITION, deprived ALL potential "applicants" for "legitimate" power in Kiev, the legal right to make any decisions on the Crimean referendum and announce legal assessments on the actions of the Crimeans ...

                  So, there are no entities that have the legal right to present any "claims" to the Crimeans regarding their holding a referendum. And the current Kiev authorities, the "direct heirs" of criminals - coup d'état, certainly do not belong to this kind of subjects. Like the "democratic" West, in general, and you, in particular ...
                  1. pytar
                    pytar 30 September 2021 17: 32
                    -1
                    Quite the opposite. It was the Crimeans who would loudly applaud me ...

                    Strange, but obviously not even Serbia thinks so! She did not recognize either the referendum in Crimea or the LPNR! lol

                    After all, sadly suffering from "selective-democratic" Eurosclerosis, you "forgot" ...

                    Lacking anything intelligible to say, you began to revel in idle talk ...

                    ... the Crimeans held their own referendum on independence AFTER the anti-constitutional coup in Kiev, and not BEFORE it, as it is UNILATERAL and WRONG, in violation of the FEDERAL legislation of the SFRY, were made by the Slovenian, Croatian and Bosnian separatists.

                    Everything is elementary for you - "ours are always right, not ours, always not right"... Alone "separatists"others "fighters for independence", no matter what they do the same thing. laughing You will not tell them that they are "separatists" if you happen to find yourself in the former south-republics. You run the risk of getting tough ... crying
                    1. ABC-schütze
                      ABC-schütze 1 October 2021 10: 25
                      0
                      "Strange, but obviously even Serbia does not think so! It did not recognize either the referendum in Crimea or the LPNR!"
                      ************************************************** ************
                      Firstly, as I recall, you have been repeatedly asked not to replace the absence of intelligible, legal arguments with "references" to the subjective political situation. After all, this is direct evidence of your conceptual impotence. This time ...

                      The second ...

                      And here, in general, some kind of Serbia? .. I don’t give a damn about the fact that Belgrade “recognizes” or “does not recognize” if the voice of its position is not accompanied by CLEAR references to international law. Belgrade does not provide such links. You too ...

                      Specifically, you personally, in your response to my comment, specifically, but inadvertently, gave a hint about the "Crimeans" who, no one knows from what fright, would "dislike" something there ...

                      You were given a SPECIFIC, INTERNATIONAL LEGAL assessment of the situation on the territory of the former united Ukraine, which preceded the holding of the referendum on the independence of Crimea and determined its international legitimacy and legality.

                      And the situation on the territory of the SOVEREIGN SFRY, where, when the Croatian and Slovenian separatists held their "referendums", in the capital, there were NO FEDERAL STATE REVOLUTIONS. In the capital of the SFRY, a country, a member of the UN, there was a legitimate government, IMMEDIATELY, and LEGALLY, NOT RECOGNIZING the "legality" of these separatist "referendums" ...

                      And the fact that the legitimate government of the SFRY failed to use its legal right to use military force and "roll up the asphalt" republican separatists does not in any way give "legitimacy" to the decisions and actions of the latter.

                      They are criminals who have VIOLATED the Constitution and the law of the SFRY. And you, their CRIMINAL actions, retroactively, impotently, are trying to justify.

                      And the inhabitants of the Crimea, the Constitution and laws of the former united Ukraine have NOT VIOLATED, and the coup d'etat in the capital of the former united Ukraine, did not commit. ..

                      And the legitimate President of the former united Ukraine, as well as the head of the legitimate government of the former united Ukraine, HAVE NEVER SPECIFIED ANY claims of the LEGAL plan for the holding of the referendum by the population of Crimea.

                      For this, once again, I express my condolences to you on the occasion of the next and quick loss of your intelligible argumentation ...
                      1. pytar
                        pytar 1 October 2021 14: 04
                        -1
                        Firstly, as I recall, you have been repeatedly asked not to replace the absence of intelligible, legal arguments with "references" to the subjective political situation. After all, this is direct evidence of your conceptual impotence. This time ...

                        Fun to play with "arguments"demonstrating pseudo-legal knowledge! You have the position of a lawyer for one of the parties, but not the position of the court! laughing
                        In fact, there is a parallel in the situation between the former South Republics and the former Soviet republics! All of them are internationally recognized subjekty, members of the UN and maintaining official diplomatic relations with each other. This means only one thing - mutual recognition of subjectivity! Against this background, your "arguments" don't cost a dime!
                        There is also a slight parallel between Kossovo and Crimea, partly with the LPNR. The topic is lengthy and undoubtedly controversial.
                      2. ABC-schütze
                        ABC-schütze 1 October 2021 14: 56
                        0
                        "It's funny to play with 'arguments', demonstrating pseudo-legal knowledge! You have the position of a lawyer for one of the parties, but not the position of the court!"
                        ************************************************** *******
                        If this is your "answer" to my remark about your COMPLETE CONCEPTUAL "flight" in an attempt, for no reason at all, to "appeal" to the position of Serbia on the issue of the referendum in Crimea, then you again "passed" .. ...

                        For, in fact, my ARGUMENTS were not opposed by ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ...

                        Neither as a "judge" nor as a "prosecutor" ...

                        In other words, again, trite, they tried to hide behind the empty, emotional lyrics of the forum balabol ... This time ...


                        "In fact, there is a parallel in the situation between the former South Republics and the former Soviet republics! All of them are internationally recognized subjectors, members of the UN and maintaining official diplomatic relations with each other.
                        This means only one thing - mutual recognition of subjektness! "
                        *******************************************************
                        In fact, in the context of our discussion, this means that you are a false witness (or just a liar), INTENTIONALLY giving false testimony to the court (VO forum). Being engaged in banal "fabrication" of texture and substitution of concepts and themes ...

                        Sorry, but personally, you have already been poked three times into the PRINCIPAL DIFFERENCE OF THE LEGAL ASSESSMENT of the prehistory of the situation on the eve of the ILLEGAL collapse of the SFRY by the separatists and the situation in Crimea.

                        You are trying to voice the current situation in front of the court "after the fact", that is, persistently (if not stupidly) trying to JUSTIFY THE VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW BY THE FOLLOWING considerations of the international political situation, which, in fact, determines all kinds of "recognition - non-recognition"

                        By the way, in this matter, you strongly remind me of the cry of the funny Condoleezza Rice addressed to Russia, on the eve of its recognition of the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia: "The case of Kosovo does not create a precedent!"

                        It was funny ... And why, as a matter of fact, does not "create"? .. The girl kept silent about this ...

                        Moreover, in the context of Kosovo, the UN Security Council Resolution on the recognition of this region's belonging to Serbia, YES, NOBODY has canceled it. And the resolutions of the UN Security Council, I remind you, have a SUPERIOR and MANDATORY force.

                        And even the decisions of the UN Court (where Serbia applied on this issue), according to the UN Charter, DO NOT HAVE PRIORITY and SUPERIOR POWER over the Resolutions of the Security Council. That is, the UN Court is AUTHORIZED TO "cancel" the Security Council resolutions and they can be canceled ONLY by the Security Council itself. So, Kosovo, de jure, WHILE, remains, IN ACCORDANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW, the SERBIAN territory.

                        No matter how many states its "independence", for reasons of conjuncture, would not "recognize" ...

                        This is for you, another session of legal educational program. This coming weekend ...
        2. ABC-schütze
          ABC-schütze 28 September 2021 14: 59
          +1
          And just in case ...

          Name a state in Europe or overseas that would preserve its unity, territorial integrity and sovereignty, without the aforementioned "hedgehog gloves" ...

          Is this Great Britain? .. With her Northern Ireland? ..

          Is this Spain with its Catalonia? ..

          Is this France with its Corsica? ..

          Maybe this is the USA? .. With their civil war between the North and the South? ..
          1. pytar
            pytar 28 September 2021 15: 42
            -4
            Name a state in Europe or overseas that would preserve its unity, territorial integrity and sovereignty, without the aforementioned "hedgehog gloves" ...

            Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Finland, Austria, Eire, the Netherlands, Hungary, Poland ... more can be added to the list. Protest and disorder can occur in every country, the question is on what principles the state is anchored. Great Britain, Spain, France, colonial multinational empires. The situation in them is more complicated ... Yugoslavia was also a multinational, multiconfessional state, tailored according to the ideology that had gone by the 90s in the summer.
            1. ABC-schütze
              ABC-schütze 29 September 2021 11: 14
              +1
              "Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Finland, Austria, Eire, the Netherlands, Hungary, Poland ... you can add to the list. Protest and disorder can occur in every country, the question is on what principles the state is anchored."
              ************************************************** **********************
              IN ANY well-ordered state, swords are sharp and jesters are dumb. Not the other way around ...

              For this, no "protest riots", more massive, there, by definition, can not "occur". And all the "protests" are expressed only in the form and procedure established by law, and not in the format of herd street hysterics of philistine crowds ... This time ...

              Not some abstract "state", but a REALLY sovereign state. And it means, do not confuse, in the absence of arguments on the merits of the question posed, politics with arithmetic. These are two ...

              A really sovereign state is always built on the principles of territorial integrity, inviolability of borders, the priority of federal laws over any "wishlist" of the dissatisfied, and the readiness to protect EVERYTHING listed from any encroachments.

              And also, the principle of the legal and monopoly right of the state to use military (armed) force to protect the above principles ...

              By the way, you are our "attentive". Try to shy away from lyrics, such as "gone into oblivion" ideologies. And be closer to the international legal "protocol" and the REAL cause-and-effect relationships of the historical consequences of the Second World War, which led to the INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION of the SFRY'S sovereign right to build its state on the basis of its OWN principles.

              And do not forget that ALL the principles I mentioned above were INTERNATIONAL APPROVED BY ALL the states you listed. When they sign the Final Act (Helsinki Agreements). In the format of the FIXED, BASIC PRINCIPLE of the inviolability of post-war STATE borders in Europe.

              And this BASIC INTERNATIONAL PRINCIPLE, in the context of the STATE borders of the sovereign SFRY, was the "democratic" West, with the connivance of the Gorbachev elite, CRIMELY trampled ...

              And just in case, chatting about "principles" and citing funny examples of impotent "sovereignty" as a "model", try to figure out that Yugoslavia, WHICH IS TALKING ABOUT, ALL World War II, ACTIVELY and SUCCESSFULLY put up ARMED resistance to Hitler's aggression. And to the outbreak of World War II in Europe, I had NO attitude ...

              That is, armed with the struggle of the PEOPLE, won its LEGAL RIGHT to become a sovereign SFRY and defend its state integrity and system from ANY encroachments.

              And ALL, you listed, either were allies of the Nazis (Hungary, Finland and not mentioned by you, for some reason, say, your native Bulgaria ...), their all their post-war basic "principles" and the status of OBJECTS, and wax not subjects, geopolitics were dictated by the will of the winners.

              Or, they quickly fell under Hitler's Germany (Netherlands, Poland, Norway, Austria), which means that it is not for them, with their impotence, in defending their sovereignty, to expose their "principles" as a "model" for really sovereign states, ALWAYS ready to ACTIVELY defend its sovereignty from ANY encroachments, both outside and inside ... By the way, Holland was "in status, a" colonial power "...

              And your "example" of Iceland, with its population of half a million, in the context of the topic under discussion, is generally ridiculous. I wonder how you, with such observation, in your "register of examples", also forgot to remember the Vatican? ..

              Oh yes...

              You also mention Switzerland and Sweden. Cooperating under the guise of "neutrality" with all the warring parties. Maybe their "principles" for sovereign states to take "as an example"? ..

              Well, then you will have to prove that it is their own "principles" of state building and the presence of a real potential to defend these principles, and not at all the subjective strategic interest of the belligerents in them (FIRSTLY, the USA, Great Britain and Nazi Germany), i.e. e. "external players", allowed them to maintain during the Second World War, their "neutrality" and state independence ...
              1. pytar
                pytar 30 September 2021 10: 11
                -1
                IN ANY well-ordered state, swords are sharp and jesters are dumb. Not the other way around ...

                It is not for you to judge which states are correct and which are not. So you get to the point of determining which people and people are correct, and who are subhumans, as did one criminal mustache ...

                ... And stay closer to the international legal "protocol" ... THE INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION OF THE SOVEREIGN Right of the SFRY to build its state on the basis of its OWN principles.

                Once you decide to bet on legal, legal arguments, why are you missing out on the most important thing? Socialist Federated Republic of Yugoslavia! State Federated, consisted of several republics and autonomous regions! The republics have the sovereign right to leave! The SFRY is not a nation state!

                And do not forget that ALL the principles I mentioned above were INTERNATIONAL APPROVED BY ALL the states you listed. When they sign the Final Act (Helsinki Agreements). In the format of a FIXED, BASIC PRINCIPLE inviolability of post-war STATE borders in Europe. And this BASIC INTERNATIONAL PRINCIPLE, in the context of the STATE borders of the sovereign SFRY, was the "democratic" West, with the connivance of the Gorbachev elite, CRIMELY trampled ...

                And so, we look at the map and draw conclusions!

                Borders of the Republics and AO, into the SFRY!


                How Serbia tried to change the internationally recognized borders of the Republics!


                Border Republics, after the end of the Yugoslav wars.

                The borders remained as they were before in accordance with international law. The status of the former Federation subjekts has changed in accordance with the UN basic principles of self-determination.

                That is, armed with the struggle of the PEOPLE, won its LEGAL RIGHT to become a sovereign SFRY and defend its state integrity and system from ANY encroachments.

                The people of the former Yugoslavia did just that, providing armed resistance to the Serbian aggression.

                Try to shy away from lyrics, such as ideologies that have gone into oblivion.

                Your attention! Do you read what you write yourself? try to relate this principle to your "judgments"!
                1. ABC-schütze
                  ABC-schütze 30 September 2021 11: 24
                  0
                  "It is not for you to judge which states are correct and which are not."
                  *******************************************************************
                  Yeah ... Awesome "argument" ... Of course, "not for me", but exclusively for you. Who would argue? ..

                  Move on ...

                  "Since you decided to put on juridical, legal arguments, why are you missing the most important thing? The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia! The Federal State, consisted of several republics and autonomous regions! The republics have the sovereign right to leave! The SFRY is not a national state!"
                  *******************************************************************
                  Do not engage in vulgar "gambling" cheating. On the VO forum it will not work ... Even on geographic maps ...

                  The SFRY, in contrast to the "several republics" mentioned by you, was an INTERNATIONAL RECOGNIZED, SOVEREIGN STATE, a member of the UN.

                  And EXACTLY this STATUS of the borders of the SFRY (and not just their "card perimeter"), as the INTRACTABLE POST-WAR STATE borders of a SOVEREIGN STATE in Europe, was internationally secured by the Final Act (Helsinki Agreements).

                  But the aforementioned "several republics", NOT being sovereign states, ANY "own", especially "international" in the STATUS of POST-WAR STATE borders in Europe, NEVER HAVE. And as the owners of such boundaries, ANYONE and NEVER RECOGNIZED ...

                  And again, don't lie ...

                  The "Europeans", in the guise of all sorts of germaniums, etc., announced the "recognition" of a certain "independence" of any of the subjects of the SFRY, if it "announces" about it, before a "certain" date (you yourself specify it ...), BEFORE the UN makes any decisions on these issues.

                  Than, ONLY and CRIMINALLY violated the INTERNATIONAL LAW and the BASIC LEGAL PRINCIPLES of the inviolability of the post-war borders in Europe, enshrined in the final Act.

                  Those. behaved like REVANCHISTS, ONE-SIDE, REFUSED OF THEIR INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS ...

                  And then, in general, it's funny ...


                  "The republics have the sovereign right to leave! The SFRY is not a nation state!"
                  *******************************************************************
                  Who, where and when, sang such garbage to you? ..

                  No republics of the SOVEREIGN STATE, no "right" to "leave" somewhere there, and BY DEFINITION, CANNOT HAVE. Especially in the format of "unilateral proclamation", some kind of "independence" ...

                  For, in addition to the "right", they have obligations before the SOVEREIGN STATE - THE SUBJECT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.

                  And all "departures - parishes", with all sorts of declarations of "independence", are legal and have a legal format, only AFTER THE LEGAL, LEGAL and SATISFACTORY OF ALL OTHER subjects of the federation, resolving the issue of obligations. ANY Federation, not even "national", is, excuse me, not a walk-through, for those who like to "walk" with their separatist wishlist ...

                  By the way, why, the aforementioned "autonomies" within the republics of the SFRY, are you deprived of such a right to a unilateral "free exit" and the proclamation of "independence"? ..

                  They, the Croatian and Bosnian Serbs of the autonomies, let's say that something "Worse", Croats and Bosniaks in the main republican territories? ..
                2. Sergej1972
                  Sergej1972 2 October 2021 15: 50
                  0
                  In the vast majority of federations, including the United States. India, the Russian Federation, the Federal Republic of Germany, the right of subjects to secede is not recognized. The right to secession is not a sign of a federal state.
                  1. pytar
                    pytar 3 October 2021 12: 04
                    0
                    In the vast majority of federations, including the United States. India, the Russian Federation, the Federal Republic of Germany, the right of subjects to secede is not recognized. The right to secession is not a sign of a federal state.

                    Crimea had the right to secede? .... In November 1991, the Arbitration Commission for the Yugoslav Peace Conference concluded that the SFR Yugoslavia was in the process of disintegration, that the Serb population in Croatia and Bosnia did not have the right to self-determination in the form of new states and that borders between republics will be recognized as international borders... As a result, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 721 / 2.11.1991, paving the way for the deployment of peacekeeping operations in Yugoslavia.
                    After the collapse of the SFRY, the Republics of Montenegro and Serbia formed a reduced federal state, officially known until 2003 as the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY). This country sought to obtain the status of the successor to the SFRY, but other former republics opposed it. Ultimately Serbia and Montenegro agreed with the opinion of the Badinter Arbitration Committee on the joint continuity of all the republics of the former SFRY, and in 2003 the official name of the FRY was changed to "Serbia and Montenegro". The country fell apart when Montenegro and Serbia became independent in 2006, and Kosovo declared independence from Serbia in 2008.
      2. Sergej1972
        Sergej1972 2 October 2021 15: 47
        0
        The Socialist Republic of Serbia also had a territorial defense, the largest in number in the SFRY. Unlike the USSR, where the largest republic, the RSFSR, had a truncated management structure, the structure of the authorities and government of the Socialist Republic of Serbia was exactly the same as that of the other five republics of Yugoslavia. And the party was (Union of Communists of Serbia), and territorial defense.
        1. ABC-schütze
          ABC-schütze 3 October 2021 18: 45
          0
          Then, let's separate the two concepts ...

          Namely - "territorial defense" (concept), and the Territorial Defense Forces (ONE of the elements of the territorial defense structure).

          According to my information, until May 15, 1991, the Territorial Defense Forces (the composition of which, in the "special period" was supplemented by the personnel and equipment of the republican police, which was armed with: armored personnel carriers, armored reconnaissance vehicles, infantry fighting vehicles and a number of helicopters) were under republican subordination. That greatly contributed to their rapid "transformation" into the nucleus of the separatist, so-called. "armed forces" ...

          And they had only Slovenia (70 people and Croatia (000 people). In Serbia, there was no Territorial Defense Forces.

          But, according to the concept of territorial defense of the SFRY, in case of external aggression, the JNA had trained reservists (total number of 885 people), mobilized upon conscription and having light small arms and anti-tank weapons in their "home storage". Of course, those were also on the territory of Serbia, but they did not constitute the Territorial Defense Forces as a separate structure.

          If I, in the context of Serbia, "strongly on the rights", then introduce your clarifications, if it does not complicate ...
          1. Sergej1972
            Sergej1972 3 October 2021 19: 21
            0
            Here, from Wikipedia in Serbian language.
            And also in Latin https://sh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teritorijalna_odbrana
            Unfortunately, sections on the territorial defense of the republics have not yet been created there. But the territorial defense of Serbia is mentioned. It directly follows from the text that absolutely all the republics had territorial defense, and even in the autonomous regions. And they were in double subordination, but were supported by the republican and local budgets.
  4. Catfish
    Catfish 27 September 2021 19: 36
    +4
    ... for example, to Croatia - the "initiator" of the collapse of the SFRY

    Well, Croats, they always follow the principle "no matter how much the wolf feeds, he always looks into the forest."
    The Croatan Legion.

    1. Timofey Astakhov
      Timofey Astakhov 28 September 2021 00: 05
      -3
      The "skirmisher" for the collapse of the SFRY was Milosevic. Under Tito, nothing of the kind and, in principle, was impossible
      1. Catfish
        Catfish 28 September 2021 06: 02
        +6
        Tito himself was Croatian by nationality.
        By the way, I remember well what a negative attitude towards the foreign policy of Yugoslavia and its ruling party was in the Soviet press in the 60s and 70s. About how Tito came to power in the Union, the book "The Yugoslav Tragedy" was published, in which Tito and the first post-war years in Yugoslavia were described in a very black color.
        1. Reptiloid
          Reptiloid 28 September 2021 20: 31
          +1
          hi I remembered my grandfather told me that then, in the 60s of the last century, there were cadets from Yugoslavia in the Kirov Military Medical Academy, in Leningrad. He taught. At home there are still greeting cards for him from various cadets. (From the Syrians also)
        2. Sergej1972
          Sergej1972 2 October 2021 16: 00
          +1
          This book was published in the 90s, after the collapse of the USSR and the SFRY. In the 60s and 70s, after normalization in the mid 50s. relations between the two countries, criticism of the SFRY and the SKY in the Soviet press was moderate, was rare and in an emphatically correct form. They wrote more about the achievements of Yugoslavia, about its successes, about Soviet-Yugoslav cooperation. The last time there was noisy criticism under Khrushchev, in the late 50s, when the new SKU Program was adopted. And in the Program of the CPSU, adopted by the 22nd Congress in 1961, the ideological approaches of the leadership of the SKYU were criticized. However, after a year they tried not to mention this, because already in 1962-1963, relations returned to normal. And it was expressly forbidden to criticize Tito. Even if they wrote about the problems of the SFRY, then Tito was always portrayed during this period as the leader of the "healthy forces" in the SKY and SFRY. In an indirect, veiled form, the negative was associated with Tito's closest associate, the chief ideologist of the SKYU, Kardel. There were no special problems until the introduction of the ATS troops into Czechoslovakia. During the six-day war, the SFRY unequivocally supported the position of the USSR and the Department of Internal Affairs, the sympathies of the Yugoslavs were on the side of the Arabs.
      2. ABC-schütze
        ABC-schütze 28 September 2021 12: 33
        +2
        Your thesis is highly dubious. In fact, at the level of anti-Serb information and propaganda stuffing ...

        After Tito's death, Milosevic, who perfectly understood what was going on and what, for the Serbs living on the territory of the SFRY, the disintegration of the country with the corresponding "parade of sovereignty" would lead to, he was only "guilty" of what he tried to achieve for the Serbs who lived compactly, in the autonomies, OUTSIDE the territory of Serbia, EXACTLY THE SAME RIGHTS to the formation of their state (in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia), as well as those who briskly "ran" from the SFRY, unilaterally proclaiming the "state independence" of their entities - Slovenia, Croatia , BiH.

        But the West (primarily Germany) denied the Serbs the right to form their own state (just as they denied such a right to the inhabitants of Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Transnistria), while Croats, Slovenes and Bosnian Muslims did not.

        To begin with, I will note that the West - Germany and other public, illegally recognizing the "independence" of Slovenia, Croatia and BiH, CRIMINALLY VIOLATED the principle of inviolability of post-war borders in Europe, UNANIMOUSLY enshrined by ALL signatories of the Final Act (Helsinki Agreements).

        Since this kind of "recognition", de jure, at the conceptual level, meant unlawful consent to the elimination of the sovereign subject of international law, the SFRY, a member of the UN and the OSCE.

        And the corresponding elimination of EXACTLY HIM, its state borders, with the illegal "transfer" of their status to any self-proclaimed, "newly recognized" remake.

        What, I remind, the Serbs who lived compactly outside the territory of Serbia were DEMONSTRATIVE - maliciously and unmotivated from a legal point of view, they were denied ...
        1. Reptiloid
          Reptiloid 28 September 2021 15: 04
          0
          The public in the West agreed, was not shocked (internationally) that children in Belgrade could die due to the lack of drugs for leukemia. In the understanding of the West, the Serbs are the "wrong" people. And this would have been impossible if the USSR had not been destroyed.
          Western countries have had enmity towards Orthodox Serbs in different centuries.
  5. Timofey Astakhov
    Timofey Astakhov 28 September 2021 00: 02
    -1
    "Of course, it was in the West that they prepared in advance to accelerate the collapse of the SFRY."
    why would it suddenly?
    1. ABC-schütze
      ABC-schütze 28 September 2021 12: 45
      0
      "From the fact" that the West has never tolerated and does not tolerate REALLY sovereign states and with REALLY sovereign policies.

      Especially, on that "clearing", which he considers to be the zone of his strategic interests and influence ...

      Is this "news" for you? ..
      Just don't say yes. Hardly anyone will believe this ...

      The sovereignty of the SFRY under Tito, the West was forced to endure, since Tito often and REALLY "butted" with the Soviet political leadership.

      After the treacherous collapse of the USSR, chronologically, closely coinciding with the death of Tito, the need for the REAL sovereignty of the SFRY practically "disappeared".

      This became a practical incentive for all kinds of illegal "confessions" of all kinds of "independence", all kinds of remakes ...
      1. Reptiloid
        Reptiloid 28 September 2021 14: 06
        0
        Greetings comrade!
        I read in the book by Ksenia Grigorievna Myalo "Russia and the last wars of the XX century. To the history of the fall of the superpower", about the ancient Ustashe song about the fact that, like the blood of Serbs is better than wine (there were similar moments of German Nazis).
        The genocide of the Serbs, and of the Slavs in general, by the Germans has a very ancient history. Remember the empire from sea to sea of ​​King Germanarich, then Gottfried of Denmark, Charles the Great, and later Teutons, Austrians ...
        In general, the technologies for destroying the USSR and the SFRY, and their heirs, the Russian Federation and Serbia, are the same.
        1. ABC-schütze
          ABC-schütze 28 September 2021 14: 44
          -1
          Good afternoon...

          I am not a philologist or a historian, but there is also a version (hypothesis) that the very designation "Slav" comes from the old Germanic der Sklave, which means "slave" ...

          And in general, not very aggressive-warlike, sedentary farmers - "Slavs" who inhabited vast, poorly defended territories, were quite common "objects of trade" of near and distant neighbors ..

          True, with the course of history, the Slavs proved their unique capabilities for competitive development, their ability and willingness to stand up for themselves, to unite. And the former, derogatory meaning of this term has sunk into oblivion ...

          As for "technologies", at that time, the socialist (based, including on the principles of Soviet power) way of life in Europe, in general, and the USSR, as a state, in particular, as a guarantor of the existence and development of this way, destroyed, FIRSTLY, by the treacherous policy of the so-called. "restructuring".

          And the aforementioned "technologies" turned out to be possible for use with the required result only against the background of the mentioned policy of betrayal of their own, "Soviet" "leaders". The SFRY after Tito found itself de facto in political isolation. And surrounded by subjects that are by no means "neutral" to its distant fate and destiny.

          And in such circumstances and conditions, there are always subjects, "covered" by the so-called. by the "international community", ACTIVELY ready, with impunity, to "drink the blood" of a weakened historical and cultural-ethnic competitor ..

          Sorry, while taking my leave ...
          1. Reptiloid
            Reptiloid 28 September 2021 15: 27
            0
            Yes, getting peace-loving farmers as slaves has been a dream of the West for a long time. So they called those who were attacked in order to justify their atrocities (I recently wrote a comment on this topic here). I also believe that the destruction of the SFRY is a direct consequence of the destruction of the USSR. When Clinton promised Yeltsin (telephone conversations are known) to support him in the future if he (EBN) has a "democratic" course
    2. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 28 September 2021 15: 12
      0
      Quote: Timofey Astakhov

      why would it suddenly?

      Serbia was the place where "Rome" and "Byzantium" converged, that is, the Catholic and Orthodox worldviews, or two fundamentally different civilizations. Franz Joseph wanted so much that Serbia would not exist, which he said
  6. Glagol1
    Glagol1 16 November 2021 01: 18
    0
    The collapse of the USSR gave rise to the crisis of the SFRY. Of course, Tito's death in 1980 was the first step, but if the USSR had remained, the crisis would have been different. The West is the main culprit in this tragedy, even the most orthodox leaders in the Balkans would have been ready for restraint, but the West pushed through the provocation. And so, Yugoslavia was a super-European country, 25 million. population, in the top 10 in Europe by runway. A very influential force in the world. But the West does not need strong countries with independent policies. A timeless lesson for us.