Vladimir Umeljić
German historical revisionism in the Balkans at the turn of the 21st century
(The mechanism of ideologically motivated virtual reality [Theory of
Definitionism] in the service of hegemony)
In the second half of the 1990s I first put forth the view that the Federal
Republic of Germany (prior to unification of the two Germanys) de-
served the name “European Germany”, but that after unification the
term “German Europe” became much more appropriate for the new
socio-political and economic reality. This is evident when we look at
Balkan history. From the beginning of the acute phase of the crisis in
the former Yugoslavia, the civil conflicts that followed, and the ultim-
ate collapse of the country, German politicians, media, and education-
al institutions were extremely active players in the entire affair. With
this we witnessed the proclamation of a “New World Order” in Europe,
to say nothing about the rest of the world.
Further analysis shows that German universities and academic
institutions played a central role in the systematic attempt to revise
the history of the Balkan Peninsula. This new trend in the German
social sciences is not limited to recent history and the Yugoslav Civil
Wars of the 1990s, in the context of which the Serbs are unequivocally
portrayed as the “sole culprits, aggressors, genocide fuelled maniacs,
ethnic cleansers, mass rapists, and founders of concentration camps,
etc.” This particular time period is not the focus of this paper. What’s
more, this revisionist trend is not limited to the 20th century, but
rather it extends to the time of the Ottoman occupation of Serbian
lands, and even further to the first migrations of Slavic peoples to the
Balkans. It is widely known that:
“Who controls the past, controls the present, and the future.”
Table of Contents:
I. Revisionism of Balkan history by German universities and academ
ic institutions with regards to the 20th century, with an emphasis on
the recently actualized thesis that “There was no genocide commit
ted against the Serbs by the Nazi-allied Independent State of Croatia
(ISC) from 1941-1945.”
II. Revisionism of Balkans history by German universities and aca
demic institutions with regards to the time of the Ottoman occupa
tion of Serbian lands and the time of the first migrations of Slavs to
the Balkan Peninsula.
III. The linguistic and philosophical approach to historical revisionism
in the Balkans by German universities and academic institutions
at the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st century. (Theory
of Definitionism).
I
Revisionism of Balkans history by German universities and academ-
ic institutions with regards to the 20th century, with an emphasis on
the recently actualized thesis that “There was no genocide committed
against the Serbs by the Nazi-allied Independent State of Croatia (ISC)
from 1941-1945.”
Young American historian Alexander Korb successfully defended his
doctoral dissertation at Berlin’s Humboldt University entitled: “In the
Shadow of the World War: Mass Violence by the Croatian Ustashe
against the Serbs, Jews, and Roma.” The professors who were in charge
of evaluating his work (Dr. Jorg Baberowski, Dr. Kiran Klaus Patel, and
Dr. Michael Wildt) decided unanimously to award him the highest
grade possible, summa cum laude. In his assessment, Prof. Baberow-
ski wrote, among other things, that “Korb’s dissertation is one extra-
ordinary contribution to the research of genocide and violence. No
one will be able to write on this topic in the same way again.”
What is so revolutionary and new about Korb’s socio-historical
treatment of the Croatian state between 1941-1945, a state which was
artificially carved out of the then Kingdom of Yugoslavia by Adolf
Hitler and Benito Mussolini? The thing that undoubtedly and decid-
edly differentiates Alexander Korb from the greatest part of the pre-
vious (positive) historical science and research done on this period of
Balkans history aside from those done by Croatia itself, that is to say
the crimes of genocide in the aforementioned Croatian state, are his
fundamental claims and final conclusions. He claims that:
1. “No genocide was committed against the Serbs” in the Independent
State of Croatia from 1941-1945. (pg. 34, 114, 205, 352, 373, 374.)
2. The Croatian clergy and the Vatican “played no important role” in
the mass violence against Serbs in the Croatian state from 1941-
1945. As such, even the forced conversions of Serbs to Catholicism
had an “exclusively secular character.” (pg. 29, 73, 248, 285, 286, 363.)
This is without a doubt a radical shift in the historical research of the
ISC, and the phenomenon of genocide, because – as Korb asserts – the
Jasenovac concentration camp alone was, up to the year 1999, the sub-
ject of 1,188 monographs and scientific publications, as well as 1,544
academic articles and contributions (pg. 297). Korb disagrees with
the vast majority of these scientific works and their conclusions. His
dissertation, after which “no one will be able to write on this topic in
the same way again,” as previously mentioned, is primarily compatible
with Croatian historiography and its persistent relativism and denial
of the genocide that took place in the ISC between 1941-1945, as well
as the denial of any wrongdoing on the part of the Catholic Church
during this period.
For example, Korb’s conclusions are in line with the views of one
important Croatian intellectual and theological authority by the name
of Ivo Omrcanin, (Doctor Theologiae, Juris, Juris Canonici, Advocatus
Sacrae Romanae Rota, Procurator Sacrae Congregationis Rituum, A.
Iurisprudens and Professor of Philosophy of Law), who barely 20 years
after the end of the Second World War claimed not only that the Cro-
atian state did not commit genocide against the Serbs between 1941-
1945, but rather that “Serbs committed genocide against Croatians.”
The thing that is revolutionary and new with Korb’s views – if Prof.
Baberowski was indeed correct – is that his work has ushered in a rad-
ical paradigm shift in German historical research, and that in and of
itself is more than enough reason to pay close attention to this work.
Sine ira et studio (Without anger and study).
Tacitus
First, what is it that Korb denies in the previous historical and scientific
studies? In short, the state of genocide research in 20th century Europe
(before Korb). Three great genocides were committed in Europe in
the 20th century (the Turkish genocide of Armenians between 1915-1919
belongs not only geopolitically but, in my opinion, culturally and
socio-psychologically to a completely different historical and socio-
moral heritage. Research into this chronologically the first great geno-
cide of the 20th century thus genuinely belongs to Europe’s immediate
neighbourhood, the sphere of Turkish studies):
• The genocide committed by the Nazis and all of their – German
and non-German – allies against the Jews (Holocaust, Shoah) is,
despite the efforts of the tireless promoters of the so-called “Ausch-
witz-Lügen” (Lies about Auschwitz), probably the most closely re-
searched genocide in the history of mankind. That was certainly not
only the result of many scientific analyses and studies, but also the
long, tireless, and difficult process of the multidisciplinary discovering
and unravelling of these terrible events. Taking part in this process
are not only the descendents of the victims but also the descendents of
those who committed the crimes. The number of victims is estimated
at around 6 million.
• Genocide against the Sinti and Roma, which is unfortunately still
inadequately researched. However, it is common knowledge that the
Nazis and their allies killed more than 500,000 members of this ethnic
group.
• During the Second World War, Adolf Hitler and Benito Musso-
lini constructed a Nazi satellite state in the Balkans, the so-called In-
dependent State of Croatia. Its leaders were the clerical fascist Ustasha
regime. They are responsible for the third great genocide in Europe in
the 20th century against the Sinti and Roma (around 40 thousand cas-
ualties), against Jews (around 30 thousand casualties), and, most prom-
inently, against the Serbs (Serbocide), who were persecuted under the
state-sanctioned and publically stated program to ethnically cleanse
one third of the Serbs from Croatia, to convert one third to Catholi-
cism, thereby “Croatianizing” them, and to exterminate the final third.
Andrey Trembelas
Epistle
To His Excellency, Francis,
Head of State of the Vatican City
Vatican City, Rome
Your Excellency,
With due respect and sincere love, we send you this Episcopal letter,
the purpose of which doesn’t come from any selfish motive, but from
pure, sincere and selfless Christian love, from Christian duty, from an
essential commandment of our Saviour Christ, Who “desires all men
to be saved and to come to a full knowledge of the truth”1 and finally
from a warm and ardent desire for your salvation. Because of this we
feel it to be our holy and mandatory duty, as the least of the members of
the All-holy and All-pure Body of Christ, and especially as Orthodox
Bishops, who belong as such to the Holy Synod of the Holy Autoceph-
alous Church of Greece, which is our highest ecclesiastical authority,
as to the whole and Undivided One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic
Orthodox Church, to endeavour with all our might to restore you to
the Mother Orthodox Catholic Church, from which you left and from
which you were cut off, a work which we hope, the Uncreated Divine
Grace of the Lord cooperating, shall be achieved. This holy obligation
of the return of heretics to the Orthodox Church has, of course, holy
canonical grounds and basis and is supported by the 131st, 132nd, and
133rd holy Canons of the Local Council of Carthage (418 or 419 A.D.).2
From the outset we must clarify that we Orthodox, not taking part
in the politically correct spirit of western and especially ecumenist
“Christianity,” do not refer to those religious communities who have,
sadly, been separated from the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic
Orthodox Church as “Churches.” But, following the example of our
Holy Fathers throughout the ages, refer to them as heretics, and you,
Your Excellency, and your followers, we denominate as “Papists” and
your heresy as “Papism.” These terms are, for us, not derogatory, nei-
ther are they slurs, but they are theological and even technical terms
which best describe the spiritual and ecclesiastical delusion and error
in which you find yourselves. We, in fact use them with love, for when
one loves his brother he tells him the truth hoping to bring him back
to his senses.
It should also be made clear that the following words are written
with pain of heart and not from some personal bitterness or hatred
towards your respectable personage. Our purpose is not to offend
you, but to reveal, rebuke, admonish and to refute your deluded and
heretical ideas, theories and actions. Our basic rule is that we should
love the heretics but rebuke and hate their heresy and delusions. Our
only interest is our Holy Orthodoxy, the only place in which humans
have salvation. We unceasingly pray that our Lord Jesus Christ gather
together the deluded “Pope” and his followers, through repentance
and the renunciation of your delusion and heresy, into the One, Holy,
Catholic and Apostolic, Orthodox Church and to assume as an Ortho-
dox Pope, according to seniority of honour of the Pentarchy and in
agreement with the Divine and Holy Canons, the Chairmanship of
honour of the Autocephalous Orthodox Churches as “primus inter
pares.”
An additional reason, which shows the timeliness and import-
ance of our present Episcopal epistle, are the intrigues in the realm
of the modern heretical Ecumenical Movement with its ecumenist
theological dialogues between Orthodox and Papists, where the repre-
sentatives from the Orthodox side, animated unfortunately by the pan
heretical spirit of inter-Christian and inter-religious syncretistic ecu-
menism, and employing the false ecumenist love, a “love” without true
love and unity in the Orthodox faith, deceive you, Your Excellency,
claiming that Papism is a so called “Church,” and moreover a “sister
Church,” with valid Mysteries (Sacraments), Baptism, the Priesthood
and Grace, that Papism and Orthodoxy make up the so-called, “two
lungs,” with which the Church of Christ breaths, that you, the heretical
“Pope,” are a canonical bishop, successor of the Apostle Peter and Vicar
of Christ on earth, who possess the Apostolically, Scripturally and
Patristically groundless and non-existent “Petrine” primacy of power
over all the Church, and the blasphemous “Papal Infallibility,” instead
of the true primacy of honor (διά τό εἶναι τήν Ρώμην πρωτεύουσα) as
is commanded by the Holy Canons of the undivided Church of the
first millennium to which the Orthodox Pope of Rome and Patriarch
of the West is entitled, doctrines that are totally unknown and without
foundation or witness in the general Tradition of the Catholic Ortho-
dox Church of the first ten centuries and of the eight Holy Ecumenical
Councils, doctrines which are a clear blasphemy against the All-Holy
Spirit and which show your theological departure and the satanic
pride of which you are possessed. Clear proof of the absurdity of the
Orthodox Ecumenists is that, while they attribute to you ecclesiastical
titles, you who are obviously heretical and erroneous in belief, they do
not dare, even though it would be in keeping with their declarations,
to come into sacramental communion with you, because they know
from that moment they will immediately lose their own ecclesiastical
identity. Does this not make up the most blatant proof of the false doc-
trines of Ecumenism? If they indeed believe their unacceptable and
provocative declarations, then let them dare to take the step into sac-
ramental communion, because otherwise they prove by their actions
the emptiness of the ecclesiastical titles which they give to you false
bishops of the false believers. Clear conformation of the above was the
last-minute cancellation of your personal attendance at the celebra-
tions of the 1700th anniversary of the Edict of Milan in Niš, Serbia, on
June 10th, 2013,3 and the cancellation of your visit to the Holy Mountain
of Athos the same month,4 as rumour has it.
In communicating with you through this present Episcopal letter,
we desire that it be made known to you that, according to the dia-
chronic Holy Scriptural, Canonical and Patristic Tradition and ac-
cording to the infallible conscience of the fullness of the Eastern
Orthodox Catholic Church, Papism, of which you are the leader, Your
Excellency, is not a “Church,” but a religious community, a parasyna-
gogue, a heresy, an alteration, a demolishing and a total perversion of
the Truth, namely, of the very God-man, Christ. Hosts of Orthodox
Councils have condemned Papism as a heresy. We will cite some sig-
nificant examples: The Council of 879-880 in Constantinople, under
the Ecumenical Patriarch, Archbishop of Constantinople and New
Rome, Saint Photios the Great, Equal to the Apostles, which con-
demned as heretical the teaching of the Filioque, and is considered
by the consciousness of the Church to be the 8th Ecumenical Council,
because in it were representatives of all the Patriarchates, including
the then Orthodox Pope of Rome, John the 8th, and because the de-
cisions of this council were universally accepted. Unfortunately, this
heterodox belief has prevailed as your official teaching, from the be-
ginning of the 11th century (1014) until today. Papism adopted after
more than a millennium, a heretical teaching, which Rome had al-
ready condemned along with the other Orthodox Patriarchates, refut-
ing and condemning itself as a heresy. Besides that, all the subsequent
Orthodox Councils, like the Constantinopolitan Councils of 1170,
1341, 1450, 1722, 1838, and 1895 unequivocally condemned Papism as a
heresy.5 What is more, all of the Saints who lived after the schism of
1054, such as St. Germanos Patriarch of Constantinople, St. Gregory
Palamas, St. Mark of Ephesus, St Simeon of Thessalonica, St. Nicode-
mus the Hagiorite, St. Cosmas of Aetolia, St Nektarios of Pentapolis,
Saint Justin Popović and others,6 with one voice, condemn Papism as
a heresy. Papism is not a “Church” but a State – the Vatican, a worldly
organization, with a government, with you, the “Pope,” as leader, with
the Cardinals as Ministers and Secretaries and with the “Bank of the
Holy Spirit.” Neither is Papism a “Roman Catholic Church,” because it
is neither Roman, nor Catholic, nor a Church. It has no relation with
Romiosini or with Romania. It isn’t Catholic since it separated of its