AHC/WI: Serbia won the Bosnian War

[tuareg109]

But intensive propaganda on all three sides claimed that it was, in fact, a war of survival - that the Evil Ustashe getting their Greater Croatia/Evil Islamists getting their unitary Bosnia/Evil Chetniks getting their Greater Serbia can only end in *our* extermination or deportation. Obviously, neither of these claims was completely true, but they were still believed by many.

True, but everybody else had somewhere to run to. Serbs in Bosnia could go to Serbia, Croats in Hercegovina and the Krajina could go to Dalmatia or Pannonian Croatia, and Kosovars could go to Albania--though that's 1999.

While the civil war was 3-sided, Bosniaks had literally nowhere to go. Their backs were against the wall; and, though all wars were touted as "wars of survival", the Serbs and Croats were pushing into other people's lands and homes, whereas the Bosniaks were basically either holding a line or retreating--closer and closer to that wall--for the entire first half of the war.

When Bosnia and Croatia joined forces, people in Bihac and its surroundings (where I'm from) still had nowhere to go; the city was completely surrounded. So it's survival of land and property vs. literal survival, as in life or death.

 

[Marko]

To set a few things straight or at least add additional information as well as my opinion on the matter.


As far as I am concerned as well as most historians in Croatia (though that stance is not widely accepted) the war in BiH had two starts. The first one when local BiH serbs and JNA devastated the village of Ravno in their attempt to completely control the hinterlands of Dubrovnik - this happened at the begining of october 1991. The fighting between local BiH Croat forces and local BiH Serb forces and JNA spread across BiH with heavy fighting west of Livno and aroud Kupres. BiH Muslim (from this point on Bosniaks) join local BiH Croats in resisting local BiH Serbs and JNA. This continues until the Bosniak-Croat conflict with as much as 1/3 of "Croat" forces being made of Bosniaks. The second one is the international date od March 1st when the Bosniak leadership lead Bosniaks start fighting against BiH Serbs and JNA. That date is nonsense since the fighting had been going on for 6 months by then. In addition the fighting in BiH during autumn/winter '91-'92 is the reason why southern Dalmatia remained under Croatian control, in a way the fighting in BiH was crucial to Croatia's survival.


As to how can Serbia (not Serbs) win the war in BiH. The anwser is to actually fight in it from the start. JNA + local Serbs failed to "win" in Croatia due to the collapse of recruitment in Serbia during late summer and autumn of '91. Less than 10% anwsered. A big thank you to my eastern neighbours to resisting the maddness that was sweaping the land.

If they do mobilise even with just 40% anwsering the call the war in Croatia is mostly a foregone conclusion. Even with the level of casulties sustained at Vukovar, Osijek, Vinkovci, Đakovo and rest of eastern Slavonia would fall, by Februray '92. The JNA + local Serbs had a huge advantage in war material, what they lacked was manpower. By December '91 the situation in the field was allready 3:1 in favour of the Croats while "Serbs" had (roughly) 20:1 advantage in tanks and armoured vehicles, 15:1 advantage in heavy artilery, 10:1 advantage in light artilery, 200:1 advantage in aircraft and 45:1 advantage in ships.

With the upsurge of men to support existing material Dubrovnik and Zadar are destined to fall by December '91 with central Dalmatia and western Herzegovina cut off from the rest of the country. They would also have sufficient forces to press their attack on Karlovac and quite likely take it by February '92. Reaching Zagreb from that point could be possible by April/May '92 after some vicious fighting and with willingness to suffer casulties needed to break the Croats. The conquest of Zagreb would probably requier an additional 10-15% recruitment.

Unless the Bosniaks join the Croats in fighting the Serbs during the late autumn/winter of '91 any rebellion at a further point in time would just be a suicide. So that is one way to "win" the war in BiH.


If the situation follows OTL until March 1st '92 Serbia/JNA can win the BiH conflict by going for the land rather than the "landmarks" strategy. In reallity not repeating the same mistake they did in Croatia in '91. If JNA + BiH Serbs just surround Sarajevo instead of expanding serious effort early on to actually take the city they can concentrate on more important goals.

1) Secure the Drina vally - as in OTL but try and do it with less brutality so as not to atract the attention of the western press.

2) Put preasure on Posavina but actually try and break south of Tuzla to divide the Bosniaks and turn the northern Bosniak forces into an appendix of Croatian forces in Slavonia.

3) Secure the Sana valley.

4) Ignore western Herzegovina and central BiH inhabited by Croats since those areas are sure to recieve assistance in material and volunteers from Croatia proper where the main body of fighting had died down.

5) Put preasure on Cazinska Krajina and the so called Bihać pocket to fill in the hollow area in the western serbian lands. All these goals are achiveable by August '92.

6) Frieze the front line and call the EU/UN to the peace table, initiate the talks make yourselves look like peacemakers.

The negotiations would start with the front line going something along these lines. In my opinion a total pawnage of their opponents as far as Serbs are concerned during the shorth but brutal war of "Yugoslav seccession"

 

[Marko]

...

Even during the time when Croats and Bosniaks were fighting Croatia was accepting Bosniak refugees and allowing aid through its lands to reach the Bosniaks. Even more insane was the fackt that most of the guns and ammunition used by the ABiH came through HVO lines with approval of the Croatian BiH leadership.

And if someone believes all of this was not a big criminal enterprise good luck to them

 

[Mookie]

Arkan was a criminal too, and he was eventually killed by another Serbian criminal. But I'm not sure it would be fine to qualify him as "just a gang member".

Arkan was a war criminal and a criminal. But he killed Bosniaks because of Bosniaks. He didnt have a drug deal with entire eastern Bosnia.

Lol. I can sort of understand that, at least if he was talking about the black ones. The others are nothing special.



But intensive propaganda on all three sides claimed that it was, in fact, a war of survival - that the Evil Ustashe getting their Greater Croatia/Evil Islamists getting their unitary Bosnia/Evil Chetniks getting their Greater Serbia can only end in *our* extermination or deportation. Obviously, neither of these claims was completely true, but they were still believed by many.

"intensive" propaganda? Orthodox churches remained in Bosniak controled teritory untouched, main church remained untouched, while every mosque the Serbs reached was mined and blown up. Every village they reached was ethnicaly cleansed. That is a reason why from 55% they went to 95% population of "RS"

Even during the time when Croats and Bosniaks were fighting Croatia was accepting Bosniak refugees and allowing aid through its lands to reach the Bosniaks. Even more insane was the fackt that most of the guns and ammunition used by the ABiH came through HVO lines with approval of the Croatian BiH leadership.

And if someone believes all of this was not a big criminal enterprise good luck to them

That weapons that you were so generous to give us were paid and bought by Bosniaks and Bosnian army. You took 50% from every arms shipment. If anyone should thank anyone it should be Croats thanking Bosniaks for arming them for free.
As for refugees, yeah you took them. When they aquired "krstenica", which is imposible to obtain if you arent Krsten

 

[Mookie]

And what is that map suposed to show Marko? Is it your signature or related to topic?

 

[Marko]

That weapons that you were so generous to give us were paid and bought by Bosniaks and Bosnian army. You took 50% from every arms shipment. If anyone should thank anyone it should be Croats thanking Bosniaks for arming them for free.

As for refugees, yeah you took them. When they aquired "krstenica", which is imposible to obtain if you arent Krsten

Yes they were paid but it is still ludicrous to allow weapons, even if only 50%, to get to the "enemy" through your own lines.

As for the second part. Don't be apsurd. There were more than 200 000 Bosniak in Croatia during the Croat-Bosniak conflict. The number that were forced to change religion was miniscule and a result of local thugs terrorising the refugees.


The map is there to represent what Serbia could hold by summer 1992 if they tried to "win" the war rather than conquer BiH.

 

[Mookie]

Yes they were paid but it is still ludicrous to allow weapons, even if only 50%, to get to the "enemy" through your own lines.

As for the second part. Don't be apsurd. There were more than 200 000 Bosniak in Croatia during the Croat-Bosniak conflict. The number that were forced to change religion was miniscule and a result of local thugs terrorising the refugees.


The map is there to represent what Serbia could hold by summer 1992 if they tried to "win" the war rather than conquer BiH.

50% of weapons goes to your enemy, 50% stays with you + weapons you buy on other sides. And that is a bad deal?
No Bosniak from lands under control of HZHB could leave without Krstenica. It was a most vile system developed, aimed at Bosniaks.

 

[Marko]

50% of weapons goes to your enemy, 50% stays with you + weapons you buy on other sides. And that is a bad deal?
No Bosniak from lands under control of HZHB could leave without Krstenica. It was a most vile system developed, aimed at Bosniaks.

Yes it is. If you can keep the other 50% so the enemy has nothing.

 

[Mookie]

Yes it is. If you can keep the other 50% so the enemy has nothing.

Lol. Or you can refuse, and your enemy has nothing and neither do you. How about that?
You took half the weapons, and you were the ones having the "first pick". You chose first. There is a reason why you had artilery and tanks and we didnt. Receiving 50% of your weapon needs for free is a cool things to save up money, dont you think

 

[tuareg109]

I'm still having some trouble imagining that the U.S. and U.K. would sit idly by and watch Serbia invade a country fighting a civil war. They intervened in OTL, and it's very likely they'd intervene more in TTL, because of greater perceived aggression.

 

[Halagaz]

Arkan was a war criminal and a criminal. But he killed Bosniaks because of Bosniaks. He didnt have a drug deal with entire eastern Bosnia.

I have never even met Arkan and you have most likely never even met Delalic. Speculation on their exact motives for the murder of Bosniaks/Serbs is just that, speculation.

"intensive" propaganda? Orthodox churches remained in Bosniak controled teritory untouched, main church remained untouched, while every mosque the Serbs reached was mined and blown up. Every village they reached was ethnicaly cleansed. That is a reason why from 55% they went to 95% population of "RS"

Whoa. I never disputed that the Bosnian Serb army commited many atrocities, more than any other side, but now you're just descending into caricature. Not all Orthodox churches remained untouched, and claiming that every village they reached was ethnically cleansed...seriously?

That is a reason why from 55% they went to 95% population of "RS"

And in the "Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina" they went from 17% to 2%.

 

[Halagaz]

If JNA + BiH Serbs just surround Sarajevo instead of expanding serious effort early on to actually take the city they can concentrate on more important goals.

1) Secure the Drina vally - as in OTL but try and do it with less brutality so as not to atract the attention of the western press.

2) Put preasure on Posavina but actually try and break south of Tuzla to divide the Bosniaks and turn the northern Bosniak forces into an appendix of Croatian forces in Slavonia.

3) Secure the Sana valley.

4) Ignore western Herzegovina and central BiH inhabited by Croats since those areas are sure to recieve assistance in material and volunteers from Croatia proper where the main body of fighting had died down.

5) Put preasure on Cazinska Krajina and the so called Bihać pocket to fill in the hollow area in the western serbian lands. All these goals are achiveable by August '92.

6) Frieze the front line and call the EU/UN to the peace table, initiate the talks make yourselves look like peacemakers.

1)-6) sound sensible to me...but as for 2). You mean push through Kladanj and make a beeline to link up with the forces around Maglaj? I'd think that would be a lot harder to force than the Posavina Corridor, and harder to keep too.

 

[Mookie]

I have never even met Arkan and you have most likely never even met Delalic. Speculation on their exact motives for the murder of Bosniaks/Serbs is just that, speculation.



Whoa. I never disputed that the Bosnian Serb army commited many atrocities, more than any other side, but now you're just descending into caricature. Not all Orthodox churches remained untouched, and claiming that every village they reached was ethnically cleansed...seriously?



And in the "Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina" they went from 17% to 2%.

You never met him yet the fact that he killed the guy for criminal reasons is unbelievable to you.

Yes, every orthodox church was untouched. Some were damaged if enemy was holled inside them, but no one set explosives to them and blew them up like serbs did to mosques.
And yes, every place serbs captured was ethnicaly cleansed. Every. There isnt a single ocasion during the entire war, in which serbs captured a village with Bosniaks in it and didnt commit crimes.

 

[Avskygod0]

The solution to this, without hippies getting outlandishly pissy, is to essentialy carve up the state of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes into bassically Serbia, Croatia and Slovenia. Serbs and Croats will do assimilation projects in Bosnia and other places. This could essentialy prevent the bosnian war, the Kosovo war and all other shit-slinging. Or they could promote heavy Christianization, essentialy making Boniaks not exist and Bosnians taking their place

 

[Pellegrino]

50% of weapons goes to your enemy, 50% stays with you + weapons you buy on other sides. And that is a bad deal?
No Bosniak from lands under control of HZHB could leave without Krstenica. It was a most vile system developed, aimed at Bosniaks.

Yes they were paid but it is still ludicrous to allow weapons, even if only 50%, to get to the "enemy" through your own lines.

As for the second part. Don't be apsurd. There were more than 200 000 Bosniak in Croatia during the Croat-Bosniak conflict. The number that were forced to change religion was miniscule and a result of local thugs terrorising the refugees.


The map is there to represent what Serbia could hold by summer 1992 if they tried to "win" the war rather than conquer BiH.

Yes it is. If you can keep the other 50% so the enemy has nothing.

Lol. Or you can refuse, and your enemy has nothing and neither do you. How about that?
You took half the weapons, and you were the ones having the "first pick". You chose first. There is a reason why you had artilery and tanks and we didnt. Receiving 50% of your weapon needs for free is a cool things to save up money, dont you think

I would agree with Marko here, 50% of the weapons to your enemy is a Terrible idea, and I really doubt that it would be 0% to the Croats if they didn't agree to that deal. Marko would know more on this, but my understanding is that Germay dumped off some of its East German weaponry to the Croatians early in the conflict, and there is little question the Croatians would have allowed those weapons to end up in the hands of the Bosnian-Croats. The Herceg-Croats didn't need to allow the Bosniaks to receive 50% of weapons that they received, it was not a 50% or 0% choice.

 

[Hades]

America decides to intervene and gets itself involved in a Vietnam style quagmire

 

[Mookie]

I would agree with Marko here, 50% of the weapons to your enemy is a Terrible idea, and I really doubt that it would be 0% to the Croats if they didn't agree to that deal. Marko would know more on this, but my understanding is that Germay dumped off some of its East German weaponry to the Croatians early in the conflict, and there is little question the Croatians would have allowed those weapons to end up in the hands of the Bosnian-Croats. The Herceg-Croats didn't need to allow the Bosniaks to receive 50% of weapons that they received, it was not a 50% or 0% choice.

It seems you dont understand. Weapons were bought and smugled by Bosniaks and Bosnian government.
Croats kept half of it, chosing what they want. I dont see how allowing only 50% of weapons from reaching your enemy while you keep 50% is bad. I would agree to that any day of the year.

 

[Mookie]

America decides to intervene and gets itself involved in a Vietnam style quagmire

You are overestimating the serbs there

 

[Halagaz]

You never met him yet the fact that he killed the guy for criminal reasons is unbelievable to you.

Looks like you missed what I was saying. You claimed Arkan killed for purely nationalist reasons (even though you don't know him and thus can't know that), and that Delalic killed for purely "criminal" reasons (even though you don't know him either and thus can't know that). I believe that both were most likely criminals and psychos to whom nationalism was just a convenient excuse, but regardless of what their exact motives were, that doesn't make Delalic's (or Arkan's) crimes any less reprehensible.

Yes, every orthodox church was untouched

No, they weren't. For example, the Church of the Holy Trinity in Mostar.

And yes, every place serbs captured was ethnicaly cleansed. Every. There isnt a single ocasion during the entire war, in which serbs captured a village with Bosniaks in it and didnt commit crimes.

Many Bosniak villages in the Derventa/Brod region were unharmed. In fact, the Bosniaks from the region fought in a small unit within the Serb Army.

 

[Pellegrino]

It seems you dont understand. Weapons were bought and smugled by Bosniaks and Bosnian government.
Croats kept half of it, chosing what they want. I dont see how allowing only 50% of weapons from reaching your enemy while you keep 50% is bad. I would agree to that any day of the year.

Not when the alternative was they get nothing. The Bosnian government would have been hard pressed to get more than a few rifles without corruption from the Croats and Serbs, and had Croatia decided to strictly enforce an embargo, they probably would have seized Mostar with little to no resistance. Now I can understand if the Croats were allowing weapons to go to the Bosnians early on as part of a strategy to weaken the Serbs. A Lightning victory for the Serbs in Bosnia would have faired poorly for Croatia in its fight with Serb rebels in Krajina, and so I can understand if the Croatians decided it was worth the risk to arm the Bosnians. But to say that the Croats were cool with the deal because they got to pick all the good weapons out of the bundle and sent what was left to the Bosniaks just doesn't make sense. The Bosniaks were fightig for their lives, and were considerably tougher than either the Croats or Serbs expected. Some of the defenders of Sarajevo were armed with old bolt action Rifles early in the conflict, and yet they still held off the Serbs. The same goes for Mostar, where the Bosniaks were badly outgunned and held their own against the better armed Croat force. Giving the Bosniaks any weapons would have been a terrible idea.