Feb. 20th, 2014 04:29 pm
Fire in the Balkans
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
muckefuckI was more than a little surprised to find out yesterday (again from reading the Economist) about the riots in Bosnia-Hercegovina. Not because I don't expect unrest there, but because I've heard literally nothing from any other news outlet. I'm not especially catholic in my choice of sites (generally BBC, al-Jazeerah, and my customised Google feed) and I don't spend a big chunk of each day reading them, but I like to think that when there are widespread anti-governmental riots in a European state my country was instrumental in creating, I'll hear about it sooner rather than later--let alone two weeks later.
Delving a bit more into the story, it's not hard to see why there wasn't more coverage. We have a prevailing narrative in the USA about the region which can be summed up as, "Whaddya expect, it's the Balkans." If the clashes had been interethnic, they would've fit right into that narrative. But they weren't. Instead we had crowds of all ethnicities taking on corrupt officials installed with the backing of the EU and its allies (e.g. us). It has far less in common with the "ancient hatreds" which led to the breakup of Yugoslavia than with the Occupy movement and--as we know--reporting on non-USA demonstrations relating to that has been dismal. In addition, despite the presence of Muslims in Bosnia, it can't be linked to the Arab Spring either because, as mentioned above, it's a regime we support, not one we want to see "changed".
Given that, it's not at all unexpected to hear from people in former Yugoslavia that the demonstrations have actually been going on for a year, but it took a building being burnt down to net them any sort of mention in the foreign press. Now that the "riots" have mostly ended, we'll probably stop hearing anything at all. Which is a damn shame, because the system of citizen-organised "plena" which are presently negotiating with local authorities is heartening and a model for how Occupy might've played out if we only trusted direct democracy in this country a bit more.
Delving a bit more into the story, it's not hard to see why there wasn't more coverage. We have a prevailing narrative in the USA about the region which can be summed up as, "Whaddya expect, it's the Balkans." If the clashes had been interethnic, they would've fit right into that narrative. But they weren't. Instead we had crowds of all ethnicities taking on corrupt officials installed with the backing of the EU and its allies (e.g. us). It has far less in common with the "ancient hatreds" which led to the breakup of Yugoslavia than with the Occupy movement and--as we know--reporting on non-USA demonstrations relating to that has been dismal. In addition, despite the presence of Muslims in Bosnia, it can't be linked to the Arab Spring either because, as mentioned above, it's a regime we support, not one we want to see "changed".
Given that, it's not at all unexpected to hear from people in former Yugoslavia that the demonstrations have actually been going on for a year, but it took a building being burnt down to net them any sort of mention in the foreign press. Now that the "riots" have mostly ended, we'll probably stop hearing anything at all. Which is a damn shame, because the system of citizen-organised "plena" which are presently negotiating with local authorities is heartening and a model for how Occupy might've played out if we only trusted direct democracy in this country a bit more.
Tags: