The Trials of Trifkovic
Chronicles' distinguished foreign affairs editor has a way of exciting controversy. Often the cause is his view of Islam. Despite the fact that he has declared, over and over, that he opposes the aggressive policies and measures taken by the US against Iraq and Afghanistan, his historical critique has been sufficiently on-target to create a whole host of enemies. The most recent attack comes from a surprising source, the Belgrade publication Politika, which is often said to be the Serbian (formerly Yugoslav equivalent) of the New York Times.
Here is the opening of a recent article (20 September):
"The latest tensions caused by the movie which has blasphemously presented Prophet Muhammad lead us to re-examine the position of Islamic fundamentalism as the Holy Grail of the contemporary American policy, which conceals its true intentions behind the a-political formulae such as democracy, human rights, and global security.
"Some time ago in America, a story strongly resonated about the affair involving an interest group of political analysts gathered around certain companies and foundations whose members were given jobs to lecture on global politics at American military schools. It was subsequently established that they told the students that a war of civilizations was inevitable, that Christians will have to rise against Muslims, and that in that war the rules of warfare inevitably will have to be violated, that the massacres like Hiroshima and Dresden will be necessary, and that Islam needs to be cut at the root, with the demolition of Mecca included. When certain information about these lectures reached the public, the very top of the American state structure reacted and most of these lecturers were removed from their teaching posts.
"This story has been made particularly spicy by one detail, that as a guest-lecturer working together with them was a Serb, Srdja Trifkovic, thus establishing an interesting coalition between the Serbian Right and the American neoconservatives, which – having in mind recent experiences – seems perfectly natural…"
There are several disturbing aspects to the diatribe. First-off, it is amazingly fact-free. The only name offered in evidence is Trifkovic's, and there are no details about the organizations and sponsors behind the alleged Islamophobic conspiracy. Secondly, Trifkovic is supposed to be collaborating with the imperialist neoconservatives, the very people who hate his guts and have declared war on Chronicles magazine as "unpatriotic conservatives." His alleged calls for nuclear attack are completely at odds with his often stated opposition to America's attacks on Muslim countries.
Either the writer and his editors have some very top-secret information which, when released will cost Trifkovic his job at Chronicles and wreck his career, or they have very foolishly committed libel under American as well as Serbian law. Ordinarily I should be inclined to dismiss this sort of stuff as typical East-European hysteria, but even in the bad old days of Tito and Milosevic Politika maintained a reputation for, if not quite integrity then at least for the appearance of sanity. This piece can either be backed up or it is gutter journalism of the worst type.
Dr. Trifkovic will have to go to the Serbian courts to deal with these charges. I assume that he can explode the allegations as successfully as he has always done in the past. Still, the episode will leave a bad taste in the mouth of Americans who had begun to believe that the Belgrade government might really be sincere in its protestations of democracy, freedom of speech, and the rule of law. The only way Serbia can restore its credibility is by punishing the perpetrators of this libelous prank.
Entries(RSS)
It "seems perfectly natural" for neoconservatives to be allied with the Serbian Right?
Kind of like how it "seems perfectly natural" to suggest that John McCain is allied to Russian nationalists?
the Belgrade publication Politika, which is often said to be the Serbian (formerly Yugoslav equivalent) of the New York Times
Excuse me while I go re-extract my breakfast.
Either the writer and his editors have some very top-secret information which, when released will cost Trifkovic his job at Chronicles and wreck his career, or they have very foolishly committed libel under American as well as Serbian law.
Let's raise a glass to hoping Dr. T takes them for all they've got and buys out the paper.
By the way, it would be remiss not to mention that in a number of civil law jurisdictions, defamation is treated under the penal codes and is not a mere civil wrong. Yet in January of this year, the United Nations Committee on Human Rights struck a major blow against defamation laws: they didn't go so far as to insist that defamation-as-penal was in violation of international legal principles regarding freedom of expression, but the ruling certainly pushed in that direction:
"Comments about public figures, consideration should be given to avoiding penalties or otherwise rendering unlawful untrue statements that have been published in error but without malice. In any event, a public interest in the subject matter of the criticism should be recognized as a defense. State parties should consider the decriminalization of libel."
Nota bene: the international Jacobin usurpers have figured out the truth is not on their side and that their only hope is to legitimize the lies that they tell.
Mr Trifkovic claims that I wrote, "This story has been made particularly spicy by one detail, that as a guest-lecturer working together with them was a Serb, Srdja Trifkovic, thus establishing an interesting coalition between the Serbian Right and the American neoconservatives, which – having in mind recent experiences – seems perfectly natural…" There are relevant sources that can form the basis for this sentence.
First of all there is the article from Wired magazine "US Military Taught Officers: Use ’Hiroshima’ Tactics for ’Total War’ on Islam" published in May and it is still available online. In this article Noah Schatchman and Spencer Ackerman claim, "Guandolo’s paper, titled “Usual Responses from the Enemy When Presented With the Truth” (.pdf), was one of hundreds of presentations, documents, videos and web links electronically distributed to the Joint Forces Staff College students. Included in that trove: a paper alleging that “it is a permanent command in Islam for Muslims to hate and despise Jews and Christians” (.pdf). So was a video lecture from Serge Trifkovic, a former professor who appeared as a defense witness in several trials of Bosnian Serb leaders convicted of war crimes, including the genocide of Muslims. A web link, titled “Watch Before This Is Pulled,” supposedly shows President Obama — the commander-in-chief of the senior officers attending the course — admitting that he’s a Muslim." Even if the transcription of Mr Trifkovic's is inaccurate in this article, it is obvious that if refers to him since this is his field of expertise and he had the experience of testifying in Hague Tribunal.
This same sentence from Wired was interpreted on Russia Today the very same day in an article "US military school taught soldiers to wage a "total war" against Islam" (also available online) in the following manner, " In another instance, former professor Serge Trifkovic lectured students via video with a curriculum that included footage that supposedly proves that US President Barack Obama is a Muslim."
These sources, both the initial Wired article and Russia Today interpretation prove that my claims were based on solid sources and that my interpretation of that source is relevant.
Thus, if Mr Trifkovic wants to pursue the truth in court he should initially sue Wired and Russia Today which were used as sources in my column. If people like Schachtman, Akerman and editors of Russia Today turn out to be slanderers then Mr Trifkovic will have his justice.
English is obviously not my first language so I apologize if my statement isn't perfectly clear.
A reader from Serbia here. "Politika" has published Dr.Trifković's response in which he threatens with a law-suit as well as a counter-response from the author, one Dimitrije Vojinov.
Of the latter I'll say this: Pontius Pilate was an amateur when it came to washing his hands. Vojinov claims that he is not the one Trifković should be complainig but rather the lecturers who "used video excertps from a lecture by Dr. Trifković on islam". Never mind that Vojinov's original phrasing was concotted in such a way as to conclude that Dr.Trifković personally assisted these people in their lectures and/or articles thus deliberately misleading the readers. This is "critics of mulriculturalism inspired Breivik" canard to the nth power!
I am surprised to see Dimitrije Vojinov write something like this, he is generally speaking, not known for writing such calumnies. And his ability to man up and admit error is even worse then the error itself.
On the one hand you have Dr. Fleming getting "Legalled" by the Daily Mail. On the other hand you have Dr. Trifkovic getting Libelled by the Politika. One side refuses to allow facts to be spoken, and the other doesn't care if lies are proclaimed. Truly, those in league with Islam, those afraid of Islam, and those in awe of Islam care little which rules they break so long as Islam benefits.
If Christians had but half the drive as their foes, be they secular or Islamic, then who knows what the world would be, but we're too busy arguing about important issues like NFL referees and the First Lady's school lunch agenda and how free speech protects pornography and why you can be a good Christian and enjoy the Twilight movies and whether Apple's new iPhone is/isn't the best thing ever conceived by a rational being . . . etc.
"And the lord commended the unjust steward, forasmuch as he had done wisely: for the children of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light."
Mr Gurnemanz,
I think that this quote from Russia Today, and may I remind you that Mr Trifkovic has no qualms with appearing in their broadcasts, states - "In another instance, former professor Serge Trifkovic lectured students via video with a curriculum that included footage that supposedly proves that US President Barack Obama is a Muslim." This quote is in absolute accord with my own. Russia Today describes Mr Trifkovic's role as active, allegedly "he lectured via video" and as far as I can understand it means that he "actively" lectured via video. Otherwise, we would get some specific description of this lecture i.e. we would get some kind of info where this lecture took place and whether it was a recording. Thus, this interpretation form Russia Today is in line with my own. Since Mr Trifkovic appears in their broadcasts I assume he considers Russia Today to be a credible network.
Also, Politika didn't publish my counter-response. I don't know where you read my counter-response but I'm sure you couldn't read it in Politika newspaper. Such claims definitely undermine your credibility on this subject.
Mr Gurnemanz,
I never claimed that Mr Trifkovic should address the people who lectured in this military school. I claimed that he should set the record straight with journalists from Wired and Russia Today whose writings were the basis for my claims in this column.
It seems that you are the one slandering here, because your messages are full of false information, not just when it comes to what I said in my counter-response but also when it comes to where you read it.
Doctor Trifkovic is on assignment these days in a country it is better not to mention until he has returned to the dubious safety of Belgrade. I am puzzled and disappointed by Mr. Vojnov's response. First he attributes homicidal statements to Trifkovic and the absurd proposition that he has collaborated with neoconservatives, and then he defends himself by 1) citing second hand sources that he had previously claimed to be significant but prove to be nothing of the kind, and 2) citing proof for trivial things such as that ST lectured here or there or that film clips of him were used. A journalist who relies on articles in Wired is incredibly naive and one who thinks that he can defend himself by saying he is only repeating lies has a very imperfect understanding of the ethics of his trade or the libel laws of developed nations. To exculpate himself and retain even a figleaf of respectability, Vojnov must prove that ST called for the nuclear destruction of Mecca, must prove that he has collaborated with the neocons. If he cannot do this, then he is guilty of lying and libel. His answers so far have contributed nothing to the discussion. This is a sad day for Politika. Perhaps the poor man is suffering under some sort of emotional strain. Otherwise, I cannot understand why he continues to dig his hole deeper and deeper. The problem lies not with his English but with his rationality--and integrity. As Gurnemanz observed, it is time for Vojnov to man up.
Mr Fleming,
You seem to share Mr Trifkovic's belief that this whole column is about him. However, he is just mentioned once and since you probably cannot even read this article (since it is in Serbian) I can't blame you for sharing this misconception. Hopefully, someone will deliver you a fully translated column and I believe that afterwards you may even ask me to write for your magazine. Again, I admit English is not my first language so you have my apologies if these responses are linguistically not on par with your accusations.
On the other hand, since I never doubted your or Trifkovic's rationality and integrity, I remained polite and within confines of this subject, you should act the same way and treat me with respect. After all, you are the host here and you should show me some hospitality.
Since Wired is not a credible source, what do you make of Russia Today, Mr Fleming? Is RT a credible source? If not, why do you host videos made by Russia Today on Trifkovic's page on this very website? Let me remind you that RT - whose videos of ST you host claims - "In another instance, former professor Serge Trifkovic lectured students via video with a curriculum that included footage that supposedly proves that US President Barack Obama is a Muslim." What do you make of this claim?
Bear in mind, I relied on Wired and Russia Today and they may be slanderers but if anyone deserves pressure and insults it is them, not me.
A journalist does not rely on published sources of dubious value when he is attacking a man's reputation. An article in a credible newspaper is one thing, Wired quite another. It is a New Age technology journal with all the usual axes to grind and no serious record in political journalism.
Second, in a matter of this type, a real journalist interviews his victim. Otherwise he is acting as a gossip columnist. It does not matter if you only wrote one sentence of libel in an article of a thousand pages, because you are responsible for what you wrote. You made claims, serious claims, but so far you do not even attempt to back them up.
As for the sentence you quote, perhaps the problem is with your English, because it might mean any number of things. For example, a person can supply a video of his own lecture, whether live or taped, and the people holding the seminar may add things to the curriculum. If you wish, you can express your meaning (of this sentence) in Serbian, and I'll make a stab at translating it.
Since Trifkovic has published thousands of pages on US foreign policy, if his position is that Obama is a Muslim, you should be able to cite his words. As his editor and colleague, I am tolerably familiar with his opinions, and they do not at all resemble your characterization. Have you read his books and articles on Islam? Listened to his academic papers delivered in several languages and in many countries? Other than muddled accounts in RT and Wired, do you have anything to back up your allegations? If I claimed that Vojnov advocated pedophilia and rape, and some one picked up that quotation in Politika, would you feel you had been fairly treated by your publication?
By the way, one might conclude from your remarks that there would be something indecent about Obama being a Muslim or at least your are guilty of a naive credulity in the good faith of politicians. You must know from your own experience of Serbian politicians that they lie most of the time. Ours are no better. We at Chronicles have consistently maintained that we don't know what religion Obama is, and I have insisted repeatedly that if Obama has a god, it is the face he sees in the mirror when he shaves.
Mr. Vojnov, you may be a much better journalist than you seem to be in these exchanges. We all make mistakes in the heat of the moment and then find ourselves making things worse by every attempted justification. I advise you to take a deep breath and calm down. The irrelevant smoke you are laying down will confuse no rational person. You have clearly done wrong and, depending on the vagaries of the Serbian legal system, you or your employer may have to pay for it. It is not up to me to say.
What I can and do say is this. You appear to be showing the face of a regime that claims to be democratic, Western, and based on the rule of law. Your attempt to ruin Trifkovic by innuendo, rumor, bad sources, and guilt-by-association is all too reminiscent of the bad old days of Tito.
In the Milosevic years and later, I met many writers and editors of Politika. I usually disagreed with them, but they were not fools. The first fool I met was a young woman reporter who came to interview after a speech I gave about the USA. Instead of asking questions, she tried to force me to agree with her opinions derived from watching American TV and spending a year or two in New York. I tried to be as nice as I could be, but I had to conclude that the standards of the paper had really slipped, when it permitted such a person to think she was a qualified expert who was entitled to argue with an American scholar and journalist about his own country.
Let me repeat. If you wish to participate in a rational discussion on our website, you simply must provide documentation of your bizarre claims.
It seems to me that Mr. Vojnov English is fairly decent. Although I have not been able to acess the "Politika" article, I don't think that his op ed was intended to slander Dr.T.
Instead, I feel that this is the case of someone "punching out of his weight class". This is a very common problem with journalism from Yugoslavia, as the writers feel pressed to work on stories that satisfy pet peevees of the readers such as the Vatican conspiracy, the great Jihad conspiracy, the Croat anti-Serb conspiracy etc. The "New Standard", which publishes Trifkovic or "Novosti" which does not, practices this type of editorializing just as much as "Politika".
so some writer connects the worng dots. Good knowledge of English is not enough if you are not American to know the difference between Con and Neocon, or who Pat Buchanan is in that part of the world. Thus it all gets bunched up, as after all they must be all on the same side in the end against Jihad, just watch what they are up to with Iran.
The shoddy work with sources dates back to the communist era, when you did not need to know much to succeed, as long as you were connected. I am told that it is still this way, although Mr. Vojnov response to me indicates a willingness to learn, thus there is hope. I hope he apologizes and everyone becomes friends in the end as likelyhood of this episode being rendered as slander in Serbian courts is very slim. The chance of those judges understanding the difference between Con and Neocon are very low.
Frankly, I can't remember when I was 'permitted' but discouraged from taking the train to East Berlin. And points East. But, I am sure it was a long time ago. If Mr. Trifkovic got himself in trouble, good for him. I fondly recall the Eastern European spies posing as ski resort sales managers. They wore bikinis. Of course, they warned us about them. The lovely ladies and beer were warm and memorable. If Mr. Trifkovic is in trouble, I wish him the best of luck. Those vacations were awesome. I'm on my way, my friend. With money, guns and lawyers.
Wow. W. C. Taqiyya you've a sexy name or is it the picture. A character of mine in a novel (only 18 years old) wonders to become a spy-?-why, for whom. Then decides it's boring really, must be residual youthfulness he's almost left behind. Maybe not?
Not many of us, regular Chronicles readers have had the Belgrade daily "Politika" in their hands since the age of 8 (I spent my weekly allowance almost only on buying Politika - and nothing else - there was no money left fo anything else and it was only 25 dinars (about US 5 cents at that time).
Aboslutely correct assertion by Dr. Fleming that Politika was most akin to the NYT - 10 years after I started bying Politika I lived in NYC and started buying the NYT.
However there has never been any long term consistency with Politika - it often leaned towards the ruller's chair even if self-contradicting. It has been owned by Germans for the last 10 or more years and I would not be surprised if some conspiracy theary had actual sound foundations. One of the most promenet contributors to Politika was a school friend of mine (editor in chief, Ljiljana Smajlovic) and she was recently ousted after suggesting that the president (Tadic) at that time had no business publishing his own op-eds on the front page. I am not sure who exactly is running the show now unless it's Ms. Sonia Licht - a Jewish Belgrade resident with Janus type journalistic personality, close to Latinka Perovic (a political Janus, formerly a staunch communist and now a staunch anti-communist). All of this from the horses mouth as my home was about a 2 minutes walk to the main building and the local restaurant (Suamtovac) was a source of many true, half-true and complete falshoods.
In spite of the fact that I never do any spell checking, this time I went heavily overboard. "Horses mouth" should have been horse's mouth. Nothing German on Earth should be capitalized (after 1945). The name of the restaurant where much inspiration was used instead of facts, is properly called Sumatovac.
There was no money left fo anything else (R is badly missing in my own Ebonics English).
My words "conspiracy theary" should probably be patented as mix of theory and theater.
Dr. Pavlovich, thanks for dropping by and offering that bit o' light! I always appreciate your down/on-the-ground observations on Ballan issues.
If I had to rate the Belgrade journalists-op-ed writers, I would go for this list:
1. Teofil Pancic
2. Ana Radmilovic
3. Ljiljana Smajlovic
4. Boris Dezulovic
5. Petar Lukovic
Having said this, choice no.1 is in a class by himself.
Dear Nick Moses,
Many thanks for pretending not to see my hasty spelling and comment on my "2 cents" - I only wish that my comment were more light-hearted - but I am torn between feeling remorseful and ashamed that many billiant people from the country of my birth have been "stone/crucified" by the powers at the helm. However we has reasons for similar sadness here at home. I have struggled to see any objectivity in the US medeia over the last few decades. Whoever is the resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue seems to have the "media's objectivity" surrendered to that address. In that (sad) regard - Serbia is no different, but I believe strongly that the people of the US (some of us naturalized, others native born), as well as the "wicked-evil-hostile-unfriendly Serbians" do have that one vein in common. We are both extremely freedom loving, and we both cherish the freedoms given to us irrespective of what shade of blue, red or gray the media chooses to paint us with. For my money, I enjoy Dr. Wilson's views of the explited South which was the firs prenatal sign of Fascism ("the honest Abe") employed to "save our country." I hope your time in France has brought you many first hand insights into European culture (mainly food and wine) which will make all the more American that you already are. So much for my "third penny", in addition to my first "two cents".
@jack baily,
Every so often (depending on how the winds blow), take a look at Miroslav Lazanski's contributions, in my view he easily makes the top 10 - and it's not the "Hit parade" of the BBC from the 1970s.
@Dimitrije Vojnov,
Would you kindly forego the disrespectful (if not intentional) insults by addressing Dr. Trifkovic and Dr.;Fleming as Mister. This is the same Faiscist strategy which was used (first to my knowledge) by a certain Adolf (Hilter) when he was standing trial, second (chronologiically) by President Slobodan Milosevic who addresses the British born Judge may with disdainful "Mr. May". All that rubbish is a child's ploy to annoy and provoke a reaction from the degrading and demeaning "accidental" mis-use of proper title. Dr. Srdjan Trifkovic is definitely a Ph. D. as is Dr. T. Fleming. I couldn't be too sure about my dentist or my chiropractor. I do have a few friends who happen to be physicians and I call them only by their first names. Your point looses all credibility when you star with these pedestiran blows. I don't what you wrote, or sasid, or didn't write or didn't say - but in this forum you shows that you are (at best) somewhat ill-willed (I am sure I didn' say Hell-bent).
Dr. Iliya Pavlovich
*correction: make that Judge May.