Military Review English Edition November-December 2014 | Page 127
GENOCIDE
“limited war of pacification,” and a “genocidal war of
pacification.” In shaping the concept of ethnic cleansing
and genocide, Naimark makes other useful distinctions and generalizations. For instance, throughout the
work the author sees most recent conflicts, as opposed
to ancient hatreds, to be causal to ethnic cleansing.
He states, “Comparative reflection on the problems of
ethnic cleansing also leads to the conclusion that each
case must be understood in its full complexity, in its
own immediate context, rather than merely as part of a
long-term historical conflict between nations.”
The comparatively recent conflict that took place
in the Balkans during 1990 provides an example.
Naimark notes that though the Serbs deliberately
roused glorified memories of Milos Obilic—a medieval Serbian knight who figured prominently in the
war between Serbs and the Ottoman Empire and
whose memory was well-polished by the centuries
since 1389—to mobilize nationalist fervor against
Albanians and Croats, the causes for conflict were
actually proximate.3
He asserts, “ the brutal, uncompromising nature
…
of the struggle in Croatia and later in Bosnia and
Kosovo in the 1990s had much more to do with the
history of the region since 1940 … than it did with
the inheritance of the distant past.” Thus, he does not
attribute the violence mainly to any ancient history
of animosity between ethnic groups, but asserts that
the main causes of that conflict were recent in origin,
which “can be traced to Turkish and Armenian reactions to the loss of the Ottoman lands in the Balkan
Wars of 1912-13.” This insistence that genocide stems
from recent and current causes of hatred, regardless of
the past, is one of his key leitmotifs.
In terms of style, Naimark refrains from condemning those nations or agencies that stood by and did not
intervene in genocides. Rather, his narrative unfolds
with relative objectivity from the ground-level perspective of individual victims and perpetrators. When
he refers to interveners, he tells stories of neighbors,
not nations. For example, he describes the actions
of Serbians who assisted their Croat neighbors, or
of Turks who hid Armenian women. Consequently,
Naimark rarely refers to instances in which organizations failed to intervene. Only anomalously does he
mention Dutch peacekeepers who “stood aside as the
Bosnian Serbs advanced” at Srebrenica.
MILITARY REVIEW November-December 2014
Some critics misinterpret Naimark’s approach. For
example, Baron describes Naimark’s narrative as unduly pessimistic and “dismal.”4 However, I disagree. Baron
has not fully accounted for the nature of the subject
matter in his analysis. Ethnic cleansing and genocide
can only ever be gloomy topics. Taken in this context,
Fires of Hatred is not a pessimistic prediction that
future genocides are unavoidable.
On the contrary, it is a book that is respectful and
deliberately measured, while still challenging the
reader’s moral sensibilities. Naimark invokes a sense
of horror without sensationalizing, as when he reflects
on the use of terror endemic to ethnic cleansing: the
chopped off ears and fingers, the brandings, the mutilated genitals, the brains of babies splattered against
walls, the gauntlets victims are forced to run, and
the sexual assaults. The litany of abuses is unending,
and it repeats itself from case to case throughout the
century.4
Naimark closes with a warning, “Does the international community have the will to act promptly and
decisively? If not, the horrors recounted in this book
will surely happen again.”5 This admonition is the only
homily in the book, and it is made all the more impactful by the history Naimark recounted so remarkably
well. Fires of Hatred is a thorough, discerning, and
eloquent work on a dismal subject. However, it is not
sensationalized or maudlin.
Even the title, Fires of Hatred, demonstrates
Naimark’s effort to appeal to the intellect rather than
the emotion. As such, it is an indispensable resource
for any scholar studying mass atrocities and ethnic
cleansing.
Chaplain (Maj.) Mark Beals, U.S. Army, Fort
Polk, Louisiana
Notes
1. Ara Sanjian, “Review of Fires of Hatred; Ethnic Cleansing
in Twentieth Century Europe,” Bulletin of the Royal Institute of
Inter-Faith Studies, 5(1)(Spring/Summer 2003): 3, http://www.
academia.edu/838318/Norman_Naimark_Fires_of_Hatred_Ethnic_Cleansing_in_Twentieth-Century_Europe_2003_book_review_in_English_.
2. Nick P. Baron, “Review of Fires of Hatred; Ethnic Cleansing
in Twentieth Century Europe,” School of History and Classics,
University of Manchester published on H-Genocide March,
2004, 2, https://networks.h-net.org/node/3180/reviews/6267/
125