SERBIAN DOCTRINE OF NEUTRALITY:Neither for Ukrainian victims, nor for Russian criminals

Žurnal in English

SERBIAN DOCTRINE OF NEUTRALITY: Neither for Ukrainian victims, nor for Russian criminals

Is it so difficult to say that killing and destruction are evil, that one should be on the side of the victim, and not the criminal, that it is an elementary moral obligation of every honest human being. Distinguishing between attacker and assailant - what is so complicated here?

Neither for Ukrainian victims, nor for Russian criminals

Joseph Brodsky wrote the essay "Tragic Elegiac" about the general state of consciousness in Soviet Russia, marked by "complete atrophy of the ability to call things by their real names." The lack of naming skills is not only characteristic of Russia, but is a basic feature of the state of consciousness in its local replica, which is kept under the name of Serbia. Nothing is harder in our society than saying to the Pope - the Pope, bob - bob, criminal - criminal, evil - that they are evil, and so on.

Thirty-five years of systematic destruction of moral consciousness, mass brainwashing and joint criminal enterprise against common sense and humanity have led to tragic consequences. The needle in the moral compass suffers from dizziness, and the ability to distinguish between good and evil is reduced to the measure of a stunted poppy seed. The increasingly popular doctrine of neutrality over the war in Ukraine speaks in favour of this.

The President of Serbia, Aleksandar Vučić, is ringing all the bells as Serbia pursues an independent and autonomous policy, he is proud of being different from the world that imposed sanctions on Russia, he persistently insists on balancing between the criminal and the victim. He finally managed to talk to his Russian counterpart, he said a historic "yes" to Vladimir Putin, and the landlord, in turn, provided him with a cheap gas supply for the next three years. Nothing is better than being 100% dependent on Russian gas, that is the best precondition for pursuing an independent policy.

On the side of evil and the upsidedown

After the historic agreement, Minister of Police Aleksandar Vulin issued a statement in the form of a panegyric in which he called Vučić "the last free leader in Europe", a man who decided that Serbia "does not participate in anti-Russian hysteria", and concluded that "Vučić knows how much the policy of neutrality costs him personally. " As expected, Vulin is a poltroon over poltroons, and on top of that he is a loyal servant of the Kremlin, Russian oppositionists accuse him of being eavesdropped on by his police while they were in Belgrade, and then handing over transcripts of their conversations to Russian services.

Nothing better can be expected from Vučić and Vulin, they are politicians who started their careers in the Serbian Radical Party and JUL, as very young people, they have always been on the side of evil and the upsidedown, and they have contributed to criminal campaigns and general destruction as much as they could. However, it is strange that Serbia's neutrality is also advocated by opposition politicians, independent journalists, and serious intellectuals, and that it has become quite normal to advocate non-alignment when one country attacks and butchers another sovereign country, killing civilians in masses, destroying towns and villages, and commiting war crimes every divine day.

Petty swindlers

Even those who are in favour of imposing sanctions on Russia are doing so for the wrong reasons. Thus, the leader of the Freedom and Justice Party, Dragan Đilas, says that Serbia should look after its own interests, and "our interest is that Serbia does not remain an isolated country." Three hundred thousand work in the companies of the European Union, Serbia has the largest economic exchange with the EU, so we need to look at the economic calculation and harmonize with the EU policy. According to that logic, if the countries of the European Union attacked a sovereign country tomorrow and started genocide against the population, Serbia should also support that, because it is in its economic interest.

Is it so difficult to say that killing and destruction are evil, that one should be on the side of the victim, and not the criminal, that it is an elementary moral obligation of every honest human being. Distinguish between attacker and assailant - what is so complicated here? No intelligence is needed for that, no knowledge of international politics, only a small mustard seed of conscience is needed. However, Đilas was strongly opposed to any sanctions during the election campaign, so it is naive to expect a serious attitude from him. There is no consistency, morals, political attitude or - far from it - opinion, it all comes down to petty bribery.

Experienced war profiteers

Opposition media are full of newly found neutrality, there are a number of people who think that it is most reasonable to remain neutral, that one should not "opt for Russia or the West over the crisis caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine". However, it is not primarily a choice between Russia and the West, but between the Russian murderous army and the citizens of Ukraine who are victims of aggression. The neutrals are whining about Serbia being a small country that can suffer serious damage if it decides, the story is constantly repeated that we are small, insignificant, poor, and that we should not interfere in clashes of great powers. And Estonia is not small? They can't take any damage? Instead of repeating reckless phrases, it would be better for them to listen a little to what the Prime Minister of Estonia, Kaja Kalas, is saying.

Serbia should not say that Russia is right or that Ukraine is right, some claim. Others say that it would be great if there was room for neutrality, but that is not the case, so Serbia should choose what will cost us less, that we should do the math. By no means do we decide to balance as a player on the wire, and if that is impossible, then see how to use the war in Ukraine for our own benefit, as experienced war profiteers, at least that is not foreign to us, we have rich experience in that economic activity, in that we are unsurpassed champions.

Are you for the Axis Powers or Yugoslavia?

It is a pity that the neutrals are not consistent, so they do not apply their own position to other cases. Are you for Cain or Abel? We really don't want to decide, you know, we are one small country, we would only suffer from that. A neighbour beats a woman. Whose side are you on? I think we should stay neutral, that's not our job anyway. If we have to, we will be on the side of the beaten woman, because we are cooperating with her company. Are you for the Axis Powers or for an attacked Yugoslavia? Just wait until we make a calculation, it's not so easy to decide on one side or the other. It is most reasonable to remain neutral, not even that Tripartite Pact is as black as it seems at first glance or at any other glance.

Hitler and Stalin carried out an aggression against Poland and dismembered it. Who's right? It is difficult to choose, we are not sure what the correct answer is, can a friend helpd? Stalin? Hitler? Ah, yes, maybe we should be on the side of Poland, but that is high international politics, we do not understand these complicated things, and it is not in our interest to decide. We cannot say that Stalin is right, that Hitler is right, or that Poland is right. It is best not to decide, or to wait for what will happen in the end, so that we can join the winner.

There is no neutrality in this world

To be neutral in the face of aggression against a sovereign country means to be on the side of the aggressor. To be neutral means to be against the victim. Not deciding means being on the side of the bully and the criminal. And that is not only true for the war in Ukraine, everything is so obvious that it is pointless to explain. However, you have not been able to explain for decades that killing people because they are of other religions or nations is not something that should be supported and glorified, so it is no wonder that it is difficult to explain who is the aggressor and who is the victim in Ukraine.

There is no neutrality in this world: whoever does not want to decide, supports the powerful, tyrants and bullies. Whoever is not on the side of the murdered is on the side of the killer. Whoever watches calmly while the villains kill, destroy, burn, rape, and rob - is an accomplice. He who does not raise his voice against injustice, supports injustice. He who does not oppose evil, increases the misery in this world that lies in evil.

Everything that is great and significant was created in resistance to the brachial force, in disobeying the law of the stronger, in rebellion against bloodshed, inhumanity and savagery. It seems that an explanation should be sought here for why so few universally valuable achievements have been created in our country. There is no neutrality in this world: either we will be on the side of the persecuted or on the side of the persecutors. Serbia has opted for neutrality that does not exist, completely in line with the tradition it has nurtured for decades. A logical choice for a country that nurtures the cult of force and war criminals, and cares about the notions of good and evil like last year's snow.