By Milovan Pisarri
Research Associate of the Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory
Dragoljub Draža Mihailović was a war criminal. Dragoljub Draža Mihailović was a collaborator with the occupiers. Dragoljub Draža Mihailović was a traitor. These are historical facts proven by hundreds of documents, testimonies, and scholarly works published both in Serbia and abroad. This is the historical truth that must not be questioned.
The same applies to the Yugoslav Army in the Homeland, also known as the Chetniks, or the Ravna Gora movement—whatever we choose to call them. Hundreds of documents, testimonies, and scholarly works have long confirmed on whose side they fought, who their enemies were, and what their political plan was. Everything is publicly available, the archives are open, and much has been published in digital form.
Inescapable evidence
The shameful history of the Chetnik movement and its commander, Draža Mihailović, could be presented in school textbooks with very simple words. If I had the chance to do so, I would write: “The Yugoslav Army in the Homeland, whose members were known as the Ravna Gora movement or Chetniks under the command of Colonel Dragoljub Mihailović, was a military, royalist, and nationalist organization that emerged after the defeat of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia’s army with the aim of continuing the fight against the occupiers. Its liberation character was soon replaced by opportunistic collaboration with Axis forces: as early as the fall of 1941, fearing that the communists posed a greater threat than the occupiers themselves, the Chetniks chose to fight against the anti-fascist partisan movement led by the Communist Party of Yugoslavia. To that end, they repeatedly made agreements for active cooperation with German, Italian, Ustaše forces, as well as Milan Nedić’s government against the partisans, and they executed captured partisans and their sympathizers, either in special operations or in massacres like the one in the village of Vranić near Belgrade. At the same time, they developed an extreme nationalist ideology that led to ethnic cleansing and mass killings, primarily targeting the Muslim population in Sandžak and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Pushed back by the partisans and the National Liberation Army, the Chetnik forces withdrew in September 1944 along with other Serbian collaborators, covering the retreat of the German army. In the same month, under pressure from the U.S. and British allies due to their ongoing collaboration with the enemy, King Peter II withdrew all support for Dragoljub Mihailović and recognized Josip Broz Tito as the sole legitimate leader of the liberation struggle, calling on all fighters to join his command.”
Very clear, simple, and all based on the mentioned documents, testimonies, and scholarly works. So how is it possible that in 2024, Chetniks are still being spoken of as heroes, anti-fascists, and patriots? How is it possible that young generations are growing up with the belief that they are a positive example and a role model for Serbia and the Serbian people? How is it possible that there are streets and monuments dedicated to Chetniks in Serbia and Republika Srpska? How is it possible that the mayor of Belgrade can propose building a monument to Dragoljub Mihailović in the centre of Belgrade today?
The story isn’t very complicated. The Chetnik ideology, like many other nationalist ideologies, and even fascist ones, survived World War II. Its prominent members fled abroad and continued to cultivate the cult of royalist anti-communist forces. Along with that, they also nurtured the hope of returning and establishing the Greater Serbia that many had dreamed of even before World War II, which the Chetniks, despite lacking their own state, attempted to achieve. The opportunity arose at the end of the 1980s. Amidst the economic, political, and social crisis of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, nationalism flared up, and as always in such situations, the elites used it to achieve their goals. In Serbia’s first multiparty elections, parties that openly invoked the Chetnik experience and the legacy of Dragoljub Mihailović appeared. During the wars in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, that kind of Serbian nationalism continued where the Chetniks had left off in 1945 (and yes, it’s clear that Croatian nationalism did the same, and Serbian nationalism wasn’t the sole cause of the war).
The entire decade unfolded in the spirit of nationalism: the socialists in power used it opportunistically, while for the opposition, it was one of the main tools in the effort to overthrow Slobodan Milošević’s regime. This is when the drastic revision of history began, demonizing socialist Yugoslavia, communism, and Tito, while glorifying Serbia, monarchism, the Chetniks, and Draža. The final step in nationalists’ takeover of the political and public sphere came with their victory in the 2000 presidential and parliamentary elections. Nationalism then captured the state, and thus, power. From that point on, the revision of history became institutionalized: laws were changed, textbooks rewritten, and street names altered. The Chetniks were rehabilitated. Efforts were made to locate the remains of Dragoljub Mihailović. Monuments to Chetnik leaders were erected. The political fabrication of a new history quickly gained momentum.
The grueling work of historians
However, to achieve this, it was necessary to gather strong evidence to support the truth of their narrative. And it was precisely these pieces of evidence that historians provided, through grueling work that many of them viewed as a mission in both their professional and private lives. The problem is that the passion they invested in this effort overshadowed everything they had learned during their studies. Namely, in the sea of publications produced by these new historians with the goal of justifying the political rehabilitation of the Chetniks and Dragoljub Mihailović, history was no longer a subject of analysis but became a drawer from which they needed to extract any trace that could confirm a preconceived hypothesis. These historians, in fact, have always done and continue to do what a historian must never do: they search only for evidence that will confirm their initial thesis, while ignoring all the evidence that contradicts it. This is why Draža is considered a hero: because these historians isolate and highlight only what suits them and deliberately suppress everything else.
And, of course, like small children, they persistently repeat their lies. Draža was the first guerrilla fighter in Europe, Draža was an anti-fascist, Draža was a recognized leader abroad, Draža was a good man. These notorious lies can be repeated endlessly by these historians only in this country (and in the Republic of Srpska), where politics and historiography perform a romantic waltz while responsibility and science sink in the all-encompassing collapse of values and professionalism. There are two possible explanations for this: either these historians are extremely limited, or they align with the nationalist politics they promote, which their hero Dragoljub Mihailović also upheld. And while it would be comforting to believe the first explanation is true, unfortunately, the likelihood is that the answer lies in the second.
Given all of this, it is clear that everything happening, including the proposal to erect a monument to Draža Mihailović, should not come as a surprise. It is merely another act in the process of normalizing the Chetnik ideology, which has been ongoing for the past thirty years. In this process, historians bear significant responsibility: through their political, rather than scientific, work, they have butchered Serbian historiography. They have disfigured the goddess Clio, the muse of history, turning history into tabloid writing that respects neither methodology nor professional standards. These historians will surely compete to write the inscription for the plaque that (I assume) will be placed next to the future monument to Draža. My advice is for them to choose one of his famous quotes. Perhaps: “In Sandžak, we liquidated all the Turks in the villages except in the small towns” (Draža Mihailović’s dispatch from February 18, 1943).
(Radar, 03.10.2024)
https://radar.nova.rs/drustvo/milovan-pisari-spomenik-drazi-mihailovicu/