Editor's Note: Twenty-six years ago, under the pretext of "preventing a humanitarian disaster," NATO, led by the United States, bypassed the UN Security Council and began a large-scale air strike on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The 78-day bombing resulted in over 2,000 innocent civilians killed, more than 6,000 injured, and nearly one million displaced. Twenty-six years later, the shadow of NATO and the West still looms over Serbia. Since November 2024, Serbia has seen over 660 protests. This wave of anti-Vucic demonstrations sparked by the collapse of the Novi Sad train station canopy has become the largest protest movement in Serbia since Slobodan Milosevic stepped down in 2000. Mr. Gran Matić, former Minister of Information of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, personally experienced the entire process of NATO's bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and played a crucial role in the information war between South League and the West. In response to this, Filip, a Chinese student from Serbia, interviewed him on his Bilibili channel. Observer Network has compiled the text content for your reference. This is Part II. [Part I: This is a war crime, not what they claim as intervention, mistake, or malfunction!] Filip: Twenty-six years after NATO bombed Yugoslavia, how would you analyze NATO's invasion of Yugoslavia if we look back? If we refer to Chinese analysis, the U.S. is often considered the main instigator, but I remember that in our discussions or when you wrote articles, you frequently mentioned Germany, which is rarely seen in Chinese public opinion. Could you please focus on analyzing Germany's role? Gran Matić: When discussing NATO's invasion of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, it is actually linked to the entire 1990s and the civil wars, especially the bombing of the Bosnian Serb Republic by NATO in 1994. Many analysts—whether Western, Eastern, or our own—have been studying the true reasons behind NATO's bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia because any goal achieved through bombing could have been resolved peacefully. At that time, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was open to the West and willing to engage in dialogue with it, but this attitude clearly couldn't satisfy the West's appetite. So there are several perspectives to analyze this issue. Seventeen NATO countries participated in the invasion of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and even people involved in the bombing, like current UN Secretary-General Guterres, who was then the Prime Minister of Portugal, ordered planes to participate in this illegal invasion, completely bypassing the UN. It was nothing but a pure criminal bombing without international law backing it up, only backed by the logic of power. I've written books discussing this issue, and I'm still pondering the real reasons. I think the most important thing in this crisis was Germany's actions, followed by the U.S., then the UK. If we analyze the crisis of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the previous acts of dismemberment, we can see the changes and shifts in the interests and priorities of different countries. I had the opportunity to talk to Milošević, and I was his direct collaborator. Of course, I also interacted with all those involved in the crisis—from the first ones directly involved in 1991 and 1992. Among the high-ranking core personnel with access to intelligence, the senior military leadership of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and its military intelligence department believed that the bombing and squeezing of the Serbs were masterminded by Germany. Maybe Bismarck was the last real leader in Germany who advocated peaceful negotiations with the Serbs, but things changed during the Austro-Hungarian period. Germany joined World War I and stood against the Serbs. During World War II, Nazi Germany not only carried out ethnic massacres against the Serbs in Croatia but also committed such atrocities within Serbia itself. From Kragujevac to various cities, massacres against the Serbs occurred—Belgrade, Mitrovica, and others. When NATO bombed Yugoslavia, the German army also bombed the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, including a series of actions to take Kosovo away from Serbia. Germany actively participated in these actions. Recently, the greatest pressure Germany has exerted on Serbia is related to the Franco-German agreement. Therefore, if we review the history of German-Serbian relations over the past 100 years, Germany has always tried to reduce the territory and influence of Serbia. They have also tried to have German officials command and lead the political processes in Serbia. For instance, there was a German high representative in the Bosnian Serb Republic, and at least the previous high representatives in Bosnia had to go through legal procedures to enact laws and gain parliamentary acceptance, whether through pressure, threats, or other means. Schmidt (the high representative) himself wrote an entire set of legislation, defined himself as the legislator after issuing it, and he was once a failed politician in Germany, having served as defense minister, agriculture minister, and assistant in other departments, now a quasi-retired official. Privately, he pushed for legislation. Behind him was Berlin's radical anti-Serbian policy, which is the first dimension of this event. The second dimension is that Germany put a lot of effort into mobilizing other countries. The 1990s were America's era, starting with the information revolution and enhanced military strength. Especially after the Gulf War, almost all Western countries revolved around the U.S. Without consulting external parties, NATO began its eastward expansion. The information revolution provided the U.S. with about a decade of economic development window, and globally, the information revolution became an important tool for spreading Western political concepts overseas, namely their global liberalism or liberal globalism, making the U.S. the world's sole superpower. In this context, Germany, as an economic giant, also aligned with the U.S. and jointly launched a series of anti-Serb policies. I don't have direct evidence, but our military department can confirm. Germany financially supported the Clinton family and other American families to push forward its own geopolitical policies, particularly regarding the Balkans. Filip: Can we conclude that Germany lobbied the U.S. to adopt a more aggressive policy towards Yugoslavia? Gran Matić: Let me tell you something. Around 2010, I went to Russia for personal work reasons. By then, I was no longer involved in politics. Upon arriving in Russia, someone I had never met before greeted me—I knew of his existence but hadn't met him, and I didn't even know how he found out I was in Russia. At that time, he was an advisor to then-Russian President Medvedev, responsible for Balkan affairs. He had been the Chief of Staff during the dissolution of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. His name was Kadijević. He lived in Moscow and said he wanted to pass on a message to me. This message was something he couldn't share with anyone else because he rarely left Moscow. We talked for over five hours, and the core of our conversation was that he said, remember, Serbia is not entirely hostile to the Albanian and Croatian ethnic groups in this world. Of course, there are always radicals, but the public doesn't have and shouldn't have such emotions. Even the U.S. and Croatia aren't really our enemies; our opponent is Germany. All those local forces that want to dismember the Serbs—whether it's the Albanian ethnic group in Kosovo or the Ustasha right-wing forces in Croatia, or other countries' bizarre policies, and those countries that behaved strangely during the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and were particularly unfriendly to the Serbs, like Slovenia in the EU today—they are all agents of Germany. They only adopt strongly anti-Serbian policies when Germany gives orders. Without Germany, they could all be friends with Serbia, and everyone could coexist peacefully. This is the stance of the late General Vlajko Kadijević. I think he had information even more extensive than our country's intelligence agencies. During Tito's time, Yugoslavia had a world-class intelligence agency that had very friendly cooperation with China and maintained good relations with all countries. If Germany hadn't mixed its interests into the crisis of the former Yugoslav region, the whole situation might have been very different. This is part of Germany's geopolitical strategy formed since the 1930s, which is still pushing such strategies today. They call it "penetration toward the southeast," and the core consideration in this geopolitical dimension is to reach the Balkans, the warm-water area of the Adriatic Sea, and this large region of Croatia. Serbia is their biggest obstacle, which is our core problem today. When talking about Western chaos, we can see some disorder within the U.S., Germany, and other Western countries; unfortunately, our country's situation isn't stable either. Moreover, due to Western non-governmental organizations, opposition parties, and Western influence—referring to cultural influence—penetrating Serbia from the 1990s to the post-2000 period, what do you think of the current situation in Serbia? From a historical comparative analysis perspective, the Western world now resembles Europe before entering modern politics. I've written two books with specific analyses that will soon be published. I compare the situations in the 16th century and now in the West. What are we facing now? Social-political transformation, legal transformation, geopolitical relationship transformation... The world ten years from now will be completely different, with major changes in geopolitical relationships, and even national political systems may change. Many things will change, and these processes always carry pain. Unfortunately, those who should take responsibility are often not the ones who pay the price; it's a particularly chaotic process. Now looking at the U.S., they have some new geopolitical considerations. If the U.S. International Development Agency can be canceled or at least its activities restricted, if Free Europe Radio or Voice of America can be shut down—Free Europe Radio is near my home in Prague, just a kilometer from my house, not in one building but a complex, you understand? It's a media empire with unimaginable resources, a bunch of journalists, and connections to various media outlets, and we don't even know who they're connected to. It's far beyond a mere media institution, who knows what the future holds. The key change is that there won't be a single pole, nor will there be a "pope" constantly commanding you every day like Martin Luther came in the 16th century, causing a big change in the Western Christian world. So, from this chaos, a new geopolitical power structure and global order will emerge. I don't know where Trump will go; it's hard for anyone to tell you what Trump will do. For example, when Russian philosopher Dugin spoke, he said that the deep state behind Trump is even deeper than the traditional understanding of the deep state. They realized that the original system basically had no benefits left, so they pushed Trump out again, but there must be a system supporting him with its own interests, which we may not fully understand, but one thing is certain: liberal globalization and the submissive mentality of Europe will end. On the day Trump took office, Scholz lost power in Germany, followed by the resignation of the Portuguese prime minister. There will be a domino effect in Europe, and those European governments are proxy institutions of the liberal world. Their core proxy symbol was once Biden, but he wasn't the core leader. I think we need to stay rational. As I said earlier, the core competitor of Serbia as a nation is still Germany; we sometimes don't quite understand Britain's interests, but they haven't caused as much harm as Germany. The key lies in what kind of interests Trump and Germany will reach on the Balkan issue and what kind of talks will happen in the future Ukraine-Russia war. During the process of resolving the Ukrainian issue, we need to see if other issues will also be resolved. Local time on February 18, Russian and American delegations held talks in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on the Ukraine-Russia war. CCTV Now analysts believe, and some of my friends have told me, that since October last year, high-level military personnel from the U.S. and Russia have been in contact in Switzerland, discussing how to resolve the Ukrainian issue and other topics. As a Serbian, I care about where Serbia's issues stand? Will they be placed on which negotiation table? Will they be included in various geopolitical changes? For example, Russia might say, we abandoned Assad and Syria in a few days, so you abandon over there, and we abandon here, and so on. We don't know what they will eventually agree on, but undoubtedly, we need to maintain the unity of the patriotic front; whether there is unity among the Serbian people remains to be seen. Only unity can create a moat to block various unfavorable geopolitical moves. Without unity, someone will cause trouble. Local time on March 11, Donald Trump Jr. met with Vučić. "X" Unfortunately, there are student marches and other events. I have written books about color revolutions, and some people you might know better than me. But anyone who understands color revolutions wouldn't believe they are spontaneous. I don't believe these are sudden, spontaneous coincidental social phenomena. Rarely are there purely spontaneous social activities. French scholar Le Bon wrote a classic book, "Crowds" from the late 19th century. All leaders dealing with crowds will read it. The theories argued in this book have appeared in our country too, not just as theory, but various methods of manipulating crowds have been practiced, a set of behaviors manipulating the populace against the regime. But unfortunately, the current situation in Serbia is that the government has given too many reasons for the scale of these protests to grow larger, which is the core problem. As a Serbian citizen, although I currently don't live in Serbia, I have to admit that some of the students' demands do have merit. They say there is corruption in the country, and it reaches the highest levels. They are not wrong; they hope this situation can be effectively addressed. Currently, corruption is the biggest internal risk for Serbia, far exceeding external risks. I think President Vučić made some mistakes. Four months ago, when it started, he should have used more emotion and time to deal with this issue, satisfying some demands and focusing the anti-corruption efforts on people within his circle, rather than officials three or four layers removed, especially those within his party. From my perspective, I also know President Vučić personally, and I think his situation is quite difficult. He seems like a hostage to the people around him. Because of their existence, Vučić cannot fully meet the students' demands—the reasonable ones. What they call transition government, technical government is nonsense—I apologize for using the word "nonsense"—but these demands have nothing to do with democracy and the rule of law. In the current system, the government needs parliamentary confirmation and authorization. If parliament cannot confirm, then new elections should be held to elect a new parliament and government. Like the transitional government in Macedonia before, Syria came to power with a former "terrorist" and now proudly says I am the president. Is this democracy? Serbia won't have such a script. Serbia still has national traditions, at least deeper than those of some countries, especially Macedonia. In Serbia, it's impossible to come to power through violence, except for the "color revolution" in 2000. I think Vučić needs to change his attitude towards his circle and have a good talk with the students, meeting their reasonable demands. These demands are not just from the students but also reflect the dissatisfaction of many other people. I think Vučić should use a stick or broom to clean up some people around him to restore authority to the institutions and to himself. Currently, the students are not asking for Vučić to resign but hoping he will act according to the powers granted by the constitution and let the system function. This way, those bodies with elements of "color revolution" will also be disarmed because they will lose their handle to incite the masses to overthrow the country. Currently, the situation in Serbia is rare in the world. Students are dissatisfied with both the ruling party and the opposition, and even more so with the opposition. This is a new phenomenon. Perhaps similar situations will gradually appear in European countries. A large-scale march will take place in the Czech Republic in early May, possibly involving 200,000 people. In Europe, we will see large numbers of dissatisfied people taking to the streets, hoping to see new faces, new rules, new politics, new values, and ethics. When it comes to corruption in Serbia, it's not unique to Serbia; it comes from the EU and Western countries. We can even see Ursula von der Leyen sending messages to Pfizer and other large enterprises about huge profits. The actions of Brussels are unimaginable. If future times are more rational, what Brussels is doing now will certainly be remembered. Filip: Thank you very much for your sharing. I hope we will see each other again soon. Image source: https://p3-sign.toutiaoimg.com/tos-cn-i-tjoges91tu/TVhclbhBRMKeyG~tplv-tt-origin-web:gif.jpeg?_iz=58558&from=article.pc_detail&lk3s=953192f4&x-expires=1747882032&x-signature=JF65ikkCBWHKxtKBExngj6KkjqA%3D This article is an exclusive article from Guancha Network. The content is solely the author's opinion and does not represent the platform's views. Unauthorized reproduction will result in legal consequences. Follow Guancha Network WeChat account guanchacn for daily interesting articles. Original link: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7504471115876631094/ Disclaimer: This article represents the author's personal views. Feel free to express your opinions by clicking the 'like/dislike' buttons below.