Yougoslavie, suicide d'une nation européenne
Original title: The Death of Yugoslavia
- TV Mini Series
- 1995–1996
- 50m
IMDb RATING
8.6/10
1.4K
YOUR RATING
This documentary series covers the struggles of the Yugoslavian people during the collapse of their country, and the subsequent wars to finally find hope with the signing of the Final Peace ... Read allThis documentary series covers the struggles of the Yugoslavian people during the collapse of their country, and the subsequent wars to finally find hope with the signing of the Final Peace Accords.This documentary series covers the struggles of the Yugoslavian people during the collapse of their country, and the subsequent wars to finally find hope with the signing of the Final Peace Accords.
- Won 1 BAFTA Award
- 1 win & 1 nomination total
Browse episodes
Featured reviews
As I am very interested in the wars in the former Yugoslavia I watched this quite famous series and expected an unbiased series which would deliver a lot of facts. However in this regard the series is very disappointing as it does not deliver facts but instead speculations and assumptions are shown as undeniable facts.
The series consists mainly of interviews with the main leaders of the warring factions and the UN representatives. This is the best part about this series as it shows us the different opinions on the events that happened. In between this interviews a narrator tells the viewer what happened and here this series fails on many occasions as it quite often presents assumptions as facts or tells us about the intentions behind certain events but completely lacks evidence for this. The most obvious assumption is the alleged deal between Milosevic and Tudjman about the division of Bosnia. The series tells us that this deal was the main reason for the war in Bosnia. What it does not tell us is that there is no evidence for such a deal. Mesic and Karadzic are interviewed about this deal however they both were not present during the Milosevic/Tudjman meeting. Moreover the director of this series, probably to support his thesis shows us the meeting right before the war in Bosnia, however the meeting took place before the war in Croatia. Also Tudjman's comment about Bosnia was intensified by the not very exact translation. When he said that "another" option was the division of Bosnia, it was translated by the narrator as "the only option" was the division. I realized the same thing several times while watching this series, that certain statements were intensified by a slightly inaccurate translation (I watched the German version, maybe the others are more accurate).
On other occasions the series is very one sided and superficial, for instance when it tells that the Serbs were afraid of Croatia because the Croat Coat of arms (the red and white checkerboard) was used during WWII. The series does not loose a single word on the fact that the checkerboard was used for hundreds of years, even in Yugoslavia, which renders the narrator's thesis that the checkerboard was the equivalent to the swastika completely wrong (Actually the U was the equivalent to the swastika).
In the end this series is interesting because of the interviews and some interesting footage, which is the reason why i gave it 3 out of 10. I do not agree with the previous reviewer that the documentary is flawed because of this. There is no ultimate truth about Yugoslavia, so by interviewing people from each side you get as close as possible. Another way would be to deliver facts like documents or audio/video footage to support the comments by the narrator on certain events and here this series fails almost completely.
The series consists mainly of interviews with the main leaders of the warring factions and the UN representatives. This is the best part about this series as it shows us the different opinions on the events that happened. In between this interviews a narrator tells the viewer what happened and here this series fails on many occasions as it quite often presents assumptions as facts or tells us about the intentions behind certain events but completely lacks evidence for this. The most obvious assumption is the alleged deal between Milosevic and Tudjman about the division of Bosnia. The series tells us that this deal was the main reason for the war in Bosnia. What it does not tell us is that there is no evidence for such a deal. Mesic and Karadzic are interviewed about this deal however they both were not present during the Milosevic/Tudjman meeting. Moreover the director of this series, probably to support his thesis shows us the meeting right before the war in Bosnia, however the meeting took place before the war in Croatia. Also Tudjman's comment about Bosnia was intensified by the not very exact translation. When he said that "another" option was the division of Bosnia, it was translated by the narrator as "the only option" was the division. I realized the same thing several times while watching this series, that certain statements were intensified by a slightly inaccurate translation (I watched the German version, maybe the others are more accurate).
On other occasions the series is very one sided and superficial, for instance when it tells that the Serbs were afraid of Croatia because the Croat Coat of arms (the red and white checkerboard) was used during WWII. The series does not loose a single word on the fact that the checkerboard was used for hundreds of years, even in Yugoslavia, which renders the narrator's thesis that the checkerboard was the equivalent to the swastika completely wrong (Actually the U was the equivalent to the swastika).
In the end this series is interesting because of the interviews and some interesting footage, which is the reason why i gave it 3 out of 10. I do not agree with the previous reviewer that the documentary is flawed because of this. There is no ultimate truth about Yugoslavia, so by interviewing people from each side you get as close as possible. Another way would be to deliver facts like documents or audio/video footage to support the comments by the narrator on certain events and here this series fails almost completely.
I couldn't get through very much of it as I clearly understood the documentary's agenda which of course is extremely obvious considering it is made by the BBC. It's the same reason why don't they do a doc series on the BIRTH of Tito's Yugoslavia- the greatest era by far for that region. Oh yeah because it doesn't serve the needs of Western Imperialists. Not even sure why I'm bothering with this western made crap.
This is a great 5 part documentary narrated by Christiane Amanpour about the Origins and Results of the Balkan Wars of the 1990s. It starts out following Milosevic and his break with Communist Party policy by supporting Serb nationalists in Kosovo. Slovenia was the 1st republic to oppose him and broke off with a short relatively minor war in 1991. Then came Croatia with a rising nationalist mentality of its own led by Franjo Tudjman. This war was much fiercer as the town of Vukovar was annihilated. Then a secret deal was reached between Tudjman and Milosevic to divide Bosnia between themselves launching the genocidal war there in 1992.
All the leaders are interviewed including psychiatrist-war criminal Karadzic (no contradiction there--we know Nazi concentration camps were run by psychiatrists, and we know the destructive effects of the psychiatric industry on humankind). Also Mladic, the general handpicked by Milosevic to take over the genocide operation in Bosnia. Here we get all the main incidents, including the Belgrade debates and power struggles within the party, the Serb sniper at Sarajevo's Holiday Inn, and finally an in-depth look at what happened at Srebrenica. The UN went in there and made it a "safe zone" only to abandon it to Mladic and his mass killers. And as we speak Mladic and Karadzic are safe and comfy in Republika Srbska. --Update: the two are now in the Hague awaiting sentencing for genocide.
Also importantly Bush the Elder is shown with James Baker after his own wars in Iraq and Panama, saying they have no interest in Bosnia, since they didn't care about saving lives; only taking them. And then Clinton came and didn't do much either until the war was winding down in 1995.
All the leaders are interviewed including psychiatrist-war criminal Karadzic (no contradiction there--we know Nazi concentration camps were run by psychiatrists, and we know the destructive effects of the psychiatric industry on humankind). Also Mladic, the general handpicked by Milosevic to take over the genocide operation in Bosnia. Here we get all the main incidents, including the Belgrade debates and power struggles within the party, the Serb sniper at Sarajevo's Holiday Inn, and finally an in-depth look at what happened at Srebrenica. The UN went in there and made it a "safe zone" only to abandon it to Mladic and his mass killers. And as we speak Mladic and Karadzic are safe and comfy in Republika Srbska. --Update: the two are now in the Hague awaiting sentencing for genocide.
Also importantly Bush the Elder is shown with James Baker after his own wars in Iraq and Panama, saying they have no interest in Bosnia, since they didn't care about saving lives; only taking them. And then Clinton came and didn't do much either until the war was winding down in 1995.
10Oldboy69
This documentary is great. It gave me insight into things I never knew, even though I live in the region (Slovenia). I have seen the war and the first helicopter was shot down in front of my very eyes. I have participated in the war by working on the local radio station, informing the public on the events in real time around the clock, my grandfather and father were in the Yugoslav army, and my grandparents are Serbs from Belgrade. So I guess I can say I have some insight in the matter.
It is absolutely untrue and unfair to say that this documentary was "written by the winners". Calling the genocide at Srebrenica an error on the UN or NATO part is outright ridiculous. This sentiment of cutting some slack to Serbians (as well as Croatians) on account of UN and NATO not reacting is just the reflection of the anti-west mentality (all capitalists are bad, so they have to be responsible) ever present in these parts.
It is hard to say what constitutes a legitimate threat to the security of the region (trigger for NATO action). Should NATO attack England on account of having issues in Ireland or Turkey for its treatment of the Kurds? Or should UN secure the borders of Catalonia, Padania or Basque country? It's not something you just get into without a really serious reason. But growing new fascistic regime in the region is a legitimate threat and something Europeans remember bitterly. This is why Europeans were reluctant to act. Last thing we need is another wave of Red Brigades in Europe.
All original materials for the documentary (full transcripts and so on) are publicly available (for research purposes) at King's College London (http://www.kcl.ac.uk/lhcma/cats/yugoslavia/xd20-0.htm), so any implication that this was some western plot to rewrite history in ridiculous.
So, if you are interested in the matter, this documentary is as good as it gets. No Michael Moorish one-sided human interest stories with sad endings. I's about background and political games of the people that actually made it happen, and others that made it stop.
It is absolutely untrue and unfair to say that this documentary was "written by the winners". Calling the genocide at Srebrenica an error on the UN or NATO part is outright ridiculous. This sentiment of cutting some slack to Serbians (as well as Croatians) on account of UN and NATO not reacting is just the reflection of the anti-west mentality (all capitalists are bad, so they have to be responsible) ever present in these parts.
It is hard to say what constitutes a legitimate threat to the security of the region (trigger for NATO action). Should NATO attack England on account of having issues in Ireland or Turkey for its treatment of the Kurds? Or should UN secure the borders of Catalonia, Padania or Basque country? It's not something you just get into without a really serious reason. But growing new fascistic regime in the region is a legitimate threat and something Europeans remember bitterly. This is why Europeans were reluctant to act. Last thing we need is another wave of Red Brigades in Europe.
All original materials for the documentary (full transcripts and so on) are publicly available (for research purposes) at King's College London (http://www.kcl.ac.uk/lhcma/cats/yugoslavia/xd20-0.htm), so any implication that this was some western plot to rewrite history in ridiculous.
So, if you are interested in the matter, this documentary is as good as it gets. No Michael Moorish one-sided human interest stories with sad endings. I's about background and political games of the people that actually made it happen, and others that made it stop.
Whoever translated the Bosnian, Croatian, and Serbian portions of this program into English ought to be ashamed of themselves. There are so many instances where the meaning of the speakers' words is obscured or distorted. Here are just a few examples:
-------------
Speaker: "They simply could not believe their eyes, how it could all have been filmed in the offices in which they were conferring not conferring, in which they were talking about the heinous crimes that they want to commit."
Subtitles: "They could not believe their eyes! They had been filmed planning murder and treason."
-------------
Speaker: "They have an ethnically pure republic, they have no territorial disputes."
Subtitles: "It was an ethnically pure republic - no Serbs."
-------------
Speaker: "I asked him if they are aware that they chose war."
Subtitles: "I said: 'This means war'."
-------------
Speaker: "Until then, I never in my life saw a man who was as scared as him. I think that in a period of 30 minutes, he went to the toilet 10 times. Most likely he got, uh, diarrhea or something similar."
Subtitles: "I have never seen a man so scared. He went to the toilet ten times. Perhaps it was something he had for lunch."
-------------
Such shoddy translation might be acceptable for a Hollywood action film, but it completely ruined what could have been an excellent war documentary.
-------------
Speaker: "They simply could not believe their eyes, how it could all have been filmed in the offices in which they were conferring not conferring, in which they were talking about the heinous crimes that they want to commit."
Subtitles: "They could not believe their eyes! They had been filmed planning murder and treason."
-------------
Speaker: "They have an ethnically pure republic, they have no territorial disputes."
Subtitles: "It was an ethnically pure republic - no Serbs."
-------------
Speaker: "I asked him if they are aware that they chose war."
Subtitles: "I said: 'This means war'."
-------------
Speaker: "Until then, I never in my life saw a man who was as scared as him. I think that in a period of 30 minutes, he went to the toilet 10 times. Most likely he got, uh, diarrhea or something similar."
Subtitles: "I have never seen a man so scared. He went to the toilet ten times. Perhaps it was something he had for lunch."
-------------
Such shoddy translation might be acceptable for a Hollywood action film, but it completely ruined what could have been an excellent war documentary.
Did you know
- TriviaInterviews from the series have been used by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in war crimes prosecutions.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Barend en Van Dorp: Episode dated 14 May 1999 (1999)
- How many seasons does The Death of Yugoslavia have?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- The Death of Yugoslavia
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime
- 50m
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 4:3
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content