This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Croat鈥揃osniak War article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources:聽 Google ( books聽路 news聽路 scholar聽路 free images聽路 WP聽refs)聽路 FENS聽路 JSTOR聽路 TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Croat鈥揃osniak War. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Croat鈥揃osniak War at the Reference desk. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from Toti膰 kidnapping was copied or moved into [[]]. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
It is not true that Josipovi膰 apologized "for Croatia's involvement in efforts to divide Bosnia and Herzegovina" as you state it. If you follow the link by the text you can find real text of appologie: ".. I deeply regret that these politics contributed to the deaths of people and divisions that still haunt us." So he's not talking about division of Bosnia, he is talking about nationalism as predominant ideologie what caused war and suffering. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.141.62.173 ( talk) 10:32, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
I want user Alan.Ford to explain his mass removal of referenced sections. I am unable to understand what or how this is an explanation: "are you kidding me? you haven't even read the article, haven't you realised that you put wrong paragraph into wrong section with false data? April 1993 comes after December 1992, not before". What I don't understand is: 1) "you haven't even read the article" -- what article are you talking about? 2) "wrong paragraph into wrong section" --what paragraph and what section? Explain 3) "With false data" --please explain what is false data. If you can make such a bold claim, you need to back it up. 4) What you are talking about with regards to "April 1993 comes after December 1992".
I do not want an edit war with anyone. However, blanking entire paragraphs is a form of type of vandalism. With serious accusations thrown at my sourced edits, I want an explanation on what is so horrendous that Wikipedia would justify mass removal. -- Jesuislafete ( talk) 18:53, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
As I said in my previous comment Jesuislafete's edits are based on nationalistic propaganda, all my effort is to preserve consistency of the article based on WP:RS. Jesuislafete hasnt even read this article. He just included Croatian nationalistic POVs in the middle of background section destroying hronology of the events. Don't be silly man. It's so obvious. Alan.Ford.Jn ( talk) 12:31, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
I suggest that we go sentence by sentence, you already destroyed the concept of the article, even timline, with the large amount of nationalistic trash. So, please tell me which would be the first sentence that you would like to add, based on WP:RS. Alan.Ford.Jn ( talk) 14:47, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
::In April 1993 and early summer 1993, ABiH 3rd Corps units launched a series of heavy attacks against the HVO. On April 16 in the village of Trusina, members of the ABiH army sqaud called "Zulfikar" killed 18 Croat civilians and 4 soldiers. [1] [2] According to witness testimony, the unit rounded up a group of Croat residents captured soldiers, bound and shot them. A member of the Zulfikar unit, Rasema Handanovic, admitted taking part in the murders under orders from commander Nihad Bojadzic who ordered the killing of the prisoners and 鈥渘ot to leave any survivors鈥. [3]
::The series of attacks culminated in a massive attack between 7 June and 13 June 1993 within, among others, the municipalities of Kakanj, Travnik and Zenica. [4] The ABiH 3rd Corps attacked towns and villages, subjecting predominantly Bosnian Croat, but also Bosnian Serb civilians, including women, children, the elderly and the infirm, to willful killings and serious injuries. [5] Further, in the course of, or after the attacks, at least 200 Bosnian Croat and Bosnian Serb civilians were killed and many more were wounded or harmed while attempting to hide or escape. [5] In a music school turned detention centre, 47 Bosnian Croats were held without food for the first week and in a cellar with no light for 45 days, and were beaten with telephone cables, batons and shovel handles during interrogations. [6] In several instances, ABiH forces killed HVO troops after their surrender. [5]
::During the night on September 8th or 9th, at 33 Croat villagers in Grabovica were killed by members of the 9th Brigade and unidentified members of the Bosnian Army. [7] [8] Three combatants, Nihad Vlahovljak, Haris Rajki膰 and Sead Karagi膰 were convicted for taking part in the killings. [9] A few days later on the 14th, in the village of Uzdol, it was reported that 29 Croat civilians and one prisoner of war were killed by the Prozor Independent Battalion and members of the local police force. [10]
Alan Ford, if you wish to remove sourced info, you must demonstrate the source is unreliable per
WP:RS. And it should take more than your opinion in that respect. --
Director (
talk)
05:21, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
ehak
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).UNHCHR
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).I moved the page to Croat-Muslim war because the term is more often used then the earlier (current) one. I got some 630 635 results and some 380 342 results for Muslim-Croat War. Croat-Bosniak War shows some 90 results and Bosniak-Croat war shows some 30 resuls (Google Books). --
W眉stenfuchs
11:39, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Google Schoolar also shows some 50 results for C-M W and some 20 results 12 for C-B W. --
W眉stenfuchs
11:42, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
I agree to the current title, we can close the discussion. -- W眉stenfuchs 12:46, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Croat-Bosniak war is inaccurate because Bosniaks (Bo拧njaci) called themselves Muslims (Muslimani) to First Bosniak Council, held on 27th November 1993. Then they took name Mulims-Bosniaks (Muslimani-Bo拧njaci). In the Washington Agreement, it's only appear the name Bosniaks. Correct names of the article are: Croat-Muslim War and Croat-Muslim/Bosniak War! -- 93.180.108.49 ( talk) 15:38, 12 November 2012 (UTC) user Mostarac from croatian wikipedia
This paragraph has again been the topic of an edit war. I think I've seen this mentioned several times by now. The NYT article is dated June 30, 1993, and it mentions the same three towns, but not with the same timeline. It is the ICTY case information sheet for Had啪ihasanovi膰 & Kubura that does that, and indeed this paragraph seems to be a blatant copyright violation. It can be removed on that account, but not on account of being a hoax / not at all related to the sources included in the article, not supported by the sources, that the date is not even mentioned in the article or that it doesn't fit the timeline. Two years earlier in the article history, I found more contentious removals of the exact same paragraph [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]. Likewise, plain old edit warring to add it back is unacceptable. Yes, User:Alan.Ford.Jn and User:Jesuislafete, I'm looking at you two. Please figure out where exactly to put this information in the article, and do not copy&paste. User:Timbouctou, you get a free pass from me here because of the recent contentious block, yet, the edit warring policy did not go anywhere, so you're nevertheless playing with fire. Can't we just break with the history and deal with this issue properly? -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 20:22, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
I suggest you delete the whole article and start from zero cause it has little to do with objectivity - looks like propaganda. Shame for Wikipedia. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.167.254.198 ( talk) 05:21, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
I agree. This article does not only look like propaganda. This is definitely propaganda with so many mistakes it can only be written from scratch! Rubbish! 鈥斅燩receding unsigned comment added by 83.178.253.193 ( talk) 08:42, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
This is not the first time I ask for a better source of the alleged quote that was published in an Independent article in 2000 with a highly biased title, because that is the only place where it can be found. The "Muslimania" part also, another "quote" that can be found only in one place, in a news article from 2000. They don't have a date nor cite a source for the "quotes". Daily tabloids published all sorts of articles, rumors or bad translations. Something like that would certainly be brought up in some of the ICTY trials (like the correspondence with Herzeg-Bosnia politicians in December 1991 or the Brioni transcripts), and there is a huge number of them. Like the one where Tu膽man said on a meeting of the Defence and National Security Council on 2 September 1993 that "... there is no ... nor has there ever been an agreement between Croats and Serbs in Bosnia and Herzegovina regarding the division of Bosnia." Tzowu ( talk) 12:48, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Historian Marko Attila Hoare did a really scathing review of Schindler's book calling it a "inaccurate, unscholarly, poorly researched and politically motivated work of propaganda" and noted that "So dubious, indeed, is Schindler鈥檚 source material, that it is difficult to believe that he is using it innocently, or that he is attempting to convince anybody but the most naive of the merits of his case." [10] -- Poto膷nik ( talk) 15:35, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Regarding propaganda, this is what James J. Sadkovich wrote about Vulliamy:
"There is no doubt that interpretations regarding the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina differ sharply, and it is clear that propaganda often shaped accounts by both journalists and scholars. In his prize-winning book on the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Ed Vulliamy provides not only a first-hand account of the conflict there, but also many useful examples of how propaganda techniques were inadvertently used by journalists to savage a particular side, in his case the Croats. For example, he employs 鈥渘ame-calling鈥 when he portrays Muslim soldiers as 鈥渂oyish鈥 but refers to Croats and HVO members as 鈥渓outs,鈥 鈥渂ruisers,鈥 鈥渢hugs鈥 and 鈥渃lodhoppers.鈥 He offers 鈥済littering generalities鈥 when he writes that the 鈥渟acking of Prozor was the beginning of the second war of civilian ethnic cleansing,鈥 and that the 鈥渟iege of Mostar鈥 was 鈥渙ne of the most brutal offensives of the entire war. He also uses 鈥渢ransfer,鈥 the association of a group or an individual with other groups or individuals, when he suggests that the HVO admired the Usta拧a and that Herceg Bosna was 鈥渢he mirror-image of the Bosnia-Serb state,鈥 and when he lumps Nazis, Fascists, Croats, and Catholics together by commenting that the Catholic shrine of Me膽ugorje was 鈥渁 base for the imminent ethnic cleansing of the Mostar region鈥 with 鈥渟tatuettes of the Madonna . . . on sale in trays next to others full of Swastikas, Maltese Crosses and other Nazi regalia.鈥 Vulliamy thinks the peace plan proposed by Cyrus Vance and David Owen 鈥減layed fairy godmother to the Croats,鈥 and he is convinced that Herceg-Bosna was a 鈥渘asty sort of place鈥 and that Franjo Tu膽man sought to create a Greater Croatia. But how reliable his account might be is not clear. Vulliamy seems to confuse Croatian Defense Forces (Hrvatske oru啪ane snage鈥揌OS) with the HVO, and in his recent testimony at The Hague, he said that he was not a 鈥減olitical鈥 or a 鈥渕ilitary鈥 reporter, and had only a 鈥渓ayman鈥檚鈥 knowledge of the area and its history and politics."
But nonetheless, full comments of journalists might be apropriate for a separate article about the Vance-Owen plan. Here there is only a small section about it. There are also sources that directly say that the plan was more favourable to the Croats than earlier peace proposals, like in the book "Territorial Proposals for the Settlement of the War in Bosnia-Hercegovina" [19], so I think that comments such as "borders proposed seemed so ridiculously advantageous to the Bosnian Croats" are not necessary. Tzowu ( talk) 23:23, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
How is it possible that "More Croatian soldiers died in fighting against the ARBiH than against the JNA or RSK forces in Croatia" if the estimated number of soldiers killed in the war in Croatia is between 6,788鈥8,784, and in the Bosnian War the HV-HVO had 6,000 soldiers killed, with the vast majority being HVO members? Tzowu ( talk) 22:23, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Oddly enough I independently noticed the same sentence. Jinx! I guess it's because it's a violation of WP:EXTRAORDINARY. The Gallagher source doesn't explain it, it just seems to reference it to a discussion between Stipe Mesi膰 and Jovan Divjak in Maga拧/Ani膰 2001 'Chronology 1985鈥1995' book, but I wasn't able to access the exact bibliography entry via Google Books to verify this, and a Google search for "2001 maga拧 ani膰 chronology" brings up nothing, so we need some help here. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 20:09, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
The 3,500-5000 number of HV soldiers in BiH was denied by Croatia and later the Herzeg-Bosnia leadership. Here is what Shrader wrote about it:
"A formal accusation by the UN Secretary General was of greater moment. On February 1, 1994, UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali formally notified the Security Council that, based on UNPROFOR reports, 鈥渢he Croatian Army has directly supported the HVO in terms of manpower, equipment and weapons for some time,鈥 and that the UNPROFOR estimated that, as of the date of the report, the Croatian Army had the equivalent of three brigades (some three thousand to five thousand men) of regular HV personnel in 鈥渃entral and southern Bosnia and Herzegovina.鈥 Yet, one must ask where the secretary general got his information. It could only have been from UNPROFOR observers on the ground or from Bosnia-Herzegovina鈥檚 Muslim-led government, which, once conflict had broken out between Muslims and Croats, had a vested interest in blaming the situation on Croatian intervention. In any event, what constituted HV intervention? A few HVO soldiers wearing old HV uniforms and insignia, or a thousand-man HV brigade with all its authorized weapons and vehicles? The former there were aplenty; the latter existed in central Bosnia only in the imagination of some overwrought observers."
Anyway, the 40,000-50,000 number cited with CIA includes all HV personnel that joined the HVO. That's why I left out the flags when I added it to the inbox. Tzowu ( talk) 11:58, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Croatia shouldn't be above HRHB in the infobox, it should be "Supported by: Croatia" below the HRHB. I don't see Russia above the two pro-Russian republics above in the War in Donbass. Tzowu ( talk) 13:09, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
OK, so there is a quote by Kordi膰 stating that Herzeg-Bosnia is Croat land and Ignac Ko拧troman (who?) about being an integral part of "our dear State of Croatia". There is also a view of Tu膽man about Muslims being Croats of Muslim faith from 1990, that BiH should have been included in SR Croatia from 1980, etc. And then there is Bla啪 Kraljevi膰's quote about the integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina. I believe I can find dozens of Tu膽man's quotes about the exact same thing, however, I doubt I can find quotes such as these:
Kraljevi膰: "I am holding all formations of HOS on these lands and in cooperation of HOS and Bosnia, and Croatia to quickly as possible come to the realization of Croatian goals, therefore, Croatia to the Drina"
Kraljevi膰: "we think that now the Croatian nationalists have a word, therefore, Usta拧e and Usta拧e sympathizers, and not some kind of sundowners and Communists such as the HVO boss, Mate Boban"
Kraljevi膰: "I'm staying here for homeland ready, I will create with other people, other Croats, Muslims and others, a free, independent state of Croatia, of course, from Sutla to the Drina, a country of freedom and democracy"
Kraljevi膰: "We in Bosnia and Herzegovina, I guarantee you in the name of HOS, we will do everything to drive out the killers, that is the Chetniks, across the Drina and to ensure that that part of Croatia be ready to join the Croatian motherland."
It's interesting that Hoare missed them about the fighter for integral Bosnia. What I'm asking is, who is Ignac Ko拧troman and is all of this really relevant? And should we include something about the elections in BiH in 1990? Tzowu ( talk) 13:47, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Croat鈥揃osniak War. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.鈥 cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 19:10, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
The Croat鈥揃osniak War was a conflict between the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the self-proclaimed Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia, backed by Croatia, that lasted from 19 June 1992 鈥 23 February 1994. The Croat-Bosniak war is often referred to as a "war within a war" because it was part of the larger Bosnian War. At the begining of the war, Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) and Croats fought on the same side against the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) and the Army of Republika Srpska (VRS), but by the end of 1992 tensions between them increased. First armed incidents occurred in October 1992 in central Bosnia between local Croat and Bosniak forces. Their military alliance held out until early 1993 when their collaboration fell apart and the two former allies engaged in open conflict.
The war escalated in central Bosnia and soon spread to Herzegovina, with most of the fighting taking place in those two regions. The Bosniaks were organized in the Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (ARBiH), and Croats in the Croatian Defence Council (HVO). The war generally consisted of sporadic conflicts with numerous ceasefires signed in the course of it. However, it was not an all-out war between the Bosniaks and Croats and they remained allied in other regions. Several peace plans were proposed by the international community during the war, but each of them failed. On 23 February 1994 a ceasefire was reached and an agreement ending the hostilities was signed in Washington on 18 March 1994. The agreement led to the establishment of the Croat鈥揃osniak Federation and joint operations against the Serb forces.
Both sides committed atrocities against civilians and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) indicted high-ranking Croat and Bosniak officials for war crimes. Due to the involvement of the Croatian Army (HV) that supported the HVO, the ICTY ruled in cases against Herzeg-Bosnia political and military leaders that the conflict was international.
Any suggestions/additions? The wording can change significantly if there are changes in the Prli膰 et al. case, and as it is a first instance verdict I left out the quote. The
Russo-Georgian War has "backed by Russia/Russian-backed" so I replaced "controlled" with "backed", though post-Soviet conflicts mostly use "supported by". Regarding the dates, is 19 June really the start of the war? Most sources I saw have the start of the conflict in either October 1992 or January/early 1993. In the article about the war in Croatia, the incident with the first fatalities is stated as the start of the war, which would in this case probably be October 1992. Btw, in the Had啪ihasanovi膰 & Kubura trial, the Chamber concluded that the conflict in that case was an internal armed conflict.
[21] p. 8-9.
Tzowu (
talk)
23:14, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Separated:
Both sides committed atrocities against civilians and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) indicted high-ranking Croat and Bosniak officials for war crimes. Due to the involvement of the Croatian Army (HV) that supported the HVO, the ICTY ruled in cases against Herzeg-Bosnia political and military leaders that the conflict was international. It found that Croatia had overall control of Herzeg-Bosnia and that there was a goal to annex or control parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina in correspondence with the borders of the 1939 Banovina of Croatia. In a first instance verdict of the Prli膰 et al. case it determined that a joint criminal enterprise existed for this purpose. -- Poto膷nik ( talk) 08:44, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Tzowu ( talk) 22:23, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
this article has a statement: The Serb and Croat political leadership agreed on a partition of BiH with the 1991 Kara膽or膽evo agreement and the 1992 Graz agreement, leading the way to a tripartite division of the country. Is this true? 89.164.228.131 ( talk) 10:46, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
I don't see any real discussion on this. Only you saying that you dislike like the source's headline. Removing it on these grounds is ridiculous. -- Poto膷nik ( talk) 16:18, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
And why is Hoare's term ("support for Bosnian Croat separatism") better than "support for Herzeg-Bosnia"? The second one is more neutral and there are enough sources for that wording as well. Tzowu ( talk) 16:33, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Croat鈥揃osniak War. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked=
to true
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:23, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Regarding my last edit: 1. There's literally no proof for that 22,000 number which Feral blurted in one of its issues. WP:EXTRAORDINARY 2. HVO doesn't (yet) receive pensions. 3. That "HV members committed war crimes" is referenced to a quote which says "Members of the regular Croatian army committed atrocities during the wars in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina", so this relates to both the entire Bosnian war and the Croatian War of Independence, outside the scope of this article, without explicitly mentioning this war. 4. Tu膽man did not write that BiH "should obviously have been included in the composition of the Croatian federal unit", he made a comparison with the joining of Vojvodina to Serbia and said that "according to the same yardstick should have been made a part of the Croatian federal unit". 5. BiH is under its constitution a national state of the Croatian nation, there's nothing contentious in that notion. Tzowu ( talk) 01:00, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Currently, sourced with Sells and Walasek, it says in the article that "the ARBiH generally had respectful attitudes/policies toward the religious property of Christian communities" and "there was no Bosnian government policy to destroy Catholic churches", while the HVO "engaged in the deliberate destruction of Muslim buildings".
Sources of the Islamic community in BiH say that the HVO damaged or destroyed 138 congregational mosques, 63 small neighbourhood mosques, 18 Quran schools, 2 dervish lodges, 4 mausolea/shrines and 84 buildings of religious endowments. According to the book Raspeta crkva u Bosni i Hercegovini, that documented the destruction of Catholic sacral objects, 75 Catholic churches, 94 chapels, 49 parish houses, 7 monasteries and 69 graveyards were either damaged or destroyed by the ARBiH or mujahideen forces (page 357). Schindler in Unholy Terror p. 100 writes: "The Muslims' religious-cum-ideological agenda was apparent in their frequent desecration of Catholic churches during the fighting. Many were burned, while others were defaced in a grotesque fashion."
I don't think that it is such a big difference in numbers that it could be said how one side "deliberately destroyed religious objects", while the other side did almost nothing wrong. Tzowu ( talk) 23:15, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Croat鈥揃osniak War. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:25, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
The Telegram.hr article by Goranko Fi啪uli膰 counted all war related deaths in 1993 in the Vrbas, Neretva and Central Bosnia regions as casualties of the Croat-Bosniak War. He probably found it in this article, which was added by me as the 1993 numbers for those three regions are closer to the actual number of casualties than deaths in the three regions from 1992-1995, but those are not the official casualties number for the Croat-Bosniak war.
Article: "According to this data, in Central Bosnia there were 5,149 casualties in 1993, of which 2,893 were Bosniaks, 1,951 were Croats, 289 were Serbs, and 16 were other ethnicities. In the region of Neretva river, encompassing Herzegovina, out of 2,764 casualties in 1993, 1,760 were Bosniaks, 779 were Croats, 205 were Serbs, and 20 were other ethnicities. Out of 16 municipalities in the Vrbas region, two municipalities were affected by the Croat-Bosniak conflict: Bugojno and Gornji Vakuf-Uskoplje. There were 1,908 casualties in the entire region in 1993, of which 946 were Bosniaks, 524 were Croats, 431 were Serbs, and 7 were other ethnicities."
Telegram: "Istra啪iva膷ki i dokumentacijski centar u Sarajevu objavio je 2007. rezultate svojih istra啪ivanja prema kojima je u tom ratnom sukobu poginula 9821 osoba, od 膷ega 5599 Bo拧njaka, 3254 Hrvata, 925 Srba i 43 osobe ostalih nacionalnosti. Zna膷i, u hrvatsko-bo拧nja膷kom ratnom sukobu, ubijeno je ne拧to vi拧e od tre膰ine svih poginulih Hrvata, odnosno 8,2聽% od ukupno poginulih Bo拧njaka."
Maybe it wasn't clear enough that the IDC data relates to both the Croat-Bosniak War and the war with the VRS. Tzowu ( talk) 19:20, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Croat鈥揃osniak War article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources:聽 Google ( books聽路 news聽路 scholar聽路 free images聽路 WP聽refs)聽路 FENS聽路 JSTOR聽路 TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Croat鈥揃osniak War. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Croat鈥揃osniak War at the Reference desk. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from Toti膰 kidnapping was copied or moved into [[]]. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
It is not true that Josipovi膰 apologized "for Croatia's involvement in efforts to divide Bosnia and Herzegovina" as you state it. If you follow the link by the text you can find real text of appologie: ".. I deeply regret that these politics contributed to the deaths of people and divisions that still haunt us." So he's not talking about division of Bosnia, he is talking about nationalism as predominant ideologie what caused war and suffering. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.141.62.173 ( talk) 10:32, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
I want user Alan.Ford to explain his mass removal of referenced sections. I am unable to understand what or how this is an explanation: "are you kidding me? you haven't even read the article, haven't you realised that you put wrong paragraph into wrong section with false data? April 1993 comes after December 1992, not before". What I don't understand is: 1) "you haven't even read the article" -- what article are you talking about? 2) "wrong paragraph into wrong section" --what paragraph and what section? Explain 3) "With false data" --please explain what is false data. If you can make such a bold claim, you need to back it up. 4) What you are talking about with regards to "April 1993 comes after December 1992".
I do not want an edit war with anyone. However, blanking entire paragraphs is a form of type of vandalism. With serious accusations thrown at my sourced edits, I want an explanation on what is so horrendous that Wikipedia would justify mass removal. -- Jesuislafete ( talk) 18:53, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
As I said in my previous comment Jesuislafete's edits are based on nationalistic propaganda, all my effort is to preserve consistency of the article based on WP:RS. Jesuislafete hasnt even read this article. He just included Croatian nationalistic POVs in the middle of background section destroying hronology of the events. Don't be silly man. It's so obvious. Alan.Ford.Jn ( talk) 12:31, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
I suggest that we go sentence by sentence, you already destroyed the concept of the article, even timline, with the large amount of nationalistic trash. So, please tell me which would be the first sentence that you would like to add, based on WP:RS. Alan.Ford.Jn ( talk) 14:47, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
::In April 1993 and early summer 1993, ABiH 3rd Corps units launched a series of heavy attacks against the HVO. On April 16 in the village of Trusina, members of the ABiH army sqaud called "Zulfikar" killed 18 Croat civilians and 4 soldiers. [1] [2] According to witness testimony, the unit rounded up a group of Croat residents captured soldiers, bound and shot them. A member of the Zulfikar unit, Rasema Handanovic, admitted taking part in the murders under orders from commander Nihad Bojadzic who ordered the killing of the prisoners and 鈥渘ot to leave any survivors鈥. [3]
::The series of attacks culminated in a massive attack between 7 June and 13 June 1993 within, among others, the municipalities of Kakanj, Travnik and Zenica. [4] The ABiH 3rd Corps attacked towns and villages, subjecting predominantly Bosnian Croat, but also Bosnian Serb civilians, including women, children, the elderly and the infirm, to willful killings and serious injuries. [5] Further, in the course of, or after the attacks, at least 200 Bosnian Croat and Bosnian Serb civilians were killed and many more were wounded or harmed while attempting to hide or escape. [5] In a music school turned detention centre, 47 Bosnian Croats were held without food for the first week and in a cellar with no light for 45 days, and were beaten with telephone cables, batons and shovel handles during interrogations. [6] In several instances, ABiH forces killed HVO troops after their surrender. [5]
::During the night on September 8th or 9th, at 33 Croat villagers in Grabovica were killed by members of the 9th Brigade and unidentified members of the Bosnian Army. [7] [8] Three combatants, Nihad Vlahovljak, Haris Rajki膰 and Sead Karagi膰 were convicted for taking part in the killings. [9] A few days later on the 14th, in the village of Uzdol, it was reported that 29 Croat civilians and one prisoner of war were killed by the Prozor Independent Battalion and members of the local police force. [10]
Alan Ford, if you wish to remove sourced info, you must demonstrate the source is unreliable per
WP:RS. And it should take more than your opinion in that respect. --
Director (
talk)
05:21, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
ehak
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).UNHCHR
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).I moved the page to Croat-Muslim war because the term is more often used then the earlier (current) one. I got some 630 635 results and some 380 342 results for Muslim-Croat War. Croat-Bosniak War shows some 90 results and Bosniak-Croat war shows some 30 resuls (Google Books). --
W眉stenfuchs
11:39, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Google Schoolar also shows some 50 results for C-M W and some 20 results 12 for C-B W. --
W眉stenfuchs
11:42, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
I agree to the current title, we can close the discussion. -- W眉stenfuchs 12:46, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Croat-Bosniak war is inaccurate because Bosniaks (Bo拧njaci) called themselves Muslims (Muslimani) to First Bosniak Council, held on 27th November 1993. Then they took name Mulims-Bosniaks (Muslimani-Bo拧njaci). In the Washington Agreement, it's only appear the name Bosniaks. Correct names of the article are: Croat-Muslim War and Croat-Muslim/Bosniak War! -- 93.180.108.49 ( talk) 15:38, 12 November 2012 (UTC) user Mostarac from croatian wikipedia
This paragraph has again been the topic of an edit war. I think I've seen this mentioned several times by now. The NYT article is dated June 30, 1993, and it mentions the same three towns, but not with the same timeline. It is the ICTY case information sheet for Had啪ihasanovi膰 & Kubura that does that, and indeed this paragraph seems to be a blatant copyright violation. It can be removed on that account, but not on account of being a hoax / not at all related to the sources included in the article, not supported by the sources, that the date is not even mentioned in the article or that it doesn't fit the timeline. Two years earlier in the article history, I found more contentious removals of the exact same paragraph [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]. Likewise, plain old edit warring to add it back is unacceptable. Yes, User:Alan.Ford.Jn and User:Jesuislafete, I'm looking at you two. Please figure out where exactly to put this information in the article, and do not copy&paste. User:Timbouctou, you get a free pass from me here because of the recent contentious block, yet, the edit warring policy did not go anywhere, so you're nevertheless playing with fire. Can't we just break with the history and deal with this issue properly? -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 20:22, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
I suggest you delete the whole article and start from zero cause it has little to do with objectivity - looks like propaganda. Shame for Wikipedia. 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.167.254.198 ( talk) 05:21, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
I agree. This article does not only look like propaganda. This is definitely propaganda with so many mistakes it can only be written from scratch! Rubbish! 鈥斅燩receding unsigned comment added by 83.178.253.193 ( talk) 08:42, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
This is not the first time I ask for a better source of the alleged quote that was published in an Independent article in 2000 with a highly biased title, because that is the only place where it can be found. The "Muslimania" part also, another "quote" that can be found only in one place, in a news article from 2000. They don't have a date nor cite a source for the "quotes". Daily tabloids published all sorts of articles, rumors or bad translations. Something like that would certainly be brought up in some of the ICTY trials (like the correspondence with Herzeg-Bosnia politicians in December 1991 or the Brioni transcripts), and there is a huge number of them. Like the one where Tu膽man said on a meeting of the Defence and National Security Council on 2 September 1993 that "... there is no ... nor has there ever been an agreement between Croats and Serbs in Bosnia and Herzegovina regarding the division of Bosnia." Tzowu ( talk) 12:48, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Historian Marko Attila Hoare did a really scathing review of Schindler's book calling it a "inaccurate, unscholarly, poorly researched and politically motivated work of propaganda" and noted that "So dubious, indeed, is Schindler鈥檚 source material, that it is difficult to believe that he is using it innocently, or that he is attempting to convince anybody but the most naive of the merits of his case." [10] -- Poto膷nik ( talk) 15:35, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Regarding propaganda, this is what James J. Sadkovich wrote about Vulliamy:
"There is no doubt that interpretations regarding the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina differ sharply, and it is clear that propaganda often shaped accounts by both journalists and scholars. In his prize-winning book on the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Ed Vulliamy provides not only a first-hand account of the conflict there, but also many useful examples of how propaganda techniques were inadvertently used by journalists to savage a particular side, in his case the Croats. For example, he employs 鈥渘ame-calling鈥 when he portrays Muslim soldiers as 鈥渂oyish鈥 but refers to Croats and HVO members as 鈥渓outs,鈥 鈥渂ruisers,鈥 鈥渢hugs鈥 and 鈥渃lodhoppers.鈥 He offers 鈥済littering generalities鈥 when he writes that the 鈥渟acking of Prozor was the beginning of the second war of civilian ethnic cleansing,鈥 and that the 鈥渟iege of Mostar鈥 was 鈥渙ne of the most brutal offensives of the entire war. He also uses 鈥渢ransfer,鈥 the association of a group or an individual with other groups or individuals, when he suggests that the HVO admired the Usta拧a and that Herceg Bosna was 鈥渢he mirror-image of the Bosnia-Serb state,鈥 and when he lumps Nazis, Fascists, Croats, and Catholics together by commenting that the Catholic shrine of Me膽ugorje was 鈥渁 base for the imminent ethnic cleansing of the Mostar region鈥 with 鈥渟tatuettes of the Madonna . . . on sale in trays next to others full of Swastikas, Maltese Crosses and other Nazi regalia.鈥 Vulliamy thinks the peace plan proposed by Cyrus Vance and David Owen 鈥減layed fairy godmother to the Croats,鈥 and he is convinced that Herceg-Bosna was a 鈥渘asty sort of place鈥 and that Franjo Tu膽man sought to create a Greater Croatia. But how reliable his account might be is not clear. Vulliamy seems to confuse Croatian Defense Forces (Hrvatske oru啪ane snage鈥揌OS) with the HVO, and in his recent testimony at The Hague, he said that he was not a 鈥減olitical鈥 or a 鈥渕ilitary鈥 reporter, and had only a 鈥渓ayman鈥檚鈥 knowledge of the area and its history and politics."
But nonetheless, full comments of journalists might be apropriate for a separate article about the Vance-Owen plan. Here there is only a small section about it. There are also sources that directly say that the plan was more favourable to the Croats than earlier peace proposals, like in the book "Territorial Proposals for the Settlement of the War in Bosnia-Hercegovina" [19], so I think that comments such as "borders proposed seemed so ridiculously advantageous to the Bosnian Croats" are not necessary. Tzowu ( talk) 23:23, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
How is it possible that "More Croatian soldiers died in fighting against the ARBiH than against the JNA or RSK forces in Croatia" if the estimated number of soldiers killed in the war in Croatia is between 6,788鈥8,784, and in the Bosnian War the HV-HVO had 6,000 soldiers killed, with the vast majority being HVO members? Tzowu ( talk) 22:23, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Oddly enough I independently noticed the same sentence. Jinx! I guess it's because it's a violation of WP:EXTRAORDINARY. The Gallagher source doesn't explain it, it just seems to reference it to a discussion between Stipe Mesi膰 and Jovan Divjak in Maga拧/Ani膰 2001 'Chronology 1985鈥1995' book, but I wasn't able to access the exact bibliography entry via Google Books to verify this, and a Google search for "2001 maga拧 ani膰 chronology" brings up nothing, so we need some help here. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 20:09, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
The 3,500-5000 number of HV soldiers in BiH was denied by Croatia and later the Herzeg-Bosnia leadership. Here is what Shrader wrote about it:
"A formal accusation by the UN Secretary General was of greater moment. On February 1, 1994, UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali formally notified the Security Council that, based on UNPROFOR reports, 鈥渢he Croatian Army has directly supported the HVO in terms of manpower, equipment and weapons for some time,鈥 and that the UNPROFOR estimated that, as of the date of the report, the Croatian Army had the equivalent of three brigades (some three thousand to five thousand men) of regular HV personnel in 鈥渃entral and southern Bosnia and Herzegovina.鈥 Yet, one must ask where the secretary general got his information. It could only have been from UNPROFOR observers on the ground or from Bosnia-Herzegovina鈥檚 Muslim-led government, which, once conflict had broken out between Muslims and Croats, had a vested interest in blaming the situation on Croatian intervention. In any event, what constituted HV intervention? A few HVO soldiers wearing old HV uniforms and insignia, or a thousand-man HV brigade with all its authorized weapons and vehicles? The former there were aplenty; the latter existed in central Bosnia only in the imagination of some overwrought observers."
Anyway, the 40,000-50,000 number cited with CIA includes all HV personnel that joined the HVO. That's why I left out the flags when I added it to the inbox. Tzowu ( talk) 11:58, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Croatia shouldn't be above HRHB in the infobox, it should be "Supported by: Croatia" below the HRHB. I don't see Russia above the two pro-Russian republics above in the War in Donbass. Tzowu ( talk) 13:09, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
OK, so there is a quote by Kordi膰 stating that Herzeg-Bosnia is Croat land and Ignac Ko拧troman (who?) about being an integral part of "our dear State of Croatia". There is also a view of Tu膽man about Muslims being Croats of Muslim faith from 1990, that BiH should have been included in SR Croatia from 1980, etc. And then there is Bla啪 Kraljevi膰's quote about the integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina. I believe I can find dozens of Tu膽man's quotes about the exact same thing, however, I doubt I can find quotes such as these:
Kraljevi膰: "I am holding all formations of HOS on these lands and in cooperation of HOS and Bosnia, and Croatia to quickly as possible come to the realization of Croatian goals, therefore, Croatia to the Drina"
Kraljevi膰: "we think that now the Croatian nationalists have a word, therefore, Usta拧e and Usta拧e sympathizers, and not some kind of sundowners and Communists such as the HVO boss, Mate Boban"
Kraljevi膰: "I'm staying here for homeland ready, I will create with other people, other Croats, Muslims and others, a free, independent state of Croatia, of course, from Sutla to the Drina, a country of freedom and democracy"
Kraljevi膰: "We in Bosnia and Herzegovina, I guarantee you in the name of HOS, we will do everything to drive out the killers, that is the Chetniks, across the Drina and to ensure that that part of Croatia be ready to join the Croatian motherland."
It's interesting that Hoare missed them about the fighter for integral Bosnia. What I'm asking is, who is Ignac Ko拧troman and is all of this really relevant? And should we include something about the elections in BiH in 1990? Tzowu ( talk) 13:47, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Croat鈥揃osniak War. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.鈥 cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 19:10, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
The Croat鈥揃osniak War was a conflict between the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the self-proclaimed Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia, backed by Croatia, that lasted from 19 June 1992 鈥 23 February 1994. The Croat-Bosniak war is often referred to as a "war within a war" because it was part of the larger Bosnian War. At the begining of the war, Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) and Croats fought on the same side against the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) and the Army of Republika Srpska (VRS), but by the end of 1992 tensions between them increased. First armed incidents occurred in October 1992 in central Bosnia between local Croat and Bosniak forces. Their military alliance held out until early 1993 when their collaboration fell apart and the two former allies engaged in open conflict.
The war escalated in central Bosnia and soon spread to Herzegovina, with most of the fighting taking place in those two regions. The Bosniaks were organized in the Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (ARBiH), and Croats in the Croatian Defence Council (HVO). The war generally consisted of sporadic conflicts with numerous ceasefires signed in the course of it. However, it was not an all-out war between the Bosniaks and Croats and they remained allied in other regions. Several peace plans were proposed by the international community during the war, but each of them failed. On 23 February 1994 a ceasefire was reached and an agreement ending the hostilities was signed in Washington on 18 March 1994. The agreement led to the establishment of the Croat鈥揃osniak Federation and joint operations against the Serb forces.
Both sides committed atrocities against civilians and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) indicted high-ranking Croat and Bosniak officials for war crimes. Due to the involvement of the Croatian Army (HV) that supported the HVO, the ICTY ruled in cases against Herzeg-Bosnia political and military leaders that the conflict was international.
Any suggestions/additions? The wording can change significantly if there are changes in the Prli膰 et al. case, and as it is a first instance verdict I left out the quote. The
Russo-Georgian War has "backed by Russia/Russian-backed" so I replaced "controlled" with "backed", though post-Soviet conflicts mostly use "supported by". Regarding the dates, is 19 June really the start of the war? Most sources I saw have the start of the conflict in either October 1992 or January/early 1993. In the article about the war in Croatia, the incident with the first fatalities is stated as the start of the war, which would in this case probably be October 1992. Btw, in the Had啪ihasanovi膰 & Kubura trial, the Chamber concluded that the conflict in that case was an internal armed conflict.
[21] p. 8-9.
Tzowu (
talk)
23:14, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Separated:
Both sides committed atrocities against civilians and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) indicted high-ranking Croat and Bosniak officials for war crimes. Due to the involvement of the Croatian Army (HV) that supported the HVO, the ICTY ruled in cases against Herzeg-Bosnia political and military leaders that the conflict was international. It found that Croatia had overall control of Herzeg-Bosnia and that there was a goal to annex or control parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina in correspondence with the borders of the 1939 Banovina of Croatia. In a first instance verdict of the Prli膰 et al. case it determined that a joint criminal enterprise existed for this purpose. -- Poto膷nik ( talk) 08:44, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Tzowu ( talk) 22:23, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
this article has a statement: The Serb and Croat political leadership agreed on a partition of BiH with the 1991 Kara膽or膽evo agreement and the 1992 Graz agreement, leading the way to a tripartite division of the country. Is this true? 89.164.228.131 ( talk) 10:46, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
I don't see any real discussion on this. Only you saying that you dislike like the source's headline. Removing it on these grounds is ridiculous. -- Poto膷nik ( talk) 16:18, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
And why is Hoare's term ("support for Bosnian Croat separatism") better than "support for Herzeg-Bosnia"? The second one is more neutral and there are enough sources for that wording as well. Tzowu ( talk) 16:33, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Croat鈥揃osniak War. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked=
to true
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:23, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Regarding my last edit: 1. There's literally no proof for that 22,000 number which Feral blurted in one of its issues. WP:EXTRAORDINARY 2. HVO doesn't (yet) receive pensions. 3. That "HV members committed war crimes" is referenced to a quote which says "Members of the regular Croatian army committed atrocities during the wars in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina", so this relates to both the entire Bosnian war and the Croatian War of Independence, outside the scope of this article, without explicitly mentioning this war. 4. Tu膽man did not write that BiH "should obviously have been included in the composition of the Croatian federal unit", he made a comparison with the joining of Vojvodina to Serbia and said that "according to the same yardstick should have been made a part of the Croatian federal unit". 5. BiH is under its constitution a national state of the Croatian nation, there's nothing contentious in that notion. Tzowu ( talk) 01:00, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Currently, sourced with Sells and Walasek, it says in the article that "the ARBiH generally had respectful attitudes/policies toward the religious property of Christian communities" and "there was no Bosnian government policy to destroy Catholic churches", while the HVO "engaged in the deliberate destruction of Muslim buildings".
Sources of the Islamic community in BiH say that the HVO damaged or destroyed 138 congregational mosques, 63 small neighbourhood mosques, 18 Quran schools, 2 dervish lodges, 4 mausolea/shrines and 84 buildings of religious endowments. According to the book Raspeta crkva u Bosni i Hercegovini, that documented the destruction of Catholic sacral objects, 75 Catholic churches, 94 chapels, 49 parish houses, 7 monasteries and 69 graveyards were either damaged or destroyed by the ARBiH or mujahideen forces (page 357). Schindler in Unholy Terror p. 100 writes: "The Muslims' religious-cum-ideological agenda was apparent in their frequent desecration of Catholic churches during the fighting. Many were burned, while others were defaced in a grotesque fashion."
I don't think that it is such a big difference in numbers that it could be said how one side "deliberately destroyed religious objects", while the other side did almost nothing wrong. Tzowu ( talk) 23:15, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Croat鈥揃osniak War. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:25, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
The Telegram.hr article by Goranko Fi啪uli膰 counted all war related deaths in 1993 in the Vrbas, Neretva and Central Bosnia regions as casualties of the Croat-Bosniak War. He probably found it in this article, which was added by me as the 1993 numbers for those three regions are closer to the actual number of casualties than deaths in the three regions from 1992-1995, but those are not the official casualties number for the Croat-Bosniak war.
Article: "According to this data, in Central Bosnia there were 5,149 casualties in 1993, of which 2,893 were Bosniaks, 1,951 were Croats, 289 were Serbs, and 16 were other ethnicities. In the region of Neretva river, encompassing Herzegovina, out of 2,764 casualties in 1993, 1,760 were Bosniaks, 779 were Croats, 205 were Serbs, and 20 were other ethnicities. Out of 16 municipalities in the Vrbas region, two municipalities were affected by the Croat-Bosniak conflict: Bugojno and Gornji Vakuf-Uskoplje. There were 1,908 casualties in the entire region in 1993, of which 946 were Bosniaks, 524 were Croats, 431 were Serbs, and 7 were other ethnicities."
Telegram: "Istra啪iva膷ki i dokumentacijski centar u Sarajevu objavio je 2007. rezultate svojih istra啪ivanja prema kojima je u tom ratnom sukobu poginula 9821 osoba, od 膷ega 5599 Bo拧njaka, 3254 Hrvata, 925 Srba i 43 osobe ostalih nacionalnosti. Zna膷i, u hrvatsko-bo拧nja膷kom ratnom sukobu, ubijeno je ne拧to vi拧e od tre膰ine svih poginulih Hrvata, odnosno 8,2聽% od ukupno poginulih Bo拧njaka."
Maybe it wasn't clear enough that the IDC data relates to both the Croat-Bosniak War and the war with the VRS. Tzowu ( talk) 19:20, 9 December 2017 (UTC)