THE ALLIANCE BETWEEN ISRAEL AND CROATIA’S NEO-NAZIS IS STRONGER THAN EVER

Marko Perkovic Thompson’s Half Million Fascist Concert

Guest Post by Jenna Delich

 

On September 14, 2022, Tony Greenstein and I wrote an article on attempts by Croatia to impose anti-Semitic election laws on Bosnia and Herzegovina.(5)

The Dayton Peace Accords, signed in November 1995, brought the war of aggression on Bosnia and Herzegovina by Serbia and Croatia to an end. The accords divided Bosnia and Herzegovina into two administrative units, pledging equal rights for its ‘constituent peoples’ (Bosniaks, Bosnian Serbs, and Bosnian Croats) and ‘others’.  As outlined in the Dayton Peace Accords, the country’s Presidency consists of three members, each coming from one of the three ‘constituent peoples’ but each representing all of the Bosnian citizens. The current election laws prevent members of the Bosnian Jewish community and those who identify as ‘others’ from running for President.

Croatia is asking a genocidal supremacist entity for help with "equality" in Bosnia.

By equality they mean 2:1 power "sharing" i.e. two desirable fascist parties among Bosnian Croats and Serbs to overpower the Bosniak majority and other normal Bosnians.https://t.co/ydhfggdyVu

— Aida A. (@_truthtopower) July 15, 2025

For the past five years the neighbouring Croatia keeps persevering in imposing new discriminatory, antisemitic and fascist election laws on one of the two Bosnian entities, the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. That would inevitably lead to having a ‘third entity’ emerging within Bosnia and Herzegovina with an overwhelming Bosnian Croat majority. That new ‘entity’ would subsequently cede from Bosnia and Herzegovina to join Croatia. It is in line with the same World War 2 ideology pursued by the Nazi collaborators, the infamous Croat Ustaše, which included creating Greater Croatia by carving up Bosnia and Herzegovina. 

In the wake of recent events, I decided to revisit the article referred to above which addressed the contentious issue of Croatia’s proposed antisemitic election law for Bosnia and Herzegovina.(5) The law, which Croatia envisions implementing under the guise of (allegedly) safeguarding the interests of Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina, has garnered significant attention again.

In our article we endeavoured to provide historical context for Croatia’s political trajectory, including its WW2 legacy, and shed light on its actions during the War of Aggression on Bosnia and Herzegovina in the 1990s. (5)

We highlighted Croatia’s involvement in this conflict for which it was subsequently prosecuted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and ruled guilty of committing ‘joint criminal enterprise’ on Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is the same Croatian policy that now continues to be the framework for pursuing such election laws for Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Such laws are seeking to ensure that only Croats can vote for an ethnic Croat candidate to be a member of the Bosnian Presidency, which would preclude all other Croats, not considered by HDZ, the Croatian nationalist party, in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) and the HDZ party headquarters in Zagreb, Croatia to be ‘pure-bred’, as well as Jews and others from ever running for the Presidency. This would go against numerous judgements made by the European Court of Human Rights (EHRC), including the one (Sejdic-Finci v Bosnia and Herzegovina) that concluded that the current election laws discriminate against Jews and Roma.

Imagine now that Croatia is seeking to make those existing election laws even worse by wanting to have only ‘pure-bred’ Croats who would be elected by only Croats voting for them! This would not only exclude Bosnian Jews from running for the Presidency but also from voting for a Bosnian Croat candidate for the Presidency, the right they have been granted by the existing election laws. Such an election law would be antisemitic in all its respects.

Regrettably, three years have passed since the publication of our article of September 14, 2022, and Croatia has not relinquished its pursuit of implementing the antisemitic election law. (5)

The laws’ proponents argue that it will ensure the ‘legitimate representation’ once there are only those considered to be ‘pure-bred’ Croats running for the Bosnian Presidency. As previously mentioned, the HDZ BiH party, under the direction of its headquarters in Zagreb, Croatia will determine who meets this criterion to run and subsequently represent Croats in Bosnia.

Croatian Prime Minister says that ‘only Thomson could bring together half a million people’ while the Thomson’s concert audience passionately raises their hands in a fascist salute and praise concentration camp Jasenovac in their songs

Given the nature of such election laws and prospects of those being imposed on Bosnia and Herzegovina by Croatia, it is crucial to acknowledge its potential implications. The implementation of such election laws could have far-reaching consequences and raise concerns about the perpetuation of discriminatory practices and creation of an apartheid state at the heart of Europe.

The politics pursued by Croatia since the 1990’s remain the same despite it being adjudicated for committing ‘joint criminal enterprise’ on Bosnia and Herzegovina.

In the past few years, it seems to be becoming even more aggressive and radical, and more open in demonstrating these traits in public. This is the same politics pursued by Croatia in World War II – the ideology of the Ustaše movement, which included the creation of Greater Croatia. This time, rather than taking the whole of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia seems willing to ‘settle’ for taking almost half.

Founded in 1929, the Ustashas were pro-German Croatian fascists who imprisoned, tortured, and committed genocide against ethnic minorities during World War II. Their brutal actions shocked even the Wehrmacht. The Croatian Ustashas imprisoned, tortured, and killed over 30,000 Jews in concentration camps like Jasenovac (also known as the ‘Auschwitz of the Balkans’), Lepoglava, and Stara Gradiska.

Croatia’s plans, as outlined in the antisemitic, discriminatory and fascist election laws they keep trying to impose on Bosnia and Herzegovina, would result in the creation of small, unliveable ghettos for the Bosniaks, the ethnic group comprising 51% of the country’s population. This would also include members of the Jewish community and other groups, as well as all Serbs and Croats who oppose the policy of ethnic divide, apartheid, and fascism.

And although the legacy of the WWII Croatian Ustashas’ ideology continues to influence Croatia’s policy today, Croatia recently publicly announced that it had received support from Israel in its efforts to enact antisemitic election laws in its neighbouring country, Bosnia and Herzegovina. (1)

This is not the first time Israel has provided support to Croatia for the same antisemitic election laws. They did it in 2022, as we discussed this in our article of September 14, 2022. (5) That time, the information about the support was ‘leaked’, while this time it was announced openly and proudly.

Good meeting my friend Croatian FM @grlicradman on the sidelines of the EU-Southern Neighbourhood Ministerial Meeting in Brussels.
We discussed regional issues in the Middle East and Southeast Europe. I thanked him for Croatia's friendship and support.
Israel firmly believes… pic.twitter.com/r9yM1qt1fz

— Gideon Sa'ar | גדעון סער (@gidonsaar) July 15, 2025

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar also publiclyacknowledged a ‘good meeting’ with their ‘Croatian friend’ in Brussels in his tweet on X on July 15, 2025. However, his remarks deviated from the principles outlined in the Dayton Peace Accords. He referred to ‘constituent peoples’ while omitting ‘citizens and others,’ which are all included in the Dayton Peace Accords. Additionally, he mentioned ‘power sharing,’ which is neither present in the Dayton Peace Accords nor the Bosnian political system. Despite these blunders (whether deliberate or not), Sa’ar subsequently expressed his full support for the (antisemitic) election law, stating:

 “This must be accompanied by a strong commitment to the principles of power-sharing, both in the structure of governance and in the necessary reform of the country’s electoral legislation.”

Such support could not have come at a more opportune moment as the European Union was grappling with the aftermath of a music concert in Zagreb, Croatia, which took place only ten days prior, on July 5th, 2025.

The concert was performed by Marko Perkovic Thompson, a popular far-right Croatian singer who evoked disturbing memories of the notorious Croatian Ustashas.

At the recent concert of July 5, 2025, half a million Croats enthusiastically raised their hands in the fascist salute, screaming ‘Za dom spremni’ from the top of their lungs. Some of the attendees even sang songs about the Jasenovac concentration camp, where they were responsible for the systematic murder of Jews and other victims. Despite the presence of the police, no action was taken.

Notably, Marko Perkovic Thompson appeared on stage fully dressed in a black Ustashas uniform, bearing the prison number of the notorious Ustasha terrorist Zdenko Busic.

In response to the incident, the European Commission strongly condemned the fascist salute (‘Za dom spremni’) and other Ustashas insignia that were displayed at the concert.

When responding to the European Commission’s statement, Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic expressed his inability to discern any contentious points within the Brussels-based document. This stance is unsurprising, given his willingness to engage in a handshake with the “singer” and pose for a photograph with him.(4)

Plenković, attempted to downplay the message from the European Commission. However, the European Commission responded condemning any expression of fascism reminiscent of Europe’s darkest chapters. In contrast, the Croatian Minister of Internal Affairs viewed the concert as a “celebration of patriotism, unity, and values.” (4)

Austria’s investigative authorities are currently examining the concert materials, particularly looking for those individuals who purchased tickets for Tomson’s concert  in Austria. Given the sale of 18,000 tickets in Austria, some are saying that those who live and work in Austria could have their work permits revoked and be deported back to Croatia if found to have attended the concert.

The Croatian Prime Minister’s assertion that “only Tomson could bring together half a million people” serves as a stark reflection of the political climate in Croatia and the pervasive presence of fascist ideology all over it.

It is in light of the condemnation of the concert by Marko Perkovic Thomson in Zagreb of 5th July 2025,and an uproar from across Europe, and what seems to be the prevailing political ideology reminiscent of WW2 in Croatia, that the Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar found it acceptable to voice the  support of Israel to Croatia in its endeavours to impose antisemitic election laws on its neighbouring country, Bosnia and Herzegovina, only some ten days after the concert by Marko Perkovic Thomson took place (on 15th July 2025). Indeed, the nature of the Croatian politics hasn’t changed since Israel lent Croatia a hand of support to pursue anti-Semitic election laws for Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2022. It has only become more aggressive and radical, and more transparent in showing it to the world outside Croatia to see.

Israel was heavily criticised in the Israel media (The Times of Israel, Jerusalem Post) for supporting Croatia in pursuit of anti-Semitic election laws for Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2022- the criticism that was addressed in Tony Greenstein’s and my article of September 14, 2022

Should it be perplexing that, after all, the two countries could be allies? One can conclude, yet again and as we said in our article of September 14, 2022, that the alliance between Israel and the HDZ proves that Zionist Anti-Semitism remains as strong as ever!

1. https://x.com/gidonsaar/status/1945040569543037218?s=462.

2. https://www.index.hr/amp/vijesti/clanak/ek-reagirala-na-plenkovica-i-thompsonov-koncert-plenkovic-to-je-uopcena-reakcija/2688576.aspx3.

3. https://www.euronews.ba/region/aktuelno/28764/plenkovic-thompson-jedini-danas-moze-dovesti-pola-miliona-ljudi-u-hrvatsku4. https://youtu.be/dNUC-iHnKXI5. 4.

4. https://www.rtvbn.com/4079049/austrijanci-cesljaju-snimke-sa-tompsonovog-koncerta

5. 14 September 2022 https://azvsas.blogspot.com/2022/09/why-is-israel-supporting-law-proposed.html

How Israel's Censorship Covers Up Its Role in Genocide & the Idiocy of Chakrabarti

Yair Auron - Professor of Holocaust Studies at Israel's Open University

According to the Chakrabarti Inquiry Report on Racism and Anti-Semitism comparisons between the actions of Israel and Zionism with those of Hitler, the Nazis or the Holocaust.  'can only be intended to be incendiary rather than persuasive.'

In fact Chakrabarti uses the term 'Jewish people or institutions anywhere in the world' when referring to Zionism and Israel.  The Chakrabarti Report, which sections of the liberal left have abandoned all sense of critical judgement over, conflates Jewish' with Zionist, itself an example of its political and terminological confusion over this subject.  It is one of my major disagreements with the group Free Speech on Israel, where I held a minority position.  See A marred report.

What therefore would the liberal apostles of Chakrabarti, FSOI and other well meaning people have to say to Yair Auron, Professor of Holocaust Studies at Israel's Open University, who has just brought a failed action at Israel's Supreme Court to try and have the files at Israel's state archives opened in respect of the arms trade conducted with the perpetrators of the genocide in Bosnia?

Do they think Auron is an anti-Semite for comparing Israel's actions to those who supplied help and weapons to the Nazis during WW2?  Or is he just being 'incendiary'?  Certainly in the Labour Party comparisons between Israel and the Nazis is considered a prime example of 'anti-Semitism'.  This is why Ken Livingstone has been suspended.

Perhaps because he lives in Israel, a state which is moving so far to the Right that many people identify with the actions of the Nazis even whilst wishing that they had targeted someone else other than the Jews, it is permissible to make such comments.  Auron was quite clear about why he and fellow petitioner Itay Mack had brought the action:

“We betrayed the legacy of the Holocaust when we’re committing acts like this,” Professor Yair Auron said. “To sell weapons to Serbia or to Rwanda during the genocide is similar to selling weapons to Nazi Germany during the Second World War. No country has the right to do it and especially not Israel.” 

No one should think just because the Palestinians are the primary victims of the most moral army in the world and the large Israeli arms industry, that they are the only victims.

Throughout Central and South America, from the 1970’s onwards, Israeli democracy ensure that the death squad regimes of El Salvador, Guatemala and other countries received the training and armaments that they required.

Jan Pieterse in State Terrorism on a Global Scale:  The Role of Israel in 1984 described how Israel was ‘the largest supplier of arms to Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa. But Israel's activities in Third World countries are in fact far more wide-ranging than just military sales. Israel has become active in all the dimensions of the global counterinsurgency business. Thus, for example, in Guatemala, "Hit lists used by the death squads have been computerized. Technologically sophisticated murder is coordinated by a Regional Telecommunications Center built and managed by Israeli Army experts."

Israel's multifaceted relations with Guatemala include the following items:  Since 1976, Israel has been the main provider of arms, aircraft, and military training to Guatemala.  It has trained 800 Guatemalan air force pilots to fly Israeli-supplied Kfir fighters and Arava transport planes.  It has supplied radar systems throughout the country.  It has trained the military and G-2 police units in the use of interrogation techniques, modern intelligence methods, psychological warfare, and terror. 

Israel sponsored an Army Electronics and Transmission School in Guatemala which opened in November 1981.  The 300 Israeli advisers present in Guatemala assisted in the coup of March 1982 that brought General Rios Montt to power, and trained officers backing him.  These Israeli advisers assisted in the design of the Program of Assistance to Conflict Areas (PAAC), put into effect from August 1982; developed jointly with advisers from South Africa and Taiwan, the program involves the creation of "model villages" that combine features of the "strategic hamlets" implanted in Vietnam and Israeli kibbutzim.

Israeli experts train contras, and also serve El Salvador, Honduras, Haiti, Chile, and Bolivia and Argentina (at least before their return to civilian government) at a training camp in Guatemala.  In the northern province of Alta Verapaz, Israel constructed a factory which produces 5.56 caliber munitions and Uzi machine guns that is to supply all of Central America.  Israel is in the special position of having recent combat experience as well as current counterinsurgency experience (in the West Bank and Gaza). The lessons of the Middle East, as a testing ground for Western military equipment against Soviet-supplied armies, are disseminated through the world via Israel.  Especially during the past decade, Israel has come to specialize as a strong arm of the Pax Americana, and it has been performing this role not simply regionally but also on a global scale.

Virtually anywhere in the world, where atrocities and mass murder is being committed, you can be sure to find the Israeli state providing state-of-the art weaponry.  This was also true in Bosnia and the former Yugoslavia.  Here is an article from Israel’s +972 magazine we see how Israel’s Supreme Court helps in covering up the details of what Israel during the time when concentration camps renewed their acquaintance with Europe.

Supreme Court rules against exposing Israel's role in Bosnian genocide

Citing potential damage to Israel’s foreign relations, the Supreme Court rejects a petition calling to reveal details of the government’s arms exports to the Serbian army during the Bosnian genocide.

By John Brown* (Translated by Tal Haran)

A mass grave in Bosnia. (ICTY)

Israel’s Supreme Court last month rejected a petition to reveal details of Israeli defense exports to the former Yugoslavia during the genocide in Bosnia in the 1990s. The court ruled that exposing Israeli involvement in genocide would damage the country’s foreign relations to such an extent that it would outweigh the public interest in knowing that information, and the possible prosecution of those involved.

The petitioners, Attorney Itay Mack and Professor Yair Oron, presented the court with concrete evidence of Israeli defense exports to Serbian forces at the time, including training as well as ammunition and rifles. Among other things, they presented the personal journal of General Ratko Mladić, currently on trial at the International Court of Justice for committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Mladić’s journal explicitly mentions Serbia’s ample arms ties with Israel at the time.

The exports took place long after the UN Security Council placed an arms embargo on various parts of the former Yugoslavia, and after the publication of a series of testimonies exposing genocide and the creation of concentration camps.

The Israeli State Attorney’s reply and the court’s rejection of the petition are a de facto admission by Israel that it cooperated with the Bosnian genocide: if the government had nothing to hide, the documents under discussion would not pose any threat to foreign relations.

The most horrific acts of cruelty since the Holocaust

Between 1991 and 1995 the former Yugoslavia shattered, going from a multi-national republic to an assemblage of nations fighting each other in a bloody civil war that included massacres and ultimately genocide.

The Serbs waged war against Croatia from 1991-1992, and against Bosnia from 1992-1995. In both wars the Serbs committed genocide and ethnic cleansing of Muslims in the areas they occupied, leading to the deaths of 250,000 people. Tens of thousands of others were wounded and starved, a multitude of women were raped, and many people were incarcerated in concentration camps. Other parties to the conflict also committed war crimes, but the petition focuses on Israel’s collaboration with the Serbian forces. The horrendously cruel acts in Yugoslavia were the worst Europe had seen since the Holocaust.

Ratko Mladić. Evidence of Israeli arms deals was found in his journal. (Mikhail Estefayev)

One of the most notorious massacres was perpetrated by soldiers serving under Serbian General Ratko Mladić around the city of Srebrenica in July 1995. Serbian forces commanded by the general murdered about 8,000 Bosnians and buried them in mass graves in the course of a campaign of ethnic cleansing they were waging against Muslims in the area. Although the city was supposed to be under UN protection, when the massacre began UN troops did not intervene. Mladić was extradited to the International Court of Justice at The Hague in 2012, and is still on trial.

At the time, prominent Jewish organizations were calling for an immediate end to the genocide and shutting down the death camps. Not so the State of Israel. Outwardly it condemned the massacre, but behind the scenes was supplying weapons to the perpetrators and training their troops.

Attorney Mack and Professor Oron have gathered numerous testimonies about the Israeli arms supply to Serbia, which they presented in their petition. They provided evidence of such exports taking place long after the UN Security Council embargo went into effect in September 1991. The testimonies have been crossed-checked and are brought here as they were presented in the petition, with necessary abbreviations.

In 1992 a former senior official of the Serb Ministry of Defense published a book, The Serbian Army, in which she wrote about the arms deal between Israel and Serbia, signed about a month after the embargo: “One of the largest deals was made in October 1991. For obvious reasons, the deal with the Jews was not made public at the time.”

An Israeli who volunteered in a humanitarian organization in Bosnia at the time testified that in 1994 a UN officer asked him to look at the remains of 120 mm shell — with Hebrew writing on it — that exploded on the landing strip of the Sarajevo airfield. He also testified that he saw Serbs moving around in Bosnia carrying Uzi guns made in Israel.

A concentration camp in Bosnia. (ITN)

In 1995 it was reported that Israeli arms dealers in collaboration with the French closed a deal to supply Serbia with LAW missiles. According to reports from 1992, a delegation of the Israeli Ministry of Defense came to Belgrade and signed an agreement to supply shells.

The same General Mladić who is now being prosecuted for war crimes and genocide, wrote in his journal that “from Israel — they proposed joint struggle against Islamist extremists. They offered to train our men in Greece and a free supply of sniper rifles.” A report prepared at the request of the Dutch government on the investigation of the Srebrenica events contains the following: “Belgrade considered Israel, Russia and Greece its best friends. In autumn 1991 Serbia closed a secret arms deal with Israel.”

In 1995 it was reported that Israeli arms dealers supplied weapons to VRS — the army of Republika Srpska, the Bosnian Serb Army. This supply must have been made with the knowledge of the Israeli government.

The Serbs were not the only party in this war to which the Israeli arms dealers tried to sell weapons. According to reports, there was also an attempt to make a deal with the anti-Semitic Croatian regime, which eventually fell through. The petition also presented reports by human rights activists about Israelis training the Serb army, and that the arms deal with the Serbs enabled Jews to leave Sarajevo, which was under siege.

While all of this was taking place in relative secrecy, at the public level the government of Israel lamely expressed its misgivings about the situation, as if this were some force majeure and not a manmade slaughter. In July 1994, then-Chairman of the Israeli Knesset’s Foreign Relations and Defense Committee MK Ori Or visited Belgrade and said: “Our memory is alive. We know what it means to live with boycotts. Every UN resolution against us has been taken with a two-thirds majority.” That year, Vice President of the US at the time, Al Gore, summoned the Israeli ambassador and warned Israel to desist from this cooperation.

Incidentally, in 2013 Israel had no problem extraditing to Bosnia-Herzegovina a citizen who immigrated to Israel seven years earlier and was wanted for suspicion of involvement in a massacre in Bosnia in 1995. In other words, at some point the state itself recognized the severity of the issue.

The Supreme Court in the service of war crimes

The Supreme Court session on the state’s reply to the petition was held ex parte, i.e. the petitioners weren’t allowed to hear it. Justices Danziger, Mazouz and Fogelman rejected the petition and accepted the state’s position that revealing the details of Israeli defense exports to Serbia during the genocide would damage Israel’s foreign relations and security, and that this potential damage exceeds the public’s interest in exposing what happened.

A mass grave at Srebrenica, where Serbian forces massacred around 8,000 Bosnian Muslims in 1995. (Adam Jones)

This ruling is dangerous for several reasons. Firstly, the court’s acceptance of the state’s certainty in how much damage would be caused to Israel’s foreign relations is perplexing. Earlier this year, the same Supreme Court rejected a similar claim regarding defense exports during the Rwandan genocide, yet a month later the state itself declared that the exports were halted six days after the killing started. If even the state does not see any harm in revealing — at least partially — this information regarding Rwanda, why was a sweeping gag imposed on the subject a month prior? Why did the Supreme Court justices overlook this deception, even refusing to accept it as evidence as the petitioners requested? After all, the state has obviously exaggerated in its claim that this information would be damaging to foreign relations.

Secondly, it is very much in the public’s interest to expose the state’s involvement in genocide, including through arms dealers, particularly as a state that was founded upon the devastation of its people following the Holocaust. It was for this reason that Israel was, for example, willing to disregard Argentina’s sovereignty when it kidnapped Eichmann and brought him to trial on its own soil. It is in the interest not only of Israelis, but also of those who were victims of the Holocaust. When the court considers war crimes, it is only proper for it to consider their interest as well.

When the court rules in cases of genocide that damage to state security — which remains entirely unproven — overrides the pursuit of justice for the victims of such crimes, it is sending a clear message: that the state’s right to security, whether real or imaginary, is absolute, and takes precedence over the rights of its citizens and others.

The Supreme Court’s ruling might lead one to conclude that the greater the crime, the easier it is to conceal. The more arms sold and the more genocide perpetrators trained, the greater the damage to the state’s foreign relations and security should such crimes be exposed, and the weight of such supposed damage will necessarily override the public interest. This is unacceptable. It turns the judges — as the petitioners have put it — into accomplices. The justices thus also make an unwitting Israeli public complicit in war crimes, and deny them the democratic right to conduct the relevant discussion.

The state faces a series of similar requests regarding its collaboration with the murderers of the Argentinian Junta, Pinochet’s regime in Chile, and Sri Lanka. Attorney Mack intends to present additional cases by the end of this year. Even if it is in the state’s interest to reject these petitions, the Supreme Court must stop helping to conceal these crimes — if not for the sake of prosecuting perpetrators of past atrocities, at least in order to put a stop to them in our time.

*John Brown is the pseudonym of an Israeli academic and a blogger. This story first appeared in Hebrew on Local Call, where he is a blogger. Read it here.