ABSTRACT
Under such circumstances, inter-community reconciliation and integration appears to be wishful thinking. How can the vicious circle of myth, atrocities and revenge be broken? In the short and medium term, mutual toleration of separate existences protected by either international or national security forces seem to be the best that one can hope for. This is to some extent also reflected in the analyses of the educational system and local governance by Nelles and Baskin. In the longer term, however, it must be possible to proceed from guarded separation to mutual toleration among separated communities, and then to genuine reconciliation and integration. According to Vetlesen, there is some hope not least due to the intervention of third parties. The important task is to reverse the logic of genocide that is to relocate guilt and responsibility from a collective to an individual level. Unfortunately, however, the case against former President Slobodan Milošević is seen by many as just another stroke by NATO imperialists against a suffering Serbia. It is essential to counter this myth of suffering and victimization, and to force the players to acknowledge that there can be perpetrators and victims on both sides. This will allow the two groups to meet, for instance in trade, but it will not create a genuinely integrated multicultural society.
