If you're sticking to your "I have this feeling people willingly misunderstood him, they’re so keen on this idea of one sole perpetrator of the war, that him being willing to just be a witness that bad things also happened in Serbia as well got people mad" (a page or so earlier, like you said) — then yes, that is a clear position. It is also one that is historically and factually wrong, and morally monstrous.
I urge you to educate yourself beyond Handke's twisted and insincere views on the Yugoslav wars. Like I said a page or so earlier as well: "Why can't he be a great writer with terrible politics? Why does he have to be "misunderstood"?" And why is it that when this all is brought up, you prefer to wave it away and pretend it doesn't exist?
I don't pretend things don't exist; It's just I've already
expressed myself about it and I stand by it, even after your replies (which I've read, including the links contained therein); and I don't see the need to be caught up in an endless loop talking about things already spoken (or to put it more accurately, written). As you might have noticed, I'm pretty much averse to discussing politics, so I don't intend to talk about it, to pontificate about it; my thing is Art (I'm aware, tho, that politics can be infused into Art, and I'm not contrary to that happening; simply put, whatever point of view presented, I just consider it as a part of a work like any other and judge not its contents but how they were handled).
At the stage we're in, however, I'm not sure I could say anything that could settle this whole debacle but to agree with you that Handke, a person I don't even know, is a most terrible human being, beyond any forgiveness, and apologise for my "morally monstrous" character.
One thing we can all agree is how bad any sort of crime and harm ever perpetrated in human history is condemnable. And that is that. I’m totally against any kind of violence, verbal or physical, and I’m also against denying any sort of violence, be it a genocide or anything else. So, without us pretending to know what's inside each other's minds, what our thoughts consist of, can we just leave each other be and engage in the world in whatever way we find most suitable and pleasing for ourselves, as long as it doesn't offend or deprive others of their rights?
I thank you in advance, and apologise for not willing to further attempt to respond in a satisfying way to you or anyone, and for refraining for good from this complete ordeal.