 |
| Radovan Karadzic: Courtesy of the ICTY |
I think both sides of the debate can agree that the decision by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia to acquit former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic of genocide in 1992 is momentous.
Serbs and Bosniaks alike are vexed by the media's concentration on the Srebrenica massacre in 1995, Serbs because they say it was a reaction to crimes against Serbs in the region in 1992, Bosniaks because it distracts attention from the brutal ethnic cleansing they experienced all over Bosnia in 1992.
The focus on the symbolically-important Srebrenica massacre may explain why the decision has, judging by BBC, Sky and ITN TV news programmes this evening, received scant coverage so far.
But the lack of coverage of this momentous decision is surely not just due to this. It seems to me also due to a reluctance to present the public with news that calls into question widely held assumptions about the war. Today’s decision does not sit well with the Western perception of Radovan Karadzic and the Bosnian Serb leadership in general. Where it has been covered on English-language news websites, the headline has often been about the predictable failure to have some of the charges dropped, rather than the real story, the ruling on Count One, the charge of genocide in various municipalities in Bosnia from March to December 1992.
Surely his his monstrous reputation is what makes the headline “Karadzic acquitted...” all the more newsworthy? The ruling is particularly interesting given that it would seem much easier to connect Karadzic with the events of 1992 than with the Srebrenica massacre. As James Gow writes of the massacre in the excellent 'The Serbian Project and its Adversaries': “Mladic’s bloody determination in this situation almost certainly means that the Bosnian Serb political leader Karadzic was not involved and knew nothing about it – potentially creating significant problems for the prosecution, if he faced trial for genocide in The Hague, based on events at Srebrenica.”
That today’s news is of interest to audiences outside the Balkans is suggested by the wide attention given to the ruling by RT, the English language TV station funded by the Russian government.
As with all RT’s news on the former Yugoslavia, the coverage is undoubtedly due to the channel’s strong pro-Serb bias. But I think the Western media’s lack of coverage of the decision is also for the wrong reasons.
6 comments:
Wait a minute Rory. What kind of reaction to Bosniak crimes around Srebrenica?
Three years before the 1995 Srebrenica massacre, Serbs destroyed 296 Bosniak villages and killed at least 3,166 Bosniaks around Srebrenica. If there was any reaction, it was not Serb reaction, but Bosniak reaction to Serb war crimes from DAY 1.
Genocide in 7 B&H municipalities was proven in the trial of Slobodan Milsoevic.
According to Dr. Marko Hoare (who worked for the ICTY):
"On 16 June 2004, in ‘Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milosevic: Decision on Motion for Judgement of Acquittal’, the Trial Chamber refused to acquit Milosevic on the same grounds, and ruled:
246. On the basis of the inference that may be drawn from this evidence, a Trial Chamber could be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that there existed a joint criminal enterprise, which included members of the Bosnian Serb leadership, whose aim and intention was to destroy a part of the Bosnian Muslim population, and that genocide was in fact committed in Brcko, Prijedor, Sanski Most, Srebrenica, Bijeljina, Kljuc and Bosanski Novi. The genocidal intent of the Bosnian Serb leadership can be inferred from all the evidence.."
http://greatersurbiton.wordpress.com/2012/06/30/the-ictys-u-turn-over-genocide-in-bosnia/
The point about the Srebrenica massacre as a reaction to crimes in 1992 is made by some Serbs, not by me, which is why I wrote "they say" in the sentence you refer to. The Serb claim is also put into context by my reference to the brutal ethnic cleansing of Muslims all over Bosnia in 1992.
Rory, Serbs have lied so much about Srebrenica that anything they say must be approached with a high degree of caution.
PHOTO: This 19th century masterpiece painting by Uros Predic, known as "Orphan Upon His Mother's Grave" was used as an incitmenet to hatred. In 1994, during the brutal siege of Srebrenica, Belgrade's newspapers 'Vecernje Novosti' claimed it to be one-and-a-half-year-old photo of an orphaned Serbian boy whose entire family was killed by "Muslims" (Bosniaks) around Srebrenica. LINK: http://goo.gl/D8opc
Genocide is opposite to deportation (ethnic cleansing). Indictment with both charges is suspicious. Act of deportation serves as a prove that there was no intention of genocide. And vice versa.
so srebrenica genocide what you are saying that only bosnian muslims died in srebrenica ??? what about all of the serbian villages that got massacred by nasir oric ? what about all the other towns and cities where serbs were rapped tortured and killed? eg konjic and surrounding areas. i agree all three sides done some very bad things to the others but you can not say one ethnicity killed every one and the other two were saints.
Post a Comment