<http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=738> The Hague vs. Karadzic: A Grim
Update


by Srdja Trifkovic

http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=738

The  <http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LN441996.htm> amended ICTY
indictment against Radovan Karadzic was made public by the Yugoslav war
crimes tribunal on September 23. Its objective is not only to reinforce the
charge of genocide against the former Bosnian-Serb leader himself and ipso
facto against the Bosnian-Serb Republic (Republika Srpska), but also to make
yet another attempt to assert the culpability of Serbia – and by extension
the collective guilt of the entire Serbian nation – in that alleged crime. 

The Tribunal is making the assertion of Belgrade's complicity in an indirect
and partly concealed manner. Unlike the
<http://www.un.org/icty/indictment/english/kar-ii950724e.htm> original
indictments (July-November 1995),
<http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:N8AA-h94zg0J:www.un.org/icty/indictment
/english/kar-ai000428e.htm+icty+amended+indictment+karadzic&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd
=1&gl=us> amended in May 2000, in the latest modified indictment the OTP
(Office of the Prosecutor) narrows down it focus on one "overreaching" and
three "common" joint criminal conspiracies. The first of them accuses
Karadzic of being part of a criminal conspiracy to carry out genocide in
Bosnia in the areas claimed by Serbs. It claims that, in addition to a
number of persons from the Republika Srpska, this "joint criminal
conspiracy" included several former top officials of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia and the Republic of Serbia, specifically former Serbian and
Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, former security service chief Jovica
Stanisic, his aide Frenki Simatovic, and prominent politician Vojisal Seselj
(Art. 11), as well as an indeterminate number of unnamed and unindicted
personnel of the Serbian Interior Ministry, MUP, the Yugoslav People's Army,
JNA, and the Yugoslav Army, VJ (Art. 12).  

It is noteworthy that Karadzic's named alleged co-conspirators from Belgrade
are either unable to defend themselves against this new charge, or else have
not been accused of it – although they are in ICTY custody:

*       Milosevic died in March 2006 and therefore he is unable to defend
himself against this new charge, although he mounted a vigorous and
effective defense against a
<http://www.un.org/icty/indictment/english/mil-ai040421-e.htm> similar
charge concerning Kosovo;

*       Stanisic, Simatovic and Seselj have been indicted by the ICTY on
lesser counts, but since none of them have been accused of "genocide" by the
Tribunal they cannot mount any defense in their own trials against this
additional and very serious charge that appears on Karadzic's rap sheet;

*       Additional Belgrade personnel (MUP, JNA and VJ) remain unnamed and
therefore cannot mount a defense.

The ICTY OTP strategy is clear: to force Karadzic to defend not just himself
against the charge of genocide, but also his various alleged
fellow-conspirators in Serbia – named and unnamed – who have not been
accused of this supreme crime themselves. His failure to do so will result
in a conviction that will apply not only to him but also to all others.

In preparing his defense Karadzic will naturally focus on himself and his
own actions, as may well be expected of any accused. This will be just what
the OTP wants: to smuggle the pan-Serbian conspiracy to commit "genocide"
involving Belgrade – a charge so far unproven and rejected by the
International Court of Justice – on the back of Karadzic's indictment. If it
is "proven," at the ICTY, the Sarajevo Muslims will duly renew their case
against Serbia at the ICJ.

A year and a half ago,
<http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles7/TrifkovicRuling.php> in a landmark
case that put a nation on trial for genocide for the first time in history,
Serbia was
<http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article1441632.ece>
found not guilty by the International Court of Justice at The Hague. "The
court finds that the acts of genocide at Srebrenica cannot be attributed to
[Serbia's] state organs," said the ICJ president,
<http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/igeneralinformation/icvjudge/Higgins.html>
Judge Rosalyn Higgins, in the ruling made public on February 26, 2007. She
said it could also not be established that Serbia had been complicit by
supplying aid to the Bosnian Serbs in the summer of 1995, when the killings
at Srebrenica took place. Reflecting the complexities of the case, the 16
judges deliberated for 10 months. The court's decisions are binding, without
appeal, and enforceable by the UN Security Council.

The Muslim authorities in Sarajevo
<http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/ipresscom/ipress2006/ipresscom_2006-09_bhy_20
060227.htm> instituted proceedings against Serbia at the ICJ in March 1993,
charging the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (as it was then) of violating
the 1948 U.N. Genocide Convention. The case continued after the end of the
Bosnian war in October 1995 and the fall of Slobodan Milosevic in October
2000, even though the Republika Srpska (RS)—a constituent Bosnian
entity—subsequently objected to the charge being brought on behalf of
"Bosnia-Herzegovina" as a whole. The RS authorities disputed the legitimacy
of the filing of the Bosnian application to the Court because it had not
been ratified by the post-Dayton presidency, where the Bosnian Serbs would
have been able to veto it. 

Most major media  <http://www.antiwar.com/deliso/?articleid=8985> depositors
in the bank of collective Serbian guilt have tried to spin the verdict, but
they could not alter the significance of the ICJ ruling, which came just two
weeks before the  <http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=384582007>
first anniversary of the death of Slobodan Milosevic in detention at
<http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/News/Trifkovic00/NewsST032000.html> The
Hague Tribunal. The "Bosnian" case against Milosevic had rested on his
alleged incitement of the Bosnian Serbs to commit genocide and his supposed
personal responsibility for its occurrence. As
<http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/laughland3.html> John Laughland was
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2022969,00.html> quick to note
in The Guardian on February 28, 2007, Milosevic was posthumously exonerated
by the ICJ. He had always argued that neither Yugoslavia nor Serbia had
command of the Bosnian Serb army, and this has now been upheld by the world
court.

 "If Milosevic were still alive," I wrote in February 2007, "the ICTY would
have to devise some creative stratagems to deal with the implications of the
ICJ verdict. It would have found them, no doubt." 

Now we know that it has done so regardless of his death, posthumously
reindicting Milosevic in the charge against Karadzic. This reflects ever
more glaringly the fact that the  <http://www.un.org/icty/> ICTY is a
political, rather than judicial institution. It will continue to deny
<http://www.balkanstudies.org/wordfiles/Bosnia/OUP_Bosnia_2001.htm> what I
have argued for years: that the crimes in Bosnia in 1992-1995 were not the
direct result of anyone's "nationalist project" as such. The crimes were the
results of the war, not its causes. However severely they must be judged,
they were the consequence of a great, complex international blunder, and of
Izetbegovic's decision to secede. Events cut channels deeper and less
controllable than the intentions of anyone. 

Reply via email to