Tuesday February 20, 2018
Home World Srebrenica Ma...

Srebrenica Massacre: As the world pays homage to victims, hypocrisy has become the global norm

0
//
68
Republish
Reprint

Srebrenica_massacre_memorial_gravestones_2009_1

By Gaurav Sharma

Twenty years ago scores of people, mostly young Muslim boys and men from the east Bosnian town of Srebrenica were captured, blindfolded, tied-up and loaded into trucks. Shortly thereafter they were lined up, asked to pray and shot dead with automatic weapons.

Today, the world will fall silent for a few hours to commemorate the anniversary of the systematic killings recognized by the UN war crimes tribunal as the only genocide on European soil since World War 2.

The brutal massacre was part of the Bosnian Wars which occurred during the early 1990’s. The wars were a trickle down effect of the political and economic upheavals that began in Yugoslavia in 1980’s after the fall of the firm communist leadership of Josip Broz Tito.

Following the fall of the communist regime in Yugoslavia, ethnic tensions flared up between Serbs and Croats, leading to the Croatian War of Independence. After the independence of Croatia in 1991, the influence of xenophobia and ethnic hatred burst out in the open. The Serb-dominated Yugoslav army attacked Croat villages and bombarded Dubrovnik with special focus.

The media dubbed the explosion of violence in the area as “a strategy for pursuing the creation of a Greater Serbia”. Following Serbian and Croatian lines, the violence continued unabated in Bosnia and Herzegovina, a newly formed state which comprised a multi-ethnic population of majority Muslim Bosniaks, and minority Orthodox Serbs and Catholic Croats.

Bosnia and Herzegovina received international recognition on April 6,1992. On the same day, the Serbs laid siege to the capital city of Sarajevo and marked the beginning of the Bosnian Wars.

In July 1995, the self-proclaimed Bosnian Serb Army under the command of General Ratko Mladic swept into the Srebrenica enclave, a UN designated “safe haven” and perpetrated the killings of more than 8,000 Muslim men and boys. The bodies were later dumped into pits.

In the bloody aftermath of the genocide, the Serbian wartime leadership dug up the mass graves and reburied the corpses in a bid to conceal the atrocities inflicted on Bosnian Muslims.

While Serbian leaders Radovin Karadzic and General Ratko Mladic await sentences for their role in directing the genocide, the seemingly innocuous Western powers who were well aware, if not active participants in the genocide have remained clear of any criminal charges.

Declassified cables and testimonies in the Hague tribunal have revealed that America, Britain and France supported the contention that Srebrenica, along with two other UN safe havens were “untenable”. To bargain for peace, the Western powers were willing to cede Srebrenica to the Serbs.

What firmly establishes the complicity of the West in the genocide is the revelation that they were well aware of “Directive 7”, a Serbian military order that called for the permanent removal of Bosnian Muslims from the safe area.

After a US diplomat reported to Washington that a peace map would not become a reality unless the safe areas were ceded to the Serbs, the US policy-making Principles Committee urged the soldiers to move away from the fragile land, a reference to the safe areas.

Furthermore, the US cables show that the CIA was watching the mass-killings “live” through satellites.

Dutch troops have also been accused of evicting people from their refuge and watching the Serbian army segregate young children and women from the male assemblage.

As happens with most people who reveal the secret complicity of the dominant powers, Florence Hartmann, the woman behind the shocking disclosures has beenindicted for breach of confidentiality and also convicted of contempt of court by the International Criminal tribunal.

Meanwhile, Serbia and Russia have chosen to turn a blind eye on the massacre with Milorad Dodik, a Bosnian Serb leader, terming the genocide as“one of the biggest shams of the 20th century.” Russia has moved along similar lines by vetoing against a UK-sponsored UN security council resolution declaring the killings as genocide.

At the same time, the two countries acknowledge the killings as a “grave crime” while blaring out resounding calls that they are “not deaf to the sufferings of the victims of Srebrenica”.

As commemorations paying homage to the victims of Srebrenica, including a memorial service in Westminster Abbey and a mass gathering at a huge graveyard near the United Nations base at Potocari start pouring in, one wonders if hypocrisy has become the global political norm.

On the other hand, the families of the victims have been forced to live in a limbo built on foundations of constant fear and hatred where justice has become a far fetched dream.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 NewsGram

Next Story

Dalveer Bhandari re-elected as the judge of ICJ

Bhandari has also served as the judge of Supreme Court of India

0
//
52
The judge of the international court of justice.
Dalveer Bhandari got 121 votes in a 193 members assembly. IANS

Arul Louis

United Nations, November 21

Judge Dalveer Bhandari was re-elected to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Tuesday as the General Assembly rallied behind him in a show of strength that made Britain bow to the majority and withdraw its candidate Christopher Greenwood.

“I am grateful to all the nations who have supported me,” Bhandari told IANS in the Assembly chamber after the election. “It was a big election as you know.” The withdrawal of its candidate by Britain, which had the backing of its fellow permanent members, was a setback for the Security Council that had been locked in a test of wills with the Assembly.

A candidate has to win a majority in both the chambers. Bhandari won majorities in the Assembly in the first 11 rounds of voting over two meetings, while the Council blocked his election by giving majorities to Greenwood in the ten rounds of balloting it held.

“The British ultimately had to bow down to the will of the majority,” a diplomat said. “The Indians stared them down.” The Council’s permanent members have traditionally had a judge in the ICJ, assuming it to be a matter of right. This time the 193-member Assembly asserted itself, forcing the Council to back down and put at risk the continuation of the ICJ perk of the permanent members.

In letters written to the Presidents Miroslav Lajcak of the Assembly and Sebastiano Cardi of the Council, Britain’s Permanent Representative Matthew Rycroft said that his country was withdrawing Greenwood’s candidature keeping “in mind the close relationship that the United Kingdom and India always enjoyed and will continue to enjoy”.

Bhandari’s election was a dramatic face-saving turn of fortunes for India, as he lost the Asian seat on the ICJ to Lebanese lawyer-turned-diplomat Nawaf Salam, who had been campaigning for two years and had the backing of the powerful Organisation of Islamic Cooperation with 55 members in the UN.

Bhandari got a second chance only because an unpopular Britain could not get an Assembly majority for a remaining judgeship requiring a runoff where the two chambers of the UN split in their voting.

Bhandari’s cause became a rallying point for the nations not a member of the Council, who were chafing under the domination of the unrepresentative Council to make a popular show of force.

India hammered home the representative character of the Assembly compared to the Council and insisted that the UN members follow democratic principles and re-elect Bhandari by accepting the global majority he has received in the Assembly.

In the last round of voting on November 13, Bhandari received 121 votes, just short of a two-thirds majority in the 193-member Assembly, while Greenwood received nine in the Council.

“The precedent is clear,” India’s Permanent Representative Syed Akbaruddin said at a reception for Bhandari attended by representatives of over 160 countries on Thursday.

“As is expected in the 21st century, the candidate who enjoys the overwhelming support of the General Assembly membership can be the only legitimate candidate to go through.” Diplomats familiar with behind-the-scenes manoeuvres said Britain indicated late last week that it would withdraw Greenwood, but over the weekend changed course with the backing of some fellow permanent members and came up with a plan for the Council to call for ending the balloting and set up a joint conference to resolve the deadlock.

The statutes of the ICJ provides for a joint conference made up of three members each from the Council and the Assembly to resolve a deadlock that persists after three election meetings.

India feared the outcome and campaigned resolutely to avoid it, pointing to the precedents in the elections in 2011 and 2014 and earlier when the candidate leading in the Council withdrew in favour of the candidate with the majority in the Assembly even though in those cases permanent members were not involved.

Bhandari’s election upsets what has become a traditional balance in the ICJ. Besides a permanent member going unrepresented, four Asian countries will be represented on the ICJ bench instead of the usual three.

Three incumbent judges of the ICJ — President Ronny Abraham of France, Vice President, Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf of Somalia, and Antonio Augusto Cancado Trindade of Brazil – were elected along with Salam in the first four rounds of voting on November 9.

Bhandari and the others elected will start their term in February next year. (IANS)