The Hague vs. Karadzic: A Grim Update
by Srdja Trifkovic
[Subscribe online to Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture. Click here for details].
The 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 original indictments (July-November 1995), amended in May 2000, in the latest modified indictment the OTP (Office of the Prosecutor) narrows down its focus to one “overreaching” and three “common” joint criminal conspiracies.
The first, “overreaching” one accuses Karadzic of being part of a criminal conspiracy to carry out genocide in Bosnia-Herzegovina in the areas claimed by the Serbs. It asserts 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, his former security service chief Jovica Stanisic, the latter’s close aide Frenki Simatovic, and prominent politician Vojislav 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 similar charge concerning Kosovo;
-
Stanisic, Simatovic and Seselj have been indicted by the ICTY on lesser counts; but since none of them have been directly 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, in a landmark case that put a nation on trial for genocide for the first time in history, Serbia was 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, 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 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 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 first anniversary of the death of Slobodan Milosevic in detention at 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 John Laughland was 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 ICTY is a political, rather than judicial institution. It will continue to deny 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 in Bosnia 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.
[Subscribe online to Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture. Click here for details].
1 Comment by Etienne Gervaise on 24 September 2008:
These lame-oh Eurotrials are nothing more than showboat entertainment along the lines of Uncle Joe Stalin. The only trouble is that today nobody really cares about so-called “war criminals,” they want to know who’s sleeping with whom and, naturally, the latest soccer scores.
Of course, both the lawyer business and the gutter press are controlled by the same filthy swindlers that are ripping off our pensions.
2 Comment by Eagle on 24 September 2008:
I really wonder how much more time transpires before the Marxists, who are increasingly in control of the levers of power in the west, institute a court in which crimes against humanity are prosecuted against all who profess:
1. Christian faith
2. European lineage of any sort
3. Preferences for European culture
From what I see at the ICTY, from prosectutions of thought crimes in major European nations, and the erasure of cultural heritage being ushered in by the Brussels bureaucracy, I cannot imagine it is too far off.
3 Comment by Eagle on 24 September 2008:
Perhaps our Marxist superiors will go one step better than brain-washing and ethnic dilution by mass emigration; neurochemical mind controls and forced procreation with non-whites will be the next logical steps as they carry out their genocide. The future could well make us long for the days of the catacombs that our distant ancestors endured.
4 Comment by james1 on 24 September 2008:
Will the golden chain list be presented as evidence that terrorists themselves listed dating back to 89 as the main financiers?
If he is still alive Karadzic could get former Egyptian UN diplomat Botros Gally to testify that the UN safe zone in Srebrenica was a haven for Bosnian militants to attack Serbian villages.
Or present a previous 2002 report on Srebrenica http://slobodan-milosevic.ihostsites.net/news/smorg-sreb101604.htm
In the Dutch documentary and a legal expert assigned to assist Karadzic interviewed on Russia Today they mentioned the role played by western intelligence and the Vatican in supporting anti-Serb militants.
What role does the Vatican have in this?
5 Comment by jack bailey on 24 September 2008:
“The crimes in Bosnia were the results of the war, not its causes.” This at some point becomes like the chicken and the egg question since the result is none the less the same: 80000 or so dead. The real cause of the war was the desire of the many to escape the communist yoke by any means available. All other national communist parties in Yugoslavia were self-liquidationist at that point except for the Serbian communists. The Serbian communists could have followed this pattern and thus preserved Yugoslavia. However, they would have rather seen the demise of Yugoslavia than to give up their power. Since they had almost no support in all other republics to preserve communism as the ruling ideology, they adapted the ideology of Seselj for their own ends, in order to go to war to defend the outside Serb lands, which were at that point threatened as a reaction to his propagation of hatred (talk about prophesizing one’s own doom!). By helping the endangered Serbs outside of Serbia, Serb communists wanted to legitimize their control of power, as the sole defenders of the Serbs. This is in fact what the Tribunal should try to prove, because this is the real story. From the international standpoint, the only party that would have never been allowed to win in this civil war is the Serb communists, the Serb UDBA and this was finally accomplished through the bombardment of Serbia. There is no doubt that the existing peace is unjust for the Serbs. The mopup operation called Hague Tribunal is biased against the Serbs as well and goes beyond what it really needs to do. Therein lies a paradox: by not limiting themselves in “exorcizing” communism only and getting themselves mired in the “chicken and egg” questions, the Hague inqusition is actually strengthening the Seselj nationalists and with it the possibility of future wars in the area. One can only hope that there is someone out there with the power and wisdom to delcare: enough already!
6 Comment by Trifkovic on 24 September 2008:
Oh, not another recycled Seselj/UDBA tirade — enough already, indeed!
7 Comment by Mike Ezzo on 24 September 2008:
Eagle, another one I’m still waiting for is an Islamic court to defend Christianity against the jihadi.
8 Comment by John Press on 24 September 2008:
Hey all,
I have subscribed to Chronicles for many years. It has formed the basis of many of my suppositions. In appreciation and in hope of some positive feedback, I want to offer free copies of the book “Culturism: A Word, A Value, Our Future” to anyone on this blog.
Culturism is the opposite of multiculturalism. Multiculturalism says we have no core culture to protect. Culturists and Chronicles readers know better.
The word ‘racist’ is used to stop conversations. We can redirect discussions to our way by thinking by identifying ourselves as culturists.
Being highly educated, folks at Chronicles will undoubtedly disagree with parts of my premises. But we will agree on immigration and foreign policy as we are culturists. I would also hope we can agree on the practicality of identifying as culturists who believe in culturism.
Go to http://www.culturism.us, find “contact” at the bottom right and email me for a copy of the book culturism.
Thanks!! John
9 Comment by Akira on 24 September 2008:
As long as we’re putting entire nations on trial, how about bringing the nation [Umm...Ah...] of Islam to face “justice” at the Hague?
Now that would be entertaining!
+ + +
Eagle, re “how much time before Marxists institute a court against … ” etc.:
Haven’t you heard about Canadian “Human Rights” Commissions?
10 Comment by Akira on 24 September 2008:
Jack Bailey,
Yes, only Serbs were concerned about their fellow nationals in Bosnia. Zagreb played no role in Bosnia, Muslims did nothing to help Bosnian Muslims, and Santa is living in my basement.
11 Comment by Akira on 24 September 2008:
John Press,
You are right to say that “The word ‘racist’ is used to stop conversations.”
However, there still is such a thing as irrational and hateful racism.
One of the problems with the widespread and usually innacurate use of that term is that the word, like “sexism” or “fascism” becomes meaningless. It basically means, “I don’t like you and I am going to slander you.”
Racism is a serious problem, which is made light of by statements we often hear, such as “If you don’t support Obama, you must be racist!” and “If you criticize the Koran, you are a racist.”
And, while their is often a strong correlation between race (and ethnos) and a nation, many nations/cultures are not racially based.
I agree that “multiculturalism” really means no culture, in the same way that someone who professes to be a Christian and a Muslim [yes, certain Anglican priests at least have said so ... "All religions are the same ... they're all a path to God/The Goddess/The Gods"] is neither one nor the other.
12 Comment by M K on 25 September 2008:
…this is one of the many examples Clinton/ the US ideally rejected participating, and thereby rendered itself immune to the ICJ and any type of World Court for that matter…but it will be only a matter of time when we will be all under the UN and IMF, NWO
13 Comment by Eagle on 25 September 2008:
Yes, sure, Mr. Bailey, it was all a fight against communism. That is why all the seceded Yugoslav republics promptly elected to their leadership….communists. And that is why the ex-Soviet republics also elected…communists. And that is why NATO and the EU were/are run by men like Javier Solana (communists). But let’s not quiblle with things like facts….let’s instead all be on the look-out for UDBA and other non-existent underground communist operatives…while our ACTUAL Marxist superiors – who go by other names but whose behavior follows the Leninist-Gramcian line – destroy the civilization around us. This very real communist-style push to authoritarian, centralized, and violent life must, in your eyes, be aye-o.k. as long as the appropriate democratic-capitalist sloganeering accompanies it.
14 Comment by Akira on 25 September 2008:
John,
I’d say that the most common, or at least acceptable” racism in the US is hatred or contempt for white people.
I doubt it would be possible to watch NBC, ABC or CBS for a few hours without hearing at least one comment about how whites are stupid, or racist, or arrogant, or evil, or can’t dance, or can’t play basketball, or talk funny, or whatever.
Anyway, about The Racism Industry: that would be a whole other book, right?
Typical: “Democrat Congress-hack: Jews are Black, Blacks and Jews love to kill babies, Palin is Hitler” [I calls 'em as I sees 'em.]
http://brianakira.wordpress.com/2008/09/25/democrat-congress-hack-jews-are-black-blacks-and-jews-love-to-kill-babies-palin-is-hitler/
15 Comment by roho on 25 September 2008:
At some point, Christians will have to understand that NOTHING has changed in 2008 years, other than the tactics to turn christian against christian?……………Nothing.
16 Comment by Trifkovic on 25 September 2008:
#16 roho: Persecuting emperors were Pythonesque amateurs compared to the Beast of our own postmodern times
17 Comment by jack bailey on 26 September 2008:
some did select the communists and some did not. But most of these communists in Eastern Europe adopted a liberal line. There is a great deal of difference between a Drenovsek, Gorbachev and Milosevic, Lukasenko. As for the UDBAs of this world: they are real and they need not be organized. They can exist and operate in nonformal patterns. Everyone knows what the ideology is: nationalism as the last stage of communism. Whether the current Western world liberalism is yet another form of Trockyism ( yes it is) is another discussion. But to answer your question, yes living under liberalism beats living under Milosevic any day of the week.
18 Comment by jack bailey on 26 September 2008:
Absolutely, Akira. Croats and Muslims had their agenda. I suggest you reread what I wrote.
19 Comment by jack bailey on 26 September 2008:
Dr. Trifkovic, fine. Seselj had nothing to do with UDBA. I was merely trying to point out that Karadzic is not guilty as charged at the tribunal, but at the same time it needs to be said that he was a “useful idiot” in a communist conspiracy. YOu write about how he was convinced that the international community could be forced to accept a Bosnian Serb victory and how unrealistic that was, about his serious disagreements with Mladic, where he was treated practically as an outsider. In other words, he was just the front and the Army was not taking him seriously. If you are really determined to fight for a Serbian national cause as you are, I don’t see why it’s so hard to get rid of the baggage of communism. To paraphrase this mindset: “Communism and UDBA did not exist in the civil war and if they did, they did not matter, it’s all paranoia and furthermore we don’t want to talk about it as it is distracting. Instead we are sticking to the argument that America, Vatican, western Europe hates the Serbs!” (by the way, why is it then that the youth of Serbia is trying to immigrate to the West as fast as they can?). There is no doubt that this is a losing sentiment. This line of defense has not worked, has it? So why not try something different? Like conceding that there was a conspiracy. However, the conspiracy was a communist one instead of a nationalist one. They are two different things. Thus the Bosnian Serbs were forced into a civil war to defend themselves due to the machinations of Milosevic and UDBA. Then your argument that the atrocities were a consequence of the war and not the cause of it becomes easily understandable to the Hague Inquisitors.
20 Comment by Eagle on 26 September 2008:
Mr. Bailey,
This is a re-hash of past exchanges here. You are confused and/or misled on many facets of the dissolution of Yugoslavia, the Soviet Union, and many other political-cultural European matters.
It is complicated, to say the least. What is ‘liberal’ and what is ‘communist’ is not something you define well – at all , really. Is it labels or actual behaviors? Is it the sentiment of the political class or the culture at large? What are you attacking?
Oh, Croatia’s and Ukraine’s communists ‘reformed’ but the baddies in Belgrade and Minsk didn’t apply the same labels of ‘reform’??
Serbia is a small place and those of us that have family ties there, travel there, watch the satellite TV from there, and read materials from there get some sense of what is going on.
Objective observers have noted that while Milosevic was vilified, like Putin, he was winning elections. I cannot comment to the freedom of each and every election, but the latter voting in which he prevailed seemed relatively ‘free’ in that independent polls confirmed is popularity. The media freedoms under his rule were more free than western Europe’s are today. The freedom to travel remained not only for Serbia’s citizens, but for innumerable foreign journalists and NGOs that traversed the country. Private ownership of enterprises existed.
It is true that the de-nationalization of state-owned industries and the liberalizing of banking rules did not happen at any significant pace under his government’s rule – and they liberalize at a slower pace than the “west” would like even under today’s democrats. But I would say that the Russian experience with oligarch’s looting state industries under the watchful eye of Harvard economists and today’s experience with failing liberalized banks under the management of those same Crimson alumni in the US justifies Serbia’s more prudent approach to this matter.
That there were and are secretive intelligence services in Serbia neither confirms nor denies any communist activities. There are secretive intelligence services in almost all countries across the globe – from Pakistan to the United States. Does their existence infer a secret communist conspiracy?!
When folks such as yourself bring up the boogeyman of Milosevic and Lukashenko, I wonder what is it that drives your fear and bias to such an extreme as to condone a violent assault on their people? I am not saying they are admirable leaders, but I am saying that their behavior seems to me the business of their own people and not the business of busy-body Americans searching for communist dragons to slay.
21 Comment by Etienne Gervaise on 26 September 2008:
Go with your instincts everybody. If it smells like Two Minutes Hate, then it is indeed Two Minutes Hate.
In the bad old days of the Cold War Russians read Pravda and Izvestia and were intelligent enough to read between the lines. Today’s ameriKKKans have been dumbed down so badly (so that our minorities will appear smarter) that we lack the ability to know when we’re being conned by the gutter press.
22 Comment by Tomislav Milosevic on 26 September 2008:
Dr. Radovan Karadzic had been found guilty of any immense crime at the same time as he was stripped of his title, Dr. that is. Since then he was a smuggler, a thief, a fugitive, adulterer………
Serbs, on the other hand, started being guilty of something prior to Stefan Nemanja as it seems.
I am finally beginning to understand the reasons.
Consequences also.
23 Comment by Boba on 27 September 2008:
Has anybody watched the miserable “debate” yesterday, between McCain and Obama? Americans (but also others in the world) should be very concern.
Candidates are not only tired of debating; they are totally disconnected from reality of the economic crisis that the USA is in. AND they are liars! McCain cannot stop lying about Serbs, Bosnia and Kosovo . His leit-motive is heard over and over again “Serbs have committed genocide and ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Kosovo”!! NO, Mr. MCCAIN – It was AMERICAN SPONSORED AND TRAINED Croats, Bosnian Muslims and Kosovo Albanians who have committed genocide and ethnic cleansing against the Serbs in Croatia, Bosnia and the Serbian province of Kosovo and Metohija. Thus, the USA leadership is equally responsible as the one of Croatian/ B. Muslim /Albanian rebels for genocide committed against the Serbs.
Until McCain and Obama do not realize their responsibilities in the break-up of Yugoslavia and the illegal and criminal bombing of Serbs , they should not be considered as statesmen and serious leaders of the “fee world”.
24 Comment by Boba on 27 September 2008:
Has anybody watched the miserable “debate” yesterday, between McCain and Obama? Americans (but also others in the world) should be very concerned.
25 Comment by Etienne Gervaise on 27 September 2008:
@23 Boba
I did not watch the debates, I think some funny cartoons were on instead. You’ll find that many Chronicles readers can’t be bothered to vote. I am not one of them.
When presented with a choice between the Stupid Party and the Evil Party arguing about how badly they want to plunder the future to bail out their greedy contributors, I will vote for None of the Above or any Third Party candidate. I might toss a coin between Chuck Baldwin or Bob Barr this November.
26 Comment by james1 on 27 September 2008:
@25Etienne Gervaise
How does the electoral system work as far as I understand you need a certain amount of registered signatures in each state to be eligible to be put on the ballot?
With virtually no media exposure for third party candidates and the millions maybe even billions you need to publicise your campaign it is virtually impossible for third party candidates to win an election against the two party candidates who although appear opposite are members of the same organisations and think tanks like CFR whose policy foreign and domestic are already set by the appointed advisers and financial backers hence the mess were in with the banks.
Why is it not a big deal that the leading third party presidential candidate is not allowed to take part in the presidential TV debate.
27 Comment by Etienne Gervaise on 27 September 2008:
@26 James
I hear that a lot, “So you wasted your vote?” But as Randall Terry said on his radio show, “Why vote for the lesser of 2 evils? Evil is evil so you might as well go whole hog.”
At the JRC meeting in Washington last year Tom Landess talked about listening to the sermon from Bob Jones University which stated that politics is the devil’s game, which leads me to wonder why pols crusading in SC always make the pilgrimage to his campus. If you expect a politician to change something, then it will be for the worse. (Think Obama.)
As a Christian I regard myself as salt of the Earth. The purpose of salt is to retard corruption rather than stop it. So if I “waste” my vote by selecting a loser, my conscience is clear. But I have a lot of guns and ammo. When the jury box and the ballot box fail, reach for the cartridge box.
28 Comment by james1 on 27 September 2008:
@27Etienne Gervaise
At least in the US you have candidates like Ron Paul or Chuck Baldwin who are willing to talk about banking manipulation (well Ron Paul at least don’t know much about Chuck Baldwin) as well as some radio and news internet media supporting them like Alex Jones or American Free Press.
Here in the UK apart from the BNP who are denounced as Nazis all other third parties are liberal ones. The Liberal Democrats leader Paddy Ashdown was an MI6 agent a real scumbag who as UN representative essentially overseen the operating of terrorist organisations in Bosnia especially Abdullah Bin Laden’s organisations.
There’s also his false eye witness testimony in the Hague against Milosevic and his relationship to KLA militants. I remember him being interviewed on BBC Hardtalk (what a joke that is) and they never questioned him on any of these points.
The worst was when BBC conspired with a Labour funded group Searchlight to do a hit piece on the BNP were a reporter went undercover to show that the BNP were racist. Nick Griffin was charged with footage taken in the documentary for insisting racial hatred but later cleared.
Are you a John Hague Christian or a traditional Christian?
29 Comment by JJ on 28 September 2008:
As usual, Jack Bailey is right.
Denying connection between UDBA and Seselj Radicals is ridiculous.
Also, ignoring the Serb communist plot to stir up hell in ex-Yu in order to remain their grip on power is obvious to anyone with analytical skills.
30 Comment by Etienne Gervaise on 28 September 2008:
@28 James
I was christened into the Church of England at an early age. When priestesses were ordained in England, I became Eastern Orthodox — Romanian Orthodox to be precise, that way I did not have to learn Slavonic or old Greek. The Romanians hold services for evangelical reasons. I suppose it makes me a traditional Christian, unlike Mr Obama who seems comfortable with his muslim faith — at least until Steffie reminds him that America might not be ready for that yet.
31 Comment by Etienne Gervaise on 28 September 2008:
*services in either modern Romanian or English
32 Comment by Boba on 28 September 2008:
Re: # 29
What is obvious JJ is that you do not have a clue who did what in the former Yugoslavia, or do not want to admit that it was Slovene/Croatian communists and Bosnian / Albanian Islamists in Bosnia and Kosovo-Metohija, trained and financed by the US led western parties, who caused and provoked the bloody war of the Yugoslav disintergartion.
33 Comment by Eagle on 29 September 2008:
I really enjoy when the pretentious posters like JJ weigh in with Bailey and make a statement of fact without producing even some conjectures, much less some examples of facts.
34 Comment by Eagle on 29 September 2008:
The Russians are coming! The Russians are coming!
Ahh, the hunt for commies, like the hunt for UBL and WMDs proceeds at a furious pace and produces great cover for imperial ambitions.
It’s not to say that commies, UBL, and WMDs don’t exist, it is to question at what point they become less of a danger than those that would hunt them down.
35 Comment by james1 on 29 September 2008:
@34Eagle
Cindy McCain the “former” drug taking mistress of McCain who McCain was screwing around with while his wife was ill now wife daughter of Bronfman/Lansky organised crime affiliate summed up Palin foreign policy credentials by saying She is the former governor of Alaska which is close to Russia so she knows the threat Russia poses.
36 Comment by Jovan on 29 September 2008:
Only part I strongly disagree with (and please tell me if I am wrong)
“Prominent politician Vojislav Seselj”
If he is Prominent than Srbija is in bigger trouble than I thought.
I support some if not most of the SRS but we need to choose
Better people to admire.
The current government as in the rest of the world
Is more of the same.Srbija/Jugoslava was once a
A healthy and plump cow. Now is is emaciated and bone dry.
All government is corrupt from Tadic to Seselj to Sloba’s old friends that robbed the Serbian people blind. No hope in the near future.
37 Comment by james1 on 29 September 2008:
The thing I dont understand and is never discussed is the whole Arkan thing.
He was presented as an evil, racist paramilitary leaders killing inniocent muslims
I asked about this before on another post but didn’t get a response and to my knowledge was not mentioned in the case against Milosevic.
38 Comment by JJ on 29 September 2008:
#32
Poor Boba, you never give up on the tired old cliches, don’t you? How convenient it is to always pin blame on someone else!
#33
Dear Eagle, I do not wish to bore the readers with pretentious, and erroneous, tirades as you do. I take it for granted that some facts should be obvious by now. If not – there is nothing new to add. Cheers!
39 Comment by Eagle on 30 September 2008:
JJ – I suppose arguing with a clarity of language and commitment to factual truth will get a person labeled as “pretentious” in these dark Marxist days. Sorry to cloud your days with a notion of truth. Press on about UDBA and the spetsnaz units about to take your neighborhood.
40 Comment by jack bailey on 30 September 2008:
Dr. Trifkovic mentions that he was at one point an advisor to the Royal family on his trips to visit Karadzic. This pertains I believe to the humanitarian actions that the Serb Royals engaged in at that time. (The program was in fact aimed to help both sides in the conflict). While the Royals were very concerned about the human catastrophe, it is safe to say that privately the Royals were and still are dismayed at the type of nationalism espoused by Seselj, Karadzic, Cosic (Cosic being the main ideologue of the Serbian cause). This type of nationalism is in fact completely at odds with the Royals’ own understanding of nationalism and also of how they perceive the role of the monarchist tradition as a benign force in Serb history.
The biggest problem with the Cosic’s interpretation of nationalism is that it propagates national identity as the basis of the personal identity. It is in fact the other way around. National identity is formed thorugh the actions of all individual identities. It is silly to claim that kneeling at the altar of sarma, cevapcici, the trumpet orchestra or that blind acceptance of pronouncements by the central committee of the Serbian Ortodox Church or SANU makes one a Serb. but this is in fact what people like Seselj and Cosic believe and are demanding from people that would be Serbs to this day! Anyone who gets a chance to watch the Seselj-Karadzic St Vitus celebration day (that is easily reachable on the internet) can truly appreciate how debasing this process is. But the two were able to inflame the passions with such actions and this had led to a shameful civil war, were one side killed the other’s civilians and then the other side did the same. There was comparatively little actual combat between the armies! Now the reason why the people who are responsible for this whether Croat, Serb or Muslim, are not being tried by their own courts (and that is truly shameful) is why a subsidiary court like the Hague exists. The Hague is a political court and is perceived biased against the Serbs but some of this bias happens due to poor defense strategies by the serb side. For the Serb side, lamenting over or testifying at the Hague by recycling Cosic’s ideology and interpretations of history is misguided as it is only a proof to the Tribunal that such a witness or such a defense is indoctrinated in the malicious ideology that the Tribunal is hoping to anathemize in the first place! Thus the line of defense currently used in the cases in front of the Tribunal is doomed to fail but is played out nonetheless for the benefit of the followers of this ideology back home in Serbia. On the other hand, if it was ever implied that a communist conspiracy in fact started the civil war, with the goal of derailing the aims of the West as it pertained to the Balkans, there would be something to work with that could be believable. Under such a defense, the Bosnian Serb army would have been forced to act the way it did and would have had to do what it had to do but only after the communist conspiracy succeeded. Such a strategy would be beneficial to many of the defendants, but it is not being used on purpose. Thus this Shakespearian tragicomedy continues on and on with no end in sight. But the only ideology that will eventuually be allowed to prevail at the Hague is an ideology that is based on tolerance. There can be no exceptionalism for Serbs, just like there can be none for Albanians, Croats, Muslims all over the world and none for the state of Israel either. This is what the Hague is trying to establish above all. There can be no “Great Walls of China” in the 21st century. Instead all the nations and peoples have to learn and live together. Nationalism as the last stage of communism has to be defeated and will be defeated