Bosnian Serbs sue UN, Dutch for Srebrenica killings

4th March 2009, Comments 4 comments

About 1,000 Serb civilians in Srebrenica, then under the protection of Dutch United Nations peacekeepers, were killed or went missing during the war, plaintiffs say.

Banja Luka -- A Bosnian Serb group Tuesday said it had filed a suit in a Dutch court against the UN and the Netherlands for failing to protect Srebrenica Serbs during the 1992-1995 war.

"Our lawyers filed the suit ... last week because they failed to protect Serb civilians in Srebrenica," the head of the Historic Project Srebrenica association, Stefan Karganovic, told AFP.

According to his group, which is based in The Hague, some 1,000 Serb civilians in Srebrenica, then under the protection of Dutch United Nations peacekeepers, were killed or went missing during the war.

Srebrenica was a UN-protected Muslim enclave until July 11, 1995, when it was overrun by Bosnian Serb forces who then executed some 8,000 Muslim men and boys.

The suit was filed at the same district court in The Hague where Bosnian Muslims who lost family members in the massacre are seeking justice for the alleged failure of Dutch troops to protect their loved ones.

Karganovic said the goal of his association was "moral" adding it wanted to prove that the "Srebrenica tragedy was multinational and that the Serbs have been killed there too."

The association did not want to deny the massacre of Muslims, he stressed.

"It was a horrible massacre, but we want to point out that Serbs were also exposed to sufferings there."

The Srebrenica massacre, Europe's worst atrocity since World War II, has been termed genocide by the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), both based in The Hague.

In 2002, the Dutch government resigned over an official report that stated its peacekeepers had been sent on an "impossible" mission.

The UN has also admitted it failed to protect the Muslims of Srebrenica from mass murder, but none of its officials were held responsible.


4 Comments To This Article

  • Max posted:

    on 4th July 2011, 20:51:11 - Reply

    What interest did the U.S. and Germany pursue with the establishment of the ICTY?Because Yugoslavia stood in the way of their drive to expand in Eastern Europe, they led the way to its destruction; both states share responsibility for the outbreak and escalation of secessionist civil wars. With full awareness of the results of their plans, they had already in 1993 by diplomatic and covert operations covered their hands with Balkan blood, and then invented a "court" that could be used as a weapon to pressure the warring parties. And it should judge the crimes committed in former Yugoslavia - in true NATO-style: bring the recalcitrant Serbs to their knees and acquit the NATO countries of their responsibility. With this in mind, protected by the ICTY, NATO conducted an aggressive war against Yugoslavia in 1999 without a UN mandate. Because of its financial resources and political connections NATO spokesman Jamie Shea had described the military alliance as a "friend of the ICTY" and thus proactively explained why there would be no charges The ICTY is a United Nations body in name only. It was established without a full meeting of the General Assembly, which would have necessitated ratification and compliance with the UN Charter, and many tenets of international law. Rather than being an independent judicial body, it was created in 1993 as a subsidiary of the UN Security Council. The sole authority cited for its creation was the UN Charter, Chapter VII, Article 29, which states: “The Security Council may establish such subsidiary organs as it deems necessary for the performance of its functions.”Security Council resolutions 808 and 827 stated that the situation in Bosnia presented a threat to international security and that the prosecution of war criminals would contribute to establishing peace. This is a false interpretation of the UN Charter. The clause cited only allows for subsidiary organs concerned with matters of an economic or military nature. Moreover, the threat to international security traditionally refers to conflicts between nation-states, rather than a civil war.The main instigator of the ICTY was the US, which has consistently opposed the universal application of human rights laws.According to Articles 16 and 32 of the ICTY, the Chief Prosecutor shall not receive instruction from any government or any source and the Tribunal’s expenses are to be provided for by a regular budget from the UN. However, the Hague Tribunal has been the recipient of corporate patronage and routinely works in tandem with the departments overseeing US foreign policy. In 1994/5 it is estimated that the US provided $700,000 in cash and $2,300,000 worth of equipment to the Tribunal. Among the private sponsors are the international financier George Soros and the Rockefeller family.A court created only for the crimes in one country is by definition discriminatory, incapable of equal justice, a weapon against chosen enemies, or antagonistic interests and war by other means. If there is to be any international criminal court, it must act equally as to all nations with none above the law. This ad hoc Tribunal for a single nations corrupts international law.”Can a criminal tribunal for Yugoslavia which ignores pervasive violence by the U.S. and diverts public awareness from United States conduct and legitimatizes by silent acceptance aerial and missile assaults on civilians and illegal weapons use against one country after another, making its repetition expected before it occurs, contribute to the hope for the rule of law, justice or peace?Although this was a three-sided civil war, about 80 percent of all defendants are Serbs, including many top politicians and senior military. Not so with the Croats and Bosnian Muslims. The Croatian General Ante Gotovina was indeed found responsible for notorious "ethnic cleansing of Krajina," which removed hundreds of thousands of Serbs, but not his superior officers. The same applies to the Bosnian Muslim Naser Oric. Although he boasted during the war to the Western press with the severed heads of Serbs, the ICTY says that no one can prove he is responsible for the attacks of his soldiers on the Serbs around Srebrenica. The U.S. journalists, who were the first to see his human war trophies, were never called to testify by the ICTY. The pseudo trials against non-Serbs are meant to demonstrate to the outside world the impartiality of the ICTY.His adoption of Serb chauvinism has been a definite contributory factor in fanning ethnic hatred, which, together with the US and European policy of dismembering Yugoslavia, set the stage for a series of bloody civil wars/The Observer,...... The legacy has been the creation of a series of mini-states, in which the Western powers exercise untrammelled economic and political control. The function of the ICTY is to provide a legal veneer for this predatory imperialist policy.
  • Max posted:

    on 4th July 2011, 20:49:12 - Reply

    “Srebrenica Massacre” Invented by Bill Clinton and Alija Izetbegovic:Mladic arrest: What about the NATO war criminals?
    From the very beginning of the war, the Serbs were presented as the new Nazis. Croats and Muslims were presented not as combatants, but as innocent victims.One of the most stubborn factoids of our time is the myth that the massacre at Srebrenica in 1995 during the Bosnian civil war was solely about the killing of innocent Muslims by vicious racist genocidal Serbs. It is a relic of the coordinated media message put out at the time, which demonized the Serbs as cruel oppressors and ignored any atrocities of equal or greater magnitude by other parties to the conflict.The Joseph Goebbels Nazi style “Big Lie”was spread world-wide with the mainstream media-connected resources of a multi-million dollar funded American “public relations” camp; lobbying firm called ‘Ruder Finn’ – whom also worked as a lobbying group in Washington on behalf of the Islamist Nazi terrorist KLA and Tudjman’s HDZ Fascist neo-Ustasha Nazi racist government responsible for the ethnic cleansing of over 350,000 Krajina province Serbs from 1990 to 1995 and for the murder of at least 15,000 Serbs during the same period.James Harff, of PR firm Ruder Finn: Philippe Morillon:The fall of Srebrenica in 1995 was the "direct reaction" to the massacres of Bosnian Serbs by Naser Oric's forces in 1992-1993. Morillon acknowledged that Oric's troops had committed war crimes in eastern Bosnia. Morillon personally witnessed the exhumation of the bodies of Bosnian Serb civilians and soldiers who had been tortured, mutilated, and executed. He saw with his own eyes the Serbian villages that had been burned to the ground in the Srebrenica pocket. More than anyone else, Morillon understood the level of devastation in eastern Bosnia and the extent and nature of the massacres of Bosnian Serbs.“I feared that the Serbs, the local Serbs, the Serbs of Bratunac, these militiamen, they wanted to take their revenge for everything that they attributed to Naser Oric. It wasn’t just Naser Oric that they wanted to revenge, take their revenge on; they wanted to revenge their dead on Orthodox Christmas.”Phillip Corwin, former UN Civilian Affairs Coordinator in Bosnia during the 1990s, said: “What happened in Srebrenica was not a single large massacre of Muslims by Serbs, but rather a series of very bloody attacks and counterattacks over a three year period which reached a crescendo in July of 1995.”The list of 7,000-8,000 Bosnian Muslims contains the names of the individuals who have been reported missing — it is not the list of the victims of a crime, those who have allegedly lost their lives during Srebrenica takeover.The number of 7,000-8,000 missing Bosnian Muslims, presented to the public as the victims of a war crime, is one of the biggest lies and manipulations continually present in this part of the world!There is a world of difference, victims of the war crime are men who have been captured and executed without trial, while the victims of war are individuals who were killed during the battles, like Bosnian Muslim troops from Srebrenica column, which suffered heavy casualties after being engaged in battle with the Bosnian Serb Army.Dr. Ljubisa Simic, pathologist and forensic expert who had full access to the Hague Prosecution’s forensic evidence in relation to the alleged “Srebrenica massacre”, found the scientific evidence of the Srebrenica hoax: the total number of victims, the number of the executed victims, the time of death and the causes of death tell a story that is entirely different from the official myth:Forensic analysis of post-mortem reports : Internationally respected military forensic specialist Dr Zoran Stankovic, who reviewed the findings of the six experts employed by the Tribunal wrote that the effort lacked standard procedures, several of experts also lacked familiarity with wounds inflicted by military ordinance and some parts of the reports are “contrary to the generally acceptable forensic standards”. According to Dr Stankovic, many of the bodies exhumed from 17 gravesites were found in an advance state of decay “skeletonized, disarticulated and decomposed” lacking soft tissue and body parts that could help determine the cause of death. “Ascertainment of the cause of death in the cases of decomposed bodies is generally extremely difficult and in most case impossible…It is not allowed that [ICTY] experts provide their opinion in that regard and put forward the assumption having no grounds in autopsy findings.”Between 200 and 300 blindfolds and ligatures were exhumed with bodies by the ICTY, and as Dr. Stankovic notes, these are sure signs of execution… Between 1996 and 2001 a team of investigators led by Australian forensic scientist Dean Manning was employed by the ICTY to exhume graves thought to be associated with the Srebrenica massacre. The team discovered 448 blindfolds and 423 ligatures among the bodies exhumed from the gravesites. They determined that 1,785 individuals died of gunshot wounds, 169 died of probable or possible gunshot wounds, 67 died of Shrapnel wounds or blast injuries, 11 died of gunshot and blast injuries, 6 died of other causes (trauma, suffocation, etc.), and 1441 died of undetermined causes. Investigators also found shell casings among the bodies which indicates that some individuals must have been shot in or near the gravesite.The shell casings were found in the same graves where the blindfolds and ligatures were found. Those buried at the Srebrenica Memorial Complex not only were not killed in July 1995, but actually died much earlier,, even in the early 1980s – more than 10 years before the civil war in Yugoslavia even started: Fetahija (Nazif) Hasanovic, b. 1955 – d. Dec.15, 1996, Srebrenica; Sukrija (Amil) Smajlovic, b.1946 – d. May 2,1996, Zaluzje; Maho (Suljo) Rizvanovic, b.1953 – d. Jan. 3,1993, Glogova; Mefail (meho) Demirovic, b.1970 – d. May 10, 1992, Krasanovici; Redzic (Ahmet) Asim, b.1949 – d. April 22, 1992, of Osman (Ibro) Halilovic (1912-1989), Nurija (Smajo) Memisevic (1966-1993), Salih (Saban) Alic (1969-1992), Mujo (Hasim) Hadzic (1954-1993), Ferid (Ramo) Mustafic (1975-1993) and Hajrudin (Ismet) Cvrk (1974-1992)...............Hamed (Hamid) Halilovic (1940-1982), transferred from the nearby cemetery in Kazani, who apparently died a full 13 years before the Srebrenica "genocide."Several hundred soldiers as well as civilians were transferred to the Srebrenica Memorial from other cemeteries and reburied, with Muslim burial rituals. An International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) report, document #37, dated September 13, 1995 states: “Approximately 5,000 Srebrenica Muslim troops left the enclave prior to its fall. In the summer of 2005, on the 10-year anniversary of the event, the "Srebrenica Research Group," composed of mostly American and British media and academic figures, as well as former U.N. civil officials and military observers with ex-Yugoslavia experience, put up a website in which the entire "Srebrenica massacre" account was reconsidered and demystified. Instead of the 7-8,000 figure, U.N. officials and U.S. Congress experts were quoted giving figures of "700-800," "the low hundreds," "about 2,000 Muslims and Serbs total," etc. BACKGROUND—Two prominent supporters (at the time) of the late Muslim leader Alija Izetbegovic, his Srebrenica SDA party chairman Ibran Mustafic and police commander Hakija Meholjic, have subsequently accused Izetbegovic of deliberately sacrificing the enclave in order to trigger NATO intervention. Meholjic is explicit: in his presence,Izetbegovic quoted Bill Clinton/ as saying that 5,000 dead Muslims would be sufficient to provide the political basis for an American-led intervention on the side of the Muslims.In a letter to Izetbegovic, Naser Oric, who refused to show up in Sarajevo as a member of the Srebrenica delegation, said the following: “I opposed your decision to surrender Srebrenica which you had arranged with the French and I particularly disagreed with the ensuing events and too many sacrificed civilians, regardless of the effect made. I honoured the agreement and I can tell you that the dearest amount of cash I have ever received is the two million Deutche Marks I collected as a reward on the Yellow Bridge near Bratunac on my way out.”From Kosovo in 1999 to the Congo in 2005, Srebrenica is held up as conclusive proof that the West is morally obliged to intervene militarily in conflict situations. Jack Straw argued in defence of Western intervention in Macedonia in 2001, on the basis that Srebrenica showed what happened when the West was reluctant to intervene. Liberal commentator David Aaronovitch used the same argument to explain his support for military action in Iraq. When discussing the killing of 60 Congolese soldiers by UN troops, UN General Patrick Cammaert argued in favour of robust military intervention, because of ‘the lessons of Srebrenica, Somalia and Rwanda.By falsely identifying Milosevic with the Bosnian Serb leadership and by exploiting the notion that Srebrenica killings were part of a vast Serb plan of "genocide" carried out against non-Serbs for purely racist reasons, Madeleine Albright was able to advocate the NATO war against Yugoslavia as necessary to prevent "another Srebrenica" in Kosovo, where the situation was altogether different. To use "Srebrenica" as an effective instrument in the restructuring of former Yugoslavia, notably by replacing recalcitrant Serb leaders by more pliable politicians, the crime needed to be as big as possible: not a mere war crime (such as the United States itself commits on a serial basis, from Vietnam to Panama to Iraq), but "genocide": "the worst atrocity in Europe since the Holocaust".We all remember the Western media hoaxes and fakery concerning the events in Jenin and Qana recently and how these media frauds were used to demonize Israel and the Jewish people.
  • John Hawthorne posted:

    on 4th March 2009, 23:14:00 - Reply

    They have a good point.
  • John Peter Maher posted:

    on 4th March 2009, 17:37:46 - Reply

    " 8,000 Muslim men and boys" is boiler-plate. Muslim males at age 15 in any case are "warrirors." No report of such a massacre appeared anywhere for weeks after the purported event. Even when Albright went to the UN in August 1995, to lay down a smoke screen to cover the US_Croatian "Storm" in which 250,000 Serbs were chased out of Krajina, she referred to "missing", not killed. Some 6000 of the missing made it -- fully armed -- to Tuzla. Which WAS reported, by Chris Hedgers (NY Times), Pomfret, Pumphrey and others. In July 1995 summary execution took place of hundreds of mujahedin who had massacred some 3000 Serb civilians around eastern Bosnia 1992 to 1993. The Muslim techniques included crucifixion, burning, flaying and impaling. Shall I send you the photographs?