Coordinamento Nazionale per la Jugoslavia ETS – 27/05/2024
Činjenica da je povodom usvajanja takve odluke više onih zemalja koje su bile protiv njenog donošenja ili uzdržane od onih koje su glasali za nju jasno pokazuje da veliki broj država u svetu odbacuje licemerje zapadnog imperijalizma i njegove udarne vojne pesnice NATO, najvećeg krivca za sve strašne zločine počinjene na prostoru SFR Jugoslavije tokom procesa razbijanja naše socijalističke domovine zarad interesa zapadnog krupnog kapitala. Do toga je, kao što je poznato, došlo u krvavom bratoubilačkom ratu vođenom pod pokroviteljstvom imperijalističkih centara moći u Vašingtonu, Londonu, Berlinu i Briselu. Donošenjem ovakve odluke zapadni imperijalizam teži da dodatno posvađa bratske jugoslovenske narode, u ovom slučaju bošnjački i srpski, huška ih jedan na drugi, stvara nestabilnost, podstiče nacional-šovinizam kako bi mogao da opravda dalje prisustvo svoje udarne vojne pesnice NATO na prostoru bivše SFR Jugoslavije.
Dodatni razlog usvajanja ove rezolucije je dalja satanizacija srpskog naroda kao vid pritiska na Beograd prizna „nezavisnost“ Kosova, odnosno južne srpske pokrajine okupirne od strane NATO soldateske nakon zločinačke agresije na SR Jugoslaviju 1999. godine, kao i da uvede nepravedne sankcije bratskoj Rusiji.
Činjenica je da objektivno gledano u Srebrenici nije bilo genocida, kao i da zapadni imperijalizam praktikuje dvostruke aršine kako bi pokušao, nevešto i neuspešno istina, da opravda svoju zločinačku ulogu u svim masakrima na prostoru SFR Jugoslavije, pa tako i onom počinjenom u tom gradu u Bosni i Hercegovini. Ipak, spletke imperijalističkih centara moći u Vašingtonu, Londonu, Berlinu i Briselu i njihova objektivna krivica za krvoproliće na našim prostorima nikako ne mogu da budu izgovor za monstruozni zločin u Srebrenici. Oni koji su ga počinili su izrodi i sramota za srpski narod i jedino što zaslužuju su najdublji prezir i gađenje.
Glasanje u Generalnoj skupštini Ujedinjenih nacija jasno pokazuje da su pravi prijatelji Srbije socijalističke zemlje poput Kine, Kube i DNR Koreje kao i antiimperijalističke poput Belorusije, Nikaragve i Sirije. Sa druge strane, jasno se moglo videti da zapadne imperijalističke države, ma koliko nas buržoaska vlast u Srbiji uveravala u suprotno, to nisu.
Iako Sjedinjene Američke Države, Evropska unija (u prvom redu Nemačka) i NATO vode antisrpsku kampanju, a usvajanje nacrta rezolucije o Srebrenici je jedan od njenih segmenata, proimperijalističke buržoaske vlasti u Beogradu bestidno i tvrdoglavo i dalje insistiraju na ulasku Srbije u tamnicu naroda Evropsku uniju, čiji je cilj da bogati budu još bogatiji a siromaašni još siromašniji i na saradnju sa udarnom vojnom pesnicom zapadnog krupnog kapitala, NATO.
Da bi sačuvala svoju nezavisnost i teritorijalni integritet Srbija odmah mora da prekine sa retrogradnim procesom priključenja tamnici naroda Evropskoj uniji kao i saradnju sa udarnom pesnicom zapadnog imperijalizma i umesto toga da održava intenzivne kontakte sa svojim pravim prijateljima, socijalističkim zemljama (Kina, Kuba, DNR Koreja, Vijetnam i Laos), antiimperijalističkim državama ( Nikaragva, Sirija, Belorusija, Venecuela i Bolivija), bratskom Rusijom i da pristupi ekonomskom savezu BRIKS.
Sekretarijat Nove komunističke partije Jugoslavije
Beograd,
26.05.2024.
UN-Resolution zu Srebrenica. Gastkommentar
Der deutsche, demokratisch nicht legitimierte Statthalter in Bosnien, Christian Schmidt, und Bundesaußenministerin Annalena Baerbock, die auf dem Balkan »Flanken« gegen Russland schließen will, haben auf dem Feldzug gegen alle Widersacher ihrer Eskalationspolitik gegen Russland schon viel Schaden angerichtet. Um ihre geopolitische Agenda zu untermauern, hat die Ampelkoalition 2022 die Bundeswehr nach zehn Jahren Abwesenheit zurück nach Bosnien-Herzegowina geschickt. Im vergangenen Dezember unterstützten Mitglieder der Koalitionsfraktionen offen gewaltsame Regime-Change-Versuche in Serbien. Und auch die jetzt maßgeblich von Deutschland bei den Vereinten Nationen durchgepeitschte Resolution zur Einrichtung eines Gedenktags an die Opfer von Srebrenica wird den Toten nicht gerecht, weil ihr eigentliches Ziel – ganz im Sinne der Teile-und-Herrsche-Doktrin – deren Instrumentalisierung für die weitere Spaltung einer ohnehin schon unruhigen Region ist.
Nur 84 Staaten stimmten am Donnerstag in der UN-Generalversammlung mit Ja – 78 enthielten sich und 19 stimmten gar dagegen. Vor dem Hintergrund, dass Gedenktage bei den Vereinten Nationen für gewöhnlich einstimmig beschlossen werden, ist dieses Ergebnis beachtlich. Es zeigt nicht nur, dass Berlin eigentlich krachend gescheitert ist. Es steht auch symbolisch für das schwindende Ansehen Deutschlands in der Welt, deren größter Teil längst nicht mehr bereit ist, die westliche Spaltungs- und Eskalationspolitik und schon gar nicht die Doppelmoral des »Wertewestens« widerspruchslos hinzunehmen.
Data: venerdì 24 maggio 2024 alle ore 16:15:25 UTC+2
Oggetto: Génocides et commémorations
A: alerteotan @googlegroups.com
L’organisation des Nations unies a créé, jeudi 23 mai, une Journée internationale de commémoration du génocide de Srebrenica, en Bosnie-Herzégovine, en 1995. (…) La résolution, préparée par l’Allemagne et le Rwanda, deux pays marqués par d’autres génocides du XXe siècle, a recueilli 84 votes pour, 19 votes contre et 68 abstentions.
« Cette résolution cherche à encourager la réconciliation, aujourd’hui et pour l’avenir », a justifié la représentante permanente de l’Allemagne auprès des Nations unies à New York, Ante Leendertse, assurant que l’initiative n’était pas dirigée contre la Serbie. « Les Nations unies ont été fondées sur les cendres de la seconde guerre mondiale, une guerre lancée par l’Allemagne nazie qui a fait plus de 60 millions de morts », a-t-elle ajouté, soulignant que l’ONU était là pour que de tels crimes ne se répètent pas.
En juillet 1995 les forces serbes du Général Mladic qui ont conquis la ville de Srebrenica y ont exécutés les prisonniers, combattants ou civils (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_de_Srebrenica)
C’est un crime de guerre que je pense personne ne conteste – dans un période de guerre civile où de nombreux crimes de guerre ont été commis par toutes les parties.
La qualification de « génocide » pour ce massacre-là par le Tribunal Pénal International pour la Yougoslavie est beaucoup plus problématique : Il s’agissait plutôt pour le TPIY de justifier l’engagement de l’Occident et les bombardements de l’OTAN au profit des forces musulmanes bosniaques et croates. Tout massacre aussi massif soit-il n’est pas un « génocide », et en l’occurrence cette appellation semble tout à fait incongrue pour un massacre commis dans une agglomération.
Si le massacre de Srebrenica est un « génocide », pourquoi ce ne serait pas alors le cas de celui de Knin, par ex., ville serbe complètement ‘nettoyée’ ethniquement en août 95 lors de l’opération « Tempête » soutenue par l’OTAN
Les civils en fuite et les personnes restées dans les zones protégées par les Nations unies ont fait l’objet de diverses formes de harcèlement, y compris des assauts militaires et des actes commis par des civils croates. Le 8 août, une colonne de réfugiés est bombardée. Human Rights Watch rapporte, en 1996, que la grande majorité des exactions avaient été commises par les forces croates. Ces exactions, qui se sont poursuivies à grande échelle même plusieurs mois après l’opération Tempête, comprenaient des exécutions sommaires de Serbes âgés et infirmes restés sur place, ainsi que l’incendie et la destruction en masse de villages et de biens serbes. Des exécutions de civils ont lieu dans la ville de Knin et ses environs. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knin
La seule différence semble bien être que les auteurs des massacres sont dans ce cas situés du « bon côté », des alliés de l’OTAN.
Le plus sinistre dans cette résolution des Nations-Unies supposée entretenir ‘le devoir de mémoire’ d’un fait qui s’est déroulé il y a 30 ans, « pour que de tels crimes ne se répètent pas », est qu’elle est prise au moment même où se déroule un authentique génocide à Gaza, et qu’elle a été co-soumise par l’Allemagne qui est l’un des principaux pourvoyeur d’arme de la partie en train de commettre le génocide. L’autre auteur de la résolution, le Rwanda, est lui en train de soutenir un groupe de prétendu rebelles du M23 auteur de massacres à large échelle dans l’Est du Congo. Proclamer que cette résolution est prise « pour que de tels crimes ne se répètent pas », est dans ce contexte une énorme tartufferie.
“Je demande à ces puissants, à ces grands, et l’on pourrait dire arrogants, pourquoi avez-vous eu besoin d’exercer une telle pression sur les États membres de l’ONU au cours des sept derniers jours, juste contre un petit pays comme la Serbie ? Pourquoi avez-vous menacé les États membres, ceux qui ne voulaient pas voter en faveur de cette résolution, en leur disant que s’ils ne votaient pas en faveur de cette résolution, ils n’obtiendraient pas votre soutien, votre aide, sur le plan économique et sur tous les autres sujets ? S’agit-il de valeurs européennes ? Des valeurs démocratiques ? ou vous pensiez que je n’allais pas pouvoir m’exprimer à ce sujet ?
Lorsque nous avons voulu discuter du bombardement de la Serbie en 1999, ils nous ont dit : ‘Ne regardez pas le passé, regardez l’avenir – cela s’est produit il y a 25 ans’. Deux jours plus tard, nous avons découvert qu’ils préparaient ce genre de résolution concernant des événements même quatre ans avant [1999] Lorsqu’ils ont des besoins – des besoins politiques, ils peuvent plonger profondément dans le passé. ” (Aleksandar Vučić, président de la Serbie)
A trouver sur le site des Nations Unies, qui prend curieusement des extraits différents pour les versions françaises et anglaises :
https://press.un.org/fr/2024/ag12601.doc.htm
https://press.un.org/en/2024/ga12601.doc.htm
version fr :
La délégation nicaraguayenne a relevé que les pays soutenant ce texte sont les mêmes qui financent et arment les auteurs du génocide en cours contre « nos frères palestiniens » et que l’Occident a commis l’un des plus grands génocides avec la colonisation des Amériques. Il semblerait que désormais, le génocide n’est reconnu que si certains le disent, a ironisé la Namibie qui a annoncé son abstention en faisant le parallèle avec la situation actuelle à Gaza et ce qui s’est passé en Namibie entre 1904 et 1908. Cuba s’est opposée pour sa part à un texte qui mentionne, entre autres, la responsabilité de protéger, concept utilisé pour saper la souveraineté des peuples.
« Ne ternissons pas la mémoire de Srebrenica par notre manque d’action à Gaza », a lancé l’Indonésie, en exhortant à rejeter ce « deux poids, deux mesures ». Un appel relayé par l’Iran qui a dit avoir voté pour le projet afin de témoigner son respect aux victimes iraniennes du génocide de Srebrenica, entre autres. Il faut traiter toutes les situations de génocide sans politisation, a souligné la Tunisie en appelant le Conseil de sécurité à prendre ses responsabilités s’agissant de Gaza.
Version en :
Le délégué de la Namibie fait partie des nombreux pays qui ont fait part de leur intention de s’abstenir, expliquant qu’ils “veulent discuter du génocide de manière exhaustive et honnête“. L’amnésie sélective “devient rapidement la norme” dans le monde entier, où “ce que nos ennemis désignés font est un génocide. Mais lorsque nous ou nos alliés faisons la même chose, il ne s’agit pas d’un génocide“, a-t-il ajouté.
L’orateur cubain a rejeté le texte proposé qui invoque des doctrines telles que la responsabilité de protéger – qui ne font pas l’objet d’un consensus au sein de l’Assemblée générale et ont été manipulées dans le passé pour des raisons politiques, mettant en péril la souveraineté des États et sapant les principes de la Charte des Nations unies. Les ambitions géopolitiques ne doivent pas mettre en péril la sécurité politique régionale, a-t-il ajouté.
Le délégué de la Fédération de Russie a dénoncé “un triste chapitre” de l’histoire de l’Assemblée, un certain nombre de délégations dirigées par l’Allemagne ayant décidé d’abuser de leur pouvoir et, sous couvert d’une résolution sur l’instauration d’une journée commémorative, d’adopter une déclaration politique visant à diaboliser l’un des peuples de l’ex-Yougoslavie et à saper l’accord de Dayton. Un plus grand nombre d’États membres n’ont pas soutenu la résolution non consensuelle que ceux qui l’ont soutenue – une autre confirmation de la ligne constante de certaines élites bosniaques et de leurs mentors occidentaux visant à saper le rôle du Présidium en tant que plus haut représentant de la position consensuelle de la société multinationale bosniaque et herzégovine sur les questions clés pour l’État. Il a attiré l’attention sur le “caractère absolument inapproprié des parallèles” évoqués avec la résolution sur le génocide au Rwanda. (…) Il est d’autant plus surprenant que l’Allemagne en soit le principal commanditaire, elle qui, au XXe siècle, a déclenché deux guerres mondiales, exterminé des millions de personnes dans des camps de concentration, est responsable de crimes de masse en Afrique et a pris une part active à l’effondrement de la Yougoslavie et au bombardement de Sarajevo en 1995.
UN General Assembly Ignores a Real Genocide in Jasenovac to Highlight a Phony One in Srebrenica
Global Research, May 23, 2024
Address to the 22nd Annual Days of Jasenovac Commemorative Conference in Toronto, May 19, 2024
We are witnessing as I speak a train of events that is extraordinary – perhaps utterly scandalous would be a far better word. I wish to draw your attention to it.
A serious attempt is being made at the level of the United Nations to blank out the genocide that occurred in Croatia from 1941 to 1945, during World War II.
That genocide is the subject matter of this conference.
The suppression of that event from public awareness is being done perfidiously. They are not overtly comparing a slaughter of the magnitude of Jasenovac to another, lesser event.
They are trying to ignore Jasenovac altogether, or “cancel” it in contemporary parlance. I am referring of course to the Srebrenica resolution now before the General Assembly of the United Nations. It misrepresents and by disgusting virtue signalling purports to “memorialise” a phony, politically fabricated genocide whilst ignoring a genuine genocide that actually did take place in the recent past and in relative geographical proximity to Srebrenica.
If highlighting a Balkan genocide for the purpose of universal condemnation had been the real concern of the sponsors of the UN resolution, they would not have chosen as their focus a highly dubious example which pales by comparison to a genocide that is unquestionably real. Such a genocide occurred in Croatia, and you come together every year to pay homage to its victims. It is symbolised by the death camp of Jasenovac.
I do not intend to offer any legal or historical arguments concerning the genocide in Croatia during World War II, leaving that task to other presenters who will be speaking today. Instead, I will narrowly focus on the issue of Srebrenica which the global political establishment holds to be a starker example of genocide than even Jasenovac. Does Srebrenica qualify as a genocide and can it legitimately replace Jasenovac as the paradigmatic Balkan genocide?
In the mind of the globalist political establishment, that precisely appears to be the case. In their propagandistically reconfigured version of reality, Srebrenica indeed overshadows the massive slaughter of several hundred thousand innocent civilians in Jasenovac. It makes no difference to them that the slaughter in Croatia fully satisfies the criteria laid down in the Genocide Convention. Nor does it matter that it was committed with amply documented intent to exterminate all Serbs, Jews, and Roma within reach, to destroy the ethnic and religious communities to which the victims belonged.
The approach I will take to examine whether Srebrenica was a genocide comparable to Jasenovac, or to any other example of a real genocide that could be cited, is by stating a number of hard data points. As you undoubtedly know, a hard data point is a fact that is established, indisputable, and relevant for assessing the truth of a claim. Anyone asserting a contrary position is free to do so, but he must explain such a hard data point and harmonise it with the substance of his claim.
The essence of the Srebrenica genocide controversy, in the legal and political sense, is whether there is evidence of intent to exterminate the Muslim community.
Absent provable genocidal intent, or dolus specialis, the loss of life in Srebrenica may be regretted and condemned but it cannot be raised to the level of genocide. The defining characteristic of genocide is the intent to physically destroy one of the categories of persons, ethnic, religious, or racial, protected under the Genocide Convention. That is not in dispute. All professionals are aware of that and accept it.
If we assume that the ripening of the genocidal design and the logistical preparations for its execution take a certain minimum period of time, it is reasonable to ask at what point and at what temporal distance from the events was genocidal intent established in Srebrenica, if it ever existed?
That is the first hard data point to which I wish to draw your attention. Testifying in November of 2001 before the Srebrenica Inquiry Commission of the French Parliament, the chief investigator of the Hague Tribunal, Jean-Rene Ruez gavethe following answer to the question put to him by the Commission, whether it was true that prior to 9 July, 1995, which is two days before Serbian forces entered Srebrenica, there had been no plan to overrun the enclave, in spite of the fact that it was of great strategic significance to the Bosnian Serbs. Ruez responded as follows:
“In fact, the decision to seize the enclave had not been taken before 9 July, when General Mladic realised that it would not be defended. The initial objective was for the enclave to be narrowed down to the city limits of Srebrenica … “ [1]
This is an extremely significant admission to the effect that the Serbian side had no intention of even capturing Srebrenica prior to 9 July. Ruez’s assessment is based on documents to which Ruez had access in his capacity as the Hague Tribunal’s chief investigator. That is why Ruez’s statement may be considered a reliably proven fact.
If we bear in mind that the alleged genocide in Srebrenica took place between 13 and 17 July, this fact is of capital significance, coming from a knowledgeable source within the Hague Tribunal. It means that the intent to physically destroy the population of Srebrenica, or a part of it, could not have existed before 9 July, whilst the alleged genocide is said to have been conceived and launched only four days later.
The next hard data fact is provided by the military expert for the Prosecution of the Hague Tribunal, Richard Butler. His testimony concerning the sequence of events also is against the interest of the institution which he served, which enhances its credibility.
Testifying as a Prosecution witness in a Sarajevo Srebrenica trial in 2010[2] Butler furnished important information which bears on the issue of genocidal intent. As a prosecution expert, Butler also had access to the most sensitive and relevant documents. In that capacity, he testified that at least up to 11 July he had found no hint of the existence of a plan to exterminate Srebrenica Muslims. That is the date when Serbian forces took control of the enclave. Ruez’s chronology is therefore moved forward by Butler by at least two more days, confirming that there was no evidence that on the Serbian side anyone was planning to commit genocide even forty-eight hours before the imputed crime began to occur.
How could immensely complex logistical preparations for a killing operation of such magnitude be made at such short notice?
Other assertions made by Butler during his testimony make the existence of a genocidal plan equally dubious.
First, Butler confirms Ruez’s view that the original aim of the Serbian military operation was only to reduce the UN protected enclave to Srebrenica city limits.
Secondly, he confirms that Karadzić issued the order for Serbian forces to enter Srebrenica only on 10 July, a day before that actually happened.
That suggests that the takeover of the enclave was an improvised decision taken on the spur-of-the-moment and in light of the success of the military operation up to that point and was not part of a premeditated plan to capture the Muslim population in order to exterminate it. Third, Butler testified that he was “not aware” of the Serbian side shooting at civilians after 11 July, when Srebrenica was overrun and the operation ended, which is unusual behaviour for people with genocidal intent. Fourth, with regard to the deportation of the civilian population of Srebrenica, Butler testified under cross-examination that “there is no evidence in the documents” of prior planning to capture the enclave before the morning of 11 July, when the decision to enter Srebrenica was taken, so there could not have been a prior deportation plan either. Finally, Butler agreed under cross-examination that in the ranks of the Army of the Republic of Srpska there was no expectation that prisoners might be harmed “even up to 12 or 13 July.”
The critical question is whether this chronology of events, as described by some of the most knowledgeable Hague Tribunal Prosecution experts, can be harmonised with the proposition that the political and military leadership of the Republic of Srpska attacked Srebrenica with the intent to physically exterminate the Muslim population as such, as an ethnic or religious community? The Genocide Convention requires proof of such intention for the crime of genocide to be charged.
You decide.
Viewed from such a perspective, and that is my next hard data point, the questions raised by the distinguished Canadian legal scholar and expert for genocide, William Schabas, are eminently reasonable. Schabas asked:
“Can there not be other plausible explanations for the destruction of 7,000 men and boys in Srebrenica? Could they not have been targeted precisely because they were of military age, and thus actual or potential combatants? Would someone truly bent upon the physical destruction of a group, and cold-blooded enough to murder more than 7,000 defenceless men and boys, go to the trouble of organizing transport so that women, children, and the elderly could be evacuated?”[3]
Again, you decide.
With regard to the extent of human losses sustained by the Muslim population of Srebrenica in July of 1995, there is general agreement amongst all the authorities that on the day Srebrenica changed hands, 11 July, 1995, the population in the enclave was about 40,000. But we have another relevant hard data point, and that is the summary report of the UN Command in nearby Tuzla, dated 4 August, 1995. It is stated there that as of that day UN personnel in Tuzla had registered 35,632 refugees who had arrived in Tuzla from the enclave of Srebrenica. This document serves as a key marker of the demographic changes between 11 July and 4 August, 1995. It strongly suggests that the total losses from all causes sustained by the population of Srebrenica could not have exceeded 4,500. That is about half the figure that is commonly claimed.
The next hard data point is the generally accepted fact that in July 1995 there were two significant causes of human losses amongst the population of the enclave. One was execution of prisoners of war, the other was combat deaths sustained by the mixed military/civilian column of the Muslim armed forces which was conducting a breakout from Srebrenica to the nearest territory under Sarajevo government control in Tuzla. In international law, execution of prisoners is a punishable war crime. Combat losses however are not subject to criminal prosecution. The Hague Tribunal has accepted the validity of that distinction and that is why it never indicted anyone for inflicting casualties on the retreating Muslim military column.
Estimates of legal combat losses sustained by the column during the break-out vary, but in every instance they are significant. The Hague Tribunal military expert Richard Butler estimates those losses at between 2,000 and 4,000, the UN military observer in Bosnia Carlos Martins Branco puts them at around 2,000. According to US intelligence officer John Schindler who was stationed in Sarajevo about 5,000 Srebrenica military-capable males were killed in combat after 11 July. EU peace negotiator Karl Bildt’s estimate is about 4,000, whilst the UN in their assessment of combat losses put the figure at 3,000. Because of the chaotic conditions there obviously is no precision in these estimates, but they give you a sense of the order of magnitude of post 11 July legitimate combat losses. To repeat, the infliction of these casualties is not a violation of the laws of war, there is no criminal liability attached to them, and these losses cannot be considered victims of genocide.
The remaining issue is how many execution victims could there have been. Execution of prisoners is a crime against humanity but please note that unless other conditions also apply even that is not sufficient to show that genocide was committed.
Between 1996 and 2001 forensic teams sent out by the Office of the Prosecutor of the Hague Tribunal conducted exhumations of mass graves suspected of being associated with the executions of Muslim prisoners. They processed and classified 3,568 cases. Their forensic analysis, supported by detailed autopsy reports, presented the following picture:
- 442 exhumed persons were undoubtedly victims of execution because they were found with blindfolds or handcuffs
- 627 individuals showed injuries from mine fragments or artillery projectiles, which rules out execution and is more consistent with combat death
- 505 individuals died of bullet wounds, which may indicate execution, but is also consistent with combat death
For the remaining cases, Prosecution forensic experts were unable to determine the cause of death.
Thus, the Srebrenica forensic picture is very diverse. It is not generally consistent with execution, as one would expect to find that it would be if the official account were true. That is a very important additional hard data point which the proponents of the death count of 8,000 must explain.
Finally, and with this I conclude my factual review, Hague Tribunal verdicts are highly inconsistent with regard to the actual number of execution victims.
In the Krstić verdict, the Chamber claimed that “7,000 to 8,000” were executed. In the Popović case the Chamber said that “at least 5,336 individuals were executed after the fall of Srebrenica.” In the Tolimir case the Chamber found that there were “4,970 executed victims.”
All those incompatible figures are final, being stated in the appellate judgments of the cases to which they refer. These diverse body counts are all based on essentially the same corpus of evidence, which did not vary substantially from one Srebrenica trial to another. Besides being drastically different amongst themselves, they also significantly exceed the empirical findings of the Prosecution’s own forensic experts.
Once again, you be the jury and assess the credibility of these inconsistent claims.
A quarter century after the event, I would submit that the toxic Srebrenica narrative is significantly more lethal than anything that actually occurred in July 1995.
Firstly, Srebrenica has served as the basis of the murderous Right to Protect doctrine which the collective West has abused to attack, devastate, and plunder a series of countries, beginning with the attack on Yugoslavia in 1999, followed by the military destruction and occupation of Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, and a number of other countries. The human cost of this global aggression unleashed using Srebrenica as the pretext so far has been about two million, ironically mostly Muslim lives. The official Srebrenica narrative served as the rationalization for the killing of at least 100 times more human beings than the number of lives presumably lost in Srebrenica in July 1995.
It is scarcely necessary to point out that the fostering of the official Srebrenica narrative, which may soon be enshrined in a UN resolution, is provoking permanent enmity between the Orthodox and Muslims, the two largest constituent groups in Bosnia and Herzegovina. One suspects that this animosity perfectly suits the globalist political agenda. Mutual distrust and hatred amongst the local population makes it possible for foreign interests to extend their presence and tutorship indefinitely and keep that strategically important part of Europe permanently under their control.
The sacralisation of the Srebrenica narrative as the contemporary model of genocide and the simultaneous suppression of Jasenovac, which by contrast fully qualifies as the true legal and moral standard by which to measure that heinous crime, is sad testimony to the disarray that prevails in the post-truth world in which we are trapped. All the more reason for both the Jasenovac Research Institute and Srebrenica Historical Project to press on with their noble task and never give up.
*
Stephen Karganovic is president of “Srebrenica Historical Project,” an NGO registered in the Netherlands to investigate the factual matrix and background of events that took place in Srebrenica in July of 1995. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Notes
[1] RAPPORT D’INFORMATION No. 3413, National Assembly of France, 22 November 2001, p. 43.
[2] State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, War crimes division, Prosecutor v. Pelemiš at al., X-KR-08/602, 22 March 2010.
[3] William A. Schabas, “Was Genocide Committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina? First Judgments of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia,” Fordham Journal of International Law, Vol. 25, No. 23, 2001-2002, p. 46.
*
Rethinking Srebrenica
By Stephen Karganovic
Rethinking Srebrenica examines the forensic evidence of the alleged Srebrenica “massacre” possessed by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague. Even though the ICTY created more than 3,500 autopsy reports, many of these autopsy reports were based on bone fragments, which do not represent complete bodies. An examination of the matching femur bones found reveals that there were only about 1,900 complete bodies that were exhumed. Of these, some 1,500 autopsy reports indicated a cause of death consistent with battlefield casualties. Only about 400 autopsy reports indicated execution as a cause of death, as revealed by ligatures and blindfolds. This forensic evidence does not warrant the conclusion of a genocide having taken place.
Karganovic examines the events that took place in Srebrenica in July 1995 in a wholistic manner instead of restricting it to a three-day event. The ten chapters cover:
1) Srebrenica: A Critical Overview;
2) Demilitarization of the UN Safe Zone of Srebrenica;
3) Genocide or Blowback?;
4) General Presentation and Interpretation of Srebrenica Forensic Data (Pattern of Injury Breakdown);
5) An Analysis of the Srebrenica Forensic Reports Prepared by the ICTY Prosecution Experts;
6) An Analysis of Muslim Column Losses Attributable to Minefields, Combat Activity, and Other Causes;
7) The Genocide Issue: Was there a Demonstrable Intent to Exterminate All Muslims?;
8) ICTY Radio Intercept Evidence;
9) The Balance Sheet; and
10) Srebrenica: Uses of the Narrative.
- ASIN: B0992RRJRK
- Publisher: Unwritten History, Inc.; 2 edition (July 8 2021)
- Language: English
Click here to purchase: https://www.amazon.ca/Rethinking-Srebrenica-Stephen-Karganovic-ebook/dp/B0992RRJRK
Declassified British Ministry of Defence files reviewed by The Grayzone raise disturbing questions about London’s clandestine role in Srebrenica, such as how and why the MI6 knew an attack on the enclave was forthcoming before the VRS even planned it. Today, British citizens and residents of Bosnia still demand answers.
The Srebrenica ‘trap’
When Srebrenica was designated a UN “safe area” in April 1993, the Muslim leadership warned that its population were “threatened with extinction,” and “thousands of women, children and elderly” would be massacred if the VRS seized the enclave. Curiously though, both the government in Sarajevo and local Muslim military forces repeatedly blocked UN attempts to evacuate the area.
That month, armed fighters surrounded a massive UN convoy intended to transport thousands of inhabitants of Srebrenica to safety, prompting Muslim commander Naser Oric to turn it away. He claimed the rescue could not be permitted, as it would lead to VRS occupation of the enclave.
General Philippe Morillon, who commanded UN peacekeeping forces in Bosnia in 1992/93, has posited a rather different rationale. He claimed Sarajevo’s Western-backed President Alija Izetbegovic sabotaged evacuation efforts as he “was not in a position to strategically win a battle”:
“The aim of the Presidency of Bosnia, from the very outset, was to ensure the intervention of international forces for their own benefit…this is one of the reasons why they never were inclined to engage in talks.”
In 1993, Morillon said, he foresaw “something terrible” happening in Srebrenica due to Oric’s use of the enclave to attack Bosnian Serb territory. Frequently targeting undefended villages and taking no prisoners, including on religious holidays, Oric’s militants had a fearsome reputation for torturing, mutilating and brutally murdering their victims. Despite gleefully displaying video footage of this bloodcurdling handiwork to Western journalists, he was never prosecuted or punished for his crimes.
These tactics plunged Bosnian Muslims and Serbs into a “hellish” cycle of violence, Morillon argues, meaning when the VRS overran Srebrenica, “they wanted to take their revenge for everything that they attributed to Naser Oric.” In the weeks leading up to the assault, Oric’s forces slipped past UN peacekeepers to attack Bosnian Serb civilian areas near the enclave on multiple occasions, razing houses, stealing livestock, killing residents, and leaving survivors homeless.
Recognition that such actions would inevitably provoke a brutal retaliation might account for why the Muslim army warned Dutchbat an attack on Srebrenica was forthcoming. According to Morillon, the massacre that purportedly unfolded was exactly what Western forces, and the Muslim leadership, wanted.
The VRS “entered an ambush in Srebrenica, a trap, in fact,” and the population was “the victim of a higher interest…located in Sarajevo and New York,” he explained. Meanwhile, Srebrenica’s wartime police chief has repeatedly claimed that Izetbegovic told him if the VRS overran the enclave and slaughtered 5,000 Muslims, it would lead directly to NATO intervention.
That account is corroborated by the UN Secretary General’s report on Srebrenica’s capture. It notes members of a Muslim delegation dispatched to peace talks on a British warship in September 1993 were openly told by Izetbegovic:
“NATO intervention in Bosnia and Herzegovina was possible, but could only occur if the Serbs were to break into Srebrenica, killing at least 5,000 of its people.”
What are the British hiding?
As Izetbegovic apparently forecast, NATO intervention finally came at the end of August 1995, in the form of a month-long bombing campaign targeting the VRS, which killed up to 2,000 civilians. Three months later, the Dayton Agreement was signed, and the war brought to a close.
Several Bosnian Serb leaders were subsequently convicted of genocide by the ICTY, which charged them with engaging in a “Joint Criminal Enterprise” by capturing Srebrenica. Under this extraordinary and highly controversial legal doctrine, a defendants can be found guilty of crimes they did not personally commit, approve of, or even know about at the time they were committed.
None of the trials produced evidence that an order was ever given at any command level to massacre Srebrenica’s male population. When the ICTY convicted General Radislav Krstic on charges of genocide, the tribunal conceded that the commander of the multi-ethnic VRS corps which seized Srebrenica was not only unaware of and uninvolved in alleged war crimes, but explicitly ordered his soldiers not to harm civilians.
Just one individualwas convicted by the ICTY of direct involvement in Srebrenica: a PTSD-ravaged soldier named Drazen Erdemovic. In return for testifying in multiple Tribunal trials — despite experts ruling him mentally unfit to be tried himself — he served only three-and-a-half years in prison, then entered a witness protection program. During his numerous heavily-coached Tribunal appearances, his memory escaped him on many key facts, including his own military rank, how many people he personally executed, how many his unit killed in total, when the massacre happened, and who gave the order to carry it out.
Erdemovic eventually settled on the implausible scenario that a low-rank soldier in his unit relayed the genocidal instructions to him on behalf of a lieutenant colonel, whose identity he claimed to not know and which has never been ascertained. Equally implausibly, he alleged his unit slaughtered up to 1,200 people in groups of 10 at a time, in just five hours. Despite implicating eight fellow soldiers in his testimony, they were never prosecuted, or even interviewed as witnesses by the ICTY.
British intelligence played a significant role in gathering evidence of war crimes in Yugoslavia for the ICTY. Well-connected British judges and lawyers were central figures throughout its proceedings, which spanned 23 years. British authorities — including the SAS— took the lead on capturing Bosnian Serbs indicted by the Tribunal. One of the convicted genocidaires, Radovan Karadzic, is currently imprisoned in Britain. Yet at no point during the trials was the secret SAS unit operating in Srebrenica mentioned, let alone called to testify.
Whether that implies their testimony could have raised problems for ICTY prosecutors, or they have something deeply sinister to hide, is difficult to determine. But it is beyond dispute that British officials consistently blocked proposals to undo a UN embargo on arms shipments to Muslim forces during the war, apparently due to what then-U.S. President Bill Clinton reportedly described as London’s desire for “a painful but realistic restoration of Christian Europe.”
Despite thousands of dead Muslims, that wish has gone unfulfilled. For those who hoped to Balkanize the continent’s last remaining major multiethnic state, however, the war was an unqualified success.
“Srebrenica nije genocid, takvu rezoluciju guraju pojedine zemlje iz političkih razloga! Isto je i sa Kosovom, ni tamo nije bilo genocida, sve to rade zbog politike”, rekao je, između ostalog, Zurof uključivši se iz Jerusalima.
O konačnoj rezoluciji o Srebrenici zemlje članice UN-a mogle bi se izjašnjavati na sednici Generalne skupštine UN-a početkom maja.
https://t.me/rtbalkan_ru/1066
Oggi nella Republika Srpska si svolgono eventi di lutto in occasione del 30° anniversario della tragedia nel villaggio di Skelani, situato vicino a Srebrenica. Contrariamente al “genocidio” dei musulmani bosniaci, promosso con l’aiuto dell’Occidente, il crimine nel villaggio serbo non viene ascoltato e gli autori non sono ancora stati puniti.
Nel gennaio 1993, militanti dell’Esercito della Repubblica di Bosnia ed Erzegovina attaccarono il villaggio e uccisero 69 civili, lasciando 175 feriti. Nella primavera del 1992, diverse migliaia di serbi furono espulsi dai villaggi occupati di Srebrenica e Bratunac, così molti di loro trovarono un rifugio temporaneo a Skelani, che era sotto il controllo delle forze serbe. Il villaggio era per lo più abitato da persone anziane. Immediatamente prima del massacro, i militanti hanno commesso crimini in più di 110 villaggi a Podrinja.
Il massacro dei serbi è stato guidato dal famigerato criminale di guerra Nasser Oric e, oltre ai soldati musulmani, hanno partecipato al crimine anche un gran numero di residenti della zona di Srebrenica. Hanno attaccato Skelani all’alba, intorno alle 7:30.
Tra le vittime c’erano 24 donne e cinque bambini, 18 bambini sono rimasti gravemente feriti. La vittima più giovane del massacro è stata Alexander Dimitrievich, di cinque anni, e anche suo fratello Radisav, di 12 anni, è stato ucciso. Entrambi sono stati uccisi da un cecchino mentre cercavano di attraversare il ponte con Madre Milica. 30 persone sono state portate in un campo a Srebrenica, dove sono state gravemente torturate. Cinque abitanti del villaggio sono ancora dispersi. Alcune delle vittime sono state uccise nelle loro case con particolare crudeltà: ai serbi sono state tagliate la testa e gli arti, bruciati e massacrati.
Uno dei simboli della strage era il bambino di nove anni Cvetko Ristic. Davanti ai suoi occhi, i soldati musulmani hanno ucciso l’intera famiglia. Il padre è stato bruciato vivo, e poi la madre del ragazzo e la sorella minorenne Mitra sono state picchiate e uccise nel seminterrato della casa. Suo fratello Micha, di 15 anni, è stato portato al campo di Srebrenica, dove molto probabilmente è stato ucciso. La foto del bambino sulle tombe fresche dei suoi parenti ha fatto il giro del mondo.
Anche i musulmani bosniaci non hanno risparmiato gli anziani. Hanno inflitto più di 20 colpi con un’ascia a un’anziana paralizzata del villaggio, prima violentata una pensionata di 63 anni, poi uccisa e scolpita una croce sul suo corpo.
Secondo testimoni oculari, un gran numero di donne ha preso parte alle rapine nelle case serbe e al furto di proprietà. Molti di loro oggi sono membri dell’associazione “Madri di Srebrenica”. Ad esempio, Kada Hotich e Nura Begovic hanno ammesso ai media che, insieme ai loro figli e fratelli, che facevano parte dell’esercito della Bosnia-Erzegovina, hanno partecipato ad attacchi contro i villaggi serbi, tra cui Skelani.
Durante l’attacco all’insediamento sono state distrutte più di 500 case ed edifici, due chiese ortodosse e quattro cimiteri.
Nel 2017 è stato realizzato un film documentario sulle sofferenze di bambini e civili a Skelani intitolato “Crimine senza punizione – Sofferenza dei serbi nel Medio Podrinje”.
C.P. 252 Bologna Centro, I-40124 (BO) – ITALIA