In a United Nations General Assembly vote held on 23 May 2024, the world’s nations came together to proclaim 11 July as the “International Day of Reflection and Commemoration of the 1995 Genocide in Srebrenica.” The vote was 84 in favor, 19 against, and 68 abstentions. The German representative explained that the intent was to commemorate “the tragedy that took place almost 30 years ago, starting on 11 July 1995, when 8372 Bosnian Muslims were systematically executed in the town of Srebrenica, which had been designated a safe area by Security Council resolution 819 (1993).” While this resolution is a step forward in the international struggle for justice, it has sparked a heated discussion on the legitimacy of international courts and how their rulings are applied in different corners of the world. The ongoing genocide in Gaza is not only a tragic reminder of the inhuman tradition of ethnic cleansing but yet another piece of evidence to prove the real reason behind the international criminal court system.
The shadow of genocide looms large over countries that claim to champion the values of liberty, equality, and fraternity. Examples are plentiful worldwide. The United States of America is built on land that was seized in one of the most successful genocides in history and its present position as a global superpower can be owed to its historic and continued reliance on imperialist institutions like slavery. Sparked by fascism, the German state of the 1930s and 40s systematically executed approximately six million European Jews. The same state, along with Belgium, exploited and divided the nation of Rwanda in the 20th century. Presently, the US, Germany, and the European Union seated in Belgium, are in full support of the state of Israel in their continued human rights violations. It should come as no surprise that many in the Global South, including Bosnians, see the Western attitude toward genocide and international law as a matter of theatrics. Namibia’s representative in the UNGA vote questioned why “selective amnesia” is becoming the norm in international discourse. However, the truth is that this has been common practice for centuries.
The line between what is acceptable and what is not has always been drawn by the US and its allies. Countries like Bosnia and Herzegovina are chastised for their corruption, but the US solved this issue by institutionalizing bribery into lobbying to make it easier for groups and corporations to push their agendas onto the American political stage and consequently, the rest of the world. In Germany and the US alike, pro-Palestinian protesters are suppressed by state authorities, while fascists are free to express their right to “free speech” in Milan or Charlottesville where the police were either supportive or indifferent. Students are often hailed as the most ripe layer of a nation’s intelligentsia, striving for a more progressive and empathetic society. When Western media reports on incidents of student-police violence in Iran or China, then the students are fighting for their right to protest, but when they are protesting in Europe or America, the narrative is one of radicalism, terrorism, and unlawfulness. Columbia University stands as a shining example of this brand of Western hypocrisy. However, the leaders of the Global North will always espouse the same excuse, as the former Prime Minister of the Netherlands Mark Rutte, explained when he was asked about a comparison between Palestine and Bosnia. In his view, there is “really no comparison.” Indeed there is a comparison to be made, one between the international response to 1995 Bosnia (which aligned with US interests) and 2023 Gaza (which goes against US interests).
Both the Bosniaks in Srebrenica and the Palestinians in Gaza are the victims of a misinformation campaign. During the case of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the most controversial point was the issue of intent — whether the Serb forces carried out a spontaneous massacre or a planned genocide. In this case, the ICTY used the destruction of cultural elements like mosques, schools, and libraries as evidence of the intentional eradication of Bosniak culture and community from the region. However, the US refuses to accept the destruction of the same institutions in Gaza as evidence of an ongoing genocide. The war in Bosnia saw the deliberate targeting of NGOs and International Aid workers. The same has happened in Gaza, whether it is deliberate drone strikes on aid workers or aid blockades. One of the most harrowing symbols of the genocide in Bosnia were the mass graves and the ones found in Gaza are a stark reminder for survivors of the 1995 genocide. Following this, the ICTY discussed the issue of the number of dead, as the reliability of Bosniak sources was put into question, as is a common tactic today. These numbers are often challenged by claims that the majority of the deaths were combatants and then that the civilian deaths are high because combatants would use civilians as human shields, paralleling the Hamas human shield claims that justified attacks in Tuzla, Prijedor, Sarajevo, and other towns. Finally, Refik Hodzić points out how Bosniaks were once targeted by campaigns to paint all of their civilians as mujahadeen, jihadists, and terrorists as all Gazans are labeled as Hamas supporters, violent jihadists, and Islamic terrorists today. The truth could not be further from these claims as the peoples of Yugoslavia lived under the banner of Brotherhood and Unity for decades before the 1990s, as Jews and Palestinians shared the same land for centuries before the import of European colonialism to the region.
NATO’s involvement in Yugoslavia and the subsequent international court rulings calling for Milošević, Karadžić, and Mladić’s arrests were met as victories of global justice. However, the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrants on Netanyahu and Gallant are being pushed back and the International Court of Justice’s rulings are being dismissed by the US and EU. Although it might seem baffling, especially to experts on the matter like Francis Boyle, this shift in Western nations’ attitudes toward the international rule of law is the result of a precise and tempered attempt to preserve the profits of megacorporations, exploit developing nations of their natural resources, and uphold the institution of white supremacy. It is a shame that the words Srebrenica and Gaza have to be tainted with a legacy as tragic as genocide when their names mean “silver” and “strength” respectively. Bosnians, who live under the shadow of genocide and war, know all too well how dangerous international indifference can be, which is why Bosnian scholars and researchers are some of the most vocal in the struggle for international justice, be it for themselves, Armenians, Rwandans, Jews, or Palestinians. The way forward is difficult and it involves European independence from US foreign policy. In doing so, the EU could ensure that the principles of international law are applied equally to all nations. Only once European leadership starts aligning their policies with the interests of their people, can the first step be taken toward a truly free and democratic Europe.
Follow the comments:
|
