UN Court: Serbia and Croatia didn't commit genocide in 1990s

[webfact]

UN Court: Serbia and Croatia didn't commit genocide in 1990s
MIKE CORDER, Associated Press

THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — The United Nations' top court ruled Tuesday that Serbia and Croatia did not commit genocide against each other's people during the bloody 1990s wars sparked by the breakup of Yugoslavia.

The ruling could help put to rest lingering animosities between the Balkan neighbors.

The International Court of Justice said Serb forces committed widespread crimes in Croatia early in the war, but these did not amount to genocide. The 17-judge panel then ruled that a 1995 Croat offensive to win back territory from rebel Serbs also featured serious crimes, but did not reach the level of genocide.

Fighting in Croatia from 1991-95 left around 10,000 people dead and forced millions from their homes.

Tuesday's decision was not unexpected, as the U.N.'s Yugoslav war crimes tribunal, a separate court also based in The Hague, has never charged any Serbs or Croats with genocide in one another's territory.

Croatia brought the case to the world court in 1999, asking judges to order Belgrade to pay compensation. Serbia later filed a counterclaim, alleging genocide by Croat forces during the 1995 "Operation Storm" military campaign.

Rejecting both cases, court President Peter Tomka stressed that many crimes happened during fighting between Serbia and Croatia and urged Belgrade and Zagreb to work together toward a lasting reconciliation.

"The court encourages the parties to continue their cooperation with a view to offering appropriate reparation to the victims of such violations," Tomka told a packed Great Hall of Justice at the court's Hague headquarters, the Peace Palace.

Decisions by the International Court of Justice are final and legally binding.

Tomka said crimes including killings and mass expulsions by both sides constituted elements of the crime of genocide, but the judges ruled that neither Serbia nor Croatia carried out the crimes with the "specific intent" to destroy targeted populations.

Both countries expressed disappointment that the court had rejected their claims, but said it is time to move on.

"We are not happy, but we accept the ruling in a civilized manner," Croatian Prime Minister Zoran Milanovic said. "It has been more than 20 years; Croatia is now a member of the European Union and can now build its future."

In Serbia, President Tomislav Nikolic said that although the court did not back the Serbian genocide claim it did "reverse some usual stereotypes" that Serbs were the only culprits for the war.

"Despite the injustice, an encouraging step has been made," Nikolic said in a televised statement. He expressed hope Serbia and Croatia will move on "in good faith

The case brought by Croatia was not the first time Serbia had faced allegations of genocide at the world court.

In a landmark 2007 judgment, judges cleared Belgrade of committing genocide in the 1995 massacre of 8,000 Muslim men and boys in the Bosnian enclave of Srebrenica, but said Serbia breached the genocide convention by failing to prevent the slaughter, Europe's worst mass slaying since World War II.
____

Associated Press Jovana Gec in Belgrade contributed.


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-02-04

[chooka]

Bit late for Sloba, he died in prison.

[rickirs]

"killings and mass expulsions by both sides constituted elements of the crime of genocide, but the judges ruled that neither Serbia nor Croatia carried out the crimes with the "specific intent" to destroy targeted populations."

While the charge of genocide by Serbia against Croatia and Croatia against Serbia are separate and distinct with regard to facts and circumstance, the fact that the Court used the same logic for both to dismiss genocide against each seems to indicate that there was a mutual agreement between Serbia and Croatia to a finding for dismissal. Both countries have matured and co-existed peacefully for 20 years now with democratic societies. So the Court ruling might more reflect reconciliation between the two countries rather than delivery of justice. In essence, each country has given amnesty to the other.

[Kerryd]

I was in Croatia in '92/'93. All 3 sides were equally to blame (Serbs, Croats, Muslims). In addition to being a "national" conflict, it was also a religious one. Orthodox Christians (mostly Serbs and Bosnians), "Western" Christians (mostly Croats and Bosnians) and Muslims (mostly Bosnian and foreign). I had to interact with people in Zagreb, Daruvar, Nova Gradiska and points in between and while there were some good people on each side, there were just as many that would have loved nothing more than to see their opponents annihilated..

All 3 sides were more than willingly to slaughter anyone not on their side. The main differences between the 3 were mostly technical. The Serbs had access to more (and better) weapons and would blow up the houses (with their occupants if they didn't get out in time). The Croats would do the same thing but as they didn't have as much explosives, they'd simply burn the houses down (with their occupants if they didn't get out in time). It was said that of the 3, you did not want to get caught by the Muslims. With the Serbs and Croats there was the possibility of getting you back, but the Muslims would hand you over to their women who would torture and kill you.

Coming across a station wagon with a family of 8 machine-gunned to death because of the license plate on their car (the Croats would target anyone who still had the old Yugoslavian plates on their cars). Families would praise their kids for shooting their toy weapons at the UN vehicles. Being shot at by both sides (in Croatia) because a large portion of the people in our area were pissed at us for not allowing them to continue their ethnic cleansing. Serbs would put up a flag pole in the middle of a field with a Serb flag on it (and then mine the entire field with anti-personnel mines to get anyone stupid enough to try and take the flag down). The Croat police would drive cars full of weapons through our check-points knowing that they were the one group we weren't allowed to stop and search. At night they'd distribute the weapons to the "militias" that were responsible for a lot of the murder and mayhem that went on. We arrest people and hand them to the Croat police (as per our UN mandate) and literally watch them walk the suspects out the back door and let them go (if they were Croatian) ! Seriously, it happened so often that we would get people in position to watch (and film) the rear of the stations for proof.

At one point in Sarajevo, all 3 sides were firing artillery into the city, while at the same time all denying it was them doing it. The UN brought in a counter-battery team to try and pin-point where the shelling was coming from. Reportedly, all 3 sides targeted the counter-battery group because all 3 sides didn't want it proven that they were full of shit.

I was pretty much thoroughly disgusted by the time I left there. The only redeeming factors were the 2 trips I made to Budapest and the one, life-altering (eventually) trip I made to Thailand during that tour. At the time I figured it would take 20 years of solid peace before you could have any real progress, because you needed to raise an entire generation in peaceful conditions. If they grow up only knowing death and destruction, it will come naturally to them when they are old enough to participate themselves. It seems to have worked though, to a degree at least. We had a number of Bosnians working for us in Afghanistan (though I for one really doubted the validity of their Security Clearances but NATO was quick to accept them so we couldn't say much about it).

Oh well, now the World Court can turn it's attention back to prosecuting 90 year old Nazi gate guards and cooks.

[Scott]

Oh, my goodness, Kerryd, I was working in Sarajevo, but I think it was a little later. Most of my time was spent in Bosnia, but I worked in Zagreb for a while.

I am a little surprised about this ruling. The Srebrenicia killings seemed pretty close to genocide, IMO.