A Note on Nomenclature_________________________________________________________1Ethnicities_________________________________________________________________________1

Nationalities________________________________________________________________________1

Introduction___________________________________________________________________3

Historical Background__________________________________________________________4World War II and the Rise of Tito_____________________________________________________5

After Tito: The Breakup of Yugoslavia_________________________________________________7

Bosnia and Herzegovina_____________________________________________________________11

Safe Area Srebrenica as a Refugee Collection Point______________________________________14

Reaction to Srebrenica______________________________________________________________16

Kosovo___________________________________________________________________________17

0

A Note on Nomenclature To better understand the various conflicts of the Balkan Peninsula and of the

refugee crisis at large, it is necessary to define specific terminology. These terms will

make some of the complexities of this area more manageable, and will offer the reader a

better comprehension of the tensions of the region. Definitions and explanations that

follow should be considered generalizations and not hard and fast rules. Moreover,

statements of religious affiliation should be limited to descriptive understanding only.

Ethnicities Bosniak: Nation of people generally collected in the center of what is today Bosnia and Herzegovina. Bosniaks are typically of the Muslim faith, and represent the northern-most territorial boundary of the Ottoman Empire until the end of World War I.

Croat: Nation of people generally collected in the Republic of Croatia during the time of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Croats are typically Roman Catholic and identify largely with their European neighbors. Croatia was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire until the end of World War I.

Serb: Nation of people found in eastern Bosnia, eastern Croatia (Slavonia) and throughout Serbia. Serbs are typically practice the eastern order of Orthodox Catholicism. Serbia was largely controlled by the Ottoman Empire until the end of World War I.

Slovene: Slovenes are most closely related to their European neighbors and are typically Roman Catholic.

Nationalities Bosnian: Bosnians are citizens of the present state of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Bosnia has historically been a mixture of Bosniaks, Croats, and Serbs throughout history. Bosnians are typically split by those with an affinity toward Turkish or Western culture. Croats settled largely in the western regions (Herzegovina), Bosniaks largely in the center (Bosnia), and Serbs can be found primarily in the eastern regions of the country (Republika Srpska).

Croatian: Croatians are citizens of the present state of Croatia. Before the 1990s, Croats were located primarily in the southern (Dalmatia) and central (Croatia) regions. Serbs were often found to be living in the eastern regions (Eastern Slavonia).

1

Macedonian: Macedonians are citizens of the Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia (FYROM). Due to its proximity to Albania, the FYROM had a substantial Albanian population.

Serbian1: Serbians are citizens of the present state of Serbia and Montenegro. Before the war, Serbia was home primarily to Serbs, but there also existed significant Hungarian and Albanian populations. After the war, Serbia is made up almost entirely of Serbs.

Slovenian: Slovenians are citizens of the present state of Slovenia. Slovenians are very close in their relationships to Europe and the population is largely homogenous.

Before the breakup of Yugoslavia, all six republics were members of the Socialist Federal

Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY)

1 In the post-war period, the remnants of the former Yugoslavia were limited to Serbia and Montenegro, and Montenegro gained independence in 2006. Serbia is considered to have dominated Montenegro in both political and military arenas. As such, the Montenegrans were not significant players during the conflicts of the 1990s.

2

Historical BackgroundTo conceptualize the nationalism upon which leaders in the 20th Century mobilized

their citizens during the conflicts in the southern Slavic region, one must begin in the

fourteenth century. The Battle of Kosovo Polje occurred on Vidovdan, or St. Vitus Day,

in 1389 and became a date enshrined in the national consciousness of Serbs. On this day,

the Serbs lost to the conquering Ottoman

Empire as it sought to establish a stronghold in

Europe. To this day, the Serbian Orthodox

observe this holiday. Despite its importance to

the collective tradition of the Serbian people as

an anniversary of their ancestors valiantly

fighting against oppression, it represents an

occasion after which Serbs would be subjugated

by their Ottoman masters.2 Nevertheless, St.

Vitus Day would retain its historical

significance for those rallying behind Serb

national pride even at the end of the 20th

Century. The idea of an independent Serbian state, though, did not come into favor until

the 19th Century. The Southern Slavic states began achieving independence in 1878 with

the Congress of Berlin, which followed the Russo-Turkish War. Under that agreement,

both Serbia and Montenegro became independent, and Bosnia and Herzegovina came

under the control of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. National tensions remained, however,

and at the beginning of the 20th Century they culminated in what became a global war.

On 28 June 1914, St. Vitus Day, the assassination of the Habsburg Archduke

Franz Ferdinand by a Serbian nationalist named Gavrilo Princip became the spark that

ignited the “powder keg of Europe,” a principle cause of the First World War. Ferdinand,

according to popular opinion at the time, was in favor of “trialism,” which was a proposal

2 John B. Allcock, Explaining Yugoslavia (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000), 316-7.

Western Balkans

3

to grant the southern Slavs autonomy within Austria-Hungary.3 One month following the

assassination, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia. The assassination was not the

sine qua non of a widespread European conflict. Under the many treaties and alliances in

effect in Europe at the time, widespread war in hindsight, seemed inevitable. World War

I officially began on 1 August 1914, though the Balkan states were not its primary focus

of battle. The war sounded the death knell for the Ottoman Empire, which even before

the war was in such decline that it had earned the nickname “the sick man of Europe.”

Upon the conclusion of the Great War in 1918, the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and

Slovenes came into being.

On 28 June 1921, the Vidovdan Constitution outlined a predominantly Serbian,

centralist government for the Kingdom, although in 1929 the President of Serbia

suspended the constitution in favor of establishing a dictatorship. After a decade of

autocratic rule, a Sporazum (compromise) allowed for an independent government based

in Croatia. Called Hrvatska, its federal structure arguably may have blossomed into the

“First Yugoslavia.” The chaos of the Second World War, however, arrived before the

new government had sufficient time to create orderly and structured rule.4

World War II and the Rise of TitoTwo years after the German invasion of Poland, World War II began directly

affecting the fledgling government in Yugoslavia. In 1941, the Nazis invaded

Yugoslavia and quickly installed a Ustasha regime in Croatia sympathetic to Adolf Hitler

and Benito Mussolini. The states surrounding Yugoslavia began annexing its territory as

their own in the name of ethnic rights.5 Meanwhile, both Germany and Italy established

protectorates in Serbia and Montenegro, respectively. In Croatia, the Ustasha

government operated a concentration camp, Jasenovic, in which both Serbs and Jews

faced extermination. The extent to which this death camp killed Serbs would become an

important issue of debate in the ensuing dialogue that became Yugoslavia.

3 Carole Rogel, The Breakup of Yugoslavia and the War in Bosnia, (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1998), 6.4 Allcock, 269.5 Rogel, 10.

4

Widespread resistance to the occupation soon

became the norm. By the next year, fighting

between rival collaborationist and resistance factions

plunged the state into civil war. The conflict pitted members of the same nationality and

even family against each other. During this time, more than any other, such fratricidal

conflict set the grim precedent of ethnic conflict in the region.6 In the end, Josip Broz

Tito, whose parents were Croatian and Slovenian, and who lived in Serbia, emerged the

victor as leader of the communist resisters.

By 1945, Tito had attained sufficient control of the region to establish the Socialist

Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY). The Yugoslav government under Tito

deemphasized nationalism on the grounds

that it led to the destabilization of the

region underscored throughout World War

II.7 The SFRY consisted of six republics:

Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia,

Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia, and

two autonomous areas within Serbia

Kosovo8 and Vojvodina. The SFRY

initially aligned itself with the Soviet Union only to face expulsion after a confrontation

between Tito and Soviet leader Joseph Stalin in 1948. No longer a part of the Soviet

Union, the SFRY captured the attention of the West, from which it now received aid,

though it remained a communist government. Continuing his practice of non-alignment,

Tito continued his rule until his death in 1980, effectively balancing his relationship with

both the United States and the Soviet Union.

In order to limit the effect of nationalism, Tito implemented a variety of programs

that sought to unite Yugoslavia as a single country, not of six constituent republics. 6 Jeffrey S. Morton, et al. (ed.), Reflections on the Balkan Wars: Ten Years After the Break Up of Yugoslavia (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), 6.7 Ibid, 6.8 Kosovo, the site of the battle that bears its name from 1389, had become a haven for a largely Albanian population, while Vojvodina was primarily a Hungarian region.

Ustaša:The Ustaše was a Croatian far-right organisation put in charge of the Independent State of Croatia by the Axis Powers in 1941. They pursued Nazi/fascist policies and were subsequently expelled by the communist Yugoslav partisans and the Red Army in 1945.

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ustasha

Map of Serbia and its Constituent Provinces

5

Economic development programs were established throughout the country, ensuring that

despite its communist nature, that prosperity could be had in all sectors. In addition, Tito

strongly advocated intermarriage among ethno-linguistic groups. The product of a mixed

marriage, Tito believed strongly that if there was a meaningful interrelation among the

people of Yugoslavia, then it would be unlikely that these groups would turn on

themselves in any sort of a violent way.

After Tito: The Breakup of YugoslaviaThe death of Tito, the charismatic ‘president-for-life’ who gained fame and power

as a leader of a resistance movement during World War II, placed Yugoslavia in similar

circumstances as the Fifth Republic in France after De Gaulle stepped down. A

government created around a uniquely popular personality now lacked that unifying

executive, and changes in the government were inevitable. Consequentially, the

nationalism that Tito had worked so hard to suppress renewed itself in force in the years

following his passing, and other aspects of the “Titoist” ideology that prevailed during his

rule crumbled as well.9 In 1986, the Serbian Academy of Sciences published a

memorandum accusing Tito of causing the economic woes of Serbians through a variety

of discriminatory policies, including granting equal authority within the federal

government to Kosovo. The Academy felt the territory rightfully belonged to Serbia as

part of “Greater Serbia” ideals. Historically, Kosovo had long been a part of Serbia,

however it had become ninety per cent Albanian and just ten per cent Serb by the 20th

Century. During this time, the majority of Kosovars, afraid of the growing Serbian

nationalism present even under Tito, clamored for uniting Kosovo with Albania.10

During this wave of nationalist sentiment, a heretofore inconspicuous bureaucrat

named Slobodan Milošević capitalized upon the prevailing attitudes of those who

sympathized with the memorandum. He soon rose to the leadership of the Serbian

League of Communists (SKS). He had, as a member

of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia, moved

9 Allcock, 241.10 Morton, 6.

Slobodan Milosevic

6

through the ranks by giving speeches and pledging actions that appealed to Serbian

nationalists. Many of these promises particularly addressed the protection of minority of

Serbs who lived in Kosovo.11 In a speech delivered to what was estimated as a crowd of

nearly one million people on the 600th anniversary of Serbian defeat on the fields of

Kosovo Polje, Slobodan Milošević responded to an attack on Serbian nationalists by

Albanians by calling for “unity and prosperity,” a common reprise in Yugoslavia,

however his speech was considered to be wildly nationalistic, and some felt that is was a

harbinger of things to come. Slovenia, afraid of further consequences arising from the

newest applications of the Greater Serbia philosophy, organized a walkout of a session of

the communist congress in Belgrade in January 1990. The Croat delegation followed,

effectively sealing the fate of the League of Communists.

In that year, nationalist sentiments across the region revealed themselves in the

subsequent elections held in the Yugoslav republics. In Croatia, former communist

Franjo Tudjman, the candidate of the nationalist Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ), won

the presidency. In Slovenia, the presidential victor was Milan Kucan, also a former

communist. Milošević won in Serbia, representing the new Social Democratic Party.

Momir Bulatovic, a reformist who nevertheless allied with Milošević, achieved victory in

Montenegro. Lastly, Alija Izetbegović of the Muslim Party of Democratic Action won in

Bosnia-Herzegovina. Shortly before the elections, Milošević took $1.8 billion from the

Yugoslavian federal bank and used it to subsidize various Serbian interests, which no

doubt helped assure his victory. At the same time, Milošević began replacing high level

military officials with Serbs.

The trend toward nationalism in the governments of the Yugoslav republics

seemed to undermine the overarching federal structure. Although international actors

like the European Community, the United States, and the International Monetary Fund all

saw a unified Yugoslavia in their best interests, ultimately the tension between nations

became insurmountable.

11 Week in Review Desk, “A Whirlwind of Hatreds: How the Balkans Broke Up,” The New York Times, 14 February 1993. Online: Lexis-Nexis, http://www.lexis-nexis.com.

7

Slovenia and Croatia

On 15 May 1991, according to the standard of rotation of the presidency, Croatian

President Stipe Mesic was to assume the post; however the president at the time refused

to step down. Borisav Joric, a Serb in association with Milošević, would not relinquish

his office and was supported in his resistance by Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo, and

Vojvodina. In response, Croatia held referenda to move toward independence and was

successful, creating its own national guard. Slovenia, considered by most states to be

more European than Yugoslavian, declared its independence on 25 June 1991 after

considerable deliberations and planning. Seizing on an opportunity, and fearful of being

dragged into the wrong side of a war, Croatia declared its independence on the same day

in a somewhat less organized fashion. In response, the Yugoslavian National Army

(JNA), with its Serb military commanders, was ordered into Slovenia, however the

Slovene National Guard and police effectively suppressed the campaign and it was

abandoned after just ten days. Foreign Ministers of the European Community (EC)

began an embargo on arms to Yugoslavia on 5 July of that year, seeking to avoid open

war.12 Two days later, the EC facilitated the Brioni Agreement, formally ending the

conflict there.

Croatia fared much worse than Slovenia in its

efforts against the JNA.13 Fighting erupted

throughout Croatia, devastating the resorts in the city

of Dubrovnik, on the Adriatic, along with two

heavily populated cities in east Croatia, Osijek and

Vukovar. It was in the east of Croatia that Serbia

12 Sir Russel Johnston, “The Yugoslav conflict- Chronology of Events from 30th May 1991- 8th November 1993,” Defence Committee of the Western European Union. Online: http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/academic/history/marshall/military/a-weu/document/yugodefc.rus (Accessed 15 April 2006).13 Rogel, 25.

Croatia

8

began its policy of “ethnic cleansing,” in an attempt to rid Croatia of Croatians and other

non-Serbian nationalities.

Again, the EC attempted to negotiate truces, all of which ended shortly after going

into effect, often on the same day as their signing.14 The United Nations began its

involvement in the conflict with the passage of economic sanctions, including Security

Council Resolution 713, which established an embargo on arms sales to all of

Yugoslavia. These sanctions had no immediate

effect, however their long term ramifications would

shape the ensuing conflict. Then, in 1992,

invoking Chapter VIII of the UN Charter, the

United Nations finally brokered a ceasefire, to be monitored by a protection force

(UNPROFOR) of 14,000 peacekeepers.15 At the time of the ceasefire, the situation in

Croatia was already dour: the Serbs had already taken control of one third of the state, ten

thousand people had been killed, thirty thousand wounded, and the fighting had displaced

730,000 refugees, Croat and Serb alike.16

Bosnia and HerzegovinaThe United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) established its headquarters

in Sarajevo with the intention of basing its administration away from the conflict in

Croatia. Unfortunately, fighting would soon come to Bosnia as well. In 1992, fearing

domination by Serbian government forces, Bosnian citizens passed a referendum for

independence, and gained international recognition from the United States and the EC.

Consequently, the Serb-controlled JNA turned its attention to Sarajevo, beginning an epic

siege there on 5 April, involving heavy artillery fired upon the city by Serb forces from

its surrounding hills.17 Escalating tensions forced the relocation of UNPROFOR to

Zagreb, as Radovan Karadzic, the head of the Serbian Democratic Party, led Bosnian

14 Johnson.15 United Press International, “Security Council to Approve Peace Force to Yugoslavia,” 20 February 1992. Online: Lexis-Nexis, http://www.lexis-nexis.com.16 Rogel, 26.17 Final report of the United Nations Commission of Expertsestablished pursuant tosecurity council resolution 780 (1992). Online: http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/comexpert/ANX/VI-01.htm#I.C (accessed 18 April 2006).

Ethnic Cleansing:the mass expulsion and killing of one ethic or religious group in an area by another ethnic or religious group in that area

Source: wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

9

Serb troops into combat against the multinational Bosnian government forces. Karadzic

aimed to create a contiguous Serbian territory encompassing western Bosnia and the

Krajina region of Croatia, along with Sarajevo.18 The Bosnian Serbs were incensed by

the independence maneuver by the predominantly Muslim population, and sought to

establish a region in which it believed that the rights of Serbs would be protected. While

potentially noble in purpose, this effort relied upon ethnic cleansing, in process.

Izetbegović called for international help, and on 22 May 1992, the United Nations

recognized and admitted Bosnia-Herzegovina as a

sovereign state; one week later, it levied sanctions upon

Serbia and Montenegro for being the aggressor in the

conflict. Despite this seemingly supportive stance, the

United Nations maintained its arms embargo on the

whole of Yugoslavia, including the munitions-weak

state of Bosnia.

As in Croatia, the sanctions had little mitigating

effects. In fact, these sanctions made it quite difficult

for Bosnia to defend itself from its Serbian attackers. Of the states involved in the

conflict, the Serbians had access to the formidable JNA and held onto major munitions

building facilities in the former Yugoslavia, the Croatians received munitions from

Germany, the United States, and other supporters, but Bosnia lacked access to the very

weapons it needed to defend itself. Instead of trying to thwart continued combat, the

arms embargo served as a veritable advantage for the invading Serbians who were able to

maintain a significant weapons cache for use in its efforts.

The presence of ethnic cleansing, genocide, and mass rape forced many Bosnians

to flee, causing an influx of refugees in the surrounding areas. Amidst the atrocities, the

international community struggled to find an end to the conflict. A Security Council

resolution established a no-fly zone over Bosnia, and granted the North Atlantic Treaty

Organization (NATO) the authority to enforce it. The EC and the UN established the

18 Rogel, 32.

Alija Izetbegovic

10

International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia (ICFY) in September to seek a

political solution to the fighting. In an attempt to ease the refugee crisis, the UN also

passed resolutions creating nominal “safe areas” in Sarajevo, Bihać, Goražde, Srebrenica,

Tuzla, and Žepa, though these lacked effective mechanisms of enforcement.

The ICFY in 1993 proposed the Vance-Owen Peace Plan (VOPP), which called

for a division of Bosnia into ten provinces. Each ethnic group would receive three

provinces, while the UN would take control of the tenth in Sarajevo. Cyrus Vance, the

UN envoy, and Lord David Owen, representing the EC, appealed to leaders throughout

Yugoslavia to accept the terms of the agreement, and to establish a lasting peace. Only

the Croats voiced their acceptance for

the proposal, while both Muslims and

Serbs voiced objection: Izetbegović

refused the plans because it essentially

granted a third of Bosnia to the Serbian

invaders, the Serbs did not accept the

plan because they felt they had more

opportunity to seize land through

combat.19 The Bosnian Serbs, unwilling

to give up the territory they had

acquired during the fighting, rejected

the proposal in May 1993. Almost

irregardless of these positions, by the

time the VOPP was being actively

considered, the realities on the ground

had essentially made the plan obsolete.

The next year saw the proposal

of the Owen-Stoltenberg plan, which

19 The Economist, “A Map for Peace: Why the West Must Push for an Imperfect Plan for Bosnia,” 9 January 1993. Online: Lexis-Nexis, http://www.lexisnexis.com.

Proposed Peace PlansRed: Serb Majority Blue: Croat MajorityGreen: Bosniak Majority White: UN control

Vance Owen Peace Plan

Owen-Stoltenberg Plan

11

called for Bosnia to become divided based on ethnicity into a confederation. While it had

the support and co-authorship of Milošević and Tudjman, Izetbegović maintained his

convictions for a multinational Bosnia and did not participate in the peace talks. The

Bosnian state continued to erode, with tensions escalating between Muslims and a group

of Bosnian Croats who believed in Croatian ownership of Herzeg-Bosna, in the

southwest. It should be noted that while the Serbians and Bosnian Serbs were most

known for ethnic cleansing, that all sides of the conflict were known to have used this

strategy.20

In 1994, television footage of a Serb attack in a marketplace in Sarajevo drew

considerable international outcry. Before details were known, as in most shellings in

Bosnia, the Bosnian government was accused of bombing itself in an effort to bring about

international concern for its cause. When the shells were ultimately identified as

emanating from Serb foces, NATO began enforcing a 20 kilometer safe zone around the

city – not specifically to protect the people of Sarajevo, but instead to ensure the safety of

UN workers in the area. The Contact Group, the collection of states charged with

negotiating a meaningful peace in the area and consisting of France, Germany, Great

Britain, Russia, and the United States, facilitated an agreement accepted by both parties,

allowing Bosnian Croats the ability to enter into a confederation with Croatia while

simultaneously remaining part of the Bosnian federation.21 Over time, as the initial

incursions into Bosnia and Croatia were failing, Milošević realized that he needed to

distance himself from the Bosnian Serbs, and ultimately he ordered them to peace.22

In 1995, after negotiations between Tudjman and the United Nations, Croatia

launched an offensive to reclaim the territory the Serbs had taken in 1992 with the

permission of the international community. After staging successful campaigns to retake

the central and eastern areas of the state, the Croatian forces entered into battle with

Bosnian forces against the Bosnian Serbs.

20 Morton, 14.21 Ibid.22 Rogel, 36.

12

Safe Area Srebrenica as a Refugee Collection Point During the war in Bosnia, instead of offering a true intervention force, the

international community sought to protect Bosnians in what were termed “safe areas.”

These cities were to be guarded by United Nations personnel, and the people who sought

refuge there would be both protected, and provided with humanitarian assistance from

UN and other relief agencies. These safe areas were located in such areas as Žepa,

Srebrenica, and Goražde, and were represented to the Bosnians as areas where Muslims

and other ethnic groups could safely reside. The implication was that United Nations

“blue helmets” would protect these individuals militarily, if necessary.

By July 1995, some 40,000 internally

displaced persons from across Bosnia had

sought refugee in Srebrenica in eastern

Bosnia. These individuals had come to the

Muslim enclave after their own homes had

been overrun by the advancing Bosnian

Serbs. According to Resolution 819,

Srebrenica was deemed a safe haven, and

“should be free from any armed attack or

any other hostile act.”23 This resolution

further called for a general demilitarization

of all sides of the conflict, and called upon

the UN to “increase the presence” of the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR)

to monitor humanitarian assistance. While the resolution seems to suggest that

UNPROFOR would defend the enclave, the language specifically stated that the role of

the UN forces would be for monitoring purposes, not specifically for the protection of the

people assumed to be under their care. UNPROFOR sent some 600 lightly armed Dutch

soldiers (DutchBat) to Srebrenica to monitor events there. As part of the agreement to

have UN soldiers in the area, both sides were required to demilitarize. DutchBat took

23 United Nations Security Council Resolution 819. Resolution S/RES/819, April 16, 1993.

Srebrenica

13

possession of a few artillery pieces and most of the small arms possessed by the Bosnians

that were in Srebrenica. The Bosnian-Serbs agreed to withdraw their heavy artillery and

soldiers from the region.

The agreement was short-lived. From 6-8 July 1995, Bosnian Serb forces

continuously shelled the enclave, inflicting casualties on both the IDP and existing

civilian population. The newly disarmed Bosnians asked UNPROFOR to return their

surrendered weapons so that they would be able to defend themselves, however the Dutch

soldiers, under orders from UNPROFOR and the Security Council refused this request.

Thousands more Bosnians fled the outlying villages and collected in Srebrenica,

assuming they would receive UN protection. On 9 July, the shelling intensified and the

Bosnian-Serbs took some thirty Dutch soldiers prisoners. In response, DutchBat issued

an ultimatum that the attackers remove their artillery from around the region or suffer

NATO air strikes. The Bosnian-Serbs refused and the following day, NATO dropped

two bombs on artillery positions. The Bosnian-Serbs responded with threats to kill their

Dutch prisoners if the air strikes were not called off, and NATO, whose paramount

mission was to protect UNPROFOR forces, ended further attacks. Two hours after the

planes returned to NATO bases, Bosnian-Serb military leader Ratko Mladic entered

Srebrenica and demanded full disarmament in exchange for the lives of the people in the

enclave. The following day, buses arrived to remove all women and children to Muslim

territory. Mladic ordered that all males between the ages of 12 and 77 be held for

interrogation as potential enemy combatants. In the end, some 23,000 women and

children were evacuated, and it is estimated that about 15,000 Bosnian men had escaped

the enclave into the hills. On 13 July 1995, the DutchBat forces negotiated the release of

14 Dutch soldiers from captivity in exchange for some 5,000 refugees at the base at

Potocari. The Dutch further negotiated their safe departure from the region, provided

they leave behind their weapons, food, and medical supplies. Over the course of the next

three days, the Bosnian-Serbs are believed to have killed more than 8,000 Bosnian men,

14

most in summary executions. Their bodies have been

found in mass graves since the implementation of the

Dayton Accords.24

Reaction to Srebrenica When the United Nations arrived in Bosnia,

most people assumed that the UN forces would be

effective at bringing about peace and security. The

UN offered implied guarantees of protection and

promoted their efforts at bringing all sides to the negotiating table, while stopping the

shooting on the ground. In the end, while the Bosnian refugees held faith in the words of

the UN forces, very little was actually done to ensure their protection. UN safe areas at

Srebrenica, Goražde and Žepa were overrun, and UN forces did little to protect the

innocent or persecuted. Moreover, UNPROFOR officers continually informed the

Bosnians that their true mission was to enforce the peace, not to bring it about. The result

of these events brought about significant distrust of the United Nations and of the

Western world, in general in the region. The Bosnians believe that they were abandoned

and betrayed by the guarantors of freedom.25 This distrust of international organizations

has led to hesitancy in working with the United Nations, the UN High Commission on

Refugees, and other organizations as they attempt to return to their homes and to a sense

of normalcy. These doubts about real support have caused difficulties in the safe return

and repatriation of countless thousands of refugees and internally displaced persons.

While fighting has ended throughout the region, there is still widespread hatred and

ethnic tension, and there is little faith that the organizations that are pushing so strongly

for refugees to return home will provide the necessary protection and security should

conflict resurface.26

24 “Timeline: Siege of Srebrenica,” BBC News, 9 June 2005. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/675945.stm Accessed 1 August 2005.25 Hinchliffe, Michael. Personal interview with Blanca Milutanovic. Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina 10 July 2005.26 Ibid.

Ratko Mladic

15

KosovoSerbian leaders had, in March 1989, eliminated the autonomy of Kosovo by

bringing it under Serbian control. In 1991, separatist groups claimed independence for

the predominantly Albanian republic. Albania quickly recognized Kosovo as

independent, and in 1992 the new republic elected Ibrahim Rugova its first president.

The Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) rose in power in 1996, and began claiming

responsibility for several attacks on police targets. On 28 February 1998, the death of

two Serbian police officers provoked Milošević to retaliate, sending in Serbian military

forces that used lethal measures against those whom it considered separatists.

Fighting escalated on both sides, with

another ethnic cleansing, this time against the

Albanians living in the region. President Bill

Clinton of the United States, among other world

leaders, condemned the attacks and moved

international agencies to action to end the

conflict. After UN sanctions, a sustained NATO

bombing campaign, and the deployment of the

NATO peacekeeping force K-FOR, Milošević

pulled forces out of Kosovo, paving the way for a

cease-fire on 2 June 1999. By this time,

approximately 860,000 Kosovars had fled to

neighboring states, arguably helping achieve Milošević’s goal at a pure Serb population.27

27 Cooper, Mary H. "Global Refugee Crisis." The CQ Researcher 9, no. 25 (July 8, 1999). http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre1999070900 (accessed April 18, 2006).

Kosovo