The 8 Stages of Genocide By Gregory H. Stanton, President, Genocide Watch

The 8 Stages of Genocide By Gregory H. Stanton, President, Genocide Watch

Classification Symbolization Dehumanization Organization Polarization Preparation Extermination Denial Genocide is a process that develops in eight stages that are predictable but not inexorable. At each stage, preventive measures can stop it. The process is not linear.  Logically, later stages must be preceded by earlier stages.  But all stages continue to operate throughout the process. 1. CLASSIFICATION: All cultures have categories to distinguish people into “us and them” by ethnicity, race, religion, or nationality: German and Jew, Hutu and Tutsi. Bipolar societies that lack mixed categories, such as Rwanda and Burundi, are the most likely to have genocide. The main preventive measure at this early stage is to develop universalistic institutions that transcend ethnic or racial divisions, that actively promote tolerance and understanding, and that promote classifications that transcend the divisions. The Catholic church could have played this role in Rwanda, had it not been riven by the same ethnic cleavages as Rwandan society. Promotion of a common language in countries like Tanzania has also promoted transcendent national identity. This search for common ground is vital to early prevention of genocide. 2. SYMBOLIZATION: We give names or other symbols to the classifications. We name people “Jews” or “Gypsies”, or distinguish them by colors or dress; and apply the symbols to members of groups. Classification and symbolization are universally human and do not necessarily result in genocide unless they lead to the next stage, dehumanization. When combined with hatred, symbols may be forced upon unwilling members of pariah groups: the yellow star for Jews under Nazi rule, the blue scarf for people from the Eastern Zone in Khmer Rouge Cambodia. To combat symbolization, hate symbols can be legally forbidden (swastikas) as can hate speech. Group marking like gang clothing or tribal scarring can be outlawed, as well. The problem is that legal limitations will fail if unsupported by popular cultural enforcement. Though Hutu and Tutsi were forbidden words in Burundi until the 1980’s, code-words replaced them. If widely supported, however, denial of symbolization can be powerful, as it was in Bulgaria, where the government refused to supply enough yellow badges and at least eighty percent of Jews did not wear them, depriving the yellow star of its significance as a Nazi symbol for Jews. 3. DEHUMANIZATION: One group denies the humanity of the other group. Members of it are equated with animals, vermin, insects or diseases. Dehumanization overcomes the normal human revulsion against murder. At this stage, hate propaganda in print and on hate radios is used to vilify the victim group. In combating this dehumanization, incitement to genocide should not be confused with protected speech. Genocidal societies lack constitutional protection for countervailing speech, and should be treated differently than democracies. Local and international leaders should condemn the use of hate speech and make it culturally unacceptable. Leaders who incite genocide should be banned from international travel and have their foreign finances frozen. Hate radio stations should be shut down, and hate propaganda banned. Hate crimes and atrocities should be promptly punished. 4. ORGANIZATION: Genocide is always organized, usually by the state, often using militias to provide deniability of state responsibility (the Janjaweed in Darfur.) Sometimes organization is informal (Hindu mobs led by local RSS militants) or decentralized (terrorist groups.) Special army units or militias are often trained and armed. Plans are made for genocidal killings. To combat this stage, membership in these militias should be outlawed. Their leaders should be denied visas for foreign travel. The U.N. should impose arms embargoes on governments and citizens of countries involved in genocidal massacres, and create commissions to investigate violations, as was done in post-genocide Rwanda. 5. POLARIZATION: Extremists drive the groups apart. Hate groups broadcast polarizing propaganda. Laws may forbid intermarriage or social interaction. Extremist terrorism targets moderates, intimidating and silencing the center. Moderates from the perpetrators’ own group are most able to stop genocide, so are the first to be arrested and killed. Prevention may mean security protection for moderate leaders or assistance to human rights groups. Assets of extremists may be seized, and visas for international travel denied to them. Coups d’état by extremists should be opposed by international sanctions. 6. PREPARATION: Victims are identified and separated out because of their ethnic or religious identity. Death lists are drawn up. Members of victim groups are forced to wear identifying symbols. Their property is expropriated. They are often segregated into ghettoes, deported into concentration camps, or confined to a famine-struck region and starved. At this stage, a Genocide Emergency must be declared. If the political will of the great powers, regional alliances, or the U.N. Security Council can be mobilized, armed international intervention should be prepared, or heavy assistance provided to the victim group to prepare for its self-defense. Otherwise, at least humanitarian assistance should be organized by the U.N. and private relief groups for the inevitable tide of refugees to come. 7. EXTERMINATION begins, and quickly becomes the mass killing legally called “genocide.” It is “extermination” to the killers because they do not believe their victims to be fully human. When it is sponsored by the state, the armed forces often work with militias to do the killing. Sometimes the genocide results in revenge killings by groups against each other, creating the downward whirlpool-like cycle of bilateral genocide (as in Burundi). At this stage, only rapid and overwhelming armed intervention can stop genocide. Real safe areas or refugee escape corridors should be established with heavily armed international protection. (An unsafe “safe” area is worse than none at all.) The U.N. Standing High Readiness Brigade, EU Rapid Response Force, or regional forces -- should be authorized to act by the U.N. Security Council if the genocide is small. For larger interventions, a multilateral force authorized by the U.N. should intervene. If the U.N. is paralyzed, regional alliances must act. It is time to recognize that the international responsibility to protect transcends the narrow interests of individual nation states. If strong nations will not provide troops to intervene directly, they should provide the airlift, equipment, and financial means necessary for regional states to intervene. 8. DENIAL is the eighth stage that always follows a genocide. It is among the surest indicators of further genocidal massacres. The perpetrators of genocide dig up the mass graves, burn the bodies, try to cover up the evidence and intimidate the witnesses. They deny that they committed any crimes, and often blame what happened on the victims. They block investigations of the crimes, and continue to govern until driven from power by force, when they flee into exile. There they remain with impunity, like Pol Pot or Idi Amin, unless they are captured and a tribunal is established to try them. The response to denial is punishment by an international tribunal or national courts. There the evidence can be heard, and the perpetrators punished. Tribunals like the Yugoslav or Rwanda Tribunals, or an international tribunal to try the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, or an International Criminal Court may not deter the worst genocidal killers. But with the political will to arrest and prosecute them, some may be brought to justice.

Denial of genocide in Bosnia and Herzegovina

 

Prof. dr. Smail ČEKIĆ:

 

With the comprehensive research activity, efforts, endeavors, and results, through organized, targeted, systematic, and continuous work, the scholars gain new scientific findings and the truth, which they adequately and timely present to the domestic and international public, and therefore indicate numerous, versatile, in different area and areas, and different extents of Holocaust, genocide, and other forms of crimes against humanity and international law, which is one of potential adequate preventive and strategic forms of activities.

 

At the end of 20th century, in Europe, before the eyes of the world public, in accordance with primarily Serbian great-state project – the Serbian fascist ideology and politics and genocidal criminal practice, the genocide was committed against the Bosnia and Herzegovina Muslims – Bosniacs due to their national, ethnic, and religious affiliation, as well as to take over their living space. Those who had an obligation and opportunity to prevent and stop the genocide, intentionally failed to do so. The UN failed to protect the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina – its member, a victim of the armed aggression and genocide. Instead, the UNSC, unfortunately, serving the interests of great powers, not only missed to defend Bosnia, but it rather deprived it (25 September 1991) from its irrevocable right to defend itself from the aggression and genocide. Victims of aggression and genocide were punished with the arms embargo, which denied the right to self-defense. Imposed upon (SFR) Yugoslavia, not the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, embargo was illegitimate and without any legal force, because it deprived a sovereign state, a member of the UN, from its natural right to individual and collective self-defense, provided in Article 51 of the UN Charter.

 

Numerous leading Western politicians, unfortunately, due to their national, ethnic, and religious affiliation of the genocide victims (Bosnian, European Muslims – Bosniacs) supported the aggressive war against Bosnia and Herzegovina and genocide against Bosniacs, while many of them , unfortunately, took part in the division and destruction of the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the adoption of senseless, absurd, and shameful Judgment (ICJ Judgment in the case: Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro dated 26 February 2007), which, among other things, represent the crime of genocide, because it denies genocide in (all) the occupied places in Bosnia and Herzegovina, towns under siege, except for the UN safe area - Srebrenica, July 1995, and it exonerates Serbia and Montenegro (Federal Republic Yugoslavia) from the responsibility for the genocide. Unfortunately, the biggest number of western intellectuals was ambivalent in terms of prevention and stopping of great-Serbian (and great-Croatian) aggression and genocide against innocent and barehanded civilians. Adorno pointed to a similar phenomenon after the WWII, with his question “How can the poetry be possible after Auswitz?” . Similar question was raised in the late nineties of the 20th century by a known scholar Tomas Kuschman: “How can the idea of Europe be possible after Bosnia”, that is, genocide in Bosnia and Herzegovina at the end of the 20th century.

 

Denial (collective and individual) of genocide (non acceptance – refusal to accept the fact on genocide), according to the scholars and the authorities of Holocaust and genocide, is the last stage of genocide, which always accompanies that gravest form of crimes against humanity and international law and it can last (so) long after the genocide.

 

Genocide is extremely complex empirical phenomenon of societal reality, dynamic structural and development phenomenon, in whose contents are numerous and versatile factors, which are currently, potentially, and prosperously subjects of scientific studies and research of numerous, versatile, and different sciences and scientific disciplines. In this regard, various dimensions and aspects of societal and scientific interest could be discussed, as well as scientific findings, which can only be reached through the process of scientific study within various and versatile sciences and scientific disciplines.

 

Genocide, by its definition the gravest, most complex, and the most heinous form of crime in the history of mankind, and one of the most complex social processes and phenomena, projected in time and space as a process resulting from the collective ideology, politics and practice, has its stages, systematic and planning character, a broad context, dynamics, and intensity, carried out continuously (against unprotected, helpless, innocent, and unarmed victims, selected only because they belong to one of the protected groups, according to the international law, which is the target only because of their affiliation), in form of mutually functionally connected different actions, committed by a large number of organized participants in the process which characterizes the planning, preparation, organization, and execution, along with a full support, coordination, direct engagement, and control by the highest state authorities, which is also characteristic for the genocide against Bosniacs in Bosnia and Herzegovina at the end of the 20th century. It is clear that this is a phenomenon which is directly produced and protected by the most powerful political subjects – state which plans, prepares, organizes, and directs (directly and indirectly) massive involvement of people. Without the massive involvement of population, genocide cannot be possible, given that this is a phenomenon that also understands the massive character, both on the side of the victim and the perpetrator, who (people) is organized (state) in a legitimate and/or illegitimate ways, which (people) is directly engaged in the perpetration of genocide and other forms of crimes against humanity and international law. Talking about the massive engagement of people in genocide, only the genocide against Bosniacs in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the UN safe area Srebrenica in July 1995, according to the study of the Republika Srpska Government, engaged (on various bases and ways) over 25,000 Serbs.

 

Denial of genocide is a valid and reliable indicator, which suggests that the genocide is committed. Denial has different motives: ideological, strategic, socio-political and others, whereas the consequences for the victims are always tragic.

 

Denial of genocide is a crime (of genocide), which takes place in two stages: during the commission and after the commission. Denial aims to willfully and intentionally forges the facts, especially in relation to causes, objective and the character of war (insisting on a civil war instead of international armed conflict), and the nature of crime (insisting on “ethnic cleansing”, instead of genocide); - equalizing genocide perpetrators and victims; - intentionally misinform and deceive the domestic and international public; - suggest the existence of several (warring) parties and their equal guilt and responsibility; - evade responsibility for genocide; - show the perpetrators as heroes, who allegedly fight for a just cause, such as the case in the Serbian “culture” of hatred and violence the extermination of Muslims, including Bosniacs, a holy and heroic act, with which the genocide turned into a part of family tradition and heroic Serbia history, in which from one to another generation the criminals are considered heroes; - encourage genocide; - demonizes victims and show them as the perpetrators of crimes; - conceal, minimizes, relativize the genocide, especially the fact on the number and the status of victims, while minimizing the planned and systematic massive and individual murders; - maintain the genocidal ideology, politics, and practice.

 

The end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st century are full of numerous and different historic forgeries, motivated by political and ideological grounds, which present untruthful facts on the events in the West Balkans, especially Bosnia and Herzegovina, which are interpreted, free of any documents or archives, and used to design political truths applicable to current circumstances. Unfortunately, this is the obvious abuse of science conducted by some scholars without any scruples and accountability, and the quasi scholars. This is particularly so with the great-Serbian intellectuals and politicians who build and establish their bases for ideology, politics and the practice of genocide.

 

The Serbian nationalists still insist on fulfillment of great-Serbian project, convinced that in the changed international conditions they could achieve their Nazi and genocidal plan – unification of all “Serbian” countries (“rounding up of all Serbian states”) and the Serbian people (“unification of Serbianhood”), that is, the establishment of a single Serbian state - Great Serbia. In this process of implementation of their activities, they use the political methods and tools applicable to newly emerging circumstances (conditions.). It is emphasized in this process that the science is misused under the umbrella of the great-Serbian ideology and politics. It could be named an official science, with the task to secure “arguments” to corroborate their theses on the need to build and establish a single great-Serbian state.

 

A significant part of the Serbian political and intellectual (societal and spiritual) elite, especially in Serbia and the entity Republika Srpska (in Bosnia and Herzegovina), in accordance with the great-Serbian genocidal ideology, politics and practice, and a number of their counterparts – quasi scholars from the West, have persistently tried for almost two decades to conceal, minimize, relativize, contest, deny genocide against Bosniacs in Bosnia and Herzegovina, including the one in the territory of the UN safe area – Srebrenica in July 1995; permanently and continuously equalize the genocide victims and perpetrators (criminals), and declare aggression and genocide victims the criminals to change the character and nature of crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina, with the objective to turn international armed conflict (aggression) into civil war, and crime of genocide into “ethnic cleansing”; manipulate with the genocide victims, especially the number and the status of victims (instead of civilian and combatant, the notions civilian and soldier are used), while and use the quasi scholars for that purpose; keep quiet about the historic reality, and personal responsibility in planning, preparation, and execution of crime of genocide; deceive the domestic and international public with (false) epic-mythology theses: - on Bosnia and Herzegovina as a “Serbian state”, and Bosniacs as “Serbs of Islamic religion”; - that the fascist, collaborationist, traitor, and criminal movement of Draža Mihailović has antifascist character; - that the secessionist Republics (Slovenia and Croatia) are to be blamed for the fall of Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia, as well as Vatican and German and American conspiracy against Serbs, and the Islamic fundamentalism; - that there was a civil war in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the internal conflict between three sides, rather than the crime against peace or a classic aggression (international armed conflict) by Serbia and Montenegro / Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (as well as the Republic of Croatia) against the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, where they use “ethnic cleansing“ instead of genocide, in which all three sides equally share the responsibility, while some deny the idea of great-Serbian project, others the fascist and criminal character, etc. etc. this is a designed, planned, and systematic attack against the truth on the events in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina at the end of the 20th century and a memory to the genocide victims. The genocide denial also hurts the human dignity, which was already hurt by the commission of these crimes and falsifying the historic facts, lies and propaganda, which is transformed now to a form of disgust. Any reasonable and civilized human being and antifascist is horrified with the denial of genocide committed against Bosniacs, and genocide in general. That is why our answer has to be based on facts and empiric data, and the public, domestic and international, has to be timely, fully, objectively, and clearly informed about it, the genocide denial and genocide in general.

 

It is also the historic fact (based on numerous relevant documents of various provenience): - firstly, the Serbian Nazism, unlike the Serbian antifascism, has again during the last decade of the 20th century generated the worst crimes, including genocide against Bosniacs, which was, just like the aggression against the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, planned, prepared, organized, ordered, pursued and committed by the state of Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) and their collaborationists and the fifth column (aggression by the Republic of Croatia against the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and other forms of crimes against humanity and international law committed against Bosniacs are not subject of this paper);

 

- secondly, the entity Republika Srpska is a genocidal creation of the great-Serbian Nazism, that is, the state of Federal Republic of Yugoslavia / Serbia and Montenegro (Republika Srpska is a legacy of genocide – it is a national-socialist/Nazi creation), emerged on grave violations of international humanitarian law, marked and soaked in, mainly, Bosniac blood, and covered and bordered with numerous mass graves and concentration camps, in which fascist organizations legally function. Political leadership and other structures of the Republika Srpska, in accordance with the great-Serbian genocidal ideology, politics, and practice, falsify historic facts and deny genocide against Bosniacs, and obstruct by all possible means the strengthening of Bosnia and Herzegovina and they continuously pursue the politics of secession and destruction of the state Bosnia and Herzegovina;

 

- thirdly, the Dayton Agreement legalized great-Serbian Nazi ideology, politics, and practice of genocidal character. It, among other things, changed the name of the internationally recognized state (Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina), eliminating fro its name the word Republic, while giving it to the criminals as a reward for genocide. The structures of the entity Republika Srpska did not eliminate the forces which took part in the aggression and genocide including the genocide against Bosniacs in and around the UN safe area – Srebrenica in July 1995, which was confirmed by the results of the Republika Srpska Government research, as it was the case with the denazification of Germany following the WWII, and thus they remained politically active and still today openly destroy the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

 

It has been the holy duty and responsibility of scholars, scientists, and intellectuals to speak the truth and detect the forgeries, lies, and deceptions related to genocide and other forms of crimes against humanity and international law, including the genocide denial. There cannot be silence or irrelevance on genocide. Thus, t is the duty of scholars, as Nobel prize winner Elie Wiesel writes, to speak on behalf of genocide victims, remind of their suffering and tears and suppress the fear of oblivion.

 

With the comprehensive research activity, efforts, endeavors, and results, through organized, targeted, systematic, and continuous work, the scholars gain new scientific findings and the truth, which they adequately and timely present to the domestic and international public, and therefore indicate numerous, versatile, in different area and areas, and different extents of Holocaust, genocide, and other forms of crimes against humanity and international law, which is one of potential adequate preventive and strategic forms of activities.

 

Analyzing, scientifically, theoretically, and empirically, the genocide and other forms of crimes against humanity and international law, the scientist – scholars at the same time raise their voice against genocide and send their message which will significantly influence and affect the world and morality of the powerful to save the modern mankind and civilization, maintain the highest human values, human freedoms, human rights and lives of all, especially the small and weak human groups, communities and nations. The current and future generations have to learn the historic lesson from all the known genocides, in the interest of future of the modern world and civilization, on the need to strengthen, develop and unify all the antifascist forces, irrespective of their national, ethnic, racial, religious, ideological or political affiliation, and their commitment in the strategy of prevention and punishment of crime of genocide.

The actual phase of genocide including its structure

Professor Emir Ramic

The organization of United Nations did not protect its member, Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (RBiH) when it became a victim of armed aggression, war crimes and genocide-committed by neighbouring countries, SR Yugoslavia and Croatian Republic. Instead of protecting Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Security Council put an arms embargo into place. The action of the UN Security Council prevented self-defence as well as collective defence which goes against article 51 of the UN charter.

Nevertheless that aggression- at least in the case of SR Yugoslavia- came in a form of reclamation and a court process in front of the International Court of Justice in the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina vs SRJ. The verdict was announced on 26.2.2007 and it does not acknowledge that genocide occurred in occupied regions and regions under siege but just in the UN safe area, Srebrenica in July 1995. This verdict acquits Serbia and Montenegro of the suspicion that the aggression and genocide was for the purpose of establishing Republika Srpska.

This has brought more unfortunate aftermath to date, therefore IRGC wishes to direct attention regarding the manifestation of genocide and more specifically the denial of genocide. Academics know that collective and independent denial of genocide through negating facts and legal verdicts, spreading lies and supporting war criminals represents a continuous phase of crimes against humanity in the international court of law. Denial is an indicator that genocide occurred and continues to be motivated through:

-consciously and deliberately falsify facts, specifically in regards to indictments, goals and characters of the war (ie. insisting this was a civil war instead of an aggression) and the nature of the crime (insisting it is ethnic cleansing as oppose to genocide);

- assimilating perpetrators of genocide and the victims;

-purposely misleads and deceives domestic and international media;

-indicating the existence of multiple (conflicting) parties and the idea of equal blame and responsibility;

-perpetrators avoiding responsibility and punishment for genocide;

- representing the perpetrators as heroes, who believe they are fighting for a just cause known as Greater Serbian tradition of hatred and violence. Under this tradition the extermination of Muslims,including Bosniaks is seen as holy and heroic and therefore genocide is justified as part of Serbian cultural tradition and the heroic past;

-encouragement of the commission of genocide;

-satanizing victims and rendering them as perpetrators of crime

- concealing and downplaying genocide, especially the facts about the number and status of victims, thereby alleviating a planned and systematic mass murder and individual;

-Maintaining a performance and results of the genocidal ideology, policy and practice.

A lack of judgement in the International Court of Justice regarding the responsibility of Serbia has been reduced only to a status of “failure to prevent genocide in Srebrenica¨. A significant segment of the Serbian academic elite that denies the crimes of aggression in RBiH and the crime of genocide against Bosniaks benefit from this verdict.

When the International Court of Justice brought the verdict in regards to the responsibility of the Republic of Serbia,only to • “failing to prevent genocide in Srebrenica ¨, a large segment of the Serbian academic public took this as a ‘confirmation that Serbia was not the aggressor in the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina’. This verdict provided a new momentum for the denial campaign which is present in politics, media, legal processes and the educational system. Parallel to this, the Bosniak leaders are not interested in this problem at all, nor the execution of at least one positive part of the verdict that provides an opportunity for elimination of Republika Srpska, the state created as a result of genocide.

Denier of aggression and genocide, Srdja Trifkovic

Denying the aggression and genocide in RBiH takes various forms. Open deniers such as Srdja Trifkovic often take an example of a video which contains the Serbian special unit ‘Scorpions’ killing six young Bosniaks to demonstrate that genocide did not occur. According to him, this clip is only a manipulation and does not prove that genocide occurred in Srebrenica. Denier, Trifkovic claims that the footage from Srebrenica had been made to attach the collective responsibility of the Serbian nation to use the tenth anniversary to break Serbia up and to revise the Dayton agreement; all of this in order to abolish the Republika Srpska and create a centralized, unitary BiH. The goal is essentially to retroactively justify the policy of Western powers. Through the efforts of the Institute for Research of Genocide Canada (IRGC), the Congress of North America (CNAB) and other organizations on the soil of North America, aggression and genocide denier SrÄ‘a Trifkovic was denied entry into Canada which successfully prevented him from spreading lies to students at a University in Vancouver.

Denier of aggression and genocide Darko Trifunovic

Many other indviduals who continue to deny the aggression and genocide follow in Trifkovic’s footsteps. Darko Trifunovic, a university lecturer for security, continues to promote the story of Islamic terrorism in Bosnia ‘which serves as a basis for his denial of the Judgement at the International Court of Justice. Trifunovic denies ICJ’s verdict on Krstic. He argues that in Srebrenica less than 100 men were executed. The action of CNAB in collaboration with various Muslim organizations in and outside of Bosnia, prevented Darko Trifunovic from attending the European Police Congress in Germany, thus preventing the spread of lies about the war and genocide in Bosnia and Herzegovina and against Bosniaks.

Denier of aggression and genocide Emil Vlajki

Lines of denial that Emil Vlajk- a member of the Croatian authorities in the RS- expresses have become domesticated. In his essay “Srebrenica as a Metaphor ¨ Vlajki states that the ‘evidence of the alleged massacre and others were sloppy .¨ Further he states that the propaganda and war were a political complex created by the USA .As a result Srebrenica has become one of the biggest myths of the twentieth century, and a reason to present ‘ Serbs as the perpetrators of the worst single massacre committed in Europe since Hitler’s time ¨. Vlajki justifies the stigmatization of Serbs as propaganda due to the political complex that the United States help create to bring the case of Srebrenica into international institutions, school textbooks and anthologies. But what seems to bother him the most is what he calls the myth of Srebrenica.” According to him, the people in the West have a Pavlovian Condition so when they say the word ‘Serbs’, they immediately think of Srebrenica and vice versa.”

Denier of aggression and genocide Milvoje Ivanisevic

Milivoje Ivanisevic, a publicist who claims to be engaged in investigating war crimes in BiH, stated in his book “Searching for Truth”, that genocide in Srebrenica did not occur.¨ Since the Serbs returned to Srebrenica on July 11th, 1995 stories began to circulate about the large number of Muslims being killed, more specifically innocent Muslim civilians,old men, women and children. Over time, these figures have been reproduced and eventually reached proportions that many today – not only the Hague tribunal, in the Muslim world but in the whole world believe – but officials of other countries often refer to it as genocide.”He accuses many NGOs, especially in Sarajevo and Belgrade, of insisting on the use of the word genocide, which the Serbs imposed as irrational guilt. ¨ The events of Srebrenica still stir over our consciousness and becomes a metaphor for unimaginable and, moreover, genocidal Serb crimes against innocent villagers in the gorges and wilderness Bosnian town of misplaced ¨, says Ivanisevic. A more detailed analysis of this thought suggests that we cannot deny what we do not know but only what we know.

Upgrading of the Great Serbia plan inludes the fight for the preservation of war,aggression, genocidal prey

One of the main theses presented by the Serbian elites, with Dobrica Cosic at the helm, is creating a disastrous outcome for all the Serbian people of Yugoslavia. There is talk of a historical failure, loss of historical time and the loss of opportunities to create a Greater Serbia, which was allegedly offered to Pasic, during the London Pact. In the article, “Our defeat is not final ¨ (NIN magazine, October 2008.) On one hand Ćosić discusses Serbian guilt for the crimes, but on the other hand he points out that the Serbs ‘captured a historic victory: Republika Srpska ¨.

In the article ¨ Democratic Lies about the Bosnian war ¨ (Politika, February 2009.) Cosic accuses the West: ¨ and believes that the Serbs,with reasonable and conscious people of the world, are obliged to fight for historical truth about the Bosnian war and prove that they defended Christian Europe from Islamic Jihad. In return Europe punished Serbs and Serbia with a Nato bombing.

Many people underestimate the impact of Dobrica Cosic’s writing regarding • ¨ the Greater Serbian plan, which includes the fight for the preservation of the spoils, but through the diplomatic channel with democratic legitimacy. In regards to the integration of Republika Srpska with Serbia, it is a strategy that has been created around signing of the Dayton agreement (which made this process possible). The relationship of this kind with the Republika Srpska boils over the interpretations of the war, which is treated as’ a war of liberation of the Serbs in Bosnia ¨, ¨ who have achieved a historic victory.¨ In the preface of the book by Nikola Koljevic, “Creation of Republika Srpska”, Cosic writes that Republika Srpska is the “first Serbian government over the Drina”, and that Radovan Karadzic is ¨ its most important creator ¨, who is not a war criminal, but ¨ a political leader of the people of Republika Srpska.¨

The only way to finish Cosic’s nationalist program in order to preserve the spoils and the implementation plan for the separation of Serbian people after the arrest of Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic, it was necessary to further radicalize Milorad Dodik. There is an entire organization, led by Dobrica Cosic, who performs “damage control ¨, not only in interpretation, but also the preservation of the spoils. There are people in the domain of culture, science, media, intelligence services …
The prosecution of mass crimes by the international and national courts, as expected,have not provided effective for the moral reconstruction of Serbian society; there has been no recognition of the criminal policy nor acceptance of responsibility. On the contrary! The Serbian elites believe that the international community will accept the fact that Serbia still has practiced Nazi ideology, that has caused the division of Bosnia, even at the price that Serbia is facing the rejection of EU membership. Cosic and others say that “every policy that believes that national preservation can be achieved through the EU, is considered an illusion and utopian.” As a result the Serbian policy towards the ICTY seeks that the trial of Karadzic and Mladic be performed with less volume and to ease the weigh of crimes. Furthermore the policy seeks that these convictions are not legal barriers to divide Bosnia.

After removal of the Milosevic regime, the Serbian elite has amended its strategy

After the change of regime of Slobodan Milosevic, Serbian elites amended their strategy. Immediately after October 5th, 2000 the so-called. ¨ (Kostunica’s) Commission on Truth and Reconciliation¨ was formed. Its starting premise was to justify in a broader historical context that in the 20th century Serbs were victims of others, and that the wars of the 1990s resulted from past Serbian victims. In Bosnia and Herzegovina there have so far been two similar initiatives, but the only result achieved by the Srebrenica Commission was appointed by the RS Government in December 2003. In addition to specific and relevant research results, there has been a political consensus backing the commission up.

Bosniaks should reject the pressures to ¨ forgot genocide, stop playing the role of a victim ¨

Bosniaks must always rely on the UN Charter, International law, the Genocide Convention – and in all relevant resolutions by relying on specified International laws and the acts attributed to the documents and judgments, and to mention the thousand-year existence of the state of Bosnia and its continuity.
Bosniaks should point out that the Dayton structure in BiH is based on the results of aggression, war crimes and crimes of genocide. In addition the existing constitutional system of BiH is not in accordance with the UN Charter and the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. For this main reason the Bosnian government should insist on the return of the application of the UN Charter, International law and in particular the Convention on Genocide and the judgments of the Court of The Hague, in order to prevent the humiliation of the victim and the consequent collapse of the state, society and citizens. Bosniaks are expelled from the domain of legal protection and are therefore victims of murder, injures, expulsion, looting, terrorism … without harmful consequences to themselves. I must therefore protect their human rights and civil dignity – which include killings, rapes, torture, beatings in concentration and expulsion of Bosniaks alongside seizure of property.

No satisfaction for the past suffering of the Bosniak victims has reached the essence of justice: the abolition of an entity structure along with Republika Srpska as well as the achievements of the crime of aggression and genocide. From Bosniaks it is requested that they ¨ forget the genocide and stop playing the position of victims”. Furthermore it is expected that Bosniaks “apologize to the Serbian victims” and that the status of expulsion be seen self-expulsion so that Serbs and Croats can live guiltfree. There is no greater humiliation than giving into Serb nationalist demands and Bosniaks therefore cannot let that happen. Instead Bosniak people must secure their Bosnian citizenship and must see themselves as citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina in order to preserve the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina and myself in that state.