In the Krstić judgment (par. 90 – 94) the Hague Tribunal launched its “patriarchal society” argument in order to explain the embarrassing anomaly that Serbian forces transported an estimated 20,000 residents of the Srebrenica enclave, mostly women, children, and elderly, to Sarajevo-controlled territory instead of executing them, as the court’s “genocidal intent” hypothesis would have required them to do (see, in particular, par. 634 of the Krstić trial judgment). Reconciling the facts on the ground with the political imperative of issuing a finding of genocide placed incredible strains on the court’s reasoning and necessitated extraordinary legal and intellectual contortions. The solution was found in summoning the “expert” testimony of an anthropologist who dutifully stated that the religious world view of the Muslim population of Eastern Bosnia, and Srebrenica specifically, is such that upon losing her husband a woman is typically barred from remarrying and reproducing. Hence, according to the court’s reasoning, it was sufficient to execute the males but unnecessary to repeat the process with the females in order to successfully obtain the preordained legal result of “genocide.” The law review article posted below apparently takes the Hague Tribunal’s arguments seriously and attempts to give them a scholarly gloss. How successfully, is left up to the readers to decide. Suffice to say that notwithstanding the “genocide” Muslims are today the majority population of Srebrenica, as well as Bosnia as a whole according to the last census.