The Balkan Conflicts Research Team is continuously producing superb, hard-hitting and intellectually provocative Twitters about Srebrenica and the Hague Tribunal. We highly recommend them to our readers who may follow them by visiting their Twitter account at: Balkan Conflicts Research Team@ResearchTeam
You may view this Tweet here: https://twitter.com/ResearchTeam/status/1238394145259040769?s=20
What was “Greater Serbia”?
ICTY investigators and prosecutors alleged that Slobodan Milosevic had caused all the wars in the Balkans because he was secretly trying to create a “Greater Serbia” by seizing land from the other Yugoslav republics.
What made them think this?
Apparently the 1992 BBC TV series “The Death of Yugoslavia” which took this theory as its primary thesis. The series was regularly played in Tribunal proceedings.
Was the theory plausible?
No. It was first suggested that a memorandum produced by the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts in 1986 had inspired Milosevic to develop a ‘Greater Serbia” policy. But, despite intense searching, no link between Milosevic and this paper could be found. The ICTY tried to find other evidence to support the claim but all their efforts came to nothing.
Why did the ICTY stick with the theory?
They were desperate to convict Slobodan Milosevic of genocide, but couldn’t find any evidence to support their charge. Eventually the lead prosecutor, Geoffrey Nice, armed with the new ICTY-created concept of Joint Criminal Enterprise, saw ‘Greater Serbia” as his best option.
What happened?
Nice soon found himself in difficulties. He became ever more aware that Milosevic – alone among the Balkan leaders – was a strong believer in multi-ethnicity and religious tolerance. And he was unable to uncover anything that linked Milosevic to a “Greater Serbia” plan – indeed, he couldn’t find a single instance of the use of the expression by Milosevic.
Where did this leave things?
When Milosevic died on 11 March 2006, the prosecution had already concluded its case. Every attempt to support “Greater Serbia” allegations had failed. The ICTY was clearly very worried, as demonstrated by its clumsy attempt to sway opinion with the bogus ’Skorpion video’ which was illegally allowed to interrupt the presentation of the defence case.
What would have happened?
Failure to convict Milosevic for very serious offences would have been unthinkable for this Tribunal. Milosevic’s sudden death certainly solved that problem.