RETHINKING SREBRENICA Stephen Karganović Ljubiša Simić RETHINKING SREBRENICA Stephen Karganović Ljubiša Simić Unwritten History, Inc. New York, New York Rethinking Srebrenica (originally published as Deconstruction of a Virtual Genocide) First published 2013. Copyright © 2013 by Stephen Karganović and Ljubiša Simić. Certain copyrighted materials have been quoted here under the Fair Use provi- sions of the U.S. Copyright Act (Section 107) which permits the use of copy- righted materials for the purposes of criticism, comment, news, reporting, and teaching. Every effort has been made by the publisher to trace the holder of the copyright for the illustration used on the front cover. As it stands now, the source re- mains unknown. This omission will be rectified in future editions. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, re- cording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Publisher. Inquiries should be addressed to: Unwritten History, Inc. UPS Store #1052 PMB 199, Zeckendorf Towers 111 E. 14th Street New York, NY 10003 e-mail: [email protected] website: www.unwrittenhistory.com ISBN: 978-0-9709198-3-0 Printed by Thomson-Shore, Inc. in the United States of America CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................................. vii I. SREBRENICA: A CRITICAL OVERVIEW ...................... 15 II. DEMILITARIZATION OF THE UN SAFE ZONE OF SREBRENICA ............................................................. 53 III. GENOCIDE OR BLOWBACK? ...................................... 75 IV. GENERAL PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION OF SREBRENICA FORENSIC DATA (PATTERN OF INJURY BREAKDOWN) ............ 108 V. AN ANALYSIS OF THE SREBRENICA FORENSIC REPORTS PREPARED BY ICTY PROSECUTION EXPERTS ......... 130 VI. AN ANALYSIS OF MUSLIM COLUMN LOSSES ATTRIBUTABLE TO MINEFIELDS, COMBAT ACTIVITY, AND OTHER CAUSES ............... 168 VII. THE GENOCIDE ISSUE: WAS THERE DEMONSTRABLE INTENT TO EXTERMINATE ALL MUSLIMS? .............. 195 VIII. ICTY RADIO INTERCEPT EVIDENCE ....................... 231 IX. THE BALANCE SHEET ............................................. 248 X. SREBRENICA: USES OF THE NARRATIVE.................. 269 INTRODUCTION It is impossible to discuss Srebrenica unless we take a holis- tic approach. The holistic approach1 prescribes that a phenome- non ought to be studied as an integral whole. An analysis must take all the components into account. The perception of the whole will be distorted and inauthentic to the extent that certain elements of the whole are stripped of the weight and significance properly due to them. The principle of holistic analysis, as the basis of an accurate perception of the way things really are, does not apply simply to pure science, medicine, anthropology, and sociology, but as well to similar branches of knowledge in the exact or social sciences. This applies just as well to the study and interpretation of historical events. Reductionism prevails whenever the obligation to take into account all factors that have played a role in a certain event has been systematically avoided. Every form of reductionism is se- lective with regard to factual data.2 We apply reductionism when we deliberately reduce complex phenomena to only a few select- ed factors that tend to corroborate the interpretation or thesis that we have formulated in advance. By doing so, we do not merely commit an egregious methodological error; we are also display- ing crude contempt for the truth. In the debate concerning the events that occurred in Srebren- ica in July 1995 — which has not subsided in the subsequent decade and a half, but in some respects has gained increasing momentum as new data are discovered — the need to reject re- 1. The general principle of holism was articulated by Aristotle as fol- lows in his Metaphysics thus: “The whole is more than the sum of its parts” (1045a10). 2. The degree of bias which characterizes the practice of the selectivity may vary from one case to another. vii RETHINKING SREBRENICA ductionism and to adopt an all-inclusive, holistic approach be- comes not only more apparent but more urgent. Only two com- peting schools of thought exist in relation to Srebrenica. The Re- ductionist School which, until recently was dominant and is now slowly but surely ceding ground, advocates compressing the en- tire event to a three-day period in July 1995. Even within such a drastically reduced time frame, this school insists on a dogmatic and one-dimensional presentation and interpretation of events. The Holistic School, on the other hand, maintains that it is im- possible to conduct a meaningful dialogue about those three days without a contextual grasp of all the events and contacts between the Serbian and Muslim communities in the region of Srebrenica during the preceding three years (1992–1995) of the conflict. The anxiety of the Reductionist camp is perceptible and, re- alistically speaking, it is entirely warranted. New facts and scien- tifically sound analyses of available data suggest alternative in- terpretations that do not at all favor their inflexible thesis. In or- der to survive, advocates of Reductionism must seek the support — to an ever increasing extent — of various political and admin- istrative structures. Examples of such palpably unacademic be- havior include demands for the adoption of political resolutions that sacralize such a dogmatic version of the events that took place in Srebrenica and impose it as the only correct one;3 persis- tent attempts to criminalize the public expression of doubt con- cerning the official account;4 and, finally, as an extraordinary 3. An example is the European Parliament Resolution of January 15, 2009, and the Declaration of the Parliament of Serbia adopted on March 31, 2010. 4. An example of this is the pending proposal to change the Criminal Code of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (the Muslim- Croat entity) to make “Srebrenica genocide denial” a crime, and there is the demand advanced in May 2007 by Serbian politician Nenad Čanak for the introduction of similar legislation in Serbia [Blic (Belgrade), May 28, 2007]. The latest call for repressive legis- viii INTRODUCTION sign of desperation, resorting to criminal complaints in order to silence, intimidate, and financially ruin skeptics.5 The old adage that the truth should be self-sufficient and not a ward of the coer- cive apparatus of the state in order to prevail is in this context particularly significant. The proponents of the official version of the events that took place in Srebrenica act as if they themselves are unsure of the verisimilitude of such “truth” and its ultimate vindication by the exclusive use of the standard methods of intel- lectual discourse. The central issue that we analyze in this study concerns the casualties suffered by the Muslim side in July 1995 as a result of the attack by the Army of the Republic of Srpska (Vojska Re- publike Srpske or “VRS“) on the enclave of Srebrenica. This issue is important in several respects because first and foremost these casualties, by being conflated with the execution victims, are framed in terms of the guilt of the Serbian side, which even goes so far as to impute collective guilt. Assuming, arguendo, that some form of guilt were properly attributable to these casu- alties, it is necessary to establish their nature and scope so that the degree of applicable guilt may be fairly assessed. Further, these conflated casualties-plus-execution-victims in the case of Srebrenica have not been treated as a standard war crime but have been raised to the level of genocide — the most heinous crime known in international law. This provides additional impe- tus to clarify with the greatest possible accuracy the dimensions lation on this subject was made by Serbian Helsinki Committee President Sonja Biserko on July 10, 2012 (http://www.helsinki.org.rs/tjsrebrenica_t10.html). 5. An illustration of this tactic is the recent lawsuit filed against the Swiss newspaper La Nation for expressing what were, in fact, some very mild and moderate doubts. See: Balkan Insight, April 19, 2010, “Complaint Filed for Srebrenica Genocide Denial”, http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/27445/. ix RETHINKING SREBRENICA of that event in terms of actual human losses as well as their proper legal classification. Finally, the truth must not only be welcomed but it must also be actively sought, and when found, it must be given unhindered opportunity to affect thinking and to work its healing power in human relations. That is why it is essential to establish the truth about Srebrenica. If the official version is incorrect with respect to key material aspects, its successful perpetuation and imposi- tion will result in the most negative consequences. It will further poison the relations of and mutually alienate the Orthodox and Muslim communities in Srebrenica, who have no other choice — if they care for a better future — than to live in peace and har- mony, assuming, of course, that they do not wish to see the hor- rors of the recent war repeated. The Holistic approach prescribes, above all, a careful and unprejudiced analysis of the available data. In question is the extent and classification of Muslim casualties that were the di- rect result of the takeover of the Srebrenica enclave by the Army of the Republika Srpska in July 1995.6 The principal task of this study is clarification.