Ahead of the diplomatic blitz Serbian President Vucic is taking to the UN in New York City, US Assistant State Secretary James O’Brien swooped into Belgrade for a tête-à-tête on a Saturday morning at 9 AM. The conversation isolated two points of disagreements: Kosovo and the UN resolution on Srebrenica in what O’Brian otherwise has qualified as “good conversation” with President Aleksandar Vucic.
Serbia finds itself between the rock and a hard place. On one flank, the European Council is ready to embrace Kosovo into its fold, while on the other, Germany is leading the charge in the United Nations General Assembly to adopt a resolution dubbing the events in Srebrenica in 1995 as “genocide.”
With the specter of diplomatic turbulence on the international stage looming large in the weeks leading up to May 2, when the vote in the United Nations General Assembly is scheduled, the Serbian delegation, led by the President, is singularly focused. Their goal is to directly engage with all stakeholders and sway the number of ‘yes’ votes in the United Nations General Assembly.
Serbia’s argument regarding the UN resolution on Srebrenica revolves around two key points:
1. Serbia’s position maintains that the proposed UN resolution is brought against one ethnic group, the Serbs in Bosnia and Herzegovina twenty-nine years after the harrowing Srebrenica massacre and it threatens to undermine the complex and often fragile reconciliation process.
Serbia has voiced concerns about the potential impact of the proposed UN resolution on the region’s reconciliation process and the potential repercussions on the Dayton Agreement, which guarantees equal treatment for all ethnic groups.
According to Serbia’s position, the process leading to the UN draft resolution was “deeply flawed.” Drawing a parallel between the inclusive process observed in crafting the UN resolution on the genocide in Rwanda, which involved regional consultations through the African Union, the outgoing Serbia’s Ambassador to US Marko Djuric pointed out in his OpEd a lack of sufficient dialogue with all stakeholders in the Srebrenica resolution.
“The Srebrenica resolution was advanced without sufficient dialogue with all stakeholders in the region, particularly in Bosnia and Herzegovina,” he noted.
Djuric emphasized the significant issue that Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Permanent Representative to the UN proceeded unilaterally in proposing the resolution, bypassing the necessary authorization from the nation’s three-member Presidency as mandated by its Constitution.
“This breach of protocol sidestepped the established procedures meant to ensure consensus among the members of the Presidency, which represents the Bosniak, Serb, and Croat populations,” said Ambassador Djuric.
2. Serbia maintains that the approval of any such a resolution falls squarely within the purview of the UN Security Council, not the United Nations General Assembly. This crucial distinction, Serbia argues, must be acknowledged and respected, lest the fundamental structures of international governance be undermined.
Resolutions as tools in international politics
While the condemnation of the Srebrenica massacre enjoys unanimous international and regional agreement, with Serbia acknowledging the war crime of 1995, broader apprehensions are mounting. Particularly in light of the Gaza situation, questions arise about the application of the term “genocide'”within the broader discourse on political violence.
Joe Rogan recently said that on his podcast that what Isreal is doing in Gaza is “genocide” promting massive headlines world wide.
“They always say that they’re only bombing Hamas and everybody else is a casualty, well if those guys are just unarmed civilians and they’re walking alone, that’s what they appear to be, and you just blast them from the sky with robots… If you can’t talk about that, if you can’t say that’s real, then you’re saying that genocide is okay as long as we’re doing it,” said Rogan.
While Joe Rogan is no expert in political violence this is a good example how “genocide” enters national conversation and can have a real-world impact on driving people apart in post-conflict period that follows every interstate or intrastate violence.
While Rogan has a world wide outreach, he is far from being the only one who speaks about Israel committing the acts of genocide in Gaza.
“ Israel has committed three acts of genocide with the requisite intent: causing seriously serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part, and imposing measures intended to prevent birth within the group,” said Francesca Albanese Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967.
In light of the impending vote at the UN General Assembly regarding Srebrenica, it prompts consideration of the potential politicization of resolutions as tools in international politics.
In the context of the political climate and happenings in the Middle East, the UN resolution on Srebrenica may have real world repercussion where Israeli’s killings of civilian population in Gaza may be dubbed next as “genocide” in the UN General Assembly.
Israel-American historian Efraim Zuroff, writing about the UN Resolution on Srebrenica The Jerusalem Post stated that not every war crime is a case of genocide.
Zuroff goes at the core of political violence studies of massacre vs. genocide stating, “anyone acquainted with that event, as well as with the original definition of “genocide,” knows very well that the crime committed by the Serbian troops does not fit the definition of genocide, for the simple reason that the women and children at Srebrenica were ALL released unharmed.”
Former US Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell responded on X to Zuroff’s article by stating that “Pushing some other war crimes into the Genocide label weakens what the then German government did in 1941. Keep politics out of this sensitive but important labeling. “
In the realm of social science research on political violence, Stathis Kalyvas, one of the foremost scholars, refers to genocide as “defined by its intention to achieve the complete extermination of a particular group.” In the war crimes of Srebrenica, however, the “complete extermination” was not realized, as women and children were segregated from the men who were then slaughtered.
ICTY ruled in 2004 that the massacre in Srebrenica was a genocide. The National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia adopted a Declaration in 2010 condemning the crime against Bosniaks in Srebrenica in July 1995.
“The Srebrenica Declaration sharply condemns the crime committed against the Bosnian population in Srebrenica in July 1995, expresses condolences to families of victims and extends apologies to them for lack of measures that could have prevented the tragedy,” the statement read.
Flash forward to 2024, Germany is now leading the way in the United Nations General Assembly to vote on the resolution titled “International Day of Reflection and Commemoration of the 1995 Genocide in Srebrenica.”
“The political irony is stark,” a senior diplomatic source at the UN told The Pavlovic Today. “Germany, a nation whose own history carries the indelible stain of the Holocaust and genocidal atrocities committed during the Second World War. Yet, despite this grim historical reality, at the United Nations General Assembly we did not pass a resolution condemning war crimes in Germany as genocide.”
UN Resolution, 29 years later
The UN Resolution on Srebrenica, obtained by The Pavlovic Today, comprises a framework consisting of 7 articles.
The resolution calls for the establishment of an outreach program titled “The Srebrenica Genocide and the United Nations,'” and requests the Secretary-General to bring the present resolution to the attention of all Member States, organizations of the United Nations system and civil society organizations for appropriate observance.
The authors of the resolution are asking the members of General Assembly to condemn “without reservation” actions that “glorify” those convicted of crimes against humanity and genocide.
It’s evident to any expert in political violence that the atrocities in Srebrenica the UN resolution refers to squarely fit within the state-actor typology of violence, rendering the blame game unnecessary. The nation at fault is widely acknowledged without the need to spell out S-E-R-B-I-A.
The resolution also talks about the importance for regular briefings on “hate speech.” However, it remains to be seen how the United States, with its robust protections under the First Amendment, will respond to this provision.
Notably, the US Constitution does not carve out an exception for “hate speech.” Instead, in the realm of criminality, hate language can serve as evidentiary support. As elucidated by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, “For a crime to be classified as a hate crime… the victim must report at least one of three types of evidence that the act was motivated by hate: the offender used hate language, the offender left behind hate symbols, or police investigators confirmed that the incident was hate crime.”
Diplomats from the coalition backing the UN resolution have emphasized the omission of explicit mention of Serbia and avoidance of attributing collective responsibility for the 1995 Srebrenica events. The strategic move not to mention Serbia in the UN Resolution, however, is seen by many as an attempt to downplay the potential repercussions of labeling it as “genocide” for both the Serbian population in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the broader Serbian community worldwide.
It’s evident to any expert in political violence that the atrocities in Srebrenica the UN resolution refers to squarely fit within the state-actor typology of violence, rendering the blame game unnecessary.
The nation at fault is widely acknowledged without the need to spell out S-E-R-B-I-A.
A Member of the UK Parliament The Pavlovic Today talked to drew a parallel to the legal tactics deployed by defense counsel in libel suits, wherein individuals are alluded to without direct mention, yet their identity remains apparent to all parties involved.
Failed Promises and Dead Letters
After the Saturday’s high-level meeting in Belgrade with Vucic, Assistant State Secretary James O’Brien—who seemed aware that the escalating political pressure on Serbia could alienate the Serbian people who perceive the US not missing opportunity to condemn Serbia as a double standard in the international community’s approach to accountability— attempted to offer some words of optimism.
Standing next to visibly disheartened President Vucic on Saturday morning in Belgrade in front of the press, O’Brien danced around the proverbial elephant in the room, delicately trying to refocus the outcomes of the conversation on the economic partnership between the US and Serbia.
Seasoned diplomat said that the US had some conversation about their own history , without specifying what aspects he referred to. There is no UN resolution however, adopted in the United Nations General Assembly associating the term “genocide” with any part of US history.
Speaking of Kosovo, O’Brien offered a carrot on an eleven-years-long stick. He said that the Kosovo government promised the formation of the Association of Serb-majority municipalities but did not say what specific guarantees, if any, PM Kurti had given to him.
“If there is concern that the international community is not fulfilling its obligation to help in this matter, I hope that we will do everything in our power to help fulfill our promise to ourselves and to others,” Blinken’s diplomat said.
President Vucic emphasized that the legally binding Brussels Agreement, under which Kosovo was obliged to form the municipalities, has proved to be nothing but a “dead letter on paper.” Kosovo successfully dodged compliance with this obligation for eleven long years.
As the UN convenes on Monday, the US is pushing to place the Association of Serb-majority municipalities on the agenda in New York. The Biden administration recognizes the necessity of concessions for the Serbs amidst escalating moves towards “final solution” for Kosovo ahead of the 2024 election in November. Yet, the current offerings fail to match the mounting pressure the US has exerted on Serbia, largely in alignment with Germany.
The Pavlovic Today reached out to the State Department with four follow-up questions on different aspects of Assistant Secretary O’Brien’s remarks, but did not recieve responses by the time of the publication of this article.
READ ALSO
Spring Travel Plans? Ensure Your Car’s Ready With These Crucial Checks!
It is important to inspect your car before any trip, especially if it is a longer one. Unexpected situations can arise, but you will feel much more at ease if you give your vehicle a once-over before hitting the road. What is crucial? 1. Electrical components The most common car breakdowns in warm weather are…
Embark On A Luxurious Journey To Switzerland With Air Serbia
Zurich, Switzerland’s financial capital and largest city, although not the country’s capital city, as you know, with that honor belonging to Bern. A whopping 30 percent of its residents are foreigners, and while we’re on the topic of interesting facts, it should be noted that this city is proud to be home to the largest…
Inside The First Ever Teachers Of The Year State Dinner
First Lady Jill Biden made history by hosting the inaugural “Teachers of the Year” State Dinner at the illustrious White House on Thursday evening. Breaking from tradition, this event marked the first time American educators were honored at a State Dinner, celebrating their invaluable contributions to education. The award went to Missy Testerman from Tennessee, and the State Teachers…