"The international press…made the battle for Srebrenica sound like
Stalingrad. There is a kind of dialectical relation between the
attention of a great power and the power of the media. It creates a
distortion in our work. What I am trying to do, without great success,
is to correct this distortion."- Comments by UN Secretary General
Boutros-Boutros Ghali at the time of Srebrenica's capture by Bosnian
Serb troops.
For all intents and purposes the "Srebrenica Massacre" has become for
many advocates of the "New Interventionism" the sine qua non of the
Western presence in the Balkans. The notion that the Bosnian Serb Army or
Vojska Republike Srpske (VRS) organized and executed a premeditated
slaughter of 7,000 unarmed Bosnian Muslim civilian males has become a
crucial element in portraying Serbs, collectively, as genocidal
aggressors.
However, one need not look too deep, or even to the Serbian side, for
another, non-CNN, perspective on this chapter of the Balkan story. A
completely different narrative emerges from within the ranks of the Armija
Bosne i Hercegovine (ARBiH), in other words the army of the US-backed
Islamist faction in Bosnia.
There exists strong evidence that the United States and the
pro-American leadership in Sarajevo conspired to manufacture the
appearance of a massacre in Srebrenica with the ultimate objective of
provoking Western intervention. A precedent for such a scenario is well
documented in the BBC's 'Death of Yugoslavia' in which Germany is shown to
have deliberately engineered the 'fall' of the town of Vukovar in order to
gain support for the neo-fascist Croatian secessionists in late 1991.
About That Odd Tangent in Mr. Annan's Srebrenica Report…
In UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's recently released report on
Srebrenica an astute reader might spot a curious tangent that is never
explored by Annan. This tangent, and critical omissions within it, hold
the key to understanding the complex nature of events that later
transpired in the Drina Valley in the summer of 1995.
Describing the deliberations of the Izetbegovic regime over the Contact
Group's peace initiative, introduced aboard the HMS Invincible in the
summer of 1993, the UN Report conveys the following information:
"115. Representatives of the Bosniac community gathered
in Sarajevo on 28 and 29 September to vote on the peace package. A
delegation of Bosniacs from Srebrenica was transported to Sarajevo by
UNPROFOR [UN forces in Bosnia] helicopter to participate in the debate.
Prior to the meeting, the delegation met in private with [Bosnian]
President Izetbegovic, who told them that there were Serb proposals to
exchange Srebrenica and Zepa for territories around Sarajevo. The
delegation opposed the idea, and the subject was not discussed further.
Some surviving members of the Srebrenica delegation have stated that
President Izetbegovic also told them he had learned that a NATO
intervention in Bosnia and Herzegovina was possible, but could only occur
if the Serbs were to break into Srebrenica, killing at least 5,000 of its
people."(My emphasis)
http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/safe.htm#115
This would normally be a rather strange assertion for a head of
government but it is not so strange coming from Alija Izetbegovic.
It is well established that Izetbegovic's own party, the SDA,
specialized in staged mortar attacks on civilians which were then blamed
on Bosnian Serb forces. This operational tactic of the Sarajevo regime's
Special Forces (AID) was designed to gain sympathy and invite NATO
intervention on behalf of the Izetbegovic regime. This strategy has been
confirmed not only by members of the ARBiH but also by many diplomats in
the region, including chief negotiator Lord Owen and several UNPROFOR
force commanders in Bosnia, such as General Satish Nambiar of India,
General Louis Mackenzie of Canada, and General Michael Rose of Great
Britain.
A similar deceit on the scale of Srebrenica was not without precedent.
As mentioned earlier, an analogous 'sacrifice' had already occurred in
Croatia. The ruling Croatian neo-fascist HDZ had decided, at a critical
juncture in the battle over Vukovar, not to send necessary reinforcements
to the city. This was done on the instructions of Bonn in order to gain
maximum propaganda value when, as was inevitable, superior Yugoslav forces
retook the city. A similar scenario could therefore ostensibly be
engineered between the Sarajevo regime and their handlers in Washington in
order to produce a similar propaganda effect.
By mid-1995 the Clinton Administration had already succeeded in
fulfilling major US-foreign policy objectives in the Balkans by ending the
Muslim-Croat War in Central Bosnia, by forging an anti-Serbian,
Muslim-Croat military and political alliance, by increasing military
support for these pro-Western belligerents, and by securing UN Security
Council approval for limited air-strikes against Bosnian Serb positions.
However British, French, German and Russian foreign policy
establishments wavered on the question of full-blown NATO intervention
against the Serbs for complex domestic-political reasons. The already
firmly anti-Serbian position of the Contact Group had to be further
instilled in the general populace before a full-blown NATO intervention
could be launched against the Serbs. Such an intervention would invariably
include changing the 'facts on the ground' and would involve large-scale
Western-backed ethnic-cleansing of Serbian populations throughout Croatia
and large swaths of Bosnia. In order to sustain such a criminal enterprise
the West needed to demonize the Serbs to such an extent that their large
scale victimization would only be greeted with, at best, a "now they're
getting a taste of their own medicine" response among the general
public.
Clinton's Modest Proposal…
Although Izetbegovic has denied making the above statement about the
possibility of NATO intervention in the wake of Srebrenica’s capture by
the Serbian army, the allegations have persisted in the Bosnian press. In
fact there is an added twist to the story. This
additional information appeared in a June 22nd, 1998 interview
with Hakija Meholjic in the Bosnian weekly DANI. Meholjic had been
Srebrenica's chief of police. Together with Naser Oric he spearheaded
anti-Serbian pogroms in the Drina Valley. Meholjic was present at the
Sept. 28th and 29th, 1993 meetings in Sarajevo. He was present when
Serbian forces took Srebrenica in 1995. According to Meholjic, Izetbegovic
had said:
"'You know, I was offered by Clinton in April 1993
(after the fall of Cerska and Konjevic Polje) that the Chetnik forces
enter Srebrenica, carry out a slaughter of 5,000 Muslims, and then there
will be a military intervention.' [Meholjic then continues] Our
delegation was composed of nine people, one among us was from Bratunac and
unfortunately he is the only one not alive now, but all the others from
the delegation are alive and can confirm this." (My emphasis. 'DANI',
June 22, 1998. The text can be read in English at http://www.cdsp.neu.edu/info/students/marko/dani/dani2.html and in the original Serbo-Croatian at http://www.bhdani.com/arhiva/980678/tekst278.htm )
Thus in contrast with the UN report, it is clearly stated that none
other than US President Bill Clinton had personally suggested that a
"Srebrenica Massacre" scenario would produce NATO intervention on behalf
of the ARBiH. Hakija Meholjic and the hardcore Srebrenica militants in the
ARBiH to this day insist that "everybody betrayed us" and are determined
to press for an inquiry.
Srebrenica's Troubled Demons
Although designated a UN protected 'safe-haven' (which was supposed to
mean complete demilitarization) in 1993, it is abundantly clear that the
Srebrenica enclave continued to be filled with heavily armed ARBiH units
through 1995. Various intelligence reports estimate that between
1,500-5,000 ARBiH troops were stationed in the enclave when it was
captured by the VRS on July 12, 1995.
The UN protected 'safe-haven' was used as a de facto launching pad for
ARBiH attacks on surrounding Serbian villages and civilians. Thus the real
tragedy was the UN's failure to protect the entire civilian population of
the Drina Valley by failing to demilitarize the enclave.
The ARBiH units stationed in Srebrenica were quite militant and
uncompromising in their attitude towards Serbs, whom they invariably
viewed as "Chetnik aggressors". It is not surprising that an alternate
scenario about Srebrenica's fall emerges from the ARBiH soldiers in the
enclave itself. They were instrumental in spreading fear in the
surrounding countryside by carrying out brutal attacks on undefended
Serbian villages. For these Bosnian Islamist nationalists the whole
Srebrenica scenario that played out in the Western media after the
enclave's fall was profoundly injurious to the reputations of these
'defenders' of the 'Bosniac' people.
In fact in the days before the enclaves fall, key figures in Srebrenica
were called out of the enclave. Factional fighting, confirmed by Dutch
peacekeepers on the ground, erupted between ARBiH factions over the
ultimate fate of Srebrenica. The cause of their dispute was not only
whether or not to abandon the town to the small advancing VRS forces, but
also stemmed from complex political struggles within the ARBiH and the
SDA. The struggle was a result of long-standing tensions between locally
unpopular Izetbegovic loyalists, who took into consideration the situation
in all of Bosnia, and those local leaders more narrowly committed to
'defending' Srebrenica. What becomes clear from the picture, however, was
that Izetbegovic was willing to bargain away Srebrenica in order to
achieve full control of Sarajevo (most of which - barring the Serbian
sections - being already in the hands of his inner-circle). Srebrenica was
therefore politically expendable to Izetbegovic, and it is increasingly
evident that he exploited it for maximum political advantage. With one
deft political maneuver he could not only eliminate popular elements
within his own party that weren’t beholden to his directives but at the
same time invite Western military intervention against the hated 'Chetnik
aggressor'.
In a January 18th, 1999 interview with 'DANI', Nesib Buric,
former member of an ARBiH battalion stationed in Srebrenica, and now
Deputy Mayor for Social Security of War Veterans and Disabled Persons in
Srebrenica, clearly summed-up the perspective of the local Srebrenica
faction within the ARBiH:
"I know that they are now trying to humiliate people
from Srebrenica and spread rumors that we supposedly did not fight and
were slain while running away from Srebrenica. No one can deny that in the
Srebrenica municipality there are 2,000 buried fighters. No one can
deny that we set up a large free territory. However, without assistance
from outside we could not hold out for long surrounded by the enemy.
You can write that I absolutely support the statement by Hakija
Meholjic that we were betrayed. Why does not someone refute his
assertions with arguments? Instead they are using slander and saying that
Hakija was like this and like that. Hakija was among the first people in
Srebrenica to pick up a rifle and work on the organization of the
resistance. Therefore, he has the right to speak up. Ibran Mustafic and
those women do not have the right to make lists for the Hague Tribunal.
They do not have any evidence for that. In Srebrenica, Ibran refused to
fight and lead a brigade, but turned to his prewar flirt with politics. As
far as Hakija is concerned, you can write that every single child from
Srebrenica agrees with his statement." ( My emphasis. English
translation of the text from 'DANI' can be read at http://www.cdsp.neu.edu/info/students/marko/dani/dani6.html Original text in Serbo-Croatian can be read at http://www.bhdani.com/arhiva/1999/93/tekst393.htm )
In short the Islamist veterans from Srebrenica make a three-fold claim,
that:
1) A high-level political decision was made between the leadership in
Sarajevo and the Clinton Administration on the fate of the Srebrenica
enclave,
2) That the ARBiH militants in the enclave were betrayed by the
Izetbegovic regime during the critical days in mid-June 1995 when the
enclave was recaptured by the Bosnian Serb army, and that
3) Those killed in Srebrenica were ARBiH soldiers who died during
firefights while defending their positions, not fleeing
civilians.
Any version of events that doesn't seriously consider this perspective
on Srebrenica is designed to deliberately mislead public opinion on the
dynamics of the conflict in the Balkans. By obscuring the real facts and
presenting a simple scenario about Srebrenica, the Western foreign policy
establishment and media have designed a narrative with the sole objective
of demonizing the Serbs and justifying the continued existence of NATO and
its presence within the Balkans.
The description of events described above, however, suggests a much
more complex scenario. It becomes increasingly evident that there was a
conscious decision made in Sarajevo to abandon the enclave's "defenders"
and extract maximum propaganda value by presenting their defeat as a
massacre of helpless people. Furthermore, the distinct possibility that
the Clinton Administration was intimately involved in this decision - and
the precedent set by Germany and Croatia in Vukovar - suggest the profound
control by Western nations over the decision and war-making apparatus of
the secessionist republics during key phases of Yugoslavia's
dismemberment. The fact that the Western media has only played a marginal
role (and even then with giant time-lags) in exposing the foreign policy
machinations of our elites further underlines the current profound crisis
of democracy in advanced industrialized countries.