Editorial

Accountability for war crimes

Mladic’s actions were as monsterous as Bin Laden’s. Why was a criminal trial for Bin Laden deemed out of the question?

Editorial May 27, 2011

This has certainly been a good year for tracking down international villains. First, the Americans tracked down and killed Osama bin Laden after a 10-year hunt and now the Serbian government has handed over war criminal Ratko Mladic, who had been in hiding since 1995. Mladic was believed to be behind the Srebrenica massacre of 1995 in which Serbian forces massacred 8,000 Bosnian men and children. If ever there was a person who deserves to face the wrath of the law, it is Mladic. Mladic will surely be found guilty in a court of law, most likely the international court of justice, but there is one lingering questioin. Mladic’s actions were as monsterous as Bin Laden’s, yet a criminal trial for the latter was always deemed out of the question. Why the double standard?

There are two possible explanations for this. Since Mladic’s crimes were committed, first UN forces in Bosnia and then Nato troops in Kosovo helped put an end to the massacres in the Balkans. Then, Slobodan Milosovic, the leader who was chiefly responsible for this attempted genocide, was overthrown. Thus, unlike with Osama, there is little chance that Mladic’s trial will lead to public retaliation from his followers.

At the same time, it is hard not to note that Mladic’s victims were all Muslim while Osama’s greatest crime, the 9/11 attacks, targeted the US and primarily killed Americans. By denying Osama the trial that Mladic will be given, the implication seems to be that killing Americans is worse than massacring Muslims. Ideally, the example of Nuremburg, when genocidal Nazis were all given a fair trial, should be heeded in all cases. That would silence those who speak of victor’s justice and set the example that justice is delivered from courts and not bullets. That Mladic will face trial does not make his actions any less vile; it simply establishes the supremacy of rule of law.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 28^th, 2011.

COMMENTS (7)

SharifL | 13 years ago | Reply Great, the butcher of Serbia has been caught. Caradzic was caught a couple of years ago. I am glad nobody is blaming those who knew his whereabouts and asking questions like: How could he live without any support from the top? And no foreign power attacked to take him prisoner. But when US killed Osama, the talk of the town was ISI involvement and a bad regime. And that attack was illegal according to international law. Catching a thief and hanging on spot is equivalent to cowboy laws of 18th century, but still practiced by USA. Over 54% of Serbs do not want this man handed over to Hague and many more consider him a hero, for killing Bosnians in unlimited numbers. Get ready for this country to become part of EU for services rendered. I do not know how to say it, but on one side I am happy that he is caught, but unhappy how west looks at things differently, depending on self interest.

R | 13 years ago | Reply @yeti: I doubt if you could blame the 'children' mentioned here, in any way. Children are, in general considered to be blameless, hence dear yeti, although "Nobody involved in the balkan wars were blameless," to quote you, I have very little doubt that the kids who were killed had done anything that would be considered wrong... especially if you look at it from a more global point of view...

VIEW MORE COMMENTS

Nazir Habib | 13 years ago | Reply Very convincing and veritable. Killing Muslims in the eyes of the white man is an accepted daily routine. Like the Red Indians, Japanese, Chinese, the Xhosas and Zulus, Aborigines, Vietnamese and now Muslims. Your statement of showing 'supremacy of law' for a white man is well received and well taken. The trial will linger on indefinitely in closely guarded rooms, air conditioned and his cell will also be quite comfortable and he will probably end up in life imprisonment. But no death sentence. Wheras OBL was shot on sight. That's white man's justice. Salams to all righteous people where ever they are.

Ani | 13 years ago | Reply Good article So now we can expect the same calls for accountability of the Pakistani Army for the genocide in East Pakistan? Or does this only apply to Non-Muslims?

LJU3 | 13 years ago | Reply The difference is a simple one--Usama bin Laden was killed pursuant to prosecution of a war, and it is thus perfectly reasonable to kill him (rather than capture him) if the exigencies of the situation so demand. Mladic was captured well after the end of the war in which he was involved. Thus, the war-crimes tribunal regime is the perfect way to try him. Were he found during the war, killing Mladic would have been perfectly reasonable (just as it was with bin Laden). To do so today would constitute a revenge killing. As to your notion regarding the Muslim angle--get real. Seriously. You're comparing apples to oranges: two very different men caught in two very different circumstances by two completely dfferent authorities. There is no basis to your statement, so please stop trolling.

yeti | 13 years ago | Reply General Mladic was fighting a war in his home land a civil war. Nobody involved in the balkan wars were blameless.These are very different events compared with the terrorism of al qaeda. Who attack all over the world. Also I think that Mr George W Bush and Mr Tony Blair would benefit from a visit to the court. They have caused much greater lose of life than General Mladic.

Mirza | 13 years ago | Reply Why is Ghairat brigade quiet now when the West is putting the murderer of Muslims on trial? Nicely done, the world has become a better place withing a few weeks!

Replying to X