From its inception nearly three years ago our NGO was committed to forming a comprehensive and contextual archive of wartime events in and around Srebrenica between 1992 and 1995. We have every reason to be satisfied with the progress of our work. It is focused strictly on the facts and the evidence, it is clinically dispassionate, and it is respectful of everyone involved.

Of course, it is not our mission to simplify our opponents' life, but neither is it our goal to complicate it. We are always happy to enter into dialogue with anyone, whatever their views, as long as they are prepared to observe minimum standards of intellectual discourse. It is regrettable that our standing offer to try and sort out all Srebrenica issues in a calm and reasonable discussion has met with no response from those whose views and methodology differ from ours. Their constant invocation of the finality of ICTY judgments does not compensate for their systematic avoidance of factual issues and rational analysis. If a court judgment is above scrutiny and automatically settles everything, are we also expected to believe that the Reichstag fire was not politically orchestrated by Hermann Goering but was set as charged by the clueless Van den Lube? After all, there is an unambiguous judgment by a German court that says so. When you control an ad hoc judicial mechanism it is easy to obtain the judgment that you wish. That applies to the German court in 1933 and it applies in equal measure to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.

[It is hard to say to what extent the Dutch text which follows in English translation is a reflexion of the July 5, 2011 decision of the Court of Appeals in the Hague in the tort action brought against the Dutch state on behalf of Srebrenica victims Nuhanović and Mustafić. As is already known, the appellate chamber in that case set aside the trial decision whereby the suit for damages was thrown out of court. Although the appellate chamber tried to limit the impact of its decision to the present case, arguing that there was a special relationship between the victims and the Dutch battalion which entitled the former to protection, the fact remains that an important procedural door was opened and a principle was established.

[Our research associate, Mr. Andy Wilcoxson, has written a cogent analysis of events in Srebrenica in July of 1995 which we are happy to pass on to our readers. The forthcoming 16th anniversary of these events is the perfect time for a realistic and meticulously documented examination of their background.]

Press Statement

Richard Boucher, Spokesman

Washington, DC

May 11, 2001

SECRETARY APPOINTS NEW CHAIRPERSON OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION FOR MISSING PERSONS

Secretary Powell has appointed Jim Kimsey as the new U.S. chairperson of the International Commission for Missing Persons (ICMP), the leading organization involved in the identification of remains of people killed in recent conflicts in the Balkans. Mr. Kimsey is the Founding CEO and Chairman Emeritus of America Online, Inc.

Mr. Kimsey has extensive experience as a member of the board of directors for several international organizations, both non-profit and for-profit. His notable business success, combined with his international humanitarian work, ensures he will provide excellent leadership to this important organization.

Under Mr. Kimsey's leadership, the organization will continue to play a vital role in bringing closure to a large number of families and enabling the region to move beyond the problems of the past.

Past chairpersons include former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, and most recently, former Senator Bob Dole.

We look forward to working with Mr. Kimsey during his tenure as U.S. chairperson of the International Commission for Missing Persons.

Released on May 11, 2001

[It is time for some serious attention to be given to the important but largely neglected issue of DNA analysis. After 15 years and much digging it has proved impossible to meet the 8,000 “men and boys” quota (even by splitting up human remains and treating a few bones as a “case”, or implicitly as the equivalent of a body). As a result, traditional forensics went out of fashion at the Hague to be replaced by the supposedly cutting-edge science of DNA analysis. In the great rush to meet the number game quota it was not noticed that traditional autopsy reports, even if they failed to generate the required number of bodies, were nevertheless forensically relevant in ways that are critical in a criminal investigation such as Srebrenica. They can give us key information about the time and manner of death which DNA cannot and was not designed to do. But DNA’s deficiencies are supposed to be compensated by the allure of advanced science. In fact, however, even advanced science cannot make up for certain immutable realities. One of them is that DNA results coming out of the ICMP laboratory in Tuzla are intrinsically unreliable because they are entirely faith-based since they are not independently verifiable. Requests to ICMP to provide samples that independent laboratories could analyse are met with refusals and evasions. So   when it comes to the practical application of this “cutting edge technology” on the level of verification we are in the same position that we would have been in the Middle Ages: we are being asked to believe that what we are told is true without the possibility of proof. But there is another significant fact which has a huge bearing on the credibility of the DNA evidence that is being offered. An Israeli biological research firm, Nucleix, has demonstrated that DNA samples can be falsified with great ease, a fact which makes ICMP evasions additionally suspect and rigorous application of proper verification criteria even more urgent. The complete dishonesty with which the DNA issue has been presented illustrates the corrupt nature of the official version of Srebrenica and explains its partisans’ vigorous resistance to free inquiry and criticism of their conclusions. We are afraid, however, that DNA manipulation will not help them bridge the enormous gap between the verifiable number of Srebrenica bodies and the numbers they need to approach “genocidal” levels. If the task of DNA procedure was to do that, it too will fail under the relentless battering of critical scrutiny. We leave it up to our readers to assess the DNA controversy and its background.]

Smail Čekić’s „The Aggression on Bosnia and Genocide Against Bosniacs, 1991 – 1993“, published originally in Sarajevo in 1994, and in English translation a year later, is presented here not for its scholarly value but primarily for its political interest. It is an excellent illustration of how – even while the Bosnian war was still in progress – and before a single prisoner of war was executed in Srebrenica in July of 1995 the Moslem leadership in Sarajevo was single-mindedly setting the stage for eventually playing its „genocide card.“ Smail Čekić is an old propaganda warhorse of the Sarajevo authorities, occupying a number of prominent academic and war crimes „research” posts. The present treatise comprises the chapter “A Historical review of the genocide against Bosniacs” from the book referenced above. Čekić claims that Bosnian Moslems have been the victims of about a dozen genocides over the last two centuries.

[Since becoming the focal point of dramatic events in the final stages of the Bosnian war, Srebrenica has served as a potent emotional symbol and has scarcely been associated with reason nor has it been seen as a manifestation of reason’s influence in human affairs. Not only was Srebrenica placed long ago beyond the limits of free inquiry, but all attempts to treat the official narrative with less than absolute reverence are regularly denounced with the strongest disapproval and wrath if necessary. Incapable of standing on its own without the artificial sustenance of social pressure to keep opinions in line and ultimately legal punishment to suppress recalcitrant skeptics, Srebrenica can only be kept afloat by dint of endless repetition of its signature refrains (8,000 men and boys, genocide) combined with the proscription of all dissonant views. Srdja Trifković, a distinguished historian and analyst of Balkan affairs, shows something very important in the Chronicles Magazine article reproduced below.  The endless repetition of the Srebrenica refrain has evidently taken its toll even on the mind of political commentator, Patrick Buchanan, who is known for independent thinking and boldness to publicly take “out-of-the-box” positions on controversial issues. But it seems from Buchanan’s casual quote cited by Dr. Trifković that even Buchanan could not resist the powerful, mind-bending allure of the Srebrenica cult.  Dr. Trifković sets him straight and we share his hope that this analysis will reach Mr. Buchanan’s desk.]

William Blake, “The Marriage of Heaven and Hell” (1790-93)
Title suggested by Professor Edward Herman

Our efforts to encourage civilised dialogue about Srebrenica unfortunately have not borne fruit so far. A few days ago we received the latest confirmation that our partners on the other side lack the will to work with us to solve the Srebrenica issue in a decent and scholarly manner. Srebrenica Genocide Blog, a portal in mediocre English which propagates “Srebrenica genocide” with all the standard accompanying elements [8,000 victims, etc.] reacted with extraordinary hysteria to a research article entitled “No evidence supporting genocide finding in ICTY Srebrenica verdicts” by our American associate, Andy Wilcoxson. Based on a careful analysis of judgments in the Krstić and Popović cases, Mr. Wilcoxson develops his thesis that the chambers’ conclusions in these trials with respect to genocide do not satisfy basic international law criteria or even the Hague Tribunal’s own definition of genocide. His article is accessible on the internet.[1]

Written by: Andy Wilcoxson

Our research associate Andy Wilcoxson has decided to try an original new approach in his analysis of the validity of the genocide finding in ICTY Srebrenica verdicts. The piece that follows is the result of his efforts. “I wrote it, “he said, “because I think it is a way of looking at the topic from outside the box. You can prove that there was no genocide without having to prove anything about the scale of the executions or the context of the events, and by disproving the genocide thesis you take away the emotionally charged ‘hate speech’ and ‘genocide denial’ arguments. Once ‘genocide’ gets taken out of the equation one can begin to have a rational discussion about everything else and the truth can be established.” Indeed, but is there anyone on the other side who is interested in a rational discussion? We think that Mr. Wilcoxson’s approach is completely justified and correct. We therefore commend his analysis to our readers and look forward to their reactions.

The week of 14 March was not particularly lucky for Srebrenica prosecutors at the Sarajevo branch office of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.

The technical name of the court in question is State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Its ostensible task is to prosecute war crimes committed during the 1992 – 1995 Bosnian war. But it has no standing within the framework of Bosnia’s formal constitutional system as it was set up pursuant to the 1995 Dayton peace agreement. One of the reasons why the court’s legal status is spurious is that it was imposed by High representative Jeremy Ashdown relying on his questionable “Bonn Powers.” For all practical purposes it is but an extension of ICTY. Both with regard to its extra-judicial origin and in its pronouncedly asymmetrical approach to the prosecution of war criminals (the accused are overwhelmingly Serbs with a few token defendants from the other ethnic groups thrown in for the sake of appearances) the Sarajevo tribunal is a faithful clone of its Hague model and ideological patron.