Critique of Serbian Casualties and Selective History in the Context of Srebrenitsa

It is an undeniable fact that the Bosna-Hersek war (1992-1995) left deep and still unhealed wounds on all peoples. However, it is noted that a highly asymmetrical picture emerged in the public opinion, media, and international discourses that formed during the decade following the war. In the analysis penned by Spasoje Tomić, it is claimed that the suffering of the Serbian civilian population, especially in the regions of Orta Podrinje, Bratunac, and Birç, was generally marginalized and excluded from international attention. This situation carries the risk of evaluating the complex war history of the region from a one-sided perspective. The article emphasizes that in order to fully understand the events of July 1995, the conflicts and events that took place in 1992 and 1993 must be taken into account.

According to Tomić's analysis, during the 1992 and 1993 periods when the conflicts began, Serbian villages around Bratunac, Srebrenitsa, and Vlasenica were subjected to attacks by ArBiH forces under the command of Naser Orić. It is expressed that timing the majority of the attacks to coincide with major Orthodox holidays carried strong symbolic messages. It is noted that similar tragic fates were experienced in villages such as Kravitsa (1993 New Year), Bjelovats, Zalazje, and Skelani, where numerous civilians lost their lives and properties were systematically destroyed. According to data from research centers and victim family associations, over 3,000 Serbs lost their lives in the Orta Podrinje and Birç regions during the war. It is recorded that among these casualties were many women, children, and the elderly.

In the aforementioned text, the international approach to the former Yugoslavya conflicts is severely criticized, focusing on the concept of 'selective justice.' While it is noted that the events that took place in July 1995 were detailed extensively in international law, media, and political arenas, it is claimed that the crimes committed against Serbs during the 1992-1993 period largely went unaddressed. Examples such as the acquittal of Naser Orić in his trial in Lahey have created a profound sense of injustice and invisibility among the Serbian people. The author argues that such practices attempt to monopolize the status of victimhood in the war and ignore the victims of the other side.

In the academic discussions section, different views regarding the legal definition of the events in Srebrenitsa are laid out. Some Serbian historians, including the author, and international experts such as Efraim Zuroff and Jehuda Bauer acknowledge that what happened was a grave war crime, but state that there are legal reservations as to whether it falls under the definition of 'genocide' within the scope of the 1948 BM Genocide Convention. It is observed that this terminological distinction is attempted to be made by putting forward reasons such as the primary targets being military-aged men and the evacuation of women and children. However, the text emphasizes that these academic discussions never deny the crime committed; they only aim to clarify legal concepts. It is warned that the use of the term 'genocide' for political purposes could overshadow the complexity of the war, in which all peoples suffered heavy casualties.

In conclusion, it is stated that ignoring the Serbian casualties in the regions of Orta Podrinje, Bratunac, and Birç is one of the biggest obstacles to objectively evaluating the war's history. Pursuing a holistic historical truth that mandates the recognition of all innocent victims is explained as one of the main pillars of contemporary Serbian historical consciousness. It is argued that historiography aiming to be objective must take into account the causes, process, and consequences of all conflicts without favoring any side. Such academic approaches are of great importance for the establishment of lasting peace and mutual understanding in regions like Balkanlar, which have suffered deep traumas in the past. Investigating war crimes and the human tragedy in all their dimensions without discrimination based on identity is considered the first step that must be taken to heal the societal wounds in the region.