On July 18th, Radovan Karadzic was arrested on charges of war crimes by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), an organization of the United Nations. Acting as the President of Republik Srpska during the Bosnian War, Karadzic ordered the mass execution of over 8,000 civilians in Srebrenica. After years of denial, the bodies of elderly men and children have been found among the mass graves that now mark the Srebrenica Massacre. Carried out by a small military force that possessed neither the capability nor the resources to fight at the level of their adversaries—the Bosnian military, using then UN-protected Srebrenica to launch attacks on its army—this act of barbarism is a testament to the brutality that a desperate disadvantage can elicit. The coming months will see Radovan Karadzic answer for his savage decision and the blood that was spilled onto the soils of Srebrenica at his request. Undoubtedly, Karadzic deserves to be arrested. But is it fair? Moreover, is it just?
The questionable justice of Karadzic’s arrest and subsequent trial begins with the matter of their timing. In Russia, the reign of Vladimir Putin has been marked by the consolidation of power through control of European oil supplies. More recently, Putin has set his sights on acquiring Serbia’s national oil. For Serbia, protecting this resource meant seeking support from the West in the form of membership in the European Union. With a pro-Western government recently elected to Belgrade by the slightest of margins, EU membership is well within Serbia’s reach. But as a condition of acceptance, the EU required Serbia to hand over Karadzic. It seems that Karadzic’s whereabouts were never much of a secret among Serbian leadership.
A week after his arrest, Karadzic is on trial before the Hague—representing himself. He is no longer the bearded man that posed as a new-age healer to avoid arrest. Shaven and groomed, Karadzic looks far more like the leader of Republic Srpska, dressed to play his new role in the court of the United Nations. He tells the court of a deal made between himself and a prominent American ambassador, Richard Holbrooke, in which Karadzic agreed to step down from presidency in exchange for immunity against such prosecution. The court ignores these statements and the details receive little coverage in the day’s news. After all, this is not meant to be a fair trial.
For Serbia, joining the EU means more than fitting in economically—it implies an adjustment of their national culture and mindset to suit the interests of the West. This trial indicates that Serbia is incapable of trying its own war criminals. Instead, the West must guide Serbia towards the EU’s more enlightened morality. With such cultural and political dominance in place, Europe and the West hope to make Serbia firmly impenetrable to Russian influence—economic or otherwise. This matter of EU membership has not gone unnoticed in Serbia. Days after Karadzic’s arrest, thousands of Serbians rallied on the streets of Belgrade to show their support. While the Serbian economy may be oriented towards a coalition with the West, Serbian culture remains firmly oriented towards conservative Russian influences. The West must be careful not to confuse a desire for economic alliance with submission to cultural dominance.
Unlike the government of Boris Tadic, the citizens of Serbia have a limited tolerance for international influences, regardless of economic need. Karadzic’s own actions reflect the disastrous chaos and brutality that can emerge when disadvantaged and desperate groups fight for what they believe to be rightfully theirs. In the present trial, doing what is right seems a simple and trivial matter, but doing the right thing in a way that is both fair and just to Serbian citizens will prove difficult. The EU’s decesion will do a great deal to determine whether Serbia enters the EU as an equal partner or an enemy in waiting.
