The Hague acquits Serbian ultranationalist Vojislav Seselj

[Chetnik]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35933468

Serbian ultra-nationalist Vojislav Seselj has been found not guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity over the Balkan wars in the 1990s.

The UN war crimes court at The Hague said he had neither borne individual responsibility for the crimes, nor known about them nor endorsed them.

Mr Seselj had denied the charges. In his first reaction, he said the court had reached the only verdict possible.

But Croatia's prime minister condemned the verdict as "shameful".

The UN tribunal's prosecutor Serge Brammertz said his office would decide later whether to appeal.

"I'm absolutely convinced that the victims' communities and many people will not be satisfied with this outcome," Mr Brammertz said.
A fading force in Serbia: analysis by Guy Delauney, BBC News, Belgrade

It was billed as a landmark verdict for The Hague Tribunal but Vojislav Seselj was determined his day of judgement should be business as usual and his wish was granted.

He is not just a free man but available to act as the figurehead of his Radical Party in Serbia's forthcoming general election. The unrepentant ultra-nationalists hold rallies which feature fiery rhetoric and, frequently, burning of EU flags. The next such event, on the outskirts of Belgrade, will follow just hours on from the verdict. But there is little support for ultra-nationalism now and Vojislav Seselj's party will be happy just to gain a parliamentary seat in next month's vote, following an electoral wipe-out two years ago.

Journalist Dejan Anastasejovic, a long-standing critic of Mr Seselj, called the acquittal a "deeply flawed outcome of a deeply flawed process" but said there was now very little political support for Mr Seselj and his allies.

Serbia's Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic said that "in political terms, this particular verdict could not have serious consequences for Serbia".
Vojislav Seselj - key moments

Youngest PhD holder in what is then Yugoslavia; teaches at Michigan and then at Sarajevo universities
Is jailed for two years in 1984 for advocating that Yugoslavia should be replaced with a Serb-dominated entity
Sets up Serbian Radical Party in 1990, elected MP a year later
Breaks with Slobodan Milosevic in 1993 over Bosnian peace plans
Becomes deputy prime minister in 1998 when the Kosovo atrocities escalate
Indicted by ICTY in 2003, surrenders voluntarily
Temporarily released to Belgrade to undergo treatment in 2014
Acquitted of all charges in 2016

I'll try to sum up the issues the interested parties have:

Serbs: Think he, like other Serbs who were tried by the Hague, is innocent and did only that which all sides seem to have done to each other during the war.

non-Serbs: Think he, like other Serbs who were tried by the Hague, went above and beyond what can be considered "decent" in war and committed unforgivable war crimes.

I know most people here aren't aware of the big names that came out of the gruesome Yugoslav civil wars, but I'd like to get Western opinions on this. There have been Serb commanders that did considerably horrible things during the wars. Ratko Mladic and "Arkan" are two names that are quickly thrown around even among Serbs. My question to the MMO-Champ forum-goers is: The judges in the Hague believe that the evidence has shown Seselj to be not guilty, but he certainly participated in fighting, should he have been given an acquittal?

[Deleted]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35933468


I'll try to sum up the issues the interested parties have:

Serbs: Think he, like other Serbs who were tried by the Hague, is innocent and did only that which all sides seem to have done to each other during the war.

non-Serbs: Think he, like other Serbs who were tried by the Hague, went above and beyond what can be considered "decent" in war and committed unforgivable war crimes.

I know most people here aren't aware of the big names that came out of the gruesome Yugoslav civil wars, but I'd like to get Western opinions on this. There have been Serb commanders that did considerably horrible things during the wars. Ratko Mladic and "Arkan" are two names that are quickly thrown around even among Serbs. My question to the MMO-Champ forum-goers is: The judges in the Hague believe that the evidence has shown Seselj to be not guilty, but he certainly participated in fighting, should he have been given an acquittal?

Honestly a lot of what went on during the 90s was pretty terrible during the war. That being said, unless they have proof the guy was directly responsible for ordering any of the "ethnic cleansing" or any cruelty that goes above and beyond "normal" warfare, there's no reason to find him guilty.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Sounds like the evidence against the defendant was not sufficient to move the judges to consider him guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. Maybe he's guilty...but the Prosecutor was unable to prove it.

[Deleted]

Because he didn't do anything except incite the rabble with ultranationalist rhetoric. It's easy to jail Karadžič, who killed thousands of people. But it's harder to jail someone for offensive language. Miloševič got poisoned in jail, because they couldn't prove him anything and because at his trial he was constantly blaming USA/NATO for intervening in the country. Which they did.

[Deleted]

Because he didn't do anything except incite the rabble with ultranationalist rhetoric. It's easy to jail Karadžič, who killed thousands of people. But it's harder to jail someone for offensive language. Miloševič got poisoned in jail, because they couldn't prove him anything and because at his trial he was constantly blaming USA/NATO for intervening in the country. Which they did.

Yay conspiracy theories. He wasn't poisoned. He should have gotten better medical treatment yes, but poisoning, no.

[Sierra85]

Yay conspiracy theories. He wasn't poisoned. He should have gotten better medical treatment yes, but poisoning, no.

you speak with some authority, almost like you are a doctor. it is possible he was poisoned. have you read the toxicology reports??

[Deleted]

you speak with some authority, almost like you are a doctor. it is possible he was poisoned. have you read the toxicology reports??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_...C5%A1evi%C4%87

[Sierra85]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_...C5%A1evi%C4%87

wikipedia, the most trusted source of information. I'm sure you edited it before linking.

[Deleted]

wikipedia, the most trusted source of information. I'm sure you edited it before linking.

Not sure if serious or sarcasm. Also why the hell should I care about how he died?

[Khazaad]

Your nick itself makes any opinion you hold on the subject irrelevant.

For our western forum members, ''Chetnik'' is the name of Serbian WW2 military movement allied with Axis with the goal of establishing ethnically clean ''Greater Serbian State'' encompassing territories of Croatia, Bosnia and Albania.
The idea itself never died out among the parts of the Serbs, but had it's official revival in 90's, led by the Šešelj himself.
Movement is notorious for it's terror tactics and crimes against civilians in order to remove non Serbian population from ''holy Serbian soil''.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chetniks#Yugoslav_Wars

[Deletedaccount1]

Has the Hague ever done anything noteworthy that required an international tribunal to solve?

The ICC seems so pointless to me.

[Deleted]

Has the Hague ever done anything noteworthy that required an international tribunal to solve?

The ICC seems so pointless to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radova...d%C5%BEi%C4%87 some people was judge for its involvement in warcrimes in the Yugoslavian war(s)

But then we never know how much worse it would have been if ICC never existed.... there is a difference between a small risk that you will have to answer for your actions or you never have to o answer for your actions.

[Deleted]

Yay conspiracy theories. He wasn't poisoned. He should have gotten better medical treatment yes, but poisoning, no.

There is no conspiracy theory. Just read this: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-mur...milosevic/2542

[Chetnik]

Your nick itself makes any opinion you hold on the subject irrelevant.

For our western forum members, ''Chetnik'' is the name of Serbian WW2 military movement allied with Axis with the goal of establishing ethnically clean ''Greater Serbian State'' encompassing territories of Croatia, Bosnia and Albania.
The idea itself never died out among the parts of the Serbs, but had it's official revival in 90's, led by the Šešelj himself.
Movement is notorious for it's terror tactics and crimes against civilians in order to remove non Serbian population from ''holy Serbian soil''.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chetniks#Yugoslav_Wars

Lolwut? Because the Chetniks came out of nowhere right? There weren't Chetniks that fought to free Serbia from Ottoman rule in the 1800s? There weren't Chetniks that fought in the Balkan Wars or WW1? There weren't a vast majority of Chetniks that fought against the occupying Nazi forces? There were Bosniaks and Croats that supported the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, which makes them Chetniks as well. Were there people who claimed to be Chetniks, but took their patriotism to the extreme? Of course. To blame an entire people for the actions of the few is reprehensible. It's clear you also didn't look at my picture, which would insinuate support for a united Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian state.

Denying someone human rights on the basis of the perception of the background they come from is racist.

Those are your own words. Denying Vojislav Seselj, or anyone really, a fair trial (something seen as a human right) based on the perception of the background he comes from is racist.

Also, dismissing arguments on one subject based on who is making the arguments rather than the substance of the argument is, by definition, ad hominem.

[Khazaad]

Lolwut? Because the Chetniks came out of nowhere right? There weren't Chetniks that fought to free Serbia from Ottoman rule in the 1800s? There weren't Chetniks that fought in the Balkan Wars or WW1? There weren't a vast majority of Chetniks that fought against the occupying Nazi forces? There were Bosniaks and Croats that supported the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, which makes them Chetniks as well. Were there people who claimed to be Chetniks, but took their patriotism to the extreme? Of course. To blame an entire people for the actions of the few is reprehensible. It's clear you also didn't look at my picture, which would insinuate support for a united Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian state.

On which territory, if you don't mind clearing it up?

If it's on territory on Bosnia and Herzegovina then you advocate cancelation of Republic of Serbia entity within it? I somehow doubt it, but you're free to prove me wrong.
If it's on territory of ex Yugoslavia then you pretty much advocate for ''Greater Serbian State'' at that point, which would explain this thread also.

Also, Nazis in early 30s were just a movement for strong Germany within it's borders; Taliban in 80s were just a movement for liberation of Afghanistan from Soviets. History is full of movements that started of for a reasonable cause, that does not excuse them from what they've become.

How would you react if I called myself ''Ustasha''? After all, they were just a noble movement for independance of Croatia for Yugoslavian crown (which was in everything but the name the Serbian dictatorship), right? Wrong! They were despicable war criminals on the wrong side of history, and I despise any Croat who affiliates himself with the idea- an attitude all Croats and Serbs should take toward their respectable ultranationalist ideas if there is ever to be peace in the region.

[Chetnik]

How would you react if I called myself ''Ustasha''? After all, they were just a noble movement for independance of Croatia for Yugoslavian crown (which was in everything but the name the Serbian dictatorship), right? Wrong! They were despicable war criminals on the wrong side of history, and I despise any Croat who affiliates himself with the idea- an attitude all Croats and Serbs should take toward their respectable ultranationalist ideas if there is ever to be peace in the region.

I wouldn't care if you called yourself Ustasa, and my family is from Croatia (on my mom's side, my dad's is from Kosovo). Hell, "Lijepa Nasa" sounds a lot better to me than "Boze Pravde," and "Hej Sloveni" was considerably better than that. I mean, just look at the words. "Lijepa Nasa" could be used for almost any secular country, but "Boze Pravde" infers a marriage between church and state, and I've fallen in love with the separation of church and state. For me, you cross the line when you advocate for the policies of Ante Pavelic (convert 1/3, deport 1/3, kill 1/3). The Ustasa were bourne from a sense of disillusionment with a government that didn't seem to give a shit about them, and in some cases, actively worked against their interests. Looking at it objectively, the Ustasa of the post-WW1 world had an understandable reaction. If you just spent the past 20 years fighting for independence from an oppressive regime that shares 0 culture with you, only to be replaced by people who share 99% of culture with you, but are just as oppressive, I'd be mad too. The best thing that happened to Yugoslavia was Tito, it's just too bad he was so married to communism, and Serbs were so brainwashed by it, that our brothers in the west of the country talking about moving toward capitalism enraged the communists so much that they imprisoned people with valid concerns, radicalizing them and laying the groundwork for a bloody civil war. There's nothing wrong with nationalism or patriotism. America is arguably the most powerful and most successful country in the history of the world, and it's built on the value of patriotism.

The initial Chetniks of Krajina in the 90s were like this. The new government in Zagreb banned Cyrillic, even in towns like Vukovar where a large portion of the population was Serbian. There were many Serbs who tried, with everything that they had, to become a part of the new Croatia, but emotions were running high, and the Croats who were willing to see Croatian Serbs become valued members of the new Croatia were quickly drowned out. Likewise, the Serbs who were willing to work with a Croatian administration were quickly drowned out by cries to join Serbia after seeing advocates of Ante Pavelic's (some of the more prominent members of the HDZ) ideas in key positions in Zagreb. Serbs in Croatia, Kosovo, Vojvodina, Montenegro, Bosnia, and Macedonia are still, to this day, seen as lesser by the Serbs of Belgrade. Last year, my sister was getting married in Kragujevac, and I was visiting family in Karlovac, so we drove to Kragujevac with a car that had Karlovac plates. My sister lived about 1km from the center of KG, and we parked in her apartment parking lot and ended up getting our car tagged overnight with "Ustasa" in multiple places. You can see something similar when you go to Croatian areas in Bosnia with a car with plates from Serbia (although, to the credit of Croatians in Croatia, I never had something like that happen in Croatia with a car with Serbian plates).

A similar thing happened in Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine. The new Kiev government wanted to stamp out the Russian identity of Ukrainian Russians, which radicalized the Russians, which leaves them now in a very similar position to what Croatia had with Krajina. They've actually eased the restrictions that the initial new government in Kiev had put in place, but that doesn't seem to matter. The damage has been done. The only reason it's going on for so long in Ukraine is that the rebels have the backing of Russia, which is a power that can contend with the West. Serbia was certainly a power that could contend with Croatia, but it couldn't contend with the West. Only a united Yugoslavia was ever powerful enough to be a threat to both Russia and the West. Despite what you might think, that doesn't mean I endorse what the rebels are doing in Donetsk and Luhansk. It pains me to see history repeating itself, but I understand why it happened.

If it's on territory on Bosnia and Herzegovina then you advocate cancelation of Republic of Serbia entity within it? I somehow doubt it, but you're free to prove me wrong.
If it's on territory of ex Yugoslavia then you pretty much advocate for ''Greater Serbian State'' at that point, which would explain this thread also.

Yes, I advocate the cancellation of the Republic of Srpska, which is what I assume you meant. The Republic of Serbia is the state to the east of Croatia. Bosnia isn't a good example of Yugoslavia however, since its ethnic composition is not quite a reflection of the area that Yugoslavia encompassed. However, I also advocate that such a state would be the territory of ex Yugoslavia. I don't see how that advocates for "Greater Serbia." The only reason Belgrade was the capital, was because it was the historic capital. There's no reason that can't change. In fact, that's one thing I think we could learn from the Americans: when the US formed, they put Washington DC right on the border between the anti-slavery North and the pro-slavery South. They actually carved the land of Washington DC from Maryland (a Northern state) and Virginia (a Southern state). My dream is a pipe dream though. Too much blood was shed for any chance of reunification in my lifetime.