The establishment of the Hague Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia is a serious attempt on the part of the international community to address by non-political means, and with full respect for moral and legal principles, the responsibility for crimes committed in this war. This seems to be the right way to prevent the manipulation whereby all sorts of demagogues, seizing upon the lack of memory and objective historical sources, tamper with historical facts to create "archipelagoes of history" - a term coined by the British historian Tony Judt. "Archipelagoes of history" steadily produce hatred and violence creating among the peoples of this region the illusion that history owes them something, and thus they refuse to look ahead until they have collected their "old debts" . This war began without a real debate about the past and without "historical reconciliation"; the upshot is tremendous human and material losses, and these, in their turn, will give rise to new revanchist aspirations. The circle thus definitely closes.

It is safe to say that the Hague Tribunal will not pass a final historical verdict, but it will collect all relevant testimonies about the war and identify those responsible for war crimes, as well as the instigators of this war. The Hague Tribunal thus needs to be accepted and recognised without delay, in order to break the vicious circle and ensure peace and respect of human values in this region.

In this respect, evidently, the question of national courts also arises. If national courts were cast in their proper role, it would unquestionably mean that this society was learning democracy and coming of age, and this should be a goal to aspire to. Regrettably, if two trials, one in Sabac and one in Beli Manastir, are taken as an indication, conditions for this are as yet non-extant. All these trials demonstrated was the intent of the Yugoslav authorities to prosecute those criminals who, regardless of their own responsibility, objectively relieve of responsibility the designers of the criminal policies. Be that as it may, it is evident that the International Tribunal will not be able to prosecute all war criminals, and that it will leave plenty of room for national courts, whose role has not been marginalized by the Security Council decision as our public are repeatedly told day in and day out.

The attitude of the Yugoslav authorities to the Tribunal has been arrogant and disparaging from the beginning. The State Commission for War Crimes, headed by Dr Milan Bulajic, came up with not a single relevant file about crimes committed against Serbs. On the other hand, the State has so far refused to admit Tribunal's investigators into the country, and allow them to interview witnesses of events in the early days of the war and witnesses of the latest developments in Krajina. Moreover, it has not admitted to its territory liaison officers for cooperation with the Tribunal, whose arrival was announced last summer. Meanwhile, all sorts of smaller para-state humanitarian organisations from the RSK or RS begin to turn up, setting off on world-wide tours, each with its own evidence, affirming that the Tribunal has an anti-Serb bias. All this shows that there is no serious intention of shedding light on the crimes committed against Serbs by the other side, nor on the crimes committed against Serbs for which the Serb side is responsible.

As things are now, the peace treaty to ensue after Dayton will mean certain assistance to all parties. The assistance will be contingent on a number of binding provisions, one of which, obviously the most important for all parties, will be cooperation with the Tribunal. It seems that the Yugoslav regime will find this condition the hardest. It may be expected, therefore, that FR Yugoslavia will open some channels of cooperation in the conceivable future, but only to the extent which will not jeopardise the current protagonists of power who bear the responsibility for this war and keep them under complete state control. After all, the protagonists of power would be happiest to hide behind the collective guilt of the people and transfer the responsibility to the international community and the Tribunal, which they persistently qualify as anti-Serb. Much to our regret, it seems that the regime will enjoy the support of most actors on the Serbian political scene, because confronting one's own guilt is a very hard and responsible act necessitating full moral and political maturity. Serbia has suffered the defeat of its greater-Serbian project, but not the defeat of the thought behind it.

To claim that the return of the refugees is impossible, a thesis launched of late and from all sides equally, means only to insist on the thesis about the "humane resettlement" of the population which triggered this war. Refugees are the only proof that we cannot live together. Their return would annul the chief objective of this war - ethnic cleansing and creation of ethnically pure state products. Hence the ill will towards the refugees arriving from all over at the last stage of the war. In Serbia, Serb refugees are an embarrassing reminder of the price of this war and of responsibility for the fate of millions of human beings. On the other hand, they are perceived as the vanquished party and a disruptive force. The latest Serb refugees are also principally victims of the regime and the greater-Serbian project, and only then of the regimes they left behind.

Fortunately, the international community has accepted the principle of the refugees' right to return home, if that is what they want. Helsinki Committee has addressed this issue and helped to articulate the will of those whom nobody wants, except as an instrument of manipulation. To this end, the Committee has prepared a document for the Peace Conference, requesting that the question of refugees be accorded priority in the peace treaty. The same applies to the cooperation with the Tribunal. Cooperation with the Tribunal is a moral obligation of all citizens of this country, and for non-governmental organizations it is an obligation under resolution 827 of the Security Council.

The attempt to cast a slur on some non-governmental organizations as anti-Serb is an attempt on the part of the authorities to close any other channel of cooperation with the Tribunal. It only shows their anxiety that their truth about war crimes might get out of control. As time passes, there will be more and more citizens of this country - and non-governmental organisations - who will refuse to bear the burden of the collective responsibility for something they had no part in. Murder will out. Inevitably.

Webmaster: Slobodan Markovic (twiddle@eunet.yu)

All rights reserved. Belgrade Circle Journal encourages the reproduction of material appearing on its pages, provided that the source and the author are cited, except in cases where this would constitute violation of copyright held by other organisations or individuals.