This paper will, by considering the events which happened prior to the massacre of Srebrenica and the fact that troops of the United Nations had already been deployed in Bosnia since 1992 and had collected much information, try to give an answer to following question. Could the massacre of Srebrenica have been avoided and what was the role of the international community?
In the attempt of finding a correct answer, the paper will be divided into two parts, the first one answering the question if Srebrenica can even be considered as being a genocide in the correct meaning of the word and the second part being about the avoidance of the tragedy which happened there.
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Was Srebrenica a genocide?
1. A definition of genocide
2. The evolution of the term “genocide” since the Second World War
3. The Tribunal of The Hague
4. Is Srebrenica really a genocide?
III. Could Srebrenica have been avoided?
1. No lessons learned from Rwanda?
2. The failing of the UN and the international community
3. False promises and small efforts
IV. Conclusion
V. Bibliography
Research Objective and Topics
This essay aims to analyze whether the massacre of Srebrenica could have been avoided and evaluates the role of the international community during the Bosnian conflict. By examining historical context, legal definitions of genocide, and the operational failures of UN peacekeepers, the paper investigates why international interventions were ineffective despite prior warnings and the presence of UN personnel.
- The legal classification of Srebrenica as genocide.
- The historical influence of international response failures in Rwanda.
- Institutional limitations and mandate conflicts within the United Nations.
- The political and military dynamics affecting the safety of declared "safe havens."
Excerpt from the Book
II. Was Srebrenica a genocide?
The word genocide comes from the Greek “genos”, which means race or tribe, and the word “cide” which means killing (Genocide – Background). It was first mentioned by Raphaël Lemkin, a Polish lawyer, in his book Axis Rule in Occupied Europe from 1944 (Background). This special term was developed by Lemkin as a response especially to the Holocaust from the Second World War, but it also referred to other actions which had happened throughout the history against certain groups of people (Background). The definition of genocide is given in article II of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide as well as in article 6 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and describes a genocide as following:
Genocide means any following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
This definition contains two very important elements, which are 1. Mental elements, with the phrase “with intent to destroy […] a national, ethnical, racial or religious group” and 2. Physical elements, which are the five actual acts listed above, from (a) to (e). Even though it can be difficult to prove the actual intent of perpetrators, it is important for constituting an actual case of genocide that the perpetrators have the “intent to destroy […] a national, ethnical, racial or religious group (Genocide – Background; Convention on the Prevention). This word “intent” is very important here: For an intention, a Dolus Specialis is needed, an intention that makes genocide as such a unique crime, because people who become the victims of a genocide are not randomly targeted but on the contrary wilfully attacked, and this only because they belong to a special group of people (but not members as individuals) that someone who does not belong to this group wants to eliminate (Genocide – Background).
Summary of Chapters
I. Introduction: Outlines the geography and historical background of the Bosnian conflict, specifically focusing on Srebrenica's designation as a UN "safe area" and the escalation of violence.
II. Was Srebrenica a genocide?: Discusses the legal definition of genocide, its application to Srebrenica through the lens of intent (Dolus Specialis), and historical precedents including the Nuremberg Trials and the ICTY.
III. Could Srebrenica have been avoided?: Examines failures in international response, comparing the Bosnian situation to the preceding genocide in Rwanda and criticizing the ineffective mandates and political divisions within the UN Security Council.
IV. Conclusion: Synthesizes the findings, arguing that the massacre could likely have been avoided had the international community acted decisively and prioritizes the need for improved support for victims, particularly women, in post-conflict reconstruction.
Keywords
Srebrenica, Genocide, United Nations, UNPROFOR, Bosnia, Sarajevo, International Criminal Tribunal, Dolus Specialis, Safe Haven, Rwanda, Humanitarian Aid, Peacekeeping, Radovan Karadzic, Ratko Mladic, Security Council.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this essay?
The essay explores the tragic events of Srebrenica in 1995, evaluating whether the massacre qualifies as genocide and assessing the level of responsibility held by the international community.
What are the primary thematic areas covered?
The main themes include the legal definition of genocide, the institutional shortcomings of the UN, the failure of safe havens in conflict zones, and the comparison with other historical atrocities like the Rwandan genocide.
What is the central research question?
The primary question asks whether the Srebrenica massacre could have been avoided and what specific role the international community played in the unfolding of the tragedy.
Which scientific methods or approaches are used?
The author employs a historical-analytical approach, reviewing reports, legal conventions, and academic literature to assess institutional decision-making and legal definitions.
What subjects are addressed in the main body?
The body chapters cover the legal evolution of the term "genocide," the role of the Hague Tribunal, the impact of UN mandates on peacekeeping, and the specific failure of international actors to protect the enclave of Srebrenica.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include genocide, UNPROFOR, Srebrenica, international peacekeeping, safe havens, and institutional failure.
How does the author relate the Srebrenica massacre to the Rwandan genocide?
The author highlights that both events occurred within a year of each other and suggests that the international community failed to learn from the Rwandan crisis, repeating the same patterns of indifference and inaction.
What role did UN Resolution 1325 play in the author's conclusion?
The author references this resolution to emphasize that conflicts impact men and women differently and that women are essential for post-conflict rebuilding and long-term security.
How did General Philippe Morillon’s involvement influence the situation?
General Morillon attempted to provide hope by remaining in Srebrenica, but his efforts were ultimately undermined by a lack of support from higher UN echelons and conflicting legal mandates.
Why were the UN safe havens considered ineffective?
They were deemed ineffective because they lacked sufficient personnel, clear rules of engagement, and the necessary military backing to defend civilians against systematic attacks.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Mathilda Castel (Autor:in), 2018, Could the massacre of Srebrenica have been prevented?, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/540538
