A UN resolution on genocide reaffirms truth – and angers the Serbian government

President of Serbia Aleksandar Vučić at the United Nations Security Council in April 2024. Photo: Lev Radin / Shutterstock

The UN’s decision to adopt a resolution on the Srebrenica genocide marks a new chapter of accepting the truth about what happened in 1995 in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is a long awaited and welcome step, reaffirming the truth of that genocide. For some, though, it is politically inconvenient, leading to tensions and frustration.

On May 23rd, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted a resolution on the Srebrenica genocide which rekindled the fires of truth and, at the same time, threw fuel on the fire of tension coming from Serbia and the Bosnian Republika Srpska entity. Eighty-four countries adopted the Srebrenica Resolution. There were 68 abstentions and 19 countries voted against – including Serbia.

The resolution is significant because it reasserts the conviction of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide as a verdict by the international court. For too long, politics and revisionism have clouded the truth about Srebrenica, so it is reassuring to see the facts confirmed and restated through the resolution.

The 2004 verdict from the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was directed at responsible individuals and specific military units, clearly distinguishing them from collective actors such as Serbia and Republika Srpska. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) gave its own similar verdict in 2007.

In recent years, Serbia has taken steps to recognize the ruling domestically. Its National Assembly adopted a resolution on Srebrenica in line with the ICJ’s verdict, albeit excluding the term “genocide”. In 2015, Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić visited Srebrenica to pay tribute but was attacked and forced to leave, hounded out by victims’ families who saw through his insincere condolences.

The UN resolution and its text commemorating the Srebrenica genocide exclude Serbian collective responsibility for the Bosnian genocide, which ought to appease Vučić, thanks to a Montenegrin amendment. The first amendment declares that criminal responsibility under international law for genocide is individualized and cannot be attributed to religious, ethnic, or other groups as a whole. This absolves Serbia but condemns some Serbian individuals with links to the Bosnian Serb Army in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The second amendment, also pushed by Montenegro, affirms the coexistence of the entities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, echoing EU calls for unity and diversity.

The Srebrenica Resolution is essential to preserving historical memory and ensuring accountability for responsible individuals. The 1995 genocide left over 8,000 Bosniak men and boys dead, killed systematically by the Bosnian Serb forces. It is a dark chapter which needs remembering. By formally recognizing the terror and condemning those atrocities, the resolution helps Bosnia and Herzegovina cement its collective memory of those events and ensure future generations understand their gravity. This acknowledgement by the international community conveys a powerful message that these crimes will not be forgotten, nor camouflaged by consistent pressure from Serbia and Republika Srpska.

Serbia does not welcome the truth about the Srebrenica genocide. The Serbian government has consistently attacked the resolution since its preliminary phases, alleging that its authors brand Serbia a genocidal nation, even though the document states the crime of genocide refers to individuals, not groups or nations.

President Vučić made a dramatic scene during voting on the resolution, draping an enormous Serbian flag over his shoulders and apparently pretending to cry as a pretext of gaining attention as he sat in the assembly chamber. Vučić believes the resolution aims to stigmatize Serbia. Despite the resolution being sponsored by Rwanda and Germany, it does not mention or attribute responsibility to Serbia for the Srebrenica genocide.

The leader of the Bosnian Serb entity, Milorad Dodik, took a similar approach in opposing the resolution. For Dodik, the Srebrenica genocide is a false assumption and a sham. Both Vučić and Dodik campaigned relentlessly against the ruling. As Serbia prepares for elections in June, it continues to show reluctance to join EU sanctions against Russia over the Ukraine war.

The adoption of the Srebrenica Resolution is crucial, not only as a historical record of memory but also as a step towards healing deep wounds which continue to affect the whole region. Bosnia and Herzegovina’s support and validation of what happened affirm the resolution’s importance. Meanwhile, Serbia and Republika Srpska’s hostility demonstrates that the truth, no matter how painful, cannot be ignored. The resolution remains meaningful to the region and essential for the ongoing reconciliation process.

Arta Haxhixhemajli is a Kosovar researcher, a non-resident fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States and a policy fellow with Young Voices Europe. Her research covers international relations, security and geopolitics.

Please support New Eastern Europe's crowdfunding campaign. Donate by clicking on the button below.

Aleksandar Vučić, genocide, Serbia, serbian foreign policy, Srebrenica, United Nations