0601 Aleksandar Pavic.vp - Srebrenica historical project

356 DELATNOST ME\UNARODNOG TRIBUNALA ‰321–356Š
{kog tribunala, œzvani~nog tuma~aŒ ratnih de{avawa u biv{oj Jugoslaviji
tokom 1990-ih, tako }e mediji biti neophodni za promovisawe revizije
œzvani~ne pri~eŒ o Srebrenici. Tek tada }e borba za istinu dobiti svoj
puni smisao, i dati potku svim onim politikama koje, u pravcu stvarawa
stabilnijeg, multipolarnog sveta, tra`e i odgovaraju}u osnovu. A jedna od
tih osnova razbijawa unipolarnog pogleda na svet i wegovog tuma~ewa jeste
i raskrinkavawe preovla|uju}eg œzvani~nog diskursa o SrebreniciŒ.
Aleksandar Pavi}
CHALLENGING THE SREBRENICA “OFFICIAL DISCOURSE”
USING NON-SERBIAN SOURCES
While the “official discourse” regarding the events that took place in the Bosnian
town of Srebrenica in July 1995 has monopolized the global mainstream media, there is
also another version of events — or, at least, another approach to them — that has been
almost completely censored out of public view. Interestingly, this alternative version can
be pieced together from almost the same media sources that built up the official version,
by which “7,000–8,000” Bosnian Muslim males were executed by Bosnian Serb forces —
media such as the London Times, New York Times, Washington Post, BBC, Jane's
Defence, Boston Globe — albeit, not from the same reporters. In addition, quotes from
certain high-ranking officials who were in the field in Bosnia during the said time period
also paint quite a different picture. Phillip Corwin, the highest ranked UN official in the
field at the time, for instance, talks about “700–800” victims of execution, while
Portuguese UN officer Carlos Martins Branco uses the figure of “about 2000” — but on
both sides (Serbian and Muslim). Another troubling feature of the Srebrenica “official
discourse” is the reliance on a single “direct participant” in the said event, both by the
mainstream media and by the ICTY, to build a case of “genocide” against top Bosnian
Serb political and military leaders. This “direct participant”, a Bosnian Croat (!) by the
name of Dra`en Erdemovi}, although spared from direct cross-examination, and although
having offered considerably differing accounts of what he claims he witnessed and took
part in, has been taken at his word to accuse a vast array of people and blacken the
reputation of an entire political entity, Republika Srpska. This paper restructures the
events that occurred in Srebrenica in July 1995, using entirely non-Serbian, mostly
Western sources. These sources are also used to critically analyze subsequent use of
evidence, both in the media and in the ICTY, to construct the “official story” regarding
Srebrenica.