The Mothers of Srebrenica undoubtedly need a new public relations advisor. On Wednesday, March 4, 2009, in Srebrenica, before an audience of local people, victims and representatives of the media, the Dutch NGO Srebrenica Historical Project announced its suit against the UN and Holland for failing to protect Serbian and non-Muslim civilians in the region of Srebrenica during the 1992—1995 conflict. Shortly thereafter, the Tuzla organization called Mothers of Srebrenica and Zepa distributed a public statement according to which its members were “bitter.” The following reason is given for their bitterness:
         “This is the way Serbs are trying to minimize the genocide that had been committed over the Bosniaks in Srebrenica, while turning criminals into victims. The name of the organization which prepared that nebulous lawsuit [Srebrenica Historical Project] speaks for itself,” as reported by Fena and BH Telekom news agencies on 6 March 2009. [PDF - 208 KB]

Interview with Phillip Corwin by Cathrin Schütz, Junge Welt
American Phillip Corwin was the highest UN official in Bosnia from spring to summer of 1995, serving as Civil Affairs Coordinator and Delegate of the Special Representative for the UN Secretary General. Previously, from 1994 to the spring of 1995 he held the same office for the region of Eastern Slavonia in Croatia. Duke University Press published his memoirs: Dubious mandates - A Memoir of the UN in Bosnia, Summer 1995.
Q: Richard Holbrooke, Paddy Ashdown and many other Western representatives who were involved in the Yugoslav tragedy, unanimously assessed the arrest of Radovan Karadzic's as the capture of one of the most brutal war criminals of our time. What is your opinion?

Dmitar Stoyanov, Bulgarian EU parliament deputy

         The pressure to do the right thing sometimes can indeed be great. So great, in fact, that one’s own institutional procedures are hastily violated, not to mention disregarding such marginal principles such as allowing time for calm deliberation or giving all interested parties an opportunity to have a say.
          It was done with such irreproachable politically correct haste that on January 15, 2009, the European Parliament by a lopsided Supreme Soviet majority of over 500, with 22 abstaining and only 9 opposed, voted to declare July 11 a day of remembrance of the genocide in Srebrenica. The curious thing is that the various drafts of the Srebrenica genocide resolution had been tabled barely three months earlier and that under the circumstances the normal legislative path of the initiative would have been not just the draft reconciliation process but—more importantly—public hearings that should have been called by committee with broad participation of all interested parties to discuss its merits. That such a course should have been followed is, at least, the distinct impression left by Rule 114 (2): “Such proposals shall be referred to the committee responsible for consideration. Where appropriate, the Committee shall refer the matter to Parliament in accordance with the procedures laid down in these rules.”