The years of fragile peace and cohabitation in Bosnia and Hercegovina have often been undermined in the recent past, and that was reflected in wall grafitti which appeared in Potočari (Republic of Srpska) a few days ago. As if looking for a pretext to provoke their Serbian neighbors, Moslems are taunting Serbs on their own land with one of the most odious criminals of the recent war, Naser Orić. Do they think that, using Srebrenica (about which we still to this day do not know the complete truth) as cover, they can get away with anything, without accountability? Must Serbs quietly, on their own land, tolerate praise for Naser Orić? Or should Serbs also build some sort of monument to Orić for failing to exterminate them all, for lack of opportunity if not for any other reason?

    Whoever may be responsible for this inappropriate act is inflicting great damage to all BH communities. Young Moslems do not grasp (or they do not want to) the effects of such conduct. In the last couple of years, there has been a great deal of discussion about the “idol” Naser Orić, and the impression was taking hold that the Moslem community were beginning to appreciate the gravity of his crimes throughout Bratunac municipality.
    It now appears that the picture is not all that simple, especially where the younger generation are involved. Those who did not have a chance to sully their hands may be unhappy because of that, so they may now be sending us a message about the sort of future they desire and what place they see for themselves in it.
    The perpetrators of this act, who are generousy making a gift of Serbian land to Naser Orić, should know that to him it belongs less than to anybody else. Instead of  claims to Serb land, next to Orić’s name should be written the names of dozens of Serbian villages that he torched, of hundreds of people that he slaughtered and drove out, and of the Serbian families that he devastated.
    Clearly, the focus here is not on Naser Orić as an individual because he will be judged by history, which will assign to him the place that he has earned as one of the leading criminals of the twentieth century. The issue concerns the progress made during fifteen somber years since the war’s end. It also concerns the young generations of Moslems who did not take part in the war, but who, alas, are willing to glorify its crimes and one of their leading perpetrators.
    There is justified concern that young Moslems might be identifyng with those who had committed the most serious crimes in violation of the laws and customs of war, and there is fear that, as soon as the opportunity presents itself, those young people may grab a gun and, marching in close formation with their idol, once again wage war on their neighbors.
    That is the path to nowhere for the Moslem community. On that path, blood will never be rinsed from the hands of those for whom the young generation of Moslems seem to be cheering.
    If the Moslem community truly see the value of reconciliation and living together in peace, they must give their young a more realistic picture of what went on during the war than they have done so far. Otherwise, should we fail to do everything in our power to lower tensions, instead of exacerbating them, the bloodshed could well resume, with unforeseeable consequences. Therefore the real message should clearly be the following: leave Orić to history, leave him to the judgment which awaits him and all those whose hands are bloody, the judgment from which he cannot escape and where he will receive punishment in proportion to his crimes.  

 A wall in Potočari with grafitti saying “This land belongs to Naser” and arrows pointing in all directions [1]

 A wall in Potočari with grafitti saying “This land belongs to Naser” and arrows pointing in all directions [2] 

APPENDIX

     The argument, often heard from the Moslem side, that Naser Orić was tried and found innocent, so that war crimes charges against him (and by implication against Moslem forces in the enclave) were not proved, is without basis. That is just a superficial, layman’s, impression of the Naser Orić trial, which can be accepted only by those who had not bothered to read the indictment and the judgment. First of all, as far as the indictment is concerned, it is confined to an insignificantly small segment of Orić’s activities during the existence of the enclave which he commanded between 1992 and 1995. The trial chamber, according to the rules, can render judgment only on the charges stated in the indictment and only with respect to the evidence the prosecution chose to present. Anybody who takes the time to go to the ICTY internet site and to check those documents will appreciate the factually and temporally limited scope of the Naser Orić indictment. It is more or less as if Hitler had been arrested after World War II and was indicted at Nuernberg only for traffic violations.
    It is formally true that, at the end of the trial, Naser Orić was acquitted even pursuant to such a limited indictment. But it is important to point out the reason which motivated the chamber to render such a decision. The reason is not that the crimes did not occur, or that Moslem forces from Srebrenica did not slaughter and torture Serb civilians, or that they did not attack and devastate surrounding Serbian villages. The reason is of a purely technical nature: the chamber decided that the prosecution had failed to establish the link between Orić and those crimes, i.e. that he had sufficient command authority to order or to prevent them, or to punish their perpetrators. That conclusion is highly controversial, but this is not the place to debate it. It is enough to state that, in its assessment of the evidence, the chamber did conclude that crimes against the Serbian population did indeed occur, and that they constitute grave violations of the rules and customs of war. Anyone who has internet access can easily verify that by going to the site of the Tribunal, and in order to help them we are listing some of the paragraphs in the judgment where the trial chamber affirms that unequivocally.
    The story that the acquittal of Naser Orić on technical grounds, pursuant to the limited indictment filed against him, is exculpatory for the Moslem side, i.e. that the Hague Tribunal stated that during the conflict no crimes against the Serbian population in and around Srebrenica had occurred, is false and it is easily refuted.

Naser Oric Judgment; Factual Findings

I. General 

par. 355-356 [General] 
par. 357 [Conditions at Detention Facilities] 
par. 358-365 [Srebrenica Police Station] 
par. 366-376 {Building Behind Municipal Building] 
par. 377 [Srebrenica Hospital]

 
II. Murder
par. 378-384 [Dragutin Kukić] 
par. 385-390 [Jakov Dokić] 
par. 391-395 [Dragan Ilić] 
par. 396-400 [Milisav Milovanović] 
par. 401-405 [Kostadin Popović] 
par. 406-411 [Branko Sekalić]

III. Cruel Treatment 

A.  Srebrenica Police Station, Sept-Oct 1992
par. 412-419 [Nedeljko Rodić] 
par. 420-425 [Slovoljub Žikić] 
par. 426-430 [Zoran Branković] 
par. 431-435 [Nevenko Bubanj] 
par. 436-440 [Veselin Šarac]  
B. Srebrenica Police Station and Building Behind Municipal Building, Dec 1992-Mar 1993  
par. 441-450 [Ilija Ivanović]  
par. 451-456 [Ratko Nikolić]  
par. 457-463 [Rado Pejić]  
par. 464-469 [Stanko Mitrović]  
par. 470-474 [Mile Trifunović]  

IV. Wanton Destruction of Cities, Towns, or Villages Not Justified by Military  Necessity 
par. 590 [General] 
A. Ratkovići, Gonji, and Dučići  
par. 596-608 [Attack of 21 Jun 1992] 
B. Bradevina   
par. 609-619 [Attack of 27 Jun 1992] 
C. Ježestica     
par. 622-633 [Attack of 8 Aug 1992] 
D. Fakovići and Divovići   
par. 636-645 [Attack of 5 Oct 1992] 
E. Bjelovac and Sikirić   
par. 648-658 [Attack of 14-19 Dec 1992] 
F. Kravica, Siljkovići, and Ježestica
par 661-676 [Attack of 7 & 8 Jan 1993]