There is some truth to the complaint voiced in many parts of the world following the arrival of Slobodan Milosevic at the Yugoslav war crimes tribunal in The Hague that only the defeated are ever brought to book for their misdeeds. Those involved in crimes against humanity who are on the winning side in a war do indeed get away with it because no one is going to arrest them. In any event, there is no international body to bring them to account. The Hague tribunal was set up by the UN to deal specifically with war crimes in former Yugoslavia. It and the similar tribunal established to investigate and punish crimes against humanity in Rwanda are unique institutions. The idea of a truly international war crimes court is one that the UN would like to see, but not the US, Russia, China or almost any country involved in military operations beyond its borders. They do not want the humiliation of seeing their own nationals put on trial.
Were there such a court, it is not difficult to think of who might be brought to account. Russian President Boris Putin deserves to be charged as a war criminal for his brutal policies in Chechnya. Ariel Sharon is another who ought to be facing international justice. A case could also be made for charges against former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger over events during the Vietnam War. And then there is Beijing’s half century of repression in Tibet. It is easy to see why the idea of a truly international crimes against humanity court is not going to get through the UN Security Council.
Barring a highly unlikely change of heart in Washington, Moscow and Beijing, there is every reason to think that tribunals such as those on Rwanda and former Yugoslavia will continue to be rarities. Some will be set up after future outbreaks of violence, but only in cases where the major international powers have no vested interests. Not that any of this undermines the absolute rightness of bringing Milosevic to trial.
As for the crisis now overtaking Croatia because of its plan to hand over two war crimes suspects to The Hague tribunal, it was a decision that could not be avoided. Croatia did not lose a war, but war crimes were committed by some of its forces during the 1990s’ Balkans wars, largely because of policies of the late President Franjo Tudjman. He had the fortune to die before he could be indicted as a war criminal; had he lived there is no doubt that The Hague tribunal would now be pressing for his arrest. But the fact that he is dead does not mean that his henchmen should escape justice. Nor will they. Yugoslavia handed over Milosevic not because of any outbreak of moral integrity in Belgrade but because it needs international aid to rebuild, and the US had made it clear that it would not get any unless he was handed over. Croatia is in a similar position. It wants aid and wants to join the EU. With The Hague tribunal demanding that suspects be handed over, Zagreb is in no position to bargain. Whatever the protesters in Zagreb imagine, the time has come for Croatia’s reckoning. It would be folly, too, to imagine that it will end there. The Hague tribunal will bring about other reckonings as well — notably in Bosnia, and among all three communities.
