by Anes Alic
Croatia’s newly elected moderate government has indicated that for the sake of improving regional relations and EU standing, it would withdraw a genocide lawsuit against Serbia – a move that could easily have been made by previous Croatian governments who were unwilling to take a chance at the polls by upsetting the nationalist apple cart.
Croatia’s moderate coalition, led by the Social Democratic Party (SDP), won the majority of seats in the assembly in 4 December elections, defeating conservatives who largely ruled the country since it proclaimed independence from the former Yugoslavia in 1991.
Earlier this week, just a few days after the new government’s inauguration, newly appointed Foreign Minister Vesna Pusic said Zagreb would withdraw its genocide lawsuit against Serbia as a gesture of goodwill, and that Croatia hoped to resolve other controversial issues through talks, which could only happen if Serbia responded in kind by withdrawing its own genocide suit against Croatia.
Once both suits are withdrawn, the two countries can begin to work on more practical issues which have been neglected since the war ended and which represent significant hurdles to reconciliation. Those issues involve cases of missing persons, war crimes prosecution and property restitution.
However, according to Croatian media, some officials may insist on those issues being settled before they withdraw the lawsuit, primarily those concerned with property restoration. This could postpone the withdrawal from both sides indefinitely, with exiled Croatian Serbs seeking compensation as well.
Many expected that the announcement would result in a backlash among Croatian citizens and be viewed by those with nationalist leanings as a patriotic betrayal. Certainly, the ruling politicians have refrained from this calculated risk for years for this very reason.
However, that is not how the announcement has played out. Right-wing political parties are still roiling from their electoral defeat; the long ruling nationalist Croat Democratic Union (HDZ) has all it can handle to keep the party alive, with several corruption scandals ongoing and others pending.
Croatia’s genocide claim at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) dates back to 1999, when Zagreb demanded that Belgrade be made liable for punishing all perpetrators of war crimes committed on Croatian territory, return looted cultural property and pay reparations for war damages.
When Croatia refused to withdraw the suit, Serbia submitted a counter-claim in early 2010, maintaining that Croatia was guilty of genocide against Serbs during the 1995 military offensive “Operation Storm”, which was launched to recover territory seized by Serbian forces. The claim also covers missing persons, deaths, refugees, and all military operations dates back to the World War II persecution of Serbs by the then-Independent State of Croatia.
The truth is, though, that Serbia never desired to file this suit against Croatia in the first place; and it was merely a tit-for-tat response to Croatia’s unwillingness to compromise on the issue.
For Croatia’s HDZ, throughout 2010 the refusal to withdraw the lawsuit for the sake of improving regional relations and EU accession status, was intended as a distraction from high-profile corruption scandals that were threatening the bring the party down. But the electorate and the party’s nationalist supporters were not distracted sufficiently by this ruse.
Initially, Croatia had considered withdrawing the lawsuit back in 2007, when the ICJ cleared Serbia of responsibility for the genocide of Bosnian Muslims and Croats during the 1992-1995 war. Seeing little hope of winning the case against Serbia, Croatian authorities debated whether they should drop it altogether. In the end, it was not withdrawn as the ruling authorities feared a public backlash that would translate into a loss of votes.
Legal experts from both countries agree that neither side would win their lawsuits, that crimes were committed by both sides and that the lawsuits have been used solely for internal political machinations.
Now, it appears that the cases will be swept under the rug – and this in the absence of any concrete event or incident other than a change of government in Croatia. On the contrary, all recent events leading up to Croatia’s announcement indicated that no progress would be made on this front.
During the course of the past couple of years, there have been several trials in which Croatian and Serbian political, military and police officers were convicted and sentenced for war crimes and which could have been used to bolster both sides’ claims of genocide in a court of law. But again, politics, rather than law, has dictated this scenario from the onset.
“Maintaining a law intensity conflict is of no use to the citizens, but it is useful to political elections. Our goal is that there should be benefit for the citizens, and a little less of the cynical approach to those problems that are used for election results,” Pusic was quoted as saying by Croatian media.Pusic’s quote can and should be applied to nearly all Western Balkan political disputes.
Will the eventual dropping of the lawsuit by Croatia complicate the political situation in Serbia, as Serbia would then be obliged to drop its own counter-suit, which was entirely reactionary in the first place? It could. Serbia’s next elections are scheduled for April, and moderate ruling coalition parties will have to court right-wing-leaning voters for their survival.
As a result of the tension surrounding Kosovo and economic woes, recent surveys indicate that the radical Progressive Party (SNS) stands to gain some 33% of votes, with the Democratic Party (DS) of pro-European President Boris Tadic trailing some 6% behind.
Tadic’s pro-EU government traditionally has had a difficult time synchronizing its moderate political views with the desires of the electorate, which is leaning toward conservative political parties.
The most likely outcome of the Croatia’s move to withdraw the genocide suit is that the Serbian authorities would wait for elections to pass before they responded in kind. April is not so far away, and this might be a short enough window to get away with.
Croatia is scheduled to become an EU member in mid-2013, after the treaty is ratified by all EU member states and Croatia itself. With Croatia closer to EU membership, Serbia’s, which has recently taking a beating on the EU scene, will have to consider its next move carefully if it does not wish to be left behind.
Theoretically, Croatia could block Serbia’s entry, as new members need support from all EU states. EU countries will pressure both to settle all outstanding issues, including the mutual genocide cases, before joining the bloc.
by Anes Alic for ISA Intel. Copyright 2012 ISA Intel. All right reserved
