LIFE BEYOND HELL IN ŽEPA

(1)

–

A CASE STUDY ON THE EXERCISE OF TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE

MECHANISMS IN POST-CONFLICT SOCIETIES

MA Thesis in European Studies Graduate School for Humanities

Universiteit van Amsterdam Student Number: 10836675

Main Supervisor: Dr. Nevenka VRKIĆ-TROMP Second Supervisor: Dr. Artemy KALINOVSKY

(2)

AN OATH On the top Of Grad Flutters Our flag Shiny stars on A blue heaven Do swear To your holy Homeland

Upon the mezar Of a fallen Shaheed That you will guard

This blue sky Let this flag flutter

In your heart Let the beauties of Žepa

Let the song echo Down the Žepa basin

Adhan can be heard From the minaret Let the Tower speak

About our past Let Bosniaks repair

The bridges Let life return To the homeland! By Smajil Durmišević

(3)

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

First, I would like to thank the people of Žepa, Sarajevo, Lješevo and Tuzla, as well as the Kulovac family at large, for their help, generosity, kindness and their trust. By sharing their memories, pain, stories, thoughts -but also joy- with me they allowed me to grasp a reality of which I have tried to give an account in this MA thesis.

I have a special though for my host family in Žepa, who let me into the intimacy of their home and daily lives, who shared everything they had with me. I am forever grateful to them for taking such a great care of me during my stay and did their utmost to make me feel at home.

Secondly, I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Nevenka Vrkić-Tromp, for her guidance, recommendations and help, but first and foremost for giving me the opportunity to work on such an interesting topic.

Thirdly, I would like to thank my parents, family and friends for their unconditional support and patience.

Finally, I would like to thank everyone who has taken the time to listen to me and advise me throughout my research and the writing process.

(5)

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

-ABiH/ABIH: Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Armija Republike Bosne I Hercegovine) created in May 1992

-BiH: Bosnia and Herzegovina

-DPA: Dayton Peace Agreement signed on the 14th_{of December 1995}

-DPS/ Displaced Persons

-FBiH: Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Federacija Bosne i Hercegovine)

-HDZ-BiH: Croatian Democratic Union of BiH (Hrvatska Demokratska Zajednica Bosne i Hercegovine) Croat political party

-ICTY: International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia established in 1993 -IDPs: Internally Displaced Persons

-JNA: Yugoslav People's Army (Jugoslovenska Narodna Armija) military of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

-RS: Republika Srpska, Serb Republic of Bosnia-Hercegovina

-SDA: Party of Democratic Action (Stranka demokratske Akcije) Bosniak political party in BiH -SDS: Serb Democratic Party (Srpska Demokratska Stranka) Serb political party in BiH

-SFOR: Stabilization Force, multinational peacekeeping force deployed in BiH after the signature of the Dayton Peace Agreement

-UKRCoy: Ukrainian Company

-UNPROFOR: United Nations Protection Force: the Peacekeeping Force sent in BiH and Croatia during the Wars in Yugoslavia

(6)

INTRODUCTION

It is in Amsterdam that I first learned in details about what had happened in Yugoslavia. As a History student in France interested in Communism I had a very general knowledge of the early years of Yugoslavia, but not so much of the war. I decided to complete the last year of my undergraduate as an Erasmus student at the University of Amsterdam. It is during the first semester of that year that I followed a course on International Relations in Central and Eastern Europe, and that I first heard and learned about Bosnia-Herzegovina in the 1990s. One of the assignment for the course was the book written by Chuck Sudetić 'Blood and Vengeance', who chose to track and tell the story of the Celiks, a Bosniak family native of Eastern Bosnia. The author begins by quickly depicting the history of the region prior to the war and then focuses on the war and genocide in Srebrenica and Žepa, two UN safe areas in Eastern Bosnia. This book was my very first encounter with the Bosnian tragedy. It allowed me to get an accurate and personal testimony, the testimony of how civilians endured the war. One can easily identify with the characters of this book, therefore, it triggers something that political history cannot trigger. Political history gives a general context in an abstract and impersonal way.

This book introduced me to Bosnia-Herzegovina, the war and the faith of Srebrenica and Žepa dwellers. I then took two courses to deepen my knowledge of the region. One of the course on Yugoslavia dealt with Transitional Justice mechanisms in post-conflict societies. It introduced me to a whole new kind of approach and enabled me to learn how to deal with the aftermath of mass atrocities and the reconstruction of a post-conflict society. The following year I continued with a Master Program in Eastern European Studies, bearing in mind that I wanted to focus on post-conflict Bosnia-Herzegovina for my thesis. The name Žepa came up a second time when discussing a possible topic for my MA thesis with a professor. She explained to me that nowadays Žepa was a forgotten village inhabited by returnees who struggled on a daily basis to survive, because, as Bosniaks living in Republika Srpska, their minority rights were neglected. I quickly came to understand that fieldwork would be required, not only because I wanted to interact and work with living people so as to to hear their side of the story without any filters, but also because it seemed like the only way I could get information on the enclave. In fact, I was shocked at how little I could find on Žepa, considering the extensive literature accessible in different languages on Srebrenica.

(7)

Since I knew very little about Žepa, I had many questions. What had happened during the war years ? How is the life in Žepa nowadays? Who actually lived there ? How many returned ? Had Žepa been rebuilt after the war ? Rather logically, I became interested in the situation in Žepa before the war. I wanted to reconstruct how people's everyday life was prior to 1992. But also, how people's life could have been altered in such a horrific way, and how this situation was even made possible ?

For all those reasons I went to Žepa during the Summer of 2016 and met with many of its inhabitants who survived the war and ethnic cleansing, and who still live as survivors.

I had no idea how Žepa used to look like and how it would look like nowadays. In fact, I had the image of the village where the movie Snijeg (Snow) had been shot. Žepa looks nothing like that village, it is more lively.

To live in Bosnia-Herzegovina when you are not a politician or when you do not own a company is very hard. People embrace the fact that the war is over, they have physical security in a sense that they can go out without being scared to get shot when they cross the street, they can sleep without the fear of being waken up by the sound of shells falling near by their house. But they still live with very little financially speaking and with even less possibilities, in Žepa more than anywhere else. Many people might think that studying a tiny and remote village lost in the mountains in the middle of Republika Srpska is hopeless However, before the war Žepa was not an isolated town, with an approximate number of 3 000 inhabitants, Žepa was well connected to the rest of Yugoslavia. What happened in Žepa is not a simple rural exodus towards cities due to the Industrial Revolution as it had been the case in the course of the twentieth century in Western Europe. These people, their story and suffering should not be forgotten and they have the right to be acknowledged.

For those of us born before 1975 in Europe, they all presumably remember at least two things from the War in BiH: the fall of Srebrenica and the siege of Sarajevo. The siege and fall of the enclave of Žepa, on the other hand, has been widely forgotten, along with the fate of its inhabitants. In fact, if I was to randomly ask people if they knew anything about Žepa the answer would most likely be no. On the other hand, if I was to ask the same group about Srebrenica, and it is true especially here in the Netherlands, my guess would be that a lot more of them would remember what happened during the

(8)

Summer of 1995.

What this demonstrates is that Srebrenica has been extensively studied by international scholars as well as investigated by all kinds of international experts. Whereas Žepa has been comparatively neglected since 1995. How can it be explained ? Žepa and Srebrenica both made the headlines in 1993 when, along with Sarajevo, Tuzla, Bihać and Goražde the UN issued a declaration stating that the six enclaves were 'Safe Havens', therefore UN troops were sent to protect the civil population in these enclaves. And again in 1995 the fall of Srebrenica followed by Žepa to the Bosnian Serb Army (VRS) of General Mladić received maximum exposure in the international media for two reasons: the failure of the UNPROFOR troops to protect the civil population and the wave of refugees brought to the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina (ABiH)-held territory following the fall of both enclaves.

The two enclaves were (and still are) similar in various ways. First, they had a considerable majority of Bosniaks before the war. Secondly, there was no ethnic tensions prior to the war. Thirdly, they were both well connected to the rest of Yugoslavia. Finally, in both cases men and boys were separated from the rest of their families after the fall of the enclaves. They then fled and hid in the surrounding hills and woods. The differences: Srebrenica is geographically bigger than Žepa, it is largely more populated (especially during the siege of the enclaves), Srebrenica fell before Žepa so the people in Žepa were already aware of what had happened, and finally Žepa is located by the river Drina. The last two points are fairly relevant because when the enclave of Srebrenica had no other alternative than to hide or surrender to the VRS. Whereas in Žepa, a large majority of the male population chose to cross the Drina and surrender to the Serbian Army, while the rest fled to the hills. Those who were caught by the VRS were whether executed or held in the Rogatica jail and later, exchanged against Serb prisoners of war in Sarajevo.

The numbers are rather controversial but I believe that the reason why Srebrenica is still present in people's mind is because around 8 000 Bosniak men and boys went missing when the enclave fell and their remains were later (partially) found in primary and secondary mass graves. While in Žepa, the death toll reached 1161_{, of which three were the main military commanders and civilian leaders of the}

1 Institute for War and Peace Reporting. Demographics of Bosnian War Set Out. Velma Šarić. 04/05/2012. URL:

(9)

War Presidency in the enclave. The second argument would be the difference in location. As a matter of fact, Žepa is a very remote place in the mountains, and I have experienced that personally: if you don't have a car it is hardly accessible. Even with a car, unless you are with a local, it is very difficult to find the way to the village of Žepa.

Furthermore, in Žepa and Srebrenica only a very small portion of the cleansed population came back. In fact, Srebrenica and Žepa are nowadays part of the Republika Srpska, unlike the four other safe areas which are located within the Federation. The partition of BiH enacted by the Dayton Peace Agreement (DPA) signed in December 1995, justified and gave a legal ground to the ethnic cleansing perpetrated against the Bosniak and Bosnian Croat populations. Even though Annex Seven of the Dayton Agreement, which deals with the return of the refugees and cleansed populations, was included to put the creation of a Republika Sprska into perspective -and it is likely this annex had the long term goal to achieve reconciliation through the return and repopulation of the cleansed areas- the partition of BiH still conveys a strong message: the Bosnian Serb nationalists won the war.

I first started my research in BiH in the capital city: Sarajevo. From there I made a second stop in Tuzla before heading towards Žepa. Tuzla was an important industrial hub in Yugoslavia, it is what one can call a typical Communist town. It is located in the North-East of the country. I decided to stop in Tuzla for three reasons. The first one is, Tuzla is well known to be one of the rare cities which population stayed rather united during the war and resisted to the ethnic hatred and brainwash. Its population is still very mixed and also very Yugonostalgic. The unemployment rate is very high as most of the factories were damaged or closed during or after the war. For those which did not go bankrupt because of the liberalization of the economy, they were privatized and sometimes cannot even afford to pay their employees2_.

The second reason is, Tuzla is an important stage when studying the war (and aftermaths) in Eastern Bosnia. The cleansed population from Srebrenica and Žepa all ended up in refugee camps in Tuzla before being reoriented towards Zenica, Srebrenik or other towns in ABiH-held territory. It was a way for me to establish a first connection with Žepa.

(10)

Third reason was that I thought it would be easier to reach Žepa if I was departing from Tuzla. I was obviously wrong. I moved heaven and earth to find a way to arrive in Žepa by my own means. However, I found that it was impossible to reach Žepa with public transport. Indeed, there was absolutely no buses driving there, even taxis refused to take me there. So, I resigned myself to asking my host family from Žepa to pick me up in Srebrenica, which they kindly agreed to do. It was my first encounter with the reality of the isolation of Žepa.

I was very anxious to arrive in Žepa, I had been reading about Eastern Bosnia and studying theories on post-conflict societies for almost ten months before heading to Žepa. I had very few information on the town itself and was not sure what to expect. Moreover, I had exchanged only one email with my host family, and I did not even know if they spoke any English.

There are over 100 km separating Tuzla from Srebrenica. During that bus drive I was surprised to notice the little differences between the Federation and the Republic. There is no official border although the Federation and the Republic are officially two separate entities. There is no control, or announcement in the bus when you leave and enter one or the other entity. I noticed we had entered the Republic when the bus stopped at the Zvornik station and I tried to read the name of the town, only to find it was written in the Cyrillic alphabet.

The deeper the bus rode into the Republic the more abandoned houses I could see. One can also noticed some in the Federation of course. However, the houses damaged or destroyed during the war have been rebuild for the most part. The striking thing is that not only the ruins are just standing there but in every single of those abandoned houses vegetation has reasserts itself. Sometime you can see a giant trunk tree in the middle of what might have been a living room.

Srebrenica was the terminus of the bus. The bus drove passed the station -or maybe what used to be a bus station because it seemed rather deserted, just like the town itself- and left the remaining passengers in front of the mosque.

I was walking towards the meeting point, the bus station, when a car stopped next to me and a young woman stepped out and asked me if I was “Clara”. It was the very first time that I was meeting Sara and Nizam -my host family during my stay in Žepa-, and they greeted me in such a warm way that I immediately felt welcomed. In the car with them was also their seven year-old son: Ayaz. We

(11)

exchanged a few words as his english was quite good and his accent even better, especially for a a kid who had never studied English at school.

The journey from Srebrenica to Žepa was quite long. In fact, Eastern Bosnia is very mountainous. Sara explained to me that Žepa was just on the other side of the mountain, which meant a 60 km drive. However the road was very bad because of the lack of maintenance. Therefore, it was too dangerous to drive across the mountain so they had to take a longer road which bypassed the mountain and went through Vlasenica and Han Pijesak. Between Han Pijesak and Žepa I could noticed tiny cemeteries on the side of the road, most of the gravestones indicated those were Bosniak graves.

We entered Žepa via the main access, the northern road. Sara turned to me and said “Welcome to Žepa”. The first thing you notice when you enter the town is that on both the left and the right side there is a cemetery, then when you continue you see the mosque, the water source, a small memorial, and an impressive abandoned building with no windows or doors.

Nizam, Sara and Ayaz live with Sanika and Aliza. Aliza is Nizam's mother and Sanika is Nizam's father's sister. The two women greeted me with the same warmth as Nizam and Sara did earlier in the day. I was astonished by such kindness and hospitality, if it was not for the isolation and the visible impact of the war on the village, I could never have guessed what those people had to go through some twenty-one years ago. Unfortunately, the memory of the war does not only show on buildings but it is deeply embedded in people's mind and therefore, social relations and daily life.

The main interrogation around which I have built my analysis of the situation in Žepa is: To what extent have Transitional Justice mechanisms been implemented in the local community of Žepa, in order to encourage the reconstruction of social infrastructure as well as the return of the cleansed population, and therefore contribute to the broader reconciliation process in Bosnia-Herzegovina? In order to answer this question, I shall first explain my topic in more detail, the scope of my research and the methodology I have used to address it. Secondly, I will depict the broader picture of the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina, its impacts and consequences in Žepa and how it is commemorated nowadays. For that purpose I will use both primary and secondary sources. The secondary sources will help me contextualize the war and the primary sources e.g. the interviewees' memories of the war, will

(12)

contribute to give a personal aspect of the matter. Thirdly, I will discuss and challenge the initiative, goals and results of the ICTY, established as the main retributive system during the war. For that I will use both academic articles as well as the opinion of interviewees on the matter. Fourthly, I will examine the return to Žepa, with all the practical and emotional challenges that are implied by such return. Finally, I will end my overall investigation with the analysis of the challenges that Žepa's inhabitants have to face on a daily basis.

(13)

I- TOPIC, SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

Mass atrocities are not a modern act of war in our societies. Thucydides set the first written record of mass murder in Europe when he described the massacre orchestrated by the Thracians on the civilian population of Mycalessus during the Peloponnesian War. Yet, what is new is the way we try to prevent, apprehend and deal with the aftermath of mass murder. It is a fact that warfare has taken a new turn ever since the Industrial Revolution. Weapons are now developed to make as much casualties as possible. Warfare is no longer a noble art, as it was during the Middle Ages or the Renaissance, nowadays non-combatants are those who suffer the most. It has certainly reached its climax with the use of the nuclear bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. With the proliferation of such weaponry the International Community has been forced to set up rules to regulate not only the use of such weapons but of warfare itself in order to protect the civilian populations. The three first Geneva Conventions dealt with the respect of non-civilians' rights during armed conflicts3_{. However, the extent}

of the civilian casualties during WW2 has forced the International Community to enact a Fourth Geneva Convention in 1949 followed by Three Additional Protocols much later in 1977, so as to assure, as far as international humanitarian law is concerned, the good treatment of civilians during wartime4_.

The uncovering of the gaze chambers, the concentration camps and the other inhumane acts committed during WW2 urged the General Assembly of the UN, in December 1948, at the initiative of Raphael Lemkin a Polish lawyer exiled in the US during WW2, to issue Resolution 260 A (III). This resolution, also known as the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, introduced the very notion of genocide in international law by giving it a legal definition5_{. Genocide is}

characterized by “the acts committed with the intent to destroy in whole or in part a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group”. The Article 6 of the resolution provides for the eventual establishment of international penal tribunals to try natural individuals accused of having committed genocide6_.

The Second World War was a full-scale war, meaning it had a destructive and massive impact on every

3 International Committee of the Red Cross. 2014. The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols. URL: https://www.icrc.org/en/document/geneva-conventions-1949-additional-protocols [Last Accessed 14 January 2017]. 4 Ibid.

5 Genocide Watch. Genocide Convention. URL: http://www.genocidewatch.org/aboutgenocide/genocideconvention.html [Last Accessed 14 January 2017].

(14)

layers and components of the societies and countries involved. Moreover, the extent of the atrocities committed added a whole new challenge to the “traditional” post-war methods of reconstruction. Indeed, governments needed to find a way to address the barbarity of the war in order to deal with the trauma and therefore, reconstruct the social order. This concept of reconstructing the social order had never been theorized before7_.

In fact, the concept of Transitional Justice is relatively recent and has been defined by scholars using different mechanisms. The abstract definition is that Transitional Justice is both a legal and non-legal process to reconstruct a post-conflict society, in which gross violations of human rights have occurred and disrupted the social order8_{. It can be divided into two subcategories: Retributive Justice and}

Restorative Justice. Transitional Justice is a very long process, in order to achieve a certain degree of reconstruction and reconciliation both Retributive and Restorative Justice are needed. The former deals solely with punitive justice. In the case of BiH, Retributive Justice is represented on the International level by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, and on the national level by the War Crimes Chamber, an hybrid court were both national and international judges sit.

The first international tribunals were the International Military Tribunal, commonly known as the Nuremberg Tribunal, and the International Military Tribunal for the Far East -or the Tokyo Tribunal. However, between 1945 and 1993 many mass atrocities, genocide, crimes against humanity of various types have been committed all over the globe and yet, no one cared enough to establish an international institution to punish these crimes and perhaps, deter further ones9_{. In fact, the decolonization period}

which started during WW2 and continued afterwards saw an incredible amount of violation of human rights which could have legitimately led to the creation of an international tribunal, or at least prosecution by national courts.

The end goal of TJ being the reconciliation and the achievement of a long lasting peace, therefore, punishment cannot be the only response to deal with post-conflict societies10_.

7 Martina Fisher, “Transitional Justice and Reconciliation: Theory and Practice”, IN Advancing Conflict Transformation. The Berghof Handbook II ed. B. Austin, et al., (Opladen/Framington Hills, Barbara Budrich Publishers, 2011), p 406. 8 International Center for Transitional Justice. What is Transitional Justice ?. URL : https://www.ictj.org/about/transitional-justice [Last Accessed 14 January 2017].

9 Janine Natalya Clark, “The three Rs: Retributive justice, Restorative Justice, and Reconciliation”, IN Contemporary Justice Review, Vol 11, N°4 (2008), p 337.

(15)

The second subcategory is Restorative Justice and it deals with non-punitive mechanisms. It aims at rebuilding the social connections and the lost trust between perpetrators and victims11_{. In}

Bosnia-Herzegovina restorative justice is challenging to implement because of the territorial division. The three ethnic groups can live without interacting with one another. If this might be a fact for parts of BiH, it is not the case for people Žepa.

Indeed, Žepa is located in Eastern Bosnia and belongs to the municipality of Rogatica, one of the sixty-four municipalities composing the Republika Srpska.

The name Žepa can be confusing because it is used for different geographic and political entities which are all in the same vicinity. Indeed, it refers to a mountain, a river that flows into the river Drina, a local community of fourteen villages and hamlets, and the main town of this community. It is important to understand that in this analysis I am not only referring to the town of Žepa but also to the local community at large.

Nowadays, Žepa is a remote grouping of houses in the mountain. The main attractions are the historical constructions still standing: the Ottoman “kula” (tower) and the famous Ottoman bridge described by Ivo Andrić in his book “The Bridge on The Žepa”. One can also find a very nice motel with a breathtaking view located on the Drina banks in Slap. In terms of industry in the area, there is a trout farm with facilities located in both Slap and Žepa. Both the fish industry and the motel have been rebuilt after the war and they represent the only source of income in the local community. With globalization and the increasing industrialization, Europe has become more and more urban. BiH, and it is the case for several countries in the region, is still a rural country for the most part12_.

In the Summer of 2016 I spent a month in Bosnia-Herzegovina for the purpose of this research. Out of those four weeks I have spent ten days in Žepa interviewing as much inhabitants as I could. The choice to study Žepa may come across as odd to some people, however Žepa is a very peculiar and interesting case study.

As a small enclave in the mountains, Žepa is inhabited nowadays only by survivors. Before the war only a few non-Bosniaks lived there and of course non of them came back. Since the community of Žepa is very small I was able to meet a rather relevant sample of the population. Nonetheless, it is

11 Geneviève Parent, "Reconciliation and Justice after Genocide: A Theoretical Exploration," Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal: Vol. 5: Iss. 3: Article 5 (2010), p 287.

12 The World Bank. Rural population (% of total population). Last updated in 2016. URL:

(16)

important to note that I was not able to meet with and/or interview any Bosnian Serbs. This is another observation of the current ethnic separation.

Moreover, as stated in the introduction the case of Žepa is completely neglected by scholars, especially compared to Srebrenica. When the enclave fell it received an important international media coverage. Furthermore, the ICTY has tried several former VRS officials related to crimes committed in the Srebrenica and Žepa enclaves. The defendants were all indicted for the Joint Enterprise to forcibly remove and persecute the Bosniak population of Žepa13_{. For the most part, the accused were later found}

guilty of all or part of the following crimes: genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of the laws or customs of war. However, the counts of genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide only concern the enclave of Srebrenica.

Finally, the situation in Žepa encompasses the same problematics of social and material reconstruction as that of Srebrenica. Therefore, I wanted to go to Žepa myself because I was eager to get the whole picture of how Žepa's dwellers live nowadays. But also I wanted to understand and bear witness of how Transitional Justice mechanisms had been implemented -or if they had been implemented at all- in the former UN safe zone. The research I have conducted serves that purpose.

My sources are composed by a corpus of interviews I have conducted in the town of Žepa – which are at the basis of my research -, two judgments of the ICTY, academic articles which deals with the Transitional Justice process and finally, photographies I have taken during my stay in Žepa.

With regards to the ICTY judgments I have used two separate cases where eight Bosnian Serb officials have been put on trial: Prosecutor v. Zdravko Tolimir (case number IT-05-88/2-A) and in the joint cases Prosecutor v. Vujadin Popović, Ljubiša Beara, Drago Nikolić, Ljubomir Borovčanin, Radivoje Miletić, Milan Gvero, Vinko Pandurević -referred to as Popović et al.- (case number IT-05-88-T).

If my first idea was to articulate my research around their daily lives twenty one year after the occurring of an ethnic cleansing, without paying too much attention to the past, I very soon realized that the way they lived prior to 1992 was also relevant for my research. The past is so present in Žepa, not only in people's mind but also visually, in the abandoned houses and buildings, memorials and

13 United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. 2005. Press Release.

URL: http://www.icty.org/en/press/nine-accused-charged-jointly-crimes-committed-srebrenica-and-Žepa [Last Accessed 14 January 2017].

(17)

graveyards. I believe that one cannot understand Žepian's mindset and vision of their present and future conditions without getting the whole picture of how the town looked like, and how life was before the war. In other words, I needed to understand what they had lost because of the war. I, therefore, had to broaden my spectrum of questions,. To be more precise I had to ask the same questionnaire with the same main themes and apply it to the pre-war life. Of course, these questions could only be answered by a certain generation.

Upon arrival I had no idea whom I was going to meet and interview in Žepa, I did not know who lived there or even if anyone would be willing to talk to me. However, when I arrived in Žepa I soon realized that it was definitely not something I should be worried about. Most of the people there were willing to talk to me. Only very few dwellers regarded my presence in such a small town as 'suspicious'. If only a few were suspicious many were curious to see a foreigner interested in Žepa.

My interviewees are 'ordinary people' so to speak. What is implied by 'ordinary people' is the civilian population, the victims of the ethnic cleansing. Overall, I was able to interview twenty-three people. They are all Bosniaks. The age and gender of my group of interest are very mixed. All the Bosniaks interviewed in Žepa lost at least one family member during the war, whether in Žepa or Srebrenica. Indeed, the families in both enclaves were and are very intertwined. I can distinguish three different groups:

– Returnees: inhabitants of Žepa who returned

– Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs): former inhabitants of Žepa who fled (mainly) to Sarajevo, Tuzla and Zenica and never returned

– Refugees: displaced persons who still live abroad

Despite the fact that they are all Bosniaks, those three groups have one thing in common. Indeed, they share the same traumatic experience of the war. As I said I have included Bosniaks who were displaced from Žepa in 1995 and left BiH for good in the following years. I think they all have a very strong sense of belonging to BiH, but also hold a very different view on matters of reconciliation, development and wishes for the future. Although, returnees and non-returnees have a common past history, their lives are very different now and those differences shape their views on BiH.

(18)

With regards to the structure of the interviews they are semi-structured. All the interviews were conducted in English. As for the interviewees who did not speak English I used the services of three interpreters. The interpreters all have direct or indirect family connections to Žepa. Two of them experienced the war and siege of the enclave, only one did not.

In order to respect the wish of anonymity of some of the natives and/or inhabitants of Žepa, I have taken the liberty to change their names. The pseudonyms given have been arbitrarily chosen.

• Names of inhabitants interviewed in the local community of Žepa: Aliza K., Ayaz K., Ibro S., Kadira S., Nizam K., Sanika K. and Sara K.

• Names of IDS interviewed: Jari K. and Muamera S.

• Names of refugees abroad interviewed: Almedin M., Aslam C., Djalilah G., Edin K., Mirsab K., Najm K., Nihal K., Ramin K., Rejad G., Safia K. and Selma M.

• Names of other interviewees: Amir L., Benedin B., Ehlimana M., Fatima S., Haris L. (Swiss Embassy), Jelena B., Stefica B., Zehra P., Zorica S. (OSCE Representative) and Zijad T.

(19)

II- RECORDS OF THE WAR (1989-1996)

A- Rise of Nationalisms

Bosnia-Herzegovina was the most multi-ethnic Republic within the Former Yugoslavia, it was mainly constituted by three ethnic groups: Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks. They all lived in harmony in the central Republic of Yugoslavia. Yet, when nationalist tensions arose in Yugoslavia, starting in the autonomous province of Kosovo in Southern Serbia, the climate change in the co-federation. The demise of Yugoslavia has a countless number of explanations.

Its first visible hint, so to speak, can be dated from 1987 when a charismatic high government official, Slobodan Milosevic, stunned by taking the side of the Serb nationalist demonstrators in Kosovo against the Albanian Kosovaars.

Later on, in 1989, at the commemoration celebrating the 600th_{anniversary of the battle of Kosovo,}

Slobodan Milosevic, gave a speech praising Serbian glory. The Gazimestan speech was given in a very tensed climate. Nationalist demonstrations were inflaming the streets of Belgrade14_.

Soon after, in 1990 Serbia, using the pretext of uprisings threatening the Serb minority in Kosovo and the Vojvodina, put an end to the provinces' autonomy, a status that had been enacted in the 1974 Constitution.

The Republics of both Slovenia and Croatia were the first to leave the union. Slovenia and Croatia enjoyed a certain economic prosperity compared to the other republics and therefore, Serb Nationalism could jeopardize the sovereignty of their entity15_.

After countless hours of negotiations and threats, the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) was sent to force Slovenia back into Yugoslavia. The war with Slovenia lasted for about ten days and the death toll was low. It ended with the recognition of Slovenia's independence. Such a short fight can be explained by the fact that Slovenia was a rather homogenous Republic with a very small Serb minority16_.

14 Skype interview, Mirsab K., 31/07/2016..

15 Jasna Dragović-Soso, “Why Did Yugoslavia Disintegrate? An Overview of Contending Explanations”, IN: State Collapse in South-Eastern Europe: New Perspectives on Yugoslavia's Disintegration ed. Lenard J. Cohen and Jasna Dragović-Soso, (Purdue University Press, 2007 ), p 7.

(20)

Meanwhile in Croatia, the first free elections had brought the HDZ with at its head Franjo Tudjman. Croatia shared a direct border with Serbia, and an important Serb minority dwelled in the Krajina region. The declaration of independence created unrest in the Krajina region among the Serb population, which had the full support of Belgrade17_{. Serbia in full control of the JNA sent troops to}

support the Serb people living in Croatia.

As the situation was slowly sinking into open conflicts the people in Žepa stayed put, following the news broadcasted from Sarajevo on their television screens. They were aware of the situation in Kosovo and were concerned about it, but at the same time it was very far from Žepa. Again for Slovenia and Croatia it was far from their peaceful land. The Slovenes and Croatians had declared independence and the people in Žepa were about this decision. The Slovenes and Croatians were breaking apart Yugoslavia18_.

Military Service was compulsory between the age of seventeen and nineteen and lasted for twelve months. Conscription represented the main source of soldiers as all able bodied men were eligible to conscription in case of conflict19_{. As a result, several families in Žepa had sons in the JNA who were}

sent to fight in Croatia, and were even eager to fight for Yugoslavia.

For instance, Nihal was in Split fighting in the JNA lines for what he thought was a good cause: the preservation of Yugoslavia. By 1992 just as the Slovenes and Croatians before, the Bosniaks were no longer welcomed in the Yugoslav Army and Nihal came back to Žepa20_.

The media were very present on the fields and broadcasted on national television scenes of war. Media was state controlled, hence the fact that the government was working closely with the media in trying to manipulate people's mind21_.

If Žepians were upset to see Slovenia and Croatia leave the co-federation, the wars launched, especially against Croatia, had them worried about what the outcome could be for BiH. Aslam recalled that one morning he heard the TV was on, which was quite unusual in his house. His parents were watching the news, on the screen he saw people firing guns and tanks. The battle was opposing the JNA and the

URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvK80qgVWb8 [Last Accessed: 4 January 2017]. 17 Ibid.

18 Interview, Jari K., Sarajevo, 05/08/2016. 19 Ibid.

20 Interview Aliza K. & Nizam K., Žepa, 28/07/2016. 21 Interview, Aslam C., Žepa, 29/0/2016.

(21)

Croatian Army and was taking place in Croatia. His parents were really worried. Aslam explained to me that his parents were afraid that BiH would be next, but they also thought it could be easily avoided. BiH was such a multicultural Republic22_.

The broadcasts also showed something very disturbing, among the JNA soldiers a few were dressed differently. Indeed some soldiers were not wearing JNA symbols, as it was accustomed to, but Chetniks symbols23_.

The Serb families living in Žepa chose to leave the town and move to Serbia in 1990-91 sensing that the situation in Yugoslavia could compromise the well-being of BiH24_.

After the approval of the “Memorandum on Sovereignty” in October 1991, declaring Bosnia-Herzegovina a sovereign state, the Serb representatives of the tripartite coalition, labelling this decision illegal, broke relations with the coalition and established an Assembly of the Serb People in Bosnia and Herzegovina in order to protect the interests of the Serb people. On the 9th_{of January 1992 the Republic}

of the Serb people in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Republika Srpska) was declared to be part of Yugoslavia. It is shortly after that the Army of Republika Srspka (VRS) was created. Some two months later Bosnia declared its independence from the Yugoslav Federation after holding a referendum deemed illegal and boycotted by the Serbs.

People in Žepa were for the most part against this decision. Declaring independence meant dragging the country into a war, and Eastern Bosnia was the most vulnerable part of the Republic. They had been following the war in Croatia day by day and had seen the violence and destruction faced by local populations there25_{. It is after the declaration of independence that the remaining countries of}

Yugoslavia decided to launch a violent war on Bosnia and Herzegovina in order to bring it back under Serbia's control. Serbia was mostly interested in regaining the territories where the majority of the population was of Serb origins in order to create a Greater Serbia26_.

22 Interview, Aslam C., Žepa, 29/0/2016. 23 Interview, Jari K., Sarajevo, 05/08/2016. 24 Ibid.

25 Ibid.

(22)

B- Žepa in the War

The ethnic groups in BiH did not live cloistered among themselves, the towns and villages were mixed. However there was a sort of pattern: Serbs mostly lived in the Northern and Eastern parts, Croatian mostly in Southern and central parts and the Bosniaks Western and central parts.

In Eastern Bosnia, mostly populated by Serbs, there was a concentration of Bosniak population between Zvornik, Srebrenica, Foča, Goražde, Višegrad and Žepa. When the war started this concentration of Bosniak population became an issue. It prevented the leaders of the Republika Srpska from achieving a perfectly pure ethnic territory. Therefore, this chunk of land needed to be cleansed one way or the other. The ethnic cleansing started in this region, since the population was composed of civilians the challenge was not too hard to overcome. Bijeljina and Zvornik were strategic towns for the Bosnian Serbs and were taken in early March by paramilitaries27_{. Višegrad was another important town,}

the paramilitaries led by Milan Lukić showed no mercy to the Bosniak people of Višegrad some of whom were thrown into the river Drina28_{. Indeed, in Višegrad, an unverifiable number of men were}

thrown in the Drina. Their corpses drifted to the mouth of the Žepa river where the inhabitants found them and buried them on the river banks. Some of the bodies were identified by relatives who had fled Višegrad or its surroundings, or they could be identified by documents or personal belongings. Out of the 128 bodies found and buried on the river banks, 77 have been identified.29

The displaced Bosniaks sought refuge in close towns where they had relatives, thinking that it would be over soon and they would be able to return to their homes. Inhabitants from Goražde, Srebrenica and Žepa soon witnessed a flow of refugees arriving to their towns. No one really believed that it was going to last. This war was inconceivable, how could politicians from Belgrade, Zagreb or Sarajevo turn neighbors of the same village against one another30_.

Žepa is located in the mountains and its inhabitants were proud to say that Žepa had never fell before, not even at the hands of the Nazis during WW231_{. That could be the reason why people from under}

attacked villages and towns around decided to seek refuge in Žepa in the early stage of the war. Žepa,

27 War Documentary. (1995). BBC The Death Of Yugoslavia 4of6 – The Gates oh Hell. [Online Video]. 14 April 2015. URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvK80qgVWb8 [Last Accessed: 4 January 2017].

28 Šaban Kulovac, Žepa 1992-1995: Istinu ne smijemo zaboraviti, Sarajevo, 2007, p 31. 29 Ibid. p 29.

30 Interview, Aliza K., & Nizam K., Žepa, 28/07/2016.

(23)

like Srebrenica, had a fair majority of Bosniaks according to the 1991 census. As more and more villages fell to the Serb Army the number of refugees grew accordingly in Srebrenica and Žepa. The Žepa area counted 65% of refugees mainly coming from Han-Pijesak (HP), Rogatica, Višegrad and Vlasenica municipalities32_{. From 1993 onwards the enclaves were declared Safe Areas by Resolution}

824 of the UN Security Council. The endangered Bosniak enclaves could therefore receive international protection, or so it was written on paper. The Resolution also included the demilitarization of the enclaves. Following the Declaration UN soldiers were sent to Žepa. A French Battalion composed of 25 engineers was assigned to the enclave for a period of two months with the following tasks: demilitarizing the enclave, search for landmines and repair the damages perpetrated by VRS shelling33_{. Additionally, a Ukrainian Company (UKRCoy) composed of 85 soldiers was sent for the}

protection of the enclave. The UKRCoy set up 9 checkpoints -Observation Posts- all over the enclave. The headquarters controlled by 79 soldiers were established in the elementary school in Žepa town34_.

The first attack on Žepa came from one of the VRS Main Staff headquarter base in the village of Veliki Zep, in the region of Han Pijesak in June 1992.

The commander of the VRS was Ratko Mladić. The military base Crna Rijeka was “one of the most secret and sophisticated military complexes of the former Yugoslavia”35_{. With its nuclear shelter and its}

location on top of a mountain, the military complex had a significant geo-strategic position.

The JNA had another military base very close to Žepa, up on the Zlovrh mountain. The small base was used for secured telecommunications36_.

The enclave of Žepa had very little means of resistance compared to the efficient and well-organized Army of Republika Srpska. The municipal life in Žepa was organized during the war by a War Presidency, and the ABiH formed in January 1994 the 1st_{Žepa Brigade commanded by Avdo Palić.}

The Žepa Brigade was in constant communication with the ABiH headquarters in Sarajevo. The ABiH ordered all able-bodied men to resist the VRS attacks. The ranks of the Žepa Brigade were strengthened by experienced Bosniaks soldiers pulled out of the JNA in 1992. As a result, several attacks such as

32 Prosecutor v. Popović et al., (IT-05-88-T), Trial Chamber Judgement), 10 June 2010. p 267. 33 Interview, Nizam K.,Žepa,, 25/07/2016.

34 Prosecutor v. Zdravko Tolimir (IT-05-88/2-2), Trial Chamber Judgement, 12 December 2012. p 67.

35 BBC News. 2004. 'Mladic bunker' secrets revealed. URL: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4122257.stm [Last Accessed 14 January 2017].

(24)

reconnaissance and sabotage activities were successfully launched against the VRS37_.

The population in Žepa increased from about 3 000 in 1992 to 10 000 in 1995 (there is no exact record on the numbers of refugee in Žepa, it fluctuates between 6 000 and 15 000). The situation was not as bad as in Srebrenica because in Žepa, most refugees were welcomed in Žepian's houses or in the elementary school. Nonetheless, the house shortage was still an issue38_.

Between 1993 and early 1995 the situation in Žepa was relatively stable and the life in the enclave was somehow still bearable39_{. In a sense, dwellers and refugees in Žepa tried to go on and continue living}

their lives. For instance, they barely had any means but classes were still held during the siege, just as in the rest of BiH40_{. Until early 1995, food and fuel were not lacking, thanks to humanitarian relief}

convoys but also because Žepians could still make use of their stocked supplies and farming. The ceasefire and agreement signed between the VRS and the UNPROFOR enacted the unrestrained access by humanitarian convoys to the enclave. In practice not every convoys were let trough but most of them were. Moreover, illegal trade was widespread during the siege and when possible some inhabitants drove to Srebrenica to exchange goods41_{. Others would walk to Srebrenica by night and through the}

woods in order to avoid being spotted by VRS soldiers42_{. A black market was also taking place within}

the enclave of Žepa, especially between the UKRCoy and the local population. The UKRCoy sold or exchanged mainly goods but also fuel or even weapons to the ABiH43_.

However, in March 1995 arguing the violations of the Agreement of Cessation of Hostilities in late 1994-early 1995 by the ABiH (from Srebrenica), the Directives 7 and 7/1 were issued44_.

Directives were issued by the Main Staff Commander or the Supreme Commander to the VRS. They were documents setting up political or military objectives45_{. The end goal of the Directive 7 was to}

“create a free and unified Serbian state in the former Yugoslavia” by “liberating the Drina valley

37 Prosecutor v. Zdravko Tolimir (IT-05-88/2-2), p 271. 38 Interview, Jari K., Sarajevo, 05/08/2016.

39 Lelo Ravnice. (2013). “Žepa 1992”. [Online Video]. 2 October 2013. URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=8jT5Pz2p0Sk&t=1832 s . [Last Accessed: 14 January 2017]. At the end of the video we can see men going to the mosque, women washing dirty laundry, or kids swimming in the river.

40 Interviews, Aslam C., Žepa, 29/0/2016. and Jari K., Sarajevo, 05/08/2016. 41 Interview, Najm K., Žepa, 28/07/2016.

42 Interview, Jari K., Sarajevo, 05/08/2016. 43 Prosecutor v. Popović et al., (IT-05-88-T), p 90. 44 Prosecutor v. Zdravko Tolimir (IT-05-88/2-2), p 76. 45 Prosecutor v. Popović et al., (IT-05-88-T), p 37.

(25)

region”46_{. Therefore, the Directive 7 articulated the procedure to be followed by the Drina Corps. The}

VRS was to “create an unbearable situation of total insecurity with no hope of further survival or life for inhabitants of Srebrenica and Žepa”47_{. In order for the Directives to be successful the Drina Corps}

first needed to restrict and even prevent the humanitarian convoys to reach the enclave and secondly they needed to gain control over the area between the Srebrenica and Žepa enclaves in order to prevent any communication between the two and therefore, complete their isolation48_.

The humanitarian convoys were stoped in early 1995, the UKRCoy ran out of fuel and had to stop using the generators which affected the fresh food storage capacity49_{. Therefore, the humanitarian}

situation deteriorated drastically and between May and June 1995 there was no water, no food and no medical supplies left50_{. The situation was such that some people in Žepa tried to flee. The Žepa}

Brigade, however, had been ordered by the ABiH not to let anyone out and contain the population within the enclave51_.

In June and July 1995 the UKRCoy OPs in the enclave were targeted by the VRS. The attacks on the UNPROFOR aimed first at showing that the VRS was not afraid of any Western intervention and sought to prevent any NATO retaliation52_{. Secondly, that the VRS was committed to take over the}

enclave no matter what. It showed the extent of the VRS' will and military power.

In July the VRS launched several deadly attacks on Žepa, “in a five day action civilians were wounded by mortar shelling and houses in the surrounding villages were destroyed, there was also sporadic artillery, mortar and heavy machine gun fire directed at Žepa town and the surrounding villages.”53_.

The final attack on Žepa started on the 14th_{of July, after the failure of the pourparlers between the two}

parties. The ABiH was ordered by Sarajevo to defend the enclave, resist and not to sign any negotiation with the VRS54_{. The VRS took the villages one after the other, sending the civilian population to hid in}

the mountains around Žepa town. The word had spread that the enclave of Srebrenica had fell and that atrocities were being committed on boys and men. By the 19th_{of July the town of Žepa was encircled.}

46 Prosecutor v. Zdravko Tolimir (IT-05-88/2-2), p 75. 47 Prosecutor v. Zdravko Tolimir (IT-05-88/2-2), p 75. 48 Ibid. p 76.

49 Prosecutor v. Popović et al., (IT-05-88-T), p 90.

50 Prosecutor v. Zdravko Tolimir (IT-05-88/2-2), p 84. & Interview, Aliza K., Žepa, 28/07/2016. 51 Ibid.

52 Prosecutor v. Popović et al., (IT-05-88-T), p 268. 53 Ibid. p 318.

(26)

And on the 20th_{the commander of the UKRCoy, along with seven other soldiers abandoned their}

position to join the VRS55_{. An “agreement” -the War Presidency was in a very weak position- was}

reached on the 24th_{of July between the War Presidency-ABiH and the VRS for the safe evacuation of}

the civilian population outside Žepa, into ABiH-held territory56_{. The able-bodied men were to gather in}

the town and surrender all their weapons. They would be registered and taken to a detention center as prisoners of wars (POWs) in order to later be exchanged against Serb POWs in Sarajevo 57_.

C- The Fall of Žepa and the Immediate Aftermaths

The enclave of Žepa fell on the 25th_{of July. The Bosniak representatives of the enclave had}

gathered the civilian population in the center of the town when the VRS entered Žepa. The first buses to evacuate the people arrived shortly after. In fact, the “logistics of the transport, including the buses, trucks and fuel” was to be arranged by the VRS58_{. They were loaded with the wounded first, and then}

followed by women and children, and finally by the elderly59_{. By that time nearly all able-bodied men}

had left the enclave and were hiding in the woods. Najm had put his family in one of the first buses because he was afraid of what might happen with the last transports. A soldier told him to run for his life because if he was to find him he would kill him60_{. The transport of civilians lasted until the 27}th_of

July, and in fact Najm's fear was founded. Najm's sister who was on the last truck was forced by the VRS to pay them money if she wanted to keep her 3 year-old son with her61_.

The first transportations of civilians were monitored by a group of UNPROFOR officers. The civilians were told that they would be transported in ABiH-held territory. However, they had no guarantee whatsoever that they would, in fact, reach ABiH-held territory alive62_{. Especially, according to what}

they had heard about the aftermath of the fall of Srebrenica -although they did not know the extent of the atrocities committed63_{. The buses transported the civilians to Kladanj, where the civilians walked}

55 New York Times-World. 1995. Conflict in the Balkans: In Bosnia; Second 'Safe Area' in Eastern Bosnia Overrun by Serbs. URL: http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/20/world/conflict-balkans-bosnia-second-safe-area-eastern-bosnia-overrun-serbs.html [Last Accessed 14 January 2017]. & Interview, Aliza K., Žepa, 28/07/2016.

56 Prosecutor v. Popović et al., (IT-05-88-T), p 372. 57 Prosecutor v. Zdravko Tolimir (IT-05-88/2-2), p 285. 58 Ibid. p 279.

59 Ibid.

60 Interview, Najm K., Žepa, 28/07/2016. 61 Ibid.

62 Interview, Aliza K., Žepa, 28/07/2016.

(27)

the remaining distance into ABiH-held territory64_.

The able-bodied men had fled to the surrounding mountains. They had several options: to surrender to the VRS, to cross the Drina and surrender to the Serbian Army, to try to make their way into ABiH-held territory or to stay in hiding. Many of them decided to cross the Drina and surrender to the Serbian Army (JNA)65_{. The Serbian Army was waiting for them on the other side of the river banks. They were}

then sent to Serbian Police-ran concentration camps in Serbia66_{. Two of the interviewees were sent to a}

detention center called Šljivovica, along with 700-800 other Bosniak male refugees from Žepa67_{. Upon}

arrival, representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) registered the names of the inmates to make sure that the Serbian Police would not attempted at their lives. However, Najm along with nine other inmates, was kept hidden in a room while the ICRC was registering the other inmates. The Serbians tried to hide the ten inmates but eventually the ICRC found out that some of the them were missing from their lists. The Serbian Police could no longer hide them and they were registered68_{. The refugees from Žepa stayed locked up for a period of six to seven months, during which}

the ICRC came several times to make sure all of them were alive. The ICRC made arrangements for the inmates to go back to BiH (ABiH-held territory) or to receive a resident permit for third countries, depending on their wishes. The ICRC representatives also acted as intermediaries between the inmates and their families in BiH by passing letters which were first read by the Serbian Police. The inmates were often ill-treated, tortured and starved69_{. Najm spent most of the seven months in isolation and was}

often tortured. As a result of the inhumane treatments received during his incarceration in the concentration camp, Najm suffers from post-traumatic stress disorders and severe injuries to his knees, feet and torso70_.

While some of the men from Žepa were kept in concentration camps, the thousand of other refugees who had been sent to Kladanj by buses had made their way to Zenica or Tuzla. Both cities

64 Ibid.

65 Prosecutor v. Popović et al., (IT-05-88-T), pp 302-303. 66 Ibid.

67 Humanitarian Law Center. 2015. Compensation of Damages for Former Detainees of Šljivovica and Mitrovo Polje Camps. URL: http://www.hlc-rdc.org/?p=30399&lang=de [Last Accessed 14 January 2017].

68 Interview, Najm K., Žepa, 28/07/2016.

69 Humanitarian Law Center. 2015. Compensation of Damages for Former Detainees of Šljivovica and Mitrovo Polje Camps.

(28)

were turned into gigantic refugee camps. For some the staying in the camps was temporary and they were relocated in houses in the region. For the most part, Bosniaks resettled in houses which had once belonged to Bosnian Serbs or Croats who had left the country before or during the war. Sara and her family moved into an abandoned Serb house whose dwellers had sought refuge in Switzerland71_.

The houses were shared among several families72_{. Nearly all families who found an accommodation}

still live in it, or at least stayed for quite some time after the war ended73_{. Bosniaks were now 'safe' but}

their living conditions were still concerning to say the least. Refugees were in such a state of distress: they had no idea what had happened to some of their male family members, or even if they were still alive and they did not know what was going to happen to them. Moreover, the humanitarian crisis was further exacerbated because of the lack of available accommodations and the food shortage due to the flows of refugees coming from both Srebrenica and Žepa74_.

The fall of the enclave resulted in the fragmentation and the scattering, across BiH and the world, of Žepian's dwellers. The inhabitants of Žepa had become internally displaced persons.

Most of the survivors of the concentration camps in Serbia received a residence permit in the third countries of their choice. They settled there in 1996-7 and in the following years their families joined them. The others stayed in Bosnia-Herzegovina. It was not until 2000-1 that the families who wished to come back to their home -or what was left of it- in Žepa were able to do so.

D- “Forgive But Never Forget”: Commemorating The Fall of Žepa

Commemoration ceremonies and memorials have a major significance in post-conflict societies. However, it also represents risks especially in BiH. The narratives of the war varied from one ethnic group to another, therefore memorials and commemoration ceremonies are controversial. The victims have every right to want to remember, and the organization of commemoration ceremonies and edification of war memorials are a way to ease their pain and pay their respect to the dead. Nevertheless, some scholars have argued that holding on to such memories could represent an obstacle to reconciliation, because as stated by Michael Ignatieff “all nations depend on forgetting: on forging

71 Interview, Sara K., Žepa, 28/07/2016. 72 Interview, Aliza K., Žepa, 28/07/2016.

73 Interviews, Aliza K. & Sara K., Žepa. 28/07/2016.

(29)

myths of unity and identity that allow a society to forget its founding crimes, its hidden injuries and divisions, its unhealed wounds”75_{. In Žepa the issue of selective memory is not at stake since the}

victims of the war and the ethnic cleansing are the Bosniaks. However, the commemoration also has a political purpose. Žepa and Srebrenica are the only UN safe zones which fell to the VRS and as a result are part of the RS. Furthermore, the government of the RS is not inclined to recognize the wrongdoing of the VRS. Indeed, it would be undermining the territorial raison d'être of the RS to do so.

During my stay in Žepa I had the chance to attend the commemoration of the fall of Žepa on the 27th_of

July. Every year since the inhabitants came back a ceremony is organized. The commemoration gathers Bosniaks from everywhere: IDPs, refugees abroad and current inhabitants of Žepa (returnees). For the event special measures are taken. In order for people to reach the enclave buses are made available, they take people in the morning and bring them back in the late afternoon. This is organized by a man from Žepa76_{. There is a police force sent by the government of the Republika Srpska to insure security,}

although their presence and role are a bit controversial. Unfortunately, no representative of the Republika Srpska government has taken part in the commemoration this year. The event is also broadcasted, hence the presence of journalists and cameras. The ceremony starts around noon, people gather in the mosque. This year it was very warm and sunny so we gathered in the enclosure of the mosque, where rugs were overlaid on the grass77_{. The ceremony began with recital of prayers for the}

victims of the war. The recital lasted for two hours and was then followed by speeches. The Imam of Žepa along with the Mufti of Goražde and the Grand Mufti of Sarajevo were present at the ceremony and all addressed the crowd. Their speeches, as translated to me, were about peace, tolerance and the importance of remembering the war to honor the dead. The accent was put on the significance not to forget but also to forgive, to let go of any feeling of anger so as not to live with resentment and the will of revenge.

After the ceremony, those who live outside Žepa took the opportunity to visit their relatives and friends in Žepa. For the occasion the villagers killed and prepared a grilled lamb on the main square. Others gathered in houses to drink coffee and eat cakes. From what I have experienced the discussions following the commemoration are not related to the war.

75 Janine Natalya Clark, “Reconciliation through Remembrance ? War memorials and the Victims of Vukovar”, IN The

International Journal of Transitional Justice, Vol.7 (2013), p 121. 76 Interview, Muhamera S., Žepa, 27/07/2016.

(30)

Another way to remember and commemorate is through the edification of memorials. In the local community of Žepa several villages have erected memorials usually around a water source. Like in Pripećak where names of war victims have been engraved in a stone were the source flows78_{. As one}

can notice the memorials in the area are not monumental and are in fact rather austere. The main ones are in Žepa town. The one in the mosque enclosure is a very simple commemorative stone79_{, the other}

one on the main square describes in a few words the overall situation in Žepa from 1992 to its fall in 199580_.

78 Appendix p 69. 79 Appendix p 70. 80 Appendix p 70.

(31)

III- AN INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL TO FOSTER RECONCILIATION ?

“An international tribunal for (…) prosecuting persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia.”

- Security Council Resolution 827, 25 May 1993.

It has been argued that the ICTY, as a Retributive Justice mechanism, is an important and main pillar of reconciliation. Although, it is an important aspect of Transitional Justice it is not one of reconciliation. Retributive Justice operates in the courtroom, it is a strictly punitive by definition81_{. As}

far as International criminal law is concerned war trials are indeed the mainstay of retributive justice. The arguments given to justify Retributive Justice's input in reconciliation process are the following: trials and trial archives bring justice, give closure, individualize guilt, create a fair narrative and bring a sense of recognition to the victims82_{. However, all those arguments are quite relative and appear one}

sided.

Why an International Tribunal ?

The International Community represented by the UN and the Security Council was preoccupied by the ongoing conflict in the Former Yugoslavia. The unexpected proportion taken by the war launched in 1991-92 principally in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina forced the Security Council to set up a Commission of Experts to analyze the situation in the region. The Commission of Experts issued its report in early 1993 and informed the Security Council of the gross violations of human rights and the grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions that were unfolding in Yugoslavia83_{. On the 25}th_{of May}

1993 the UN Security Council issued the Resolution 827 setting up the first International War Criminal Court since the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals in 1945. The resolution enacted the status of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The primary goal of the ICTY was “the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia ”84_.

81 J. N. Clark, “The three Rs: Retributive justice, Restorative Justice, and Reconciliation”, p 334.

82 The structure of this chapter follows closely the great work of J.N. Clark, in her article “The three Rs: Retributive justice, Restorative Justice, and Reconciliation”.

83 UNSC Report on the Establishment of the Commission of Experts (14th_{October 1992), UN Doc S/24657.}

(32)

The creation of the ICTY also represented a highly symbolic move from the International Community. The purpose was to deter any further violation of human rights and therefore, put an end to the ongoing conflict(s)85_{. However, in the light of the 1995 events in the Srebrenica and Žepa enclaves, it is safe to}

assume that, as a preventive measure, Resolution 827 failed to achieve its goal.

The mandate of the ICTY further states its contribution to the restoration and maintenance of peace and security. In fact, it did not broaden its mandate as to reconcile the parties, and remained rather vague as to how peace and security should be enforced86_.

Bring Justice to the Victims

For the sake of Reconciliation it is important that all parties involved see that justice is being done, however this is not how international criminal law functions. Justice is “shaped by a variety of factors, including personal experiences and group membership”, therefore, it is highly subjective and “has no uniform or universal meaning”87_{. As a result, in the case of BiH it is almost impossible to achieve}

because most of the Bosnian Serb population apprehends the ICTY as being unjust and partial. The acknowledgment by all sides of crimes committed seems to be the only viable way for the Serbs to recognize their culpability for the mass atrocities88_{. The Gotovina verdict, acquitting the Croatian}

generals responsible for the Operation Storm in the Krajina is the proof, according to Bosnian Serb and Serbian media, that the ICTY is a partial political institution directed against their ethnic group since it “delegitimized Serbian claim to victimhood at the hands of the Croats”89_{. This feeling of victimization}

can be further appreciated in interviews given by the Serbian President Tomislav Nikolić.

Nevertheless, the ICTY does not try people based on the individual's ethnicity but on if they broke the law or not. It does not make sense to look at trials with the prism of ethnic quotas. The fact that the ICTY has mostly sentenced individuals of Serb origins simply shows that Bosnian Serbs and Serbians were involved to a greater extent in war crimes. Although, it is important to note and acknowledge that Bosniaks and Bosnian Croats have also committed crimes in violation with the laws or customs of war, Bosnian Serbs conducted an act of genocide which the others did not.

85 United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. 2005. Press Release.

URL: http://www.icty.org/en/press/nine-accused-charged-jointly-crimes-committed-srebrenica-and-Žepa [Last Accessed 14 January 2017].

86 Jelena Subotić, “Perspectives for Transitional Justice Reconciliation” IN Regional Co-operation and Reconciliation in the Aftermath of the ICTY Verdicts: Continuation or Stalemate?, ed. E.M. Felberbauer, P. Jureković, (Regional Stability in South East Europe, Vienna, August 2013), p 25.

87 J. N. Clark, “The three Rs”, p 333.

88 Jelena Subotić, “Perspectives for Transitional Justice Reconciliation” p 20. 89 Ibid. p 21.

LIFE BEYOND HELL IN ŽEPA – A CASE STUDY ON THE EXERCISE OF TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE MECHANISMS IN POST-CONFLICT SOCIETIES