The funeral of Ratko Mladic reopened one of the most painful pages in the history of the Balkans. A man sentenced by the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals to life imprisonment for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes was sent to Serbia with military honors, national flags and chants, which turned him into a hero for part of society. Aleksandar Vucic's behavior was particularly controversial. In 2015, the Serbian president went to Srebrenica and laid a wreath at the memorial to the victims, and now state representatives attended the worship in front of Mladic. About Serbia, Serbian nationalism, the memory of the wars in the former Yugoslavia and the double standards of political power… Velizar Enchev, Ambassador of Bulgaria to the Republic of Croatia (1997-2002), university lecturer, doctor of international law and international relations, speaks to FAKTİ.
- Mr. Enchev, you were a war correspondent in Yugoslavia and witnessed the siege of Sarajevo by Ratko Mladić's forces. What did you feel when you saw the man whom The Hague convicted of genocide and war crimes, being sent away with military honors and applause as a national hero?
- For a person who was in Sarajevo during the war, this cannot be just news. I do not know the siege of Sarajevo from the TV screen. I was there. I have seen with my own eyes how a European city turns into a battlefield, how civilians live under fire and how nationalism, when it becomes a state doctrine, begins to kill.
That is why for me the most disturbing image from Mladić's funeral is not the coffin itself. It is the people around him, the flags, the military ceremony, the applause and chants and his deification by the Serbian people.
Ratko Mladić is not a “controversial historical figure“. The international tribunal gave him a life sentence for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. And when such a person is sent away with a state funeral, with military honors, it is a shameful stain on the Serbian state.
– How should we interpret Aleksandar Vučić's behavior – in 2015 he laid a wreath in Srebrenica at the memory of the victims, and now the state has provided him with a plane to return Mladic's remains, with government officials participating in the funeral? Is this political cynicism or carefully calculated policy?
- This is the hypocritical policy of two faces - one for the world, the other - for the Serbs. In 2015, Vučić did go to Srebrenica and bowed before the memorial to the victims, thereby acknowledging Serbian guilt for the execution of 8,000 captured Bosnian men and boys.
In 1970, German Chancellor Willy Brandt knelt before the monument in the Jewish ghetto in Warsaw. It was a dramatic gesture of repentance. In 2015, the Serbian Prime Minister tacitly admitted the guilt of General Mladic, but unlike Willy Brandt, he did not repent or ask for forgiveness for the crime in Srebrenica. And this tragedy was the first genocide in Europe since the end of World War II, and Mladic was the man who ordered the brutal execution.
– Is it possible that Vucic is doing this because of the upcoming elections, so as not to confront Serbian society, which continues to perceive Mladic as a hero?
- That is precisely the problem. Vucic wants to win over both Brussels and Washington, as well as Serbian society. He knows that Mladic is a hero for a large part of Serbian society. But he fears that his open glorification has a high international price.
That is why we see a refusal to personally attend the funeral, but not a confrontation with the Mladic symbol. This shows how deeply the war of the 1990s has penetrated the national memory of Serbia. The question is no longer just about a general convicted of genocide. The question is how a country tells its own past and how its people honor people of whom it should be ashamed.
– To what extent does the state's participation in sending Mladić off with a military ceremony constitute rehabilitation of a man convicted by an international tribunal for genocide and war crimes?
- Legally, this is not rehabilitation. The verdict of the International Court of Justice has not been overturned. But the political and symbolic effect is different.
When the military pays tribute, when the national flag covers the coffin, when military music accompanies the ceremony and when representatives of the authorities are present, society receives a certain message. And this message can be read as follows: “He is our general, regardless of the sentence...“
Here is the dangerous line. The state can respect the dead as a human being and allow his family to bury him with dignity. But it should not turn this human right into the glorification and exoneration of a mass murderer.
– What does the fact that thousands chanted Mladic's name and state representatives stood by them say about Serbia?
- It says that the state of Yugoslavia disappeared, but its ethnic and political heritage lives on. In Serbia, there is a public environment in which Mladic is perceived not as a perpetrator of crimes, but as a defender of the Serbian people. This is very different from historical understanding.
And when a person convicted of genocide is turned into a national hero, it means that society places national belonging above the universal assessment of the crime. This is a lesson that the Balkans have learned in the most cruel way possible.
– For years you have been talking about Serbian nationalism as one of the major problems in the Balkans. Does the “Mladic“ case show that this nationalism is not a thing of the past, but continues to influence politics and society in Serbia?
- Since 1987, as an undercover intelligence officer in Yugoslavia, I have closely followed the rise of Serbian nationalism and the development of the Serbian communist leader Slobodan Milosevic. After 1997, when Milosevic was still in power in Belgrade, I was the Bulgarian ambassador to Croatia.
And from these two positions, which allowed me to observe the processes from the inside, I always say the same thing: the problem is Serbian state nationalism, claiming that a state has the right to determine the fate of other peoples.
At the same time, we must be fair: Serbian nationalism is not the only cause of the tragedy of Yugoslavia. The collapse of the federation was the result of the interaction of many factors - political, economic, ethnic and international. But this does not change the fact that the Greater Serbian project played a leading role in the Yugoslav tragedy.
And when the satrap Mladić is sent away as a national hero, it becomes clear that this ideology has not disappeared. The Balkans have an old problem: each generation inherits the memory of the previous one. If the states do not turn this memory into historical understanding, but into national mythology, the old conflicts will be reproduced.
– For years you have been talking not only about Serbian nationalism, but also about its legacy in Macedonia. What is the connection between today's Skopje and the political doctrine in Belgrade? Can it be said that Macedonianism is a continuation of Greater Serbian policy by other means?
- This historical connection is obvious and Bulgaria avoided naming it for too long. For years I have been talking about the role of Serbian state policy and the role of historical figures such as Ilija Garašanin (1812-1874) and Stojan Novaković (1842-1915) in the creation of the Macedonian doctrine aimed at separating the Bulgarian population in Macedonia from its Bulgarian identity.
After World War II, this policy of monarchical Yugoslavia received a state and institutional form in communist Yugoslavia.
Today's Macedonian Prime Minister Mickoski did not create Macedonianism. He inherited it. Macedonianism has long been an independent ideology, but its roots are in Belgrade - from the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
And here is the direct connection with Serbian nationalism, when we talk about the "Mladić" case. In Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia, Slobodan Milosevic's Greater Serbia project sought to achieve its goals through force.
In Macedonia, the tool is different - replacing identity and historical memory.
That is why I do not accept the thesis that what is happening in Skopje today has nothing to do with Belgrade in the past. When a state turns history into a tool for building an artificial nation, such as the Macedonian one, it also creates a historical enemy. In Serbia, this mechanism produced its "heroes" such as General Mladic. In Macedonia, the Macedonianism born by the Serbs produced its own “Bulgarian enemy“.
Therefore, if we want to understand why Macedonianism still has such a strong anti-Bulgarian charge today, we must know its origin.
--------------------
In the period 1991-1993, Velizar Enchev was a war correspondent for BNT and "Otechestven Vestnik" in Yugoslavia and a witness to the bloody siege of Sarajevo by the Serbian units of Gen. Ratko Mladić and Radovan Karadžić.