Negative Consequences Of The Balkan War

As was previously mentioned, the Balkan War reflects one way of historicizing mass murder. The Bosnian Serb soldiers and militiamen commenced a campaign of compiling lists of leading Muslim and Croat intellectuals, musicians, and professionals summarily executing them led by President Slobodan Milosevic and General Ratko Mladic from 1992- 1995. The system of control extended beyond inflicting bodily harm and encompassed systems intended to restrict the life and movement of non- Serb civilians. The rules were: prohibition on Non- Serbs from meeting in cafes, restaurants or other public places, bathing in rivers, hunting or fishing, and more. The punishment for those offenses was assault, kidnapping or death. The United States, Europe, and United Nations didn’t intervene as 200,000 Bosnians were killed, even though “many felt it was a war that arrived virtually on schedule” (Samantha Power) meaning that there wasn’t an absence of information about the atrocities. There wasn’t a shortage of information on the …show more content…
The intervention could do more harm than good by resulting in retaliation on against Muslims or European peacekeepers, or endanger the delivery of humanitarian aid. The third is that the ancient hatred and specific land of the region would bring about a Vietnam like military intervention that would put U.S soldiers in jeopardy. In truth, there wasn’t a way of knowing that either of those were true, but they didn’t need to be true in order to serve a purpose. This justification has both similarities and differences with another case study, the Rwandan genocide, where the colonial history wasn’t emphasized. Instead, the West paid attention to the modern history of the Hutu massacre to separate the West, or formerly colonizing nations, from responsibility over the current situation and also prevented involvement on the basis that there weren’t direct interests at