This year’s commemoration of the 29th anniversary of the alleged genocide against Bosnian-Herzegovinian Muslims at the Memorial Center in Potočari near Srebrenica will not differ from previous ones in terms of the established practices that make up the essence of the Potočari ritual, upon which political Bosniakism builds its vision of a unified Bosnia and Herzegovina.
MANIPULATION OF GLOBAL PROPORTIONS
To reach the mythical figure of over 8,000 allegedly killed captured Bosnian-Herzegovinian Muslims from the Srebrenica and Žepa enclaves in the summer of 1995, as cited in the judgments of the Hague Tribunal for the war military and political leaders of the Republic of Srpska, the remains of another 14 “identified genocide victims” will be “buried” in Potočari this year, alongside the existing 6,751. Thus, the Potočari burial ritual, as a key constitutive element of the new Bosniak identity and the political program of all Bosniak parties, will proceed according to the old agenda, regardless of the fact that the Bijeljina District Prosecutor’s Office recently launched an investigation due to serious manipulations with the identities of those listed as victims of the alleged Serbian genocide in the Potočari Memorial Center. According to the prosecutor’s findings, it is already known that 87 people buried in Potočari are alive according to the BiH Citizens’ Identity Protection System (CIPS) records, and that 816 people listed as victims in the Potočari Memorial Center cannot be found in the pre-war civil status records of SR BiH. If this list includes the names of those who died of natural causes, as well as numerous soldiers of the BiH Army who died in military actions from 1992 to 1995 in the Srebrenica enclave and throughout the former SR BiH, but were “buried” in Potočari, it becomes clear that the Srebrenica genocide myth, along with the Potočari Memorial Center, is a product of global manipulation.
FOREIGN DIRECTORS OF THE COLLECTIVE JANAZAH
The latest grounds for suspicion from the competent Bijeljina prosecutor’s office, as well as numerous previously published evidence of name and number manipulations, have not deterred domestic and foreign directors of the collective Potočari janazah. This year, the ceremony will be held with additional symbolism due to the UN General Assembly’s adoption of the Resolution on the Day of Remembrance for the Srebrenica Genocide in May this year. In anticipation of the day dedicated to the alleged Srebrenica genocide, the Memorial Center in Potočari, in cooperation with the Permanent Mission of BiH to the UN, opened an “exhibition on the genocide in Srebrenica” at the UN headquarters in New York. Moreover, Sarajevo’s “Oslobođenje” lists other countries where the Day of the so-called Srebrenica Genocide will be marked in various ways. In this context, the competent authorities of the Republic of Srpska and Serbia should compile a precise list of countries where the non-binding UN General Assembly Resolution on the Day dedicated to the so-called Srebrenica Genocide was marked after July 11, so that next year, counteractions can be taken in those countries to expose the false and manipulative nature of this Bosniak political and identity myth.

FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF CHRISTOPHER MITCHELL’S THEORY
The political function of the myth of the alleged genocide in Srebrenica can only be clearly understood if the Dayton Agreement, which ended the war in the former SR BiH and established Bosnia and Herzegovina as an independent state composed of two entities, is interpreted within the framework of the conflict resolution theory of the American conflictologist Christopher Mitchell. He distinguishes between the phase of conflict regulation (settled) and the phase of conflict resolution (resolved). In the year that the armed conflict in the former Yugoslav federal unit SR BiH was settled (1995), a series of global media manipulations, as well as still insufficiently clarified actions of individuals and groups on the ground (primarily the 10th Sabotage Detachment of the VRS), created one of the three instruments intended for the conflict resolution phase, as viewed from the interests of the Collective West.
RETURN TO THE SCENE OF THE CRIME
To resolve the conflict in BiH, besides the institutes provided by the Dayton Peace Agreement, the war crimes against Muslim prisoners that occurred under still insufficiently clarified circumstances in July 1995, when the Army of the Republic of Srpska took control of the Srebrenica enclave, were to be used according to the American plan. Since the perpetrator regularly returns to the scene of the crime, it is no coincidence that the main instigator of the crimes from 1995 – Bill Clinton, ceremoniously opened the Memorial Center in Potočari on September 20, 2003.
Accordingly, to stop or regulate (settle) the conflict in the former BiH, the USA first needed to reconcile the warring Muslim and Croat sides in BiH by concluding the Washington Agreement in March 1994, and then weaken the hitherto unchallenged position of the VRS through direct NATO air engagement on the side of Muslim and Croat armies in August and September 1995. Although the grim events in the Srebrenica enclave from July 1995, along with the staged incident at the Markale market in Sarajevo, served NATO as a justification for aggression on the Republic of Srpska, the Srebrenica event of July 1995 was primarily intended to serve the next phase of conflict resolution in BiH.
CROSSING OF TWO AMERICAN INTERESTS
The plan for resolving the conflict in BiH was crafted by crossing two key American interests in this area:
- Preventing the transformation of BiH into an Islamic state by expelling the majority of Orthodox and Roman Catholic populations.
- The elimination of cross-Drina Serbian statehood.
To achieve the first interest, the Dayton Peace Agreement was concluded in the conflict regulation (settled) phase, creating the Dayton BiH as a real union of two entities – the Republic of Srpska and the Federation of BiH. To achieve the second goal, the High Representative and the Constitutional Court of BiH (inappropriate for organizing the authority of a confederal real union like BiH under the original Dayton Constitution) were supposed to gradually derogate important constitutional competencies of the Republic of Srpska representing its statehood. In the same phase, the Srebrenica genocide myth was intended to serve as a means of pressure on post-war politicians in the Republic of Srpska to accept anti-Serbian and anti-Dayton ultimatums of the High Representative, and later to legitimize the Bosniak unitarist demand for the ultimate desovereignization and abolition of the Republic of Srpska.
THE MYTH BUILT INTO TRIBUNAL JUDGMENTS
To this end, the myth of the alleged genocide against Muslims in Srebrenica was embedded in the judgments of the Hague Tribunal in cases against some of the highest officers of the VRS, as well as against the wartime president of Srpska, Radovan Karadžić.
Through these Hague judgments, the myth of the alleged genocide in Srebrenica found its way into the latest UN General Assembly Resolution on the Day of Remembrance for the Srebrenica Genocide.
The fact that only the highest Serbian military and political leaders in BiH were accused and convicted of genocide, while some Croatian representatives and a few Muslim representatives were convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity, clearly shows that the Serbian side was disproportionately assigned greater legal responsibility compared to the other two sides involved in the civil war in BiH. Furthermore, the guilt for the alleged genocide in Srebrenica of the highest wartime political and military leaders of the Republic of Srpska – primarily Dr. Radovan Karadžić and General Ratko Mladić – was established through the application of the “joint criminal enterprise” (JCE) doctrine, which is built on the brutal violation of the principle of individual subjective responsibility. This means that the mentioned Hague Tribunal judgments, referred to in the UN General Assembly’s Resolution on the alleged genocide in Srebrenica, impose collective criminal responsibility solely on the Serbian people in BiH in the 21st century.
UNPROVEN CRIME
How the Hague Tribunal made the Serbian people in the Republic of Srpska collectively responsible for genocide is clearly evident from the following passage of the appellate judgment against General Krstić – which served as a precedent for later judgments for the alleged genocide in Srebrenica: “The Trial Chamber concluded – and the Appeals Chamber supports this conclusion – that the killing was organized and supervised by some members of the Main Staff of the Army of the Republic of Srpska (VRS). The fact that the Trial Chamber did not attribute genocidal intent to any specific official in the Main Staff of the Army of the Republic of Srpska does not undermine the conclusion that the Bosnian Serb forces committed genocide against Bosnian Muslims.”
Since the “Bosnian Serb forces,” i.e., the Army of the Republic of Srpska, were nothing other than an organization of an armed people, the unproven crime of genocide in the judgment against General Krstić was thus attributed to the entire Serbian people in the Republic of Srpska. Consequently, the argument that can often be heard in the Serbian public sphere, even from lawyers, that the Resolution on the alleged genocide in Srebrenica and the decisions of the Hague Tribunal on which it is based, stem from individual criminal responsibility, is incorrect and politically shortsighted (here).
POLITICAL NATION AS THE ONLY BEARER OF SOVEREIGNTY
The myth of the alleged genocide in Srebrenica, according to its Western creators, serves not only the ultimate desovereignization and abolition of the Republic of Srpska, within the framework of the official request of the European Union for Bosnia and Herzegovina to obtain a “functional” (unitary or regional – with ethnically faceless regions) arrangement during accession negotiations, but also the formation of a political nation as the sole bearer of sovereignty in a unified, reformed, and post-Dayton BiH. Namely, the Collective West, as in the first attempt to form a political nation in BiH under the regime of Benjamin Kallay, is doing so by privileging Muslims and adopting their autochthonist and unitarist political ideals while simultaneously destroying the special Serbian national and state consciousness in BiH. Consequently, the adoption of the myth of the alleged genocide in Srebrenica by Serbian political leaders would serve today as irrefutable evidence of a public renunciation of the right to Serbian statehood in the territory of BiH and acceptance of a unified Bosnian-Herzegovinian political nation.
DIVIDE AND RULE MAXIM
Without reducing the Serbs, under the mortgage of genocide, to the status of “raja” in the Euro-unionist “functional” BiH, which implies the loss of collective political rights of the Serbian people, it is not possible to form a unified Bosnian-Herzegovinian nation. Therefore, from the perspective of those who designed the genocide myth in Srebrenica, the ultimate desovereignization of the Republic of Srpska, under the accusation of genocide, and the transformation of the Serbian people into a raja, are inseparable goals. The myth of the Srebrenica genocide serves the Collective West another purpose. Following the old Roman ruling maxim “divide and rule,” Austria-Hungary, by privileging Muslims in the process of creating a unified Bosnian nation, succeeded in preventing political cooperation between the then Serbian and Muslim political leaders, thus preserving the stability of its colonial order in BiH.
WESTERN COLONIAL ORDER
When the West today assigns the role of victims of the alleged Serbian genocide to Muslims using the Srebrenica myth, it is actually doing so to preserve its colonial order in BiH, because the future of that order directly depends on the cooperation of the Republic of Srpska and the Federation of BiH, which is impossible as long as the Srebrenica myth is the foundation of the Federation of BiH’s policy. Accordingly, the abuse of Muslim victims from July 1995, as well as the silence about numerous Serbian war victims from Central Podrinje, to create the myth of genocide against Muslims in Srebrenica, serves the same colonial policy in the name of which Alija Izetbegović in 1992 stood against his Orthodox Serbian neighbors, and on the side of the greatest contemporary global exterminator of Islam – the USA.
Thus, the Memorial Center in Potočari is nothing more than a cult place of the colonial nature of contemporary Bosniak politics. At the same time, the leaders of such politics among Bosnian-Herzegovinian Muslims fail to see that they themselves will be the demise of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as the collaborationist policy of the Sarajevo bazaar towards the foreign protector is today unacceptable to the Serbs in Srpska for the same reasons their ancestors found Kallay’s and Hitler’s occupation regimes unacceptable.