Transitional Justice in Serbia: The Impact on Facing the Past

Contents

1. Introduction

2. Research Design

3. The State Policy of Dealing with the Past

3.1 A Fake Attempt at Dealing with the Past: The Yugoslav TRC

3.2 The 'Declaration Condemning the Crime in Srebrenica' (March 2010)

4. 'RECOM' – The Initiative for a Transnational Post-Yugoslav TRC

4.1 Transitional Justice and 'The Region'

4.2 On the Production of Victims

5. Concluding Remarks

Research Objectives & Key Themes

This thesis examines the impact of Europeanisation and transitional justice mechanisms on the Republic of Serbia's policy of dealing with its violent past. It explores how international pressure for compliance has shaped domestic narratives, often leading to strategic or "fake" adoption of reconciliation measures rather than genuine reckoning.

• The interplay between European Union enlargement policy and Serbian transitional justice.
• The effectiveness and underlying motivations of the Yugoslav Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
• The political significance and limitations of the 2010 Srebrenica Declaration.
• The role of civil society initiatives, specifically the RECOM project, in transnational truth-seeking.
• The prevalence of denial, relativisation, and selective remembrance in Serbian post-war discourse.

Excerpt from the Book

Summary of Chapters

1. Introduction: This chapter contextualizes the global shift toward transitional justice and introduces the specific case of the post-Yugoslav states and the role of the EU as a "surrogate enforcer."

2. Research Design: This section justifies the use of a qualitative case study approach to analyze Serbia's responses to transitional justice pressures from 2000 to 2011.

3. The State Policy of Dealing with the Past: This chapter analyzes state-led reconciliation efforts, focusing on the failure of the Yugoslav Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the strategic adoption of the 2010 Srebrenica Declaration.

4. 'RECOM' – The Initiative for a Transnational Post-Yugoslav TRC: This chapter examines the discourse and methodology of non-governmental human rights organizations advocating for a regional truth commission.

5. Concluding Remarks: The final chapter synthesizes findings, arguing that EU-driven symbolic compliance has not succeeded in fully suppressing nationalistic historical narratives.

Keywords

Transitional Justice, Serbia, Europeanisation, Srebrenica Declaration, RECOM, Yugoslav Truth and Reconciliation Commission, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Human Rights, Genocide, Reconciliation, Collective Memory, Nationalist Discourse, Compliance, Post-Yugoslav States, War Crimes

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core focus of this research?

The work investigates how the Republic of Serbia has managed the politics of dealing with its violent past since 2000, specifically under the influence of Europeanisation and international conditionality.

What are the central thematic fields addressed?

The main themes include state-level institutional responses, NGO-led transnational initiatives, the impact of international court verdicts, and the prevalence of historical revisionism.

What is the primary research goal?

The goal is to determine whether transitional justice measures implemented in Serbia represent genuine efforts toward reconciliation or are merely strategic tools to improve relations with the European Union.

Which methodology is employed?

The author uses a qualitative case study approach, incorporating document analysis and semi-structured interviews with representatives of human rights organizations.

What does the main body cover?

The main body examines the Yugoslav Truth and Reconciliation Commission (2001–2003), the Srebrenica Declaration (2010), and the regional civil society initiative known as RECOM.

Which keywords characterize the work?

Key terms include Transitional Justice, Europeanisation, Serbian historical memory, Srebrenica, RECOM, and the instrumentalisation of human rights policies.

How does the author define the "compromise justice" concept in the Serbian context?

It describes the government's strategy of adopting weak, domestically acceptable institutions to signal a commitment to human rights while simultaneously delaying or obstructing extraditions to the ICTY.

Why does the author argue that the RECOM initiative faces potential failure?

The author suggests that the reliance on a "neutral" or "inductive" methodology may lead to the unintended consequence of relativising crimes, as it struggles to harmonize competing nationalist narratives across the post-Yugoslav space.