Covic's denying Srebrenica and Vukovar

By: Edina Latif

Considering the politics of the Republika Srpska political parties, it is quite understandable (but not justifed) that the Chairman of BiH Presidency, Mladen Ivanic, has fiercely opposed BiH filing a request for revision of the lawsuit against Serbia.

Perhaps even more enthusiastic than Serbia's president, Tomislav Nikolic and the prime minister, Aleksandar Vucic, Ivanic is offering himself to the politics of this neighboring country, even though he is this country's chief. He gets his good salary here, and works for Belgrade. And that is not the first time.

But, what about the BiH presidency member, Dragan Covic?

How can he explain his urge to communicate that the revision of the genocide lawsuit is not necessary, even though he is aware that the worst crime was also committed over his people that were exterminated and killed for sake of creating of Republika Srpska.

The crime was also committed over his people in the neighboring country that he holds a passport of.

Just recently, after a meeting with his political and business partner, President of RS, Milorad Dodik, Covic concluded that nobody needed to act relative to the verdict, as that could damage BiH and its relations with its neighbors.

That would pull us backwards, Covic said adding that would cause a 'total collapse' in BH government.

In politics, to be pragmatic and ready to compromise are desirable virtues.

However, there are some political issues that do not allow room for any compromise. One of such issues is the revision of BH lawsuit against Serbia for genocide, which has persistently tried to be portrayed as a conflict between two peoples (Bosniaks and Serbs), instead of what it was – the dispute between two states.  

Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which was in 1993 already international recognized and independent state, filed charges against Milosevic's regime for genocide.

Today, 24 years later, BiH is not going to file request for revision of the lawsuit against Serbia and its government.

The revision relates to Milosevic's regime and Serbia that, as confirmed by numerous verdicts of the Hague court as well as local courts, committed war of aggression on BiH, and genocide in Srebrenica.

The evidence surfaced during Momcilo Perisic's trial. Belgrade requested that parts of the documents be concealed and banned from use.

By his opposing to the lawsuit revision, Dragan Covic is openly denying not only Srebrenica genocide but also Vukovar!

The genocide in Srebrenica was committed under the patronage and order of the same regime that committed the genocide in Vukovar in the neighboring Croatia.

The crimes in Vukovar were ominous indication of what would be happening during the next four years in neighboring Croatia and in BiH.

After the World War II, Europe promised that another genocide would never happen again on its ground. We paid for those failed promises in blood.

When Europe asks local politicians to turn to the future, when Europe tries to facilitate the reconciliation process, it should never, not for a moment, forget Vukovar and Srebrenica.

Europe also refers to the western cooperation after the World War II, knowing very well that the reconciliation did not happen merely by oblivion or relativization of crimes. Memory is the best prevention of future crimes.

That's why in many European countries children are taken to war museums, they take them even to trenches where battles were fought, they learn about soldiers, and horrors of war.

So who has moral rights to lecture Bosnia and Herzegovina about reconciliation and coexistence, and at the same time, to violate its right to the truth about aggression and genocide?

What would Croatian Prime Minister, Andrej Plenkovic, tell Covic about his anti-revision attitude?

Yes, the same Plenkovic, president of Croatian HDZ, who avails of every single opportunity to speak in public about Milosevic's 'grand Serbia' aggression as the tragedy that happened in Croatia and BiH.

And what would Vukovar survivors have to tell Covic about his statements?