Historijski pogledi
Latest Publications


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

112
(FIVE YEARS 112)

H-INDEX

0
(FIVE YEARS 0)

Published By Centar Za Istrazivanje Moderne I Savremene Historije Tuzla

2637-1502, 2712-0651
Updated Tuesday, 08 June 2021

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 318-323
Author(s):  
Izet Šabotić ◽  

Review: Asmir Crnkić, Mirza Ahmetbašić, Bosanska Krupa u vrijeme austrougarske uprave, JU Arhiv Unsko-sanskog kantona Bihać, Bihać 2020, 246 str.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 235-257
Author(s):  
Meldijana Arnaut Haseljić ◽  

The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia has filed an Indictment (originally July 25, 1995, and an operational Indictment on October 19, 2009) against Radovan Karadzic, the former President of Republika Srpska and Commander-in-Chief of the Army of Republika Srpska. After many years of hiding in Serbia, Karadzic was arrested on July 21, 2008, and transferred to the ICTY on July 30 of that year. The trial began on 26 October 2009. Radovan Karadzic is charged for genocide (Counts 1 and 2); crimes against humanity: persecution (count 3), extermination (count 4), murder (count 5), deportation (count 7), inhumane acts - forcible transfer (count 8); and violations of the laws or customs of war: murder (count 6), terrorism (count 9), unlawful attacks on civilians (count 10), hostage-taking (count 11). Radovan Karadzic has been charged with individual criminal responsibility in accordance with Rule 7 (1) of the Statute of the International Tribunal through his participation in several joint criminal enterprises (JCEs). According to the Indictment, no later than October 1991 to November 30, 1995, Karadzic participated in a JCE aimed at the permanent removal of Bosniaks and Croats from certain areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina; from April 1992 to November 1995, he participated in the JCE to launch and conduct a campaign of sniping and shelling of the civilian population of Sarajevo, aimed at spreading terror among the civilian population; from July 1995 until 1 November 1995, he participated in the JCE of the elimination of Bosniaks in Srebrenica, by killing men and boys, as well as forcibly expelling women, children and the elderly from the area; and for participated in the JCE of taking members of the United Nations hostage during May and June 1995. Pursuant to Article 7 (3) of the Statute, the Indictment charges him with superior responsibility because he knew or had reason to know that forces under his effective control were being prepared to commit crimes or have already committed them, and has not taken measures to prevent the commission of crimes or to punish the perpetrators of those crimes. On June 11, 2012, Karadzic filed a motion for acquittal on all counts of the Indictment. Pursuant to Rule 98bis, on 28 June 2012, the Trial Chamber rendered a Decision dismissing the motion for acquittal on ten counts of the Indictment, but acquitted Count 1 of the Indictment relating to genocide committed in certain municipalities of Bosnia and Herzegovina: Bratunac, Foca, Kljuc, Prijedor, Sanski Most, Vlasenica and Zvornik. This count of the Indictment alleges that Karadzic is responsible for the genocide as a superior, and that in agreement with others he committed, planned, instigated, ordered and/or aided and abetted the genocide. Following the Prosecution's appeal against the decision to exclude Count 1 from the Indictment, on 11 July 2013 the Appeals Chamber quashed the Trial Chamber's decision and returned Count 1 of the Indictment charging Karadzic with genocide in the said municipalities, and the proceedings continued before the Trial Chamber. The Trial Chamber's verdict against Radovan Karadzic was handed down on March 24, 2016, sentencing him to 40 years in prison for genocide, crimes against humanity, and violations of the laws or customs of war. In 6,073 paragraphs is explained the role of the RS Army, as well as police structures, territorial defense, and regional and municipal authorities and other participants in joint criminal enterprises. The forms and methods of committing crimes committed in the municipalities of Bijeljina, Bratunac, Brčko, Foča, Rogatica, Sokolac, Višegrad, Vlasenica and Zvornik in eastern Bosnia are described; Banja Luka, Bosanski Novi, Ključ, Prijedor and Sanski Most in the Autonomous Region of Krajina (“ARK”); Hadžići, Ilidža, Novi Grad, Novo Sarajevo, Pale and Vogošća in the area of Sarajevo, and precise ways of carrying out a comprehensive joint criminal enterprise, but also joint criminal enterprises related to Srebrenica (genocide), Sarajevo (terrorizing citizens with sniper fire and shelling), and hostage-taking (UNPROFOR international peacekeepers). The first-instance verdict found Karadzic guilty of 10 of the 11 counts in the indictment. Both the Prosecution and the Defense for the Accused appealed the Trial Chamber's judgment, and the second-instance proceedings continued. On March 20, 2019, the Appeals Chamber issued a final verdict sentencing Radovan Karadžić to life imprisonment. The verdict found him guilty of persecution from a territory that Bosnian Serbs considered to be claiming the right, sniping and shelling of Sarajevo, taking UNPROFOR members hostage and genocide in Srebrenica. Both Trial and Appeals Chambers acquitted Karadzic of genocide committed in seven Bosnian municipalities (Bratunac, Foca, Kljuc, Prijedor, Sanski Most, Vlasenica and Zvornik) committed in 1992.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 333-338
Author(s):  
Jasmin Jajčević ◽  
Keyword(s):  

Conference Report: Izvještaj sa Naučne manifestacije „Historijski pogledi 3“, Tuzla, 19. novembar 2020. godine


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 146-162
Author(s):  
Sead Bandžović ◽  

With the overthrow of the regime of Reza Pahlavi in 1979, the Iranian revolution ended the existence of the 2,500-year-old Persian Empire and built the Islamic Republic of Iran on its foundations. The revolution was the product of three independent social structures that merged at one point. One was the structure of constitutionalism that grew out of a century-long struggle for democracy supported by modernists; the second was Islamism as a movement to set Sharia law as the primary law supported by rural elements in society in response to Western urban elites and accepted by merchants; and the third is the nationalist structure, driven by rage fueled by Iran's long subordination to European powers. The basic principle of the Islamic Republic of Iran, proclaimed by the new constitution from 1979, is the positioning of God as the supreme bearer of people's sovereignty and people who are only marginal representatives of his power on Earth. Ayatollah Homenini, the supreme leader of the Islamic Revolution and the Iranian state, in this regard created a thesis about the Islamic State as a political representation, created on the basis of the people's will, in order to enforce God's laws. In practice, such system meant setting up Sharia (religious) laws as the only source of law in regulating social, legal and other relations within the community. A dichotomy has been created in the management of the state, so there are two groups of authorities. The first, the conciliar, consists of the Supreme leader, the Council of Guardians (Shora-ye Negahban-e Qanun-e assassi), the Council of Experts (Majles-e Khobragan Rahbari) and the Judgment Council. The task of these councils is to oversee the activities of all levels of government in order to preserve the unity, sovereignty and integrity of the Iranian political system. The conciliar government supervises and advises the republican part of the government, ie. its legislative, executive and judicial aspects. In addition to conciliar government, there is a republican government that creates laws and political decisions in accordance with religious teachings and under the supervision of theocratic political institutions. All laws and court decisions must be based on the principles of the Qur'an, and their proper interpretation requires an understanding of religious principles. On the basis of the constitution, a special High Judicial Council was established, which amended the pre-revolutionary laws (criminal, commercial, civil and procedural), thus creating the so-called “Transitional law”. The biggest changes affected the area of criminal law, where the principle of talion revenge was introduced (“an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”) and the strict punishment of extramarital relations and same-sex relationships. In the domain of marital and family law, a man is given a number of rights, thus putting the woman, as a marital partner, in a more unequal position. Husbands were facilitated in divorce, temporary marriages with more than one woman were allowed, while on the other hand women were allowed the right to divorce only if it was explicitly allowed by her husband during the marriage. The revolution also introduced new sources in the regulation of legal relations. Thus, by an order of the Supreme Judicial Council of 23 August 1982, judges were ordered to use direct authoritative Islamic texts or sources on which to base their judgments in resolving disputes. Judges are required by this Order to address the Council of Guardians of the Constitution if they cannot determine with certainty whether a regulation is in accordance with Sharia law or not. If the judge does not know which law to apply, he must contact the Office of Ayatollah Khomeini for further instructions. In addition to the internal one, the revolution caused radical changes in the foreign policy field, positioning Iran as an important participant in numerous international processes at the regional and global level.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 7-50
Author(s):  
Safet Bandžović ◽  

Knowledge of world / European history is important for a more complete understanding of complex processes, for comparisons and placing national and regional history in a broader context that provides more meaningful answers. What determines the course of history is sometimes “a series of smaller events in the midst of the context of big ideas”. The borders of the region are determined by geographical, cultural and geopolitical characteristics, as well as the political interests of those builders whose interpretation has dominance. In expanding or narrowing the territory of the Balkans, politics was usually more decisive than geography. Historical events in that area should be presented from the positions of all its peoples, including Muslim communities. Their narratives also form a legitimate part of the picture of that past. Muslims were not the “favorites” of multiple Balkan historiographies that minimized and marginalized their component, functioning as factors shaping their own national and political ideologies. Historiography does not only deal with the reconstruction of the past, but, with all the difficulties and pitfalls, it also interprets it. A fragmentary study of the destinies of Muslim communities hinders the identification of the broader processes and common denominators of their parcelized history. The processes of de-Ottomanization and Balkanization also led to their particular consciousness within the newly formed, post-Ottoman states. Their historical experience is largely not “condensed, preserved, and generationally transmitted”. The attitude that Muslims are “foreigners” in Europe is part of the mentality and process known as the “Eastern Question”. Minds are not too prone to change. Calling all Muslims “Turks” is not the result of ignorance, but of a concrete attitude. It was not until the Berlin Congress of 1878 that the question of their protection became somewhat relevant. The system of such protection was inadequate, without supervisory mechanisms to control the implementation of commitments. Major political changes most often brought about religious and ethnic changes and displacements in the Balkans. In the study of the decades-long process of formation of the Serbian state in the 19th century in the area of the Smederevo Sandzak and the emigration of Muslims from it, special attention is paid to the fate of two small settlements (Mali Zvornik and Sakar) on the right bank of the Drina. After the surrender of the towns to the Serbs in 1862, only Mali Zvornik and Sakar remained in the hands of the Muslims. The origin of the settlement of Mali Zvornik is connected to the existence of the Zvornik fortress and the town of Zvornik on the left bank of the Drina, which was first mentioned in 1412. Mali Zvornik grew on the right bank of the Drina as part of the town of Zvornik. In the first half of the 18th century, travel writers mention that Mala or Mahala of the Bosnian town of Zvornik, whose inhabitants were called Maholjani, was located there. South of Mali Zvornik lies village of Sakar. In the 19th century, in Mali Zvornik and Sakar, on the border with the Smederevo Sandzak, Muslims made up the majority of the population. As only the Drina separated them from the settlements of Divič and Tabaci on its other side, the inhabitants of these settlements were firmly connected by kinship, friendship and marriage, and they were economically oriented towards each other. The Principality of Serbia was persistent in its demands to get Mali Zvornik and Sakar, having in mind their geostrategic position. By the decision of the Berlin Congress in 1878, they became part of Serbia. Until 1912, these were the only settlements in it with a majority Muslim population. They lost that majority over time. What is conditionally called “local” history, in addition to great narratives, indicates, confirmed by various experiences, the multidimensionality of the past, its features and specifics in a particular area.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 188-216
Author(s):  
Sead Selimović ◽  

Before the aggression, Bosniaks, Serbs, Croats, Yugoslavs and Others lived together in Vlasenica. According to the 1991 census, there were 33,942 inhabitants in Vlasenica: 18,727 Bosniaks (55.17%), 14,359 Serbs (42.30%), 39 Croats (0.11%), 340 Yugoslavs (1.00%) and 477 Others (1.24%). At the same time, in the town of Vlasenica lived 7,909 inhabitants: 4,800 Bosniaks (60.69%), 2,743 Serbs (34.68), 26 Croats (0.33%), 242 Yugoslavs (3.06%) and 98 Others. 1.24%). The population of the Municipality lived in the town of Vlasenica and 90 other settlements. Vlasenica, as a strategically important city in the plans and goals of the aggressors, has been the target of attacks since 1991. Aggression and war crimes against Bosniaks were planned, prepared and organized against this Bosnian town. Camps for Bosniaks were organized in Vlasenica, civilians were killed and then “buried” in mass graves, mass and systematic rapes and other forms of sexual violence were committed, the Bosniak elite was targeted and persecuted, civilians were expelled and deported en masse, and cultural goods and property and demolished religious buildings. After the war, he began returning to Vlasenica. However, this area has long been an area of precarious living for Bosniak returnees. Thus, on July 11, 2001, a 16-year-old girl, Meliha Durić, was killed in Vlasenica. This crime has not been solved. In the Bosnian entity of RS, the Bosnian language is denied. Teaching in the Bosnian language is prohibited, and the language is called the non-existent Bosniak language. This discriminates against students who want their language to be called Bosnian. The situation with employment in public administration is not good. Returnees are mainly engaged in agriculture and animal husbandry, but there is a problem with the placement of surplus products. In 2013, a census was conducted in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It was the first census after the war and aggression. In the municipality of Vlasenica, a significant part of which belonged to the municipality of Milici, there were 11,467 inhabitants: 3,763 Bosniaks, 7,589 Serbs, 31 Croats, 22 persons who did not declare their ethnicity, 15 Others, 14 without answers. The town of Vlasenica had 6,715 inhabitants, which is 1,194 fewer than in 1991. There were 967 or 3,633 fewer Bosniaks than in 1991. There were 5,679 or 2,936 more Serbs than in 1991. The municipality of Vlasenica had, in the total population, 33.82% Bosniaks, which is 21.35% less than in 1991, and 66.18% Serbs, which is 23.88% more than in 1991. In the town of Vlasenica, there were 14.40% Bosniaks and 84.50% Serbs in the total population. There were 46.29% less Bosniaks and 49.89% more Serbs. The population of Vlasenica lived in 36 settlements of the municipality, which is 55 settlements less than in 1991. The causes of such changes in the ethnic structure of the population of Vlasenica can be traced to the aggression against the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, ethnic cleansing and genocide against Bosniaks. Certainly, other causes of the decrease in the number of Bosniaks in Vlasenica should not be neglected, such as the security situation, economic situation, education, road and other infrastructure, etc. The formation of the municipality of Milići significantly affected the reduction of the population of Vlasenica. Milići has 11,441 inhabitants: Serbs 7,180 or 62.76%, Bosniaks 4,199 or 36.70% of the total population. The population of Milić lives in 51 settlements.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 313-317
Author(s):  
Sead Selimović ◽  

Review: Filip Škiljan, Sjećanja Bošnjaka na sudjelovanje u Domovinskom ratu u Hrvatskoj, Vijeće bošnjačke nacionalne manjine Grada Zagreba, Zagreb 2020, 328 str.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 289-304
Author(s):  
Lamija Hatibović ◽  
◽  
Amer Maslo ◽  

This article presents papers on the history of Bosnia and Herzegovina published in the most prestigious historiographical journals in the Republic of Turkey in the period from 2010 to 2020. The first part of the paper explains the criteria for which the authors decided on the journals Belleten, Tarih Dergisi, Osmanlı Araştırmaları, Tarih İncelemeleri Dergisi, Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi - OTAM. Special attention is given to the works of Bosnian authors published in these journals. In the period from 2010 to 2020, six Bosnian authors published their works in these publications. Two papers were published by Kerima Filan (papers published in Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi - OTAM and Osmanlı Araştırmaları), while one paper was published by Hatidža Čar-Drnda (in Belleten journal) and Adnan Ararić (in Tarr journal Osmanş Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi - OTAM), Sabaheta Gačanin (in Tarih İncelemeleri Dergisi), Fahd Kasumović (in Belleten jounal) and Aladin Husić (in Belleten journal). Attention is also paid to the works of foreign authors in which the research focus is on Bosnia and Herzegovina. Six papers published in the Bulletin are presented in more detail, by Zafer Gölen, Hüsnü Demircan, Uğur Ünal, Tufan Turan, then two papers published in Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi - OTAM, by Ayşa Zişan Furat and Kurana published in Osmanlı Araştırmaları by Fatma Sel Turhan. Compared to Bosnian authors, Turkish historians of the Ottoman period have a greater interest in studying the history of Bosnia and Herzegovina in the 19th century, so most of the presented works deal with the events of that century. The authors pointed out the importance, but also certain shortcomings, of the works of Turkish historians. The last part of the paper is dedicated to the analysis of citations of Bosnian authors in the analyzed journals and papers. Papers in Turkish and other researchers rarely cite papers in South Slavic languages, while a large number of cited papers are by Bosnian authors who have published their papers in Turkish or English. Among the cited authors we find, among others, Ahmed Aličić, Hamdija Kreševljaković, Hatidža Čar-Drnd, Smail Čekić, Fikret Karčić, Avdo Sućeska, Nedim Filipović and Hazim Šabanović. The paper also mentions In Memoriam on the occasion of the death of Ahmed Aličić, published in the 37th issue of the journal Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi (OTAM), and several reviews of books prepared or written by Bosnian authors. A selective bibliography of papers, divided into two parts, was offered as a contribution to the paper. The first part lists the works that relate in whole or in part to the past of Bosnia and Herzegovina. These are 15 works by authors from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Turkey and Croatia, and one In Memoriam, which is written in more detail in the main part of the text. The second part of the selective bibliography lists 24 works whose content is partly related to the history of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Among the authors of these works are world-renowned historians such as Linda T. Darling and Feridun Emecena, but also authors from neighboring countries Dragana Amedoski and Marijan Premović.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 258-288
Author(s):  
Adib Đozić ◽  

The relationship between identity and national consciousness is one of the important issues, not only, of the sociology of identity but of the overall opinion of the social sciences. This scientific question has been insufficiently researched in the sociological thought of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and with this paper we are trying to actualize it. Aware of theoretical-methodological and conceptual-logical difficulties related to the research problem, we considered that in the first part of the paper we make some theoretical-methodological notes on the problems in studying this phenomenon, in order to, above all, eliminate conceptual-logical dilemmas. The use of terms and their meaning in sociology and other social sciences is a very important theoretical and methodological issue. The question justifiably arises whether we can adequately name and explain some of the “character traits” of the contemporary national identity of the Bosniak nation that we want to talk about in this paper with classical, generally accepted terms, identity, consciousness, self-awareness, shame or shame, self-shame. Another important theoretical issue of the relationship between identity and consciousness in our case, the relationship between the national consciousness of Bosniaks and their overall socio-historical identity is the dialectical relationship between individual and collective consciousness, ie. the extent to which the national consciousness of an individual or a particular national group, political, cultural, educational, age, etc., is contrary to generally accepted national values and norms. One of the important factors of national consciousness is the culture of remembrance. What does it look like for Bosniaks? More specifically, in this paper we problematize the influence of “prejudicial historiography” on the development of the culture of memory in the direction of oblivion or memory. What to remember, and why to remember. Memory is part of our identity. The phrase, not to deal with the past but to turn to the future, is impossible. How to project the future and not analyze the past. On the basis of what, what social facts? Why the world remembers the crimes of the Nazis, why the memory of the Holocaust and the suffering of the Jews is being renewed. Which is why Bosniaks would not remember and renew the memory of the genocides committed against them. Due to the Bosniak memory of genocide, it is possible that the perpetrators of genocide are celebrated as national heroes and their atrocities as a national liberation struggle. Why is the history of literature and art, political history and all other histories studied in all nations and nations. Why don't European kingdoms give up their own, queens and kings, princesses and princes. These and other theoretical-methodological questions have served us to use comparative analysis to show specific forms of self-esteem among Bosniaks today. The concrete socio-historical examples we cite fully confirm our hypothesis. Here are a few of these examples. Our eastern neighbors invented their epic hero Marko Kraljevic (Ottoman vassal and soldier, killed as a “Turkish” soldier in the fight against Christian soldiers in Bulgaria) who killed the fictional Musa Kesedzija, invented victory on the field of Kosovo, and Bosniaks forgot the real Bosniak epic heroes , brothers Mujo and Halil Hrnjic, Tala od Orašac, Mustaj-beg Lički and others, who defended Bosniaks from persecution and ethnic cleansing in the Bosnian Krajina. Dozens of schools in Bosnia and Herzegovina have been named after the Serbian language reformer, the Serb Vuk Stefanović Karađić (1787-1864), who was born in the village of Tršić near Loznica, Republic of Serbia. Uskufije (1601 / 1602.-?), Born in Dobrinja near Tuzla. Two important guslars and narrators of epic folk songs, Filip Višnjić (1767-1834) and Avdo Medjedović (1875-1953), are unequally present in the memory and symbolic content of the national groups to which they belong, even if the difference in quality is on the side of the almost forgotten. Avdo Medjedovic, the “Balkan Homer”, is known at Harvard University, but very little is known in Bosnia and Herzegovina. And while we learned everything about the murderer Gavril Princip, enlightened by the “logic of an idea” (Hannah Arendt) symbolizing him as a “national hero”, we knew nothing, nor should we have known, about Muhamed Hadžijamaković, a Bosnian patriot and legal soldier, he did not kill a single pregnant woman , a fighter in the Bosnian Army who fought against the Austro-Hungarian occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1878. When it comes to World War II and the fight against fascism are full of hero stories. For one example, we will take Srebrenica, the place of genocidal suffering of Bosniaks. Before the war against Bosnian society and the state 1992-1995. in Srebrenica, the elementary school was called Mihajlo Bjelakovic, a partisan, born in Vidrići near Sokolac. Died in Srebrenica in 1944. The high school in Srebrenica was named Midhat Hacam, a partisan born in the vicinity of Vares. It is not a problem that these two educational institutions were named after two anti-fascists, whose individual work is not known except that they died. None of them were from Srebrenica. That's not a problem either. Then what is it. In the collective memory of Bosniaks. Until recently, the name of the two Srebrenica benefactors and heroes who saved 3,500 Srebrenica Serbs from the Ustasha massacre in 1942, who were imprisoned by the Ustashas in the camp, has not been recorded. These are Ali (Jusuf) efendi Klančević (1888-1952) and his son Nazif Klančević (1910-1975). Nothing was said about them as anti-fascists, most likely that Alija eff. Klančević was an imam-hodža, his work is valued according to Andrić's “logic” as a work that cannot “be the subject of our work” In charity, humanitarian work, but also courage, sacrifice, direct participation in the fight for defense, the strongest Bosniaks do not lag behind Bosniaks, but just like Bosniaks, they are not symbolically represented in the public space of Bosnia and Herzegovina. We had the opportunity to learn about the partisan Marija Bursać and many others, but why the name Ifaket-hanuma Tuzlić-Salihagić (1908-1942), the daughter of Bakir-beg Tulić, was forgotten. In order to feed the muhadjers from eastern Bosnia, Ifaket-hanum, despite the warning not to go for food to Bosanska Dubica, she left. She bravely stood in front of the Ustashas who arrested her and took her to Jasenovac. She was tortured in the camp and eventually died in the greatest agony, watered and fried with hot oil. Nothing was known about that victim of Ustasha crimes. Is it because she is the daughter of Bakir-beg Tuzlić. Bey's children were not desirable in public as benefactors because they were “remnants of rotten feudalism”, belonging to the “sphere of another culture”. In this paper, we have mentioned other, concrete, examples of Bosniak monasticism, from the symbolic content of the entire public space to naming children.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 217-234
Author(s):  
Mesud Šadinlija ◽  

The presence of regular Yugoslav military forces in central Podrinje and their participation in the aggression against Bosnia and Herzegovina have been evident from the very beginnings. As there were no significant forces of the Yugoslav People’s Army in Bosnian Podrinje, in the beginning of April 1992 the 336th Motorized brigade was dislocated from the area of Tuzla and it established its command post in Šekovići, thus becoming the bearer of battle activities and organization of the Army of the Serb Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina in this region, including in its organic composition all Serb armed formations from Zvornik, Kalesija, Šekovići, Vlasenica, Milići, Bratunac and Skelani. In the attacks during which the Serb forces gained control over a broader area of Central Podrinje, and the Bosniak population, which constituted a pronounced majority of the overall population, was suppressed and reduced to three isolated enclaves on the territory of Cerska, Konjević Polje and Srebrenica, the function of leading and commanding these forces, as well as other regular and irregular units which were directed or acted from the territory of Serbia, was conducted by the Operative group “Drina”, a formation under the command of the Belgrade military zone, later the 1st Army of the Yugoslav Army. In the attacks on the remaining enclaves of Podrinje during the summer and autumn of 1992 the aviation of the Yugoslav Army was employed along with lighter jets of agricultural aviation, as well as artillery from the firing positions of the Yugoslav Army on the territory of Serbia. The contents of the Wance-Owen peace plan, according to which the greater part of the Bosnian Podrinje was supposed to be included into one of the provinces with a Bosniak ethnic majority, which would have spelt the end of the Serb national policy in Podrinje, represented an announcement of a large winter offensive of the Serbian forces. With a directive issued on 19 November 1992 the Drina corps of the Army of Republika Srpska was ordered to defend Višegrad, Zvornik and the corridor towards Serbia with its main forces, to deblock the communication on the line Milići – Konjević Polje – Zvornik, and to exhaust the enemy on the broader area of Podrinje, inflict upon him as much loss as possible, and force him to “leave the areas of Birač, Žepa and Goražde together with the Muslim population”. On the basis of this directive act, the planned offensive military activities of the Serb forces in Central Podrinje, initiated during November and finished with the agreement on the demilitarization of Srebrenica in April 1993, according to the documents of the Army of Republika Srpska, had three successive phases codenamed: “PROBOJ” (Breakthrough), “PESNICA” (Fist) and “UDAR” (Assault). Despite the significant engaged forces, the offensive “PROBOJ” did not go according to plan, and in the counterattacks during December the forces of the Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina liberated a large number of settled places, and until 9 January 1993 gained control over Serb strongholds in the communication region of Bratunac – Kravica, and thus physically connected all parts of the liberated territory. Then a new offensive was launched, codenamed “PESNICA”, which, aside from the stabilization of the Serb defence of Bratunac, did not achieve its stated goals, while on the other side the forces of the Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina arrived to the part of the state border with Serbia in the region of Skelani. In the final phase of the offensive, that bore the code name of “UDAR”, the Army of Yugoslavia directly joined the fighting in Central Podrinje on the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina. From the direction of Bratunac towards Srebrenica the forces from the composition of OG “Drina” and parts of other units from the 1st Army of the Yugoslav Army were active, which established a command outpost in Ljubovija. In central Podrinje parts of the Special units corps of the Yugoslav Army also operated, and during the offensive they were stationed in the region of Skelani. From that side, from the direction of Skelani towards Srebrenica, the forces from the composition of the Užice corps of the 2nd Army of the Yugoslav Army were also active. When the forces of the Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina were suppressed from the larger part of the territory and together with the masses of Bosniak civilians restricted to the broader town area of Srebrenica, the units of the Yugoslav Army could retreat to the territory of their state. The offensive was concluded with the signing of the agreement about the demilitarization of Srebrenica.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document