Dutch Must Pay Srebrenica Compensation
As Two Dead Dogs has already alluded to - the Dutch certainly didn't lack courage......they simply lacked the backing of the UN.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"- what exactly would the UN have done if WW111
had broken out on their watch....?!"
Been moved aside as a useless hindrance so the
real people could get on with it ?
had broken out on their watch....?!"
Been moved aside as a useless hindrance so the
real people could get on with it ?
"- what exactly would the UN have done if WW111 had broken out on their watch....?!"
Speaking as someone who was on board the AWACS that was providing the link to CAOC that night..... I completely disagree with your assessment of the situation. My understanding was that the CAOC went through all means possible to secure the air strikes but the ROE were just too restrictive without the UN approval which was not forthcoming, regardless of the perils faced by the Dutch troops. I also understand that it was this failure to gain approval of air support for the Dutch that led to NATO nations taking over the air campaign and bringing the conflict to a conclusion.
However, my point is that the Dutch could have unilaterally stepped outside of their own ROEs instead of expecting others to take that decision. They could have robustly defended their compound (and those Bosniaks who were sheltering within) instead of expelling them. They could have also put out some defended positions around their compound to extend a protected zone to some of the others who were seeking protection. With some agile PR they could have widely publicised the situation and the UN bureaucracy would have been obliged very quickly to relax their ROEs and allowed air support. The situation should never have been allowed to escalate.
Instead, the Serb thugs (they cannot be described as belonging to an army) realised that they were unopposed so went on a rampage.
As I wrote in my previous post, if BritBat had been in control the massacre would never have happened as there would have been an immediate and robust response which - if it did not immediately deter further aggression - would have lead to a rapid escalation in international publicity which would have lead to a change in ROEs. I would also say without hesitation that the same would have been the case if the French had been in control of the sector - they were just as robust as BritBat in dealing with situations while they had control of Sarajevo.
Unfortunately, it was the Dutch in control of Srebrenica who - though very professional and brave soldiers - were too politically cowardly.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,564
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
However, my point is that the Dutch could have unilaterally stepped outside of their own ROEs instead of expecting others to take that decision.
However, my point is that the Dutch could have unilaterally stepped outside of their own ROEs instead of expecting others to take that decision.
The way round that problem would have been for the Dutch to have planted themselves firmly amongst the Bosniaks so that it would have been impossible for the Serbs to attack (e.g. by shelling) without provoking a self-defence response from the Dutch. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
I think the reason the Dutch were operationally hamstrung was possibly due to a lack of recent operational experience. Their last war was in Indonesia in the late 40's. I have no doubt that a British or French or even an American force would have faced an impossible position with a different mindset because they had a history of facing overwhelming odds and prevailing. I read an article about the Aussies taking over from the Dutch in Helmand Province. The Dutch were more interested in getting to know the locals to keep the peace, the Aussies backed up hearts and minds with patrolling. Not suggesting the Dutch are timid, they just have a different way of approaching a problem.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,094
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, my point is that the Dutch could have unilaterally stepped outside of their own ROEs instead of expecting others to take that decision.
they could have applied their national laws of self defence
I don't think the Dutch, (or several other units), ever envisaged that they would not get vital support when it was needed. As mentioned by others above, ROE changes came about as a result of this event.
Last edited by parabellum; 15th Sep 2013 at 22:51.
I was experiencing the Dutch culture first hand at the time of the Srebrenica massacre and there's no doubt that the Dutch military was embarrassed by events there. The points already about the difference between the Britsh and Dutch approach is well made. As I said to my Dutch colleagues at the time I couldn't imagine that happening had the Paras been in charge. The price we pay though are atrocities such as Bloody Sunday and Amritsar. The Dutch are a very democratic society and far more trusting than us cynical Brits. In many ways they have a more advanced and balanced society than ours and probably credited the Serbs with the same values that they themselves held. Every nationality has it's own way of dealing with situations (Italians paying the Taliban not to attack them). Long may these differences continue, the world would be the poorer if every nation responded identically to a crisis. Who has the right answer to the Syrian issue for example?
I just read up about some of the detail on the Srebrenica massacre. Its incredible to think such things could happen so recently in what appeared to be a civil society so close to home.
Is it just me, or does it seem more shocking now, in hindsight, than it did at the time?
Is it just me, or does it seem more shocking now, in hindsight, than it did at the time?
Perhaps if the Dutch had followed the Swedish model....
Business | Assertive Swedes Play Tough Guy In Bosnia -- Most U.N. Troops Use Other Tactics | Seattle Times Newspaper
U.N. troops routinely spend days negotiating with Bosnian factions for rights of passage for aid convoys.
[Colonel Ulf Hendricsson, commander of the U.N. Nordic battalion in central Bosnia] has a different approach.
"I have come to checkpoints where the soldiers refuse to remove the mines blocking our way," he said. "I've told the soldiers if they don't move the mines we'll blow their heads off. We've always gotten through."
Business | Assertive Swedes Play Tough Guy In Bosnia -- Most U.N. Troops Use Other Tactics | Seattle Times Newspaper
U.N. troops routinely spend days negotiating with Bosnian factions for rights of passage for aid convoys.
[Colonel Ulf Hendricsson, commander of the U.N. Nordic battalion in central Bosnia] has a different approach.
"I have come to checkpoints where the soldiers refuse to remove the mines blocking our way," he said. "I've told the soldiers if they don't move the mines we'll blow their heads off. We've always gotten through."
Every nationality has it's own way of dealing with situations (Italians paying the Taliban not to attack them). Long may these differences continue, the world would be the poorer if every nation responded identically to a crisis
AFP: French killed after Italy bribed Taliban: report
So the Italians got it wrong in your opinion. No more wrong than the US and the Brits deciding to invade Iraq in mine. Nobody's perfect.
Can't argue with you about Iraq (though I have to admit I supported the invasion at the time), but that's a whole different kettle of fish...
Last edited by melmothtw; 17th Sep 2013 at 13:45.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Court rules Dutch troops partly responsible for Srebrenica deaths
Peacekeepers’ actions deprived victims of ‘chance of survival,’ judge rules.
A Dutch appeals court ruled on Tuesday that the Netherlands is partly responsible for the deaths of around 350 Muslim men and boys in the 1995 Srebrenica massacre.
In its ruling, the court in The Hague upheld a decision from 2014 that found Dutch peacekeepers stationed in Bosnia-Herzegovina at fault for expelling Muslim men from a Dutch U.N. base, many of whom were eventually killed by Bosnian Serb forces. The presiding judge said that Dutch actions meant the Muslim men “were deprived of the chance of survival.”
The court estimated that the men would have had a 30 percent chance of survival if they had been allowed to stay in the Dutch base. “The state is therefore liable for 30 percent of the losses suffered by the relatives,” the court said in a statement.
The case was filed by relatives of the victims, a group known as the Mothers of Srebrenica.
More than 7,000 men and boys were killed in the massacre, which the U.N.’s International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia ruled was genocide.
Peacekeepers’ actions deprived victims of ‘chance of survival,’ judge rules.
A Dutch appeals court ruled on Tuesday that the Netherlands is partly responsible for the deaths of around 350 Muslim men and boys in the 1995 Srebrenica massacre.
In its ruling, the court in The Hague upheld a decision from 2014 that found Dutch peacekeepers stationed in Bosnia-Herzegovina at fault for expelling Muslim men from a Dutch U.N. base, many of whom were eventually killed by Bosnian Serb forces. The presiding judge said that Dutch actions meant the Muslim men “were deprived of the chance of survival.”
The court estimated that the men would have had a 30 percent chance of survival if they had been allowed to stay in the Dutch base. “The state is therefore liable for 30 percent of the losses suffered by the relatives,” the court said in a statement.
The case was filed by relatives of the victims, a group known as the Mothers of Srebrenica.
More than 7,000 men and boys were killed in the massacre, which the U.N.’s International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia ruled was genocide.