1991-1999: From Multi-Ethnic State to Violent Fragmentation
?
×
Keyboard Shortcuts
→ Next slide
← Previous slide
Home First slide
End Last slide
S Toggle speaker notes
F Toggle fullscreen
Esc Overview mode
B Pause (blackout)
Tip: Press 'S' to open speaker notes for detailed study information on each slide.
Historical Context: Yugoslavia's Dissolution
Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia established post-WWII under Josip Broz Tito
Six republics, multiple ethnic groups managed through federal structures
Tito's death (1980) weakened mechanisms managing ethnic pluralism
USSR collapse (1989-1991) removed external constraints on nationalist movements
Economic decline, debt crisis, and constitutional deadlock in late 1980s
Rise of ethno-nationalist mobilization by political elites
×
Josip Broz Tito (1892-1980)
Yugoslav communist revolutionary and statesman who served as president of Yugoslavia. Tito's system balanced ethnic tensions through:
Federal structure: Six republics (Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Slovenia, Macedonia, Montenegro) and two autonomous provinces (Kosovo, Vojvodina)
"Brotherhood and Unity": Official ideology promoting Yugoslav identity over ethnic nationalism
Rotating leadership: Designed to prevent any one ethnic group from dominating
Non-aligned movement: Yugoslavia positioned between Soviet and Western blocs
After Tito's death, ethnic tensions re-emerged and nationalist politicians exploited them for political gain.
×
USSR Collapse and Yugoslavia's Breakup
The collapse of the Soviet Union (1989-1991) profoundly affected Yugoslavia's dissolution:
How the Cold War Shaped Yugoslavia
Cold War stability: Yugoslavia's position between East and West gave it strategic importance; both superpowers had interest in maintaining Yugoslav territorial integrity
Western support: U.S. and Western Europe provided economic aid to keep Yugoslavia independent from Soviet sphere
Soviet deterrent: Existence of USSR deterred aggressive nationalist moves that might invite Soviet intervention
Post-1989 Transformation
Removal of external constraint: Fall of Berlin Wall (1989) and USSR collapse (1991) eliminated Cold War incentives to preserve Yugoslavia
Nationalist inspiration: Successful independence movements in Baltic states, Eastern Europe showed secession was possible
Western distraction: Europe/U.S. focused on German reunification, Soviet collapse; less attention to Yugoslavia
End of communism's legitimacy: Collapse of communist ideology removed Yugoslavia's unifying political framework
Economic crisis: End of Cold War aid, IMF structural adjustment programs increased economic pressures
The "New World Order" Context
Optimism about democracy: 1989-1991 seemed to herald peaceful democratic transitions; Yugoslav violence was shocking
Uncertainty about intervention: Post-Cold War rules unclear; when should international community intervene?
Germany's early recognition: Germany pushed for recognition of Slovenia/Croatia (Dec 1991), over objections from U.S./UK who feared it would inflame conflict
Scholarly Analysis
Historian Susan Woodward argues that Yugoslavia's wars were the first major conflict of the post-Cold War era, occurring in a "security vacuum" where old rules no longer applied but new ones hadn't been established. The international community was unprepared for violent state breakup in Europe.
Timeline of Yugoslav Wars
June 1991Ten-Day War: Slovenia declares independence, brief conflict
1991-1995Croatian War of Independence: Ethnic cleansing of Serbs and Croats
1992-1995Bosnian War: Most extensive ethnic cleansing; ~100,000 killed
July 1995Srebrenica massacre: Genocide; ~8,000 men and boys killed
1998-1999Kosovo War: Mass expulsion of at least 700,000 Kosovo Albanians (ICTY finding)
Defining Ethnic Cleansing
Ethnic Cleansing is the systematic forced removal of an ethnic, racial, or religious group from a geographic area through violence, intimidation, forced deportation, or other coercive means, with the intent to create an ethnically homogeneous region. It is distinct from genocide in that the primary goal is removal rather than complete physical destruction (though the two can overlap).
NOT a legally defined crime under international law (unlike genocide)
Term originated with perpetrators as euphemistic propaganda; adopted by international media 1991-1992
Methods: forced deportation, killing, detention, sexual violence, cultural destruction
Goal: demographic transformation to secure territorial control
×
The Problematic Origins of "Ethnic Cleansing"
The term "ethnic cleansing" has a disturbing history that reveals how perpetrators frame their own atrocities.
Perpetrator Language
Original use: Serbian etničko čišćenje and Croatian etničko čišćenje were used BY PERPETRATORS and nationalist media in Yugoslavia, 1991-1992
Euphemistic framing: "Cleansing" implies purification, tidying up, improvement—sanitizing what was actually forced expulsion, mass murder, and systematic terror
Propaganda purpose: Language suggested mixed populations were "dirty" or "polluted" and creating ethnically homogeneous territories was a legitimate, even positive goal
Strategic rhetoric: Made crimes sound like necessary housekeeping rather than atrocities
International Adoption
Media pickup: Western journalists and diplomats adopted the term directly from Yugoslav sources in 1991-1992
Became standard terminology: Despite problematic origins, "ethnic cleansing" is now the accepted international term
No legal definition: Unlike "genocide," "ethnic cleansing" was never codified in international law—remains a descriptive political term
Critical Perspectives
Should we use perpetrators' language?: Some scholars argue we shouldn't adopt euphemistic terminology created by those committing crimes
Alternative framing: More accurate terms would be "forced deportation," "population expulsion," "crimes against humanity," "mass atrocities"
Historical parallel: Nazi Germany used similar euphemisms like Säuberung (cleansing/purging) and Sonderbehandlung (special treatment) to disguise mass murder
Power of language: Perpetrators understand that controlling terminology helps normalize their actions
Why the Term Persists
Descriptive utility: Despite problematic origins, "ethnic cleansing" conveys a specific phenomenon (demographic transformation through violence) that existing legal terms don't fully capture
Fills a gap: "Genocide" requires specific intent to destroy; "war crimes" too broad; "ethnic cleansing" describes the middle ground
Universal recognition: Term is now widely understood internationally
Pedagogical Importance
Teaching point: When we use the term "ethnic cleansing," we should acknowledge its origins and recognize that we're using language created by perpetrators. This awareness helps students understand how propaganda works and why language choices matter in framing atrocities.
Distinguishing Genocide from Ethnic Cleansing
1948 UN Genocide Convention Definition:
"Acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such."
Specific intent (dolus specialis) required for genocide charge
Ethnic cleansing can occur without genocidal intent
"After establishing control over the city of Prijedor, Bosnia and Herzegovina, at the end of May 1992, the Bosnian Serb authorities ordered the Muslim and Croatian populations to wear white armbands while moving through the city for identification purposes and to hang white sheets on their houses as a sign of loyalty to the new authorities."
— UN International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, “Remember Prijedor Victims” (IRMCT)
Siege of Sarajevo (1992-1996)
Longest siege in modern warfare: 1,425 days
Approximately 11,000 killed (1,500+ children)
Artillery bombardment and sniper fire targeted civilians
Strategy of urban terror and attrition
"Mrs Zametica had gone to the Dobrinja river to fetch water. . . . When Mrs Zametica overcame her hesitation, and went down to the river to fill her bucket, she was struck by a bullet."
— ICTY Trial Chamber, Prosecutor v. Galić, summary of judgement, December 5, 2003, on the killing of Munira Zametica, 48, on July 11, 1993 (ICTY)
Croatian Forces: Operation Storm & HVO Campaigns
Generally more limited geographic scale than Serbian operations
Operation Storm (August 1995): 150,000-200,000 Serbs fled Krajina
Croatian Defence Council (HVO) in Bosnia against Bosniaks (1993-1994)
Ahmići massacre (April 1993): 116 Bosniaks killed
Mostar: Destruction of Old Bridge, expulsion of Bosniaks
"A large number of civilians are already evacuating Knin and heading towards Banja Luka and Belgrade. That means that if we continue this pressure, probably for some time to come, there won’t be so many civilians just those who have to stay, who have no possibility of leaving."
— Croatian general Ante Gotovina at the Brijuni meeting, July 31, 1995, as quoted by the ICTY. The Trial Chamber convicted him in 2011; the Appeals Chamber acquitted him in 2012. Weigh this contested case carefully (ICTY case information sheet)
Bosniak Forces: Limited and Localized Operations
Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (ARBiH)
Ethnic cleansing by Bosniak forces was limited and localized
Main documented incidents: Grabavica (Sarajevo suburbs), parts of central Bosnia
Crimes occurred but on much smaller scale than Serb or Croat operations
ARBiH often defending territory rather than conquering/expelling
Important Note on Analytical Balance: Acknowledging crimes by Bosniak forces does not create moral equivalence. Scale, systematization, and strategic centrality differed significantly across belligerents.
Methods of Ethnic Cleansing
Forced deportation: Bus convoys, forced marches, expulsion at gunpoint
Mass killing: Executions, village massacres, camp murders
Detention camps: Omarska, Keraterm, Manjača—sites of torture, starvation, abuse
Sexual violence: Rape camps, systematic sexual assault to terrorize communities
Cultural destruction: Mosques, churches, bridges destroyed to erase historical presence
"What the evidence shows, is that the rapes were used by members of the Bosnian Serb armed forces as an instrument of terror. An instrument they were given free rein to apply whenever and against whomsoever they wished."
— ICTY Trial Chamber, Prosecutor v. Kunarac, Kovač and Vuković (the Foča case), summary of judgement, February 22, 2001 (ICTY)
Srebrenica: Escalation to Genocide
July 11-22, 1995
Approximately 8,000 Bosniak men and boys systematically murdered
Declared genocide by ICTY and International Court of Justice
UN-designated "safe area" fell to VRS forces commanded by Ratko Mladić
Men separated from women/children at Potočari
Mass executions at sites including Kravica warehouse, Branjevo Farm, Pilica Cultural Center
Bodies buried in mass graves, later moved to secondary graves to hide evidence
Voices from Srebrenica
"He told us to move to the right side, and he told my son, ‘Young man, you should go to the left side.’ . . . And then I begged them, I pleaded with them. Why are you taking him? He was born in 1981. But he repeated his order. . . . That was the last time I heard his voice."
— Witness DD, a Bosniak mother at Potočari, July 1995, testifying at the ICTY; quoted in Prosecutor v. Krstić, Trial Judgement, August 2, 2001 (ICTY)
"The men in front of us were ordered to turn their backs. When those men turned their backs to us, we shot at them. We were given orders to shoot."
— Dražen Erdemović, a Bosnian Serb soldier who took part in the killings at Branjevo Military Farm, testifying at the ICTY; quoted in Prosecutor v. Krstić, Trial Judgement, August 2, 2001 (ICTY)
"Of the 21 gravesites exhumed, 14 were primary gravesites, where bodies had been put directly after the individuals were killed. Of these, eight were subsequently disturbed and bodies were removed and reburied elsewhere, often in secondary gravesites located in more remote regions."
— ICTY Trial Chamber, Prosecutor v. Krstić, Trial Judgement, August 2, 2001, on the exhumations after Srebrenica (ICTY)
Kosovo War (1998-1999)
Albanian majority (90%) vs. Serbian control of autonomous province
Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) insurgency triggered Serbian crackdown
1998-1999: Serbian/Yugoslav forces conducted mass expulsions of at least 700,000 Kosovo Albanians (ICTY)
NATO intervention (March-June 1999) forced Serbian withdrawal
Post-war: Reverse ethnic cleansing of Serb and Roma populations
"When these Kosovo Albanians returned to Peć after the conflict, they found that many of their houses had been burned, although the houses belonging to Serb residents of the town were undamaged."
— ICTY Trial Chamber, Prosecutor v. Milutinović et al., summary of judgement, February 26, 2009 (ICTY)
Kosovo After 1999: Reversal of Ethnic Cleansing
Following Serbian forces' withdrawal (June 1999), Kosovo experienced reverse ethnic cleansing dynamics targeting Serb and Roma civilians.
Approximately 200,000 Serbs fled Kosovo post-war
Revenge attacks, arson, intimidation by former KLA-linked actors
Roma communities particularly vulnerable
KFOR (NATO peacekeepers) unable to prevent all violence
"Albanian anger extends to members of the Roma minority, whom many Albanians perceived as willing collaborators in Serb atrocities. . . . No reliable estimates exist for the total number of Roma who have left Kosovo since early June, but there has clearly been significant displacement."
— Human Rights Watch, “Abuses against Serbs and Roma in the New Kosovo,” August 1999 (HRW)
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
Established May 1993 by UN Security Council Resolution 827
First international war crimes tribunal since Nuremberg and Tokyo (WWII)
161 individuals indicted including heads of state
Established genocide at Srebrenica; convicted Karadžić, Mladić, others
Legal precedents: rape as crime against humanity, command responsibility
Closed 2017; legacy includes establishing International Criminal Court (ICC)
Conclusion: Understanding Ethnic Cleansing
Ethnic cleansing was defining strategy of Yugoslav Wars
Employed across multiple conflicts with unequal intensity and consequence
Most systematic and expansive in Serbian campaigns
Episodic and regionally focused in Croatian operations
Limited and localized among Bosniak forces
Srebrenica genocide stands as catastrophic culmination
Lasting indictment of delayed international intervention
References and Further Reading
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Judgments and Case Law. www.icty.org
United Nations. 1948. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
Ramet, Sabrina P. 2006. The Three Yugoslavias: State-Building and Legitimation, 1918–2005.
Schabas, William A. 2009. Genocide in International Law.
Honig, Jan Willem, and Norbert Both. 1996. Srebrenica: Record of a War Crime.