The term "image resolution" refers to the ability of a device to break down the visual content on its screen into finer details. The term "higher resolution" represents the improvement of that technical ability and the possibility of further "shredding" of a certain image. Although it is unethical in this way to explain the current controversy regarding the adoption of the Resolution on the genocide in Srebrenica in the United Nations, it is necessary to point out that this symbolic comparison helps us to see more comprehensively today's attitude towards this most terrible crime in Europe after the Second World War!
An event whose meaning is not understood, denied or relativized by some must be "magnified" in order for all the circumstances that followed it, as well as the consequences that resulted from it, to finally get the right meaning and understanding. Also, with this approach, one's intentions are exposed and oblivion is not given a chance.
By adopting the said resolution, no collective responsibility with the prefix of genocide will be established. Although the text of this decision itself neither announces nor implies it, the opponents of this resolution are concerned about the fact that June 11 will be marked as the International Day of Remembrance of the Genocide in Srebrenica.
Disputes about the determination of the criminal offense for the mass execution of men of the Islamic religion in Srebrenica represent a disavowal or non-recognition of the fact that the essence of the execution of genocide is not the killing itself, but the effort to destroy a certain group partially or completely. The UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide clearly defines the acts of committing this criminal act against humanity and lists as the first "murders, infliction of grievous bodily harm or serious harm to the physical or mental health of members of a particular national, ethnic, racial or religious group".
Deniers of the genocide in Srebrenica are afraid of the real core of the social danger of this criminal act, because it is found in the order for its execution - the order in this case is an independent criminal act! Criminal law theorists know that the responsibility of the orderer for this criminal offense can be determined even when the immediate executor by executing the order did not fulfill the characteristics of the criminal offense of genocide (for example, he did not intend to destroy a certain identity group by carrying out the execution). They are afraid of the individualization of criminal responsibility, not the alleged collective responsibility. They are also afraid of the possibility of new legal convictions that will follow. Why?
Further prosecutions of political and military leaders for mass war crimes, including genocide, committed not only during the Yugoslav wars of 1991-1999, but possibly also on the territory of Ukraine, in the Gaza Strip, in principle, will not require the identification of the immediate perpetrator of the criminal act in order for the superior to be held responsible . It is not even necessary for the perpetrator to be accused or convicted of the criminal offense that is the basis of the accusation regarding the superior's responsibility! It is sufficient to prove that the immediate perpetrator, or several of them, was under the effective control of a superior at a certain time, i.e. that the defendant was adequately informed about (his) crime and that his behavior did nothing to prevent it, as well as to detect or punish it immediate executors.
In the case of Montenegro, the attitude of its public actors towards the Srebrenica resolution "magnifies" their hidden flaws or reveals the real intentions of those who want to continue as before. Some are silent, some are indignant, just like on the eve of the referendum on the legal status of the Republic of Montenegro... As in the 90s, we have party representatives who, without any leeway, go to Belgrade for opinions and uncritically implement the official policy of the Republic of Serbia! Of course, the official positions of the archbishops of the Serbian Orthodox Church regarding the adoption of the Resolution on the Srebrenica genocide in the United Nations also represent a continuation of the ignorant attitude towards the suffering of the civil conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The tense comment of the Metropolitan of the SPC in Montenegro, Joanikij Mićović, is a continuation of the practice established by his predecessor Amfilohije Radović based on these and similar events. Less than a year after the Srebrenica tragedy, the late metropolitan prepared a collection of theological-philosophical works entitled "The Lamb of God and the Beast from the Abyss". In this "Svetigore" publication, the tragic Bosnian conflict was tried to be justified, and among the authors was Radovan Karadžić, although the topic was presented as "an inconvenient opinion for a clergyman".
Mehmet Meša Selimović writes in his "Memories": "Even today I do not understand that it is necessary to speak very carefully about the crimes of certain national groups in the NOB. Wouldn't the truth, whatever it is, be more useful? Wouldn't it contribute to don't repeat what happened? The danger of a nation maliciously identifying itself with its criminals is far less than the danger of new shoots growing from the unrooted roots of evil did to expose and condemn the Chetniks. Other writers, with the honorable exception of Ivan Goran Kovačić, did not tell the whole truth about their traitors".
Since, according to Selimović, "each of us remains to bear our own burden and our own destiny", he goes on to say: "Precisely because we cannot and will not identify ourselves with criminals and that we condemn all crimes against people and nations. Shame and national complexes, which if we remain silent, it will not help us much: history cannot be erased or changed. All the considerations and all the masks of generalization, from which both our literature and our historiography, and our political practice suffer, have already resulted in negative consequences, because the guilt has not been marked, so there are injustices and phenomena that we did not expect, at least not in a serious number, and certainly not among young people. Nothing is good that remains unexplained, nor is history built on silence. .
Bonus video:
