Understanding the Milošević Case: Legacy of an Unfinished Trial

By the nature of a legal proceeding which deals with individual criminal responsibility, the trial record contains a comprehensive—and possibly the largest—collection of materials pointing to the political and criminal responsibility of Milošević in the disintegration of Yugoslavia and the subsequent wave of violence. In the scholarly literature on the role of history in ascribing guilt to individuals, some argue that the question of guilt or innocence belongs exclusively in the courtroom. Other scholars, however, such as Charles Maier, see mass atrocities trials as dealing with the responsibility of individuals—which is what historians do as well. According to Maier, a historian confronts responsibility precisely because it helps to measure the degree of freedom of choice within a given institutional context. Maier asserts that “doing justice” and “doing history” are related activities. A historian endeavours to “do justice” by voicing the aspirations of the protagonists and exploring their choices. In literature that addresses the collapse of Yugoslavia, as well as in the writings of journalists and policymakers involved in the wars, there is a near consensus on the centrality of the role played by Slobodan Milošević in the violent processes of disintegration. However, the exact nature of Milošević’s role and strategy, as well as the roles and strategies of the other actors involved, remain a matter of dispute. The record left by the Milošević trial will inevitably contribute to a more comprehensive historical record from which historians, legal, and other scholars will be able to explore.