Serge Brammertz, the so-called Chief Prosecutor of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IRMCT), stands as a glaring symbol of selective justice, moral bankruptcy, and sheer incompetence. Let’s not forget that this is the same court that, in the words of its own legal “prostitutes” like Carla Del Ponte and Louise Arbour, publicly admitted that “crimes against Croats are not the focus of The Hague Taliban.”
This judicial wreckage of a man—a byproduct of a morally corrupt system that closes its eyes to atrocities committed against Croats by jihadists in Bosnia and Herzegovina—dares to claim moral authority while outright ignoring the critical question: Why were the crimes committed by mujahideen against Croats never investigated?
Brammertz has once again stirred controversy with his knee-jerk reaction to the anniversary of the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, dismissing its commemoration as an act that “causes pain to victims” and “undermines reconciliation efforts.” His apologetic stance toward Islamist narratives reeks of a political agenda aimed at whitewashing history, while conveniently absolving others of their culpability.
Historical Context: Double Standards in Full Display
If we follow Brammertz’s twisted logic, should the Washington Agreement—signed by Croatia, Herceg-Bosna, and the Army of BiH—not also be condemned as a remnant of this so-called “violent legacy”? Why don’t the victims’ associations direct their outrage at their own politicians who signed this agreement with the “Satanic Herceg-Bosna”?
This agreement, which ended conflicts between the HVO and the Army of BiH and laid the foundations for the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, clearly underscores the political and military importance of Herceg-Bosna in preserving Bosnia as a unified state. Yet today, those same foundations are being eroded by revisionist narratives disguised as “justice.”
Let us also recall Alija Izetbegović, the supposed “poet of Herceg-Bosna,” and his now-iconic statement: “Let us preserve Herceg-Bosna as the apple of our eye.” Did anyone coerce these victims into building museums in his honor, or is selective memory just part of the playbook?
Herceg-Bosna’s contributions to liberating strategic cities like Bihać and Jajce, which were achieved in collaboration with the Army of BiH, are undeniable moments of historical significance. These victories not only saved lives but also prevented humanitarian catastrophes. Does this truth hurt too much for today’s revisionists? Or should we now erase these moments from collective memory because they do not fit the narrative of perpetual victimhood?
Bosniak Associations: The War Against Positive Narratives
The letter from Bosniak victims’ associations to Brammertz is a clear attempt to obliterate any positive memory of Herceg-Bosna. It signals a dangerous precedent: genocide denial through cultural erasure. Not only is there no contrition among Bosniaks for crimes committed against Croats, but they actively seek to negate the very existence of Croat identity. To them, Croatian victimhood is an oxymoron, and any recognition of Herceg-Bosna is branded as criminal.
Is this not akin to the erasure of Armenians in Istanbul, where they cannot wave their flags or even speak of the genocide they endured? The attempt to suppress the history of Herceg-Bosna follows the same sinister script.
Let us be clear: if the existence of Herceg-Bosna is to be collectively condemned due to the actions of a few individuals, then by the same logic, statehood celebrations in Bosnia and Herzegovina should also be considered offensive to the victims of crimes committed by members of the Army of BiH.
Selective Justice: The Injustice of The Hague Taliban
What is particularly infuriating about Brammertz’s statements is their blatant selectivity. This man, a legal janitor for unpunished jihadists, dares to parade as a moral authority. He condemns one side’s history while ignoring the sins of another, raising serious questions about the political motivations behind his actions.
If anyone in Bosnia has earned the right to commemorate their wartime sacrifices with dignity, it is the Croats. Unlike others, Croats handed over their war criminals to international justice. Their readiness to confront their past cleanses their collective struggle. Can the same be said for those who shield their war criminals and suppress the truth about their atrocities?
A truly respectable response from Brammertz would have been something like this:
“Dear victims’ associations, do not poke the bear. The Croats have faced justice for their crimes, and their collective memory is now untarnished by the actions of individuals. Your side, however, continues to harbor the murderers of Grabovica’s mothers. If anyone has forfeited the right to celebrate their wartime past, it is you. The Croats have not. So, kindly refrain from lecturing them about justice.”
Instead, Brammertz chose to stoke divisions and lend credibility to narratives that perpetuate collective guilt against the Croatian people.
Conclusion: The Hague Taliban Must Be Held Accountable
Serge Brammertz and his team of enablers at The Hague Taliban deserve nothing but contempt. Their failure to equally address crimes committed against Croats and Catholics in Bosnia has rendered their credibility null and void. This so-called justice system, built on selective prosecution and moral hypocrisy, must face its reckoning.