Advocating a “shorter” list of crimes and indictment for Ratko Mladic misses the point. It is preferable to have a quick trial, but not at the expense of Mladic not being prosecuted and judged for all the crimes committed. Anyway, the opportunity for quick justice to satisfy victims was deliberately or otherwise passed upon by Washington and EU as well as Belgrade officials for the last 16 years. Most critically, justice is more about the complete truth being accorded its legal conviction rather than retribution toward another person. Which of Mladic's Crimes Should be Set Aside from Indictment? Mladic’s crimes just within Bosnia & Herzegovina (BiH) range the time frame from 1992 to 1995. They involve orchestrating mass rape to genocide. The geographic breadth is concentration camps in the “BiH Krajina" region to systematic killings in eastern BiH to the siege of civilian centers of which Tuzla, Bihac, Tuzla and Mostar are only the most notable. Who will decide which crimes are not worthy and thus should be glossed over in favor of a simplified indictment and trial? Which victims are not to be recognized in the final judgment of the ICTY (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia) and the preceding indictment? Should we not take into account offenses committed by Mladic against fellow Serbs who dared oppose him as well as Bosniaks, Croats, Jews and others who were singled out more on ethnic/religious criteria? And how about Ratko Mladic’s alleged crimes in Croatia – will Croatians feel justice and the truth of history addressed if Mladic’s role in Croatia is set aside for the sake of expediency? Rational for Justice: Truth, a Historical Record and Sound Foundation for Reconciliation When we debated and established the rationale and mandate for the ICTY, it was always more about the truth, establishing a historical record rather than punishment. The ICTY does not have an option to decree the death penalty, and if there is ever a person deserving such capital punishment it is Ratko Mladic. This is in itself also recognition that the most significant part of justice is the truth rather than the retribution. During our debates at the United Nations in establishing the ICTY, the basis for efforts at reconciliation now and in the future had to be based on the solid foundation of history authored by the rule of law and truth, and not the version of history convenient for those within the region or the big powers who have yet to address their own accountability. That is why it is termed “truth and reconciliation,” and in the case of BiH it also involves not only the “Bosnian parties,” but also neighboring states and the big powers who were either recklessly negligent, acquiescent or complicit. (Choose one of the latter descriptions but it is not credible to simply ignore Washington’s, London’s , Paris’ or Brussels’ role then and even now). Suspicious for Calls of "Shortening" Indictment? That is also one of the reasons why I’m also suspicious of some calls for a quick and simplified trial. Is there a motive to caricature the conflict and Mladic’s role so that a true picture of everyone’s responsibility simply is shoved by the frame of justice drawn by The Hague Tribunal. I’m not paranoid even if perhaps I have reason and experience to be. Is the objective by abridging the indictment and trial to also curtail the full telling of what happened and ultimately the memory of history? (Compare pending prosecution of "9/11" architect Khalid Sheikh Mohamed against whom US authorities just again expanded indictment, very long already and for which he could be executed as it stood previously several thousand times over, at least once for every victim murdered on US soil at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and Pennsylvania - do not BiH victims in Srebrenica, Sarajevo, Tuzla, Prijedor etc deserve same recognition especially since Mladic does not face execution). Ratko Mladic's Defense Revealing? Ratko Mladic’s defense does not frighten me either. To the contrary, it may be almost as much of an indictment of his ideology and those entities and political forces that still cling to consequences of Mladic’s deeds while conveniently avoiding accountability for the fruits of his genocide. I want to hear what Mladic has to say about international acquiescence or maybe even complicity. We certainly should know how Mladic remained free for so long – for the first few years of “peace”, he moved freely within BiH among NATO troops. (The Following is from ICTY website: "in many instances the authorities provided protection from arrest to fugitives and generally showed blatant contempt for the tribunal’s orders.International troops stationed in Bosnia and Herzegovina were also not willing to take action to arrest accused persons. By mid 1997 more than 50 fugitives were at large – mostly in Serbia and the Serb-dominated portion of Bosnia and Herzegovina - and as few as eight suspects actually detained in The Hague.") Who is afraid of the truth? Not the victims, and they have been waiting for it for along time to come before the Court in The Hague, and it should not now be as watered down as Mladic’s own arrest and detention was inexplicably delayed. More Related Reports at Srebrenica Genocide Channel at diplomaticallyincorrect.org/c/the-genocide-of-srebrenica Including - "Mladic's Arrest Must Expose Sexual Crimes" - diplomaticallyincorrect.org/films/blog_post/mladics-arrest-must-expose-sexual-crimes-by-ambassador-mo/28424 By Ambassador Muhamed Sacirbey Facebook - Become a Fan at “Diplomatically Incorrect” Twitter - Follow us at DiplomaticallyX