Bosnian Historian Rebuts 'Power Struggle' Claim for War Crimes and Genocide

Muamer Džananović, a distinguished Bosnian historian and the director of the Institute for Research of Crimes Against Humanity and International Law at the University of Sarajevo, has publicly countered a statement made by Sabina Ćudić, president of Naša stranka. Ćudić had characterized the aggression against Bosnia and Herzegovina as fundamentally a "struggle for power."

Speaking ahead of a commemoration for atrocities committed in Višegrad, Džananović was approached by a journalist seeking comment on Ćudić's remarks from the previous evening. He initially informed the reporter he was unaware of the specifics and occupied with the upcoming memorial, thus unable to provide an immediate statement. However, shortly after, he reviewed Ćudić's comments while proceeding towards the iconic Mehmed-paša Sokolović Bridge. This site holds profound symbolic significance, marking massacres of Bosniak Muslims during both the 1992-1995 war and World War II.

On his way to the bridge, Džananović encountered Redžo Tufekčić, son of Hasan Tufekčić, and asked to take a photograph with him. Džananović recalled having discussed the Tufekčić family's ordeal at a recent Sarajevo roundtable, a mention Redžo deeply appreciated, as he had been present in the audience. During World War II, Chetnik forces loyal to Draža Mihailović murdered Hasan Tufekčić’s first wife and all ten of their children—five sons and five daughters—on or near the Višegrad bridge. Hasan Tufekčić, born in Višegrad in 1905, survived these wartime massacres against Bosniaks. He later remarried and had five more children.

Tragically, in 1992, during the aggression against Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbian perpetrators again targeted Hasan's family. They killed his second wife and three of his children from this marriage: Hajra, Sabaheta, and Ramiz. These children bore the names of their half-siblings who perished in World War II. Additionally, Hasan's granddaughter, Irma Subašić, born on April 19, 1992, to Sabaheta (née Tufekčić) Subašić, was also killed in Višegrad that year. In total, Hasan Tufekčić lost thirteen children, two wives, and one grandchild to "Greater Serbian" atrocities across two distinct conflicts.

It was this profound personal tragedy, Džananović stated, that compelled him to respond after reading Ćudić's comments. He questioned how one could explain to someone like Hasan Tufekčić—or his son Redžo, whom he met on the bridge—that their family members were slaughtered in 1943 and 1992 by "Greater Serbian" perpetrators due to a mere "struggle for power." He challenged whether the murder of Hasan's first wife and ten children in 1943, or the killings of Hajra, Sabaheta, Ramiz, and Irma in 1992, could truly be attributed to a simple political contest for authority. Džananović unequivocally rejected this notion, asserting that these atrocities were driven by specific ideologies, grand-state projects, and well-organized political, military, and police structures. Their explicit objectives, he stressed, included the persecution, killing, intimidation, and ethnic cleansing of Bosniaks from lands they had inhabited for centuries.

Džananović warned that "Greater State" aspirations and challenges persist today, albeit in different forms. He highlighted Redžo Tufekčić's ongoing struggle to reclaim property seized by local Višegrad authorities and the government of the Republika Srpska (RS) entity. This land was confiscated to expand a local cemetery in Crnča and other parcels were allocated to another family for housing construction. Drawing on his experience as a survivor of the Siege of Sarajevo and his review of verdicts from the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), its Residual Mechanism, and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, Džananović affirmed that rulings for international armed conflict, joint criminal enterprises, and genocide were not predicated on a "struggle for power."

He pointed out that Franjo Tuđman and Slobodan Milošević, along with their respective political, military, and police apparatuses, were judicially confirmed as leaders of these joint criminal enterprises. Džananović stressed that verdicts for the genocide against Bosniaks, crimes against humanity, the terrorization of Sarajevo residents during its siege, and mass atrocities in Prijedor, Višegrad, Foča, Zvornik, and numerous other towns were not rendered because of a "power struggle." Similarly, he argued, life sentences for the Srebrenica genocide and convictions against nearly entire political and military leaderships of the self-proclaimed entities of Republika Srpska (RS) and Herceg-Bosna (HZHB) were not the result of mere political competition or conflicts of interest. Consequently, Džananović deemed it perilous to, whether intentionally or unintentionally, blur the stark distinction between aggressors and victims, or between systematic crimes and ordinary political crises.

He asserted that historical and judicially established facts are not subject to political marketing or daily diplomatic maneuvers. Džananović expressed his firm belief that if international actors seek to relativize the nature of the aggression against the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina today, it is imperative not to acquiesce through silence, calculations, or the softening of truth. He particularly urged those seeking the trust of the nation's citizens to refrain from such actions. A more equitable and promising future, he concluded, can only be built upon truth and a continuous stand against historical revisionism and the relativization of crimes.