The glorification of convicted war criminal Ratko Mladić following his death has exposed the continued presence in Serbia of political and ideological currents that contributed to the wars of the 1990s, according to Sonja Biserko, president of the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia.
In an interview with RTKLive, Biserko said the nationalist ideology that helped prepare Serbian society for the conflicts in Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Kosovo was not a spontaneous phenomenon and has not disappeared.
“The dehumanization of ‘the others’ was a key step in the process of preparing Serbia for the wars of the 1990s,” Biserko said.
She argued that Serbian media and political structures in the late 1980s and early 1990s systematically promoted narratives portraying Croats and Albanians as existential threats to Serbs, while Muslims later became the target of increasingly intense propaganda.
“A narrative was created in which entire communities were presented as hostile, dangerous and less worthy. This ideological preparation was the introduction to the crimes that were later committed in Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Kosovo,” she said.
Mladić Was a Military Executor, Not the Sole Architect
Biserko rejected attempts to portray Mladić as an isolated figure or the sole embodiment of the crimes committed during the Yugoslav wars.
She said Mladić was not the principal architect of the political project that led to genocide and mass crimes but was one of its most important military executors.
“That in no way reduces his individual responsibility,” Biserko said. “On the contrary, his role in implementing that policy was decisive.”
According to Biserko, responsibility for the wars cannot be limited to a small number of political and military leaders who were prosecuted before the Hague tribunal.
She argued that the ideological and institutional infrastructure behind the conflicts extended into political, academic, cultural, military, security and media structures, including those operating from Belgrade.
Biserko pointed to a meeting of the Assembly of Republika Srpska in May 1992, during which, she said, Mladić openly warned that achieving the war objectives set by the Bosnian Serb leadership would amount to genocide.
She argued that this demonstrated that Mladić understood the nature and potential consequences of the policies he was implementing.
“The Ideology Did Not Disappear”
The nationalist reaction following Mladić’s death, Biserko said, should be understood as evidence that the ideology behind the wars of the 1990s remains present in parts of Serbian society.
She said the glorification of Mladić as a hero and calls for him to receive state honors were not isolated or spontaneous reactions.
“His death only made visible what had been present all along,” Biserko said.
According to her, a significant part of Serbian society has still not fully accepted responsibility for the wars or the consequences of the political projects pursued during the 1990s.
She linked this continuing political and ideological current to the concept of the “Serbian World,” arguing that it represents a continuation of earlier nationalist projects through different instruments.
According to Biserko, those instruments are now primarily diplomatic, political, economic and cultural rather than military.
“The goal is to preserve and expand Serbia’s political, cultural and security influence in areas where Serbs live,” she said.
She cited Serbia’s 2011 Strategy for Preserving and Strengthening Relations Between the Mother State and the Diaspora, the 2019 National Security Strategy and the 2021 Charter for the Serbian Cultural Space as examples of documents that, in her view, demonstrate long-term continuity in Serbian national policy.
“Governments change, but the idea of Greater Serbia survives,” Biserko argued.
Western Support for Vučić and the Politics of “Stabilocracy”
Biserko also criticized Western governments, arguing that they had supported Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić for years in the hope that he would maintain regional stability and gradually move Serbia closer to the West.
She said Western governments had often tolerated what she described as Serbia’s promotion of the “Serbian World,” pressure on neighboring states and rapid military buildup.
According to Biserko, the European Union’s policy toward the region has increasingly prioritized short-term stability over democratic transformation.
She described this approach as “stabilocracy” — the tolerance of increasingly authoritarian leaders in exchange for political stability.
“The EU has gradually lost part of its authority, while the idea of enlargement no longer represents a convincing political perspective for many citizens of the region,” she said.
Biserko argued that the reaction to Mladić’s death should therefore not be seen simply as a question of attitudes toward one convicted war criminal.
Instead, she said, it reflects a broader failure to politically and socially confront the ideology that contributed to the wars.
“That ideology has adapted to new circumstances and acquired new instruments,” she said.
State Honors Debate Sends a Political Message
Biserko also addressed the controversy surrounding statements by Serbian Justice Minister Nenad Vujić concerning the possible funeral arrangements for Mladić.
She said the announcement that Mladić could receive the highest state and military honors represented a significant political message.
“It is difficult to imagine that a minister, on such a sensitive issue, would make such an announcement without a political context and coordination,” she said.
Biserko noted that Vučić later avoided directly confirming that a state funeral would be held, while saying that if Mladić’s family chose for him to be buried in Serbia, the state would assist in ensuring that the burial was conducted with dignity.
She argued that the issue was particularly sensitive because, in her view, the glorification of Mladić has become one of the mechanisms through which the genocide in Srebrenica is relativized.
“Srebrenica is not always denied directly,” Biserko said. “It is often denied by turning the perpetrator of genocide into a hero.”
She warned that a large public funeral could become more than a farewell to an individual and could instead develop into a broader nationalist demonstration.
Montenegro and Kosovo Remain Central to Serbia’s Regional Influence
Biserko also argued that Montenegro has become one of the key battlegrounds between European integration and Belgrade’s efforts to preserve political and cultural influence in the region.
She said Montenegro’s possible accession to the European Union in 2028 would have major geopolitical consequences because it could demonstrate that Western Balkan integration remains achievable.
According to Biserko, Serbia seeks to influence political developments in Montenegro through several channels, including the Serbian Orthodox Church, media, economic ties and political networks.
On Kosovo, Biserko argued that Belgrade has for decades instrumentalized the Kosovo Serb community to advance broader political interests.
She said political actors willing to engage directly with institutions in Prishtina had been marginalized, while Kosovo continued to serve as a powerful instrument of political mobilization inside Serbia.
“By maintaining the illusion that Kosovo is still Serbia,” she said, political leaders continue to mobilize public opinion despite the changing political realities surrounding Kosovo.
US Congressional Pressure and Regional Security
Biserko also commented on the proposed US legislation introduced by Congressman Joe Wilson and Congressman Bill Keating that calls for increased pressure on Serbia and potential sanctions and travel restrictions against individuals who undermine peace, stability and territorial integrity in the Western Balkans.
She said the proposal reflected growing awareness in Washington of Serbia’s role in regional security.
According to Biserko, Vučić has expanded Serbia’s regional influence through media acquisitions, economic projects and security structures.
She cited the Banjska case, alleged activities involving Serbian-linked groups in Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Serbia’s military buildup as developments that, in her view, contribute to regional instability.
“His policy continuously produces security instability in the region,” Biserko said.
She added that the European Union was increasingly viewing the Western Balkans through a security lens as Russia, China, Turkey and other international actors compete for influence in the region.
“The Balkans are entering a more dangerous phase,” she said, arguing that the region remains an unfinished political and security issue for Europe.
For Biserko, the response to Mladić’s death ultimately serves as a warning that the ideas behind the Yugoslav wars have not disappeared.
“They have adapted to new circumstances and acquired new instruments,” she said.
