ABSTRACT
The previous chapter explored the liberal and realist dilemmas inherent in the
processes of efforts to bring about a lasting peace by the identification of ‘guilty’
parties, the definition of the ‘truth’ and the attempted laying to rest of old ghosts
in what can be described as a ‘legalistic’ approach aimed at a retributive justice
through War Crimes Tribunals (WCTs). The aim of these tribunals has always
been to punish the guilty. However, they have also been presented as being about
bringing reconciliation between the community from which the perpetrators of
the crime came and those who were wronged. But as we have seen the imposi-
tion of what is often called victors’ justice means that all externally imposed tri-
bunals are nearly always looked at with suspicion. To extract Milosevic from
Serbia and try him in The Hague may look like a good way of showing inter-
national approbation for the process of punishment and reconciliation, but it can
have the opposite effect. Milosevic is now seen as having stood up to his accusers
‘like a true Serb’.
