Bosnian Serb war criminal Radovan Karadžić is continuing his defense at The Hague:
Mr Karadzic, who led the Bosnian Serbs during the war in the 1990s, said there was a core group of Muslims in Bosnia – then and now – who wanted 100% power.
He said the Serbs acted in self-defence after their peace plans were rejected. [...]
The wartime leader is trying to show that there was no joint criminal enterprise – no plan or plot – to carry out the genocide or “ethnic cleansing”, but that Serbs were only defending themselves from perceived Muslim aggression, says the BBC’s Dominic Hughes at the trial.
“Their conduct gave rise to our conduct, and that is 100% true,” Mr Karadzic told the court.
I wonder sometimes if Karadzic isn’t a man who was ahead of his time. If the Bosnian civil war had come around 10 years later, couldn’t you imagine him getting a sympathetic hearing from guys like Daniel Pipes and Andy McCarthy and Geert Wilders and Bibi Netanyahu and Frank Gaffney who’d be open to the argument that Karadzic & Milosevic were basically just somewhat unsavory allies in the Balkan front of the war on Islamofascism? Mark Steyn is sort of a pioneering figure in pro-Serb “war on terror”-era revisionism, arguing that Bosnia-style ethnic cleansing could be “the model for the entire continent” as it’s faced with a rising Muslim population share.
AJB in comments offers this:
Israeli Foreign minister Ariel Sharon has been quoted as saying that Nato’s involvement could give birth to a dangerous Islamic state in Kosovo and lead to global instability. [...] In contrast, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has distanced himself from the ruckus, expressing his support for Nato.
Among other things, that’s Netanyahu being savvy about his political alliances in the US.