Creating new perspectives since 2009

Revealing Israel’s arms exports to perpetrators of genocide is a moral obligation

July 3, 2017 at 4:08 pm

Image of Israeli security forces in Bethlehem, West Bank on 17 April 2017 [Mamoun Wazwaz/Anadolu Agency]

In November 2016 Israel’s Supreme Court rejected a petition to reveal details of Israeli defence exports to the former Yugoslavia during the genocide in Bosnia in the 1990s. The court ruled that exposing Israeli involvement in genocide would damage the country’s foreign relations to such an extent that it would outweigh the public interest in knowing that information, and the possible prosecution of those involved.

We the petitioners, Attorney Eitay Mack and I presented the court with concrete evidence of Israeli defence exports to Serbian forces at the time, including training as well as ammunition and rifles. Among other things, they presented the personal journal of General Ratko Mladić, currently on trial at the International Court of Justice for committing war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Mladić’s journal explicitly mentions Serbia’s ample arms ties with Israel at the time.

The exports took place long after the UN Security Council placed an arms embargo on various parts of the former Yugoslavia, and after the publication of a series of testimonies exposing genocide and the creation of concentration camps.

Read: Israel benefits from our catastrophes

The Israeli State Attorney’s reply and the court’s rejection of the petition itself are a de facto admission by Israel that it cooperated with the Bosnian genocide: if the government had nothing to hide, the documents under discussion would not pose any threat to foreign relations.

Between 1991 and 1995 the former Yugoslavia shattered, going from a multi-national republic to an assemblage of nations fighting each other in a bloody civil war that included massacres and ultimately genocide.

The Serbs waged war against Croatia from 1991-1992, and against Bosnia from 1992-1995. In both wars the Serbs committed probably a genocide and surely ethnic cleansing of Muslims in the areas they occupied, leading to the deaths of 250,000 people. Tens of thousands of others were wounded and starved, a multitude of women were raped, and many people were incarcerated in concentration camps. Other parties to the conflict also committed war crimes, but the petition focuses on Israel’s collaboration with the Serbian forces. The horrendously cruel acts in Yugoslavia were the worst Europe had seen since the Holocaust.

Read: Israeli expansionist, colonial settlements are, and always have been, illegal

One of the most notorious massacres was perpetrated by soldiers serving under Serbian General Ratko Mladić around the city of Srebrenica in July 1995. In my opinion, in Srebrenica genocide was committed. Serbian forces commanded by the general murdered about 8,000 Bosnians and buried them in mass graves in the course of a campaign of ethnic cleansing they were waging against Muslims in the area. Although the city was supposed to be under UN protection, when the massacre began UN troops did not intervene. Mladić was extradited to the International Court of Justice at The Hague in 2012, and is still on trial.

At the time, prominent Jewish organisations were calling for an immediate end to the genocide and shutting down the death camps. Not so the State of Israel. Outwardly it condemned the massacre, but behind the scenes was supplying weapons to the perpetrators and training their troops.

We have gathered numerous testimonies about the Israeli arms supply to Serbia, which were presented in the petition. Evidence was provide of such exports taking place long after the UN Security Council embargo went into effect in September 1991. The testimonies have been crossed-checked and are brought here as they were presented in the petition, with necessary abbreviations.

In 1992 a former senior official of the Serb Ministry of Defence published a book, “The Serbian Army”, in which she wrote about the arms deal between Israel and Serbia, signed about a month after the embargo: “One of the largest deals was made in October 1991. For obvious reasons, the deal with the Jews [Israelis] was not made public at the time.”

Read: Israel is a troubling guardian of the holy land

An Israeli who volunteered in a humanitarian organisation in Bosnia at the time testified that in 1994 a UN officer asked him to look at the remains of 120mm shell – with Hebrew writing on it – that exploded on the landing strip of the Sarajevo airfield. He also testified that he saw Serbs moving around in Bosnia carrying Uzi guns made in Israel.

In 1995 it was reported that Israeli arms dealers, in collaboration with the French, closed a deal to supply Serbia with LAW missiles. According to reports from 1992, a delegation of the Israeli Ministry of Defence came to Belgrade and signed an agreement to supply shells.

The same General Mladić who is now being prosecuted for war crimes and genocide, wrote in his journal that “from Israel – they proposed joint struggle against Islamist extremists. They offered to train our men in Greece and a free supply of sniper rifles.” A report prepared at the request of the Dutch government on the investigation of the Srebrenica events contains the following:

Belgrade considered Israel, Russia and Greece its best friends. In autumn 1991 Serbia closed a secret arms deal with Israel.

In 1995 it was reported that Israeli arms dealers supplied weapons to VRS – the army of Republika Srpska, the Bosnian Serb Army. This supply must have been made with the knowledge of the Israeli government.

We have reports by human rights activists about Israelis training the Serb army. Probably the arms deal with the Serbs enabled Jews to leave Sarajevo, which was under siege, but we cannot prove it.

Read: Israel knows that it only has to bide its time to get everything it wants

While all of this was taking place in relative secrecy, at the public level the government of Israel lamely expressed its misgivings about the situation, as if this were some force majeure and not a manmade slaughter. In July 1994, then-Chairman of the Israeli Knesset’s Foreign Relations and Defence Committee, MK Ori Or, visited Belgrade and said: “Our memory is alive. We know what it means to live with boycotts. Every UN resolution against us has been taken with a two-thirds majority.” That year, Vice President of the US at the time, Al Gore, summoned the Israeli ambassador and warned Tel Aviv to desist from this cooperation.

Image of Israeli parliament Knesset in session [Itzik Edri/Wikipedia]

Image of Israeli parliament Knesset in session [Itzik Edri/Wikipedia]

The Supreme Court session on the state’s reply to our petition was held ex parte, i.e. that we, the petitioners weren’t allowed to hear it. The three Supreme Court Justices rejected our petition and accepted the state’s position that revealing the details of Israeli defence exports to Serbia during the ethnic cleansing and the genocide would damage Israel’s foreign relations and security, and that this potential damage exceeds the public’s interest in exposing what happened.

This ruling is questionable and even dangerous for several reasons. Firstly, the court’s acceptance of the state’s certainty in how much damage would be caused to Israel’s foreign relations is perplexing. Earlier this year, the same Supreme Court rejected a similar claim regarding defence exports during the Rwandan genocide, yet a month later the state itself declared that the exports were halted six days after the killing started.

Why did the Supreme Court justices overlook this deception, even refusing to accept it as evidence as the petitioners requested? After all, the state has obviously exaggerated in its claim that this information would be damaging to foreign relations.

It is very much in the public’s interest to expose the state’s involvement in genocide, including through arms dealers, particularly as a state that was founded upon the devastation of its people following the Holocaust.

It is in the interest not only of Israelis, but also of those who were victims of the Holocaust to have completely different moral conduct. When the court considers war crimes, it is only proper for it to consider their interest as well.

When the court rules in cases of genocide that damage to state security – which remains entirely unproven – overrides the pursuit of justice for the victims of such crimes, it is sending a clear message: that the state’s right to security, whether real or imaginary, is absolute, and takes precedence over the rights of its citizens and others.

The Supreme Court’s ruling might lead one to conclude that the greater the crime, the easier it is to conceal. This is unacceptable. It turns the judges – as the petitioners have put it – into accomplices. The justices thus also make an unwitting Israeli public complicit in war crimes, and deny them the democratic right to conduct the relevant discussion.


The state faces a series of similar requests regarding its collaboration with the murderer’s governments.  Even if it is in the state’s interest to reject these petitions, the Supreme Court must stop helping to conceal these crimes – if not for the sake of prosecuting perpetrators of past atrocities, at least in order to put a stop to them now for the future.

When the state of Israel, our government, sells weapons to perpetrators of genocide, it betrays the legacy and the memory of our genocide, the Holocaust. The same, when our government denies genocide of another people, as we deny the Armenian Genocide, we betray the legacy and the memory of our genocide.

To send weapons to Serbia or Rwanda at the same time they committed genocide is very similar to send weapons to Nazi Germany during the Holocaust!

We, Israelis, should be asking ourselves difficult questions. We have to ask ourselves questions about our responsibility regarding such acts of injustice, and to consider possible ways of taking actions to prevent them, whether as individuals or as a collective.

For me there is one lesson, or legacy, from the Holocaust and the genocide; the universal value of human life, wherever it may be found. The fundamental principle underling my activities are the holiness of human life and the equality of the humans whether we are Serbs, Bosnians, Tutsis, Turks, Armenians, Palestinians or Jews.

For us, Eitay and myself, our activities are motivated from our moral values, in a way we cannot not do them. Even after the two decisions of the Supreme Court, regarding Serbia and Rwanda, and we do not give up. We are trying other legal avenues, and we are trying, as much we can, to move our civil society.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.