[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 29 (Wednesday, March 16, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: March 16, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
   ICJ JUDGE FINDS GENOCIDE IN BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA, CALLS ON SECURITY 
                   COUNCIL TO RECONSIDER ARMS EMBARGO

                                 ______


                          HON. STENY H. HOYER

                              of maryland

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, March 16, 1994

  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw my colleagues' attention 
to an opinion written by the distinguished jurist, Judge Lauterpacht, 
who has joined the International Court of Justice to hear the on-going 
case of Bosnia-Herzegovina versus Serbia and Montenegro. Thus far, the 
court has issued two preliminary orders that, regrettably, have done 
little more than restate the obligations of the Genocide Convention. 
The separate opinion of Judge Lauterpacht, however, is notable both for 
the clarity of its views and for its significance for policymakers.
  In particular, Judge Lauterpacht draws the following conclusions:

       In the light of the material available to the Court in 
     April 1993 and which has accumulated further since then, it 
     is impossible to deny either the occurrence or the massive 
     scale of these crimes. The evidence also indicates plainly 
     that, in particular, the forced migration of civilians, more 
     commonly known as `ethnic cleansing', is, in truth, part of a 
     deliberate campaign by the Serbs to eliminate Muslim control 
     of, and presence in, substantial parts of Bosnia-Herzegovina. 
     Such being the case, ``it is difficult to regard the Serbian 
     acts as other than acts of genocide in that they clearly fall 
     within categories (a), (b) and (c) of the definition of 
     genocide quoted above'' [from the Genocide Convention], they 
     are clearly directed against an ethnical or religious group 
     as such, and they are intended to destroy that group, if not 
     in whole certainly in part, to the extent necessary to ensure 
     that that group no longer occupies the parts of Bosnia-
     Herzegovina coveted by the Serbs. ``The Respondent [Serbia 
     and Montenegro] stands behind the Bosnian Serbs and it must, 
     therefore, be seen as an accomplice to, if not an actual 
     participant in, this genocidal behavior.''

  The importance of these conclusions is more than academic. It relates 
directly to the request of Bosnia-Herzegovina to have the arms embargo 
lifted because it prevents Bosnia from exercising its right, under 
article 51 of the United Nations Charter, to self-defense. Moreover, 
Judge Lauterpacht suggests that the Security Council, when 
reconsidering the arms embargo in the future, should give specific 
consideration to the possibility that the arms embargo, by preserving a 
balance of weaponry that is favorable to the Serbs, may actually 
contribute to genocidal activity such as ethnic cleansing.
  Mr. Speaker, we may be at a decisive juncture in this conflict that 
will make reconsideration of the arms embargo unnecessary. I would like 
nothing more. But experience suggests to me that this may not be the 
case. I have previously supported lifting the arms embargo for the 
simple reason that it wrongly denies Bosnia the right to self-defense 
that the U.N. Charter guarantees it. Judge Lauterpacht has presented 
yet another argument for the Security Council to renew its examination 
of the arms embargo against Bosnia-Herzegovina and, in my opinion, to 
lift it.

                          ____________________