After Mladić’s death, key questions remain over Israeli support in Bosnia genocide

The death of Ratko Mladić, the Bosnian Serb military commander convicted of genocide and war crimes, has revived unresolved questions about the international networks that supplied and supported the forces under his command during Bosnia’s 1992–95 war.

Mladić died on Thursday while hospitalised in The Hague, where he was in United Nations custody. His convictions for genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of the laws or customs of war had been upheld on appeal, and he was serving a life sentence.

His death closes the life of one of the central perpetrators of the Bosnian genocide. It does not, however, settle wider questions about foreign military supply, state knowledge and the archives that could help clarify them.

Among the least explored is Israel’s alleged role in supplying or facilitating military assistance to Serbian and Bosnian Serb forces during the war. Israeli human-rights lawyer Eitay Mack and Israeli genocide scholar Yair Auron have sought disclosure of official records concerning Israeli defence exports to the former Yugoslavia, but Israel’s Supreme Court rejected their petition in 2016.

"We collected evidence based on the investigation and testimonies from people that were in Bosnia at the time, and we reached the conclusion that [Israel was] sending arms, despite the UN Security Council embargo and clear knowledge from the Israeli government of the atrocities happening in the war," Mack told The New Arab.

Mack pointed out that the prime minister at the time, Yitzak Rabin of the Labor Party, had been in a coalition with the left, who would push for the government to denounce what was happening in Bosnia.

Despite policy being dictated by what he described as "the most leftist government that Israel ever had", the court upheld an earlier decision not to release information on defence export licences and Defence Ministry decisions concerning the former Yugoslavia between 1990 and 1996. It said disclosure could harm Israel’s national security or relations with foreign countries.

The ruling has resulted in a substantial accountability gap. It neither publicly establishes the scale of any Israeli exports, nor resolves questions about Israeli equipment, training or arms brokering reaching Serbian or Bosnian Serb forces during a period when a UN arms embargo covered the former Yugoslavia.

Mack nevertheless argues the court’s recognition that relevant documents existed – and its decision to shield them – is significant, saying that the stated concern over foreign relations pointed to the sensitivity of the withheld information.

What the court records show

Mack and Auron filed their request under Israel’s freedom-of-information law after years of allegations that Israeli military equipment or assistance reached Bosnian Serb forces during the conflict, particularly given that the UN Security Council arms embargo had formally been in place since September 1991 until late 1995.

The petitioners submitted testimonies from journalists and humanitarian workers who had been in Bosnia, as well as publicly available reporting and historical material documenting Israeli assistance.

Among the material cited was a 2002 Dutch government-commissioned report that referred to allegations that Israeli arms had been supplied in exchange for Bosnian Serb forces allowing members of Sarajevo’s Jewish community to leave the besieged city in 1992.

The same report referred to an investigation into the remains of a mortar grenade at Sarajevo airport in late 1994 that reportedly bore Hebrew letters, as well as a 1995 Israeli television report on private Israeli arms dealers supplying the Bosnian Serb Army (VRS).

"Despite the atrocities, Israel still chose to send arms shipments to the Bosnian Serbian forces, which included ammunition, mortar shells, rifles and rockets," Mack said.

The petition also pointed to references in Mladić’s diaries, portions of which appeared in an International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia judgment in the case of former Yugoslav army chief Momčilo Perišić.

According to the material cited in that judgment, Mladić wrote of an apparent Israeli offer of cooperation against "extreme Islam", with former Bosnian Serb Defence Minister Dusan Kovacevic giving evidence that he was contacted by Israel’s intelligence agency, Mossad, around March 1995, reportedly regarding proposed training in Greece and weapons for a group of fighters.

According to the judgment, Mladić wrote in his diary: "From Israel – they offer joint combat against extreme Islam – offer the training of our men in Greece at their expense. They offer us special weapons for 500 men – snipers for free – they said it came to Bihac, I don’t know whether it was given to Serbia [sic]."

Mack said that the court order dismissed the evidence, arguing that it didn’t know whether the suggestion in the diary had actually been implemented.

A broader pattern of secrecy

For Mack, the questions raised by Israel’s sealed Bosnia-war files are part of a wider pattern in which Israeli courts and state institutions have resisted public scrutiny of defence exports to governments accused of grave abuses.

He pointed to his previous legal effort with Auron to obtain documents on alleged Israeli arms exports to Rwanda during the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi. Israel’s Supreme Court also refused disclosure in that case, ruling that the public interest in releasing the information did not outweigh potential harm to national security and foreign relations.

"You can see it in other places," Mack told The New Arab. "I had a procedure regarding the genocide in Rwanda, where the Rwandan government didn’t want to open its own archives and Israel, continuing to be involved in repression and atrocities themselves, don’t have an interest to open these archives."

Mack argued that this reflects a broader weakness in international accountability mechanisms: investigations often concentrate on direct perpetrators while leaving the role of foreign governments, arms suppliers and intermediaries insufficiently examined.

"This is a structural problem when we talk about international justice, where we should also talk about the arms suppliers and foreign actors that are involved in the conflict – not only on those that are directly involved in the offences," he said.

He cited Chad as another example. After Israel and Chad restored diplomatic relations in 2019, the two countries announced cooperation in areas including security. Israeli and international rights groups subsequently raised concerns about the lack of transparency surrounding possible military or security assistance to President Idriss Déby’s authoritarian government, warning that such assistance could be deployed against political opponents, activists and other critics.

For Mack, the continuing secrecy over Bosnia cannot be treated solely as a historical matter. He said the evidence submitted in the case indicated that Israel’s military dealings were undeterred by growing international outrage.

"After the genocide happened, there was still evidence that the shipments continued," he said. "So our conclusion was that Israel did business as usual during the years of the war, and also before and after the Srebrenica massacre that was recognised as genocide."

Mladić was convicted of genocide for the 1995 killings in Srebrenica, in which Bosnian Serb forces murdered more than 8,000 Bosniak men and boys after the UN-designated safe area fell. He was also convicted of crimes against humanity and war crimes, including terror and unlawful attacks on civilians during the siege of Sarajevo.

Mack stressed that the failure of the legal bid had not ended public discussion of Israel’s role during the Bosnian war.

"Despite the legal case failing, I think what is good is that both in Israel and outside of Israel, it’s become more common knowledge of the involvement of Israel in the war," he said. "So even if the Israeli government is trying to hide information in the archive, they can’t keep the public silent."

He said his work challenging Israeli arms exports and security ties in multiple countries was intended to demonstrate what he sees as a continuing state practice rather than a collection of isolated episodes.

"What I try to do is raise as many cases of Israeli involvement around the world so that the Israeli public can see that we are not talking about unique circumstances or incidents, but that it’s a pattern of behaviour of all Israeli governments," Mack said.

Mack linked that assessment to the absence of accountability for Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

"There is zero accountability in what’s going on," he said. "But I think it’s predictable given how there’s no justice and zero accountability regarding what Israel and Israel’s security forces are doing to Palestinians. So I think it’s logical that we will not see accountability for what Israelis are doing in other countries."