Srebrenica: The Impossible Choices of a Commander

摘要

This paper examines the moral dimension of the events in Srebrenica, and explore whether Lieutenant Colonel Thom Karremans took the correct moral and ethical approach, as he decided not to defend the enclave of Srebrenica during the first five days of the attack on it by Bosnian Serbs. When faced with an ethical or moral dilemma, decisions are extremely difficult. But commanding officers need to make split-second decisions in circumstances in which the ethical or moral dilemma might not have presented itself yet to the fullest extent. Marine Corps Warfighting Publication 6-11 defines an ethical dilemma as 'the necessity to choose between competing obligations in circumstances that prevent one from doing both. Action is at the hearth of ethical behaviour. An academic understanding of what is right and wrong is irrelevant unless it is coupled with appropriate action. And even then, the answer is not always clear.' Action is clearly the most important element in this definition. Taking the appropriate action to solve the dilemma requires choosing between competing obligations. However, to make that choice one must first recognize the dilemma. The skills to recognize an ethical dilemma and make the choice between competing obligations may be influenced by several factors. The decisions Karremans had to make during the fall of the enclave were very much about life and death and clearly influenced the history of Srebrenica and its population. The framework for analyses presented here identifies the skills that commanders need to possess to make the right decisions when faced with an ethical or moral dilemma. In the case of Srebrenica, it became clear that these skills were affected by many external and internal factors. As a result, it was extremely difficult for Karremans to make the morally right decision and take appropriate action.