Thousands honor the convicted Bosnian Serb commander as reactions from Belgrade to Podgorica and Skopje reveal how deeply the wars of the 1990s still shape the region’s European future.
Tirana Times, August 31, 2026 – PALE, Bosnia and Herzegovina. Candles burned and flares lit the Olympic Park as several thousand people gathered to honor Ratko Mladić, chanting his name and singing songs portraying the convicted Bosnian Serb military commander as a hero.
A day earlier, hundreds had gathered in Istočno Novo Sarajevo, in the Serb-run Republika Srpska entity, where a memorial was held and a banner displayed in Mladić’s honor. The gatherings, which should not be confused with central Sarajevo, drew hundreds in Istočno Novo Sarajevo and several thousand in Pale.
The images were striking: More than three decades after the Bosnian war ended, large crowds were paying tribute to a man who died while serving a life sentence for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.
Mladić commanded the Bosnian Serb army during the 1992-95 war. He was convicted for the Srebrenica genocide, where more than 8,000 Bosniak men and boys were killed, and for crimes including the campaign of terror against civilians during the siege of Sarajevo. His life sentence was upheld on appeal.
His death on Aug. 27 has exposed how far parts of the Western Balkans remain from a common understanding of the wars of the 1990s — and how the refusal to confront that past increasingly collides with the region’s declared ambition to join the European Union.
The sharpest illustration came from Belgrade.
Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić criticized the U.N. war crimes court for refusing to allow the seriously ill Mladić to return to Serbia and said the state would help organize a dignified burial if his family decided he should be buried there.
Justice Minister Nenad Vujić went further, saying Mladić would be buried with the “highest state and military honors.”
Those statements move the issue beyond private mourning. Senior Serbian officials are signaling that a man convicted of genocide can still receive the symbolism normally reserved for national service and honor.
Serbia ultimately cooperated with international justice, and Mladić was arrested there in 2011 after more than 15 years as a fugitive. But judicial cooperation has never fully developed into a political and social reckoning with the crimes established in court.
For significant parts of Serbia’s political establishment, Mladić is still viewed primarily through the prism of Serbian suffering and national defense rather than through the crimes for which he was convicted.
That view is not shared by all Serbs or all Serbian parties.
The Green-Left Front said Mladić’s death did not end responsibility for war crimes and warned against glorifying a convicted war criminal. The Democratic Party said death could not change facts established by international courts or erase responsibility. Other opposition groups took similar positions, while the nationalist New DSS praised Mladić as a defender of the Serbian people.
Yet the message from senior state officials remains especially significant because similar language has been echoed across the Drina River in Republika Srpska.
Bosnia-Herzegovina effectively spoke with two voices after Mladić’s death.
Denis Bećirović, chair of the country’s three-member presidency, said Mladić would remain written “in black letters” in the history of Bosnia, Europe and the world and that court judgments and facts would survive him.
Federation Prime Minister Nermin Nikšić said Mladić’s death did not alter the truth or diminish responsibility established by international courts, recalling the thousands killed, expelled and imprisoned, the Srebrenica genocide and years of terror against Sarajevo’s civilian population.
The Serbian member of Bosnia’s presidency, Željka Cvijanović, reacted in almost opposite terms. She said she received news of his death with “sincere sadness” and said Serbs would remember him as commander of the “glorious” Republika Srpska Army that defended their people.
Staša Košarac, deputy chair of Bosnia’s Council of Ministers, called Mladić a “patriot” and said he “was, is and will remain my commander.” Other senior Republika Srpska leaders also praised his wartime role.
The ceremonies in Pale and East Sarajevo were therefore not isolated expressions of grief. They reflected a political narrative deeply embedded in Republika Srpska’s institutions and public life.
Three decades after the Dayton peace agreement ended the war, Bosnia’s senior officials still cannot agree on the historical and moral meaning of one of its central wartime figures, even when international courts have established the legal facts.
The controversy has also reached Montenegro, where it intersects directly with the country’s EU membership bid.
Parliament Speaker Andrija Mandić announced that he had sent condolences to Mladić’s son Darko, personally and on behalf of his New Serbian Democracy party. His political ally Milan Knežević published a photograph of Mladić with the message: “Every Serbian house has a Ratko.”
Mandić is not a marginal nationalist figure. He presides over the parliament of a country negotiating membership in the European Union.
Montenegro’s president and government quickly distanced themselves.
President Jakov Milatović’s office said Mladić’s convictions for genocide and serious war crimes were legally established facts and that sympathy toward his family could not justify relativizing those crimes.
Foreign Minister Ervin Ibrahimović said a finally convicted war criminal, “alive or dead,” deserved only contempt.
Prime Minister Milojko Spajić’s Europe Now Movement said Mandić’s condolences represented his and his party’s position, not government policy, and said there could be no relativization of final judgments for genocide and war crimes.
But the case raises a broader question: Can a country credibly embrace European values while one of its highest-ranking officials honors a convicted war criminal?
Croatia, an EU member and Montenegro’s neighbor, said Mandić’s condolences were unacceptable and contrary to European values. Zagreb also reminded Podgorica that bilateral disputes and political choices remain relevant to Montenegro’s progress toward membership.
A much sharper personal judgment came from retired Croatian General Rahim Ademi, who fought forces under Mladić’s command during the war in Croatia.
“I can say that he was not a soldier at all,” Ademi said in comments circulated by Daily Croatia after Mladić’s death. “He never showed his military skills in warfare, he showed ‘courage’ only on innocent civilians, killing civilians and people who were unarmed.”
The post said that in September 1991, Ademi and his units defeated Serbian forces under Mladić’s command near Šibenik.
Ademi’s remarks underscore how sharply Mladić’s legacy differs across the former Yugoslavia. Where some Serbian nationalists celebrate him as a formidable commander, Ademi described a military record defined by violence against civilians rather than battlefield skill.
The contradiction is particularly relevant for Montenegro. The country can close negotiating chapters and align legislation with Brussels, but EU integration is not only a technical exercise. The European project also rests on the rejection of ethnic warfare, genocide and the glorification of those convicted of such crimes.
Honoring Mladić as a hero and claiming adherence to those values are increasingly difficult positions to reconcile.
North Macedonia has faced a similar test.
Dalibor Kitanović, director of the state Agency for the Realization of Community Rights, caused an uproar after glorifying Mladić publicly. At the same time, the Democratic Party of Serbs, led by Local Self-Government Minister Ivan Stoilković, published a tribute describing Mladić as a soldier and general who had placed his life at the service of his people.
The government responded that Mladić had been finally convicted of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes and called Kitanović’s position “personal and unacceptable.” It said he should withdraw it or, if unable to accept government policy, leave his post.
The governing Albanian coalition VLEN condemned the glorification, while the opposition DUI and Social Democrats demanded political accountability. The episode showed how unresolved interpretations of the Yugoslav wars continue to reach into contemporary governing coalitions.
In Kosovo, reactions focused primarily on Serbia.
Acting minister Andin Hoti said that in 2026 there was still a European state that had not completed the process of confronting its past and where war criminals continued to be glorified. He questioned how that could be reconciled with Serbia’s EU candidacy.
Vjosa Osmani similarly argued that Serbia’s reaction showed its political establishment had not fundamentally changed, while criticizing Brussels for continuing to support a candidate country that glorifies war criminals and denies genocide and other wartime crimes.
The European Commission has drawn the clearest line.
It said any glorification of war criminals runs counter to the most fundamental European values and has no place either in the European Union or among candidate countries.
That warning applies not only to Serbia but also to the contradictions exposed in Montenegro and North Macedonia.
Albert Rakipi, chairman of the Albanian Institute for International Studies, AIIS, and a former deputy foreign minister of Albania, said the reactions to Mladić’s death represented a deeply troubling development for Balkan societies, particularly for countries seeking membership in the European Union.
“It is profoundly disappointing that, more than three decades after the wars, significant parts of Balkan societies are still not ready to break with the criminal legacy of the wars of the 1990s,” Rakipi said. “For countries that aspire to join the European Union, this is especially critical. European integration cannot be reduced to negotiating chapters and adopting legislation. It also requires a clear political and moral break with the glorification of war crimes and those convicted of committing them.”
European Parliament rapporteur for Serbia Tonino Picula said participation by Serbian government representatives in Mladić’s funeral would reveal the degree to which authorities in Belgrade identify with his crimes and called for an appropriate EU response.
The question is whether Brussels will treat the latest glorification merely as offensive rhetoric or as a political test with consequences for enlargement.
The wars ended more than three decades ago, but the battle over their meaning did not.
Mladić’s death has shown that the issue is no longer simply whether governments cooperate with international courts or formally recognize their judgments. The deeper test is whether political elites accept what those judgments mean when the perpetrators belong to their own national community.
Many Serbian politicians, officials and citizens in Serbia and elsewhere have clearly rejected the glorification of war criminals. The issue should therefore not be presented as if an entire nation refuses to confront its past.
But the institutional weight of the reactions since Mladić’s death is difficult to ignore.
A Serbian justice minister promises the highest state and military honors. Montenegro’s parliament speaker sends condolences. A minister’s party in North Macedonia publishes a tribute. Senior Bosnian Serb officials continue to portray Mladić as an honorable commander. Thousands gather in Pale to chant his name.
These are not memories confined to history books. They show that the politics of the 1990s still reaches into governments, parliaments and governing coalitions across the Western Balkans.
Ratko Mladić is dead. The political mythology built around him is not.
And as long as convicted war criminals can be celebrated by officials who simultaneously speak of a European future, confronting the past will remain not only a question of history and reconciliation, but a test of what European integration in the Balkans actually means.
The post Mladić’s Death Exposes the Balkans’ Unfinished Reckoning With War Crimes appeared first on Tirana Times.
