Turkish
Italian
Spanish
Portuguese
Romanian
Albanian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Bulgarian
Greek
Hungarian
French
Croatian
Czech
Bundestag Commemorates Srebrenica with Deep Divisions
On the 30th anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre, the German Bundestag held a special debate to commemorate the victims of the genocide committed during the Bosnian War in July 1995. The session was intended to honor the memory of over 8,000 Muslim men and boys who were executed after the fall of the UN-declared safe zone in Srebrenica. However, what began as a solemn act of remembrance quickly descended into controversy following inflammatory remarks by members of the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party.
Parliamentarians from across the political spectrum paused regular budget proceedings to take part in the debate. Bundestag President Julia Klöckner (CDU) opened the session by labeling the Srebrenica massacre the worst war crime on European soil since World War II. She also addressed the failure of the United Nations peacekeeping forces stationed there at the time, saying that their inability to protect civilians remains a critical lesson in the enforcement of international human rights.
AfD Politicians Challenge Genocide Definition
The atmosphere in the Bundestag changed sharply when AfD parliamentarian Alexander Wolf questioned the international legal classification of the Srebrenica massacre as genocide. He argued that the actions of the Bosnian Serb forces, who spared women and children, did not fulfill the legal criteria for genocide. Wolf also criticized the external influence on Bosnia and Herzegovina’s internal reconciliation process, claiming that forced narratives hinder stability in the region.
His remarks triggered immediate backlash from other parliamentary groups. Siemtje Möller, deputy chair of the SPD parliamentary group, reminded the chamber that both the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) had legally confirmed the genocide classification in multiple rulings. Jürgen Hardt of the CDU accused Wolf of historical revisionism and aligning himself with war criminals rather than victims.
Domestic Politics Injected into Memorial
The situation worsened when AfD MP Martin Sichert used the commemorative platform to draw parallels between the Bosnian conflict and domestic issues in Germany. He claimed that “what happened in Yugoslavia on a large scale is mirrored today in schoolyards across Germany,” and asserted that Srebrenica should be seen as a warning against multiculturalism.
Members of the SPD and Die Linke parties responded by turning their backs to Sichert in protest. Bundestag President Klöckner reprimanded him for veering off topic and reminded him of the session’s intended purpose.
In response to the disruption, Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul (CDU) spontaneously took the podium. Speaking to both MPs and guests, including survivors and the Bosnian ambassador, he expressed regret that such a divisive and insensitive debate had taken place. Representing the federal government, he reaffirmed that Germany recognizes the events of Srebrenica as genocide without qualification.
International Observances Underscore Germany’s Role
While the Bundestag debate unfolded, a central memorial ceremony was taking place in the Bosnian village of Potocari, the site of the former Dutch UN base during the war. Thousands gathered, including international guests and relatives of the victims. As part of the ceremony, the remains of recently identified victims were buried alongside others already laid to rest.
The ceremony in Potocari marked the first official recognition of July 11 as an International Day of Remembrance for the Srebrenica Genocide, a designation established by the United Nations General Assembly in 2024. Notably, countries such as Serbia, China, Russia, and Hungary voted against the resolution. Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić did not attend the ceremony but issued a brief condolence message on social media, referring to the killings as a “horrible crime” without using the term “genocide.”
Munira Subašić, head of the Mothers of Srebrenica association, condemned those who voted against the UN resolution, saying they “choose to live in darkness” rather than confront historical truth.
United Nations’ Role Under Scrutiny
The failure of the UN to prevent the massacre was repeatedly highlighted in Berlin. Gunther Krichbaum, Minister of State for Europe in the Foreign Office, criticized the Dutch peacekeeping troops stationed in Srebrenica at the time. He said that international mandates are meaningless unless they are robustly enforced. The UN’s inability to act decisively in 1995, he argued, remains a stain on the organization’s credibility.
Krichbaum emphasized that the events in Srebrenica serve as a lasting warning to the international community: silence and inaction in the face of ethnic violence can lead to catastrophic outcomes. He called for stronger mandates and real-world accountability in future international peacekeeping missions.
Political Fallout Continues
The controversy surrounding the AfD’s remarks extended beyond the parliamentary floor. Public figures and human rights organizations condemned the party’s attempt to minimize the massacre. The timing of their comments, coinciding with global commemorations, added to the backlash.
Several MPs emphasized the danger of allowing revisionist narratives to enter formal discourse. They argued that publicly questioning established historical facts—especially during an official memorial—undermines Germany’s credibility in championing human rights.
Meanwhile, calls for stronger consequences grew. Critics argued that the Bundestag must protect its integrity and ensure such commemorative sessions are not used to promote political agendas that distort facts or disrespect victims.
The incident has once again raised concerns about the increasing presence of far-right narratives in German political discourse and the challenges of preserving historical truth within a pluralistic democratic system.
