History - THE OMARSKA MEMORIAL DEBATE

Phase 1: Initiation

In 2004, the purchase of the mine by Mittal Steel and their plans to re-start production raised the issue of how the Omarska camp should be commemorated and what should be done about the bodies of victims still believed to be on the site. Survivors began contacting Mittal Steel to urge them to deal with these issues in a responsible way.

Satko Mujagic of the Dutch-based Optimisti 2004 group wrote to Mittal Steel in Rotterdam suggesting that the company lease the site of the White House area of the mine buildings to survivors so that they can commemorate the camp. Edin Ramulic also wrote to Mittal Steel on behalf of the respected Prijedor-based NGO IZVOR.

Mittal Steel's European office responded by appointing the British charity Soul of Europe to mediate between Serbs, Croats and Muslims and seek to achieve a memorial project agreed by "all sides" that "does not antagonise local Serbs".

more about the paticipants

Phase 2: The Soul of Europe project

In 2005, Soul of Europe began what they saw as a mediation process between "local Serbs, Bosniaks and Croats", and appointed a local project team to negotiate a solution. Former British priest Donald Reeves and his colleague Peter Pelz started gathering local partners among survivors, mine personnel and local Serbs, holding round tables to discuss a possible memorial.

What they promised

the project would be owned and controlled by survivors
it would be a memorial project not a reconciliation project
Local Serb concerns would not drive the project
They would create a process for all survivors to contribute, rather than dictate solution

Throughout 2005, the project proceeded with preliminary talks, often one-to-one rather than group-based discussions among stakeholders, resulting in confusion about Soul of Europe's plans. Verbal assurances, rather than written decisions, were offered about various concerns. For commercial reasons, the project was rushed through, meaning few stakeholders outside Soul of Europe's inner group had a chance to contribute. Also, those who disagreed with important aspects of the project were quickly excluded and doubts cast on their legitimacy. In Soul of Europe's internal reports to Mittal Steel - some of the only written evidence of decisions taken by the project - they go so far as to identify "spoilers": those was disagree and should be worked around, including some survivors.

Faced with what was probably for them a surprising level of emotion and anxiety about the project among potential stakeholders, Soul of Europe tried to find a solution - any solution - that would fulfil their brief of achieveing a PR success for the company without antagonising local Serbs. Local Serb authorities and mine personnel opposed the idea of a memorial centre for obvious reasons - it would tell the story of their own crimes against local Bosniaks and Croats - and yet Soul of Europe continues to court individuals such as the local Mayor, Marko Pavic, who was involved in the crimes against Bosniaks and Croats in 1992, as described by Human Rights Watch here.

This confusion about key issues (who, what, etc.) was exacerbated by an extraordinary lack of transparency and clearly stated principles. Disturbingly, even the Bosniak survivor representatives were not been party to much of the decision-making, although Soul of Europe claim edthe project belongs to them.

Concerns raised by survivors

No agreed principles, process or documentation; verbal assurances offered and broken
Even participants did not know what was going on
Mediators imposing their own patronising reconciliation agenda
Serbian war criminals had more influence than most survivors
By seeking support of Serb authorities they made the project a hostage to fortune
Mediators used the tried and trusted English "Divide and Conquer" technique with local survivors and the diaspora to create a small group of supporters to the exclusion of the majority

Soul of Europe had originally intended a multi-day conference in north-west Bosnia where stakeholders and those with an interest in the project could contribute. In the end, on December 1, 2005, Soul of Europe and Mittal Steel announced their preferred solution at a small, closed event in Banja Luka. Despite their efforts, Mayor Pavic did not attend, and Serb mine representatives had to be literally ordered to show up by Mittal. Worst of all, Bosniak survivors were discouraged from recalling the horrors of the camp in an attempt to placate Serb feelings about the memorial.

Indeed, it is not clear whether this meeting announced the beginning of a process, if so what sort of process, or a full solution. The only communication was a short report from the Bosniak representatives, translated here, that says they agreed:

An "in-principle solution" worked up over the last 6 months by 4 working groups, in which the area around the small, notorious White House would be given over to a memorial.
In early 2006, a committee will be formed to build the memorial centre, and later manage it. The committee will have a Mittal member because the memorial is to be paid for by them.
Religious leaders will be invited to contribute, and other individuals invited to play a part.

In a follow-up meeting on December 19th, Soul of Europe admitted that in addition to Marko Pavic, two other suspected Serbian war criminals had been involved in the process, which had the effect of re-traumatising survivors and making them fearful of the process. They also informed survivors that the memorial would now be simply a "Muslim memorial", not a memorial telling the story of the camp; it would be wholly owned and controlled by Mittal and their local Serbian business partners; and access to the main site would be twice yearly under control of the mine company. Once again, vague, verbal assurances were given that survivors concerned would be addressed, and Soul of Europe representatives characteristically refused to accept the minutes of the meeting drawn up by the survivors, without offering their own version.

Soul of Europe talk about their role as being to "mediate between the communities" and "break the wall of silence" between them. What they do not understand is that both Serbs and Bosniaks know full well what happened in 1992; it is just that Serbs don't want to admit it and Bosniaks are not allowed to commemorate it. The mid-point between denial and truth is not denial .... but nor is it truth. What is needed at Omarska is not mediation. What is needed is for the world's biggest Steel company to take a moral stand, do the right thing in supporting the establishment of a Foundation to own and run a memorial to the camp, and work with Serb employees to help them understand why this is also in their interests as well. If the local Serb authorities give them any trouble, then they have recourse to the UN and EU's Office of the High Representative and the legal state structures established by the Dayton Accords.

What they delivered

Only the small White House building would form part of the memorial and the memorial would be mostly on a newly constructed site that did not exist in 1992; access to the real camp buildings will be twice yearly
Mittal and their Serbian partners would own and control the memorial site, and sit on the board of a new body inclusing survivor organisations that will be establilshed by Soul of Europe; Mittal would fund the entire process (although survivors did not ask for this)
Religious leaders would be invited to take part - to pursue the inter-faith reconciliation agenda - although religion had no part to play in the camp and the crimes committed there
The plans for the memorial would not be subject to proper consultation; they contained controversial ideas such as the use of statues and barbed wire to create an unrealistic, stereotypical impression of the camp
There would be no survey of the mine for mass graves

What they should have done

Bring all survivors and the Bosniak diaspora together (not seek to divide them!) to discuss the issues and help them build capacity for a Foundation to run the project
Persuade Mittal to offer alease to this Foundation over some of the camp buildings (which are anyway close to the end of their useful life and of little economic value) subject to good behaviour and good neighbour guarantees from the Foundation
Lease the site, with its own access road, and let the Foundation get on with the job of raising the money and deciding what sort of memorial they would like
Separately, support local Serb-run reconciliation and social initiatives and re-assure them them that a truthful memorial poses no threat to them
Prioritise the funding of a full survey of the site by the ICMP to ensure that mining production does not interfere or damage with important forensic evidence

Phase 3: Reflection and Consultation

In response to the failings of the Soul of Europe project, we established this web site and Petition Archive 2 to argue for a clear set of principles to underpin a survivor-led memorial project.

Rather than criticise Mittal Steel, we tried to engage with them based on an understanding of the sensitivity of their position. We shared a briefing with them to explain our concerns and suggest a constructive way forward.

In February 2006, Mittal Steel issued a press release confirming that they were suspending the mediation process, once it had become clear that it was not widely supported by survivors and families of the dead/missing. Soul of Europe used its access to mainstream media journalists to report this as the end of the project, which they claimed was scuppered by "extremists on all sides". However, Mittal Steel confirmed to us that they were still prepared to continue the memorial project if survivors and families of the dead could reach broad agreement on how to proceed.

Representing the signatories of our Petition Archive 2, we remained in contact with Mittal Steel and also with the key players locally, including those that were part of the Soul of Europe process and also those excluded by it. In March 2006, the main local organisations signed a joint letter setting out their preferred next steps, and this was sent to Mittal Steel in April.

Mittal Steel are now consulting about next steps and we await their decision to continue the project.

We believe one of the first steps should be to consult those who have an interest in a memorial centre at Omarska and help them think through what it means for them.

That is why we have set up this wiki space to help people contribute to the process before it reaches the implementation stage and it is too late to make their voices heard.

Please think about What you can do to help and get involved

Useful Links

Na Bosanskom

Background

The Memorial Project

The Debate

History of the project

Phase 1: Initiation

Phase 2: The Soul of Europe project

Phase 3: Reflection and Consultation