Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract This article argues that the actions and activities of the ICTY have not been beneficial to achieving reconciliation or stability in the Balkans, but to the contrary are part of the reason that parts of the region have remained unstable. This result should not be unexpected as there is very little evidence, if indeed any, that indicates that protracted tribunals like the ICTY (and unlike, therefore, Nuremberg), have ever had, or even could have, beneficial effects on reconciliation. It argues, further, that the primary beneficiaries of the ICTY have been international human rights lawyers and human rights agencies, and in the region itself, the political parties of indictees. Considering the amounts of money spent on the Tribunal compared to those spent on rebuilding the region it seems that the ICTY has functioned better as an antiwar profiteer than it has as a promoter of peace and reconstruction
Robert M. Hayden (Thu,) studied this question.