yugoslavias implosion

and a historic figure. At the same time, the fact that his death
preceded a sentence took a load off his supporters’ minds. The manner
in which the Serbian elite reacted to his death demonstrates how
close to their political and ideological heart Milošević’s regime had
been.
According to the masterminds behind Milošević’s policies—some
of whom took the stand in his defense—the international community
is to blame for Milošević’s death. Mihajlo Marković, academic
and chief ideologist of the Socialist Party of Serbia, declared that
Milošević’s death “testified once again that the Hague Tribunal was
political, rather than a legal institution.” 526 Smilja Avramov, an advocate
of conspiracy theories as well as a professor at the Belgrade
Law School, said, “That’s not a tribunal, that’s a morgue! That’s
the place for killing Serbs! Milošević is the sixth Serb in a row who
met his death in that court.” 527 Academic Čedomir Popov grieved
over Milošević, mourning that “a major historic figure has met an
undignified death he did not deserve. … History and the part of the
Serbian people that is fully aware of national interests and the meaning
of dignity will identify those who are responsible for Milošević’s
death.” 528
Reactions to Milošević’s death also brought to the fore genuine
devotion to the program that had been given plebiscitary support.
Serbs said goodbye to the man they adored—but also hated
because they had expected the impossible from him. Milošević and
his regime were blamed for all their dashed hopes. By denying their
own responsibility for the failures that were attributed exclusively to
their former leader, Serbian individuals and groups embraced collective
denial on a grand scale.
526 Vecernje Novosti, March 12, 2006 .
527 Kurir, March 13, 2006 .
528 Večernje Novosti, March 13, 2006 .
307
ChApter 4