Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a22d47b608b3227c

Jump to content

Talk:Stari Most

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 5 months ago by ~2026-11044-41 in topic ICTY findings

ICTY findings

[edit]

Was the Old Bridge therefore a legitimate military target for the HVO forces? The ICTY Trial Chamber considered in 2013 that it was. In its judgment, it states that the Old Bridge was indeed a military target, but added that its destruction was disproportionate to the military gains achieved. It was therefore an illegal act, a war crime and a crime against humanity, being “an underlying act of persecutions on political, racial and religious grounds as a crime against humanity and unlawful infliction of terror on civilians as a violation of the laws and customs of war “).  The 2013 judgment (para. 1294-1366) takes the different elements into account in reaching this conclusion. It points to the historic and symbolic value of the bridge, recognizing at the same time that “the Old Bridge was essential to the ABiH for the combat activities of its units on the front line, for evacuations and for sending troops, provisions and material and that it was used for this purpose”. But the Trial Chamber also recognized that the Old Bridge was also “essential for supplies to the inhabitants of the Muslim enclave on the right bank of the Neretva” river.   ~2026-11044-41 (talk) 03:35, 19 February 2026 (UTC)Reply