THE HISTORICAL and CONTEMPORARY CONTEXT of THE ‘FORCED TRANSFER of THE ETHNIC GROUPS’ FROM HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE: THE BALKAN CASE

Abstract

Since the 1990s, crimes against humanity have been codified in different international treaties such as the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (1993) and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998). The Rome Statute provides the most recent and broad list of criminal acts that may constitute crimes against humanity, including forced migration. However, in the early 20th cc, within Southeastern Europe, population transfers were legitimated by the bilateral agreements based on so-called liberating actions and supported by the international institution as a tool to sustain peace in the region. This paper by analyzing the bilateral agreements and population transfers between the Balkan states aims to answer these main questions: Why did ‘forcible transfer of population’ began to be defined as ‘a crime against humanity’ by the UN in 1998 but not before? Why population and especially minority transfers were seen as a mean for peace before 1990s? The comparative approach of this paper based mainly on the Balkan region, by displaying the historical and contemporary contexts of population transfers, suggests a new theoretical framework that the early population transfers and contemporary displaced population are different in terms of 4 issues: legal frameworks; the impact on national identity; the geographical extension and lastly reintegration and return policies.