(SpeakOut.com, April 1, 2001)-- After a 26-hour standoff, Serbian police finally arrested the man who provoked the breakup of Yugoslavia in 1991 and full-scale war with NATO in 1999, Slobodan Milosevic. In between, Milosevic constantly stoked vehement nationalism and ethnic prejudice among his fellow countrymen, leading to civil wars that killed or maimed hundreds of thousands -- wars only now beginning to heal.

The former dictator's arrest followed pressure from the U.S., which had threatened to deny Yugoslavia's still-fledgling elected government $50 million in aid unless Milosevic was apprehended on international war crimes charges. But, according to wire reports and reports in newspapers, including the Washington Post, Milosevic surrendered only after receiving reassurances he was being arrested by local authorities on Serbian charges of corruption and abuse of power -- not in connection with international war crimes charges handed down by the UN's Hague Tribunal in 1999 and since. The reassurances, and the thousands of heavily armed Milosevic supporters throughout Serbia, appear to be leading to a new dilemma facing diplomats and Serbian authorities over what to do with him.

The beginning of the end for Milosevic came in the early fall of 2000. Protesters seized control of the Yugoslav parliament building on October 5, turning a week of protests into a full-scale revolution against 13 years of power that from its earliest days soon became a fully-fleged dictatorship under the iron-fisted rule of Slobodan Milosevic.

"We are in Eastern Europe 1989 again," a U.S. intelligence official told NBC.com last fall, "The question is whether we are seeing Berlin or Bucharest." The potential parallels to the 1989 revolution in Romania were most troubling. While the revolution in East Germany was relatively peaceful, the Romanian one was not. Nationalist hard-liner Nicolae Ceausescu was overthrown in a short, violent, and bloody revolution where about 1,000 were killed in a last-ditch effort to save his crumbling regime. Similar violence loomed, once again, in Serbia.

Fortunately, support for Vojislav Kostunica, the pronounced winner of the Sept. 24 election in Serbia, quickly spread, calming the situation in the streets. But there remained differences among international leaders on the measures necessary for a peaceful change of power, and over Milosevic's fate.

While Milosevic's days in power may be over, he did not go gently. He weathered a serious threat to his regime during country-wide strikes and demonstrations in 1996 after opposition members were granted electoral concession. His last-ditch call for a run-off election on October 8, 2000, was a tactic motivated by the same divide-and-conquer strategy that served him well throughout his tenure. It didn't work in the end, but as NATO forces found out when they bombed Belgrade for 78 days in 1999, cornered as he was, Milosevic held out for as long as possible.

With a $5 million dollar price on his head, a full-scale insurrection at home, and potentially violent crowds of demonstrators in the streets to make sure he doesn't come back to power, Milosevic had reasons to flee, but apparently the risk of death or arrest was too great. In more recent months, his compound has been under constant police surveillance.

Some in NATO considered giving Milosevic a way out by offering him immunity. The U.S. State Department answered that with an unconditional "no" on October 4, 2000, by demanding that Russia or any country turn Milosevic over to the Hague International War Crimes Tribunal if he leaves the country. By October 6, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov finally flew to Yugoslavia, and offered Russia's recognition to "president-elect" Vojislav Kostunica. This represents a turnaround. Russian President Vladimir Putin, had previously only offered to mediate the electoral dispute between Milosevic and Kostunica, has claimed that such statements "are clearly linked with the forthcoming presidential election in the U.S., [and] only pour oil on the flame of the growing election conflict in Yugoslavia.

Jiri Dienstbier, the UN human rights representative in the former Yugoslav republics suggested last fall that dismissing the UN war crimes indictment against Milosevic would help bring about a more peaceful transition. "Punishing Milosevic," he said, "shouldn't take precedence over the future of 10 million Serbs." He may not agree with that softer approach now that Milosevic is in custody -- and his statement was immediately dismissed by members of the Hague war crimes tribunal as "extremely disturbing." But the problem of punishing Milosevic without causing civil unrest may again haunt Serbia's new government and NATO as they move forward on what must be done: bringing Milosevic to justice.

On One Hand...

The U.S. should allow President Kostunica's government to try Milosevic in Serbia only, if bloodshed is to be prevented. That doesn't mean Milosevic needs to be let off the hook. It just means the U.S. and its allies must allow Serbia to act as a sovereign power, and try its former leader on lesser, Serbian charges and punish him on easier terms than those the Hague would like to mete out. Milosevic has been cornered, yes. But he's a ruthless survivor, and if the still-fragile government of President Vojislav Kostunica --which has publicly said it is against extradition -- shows itself so concerned with Western opinion as to hand over Milosevic to the UN, there will be civil disturbances and violence in the streets and growing opposition to government in general. These would be developments counter to U.S. aims of stability in the region.

On the Other Hand...

Milosevic should not be allowed to escape the International Court in the Hague. Nor should any deals be worked out offering him asylum or safe passage out of Yugoslavia by any foreign power. He is a war criminal who bears ultimate responsibility for one of the major genocidal atrocities of the late 20th century. He is currently indicted for his actions in Kosovo. The Hague has succeeded in arresting a number of those responsible for the war crimes; many of the men behind the operations are still free. Allowing him to escape international punishment would only offer Milosevic yet another chance to exercise power, perhaps from prison. More important, the Hague's indictment against Milosevic must stand if we're going to give notice to the Pinochets or the other strongmen of the world that executive power does not protect anyone from justice.

• In May 1999, the Hague tribunal indicted Milosevic for crimes against ehtnic Albanians in Kosovo. Carla Del Ponte, chief prosecutor of the UN war crimes tribunal has also said that Milosevic is also being investigated for alleged crimes in earlier wars in Bosnia and Croatia.

• Survivors from the Srebrenica enclave, where thousands of Muslim men were killed by Bosnian Serb forces in 1995, denounced the idea tabled by some leaders in the fall of 2000 that Milosevic could be offered political asylum in another country in order to avoid further turmoil in Yugoslavia.

The Associated Press, Reuters, Washington Post, New York Times