| Date | November 2019 | Marks available | 4 | Reference code | 19N.1.BP.TZ0.18 |
| Level | Both SL and HL | Paper | Paper 1 - first exams 2017 | Time zone | TZ0 |
| Command term | Analyse | Question number | 18 | Adapted from | N/A |
Question
The sources and questions relate to case study 2: Kosovo (1989–2002) — Impact: International reaction and impact; International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY); indictment of Milosevic.
Source S
Rachel Kerr, an expert in war studies, writing in the academic book The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia: An Exercise in Law, Politics and Diplomacy (2004).
In the immediate aftermath of Milosevic’s downfall in October 2000, Western leaders took a conciliatory [reasoned] tone, choosing not to force the issue [of his arrest] in such a fragile political environment. The [International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, ICTY] Prosecutor, Carla del Ponte, travelled to Belgrade to press the issue in January 2001; and momentum gradually built, which resulted in the transfer of Milosevic to The Hague on 28 June 2001. Although the oil embargo and flight ban were lifted in October 2000, the United States and the United Kingdom were determined to retain key sanctions until Milosevic was handed over. This policy was not shared by the whole of the European Union, however; Italy and Germany were alleged to be keen to lift sanctions, and even to grant immunity to Milosevic. In February, the United States made the provision of an aid package worth $100 million conditional on concrete signs of cooperation and imposed a deadline of 31 March 2001. On 9 March 2001, the United States specified exact conditions, one of which was the arrest of Milosevic … In the end, the combination of withholding financial assistance and international isolation, coupled with domestic political manoeuvrings in the FRY [Federal Republic of Yugoslavia] and Serbia, led to Milosevic’s detention and transfer to The Hague. The day after Milosevic was transferred, $1.3 billion worth of aid was pledged to the FRY.
[Source: adapted from Rachel Kerr, The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia:
An Exercise in Law, Politics and Diplomacy, © Rachel Kerr 2004, published by Oxford University Press.
Reproduced with permission of the Licensor through PLSclear]
With reference to its origin, purpose and content, analyse the value and limitations of Source S for an historian studying the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia’s (ICTY’s) indictment and arrest of Slobodan Milosevic.
Markscheme
Value:
- The author is an expert in war studies.
- It aims to consider the role and practice of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, ICTY (the tribunal).
- It provides detail about the events that led to the arrest and extradition of Milosevic to the tribunal.
Limitations:
- Given its publication date, the source has limited hindsight on events.
- It is a general book on the tribunal.
- It focuses on international pressure for the arrest and transfer of Milosevic to the tribunal following the indictment and lacks balance on internal factors leading to his arrest in Serbia.
The focus of the question is on the value and limitations of the question. If only value or limitations are discussed, award a maximum of [2]. Origins, purpose and content should be used as supporting evidence to make relevant comments on the values and limitations. For [4] there must be at least one reference to each of them in either the values or the limitations.
