But I found this quote to be very interesting to say the least:
So is the government in Belgrade hiding him, or are they just incompetent?
Neither. I identified three times between the end of 2005 and the beginning of 2006 that Serbia could have arrested him and instead they sent him a message asking him to voluntarily surrender. They don't want to arrest him because they feel it could be politically damaging
I don't mean to sound (too) glib; but does anyone but me think that this tactic might be slightly counterproductive?
Mladic has been on the run for 10 years plus; and there has never been any indication (as far as I am aware) that he has planned to turn himself in.
Plus, Mladic isn't an idiot, one would assume that when Mladic receives a phone call asking him to surrender; he's probably going to switch safe houses or employ another tactic to avoid detection.
Secondly, exactly why does the Serbian government feel the need to ask Mladic to surrender in the first place?
The answer Del Ponte gives is because they feel that arresting him could be politically damaging.
By "politically damaging" does she mean that arresting Mladic could lead to massive civil strife and anarchy in the streets in Belgrade?
I know that Mladic still has sizeable support in Serbia; but somehow I doubt the streets of Belgrade will be turned into scene from "Apocalypse Now" if Mladic is apprehended.
Or, does "politically damaging" merely mean that the government is afraid of what damaging effects arresting the General will have on their re-election prospects?
Anyway, one can only hope that the powers that be will stop treating Mladic with kids gloves or as if he is simply being charged with not obeying a traffic law.