I worked with a now deceased retired Colonel who served in the Yugoslavian Military before that country split into their own separate entities. He was a Bosnian Croat, was unfortunately tortured by the Serbian Military and only managed to escape his captivity through the help of his old comrades that were no serving in the Serbian Military to whom he was tasked to kill and vice-versa in war.Well agreed that war is war and you do what you have to do to win for the interests of your nation. On the other hand, genocidal wars based on ethnic supremacy, where soldiers become motivated to do things like impaling infants on bayonets for fun are almost always unsavory in nature.
If its in China's geopolitical interests to support the Serbs, then so be it. I'm just finding it funny another user is describing Serbia as a nation that "never compromised on morality" when their recent history is as blood soaked as Imperial Japan's and Nazi Germany's. And arguably has the same syndrome as Japan where genociders are still held up as war heroes.
I managed to impress upon him due to the fact that I managed to read up on that awful conflict splitting friends against each other along ethnic lines written by what many had thought or assumed to become Americas SOS, Amb Richard Holbrooke in his book "To End A War." That's where I first learned of the geeky, loner, water walker in U.S. Army parlance regarding officers that are promoted so quickly like then Lt.Gen. Wes Clark who served as J-5 (responsible for Strategy) in the Joint Chief of Staff of the U.S. military who then wrote his own book about his own experience from that conflict in Europe that most people in America hardly paid attention to and frankly gave a shit about (Kosovo War of 1999) Waging Modern Wars.
I can't and good conscience defend what the Serbs did in that civil war. Europe was as incompetent then as they are now. They could not deal with their own issues because they never had any cohesive stance that can be back by a single entity strong enough to actually will that continent to do something tangible. Which is why the U.S. had to always bail those Europeans then and now. George Bush Sr. did not want to get involve with Europe's growing mess; Bill Clinton saw an opportunity to assert his lack of foreign policy credentials took it upon his administration to apparently take some tangible actions that were sorely missing from the previous Republican administration headed by then Pres. Bush Sr. Anyways, I could go on and on about that conflict because I read up on that pretty extensively and had worked with a fellow that suffered at the hands of his former comrade-at-arms in Yugoslav Military.