The Bosnian War became known as one of the bloodiest and most destructive conflicts in Europe in the early 1990s. After the Cold War era, the ethnic, political, and religious tensions that appeared with the breakup of Yugoslavia turned the full attention of the international community to the Balkans. The most dramatic turning point in this process was the Srebrenica Massacre in 1995. Although it was declared a “safe zone” by the United Nations, more than 8,000 Bosniak men and boys were killed after Serbian forces took control of the city. This became not only a national tragedy but also a symbol of the moral and political failure of the international system, especially of Europe.[i]
Jasmila Žbanić’s 2020 film “Quo Vadis, Aida?” tells this tragedy again through an individual witness, while also creating a strong critical message about Europe. The film also works as a mirror that tests Europe’s values such as peace, human rights, and democracy.[ii] For this reason, “Quo Vadis, Aida?” is an important starting point to think about Europe’s historical memory, its role in international politics, and its weaknesses in crisis management.
After the Second World War, Europe rebuilt itself as a “fortress of peace and human rights,” learning lessons from the destruction caused by the Holocaust and fascism. Among the founding ideals of the European Union, preventing war from happening again on the continent and protecting human rights universally had an important place. However, in the mid-1990s, the tragedy in Bosnia showed how fragile these values were. The Srebrenica Massacre happened in the center of Europe, in front of everyone’s eyes. Even though the international media, civil society organizations, and political actors knew about the events, no effective action was taken. The United Nations peacekeeping force made up of Dutch soldiers avoided taking steps to stop the massacre, using “neutrality” and “chain of command” as reasons.[iii] This situation clearly shows what kind of choice Europe made between moral responsibility and political interest.
The film tells the events in Srebrenica through the eyes of a translator named Aida. Aida works at the United Nations base and acts as a bridge both between international forces and local people, and between political discourse and human reality. However, her struggle to protect her family fails because of bureaucratic deadlocks, unclear orders, and the passivity of European forces. Aida’s tragedy is actually a symbol of Europe’s helplessness in times of crisis. Throughout the film, the Dutch soldiers waiting without knowing what to do, the high-level commanders saying they are “waiting for a political decision,” and the civilians gathering helplessly in front of the gates show Europe’s calm but insensitive attitude.[iv] Here, Europe is shown not only as insufficient but also as an accomplice. Because passivity, in its results, creates an active responsibility.
The film reveals the deep gap between Europe’s normative identity and its actions in practice. Europe defends human rights as a universal principle; however, in Bosnia these values were suspended in front of political interests and bureaucratic concerns. The “peacekeeping” mission turned into passivity on the ground under the name of “neutrality.” This situation brings up a wider discussion about Europe’s role in the international system. The European Union and its member states are often described as a normative power; that is, it is argued that they influence through values, not military force. However, “Quo Vadis, Aida?” is written to show that this normative power quickly collapses in times of crisis. The Srebrenica Massacre represents some of Europe’s problems not only militarily but also morally.
After the Holocaust, Europe’s most important motto was “never again.” However, in the 1990s, another genocide happened in the very center of the continent.[v] This situation caused a serious break in Europe’s memory. Because the “never again” statement was tested in Bosnia and failed. In the film, the collapse of this statement is shown through individual sufferings. Aida’s inability to save her family is not only a woman’s tragedy; it is a dramatic symbol of Europe’s failure to apply its own principles. Throughout the film, the audience sees that not only the Bosniaks but also Europe has lost at the level of values.[vi]
“Quo Vadis, Aida?” is not only a story of the past but also a work that contains warnings for today. Europe’s passivity and interest-focused approach in Bosnia also appear in different crises today. In the Ukraine War, Europe’s military and political support, although more visible, still shows that calculations of interest are decisive. Similarly, after the Syrian Civil War, the refugee crisis tested Europe’s humanitarian values and showed that many countries closed their borders and turned to the “Fortress Europe” model.[vii] In this context, the question that gives the film its name, “Quo Vadis?”, meaning “Where are you going?”, is not only asked to Aida but also to Europe. Is Europe really a fortress of human rights and peace, or is it a power that easily sacrifices its values in front of interests? The answer to this question will be decisive not only for the Balkans but also for crises happening on a global scale.
In conclusion, the film “Quo Vadis, Aida?” is not only a historical drama but also a strong ethical and political critique directed at Europe. While the film reminds of a massacre that has left deep marks in Europe’s collective memory, it also raises questions that remain valid today. Srebrenica serves as a “painful warning” for Europe to redefine itself, support its values with concrete actions, and make the “never again” principle real. “Quo Vadis, Aida?” is not only the film of the Bosnian War but also of Europe. Europe’s past passivity and responsibilities are a lesson for today and tomorrow. This film asks the continent once again: “Where are you going, Europe?” The answer to this question will determine not only Europe’s future but also the future of global peace and human values.
[i] Mark Kermode, “Quo Vadis, Aida? review – profoundly moving story of the Srebrenica massacre”, The Guardian, https://www-theguardian-com.translate.goog/film/2021/jan/24/quo-vadis-aida-review-srebrenica-massacre-jasmila-zbanic-jasna-duricic?_x_tr_sl=en&_x_tr_tl=tr&_x_tr_hl=tr&_x_tr_pto=tc, (Access Date: 03.10.2025).
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Ambreen Yousuf, “‘Quo Vadis, Aida?’: Killers in Srebrenica never punished”, Daily Sabah, https://www.dailysabah.com/arts/cinema/quo-vadis-aida-killers-in-srebrenica-never-punished (Access Date: 03.10.2025).
[iv] Ibid.
[v] “Big Talk: Srebrenica. Never Again?”, IFFR, https://iffr.com/en/iffr/2021/events/big-talk-srebrenica-never-again, (Access Date: 03.10.2025).
[vi] A. O. Scott, “‘Quo Vadis, Aida?’ Review: Life and Death in Srebrenica”, The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/11/movies/quo-vadis-aida-review.html, (Access Date: 03.10.2025).
[vii] Ibid.
