dw.com
Serbia Protests: Alleged Sonic Weapon Use Following Train Station Collapse
Following a train station roof collapse in Novi Sad, Serbia (November 2024) resulting in 15 deaths, at least 100,000 people protested in Belgrade on March 15, 2025, against corruption; protesters allege police used sonic weapons, a claim the Interior Ministry denies.
- What are the immediate impacts of the alleged use of sonic weapons during the Belgrade protest on March 15, 2025?
- Following the collapse of a train station roof in Novi Sad, Serbia in November 2024, resulting in 15 deaths, protests erupted nationwide. The largest demonstration, on March 15, 2025 in Belgrade, involved at least 100,000 people protesting corruption. Participants claim police used sonic weapons, an allegation the Interior Ministry denies.",
- What are the long-term consequences of exposure to high-intensity sound waves from LRADs, and what international norms govern their use?
- The use of sonic weapons, or Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs), during the Belgrade protest raises concerns about potential human rights violations. LRADs emit high-intensity sound waves, causing pain and potential long-term hearing damage. The incident highlights the controversial use of non-lethal weapons against protestors.",
- What are the broader implications of this event for the use of non-lethal weapons in crowd control, and what measures can be implemented to prevent future incidents?
- This incident underscores the need for international scrutiny of non-lethal weapons and their potential for misuse. The lack of transparency surrounding the alleged use of LRADs in Belgrade raises serious questions about accountability and the protection of human rights during protests. Future investigations should focus on establishing clear guidelines and regulations for the use of such technology.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the use of acoustic weapons primarily through the lens of negative consequences and potential harm, particularly in the context of protests and alleged human rights abuses. The headline and introduction immediately establish this negative framing. While this is supported by evidence, a more balanced presentation might also include information on the intended purposes of the technology and the context in which it is sometimes used.
Language Bias
The article uses relatively neutral language, but words like "extrem laut" (extremely loud) and descriptions of the effects as causing "Schmerzen" (pain) and "psychischen Schäden" (psychological damage) contribute to a negative portrayal. While accurate, these descriptions could be slightly softened to maintain a more neutral tone. For example, instead of "Schmerzen", the article could say "discomfort" or "hearing discomfort".
Bias by Omission
The article provides a detailed explanation of acoustic weapons and their effects, including potential long-term consequences and historical uses. However, it focuses primarily on the negative impacts and doesn't explore potential legitimate uses of such technology (e.g., crowd control in extreme situations, deterring pirates). The omission of potential counterarguments or balanced perspectives could leave the reader with an overly negative view of acoustic weapons.
False Dichotomy
The article doesn't present a false dichotomy, but it could benefit from a more nuanced discussion of the ethical considerations. For example, it could discuss the tension between the potential for harm and the potential for legitimate uses in specific, narrowly defined circumstances.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the use of sonic weapons against protestors in Serbia, indicating a breakdown in peaceful protest and potentially undermining the rule of law. The lack of transparency and denial by authorities further exacerbates this issue.