news.sky.com
Sonic Weapon Allegedly Used Against Serbian Protestors
During a silent vigil in Belgrade on March 15th, 2024, a powerful, unidentified sound caused panic among anti-corruption protestors, raising concerns about the potential illegal use of sonic weapons by Serbian authorities, prompting investigations and sparking a debate on human rights and government transparency.
- What specific evidence suggests the use of acoustic weapons against protestors in Belgrade on March 15th, 2024, and what are the immediate implications?
- On March 15th, 2024, a sudden, unexplained sound caused panic and a stampede among anti-corruption protestors in Belgrade, Serbia, during a silent vigil. Protestors described the sound as immensely powerful and resembling a low-flying plane. The incident led to injuries and raised serious concerns about potential human rights abuses.
- What are the long-term implications of this incident regarding the use of acoustic weapons for crowd control, specifically concerning international regulations and human rights?
- The event highlights the potential for misuse of acoustic weapons to suppress dissent and the lack of international regulations governing their sale and use. The secrecy surrounding LRAD ownership and operation, coupled with conflicting government statements, indicates a systemic issue of transparency and potential human rights violations. This incident could set a precedent for similar actions in other countries.
- How does the Serbian government's response to the incident, including conflicting statements and the revelation of LRAD purchases, reflect broader issues of transparency and accountability?
- The incident is linked to the alleged use of a Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD), a sonic weapon capable of inflicting pain and dispersing crowds. Initial denials by Serbian officials were followed by admissions of possessing LRADs and conflicting statements regarding their deployment. Documents leaked to the opposition appear to show purchases of LRADs by the Serbian Ministry of the Interior, raising questions about accountability and transparency.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article presents a relatively neutral framing of the events. While it details the government's denials and subsequent admissions, it also gives voice to the concerns of protestors and human rights groups. The headline, if there were one, would greatly influence this score. The chronological presentation allows for a balanced view of unfolding events.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral and objective. The article uses direct quotes extensively, allowing the reader to assess the opinions and perspectives of various individuals involved. However, terms like "powerful acoustic sound device" and "painful levels of sound" could be considered somewhat loaded. More neutral alternatives might include "acoustic device" and "high-intensity sound".
Bias by Omission
The article does a good job of presenting multiple perspectives, including those of the Serbian government, protestors, human rights groups, and experts. However, the article does not include statements from members of the public who may have experienced the effects of the acoustic device beyond the accounts of named individuals. This omission might limit the reader's understanding of the broader impact of the incident.
Sustainable Development Goals
The incident involving the alleged use of acoustic devices against peaceful protestors in Serbia directly undermines the principles of peace, justice, and strong institutions. The government's initial denial, subsequent conflicting statements, and lack of transparency erode public trust in institutions and create an environment of fear and repression, hindering the ability of citizens to exercise their fundamental rights to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression. The use of such devices against civilians is a violation of human rights, and the lack of accountability for those responsible undermines the rule of law.