The latter attack was the alleged reason for NATO air strikes against Bosnian Serb forces that would eventually lead to the Dayton Peace Accords and the end of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

[4] Republika Srpska authorities denied all responsibility and accused the Bosnian government of shelling its people to incite international outrage and NATO intervention.

[8] Rescue workers and United Nations (UN) personnel rushed to help the numerous civilian casualties, while footage of the event soon made news reports across the world.

Republika Srpska authorities, as in the 1994 incident, denied all responsibility and accused the Bosnian government of bombarding its people to incite international outrage and possible intervention.

[14][15] [16] David Harland, the former head of UN Civil Affairs in Bosnia, claimed at the trial of General Dragomir Milošević in ICTY, that he was responsible for the creation of the myth that UNPROFOR was unable to determine who had fired the mortar shells that caused the second Markale massacre.

The myth that has survived for more than ten years, Harland said, was created because of a "neutral statement" made by General Rupert Smith, the UNPROFOR commander.

[17] In January 2004, prosecutors in the trial against Galić, a Bosnian Serb general, Sarajevo-Romanija Corps commander in the siege of Sarajevo, introduced into evidence a report including the testimony of ammunition expert Berko Zečević.

Working with two colleagues, Zečević's investigation revealed a total of six possible locations from which the shell in the first Markale massacre could have been fired, of which five were under VRS and one under ARBiH control.

The Trial Chamber concluded the Markale town market had been hit on 28 August 1995 by a 120 mm mortar shell fired from the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps positions.

[19] According to Tim Judah, "The Serbian argument was grotesque, since what they wanted the world to believe was that of the hundreds of thousands of shells they fired, none had ever hurt anyone.