 MILOSEVIC TRIAL DISCUSSION ARCHIVE |
| JURIST >> LEGAL NEWS - WORLD LAW >> Discussion >> Milosevic Trial Discussion Archive |
—————————————————————————————
Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic is on trial for war crimes in the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia at The Hague. This marks the first time a head of state has been personally prosecuted before an international criminal court.
Is Slobodan Milosevic getting a fair trial?
————————————————————————————
NOTICE: Comments posted to this discussion board are solely the responsibility of individual posters, and not of JURIST, its owner, operators, host or staff. JURIST reserves the right to block or remove posts that are in violation of law or that advocate illegal acts, that are obscene, disruptive, defamatory, threatening, harassing or abusive, that are in breach of intellectual property rights, rights of publicity or rights of privacy, that are advertisements or solicitations, or that are not related to the topic being discussed.
————————————————————————————
- discussion archive
- Friday August 01, 2003 at 12:09 am
I guess Ramsey Clark is back!Following, we summarize the main ICDSM Hague meeting conclusions:
1. Main and unifying goal of ICDSM is the release of Slobodan Milosevic and public promotion of his internationally important struggle for truth, justice, freedom and national dignity;
2. Agreed concrete public, political and legal actions to fight for a one-year break of the Hague process;
3. Joint actions to raise urgently needed necessary funds for the defense (ongoing efforts show first promising results);
4. Coordinated actions with the Serb/Yugoslav Diaspora;
5. Leading and coordinating role of Sloboda in all activities;
6. Support for progress in setting up new national committees in France, USA, The Netherlands, Canada.
7. The ICDSM has two co-chairmen, Velko Valkanov and Ramsey Clark, a multitude of vice-chairmen and a Board of members who are mainly leaders of national branches and of important task forces.
It is obligatory that all ICDSM members work in accordance with these conclusions. All actions contravening these conclusions can not be made on behalf or in the function of ICDSM.
Dan B
Canada - Friday August 01, 2003 at 5:19 am
Vera & AndyDidn't we have some testimony regarding Prijedor during the Milosevic hearings ?
That testimony and cross examination may shed some light on the Stakic judgement. Perhaps you can refresh our memories.
Thanks.
AP V
NY
NY - Friday August 01, 2003 at 8:51 am
AP V,Stakic hasn't been mentioned at all during the Milosevic proceedings.
Prijedor, as far as I can remember, has been only mentioned briefly.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Friday August 01, 2003 at 9:05 am
Andy,What happened to your website and you may want to contact `Sloboda` about them not including your website in their e-mails (links).
How is your video progressing?
Dan B
Canada - Friday August 01, 2003 at 10:11 am
War is not a war crime. I don´t know about peace... When Milosevic opened his defence by arguing that he was regarded as a peacemaker by the West, the learned opinion scoffed and replied that it is irrelevant whether he was a peacemaker or not. However, now that there is some sketchy evidence suggesting he might have been a warmonger, the learned opinion seems relieved. Isn´t there some kind of discrepancy in this?And it goes further. We are not talking merely about the learned opinion. We are talking about the bedrock of the prosecution´s strategy. Isn't the prosecution trying to argue that Belgrade (Milosevic included) were financing the war effort in Croatia, and so on? Yet, war is not a war crime. Hence, who financed the war is irrelevant. May likes shouting "irrelevant" this way or that, but should he stick to the actual meaning of that word, he should stop the prosecution´s argument right in its tracks. Who started the war against whom, and who financed the war once it started, is irrelevant! Yes, financing can point to the power structures behind the war machine, but its relevance to the commission of actual war crimes is circumstantial at best, and in any case, it can't be made the bedrock of the prosecution's case. These are some of the things May should pay attention to once he wakes up.
Instead, May is shouting "irrelevant" at the very stuff the trial should be about. The trial is about hearing both sides of the story. The trial should be fair. Yet, the minute someone says something that contradicts the Nato doctrine, May rules it irrelevant. Yet contradicting is what a fair trial is all about. He told Tapuskovic not to defend Serbia. Boy! Isn't that what the defence is supposed to do? (Amici curiae included, in this case.) Sure, it is the president of Serbia and Yugoslavia who is in the dock, but Serbia is also inevitably involved.
The prosecution seems so keen on trying to find an answer to the question who started the war perhaps because it needs some excuse for its policy of picking on the Serbs. Hence, the Serbs must have started the war. However, this tribunal is not competent to answer the question who started the war. The International Court of Justice is. And we know who is trying to keep the case out of the ICJ even at the cost of letting this farce go on at The Hague.
J W
Canada - Friday August 01, 2003 at 10:11 am
.
J W
Canada - Friday August 01, 2003 at 10:16 am
Canada`s most famous lawyer Edward Greenspan calls Milosevic Trial a `lynching`Edward Greenspan is Canada’s most famous lawyer, seen by millions as the host of CBC-TV’s, The Scales of Justice. He’s colourful and brash, brilliant and witty, a legal eagle whose casebooks rivals that of Perry Mason and L.A. Law.
Edward L. Greenspan has been reading transcripts of Slobodan Milosevic´s war crimes trial. He´s come to one conclusion.
Here are some quotes: "What´s the rush? It looks like May has forgotten that Milosevic is entitled to due process. "
Of all the judges in the world, why select Richard May from Britain? Why does the Tribunal need a judge from a NATO country at all, let alone as the president of the court? How can justice be seen to be done by such a court? Does Milosevic make a valid point when he says the court is nothing more than NATO aggression?
The first two minutes of the Milosevic trial told me all I needed to know. This is a lynching. Normally, lynchings are done outdoors. Here, the lynching has been brought indoors. Instead of a tree and a rope, there are May and Del Ponte. The problem with lynching is that it´s fatally flawed as a process, whether the man who gets hanged is innocent or guilty. The result is certain. A kangaroo court is one in which legal procedures are largely a show, and the action "jumps" from accusation to sentencing without due process. No matter how long a trial takes, if the result is inevitable, then it´s a show trial. The accusers might as well shoot Milosevic. At least, it doesn´t soil the process.
Full article here: http://www.balkanpeace.org/rs/archive/mar02/rs207.shtml
It would be interesting to know what his opinion is as of today, on the evidence etc... .
Dan B
Canada - Friday August 01, 2003 at 10:54 am
News Flash - er(-: We are constantly bombarded with propaganda about the bad behaviour of Serbs in the Balkans I thought I’d redress the balance a little :-)
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Friday August 01, 2003 at 3:11 pm
CBC Newsworld, July 31, PM, reported the verdict on M. Stakic. Many of the film clips shown featured the tubercular Omarska prisoner from the documentary which was subject of the libel suit in England. There was also a side view photo of a man with what looked like whip lash marks perhaps on his back and side.The quote below shows the Hague is planning more genocide convictions even it failed this time.
August 1, The Daily Star
War crimes court gives Bosnian Serb life
AP, The HagueWithout referring to the Milosevic case, however, the judge said the genocide ruling applied only to Stakic and should not mean another trial cannot reach another conclusion when presented with other evidence.
Nikole J.
Canada - Friday August 01, 2003 at 3:19 pm
Dan, to quote from the article you cited:The place of justice is a hallowed place, not a hollow place.
Ian Davis
Waterloo
Ontario, Canada - Friday August 01, 2003 at 3:49 pm
To "MORTICIA" Del Ponte .- Have you ever thought of prosecute Mr Milosevic because of the 97-98 El Niño disaster , at least you won't have to go through the aggravation of finding witnesses to prove the case
Milan Prika
Rep. of Panama - Friday August 01, 2003 at 7:46 pm
To AP V: Prijedor has not been covered so far in the Milosevic hearings, and Dr Stakic has not been mentioned. Perhaps you remembered that I posted twice about the Stakic case here, and this may have misled you. It was during one of those breaks in the Milosevic proceedings due to his illness, when our TV B92 transmitted the Stakic "trial" instead and I found it really amazing how these other cases were even more garbled and sinister than the one we're trying to follow here. For those who want to have a look into the case which produced a life sentence for the young doctor, go to my posts in the Archive, 22 Jan. 2003 at 5:01 am and 24 March 2003 at 12:40 am.Yesterday I was able to watch the sentencing and the sinister nature of the proceedings became obvious to the fullest. Dr Stakic is the first who got slapped with the life sentence at the ICTY. He is the first Serb politician who was sentenced while not pleading guilty (Biljana Plavsic and Stevan Todorovic had pleaded guilty, so there was leniency) and he was at the bottom of the hierarchy, a simple town Mayor, so you can imagine what's in store for the former members of governments and former Presidents.
He had the misfortune to have 3 sites where POWs had been held and refugees had been collected on the territory of his municipality, but these sites were pronounced Nazi concentration camps by the eager media early on (yes, one of them is the famous place photographed by the ITN with the skinny man in close-up).
This sentence plainly shows the mess that the whole system of the ICTY is in. Each Trial Chamber acts as if they are a separate vigilante pack, not bothering to co-ordinate their "efforts". The sentences are unbalanced and arbitrary, the explanations for them preposterous.
The sin of Dr Stakic is not the "joint criminal enterprise", would you believe, but something called "co-perpetratorship" (?!). Perhaps it's an ICTY definition of the command responsibility for civil servants. Stakic never ordered, committed nor co-operated in any crime. He was found guilty for his role in "ethnically cleansing Prijedor", this role simply being his position of the Mayor. The Bench compared him with the perpetrators of the 'white collar crimes' and the 'perpetrator in white gloves' and concluded 'he might deserve a higher penalty than the one who physically participated'.
Some people allegedly got maltreated and killed in these "concentration camps", but perhaps not enough for genocide and just about enough for extermination, according to the Bench. I always found it amazing to learn that those accused by the ICTY of ruthless and planned extermination allegedly exterminated only one village leaving others alone, or allegedly beat or killed several people from a group and let hundreds of others go. Could these be simple individual killings and brutalities "of convenience", and not something pre-planned? If so, could the Mayor be imprisoned for life and the detention site commanders get 5 to 9 years?
Why all the explanations of the sentence given by the Bench represented the situation in Prijedor as if it were in a vacuum, a haven of peaceful Muslim population brutalized by the Serbs with no reason other than hatred and pre-planned scheme, while the simple truth was that the vicious fights and mutual brutalities were happening and the population was fleeing, rather than being deported?
Stakic was acquitted on charges of genocide, but the Chamber pointed out that it should not be concluded genocide did not occur in Prijedor (?!). If the Mayor did not indulge in the "co-perpetratorship" of genocide, and the genocide did occur in Prijedor, who was the co-perpetrator and could it be that the Mayor did not play a leading role in the ethnic cleansing either? Why the charge of extermination has stuck and genocide hasn't, if it did occur? How come General Krstic was found guilty of genocide for Srebrenica and only got 46 years? Could the alleged killing of unspecific number of men & boys, allegedly executed but more probably killed in battle and while fleeing through the woods be qualified as genocide at all? Could it be that the ICTY "judges" have not the slightest idea what they're talking about?
Vera Martinovic
Belgrade
Yugoslavia - Friday August 01, 2003 at 9:38 pm
VeraThanks for bringing up the Krstic vs. Stakic judgements. It is baffling to fathom that Krstic who the Judges determines had "defacto command responsibilty' for 'genocide' recieved a sentence similar to what a US drug dealer gets and compare it to Stakic who the Judges determines was merely one of many who assisted in allowing murders to take places getting life.
It is clear that even using the ICTY's own criteria the Judges don't have the slightest notion of what is happening
The ICTY is a great step backward for rule of law
AP V
NY
NY - Saturday August 02, 2003 at 9:20 am
There is indeed one exception to the truism that war is not a war crime. This one exception is genocide. In case of genocide, it is a crime even to contemplate on the commission of the crime.This must be why the prosecution is proceeding piece by piece to draw a picture of an evil man whose true face came forth in the genocide in Bosnia. We have seen that Milosevic may have had a hand in the war in Croatia, and he was certainly responsible for the war in Kosovo. If the war in Bosnia, which the prosecution has been saving conveniently for the last, can be qualified as a genocidal war, then the mastermind behind it should be held responsible for facilitating the war in Croatia and Kosovo as well. Can the leopard change his spots? Even if these wars were not genocidal (by the tacit admission by the prosecution), at least Milosevic should be held accountable for his own part in them, because his motives in them must have been genocidal.
However, this strategy of the prosecution is so garbled as to be no real strategy at all. The prosecution builds up its case in the hope that the genocide in Bosnia will contaminate in retrospect all the wars waged by Milosevic. They hope to show that in his case, war was indeed a war crime, so to speak.
But it didn't go that way. The prosecution is simply zigzagging along the timeline. The prosecution has built up the illusion that Milosevic's work culminated in Bosnia simply by saving it for the last. In fact, Bosnia was an interlude in the Balkan wars. Actually, the prosecution's strategy could easily turn against itself. If the war in Bosnia was a genocide, why weren't the wars in Kosovo or Croatia, if they were driven by the same madman? You know, the war in Croatia has been called a genocide by the Croatian government, and the war in Kosovo was also called a genocide at some point.
But more importantly, in its attempt to assemble a picture of an evil man, the prosecution has to eliminate a very important piece: the Dayton Accords. If the prosecution is out there to malign everything that Milosevic ever did, they have no option but skip the Dayton Accords. People were even talking Nobel Peace Prize at the time, and it is evident that the Dayton Accords would never have materialized without Milosevic. So a genocidal maniac one day, a potential Nobel Peace Prize candidate the next, huh? That's the true history of the Balkans after the inestimable contribution by the prosecution, and they think Milosevic is crazy! With the Bosnia trump card gone, the prosecution case collapses. Had they looked a couple months down the line, they would have seen the Dayton Accords, which Milosevic has repeatedly referred to in the trial, and at least redeemed their place in humanity by showing their appreciation of the fact that somebody put a stop to the war. Yes, lynching it is. Edward Greenspan is just trying his hand at political apologetics by calling Milosevic a thug.
J W
Canada - Saturday August 02, 2003 at 9:27 am
Originally posted by Peter Taylor:
We are constantly bombarded with propaganda about the bad behaviour of Serbs in the Balkans I thought I’d redress the balance a little :-)
Me too.;-)
For all of you that stumbled upon this forum accidentally, and for all of you that read this report long time ago and feel need to redress the balance a little, take your time to print it out and do a "slow, thorough read". It's in pdf format.
If it brings to mind the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) "intelligence" that George W. Bush used to justify his devastation of yet another country, I won't be surprised.
D(usom) S(arajlija)
USA - Saturday August 02, 2003 at 11:10 am
At the beginning I was worried because of the heavy propaganda demonizing all serbian nation specially by Mad Notbright "she's forgotten that she fed in Belgrade after WWII while the rest of Chekoslovakia was starving" and showed her "gratitude" to Yugoslavia by trying to impose a "diktat" in Rambouillet with the intention of cercenate not only territory but also tear to the roots the Serbian identity . Maybe a trauma from her childhood and the confussion she's inn finding her own identity, drove her to such an abomination . Now years after in the general context and not ignoring execes from all sides , when the real truth (not ICTY'S) is emerging slowly but steady , I have never been more proud of my Serb ancestry
B P
Peru - Saturday August 02, 2003 at 11:59 am
As a contribution towards redressing the balance the value of the below comment may range somewhere in between Peter's "penis through the (de)fence" and a lengthy "key report from the Defence and Policy Strategy Monthly":"The killing of the Hussein brothers was necessary," columnist Charles Krauthammer writes in Washington Post (1), - necessary in order "to strip them of the awe and aura they possessed in life."
Krauthammer, who reportedly won the Pulitzer Prize for distinguished commentary way back in 1987, appears satisfied with the U.S. government's finding of this "loophole in international law":
Waiting out Hussein's sons and a grandson might open any possibility of their escape or, even worse, protracted negotiations for their surrender, - followed by a "trial" - ICTY style...
...but while "the Geneva Conventions do not allow you to parade war prisoners, there is (in Krauthammers mind at least) "nothing about" displaying their dead bodies."
The columnist openly admits the occuoant's deliberate act of murder:
"We had no wish to take Uday and Qusay alive!"
The idea of feeding them maybe for 50 years merely to leave Iraqis in fear of a restoration of the Hussein dynasty is "simply insane," according to people like Krauthammer, the president of the U.S. - the strongest force ever on earth, with surely the most heartbreakingly underdeveloped mind till now. Listen:
"When confronted with his (Saddam Hussein's) designated heirs, world-class murderers who refused to surrender, the idea of waiting them out so that we could forever be custodians of their restoration is simply insane," Krauthammer writes, - which "suggests a plan for if the U.S. finds Saddam: Give him 30 seconds to contemplate his surrender - then kill him anyway!"
As if the U.S. were "sane"?
(1) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10956-2003Jul31.html
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copemhagen
D E N M A R K - Saturday August 02, 2003 at 2:44 pm
I am in receipt of the following message, which is hereby being relayed without further comment:FREEDOM FOR SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC!
Statement of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and of the Peoples’ Patriotic Union of Russia
The state of health of the most known political prisoner in the world - former President of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Slobodan Milosevic - has again been sharply deteriorated. The illness of president Milosevic has so much worsened, so that even the unjust NATO-court has been forced to have a break in its proceedings.
Many times the world public demanded that doctors from Yugoslavia and other countries would be allowed to see the former head of the Yugoslav state in prison in order to carry out regular check-ups of his health and to determine the specialized therapy. The judges of the NATO-tribunal and Dutch authorities avoid fulfilling their elementary duties in the most shameful way in relation to the political prisoner Slobodan Milosevic.
The Communist Party of the Russian Federation and the Peoples’ Patriotic Union of Russia demand the immediate release of Slobodan Milosevic from prison.
He has to have the possibility to fully recuperate his health in Belgrade with the aid of doctors who were treating him for many years.
Slobodan Milosevic also has to have the possibility to prepare for the second phase of the process, when he will present his evidence against the false accusations of the NATO “tribunal” at The Hague.
President of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation President of the of the Peoples’ Patriotic Union of Russia
Gennadi Zyuganov
Moscow, August 1st, 2003
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K- Saturday August 02, 2003 at 7:44 pm
Essential Public Policy Points Relating to the ISSA Mission to Yugoslavia, April 18-21, 1999The International Strategic Studies Association organized a fact-finding mission from Washington DC to Yugoslavia on April 18-21, 1999. The purpose was for the Association and a key US Congressman to determine to a greater extent factors important to future policymaking with regard to the war being prosecuted against Yugoslavia. ISSA worked with a Yugoslav NGO, the Institute for Geopolitical Studies, in facilitating the mission.
US Congressman Jim Saxton (Republican, New Jersey), an ISSA Life Member and Chairman of the US House of Representatives Task Force on Terrorism & Unconventional Warfare (and member of the House Armed Services Committee; and Vice-Chairman of the Joint [House-Senate] Economic Committee), participated in the mission, along with the Director of the Task Force on Terrorism, Yossef Bodansky.
The mission delegates met with key Yugoslav officials and politicians, at the highest levels, including the Foreign Minister. As well, contacts were made with non-governmental individuals in Yugoslavia, and an assessment was made of NATO bombing damage in the greater Belgrade area.
A. The Rationale Behind the Fact-Finding Visit
1. The visit was principally undertaken to ensure that the US Congress had sufficient independent information on the conduct of the war (“the Kosovo Crisis”) to be able to fully debate proposals put to it by the US Administration. The Founding Fathers of the United States wished to ensure that there were checks and balances in the US system. The Congress was empowered to approve and fund - or disapprove and withhold funding - the actions of the Administration, and was charged with the function of declaring war. It was, therefore, the responsibility of Congress to satisfy itself through the utmost diligence that courses of action to which it committed its actions were appropriate. It was never intended that the Congress should blindly endorse the Administrative Branch, but rather should support it or check it after due debate and research.
2. The commitment of US lives into a combat situation, where many lives will certainly be lost, and where the long-term strategic interests of the United States are involved, cannot therefore be undertaken without the most complete research and understanding. With regard to the present situation in Yugoslavia, Congress had until this mission been virtually totally reliant on the Administration’s view of events, and on the media, which has been greatly influenced by the only real source of information and opinion available: the Administration.
3. It was necessary to determine far more objectively the real situation before one-sided evidence and jingoism was allowed to determine whether Congress threw American lives, and the future strategic position of the United States, into a war. This was the underlying motive for the ISSA/Saxton mission to Yugoslavia.
4. It was also necessary to ensure that the United States did not unwittingly commit crimes of its own in pursuit of a just solution to the tragedy.
B. What was discovered was:
1. The Flow of Refugees: The international media, because it is largely on the external borders of Yugoslavia, has seen only the flow of refugees out of the country, to Albania and Macedonia. However, some one-third of the Albanian Yugoslav and other ethnic group refugees appear, in fact, to be fleeing further into Serbia, to avoid the Kosovo Liberation Army. Yugoslavia has already been burdened since 1992 with almost one-million refugees from Bosnian Serb areas and Croatian Serb areas, as well as Croatians and Muslims fleeing into Serbia-proper from what is now Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia.
2. There is no doubt but that the NATO bombings in Kosovo and in the rest of Serbia have contributed heavily - perhaps overwhelmingly - toward the outflow of refugees, not only the Kosovar Albanians but many other ethnic groups who have been forced on the road with the destruction of their homes or their livelihoods.
3. There are some 26 different ethnic groups in Yugoslavia, and some 20 different ethnic groups living in the Kosovo region. Within Yugoslavia, some one-third of the population is not of Serbian origin, and this makes it the most multi-cultural, multi-religious state in the Balkan region.
4. We saw extensive destruction of civilian targets, many of which could not be justified by NATO as military targets nor vital to the maintenance of a Yugoslav strategic power base. Given the widespread damage to these purely civilian targets which we saw, including the direct destruction of homes, it is not difficult to believe the claims of the Yugoslav Government that some 400,000 to a half-million people have been thrown out of work because of the destruction of their workplaces. This means that some 2-million Yugoslavs of all ethnic origins are without income, out of a population of some 10+-million people.
5. Justification for bombing civilian targets has now been given that these facilities were owned by relatives of President Milosevic, but the vast majority of these factories were either State-owned, privately-owned by non-Milosevic family members or, for the greater part, owned jointly by the State and by the workforces of the various factories. As a result, this has directly contributed to an attack on the average Yugoslav family.
6. There was no evidence to support the contention that the Yugoslav warfighting capability has been overwhelming broken by the sustained NATO bombing campaign. Rather, the bombing has driven the Yugoslav people to put aside their political differences and to unite in the face of an external threat, much as would be the case if the United States was attacked. We met with people who have, in the past, been totally opposed, politically, to President Milosevic. Today, they are working completely with Mr Milosevic to defend their country. So the intention of the bombing to break the Yugoslav people away from Mr Milosevic has totally failed, and shows no sign of succeeding.
7. The cost in terms of human casualties from the NATO bombing have largely been civilian: between 500 and 1,000 dead, with several thousand injured. Military personnel casualties have been minimal.
8. There has clearly been significant damage suffered by Yugoslav military assets, including domestic oil refining capability. However, it would be a mistake to believe that the real warfighting capability of Yugoslavia has been degraded to anything like the level where the insertion of ground forces could be successful: that is, that it could militarily defeat Yugoslavia without massive loss of life and without destroying the one thing which the campaign intends to save, namely a viable restoration of Kosovars to their homes and livelihoods in the Kosovo region. The net result of an insertion of ground forces would be that a protracted war would continue within the very rugged terrain of the country, and that the lowland areas would be lain-waste to in the process. It surely is not our intention to achieve a victory without restoring the homes and employment of the Kosovar people (whether of Albanian origin or not).
9. Apart from a costly, protracted war with the massive loss of life among NATO states, including, of course, the United States, there is reason for grave concern over a wider war. Firstly, it is clear that there would be retaliatory actions against major Western targets, such as our own oil refineries and nuclear power stations, etc., from Yugoslav special forces or from non-government Serb activists. So we could expect a major outbreak of anti-NATO terrorism, perhaps on a scale not before seen, if we choose to escalate the war into a full ground operation. This must at the very least be taken into consideration.
10. We attempted to investigate reports that there has already been considerable loss of life among NATO forces, and we feel that we received some confirmation that this has been the case. Clearly, the cost to NATO in human and equipment terms has already been far greater than anything which has been announced. Just how extensive the NATO aircraft and personnel losses have been remains to be confirmed. What is clear is that already there has been a cost to us, apart from the mere monetary cost of equipment and consumables. This cost can only rise significantly as the conflict proceeds.
11. It has been stated by NATO that the Yugoslav Air Force has been driven from the skies, with half the Yugoslav fighter aircraft force lost, and that all defenses now consist only of anti-aircraft artillery and anti-aircraft missiles. It is more likely that the Yugoslav Air Force is preserving its forces to be used in any broader conflict. This is not Iraq, and we should not make the mistake of believing that the fight, or fighting capability, has been driven from the Yugoslavs.
12. There has, in fact, been considerable progress toward reaching a political solution acceptable to all moderate parties. And, of course, we except from the definition “moderate parties” the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army, which derived from the communist origins of the former Albanian stalinist leaders and which today is funded largely by narcotic trafficking into Western Europe and through extortion. It has been a mistake for the West to support the KLA now, when moderate Kosovar Albanian leaders have been committed to a political solution to the tragedy. Equally, attempts to discredit moderate Kosovar Albanian leader Dr Ibrahim Rugova are counter-productive to achieving a peaceful and lasting solution to the problem. The fact that Dr Rugova’s enormous courage in remaining in Yugoslavia to seek such a solution is now being dismissed by allegations that he is “a virtual prisoner” only serve to reinforce the hand of the KLA, which has previously been labeled a terrorist force by the United States, and remains so today. [The matter of KLA terrorism and the prospect of Yugoslav special operations in a wider war are both matters which have been the subject of considerable study by the US House of Representatives Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, chaired by Congressman Saxton.]
13. We received strong indications from the very senior officials with whom we met - and clearly the messages which we received were sanctioned by Mr Milosevic himself - that virtually all the substantive demands for Kosovo’s future autonomy within Yugoslavia could be met, and met quickly, provided negotiations could resume. As a result, we need to undertake a careful step-by-step approach toward peace and we need to see some substantive evidence of commitment and goodwill on the part of the Yugoslavs. I believe that this will be forthcoming.
14. Without question, we need to ensure that Congress is totally clear on the situation before further escalation takes place, and before further funding is put in place to continue a protracted war. Congress needs to undertake this process of due diligence itself, given the fact that the enormous confusion which has taken place due to media manipulation on all sides has only contributed to a blood-lust which - if it is the only basis for decisionmaking - could lead to a much longer and wider war.
15. Finally, it seems clear that if we accept that we must commit to a broader war in Yugoslavia, then we must also accept that US and NATO military preoccupation with this conflict will open the door to a range of other conflicts which could be of massive and lasting consequence. In this regard, we must expect that an expanded war would lead to an exacerbation of Turkish-Greek tensions leading to a separate war, in which the Cyprus issue would become a key. We could expect North Korea to take the opportunity to initiate a military attack on South Korea, with Japan drawn into the fray. We could expect that the People’s Republic of China would use the opportunity to attempt to invade Taiwan. We could expect a variety of new conflicts to arise in the Middle East. And so on. What is clear, not just to ourselves but to others, is that we have a finite military force available to NATO at present, and, because we have spent our post-Cold War “peace dividend”, others will take advantage of the situation to launch their offensives, knowing the West does not have the capacity to fight on many fronts.
Dakic Ana
Serbia- Saturday August 02, 2003 at 8:00 pm
INteresting article:http://www.davidicke.net/tellthetruth/rothschild/soros.html
William Engdahl knows this to say about him: "Soros speculates on the world's financial markets via his secret off-shore company, "Quantum Fund NV", a private "investment fund" that handles a portfolio of 4 to 7 Billion US$ for several "clients". The Quantum Fund is registered in the tax haven of the Netherland Antilles in the Caribbean. In order to evade control of his financial activities by the U.S. administration not a single U.S. citizen sits on the board of Quantum. It's directors are a curious mixture of Swiss and Italian financiers... Soros has been identified as a front man of the Anglo-French Rothschild banking group. Understandably neither he nor the Rothschilds want this important fact to be public, so the tight links to his friends in the London "City", in the British foreign ministry, in the state of Israel and to his mighty friends in the American establishment would stay concealed."
Not a single Western newspaper has so far uncovered the fact that the Rothschilds group linked with George Soros was at the hub of the vast illegal network of the BCCI. The key person in these activities was Dr. Alfred Hartmann, the managing director of the Swiss branch of the BCCI (Banque de Commerce et de Placement SA), head of the Zurich Rothschild bank AG and member of the board of N.M. Rothschild & Sons in London. He was also on the board of the Swiss branch of the Italian BNL and was vice-chairman of the "N.Y. Intermaritime Bank" in Geneva. A friendly secret service man who had worked on the "Soros" case disclosed that in Sept. 1993 Soros had amassed along with a group of "silent partners", a firtune in excess of 10 Billion dollars to use as a lever to unhinge the European currencies. Among the partners apparently were the little known metal and oil dealer Marc Rich and the Israeli arms dealer Shaul Eisenberg. For decades Eisenberg has been working for the Israeli secret service and has important arms deals in all of Asia and in the Near East. A third partner of Soros is Rafi Eytan who before was the Mossad connection to the British secret service in London.
MArk Rich received special presidental pardon from Clinton on the last day of his presidency. It is also known that Mark Rich was dealing in arms. Does anybody wants to comment?
Dakic Ana
Serbia- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 10:18 am
Admittedly I never knew about the ISSA Mission to Yugoslavia, April 18-21, 1999, from which Dakic Ana is reporting (August 02, 2003 at 7:44 pm)While I am not really surprised though with the "facts" found by the ISSA Mission, I shall never cease to wonder about the U.S. in general:
Which other nation on planet Earth would even contemplate sending a high-level Gvt. mission to "enemy country" during the war to ensure that its parliament had sufficient independent information on its conduct?
I cannot deny a certain admiration - albeit small now and fading - for this strange nation, the U.S. of America, which combine the highest, the most honorable endeavours with the most stupid and criminal conduct anywhere, by anyone.
For all their qualities I increasingly tend to believe, that the best, maybe the only solution to the woes of this world would be, that Americans withdraw to the planet MARS, - from where it is suggested by themselves, that they were originally.
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 10:54 am
By the same token, what country would receive an enemy "fact finding delegation".
Dakic Ana
Serbia- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 11:14 am
Dakic Ana, you do have a point, indeed!Personally I hold Serbia (and mr. Milosevic in particular) in the highest esteem. Yet I wouldn´t go as far as to suggest that either were from Venus exactly...
Now, if anyone would suggest, that there may be little or no truth in the rather sweeping statement on the U.S., then here is some documentation for the amazing stupidity of American "politics":
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=533
If that is a digression really from our subject of the "trial", it may still serve as a reminder, that "mod dumheden kæmper selv guderne forgæves" (against stupidity even the Gods are striving in vain).
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 11:57 am
This letter was posted on a message board in Serbia. Several people have also received it bby e-mail. ------------------------------An Answer to “An Open Letter” by Andy Wilcoxson
The attacks on Ramsey Clark are part of a political smear campaign against a man who has stood solidly on the side of the Serbian people through their most difficult moments. This effort by destructive elements is nothing less than a form of political gangsterism that directly undermines the struggle led by President Milosevic.
There is no room for these sorts of allegations and deceptions inside the ICDSM, Sloboda, or the struggle in Serbia. We condemn it and we will not tolerate it, nor will we allow anyone who employs such tactics in our movement.
The content of the letter is a lie, and it is a perfect example of how someone who wants to harm our struggle acts.
Vladimir Krsljanin, Coordinator of ICDSM, General Secretary of Sloboda, Foreign Relations Assistant to President Milosevic ------------------------------- Does anybody know what letter this in regards to? Thanks
Dan B
Canada- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 2:19 pm
Another article has appeared today. It is called "Yugoslav Tribunal Is Court Making History " by Arthur Max.Day after day, Milosevic sits alone, facing a battery of prosecutors on the other side of the room. He cross-examines aggressively, prompting frequent warnings by the presiding judge, Richard May of Britain, to stop browbeating the witnesses.
In the evening he returns to his cell at the U.N. detention center to consult by phone with a team of lawyers, researchers and advisers who feed him information about upcoming witnesses.
"I don't think he has any real belief that he's going to get an acquittal or has an interest in obtaining one," said Michael P. Scharf, a professor at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, in Cleveland, Ohio.
"He has done very well at taking key witnesses against him and raising doubts about their credibility and their truthfulness," said Scharf.
Dan B
Canada- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 3:46 pm
Dakicdon't forget that Holbrooke now works for a Soros private equity group. (aka LBO shop)
AP V
NY
NY- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 3:49 pm
Dan in Canada,there may be no need to relay an article by "ARTHUR MAX, Associated Press Writer" - just because it "appeared" some 32 minutes ago!
However if you choose to do so anyway, you might quote the very beginning of mr. MAX's article, from which it would be clear to anybody that this is nothing but some stupid yankee propaganda.
Writes mr. MAX:
THE HAGUE, Netherlands - At first, Bosnian Serb Lt. Col. Drago Obrenovic professed innocence.
Then, standing contritely before judges of the U.N. war crimes tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, he pleaded guilty in the massacre of Bosnian Muslims at Srebrenica, a place that resonates for the Balkan wars as Auschwitz does for World War II.
In this way, Obrenovic represents a new wave among the 91 accused war criminals brought to the tribunal. He also stands in stark contrast to the tribunal's biggest suspect, former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic...
Good for mr. Obrenovic, - right? What do you think, Dan?
"I don't think," Michael P. Scharf admits, - and yet this man alledgedly is "a professor at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, in Cleveland, Ohio."
What is it then - more or less exactly - that the professor does not "think"?
Well, the professor at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, in Cleveland, Ohio does not "think", that "he (mr. Milosevic) has any real belief that he's going to get an acquittal or has an interest in obtaining one."
He hasn't? He doesn't?
Does the "professor" (in law?)give his reasons for "thinking" that mr. Milosevic has "no real belief" or "interst"? No! Did mr. MAX, the "writer", ask the professor for his reasons?
Well, - that we do not know, - as mr. MAX does not tell! In stead of reasons, in stead of value we get a photo of mr. MAX, - hammering the fact that this ridiculous little piece of yankee propaganda is just an opportunity for little nutheads to sport their titles of "Associated Press Writer" and "professor at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, in Cleveland, Ohio" respectively.
with no respect for the U.S. at all,
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 3:57 pm
Who else but Andy Wilcoxson (and/or Jared Israel) would necessarily know about this "letter posted on a message board in Serbia." (Dan, August 03, 2003 at 11:57 am)May I suggest, that we either get clarification from mr. Wilcoxson immediately - or forget about the whole "thing"?
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 4:04 pm
I also received the response, which i posted via e-mail by Mr. Krsljanin.
Dan B
Canada- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 4:18 pm
THE YANKS AND THE SUISSE CONNECTIONIt hardly takes a yankee professor - and certainly not a professor at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, in Cleveland, Ohio - to assess, that mr. Milosevic "has done very well at taking key witnesses against him and raising doubts about their credibility and their truthfulness."
Even mr. Nice, the hapless ICTY Prosecutor, has had to admit this.
But may that be all? Is that the essence of mr. Milosevic's work so far?
Well, - certainly it takes a mrs. del Ponte to suggest, that "In our view, the connection is there!"
Just before "yielding the floor", this socalled Chief Prosecutor expresses her "hopes" (!) to bring persuasive evidence against mr. Milosevic...
How very reassuring: "The difficulty is to bring the evidence in court,", she adds.
Yes, ma'am?
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 4:28 pm
Dan says:"I also received the response, which i posted via e-mail by Mr. Krsljanin."
?
Which "response"? From Andy Wilcoxson maybe? "by" Mr. Krsljanin?
I don't get it, Dan! Please clarify! And if you do have a relevant "response", - then post it for all to see, in order that we get rid of this apparent mess before it grows into something comparable to the "African Uranium" flap...
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 4:41 pm
Vladimir Krsljaninwas was the caller for the June 28 demonstration in The Hague, the very same one someone in these forum expressed reservations in supporting saying The Hague being the capital of a nation was perhaps not the right place to demonstrate against the ICTY, that it could harm Mr. Milosevic case, etc., Now I am not surprised Vladimir Krsljanin defends the truth about Ramsey Clark. It is never too late.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 5:53 pm
Michael P. Scharf, a professor at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, in Cleveland, Ohio, doesn't "think" that mr. Milosevic has any "real belief that he's going to get an acquittal or has an interest in obtaining one..."What on Earth is this "professor" talking about?
And what's mr. MAX writing about, anyway?
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 6:33 pm
If this person with a fathom long title is a "professor" then my stern side is a rose garden . Godfred , how can I have "cuidado" when you reed this kind of nonsense , does this individuals think that the whole world feeds on alfalfa ?
Milan Prika
Rep. of Panama- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 6:33 pm
Why would an American professor of Law, Michael P. Sharf, who testified as an expert before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee and is currently Chairman of the Board of Directors of the International Law Students Association,and has published several books, incl.:
Slobodan Milosevic on Trial: A Companion (2002)
and written several articles, incl.:
Balkan Justice: The Story Behind the First International War Crimes Tribunal Since Nuremberg (1997)
even dream of suggesting, as apparently he has been suggesting to mr. Arthur Max, an Associated press writer, that:
Mr. Milosevic doesn't have "any real belief that he's going to get an acquittal or has an interest in obtaining one..."?
Maybe mr. Sharf is merely suggesting that he (Sharf) is "thinking"? But on what basis, mr. Sharf?
I have no doubt, that in the time to come we shall have all sorts of comments to this trial from the U.S., - maybe even from the President, who may explain a term like "real belief" thus:
"Real belief? Well, - I shall tell you when I have understood the parameters..."
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 7:51 pm
I do not want to sound "biblical" but I start to think that there might be a grain of truth to this. Is Soros an Antichrist? He was born a Jew, in Budapest, Hungary, sometime in 1930. The exact date of his birth has never revealed for some unspecified reason.When he was very young he embraced Christianity in order to escape the Nazi persecution of the Jews during WWII.
He changed his original name to a much simpler one as he got older. His new name has sort of Greek ring to it but he is still very much Jewish, a fact he does not deny.
He is a very wealthy man having accumulated billions of dollars through remarkable investment strategies. Making large sums of money just comes naturally to him. He virtually broke the Bank of England overnight, amassing a fortune of nearly two billion dollars in a day.
He has an extremely powerful influence over world markets. Every leader of every country on Earth is quite familiar with his reputation; yet he is relatively unknown at this point by most of the masses. He has been accused of being the man responsible for the recent Asian economic crisis. He keeps a very secretive profile but is occasionally thrown into the spotlight.
From the days of his youth he has had fantasies of personal divinity. He thinks of himself as God, but I doubt he would publicly attest to maintaining this view nowadays because his time has not yet come.
From his own words, he considers himself to be more of a philosopher than a great financial mind. His philosophy for mankind is closely associated with a socialist form of democracy integrated with a free enterprise system. He spends most of his time promoting his concept of "open societies" around the world. This philosophical characteristic is typical of the Antichrist according to Daniel 7:25. "And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws"
He wants to be known as a great philanthropist and so he donates extremely large sums of money to his foundations as well as other charitable causes. By promoting this type of image to the world, it will be easier for him to gain its trust and friendship. One thing about his generosity is that it seems to have more of an effect at edifying his political persona and agenda, wherein he stands to gain more from these benevolent acts than those who are the recipients thereof.
Though he has established residences all around the world, his business empire is headquartered in the Netherlands, Europe.
Recently, he gave a demonstration of his political acumen during a news conference at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, by requesting the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to withdraw its aid from Russia. Part of the agenda at this meeting regarded globalization and the New World Order and it also included a speech given by our very own president, William Jefferson Clinton.
Dakic Ana
Serbia- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 8:23 pm
According to some, he - a Jewish boy - was miraculously saved from extermination in Nazi camps; he was hidden by Christians, then obtained false documents. Another version is that he himself, being a teenager at that time, helped the fascists to rob Hungarian Jews and that, therefore, he was forced to flee in 1947. There, the poor thing allegedly worked as a railway porter, a dishwasher in a bar - and suddenly he was able to enter one of the most prestigious universities in the world, the London School of Economics. And furthermore, he became a close associate of the Rothschild bankers. Then follows the marvelous story how the hard-working, modest youth, saving his pennies and pfennigs, became a global financial with huge quantities of money of non-transparent origin, and hidden from the tax men on the secretive island of Curacao, Mr. Soros plans and executes pirate-style attacks on national currencies, shatters their exchange-rates on the world money markets. The first big hits by these "royal pirates from Curacao" were directed against European currencies, of friends and allies of the United States. In 1992 a "Black Wednesday" was organized in England, when the English pound fell by 12 percent. The country’s economy was badly hit, but Soros’ fee amounted to US $1 billion. In the same year, the Italian lira was seriously devalued, in order to force its "democrats" to start a fire sale of state property, and to buy up such properties for a song. Soros also lent a hand in bankrupting Argentina. Whilst the intimate friend of our reformers, Domingo Cavallo, was destroying Argentina’s production system, Soros bought up 400,00 ha. of land (not to mention real estate in Buenos Aires) and turned the large-scale beef producer. He intends to supply Europe - just at a time when in Europe the psychosis about "mad cow disease" was rampant, yet in the USA nobody has ever heard about such an affliction. In year 1997 the Soros "Sonderkommando" was transferred to the Eastern Front - the task was to stop the economic growth of the "Asian Tigers". Here the conditions required some hard work - but the currencies of Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines crashed. For some time the economies of these countries were undermined. Indonesia was thrown into complete chaos. According to the estimates, it cost Malaysia US $30 billion to save its financial system, and the country was thrown back it its development by 10-15 years.
Dakic Ana
Serbia- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 9:20 pm
Mr Saxton and Mr Copley are to be commended for speaking out during the Kosovo bombing, but they may be making a mistake in suggesting that the US wanted to go to war from the beginning. To be sure, there were some groups in the US that did not spare any effort to persuade Clinton to bomb the country (Wolfowitz and others), but it is only with the benefit of hindsight that one can assume that Clinton wanted to bomb the country from the start.On the contrary, there is every indication that the US administration hoped to get the Yugoslavs to sign the Rambouillet Accords. At least, they trusted that Milosevic would be a sole voice of reason in Yugoslavia. That perception was based on the Dayton process. Even after the bombing had started, the US still talked about bombing Yugoslavia to the negotiating table.
The Racak massacre (and that is what it was, regardless of who executed it) was the incident that triggered the Rambouillet process, but it was too sloppy to have been carried out by the Americans. William Walker seemed genuinely surprised when he first learned about it. It was only after he understood that this was his chance to force the Serbs to the negotiating table that he was willing to play ball with the Kosovars. In any case, it seems unlikely that whoever carried out the massacre ever thought of it being subject to the scrutiny of the ICTY, if that is what the theory holds.
The thesis that the US wanted to go to war is contingent on the belief that the last remaining superpower has everything in the bag. Of course, this is a belief that the US administration wants to perpetuate even in the event of a miscalculation. The notorious Appendix B has been paraded as evidence that the US wanted Yugoslavia to turn down the proposal so it could get an excuse for the bombing campaign. However, Appendix B is of obscure provenance, and its presence didn't mean that the Serbs could not sign the Accords themselves. It is possible that Appendix B got highlighted only when the US administration needed to "reassure" the world that it knew the Serbs would turn down the proposal. It was all about American credibility, which was made crystal-clear during the bombing.
And talking about the Rambouillet Accords, it is true that the US administration had promised it would have no dealings with the KLA, but Richard Gelbard made that statement back in 1998 before the Good Friday Agreement, which showed that even so-called terrorists could be reliable partners in peace. And it is against the background of the Good Friday Agreement that the motives of the Clinton/Blair administration should be evaluated. The storyline must have looked like this: the Good Friday Agreement in 1998, the Rambouillet Peace Agreement in 1999, Camp David II in 2000. A war didn't fit in this scenario.
There were also intelligence reports that suggested Milosevic was not really interested in Kosovo. According to these reports, Milosevic was interested in the Trepca mines, nothing else. He was not conceived as a Serb nationalist. He had compromised on the Bosnian Serbs, hadn't he?
But now that "intelligence failure" is the word of the day, it is not hard to figure out what went wrong. Indeed, Milosevic was seen as being too soft in Bosnia and Croatia, but to quell any discontent, he had to appear tough in Kosovo. Even more importantly, Milosevic realized that Kosovo was not bargainable like Croatia or Bosnia, because Kosovo was part of Serbia. The dismay that swept across the US administration when Milosevic said no to the Rambouillet Accords implies that Milosevic had not been expected to behave "nationalistically" at all. He certainly had not done so in Croatia or Bosnia. So much for the Greater Serbia rubbish.
On the other hand, Milosevic was seen as a man who sticks to the letter of the law, so his "no" must have caused a prick of conscience in Washington. The Clinton administration realized it had put itself on a very slippery slope.
Even when the bombing started, Nato had some things going for it. The precedents that were cited were the cases where air power had worked in Bosnia. This time, however, Nato simply disposed of the dual-key system, which was seen as the key ingredient in the genocide in Srebrenica. And it was thought that the bombing would be over in a couple of days.
Certainly Nato had no intention to make the campaing drag on months, which was to expose it to a lawsuit in the ICJ. You may say that was no big deal, but in fact the US had done anything to avoid the ICJ ever since it lost the Nicaragua case. Superpowers sometimes work in mysterious ways.
And the indictment of Milosevic was not in the cards either. The indictment of Milosevic was only an attempt to relegate the lawsuit to the dark recesses of the ICTY and dimlights like Del Ponte. It is clear this decision is a success only as long as nobody talks about it.
On the other hand, it is no wonder the US troops seems so trigger-happy in Iraq. Actually, killing Hussein's family members is the most elaborate admission on the part of the US that the Milosevic trial has not been working at all.
J W
Canada- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 9:31 pm
J W
Canada- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 9:52 pm
JWYour analysis accepts some fundamental lies from the War Party propaganda
The lie is that President Milosevic and "Serbia" somehow gave up trying to "hold" on to Krajina and Bosnia.
The truth is that the Federal Government of Yugoslavia and the state Government of Serbia as well as then Governor Milosevic never once tried to "hold" on to Krajina nor Bosnia. From the start they completely accepted the ultimate sovergnity of Z-grad and Sarajevo. They only tried to negotiate the process of succession.
Repeating War Party lies only serves to reinforce their progaganda. We should be careful.
AP V
NY
NY- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 10:30 pm
I was not trying to suggest that Milosevic tried to hold on to Krajina or Bosnia at any point. On the contrary, the Western belief that Milosevic would listen to "reason" on Kosovo belies the fact that Milosevic had made a favourable impression in Washington after Croatia and Bosnia, the war lies notwithstanding. Needless to say, this argument makes short work of the prosecution´s case, which hinges (sort of) on Milosevic peddling the Greater Serbia ideology, which is supposed to be a manifestation of his genocidal disposition.
J W
Canada- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 11:34 pm
The response: I mean the letter that I posted, which came via email from Krsljanin.
Dan B
Canada- Sunday August 03, 2003 at 11:35 pm
I assume that Mr. Krsljanin responded to letter by Andy.
Dan B
Canada - Saturday August 02, 2003 at 7:44 pm