Information

Informazione

: Published: 27 July 2008

http://en.fondsk.ru/article.php?id=1487

Strategic Culture Foundation (Russia)

Pyotr Iskenderov

Will the Serbian-Albanian Standoff Develop Into a Military Conflict?

[Edited]

July 13th marked the 130th anniversary of the day of

conclusion of one of the most famous and

simultaneously contradictory international agreements

related to the settlement of the problems of the

Balkans, the Berlin Treaty (Treatise).

The document drew the line under the 1975-1877 Great

Esatern Crisis.

That was known for both...victories...the Russian army

that liberated...Serbs, Montenegrians and Bulgarians

from Turkish oppression, and the inability of the

Russian diplomats to defend the victories won in the

bloody war.

In the end, instead of what seemed such a close

realisation of the dream of flying the Russian flag

over Constantinople and the Black Sea Straits,

St.Petersburg had to satisfy itself with acquiring

control of Batum. Bulgaria was re-captured by the

Ottoman Empire regardless of the fact that it had

succeeded in laying down the foundations of the future

national statehood.

However, the significance of the Berlin Congress was

more than drawing a bottom line under the 1877-1878

Russo-Turkish war. The decisions that were made or

declined at that forum laid the foundations of the

beginning of a rapid maturing of the regional problem

that currently, 130 years later, is threatening to

push the Balkans into the nightmare of a deeper

cataclysm than that of the late 1890s and early 1990s.

For the first time in history the Albanian national

movement made itself manifest.

Right from the start it had a single-valued Greater

Albanian character.

It was incorporated in the form of a set of decisions

made by the Albanian (Prizren) League aiming at the

consolidation of all the territories inhabited by

Albanians into a single state formation by using arms

and disregarding the interests of non-Albanian ethnic

elements.

The initial programme adopted by the Prisren League in

1878 stipulated that all Albanians living in the

Balkan Peninsula should wage armed struggle “for the

creation of a separate province out of all the

territories inhabited by Albanians to be run by

Turkish governors-general.”

In the follow-up versions of the programme the

sovereignty of the Turkish sultans was reduced to the

responsibility to defend Albanian interests and “the

integrity of Albanian lands” that began to be

interpreted more and more widely.

At that time the great powers decided to disregard the

danger that was becoming more and more obvious.

Albanian issue was not viewed as significant enough to

be included on the agenda of the Berlin Congress.

Its participants even doubted the very fact of the

existence of an Albanian nation (according to German

Chancellor Otto Bismarck, the chair of the Congress,

“the Albanian nation does not exist”) so they regarded

any one territory with an Albanian population only as

a fact of geography.

However, one Congress decision directly determined the

follow-up course of events in that Balkans region that

at the time was known as Old Serbia, nowadays Kosovo

and Metohia. Having encouraged the Austrian-Hungarian

occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina that were in the

sphere of Serbia’s national and state interests, the

Berlin Treaty forced Belgrade to choose as its

priority policies direction the southern vector, Old

Serbia and Macedonia.

Small wonder, as early as 1912 the Kosovo problem was

one of the front-burner issues of big European

policies.

....

The mapping of the Serbian-Albanian frontier defined

by the 1912-1913 London Conference of the great powers

on the whole remained almost intact, and currently the

leaders of Albanians in Kosovo, Macedonia, South

Serbia and Montenegro in their maps of “Greater

Albania” largely redraw the projects of building the

Balkans used by the Austrian-Hungarian foreign

ministry before World War I.

In 1912 the great powers themselves realised that by

creating an autonomous Albania that had no real

preconditions for its statehood, having simultaneously

refused the victorious Serbia a vitally important

access to the Adriatic Sea, they made prepared the

soil for new conflicts.

....

In the early 20th century Albanian supporters in the

powers of the Tripartite Union did not doubt that the

time would come to make real their project of

establishing a “Greater Albania” that was to include

the entire Old Serbia (Kosovo and Metohia) and

three-quarters of the territory of Macedonia.

All the more so that at the time anti-Serbian

sentiment was fed by both their nationalist

aspirations and the activities of their neighbours in

the Balkans, with the leading role played by certain

circles in Bulgaria. Close ties were established

between Albanian and Macedonian leaders already in

early 1990s.

That was mainly true of the Interim Macedonian

Revolutionary Organisation (IMRO). Contacts of the

kind met Sofia’s interests when it thought that giving

Albanians autonomy would make a similar Macedonian

scenario also probable, so they rendered financial and

military support to the Albanian leaders.

The situation is repeated today as Bulgaria was one of

the first states to acknowledge Kosovo independent

whereas IMRO leaders and other Macedonian political

forces engaged in internal strife that has lasted for

years embrace local Albanian parties led by

“godfathers” of independent Kosovo as their coalition

partners.

What we are witnessing in Kosovo at present is the

process of implementation of the “Greater Albania”

projects dating back to the early 1900s that were

devised with the full-fledged participation of

Austrian, German and Italian diplomats envisaging

turning Kosovo and Macedonia into a nucleus of an

Albanian state ephemerically controlled by the

European supervisors.

In the plans of the United States and the leading

European states the establishment of independent

Kosovo was to become a major stride ahead in realising

the strategy of...counteracting the Russian attempts

to regain its historical positions in the Balkans.

Small wonder, the words head of Chiefs of Staff of the

Austrian-Hungarian army general Conrad von Hetzendorf

said on the eve of World War I sound so acutely

modern. He said that Albania established at the will

of the great powers “should be taken account of as an

ally in the fight against Serbia and Montenegro.”

The architects of independent Kosovo are not perplexed

about the total inviability of the new pseudo-state

whose support has already become a burden on the

European and US taxpayers.

The Brussels conference of the Kosovo donor countries

and organisations on July 11, 2008 assessed the

initial cost of this project rooted in the age-long

geopolitical history as worth Euro 1.2 billion, with

Euro 800 000 million of initial needs to be supported

by the EU and Euro 250 million by the United States.

It is noteworthy that the bulk of this astronomic

amount will be used to pay back the state debt of

Serbia to the former Yugoslavia that Kosovo is now the

payer.

What would these investments do? The amounts the

international community already invested in Kosovo in

the last decade would give an unequivocal answer.

It’s $5 billion. This money failed to make Kosovo a

viable economy or even make it independent from the

financial and economic system of Serbia, filling the

accounts of Kosovo criminal kingpins that currently

form the province’s ruling elite.

Further developments in Kosovo can take different

forms:

1) The first scenario is the immediate explosion of

the Serbian-Albanian standoff in the province, making

it a bloody armed confrontation.

This can happen should Pristina authorities supported

by NATO, KFOR and the EU international police force

try to implement the provisions of the Constitution of

the self-proclaimed Kosovo state, taking control of

the Serb-inhabited territories.

The attack on the court building in Kosovo Mitrovica

undertaken by an international police force in March

of 2008 was a rehearsal for such a scenario. Kosovo

Serbs then showed in reality their preparedness to

defend their rights. Should such an act be repeated,

its consequence could be much more tragic.

2) The second scenario envisages the preservation in

Kosovo of the status quo for an indefinite period.

That could enable Kosovo Serbs to live in the province

according to Serbian law until Kosovo’s Albanian

authorities continue building muscle, getting armed

with the help of and under the control of NATO.

In that period the Pristina authorities would try to

lay the foundations for the implementation of the

Kosovo scenario in Macedonia, Montenegro and South

Serbia with an eye to turning the Balkans into an

arena of the struggle for “Greater Albania.”

3) Finally the third scenario is of a more global

nature.

It is all about holding an international forum along

the lines of the above-mentioned Berlin Congress to

work out blueprints of new foundations of bringing

order to the Balkans.

That would allow the players on the Balkans field to

disavow their previous unilateral decisions in an

attempt to find a solution to both the Kosovo and

other Balkans crisis.

However, as a precondition to this Russia should get

the approval of the United States and the EU

leadership to give up their support of independent

Kosovo to return the situation onto the international

legal field under the control of the United Nations.

______________________

Pyotr Ahmedovich ISKENDEROV, Senior Fellow, Institute

for Slavic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences,

Cand. Of Sc. (History)

: Published: 25 July 2008

(allucinante cronaca degli incontri tra il presidente degli USA e Condoleeza Rice da una
parte, e il "presidente" e il "premier" dello Stato-fantoccio del Kosovo, trattati da scolaretti
servili, dall'altra. Fonte: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/yugoslaviainfo)

Bush To KLA Capos: Yes, Sir. Thank You, Guys

Posted by: "Rick Rozoff"
Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:14 pm (PDT)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/07/20080721-3.html

The White House
President George W. Bush

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
July 21, 2008

President Bush meets with President Sejdiu and Prime
Minister Thaci of the Republic of Kosovo
Oval Office

-[Bush] I mentioned to both these leaders that they
were sitting right below the portrait of George
Washington, the founder of a free United States. And I
appreciate your courage. I appreciate your leadership.
And I commit the United States to help you realize
your dreams. Welcome.
-[Thaci] As a sovereign and democratic country we want
to be part of NATO and part of the EU and have
excellent relations with the United States. This is
our pledge, this is our responsibility, this is our
vision.
Thank you very much.
[Bush] Yes, sir. Thank you, guys.

PRESIDENT BUSH: It has been an honor to welcome the
President and Prime Minister of an independent Kosovo
to the Oval Office. I'm proud you all are here. I
welcome you. I'm a strong supporter of Kosovo's
independence. I'm against any partition of Kosovo. I
believe strongly that the United Nations mission must
be transferred to the EU as quickly as possible. I
want to thank you very much for your support of
minority rights, the full implementation of the
Ahtisaari plan.

We discussed a variety of issues. We discussed the
problems that Kosovo faces, its desire to be
recognized by more nations around the world. I pledged
that the United States would continue to work with
those nations that have not recognized an independent
Kosovo to convince them to do so as quickly as
possible.

We talked about economics, education. And we talked
about the transatlantic aspirations of both Kosovo and
Serbia, which the United States supports in both
cases.

I mentioned to both these leaders that they were
sitting right below the portrait of George Washington,
the founder of a free United States. And I appreciate
your courage. I appreciate your leadership. And I
commit the United States to help you realize your
dreams. Welcome.

PRESIDENT SEJDIU: (As translated.) It's an
extraordinary occasion for us to be received by
President Bush to convey to him all of the aspirations
and all the thanks of the Kosovo people - heartfelt
thanks.

The Kosovo people have been following democracy, the
principles of democracy and freedom. And the United
States are - they're our supporters. We guaranteed
President Bush that we will continue on this road, and
at the same time to implement the Ahtisaari document.

Kosovo will be a country of democracy, a country of
all its citizens. It will have a special respect for
the minorities. We are very much interested to have
good relations with the Republic of Serbia. Our
progress will be with the integration of NATO and the
EU.

Again, my heartfelt thanks, and God bless America.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Thank you, sir. Prime Minister?

PRIME MINISTER THACI: (As translated.) Today's meeting
with President Bush not only reiterates the fact that
we are closely connected with the United States, but
will always be their trustful friend, forever.

We have always trusted the United States and trusted
the development of our country and that it will be to
the benefit of the international development.

The Kosovo government and the Kosovo people will
always bow in deep respect for the United States and
for the U.S. administration. It is a joint success
story. We are building a democratic Kosovo,
affirmative action for the minorities. We'll develop
economic - Kosovo economically. We'll have excellent
relations with all our neighbors, and in the future
with Serbia.

As a sovereign and democratic country we want to be
part of NATO and part of the EU and have excellent
relations with the United States. This is our pledge,
this is our responsibility, this is our vision.

Thank you very much.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yes, sir. Thank you, guys.

KLA's Thaci To Rice: We Bow Before The American Government
Posted by: "Rick Rozoff"
Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:26 pm (PDT)

http://www.ks-gov.net/pm/Fillimi/tabid/36/EntryID/835/Default.aspx

Office of the Prime Minister of Kosovo
July 18, 2008

Prime Minister Thaci: Kosovo and its people bow before
the American Government and American people for their
support

Thank you, Madame Secretary, for the strong support
that the United States of America has given to Kosovo
and its people.

Today, Kosovo is an independent, sovereign and
democratic state; it is a country of peace, stability
and with a perspective to develop. Kosovo has
excellent cooperation with all the countries of the
region, with Macedonia, Albania, Montenegro, and in
the near democratic future, we believe, also with
Serbia.
....
This is a historical visit and meeting, because it is
the first delegation of the state of Kosovo to visit
Washington.

We expressed our new commitment to making progress in
Kosovo, and awareness about the new responsibilities
that we will take over for Kosovo as a state that will
be part of the Euro-Atlantic family, part of NATO and
of the European Union, and always in excellent
relations with the US.

Kosovo and the people of Kosovo bow before the
Government and the people of America for their
support.

===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/messages

http://lists.topica.com/lists/ANTINATO/read
==============================

: Published: 24 July 2008

J. Laughland on the Arrest of Radovan Karadzic

and more: Moscow hopes a trial of Radovan Karadzic to be unbiased / MOSCOW ACCUSES HAGUE-BASED TRIBUNAL OF DOUBLE STANDARDS / The lost chance for peace in Bosnia (Letters to The Independent)

===

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080722/114637671.html

Russian Information Agency Novosti

July 22, 2008

On the Arrest of Radovan Karadzic

John Laughland, Director of Studies at the Institute

for Democracy and Cooperation in Paris

MOSCOW - The arrest of Radovan Karadzic comes almost

exactly seven years after the first appearance of

Slobodan Milosevic at the International Criminal

Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague on 3

July 2001.

Milosevic's handover was, like Karadzic's, the

immediate result of regime change in Belgrade: just as

Karadzic's arrest swiftly followed the formation of a

pro-European and pro-Western government in Serbia on 8

July, so Milosevic's arrest in April 2001 was the

result of the victory of the Democratic Party (whose

leader is now the President of Serbia) at the

parliamentary elections in December 2000.

The arrest shows that political power matters deeply

when it comes to criminal prosecution: obviously, as

with Milosevic, the fact that Karadzic's friends lost

power in Belgrade caused it.

But this truth also applies to the ICTY itself.

At the end of June, the ICTY released Nasir Oric, the

Bosnian Muslim commander at Srebrenica whose forces

used the cover of the UN safe haven there to conduct

nightly raids against the surrounding Serbian

villages, and which committed numerous atrocities

against civilians.

Oric's release followed the ICTY's acquittal in April

of the former Prime Minister of Kosovo and former KLA

leader, Ramush Haradinaj, even though the Tribunal in

its ruling noted that several prosecution witnesses

had been mysteriously killed before they could come to

The Hague to give their testimony.

Many Serbs, then, will be convinced that the ICTY has

a fundamental anti-Serb bias.

But the majority of Serbs has evidently also been so

worn down by a decade and a half of such hostility

from the West in general, that it has presumably

decided that if you can't beat them, join them: this

is why Serbs voted for a pro-European president in

February and a pro-European government in May.

They, or at any rate their leaders, have concluded

that Karadzic should be sacrificed for the greater

national good, which in their view means absorption

into the EU and NATO.

Serbia's inclusion into these structures, which is now

inevitable, will merely complete the West's

geopolitical project in the Balkans.

Therefore, while it may well be true that the ICTY is

anti-Serb, this is to miss the key point about the

ICTY's political agenda, which is to justify the

West's new doctrine of military and judicial

interventionism.

According to this doctrine, military force can be

deployed against a state when its government commits

human rights abuses.

The Serbs are just the people on whom this policy has

been tried out.

While it may have great superficial appeal, since

there is no doubt that atrocities were committed in

the Balkan wars, the hypocrisy of this policy lies in

the fact that neither NATO nor any of the Western

powers have ever tried to get truly international

support for it, for instance by drawing up an

international treaty or by reforming the UN charter

which currently prohibits such interventionism. The

policy has simply been announced unilaterally.

No criminal trial of a political leader in history has

ended in acquittal, in spite of the fact that the

tradition stretches back to the trial of the King of

England, Charles I, in 1649.

This is because the prosecution of a former sovereign

is a means of demonstrating that a new regime is in

power, and that the old regime was never legitimate in

the first place.

In the case of Karadzic, things will be no different.

The ICTY commits numerous violations of the best

principles of legal procedure to obtain its

convictions, and it has in particular elaborated a

theory of liability which is so broad that defendants

are effectively required to prove their innocence

against the presumption of guilt.

Even if no order is produced from Karadzic instructing

people to commit war crimes, he will be convicted on

the basis that he should have known or must have

known.

The ICTY will do this because the political narrative

behind his trial is be that he, as Bosnian Serb

president, was only ever a criminal; that the state he

headed never had any legitimacy; and that NATO's

intervention against the Bosnian Serbs in 1995 was

therefore not an act of aggression in international

law but instead a justifiable act.

The logic tested in the Balkans 1995 and 1999 (when

NATO attacked Yugoslavia over Kosovo) was implemented

much more dramatically when the US and Britain

declared that they alone had the right to enforce UN

Security Council Resolutions in Iraq.

That war - also subsequently legitimised by a

political trial - has now consumed nearly a million

lives and plunged a whole region into seemingly

interminable chaos.

It is time for the world to reflect seriously on the

danger of introducing the criminal law into

international relations.

John Laughland - British political scientist, Director

of Studies at the Institute for Democracy and

Cooperation in Paris. His book on the Milosevic

trial, "Travesty", was published by Pluto Press in

London in 2007.

---

http://www.ruvr.ru/main.php?lng=eng&q=29997&cid=45&p=22.07.2008

Voice of Russia

July 22, 2008

Moscow hopes a trial of Radovan Karadzic to be unbiased

Moscow hopes a trial of the former Bosnian Serb leader

Radovan Karadzic by the International Tribunal for

Former Yugoslavia will be unbiased.

Mr. Karadzic was charge with war crimes in the Balkans

in the early 1990s.

Commenting on his arrest, the Russian Foreign Ministry

spokesman Andrei Nesterenko said the issue was an

internal matter for Serbia.

At the same time he noted that the Hague-based

tribunal had repeatedly demonstrated bias against

Serbs and acquitted Kosovo Albanians despite

irrefutable evidence of their involvement in war

crimes.

Russia insists that the tribunal be dissolved and all

the remaining cases be tried by judicial bodies of

former Yugoslav republics.

---

http://www.ruvr.ru/main.php?lng=eng&q=30041&cid=56&p=23.07.2008

Voice of Russia

July 23, 2008

MOSCOW ACCUSES HAGUE-BASED TRIBUNAL OF DOUBLE STANDARDS

Vyacheslav Solovyov

Moscow has again urged the International Tribunal for

Former Yugoslavia to renounce double standards and

bias.

The call came in a statement released by the Russian

Foreign Ministry following the arrest in Serbia of the

former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic.

13 years ago, the tribunal indicted him in absentia

for military crimes during the war in

Bosnia-Herzegovina in the early 90s of the past

century.

It is no secret that neither Serbs, nor Bosnian

Muslims, nor Croatians spared each other during that

war.

Nevertheless, despite evidence of crimes committed by

each of the sides, there is only one defendant –

Radovan Karadzic.

The tribunal is notorious for its bias against Serbs.

Over more than a decade, about 100 Serbs and just 25

Croatians, 9 Bosnian Muslims and 8 Albanians have

stood trial on charges of war crimes in an obvious

attempt to hold the Serbs responsible for the events

in the Balkans.

While the Serbian government is receiving

congratulations from Washington and European capitals

on Mr. Karadzic’s arrest, the majority of Serbs, most

of whom treat Mr. Karadzic as a hero, suspect Belgrade

of political bargaining.

This is how Borislav Milosevic, the brother of the

former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic who died

in prison during a trial in the Hague, commented on

the issue:

"For a big part of the Serbian population, Radovan

Karadzic is a national hero and the Hague-based

tribunal is an anti-Serb court convicting Serbs only.

As the Russian Foreign Ministry has said recently,

this tribunal must be shut. It’s been a tool to exert

pressure on Belgrade and our people."

The tribunal’s former chief prosecutor Carla Del

Ponte, in her book titled “The Hunt: Me and My War

Criminals”, published after her resignation,

acknowledged that evidence of severe crimes had often

been ignored if those crimes were committed by Bosnian

Muslims, Croatians or Kosovo Albanians.

For one, the tribunal turned a blind eye to the

abduction and killing of more than 300 Serbs by

Albanian militants in Kosovo and the subsequent sale

of their organs for transplant surgery.

No investigation into these facts has been launched.

---

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/letters/letters-israeli-soldiers-875816.html

The Independent

July 24, 2008

The lost chance for peace in Bosnia

It's all the fault of the Serbs and Radovan Karadzic,

according to Marcus Tanner ("Karadzic, the

psychiatrist who became a genocidal madman", 22 July).

He may care to ask why the Dayton Agreement was not

reached before the Bosnian wars broke out. There was,

after all, the confederal-cantonal Cutileiro Plan,

which was provisionally agreed by Bosnia's three

ethnic leaders at negotiations hosted by the European

Community in Lisbon on 23 February 1992.

The Muslim leader, Alija Izetbegovic, who all along

wanted a centrally governed Bosnia, flew back to

Sarajevo and met the US ambassador to Yugoslavia

Warren Zimmermann. Encouraged by Zimmermann,

Izetbegovic disowned the plan. Washington had, in

effect, pushed the Europeans aside and paved the way

for war. Some three and a half years later, a

muscularly interventionist Washington was

congratulating itself for having engineered the

confederal-cantonal Dayton Agreement.

And the beliefs of Alija Izetbegovic echoed those of

Islamists. His authorship of The Islamic Declaration

in 1970 earned him a prison sentence. In it, he

yearned for a caliphate subject to Islamic law from

Morocco to Indonesia, and ultimately elsewhere,

whenever and wherever Muslims attained a majority. At

no time did he disown the publication.

Irony abounds. Just as many British today fear

Islamist organisations advocating a caliphate, so

Bosnia's Serbs and Croats feared a centrally-governed,

Izetbegovic-led Bosnia. Moreover, if Izetbegovic were

alive today, he would not be granted entry into the

US.

Yugo Kovach

Twickenham, Middlesex

: Published: 22 July 2008

Radovan Karadzic, un ricordo

In un momento in cui il mondo esulta per la cattura del "criminale" Karadzic, penso sia onesto proporre un'immagine di "minoranza" dell'uomo.

Nei primi anni '90 ebbi l'occasione di parlargli molte volte. In una affrontai il tema dei crimini di guerra di cui era accusato. Gli dissi "neanche mia moglie mi crede quando le dico che non mi sembri un criminale"; lui mi rispose che nei primi giorni della guerra civile "cittadini uccisero altri cittadini", e che nessuna autorità era abbastanza forte da fermare il massacro. Quando lui prese in mano la situazione i massacri furono fermati. Per dare a mia moglie un messaggio concreto della sua buona fede mi consegnò un documento in cui mi permetteva di attraversare le linee serbe con bambini musulmani da portare in Italia per cure.

Quando i croati sfondarono il fronte occidentale migliaia di profughi serbi stavano scappando dai territori invasi. C'era una ragazza croata con un tumore in fase terminale che voleva morire tra le braccia di sua madre, abitante a Banja Luka. Per una croata viaggiare contro la corrente dei serbi in fuga era un grosso problema, e nemmeno importanti organizzazioni internazionali erano riuscite ad aiutarla. Io chiesi aiuto a Karadzic e lo ottenni. Degli amici veneti e triestini la misero su di un aereo per Belgrado; qui venne presa in carico da miei colleghi serbi che la nascosero per una notte in un ospedale, quindi iniziò il suo viaggio verso Banja Luka in una ambulanza messa a disposizione dai serbo-bosniaci. Io la precedevo di qualche chilometro per trattare il suo passaggio ai vari posti di blocco. La ragazza era molto coraggiosa e strinse la vita tra i denti, rifiutandosi di morire prima di aver visto sua madre. Alla fine arrivò a casa della madre e poche dopo ore morì come aveva chiesto. I serbo-bosniaci mi diedero una medaglia quale segno di riconoscenza per aver dato loro l'occasione di mostrare la loro vera natura.

Prima che la guerra volgesse in favore dei croati e dei musulmani la sacca di Bihac era assediata dall'esercito di Mladic e la gente stava per morire di fame.

Io fui contattato da alcuni membri del Quinto Corpo d'Armata musulmano per una missione di soccorso alla popolazione di Bihac. Avevano riempito due camion con cibo, in particolare zucchero, ma non sapevano come passare attraverso le linee serbe. Nemmeno l'ONU era riuscita ad ottenere i permessi.

Io offrii una cena a Zagabria ad un membro dello stato maggiore croato e ottenni da lui il permesso di passare attraverso il territorio croato, fino al confine di Moscenica con la zona occupata dai serbi.

Arrivai poi a Pale di sera e chiesi di parlare con Karadzic; era occupato con il Gruppo di Contatto europeo, e mi fu chiesto di aspettare. Nell'attesa molto lunga fui invitato a cena in una sala piena di soldati e funzionari del governo serbo-bosniaco. A metà della cena mi accorsi che i presenti si irrigidivano, mentre alla mie spalle la voce di Karadzic: "cosa vuoi questa volta?" Io riuscii a malapena ad ingoiare un grosso boccone e balbettai: "i bambini di Bihac stanno morendo di fame, tu non li lascerai morire, vero?"

Karadzic sospirò e mi diede il permesso di passare con i camion, ma mi raccomandò di fare attenzione perchè "quelli erano terroristi". Io ebbi il coraggio di rispondergli "è proprio quello che dicono di te".

Così fui in grado di guidare i due camion con targa croata con due autisti musulmani attraverso la Croazia e la Republika Srpska. Nessun osò torcere un capello ai miei autisti. Ebbi solo un problema con un funzionario dell'ONU che mi denunciò per violazione dell'embargo contro la Serbia, avendo io una tanica di benzina in macchina...

Poi i due camion riuscirono a passare dentro la sacca di Bihac, altri camion li seguirono nelle settimane seguenti, poi i musulmani cercarono di rapirmi, ma questa è un'altra storia.

Quando il Tribunale dell'Aja emise il primo mandato di cattura contro Karadzic la motivazione era quella di essere stato il comandante in capo dell'esercito serbo che si era reso responsabile di quei crimini. Chissà se qualcuno ricorda che una settimana prima di Srebrenica il giornalista del Piccolo di Trieste, Maranzana, aveva scritto un articolo in cui definiva Karadzic un presidente ormai praticamente spodestato (da Mladic, per ordine di Milosevic?) quasi prigioniero nella sua residenza di Pale. La mia impressione è che il Tribunale, in ossequio a chi pagava lo stipendo ai suoi giudici, abbia emesso il mandato di cattura un po' frettolosamente, inventandosi gli unici crimini di cui Karadzic poteva certamente definirsi innocente.

Io non so se Radovan abbia rubato da bambino la marmellata o se abbia mai ordinato di uccidere qualcuno nella sua vita; posso solo testimoniare che l'uomo che io ho conosciuto mi ha sempre concesso di aiutare bambini di entrambe le fazioni senza alcuna discriminazione. Non ebbi mai l'impressione di parlare con un mostro.

Marino Andolina

pediatra (Trieste)