Subject: Novi tekst na ARTEL
GEOPOLITIKA- Vladislav
Jovanovic: Problem izbeglica i
raseljenih lica, kao i nestalih Srba na KiM
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2002 21:12:18 -0700
From: "Artel" <artel@...>

office@...
Datum:02 juni 2002

Vladislav Jovanovi?: PROBLEM IZBEGLICA I
RASELJENIH LICA, KAO I NESTALIH SRBA NA
kOSOVU I METOHIJI

Izlaganje Vladislava Jovanovi?a, bivseg MIP-a SRJ
na okruglom stolu Beogradskog foruma odrzanom u
Etnografskom muzeju u Beogradu na temu "Problem
izbeglica u SRJ i nestalih lica sa Kosova i
Metohije"
Beograd, 24 maj 2002

O izbeglicama i prognanicima iz Hrvatske i BiH,
odnosno sa Kosova i Metohije, koji su nasli
uto?iste u SRJ, tzv. me|unarodna zajednica nerado
govori, a jos manje je spremna da adekvatnije
u?estvuje u pokrivanju najnu?nijih troskova
njihovog golog opstanka. Na njih se gleda kao na
izbeglice drugog reda i stavljaju se na za?elje
liste izbeglica koje se nalaze u drugim bivsim
jugoslovenskim republikama. Dvostruki standard
koji je tokom jugoslovenske krize razvijeni deo
medjunarodne zajednice sistematski primenjivao na
stetu srpskog naroda i SRJ, dobio je u slu?aju
izbeglica posebno cini?an prizvuk. Iako su bili
nedvosmislene ?rtve politike i prakse etni?kog
?is?enja u Hrvatskoj, BiH i na Kosovu i Metohiji,
izbeglice u Jugoslaviji se diskriminisu i
tretiraju kao nuz produkt politike SRJ, odnosno
Srbije u jugoslovenskoj krizi. Kao takvima, za
njihove patnje i potucanje ima se manje
razumevanja i vrsi se veoma mali pritisak na
vlasti u Hrvatskoj i BiH, odnosno na Kosovu i
Metohiji da im se omogu?i sto raniji povratak u
garantovanim - bezbednosnim i pristojnim
materijalnim uslovima.
Specifi?nost polo?aja izbeglica u Hrvatskoj i BiH
je u tome sto su oni trostruko diskiminisani:
1. kao ?rtve etni?kog ?is?enja u spomenutim
bivsim jugoslovenskim republikama,
2. kao ?rtve osmogodisnje politike sveobuhvatnih
ekonomskih sankcija protiv SRJ gde su ih nevolje
dovele i
3. kao ?rtve tromese?ne agresije NATO na SRJ koja
je osetno smanjila i onako istanjene ekonomske
mogu?nosti Jugoslavije da im vise poma?e i tokom
koje su pogodjeni i neki centri za kolektivan
smestaj izbeglica.
Specifi?nost i ironija polo?aja prognanika sa
Kosova je u tome sto je do njihovog pogroma i
proterivanja doslo posle zavrsetka rata, kada je
realizovanje rezolucije SB 1244 bilo garantovano
od strane UNMIK-a i 50 hiljada do zuba naoru?anih
vojnika NATO-a. Oni nisu ?rtve rata, kao sto
propaganda NATO-a ?eli da predstavi, nego mira
koji je NATO pretvorio u osvetni?ki rat vra?enih
pripadnika OVK protiv nenaoru?anih srpskih i
romskih civila. Prvi put u istoriji aktivnosti
OUN jedna njena mirovna operacija je iskoris?ena
za sprovdjenje politike genocida nad delom naroda
na ?ijoj suverenoj teritoriji se operacija
ostvaruje.
Zbog nespre?avanja takvih zlo?ina i selektivnog
implementiranja rezolucije1244, nije preterano
konstatovati da su UNMIK i KFOR pristali da budu
sau?esnici u po?injenim zlo?inima nad Srbima i
Romima. Paradoksalan je podatak da je SRJ,
odnosno Srbija, najvise optu?ivana za nastanak i
trajanje ratnih sukoba na tlu prethodne SFRJ, a
da su najbrojnije ?rtve etni?kog ?is?enja upravo
njeni sunarodnici. To je najre?itiji dokaz
neosnovanosti i zlonamernosti takvih optu?bi.
Njihov pravi cilj je da se prikrije i umanji
primarna odgovornost onih stranih krugova koji su
raniju SFRJ pustili niz vodu i doprineli njenom
razbijanju, kao i odgovornost separatisti?kih
elita u bivsim jugoslovenskim republikama i na
Kosovu i Metohiji koji su projekte oru?ane
secesije neposredno izveli. Posebna odgovornost
le?i na UNMIK i KFOR-u sto su dozvolili da u zoni
njihove neposredne odgovornosti dodje do brojnih
ubistava i masovnog uns{tavanja ili prisvajanja
imovine prognanih Srba i Roma, kao i do masovnih
i sistematskih otmica preko 1 300 Srba.
Neprihvatljiv je argumenat me|unarodne zajednice
da je to posledica prethodnog sukoba na Kosovu,
odnosno da se radi o odmazdi albanskih terorista
zbog gubitaka koje su pretrpeli tokom sukoba sa
nasom vojskom i policijom. Rezolucija SB 1244 je
garantovala li?nu, kolektivnu i imovinsku
bezbednost svih stanovnika Kosova i Metohije.
KFOR i UNMIK su preuzeli obavezu da osiguraju
primenu te rezolucije u praksi i to bez ikakvog
odlaganja. Oni to jos nisu sproveli - kada je re?
o slobodi i osnovnim ljudskim pravima Srba i
Roma. Ako su o?ekivali krvavu osvetu Albanaca nad
Srbima i Romima, nisu smeli dopustiti da
naoru?ana OVK iz Makedonije i Albanije udje na
teritoriju Kosova i Metohije. Takodje, KFOR je
morao osigurati da povratak albanskih izbeglica
iz spomenutih zemalja bude kontrolisan i pod
njegovim vojnim nadzorom, kako bi se izbegla
stihija i anarhija koji su, odmah posle
povla?enja Vojske Jugoslavije i policije sa
Kosova i Metohije, zavladale tom pokrajinom.
Klju?ne zemlje NATO nemaju za takav propust
nikakav alibi. Znale su, a ako nisu znale onda su
to morale znati, da se mogu o?ekivati masovni
zlo?ini nad Srbima i Romima. Isto tako, znale su
kako se postupa u sli?nim situacijama, ali nisu
preduzele preventivne mere. Morale su se
inspirisati primerom iz vlastite proslosti, kada
su Velika Britanija i Francuska pri kraju Prvog
svetskog rata zabranile pobedni?koj Vojsci Srbije
da prodre u Bugarsku, sa obrazlo?enjem da bi
brojni zlo?ini bugarske okupatorske vojske u
Srbiji mogli dovesti do osvete srpske vojske nad
bugarskim stanovnistvom. Iste te zemlje NATO jos
nisu objasnile zasto ih takvi humanitarni razlozi
nisi naveli da spre?e masovne zlo?ine OVK nad
Srbima i Romima. Utoliko pre sto su oni, posle
odlaska jugoslovenske vojske i policije, bili
potpuno nezasti?eni i moglo se predvideti da ?e
biti ?rtve odmazdi od strane pomahnitalih
Albanaca. Ako bi se striktno primenjivala pravila
Statuta Haskog tribunala, najvisi rukovodioci
NATO morali bi se smatrati krivi?no odgovornim
zato sto su znali sta ?e se dogoditi na Kosovu i
Metohiji, a nisu nista preduzeli da do toga ne
dodje. Kad je do masovnih albanskih zlo?ina
doslo, oni su otvoreno umanjivali njihov obim,
dok zlo?ine u vezi sa nestalim Srbima do danas
prikrivaju ili istinu o njima saopstavaju samo u
malim dozama i u du?im vremenskim razmacima.
Prema podacima jugoslovenskog Crvenog krsta, SRJ
je doma?in oko 600 hiljada izbeglica i privremeno
raseljenih lica iz Hrvatske, BiH i sa Kosova i
Metohije. Mogu?e je da ih ima i vise od toga, jer
ih je do pre par godina bilo skoro 1 milion. Ali
i ako se zadr?imo samo na podacima jugoslovenskog
Crvenog krsta, treba re?i da je to daleko najve?i
broj izbeglica i raseljenih lica koji se u ovom
trenutku nalaze u jednoj evropskoj zemlji.
S obzirom na toliki broj izbeglica i bitno
umanjene ekonomske mogu?nosti SRJ usled sankcija
i agresije, mo?emo polo?aj najve?eg broja
izbeglica ozna?iti kao trenutno najve?u
humanitarnu katastrofu u Evropi. Ogroman broj
izbeglica ?ivi u nemogu?im fizi?kim i
materijalnim uslovima. Bez trajnog posla, oni
nemaju nikakvu porodi?nu imovinu, a bez realnih
nada da ?e se u dogledno vreme vratiti u
nekadasnje domove, oni nemaju ni elementarnu
?ivotnu perspektivu. Objektivno gledano,
prepusteni su sami sebi. Me|unarodna zajednica ih
tretira sa sve ve?om ravnodusnos?u i smanjuje i
dosadasnju skromnu finansijsku pomo?. Zaokupljena
brojnim vlastitim, politi?kim i materijalnim
problemima, SRJ nije u stanju ili nije previse
voljna da prema njima ispolji ve?u solidarnost i
pru?i im adekvatniju zastitu.
Posebno je tragi?na i optu?uju?a situacija u vezi
sa 1 300 nestalih Srba na Kosovu i Metohiji.
Njihovi najbli?i srodnici nemaju ?ak ni osnovno
pravo na informaciju sta se sa njima desilo.
Pravo na informaciju je preduslov za koris?enje
svakog drugog ljudskog prava. Sampioni odbrane
ljudskih prava ne ?ine nista efektivno da se
istina o nestalim Srbima utvrdi i prava njihovih
porodica da je saznaju zastiti. Organi UNMIK i
KFOR guraju to neprijatno pitanje pod tepih, jer
im je va?nije da sa ve?inskim Albancima na Kosovu
i Metohiji ostanu u dobrim odnosima, nego da
otkrivaju i gone njihove zlo?ine nad Srbima.
Zvani?ne vlasti u SRJ i Srbiji vode o tome
ra?una, ali je njihova aktivnost vise
deklarativna nego sustinska. Revnosno ispunjavaju
sve zahteve razvijenog dela medjunarodne
zajednice koji se odnose na albanske zatvorenike
i osudjenike u Srbiji, ali se ne usdj|uju da
njihovo pustanje uslove oslobadjanjem nestalih
Srba ili bar dobijanjem pune i istinite
informacije o njihovoj sudbini.
Inferiorni polo?aj zvani?nih vlasti prema
zapadnom delu me|unarodne zajednice ne pru?a nadu
da ?e se njihova efikasnost u pitanju nestalih
Srba bitnije pove?ati. Resenje se nalazi u
dramati?nom poja?avanju nacionalnog i
medjunarodnog pritiska na UNMIK, KFOR i one
faktore koji ih stite i usmeravaju, radi
naterivanja da sto pre podnesu potpuni izvestaj o
sudbini nestalih Srba i preduzetim merama za
gonjenje i ka?njavanje albanskih krivaca za te
zlo?ine. Za sadasnji te?ak i bezperspektivni
polo?aj najve?eg broja izbeglica i raseljenih
lica u SRJ glavnu krivicu snosi medjunarodna
zajednica koja je mesanjem u jugoslovensku krizu
ubrzala razbijanje SFRJ i pristrasnos?u u korist
Hrvatske, BiH i kosovskih Albanaca pre?utno
opstruisala masovniji povratak izbeglica svojim
rodnim mestima. Medjutim, deo krivice snosi i
prethodna vlast koja je izbeglice dugo dr?ala u
neizvesnosti u pogledu njihove realne budu?nosti,
kao i sadasnja vlast DOS-a koja nastavlja sa
istom politikom. U oba slu?aja, interesi i
izborne ra?unice politi?kih partija na vlasti su
bili i ostali iznad elementarnih nacionalnih
interesa kada je re? o problemima izbeglica i
raseljenih lica. Medjutim, problemi tih lica su
tako veliki i jedinstveni da moraju biti
posmatrani i resavani iznad interesa bilo koje
politi?ke stranke ili koalicije na vlasti. Na
izgon skoro jednog miliona nasih sunarodnika iz
doju?erasnjih delova jedinstvene dr?ave mora se
gledati kao na elementarnu nesre?u nevidjenih
razmera. Takva vanredna nesre?a zahteva
preduzimanje vanrednih mera, ne manjih od onih
koje je SFRJ preduzimala posle velikih
zemljotresa u Skoplju, Banjaluci i Crnoj Gori.
Polaze?i od toga, predla?em da ovaj okrugli sto
usvoji slede?e zaklju?ke i s njima upozna Saveznu
i obe republi?ke vlade i javnost nase zemlje:
1. Da sva lica srpske i crnogorske narodnosti
automatski postaju jugoslovenski dr?avljani ?im
stupe na teritoriju SRJ sa namerom da u njoj
dobiju zastitu od progona u drugoj dr?avi ili da
u njoj ?ive. Sva takva lica koja godinama imaju
status izbeglica automatski ?e se smatrati
jugoslovenskim dr?avljanima. Kao inspiracija i
primer za takvo postupanje mogu da slu?e Izrael i
S.R. Nema?ka koje pravo na automatsko sticanje
dr?avljanstva Izraela odnosno, Nema?ke priznaju
svim licima svog etnikuma ?im stupe na tle
Izraela, odnosno Nema?ke, sa namerom da tamo
ostanu. Argumenat koji je do sada koris?en da bi
lako sticanje jugoslovenskog dr?avljanstva
destimulisalo izbeglice na povratak u Hrvatsku
ili BiH nije odr?iv, jer ih nase dr?avljanstvo ne
spre?ava da zadr?e i dr?avljanstvo Hrvatske ili
BiH. S druge strane, to ne bi oslobodilo Hrvatsku
i BiH obaveze da im osiguraju uslove za povratak,
jer se ne bi moglo tuma?iti kao opcija izbeglica,
ve? samo kao poboljsavanje njihovog polo?aja.
2. Da se, u cilju pru?anja trajne i potpune
zastite izbeglica, njihove maloletne dece,
invalida rata i ratnih siro?adi, donese odluka
(zakon) o osnivanju Fondacije solidarnosti za
period od 20 godina, u koju bi se redovno slivala
sredstva iz obavezne solidarnosti svih plate?no
sposobnih gradjana SRJ, redovni doprinosi
preduze?a, redovni prilozi nase dijaspore i
donacije zemalja koje najvise u?estvuju u
pru?anju humanitarne pomo?i, kao i onih koje su
u?estvovale u bombardovanju SRJ. Fondacija bi
bila pod najstro?im finansijskim re?imom, njeno
poslovanje bi bilo redovno kontrolisano i potpuno
transparentno.
3. Da Vlada SRJ, preko Generalne skupstine OUN,
zatra?i od Stalnog medjunarodnog suda pravde u
Hagu, kao organa OUN, zvani?no tuma?enje da li
rezolucija SB 1244 treba da bude sveobuhvatno, a
ne selektivno implementirana i da li OUN, koja
vrsi privremenu administrativnu i policijsku
vlast, i NATO, koji dr?i Kosovo i Metohiju pod
svojom neposrednom vojnom kontrolom, imaju
obavezu da, zbog propustanja da im osiguraju
li?nu i imovinsku bezbednost, prognanim Srbima i
Romima, kao i porodicama nestalih Srba, isplate
odgovaraju?u finansijsku nadoknadu zbog
izgubljenih ?ivota i imovine, kao i pretrpljene
patnje i dusevnog bola.

FREEDOM ASSOCIATION SPECIAL BULLETIN No.9
May 28, 2002

WITNESSES PROVE PROSECUTION’S IMPOTENCE

The impotence of The Hague Prosecution is more
and more obvious as days go by. As greater
importance is given to some of the witnesses,
as more evident is that the indictment is based
on mounted and constructed evidence. The best
proof comes from today's cross-examination of
the protected witness K-5, whose identity is no
secret to Yugoslav press, since in yesterday's
papers appeared to be a certain Afrim Sijaku from
the town of Urosevac.

In any case, as the witness himself had said in
his written statement, it is a man who has been
charged for heavy felonies, such as thefts and
assaults, who was a notorious drunkard, while
as a police informer he was well into smuggling
of narcotics and other mafia business. His
testimonial was based on allegations that as
a police informer he tipped the houses of Albanians
linked to the KLA, either the individuals active
within the terrorist organization, on the basis of
what the Police executed alleged liquidations,
arsons and plunders.

However, on Milosevic's questions this witness,
almost evidently scared, denied everything related
to KLA crimes, under whose "treatment" he had been
for several days, as he himself had admitted. While
in his written statement he mentioned having been
afraid of the KLA and of some other Albanians, today
he denied it, even when judge May tried to help
him by asking him whether he was afraid in the
beginning, but not at this moment.

Slobodan Milosevic asked the witness regarding
criminal charges that have been pressed against
him for several times, but he kept denying, even
when Milosevic read the document numbers under
which these charges were pressed - there had been
ten in 1990 only, as was the case in all of the
following years till 1995 - when he had spent
nine months in prison. Those charges were mostly
related to thefts, burglaries, assaults, etc.
The witness, however, had no other explanation but
to deny those facts.

In his written statement, given to The Hague
Prosecution representatives two years ago, this
witness mentioned that, as a Serbian police informer,
he was producing data on drug dealers and thieves.
Still, he had no explanation whatsoever, how could
he have had such data, if not because of being
himself involved in the narcotics business. The
same applied to him recalling the reasons for having
been in prison in 1995 and how come the Serbian
Police could not release him from serving his sentence.
Beside that, his answers to Milosevic’s question
about a Serb, with whom he allegedly had opened a
restaurant and shared stolen goods, proved to be
rather contradictory. He claimed the Serb was one
of Arkan’s "Tigers", but later he testified that
the man in question had served a four-year term in
the Lipljan penitentiary, a period coinciding with
the very length of existence of the so-called
"Tigers". The witness never answered to Milosevic’s
questions - has he been an informer for the sake of
committing crimes much easier and has he been a
thief himself. Sijaku’s testimonial has raised
once again the issue of credibility of The Hague
Prosecution, as well as of credibility of the very
indictment against Milosevic, since it was obviously
based on constructed facts and on witnesses
especially trained for the job.

===*===

FREEDOM ASSOCIATION SPECIAL BULLETIN No.10
May 30, 2002

THE MASSACRE IN RACAK FABRICATED

As far as the cross-examination of the witnesses
of The Hague Prosecution by Slobodan Milosevic goes
on, it gets clearer that the alleged massacre of
civilians was fabricated in order to serve to NATO
aggressors as some kind of pretext to start the
bombing of Yugoslavia.

Yesterdays and today's testimony of the Canadian
general Michel Maisoneuve, who was member of the
OSCE Verification Mission and Head of the Prizren
Regional Center, has shown that, too. From his
testimony one could see that one of the key tasks
of the Prosecution is to present Racak as a crime
against civilians, in order to justify the NATO
aggression. However, as much as the general tried
to respond to the suggestive Prosecutor's questions
and present the Racak events as a brutal crackdown
of the Police with the locals, confronted with
Milosevic's questions he seldom had to confess it
was a conflict between the Police and the KLA
terrorists. After all, the OSCE Mission itself
confirmed that among the deads were KLA members as
well.

General Maisoneuve, for instance, on Milosevic's
question could not deny that the Verification Mission
made efforts to affirm the KLA as a legitimate side
in the conflict, since he was the author of the mission
document where this was explicitly specified and which
Milosevic had quoted. Maisoneuve tried to present this
as an attempt of the mission to establish trust. This
way he also tried to justify the complaint raised by
him and the mission as to why the investigation judge
came to Racak the day after the event escorted by the
Police. However, when asked if it meant that him and
the mission are denying the sovereignty of Yugoslavia
and Serbia on that part of their territory as well
as the right of the legal authorities of the State
to eliminate the terrorists who are violently
struggling for secession, Maisoneuve had to confess
that this would not be right and that he does not
consider this was the task of the mission.

Maisoneuve had to confess that in all of the
occasions when OSCE Mission's verifiers were
present, the Police behaved in a correct and
professional way. In the OSCE reports, however,
brutal crackdowns of Albanian civilians by the
Serbian Police were mentioned, which was done
according to the witness on the basis of
testimonies of the Albanians. Maisoneuve had
problems while explaining the allegations from
the mission reports about Army tank and artillery
attacks on Racak civilian homes from distance.
On a direct question if there were any victims
in Racak of these mortar attacks, the witness
had to admit there were not, reducing his whole
story on Army involvement to him being told by
one of his verifiers that one tank had hit a
house. He was also forced by Milosevic's cross-
examination to deny that Army individuals have
accused the Police for intervening in Racak.

General Maisoneuve tried not to avoid answers to
direct questions, so that Milosevic succeeded to
make his answers more useful to the Defence than
to the Prosecution. That is why judge May did his
best to avoid such a situation. When asked by
Milosevic if, after everything he found out so far
about the Racak events he still personally considers
there had been a massacre, May promptly intervened
and explicitly prevented him from answering that
question.

A totally separate story are the Racak victims,
for whom the OSCE mission chief William Walker
affirmed they were civilian ones killed from a
close range on the same spot, where the day after
dead bodies were found. After the cross-examination
of this witness, as well as of other ones before,
it came out rather evident that these people
perished in combat and were brought to one single
spot in order to make it look as if they were executed.

Milosevic has proved that serious fighting took
place between the Police and the KLA forces,
trenched around the village, and that the bodies
were brought and grouped up after the Police and
OSCE verifiers had withdrawn. This was evident from
the position of the bodies, as well as from the
findings of the forensic teams who examined them.

After a series of usuccessful attempts to build-up
a Walker's fabricated story about Racak through
testimonies of witnesses, the prosecution attempted
to bring one of its own investigators to appear as
witness with special goal - to present to the court
a "summary" of the events in Racak, based on written
statements of "many witnesses" who did not appear,
as well as on tons of "documents" collected by
prosecution. After a sharp complaint by President
Milosevic against the "indirect witnesses", the
"trial chamber" decided not to accept testimony
of the prosecution investigator Barney Kelly. This
was considered by many as one of the greatest defets
of the prosecution, since the begining of the "trial".

===*===

To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sps.org.yu/ (official SPS website)
http://www.belgrade-forum.org/ (forum for the world of equals)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)
http://www.jutarnje.co.yu/ ('morning news' the only Serbian newspaper
advocating liberation)

http://www.ansa.it/rubriche/italia/2002-05-29_1260287.html

Presidente Montenegro indagato per mafia e contrabbando

Read more ...