Informazione
SCATOLE CINESI
Il Ministro montenegrino dell'educazione si oppone al progetto di una
scuola per insegnanti in lingua albanese, che il suo collega Ministro
"per le minoranze etniche", invece, vuole aprire ad Ulcinj.
Ulcinj e' al confine con la repubblica di Albania, in un'area con una
forte componente albanese, che secondo alcuni progetti in futuro
potrebbe entrare a far parte della Grande Albania.
Il Ministro montenegrino dell'educazione si oppone al "segregazionismo
etnico" ed alla secessione dell'area di Ulcinj; tuttavia, egli fa parte
di un governo di secessionisti, quelli che si stanno inventando una
identita' etno-culturale artificiale "montenegrina" per poter spaccare
il loro paese, e che sono dunque corresponsabili dello squartamento
della Jugoslavia.
Ancora una volta, da quelle parti, chi di secessionismo ferisce, di
secessionismo perisce.
(I. Slavo)
www.b92.net
Beta News Agency, Belgrade
August 3, 2003
Montenegrin ministry opposes Albanian schooling
PODGORICA -- Sunday -- The Montenegrin Education Ministry is opposing a
proposal to establish an Albanian-language teacher-training faculty in
either town of Ulcinj or Tuzi, both of which have majority Albanian
populations.
Education Minister Slobodan Backovic told journalists that the move
would not be in accordance with the recommendations of the EU, as "it
looks like segregation".
He recalled that an Albanian-language study section was opened at the
Niksic Philosophical University two years ago and no one was
interested. NGO's and political parties started dealing with this
"problem", but "no one asked the universities or the government for
their opinions".
Albanian national parties, backed by the ministry for ethnic
minorities, are pressing for a teacher-training facility to be opened
in one of the towns, as well as calling for the Montenegrin authorities
to train Albanian-language teachers to educate in Pristina, Skadar and
Tirana.
Il Ministro montenegrino dell'educazione si oppone al progetto di una
scuola per insegnanti in lingua albanese, che il suo collega Ministro
"per le minoranze etniche", invece, vuole aprire ad Ulcinj.
Ulcinj e' al confine con la repubblica di Albania, in un'area con una
forte componente albanese, che secondo alcuni progetti in futuro
potrebbe entrare a far parte della Grande Albania.
Il Ministro montenegrino dell'educazione si oppone al "segregazionismo
etnico" ed alla secessione dell'area di Ulcinj; tuttavia, egli fa parte
di un governo di secessionisti, quelli che si stanno inventando una
identita' etno-culturale artificiale "montenegrina" per poter spaccare
il loro paese, e che sono dunque corresponsabili dello squartamento
della Jugoslavia.
Ancora una volta, da quelle parti, chi di secessionismo ferisce, di
secessionismo perisce.
(I. Slavo)
www.b92.net
Beta News Agency, Belgrade
August 3, 2003
Montenegrin ministry opposes Albanian schooling
PODGORICA -- Sunday -- The Montenegrin Education Ministry is opposing a
proposal to establish an Albanian-language teacher-training faculty in
either town of Ulcinj or Tuzi, both of which have majority Albanian
populations.
Education Minister Slobodan Backovic told journalists that the move
would not be in accordance with the recommendations of the EU, as "it
looks like segregation".
He recalled that an Albanian-language study section was opened at the
Niksic Philosophical University two years ago and no one was
interested. NGO's and political parties started dealing with this
"problem", but "no one asked the universities or the government for
their opinions".
Albanian national parties, backed by the ministry for ethnic
minorities, are pressing for a teacher-training facility to be opened
in one of the towns, as well as calling for the Montenegrin authorities
to train Albanian-language teachers to educate in Pristina, Skadar and
Tirana.
http://www.resistenze.org/sito/te/pe/im/peimlenin.htm
www.resistenze.org - pensiero resistente - sull'imperialismo
Gocce di LENIN sull'imperialismo
da: L'imperialismo fase suprema del capitalismo, (1916)
Cap. 1
[..] Ma la nostra rappresentazione della forza reale e dell'importanza
dei moderni monopoli sarebbe assai incompleta, insufficiente e
inferiore alla realtà, se non tenessimo conto della funzione delle
banche.
Cap. 2
[..] Pertanto l'inizio del XX secolo segna il punto critico del
passaggio dall'antico al nuovo capitalismo, dal dominio del capitale in
generale al dominio del capitale finanziario.
Cap.3
[..] Concentrazione della produzione; conseguenti monopoli; fusione e
simbiosi delle banche con l'industria: in ciò si compendia la storia
della formazione del capitale finanziario e il contenuto del relativo
concetto.[..]
Cap. 4
[..] L'esportazione di capitali influisce sullo sviluppo del
capitalismo nei paesi quali affluisce, accelerando tale sviluppo.
Pertanto se tale esportazione, sino a un certo punto, può determinare
una stasi nello sviluppo nei paesi esportatori, tuttavia non può non
dare origine a una più elevata e intensa evoluzione del capitalismo in
tutto il mondo.[..]
Cap. 5
[..] E a misura che cresceva l'esportazione dei capitali, si
allargavano le relazioni estere e coloniali e le sfere d'influenza
delle grandi associazioni monopolistiche, naturalmente si procedeva
sempre più verso accordi internazionali tra di esse e verso la
creazione di cartelli mondiali. [..]
[..] I capitalisti si spartiscono il mondo non per la loro speciale
malvagità, ben si perché il grado raggiunto dalla concentrazione li
costringe a battere questa via, se vogliono ottenere dei profitti. E la
spartizione si compie « proporzionalmente al capitale », « in
proporzione alla forza », poiché in regime di produzione mercantile e
di capitalismo non è possibile alcun altro sistema di spartizione. Ma
la forza muta per il mutare dello sviluppo i economico e politico. Per
capire gli avvenimenti, occorre sapere quali questioni siano risolte da
un mutamento di potenza; che poi tale mutamento sia di natura «
puramente» economica, oppure extra-economica~ (per esempio militare),
ciò, in sé, è questione secondaria, che non può mutar nulla nella
fondamentale concezione del più recente periodo del capitalismo.
Sostituire la questione del contenuto della lotta e delle stipulazioni
tra le leghe capitalistiche con quella della forma di tale lotta e di
tali stipulazioni (che oggi può essere pacifica, domani bellica,
dopodomani! nuovamente pacifica), significa cadere al livello del
sofista.
- L'età del più recente capitalismo ci dimostra come tra le i leghe
capitalistiche si formino determinati rapporti sul terreno della
spartizione economica del mondo, e, di pari passo con tale fenomeno e
in connessione con esso, si formino anche tra le leghe politiche, cioè
gli Stati, determinati rapporti sul terreno della spartizione
territoriale del mondo, della lotta per le colonie, della « lotta per
il territorio economico ». [..]
Cap. 6
[..] Il mondo appare completamente ripartito sicché in avvenire sarà
possibile soltanto una nuova spartizione,[..]
[..] E' quindi fuori discussione il fatto che al trapasso del
capitalismo alla fase di capitalismo monopolistico finanziario è
collegato un inasprimento della lotta per la ripartizione del mondo.[..]
[..] Quanto più il capitalismo è sviluppato, quanto più la scarsità
delle materie prime è sensibile, quanto più acuta è in tutto il mondo
la concorrenza e la caccia alle sorgenti di materie prime,[..]
Cap. 7
[..] dobbiamo dare una definizione dell'imperialismo, che contenga i
suoi cinque principali contrassegni, e cioè:
1. la concentrazione della produzione e del capitale, che ha raggiunto
un grado talmente alto di sviluppo da creare i monopoli con funzione
decisiva nella vita economica;
2. la fusione del capitale bancario col capitale industriale e il
formarsi, sulla base di questo «capitale finanziario », di
un'oligarchia finanziaria;
3. la grande importanza acquistata dall'esportazione di capitale in
confronto con l'esportazione di merci;
4. il sorgere di associazioni monopolistiche internazionali di
capitalisti, che si ripartiscono il mondo;
5. la compiuta ripartizione della terra tra le più grandi potenze
capitalistiche.[..]
[..] «Dal punto di vista strettamente economico - scrive Kautsky
- non può escludersi che il capitalismo attraverserà ancora una nuova
fase: quella cioè dello spostamento della politica dei cartelli nella
politica estera. Si avrebbe allora la fase dell'ultra- imperialismo » ,
cioè del super-imperialismo, della unione degli imperialismi di tutto
il mondo e non della guerra tra essi, la fase della fine della guerra
in regime capitalista, la fase «dello sfruttamento collettivo del mondo
ad opera del capitale finanziario internazionalmente coalizzato »[..]
[..] I cartelli internazionali, considerati da Kautsky come germi
dell'« ultra-imperialismo» (cosμ come la produzione delle pastiglie
nutritive nei laboratori può essere proclamata il germe
dell'ultra-agricoltura!), non ci offrono forse l'esempio della
spartizione e nuova ripartizione del mondo, del passaggio dalla
ripartizione pacifica alla non pacifica e viceversa? Forse il capitale
finanziario americano e d'altra nazionalità, che riparti già il mondo
in via pacifica con la partecipazione della Germania - per esempio col
sindacato internazionale delle rotaie e col trust internazionale della
marina mercantile - non ripartisce ora di bèl nuovo il mondo intero
sulla base di nuovi rapporti di forza che vanno modificandosi in
maniera nient' affatto pacifica? [..]
Cap. 8.
[..] L'imperialismo è l'immensa accumulazione in pochi paesi di
capitale liquido [..]. Da ciò segue, inevitabilmente, l'aumentare della
classe o meglio del ceto dei rentiers, cioè di persone che vivono del
«taglio di cedole», non partecipano ad alcuna impresa ed hanno per
professione l'ozio. L'esportazione di capitale, uno degli essenziali
fondamenti economici del- l'imperialismo, intensifica questo completo
distacco del ceto dei rentiers dalla produzione e dà un 'impronta di
parassitismo a tutto il paese, che vive dello sfruttamento del lavoro
di pochi paesi, e colonie d'oltre oceano. [..]
~ La prospettiva della spartizione della Cina dà origine al seguente
apprezzamento economico di Hobson: - « La più grande parte dell'Europa
occidentale potrebbe allora assumere l'aspetto e il carattere ora
posseduti soltanto da alcuni luoghi, cioè l'Inghilterra meridionale, la
Riviera e le località del- l'Italia e della Svizzera visitate dai
turisti e abitate da gente ricca. Si avrebbe un piccolo gruppo di
ricchi aristocratici, traenti le loro rendite e i loro dividendi dal
lontano Oriente; accanto, un gruppo alquanto più numeroso di impiegati
e di commercianti e un gruppo ancora maggiore di domestici, lavoratori
dei trasporti e operai occupati nel processo finale della lavorazione
dei prodotti più avariabili. Allora scomparirebbero i più importanti
rami di industria, e gli alimenti e i prodotti base affluirebbero come
tributo dall'Asia o dall'Africa... Ecco quale possibilità sarebbe
offerta da una più vasta lega delle potenze occidentali, da una
Federazione europea delle grandi potenze. Essa non solo non spingerebbe
innanzi l'opera della civiltà mondiale, ma potrebbe presentare il
gravissimo peri- colo di un parassitismo occidentale, quello di
permettere l'esistenza di un gruppo di nazioni industriali piu
progredite, le cui classi elevate riceverebbero, dall'Asia e
dall'Africa, enormi tributi [..]
[..] L'imperialismo tende a costituire tra i lavoratori categorie
privilegiate e a staccarle dalla grande massa dei proletari.[..]
[..] In una lettera a Kautsky del 12/9/1882, Engels scriveva: « Ella mi
domanda che cosa pensino gli operai della politica coloniale. Ebbene:
precisamente lo stesso che della politica in generale. In realtà non
esiste qui alcun partito operaio, ma solo radicali, conservatori e
radicali-liberali, e gli operai si godono tranquillamente insieme con
essi il monopolio commerciale e coloniale dell'Inghilterra sul mondo
».[..]
Cap. 9
[..] Da un lato le gigantesche dimensioni assunte dal capitale
finanziario, concentratosi in poche mani e costituente una fitta e
ramificata rete di relazioni e di collegamenti, che mettono alla sua
dipendenza non solo i medi e piccoli proprietari e capitalisti, ma
anche i piccolissimi, dall'altro lato l'inasprirsi della lotta con gli
altri gruppi finanziari nazionali per la spartizione del mondo e il
dominio sugli altri paesi; tutto ciò determina il passaggio della massa
delle classi possidenti, senza eccezione, dal lato dell'imperialismo.
Entusiasmo « universale » per le prospettive offerte dall'imperialismo;
furiosa difesa ed abbellimento di esso: ecco i segni della nostra età.
L'ideologia imperialista si fa strada anche nella classe operaia, che
non. è separata dalle altre classi da una muraglia cinese. Ché se a
ragione i capi della cosiddetta « socialdemocrazia » di Germania
vengono qualificati « social-imperialisti », cioè socialisti a parole,
imperialisti a fatti, [..]
[..] Kautsky chiama ultra-imperialismo o super-imperialismo ciò che,
tredici anni prima di lui, Hobson chiamava inter-imperialismo, A parte
la formazione di una nuova parola erudita per mezzo della sostituzione
di una particella latina con un'altra, il progresso del pensiero «
scientifico..» di Kautsky consiste soltanto nella pretesa di far
passare per marxismo ciò che Hobson descrive in sostanza come ipocrisia
dei pretucoli inglesi. Dopo la guerra contro i boeri era del tutto
naturale che questo reverendissimo ceto si sforzasse soprattutto di
consolare i piccoli borghesi e gli operai inglesi che avevano avuto non
pochi morti nelle battaglie dell' Africa del Sud e .che assicuravano,
con un aumento delle imposte, più alti guadagni ai finanzieri inglesi,
E quale consolazione poteva essere migliore di questa, che
l'imperialismo non era poi tanto cattivo, che esso si avvicinava
all'inter- (o ultra-) imperialismo capace di garantire la pace
permanente? Quali che potessero essere i pii desideri dei pretucoli
inglesi e del sentimentale Kautsky, il senso obiettivo, vale a dire
reale, sociale, della sua « teoria » è uno solo: consolare nel modo più
I reazionario le masse, con la speranza della possibilità di una pace
permanente nel regime del capitalismo, sviando l'attenzione dagli
antagonismi acuti e dagli acuti problemi di attualità e dirigendo
l'attenzione sulle false prospettive di un qualsiasi sedicente nuovo e
futuro «ultra-imperialismo ».Inganno delle masse: all'infuori di
questo, non v'è assolutamente nulla nella teoria «marxista ». di
Kautsky. [..]
[..] Pertanto, nella realtà capitalista, e non nella volgare fantasia
filistea dei preti inglesi o del « marxista » tedesco Kautsky, le
alleanze «inter-imperialistiche» o «ultra-imperialiste» non sono altro
che un « momento di respiro » tra una guerra e l'altra, qualsiasi forma
assumano dette alleanze, sia quella di una coalizione imperialista
contro un 'altra coalizione imperialista, sia quella di una lega
generale tra tutte le potenze imperialiste. Le alleanze di pace
preparano le guerre e a loro volta nascono da queste; le une e le altre
forme si determinano reciprocamente e producono, su di un unico e
identico terreno, dei nessi imperialistici e dei rapporti dell'economia
mondiale e della politica mondiale, l'alternarsi della forma pacifica e
non pacifica della lotta [..]
Cap. 10
[..] I capitalisti di uno dei tanti rami industriali, di uno dei tanti
paesi, ecc., raccogliendo gli alti-profitti monopolistici hanno la
possibilità di corrompere singoli strati di operai e, transitoriamente,
perfino considerevoli minoranze di essi, schierandole a fianco della
borghesia del rispettivo ramo industriale o della rispettiva nazione
contro tutte le altre. Questa tendenza è rafforzata dall'aspro
antagonismo esistente tra i popoli imperialisti a motivo della
spartizione del mondo. Cosμ sorge un legame tra l'imperialismo e
l'opportunismo; [..]
[..] la lotta contro 1'imperialismo se non è indissolubilmente legata
con la lotta contro l'opportunismo, è una frase vuota è falsa.[..]
[..] Da tutto ciò che si è detto sopra intorno all'essenza economica
dell'imperialismo risulta che esso deve esser caratterizzato come
capitalismo di transizione, o più esattamente come capitalismo morente.
A tale riguardo è molto istruttivo il fatto che le espressioni correnti
degli economisti borghesi, che scrivono intorno al moderno capitalismo,
sono: «intreccio », «mancanza d'isolamento » e cosi via; [..] «
Casualmente si vanno intrecciando » i possessi delle nazioni, i
rapporti tra i proprietari privati. Ma il substrato di questo
intreccio, ciò che ne costituisce la base, sono le relazioni sociali di
produzione che si vanno modificando. Quando una grande azienda assume
dimensioni gigantesche e diventa rigorosamente sistematizzata e, sulla
base di un' esatta valutazione di dati innumerevoli, organizza
metodicamente la fornitura della materia prima originaria nella
proporzione di due terzi o di tre quarti dell'intero fabbisogno di una
popolazione [..] quando un unico centro dirige tutti i successivi stadi
.di elaborazione della materia prima, [..]allora diventa chiaro che si
è in presenza di una socializzazione della produzione e non già di un
semplice «intreccio»; che i rapporti di economia privata e di proprietà
privata formano un involucro non più corrispondente al contenuto,
involucro che deve andare inevitabilmente in putrefazione qualora ne
venga ostacolata artificialmente l'eliminazione, e in stato di
putrefazione potrà magari durare per un tempo relativamente lungo
(nella peggiore ipotesi, nella ipotesi che per la guarigione del
bubbone opportunistico occorra molto tempo!) ma infine sarà fatalmente
eliminato.[..]
da: L'autodecisione delle nazioni
[..] Alla rissa nazionalistica tra i diversi partiti borghesi, la
democrazia operaia oppone, come sua istanza, l'unità incondizionata e
la completa fusione degli operai di tutte le nazionalità in tutte le
organizzazioni operaie, sindacal-cooperative, di consumo, culturali,
ecc., in antitesi a qualsiasi forma di nazionalismo borghese. Solo
questa unità e fusione può tutelare la democrazia, difendere gli
interessi degli operai contro il capitale - che è già diventato e
diventa sempre più internazionale - garantire lo sviluppo dell'umanità
verso un nuovo modo di vita, a cui sia estraneo ogni privilegio e ogni
sfruttamento [..]
www.resistenze.org - pensiero resistente - sull'imperialismo
Gocce di LENIN sull'imperialismo
da: L'imperialismo fase suprema del capitalismo, (1916)
Cap. 1
[..] Ma la nostra rappresentazione della forza reale e dell'importanza
dei moderni monopoli sarebbe assai incompleta, insufficiente e
inferiore alla realtà, se non tenessimo conto della funzione delle
banche.
Cap. 2
[..] Pertanto l'inizio del XX secolo segna il punto critico del
passaggio dall'antico al nuovo capitalismo, dal dominio del capitale in
generale al dominio del capitale finanziario.
Cap.3
[..] Concentrazione della produzione; conseguenti monopoli; fusione e
simbiosi delle banche con l'industria: in ciò si compendia la storia
della formazione del capitale finanziario e il contenuto del relativo
concetto.[..]
Cap. 4
[..] L'esportazione di capitali influisce sullo sviluppo del
capitalismo nei paesi quali affluisce, accelerando tale sviluppo.
Pertanto se tale esportazione, sino a un certo punto, può determinare
una stasi nello sviluppo nei paesi esportatori, tuttavia non può non
dare origine a una più elevata e intensa evoluzione del capitalismo in
tutto il mondo.[..]
Cap. 5
[..] E a misura che cresceva l'esportazione dei capitali, si
allargavano le relazioni estere e coloniali e le sfere d'influenza
delle grandi associazioni monopolistiche, naturalmente si procedeva
sempre più verso accordi internazionali tra di esse e verso la
creazione di cartelli mondiali. [..]
[..] I capitalisti si spartiscono il mondo non per la loro speciale
malvagità, ben si perché il grado raggiunto dalla concentrazione li
costringe a battere questa via, se vogliono ottenere dei profitti. E la
spartizione si compie « proporzionalmente al capitale », « in
proporzione alla forza », poiché in regime di produzione mercantile e
di capitalismo non è possibile alcun altro sistema di spartizione. Ma
la forza muta per il mutare dello sviluppo i economico e politico. Per
capire gli avvenimenti, occorre sapere quali questioni siano risolte da
un mutamento di potenza; che poi tale mutamento sia di natura «
puramente» economica, oppure extra-economica~ (per esempio militare),
ciò, in sé, è questione secondaria, che non può mutar nulla nella
fondamentale concezione del più recente periodo del capitalismo.
Sostituire la questione del contenuto della lotta e delle stipulazioni
tra le leghe capitalistiche con quella della forma di tale lotta e di
tali stipulazioni (che oggi può essere pacifica, domani bellica,
dopodomani! nuovamente pacifica), significa cadere al livello del
sofista.
- L'età del più recente capitalismo ci dimostra come tra le i leghe
capitalistiche si formino determinati rapporti sul terreno della
spartizione economica del mondo, e, di pari passo con tale fenomeno e
in connessione con esso, si formino anche tra le leghe politiche, cioè
gli Stati, determinati rapporti sul terreno della spartizione
territoriale del mondo, della lotta per le colonie, della « lotta per
il territorio economico ». [..]
Cap. 6
[..] Il mondo appare completamente ripartito sicché in avvenire sarà
possibile soltanto una nuova spartizione,[..]
[..] E' quindi fuori discussione il fatto che al trapasso del
capitalismo alla fase di capitalismo monopolistico finanziario è
collegato un inasprimento della lotta per la ripartizione del mondo.[..]
[..] Quanto più il capitalismo è sviluppato, quanto più la scarsità
delle materie prime è sensibile, quanto più acuta è in tutto il mondo
la concorrenza e la caccia alle sorgenti di materie prime,[..]
Cap. 7
[..] dobbiamo dare una definizione dell'imperialismo, che contenga i
suoi cinque principali contrassegni, e cioè:
1. la concentrazione della produzione e del capitale, che ha raggiunto
un grado talmente alto di sviluppo da creare i monopoli con funzione
decisiva nella vita economica;
2. la fusione del capitale bancario col capitale industriale e il
formarsi, sulla base di questo «capitale finanziario », di
un'oligarchia finanziaria;
3. la grande importanza acquistata dall'esportazione di capitale in
confronto con l'esportazione di merci;
4. il sorgere di associazioni monopolistiche internazionali di
capitalisti, che si ripartiscono il mondo;
5. la compiuta ripartizione della terra tra le più grandi potenze
capitalistiche.[..]
[..] «Dal punto di vista strettamente economico - scrive Kautsky
- non può escludersi che il capitalismo attraverserà ancora una nuova
fase: quella cioè dello spostamento della politica dei cartelli nella
politica estera. Si avrebbe allora la fase dell'ultra- imperialismo » ,
cioè del super-imperialismo, della unione degli imperialismi di tutto
il mondo e non della guerra tra essi, la fase della fine della guerra
in regime capitalista, la fase «dello sfruttamento collettivo del mondo
ad opera del capitale finanziario internazionalmente coalizzato »[..]
[..] I cartelli internazionali, considerati da Kautsky come germi
dell'« ultra-imperialismo» (cosμ come la produzione delle pastiglie
nutritive nei laboratori può essere proclamata il germe
dell'ultra-agricoltura!), non ci offrono forse l'esempio della
spartizione e nuova ripartizione del mondo, del passaggio dalla
ripartizione pacifica alla non pacifica e viceversa? Forse il capitale
finanziario americano e d'altra nazionalità, che riparti già il mondo
in via pacifica con la partecipazione della Germania - per esempio col
sindacato internazionale delle rotaie e col trust internazionale della
marina mercantile - non ripartisce ora di bèl nuovo il mondo intero
sulla base di nuovi rapporti di forza che vanno modificandosi in
maniera nient' affatto pacifica? [..]
Cap. 8.
[..] L'imperialismo è l'immensa accumulazione in pochi paesi di
capitale liquido [..]. Da ciò segue, inevitabilmente, l'aumentare della
classe o meglio del ceto dei rentiers, cioè di persone che vivono del
«taglio di cedole», non partecipano ad alcuna impresa ed hanno per
professione l'ozio. L'esportazione di capitale, uno degli essenziali
fondamenti economici del- l'imperialismo, intensifica questo completo
distacco del ceto dei rentiers dalla produzione e dà un 'impronta di
parassitismo a tutto il paese, che vive dello sfruttamento del lavoro
di pochi paesi, e colonie d'oltre oceano. [..]
~ La prospettiva della spartizione della Cina dà origine al seguente
apprezzamento economico di Hobson: - « La più grande parte dell'Europa
occidentale potrebbe allora assumere l'aspetto e il carattere ora
posseduti soltanto da alcuni luoghi, cioè l'Inghilterra meridionale, la
Riviera e le località del- l'Italia e della Svizzera visitate dai
turisti e abitate da gente ricca. Si avrebbe un piccolo gruppo di
ricchi aristocratici, traenti le loro rendite e i loro dividendi dal
lontano Oriente; accanto, un gruppo alquanto più numeroso di impiegati
e di commercianti e un gruppo ancora maggiore di domestici, lavoratori
dei trasporti e operai occupati nel processo finale della lavorazione
dei prodotti più avariabili. Allora scomparirebbero i più importanti
rami di industria, e gli alimenti e i prodotti base affluirebbero come
tributo dall'Asia o dall'Africa... Ecco quale possibilità sarebbe
offerta da una più vasta lega delle potenze occidentali, da una
Federazione europea delle grandi potenze. Essa non solo non spingerebbe
innanzi l'opera della civiltà mondiale, ma potrebbe presentare il
gravissimo peri- colo di un parassitismo occidentale, quello di
permettere l'esistenza di un gruppo di nazioni industriali piu
progredite, le cui classi elevate riceverebbero, dall'Asia e
dall'Africa, enormi tributi [..]
[..] L'imperialismo tende a costituire tra i lavoratori categorie
privilegiate e a staccarle dalla grande massa dei proletari.[..]
[..] In una lettera a Kautsky del 12/9/1882, Engels scriveva: « Ella mi
domanda che cosa pensino gli operai della politica coloniale. Ebbene:
precisamente lo stesso che della politica in generale. In realtà non
esiste qui alcun partito operaio, ma solo radicali, conservatori e
radicali-liberali, e gli operai si godono tranquillamente insieme con
essi il monopolio commerciale e coloniale dell'Inghilterra sul mondo
».[..]
Cap. 9
[..] Da un lato le gigantesche dimensioni assunte dal capitale
finanziario, concentratosi in poche mani e costituente una fitta e
ramificata rete di relazioni e di collegamenti, che mettono alla sua
dipendenza non solo i medi e piccoli proprietari e capitalisti, ma
anche i piccolissimi, dall'altro lato l'inasprirsi della lotta con gli
altri gruppi finanziari nazionali per la spartizione del mondo e il
dominio sugli altri paesi; tutto ciò determina il passaggio della massa
delle classi possidenti, senza eccezione, dal lato dell'imperialismo.
Entusiasmo « universale » per le prospettive offerte dall'imperialismo;
furiosa difesa ed abbellimento di esso: ecco i segni della nostra età.
L'ideologia imperialista si fa strada anche nella classe operaia, che
non. è separata dalle altre classi da una muraglia cinese. Ché se a
ragione i capi della cosiddetta « socialdemocrazia » di Germania
vengono qualificati « social-imperialisti », cioè socialisti a parole,
imperialisti a fatti, [..]
[..] Kautsky chiama ultra-imperialismo o super-imperialismo ciò che,
tredici anni prima di lui, Hobson chiamava inter-imperialismo, A parte
la formazione di una nuova parola erudita per mezzo della sostituzione
di una particella latina con un'altra, il progresso del pensiero «
scientifico..» di Kautsky consiste soltanto nella pretesa di far
passare per marxismo ciò che Hobson descrive in sostanza come ipocrisia
dei pretucoli inglesi. Dopo la guerra contro i boeri era del tutto
naturale che questo reverendissimo ceto si sforzasse soprattutto di
consolare i piccoli borghesi e gli operai inglesi che avevano avuto non
pochi morti nelle battaglie dell' Africa del Sud e .che assicuravano,
con un aumento delle imposte, più alti guadagni ai finanzieri inglesi,
E quale consolazione poteva essere migliore di questa, che
l'imperialismo non era poi tanto cattivo, che esso si avvicinava
all'inter- (o ultra-) imperialismo capace di garantire la pace
permanente? Quali che potessero essere i pii desideri dei pretucoli
inglesi e del sentimentale Kautsky, il senso obiettivo, vale a dire
reale, sociale, della sua « teoria » è uno solo: consolare nel modo più
I reazionario le masse, con la speranza della possibilità di una pace
permanente nel regime del capitalismo, sviando l'attenzione dagli
antagonismi acuti e dagli acuti problemi di attualità e dirigendo
l'attenzione sulle false prospettive di un qualsiasi sedicente nuovo e
futuro «ultra-imperialismo ».Inganno delle masse: all'infuori di
questo, non v'è assolutamente nulla nella teoria «marxista ». di
Kautsky. [..]
[..] Pertanto, nella realtà capitalista, e non nella volgare fantasia
filistea dei preti inglesi o del « marxista » tedesco Kautsky, le
alleanze «inter-imperialistiche» o «ultra-imperialiste» non sono altro
che un « momento di respiro » tra una guerra e l'altra, qualsiasi forma
assumano dette alleanze, sia quella di una coalizione imperialista
contro un 'altra coalizione imperialista, sia quella di una lega
generale tra tutte le potenze imperialiste. Le alleanze di pace
preparano le guerre e a loro volta nascono da queste; le une e le altre
forme si determinano reciprocamente e producono, su di un unico e
identico terreno, dei nessi imperialistici e dei rapporti dell'economia
mondiale e della politica mondiale, l'alternarsi della forma pacifica e
non pacifica della lotta [..]
Cap. 10
[..] I capitalisti di uno dei tanti rami industriali, di uno dei tanti
paesi, ecc., raccogliendo gli alti-profitti monopolistici hanno la
possibilità di corrompere singoli strati di operai e, transitoriamente,
perfino considerevoli minoranze di essi, schierandole a fianco della
borghesia del rispettivo ramo industriale o della rispettiva nazione
contro tutte le altre. Questa tendenza è rafforzata dall'aspro
antagonismo esistente tra i popoli imperialisti a motivo della
spartizione del mondo. Cosμ sorge un legame tra l'imperialismo e
l'opportunismo; [..]
[..] la lotta contro 1'imperialismo se non è indissolubilmente legata
con la lotta contro l'opportunismo, è una frase vuota è falsa.[..]
[..] Da tutto ciò che si è detto sopra intorno all'essenza economica
dell'imperialismo risulta che esso deve esser caratterizzato come
capitalismo di transizione, o più esattamente come capitalismo morente.
A tale riguardo è molto istruttivo il fatto che le espressioni correnti
degli economisti borghesi, che scrivono intorno al moderno capitalismo,
sono: «intreccio », «mancanza d'isolamento » e cosi via; [..] «
Casualmente si vanno intrecciando » i possessi delle nazioni, i
rapporti tra i proprietari privati. Ma il substrato di questo
intreccio, ciò che ne costituisce la base, sono le relazioni sociali di
produzione che si vanno modificando. Quando una grande azienda assume
dimensioni gigantesche e diventa rigorosamente sistematizzata e, sulla
base di un' esatta valutazione di dati innumerevoli, organizza
metodicamente la fornitura della materia prima originaria nella
proporzione di due terzi o di tre quarti dell'intero fabbisogno di una
popolazione [..] quando un unico centro dirige tutti i successivi stadi
.di elaborazione della materia prima, [..]allora diventa chiaro che si
è in presenza di una socializzazione della produzione e non già di un
semplice «intreccio»; che i rapporti di economia privata e di proprietà
privata formano un involucro non più corrispondente al contenuto,
involucro che deve andare inevitabilmente in putrefazione qualora ne
venga ostacolata artificialmente l'eliminazione, e in stato di
putrefazione potrà magari durare per un tempo relativamente lungo
(nella peggiore ipotesi, nella ipotesi che per la guarigione del
bubbone opportunistico occorra molto tempo!) ma infine sarà fatalmente
eliminato.[..]
da: L'autodecisione delle nazioni
[..] Alla rissa nazionalistica tra i diversi partiti borghesi, la
democrazia operaia oppone, come sua istanza, l'unità incondizionata e
la completa fusione degli operai di tutte le nazionalità in tutte le
organizzazioni operaie, sindacal-cooperative, di consumo, culturali,
ecc., in antitesi a qualsiasi forma di nazionalismo borghese. Solo
questa unità e fusione può tutelare la democrazia, difendere gli
interessi degli operai contro il capitale - che è già diventato e
diventa sempre più internazionale - garantire lo sviluppo dell'umanità
verso un nuovo modo di vita, a cui sia estraneo ogni privilegio e ogni
sfruttamento [..]
U.S. JEWS AND THE BALKAN SITUATION
Alvin Dorfman and Heather Cottin
Jewish Currents, April 1996
There is at present widespread support in American public opinion for
the policies of the U.S. government in the Balkans. It is a striking
and dark paradox that Jewish opinion has played an important role in
helping to mobilize that support.
U.S. policy in the Balkans has now carried the United States into
direct intervention in two civil wars, one between Croatian Serbs and
the new proto-fascist state of Croatia, and one between the Bosnian
Serbs and a Bosnian Muslim government which has become increasingly
fundamentalist. In the first case, the U.S. helped the new Croatia to
plan, organize and carry out the invasion of the Krajina region in
Croatia, which led to the uprooting of more than a quarter of a million
Serbs and the slaughter of thousands who tried to remain in their
ancestral homes there. In the second case, the U.S. used NATO, against
the advice of many of its allies, to destroy the military
infrastructure of the Bosnian Serb army and to shift the balance of
power in favor of a minority Muslim government in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
This, too, has led to the flight of well over 100,000 Bosnian Serbs.
In intervening in this manner, the U.S. has not just taken sides in an
internal European war; it has allied itself with the most reactionary
elements in Europe, including a newly expansionist, racist and
increasingly militaristic German government. Worse still, the U.S., in
order to create what it thinks will be a more favorable atmosphere for
the re-election of Pres. Bill Clinton, is now seeking to impose an
unworkable overall peace "settlement" in Yugoslavia and to enforce it
with a 60,000-man NATO task force, which will include some 25,000 U.S.
troops. Even Richard Holbrooke, the Assistant Secretary of State for
European Affairs, admits that this could well lead to another Vietnam.
To anyone who lived through World War II and who still understand the
meaning of Nazism - and this applies especially to Jews - all of this
should be not just astonishing, but repulsive. The United States, in
alliance with the German government, is now pursuing policies very
similar to those pursued by the Nazis who wished to splinter the
Balkans in order to dominate the area. It was the Nazis who unleashed
clerical fascism in Yugoslavia during World War II. And it was the
Nazis who displayed a pathological hatred of the Serbs, as well as of
Jews and Gypsies.
It is difficult to understand how U.S. policy toward the Balkans could
have taken such a turn in any reasonably democratic country.
Unfortunately, a large part of the explanation is that public opinion
in this matter has been driven into something like a frenzy by what
seems to be an officially inspired and large-scale campaign of
propaganda. No foreign policy can succeed without public support. And
U.S. policy in the Balkans is clear testimony to that fact. Although as
recently as four years ago, the American public did not even know the
location of the regions known as Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia,
the Krajina and Montenegro - and perhaps many Americans still don't -
key individuals and groups in this country were targeted for a
propaganda barrage designed to demonize the Serbs, to hide the reality
of Croatian fascism and to canonize the Bosnian Muslims.
Several groups received special treatment by the government and the
media in the course of this propaganda campaign. Since they, like many
other Americans, were for the most part ignorant of the history of the
region, they were relatively easy to convince. The groups which were
singled out were liberals, women and Jews. And government spokesmen
and the media have been hammering at them for years now.
To take but one example: in Washington the public relations firm of
Ruder/Finn mounted a campaign to get American Jews to associate the
civil war in Bosnia-Herzegovina with the Holocaust. This campaign,
according to Justice Department documents, was paid for by the
governments of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, although the head of
Ruder/Finn later explained these governments had not paid for all the
costs of the campaign. What other governments were passing money to
Ruder/Finn?
Was the C.I.A. helping to subsidize the campaign through traditional
means, the usual kinds of "front" companies, or "proprietaries," as
insiders like to call them?
Every effort was made by Ruder/Finn to reach the leading Jewish
organizations in the United States at an early stage. Facts were
distorted. Lies were reiterated so many times that they became "facts."
In an interview with the well- known French TV journalist Jacques
Merlino, James Harff, director of Ruder/Finn Global Affairs, boasted
that the achievement he was most proud of was "to have put Jewish
opinion on our side." He said, "We out witted three Jewish
organizations - the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish
Committee and the American Jewish Congress..." Harff called getting
these organizations to publish a pro-Bosnian Muslim ad in the N.Y.
Times, and to organize demonstrations outside the United Nations "a
tremendous coup." He crowed, "By a single move we were able to present
a simple story of good guys and bad guys which would hereafter play
itself...We won by targeting the Jewish audience..." He explained, "Our
work is not to verify information, our work is to accelerate the
circulation of information favorable to us. We are not paid to be
moral."*
It should be remembered that Jews have also been singled out as targets
of official propaganda in the not-too-distant past. When the Reagan
administration was secretly trying to overthrow the Sandinistas
government in Nicaragua, it used the same techniques that Ruder/Finn
used in demonizing the Serbs. And some Jewish leaders allowed
themselves to be used to discredit the Nicaraguan government. They
helped to promote the idea that the Sandinistas were anti-Semetic.
There was not a grain of truth to the claim. But some Jewish leaders
signed a full-page ad in The N.Y. Times, The Washington Post and The
L.A. Times which referred to the Contras as the moral equivalent of
American revolutionaries and as "freedom fighters."
Today American Jewish organizations are being used in a similar way.
It is important to contrast what has happened in America with what has
happened in Israel. The Israeli public has proved much harder to
deceive than the American public.
Jews are people of the Book, and very aware of their place in history.
Israelis are, not surprisingly, much more aware of history in general
than American Jews, and especially of European history. Israeli
Yugoslav Jews were therefore more immune to media manipulation during
the world-wide campaign against the Serbs. American Jews jumped on the
anti-Serb bandwagon rolling through the American media. In Israel,
Yugoslav Jews knew very well that the Serbs had been their strongest
allies during the Holocaust, carried out in Yugoslavia primarily by
Croatian fascists. They remembered that the Croatian Ustashi had
murdered hundreds of thousands at the Jasenovac death camp. They
remembered that the Croatian president, Franjo Tudjman, had declared
that "only 1,000,000 Jews had died in the Nazi Holocaust." They knew
that Tudjman had proclaimed proudly that his wife "was neither a Serb
nor a Jew."
Israel may have recognized Croatia - under pressure. But it is no
secret that Israeli arms have ended up in Serb hands. Israel has still
not recognized Bosnia-Herzegovina. It would be a near-suicidal step
for any Israeli government to support a Bosnian Muslim regime whose
president (Izetbegovic) has written that "There can be no peace or
coexistence between the Islamic faith and non-Islamic societies..."
In the United States, the process of rehabilitating Croatia has been
incredibly successful. Croatian fascists, who still provide the model
of ideal nationalism for the Croatian government today, killed 60,000
Jews in World War II. They recently destroyed Jewish synagogues as
well as Serbian churches. If one can ignore such things, it is hardly
surprising that there was little international protest in August, 1995
when 250,000 Serbs living in the Krajina region of Croatia were driven
off the land on which their families have lived for 300 years. How
could such "ethnic cleansing" have been carried out without
international opprobrium? The Croatian campaign in the Krajina was the
largest and most violent attack on European soil since the end of World
War II. And much of it, because the Croatian Serb Army was quickly
shattered, was directed at unarmed civilians. The international media
called the Serbs "rebels" even though this region was recognized as
Serb by the Croatian government during World War II. No CNN horror
films catalogued the Croatian air force strafing of Serb refugees, the
destruction of their churches, the cold-blooded assassination of old
people, the burning of more than 16,000 homes and other properties. No
American refugee organization concerned themselves with the hundreds of
thousands of Serbs, from Croatia and Western Bosnia, streaming into
Yugoslavia. And since, by the summer of 1995, American Jews had been
properly brainwashed and made anti-Serb, no Jews spoke out about a
horror which should been chillingly familiar. Somehow the fact that
Croatia expelled more than 40,000 Serbs when it declared its
independence in 1991 has been ignored. Somehow the fact that Croatia
has denied its population basic human rights such as freedom of speech
and freedom of the press and that it operates a repressive police state
has been hidden. In fear of their lives and livelihoods, some Croatian
Jews extol the virtues of the Croatian government. When Croatian
fascists commit atrocities, people seem to respond with the familiar
refrain, "We didn't know."
Things have not been very different with respect to Bosnia-Herzegovina.
In the U.S. media and among senior American officials, Bosnian Muslim
spokesmen are taken at their word where Serbs are not. Jewish leaders
have been trotted out to make condemnatory anti-Serb pronouncements.
Even when UNPROFOR (UN Protection Force) spokespersons denied or raised
doubts about stories of questionable veracity, the Bosnian Muslim
position or claim has been taken as truth.
Feminists in the U.S. were treated to a propaganda blitz about rapes
allegedly carried out by Serbs. It had an electrifying effect. In the
end, the radical group "Madre," which previously supported Central
American women, launched an emotional campaign to save thousands of
Bosnian Muslim women allegedly raped by Bosnian Serb soldiers. Gloria
Steinem lent the story respectability in Ms. Magazine. The N.Y. Times
wrote that 20,000 to 50,000 Bosnian women had been raped, despite the
fact that there was no substantiation for such numbers - except, of
course, from the Bosnian Muslim "Ministry of Information." Despite
doubts expressed by Helsinki Watch, Human Rights Watch and respected
individuals such as Simone Weil, the president of the European
Parliament, the American media relied on the Bosnian War Crimes
Commission and Caritas, the Catholic charity connected to the Croatian
government, for verification of these outrageous claims. The German
media promoted the rape hysteria for their own reasons, which British
historian Nora Beloff ascribed to the German need "to Satanize the
Serbs in order to cover their own responsibility for pitching
Yugoslavia into war."
In the U.S., from the beginning of the conflict, there was never any
attempt to see the civil wars in Yugoslavia from a position of
neutrality. Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina were simply "new states"
welcomed into the brotherhood of nations, with seats quickly obtained
for them at the UN. They were never pictured, as any briefing on
history and politics would demand, as the fruits of the most extreme,
exclusivist nationalism, the kind of nationalism which turned Central
Europe upside down in the 1930s and led to World War II. But Yugoslav
Jews in Israel, understanding what was really happening in the Balkans,
actively opposed any government support of Croatians or Muslims,
despite Croatian public relations efforts directed at Israel. Jews in
Israel knew that Hamas members trained in Bosnia. They remembered that
the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem organized two Bosnian Muslim divisions for
Hitler's army during World War II.
It is distinctly peculiar that so many Americans, and more curious
still that so many American Jews, should have taken the side of the
Bosnian Muslim government. Of course, the USA has backed Muslim
fundamentalism before, in Afghanistan, for instance, where it was a
useful tool for ending Russian aid to the Afghan government. But these
are European Muslim fundamentalists. That is perhaps why the
theocratic ideas of Mr. Izetbegovic and his colleagues have received so
little attention here. Jews might wince if they learned that the
Bosnian president has said, "The struggle for Islamic order and the
fundamental reconstruction of Muslim society can be successfully waged
only by battle-tested and hardened individuals...The Islamic order
should take power as soon as it is morally and numerically strong
enough not only to overthrow non-Islamic rule but to develop new
Islamic rule." Are these the heroes of the West? It is strange that
Americans and American Jews, as a people who believe in multicultural
diversity and freedom of religion, have embraced the Bosnian Muslim's
struggle as their own.
The Horror of the last four years was brought upon the Balkans
primarily by Germany and the United States for geopolitical reasons.
Yugoslavia might already in 1991 or 1992 have begun to break up as a
result of internal disagreements. But, in the absence of German and
U.S. interventions, it is unlikely that there would have been civil
wars there. By the end of 1992, however, Germany, throwing its weight
around as an economic power, was able to force the international
community to recognize Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia-Herzegovina as
independent states. It was quietly but effectively assisted by the
Bush administration, which, almost immediately after the Yelstin
takeover of 1991 in the Soviet Union, publicly abandoned its support
for the territorial integrity of Yugoslavia. By their joint
maneuvering the two great powers created a situation which reduced the
stature of more than two million Serbs outside Serbia and Montenegro to
that of "ethnic minorities" in hostile states.
When Croatia denied Serbs all political standing, the Krajina Serbs
declared their independence from Croatia - with as much right as the
Croatians had in declaring their independence from Yugoslavia. In
Bosnia, where under Izetbegovic Serbs were denied all political and
economic rights, the Bosnian Serbs also embarked on a struggle for
self-determination. They had no wish to be dominated by a repressive
fundamentalist regime.
But Germany and the U.S. were determined to succeed in their efforts to
break up Yugoslavia. Germany poured millions of deutschemarks into the
Croatian military, and it trained and armed Bosnian Muslims, with help
from Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey and other Islamic governments.
Weapons, money and men poured into Bosnia for the jihad. And the
Muslim government opposed every peace agreement that would have given
anything of value to the Bosnian Serbs. The U.S. has provided finance,
political support and covert military assistance to both the Bosnian
Muslims and the Croatians.
Thus, there had to be a battle to win the hearts and minds of the
American people. Their support was needed if these policies were to
succeed. The support of American Jews became a key to moving public
opinion. Their major organizations carried weight, both in terms of
resources and in terms of moral leadership. Jewish support underwrote
the morality of the German-American policies in the Balkans.
It also followed that a great deal had to be hidden. Germany's pursuit
of divisive and expansionist policies in the Balkans for the third time
in the century had to be hidden. The fundamentalist values of
government leaders in Bosnia had to be kept hidden. And the role of
Germany and the U.S. in building up extremist nationalist movements so
that Yugoslavia could be torn apart had to be hidden: Widespread
information about any of these would have made it very difficult to win
the prize of Jewish opinion.
The time has come to question our position on this issue. Progressives
in the country, and Jews especially, have been inundated by a tidal
wave of poisonous falsehoods. We must ask ourselves, "Since when were
aggressive, anti-democratic foreign policies worthy of support?" We
need to establish why Yugoslavia broke up. We need to understand the
meaning of the U.S. German alliance after the Cold War. And we need to
question why we have deserted the Serbs, our only friends in
Yugoslavia, the only people who stood with us against the Nazis and who
died with us at the death camp Jasenovac. Serbs in Belgrade, to whom we
have spoken by phone, are appalled by what American Jewish
organizations have done. Jews of Yugoslav origin in Israel are
mortified. One has only to read the Israeli press to realize that. We
must see our shame. If it comes from not knowing, or being misled, we
need to atone for it. Jews have nothing to gain and everything that we
morally stand for to lose by continuing to turn our backs on the
Serbian people.
Reproduced with the permission of the authors.
Alvin Dorfman is a contributor to Jewish Currents and as had a long
association with the magazine.
Heather Cottin is a new contributor. She is a public high school
social studies teacher.
END
This article does not have permission of the copyright by owner, but is
being offered for comment, criticism and research under the "fair use"
provisions of the Federal copyright laws.
Alvin Dorfman and Heather Cottin
Jewish Currents, April 1996
There is at present widespread support in American public opinion for
the policies of the U.S. government in the Balkans. It is a striking
and dark paradox that Jewish opinion has played an important role in
helping to mobilize that support.
U.S. policy in the Balkans has now carried the United States into
direct intervention in two civil wars, one between Croatian Serbs and
the new proto-fascist state of Croatia, and one between the Bosnian
Serbs and a Bosnian Muslim government which has become increasingly
fundamentalist. In the first case, the U.S. helped the new Croatia to
plan, organize and carry out the invasion of the Krajina region in
Croatia, which led to the uprooting of more than a quarter of a million
Serbs and the slaughter of thousands who tried to remain in their
ancestral homes there. In the second case, the U.S. used NATO, against
the advice of many of its allies, to destroy the military
infrastructure of the Bosnian Serb army and to shift the balance of
power in favor of a minority Muslim government in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
This, too, has led to the flight of well over 100,000 Bosnian Serbs.
In intervening in this manner, the U.S. has not just taken sides in an
internal European war; it has allied itself with the most reactionary
elements in Europe, including a newly expansionist, racist and
increasingly militaristic German government. Worse still, the U.S., in
order to create what it thinks will be a more favorable atmosphere for
the re-election of Pres. Bill Clinton, is now seeking to impose an
unworkable overall peace "settlement" in Yugoslavia and to enforce it
with a 60,000-man NATO task force, which will include some 25,000 U.S.
troops. Even Richard Holbrooke, the Assistant Secretary of State for
European Affairs, admits that this could well lead to another Vietnam.
To anyone who lived through World War II and who still understand the
meaning of Nazism - and this applies especially to Jews - all of this
should be not just astonishing, but repulsive. The United States, in
alliance with the German government, is now pursuing policies very
similar to those pursued by the Nazis who wished to splinter the
Balkans in order to dominate the area. It was the Nazis who unleashed
clerical fascism in Yugoslavia during World War II. And it was the
Nazis who displayed a pathological hatred of the Serbs, as well as of
Jews and Gypsies.
It is difficult to understand how U.S. policy toward the Balkans could
have taken such a turn in any reasonably democratic country.
Unfortunately, a large part of the explanation is that public opinion
in this matter has been driven into something like a frenzy by what
seems to be an officially inspired and large-scale campaign of
propaganda. No foreign policy can succeed without public support. And
U.S. policy in the Balkans is clear testimony to that fact. Although as
recently as four years ago, the American public did not even know the
location of the regions known as Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia,
the Krajina and Montenegro - and perhaps many Americans still don't -
key individuals and groups in this country were targeted for a
propaganda barrage designed to demonize the Serbs, to hide the reality
of Croatian fascism and to canonize the Bosnian Muslims.
Several groups received special treatment by the government and the
media in the course of this propaganda campaign. Since they, like many
other Americans, were for the most part ignorant of the history of the
region, they were relatively easy to convince. The groups which were
singled out were liberals, women and Jews. And government spokesmen
and the media have been hammering at them for years now.
To take but one example: in Washington the public relations firm of
Ruder/Finn mounted a campaign to get American Jews to associate the
civil war in Bosnia-Herzegovina with the Holocaust. This campaign,
according to Justice Department documents, was paid for by the
governments of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, although the head of
Ruder/Finn later explained these governments had not paid for all the
costs of the campaign. What other governments were passing money to
Ruder/Finn?
Was the C.I.A. helping to subsidize the campaign through traditional
means, the usual kinds of "front" companies, or "proprietaries," as
insiders like to call them?
Every effort was made by Ruder/Finn to reach the leading Jewish
organizations in the United States at an early stage. Facts were
distorted. Lies were reiterated so many times that they became "facts."
In an interview with the well- known French TV journalist Jacques
Merlino, James Harff, director of Ruder/Finn Global Affairs, boasted
that the achievement he was most proud of was "to have put Jewish
opinion on our side." He said, "We out witted three Jewish
organizations - the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish
Committee and the American Jewish Congress..." Harff called getting
these organizations to publish a pro-Bosnian Muslim ad in the N.Y.
Times, and to organize demonstrations outside the United Nations "a
tremendous coup." He crowed, "By a single move we were able to present
a simple story of good guys and bad guys which would hereafter play
itself...We won by targeting the Jewish audience..." He explained, "Our
work is not to verify information, our work is to accelerate the
circulation of information favorable to us. We are not paid to be
moral."*
It should be remembered that Jews have also been singled out as targets
of official propaganda in the not-too-distant past. When the Reagan
administration was secretly trying to overthrow the Sandinistas
government in Nicaragua, it used the same techniques that Ruder/Finn
used in demonizing the Serbs. And some Jewish leaders allowed
themselves to be used to discredit the Nicaraguan government. They
helped to promote the idea that the Sandinistas were anti-Semetic.
There was not a grain of truth to the claim. But some Jewish leaders
signed a full-page ad in The N.Y. Times, The Washington Post and The
L.A. Times which referred to the Contras as the moral equivalent of
American revolutionaries and as "freedom fighters."
Today American Jewish organizations are being used in a similar way.
It is important to contrast what has happened in America with what has
happened in Israel. The Israeli public has proved much harder to
deceive than the American public.
Jews are people of the Book, and very aware of their place in history.
Israelis are, not surprisingly, much more aware of history in general
than American Jews, and especially of European history. Israeli
Yugoslav Jews were therefore more immune to media manipulation during
the world-wide campaign against the Serbs. American Jews jumped on the
anti-Serb bandwagon rolling through the American media. In Israel,
Yugoslav Jews knew very well that the Serbs had been their strongest
allies during the Holocaust, carried out in Yugoslavia primarily by
Croatian fascists. They remembered that the Croatian Ustashi had
murdered hundreds of thousands at the Jasenovac death camp. They
remembered that the Croatian president, Franjo Tudjman, had declared
that "only 1,000,000 Jews had died in the Nazi Holocaust." They knew
that Tudjman had proclaimed proudly that his wife "was neither a Serb
nor a Jew."
Israel may have recognized Croatia - under pressure. But it is no
secret that Israeli arms have ended up in Serb hands. Israel has still
not recognized Bosnia-Herzegovina. It would be a near-suicidal step
for any Israeli government to support a Bosnian Muslim regime whose
president (Izetbegovic) has written that "There can be no peace or
coexistence between the Islamic faith and non-Islamic societies..."
In the United States, the process of rehabilitating Croatia has been
incredibly successful. Croatian fascists, who still provide the model
of ideal nationalism for the Croatian government today, killed 60,000
Jews in World War II. They recently destroyed Jewish synagogues as
well as Serbian churches. If one can ignore such things, it is hardly
surprising that there was little international protest in August, 1995
when 250,000 Serbs living in the Krajina region of Croatia were driven
off the land on which their families have lived for 300 years. How
could such "ethnic cleansing" have been carried out without
international opprobrium? The Croatian campaign in the Krajina was the
largest and most violent attack on European soil since the end of World
War II. And much of it, because the Croatian Serb Army was quickly
shattered, was directed at unarmed civilians. The international media
called the Serbs "rebels" even though this region was recognized as
Serb by the Croatian government during World War II. No CNN horror
films catalogued the Croatian air force strafing of Serb refugees, the
destruction of their churches, the cold-blooded assassination of old
people, the burning of more than 16,000 homes and other properties. No
American refugee organization concerned themselves with the hundreds of
thousands of Serbs, from Croatia and Western Bosnia, streaming into
Yugoslavia. And since, by the summer of 1995, American Jews had been
properly brainwashed and made anti-Serb, no Jews spoke out about a
horror which should been chillingly familiar. Somehow the fact that
Croatia expelled more than 40,000 Serbs when it declared its
independence in 1991 has been ignored. Somehow the fact that Croatia
has denied its population basic human rights such as freedom of speech
and freedom of the press and that it operates a repressive police state
has been hidden. In fear of their lives and livelihoods, some Croatian
Jews extol the virtues of the Croatian government. When Croatian
fascists commit atrocities, people seem to respond with the familiar
refrain, "We didn't know."
Things have not been very different with respect to Bosnia-Herzegovina.
In the U.S. media and among senior American officials, Bosnian Muslim
spokesmen are taken at their word where Serbs are not. Jewish leaders
have been trotted out to make condemnatory anti-Serb pronouncements.
Even when UNPROFOR (UN Protection Force) spokespersons denied or raised
doubts about stories of questionable veracity, the Bosnian Muslim
position or claim has been taken as truth.
Feminists in the U.S. were treated to a propaganda blitz about rapes
allegedly carried out by Serbs. It had an electrifying effect. In the
end, the radical group "Madre," which previously supported Central
American women, launched an emotional campaign to save thousands of
Bosnian Muslim women allegedly raped by Bosnian Serb soldiers. Gloria
Steinem lent the story respectability in Ms. Magazine. The N.Y. Times
wrote that 20,000 to 50,000 Bosnian women had been raped, despite the
fact that there was no substantiation for such numbers - except, of
course, from the Bosnian Muslim "Ministry of Information." Despite
doubts expressed by Helsinki Watch, Human Rights Watch and respected
individuals such as Simone Weil, the president of the European
Parliament, the American media relied on the Bosnian War Crimes
Commission and Caritas, the Catholic charity connected to the Croatian
government, for verification of these outrageous claims. The German
media promoted the rape hysteria for their own reasons, which British
historian Nora Beloff ascribed to the German need "to Satanize the
Serbs in order to cover their own responsibility for pitching
Yugoslavia into war."
In the U.S., from the beginning of the conflict, there was never any
attempt to see the civil wars in Yugoslavia from a position of
neutrality. Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina were simply "new states"
welcomed into the brotherhood of nations, with seats quickly obtained
for them at the UN. They were never pictured, as any briefing on
history and politics would demand, as the fruits of the most extreme,
exclusivist nationalism, the kind of nationalism which turned Central
Europe upside down in the 1930s and led to World War II. But Yugoslav
Jews in Israel, understanding what was really happening in the Balkans,
actively opposed any government support of Croatians or Muslims,
despite Croatian public relations efforts directed at Israel. Jews in
Israel knew that Hamas members trained in Bosnia. They remembered that
the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem organized two Bosnian Muslim divisions for
Hitler's army during World War II.
It is distinctly peculiar that so many Americans, and more curious
still that so many American Jews, should have taken the side of the
Bosnian Muslim government. Of course, the USA has backed Muslim
fundamentalism before, in Afghanistan, for instance, where it was a
useful tool for ending Russian aid to the Afghan government. But these
are European Muslim fundamentalists. That is perhaps why the
theocratic ideas of Mr. Izetbegovic and his colleagues have received so
little attention here. Jews might wince if they learned that the
Bosnian president has said, "The struggle for Islamic order and the
fundamental reconstruction of Muslim society can be successfully waged
only by battle-tested and hardened individuals...The Islamic order
should take power as soon as it is morally and numerically strong
enough not only to overthrow non-Islamic rule but to develop new
Islamic rule." Are these the heroes of the West? It is strange that
Americans and American Jews, as a people who believe in multicultural
diversity and freedom of religion, have embraced the Bosnian Muslim's
struggle as their own.
The Horror of the last four years was brought upon the Balkans
primarily by Germany and the United States for geopolitical reasons.
Yugoslavia might already in 1991 or 1992 have begun to break up as a
result of internal disagreements. But, in the absence of German and
U.S. interventions, it is unlikely that there would have been civil
wars there. By the end of 1992, however, Germany, throwing its weight
around as an economic power, was able to force the international
community to recognize Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia-Herzegovina as
independent states. It was quietly but effectively assisted by the
Bush administration, which, almost immediately after the Yelstin
takeover of 1991 in the Soviet Union, publicly abandoned its support
for the territorial integrity of Yugoslavia. By their joint
maneuvering the two great powers created a situation which reduced the
stature of more than two million Serbs outside Serbia and Montenegro to
that of "ethnic minorities" in hostile states.
When Croatia denied Serbs all political standing, the Krajina Serbs
declared their independence from Croatia - with as much right as the
Croatians had in declaring their independence from Yugoslavia. In
Bosnia, where under Izetbegovic Serbs were denied all political and
economic rights, the Bosnian Serbs also embarked on a struggle for
self-determination. They had no wish to be dominated by a repressive
fundamentalist regime.
But Germany and the U.S. were determined to succeed in their efforts to
break up Yugoslavia. Germany poured millions of deutschemarks into the
Croatian military, and it trained and armed Bosnian Muslims, with help
from Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey and other Islamic governments.
Weapons, money and men poured into Bosnia for the jihad. And the
Muslim government opposed every peace agreement that would have given
anything of value to the Bosnian Serbs. The U.S. has provided finance,
political support and covert military assistance to both the Bosnian
Muslims and the Croatians.
Thus, there had to be a battle to win the hearts and minds of the
American people. Their support was needed if these policies were to
succeed. The support of American Jews became a key to moving public
opinion. Their major organizations carried weight, both in terms of
resources and in terms of moral leadership. Jewish support underwrote
the morality of the German-American policies in the Balkans.
It also followed that a great deal had to be hidden. Germany's pursuit
of divisive and expansionist policies in the Balkans for the third time
in the century had to be hidden. The fundamentalist values of
government leaders in Bosnia had to be kept hidden. And the role of
Germany and the U.S. in building up extremist nationalist movements so
that Yugoslavia could be torn apart had to be hidden: Widespread
information about any of these would have made it very difficult to win
the prize of Jewish opinion.
The time has come to question our position on this issue. Progressives
in the country, and Jews especially, have been inundated by a tidal
wave of poisonous falsehoods. We must ask ourselves, "Since when were
aggressive, anti-democratic foreign policies worthy of support?" We
need to establish why Yugoslavia broke up. We need to understand the
meaning of the U.S. German alliance after the Cold War. And we need to
question why we have deserted the Serbs, our only friends in
Yugoslavia, the only people who stood with us against the Nazis and who
died with us at the death camp Jasenovac. Serbs in Belgrade, to whom we
have spoken by phone, are appalled by what American Jewish
organizations have done. Jews of Yugoslav origin in Israel are
mortified. One has only to read the Israeli press to realize that. We
must see our shame. If it comes from not knowing, or being misled, we
need to atone for it. Jews have nothing to gain and everything that we
morally stand for to lose by continuing to turn our backs on the
Serbian people.
Reproduced with the permission of the authors.
Alvin Dorfman is a contributor to Jewish Currents and as had a long
association with the magazine.
Heather Cottin is a new contributor. She is a public high school
social studies teacher.
END
This article does not have permission of the copyright by owner, but is
being offered for comment, criticism and research under the "fair use"
provisions of the Federal copyright laws.
1. Serbia sotto la legge marziale (N. Malic, 27/3/2003)
2. Serbia: Due mesi dopo, tutti contro tutti
ed altri dispacci ANSA sulla situazione politica interna serba
=== 1 ===
(for this text in english see:
http://www.antiwar.com/malic/m032703.html
or
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/2418 )
Serbia sotto la legge Marziale
di Nebojsa Malic
27 Marzo 2003
(Traduzione di Alessandro Lattanzio
e-mail: alexlattanzio@...
Sito: http://members.xoom.it/sitoaurora)
Due settimane fa, il Primo Ministro Serbo Zoran
Djindjic è stato ucciso da un cecchino. I suoi
successori hanno immediatamente dichiarato lo "stato
di emergenza" - in effetti, la legge Marziale - di
durata indefinita, e il lancio massiccio di operazioni
di polizia per trovare i sospettati del crimine
dell'assassinio di Djindjic. Djindjic ha avuto dei
funerali di stato e numerosi elogi dalla stampa
occidentale, prima che le notizie della Sua Molto
Democratica Imperiale invasione dell'Iraq mettesse a
lato la Serbia.
Mentre le forze imperiali, fiduciose dopo i
bombardamenti terroristici sulla Serbia nella
sottomissione del 1999, combattono contro una
inaspettata resistenza irachena, i successori di
Djindjic riaffermano il vassallaggio della Serbia, con
l'espulsione di diplomatici iracheni. Mentre a casa,
essi assumono poteri sui propri cittadini, che perfino
l'imperatore invidierebbe.
Una guerra differente
Sotto la leadership del partito di Djindjic, il
compare Zoran Zivkovic, che è stato nominato Primo
Ministro, il 17 marzo, del nuovo governo, lanciò la
"guerra al crimine organizzato."
Con velocità insolita, accusarono della morte di
Djindjic il "clan Zemun",
una organizzazione criminale basata a Belgrado. Subito
la polizia, che non riesce a risolvere un solo caso di
assassinio, degli ultimi due anni, seppe tutto su chi
fosse il colpevole e di cosa. Il 18 marzo, il governo
disse di avere arrestato 750 persone. Due giorni dopo,
il numero giunse a più di 1000, e il 23 era a 2700!
Dal 17 Marzo, le prigioni di Belgrado erano piene, e
gli arrestati venivano spediti altrove.
Sebbene la Serbia sia afflitta dal crimine
organizzato, come tutti i paesi post-Comunisti, vi
sono valide preoccupazioni che l'azione del governo
non sia destinato a distruggere realmente la mafia.
Per esempio, mentre il poco noto " "clan Zemun" sia un
bersaglio, il più famoso "clan Surcin" il cui capo
viaggiava con Djindjic sul suo aereo privato, non è
stato menzionato.
Uno degli aderenti del "clan Zemun", noto come
"Legija," usò un commando della Unità Operazioni
Speciali del Ministero degli Interni. Legija aiutò
Djindjic a prendere il potere nel 2000 e nel 2001 a
arrestare Milosevic. Vi sono indicazioni che si
volesse consegnare Legija all'inquisizione dell'Aja,
poco prima di messere ucciso.
I fatti seguenti meritano una spiegazione. Zivkovic
era ministro degli interni nel governo jugoslavo fino
quando venne dissolto il mese scorso. Djindjic fu
ucciso sotto il suo sguardo, appena nominato! Dusan
Mihajlovic, ministro degli interni ( e quindi con
maggiore responsabilità rispetto a Zivkovic) rimase al
suo posto. La vecchia unità di Legija, I "berretti
rossi" venne sottoposta a Mihajlovic dal 2002. (venne
dissolta due giorni fa, come qualche elemento
filoimperialista suggeriva.)
Vi sono numerose indicazioni che lo stato di emergenza
e la " guerra al crimine" attualmente punti sugli
oppositori del governo in generale. "La guerra è la
salute dello stato" diceva Randolph Bourne. La guerra
dello stato sui problemi sociali serve bene allo
scopo.
Lasciate iniziare le purghe
Grazie allo stato di emergenza, la polizia non ha
bisogno di cercare o di arrestare i ricercati, ma
semplicemente di irrompere nelle case e negli uffici
dei sospetti.
Le proprietà dei sospetti possono essere confiscati o
distrutti, come nel caso della casa del sospettato
leader del "clan Zemun". Con lo stato di emergenza i
sospetti possono essere incarcerati per 30 giorni
senza accuse formali.
Fin quando la Serbia mantenne il sistema giuridico
comunista, tutti i sospetti venivano ritenuti
innocenti fino a prova contraria.
L'assassinio di Djindjic è stato definito, sia dalla
stampa imperialista che dal governo serbo, una
"vendetta del regime di Milosevic". È difficile dire
chi l'abbia detto per primo, tale accusa appare prima
nella stampa usa e poi nelle dichiarazioni ufficiali
serbe. Sarebbe la prima volta che la Serbia apprende i
propri eventi dall'impero. Il 16 Marzo un amico di
Djindjic scrisse un commento per il Washington Post,
accusando apertamente Slobodan Milosevic.
Il Primo Ministro Zivkovic inoltre disse: "gruppi
politicamente affini" e assicurò che avrebbe "ripulito
la Serbia con una spazzola di ferro." Un membro
importante del regime di Djindjic affermò che la
tragica fine del Primo Ministro avrebbe potuto essere
usato per "ispirare" la costruzione di una Serbia
democratica.
Se così è, i leaders della Serbia hanno una strana
concezione della "democrazia." Significa censura? Sì.
Lo stato di emergenza fornisce un controllo totale sui
media, limita le notizie a quelle ufficiali. Ciò, si
suppone, solo per estenderla alle cause dello stato di
emergenza, ma da quando il governo decide su cosa si
applica o non si applica, in pratica significa censura
su tutto. Parecchie pubblicazioni e stazioni TV sono
già state bandite. Un consulente del governo serbo,
posando da giornalista indipendente, tentava di
scusare la censura dichiarando che "tutti coloro che
ne sono interessati, sono soprattutto tabloid
scandalistici, noti per i loro reportage inverosimili,
per l'invasione della privacy e la diffusione di voci
e perfino bugie". Ma ciò descrive parecchi dei media
nei Balcani! Inoltre, nessuna persecuzione non inizia
a colpire soprattutto gli impopolari, dopodiché ci si
rivolge verso gli altri, con il tempo, che non hanno
modo di resistere.
La settimana scorsa, il governo ha ripulito il sistema
giudiziario, creando l'opportunità di "impacchettare"
le corti con i loro supporters. Nenad Canak, un
politico lunatico che appare spesso nella coalizione
del DOS, ha richiesto il bando di alcuni partiti
politici. Vi è, perfino, una "guerra culturale",
scoppiata quando le autorità arrestarono Ceca
Raznatovic, una cantante neo-folk e vedova del leader
della milizia paramilitare Arkan.
Sospettata di legami con il 'clan Zemun,' Raznatovic e
la sua musica sono considerate una "volgare
celebrazione della classe criminale della Serbia,"
come ha detto il famoso Time magazine, l'estate
scorsa. Inoltre, il capo del controspionaggio militare
è stato dimesso, recentemente, dal governo
pro-Djindjic dell'unione di Serbia-Montenegro,
suggerendo che la purga nell'ambiente militare deve
ancora iniziare.
L'uomo sospettato dell'assassinio è stato arrestato
lunedì, ma la polizia non sa dire come "sanno" che è
stato lui a sparare. La Serbia di oggi nelle loro
parole, non può essere messa in discussione.
Falsificare un martire
Sebbene la gente in Serbia in generale sia stata
condizionata a, se non alla fiducia, almeno a obbedire
al governo incondizionatamente, molti vedono lo stato
di emergenza per quello che è: una volgare presa del
potere, usando il corpo di Djindjic come la
proverbiale 'camicia insanguinata'.
L'impero ha trattato, certamente, Djindjic come "un
martire della causa per una Serbia liberale e
democratica " (Tod Lindberg, The Washington Times).
Nelle settimane seguenti la sua morte, The Toronto
Star lo chiamò "un vero patriota', l'IWPR di Londra
lamentò interruzione della strada della Serbia verso
una "piena integrazione Euro-Atlantica " e the New
York Times scrisse che l'impero aveva ragione nelle
sue richieste e Djindjic faceva bene a obbedirgli,
avrebbe dovuto ricevere maggior aiuto nei confronti
dell'opposizione.
Una rara voce di dissenso proviene da Neil Clark del
London Guardian, che ha chiamato Djindjic "Il Quisling
di Belgrado." Dice Clark, "Quando un uomo vende gli
interessi del proprio paese, il suo ex-presidente e i
suoi principali avversari politici, cos'altro avrebbe
venduto? Solo il paese stesso."
E Steven Erlanger del New York Times notò, in un
articolo del 16 marzo, che Djindjic aveva legami con
la mafia che, si può supporre, lo ha ucciso, perfino
anche se ancora dichiara che Djindjic era odiato per
la sua obbedienza, totalmente giustificata, alle
richieste occidentali.
L'IWPR, un ripugnante propalatore dello statismo
transnazionale, dichiarava la legge marziale quale
"opportunità" per potare la Serbia dal crimine
organizzato, con il paravento della cauzione che
potrebbe portare alla dittatura. Il pugno di ferro del
governo è stato, inequivocabilmente appoggiato dalla
Imperiale ICG. The Christian Science Monitor riportava
che il dirigente dell'ICG di Belgrado, James Lyon,
disse "Se possono tenere tale situazione per due
settimane, sono ottimista sul fatto che la morte di
Djindjic sia la scintilla che dia alla Serbia un
futuro democratico."
Tuttavia l'ICG era preoccupato per la possibilità che
la futura Serbia non sia così obbediente e piegata
come Djindjic l'ha resa, e chiedeva all'Impero di non
allentare la sua pressione su Belgrado. Il popolo
della Serbia, certo, non sa nulla di ciò.
Con lo stato di emergenza, la menzione di questo
articolo potrebbe essere vietata...
Nebojsa Malic
(ringraziamo A. Lattanzio per averci fatto pervenire la traduzione. CNJ)
=== 2 ===
http://www.ansa.it/balcani/serbiamontenegro/serbiamontenegro.shtml
SERBIA: DJINDJIC, DUE MESI DOPO TUTTI CONTRO TUTTI
(Di Beatrice Ottaviano) (ANSA) - BELGRADO, 21 MAG - Sono passati poco
piu' di due mesi dall'assassinio, il 12 marzo a Belgrado, del primo
ministro serbo Zoran Djinjdic: e il fronte comune che governo e
istituzioni avevano fatto attorno alla figura e agli ideali del leader
ucciso sta gia' crollando sotto i colpi di feroci polemiche, accuse e
veleni che evocano un clima pre- elettorale. La tregua fra i litigiosi
partitelli che compongono il variegato arcipelago del Dos - la
coalizione promossa a suo tempo da Djindjic - per abbattere il regime
di Slobodan Milosevic, e che tuttora detiene la maggioranza in
parlamento - e' stata infranta dapprima da una battaglia
a colpi di pubbliche dichiarazioni fra un personaggio fino a due mesi
fa considerato come il possibile nuovo uomo forte dell'esecutivo, il
vicepremier serbo Nebojsa Covic, e una emittente privata ritenuta molto
vicina al Partito democratico (Ds) del premier assassinato, la
televisione 'Pink'. Covic ha attaccato il direttore della tv, Zeliko
Mitrovic, accusandolo di aver orchestrato una campagna contro di lui e
sottolineandone l'imbarazzante passato di uomo di regime e membro del
direttivo dello Jul, il partito dei 'comunisti in Mercedes' della ex
first lady jugoslava Mira Markovic. Mitrovic ha replicato ricordando i
trascorsi di Covic nei vari esecutivi di Milosevic e accusando senza
giri di parole il vicepremier di peculato sui fondi statali destinati
al Kosovo. Quella polemica e' trascesa
fino a investire presunti legami di vari membri del governo con la
criminalita' organizzata.
Oggi sono scesi in campo anche la polizia e i servizi segreti (Bia),
che hanno minacciato Covic di querela per una affermazione di questi
sul ruolo avuto dai principali
sospettati per l'uccisione di Djindjic, l'ex capo delle forze speciali
dei servizi Milorad 'Legija' Lukovic e il boss criminale Dusan 'Siptar'
Spasojevic (ucciso in aprile in un conflitto a
fuoco con le forze dell'ordine), nell'arresto di Milosevic, nell'aprile
del 2000. ''E' divertente come assistere a un dibattito sulla salute
fra diabetici - commenta Ivan Andric, leader di 'Alleanza civica'
(Gss), uno dei partiti del Dos finora non coinvolti nella raffica di
accuse e controaccuse - e' surreale vedere quella gente discutere di
questioni morali''. Le polemiche non investono solo il governo e i
partiti della coalizione e non riguardano solo il passato: nei giorni
scorsi il capo delle dogane Vladan Begovic e' stato trasferito a un
diverso incarico (spacciato come piu' prestigioso) dopo che aveva
avallato la denuncia di una gigantesca truffa ai danni dell'Unione
europea sulle esportazioni agevolate di zucchero, nella quale sarebbero
coinvolte secondo la stampa locale aziende vicine al partito del
defunto premier. Il ministro dell'agricoltura Dragan Veselinov - del
quale peraltro i giovani del movimento 'Otpor' chiedono a gran voce le
dimissioni per un'altra controversa vicenda - ha cercato, assieme ai
vertici del governo, di gettare acqua sul fuoco e si e' trincerato
dietro la consueta formula dell' 'indagine in corso', ma lo scandalo si
arricchisce quotidianamente di nuovi particolari.
Altro punto caldo e' la Banca centrale serba, il cui governatore
Mladjan Dinkic e' vicepresidente di un partito sgradito alla
coalizione di maggioranza - che sente minacciati i suoi feudi
elettorali - l'influente ex gruppo di esperti del G17 guidato dall'ex
vicepremier jugoslavo Miroljub Labus. Un misterioso disegno di legge
governativo - confermato dal ministro delle finanze Bozidar Djelic ma
smentito dal premier Zoran Zivkovic - escluderebbe Dinkic dalla rosa
dei candidabili al posto di governatore della Bcs. Ieri sera questi ha
ribattuto in una intervista alla tv di stato Rts accusando ''alcuni
membri dell'attuale governo'' di legami con la criminalita' e
affermando che ''una vera guerra alle cosche non puo' essere portata
avanti da questo esecutivo''. Dinkic sostiene che il polverone attuale
e' dovuto al fatto che ''le elezioni sono vicine e molti piccoli
partiti avranno difficolta' a superare la soglia del 4% necessaria per
entrare in parlamento''. Ma quanto sia vicino il voto, e' altro
argomento di lite: l'opposizione conservatrice che fa capo all'ex
presidente jugoslavo Vojislav Kostunica lo vuole entro quest'anno,
alcuni partiti del Dos parlano della prossima primavera e il partito
del premier Zivkovic insiste nel portare a termine l'attuale
legislatura, che scade nel dicembre 2004. (ANSA). OT 21/05/2003 15:43
SERBIA: SI DIMETTE CONTROVERSO CAPO UFFICIO STAMPA GOVERNO
(ANSA) - BELGRADO, 7 LUG - Il controverso capo dell'ufficio stampa del
governo serbo, Vladimir 'Beba' Popovic, si e' dimesso e restera' in
carica solo fino al 15 luglio, in attesa della nomina di un sostituto.
Lo ha detto il primo ministro serbo Zoran Zivkovic, precisando che le
dimissioni sono state accolte dall'esecutivo nella riunione di
venerdi' scorso. Popovic, amico intimo del defunto premier Zoran
Djindjic (assassinato a Belgrado il 12 marzo), si era contraddistinto
per la conflittualita' con la quale aveva condotto i contatti con i
media. Aveva esordito la sua gestione dell'ufficio stampa, durante lo
stato di emergenza seguito all'uccisione di Djindjic, con una violenta
quanto rozza tirata intimidatoria nei confronti di una cronista
televisiva, aveva redatto 'liste nere' di giornalisti a suo dire
coinvolti in complotti antigovernativi, e negli ultimi mesi ha
querelato periodici, quotidiani ed emittenti che lo hanno criticato,
chiedendo risarcimenti astronomici per presunti 'danni morali'.
Fra le tante vittime della suscettibilita' di 'Beba' si annoverano i
media piu' diffusi, come i periodici 'Nin' e 'Vreme', il quotidiano
'Vecernje Novosti', la storica emittente di opposizione 'B-92',
personaggi politici come l'ex presidente jugoslavo Vojislav Kostunica,
organizzazioni non governative come il Centro per i diritti umani.
L'operato del controverso portavoce governativo e' stato piu' volte
censurato dalle locali associazioni dei giornalisti, e ha portato a
plateali dimissioni di protesta in alcune redazioni. La notizia
dell'uscita di scena di 'Beba' (in serbo bimbo) non tranquillizza il
direttore di 'Nin' Slobodan Reljic, il cui nome era in cima ala lista
dei nemici del rissoso addetto stampa: ''L'essenza del problema non e'
il siluramento di un uomo, anche se si chiama Vladimir 'Beba' Popovic.
Dovremmo avere una situazione tale da non rischiare l'ascesa di nuovi
possibili 'Beba'. Nessuno sa come Popovic sia riuscito a restare tanto
a lungo al potere, chi ce lo abbia messo e con quali meccanismi: e'
una situazione inammissibile per un Paese che vuole entrare in
Europa''. (ANSA). OT 07/07/2003 18:52
SERBIA/MONTENEGRO: RILASCIATA VEDOVA COMANDANTE ARKAN, TV
(ANSA) - BELGRADO, 15 LUG - La vedova del comandante Arkan, Svetlana
Raznatovic, e' stata rilasciata oggi dopo quattro mesi trascorsi in
carcere a Belgrado. Lo ha dichiarato il suo avvocato alla rete
televisiva B52 aggiungendo che la donna - vedova del famigerato capo
paramilitare serbo Zeljko Raznatovic detto Arkan, sposato nel 1995 -
''e' gia' a casa sua''. Svetlana Raznatovic era stata arrestata il
17 marzo nell'ambito dell'inchiesta sull'omicidio, avvenuto cinque
giorni prima, del primo ministro serbo Zoran Djindjic. In serata
l'agenzia di stampa France Presse ha riferito che pure l'ex capo dei
servizi segreti dell'esercito, generale Aco Tomic, e' stato
scarcerato su ordine della Corte suprema di Serbia. Anche Tomic era
finito in prigione l'8 aprile perche' sospettato di aver partecipato
all'organizzazione dell'attentato a Djindjic. Durante l'inchiesta
per l'assassinio di Djindjic, piu' di 10.000 persone erano state
arrestate e circa 4.000 sono indagate per sospetti legami con il
crimine organizzato e con i responsabili del mortale attentato.
(ANSA). COR-BA 15/07/2003 21:55
SERBIA: ESPONENTI GABINETTO ZIVKOVIC ACCUSATI RICICLAGGIO
(ANSA) - BELGRADO, 17 LUG - Documenti che indicherebbero un
coinvolgimento di due consiglieri del primo ministro serbo Zoran
Zivkovic in una indagine sul riciclaggio di denaro sporco sono stati
consegnati questa mattina alla magistratura ed alla stampa dal
Governatore della Banca centrale della Serbia, Mladjan Dinkic.
Secondo l' agenzia Beta, nei documenti resi noti da Dinkic, e che
sarebbero stati redatti dalle autorita' di polizia ungherese, si
afferma che il consigliere di Zivkovic per i servizi segreti, Zoran
Janjusevic, e il suo ex capo di gabinetto, Nemanja Kolesar, sarebbero
sospettati di coinvolgimento nel riciclaggio. Kolesar in giugno e'
stato nominato capo dell' Agenzia per la privatizzazione delle banche
in Serbia. ''Secondo la polizia ungherese - ha detto Dinkic -
il gabinetto di Zivkovic e' implicato nel riciclaggio di denaro''.
Il governatore ha anche aggiunto che il Ministro degli interni, Dusan
Mihajlovic, aveva ricevuto i documenti fin da giugno, ma ''aveva
tentato di nascondere''. Stando al documento, di cui Dinkic ha
presentato una traduzione in serbo, il riciclaggio sarebbe stato
compiuto attraverso due compagnie con sede nelle Seychelles e a
Cipro. (ANSA). COR-MIU 17/07/2003 15:04
UE: SERBIA-MONTENEGRO; PRODI E SOLANA SPINGONO PER RIFORME
(ANSA) - BRUXELLES, 22 LUG - L'Alto rappresentate dell'Ue per la
politica estera e di sicurezza comune, Javier Solana, ha indirizzato
oggi un messaggio ''fermo'' al presidente della Serbia-Montenegro,
Svetovar Marovic, invitando i partiti politici a mettere fine alle
dispute sulle riforme in vista. Lo hanno reso noto fonti
comunitarie che hanno preso parte alla riunione che ha avuto luogo
oggi a Bruxelles tra il presidente serbo e il mister Pesc dell'Unione
europea. ''Il messaggio dato sulle lotte intestine tra partiti e'
stato molto forte'' e anche se Solana ha usato un tono piu' leggero,
restano serie preoccupazioni sullo stato del clima politico nel paese,
hanno riferito le fonti. Nel corso della conferenza stampa che ha
fatto seguito all' incontro, Solana ha osservato che ''la situazione
non e' drammatica'', pur indicando che ''sarebbe meglio se ci fosse
piu' consenso in momenti in cui il paese attraversa l' emozione della
morte del suo primo ministro''. Solana si e' anche detto dispiaciuto
per il fatto che il Parlamento nazionale non abbia ancora adottato un
piano d'azione per le riforme in materia di mercato interno e di
commercio. Svetovar Marovic e' stato ricevuto anche dal presidente
della Commissione Ue Romano Prodi che, in un breve incontro stampa, ha
sottolineato di avere ricevuto l'assicurazione ''secondo la quale
esiste un accordo generale sulla strategia di integrazione europea e
sulle riforme necessarie per raggiungere questo obiettivo''. Marovic
ha evocato la data del 2007 e ha detto di contare nella firma, il
prossimo anno, di un accordo di associazione e di stabilizzazione tra
la Ue e la Serbia e il Montenegro. Sulla data del 2007, Prodi e' stato
prudente: ''Abbiamo cominciato un processo e vogliamo portarlo avanti
il piu' rapidamente possibile. Ma questo dipende da una serie di
circostanze''. (ANSA). KRX*OS 22/07/2003 20:14
2. Serbia: Due mesi dopo, tutti contro tutti
ed altri dispacci ANSA sulla situazione politica interna serba
=== 1 ===
(for this text in english see:
http://www.antiwar.com/malic/m032703.html
or
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/2418 )
Serbia sotto la legge Marziale
di Nebojsa Malic
27 Marzo 2003
(Traduzione di Alessandro Lattanzio
e-mail: alexlattanzio@...
Sito: http://members.xoom.it/sitoaurora)
Due settimane fa, il Primo Ministro Serbo Zoran
Djindjic è stato ucciso da un cecchino. I suoi
successori hanno immediatamente dichiarato lo "stato
di emergenza" - in effetti, la legge Marziale - di
durata indefinita, e il lancio massiccio di operazioni
di polizia per trovare i sospettati del crimine
dell'assassinio di Djindjic. Djindjic ha avuto dei
funerali di stato e numerosi elogi dalla stampa
occidentale, prima che le notizie della Sua Molto
Democratica Imperiale invasione dell'Iraq mettesse a
lato la Serbia.
Mentre le forze imperiali, fiduciose dopo i
bombardamenti terroristici sulla Serbia nella
sottomissione del 1999, combattono contro una
inaspettata resistenza irachena, i successori di
Djindjic riaffermano il vassallaggio della Serbia, con
l'espulsione di diplomatici iracheni. Mentre a casa,
essi assumono poteri sui propri cittadini, che perfino
l'imperatore invidierebbe.
Una guerra differente
Sotto la leadership del partito di Djindjic, il
compare Zoran Zivkovic, che è stato nominato Primo
Ministro, il 17 marzo, del nuovo governo, lanciò la
"guerra al crimine organizzato."
Con velocità insolita, accusarono della morte di
Djindjic il "clan Zemun",
una organizzazione criminale basata a Belgrado. Subito
la polizia, che non riesce a risolvere un solo caso di
assassinio, degli ultimi due anni, seppe tutto su chi
fosse il colpevole e di cosa. Il 18 marzo, il governo
disse di avere arrestato 750 persone. Due giorni dopo,
il numero giunse a più di 1000, e il 23 era a 2700!
Dal 17 Marzo, le prigioni di Belgrado erano piene, e
gli arrestati venivano spediti altrove.
Sebbene la Serbia sia afflitta dal crimine
organizzato, come tutti i paesi post-Comunisti, vi
sono valide preoccupazioni che l'azione del governo
non sia destinato a distruggere realmente la mafia.
Per esempio, mentre il poco noto " "clan Zemun" sia un
bersaglio, il più famoso "clan Surcin" il cui capo
viaggiava con Djindjic sul suo aereo privato, non è
stato menzionato.
Uno degli aderenti del "clan Zemun", noto come
"Legija," usò un commando della Unità Operazioni
Speciali del Ministero degli Interni. Legija aiutò
Djindjic a prendere il potere nel 2000 e nel 2001 a
arrestare Milosevic. Vi sono indicazioni che si
volesse consegnare Legija all'inquisizione dell'Aja,
poco prima di messere ucciso.
I fatti seguenti meritano una spiegazione. Zivkovic
era ministro degli interni nel governo jugoslavo fino
quando venne dissolto il mese scorso. Djindjic fu
ucciso sotto il suo sguardo, appena nominato! Dusan
Mihajlovic, ministro degli interni ( e quindi con
maggiore responsabilità rispetto a Zivkovic) rimase al
suo posto. La vecchia unità di Legija, I "berretti
rossi" venne sottoposta a Mihajlovic dal 2002. (venne
dissolta due giorni fa, come qualche elemento
filoimperialista suggeriva.)
Vi sono numerose indicazioni che lo stato di emergenza
e la " guerra al crimine" attualmente punti sugli
oppositori del governo in generale. "La guerra è la
salute dello stato" diceva Randolph Bourne. La guerra
dello stato sui problemi sociali serve bene allo
scopo.
Lasciate iniziare le purghe
Grazie allo stato di emergenza, la polizia non ha
bisogno di cercare o di arrestare i ricercati, ma
semplicemente di irrompere nelle case e negli uffici
dei sospetti.
Le proprietà dei sospetti possono essere confiscati o
distrutti, come nel caso della casa del sospettato
leader del "clan Zemun". Con lo stato di emergenza i
sospetti possono essere incarcerati per 30 giorni
senza accuse formali.
Fin quando la Serbia mantenne il sistema giuridico
comunista, tutti i sospetti venivano ritenuti
innocenti fino a prova contraria.
L'assassinio di Djindjic è stato definito, sia dalla
stampa imperialista che dal governo serbo, una
"vendetta del regime di Milosevic". È difficile dire
chi l'abbia detto per primo, tale accusa appare prima
nella stampa usa e poi nelle dichiarazioni ufficiali
serbe. Sarebbe la prima volta che la Serbia apprende i
propri eventi dall'impero. Il 16 Marzo un amico di
Djindjic scrisse un commento per il Washington Post,
accusando apertamente Slobodan Milosevic.
Il Primo Ministro Zivkovic inoltre disse: "gruppi
politicamente affini" e assicurò che avrebbe "ripulito
la Serbia con una spazzola di ferro." Un membro
importante del regime di Djindjic affermò che la
tragica fine del Primo Ministro avrebbe potuto essere
usato per "ispirare" la costruzione di una Serbia
democratica.
Se così è, i leaders della Serbia hanno una strana
concezione della "democrazia." Significa censura? Sì.
Lo stato di emergenza fornisce un controllo totale sui
media, limita le notizie a quelle ufficiali. Ciò, si
suppone, solo per estenderla alle cause dello stato di
emergenza, ma da quando il governo decide su cosa si
applica o non si applica, in pratica significa censura
su tutto. Parecchie pubblicazioni e stazioni TV sono
già state bandite. Un consulente del governo serbo,
posando da giornalista indipendente, tentava di
scusare la censura dichiarando che "tutti coloro che
ne sono interessati, sono soprattutto tabloid
scandalistici, noti per i loro reportage inverosimili,
per l'invasione della privacy e la diffusione di voci
e perfino bugie". Ma ciò descrive parecchi dei media
nei Balcani! Inoltre, nessuna persecuzione non inizia
a colpire soprattutto gli impopolari, dopodiché ci si
rivolge verso gli altri, con il tempo, che non hanno
modo di resistere.
La settimana scorsa, il governo ha ripulito il sistema
giudiziario, creando l'opportunità di "impacchettare"
le corti con i loro supporters. Nenad Canak, un
politico lunatico che appare spesso nella coalizione
del DOS, ha richiesto il bando di alcuni partiti
politici. Vi è, perfino, una "guerra culturale",
scoppiata quando le autorità arrestarono Ceca
Raznatovic, una cantante neo-folk e vedova del leader
della milizia paramilitare Arkan.
Sospettata di legami con il 'clan Zemun,' Raznatovic e
la sua musica sono considerate una "volgare
celebrazione della classe criminale della Serbia,"
come ha detto il famoso Time magazine, l'estate
scorsa. Inoltre, il capo del controspionaggio militare
è stato dimesso, recentemente, dal governo
pro-Djindjic dell'unione di Serbia-Montenegro,
suggerendo che la purga nell'ambiente militare deve
ancora iniziare.
L'uomo sospettato dell'assassinio è stato arrestato
lunedì, ma la polizia non sa dire come "sanno" che è
stato lui a sparare. La Serbia di oggi nelle loro
parole, non può essere messa in discussione.
Falsificare un martire
Sebbene la gente in Serbia in generale sia stata
condizionata a, se non alla fiducia, almeno a obbedire
al governo incondizionatamente, molti vedono lo stato
di emergenza per quello che è: una volgare presa del
potere, usando il corpo di Djindjic come la
proverbiale 'camicia insanguinata'.
L'impero ha trattato, certamente, Djindjic come "un
martire della causa per una Serbia liberale e
democratica " (Tod Lindberg, The Washington Times).
Nelle settimane seguenti la sua morte, The Toronto
Star lo chiamò "un vero patriota', l'IWPR di Londra
lamentò interruzione della strada della Serbia verso
una "piena integrazione Euro-Atlantica " e the New
York Times scrisse che l'impero aveva ragione nelle
sue richieste e Djindjic faceva bene a obbedirgli,
avrebbe dovuto ricevere maggior aiuto nei confronti
dell'opposizione.
Una rara voce di dissenso proviene da Neil Clark del
London Guardian, che ha chiamato Djindjic "Il Quisling
di Belgrado." Dice Clark, "Quando un uomo vende gli
interessi del proprio paese, il suo ex-presidente e i
suoi principali avversari politici, cos'altro avrebbe
venduto? Solo il paese stesso."
E Steven Erlanger del New York Times notò, in un
articolo del 16 marzo, che Djindjic aveva legami con
la mafia che, si può supporre, lo ha ucciso, perfino
anche se ancora dichiara che Djindjic era odiato per
la sua obbedienza, totalmente giustificata, alle
richieste occidentali.
L'IWPR, un ripugnante propalatore dello statismo
transnazionale, dichiarava la legge marziale quale
"opportunità" per potare la Serbia dal crimine
organizzato, con il paravento della cauzione che
potrebbe portare alla dittatura. Il pugno di ferro del
governo è stato, inequivocabilmente appoggiato dalla
Imperiale ICG. The Christian Science Monitor riportava
che il dirigente dell'ICG di Belgrado, James Lyon,
disse "Se possono tenere tale situazione per due
settimane, sono ottimista sul fatto che la morte di
Djindjic sia la scintilla che dia alla Serbia un
futuro democratico."
Tuttavia l'ICG era preoccupato per la possibilità che
la futura Serbia non sia così obbediente e piegata
come Djindjic l'ha resa, e chiedeva all'Impero di non
allentare la sua pressione su Belgrado. Il popolo
della Serbia, certo, non sa nulla di ciò.
Con lo stato di emergenza, la menzione di questo
articolo potrebbe essere vietata...
Nebojsa Malic
(ringraziamo A. Lattanzio per averci fatto pervenire la traduzione. CNJ)
=== 2 ===
http://www.ansa.it/balcani/serbiamontenegro/serbiamontenegro.shtml
SERBIA: DJINDJIC, DUE MESI DOPO TUTTI CONTRO TUTTI
(Di Beatrice Ottaviano) (ANSA) - BELGRADO, 21 MAG - Sono passati poco
piu' di due mesi dall'assassinio, il 12 marzo a Belgrado, del primo
ministro serbo Zoran Djinjdic: e il fronte comune che governo e
istituzioni avevano fatto attorno alla figura e agli ideali del leader
ucciso sta gia' crollando sotto i colpi di feroci polemiche, accuse e
veleni che evocano un clima pre- elettorale. La tregua fra i litigiosi
partitelli che compongono il variegato arcipelago del Dos - la
coalizione promossa a suo tempo da Djindjic - per abbattere il regime
di Slobodan Milosevic, e che tuttora detiene la maggioranza in
parlamento - e' stata infranta dapprima da una battaglia
a colpi di pubbliche dichiarazioni fra un personaggio fino a due mesi
fa considerato come il possibile nuovo uomo forte dell'esecutivo, il
vicepremier serbo Nebojsa Covic, e una emittente privata ritenuta molto
vicina al Partito democratico (Ds) del premier assassinato, la
televisione 'Pink'. Covic ha attaccato il direttore della tv, Zeliko
Mitrovic, accusandolo di aver orchestrato una campagna contro di lui e
sottolineandone l'imbarazzante passato di uomo di regime e membro del
direttivo dello Jul, il partito dei 'comunisti in Mercedes' della ex
first lady jugoslava Mira Markovic. Mitrovic ha replicato ricordando i
trascorsi di Covic nei vari esecutivi di Milosevic e accusando senza
giri di parole il vicepremier di peculato sui fondi statali destinati
al Kosovo. Quella polemica e' trascesa
fino a investire presunti legami di vari membri del governo con la
criminalita' organizzata.
Oggi sono scesi in campo anche la polizia e i servizi segreti (Bia),
che hanno minacciato Covic di querela per una affermazione di questi
sul ruolo avuto dai principali
sospettati per l'uccisione di Djindjic, l'ex capo delle forze speciali
dei servizi Milorad 'Legija' Lukovic e il boss criminale Dusan 'Siptar'
Spasojevic (ucciso in aprile in un conflitto a
fuoco con le forze dell'ordine), nell'arresto di Milosevic, nell'aprile
del 2000. ''E' divertente come assistere a un dibattito sulla salute
fra diabetici - commenta Ivan Andric, leader di 'Alleanza civica'
(Gss), uno dei partiti del Dos finora non coinvolti nella raffica di
accuse e controaccuse - e' surreale vedere quella gente discutere di
questioni morali''. Le polemiche non investono solo il governo e i
partiti della coalizione e non riguardano solo il passato: nei giorni
scorsi il capo delle dogane Vladan Begovic e' stato trasferito a un
diverso incarico (spacciato come piu' prestigioso) dopo che aveva
avallato la denuncia di una gigantesca truffa ai danni dell'Unione
europea sulle esportazioni agevolate di zucchero, nella quale sarebbero
coinvolte secondo la stampa locale aziende vicine al partito del
defunto premier. Il ministro dell'agricoltura Dragan Veselinov - del
quale peraltro i giovani del movimento 'Otpor' chiedono a gran voce le
dimissioni per un'altra controversa vicenda - ha cercato, assieme ai
vertici del governo, di gettare acqua sul fuoco e si e' trincerato
dietro la consueta formula dell' 'indagine in corso', ma lo scandalo si
arricchisce quotidianamente di nuovi particolari.
Altro punto caldo e' la Banca centrale serba, il cui governatore
Mladjan Dinkic e' vicepresidente di un partito sgradito alla
coalizione di maggioranza - che sente minacciati i suoi feudi
elettorali - l'influente ex gruppo di esperti del G17 guidato dall'ex
vicepremier jugoslavo Miroljub Labus. Un misterioso disegno di legge
governativo - confermato dal ministro delle finanze Bozidar Djelic ma
smentito dal premier Zoran Zivkovic - escluderebbe Dinkic dalla rosa
dei candidabili al posto di governatore della Bcs. Ieri sera questi ha
ribattuto in una intervista alla tv di stato Rts accusando ''alcuni
membri dell'attuale governo'' di legami con la criminalita' e
affermando che ''una vera guerra alle cosche non puo' essere portata
avanti da questo esecutivo''. Dinkic sostiene che il polverone attuale
e' dovuto al fatto che ''le elezioni sono vicine e molti piccoli
partiti avranno difficolta' a superare la soglia del 4% necessaria per
entrare in parlamento''. Ma quanto sia vicino il voto, e' altro
argomento di lite: l'opposizione conservatrice che fa capo all'ex
presidente jugoslavo Vojislav Kostunica lo vuole entro quest'anno,
alcuni partiti del Dos parlano della prossima primavera e il partito
del premier Zivkovic insiste nel portare a termine l'attuale
legislatura, che scade nel dicembre 2004. (ANSA). OT 21/05/2003 15:43
SERBIA: SI DIMETTE CONTROVERSO CAPO UFFICIO STAMPA GOVERNO
(ANSA) - BELGRADO, 7 LUG - Il controverso capo dell'ufficio stampa del
governo serbo, Vladimir 'Beba' Popovic, si e' dimesso e restera' in
carica solo fino al 15 luglio, in attesa della nomina di un sostituto.
Lo ha detto il primo ministro serbo Zoran Zivkovic, precisando che le
dimissioni sono state accolte dall'esecutivo nella riunione di
venerdi' scorso. Popovic, amico intimo del defunto premier Zoran
Djindjic (assassinato a Belgrado il 12 marzo), si era contraddistinto
per la conflittualita' con la quale aveva condotto i contatti con i
media. Aveva esordito la sua gestione dell'ufficio stampa, durante lo
stato di emergenza seguito all'uccisione di Djindjic, con una violenta
quanto rozza tirata intimidatoria nei confronti di una cronista
televisiva, aveva redatto 'liste nere' di giornalisti a suo dire
coinvolti in complotti antigovernativi, e negli ultimi mesi ha
querelato periodici, quotidiani ed emittenti che lo hanno criticato,
chiedendo risarcimenti astronomici per presunti 'danni morali'.
Fra le tante vittime della suscettibilita' di 'Beba' si annoverano i
media piu' diffusi, come i periodici 'Nin' e 'Vreme', il quotidiano
'Vecernje Novosti', la storica emittente di opposizione 'B-92',
personaggi politici come l'ex presidente jugoslavo Vojislav Kostunica,
organizzazioni non governative come il Centro per i diritti umani.
L'operato del controverso portavoce governativo e' stato piu' volte
censurato dalle locali associazioni dei giornalisti, e ha portato a
plateali dimissioni di protesta in alcune redazioni. La notizia
dell'uscita di scena di 'Beba' (in serbo bimbo) non tranquillizza il
direttore di 'Nin' Slobodan Reljic, il cui nome era in cima ala lista
dei nemici del rissoso addetto stampa: ''L'essenza del problema non e'
il siluramento di un uomo, anche se si chiama Vladimir 'Beba' Popovic.
Dovremmo avere una situazione tale da non rischiare l'ascesa di nuovi
possibili 'Beba'. Nessuno sa come Popovic sia riuscito a restare tanto
a lungo al potere, chi ce lo abbia messo e con quali meccanismi: e'
una situazione inammissibile per un Paese che vuole entrare in
Europa''. (ANSA). OT 07/07/2003 18:52
SERBIA/MONTENEGRO: RILASCIATA VEDOVA COMANDANTE ARKAN, TV
(ANSA) - BELGRADO, 15 LUG - La vedova del comandante Arkan, Svetlana
Raznatovic, e' stata rilasciata oggi dopo quattro mesi trascorsi in
carcere a Belgrado. Lo ha dichiarato il suo avvocato alla rete
televisiva B52 aggiungendo che la donna - vedova del famigerato capo
paramilitare serbo Zeljko Raznatovic detto Arkan, sposato nel 1995 -
''e' gia' a casa sua''. Svetlana Raznatovic era stata arrestata il
17 marzo nell'ambito dell'inchiesta sull'omicidio, avvenuto cinque
giorni prima, del primo ministro serbo Zoran Djindjic. In serata
l'agenzia di stampa France Presse ha riferito che pure l'ex capo dei
servizi segreti dell'esercito, generale Aco Tomic, e' stato
scarcerato su ordine della Corte suprema di Serbia. Anche Tomic era
finito in prigione l'8 aprile perche' sospettato di aver partecipato
all'organizzazione dell'attentato a Djindjic. Durante l'inchiesta
per l'assassinio di Djindjic, piu' di 10.000 persone erano state
arrestate e circa 4.000 sono indagate per sospetti legami con il
crimine organizzato e con i responsabili del mortale attentato.
(ANSA). COR-BA 15/07/2003 21:55
SERBIA: ESPONENTI GABINETTO ZIVKOVIC ACCUSATI RICICLAGGIO
(ANSA) - BELGRADO, 17 LUG - Documenti che indicherebbero un
coinvolgimento di due consiglieri del primo ministro serbo Zoran
Zivkovic in una indagine sul riciclaggio di denaro sporco sono stati
consegnati questa mattina alla magistratura ed alla stampa dal
Governatore della Banca centrale della Serbia, Mladjan Dinkic.
Secondo l' agenzia Beta, nei documenti resi noti da Dinkic, e che
sarebbero stati redatti dalle autorita' di polizia ungherese, si
afferma che il consigliere di Zivkovic per i servizi segreti, Zoran
Janjusevic, e il suo ex capo di gabinetto, Nemanja Kolesar, sarebbero
sospettati di coinvolgimento nel riciclaggio. Kolesar in giugno e'
stato nominato capo dell' Agenzia per la privatizzazione delle banche
in Serbia. ''Secondo la polizia ungherese - ha detto Dinkic -
il gabinetto di Zivkovic e' implicato nel riciclaggio di denaro''.
Il governatore ha anche aggiunto che il Ministro degli interni, Dusan
Mihajlovic, aveva ricevuto i documenti fin da giugno, ma ''aveva
tentato di nascondere''. Stando al documento, di cui Dinkic ha
presentato una traduzione in serbo, il riciclaggio sarebbe stato
compiuto attraverso due compagnie con sede nelle Seychelles e a
Cipro. (ANSA). COR-MIU 17/07/2003 15:04
UE: SERBIA-MONTENEGRO; PRODI E SOLANA SPINGONO PER RIFORME
(ANSA) - BRUXELLES, 22 LUG - L'Alto rappresentate dell'Ue per la
politica estera e di sicurezza comune, Javier Solana, ha indirizzato
oggi un messaggio ''fermo'' al presidente della Serbia-Montenegro,
Svetovar Marovic, invitando i partiti politici a mettere fine alle
dispute sulle riforme in vista. Lo hanno reso noto fonti
comunitarie che hanno preso parte alla riunione che ha avuto luogo
oggi a Bruxelles tra il presidente serbo e il mister Pesc dell'Unione
europea. ''Il messaggio dato sulle lotte intestine tra partiti e'
stato molto forte'' e anche se Solana ha usato un tono piu' leggero,
restano serie preoccupazioni sullo stato del clima politico nel paese,
hanno riferito le fonti. Nel corso della conferenza stampa che ha
fatto seguito all' incontro, Solana ha osservato che ''la situazione
non e' drammatica'', pur indicando che ''sarebbe meglio se ci fosse
piu' consenso in momenti in cui il paese attraversa l' emozione della
morte del suo primo ministro''. Solana si e' anche detto dispiaciuto
per il fatto che il Parlamento nazionale non abbia ancora adottato un
piano d'azione per le riforme in materia di mercato interno e di
commercio. Svetovar Marovic e' stato ricevuto anche dal presidente
della Commissione Ue Romano Prodi che, in un breve incontro stampa, ha
sottolineato di avere ricevuto l'assicurazione ''secondo la quale
esiste un accordo generale sulla strategia di integrazione europea e
sulle riforme necessarie per raggiungere questo obiettivo''. Marovic
ha evocato la data del 2007 e ha detto di contare nella firma, il
prossimo anno, di un accordo di associazione e di stabilizzazione tra
la Ue e la Serbia e il Montenegro. Sulla data del 2007, Prodi e' stato
prudente: ''Abbiamo cominciato un processo e vogliamo portarlo avanti
il piu' rapidamente possibile. Ma questo dipende da una serie di
circostanze''. (ANSA). KRX*OS 22/07/2003 20:14
LE CAMICIE NERE DELLA SERBIA DIVENTANO PARTITO
SERBIAN BROWN SHIRTS TO BECOME A POLITICAL PARTY
(italiano / english)
I rimasugli "Otpor" - l'organizzazione sul libro paga del Dipartimento
di Stato USA (1) protagonista delle spedizioni punitive ai danni di
comunisti, esponenti sindacali e della sinistra serba nel corso della
"rivoluzione" neoliberista belgradese del 2000 - hanno deciso di
compiere un salto di qualita': da picchiatori alle manifestazioni stile
"disobbedienti padovani" a piccolo partito di pressione filoamericana
stile "radicali transnazionali".
http://www.rferl.org/newsline/2003/07/4-SEE/see-310703.asp
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty - July 31, 2003
SERBIAN NGO TO BECOME POLITICAL PARTY
Stanko Lazendic, who heads the Novi Sad branch of the
Otpor (Resistance) Serbian students' movement, said on
30 July that Otpor will officially become a political
party in September, Deutsche Welle's Serbian Service
reported. He charged that the government ignores the
activities and suggestions of the NGOs that want
Serbia to become a democratic state, adding the only
way an NGO like Otpor can put its ideas into practice
is by taking an active part in politics. Otpor played
an important role in the ouster of former Yugoslav
President Slobodan Milosevic in 2000. PM
---
About the US Dept. of State ongoing financial support to Otpor follow
the links of the following note:
---
NOTA (1)
Da: "Coord. Naz. per la Jugoslavia"
Data: Gio 10 Lug 2003 15:38:06 Europe/Rome
Oggetto: [JUGOINFO] Visnjica broj 287
NERO SU BIANCO I FINANZIAMENTI AD OTPOR
<<...Chiunque abbia frequentato Otpor ha dichiarato che le
enormi spese da essi sostenute nei loro convegni e incontri erano
assolutamente inimmaginabili, nelle condizioni di miseria della
Jugoslavia di allora, senza pensare a sostegni finanziari esterni, e
rappresentavano anzi uno schiaffo in faccia alla poverta' dilagante;
cosi come la debolezza estrema del loro discorso politico e dei
presunti leader lasciava trasparire senza ombra di dubbio l'esistenza
di un manovratore esterno...>>
<<...Per quanto riguarda i finanziamenti ricevuti dalla National
Endowment for Democracy (NED) ... è possibile verificare sul sito della
suddetta organizzazione (direttamente dipendente dal Dipartimento di
Stato degli USA) che Otpor ha ricevuto:
anno 2000 $189,600 + $47,790
http://www.ned.org/grants/00programs/grants-cee.html
anno 2001 $228,000 + $45,085
http://www.ned.org/grants/01programs/grants-cee.html
La NED è "un'organizzazione non governativa che riceve dei fondi
pubblici per portare avanti iniziative democratiche" (non-governmental
organization that receives public funding to carry out democracy
initiatives).
ttp://www.ned.org/about/nedhistory.html
Sempre sulla pagina che fornisce le informazioni riguardo
all'organizzazione si scrive:
"Oggi, la Guerra Fredda è un ricordo lontano, e la promozione della
democrazia è diventato un campo fisso dell'attività internazionale e un
pilastro della politica estera americana." (Today, the Cold War is
almost a distant memory, and democracy promotion has become an
established field of
international activity, and a pillar of American foreign policy.)
http://www.ned.org/about/about.html ...>>
In effetti, la NED nacque negli USA per "sganciare" alcune operazioni
politiche dalla competenza troppo imbarazzante della CIA, rendendole
"scoperte" attraverso una patina di intervento "culturale" ed
"umanitario". Sulla questione dei finanziamenti USA ad Otpor si vedano
anche gli articoli:
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/1440 (Tute e
guerre, F. Grimaldi)
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/963
("Otpor " ed il "National Endowment for Democracy )
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/593 (Come gli
Stati Uniti hanno creato un'opposizione corrotta in Serbia )
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/517 (Corsi di
formazione per attivisti OTPOR organizzati dalla CIA)
(Estratti dal dibattito in corso sulla lista del Bologna Social Forum:
http://liste.bologna.social-forum.org/wws/arc/forum/2003-06/thrd8.html )
SERBIAN BROWN SHIRTS TO BECOME A POLITICAL PARTY
(italiano / english)
I rimasugli "Otpor" - l'organizzazione sul libro paga del Dipartimento
di Stato USA (1) protagonista delle spedizioni punitive ai danni di
comunisti, esponenti sindacali e della sinistra serba nel corso della
"rivoluzione" neoliberista belgradese del 2000 - hanno deciso di
compiere un salto di qualita': da picchiatori alle manifestazioni stile
"disobbedienti padovani" a piccolo partito di pressione filoamericana
stile "radicali transnazionali".
http://www.rferl.org/newsline/2003/07/4-SEE/see-310703.asp
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty - July 31, 2003
SERBIAN NGO TO BECOME POLITICAL PARTY
Stanko Lazendic, who heads the Novi Sad branch of the
Otpor (Resistance) Serbian students' movement, said on
30 July that Otpor will officially become a political
party in September, Deutsche Welle's Serbian Service
reported. He charged that the government ignores the
activities and suggestions of the NGOs that want
Serbia to become a democratic state, adding the only
way an NGO like Otpor can put its ideas into practice
is by taking an active part in politics. Otpor played
an important role in the ouster of former Yugoslav
President Slobodan Milosevic in 2000. PM
---
About the US Dept. of State ongoing financial support to Otpor follow
the links of the following note:
---
NOTA (1)
Da: "Coord. Naz. per la Jugoslavia"
Data: Gio 10 Lug 2003 15:38:06 Europe/Rome
Oggetto: [JUGOINFO] Visnjica broj 287
NERO SU BIANCO I FINANZIAMENTI AD OTPOR
<<...Chiunque abbia frequentato Otpor ha dichiarato che le
enormi spese da essi sostenute nei loro convegni e incontri erano
assolutamente inimmaginabili, nelle condizioni di miseria della
Jugoslavia di allora, senza pensare a sostegni finanziari esterni, e
rappresentavano anzi uno schiaffo in faccia alla poverta' dilagante;
cosi come la debolezza estrema del loro discorso politico e dei
presunti leader lasciava trasparire senza ombra di dubbio l'esistenza
di un manovratore esterno...>>
<<...Per quanto riguarda i finanziamenti ricevuti dalla National
Endowment for Democracy (NED) ... è possibile verificare sul sito della
suddetta organizzazione (direttamente dipendente dal Dipartimento di
Stato degli USA) che Otpor ha ricevuto:
anno 2000 $189,600 + $47,790
http://www.ned.org/grants/00programs/grants-cee.html
anno 2001 $228,000 + $45,085
http://www.ned.org/grants/01programs/grants-cee.html
La NED è "un'organizzazione non governativa che riceve dei fondi
pubblici per portare avanti iniziative democratiche" (non-governmental
organization that receives public funding to carry out democracy
initiatives).
ttp://www.ned.org/about/nedhistory.html
Sempre sulla pagina che fornisce le informazioni riguardo
all'organizzazione si scrive:
"Oggi, la Guerra Fredda è un ricordo lontano, e la promozione della
democrazia è diventato un campo fisso dell'attività internazionale e un
pilastro della politica estera americana." (Today, the Cold War is
almost a distant memory, and democracy promotion has become an
established field of
international activity, and a pillar of American foreign policy.)
http://www.ned.org/about/about.html ...>>
In effetti, la NED nacque negli USA per "sganciare" alcune operazioni
politiche dalla competenza troppo imbarazzante della CIA, rendendole
"scoperte" attraverso una patina di intervento "culturale" ed
"umanitario". Sulla questione dei finanziamenti USA ad Otpor si vedano
anche gli articoli:
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/1440 (Tute e
guerre, F. Grimaldi)
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/963
("Otpor " ed il "National Endowment for Democracy )
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/593 (Come gli
Stati Uniti hanno creato un'opposizione corrotta in Serbia )
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/517 (Corsi di
formazione per attivisti OTPOR organizzati dalla CIA)
(Estratti dal dibattito in corso sulla lista del Bologna Social Forum:
http://liste.bologna.social-forum.org/wws/arc/forum/2003-06/thrd8.html )
From: Vladimir Krsljanin (SLOBODA Belgrade)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003
1. Adopted Conclusions of the ICDSM
2. Zyuganov: Freedom for Slobodan Milosevic!
=== 1: Adopted Conclusions of the ICDSM ===
Dear friends,
President Slobodan Milosevic is winning the historical battle for the
truth and against US/NATO/ICTY aggression. He is winning with the true
support of his people. He is winning in spite he is the first and most
important prisoner of the "New World Order", which means the suffering
of millions, new colonization and global tyranny. He is winning in
spite his life is under threat, he is separated from his family, his
wife, son, closest associates are being hunted. In spite his country is
occupied and the puppet regime threatens everyone who supports his
struggle or works for his defense. In spite all those who now try to
use his victory, his honesty and glory, in spite the calculants,
opportunists and alleged friends.
In his victory, like in whole his life and struggle, President
Milosevic is sincere and generous. His main thought is how to reach the
broadest peoples' unity in the struggle for freedom. Like always, he is
ready to accept everyone who is sincerely wishing to contribute to that
struggle.
After the successful Vidovdan demonstration at The Hague, the ICDSM
agreed on important conclusions. All the leading personalities of
ICDSM were free to comment the draft of the conclusions or to send
their remarks about its content until yesterday, July 31, 2003. Many
endorsements and useful comments have reached us, including
full support of the Founder and Co-Chairman of ICDSM professor Velko
Valkanov, and of the Russian Committee led by Alexander Zinoviev.
President Milosevic himself has made several specific remarks and gave
his endorsement to the conclusions, stressing the importance of the
leading role of "Sloboda". All his remarks have been incorporated in
the final text of the conclusions, posted below.
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.
Vladimir Krsljanin,
Co-ordinator of the Board of ICDSM,
General Secretary of "Sloboda",
Foreign Relations Assistant to President Slobodan Milosevic
Klaus Hartmann,
Vice-Chairman of ICDSM,
Speaker of the German Section of ICDSM,
Vice-Chairman of the World Union of Freethinkers
---
Following we present the full text of the adopted ICDSM conclusions:
ON THE FUTURE WORK OF ICDSM
This paper contains theResults, Conclusions and Proposalsof a meeting
which was held in Scheveningen, June 28, 2003, beginning at 18:00 hrs,
after the demonstration march and rallies organized in front of the
Hague “Tribunal” and the Scheveningen prison by Serbian organisations
and ICDSM.
Prof. Dr. Velko Valkanov and Klaus Hartmann introduced the meeting,
giving reports about their visit toPresidentSlobodan Milosevic,
providing a basis for the discussion and making proposals for the
future work of ICDSM. These proposals were supplemented by Vladimir
Krsljanin. A discussion paper was submitted by the German Section of
ICDSM.
It was decided that the main results of the meeting should be
summarized and sent to all officials of ICDSM who would be requested to
give their comments. Such comments should reach the sender by July 31,
2003, at latest.
A. The events of the last months have revealed that
there is a need to define some basic principles of co-operation in
ICDSM:
1. Officials of ICDSM work together on the basis of complete
equality and equal rights.
2. Each official of ICDSM has the right to decide on the function
he may be asked to exercise for ICDSM, either to accept it or to refuse
it. He has no right to nominate other officials or to depose them.
3. Public attacks on officials or members of ICDSM are not
permissible and incompatible with a function in ICDSM. Any criticism or
argument may be expressed only internally and directly.
4. Co-operation within ICDSM is based in substance on the following
demands:
- Release of Slobodan Milosevic and public promotion of his
internationally important struggle for truth, justice, freedom and
national dignity
- Abolishment of the illegal ICTY and release of all its
prisoners
- Opposition to NATO aggression against Yugoslavia and Serbian
people, demand for compensation for damage and for criminal
accountability of NATO leaders
- Defence of international law, equality and independence, national
sovereignty and dignity of all countries.
- Opposition to neo-colonialism of the „New World Order“.
Agreement on other issues, such as developments in other countries and
regions or political concepts of society is neither a condition nor a
subject matter of work within ICDSM.
B. The most important future activities:
5. A matter of highest priority is the mobilisation of funds for
the defence. This regards the presently incurred costs as well as the
considerably higher funds, which will be required during the
“half-time” of the defence. The funds shall be collected on a national
basis and shall be put at the immediate disposal of SLOBODA. Different
concrete methods have been proposed and discussed. In order to
co-ordinate these activities it is suggested to form a “financial
committee” or working group. The German Section has offered the
co-operation of its “financial manager” Peter Betscher. Other members
and national branches are requested to make their own proposals of
persons to co-operate in this body.
6. Having in mind the highest importance of the actions against the
worst forms of violation of the human rights of President Milosevic –
in the first place against the threats to his life and health, against
the attacks on his family, need to fight his illegal detention, and as
the most actual: the strongest possible demand for at least one year
long provisional release for recovery and appropriate preparation of
his defense case, – public, political and legal activity of all
national branches is required. At the same time, ICDSM will form a task
force headed by Professor Bernardini to propose and organize legal
actions before the international bodies for human rights protection.
All the lawyers within the ICDSM should give concrete contributions to
the further strengthening of the defense. ICDSM should create
conditions for providing President Milosevic with more permanent legal
assistance in his struggle. As a first step in this direction, the
proposal for
the permanent engagement of Ms.Tiphaine Dickson, attorney from Canada,
has been supported.
7. Each of the national branches should organize appropriate
concrete activities to support the preparation of the defense case such
as: collection of evidence, proposing the appropriate international
witnesses of defense, aiding the works of Sloboda and the future Hague
defense team. Special attention should be paid to the media work and
the public promotion of the results of President Milosevic’s struggle
for the truth and justice at The Hague.
8. The Vidovdan protest events at The Hague have been considered as
successful. Broad participation of Serbs from the Western European
countries has been very important. The content of the speeches and the
high rank of Serbian and international speakers and other participants
have secured the seriousness and strength of the events. The local
organization has been good, accurate and reliable.
The key role of the broad activities of the German branch of ICDSM has
been emphasized and their successful interaction with Serbian groups in
Germany in particular. This experience should be used as a positive
example for the future activities of ICDSM.
Established cooperation of ICDSM with prominent Serbian representatives
and groups from Germany, Great Britain, France, Austria, The
Netherlands and other European countries will continue and further
develop.
Since the whole event produced a positive public and mobilizing effect,
similar actions should be repeated periodically. It has been proposed
that the next protest at The Hague takes place by the end of October
2003.
C. Organizational matters
9. The enhancement of the efficiency of work, being an unquestioned
necessity, should include a reappraisal of the leadership structures,
taking into account the views expressed by president Milosevic about
the efficiency and equality necessary for the successful work if the
ICDSM. The question of the most adequate leadership structures should
not be decided hastily, as this is a matter reserved for discussion by
officials and national branches of the International Committee.
10. The two co-chairmen at the top of the International Committee have
been symbolizing the fact that it originated from the movements in
Europe and the US, which created public tribunals condemning NATO
aggression on Yugoslavia. Besides, the reputation of both co-chairmen
gave positive impact to the prestige of ICDSM. The multitude
vice-chairmen, as originally intended, should be either leaders of
national branches of ICDSM or persons who, by the amount and quality of
their activities give the most important impact in serving our cause in
their respective countries.
11. SLOBODA/Freedom Association, the Yugoslav Section of ICDSM, has to
have the leading function in the Board of the International Committee
as organizer of the immediate defence work and as crucial factor in the
peoples’ struggle for freedom and against the colonial regime in
Belgrade.
- The tasks of a working committee of ICDSM will be given to
SLOBODA. Vladimir Krsljanin, the secretary of SLOBODA, will have the
function of the co-ordinator of the Board of ICDSM
12. Besides the existing co-chairmen and vice-chairmen, the members of
the Board of the International Committee should be chosen mainly among
the spokespersons and co-ordinators of the most active national
branches or sections of ICDSM. The main criteria should be their
capacity to promote the cause of ICDSM in the framework of an
organizational structure at the national level, which should be capable
to make alliances based on the global importance of the struggle of
President Milosevic, including with the Serbian/Yugoslav community.
- The forthcoming establishment of national branches in Great Britain,
France, The Netherlands, Canada and the US is applauded, as well as
planned broadening of the activity of the committee in Italy and the
reported activity of the Irish branch of ICDSM. Vladimir Krsljanin is
charged with the task of co-opting in the Board of ICDSM, after
consultations, a representative of each of the national branches which
are not represented in the Board.
- The request for membership in ICDSM made by the Russian Social
Committee for thedefense of Slobodan Milosevic is granted with
appreciation for their extremely important activities and as a proof of
a wide recognition of the global importance of the struggle of Slobodan
Milosevic, which requires coordination of all organizations and groups
struggling for his release. Vladimir Krsljanin is charged with the
task, to consult with the Russian committee on its adequate
representation and to take care of the follow up.
13. Statements on behalf of ICDSM, if not adopted after consultation of
all Board members, will be made only by the two co-chairmen and the
co-ordinator, while the representatives of the national sections and
branches and other members of the Board will speak only in their own
name. Any change in the composition of the Board can be made only on
the basis of a broad agreement among its members. For this purpose the
co-ordinator consults with the other members of the Board in order to
reach an agreed decision.
---
YOUR HELP
The work for the defense of Slobodan Milosevic totally depends on your
donations.
For more details, see: http://www.sloboda.org.yu/finappeal.htm
Send a check to our address:
SLOBODA
Rajiceva 16, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia and Montenegro, Yugoslavia
or transfer your donation to our account using the instructions at:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/pomocdet.htm
---
SLOBODA urgently needs your donation.
Please find the detailed instructions at:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/pomoc.htm
To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/ (Sloboda/Freedom association)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)
http://www.free-slobo.de/ (German section of ICDSM)
http://www.wpc-in.org/ (world peace council)
http://www.geocities.com/b_antinato/ (Balkan antiNATO center)
=== 2: Zyuganov: Freedom for Slobodan Milosevic! ===
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
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003
1. Adopted Conclusions of the ICDSM
2. Zyuganov: Freedom for Slobodan Milosevic!
=== 1: Adopted Conclusions of the ICDSM ===
Dear friends,
President Slobodan Milosevic is winning the historical battle for the
truth and against US/NATO/ICTY aggression. He is winning with the true
support of his people. He is winning in spite he is the first and most
important prisoner of the "New World Order", which means the suffering
of millions, new colonization and global tyranny. He is winning in
spite his life is under threat, he is separated from his family, his
wife, son, closest associates are being hunted. In spite his country is
occupied and the puppet regime threatens everyone who supports his
struggle or works for his defense. In spite all those who now try to
use his victory, his honesty and glory, in spite the calculants,
opportunists and alleged friends.
In his victory, like in whole his life and struggle, President
Milosevic is sincere and generous. His main thought is how to reach the
broadest peoples' unity in the struggle for freedom. Like always, he is
ready to accept everyone who is sincerely wishing to contribute to that
struggle.
After the successful Vidovdan demonstration at The Hague, the ICDSM
agreed on important conclusions. All the leading personalities of
ICDSM were free to comment the draft of the conclusions or to send
their remarks about its content until yesterday, July 31, 2003. Many
endorsements and useful comments have reached us, including
full support of the Founder and Co-Chairman of ICDSM professor Velko
Valkanov, and of the Russian Committee led by Alexander Zinoviev.
President Milosevic himself has made several specific remarks and gave
his endorsement to the conclusions, stressing the importance of the
leading role of "Sloboda". All his remarks have been incorporated in
the final text of the conclusions, posted below.
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.
Vladimir Krsljanin,
Co-ordinator of the Board of ICDSM,
General Secretary of "Sloboda",
Foreign Relations Assistant to President Slobodan Milosevic
Klaus Hartmann,
Vice-Chairman of ICDSM,
Speaker of the German Section of ICDSM,
Vice-Chairman of the World Union of Freethinkers
---
Following we present the full text of the adopted ICDSM conclusions:
ON THE FUTURE WORK OF ICDSM
This paper contains theResults, Conclusions and Proposalsof a meeting
which was held in Scheveningen, June 28, 2003, beginning at 18:00 hrs,
after the demonstration march and rallies organized in front of the
Hague “Tribunal” and the Scheveningen prison by Serbian organisations
and ICDSM.
Prof. Dr. Velko Valkanov and Klaus Hartmann introduced the meeting,
giving reports about their visit toPresidentSlobodan Milosevic,
providing a basis for the discussion and making proposals for the
future work of ICDSM. These proposals were supplemented by Vladimir
Krsljanin. A discussion paper was submitted by the German Section of
ICDSM.
It was decided that the main results of the meeting should be
summarized and sent to all officials of ICDSM who would be requested to
give their comments. Such comments should reach the sender by July 31,
2003, at latest.
A. The events of the last months have revealed that
there is a need to define some basic principles of co-operation in
ICDSM:
1. Officials of ICDSM work together on the basis of complete
equality and equal rights.
2. Each official of ICDSM has the right to decide on the function
he may be asked to exercise for ICDSM, either to accept it or to refuse
it. He has no right to nominate other officials or to depose them.
3. Public attacks on officials or members of ICDSM are not
permissible and incompatible with a function in ICDSM. Any criticism or
argument may be expressed only internally and directly.
4. Co-operation within ICDSM is based in substance on the following
demands:
- Release of Slobodan Milosevic and public promotion of his
internationally important struggle for truth, justice, freedom and
national dignity
- Abolishment of the illegal ICTY and release of all its
prisoners
- Opposition to NATO aggression against Yugoslavia and Serbian
people, demand for compensation for damage and for criminal
accountability of NATO leaders
- Defence of international law, equality and independence, national
sovereignty and dignity of all countries.
- Opposition to neo-colonialism of the „New World Order“.
Agreement on other issues, such as developments in other countries and
regions or political concepts of society is neither a condition nor a
subject matter of work within ICDSM.
B. The most important future activities:
5. A matter of highest priority is the mobilisation of funds for
the defence. This regards the presently incurred costs as well as the
considerably higher funds, which will be required during the
“half-time” of the defence. The funds shall be collected on a national
basis and shall be put at the immediate disposal of SLOBODA. Different
concrete methods have been proposed and discussed. In order to
co-ordinate these activities it is suggested to form a “financial
committee” or working group. The German Section has offered the
co-operation of its “financial manager” Peter Betscher. Other members
and national branches are requested to make their own proposals of
persons to co-operate in this body.
6. Having in mind the highest importance of the actions against the
worst forms of violation of the human rights of President Milosevic –
in the first place against the threats to his life and health, against
the attacks on his family, need to fight his illegal detention, and as
the most actual: the strongest possible demand for at least one year
long provisional release for recovery and appropriate preparation of
his defense case, – public, political and legal activity of all
national branches is required. At the same time, ICDSM will form a task
force headed by Professor Bernardini to propose and organize legal
actions before the international bodies for human rights protection.
All the lawyers within the ICDSM should give concrete contributions to
the further strengthening of the defense. ICDSM should create
conditions for providing President Milosevic with more permanent legal
assistance in his struggle. As a first step in this direction, the
proposal for
the permanent engagement of Ms.Tiphaine Dickson, attorney from Canada,
has been supported.
7. Each of the national branches should organize appropriate
concrete activities to support the preparation of the defense case such
as: collection of evidence, proposing the appropriate international
witnesses of defense, aiding the works of Sloboda and the future Hague
defense team. Special attention should be paid to the media work and
the public promotion of the results of President Milosevic’s struggle
for the truth and justice at The Hague.
8. The Vidovdan protest events at The Hague have been considered as
successful. Broad participation of Serbs from the Western European
countries has been very important. The content of the speeches and the
high rank of Serbian and international speakers and other participants
have secured the seriousness and strength of the events. The local
organization has been good, accurate and reliable.
The key role of the broad activities of the German branch of ICDSM has
been emphasized and their successful interaction with Serbian groups in
Germany in particular. This experience should be used as a positive
example for the future activities of ICDSM.
Established cooperation of ICDSM with prominent Serbian representatives
and groups from Germany, Great Britain, France, Austria, The
Netherlands and other European countries will continue and further
develop.
Since the whole event produced a positive public and mobilizing effect,
similar actions should be repeated periodically. It has been proposed
that the next protest at The Hague takes place by the end of October
2003.
C. Organizational matters
9. The enhancement of the efficiency of work, being an unquestioned
necessity, should include a reappraisal of the leadership structures,
taking into account the views expressed by president Milosevic about
the efficiency and equality necessary for the successful work if the
ICDSM. The question of the most adequate leadership structures should
not be decided hastily, as this is a matter reserved for discussion by
officials and national branches of the International Committee.
10. The two co-chairmen at the top of the International Committee have
been symbolizing the fact that it originated from the movements in
Europe and the US, which created public tribunals condemning NATO
aggression on Yugoslavia. Besides, the reputation of both co-chairmen
gave positive impact to the prestige of ICDSM. The multitude
vice-chairmen, as originally intended, should be either leaders of
national branches of ICDSM or persons who, by the amount and quality of
their activities give the most important impact in serving our cause in
their respective countries.
11. SLOBODA/Freedom Association, the Yugoslav Section of ICDSM, has to
have the leading function in the Board of the International Committee
as organizer of the immediate defence work and as crucial factor in the
peoples’ struggle for freedom and against the colonial regime in
Belgrade.
- The tasks of a working committee of ICDSM will be given to
SLOBODA. Vladimir Krsljanin, the secretary of SLOBODA, will have the
function of the co-ordinator of the Board of ICDSM
12. Besides the existing co-chairmen and vice-chairmen, the members of
the Board of the International Committee should be chosen mainly among
the spokespersons and co-ordinators of the most active national
branches or sections of ICDSM. The main criteria should be their
capacity to promote the cause of ICDSM in the framework of an
organizational structure at the national level, which should be capable
to make alliances based on the global importance of the struggle of
President Milosevic, including with the Serbian/Yugoslav community.
- The forthcoming establishment of national branches in Great Britain,
France, The Netherlands, Canada and the US is applauded, as well as
planned broadening of the activity of the committee in Italy and the
reported activity of the Irish branch of ICDSM. Vladimir Krsljanin is
charged with the task of co-opting in the Board of ICDSM, after
consultations, a representative of each of the national branches which
are not represented in the Board.
- The request for membership in ICDSM made by the Russian Social
Committee for thedefense of Slobodan Milosevic is granted with
appreciation for their extremely important activities and as a proof of
a wide recognition of the global importance of the struggle of Slobodan
Milosevic, which requires coordination of all organizations and groups
struggling for his release. Vladimir Krsljanin is charged with the
task, to consult with the Russian committee on its adequate
representation and to take care of the follow up.
13. Statements on behalf of ICDSM, if not adopted after consultation of
all Board members, will be made only by the two co-chairmen and the
co-ordinator, while the representatives of the national sections and
branches and other members of the Board will speak only in their own
name. Any change in the composition of the Board can be made only on
the basis of a broad agreement among its members. For this purpose the
co-ordinator consults with the other members of the Board in order to
reach an agreed decision.
---
YOUR HELP
The work for the defense of Slobodan Milosevic totally depends on your
donations.
For more details, see: http://www.sloboda.org.yu/finappeal.htm
Send a check to our address:
SLOBODA
Rajiceva 16, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia and Montenegro, Yugoslavia
or transfer your donation to our account using the instructions at:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/pomocdet.htm
---
SLOBODA urgently needs your donation.
Please find the detailed instructions at:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/pomoc.htm
To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/ (Sloboda/Freedom association)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)
http://www.free-slobo.de/ (German section of ICDSM)
http://www.wpc-in.org/ (world peace council)
http://www.geocities.com/b_antinato/ (Balkan antiNATO center)
=== 2: Zyuganov: Freedom for Slobodan Milosevic! ===
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
Social massacre in Serbia
7.
A) Serbian Regime Passes Sweeping Law To Purge Former
Officials From All Government, Public, Media Positions
B) Last US Sanctions Lifted As Serbia And Montenegro
'Integrate Into International Community'
C) German Businesses To Invest In Serbia
8.
Serbia: Workers' protests held in Nis, Kragujevac
9.
58 COMPANIES IN SERBIA PRIVATIZED IN APRIL; PROPERTY OF PRIVATIZED
ENTERPRISES WILL BE PROTECTED, VLAHOVIC
10.
Free press under fire in Serbia (by David Binder)
11.
Serbia prepares ground for oil privitisation
12.
Financial Times:
A) River traffic falls as users get Danube blues
B) Walk-out at central bank strips Serbia of top economic talent
13.
THREE WAZ [GERMAN] TOP MANAGERS TO HEAD POLITIKA
14. SERBIAN PREMIER VISITS USA:
A. ZIVKOVIC FOR STRONGER TIES BETWEEN WASHINGTON AND BELGRADE
B. POWELL PRAISES SERBIAN, SCG GOVERNMENTS AND BACKS REFORMIST COURSE
C. ZIVKOVIC ON TALKS WITH PIERRE RICHARD PROSPER
D. ZIVKOVIC AND SVILANOVIC MEET CONGRESSMEN IN WASHINGTON
E. US CONGRESS INCREASES AID TO 135 ML DLRS ["AGAINST ORGANIZED CRIME"]
F. Zivkovic: Belgrade, Washington Becoming Allies
G. ZIVKOVIC:US SECRETARY OF STATE PROMISED PARTICIPATION OF SERBIAN
COMPANIES IN IRAQ'S RECONSTRUCTION
H. SERBIAN PREMIER: CASE OF FORMER BOSNIAN SERB LEADER [MLADIC] TO BE
CLOSED BY END OF YEAR
I. ZIVKOVIC ALL SMILES AFTER US VISIT
15.
CONTINUING DROUGHT COULD SPELL DISASTER
16. SERBIAN MILITARY PURGES TO ESCALATE:
SCG BEGINS MILITARY SHAKE-UP; Chief of Military Intelligence dismissed;
TADIC: POSSIBLE MILITARY COOPERATION WITH ISRAEL
17.
[Serbia-Montenegro Minister of International Economic Relations Branko]
LUKOVAC SAYS BOTH SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO SHOULD BE INDEPENDENT
=== 7 ===
Da: kiosk
Data: Mar 3 Giu 2003 11:49:30 Europe/Rome
A: anti-imperialiste@...
HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
A) Serbian Regime Passes Sweeping Law To Purge Former
Officials From All Government, Public, Media Positions
B) Last US Sanctions Lifted As Serbia And Montenegro
'Integrate Into International Community'
C) German Businesses To Invest In Serbia
A.
http://www.rferl.org/newsline/2003/06/4-SEE/see-020603.asp
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty- June 2, 2003
SERBIA PASSES SWEEPING LUSTRATION LAW
The Serbian parliament approved a lustration law on 30
May which, if strictly enforced, could prove one of
the toughest measures in postcommunist Europe aimed at
excluding former officials and their supporters from
political power, university life, the security forces,
and the media, RFE/RL reported. PM
B.
http://www.seeurope.net/en/Story.php?StoryID=40794&LangID=1
Seeurope.net - June 2, 2003
Last US Sanctions Lifted
The latest decision by US President George Bush spells
the official end of US sanctions against Serbia-Montenegro, a US
Treasury representatives said Saturday.
Taylor Gorfin told media that the sanctions had been lifted gradually
and no more now remained.
Bush’s decision to lift national emergency orders
against Belgrade was another positive signal of
support for Serbia-Montenegro’s integration into the
[inter]national community, said Belgrade’s ambassador
to Washington, Ivan Vujicic, reported radio B92.
Serbian Prime Minister Zoran Zivkovic told Belgrade’s
BK Television that he expected that US Secretary of
State Colin Powell would certify further financial
support for Serbia-Montenegro by June 15.
He described US financial assistance as significant,
but added that it was even more important that the US
now had no further political demands.
C.
http://www.serbia.sr.gov.yu/news/2003-06/02/329470.html
Serbia Info - June 2, 2003
German businesses to invest in Serbia
Belgrade, June 2, 2003 - Serbian Deputy Minister of
Transport and Telecommunications Miodrag Jocic said
Monday that Germany has announced a €30 million aid
package for Serbia's traffic infrastructure
development. At the opening of a forum gathering
entrepreneurs from Serbia and the North
Rhine-Westphalia province of Germany at Belgrade's
Hotel Hyatt, Jocic said that the aim of the conference
is to attract German investors to invest in Serbia's
transport, energy and mining, construction, and
spatial planning sectors.
Joerg Hennerkes, the Secretary of North
Rhine-Westphalia's Transport Ministry, said that
German businessmen should get as much information as
possible about prospective forms of cooperation in
these fields.
German Ambassador to Serbia and Montenegro Kurt
Leonberger said that Serbia has created a stable
political framework for foreign investment.
Another field in which Serbia needs a partner is air
transport. Deputy Minister of Transport and
Telecommunications Dragoljub Trgovcevic said that
cooperation is necessary for the building of a "cargo
centre" at Belgrade Airport.
Trgovcevic stressed that the airport has a very
favourable position which can provide the cheapest and
quickest transport of goods from the east to Europe.
He added that an airport modernisation project has
been prepared, and that total investment amounts to
some million.
Of the total amount, the European Investment Bank and
the Airport have provided million. Trgovcevic said
that tenders have been called for the modernisation of
the two existing passenger terminals, announcing that
the works should begin in February 2004.
=== 8 ===
Subj:[yugoslaviainfo] [Central] Serbia: Workers' protests held in Nis,
Kragujevac
Date:6/19/03 7:19:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From:p-tosic
To:Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli.
Sent from the Internet
[ The word 'Nezavisnost' means 'Independence' in Serbian. Trade union
'Nezavisnost' is one of the largest such organizations of industrial
workers in Serbia. ]
Serbia: Workers' protests held in Nis, Kragujevac
June 18, 2003 7:18pm
site on 18 June
Kragujevac, Nis: Thousands of workers protested today in front of the
town hall in the central Serbian city of Kragujevac. The demonstrators
were demanding dismissal of the Serbian government, full employment and
the establishment of a social dialogue.
Addressing the protesters, the leader of the Alliance of Independent
Unions of Serbia, Milenko Smiljanic, said that Serbia was on its knees
and the workers in the streets, adding that the situation could no
longer be tolerated. "When they ask me what the privatization process
will be like I tell them it will be slow, because many of those taking
part will end up in
jail," said Smiljanic.
The majority of employees from state-owned companies in Kragujevac
joined the demonstration, together with workers from other large
centres in the region.
Thousands of workers also took to the streets in the southern Serbian
city of Nis today, demanding that the Serbian government take steps
"for the salvation of Serbia's workers and economy". The Nezavisnost
Union, which organized the demonstration, has called its members to
rally in Belgrade on
25 June. Union leader Miodrag Randjelovic denied claims that the
demonstration was politically motivated, describing it as a
socio-economic protest. "We will not allow one more worker to be left
without a job or out on the street. We urge the government to come to
its senses," said Randjelovic, warning that the union would call for
the dismissal of the government and extraordinary parliamentary
elections.
Organizers claimed the workers came from more than a dozen towns and
cities throughout Serbia.
Source: Radio B92 text web site, Belgrade, in English 1850 gmt 18 Jun 03
=== 9 ===
58 COMPANIES IN SERBIA PRIVATIZED IN APRIL
BELGRADE, June 18 (Beta) - The director of the Serbian Privatization
Agency, Mirko Cvetkovic, stated on Wednesday that 58 companies were
sold in April, out of the 100 that have been offered for sale.
"Out of the total number of sold companies, two were sold at
tenders, 49 at auctions, and seven on the capital market," Cvetkovic
said at the session of the Serbian Legislature's Privatization
Committee.
He said that 7,214 workers were employed by these companies.
Cvetkovic announced an increase in sales in June, explaining
that 80 auctions have been scheduled, and that the sale of companies
dropped in May because they were busy with closing accounts.
PROPERTY OF PRIVATIZED ENTERPRISES WILL BE PROTECTED, VLAHOVIC
BELGRADE, July 22 (Tanjug) - The Serbian Ministry of
Economy and Privatization, in cooperation with other
ministries, will protect the private property of
privatized enterprises in the same way as it does with
other private companies in view of the fact that the
ownership transformation is aimed at building a more
efficient economy in which private property would
prevail, Minister Aleksandar Vlahovic said on Tuesday.
Speaking at a meeting on the protection of private
property interests in the post-privatization process
at the Serbian Chamber of Commerce and Industry,
Vlahovic said that enterprises could not be
restructured of privatized without partnership between
the Privatization Agency, trade union, state and
business associations.
Generally speaking, new owners encounter no problems
when they take over enterprises, although there are
exceptions, Vlahovic said and announced the adoption
of a law on denationalization by the end of the year,
under which original owners of enterprises would
receive financial compensation.
The state has obligations towards the original owners,
rather than the new owners, and the state allocates
five percent of privatization income for financial
compensation, he said.
President of the League for Property Protection
Slavenko Grgurevic said that the key problem lay in
the fact that the minister was urging the protection
of private property after privatization.
Original owners will sue the state and demand the
realization of their rights through the Council of
Europe, i.e. court at Strasbourg, Grgurevic said.
=== 10 ===
http://www.msnbc.com/news/931485.asp
Free press under fire in Serbia
U.S. protests new pressures on media
After the March assassination of Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic, whose
death was mourned by tens of thousands, Serbia's new government has
targeted the country's independent media.
By David Binder
SPECIAL TO MSNBC
WASHINGTON, June 26 - Little noticed outside the country, the Serbian
government's crackdown on organized crime after the March 12
assassination of Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic has included repeated
attacks on the independent press. Newspapers have been closed,
journalists have been fined exorbitantly for alleged libel of
government officials by compliant courts and the media have accused the
government of censorship. The moves have drawn criticism from U.S. and
European officials, apparently to little avail. But that may be
changing.
IN ADDITION, the Serbian government has packed the nine-member state
Broadcasting Agency Council with its supporters including at least one
of questionable origin.
These actions have prompted protests and expressions of concern by U.S.
Ambassador William Montgomery, Ian Willem Blankert of the European
Commission and international press organizations such as the New
York-based Committee to
Protect Journalists. Yet until now, there has been no outcry from the
general public in Serbia.
The chief villain in the eyes of Serbian journalists is Vladimir "Baby"
Popovic, a flamboyant figure who is currently head of the coalition
government's Office of Communications.
Popovic, 44, has had a meteoric career, starting as a "brilliant"
accordion player, according those who know him, and working in Belgrade
as a hotel waiter, a maitre d? and then a budding businessman. His
marketing firm, Spektra, brought him into
contact with Zoran Djindjic and other politicians who helped topple
President Slobodan Milosevic three years ago. He then became the
Belgrade representative of Ogilvy & Mather, the global marketing firm.
He grew wealthy, bought apartments in several countries, collected art
and was reputed to have "outstanding success with women," one Serbian
paper reported. His moniker, "Baby," apparently alludes to his youthful
face.
BACK IN GOVERNMENT
But Djindjic, apparently disturbed by Popovic's continuing business
endeavors as a government employee, got rid of him last October.
Popovic resurfaced in March after the assassination of Djindjic, when
the government declared a national state of emergency, in his former
job. During the 42-day "emergency," in which more than 10,000 citizens
were detained and 4,000 arrested, a series of harsh measures viewed as
hostile to the media were instituted.
Nacional, a sensationalist tabloid, was banned and, three weeks later,
its assets were confiscated. Another newspaper, Identitet, was also
closed down. Heavy fines were imposed on two provincial television
stations, including TV Leskovac. An edition of the weekly Svedok was
confiscated because it carried an interview with Milorad Lukovic
Legija, an organized crime figure on the run after he was accused of
masterminding the plot to murder Djindjic.
STIFF FINES
Lawsuits were filed against journalists of the popular tabloid Vecernje
Novosti and the independent television-radio station B-92. One of
Popovic's libel suits, against Zeljko Cvijanovic, the editor of the
weekly Blic News, was based on an article published 11 months earlier
and resulted in a 50,000 dinar ($900) fine on May 30.
That may seem small, but in a country where the average income is about
$100 a month, it is hefty.
Cvijanovic quit his job, saying "it is impossible to edit Blic News in
line with the principles of free and open journalism."
One prominent journalist, Aleksandar Tijanic, responded by suing
Popovic for libel, charging that he had "linked him to a media pressure
group."
Tijanic declared: "Each and every question which is stifled by force
today will remain open forever."
Popovic's latest suit is against NIN, a respectable and nationally
prominent weekly, for "defamation of character." Filed last week, it
demands 1 million dinars for causing "emotional distress" to the
plaintiff. At issue was a question published by NIN about Popovic's
status as a government employee after Djindjic distanced himself from
Popovic. In April that same question, posed by Gordana Susa, a TV
reporter,
prompted Popovic to call her and threaten her.
At present there are more than 170 libel suits pending in Serbian
courts.
U.S. PRESSURE REBUFFED
According to America diplomats, Montgomery approached Prime Minister
Zoran Zivkovic in April suggesting that Popovic leave his post and was
told it would happen within 10 days. It didn't. Instead Zivkovic
inveighed repeatedly against the Serbian press, accusing journalists of
carrying their complaints to "Western embassies."
In the absence of action on the Popovic situation, Montgomery
ostentatiously visited the editorial offices of NIN on Tuesday to offer
what its journalists interpreted as his support in the defamation case.
The ugliness of the situation has reached the point where some
observers are comparing it to the Milosevic period and even to the
Communist era of Josip Broz Tito. Zivkovic appears to have grasped that.
In an interview this week he declared: "As head of government I don't
want such a battle with the media." Branislav Lecic, his minister of
culture and media, has begun meetings with a group of Serbian editors
to hear their objections to the new
information law and to see if a compromise can be reached.
David Binder has covered the Balkans for four decades.
=== 11 ===
HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
http://www.b92.net/english/news/index.php?nav_id=23651&style=headlines
B92 - July 10, 2003
Serbia prepares ground for oil privitisation
BELGRADE -- Wednesday – The Serbian government is to
dismiss tomorrow the acting manager of the national oil company,
apparently smoothing the path to privatization, B92 learnt today from a
government source.
Asked if the information was correct, Serbia’s energy
minister said that her ministry had proposed new
legislation by which the general manager of Serbian
Oil Industries (NIS) would be appointed by the
government, rather than parliament. Kori Udovicki
confirmed that the acting manager could be dismissed
in the event the law gets bogged down in parliament.
Jelica Putnikovic, a journalist with Frankfurt
Serbian-language daily Vesti, said that though
Dimitrije Vukcevic was coming to end of his tenure,
the dismissal coincided with the start of
privatization proceedings. “Obviously they want to
have a man they can cooperate with, since there have
been many unofficial indications that Vukcevic was not
always loyal.”
Vukcevic told B92 he had yet to be informed he is out
of a job. Unofficial sources suggest he will be
replaced by Pavle Vuckovic, the current director of
Energoprojekt.
=== 12 ===
FINANCIAL TIMES (UK)
From: "decani3"
To: Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli.
A. River traffic falls as users get Danube blues
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/
FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1057562528506
River traffic falls as users get Danube blues
By Robert Wright
Published: July 18 2003 5:00 | Last Updated: July 18 2003 5:00
The three barges makean impressive sight as they nose down the Danube
in the Serbian city of Novi Sad, strapped abreast of each other.
The tug pushing them positions itself carefully, then takes its
load past the imposing Petrovaradin citadel and through a gap in a
makeshift pontoon bridge. They race on towards a bend in the river,
pushed by a powerful current.
The barges are as impressive for the surprising confidence they
represent in transport on the Danube as for their size; their decks are
loaded with new cars - the kind of high-value cargo the Danube has
previously struggled to attract.
Yet many other users have given up on freight transport on
Europe's second-longest river. According to the Danube Commission,
which governs many of the river's affairs, only 7 per cent of the
river's carrying capacity is in use, against about 72 per cent for the
Rhine, Europe's busiest river.
Traffic on the river reached its peak at 91m tonnes of cargo in
1987, when most countries on the Danube were part of the Comecon
trading bloc of communist countries. By 1998, the last year for which
full figures are available, the figure was just 30m tonnes, even before
the problems of the Kosovo war.
A visit to Novi Sad, capital of Serbia's northern province of
Vojvodina, shows why the river is still struggling to recover.
A European Union-funded project, which finished on June 16, saw the
river cleared of wreckage and unexploded bombs left over from
destruction of the city's three Danube bridges by Nato forces in the
1999 Kosovo war.
But the pontoon bridge - a floating replacement for one of the
destroyed bridges - is open only three nights a week, soon to rise to
four, and vessels must pay to pass through. A poorly placed temporary
replacement railway bridge also causes problems for some vessels.
On top of that the Serbian government last month started requiring
vessels with high-value cargoes to obtain substantial customs
guarantees before passing through the river's Serbian section.
The decision brought almost a complete halt to cargo shipments on the
river for more than three weeks. It was finally withdrawn later in the
month under strong international pressure.
The affair has added to frustration among the Danube's users after a
series of problems during the 1990s caused by Croatia's war of
independence and international sanctions against Serbia.
The frustration has been exacerbated this year by unusually low water
levels resulting from drought across much of Hungary, Croatia and
Serbia. The river has become impassable at several points.
"People are very concerned about what will happen next," says
Edgar Martin of Danube-research.com, a UK-based consultancy. "People
are worried about what the next tax or customs fee or something will
be."
Nor is there much immediate prospect of an improvement in conditions.
Environmental objections have prevented the dredging of some of the
river's shallowest sections, particularly in Bavaria. In Novi Sad,
meanwhile, Milan Jazic, who handles Danube matters for the city
council, says the city continues to need the pontoon bridge as well as
a makeshift fixed road bridge hastily erected in 2000.
The pontoon bridge will be removed only when the Most Slobode (Freedom
Bridge) - an eight-lane suspension bridge - is reopened. The €40m
($45m, £28m) bridge reconstruction, funded mainly by the European
Union, is due to be finished in December 2004.
But flooding last summer and a cold winter have delayed work,
leaving contractors struggling to meet the deadline.
The car-carrying barges show, however, that the Danube's
substantial cost advantages over rail and road alternatives remain
powerful incentives. The EU-funded clearing of the river at Novi Sad
has also made traffic easier, partly because it has reduced the risk
for vessels' insurers.
More frequent opening of the bridge and a lower fee for passing through
it have helped to stimulate traffic.
Danail Nedialkov, director-general of the Danube Commission's
secretariat, says 2,338 vessels passed through the bridge in the second
quarter of this year, up from 1,607 in the first period and 5,424 in
the whole of last year.
Yet there remains growing frustration on all sides at the slow
pace of improvement.
"It's just not providing a reliable service at the moment," Mr
Martin of Danube-research.com says of the river. "These [problems] need
to be dealt with urgently, then it will provide cheap, environmentally
friendly transport."
B. Walk-out at central bank strips Serbia of top economic talent
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/
FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1057562562347
Walk-out at central bank strips Serbia of top economic talent
By Eric Jansson in Belgrade
Published: July 19 2003 5:00 | Last Updated: July 19 2003 5:00
Serbia's senior central bankers resigned en masse yesterday,
protesting against controversial central bank reforms approved by
parliament.
The resignations of governor Mladjan Dinkic, two of the bank's
three vice-governors and several department chiefs strip Serbia's
leadership of some of its top economic talent.
Radovan Jelasic, one of the resigning vice-governors, said he and Mr
Dinkic would continue working at the bank only until "a regular
handover can be arranged". One vice-governor, Vesna Arsic, retains her
post.
Mr Dinkic and his team are credited with pushing through tough banking
reforms, taming Serbia's once-soaring inflation rate and finding ways
for Serbs to reclaim foreign funds frozen under the former regime of
Slobodan Milosevic.
But they fell foul of Zoran Zivkovic, the prime minister, and
government ministers this year after Mr Dinkic's private think-tank,
G17, converted itself into a political party sometimes critical of
government policy.
Especially tough criticism was reserved for the new reforms
approved yesterday by parliament. Mr Dinkic says that the legislation
undermines the central bank's independence by giving MPs the power to
both nominate and appoint top bank officials. Government officials say
the bank's independence is not threatened.
Ministers say the bill was drafted originally as a matter of
housekeeping, as the central bank is being transformed into a solely
Serbian institution, following the formal dissolution of Yugoslavia
five months ago.
Ministers also say the bank governor deserves credit for carrying out
some of Serbia's most important reforms to date.
But Mr Jelasic says the bank's achievements have provoked
suspicion and jealousy among ministers whose popularity is flagging.
Mr Dinkic had already taken pre-emptive action against his removal by
trying to undermine the government with allegations of corruption among
senior government officials.
Prosecutors demanded this week that he present evidence. Mr Dinkic
replied that it had already been handed to police but was being ignored.
Whatever becomes of Mr Dinkic's allegations, which have been
reported widely in Belgrade's newspapers, rifts between Serbia's
reformers are clearly growing rather than healing since Zoran Djindjic,
the former prime minister, was murdered in March.
=== 13 ===
THREE WAZ TOP MANAGERS TO HEAD POLITIKA
BELGRADE,July 18 (Beta)-WAZ executive director Bodo
Hombach is the new president of the managing board of
the Politika Newspapers & Magazines company, founded
last year by the Belgradebased Politika company and
this German newspaper concern.
Politika GM Mirko Djekic told BETA on July 18 that one
of the WAZ biggest shareholders, Luc Gland, and the
chief financial auditor of the concern, Markus
Bergman, were also appointed members of the Politika
managing board.
According to Djekic, the branches of this joint
ownership company will be opened in Podgorica, Novi
Sad and possibly some other towns in former
Yugoslavia, which will act as headquarters of the
existing, but also of new publications.
The managing board members, in addition to three WAZ
representatives, also include the Komercijalna Banka
chairman and the president of the Politika managing
board Ljubomir Mihajlovic, lawyer Strahinja
Kastratovic and Politika daily GM and editor in chief
Darko Ribnikar.
=== 14 ===
SERBIAN PREMIER VISITS USA:
A. ZIVKOVIC FOR STRONGER TIES BETWEEN WASHINGTON AND BELGRADE
LONDON, July 25 (Tanjug) - Serbian Prime Minister
Zoran Zivkovic has said the objective of his visit to
the United States is to deepen political dialogue and
promote cooperation between Washington and Belgrade.
This means there were no numbers, dates, or other such
things that people usually expect from such meetings.
This is the strengthening of political ties between
the two states and the objective is to persuade the
United States that Serbia can be a good partner in the
Balkans, while the other objective is to find a good
ally for all the tribulations in store at the
beginning of the 21st century, the prime minister said
in an interview to BBC Radio.
Asked about the predominant topic during his talks
with Secretary of State Colin Powell and national
security adviser Condoleezza Rice, Zivkovic said it
was their support to reforms and what has been done
through them in the past two and a half years,
especially in the past few months, the fight against
crime, and the state's stand on The Hague
international tribunal.
Talks also covered the participation of Serbian
companies in the reconstruction of Iraq and
possibilities for Serbia's business returning to the
United States, and a contract on normal trade
relations - the bill that has been tied up in the
Senate for quote some time, Zivkovic said.
B. POWELL PRAISES SERBIAN, SCG GOVERNMENTS AND BACKS REFORMIST COURSE
WASHINGTON, July 25 (Tanjug) - United States Secretary
of State Colin Powell has praised Serbian Prime
Minister Zoran Zivkovic and Serbia and Montenegro
Foreign Minister Goran Svilanovic for their resolve to
continue implementing political and economic reforms,
and for the support received from citizens following
the March assassination of Serbian prime minister
Zoran Djindjic.
Powell thanked the visiting ranking officials for the
good cooperation with Serbia in fighting terrorism,
and other issues of mutual interest when they were
leaving the State Department late Thursday afternoon
local time.
The talks were an opportunity for the US side to
express its constant support to the democratic reform
processes taking place in Serbia and Montenegro, a
State Department source told Tanjug.
Powell expressed the strong US support to the process
of SCG integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions,
and stressed support to general stability and progress
in that country, the source said.
C. ZIVKOVIC ON TALKS WITH PIERRE RICHARD PROSPER
WASHINGTON, July 24 (Beta) - Serbian Premier Zoran
Zivkovic said on July 24 that U.S. ambassador for war
crimes Pierre Richard Prosper was convinced that
Belgrade authorities were "adequately cooperating"
with the International Criminal Tribunal for the
Former Yugoslavia (ICTY).
"What Prosper said about our cooperation a few weeks
ago has been confirmed. He is convinced that we are
cooperating adequately with the ICTY and that is
true," Zivkovic told BETA in a telephone conversation,
after meeting Prosper in Washington.
Zivkovic is leading a joint delegation comprising
representatives of the Serbian and SerbianMontenegrin
governments.
Zivkovic and Prosper agreed that former Bosnian Serb
army commander Ratko Mladic "is the only indictee
particularly interesting to the ICTY and the U.S." "I
have repeated our opinion that Mladic's arrest is a
technical issue, meaning that if he is on our
territory he will be arrested, if not then there is
nothing we can do," Zivkovic said.
According to Zivkovic, one of the topics of
conversation was also the war crimes tribunal recently
formed in Serbia, which is due to start operating
soon.
The delegation is scheduled to hold talks with U.S.
Secretary of State Colin Powell and U.S. president's
national security adviser Condoleezza Rice in the late
evening hours (CET) of July 24.
D. ZIVKOVIC AND SVILANOVIC MEET CONGRESSMEN IN WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON, July 25 (Tanjug) - Serbian Prime Minister
Zoran Zivkovic and Serbia and Montenegro Foreign
Minister Goran Svilanovic will confer with prominent
congressmen in Washington on Friday, the second day of
their official visit to the United States, and they
will later also meet with editors and reporters of The
Washington Post, and attend a meeting at the Heritage
Foundation.
Zivkovic and Svilanovic first met with Congressman
Rahm Emanuel, the author of a resolution passed by the
House of Representatives paying tribute to recently
assassinated Serbian prime minister Zoran Djindjic.
The resolution said Djindjic was the chief organizer
and strategist of the opposition platform for the
presidential elections in Yugoslavia on Sept 24, 2000,
and the subsequent popular revolt on Oct 5, which led
to the ousting of Slobodan Milosevic and his
subsequent extradition to The Hague tribunal.
Today, the Serbian and SCG delegation will meet with
Congressman Pete Sessions, a great advocate of the
normalization of trade relations between the US and
SCG.
This evening, the delegation will meet with former US
ambassador to Yugoslavia Lawrence Eagleberger.
E. US CONGRESS INCREASES AID FOR SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO TO 135 ML DLRS
WASHINGTON, July 25 (Tanjug) - The United States
Congress House of Representatives has decided to raise
the planned 95 million dollar aid for Serbia to 100
million and the planned 18 million for Montenegro to
35 million, as support to fighting organized crime
there, Tanjug learned on Thursday.
Serbia has to meet certain conditions before receiving
this aid, mostly in connection with cooperation with
The Hague tribunal, ending support to Republika Srpska
and respect of human rights and laws.
The House on Wednesday passed legislature on the
distribution of funds abroad, financing exports, and
similar programs, worth 17 billion dollars, for the
coming fiscal year which begins on Oct 1 and ends on
Sept 30 next year.
F. Zivkovic: Belgrade, Washington Becoming Allies
BELGRADE, July 27 (BETA) - Relations between
Washington and Belgrade are becoming those of two
allies, Serbian Premier Zoran Zivkovic explained on
Saturday, while on a visit to U.S.
At a news conference following a meeting with U.S.
Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security
Adviser Condoleezza Rice, Zivkovic said he hoped the
U.S. would back Serbia-Montenegro's integration in
European and transatlantic institutions.
Zivkovic added that relations between the two
countries were at a 50-year high. "My goal and that of
my cabinet is to use these good relations in the
temptations that we will face, both at home and in the
region."
He expressed the hope that Serbia-Montenegro would
become a member of NATO's Partnership for Peace this
winter, "late this year or early next year."
In addition, Zivkovic said he expected U.S. support
for the union's European and Euroatlantic integration.
"We will have the U.S. there as an ally. There are
some conditions, some of which have existed for quite
some time -- the extradition of war crimes suspects
charged by the Hague Tribunal -- but given the speed
of the talks and the atmosphere it is clear that they
are not major conditions."
"The political dilemma of whether to arrest and
extradite Mladic does not exist... the only question
is if he is in our territory. By the end of the year
we will either find Mladic, arrest him, and extradite
him to The Hague or we will find a way to prove he is
not in our territory."
Commenting on a U.S. request for a treaty on the
non-extradition of U.S. citizens to the International
Criminal Court, Zivkovic stressed that
Serbia-Montenegro was in a special position.
"On the one hand Serbia-Montenegro is being asked to
extradite its own citizens to the Hague Tribunal, and
on the other we are being asked to sign a
non-extradition treaty with the U.S."
"This is not about choosing between the EU and U.S.,
but an internal issue. We hope that Washington will
understand our predicament," said Zivkovic.
http://www.beta.co.yu/eng/
BETA: Daily News Internet
July 28, 2003
G. ZIVKOVIC:US SECRETARY OF STATE PROMISED PARTICIPATION OF SERBIAN
COMPANIES IN IRAQ'S RECONSTRUCTION
WASHINGTON, Jul 26 (Tanjug) - Serbian Premier Zoran
Zivkovic has said in Washington that he had been
assured by US Secretary of State Colin Powell during
the latter's visit to Belgrade last March that Serbian
companies will be able to take part in Iraq's
reconstruction, and that Powell reiterated this
assurance when he conferred with Zivkovic Thursday.
Zivkovic told the press Friday evening that he had
informed Powell that he would cite this assurance in
his forthcoming talks with representatives of US
companies taking part in Iraq's reconstruction during
his current visit to the US, and that Powell gave his
approval.
Zivkovic said he and his delegation would confer with
executives of the leading US construction company
operating in Iraq on the participation of Serbian
companies in projects in Iraq, as well as on the US
company's participation in infrastructure projects in
Serbia. Zivkovic added he expects US companies to
intensify their presence in Serbia through the
privatization process and new investments in the
coming months.
H. SERBIAN PREMIER: CASE OF FORMER BOSNIAN SERB LEADER TO BE CLOSED BY
END OF YEAR
WASHINGTON, Jul 26 (Tanjug) - Serbian Premier Zoran
Zivkovic has said in Washington that agreement has
been reached with US officials that former Republika
Srpska army commander Ratko Mladic must be arrested by
the end of this year if he is in Serbia, or that proof
must be presented that he is not there.
At a press briefing Friday evening, the second day of
his visit to the US, Zivkovic ruled out the
participation of any third party in a possible arrest
operation, for which modalities are being worked out.
People more important than Mladic have been arrested
in Serbia, and there is therefore no need or legal
possibility of proceeding in a different manner in his
case, Zivkovic said, noting that there is no reliable
evidence at present on Mladic's presence in Serbia's
territory.
Cooperation with the UN war crimes tribunal is an
international commitment of Serbia-Montenegro (SCG),
and also a commitment in line with domestic law,
Zivkovic said, adding that arresting all indictees
found in Serbia's territory is only a technical issue.
US OFFICIAL SAYS RESPONSIBILITY FOR ARRESTING FORMER BOSNIAN SERB
COMMANDER LIES WITH SERBIAN GOVERNMENT
WASHINGTON, Jul 25 (Tanjug) - The State Department
ambassador-at-large for War Crimes Issues
Pierre-Richard Prosper told Tanjug Friday that the
greatest responsibility for arresting former Bosnian
Serb army commander Ratko Mladic lies with the Serbian
government.
The US believes that the Serbian government has the
responsibility, as well as technical and human
potentials to search its own territory, Prosper said.
Available information indicate that there is no reason
to believe that Mladic is not in Serbia. Search for
Mladic must be carried out in Serbia, he explained.
Secretary of State Colin Powell and US president's
Advisor for National Security Condoleezza Rice also
made this clear Thursday to Serbian Premier Zoran
Zivkovic and Serbia-Montenegro (SCG) Foreign Minister
Goran Svilanovic, Prosper said.
I. ZIVKOVIC ALL SMILES AFTER US VISIT
NEW YORK,July 30 (B92,VOA)- Serbia's prime minister
has hailed his visit to the US as a sign that good
relations between the two countries have been fully
restored.
"Relations between Serbia and the US are at a very
high level", Zoran Zivkovic told B92 at the end of a
week-long trip to the States. "All talks were between
partners of different size, wealth and power, but not
in terms of how they look on the real situation in
Serbia and the US."
Speaking to Voice of America last night, the premier
said that "after a long time we can now say that, when
we are speaking with an official, we can be certain
that he believes what we are saying, that he shares
our visions and that he is ready to help resolve our
problems".
He dismissed speculation that the Belgrade delegation
had come under pressure regarding the fractious
political situation in Serbia and the worsening plight
of the independent media during discussions with US
officials.
The prime minister said that "exclusively for B92" he
could list the issues not addressed: "They were:
corruption, the situation in the governing coalition,
the Democratic Party and relations between the
government and media. These are the issues that
weren't addressed during these seven days, and that
shouldn't surprise anyone. Those who awaited this
visit with malice and a desire for it to be just
another way of putting pressure on the Serbian
government must be disappointed."
Zivkovic added that he expected Congress to adopt
legislation on the resumption of normal trade
relations with Serbia by early autumn.
=== 15 ===
CONTINUING DROUGHT COULD SPELL DISASTER
BELGRADE,July 28 (Beta)-Andjelka Mihajlov, Serbian
Minister for the Protection of Natural Resources and
the Environment, today announced that river currents
have this month dropped to minimum levels; with the
Danube falling to its absolute minimum at Bezdan,
which was never recorded throughout the entire 20th
century.
Speaking at a joint session of the Serbian
Parliament's Environment Protection Committee and
Agriculture and Water Committee, Mihajlov explained
that annual minimums are not usually reached until
September or October and thus this year's drought
could dramatically worsen if rain does not fall and
adequate measures are not applied.
One such protective measure, according to Mihajlov,
should be the increase in pollution control, as low
water levels contribute to industrial and urban waste
pollution by concentrating poisonous elements.
Srdja Popovic, environmental advisor to PM Zoran
Zivkovic, noted that the extremes of climate, which
caused flooding in Serbia this time last year, are
triggered by global climate changes.
Agriculture Minister Stojan Jeftic said that the state
has already contacted neighboring countries and
requested that accumulated water be re-directed to
rivers flowing through Serbia in an effort to raise
the water level. However, the entire region is
suffering drought and the responses were negative.
The parliamentary committees are to organize urgent
analysis of the worst affected areas before they
re-convene at another joint session in a month's time.
=== 16 ===
Da: Rick Rozoff
Data: Mer 30 Lug 2003 18:20:00 Europe/Rome
Oggetto: US-NATO Orders: Serbian Military Purges To Escalate
[Note: Serbia-Montenegro 'President' Zoran Zivkovic
has just returned from Washington.]
http://www.rferl.org/newsline/2003/07/4-SEE/see-300703.asp
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty - July 30, 2003
SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO BEGINS MILITARY SHAKE-UP
-[Defense Minister] Tadic went on to Jerusalem, where
he began a three-day visit to discuss military
cooperation with Israeli government officials.
Members of Serbia and Montenegro's Supreme Defense
Council agreed in Meljine near Herceg Novi on 29 July
to accept Defense Ministry proposals to sack an
unspecified number of officers, whose names will be
made public "in 10 days' time," RFE/RL's South Slavic
and Albanian Languages Service reported. Belgrade
media suggest that one man on the list is military
intelligence chief General Radoslav Skoric, who was
allegedly sacked for keeping "too close" ties to the
Bosnian Serb military. In related news, Defense
Minister Boris Tadic and Montenegrin Prime Minister
Milo Djukanovic signed an agreement providing for
Montenegrin police to take over control of
Montenegro's borders from the military. Tadic went on
to Jerusalem, where he began a three-day visit to
discuss military cooperation with Israeli government
officials. PM
http://www.makfax.com.mk/news1-a.asp?br=46227
MakFax (Macedonia) - July 30, 2003
SCG: Chief of Military Intelligence dismissed
The Supreme Defense Council of Serbia & Montenegro has
put a number of military chiefs on retirement list,
including the Head of Military Intelligence, Radoslav
Shkoric, said Belgrade’s media.
Sources close to top military officials say Shkoric
was pushing for close co-operation with the Army of
Republika Srpska.
This is a second shift of commanding structures in
military intelligence following the assassination of
Serbia’s PM Zoran Djindjic. The Head of National
Security, General Aca Tomic was replaced and kept in
custody in the aftermath of Djindjic’s assassination.
---
TADIC: POSSIBLE MILITARY COOPERATION WITH ISRAEL
TEL AVIV,July 30 (Beta)-Serbia&Montenegro Defense
Minister Boris Tadic said on July 30 that he had
talked with senior managers of the Izreali military
and aircraft industry about possible modes of
cooperation and that there was a possibility of
reaching an agreement.
Tadic told BETA in a telephone conversation that the
projects included a certain type of automatic rifle
produced by Serbia&Montenegro and unmanned aerial
vehicles.
Tadic said that these vehicles had important software
components, which could be produced in Serbia and
Montenegro. He added that they had also considered the
possibility of modernizing Russianmade helicopters,
which are commonly used in Serbia&Montenegro and the
neighboring countries.
Tadic, who is on a threeday visit to Israel, said that
an expert meeting had been scheduled, to discuss the
possibility of reaching an agreement with the Isreali
aircraft industry on one of these projects.
He said that he had talked with Izreali Prime Minister
Shimon Perez about the peace process in the Middle
East and the Balkans and the solutions that could be
applied in both cases.
=== 17 ===
LUKOVAC SAYS BOTH SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO SHOULD BE INDEPENDENT
PODGORICA, July 29 (Tanjug) - Serbia-Montenegro
Minister of International Economic Relations Branko
Lukovac on Tuesday reiterated that the state union
members would fare better if they were independent
states.
Stressing he believed that Serbia and Montenegro
"should be equal with all other European states,"
Lukovac said that "what has been done with the Action
Plan is an outstanding achievement, freeing us of
barriers that we will build some borders among
ourselves and place new obstacles." "In this document,
we succeeded in including the best values of the EU
members ensuring a free flow of people, goods and
capital, so that we removed fear that this might
affect the mutual relations of Serbia and Montenegro
in any form of their existence, either as a community
or as independent states," Lukovac told Radio Free
Europe. According to him, now that Serbia and
Montenegro have taken European standards and built
good relations and strong ties on the EU model, one
may say that it is senseless for states with full
economic responsibilities not to have their voice and
clear status in the international community. "There is
no reason for international community's fear that good
relations between Serbia and Montenegro may be
jeopardized by a change in their state and legal
status and they will be preserved the best if
everyone's right to decide on oneself is recognized,"
Lukovac said.
7.
A) Serbian Regime Passes Sweeping Law To Purge Former
Officials From All Government, Public, Media Positions
B) Last US Sanctions Lifted As Serbia And Montenegro
'Integrate Into International Community'
C) German Businesses To Invest In Serbia
8.
Serbia: Workers' protests held in Nis, Kragujevac
9.
58 COMPANIES IN SERBIA PRIVATIZED IN APRIL; PROPERTY OF PRIVATIZED
ENTERPRISES WILL BE PROTECTED, VLAHOVIC
10.
Free press under fire in Serbia (by David Binder)
11.
Serbia prepares ground for oil privitisation
12.
Financial Times:
A) River traffic falls as users get Danube blues
B) Walk-out at central bank strips Serbia of top economic talent
13.
THREE WAZ [GERMAN] TOP MANAGERS TO HEAD POLITIKA
14. SERBIAN PREMIER VISITS USA:
A. ZIVKOVIC FOR STRONGER TIES BETWEEN WASHINGTON AND BELGRADE
B. POWELL PRAISES SERBIAN, SCG GOVERNMENTS AND BACKS REFORMIST COURSE
C. ZIVKOVIC ON TALKS WITH PIERRE RICHARD PROSPER
D. ZIVKOVIC AND SVILANOVIC MEET CONGRESSMEN IN WASHINGTON
E. US CONGRESS INCREASES AID TO 135 ML DLRS ["AGAINST ORGANIZED CRIME"]
F. Zivkovic: Belgrade, Washington Becoming Allies
G. ZIVKOVIC:US SECRETARY OF STATE PROMISED PARTICIPATION OF SERBIAN
COMPANIES IN IRAQ'S RECONSTRUCTION
H. SERBIAN PREMIER: CASE OF FORMER BOSNIAN SERB LEADER [MLADIC] TO BE
CLOSED BY END OF YEAR
I. ZIVKOVIC ALL SMILES AFTER US VISIT
15.
CONTINUING DROUGHT COULD SPELL DISASTER
16. SERBIAN MILITARY PURGES TO ESCALATE:
SCG BEGINS MILITARY SHAKE-UP; Chief of Military Intelligence dismissed;
TADIC: POSSIBLE MILITARY COOPERATION WITH ISRAEL
17.
[Serbia-Montenegro Minister of International Economic Relations Branko]
LUKOVAC SAYS BOTH SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO SHOULD BE INDEPENDENT
=== 7 ===
Da: kiosk
Data: Mar 3 Giu 2003 11:49:30 Europe/Rome
A: anti-imperialiste@...
HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
A) Serbian Regime Passes Sweeping Law To Purge Former
Officials From All Government, Public, Media Positions
B) Last US Sanctions Lifted As Serbia And Montenegro
'Integrate Into International Community'
C) German Businesses To Invest In Serbia
A.
http://www.rferl.org/newsline/2003/06/4-SEE/see-020603.asp
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty- June 2, 2003
SERBIA PASSES SWEEPING LUSTRATION LAW
The Serbian parliament approved a lustration law on 30
May which, if strictly enforced, could prove one of
the toughest measures in postcommunist Europe aimed at
excluding former officials and their supporters from
political power, university life, the security forces,
and the media, RFE/RL reported. PM
B.
http://www.seeurope.net/en/Story.php?StoryID=40794&LangID=1
Seeurope.net - June 2, 2003
Last US Sanctions Lifted
The latest decision by US President George Bush spells
the official end of US sanctions against Serbia-Montenegro, a US
Treasury representatives said Saturday.
Taylor Gorfin told media that the sanctions had been lifted gradually
and no more now remained.
Bush’s decision to lift national emergency orders
against Belgrade was another positive signal of
support for Serbia-Montenegro’s integration into the
[inter]national community, said Belgrade’s ambassador
to Washington, Ivan Vujicic, reported radio B92.
Serbian Prime Minister Zoran Zivkovic told Belgrade’s
BK Television that he expected that US Secretary of
State Colin Powell would certify further financial
support for Serbia-Montenegro by June 15.
He described US financial assistance as significant,
but added that it was even more important that the US
now had no further political demands.
C.
http://www.serbia.sr.gov.yu/news/2003-06/02/329470.html
Serbia Info - June 2, 2003
German businesses to invest in Serbia
Belgrade, June 2, 2003 - Serbian Deputy Minister of
Transport and Telecommunications Miodrag Jocic said
Monday that Germany has announced a €30 million aid
package for Serbia's traffic infrastructure
development. At the opening of a forum gathering
entrepreneurs from Serbia and the North
Rhine-Westphalia province of Germany at Belgrade's
Hotel Hyatt, Jocic said that the aim of the conference
is to attract German investors to invest in Serbia's
transport, energy and mining, construction, and
spatial planning sectors.
Joerg Hennerkes, the Secretary of North
Rhine-Westphalia's Transport Ministry, said that
German businessmen should get as much information as
possible about prospective forms of cooperation in
these fields.
German Ambassador to Serbia and Montenegro Kurt
Leonberger said that Serbia has created a stable
political framework for foreign investment.
Another field in which Serbia needs a partner is air
transport. Deputy Minister of Transport and
Telecommunications Dragoljub Trgovcevic said that
cooperation is necessary for the building of a "cargo
centre" at Belgrade Airport.
Trgovcevic stressed that the airport has a very
favourable position which can provide the cheapest and
quickest transport of goods from the east to Europe.
He added that an airport modernisation project has
been prepared, and that total investment amounts to
some million.
Of the total amount, the European Investment Bank and
the Airport have provided million. Trgovcevic said
that tenders have been called for the modernisation of
the two existing passenger terminals, announcing that
the works should begin in February 2004.
=== 8 ===
Subj:[yugoslaviainfo] [Central] Serbia: Workers' protests held in Nis,
Kragujevac
Date:6/19/03 7:19:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From:p-tosic
To:Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli.
Sent from the Internet
[ The word 'Nezavisnost' means 'Independence' in Serbian. Trade union
'Nezavisnost' is one of the largest such organizations of industrial
workers in Serbia. ]
Serbia: Workers' protests held in Nis, Kragujevac
June 18, 2003 7:18pm
site on 18 June
Kragujevac, Nis: Thousands of workers protested today in front of the
town hall in the central Serbian city of Kragujevac. The demonstrators
were demanding dismissal of the Serbian government, full employment and
the establishment of a social dialogue.
Addressing the protesters, the leader of the Alliance of Independent
Unions of Serbia, Milenko Smiljanic, said that Serbia was on its knees
and the workers in the streets, adding that the situation could no
longer be tolerated. "When they ask me what the privatization process
will be like I tell them it will be slow, because many of those taking
part will end up in
jail," said Smiljanic.
The majority of employees from state-owned companies in Kragujevac
joined the demonstration, together with workers from other large
centres in the region.
Thousands of workers also took to the streets in the southern Serbian
city of Nis today, demanding that the Serbian government take steps
"for the salvation of Serbia's workers and economy". The Nezavisnost
Union, which organized the demonstration, has called its members to
rally in Belgrade on
25 June. Union leader Miodrag Randjelovic denied claims that the
demonstration was politically motivated, describing it as a
socio-economic protest. "We will not allow one more worker to be left
without a job or out on the street. We urge the government to come to
its senses," said Randjelovic, warning that the union would call for
the dismissal of the government and extraordinary parliamentary
elections.
Organizers claimed the workers came from more than a dozen towns and
cities throughout Serbia.
Source: Radio B92 text web site, Belgrade, in English 1850 gmt 18 Jun 03
=== 9 ===
58 COMPANIES IN SERBIA PRIVATIZED IN APRIL
BELGRADE, June 18 (Beta) - The director of the Serbian Privatization
Agency, Mirko Cvetkovic, stated on Wednesday that 58 companies were
sold in April, out of the 100 that have been offered for sale.
"Out of the total number of sold companies, two were sold at
tenders, 49 at auctions, and seven on the capital market," Cvetkovic
said at the session of the Serbian Legislature's Privatization
Committee.
He said that 7,214 workers were employed by these companies.
Cvetkovic announced an increase in sales in June, explaining
that 80 auctions have been scheduled, and that the sale of companies
dropped in May because they were busy with closing accounts.
PROPERTY OF PRIVATIZED ENTERPRISES WILL BE PROTECTED, VLAHOVIC
BELGRADE, July 22 (Tanjug) - The Serbian Ministry of
Economy and Privatization, in cooperation with other
ministries, will protect the private property of
privatized enterprises in the same way as it does with
other private companies in view of the fact that the
ownership transformation is aimed at building a more
efficient economy in which private property would
prevail, Minister Aleksandar Vlahovic said on Tuesday.
Speaking at a meeting on the protection of private
property interests in the post-privatization process
at the Serbian Chamber of Commerce and Industry,
Vlahovic said that enterprises could not be
restructured of privatized without partnership between
the Privatization Agency, trade union, state and
business associations.
Generally speaking, new owners encounter no problems
when they take over enterprises, although there are
exceptions, Vlahovic said and announced the adoption
of a law on denationalization by the end of the year,
under which original owners of enterprises would
receive financial compensation.
The state has obligations towards the original owners,
rather than the new owners, and the state allocates
five percent of privatization income for financial
compensation, he said.
President of the League for Property Protection
Slavenko Grgurevic said that the key problem lay in
the fact that the minister was urging the protection
of private property after privatization.
Original owners will sue the state and demand the
realization of their rights through the Council of
Europe, i.e. court at Strasbourg, Grgurevic said.
=== 10 ===
http://www.msnbc.com/news/931485.asp
Free press under fire in Serbia
U.S. protests new pressures on media
After the March assassination of Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic, whose
death was mourned by tens of thousands, Serbia's new government has
targeted the country's independent media.
By David Binder
SPECIAL TO MSNBC
WASHINGTON, June 26 - Little noticed outside the country, the Serbian
government's crackdown on organized crime after the March 12
assassination of Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic has included repeated
attacks on the independent press. Newspapers have been closed,
journalists have been fined exorbitantly for alleged libel of
government officials by compliant courts and the media have accused the
government of censorship. The moves have drawn criticism from U.S. and
European officials, apparently to little avail. But that may be
changing.
IN ADDITION, the Serbian government has packed the nine-member state
Broadcasting Agency Council with its supporters including at least one
of questionable origin.
These actions have prompted protests and expressions of concern by U.S.
Ambassador William Montgomery, Ian Willem Blankert of the European
Commission and international press organizations such as the New
York-based Committee to
Protect Journalists. Yet until now, there has been no outcry from the
general public in Serbia.
The chief villain in the eyes of Serbian journalists is Vladimir "Baby"
Popovic, a flamboyant figure who is currently head of the coalition
government's Office of Communications.
Popovic, 44, has had a meteoric career, starting as a "brilliant"
accordion player, according those who know him, and working in Belgrade
as a hotel waiter, a maitre d? and then a budding businessman. His
marketing firm, Spektra, brought him into
contact with Zoran Djindjic and other politicians who helped topple
President Slobodan Milosevic three years ago. He then became the
Belgrade representative of Ogilvy & Mather, the global marketing firm.
He grew wealthy, bought apartments in several countries, collected art
and was reputed to have "outstanding success with women," one Serbian
paper reported. His moniker, "Baby," apparently alludes to his youthful
face.
BACK IN GOVERNMENT
But Djindjic, apparently disturbed by Popovic's continuing business
endeavors as a government employee, got rid of him last October.
Popovic resurfaced in March after the assassination of Djindjic, when
the government declared a national state of emergency, in his former
job. During the 42-day "emergency," in which more than 10,000 citizens
were detained and 4,000 arrested, a series of harsh measures viewed as
hostile to the media were instituted.
Nacional, a sensationalist tabloid, was banned and, three weeks later,
its assets were confiscated. Another newspaper, Identitet, was also
closed down. Heavy fines were imposed on two provincial television
stations, including TV Leskovac. An edition of the weekly Svedok was
confiscated because it carried an interview with Milorad Lukovic
Legija, an organized crime figure on the run after he was accused of
masterminding the plot to murder Djindjic.
STIFF FINES
Lawsuits were filed against journalists of the popular tabloid Vecernje
Novosti and the independent television-radio station B-92. One of
Popovic's libel suits, against Zeljko Cvijanovic, the editor of the
weekly Blic News, was based on an article published 11 months earlier
and resulted in a 50,000 dinar ($900) fine on May 30.
That may seem small, but in a country where the average income is about
$100 a month, it is hefty.
Cvijanovic quit his job, saying "it is impossible to edit Blic News in
line with the principles of free and open journalism."
One prominent journalist, Aleksandar Tijanic, responded by suing
Popovic for libel, charging that he had "linked him to a media pressure
group."
Tijanic declared: "Each and every question which is stifled by force
today will remain open forever."
Popovic's latest suit is against NIN, a respectable and nationally
prominent weekly, for "defamation of character." Filed last week, it
demands 1 million dinars for causing "emotional distress" to the
plaintiff. At issue was a question published by NIN about Popovic's
status as a government employee after Djindjic distanced himself from
Popovic. In April that same question, posed by Gordana Susa, a TV
reporter,
prompted Popovic to call her and threaten her.
At present there are more than 170 libel suits pending in Serbian
courts.
U.S. PRESSURE REBUFFED
According to America diplomats, Montgomery approached Prime Minister
Zoran Zivkovic in April suggesting that Popovic leave his post and was
told it would happen within 10 days. It didn't. Instead Zivkovic
inveighed repeatedly against the Serbian press, accusing journalists of
carrying their complaints to "Western embassies."
In the absence of action on the Popovic situation, Montgomery
ostentatiously visited the editorial offices of NIN on Tuesday to offer
what its journalists interpreted as his support in the defamation case.
The ugliness of the situation has reached the point where some
observers are comparing it to the Milosevic period and even to the
Communist era of Josip Broz Tito. Zivkovic appears to have grasped that.
In an interview this week he declared: "As head of government I don't
want such a battle with the media." Branislav Lecic, his minister of
culture and media, has begun meetings with a group of Serbian editors
to hear their objections to the new
information law and to see if a compromise can be reached.
David Binder has covered the Balkans for four decades.
=== 11 ===
HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
http://www.b92.net/english/news/index.php?nav_id=23651&style=headlines
B92 - July 10, 2003
Serbia prepares ground for oil privitisation
BELGRADE -- Wednesday – The Serbian government is to
dismiss tomorrow the acting manager of the national oil company,
apparently smoothing the path to privatization, B92 learnt today from a
government source.
Asked if the information was correct, Serbia’s energy
minister said that her ministry had proposed new
legislation by which the general manager of Serbian
Oil Industries (NIS) would be appointed by the
government, rather than parliament. Kori Udovicki
confirmed that the acting manager could be dismissed
in the event the law gets bogged down in parliament.
Jelica Putnikovic, a journalist with Frankfurt
Serbian-language daily Vesti, said that though
Dimitrije Vukcevic was coming to end of his tenure,
the dismissal coincided with the start of
privatization proceedings. “Obviously they want to
have a man they can cooperate with, since there have
been many unofficial indications that Vukcevic was not
always loyal.”
Vukcevic told B92 he had yet to be informed he is out
of a job. Unofficial sources suggest he will be
replaced by Pavle Vuckovic, the current director of
Energoprojekt.
=== 12 ===
FINANCIAL TIMES (UK)
From: "decani3"
To: Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli.
A. River traffic falls as users get Danube blues
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/
FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1057562528506
River traffic falls as users get Danube blues
By Robert Wright
Published: July 18 2003 5:00 | Last Updated: July 18 2003 5:00
The three barges makean impressive sight as they nose down the Danube
in the Serbian city of Novi Sad, strapped abreast of each other.
The tug pushing them positions itself carefully, then takes its
load past the imposing Petrovaradin citadel and through a gap in a
makeshift pontoon bridge. They race on towards a bend in the river,
pushed by a powerful current.
The barges are as impressive for the surprising confidence they
represent in transport on the Danube as for their size; their decks are
loaded with new cars - the kind of high-value cargo the Danube has
previously struggled to attract.
Yet many other users have given up on freight transport on
Europe's second-longest river. According to the Danube Commission,
which governs many of the river's affairs, only 7 per cent of the
river's carrying capacity is in use, against about 72 per cent for the
Rhine, Europe's busiest river.
Traffic on the river reached its peak at 91m tonnes of cargo in
1987, when most countries on the Danube were part of the Comecon
trading bloc of communist countries. By 1998, the last year for which
full figures are available, the figure was just 30m tonnes, even before
the problems of the Kosovo war.
A visit to Novi Sad, capital of Serbia's northern province of
Vojvodina, shows why the river is still struggling to recover.
A European Union-funded project, which finished on June 16, saw the
river cleared of wreckage and unexploded bombs left over from
destruction of the city's three Danube bridges by Nato forces in the
1999 Kosovo war.
But the pontoon bridge - a floating replacement for one of the
destroyed bridges - is open only three nights a week, soon to rise to
four, and vessels must pay to pass through. A poorly placed temporary
replacement railway bridge also causes problems for some vessels.
On top of that the Serbian government last month started requiring
vessels with high-value cargoes to obtain substantial customs
guarantees before passing through the river's Serbian section.
The decision brought almost a complete halt to cargo shipments on the
river for more than three weeks. It was finally withdrawn later in the
month under strong international pressure.
The affair has added to frustration among the Danube's users after a
series of problems during the 1990s caused by Croatia's war of
independence and international sanctions against Serbia.
The frustration has been exacerbated this year by unusually low water
levels resulting from drought across much of Hungary, Croatia and
Serbia. The river has become impassable at several points.
"People are very concerned about what will happen next," says
Edgar Martin of Danube-research.com, a UK-based consultancy. "People
are worried about what the next tax or customs fee or something will
be."
Nor is there much immediate prospect of an improvement in conditions.
Environmental objections have prevented the dredging of some of the
river's shallowest sections, particularly in Bavaria. In Novi Sad,
meanwhile, Milan Jazic, who handles Danube matters for the city
council, says the city continues to need the pontoon bridge as well as
a makeshift fixed road bridge hastily erected in 2000.
The pontoon bridge will be removed only when the Most Slobode (Freedom
Bridge) - an eight-lane suspension bridge - is reopened. The €40m
($45m, £28m) bridge reconstruction, funded mainly by the European
Union, is due to be finished in December 2004.
But flooding last summer and a cold winter have delayed work,
leaving contractors struggling to meet the deadline.
The car-carrying barges show, however, that the Danube's
substantial cost advantages over rail and road alternatives remain
powerful incentives. The EU-funded clearing of the river at Novi Sad
has also made traffic easier, partly because it has reduced the risk
for vessels' insurers.
More frequent opening of the bridge and a lower fee for passing through
it have helped to stimulate traffic.
Danail Nedialkov, director-general of the Danube Commission's
secretariat, says 2,338 vessels passed through the bridge in the second
quarter of this year, up from 1,607 in the first period and 5,424 in
the whole of last year.
Yet there remains growing frustration on all sides at the slow
pace of improvement.
"It's just not providing a reliable service at the moment," Mr
Martin of Danube-research.com says of the river. "These [problems] need
to be dealt with urgently, then it will provide cheap, environmentally
friendly transport."
B. Walk-out at central bank strips Serbia of top economic talent
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/
FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1057562562347
Walk-out at central bank strips Serbia of top economic talent
By Eric Jansson in Belgrade
Published: July 19 2003 5:00 | Last Updated: July 19 2003 5:00
Serbia's senior central bankers resigned en masse yesterday,
protesting against controversial central bank reforms approved by
parliament.
The resignations of governor Mladjan Dinkic, two of the bank's
three vice-governors and several department chiefs strip Serbia's
leadership of some of its top economic talent.
Radovan Jelasic, one of the resigning vice-governors, said he and Mr
Dinkic would continue working at the bank only until "a regular
handover can be arranged". One vice-governor, Vesna Arsic, retains her
post.
Mr Dinkic and his team are credited with pushing through tough banking
reforms, taming Serbia's once-soaring inflation rate and finding ways
for Serbs to reclaim foreign funds frozen under the former regime of
Slobodan Milosevic.
But they fell foul of Zoran Zivkovic, the prime minister, and
government ministers this year after Mr Dinkic's private think-tank,
G17, converted itself into a political party sometimes critical of
government policy.
Especially tough criticism was reserved for the new reforms
approved yesterday by parliament. Mr Dinkic says that the legislation
undermines the central bank's independence by giving MPs the power to
both nominate and appoint top bank officials. Government officials say
the bank's independence is not threatened.
Ministers say the bill was drafted originally as a matter of
housekeeping, as the central bank is being transformed into a solely
Serbian institution, following the formal dissolution of Yugoslavia
five months ago.
Ministers also say the bank governor deserves credit for carrying out
some of Serbia's most important reforms to date.
But Mr Jelasic says the bank's achievements have provoked
suspicion and jealousy among ministers whose popularity is flagging.
Mr Dinkic had already taken pre-emptive action against his removal by
trying to undermine the government with allegations of corruption among
senior government officials.
Prosecutors demanded this week that he present evidence. Mr Dinkic
replied that it had already been handed to police but was being ignored.
Whatever becomes of Mr Dinkic's allegations, which have been
reported widely in Belgrade's newspapers, rifts between Serbia's
reformers are clearly growing rather than healing since Zoran Djindjic,
the former prime minister, was murdered in March.
=== 13 ===
THREE WAZ TOP MANAGERS TO HEAD POLITIKA
BELGRADE,July 18 (Beta)-WAZ executive director Bodo
Hombach is the new president of the managing board of
the Politika Newspapers & Magazines company, founded
last year by the Belgradebased Politika company and
this German newspaper concern.
Politika GM Mirko Djekic told BETA on July 18 that one
of the WAZ biggest shareholders, Luc Gland, and the
chief financial auditor of the concern, Markus
Bergman, were also appointed members of the Politika
managing board.
According to Djekic, the branches of this joint
ownership company will be opened in Podgorica, Novi
Sad and possibly some other towns in former
Yugoslavia, which will act as headquarters of the
existing, but also of new publications.
The managing board members, in addition to three WAZ
representatives, also include the Komercijalna Banka
chairman and the president of the Politika managing
board Ljubomir Mihajlovic, lawyer Strahinja
Kastratovic and Politika daily GM and editor in chief
Darko Ribnikar.
=== 14 ===
SERBIAN PREMIER VISITS USA:
A. ZIVKOVIC FOR STRONGER TIES BETWEEN WASHINGTON AND BELGRADE
LONDON, July 25 (Tanjug) - Serbian Prime Minister
Zoran Zivkovic has said the objective of his visit to
the United States is to deepen political dialogue and
promote cooperation between Washington and Belgrade.
This means there were no numbers, dates, or other such
things that people usually expect from such meetings.
This is the strengthening of political ties between
the two states and the objective is to persuade the
United States that Serbia can be a good partner in the
Balkans, while the other objective is to find a good
ally for all the tribulations in store at the
beginning of the 21st century, the prime minister said
in an interview to BBC Radio.
Asked about the predominant topic during his talks
with Secretary of State Colin Powell and national
security adviser Condoleezza Rice, Zivkovic said it
was their support to reforms and what has been done
through them in the past two and a half years,
especially in the past few months, the fight against
crime, and the state's stand on The Hague
international tribunal.
Talks also covered the participation of Serbian
companies in the reconstruction of Iraq and
possibilities for Serbia's business returning to the
United States, and a contract on normal trade
relations - the bill that has been tied up in the
Senate for quote some time, Zivkovic said.
B. POWELL PRAISES SERBIAN, SCG GOVERNMENTS AND BACKS REFORMIST COURSE
WASHINGTON, July 25 (Tanjug) - United States Secretary
of State Colin Powell has praised Serbian Prime
Minister Zoran Zivkovic and Serbia and Montenegro
Foreign Minister Goran Svilanovic for their resolve to
continue implementing political and economic reforms,
and for the support received from citizens following
the March assassination of Serbian prime minister
Zoran Djindjic.
Powell thanked the visiting ranking officials for the
good cooperation with Serbia in fighting terrorism,
and other issues of mutual interest when they were
leaving the State Department late Thursday afternoon
local time.
The talks were an opportunity for the US side to
express its constant support to the democratic reform
processes taking place in Serbia and Montenegro, a
State Department source told Tanjug.
Powell expressed the strong US support to the process
of SCG integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions,
and stressed support to general stability and progress
in that country, the source said.
C. ZIVKOVIC ON TALKS WITH PIERRE RICHARD PROSPER
WASHINGTON, July 24 (Beta) - Serbian Premier Zoran
Zivkovic said on July 24 that U.S. ambassador for war
crimes Pierre Richard Prosper was convinced that
Belgrade authorities were "adequately cooperating"
with the International Criminal Tribunal for the
Former Yugoslavia (ICTY).
"What Prosper said about our cooperation a few weeks
ago has been confirmed. He is convinced that we are
cooperating adequately with the ICTY and that is
true," Zivkovic told BETA in a telephone conversation,
after meeting Prosper in Washington.
Zivkovic is leading a joint delegation comprising
representatives of the Serbian and SerbianMontenegrin
governments.
Zivkovic and Prosper agreed that former Bosnian Serb
army commander Ratko Mladic "is the only indictee
particularly interesting to the ICTY and the U.S." "I
have repeated our opinion that Mladic's arrest is a
technical issue, meaning that if he is on our
territory he will be arrested, if not then there is
nothing we can do," Zivkovic said.
According to Zivkovic, one of the topics of
conversation was also the war crimes tribunal recently
formed in Serbia, which is due to start operating
soon.
The delegation is scheduled to hold talks with U.S.
Secretary of State Colin Powell and U.S. president's
national security adviser Condoleezza Rice in the late
evening hours (CET) of July 24.
D. ZIVKOVIC AND SVILANOVIC MEET CONGRESSMEN IN WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON, July 25 (Tanjug) - Serbian Prime Minister
Zoran Zivkovic and Serbia and Montenegro Foreign
Minister Goran Svilanovic will confer with prominent
congressmen in Washington on Friday, the second day of
their official visit to the United States, and they
will later also meet with editors and reporters of The
Washington Post, and attend a meeting at the Heritage
Foundation.
Zivkovic and Svilanovic first met with Congressman
Rahm Emanuel, the author of a resolution passed by the
House of Representatives paying tribute to recently
assassinated Serbian prime minister Zoran Djindjic.
The resolution said Djindjic was the chief organizer
and strategist of the opposition platform for the
presidential elections in Yugoslavia on Sept 24, 2000,
and the subsequent popular revolt on Oct 5, which led
to the ousting of Slobodan Milosevic and his
subsequent extradition to The Hague tribunal.
Today, the Serbian and SCG delegation will meet with
Congressman Pete Sessions, a great advocate of the
normalization of trade relations between the US and
SCG.
This evening, the delegation will meet with former US
ambassador to Yugoslavia Lawrence Eagleberger.
E. US CONGRESS INCREASES AID FOR SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO TO 135 ML DLRS
WASHINGTON, July 25 (Tanjug) - The United States
Congress House of Representatives has decided to raise
the planned 95 million dollar aid for Serbia to 100
million and the planned 18 million for Montenegro to
35 million, as support to fighting organized crime
there, Tanjug learned on Thursday.
Serbia has to meet certain conditions before receiving
this aid, mostly in connection with cooperation with
The Hague tribunal, ending support to Republika Srpska
and respect of human rights and laws.
The House on Wednesday passed legislature on the
distribution of funds abroad, financing exports, and
similar programs, worth 17 billion dollars, for the
coming fiscal year which begins on Oct 1 and ends on
Sept 30 next year.
F. Zivkovic: Belgrade, Washington Becoming Allies
BELGRADE, July 27 (BETA) - Relations between
Washington and Belgrade are becoming those of two
allies, Serbian Premier Zoran Zivkovic explained on
Saturday, while on a visit to U.S.
At a news conference following a meeting with U.S.
Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security
Adviser Condoleezza Rice, Zivkovic said he hoped the
U.S. would back Serbia-Montenegro's integration in
European and transatlantic institutions.
Zivkovic added that relations between the two
countries were at a 50-year high. "My goal and that of
my cabinet is to use these good relations in the
temptations that we will face, both at home and in the
region."
He expressed the hope that Serbia-Montenegro would
become a member of NATO's Partnership for Peace this
winter, "late this year or early next year."
In addition, Zivkovic said he expected U.S. support
for the union's European and Euroatlantic integration.
"We will have the U.S. there as an ally. There are
some conditions, some of which have existed for quite
some time -- the extradition of war crimes suspects
charged by the Hague Tribunal -- but given the speed
of the talks and the atmosphere it is clear that they
are not major conditions."
"The political dilemma of whether to arrest and
extradite Mladic does not exist... the only question
is if he is in our territory. By the end of the year
we will either find Mladic, arrest him, and extradite
him to The Hague or we will find a way to prove he is
not in our territory."
Commenting on a U.S. request for a treaty on the
non-extradition of U.S. citizens to the International
Criminal Court, Zivkovic stressed that
Serbia-Montenegro was in a special position.
"On the one hand Serbia-Montenegro is being asked to
extradite its own citizens to the Hague Tribunal, and
on the other we are being asked to sign a
non-extradition treaty with the U.S."
"This is not about choosing between the EU and U.S.,
but an internal issue. We hope that Washington will
understand our predicament," said Zivkovic.
http://www.beta.co.yu/eng/
BETA: Daily News Internet
July 28, 2003
G. ZIVKOVIC:US SECRETARY OF STATE PROMISED PARTICIPATION OF SERBIAN
COMPANIES IN IRAQ'S RECONSTRUCTION
WASHINGTON, Jul 26 (Tanjug) - Serbian Premier Zoran
Zivkovic has said in Washington that he had been
assured by US Secretary of State Colin Powell during
the latter's visit to Belgrade last March that Serbian
companies will be able to take part in Iraq's
reconstruction, and that Powell reiterated this
assurance when he conferred with Zivkovic Thursday.
Zivkovic told the press Friday evening that he had
informed Powell that he would cite this assurance in
his forthcoming talks with representatives of US
companies taking part in Iraq's reconstruction during
his current visit to the US, and that Powell gave his
approval.
Zivkovic said he and his delegation would confer with
executives of the leading US construction company
operating in Iraq on the participation of Serbian
companies in projects in Iraq, as well as on the US
company's participation in infrastructure projects in
Serbia. Zivkovic added he expects US companies to
intensify their presence in Serbia through the
privatization process and new investments in the
coming months.
H. SERBIAN PREMIER: CASE OF FORMER BOSNIAN SERB LEADER TO BE CLOSED BY
END OF YEAR
WASHINGTON, Jul 26 (Tanjug) - Serbian Premier Zoran
Zivkovic has said in Washington that agreement has
been reached with US officials that former Republika
Srpska army commander Ratko Mladic must be arrested by
the end of this year if he is in Serbia, or that proof
must be presented that he is not there.
At a press briefing Friday evening, the second day of
his visit to the US, Zivkovic ruled out the
participation of any third party in a possible arrest
operation, for which modalities are being worked out.
People more important than Mladic have been arrested
in Serbia, and there is therefore no need or legal
possibility of proceeding in a different manner in his
case, Zivkovic said, noting that there is no reliable
evidence at present on Mladic's presence in Serbia's
territory.
Cooperation with the UN war crimes tribunal is an
international commitment of Serbia-Montenegro (SCG),
and also a commitment in line with domestic law,
Zivkovic said, adding that arresting all indictees
found in Serbia's territory is only a technical issue.
US OFFICIAL SAYS RESPONSIBILITY FOR ARRESTING FORMER BOSNIAN SERB
COMMANDER LIES WITH SERBIAN GOVERNMENT
WASHINGTON, Jul 25 (Tanjug) - The State Department
ambassador-at-large for War Crimes Issues
Pierre-Richard Prosper told Tanjug Friday that the
greatest responsibility for arresting former Bosnian
Serb army commander Ratko Mladic lies with the Serbian
government.
The US believes that the Serbian government has the
responsibility, as well as technical and human
potentials to search its own territory, Prosper said.
Available information indicate that there is no reason
to believe that Mladic is not in Serbia. Search for
Mladic must be carried out in Serbia, he explained.
Secretary of State Colin Powell and US president's
Advisor for National Security Condoleezza Rice also
made this clear Thursday to Serbian Premier Zoran
Zivkovic and Serbia-Montenegro (SCG) Foreign Minister
Goran Svilanovic, Prosper said.
I. ZIVKOVIC ALL SMILES AFTER US VISIT
NEW YORK,July 30 (B92,VOA)- Serbia's prime minister
has hailed his visit to the US as a sign that good
relations between the two countries have been fully
restored.
"Relations between Serbia and the US are at a very
high level", Zoran Zivkovic told B92 at the end of a
week-long trip to the States. "All talks were between
partners of different size, wealth and power, but not
in terms of how they look on the real situation in
Serbia and the US."
Speaking to Voice of America last night, the premier
said that "after a long time we can now say that, when
we are speaking with an official, we can be certain
that he believes what we are saying, that he shares
our visions and that he is ready to help resolve our
problems".
He dismissed speculation that the Belgrade delegation
had come under pressure regarding the fractious
political situation in Serbia and the worsening plight
of the independent media during discussions with US
officials.
The prime minister said that "exclusively for B92" he
could list the issues not addressed: "They were:
corruption, the situation in the governing coalition,
the Democratic Party and relations between the
government and media. These are the issues that
weren't addressed during these seven days, and that
shouldn't surprise anyone. Those who awaited this
visit with malice and a desire for it to be just
another way of putting pressure on the Serbian
government must be disappointed."
Zivkovic added that he expected Congress to adopt
legislation on the resumption of normal trade
relations with Serbia by early autumn.
=== 15 ===
CONTINUING DROUGHT COULD SPELL DISASTER
BELGRADE,July 28 (Beta)-Andjelka Mihajlov, Serbian
Minister for the Protection of Natural Resources and
the Environment, today announced that river currents
have this month dropped to minimum levels; with the
Danube falling to its absolute minimum at Bezdan,
which was never recorded throughout the entire 20th
century.
Speaking at a joint session of the Serbian
Parliament's Environment Protection Committee and
Agriculture and Water Committee, Mihajlov explained
that annual minimums are not usually reached until
September or October and thus this year's drought
could dramatically worsen if rain does not fall and
adequate measures are not applied.
One such protective measure, according to Mihajlov,
should be the increase in pollution control, as low
water levels contribute to industrial and urban waste
pollution by concentrating poisonous elements.
Srdja Popovic, environmental advisor to PM Zoran
Zivkovic, noted that the extremes of climate, which
caused flooding in Serbia this time last year, are
triggered by global climate changes.
Agriculture Minister Stojan Jeftic said that the state
has already contacted neighboring countries and
requested that accumulated water be re-directed to
rivers flowing through Serbia in an effort to raise
the water level. However, the entire region is
suffering drought and the responses were negative.
The parliamentary committees are to organize urgent
analysis of the worst affected areas before they
re-convene at another joint session in a month's time.
=== 16 ===
Da: Rick Rozoff
Data: Mer 30 Lug 2003 18:20:00 Europe/Rome
Oggetto: US-NATO Orders: Serbian Military Purges To Escalate
[Note: Serbia-Montenegro 'President' Zoran Zivkovic
has just returned from Washington.]
http://www.rferl.org/newsline/2003/07/4-SEE/see-300703.asp
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty - July 30, 2003
SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO BEGINS MILITARY SHAKE-UP
-[Defense Minister] Tadic went on to Jerusalem, where
he began a three-day visit to discuss military
cooperation with Israeli government officials.
Members of Serbia and Montenegro's Supreme Defense
Council agreed in Meljine near Herceg Novi on 29 July
to accept Defense Ministry proposals to sack an
unspecified number of officers, whose names will be
made public "in 10 days' time," RFE/RL's South Slavic
and Albanian Languages Service reported. Belgrade
media suggest that one man on the list is military
intelligence chief General Radoslav Skoric, who was
allegedly sacked for keeping "too close" ties to the
Bosnian Serb military. In related news, Defense
Minister Boris Tadic and Montenegrin Prime Minister
Milo Djukanovic signed an agreement providing for
Montenegrin police to take over control of
Montenegro's borders from the military. Tadic went on
to Jerusalem, where he began a three-day visit to
discuss military cooperation with Israeli government
officials. PM
http://www.makfax.com.mk/news1-a.asp?br=46227
MakFax (Macedonia) - July 30, 2003
SCG: Chief of Military Intelligence dismissed
The Supreme Defense Council of Serbia & Montenegro has
put a number of military chiefs on retirement list,
including the Head of Military Intelligence, Radoslav
Shkoric, said Belgrade’s media.
Sources close to top military officials say Shkoric
was pushing for close co-operation with the Army of
Republika Srpska.
This is a second shift of commanding structures in
military intelligence following the assassination of
Serbia’s PM Zoran Djindjic. The Head of National
Security, General Aca Tomic was replaced and kept in
custody in the aftermath of Djindjic’s assassination.
---
TADIC: POSSIBLE MILITARY COOPERATION WITH ISRAEL
TEL AVIV,July 30 (Beta)-Serbia&Montenegro Defense
Minister Boris Tadic said on July 30 that he had
talked with senior managers of the Izreali military
and aircraft industry about possible modes of
cooperation and that there was a possibility of
reaching an agreement.
Tadic told BETA in a telephone conversation that the
projects included a certain type of automatic rifle
produced by Serbia&Montenegro and unmanned aerial
vehicles.
Tadic said that these vehicles had important software
components, which could be produced in Serbia and
Montenegro. He added that they had also considered the
possibility of modernizing Russianmade helicopters,
which are commonly used in Serbia&Montenegro and the
neighboring countries.
Tadic, who is on a threeday visit to Israel, said that
an expert meeting had been scheduled, to discuss the
possibility of reaching an agreement with the Isreali
aircraft industry on one of these projects.
He said that he had talked with Izreali Prime Minister
Shimon Perez about the peace process in the Middle
East and the Balkans and the solutions that could be
applied in both cases.
=== 17 ===
LUKOVAC SAYS BOTH SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO SHOULD BE INDEPENDENT
PODGORICA, July 29 (Tanjug) - Serbia-Montenegro
Minister of International Economic Relations Branko
Lukovac on Tuesday reiterated that the state union
members would fare better if they were independent
states.
Stressing he believed that Serbia and Montenegro
"should be equal with all other European states,"
Lukovac said that "what has been done with the Action
Plan is an outstanding achievement, freeing us of
barriers that we will build some borders among
ourselves and place new obstacles." "In this document,
we succeeded in including the best values of the EU
members ensuring a free flow of people, goods and
capital, so that we removed fear that this might
affect the mutual relations of Serbia and Montenegro
in any form of their existence, either as a community
or as independent states," Lukovac told Radio Free
Europe. According to him, now that Serbia and
Montenegro have taken European standards and built
good relations and strong ties on the EU model, one
may say that it is senseless for states with full
economic responsibilities not to have their voice and
clear status in the international community. "There is
no reason for international community's fear that good
relations between Serbia and Montenegro may be
jeopardized by a change in their state and legal
status and they will be preserved the best if
everyone's right to decide on oneself is recognized,"
Lukovac said.
From: Vladimir Krsljanin (30/7/2003)
SLOBODA today addressed the media in Belgrade with the following
statement:
Sloboda/Freedom Association – Yugoslav Committee for the Release of
Slobodan Milosevic warns the public at home and abroad that the state
of health of President Slobodan Milosevic is continuously getting
worse, due to the dangerous and malicious disrespect of the
international standards of the human right protection by the illegal
tribunal at The Hague.
President Milosevic is triumphant in his struggle for truth in the
process without a precedent in history, in spite he faces everyday
burden exceeding the human abilities as well as the inhuman prison
conditions. And it lasts more than two years already. Few specialist
medical examinations and analyses have undoubtedly proven that the
conditions he faces are a dangerous factor of cardiovascular risk. But
the tribunal refuses even to secure regular check-ups of the
President’s health condition.
Sloboda/Freedom Association demands that President Milosevic should be
at least provided with the necessary examinations and recuperation in
his own country and to be allowed to continue his participation in the
process from freedom. That would be the only way to protect his life
and health.
Belgrade, July 30, 2003
NOTE: Since last Friday, President Milosevic has kidney pains. On
Friday, the court session started with delay, since he was waiting to
get a pill against pain. This week, there was no trial. Tribunal’s
doctors have been examining him today. Results are still expected.
President Milosevic was examined by the specialists’ medical team from
Belgrade in February. On that occasion, Belgrade doctors agreed with
their Dutch colleagues appointed by the tribunal that President
Milosevic needs regular health monitoring, including specialists’
examination at least once in a month. Since then, there were no
specialists’ examinations. In June, Sloboda demanded in strongest terms
that Belgrade medical team goes to The Hague again, referring to the
February agreement. This demand was sent to the person in charge,
tribunal’s Registrar and to all “judges” of the “Trial Chamber III”.
Until now, Sloboda got no response from the tribunal. When we were
urging a response by phone, persons from the Registry replied that for
another visit of Belgrade doctors, according to the tribunal’s “Rules”,
‘a written request of the accused is needed’. Now we are facing another
dramatic turn in President Milosevic’s health due to another tribunal’s
deliberate disregard of the medical conclusions. And President
Milosevic is not willing to ask his inquisitors for anything.
Sloboda calls upon the national committees, jurists and medical doctors
to react. Address the tribunal and UN Security Council members (find
their contacts at
http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/unsc_members.html )
---
When light of truth or light of public attention falls on the illegal
tribunal’s building made of immoral and criminal ‘right of might’, the
building starts to be ruined.
Look at the two excerpts from today’s tribunal’s weekly press briefing
(last before the three weeks summer recess). First, about the President
Milosevic’s health:
<<Asked for more information concerning Milosevic’s health, [spokesman
for Registry and Chambers Jim] Landale replied that he could not really
go much further than what Judge May had said in court this morning
during the administrative session, which was that the Trial Chamber
understood that Milosevic was suffering from problems with his blood
pressure and that was the reason he was not able to attend court this
week and why the trial would now adjourn until 25 August 2003. He could
not go further than that, he concluded.
A journalist stated that everyone had become used to interruptions of
the Milosevic trial due to reasons of blood pressure, flu or
exhaustion, but that Milosevic, during the public hearing on Friday,
had mentioned that he had asked for a pain killer and that it was the
first time he did so. Asked whether this indicated that there was a new
ailment, or new symptoms, Landale replied that he would not go any
further than what Judge May had said in court today. He added that it
was not for him to disclose confidential medical information and that
he would not do so.>>
And second, about Carla del Ponte:
<<Asked what the position of the Prosecutor was concerning
recommendations made by the UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, not to
extend her mandate as Prosecutor of the ICTR, [spokeswoman for the
Office of the Prosecutor Florence] Hartmann replied that the next step,
following the recommendation of the Secretary-General, was for the
Security Council to issue a resolution. It was up to the Security
Council to decide on such matters. She concluded that the Prosecutor
would make no comment until a decision had been made.
According to a journalist, Carla Del Ponte had told a Swiss newspaper a
few days ago that if her mandate for the ICTR was not extended, she
would not stay at the ICTY. Hartmann replied that she had no further
comment to make on this issue except that she was waiting to see what
the Security Council decided. She would comment after that, but not at
the moment as it was too early.>>
WHY SHOULD SUCH A PERSON KEEP ANY POST IN UN SYSTEM?
(we remind you of one of our earlier posts, which is just a piece of
numerous dirty stories about the criminal NATO executor)
TRANSLATION OF INTERVIEW BY JURGEN ELSAESSER WITH FELIPE TUROVER ON
CARLA DEL PONTE
(source: Konkret, December 2002)
Translated by Colin Meade
[quotation]
Felipe Turover: "Carla del Ponte told the hit-men where to find me".
[Introduction]
"Justice is a woman", said UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan about Carla
del Ponte, currently Chief Prosecutor in the Hague trial of Slobodan
Milosevic. Felipe Turover's experience of the Swiss jurist is very
different. 37-year old Felipe comes from a Spanish Republican family
whose parents fled with him from Franco to the Soviet Union. After the
death of the dictator, Felipe returned to his native land before going
back at the end of the 1980s to Moscow as a financial expert. From 1992
to 1999 he worked for the Yeltsin government managing debts with
Western creditor banks.
[Interview]
Elsässer: You are the chief witness in the Mabetex case, also known as
Russiagate. What is it about and how does Carla del Ponte come into it?
Turover: Mabetex is a construction company based in Lugano in Italian
Switzerland. It belongs to the Kosovo Albanian Beghijet Pacolli who now
has a Swiss passport. In the 1990s Pacolli and his business partner
Viktor Stolpovskich won some two billion euros-worth of orders from the
Kremlin, supposedly for building and restoration work in the government
and presidential complex. It has been proved that billions of dollars
vanished from Russia through this operation, with millions being spent
on bribes in Moscow in return. Pacolli acted as guarantor for credit
cards for Yeltsin and both his daughters, according to the Banca del
Gottardo which issued the cards. Carla del Ponte, at that time a Swiss
public prosecutor contacted me in 1997 and asked me to be ready to
testify in the case. Later she invited the Russian investigating
prosecutor Yuri Skuratov to Switzerland and put me in touch with
him. At that time she already had a reputation as a great fighter for
justice and I therefore did as she asked. That was an almost fatal
error.
Elsässer: Why?
Turover: I was dependent on her honesty and had made it clear to her
from the start that my testimony placed my life in danger. I was still
at the time working as an advisor to the Russian authorities, i.e. for
the very people I was incriminating with these documents. So what did
Ms del Ponte do? She gave my full name and job to the press. This was
as if I had given information to the US Drug Enforcement Agency about
the Escobar Clan out of Medellin and then, while still in the lions'
den, read in the New York Times that I was the chief witness against
Escobar. In my case, it was Moscow rather than Medellin and the
newspaper was the Corriere della Sera but the effect was the same. I
was in big trouble and saved my life by hurriedly getting out of
Moscow. Since then, for the past three years, I have been living
undercover. I have Carla del Ponte to thank for this. She told the
hit-men where to find me.
Elsässer: Isn't that an exaggeration? How is a Swiss Federal Prosecutor
responsible for an article in an Italian newspaper?
Turover: Both the Corriere journalists got all their information from
del Ponte, including my mobile phone number. They told me so
themselves, because they knew my life was in danger.
Elsässer: Del Ponte has denied that.
Turover: Then she's not telling the truth. And I've already said this
many times and she has never threatened to sue for slander. The reason
is simple: she has no proof, but I do.
Elsässer: Mabetex boss Pacolli is not only a construction magnate, but
is also said to have close ties to the Kosovo Albanian KLA terrorists.
Turover: That's right. He himself has stated that at least until 2000
his group owned the Kosovo Albanian daily "Bota Sot" which even the
OSCE condemned for racist articles. Its agitation was aimed mainly at
the Serbs, but it also made an anti-Semitic attack on me as the "Jew
Turover".
Elsässer: If it were the case that the Yeltsin clan had received Kosovo
Albanian bribes, this might explain his behaviour in spring 1999. As
NATO prepared for war against Yugoslavia, he didn't lift a finger to
help the Serbs, his supposed brother people. At the Rambouillet
Conference, when the NATO states took an extremely biased pro-Albanian
position, Moscow didn't protest, although its diplomats were at the
negotiating table. Did the Kosovo Albanians buy Yeltsin's passivity?
Turover: That's possible. We're looking here at a symbiosis of
politics, plunder and money laundering on a large scale.
Elsässer: And del Ponte?
Turover: All the preliminary inquiries in the Mabetex case in
Switzerland were politically abandoned at the highest level. Moreover,
the documents that del Ponte had received from her Russian colleague
Skuratov somehow ended up in Pacolli's possession. He reported back to
his Russian friends Yeltsin and Borodin and subsequently Skuratov, an
honest and competent lawyer, was shunted aside, in spite of three
almost unanimous resolutions in his support from the Russian
Senate. The end of Skuratov was also the end of the Moscow Mabetex case
- the proceedings were finally abandoned in December 2000.
Elsässer: Was del Ponte acting to protect the Albanian Mafia or the
Yeltsin clan?
Turover: Neither. She acts only in her own interest. She is indifferent
to political goals. Look at the point in time when she made public what
she knew about the Mabetex case, including my name - the end of August
1999. That was a blow not only to me, but to Yeltsin too.
It's true that she later failed to follow through on the case, but at
that moment her revelations did serious damage to Yeltsin. The
immediate background was the spectacular coup by Russian elite units in
Kosovo in summer 1999; after the ceasefire they occupied Pristina
airport, getting there before NATO. According to the British head of
KFOR, Michael Jackson, this could have led to world war three. Moscow
was playing for high stakes. It wanted its own occupation zone in
Kosovo to protect the Serbs. In this situation Yeltsin had to be
repudiated. The current US Foreign Minister, Madeleine Albright,
therefore met del Ponte at London Heathrow airport in July 1999 and
probably spelt all this out to her. So then del Ponte went public with
her revelations about Yeltsin in Corriere della Sera and in
mid-September Albright in a statement on CNN stoked up the heat about
Russian government corruption. Yeltsin had to fear an effort to impeach
him and then prosecution. He was let off the hook by two bombings in
Moscow, allegedly by Chechen terrorists. Russian troops went into
Chechnya and public attention was diverted from Russiagate.
Elsässer: Was del Ponte acting as an agent of Washington in this
situation?
Turover: She is no more pro-American than she is pro-Albanian. She acts
in Swiss interests, i.e. in the interests of the Mafia in Switzerland.
Elsässer: Explain.
Turover: Switzerland and the Swiss banks live mainly off money
laundering. All the world's dictators and major criminals deposit their
money here. Above all the canton of Tessin is exceptionally well placed
for this. People simply carry millions in suitcases and glove
compartments over the border from Italy. Every politician in Tessin
knows about it and benefits from it. And as the canton's public
prosecutor del Ponte protected this activity even before the Mabetex
case at the end of the 1990s. Take the case of a company in Chiasso
accused of money laundering for the Italian Mafia. She stopped the
proceedings. But basically del Ponte is pro-del Ponte. She would do
anything for her career, even bring a case against George W. Bush. She
is in any case a useless lawyer. To my knowledge she has never won a
case in her entire career. Her only talent is self-promotion,
self-marketing.
Elsässer: Her agreement with Albright in any case proved profitable. A
little later she became the Chief Prosecutor at the Hague, at
Washington's behest. The Zurich Weltwoche expressed surprise: "why the
Americans wanted her to succeed the difficult and prematurely ousted
Louise Arbour remains a puzzle. After all they had made no secret of
the fact that they regarded the Court as a useless waste of time".
Turover: Del Ponte and the Swiss government helped Albright and the
Americans - they're honest people, they pay their bills - therefore
rewarded her with the Hague job. Here too she has sold herself
brilliantly. With her, the trial is a total disaster. She has nothing
on Milosevic, and legally he ought therefore to be released
immediately. And so Milosevic, who himself is nothing but a bandit and
con man, can present himself as an innocent victim of persecution and
Serb nationalism is on the rise as the recent elections showed [1]. Do
people in the Hague really not know that the Swiss Federal Government
has appointed a special investigator to look into the del Ponte
affair? How can a woman who is herself the subject of judicial
investigation at the highest level because of serious crimes stay on as
Chief Prosecutor at the UN war crimes tribunal?
Elsässer: In March 2001 you reported Carla del Ponte and persons
unknown to the police for, among other things, endangering your life
and attempted murder (tentato assassinio) in connection with
Russiagate. But the Swiss Federal Prosecutor, Valentin Roschacher,
dismissed the charges against his predecessor. So how can you say that
a special investigation of del Ponte is ongoing?
Turover: Roschacher protected del Ponte and I have therefore brought a
case against him for bias in her favour. This case has not only been
taken up, but in May 2002 the Swiss Federal Council appointed a special
investigator, Arthur Hublard, the former public prosecutor of Jura
canton. He is investigating my accusations against Roschacher - but the
del Ponte case is obviously also involved here. Furthermore, I have
laid charges against Switzerland at the European Court of Human Rights
in Strasbourg.
Elsässer: Against Switzerland, not against del Ponte?
Turover: You can't bring cases against private persons in
Strasbourg. But in substance the charges relate primarily to del Ponte
because as the Swiss Federal Prosecutor she placed my life in
danger. It's preposterous for her to continue to hold office in the
Hague when two such cases are pending.
Elsässer: You are living in hiding, constantly moving house. How long
will you keep this up?
Turover: I have to, otherwise I'm dead because of del Ponte. I have of
course insured myself by making sure that in the event of my demise
even more explosive information than hitherto will be revealed. But
that does not provide me with real security. So far at least five
prosecution witnesses in the Mabetex case have been cleared out of the
way. The most recent victim was Pacolli's personal secretary, a 32-year
old woman, who was found dead in the bathroom, allegedly from a blood
clot. There was no autopsy and she was cremated the next day.
[1] Obviously, these disparaging remarks about Mr Milosevic do not
represent the views of the ICDSM. The reason why Carla del Ponte has
got nothing on Mr Milosevic is that the charges against him have no
basis in reality. However incompetent del Ponte may be, she has had a
multitude of "experts", investigators and compliant officials within
and outside Yugoslavia to help her in her quest for "evidence". They
have found nothing because there was never anything there to find.
---
IS THE END NEAR?
Obviously. Anyhow. Remember: in spite of all blackmails from ICTY and
puppet regime in Belgrade, all the ‘crucial insiders’ were just more
and more ruining the ‘indictment’ – one of the biggest historical lies
ever. And here is how just days ago, Carla tried, without conviction,
to advertise her non-existing achievements and to propose herself to
the Security Council:
UN Prosecutor to Show Milosevic Evidence
ARTHUR MAX
Associated Press
Wed, Jul. 16, 2003
THE HAGUE, Netherlands-With time running out to conclude her case, the
chief U.N. war crimes prosecutor said Wednesday she will begin focusing
on the genocide charges against Slobodan Milosevic, and the next few
months will be critical.
The prosecutor, Carla Del Ponte, said crucial evidence will soon be
presented to the tribunal regarding the former Yugoslav president's
involvement with the massacre in Srebrenica and the months-long
bombardment of Sarajevo. She said she was confident it would lead to
convictions for genocide - the most serious of the 66 charges Milosevic
faces.
The prosecution has until the end of the year to complete its case in
the trial. Milosevic, 61, who is representing himself, will then have
equal time - nearly two years - to present his defense.
Milosevic, who has been on trial since February 2002, has serious heart
trouble and illness that has repeatedly delayed hearings.
In verdicts in other cases, the Yugoslav tribunal has set stiff
standards for genocide convictions, demanding the prosecution
demonstrate that a prior intent to destroy a race or ethnic group was
the motive for the crime.
In the tribunal's 10-year existence, one person has been convicted of
genocide. Two other defendants were acquitted, but were convicted of
crimes against humanity and received long prison terms. Prosecutors
have dropped genocide charges in several other cases when they believed
the evidence was inadequate.
In an Associated Press interview, Del Ponte said the prosecution's case
against Milosevic is going well, but they haven't yet proved the
genocide charges.
"So far it's going OK, but let's see. It will be in September-October
that will be the most crucial moment for this count of genocide," she
said.
Del Ponte said she expected to hand down the last indictments against
war crimes suspects in the former Yugoslavia, and conclude all the
investigations on schedule by the end of next year.
The tribunal, created in 1993 by the U.N. Security Council to prosecute
crimes in the Balkan wars of the 1990s, will disband when the last
trials are completed - in 2010 at the latest.
Keeping an eye on a television monitor showing the Milosevic trial one
floor below her office, Del Ponte said she hoped senior political and
military figures during his 13 years in power, who are under indictment
themselves, will testify against their former leader.
She has been buoyed in the last month by the decision of two former
Yugoslav army officers to change their innocent pleas to guilty and to
issue lengthy statements implicating co-defendants - but not Milosevic
himself - in the killings at Srebrenica in July 1995.
Bosnian Serbs slaughtered more than 7,000 Muslims in one week in the
enclave, which had been declared a U.N. protected zone. It was the
worst mass murder in Europe since World War II.
Del Ponte held out hope that Biljana Plavsic, the former Bosnian Serb
leader who pleaded guilty and the most senior political figure to be
convicted so far, would change her mind and testify against Milosevic.
Plavsic is serving an 11-year sentence in Sweden.
"If Biljana Plavsic would agree to testify in court, it would be much
easier," Del Ponte said. "But it's not only Plavsic. We have others."
In her plea bargain last year, Plavsic made it clear she had no
intention to be a witness in other trials.
"Until now, I am optimistic," Del Ponte said about persuading suspects
to testify against Milosevic. "But you know it can change from day to
day, because sometimes witnesses are hesitant for other reasons -
threats, a political situation."
Don’t miss to tell to the Security Council and to the public, before
September 15 what do you think about Carla del Ponte and her NATO
justice.
---
And justice will work, sooner or later. On behalf of the people, of
course. There is at least one document waiting since last year in
Belgrade that democracy returns:
District State Attorney’s Office-Belgrade
B e l g r a d e
16A Slobodana Penezica St.
Pursuant to the Art. 224 of the Law on Criminal Proceedings and the
Art. 107 item 1 of the Penal Code of FRY, the above Attorney’ s Office
being of actual and regional jurisdiction has been filed the following
CRIMINAL CHARGES
against:
1. Carla del Ponte, the Attorney of the International Criminal Tribunal
for the Former Yugoslavia in the Hague;
2. Geoffrey Nice, the Deputy Attorney of the ICTY;
3. Dirk Ryneveld, the Deputy Attorney of the ICTY;
4. Cristina Romano, the Deputy Attorney of the ICTY;
5. Milbert Shin, the Deputy Attorney of the ICTY;
6. Daniel Saxon, the Deputy Attorney of the ICTY;
7. Julia Baly, the Deputy Attorney of the ICTY;
8. Daryl A. Mundis, the Deputy Attorney of the ICTY
Them having deliberately ever since June 26, 2001, initiated the
procedure of life deprivation of Slobodan Milosevic, him being at
request of the Attorney’s Office of the Hague Tribunal, kept in the
Detention Unit of the ICTY in Scheweningen in the Hague; him being
occasionally, ever since February 12, 2002, brought and kept under
surveillance in the court -room in the Hague and him being returned to
the Detention Unit although all of them knowing that the health
condition of Slobodan Milosevic requires urgent medical
treatment outside prison; them depriving Slobodan Milosevic necessary
cardiology specialist treatment and further care; them doing this
persistently and deliberately, ignoring opinions and recommendations of
the physicians conference from FRY and recommendations of the
physicians Dr. J.W. Crosse and Dr. H.A. Rodrigues from Holland dtd.
June 17, 2002, as well as opinions of the Head of the Cardiology Clinic
of the Military Medical Academy, Belgrade, FRY dtd. July 23, 2002, that
tried persistently to propose to the Trial Chamber Slobodan Milosevic
being assigned defense attorney instead of Slobodan Milosevic
temporarily being relieved due to further medical treatment and
seriously aggravated health condition that might cause his death.
Them, hereby, being co-executors for the criminal offense of attempted
murder pursuant to the Art 47 item 1 of the Penal Code of the Republic
of Serbia in connection with the Art. 19 of the Penal Code of FRY.
Them although chosen by the OUN and having the above assignments,
deliberately and roughly broke their professional code of conduct and
the acts of the OUN, representing the generally binding acts of the
international public law that covers bodies and institutions of the OUN
as well as the stuff of the OUN, i.e.:
“the principles of medical ethics applied to medical stuff, physicians
mostly, to protect detainees and persons detained from torture and
other cruel, inhuman or degrading punishments or deeds” (Adopted by the
General Assembly of the United Nations on Dec. 18 1982, the Resolution
37/94),
as well as
“The Code of Conduct of Persons Liable for Introduction of the Law”
adopted on the part of the General Assembly of the United Nations on
Dec. 17, 1979, the Resolution 34/169.
The Art. 6 of this Code determined that “persons liable for application
of this law should take care that health of persons entrusted to them
should be FULLY PROTECTED and they MUST, IMMEDIATELY TAKE ALL NECESSARY
STEPS to provide the affected persons with all medical care whenever
need arises”.
They violated severely the Art. 3 of the Universal Declaration on Human
Rights that guarantees that “EVERYBODY HAS RIGHT TO LIFE, FREADOM AND
SECURITY OF HIS PERSONALITY.”
The Attorney and her Deputies do not propose to the President of the
Court and the Trial Chamber neither the change of conditions for
Slobodan Milosevic pursuant to the Art. 64 of the Rules nor do they
initiate the Trial Chamber to release temporarily Slobodan Milosevic
due to medical treatment pursuant to the Art. 65 of the Rules although
they are well acquainted with the quoted medical reports and proposals.
In Annex to these Charges we provide copies of medical reports of Dr.
J.W. Crosse and Dr. H.A. Rodriques from Holland dtd. July 19, 2002,
done upon request of the court council of MKSJ and Dr. Sc. Med. Zdravko
Mijailovic, the Head of the Cardiology Clinic of the Military Medical
Academy, Belgrade.
Hereinafter we propose pursuant to the legal jurisdiction mentioned in
the Law on Public Attorney Office Work and the Criminal Proceedings
Regulations to take all necessary steps for suspects’ persecution in
conformity with the presentation of evidence and their punishment
before authorized courts.
In Belgrade on Nov. 12, 2002.
Charges filed by
Association of Citizens “FREEDOM’
National Committee for Release of Slobodan Milosevic
Belgrade, 16 Rajiceva St.
---
SLOBODA urgently needs your donation.
Please find the detailed instructions at:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/pomoc.htm
To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/ (Sloboda/Freedom association)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)
http://www.free-slobo.de/ (German section of ICDSM)
http://www.wpc-in.org/ (world peace council)
http://www.geocities.com/b_antinato/ (Balkan antiNATO center)
SLOBODA today addressed the media in Belgrade with the following
statement:
Sloboda/Freedom Association – Yugoslav Committee for the Release of
Slobodan Milosevic warns the public at home and abroad that the state
of health of President Slobodan Milosevic is continuously getting
worse, due to the dangerous and malicious disrespect of the
international standards of the human right protection by the illegal
tribunal at The Hague.
President Milosevic is triumphant in his struggle for truth in the
process without a precedent in history, in spite he faces everyday
burden exceeding the human abilities as well as the inhuman prison
conditions. And it lasts more than two years already. Few specialist
medical examinations and analyses have undoubtedly proven that the
conditions he faces are a dangerous factor of cardiovascular risk. But
the tribunal refuses even to secure regular check-ups of the
President’s health condition.
Sloboda/Freedom Association demands that President Milosevic should be
at least provided with the necessary examinations and recuperation in
his own country and to be allowed to continue his participation in the
process from freedom. That would be the only way to protect his life
and health.
Belgrade, July 30, 2003
NOTE: Since last Friday, President Milosevic has kidney pains. On
Friday, the court session started with delay, since he was waiting to
get a pill against pain. This week, there was no trial. Tribunal’s
doctors have been examining him today. Results are still expected.
President Milosevic was examined by the specialists’ medical team from
Belgrade in February. On that occasion, Belgrade doctors agreed with
their Dutch colleagues appointed by the tribunal that President
Milosevic needs regular health monitoring, including specialists’
examination at least once in a month. Since then, there were no
specialists’ examinations. In June, Sloboda demanded in strongest terms
that Belgrade medical team goes to The Hague again, referring to the
February agreement. This demand was sent to the person in charge,
tribunal’s Registrar and to all “judges” of the “Trial Chamber III”.
Until now, Sloboda got no response from the tribunal. When we were
urging a response by phone, persons from the Registry replied that for
another visit of Belgrade doctors, according to the tribunal’s “Rules”,
‘a written request of the accused is needed’. Now we are facing another
dramatic turn in President Milosevic’s health due to another tribunal’s
deliberate disregard of the medical conclusions. And President
Milosevic is not willing to ask his inquisitors for anything.
Sloboda calls upon the national committees, jurists and medical doctors
to react. Address the tribunal and UN Security Council members (find
their contacts at
http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/unsc_members.html )
---
When light of truth or light of public attention falls on the illegal
tribunal’s building made of immoral and criminal ‘right of might’, the
building starts to be ruined.
Look at the two excerpts from today’s tribunal’s weekly press briefing
(last before the three weeks summer recess). First, about the President
Milosevic’s health:
<<Asked for more information concerning Milosevic’s health, [spokesman
for Registry and Chambers Jim] Landale replied that he could not really
go much further than what Judge May had said in court this morning
during the administrative session, which was that the Trial Chamber
understood that Milosevic was suffering from problems with his blood
pressure and that was the reason he was not able to attend court this
week and why the trial would now adjourn until 25 August 2003. He could
not go further than that, he concluded.
A journalist stated that everyone had become used to interruptions of
the Milosevic trial due to reasons of blood pressure, flu or
exhaustion, but that Milosevic, during the public hearing on Friday,
had mentioned that he had asked for a pain killer and that it was the
first time he did so. Asked whether this indicated that there was a new
ailment, or new symptoms, Landale replied that he would not go any
further than what Judge May had said in court today. He added that it
was not for him to disclose confidential medical information and that
he would not do so.>>
And second, about Carla del Ponte:
<<Asked what the position of the Prosecutor was concerning
recommendations made by the UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, not to
extend her mandate as Prosecutor of the ICTR, [spokeswoman for the
Office of the Prosecutor Florence] Hartmann replied that the next step,
following the recommendation of the Secretary-General, was for the
Security Council to issue a resolution. It was up to the Security
Council to decide on such matters. She concluded that the Prosecutor
would make no comment until a decision had been made.
According to a journalist, Carla Del Ponte had told a Swiss newspaper a
few days ago that if her mandate for the ICTR was not extended, she
would not stay at the ICTY. Hartmann replied that she had no further
comment to make on this issue except that she was waiting to see what
the Security Council decided. She would comment after that, but not at
the moment as it was too early.>>
WHY SHOULD SUCH A PERSON KEEP ANY POST IN UN SYSTEM?
(we remind you of one of our earlier posts, which is just a piece of
numerous dirty stories about the criminal NATO executor)
TRANSLATION OF INTERVIEW BY JURGEN ELSAESSER WITH FELIPE TUROVER ON
CARLA DEL PONTE
(source: Konkret, December 2002)
Translated by Colin Meade
[quotation]
Felipe Turover: "Carla del Ponte told the hit-men where to find me".
[Introduction]
"Justice is a woman", said UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan about Carla
del Ponte, currently Chief Prosecutor in the Hague trial of Slobodan
Milosevic. Felipe Turover's experience of the Swiss jurist is very
different. 37-year old Felipe comes from a Spanish Republican family
whose parents fled with him from Franco to the Soviet Union. After the
death of the dictator, Felipe returned to his native land before going
back at the end of the 1980s to Moscow as a financial expert. From 1992
to 1999 he worked for the Yeltsin government managing debts with
Western creditor banks.
[Interview]
Elsässer: You are the chief witness in the Mabetex case, also known as
Russiagate. What is it about and how does Carla del Ponte come into it?
Turover: Mabetex is a construction company based in Lugano in Italian
Switzerland. It belongs to the Kosovo Albanian Beghijet Pacolli who now
has a Swiss passport. In the 1990s Pacolli and his business partner
Viktor Stolpovskich won some two billion euros-worth of orders from the
Kremlin, supposedly for building and restoration work in the government
and presidential complex. It has been proved that billions of dollars
vanished from Russia through this operation, with millions being spent
on bribes in Moscow in return. Pacolli acted as guarantor for credit
cards for Yeltsin and both his daughters, according to the Banca del
Gottardo which issued the cards. Carla del Ponte, at that time a Swiss
public prosecutor contacted me in 1997 and asked me to be ready to
testify in the case. Later she invited the Russian investigating
prosecutor Yuri Skuratov to Switzerland and put me in touch with
him. At that time she already had a reputation as a great fighter for
justice and I therefore did as she asked. That was an almost fatal
error.
Elsässer: Why?
Turover: I was dependent on her honesty and had made it clear to her
from the start that my testimony placed my life in danger. I was still
at the time working as an advisor to the Russian authorities, i.e. for
the very people I was incriminating with these documents. So what did
Ms del Ponte do? She gave my full name and job to the press. This was
as if I had given information to the US Drug Enforcement Agency about
the Escobar Clan out of Medellin and then, while still in the lions'
den, read in the New York Times that I was the chief witness against
Escobar. In my case, it was Moscow rather than Medellin and the
newspaper was the Corriere della Sera but the effect was the same. I
was in big trouble and saved my life by hurriedly getting out of
Moscow. Since then, for the past three years, I have been living
undercover. I have Carla del Ponte to thank for this. She told the
hit-men where to find me.
Elsässer: Isn't that an exaggeration? How is a Swiss Federal Prosecutor
responsible for an article in an Italian newspaper?
Turover: Both the Corriere journalists got all their information from
del Ponte, including my mobile phone number. They told me so
themselves, because they knew my life was in danger.
Elsässer: Del Ponte has denied that.
Turover: Then she's not telling the truth. And I've already said this
many times and she has never threatened to sue for slander. The reason
is simple: she has no proof, but I do.
Elsässer: Mabetex boss Pacolli is not only a construction magnate, but
is also said to have close ties to the Kosovo Albanian KLA terrorists.
Turover: That's right. He himself has stated that at least until 2000
his group owned the Kosovo Albanian daily "Bota Sot" which even the
OSCE condemned for racist articles. Its agitation was aimed mainly at
the Serbs, but it also made an anti-Semitic attack on me as the "Jew
Turover".
Elsässer: If it were the case that the Yeltsin clan had received Kosovo
Albanian bribes, this might explain his behaviour in spring 1999. As
NATO prepared for war against Yugoslavia, he didn't lift a finger to
help the Serbs, his supposed brother people. At the Rambouillet
Conference, when the NATO states took an extremely biased pro-Albanian
position, Moscow didn't protest, although its diplomats were at the
negotiating table. Did the Kosovo Albanians buy Yeltsin's passivity?
Turover: That's possible. We're looking here at a symbiosis of
politics, plunder and money laundering on a large scale.
Elsässer: And del Ponte?
Turover: All the preliminary inquiries in the Mabetex case in
Switzerland were politically abandoned at the highest level. Moreover,
the documents that del Ponte had received from her Russian colleague
Skuratov somehow ended up in Pacolli's possession. He reported back to
his Russian friends Yeltsin and Borodin and subsequently Skuratov, an
honest and competent lawyer, was shunted aside, in spite of three
almost unanimous resolutions in his support from the Russian
Senate. The end of Skuratov was also the end of the Moscow Mabetex case
- the proceedings were finally abandoned in December 2000.
Elsässer: Was del Ponte acting to protect the Albanian Mafia or the
Yeltsin clan?
Turover: Neither. She acts only in her own interest. She is indifferent
to political goals. Look at the point in time when she made public what
she knew about the Mabetex case, including my name - the end of August
1999. That was a blow not only to me, but to Yeltsin too.
It's true that she later failed to follow through on the case, but at
that moment her revelations did serious damage to Yeltsin. The
immediate background was the spectacular coup by Russian elite units in
Kosovo in summer 1999; after the ceasefire they occupied Pristina
airport, getting there before NATO. According to the British head of
KFOR, Michael Jackson, this could have led to world war three. Moscow
was playing for high stakes. It wanted its own occupation zone in
Kosovo to protect the Serbs. In this situation Yeltsin had to be
repudiated. The current US Foreign Minister, Madeleine Albright,
therefore met del Ponte at London Heathrow airport in July 1999 and
probably spelt all this out to her. So then del Ponte went public with
her revelations about Yeltsin in Corriere della Sera and in
mid-September Albright in a statement on CNN stoked up the heat about
Russian government corruption. Yeltsin had to fear an effort to impeach
him and then prosecution. He was let off the hook by two bombings in
Moscow, allegedly by Chechen terrorists. Russian troops went into
Chechnya and public attention was diverted from Russiagate.
Elsässer: Was del Ponte acting as an agent of Washington in this
situation?
Turover: She is no more pro-American than she is pro-Albanian. She acts
in Swiss interests, i.e. in the interests of the Mafia in Switzerland.
Elsässer: Explain.
Turover: Switzerland and the Swiss banks live mainly off money
laundering. All the world's dictators and major criminals deposit their
money here. Above all the canton of Tessin is exceptionally well placed
for this. People simply carry millions in suitcases and glove
compartments over the border from Italy. Every politician in Tessin
knows about it and benefits from it. And as the canton's public
prosecutor del Ponte protected this activity even before the Mabetex
case at the end of the 1990s. Take the case of a company in Chiasso
accused of money laundering for the Italian Mafia. She stopped the
proceedings. But basically del Ponte is pro-del Ponte. She would do
anything for her career, even bring a case against George W. Bush. She
is in any case a useless lawyer. To my knowledge she has never won a
case in her entire career. Her only talent is self-promotion,
self-marketing.
Elsässer: Her agreement with Albright in any case proved profitable. A
little later she became the Chief Prosecutor at the Hague, at
Washington's behest. The Zurich Weltwoche expressed surprise: "why the
Americans wanted her to succeed the difficult and prematurely ousted
Louise Arbour remains a puzzle. After all they had made no secret of
the fact that they regarded the Court as a useless waste of time".
Turover: Del Ponte and the Swiss government helped Albright and the
Americans - they're honest people, they pay their bills - therefore
rewarded her with the Hague job. Here too she has sold herself
brilliantly. With her, the trial is a total disaster. She has nothing
on Milosevic, and legally he ought therefore to be released
immediately. And so Milosevic, who himself is nothing but a bandit and
con man, can present himself as an innocent victim of persecution and
Serb nationalism is on the rise as the recent elections showed [1]. Do
people in the Hague really not know that the Swiss Federal Government
has appointed a special investigator to look into the del Ponte
affair? How can a woman who is herself the subject of judicial
investigation at the highest level because of serious crimes stay on as
Chief Prosecutor at the UN war crimes tribunal?
Elsässer: In March 2001 you reported Carla del Ponte and persons
unknown to the police for, among other things, endangering your life
and attempted murder (tentato assassinio) in connection with
Russiagate. But the Swiss Federal Prosecutor, Valentin Roschacher,
dismissed the charges against his predecessor. So how can you say that
a special investigation of del Ponte is ongoing?
Turover: Roschacher protected del Ponte and I have therefore brought a
case against him for bias in her favour. This case has not only been
taken up, but in May 2002 the Swiss Federal Council appointed a special
investigator, Arthur Hublard, the former public prosecutor of Jura
canton. He is investigating my accusations against Roschacher - but the
del Ponte case is obviously also involved here. Furthermore, I have
laid charges against Switzerland at the European Court of Human Rights
in Strasbourg.
Elsässer: Against Switzerland, not against del Ponte?
Turover: You can't bring cases against private persons in
Strasbourg. But in substance the charges relate primarily to del Ponte
because as the Swiss Federal Prosecutor she placed my life in
danger. It's preposterous for her to continue to hold office in the
Hague when two such cases are pending.
Elsässer: You are living in hiding, constantly moving house. How long
will you keep this up?
Turover: I have to, otherwise I'm dead because of del Ponte. I have of
course insured myself by making sure that in the event of my demise
even more explosive information than hitherto will be revealed. But
that does not provide me with real security. So far at least five
prosecution witnesses in the Mabetex case have been cleared out of the
way. The most recent victim was Pacolli's personal secretary, a 32-year
old woman, who was found dead in the bathroom, allegedly from a blood
clot. There was no autopsy and she was cremated the next day.
[1] Obviously, these disparaging remarks about Mr Milosevic do not
represent the views of the ICDSM. The reason why Carla del Ponte has
got nothing on Mr Milosevic is that the charges against him have no
basis in reality. However incompetent del Ponte may be, she has had a
multitude of "experts", investigators and compliant officials within
and outside Yugoslavia to help her in her quest for "evidence". They
have found nothing because there was never anything there to find.
---
IS THE END NEAR?
Obviously. Anyhow. Remember: in spite of all blackmails from ICTY and
puppet regime in Belgrade, all the ‘crucial insiders’ were just more
and more ruining the ‘indictment’ – one of the biggest historical lies
ever. And here is how just days ago, Carla tried, without conviction,
to advertise her non-existing achievements and to propose herself to
the Security Council:
UN Prosecutor to Show Milosevic Evidence
ARTHUR MAX
Associated Press
Wed, Jul. 16, 2003
THE HAGUE, Netherlands-With time running out to conclude her case, the
chief U.N. war crimes prosecutor said Wednesday she will begin focusing
on the genocide charges against Slobodan Milosevic, and the next few
months will be critical.
The prosecutor, Carla Del Ponte, said crucial evidence will soon be
presented to the tribunal regarding the former Yugoslav president's
involvement with the massacre in Srebrenica and the months-long
bombardment of Sarajevo. She said she was confident it would lead to
convictions for genocide - the most serious of the 66 charges Milosevic
faces.
The prosecution has until the end of the year to complete its case in
the trial. Milosevic, 61, who is representing himself, will then have
equal time - nearly two years - to present his defense.
Milosevic, who has been on trial since February 2002, has serious heart
trouble and illness that has repeatedly delayed hearings.
In verdicts in other cases, the Yugoslav tribunal has set stiff
standards for genocide convictions, demanding the prosecution
demonstrate that a prior intent to destroy a race or ethnic group was
the motive for the crime.
In the tribunal's 10-year existence, one person has been convicted of
genocide. Two other defendants were acquitted, but were convicted of
crimes against humanity and received long prison terms. Prosecutors
have dropped genocide charges in several other cases when they believed
the evidence was inadequate.
In an Associated Press interview, Del Ponte said the prosecution's case
against Milosevic is going well, but they haven't yet proved the
genocide charges.
"So far it's going OK, but let's see. It will be in September-October
that will be the most crucial moment for this count of genocide," she
said.
Del Ponte said she expected to hand down the last indictments against
war crimes suspects in the former Yugoslavia, and conclude all the
investigations on schedule by the end of next year.
The tribunal, created in 1993 by the U.N. Security Council to prosecute
crimes in the Balkan wars of the 1990s, will disband when the last
trials are completed - in 2010 at the latest.
Keeping an eye on a television monitor showing the Milosevic trial one
floor below her office, Del Ponte said she hoped senior political and
military figures during his 13 years in power, who are under indictment
themselves, will testify against their former leader.
She has been buoyed in the last month by the decision of two former
Yugoslav army officers to change their innocent pleas to guilty and to
issue lengthy statements implicating co-defendants - but not Milosevic
himself - in the killings at Srebrenica in July 1995.
Bosnian Serbs slaughtered more than 7,000 Muslims in one week in the
enclave, which had been declared a U.N. protected zone. It was the
worst mass murder in Europe since World War II.
Del Ponte held out hope that Biljana Plavsic, the former Bosnian Serb
leader who pleaded guilty and the most senior political figure to be
convicted so far, would change her mind and testify against Milosevic.
Plavsic is serving an 11-year sentence in Sweden.
"If Biljana Plavsic would agree to testify in court, it would be much
easier," Del Ponte said. "But it's not only Plavsic. We have others."
In her plea bargain last year, Plavsic made it clear she had no
intention to be a witness in other trials.
"Until now, I am optimistic," Del Ponte said about persuading suspects
to testify against Milosevic. "But you know it can change from day to
day, because sometimes witnesses are hesitant for other reasons -
threats, a political situation."
Don’t miss to tell to the Security Council and to the public, before
September 15 what do you think about Carla del Ponte and her NATO
justice.
---
And justice will work, sooner or later. On behalf of the people, of
course. There is at least one document waiting since last year in
Belgrade that democracy returns:
District State Attorney’s Office-Belgrade
B e l g r a d e
16A Slobodana Penezica St.
Pursuant to the Art. 224 of the Law on Criminal Proceedings and the
Art. 107 item 1 of the Penal Code of FRY, the above Attorney’ s Office
being of actual and regional jurisdiction has been filed the following
CRIMINAL CHARGES
against:
1. Carla del Ponte, the Attorney of the International Criminal Tribunal
for the Former Yugoslavia in the Hague;
2. Geoffrey Nice, the Deputy Attorney of the ICTY;
3. Dirk Ryneveld, the Deputy Attorney of the ICTY;
4. Cristina Romano, the Deputy Attorney of the ICTY;
5. Milbert Shin, the Deputy Attorney of the ICTY;
6. Daniel Saxon, the Deputy Attorney of the ICTY;
7. Julia Baly, the Deputy Attorney of the ICTY;
8. Daryl A. Mundis, the Deputy Attorney of the ICTY
Them having deliberately ever since June 26, 2001, initiated the
procedure of life deprivation of Slobodan Milosevic, him being at
request of the Attorney’s Office of the Hague Tribunal, kept in the
Detention Unit of the ICTY in Scheweningen in the Hague; him being
occasionally, ever since February 12, 2002, brought and kept under
surveillance in the court -room in the Hague and him being returned to
the Detention Unit although all of them knowing that the health
condition of Slobodan Milosevic requires urgent medical
treatment outside prison; them depriving Slobodan Milosevic necessary
cardiology specialist treatment and further care; them doing this
persistently and deliberately, ignoring opinions and recommendations of
the physicians conference from FRY and recommendations of the
physicians Dr. J.W. Crosse and Dr. H.A. Rodrigues from Holland dtd.
June 17, 2002, as well as opinions of the Head of the Cardiology Clinic
of the Military Medical Academy, Belgrade, FRY dtd. July 23, 2002, that
tried persistently to propose to the Trial Chamber Slobodan Milosevic
being assigned defense attorney instead of Slobodan Milosevic
temporarily being relieved due to further medical treatment and
seriously aggravated health condition that might cause his death.
Them, hereby, being co-executors for the criminal offense of attempted
murder pursuant to the Art 47 item 1 of the Penal Code of the Republic
of Serbia in connection with the Art. 19 of the Penal Code of FRY.
Them although chosen by the OUN and having the above assignments,
deliberately and roughly broke their professional code of conduct and
the acts of the OUN, representing the generally binding acts of the
international public law that covers bodies and institutions of the OUN
as well as the stuff of the OUN, i.e.:
“the principles of medical ethics applied to medical stuff, physicians
mostly, to protect detainees and persons detained from torture and
other cruel, inhuman or degrading punishments or deeds” (Adopted by the
General Assembly of the United Nations on Dec. 18 1982, the Resolution
37/94),
as well as
“The Code of Conduct of Persons Liable for Introduction of the Law”
adopted on the part of the General Assembly of the United Nations on
Dec. 17, 1979, the Resolution 34/169.
The Art. 6 of this Code determined that “persons liable for application
of this law should take care that health of persons entrusted to them
should be FULLY PROTECTED and they MUST, IMMEDIATELY TAKE ALL NECESSARY
STEPS to provide the affected persons with all medical care whenever
need arises”.
They violated severely the Art. 3 of the Universal Declaration on Human
Rights that guarantees that “EVERYBODY HAS RIGHT TO LIFE, FREADOM AND
SECURITY OF HIS PERSONALITY.”
The Attorney and her Deputies do not propose to the President of the
Court and the Trial Chamber neither the change of conditions for
Slobodan Milosevic pursuant to the Art. 64 of the Rules nor do they
initiate the Trial Chamber to release temporarily Slobodan Milosevic
due to medical treatment pursuant to the Art. 65 of the Rules although
they are well acquainted with the quoted medical reports and proposals.
In Annex to these Charges we provide copies of medical reports of Dr.
J.W. Crosse and Dr. H.A. Rodriques from Holland dtd. July 19, 2002,
done upon request of the court council of MKSJ and Dr. Sc. Med. Zdravko
Mijailovic, the Head of the Cardiology Clinic of the Military Medical
Academy, Belgrade.
Hereinafter we propose pursuant to the legal jurisdiction mentioned in
the Law on Public Attorney Office Work and the Criminal Proceedings
Regulations to take all necessary steps for suspects’ persecution in
conformity with the presentation of evidence and their punishment
before authorized courts.
In Belgrade on Nov. 12, 2002.
Charges filed by
Association of Citizens “FREEDOM’
National Committee for Release of Slobodan Milosevic
Belgrade, 16 Rajiceva St.
---
SLOBODA urgently needs your donation.
Please find the detailed instructions at:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/pomoc.htm
To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/ (Sloboda/Freedom association)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)
http://www.free-slobo.de/ (German section of ICDSM)
http://www.wpc-in.org/ (world peace council)
http://www.geocities.com/b_antinato/ (Balkan antiNATO center)
(srpskohrvatski / english)
0. Sloboda: Reagujte dok ne bude prekasno!
Milosevic "Trial", 15--25 July 2003:
1. Dealing With the "Hostile" Insider Witness
by Judith Armatta, 15 July, 2003 - http://www.cij.org/
2. SYNOPSIS OF THE JULY 22, 2003 PROCEEDINGS AT THE HAGUE TRIBUNAL
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg072203.htm
3. SYNOPSIS OF JULY 23 HEARINGS AT THE HAGUE TRIBUNAL
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg072303.htm
4. ANOTHER SYNOPSIS OF THE JULY 23, 2003 PROCEEDINGS AT THE HAGUE
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/martinovic072303.htm
5. SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC: HISTORY TEACHER, July 24
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/martinovic072403.htm
6. "TRIAL" HALTED DUE TO PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC'S ILL HEALTH
Milosevic war crimes trial to resume August 25
=== 0 ===
Da: "Vladimir Krsljanin"
Data: Mer 30 Lug 2003 16:42:10 Europe/Rome
Oggetto: Sloboda: Reagujte dok ne bude prekasno!
SAOPSTENJE ZA JAVNOST
Udruzenje "Sloboda" - Jugoslovenski komitet za oslobodjenje
Slobodana Milosevica ukazuje domacoj i medjunarodnoj javnosti da se
zbog opasnog i zlonamernog nepostovanja medjunarodnih standarda o
zastiti ljudskih prava od strane ilegalnog tribunala u Hagu, stanje
zdravlja Predsednika Slobodana Milosevica stalno pogorsava. Predsednik
Milosevic svojom borbom za istinu trijumfuje u procesu bez presedana u
istoriji, izlozen svakodnevnim nadljudskim naporima i nehumanim
zatvorskim uslovima.
To traje vec vise od dve godine. Iako su dosadasnji malobrojni
specijalisticki pregledi i medicinske analize nesumnjivo utvrdili da
uslovi kojima je izlozen predstavljaju opasan faktor kardiovaskularnog
rizika, tribunal odbija cak i da obezbedi redovne specijalisticke
kontrole njegovog zdravstvenog stanja.
Udruzenje "Sloboda" zahteva da se Predsedniku Slobodanu Milosevicu
omoguce neophodni pregledi i oporavak u nasoj zemlji i da u ovom
procesu ucestvuje sa slobode. To je jedini primeren nacin da se zastite
njegov zivot i zdravlje.
UDRUZENJE "SLOBODA" - JUGOSLOVENSKI KOMITET ZA OSLOBODJENJE SLOBODANA
MILOSEVICA
Beograd, 30. jula 2003. godine
SLOBODA urgently needs your donation.
Please find the detailed instructions at:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/pomoc.htm
To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/ (Sloboda/Freedom association)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)
http://www.free-slobo.de/ (German section of ICDSM)
http://www.wpc-in.org/ (world peace council)
http://www.geocities.com/b_antinato/ (Balkan antiNATO center)
=== 1 ===
(NOTE: This Lady Armatta, after expressing concern about how
"accusation" witnesses turn in favor of Milosevic in
cross-examinations, claims that in "modern" proceedings such
cross-examinations must be forbidden. Milosevic would have "a nearly
hypnotic effect" thus "it makes it difficult to get at the truth", she
says - she is right, since only HER truth is meant.)
http://www.cij.org/
index.cfm?fuseaction=viewReport&reportID=361&tribunalID=1
Dealing With the "Hostile" Insider Witness
International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY)
Milosevic Trial - The Hague - Court Room Three
15 July 2003
THE HAGUE - An attorney cannot impeach a witness he or she has called,
according to traditional trial practice rules. The rule is based on
the assumption that a party calling a witness vouches for the witness's
credibility. Only when the party can show that a witness has surprised
him or her with their testimony is there an exception. In this
situation, an attorney may ask the court to declare the witness
“hostile” and allow the attorney to impeach his or her own witness,
i.e., attempt to show the witness is lying. Traditionally, judges did
not favor this procedure and tended to tell attorneys they take their
witnesses as they find them. If they “go south” (change their stories)
on the stand, it is just one of life’s risks.
The more modern approach is to recognize that attorneys do not have
unlimited choice of witnesses. Not infrequently, a witness with
important information may also be untrustworthy. That is often the
case with certain witnesses in war crimes trials, especially where the
charge is involvement in a joint criminal enterprise. The best
witnesses in such cases are insiders. They can also be the worst.
Geoffrey Nice has been struggling with this problem since the beginning
of the Milosevic trial, as the Trial Chamber appears to favor the
traditional rule. The recent appearance of Zoran Lilic, one-time
President of the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY), was only
the latest challenge.
On the stand, Lilic showed himself a devotee of Slobodan Milosevic, the
Accused who he had come to testify against. Like other insider
witnesses, such as Rade Markovic, Dragan Vasiljkovic and protected
witness B-1775, once confronted by his old-time boss, Lilic rolled over
like a cur before the alpha dog. Milosevic’s aura was too strong for
him. Lilic (and Markovic, Vasiljkovic and B-1775) willingly and
unashamedly agreed to whatever Milosevic asked, with some exceptions.
It is not unusual for authoritarian leaders to surround themselves with
“yes-men,” but it makes it difficult to get at the truth, particularly
if the hostile witness rule is applied.
Lilic provided important testimony on direct examination about:
Milosevic's central role in getting the Bosnian Serbs to lay down their
guns; the primacy of Milosevic's Serbian police (MUP) over the VJ
(Yugoslav Army) and the direct subordination of MUP chiefs to him; the
FRY's financial support of the Croatian and Bosnian Serb armies, and
crimes committed by Serbian forces in Kosovo. The former FRY president
also authenticated minutes of high level meetings and a letter Army
Chief of Staff Momcilo Perisic wrote Milosevic, protesting his
extra-legal activities in Kosovo.
On cross examination, Lilic changed his testimony to suit his former
mentor with the ease of an actor changing roles. The fact that some of
his answers directly contradicted his earlier testimony seemed to
bother him not in the slightest. Despite having criticized Milosevic
for unnecessarily prolonging the war in Kosovo, when the Accused asked,
he agreed that Milosevic sought peace, not war. He testified that
Milosevic had no control over the Yugoslav army (VJ) and did not
interfere in its command during Lilic’s term in office – 1993 to 1997.
Moreover, he agreed that no VJ generals were promoted or dismissed at
Milosevic's request. In contrast to his earlier statement, Lilic also
assented to Milosevic's suggestion that he had no control over the
Bosnian Serbs, who often obstructed his efforts for a negotiated
settlement
In addition to these concessions, Lilic also provided the Amicus,
Branislav Tapuskovic, with helpful responses. He agreed with his
examiner that all the republican territorial defense units were under
JNA (Yugoslav People’s Army) command and their weapons and equipment
were JNA property. The Chamber has heard contrary evidence to the
effect that each Yugoslav republic had its own TO, financed by the
individual republics, and providing their own equipment, weapons and
ammunition. The relationship of the JNA and republican TO’s, including
property ownership, is important because the JNA took control of TO
weapons and ammunition before the wars, then redistributed them to
local Serbs, according to other testimony before the Chamber.
Mr. Tapuskovic also elicited the witness’s agreement that Serbian
Orthodox Patriarch Pavle was the one who intervened and secured
Mladic’s agreement for Milosevic to negotiate for the Bosnian Serbs at
Dayton – not Milosevic. This scenario counters Milosevic’s reputed
“influence” over the Bosnian Serb leadership.
Confronted with his witness’s many concessions to Milosevic, Geoffrey
Nice had only a short time for re-examination and a significant
challenge ahead of him. He did not ask the Chamber to declare Lilic a
hostile witness, though he would have been justified in doing so.
Rather, he set out to tread a cautious line, which twice drew warnings
from the Bench.
Probing Lilic’s relationship with the Accused, Mr. Nice asked him who
was giving instructions to whom as they sought to get Mladic to release
the two French pilots before the signing of the Dayton Accords in
Paris. Lilic responded, “Our fear was that the Accords would not be
signed and Milosevic insisted that I should issue an order to Perisic
that he try to establish the location of the pilots. I was not giving
instruction to him. He used his right through me to bring influence to
bear on the Yugoslav Army.” It is an explanation as curious as it is
convoluted and may provide unintended insight into the way Lilic has
ordered his reality to include a vision of his own power within the
confines of Milosevic’s far greater power.
Nice then stepped into deeper water and asked his witness, “Mladic left
the RS (Republika Srpska) at the end of 1996. Did he come to Serbia?”
Lilic responded: “I don’t know whether he left the RS altogether but
he certainly did come to Serbia.” Nice followed up by asking if there
was ever an inquiry into Mladic's involvement in Srebrenica, to which
Lilic replied, “As far as I know, no such investigation was
instituted.” Before the prosecutor could ask about the subsequent
promotion of Mladic, Judge May cautioned him, “There’s a limit to the
extent you can cross examine your own witness.”
Not for the first time, Nice tried to explain the trouble with insider
witnesses. “There are certain witnesses whose evidence has to be
viewed cautiously.” Yet, he said, “the Chamber is assisted by hearing
their evidence on particular documents and events,” in this case the
promotion of someone who has been indicted for genocide in Srebrenica.
Nice wanted to present a document showing Mladic’s promotion and to ask
the witness how it occurred. The Chamber ruled to exclude the document
and Nice approached his witness from a different angle.
In response to Mr. Nice’s questions, Lilic admitted that during his
term as president he had access to significant intelligence data,
though he said Milosevic had “more and better information.”
Nevertheless, when Nice asked him whether, despite the range of
available information, he had no intelligence on what happened at
Srebrenica, he said simply, “Right.”
Nice continued, “You denied the existence of any detention camps [when
Milosevic asked him about a report that nine existed in Serbia,
identified by location and number of prisoners] . . . . Did you visit
the areas yourself?” In another demonstration of his convoluted
universe, Lilic answered, “I did not visit them and according to my
information, they did not exist. I cannot visit what our [military
intelligence] service says does not exist.” It apparently never
occurred to him to visit the identified areas to see if they held camps
in which people were being detained. When Nice attempted to follow up
by asking if the witness would allow that he could have been kept from
information of this kind, Judge Robinson interrupted to caution him,
“Mr. Nice, you’re getting pretty close to cross examining.”
The lead prosecutor quietly asked his less than stellar witness, "If
the Court determines that the army [VJ] was involved [in the Bosnian
Serb war against the Bosnian government], who was in a position to
control or influence the VJ . . .?" The witness waffled, appearing
confused. Only General Perisic could have issued orders of that kind,
he said, and if he did, they could have come from Milosevic. That, he
continued, would have been completely unlawful. So, it could not have
happened, he appeared to conclude. "Only the President of FRY [Lilic]
[acting] with the Supreme Defense Council could issue such an order."
This exemplifies the dance he was forced to do in his efforts to please
Milosevic and protect himself.
Nice's further probing rehabilitated significant evidence Lilic had
given on direct examination, which he had repudiated on cross
examination by Milosevic. For example, Lilic re-asserted that the
Serbian MUP was militarized under Milosevic's presidency, and that it
included two special anti-terrorist units, the SJO and the SAJ. He
also reaffirmed that Jovica Stanisic, head of the Serbian State
Security Service, and indirectly Milosevic, exercised political control
over the Red Berets.
The Prosecutor then asked him about General Pavkovic's May 25, 1999
letter to Milosevic, asking him to take urgent measures to
resubordinate MUP units in Kosovo to the VJ. General Pavkovic reported
that certain MUP units were out of control, looting vast amounts of
property and "committing serious crimes against the Shiptars
[pejorative name for Kosovar Albanians]" including murder, rape,
robbery, plunder, etc. Lilic had fallen out of favor by this time and
could not testify directly about the letter. However, Mr. Nice asked
him one important question, "Do you have any reason to doubt General
Pavkovic?" In a strong voice, Lilic responded, "absolutely not."
Finally, Mr. Nice showed Lilic the transcript of a speech by Ratko
Mladic on April 16, 1995. In it, Mladic identifies the quantity of
weapons and ammunition the FRY provided to the RS Army from the
beginning of the war until December 31, 1994. Lilic explained that
Mladic was a bit of a sensationalist and the quantities were "so large
I personally don't believe them." The Prosecutor offered a
hypothetical, "If in due course it is found that [the VJ provided]
these materials . . ., who bears responsibility for authorizing it --
you as Commander in Chief?" Because the weapons were owned by the VJ
and because of the quantity, Lilic claimed that only the federal
minister of defense could have authorized their transfer to the RS.
Experience with insider witnesses demonstrates that the Court should
adopt the modern rule and allow cross examination of a party's own
witnesses. The Milosevic trial provides strong support to do so. At
least four witnesses have significantly diverted from their direct
testimony when Milosevic questioned them, under a nearly hypnotic
effect. The prosecutor should not be placed in a position to press a
reluctant Court to declare these witnesses "hostile" in order to
attempt to get at the truth. The purpose of presenting testimony
through these difficult witnesses is to assist the Chamber in its
decision-making. Applying the traditional rule thwarts that aim. The
Chamber should adopt the modern approach.
Submitted by Judith Armatta on 15 July, 2003 - Updated: 15 July 2003
08:32
=== 2 ===
SYNOPSIS OF THE JULY 22, 2003 PROCEEDINGS AT THE HAGUE TRIBUNAL
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - July 22, 2003
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
The so-called “Trial” of Slobodan Milosevic resumed again today after
a four day weekend.
A secret witness code named “B-127” testified for most of the day.
B-127 is a Muslim and a former member of the JNA who stayed on and
joined the VRS, after the JNA withdrew from Bosnia-Herzegovina in May
of 1992.
The prosecution was trying to use B-127’s testimony as part of its
pathetic attempt to “prove” their absurd claim that the VJ and the VRS
were the same army, and not 2 different armies.
The “damning testimony” came fast and furious when B-127 claimed that
the VJ and the VRS shared information with each other. Oh, parish the
thought that 2 friendly states would share information with each
other! That has got to be the most sinister conspiracy in the history
of the world, or so you would think if you listened to the
“prosecutor” at the Hague Tribunal.
The truth is that it is completely normal for states that are on
friendly terms with one another to share information. An example of
that is making headlines right now. George W. Bush made what was
apparently a false claim in his State of the Union speech, on the basis
of British intelligence.
B-127 said that the information sharing went so far that the VJ could
access VRS radar data, and the VRS could access VJ radar data. In
North America the USA and Canada have the same agreement – it’s called
NORAD.
If one uses the logic employed by the Hague Tribunal one could
theorize that the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was really a Canadian
endeavor, and therefore the actions of the USA are really Canada’s
responsibility. After all, Canada and the USA cooperate with each
other, they share intelligence data, they share radar data – in fact,
in my home state of Washington, the Canadian Armed forces even conduct
joint training operations together with the U.S. Army at Ft. Lewis
near Tacoma.
Just like Slobodan Milosevic secretly controlled the government and
army of Republika Srpska – Canadian PM, Jean Chretien must be secretly
controlling the U.S. Government and the American armed forces. If you
understand the logic of the Hague Tribunal, or if you smoke enough
crack, then that type of thinking will make perfect sense to you.
Another thing that was seen as sinister (by the prosecutor) was the
fact that the government of Yugoslavia paid the former soldiers of the
JNA, through the 30th Personnel Center, the social insurance, health
benefits, salaries, old-age pensions, etc… which they had legally
accrued under Yugoslav law.
Imagine those scheming Serbs - paying people the money that they owed
them. If that doesn’t point to a “joint criminal enterprise” then I
don’t know what does. They even paid B-127, who is a Muslim, through
that same 30th Personnel Center.
The 30th Personnel Center was purely an administrative body that was
in charge of paying legally accrued social benefits to the former
soldiers of the JNA. The 30th Personnel Center issued no orders of any
kind. It had one office, consisting of one room, and it operated for a
full 6 years after the war ended,therefore it had absolutely nothing
at all to do with the war.
The prosecution’s claim that the VJ and the VRS were the same army
fell to pieces when Slobodan Milosevic asked B-127 some very direct
questions.
President Milosevic asked if B-127 knew of any orders that the VJ had
issued to the VRS, and B-127 didn’t know about any.
President Milosevic asked if B-127 had ever seen any units of the VJ
operating in Bosnia, and again B-127 hadn’t.
B-127 tried to save the prosecution’s case by saying that people from
Serbia were forced to join the VRS. President Milosevic then asked for
an example of this, but B-127 failed to come up with even a single
example.
President Milosevic further destroyed the prosecution’s case when he
asked - if the VJ and the VRS were the same army (as the prosecutor
claims), then why didn’t the VRS engage Albanian terrorists in Kosovo,
or mobilize to defend Yugoslavia during the NATO aggression?
After B-127 withdrew another secret witness code named B-83 came and
testified for about 10 minutes.
Then the so-called “judges” ruled that written statements from 2
secret witnesses, B-1576 and B-1010, could be admitted as evidence
under rule 92-bis without any cross-examination. In fact these secret
witnesses, if they even exist, don’t even have to appear in front of
the tribunal at all. For all we know these so-called “witnesses” could
simply be figments of Carla del Ponte’s imagination.
=== 3 ===
SYNOPSIS OF JULY 23 HEARINGS AT THE HAGUE TRIBUNAL
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - July 23, 2003
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
Today at the Hague tribunal a secret witness testified under the
pseudonym of “B-83.” The majority of B-83’s testimony was given in
private session.
B-83 was apparently an official in the Serbian government who had
something to do with financial matters. His employment wasn’t clear
due to the excessive use of private sessions. I’m not even sure what
the gist of his testimony was supposed to be since so much of it was
given in private session.
B-83 did, however, say some interesting things in open session. B-83
accused the prosecution of twisting his words and putting falsehoods
into his witness statement. B-83 also said that the prosecution did
not give him adequate time to review his statement, or even give him
the chance to see the statement in his own language until he got to
the Hague earlier this week.
For example the prosecution made up a story about the Serbian Police
"organizing car thefts" and inserted this outrageous fairytale into
B-83's witness statement, even though the witness said that this story
wasn’t true. The prosecution also made up a bunch of malarkey about
“black budgets” which the witness also denied.
In fact, according to the witness, there were errors of fact in almost
every single paragraph of this witness statement that the prosecutor
had prepared for him.
While President Milosevic was questioning B-83 about the numerous
false claims that the prosecution had inserted into his witness
statement the so-called “judge” May cut him off and accused him of
“wasting time on irrelevant matters.”
This is amazing even for the Hague Tribunal. Here we have a witness
who had perjurious statements put into his mouth, against his will and
without his knowledge, by the prosecutor and the judge doesn’t see any
problem with that! If this was a real court, with a real judge, a
mistrial would be declared, and the prosecutor would face criminal
prosecution himself.
After B-83 finished, the prosecution called a so-called “expert”
witness, one Audrey Budding, a historian from Harvard who wrote a
paper on “Serb nationalism.”
Mrs. Budding proved her self to be an apologist for the Albanian
Fascists of the 2nd World War.
Mrs. Budding denied that the Ballistas* were fascists, and even had
the nerve to claim that the Ballistas were the victims of the Chetniks
and the Partisans.
All in all it was just another day at the Hague Tribunal.
* If you don’t know what a Ballista is see:
http://emperors-clothes/articles/thompson/rootsof.htm
=== 4 ===
ANOTHER SYNOPSIS OF THE JULY 23, 2003 PROCEEDINGS AT THE HAGUE
Written by: Vera Martinovic - July 23, 2003
Today's first witness, B-083, demonstrated again the flimsiness of the
Prosecution's case and the desperation of the OTP (Office of the
Prosecutor). Why flimsiness? Because, in the absence of anything
stronger, the Prosecutors sought to prove that Serbia provided
financial aid to the Serbs on the other side of the Drina. But that is
a common knowledge, an undisputed fact and certainly not a war crime.
And why desperation? They manipulated heavily the testimony of B-083,
fabricating his several previously given written statements, tricking
him into signing the English version without him fully understanding
it and trying to hide that by keeping his entire testimony in the
private session.
Only the last 10 minutes of the cross-examination were held in the
open session, but it was enough to reveal the whole scam. B-083 thus
joined those Prosecution witnesses whom they regretted they had ever
summoned: having received only few days ago at The Hague the Serbian
version of "his" statements, B-083 corrected in his handwriting
practically each and every paragraph, striking them out and adding in
the margins his explanations which invalidated the statements in toto.
B-083, introduced only vaguely as an "officer in the Ministry of
Defence of Serbia in 1991," started his testimony yesterday, but it
lasted only 10 minutes before the proceedings were adjourned for the
day and it was in the open session. The only thing Nice covered then
was the claim that the Government of Serbia deliberated in one of its
sessions in November 1991 the aid for the Serbs in Croatia, and the
amount mentioned was in the neighborhood of 92 million DM.
Today, B-083 finished his examination-in-chief, but most of it was in
private session. Therefore, the public was unable to follow the
explanation about those alleged millions.
Back in the open session, we saw that the examination-in-chief was
over and that amicus curiae Stephen Kay was arguing with Mr. May over
the allotment of time for the cross-examination, and the constant
changing in the order of witnesses.
Each time May spoke, he managed to muddle the issues, "explaining"
that indeed the Accused has to be granted a certain amount of time,
but he is not to waste it on arguments and quarrels with the witness.
Kay tried to point out this is a technical matter and the main thing
is that Nice 'moves like an express train', covering a large number of
important issues extremely briefly and superficially, which in turn
radically shortens the allotment of time for the Accused and makes it
impossible for him to cover those issues at all. He also noticed that
it is Nice who leads the most important witnesses, like Kucan was, who
was processed in only 1 day. Therefore, the time spent for the
examination-in-chief could not be the standard by which the allotted
time for the cross-examination is to be measured.
Apparently, the OTP produces a weekly list of witnesses complete with
the time planned for each examination-in-chief, and since the general
rule has been to allot approximately the same time for the
cross-examination, the Accused can plan his questioning accordingly.
But then Nice comes up, drastically cutting the actual time of his
questioning of a witness to, say, half an hour instead of the planned
two hours, simply by being superficial and thereby setting the low time
standard. And, he constantly reshuffles the witnesses, hampering the
preparation of the Defense.
Nice tried to prevent the judges from allotting too much time to this
cross-examination, by appealing to the Chamber to 'exert pressure on
the amicus and the Accused' (I failed to understand what kind of
pressure and in relation to what - perhaps to make them shut up).
Nice also half-complained and half-flattered: "I have to note that in
a short time the Accused has developed enviable skills of
cross-examination." What he meant by that was probably that the Accused
was now so much better at it that he could wrap it up in much less
time.
The troika in the scarlet robes put their heads together, murmuring
for two minutes among themselves and then May pronounced: "An hour and
fifteen minutes." Like a magician pulling a rabbit out of the hat, or
a generous nobleman tossing coins to a beggar: 15 minutes longer than
Nice had for the examination-in-chief.
So, not only haven't we seen what the witness had to say, and how rich
were the issues he covered, we also couldn't judge whether an hour and
fifteen would be reasonably long enough to cross-examine.
But, that was not all. Milosevic first tried to verify with May that
the issue of the place of employment of this witness was not for the
private session. May answered he also believed this had been mentioned
in the open session. But the moment Milosevic started to mouth his
first question, something to the effect of "You have been working…",
Nice jumped up, saying: "I believe this could infringe the security
measures." May seconded: "Yes, I think it might. We go to the private
session." And nearly all of the cross-examination, more than one hour
of it, was closed to the public!
When the session again became open again, there were Milosevic and the
witness at the end of the careful demolition of the written statements
by the latter and of the Prosecution's credibility.
Milosevic said that there was virtually not a single paragraph in
these statements that had not been corrected in writing by the
witness. B-083 confirmed: "That's right." He explained there were so
many mistakes and even some totally unrelated, irrelevant and invented
stuff, that he believed it was unfair that Milosevic is to be charged
with these things or the Tribunal's time wasted like this.
B-083 used the words "silly" and "preposterous" when describing these
passages from "his" statements. He spoke directly to Milosevic: "I
apologise to you", and he requested these issues to be disregarded. He
said he had made a mistake by being insufficiently cautious, and
signing this without having read it or having received it in Serbian.
Milosevic quoted several quite outrageous passages from one of these
statements, allegedly in direct speech by the witness: "I'll give you
another example of illegal fundraising - the Police had been involved
in car theft." He said to the witness: "Here you have added in your
handwriting: 'Not correct'." B-083 confirmed this, saying he also wrote
that it should be explained to the Accused, along with an apology, the
circumstances of this statement.
B-083 only got the Serbian version 5 days ago. Apparently, the OTP
Investigator Gerald Sexton had tricked the witness into signing the
English version years ago, saying he'll be able to 'explain everything
at The Hague', but then B-083 found out that practically everything
had been invented or too liberally interpreted, but as if the witness
had been quoted verbatim complete with the inverted commas ("I'll give
you another example…"). The witness now stated that, if he only had a
chance to write his statement with his own hand, "we would not be
having 1 minute of this discussion'.
Here's another gem: Milosevic said that one of the statements
contained the claim by the witness about our state budget, which had
'one secret segment, called a black fund'. B-083 simply said there's no
way he could have said that.
Judging by some other examples from the OTP's work of fiction that
Milosevic quoted, B-083 spoke to the Investigator quite broadly and
openly about the situation in the Ministry of Defense, where internal
squabbles and embezzlements were rife (and for which, as Milosevic
pointed out that 2 Ministers had been arrested at that time), and
cunning Mr. Sexton took it all and gave it a nice spin, necessary for
the Indictment.
B-083 had clearly misunderstood what it meant to give a statement for
the court, presuming it meant one should open up one's heart and spill
out every large and tiny office happening, giving the Investigator a
free hand to weave a story out of it, not even bothering to read what
the nice, understanding gentleman wrote in his name. Now he was
understandably angry at being bamboozled.
B-083 continued to complain about some of his former misbehaving
office colleagues even to Milosevic, saying that some of those who did
it were still holding their high positions today "and you and me are
sitting here". Milosevic drove the point home: "What possible
connection all these things could have with what's going on here?" The
witness answered: "None whatsoever."
Gradually, B-083 and Milosevic began to discuss those events in almost
friendly manner, chatting and not bothering to keep the pause between
questions and answers, like in a normal conversation. Milosevic would
quote another invented passage and they would together marvel at how
brazen the OTP had been, the witness repeating 'I have never said
something like that'.
B-083 even volunteered in his explanation of one particular instance
that he had 'never went there to inspect', forcing Nice to interject:
"I do not know whether the witness is aware he's in the open session?"
May also interrupted the cozy chat once, warning both not to overlap,
reminding witness he is "here to testify" and Milosevic is "here to
cross-examine," and not to have a conversation. Milosevic was quite
pleased with himself for exposing once more the sleazy modus operandi
of the OTP and disrupting so successfully this show trial, that he
calmly answered to May he was quite pleased to have the opportunity to
chat with this man, whom he has never met before.
Milosevic and the witness even tried to establish the method of
creating certain passages of the statements by the OTP. The problem
was, as many times before with those written statements, that there
were no questions to which these statements were answering, only the
unbroken, spun story.
B-083 was guessing what the original questions by the Investigator
must've been: probably the Investigator asked, for instance, what
would be the regular chain of command in the government for any given
issue. He got a detailed answer about the whole structure with the
President of the Republic at the top of the pyramid. Then the OTP
retold this explanation as if it had been an answer to a specific
accusation against Milosevic.
B-083 used the ship metaphor, describing the subordination, but he was
not answering the question of whether the captain organized the
piracy. It was as if the Investigator had asked: Who runs the ship?
and got the answer: The captain, who has officers under him. Then, the
Investigator spun the question this way: Who organized the piracy using
this ship? , and coupled it with the original question: The captain,
who has officers under him.
It was obvious that both Milosevic and B-083 were displeased when Mr.
May announced that there were only 5 minutes left, so they quickly
tried to cover several more inventions (Milosevic quoting them and
asking whether they were correct, the witness answering: "Not a chance.
Please, disregard this.") They parted almost friends, I'm sure.
Mr. Tapuskovic got his 2 minutes, and he used them to clarify the only
issue from the testimony mentioned by the witness in the open session
- those millions of Deutsche Marks requested/planned/given by Serbia
to the Serbs in Croatia. He wanted to make a distinction between the
sums requested and planned and those actually paid. B-083 confirmed
that he personally handled some of these payments, but these were all
amounts in dinars, it was aid and hardly the amount stated. Tapuskovic
was pleased: "I have no further questions."
Nice had a chance for a redirect, but guess what? The public couldn't
see it, again. He said: "We have a couple of additional questions, but
they're for a private session." And the screen went blank.
Please try to read "Dealing with the 'Hostile' Insider Witness"
(
http://www.cij.org/
index.cfm?fuseaction=viewReport&reportID=361&tribunalID=1 ) by Judith
Armatta of the CIJ. Here she explained the fact that several insiders
so far (notably Radomir Markovic, Captain Dragan, Zoran Lilic and
B-1775) allegedly changed their testimony due to the mesmerizing
effect of Milosevic on them. She compared him with an 'alpha dog', in
front of which a poor witness simply 'rolled over like a cur'. She
applied her cottage psychology/astrology/ESP skills, claiming that a
witness stood no chance, because 'Milosevic's aura was too strong for
him'.
I would suggest much simpler explanations: these people did not
volunteer to testify for the Prosecution, they had been summoned
or/and threatened into it with possible indictments against themselves.
And then the following happened: for instance, Captain Dragan had NOT
changed his testimony nor succumbed to a powerful aura, but had been
bamboozled by the OTP in the same manner as today's witness B-083.
Their original written statements had been liberally invented,
suggestively worded and devoid of questions by the Investigator and
they were tricked into signing. Not having seen the
examination-in-chief of B-083, I can only suppose that it had been
pretty much like that one of Captain Dragan: Prosecutor Nice rushing,
skipping and sliding through the invented statement 'like an express
train', sometimes not making sense at all, leaving the witness to
stare in disbelief and to simply say 'yes' to whatever construction
proffered. Too bad there was this damned cross-examination and the
possibility to demonstrate that the testimony was not at all what the
witness has signed, meant or wanted to say.
The second witness today, who is to continue tomorrow, is an expert on
history from Harvard (the font of knowledge for the ICTY), who
testifies about the Serbian nationalism in 20th century as she had
penned it in her report commissioned by the OTP. The very definition of
an expert must've been wildly stretched after the ICTY set up shop.
Vera Martinovic is an independent writer based in Belgrade, Yugoslavia.
=== 5 ===
SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC: HISTORY TEACHER
July 24, 2003
Written by: Vera Martinovic
Audrey Budding testified who testified on July 23rd and 24th, is a
skinny, bespectacled youthful PhD with expressive gesticulation. She
knows lots of historical facts. Her clothes and hairdo are unusually
interesting for an American. She apparently speaks/reads Serbian.
But that's where the plus side stops. Mrs. Budding's historical
knowledge is fragmentary and incomplete and, so she often misses the
big picture, and is unaware of important events and sources.
Mrs. Budding used to be a diplomatic official at the American Embassy
in Belgrade in the '80s, so she is obviously more of a politician then
a historian.
She penned a report commissioned by the OTP on Serbian nationalism in
the 20th century, which seems to be a rewrite of her own, more
balanced PhD thesis on the Serbian intellectuals and the national
question, only with the added twist to make the Serbs look bad, so she
supplied a political trial with a politicized rewrite of her own work.
None the less, I have to give her the credit of being much more subtle
than the previous Prosecution "expert", Riedlmayer, who was simply
ridiculous.
Mrs. Budding was seldom obvious and crude in her conclusions, except
sometimes, when Milosevic cornered her with facts and questions, and
then she turned stubborn. For example, when she disagreed with the
data by the Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum about the figure of 600,000
victims of the Ustasa concentration camp Jasenovac, claiming the
number is 100,000 and explaining that anyway 'nobody knows exactly how
many Serbs died in NDH [Nezavisna Drzava Hrvatska = Independent State
of Croatia, Ustase-led Nazi puppet invention during WW2, comprising
today's Croatia and Bosnia & Herzegovina], in each village and each
house' . Although she admitted this was clearly a genocide, she was
suspicious about the number, she couldn't be bothered to believe those
pedantic Jews at the Holocaust museum, and certainly not Yugoslav
sources, because she was unable to personally peek into each village
and house.
Another example where she was crude and stubborn was when she refused
to accept the fact that the Albanian Fascist movement of the notorious
Balli Combetar or balisti, were Fascists. The fact that they were
installed by Mussolini to rule Kosovo when it was given over to
Albania during the WW2, butchered thousands of Serbs, and then
continued armed fighting years after the war officially ended, all
that was to Audrey, "a rebellion that started after this region of
Drenica was incorporated in the Yugoslav state, which caused the
revolt of the Albanians, who didn't want to join the Partisans in the
final push against the Germans in 1944 because they were afraid to
leave their houses, and so this rebellion was quashed and probably few
thousands were killed, some in battles, some executed".
Mrs. Budding stubbornly persisted saying, "to describe balisti as
Albanian Fascists is not correct, because they did not support the
Fascistic form of the state."
Milosevic got impatient and curtly asked: "And what did they support?
Did they support Italian Fascists?"
Mrs. Budding mumbled that well, of course, they supported the creation
of the Greater Albania.
Milosevic snapped: "Not only supported the idea, but militarily
supported the Fascists."
Mrs. Budding mumbled some more, trailing off and ultimately saying
that she's not familiar with it, with each military action, that there
were different groups… Some historian and expert!
There were some more gaffes in her paper, like when she wrote that the
Ustasa émigrés were a marginal group (Milosevic wanted to know how
come they got to run a country for 4 years if they were so marginal).
Also, she found it problematic to define the nascent Yugoslavia as a
solution for the Serbs, with the maxim 'all Serbs in one state'. When
Milosevic said that Yugoslavia was not a solution only for the Serbs,
but also for others, that it could be equally said 'all Croats/Slovenes
in one state', Mrs. Budding proudly begged to disagree, 'because there
were significant Croatian and Slovenian minorities left in Italy and
Austria', but when Milosevic reminded her that also a significant
portion of the Serbs were left in Hungary and Romania, so the maxim
still applied for the bulk of all nations, Mrs. Budding didn't have
anything to say. A historian who argues an issue not knowing what the
next related historical fact might be used against her is not a very
competent historian.
Almost all other conclusions in her report were less obviously biased,
only ever so slightly leaned towards prejudice and one would have to
carefully read both her thesis and her OTP report to pinpoint the
distortions, although the general impression of a different slant is
palpable even from those paragraphs that were read in the courtroom.
Milosevic quoted her PhD thesis where she explained how it was
impossible for the Serbs to accept the confederate Yugoslavia and its
breaking along the borders of its republics because they were so
dispersed; the same issue in her report for the OTP got the subtle
addition that the Serbs failed to pay much attention to their ties
with other nations within the republics in which they lived outside of
Serbia.
Milosevic quipped: "Well, do you seriously believe that the ties of
the Serbs in Croatia with the Croats, these ties that include the
genocide that you've already explained, are so much stronger and more
important than the ties with other Serbs?!" Budding got pretty confused
after that and started to babble about life being not only one's
nation, but a house in which one lives… To that one can argue that one
can indeed live in a house if it still stands and if one is still
alive.
Another major problem with Budding's paper is the extremely shallow
and selective pool of sources that she used, some of the works
completely debunked as political pamphlets (e.g. "Kosovo - A Brief
History' by Noel Malcolm), yet she quoted from such articles and
books, disregarding or not being aware of the existence of other well
known authors and works that Milosevic listed.
Budding was often reduced to answering 'I'm not familiar with this
particular work' or 'I do not know about these particular sources' or
'I haven't read all the transcripts, only from the first meeting' or
'No, I haven't seen these diplomatic documents'. Milosevic and his
aides have done their homework and at times Mrs. Budding was indeed
receiving a thorough lesson in history.
The young doctor was selective not only in her sources, but also in
the historical events which she did or did not include in her paper.
Thus, she did quote a public speech by the soon-to-be Yugoslav King
Alexander, who said that Serbia must be strong so that Yugoslavia could
be strong too. She explained that as an example of 'Serbian
nationalism', but she failed to quote and explain, or even to mention
at all the crucial document of that time, the Corfu Declaration on the
creation of Yugoslavia. She explained her omissions with the necessity
to keep her report concise. Strangely enough, only the relevant and
balanced things got chopped off.
The "learned panel of judges" found themselves in an absurd situation:
here they were, admitting into evidence the Prosecution's exhibit
going way back into the 15th century, and discussing these despised
historical issues which they always pronounced as irrelevant, and of
which they knew nothing, and frankly didn't care to know. But, this is
what you get when the Prosecution's case so heavily depends on the
silly notion that all this is one and the same 'joint criminal
enterprise' to create the Greater Serbia, the plan which goes
centuries back, so even King Alexander, Vuk Karadzic, Garasanin and
other Serbian historical figures must be evoked in order to take their
punishment for their participation in this Nice-Del Ponte co-production
in Cinemascope.
History is a tough discipline, and it demands a broad knowledge. It
was at times hard for me to follow all of the expert nuances, because
I certainly haven't read all of the books that were mentioned. But, at
least I was able to follow the basic logic of the discussion and
arguments.
Mr. May was probably dozing or doing crosswords, because he proved
time and again unable to follow or understand the point of a certain
line of questioning.
At one point, Milosevic asked Mrs. Budding why she wrote that Vuk
Karadzic could be attributed with the authorship of the idea of
defining a nation by its language, when there is a whole line of other
linguists, historians and philosophers (of which he quoted some) who
had stated the same ideas much earlier, and Karadzic had merely
embraced that idea?
May interrupted by saying: "I do not know what is the purpose of this
list of names?" Milosevic professorially reprimanded him: "Mr May, you
have not been listening to the previous question", and he patiently
repeated the whole question and said that 'the list you're preventing
me from reading are the people who originally created the idea, among
them someone whom you might be familiar with, a German philosopher
Fichte'. So, not only was Mrs. Budding given a free history lesson,
but Mr. May as well.
The time was again the main problem, May not wanting to allow any
extension of the cross-examination. Milosevic said twice: "These time
restrictions I really regard as violence." And, at one point he
mockingly pointed at the courtroom wall clock and told May: "Anyway,
the press has been already writing that the central issue here is
time, and nothing much else."
As I said, Mrs. Budding was subtle in her intentional bias, perhaps
overly subtle, so the point the Prosecution wanted to make with this
witness hasn't come across all that clearly. It only left a faint
anti-Serb aftertaste, a few hints and insinuations, an admission that
yes, no nation of these parts is blameless, but the Serbs were somehow
the main culprits.
The time allotted for this witness, both for the examination-in-chief
and for the cross-examination, was all to short. And even that short
time was interrupted by inane interventions from Nice and stupid
questions from May. Milosevic told May at one point (when the latter
tried to dismiss one issue as irrelevant): "I don't believe that you
should learn the whole Serbian history in half an hour, but since you
mainly deal here with altering history, I consider this particular
issue to be relevant."
What I find appalling is that the "trial" aimed at rewriting history
was dealing in history in such a superficial and brief manner. But,
the reason lies precisely in that: when you want to do a quick and
crude rewrite, you don't dwell too much on the serious science.
Vera Martinovic is in independent writer based in Belgrade, Yugoslavia.
=== 6 ===
"TRIAL" HALTED DUE TO PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC'S ILL HEALTH
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - July 28, 2003
On Monday July 28th the troika announced that there would be no
proceedings in the Milosevic "trial." The proceedings have also been
canceled for the 29th.
There is no word on what type of illness President Milosevic is
suffering from, although it is known that he suffers from high blood
pressure and that he has a heart condition.
The Tribunal's doctors will examine President Milosevic on Tuesday in
order to determine when he will be fit to resume taking part in the
proceedings.
---
http://www.ptd.net/webnews/wed/aa/Qwarcrimes-yugo-
milosevic.R_qz_DlT.html
Milosevic war crimes trial to resume August 25
Tuesday, 29-Jul-2003 1:00PM
THE HAGUE, July 29 (AFP) - The war crimes trial of Slobodan Milosevic,
suspended again because the former Yugoslav leader was again suffering
from ill-health, will resume on August 25, the UN tribunal said Tuesday.
"The trial of Slobodan Milosevic is scheduled to resume on Monday 25
August at 9:00 am after the ICTY summer court recess," the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia said in a
press release.
Tribunal spokesman Jim Landale told AFP Monday that Milosevic, who had
seen a doctor on Monday, would have another medical visit on Tuesday
and that the doctor's conclusions would affect the start date for the
trial.
He did not provide details on the illness of the former Yugoslav
leader, who suffers from high blood pressure and is at risk of a heart
attack.
The interruption was the ninth to date in the long-running trial before
the The Hague-based court. The ICTY began hearing Milosevic's case in
February last year, and the prosecution has not finished arguing its
case.
Milosevic, 61, has been undertaking his own defense in the case.
The one-time Yugoslav president, who was ousted from power in October
2000, is standing trial on more than 60 charges of war crimes and
crimes against humanity for his role in the 1990s wars in Bosnia,
Croatia and Kosovo.
0. Sloboda: Reagujte dok ne bude prekasno!
Milosevic "Trial", 15--25 July 2003:
1. Dealing With the "Hostile" Insider Witness
by Judith Armatta, 15 July, 2003 - http://www.cij.org/
2. SYNOPSIS OF THE JULY 22, 2003 PROCEEDINGS AT THE HAGUE TRIBUNAL
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg072203.htm
3. SYNOPSIS OF JULY 23 HEARINGS AT THE HAGUE TRIBUNAL
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg072303.htm
4. ANOTHER SYNOPSIS OF THE JULY 23, 2003 PROCEEDINGS AT THE HAGUE
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/martinovic072303.htm
5. SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC: HISTORY TEACHER, July 24
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/martinovic072403.htm
6. "TRIAL" HALTED DUE TO PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC'S ILL HEALTH
Milosevic war crimes trial to resume August 25
=== 0 ===
Da: "Vladimir Krsljanin"
Data: Mer 30 Lug 2003 16:42:10 Europe/Rome
Oggetto: Sloboda: Reagujte dok ne bude prekasno!
SAOPSTENJE ZA JAVNOST
Udruzenje "Sloboda" - Jugoslovenski komitet za oslobodjenje
Slobodana Milosevica ukazuje domacoj i medjunarodnoj javnosti da se
zbog opasnog i zlonamernog nepostovanja medjunarodnih standarda o
zastiti ljudskih prava od strane ilegalnog tribunala u Hagu, stanje
zdravlja Predsednika Slobodana Milosevica stalno pogorsava. Predsednik
Milosevic svojom borbom za istinu trijumfuje u procesu bez presedana u
istoriji, izlozen svakodnevnim nadljudskim naporima i nehumanim
zatvorskim uslovima.
To traje vec vise od dve godine. Iako su dosadasnji malobrojni
specijalisticki pregledi i medicinske analize nesumnjivo utvrdili da
uslovi kojima je izlozen predstavljaju opasan faktor kardiovaskularnog
rizika, tribunal odbija cak i da obezbedi redovne specijalisticke
kontrole njegovog zdravstvenog stanja.
Udruzenje "Sloboda" zahteva da se Predsedniku Slobodanu Milosevicu
omoguce neophodni pregledi i oporavak u nasoj zemlji i da u ovom
procesu ucestvuje sa slobode. To je jedini primeren nacin da se zastite
njegov zivot i zdravlje.
UDRUZENJE "SLOBODA" - JUGOSLOVENSKI KOMITET ZA OSLOBODJENJE SLOBODANA
MILOSEVICA
Beograd, 30. jula 2003. godine
SLOBODA urgently needs your donation.
Please find the detailed instructions at:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/pomoc.htm
To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/ (Sloboda/Freedom association)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)
http://www.free-slobo.de/ (German section of ICDSM)
http://www.wpc-in.org/ (world peace council)
http://www.geocities.com/b_antinato/ (Balkan antiNATO center)
=== 1 ===
(NOTE: This Lady Armatta, after expressing concern about how
"accusation" witnesses turn in favor of Milosevic in
cross-examinations, claims that in "modern" proceedings such
cross-examinations must be forbidden. Milosevic would have "a nearly
hypnotic effect" thus "it makes it difficult to get at the truth", she
says - she is right, since only HER truth is meant.)
http://www.cij.org/
index.cfm?fuseaction=viewReport&reportID=361&tribunalID=1
Dealing With the "Hostile" Insider Witness
International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY)
Milosevic Trial - The Hague - Court Room Three
15 July 2003
THE HAGUE - An attorney cannot impeach a witness he or she has called,
according to traditional trial practice rules. The rule is based on
the assumption that a party calling a witness vouches for the witness's
credibility. Only when the party can show that a witness has surprised
him or her with their testimony is there an exception. In this
situation, an attorney may ask the court to declare the witness
“hostile” and allow the attorney to impeach his or her own witness,
i.e., attempt to show the witness is lying. Traditionally, judges did
not favor this procedure and tended to tell attorneys they take their
witnesses as they find them. If they “go south” (change their stories)
on the stand, it is just one of life’s risks.
The more modern approach is to recognize that attorneys do not have
unlimited choice of witnesses. Not infrequently, a witness with
important information may also be untrustworthy. That is often the
case with certain witnesses in war crimes trials, especially where the
charge is involvement in a joint criminal enterprise. The best
witnesses in such cases are insiders. They can also be the worst.
Geoffrey Nice has been struggling with this problem since the beginning
of the Milosevic trial, as the Trial Chamber appears to favor the
traditional rule. The recent appearance of Zoran Lilic, one-time
President of the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY), was only
the latest challenge.
On the stand, Lilic showed himself a devotee of Slobodan Milosevic, the
Accused who he had come to testify against. Like other insider
witnesses, such as Rade Markovic, Dragan Vasiljkovic and protected
witness B-1775, once confronted by his old-time boss, Lilic rolled over
like a cur before the alpha dog. Milosevic’s aura was too strong for
him. Lilic (and Markovic, Vasiljkovic and B-1775) willingly and
unashamedly agreed to whatever Milosevic asked, with some exceptions.
It is not unusual for authoritarian leaders to surround themselves with
“yes-men,” but it makes it difficult to get at the truth, particularly
if the hostile witness rule is applied.
Lilic provided important testimony on direct examination about:
Milosevic's central role in getting the Bosnian Serbs to lay down their
guns; the primacy of Milosevic's Serbian police (MUP) over the VJ
(Yugoslav Army) and the direct subordination of MUP chiefs to him; the
FRY's financial support of the Croatian and Bosnian Serb armies, and
crimes committed by Serbian forces in Kosovo. The former FRY president
also authenticated minutes of high level meetings and a letter Army
Chief of Staff Momcilo Perisic wrote Milosevic, protesting his
extra-legal activities in Kosovo.
On cross examination, Lilic changed his testimony to suit his former
mentor with the ease of an actor changing roles. The fact that some of
his answers directly contradicted his earlier testimony seemed to
bother him not in the slightest. Despite having criticized Milosevic
for unnecessarily prolonging the war in Kosovo, when the Accused asked,
he agreed that Milosevic sought peace, not war. He testified that
Milosevic had no control over the Yugoslav army (VJ) and did not
interfere in its command during Lilic’s term in office – 1993 to 1997.
Moreover, he agreed that no VJ generals were promoted or dismissed at
Milosevic's request. In contrast to his earlier statement, Lilic also
assented to Milosevic's suggestion that he had no control over the
Bosnian Serbs, who often obstructed his efforts for a negotiated
settlement
In addition to these concessions, Lilic also provided the Amicus,
Branislav Tapuskovic, with helpful responses. He agreed with his
examiner that all the republican territorial defense units were under
JNA (Yugoslav People’s Army) command and their weapons and equipment
were JNA property. The Chamber has heard contrary evidence to the
effect that each Yugoslav republic had its own TO, financed by the
individual republics, and providing their own equipment, weapons and
ammunition. The relationship of the JNA and republican TO’s, including
property ownership, is important because the JNA took control of TO
weapons and ammunition before the wars, then redistributed them to
local Serbs, according to other testimony before the Chamber.
Mr. Tapuskovic also elicited the witness’s agreement that Serbian
Orthodox Patriarch Pavle was the one who intervened and secured
Mladic’s agreement for Milosevic to negotiate for the Bosnian Serbs at
Dayton – not Milosevic. This scenario counters Milosevic’s reputed
“influence” over the Bosnian Serb leadership.
Confronted with his witness’s many concessions to Milosevic, Geoffrey
Nice had only a short time for re-examination and a significant
challenge ahead of him. He did not ask the Chamber to declare Lilic a
hostile witness, though he would have been justified in doing so.
Rather, he set out to tread a cautious line, which twice drew warnings
from the Bench.
Probing Lilic’s relationship with the Accused, Mr. Nice asked him who
was giving instructions to whom as they sought to get Mladic to release
the two French pilots before the signing of the Dayton Accords in
Paris. Lilic responded, “Our fear was that the Accords would not be
signed and Milosevic insisted that I should issue an order to Perisic
that he try to establish the location of the pilots. I was not giving
instruction to him. He used his right through me to bring influence to
bear on the Yugoslav Army.” It is an explanation as curious as it is
convoluted and may provide unintended insight into the way Lilic has
ordered his reality to include a vision of his own power within the
confines of Milosevic’s far greater power.
Nice then stepped into deeper water and asked his witness, “Mladic left
the RS (Republika Srpska) at the end of 1996. Did he come to Serbia?”
Lilic responded: “I don’t know whether he left the RS altogether but
he certainly did come to Serbia.” Nice followed up by asking if there
was ever an inquiry into Mladic's involvement in Srebrenica, to which
Lilic replied, “As far as I know, no such investigation was
instituted.” Before the prosecutor could ask about the subsequent
promotion of Mladic, Judge May cautioned him, “There’s a limit to the
extent you can cross examine your own witness.”
Not for the first time, Nice tried to explain the trouble with insider
witnesses. “There are certain witnesses whose evidence has to be
viewed cautiously.” Yet, he said, “the Chamber is assisted by hearing
their evidence on particular documents and events,” in this case the
promotion of someone who has been indicted for genocide in Srebrenica.
Nice wanted to present a document showing Mladic’s promotion and to ask
the witness how it occurred. The Chamber ruled to exclude the document
and Nice approached his witness from a different angle.
In response to Mr. Nice’s questions, Lilic admitted that during his
term as president he had access to significant intelligence data,
though he said Milosevic had “more and better information.”
Nevertheless, when Nice asked him whether, despite the range of
available information, he had no intelligence on what happened at
Srebrenica, he said simply, “Right.”
Nice continued, “You denied the existence of any detention camps [when
Milosevic asked him about a report that nine existed in Serbia,
identified by location and number of prisoners] . . . . Did you visit
the areas yourself?” In another demonstration of his convoluted
universe, Lilic answered, “I did not visit them and according to my
information, they did not exist. I cannot visit what our [military
intelligence] service says does not exist.” It apparently never
occurred to him to visit the identified areas to see if they held camps
in which people were being detained. When Nice attempted to follow up
by asking if the witness would allow that he could have been kept from
information of this kind, Judge Robinson interrupted to caution him,
“Mr. Nice, you’re getting pretty close to cross examining.”
The lead prosecutor quietly asked his less than stellar witness, "If
the Court determines that the army [VJ] was involved [in the Bosnian
Serb war against the Bosnian government], who was in a position to
control or influence the VJ . . .?" The witness waffled, appearing
confused. Only General Perisic could have issued orders of that kind,
he said, and if he did, they could have come from Milosevic. That, he
continued, would have been completely unlawful. So, it could not have
happened, he appeared to conclude. "Only the President of FRY [Lilic]
[acting] with the Supreme Defense Council could issue such an order."
This exemplifies the dance he was forced to do in his efforts to please
Milosevic and protect himself.
Nice's further probing rehabilitated significant evidence Lilic had
given on direct examination, which he had repudiated on cross
examination by Milosevic. For example, Lilic re-asserted that the
Serbian MUP was militarized under Milosevic's presidency, and that it
included two special anti-terrorist units, the SJO and the SAJ. He
also reaffirmed that Jovica Stanisic, head of the Serbian State
Security Service, and indirectly Milosevic, exercised political control
over the Red Berets.
The Prosecutor then asked him about General Pavkovic's May 25, 1999
letter to Milosevic, asking him to take urgent measures to
resubordinate MUP units in Kosovo to the VJ. General Pavkovic reported
that certain MUP units were out of control, looting vast amounts of
property and "committing serious crimes against the Shiptars
[pejorative name for Kosovar Albanians]" including murder, rape,
robbery, plunder, etc. Lilic had fallen out of favor by this time and
could not testify directly about the letter. However, Mr. Nice asked
him one important question, "Do you have any reason to doubt General
Pavkovic?" In a strong voice, Lilic responded, "absolutely not."
Finally, Mr. Nice showed Lilic the transcript of a speech by Ratko
Mladic on April 16, 1995. In it, Mladic identifies the quantity of
weapons and ammunition the FRY provided to the RS Army from the
beginning of the war until December 31, 1994. Lilic explained that
Mladic was a bit of a sensationalist and the quantities were "so large
I personally don't believe them." The Prosecutor offered a
hypothetical, "If in due course it is found that [the VJ provided]
these materials . . ., who bears responsibility for authorizing it --
you as Commander in Chief?" Because the weapons were owned by the VJ
and because of the quantity, Lilic claimed that only the federal
minister of defense could have authorized their transfer to the RS.
Experience with insider witnesses demonstrates that the Court should
adopt the modern rule and allow cross examination of a party's own
witnesses. The Milosevic trial provides strong support to do so. At
least four witnesses have significantly diverted from their direct
testimony when Milosevic questioned them, under a nearly hypnotic
effect. The prosecutor should not be placed in a position to press a
reluctant Court to declare these witnesses "hostile" in order to
attempt to get at the truth. The purpose of presenting testimony
through these difficult witnesses is to assist the Chamber in its
decision-making. Applying the traditional rule thwarts that aim. The
Chamber should adopt the modern approach.
Submitted by Judith Armatta on 15 July, 2003 - Updated: 15 July 2003
08:32
=== 2 ===
SYNOPSIS OF THE JULY 22, 2003 PROCEEDINGS AT THE HAGUE TRIBUNAL
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - July 22, 2003
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
The so-called “Trial” of Slobodan Milosevic resumed again today after
a four day weekend.
A secret witness code named “B-127” testified for most of the day.
B-127 is a Muslim and a former member of the JNA who stayed on and
joined the VRS, after the JNA withdrew from Bosnia-Herzegovina in May
of 1992.
The prosecution was trying to use B-127’s testimony as part of its
pathetic attempt to “prove” their absurd claim that the VJ and the VRS
were the same army, and not 2 different armies.
The “damning testimony” came fast and furious when B-127 claimed that
the VJ and the VRS shared information with each other. Oh, parish the
thought that 2 friendly states would share information with each
other! That has got to be the most sinister conspiracy in the history
of the world, or so you would think if you listened to the
“prosecutor” at the Hague Tribunal.
The truth is that it is completely normal for states that are on
friendly terms with one another to share information. An example of
that is making headlines right now. George W. Bush made what was
apparently a false claim in his State of the Union speech, on the basis
of British intelligence.
B-127 said that the information sharing went so far that the VJ could
access VRS radar data, and the VRS could access VJ radar data. In
North America the USA and Canada have the same agreement – it’s called
NORAD.
If one uses the logic employed by the Hague Tribunal one could
theorize that the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was really a Canadian
endeavor, and therefore the actions of the USA are really Canada’s
responsibility. After all, Canada and the USA cooperate with each
other, they share intelligence data, they share radar data – in fact,
in my home state of Washington, the Canadian Armed forces even conduct
joint training operations together with the U.S. Army at Ft. Lewis
near Tacoma.
Just like Slobodan Milosevic secretly controlled the government and
army of Republika Srpska – Canadian PM, Jean Chretien must be secretly
controlling the U.S. Government and the American armed forces. If you
understand the logic of the Hague Tribunal, or if you smoke enough
crack, then that type of thinking will make perfect sense to you.
Another thing that was seen as sinister (by the prosecutor) was the
fact that the government of Yugoslavia paid the former soldiers of the
JNA, through the 30th Personnel Center, the social insurance, health
benefits, salaries, old-age pensions, etc… which they had legally
accrued under Yugoslav law.
Imagine those scheming Serbs - paying people the money that they owed
them. If that doesn’t point to a “joint criminal enterprise” then I
don’t know what does. They even paid B-127, who is a Muslim, through
that same 30th Personnel Center.
The 30th Personnel Center was purely an administrative body that was
in charge of paying legally accrued social benefits to the former
soldiers of the JNA. The 30th Personnel Center issued no orders of any
kind. It had one office, consisting of one room, and it operated for a
full 6 years after the war ended,therefore it had absolutely nothing
at all to do with the war.
The prosecution’s claim that the VJ and the VRS were the same army
fell to pieces when Slobodan Milosevic asked B-127 some very direct
questions.
President Milosevic asked if B-127 knew of any orders that the VJ had
issued to the VRS, and B-127 didn’t know about any.
President Milosevic asked if B-127 had ever seen any units of the VJ
operating in Bosnia, and again B-127 hadn’t.
B-127 tried to save the prosecution’s case by saying that people from
Serbia were forced to join the VRS. President Milosevic then asked for
an example of this, but B-127 failed to come up with even a single
example.
President Milosevic further destroyed the prosecution’s case when he
asked - if the VJ and the VRS were the same army (as the prosecutor
claims), then why didn’t the VRS engage Albanian terrorists in Kosovo,
or mobilize to defend Yugoslavia during the NATO aggression?
After B-127 withdrew another secret witness code named B-83 came and
testified for about 10 minutes.
Then the so-called “judges” ruled that written statements from 2
secret witnesses, B-1576 and B-1010, could be admitted as evidence
under rule 92-bis without any cross-examination. In fact these secret
witnesses, if they even exist, don’t even have to appear in front of
the tribunal at all. For all we know these so-called “witnesses” could
simply be figments of Carla del Ponte’s imagination.
=== 3 ===
SYNOPSIS OF JULY 23 HEARINGS AT THE HAGUE TRIBUNAL
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - July 23, 2003
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
Today at the Hague tribunal a secret witness testified under the
pseudonym of “B-83.” The majority of B-83’s testimony was given in
private session.
B-83 was apparently an official in the Serbian government who had
something to do with financial matters. His employment wasn’t clear
due to the excessive use of private sessions. I’m not even sure what
the gist of his testimony was supposed to be since so much of it was
given in private session.
B-83 did, however, say some interesting things in open session. B-83
accused the prosecution of twisting his words and putting falsehoods
into his witness statement. B-83 also said that the prosecution did
not give him adequate time to review his statement, or even give him
the chance to see the statement in his own language until he got to
the Hague earlier this week.
For example the prosecution made up a story about the Serbian Police
"organizing car thefts" and inserted this outrageous fairytale into
B-83's witness statement, even though the witness said that this story
wasn’t true. The prosecution also made up a bunch of malarkey about
“black budgets” which the witness also denied.
In fact, according to the witness, there were errors of fact in almost
every single paragraph of this witness statement that the prosecutor
had prepared for him.
While President Milosevic was questioning B-83 about the numerous
false claims that the prosecution had inserted into his witness
statement the so-called “judge” May cut him off and accused him of
“wasting time on irrelevant matters.”
This is amazing even for the Hague Tribunal. Here we have a witness
who had perjurious statements put into his mouth, against his will and
without his knowledge, by the prosecutor and the judge doesn’t see any
problem with that! If this was a real court, with a real judge, a
mistrial would be declared, and the prosecutor would face criminal
prosecution himself.
After B-83 finished, the prosecution called a so-called “expert”
witness, one Audrey Budding, a historian from Harvard who wrote a
paper on “Serb nationalism.”
Mrs. Budding proved her self to be an apologist for the Albanian
Fascists of the 2nd World War.
Mrs. Budding denied that the Ballistas* were fascists, and even had
the nerve to claim that the Ballistas were the victims of the Chetniks
and the Partisans.
All in all it was just another day at the Hague Tribunal.
* If you don’t know what a Ballista is see:
http://emperors-clothes/articles/thompson/rootsof.htm
=== 4 ===
ANOTHER SYNOPSIS OF THE JULY 23, 2003 PROCEEDINGS AT THE HAGUE
Written by: Vera Martinovic - July 23, 2003
Today's first witness, B-083, demonstrated again the flimsiness of the
Prosecution's case and the desperation of the OTP (Office of the
Prosecutor). Why flimsiness? Because, in the absence of anything
stronger, the Prosecutors sought to prove that Serbia provided
financial aid to the Serbs on the other side of the Drina. But that is
a common knowledge, an undisputed fact and certainly not a war crime.
And why desperation? They manipulated heavily the testimony of B-083,
fabricating his several previously given written statements, tricking
him into signing the English version without him fully understanding
it and trying to hide that by keeping his entire testimony in the
private session.
Only the last 10 minutes of the cross-examination were held in the
open session, but it was enough to reveal the whole scam. B-083 thus
joined those Prosecution witnesses whom they regretted they had ever
summoned: having received only few days ago at The Hague the Serbian
version of "his" statements, B-083 corrected in his handwriting
practically each and every paragraph, striking them out and adding in
the margins his explanations which invalidated the statements in toto.
B-083, introduced only vaguely as an "officer in the Ministry of
Defence of Serbia in 1991," started his testimony yesterday, but it
lasted only 10 minutes before the proceedings were adjourned for the
day and it was in the open session. The only thing Nice covered then
was the claim that the Government of Serbia deliberated in one of its
sessions in November 1991 the aid for the Serbs in Croatia, and the
amount mentioned was in the neighborhood of 92 million DM.
Today, B-083 finished his examination-in-chief, but most of it was in
private session. Therefore, the public was unable to follow the
explanation about those alleged millions.
Back in the open session, we saw that the examination-in-chief was
over and that amicus curiae Stephen Kay was arguing with Mr. May over
the allotment of time for the cross-examination, and the constant
changing in the order of witnesses.
Each time May spoke, he managed to muddle the issues, "explaining"
that indeed the Accused has to be granted a certain amount of time,
but he is not to waste it on arguments and quarrels with the witness.
Kay tried to point out this is a technical matter and the main thing
is that Nice 'moves like an express train', covering a large number of
important issues extremely briefly and superficially, which in turn
radically shortens the allotment of time for the Accused and makes it
impossible for him to cover those issues at all. He also noticed that
it is Nice who leads the most important witnesses, like Kucan was, who
was processed in only 1 day. Therefore, the time spent for the
examination-in-chief could not be the standard by which the allotted
time for the cross-examination is to be measured.
Apparently, the OTP produces a weekly list of witnesses complete with
the time planned for each examination-in-chief, and since the general
rule has been to allot approximately the same time for the
cross-examination, the Accused can plan his questioning accordingly.
But then Nice comes up, drastically cutting the actual time of his
questioning of a witness to, say, half an hour instead of the planned
two hours, simply by being superficial and thereby setting the low time
standard. And, he constantly reshuffles the witnesses, hampering the
preparation of the Defense.
Nice tried to prevent the judges from allotting too much time to this
cross-examination, by appealing to the Chamber to 'exert pressure on
the amicus and the Accused' (I failed to understand what kind of
pressure and in relation to what - perhaps to make them shut up).
Nice also half-complained and half-flattered: "I have to note that in
a short time the Accused has developed enviable skills of
cross-examination." What he meant by that was probably that the Accused
was now so much better at it that he could wrap it up in much less
time.
The troika in the scarlet robes put their heads together, murmuring
for two minutes among themselves and then May pronounced: "An hour and
fifteen minutes." Like a magician pulling a rabbit out of the hat, or
a generous nobleman tossing coins to a beggar: 15 minutes longer than
Nice had for the examination-in-chief.
So, not only haven't we seen what the witness had to say, and how rich
were the issues he covered, we also couldn't judge whether an hour and
fifteen would be reasonably long enough to cross-examine.
But, that was not all. Milosevic first tried to verify with May that
the issue of the place of employment of this witness was not for the
private session. May answered he also believed this had been mentioned
in the open session. But the moment Milosevic started to mouth his
first question, something to the effect of "You have been working…",
Nice jumped up, saying: "I believe this could infringe the security
measures." May seconded: "Yes, I think it might. We go to the private
session." And nearly all of the cross-examination, more than one hour
of it, was closed to the public!
When the session again became open again, there were Milosevic and the
witness at the end of the careful demolition of the written statements
by the latter and of the Prosecution's credibility.
Milosevic said that there was virtually not a single paragraph in
these statements that had not been corrected in writing by the
witness. B-083 confirmed: "That's right." He explained there were so
many mistakes and even some totally unrelated, irrelevant and invented
stuff, that he believed it was unfair that Milosevic is to be charged
with these things or the Tribunal's time wasted like this.
B-083 used the words "silly" and "preposterous" when describing these
passages from "his" statements. He spoke directly to Milosevic: "I
apologise to you", and he requested these issues to be disregarded. He
said he had made a mistake by being insufficiently cautious, and
signing this without having read it or having received it in Serbian.
Milosevic quoted several quite outrageous passages from one of these
statements, allegedly in direct speech by the witness: "I'll give you
another example of illegal fundraising - the Police had been involved
in car theft." He said to the witness: "Here you have added in your
handwriting: 'Not correct'." B-083 confirmed this, saying he also wrote
that it should be explained to the Accused, along with an apology, the
circumstances of this statement.
B-083 only got the Serbian version 5 days ago. Apparently, the OTP
Investigator Gerald Sexton had tricked the witness into signing the
English version years ago, saying he'll be able to 'explain everything
at The Hague', but then B-083 found out that practically everything
had been invented or too liberally interpreted, but as if the witness
had been quoted verbatim complete with the inverted commas ("I'll give
you another example…"). The witness now stated that, if he only had a
chance to write his statement with his own hand, "we would not be
having 1 minute of this discussion'.
Here's another gem: Milosevic said that one of the statements
contained the claim by the witness about our state budget, which had
'one secret segment, called a black fund'. B-083 simply said there's no
way he could have said that.
Judging by some other examples from the OTP's work of fiction that
Milosevic quoted, B-083 spoke to the Investigator quite broadly and
openly about the situation in the Ministry of Defense, where internal
squabbles and embezzlements were rife (and for which, as Milosevic
pointed out that 2 Ministers had been arrested at that time), and
cunning Mr. Sexton took it all and gave it a nice spin, necessary for
the Indictment.
B-083 had clearly misunderstood what it meant to give a statement for
the court, presuming it meant one should open up one's heart and spill
out every large and tiny office happening, giving the Investigator a
free hand to weave a story out of it, not even bothering to read what
the nice, understanding gentleman wrote in his name. Now he was
understandably angry at being bamboozled.
B-083 continued to complain about some of his former misbehaving
office colleagues even to Milosevic, saying that some of those who did
it were still holding their high positions today "and you and me are
sitting here". Milosevic drove the point home: "What possible
connection all these things could have with what's going on here?" The
witness answered: "None whatsoever."
Gradually, B-083 and Milosevic began to discuss those events in almost
friendly manner, chatting and not bothering to keep the pause between
questions and answers, like in a normal conversation. Milosevic would
quote another invented passage and they would together marvel at how
brazen the OTP had been, the witness repeating 'I have never said
something like that'.
B-083 even volunteered in his explanation of one particular instance
that he had 'never went there to inspect', forcing Nice to interject:
"I do not know whether the witness is aware he's in the open session?"
May also interrupted the cozy chat once, warning both not to overlap,
reminding witness he is "here to testify" and Milosevic is "here to
cross-examine," and not to have a conversation. Milosevic was quite
pleased with himself for exposing once more the sleazy modus operandi
of the OTP and disrupting so successfully this show trial, that he
calmly answered to May he was quite pleased to have the opportunity to
chat with this man, whom he has never met before.
Milosevic and the witness even tried to establish the method of
creating certain passages of the statements by the OTP. The problem
was, as many times before with those written statements, that there
were no questions to which these statements were answering, only the
unbroken, spun story.
B-083 was guessing what the original questions by the Investigator
must've been: probably the Investigator asked, for instance, what
would be the regular chain of command in the government for any given
issue. He got a detailed answer about the whole structure with the
President of the Republic at the top of the pyramid. Then the OTP
retold this explanation as if it had been an answer to a specific
accusation against Milosevic.
B-083 used the ship metaphor, describing the subordination, but he was
not answering the question of whether the captain organized the
piracy. It was as if the Investigator had asked: Who runs the ship?
and got the answer: The captain, who has officers under him. Then, the
Investigator spun the question this way: Who organized the piracy using
this ship? , and coupled it with the original question: The captain,
who has officers under him.
It was obvious that both Milosevic and B-083 were displeased when Mr.
May announced that there were only 5 minutes left, so they quickly
tried to cover several more inventions (Milosevic quoting them and
asking whether they were correct, the witness answering: "Not a chance.
Please, disregard this.") They parted almost friends, I'm sure.
Mr. Tapuskovic got his 2 minutes, and he used them to clarify the only
issue from the testimony mentioned by the witness in the open session
- those millions of Deutsche Marks requested/planned/given by Serbia
to the Serbs in Croatia. He wanted to make a distinction between the
sums requested and planned and those actually paid. B-083 confirmed
that he personally handled some of these payments, but these were all
amounts in dinars, it was aid and hardly the amount stated. Tapuskovic
was pleased: "I have no further questions."
Nice had a chance for a redirect, but guess what? The public couldn't
see it, again. He said: "We have a couple of additional questions, but
they're for a private session." And the screen went blank.
Please try to read "Dealing with the 'Hostile' Insider Witness"
(
http://www.cij.org/
index.cfm?fuseaction=viewReport&reportID=361&tribunalID=1 ) by Judith
Armatta of the CIJ. Here she explained the fact that several insiders
so far (notably Radomir Markovic, Captain Dragan, Zoran Lilic and
B-1775) allegedly changed their testimony due to the mesmerizing
effect of Milosevic on them. She compared him with an 'alpha dog', in
front of which a poor witness simply 'rolled over like a cur'. She
applied her cottage psychology/astrology/ESP skills, claiming that a
witness stood no chance, because 'Milosevic's aura was too strong for
him'.
I would suggest much simpler explanations: these people did not
volunteer to testify for the Prosecution, they had been summoned
or/and threatened into it with possible indictments against themselves.
And then the following happened: for instance, Captain Dragan had NOT
changed his testimony nor succumbed to a powerful aura, but had been
bamboozled by the OTP in the same manner as today's witness B-083.
Their original written statements had been liberally invented,
suggestively worded and devoid of questions by the Investigator and
they were tricked into signing. Not having seen the
examination-in-chief of B-083, I can only suppose that it had been
pretty much like that one of Captain Dragan: Prosecutor Nice rushing,
skipping and sliding through the invented statement 'like an express
train', sometimes not making sense at all, leaving the witness to
stare in disbelief and to simply say 'yes' to whatever construction
proffered. Too bad there was this damned cross-examination and the
possibility to demonstrate that the testimony was not at all what the
witness has signed, meant or wanted to say.
The second witness today, who is to continue tomorrow, is an expert on
history from Harvard (the font of knowledge for the ICTY), who
testifies about the Serbian nationalism in 20th century as she had
penned it in her report commissioned by the OTP. The very definition of
an expert must've been wildly stretched after the ICTY set up shop.
Vera Martinovic is an independent writer based in Belgrade, Yugoslavia.
=== 5 ===
SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC: HISTORY TEACHER
July 24, 2003
Written by: Vera Martinovic
Audrey Budding testified who testified on July 23rd and 24th, is a
skinny, bespectacled youthful PhD with expressive gesticulation. She
knows lots of historical facts. Her clothes and hairdo are unusually
interesting for an American. She apparently speaks/reads Serbian.
But that's where the plus side stops. Mrs. Budding's historical
knowledge is fragmentary and incomplete and, so she often misses the
big picture, and is unaware of important events and sources.
Mrs. Budding used to be a diplomatic official at the American Embassy
in Belgrade in the '80s, so she is obviously more of a politician then
a historian.
She penned a report commissioned by the OTP on Serbian nationalism in
the 20th century, which seems to be a rewrite of her own, more
balanced PhD thesis on the Serbian intellectuals and the national
question, only with the added twist to make the Serbs look bad, so she
supplied a political trial with a politicized rewrite of her own work.
None the less, I have to give her the credit of being much more subtle
than the previous Prosecution "expert", Riedlmayer, who was simply
ridiculous.
Mrs. Budding was seldom obvious and crude in her conclusions, except
sometimes, when Milosevic cornered her with facts and questions, and
then she turned stubborn. For example, when she disagreed with the
data by the Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum about the figure of 600,000
victims of the Ustasa concentration camp Jasenovac, claiming the
number is 100,000 and explaining that anyway 'nobody knows exactly how
many Serbs died in NDH [Nezavisna Drzava Hrvatska = Independent State
of Croatia, Ustase-led Nazi puppet invention during WW2, comprising
today's Croatia and Bosnia & Herzegovina], in each village and each
house' . Although she admitted this was clearly a genocide, she was
suspicious about the number, she couldn't be bothered to believe those
pedantic Jews at the Holocaust museum, and certainly not Yugoslav
sources, because she was unable to personally peek into each village
and house.
Another example where she was crude and stubborn was when she refused
to accept the fact that the Albanian Fascist movement of the notorious
Balli Combetar or balisti, were Fascists. The fact that they were
installed by Mussolini to rule Kosovo when it was given over to
Albania during the WW2, butchered thousands of Serbs, and then
continued armed fighting years after the war officially ended, all
that was to Audrey, "a rebellion that started after this region of
Drenica was incorporated in the Yugoslav state, which caused the
revolt of the Albanians, who didn't want to join the Partisans in the
final push against the Germans in 1944 because they were afraid to
leave their houses, and so this rebellion was quashed and probably few
thousands were killed, some in battles, some executed".
Mrs. Budding stubbornly persisted saying, "to describe balisti as
Albanian Fascists is not correct, because they did not support the
Fascistic form of the state."
Milosevic got impatient and curtly asked: "And what did they support?
Did they support Italian Fascists?"
Mrs. Budding mumbled that well, of course, they supported the creation
of the Greater Albania.
Milosevic snapped: "Not only supported the idea, but militarily
supported the Fascists."
Mrs. Budding mumbled some more, trailing off and ultimately saying
that she's not familiar with it, with each military action, that there
were different groups… Some historian and expert!
There were some more gaffes in her paper, like when she wrote that the
Ustasa émigrés were a marginal group (Milosevic wanted to know how
come they got to run a country for 4 years if they were so marginal).
Also, she found it problematic to define the nascent Yugoslavia as a
solution for the Serbs, with the maxim 'all Serbs in one state'. When
Milosevic said that Yugoslavia was not a solution only for the Serbs,
but also for others, that it could be equally said 'all Croats/Slovenes
in one state', Mrs. Budding proudly begged to disagree, 'because there
were significant Croatian and Slovenian minorities left in Italy and
Austria', but when Milosevic reminded her that also a significant
portion of the Serbs were left in Hungary and Romania, so the maxim
still applied for the bulk of all nations, Mrs. Budding didn't have
anything to say. A historian who argues an issue not knowing what the
next related historical fact might be used against her is not a very
competent historian.
Almost all other conclusions in her report were less obviously biased,
only ever so slightly leaned towards prejudice and one would have to
carefully read both her thesis and her OTP report to pinpoint the
distortions, although the general impression of a different slant is
palpable even from those paragraphs that were read in the courtroom.
Milosevic quoted her PhD thesis where she explained how it was
impossible for the Serbs to accept the confederate Yugoslavia and its
breaking along the borders of its republics because they were so
dispersed; the same issue in her report for the OTP got the subtle
addition that the Serbs failed to pay much attention to their ties
with other nations within the republics in which they lived outside of
Serbia.
Milosevic quipped: "Well, do you seriously believe that the ties of
the Serbs in Croatia with the Croats, these ties that include the
genocide that you've already explained, are so much stronger and more
important than the ties with other Serbs?!" Budding got pretty confused
after that and started to babble about life being not only one's
nation, but a house in which one lives… To that one can argue that one
can indeed live in a house if it still stands and if one is still
alive.
Another major problem with Budding's paper is the extremely shallow
and selective pool of sources that she used, some of the works
completely debunked as political pamphlets (e.g. "Kosovo - A Brief
History' by Noel Malcolm), yet she quoted from such articles and
books, disregarding or not being aware of the existence of other well
known authors and works that Milosevic listed.
Budding was often reduced to answering 'I'm not familiar with this
particular work' or 'I do not know about these particular sources' or
'I haven't read all the transcripts, only from the first meeting' or
'No, I haven't seen these diplomatic documents'. Milosevic and his
aides have done their homework and at times Mrs. Budding was indeed
receiving a thorough lesson in history.
The young doctor was selective not only in her sources, but also in
the historical events which she did or did not include in her paper.
Thus, she did quote a public speech by the soon-to-be Yugoslav King
Alexander, who said that Serbia must be strong so that Yugoslavia could
be strong too. She explained that as an example of 'Serbian
nationalism', but she failed to quote and explain, or even to mention
at all the crucial document of that time, the Corfu Declaration on the
creation of Yugoslavia. She explained her omissions with the necessity
to keep her report concise. Strangely enough, only the relevant and
balanced things got chopped off.
The "learned panel of judges" found themselves in an absurd situation:
here they were, admitting into evidence the Prosecution's exhibit
going way back into the 15th century, and discussing these despised
historical issues which they always pronounced as irrelevant, and of
which they knew nothing, and frankly didn't care to know. But, this is
what you get when the Prosecution's case so heavily depends on the
silly notion that all this is one and the same 'joint criminal
enterprise' to create the Greater Serbia, the plan which goes
centuries back, so even King Alexander, Vuk Karadzic, Garasanin and
other Serbian historical figures must be evoked in order to take their
punishment for their participation in this Nice-Del Ponte co-production
in Cinemascope.
History is a tough discipline, and it demands a broad knowledge. It
was at times hard for me to follow all of the expert nuances, because
I certainly haven't read all of the books that were mentioned. But, at
least I was able to follow the basic logic of the discussion and
arguments.
Mr. May was probably dozing or doing crosswords, because he proved
time and again unable to follow or understand the point of a certain
line of questioning.
At one point, Milosevic asked Mrs. Budding why she wrote that Vuk
Karadzic could be attributed with the authorship of the idea of
defining a nation by its language, when there is a whole line of other
linguists, historians and philosophers (of which he quoted some) who
had stated the same ideas much earlier, and Karadzic had merely
embraced that idea?
May interrupted by saying: "I do not know what is the purpose of this
list of names?" Milosevic professorially reprimanded him: "Mr May, you
have not been listening to the previous question", and he patiently
repeated the whole question and said that 'the list you're preventing
me from reading are the people who originally created the idea, among
them someone whom you might be familiar with, a German philosopher
Fichte'. So, not only was Mrs. Budding given a free history lesson,
but Mr. May as well.
The time was again the main problem, May not wanting to allow any
extension of the cross-examination. Milosevic said twice: "These time
restrictions I really regard as violence." And, at one point he
mockingly pointed at the courtroom wall clock and told May: "Anyway,
the press has been already writing that the central issue here is
time, and nothing much else."
As I said, Mrs. Budding was subtle in her intentional bias, perhaps
overly subtle, so the point the Prosecution wanted to make with this
witness hasn't come across all that clearly. It only left a faint
anti-Serb aftertaste, a few hints and insinuations, an admission that
yes, no nation of these parts is blameless, but the Serbs were somehow
the main culprits.
The time allotted for this witness, both for the examination-in-chief
and for the cross-examination, was all to short. And even that short
time was interrupted by inane interventions from Nice and stupid
questions from May. Milosevic told May at one point (when the latter
tried to dismiss one issue as irrelevant): "I don't believe that you
should learn the whole Serbian history in half an hour, but since you
mainly deal here with altering history, I consider this particular
issue to be relevant."
What I find appalling is that the "trial" aimed at rewriting history
was dealing in history in such a superficial and brief manner. But,
the reason lies precisely in that: when you want to do a quick and
crude rewrite, you don't dwell too much on the serious science.
Vera Martinovic is in independent writer based in Belgrade, Yugoslavia.
=== 6 ===
"TRIAL" HALTED DUE TO PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC'S ILL HEALTH
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - July 28, 2003
On Monday July 28th the troika announced that there would be no
proceedings in the Milosevic "trial." The proceedings have also been
canceled for the 29th.
There is no word on what type of illness President Milosevic is
suffering from, although it is known that he suffers from high blood
pressure and that he has a heart condition.
The Tribunal's doctors will examine President Milosevic on Tuesday in
order to determine when he will be fit to resume taking part in the
proceedings.
---
http://www.ptd.net/webnews/wed/aa/Qwarcrimes-yugo-
milosevic.R_qz_DlT.html
Milosevic war crimes trial to resume August 25
Tuesday, 29-Jul-2003 1:00PM
THE HAGUE, July 29 (AFP) - The war crimes trial of Slobodan Milosevic,
suspended again because the former Yugoslav leader was again suffering
from ill-health, will resume on August 25, the UN tribunal said Tuesday.
"The trial of Slobodan Milosevic is scheduled to resume on Monday 25
August at 9:00 am after the ICTY summer court recess," the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia said in a
press release.
Tribunal spokesman Jim Landale told AFP Monday that Milosevic, who had
seen a doctor on Monday, would have another medical visit on Tuesday
and that the doctor's conclusions would affect the start date for the
trial.
He did not provide details on the illness of the former Yugoslav
leader, who suffers from high blood pressure and is at risk of a heart
attack.
The interruption was the ninth to date in the long-running trial before
the The Hague-based court. The ICTY began hearing Milosevic's case in
February last year, and the prosecution has not finished arguing its
case.
Milosevic, 61, has been undertaking his own defense in the case.
The one-time Yugoslav president, who was ousted from power in October
2000, is standing trial on more than 60 charges of war crimes and
crimes against humanity for his role in the 1990s wars in Bosnia,
Croatia and Kosovo.
http://www.reseauvoltaire.net/article10200.html
RÉSEAU VOLTAIRE - Focus
Diviser pour mieux régner
L'éclatement du continent européen au service des États-Unis
La régionalisation de l'Europe pourrait être détournée de son sens
initial à la faveur d'un déséquilibre des institutions. Elle serait
alors un moyen de démembrer politiquement l'Europe, laissant ainsi le
champ libre à la domination de l'Empire états-unien. Pierre Hillard
analyse cette variante de la doctrine Wolfowitz : comment transformer
le rêve d'unité européenne en un cauchemar de la yougoslavisation
généralisée.
11 juillet 2003
Les modalités de la construction européenne dépendent de l'idée que
l'on se fait de l'unité de l'Europe et de son rôle dans le monde. Après
avoir piloté la création de l'Union pour stabiliser l'Europe
occidentale et la soustraire à l'influence soviétique, les États-Unis
encouragent aujourd'hui à la fois son élargissement géographique et sa
dilution politique. L'Union pourrait alors absorber la Russie et broyer
les États-membres en une myriade de régions pour se transformer en une
vaste zone de libre-échange protégée par la puissance militaire
états-unienne.
Contrairement à une idée répandue, il se trouve au sein même de l'Union
de nombreuses forces pour promouvoir ce projet comme l'atteste la carte
officielle que nous reproduisons.
(Table des régions d'Europe:
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/files/IMMAGINI/europe-
confetis.jpg
Edité par l'Assemblée des régions d'Europe (ARE), 2002)
Elle a été élaborée au sein de l'ARE (l'Assemblée des Régions d'Europe)
en 2002. Créé en 1985 par les Français, les Espagnols et les Portugais,
cet institut fut repris en 1987 par les Allemands qui lui insufflèrent
des principes fédéralistes, régionalistes et ethnicistes, le tout en
liaison avec les organismes européens comme le Comité des Régions (le
CdR), le Congrès des Pouvoirs Locaux et Régionaux d'Europe (le CPLRE)
ou le Conseil des Communes et des Régions d'Europe (le CCRE). L'intérêt
majeur de ce document est de révéler le sens caché de la forme actuelle
de la régionalisation européenne. Celle-ci ne concerne pas que l'Union
présente, mais est conçue pour s'étendre à toute l'Eurasie. Tous les
États d'Europe centrale, les États baltes, l'Ukraine, la Russie -avec
une frontière à l'Est qui s'étend vers la Sibérie- les États du Caucase
et la Turquie sont déjà intégrés dans ce projet européen ou plutôt
euro-atlantique. L'adhésion à l'Union ne serait plus le moyen de
réaliser l'unité européenne, mais au contraire de démembrer le
continent, assurant ainsi le triomphe pacifique de l'hyper puissance
états-unienne selon le principe classique « diviser pour régner ». La
régionalisation, présentée comme un moyen de rapprocher les citoyens
des lieux de décisions, ne serait plus qu'un artifice pour prévenir
l'émergence d'une Europe-puissance en application de la « doctrine
Wolfowitz » [ 1]
Peu de temps avant de quitter la Maison-Blanche, le président Clinton a
présenté la vision états-unienne de l'Europe dans un discours
magnifiant le bloc transatlantique. Il soulignait aussi et d'une
manière très nette que « (...) l'unité de l'Europe est en train
d'engendrer quelque chose de véritablement neuf sous le soleil : des
institutions communes plus vastes que l'État-nation parallèlement à la
délégation de l'autorité démocratique aux échelons inférieurs. L'Écosse
et le Pays de Galles ont leurs propres parlements. L'Irlande du Nord,
dont ma famille tire son origine, a retrouvé son nouveau gouvernement.
L'Europe est pleine de vie et résonne à nouveau des noms d'anciennes
régions dont on reparle - la Catalogne, le Piémont, la Lombardie, la
Silésie, la Transylvanie etc. - non pas au nom d'un quelconque
séparatisme, mais dans un élan de saine fierté et de respect de la
tradition. La souveraineté nationale est enrichie de voix régionales
pleines de vie qui font de l'Europe un lieu garantissant mieux
l'existence de la diversité (...) » [ 2]
La « sympathie » américaine à l'égard de cette forme de régionalisation
s'explique par le transfert du pouvoir politique des États vers les
régions. Désormais, la « région-État » se pare d'une autonomie
politique de plus en plus grande dans les domaines qui touchent
l'administration, la justice, les systèmes bancaire et postaux ou
encore l'éducation, cette dernière devenant de plus en plus - quoiqu'en
disent les autorités officielles - une éducation régionale. Or, ces
instances politiques régionales sont conduites à traiter directement
avec les instances supranationales de Bruxelles en court-circuitant
l'autorité nationale. Ceci ne peut que combler d'aise les dirigeants
politiques et économiques états-uniens qui, par l'intermédiaire de
leurs puissants lobbies présents massivement à Bruxelles, pourront
engager des contacts directement avec la Lombardie, l'Alsace, la
Catalogne, etc. Entre d'un côté, la puissance politique, militaire et
économique considérable des États-Unis et de l'autre, une quelconque
région d'Europe, on devine sans peine quel parti Washington tirera de
cette affaire.
Pour renforcer l'emprise complète américaine sur le vieux continent,
Les États-Unis ont présenté au seul gouvernement allemand une véritable
feuille de route pour l'extension à l'Est de l'Union européenne (l'UE)
et de l'OTAN. Selon le Financial Times Deutschland du 24 octobre 2002
l'objectif d'une « Europe libre et unie » doit s'articuler selon les
modalités suivantes. Après l'intégration de dix États en 2004 à l'UE
(Pologne, République tchèque, Slovaquie, Hongrie, Slovénie, Lituanie,
Lettonie, Estonie, Chypre et Malte), les pourparlers d'adhésion de
l'Ukraine à l'OTAN devraient commencer en 2004, suivies de ceux de la
Serbie en 2005, de la Croatie et de l'Albanie en 2007. En outre, selon
cette feuille de route, les États-Unis souhaiteraient l'adhésion de la
Turquie à l'UE pour 2007. Enfin, le Financial Times Deutschland ajoute
que l'intégration complète des Balkans et de l'Ukraine dans les
institutions euro-atlantiques doit être achevée pour 2010.
Au moins, nous connaissons la date butoir des objectifs états-uniens.
Dans cette parcellisation européenne donnant la primauté politique aux
régions, aux dépens des nations, en liaison directe avec tous les
lobbies financiers de Bruxelles, l'Allemagne joue un rôle décisif. En
effet, à l'origine de la régionalisation en Europe ( recommandation 34
(1997) du Congrès des Pouvoirs Locaux et Régionaux d'Europe:
http://www.coe.int/T/F/Cplre/%5F5.%5FTextes/2._Textes_adopt%E9s/
1._Recommandations/1997/Rec_34_1997_F.asp#TopOfPage ), elle soumet le
continent aux concepts institutionnels que les Britanniques et
États-Uniens lui ont imposés à la Conférence de Postdam (11 juillet au
2 août 1945) et lors de la création de la bizone d'occupation (2
décembre 1946). À l'époque, le rôle dévolu aux Länders visait à la fois
à rétablir les libertés supprimées par le centralisme du IIIe Reich et
à priver l'Allemagne du statut de grande puissance. Ce dispositif avait
été approuvé par la France qui, selon le mot de Mauriac à propos des
zones d'occupation, aimait tant l'Allemagne qu'il préférait qu'il y en
ait plusieurs. En outre, les Anglo-Saxons figèrent ces institutions en
sacralisant la Constitution allemande et en créant une Cour
constitutionnelle indépendante à Karlsruhe.
Cependant la vassalité de l'Europe vis-à-vis des États-Unis n'a plus de
raison d'être depuis l'effondrement de l'Union soviétique et la
dissolution du Pacte de Varsovie. La classe dirigeante allemande, quant
à elle, se trouve partagée entre d'une part ceux qui rêvent d'une
puissance indépendante et qui se sont exprimés en refusant de
s'associer à l'attaque de l'Irak, et d'autre part, ceux qui préfèrent
minimiser les risques et jouer le rôle de gouverneur délégué de
l'Empire pour l'Europe. Ceux-là se sont empressés de jouer les
supplétifs dans le démembrement de la Yougoslavie et dans la guerre du
Kosovo. Dès lors, ces contradictions pourraient trouver une solution en
se débarrassant de la tutelle états-unienne afin d'être seuls maîtres à
bord, selon le bon vieux « principe d'Iznogoud » (être calife à la
place du calife). Tout le problème réside dans la capacité des
Anglo-Saxons à convaincre les élites allemandes de jouer le rôle qu'ils
leur ont assigné dans le nouvel ordre mondial
En tout cas, l'éclatement de l'Europe comme le présente cette carte de
l'ARE est encore transitoire. En effet, l'émergence première des
régions est le préalable avant de passer à un autre niveau : le
remaniement des frontières régionales en fonction de critères
économiques et ethniques. Dans le cadre de l'interrégionalité, de
nombreux regroupements sont possibles comme par exemple entre les
entités basques française et espagnole ou encore entre l'Alsace et le
Pays de Bade. C'est tout l'enjeu de la carte élaborée par la commission
européenne en 2002 [ 3]. En effet, l'objectif étant de créer un vaste
marché économique de libre-échange transatlantique, les technocrates
bruxellois ont procédé à des remaniements territoriaux afin de créer
des groupes économiques comme le stipulent les textes officiels :
Interreg IIIB regroupe désormais toutes les actions de coopération
transnationale impliquant les autorités nationales, régionales et
locales et les autres acteurs socio-économiques. L'objectif est de
promouvoir l'intégration territoriale au sein de grands groupes de
régions européennes y compris au-delà de l'Union des Quinze, de même
qu'entre les États membres et les pays candidats ou autres pays
voisins, et à favoriser ainsi un développement durable, équilibré et
harmonieux de l'Union. Une attention particulière est accordée
notamment aux régions ultrapériphériques et insulaires [ 4].
Cette révolution politique, géopolitique et sociale en Europe est sur
le point de franchir un pas décisif avec la reconnaissance d'une
personnalité juridique pour l'Union européenne. Ce qui peut apparaître
comme l'aboutissement d'un rêve d'unité contient en lui-même des
éléments qui, dans ce contexte particulier et en l'absence de
garde-fous, peuvent dériver vers le cauchemar de la Yougoslavisation
généralisée.
Pierre Hillard
Essayiste, auteur de Minorités et régionalismes, Enquête sur le plan
allemand qui va bouleverser l'Europe , Editions François-Xavier de
Guibert, 2002 (
http://www.fnac.com/Shelf/
article.asp?PRID=1288052&SID=7309b720%2D64c4%2D994f%2D8a47%2D3d14eb640a3
1&UID=0b549c42e%2Dec06%2D0016%2D8814%2D5cec73ad87b9&AID=&Origin=FnacAff&
Pe=1&No=1&Fr=0&Mn=1&Ra=-1&To=0 ).
Article suivant : L'effet CNN
[1] Cf. Defense Policy Guidance for the Fiscal Years 1994-1999 , US
Department of Defense, 18 février 1992. Des extraits du document ont
été publiés dans The New York Times du 8 mars 1992.
[2] Extrait du discours du président Clinton à l'occasion de la remise
du prix Charlemagne
(http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/Europe-0005/speeches/20000602-
1245.html) , Aix-la-Chapelle, 2 juin 2000.
[3] Voir la carte des 13 programmes INTERREG IIIB 2000-2006, Les
politiques structurelles et les territoires de l'Europe, Coopération
sans frontières , Commission européenne, 2002.
[4] Ibid., p. 8.
RÉSEAU VOLTAIRE - Focus
Diviser pour mieux régner
L'éclatement du continent européen au service des États-Unis
La régionalisation de l'Europe pourrait être détournée de son sens
initial à la faveur d'un déséquilibre des institutions. Elle serait
alors un moyen de démembrer politiquement l'Europe, laissant ainsi le
champ libre à la domination de l'Empire états-unien. Pierre Hillard
analyse cette variante de la doctrine Wolfowitz : comment transformer
le rêve d'unité européenne en un cauchemar de la yougoslavisation
généralisée.
11 juillet 2003
Les modalités de la construction européenne dépendent de l'idée que
l'on se fait de l'unité de l'Europe et de son rôle dans le monde. Après
avoir piloté la création de l'Union pour stabiliser l'Europe
occidentale et la soustraire à l'influence soviétique, les États-Unis
encouragent aujourd'hui à la fois son élargissement géographique et sa
dilution politique. L'Union pourrait alors absorber la Russie et broyer
les États-membres en une myriade de régions pour se transformer en une
vaste zone de libre-échange protégée par la puissance militaire
états-unienne.
Contrairement à une idée répandue, il se trouve au sein même de l'Union
de nombreuses forces pour promouvoir ce projet comme l'atteste la carte
officielle que nous reproduisons.
(Table des régions d'Europe:
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/files/IMMAGINI/europe-
confetis.jpg
Edité par l'Assemblée des régions d'Europe (ARE), 2002)
Elle a été élaborée au sein de l'ARE (l'Assemblée des Régions d'Europe)
en 2002. Créé en 1985 par les Français, les Espagnols et les Portugais,
cet institut fut repris en 1987 par les Allemands qui lui insufflèrent
des principes fédéralistes, régionalistes et ethnicistes, le tout en
liaison avec les organismes européens comme le Comité des Régions (le
CdR), le Congrès des Pouvoirs Locaux et Régionaux d'Europe (le CPLRE)
ou le Conseil des Communes et des Régions d'Europe (le CCRE). L'intérêt
majeur de ce document est de révéler le sens caché de la forme actuelle
de la régionalisation européenne. Celle-ci ne concerne pas que l'Union
présente, mais est conçue pour s'étendre à toute l'Eurasie. Tous les
États d'Europe centrale, les États baltes, l'Ukraine, la Russie -avec
une frontière à l'Est qui s'étend vers la Sibérie- les États du Caucase
et la Turquie sont déjà intégrés dans ce projet européen ou plutôt
euro-atlantique. L'adhésion à l'Union ne serait plus le moyen de
réaliser l'unité européenne, mais au contraire de démembrer le
continent, assurant ainsi le triomphe pacifique de l'hyper puissance
états-unienne selon le principe classique « diviser pour régner ». La
régionalisation, présentée comme un moyen de rapprocher les citoyens
des lieux de décisions, ne serait plus qu'un artifice pour prévenir
l'émergence d'une Europe-puissance en application de la « doctrine
Wolfowitz » [ 1]
Peu de temps avant de quitter la Maison-Blanche, le président Clinton a
présenté la vision états-unienne de l'Europe dans un discours
magnifiant le bloc transatlantique. Il soulignait aussi et d'une
manière très nette que « (...) l'unité de l'Europe est en train
d'engendrer quelque chose de véritablement neuf sous le soleil : des
institutions communes plus vastes que l'État-nation parallèlement à la
délégation de l'autorité démocratique aux échelons inférieurs. L'Écosse
et le Pays de Galles ont leurs propres parlements. L'Irlande du Nord,
dont ma famille tire son origine, a retrouvé son nouveau gouvernement.
L'Europe est pleine de vie et résonne à nouveau des noms d'anciennes
régions dont on reparle - la Catalogne, le Piémont, la Lombardie, la
Silésie, la Transylvanie etc. - non pas au nom d'un quelconque
séparatisme, mais dans un élan de saine fierté et de respect de la
tradition. La souveraineté nationale est enrichie de voix régionales
pleines de vie qui font de l'Europe un lieu garantissant mieux
l'existence de la diversité (...) » [ 2]
La « sympathie » américaine à l'égard de cette forme de régionalisation
s'explique par le transfert du pouvoir politique des États vers les
régions. Désormais, la « région-État » se pare d'une autonomie
politique de plus en plus grande dans les domaines qui touchent
l'administration, la justice, les systèmes bancaire et postaux ou
encore l'éducation, cette dernière devenant de plus en plus - quoiqu'en
disent les autorités officielles - une éducation régionale. Or, ces
instances politiques régionales sont conduites à traiter directement
avec les instances supranationales de Bruxelles en court-circuitant
l'autorité nationale. Ceci ne peut que combler d'aise les dirigeants
politiques et économiques états-uniens qui, par l'intermédiaire de
leurs puissants lobbies présents massivement à Bruxelles, pourront
engager des contacts directement avec la Lombardie, l'Alsace, la
Catalogne, etc. Entre d'un côté, la puissance politique, militaire et
économique considérable des États-Unis et de l'autre, une quelconque
région d'Europe, on devine sans peine quel parti Washington tirera de
cette affaire.
Pour renforcer l'emprise complète américaine sur le vieux continent,
Les États-Unis ont présenté au seul gouvernement allemand une véritable
feuille de route pour l'extension à l'Est de l'Union européenne (l'UE)
et de l'OTAN. Selon le Financial Times Deutschland du 24 octobre 2002
l'objectif d'une « Europe libre et unie » doit s'articuler selon les
modalités suivantes. Après l'intégration de dix États en 2004 à l'UE
(Pologne, République tchèque, Slovaquie, Hongrie, Slovénie, Lituanie,
Lettonie, Estonie, Chypre et Malte), les pourparlers d'adhésion de
l'Ukraine à l'OTAN devraient commencer en 2004, suivies de ceux de la
Serbie en 2005, de la Croatie et de l'Albanie en 2007. En outre, selon
cette feuille de route, les États-Unis souhaiteraient l'adhésion de la
Turquie à l'UE pour 2007. Enfin, le Financial Times Deutschland ajoute
que l'intégration complète des Balkans et de l'Ukraine dans les
institutions euro-atlantiques doit être achevée pour 2010.
Au moins, nous connaissons la date butoir des objectifs états-uniens.
Dans cette parcellisation européenne donnant la primauté politique aux
régions, aux dépens des nations, en liaison directe avec tous les
lobbies financiers de Bruxelles, l'Allemagne joue un rôle décisif. En
effet, à l'origine de la régionalisation en Europe ( recommandation 34
(1997) du Congrès des Pouvoirs Locaux et Régionaux d'Europe:
http://www.coe.int/T/F/Cplre/%5F5.%5FTextes/2._Textes_adopt%E9s/
1._Recommandations/1997/Rec_34_1997_F.asp#TopOfPage ), elle soumet le
continent aux concepts institutionnels que les Britanniques et
États-Uniens lui ont imposés à la Conférence de Postdam (11 juillet au
2 août 1945) et lors de la création de la bizone d'occupation (2
décembre 1946). À l'époque, le rôle dévolu aux Länders visait à la fois
à rétablir les libertés supprimées par le centralisme du IIIe Reich et
à priver l'Allemagne du statut de grande puissance. Ce dispositif avait
été approuvé par la France qui, selon le mot de Mauriac à propos des
zones d'occupation, aimait tant l'Allemagne qu'il préférait qu'il y en
ait plusieurs. En outre, les Anglo-Saxons figèrent ces institutions en
sacralisant la Constitution allemande et en créant une Cour
constitutionnelle indépendante à Karlsruhe.
Cependant la vassalité de l'Europe vis-à-vis des États-Unis n'a plus de
raison d'être depuis l'effondrement de l'Union soviétique et la
dissolution du Pacte de Varsovie. La classe dirigeante allemande, quant
à elle, se trouve partagée entre d'une part ceux qui rêvent d'une
puissance indépendante et qui se sont exprimés en refusant de
s'associer à l'attaque de l'Irak, et d'autre part, ceux qui préfèrent
minimiser les risques et jouer le rôle de gouverneur délégué de
l'Empire pour l'Europe. Ceux-là se sont empressés de jouer les
supplétifs dans le démembrement de la Yougoslavie et dans la guerre du
Kosovo. Dès lors, ces contradictions pourraient trouver une solution en
se débarrassant de la tutelle états-unienne afin d'être seuls maîtres à
bord, selon le bon vieux « principe d'Iznogoud » (être calife à la
place du calife). Tout le problème réside dans la capacité des
Anglo-Saxons à convaincre les élites allemandes de jouer le rôle qu'ils
leur ont assigné dans le nouvel ordre mondial
En tout cas, l'éclatement de l'Europe comme le présente cette carte de
l'ARE est encore transitoire. En effet, l'émergence première des
régions est le préalable avant de passer à un autre niveau : le
remaniement des frontières régionales en fonction de critères
économiques et ethniques. Dans le cadre de l'interrégionalité, de
nombreux regroupements sont possibles comme par exemple entre les
entités basques française et espagnole ou encore entre l'Alsace et le
Pays de Bade. C'est tout l'enjeu de la carte élaborée par la commission
européenne en 2002 [ 3]. En effet, l'objectif étant de créer un vaste
marché économique de libre-échange transatlantique, les technocrates
bruxellois ont procédé à des remaniements territoriaux afin de créer
des groupes économiques comme le stipulent les textes officiels :
Interreg IIIB regroupe désormais toutes les actions de coopération
transnationale impliquant les autorités nationales, régionales et
locales et les autres acteurs socio-économiques. L'objectif est de
promouvoir l'intégration territoriale au sein de grands groupes de
régions européennes y compris au-delà de l'Union des Quinze, de même
qu'entre les États membres et les pays candidats ou autres pays
voisins, et à favoriser ainsi un développement durable, équilibré et
harmonieux de l'Union. Une attention particulière est accordée
notamment aux régions ultrapériphériques et insulaires [ 4].
Cette révolution politique, géopolitique et sociale en Europe est sur
le point de franchir un pas décisif avec la reconnaissance d'une
personnalité juridique pour l'Union européenne. Ce qui peut apparaître
comme l'aboutissement d'un rêve d'unité contient en lui-même des
éléments qui, dans ce contexte particulier et en l'absence de
garde-fous, peuvent dériver vers le cauchemar de la Yougoslavisation
généralisée.
Pierre Hillard
Essayiste, auteur de Minorités et régionalismes, Enquête sur le plan
allemand qui va bouleverser l'Europe , Editions François-Xavier de
Guibert, 2002 (
http://www.fnac.com/Shelf/
article.asp?PRID=1288052&SID=7309b720%2D64c4%2D994f%2D8a47%2D3d14eb640a3
1&UID=0b549c42e%2Dec06%2D0016%2D8814%2D5cec73ad87b9&AID=&Origin=FnacAff&
Pe=1&No=1&Fr=0&Mn=1&Ra=-1&To=0 ).
Article suivant : L'effet CNN
[1] Cf. Defense Policy Guidance for the Fiscal Years 1994-1999 , US
Department of Defense, 18 février 1992. Des extraits du document ont
été publiés dans The New York Times du 8 mars 1992.
[2] Extrait du discours du président Clinton à l'occasion de la remise
du prix Charlemagne
(http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/Europe-0005/speeches/20000602-
1245.html) , Aix-la-Chapelle, 2 juin 2000.
[3] Voir la carte des 13 programmes INTERREG IIIB 2000-2006, Les
politiques structurelles et les territoires de l'Europe, Coopération
sans frontières , Commission européenne, 2002.
[4] Ibid., p. 8.
Nota biografica su Josip Broz Tito
(Il testo che segue e' apparso su "La Voce", notiziario del Gruppo
Atei Materialisti Dialettici (GAMADI). Per informazioni sul GAMADI e
per abbonarsi al mensile "La Voce":
telefono e fax 06-7915200
posta elettronica <gamadilavoce@...>
Per iscriversi al servizio telematico del GAMADI inviare un messaggio
vuoto a:
<Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli.>.
La revisione e la nota sono a cura del CNJ.)
---
JOZIP BROZ
TITO (nome di battaglia)
Il suo vero nome era Josip Broz, e fu il capo politico e militare della
Jugoslavia.
Tito nacque il 25 maggio del 1892 (1) a Kumrovec, periferia di
Zagabria, in Croazia.
Si sa che la madre era slovena e che il padre era un fabbro ferraio,
per cui Tito seguì il mestiere paterno.
In giovanissima età partecipò al movimento giovanile socialista e
venne, per questo, più volte arrestato.
Nel 1914 (prima guerra mondiale) venne arruolato nell’esercito
austriaco e venne inviato prima sul fronte italiano e poi su quello
russo.
Fu ferito nei Carpazi, e cadde prigioniero.
La rivoluzione russa lo colse quando era in Siberia e Tito, con
slancio, diede il suo contributo rivoluzionario.
Nel 1924 fece ritorno in Croazia, portando seco la moglie russa ed un
figlio.
Iniziò il suo mestiere di operaio metalmeccanico a Zagabria, dove
esercitava opera di propaganda in difesa dei diritti dei lavoratori.
Per questo, il 10 novembre del 1928 viene arrestato e condannato a 5
anni di ergastolo in parte scontati a Lepoglava.
La moglie e il figlio fuggirono in Russia e Tito, appena liberato, li
raggiunse.
Va considerato che negli anni 1934-1938 sia in patria che all’estero
egli si dedicò totalmente alla propaganda comunista.
Nel 1936 partecipò alla guerra civile di Spagna, come sergente nelle
Brigate Internazionali, formate da volontari, in aiuto alla Repubblica
spagnola minacciata dalla guerra civile scatenata dal fascista
Francisco Franco.
Tito tornò clandestinamente in Jugoslavia e precisamente a Zagabria e
a Belgrado.
Uscì dalla clandestinità nel 1938 col soprannome di Tito, datogli dai
compagni di lotta.
Nel 1940 venne eletto Segretario del Comitato Centrale dei delegati
comunisti jugoslavi.
Nella primavera del 1941, Tito si trovava a Belgrado.
Non ebbe esitazioni a divenire capo del Movimento di Resistenza,
essendo entrata in guerra anche l’URSS.
Opero' dapprima in Serbia, poi nel Montenegro e in Bosnia, finché non
si scontrò col movimento dei cetnici capeggiato da Draza Mihajlovic.
Tra i due movimenti era impossibile una intesa.
Tito, comunque, ebbe la meglio, anche per il riconoscimento
internazionale, e i suoi reparti partigiani, male equipaggiati e poco
armati, seppero svolgere azioni ardite contro gli agguerriti eserciti
tedesco nazista e fascista italiano.
In questa epica occasione Tito dimostrò di possedere, oltre a
straordinarie attitudini organizzative, anche un inestimabile talento
militare.
Il 29 novembre del 1943 la Seconda sessione del Consiglio Antifascista
di Liberazione Nazionale (AVNOJ) conferì a Tito il titolo di
Maresciallo.
La forte pressione tedesca, giunta a ferirlo in battaglia, lo
costrinse a rifugiarsi a Lissa, in Dalmazia.
Da questo luogo di convalescenza, il 16 giugno 1944, egli stabilì un
accordo con J. Subasic che era emissario del governo regio in esilio a
Londra.
Tito venne trasportato a Bari, in Italia, per curare meglio la sua
ferita, e sembra che, su invito di Churchill che si trovava tra il
22 e il 24 agosto del 1944 a Roma, Tito abbia avuto un breve incontro
con lo statista inglese. Operava in difesa del suo paese, qualsiasi
fosse stato l’esito della guerra.
Via via che le truppe sovietiche si avvicinavano al Danubio e alla
Jugoslavia, Tito ritenne di doversi sciogliere dall’intesa con
l’Inghilterra, identificandosi con gli ideali rappresentati dall’URSS.
Una visita di Tito a Mosca, nel novembre del 1944, rinsaldò
l’orientamento della sua politica verso l’URSS, che non venne a
cessare neppure quando, nel 1948 il Kominform lanciò contro di lui
l’accusa di deviazionismo, di nazionalismo.
Le condizioni della Jugoslavia erano assai difficili, anche perché
provata da una grave crisi economica. Tito voleva il bene del suo paese
e seguiva una linea di condotta volta ed aderente agli interessi della
Jugoslavia.
Per le accuse di nazionalismo, Tito era forte del fatto che i suoi
sentimenti internazionalisti li aveva dimostrati anche rischiando la
vita in Spagna e nella rivoluzione d’Ottobre.
Nel 1948 viene eletto Segretario Generale del Partito, nonostante le
ingiunzioni dell’URSS.
Dalla Costituzione della Repubblica Federale Popolare di Jugoslavia,
Tito fruirà del titolo di Primo Ministro e di Ministro per la difesa
nazionale, poi di Presidente dello Stato.
Fu cosa non facile mantenere la pace in quell'agglomerato di etnie, con
tre religioni diverse ma con l’ateismo materialista dialettico che,
tramite la politica di Tito, si faceva strada, nella parte del popolo
più illuminata e negli studenti.
Non siamo in grado di dire se Tito fu sempre un comunista coerente e
rispettoso dei principi scientifici. Quello che però è possibile
affermare è che egli fu un dirigente comunista che amava il suo paese
e il suo popolo.
Sappiamo che tutti i cittadini, di tutte le repubbliche, godevano di un
alloggio sicuro, della sanità gratuita, del diritto allo studio
gratuito.
Sappiamo che sotto la direzione di Tito non vi erano disoccupati e che
la donna godeva del rispetto e degli stessi diritti dell’uomo.
Tito si batteva affinché nel paese vigesse una maggior democrazia.
Tentò di applicare l’autogestione che a suo parere doveva dare respiro
e migliori condizioni di vita al popolo.
Ma fu un esperimento errato che, al contrario di quanto egli volesse,
finì col rafforzare la burocrazia.
Nel 1977, Tito tornò a porre la questione della democrazia nel
paese, credendo nella necessità di applicare un diffuso pluralismo
d’interessi e la sua espressione in una nuova politica.
Anche se questi tentativi innovativi possono lasciare perplessi,
considerando anche che venivano da un uomo malato, che poi morì a
Lubiana il 4 maggio del 1980, noi lo vogliamo ricordare come una
figura politica molto amata dal suo popolo, un uomo che ha dedicato la
vita agli interessi del suo paese, un uomo che vorremmo riavere nella
tormentata e distrutta terra jugoslava, di oggi.
Ecco quello che lo scrittore Zvonko Straunbringer scrisse nella stesura
del suo libro: “LA BATTAGLIA PIU’ SOFFERTA DI JOZIP BROZ TITO":
<<Nel corso dei 35 anni di sviluppo postbellico della Jugoslavia, Tito
ha lasciato una forte impronta. Ha tentato di trovare le giuste
risposte ai dilemmi e alle richieste, ed ha ritenuto che solo il
socialismo avrebbe potuto dare le giuste risposte.
Era profondamente convinto dell’idea della Jugoslavia e per tutto il
tempo, da quando entrò a far parte del movimento rivoluzionario,
durante l'ultima guerra e alla fine di essa, ha combattuto decisamente
per la sua affermazione.
La Jugoslavia sotto la guida di Tito ha combattuto grandi battaglie
perché si realizzasse la grande idea della Pace mondiale, del
Non-allineamento, del superamento del bipolarismo e per la costruzione
di un assetto internazionale più giusto, nel quale i paesi grandi e
piccoli, ricchi e poveri, fossero politicamente alla pari.
A questo scopo Tito ha visitato 69 paesi incontrando più di 500 capi di
stato, sovrani e premier. Ha costruito ponti di amicizia e
collaborazione, tanto che per decenni la Jugoslavia ha goduto di grande
prestigio nel mondo.>>
Questo libro su Tito, afferma Ivan Pavicevac, è un grande contributo
nella delucidazione della verità non soltanto su Tito ma su noi stessi,
che abbiamo vissuto in quel periodo, che abbiamo combattuto e lavorato
sul suolo jugoslavo.
Non ci sono uomini infallibili, tanto meno statisti... Ma le sue idee
socio-politiche sono state progressiste. Quanto più ha potuto, egli ha
saputo realizzarle, queste sue idee.
Tanto per le guerre come per le rivoluzioni e così pure per le figure
storiche non può esserci un giudizio finale. E qui, la storia va
esposta, e vanno verificati i fatti.
Nessuno di noi idolatra Tito, in quanto egli non è una reliquia, né un
santo, né un mago.
Egli è stato presidente della Jugoslavia e come tale appartiene ad una
critica storica.
Quando era vivo, Tito si opponeva alle canzoni celebrative, alla parole
di elogio, ai giuramenti rivolti alla sua persona, specie dagli
anniversari, perché si sentiva in imbarazzo.
Un giorno un regista chiese a Tito: "Come uomo semplice, cos’è che la
turba, e perché a volte non riesce a dormire?”
Tito rispose:
“E’ la nostra unità, la Jugoslavia” – Questi piccoli dissidi, a volte,
tra le Repubbliche – Vorrei che rimanessero nell’unità.
L’unità e la fratellanza sono le nostre conquiste, la nostra realtà.
In questo noi abbiamo ottenuto molto. Vorrei che fosse così anche
quando non ci saremo più”
Cubrilovic, un politico che uscì dal governo nel 1951, dopo la morte di
Tito disse:
“E’ stato uno dei più grandi atei, il comunista Jozip Broz Tito, ma
praticamente è stato sepolto con tutti gli onori perfino delle
chiese. Le gerarchie di tutte le comunità religiose non potevano
sorvolare sul fatto che milioni di credenti hanno veramente amato e
stimato Tito, e che sono stati addolorati alla notizia della sua morte”.
Noi del G.A.MA.DI., compagni di lotta di tutti i popoli, auguriamo ai
popoli della Jugoslavia un nuovo Tito!
---
1. 25 maggio per gli jugoslavi e' la "Giornata della Gioventu'",
tradizionalmente assunta come anniversario della nascita di Josip Broz
"Tito" (1892). Per la precisione, Tito è nato a Kumrovec, al confine
tra Croazia e Slovenia, il 7 maggio e non il 25. Quest'ultima è la data
di quando è "rinato": è la data del fallito attacco dei paracadutisti
tedeschi a Drvar, e da allora si festeggia come suo simbolico
compleanno.
(a cura del CNJ)
(Il testo che segue e' apparso su "La Voce", notiziario del Gruppo
Atei Materialisti Dialettici (GAMADI). Per informazioni sul GAMADI e
per abbonarsi al mensile "La Voce":
telefono e fax 06-7915200
posta elettronica <gamadilavoce@...>
Per iscriversi al servizio telematico del GAMADI inviare un messaggio
vuoto a:
<Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli.>.
La revisione e la nota sono a cura del CNJ.)
---
JOZIP BROZ
TITO (nome di battaglia)
Il suo vero nome era Josip Broz, e fu il capo politico e militare della
Jugoslavia.
Tito nacque il 25 maggio del 1892 (1) a Kumrovec, periferia di
Zagabria, in Croazia.
Si sa che la madre era slovena e che il padre era un fabbro ferraio,
per cui Tito seguì il mestiere paterno.
In giovanissima età partecipò al movimento giovanile socialista e
venne, per questo, più volte arrestato.
Nel 1914 (prima guerra mondiale) venne arruolato nell’esercito
austriaco e venne inviato prima sul fronte italiano e poi su quello
russo.
Fu ferito nei Carpazi, e cadde prigioniero.
La rivoluzione russa lo colse quando era in Siberia e Tito, con
slancio, diede il suo contributo rivoluzionario.
Nel 1924 fece ritorno in Croazia, portando seco la moglie russa ed un
figlio.
Iniziò il suo mestiere di operaio metalmeccanico a Zagabria, dove
esercitava opera di propaganda in difesa dei diritti dei lavoratori.
Per questo, il 10 novembre del 1928 viene arrestato e condannato a 5
anni di ergastolo in parte scontati a Lepoglava.
La moglie e il figlio fuggirono in Russia e Tito, appena liberato, li
raggiunse.
Va considerato che negli anni 1934-1938 sia in patria che all’estero
egli si dedicò totalmente alla propaganda comunista.
Nel 1936 partecipò alla guerra civile di Spagna, come sergente nelle
Brigate Internazionali, formate da volontari, in aiuto alla Repubblica
spagnola minacciata dalla guerra civile scatenata dal fascista
Francisco Franco.
Tito tornò clandestinamente in Jugoslavia e precisamente a Zagabria e
a Belgrado.
Uscì dalla clandestinità nel 1938 col soprannome di Tito, datogli dai
compagni di lotta.
Nel 1940 venne eletto Segretario del Comitato Centrale dei delegati
comunisti jugoslavi.
Nella primavera del 1941, Tito si trovava a Belgrado.
Non ebbe esitazioni a divenire capo del Movimento di Resistenza,
essendo entrata in guerra anche l’URSS.
Opero' dapprima in Serbia, poi nel Montenegro e in Bosnia, finché non
si scontrò col movimento dei cetnici capeggiato da Draza Mihajlovic.
Tra i due movimenti era impossibile una intesa.
Tito, comunque, ebbe la meglio, anche per il riconoscimento
internazionale, e i suoi reparti partigiani, male equipaggiati e poco
armati, seppero svolgere azioni ardite contro gli agguerriti eserciti
tedesco nazista e fascista italiano.
In questa epica occasione Tito dimostrò di possedere, oltre a
straordinarie attitudini organizzative, anche un inestimabile talento
militare.
Il 29 novembre del 1943 la Seconda sessione del Consiglio Antifascista
di Liberazione Nazionale (AVNOJ) conferì a Tito il titolo di
Maresciallo.
La forte pressione tedesca, giunta a ferirlo in battaglia, lo
costrinse a rifugiarsi a Lissa, in Dalmazia.
Da questo luogo di convalescenza, il 16 giugno 1944, egli stabilì un
accordo con J. Subasic che era emissario del governo regio in esilio a
Londra.
Tito venne trasportato a Bari, in Italia, per curare meglio la sua
ferita, e sembra che, su invito di Churchill che si trovava tra il
22 e il 24 agosto del 1944 a Roma, Tito abbia avuto un breve incontro
con lo statista inglese. Operava in difesa del suo paese, qualsiasi
fosse stato l’esito della guerra.
Via via che le truppe sovietiche si avvicinavano al Danubio e alla
Jugoslavia, Tito ritenne di doversi sciogliere dall’intesa con
l’Inghilterra, identificandosi con gli ideali rappresentati dall’URSS.
Una visita di Tito a Mosca, nel novembre del 1944, rinsaldò
l’orientamento della sua politica verso l’URSS, che non venne a
cessare neppure quando, nel 1948 il Kominform lanciò contro di lui
l’accusa di deviazionismo, di nazionalismo.
Le condizioni della Jugoslavia erano assai difficili, anche perché
provata da una grave crisi economica. Tito voleva il bene del suo paese
e seguiva una linea di condotta volta ed aderente agli interessi della
Jugoslavia.
Per le accuse di nazionalismo, Tito era forte del fatto che i suoi
sentimenti internazionalisti li aveva dimostrati anche rischiando la
vita in Spagna e nella rivoluzione d’Ottobre.
Nel 1948 viene eletto Segretario Generale del Partito, nonostante le
ingiunzioni dell’URSS.
Dalla Costituzione della Repubblica Federale Popolare di Jugoslavia,
Tito fruirà del titolo di Primo Ministro e di Ministro per la difesa
nazionale, poi di Presidente dello Stato.
Fu cosa non facile mantenere la pace in quell'agglomerato di etnie, con
tre religioni diverse ma con l’ateismo materialista dialettico che,
tramite la politica di Tito, si faceva strada, nella parte del popolo
più illuminata e negli studenti.
Non siamo in grado di dire se Tito fu sempre un comunista coerente e
rispettoso dei principi scientifici. Quello che però è possibile
affermare è che egli fu un dirigente comunista che amava il suo paese
e il suo popolo.
Sappiamo che tutti i cittadini, di tutte le repubbliche, godevano di un
alloggio sicuro, della sanità gratuita, del diritto allo studio
gratuito.
Sappiamo che sotto la direzione di Tito non vi erano disoccupati e che
la donna godeva del rispetto e degli stessi diritti dell’uomo.
Tito si batteva affinché nel paese vigesse una maggior democrazia.
Tentò di applicare l’autogestione che a suo parere doveva dare respiro
e migliori condizioni di vita al popolo.
Ma fu un esperimento errato che, al contrario di quanto egli volesse,
finì col rafforzare la burocrazia.
Nel 1977, Tito tornò a porre la questione della democrazia nel
paese, credendo nella necessità di applicare un diffuso pluralismo
d’interessi e la sua espressione in una nuova politica.
Anche se questi tentativi innovativi possono lasciare perplessi,
considerando anche che venivano da un uomo malato, che poi morì a
Lubiana il 4 maggio del 1980, noi lo vogliamo ricordare come una
figura politica molto amata dal suo popolo, un uomo che ha dedicato la
vita agli interessi del suo paese, un uomo che vorremmo riavere nella
tormentata e distrutta terra jugoslava, di oggi.
Ecco quello che lo scrittore Zvonko Straunbringer scrisse nella stesura
del suo libro: “LA BATTAGLIA PIU’ SOFFERTA DI JOZIP BROZ TITO":
<<Nel corso dei 35 anni di sviluppo postbellico della Jugoslavia, Tito
ha lasciato una forte impronta. Ha tentato di trovare le giuste
risposte ai dilemmi e alle richieste, ed ha ritenuto che solo il
socialismo avrebbe potuto dare le giuste risposte.
Era profondamente convinto dell’idea della Jugoslavia e per tutto il
tempo, da quando entrò a far parte del movimento rivoluzionario,
durante l'ultima guerra e alla fine di essa, ha combattuto decisamente
per la sua affermazione.
La Jugoslavia sotto la guida di Tito ha combattuto grandi battaglie
perché si realizzasse la grande idea della Pace mondiale, del
Non-allineamento, del superamento del bipolarismo e per la costruzione
di un assetto internazionale più giusto, nel quale i paesi grandi e
piccoli, ricchi e poveri, fossero politicamente alla pari.
A questo scopo Tito ha visitato 69 paesi incontrando più di 500 capi di
stato, sovrani e premier. Ha costruito ponti di amicizia e
collaborazione, tanto che per decenni la Jugoslavia ha goduto di grande
prestigio nel mondo.>>
Questo libro su Tito, afferma Ivan Pavicevac, è un grande contributo
nella delucidazione della verità non soltanto su Tito ma su noi stessi,
che abbiamo vissuto in quel periodo, che abbiamo combattuto e lavorato
sul suolo jugoslavo.
Non ci sono uomini infallibili, tanto meno statisti... Ma le sue idee
socio-politiche sono state progressiste. Quanto più ha potuto, egli ha
saputo realizzarle, queste sue idee.
Tanto per le guerre come per le rivoluzioni e così pure per le figure
storiche non può esserci un giudizio finale. E qui, la storia va
esposta, e vanno verificati i fatti.
Nessuno di noi idolatra Tito, in quanto egli non è una reliquia, né un
santo, né un mago.
Egli è stato presidente della Jugoslavia e come tale appartiene ad una
critica storica.
Quando era vivo, Tito si opponeva alle canzoni celebrative, alla parole
di elogio, ai giuramenti rivolti alla sua persona, specie dagli
anniversari, perché si sentiva in imbarazzo.
Un giorno un regista chiese a Tito: "Come uomo semplice, cos’è che la
turba, e perché a volte non riesce a dormire?”
Tito rispose:
“E’ la nostra unità, la Jugoslavia” – Questi piccoli dissidi, a volte,
tra le Repubbliche – Vorrei che rimanessero nell’unità.
L’unità e la fratellanza sono le nostre conquiste, la nostra realtà.
In questo noi abbiamo ottenuto molto. Vorrei che fosse così anche
quando non ci saremo più”
Cubrilovic, un politico che uscì dal governo nel 1951, dopo la morte di
Tito disse:
“E’ stato uno dei più grandi atei, il comunista Jozip Broz Tito, ma
praticamente è stato sepolto con tutti gli onori perfino delle
chiese. Le gerarchie di tutte le comunità religiose non potevano
sorvolare sul fatto che milioni di credenti hanno veramente amato e
stimato Tito, e che sono stati addolorati alla notizia della sua morte”.
Noi del G.A.MA.DI., compagni di lotta di tutti i popoli, auguriamo ai
popoli della Jugoslavia un nuovo Tito!
---
1. 25 maggio per gli jugoslavi e' la "Giornata della Gioventu'",
tradizionalmente assunta come anniversario della nascita di Josip Broz
"Tito" (1892). Per la precisione, Tito è nato a Kumrovec, al confine
tra Croazia e Slovenia, il 7 maggio e non il 25. Quest'ultima è la data
di quando è "rinato": è la data del fallito attacco dei paracadutisti
tedeschi a Drvar, e da allora si festeggia come suo simbolico
compleanno.
(a cura del CNJ)
Artel Geopolitika - http://www.artel.co.yu - office@...
1. Razapinjanje i izdaja Srbije
(Oliver Vulović)
2. Ko finansira i kako deluju nevladine organizacije
(Rade Drobac)
3. Dijaspora trazi svojih 3,5 miliona euro
(Savet Sabora Dijaspore)
=== 1 ===
Razapinjanje i izdaja Srbije
http://www.artel.co.yu/sr/reakcije_citalaca/2003-07-30_1.html
Oliver Vulović
Oliverv@...
oliver_vulovic@...
B e o g r a d, 29 / 07 / 2003
Nacija sa kojom su kroz istoriju sve države nasilnice kad-tad morale da
potpišu mirovne ugovore po principu ve viktis, ovih dana je doživela da
joj prvi među jednakima iz redova ileganih uzurpatora izvršne vlasti u
Srbiji, Zoran Živković, iz Amerike poruči da je otvorio širom vrata
Srbije i dao sva ovlašćenja i privilegije američkim obaveštajcima, u
cilju realizacije akcije kidnapovanja i zatamničenja bivšeg generala
odmbrambenih snaga Republike Srpske, gospodina Ratka Mladića, i bivšeg
predsednika Republike Srpske, gospodina Radovana Karadžića. To je ono
što je Zoran Živković smeo i imao obraza da za sada u svom javljanju iz
Amerike prizna naciji a dok ćemo nove klauzule iz ovog modernog pacta
convente, saznati kada se kvazimajstori propagande iz DOS-a i DSS-a
odluče da opet nemušto i traljavo iskreiraju novu političku aferu ili
krizu u Srbiji u cilju očuvanja svoje demokrature čije ćemo posledice
osećati još dugi niz godina unapred.
Poseta Zorana Živkovića Americi, je prirodan sled događaja nakon
iznenadne posete Kolina Pauela Beogradu i naglog pada autoriteta
Vilijema Montogomerija, iznurenog porodičnim skandalima i inače do
skora pravog i jedinog vlastodrsca u Srbiji, koji se čas nalazio u
redakciji NIN-a da smenjuje Bebu Popovića,čas u vladi Srbije da da
instrukcije oko Šljibvančaninovog hapšenja a čas je slao emisare u
Vranje da smenjuje srpske vladike. Ovom posetom je od naroda
«pročitani» DOS, želeo da ispuni više ciljeva, koje su u stilu
nekadašnjih portparola centralnih komiteta i SSRN-a pokušali da
predstave kao vrhunske diplomatske uspehe, no, Živković se vratio punih
usta «savezništva» sa Amerikom a sa rukama iza leđa, punim novih
ultimatuma i naređenja.
«Denacifikacija» Srbije i Srba, jednostavno mora biti po amričkim
shvatanjima do kraja doveden proces čiji kraj mora biti krunisan osudom
Slobodana Miloševića u Hagu, našim potpisom i saglasnošću na projekat
«nezavisnog Kosova», rasturanja naše vojske, priznavanja nezavisnosti
Crnoj Gori, odricanja od Srba u Republici Srpskoj , odustajanje od
insistiranja na ispunjavanju prava povratka Srba na Kosmet i u
Republiku Hrvatsku kao i odustajanje od naše tužbe protiv NATO država,
za koju je jedan gospodin iz redova američke administracije, gospodinu
Zoranu Živkoviću u lice rekao da je idiotska. Dakle, gospodin Živković
je stoički i sa osmehom saslušao od predstavnika administracije koja ne
priznaje međ.sudove osim one koja sama napravi, da je NATO agresija
nešto sasvim u redu i prirodno, čak i sa stanovišta međunarodnog prava
a da je naša tužba zbog te agresije idiotska. Verovatno možemo
očekivati da će jednog dana, ako ikada više u svojstvu premijera poseti
Ameriku, gospodin Živković se vratiti i reći da je i sama ideja
suverene srpske države idiotska, za šta će imati uporište i u ustavu
koji namerava da sa grupom istomišljenika oktriše sledeće godine a u
kojem se Srbi pominju samo u teškoj nužnosti.
Trio koji trenutno razvlači i razapinje Srbiju (DS; DSS; G17+) uz pomoć
par urlača iz vladinih i nevladinih grupa je shvatio da se politički
peščani sat u Strbiji opet okrenuo da meri vreme i da ma kako sporo i
otežano cureo, svakog momenta pokazuje kako je njihovom
eksperimentisanju sa državom i narodom kraj veoma blizu te su zbog toga
sve nervozniji i u svojoj oholosti i nadmenosti, koja je karakterisala
i način njihovog vladanja, i ne pokušavaju tu svoju nervozu i zlovolju
da sakriju. Mnogo je pitanja i računa na koja će morati da odgovore i
da ih plate gospoda iz DOS-a , a nešto kasnije i iz DSS-a, kada narod
bude pitao i naplaćivao. Iskreno se nadam, da će makar tada, u
trenucima svog poraza i narodne osude, izbeći da kopiraju svoje kolege
i nalogodavce iz Amerike i da neće buduće tužbe protiv njihove
štetočinske politike nazvati idiotskim.
=== 2 ===
OGLEDALO nedelje: Jaci od drzave
http://www.artel.co.yu/sr/izbor/medjunarodne_org/2003-07-29_2.html
Ko finansira i kako deluju nevladine organizacije
Piše: Rade Drobac
Beograd, 23. juli 2003. godine
Džejms Lajon, director kancelarije u Beogradu Medjunarodne krizne grupe
(International Crises Group- ICG) postao je poslednjih dana ličnost o
kojoj se možda najviše govori.
Za njega smo saznali tek nedavno, kada mu je uskraćen, a nakon
intervencija spolja, ipak produžen dalji boravak u našoj zemlji.
Tada smo saznali da je napisao neki izveštaj o stanju u našoj zemlji
koji nije povoljan za vladajuću garnituru zbog čega se ona jako
potresla i želela da ga protera, ali nije uspela.
Neupućenima je sigurno ostalo nejasno zašto bi se jedna vlada toliko
potresala oko izveštaja neke nevladine organizacije. Napravljena je
mala drama oko ovog slučaja, koja još traje, ali je stvar u suštini
komična. Deluje kao da vlada jedne suverene zemlje zazire, i to debelo,
od škrabotina nekog medjunarodnog mastiljara, i to još iz neke
nevladine organizacije, kojih danas ima bezbroj.
Stvar je još čudnija kada se zna koji sve problemi, pre svega
egzistencijalni a potom i nnogi drugi, muče našu napaćenu zemlju, pa se
postavlja logično pitanje otkud takav značaj jednom strancu i njegovim
ocenama stanja u našoj zemlji, koji nije ni predsednik države, ni
vlade, ni OUN-a, ni OEBS-a, ni NATO-a, niti nekakav finansijski magnat,
već običan činovnik jedne nevladine organizacije čije je sedište u
dalekim SAD.
Medjutim, taj značaj, ili bolje rečeno strah od posledica njegovog
izveštaja, iako svakako preuveličan, nije i bezrazložan.
Selektivan pristup
I letimičnim ispitivanjem sadržaja rada grupe vidi se da se očito bavi
odredjenim temama i regionima, vrlo selektivno i fokusiraju}i se upravo
na one koji su istovremeno i predmet inrteresovanja vlada njihovih
zemalja, a pre svega SAD i NATO. Jedna od tačaka njihovog interesovanja
je i naša zemlja.
Ovde se postavlja i jedno suštinsko pitanje: da li je to grupacija koja
svojim radom i aktivnostima utiče na vlade svojih zemalja da promene
politiku, ili naprotiv, ona, na mig vlada i oligarhija koje je
podržavaju, pokreće aktivnosti na destabilizaciji odredjene zemlje,
regiona ili ličnosti sa ciljem da otvori prostor da se u nastalu
situaciju uključe, tobož sa plementim ciljevima i motivima, i državni
organi pojedinih zemalja koje sve ovo orkestriraju.
Tu dilemu ne možemo otkloniti iz prostog razloga što je sprega vlada i
mnogih nevladinih organizacija, politička, interesna, personalna,
finansijska i organizaciona, iako skrivena, tako jaka da, u stvari, one
zajedno predstavljaju jednu funkcionalnu celinu koja radi
sinhronizovano, uz medije pod svojom kontrolom, na ostvarivanju
zajedničkih ciljeva.
Imali smo prilike da na našoj kž`i osetimo njihovo delovanje i njegove
posledice i otuda je strah opravdan.
"Pritisak" javnosti
Kako funkcioniše sistem pritisaka preko nevladinih organizacija? Bogate
oligarhije Zapada sprovode svoje geopolitičke zamisli vrlo jednostavnim
metodom. U poslednjih nekoliko desetina godina, a naročito u poslednjoj
deceniji, te strukture SAD i Zapada su namnožile u svojim zemljama, ali
i po celom svetu, razne medjunarodne institucije, često sa nacionalnim
ograncima, u najvećem broju pod firmom nevladinih organizacija,
fondacija, asocijacija, instituta, foruma i tome slično. Zahvaljujući
činjenici da ih one finansiraju, one im postavljaju i kadrove. Te
institucije predstavljaju , s jedne strane, obaveštajnu mrežu,
delimično i u sopstvenim zemljama, a naročito u stranim, oslanjajući se
u dobroj meri na lokalne kadrove, pri čemu im status nevladinih
organizacija obezbedjuje legalnan boravak i rad. Druga funkcija, ona o
kojoj je ovde prvenstveno reč je da pokreću odredjena pitanja u
sopstvenoj i svetskoj javnosti i javnom mnjenju fokusirane zemlje, na
sopstvenu inicijativu (čitaj u dogovoru sa svojim nalogodavcima) ili na
"inicijativu" svojih mentora, na način koji odgovara njihovim potrebama.
Najčešće se to izražava u vidu napada, kritika, afera i optužbi na
račun odredjenih ličnosti, vlada, država, naroda ili bilo koga i čega
što im zasmeta da ostvare svoje globalne planove. Naravno, te
aktivnosti odmah dobijaju maksimalan prostor u režimskim medijima u
sopstvenoj zemlji i zemljama saveznika i u "nezavisnim" medijima u
drugim zemljama (onima koje oni finansiraju) što im daje propulzivnost
i , napokon značaj i verodostojnost. To sve stvara utisak strašnog
problema koji , opet, zahteva, intervenciju vlada tih zemalja. Koliko
li smo puta čuli od zvaničnika SAD da se "pod pritiskom" javnosti
"nešto mora učiniti", a taj pritisak stvaraju prvenstveno nevladine
organizacije i mediji pod njihovom kontrolom
Obično je to završavalo sankcijama ili bombardovanjem, pri čemu su se
te akcije pokušavale legalizovati kroz OUN, a ako to nije bilo moguće
izvodjene su i bez saglasnosti ovog najvišeg medjunarodnog tela.
Medju nevladinim organizacijama ICG i nije najznačajnija. Navedimo samo
neke poznatije i značajnije od nje ili u njenoj ravni. Ko nije čuo za
Bildemberg grupu, Trilateralnu komisiju, Soroš Fondaciju, Fondaciju
Fridrih Ebert iz Nemačke, Karnež`i fondaciju iz SAD, Kraljevski
institut za strateške studfije iz Londona i mnoge druge. Na regionalnom
planu navedimo, na primer, asocijaciju Alpe-Adria Višegradsku grupu i
mnoge druge širom sveta.
Na našem nacionalnom planu malo je onih koji nisu čuli za Fond za
humanitarno pravo Nataše Kandić, Helsinški odbor za ljudska prava Sonje
Biserko, Centar za kulturnu dekontaminaciju Borke Pavičević itd. Imena
kao Sonja Liht, Vojin Dimitrijević, Biljana Vučo su svima poznata. Da i
ne govorimo o Grupi 17 plus. Svi su oni u funkciji interesa onih koji
ih finasiraju. Pri tome treba znati da ti načini finasiranja nisu uvek
isti. Često su to indirektni kanali, preko nekakvih drugih
medjunarodnih institucija tipa - za razvoj medija, demokratije i sl.
Naravno, u državama pod njihovom kontrolom, zapadne oligarhije troškove
finansiranja svojih produženih ruku, nevladinih organizacija, teže da
prebace na lokalne izvore, pre svega na budžet marionetskih vlada.
Uštede i za tako moćne grupe, nisu za odbacivanje, a može lakoverne da
zavara da pomisle da te organizacije rade za dobro svoje zemlje.
Naravno, istine radi, ima organizacija i institucija ovog tipa koje su
zaista ono za šta se izdaju i što bi i ostale trebale biti. Ali to je
prava retkost, a najbolji pokazatelj da li su prave je njihov konto u
banci. Takve institucije niko ne podržava niti finansira.
Ima organizacija koje nisu u globalnoj mreži SAD I NATO zemalja, a nisu
ni nezavisne. Njih drže nacionalne oligarhije ili vlade u interesu
svoje politike ili nacionalnih i državnih interesa. To je pokušaj
odbrane od opasnosti koja preti od globalnih nevladinih mreža i sedme
sile, ali jedna letva ne može zaustaviti provaljenu branu.
Jedini spas od ove moderne pošasti je razumevanje njihovih pravih
poslova i ciljeva i uskraćivanje podrške i prostora njihovom radu jer
je on, najčešće, u.funkciji globalne politike velikih sila današnjice.
A ona je krajnje agresivna, militaristička, opresivna i hegemonistička
i usmerena na destabilizaciju malih država i pojedinih regiona,
poništavanje nacionalnih interesa malih i srednjih zemalja,
razjedinjavanje njihovih nacionalnih snaga i stvaranje unutrašnjih
sukoba, poništavanje njihovog nacionalnog i kulturnog identiteta sa
ciljem njihovog potpunog podredjivanja svojim interesima i potrebama.
Najbolji dokz toga je delovanje najvećeg broja ovih nevladinih
organizacija na našem prostoru.
=== 3 ===
DIJASPORA TRAZI SVOJIH 3,5 MILIONA EURO
http://www.artel.co.yu/sr/glas_dijaspore/2003-07-29_3.html
SAVET SABORA DIJASPORE
Beograd, 29. juli 2003. godine
Tokom i nakon agresije NATO pakta nad Jugoslavijom naši ljudi iz
dijaspore sakupili su, pored ogromne humanitarnwe pomoći u robi, preko
12 miliona DM (6 miliona EURO) u gotovom. Novac je namenjen obnovi,
razvoju i humanitarnoj pomoći, a deponovan je u fond dijaspora za
maticu koji je osnovan i registrovan kod tadašnjih saveznih vlasti SRJ
tokom 1999. Devizni i dinarski računi fonda nalazili su se kod
Beogradske banke. U periodu 1999. i 2000. oko polovine sredstava fonda
investirano je u obnovu i izgradnju porušenih mostova na Dunavu,
Velikoj i Zapadnoj Moravi, zatim bolnica ("Dr Dragiša Mišović" Beograd,
"Ortopedska klinika" Beograd, i dr.), škola (OS "Djura Jakšić"
Ćuprija), kao i za izgradnju i obnovu putne mreže u Šumadiji i
Pomoravlju, ukupne dužine oko 100 km.
Što se tiče polovine investiranih sredstava, o svakoj pojedinačnoj
isplati postoji kompletna dokumentacija u Ministarstvu inostranih
poslova i u Banci. Uz to dokumentacija je objavljena i u knjizi
"Mostovi, dijaspora-matica", na blizu 400 stranica, u izdanju
Beogradskog foruma za svet ravnopravnih, Beograd, 2003.
Što se tice preostale, neutrošene polovine sredstava, nakon promene
vlasti u Beogradu 2000. računi fonda prakticno su blokirani.
Rukovodstvo Beogradske banke nije izvršavalo naloge ovlašćenih lica
Fonda. Medju nalozima koji nisu izvršeni bili su nalozi za isplatu
10,000 DM skupštini opštine Mojkovac koji je upravni odbor fonda
odobrio kao pomoć za izgradnju spomen-hrama Mojkovackoj bitci . Nije
izvršen ni nalog za isplatu oko 200,000 DM komesarijatu za izbeglice
koji je Upravni odbor odobrio za kupovinu napuštenih seoskih kuća i
imanja radi naseljavanja izbeglica .
Suočen sa takvim odnosom tadašnjeg novog rukovodstva Beogradske banke,
upravni odbor je odlučio da sva dinarska i sredstva sa računa
Beogradske banke prebaci na nove račune otvorene kod Raifasen banke
A.D. Beograd. Nalog za transfer sredstava u drugu banku izdat je pre
otpočinjanja likvidacionog postupka Beogradske banke. Ni taj nalog nije
izvršen niti je upravi Fonda dato objašnjenje za nepostupanje. O tome
su obavešteni ministrar finansija i ekonomije u vladi srbije Božidar
Djelić, tadašnji guverner NBJ Mladjan Dinkić, direktor ZOP-a Srbije
Živko Nešić. Obavešteno je i tadašnje najviše državno rukovodstvo: dr
Vojislav Koštunica, predsednik SRJ, dr Dragoljub Mićunović, predsednik
Veća gradjana Savezne Skupstine SRJ, mr Dragiša Pešic, predsednik
Savezne vlade, dr Zoran Djindjić, predsednik vlade republike Srbije i
dr.
Kasnije je otpočet postupak likvidacije Beogradske banke. Likvidaciono
rukovodstvo, predstavnici agencije za sanaciju i likvidaciju banaka
pismeno su potvrdili upravi fonda da se u času odpočinjanja likvidacije
na računima fonda nalazilo preko 3,000,000 EURO , bez kamate i oko
2,000,000 na dinarskom računu . Sve je to navodno u likvidacionoj masi
o čijoj će deobi odlučiti trgovinski sud u Beogradu.
Paralelno sa blokiranjem sredstava Fonda koje se ne može ničim
opravdati osim politikom koja je loša za odnose izmedju matice i
dijaspore, vlasti su na svoju ruku samoinicijativno donele rešenje o
brisanju fonda dijspora za maticu koji se vodi kod saveznog
ministarstva pravde.
Dakle , najpre blokada sredstava a zatim brisanje Fonda iz registra i
konacno utapanje sredstava u likvidacionu masu. Šta bi mogao biti
razlog za brisanje fonda iz registra nakon što je fond bio zakonito
registrovan i postojao i radio više od 2 godine? Jasno je da se ne mogu
izbrsati mostovi izgradjeni sredstvima Fonda kao što su Varadinska duga
kod Novog Sada ili most na Zapadnoj Moravi kod sela Jasika na ulazu u
Kruševac ili most na Velikoj Moravi kod Varvarina koji čuva uspomenu na
12 poginulih gradjana na Svetu Trojicu 30. maja 1999, medju kojima je
poginula i poznata matematičarka Sanja Milenković. Učinjeno je to
očigledno da bi preostalih 3,5 miliona Eura u gotovom ostali bez
pravnog titulara, bez vlasnika.
Medjutim, vlasnici postoje. To su ljudi iz dijaspore koji su dali svoje
lične priloge u Fond, to je upravni odbor Fonda na čelu sa svojim
predsednikom dr. Milivojem Milićevićem, dobrotvorom i liderom dijaspore
iz berlina. Hiljade i hiljade priložnika sirom Evrope i sveta je
zainteresovano da se njihov novac vrati u fond i da se iskoristi onako
kako su oni odlučili u skladu sa Odlukom Sabora dijaspore. Većina njih
raspolaže potvrdama o iznosima uplaćenih sredstava, a veliki broj i sa
pismenim priznanjima za dobročiniteljski doprinos.
Oni žele da se problem reši ljudski, dogovorom sa predstavnicima vlasti
svoje matice. Ne žele, osim ako ne budu prinudjeni, da rešenje traže
preko vlada zemalja u kojima sticajem okolnost žive i rade. Ne žele da
se to rešava ni pred institucijama Saveta Evrope i Evropske Unije.
Smatraju da za razumne ljude i ozbiljne državne predstavnike to nije
dobar put.
O tome svedoče svi dosadašnji koraci organa Fonda koji su bili usmereni
isključivo prema vlastima matice.
Fond je uputio mnoga pisma interne i javne apele vlastima da izkažu
odgpvoran i razuman odnos prema ovom problemu. Fond žali što do sada
nije dobio zadovoljavajući odgovor, odnosno rešenje. Jedini prihvatljiv
način jeste da vlasti, a pre svega gospoda Ministar Djelić i novi
Guverner NBS Kori Udovički, omoguće da se blokirani novac hitno vrati
Fondu i tako prekine posve nepotrebna rašomonijada. Na toj liniji bili
su zahtevi poslanika u Saveznoj skupštini i Narodnoj skupštini Srbije,
kao što je pitanje poslanika u Veću republika Milutina Mrkonjića na
koje nije dobijen zadovoljavajući odgovor.
Ako su vlasti našle za shodno da izvrše celokupne isplate nekim
komercijalnim deponentima BB, kao na primer Telekomu Srbija kome je
isplaćen iznos od potraživanja Fonda, onda tim pre treba da nadju za
shodno da se sredstva Fonda, kao udruženja gradjana, vrate Fondu.
Čini se da je ministar Djelić shvatio, iako sa zakašnjenjem, ozbiljnost
ovog problema i posledice odugovlačenja koje se izražavaju u
nepoverenju dijaspore zbog manipulacije njenim parama. Naime, na
uskršnjim susretima dijaspore i matice u Domu Vojske Jugoslavije,
Ministar Djelić je izjavio da veruje da će naći rešenje i zamolio tada
prisutne predstavnike dijaspore "za malo strpljenja".
Od tada je prošlo više od tri meseca. Dijaspora veruje da je bilo
dovoljno vremena da se njena sredstva pronadju i da je gospodin
Ministar spremio ispravno rešenje. To znači vraćanje svih deviznih i
dinarskih srestava Fondu i njegovoj upravi. To takodje znači
omogućavanje Fondu da nastavi normalno da radi u skladu sa Statutom i
voljom prilogodavaca.
I djaspora, a pogotovu matica imaju dovoljno drugih teškoća. Ne treba
im još i ova veštačka, birokratska prepreka na putu bolje saradnje,
stvarnog medjusobnog poštovanja .
U ime SAVETA SABORA DIJASPORE
dr. Milivoje Milićević, s.r.
1. Razapinjanje i izdaja Srbije
(Oliver Vulović)
2. Ko finansira i kako deluju nevladine organizacije
(Rade Drobac)
3. Dijaspora trazi svojih 3,5 miliona euro
(Savet Sabora Dijaspore)
=== 1 ===
Razapinjanje i izdaja Srbije
http://www.artel.co.yu/sr/reakcije_citalaca/2003-07-30_1.html
Oliver Vulović
Oliverv@...
oliver_vulovic@...
B e o g r a d, 29 / 07 / 2003
Nacija sa kojom su kroz istoriju sve države nasilnice kad-tad morale da
potpišu mirovne ugovore po principu ve viktis, ovih dana je doživela da
joj prvi među jednakima iz redova ileganih uzurpatora izvršne vlasti u
Srbiji, Zoran Živković, iz Amerike poruči da je otvorio širom vrata
Srbije i dao sva ovlašćenja i privilegije američkim obaveštajcima, u
cilju realizacije akcije kidnapovanja i zatamničenja bivšeg generala
odmbrambenih snaga Republike Srpske, gospodina Ratka Mladića, i bivšeg
predsednika Republike Srpske, gospodina Radovana Karadžića. To je ono
što je Zoran Živković smeo i imao obraza da za sada u svom javljanju iz
Amerike prizna naciji a dok ćemo nove klauzule iz ovog modernog pacta
convente, saznati kada se kvazimajstori propagande iz DOS-a i DSS-a
odluče da opet nemušto i traljavo iskreiraju novu političku aferu ili
krizu u Srbiji u cilju očuvanja svoje demokrature čije ćemo posledice
osećati još dugi niz godina unapred.
Poseta Zorana Živkovića Americi, je prirodan sled događaja nakon
iznenadne posete Kolina Pauela Beogradu i naglog pada autoriteta
Vilijema Montogomerija, iznurenog porodičnim skandalima i inače do
skora pravog i jedinog vlastodrsca u Srbiji, koji se čas nalazio u
redakciji NIN-a da smenjuje Bebu Popovića,čas u vladi Srbije da da
instrukcije oko Šljibvančaninovog hapšenja a čas je slao emisare u
Vranje da smenjuje srpske vladike. Ovom posetom je od naroda
«pročitani» DOS, želeo da ispuni više ciljeva, koje su u stilu
nekadašnjih portparola centralnih komiteta i SSRN-a pokušali da
predstave kao vrhunske diplomatske uspehe, no, Živković se vratio punih
usta «savezništva» sa Amerikom a sa rukama iza leđa, punim novih
ultimatuma i naređenja.
«Denacifikacija» Srbije i Srba, jednostavno mora biti po amričkim
shvatanjima do kraja doveden proces čiji kraj mora biti krunisan osudom
Slobodana Miloševića u Hagu, našim potpisom i saglasnošću na projekat
«nezavisnog Kosova», rasturanja naše vojske, priznavanja nezavisnosti
Crnoj Gori, odricanja od Srba u Republici Srpskoj , odustajanje od
insistiranja na ispunjavanju prava povratka Srba na Kosmet i u
Republiku Hrvatsku kao i odustajanje od naše tužbe protiv NATO država,
za koju je jedan gospodin iz redova američke administracije, gospodinu
Zoranu Živkoviću u lice rekao da je idiotska. Dakle, gospodin Živković
je stoički i sa osmehom saslušao od predstavnika administracije koja ne
priznaje međ.sudove osim one koja sama napravi, da je NATO agresija
nešto sasvim u redu i prirodno, čak i sa stanovišta međunarodnog prava
a da je naša tužba zbog te agresije idiotska. Verovatno možemo
očekivati da će jednog dana, ako ikada više u svojstvu premijera poseti
Ameriku, gospodin Živković se vratiti i reći da je i sama ideja
suverene srpske države idiotska, za šta će imati uporište i u ustavu
koji namerava da sa grupom istomišljenika oktriše sledeće godine a u
kojem se Srbi pominju samo u teškoj nužnosti.
Trio koji trenutno razvlači i razapinje Srbiju (DS; DSS; G17+) uz pomoć
par urlača iz vladinih i nevladinih grupa je shvatio da se politički
peščani sat u Strbiji opet okrenuo da meri vreme i da ma kako sporo i
otežano cureo, svakog momenta pokazuje kako je njihovom
eksperimentisanju sa državom i narodom kraj veoma blizu te su zbog toga
sve nervozniji i u svojoj oholosti i nadmenosti, koja je karakterisala
i način njihovog vladanja, i ne pokušavaju tu svoju nervozu i zlovolju
da sakriju. Mnogo je pitanja i računa na koja će morati da odgovore i
da ih plate gospoda iz DOS-a , a nešto kasnije i iz DSS-a, kada narod
bude pitao i naplaćivao. Iskreno se nadam, da će makar tada, u
trenucima svog poraza i narodne osude, izbeći da kopiraju svoje kolege
i nalogodavce iz Amerike i da neće buduće tužbe protiv njihove
štetočinske politike nazvati idiotskim.
=== 2 ===
OGLEDALO nedelje: Jaci od drzave
http://www.artel.co.yu/sr/izbor/medjunarodne_org/2003-07-29_2.html
Ko finansira i kako deluju nevladine organizacije
Piše: Rade Drobac
Beograd, 23. juli 2003. godine
Džejms Lajon, director kancelarije u Beogradu Medjunarodne krizne grupe
(International Crises Group- ICG) postao je poslednjih dana ličnost o
kojoj se možda najviše govori.
Za njega smo saznali tek nedavno, kada mu je uskraćen, a nakon
intervencija spolja, ipak produžen dalji boravak u našoj zemlji.
Tada smo saznali da je napisao neki izveštaj o stanju u našoj zemlji
koji nije povoljan za vladajuću garnituru zbog čega se ona jako
potresla i želela da ga protera, ali nije uspela.
Neupućenima je sigurno ostalo nejasno zašto bi se jedna vlada toliko
potresala oko izveštaja neke nevladine organizacije. Napravljena je
mala drama oko ovog slučaja, koja još traje, ali je stvar u suštini
komična. Deluje kao da vlada jedne suverene zemlje zazire, i to debelo,
od škrabotina nekog medjunarodnog mastiljara, i to još iz neke
nevladine organizacije, kojih danas ima bezbroj.
Stvar je još čudnija kada se zna koji sve problemi, pre svega
egzistencijalni a potom i nnogi drugi, muče našu napaćenu zemlju, pa se
postavlja logično pitanje otkud takav značaj jednom strancu i njegovim
ocenama stanja u našoj zemlji, koji nije ni predsednik države, ni
vlade, ni OUN-a, ni OEBS-a, ni NATO-a, niti nekakav finansijski magnat,
već običan činovnik jedne nevladine organizacije čije je sedište u
dalekim SAD.
Medjutim, taj značaj, ili bolje rečeno strah od posledica njegovog
izveštaja, iako svakako preuveličan, nije i bezrazložan.
Selektivan pristup
I letimičnim ispitivanjem sadržaja rada grupe vidi se da se očito bavi
odredjenim temama i regionima, vrlo selektivno i fokusiraju}i se upravo
na one koji su istovremeno i predmet inrteresovanja vlada njihovih
zemalja, a pre svega SAD i NATO. Jedna od tačaka njihovog interesovanja
je i naša zemlja.
Ovde se postavlja i jedno suštinsko pitanje: da li je to grupacija koja
svojim radom i aktivnostima utiče na vlade svojih zemalja da promene
politiku, ili naprotiv, ona, na mig vlada i oligarhija koje je
podržavaju, pokreće aktivnosti na destabilizaciji odredjene zemlje,
regiona ili ličnosti sa ciljem da otvori prostor da se u nastalu
situaciju uključe, tobož sa plementim ciljevima i motivima, i državni
organi pojedinih zemalja koje sve ovo orkestriraju.
Tu dilemu ne možemo otkloniti iz prostog razloga što je sprega vlada i
mnogih nevladinih organizacija, politička, interesna, personalna,
finansijska i organizaciona, iako skrivena, tako jaka da, u stvari, one
zajedno predstavljaju jednu funkcionalnu celinu koja radi
sinhronizovano, uz medije pod svojom kontrolom, na ostvarivanju
zajedničkih ciljeva.
Imali smo prilike da na našoj kž`i osetimo njihovo delovanje i njegove
posledice i otuda je strah opravdan.
"Pritisak" javnosti
Kako funkcioniše sistem pritisaka preko nevladinih organizacija? Bogate
oligarhije Zapada sprovode svoje geopolitičke zamisli vrlo jednostavnim
metodom. U poslednjih nekoliko desetina godina, a naročito u poslednjoj
deceniji, te strukture SAD i Zapada su namnožile u svojim zemljama, ali
i po celom svetu, razne medjunarodne institucije, često sa nacionalnim
ograncima, u najvećem broju pod firmom nevladinih organizacija,
fondacija, asocijacija, instituta, foruma i tome slično. Zahvaljujući
činjenici da ih one finansiraju, one im postavljaju i kadrove. Te
institucije predstavljaju , s jedne strane, obaveštajnu mrežu,
delimično i u sopstvenim zemljama, a naročito u stranim, oslanjajući se
u dobroj meri na lokalne kadrove, pri čemu im status nevladinih
organizacija obezbedjuje legalnan boravak i rad. Druga funkcija, ona o
kojoj je ovde prvenstveno reč je da pokreću odredjena pitanja u
sopstvenoj i svetskoj javnosti i javnom mnjenju fokusirane zemlje, na
sopstvenu inicijativu (čitaj u dogovoru sa svojim nalogodavcima) ili na
"inicijativu" svojih mentora, na način koji odgovara njihovim potrebama.
Najčešće se to izražava u vidu napada, kritika, afera i optužbi na
račun odredjenih ličnosti, vlada, država, naroda ili bilo koga i čega
što im zasmeta da ostvare svoje globalne planove. Naravno, te
aktivnosti odmah dobijaju maksimalan prostor u režimskim medijima u
sopstvenoj zemlji i zemljama saveznika i u "nezavisnim" medijima u
drugim zemljama (onima koje oni finansiraju) što im daje propulzivnost
i , napokon značaj i verodostojnost. To sve stvara utisak strašnog
problema koji , opet, zahteva, intervenciju vlada tih zemalja. Koliko
li smo puta čuli od zvaničnika SAD da se "pod pritiskom" javnosti
"nešto mora učiniti", a taj pritisak stvaraju prvenstveno nevladine
organizacije i mediji pod njihovom kontrolom
Obično je to završavalo sankcijama ili bombardovanjem, pri čemu su se
te akcije pokušavale legalizovati kroz OUN, a ako to nije bilo moguće
izvodjene su i bez saglasnosti ovog najvišeg medjunarodnog tela.
Medju nevladinim organizacijama ICG i nije najznačajnija. Navedimo samo
neke poznatije i značajnije od nje ili u njenoj ravni. Ko nije čuo za
Bildemberg grupu, Trilateralnu komisiju, Soroš Fondaciju, Fondaciju
Fridrih Ebert iz Nemačke, Karnež`i fondaciju iz SAD, Kraljevski
institut za strateške studfije iz Londona i mnoge druge. Na regionalnom
planu navedimo, na primer, asocijaciju Alpe-Adria Višegradsku grupu i
mnoge druge širom sveta.
Na našem nacionalnom planu malo je onih koji nisu čuli za Fond za
humanitarno pravo Nataše Kandić, Helsinški odbor za ljudska prava Sonje
Biserko, Centar za kulturnu dekontaminaciju Borke Pavičević itd. Imena
kao Sonja Liht, Vojin Dimitrijević, Biljana Vučo su svima poznata. Da i
ne govorimo o Grupi 17 plus. Svi su oni u funkciji interesa onih koji
ih finasiraju. Pri tome treba znati da ti načini finasiranja nisu uvek
isti. Često su to indirektni kanali, preko nekakvih drugih
medjunarodnih institucija tipa - za razvoj medija, demokratije i sl.
Naravno, u državama pod njihovom kontrolom, zapadne oligarhije troškove
finansiranja svojih produženih ruku, nevladinih organizacija, teže da
prebace na lokalne izvore, pre svega na budžet marionetskih vlada.
Uštede i za tako moćne grupe, nisu za odbacivanje, a može lakoverne da
zavara da pomisle da te organizacije rade za dobro svoje zemlje.
Naravno, istine radi, ima organizacija i institucija ovog tipa koje su
zaista ono za šta se izdaju i što bi i ostale trebale biti. Ali to je
prava retkost, a najbolji pokazatelj da li su prave je njihov konto u
banci. Takve institucije niko ne podržava niti finansira.
Ima organizacija koje nisu u globalnoj mreži SAD I NATO zemalja, a nisu
ni nezavisne. Njih drže nacionalne oligarhije ili vlade u interesu
svoje politike ili nacionalnih i državnih interesa. To je pokušaj
odbrane od opasnosti koja preti od globalnih nevladinih mreža i sedme
sile, ali jedna letva ne može zaustaviti provaljenu branu.
Jedini spas od ove moderne pošasti je razumevanje njihovih pravih
poslova i ciljeva i uskraćivanje podrške i prostora njihovom radu jer
je on, najčešće, u.funkciji globalne politike velikih sila današnjice.
A ona je krajnje agresivna, militaristička, opresivna i hegemonistička
i usmerena na destabilizaciju malih država i pojedinih regiona,
poništavanje nacionalnih interesa malih i srednjih zemalja,
razjedinjavanje njihovih nacionalnih snaga i stvaranje unutrašnjih
sukoba, poništavanje njihovog nacionalnog i kulturnog identiteta sa
ciljem njihovog potpunog podredjivanja svojim interesima i potrebama.
Najbolji dokz toga je delovanje najvećeg broja ovih nevladinih
organizacija na našem prostoru.
=== 3 ===
DIJASPORA TRAZI SVOJIH 3,5 MILIONA EURO
http://www.artel.co.yu/sr/glas_dijaspore/2003-07-29_3.html
SAVET SABORA DIJASPORE
Beograd, 29. juli 2003. godine
Tokom i nakon agresije NATO pakta nad Jugoslavijom naši ljudi iz
dijaspore sakupili su, pored ogromne humanitarnwe pomoći u robi, preko
12 miliona DM (6 miliona EURO) u gotovom. Novac je namenjen obnovi,
razvoju i humanitarnoj pomoći, a deponovan je u fond dijaspora za
maticu koji je osnovan i registrovan kod tadašnjih saveznih vlasti SRJ
tokom 1999. Devizni i dinarski računi fonda nalazili su se kod
Beogradske banke. U periodu 1999. i 2000. oko polovine sredstava fonda
investirano je u obnovu i izgradnju porušenih mostova na Dunavu,
Velikoj i Zapadnoj Moravi, zatim bolnica ("Dr Dragiša Mišović" Beograd,
"Ortopedska klinika" Beograd, i dr.), škola (OS "Djura Jakšić"
Ćuprija), kao i za izgradnju i obnovu putne mreže u Šumadiji i
Pomoravlju, ukupne dužine oko 100 km.
Što se tiče polovine investiranih sredstava, o svakoj pojedinačnoj
isplati postoji kompletna dokumentacija u Ministarstvu inostranih
poslova i u Banci. Uz to dokumentacija je objavljena i u knjizi
"Mostovi, dijaspora-matica", na blizu 400 stranica, u izdanju
Beogradskog foruma za svet ravnopravnih, Beograd, 2003.
Što se tice preostale, neutrošene polovine sredstava, nakon promene
vlasti u Beogradu 2000. računi fonda prakticno su blokirani.
Rukovodstvo Beogradske banke nije izvršavalo naloge ovlašćenih lica
Fonda. Medju nalozima koji nisu izvršeni bili su nalozi za isplatu
10,000 DM skupštini opštine Mojkovac koji je upravni odbor fonda
odobrio kao pomoć za izgradnju spomen-hrama Mojkovackoj bitci . Nije
izvršen ni nalog za isplatu oko 200,000 DM komesarijatu za izbeglice
koji je Upravni odbor odobrio za kupovinu napuštenih seoskih kuća i
imanja radi naseljavanja izbeglica .
Suočen sa takvim odnosom tadašnjeg novog rukovodstva Beogradske banke,
upravni odbor je odlučio da sva dinarska i sredstva sa računa
Beogradske banke prebaci na nove račune otvorene kod Raifasen banke
A.D. Beograd. Nalog za transfer sredstava u drugu banku izdat je pre
otpočinjanja likvidacionog postupka Beogradske banke. Ni taj nalog nije
izvršen niti je upravi Fonda dato objašnjenje za nepostupanje. O tome
su obavešteni ministrar finansija i ekonomije u vladi srbije Božidar
Djelić, tadašnji guverner NBJ Mladjan Dinkić, direktor ZOP-a Srbije
Živko Nešić. Obavešteno je i tadašnje najviše državno rukovodstvo: dr
Vojislav Koštunica, predsednik SRJ, dr Dragoljub Mićunović, predsednik
Veća gradjana Savezne Skupstine SRJ, mr Dragiša Pešic, predsednik
Savezne vlade, dr Zoran Djindjić, predsednik vlade republike Srbije i
dr.
Kasnije je otpočet postupak likvidacije Beogradske banke. Likvidaciono
rukovodstvo, predstavnici agencije za sanaciju i likvidaciju banaka
pismeno su potvrdili upravi fonda da se u času odpočinjanja likvidacije
na računima fonda nalazilo preko 3,000,000 EURO , bez kamate i oko
2,000,000 na dinarskom računu . Sve je to navodno u likvidacionoj masi
o čijoj će deobi odlučiti trgovinski sud u Beogradu.
Paralelno sa blokiranjem sredstava Fonda koje se ne može ničim
opravdati osim politikom koja je loša za odnose izmedju matice i
dijaspore, vlasti su na svoju ruku samoinicijativno donele rešenje o
brisanju fonda dijspora za maticu koji se vodi kod saveznog
ministarstva pravde.
Dakle , najpre blokada sredstava a zatim brisanje Fonda iz registra i
konacno utapanje sredstava u likvidacionu masu. Šta bi mogao biti
razlog za brisanje fonda iz registra nakon što je fond bio zakonito
registrovan i postojao i radio više od 2 godine? Jasno je da se ne mogu
izbrsati mostovi izgradjeni sredstvima Fonda kao što su Varadinska duga
kod Novog Sada ili most na Zapadnoj Moravi kod sela Jasika na ulazu u
Kruševac ili most na Velikoj Moravi kod Varvarina koji čuva uspomenu na
12 poginulih gradjana na Svetu Trojicu 30. maja 1999, medju kojima je
poginula i poznata matematičarka Sanja Milenković. Učinjeno je to
očigledno da bi preostalih 3,5 miliona Eura u gotovom ostali bez
pravnog titulara, bez vlasnika.
Medjutim, vlasnici postoje. To su ljudi iz dijaspore koji su dali svoje
lične priloge u Fond, to je upravni odbor Fonda na čelu sa svojim
predsednikom dr. Milivojem Milićevićem, dobrotvorom i liderom dijaspore
iz berlina. Hiljade i hiljade priložnika sirom Evrope i sveta je
zainteresovano da se njihov novac vrati u fond i da se iskoristi onako
kako su oni odlučili u skladu sa Odlukom Sabora dijaspore. Većina njih
raspolaže potvrdama o iznosima uplaćenih sredstava, a veliki broj i sa
pismenim priznanjima za dobročiniteljski doprinos.
Oni žele da se problem reši ljudski, dogovorom sa predstavnicima vlasti
svoje matice. Ne žele, osim ako ne budu prinudjeni, da rešenje traže
preko vlada zemalja u kojima sticajem okolnost žive i rade. Ne žele da
se to rešava ni pred institucijama Saveta Evrope i Evropske Unije.
Smatraju da za razumne ljude i ozbiljne državne predstavnike to nije
dobar put.
O tome svedoče svi dosadašnji koraci organa Fonda koji su bili usmereni
isključivo prema vlastima matice.
Fond je uputio mnoga pisma interne i javne apele vlastima da izkažu
odgpvoran i razuman odnos prema ovom problemu. Fond žali što do sada
nije dobio zadovoljavajući odgovor, odnosno rešenje. Jedini prihvatljiv
način jeste da vlasti, a pre svega gospoda Ministar Djelić i novi
Guverner NBS Kori Udovički, omoguće da se blokirani novac hitno vrati
Fondu i tako prekine posve nepotrebna rašomonijada. Na toj liniji bili
su zahtevi poslanika u Saveznoj skupštini i Narodnoj skupštini Srbije,
kao što je pitanje poslanika u Veću republika Milutina Mrkonjića na
koje nije dobijen zadovoljavajući odgovor.
Ako su vlasti našle za shodno da izvrše celokupne isplate nekim
komercijalnim deponentima BB, kao na primer Telekomu Srbija kome je
isplaćen iznos od potraživanja Fonda, onda tim pre treba da nadju za
shodno da se sredstva Fonda, kao udruženja gradjana, vrate Fondu.
Čini se da je ministar Djelić shvatio, iako sa zakašnjenjem, ozbiljnost
ovog problema i posledice odugovlačenja koje se izražavaju u
nepoverenju dijaspore zbog manipulacije njenim parama. Naime, na
uskršnjim susretima dijaspore i matice u Domu Vojske Jugoslavije,
Ministar Djelić je izjavio da veruje da će naći rešenje i zamolio tada
prisutne predstavnike dijaspore "za malo strpljenja".
Od tada je prošlo više od tri meseca. Dijaspora veruje da je bilo
dovoljno vremena da se njena sredstva pronadju i da je gospodin
Ministar spremio ispravno rešenje. To znači vraćanje svih deviznih i
dinarskih srestava Fondu i njegovoj upravi. To takodje znači
omogućavanje Fondu da nastavi normalno da radi u skladu sa Statutom i
voljom prilogodavaca.
I djaspora, a pogotovu matica imaju dovoljno drugih teškoća. Ne treba
im još i ova veštačka, birokratska prepreka na putu bolje saradnje,
stvarnog medjusobnog poštovanja .
U ime SAVETA SABORA DIJASPORE
dr. Milivoje Milićević, s.r.
Jugocoord su Telegram
Jugocoord su Facebook