Informazione
(see original articles in english at bottom)
Nemmeno i croati sono entusiasti di entrare nella NATO
Un recentissimo sondaggio ha rivelato che piu' della meta' dei
cittadini della Croazia sono ben poco entusiasti rispetto alla
inclusione del paese nella NATO, e che almeno un 20 per cento e'
nettamente contrario. Naturalmente l'opinione dei cittadini su una
questione del genere non verra' tenuta in considerazione: se essa
rappresentera' un problema si organizzeranno campagne massmediatiche
ed iniziative di disinformazione ad hoc per imporre "democraticamente"
l'ingresso a tutti i costi della Croazia nella NATO nel 2004. (I.S.)
=== english ===
http://www.ptd.net/webnews/wed/dp/Qcroatia-nato-eu.RnQY_CDU.html
Croatians give lukewarm support to NATO bid, poll
shows
ZAGREB, Dec 30 (AFP) - Fewer than half of Croatians
support their country's entry into NATO, which the
government would like to join in 2004, according to an
opinion poll released on Monday.
The poll, published by the daily Jutarnji List, found
43 percent of those surveyed favour joining the
Atlantic alliance while 20 percent said membership was
"undesirable."
Twenty-two percent said they did not care and the
remaining 15 percent gave no answer.
The poll also showed that 57 percent of Croatians
supported the country's membership in the EU, while 16
percent were against it.
Croatia's moderate rulers, who took over from
nationalists three years ago, have put the country's
membership in the EU and NATO at the top of their
agenda.
Croatia, which proclaimed independence from the former
Yugoslavia in 1991, joined NATO's Partnership for
Peace program in 2000. The program is seen as the
first step to joining the Alliance.
Zagreb hopes to enter NATO in 2004. It also has voiced
hope of becoming a full-fledged member of the European
Union by 2008.
http://en.rian.ru/rian/index.cfm?prd_id=160&msg_id
=2949095&startrow=1&date=2002-12-31&do_alert=0
Novosti
December 31, 2002
LESS THAN HALF OF CROATIANS SPOKE IN FAVOUR OF THE
COUNTRY'S ENTRY INTO NATO
BELGRADE, 31 December. /RIA Novosti correspondent
Aleksander Slabynko/. Less than half of interviewed
Croatians, 43%, spoke in favor of the country's entry
into NATO, about a quarter, 20% spoke against that and
the rest were indifferent to the intention of Croatia
to join the North Atlantic Alliance.
These were the results of the survey of 1500 Croatian
citizens published on Tuesday by "Jutarni List"
newspaper.
As far as entry into the European Union was concerned,
then the results were more optimistic: 57% of
Croatians supported the course of the government
towards entry into the European Union and only 16%
spoke against that.
Croatia is preparing to join NATO in 2004, and the
European Union in 2007-2008.
Nemmeno i croati sono entusiasti di entrare nella NATO
Un recentissimo sondaggio ha rivelato che piu' della meta' dei
cittadini della Croazia sono ben poco entusiasti rispetto alla
inclusione del paese nella NATO, e che almeno un 20 per cento e'
nettamente contrario. Naturalmente l'opinione dei cittadini su una
questione del genere non verra' tenuta in considerazione: se essa
rappresentera' un problema si organizzeranno campagne massmediatiche
ed iniziative di disinformazione ad hoc per imporre "democraticamente"
l'ingresso a tutti i costi della Croazia nella NATO nel 2004. (I.S.)
=== english ===
http://www.ptd.net/webnews/wed/dp/Qcroatia-nato-eu.RnQY_CDU.html
Croatians give lukewarm support to NATO bid, poll
shows
ZAGREB, Dec 30 (AFP) - Fewer than half of Croatians
support their country's entry into NATO, which the
government would like to join in 2004, according to an
opinion poll released on Monday.
The poll, published by the daily Jutarnji List, found
43 percent of those surveyed favour joining the
Atlantic alliance while 20 percent said membership was
"undesirable."
Twenty-two percent said they did not care and the
remaining 15 percent gave no answer.
The poll also showed that 57 percent of Croatians
supported the country's membership in the EU, while 16
percent were against it.
Croatia's moderate rulers, who took over from
nationalists three years ago, have put the country's
membership in the EU and NATO at the top of their
agenda.
Croatia, which proclaimed independence from the former
Yugoslavia in 1991, joined NATO's Partnership for
Peace program in 2000. The program is seen as the
first step to joining the Alliance.
Zagreb hopes to enter NATO in 2004. It also has voiced
hope of becoming a full-fledged member of the European
Union by 2008.
http://en.rian.ru/rian/index.cfm?prd_id=160&msg_id
=2949095&startrow=1&date=2002-12-31&do_alert=0
Novosti
December 31, 2002
LESS THAN HALF OF CROATIANS SPOKE IN FAVOUR OF THE
COUNTRY'S ENTRY INTO NATO
BELGRADE, 31 December. /RIA Novosti correspondent
Aleksander Slabynko/. Less than half of interviewed
Croatians, 43%, spoke in favor of the country's entry
into NATO, about a quarter, 20% spoke against that and
the rest were indifferent to the intention of Croatia
to join the North Atlantic Alliance.
These were the results of the survey of 1500 Croatian
citizens published on Tuesday by "Jutarni List"
newspaper.
As far as entry into the European Union was concerned,
then the results were more optimistic: 57% of
Croatians supported the course of the government
towards entry into the European Union and only 16%
spoke against that.
Croatia is preparing to join NATO in 2004, and the
European Union in 2007-2008.
"Kom' obojci, kom' opanci"
Kome odgovara dogovor Hrvatske i Crne Gore, odnosno Jugoslavije?
PREVELI NAS ZEDNE PREKO PREVLAKE
Za "Oko", nedeljnik , 18. decembar 2002, pise Branko Stasic.
Protokol o privremenom rezimu na podrucju Prevlake, uz juznu granicu
Hrvatske i SRJ, kojim ovaj mali kopneni spic na ulazu u Boku Kotorsku
prestaje da bude neuralgicna tacka i postaje "primer kako treba
resavati sporna pitanja u odnosima susednih zemalja", u Hrvatskoj je
docekan euforicno, kao "nova pobeda deset godina posle Domovinskog
rata" (...)
===
Dal settimanale belgradese "Oko", 18 dicembre 2002
"A chi le pezze e a chi le ciocie"
CI HANNO FATTO ATTRAVERSARE LA PREVLAKA SENZA BERE
di Branko Stasic
A chi conviene questo accordo tra la Croazia e il Montenegro cioé
Jugoslavia?
Dopo lunghe trattative, la cui ultima fase è durata 9 mesi, la
Jugoslavia, cioé il Montenegro, e la Croazia hanno trovato la
risoluzione per il loro "ultimo contenzioso", quello del promontorio
di Prevlaka [zona marina strategica presso Cattaro, ndCNJ].
L'altra settimana (nella prima metà di dicembre) sulla linea di
frontiera, sotto una tenda appositamente allestita, è stato raggiunto
l'accordo per un regime temporaneo, firmato tra i ministri degli
Esteri della Jugoslavia e della Croazia, Goran Svilanovic e Tonino
Picula.
Si può subito dire che questa risoluzione è un (in)successo della
diplomazia montenegrina giacché la firma l'ha messa il capo della
missione jugoslava, e non montenegrina. Ma questa e' soltanto una
formalità, perché il Montenegro, malgrado di fatto indipendente, non è
uno stato, mentre la R.F. di Jugoslavia lo è. Perciò la nuova unità
statale di Serbia e Montenegro avra' in eredità anche questo
Protocollo, come anche molti altri oneri e doveri derivanti dai
precedenti accordi interstatali.
Ciò che questa soluzione definisce "regime provvisorio" è anche una
definizione formale, perché la soluzione finale concerne soltanto la
linea di frontiera marittima, e perché sia il Montenegro che la
Croazia ritengono che con nuovi dialoghi potrebbero ottenere di più.
Senza "dimostrazioni di forza"
In ogni caso, dopo 10 anni dalla fine dello scontro bellico tra
Podgorica e Belgrado da una parte e Zagabria dall'altra, cioé dalla
sconfitta del tentativo serbo-montenegrino di occupare Dubrovnik e
dintorni [sic], ritornano gli appetiti territoriali della tornata
precedente. Prevlaka di nuovo viene posta sotto giurisdizione croata,
come era nella ex Jugoslavia [socialista, nella quale pero' le
frontiere avevano esclusivamente valore amministrativo, ndCNJ].
L'altra settimana la missione ONU - MO, che era rimasta per 10 anni
sulla Prevlaka, in base alla risoluzione del Consiglio di sicurezza
779, "ha conseganto le chiavi" ai rappresentanti della Croazia, con il
che la polizia croata ha stabilito il controllo di questo piccolo
promontorio-punta all' ingresso del Golfo della Boka Kotorska, ed un
"controllo parziale", insieme alla polizia montenegrina, su di una
sottile cintura della costa interna del promontorio del "mare comune"
nel golfo.
Secondo il Protocollo, le due parti "regolano temporaneamente" le
relazioni collegate alle regole di frontiera con la demilitarizzazione
della zona, senza ingerenze doganali, come anche relativamente alle
questioni legate alla vita dei cittadini su quel territorio, che non
dovrebbero più rappresentare problemi. Sulla "temporaneità" si insiste
non solo nelle dichaiarazioni dei rappresentanti delle due parti, ma
anche nella parte iniziale del documento, dove e' scritto che le
decisioni del Protocollo e gli annessi, come anche l'applicazione
dello stesso, "in nessun modo pregiudicano la frontiera di divisione
tra i due stati". (...)
Il Protocollo obbliga la Croazia alla completa demilitarizzazione
nella fascia di 5 km dalla frontiera (con l'eccezione della strada
Poljice - Molunat) mentre per la RFJ (Montenegro), in profondità di 3
km (e di più nemmeno ne avrebbe).
La demilitarizzazione sottintende lo spostamento o distruzione di
tutte le fortificazioni (bastioni e installazioni missilistiche) come
anche il trasferimento in nuove locazioni fuori da questa zona di
tutti i sistemi militari missilistici, l'artiglieria, ecc. (...)
Le due parti alla firma del "Protocollo provvisorio" hanno affermato
con orgoglio che l'accordo è stato raggiunto "senza mediazione
straniera", ed hanno dichiarato che "è stato trovato un altro punto di
incontro e cooperazione".
Sembra però che la parte croata abbia più ragioni di essere
soddisfatta, e non lo ha nascosto. (...)
Al capo della missione jugoslava, Goran Svilanovic, mancava una vera
ragione di soddisfazione, non soltanto perché non era poi tanto
interessato in questo accomodamento, ma anche perché non poteva dire
altro che: più di questo non si sarebbe potuto ottenere. Anche in
questi accordi ha prevalso il principio della divisione della RFS di
Jugoslavia, cioé che le frontiere repubblicane (e amministrative) sono
diventate frontiere di nuovi stati. In altre parole "si è ottenuto
soltanto quello che era possibile".
Ci sono pareri, sia dalla parte montenegrina che quella croata,
secondo cui ognuna di esse poteva ottenere di più.
Il capo-missione degli esperti, il montenegrino N. Vucinic, in un
primo momento ha dichiarato che "il Montenegro forse poteva ottenere
di più", ma ha subito ammesso: "importante è che abbiamo difeso i
nostri interessi". Per i firmatari jugoslavi il più importante aspetto
sembra essere "il guadagno" sul mare. "Il regime marittimo nel golfo
delle Bocche di Cattaro nel settore di Dubrovnik è rimasto come prima
della guerra" ha dichiarato Vucinic.
Sia come sia, Podgorica in questo caso non ha ragione di lamentarsi di
Belgrado e nemmeno di lasciargli la gloria, perché tutta l'operazione
è il risultato della propria abilità.
Il presidente montenegrino M. Djukanovic alla vigilia della firma del
Protocollo ha dichiarato che "il Montenegro e la Croazia sulla
questione della Prevlaka stanno contrattando senza la mediazione di
Belgrado". In un'altra occasione ha detto: "Belgrado è qui soltanto
presente da un punto di vista giuridico e formale". (...)
Da parte croata la firma del Protocollo è stata salutata quasi
euforicamente, almeno nei media. Sicuramente i giornalisti hanno
voluto comunicare quello che i politici si astenevano dal comunicare -
e cioe' che "la Croazia ha ottenuto un'altra vittoria, 10 anni dopo la
cosiddetta guerra patriottica".
Ma nelle fila croate non tutti sono contenti. Cosi l'ex diplomatico
del periodo tudjmaniano, Davorin Rudolf, afferma che la Croazia "ha
concesso troppo" quando ha "concesso" le acque territoriali (e con
esse ha "regalato" anche parte dello spazio aereo e i fondali marini),
cioé che la frontiera provvisoria del regolamento marittimo "è
scandalosa e a discapito della Croazia". Ufficialmente però la Croazia
e la Jugoslavia ritengono di aver "fatto un grande passo nella
normalizzazione delle relazioni reciproche", come dice il capo del
Governo croato, Ivica Racan, ma anche complessivamente, come dichiara
il capo delegazione jugoslava Svilanovic.
La Jugoslavia ha riconosciuto la sovranità della Croazia sulla
Prevlaka, e tutto il resto dipenderà essenzialmente dalla buona
volontà, dagli interessi e dalle necessità del futuro.
Un po' di storia
[che ognuno "tira", a mo' di coperta, come gli conviene, N.d.t.]
Comperata ancora nel 1419; ufficialmente Zagabria non ha mai permesso
di mettere in dubbio che il promontorio della Prevlaka non
appartenesse alla Croazia. In questo ha avuto il sostegno degli
accademici. Questa posizione è stata confermata con la
scoperta nel libro "Hrvatska Prevlaka". La Repubblica di Dubrovnik
(Ragusa) "ancora nel lontano 1419 ha comperato la Prevlaka dal
feudatario bosniaco Sandalj Hranic", e di questo acquisto "il trattato
venne stipulato il 24 giugno 1419 nel luogo di Scepan Polje,
sull'odierna frontiera tra la Serbia e il Montenegro".
Prevlaka durante i secoli, come del resto tutto il litorale Adriatico,
ha cambiato proprietari: sotto Napoleone dal 1805 al 1813,
austroungarica dal 1814 al 1918, nel Regno della Jugoslavia dal 1918
al 1941, sotto l' Italia fino al 1945. Di nuovo in Jugoslavia, fino al
1991, ma la domanda è: in questa cornice, a chi apparteneva? I croati
affermano che "era sempre nella compagine di Dubrovnik", cioé della
Croazia, mentre fonti montenegrine risalgono al periodo
austroungarico, ed una di queste fonti riprende un documento secondo
cui Punta d' Ostrò, cioé Rt Ostra, amministrativamente appartiene al
comune di Castelnuovo, cioé l'odierna Hercegnovi, e questo al
distretto di Cattaro, cioé Kotor!
[Traduzione di Ivan per il CNJ.
Nota del traduttore:
Sembra come quella coperta troppo corta che ognuno cerca di tirare
dalla parte propria. La Croazia ha dovuto concedere delle frontiere
marine alla Slovenia in Istria; ora, riconosciuta "democratica" dal
governo Bush junior, essa rivendica territorio "di terra e di mare" da
un'altra parte...
"Povero popolo jugoslavo, qualunque cosa avresti fatto saresti stato
fregato". Svegliati! Solo in uno stato comune fondato sulla tolleranza
potrà ripristinarsi una pace duratura.]
Kome odgovara dogovor Hrvatske i Crne Gore, odnosno Jugoslavije?
PREVELI NAS ZEDNE PREKO PREVLAKE
Za "Oko", nedeljnik , 18. decembar 2002, pise Branko Stasic.
Protokol o privremenom rezimu na podrucju Prevlake, uz juznu granicu
Hrvatske i SRJ, kojim ovaj mali kopneni spic na ulazu u Boku Kotorsku
prestaje da bude neuralgicna tacka i postaje "primer kako treba
resavati sporna pitanja u odnosima susednih zemalja", u Hrvatskoj je
docekan euforicno, kao "nova pobeda deset godina posle Domovinskog
rata" (...)
===
Dal settimanale belgradese "Oko", 18 dicembre 2002
"A chi le pezze e a chi le ciocie"
CI HANNO FATTO ATTRAVERSARE LA PREVLAKA SENZA BERE
di Branko Stasic
A chi conviene questo accordo tra la Croazia e il Montenegro cioé
Jugoslavia?
Dopo lunghe trattative, la cui ultima fase è durata 9 mesi, la
Jugoslavia, cioé il Montenegro, e la Croazia hanno trovato la
risoluzione per il loro "ultimo contenzioso", quello del promontorio
di Prevlaka [zona marina strategica presso Cattaro, ndCNJ].
L'altra settimana (nella prima metà di dicembre) sulla linea di
frontiera, sotto una tenda appositamente allestita, è stato raggiunto
l'accordo per un regime temporaneo, firmato tra i ministri degli
Esteri della Jugoslavia e della Croazia, Goran Svilanovic e Tonino
Picula.
Si può subito dire che questa risoluzione è un (in)successo della
diplomazia montenegrina giacché la firma l'ha messa il capo della
missione jugoslava, e non montenegrina. Ma questa e' soltanto una
formalità, perché il Montenegro, malgrado di fatto indipendente, non è
uno stato, mentre la R.F. di Jugoslavia lo è. Perciò la nuova unità
statale di Serbia e Montenegro avra' in eredità anche questo
Protocollo, come anche molti altri oneri e doveri derivanti dai
precedenti accordi interstatali.
Ciò che questa soluzione definisce "regime provvisorio" è anche una
definizione formale, perché la soluzione finale concerne soltanto la
linea di frontiera marittima, e perché sia il Montenegro che la
Croazia ritengono che con nuovi dialoghi potrebbero ottenere di più.
Senza "dimostrazioni di forza"
In ogni caso, dopo 10 anni dalla fine dello scontro bellico tra
Podgorica e Belgrado da una parte e Zagabria dall'altra, cioé dalla
sconfitta del tentativo serbo-montenegrino di occupare Dubrovnik e
dintorni [sic], ritornano gli appetiti territoriali della tornata
precedente. Prevlaka di nuovo viene posta sotto giurisdizione croata,
come era nella ex Jugoslavia [socialista, nella quale pero' le
frontiere avevano esclusivamente valore amministrativo, ndCNJ].
L'altra settimana la missione ONU - MO, che era rimasta per 10 anni
sulla Prevlaka, in base alla risoluzione del Consiglio di sicurezza
779, "ha conseganto le chiavi" ai rappresentanti della Croazia, con il
che la polizia croata ha stabilito il controllo di questo piccolo
promontorio-punta all' ingresso del Golfo della Boka Kotorska, ed un
"controllo parziale", insieme alla polizia montenegrina, su di una
sottile cintura della costa interna del promontorio del "mare comune"
nel golfo.
Secondo il Protocollo, le due parti "regolano temporaneamente" le
relazioni collegate alle regole di frontiera con la demilitarizzazione
della zona, senza ingerenze doganali, come anche relativamente alle
questioni legate alla vita dei cittadini su quel territorio, che non
dovrebbero più rappresentare problemi. Sulla "temporaneità" si insiste
non solo nelle dichaiarazioni dei rappresentanti delle due parti, ma
anche nella parte iniziale del documento, dove e' scritto che le
decisioni del Protocollo e gli annessi, come anche l'applicazione
dello stesso, "in nessun modo pregiudicano la frontiera di divisione
tra i due stati". (...)
Il Protocollo obbliga la Croazia alla completa demilitarizzazione
nella fascia di 5 km dalla frontiera (con l'eccezione della strada
Poljice - Molunat) mentre per la RFJ (Montenegro), in profondità di 3
km (e di più nemmeno ne avrebbe).
La demilitarizzazione sottintende lo spostamento o distruzione di
tutte le fortificazioni (bastioni e installazioni missilistiche) come
anche il trasferimento in nuove locazioni fuori da questa zona di
tutti i sistemi militari missilistici, l'artiglieria, ecc. (...)
Le due parti alla firma del "Protocollo provvisorio" hanno affermato
con orgoglio che l'accordo è stato raggiunto "senza mediazione
straniera", ed hanno dichiarato che "è stato trovato un altro punto di
incontro e cooperazione".
Sembra però che la parte croata abbia più ragioni di essere
soddisfatta, e non lo ha nascosto. (...)
Al capo della missione jugoslava, Goran Svilanovic, mancava una vera
ragione di soddisfazione, non soltanto perché non era poi tanto
interessato in questo accomodamento, ma anche perché non poteva dire
altro che: più di questo non si sarebbe potuto ottenere. Anche in
questi accordi ha prevalso il principio della divisione della RFS di
Jugoslavia, cioé che le frontiere repubblicane (e amministrative) sono
diventate frontiere di nuovi stati. In altre parole "si è ottenuto
soltanto quello che era possibile".
Ci sono pareri, sia dalla parte montenegrina che quella croata,
secondo cui ognuna di esse poteva ottenere di più.
Il capo-missione degli esperti, il montenegrino N. Vucinic, in un
primo momento ha dichiarato che "il Montenegro forse poteva ottenere
di più", ma ha subito ammesso: "importante è che abbiamo difeso i
nostri interessi". Per i firmatari jugoslavi il più importante aspetto
sembra essere "il guadagno" sul mare. "Il regime marittimo nel golfo
delle Bocche di Cattaro nel settore di Dubrovnik è rimasto come prima
della guerra" ha dichiarato Vucinic.
Sia come sia, Podgorica in questo caso non ha ragione di lamentarsi di
Belgrado e nemmeno di lasciargli la gloria, perché tutta l'operazione
è il risultato della propria abilità.
Il presidente montenegrino M. Djukanovic alla vigilia della firma del
Protocollo ha dichiarato che "il Montenegro e la Croazia sulla
questione della Prevlaka stanno contrattando senza la mediazione di
Belgrado". In un'altra occasione ha detto: "Belgrado è qui soltanto
presente da un punto di vista giuridico e formale". (...)
Da parte croata la firma del Protocollo è stata salutata quasi
euforicamente, almeno nei media. Sicuramente i giornalisti hanno
voluto comunicare quello che i politici si astenevano dal comunicare -
e cioe' che "la Croazia ha ottenuto un'altra vittoria, 10 anni dopo la
cosiddetta guerra patriottica".
Ma nelle fila croate non tutti sono contenti. Cosi l'ex diplomatico
del periodo tudjmaniano, Davorin Rudolf, afferma che la Croazia "ha
concesso troppo" quando ha "concesso" le acque territoriali (e con
esse ha "regalato" anche parte dello spazio aereo e i fondali marini),
cioé che la frontiera provvisoria del regolamento marittimo "è
scandalosa e a discapito della Croazia". Ufficialmente però la Croazia
e la Jugoslavia ritengono di aver "fatto un grande passo nella
normalizzazione delle relazioni reciproche", come dice il capo del
Governo croato, Ivica Racan, ma anche complessivamente, come dichiara
il capo delegazione jugoslava Svilanovic.
La Jugoslavia ha riconosciuto la sovranità della Croazia sulla
Prevlaka, e tutto il resto dipenderà essenzialmente dalla buona
volontà, dagli interessi e dalle necessità del futuro.
Un po' di storia
[che ognuno "tira", a mo' di coperta, come gli conviene, N.d.t.]
Comperata ancora nel 1419; ufficialmente Zagabria non ha mai permesso
di mettere in dubbio che il promontorio della Prevlaka non
appartenesse alla Croazia. In questo ha avuto il sostegno degli
accademici. Questa posizione è stata confermata con la
scoperta nel libro "Hrvatska Prevlaka". La Repubblica di Dubrovnik
(Ragusa) "ancora nel lontano 1419 ha comperato la Prevlaka dal
feudatario bosniaco Sandalj Hranic", e di questo acquisto "il trattato
venne stipulato il 24 giugno 1419 nel luogo di Scepan Polje,
sull'odierna frontiera tra la Serbia e il Montenegro".
Prevlaka durante i secoli, come del resto tutto il litorale Adriatico,
ha cambiato proprietari: sotto Napoleone dal 1805 al 1813,
austroungarica dal 1814 al 1918, nel Regno della Jugoslavia dal 1918
al 1941, sotto l' Italia fino al 1945. Di nuovo in Jugoslavia, fino al
1991, ma la domanda è: in questa cornice, a chi apparteneva? I croati
affermano che "era sempre nella compagine di Dubrovnik", cioé della
Croazia, mentre fonti montenegrine risalgono al periodo
austroungarico, ed una di queste fonti riprende un documento secondo
cui Punta d' Ostrò, cioé Rt Ostra, amministrativamente appartiene al
comune di Castelnuovo, cioé l'odierna Hercegnovi, e questo al
distretto di Cattaro, cioé Kotor!
[Traduzione di Ivan per il CNJ.
Nota del traduttore:
Sembra come quella coperta troppo corta che ognuno cerca di tirare
dalla parte propria. La Croazia ha dovuto concedere delle frontiere
marine alla Slovenia in Istria; ora, riconosciuta "democratica" dal
governo Bush junior, essa rivendica territorio "di terra e di mare" da
un'altra parte...
"Povero popolo jugoslavo, qualunque cosa avresti fatto saresti stato
fregato". Svegliati! Solo in uno stato comune fondato sulla tolleranza
potrà ripristinarsi una pace duratura.]
QUELLI CHE AUGURANO SVENTURA PER IL 2003
«La guerra all'Iraq non comporta un problema morale.
La terza guerra mondiale è necessaria per
occidentalizzare il terzo e quarto mondo».
Gustavo Selva, An, presidente della Commissione Esteri
della Camera, 28 dicembre
«La guerra all'Iraq non comporta un problema morale.
La terza guerra mondiale è necessaria per
occidentalizzare il terzo e quarto mondo».
Gustavo Selva, An, presidente della Commissione Esteri
della Camera, 28 dicembre
Subject: Relazione viaggio a Kragujevac del dicembre 2002
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:45:47 -0000
From: "vlaic"
RITORNO DALLA ZASTAVA DI KRAGUJEVAC
Viaggio del dicembre 2002
(resoconto di viaggio a cura di un compagno del gruppo ZASTAVA
Trieste)
Questa relazione e' suddivisa in quattro parti:
A) Cronaca del viaggio
B) Alcune informazioni generali
C) Informazioni sulla Zastava; nuovi possibili progetti di
solidarieta'; le morti "sospette' di numerosi operai.
D) Conclusioni
Cronaca del viaggio
Vi inviamo un resoconto del viaggio appena concluso alla Zastava di
Kragujevac per consegnare le adozioni a distanza, fatto dal
Coordinamento Nazionale RSU e dal Gruppo Zastava di Trieste.
Per i titolari delle nuove adozioni: stiamo procedendo ad organizzare
la spedizione delle schede relative ai bambini adottati.
Siamo partiti da Trieste venerdi' 20 dicembre alle 3 del mattino, con
un pullmino a nove posti. La delegazione era formata da 5 persone:
Alma da Firenze, Gilberto e Sergio da Trieste, Paola e Mario da Crema.
Il pullmino ci e' stato prestato (gratuitamente) da un'associazione di
solidarieta' internazionale triestina e così ci siamo dovuti accollare
le sole spese del viaggio.
Avevamo una quarantina di scatole di aiuti, alimentari, vestario e
materiale scolastico. Per gli alimentari si trattava di regali alle
famiglie jugoslave da parte delle famiglie adottanti italiane, il
vestiario era frutto di raccolte operate a Padova e Trieste, mentre il
materiale scolastico era un dono di un sottoscrittore privato.
Inoltre portavamo con noi alcune decine di costosissimi flaconi di
chemioterapici, raccolti a Trieste, per il reparto oncologico
dell'Ospedale di Kragujevac e per l'Ospedale pediatrico di Belgrado,
per un valore di 12.000 euro.
Ricordiamo che le spese di viaggio sono state direttamente sostenute
dai partecipanti, senza alcuno storno dai fondi ricevuti per le quote
di adozione a distanza da distribuire in questa occasione (come del
resto in tutti i precedenti viaggi effettuati).
Siamo arrivati a Kragujevac alle 4 del pomeriggio, senza alcun
problema durante il viaggio, se si eccettua una fitta nebbia che ci ha
accompagnato praticamente per tutto il viaggio, oltre a un freddo
intenso.
Il pomeriggio abbiamo predisposto i dettagli per l'assemblea del
giorno dopo; successivamente abbiamo visitato una famiglia in cui una
delle figlie e' colpita da una grave patologia cerebrale, e per la
quale i lavoratori della Lever di Lodi avevano fatto una
sottoscrizione staordinaria. A cena abbiamo raccolto le ultime notizie
sulla Zastava e discusso i dettagli di nuovi possibili progetti di
solidarieta' immediata.
Il mattino di sabato abbiamo distribuito le quote delle adozioni.
Erano 40, di cui 7 nuove, provenienti da lavoratori italiani che fanno
riferimento alla campagna del coordinamento RSU e di ZASTAVA Trieste.
Sono stati inoltre consegnati i fondi raccolti a Padova per far fronte
a una pesante situazione sanitaria che si e' presentata nella famiglia
di uno dei bambini adottati.
E' stata anche consegnata ad una studentessa universitaria priva di
qualsiasi reddito una quota una-tantum corrispondente ad una adozione
annuale, frutto della conversione in denaro delle spese floreali non
effettuate relativamente ad un lutto che ha colpito uno dei nostri
sottoscrittori.
Durante l'assemblea c'e' stato il solito scambio di regali tra
famiglie italiane e jugoslave e viceversa. Complici le festivita' di
fine anno, alla fine il bagagliaio del pullmino era molto simile ad
una distilleria di superalcolici.
Dopo un gustosissimo pasto a casa del vice-presidente del sindacato,
siamo partiti da Kragujevac alle 4 del pomeriggio.
A Belgrado abbiamo consegnato i chemioterapici e dopo un tranquillo
viaggio notturno siamo arrivati a Trieste alle 4 del mattino di
domenica.
I resoconti di tutti i viaggi precedenti sono reperibili su diversi
siti.
Il piu' completo e' il sito del coordinamento RSU, all'indirizzo:
http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/
seguendo il link Solidarietà con i lavoratori della Jugoslavia:
http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/guerra.htm
dove sono anche descritte in dettaglio tutte le iniziative in corso, e
riportati i resoconti anche di altre associazioni.
Il resoconto del viaggio di ottobre 2002 e' particolarmente ricco di
notizie sulla situazione dei lavoratori della Zastava.
Gli stessi resoconti sono presenti anche sul sito del Coordinamento
Nazionale per la Jugoslavia, all'indirizzo:
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
che contiene inoltre centinaia di articoli sulla situazione nei
Balcani difficilmente reperibili sulla stampa nazionale.
Alcune informazioni generali
Quello che abbiamo potuto verificare è un peggioramento continuo della
situazione materiale in cui versano le famiglie in relazione ad un
continuo inarrestabile aumento dei prezzi, soprattutto delle tariffe e
degli affitti, ma anche una tenuta della capacità di iniziativa da
parte del sindacato in difesa dei diritti dei lavoratori e per
conquistare prospettive produttive per la fabbrica.
I prezzi stanno raggiungendo livelli "occidentali" a fronte di
stipendi, quando esistono, circa dieci volte piu' bassi che in
occidente.
I dati ufficiali affermano che circa i 2/3 della popolazione serba
spende meno di 1 euro al giorno pro-capite, e che un terzo spende meno
di mezzo euro al giorno; il 60% della spesa e' per il cibo. La
disoccupazione dilaga ed interessa centinaia di migliaia di
lavoratori, su circa undici milioni e mezzo di abitanti a cui vanno
sommati circa un milione di profughi.
L'aumento vertiginoso del prezzo dell'energia elettrica ha provocato
problemi gravissimi; il riscaldamento domestico in Jugoslavia e' in
gran parte basato sull'elettricita', che prima dell'ottobre 2000
veniva considerata un bene socialmente primario e quindi erogata a
prezzi controllati; inoltre a Kragujevac era attivo il
teleriscaldamento utilizzando la centrale termica della Zastava; tale
impianto e' stato uno dei primi ad essere distrutto dai bombardamenti
del 1999.
L'aumento vertiginoso dell'elettricita' ha di fatto privato la maggior
parte della popolazione di questa fonte per il riscaldamento e
l'inverno balcanico e' decisamente freddo (sabato a mezzogiorno, a
Kragujevac con uno splendido sole il termometro segnava -7 gradi). A
Belgrado citta' sono circa 170.000 le famiglie che non possono piu'
pagare la bolletta elettrica.
A Kragujevac, durante gli inverni del 1999 e del 2000 il sindacato era
riuscito a rifornire di legna per il riscaldamento le famiglie piu'
disastrate; faceva un certo effetto vedere l'enorme piazzale di
parcheggio davanti agli stabilimenti ricoperto di cataste di legna.
Per mancanza di fondi questa operazione non e' stata ripetuta nel 2001
e neppure ovviamente per l'inverno attualmente in corso; ci si deve
rivolgere al libero mercato dove un metro cubo di legna costa
attualmente circa 30 euro. Chi scrive ha visto il sabato mattina file
lunghissime di trattori con rimorchi pieni di legna parcheggiati un
po' dovunque, sia in periferia che in centro citta'.
Questo significa anche rapido disboscamento?
Per quanto riguarda la sanita', quella pubblica, un tempo vanto della
Jugoslavia, praticamente non esiste piu' e i farmaci vanno acquistati
nelle farmacie private.
Negli ospedali, in cui manca moltissimo, si deve pagare anche la
degenza; con amarezza, la delegata dell'ufficio adozioni ci ha detto
"devi portare anche il filo per la sala operatoria".
Per quanto riguarda la scuola, una volta sostanzialmente gratuita,
sono state introdotte tasse di iscrizione che nulla hanno da invidiare
alle nostre: le tasse di iscrizione all'Universita' hanno raggiunto la
cifra di circa 1000-1500 euro/anno.
Malgrado cio' la scolarizzazione e' ancora alta; riportiamo i dati per
l'intera Repubblica Federale (escluso il Kosovo), tratti dall'ultimo
bollettino dell'Associazione ABC di Vittorio Tranquilli, edito
all'inizio di dicembre 2002.
Asili infantili: 1730 istituti per 174.621 bambini dai due ai sei
anni; Scuole di base (dai 7 ai 14 anni): 1630 per 805.554 studenti;
Scuole superiori (dai 14 ai 18 anni): 519 per 738.635 studenti
Universita' per un totale di 81 facolta' concirca 200.000 studenti.
Gli istituti scolastici sono comunque assai degradati, a causa di
dieci anni di embargo e dei numerosi bombardamenti del 1999, che hanno
colpito 420 scuole di base, 15 scuole superiori e 26 facolta'
universitarie.
Per quanto riguarda le abitazioni, il continuo aumento dei prezzi
costringe le famiglie in affitto a cercare case sempre piu' piccole,
oppure alla coabitazione, in ambienti fatiscenti, spesso privi di
riscaldamento e con servizi igienici pessimi, se non addirittura
mancanti. Le famiglie che visitiamo regolarmente abitano di norma in
case mai finite e hanno a disposizione non piu' di 40 metri quadri
suddivisi in due-tre stanze, con stufa a legna in cucina.
I fondi occidentali, che arrivano con il contagocce, sono soprattutto
impiegati per la costruzione di strade, lungo le direttrici dei
corridoi 8 e 10, a riprova del fatto che il crimine maggiore della
Jugoslavia fu quello di pretendere di conservare un sistema di
ispirazione sociale e indipendente dalle multinazionali, ma anche un
crimine "geografico" poiche' la Jugoslavia si trova nel cuore di
questi corridoi.
Si consiglia la lettura del recente articolo, lungo ed esuriente, di
Michel Collon, giornalista belga; esso e' stato tradotto in Italiano a
cura dell'Associazione SOS Jugoslavia di Torino ed e' reperibile,
suddiviso in due parti, agli indirizzi
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/2163
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/2164
Informazioni sulla Zastava; nuovi possibili progetti di solidarieta';
le morti "sospette" di numerosi operai.
Nella relazione del viaggio di ottobre scorso, reperibile, tra gli
altri, sul sito delle RSU all'indirizzo
http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/doc/altri2002/2002_1014zastava.htm
erano contenuti cenni storici sulla citta' di Kragujevac e sulla
Zastava; erano presentate numerose ed aggiornate informazioni sulla
situazione occupazionale, salariale e sindacale dei lavoratori.
Questi dati non sono sostanzialmente cambiati negli ultimi due mesi;
rimandiamo quindi a quella relazione chi volesse una documentazione
aggiornata sulla situazione della fabbrica.
Di seguito riportiamo le nuove informazioni ottenute da colloqui con i
delegati.
Il consuntivo dell'anno 2002 ha visto la produzione di 12.000 vetture,
a fonte di una programmazione di 20.000 e ad una produzione di 220.000
in epoca precedente al bombardamento della fabbrica.
E' doveroso ricordare che il 7 novembre scorso a Firenze dovevano
essere presenti al Social Forum, in un incontro con i Sindacati
europei, anche due delegati dei lavoratori ed una dirigente del
Sindacato metalmeccanici nazionale jugoslavo, ma l'ambasciata Italiana
di Belgrado li ha convocati per la concessione dei visti lo stesso
giorno in cui dovevano parlare, malgrado i visti fossero stati
richiesti con molto anticipo dalla CGIL di Brescia. Si e' trattato
chiaramente di una manovra provocatoria per impedire ai rappresentanti
dei lavoratori di poter illustrare la situazione in una occasione
importante come il Social Forum Europeo.
Benche' non sia provato, si puo' ragionevolmente sospettare che dietro
questa negazione dei visti ci sia il bancarottiere americano Malcom
Bricklin, che due mesi fa, sulla base di un incredibile piano
industriale, ha proposto di acquistare la Zastava Automobili, con
l'ipotesi di produrre tra cinque anni 220.000 automobili e con la
previsione di venderne il 75% sul mercato americano ed europeo. Da
notare che questo fantasioso piano era stato presentato in pompa
magna, senza alcuna informazione preventiva ai Sindacati dei
lavoratori, dal Ministro dell'Economia e delle Privatizzazioni
Vlahovic, esattamente il giorno prima delle (fallite per il non
raggiungimento del quorum) elezioni presidenziali in Serbia, il 13
ottobre 2002.
Sul gia' citato bollettino di ABC e' riportato che Briklin era
presente a Kragujevac il 7 novembre scorso e che ha ribadito tutta
l'operazione, senza pero' presentare alcuna garanzia se non verbale.
L'accordo dovrebbe essere firmato entro il primo di marzo del 2003.
Durante l'incontro con i delegati sindacali si e' anche affrontato il
discorso del forno per la panificazione; sono stati finalmente
reperiti i locali dove installarlo (all'interno della mensa
aziendale); i lavori di adattamento dei locali sono previsti iniziare
nella meta' di gennaio 2003 e quindi potrebbe essere trasferito a
Kragujevac verso marzo.
Resta il problema, che sara' risolto a breve, di chi ne risultera'
intestatario.
E' stato inoltre affrontata la possibilita' di dare origine a
micro-progetti di solidarieta' legati alla vendita di prodotti di
artigianato tessile (tessitura in cotone e in lana) preparati da
gruppi di donne di Kragujevac e venduti sia direttamente dalle
associazioni interessate in Italia sia attraverso canali quali la rete
delle Botteghe del commercio equo e solidale.
E' stato inoltre discusso un problema gravissimo che sta emergendo
ora, tra mille omerta' e mille negazioni. Un numero al momento non
precisabile ma senz'altro assai significativo di operai che avevano
partecipato allo sgombero delle macerie dei reparti bombardati sono
recentemente deceduti, tutti con patologie collegate a malattie
epatiche. Numerosi altri sono ricoverati in ospedale con gli stessi
sintomi.
Le difficolta' nel reperire informazioni dirette e documentate sono
notevoli; si riesce a raccogliere qualche brandello di verita' da
alcuni medici, che pero' parlano solo se coperti da anonimato.
E' un altro fronte sul quale cercheremo di impegnarci.
Conclusioni
La situazione sindacale in Jugoslavia è ovviamente molto problematica.
Oltre alla Zastava sono centinaia le fabbriche bombardate e sono oggi
oltre 600.000 i lavoratori licenziati a causa delle bombe della NATO.
La Classe lavoratrice Jugoslava è quindi oggi in condizioni di
oggettiva debolezza e deve fare i conti con la necessità di una
ricostruzione post-bombardamenti che assume ormai una chiara
direttrice iper-liberista.
Lo Stato, governato da una coalizione di centro destra e fortemente
allettato e subordinato alle promesse di aiuto occidentali, ha
lasciato al libero mercato ogni decisione. Così i prezzi aumentano, le
scuole e la sanità diventano prestazioni disponibili solo per i più
ricchi, le fabbriche, le zone industriali sono all'asta di
profittatori occidentali che comprano tutto a prezzi bassi e ponendo
condizioni di lavoro inaccettabili.
Non possiamo e non dobbiamo lasciare soli, abbandonati e invisibili, i
lavoratori e le lavoratrici jugoslavi e le loro famiglie.
Dobbiamo intensificare i nostri sforzi affinche' giunga a loro la
nostra solidarieta' e fratellanza materiale e politica.
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:45:47 -0000
From: "vlaic"
RITORNO DALLA ZASTAVA DI KRAGUJEVAC
Viaggio del dicembre 2002
(resoconto di viaggio a cura di un compagno del gruppo ZASTAVA
Trieste)
Questa relazione e' suddivisa in quattro parti:
A) Cronaca del viaggio
B) Alcune informazioni generali
C) Informazioni sulla Zastava; nuovi possibili progetti di
solidarieta'; le morti "sospette' di numerosi operai.
D) Conclusioni
Cronaca del viaggio
Vi inviamo un resoconto del viaggio appena concluso alla Zastava di
Kragujevac per consegnare le adozioni a distanza, fatto dal
Coordinamento Nazionale RSU e dal Gruppo Zastava di Trieste.
Per i titolari delle nuove adozioni: stiamo procedendo ad organizzare
la spedizione delle schede relative ai bambini adottati.
Siamo partiti da Trieste venerdi' 20 dicembre alle 3 del mattino, con
un pullmino a nove posti. La delegazione era formata da 5 persone:
Alma da Firenze, Gilberto e Sergio da Trieste, Paola e Mario da Crema.
Il pullmino ci e' stato prestato (gratuitamente) da un'associazione di
solidarieta' internazionale triestina e così ci siamo dovuti accollare
le sole spese del viaggio.
Avevamo una quarantina di scatole di aiuti, alimentari, vestario e
materiale scolastico. Per gli alimentari si trattava di regali alle
famiglie jugoslave da parte delle famiglie adottanti italiane, il
vestiario era frutto di raccolte operate a Padova e Trieste, mentre il
materiale scolastico era un dono di un sottoscrittore privato.
Inoltre portavamo con noi alcune decine di costosissimi flaconi di
chemioterapici, raccolti a Trieste, per il reparto oncologico
dell'Ospedale di Kragujevac e per l'Ospedale pediatrico di Belgrado,
per un valore di 12.000 euro.
Ricordiamo che le spese di viaggio sono state direttamente sostenute
dai partecipanti, senza alcuno storno dai fondi ricevuti per le quote
di adozione a distanza da distribuire in questa occasione (come del
resto in tutti i precedenti viaggi effettuati).
Siamo arrivati a Kragujevac alle 4 del pomeriggio, senza alcun
problema durante il viaggio, se si eccettua una fitta nebbia che ci ha
accompagnato praticamente per tutto il viaggio, oltre a un freddo
intenso.
Il pomeriggio abbiamo predisposto i dettagli per l'assemblea del
giorno dopo; successivamente abbiamo visitato una famiglia in cui una
delle figlie e' colpita da una grave patologia cerebrale, e per la
quale i lavoratori della Lever di Lodi avevano fatto una
sottoscrizione staordinaria. A cena abbiamo raccolto le ultime notizie
sulla Zastava e discusso i dettagli di nuovi possibili progetti di
solidarieta' immediata.
Il mattino di sabato abbiamo distribuito le quote delle adozioni.
Erano 40, di cui 7 nuove, provenienti da lavoratori italiani che fanno
riferimento alla campagna del coordinamento RSU e di ZASTAVA Trieste.
Sono stati inoltre consegnati i fondi raccolti a Padova per far fronte
a una pesante situazione sanitaria che si e' presentata nella famiglia
di uno dei bambini adottati.
E' stata anche consegnata ad una studentessa universitaria priva di
qualsiasi reddito una quota una-tantum corrispondente ad una adozione
annuale, frutto della conversione in denaro delle spese floreali non
effettuate relativamente ad un lutto che ha colpito uno dei nostri
sottoscrittori.
Durante l'assemblea c'e' stato il solito scambio di regali tra
famiglie italiane e jugoslave e viceversa. Complici le festivita' di
fine anno, alla fine il bagagliaio del pullmino era molto simile ad
una distilleria di superalcolici.
Dopo un gustosissimo pasto a casa del vice-presidente del sindacato,
siamo partiti da Kragujevac alle 4 del pomeriggio.
A Belgrado abbiamo consegnato i chemioterapici e dopo un tranquillo
viaggio notturno siamo arrivati a Trieste alle 4 del mattino di
domenica.
I resoconti di tutti i viaggi precedenti sono reperibili su diversi
siti.
Il piu' completo e' il sito del coordinamento RSU, all'indirizzo:
http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/
seguendo il link Solidarietà con i lavoratori della Jugoslavia:
http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/guerra.htm
dove sono anche descritte in dettaglio tutte le iniziative in corso, e
riportati i resoconti anche di altre associazioni.
Il resoconto del viaggio di ottobre 2002 e' particolarmente ricco di
notizie sulla situazione dei lavoratori della Zastava.
Gli stessi resoconti sono presenti anche sul sito del Coordinamento
Nazionale per la Jugoslavia, all'indirizzo:
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
che contiene inoltre centinaia di articoli sulla situazione nei
Balcani difficilmente reperibili sulla stampa nazionale.
Alcune informazioni generali
Quello che abbiamo potuto verificare è un peggioramento continuo della
situazione materiale in cui versano le famiglie in relazione ad un
continuo inarrestabile aumento dei prezzi, soprattutto delle tariffe e
degli affitti, ma anche una tenuta della capacità di iniziativa da
parte del sindacato in difesa dei diritti dei lavoratori e per
conquistare prospettive produttive per la fabbrica.
I prezzi stanno raggiungendo livelli "occidentali" a fronte di
stipendi, quando esistono, circa dieci volte piu' bassi che in
occidente.
I dati ufficiali affermano che circa i 2/3 della popolazione serba
spende meno di 1 euro al giorno pro-capite, e che un terzo spende meno
di mezzo euro al giorno; il 60% della spesa e' per il cibo. La
disoccupazione dilaga ed interessa centinaia di migliaia di
lavoratori, su circa undici milioni e mezzo di abitanti a cui vanno
sommati circa un milione di profughi.
L'aumento vertiginoso del prezzo dell'energia elettrica ha provocato
problemi gravissimi; il riscaldamento domestico in Jugoslavia e' in
gran parte basato sull'elettricita', che prima dell'ottobre 2000
veniva considerata un bene socialmente primario e quindi erogata a
prezzi controllati; inoltre a Kragujevac era attivo il
teleriscaldamento utilizzando la centrale termica della Zastava; tale
impianto e' stato uno dei primi ad essere distrutto dai bombardamenti
del 1999.
L'aumento vertiginoso dell'elettricita' ha di fatto privato la maggior
parte della popolazione di questa fonte per il riscaldamento e
l'inverno balcanico e' decisamente freddo (sabato a mezzogiorno, a
Kragujevac con uno splendido sole il termometro segnava -7 gradi). A
Belgrado citta' sono circa 170.000 le famiglie che non possono piu'
pagare la bolletta elettrica.
A Kragujevac, durante gli inverni del 1999 e del 2000 il sindacato era
riuscito a rifornire di legna per il riscaldamento le famiglie piu'
disastrate; faceva un certo effetto vedere l'enorme piazzale di
parcheggio davanti agli stabilimenti ricoperto di cataste di legna.
Per mancanza di fondi questa operazione non e' stata ripetuta nel 2001
e neppure ovviamente per l'inverno attualmente in corso; ci si deve
rivolgere al libero mercato dove un metro cubo di legna costa
attualmente circa 30 euro. Chi scrive ha visto il sabato mattina file
lunghissime di trattori con rimorchi pieni di legna parcheggiati un
po' dovunque, sia in periferia che in centro citta'.
Questo significa anche rapido disboscamento?
Per quanto riguarda la sanita', quella pubblica, un tempo vanto della
Jugoslavia, praticamente non esiste piu' e i farmaci vanno acquistati
nelle farmacie private.
Negli ospedali, in cui manca moltissimo, si deve pagare anche la
degenza; con amarezza, la delegata dell'ufficio adozioni ci ha detto
"devi portare anche il filo per la sala operatoria".
Per quanto riguarda la scuola, una volta sostanzialmente gratuita,
sono state introdotte tasse di iscrizione che nulla hanno da invidiare
alle nostre: le tasse di iscrizione all'Universita' hanno raggiunto la
cifra di circa 1000-1500 euro/anno.
Malgrado cio' la scolarizzazione e' ancora alta; riportiamo i dati per
l'intera Repubblica Federale (escluso il Kosovo), tratti dall'ultimo
bollettino dell'Associazione ABC di Vittorio Tranquilli, edito
all'inizio di dicembre 2002.
Asili infantili: 1730 istituti per 174.621 bambini dai due ai sei
anni; Scuole di base (dai 7 ai 14 anni): 1630 per 805.554 studenti;
Scuole superiori (dai 14 ai 18 anni): 519 per 738.635 studenti
Universita' per un totale di 81 facolta' concirca 200.000 studenti.
Gli istituti scolastici sono comunque assai degradati, a causa di
dieci anni di embargo e dei numerosi bombardamenti del 1999, che hanno
colpito 420 scuole di base, 15 scuole superiori e 26 facolta'
universitarie.
Per quanto riguarda le abitazioni, il continuo aumento dei prezzi
costringe le famiglie in affitto a cercare case sempre piu' piccole,
oppure alla coabitazione, in ambienti fatiscenti, spesso privi di
riscaldamento e con servizi igienici pessimi, se non addirittura
mancanti. Le famiglie che visitiamo regolarmente abitano di norma in
case mai finite e hanno a disposizione non piu' di 40 metri quadri
suddivisi in due-tre stanze, con stufa a legna in cucina.
I fondi occidentali, che arrivano con il contagocce, sono soprattutto
impiegati per la costruzione di strade, lungo le direttrici dei
corridoi 8 e 10, a riprova del fatto che il crimine maggiore della
Jugoslavia fu quello di pretendere di conservare un sistema di
ispirazione sociale e indipendente dalle multinazionali, ma anche un
crimine "geografico" poiche' la Jugoslavia si trova nel cuore di
questi corridoi.
Si consiglia la lettura del recente articolo, lungo ed esuriente, di
Michel Collon, giornalista belga; esso e' stato tradotto in Italiano a
cura dell'Associazione SOS Jugoslavia di Torino ed e' reperibile,
suddiviso in due parti, agli indirizzi
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/2163
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/2164
Informazioni sulla Zastava; nuovi possibili progetti di solidarieta';
le morti "sospette" di numerosi operai.
Nella relazione del viaggio di ottobre scorso, reperibile, tra gli
altri, sul sito delle RSU all'indirizzo
http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/doc/altri2002/2002_1014zastava.htm
erano contenuti cenni storici sulla citta' di Kragujevac e sulla
Zastava; erano presentate numerose ed aggiornate informazioni sulla
situazione occupazionale, salariale e sindacale dei lavoratori.
Questi dati non sono sostanzialmente cambiati negli ultimi due mesi;
rimandiamo quindi a quella relazione chi volesse una documentazione
aggiornata sulla situazione della fabbrica.
Di seguito riportiamo le nuove informazioni ottenute da colloqui con i
delegati.
Il consuntivo dell'anno 2002 ha visto la produzione di 12.000 vetture,
a fonte di una programmazione di 20.000 e ad una produzione di 220.000
in epoca precedente al bombardamento della fabbrica.
E' doveroso ricordare che il 7 novembre scorso a Firenze dovevano
essere presenti al Social Forum, in un incontro con i Sindacati
europei, anche due delegati dei lavoratori ed una dirigente del
Sindacato metalmeccanici nazionale jugoslavo, ma l'ambasciata Italiana
di Belgrado li ha convocati per la concessione dei visti lo stesso
giorno in cui dovevano parlare, malgrado i visti fossero stati
richiesti con molto anticipo dalla CGIL di Brescia. Si e' trattato
chiaramente di una manovra provocatoria per impedire ai rappresentanti
dei lavoratori di poter illustrare la situazione in una occasione
importante come il Social Forum Europeo.
Benche' non sia provato, si puo' ragionevolmente sospettare che dietro
questa negazione dei visti ci sia il bancarottiere americano Malcom
Bricklin, che due mesi fa, sulla base di un incredibile piano
industriale, ha proposto di acquistare la Zastava Automobili, con
l'ipotesi di produrre tra cinque anni 220.000 automobili e con la
previsione di venderne il 75% sul mercato americano ed europeo. Da
notare che questo fantasioso piano era stato presentato in pompa
magna, senza alcuna informazione preventiva ai Sindacati dei
lavoratori, dal Ministro dell'Economia e delle Privatizzazioni
Vlahovic, esattamente il giorno prima delle (fallite per il non
raggiungimento del quorum) elezioni presidenziali in Serbia, il 13
ottobre 2002.
Sul gia' citato bollettino di ABC e' riportato che Briklin era
presente a Kragujevac il 7 novembre scorso e che ha ribadito tutta
l'operazione, senza pero' presentare alcuna garanzia se non verbale.
L'accordo dovrebbe essere firmato entro il primo di marzo del 2003.
Durante l'incontro con i delegati sindacali si e' anche affrontato il
discorso del forno per la panificazione; sono stati finalmente
reperiti i locali dove installarlo (all'interno della mensa
aziendale); i lavori di adattamento dei locali sono previsti iniziare
nella meta' di gennaio 2003 e quindi potrebbe essere trasferito a
Kragujevac verso marzo.
Resta il problema, che sara' risolto a breve, di chi ne risultera'
intestatario.
E' stato inoltre affrontata la possibilita' di dare origine a
micro-progetti di solidarieta' legati alla vendita di prodotti di
artigianato tessile (tessitura in cotone e in lana) preparati da
gruppi di donne di Kragujevac e venduti sia direttamente dalle
associazioni interessate in Italia sia attraverso canali quali la rete
delle Botteghe del commercio equo e solidale.
E' stato inoltre discusso un problema gravissimo che sta emergendo
ora, tra mille omerta' e mille negazioni. Un numero al momento non
precisabile ma senz'altro assai significativo di operai che avevano
partecipato allo sgombero delle macerie dei reparti bombardati sono
recentemente deceduti, tutti con patologie collegate a malattie
epatiche. Numerosi altri sono ricoverati in ospedale con gli stessi
sintomi.
Le difficolta' nel reperire informazioni dirette e documentate sono
notevoli; si riesce a raccogliere qualche brandello di verita' da
alcuni medici, che pero' parlano solo se coperti da anonimato.
E' un altro fronte sul quale cercheremo di impegnarci.
Conclusioni
La situazione sindacale in Jugoslavia è ovviamente molto problematica.
Oltre alla Zastava sono centinaia le fabbriche bombardate e sono oggi
oltre 600.000 i lavoratori licenziati a causa delle bombe della NATO.
La Classe lavoratrice Jugoslava è quindi oggi in condizioni di
oggettiva debolezza e deve fare i conti con la necessità di una
ricostruzione post-bombardamenti che assume ormai una chiara
direttrice iper-liberista.
Lo Stato, governato da una coalizione di centro destra e fortemente
allettato e subordinato alle promesse di aiuto occidentali, ha
lasciato al libero mercato ogni decisione. Così i prezzi aumentano, le
scuole e la sanità diventano prestazioni disponibili solo per i più
ricchi, le fabbriche, le zone industriali sono all'asta di
profittatori occidentali che comprano tutto a prezzi bassi e ponendo
condizioni di lavoro inaccettabili.
Non possiamo e non dobbiamo lasciare soli, abbandonati e invisibili, i
lavoratori e le lavoratrici jugoslavi e le loro famiglie.
Dobbiamo intensificare i nostri sforzi affinche' giunga a loro la
nostra solidarieta' e fratellanza materiale e politica.
Subject: New Year at The Hague: President Milosevic's wishes
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 02:09:50 +0100
From: "Vladimir Krsljanin"
COURAGE, EFFICIENCY, INITIATIVE, PERSISTENCE
and happiness for your families, were the wishes of President Slobodan
Milosevic for the New Year sent to his comrades and associates from
SLOBODA/Freedom Association.
The wishes were expressed with his always vivid and sound
spirit that gives strength and self-confidence to everyone who had
luck to get in direct contact with him.
As for our concerns, they are still and extremely big. At
present, we are in uneasy struggle with absent (due to Christmas
brake) Tribunal stuff to finally get the approval for the team of
medical specialists from the Military Medical Academy in Belgrade to
go to The Hague and make necessary medical examinations of the
President's health, after the last deterioration. The original request
for this visit was sent on November 9.
Many of those who sent their written appeals to the
Tribunal receive these days replies. The lies told in these replies
about the medical care provided to President Milosevic should be
exposed.
Pressure should also concentrate on UN High Commissioner
for Human Rights in Geneva, who should react immediately and soundly
on human rights violations within the UN system.
Weekends and long holidays are the time when we all
particularly worry. One can not forget that Dr Milan Kovacevic,
Jasenovac survivor, with known heart disease, died at The Hague in a
weekend night, after hours of agony, with no one even attempted to
help. Here are few lines from BBC News report of August 1, 1998:
"...tribunal spokesman Christian Chartier denied that the
tribunal was lax in its care or surveillance of jailed suspects. He
said it recognised the stress they were under, and said that Dr
Kovacevic had been under regular care by a heart specialist. (...)
The [defense] legal team also argued that their client
should be released because he was suffering from a life threatening
heart condition. "
Does this sound familiar?
*********************************************
RECENT INTERNATIONAL REACTIONS AND APPEALS
1. International Action Center, New York
2. German Communist Party
3. A Slovenian MP at WEU Parliamentary Assembly
4. New Worker on the London support meeting
5. Journal of the Dutch Bar Association on the process
6. CANA London
7. Reactions on a Guardian article on The Hague process
8. A Column from Antiwar.com
*********************************************
1. International Action Center, New York
Free Slobodan Milosevic!
The International Action Center demands the immediate
release of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic
from detention in NATO's maximum-security prison near The
Hague in the Netherlands.
Milosevic was kidnapped and transported from his homeland
to stand trial for alleged war crimes during NATO's wars
on the Balkans. He's been representing himself since
mid-February at The Hague, where the U.S.-funded pro-NATO
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
sits.
The former president has defiantly refused to recognize
the authority of a court that was illegally
established--international war crimes tribunals can be
constituted only by treaty among nations--and is waging a
strong political and legal defense, often turning the
tables on pro-NATO prosecutors.
Milosevic, who suffers from cardiovascular illness, has
been conducting a convincing defense, but his life is
being endangered. Exhausting, all-day court sessions, and
the lack of specialized medical care, has worsened his
health, in addition to the repressive conditions of his
incarceration. The NATO prison has, in fact, already
caused the deaths of inmates through inhumane treatment
and lack of proper medical care.
Milosevic was president of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia (FRY) in 1999 when that country heroically
attempted to resist the latest imperialist aggression in
the region on behalf of big business. The FRY was the
last remaining obstacle to total re-colonization of the
Balkans.
The 78-day terror bombing unleashed against the FRY
deliberately targeted not only the Yugoslav military but
also bridges, life-sustaining infrastructure and
civilians. Thousands perished in the high-tech pounding.
Whole industries, hospitals, schools and other
institutions vital to life were devastated. The Chinese
Embassy was purposely attacked, as was Radio-TV Serbia and
Novi Sad TV. All were occupied at the time.
Since 1991, when the Clinton White House and the U.S.
Congress instigated civil war in the Balkans, tens of
thousands have perished. Multi-national unity has been
ripped apart for capitalist exploitation, neo-colonial
plunder and NATO's expansion east.
The U.S.-led NATO alliance now needs scapegoats and show
trials to justify their murderous aggression on
Yugoslavia. The Hague tribunal was established to deflect
attention from the fact that Washington and its NATO
allies are the real war criminals in the Balkans--not
Slobodan Milosevic who, as the symbol of resistance, was
first demonized and then abducted to stand trial.
Ever wonder what became of the "mass graves" that NATO
used to justify the bombing of Yugoslavia and occupation
of Kosovo?
Milosevic has been forced to work under harsh conditions.
But he has still succeeded in turning the show trial into
an expose of NATO's crimes against Yugoslavia-crimes
against humanity and crimes against peace.
The International Action Center joins other organizations
and individuals worldwide in demanding in one voice that
Slobodan Milosevic be immediately released.
Solidarity and support comes from the Baghdad Conference
of May 7-9, 2002; May 17-19, 2002 European Peace Forum;
Dec. 11, 2002 Declaration of the State Duma of the Federal
Assembly of the Russian Federation; 10,000 protesters at
the Nov.19, 2002 demonstration in Belgrade, the Yugoslav
capital; doctors' organizations in Germany; and members of
the International Committee for the Defense of Slobodan
Milosevic.
Free Milosevic now! Abolish NATO!
International Action Center
December 17, 2002
*********************************************
2. German Communist Party
FOR THE ABOLITION OF THE "HAGUE TRIBUNAL" -
FOR THE IMMEDIATE RELEASE OF SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC!
(Resolution adopted by the16th Congress of the German Communist Party
(DKP)
in Duesseldorf, December 1st, 2002)
The German Communist Party demands the immediate abolition of the
so-called "tribunal" for the former Yugoslavia.
This "tribunal" was created by an unauthorized organ - UN Security
Council, in violation of the UN Chapter. It is not a legal
institution, but the continuation of the NATO aggression, poorly
camouflaged with pseudo-juridical requisites. Its purpose is not only
to fabricate false legitimacy for the illegal NATO-war, but also to
prepare new wars. The US at the same time negates the jurisdiction of
the legally founded International Criminal Court, announcing even the
military intervention in The Netherlands if a US citizen would be
brought before the ICC, presses Yugoslavia to cooperate with the NATO
court martial and threatens to establish another ad-hoc-tribunal in
the case of Iraq.
By his sovereign appearance at The Hague, Slobodan Milosevic produced
a fiasco for the NATO prosecutor. Since the "tribunal" cannot defeat
Slobodan Milosevic by "legal" means, it tries to threaten his health
and life by inhuman court and prison conditions. We support the appeal
of German and international physicians that Slobodan Milosevic has to
be released in order to get adequate therapy in Yugoslavia by the
doctors who took care about his health for years.
After, at the beginning of the "trial" even mainstream journalists had
to draw parallels with the German fascist Reichstag-fire trial against
Georgi Dimitrov, there is media silence about The Hague process now.
The many years of media demonization of Slobodan Milosevic was part of
war propaganda.
Today, Slobodan Milosevic is the highest ranking political prisoner of
NATO and as such he deserves solidarity of all anti-imperialist
forces.
The German Communist Party supports the struggle of Slobodan Milosevic
and the Socialist Party of Serbia against the "tribunal" of NATO
criminals.
The NATO aggressors have to be put on trial, Yugoslavia needs to get
comprehensive reparations for war damages!
We demand the immediate abolition of the "Hague Tribunal" and the
immediate release of Slobodan Milosevic and of all prisoners of the
illegal "Tribunal"!
*********************************************
3. A Slovenian MP at WEU Parliamentary Assembly
Mr. Zmago Jelincic, president of the Slovenian National Party put two
unpleasant questions to the leading representatives of NATO. The
answers were without answer. But the questions become the main subject
of discussion in the couloirs during the whole session. We quote the
questions from the official transcript.
ASSEMBLY OF WESTERN EUROPEAN UNION
THE INTERIM EUROPEAN SECURITY AND DEFENCE ASSEMBLY
FORTY-EIGHTH ORDINARY SESSION, Paris, 2-4 December 2002
Mr Antonio MARTINS DA CRUZ, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Portugal,
Chairman-in-Office of the WEU Council
Mr. JELINCIC: Portugal is soon to lead the Organisation for Security
and Cooperation in Europe, and because it is not possible to create
stability, security and peace without discovering the reality of past
events, I should like to put the following question: The medical
condition of the former Yugoslav President, Mr. Slobodan Milosevic,
has seriously deteriorated, to the degree to which it is questionable
whether he will even survive to the end of the trial in The Hague.
Given that, we must ask ourselves what is in the best interests of
truth. Will Mr. Milosevic's death contribute to a fair trial or to
the credibility of the international court? Will he still be able to
reveal information that is crucial to the truth? I think not. With his
death, the truth will be lost. Do you not think that it would be for
the best if the Assembly appealed to the international community and
competent organisations to release Mr. Milosevic, enabling him to
receive proper medical care?
Mr Guenther ALTENBURG, NATO Assistant Secretary-General for Political
Affairs, representing Lord ROBERTSON, Secretary General
Mr. JELINCIC: On the subject of the widening of the EU and NATO, we
cannot avoid the question of security in the neighbouring countries.
The current Yugoslav Government has no trust among the
people - with justification, it would seem. Violence and criminality
in Yugoslavia are increasing day by day, and the demands of the
separatist minority parties are getting more and more recognition. On
the other hand, the government is doing nothing to establish a stable
and prosperous environment. It behaves passively, and even cooperates
with those parties. Such a situation could easily lead to further
violence, such as that caused by Albanian separatists in the
recent past. Yugoslavia in its current state cannot afford to fall
into another war, but that is bound to happen if nothing is done. Due
to its inappropriate behavior, the current government has lost the
confidence of the nation that elected it. There must be new elections
to clarify the situation. Naturally, the government will not declare
elections, so it is in the hands of responsible national organisations
to call for new elections. Do you agree that Europe should demand the
clarification of the political situation in Yugoslavia through
elections?
*********************************************
4. New Worker on the London support meeting
New Worker Online
New Worker International News - 20/12/2002
Defend the life of Slobodan Milosevic!
by Elizabeth Farrell
SLOBODAN Milosevic faces a torrent of
lies and abuse in the dock of the
so-called International War Crimes
Tribunal in The Hague. This is beginning
to seriously damage the health of the
former Yugoslav President, who had
been diagnosed with a heart condition
and suffers form very high blood
pressure. He is not only fighting for
justice, he is also fighting for his
life, warned the International Committee
to Defend Slobodan Milosevic at a
meeting in London Conway Hall last week.
Paul Davidson chaired the meeting, and
speakers included Brian Denny from
the Campaign Against Euro-Federalism,
Serbian activist Stan Gasparovski and
Christopher Black, Milosevich's legal advisor.
Denny raised his concerns about the
'Corpus Durus' system that is used in
the trial, which means that the judge
is also the prosecutor. There is no
jury, and - unlike any trial in Britain
- the defendant is guilty until
proven innocent. He also mentioned the
conditions under which Milosevic is
imprisoned.
"The days in court are long, and Milosevic
is only given a sandwich and a
bad coffee for lunch. By the time he gets
back, he has missed his evening meal."
Stan Gasparovski, who had recently
been to The Hague to attend the trial,
told the meeting about that visit.
He warned us about Milosevich's health,
saying that his heart condition,
'Essential hypertension with secondary
organ damage and hypertrophy of the
left ventricle', is life threatening and
needs immediate treatment. Stan pointed
out that, so far, Milosevic has only
been allowed to see the prison GP,
and has been refused an examination by
specialists, and medical treatment.
Despite all this, he said, "Milosevic
is very determined and confident -
because he has the truth on his side."
The last speaker was Chris Black,
Milosevic's legal advisor.
He told us that Nato's main weapon was
to demonise the Serbs and destroy
Milosevic, by using propaganda to
justify their aggression against
Yugoslavia.
He also pointed out that the prosecution's
main witness, former head of
Serbia's Secret Services Rado Markovich,
spoke in favour of Milosevic
instead of against him. When he was
asked whether Milosevic had given orders
to start ethnic cleansing of Albanians
in Kosovo, Markovic replied:
"No such orders were ever given, and
no ethnic cleansing took place."
The only evidence against Milosevic,
Chris Black rightfully said, "is that
he is not guilty."
To join the struggle for justice for Milosevic, contact the
International
Committee in his defence at www.icdsm.org
*********************************************
5. Advocatenblad - Journal of the Dutch Bar Association on the process
The appointment of the Friends of the court by The Yugoslavia tribunal
countervails Mr Milosevic's right to conduct his own defense. This is
the view advocated by N.M.P. Steijnen, an attorney of Milosevic in the
"legal affairs outside the tribunal".
N.M.P. Steijnen, attorney in Zeist and member of the ICDSM.
The right to conduct one's own defense
("to defend himself in person") is a
minimum basic right (Art. 6 ECHR,
Art. 14 ICCPR; see Art. 26 ICTY Statute).
It is doubtful whether counsel can
ever be imposed. The Dutch system goes a
long way toward recognizing this right
but does not make it absolute, as is
demonstrated by the imposition of a
counsel in criminal trials in the last
instance. The European Court also allows
the legislator to impose a counsel
in some cases where the nature of the
proceedings so requires. On the other
hand, if the right to defend oneself
has been explicitly recognized in
certain kinds of proceedings (as in
the trials before the ICTY) this right
has to be respected in full. This
principle should also apply to Milosevic,
who has repeatedly emphasized that
he wants to conduct his own defense.
Objective perspective
The tribunal has now appointed three
amici curiae in Milosevic's case at the
request of the Dutch attorney Wladimiroff.
In Advocatenblad 2001-16 (21
September 2001) Wladimiroff explained
his appointment: "It seemed to me that
someone like that [amicus curiae] could
also see to the defense in
Milosevic's case, with the difference
that Milosevic is not the client. We
give the objective perspective of the
defense independently of the suspect."
(p. 621) It is of course a profound
mystery how any defense can exist
without a client. It is equally
nonsensical to say that something called
"the objective perspective of the
defense" could exist "independently of the
suspect". If it is not Wladimiroff
and his co-amici who decide what the
"objective perspective of the defense"
is, then who is it? This goes to show
that the "objective perspective of the
defense" is perfectly subjective and,
as a bonus, "independent of the suspect",
i.e. quite impervious to what the
suspect thinks about it.
Why has the ICTY decided to allow such
a construction? The motivation given
in the decision of appointment is that
it was considered "desirable" and
"important to secure a fair trial". The
tribunal could thus give the
impression of being properly concerned
about Milosevic's "fair trial". That
was of utmost importance in order to
mask what happened to the right "to
have adequate facilities for the preparation
of his defence" (Art. 6 ECHR,
Art. 14 ICCPR and Art. 21 of the ICTY Statute).
Adequate facilities
Milosevic wanted to conduct his own
defense but did not waive his right to
have adequate facilities for the preparation
of his defence. Already during
his detention in Belgrade and before
his transfer to The Hague he had at his
disposal an international team of
attorneys, ICDSM, to assist him in the
preparation of his defense. However,
the administration of the tribunal has
been systematic in its attempts to
sabotage and prevent Milosevic's
cooperation with this team.
First, the access to Milosevic was
limited as much as possible by simply
refusing to respond to a request for
admission. If, after repeated requests,
the permission for a visit was finally
granted, it was done out of
magnanimity far transcending anything
to which the tribunal was even
remotely obliged. The length of the
visit was then severely limited,
confidential contact was made impossible
and the exchange of documents was
prohibited. One often found out that
the correspondence sent to Milosevic
did not reach him. Ultimately, the
Canadian lawyer Chris Black was
completely banned by the administration
of the tribunal, because he had
relayed some statements made by
Milosevic to the Dutch press.
Finally the tribunal decided, without
any notice and without consulting
those concerned, to appoint Ramsey
Clark and Livingston as Milosevic's
"permanent legal advisers" with the
exclusive right to function in this
capacity. Clark, who is associated with
the ICDSM, was incapable of crossing
the ocean frequently simply due to his
age, whereas Livingston is unknown to
both the ICDSM and Milosevic. From the
outset it was quite clear that this
solution was completely unacceptable to
Milosevic. With this strategem the
administration of the tribunal managed
to close the door definitively to the
legal advisers who Milosevic had chosen
for himself.
I was subjected to more or less the same
treatment, but because I worked as
Milosevic's lawyer in Dutch legal
proceedings, my contact with the client
could not be completely banned. The
limited access that I was granted was
subject to the explicit restriction that
we could discuss only the Dutch
legal proceedings and every contact was
being monitored. The latter
restriction was removed only after
Milosevic authorized me to initiate legal
proceedings in the European Court of Human
Rights. Even then, the
administration of the tribunal was
willing to change its mind only when
pressured with impeding interlocutory
injunction proceedings and only after
it had reminded us that the tribunal was
not strictly speaking bound by this
Agreement, because it was not a party
to the treaty.
When the trial began, Milosevic was
also in a desperately isolated position.
He had only a fixed telephone line with
his party rank and file in Belgrade
and his two personal lawyers Tomanovic
and Ognjanovic. After repeated
complaints, the tribunal relaxed somewhat
the contacts with the Yugoslav
lawyers. This does not mean that Milosevic's
enormous handicap in comparison
to the powerful and extensive machinery
of the Prosecution has narrowed. Mil
osevic tries to make the best of his
preparation whatever it takes.
Outmanoeuvred
With the appointment of the amici curiae
all this got camouflaged. First and
foremost, the amici curiae are part of
the household of the tribunal, which
controls them, whereas the ICDSM advisers
belong to the Milosevic camp and
are beyond the tribunal's disciplinary
measures. The three amici were
granted all the rights which are normally
afforded to the chosen lawyer,
including the right to table various
"motions" and make "submissions",
perform cross-examination and further
act "in any other way designated
counsel considers appropriate in order
to secure a fair trial". The tribunal
thus has a number of pseudolawyers,
who countervail Milosevic's procedural
strategy contingent on the illegality
of the tribunal.
An example. Milosevic has repeatedly
insisted that his abduction from
Yugoslavia and his detention in
Scheveningen were illegal and he regarded
the tribunal as an illegal institution.
The Trial Chamber finally asked
Milosevic to set all this in writing.
Immediately the amici curiae also set
to work in order to express their
objections to the legality, but unlike
Milosevic, they called this paper
explicitly a "preliminary motion". This
way, they gave the tribunal the chance
to regard the papers by Milosevic and
by the amici curiae as a joint
"preliminary motion" without any distinction,
and hence as a document subject to the
rules of procedure of the tribunal.
This way, the tribunal could regard
the subsequent review as a formal
session, which could also look into the
question of habeas corpus, which is
not subject to any specific rule in the
tribunal's basic documents.
Milosevic was thus quite unaware that
it was now possible for the tribunal
to rule on the request of habeas corpus.
He was caught unprepared and was
outmanoeuvred on this point.
Munition
The statements attributed to Wladimiroff
by the Trial Chamber have again
caused Milosevic to take action against
the amici. The discharge of
Wladimiroff is not the ultimate objective,
the ultimate objective is the
discharge of all the amici. In spite of
the recent discharge, Milosevic
wants the disciplinary organs of the
Dutch law society to make a ruling on
Wladimiroff's conduct, which he expects
will provide munition against the
rest of the amici.
Endnote on the functions of Mr Steijnen
In this connection he appeared in
interlocutory injunction proceedings which
Milosevic had initiated against the
Dutch State after his transfer to and
detention in The Hague; in this
connection, he was authorized by Milosevic
to initiate proceedings in the ECHR
together with the French attorney
Vergès, the Canadian lawyer Black and others.
*********************************************
6. CANA London
To the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
24th December 2002
Dear Sirs
I refer to reports which I have received tonight that the health of
the former President of Yugoslavia, Mr Milosevic is again worsening, &
the Tribunal has done nothing, despite protests from all over the
world, to ensure that the prisoner is seen by competent specialist
physicians independent of the Tribunal & neither will the Tribunal
grant bail.
I have written to the Tribunal on previous occasions, without
receiving any acknowledgement, pointing out that the decisions of
Judge May constitute prima facie a criminal case under section 134 of
the Criminal Justice Act 1988. He is complicit in torture, & not
merely complicit but the main instrument.
I have told the Law Officers that I will be lodging as soon as
convenient an Information @ Highgate Magistrates Court with the view
to the prosecution of the said judge May.
The Information is currently being prepared but should Mr Milosevic
die I will upgrade it to a charge of murder against both Judge May &
the other judges hearing this case.
I think the behaviour of your Court is deplorable. Primary
responsibility is on the Netherlands Government for hosting your Court
& on the United Nation Security Council for refusing to engage in any
form of monitoring of their own creation. We believe an enquiry should
be instituted by the Security Council & the General Assembly into
(inter alia) the illegal financing of this Court, (the expenses of
which should be met from the normal UN budget, but @ least in part
they are met by Mr Soros. Is this not correct?)
We also blame Amnesty International, which organisation has altogether
failed in terms of protecting the interests of prisoners of
conscience. We call on AI organisations world wide to take up such an
obvious case of political persecution & to hear the concerns of so
many people about this farce of international justice, the WTE,
(Washington's Tribunal in Europe).
CANA UK believes that Mr Milosevic's life is in imminent danger, not
least because of the imminence of the pre-planned aggression on Iraq.
The American Government has taken a leaf out of the Stalinist book.
Trotsky was finally eliminated in 1940, as the German armies were
marching through France. There is no doubt in my mind that the object
of the Tribunal, now that it has not been able to find a case against
the President, is to kill him, in the most expeditious & least
publicised manner possible & also at the most opportune time.
Judge May's tenure @ the Hague, in his NATO- EU role, of supreme
torturer, as well as prosecutor, judge & in all probability
executioner, should go down in history as the most obscene
misapplication of judicial power by a British judge anywhere in the
world since Judge Jeffreys & the Bloody Assize.
British judges have built up an entirely fallacious reputation for
being fair minded, when in fact as a group, & with few exceptions,
they are invariably corrupt, as Judge May's handling of this so called
trial proves, & as do many other cases known to me.
The Law Officers consistently refuse to investigate all the numerous
instances of judicial corruption brought to their attention every
year. If they are indolent, in their refusal to grasp this nettle,
this is not surprising, when the UK judiciary as a collectivity
believe themselves to be above the law. The psycho-pathological
problems which afflict them as a caste are accentuated in the case of
Judge May as he is currently removed from the jurisdiction, (although
he remains an official of the UK Government - whatever undertakings he
may have entered into with regard to this continent so called Court,
he remains bound by judicial oath to Her Majesty).
I also paste below a copy of a letter sent to the Guardian + copy to
Geoffrey Robertson QC which highlights a deficiency in the Court as
an institution, quite apart from its procedures.
Yours Sincerely
William Spring
*********************************************
7. Reactions on a Guardian article on The Hague process
(Sent but unpublished letters to the Editor)
*****************
from Colin Meade
53 Florence Rd
London
N4 4 4DJ
Dear Sir,
In his article on the Milosevic trial (19 December), Geoffrey
Robertson QC writes as if he knows that Milosevic is the main author
of the tragic events in the former Yugoslavia. If he has this
information, he should pass it on to the Hague Prosecutors, who
clearly have no such evidence.
In his self-defence, Mr Milosevic has effectively demolished the
received wisdom about his country's fate, using arguments and facts.
He has among other things destroyed the credibility of many witnesses
claiming to be "victims of his policies". His performance should lead
rational people to question their prejudices.
As for a "fair trial", there can be no such thing without the
requirement for the parties to produce compelling and consistent
evidence and the presumption of innocence. In relation to the trial
of Milosevic, far too many responsible people seem to have forgotten
these elementary principles.
Yours faithfully
Colin Meade
*****************
To the Editor
The Guardian
Dear Sir
There is at least one colossal flaw in the logic of Geoffrey
Robertson's argument, (Guardian 19th December) favouring the standards
of supposed international justice exemplified by the International
Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. No justice can be
justice if not applied equally to all. I am not a Yugoslav citizen.
My first concern isn't with Mr Milosevic, but with the activities of
my Government, of Blair, Cook, & Straw, for example, all of whom I
regard as war criminals.
In the case of the first two, in May 1999 I sought to press criminal
charges before Magistrates, one, for encouraging terrorism in a
foreign state contrary to section Five of the Criminal Justice Act,
and two, for conspiracy to murder & to cause explosions in the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia. The Magistrates declined to issue the
proceedings citing insufficient evidence.
What I find remarkable is the Hague Court entertaining the testimony
of NATO war criminals, when in 1999 NATO didn't even have the figleaf
of a United Nations resolution to legitimise military action. How can
such a Court be just, which only hears the accusations of the victors,
themselves law breakers, & ignores the cries of the vanquished? Don't
dead or mutilated Yugoslavs, Afghans, or Palestinians, nor those
shortly to suffer in Iraq, count for anything? Don't they deserve an
advocate? If they do, it shouldn't be Mr Robertson. His view of
justice is inexorably skewed, in favour of wealth, power, & the
ruthless use of propaganda & military force by humanitarian warriors.
Yours sincerely
William Spring
CANA UK Christians Against Nato Aggression UK
1 Scales Road London N17 9HB
Telephone 0208 376 1454
*****************
re: Playing the Odds in the Justice Game
by Geoffrey Robertson QC
Dec 19, 2002--The Guardian
After reading Mr Robertson's account of his brief visit to The Hague
Tribunal one can only assume that this field trip to 'the aquarium' is
his only experience with the Milosevic trial--and that his ever being
weaned from the tit of the British mainstream media is not very
likely--if not completely beyond hope.
All his talk of fairness, even excessive judicial fairness [sic], the
moral implications of procedural niceties, such as Milosevic's
cross-examining witnesses actually ceding legitimacy to the Tribunal,
and linkages between WWII Germany and Serbia/Yugoslavia of the 90s, Dr
Seselj's Radical Party of Serbia and Fascism, and Hermann Goering and
Slobodan Milosevic, bespeak a superficial sense of recent history and
a misunderstanding of contemporary geopolitical forces so contorted by
the ignorance and expediency of the consensus reality of pop culture
as to be more befitting a lager lout than a QC.
The illegality of the foundations and procedures of the Tribunal are
of no concern to Robertson: Its birth by untimely ripping from the
desiccated womb of a gang-raped and brain dead UN-- midwifed by Mad
Albright and her seven dwarves (Clinton, Rubin, Cohen, Zimmerman,
Holbrooke, Gelbardt, and Soros); its outrageous private financing by
the chief sponsors of global terrorism: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran,
Turkey, and the US; its total neglect of the very time-honoured
principles, i.e., presumption of innocence, the right to face one's
accusers, equal consideration before the law, that Robertson seems so
proud to represent--and not just their neglect, but the aggressive
inversion of these principles each time Richard May berates President
Milosevic for his cross-examinations and cuts off is mike, each time a
hopelessly under-rehearsed secret witness (but usually a spy, warlord
or terrorist, very well known to all in Serbia!) is fuzzed over the
tv monitors, and each time stale and thoroughly refuted media lies,
like Roy Gutman's award-winning hearsay of the Bosnian Death and Rape
Camps or of the misattributed Croatian, Bosnian Muslim and KLA
atrocities, are presented as fresh-baked . . . media lies: All of
these are beyond Robertson's considerations.
He seems concerned with "Justice" and especially "International
Justice".
And certainly he is exercised over the a priori villain Milosevic's
not turning the court's kindness, its fairness, into its weakness by
demonstrating just how this Tribunal, rather than adjudicating crimes
against humanity, actually covers up and perpetuates such crimes. He
says nothing of how the Tribunal has refused to hear of the monstrous
acts committed by its sponsors against the people of Serbia and
Yugoslavia and against the person of Slobodan Milosevic, first with
their generous application of Depleted Uranium missiles and now with
their iatrogenocidal concerns for the state of his health.
Obviously Maitre Robertson exists in some para-reality; some ethereal
world connected to the physical world that constrains the rest of us
working stiffs only by a Murdochian/Orwellian news network where the
interests served are neither those of Historical Truth nor
International Justice nor even the Reality Principle, but only those
of naked, ugly Geopolitical Power.
He seems to think that if he can stand with the strong, by parroting
their infantile, delusional myths of how things are, he will be all
right.
But I'm afraid, from start to finish, he is dead wrong.
Mick Collins
Cirque Minime/Paris
*********************************************
8. A Column from Antiwar.com
More Dirty Lies
Courtesy of The Hague Inquisition
(Nebojsa Malic)
[to be found at: http://www.antiwar.com ]
*********************************************
To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sps.org.yu/ (official SPS website)
http://www.belgrade-forum.org/ (forum for the world of equals)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)
icdsm temporary address:
http://emperor.vwh.net/icdsm/index.htm
for your donations:
http://emperor.vwh.net/icdsm/donations.htm
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 02:09:50 +0100
From: "Vladimir Krsljanin"
COURAGE, EFFICIENCY, INITIATIVE, PERSISTENCE
and happiness for your families, were the wishes of President Slobodan
Milosevic for the New Year sent to his comrades and associates from
SLOBODA/Freedom Association.
The wishes were expressed with his always vivid and sound
spirit that gives strength and self-confidence to everyone who had
luck to get in direct contact with him.
As for our concerns, they are still and extremely big. At
present, we are in uneasy struggle with absent (due to Christmas
brake) Tribunal stuff to finally get the approval for the team of
medical specialists from the Military Medical Academy in Belgrade to
go to The Hague and make necessary medical examinations of the
President's health, after the last deterioration. The original request
for this visit was sent on November 9.
Many of those who sent their written appeals to the
Tribunal receive these days replies. The lies told in these replies
about the medical care provided to President Milosevic should be
exposed.
Pressure should also concentrate on UN High Commissioner
for Human Rights in Geneva, who should react immediately and soundly
on human rights violations within the UN system.
Weekends and long holidays are the time when we all
particularly worry. One can not forget that Dr Milan Kovacevic,
Jasenovac survivor, with known heart disease, died at The Hague in a
weekend night, after hours of agony, with no one even attempted to
help. Here are few lines from BBC News report of August 1, 1998:
"...tribunal spokesman Christian Chartier denied that the
tribunal was lax in its care or surveillance of jailed suspects. He
said it recognised the stress they were under, and said that Dr
Kovacevic had been under regular care by a heart specialist. (...)
The [defense] legal team also argued that their client
should be released because he was suffering from a life threatening
heart condition. "
Does this sound familiar?
*********************************************
RECENT INTERNATIONAL REACTIONS AND APPEALS
1. International Action Center, New York
2. German Communist Party
3. A Slovenian MP at WEU Parliamentary Assembly
4. New Worker on the London support meeting
5. Journal of the Dutch Bar Association on the process
6. CANA London
7. Reactions on a Guardian article on The Hague process
8. A Column from Antiwar.com
*********************************************
1. International Action Center, New York
Free Slobodan Milosevic!
The International Action Center demands the immediate
release of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic
from detention in NATO's maximum-security prison near The
Hague in the Netherlands.
Milosevic was kidnapped and transported from his homeland
to stand trial for alleged war crimes during NATO's wars
on the Balkans. He's been representing himself since
mid-February at The Hague, where the U.S.-funded pro-NATO
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
sits.
The former president has defiantly refused to recognize
the authority of a court that was illegally
established--international war crimes tribunals can be
constituted only by treaty among nations--and is waging a
strong political and legal defense, often turning the
tables on pro-NATO prosecutors.
Milosevic, who suffers from cardiovascular illness, has
been conducting a convincing defense, but his life is
being endangered. Exhausting, all-day court sessions, and
the lack of specialized medical care, has worsened his
health, in addition to the repressive conditions of his
incarceration. The NATO prison has, in fact, already
caused the deaths of inmates through inhumane treatment
and lack of proper medical care.
Milosevic was president of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia (FRY) in 1999 when that country heroically
attempted to resist the latest imperialist aggression in
the region on behalf of big business. The FRY was the
last remaining obstacle to total re-colonization of the
Balkans.
The 78-day terror bombing unleashed against the FRY
deliberately targeted not only the Yugoslav military but
also bridges, life-sustaining infrastructure and
civilians. Thousands perished in the high-tech pounding.
Whole industries, hospitals, schools and other
institutions vital to life were devastated. The Chinese
Embassy was purposely attacked, as was Radio-TV Serbia and
Novi Sad TV. All were occupied at the time.
Since 1991, when the Clinton White House and the U.S.
Congress instigated civil war in the Balkans, tens of
thousands have perished. Multi-national unity has been
ripped apart for capitalist exploitation, neo-colonial
plunder and NATO's expansion east.
The U.S.-led NATO alliance now needs scapegoats and show
trials to justify their murderous aggression on
Yugoslavia. The Hague tribunal was established to deflect
attention from the fact that Washington and its NATO
allies are the real war criminals in the Balkans--not
Slobodan Milosevic who, as the symbol of resistance, was
first demonized and then abducted to stand trial.
Ever wonder what became of the "mass graves" that NATO
used to justify the bombing of Yugoslavia and occupation
of Kosovo?
Milosevic has been forced to work under harsh conditions.
But he has still succeeded in turning the show trial into
an expose of NATO's crimes against Yugoslavia-crimes
against humanity and crimes against peace.
The International Action Center joins other organizations
and individuals worldwide in demanding in one voice that
Slobodan Milosevic be immediately released.
Solidarity and support comes from the Baghdad Conference
of May 7-9, 2002; May 17-19, 2002 European Peace Forum;
Dec. 11, 2002 Declaration of the State Duma of the Federal
Assembly of the Russian Federation; 10,000 protesters at
the Nov.19, 2002 demonstration in Belgrade, the Yugoslav
capital; doctors' organizations in Germany; and members of
the International Committee for the Defense of Slobodan
Milosevic.
Free Milosevic now! Abolish NATO!
International Action Center
December 17, 2002
*********************************************
2. German Communist Party
FOR THE ABOLITION OF THE "HAGUE TRIBUNAL" -
FOR THE IMMEDIATE RELEASE OF SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC!
(Resolution adopted by the16th Congress of the German Communist Party
(DKP)
in Duesseldorf, December 1st, 2002)
The German Communist Party demands the immediate abolition of the
so-called "tribunal" for the former Yugoslavia.
This "tribunal" was created by an unauthorized organ - UN Security
Council, in violation of the UN Chapter. It is not a legal
institution, but the continuation of the NATO aggression, poorly
camouflaged with pseudo-juridical requisites. Its purpose is not only
to fabricate false legitimacy for the illegal NATO-war, but also to
prepare new wars. The US at the same time negates the jurisdiction of
the legally founded International Criminal Court, announcing even the
military intervention in The Netherlands if a US citizen would be
brought before the ICC, presses Yugoslavia to cooperate with the NATO
court martial and threatens to establish another ad-hoc-tribunal in
the case of Iraq.
By his sovereign appearance at The Hague, Slobodan Milosevic produced
a fiasco for the NATO prosecutor. Since the "tribunal" cannot defeat
Slobodan Milosevic by "legal" means, it tries to threaten his health
and life by inhuman court and prison conditions. We support the appeal
of German and international physicians that Slobodan Milosevic has to
be released in order to get adequate therapy in Yugoslavia by the
doctors who took care about his health for years.
After, at the beginning of the "trial" even mainstream journalists had
to draw parallels with the German fascist Reichstag-fire trial against
Georgi Dimitrov, there is media silence about The Hague process now.
The many years of media demonization of Slobodan Milosevic was part of
war propaganda.
Today, Slobodan Milosevic is the highest ranking political prisoner of
NATO and as such he deserves solidarity of all anti-imperialist
forces.
The German Communist Party supports the struggle of Slobodan Milosevic
and the Socialist Party of Serbia against the "tribunal" of NATO
criminals.
The NATO aggressors have to be put on trial, Yugoslavia needs to get
comprehensive reparations for war damages!
We demand the immediate abolition of the "Hague Tribunal" and the
immediate release of Slobodan Milosevic and of all prisoners of the
illegal "Tribunal"!
*********************************************
3. A Slovenian MP at WEU Parliamentary Assembly
Mr. Zmago Jelincic, president of the Slovenian National Party put two
unpleasant questions to the leading representatives of NATO. The
answers were without answer. But the questions become the main subject
of discussion in the couloirs during the whole session. We quote the
questions from the official transcript.
ASSEMBLY OF WESTERN EUROPEAN UNION
THE INTERIM EUROPEAN SECURITY AND DEFENCE ASSEMBLY
FORTY-EIGHTH ORDINARY SESSION, Paris, 2-4 December 2002
Mr Antonio MARTINS DA CRUZ, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Portugal,
Chairman-in-Office of the WEU Council
Mr. JELINCIC: Portugal is soon to lead the Organisation for Security
and Cooperation in Europe, and because it is not possible to create
stability, security and peace without discovering the reality of past
events, I should like to put the following question: The medical
condition of the former Yugoslav President, Mr. Slobodan Milosevic,
has seriously deteriorated, to the degree to which it is questionable
whether he will even survive to the end of the trial in The Hague.
Given that, we must ask ourselves what is in the best interests of
truth. Will Mr. Milosevic's death contribute to a fair trial or to
the credibility of the international court? Will he still be able to
reveal information that is crucial to the truth? I think not. With his
death, the truth will be lost. Do you not think that it would be for
the best if the Assembly appealed to the international community and
competent organisations to release Mr. Milosevic, enabling him to
receive proper medical care?
Mr Guenther ALTENBURG, NATO Assistant Secretary-General for Political
Affairs, representing Lord ROBERTSON, Secretary General
Mr. JELINCIC: On the subject of the widening of the EU and NATO, we
cannot avoid the question of security in the neighbouring countries.
The current Yugoslav Government has no trust among the
people - with justification, it would seem. Violence and criminality
in Yugoslavia are increasing day by day, and the demands of the
separatist minority parties are getting more and more recognition. On
the other hand, the government is doing nothing to establish a stable
and prosperous environment. It behaves passively, and even cooperates
with those parties. Such a situation could easily lead to further
violence, such as that caused by Albanian separatists in the
recent past. Yugoslavia in its current state cannot afford to fall
into another war, but that is bound to happen if nothing is done. Due
to its inappropriate behavior, the current government has lost the
confidence of the nation that elected it. There must be new elections
to clarify the situation. Naturally, the government will not declare
elections, so it is in the hands of responsible national organisations
to call for new elections. Do you agree that Europe should demand the
clarification of the political situation in Yugoslavia through
elections?
*********************************************
4. New Worker on the London support meeting
New Worker Online
New Worker International News - 20/12/2002
Defend the life of Slobodan Milosevic!
by Elizabeth Farrell
SLOBODAN Milosevic faces a torrent of
lies and abuse in the dock of the
so-called International War Crimes
Tribunal in The Hague. This is beginning
to seriously damage the health of the
former Yugoslav President, who had
been diagnosed with a heart condition
and suffers form very high blood
pressure. He is not only fighting for
justice, he is also fighting for his
life, warned the International Committee
to Defend Slobodan Milosevic at a
meeting in London Conway Hall last week.
Paul Davidson chaired the meeting, and
speakers included Brian Denny from
the Campaign Against Euro-Federalism,
Serbian activist Stan Gasparovski and
Christopher Black, Milosevich's legal advisor.
Denny raised his concerns about the
'Corpus Durus' system that is used in
the trial, which means that the judge
is also the prosecutor. There is no
jury, and - unlike any trial in Britain
- the defendant is guilty until
proven innocent. He also mentioned the
conditions under which Milosevic is
imprisoned.
"The days in court are long, and Milosevic
is only given a sandwich and a
bad coffee for lunch. By the time he gets
back, he has missed his evening meal."
Stan Gasparovski, who had recently
been to The Hague to attend the trial,
told the meeting about that visit.
He warned us about Milosevich's health,
saying that his heart condition,
'Essential hypertension with secondary
organ damage and hypertrophy of the
left ventricle', is life threatening and
needs immediate treatment. Stan pointed
out that, so far, Milosevic has only
been allowed to see the prison GP,
and has been refused an examination by
specialists, and medical treatment.
Despite all this, he said, "Milosevic
is very determined and confident -
because he has the truth on his side."
The last speaker was Chris Black,
Milosevic's legal advisor.
He told us that Nato's main weapon was
to demonise the Serbs and destroy
Milosevic, by using propaganda to
justify their aggression against
Yugoslavia.
He also pointed out that the prosecution's
main witness, former head of
Serbia's Secret Services Rado Markovich,
spoke in favour of Milosevic
instead of against him. When he was
asked whether Milosevic had given orders
to start ethnic cleansing of Albanians
in Kosovo, Markovic replied:
"No such orders were ever given, and
no ethnic cleansing took place."
The only evidence against Milosevic,
Chris Black rightfully said, "is that
he is not guilty."
To join the struggle for justice for Milosevic, contact the
International
Committee in his defence at www.icdsm.org
*********************************************
5. Advocatenblad - Journal of the Dutch Bar Association on the process
The appointment of the Friends of the court by The Yugoslavia tribunal
countervails Mr Milosevic's right to conduct his own defense. This is
the view advocated by N.M.P. Steijnen, an attorney of Milosevic in the
"legal affairs outside the tribunal".
N.M.P. Steijnen, attorney in Zeist and member of the ICDSM.
The right to conduct one's own defense
("to defend himself in person") is a
minimum basic right (Art. 6 ECHR,
Art. 14 ICCPR; see Art. 26 ICTY Statute).
It is doubtful whether counsel can
ever be imposed. The Dutch system goes a
long way toward recognizing this right
but does not make it absolute, as is
demonstrated by the imposition of a
counsel in criminal trials in the last
instance. The European Court also allows
the legislator to impose a counsel
in some cases where the nature of the
proceedings so requires. On the other
hand, if the right to defend oneself
has been explicitly recognized in
certain kinds of proceedings (as in
the trials before the ICTY) this right
has to be respected in full. This
principle should also apply to Milosevic,
who has repeatedly emphasized that
he wants to conduct his own defense.
Objective perspective
The tribunal has now appointed three
amici curiae in Milosevic's case at the
request of the Dutch attorney Wladimiroff.
In Advocatenblad 2001-16 (21
September 2001) Wladimiroff explained
his appointment: "It seemed to me that
someone like that [amicus curiae] could
also see to the defense in
Milosevic's case, with the difference
that Milosevic is not the client. We
give the objective perspective of the
defense independently of the suspect."
(p. 621) It is of course a profound
mystery how any defense can exist
without a client. It is equally
nonsensical to say that something called
"the objective perspective of the
defense" could exist "independently of the
suspect". If it is not Wladimiroff
and his co-amici who decide what the
"objective perspective of the defense"
is, then who is it? This goes to show
that the "objective perspective of the
defense" is perfectly subjective and,
as a bonus, "independent of the suspect",
i.e. quite impervious to what the
suspect thinks about it.
Why has the ICTY decided to allow such
a construction? The motivation given
in the decision of appointment is that
it was considered "desirable" and
"important to secure a fair trial". The
tribunal could thus give the
impression of being properly concerned
about Milosevic's "fair trial". That
was of utmost importance in order to
mask what happened to the right "to
have adequate facilities for the preparation
of his defence" (Art. 6 ECHR,
Art. 14 ICCPR and Art. 21 of the ICTY Statute).
Adequate facilities
Milosevic wanted to conduct his own
defense but did not waive his right to
have adequate facilities for the preparation
of his defence. Already during
his detention in Belgrade and before
his transfer to The Hague he had at his
disposal an international team of
attorneys, ICDSM, to assist him in the
preparation of his defense. However,
the administration of the tribunal has
been systematic in its attempts to
sabotage and prevent Milosevic's
cooperation with this team.
First, the access to Milosevic was
limited as much as possible by simply
refusing to respond to a request for
admission. If, after repeated requests,
the permission for a visit was finally
granted, it was done out of
magnanimity far transcending anything
to which the tribunal was even
remotely obliged. The length of the
visit was then severely limited,
confidential contact was made impossible
and the exchange of documents was
prohibited. One often found out that
the correspondence sent to Milosevic
did not reach him. Ultimately, the
Canadian lawyer Chris Black was
completely banned by the administration
of the tribunal, because he had
relayed some statements made by
Milosevic to the Dutch press.
Finally the tribunal decided, without
any notice and without consulting
those concerned, to appoint Ramsey
Clark and Livingston as Milosevic's
"permanent legal advisers" with the
exclusive right to function in this
capacity. Clark, who is associated with
the ICDSM, was incapable of crossing
the ocean frequently simply due to his
age, whereas Livingston is unknown to
both the ICDSM and Milosevic. From the
outset it was quite clear that this
solution was completely unacceptable to
Milosevic. With this strategem the
administration of the tribunal managed
to close the door definitively to the
legal advisers who Milosevic had chosen
for himself.
I was subjected to more or less the same
treatment, but because I worked as
Milosevic's lawyer in Dutch legal
proceedings, my contact with the client
could not be completely banned. The
limited access that I was granted was
subject to the explicit restriction that
we could discuss only the Dutch
legal proceedings and every contact was
being monitored. The latter
restriction was removed only after
Milosevic authorized me to initiate legal
proceedings in the European Court of Human
Rights. Even then, the
administration of the tribunal was
willing to change its mind only when
pressured with impeding interlocutory
injunction proceedings and only after
it had reminded us that the tribunal was
not strictly speaking bound by this
Agreement, because it was not a party
to the treaty.
When the trial began, Milosevic was
also in a desperately isolated position.
He had only a fixed telephone line with
his party rank and file in Belgrade
and his two personal lawyers Tomanovic
and Ognjanovic. After repeated
complaints, the tribunal relaxed somewhat
the contacts with the Yugoslav
lawyers. This does not mean that Milosevic's
enormous handicap in comparison
to the powerful and extensive machinery
of the Prosecution has narrowed. Mil
osevic tries to make the best of his
preparation whatever it takes.
Outmanoeuvred
With the appointment of the amici curiae
all this got camouflaged. First and
foremost, the amici curiae are part of
the household of the tribunal, which
controls them, whereas the ICDSM advisers
belong to the Milosevic camp and
are beyond the tribunal's disciplinary
measures. The three amici were
granted all the rights which are normally
afforded to the chosen lawyer,
including the right to table various
"motions" and make "submissions",
perform cross-examination and further
act "in any other way designated
counsel considers appropriate in order
to secure a fair trial". The tribunal
thus has a number of pseudolawyers,
who countervail Milosevic's procedural
strategy contingent on the illegality
of the tribunal.
An example. Milosevic has repeatedly
insisted that his abduction from
Yugoslavia and his detention in
Scheveningen were illegal and he regarded
the tribunal as an illegal institution.
The Trial Chamber finally asked
Milosevic to set all this in writing.
Immediately the amici curiae also set
to work in order to express their
objections to the legality, but unlike
Milosevic, they called this paper
explicitly a "preliminary motion". This
way, they gave the tribunal the chance
to regard the papers by Milosevic and
by the amici curiae as a joint
"preliminary motion" without any distinction,
and hence as a document subject to the
rules of procedure of the tribunal.
This way, the tribunal could regard
the subsequent review as a formal
session, which could also look into the
question of habeas corpus, which is
not subject to any specific rule in the
tribunal's basic documents.
Milosevic was thus quite unaware that
it was now possible for the tribunal
to rule on the request of habeas corpus.
He was caught unprepared and was
outmanoeuvred on this point.
Munition
The statements attributed to Wladimiroff
by the Trial Chamber have again
caused Milosevic to take action against
the amici. The discharge of
Wladimiroff is not the ultimate objective,
the ultimate objective is the
discharge of all the amici. In spite of
the recent discharge, Milosevic
wants the disciplinary organs of the
Dutch law society to make a ruling on
Wladimiroff's conduct, which he expects
will provide munition against the
rest of the amici.
Endnote on the functions of Mr Steijnen
In this connection he appeared in
interlocutory injunction proceedings which
Milosevic had initiated against the
Dutch State after his transfer to and
detention in The Hague; in this
connection, he was authorized by Milosevic
to initiate proceedings in the ECHR
together with the French attorney
Vergès, the Canadian lawyer Black and others.
*********************************************
6. CANA London
To the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
24th December 2002
Dear Sirs
I refer to reports which I have received tonight that the health of
the former President of Yugoslavia, Mr Milosevic is again worsening, &
the Tribunal has done nothing, despite protests from all over the
world, to ensure that the prisoner is seen by competent specialist
physicians independent of the Tribunal & neither will the Tribunal
grant bail.
I have written to the Tribunal on previous occasions, without
receiving any acknowledgement, pointing out that the decisions of
Judge May constitute prima facie a criminal case under section 134 of
the Criminal Justice Act 1988. He is complicit in torture, & not
merely complicit but the main instrument.
I have told the Law Officers that I will be lodging as soon as
convenient an Information @ Highgate Magistrates Court with the view
to the prosecution of the said judge May.
The Information is currently being prepared but should Mr Milosevic
die I will upgrade it to a charge of murder against both Judge May &
the other judges hearing this case.
I think the behaviour of your Court is deplorable. Primary
responsibility is on the Netherlands Government for hosting your Court
& on the United Nation Security Council for refusing to engage in any
form of monitoring of their own creation. We believe an enquiry should
be instituted by the Security Council & the General Assembly into
(inter alia) the illegal financing of this Court, (the expenses of
which should be met from the normal UN budget, but @ least in part
they are met by Mr Soros. Is this not correct?)
We also blame Amnesty International, which organisation has altogether
failed in terms of protecting the interests of prisoners of
conscience. We call on AI organisations world wide to take up such an
obvious case of political persecution & to hear the concerns of so
many people about this farce of international justice, the WTE,
(Washington's Tribunal in Europe).
CANA UK believes that Mr Milosevic's life is in imminent danger, not
least because of the imminence of the pre-planned aggression on Iraq.
The American Government has taken a leaf out of the Stalinist book.
Trotsky was finally eliminated in 1940, as the German armies were
marching through France. There is no doubt in my mind that the object
of the Tribunal, now that it has not been able to find a case against
the President, is to kill him, in the most expeditious & least
publicised manner possible & also at the most opportune time.
Judge May's tenure @ the Hague, in his NATO- EU role, of supreme
torturer, as well as prosecutor, judge & in all probability
executioner, should go down in history as the most obscene
misapplication of judicial power by a British judge anywhere in the
world since Judge Jeffreys & the Bloody Assize.
British judges have built up an entirely fallacious reputation for
being fair minded, when in fact as a group, & with few exceptions,
they are invariably corrupt, as Judge May's handling of this so called
trial proves, & as do many other cases known to me.
The Law Officers consistently refuse to investigate all the numerous
instances of judicial corruption brought to their attention every
year. If they are indolent, in their refusal to grasp this nettle,
this is not surprising, when the UK judiciary as a collectivity
believe themselves to be above the law. The psycho-pathological
problems which afflict them as a caste are accentuated in the case of
Judge May as he is currently removed from the jurisdiction, (although
he remains an official of the UK Government - whatever undertakings he
may have entered into with regard to this continent so called Court,
he remains bound by judicial oath to Her Majesty).
I also paste below a copy of a letter sent to the Guardian + copy to
Geoffrey Robertson QC which highlights a deficiency in the Court as
an institution, quite apart from its procedures.
Yours Sincerely
William Spring
*********************************************
7. Reactions on a Guardian article on The Hague process
(Sent but unpublished letters to the Editor)
*****************
from Colin Meade
53 Florence Rd
London
N4 4 4DJ
Dear Sir,
In his article on the Milosevic trial (19 December), Geoffrey
Robertson QC writes as if he knows that Milosevic is the main author
of the tragic events in the former Yugoslavia. If he has this
information, he should pass it on to the Hague Prosecutors, who
clearly have no such evidence.
In his self-defence, Mr Milosevic has effectively demolished the
received wisdom about his country's fate, using arguments and facts.
He has among other things destroyed the credibility of many witnesses
claiming to be "victims of his policies". His performance should lead
rational people to question their prejudices.
As for a "fair trial", there can be no such thing without the
requirement for the parties to produce compelling and consistent
evidence and the presumption of innocence. In relation to the trial
of Milosevic, far too many responsible people seem to have forgotten
these elementary principles.
Yours faithfully
Colin Meade
*****************
To the Editor
The Guardian
Dear Sir
There is at least one colossal flaw in the logic of Geoffrey
Robertson's argument, (Guardian 19th December) favouring the standards
of supposed international justice exemplified by the International
Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. No justice can be
justice if not applied equally to all. I am not a Yugoslav citizen.
My first concern isn't with Mr Milosevic, but with the activities of
my Government, of Blair, Cook, & Straw, for example, all of whom I
regard as war criminals.
In the case of the first two, in May 1999 I sought to press criminal
charges before Magistrates, one, for encouraging terrorism in a
foreign state contrary to section Five of the Criminal Justice Act,
and two, for conspiracy to murder & to cause explosions in the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia. The Magistrates declined to issue the
proceedings citing insufficient evidence.
What I find remarkable is the Hague Court entertaining the testimony
of NATO war criminals, when in 1999 NATO didn't even have the figleaf
of a United Nations resolution to legitimise military action. How can
such a Court be just, which only hears the accusations of the victors,
themselves law breakers, & ignores the cries of the vanquished? Don't
dead or mutilated Yugoslavs, Afghans, or Palestinians, nor those
shortly to suffer in Iraq, count for anything? Don't they deserve an
advocate? If they do, it shouldn't be Mr Robertson. His view of
justice is inexorably skewed, in favour of wealth, power, & the
ruthless use of propaganda & military force by humanitarian warriors.
Yours sincerely
William Spring
CANA UK Christians Against Nato Aggression UK
1 Scales Road London N17 9HB
Telephone 0208 376 1454
*****************
re: Playing the Odds in the Justice Game
by Geoffrey Robertson QC
Dec 19, 2002--The Guardian
After reading Mr Robertson's account of his brief visit to The Hague
Tribunal one can only assume that this field trip to 'the aquarium' is
his only experience with the Milosevic trial--and that his ever being
weaned from the tit of the British mainstream media is not very
likely--if not completely beyond hope.
All his talk of fairness, even excessive judicial fairness [sic], the
moral implications of procedural niceties, such as Milosevic's
cross-examining witnesses actually ceding legitimacy to the Tribunal,
and linkages between WWII Germany and Serbia/Yugoslavia of the 90s, Dr
Seselj's Radical Party of Serbia and Fascism, and Hermann Goering and
Slobodan Milosevic, bespeak a superficial sense of recent history and
a misunderstanding of contemporary geopolitical forces so contorted by
the ignorance and expediency of the consensus reality of pop culture
as to be more befitting a lager lout than a QC.
The illegality of the foundations and procedures of the Tribunal are
of no concern to Robertson: Its birth by untimely ripping from the
desiccated womb of a gang-raped and brain dead UN-- midwifed by Mad
Albright and her seven dwarves (Clinton, Rubin, Cohen, Zimmerman,
Holbrooke, Gelbardt, and Soros); its outrageous private financing by
the chief sponsors of global terrorism: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran,
Turkey, and the US; its total neglect of the very time-honoured
principles, i.e., presumption of innocence, the right to face one's
accusers, equal consideration before the law, that Robertson seems so
proud to represent--and not just their neglect, but the aggressive
inversion of these principles each time Richard May berates President
Milosevic for his cross-examinations and cuts off is mike, each time a
hopelessly under-rehearsed secret witness (but usually a spy, warlord
or terrorist, very well known to all in Serbia!) is fuzzed over the
tv monitors, and each time stale and thoroughly refuted media lies,
like Roy Gutman's award-winning hearsay of the Bosnian Death and Rape
Camps or of the misattributed Croatian, Bosnian Muslim and KLA
atrocities, are presented as fresh-baked . . . media lies: All of
these are beyond Robertson's considerations.
He seems concerned with "Justice" and especially "International
Justice".
And certainly he is exercised over the a priori villain Milosevic's
not turning the court's kindness, its fairness, into its weakness by
demonstrating just how this Tribunal, rather than adjudicating crimes
against humanity, actually covers up and perpetuates such crimes. He
says nothing of how the Tribunal has refused to hear of the monstrous
acts committed by its sponsors against the people of Serbia and
Yugoslavia and against the person of Slobodan Milosevic, first with
their generous application of Depleted Uranium missiles and now with
their iatrogenocidal concerns for the state of his health.
Obviously Maitre Robertson exists in some para-reality; some ethereal
world connected to the physical world that constrains the rest of us
working stiffs only by a Murdochian/Orwellian news network where the
interests served are neither those of Historical Truth nor
International Justice nor even the Reality Principle, but only those
of naked, ugly Geopolitical Power.
He seems to think that if he can stand with the strong, by parroting
their infantile, delusional myths of how things are, he will be all
right.
But I'm afraid, from start to finish, he is dead wrong.
Mick Collins
Cirque Minime/Paris
*********************************************
8. A Column from Antiwar.com
More Dirty Lies
Courtesy of The Hague Inquisition
(Nebojsa Malic)
[to be found at: http://www.antiwar.com ]
*********************************************
To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sps.org.yu/ (official SPS website)
http://www.belgrade-forum.org/ (forum for the world of equals)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)
icdsm temporary address:
http://emperor.vwh.net/icdsm/index.htm
for your donations:
http://emperor.vwh.net/icdsm/donations.htm
PATRIOT (Banja Luka)
Bivsa predsjednica RS Biljana Plavsic,
zajedno sa svojim domacim i inostranim
politickim istomisljenicima, udahnula novi
zivot Haskom tribunalu za ratne zlocine:
Instrument protiv pravde i pomirenja
Zlocini se jesu dogodili i nesumnjivo je
da pocinioce treba kazniti, ali Plavsiceva u
citiranom dokumentu ide i dalje od
toga i tvrdi ono sto je za tuzilastvo
Haskog tribunala kljucno: da je
zlocine naredjivao i podsticao najuzi
drzavni vrh. To ne samoda nije tacno
vec je moguce dokazati suprotno.
Otuda se Plavsickin potpis na
citiranom dokumentu, koji ce, apsolutno
smo uvjereni, Del Ponteova koristiti kao
pisani dokaz u svim buducim procesima
protiv srpskih optuzenika, ne moze
shvatiti nikako drugacije nego kao
frustrirajuca osveta i nastavak
zapocetog obracuna sa politickim
protivnicima unutar RS
pise: Zoran Zuza
"Priznanje Biljane Plavsic salje
kljucnu poruku o istinskom zlocinackom
karakteru poduhvata u koji je ona bila
ukljucena, kao i o legitimnosti
Haskog tribunala i njegove funkcije",
rekao je svjedoceci u zavrsnoj
raspravi u procesu protiv bivse
predsjednice RS Aleks Borejn, nekadasnji
predsjednik juznoafricke komisije za
istinu i pomirenje. Cini se da upravo
ova recenica definise sustinu i
ciljeve pravno-politicke obmane koja se
pred ocima cijelog svijeta desila protekle
sedmice u sudnici Haskog tribunala za
ratne zlocine. Priznanjem krivice, ali
i teskim optuzbama na racun drugih
srpskih lidera, udruzenih u, kako vele
tuzioci Tribunala, zlocinacki
poduhvat, Plavsiceva je okoncala svoju
politicku misiju srpskog insajdera,
zapocetu jos s proljeca 1997. godine,
kada se u portugalskom gradu Sintri
srela sa svojim odrazom u ogledalu -
tadasnjim americkim drzavnim sekretarom
Medlin Olbrajt. Njih dvije, svaka iz
svojih razloga, ali obje vodjene
mrznjom, inatom i strajne u svojim
politickim ciljevima, udahnuce novi zivot
Haskom tribunalu, ciji je kredibilitet
bio poljuljan cak i u Savjetu
bezbjednosti UN-a, instituciji
koja ga je na insistiranje Olbrajtove
i njoj slicnih lobista i osnovala
davne 1993. godine. Olbrajtova ce, bas
kao i glavni tuzilac Karla del Ponte,
treci vazan lik u ovoj politickoj
predstavi, priznanje Plavsiceve bestidno
iskoristiti kako bi svojoj prljavoj
raboti dala legitimitet i ispunila
osnovnu fukciju Tribunala: njegova
namjena nije da donese pravdu i pomirenje
u drzave bivse Jugoslavije vec da
falsifikuje istoriju i pronadje krivce
za ratove, stradanja i patnje naroda na
ovim prostorima. Kad to ucini, ispunice
svoju "istorijsku misiju" i prestati
da postoji, a van domasaja pravde, jer
i to je cilj, ostace, izmeðu ostalih,
stvarni vinovnici rata i osnivaci ovog
Tribunala. Priznanje Plavsiceve
vjerovatno je i zauvijek iskljucilo
mogucnost da se pred bilo kakvim sudom
pojavi, na primjer, americki
diplomata Voren Cimerman, covjek koji
je Aliju Izetbegovica nagovorio da
povuce potpis sa mirovnog plana Zozea
Kutiljera.
Propaganda o marioneti
Mozete li zamisliti kakvu je
zbunjenost, pa i paniku meðu akterima
ovog procesa, u kome su i pitanja i
odgovori bili izrezirani, izazvala
rijec marioneta, neoprezno izgovorena u
sudnici u kontekstu odnosa
Olbrajtove i Plavsiceve. "Beogradska
propaganda", nije se dala zbuniti
Olbrajtova, sigurna da joj niko u toj
prostoriji nece postaviti pitanje kako
je moguce da je nekoliko godina
"blisko saraðivala" sa Plavsicevom
znajuci da je optuzena za ratne zlocine.
Pitanje nije postavljeno, ali je
odgovor svakako dala Karla del Ponte,
tacno definisuci put i konacnu sudbinu
svake marionete: "Priznanje krivice
Biljane Plavsic nije nas iznenadilo.
To je bio nastavak njenog novog puta,
kojim je posla 1995. godine, odmah
poslije potpisivanja Dejtonskog
sporazuma. To, medjutim, nikako ne umanjuje
odgovornost za njeno ucesce u najgorim
zlocinima protiv covjecnosti."
Del Ponteova je svoju ulogu u ovoj
besramnoj meðunarodnoj predstavi maestralno
odigrala. Njen zadatak bio je da odglumi
strogocu i predlozi sto je moguce
vecu kaznu za 72-godisnju politicarku,
kojoj su, zbog brojnih "olaksavajucih
okolnosti" politicke naravi, na usluzi
stajale i sudije i tuzioci. Trebalo je
takoðe da strasna Karla uvjeri
javnost da je Plavsiceva odbila da
saraðuje, odnosno direktno
svjedoci u procesima protiv Slobodana
Milosevica i Momcila Krajisnika, cime
bi njeno priznanje bilo predstavljeno
ne kao izdaja pokreta koji je
predstavljala i ciljeva koje je do
1996. godine zagovarala vec kao
zrtvovanje kako bi s njenog naroda
bila skinuta kolektivna krivica. "Ja
jos nisam uspjela da je uvjerim da uðe u
posljednju fazu preuzimanja svoje
odgovornosti tako sto bi se pojavila kao
svjedok na drugim suðenjima", istakla
je Del Ponteova, zatrazivsi da
se Plavsiceva kazni kaznom ne manjom
od 15 i ne vecom od 25 godina zatvora.
Najznacajniji saradnik Tribunala
No, pravu istinu o ulozi Plavsiceve otkrice
njen advokat Robert Pavic ocjenom da njeno
priznanje krivice i izjava koju je proslog
utorka procitala pred Haskim tribunalom
predstavljaju "najznacajniji moguci oblik
saradnje". Kako drugacije nazvati dokument
naslovljen kao "cinjenicne osnove za
potvrdno izjasnjavanje o krivici",
koji je od 14. septembra do proslog
ponedjeljka bio pod pecatom. Kada je
otpecacen i objelodanjen, bilo je jasno
sta je Plavsiceva uradila i zbog cega
su njeni advokati 2. oktobra veoma lako
s tuzilastvom sklopili sporazum po kojem
su povucene sve tacke optuznice (i ona
za genocid i saucesnistvo u genocidu) osim
one koja se odnosi na progon na rasnoj i
vjerskoj osnovi, za koju je bivsa
predsjednica RS priznala krivicu. U
dokumentu koji sadrzi 22 tacke, a koji
su osim Plavsiceve potpisali i njeni
advokati Robert Pavic i Judjin O'
Saliven, na sraman nacin nastoji se
skinuti veci dio odgovornosti sa
Biljane Plavsic, a pripisati Slobodanu
Milosevicu, Radovanu Karadzicu, Momcilu
Krajisniku i generalu Ratku Mladicu.
"Osnovni cilj SDS-a i voðstva bosanskih
Srba bio je da svi Srbi u bivsoj
Jugoslaviji ostanu u zajednickoj
drzavi.
Jedan od nacina za ostvarenje toga
cilja bio je razdvajanje etnickih
grupa u BiH. Do oktobra 1991. voðstvo
bosanskih Srba, ukljucujuci i gospoðu
Plavsic, bilo je svjesno i namjeravalo je
da u razdvajanje etnickih zajednica ukljuci
trajno uklanjanje odreðenih etnickih grupa,
bilo sporazumom bilo silom, a osim toga
bilo je svjesno da ce svako prisilno
uklanjanje nesrpskog stanovnistva sa
teritorija na koje su Srbi polagali
pravo ukljuciti i diskriminatorsku
politiku progona. Namjera da se
etnicke zajednice razdvoje silom, koja
je ukljucivala i spoznaju da ce prisilno
trajno uklanjanje nesrba sa teritorija
na koje su Srbi polagali pravo ukljucivati
diskriminatorsku kampanju progona
dalje ce se pominjati kao 'cilj
prisilnog razdvajanja etnickih grupa'",
navodi se u dokumentu i nastavlja: "U
kreiranju i sprovoðenju ciljeva
prisilnog razdvajanja etnickih grupa
ucestvovali su mnogi pojedinci, ukljucujuci
Slobodana Milosevica, Radovana
Karadzica, Momcila Krajisnika i
Ratka Mladica. Meðu tim pojedincima
postojale su razlike kako u njihovoj
spoznaji detalja koji su se odnosili
na utvrðivanje i sprovoðenje tog cilja
tako i u njihovoj ulozi u njegovom
osmisljavanju i sprovoðenju. Gospoða
Plavsic je prihvatila i podrzala cilj
prisilnog razdvajanja etnickih grupa i
doprinijela njegovom ostvarenju. Ona
nije ucestvovala u utvrðivanju i
planiranju tog cilja zajedno s
Milosevicem, Karadzicem, Krajisnikom i
drugim i imala je manje znacajnu
ulogu u njegovom sprovoðenju u odnosu
na Karadzica, Krajisnika i druge."
Navodno prekrsen ustavni poredak
U dokumentu se naglasava da su
"dvojica najvaznijih voða bosanskih Srba"
Radovan Karadzic i Ratko Mladic cesto
odlazili u Beograd na konsultacije sa
Milosevicem, od koga su dobijali upute i
podrsku u ostvarenju gorecitiranih ciljeva.
Takoðe se navodi da je VRS dobijala
finansijsku i logisticku podrsku od
politickog i vojnog vrha iz Beograda.
U tekstu punom poluistina i
istorijskih falsifikata Plavsiceva i
njeni advokati pominju 14. i 15. oktobar
1991. godine, kada je Skupstina RBiH u
odsustvu i bez ucesca srpskih
poslanika usvojila Memorandum o stvaranju
suverene BiH, ali i naglasavaju da je
time "navodno prekrsen postojeci
ustavni i politicki poredak u BiH".
Citira se i Karadzicevo upozorenje
muslimanima da ce biti unisteni
ukoliko doðe do rata, ali se izostavlja
"cuvena" Izetbegoviceva recenica da
ce "zrtvovati mir za suverenu BiH".
Pominju se progoni i ubistva nesrpskog
stanovnistva, surovo i necovjecno
postupanje tokom napada na sela i
gradove, prisilno premjestanje i
deportacije, protivpravno pritvaranje
u zatocenickim objektima, unistavanje
kulturnih i vjerskih objekata, pljacke,
prisilan rad i koristenje zivih stitova...
Ovi zlocini jesu se dogodili i nesumnjivo
je da pocinioce treba kazniti, ali
Plavsiceva u citiranom dokumentu ide i
dalje od toga i tvrdi ono sto je za
tuzilastvo Haskog tribunala kljucno:
da je zlocine nareðivao i podsticao najuzi
drzavni vrh. To ne samo da nije tacno
vec je moguce dokazati suprotno - i
kroz ruke same Plavsiceve proslo je na
stotine dokumenta, naredbi i odluka u
kojima se od vojnih i policijskih snaga
RS izricito zahtijeva postovanje zenevskih
konvencija i trazi hapsenje i suðenje svima
koji su pocinili ratne zlocine i zlocine
protiv covjecnosti. Otuda se
Plavsickin potpis na citiranom dokumentu,
koji ce, apsolutno smo uvjereni, Del
Ponteova koristiti kao pisani dokaz u
svim buducim procesima protiv srpskih
optuzenika, ne moze shvatiti nikako
drugacije nego kao frustrirajuca osveta
i nastavak zapocetog obracuna
sa politickim protivnicima unutar RS.
"Vjerujem da vam je jasno da sam se ja
razisla s tim liderima - premda prekasno.
Ipak, to rukovodstvo bestidno nastavlja da
trazi odanost i podrsku naseg naroda. To
se cini izazivanjem straha, govorenjem
poluistina kako bi se ubijedio nas
narod da je svijet protiv nas. Ali,
plodovi njihovog rada, tog
rukovodstva, su jasni: grobovi,
izbjeglice, izolacija i ogorcenje prema
cijelom svijetu, koji nas je odbacio
upravo zbog tih lidera", reci ce Biljana
Plavsic, cija je slijepa mrznja hasku
sudnicu pretvorila u balkon Banskog dvora.
Dodikova "istina"
Upravo to - pretvaranje sudnice u
politicku pozornicu za suðenje SDS-u,
najprije pokretu srpskog naroda, a
onda i politickoj stranci - bio je
cilj cijelog ovog zavrsnog procesa. Eto
razloga da pozornicom prodefiluju Medlin
Olbrajt, Karl Bilt i Robert Frovik,
likovi koji su, koristeci poziciju i
uticaj Biljane Plavsic, razbilijedinstvo
srpskog naroda u RS i sproveli
zacrtane politicke ciljeve. U
podsjecanje na to tuzno i nesretno
vrijeme, pravi kosmar, koji zaista umalo
nije doveo do meðusrpskih oruzanih sukoba,
uklopilo se i svjedocenje Milorada
Dodika, koji je, govoreci "istinu i
samo istinu", sukob Biljane Plavsic i
rukovodstva SDS-a vratio cak u 1992.
godinu?! Lider SNSD-a nije objasnio,
niti ga je ko pitao, kako je moguce da
se i on sam, kao poslanik u nekadasnjoj
Skupstini RBiH, pridruzio vecini
srpskih poslanika koje danas Haski
tribunal proglasava "pobunjenickom
grupom s ciljem stvaranja velike Srbije",
kako je moguce da je tokom cijelog rata
odrzavao poslovne i politicke veze sa
Milosevicem, koga sada nastoje da
proglase "glavnim pokretacem udruzenog
zlocinackog poduhvata", kako je
moguce da je bas na tu Biljanu Plavsic,
koja se tokom 1993. i 1994. godine
"stalno sukobljavala sa ostatkom
rukovodstva SDS-a", Radovan Karadzic prije
svog definitivnog povlaèenja iz javnog
zivota prenio dio predsjednickih
ovlastenja.
Ni pravde ni pomirenja
Koliko je tesko razumjeti postupke
Biljane Plavsic, svjedoci i cinjenica
da je ona, i pored toga sto je pristala
da postane oruðe u rukama Haskog
tribunala, duboko svjesna da je rijec
o politickom sudu koji nije ispunio i
vjerovatno nece ni ispuniti zacrtanu
misiju faktora pravde i pomirenja u
zemljama bivse Jugoslavije. "Uradite
sve sto je u vasoj moci da budete
pravicni prema svim stranama u ratu.
Cineci to, mozda cete biti u mogucnosti
da ostvarite misiju zbog koje ovaj sud
postoji", porucila je Plavsiceva sudijama,
tuziocima i istraziteljima Tribunala.
U ovu recenicu stalo je sve ono sto nije
pisalo u ulozi koju je bivsa predsjednica
RS odigrala na haskoj pozornici: bez
obzira na to sta je ko od optuzenika
priznao ili ce priznati u bliskoj
buducnosti, pravde i pomirenja na
ovim prostorima nece biti sve dok se
ne utvrdi odgovornost politickih i
vojnih lidera druge dvije strane u
sukobu, kao i meðunarodnih mesetara,
ratove i raspad bivse Jugoslavije.
Istoriju, meðutim, na ovim prostorima
jos uvijek diktiraju samo bjelosvjetski
mocnici. Plavsiceva je svoj dio
diktata izdeklamovala, za sta ce biti
adekvatno nagraðena ili kaznjena, u
zavisnosti iz koje ce se perspektive
gledati odluka sudija. Ono sto ne uðe
u istoriju koju zapisu pobjednici,
ostaje u pamcenju naroda, postaje prica
ili pjesma, a nakon nekog vremena legenda
i mit. Ne bi nas zacudilo kada bi
narodni pjevac u nekoj od tih legendi,
u koju su neki ucli za zivota,
umjesto prezimena Brankovic
upotrijebio prezime Plavsic.
Bivsa predsjednica RS Biljana Plavsic,
zajedno sa svojim domacim i inostranim
politickim istomisljenicima, udahnula novi
zivot Haskom tribunalu za ratne zlocine:
Instrument protiv pravde i pomirenja
Zlocini se jesu dogodili i nesumnjivo je
da pocinioce treba kazniti, ali Plavsiceva u
citiranom dokumentu ide i dalje od
toga i tvrdi ono sto je za tuzilastvo
Haskog tribunala kljucno: da je
zlocine naredjivao i podsticao najuzi
drzavni vrh. To ne samoda nije tacno
vec je moguce dokazati suprotno.
Otuda se Plavsickin potpis na
citiranom dokumentu, koji ce, apsolutno
smo uvjereni, Del Ponteova koristiti kao
pisani dokaz u svim buducim procesima
protiv srpskih optuzenika, ne moze
shvatiti nikako drugacije nego kao
frustrirajuca osveta i nastavak
zapocetog obracuna sa politickim
protivnicima unutar RS
pise: Zoran Zuza
"Priznanje Biljane Plavsic salje
kljucnu poruku o istinskom zlocinackom
karakteru poduhvata u koji je ona bila
ukljucena, kao i o legitimnosti
Haskog tribunala i njegove funkcije",
rekao je svjedoceci u zavrsnoj
raspravi u procesu protiv bivse
predsjednice RS Aleks Borejn, nekadasnji
predsjednik juznoafricke komisije za
istinu i pomirenje. Cini se da upravo
ova recenica definise sustinu i
ciljeve pravno-politicke obmane koja se
pred ocima cijelog svijeta desila protekle
sedmice u sudnici Haskog tribunala za
ratne zlocine. Priznanjem krivice, ali
i teskim optuzbama na racun drugih
srpskih lidera, udruzenih u, kako vele
tuzioci Tribunala, zlocinacki
poduhvat, Plavsiceva je okoncala svoju
politicku misiju srpskog insajdera,
zapocetu jos s proljeca 1997. godine,
kada se u portugalskom gradu Sintri
srela sa svojim odrazom u ogledalu -
tadasnjim americkim drzavnim sekretarom
Medlin Olbrajt. Njih dvije, svaka iz
svojih razloga, ali obje vodjene
mrznjom, inatom i strajne u svojim
politickim ciljevima, udahnuce novi zivot
Haskom tribunalu, ciji je kredibilitet
bio poljuljan cak i u Savjetu
bezbjednosti UN-a, instituciji
koja ga je na insistiranje Olbrajtove
i njoj slicnih lobista i osnovala
davne 1993. godine. Olbrajtova ce, bas
kao i glavni tuzilac Karla del Ponte,
treci vazan lik u ovoj politickoj
predstavi, priznanje Plavsiceve bestidno
iskoristiti kako bi svojoj prljavoj
raboti dala legitimitet i ispunila
osnovnu fukciju Tribunala: njegova
namjena nije da donese pravdu i pomirenje
u drzave bivse Jugoslavije vec da
falsifikuje istoriju i pronadje krivce
za ratove, stradanja i patnje naroda na
ovim prostorima. Kad to ucini, ispunice
svoju "istorijsku misiju" i prestati
da postoji, a van domasaja pravde, jer
i to je cilj, ostace, izmeðu ostalih,
stvarni vinovnici rata i osnivaci ovog
Tribunala. Priznanje Plavsiceve
vjerovatno je i zauvijek iskljucilo
mogucnost da se pred bilo kakvim sudom
pojavi, na primjer, americki
diplomata Voren Cimerman, covjek koji
je Aliju Izetbegovica nagovorio da
povuce potpis sa mirovnog plana Zozea
Kutiljera.
Propaganda o marioneti
Mozete li zamisliti kakvu je
zbunjenost, pa i paniku meðu akterima
ovog procesa, u kome su i pitanja i
odgovori bili izrezirani, izazvala
rijec marioneta, neoprezno izgovorena u
sudnici u kontekstu odnosa
Olbrajtove i Plavsiceve. "Beogradska
propaganda", nije se dala zbuniti
Olbrajtova, sigurna da joj niko u toj
prostoriji nece postaviti pitanje kako
je moguce da je nekoliko godina
"blisko saraðivala" sa Plavsicevom
znajuci da je optuzena za ratne zlocine.
Pitanje nije postavljeno, ali je
odgovor svakako dala Karla del Ponte,
tacno definisuci put i konacnu sudbinu
svake marionete: "Priznanje krivice
Biljane Plavsic nije nas iznenadilo.
To je bio nastavak njenog novog puta,
kojim je posla 1995. godine, odmah
poslije potpisivanja Dejtonskog
sporazuma. To, medjutim, nikako ne umanjuje
odgovornost za njeno ucesce u najgorim
zlocinima protiv covjecnosti."
Del Ponteova je svoju ulogu u ovoj
besramnoj meðunarodnoj predstavi maestralno
odigrala. Njen zadatak bio je da odglumi
strogocu i predlozi sto je moguce
vecu kaznu za 72-godisnju politicarku,
kojoj su, zbog brojnih "olaksavajucih
okolnosti" politicke naravi, na usluzi
stajale i sudije i tuzioci. Trebalo je
takoðe da strasna Karla uvjeri
javnost da je Plavsiceva odbila da
saraðuje, odnosno direktno
svjedoci u procesima protiv Slobodana
Milosevica i Momcila Krajisnika, cime
bi njeno priznanje bilo predstavljeno
ne kao izdaja pokreta koji je
predstavljala i ciljeva koje je do
1996. godine zagovarala vec kao
zrtvovanje kako bi s njenog naroda
bila skinuta kolektivna krivica. "Ja
jos nisam uspjela da je uvjerim da uðe u
posljednju fazu preuzimanja svoje
odgovornosti tako sto bi se pojavila kao
svjedok na drugim suðenjima", istakla
je Del Ponteova, zatrazivsi da
se Plavsiceva kazni kaznom ne manjom
od 15 i ne vecom od 25 godina zatvora.
Najznacajniji saradnik Tribunala
No, pravu istinu o ulozi Plavsiceve otkrice
njen advokat Robert Pavic ocjenom da njeno
priznanje krivice i izjava koju je proslog
utorka procitala pred Haskim tribunalom
predstavljaju "najznacajniji moguci oblik
saradnje". Kako drugacije nazvati dokument
naslovljen kao "cinjenicne osnove za
potvrdno izjasnjavanje o krivici",
koji je od 14. septembra do proslog
ponedjeljka bio pod pecatom. Kada je
otpecacen i objelodanjen, bilo je jasno
sta je Plavsiceva uradila i zbog cega
su njeni advokati 2. oktobra veoma lako
s tuzilastvom sklopili sporazum po kojem
su povucene sve tacke optuznice (i ona
za genocid i saucesnistvo u genocidu) osim
one koja se odnosi na progon na rasnoj i
vjerskoj osnovi, za koju je bivsa
predsjednica RS priznala krivicu. U
dokumentu koji sadrzi 22 tacke, a koji
su osim Plavsiceve potpisali i njeni
advokati Robert Pavic i Judjin O'
Saliven, na sraman nacin nastoji se
skinuti veci dio odgovornosti sa
Biljane Plavsic, a pripisati Slobodanu
Milosevicu, Radovanu Karadzicu, Momcilu
Krajisniku i generalu Ratku Mladicu.
"Osnovni cilj SDS-a i voðstva bosanskih
Srba bio je da svi Srbi u bivsoj
Jugoslaviji ostanu u zajednickoj
drzavi.
Jedan od nacina za ostvarenje toga
cilja bio je razdvajanje etnickih
grupa u BiH. Do oktobra 1991. voðstvo
bosanskih Srba, ukljucujuci i gospoðu
Plavsic, bilo je svjesno i namjeravalo je
da u razdvajanje etnickih zajednica ukljuci
trajno uklanjanje odreðenih etnickih grupa,
bilo sporazumom bilo silom, a osim toga
bilo je svjesno da ce svako prisilno
uklanjanje nesrpskog stanovnistva sa
teritorija na koje su Srbi polagali
pravo ukljuciti i diskriminatorsku
politiku progona. Namjera da se
etnicke zajednice razdvoje silom, koja
je ukljucivala i spoznaju da ce prisilno
trajno uklanjanje nesrba sa teritorija
na koje su Srbi polagali pravo ukljucivati
diskriminatorsku kampanju progona
dalje ce se pominjati kao 'cilj
prisilnog razdvajanja etnickih grupa'",
navodi se u dokumentu i nastavlja: "U
kreiranju i sprovoðenju ciljeva
prisilnog razdvajanja etnickih grupa
ucestvovali su mnogi pojedinci, ukljucujuci
Slobodana Milosevica, Radovana
Karadzica, Momcila Krajisnika i
Ratka Mladica. Meðu tim pojedincima
postojale su razlike kako u njihovoj
spoznaji detalja koji su se odnosili
na utvrðivanje i sprovoðenje tog cilja
tako i u njihovoj ulozi u njegovom
osmisljavanju i sprovoðenju. Gospoða
Plavsic je prihvatila i podrzala cilj
prisilnog razdvajanja etnickih grupa i
doprinijela njegovom ostvarenju. Ona
nije ucestvovala u utvrðivanju i
planiranju tog cilja zajedno s
Milosevicem, Karadzicem, Krajisnikom i
drugim i imala je manje znacajnu
ulogu u njegovom sprovoðenju u odnosu
na Karadzica, Krajisnika i druge."
Navodno prekrsen ustavni poredak
U dokumentu se naglasava da su
"dvojica najvaznijih voða bosanskih Srba"
Radovan Karadzic i Ratko Mladic cesto
odlazili u Beograd na konsultacije sa
Milosevicem, od koga su dobijali upute i
podrsku u ostvarenju gorecitiranih ciljeva.
Takoðe se navodi da je VRS dobijala
finansijsku i logisticku podrsku od
politickog i vojnog vrha iz Beograda.
U tekstu punom poluistina i
istorijskih falsifikata Plavsiceva i
njeni advokati pominju 14. i 15. oktobar
1991. godine, kada je Skupstina RBiH u
odsustvu i bez ucesca srpskih
poslanika usvojila Memorandum o stvaranju
suverene BiH, ali i naglasavaju da je
time "navodno prekrsen postojeci
ustavni i politicki poredak u BiH".
Citira se i Karadzicevo upozorenje
muslimanima da ce biti unisteni
ukoliko doðe do rata, ali se izostavlja
"cuvena" Izetbegoviceva recenica da
ce "zrtvovati mir za suverenu BiH".
Pominju se progoni i ubistva nesrpskog
stanovnistva, surovo i necovjecno
postupanje tokom napada na sela i
gradove, prisilno premjestanje i
deportacije, protivpravno pritvaranje
u zatocenickim objektima, unistavanje
kulturnih i vjerskih objekata, pljacke,
prisilan rad i koristenje zivih stitova...
Ovi zlocini jesu se dogodili i nesumnjivo
je da pocinioce treba kazniti, ali
Plavsiceva u citiranom dokumentu ide i
dalje od toga i tvrdi ono sto je za
tuzilastvo Haskog tribunala kljucno:
da je zlocine nareðivao i podsticao najuzi
drzavni vrh. To ne samo da nije tacno
vec je moguce dokazati suprotno - i
kroz ruke same Plavsiceve proslo je na
stotine dokumenta, naredbi i odluka u
kojima se od vojnih i policijskih snaga
RS izricito zahtijeva postovanje zenevskih
konvencija i trazi hapsenje i suðenje svima
koji su pocinili ratne zlocine i zlocine
protiv covjecnosti. Otuda se
Plavsickin potpis na citiranom dokumentu,
koji ce, apsolutno smo uvjereni, Del
Ponteova koristiti kao pisani dokaz u
svim buducim procesima protiv srpskih
optuzenika, ne moze shvatiti nikako
drugacije nego kao frustrirajuca osveta
i nastavak zapocetog obracuna
sa politickim protivnicima unutar RS.
"Vjerujem da vam je jasno da sam se ja
razisla s tim liderima - premda prekasno.
Ipak, to rukovodstvo bestidno nastavlja da
trazi odanost i podrsku naseg naroda. To
se cini izazivanjem straha, govorenjem
poluistina kako bi se ubijedio nas
narod da je svijet protiv nas. Ali,
plodovi njihovog rada, tog
rukovodstva, su jasni: grobovi,
izbjeglice, izolacija i ogorcenje prema
cijelom svijetu, koji nas je odbacio
upravo zbog tih lidera", reci ce Biljana
Plavsic, cija je slijepa mrznja hasku
sudnicu pretvorila u balkon Banskog dvora.
Dodikova "istina"
Upravo to - pretvaranje sudnice u
politicku pozornicu za suðenje SDS-u,
najprije pokretu srpskog naroda, a
onda i politickoj stranci - bio je
cilj cijelog ovog zavrsnog procesa. Eto
razloga da pozornicom prodefiluju Medlin
Olbrajt, Karl Bilt i Robert Frovik,
likovi koji su, koristeci poziciju i
uticaj Biljane Plavsic, razbilijedinstvo
srpskog naroda u RS i sproveli
zacrtane politicke ciljeve. U
podsjecanje na to tuzno i nesretno
vrijeme, pravi kosmar, koji zaista umalo
nije doveo do meðusrpskih oruzanih sukoba,
uklopilo se i svjedocenje Milorada
Dodika, koji je, govoreci "istinu i
samo istinu", sukob Biljane Plavsic i
rukovodstva SDS-a vratio cak u 1992.
godinu?! Lider SNSD-a nije objasnio,
niti ga je ko pitao, kako je moguce da
se i on sam, kao poslanik u nekadasnjoj
Skupstini RBiH, pridruzio vecini
srpskih poslanika koje danas Haski
tribunal proglasava "pobunjenickom
grupom s ciljem stvaranja velike Srbije",
kako je moguce da je tokom cijelog rata
odrzavao poslovne i politicke veze sa
Milosevicem, koga sada nastoje da
proglase "glavnim pokretacem udruzenog
zlocinackog poduhvata", kako je
moguce da je bas na tu Biljanu Plavsic,
koja se tokom 1993. i 1994. godine
"stalno sukobljavala sa ostatkom
rukovodstva SDS-a", Radovan Karadzic prije
svog definitivnog povlaèenja iz javnog
zivota prenio dio predsjednickih
ovlastenja.
Ni pravde ni pomirenja
Koliko je tesko razumjeti postupke
Biljane Plavsic, svjedoci i cinjenica
da je ona, i pored toga sto je pristala
da postane oruðe u rukama Haskog
tribunala, duboko svjesna da je rijec
o politickom sudu koji nije ispunio i
vjerovatno nece ni ispuniti zacrtanu
misiju faktora pravde i pomirenja u
zemljama bivse Jugoslavije. "Uradite
sve sto je u vasoj moci da budete
pravicni prema svim stranama u ratu.
Cineci to, mozda cete biti u mogucnosti
da ostvarite misiju zbog koje ovaj sud
postoji", porucila je Plavsiceva sudijama,
tuziocima i istraziteljima Tribunala.
U ovu recenicu stalo je sve ono sto nije
pisalo u ulozi koju je bivsa predsjednica
RS odigrala na haskoj pozornici: bez
obzira na to sta je ko od optuzenika
priznao ili ce priznati u bliskoj
buducnosti, pravde i pomirenja na
ovim prostorima nece biti sve dok se
ne utvrdi odgovornost politickih i
vojnih lidera druge dvije strane u
sukobu, kao i meðunarodnih mesetara,
ratove i raspad bivse Jugoslavije.
Istoriju, meðutim, na ovim prostorima
jos uvijek diktiraju samo bjelosvjetski
mocnici. Plavsiceva je svoj dio
diktata izdeklamovala, za sta ce biti
adekvatno nagraðena ili kaznjena, u
zavisnosti iz koje ce se perspektive
gledati odluka sudija. Ono sto ne uðe
u istoriju koju zapisu pobjednici,
ostaje u pamcenju naroda, postaje prica
ili pjesma, a nakon nekog vremena legenda
i mit. Ne bi nas zacudilo kada bi
narodni pjevac u nekoj od tih legendi,
u koju su neki ucli za zivota,
umjesto prezimena Brankovic
upotrijebio prezime Plavsic.
To view this item online, visit
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30222
WorldNetDaily
Saturday, December 28, 2002
Instrumentalization of justice at the Hague
Posted: December 28, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Aleksandar Pavic
© 2002 WorldNetDaily.com
What better proof of the rightness of the Bush administration's
refusal to sign the International Criminal Court treaty earlier this
year than the sham "admission of guilt" by former Bosnian Serb
president Biljana Plavsic to charges of ethnically and racially
motivated "persecution as a crime against humanity" before the ad hoc
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in the Hague
last week.
As the West's mainstream media unceasingly celebrate Mrs. Plavsic's
virtual "admission" and "remorse" for virtual crimes before a virtual
court, "official" historians are busy writing a new, virtual history
of the Balkan conflicts of the 1990s, "cleansed" of inconvenient
facts, complexities and, in the end, truths. The virtual history being
written for this parallel propaganda and PR-managed universe will be
free of things such as:
* moderate Bosnian Muslims betrayed by the West;
* Western sabotage of a viable Bosnian peace agreement before the
bloody conflict even started;
* the Western states' (particularly Germany's and parts of the EU)
own role in the dismantling of the former Yugoslavia and their
accompanying violation of international law;
* the Islamic fundamentalist and extremist nature of Bosnia's
Western-supported Muslim leadership, as well as the cover-up of
that leadership's own war crimes committed not only against
Bosnia's Christian populations, but also against their own people
in their PR struggle for the "hearts and minds" of the West.
One of the best hidden facts about the Bosnian civil war is that it
was preventable, that the leaderships of that former Yugoslav
republic's three constituent peoples - the Serbs, Croats and Muslims
(of South Slavic, mostly Serb ethnic origin) - agreed to a deal
brokered by Portugal's then foreign minister, Jose Cutileiro, the
so-called Lisbon Agreement, which provided for an independent Bosnia
and Herzegovina cantonized according to ethnic lines.
This was Feb. 23 1992: The situation in Bosnia was admittedly tense
but, except for a few minor incidents, no war had broken out. The
Bosnian Serbs had already organized a referendum of their own, with a
99 percent vote in favor of remaining a part of Yugoslavia, but were
willing to compromise in order to avoid war. What happened next,
however, was that the Bosnian Muslim leader, Alija Izetbegovic,
reneged on the deal, which practically made war inevitable. As
Izetbegovic himself put it at the time, he was willing to "sacrifice
peace for sovereignty." Obviously, sovereignty itself wasn't the true
goal - radical Islamic domination of Bosnia was.
Izetbegovic could not have made the move on his own, without outside
diplomatic support. While that support was clearly coming from the
majority of the world's Islamic countries, along with Germany - which
had its own stake in the break-up of Yugoslavia into smaller, "more
manageable" units - it also came from the then U.S. ambassador to
Yugoslavia, Warren Zimmerman, who advised Izetbegovic that he
should hold out for a better deal. That better deal came in the shape
of a 42-month bloody civil war with tens of thousands killed and
hundreds of thousands of refugees.
Another inconvenient truth that remains little-publicized is the fact
that Izetbegovic was not even the most popular Bosnian Muslim leader
at the time. That honor belonged to Fikret Abdic, who received more
votes than Izetbegovic during Bosnia's first multiparty elections in
the fall of 1990. For reasons that are still unclear even today -
although much points to pressure from the outside - Abdic stepped
aside and allowed Izetbegovic to assume the leadership position, even
while remaining his political opponent, advocating peaceful ethnic
coexistence either within a reformed Yugoslavia or a newly-created,
secular (instead of fundamentalist) Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Abdic eventually broke openly with Izetbegovic during the war, forming
his own "autonomous region" in Western Bosnia, which is another fact
in a sea of obfuscation for the West's information-satiated,
truth-starved media audiences. And then - here's the real shocker -
Abdic actually formed an alliance with the dreaded "genocidal,"
"Muslim-hating" Serb forces, with which he mounted joint operations
against the 5th Corps of the Izetbegovic-controlled Bosnian Army,
(which was ultimately saved by NATO threats that it would bomb Serb
and, by extension, moderate Muslim forces if they entered the city of
Bihac). It wouldn't be the first - or the last - time that NATO served
as the air force for Balkan-based Islamic fundamentalists.
Reaping the rewards of his peace-making efforts, Abdic is presently
rotting in a Croatian prison on trumped-up "war crimes" charges,
forgotten by the West, while the openly fundamentalist Izetbegovic
continues to be celebrated by liberal Western circles for supposed
tolerance and commitment to "mutiethnicity," while he and his
followers go quietly about their business of establishing a beachhead
for radical Islam in the Balkans, as several U.S. Senate Republican
Policy Committee papers have clearly stated. Not surprisingly,
Izetbegovic even has a Western prize named after him, and it was duly
presented by none other than Prince Charles earlier this month in
London to a "deserving" British Muslim. This would be the same as if
the FBI decided to halt its increasingly frequent raids on U.S.
offices of Bosnian-based "charities" that raise funds for terrorists
and began passing out good citizenship awards to their staffs instead.
What does all this have to do with the Plavsic case and her war crimes
"admission?" Quite a bit, since it shoots large holes in the basic
premise of the Hague Inquisition's case against former Yugoslav
president Slobodan Milosevic and the entire Bosnian Serb leadership -
that they "engaged in a criminal undertaking" to "cleanse" Bosnia's
Muslim population from its homes, engaging in a "campaign of
genocide" to accomplish their sinister goals.
Plavsic's "admission" to "racially and ethnically-based" crimes by
virtue of her wartime position in the Bosnian Serb leadership is at
odds with the fact that she and the leadership not only agreed to a
pre-war peace deal with the Muslims (and Croats) but also actively
sought alliance with the faction led by the most popular (and least
fundamentalist) Bosnian Muslim leader, Abdic, once Izetbegovic nixed
the Lisbon Peace and the war broke out.
That behavior shows that there was no anti-Muslim prejudice as such
on the part of the Bosnian Serbs but only an anti-fundamentalist
prejudice, which could be excused not just in the post-9/11 world but
in the one that preceded that horrible event as well. Yet, such
behavior is not only being ignored in the Hague Inquisition's version
of history, it is de facto being criminalized at a time when the
global "war on terrorism" is gaining momentum by the minute. Why?
To keep some old skeletons from popping out of the closet? Or, worse,
to appease needed Islamic allies in preparation for the campaign in
Iraq? Are Balkan Christians once again going to be sacrificed and
slandered for the sake of a new Middle Eastern military intervention?
Are terrorists in Bosnia (and Kosovo and Macedonia) going to be
appeased while their brethren in the Middle East are supposedly hunted
down?
It happened once in the 1990s, and it looks certain to happen again.
In fact, the West's pro-fundamentalist, anti-Christian policy in the
Balkans has continued uninterruptedly from the early 1990s to this
day, and one of the Hague Inquisition's primary tasks is to cover up
that shameful policy. There is little doubt that blowback is only a
matter of time, with the caveat that a terror base in the Balkans is
much closer to Western borders than one in Asia.
An honest and fair approach to the legacy of the latest Balkan wars
would, needless to say, have to start from the beginning. If
violations of "international law" are to be enumerated, why not start
with Germany's December 1991 recognition of the then-Yugoslav
republics of Slovenia and Croatia (soon followed by the Vatican and
other Western European states), which was a clear contravention of the
1975 Helsinki Agreement's provision guaranteeing the inviolability of
international borders except by mutual consent?
And why not continue with the spring 1992 recognition of Bosnia and
Herzegovina, which not only violated Helsinki but hardened the
Izetbegovic-led secessionists' resolve to "sacrifice peace for
sovereignty?" What about the Clinton administration's pact with the
Iranians to arm the Bosnian Muslims once the war began, in violation
of a U.N. arms embargo? The list of potential violations that the
tribunal will never deal with is long indeed.
For the Hague Inquisition and its supporters, the most important thing
about Mrs. Plavsic's "admission," in the words of chief Hague
architect Madeleine Albright - who testified during the sentencing
hearing - was the fact that she "recognized the tribunal's
jurisdiction." Indeed, for proponents of global government, the
validation of "international tribunals" is of the utmost importance,
much more so than, say, determining whether genuine genocide did
indeed take place, which in the now-closed Plavsic case will never be
known, at least as far as she is concerned. For, in its zeal to gain
legitimacy, the tribunal dropped "genocide" charges against Mrs.
Plavsic in exchange for her guilty plea to the "lesser" charge of
"persecution as a crime against humanity."
Thus, if Biljana Plavsic did indeed perform genocide in Bosnia during
the 1990s, the victims have been sacrificed yet again, this time at
the altar of The Hague's political requirements and the globalist
agenda at large. What better revelation of global justice's true face,
where a charge of "genocide" is only a bargaining chip in a diplomatic
game, and not an expression of moral outrage by a civilization seeking
to preserve and defend its values. Genocide stands in the category of
absolutes. Either it happened or it didn't. If it did, there can be no
equivocating with its definition, no compromise with its executioners,
no "understanding" for their eventual motives, no mercy when carrying
out punishment. If Biljana Plavsic did indeed commit genocide, who
has the right to let her get off so lightly?
In fact, Mrs. Plavsic originally pleaded innocent to all charges
before the tribunal, and spent the balance of the past 18 months in
building her defense. Her decision to change course was as sudden as
it was surprising, at least to outside observers. It is almost certain
that she was subjected to great pressure to admit "guilt," and that
she was even convinced that, as she put it, by admitting the imagined
"crimes" in her own name, she would take the onus of "collective
responsibility" from her own people.
By cutting the Plavsic trial short and making a deal before all the
facts could be established, the International Criminal Court for the
Former Yugoslavia showed that it is not interested in justice but in a
political agenda. "War crimes" and "genocide" charges are to be pulled
out of the hat as a political expedient, not as a serious potential
violation of accepted human behavior.
The fact that Izetbegovic's forces, according to U.N. documents,
almost certainly bombed their own people - in the Sarajevo breadline
and marketplace "massacres" of 1992 and 1995 - in order to gain
Western sympathy while pinning the blame on the Bosnian Serbs has
gone unnoticed by the tribunal thus far, as have tens of thousands of
pages of other incriminating documentation against him.
Still, Abdic, the true Muslim moderate, sits in prison (albeit not in
The Hague) on "war crimes" charges, while Biljana Plavsic who - as
Carl Bildt, the former Swedish prime minister and high representative
for Bosnia, testified before the tribunal - "never participated in
leadership meetings where decisions of war and peace were made," has
been coached to "admit" "crimes" that she didn't commit. If anyone
ever wondered what Stalin's show trials of the 1930s really looked
like, there's no need to read books or dream of time travel. They are
happening right now, as the new year 2003 dawns, in The Hague, the
seat of the future permanent International Criminal Court.
Proponents of "global justice" have always pointed to the ad hoc
tribunal for the former Yugoslavia as a "trial run" for the permanent
court. The blueprint is now clear: Among all the world's conflicts,
choose one that fits the needs of a current agenda, selectively
criminalize the actions of the "enemy of the month" without regard to
the larger context, then fire away the guns of "international law" to
finish off the "perpetrator," who has previously been thoroughly
demonized by the cooperative, globally ambitious liberal press. Once
the instrumentalization of justice becomes fully legitimized, however,
ask not tomorrow for whom the bell tolls anywhere on this earth. It
will toll for thee.
Aleksandar Pavic in Belgrade covers Yugoslavia for
WorldNetDaily.com.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30222
WorldNetDaily
Saturday, December 28, 2002
Instrumentalization of justice at the Hague
Posted: December 28, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Aleksandar Pavic
© 2002 WorldNetDaily.com
What better proof of the rightness of the Bush administration's
refusal to sign the International Criminal Court treaty earlier this
year than the sham "admission of guilt" by former Bosnian Serb
president Biljana Plavsic to charges of ethnically and racially
motivated "persecution as a crime against humanity" before the ad hoc
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in the Hague
last week.
As the West's mainstream media unceasingly celebrate Mrs. Plavsic's
virtual "admission" and "remorse" for virtual crimes before a virtual
court, "official" historians are busy writing a new, virtual history
of the Balkan conflicts of the 1990s, "cleansed" of inconvenient
facts, complexities and, in the end, truths. The virtual history being
written for this parallel propaganda and PR-managed universe will be
free of things such as:
* moderate Bosnian Muslims betrayed by the West;
* Western sabotage of a viable Bosnian peace agreement before the
bloody conflict even started;
* the Western states' (particularly Germany's and parts of the EU)
own role in the dismantling of the former Yugoslavia and their
accompanying violation of international law;
* the Islamic fundamentalist and extremist nature of Bosnia's
Western-supported Muslim leadership, as well as the cover-up of
that leadership's own war crimes committed not only against
Bosnia's Christian populations, but also against their own people
in their PR struggle for the "hearts and minds" of the West.
One of the best hidden facts about the Bosnian civil war is that it
was preventable, that the leaderships of that former Yugoslav
republic's three constituent peoples - the Serbs, Croats and Muslims
(of South Slavic, mostly Serb ethnic origin) - agreed to a deal
brokered by Portugal's then foreign minister, Jose Cutileiro, the
so-called Lisbon Agreement, which provided for an independent Bosnia
and Herzegovina cantonized according to ethnic lines.
This was Feb. 23 1992: The situation in Bosnia was admittedly tense
but, except for a few minor incidents, no war had broken out. The
Bosnian Serbs had already organized a referendum of their own, with a
99 percent vote in favor of remaining a part of Yugoslavia, but were
willing to compromise in order to avoid war. What happened next,
however, was that the Bosnian Muslim leader, Alija Izetbegovic,
reneged on the deal, which practically made war inevitable. As
Izetbegovic himself put it at the time, he was willing to "sacrifice
peace for sovereignty." Obviously, sovereignty itself wasn't the true
goal - radical Islamic domination of Bosnia was.
Izetbegovic could not have made the move on his own, without outside
diplomatic support. While that support was clearly coming from the
majority of the world's Islamic countries, along with Germany - which
had its own stake in the break-up of Yugoslavia into smaller, "more
manageable" units - it also came from the then U.S. ambassador to
Yugoslavia, Warren Zimmerman, who advised Izetbegovic that he
should hold out for a better deal. That better deal came in the shape
of a 42-month bloody civil war with tens of thousands killed and
hundreds of thousands of refugees.
Another inconvenient truth that remains little-publicized is the fact
that Izetbegovic was not even the most popular Bosnian Muslim leader
at the time. That honor belonged to Fikret Abdic, who received more
votes than Izetbegovic during Bosnia's first multiparty elections in
the fall of 1990. For reasons that are still unclear even today -
although much points to pressure from the outside - Abdic stepped
aside and allowed Izetbegovic to assume the leadership position, even
while remaining his political opponent, advocating peaceful ethnic
coexistence either within a reformed Yugoslavia or a newly-created,
secular (instead of fundamentalist) Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Abdic eventually broke openly with Izetbegovic during the war, forming
his own "autonomous region" in Western Bosnia, which is another fact
in a sea of obfuscation for the West's information-satiated,
truth-starved media audiences. And then - here's the real shocker -
Abdic actually formed an alliance with the dreaded "genocidal,"
"Muslim-hating" Serb forces, with which he mounted joint operations
against the 5th Corps of the Izetbegovic-controlled Bosnian Army,
(which was ultimately saved by NATO threats that it would bomb Serb
and, by extension, moderate Muslim forces if they entered the city of
Bihac). It wouldn't be the first - or the last - time that NATO served
as the air force for Balkan-based Islamic fundamentalists.
Reaping the rewards of his peace-making efforts, Abdic is presently
rotting in a Croatian prison on trumped-up "war crimes" charges,
forgotten by the West, while the openly fundamentalist Izetbegovic
continues to be celebrated by liberal Western circles for supposed
tolerance and commitment to "mutiethnicity," while he and his
followers go quietly about their business of establishing a beachhead
for radical Islam in the Balkans, as several U.S. Senate Republican
Policy Committee papers have clearly stated. Not surprisingly,
Izetbegovic even has a Western prize named after him, and it was duly
presented by none other than Prince Charles earlier this month in
London to a "deserving" British Muslim. This would be the same as if
the FBI decided to halt its increasingly frequent raids on U.S.
offices of Bosnian-based "charities" that raise funds for terrorists
and began passing out good citizenship awards to their staffs instead.
What does all this have to do with the Plavsic case and her war crimes
"admission?" Quite a bit, since it shoots large holes in the basic
premise of the Hague Inquisition's case against former Yugoslav
president Slobodan Milosevic and the entire Bosnian Serb leadership -
that they "engaged in a criminal undertaking" to "cleanse" Bosnia's
Muslim population from its homes, engaging in a "campaign of
genocide" to accomplish their sinister goals.
Plavsic's "admission" to "racially and ethnically-based" crimes by
virtue of her wartime position in the Bosnian Serb leadership is at
odds with the fact that she and the leadership not only agreed to a
pre-war peace deal with the Muslims (and Croats) but also actively
sought alliance with the faction led by the most popular (and least
fundamentalist) Bosnian Muslim leader, Abdic, once Izetbegovic nixed
the Lisbon Peace and the war broke out.
That behavior shows that there was no anti-Muslim prejudice as such
on the part of the Bosnian Serbs but only an anti-fundamentalist
prejudice, which could be excused not just in the post-9/11 world but
in the one that preceded that horrible event as well. Yet, such
behavior is not only being ignored in the Hague Inquisition's version
of history, it is de facto being criminalized at a time when the
global "war on terrorism" is gaining momentum by the minute. Why?
To keep some old skeletons from popping out of the closet? Or, worse,
to appease needed Islamic allies in preparation for the campaign in
Iraq? Are Balkan Christians once again going to be sacrificed and
slandered for the sake of a new Middle Eastern military intervention?
Are terrorists in Bosnia (and Kosovo and Macedonia) going to be
appeased while their brethren in the Middle East are supposedly hunted
down?
It happened once in the 1990s, and it looks certain to happen again.
In fact, the West's pro-fundamentalist, anti-Christian policy in the
Balkans has continued uninterruptedly from the early 1990s to this
day, and one of the Hague Inquisition's primary tasks is to cover up
that shameful policy. There is little doubt that blowback is only a
matter of time, with the caveat that a terror base in the Balkans is
much closer to Western borders than one in Asia.
An honest and fair approach to the legacy of the latest Balkan wars
would, needless to say, have to start from the beginning. If
violations of "international law" are to be enumerated, why not start
with Germany's December 1991 recognition of the then-Yugoslav
republics of Slovenia and Croatia (soon followed by the Vatican and
other Western European states), which was a clear contravention of the
1975 Helsinki Agreement's provision guaranteeing the inviolability of
international borders except by mutual consent?
And why not continue with the spring 1992 recognition of Bosnia and
Herzegovina, which not only violated Helsinki but hardened the
Izetbegovic-led secessionists' resolve to "sacrifice peace for
sovereignty?" What about the Clinton administration's pact with the
Iranians to arm the Bosnian Muslims once the war began, in violation
of a U.N. arms embargo? The list of potential violations that the
tribunal will never deal with is long indeed.
For the Hague Inquisition and its supporters, the most important thing
about Mrs. Plavsic's "admission," in the words of chief Hague
architect Madeleine Albright - who testified during the sentencing
hearing - was the fact that she "recognized the tribunal's
jurisdiction." Indeed, for proponents of global government, the
validation of "international tribunals" is of the utmost importance,
much more so than, say, determining whether genuine genocide did
indeed take place, which in the now-closed Plavsic case will never be
known, at least as far as she is concerned. For, in its zeal to gain
legitimacy, the tribunal dropped "genocide" charges against Mrs.
Plavsic in exchange for her guilty plea to the "lesser" charge of
"persecution as a crime against humanity."
Thus, if Biljana Plavsic did indeed perform genocide in Bosnia during
the 1990s, the victims have been sacrificed yet again, this time at
the altar of The Hague's political requirements and the globalist
agenda at large. What better revelation of global justice's true face,
where a charge of "genocide" is only a bargaining chip in a diplomatic
game, and not an expression of moral outrage by a civilization seeking
to preserve and defend its values. Genocide stands in the category of
absolutes. Either it happened or it didn't. If it did, there can be no
equivocating with its definition, no compromise with its executioners,
no "understanding" for their eventual motives, no mercy when carrying
out punishment. If Biljana Plavsic did indeed commit genocide, who
has the right to let her get off so lightly?
In fact, Mrs. Plavsic originally pleaded innocent to all charges
before the tribunal, and spent the balance of the past 18 months in
building her defense. Her decision to change course was as sudden as
it was surprising, at least to outside observers. It is almost certain
that she was subjected to great pressure to admit "guilt," and that
she was even convinced that, as she put it, by admitting the imagined
"crimes" in her own name, she would take the onus of "collective
responsibility" from her own people.
By cutting the Plavsic trial short and making a deal before all the
facts could be established, the International Criminal Court for the
Former Yugoslavia showed that it is not interested in justice but in a
political agenda. "War crimes" and "genocide" charges are to be pulled
out of the hat as a political expedient, not as a serious potential
violation of accepted human behavior.
The fact that Izetbegovic's forces, according to U.N. documents,
almost certainly bombed their own people - in the Sarajevo breadline
and marketplace "massacres" of 1992 and 1995 - in order to gain
Western sympathy while pinning the blame on the Bosnian Serbs has
gone unnoticed by the tribunal thus far, as have tens of thousands of
pages of other incriminating documentation against him.
Still, Abdic, the true Muslim moderate, sits in prison (albeit not in
The Hague) on "war crimes" charges, while Biljana Plavsic who - as
Carl Bildt, the former Swedish prime minister and high representative
for Bosnia, testified before the tribunal - "never participated in
leadership meetings where decisions of war and peace were made," has
been coached to "admit" "crimes" that she didn't commit. If anyone
ever wondered what Stalin's show trials of the 1930s really looked
like, there's no need to read books or dream of time travel. They are
happening right now, as the new year 2003 dawns, in The Hague, the
seat of the future permanent International Criminal Court.
Proponents of "global justice" have always pointed to the ad hoc
tribunal for the former Yugoslavia as a "trial run" for the permanent
court. The blueprint is now clear: Among all the world's conflicts,
choose one that fits the needs of a current agenda, selectively
criminalize the actions of the "enemy of the month" without regard to
the larger context, then fire away the guns of "international law" to
finish off the "perpetrator," who has previously been thoroughly
demonized by the cooperative, globally ambitious liberal press. Once
the instrumentalization of justice becomes fully legitimized, however,
ask not tomorrow for whom the bell tolls anywhere on this earth. It
will toll for thee.
Aleksandar Pavic in Belgrade covers Yugoslavia for
WorldNetDaily.com.
Surprise! You've just received a Yahoo! Greeting
from "Coordinamento Nazionale per la Jugoslavia" (jugocoord@...)!
To view this greeting card, click on the following
Web address at anytime within the next 30 days.
http://view.greetings.yahoo.com/greet/view?DRAJ8VNY5NWJC
If that doesn't work, go to http://view.greetings.yahoo.com/pickup and
copy and paste this code:
DRAJ8VNY5NWJC
Enjoy!
The Yahoo! Greetings Team
-------------------------
Yahoo! Greetings is a free service. If you'd like to send someone a
Yahoo! Greeting, you can do so at http://greetings.yahoo.com/
New! SBC Yahoo! Dial... 1st Month Free & unlimited access.
http://pa.yahoo.com/*http://rd.yahoo.com/sbcyahoo/consumer/greettag/evt=639/*http://sbc.yahoo.com
from "Coordinamento Nazionale per la Jugoslavia" (jugocoord@...)!
To view this greeting card, click on the following
Web address at anytime within the next 30 days.
http://view.greetings.yahoo.com/greet/view?DRAJ8VNY5NWJC
If that doesn't work, go to http://view.greetings.yahoo.com/pickup and
copy and paste this code:
DRAJ8VNY5NWJC
Enjoy!
The Yahoo! Greetings Team
-------------------------
Yahoo! Greetings is a free service. If you'd like to send someone a
Yahoo! Greeting, you can do so at http://greetings.yahoo.com/
New! SBC Yahoo! Dial... 1st Month Free & unlimited access.
http://pa.yahoo.com/*http://rd.yahoo.com/sbcyahoo/consumer/greettag/evt=639/*http://sbc.yahoo.com
DISINFORMAZIONE STRATEGICA E STRATEGIA DELLA CONFUSIONE
Da alcuni mesi notiamo un crescente "interessamento" alle questioni
balcaniche da parte di personaggi della estrema destra.
Poco probabili "compagni" cercano di stabilire contatti con i nostri
ambienti, vale a dire con le iniziative di controinformazione e
solidarieta' alla Jugoslavia; bollettini telematici e pubblicazioni
storicamente assai poco internazionaliste ed ancor meno "slavofile"
citano nostre informazioni e nostre fonti; e cosi' via. Da ultimo,
abbiamo ricevuto pochi giorni fa un messaggio dalle "Edizioni
all'insegna del Veltro", nel quale si reclamizza un loro
libro-intervista a Dragos Kalajic - il "rappresentante mediatico
ufficiale" delle ragioni del popolo serbo, ormai a tutti noto come
campione di "slalom ideologico" - edito... piu' di tre anni fa! Il
titolo del libro, "Serbia, trincea d'Europa", ne chiarisce
perfettamente il contenuto e dunque ne rende superflua la lettura.
Il suddetto messaggio riporta alcuni estratti dalla Introduzione al
libro. Si menzionano "l'espulsione di 17 milioni di Tedeschi dai
territori dell'Europa centrale e orientale in cui essi erano vissuti
per secoli e la cacciata di 350.000 Italiani dall'Istria e dalla
Dalmazia (col corollario di 20.000 infoibati)" come episodi di
"pulizia etnica" ante litteram. Si accusano gli americani per avere
"armato gli infoibatori titoisti".
Non "merita" entrare nel "merito" di queste menzogne. Un libro che
cerca di far passare i popoli slavi come inguaribili massacratori in
tutte le epoche, che dipinge i tedeschi e gli italiani come pure
vittime della Seconda Guerra Mondiale, e che nasconde le carneficine
attuate dai nazifascisti e dai loro alleati nei Balcani innanzitutto
proprio ai danni dei SERBI... beh per noi un libro del genere puo'
finire dritto dritto nel secchio della spazzatura.
Quello che maggiormente conta e' che i serbi e tutti i popoli slavi
sappiano ben guardarsi da questi "falsi amici".
Italo Slavo
Da alcuni mesi notiamo un crescente "interessamento" alle questioni
balcaniche da parte di personaggi della estrema destra.
Poco probabili "compagni" cercano di stabilire contatti con i nostri
ambienti, vale a dire con le iniziative di controinformazione e
solidarieta' alla Jugoslavia; bollettini telematici e pubblicazioni
storicamente assai poco internazionaliste ed ancor meno "slavofile"
citano nostre informazioni e nostre fonti; e cosi' via. Da ultimo,
abbiamo ricevuto pochi giorni fa un messaggio dalle "Edizioni
all'insegna del Veltro", nel quale si reclamizza un loro
libro-intervista a Dragos Kalajic - il "rappresentante mediatico
ufficiale" delle ragioni del popolo serbo, ormai a tutti noto come
campione di "slalom ideologico" - edito... piu' di tre anni fa! Il
titolo del libro, "Serbia, trincea d'Europa", ne chiarisce
perfettamente il contenuto e dunque ne rende superflua la lettura.
Il suddetto messaggio riporta alcuni estratti dalla Introduzione al
libro. Si menzionano "l'espulsione di 17 milioni di Tedeschi dai
territori dell'Europa centrale e orientale in cui essi erano vissuti
per secoli e la cacciata di 350.000 Italiani dall'Istria e dalla
Dalmazia (col corollario di 20.000 infoibati)" come episodi di
"pulizia etnica" ante litteram. Si accusano gli americani per avere
"armato gli infoibatori titoisti".
Non "merita" entrare nel "merito" di queste menzogne. Un libro che
cerca di far passare i popoli slavi come inguaribili massacratori in
tutte le epoche, che dipinge i tedeschi e gli italiani come pure
vittime della Seconda Guerra Mondiale, e che nasconde le carneficine
attuate dai nazifascisti e dai loro alleati nei Balcani innanzitutto
proprio ai danni dei SERBI... beh per noi un libro del genere puo'
finire dritto dritto nel secchio della spazzatura.
Quello che maggiormente conta e' che i serbi e tutti i popoli slavi
sappiano ben guardarsi da questi "falsi amici".
Italo Slavo
http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/12/23/41243.html
Pravda.RU:Top Stories:More in detail
21:06 2002-12-23
What We Have Come To: Carla del Ponte Is Serbia's Foreign Minister!
At the end of the previous week the Hague officially demanded
extradition of Serbian President Milan Milutinovic. The Serbian
authorities are even given the deadline for the extradition: January
12, 2003.
Milutinovic is accused of ethnic cleansing on the territory of Kosovo
during escalation of the conflict between the Serbian army and
Albanian militants in 1999. Earlier, the Serbian authorities declared
that Milutinovic would be given up to the Hague tribunal as soon as
his term of office expires.
Meanwhile, Milutinovic enjoys immunity as the president of Serbia.
The other day Yugoslavia's presidential aide for foreign policy
Predrag Simic once again declared that "it is highly likely that when
Milutinovic's term of office expires, he will voluntarily appear
before the Hague tribunal."
In the words of Simic, Hague's Prosecutor Carla del Ponte "shouldn't
insist that people accused of war crimes must be detained, as some of
them think their duty is to appear before the tribunal voluntarily,"
Radio Jugoslavija reports. Simic says that in this case "the necessity
of forced detention of these people ceases to have significance." Now
the discussion hinges upon this fact.
In his turn, Yugoslav Foreign Minister Goran Svilanovic openly
declared in an interview to the Serbian newspaper Dnevnik that "none
of the country's foreign political strategic goals can be realized
until Yugoslavia doesn't cooperate with the Hague international
tribunal on a wide scale, which also means delivery of all people
accused of war crimes on the territory of former Yugoslavia."
When the united Yugoslav republic broke up and new formations appeared
on its territory, nobody seemed especially surprised with the fact
that foreign policy of the former Yugoslav republics, including Serbia
and Montenegro was getting more and more oriented toward the West, or
NATO, to be more precise. However, nobody could even suppose that it
would be done so openly and cynically (let's take for instance the
extradition of Slobodan Milosevic right the next day after it was
prohibited by the Constitutional Court), and that Serbian authorities
would give up even the slightest claim for realization of a nation-
oriented, pro-Serbian policy.
It is not ruled out that some day descendants in Yugoslavia will
estimate the above mentioned interview by Svilanovic, and the whole
policy of Prime Minister Zoran Zizic, at their true value. And Zizic
and Co. will have to serve another term, this time not a presidential
one. However, it may happen that there will be no need to dot the
"i's" and cross the "t's": within the past years, the Serbian
leadership resorts to the open propaganda methods and realizes the
political line designed to surrender the country to foreign capital.
As for Serbia's incorporation into the EU and the Council of Europe,
Svilanovic says that it will take place after a new constitution of "a
prospective union state of Serbia and Montenegro" is adopted and when
relations between its subjects are harmonized.
At the time when Svilanovic considered better ways for establishment
of cooperation with the international community and the Hague (with a
view to please the chief lady of the Tribunal), Serbian vice-premier
Nebojsa Covic discussed problems with a journalist from Belgrade's
Glas Javnosti.
Covic said that Yugoslavia was debarred from participation in the
"Partnership for Peace" program and other European organizations and
associations because of the delay with adoption of a new constitution
of a prospective Serb-Montenegrin union. It was Covic who emphasized
several times already that rightful NATO membership was the prospect
of Serbia and Montenegro. "We had this opportunity but we missed it.
We committed too many mistakes."
What mistakes does Covic mean? This can hardly be the split of the
united Yugoslav state and surrender of Kosovo to Albanian bandits.
What are the present-day thoughts of ex-president of Yugoslavia
Slobodan Milosevic in the light of the recent high-flown declarations
made by Serbian top officials and their curtseys toward the Tribunal?
What does he think when he looks at the map of the Yugoslavian
republic?
Sergey Stefanov
PRAVDA.Ru
Translated by Maria Gousseva
Read the original in Russian:
http://world.pravda.ru/world/2002/5/14/37/4761_Milutinovic.html
Pravda.RU:Top Stories:More in detail
21:06 2002-12-23
What We Have Come To: Carla del Ponte Is Serbia's Foreign Minister!
At the end of the previous week the Hague officially demanded
extradition of Serbian President Milan Milutinovic. The Serbian
authorities are even given the deadline for the extradition: January
12, 2003.
Milutinovic is accused of ethnic cleansing on the territory of Kosovo
during escalation of the conflict between the Serbian army and
Albanian militants in 1999. Earlier, the Serbian authorities declared
that Milutinovic would be given up to the Hague tribunal as soon as
his term of office expires.
Meanwhile, Milutinovic enjoys immunity as the president of Serbia.
The other day Yugoslavia's presidential aide for foreign policy
Predrag Simic once again declared that "it is highly likely that when
Milutinovic's term of office expires, he will voluntarily appear
before the Hague tribunal."
In the words of Simic, Hague's Prosecutor Carla del Ponte "shouldn't
insist that people accused of war crimes must be detained, as some of
them think their duty is to appear before the tribunal voluntarily,"
Radio Jugoslavija reports. Simic says that in this case "the necessity
of forced detention of these people ceases to have significance." Now
the discussion hinges upon this fact.
In his turn, Yugoslav Foreign Minister Goran Svilanovic openly
declared in an interview to the Serbian newspaper Dnevnik that "none
of the country's foreign political strategic goals can be realized
until Yugoslavia doesn't cooperate with the Hague international
tribunal on a wide scale, which also means delivery of all people
accused of war crimes on the territory of former Yugoslavia."
When the united Yugoslav republic broke up and new formations appeared
on its territory, nobody seemed especially surprised with the fact
that foreign policy of the former Yugoslav republics, including Serbia
and Montenegro was getting more and more oriented toward the West, or
NATO, to be more precise. However, nobody could even suppose that it
would be done so openly and cynically (let's take for instance the
extradition of Slobodan Milosevic right the next day after it was
prohibited by the Constitutional Court), and that Serbian authorities
would give up even the slightest claim for realization of a nation-
oriented, pro-Serbian policy.
It is not ruled out that some day descendants in Yugoslavia will
estimate the above mentioned interview by Svilanovic, and the whole
policy of Prime Minister Zoran Zizic, at their true value. And Zizic
and Co. will have to serve another term, this time not a presidential
one. However, it may happen that there will be no need to dot the
"i's" and cross the "t's": within the past years, the Serbian
leadership resorts to the open propaganda methods and realizes the
political line designed to surrender the country to foreign capital.
As for Serbia's incorporation into the EU and the Council of Europe,
Svilanovic says that it will take place after a new constitution of "a
prospective union state of Serbia and Montenegro" is adopted and when
relations between its subjects are harmonized.
At the time when Svilanovic considered better ways for establishment
of cooperation with the international community and the Hague (with a
view to please the chief lady of the Tribunal), Serbian vice-premier
Nebojsa Covic discussed problems with a journalist from Belgrade's
Glas Javnosti.
Covic said that Yugoslavia was debarred from participation in the
"Partnership for Peace" program and other European organizations and
associations because of the delay with adoption of a new constitution
of a prospective Serb-Montenegrin union. It was Covic who emphasized
several times already that rightful NATO membership was the prospect
of Serbia and Montenegro. "We had this opportunity but we missed it.
We committed too many mistakes."
What mistakes does Covic mean? This can hardly be the split of the
united Yugoslav state and surrender of Kosovo to Albanian bandits.
What are the present-day thoughts of ex-president of Yugoslavia
Slobodan Milosevic in the light of the recent high-flown declarations
made by Serbian top officials and their curtseys toward the Tribunal?
What does he think when he looks at the map of the Yugoslavian
republic?
Sergey Stefanov
PRAVDA.Ru
Translated by Maria Gousseva
Read the original in Russian:
http://world.pravda.ru/world/2002/5/14/37/4761_Milutinovic.html
1. URGENT ALLERT: Milosevic health worse again despite the adjournment
(SLOBODA 23/12/02)
2. Milosevic vs. Mayor of Dubrovnik (20/12/02): SCANDALOUS!!!
3. Hague Tribunal judges complicit in torture & attempted murder (CANA
UK, 25/12/02)
=== 1 ===
Subject: URGENT ALLERT: Milosevic health worse again
despite the adjournment
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:50:12 +0100
From: "Vladimir Krsljanin" <vlada@...>
URGENT PRESS STATEMENT FROM SLOBODA
Sloboda/Freedom Association informs the
public that the health condition of President
Milosevic has been deteriorate again. His blood
pressure during the weekend has been up to
230/120 mmHg.
For that reason we have sent to the Tribunal
an urgent demand for the team of medical
specialists from the Military Medical Academy
(VMA) in Belgrade to go to The Hague
immediately. First request for the visit of this
medical team has been sent to the Tribunal on
November 9.
It is obvious that the Tribunal attempts by all
means to hide the truth about the medical condition
of President Milosevic and to prevent him from
getting the cure. The fact that President's health
condition is bad even now when the process is
adjourned proves that the all statements and
so-called conclusions and decisions of the
representatives of the Tribunal are an attempt to
fool the public and to hide the organized crime. But
the responsibility for that crime can not be hidden.
Sloboda/Freedom Association calls upon all
citizens and all responsible domestic and
international factors to act immediately and do
everything necessary in this dramatic situation.
Text of Sloboda fax sent to the Hague Tribunal:
Mr. Hans Holtuis, Registrar
Ms. Monica Martinez
Legal officer to the Registry
ICTY
The Hague, The Netherlands
T O P U R G E N T
c/o: Judge Claude Jorda, President
Judges Richard May, Patric Robinson,
O-Gon Kwon, Trial Chamber III
Mr. Branislav Tapuskovic, Mr. Steven
Kay, Amicus Curiae
Subject: Medical team to visit president Milosevic
(Our faxes of November 9, 10, 11, 12, 13)
Dear Mr. Holtuis and Ms. Martinez,
The medical condition of President Milosevic is again in acute
worsening.
We urge you to APPROVE IMMEDIATELY the visit of the team of medical
specialists from the Military Medical Academy (VMA) in Belgrade,
requested in our November faxes.
There is no rule nor condition that could prevent responsible persons
from appropriate action to protect a human life.
The team of doctors from Belgrade is ready to go to The Hague any
minute.
We are expecting your call at +381 63 8862 301 or fax at +381 11 630
549.
Belgrade, December 23rd, 2002
On behalf of the Freedom Association
Bogoljub Bjelica, president
To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sps.org.yu/ (official SPS website)
http://www.belgrade-forum.org/ (forum for the world of equals)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)
icdsm temporary address:
http://emperor.vwh.net/icdsm/index.htm
for your donations:
http://emperor.vwh.net/icdsm/donations.htm
=== 2 ===
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/810368/posts
FreeRepublic.com "A Conservative News Forum"
Dec 20th Report from UN Tribunal -Milosevic
vs. Mayor of Dubrovnik
Jurist.com | 20. Dec 2002 | VM
Posted on 12/21/2002 6:31 AM PST by vooch
Friday December 20, 2002 at 10:43 pm
Let's go to Dubrovnik cross-examination report.
Milosevic asked Poljanic [ Mayor of Dubrovnik ] whether he's aware
that two Dubrovnik judges had investigated several dozens of cases of
the Serb houses being demolished by explosive since the summer of
1991. Poljanic answered he was not aware of that. Milosevic claimed
that more than 50 houses were demolished in the area of Cavtat
alone. Poljanic hurried with 'it's not true' answer, but then he
noticed Milosevic singled out one particular paper from the pile on
his desk, so he quickly added: "I'm not aware of that."
Milosevic said: "Very well. Here I have a statement from the
Dubrovnik District Court judge Dragan Gajic, given to this here
institution in November 2000." And he started to quote incidents of
mining, hand-grenades, mostly when houses were empty, but few
times some of the inhabitants got wounded, more than 50 Serb
houses demolished between the summer of 1991 and 1992 ... Poljanic
tried to wiggle out stating that it was impossible for judges to
investigate, while the JNA was keeping the area under occupation.
Milosevic put in: "And what are we to do about the summer?" Poljanic
then tackled differently: "Perhaps that was the case of these
unauthorized buildings?" [earlier on, Poljanic admitted he ordered
some unauthorized erections to be removed] Milosevic: "But surely
you didn't use hand-grenades to put down unauthorized erections?
This is your judge giving his statement before this here institution."
This same judge Gajic was furthermore quoted that he was ordered to
release some criminals, who subsequently joined Croatian armed
forces. Poljanic said he really didn't know about that, it's such a
large municipality... And, anyways, 'I really don't believe this is
true.'
Milosevic: "I'm only quoting the statement I've received from
the opposite side." This was the beginning.
Milosevic reminded Poljanic that he claimed in his
examination-in-chief a certain number of civilians got killed; but the
truth was most of them were in Croatian uniforms. Poljanic got
extremely upset, declared emphatically that 'not a single man got
killed in uniform; in the list we have discussed here were 2 soldiers
in civilian clothes, who came to the rescue of civilians shelled,
that's all'. Milosevic tried to calm him, saying that 'it's
unfortunate anybody got killed', and Poljanic agreed 'Sure, sure',
thinking this is where the issue will end, but then Milosevic started
to read some papers about the autopsy of 150 soldiers.
He asked whether the name of one Dr Ciganovic is familiar to the
witness. Poljanic confirmed. Milosevic said it was the autopsy
official, assisted by one Ms Damira Poljanic, police photographer, 'a
cousin of yours'. Baffled, Poljanic said: "I thought you were talking
about your autopsies." What a revealing, Freudian slip of the tongue:
he knows his forces killed many JNA soldiers, although he testified
there was but a handful of defenders surrounded within the town, with
one mortar and one cannon.
The Prosecution actually included in the documents also the
autopsy reports of the Croatian side, revealing the autopsy of
150 Croatian soldiers! So much about only 43 civilians killed in
the unprovoked shelling of the Pearl of the Adriatic. More like
it, the Croats were engaged in a full-fledged 3-month battle
against the JNA around Dubrovnik, where at least 150 of their
soldiers got killed and exactly 158 Montenegrins, as claimed by
Milosevic, who presented the list of names (most of the JNA units
consisted of the Montenegrins, being the closest). That's why the
suburbs of Dubrovnik got destroyed and the Croat units would simply
retreat within the Old Town after each clash (an English journalist
saw them, but that would be explained later on, when 2 videos are
introduced).
You know what was the comment of Poljanic to this 150 soldiers
autopsy fact? He actually said: "Ah, if only just one got killed, it's
one too many." Milosevic insisted: "This means that the JNA was
exposed to sustained attacks?" Poljanic: "Well, not all the time were
they sustained, but from time to time they were sustained."
At that moment, Nice begun his jumping-up exercise: he tried to
muddle the issue, 'explaining' this is a rather long statement that
could be important, but also could burden the quantity of documents,
and in short he is not opposed to it, but could it be tendered only a
segment of it, although this would be out of context... Basically,
Prosecution tried to ban their own document from the evidence!
But, May surprisingly decided to accept this statement as a whole,
being made by a professional. Take a note of that, this consists a
precedent over which further battles would ensue.
After this, more documents were pulled out of the stack made by the
brave Prosecution, who didn't bother to comb out the paperwork for
the undesirable traces.
The next statement was by one Mr Simonovic, a citizen of
Dubrovnik, who among other things, undoubtedly supportive to the
Prosecution's case, also claimed that the Croatian military
strongholds were deployed throughout the Old Town as well and he
named 5 locations. Furthermore, the Croatian soldiers were heavily
equipped with German rifles, Land Rovers and transporters; that they
were breaking into houses, looting, even raping a woman.
Poljanic was shocked, tried to deny everything, but Milosevic calmly
informed him these are not his info, 'I also do not know that
particular witness, but I've got all this from the opposite side
here.'
He proceeded to squeeze Poljanic: "You claim the JNA was not fired
upon from the positions within the Old Town?" Poljanic: No!
Milosevic read out from another statement by one Gajic about
'couple of dozens of shells fired on 6 Dec. early in the morning' [the
provocation on the notorious day of 'destruction']. Obviously, these
Dubrovnik characters blabbed too much in their statements. Poljanic
blew the top: "Not even a single revolver bullet was fired then. It's
a shameless lie! It was the greatest tragedy in the 2000-year long
history...." Milosevic: "Please, do not get excited that much. Here I
have yet another statement.."
Poljanic: 'Is it again some Gajic bloke?!"
Milosevic: "No, this one is from Simonovic."
Poljanic lost all his poise: "Aaaa, it means another one just like
him."
Milosevic instructed him: "This is a witness of this here institution,
just like you are, and you are free to judge the similarity between
you two."
From now on, Poljanic sat up, arms crossed, eyes tightly
squeezed, measuring up each move of Milosevic, answering by
pure instinct, not thinking anymore of the whole story, but only
how to come out from the current question.
Milosevic slammed the point even harder: "I'm just asking you the
questions on the basis of the statements of witnesses such as you
yourself are. Here is, for example, a statement from one Stipe
Jelavic, a witness for this false indictment." [at that moment, an
inspired TV frame was shown - Nice in a close-up, hurriedly reading
the same statement, heavily sighing]
This Jelavic guy stated there was a machine-gun nest on top of
the St. Anne church in Brgat and in two WW2 bunkers. Poljanic
allowed the possibility there was 'our army in Brgat' but not in the
church. Jelavic even described how these units in Brgat were visited
by a certain Croat military/paramilitary celebrity: 'Cengija came to
survey the troops and to decide who is to be killed.' Poljanic stated:
"Cengija is an honourable man."(?!)
Robinson understood the enormity of what was going on and said to
Milosevic: "These statements have a key importance for your defence
and you should summon witnesses." Milosevic pointed out that he
now speaks on behalf of the JNA, wrongfully accused here; this has
nothing to do with him or Serbia.
He proceeded to quote this Jelavic: an anti-aircraft gun was brought
to Brgat, there were 6 other guns at 6 other points in the town, he
even enclosed a drawing... Poljanic crumbled gradually: 'there was
one cannon moving on a truck', 'maybe there were soldiers at the
hotel', 'all these 6 locations are at Lapad', 'I was not in the
Military Command, 'I accept it was so, but I wasn't aware of that'...
Then, Kwon spoke to Milosevic: "Do you want all these statements to
be tendered as exhibits?"
May tried to gather some wool: "We shall hear your opinion, Mr
Nice, whether witnesses should be summoned..."
Nice again tried to muddle: "The general policy being not to admit
them as exhibits, just to perhaps enlarge the passage quoted..."
Kwon: "There are certain limitations regarding the statements given
to the Prosecution. Are these statements accurate? [enigmatic
oriental smile]
Nice: "I shall not object, if you doubt the accuracy of these
statements."
Robinson: "It seems to me that now both of you are holding the same
position regarding these statements."
Nice: "I wasn't saying anything, I just mentioned the context; I don't
mind if the Trial Chamber admits the statements, it's only the
question of the weight that is to be attributed..."
May: "We have already accepted one statement today, from a
professional, thus we considered it to be truthful. Maybe Mr Kay
might assist us after the cross-examination."
Kay indeed assisted later on, practically leaving it to the judges;
May said they will have to reconsider it;
Kwon further troubled them by asking: "Are there any hindrances to
the acceptance of these statements, particularly since they had been
taken by the investigators?", and Kay pricked Nice: "The
Prosecution, as far as I understood, is renouncing its objection."
Finally, after conferring a bit, May announced they accept Jelavic
statement as well, 'but this will not be a precedent in further
procedure'. [again?]
After finishing his pleasant reading of the Prosecution's
statements, Milosevic asked the technicians to please play two
videos. One was a medley of Dubrovnik footage and the
statements from some foreign journalists (I managed to write
down the name of one Phil Davidson from the London
Independent; there was also a former US Intelligence Service
official, whose name escaped me, who spoke into the camera
how the whole Dubrovnik story was a Croatian propaganda
scam, how they cowardly attacked the JNA within Montenegro,
then withdrew and proceeded with incursions from Dubrovnik,
all the while spreading stories about the destruction of the town
by heavy shelling. Davidson was a member of a large group of
journalists invited to visit Dubrovnik in October, after the stories
of 15,000 shells were spread by friendly Slovenian, Austrian and
German press; he personally counted 15 small mortar traces; the
town was in nearly pristine condition.
He saw heavy machine-guns and soldiers within the town coming
and going and during the night a heavy cannon was heard shooting
from the rooftop of their hotel. When this video ended, May tried to
dismiss it by asking: "What was it that we saw? We don't know who
these people are."
Silly Poljanic prevented him by saying: "Yes, I know even the day
when this was filmed, I received these people in Dubrovnik. Yes, we
made some loud noise earlier, although not a single shell fell on the
Old Town before 23 Oct., but there were thousands of them that fell
around the town; I picked up the journalists at the port myself, they
came by sea and not through Konavli; they filmed the Old Town and
sent that monstrosity to the world. Only after that the Old Town was
terribly shelled." In other words, yes we did lie at first, but then
we told the truth, please believe us.
But, see how even this presumption of telling the truth the second
time around was proven to be lie again. The second video played was
the one filmed on 25 March 1992, only few short months after the
'greatest tragedy in the 2000-year long history' of Dubrovnik. This
was made by the Professor of the Northeaster Illinois University,
one John Peter Maher (yes, Alexei, the one you've pointed out in
your post). It was a short home video, no sound, depicting the
Old Town alone, walking slowly through its streets, showing
every famous place and building - all nearly spotless, except for
few shrapnel scars in pavement slabs, rails and walls. The only
completely destroyed building, gutted by fire, was the library of
the Serbian Orthodox church.
To all that, Poljanic could only say that this gutted building is not
the library, but a private house, that he doesn't know whether the
library was actually burned down or by whom, and even if it was, he
can 'guarantee with everything it could be guaranteed with' that the
members of the ZNG (National Guard Units) didn't do it; and that an
expert in architecture is expected to testify here soon, who will
explain everything...[another one?]
He again started to throw out numbers of shells from the
'official version' of the Dubrovnik story: 1,056 on the Old Town,
53 on the Franciscan Convent... When Milosevic asked him how
come no buildings were destroyed with all those shells, Poljanic
said: "Well, you know how solidly built these houses are,
difficult to destroy, and densely packed, so they can not
fall..."(?!)
So, our brave witness finished shamefully. But, it was not over yet.
Kay started his short questioning as the amicus curiae and focused it
entirely on the first video. This was too painful a subject for
Poljanic, so he started to answer quite rudely; I'm sure nobody so far
spoke that way to Kay, not even May. [wow, rhymes & poetry!] When Kay
put to him that those journalists alleged old tyres were burnt on
purpose, in order to denigrate the Serbs and create the effect of the
town burning, Poljanic exploded against Kay: "Well, let's finally
agree and accept this truth that Dubrovnik was devastated as never
before in its history!"
Undeterred, Kay proceeded: "Were the guns placed on the rooftops,
to provoke the reaction?"
Poljanic, in a tone of impertinent biting, that could be used to
address a street thug: "I don't know what you're talking about, which
buildings, I don't understand the question, will you repeat?"
Kay asked in his suave English utterances, perfectly unimpressed:
"You've heard that journalist saying a heavy machine-gun had been
placed on top of his hotel, in order to provoke reaction?"
Poljanic: "It's nonsense, why would we do that, there's no logic...
Kay: "In order to blame the Serbs and to create provocations?"
Poljanic: "Bah, I don't understand any of this."
I sincerely doubt such display of rudeness from Poljanic helped the
Prosecution's case a bit.
Nice then got the opportunity to ask few additional questions and he
desperately sought to restore his crumbling case: "In regards the
alleged connections with Serbia, could you please state these
details?"
But it was all in vain, Poljanic was shattered, still in his
quarrelling mode, continued to answer in the same way as he did
to Kay: "Bah, all that was connected to the programme of the
Greater Serbia." [so much for details!]
Nice: "Did anybody apologize, a President, perhaps?" [hint, hint, help
the raging witness]
Poljanic, totally lost, started to quote the song that the Lilliputian
Montenegrin party sang at its rally in praise of Dubrovnik, but
collected himself enough to remember that the President of
Montenegro, noble mobster Djukanovic, indeed did apologize 'for the
destruction of Dubrovnik'.
Nice asked: "Do you remember whether he mentioned Serbia? If you
don't, I'll play the tape for you."
Poljanic: "I don't remember, but play the tape for me and then
I'll tell you."(?!)
Nice, destroyed: "Some other time. Thank you."
Then the discussion already described ensued, about the admissibility
of statements. May also said they'll reconsider whether to admit these
two tapes; 'maybe the one without sound could be accepted, and the
other one, being with the comments, maybe will not be accepted'.
Then the troika conferred, and announced to mark both videos for
identification.
I have addressed here only two segments of Milosevic's
cross-examination: witness' statements and videos; but there were
equally great lines regarding the Amnesty International reports and
war editions of Dubrovnik local paper (read the transcript). Do you
think that the Prosecution proved Dubrovnik had been devastated
without provocation as never before in its history?
Vera Martinovic
Belgrade
Yugoslavia
=== 3 ===
Subject: Hague Tribunal judges complicit in torture & attempted murder
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 00:04:22 -0000
From: "canauk" <canauk@...>
To: "Hague Tribunal" <nikiforov@...>,
"Hague Tribunal" <Jorda.icty@...>,
"Hague Tribunal" <fisk.icty@...>
To the International Criminal Court for the
Former Yugoslavia
24th December 2002
Dear Sirs
I refer to reports which I have received tonight that
the health of the former President of Yugoslavia,
Mr Milosevic is again worsening, & the Tribunal
has done nothing, despite protests from all over the
world, to ensure that the prisoner is seen by competent
specialist physicians independent of the Tribunal &
neither will the Tribunal grant bail.
I have written to the Tribunal on previous
occasions, without receiving any acknowledgement,
pointing out that the decisions of Judge May
constitute prima facie a criminal case under section
134 of the Criminal Justice Act
1988. He is complicit in torture, & not merely
complicit but the main instrument.
I have told the Law Officers that I will be lodging
as soon as convenient an Information @ Highgate
Magistrates Court with the view to the prosecution
of the said judge May.
The Information is currently being prepared but
should Mr Milosevic die I will upgrade it to a
charge of murder against both Judge May & the
other judges hearing this case.
I think the behaviour of your Court is deplorable.
Primary responsibility is on the Netherlands
Government for hosting your Court & on the
United Nation Security Council for refusing to
engage in any form of monitoring of
their own creation. We believe an enquiry should
be instituted by the Security Council & the General
Assembly into (inter alia) the illegal financing of
this Court, (the expenses of which should be met
from the normal UN budget, but @ least in part
they are met by Mr Soros. Is this not correct?)
We also blame Amnesty International, which
organisation has altogether failed in terms of
protecting the interests of prisoners of conscience.
We call on AI organisations world wide to take up
such an obvious case of
political persecution & to hear the concerns of so
many people about this farce of international
justice, the WTE, (Washington's Tribunal in
Europe).
CANA UK believes that Mr Milosevic's life is in
imminent danger, not least because of the
imminence of the pre-planned aggression on Iraq.
The American Government has taken a leaf out of
the Stalinist book. Trotsky was finally eliminated
in 1940, as the German armies were marching
through France. There is no doubt in my mind that
the object of the Tribunal, now that it has not been
able to find a case against the President, is to kill
him, in the most expeditious & least publicised
manner possible & also at the most opportune time.
Judge May's tenure @ the Hague, in his NATO-
EU role, of supreme torturer, as well as prosecutor,
judge & in all probability executioner, should go
down in history as the most obscene misapplication
of judicial power by a British judge anywhere in
the world since Judge Jeffreys & the Bloody Assize.
British judges have built up an entirely fallacious
reputation for being fair minded, when in fact as a
group, & with few exceptions, they are invariably
corrupt, as Judge May's handling of this so called
trial proves, & as do many other cases known to me.
The Law Officers consistently refuse to investigate
all the numerous instances of judicial corruption
brought to their attention every year. If they are
indolent, in their refusal to grasp this nettle, this is
not surprising, when the UK judiciary as a
collectivity believe themselves to be above the law.
The psycho-pathological problems which afflict
them as a caste are accentuated in the case of
Judge May as he is currently removed from the
jurisdiction, (although he remains an official of the
UK Government - whatever undertakings he may
have entered into with regard to this continent so
called Court, he remains bound by judicial oath to
Her Majesty).
I also paste below a copy of a letter sent to the
Guardian + copy to Geoffrey Robertson QC
which highlights a deficiency in the Court as an
institution, quite apart from its procedures.
Yours Sincerely
William Spring
To the Editor
The Guardian
Dear Sir
There is at least one colossal flaw in the logic of
Geoffrey Robertson's argument, (Guardian 19th
December) favouring the standards of supposed
international justice exemplified by the
International Criminal Tribunal for
the Former Yugoslavia. No justice can be justice if
not applied equally to all. I am not a Yugoslav
citizen. My first concern isn't with Mr Milosevic,
but with the activities of my Government, of Blair,
Cook, & Straw, for
example, all of whom I regard as war criminals.
In the case of the first two, in May 1999 I sought to
press criminal charges before Magistrates, one, for
encouraging terrorism in a foreign state contrary
to section Five of the Criminal Justice Act, and two, for
conspiracy to murder & to cause explosions in the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The Magistrates
declined to issue the proceedings citing insufficient
evidence.
What I find remarkable is the Hague Court
entertaining the testimony of NATO war criminals,
when in 1999 NATO didn't even have the fig-leaf
of a United Nations resolution to legitimise military
action. How can such a Court be just, which only
hears the accusations of the victors, themselves law
breakers, & ignores the cries of the vanquished?
Don't dead or mutilated Yugoslavs, Afghans, or
Palestinians, nor those shortly to suffer in Iraq,
count for anything? Don't they deserve an
advocate? If they do, it shouldn't be Mr Robertson.
His view of justice is inexorably skewed, in favour
of wealth, power, & the ruthless use of propaganda
& military force by humanitarian warriors.
Yours sincerely
William Spring
CANA UK
Christians Against Nato Aggression UK
1 Scales Road London N17 9HB
(SLOBODA 23/12/02)
2. Milosevic vs. Mayor of Dubrovnik (20/12/02): SCANDALOUS!!!
3. Hague Tribunal judges complicit in torture & attempted murder (CANA
UK, 25/12/02)
=== 1 ===
Subject: URGENT ALLERT: Milosevic health worse again
despite the adjournment
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:50:12 +0100
From: "Vladimir Krsljanin" <vlada@...>
URGENT PRESS STATEMENT FROM SLOBODA
Sloboda/Freedom Association informs the
public that the health condition of President
Milosevic has been deteriorate again. His blood
pressure during the weekend has been up to
230/120 mmHg.
For that reason we have sent to the Tribunal
an urgent demand for the team of medical
specialists from the Military Medical Academy
(VMA) in Belgrade to go to The Hague
immediately. First request for the visit of this
medical team has been sent to the Tribunal on
November 9.
It is obvious that the Tribunal attempts by all
means to hide the truth about the medical condition
of President Milosevic and to prevent him from
getting the cure. The fact that President's health
condition is bad even now when the process is
adjourned proves that the all statements and
so-called conclusions and decisions of the
representatives of the Tribunal are an attempt to
fool the public and to hide the organized crime. But
the responsibility for that crime can not be hidden.
Sloboda/Freedom Association calls upon all
citizens and all responsible domestic and
international factors to act immediately and do
everything necessary in this dramatic situation.
Text of Sloboda fax sent to the Hague Tribunal:
Mr. Hans Holtuis, Registrar
Ms. Monica Martinez
Legal officer to the Registry
ICTY
The Hague, The Netherlands
T O P U R G E N T
c/o: Judge Claude Jorda, President
Judges Richard May, Patric Robinson,
O-Gon Kwon, Trial Chamber III
Mr. Branislav Tapuskovic, Mr. Steven
Kay, Amicus Curiae
Subject: Medical team to visit president Milosevic
(Our faxes of November 9, 10, 11, 12, 13)
Dear Mr. Holtuis and Ms. Martinez,
The medical condition of President Milosevic is again in acute
worsening.
We urge you to APPROVE IMMEDIATELY the visit of the team of medical
specialists from the Military Medical Academy (VMA) in Belgrade,
requested in our November faxes.
There is no rule nor condition that could prevent responsible persons
from appropriate action to protect a human life.
The team of doctors from Belgrade is ready to go to The Hague any
minute.
We are expecting your call at +381 63 8862 301 or fax at +381 11 630
549.
Belgrade, December 23rd, 2002
On behalf of the Freedom Association
Bogoljub Bjelica, president
To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sps.org.yu/ (official SPS website)
http://www.belgrade-forum.org/ (forum for the world of equals)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)
icdsm temporary address:
http://emperor.vwh.net/icdsm/index.htm
for your donations:
http://emperor.vwh.net/icdsm/donations.htm
=== 2 ===
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/810368/posts
FreeRepublic.com "A Conservative News Forum"
Dec 20th Report from UN Tribunal -Milosevic
vs. Mayor of Dubrovnik
Jurist.com | 20. Dec 2002 | VM
Posted on 12/21/2002 6:31 AM PST by vooch
Friday December 20, 2002 at 10:43 pm
Let's go to Dubrovnik cross-examination report.
Milosevic asked Poljanic [ Mayor of Dubrovnik ] whether he's aware
that two Dubrovnik judges had investigated several dozens of cases of
the Serb houses being demolished by explosive since the summer of
1991. Poljanic answered he was not aware of that. Milosevic claimed
that more than 50 houses were demolished in the area of Cavtat
alone. Poljanic hurried with 'it's not true' answer, but then he
noticed Milosevic singled out one particular paper from the pile on
his desk, so he quickly added: "I'm not aware of that."
Milosevic said: "Very well. Here I have a statement from the
Dubrovnik District Court judge Dragan Gajic, given to this here
institution in November 2000." And he started to quote incidents of
mining, hand-grenades, mostly when houses were empty, but few
times some of the inhabitants got wounded, more than 50 Serb
houses demolished between the summer of 1991 and 1992 ... Poljanic
tried to wiggle out stating that it was impossible for judges to
investigate, while the JNA was keeping the area under occupation.
Milosevic put in: "And what are we to do about the summer?" Poljanic
then tackled differently: "Perhaps that was the case of these
unauthorized buildings?" [earlier on, Poljanic admitted he ordered
some unauthorized erections to be removed] Milosevic: "But surely
you didn't use hand-grenades to put down unauthorized erections?
This is your judge giving his statement before this here institution."
This same judge Gajic was furthermore quoted that he was ordered to
release some criminals, who subsequently joined Croatian armed
forces. Poljanic said he really didn't know about that, it's such a
large municipality... And, anyways, 'I really don't believe this is
true.'
Milosevic: "I'm only quoting the statement I've received from
the opposite side." This was the beginning.
Milosevic reminded Poljanic that he claimed in his
examination-in-chief a certain number of civilians got killed; but the
truth was most of them were in Croatian uniforms. Poljanic got
extremely upset, declared emphatically that 'not a single man got
killed in uniform; in the list we have discussed here were 2 soldiers
in civilian clothes, who came to the rescue of civilians shelled,
that's all'. Milosevic tried to calm him, saying that 'it's
unfortunate anybody got killed', and Poljanic agreed 'Sure, sure',
thinking this is where the issue will end, but then Milosevic started
to read some papers about the autopsy of 150 soldiers.
He asked whether the name of one Dr Ciganovic is familiar to the
witness. Poljanic confirmed. Milosevic said it was the autopsy
official, assisted by one Ms Damira Poljanic, police photographer, 'a
cousin of yours'. Baffled, Poljanic said: "I thought you were talking
about your autopsies." What a revealing, Freudian slip of the tongue:
he knows his forces killed many JNA soldiers, although he testified
there was but a handful of defenders surrounded within the town, with
one mortar and one cannon.
The Prosecution actually included in the documents also the
autopsy reports of the Croatian side, revealing the autopsy of
150 Croatian soldiers! So much about only 43 civilians killed in
the unprovoked shelling of the Pearl of the Adriatic. More like
it, the Croats were engaged in a full-fledged 3-month battle
against the JNA around Dubrovnik, where at least 150 of their
soldiers got killed and exactly 158 Montenegrins, as claimed by
Milosevic, who presented the list of names (most of the JNA units
consisted of the Montenegrins, being the closest). That's why the
suburbs of Dubrovnik got destroyed and the Croat units would simply
retreat within the Old Town after each clash (an English journalist
saw them, but that would be explained later on, when 2 videos are
introduced).
You know what was the comment of Poljanic to this 150 soldiers
autopsy fact? He actually said: "Ah, if only just one got killed, it's
one too many." Milosevic insisted: "This means that the JNA was
exposed to sustained attacks?" Poljanic: "Well, not all the time were
they sustained, but from time to time they were sustained."
At that moment, Nice begun his jumping-up exercise: he tried to
muddle the issue, 'explaining' this is a rather long statement that
could be important, but also could burden the quantity of documents,
and in short he is not opposed to it, but could it be tendered only a
segment of it, although this would be out of context... Basically,
Prosecution tried to ban their own document from the evidence!
But, May surprisingly decided to accept this statement as a whole,
being made by a professional. Take a note of that, this consists a
precedent over which further battles would ensue.
After this, more documents were pulled out of the stack made by the
brave Prosecution, who didn't bother to comb out the paperwork for
the undesirable traces.
The next statement was by one Mr Simonovic, a citizen of
Dubrovnik, who among other things, undoubtedly supportive to the
Prosecution's case, also claimed that the Croatian military
strongholds were deployed throughout the Old Town as well and he
named 5 locations. Furthermore, the Croatian soldiers were heavily
equipped with German rifles, Land Rovers and transporters; that they
were breaking into houses, looting, even raping a woman.
Poljanic was shocked, tried to deny everything, but Milosevic calmly
informed him these are not his info, 'I also do not know that
particular witness, but I've got all this from the opposite side
here.'
He proceeded to squeeze Poljanic: "You claim the JNA was not fired
upon from the positions within the Old Town?" Poljanic: No!
Milosevic read out from another statement by one Gajic about
'couple of dozens of shells fired on 6 Dec. early in the morning' [the
provocation on the notorious day of 'destruction']. Obviously, these
Dubrovnik characters blabbed too much in their statements. Poljanic
blew the top: "Not even a single revolver bullet was fired then. It's
a shameless lie! It was the greatest tragedy in the 2000-year long
history...." Milosevic: "Please, do not get excited that much. Here I
have yet another statement.."
Poljanic: 'Is it again some Gajic bloke?!"
Milosevic: "No, this one is from Simonovic."
Poljanic lost all his poise: "Aaaa, it means another one just like
him."
Milosevic instructed him: "This is a witness of this here institution,
just like you are, and you are free to judge the similarity between
you two."
From now on, Poljanic sat up, arms crossed, eyes tightly
squeezed, measuring up each move of Milosevic, answering by
pure instinct, not thinking anymore of the whole story, but only
how to come out from the current question.
Milosevic slammed the point even harder: "I'm just asking you the
questions on the basis of the statements of witnesses such as you
yourself are. Here is, for example, a statement from one Stipe
Jelavic, a witness for this false indictment." [at that moment, an
inspired TV frame was shown - Nice in a close-up, hurriedly reading
the same statement, heavily sighing]
This Jelavic guy stated there was a machine-gun nest on top of
the St. Anne church in Brgat and in two WW2 bunkers. Poljanic
allowed the possibility there was 'our army in Brgat' but not in the
church. Jelavic even described how these units in Brgat were visited
by a certain Croat military/paramilitary celebrity: 'Cengija came to
survey the troops and to decide who is to be killed.' Poljanic stated:
"Cengija is an honourable man."(?!)
Robinson understood the enormity of what was going on and said to
Milosevic: "These statements have a key importance for your defence
and you should summon witnesses." Milosevic pointed out that he
now speaks on behalf of the JNA, wrongfully accused here; this has
nothing to do with him or Serbia.
He proceeded to quote this Jelavic: an anti-aircraft gun was brought
to Brgat, there were 6 other guns at 6 other points in the town, he
even enclosed a drawing... Poljanic crumbled gradually: 'there was
one cannon moving on a truck', 'maybe there were soldiers at the
hotel', 'all these 6 locations are at Lapad', 'I was not in the
Military Command, 'I accept it was so, but I wasn't aware of that'...
Then, Kwon spoke to Milosevic: "Do you want all these statements to
be tendered as exhibits?"
May tried to gather some wool: "We shall hear your opinion, Mr
Nice, whether witnesses should be summoned..."
Nice again tried to muddle: "The general policy being not to admit
them as exhibits, just to perhaps enlarge the passage quoted..."
Kwon: "There are certain limitations regarding the statements given
to the Prosecution. Are these statements accurate? [enigmatic
oriental smile]
Nice: "I shall not object, if you doubt the accuracy of these
statements."
Robinson: "It seems to me that now both of you are holding the same
position regarding these statements."
Nice: "I wasn't saying anything, I just mentioned the context; I don't
mind if the Trial Chamber admits the statements, it's only the
question of the weight that is to be attributed..."
May: "We have already accepted one statement today, from a
professional, thus we considered it to be truthful. Maybe Mr Kay
might assist us after the cross-examination."
Kay indeed assisted later on, practically leaving it to the judges;
May said they will have to reconsider it;
Kwon further troubled them by asking: "Are there any hindrances to
the acceptance of these statements, particularly since they had been
taken by the investigators?", and Kay pricked Nice: "The
Prosecution, as far as I understood, is renouncing its objection."
Finally, after conferring a bit, May announced they accept Jelavic
statement as well, 'but this will not be a precedent in further
procedure'. [again?]
After finishing his pleasant reading of the Prosecution's
statements, Milosevic asked the technicians to please play two
videos. One was a medley of Dubrovnik footage and the
statements from some foreign journalists (I managed to write
down the name of one Phil Davidson from the London
Independent; there was also a former US Intelligence Service
official, whose name escaped me, who spoke into the camera
how the whole Dubrovnik story was a Croatian propaganda
scam, how they cowardly attacked the JNA within Montenegro,
then withdrew and proceeded with incursions from Dubrovnik,
all the while spreading stories about the destruction of the town
by heavy shelling. Davidson was a member of a large group of
journalists invited to visit Dubrovnik in October, after the stories
of 15,000 shells were spread by friendly Slovenian, Austrian and
German press; he personally counted 15 small mortar traces; the
town was in nearly pristine condition.
He saw heavy machine-guns and soldiers within the town coming
and going and during the night a heavy cannon was heard shooting
from the rooftop of their hotel. When this video ended, May tried to
dismiss it by asking: "What was it that we saw? We don't know who
these people are."
Silly Poljanic prevented him by saying: "Yes, I know even the day
when this was filmed, I received these people in Dubrovnik. Yes, we
made some loud noise earlier, although not a single shell fell on the
Old Town before 23 Oct., but there were thousands of them that fell
around the town; I picked up the journalists at the port myself, they
came by sea and not through Konavli; they filmed the Old Town and
sent that monstrosity to the world. Only after that the Old Town was
terribly shelled." In other words, yes we did lie at first, but then
we told the truth, please believe us.
But, see how even this presumption of telling the truth the second
time around was proven to be lie again. The second video played was
the one filmed on 25 March 1992, only few short months after the
'greatest tragedy in the 2000-year long history' of Dubrovnik. This
was made by the Professor of the Northeaster Illinois University,
one John Peter Maher (yes, Alexei, the one you've pointed out in
your post). It was a short home video, no sound, depicting the
Old Town alone, walking slowly through its streets, showing
every famous place and building - all nearly spotless, except for
few shrapnel scars in pavement slabs, rails and walls. The only
completely destroyed building, gutted by fire, was the library of
the Serbian Orthodox church.
To all that, Poljanic could only say that this gutted building is not
the library, but a private house, that he doesn't know whether the
library was actually burned down or by whom, and even if it was, he
can 'guarantee with everything it could be guaranteed with' that the
members of the ZNG (National Guard Units) didn't do it; and that an
expert in architecture is expected to testify here soon, who will
explain everything...[another one?]
He again started to throw out numbers of shells from the
'official version' of the Dubrovnik story: 1,056 on the Old Town,
53 on the Franciscan Convent... When Milosevic asked him how
come no buildings were destroyed with all those shells, Poljanic
said: "Well, you know how solidly built these houses are,
difficult to destroy, and densely packed, so they can not
fall..."(?!)
So, our brave witness finished shamefully. But, it was not over yet.
Kay started his short questioning as the amicus curiae and focused it
entirely on the first video. This was too painful a subject for
Poljanic, so he started to answer quite rudely; I'm sure nobody so far
spoke that way to Kay, not even May. [wow, rhymes & poetry!] When Kay
put to him that those journalists alleged old tyres were burnt on
purpose, in order to denigrate the Serbs and create the effect of the
town burning, Poljanic exploded against Kay: "Well, let's finally
agree and accept this truth that Dubrovnik was devastated as never
before in its history!"
Undeterred, Kay proceeded: "Were the guns placed on the rooftops,
to provoke the reaction?"
Poljanic, in a tone of impertinent biting, that could be used to
address a street thug: "I don't know what you're talking about, which
buildings, I don't understand the question, will you repeat?"
Kay asked in his suave English utterances, perfectly unimpressed:
"You've heard that journalist saying a heavy machine-gun had been
placed on top of his hotel, in order to provoke reaction?"
Poljanic: "It's nonsense, why would we do that, there's no logic...
Kay: "In order to blame the Serbs and to create provocations?"
Poljanic: "Bah, I don't understand any of this."
I sincerely doubt such display of rudeness from Poljanic helped the
Prosecution's case a bit.
Nice then got the opportunity to ask few additional questions and he
desperately sought to restore his crumbling case: "In regards the
alleged connections with Serbia, could you please state these
details?"
But it was all in vain, Poljanic was shattered, still in his
quarrelling mode, continued to answer in the same way as he did
to Kay: "Bah, all that was connected to the programme of the
Greater Serbia." [so much for details!]
Nice: "Did anybody apologize, a President, perhaps?" [hint, hint, help
the raging witness]
Poljanic, totally lost, started to quote the song that the Lilliputian
Montenegrin party sang at its rally in praise of Dubrovnik, but
collected himself enough to remember that the President of
Montenegro, noble mobster Djukanovic, indeed did apologize 'for the
destruction of Dubrovnik'.
Nice asked: "Do you remember whether he mentioned Serbia? If you
don't, I'll play the tape for you."
Poljanic: "I don't remember, but play the tape for me and then
I'll tell you."(?!)
Nice, destroyed: "Some other time. Thank you."
Then the discussion already described ensued, about the admissibility
of statements. May also said they'll reconsider whether to admit these
two tapes; 'maybe the one without sound could be accepted, and the
other one, being with the comments, maybe will not be accepted'.
Then the troika conferred, and announced to mark both videos for
identification.
I have addressed here only two segments of Milosevic's
cross-examination: witness' statements and videos; but there were
equally great lines regarding the Amnesty International reports and
war editions of Dubrovnik local paper (read the transcript). Do you
think that the Prosecution proved Dubrovnik had been devastated
without provocation as never before in its history?
Vera Martinovic
Belgrade
Yugoslavia
=== 3 ===
Subject: Hague Tribunal judges complicit in torture & attempted murder
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 00:04:22 -0000
From: "canauk" <canauk@...>
To: "Hague Tribunal" <nikiforov@...>,
"Hague Tribunal" <Jorda.icty@...>,
"Hague Tribunal" <fisk.icty@...>
To the International Criminal Court for the
Former Yugoslavia
24th December 2002
Dear Sirs
I refer to reports which I have received tonight that
the health of the former President of Yugoslavia,
Mr Milosevic is again worsening, & the Tribunal
has done nothing, despite protests from all over the
world, to ensure that the prisoner is seen by competent
specialist physicians independent of the Tribunal &
neither will the Tribunal grant bail.
I have written to the Tribunal on previous
occasions, without receiving any acknowledgement,
pointing out that the decisions of Judge May
constitute prima facie a criminal case under section
134 of the Criminal Justice Act
1988. He is complicit in torture, & not merely
complicit but the main instrument.
I have told the Law Officers that I will be lodging
as soon as convenient an Information @ Highgate
Magistrates Court with the view to the prosecution
of the said judge May.
The Information is currently being prepared but
should Mr Milosevic die I will upgrade it to a
charge of murder against both Judge May & the
other judges hearing this case.
I think the behaviour of your Court is deplorable.
Primary responsibility is on the Netherlands
Government for hosting your Court & on the
United Nation Security Council for refusing to
engage in any form of monitoring of
their own creation. We believe an enquiry should
be instituted by the Security Council & the General
Assembly into (inter alia) the illegal financing of
this Court, (the expenses of which should be met
from the normal UN budget, but @ least in part
they are met by Mr Soros. Is this not correct?)
We also blame Amnesty International, which
organisation has altogether failed in terms of
protecting the interests of prisoners of conscience.
We call on AI organisations world wide to take up
such an obvious case of
political persecution & to hear the concerns of so
many people about this farce of international
justice, the WTE, (Washington's Tribunal in
Europe).
CANA UK believes that Mr Milosevic's life is in
imminent danger, not least because of the
imminence of the pre-planned aggression on Iraq.
The American Government has taken a leaf out of
the Stalinist book. Trotsky was finally eliminated
in 1940, as the German armies were marching
through France. There is no doubt in my mind that
the object of the Tribunal, now that it has not been
able to find a case against the President, is to kill
him, in the most expeditious & least publicised
manner possible & also at the most opportune time.
Judge May's tenure @ the Hague, in his NATO-
EU role, of supreme torturer, as well as prosecutor,
judge & in all probability executioner, should go
down in history as the most obscene misapplication
of judicial power by a British judge anywhere in
the world since Judge Jeffreys & the Bloody Assize.
British judges have built up an entirely fallacious
reputation for being fair minded, when in fact as a
group, & with few exceptions, they are invariably
corrupt, as Judge May's handling of this so called
trial proves, & as do many other cases known to me.
The Law Officers consistently refuse to investigate
all the numerous instances of judicial corruption
brought to their attention every year. If they are
indolent, in their refusal to grasp this nettle, this is
not surprising, when the UK judiciary as a
collectivity believe themselves to be above the law.
The psycho-pathological problems which afflict
them as a caste are accentuated in the case of
Judge May as he is currently removed from the
jurisdiction, (although he remains an official of the
UK Government - whatever undertakings he may
have entered into with regard to this continent so
called Court, he remains bound by judicial oath to
Her Majesty).
I also paste below a copy of a letter sent to the
Guardian + copy to Geoffrey Robertson QC
which highlights a deficiency in the Court as an
institution, quite apart from its procedures.
Yours Sincerely
William Spring
To the Editor
The Guardian
Dear Sir
There is at least one colossal flaw in the logic of
Geoffrey Robertson's argument, (Guardian 19th
December) favouring the standards of supposed
international justice exemplified by the
International Criminal Tribunal for
the Former Yugoslavia. No justice can be justice if
not applied equally to all. I am not a Yugoslav
citizen. My first concern isn't with Mr Milosevic,
but with the activities of my Government, of Blair,
Cook, & Straw, for
example, all of whom I regard as war criminals.
In the case of the first two, in May 1999 I sought to
press criminal charges before Magistrates, one, for
encouraging terrorism in a foreign state contrary
to section Five of the Criminal Justice Act, and two, for
conspiracy to murder & to cause explosions in the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The Magistrates
declined to issue the proceedings citing insufficient
evidence.
What I find remarkable is the Hague Court
entertaining the testimony of NATO war criminals,
when in 1999 NATO didn't even have the fig-leaf
of a United Nations resolution to legitimise military
action. How can such a Court be just, which only
hears the accusations of the victors, themselves law
breakers, & ignores the cries of the vanquished?
Don't dead or mutilated Yugoslavs, Afghans, or
Palestinians, nor those shortly to suffer in Iraq,
count for anything? Don't they deserve an
advocate? If they do, it shouldn't be Mr Robertson.
His view of justice is inexorably skewed, in favour
of wealth, power, & the ruthless use of propaganda
& military force by humanitarian warriors.
Yours sincerely
William Spring
CANA UK
Christians Against Nato Aggression UK
1 Scales Road London N17 9HB
Subject: urge sangue
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 20:32:56 +0100
From: "Alessandro Di Meo" <dimeo@...>
Lancio un appello, in questo periodo di regali e doni, per una
donazione.
Si tratta di sangue, necessario per garantire le trasfusioni di
piastrine a Marko Milanovic, ragazzino di 12 anni proveniente da
Kraljevo, sud della Jugoslavia, affetto da Anemia Aplastica, terribile
malattia del midollo, ricoverato al reparto di Oncologia Pediatrica
dell'ospedale Agostino Gemelli di Roma.
Chiunque, ripeto, chiunque può donare.
Basta andare un giorno feriale dalle 8,30 alle 10,30 di mattina,
digiuni, al Centro Trasfusionale del Gemelli (chiedere all'entrata
principale alle signore addette alle informazioni) e dire che si vuol
donare sangue per Marko Milanovic. Vi verrà effettuato un piccolo
prelievo per le analisi e dopo due, massimo tre giorni, dovrete
tornare, sempre digiuni, per la donazione vera e propria (sempre che
le analisi, ovviamente, risultino accettabili).
Tutto questo, ripeto, garantirà a Marko, in attesa che la cura abbia
l'effetto desiderato, le trasfusioni in un periodo, questo delle
feste, in cui scarseggiano le riserve di sangue con l'ospedale che
deve affrontare interventi quali trapianti di fegato e altro.
Purtroppo, il sangue non si fabbrica ancora e c'è bisogno di un
piccolo sforzo da parte di tutti.
Grazie e auguri a tutti da parte di Marko e di sua madre, Novka.
alessandro di meo
(Un Ponte per...)
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 20:32:56 +0100
From: "Alessandro Di Meo" <dimeo@...>
Lancio un appello, in questo periodo di regali e doni, per una
donazione.
Si tratta di sangue, necessario per garantire le trasfusioni di
piastrine a Marko Milanovic, ragazzino di 12 anni proveniente da
Kraljevo, sud della Jugoslavia, affetto da Anemia Aplastica, terribile
malattia del midollo, ricoverato al reparto di Oncologia Pediatrica
dell'ospedale Agostino Gemelli di Roma.
Chiunque, ripeto, chiunque può donare.
Basta andare un giorno feriale dalle 8,30 alle 10,30 di mattina,
digiuni, al Centro Trasfusionale del Gemelli (chiedere all'entrata
principale alle signore addette alle informazioni) e dire che si vuol
donare sangue per Marko Milanovic. Vi verrà effettuato un piccolo
prelievo per le analisi e dopo due, massimo tre giorni, dovrete
tornare, sempre digiuni, per la donazione vera e propria (sempre che
le analisi, ovviamente, risultino accettabili).
Tutto questo, ripeto, garantirà a Marko, in attesa che la cura abbia
l'effetto desiderato, le trasfusioni in un periodo, questo delle
feste, in cui scarseggiano le riserve di sangue con l'ospedale che
deve affrontare interventi quali trapianti di fegato e altro.
Purtroppo, il sangue non si fabbrica ancora e c'è bisogno di un
piccolo sforzo da parte di tutti.
Grazie e auguri a tutti da parte di Marko e di sua madre, Novka.
alessandro di meo
(Un Ponte per...)
Jugocoord su Telegram
Jugocoord su Facebook