Subject: Part 1 - PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC IN
THE HAGUE JAN. 30, 2002 - OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 22:57:13 EST
From: JaredI@...
To: JaredI@...
International Committee to Defend Slobodan
Milosevic www.icdsm.org
The URL for this article is:
http://www.icdsm.org/milosevic/30jan.htm
Subscribe to the ICDSM email list at
http://www.icdsm.org/maillist.htm
Receive no more than one article per day.
=============================================
Part 1 - PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC IN THE HAGUE
JAN. 30, 2002 - OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT
BY ADDING THREE LIES, ONE DOES NOT GET THE
TRUTH - ONLY A BIGGER LIE
[Posted 1 February 2002]
=============================================
Pres. Milosevic:
By adding three lies, one does not get the
truth - only a bigger lie.
All three indictments really have a thread
running through them - to use an
expression I've heard used here - which is
the ongoing crime against
Yugoslavia and against my people.
This here is obviously a colossal abuse of
power to fabricate an historical
forgery in which those who advocated the
preservation of Yugoslavia would be
charged with its destruction; those who
defended the country would be accused
of crimes; and those who advocated and
committed secession, advocating
separatism and terrorism, would be given
amnesty - because they were backed
by forces that wanted to establish control
over the Balkans, so as to be able
to use this strategic position to establish
their control elsewhere.
As we've heard, you spoke of three connected
events. How come the authors of
this so-called plan, of which they speak so
self-assuredly, only got around
to making allegations about Bosnia and
Croatia after ten years? Furthermore,
these claims are absurd and nonsensical,
primarily because the entire policy
of the Serbs, Serbia and me personally was in
regard to Croatia and Bosnia
focused on peace, not war. We used all our
influence to achieve peace as soon
as possible.
At the very beginning of the conflict in
Croatia, we advocated a political
solution. Based on that proposal, the UN
Protected Areas were established and
the situation calmed down immediately. On
March 24, 1992, the late Croatian
leader Tudjman spoke to his nation from the
Ban Jelacic Square [in Zagreb],
saying literally: "There would not have been
a war had Croatia not wanted it,
but we judged this was the only way to
achieve independence."
There would have certainly been no war had
Croatia not wished for it. Serbia
never participated in that war anyway. It was
an internal conflict.
But why did Croatia want war? Most certainly
not in order for the Croatian
people to use their right to
self-determination and secession (Macedonia,
for example, claimed that right and separated
from Yugoslavia), but to achieve
its goal of expelling half a million Serbs
from Croatia - Serbian Krajina -
who for centuries lived there on their own
land, and not as occupiers.
Until the arrival of that Croatian regime
that wanted war and so admitted
publicly, Croatia had a Constitution
describing it as a state of Croats,
Serbs and other peoples residing therein.
That Constitution was changed.
Serbs lost their rights and their constituent
status in Croatia, and they
rose in rebellion. At the time, few in Serbia
even knew that Serbs lived in
some part of Croatia.
You speak of the plan according to which,
with German support, Croatia was
prematurely recognized at the end of 1991,
without waiting for a political
solution, which sparked a confrontation in
which Serbia - I repeat - only
contributed in finding a peaceful solution as
soon as possible. Even the
Croatian government never accused us of
responsibility for that conflict, and
now I hear, here, today, that we had some
sort of a plan for that?
There was, in fact, a plan - a clear plan
aimed against a state that was, I
would say, at the time a model of future
European federalism. That state was
Yugoslavia, in which multiple nations lived
in a federation, on equal
footing, successfully, with the ability to
prosper, develop, and show the
entire world that coexistence was possible.
All the time we fought for Yugoslavia, for
the preservation of Yugoslavia.
After all, all the facts prove that what I am
saying is true. Only the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which now
exists, retained its ethnic makeup.
There were no expulsions, from the beginning
to the end of the Yugoslav
crisis. All other republics changed their
ethnic makeup. Half a million Serbs
were expelled from Croatia and we all know
what happened in Bosnia, not to
mention other parts of Yugoslavia.
Therefore, I would say this is a malicious,
utterly hostile process aimed at
justifying the crime against my country,
using this 'court' as a weapon
against my country and my people.
Look at Bosnia-Herzegovina. Over there, we
tried from the very beginning to
secure peace. What happened to the Cutillero
Plan, which everyone had backed?
The Islamist Bosnian government rejected it
at the urging of the U.S.
Ambassador and the conflict began. How can
Serbia be accused of anything in
Bosnia, when it is well known that,
attempting to use our influence for
peace, we not only backed all the peace
proposals but also tried to help
implement them?
In 1993, in Athens, there was a meeting at
which the Vance-Owen Peace Plan
was signed. Everybody signed it. I went to
Pale with [Greek Prime Minister]
Mitsotakis and former Yugoslav president
Dobrica Cosic, and we advocated the
acceptance of this plan. Unfortunately, it
was rejected - on May 3 or May 5,
1993, I don't remember exactly. Even then we
initiated a blockade of the Serb
Republic, in order to force its leadership to
accept the peace plan. This was
Serbia's role - to attempt to achieve
peace.
We had constantly emphasized that the only
formula for achieving peace in
Bosnia was to equally protect the interests
of all three peoples in
Bosnia-Herzegovina: Serbs, Muslims and
Croats. The Dayton Agreement succeeded
because that formula was accepted - because
the national interests of all
three peoples were protected equally.
Now I hear that Dayton was supposed to
discuss Kosovo. That is nonsense. The
Dayton talks were convened to establish peace
in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and no
one even thought of addressing the issue of
Kosovo. It has been an internal
issue of Serbia, and no one could have even
dreamed that someone would
attempt to internationalize it.
You cannot, in any way, link Serbia or the
Serbian policy with any kind of
crimes. You especially cannot legally claim,
ten years later, something that
no one ever alleged about us, even then. We
were accorded only respect and
appreciation for the gigantic efforts Serbia
and the Serbian policy made to
achieve peace.
Speaking of Bosnia, do you know that 70,000
Muslim refugees sought sanctuary
in Serbia during the Bosnian conflict? Do you
think someone would flee their
home and take refuge in the very territory
from which they were endangered?
How many lives did we save, how many of your
hostages did we rescue from
Bosnia - from UN peacekeepers to pilots -
and how many peace treaties did we
insist on and make possible? Eventually, we
were the most responsible for the
success of the Dayton talks and the peace
that ensued.
It was a total peace, a complete relaxation
of tensions, and then... I will
tell you how it all began in Kosovo. Because
of the plan to establish control
of the Balkans, the territory of the former
Yugoslavia, efforts were made to
destabilize Kosovo at precisely the time when
it seemed everything would be
resolved peacefully.
(CONTINUED PART 2)
www.icdsm.org
THE HAGUE JAN. 30, 2002 - OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 22:57:13 EST
From: JaredI@...
To: JaredI@...
International Committee to Defend Slobodan
Milosevic www.icdsm.org
The URL for this article is:
http://www.icdsm.org/milosevic/30jan.htm
Subscribe to the ICDSM email list at
http://www.icdsm.org/maillist.htm
Receive no more than one article per day.
=============================================
Part 1 - PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC IN THE HAGUE
JAN. 30, 2002 - OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT
BY ADDING THREE LIES, ONE DOES NOT GET THE
TRUTH - ONLY A BIGGER LIE
[Posted 1 February 2002]
=============================================
Pres. Milosevic:
By adding three lies, one does not get the
truth - only a bigger lie.
All three indictments really have a thread
running through them - to use an
expression I've heard used here - which is
the ongoing crime against
Yugoslavia and against my people.
This here is obviously a colossal abuse of
power to fabricate an historical
forgery in which those who advocated the
preservation of Yugoslavia would be
charged with its destruction; those who
defended the country would be accused
of crimes; and those who advocated and
committed secession, advocating
separatism and terrorism, would be given
amnesty - because they were backed
by forces that wanted to establish control
over the Balkans, so as to be able
to use this strategic position to establish
their control elsewhere.
As we've heard, you spoke of three connected
events. How come the authors of
this so-called plan, of which they speak so
self-assuredly, only got around
to making allegations about Bosnia and
Croatia after ten years? Furthermore,
these claims are absurd and nonsensical,
primarily because the entire policy
of the Serbs, Serbia and me personally was in
regard to Croatia and Bosnia
focused on peace, not war. We used all our
influence to achieve peace as soon
as possible.
At the very beginning of the conflict in
Croatia, we advocated a political
solution. Based on that proposal, the UN
Protected Areas were established and
the situation calmed down immediately. On
March 24, 1992, the late Croatian
leader Tudjman spoke to his nation from the
Ban Jelacic Square [in Zagreb],
saying literally: "There would not have been
a war had Croatia not wanted it,
but we judged this was the only way to
achieve independence."
There would have certainly been no war had
Croatia not wished for it. Serbia
never participated in that war anyway. It was
an internal conflict.
But why did Croatia want war? Most certainly
not in order for the Croatian
people to use their right to
self-determination and secession (Macedonia,
for example, claimed that right and separated
from Yugoslavia), but to achieve
its goal of expelling half a million Serbs
from Croatia - Serbian Krajina -
who for centuries lived there on their own
land, and not as occupiers.
Until the arrival of that Croatian regime
that wanted war and so admitted
publicly, Croatia had a Constitution
describing it as a state of Croats,
Serbs and other peoples residing therein.
That Constitution was changed.
Serbs lost their rights and their constituent
status in Croatia, and they
rose in rebellion. At the time, few in Serbia
even knew that Serbs lived in
some part of Croatia.
You speak of the plan according to which,
with German support, Croatia was
prematurely recognized at the end of 1991,
without waiting for a political
solution, which sparked a confrontation in
which Serbia - I repeat - only
contributed in finding a peaceful solution as
soon as possible. Even the
Croatian government never accused us of
responsibility for that conflict, and
now I hear, here, today, that we had some
sort of a plan for that?
There was, in fact, a plan - a clear plan
aimed against a state that was, I
would say, at the time a model of future
European federalism. That state was
Yugoslavia, in which multiple nations lived
in a federation, on equal
footing, successfully, with the ability to
prosper, develop, and show the
entire world that coexistence was possible.
All the time we fought for Yugoslavia, for
the preservation of Yugoslavia.
After all, all the facts prove that what I am
saying is true. Only the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which now
exists, retained its ethnic makeup.
There were no expulsions, from the beginning
to the end of the Yugoslav
crisis. All other republics changed their
ethnic makeup. Half a million Serbs
were expelled from Croatia and we all know
what happened in Bosnia, not to
mention other parts of Yugoslavia.
Therefore, I would say this is a malicious,
utterly hostile process aimed at
justifying the crime against my country,
using this 'court' as a weapon
against my country and my people.
Look at Bosnia-Herzegovina. Over there, we
tried from the very beginning to
secure peace. What happened to the Cutillero
Plan, which everyone had backed?
The Islamist Bosnian government rejected it
at the urging of the U.S.
Ambassador and the conflict began. How can
Serbia be accused of anything in
Bosnia, when it is well known that,
attempting to use our influence for
peace, we not only backed all the peace
proposals but also tried to help
implement them?
In 1993, in Athens, there was a meeting at
which the Vance-Owen Peace Plan
was signed. Everybody signed it. I went to
Pale with [Greek Prime Minister]
Mitsotakis and former Yugoslav president
Dobrica Cosic, and we advocated the
acceptance of this plan. Unfortunately, it
was rejected - on May 3 or May 5,
1993, I don't remember exactly. Even then we
initiated a blockade of the Serb
Republic, in order to force its leadership to
accept the peace plan. This was
Serbia's role - to attempt to achieve
peace.
We had constantly emphasized that the only
formula for achieving peace in
Bosnia was to equally protect the interests
of all three peoples in
Bosnia-Herzegovina: Serbs, Muslims and
Croats. The Dayton Agreement succeeded
because that formula was accepted - because
the national interests of all
three peoples were protected equally.
Now I hear that Dayton was supposed to
discuss Kosovo. That is nonsense. The
Dayton talks were convened to establish peace
in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and no
one even thought of addressing the issue of
Kosovo. It has been an internal
issue of Serbia, and no one could have even
dreamed that someone would
attempt to internationalize it.
You cannot, in any way, link Serbia or the
Serbian policy with any kind of
crimes. You especially cannot legally claim,
ten years later, something that
no one ever alleged about us, even then. We
were accorded only respect and
appreciation for the gigantic efforts Serbia
and the Serbian policy made to
achieve peace.
Speaking of Bosnia, do you know that 70,000
Muslim refugees sought sanctuary
in Serbia during the Bosnian conflict? Do you
think someone would flee their
home and take refuge in the very territory
from which they were endangered?
How many lives did we save, how many of your
hostages did we rescue from
Bosnia - from UN peacekeepers to pilots -
and how many peace treaties did we
insist on and make possible? Eventually, we
were the most responsible for the
success of the Dayton talks and the peace
that ensued.
It was a total peace, a complete relaxation
of tensions, and then... I will
tell you how it all began in Kosovo. Because
of the plan to establish control
of the Balkans, the territory of the former
Yugoslavia, efforts were made to
destabilize Kosovo at precisely the time when
it seemed everything would be
resolved peacefully.
(CONTINUED PART 2)
www.icdsm.org