“Evidence” in the “Milosevic case“: What’ s behind Carla’s promises?
By Cathrin Schütz
As stated by chief prosecutor Carla del Ponte, in the upcoming months
the prosecution in the trial against former Yugoslav president Slobodan
Milosevic in The Hague will focus on “Sarajevo“ and “Srebrenica“.[1]
According to some official reports, between 7.000 and 8.000 Bosnian
Muslims were killed in July 1995, when Serb units launched an attack on
the UN “save heaven” of Srebrenica. Doubts continue to surface
regarding the extent and nature of these alleged crimes because the
official side of the story is in many respects lacking in factual
verification.[2]
After del Ponte herself had to admit that the Kosovo-case (which
originally served as the grounds for the Milosevic indictment and the
former president’s abduction and delivery to the Hague tribunal) lacked
the charge of genocide because there is no evidence for that, the
prosecution came up with additional indictments for Croatia and Bosnia
and accused Milosevic for genocide in Bosnia, a point which is mainly
based on the events around Srebrenica.
Recently, the prosecution suffered from another big disappointment when
Slobodan Milosevic’s predecessor - former Yugoslav president Zoran
Lilic - testified in The Hague on June 17. Lilic stated that Mr.
Milosevic had not been involved in the Srebrenica massacre. The next
day media headlines announced “Srebrenica »outraged« Milosevic“.[3]
But just one day later, this positive message for Milosevic disappeared
and the international press reported an opposite line, saying: “Paper
could link Milosevic with massacre“.[4]
The paper in question is an official document provided to the
prosecution by the London-based “Institute for War and Peace Reporting“
(IWPR). It is an order signed on July 10, 1995 by Bosnian-Serb Interior
Minister Tomislav Kovac, which instructs that a Serbian police unit
should be moved from Sarajevo to Srebrenica to “crush the enemy
offensive being carried out from the UN safe heaven of Srebrenica“.[5]
But the statements appearing on the occasion of the presentation of the
paper appear to be to the advantage of former president Milosevic. Some
unusual comments were made about the lack of any evidence for the
involvement of Milosevic – except the new-found document. IWPR bureau
chief in The Hague, Stacey Sullivan, while praising the paper, stated:
“Up until now, it was generally assumed that there was no link between
what happened in Srebrenica and Belgrade.“ As stated in the NYT on June
19, an official in the prosecutors office said “for the moment, this is
the first such document relating to the July 1995 massacre”.[6] SFOR
news confirms this. Reporting about the new-found document, SFOR news
states on June 20, 2003: “To date, it was mostly assumed that until the
summer of 1995, Serbia had cut off all of its ties to the Bosnian Serb
leadership and that the former Serbian forces had not participated in
the military operation in Srebrenica”.[7]
According to Sullivan, the document shows for the first time that
police from Serbia participated in this operation. The “Coalition for
International Justice“ in Washington pointed out the contrary by saying
that the document does not prove any involvement of those units. And
what is still unknown, and what Sullivan had to admit herself, is
whether Milosevic actually knew about those troops.
The NYT, usually in line with the rest of the corporate media in
pre-convicting the former president, suddenly choose to leave no doubts
about the awareness of any lack of evidence against Milosevic in the
Srebrenica case. “Witnesses and even participants in the massacre have
told the tribunal the roles played by the army, police and paramilitary
fighters in the blood bath. But even during the trial of Gen. Radislav
Krstic, one of the commanders at Srebrenica, who was sentenced to 46
years in prison for genocide, prosecutors had no documents linking the
atrocities to Belgrade”.
Recalling the reactions following the first presentation of the paper,
it now looks like it got more attention than it actually deserved.
Apparently, it provides no "new evidence" against Milosevic. Florence
Hartmann, spokesperson of the prosecution, called the document later
only “an element“, and announced there will be additional elements and
special witnesses for Srebrenica. The assumption remains that the
document was presented at the exact moment when Lilic’s testimony of
Milosevic’s innocence was the number one topic, in order to deflect
attention from news headlines which could undermine the prosecution’s
credibility. The IWPR assertion that the paper had been “overlooked”
seems to be highly questionable. The assumption that the Institute
(which with its branch in The Hague enjoys a physical closeness to the
tribunal) played in the prosecutors hands, is bolstered by a look on
their own list of cooperating organizations and partners. Among these
is the “Open Society Institute“ of US-American Billionaire George
Soros, who also provides funds directly to the tribunal. With “USAID“
the institute receives money from the US-government. Aid is also coming
from the US-American organization “International Research & Exchanges
Board”(IREX). At the same time, IREX is financing basically a long list
of journalists from former Yugoslavia reporting from the
Milosevic-trial in The Hague – providing training, apartments,
computers, etc. According to their own web-side information, IREX
receives funds from the US Department of State as well as from media
giant CNN-AOL-Time Warner, the latter also contributes financially to
the ICTY.[8]
Since Slobodan Milosevic is not permitted by the ICTY to give
press-statements, Vladimir Krsljanin, one of his Belgrade assistants,
comments for junge Welt: “Carla del Ponte recently boasted to the press
that she was able to prove all charges – except that genocide would be
more difficult. But even that she said will succeed in the upcoming
months. But that was only her attempt to hide her complete failures in
this regard from the public, because even her position as
chief-prosecutor has come under question. Slobodan Milosevic’s guilt
cannot be proven because it does not exist. Everybody knows that he
publicly and consistently condemned every extremism and crime. In his
opening statement, he announced that he would prove the complicity of
Western secret services in the worst crimes in Bosnia and Croatia.“
Indeed, this enterprise seems more likely to be successful than the
prosecution’s attempt to present evidence for a connection between
Milosevic and the massacre at Srebrenica. And the report of the
commission of the Dutch Institute for War Documentation (NIOD), led by
Cees Wiebes, agrees. “For five years, Professor Cees Wiebes of
Amsterdam University has had unrestricted access to Dutch intelligence
files and has stalked the corridors of secret service headquarters in
western capitals, as well as in Bosnia, asking questions.“[9] The
German Berliner Zeitung in April 2002, in reference to the Dutch
report, stated, there were “no hints for a direct involvement of
Milosevic and Serb authorities from Belgrade“ in the attack on
Srebrenica. Meanwhile, the same report according to The Guardian,
revealed the direct involvement of external forces: “America used
Islamists to arm the Bosnian Muslims, The Srebrenica report reveals the
Pentagon's role in a dirty war. The official Dutch inquiry into the
1995 Srebrenica massacre, released last week, contains one of the most
sensational reports on western intelligence ever published.“ “Weapons
flown in during the spring of 1995 were to turn up only a fortnight
later in the besieged and demilitarized enclave at Srebrenica. When
these shipments were noticed, Americans pressured UNPROFOR to rewrite
reports, and when Norwegian officials protested about the flights, they
were reportedly threatened into silence“, reports The Guardian.
If del Ponte wants to keep her promise of proving the genocide charge,
she may need to follow what seems to be her common routine of
manipulating witnesses, as was seen in the case of Rade Markovic. The
former head of state security, supposedly a witness on behalf of the
prosecution, stated in his testimony that he was offered a deal in
order to deliver a statement against Slobodan Milosevic.[10] Del
Ponte’s mid-July statement – in which she hoped that indicted senior
political and military figures during Milosevics 13 years in power
would testify against their former leader[11] - sounds more and more
like an announcement of new attempts to “incriminate testimony for
extenuating circumstances“.
Published in "junge Welt” (Berlin), "Beweisnot in Den Haag", August 19,
2003
URL: http://www.jungewelt.de/2003/08-19/005.php
By Cathrin Schütz
As stated by chief prosecutor Carla del Ponte, in the upcoming months
the prosecution in the trial against former Yugoslav president Slobodan
Milosevic in The Hague will focus on “Sarajevo“ and “Srebrenica“.[1]
According to some official reports, between 7.000 and 8.000 Bosnian
Muslims were killed in July 1995, when Serb units launched an attack on
the UN “save heaven” of Srebrenica. Doubts continue to surface
regarding the extent and nature of these alleged crimes because the
official side of the story is in many respects lacking in factual
verification.[2]
After del Ponte herself had to admit that the Kosovo-case (which
originally served as the grounds for the Milosevic indictment and the
former president’s abduction and delivery to the Hague tribunal) lacked
the charge of genocide because there is no evidence for that, the
prosecution came up with additional indictments for Croatia and Bosnia
and accused Milosevic for genocide in Bosnia, a point which is mainly
based on the events around Srebrenica.
Recently, the prosecution suffered from another big disappointment when
Slobodan Milosevic’s predecessor - former Yugoslav president Zoran
Lilic - testified in The Hague on June 17. Lilic stated that Mr.
Milosevic had not been involved in the Srebrenica massacre. The next
day media headlines announced “Srebrenica »outraged« Milosevic“.[3]
But just one day later, this positive message for Milosevic disappeared
and the international press reported an opposite line, saying: “Paper
could link Milosevic with massacre“.[4]
The paper in question is an official document provided to the
prosecution by the London-based “Institute for War and Peace Reporting“
(IWPR). It is an order signed on July 10, 1995 by Bosnian-Serb Interior
Minister Tomislav Kovac, which instructs that a Serbian police unit
should be moved from Sarajevo to Srebrenica to “crush the enemy
offensive being carried out from the UN safe heaven of Srebrenica“.[5]
But the statements appearing on the occasion of the presentation of the
paper appear to be to the advantage of former president Milosevic. Some
unusual comments were made about the lack of any evidence for the
involvement of Milosevic – except the new-found document. IWPR bureau
chief in The Hague, Stacey Sullivan, while praising the paper, stated:
“Up until now, it was generally assumed that there was no link between
what happened in Srebrenica and Belgrade.“ As stated in the NYT on June
19, an official in the prosecutors office said “for the moment, this is
the first such document relating to the July 1995 massacre”.[6] SFOR
news confirms this. Reporting about the new-found document, SFOR news
states on June 20, 2003: “To date, it was mostly assumed that until the
summer of 1995, Serbia had cut off all of its ties to the Bosnian Serb
leadership and that the former Serbian forces had not participated in
the military operation in Srebrenica”.[7]
According to Sullivan, the document shows for the first time that
police from Serbia participated in this operation. The “Coalition for
International Justice“ in Washington pointed out the contrary by saying
that the document does not prove any involvement of those units. And
what is still unknown, and what Sullivan had to admit herself, is
whether Milosevic actually knew about those troops.
The NYT, usually in line with the rest of the corporate media in
pre-convicting the former president, suddenly choose to leave no doubts
about the awareness of any lack of evidence against Milosevic in the
Srebrenica case. “Witnesses and even participants in the massacre have
told the tribunal the roles played by the army, police and paramilitary
fighters in the blood bath. But even during the trial of Gen. Radislav
Krstic, one of the commanders at Srebrenica, who was sentenced to 46
years in prison for genocide, prosecutors had no documents linking the
atrocities to Belgrade”.
Recalling the reactions following the first presentation of the paper,
it now looks like it got more attention than it actually deserved.
Apparently, it provides no "new evidence" against Milosevic. Florence
Hartmann, spokesperson of the prosecution, called the document later
only “an element“, and announced there will be additional elements and
special witnesses for Srebrenica. The assumption remains that the
document was presented at the exact moment when Lilic’s testimony of
Milosevic’s innocence was the number one topic, in order to deflect
attention from news headlines which could undermine the prosecution’s
credibility. The IWPR assertion that the paper had been “overlooked”
seems to be highly questionable. The assumption that the Institute
(which with its branch in The Hague enjoys a physical closeness to the
tribunal) played in the prosecutors hands, is bolstered by a look on
their own list of cooperating organizations and partners. Among these
is the “Open Society Institute“ of US-American Billionaire George
Soros, who also provides funds directly to the tribunal. With “USAID“
the institute receives money from the US-government. Aid is also coming
from the US-American organization “International Research & Exchanges
Board”(IREX). At the same time, IREX is financing basically a long list
of journalists from former Yugoslavia reporting from the
Milosevic-trial in The Hague – providing training, apartments,
computers, etc. According to their own web-side information, IREX
receives funds from the US Department of State as well as from media
giant CNN-AOL-Time Warner, the latter also contributes financially to
the ICTY.[8]
Since Slobodan Milosevic is not permitted by the ICTY to give
press-statements, Vladimir Krsljanin, one of his Belgrade assistants,
comments for junge Welt: “Carla del Ponte recently boasted to the press
that she was able to prove all charges – except that genocide would be
more difficult. But even that she said will succeed in the upcoming
months. But that was only her attempt to hide her complete failures in
this regard from the public, because even her position as
chief-prosecutor has come under question. Slobodan Milosevic’s guilt
cannot be proven because it does not exist. Everybody knows that he
publicly and consistently condemned every extremism and crime. In his
opening statement, he announced that he would prove the complicity of
Western secret services in the worst crimes in Bosnia and Croatia.“
Indeed, this enterprise seems more likely to be successful than the
prosecution’s attempt to present evidence for a connection between
Milosevic and the massacre at Srebrenica. And the report of the
commission of the Dutch Institute for War Documentation (NIOD), led by
Cees Wiebes, agrees. “For five years, Professor Cees Wiebes of
Amsterdam University has had unrestricted access to Dutch intelligence
files and has stalked the corridors of secret service headquarters in
western capitals, as well as in Bosnia, asking questions.“[9] The
German Berliner Zeitung in April 2002, in reference to the Dutch
report, stated, there were “no hints for a direct involvement of
Milosevic and Serb authorities from Belgrade“ in the attack on
Srebrenica. Meanwhile, the same report according to The Guardian,
revealed the direct involvement of external forces: “America used
Islamists to arm the Bosnian Muslims, The Srebrenica report reveals the
Pentagon's role in a dirty war. The official Dutch inquiry into the
1995 Srebrenica massacre, released last week, contains one of the most
sensational reports on western intelligence ever published.“ “Weapons
flown in during the spring of 1995 were to turn up only a fortnight
later in the besieged and demilitarized enclave at Srebrenica. When
these shipments were noticed, Americans pressured UNPROFOR to rewrite
reports, and when Norwegian officials protested about the flights, they
were reportedly threatened into silence“, reports The Guardian.
If del Ponte wants to keep her promise of proving the genocide charge,
she may need to follow what seems to be her common routine of
manipulating witnesses, as was seen in the case of Rade Markovic. The
former head of state security, supposedly a witness on behalf of the
prosecution, stated in his testimony that he was offered a deal in
order to deliver a statement against Slobodan Milosevic.[10] Del
Ponte’s mid-July statement – in which she hoped that indicted senior
political and military figures during Milosevics 13 years in power
would testify against their former leader[11] - sounds more and more
like an announcement of new attempts to “incriminate testimony for
extenuating circumstances“.
Published in "junge Welt” (Berlin), "Beweisnot in Den Haag", August 19,
2003
URL: http://www.jungewelt.de/2003/08-19/005.php