MILOSEVIC QUESTIONS HIS FIRST DEFENSE WITNESS
(italiano / english)
1. MILOSEVIC: AL TPI PRIMO TESTIMONE DIFESA PER SLOBO (ANSA 16/11/04)
2. Milosevic Wants Clinton to Testify by Christmas
(By Paul Gallagher, Reuters 11/11/04)
..."We're talking about William Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Anthony
Blair, Gerhard Schroeder and Rudolf Scharping in the first group," he
said, also adding retired general Clark, who directed the 1999 NATO
bombing of Serbia, to his list...
3. MILOSEVIC QUESTIONS HIS FIRST DEFENSE WITNESS
(Andy Wilcoxson, 16/11/04)
4. MR. NICE CROSS-EXAMINES PROFESSOR MARKOVIC
(Andy Wilcoxson, 17/11/04)
5. IVASHOV AND RYZHKOV TO APPEAR AS DEFENSE WITNESSES AT MILOSEVIC
TRIAL IN HAGUE
(RIA Novosti - November 18, 2004)
SEE ALSO, on the anti-yugoslav website www.iwpr.net :
MILOSEVIC JUDGES FACE NEW CHALLENGE Appeals chamber's decision to
restore accused's right to defend himself will require judges to
maintain firm control of the trial. By Ana Uzelac in The Hague
IWPR'S TRIBUNAL UPDATE No. 380, November 05, 2004
MILOSEVIC CALLS FOR CLINTON Former Serb leader wants high-profile
witnesses to testify by Christmas. By Alison Freebairn in The Hague
IWPR'S TRIBUNAL UPDATE No. 281, November 14, 2004
=== 1 ===
MILOSEVIC: AL TPI PRIMO TESTIMONE DIFESA PER SLOBO
(ANSA) - BRUXELLES, 16 NOV - Prima udienza al Tribunale penale
internazionale sull'ex Jugoslavia con Slobodan Milosevic nel ruolo di
'autodifesa': l'ex uomo forte di Belgrado ha oggi rivolto delle domande
a un testimone chiamato a deporre in sua difesa, Mihajlo Markovic,
ideologo del Partito socialista della Serbia. Milosevic ha qualche
settimana fa ottenuto dalla Corte dell'Aja la possibilita' di
difendersi da solo, lasciando da parte i due avvocati d'ufficio, al
termine di un lungo braccio di ferro con i giudici del Tribunale.
Quella iniziata oggi rappresenta ''una nuova era'' per l'imputato, ha
commentato il presidente della Corte, Patrick Robinson, che ha posto
pero' delle severe regole che Milosevic dovra' rispettare nei suoi
interrogatori. ''Voi non avete il diritto di porre domande che inducano
ad una risposta, i testimoni devono portare le prove di cio' che
dicono, voi non potete fare dei discorsi'', ha messo in guardia
Robinson, rivolgendosi all'imputato. Nelle domande che ha posto a
Markovic, Milosevic ha in sostanza cercato di far emergere la tesi che
le ''crisi'' che si sono succedute in Jugoslavia negli anni '90 sono
state la diretta conseguenza delle tendenze separatiste messe in moto
dai croati, dagli sloveni e dagli albanesi. Milosevic e' accusato dal
Tpi di genocidio, crimini contro l'umanita' e crimini di guerra per le
sue responsabilita' nei conflitti esplosi in Jugoslavia nei primi anni
'90. (ANSA) RIG 16/11/2004 19:24
=== 2 ===
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&ncid=564&e=2&u=/nm/
20041111/ts_nm/milosevic_dc
Reuters - November 11, 2004
Milosevic Wants Clinton to Testify by Christmas
By Paul Gallagher
AMSTERDAM - Slobodan Milosevic called on judges to
subpoena former U.S. President Bill Clinton and
British Prime Minister Tony Blair on Thursday, saying
he would like them to testify at his war crimes trial
by Christmas.
The former Yugoslav president, charged with genocide,
crimes against humanity and war crimes in the Balkans
in the 1990s, opened his defense in August in what is
seen as Europe's most significant war crimes trial
since the end of World War II.
Milosevic asked for The Hague tribunal to also summon
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, former German
Defense Minister Rudolf Scharping, former Secretary of
State Madeleine Albright and retired U.S. General
Wesley Clark.
"We're talking about William Clinton, Madeleine
Albright, Anthony Blair, Gerhard Schroeder and Rudolf
Scharping in the first group," he said, also adding
retired general Clark, who directed the 1999 NATO
bombing of Serbia, to his list.
"I would ask you to issue an order now for them to be
heard if possible before the Christmas recess,"
Milosevic said.
Milosevic, who has been on trial in The Hague since
February 2002 charged with ethnic cleansing in
Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo, said he had done the
groundwork by sending letters to embassies and
providing clarification when asked why he wanted the
witnesses to give evidence during his defense case.
"By conclusive action it has been shown that they are
not willing to appear," Milosevic told the trial's
three judges in a webcast of a hearing at the U.N.
tribunal.
KEY LEADERS
Presiding judge Patrick Robinson said he would not
issue a subpoena unless Milosevic submitted his
request in writing.
"You must make a written submission setting out the
circumstances which show that they are unwilling to
come and setting out the evidence you want them to
give," he said. (...)
Milosevic won back the right to lead his own defense
earlier this month in an appeal against a decision by
judges in September to appoint two lawyers to manage
and present his case to prevent trial delays due to
his ill health.
Milosevic, who has described himself as a peacemaker
in the Balkans and does not recognize the court, has
dismissed the charges he faces as politically
motivated "lies" and declined to enter a plea. Pleas
of not guilty were entered on his behalf.
=== 3 ===
MILOSEVIC QUESTIONS HIS FIRST DEFENSE WITNESS
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - November 16, 2004
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
Slobodan Milosevic questioned his first defense witness at the Hague
tribunal on Tuesday. The witness, Mihajlo Markovic, a Serbian social
sciences professor, testified about a number of topics, including a
1986 draft memorandum of the Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences,
which he helped to write.
A number anti-Serb propagandists, including the ICTY prosecution, have
taken bits and pieces of this incomplete memorandum out of context, and
tried to twist it into being some sort of platform for virulent Serbian
nationalism.
The professor put a great many manipulations concerning this
memorandum to bed. The memorandum explicitly states that all of the
nationalities in Yugoslavia had to be equal. It stipulated that
Yugoslavia could only survive if the principle of equality among
peoples was respected.
The memorandum stated on a number of occasions that human rights and
high democratic standards had to be rigorously adhered to.
In the context of the need for equality and human rights for everybody
in Yugoslavia, the memorandum made note of the dire situation of
Kosovo’s non-Albanian population, and observed that in the 1980s (much
as today) the human rights of Kosovo’s non-Albanian population was not
respected. The memorandum condemned the ethnic discrimination as being
unacceptable anywhere in Yugoslavia.
Markovic destroyed any idea that the Albanian secessionism in Kosovo
is the result of any of Milosevic’s politics. Markovic pointed out that
Albanian secessionists attempted an insurrection in 1968 and that Tito
had to send in the Army to quell it. He also pointed out that there
were other secessionist outbursts by Albanians in Kosovo in the early
and mid-1980s; before Milosevic ever came to power.
Markovic pointed out that each time the Kosovo-Albanian secessionists
ramped up their activities, the non-Albanian population was subjected
to increased pressure and violence which, already before Milosevic came
to power, had led to an exodus of tens of thousands of non-Albanians
from Kosovo. He pointed out that this expulsion of non-Albanians is
what gave rise to the term “ethnic cleansing” in the first place.
In addition to Albanian secessionism in Kosovo, Markovic testified
about Slovenian and Croatian secessionism. He pointed out that these
secessionist movements also began before Milosevic ever came on the
scene.
Markovic testified that Slovenia had already made up its mind to leave
Yugoslavia in the mid-1980s. He spoke of a conference that he attended
in Ljubljana in 1985 where eminent figures in Slovenian intellegencia
and politics were already saying that “Yugoslavia was dead,” and that
Slovenia only regarded Yugoslavia as “a transit station.”
Markovic noted that a Croatian secessionist movement was already well
underway with the so-called “mass national movement” in 1971.
Markovic spoke of the HDZ’s 1990 congress. He said that secession was
already foremost on the HDZ agenda, and that approximately 100 former
members of the Ustasha attended the HDZ congress.
Markovic destroyed the idea that Yugoslavia collapsed because it was
dominated by Serbs. In fact the witness observed that the opposite was
true. Serbs, who were the largest ethnic group, were under represented
in Yugoslavia.
At the time of Yugoslavia’s dissolution, in the early 1990s, the Prime
Minister of Yugoslavia was a Croat, the Defense Minister was half
Croat, the Foreign Minister was a Croat, and the President of the
Presidency of Yugoslavia was a Croat. In the top echelons of the
Yugoslav Military there were 16 Croats compared to only 2 Serbs. There
was absolutely no Serb domination in Yugoslavia when the country broke
apart.
Professor Markovic explained the origins of this propaganda about Serb
domination. He traced it back to Soviet attempts to destabilize and
take-over Yugoslavia. He said that the Soviet Union had a plan to take
over Yugoslavia and annex it to the USSR.
The Soviet plan called for turning the other Yugoslav nationalities
against the Serbs (the biggest group in Yugoslavia) by putting forward
an idea that the Serbs were unfairly dominating the country.
Markovic said that the Soviet plan called for supporting nationalistic
and secessionist groups, which would invariably arise in order to
escape the phony Serb domination.
In this way, the Soviets hoped to subdue the biggest part of the
Yugoslav population (the Serbs), by turning the other nationalities
against them. Then, once Yugoslavia’s unity was destroyed and the Serbs
were subdued, the USSR could walk in and take-over.
The Soviets never saw their plan bear fruit, but the Germans and the
Americans did what the Soviets failed to do. They managed to destroy
Yugoslavia by precisely the method laid-out in the Soviet plan.
Professor Markovic laid the thesis to rest that Milosevic had
abolished Kosovo’s autonomy in 1989. Markovic pointed out that the
constitutional changes that were adopted preserved Kosovo’s autonomy,
and that those changes were agreed to by the Kosovo assembly, and by
all of the other republics in Yugoslavia.
Markovic gave the results of the vote in the Kosovo Assembly when the
constitutional changes were adopted. 180 out of 190 deputies were
present, 10 voted against, 4 abstained, and 166 voted in favor of
adopting the constitutional changes.
Professor Markovic was an eye witness to Milosevic’s famous 1989
speech in Kosovo. Many anti-Serb propagandists, including Mr. Nice,
have manipulated and told lies about this speech, but Markovic’s
testimony puts those people in their place.
Markovic testified that it was not a nationalistic speech, and that it
did not incite ethnic intolerance. In fact that the speech did the
opposite; the professor testified that the speech called for
brotherhood and unity among the peoples of Yugoslavia.
In order to prove the tolerant nature of the speech, Milosevic read
out excerpts from the speech and asked Professor Markovic to comment on
them. Milosevic also provided the tribunal with the english translation
of the speech (which he obtained from www.slobodan-milosevic.org).
Milosevic also tendered a video tape of the speech in to evidence.
Professor Markovic, who played an important role in defining the
ideology of the Socialist Party of Serbia in the early 1990s, testified
that there were more than 50,000 non-Serbian members of the SPS.
Markovic who is one of the drafters of the SPS platform, and a former
vice-president of the party, cited internal party documents which show
that the SPS and its leadership desired a political solution to the
Kosovo crisis, and always insisted on full equality and rights for
Kosovo’s Albanian population in spite of the problems with Albanian
terrorism.
Markovic said that Milosevic, far from espousing any ideas about
greater Serbia, would not even let the SPS expand outside of Serbia’s
borders. In spite of the fact that the SDA (Bosnian-Muslim Party of
Democratic Action) was allowed to establish branches in Serbia,
primarily in the Raska district (Sandzak).
Markovic categorized the Hague Tribunal’s indictment against Milosevic
as being untrue and illogical. Markovic observed that Milosevic was not
a dictator, and that Serbia’s ethnic make-up remains the same today as
it was in the 1970s, which is something that other former-Yugoslav
republics can not say.
Professor Markovic’s examination was very successful for Milosevic.
The fact that so much important evidence was brought forward in only
one day proves that Slobodan Milosevic is the only one competent to
lead his defense. Mr. Kay never would have done such a good job.
It is even more amazing that President Milosevic managed to elicit all
of this evidence in spite of frequent interruptions and harassment both
from the Judges and from Mr. Nice.
President Milosevic managed to conclude his examination-in-chief by
the end of the day. Markovic will continue his testimony tomorrow with
cross-examination from Mr. Nice.
=== 4 ===
MR. NICE CROSS-EXAMINES PROFESSOR MARKOVIC
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - November 17, 2004
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
Professor Mihajlo Markovic was cross-examined by prosecutor Geoffrey
Nice in the Hague Tribunal's proceedings against Slobodan Milosevic
today.
Mr. Nice was remarkably unprepared for the task of cross-examination.
Mr. Nice wanted to question Markovic about articles and papers that he
had written, but he didn't have the texts of the documents. What Mr.
Nice attempted to do instead was pass off what somebody else had
written about Markovic's writings as if that material was what Markovic
had written.
Mr. Nice's cross-examination was so sloppy that it drew a rare rebuke
from Judge Bonamy, who accused the prosecutor of wasting time.
Mr. Nice was completely unable to discredit any of Markovic's
testimony. Mr. Nice failed miserably in all of his attempts to use
Markovic's testimony as a vehicle to incriminate Milosevic. In fact,
Mr. Nice's cross-examination only brought out more details that favored
Milosevic.
Markovic testified in cross-examination that Milosevic opened the doors
to freedom of speech in Serbia. Markovic noted that the League of
Communists under Ivan Stambolic had pursued what he called a "witch
hunt" against the Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Professor Markovic said that Milosevic ushered in a new era of free
speech and democracy in Serbia. He testified that Milosevic ended the
witch hunt against Serbian intellectuals, that Milosevic abolished laws
pertaining to so-called "verbal crimes," and that Milosevic freed all
political prisoners who were held by the communists.
Mr. Nice, realizing that his cross-examination was in a shambles,
turned his attention to Kosovo and asked the witness if tanks had been
sent in to Kosovo in order to intimidate deputies in the Kosovo
assembly to vote for the constitutional changes that were adopted in
1989. Markovic refuted the testimony of an earlier prosecution
witnesses and said that there were no tanks.
Un-phased by the fact that the complete texts of both, the 1986
memorandum of the Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences and Milosevic's
1989 speech at Gazimestan, had been provided and extensively quoted
from the previous day Mr. Nice none-the-less tried to manipulate these
documents.
For example, Nice quoted an article from an obscure Slovenian newspaper
that reported negatively on Milosevic's 1989 speech. Nice treated the
newspaper's opinion about the speech as if it were a better indicator
of the speech's content than the actual transcript of the speech itself.
Markovic answered Nice's intellectually dishonest questions with poise
and dignity. Markovic simply quoted from the memorandum and the speech,
and all of Nice's attempts to obscure the truth were defeated.
The only time that professor Markovic showed the slightest hint of
anger towards Mr. Nice, was when Nice made the absurd suggestion that
the Serbs were "provoking" the Albanians by celebrating the 600th
anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo, as if the Serbs have no right to
commemorate the anniversary of a significant event in their history.
Mr. Nice's cross-examination was so ineffective that Milosevic didn't
have the need to ask a single question in re-examination.
But to be fair, Mr. Nice was at a major disadvantage. First of all,
professor Markovic is clearly much smarter than Mr. Nice. This fact was
demonstrated repeatedly over the course of the cross-examination, Nice
repeatedly tried to confuse and trick the witness with misleading
questions and was beaten every time.
Secondly, professor Markovic only told the plain and simple truth,
whereas Mr. Nice has the near impossible burden of keeping all of his
lies straight. There was no contest, Mr. Nice never stood a chance.
The only bad thing about what happened today is the fact that Mr. Nice
wasted an entire day of the time allotted for Milosevic's defense case,
which has been limited to a mere 150 days (as opposed to the nearly 300
days that the prosecution was given).
The proceedings have been adjourned until next Monday's late session.
=== 5 ===
IVASHOV AND RYZHKOV TO APPEAR AS DEFENSE WITNESSES AT MILOSEVIC TRIAL
IN HAGUE
RIA Novosti - November 18, 2004
MOSCOW, November 18 (RIA Novosti) - Leonid Ivashov and Nikolai Ryzhkov
are flying on Friday to The Hague to appear as witnesses for defense at
the trial of ex-Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic, Leonid Ivashov,
vice-president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, told RIA
Novosti.
"Nikolai Ryzhkov and myself are flying on Friday to The Hague to give
evidence. The current head of Russia's Chamber of Commerce and
Industry, Yevgeny Primakov, will also go to The Hague at the end of the
month," Mr. Ivashov said.
He pointed out that the aim of his appearance at the trial is to give
objective witness evidence about processes that were under way inside
the federal republic of Yugoslavia and around it.
Mr. Ivashov motivated his desire to address the court by the fact that
"on the other side high-profile NATO officials come forward with
statements, exonerating themselves and justifying the aggression. They
demonize Milosevic, the Serbs and the political leadership of
Yugoslavia."
According to him, the Russian representatives will appear in the
courtroom of the International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia on
Saturday and Sunday.
This week, defense witnesses for the former Yugoslav president resumed
giving evidence. Slobodan Milosevic is accused of genocide in Bosnia
and Herzegovina and crimes against humanity in Croatia and Kosovo. The
first to take the witness stand was Mihail Markovic, who was considered
to be the ideologist of the Socialist Party of Serbia, whose chairman
is still Mr. Milosevic.
Mr. Ivashov took a direct part in efforts to settle the Kosovo crisis
as a representative of Russia's Defense Ministry, while Mr. Ryzhkov
headed the committee of the State Duma (lower house of Russian
parliament) to render assistance to Yugoslavia. Mr. Ivashov repeatedly
visited the country and had meetings with the Yugoslav leadership.
Yevgeny Primakov in March 1999, being Russia's prime minister, turned
back his plane over the Atlantic on which he was flying for a visit to
the United States in protest against the US decision to begin the
bombing of Yugoslavia.
The tribunal in September of this year attempted, contrary to the will
of Mr. Milosevic who was defending himself, to saddle him with a
Western lawyer whose remit included defining defense witnesses, the
nature of evidence, and its interpretation. Following which witnesses
began refusing en masse to testify.
Also refusing to come to The Hague were Russian witnesses for Mr.
Milosevic, since "in those conditions appearance as a defense witness
could be used against Milosevic and did not promote objectivity and
adoption of a just decision," the Russian general indicated.
The resumption of the trial became possible after the court again
allowed the accused to defend himself.
Judge Patrick Robinson said in The Hague last week that Mr. Milosevic
must complete his defense within 150 working days and any
unpremeditated break unconnected with an illness will be included in
this period. Mr. Milosevic indicated that he would demand an extension
of the period concerned, allocated for his defense. He also requested
that former and current western leaders - Bill Clinton, Tony Blair,
Madeleine Albright, Wesley Clark, Gerhard Schroeder and Rudolf
Scharping - be summoned to the trial and heard out.
Story Filed: 2004-11-18 11:51
Copyright 2004 RIA Novosti
Posted for Fair Use only.
(italiano / english)
1. MILOSEVIC: AL TPI PRIMO TESTIMONE DIFESA PER SLOBO (ANSA 16/11/04)
2. Milosevic Wants Clinton to Testify by Christmas
(By Paul Gallagher, Reuters 11/11/04)
..."We're talking about William Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Anthony
Blair, Gerhard Schroeder and Rudolf Scharping in the first group," he
said, also adding retired general Clark, who directed the 1999 NATO
bombing of Serbia, to his list...
3. MILOSEVIC QUESTIONS HIS FIRST DEFENSE WITNESS
(Andy Wilcoxson, 16/11/04)
4. MR. NICE CROSS-EXAMINES PROFESSOR MARKOVIC
(Andy Wilcoxson, 17/11/04)
5. IVASHOV AND RYZHKOV TO APPEAR AS DEFENSE WITNESSES AT MILOSEVIC
TRIAL IN HAGUE
(RIA Novosti - November 18, 2004)
SEE ALSO, on the anti-yugoslav website www.iwpr.net :
MILOSEVIC JUDGES FACE NEW CHALLENGE Appeals chamber's decision to
restore accused's right to defend himself will require judges to
maintain firm control of the trial. By Ana Uzelac in The Hague
IWPR'S TRIBUNAL UPDATE No. 380, November 05, 2004
MILOSEVIC CALLS FOR CLINTON Former Serb leader wants high-profile
witnesses to testify by Christmas. By Alison Freebairn in The Hague
IWPR'S TRIBUNAL UPDATE No. 281, November 14, 2004
=== 1 ===
MILOSEVIC: AL TPI PRIMO TESTIMONE DIFESA PER SLOBO
(ANSA) - BRUXELLES, 16 NOV - Prima udienza al Tribunale penale
internazionale sull'ex Jugoslavia con Slobodan Milosevic nel ruolo di
'autodifesa': l'ex uomo forte di Belgrado ha oggi rivolto delle domande
a un testimone chiamato a deporre in sua difesa, Mihajlo Markovic,
ideologo del Partito socialista della Serbia. Milosevic ha qualche
settimana fa ottenuto dalla Corte dell'Aja la possibilita' di
difendersi da solo, lasciando da parte i due avvocati d'ufficio, al
termine di un lungo braccio di ferro con i giudici del Tribunale.
Quella iniziata oggi rappresenta ''una nuova era'' per l'imputato, ha
commentato il presidente della Corte, Patrick Robinson, che ha posto
pero' delle severe regole che Milosevic dovra' rispettare nei suoi
interrogatori. ''Voi non avete il diritto di porre domande che inducano
ad una risposta, i testimoni devono portare le prove di cio' che
dicono, voi non potete fare dei discorsi'', ha messo in guardia
Robinson, rivolgendosi all'imputato. Nelle domande che ha posto a
Markovic, Milosevic ha in sostanza cercato di far emergere la tesi che
le ''crisi'' che si sono succedute in Jugoslavia negli anni '90 sono
state la diretta conseguenza delle tendenze separatiste messe in moto
dai croati, dagli sloveni e dagli albanesi. Milosevic e' accusato dal
Tpi di genocidio, crimini contro l'umanita' e crimini di guerra per le
sue responsabilita' nei conflitti esplosi in Jugoslavia nei primi anni
'90. (ANSA) RIG 16/11/2004 19:24
=== 2 ===
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&ncid=564&e=2&u=/nm/
20041111/ts_nm/milosevic_dc
Reuters - November 11, 2004
Milosevic Wants Clinton to Testify by Christmas
By Paul Gallagher
AMSTERDAM - Slobodan Milosevic called on judges to
subpoena former U.S. President Bill Clinton and
British Prime Minister Tony Blair on Thursday, saying
he would like them to testify at his war crimes trial
by Christmas.
The former Yugoslav president, charged with genocide,
crimes against humanity and war crimes in the Balkans
in the 1990s, opened his defense in August in what is
seen as Europe's most significant war crimes trial
since the end of World War II.
Milosevic asked for The Hague tribunal to also summon
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, former German
Defense Minister Rudolf Scharping, former Secretary of
State Madeleine Albright and retired U.S. General
Wesley Clark.
"We're talking about William Clinton, Madeleine
Albright, Anthony Blair, Gerhard Schroeder and Rudolf
Scharping in the first group," he said, also adding
retired general Clark, who directed the 1999 NATO
bombing of Serbia, to his list.
"I would ask you to issue an order now for them to be
heard if possible before the Christmas recess,"
Milosevic said.
Milosevic, who has been on trial in The Hague since
February 2002 charged with ethnic cleansing in
Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo, said he had done the
groundwork by sending letters to embassies and
providing clarification when asked why he wanted the
witnesses to give evidence during his defense case.
"By conclusive action it has been shown that they are
not willing to appear," Milosevic told the trial's
three judges in a webcast of a hearing at the U.N.
tribunal.
KEY LEADERS
Presiding judge Patrick Robinson said he would not
issue a subpoena unless Milosevic submitted his
request in writing.
"You must make a written submission setting out the
circumstances which show that they are unwilling to
come and setting out the evidence you want them to
give," he said. (...)
Milosevic won back the right to lead his own defense
earlier this month in an appeal against a decision by
judges in September to appoint two lawyers to manage
and present his case to prevent trial delays due to
his ill health.
Milosevic, who has described himself as a peacemaker
in the Balkans and does not recognize the court, has
dismissed the charges he faces as politically
motivated "lies" and declined to enter a plea. Pleas
of not guilty were entered on his behalf.
=== 3 ===
MILOSEVIC QUESTIONS HIS FIRST DEFENSE WITNESS
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - November 16, 2004
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
Slobodan Milosevic questioned his first defense witness at the Hague
tribunal on Tuesday. The witness, Mihajlo Markovic, a Serbian social
sciences professor, testified about a number of topics, including a
1986 draft memorandum of the Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences,
which he helped to write.
A number anti-Serb propagandists, including the ICTY prosecution, have
taken bits and pieces of this incomplete memorandum out of context, and
tried to twist it into being some sort of platform for virulent Serbian
nationalism.
The professor put a great many manipulations concerning this
memorandum to bed. The memorandum explicitly states that all of the
nationalities in Yugoslavia had to be equal. It stipulated that
Yugoslavia could only survive if the principle of equality among
peoples was respected.
The memorandum stated on a number of occasions that human rights and
high democratic standards had to be rigorously adhered to.
In the context of the need for equality and human rights for everybody
in Yugoslavia, the memorandum made note of the dire situation of
Kosovo’s non-Albanian population, and observed that in the 1980s (much
as today) the human rights of Kosovo’s non-Albanian population was not
respected. The memorandum condemned the ethnic discrimination as being
unacceptable anywhere in Yugoslavia.
Markovic destroyed any idea that the Albanian secessionism in Kosovo
is the result of any of Milosevic’s politics. Markovic pointed out that
Albanian secessionists attempted an insurrection in 1968 and that Tito
had to send in the Army to quell it. He also pointed out that there
were other secessionist outbursts by Albanians in Kosovo in the early
and mid-1980s; before Milosevic ever came to power.
Markovic pointed out that each time the Kosovo-Albanian secessionists
ramped up their activities, the non-Albanian population was subjected
to increased pressure and violence which, already before Milosevic came
to power, had led to an exodus of tens of thousands of non-Albanians
from Kosovo. He pointed out that this expulsion of non-Albanians is
what gave rise to the term “ethnic cleansing” in the first place.
In addition to Albanian secessionism in Kosovo, Markovic testified
about Slovenian and Croatian secessionism. He pointed out that these
secessionist movements also began before Milosevic ever came on the
scene.
Markovic testified that Slovenia had already made up its mind to leave
Yugoslavia in the mid-1980s. He spoke of a conference that he attended
in Ljubljana in 1985 where eminent figures in Slovenian intellegencia
and politics were already saying that “Yugoslavia was dead,” and that
Slovenia only regarded Yugoslavia as “a transit station.”
Markovic noted that a Croatian secessionist movement was already well
underway with the so-called “mass national movement” in 1971.
Markovic spoke of the HDZ’s 1990 congress. He said that secession was
already foremost on the HDZ agenda, and that approximately 100 former
members of the Ustasha attended the HDZ congress.
Markovic destroyed the idea that Yugoslavia collapsed because it was
dominated by Serbs. In fact the witness observed that the opposite was
true. Serbs, who were the largest ethnic group, were under represented
in Yugoslavia.
At the time of Yugoslavia’s dissolution, in the early 1990s, the Prime
Minister of Yugoslavia was a Croat, the Defense Minister was half
Croat, the Foreign Minister was a Croat, and the President of the
Presidency of Yugoslavia was a Croat. In the top echelons of the
Yugoslav Military there were 16 Croats compared to only 2 Serbs. There
was absolutely no Serb domination in Yugoslavia when the country broke
apart.
Professor Markovic explained the origins of this propaganda about Serb
domination. He traced it back to Soviet attempts to destabilize and
take-over Yugoslavia. He said that the Soviet Union had a plan to take
over Yugoslavia and annex it to the USSR.
The Soviet plan called for turning the other Yugoslav nationalities
against the Serbs (the biggest group in Yugoslavia) by putting forward
an idea that the Serbs were unfairly dominating the country.
Markovic said that the Soviet plan called for supporting nationalistic
and secessionist groups, which would invariably arise in order to
escape the phony Serb domination.
In this way, the Soviets hoped to subdue the biggest part of the
Yugoslav population (the Serbs), by turning the other nationalities
against them. Then, once Yugoslavia’s unity was destroyed and the Serbs
were subdued, the USSR could walk in and take-over.
The Soviets never saw their plan bear fruit, but the Germans and the
Americans did what the Soviets failed to do. They managed to destroy
Yugoslavia by precisely the method laid-out in the Soviet plan.
Professor Markovic laid the thesis to rest that Milosevic had
abolished Kosovo’s autonomy in 1989. Markovic pointed out that the
constitutional changes that were adopted preserved Kosovo’s autonomy,
and that those changes were agreed to by the Kosovo assembly, and by
all of the other republics in Yugoslavia.
Markovic gave the results of the vote in the Kosovo Assembly when the
constitutional changes were adopted. 180 out of 190 deputies were
present, 10 voted against, 4 abstained, and 166 voted in favor of
adopting the constitutional changes.
Professor Markovic was an eye witness to Milosevic’s famous 1989
speech in Kosovo. Many anti-Serb propagandists, including Mr. Nice,
have manipulated and told lies about this speech, but Markovic’s
testimony puts those people in their place.
Markovic testified that it was not a nationalistic speech, and that it
did not incite ethnic intolerance. In fact that the speech did the
opposite; the professor testified that the speech called for
brotherhood and unity among the peoples of Yugoslavia.
In order to prove the tolerant nature of the speech, Milosevic read
out excerpts from the speech and asked Professor Markovic to comment on
them. Milosevic also provided the tribunal with the english translation
of the speech (which he obtained from www.slobodan-milosevic.org).
Milosevic also tendered a video tape of the speech in to evidence.
Professor Markovic, who played an important role in defining the
ideology of the Socialist Party of Serbia in the early 1990s, testified
that there were more than 50,000 non-Serbian members of the SPS.
Markovic who is one of the drafters of the SPS platform, and a former
vice-president of the party, cited internal party documents which show
that the SPS and its leadership desired a political solution to the
Kosovo crisis, and always insisted on full equality and rights for
Kosovo’s Albanian population in spite of the problems with Albanian
terrorism.
Markovic said that Milosevic, far from espousing any ideas about
greater Serbia, would not even let the SPS expand outside of Serbia’s
borders. In spite of the fact that the SDA (Bosnian-Muslim Party of
Democratic Action) was allowed to establish branches in Serbia,
primarily in the Raska district (Sandzak).
Markovic categorized the Hague Tribunal’s indictment against Milosevic
as being untrue and illogical. Markovic observed that Milosevic was not
a dictator, and that Serbia’s ethnic make-up remains the same today as
it was in the 1970s, which is something that other former-Yugoslav
republics can not say.
Professor Markovic’s examination was very successful for Milosevic.
The fact that so much important evidence was brought forward in only
one day proves that Slobodan Milosevic is the only one competent to
lead his defense. Mr. Kay never would have done such a good job.
It is even more amazing that President Milosevic managed to elicit all
of this evidence in spite of frequent interruptions and harassment both
from the Judges and from Mr. Nice.
President Milosevic managed to conclude his examination-in-chief by
the end of the day. Markovic will continue his testimony tomorrow with
cross-examination from Mr. Nice.
=== 4 ===
MR. NICE CROSS-EXAMINES PROFESSOR MARKOVIC
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - November 17, 2004
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
Professor Mihajlo Markovic was cross-examined by prosecutor Geoffrey
Nice in the Hague Tribunal's proceedings against Slobodan Milosevic
today.
Mr. Nice was remarkably unprepared for the task of cross-examination.
Mr. Nice wanted to question Markovic about articles and papers that he
had written, but he didn't have the texts of the documents. What Mr.
Nice attempted to do instead was pass off what somebody else had
written about Markovic's writings as if that material was what Markovic
had written.
Mr. Nice's cross-examination was so sloppy that it drew a rare rebuke
from Judge Bonamy, who accused the prosecutor of wasting time.
Mr. Nice was completely unable to discredit any of Markovic's
testimony. Mr. Nice failed miserably in all of his attempts to use
Markovic's testimony as a vehicle to incriminate Milosevic. In fact,
Mr. Nice's cross-examination only brought out more details that favored
Milosevic.
Markovic testified in cross-examination that Milosevic opened the doors
to freedom of speech in Serbia. Markovic noted that the League of
Communists under Ivan Stambolic had pursued what he called a "witch
hunt" against the Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Professor Markovic said that Milosevic ushered in a new era of free
speech and democracy in Serbia. He testified that Milosevic ended the
witch hunt against Serbian intellectuals, that Milosevic abolished laws
pertaining to so-called "verbal crimes," and that Milosevic freed all
political prisoners who were held by the communists.
Mr. Nice, realizing that his cross-examination was in a shambles,
turned his attention to Kosovo and asked the witness if tanks had been
sent in to Kosovo in order to intimidate deputies in the Kosovo
assembly to vote for the constitutional changes that were adopted in
1989. Markovic refuted the testimony of an earlier prosecution
witnesses and said that there were no tanks.
Un-phased by the fact that the complete texts of both, the 1986
memorandum of the Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences and Milosevic's
1989 speech at Gazimestan, had been provided and extensively quoted
from the previous day Mr. Nice none-the-less tried to manipulate these
documents.
For example, Nice quoted an article from an obscure Slovenian newspaper
that reported negatively on Milosevic's 1989 speech. Nice treated the
newspaper's opinion about the speech as if it were a better indicator
of the speech's content than the actual transcript of the speech itself.
Markovic answered Nice's intellectually dishonest questions with poise
and dignity. Markovic simply quoted from the memorandum and the speech,
and all of Nice's attempts to obscure the truth were defeated.
The only time that professor Markovic showed the slightest hint of
anger towards Mr. Nice, was when Nice made the absurd suggestion that
the Serbs were "provoking" the Albanians by celebrating the 600th
anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo, as if the Serbs have no right to
commemorate the anniversary of a significant event in their history.
Mr. Nice's cross-examination was so ineffective that Milosevic didn't
have the need to ask a single question in re-examination.
But to be fair, Mr. Nice was at a major disadvantage. First of all,
professor Markovic is clearly much smarter than Mr. Nice. This fact was
demonstrated repeatedly over the course of the cross-examination, Nice
repeatedly tried to confuse and trick the witness with misleading
questions and was beaten every time.
Secondly, professor Markovic only told the plain and simple truth,
whereas Mr. Nice has the near impossible burden of keeping all of his
lies straight. There was no contest, Mr. Nice never stood a chance.
The only bad thing about what happened today is the fact that Mr. Nice
wasted an entire day of the time allotted for Milosevic's defense case,
which has been limited to a mere 150 days (as opposed to the nearly 300
days that the prosecution was given).
The proceedings have been adjourned until next Monday's late session.
=== 5 ===
IVASHOV AND RYZHKOV TO APPEAR AS DEFENSE WITNESSES AT MILOSEVIC TRIAL
IN HAGUE
RIA Novosti - November 18, 2004
MOSCOW, November 18 (RIA Novosti) - Leonid Ivashov and Nikolai Ryzhkov
are flying on Friday to The Hague to appear as witnesses for defense at
the trial of ex-Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic, Leonid Ivashov,
vice-president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, told RIA
Novosti.
"Nikolai Ryzhkov and myself are flying on Friday to The Hague to give
evidence. The current head of Russia's Chamber of Commerce and
Industry, Yevgeny Primakov, will also go to The Hague at the end of the
month," Mr. Ivashov said.
He pointed out that the aim of his appearance at the trial is to give
objective witness evidence about processes that were under way inside
the federal republic of Yugoslavia and around it.
Mr. Ivashov motivated his desire to address the court by the fact that
"on the other side high-profile NATO officials come forward with
statements, exonerating themselves and justifying the aggression. They
demonize Milosevic, the Serbs and the political leadership of
Yugoslavia."
According to him, the Russian representatives will appear in the
courtroom of the International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia on
Saturday and Sunday.
This week, defense witnesses for the former Yugoslav president resumed
giving evidence. Slobodan Milosevic is accused of genocide in Bosnia
and Herzegovina and crimes against humanity in Croatia and Kosovo. The
first to take the witness stand was Mihail Markovic, who was considered
to be the ideologist of the Socialist Party of Serbia, whose chairman
is still Mr. Milosevic.
Mr. Ivashov took a direct part in efforts to settle the Kosovo crisis
as a representative of Russia's Defense Ministry, while Mr. Ryzhkov
headed the committee of the State Duma (lower house of Russian
parliament) to render assistance to Yugoslavia. Mr. Ivashov repeatedly
visited the country and had meetings with the Yugoslav leadership.
Yevgeny Primakov in March 1999, being Russia's prime minister, turned
back his plane over the Atlantic on which he was flying for a visit to
the United States in protest against the US decision to begin the
bombing of Yugoslavia.
The tribunal in September of this year attempted, contrary to the will
of Mr. Milosevic who was defending himself, to saddle him with a
Western lawyer whose remit included defining defense witnesses, the
nature of evidence, and its interpretation. Following which witnesses
began refusing en masse to testify.
Also refusing to come to The Hague were Russian witnesses for Mr.
Milosevic, since "in those conditions appearance as a defense witness
could be used against Milosevic and did not promote objectivity and
adoption of a just decision," the Russian general indicated.
The resumption of the trial became possible after the court again
allowed the accused to defend himself.
Judge Patrick Robinson said in The Hague last week that Mr. Milosevic
must complete his defense within 150 working days and any
unpremeditated break unconnected with an illness will be included in
this period. Mr. Milosevic indicated that he would demand an extension
of the period concerned, allocated for his defense. He also requested
that former and current western leaders - Bill Clinton, Tony Blair,
Madeleine Albright, Wesley Clark, Gerhard Schroeder and Rudolf
Scharping - be summoned to the trial and heard out.
Story Filed: 2004-11-18 11:51
Copyright 2004 RIA Novosti
Posted for Fair Use only.