Re: Kosovo and DU

For Alan and others...IWPR does great work. Check out the Chechnya and
Balkans Update lists there too. Now that B. Plavsic is on trial, I suspexct
that the former Bosnian Serb leadership around madman Karazdic is next. And
if y'all are gonna beat this dead horse about how many Kosovatrs were killed
how come no one on the hard left brings up the 200,000 killed (mostly
Bosnian Muslims and Croats by the Serb neo-fascists with a Red-Brown  tinge
ala Milosevic et. al.) during the Bosnian cinflict from the early 90's. That
is the foreground of the later slaughter by Milosevic et. al.
                                        Michael Pugliese, just another
petty-boorrrjjjwwaaah liberal intelectual (with a just above minimum wage
job so I'm not sure about my P.B. class location, heh...)


TRIBUNAL UPDATE 202

Last Week in The Hague (December 4-9, 2000)

GENERAL KRSTIC TRIAL  - Defence witness claims Mladic's intervention spared
Srebrenica an even worse fate

KORDIC & CERKEZ TRIAL - Final witnesses called to the stand as trial draws
to a close

TUTA AND STELA CASE - Defendant pleads not guilty to amended charges

CROATIAN PAPERS RISK CONTEMPT CHARGES -  Croatian newspapers warned against
publishing protected witness statements

Tribunal Update is written by IWPR senior editor Mirko Klarin, a leading
Hague court correspondent, and Vjera Bogati.

****************** VISIT IWPR ON-LINE: www.iwpr.net **********

GENERAL KRSTIC TRIAL  -  Defence witness claims Mladic's intervention spared
Srebrenica an even worse fate

The bloodshed in Srebrenica would have been "much worse" but for the
intervention of General Ratko Mladic, a defence witness in the Krstic trial
claimed last week.

Yugoslav army general Radovan Radinovic, appearing as a military expert for
the defence, said the former Bosnian Serb army, VRS, commander altered an
order from the entity's president Radovan Karadzic demanding the
'elimination' of the United Nations protected area.

General Radislav Krstic, former commander of the VRS Drina Corps, is charged
with genocide for his alleged role in the Srebrenica massacres, which
claimed the lives of  at least 7,500 Bosnian Muslim men and boys. Krstic's
defence team claim Mladic had taken over control of the Srebrenica operation
from the defendant before the killings started.

Radinovic faced a difficult task disputing the analysis of prosecution
military experts, United States military intelligence analyst Richard Butler
and British Major General Richard Dannett (see Tribunal Updates Nos. 182,
185 and 186).

The witness served as a senior officer in the former Yugoslav People's Army
and its successor, the Yugoslav army. He taught at military colleges and,
during the Bosnian war, served as an advisor to ex federal president Dobrica
Cosic, a vocal advocate of Serbian nationalism.

Radinovic began by challenging Butler and Dannett's claim that the
Srebrenica operation - code named Krivaja 95 - was well-planned, complex and
precisely executed. He also disputed the presence of an effective chain of
command, with Krstic at its head.

The witness said Krivaja 95 was "not a big military operation". He described
the battle as "small in scope and of low intensity". Progress was slow,
"with small losses on both sides and a very small degree of destruction."

The aims, according to Radinovic, were to "prevent subversive terrorist
incursions by members of the 28th Division [of the Bosnia-Herzegovina Army],
which violated the protected zone", to sever links between the Muslim
enclaves of Srebrenica and Zepa, and to reduce the size of the enclave.

These goals were achieved on July 9, 1995, Radinovic said, when units from
the Drina Corps took up their planned positions on high ground around
Srebrenica.

Then "a crazy plan to capture Srebrenica crossed someone's mind," the
witness said.

Radinovic said the decision to press on into Srebrenica was made by
Karadzic, who as president of Bosnian Serbs was also supreme commander of
the armed forces. Radinovic's conclusion was based on an order sent to the
Drina Corps forward command post on July 9, 1995, which read "the President
of the Republic approves the continuation of the attack and the entry of the
VRS into Srebrenica."

Radinovic veers off at this point from the defence's basic argument that
Mladic had ordered the capture of Srebrenica and had taken over command of
the operation from Krstic.

But the witness did attribute responsibility for the crimes to the
politicians and the police, who were under the control of the Bosnian Serb
government.

Due to the "balance of forces" between the VRS and the BiH Army's 28th
Division, no soldier had considered capturing Srebrenica, Radinovic said. He
claimed BiH troops outnumbered the Bosnian Serb forces by almost 3 to 1.

"Military doctrine," Radinovic said, dictated "attackers must significantly
outnumber defenders" in order to capture a town.

That Srebrenica did fall, on July 11, 1995, was due more to the failings of
the 28th Division and the BiH Army's supreme command. The international
community was also partly responsible, he said.

The 28th Division failed to defend the town effectively even though it had
sufficient manpower and arms to hold out "long enough for the international
community to get involved," Radinovic said.

A decisive defence of the town would have forced the UN mechanism to act,
Radinovic argued. He said the international community's decision not to take
any action was "irresponsible".

Radinovic said blame rested not only with the Dutch UN Protection Force
Battalion in Srebrenica, but also with the then High Representative Carl
Bildt, UN Representative Yasushi Akashi and the commander of UN forces in
Bosnia, British General Rupert Smith.

Had these officials come to Srebrenica on July 11 and 12, 1995, the
'consequences' of the town's capture could have been avoided, Radinovic
said.

Radinovic did not deny the mass execution of prisoners of war, but said most
of the casualties were the result of heavy fighting between Drina corps
units and troops of the 28th BiH Army division, which were trying to break
through to Tuzla.

"The intensity of the fighting was so great," Radinovic said, "it is
realistic to express the losses in the thousands, rather than hundreds."

He criticised VRS headquarters for failing to "register properly" where BiH
Army soldiers were buried. Radinovic said those BiH officers responsible for
the decision to try and break through VRS lines must have realised what the
likely consequences would be and that they had in effect "sacrificed the
28th Division."

That the bulk of the Drina Corps was involved in an operation near Zepa was
"lucky", Radinovic said, otherwise the losses experienced by those trying to
get to Tuzla "would have been even graver."

Radinovic faced three and half days of cross-examination by prosecutors last
week. British Major Andrew Caley led the prosecution's questioning.

Caley immediately homed in on the directive from Karadzic, issued in June
1995. Radinovic described the directive as a "list of desirable aims" and
not as a binding order governing military operations.

In the directive, Karadzic called for "daily planned and thought out combat
operations" to create "conditions and total insecurity, intolerability and
make impossible the further survival of life of the inhabitants in
Srebrenica and Zepa."

Under pressure from the judges, Radinovic was forced to agree with the
prosecutor this was a directive "to eliminate the Srebrenica enclave."

But Radinovic insisted Mladic, in his order (directive 7.1), had changed the
Karadzic directive, deliberately replacing the phrase "elimination of
Srebrenica" with "active military actions around the enclave" because he
understood all too well what Karadzic's order could lead to.

"It was good that he did," said Radinovic, "because the consequences would
have been much worse."


KORDIC & CERKEZ TRIAL - Final witnesses called to the stand as trial draws
to a close

The trial of Dario Kordic and Mario Cerkez, accused of crimes against
Bosniak (Bosnian Muslim) civilians in central Bosnia, is finally drawing to
a close.

Final witnesses in the 19-month long case were called last week and closing
arguments from the prosecution and defence counsels are scheduled for
December 14 and 15.

The final prosecution witness was Halid Genjac, a member of the
Bosnia-Herzegovina tripartite presidency. During the Bosnian war, Genjac was
president of the Bosniak Muslim Party of Democratic Action, SDA, in Travnik.

"From the beginning, the HDZ [Croatian Democratic Union] obstructed
municipal political life," Genjac said. "That ended in complete blockade."

In 1992, he said, "a kind of ultimatum" was issued demanding Bosniaks join
the Croatian Defence Force, or HVO. "We stressed recognition of the HVO
government would be unconstitutional. The government in Travnik could not be
named after only one people."

According to Genjac, the only legal institutions in the town were the
municipal presidency and the executive board.

Kordic, as former vice-president of the so-called Croatian Community of
Herceg-Bosna and of the HDZ in Bosnia-Herzegovina, is charged with making
the most important political decisions in central Bosnia.

The defence claim Kordic exercised no political power. Genjac, however, said
the local Croatian leadership in Travnik "asked or quoted Kordic."

Last week, the judges also accepted as evidence several documents gleaned
from Croatian archives.

Of the large volume of material submitted by the prosecution, only 16
documents were accepted by the judges as meeting their strict criteria for
the admission of new evidence at such a late stage in proceedings.

The documents - HVO reports, orders and the logbook of the HVO central
Bosnia command - were deemed "sufficiently significant" for their adoption
at such a late stage in the trial.

At this stage, it is difficult to assess the new evidence presented because
not all the exhibits were read out in public and some of the prosecution's
witnesses did not testify in open court.

The new evidence includes allegations concerning Kordic's participation at a
meeting of central Bosnia political and military leaders in Vitez on April
15, 1993 - the eve of the Lasva valley HVO offensive.

It is alleged those at the meeting laid down plans for the attacks against
Bosniaks the following day.

Kordic's defence team called three witnesses, HVO political and military
officials, to testify that the accused was not present at the meeting and
that they also knew nothing of it.

Cerkez's lawyers focused on evidence implicating the accused in organising
the attack on Ahmici on April 16, 1993, which left over 100 Bosniak
civilians dead.

The defence argued that reports sent by Cerkez, then commander of the HVO
Vitez brigade, to his superiors about the "advances of the HVO forces on
Ahmici" did not imply the defendant knew of or had responsibility for the
massacre in the village.


TUTA AND STELA CASE - Defendant pleads not guilty to amended charges

Mladen "Tuta" Naletilic and Vinko "Stela" Martinovic pleaded not guilty last
week to amended charges concerning their alleged abuse of prisoners.

The two men were accused of forcing prisoners to carry out dangerous
military tasks such as transporting ammunition across front lines and
drawing enemy fire.

The charges constitute violations of the laws or customs of war and -
following an amendment to the indictment relating to "dangerous and
humiliating labour" - grave breaches of the Geneva Convention.

Naletilic, former commander of the Convicts' Battalion, and Martinovic,
former commander of the battalion's anti-terrorist unit, are accused of
persecuting Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) in and around Mostar in 1993 and
early 1994.

The prosecution claims the defendants were responsible for attacks on
civilians, illegal detention of civilians and of inhuman treatment of
prisoners under their control. They are also charged with murder, the forced
expulsion of people and theft.

Martinovic and Naletilic pleaded not guilty to all the original charges
during their initial hearings shortly after their arrival at The Hague.
Croatia extradited Martinovic in August 1999 and Naletilic in March 2000.

Trial preparations are still underway. Pre-trial judge Patricia Wald has
asked the prosecution to reduce the number of witnesses it plans to call to
between 50 and 60 and for the prosecution and defence to aim to present
their respective cases within ten weeks.

One unresolved pre-hearing issue is the prosecution's intention to include
as material evidence affidavits from witnesses scheduled to be interviewed
by representatives from the prosecutor's office.

Martinovic is demanding to be present when the witnesses give their
statements, because he argues this would contribute to their accuracy and
reliability.

The start date for the trial has yet to be set. "What we can say now is that
this chamber will tell both sides some time in March when this trial will
begin," presiding judge Almiro Rodrigues said.

The three trial judges have said on several occasions the cases could be
heard by a different trial chamber due to their already pressing workload
with the Srebrenica and Omarska hearings. Given the recent announcement of
27 additional temporary judges for the tribunal, a change of chamber looks
even more likely.


CROATIAN PAPERS RISK CONTEMPT CHARGES - Croatian newspapers warned against
publishing protected witness statements

Two Croatian newspapers, the weekly Globus and the daily paper Slobodna
Dalmacija, could face contempt of court charges following their publication
of statements by Croatian President Stipe Mesic during a closed tribunal
hearing in 1998.

The statements were given by Mesic in April 1998 during the trial of former
Bosnian Croat commander Tihomir Blaskic. Mesic was given protected status
and allowed to give evidence in a closed session.

On December 1, the tribunal judges which originally heard the Blaskic case,
issued an order requesting the Croatian papers stop publishing statements by
protected witnesses. The order warned, "any publication of these statements
and testimonies shall expose its authors and those responsible to be found
in contempt of the tribunal."

The court also asked the Croatian authorities to take steps to halt further
publication of the statements.

But on December 6, Slobodna Dalmacija published another transcript from a
closed court session involving the Croatian president. In his introduction
to the story, the newspaper's editor- in-chief, Josip Jovic, said he had
disregarded the Tribunal's order because "there is an understandable public
interest in The Hague testimony of the current head of state."

"The institution of keeping secrets does not apply to newspapers," Jovic
added.

The tribunal has yet to react to the Slobodna Dalmacija article.

Tribunal spokesman Jim Landale said publication of protected material was
"foolish and irresponsible". He reiterated the publication of such material
could constitute contempt of court. "It is up to the trial chamber to take
what measures it thinks necessary," Landale said, adding this could include
summoning a person to The Hague to respond to contempt of court charges.

On December 7, the Croatian government said it had no information on how the
newspapers got hold of Mesic's testimony. It said the government did not
have cited minutes of Mesic's court appearance and did not know who the
sources of such disclosures could be.

Immediately after Mesic appeared at The Hague, material relating to his
testimony leaked to the Croatian press. The reappearance of stories two
years on, and well into Mesic's presidency, suggests the revelations have
more to do with Croatian domestic politics than anything else.

Criticism in Croatia that the Tribunal court order amounted to "censorship"
and "interference with the freedom of the media" met short shrift from
prosecutor's office spokeswoman Florence Hartmann.

"Publishing information given to the Tribunal through testimonies is not a
problem - their content will be known to the public through the court
sentences in any case," Hartmann said. "But the problem is when a witness
who gave them is identified because that will affect the readiness of other
witnesses to make a statement before the Tribunal."

"The publication of protected witnesses' names only makes it harder for
prosecutors to collect information on crimes, and hence in establishing the
truth and administering justice."

****************** VISIT IWPR ON-LINE: www.iwpr.net*********

These weekly reports, produced since 1995, detail events and issues at the
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The
Hague, providing an independent and comprehensive account of the war crimes
process.

Copyright (c) 2000 The Institute for War & Peace Reporting.

Tribunal Update is produced under IWPR's Tribunal Monitoring Project. The
project seeks to contribute to regional and international understanding of
the war-crimes prosecution process.

IWPR gratefully acknowledges the Swedish International Development Agency
and the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office for support for this project, as
w ell as general support from the Ford Foundation.

Articles are available, with permission, for free republication within the
region.

The Institute for War & Peace Reporting (IWPR) is a London-based independent
non-profit organisation supporting regional media and democratic change.

Lancaster House, 33 Islington High Street, London N1 9LH, United Kingdom
Tel: (44 171) 713 7130 Fax: (44 171) 713 7140  E-mail info@iwpr.net

For further information on this project and other reporting services and
media programmes, as well as details for subscribing and unsubscribing,
visit IWPR's Website: <www.iwpr.net>.

Editor-in-Chief: Anthony Borden. Managing Editor: Yigal Chazan. Associate
Editor: Gordana Igric. Assistant Editors: Alan Davis and Heather Milner.
Editorial Assistant: Mirna Jancic. Kosovo Project Manager: Llazar Semini.
Translation: Alban Mitrushi and others.

The opinions expressed in "Tribunal Update" are those of the authors and do
not necessarily represent those of the publication or of IWPR.`

IWPR'S TRIBUNAL UPDATE, NO. 202



{#} ----------------------------------------------------+[ trienglish ]+---


-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Spector <spectors@netnitco.net>
To: WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK <wsn@csf.colorado.edu>
Date: Monday, January 15, 2001 9:05 AM
Subject: Re: Kosovo and DU


>Immediately just before the NATO bombing on Yugoslavia began, the reports
>were that 2,000 Kosovar Albanians had been murdered over the past two years
>and that as many as 50,000, perhaps even 100,000 were about to be murdered.
>After the bombing, there was a massive forced displacement of Kosovar
>Albanians, including the murders of an unknown number.  Despite the best
>efforts of U.S. technology, including FBI forensic experts, satellite
>photos, etc, current estimates of bodies found range between 600 and 2,000,
>and some of them might be Serbian victims.  Somewhere between 500 and 1500
>Yugoslavians were killed as a direct result of the NATO bombing, and it is
>difficult to estimate how many more deaths will result from the
consequences
>of bombing roads and bridges, which doubtless has caused more deaths as
>people in critical situations may be unable to get quick medical care.
>
>About the two years prior to the bombing and the initial US/NATO rationale
>of two thousand murders -- Kosovo has about 2 million people. Two thousand
>constitutes a murder rate of one/thousand, over two years.  Gary, Indiana
>which adjoins my city of Hammond, has about 100,000 people and
approximately
>one hundred murders per year, or about one/thousand over one year. Gary has
>twice the murder rate that Kosovo had.
>
>But that was enough of an excuse for US/NATO which was carrying on the
older
>imperial British strategy of destabilizing regions to keep them weak and
>vulnerable, without actually having to physically occupy them.
>
>It is true that some Serb military forces did commit war crimes. No doubt
>there were individual soldiers, even perhaps some high ranking military
>officers who approved the execution of civilians. But nothing like the
>ridiculous lies we were fed about 25,000 or 50,000. And if "depleted
>uranium" does cause cancer among civilians, if various other actions such
as
>bombing chemical plants caused civilian deaths, then the charge of "war
>crimes" must be applied to the US/NATO effort. And all this pales in
>comparison to the massive civilian deaths caused by the US led embargo
>against the Iraqi people, and of course the Vietnam War. And how come
people
>are developing amnesia about the massive civilian deaths the U.S. military
>caused in Vietnam, as well as destabilizing the rest of Southeast Asia and
>laying the basis for many more outside Vietnam?  Why are people who condemn
>imperialism considered "fringe" or "hysterical"?  Because the mainstream
>liberal intellectuals serve their masters by lying outright in propaganda
>service to these mass murderers. And no, that's not exaggeration.
>
>Alan Spector
>
>
>Alan Spector
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <franka@fiu.edu>
>To: <wwagar@binghamton.edu>
>Cc: <wsn@csf.colorado.edu>
>Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 7:23 PM
>Subject: Re: Kosovo and DU
>
>
>> everything warren says is right - except the second sentence.
>> there is no evidence of any such campaign, and the NATO/Brit "defense'
>> minister-now NATO head's, claim of 10,000 then 100,000 Albian massacred
at
>> Serb hands has turned out by Nato and other forenscic teams to have been
>> less  than 2,000 - far too many but far fewer  than necessary to whip up
>> popular support for the NATO mission = to expand eastward, and of the
>> 2,000 many were Albanian combatants and others probably were also
>> Serbs. And as to the alleged Serb plan that Warren refers to,
>> 1. the Germans invented an alleged such plan, which was then shown to be
a
>> hoax, even in leaked German foreing ministry reports and [all another
>> Tonkin Gulf and incubator babies in Kuwait]
>> 2. many Albanians fled into Serbia - from NATO!
>>
>> to beOn Sun, 14 Jan 2001 wwagar@binghamton.edu wrote:
>>
>> > Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 19:37:08 -0500 (EST)
>> > From: wwagar@binghamton.edu
>> > To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu
>> > Subject: Kosovo and DU
>> >
>> >
>> > The well-deserved flap about DU should not obscure the fundamental
>> > evil involved in the U.S./NATO rampage against Serbia.  I do not doubt
>> > that Serbia had in mind a campaign that would drive many ethnic
>Albanians
>> > over the border, with ethnic Albanian casualties in the process pour
>> > encourager les autres.  The U.S. once engaged in "Indian wars" to
effect
>> > the same result.  Be that as it may.
>> >
>> > The real point is that the United States and its "allies"
>> > intervened in the affairs of a Balkan republic in the hope of teaching
a
>> > lesson, to wit:  do not adjust your television sets, we are in control,
>> > and we will bomb into submission anybody who resists us.  If it helps
us
>> > to demolish your tanks by resorting to nuclear weapons, so be it.  We
>are
>> > above the law, if law there be, and we will use our technology to slice
>> > you to ribbons.  Should any civilians on the ground die in the process,
>so
>> > much the worse for them!  We're not trying to save them, anyway, we're
>> > trying to assert our hegemony.  Should any of our precious peacekeepers
>> > die in the process, well, we never promised them a rose garden.
>Besides,
>> > they're not us!  They're expendable, right?
>> >
>> > Of course the ultimate jest is the "D" in "DU."  The uranium is
>> > depleted for any serious use in weapons or energy production, but if it
>> > remains radioactive for several millennia, hey, that's life!  Or
>> > half-life.  Or death. ...
>> >
>> > Yours in disgust,
>> >
>> > Warren
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>>                  ANDRE  GUNDER  FRANK
>>
>>          1601 SW  83rd Avenue, Miami, FL.  33155 USA
>>       Tel: 1-305-266  0311   Fax:  1-305  266 0799
>>              E-Mail :  franka@fiu.edu
>>    Web/Home Page:  http://csf.colorado.edu/archive/agfrank
>>
>>
>>
>>
>