Thursday, June 20, 2013


Serbia

Mladic Genocide Trial A Big Story Everywhere, Except Serbia

Mejra Dzogaz watches the TV broadcast of the court proceedings of former Bosnian Serb General Ratko Mladic at her home in Potocari, Bosnia. Mejra's husband, three sons, and a grandson were killed during the Srebrenica massacre in 1995.
Mejra Dzogaz watches the TV broadcast of the court proceedings of former Bosnian Serb General Ratko Mladic at her home in Potocari, Bosnia. Mejra's husband, three sons, and a grandson were killed during the Srebrenica massacre in 1995.

Related Articles

Mladic War Crimes Trial Adjourned

The United Nations war crimes tribunal has adjourned indefinitely the trial of former Bosnian Serb military chief Ratko Mladic -- just a day after it opened.
TEXT SIZE - +
By Charles Recknagel
The opening of the trial of Ratko Mladic in The Hague on May 16 made news all over the world. All over the world, that is, except Serbia.

The former Bosnian Serb general appeared in court on 11 charges of genocide and war crimes. He is accused of orchestrating the 1995 Srebrenica massacre of nearly 8,000 Muslims and the 44-month siege of Sarajevo, in which more than 11,000 people were killed.

Yet, if television stations everywhere broadcast at least part of the proceedings, Serbian stations did not. They confined the news to the headlines, then moved on to other events.

Branka Trivic, an RFE/RL correspondent in Belgrade, says that is in line with how Serbia reacts these days to any news from The Hague.

"The Hague tribunal and the trials under way there are getting almost no attention in Serbia's media," Trivic says. "The impression is that once they delivered the last guy indicted of war crimes, they just closed that chapter, and there is no discussion whatsoever about, for instance, who were those responsible for hiding Mladic so long?"

Mladic was arrested by the Serbian Security Intelligence Agency on May 26, 2011, after being on the run since he was indicted in 1995. He was found living in northern Serbia, without disguise and in plain sight.

Today, if he seems to be a taboo subject for Serbia's mainstream media, he also is an invisible man to the country's politicians.

He has received almost no mention in Serbia's ongoing presidential race, which will conclude with a second-round vote on May 20.

Former Serbian President Boris Tadic, who announced Mladic's arrest last year, rarely speaks of The Hague in his debates with challenger Tomislav Nikolic.
Former Serbian President Boris Tadic, who announced Mladic's arrest last year, rarely speaks of The Hague in his debates with challenger Tomislav Nikolic.
Boris Tadic, who announced Mladic's arrest last year when he was Serbian president, rarely speaks of The Hague in his debates with presidential challenger Tomislav Nikolic. That is despite the fact that Nikolic, a nationalist, used to criticize Tadic for handing over suspects to the tribunal as part of the country's drive to join the European Union.

In a televised debate on May 16, Tadic made only a brief reference to indicted war criminals, saying: "People in Serbia could not travel because of sanctions in the period when you, Mr. Nikolic, were in the government. The people of Serbia were trying to save themselves from the bombs, as were the people in the region, too. That is the fundamental difference between our policies. You said that the parliament will be a safe house for The Hague suspects. In the name of the citizens, we solved that problem, as well."

Trivic says Serbia stopped talking about war criminals once the last of the 46 people indicted by The Hague tribunal, Goran Hadzic, was arrested in July.

To be sure, Mladic himself has not yet spoken at his trial, and when he does there could be a resurgence of interest in his case. But for now, quiet reigns.

The attitude in Serbia today toward those indicted appears to be that they were an obstacle to getting into the EU, not a cause for soul-searching or debating the country's past.

Tadic's promise a year ago that police would also track down and punish all those who helped Mladic has never been fulfilled.


Mladic's trial was adjourned on May 17 indefinitely on what appears to be a legal technicality. Presiding Judge Alphons Orie said he was suspending the trial due to "errors" made by prosecutors in presenting evidence to Mladic's defense lawyers. The judge said he aimed to establish a date for the resumption of the trial "as soon as possible."
This forum has been closed.
Comment Sorting
Comments
     
by: Rick from: Prague
May 17, 2012 14:15
Disinterest in war crimes trials has a tradition dating back to Nuremberg, which the German public also mostly ignored. It seems to be a normal human reaction to sweep the nasty bits of history under the carpet and take refuge in the belief that one is a victim of some foreign conspiracy. Happily, the Hague Tribunal will not allow that.
In Response

by: Paul from: London
May 17, 2012 16:17
You're joking aren't you. The Hague is a laughing stock except to those it pays handsomely and those with vested interests in keeping Serbia as the bad guy. A motley crew to say the least.

by: Esad Salkic from: Brisbane
May 17, 2012 14:34
It apears again that some Serbian ultranationlist are going too far with their support for accused War Criminal Mladic. For this reason overseers of Hague Tribunial have a difficult task in providing a natural atmosphere in court. The court officials need to feel coumfortable in order can carry out their duties with any disruption and all world decent citizen are awaiting for just judgment.
In Response

by: John
May 18, 2012 10:32
Why should anyone listen propaganda from bosnian muslim lier like you are?

by: Mark from: Australia
May 18, 2012 00:38
I find it hard to believe that the Hague prosecutors mistakenly did not hand over evidence to Mladic.

As the media coverage in Serbia shows, no-one want this to go to full trial.

Large tracts of the international community do not want a trial because it would put an uncomfortable spotlight on the links between Mladic and Belgrade, and on the Western powers role in facilitating the genocide, particularly the UK state which the Bosnian government began an action in the ICJ for breach of the genocide convention then withdrew under threats to cut off aid to refugees.

The EU don't want a completed trial because a Mladic guilty judgement may trigger instability in Serbia and the region.

Serb politicians does not want a trial because of the complications for regional relations and having to front up to the electorate about the past.

The Serbian people don’t want a trial because of the stigma but also it would create a cognitive dissonance with their image of moral equivalence of all sides and their perception of legitimacy of the Greater Serbian project.

Finally having Judge Alphonso Orie as the trial judge across different seminal cases is questionable because it creates a conflict of interest, that is, a tension between adjudicating on the facts and maintaining consistency of narrative across the different trials. It also means just one person to place political pressure on the part of states, intelligence services etc.

It’s a sad day for the victims of genocide, the world over.
In Response

by: American Man from: Chicago
May 19, 2012 06:20
What do you know about Great Serbia and where did you hear bout it first time????? Do You know who was TESLA and where he was born??? Did You know that Serbia existed before Yugoslavia??? Did You know that Croatia was never country??? Did you know that Bosnia was never country and in history and today mostly Serbian land??? Did You know that The West wanted to destroy Yugoslavia??? Did You know that Serbs made Yugoslavia and wanted to protect it. Did You Know that the West supported separatists (bosnian muslims and Croatians) in Yougoslavia the same way they are doing today in Libya,Iraq,Syria,Iran and all other countries who want to live independent from USA , UK and NATO. Is it possible that You are so blind???
In Response

by: Mark from: Australi
May 19, 2012 16:31
I'll assume your response has bona fides and try to answer each of your points:

* I've known about Greater Serbia from primary school history - it was the motivation for the Serb state's support of the Black Hand and its assasination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand which triggered WWI. Greater Serbia has always been part of the State of Serbia's imperial ambitions since regaining independence from the Turks. These irredentist desires was westward over Croatian and Bosnian territory. The main exponents were Garasjin, Stevan Moljevic, Mihailovic, Karadzic and Mladic to be achieved by a combination of ethnic cleansing and forced integration cf Prosecutor v Tadic (Transcript) (International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Trial Chamber II, Case No IT-94-1 31 May 1996) 1618. http://www.icty.org/x/cases/tadic/trans/en/960531ed.htm

* Nikola Tesla was a proud Croatian-Serb - proud of his Serb heritage but also proud of Croatian homeland. Just like an American-Serb would be. He was born in the Croatian military frontier, adminstered by the Austrian high command and carved out of and subsequently returned to civil Croatia.

* Yes Serbia existed before Yugoslavia - when it got it's independence it was less than half the territory it is today (no Vojvodina, no Kosovo or Sandjak). Serbia then went on a number of wars to increase its territory.

* Croatia and Bosnia on the other hand existed as separate crown lands of the Holy Roman Empire. Thats why the Habsburgs (and Serb kings in the first Yugoslavia) had the royal title King of Croatia. Thats why you see the Croat red and white checkered shield on old buidlings and documents all over europe. Prior to the Holy Roman Empire, both Croatia and Bosnia whose histories and royal families are intricately intertwined had indigenous royals until Pacta Conventa with Hungary and with the invading Ottoman Turks the Croats selected the Habsburgs as kings.

* The West wanted to keep Yugoslavia together - the US in particular feared a breakup of Yugoslavia would mean the breakup of the USSR which the West feared would be chaotic for a nuclear armed country.

* The Illyrian movement and pan slavism was stronger in Croatia and Slovenia, articularly among the clergy. For Serbia, Yugoslavia was a substitute for annexation which couldn't be achieved because Serbs made less than 50% in the new state. Indeed Serb nationalists and Milosevic wanted to change Yugoslavia in a centralisation attempt and abolishing autonomy for Vojvodina and Kosovo. In doing so Serbia destroyed Yugoslavia.

* The West only supported independence after the Serb barbarity of razing Vukovar to the ground and bombing the old part of UNESCo heritage listed Dubrovnik.
In Response

by: American Man from: Chicago
May 20, 2012 00:16
Nice copy and paste from wikipedia!!! Not Greater Serbia its Great Serbia. The Fact is Croatia have never been independent country nor was Bosnia. The fact is that both teritories were in big part serbian land for centuries and the fact is that Croatians and Bosnian muslims wanted to clear those territories from Serbs. Its funny that you say that the West wanted to save Yugoslavia and they were selling weapons to croations and muslims long before war started. How could the west want Yugoslavia when it was comunist country??? I am Bosnian Serb so is my father,grand father grand father........I went to war because muslims wanted to make bosnia muslim country and our goal was not to unite with Serbia it was to survive and now after watching CNN you are telling me that Serbia wanted Bosnian territory??? Bosnia is and have been serbian territory since Slovens moved to Balkan long before bosnian muslims existed. I like the facts and here is one for you and if you can give me your opinion.How do you exlain were between croations and muslims in Bosnia? Also hoe do you exlain were between muslim and muslims in Bosnia? Was that your "Greater Serbia "plan too? FYI Tesla was Serb from Military Frontier which was part of Austrio-Hungerian empire and for sure he was not proud of anything croation,also in last war croations burned his house and his church,there is nothing to be proud of. Teory of Greater Serbia plan is just the BS western propaganda. I know that You are Croation but please look at the big picture and you will see that Yugoslavia had to be destroyed by the West and those who defended it (Serbs) had to pay price. Just like in WW1 and WW2. You know what happened in Jasenovac and other death camps in Croatia (NDH) and you know who were ustashe. For you to say that the West decided to act after what happened in Vukovar is childish. Look what happened in Libya , doeasnt It remind You of Yugoslavia scenario. Arm separatist,CNN call them "fridom fighters,NATO gives the air support and job is done, lets go and destroy next country.
Sorry for the spelling mistakes,tying fast no spell check
Hvala
In Response

by: Mark from: Australia
May 21, 2012 13:01
* Your claim that Croatia or Bosnia were never independent does not stand up to scrutiny.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04510a.htm
http://www.hungarianheraldry.org/croatia/
http://www.croatianhistory.net/etf/et01.html

* Most of what is Bosnia today (west of the Bosnia river and south of Sarajevo) was an integral part of the medieval Kingdom of Croatia until conquered by the Ottomans whence it became known as Turkish Croatia, then as Bosanska Karjina. The pre-Ottoman reference to Bosnia normally referred to a tract of territory centred near the Bosnia river in what is today north-eastern Bosnia. It was this tract of territory that changed hands between Croatia, Serbia, Byzantine, Bulgaria.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02694a.htm

* that the west supported a united Yugoslavia is confirmed by Zimmerman in his book cf page 8 and 248: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=pZRpAAAAMAAJ&dq=US+Save+Yugoslavia+USSR+Zimmerman&q=US+policy#search_anchor -

* What the average man on the street that was recruited believed or was told will naturally be different from the motivation of state actors. I really feel sorry for these people that weren't served better by their politicians.

However the reasons for the country of Serbia for going to war are well-known from Serbian govt sources detailed in the trials of Dusko Tadic and Slobodan Milosevic: cf cf Prosecutor v Tadic (Transcript) (International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Trial Chamber II, Case No IT-94-1 31 May 1996) 1618; Prosecutor v Milosevic (International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Trial Chamber III, Case No IT-02-54-T).

* It would suit the Bosnian Serbs to have conflict between the Muslims and Croats or within those groups - as a strategy of divide and rule used by the Romans, Byzantines and British extremely effectively. In much the same way, it was convenient and logical for the Croats and Muslims to be allies. There is also another dimension that affected all sides, the split between the Partisan (read communist or pro-Jugoslav) and Nationalist factions in the elites.

* "The scientist once famously stated that he was equally proud of his Serb origin and Croatian homeland."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5167054.stm
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/411/croatia-marks-150th-anniversary-nikola-teslas-birth
What the relevance of Tesla is to this debate I do not know nor understand why you raised it.

* If the state of Serbia was interested in saving Yugoslavia, the JNA would not have razed Vukovar to the ground nor bombed Dubrovnik. Milosevic would not have raided the federal treasury or debased the currency by printing money (from Markovic's testimony) or rejected the confederation model which would have helped all republics to foster economic and political ties.

* Various politicians openly spoke about forming greater Serbia with various formulations including the Virovotica-Karlovac-Karlobag line - cf the statements of Vuk Draskovic (former foreign minister), Vojislav Seselj, the new Serbian president Nikolic etc

* We may never know what exactly happened before and in WWII because of the debasement of that history for political purposes by both Serb nationalists and communists. The truth lies in the archives in Belgrade.

* No comparison with Libya - the West supported a united Yugoslavia and imposed an arms embargo. Prior to NATO intervening in Bosnia, their was a split between the US and UK/France.
By contrast, the West openly armed the Libyan opposition and unanimously supported Gaddafi's overthrow.
The similarity is the technique - providing air support while non-NATO local troops on the ground did the heavy lifting.

In Response

by: vn from: Belgrade
May 21, 2012 15:27
To: Mark

Despite supporting the Serbian points of view, I appreciate your time and effort in advocating the Croatian side. However, we would very much warm up to your depicting the geography of Croatia, let's say prior to WWII (I believe the Italian Istria and some of their islands were completely out of the picture in Croatia), as well as to the story and role of Croatian General Franjo Tudjman. The story of Serbia, and of ex-Yugoslavia for that matter, seem a little strange without these inputs.

As for Tesla, also feel free to mention that his birth place was in Croatia, the region called Lika - nowadays a ghostly sight filled with a few birds, a wolf or two, and black widow spiders. In a word, a place of origin of thousands of Serbs, albeit without them. The famous scientist and inventor of AC/DC declared himself a citizen of the USA, Serb by origin, proud of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia.
In Response

by: American Man from: Chicago
May 22, 2012 04:34
Mark

Its supprise me that all your comments are based on wikiedia which is site where anybody can put info and you wont listen man who was in the war. You can read wikiedia but I can tell You first hand that arms emargo in Bosnia was never inforced. You dont have to believe me , just read the book of Bill Clinton. Yugoslavia and Libya are 100% the same scenario.

Historic fact is that Croatia was never independet country, it was puppet of big powers.

Tesla is very important to this argument because he cant be irnored. He was the greatest mind of mankind, proud Serb,son of Serbian priest,born in Austro-Hungaria and 100 years later his house and his church were burned by croation army ONLY because he was Serb. Is that part of Greater Serbia project???

If you like Hag so much (USA does not recognize this court because it can be politicly used) why dont you mention recorded audio of Franjo Tudjman on the meetin in Brioni when he said "we have to give Serbs such a blow so they practicly disapere from Croatia" is that Greater Serbia plan?
Today there is no Serbs in Croatia and there are many Croations living in Serbia (Ruma,Novi Sad,Beograd...)

You call me average man on the street but I know for a fact that Croatia let 3000 mudzahedins to Bosnia, I know that the West was arming muslims and croations, I know that Croations and Muslims were killing each other in territories where Serbian army was 100km away. I know that Serbs did not kill 8000 muslim civilians in Srebrenica ( I was there) please watch documentary "forbidden truth about Srebrenica). I know that Serbs saved thousands Croations in central Bosnia who would have gotten killed by the sama mudzahedins you let in. I was in Zepce (croation city in central Bosnia in 1993) 111th HVO was saved by army of Republica Srpska.

Dubrovnik was bombed by JNA because croation Army used it to fire on JNA . Please watch american documentary "war that could have been avoided" You will see how western media was working with croation army to stage incindents.

You seam to be educated man and it supprise me how you are limited by media and you are digging internet blogs to learn about history. Why dont you find enciklopedia. That book has some value because its writen by experts.

Read about Ustashe and Chetniks and you will se fundamental difference. Read how Chetniks saved 512 american pilots in WW2 and how Draza Mihajlovic was on front cover of Times magazin as Hero in fight against Nizies. Read how number of Croations and Slovenians were in Chetniks of Draza Mihajlovic.
Read how Kindom of Yugoslavia was the biggest mistake of Serbs and how croations killed Serbian King Aleksandar.
Read how Croations joined Nazies in WW1 and WW2. Read how thousands of Serbian orphans were coverted to catolicizam by croation priests and today they are Serb haters.
I as a Serb nationalist dont hate Croations and Muslim and yet Croation nacionalist are Serb haters.
Read how 200 000 Serbs were forced from their century homeland and watch videos of some of them being killed in UN base by croation army. Today in Tesla's home town there is no Serbs and ironicly his house and church is renovated by the same govenment who 15 years ago burned it to the ground. And yet You are still talking about Greater Serbia.
I think its more Great Croatia that was planed.

Your comment about war between Croations and Muslims being organized and controled by Serbs is funny.

At the end here is couple facts for you

1.Serbs were consitutive people in Croatia and Bosnia and Franjo and Alija illigaly declared then minorities and thats what triggered war.
2. Croatia commited war crimes against Serbs and thats even confirmed by your Hag tribunal

Zivio

In Response

by: Mark
May 24, 2012 08:17
by: American Man from: Chicago
May 22, 2012 04:34
"Its supprise me that all your comments are based on wikiedia which is site where anybody can put info and you wont listen man who was in the war."

by: Mark
I’m sorry to hear that you lived through war.

But I have no way of authenticating what you say is true, and you have no way of authenticating what I say is true, except to cite sources.

My sources include a couple court cases, a book by ex US secretary of state, references to articles in the catholic encyclopaedia, and a couple mainstream online news articles. As you can see none of them are wikipedia.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------by: American Man from: Chicago
May 22, 2012 04:34
"Historic fact is that Croatia was never independet country, it was puppet of big powers."

by: Mark
By that rationale no country is truly independent - even the US is dependent on Arabian oil; the EU on Russian gas.

I’ve already provided references for Croatian independence, whether that be outright or autonomy within a supranational structure (Austro-Hunagry, Yugoslavia, EU).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by: American Man from: Chicago
May 22, 2012 04:34
"I can tell You first hand that arms emargo in Bosnia was never inforced. You dont have to believe me , just read the book of Bill Clinton. Yugoslavia and Libya are 100% the same scenario."

by: Mark
Correction, the arms embargo was enforced in the case of Yugoslavia - that is what Clinton's "My Life" showed.

Hence the need for secret night flight drop-offs and the exorbitant black market prices.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by: American Man from: Chicago
May 22, 2012 04:34
"why dont you mention recorded audio of Franjo Tudjman on the meetin in Brioni when he said "we have to give Serbs such a blow so they practicly disapere from Croatia" is that Greater Serbia plan?
Today there is no Serbs in Croatia and there are many Croations living in Serbia (Ruma,Novi Sad,Beograd...)"

by: Mark
There are more Serbs in Croatia than there are Croats left in Serbia.

The Brioni transcripts are open to interpretation - Tudjman is referring to the Serb regular military and irregular Chetnik forces. However his honour Alphons Orie found the converse. I believe that to be a mistake - indeed much conventional international law had to be overturned by Orie J to come to the conclusion that he did - in particular the shelling without military necessity. He interpreted that anything greater than 200 m (the established legal precedent was 400 m) from the target was targeting civilians, even if the shells fell into an empty field, which over 95% that missed their target did. As you are aware the matter is under appeal, hence there is no point raising it until it attains legal certainty.

http://www.sense-agency.com/icty/american-experts-‘reject-the-findings-of-unlawful-artillery-attacks-on-krajina’.29.html?cat_id=1&news_id=13524
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Response

by: Mark
May 24, 2012 08:25
by: American Man from: Chicago
May 22, 2012 04:34
"Dubrovnik was bombed by JNA because croation Army used it to fire on JNA . Please watch american documentary "war that could have been avoided" You will see how western media was working with croation army to stage incindents."

by: Mark
All the evidence on the bombing of Dubrovnik was examined in the trial of Pavle Strugar.
cf Strugar (IT-01-42) "Dubrovnik" http://www.icty.org/case/strugar/4#tjug

The claims you make were among those made by the defendant:
(i) Strugar claimed that the damage was exaggerated and supported by a JNA commission
(ii) Strugar claimed that the Croatians deliberately inflicted damage for propaganda or in revenge against Serb shops –
(iii) Strugar claimed that the JNA were responding to Croat fire.

In each claim the presiding judge found the claim unfounded or false and that it was indiscriminate shelling by the JNA that was the source of the damage.

I have copy and pasted the relevant excerpts of the judgement.

F. HOW DID THE OLD TOWN COME TO BE SHELLED?.......................................................................77 1. Extent of damage ...................................................................................................................77
179. Notwithstanding the report of the JNA Commission, the evidence before the Chamber establishes that there was widespread and substantial, i.e large scale, damage to the Old Town from shelling on 6 December 1991.


2. Was damage deliberately inflicted by Croatian forces or interests?......................................78

180. One position for which the Defence contended is that any damage, alternatively some of the damage, to the Old Town was in fact deliberately inflicted by the Croatian defending forces or other Croatian interests.582 It was suggested that this was done to create a false picture of damage by the JNA to the Old Town. In particular, it was advanced that damage was deliberately inflicted by Croatian interests to buildings in the Old Town which were owned or occupied by Serbian interests.583 Further motives for this might include anger or revenge.
181. For reasons set out in our consideration of the issue of damage the Chamber finds that these submissions are also without factual foundation… On the contrary, as detailed in this decision, there is a clear and strong body of evidence, indeed an overwhelming body, that the damage inflicted in and to the Old Town of Dubrovnik on 6 December 1991 was caused by the JNA shelling.590 The Chamber so finds.

In Response

by: Mark
May 24, 2012 09:47
to vn from: Belgrade

The issue isn't really of geography.

It's the mendacious reasons used by a corrupt Serb elite for going to war. Eastern Slavonia and Dubrovnik had majority Croat populations, yet were targeted because of the oil or tourist revenue.

There is also the issue of actions that defied military logic - 8,000 mainly Muslim men and boys were murdered for what reason in Srebrenica? (Prosecutor v Krstic). A UNESCO world heritage site in Dubrovnik suffered extensive damage for no discernible military reason (Prosecutor v Strugar).

I think what fires up most people is the equivalence argument.

It is really only proffered by nationalist Serbs and apologists in the internationalist left - see:
http://www.monbiot.com/2011/06/13/naming-the-genocide-deniers/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/21/ratko-mladic-genocide-denial

That is, all sides are guilty of war crimes and that all sides suffered. Whilst technically true, it ignores the magnitude of suffering of each side - it would be technically true to say both Germans and Jews suffered in WWII but morally dishonest by virtue of excluding the context.

Consider the following:
(i) the conflict took place on the territory of Croatia and Bosnia. Large cities like Sarajevo and Zagreb were shelled and bombed from ground, air and sea. Both states suffered:
(a) loss of human potential - lives lost, lives not born, horrendous war injuries and disabilities, emigration to third countries
(b) ongoing mental and physical wounds - amputees, PTSD, rape victims, suicides, domestic violence
(c) materially in terms of damage to infrastructure
(d) loss of cultural artefacts - one of the elements of Croatia's genocide suit against Serbia is the failure to return cultural artefacts stolen from Vukovar.

There appeared to be and still is a disconnect in between cause and effect in the dominant narrative in Serbia.
That narrative argues that Serbia was trying to protect Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia from persecution. Any crime or discrimination of the Serb minority during the war was thus taken as validation of that narrative without understanding that scarring the landscape with war may have provoked that reaction in some non-Serbs. Thus there was feedback loop that was self-fulfilling and potentially self-serving.

There are the horrors of the Serb run camps in Manjaca, Omarska, Trnopolje as Western Bosnia was cleansed - cf Prosecutor v Dusko Tadic ICTY. The experience of discrimination, abuses even executions of Serbs in Croatia (Prosecutor v Norac ICTY) and Bosnia do not match the scale and magnitude of that conducted by the Greater Serbia project.

The fleeing of the Serb population in Krajina before a oncoming army (Prosecutor v Gotovina et al ICTY), does not compare to the systematic rounding up of whole populations of non-Serbs who are either murdered, tortured in concentration camps or expelled after signing away their possessions under duress (Prosecutor v Tadic; Prosecutor v Krstic ICTY; Bosnia v Serbia ICJ).

(ii) In Bosnia, the main victims were Bosnian Muslims - 65% of those died or missing (soldiers and civilians).
80% of civilian deaths or missing were Bosnian Muslim compared with 10% for Serb: http://www.idc.org.ba/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&id=35&Itemid=126&lang=bs

(iii) By denying the identity of a nation, one creates the pre-condition for genocide.
In Response

by: Mark
May 24, 2012 13:44
by: American Man from: Chicago
May 22, 2012 04:34
"Dubrovnik was bombed by JNA because croation Army used it to fire on JNA . Please watch american documentary "war that could have been avoided" You will see how western media was working with croation army to stage incindents."

by: Mark
from Strugar (IT-01-42) "Dubrovnik" http://www.icty.org/case/strugar/4#tjug

F. HOW DID THE OLD TOWN COME TO BE SHELLED?.......................................................................77
3. Did JNA forces fire only at Croatian military positions? ...................................................... 79

193. The Chamber concludes that the evidence of Croatian firing positions or heavy weapons within the Old Town on 6 December 1991 is inconsistent, improbable, and not credible. It further observes that the witnesses who claimed to have seen weapons located at those positions were at the material time JNA commanders or staff officers, or officers having responsibility for JNA artillery firing on the day. It appears thus that the question whether JNA fire on the Old Town was deliberate, or merely a response to defensive Croatian fire or other military positions, could have been thought by them to have a direct impact on the assessment of their performance or their exposure to disciplinary action. When all factors are weighed, including the directly contradicting evidence, the Chamber is entirely persuaded and finds that there were no Croatian firing positions or heavy weapons in the Old Town or on its walls on 6 December 1991.

214. In view of the foregoing, the Chamber finds that the shelling of the Old Town on 6 December 1991 was not a JNA response at Croatian firing or other military positions, actual or believed, in the Old Town, nor was it caused by firing errors by the Croatian artillery or by deliberate targeting of the Old Town by Croatian forces. In part the JNA forces did target Croatian firing and other military positions, actual or believed, in Dubrovnik, but none of them were in the Old Town. These Croatian positions were also too distant from the Old Town to put it in danger of unintended incidental fall of JNA shells targeted at those Croatian positions. It is the finding of the Chamber that the cause of the established extensive and large-scale damage to the Old Town was deliberate shelling of the Old Town on 6 December 1991, not only by JNA mortars but also by other JNA weapons such as ZIS and recoilless cannons and Maljutka rockets.
In Response

by: vn from: Belgrade
May 24, 2012 15:20
To: Mark

I understand you're heavily connected to the UN Tribunal and are closely following all the court proceedings on former Yugoslavia. I am in neither position, but refuse to admit to being a genocidal human being, as in wanting to destroy a whole nation of people. So, find me guilty.

My reference to geography of Croatia is related specifically to the issue of Istria - it is a territory of Italy gained by Yugoslavia (more precisely by the Croat-Slovenian President Tito) post WWII, and if Croatia is claiming that everything even slightly connected to ex-Yugoslavia should be proclaimed as invalid or put to shambles, then it would be only right to open this issue and return the property to the Italians (any site dealing with Istria or Adriatic programmes have their commentary section, and it is clear what the descendants expect).

As for all the profusion on the dealings of the Crime Tribunal;

The conflicts were so heavy and emotinally based, involving thousands of people, from presidents, generals, low rank army officers, young conscripts committing suicide, innocent passing-by victims, rascal smuggles, true prostitutes and truly raped women, mercenaries, drunkards and drug-addicts - and all this complexity to be explained by a few people at court - looks a bit bizzare.

Slovenia, Croatia and Muslims were heavily arming themselves not for the purpose of trading foreign-made armament, but for the purpose of forcefully seceding from Yugoslavia. The role of the Yugoslav army had always been clear: to defend the territory and people of Yugoslavia, and never to turn against its own people. If anyone did the traitorous role of attacking it was the paramilitary formations of Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia. Yugoslavia was only trying to prevent its falling apart. Serbia and the Serbs were a legal constitutive entity of Yugoslavia, not an external party.

I watched Milosevic's trial in short bits. For instance, at the very beginning, there was a witness repeating in the English language they were shooting and shooting and shooting (from a building, I believe it was a hotel). The translation was in the military sense, that they had guns and were shooting. The translator did not ask for an explanation. My point is - the shooting can be done by a camera, take a Canon for instance. They might have been taking pictures of either people or the terrain. But the trial went on and on, and I left the scene. And it was supposed to be an in camera trial. If you don't consider the public behind the cameras to be witnesses, then I have no idea what in camera means. All in all it's a pure Kangaroo Court supporting the interests of Franjo Tudjman and Alija Izetbegovic, i.e. of Croatia and Bosnia, period. Yugoslavia was not Serbia only, when will you people understand that? Serbia had no interest whatsoever to destroy Yugoslavia whereas Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia had all the monetary motives to do just that.

"Large cities like Sarajevo and Zagreb were shelled and bombed from ground, land and sea". Is this really worth any serious consideration? Zagreb was bombed from the sea, or Sarajevo. I'll give you the wrongdoings on Sarajevo. But the only city that was rocketed from the Adriatic Sea was Belgrade in 1999 - the heating plant. Not a very pleasant experience.

The numbers on Srebrenica haven't been established yet. There was a case in the US, during post-Srebrenica time, involving a nut-case from Srebrenica who killed several people. As this is a male, the number would then have to be 7.999. Btw, the whole population of Srebrenica wasn't 8,000.

Dubrovnik was staged, and that story, naturally, will never see the light of day in this court.

By turning a religion into a nation, and by denying the right of a country to safeguard its sovereignty, you're paving the way for the media warmongers' profiteering on delicate issues such as genocide.
In Response

by: Mark
May 25, 2012 02:52
by: vn from: Belgrade
May 24, 2012 15:20
"refuse to admit to being a genocidal human being, as in wanting to destroy a whole nation of people. So, find me guilty."

from Mark:
An here is the fundamental problem - the incorrect belief that by acknowledging the past, Serbs would be attacking their identity and thus themselves.

But if anything the opposite is true. Acknowledging the past would affirm personal integrity.

Those that committed crimes made an individual choice whether alone or as apart of a joint criminal enterprise. When a nation seeks the revisionist path of genocide denial, then it is only then that collective guilt comes into play i.e. an individual crime becomes a collective one because of the failure to acknowledge it and uphold virtues each society professes.

Everything else hereafter is academic.
-----------------------------------

by: vn from: Belgrade
May 24, 2012 15:20
"My reference to geography of Croatia is related specifically to the issue of Istria - it is a territory of Italy gained by Yugoslavia (more precisely by the Croat-Slovenian President Tito) post WWII, and if Croatia is claiming that everything even slightly connected to ex-Yugoslavia should be proclaimed as invalid or put to shambles, then it would be only right to open this issue and return the property to the Italians (any site dealing with Istria or Adriatic programmes have their commentary section, and it is clear what the descendants expect)."


from Mark:
Any border issues between Yugoslavia and Italy were resolved by the Osim agreement.

I assume your reference is a disguised argument that borders should be revised. However the eastern border between Croatia and Serbia (the only one disputed at the time) was drawn on the ethnic principle by a communist commission headed by Montenegrin Serb Milovan Djilas - he also noted that there were no perfect borders because of how mixed some regions were and this was a european problem: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=WPhhLfp8huIC&pg=PA196&lpg=PA196&dq=border+of+croatia+serbia+Milovan+Djilas&source=bl&ots=mpquAFxgZX&sig=Xtib4S0pdczOlUIsIjEjFpsZoIs&hl=en

-----------------------------------

by: vn from: Belgrade
May 24, 2012 15:20
"All in all it's a pure Kangaroo Court supporting the interests of Franjo Tudjman and Alija Izetbegovic, i.e. of
Croatia and Bosnia, period.

from Mark:
The ICTY court is political in the sense that it is answerable to the UN Security Council.

If it was a kangaroo court, then Serbian NGOs would not be heavily engaged with it, like Savo Strbac, linked to Serbian Intelligence who runs the Veritas organisation.
In Response

by: William from: Aragon
May 20, 2012 02:19
A structured and well-researched response.
In Response

by: American Man from: Chicago
May 24, 2012 23:10
Mark

The point is that Croations and Muslims were used by the west to destroy Yugoslavia and those who were defending it were enemies of the west. So please stop using Hag court as your source because Hag IS extended hand of NATO pact and of course that they will blame Serbs for everything.

They claim that 8000 muslim civilians were killed in Srebrenica
Please watch muslim documentary called "forbidden truth about Srebrenica" . I was there when it hapened and in this movie you will hear from the muslims who were there what happened. After you watch it please comment.

Regarding bombing of Dubrovnik and Sarajevo I was not in Dubrovnik but was on Sarajevo front line for short time and there are multiple non Serb sources who have said that western media staged incidents in many cases for one reason only and that is to blame Serbs and give NATO green light to bomb Serbian targets. Please watch documentary "war that could have been avoided Yugoslavia" There you will see what UN comander, Europian politicians and other non Serb sources have to say.
After you watch it please comment

I as a Serb can tell you that there were war crimes committed by some Serbs and I would shoot them right away. The problem is that those war crimes were multilied by 10 and there were some war crimes that muslims did and blamed Serbs for it with support of western media, that is the huge problem and thats why you can not compare Serbs to Germans in WW2.

You call Serbs minority in Croatia and Bosnia??? That shows you ignorance of the facts in Yugoslavia.




by: vn from: Belgrade
May 18, 2012 05:44
Is this to rack Serbian brains or what: Bosnia is one country, and Serbia is another. Yugoslavia has been murdered, however, some people are still confusing the terms of nationality, nation, state and individuals. Mladic's arrest was the problem of the UN, NATO, and Bosnia not of Serbia.

In Response

by: Masha
May 18, 2012 14:08
And yet, Serbia was hiding and protecting him (and other "bosnian" fugitives) for 17 years. Therefor, he was (and obviously still is) problem of Serbia.
In Response

by: Brazilian Man from: São Paulo, Brazil
May 18, 2012 17:31
Ratko Mladic, as Radovan Karadzic and Arkan, were at the service of Milosevic’s Serbia, who wanted to annex territories from Bosnia and Croatia by force with the use of heavy weaponry (missiles, jet, helicopters, tanks, anti-aircraft guns) from the old Yugoslav People’s Army. All the rest is myth.
In Response

by: vn from: Belgrade
May 18, 2012 19:37
To: Masha

General Ratko Mladic is now in The Hague, the UN Tribunal - what else would you expect of Serbia? On the other hand, the NATO, US, and EU are again butchering Serbia and recognizing criminals, for instance the drug leader Hashim Tachi for a Prime Minister of a mythical Albanian state of Kosovo. His present place of residence should also be in The Hague. He's also been known for criminal activities in Bosnia and Croatia.
In Response

by: Brazilan man #2 from: Brazil
May 20, 2012 00:26
Just like in every NATO war in Yugoslavian war there was "no fly zone" Only NATO planes did bombing.

Masha why would you say that?Be nice. Check my information and tell me where I am wrong. Am I wrong to say that muslims wanted and still want whole Bosnia and that croatia whole croatia for them? So how It was Greater Serbia plan?

by: Brazilian Man from: São Paulo, Brazil
May 18, 2012 17:37
Serbia is not broadcasting the Mladic trial because it still feels more anger for losing the Yugoslav Wars to the Croatians and NATO than regret for the massive human rights abuses it committed in the name of “Greater Serbia”, in a situation very similar to the post-World War I Weimar Germany and post-World War II West Germany, which only acknowledged its sins in full by the 1960s and 1970s, when Willy Brandt went on his knees in Warsaw…
In Response

by: vn from: Belgrade
May 19, 2012 05:10
To: Brazilian Man

There's nothing to be broadcasted because the trial hasn't even started yet. It's been postoponed indefinetly because of prosecutor's error (and there will be more and more of them), and Brazilian Man you're spinning a whole lot of delusional uneducated counter-propaganda mainstream.
In Response

by: American Man from: Chicago
May 19, 2012 06:08
I am sorry for people like You. In WW1 and WW2 Germans were allies with Croatians and Bosnian muslims. They killed over 1000 000 Serbs and you decided to show your stupidity to whole world.
You are probably some USTASHA not Brazilian. Here is home work for You. Google. "forbidden truth about Srebrenica"
Serbs have lived in today's Croatia and Bosnia for centuries , much longer before Bosnian muslims existed and much before Criatia was Country. Also google " NDH Croatia" google "Jasenovac" What Greater Serbia??? Where did you hear about it ??? CNN??? Great Serbia existed before Yougoslavia. You are confused man . not Brazilian Man. Is Mladic responsible for war between Croatians nad muslims in Bosnia??? Is Mladic responsible for war between muslims from central bosnia and those from western bosnia??? CNN and western media is still saying how 200 000 muslims died in bosnian war and UN and Bosnians confirmed 60 000 muslims , 30 000 Serbs and 10 000 Croatians. When you do your home work let me know do you see what happened in Yugoslavia is the same what Germans did in WW2 or its more like what NATO have done in Iraq,Libya,Egypt,Afganistan,Syria...????? NATO wanted to destroy Yugoslavia and as usual they find people inside that country and promise them good deal after the war.Croatians got their country for the first time in history and muslims in bosnia got half of bosnia to share with Croatians. Serbs kept other half of Bosnia and had to leave Croatia after war crimes on them and now you are talking about Greater Serbia.
If You are Brazilian let me know if you did check my information (I was in Bosnia during the war) and what do you think about it. If you are USTASHA don't bother.
In Response

by: Masha
May 19, 2012 12:33
Don't forget to take your medicine again.
In Response

by: Anonymous
May 19, 2012 15:44
Considering that they are all have the same heritage your statement that Serbs have lived in today's Croatia and Bosnia for centuries , much longer before Bosnian muslims existed and much before Criatia was Countr is laughable.

by: Esad Salkic from: Brisbane
May 19, 2012 09:42
Most of comments are out of order. I am exceedingly suprise that they are put on after being vetted as just comments , most of them are judgemental. Is that right.

by: Daniel from: Monte
May 19, 2012 17:47
As far as reporting on KANGAROO COURT in Hague Serbian press is taking right stance by ignoring it,This is not international court since many countries are not allowing their citizens to be subjected to the court.So this is court for selected countries and delivers selective justice.As far as western press is concernd they don't report they just fabricate lies.Simple proof of selective justice.US stoped investigation into organ traficking of their pupet TACI.This court will be remembered as a political tool,same way South African court that sentenced Nelson Mendela.

by: Dorothy
May 20, 2012 13:04

You won't hear anything in the western media either once the defense begins.
Just like the news blackout during the Milosevic defense.
This tribunal has one purpose - to falsify history.
For another perspective read here: http://srebrenica-project.com/

by: Brazilian Man from: São Paulo, Brazil
May 21, 2012 06:06
Just to make things clear: “Greater Serbia” is the concept of any Serbian state bigger than the size of the old Serbian SR of Communist Yugoslavia.

Most Popular