1 Friday, 6 February 2004
2 [Open session]
3 [The witness entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
5 [The accused entered court]
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Madam Registrar, could you call the case,
8 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. Good morning, Your Honours.
9 This is the case number, IT-99-36-T, the Prosecutor versus Radoslav
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, madam.
12 Mr. Brdjanin, good morning to you. Can you follow the
13 proceedings in a language that you can understand?
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. I can
15 follow the proceedings in a language I understand.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
17 Appearances for the Prosecution.
18 MS. KORNER: Good morning, Your Honours. Ann Sutherland, Joanna
19 Korner, and Denise Gustin, case manager.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you and good morning.
21 Appearances for Radoslav Brdjanin.
22 MR. ACKERMAN: Good morning, Your Honour. John Ackerman, David
23 Cunningham, Aleksandar Vujic, and Cynthia Dresden.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: I see you are not complaining of inequality today
25 because you are four three and three on the other side.
1 And good morning to you, Mr. Ackerman.
2 MR. ACKERMAN: I think I'll leave that alone, Judge. There is a
3 matter I would like to raise though.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
5 MR. ACKERMAN: Ms. Korner has advised me that she will not finish
7 JUDGE AGIUS: It's okay with me.
8 MR. ACKERMAN: In view of that, let me -- I want to make this
9 request. Could we stop at about 1.15 or 1.20 so that I can -- I'm still
10 dealing with this dental problem that was rather obvious here one day.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: It's not a problem with us. I suppose it's not a
12 problem with the Prosecution. I don't -- I don't even imagine it could
14 I suppose it's not a problem for the witness either?
15 THE WITNESS: The question is --
16 MR. ACKERMAN: The witness planned on being here over the
17 weekend, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
19 THE WITNESS: I planned on leaving on Sunday. I was told
20 yesterday that the Prosecution would finish its case this morning. But I
21 can -- I can certainly adjust to this new situation.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Professor Shoup. And that prompts me
23 to say good morning --
24 THE WITNESS: Good morning.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: -- to you. Welcome back.
1 Ms. Korner will be proceeding with her cross-examination. And I
2 suppose there's nothing else that -- that you need to say? You can
3 proceed, Ms. Korner.
4 MS. KORNER: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 Can I just say, Your Honours, as -- I think there's a slight
6 problem with the audiovisual unit this morning, which I think Your Honour
7 heard. I am going to ask that a video be played very shortly -- part of a
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Four hours?
10 MS. KORNER: No. No. About 15 minutes.
11 Oh, it is working. Well, my information is out of date. I'm
12 told it's now working.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: It's now working. Okay.
14 I recognise Mr. Ackerman.
15 MS. KORNER: Oh, I'm sorry.
16 MR. ACKERMAN: There is another problem, Your Honour, I neglected
17 to mention. It's one of these goose/gander problems. We were given just
18 a few moments ago, like ten minutes ago a list of exhibits that the
19 Prosecution was going to use. You'll recall Ms. Korner wanting us to give
20 her the list last Wednesday for the witness that was coming on Tuesday.
21 And we don't get a list until this morning, so obviously we haven't had a
22 change to pull these documents, look at them here -- I don't have them
23 here. I can't bring thousands of documents to court. And it's a big
24 problem. I don't think the court had the list either, as a matter of
1 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't have a list except --
2 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, that's absolutely right. It was an
3 oversight on my part. Yesterday afternoon we intended to give
4 Mr. Ackerman and the Court -- or yesterday evening -- the list, the
5 potential list, I should say, because, of course, Professor Shoup said a
6 lot of things yesterday which were not in his report and which obviously
7 we want to check on. Your Honour, that's one of the reasons why, in any
8 event, I said the cross-examination would have to go over till Monday,
9 because over the night --
10 JUDGE AGIUS: It's not a problem for us. We are prepared to --
11 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm very sorry about this. What we're
12 going to do today is we've got copies of a lot of what's going to be put
13 to the witness because they're, as it were, new documents.
14 In addition to that, whatever is -- is an exhibit - and they're
15 not that many on my list at the moment - we will put up on the ELMO from
16 our side, and the witness can have the copies. But Your Honours will be
17 able to see what I'm referring to.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Ms. Korner.
19 MS. KORNER: But I do -- Mr. Ackerman is absolutely right. I
20 think all I can say is it was a long day yesterday, and yesterday evening
21 we just forgot.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: If there is a problem as we go along, Mr. Ackerman
23 just point it out to me - and you know that we will try and find a way.
24 So that shouldn't be a problem to anyone, and let's -- let's proceed.
25 Professor Shoup.
1 THE WITNESS: Yes.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: May I just make a recommendation to you. I'm
3 saying this from experience, because I don't want you to get carried away
4 with the idea that Monday for sure this will be over. It very much
5 depends on your answers and the way you will give your answers.
6 THE WITNESS: Thank you. I appreciate that.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Please try to -- I usually give this advice to the
8 majority of witnesses.
9 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Please try to be as concise as possible. Please
11 answer the question, the whole question, and nothing but the question.
12 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: And I see no reason why you should get excited
14 about certain matters. I would imagine you are going to face quite a
16 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: So -- so --
18 MS. KORNER: That's how to put the witness off, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: No. But it's just I am alerting the witness because
20 I saw how he reacted to your last couple of questions.
21 I mean, I want to make things clear, Professor Shoup, because
22 we -- we are concerned about every person that -- that sits in this
23 courtroom, including witnesses, of course, and sometimes primarily. So we
24 are not trying to discerp people. We are not trying the Muslims in Bosnia
25 or elsewhere. We are not trying the Croats. We are just trying an
1 individual here. The historical part, of course, plays an important role,
2 and that -- and this is why Ms. Korner's question was very pertinent last
3 time, whether you have read -- whether you have been made aware of the
4 contents of the indictment in this case, because basically we have, as the
5 primary allegation, one of the main allegations by the Prosecution is that
6 there was a joint criminal enterprise in which the accused was involved
7 allegedly. So naturally the historical part assumes a very important --
8 an important role.
9 But do keep in mind that whom we are -- who we are trying here,
10 who is on trial here, is an individual and he -- he is being tried for
11 particular specific crimes. So if you wish to get acquainted, to
12 familiarise yourself with the contents of the indictment, I suppose we can
13 give you a copy. I think it's only fair that at this point in time he
14 should be made aware of what the indictment is all about. Because I -- I
15 got the impression yesterday that he ran off the -- at a tangent
16 immediately you put a particular question. And that worried -- you're
17 experienced lawyers, both of you, and that -- and I am an experienced
18 lawyer, we are experienced lawyers and Judges too. It put us on our guard
19 immediately. And this is why I'm saying what I'm saying now.
20 Professor Shoup.
21 THE WITNESS: Yes.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Have you in the meantime had a look at the
23 indictment or not?
24 THE WITNESS: No.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: No. Would you like to see the indictment?
1 THE WITNESS: Let me explain my position.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
3 THE WITNESS: I was under the impression that the expert witness
4 in this particular situation was to provide an historical background. I
5 had a choice in preparing for this trial of either getting involved in the
6 specifics of the indictment against Mr. Brdjanin - and I was not
7 encouraged to do so - or preparing the report that you have seen in front
8 of you, which deals with broader historical matters, and have tried to
9 stick to that latter because I thought that was what you wanted me to do.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: But you are testifying, giving evidence in a
11 particular trial, and you are bound to face questions which are related to
12 the events that are the subject matter of this trial.
13 THE WITNESS: I understand. I just was under the impression.
14 Nevertheless, I have seen expert witnesses testify in the case -- in the
15 Tadic case. Professor Gow, for example, who did exactly what I thought I
16 was supposed to do here, and that is to provide you with the -- and this
17 is where my expertise lies. If -- the only place where we have -- might
18 have overlapped would have been in a very detailed examination of Bosanska
19 Krajina, this area, and you -- as you will see in my report, I did make an
20 attempt to see in the scholarly literature what we know about this region
21 during the war. I came up with virtually nothing. But I felt that if I
22 focussed on -- on the indictment or particulars of the criminal actions --
23 alleged criminal actions that I really wouldn't be providing you with the
24 expertise that I thought I had acquired over the years about the problems
25 of Bosnia. It would be one or the other; I can't really give you both.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman.
2 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, Your Honour, I will take whatever
3 responsibility might accrue for Mr. Shoup not reading the indictment in
4 this case. That was my decision. It's always been my position - and I
5 think it's a correct one - that an expert witness has no business
6 providing the Court his opinion of what the evidence shows, with regard to
7 particular allegations in the indictment. That's the Court's job. And so
8 I deliberately insulated him from the indictment in this case so that we
9 could deal with matters that I believe were appropriate for -- for
10 experts. I mean, if it's required that an expert before he can testify
11 must first of all be familiar with the indictment and, second of all, know
12 Mr. Brdjanin, then I think we can throw out all of the testimony of --
13 JUDGE AGIUS: You're misreading me, Mr. Ackerman. That's not
14 what I meant. What I meant is that within the macrocosm of the whole
15 tragedy that occurred in Yugoslavia there is the microcosm of the events
16 in which, according to the Prosecution, your client is involved. And
17 those events basically, and especially since it's being alleged that a
18 joint criminal enterprise came out, was hatched, because of these events,
19 obviously form an integral part of this story. And the problem is -- the
20 problem occurred to my mind in the first place, when I -- when I read
21 through your client's report, your expert's report, and also through the
22 book, and found very little that concerned the events proper that occurred
23 between -- particularly between April and December of 1992. That did
24 trouble me, because I expected that that was going to -- to surface at
25 some point in time.
1 So I don't know. I mean, I'm not suggesting or hinting that your
2 expert should be made aware of the contents of the indictment so that he
3 then gives us his expert opinion on those particular events and as far as
4 they relate to your -- to your client. I mean, that's not the point. But
5 it would make -- it would open a window for him.
6 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, if it helps, I don't anticipate,
7 certainly not today, as far as I can see, going into the nuts and bolts of
8 the events with one or two small exceptions, which relate to various
9 assertions made by the professor. So from that point of view, it's
10 perhaps not necessary for him to look at the indictment. He may - it's up
11 to him, of course - want to see it over the weekend.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. But let's do this.
13 Madam Registrar, perhaps he could have a copy of the last revised
14 indictment, and that would be made available to the witness, say, either
15 in the first break, et cetera, and then he can have a look at it whenever
16 he likes. I think he should be put in the picture, irrespective of
17 whether there will be direct questions on -- on any of those events. But
18 there are historical events that, of course, are not mentioned in his
19 book, are not mentioned in his report, that are very pertinent to what
20 eventually happened in Bosnia, so --
21 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I am going to be touching on some of
23 JUDGE AGIUS: I can imagine. I'm pretty sure you are going to be
24 doing that.
25 Yes, let's go ahead.
1 MS. KORNER: Oh, and thank you very much, Your Honour. I was
2 going to be explain the same thing to Professor Shoup about --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: That we have --
4 WITNESS: PAUL SHOUP [Resumed]
5 Cross-examined by Ms. Korner: [Continued]
6 Q. Now, professor, I want to go back to the film that we spent all
7 of Wednesday afternoon watching. You have pointed yourself during the
8 course of the running of the film to a number of misstatements of fact of
9 that are made during the course of this film; is that right?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. And it's right, isn't it, that this film is a piece of propaganda
12 dressed up to look like an objective overview of the events of that time?
13 A. I would have to say yes. However, a very valuable piece of
14 propaganda because it reveals many real people saying real things about
15 the conflict in Yugoslavia.
16 Q. Well, I'm going to come on to that, but I want to deal with this.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. There is a third part to this film, is there not, which the Court
19 was not shown but which you've seen because you've told us you've got the
21 A. Yes. You would -- I would need a little bit of assistance here,
22 just to prod my memory about what that third part is. And then as soon as
23 you tell me what it is, I can tell you more about it.
24 Q. Well, I'm going to show you a very short part of that third part,
25 which was not shown to the Court, which deals with the filmmaker's view of
2 MS. KORNER: And if the audiovisual unit is okay with it, I'm
3 going to ask that it's played now.
4 [Videotape played]
5 MS. KORNER: Could you pause for a moment.
6 Q. Now, that gentleman, sir, Professor, you were asked about by
7 Mr. Ackerman last time.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Have you had a chance to recall -- that is, is it not, a
10 gentleman named Jatras?
11 A. I don't know. You have to -- if the Court agrees, if the Defence
12 agrees, I agree too, but I don't know.
13 Q. All right. Well, I think what I'm going to ask you to do,
14 perhaps, if the Court agrees, is you say your video is at home and your
15 wife's there and there's a name on the proper version of this video, to
16 check that that is Mr. Jatras.
17 A. Mm-hm.
18 Q. All right. Can we carry on, please.
19 [Videotape played]
20 MS. KORNER: I think we can pause the video there. Thank you.
21 We can stop it, in fact.
22 Q. Now, the -- sorry, just going back to the transcript.
23 Sir, do you agree that that film suggests, first of all, that the
24 attack on Srebrenica was entirely the fault of Naser Oric's men?
25 A. No, I don't agree.
1 Q. You don't.
2 A. No.
3 Q. All right. Do you agree that the film suggests, in terms -- or
4 by -- not in terms but by implication that no more than 200 people were
6 A. It's a little difficult, you know, for me to hear and to follow,
7 but clearly they are trying to reduce the numbers of persons who were
8 killed in the massacre, to a minimum.
9 Q. And you are aware, aren't you, that there has been a full trial
10 on this particular incident and indeed there is still a trial -- a second
11 trial going on at this moment?
12 A. I'm aware of the trials that involve the leaders of -- the Serbs
13 and that Srebrenica has come up. You phrased it as "a trial on
14 Srebrenica." That confuses me a little bit.
15 Q. Well, the trial of General Krstic.
16 A. Yes. I'm aware in just general terms the trials of individuals
17 at which this issue has -- has arisen, yes.
18 Q. Can I just ask you this: Have you ever read on the Internet any
19 of the judgements that were handed down in any of the cases which have
20 been decided since you wrote your book?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Why not?
23 A. Well, you know, I have just completed an article on the origins
24 of the war in -- the origins of the collapse of Yugoslavia. It took me
25 six months to write. It was extremely difficult to do. I do have
1 priorities. Issues such as this are not an issue for me. I just -- I
2 despise this discussion of numbers. I think the -- the idea that you can
3 reduce the number and somehow reduce the -- the crime, I don't -- I don't
4 accept this at all. And I think we are in accord on that particular
5 position. So that it -- to me the historical facts of the war are
6 extremely important, but I have my -- I have my priorities.
7 Q. No, I understand that. I'm sorry. You misunderstood why I asked
8 you that. I'm not interested in the numbers about this, but the
9 judgements recount the evidence which has been given to the Court by the
10 witnesses who actually lived through these events, and they come to
11 certain historical conclusions. Now, don't you think that's important for
12 someone who's writing about the origins of the Bosnian war?
13 A. I have followed these reports of witnesses in the press. I
14 have -- I felt that I was reasonably well informed of what they were
15 saying. If I was going to write an article on this, I would then turn to
16 the judgements that were -- I'm not unaware of what the witnesses have
17 been saying about the nature of the Srebrenica event, if that's what
18 you're implying.
19 Q. No. Please, leave aside Srebrenica. That was just an
21 There have been aware since the Tadic case a very
22 considerable number of judgements in cases which have dealt with different
23 areas of conflict within the Bosnian war. Do you agree?
24 A. Certainly.
25 Q. In the course of those judgements and appeals, the Court has come
1 to certain conclusions based not only on the evidence of witnesses but
2 also of documents. Now, didn't you think it was important to see what
3 that evidence amounted to and what conclusions the Courts had come to?
4 A. It is important if you are doing research on a specific case and
5 wish to know exactly what happened. If you're not, you are as an
6 individual informed -- to give you an example, I'm sure you're aware of
7 the bulletins issued by the IWPR.
8 Q. I'm sorry, the --
9 A. The Institute for War and Peace Reporting.
10 Q. Professor Shoup, I think I better explain something.
11 A. Well --
12 Q. Just pause. Just pause, please.
13 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, Your Honour, I think he should be permitted
14 to answer the question. He was asked the question, he was trying to
15 answer it. She didn't like the answer so she stopped him. But I think he
16 should be permitted to answer it.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated]
18 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm sorry. That's -- that's unfair and
19 Mr. Ackerman -- the reason I stopped him was because -- I'm just going to
21 Q. Professor Shoup, it may irritate you, but you can't ask me
23 A. Sure, I apologise. Yes. We agree.
24 Q. Now, will you -- you wanted to give the answer.
25 A. Yes. The answer is that in this mass of materials that -- about
1 the Balkans, including historical materials, one has to pick and choose
2 what one follows. What I have chosen to do in my case - and I certainly
3 won't apologise for it - is to follow the bulletins that are released
4 regularly by the IWPR, by the Institute for War and Peace Reporting, which
5 has its own team right here. And then I look at these and I pick out
6 things that I think are interesting and important for my own research and
7 work. It would be impossible for me to spend my whole day trying
8 electronically to track down testimony and even more difficult to find
9 some of the basic documents which aren't available, as I understand, by
10 electronic means.
11 Q. I'm sorry. I'll try one last time, Professor. I'm not talking
12 about the actual testimony of witnesses. I am talking about the written
13 judgements that are available on the Internet. I'm asking --
14 MR. ACKERMAN: He's now said three times that he hasn't read
15 them. I think we've worn that subject out, Your Honour.
16 MS. KORNER: I know he hasn't read them. And I'm still trying to
17 get an answer to the question.
18 Q. Why is that not important for your research?
19 A. Because my research is focussed on particular problems at
20 particular times. If I was doing an article on the Srebrenica case, I
21 would certainly read all the documents that I could possibly get my hands
22 on through the Internet. Yes.
23 Q. Were you going to produce a revised copy of the book that you and
24 Professor Burg wrote?
25 A. No.
1 Q. Never?
2 A. I think never.
3 Q. So you no longer have an interest in the wider implications, that
4 is, as a political scientist, the politics which led to the outbreak of
5 the war?
6 A. I don't know how anyone could reach that conclusion from what I
7 just said.
8 Q. Well, all right.
9 A. I mean, of course I have an interest. And I can document it --
10 excuse me. My position has always been that it's now time for younger
11 scholars to fill in the blanks. And I can give you evidence, repeated
12 evidence, of the efforts that I have made to try to encourage younger
13 scholars to either uncover mistakes that we might have made or to fill in
14 the things that we couldn't do. And you will notice, if you have looked
15 at the book, at the back of the book I give my electronic address, pss7a
16 and so on, with the hope that if there is something there that is wrong
17 people will contact me through the e-mail. Unfortunately, very few people
18 have done so.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: And in all fairness to the witness, Ms. Korner,
20 following your question, I think he did tell us earlier on that he spent
21 six months writing a paper or an article on the origins of the war and
22 that's -- shows you --
23 MS. KORNER: That's quite right.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
25 MS. KORNER:
1 Q. I'm sorry, we're slightly sidetracking from the film, because I
2 want to finish off on that. But did you receive a grant in 2000 for a
3 project entitled "Bosnia and Herzegovina after Dayton"?
4 A. Could you -- could you tell me from whom the grant was given and
5 from where I was supposed to be --
6 Q. It's from something called the National Endowment for the
8 A. Mm-hm.
9 Q. Do you --
10 A. No, no, no, no, that's not right.
11 Q. Well, did you -- I mean, whoever it was, did you receive a grant
12 for a project called "Bosnia and Herzegovina after Dayton"?
13 A. You -- you will please be patient with me. I really have to
14 look -- I've received grants during the course of the 1990s. I just will
15 have to -- I'd be glad to answer the question, but you'll just give me a
16 moment to -- so I don't get confused between the various places and the
17 various things that I was doing. There are times -- but I don't want to
18 say more than that at the moment. I'm sorry. I just have to check it out
19 and see what you're referring to.
20 Q. Well, are you writing either a book or a lengthy article
21 entitled "Bosnia and Herzegovina after Dayton"?
22 A. I have written for the -- for these Stefano Bianchini edited
23 volumes, as you have seen there, various articles relating to Bosnia,
24 which touch on the question of Bosnia after Dayton. But I'm not writing a
25 book -- I'm not writing a book on that question.
1 Q. All right.
2 A. No.
3 Q. Now, can we go back, please, to this film. Where did you acquire
4 your copy of the video from?
5 A. My copy?
6 Q. Mm-hm, your copy.
7 A. I can't possibly tell you any more.
8 Q. Was it from the Serbian Orthodox Church in the USA and Canada who
9 advertised this film?
10 A. No, I know that. I don't have any connection with them.
11 Q. All right. It was actually premiered, wasn't it, in about 2002?
12 A. I don't know.
13 Q. Well, do you remember when you got your copy?
14 A. No, of course not.
15 Q. Well, I'd like you to have a look at a review. Now, I accept
16 straight away that this film got a very good review from somebody in the
17 New York Times, Mr. Holden. I'd like you to have a look at another
18 review, please.
19 MS. KORNER: I'd like to have it handed out, please, copies of a
20 document, a film review, "Yugoslavia, the Forgotten War." Yes, it's going
21 to be handed out now.
22 Your Honour, this comes off the Internet.
23 Q. I'm going to go through it with you. Have you seen it before?
24 A. I have not seen this review before.
25 Q. All right. Mr. Tanzer is also a reviewer, is he not, for the New
1 York Times? Do you know that or don't you?
2 A. No, I don't.
3 Q. All right. And it's headed "Film review, The Forgotten War
4 review by Joshua Tanzer." And it starts off by saying: "They can't
5 handle the truth. The horrid Serbian-American-made propaganda
6 film 'Yugoslavia, the Avoidable War' wants you to think the Serbian-run
7 genocide of the 1990s was merely a misunderstanding caused by poor public
8 relations and bases its key conclusions on interviews with a collection of
9 crackpots and racists." I don't believe it.
10 Now, leaving aside the fact that clearly it also contains
11 interviews with, as we've seen, Lord Carrington and Lord Owen. I want to
12 look at some of the other people who appear on this film. We see the
13 filmmaker. Do you see that by the side of the picture?
14 A. I'm sorry, I'm confused. On page 1?
15 Q. On page 1. By the side of the photograph. Yes, the still taken
16 from the video.
17 A. Yes, certainly.
18 Q. "The film was made by George Bogdanich, identified innocuously on
19 the film's website as an independent documentary producer, reporter,
20 freelance journalist and editor. But in addition, an Internet search
21 shows that Bogdanich has spent years as a Serbian-American activist with
22 groups --"
23 THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, can you please slow down. Interpreters
24 can't follow.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Korner.
1 MS. KORNER: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm doing what Mr. Ackerman did.
2 It's very difficult when you're reading.
3 Q. "With groups identified variously as Serb net and the Serbian
4 American Media Centre. Bogdanich raised money for the film from the
5 Serbian American community. There's nothing wrong with being a
6 pro-Serbian activist, but you don't then release a three-hour propaganda
7 film pretending it's objective and factual and fail to disclose your
8 partisan background"? Would you agree with that, that you should disclose
9 what your background is and how the film was funded?
10 A. I would agree. I think it would be more important to be factual
11 in the film, regardless of whether you disclosed your origins.
12 Q. "The film is built around interviews with a dozen or so talking
13 heads. Some are respectable types, such as British diplomat Lord
14 Carrington. The filmmakers play these up, but they're only a fraction of
15 the total. A few appear to be left-wing NATO haters."
16 And then it goes on, and this is the author's own view of these
17 people. "Not one person gives a contrary view. What we're getting is
18 essentially the Serbian Unity Congress reading list and speakers bureau.
19 To mention five of the film's authorities, Nora Beloff, with 24 screen
20 appearances and a dedication at the end, is the picture's patron saint."
21 And then it describes her connection with the Serbs.
22 "-- we saw briefly I think for one moment. Then David Binder,
23 former Yugoslavia correspondent for the New York Times professes a
24 lifelong affections for the Serbs and was like several others quoted in
25 the film a well-received speaker of the 9th Serbian Unity Congress. He
1 illustrated his lifelong affection in a letter to the New York Review of
2 books referring to war crimes kingpin General Ratko Mladic as a superb
4 "Now, Mr. Jatras, apparently an Orthodox extremist himself, he
5 once called Michael Dukakis a pagan for not following the Orthodox Church
6 on abortion and attacked him for marrying a non-Christian, although he
7 insisted he was not being anti-Semitic. This GOP senate aide is also the
8 author of an anti-Muslim screed in the obscure "Chronicles" magazine and
9 the Christian activist that calls Islam a gigantic Christian killing
10 machine and says the religion grew from the darkness of heathen Arabic.
11 He was also the key-note speaker at the Ninth Serbian Unity Congress."
12 Now -- and it goes on to describe more about "Chronicles."
13 You heard about this particular publication?
14 A. What publication? I'm sorry.
15 Q. "Chronicles."
16 A. Serbian "Chronicles"?
17 Q. It's called "Chronicles."
18 A. No, I've not heard about it.
19 Q. Do you know someone who describes himself as a historian and
20 political scientist, Dr. Srdja Trifkovic?
21 A. No, I don't.
22 Q. Never heard of him?
23 A. Never heard of him.
24 Q. So you didn't follow in any way the testimony that he gave in,
25 for example, the Stakic case?
1 A. I have not followed, as I said earlier, testimony in these court
2 cases. I have followed the reports on the court in the IWPR and that's
4 Q. Well, the -- it goes on to talk about Mr. Trifkovic, who was a
5 spokesman for Karadzic and the Bosnian Serb government. But can we come
6 down to the next part in heavy type.
7 "The Americans, the Germans, the Croats, the Slovenes, the
8 Bosnians, the Kosova, the Albanians, NATO, and so on and so forth, that's
9 who's responsible for the Yugoslav tragedy, but never the Serbs. In three
10 hours you won't hear a single source accuse the Serbs of anything
11 disreputable." Do you agree that that is an accurate description, that
12 last sentence?
13 A. No, I disagree. I'm not trying to defend the film as you know
14 from my criticisms of the film. But there were moments when they talked
15 about Milosevic's -- if I remember, but I may have it wrong in rather
16 disparaging terms. I don't agree with your premise, and that is that they
17 are trying to show things from a Serb position. No.
18 Q. You don't.
19 A. Absolutely not. I agree with you. They're trying to show things
20 from a Serbian point of view in the film.
21 Q. All right.
22 A. Yeah.
23 Q. All right. Well, in that case, I don't think we'll bother to go
24 through this, because it states the fairly obvious, what we can all see
1 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, may that be made, however.
2 Exhibit 2724.
3 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I'm confused about the exhibit
4 number. The transcript says 7434. I think Ms. Korner said 2724.
5 MS. KORNER: I did.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: You were right, Mr. Ackerman. That shouldn't be a
7 problem, because it's only for the transcript
8 This document will be 2734 --
9 MS. KORNER: 24.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Thank you.
11 MS. KORNER: All right. Now -- one of the things --
12 MR. ACKERMAN: Excuse me. Your Honour, I'm really uncomfortable
13 that the transcript still doesn't show that it's 2724. They've now made
14 it 2734 -- there we go.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: 2724.
16 MR. ACKERMAN: 2724 now appears. Thank you.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. Ackerman. And thank you,
18 Ms. Korner.
19 MS. KORNER:
20 Q. Now, one of the things that you said about this film, in fact,
21 before I think it was shown. Yes, you were -- you were asked by
22 Mr. Ackerman - this is page 16 of the transcript for the 4th of February.
23 Professor, even though you've told us you disagree with some portions of
24 the video, do you believe it can assist this Trial Chamber and in some
25 cases amplify and explain your own testimony to be given later?" And you
1 gave an answer explaining that the question of the Serbs was a very
2 different and complex question which couldn't be reduced to a simple
3 proposition, that Milosevic was waging an aggressive war for Greater
4 Serbia. And you said, "The other thing is, is it shows you what the Serbs
5 in Croatia and Bosnia too were thinking. It shows you how they viewed
6 this conflict. It's really very hard to get inside their minds and to see
7 what they were thinking."
8 Now, I take it, Professor, you are familiar with the six-hour
9 documentary produced by the BBC called "The Death of Yugoslavia"?
10 A. Yes, I am. I am not familiar -- I have not seen it maybe for a
11 year or so. So that if you ask me about certain details, I wouldn't --
12 but the general -- yes, I've seen this on a number of occasions.
13 Q. Did you own that video?
14 A. No. That's a very long video. It's -- I don't have a copy of
15 it. The -- I use it -- I view it at the University of Virginia, where
16 they have a copy of it.
17 Q. Why did you acquire the video of whatever that film was called?
18 A. Bogdanovic.
19 Q. Bogdanovic's film.
20 A. Is that it? Yeah. I think it's a very simple answer to that:
21 The BBC film is available anywhere in most libraries. I am very
22 interested in these little scraps that come through that appear and
23 disappear. I save them as an archive. I have films from all points of
24 view. This -- the BBC films are very easy to get.
25 Q. Would you accept that the BBC, "The Death of Yugoslavia," was a
1 balanced portrayal of the conflict?
2 A. It's an excellent film.
3 Q. I'd like you to have a look, please, at just a short clip in the
4 light of the answer that you gave to Mr. Ackerman yesterday -- Thursday.
5 From the beginning of the -- part 3, I think it is.
6 MS. KORNER: Sound?
7 [Videotape played]
8 MS. KORNER: Yeah, stop it, please.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Do we have problems?
10 MS. KORNER: Sound. It's always the same in Sanction.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah, but sound is the most important part of
12 this --
13 MS. KORNER: Well, yes, it is, or this --
14 [Videotape played]
15 MS. KORNER: Yeah, Your Honours, this is a problem that has
16 arisen before. Obviously Mr. Ackerman and Sanction are a happier mix than
17 we are. But can -- Your Honour, could we rise while we sort this out?
18 Because there's no point playing it without the sound. We need to get the
19 technicians in.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: How much time?
21 MS. KORNER: I don't know.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Because if it's a short while, we can stay here and
23 wait. If it's not, we go out.
24 MS. KORNER: I don't know if anybody in the audiovisual booth can
1 [Videotape played]
2 MS. KORNER: No.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. We'll rise for a few minutes. We are going
4 to wait outside the courtroom. As soon as the problem is sorted out,
5 please let us know and we will start again.
6 --- Break taken at 9.50 a.m.
7 --- On resuming at 9.57 a.m.
8 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, can I just mention again that after
9 Your Honours rose --
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
11 MS. KORNER: -- we received an e-mail that what was being said in
12 Court by everybody when the court proceedings should have been shut down
13 was being broadcast. I don't know how many times we have had to raise
14 this, but it -- I don't think it matters, but nonetheless ...
15 JUDGE AGIUS: But I want to make sure, first of all. That was
16 one of the reasons why I suggested to my colleagues to leave the courtroom
17 in the first place, because I know that that could -- that could happen.
18 The important thing is that this does not -- is not relayed to the public
19 to start with.
20 And please do pay the utmost attention to shut down immediately
21 the sitting when the Court rises. Okay?
22 MS. KORNER: And we've now managed to get the sound working.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I thank you, Ms. Korner, for drawing my
24 attention to that.
25 MS. KORNER: All right.
1 [Videotape played]
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Have I gone deaf or --
3 MS. KORNER: No. We had the technician in here and the sound was
4 actually working. We actually heard it, and now it isn't working.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] -- Picture.
6 [Videotape played]
7 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, that's all I propose to play of that
8 film. And I'm sorry about the quality. For some unknown reason it ...
9 Q. Now, Professor Shoup, having watched that, having reminded
10 yourself of it, can you seriously say that the Serbs didn't have a chance
11 to explain long before this film was made their point of view?
12 A. I -- the question startles me. We had negotiations conducted by
13 the United -- European Community by Mr. Cutilheiro. We're all aware of
14 that. There was ample opportunity for all sides to make their positions
16 Q. Okay. I think you misunderstand. You told us on Thursday that
17 the reason that we should -- that you thought the film "The Avoidable
18 War" was a good one and one which the Court should watch was that it shows
19 you what the Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia were thinking, it shows you how
20 they viewed this conflict.
21 A. Yes, that's correct.
22 Q. Doesn't that film show you how the Serbs were thinking and how
23 they viewed this conflict from the mouths of the people themselves?
24 A. Again, perhaps I don't understand the question. The images of --
25 of the fascist Ustasha in World War II are very powerful. And these
1 images were being transmitted to the Serbs in Croatia. And now we can see
2 this on the film and how it looked. And I think we all agree that that
3 would have an emotional effect on the people. I don't know that -- I
4 implied much more than that.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] I'm getting confused.
6 MS. KORNER:
7 Q. Yes. Professor Shoup, look, it may be that we all misunderstood
8 your reasons for telling the Court they should watch "The Avoidable War."
9 But what you already said was the other thing is -- talking about "The
10 Avoidable War," is that it shows you what the Serbs in Croatia and in
11 Bosnia too were thinking. It shows you how they viewed this conflict. It
12 is really very hard to get inside their minds and to see what they were
14 A. Yes, correct.
15 Q. We heard Karadzic, Seselj, (redacted), General Kukanjac explain
16 exactly what they were thinking at the time of the outbreak, didn't we, in
17 this short clip?
18 A. But there is no contradiction here. They were themselves
19 convinced they were fighting against the fascist threat from Croatia.
20 They were also persons who were devious in their ways and extreme in their
21 conclusions, but -- and in their strategies they would, just as everyone
22 in this conflict, lie and so forth, but they -- they genuinely believed
23 the things that you saw on that Serb propaganda film, precisely because it
24 is the Serb point of view.
25 Q. All right. Professor Shoup, we may be at cross-purposes here.
1 You're not suggesting that when Karadzic told the BBC reporters, for
2 example, in respect of the peace demonstration, that he told his men --
3 I've forgotten what the exact words were, to get ready, he was lying?
4 A. The context here is -- is confused. I'm not sure -- I'm not
5 talking about him lying in that particular instance, but if he would -- he
6 said -- I'll give you an example, if you don't mind.
7 Q. All right.
8 A. But you -- because I mentioned it in the report. He said, "No,
9 we're not engaged in ethnic cleansing. You know, we're just -- people are
10 going voluntary out of this part of Serbia." That was just -- you know,
11 that was a falsehood.
12 Q. All right.
13 A. Now, you're -- you're referring to some specific incident that we
14 just saw here where he's not telling the truth? Is that what you're
16 Q. All right. I'm going to try and get at this one more time.
17 A. Yeah, sure.
18 Q. What is it about "The Avoidable War" that you say discloses about
19 the Serbs which was not available to anyone who watched the "Death of
20 Yugoslavia" made some considerable years earlier?
21 A. When one does research, when one wants to find the truth, you
22 keep looking at everything. And I presume that there's something of that
23 spirit here in this court. There will be emotional moments in this film,
24 "The Avoidable War," which you might not see on BBC. You will get a
25 chance to see an eminent professor such as Susan Woodward giving her
1 opinion, not that the BBC wouldn't have her, but they didn't. It just so
2 happened. You will see the pictures of Dubrovnik. It was not destroyed.
3 I'm not sure the BBC shows that, you know, but you will see it in this
4 film. The rule I have done -- I've followed throughout all my career in
5 the research is look at everything to find what is important. You can
6 disregard the rest. It's that simple.
7 Q. All right. Well, I think I'm leave this topic.
8 Finally, Professor.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. You agree this is a piece of Serbian propaganda. It is all the
11 more pernicious, is it not, because it includes in it interviews
12 with "respectable people" such as Lord Carrington and Lord Owen, and does
13 not reveal the background of some of the other people who are speaking,
14 such as Mr. Jatras?
15 A. I -- I just don't -- I don't call that pernicious. I call that
16 just another film. We've seen so many of these films. One always
17 extracts what one needs of this. Now, if you are speaking of using this
18 film for a broader audience, for example, showing it in a church or
19 something like this, yes, then I certainly agree with you. From the point
20 of view of the Court, the experts and so forth, this really doesn't amount
21 to that much.
22 Q. I'll just leave that.
23 MS. KORNER: All right. I'm going to move now to the report
24 itself. And perhaps it would be appropriate to have the break now.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, let's have a 25-minute break now.
1 --- Recess taken at 10.22 a.m.
2 --- On resuming at 10.58 a.m.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Korner.
4 MS. KORNER:
5 Q. Professor, I'd like to turn now to your report.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. The first thing I would like to ask you, is when were you
8 instructed to prepare this report?
9 Just pause.
10 A. No, that was --
11 Q. Just pause.
12 A. Sorry.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] One moment, Ms. Korner.
14 Something has come up.
15 THE WITNESS: Can I begin? Yes. Oh, I see.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: At the end of the sitting, please, we will reserve
17 five -- five minutes to discuss dates when -- when you'll bring over your
18 witness and when we will bring over the other two witnesses.
19 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
20 MS. KORNER: I was going to raise that, Your Honours, because we
21 have a problem.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Okay.
23 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's go ahead, Ms. Korner. Thank you.
25 MS. KORNER: Sorry, Professor Shoup.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Sorry, yes.
2 MS. KORNER:
3 Q. Yes, you were about to tell us. When were you first instructed
4 to prepare a report?
5 A. Last summer Mr. Ackerman contacted me. I must explain that at
6 the time I was not in the United States. I was in Switzerland. It was
7 not possible to do -- engage in any research until I returned to the
8 United States in November.
9 Q. All right. And could you tell us, what were the terms of
10 reference? Were they -- first of all, were they verbal or in writing?
11 A. My goodness, I can't tell you. We were in communication with
12 each other by e-mail, and we talked, I believe. I just have to refresh my
13 memory. I'm sorry. I can't tell you. What proportion of each we --
14 Q. Well, no, in terms -- sorry, Professor Shoup.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. You may misunderstand me. What were you asked to prepare a
17 report on? What were your terms of reference?
18 A. I was not given any specific terms of reference, that is, prepare
19 a report specifically on, let's say, Bosanska Krajina. I informed
20 Mr. Ackerman that I -- I'd been in the Court before and seen how an expert
21 witness gave his testimony - in this case, Professor Gow - and I think we
22 assumed that I would follow then the -- what I had learned from that
24 Q. But, I'm sorry, Professor Shoup, are you telling us that you had
25 no instructions, either verbal or written, that explained to you what sort
1 of report was required?
2 A. You know that I really don't remember. I think we had a general
3 agreement on the issue that I would provide an historical framework, you
4 know, for the events that were in question here. I wouldn't be -- I would
5 be doing a disservice to the -- to Mr. Ackerman if I said no, I received
6 no instructions. This was our general -- our general agreement. I would
7 have to go through my e-mail to see whether it went further than that.
8 We -- what I can say positively was there was no instruction that I should
9 focus on Bosanska Krajina. The understanding was I should provide a broad
10 historical framework.
11 Q. I'm sorry, you told us that "we had," that's you and
12 Mr. Ackerman, "A general agreement on the issue that I would provide a
13 historical framework for the events that were in question here." But you
14 told us that you've never read the indictment, so how did you know what
15 events were in question?
16 A. Oh, well, we discussed that. I -- I know from the -- and the
17 book indicates this -- I knew what had happened in general terms in
18 Bosanska Krajina, at the start of the war, and we mentioned it in the book
19 here, and we mentioned -- in fact, some of the really terrible, you know,
20 events, they're right here in the book. So I was familiar with them -- I
21 was familiar with them. I felt that I had to make a choice: Either to go
22 into great detail about Bosanska Krajina. I was unprepared to do that.
23 But I was prepared to provide a broad historical framework, and we -- and
24 it was on the basis of the book. I think at one point we may have even
25 agreed to that that the report would take off from the book and summarise
1 crucial parts of the book.
2 Q. All right. It's right, isn't it, Professor Shoup, other than the
3 broadest of outlines, you do not know anything about the events in the
4 Bosanska Krajina?
5 A. Well, that's unfair, really.
6 Q. All right. Well, if you'd tell us --
7 A. I'm sorry. I'm expressing an opinion about your question. But
8 those events are -- take place in the context of the issues which
9 Professor Burg and I studied in great detail. We have reference here to
10 testimony. We quote -- if -- you'll see that reference to Bosanska
11 Krajina actually is based upon testimony here at the Court.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] Professor Shoup, just --
13 THE WITNESS: Yes.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: I'm trying to take care of the interpreters' ears.
15 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Because if you bang on the book and on the table, I
17 don't think -- I don't think the interpreters will -- will -- yeah, will
18 like that.
19 THE WITNESS: All right.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: So please try to avoid it.
21 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
22 Just briefly to make the point I just made: The references to
23 Bosanska Krajina are actually taken from testimony in this Court, in
24 the -- and which was made at the time that we were writing the book.
25 MS. KORNER:
1 Q. Yes. You refer briefly in passing to some of the things that
2 were dealt with in the Tadic trial. That's right, isn't it?
3 A. I can't tell you -- I don't believe that our reference to the
4 disappearance of the intelligentsia in the Prijedor area - I can't cite
5 the exact page - was necessarily extracted -- well, maybe it was extracted
6 from the Tadic trial. I just don't remember. That's all. But it was --
7 it was extracted from the -- from the testimony here in Court.
8 Q. Yes. Professor Shoup, you referred to the testimony of Hanna --
9 what was her name -- Greve in the Tadic trial.
10 A. Yes, that's right.
11 Q. All right. Can we go back, please. Do you accept that you
12 didn't ask -- well, I don't know. Maybe I should ask you this: Did you
13 ask Mr. Ackerman for any of the, if I can call it, the core documents that
14 have been dealt with in evidence in this case?
15 A. Whether I asked or he supplied them, I don't know, but I was
16 given Professor Donia's testimony.
17 Q. No. The documents, the actual documents that came into existence
18 at the time.
19 A. Oh, no. No. No. I -- I would have avoided getting -- as I said
20 repeatedly, I felt I had to choose, either to provide this broader
21 historical analysis or to immerse myself in the details of the -- of the
23 Q. Very well. Can I put it to you, Professor Shoup --
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. -- for example, have you read any of the minutes of the
1 assemblies that were held by the Bosnian Serbs, the Serbian Assembly?
2 A. I have only read testimony and cross-examination of Professor
3 Donia relating to those minutes.
4 Q. No. But in connection with any of your researches, have you ever
5 looked at the original minutes?
6 A. No, I have never had access to them.
7 Q. Well, have you ever asked for access?
8 A. You know, in the context of our research, it was important to
9 know that certain things happened, that there was ethnic cleansing. In
10 our minds, Professor Burg's and mine, there was no contention about who
11 did it. And if we had been worried about that, if we'd thought maybe
12 there was a real problem there, maybe we would have done this, but it
13 didn't seem necessary.
14 Q. But I'm sorry, Professor Shoup, you've come here to give the
15 Court the benefit of your expertise --
16 A. That's right.
17 Q. -- on, if you like, the broader context of the events.
18 A. That's correct.
19 Q. Do you agree?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. Don't you think it would have assisted you to have looked at the
22 minutes of the Serb Assembly which relate to the -- the broader picture?
23 A. I would have been delighted to read these documents. I am -- I
24 am a researcher. I love to see original prime material. I don't think it
25 would have assisted me in trying to write a clear coherent, insofar as it
1 is clear and coherent, report concerning the broader issues related to the
2 disintegration of Bosnia.
3 Q. Well, I'm going to come back to -- to this question in a moment.
4 But can I just ask you this: Did Mr. Ackerman tell you that he had these
6 A. No. I assumed he did, just looking at the testimony of Professor
7 Donia, it was obvious there were these many documents that were being
8 discussed. And indeed, reading Professor Donia's testimony in
9 cross-examination, it was very difficult for me to understand some things
10 because it was obvious that people were referring to documents that I had
11 not read.
12 Q. Did you ask Mr. Ackerman if you could have a cite of those
13 documents that were referred to by Professor -- Dr. Donia?
14 A. As I've said now repeatedly, I had to make a choice: Either to
15 try to prepare a report about the disintegration of Bosnia in a limited
16 time - that was only perhaps a month, six weeks - or to bury myself in
17 the -- in this material related to the trial, the specifics of the
18 responsibility of the defendant for doing this or that action and so on.
19 It may be that we will now be able to write the kind of in-depth account
20 of what happened in Bosanska Krajina, as did Professor Duijzings for
21 Eastern Bosnia, utilising your documents. I would be delighted if someone
22 would undertake that task. I did not have the time or the ability to do
23 that, given what I thought I was supposed to do.
24 Q. But wouldn't it be possible that if you had a cite of these
25 original documents that it might have affected some of the conclusions
1 that you draw?
2 A. I can't answer that, since I haven't seen that.
3 Q. I know that. But as a respectable reputable historian or
4 political scientist, Professor Shoup, don't you think that you ought to
5 have looked hat these documents?
6 A. No. I think I should prepare a coherent clear report on what
7 happened to Bosnia in this period. And I know from my own research
8 experience or telling graduate students what to do, focus on the task. I
9 would -- if I had months and months and research assistants and so forth,
10 I would be delighted to have looked at these documents.
11 Q. I'm sorry, Professor Shoup, I'm going to press --
12 MR. ACKERMAN: Excuse me, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman.
14 MR. ACKERMAN: I hesitate to interrupt, but the Court does need
15 to know that the Registry limited the amount of hours that Professor Shoup
16 could -- could put into this project, so he had to limit what he could do,
17 in terms of preparing his report. We were only given a limited number of
18 hours. And that may not be true of Prosecution experts but that's true
19 with Defence experts. So I told him his hours were limited, that he had
20 to focus tightly, and that he couldn't write this definitive thing that
21 Ms. Korner is suggesting he should have done.
22 MS. KORNER: No, Your Honour, with respect, I'm not suggesting
23 that the definitive --
24 Q. But my point remain it is same, Professor Shoup. Given what
25 Mr. Ackerman has now said, that you had only a limited number of hours,
1 didn't you say or did it ever occur to you to say to Mr. Ackerman, "Look,
2 I can tell from the documents that I've seen that Professor Donia was
3 using that there are many documents which I have never seen which relate
4 to the broader picture? I cannot, given those hours, prepare a proper
5 report for you in that time"?
6 A. I appreciate your question. I think -- I think it's appropriate,
7 and I understand. I could say to you, "Yes, of course that's correct,"
8 but let me stress something that I stressed earlier in my testimony. My
9 decision was to prepare a report based upon the book and then to see what
10 new sources of information were available which might increase our
11 understanding of the war in Bosnia. And this is where I spent my research
12 time. If you know -- and I, in fact, have presented you people with
13 documents that you never saw. You will acknowledge -- I'm sorry, I can't
14 ask a question. The CIA reports. I make great efforts to find out -- and
15 it was not easy -- to get the Dutch materials. It was all electronic. It
16 is very difficult to do. With the assistance of the -- of the University
17 of Virginia library, I was able to download these materials. And I
18 thought that -- that something as -- as innovative and as really superb
19 kind of reporting on Bosnia by Duijzings should be brought into my report.
20 That's where my focus was. I apologise if I should have done it
22 Q. Well, it brings me on to another point - although, I'm going
23 slightly off the scheme that I had in mind - but the report and the book,
24 do you agree are all secondary sources?
25 A. There is the implication that in some sense secondary sources are
1 worse than primary sources. If you were an experienced researcher in this
2 field, you know that it depends. Secondary sources may actually have
3 brought together collated materials that you yourself, if you were
4 searching for primary sources, could not possibly do.
5 Let's take, for example, interviews with refugees or persons who
6 have suffered from ethnic cleansing. There are thousands of such
7 interviews. You have to rely on a secondary source that has brought this
8 all together and understands it. You can easily get lost in primary
9 sources if that's all you do. And you have to exercise your judgement on
10 what is the most valuable document, is it a secondary source or a primary
12 Q. I'm not suggesting for one moment that secondary sources may not
13 serve their purpose. But my question was simply: Do you accept that
14 these are all secondary sources?
15 A. Well, let me --
16 Q. It's either yes or no.
17 A. Yes, I understand. Certainly the vast majority of these
18 materials, for instance, the Dutch study or the CIA analysis that I have
19 used here are very valuable secondary sources.
20 Q. And you yourself, for obvious reasons, have not had the
21 possibility to check the facts that are -- are contained in the report on
22 Srebrenica by the Dutch or the facts that are contained in the CIA report.
23 A. Well, you see, no. But then as it -- also as an experienced
24 researcher, I know the people I'm dealing with. Professor Duijzings is a
25 very reliable source. He's done a great deal of work on Kosovo. He's
1 always been impartial in his studies. I have never seen anything --
2 reason to doubt what he has done. And I always consider it extremely
3 important if someone has been in the area in question, as Professor
4 Duijzings was. These are all the things that contribute to one's
5 confidence in using the material. It might be that if I went to the
6 original sources I would make a mistake. I wouldn't understand an order
7 that was given -- a military command that the CIA immediately understands
8 the significance of. I might not understand at all.
9 Q. You had -- however, on this occasion, you had available to you
10 original sources directly dealing with the topic that you were going to
11 give evidence on. That's right, isn't it?
12 A. Well, if you mean the -- I'm not sure what you mean. Let's take
13 the case of the Donia testimony.
14 Q. No. No. No.
15 A. Is this what you mean?
16 Q. I'm talking about -- pause, please, Professor Shoup. I'm talking
17 about the documents that were referred to in the Donia testimony and which
18 were available to you through Mr. Ackerman, all of those original sources
19 were available, weren't they?
20 A. Yes. But would they have helped me? I don't know.
21 Q. And you chose not to see if they would help you; is that right?
22 A. I told you my research strategy already. I don't think I have to
23 repeat it.
24 Q. Now, you can't remember what exact terms of reference were. How
25 long did you spend on writing this report?
1 A. Oh, I'd say six weeks or -- no, I take it back. I began in --
2 Q. How many hours?
3 A. Oh, I'd say at least 150. Yeah.
4 Q. Did you do all the work yourself or were you assisted?
5 A. I did all the work myself.
6 Q. Thank you. In that case, can I ask you, who is the "we" who is
7 referred to throughout your report?
8 A. It's an editorial we.
9 Q. What does that mean?
10 A. I -- it means just that. I'm accustomed not to say "I" when I
11 write my articles but to express myself in that -- in that fashion.
12 Q. Is that because it lends more weight to assertions that are made,
13 if you say "we" rather than "I"?
14 A. I suppose.
15 Q. So --
16 A. I explained, by the way, at the very beginning what the "we"
17 meant, as you know, in the report. I said -- I explained, the "we" means
18 Professor Shoup.
19 Q. Because in the case of your book, there was a genuine "we."
20 There was yourself and Professor Burg. That's right, isn't it?
21 A. And that's precisely why I think on the first page of the report
22 I explained that the "we" in question is Professor Shoup, in the report.
23 Q. And it's right, isn't it, that the references in your report are
24 always, I think without exception - and you'll correct me if I'm wrong -
25 to secondary sources in one form or another.
1 A. I would say the majority of them certainly are. I can't remember
2 if -- where I might have cited something that could be considered as a --
3 as a primary source, but certainly you're correct. At least these are
4 mostly secondary sources, and some of them, all the more valuable for that
6 Q. And do you -- in your opinion, Professor Shoup, is one of the
7 criteria or something that makes an expert authoritative is objectivity?
8 A. Absolutely. But I must -- if you're asking me a question that I
9 must reply to fully.
10 Q. Certainly.
11 A. Yes. As I have said earlier, in this kind of research, where
12 everybody is making claims and counterclaims, to sift through that
13 material, you must read and look at everything. That documentary that we
14 saw, which you said, and I agree, was Serbian propaganda, has some very
15 valuable material in it. And so you look at that and you know that you
16 need to remember that and include it in some broader framework which you
17 need corroboration, of course, of what you're doing. So that I don't
18 consider limiting myself to only primary documents or even only trusted
19 secondary documents. I read everything.
20 Q. But for the purposes of this report, you haven't read any primary
22 A. I don't know really. And I'd have to go through all the
23 footnotes here. There are about 100 of them -- to answer that question.
24 But certainly the vast majority of these sources are secondary sources,
25 which are most relevant to the discussion in question.
1 Q. And the same really, doesn't it, by and large, applies to your
2 book as well?
3 A. No. I -- I absolutely do not agree with that. The question is:
4 What is a primary source?
5 For example, our newspapers, which recount what is happening in
6 Bosnia a primary source or a secondary source? I'm sorry. I'm not
7 supposed to ask anyone questions. Certain newspapers were extremely
8 difficult to -- to obtain during the war.
9 Let me take the example of Oslobodenje. I went to extreme
10 lengths with the cooperation of Mr. Zulfikarpasic, whom you know, to
11 obtain copies of Oslobodenje published in Sarajevo because I thought it
12 was an important, essential source. I wasn't going to argue or quibble
13 about whether it was primary or secondary. I found it. I utilised it
14 when I could. It so happened that the European edition of Oslobodenje,
15 which very few people read, was much more useful and much more important.
16 I don't know why I should quibble about whether that's a primary or
17 secondary source.
18 Q. Have you read Srpski Glas?
19 A. What?
20 Q. Srpski Glas?
21 A. No, no much --
22 Q. Have you ever heard of it?
23 A. I've heard of it. But for the moment it's not something that
24 I've found immediately relevant in my research. It would take me a minute
25 to try and think back now to when I might have encountered it or used it.
1 I could probably find some notes, if there were some. But for the moment,
2 and relevant to this inquiry, no.
3 Q. I'm sorry, why wasn't the newspaper produced by the SDS and the
4 Serbs relevant to your researches or anything you were going to write?
5 A. It was relevant. And I felt that one of the gaps in the book,
6 for example, was the -- to analyse the Serbian position, especially at the
7 beginning of the war in the period we're talking about in Sarajevo itself.
8 And when I was in Sarajevo visiting the institutes there, I asked them if
9 they would provide me with -- with the news -- with the Serbian
10 newspapers, you know, of that period, 1989 and 1990, and they agreed. But
11 as -- as things worked out, we never were able to -- to complete that,
12 that part of the research. And I think that's terribly important. I
13 would agree this is one thing for us -- for a graduate student or someone
14 to try to do.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. Just --
16 Yes, Mr. Ackerman. Let's see what you have to say first.
17 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I just want to point out, just for
18 the record, what an insidious thing this is. We -- we have a -- we have
19 an International Tribunal here which allows the Defence to have an expert
20 witness but restricts the amount of time that expert witness may devote to
21 preparing a report to a very limited number of hours, which then enables
22 the Prosecutor to then accuse that witness of having done an inadequate
23 job of research and having failed to look at an appropriate number of
24 documents and having failed to do this and failed to do that. That's an
25 extraordinarily unfair situation that's created by one part of this
1 Tribunal, which then -- inadvertently, I'm sure, but does assist another
2 part of this Tribunal to discredit that expert that they have so
3 magnanimously allowed me to retain. It's just insidious and outrageous,
4 and I wish the Court wouldn't permit it to happen, because it's totally
6 If you want, order OLAD to give this man unlimited hours, send
7 him back to Virginia, and he'll prepare the kind of report Ms. Korner
8 thinks he should have prepared, but we didn't have the time to do that.
9 We had to be very, very selective. And I think it's unfair now because of
10 the Tribunal's restrictions to permit Ms. Korner then to beat up on this
11 expert for not doing everything that she thinks he should have done.
12 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, my question, apart from the
13 inappropriateness of making a speech like this in the middle of
14 cross-examination, my question goes not to just the report but to
15 Professor Shoup's general researches for the book and altogether as being
16 put forward as an expert on this period.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I have -- we have taken note of what you
18 said, both of you. Points taken.
19 Perhaps the witness can explain also to us -- we're looking
20 through the bibliography of works cited in --
21 THE WITNESS: Yes, certainly.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: -- your book and the part -- I'm referring to page
23 469 "Newspaper, news services, and translations," relative to the question
24 that Ms. Korner put to you, I note that not even for the purposes of the
25 book in question did you ever make reference or consult the Srpski Glas.
1 So it's --
2 THE WITNESS: No.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: It's conspicuously absent.
4 THE WITNESS: No, that fits in with my recollections.
5 I might add also that we -- there are sources that we would
6 consult or look at and then discard as not being relevant to our purpose.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: I can understand that.
8 THE WITNESS: Yeah, so that it doesn't mean that we haven't
9 looked at Srpski Glas, I can't remember, but it was not relevant to our
11 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.
12 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated]
13 Q. I'm sorry, I just want to make sure I understand. Are you saying
14 you may have looked at it and discarded it as not relevant or that you
15 never looked at it or that you can't remember? There are three
17 A. I will tell you what I -- I think is the case, Ms. Korner, and
18 that is because in Sarajevo I made this effort to try to get the Serbian
19 press - but I had to leave Sarajevo before we could do this - it seems to
20 me that that was motivated by my awareness that I had not had an
21 opportunity up until that time to see that press.
22 Q. But since then -- or is there any reason why you didn't go to the
23 offices of Glas in Banja Luka, if you were interested in the press?
24 A. Well, this is after the war, of course. And -- I -- you have to
25 just understand a researcher has to have certain priorities, and half this
1 book is devoted to the international community's reactions, the Cutilheiro
2 Plans, the Vance-Owen Plans, an immense amount of research was going into
3 that whole business of -- the interface between the International
4 Community and the -- and the -- you know, the local environment. I mean,
5 we have practically 1.500 footnotes in this book. That's -- and no one
6 has really, I think, up till the time of the Dutch study, done a better
7 job. So yes, there are limitations here. And I'm aware of them,
8 especially the fact that we don't know the Serb position clearly on
9 constitutional issues in this crucial period of 1989 and early 1990.
10 Q. You've already told us that there should be objectivity by an
11 expert. Can I ask you --
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. -- a little bit about your methodology. Do you, first of all,
14 define what the question is that you're asking? For example, as you've
15 told us, have the Serbs been, as it were, vilified?
16 A. You know, one has to -- if you have experience, you have to work
17 on intuition, as well as logic. Intuition told me that we weren't getting
18 the full story in Bosnia. And that led me to search out anywhere I could
19 information to see, for example, if there had been -- Serbs had been
20 guilty of the same kind of treatment that the Muslim -- that they were
21 accused of actually giving to the Muslims. It wasn't easy. And the one
22 reason it wasn't easy was that Belgrade itself was not providing this
23 information. And intuition told me that this was -- that we had to push
24 and push in that direction. For example, to get the full story. We got a
25 great deal of that story. The conclusions were not that the Serbs were
1 better off -- didn't do anything. The conclusions were that, yes, under
2 certain circumstances Serbs were victims. Now, we specified those
3 circumstances. I can give you in great, boring detail how the detective
4 work went through to find out these matters. And I'm pretty confident of
5 the results.
6 Q. Professor Shoup, I'm sorry --
7 A. So, you know, intuition counts as much as logic. If you're
8 asking me how I pose a question before starting my research.
9 Q. Well, I'm sorry, that was the simple question that I asked you:
10 Is it that you, first of all, pose a question - in this case presumably
11 something along the lines of, have we been told the full story?
12 A. Yes, that's right.
13 Q. Do you then go on to define or identify the methods for answering
14 that question?
15 A. I've already given them to you. Read everything.
16 Q. So therefore are you agreeing with me? You define the method for
17 answering the question?
18 A. Well, I've told you how I pursue my research. I try to make sure
19 that I read even -- even the propaganda can sometimes give you some very
20 valuable insights. Sometimes I'm -- maybe I'm not being clear up.
21 Q. Professor Shoup, look, at the moment I'm merely identifying which
22 you as a historian, a political scientist will understand, the methods by
23 which you conduct your research which then leads you to present the
24 material to the Tribunal or the world. Do you understand that?
25 A. I understand that. I will give you another example of the methods
1 they use, if that's -- if that's what you want.
2 Q. Well, I -- Professor Shoup, believe me, I mean, you can give me
3 the examples. I'm just asking for the straightforward methodology which
4 you use and which is important, isn't it, for an expert?
5 A. Well, then you'll have to let me answer, and that is intuition
6 that some -- the full story isn't being told, contradictions in people's
7 behaviour. One of the things that bothered us the most was
8 Mr. Milosevic's switches on the Vance-Owen Plan, which did not appear at
9 all logical. It took a lot of research to route -- to come to the final
10 understanding of why Mr. Milosevic changed his mind so frequently. This
11 was, if you will, just looking at the facts and saying, "Now, wait a
12 minute, something doesn't make sense." This is what you do when you're an
13 experienced researcher, and this paid off. I just don't know what more I
14 can say.
15 Q. Professor Shoup, do you understand what I'm trying to establish?
16 I think maybe I better start again.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. I'm trying to establish what you as an expert historian,
19 political scientist, what your actual method of approaching these matters
20 is, not what you did, not in the specifics of this case. I'm on to that.
21 But how you approach it. How you -- what your methods of research are.
22 Do you understand that?
23 A. I understand. And I apologise if I'm obstructing this dialogue.
24 Q. All right.
25 A. Let me say, to clear the air: First and foremost, having been
1 subjected to -- for years to the -- all this debate about the national
2 question in Yugoslavia, it was objectivity, to be -- to stand aside and
3 look at the situation and not get involved on one side or the other. And
4 this is what Professor Burg and I agreed to do. He actually -- he and I
5 come from different backgrounds. It seems to me it was quite an
6 accomplishment for the two of us to sit down and to be able to agree on
7 the objective facts of the case. But it was absolutely, always let's see,
8 let's not take sides, let's see what we can take by taking that impartial
10 Q. I'm going to try one more time, Professor Shoup.
11 A. Mm-hm. Go on.
12 Q. You told us that yes, you did have a question, and the answer --
13 or the question was: Have we fully been told of the facts? I've lost
14 your exact answer now.
15 A. That's right.
16 Q. All right. Now, did you then define or identify what methods you
17 would use for answering that question?
18 A. Well, again, I can only say in the chaos of this war you could
19 turn to the press, you might look at television. But I just always felt
20 that -- you could -- you could always have -- extract some useful
21 information from even the most trashy sources. And I just don't want to
22 repeat that obvious point. But we seem to be talking past each other. I
23 apologise. I just don't understand any further what I can say.
24 Q. Before you went into this, did you sit down and say, "Now, how
25 can I best answer this question?"
1 A. I would depend on the question.
2 Q. No. The question you yourself posed apparently: Have we been
3 told the whole truth?
4 A. That's right.
5 Q. Now, did you before you went anywhere sit down and say, "Now, how
6 best can we answer this question? What are the sources of information we
7 should be looking at?"
8 A. Well, to give the example --
9 Q. No, did you ask yourself that question? Not what you did.
10 A. Of course.
11 Q. Did you --
12 A. Of course. You have to, depending on the question that's being
13 posed. You know, the -- are we dealing with the International Community?
14 Are we dealing with ethnic cleansing? Are we dealing with the events of
15 the war? Each question means that you have to look at -- somewhere else
16 for the documents, and maybe UN documents in one case, maybe newspapers in
17 another, and so forth.
18 Q. Okay. So the next -- would you accept that the next stage is to
19 collect the sources of information which are relevant to the question that
20 you are asking?
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. All right. Do you agree you should then study those sources of
23 information, applying to them the appropriate analytical techniques?
24 A. Yes. I would be hard put to disagree. Mm-hm. Yes.
25 Q. And only then reach conclusions based on the application of
1 accepted scholarly methods to your sources of information?
2 A. I understand -- I do understand what you're saying. You have to
3 adhere to rigorous standards and to try to reach the truth. But I must
4 insist that scholarly research depends also on intuition and experience.
5 Something doesn't look right and so you pursue this matter because it
6 doesn't look right and you want to find out what the truth is. It's not
7 just simply simple logic to do research. It's also, as I said,
8 experience, intuition, doggedness, you name it.
9 Q. All right.
10 A. Yeah.
11 Q. You told us yesterday that a number of -- of the conclusions you
12 reached were through sitting down in people's kitchens and talking to
14 A. No. Not about -- not in this book or in the report. Absolutely
16 Q. No, in the evidence that you have been giving the Court -- and
17 this is what you told us yesterday. Do you think that's an appropriate
18 scholarly method of obtaining information?
19 A. We -- I never used it for any -- any report or book or article.
20 I -- I made that comment in the context of peoples remembering events of
21 the past in Yugoslavia or in the context of the -- of the point that
22 people have set views on the national question, which it's very difficult
23 to change. This is an observation that I can validly make on the basis of
24 years and years spent in Yugoslavia. It certainly is a correct one. But
25 it's not here in the book; it's not in the report.
1 Q. All right. Let's turn to the beginning of your report. Do you
2 accept that it is important that when making assertions of fact in a
3 report, a book, an article, that should be accurate?
4 A. It's terribly important, and it's terribly difficult not to make
5 mistakes in doing research on a confused situation like the Bosnian war,
6 which is, I repeat, why I included my e-mail address at the back of the
7 book and said, "Anyone who has something to say about this" - and I was --
8 I was very acutely aware that we could have mistaken something
9 inadvertently -- that they should let us know. And we didn't get much
10 contact, but I am very aware that there will be, in the nature of the
11 beast, things that -- well, can I give you an example, of something that
12 went wrong? Is that appropriate?
13 Q. I want -- I want to deal now with your report, please.
14 A. Okay.
15 Q. Are you -- this is how many years on, five years on or more of
16 your -- since your book was written.
17 A. That's right.
18 Q. In your report, were you careful to be accurate about statements
19 that you made in that report, which are not statements of opinion but
20 statements of fact?
21 A. I certainly tried. I may not have fully succeeded, but I can
22 assure you that my intent was honourable.
23 Q. And it's of course important, is it, to be accurate in your
24 citations and your quotes?
25 A. It certainly is. We have already discovered that one statement I
1 was made - it was brought up yesterday or so - really should be
2 reconsidered about the persons engaging in acts of retribution simply
3 because of what they heard before. And I'm -- I'm perfectly willing to
4 accept any other criticisms that you might have of the report in that
6 Q. I just want to -- you brought that up yesterday. Is it -- I
7 don't know, we got this report about a week or ten days ago. That's when
8 you finished writing it.
9 A. Mm-hm.
10 Q. Why in -- what suddenly changed your mind in the ten days?
11 A. About that sentence you mean?
12 Q. Yes.
13 A. Oh, well, one thing was to go over carefully what Professor
14 Duijzings had been writing. Remember, again the Dutch material is just
15 fort of coming in now. So far as I know, many people in here in this
16 courtroom have not read it or seen it. And so I was assimilating that
17 material. And then as I read it, I realised that Professor Duijzings, for
18 whom I have tremendous respect and who probably knows more than anyone
19 about these problems, is warning us not to assume certain things. And I
20 felt that I had gone too far at that point. And this -- this happens all
21 the time, of course. And -- and hopefully in this discussion this morning
22 I will find out other things. I'd be very grateful and appreciative if
23 you will find out what's wrong with the report.
24 Q. But I'm sorry, Professor, what I'm asking you is: This -- it's
25 not as though this report was written months ago. And you had -- you've
1 referred to Professor Duijzings all the way through.
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Why did you suddenly change your evidence -- or, I'm sorry, your
4 view on a sentence you can't have written more than a matter of weeks ago,
5 if that?
6 A. Because the -- the purpose of the report was to start with the
7 book and then to open up controversial issues, Ms. Korner. And these --
8 such things as: Was it a civil war? Who was responsible? Is there such
9 a thing as ancient hatreds playing a very vital role. And the reason
10 these subjects were there is because they are controversial. Because I'm
11 not going to claim that I have the last word on this. I always approach
12 something like this as I would giving a paper at a seminar: Now let's
13 discuss it. Let's see what's right and what's wrong in it. It is based
14 upon my knowledge which is not small about what happened there, and I
15 think it should be treated with respect and so on. But it's also, as we
16 know from scholarly efforts, never completely flawless.
17 Q. But, I'm sorry, Professor, do you understand the difference
18 between giving a seminar to a set of students and giving evidence in a
19 trial of a man charged with the most serious of offences?
20 A. I do. And I'm not in this report dealing with -- with
21 Mr. Brdjanin. And it's precisely why I didn't want to get involved in the
22 documents, because -- of Bosanska Krajina and the activities of the
23 defendant. Because I respect his rights and I don't want to make any
24 false statements.
25 I am doing something else here. I am hoping that we can open up
1 our minds to the complex events of Bosnia, that they weren't simple, and
2 in this fashion I'm entering into areas which are controversial. I don't
3 deny it. I might even myself have -- have on occasion said something
4 about this that I would like to discuss with the Court and have them
5 listen to my opinions and -- and discuss them.
6 These are -- these are very interesting, very difficult subjects
7 that I chose to treat, simply because I think the Court is interested in
8 them. I would never equate this with making a statement about the
10 Q. No. Can -- can I ask you this, Professor Shoup: Is the reason
11 that you agreed to give evidence, given the restrictions or prepare a
12 report given the restrictions that Mr. Ackerman so graphically outlined
13 was so that you could have a public forum for putting these controversial
14 propositions forward?
15 A. Of course not. Of course not. I've -- I feel that the practice
16 of having an expert witness for the Defence is an excellent practice.
17 Presumably it provides a context in which we can divorce ourselves from
18 the propaganda and so forth that we see all the time. In my case, one of
19 the primary reasons for -- for writing this was once more to remind the
20 Court that there was a great deal of negativism about the Serbs to the
21 point that sometimes even a good Serb couldn't get an audience. Yes, I
22 agree that that was a sort of political motive in all of this. But my own
23 research has always been dedicated to absolutely showing both sides of the
24 question. I think this is what my testimony indicates.
25 Q. All right. Were you shown, before you told us what you did
1 consult to write this report -- were you shown either the report or the
2 testimony given by Dr. Patrick Treanor?
3 A. Yes, I was.
4 Q. So you've read that as well.
5 A. Yes. Again, it's difficult, I must say, to understand a great
6 deal of the testimony, because they refer to documents and events that you
7 may not be familiar with, but I did my best.
8 Q. Who may not -- you mean you're not familiar with?
9 A. Yes. Yes. But these are -- these are, you know, the minutia of
10 meetings and relationships between various bodies in Bosanska Krajina
11 which an outsider outside of this Court wouldn't know.
12 Q. I'm very sorry, Professor Shoup, but the report prepared by
13 Mr. Treanor, which you say you saw, is nothing -- it has to do partly with
14 the minutiae, as you put it, of meetings, but it deals with the whole
15 question of the Bosnian Serb leadership, doesn't it?
16 A. Let's take a step back. There may be a misunderstanding. I did
17 not read his report. I read the -- the testimony on the report. And
18 this -- if you -- so I would love to see the report. I would love to see
19 Mr. Brown's report. I think those are both very interesting documents.
20 In the event, it was not possible to do so
21 JUDGE AGIUS: I need to -- to have this clear. Let's start with
22 Professor Donia. Did you -- what were you given by Mr. Ackerman?
23 THE WITNESS: I was given testimony by Professor Donia. A great
24 deal of that was cross-examination. I've not discussed this in my -- very
25 much with Mr. Ackerman, but there may even have been -- he can tell me --
1 he can tell you better what he sent me, whether it was everything that
2 Donia said or not. I just -- there was a good deal of the
3 cross-examination. There was some testimony by Dr -- by Professor Donia.
4 Was it all of it? I don't know.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Did you also receive the report, his written
6 report. Professor Donia.
7 THE WITNESS: Yes. I would just have to -- I -- I'm sorry.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: What I want to make clear, Professor Shoup, is
9 this: Because when you were asked about Mr. Treanor's report, I got the
10 impression - I may be wrong - but I got the impression that you went
11 through his testimony here, not report. But did you have the report
13 THE WITNESS: No.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: No. So in the case of Professor Donia, you went
15 through his testimony --
16 THE WITNESS: Yes, pages and pages of testimony.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Did you have his report available?
18 THE WITNESS: I do apologise to the Court. These pages and pages
19 of testimony were in front of me, and I just -- I know some of the things
20 he said, but I can't tell you exactly, was it from the report, was it from
21 the cross-examination and so forth. I would have to look at the documents
22 to check.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. And Mr. Brown, Ewan Brown, did you go
24 through his testimony?
25 A. Yes. But I saw his testimony --
1 JUDGE AGIUS: But did you --
2 THE WITNESS: But not his report.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: But not his report.
4 Okay. I think that's pretty much clear. Ms. Korner, please go
6 MS. KORNER:
7 Q. Do you think it's at all possible, Professor Shoup, that if you'd
8 asked for and read the full report of Dr. Treanor on the Bosnian Serb
9 leadership, the full report of Dr. Donia, as opposed to the testimony,
10 which was only partially dealing with the report --
11 A. Mm-hm.
12 Q. -- you might just possibly have changed your mind over the fact,
13 as you assert, that the Serbs were the subject of demonisation?
14 A. No, I don't think I would have change my mind at all. The
15 reasons for that lay mostly by the treatment of the Serbs by the Western
17 And to give you an example, I've noticed in the CIA report that
18 they still state that the Serbs committed the Markale massacre. When I
19 say that I can't believe it. There is no proof of that whatsoever. Those
20 were the things that I've had to fight against for years. I don't think
21 the Brown report would have changed any that.
22 Q. I'm not talking about Mr. Brown's report. I'm talking about
23 Dr. Treanor's report and Dr. Donia's reports, only which were partially
24 brought out in examination and cross-examination.
25 A. Well --
1 Q. Don't you think -- just listen, please.
2 A. I'm sorry.
3 Q. That you might have changed your mind if you'd read that report
4 and looked at the documents, that the allegations that Serbs committed -
5 I'm putting it at its lowest - crimes was a true one?
6 A. I have never said that the Serbs didn't commit crimes. That was
7 never an issue. I -- it was not necessary for me to read the Brown or the
8 Treanor report to find out the Serbs committed crimes. You will see it
9 right here in the book that we document this and are fully convinced that
10 this was the case.
11 Q. So by the phrase, on page 2 of your report, that one of the
12 authors, namely, yourself --
13 A. That's right.
14 Q. -- feels that the Serbs were the subject of demonisation --
15 A. That's correct.
16 Q. -- what do you actually mean by that?
17 A. I mean that a Serb who has valid reasons to believe this or that
18 or to give testimony in this court faces a tremendous obstacle. He's --
19 he's going to -- there is going to be, in my mind - I could be wrong;
20 please correct me if I'm wrong - there is going to be a hidden bias
21 against him. Now, when it comes to demonisation of the Serbs, I lived
22 through this period when the Christian Science Monitor was ascribing the
23 destruction of the bridge at Mostar, of all things, to the Serbs. I have
24 seen this evidence in this Markale massacre, one of the, you know, really
25 goriest events which upset everybody worldwide being treated as though,
1 well, so we think the Serbs did it, so we'll just it at that. I find that
2 accept. I mean. You can choose your words, "demonisation" or something
3 else. It has bothered me. I don't have to excuse myself of that.
4 Q. Have you read the judgement in the trial of General Galic?
5 A. I would love to. I've considered that extremely important and I
6 wanted to. I've discussed this with Mr. Ackerman because of the
7 difficulty in electronically downloading this material. And he told me
8 that I could download this and condense it in Acrobat, put it on the hard
9 drive and then read it. We went through a lengthy discussion on this. So
10 that I hope I would be able to handle this electronically in the future.
11 It's intimidating, as you perfectly well know yourself, downloading pages
12 and pages of documents, and -- and so forth.
13 Q. You go on to say, at page 2 in this paragraph: "Feels that the
14 Serbs were the subject of demonisation and doubts that genocide is the
15 appropriate term for atrocities committed by the Serbs during the
17 A. That's correct.
18 Q. Now, leaving aside that "genocide" is a legal term, as you
19 appreciate, Professor Shoup, what do you mean by that?
20 A. Well, I am not a legal expert but I'm free to express my opinions
21 about this. And that is simply that looking at the history of what
22 happened in the Balkans and seeing what happened in World War II when
23 whole villages, including women and children, were obliterated, this is my
24 definition of "genocide." If and where that happened in Bosnia during
25 this conflict, I will readily agree with anyone who says that this has
1 the -- all of the characteristics of genocide. If we're talking about
2 ethnic cleansing, and automatically associating that with genocide, I feel
3 this is a crime against humanity and not -- don't see any reason why I
4 should be ashamed to say that -- rather than genocide.
5 But there is a further point I must make. And I'll slow down for
6 the translator. Because I have been for so long associated with this
7 field, I know how many times the -- the accusation of genocide has been
8 utilised as a purely propaganda weapon. It was used by Milosevic against
9 the -- what was -- against the Albanians in Kosovo, saying that the Serbs
10 in Kosovo are guilty of genocide. I have seen it used in the western
11 press recklessly, by people who don't understand that rather than being
12 a -- a concept in the Balkans, which has this noble past in the Holocaust,
13 it is actually a concept that has been degenerated and been abused over
14 and over again. I'm -- and for this reason, I must be careful in using
15 this term. I see it from the perspective of those people who have misused
16 that term so frequently. That's -- I have no apologies, therefore, for
17 being reluctant to accuse anyone of genocide.
18 Q. You --
19 THE INTERPRETER: Excuse me, can you make a longer pause between
20 the question and the answer.
21 THE WITNESS: Yes, of course.
22 MS. KORNER:
23 Q. [Previous translation Continues] ... You don't know, do you, the
24 exact nature of -- I put it -- most of the events that took place, for
25 example, in the Autonomous Region of Krajina?
1 A. In our book --
2 Q. No, leave aside your book, please, and just answer the question.
3 A. Well, because that's where we deal with this problem. I have to
4 refer to it.
5 In our book, it is clear that persons were liquidated,
6 intelligentsia, professors and so forth - at least, that was our
7 conclusion; if I'm wrong, I apologise, to the Serb side in this case, but
8 that was our conclusion - that struck a chord. That reminded me exactly
9 of what happened during World War II. And it -- there are subsequent
10 articles which show you, in terms of the numbers of missing people, for
11 example, who have never been found - which is a very serious indication
12 that something terrible happened to them - they'd even put this on maps.
13 You could see that Prijedor is one, as you would agree, one place where
14 that is evident; Eastern Bosnia is another. And these are -- these are --
15 this information I think is indisputable. I'm not sure what would be
16 gained by asking me to go -- to go any further, since we all agree on what
18 Q. I'm asking you now: Do you know, for example, what happened at
19 Mount Vlasic at the beginning of August 1992?
20 A. I have been -- I'm becoming a little bit more aware. The Kozarac
21 events, remember, were -- were covered in great detail during the war
22 itself. Mount Vlasic less so. I'm becoming more aware of that particular
23 incident by -- by just what I see here in the Court.
24 Q. Do you know what happened at the Grabovica school in Kotor Varos?
25 A. No. No, I don't.
1 Q. Do you know what happened at the Velagici school in Kljuc?
2 A. No, I don't.
3 Q. All right. Now, Professor, I just want to look at a few things
4 in your report.
5 A. Sure.
6 Q. And I will, in fact, finish today.
7 A. Sure. Sure.
8 Q. Could you please look at page 7 of your report.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. In the top paragraph, you say: "In March --" it's the third line
12 A. That's right.
13 Q. "In March of 1992, Vladimir Srebrov --" would you go to the
14 footnote, please. The pen name. His real name was...
15 A. I couldn't ask the right person. I think it was Pavle Nikolic or
16 something. I'm wasn't sure. Someone here in the Court must know it.
17 Q. Milan Nikolic?
18 A. Milan Nikolic. Thank you very much.
19 Q. So you didn't check that footnote?
20 A. Well, again, it would have taken a long time and there were more
21 important things to do, and I thought the Court would understand it. In
22 this case, it was not as crucial as some other things.
23 Q. "In addressing a meeting of Serb intellectuals penned that
24 memorable phrase," and you quote it --
25 A. Yes, that's right.
1 Q. And --
2 A. "Iza jas provejava smrt."
3 Q. All right. I want you to have a look, please, at the original
4 article and a translation.
5 A. Mm-hm. Mm-hm.
6 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, this is a new document.
7 Your Honour, may that become Exhibit P2725.
8 Your Honour, I didn't exhibit that third part of the video, but I
9 don't think -- unless anybody wants it to be exhibited.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] Mr. Ackerman.
11 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I think it needs to be extracted and
12 made an exhibit because it's part of the evidence in the case now.
13 MS. KORNER: All right.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
15 MS. KORNER: I'm quite happy.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: I would think -- I would tend to agree with
17 Mr. Ackerman.
18 MS. KORNER: Then it's P2727 -- 2726, the video of the third part
19 of the film, whatever it's called.
20 MR. ACKERMAN: I assume that copies of the CD, the extracted CD,
21 will be made available to all of us?
22 MS. KORNER: It's a video.
23 MR. ACKERMAN: But it must be on CD. Were you running a video or
25 MS. KORNER: Running a video.
1 MR. ACKERMAN: Okay.
2 MS. KORNER: But we can probably put it on CD for you. But
3 you've got the full version anyhow.
4 MR. ACKERMAN: I do have the full version. I can find it. It's
5 no problem. Anyway ...
6 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Thank you, Mr. Ackerman.
7 MS. KORNER:
8 Q. All right. Do you agree that's the article you're referring to?
9 A. Absolutely. It's very moving.
10 Q. Just a moment. What does it actually say at the top? Does it
11 read as follows: "The speech that Vladimir Srebrov wrote for the Congress
12 of Serbian Intellectuals in Sarajevo but did not deliver," because he was
13 not invited?
14 A. No. He was not there in person, and that's why I say here that
15 he wrote this. But I didn't say he spoke --
16 Q. I'm sorry. If you look in your --
17 A. Do I indicate that he was there?
18 Q. No. Just a moment. Look at page 7, first paragraph: " Vladimir,
19 in addressing a meeting of Serbian --"
20 A. I'm sorry, that's a mistake. I was aware that he wasn't there.
21 When I say "penned the memorable phrase" that was meant to say that he
22 wrote it. No, he was not actually there. That's not correct. I knew
23 that. He was not there. He -- he gave them this document.
24 Q. Professor, you may at the end of all this want to go back through
25 that report and correct errors that we may not have seen ourselves, but
1 anyhow --
2 A. I'd be delighted.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's move on.
4 THE WITNESS: If this is changing the nature --
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's --
6 THE WITNESS: I think the important thing is that - as you agree,
7 that this is what he says.
8 MS. KORNER:
9 Q. All right. "What Vladimir Srebrov wanted to say at the Congress
10 of Serbian Intellectuals and was not allowed to say."
11 A. Mm-hm.
12 Q. If we just look at some of things that he said in this.
13 A. That's right.
14 Q. If you look at page 2 of the translation, that is --
15 A. Mm-hm.
16 Q. "Intellectuals are not present at this gathering. They were
17 never sent the invitations for this gathering, nor can they be found in
18 the SDS Democratic Party of Bosnia-Herzegovina, organisers of the current
19 congress. They are the -- in the extra-parliamentary Serbian opposition.
20 They do not want to take part in the slaughter of the Serbs into which
21 they are being pushed against the local Muslims and Croats by the Mafia
22 gang headed by Karadzic, Krajisnik, Ostojic."
23 A. Mm-hm.
24 Q. And so on and so forth.
25 A. So on and so forth. Mm-hm.
1 Q. And if you look, please, at page 3.
2 A. It's not numbered -- oh, yes, here it is.
3 Q. At the bottom.
4 A. Sure.
5 Q. About halfway down the paragraph, a very long paragraph.
6 A. Mm-hm.
7 Q. "In spite of all the threats and harassment that the Serbs from
8 Bosnia-Herzegovina were subjected to during the several days prior to the
9 elections of which they informed me either in person or on the phone,
10 mostly from two regions, Bosnia and Bosnian Krajina, less from
11 Herzegovina, they're crying, pleading their fear of repression by the SDS
12 BH activists forced me to publicly demand the following: Leave the Serbs
13 from the BH alone. All of you who want a Greater Serbia in this area who
14 want some kind of a Serbian state of BH, leave here. You have no business
15 here. Even more so, since you are making fools out of the uneducated
16 Serbian population, creating genocide, turning them into ethnocidal
17 people, turning them against their neighbours and relatives."
18 Now, this gentleman, Mr. Srebrov, or whatever his name was, was a
19 Serb, wasn't he?
20 A. Oh, of course.
21 Q. And his view, expressed even in April of 1992, was that the SDS
22 was effectively turning ordinary Serbs into people who were willing to
23 kill non-Serbs.
24 A. Well, that is his view, I guess. I -- the reason that -- that I
25 am glad to see this testimony is because I speak in the report about
1 persons who went over the edge, exclusive nationalists, as I call them.
2 And I don't excuse any of these people. And apart from the specific
3 accusations that Srebrov was making at this time, this was a path to
4 disaster what these people were projecting for Serbia. The idea that
5 they're committing genocide I think is -- is -- as Srebrov says here, is
6 to me not quite correct, but I understand his emotion at this particular
7 time and I associate myself with it completely. I wouldn't take this
8 document as a -- as proof of any one particular fact in any one particular
9 place. Like everything else, I would compare it to what else I've known
10 and see. The reason it's here is not because of the facts in the document
11 but to show you how or where people were that they were headed for
12 disaster. And Srebrov in my mind was a hero. I wouldn't have otherwise,
13 you know, sort of, for no reason at all provided this sentence for the
14 Court to -- to examine. I really admire him tremendously.
15 Q. All right. Let's move on. Can we go, please, to page 8 of your
16 report, where you quote from your book.
17 A. Mm-hm. Yes, okay. This now is the -- the "we," meaning
18 Professor Burg and myself.
19 Q. And you quote there part of the section "Introduction, ethnic
20 conflict and the moral question in Bosnia."
21 A. That's right.
22 Q. You didn't go on to quote what you say on page 12, did you?
23 Would you look at page 12 of your book.
24 A. Sure. I'd be delighted to do that -- certainly whatever it is.
25 I'd be delighted to read it to the Court, if you want me to. Please.
1 Q. The paragraph beginning: "Of the three nationalist forces,
2 however, the Serbs have come in for special opprobrium."
3 A. Yes. Where is that? Which paragraph? One, two --
4 Q. It's the third paragraph on page 12, chapter 1.
5 A. Yes. I'm sorry. I'm just not finding this sentence that --
6 where you're starting. I'm familiar with the paragraph, of course. Oh, I
7 see. Yes, at the beginning of the paragraph. Excuse me. Yes, I'm now
8 with you. Yes, go ahead.
9 Q. "The focus on Serb behaviour that dominates most of Western
10 discussion of the war is not, as some believe, the result only of better
11 propaganda by the Muslims. It arises out of the fact that the Bosnian
12 Serbs engaged in ethnic cleansing on a greater scale than the rest."
13 A. That's correct.
14 Q. "Although, as our account will show, Serbs in Bosnia were also
15 the victims of ethnic cleansing." That's what you said then, isn't it?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Do you adhere to that now?
18 A. Of course. That was the conclusion we reached, and nobody has
19 changed our minds.
20 Q. And that -- you go on to say further on that "The Serb
21 nationalist leaders, along with the Croat extremists, were bent on
22 destroying the multi-ethnic society which in the last analysis was the
23 greatest accomplishment of Bosnian history."
24 A. Yes. That, I -- I don't -- I have doubts that I would put it
25 this way any more. You may have noticed in my testimony that I've come to
1 the conclusion since then, knowing more about what happened after the
2 elections and the -- the struggle for power in the localities, that, as I
3 have said to the Court, probably multi-ethnic Bosnia was destroyed even
4 before the war began. That's what I say here, and that's something that's
5 developed in my own thinking since the book was written.
6 Q. All right. Now, could you move, please, to page 14. Again, it's
7 a question of footnotes that I want to ask you about.
8 A. Sure.
9 Q. You are discussing -- well, at page 14, the report of -- I'm
10 sorry, it's slightly before that. But we can deal with that. The report
11 of the expert witness for the Prosecution. Well, you hadn't actually read
12 the report, we now discover; is that right?
13 A. Well, I can't be sure. I had a mass of paper, and I don't know
14 whether, you know, I was reading the report at one and then going into the
15 testimony. I'd have to go back and just see. I just don't remember. I'm
16 sorry. I -- I just don't want to guess, Ms. Korner. You can appreciate
18 Q. And it's right, isn't it, you know Dr. Donia very well?
19 A. Yes, I do.
20 Q. You say -- you were talking about -- it's the sentence before:
21 "The Croatian national cause was quickly embraced by the Western
22 Herzegovinians who had broken all ties with central government in the
23 fall -- as early as the spring of 1991 and formed a Croat Crisis Staff in
24 the fall of that year while at the same time organising paramilitary units
25 to defend the region."
1 A. What page are we on? Excuse me.
2 Q. Page 14.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Page 14.
4 MS. KORNER:
5 Q. Of your report.
6 A. Yes, that's right. Yes, that's right.
7 Q. And footnote 34 states: "On the formation of the Crisis Staff,
8 See CIA "Balkan Battlegrounds, Volume I," page 133. Now, I'd like you --
9 to show you Volume I, 133, please.
10 A. Mm-hm. Yes.
11 Q. And can you tell us where we see -- and I'm asking this genuinely
12 out of curiosity.
13 A. Sure. Sure, of course.
14 Q. Where do we see anything on that page about Croatian Crisis
16 A. Let's see. Here -- they deal with the Croatian -- Bosnian
17 Croat -- it will take me a minute, if you don't mind. Let's see what's
18 going on here.
19 I think, without delaying the Court here, I think what's
20 happening is that the reference is to the -- to the part of the sentence
21 that deals with paramilitary units and not with the Crisis Staff. It may
22 appear from the -- from the footnote that it -- that it's dealing with
23 both of those facts, but it -- it's not. As far as I -- it's dealing
24 clearly with the military side of ...
25 Q. All right. So -- I'm sorry, but you appreciate, Professor Shoup,
1 that this is important, because clearly one wishes to check references and
2 check cites. It's important that we know where you're getting the
3 information. Do you agree with that?
4 A. Certainly. There should have been another footnote in just --
5 two footnotes, instead of one, about the -- the footnote for the formation
6 of the Crisis Croatian Staff should have been footnoted, I agree.
7 Q. Now, I'm sorry, I missed out one part that I meant to ask you
8 about. Could you go back to page 6 of your report, please, and the second
10 A. Let me just move -- mark this footnote. Mm-hm. Yeah.
11 Excuse me. I'll get there. I'm a little slow. Yes. Mm-hm.
12 Q. In that second paragraph, you say this: "The -- you say: "The
13 rational course of action -- this is paragraph 2.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Would have been surely to put aside differences over the future
16 of the Bosnian state and focus on saving Bosnia and avoiding civil war.
17 A. That's correct.
18 Q. And then, leaving out the next sentence: "To whom was one to
20 A. That's right.
21 Q. "The army JNA that remained in Sarajevo at least on the sidelines
22 until April of 1992."
23 A. That's correct.
24 Q. Now, first of all, Professor Shoup, that's inaccurate, isn't it,
25 because the JNA, or as you called it, the Serbian army, had been engaged
1 in the actions in Croatia against the Croats?
2 A. Well, I'm sorry, I -- I don't understand what that has to do with
4 Q. No, no, you say "That remained in Sarajevo on the sidelines."
5 A. That's right.
6 Q. It may be --
7 A. I say "in Sarajevo at least," because I'm very aware that the JNA
8 was operating in Bosanska Krajina fighting the Croatians. That's why the
9 "at least" is there.
10 Q. Are you also aware that the JNA was actively engaged in
11 distributing arms to Serbs?
12 A. Of course
13 Q. All right. So --
14 A. But you also are -- must be aware that on March 2nd, when the
15 crisis occurred, that was shown in the BBC film - and it looked like a
16 putsch was about to take place - Izetbegovic escaped the worst possible
17 situation then because the General -- General -- I won't -- because the
18 JNA general supported Izetbegovic. And this is March 2nd. And
19 furthermore, he had -- Izetbegovic had negotiations with the JNA on --
20 in -- later, in which JNA -- which is in the book here, in Skopje, in
21 Macedonia, where they tried to reach some kind of continuation of
22 political talks. All of this referred to one segment of the JNA - I
23 forget the general's name, excuse me - in Sarajevo, who was indeed trying
24 to mediate between the various sides in the conflict in the city. That is
25 at least on the basis of my information. If I'm wrong, I hope you will
1 correct me.
2 Q. I'm sorry, that -- as you saw, we saw rightly, General Kukanjac
3 was --
4 A. Kukanjac. Yes, thank you.
5 Q. -- negotiating. But the JNA, by and large, was actively acting
6 as a Serb army, wasn't it?
7 A. It is -- it's important to know that the JNA itself was divided.
8 Kukanjac was taking one position. The -- the forces -- the 5th Krajina
9 Brigade in -- this is the kind of a thing that has to be explored. One
10 can't -- one has to be careful of one's generalisations about these
12 Q. I --
13 A. My research suggests that persons within the JNA were not all in
14 agreement with one another what to do. I may -- further research may
15 prove me wrong, but for the moment that's where I stand.
16 Q. Yes, I know. But that's exactly the point, isn't it, Professor
17 Shoup, that you haven't engaged in further research before you make these
18 statements by, for example -- for example, examining the documents from
19 the 1st Krajina Corps?
20 A. There is no problem here. We know what the 1st Krajina Corps was
21 doing. We know it was fighting in Croatia. When I was asked yesterday
22 about what the position was of these soldiers and their morale, it seemed
23 to me that it was quite possible that they were worried -- or preparing
24 themselves to fight the other side when they were -- there's just no
25 debate about what the 1st Krajina Corps -- I don't see why we have to
1 consider more documents.
2 Let's say -- but there is the fact that in -- in -- in Skopje on
3 May 26th there was a tremendous effort made by the JNA to try and mediate
4 the -- the - or was it April 26th, excuse me - the conflict. This is also
5 a fact. You could ask me, Why don't I -- why didn't I look at the
6 documents on that meeting in Skopje as well? I would love to.
7 Q. I would like you just to have a look at one document, please.
8 A. Mm-hm. Sure.
9 Q. P1574.
10 A. Sure.
11 Q. P1574.
12 A. I just have to slow down. I'm sorry. My apologies to the
13 translators. I'll try to do better.
14 MS. KORNER: And we'll put the English on the ELMO.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] I've noticed
16 Mr. Ackerman standing up.
17 MS. KORNER: Yes, I know, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: And I anticipated what it was. Thank you.
19 MS. KORNER:
20 Q. I want you to go, please -- this is a full report on the
21 assessment of the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the area of
22 responsibility of the 2nd Military District.
23 A. I assume this is after the reorginisation of the JNA?
24 Q. No, this is not. If you look at the date, it's March 1992.
25 A. Okay.
1 Q. You say in your report -- while we're dealing --
2 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. Usher, we need to see this.
3 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour, please.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, thank you. Yes.
5 MS. KORNER:
6 Q. You state in your report that the VRS was formed on the 20th of
7 May. May I suggest to you that you're wrong on that; it was on the 12th
8 of May.
9 A. Sorry.
10 Q. Have you read the assembly meeting for the 12th of May, 1992?
11 A. No, of course not.
12 Q. All right. Please have a look, would you. This is a full
13 report, JNA, pre-VRS, to page 5.
14 A. Sure.
15 Q. And as you can see, it's not just the Krajina Corps, because it's
16 personnel strength of the 9th, the 10th, the 5th, the 17th, and the 4th.
17 A. All right.
18 Q. And then it says, under F: "The JNA has distributed 51.900
19 weapons (75%) and the SDS, 17.298 weapons."
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. And this deals, the next paragraph, you may think deals with the
22 army staying on the sidelines in Sarajevo.
23 "To date, 300 automatic rifles have been distributed to retired
24 military officers in Sarajevo (those who can be trusted)."
25 A. Mm-hm.
1 Q. "In the next three or four days, another 100 person wills be
2 armed. These person wills defend, protect housing estates, building
3 entrances," and so on.
4 A. Yes, that's correct.
5 Q. Do you think if you had read that before you wrote that in your
6 report, you might not have written that sentence, "The JNA, at least in
7 Sarajevo, remained on the sidelines."
8 A. No. I would not have changed that. I would have changed it to
9 General Kukanjac perhaps to avoid this discussion that we're having now.
10 After all, we're perfectly aware that the elements of the army at least
11 set up artillery emplacements around Sarajevo before the war began. Which
12 to me is even more, if you will, indicative that there were elements in
13 the JNA getting ready to fight than what you've said here. In any case, I
14 don't see that this is -- condemns the -- condemns the army in any way.
15 They seem to be saying, "We'll give these arms to people to protect
16 themselves." I might find some other motives for that. I just don't see
17 any significance really in giving out 100 persons some -- some means of
18 defending themselves. I really think that you have a much better case if
19 you talk about the way they were placing heavy artillery around the area
20 of Sarajevo, which they were.
21 Q. Professor, the only point that I'm trying to point out to you --
22 I'm trying to make is that your sentence in the report that the JNA
23 remained on the sidelines, from the documentary evidence that you've never
24 seen is clearly not an accurate one. Would you accept that?
25 A. I don't -- my apologies that I didn't mislead you clearly when
1 you read the report. But the fact is that General Kukanjac was taking a
2 different position and playing a role of great importance at that critical
3 juncture in trying to keep the lid on the conflict in Sarajevo. And yes,
4 we might have -- I should have perhaps put his name in there instead of
5 saying loosely "the JNA." I thought that -- that if he was -- if it was
6 General Kukanjac, he was the JNA in Sarajevo. I guess, he wasn't.
7 Q. Could you go, please, in your report now to page 24.
8 A. Sure.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] One moment, because
11 Judge Taya is asking me about the ethnicity of General Kukanjac. Was he a
12 Serb -- of Serb --
13 THE WITNESS: I don't know.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: You don't know.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: No.
16 THE WITNESS: The name is not a Serbian name. But I wouldn't
17 want to conclude just from that that he was a non-Serb.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
19 THE WITNESS: I don't know.
20 MS. KORNER:
21 Q. Now, could you go, please, to the bottom. The very last
23 A. "We now know..."
24 Q. "We now know that in the period between March and September 1991
25 Milosevic had decided that all Serb majority areas, both in Bosnia and
1 Croatia, should become Serbia proper."
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. How do we know that?
4 A. (redacted). Mind you, that is a little bit off the
5 cuff. But most of what we know about the changes that Milosevic made in
6 his policies towards the Croatian war come from that source. (redacted)
9 Q. (redacted)
11 A. Yes. I see. Mm-hm.
12 Q. And the answer is?
13 A. I believe it's -- I believe, without checking the book --
14 Q. No, no, why didn't you -- when you say, "We now know," why didn't
15 you give the footnote for that assertion?
16 A. I guess I don't understand. (redacted)
18 (redacted). If -- I said, "We now know," meaning
19 that somehow I'd got the information recently. No, I don't mean that.
20 I'm looking at it from a ten-year perspective, I guess. (redacted)
22 JUDGE AGIUS: But I don't think he's answered your question,
24 MS. KORNER: I don't think he has either, Your Honour.
25 THE WITNESS: I apologise. What's the problem?
1 Q. I want to know why, when you made an assertion isn't it not the
2 most standard form of writing a book, an article, if you make an assertion
3 such as "we now know" to give in a footnote from what "we now know." In
5 A. Oh, in other words you think there should be a footnote there.
6 Q. Well, I'm asking you, Professor Shoup, whether you don't think
7 there should be a footnote there.
8 A. Well, sure. I thought this was something that was in all in the
9 literature and there are so many books on this subject. I thought this
10 was common knowledge. But yes, for the Court it should have been
11 footnoted. Sure.
12 Q. Can we go, please, to page 25.
13 A. I thought that's where we were.
14 Q. Next page.
15 A. 26?
16 Q. 25. The end of paragraph 3: "The irony is that if both parties
17 had agreed to undertake population transfers as a means of avoiding a war
18 between them, the International Community might not have become involved
19 even if the local Croat and Muslim populations resisted displacement."
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. I want to know what you mean by that particular sentence.
22 A. I am suggesting to the Court, as someone looking at the -- the
23 history of this region -- that if the Serbs and the Croatians had agreed
24 to a solution, including the partitioning of Bosnia in some fashion, and
25 accomplished this as a fait accompli in a situation in which the
1 International Community did not want to become involved in the Balkans,
2 it's -- it's possible to speculate here - because speculation is in
3 order - it reveals the complexities to have situation - it's possible that
4 they could have gotten away with it. You can dispute this, but I think it
5 sheds light on the fact that, one, there was a lack of agreement between
6 Serbia and Croatia, which was critical to the outbreak of war in Bosnia;
7 and secondly, that the International Community was desperate to find
8 things -- sort themselves out peacefully.
9 Q. I'm sorry, what I want to know is this: By saying, "Even if the
10 local Croat and Muslim populations resisted displacement --"
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Just pause and wait for the question, please.
13 A. Sure.
14 Q. Are you intending to say there that it would have been all right
15 forcibly to move out the Muslim and Croats from where they had lived, as
16 we've been told over and over again for centuries?
17 A. I said the irony in that sentence is -- and what I'm trying to
18 say is that ethnic cleansing, which we attacked so vociferously and so
19 correctly, because I consider this a crime, that what would have amounted
20 to ethnic cleansing, population displacements done discreetly by
21 discrimination against persons, making it unpleasant for them to stay in a
22 place, might not have been so objectionable to the International Community
23 if it had avoided the -- if it had avoided the outbreak of war in
25 Q. I'm sorry.
1 A. You may dispute, this but this is my cynical view of the actions
2 of the great powers vis-a-vis this area.
3 Q. I'm sorry, you are saying in your view it would have been all
4 right if population displacements done discreetly by discrimination
5 against persons making it unpleasant or them to stay in a place might not
6 have been so objectionable?
7 A. I'm sorry, that is precisely what I did not say. I said a moment
8 ago that the irony of the situation is that it would have been acceptable
9 to the powers of Europe and the United States. I didn't say it was
10 acceptable to me. I said this is what the history of this region is all
12 Q. All right. I'm asking you. You are not, are you, saying that it
13 was accept -- that it would have been acceptable for Muslims and Croats to
14 have been forced to move out either, as you put it, by force or by
15 discrimination? You're not saying that's acceptable?
16 A. Well, how can you misunderstand the paper? I go into the fact
17 that because Milosevic and Tudjman could only come up with a scheme for
18 partition that involved population displacements it would -- it was
19 unacceptable. I said that if they could have come up with a scheme which
20 would have allowed Bosnia to remain in a "krnja" Yugoslavia, a rump
21 Yugoslavia, without displacements, thereby preserving the multicultural
22 heritage of Bosnia, that to me would have been the best solution. And I
23 make it clear in this report.
24 Q. See, the reason I ask you this - and I'm going to jump ahead for
25 one moment - is what you say later on in this report, when you're dealing
1 with ethnic cleansing. And I'll just find it for one moment. Page 37,
3 A. Sure.
4 Q. Third paragraph.
5 A. At the bottom?
6 Q. No, third paragraph: "The phenomenon of ethnic cleansing --"
7 A. Oh, yes.
8 Q. "... in Bosnia was indeed a challenge to the International
9 Community and those -- to those who had held up Bosnia as a model of
10 ethnic toleration." This is the sentence that I'm asking you about.
11 A. Sure.
12 Q. "Yet ethnic cleansing was also a rational response within limits
13 for combatants aiming to claim areas of mixed population or wishing to
14 consolidate territory won in battle." Is that your view, Professor Shoup?
15 A. Of course it's my view. I wrote it. I say that it was a
16 rational response, within limits, for combatants aiming to claim areas of
17 mixed population, if they did claim areas of mixed population - which is
18 hardly surprising that that's the case - "Or wishing to consolidate
19 territory won in battle." I don't see anything remarkable about that
21 Q. And what are the limits that you would set?
22 A. The limits with which we're very familiar; that is, the -- mind
23 you, I'm saying that it's no longer a rational response. I'm not saying
24 it's a good or bad response. It's not a rational response. If population
25 displacements or removing people from certain areas and putting them in
1 safe places, like we did in World War II with the Japanese, it's not a
2 rational response if it's done with brutality. If it's -- if it's not --
3 I don't like the response to begin with. I should slow down. I don't
4 like the whole idea. But I'm talking about the difference between taking
5 civilian populations, moving them about. It's been done in wartime time
6 and time again, on the one hand, and the non-rational response, which is
7 to plunder, which is to burn, which is to kill, these are not -- it's not
8 a question of whether these non-rational responses are acceptable. The
9 whole thing smells badly. But there is a very important distinction for
10 the Court, certainly, between actions taken in time of war, vis-a-vis
11 certain populations, and brutally or otherwise. And that's what this
12 refers to.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. One moment, Ms. Korner.
14 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm not -- I'd forgotten that
15 Mr. Ackerman asked if we could rise early. And so I won't be able to
16 finish today.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, exactly. I mean, what -- how much longer do
18 you think you need, Ms. Korner?
19 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm going to need at least another
20 couple of hours. I really -- I'd forgotten about one of the videos.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. So the reason why -- why I'm -- I've
22 interrupted you is precisely because of this: We have agreed that we'd
23 stop at quarter past 1.00.
24 MS. KORNER: I would think the interpreters would like a short
25 break, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Exactly. I -- it's not my intention to deprive the
2 interpreters or anyone else, for that matter, from a short break. How
3 much would that leave us?
4 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, if we would say 15 minutes or 10
5 minutes, perhaps would be sufficient, if we're going to stop at 1.15 in
6 any event.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: I would like -- I can't see behind the dark glass
9 It's okay.
10 So shall we have a ten-minute break now and then conclude at
11 quarter past 1.00. And then the understanding is that Ms. Korner will
12 continue with the witness on Monday.
13 MR. ACKERMAN: I think there were matters that both you and
14 Ms. Korner wanted to raise before we broke. I'm wondering if you want to
15 release the witness now or if we do ten minutes with the witness and then
16 ten minutes -- I don't know.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: No. I only needed less than five minutes,
19 MS. KORNER: I agree, Your Honour. I just want to inform Your
20 Honour of one problem. So I won't take more than five minutes all told.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: It's just scheduling of witnesses.
22 MR. ACKERMAN: No problem.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. We'll have a ten-minute break starting from
24 now. Thank you.
25 --- Recess taken at 12.32 p.m.
1 --- On resuming at 12.51 p.m.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Korner.
3 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated]
4 Q. I'm going to come back on Monday to this question of ethnic
5 cleansing --
6 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Microphone, Ms. Korner.
8 MS. KORNER: Oh, sorry.
9 Q. I'm going to come back on Monday to this question of ethnic
10 cleansing. But I want to continue on the subject of the army, please.
11 Page 29 of your report.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Where you state in the top paragraph: "Placing all the blame on
14 the VRS for the ethnic cleansing in the late spring and summer of 1992,"
15 and pausing there for a moment, Professor Shoup.
16 A. Mm-hm.
17 Q. You do not know the detail, do you, of the actions undertaken by
18 the VRS in Prijedor, Sanski Most, Kljuc, any one of those municipalities?
19 A. I know more now than I did when I read the report, having access
20 to some of the testimony here. I don't think this -- I didn't think that
21 I was saying anything that I could not say when I wrote this sentence.
22 Q. I'm sorry, what do you mean read --
23 A. Is there a problem with something I've said?
24 Q. I'm sorry, pause for a moment. Pause please, Professor Shoup. "I
25 know more now than I did when I read the report"? What report? Do you
1 mean when you wrote the report?
2 A. Wrote the report. I'm sorry.
3 Q. This report. What have you read since you wrote this report?
4 A. Well, I have been reading, as you know, these materials that
5 just -- you're asking me at what particular point in time I was looking at
6 something on Prijedor or -- some of that came in my reviewing of the
7 material that I had already read for the purposes of this report, because
8 it's tremendous. As you know, the CIA is two huge volumes and so forth.
9 And then in my hotel room, continuing to look at these reports for other
10 things that might be interesting or noticing something -- something that
11 might have been perhaps in Mr. Ackerman's office. I have come to see in
12 more detail to these -- these events.
13 For example, there is in that --
14 Q. Stop for a moment, please, Professor Shoup.
15 A. Sure.
16 Q. You said: "I know more now than I did when I read the
17 report, having access to some of the testimony here." What testimony have
18 you read since you wrote that sentence on page 29 in your report?
19 A. Well, let's see. You see, I -- I will have to take a step back.
20 I'm not sure. I think there was -- one place I know that was very
21 interest, was the CIA "Balkan Battlegrounds" annex which Mr. Ackerman
22 brought to my attention, which gave a detailed description of one such
23 incident in one particular village. I thought it was very interesting. I
24 didn't -- hadn't used that or noticed it in -- in my report when I first
25 looked at that volume.
1 So there were just -- it seems to me that I was convinced that
2 there was ethnic cleansing. My interest in writing the report at that
3 time was not so much what happened in Prijedor or in Sanski Most. I was
4 interested in that, of course, but when, because for this report it's
5 important to know whether it took place in April, May, or June. And as I
6 look at this and say -- I thought late spring and summer, May -- this
7 would refer to May/June. I now see that some of this ethnic cleansing and
8 specific incidents began a little earlier.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Professor Shoup, please.
10 THE WITNESS: Yes.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't want to make your life more difficult.
12 THE WITNESS: Yes. I can slow down.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: But -- no, no, it's not slowing down. It's
14 answering the question.
15 THE WITNESS: Yes.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Because you haven't answered the question. The
17 question put to you was a very simple one: What testimony have you read
18 since you wrote this sentence on page 29 in your report? And that's what
19 Ms. Korner wants to know.
20 THE WITNESS: Yeah. Well, let me think a minute. Since I've
21 been looking at so many documents in this past week, which of those are
22 new to me. It would take a moment for me to -- let's see. It seems to
23 me -- yes, I can say this for a certain -- for a certainty: The Brown
24 material and the -- the Treanor material I read here. I had -- they were
25 not sent to me at the time I was reading the report.
1 Now, Mr. Ackerman would know best what he sent me, but that's my
2 recollection. That's -- that's my recollection.
3 MS. KORNER:
4 Q. So you've -- I'm sorry. Let's get this quite clear. You have
5 read since you arrived here Dr. Treanor's evidence or his report?
6 A. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. It's the -- it's the testimony, not the
7 report. Yes.
8 Q. And you've read Mr. Brown's --
9 A. Testimony.
10 Q. Is that what you're telling us?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And I wish that Defence counsel would -- would perhaps clarify
13 this. He might remember better. I don't think he sent that material to
14 me in Charlottesville. I think I read it here.
15 Q. Well, anyhow, let's move on.
16 A. Yeah, sure.
17 Q. "The VRS as formed on the 20th of May." I suggest to you you're
18 wrong in that. It was officially formed at the end of the 12th of May
19 assembly session. Was that a document shown to you by Mr. Ackerman?
20 A. You mean the VRS was formed on May 20th?
21 Q. The VRS formally came into being on the 12th of May, I suggest to
23 A. Mm-hm.
24 Q. Now, I'm asking you whether Mr. Ackerman showed you the minutes
25 of the 12th of May assembly.
1 A. Oh, no.
2 Q. All right. "After the last of the non-Bosnian Serbs had left the
3 ranks of the JNA." How do you know that?
4 A. Let's see. "After the last of the non-Bosnian Serbs had left the
5 ranks of the JNA." All right. That was based on the assumption that the
6 reorginisation of the JNA in Bosnia, as we know, to become an all-Serb
7 organisation had begun as early as December of 1991. And I now see from
8 some of the -- maybe it's the Treanor or Brown testimony -- that there was
9 actually a dispute going on between the ARK, on the one hand, and the -- I
10 guess it was the VRS about certain Muslims that were still left in the --
11 in the army. So I would have to -- to say that there were still a
12 scattering of these people in the army. The basis of that was my
13 assumption that they had left by that time, but not the basis of a
15 Q. But, I'm sorry, Professor Shoup, surely it is completely wrong in
16 academic circles to put down an -- as an -- first of all, an assumption by
17 you and then as a statement of fact.
18 A. This should have been based on -- on empirical evidence of what
19 happened at that time. This was careless, I agree.
20 Q. Are you aware from your reading of testimony that there were
21 Muslim and Croat officers serving in the VRS well after its formation?
22 A. I am now, yes. I wasn't aware at the time.
23 Q. "An order by Karadzic placing all paramilitary and TO forces
24 under the command of the VRS was not issued until June and was not
25 completely enforced for three to four weeks after, according to Karadzic
2 A. Yes, that's right. That's right.
3 Q. Footnote 71: "On the formation of the VRS, see CIA ""Balkan
4 Battlegrounds" Volume II."
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. "The implementation of the June order based on information
7 supplied the author." What information?
8 A. Yes. That's right. By someone who had an interview with
9 Karadzic on this particular matter, a very reliable source. I don't know
10 if I --
11 Q. Who's that?
12 A. Obrad Kesic [phoen].
13 Q. Who?
14 A. Obrad Kesic.
15 Q. Why didn't you footnote that?
16 A. I could have, certainly.
17 Q. This -- this is important, isn't it? You agree this is an
18 important assertion.
19 A. Well, I was -- my mind was concentrated on the bigger issues.
20 Yes, we could have certainly proved that, put Obrad Kesic's name on.
21 Although I admit I was a little reluctant to do that unless it was
22 necessary, but sure.
23 Q. I'm sorry. Part of the thesis of this report is, isn't it, is
24 that there were "out of control" paramilitaries who were responsible for
25 the offences?
1 A. Let's take a step back for a moment and clarify what I'm doing.
2 I started out trying to summarise the findings of our book about the
3 historical background of Bosnia. I then thought that the Court probably
4 did not have access to the very latest information on the Bosnian war and
5 I was going to try to add that to my report, which is what I did here by
6 citing Bosnian -- the CIA "Balkan Battlegrounds." I myself was confused
7 by what I found. I found that these very valuable sources don't often
8 speak with one voice. I thought this was important and useful to the
9 Court to be able to see that in -- in the report, and that's what this is
10 all about. It's not my belief, necessarily, that we know the answer to
11 this question. There is counter-evidence that there were paramilitaries
12 of at least one side or another who were acting out of control. But it's
13 a warning. It's a warning that the latest materials from the CIA and
14 other sources seemed to be contradictory about this phenomena, not my
15 judgement. I'm not -- I'm only repeating what these people have said.
16 Q. Well, that's right. You're relying - and we go back to where we
17 started sometime earlier today - you're relying on the CIA book of which
18 you have no knowledge and have not checked the sources yourself. When I
19 say "no knowledge," of the information that's contained in this report.
20 A. I -- I don't understand. Of course I've looked at the report.
21 But I've looked -- that is, I've looked at the CIA volume, if that's what
22 you're asking me.
23 Q. Yes, no, I'm not. You yourself --
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. -- have had no opportunity to check the sources that the CIA
1 used --
2 A. Oh, I see what you mean. Of course. Of course not. And that's
3 why I freely quote what are actually contradictory positions taken by the
4 CIA to raise a red flag and hope that somebody will see that red flag and
5 delve into this matter further.
6 Q. All right. And finally on this page - and it's probably the last
7 topic we can deal with today - "Furthermore" - this is one paragraph
8 down - "the literature we have consulted --
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. -- "seems unsure about accountability of military commanders for
11 units which may have been normally operating under their command."
12 What literature?
13 A. What follows, the Shrader book. And when I say "the literature
14 we have consulted," you know what it is. It's the CIA, it's the Dutch
15 report. And here - I didn't mention this earlier - but this is very
16 interesting Charles Shrader book, "The Muslim-Croat Civil War in Bosnia."
17 Q. And so, you're talking about, because you don't specify here, the
18 CIA report, this book by Charles Shrader.
19 A. Well, I think it's evident if you look at what I've cited in the
20 course of this report.
21 Q. Did it ever occur to you to see if there were instructions that
22 were current at the time about what commanders should do?
23 A. I would have been delighted to see such instructions. Again, I
24 was faced with the -- with a dilemma, you know, of what would be most
25 useful to the Court. I decided the most useful thing was not to go into
1 areas which you knew better than I did. You've seen all that -- those
2 documents. But, rather, to bring you up to date on what the most
3 authoritative and most recent and exhaustive studies are saying. They
4 presumably have looked at the same material you have; I hope so.
5 Q. But why, rather than a source which is filtered in some form or
6 another, why not go to the original document? It -- just a moment --
7 which would show you clearly the instructions that were issued to military
9 A. If I could clone myself, I would be delighted to do so.
10 Q. But isn't it -- is it fair.
11 Just a moment, Mr. Ackerman.
12 Is it fair to say that your preference at all times is to rely on
13 secondary studies rather than original material?
14 A. I've told you before that sometimes secondary sources are more
15 reliable than primary sources if the secondary source is someone who has
16 spent a great deal of time working over material which you might work over
17 and not understand. I don't understand military terminology. I assume
18 the CIA does. I would put much more faith in their descriptions than my
19 own of -- if it was a primary source dealing with battalion X, Y, and Z.
20 Secondary sources in this war are extremely important. You have to -- and
21 maybe even more reliable on occasion than primary sources.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. We are -- we are repeating here.
23 THE WITNESS: Yes, sorry. Sorry.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Korner.
25 THE WITNESS: Well, there you are. That's what I was being --
1 being -- we get back to this subject. I'm not sure why.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Thank you, Ms. Korner.
3 Professor Shoup, it has been a long day.
4 THE WITNESS: Sure.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Even though we are finishing earlier. But you
6 deserve a rest.
7 THE WITNESS: Yes.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: We will see you again on Monday.
9 THE WITNESS: Okay.
10 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, may I --
11 JUDGE AGIUS: And we hope to finish on Monday.
12 MS. KORNER: Yes. May I just perhaps ask Your Honours to remind
13 Mr. Shoup that he's in the middle of giving evidence.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Shoup -- sorry, Professor Shoup, you are
15 in the middle of giving evidence, so you should refrain from talking --
16 THE WITNESS: Thank you. It's very important. And I appreciate
18 And I should like to ask the -- my helper here just a question.
19 Can I pose a question to the Judge without violating protocol?
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Sure.
21 THE WITNESS: I found that the document that I was asked to look
22 at earlier by the JNA was extremely interesting, and I'm wondering if the
23 Court can provide me again the number and how I can access it myself. I
24 will address that to you and not to the Prosecutor.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: This is 1275 or something like that. I don't
1 remember the number by heart.
2 THE WITNESS: Anyway, this is just minor matter but I would love
3 to --
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Is it a problem with you, Ms. Korner if we
5 photocopy it for him?
6 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, may I just have a chance to think about
7 that over the weekend?
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Sure.
9 MS. KORNER: The only reason I hesitate is because it comes from
10 the 1st Krajina Corps collection, and I'm not sure the status of it. Some
11 of the collections are on --
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Fair enough.
13 MS. KORNER: And I just want a chance to check.
14 THE WITNESS: Perhaps it's -- some way that somebody can tell me
15 how to access it. Because there's an electronic jungle out there and it's
16 awfully hard to know how to do it. Thank you.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you, Professor Shoup. You will be
18 escorted to your hotel and we'll see you again Monday. Have a nice
20 THE WITNESS: And I thank the Prosecution for providing me with
21 the full text in English. I have this pasted on my wall, by the way, in
22 my study because I think it's such a remarkable document.
23 [The witness stands down]
24 JUDGE AGIUS: So I think we need -- it's a case of discussing a
25 little bit our scheduling for this coming week. Monday will be taken
1 by -- by this witness, and we hope to finish. I --
2 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I will. I will finish on Monday.
3 There's no question.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: That's Monday.
5 Now, we have your witness in rebuttal.
6 MS. KORNER: Yes. Your Honour, that's the problem.
7 Can I go into private session?
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, let's go into private session for a while.
9 [Private session]
12 Pages 24527 to 24535 redacted, private session
2 [Open session]
3 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, we really did agree that we would
4 finish at 1.15. And we can deal with this liter.
5 MS. KORNER: Yes.
6 MR. ACKERMAN: I'm sorry that this hurts Ms. Korner's case but
7 it's in evidence. And she's had the whole case to deal with it and now to
8 say it's a temporary exhibit and shouldn't be included in the case is just
9 preposterous. It was put in evidence when Dr. Donia was testifying.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: No. I have never considered it to be tendered as
11 temporarily. I mean, that was not my impression. And correct me if I'm
12 wrong and please come back to us first thing Monday morning. But it was
13 not my impression that it was being tendered by -- by the Defence
14 provisionally or subject to our deciding --
15 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I wasn't dealing with -- I don't know.
16 I'll have to check the transcript myself. Because Mr. Cayley dealt with
17 Dr. Donia's evidence, as you may recall.
18 And Your Honour, I agree -- Mr. Ackerman has an point.
19 But I think this matter needs to be dealt with in a little more
20 depth as a matter of legal argument as to what, if any, is the relevance
21 of this book to the issues that Your Honours have to decide.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.
23 MS. KORNER: And the other publication s that Mr. Ackerman wishes
24 to enter.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Mr. Ackerman.
1 MR. ACKERMAN: I'll just close with the phrase: You're
2 professional Judge, you can to sort it out.
3 That has -- this record to be just clobbered up with all kinds of
4 material that the Prosecutor has given you that I think you shouldn't be
5 looking at either, but that's your position and I think you have to be
7 JUDGE AGIUS: It's good to know that a lawyer of such calibre as
8 you, Mr. Ackerman, holds us in such high esteem. Thank you. And have a
9 nice --
10 MR. ACKERMAN: I do indeed.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. And have a nice weekend.
12 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.31 p.m.,
13 to be reconvened on Monday, the 9th day of
14 February, 2004 at 9.00 a.m.