Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 8097

 1                           Tuesday, 19 October 2010

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness takes the stand]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 2.18 p.m.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Good afternoon, everyone.

 7             Good afternoon, General.

 8             THE WITNESS:  Good afternoon, sir.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, please continue your

10     cross-examination.

11                           WITNESS:  DAVID FRASER [Resumed]

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

13             Good afternoon to everyone.  General, good afternoon, sir.

14                           Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic: [Continued]

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   I would like to ask you - we mentioned this during our

17     conversation - you had experience in other civil wars; is that correct?

18     Can you please tell us, which wars are these?

19        A.   My first experience with the UN was in Cyprus in the mid-1980s.

20     I was back in Bosnia in 1997, and I've also spent nine months in

21     Afghanistan.

22        Q.   Did you notice any similarities in these civil conflicts?

23        A.   The only similarity I --

24             JUDGE KWON:  Sorry to interrupt, General.

25             I don't see any relevance, Mr. Karadzic.

Page 8098

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Have faith, Your Honours.  You will

 2     see that there is relevance.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Put your question.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [No interpretation]

 5             JUDGE KWON:  I'm afraid we didn't hear the interpretation of what

 6     you said.

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   Could you please tell us what the similarities were between these

 9     three civil conflicts.

10             I can repeat.  I wanted to ask you, General, if you could tell us

11     if you saw any similarities or differences in all of these conflicts,

12     from the point of view of the fate of civilians, from the position of the

13     civilians.

14             JUDGE KWON:  I told you to move on to your next topic.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I would like to say that

16     shielding behind civilians in those environments, in particular in

17     Afghanistan, was quite a prominent feature.

18             JUDGE KWON:  You can make your submission later on.  Put your

19     question to the witness.

20             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Very well.

21        Q.   General, sir, I would now like to go through a topic now, or

22     actually I can continue with what we were doing yesterday regarding

23     proportionality, and especially in relation to our relationship, meaning

24     the parties to the conflict, and UNPROFOR, and the NATO bombing.

25             I would like to ask to look at a document now, please.

Page 8099

 1             There was a crisis about Gorazde, but in autumn, September 1994,

 2     there was also a crisis in Sarajevo.  Do you remember that?

 3        A.   I remember Gorazde and Sarajevo in 1994, but -- I remember them,

 4     yes.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 6             Can we look at 1D2623, please.  1D2623, please.

 7             I don't know if we have a translation.  This is from the

 8     Main Staff of the Army of Republika Srpska to the Commands of the

 9     Sarajevo Romanija, Hercegovac and Drina Corps, and the document describes

10     the conduct of our opponents.

11             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

12        Q.   If you recall at the time, the exclusion zone was in force which

13     applied to heavy weaponry all around Sarajevo.  Do you remember that?

14        A.   I do.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

16             And I'm just briefly going to introduce that document.

17             Can we scroll it up a little bit, please?

18             So the Main Staff here is informing about the activities of our

19     opponents, that in Pazaric, Tarcin, and Bjelasnica, the Operations Group

20     Pazaric was active, which is comprised of seven brigades, and that from

21     the town of Sarajevo, also, they're acting -- then in the third

22     paragraph, it says:

23             "These forces are planning to carry out a joint assault

24     operation, with the objective of linking up the Bjelasnica-Trnovo-Gorazde

25     road."

Page 8100

 1             And the beginning of the operation is announced for the

 2     mid-September of this year.

 3             Can we scroll up the page a little bit?  I have to read slower,

 4     but I don't have time.

 5             And it says here:

 6             "It is to be expected that there will be artillery and mortar

 7     support, the equivalent of two batteries' strength.  En masse, strong

 8     sabotage groups are expected to be infiltrated into the rear, and the

 9     disposition of our forces in order to inflict losses, cause panic, cut

10     off communications, take dominant elevations, with the objective of

11     preventing manoeuvring and the supply of our forces, and to create

12     conditions to break up and destroy the cut-off units."

13             Can we have the next page, please?  Well, actually, we can stop

14     here.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   So this is a document of the 16th of September.  The Main Staff

17     is informing about its operative and intelligence data.  Do you recall

18     that the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina at the time was preparing these

19     actions that are being referred to by the Main Staff of the Army of

20     Republika Srpska, or, rather, do you remember this actually being

21     implemented shortly after the 16th of September?

22        A.   I'm not sure I do actually remember this operation, no, not the

23     way it's been written up here.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25             Can we tender the document, please?  This is one in line, and it

Page 8101

 1     is going to lead up to the crisis of the 22nd of September.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Tieger.

 3             MR. TIEGER:  Well, I've been -- first of all, it's not a matter

 4     of the authenticity of the document, as the Court is aware.  In terms of

 5     its contextualisation and the options of admission at this time, at least

 6     under MFI conditions versus Bar Table, it may be the case under the

 7     circumstances that have arisen here, and given the answer of the witness,

 8     that the Court may get considerably more illumination from a Bar Table

 9     submission than was permitted here.  On the other hand, it may be that in

10     the context of the accused's overall questioning, it may be suitable for

11     admission and contextualisation under these circumstances.

12             But given the answer of the witness thus far, I would probably

13     encourage the Court to consider this more appropriate for Bar Table

14     submission, with the contextualisation offered by that process.

15             THE ACCUSED:  [No interpretation]

16             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Karadzic, I'll hear you before we make a

17     decision.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it's like this:  Definitely,

19     this witness does not have to know or be familiar with each document, but

20     the topic that the document deals with is something that is touched upon

21     in his statement as well as in the events that ensued.  From day to day,

22     the situation was developing, and this is one of the documents that would

23     need to be tendered.  We already have a lot of documents that we are

24     going to tender through the Bar Table.

25                           [Trial Chamber confers]

Page 8102

 1             JUDGE KWON:  This will be added to your list of documents to be

 2     tendered through Bar Table.  We will not admit this at this time.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 4             Can we now look at 65 ter 16871.  16871.

 5             Could I ask the parties to look at this letter by General Gvero,

 6     which is sent through the office of the UNMO at Pale.  And he explains in

 7     paragraph 2 that:

 8             "On the 18th of September, 1994, at 1730 hours, Muslim forces

 9     started with simultaneous assaults from Sarajevo onto the RS Army

10     positions on the confrontation line," the line of conflict:  "The village

11     of Mrkovici, the village of Faletici, Lapisnica, Trebevic ..."

12             And then it says:

13             "They used 82- and 120-millimetre mortars and are firing from

14     Bascarsija and in front of the Assembly building ..."

15             And so on and so forth.

16             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

17        Q.   This first paragraph, could you please look at it, and do you

18     agree that the Muslim Army began this offensive of theirs on the 18th of

19     September, just as this letter sent to the UNPROFOR Sarajevo Command

20     indicates?

21             General, do you remember that the offensive began that

22     General Gvero's letter is informing your command about?  Do you remember

23     the offensive beginning in the way that is described here?

24        A.   I'm reading the letter now and refreshing my memory.  I'm vaguely

25     remembering that there was an offensive like this.  If I could see the

Page 8103

 1     second page, if that's possible.

 2             Okay, thank you.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, it's all right, look at

 4     page 2, but there's nothing of importance on it.

 5             I would like to tender this document.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  What was the question to the witness, Mr. Karadzic?

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   Is it true that the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina began their

 9     offensive just like it is written in this letter by General Gvero?

10             The general said that he vaguely recalls this offensive, and now

11     we're going to shed some light on this offensive using UNPROFOR

12     documents.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Tieger.

14             MR. TIEGER:  Right.  And if I recall the chronology correctly,

15     the general asked if it was possible to see page 2.  Then the accused

16     said he wanted to tender the document, I think before the opportunity was

17     provided, but I think we probably ended up with a request to see the

18     remainder of the document.

19             JUDGE KWON:  I think the general looked at the second page, which

20     is very short.  And now the general can answer the question now.

21             THE WITNESS:  Your Honour, sir, I do vaguely remember the

22     incident.  As to the specific details of how it started, that's unclear.

23     I do remember that there was an offensive around that time.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

25             We'll admit this.

Page 8104

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D773, Your Honours.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now look at 09662.  This is

 3     a 65 ter number:  09662.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   General, could I please ask you to look at this UNPROFOR

 6     document, your command's document, dated the 18th of September.

 7     Actually, it speaks about the 18th of September.  And at the top, yes, it

 8     is dated the 18th of September.  Does this document indicate that the

 9     Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina carried out an attack towards the north,

10     towards Mrkovici?  It says "Mekovici" here.  Do you recall where the

11     village of Mrkovici is?

12        A.   I do not recall where the actual village is, no.

13        Q.   If I were to recollect -- help you to recollect by telling you

14     that you have to reach Mrkovici by going through Spicasta Stijena,

15     north-east of Sarajevo, would that help you a little bit to remember?

16        A.   It would -- a map would just be helpful, just to orient me to the

17     ground here.  It's been a long time.

18        Q.   Thank you.  When we are going to deal with Spicasta Stijena, then

19     we will show you that.

20             But I would like you to look at the contents of the document and

21     to confirm that the Muslim side fired 58 projectiles, that it violated

22     the exclusion zone, and that the Serbs only later decided to retaliate

23     from Poljine, from the place where the Serbian artillery was collected.

24        A.   Just give a minute here and I'll answer.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Why don't we collapse this B/C/S version.

Page 8105

 1             THE WITNESS:  Yeah, the report is clear, how many rounds were

 2     fired.  In the report, it's clear on what happened at this point in time.

 3     I don't -- I don't doubt the details of the report, as it's come out of

 4     our headquarters.

 5             And as to the violation of the total exclusion zone, if it was,

 6     we would have definitely protested against the Muslims for this action.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 8             Can we look at the next page, please.  And that deals with

 9     precisely what you were talking about just now.

10             I'm afraid that this is too far.  Well, in English, it's the

11     first.

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   You saw, on the first page, that you got in touch with both of

14     the warring parties; first, with the 1st Corps of the B and H Army, and

15     then -- actually, and you asked them to stop the attack.  Then you got in

16     touch with the Sarajevo Romanija Corps; is that correct?  So you were

17     absolutely aware that they had launched an operation and that they had

18     violated the zone, and then after a certain period of restraint, we

19     retaliated; is that correct, General?

20        A.   In fact, what we did was, as written there in the second-last

21     paragraph, contacted the BiH Corps, asking them to stop, and requesting

22     the Serbians not to reply.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

24             Can we look at the next page now, please.

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

Page 8106

 1        Q.   General, sir, do you agree that from 1715 hours, when the attack

 2     started, until 1815 or 1820 hours, the Serbian side did not retaliate,

 3     and then after an hour they retaliated from the Poljine sector; is that

 4     correct?

 5        A.   That is correct from the report that is being submitted here,

 6     that I'm reading right now.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  And do you agree, General, sir, that this is a

 8     sufficient period of restraint, and that you could clearly see here who

 9     started the attack and who had the right to respond?

10        A.   I could see from the report who initiated the attack, and what I

11     could see is the other side defending themselves.  And after that, we

12     would have to sort of talk about where the -- those rounds were going in

13     to.  So somebody is attacking, somebody is defending.

14        Q.   But when the exclusion zone was violated, in that case is it

15     significant who violated it and who responded; who was the one who acted

16     and who reacted?  Does that have any significance in this matter?

17        A.   Both parties, if they violated the total exclusion zone, would be

18     held accountable, and we would protest against both parties if they

19     violated that agreement.

20        Q.   Well, let's stay with this case.  General, did the Serbs violate

21     this agreement here or, pursuant to the agreement, did they have the

22     right to take back their own weapons and defend themselves?  Did that

23     not -- was that not stated in the agreement, that they had the right to

24     take back their weapons and defend themselves in the event of a violation

25     of the agreement?

Page 8107

 1        A.   To answer your question, I would have to re-read the agreement,

 2     which -- I'm not going to put 10-plus years back in the memory here.  I'd

 3     have to re-read it to answer your question specifically.

 4        Q.   Well, you should take my word for it.  The Prosecution and the

 5     Trial Chamber have seen it.  But, in any case, can we look at the

 6     following page.

 7             Until we call up the document:  You will see that we did have the

 8     right to do that, and it seems that somebody in UNPROFOR forgot about

 9     that right of ours.

10             This is how our command characterised this action or, actually,

11     the reasons for the attack started by the Muslim Army:  They had two

12     objectives; to block the road, and the second reason was to give

13     President Izetbegovic a significant argument at the time when he's

14     negotiating in the United States, the lifting of the embargo, pushing the

15     Serbs to make a fault by shooting on the city.  The Bosnians also fired

16     diversion shots in the south-eastern outskirts of the city in BP 93-58

17     Sector with the possible objective of simulating an attack, and so on and

18     so forth, along the road to Pale.

19             Do you recall that warning from the Main Staff to the corps

20     commands that this would occur, and did this occur?

21             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction:  It would be "how

22     your command characterised this action."

23             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

24             THE WITNESS:  This is a document from the Sarajevo Command, so

25     this would have been our position and our assessment of the objectives of

Page 8108

 1     this action on this day.  I will agree with what has been written here.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 3             Can we see the previous page again.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   General, would you say that this was a proportionate response by

 6     the Serbs?  Can you please look at this and tell me whether it was a

 7     restraint and a proportionate response by the Serbs?

 8        A.   From my assessment, that would be a fairly proportionate response

 9     from 1810 to 1840.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

11             Can we have this document admitted into evidence, please?

12             JUDGE KWON:  That will be Exhibit D774.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

14             Can we now look briefly at D717.  It's an agreement on the weapon

15     collection points.  It's already in evidence, but we need to refresh the

16     general's memory of the document, itself.  So it's D717.

17             I apologise to the OTP for this document not being on our list,

18     but since it's already in evidence, I think it's all right.

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Now, do you recognise this first page?  Although you were absent

21     at the time when the agreement was concluded, but can you confirm this is

22     the first page of the agreement?

23             Actually, the agreement, itself, is an annex which is on page 4.

24     Therefore, can we have page 4 now, please.

25             It's entitled "Protocol of Understanding Between the

Page 8109

 1     Civilian/Military Representatives of the Republic of Srpska and

 2     UNPROFOR."

 3             Can we please look at item 1, which reads:

 4             "In the event that UNPROFOR withdraws for any reason ...,"

 5     et cetera - everybody can read it - and the last sentence says:

 6             "In the event of a Muslim attack on Serbs which UNPROFOR is not

 7     able either to prevent or stop immediately, the VRS Army reserves the

 8     right to implement adequate measures of self-defence."

 9             Do you agree that an hour of restraint and the suffering of the

10     consequences was enough grounds for us to implement Article 1, or item 1,

11     from this agreement?

12        A.   I guess the issue I have is in the beginning it says:

13             "In the event that UNPROFOR withdraws for any reason from

14     mutually agreed sites ..."

15             I'm not sure how -- I would need to get some interpretation how

16     that relates to the bottom, where:

17             "... BSA reserves the right to implement adequate measures of

18     self-defence."

19             So in that paragraph, to answer your question, UNPROFOR, in the

20     case of the 18th of September, didn't withdraw.  It was a Muslim attack.

21     So I think UNPROFOR's position at the time would have been that because

22     UNPROFOR didn't interfere with this attack and that it didn't withdraw,

23     it would probably have some issue with -- about pulling weapons out of

24     the weapon collecting points.  But that's just my interpretation of that

25     first paragraph.

Page 8110

 1        Q.   Thank you.  We both agree that UNPROFOR did not either prevent or

 2     stop the attack, nor did they warn or threaten the Muslim side by NATO

 3     bombing; is that correct?  Please have an understanding for my desire to

 4     get a yes-or-no answer from you, because I would like to finalise this as

 5     soon as possible.

 6        A.   UNPROFOR did try to warn and stop the Muslim attack, after they

 7     started it.  I can't give you a yes-or-no answer.  It's just, you know,

 8     the document I read had us protesting the Muslims for the attack and

 9     asking the Serbs to withhold their fire.

10             JUDGE KWON:  I think the general gave his answer as far as he

11     could, so you can move on.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

13             The position of the Defence is that UNPROFOR issued a warning

14     only after the Serb response, but before that they did nothing to prevent

15     or stop the attack.  Had we not defended ourselves, there would not have

16     been any termination of the attack.  But let's move on.

17             Can I have now 1D02 --

18             JUDGE KWON:  Was that a question, whether -- you can answer the

19     first part of his comment.

20             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   The attack was neither prevented nor stopped by the UNPROFOR.

22     You may have given or issued a protest, but you did nothing to prevent

23     it?

24        A.   We did nothing to prevent it, but we tried to stop it after it

25     commenced.

Page 8111

 1        Q.   Thank you.  But you failed to stop it until the Serbs responded;

 2     is that correct?

 3        A.   We did not stop the attack.  The Serbs fired back in response to

 4     the Muslims.  Our engagement was verbal.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 6             Can we now have document 1D02553.  Let's just look at it briefly

 7     in order to see what the Command of the Sarajevo Romanija Corps is

 8     writing in its report.  It's dated the 19th.  The Sarajevo Romanija Corps

 9     is informing the Main Staff about an attack which took place at 1730,

10     saying that the Muslim forces commenced an attack from Sarajevo at the

11     VRS positions at Mrkovici, Faletici, et cetera.  They are using 82- and

12     120-millimetre mortars, and the attack lasted until 2030 hours.  We

13     had -- we had some dead soldiers and wounded soldiers.

14             The attack from Sarajevo was aimed --

15             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the accused please read slowly and

16     indicate which paragraph he is reading.  Thank you.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Slow down, please.  The interpreters couldn't

18     interpret what you said from:

19             "We had some dead soldiers and wounded soldiers."

20             But you can put your question.  You don't have to read out all

21     these details.  You can summarise and then put your question to the

22     witness.

23             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Sir, the Sarajevo Romanija Corps is citing exactly the same

25     reasons here, stating that the objective of this attack is to provoke a

Page 8112

 1     response from us and then to lay blame on us.  And then later on it says

 2     that General Rose had accused the Muslim side that they were the first

 3     who caused conflict in Sarajevo, and he threatened both parties and

 4     requested them to immediately suspend the conflict, and scheduled a

 5     meeting with representatives of the warring parties.

 6             So we see here that the purpose and the aim of this attack is

 7     exactly the same.  Would you agree with that?

 8        A.   I would -- I would agree with that.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

10             Can we tender this document into evidence?

11             JUDGE KWON:  We'll mark it for identification, pending

12     translation.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  As MFI D775, Your Honours.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

15             Can we now have 1D02554.

16             This is dated the 21st of September, 1994, i.e., one day before

17     the NATO operation.  I'm going to read only the first sentence under the

18     heading "Enemy."  The Command of the Sarajevo Romanija Corps is writing

19     this to the Main Staff of the VRS.  It says:

20             "Any agreements or warning from General Rose are futile when it

21     comes to the Muslim forces.  Fire is being opened from the exclusion zone

22     by using artillery pieces exceeding the calibre of 12.7, targeting our

23     positions and villages also within the exclusion zone."

24             Can we now look at the next page, please.

25             Item 8, "Conclusions and anticipation or prediction."

Page 8113

 1             "The enemy is not giving up on provocations and attacks on all

 2     defence lines within the area of responsibility of the Sarajevo

 3     Romanija Corps.  In spite of the warning issued by General Rose, today,

 4     from the urban part of Sarajevo under Muslim control and from the

 5     exclusion zone, fire was opened from mortars and PATs at Mrkovici.  In

 6     the forthcoming day, the Muslims will continue to use military,

 7     political, and psychological and propaganda means in order to exert

 8     pressure on the Serbian forces in order to provoke extensive conflicts

 9     that would be conducive to lifting the blockade of Sarajevo."

10             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   So, General, do you agree that this is proof that the Muslims

12     were firing from the exclusion zone at our positions and our villages

13     within the exclusion zone?

14        A.   Muslims were firing from the exclusion zone, and that activity

15     was protested by Rose and by my boss against the Muslim authorities.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

17             Can we admit this document into evidence?

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Were they bombed by NATO for what they did?

20        A.   No, they weren't, because there were no targets to bomb.  But

21     they were protested by NATO -- not by NATO, but by the UN for their

22     actions.

23             JUDGE KWON:  We'll mark it for identification.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  As MFI D776, Your Honours.

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

Page 8114

 1        Q.   If they were not bombed, was that because UNPROFOR did not send

 2     such a request, or was it that they did request it but NATO refused to

 3     comply?

 4        A.   The UN never made a request to NATO to bomb the Muslims while I

 5     was there.

 6        Q.   Thank you, General.  Were the Serbs bombed on the 22nd of

 7     September?

 8        A.   I do recall.  I believe that they were bombed around that time.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Do you agree that, according to this agreement and

10     the protocol on weapons collection, we were fully entitled, in the

11     aftermath of an attack that could not be prevented or stopped, to

12     retrieve our weapons and defend ourselves?

13        A.   The short answer is:  No, I do not agree with that, in accordance

14     with the agreement that I read.

15        Q.   In your view, what were we entitled to?

16        A.   You were entitled to defend yourselves and use the weapons

17     systems that you had.  But the weapons in the weapon collecting points

18     were there to control what was in the exclusion zone and outside, in

19     accordance with the agreement, and I think you had other options to

20     address this issue, other than what was -- what was taken on the ground.

21             You asked for my opinion, and I've given it to you.  And I think

22     there was enough resources on the Serbian side to adequately defend

23     themselves against a very small attack in a very small frontage there.

24        Q.   Well, you see, General, they attacked on many lines, and they

25     were using the artillery with a calibre larger than 12.7 millimetres.  Do

Page 8115

 1     you think we could really counter the attack by mortars, 82 and 120

 2     millimetres, PATs, and other weapons?  So -- with the weapons that we had

 3     at our disposal?  So is the agreement still in force if one of the

 4     parties violates it?

 5             I'm afraid the translation was not good.

 6             Were we able to defend ourselves with infantry weapons from the

 7     attacks from artillery with the calibre exceeding 12.7 millimetres, which

 8     were banned, actually?  And is an agreement still alive if one of the

 9     parties violates it?  Is then the other party obliged to still adhere to

10     this agreement?

11        A.   To answer your first question, Were you able to defend

12     yourselves, I think, you know, based on my experience, there was enough

13     weapons systems and people around the area, not the weapons that were in

14     weapon collecting points, that you had sufficient resources to defend

15     yourselves on that -- in that attack.

16             As to the question, Is the agreement still alive after one party

17     violates it, I would say, yes, and it behooves the parties to go back and

18     to negotiate and to reinforce the agreement, as we had done repeatedly

19     with sniping -- anti-sniping agreements, to keep a lid on this situation

20     for the benefit of the innocent people in the whole region, both Muslim

21     and Serbs.

22        Q.   General, was it possible for us to have weapons in excess of 12.7

23     millimetres in order to defend ourselves?  I can tell you that we

24     couldn't, because you would have bombed them, as you did on the 22nd of

25     September with the tank.  This is explicitly stated in the protocol, but

Page 8116

 1     then why were we bombed on the 22nd of September, and why did this

 2     disrupt our relations with you?  Were we an outlawed party and fair game

 3     to be shot at, whereas the other side was free to do as they pleased?

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic -- yes.

 5             JUDGE MORRISON:  Dr. Karadzic, this is another example of a

 6     compound question.  Which one do you want the general to attempt to

 7     answer, and in which order?  One question at a time is more than enough.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  And speaking for myself, Mr. Karadzic, I don't see

 9     any relevance.  The trial is not why NATO bombed, so I think you

10     exhausted the topic sufficiently.

11             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well, if that's the position

12     of the Bench.  I just wanted the general to help us understand why we

13     were bombed and what our position was, and the issue of our relations

14     with the United Nations, because everything depended on the involvement

15     and the interference of the UN in this conflict.

16             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

17        Q.   Would you agree with me, General?

18             Count 11 in the indictment, the entire count deals with our

19     conduct after massive attacks on our positions.  The crisis between your

20     side and our side started long before that, and the crisis was

21     exacerbated by the interference of UNPROFOR and NATO bombardment.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Just for your information, General, Count 11 refers

23     to taking hostages of UN soldiers.

24             THE WITNESS:  Could I just have the question repeated, which one

25     they want me to answer?

Page 8117

 1             JUDGE MORRISON:  Well, General, I have great sympathy with you.

 2     Dr. Karadzic is doing it again.

 3             If you want a specific answer, you've got to ask a specific and

 4     focused question.  Making a speech and adding questions throughout is not

 5     helpful for the witness, and it's certainly not helpful for the Bench.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I agree, and thank you for these

 7     well-intentioned suggestions, but I have a problem with the time.

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   So, General, do you agree that our relationship greatly depended

10     on the actions or impunitive actions undertaken by the other side in the

11     conflict and on NATO actions?

12        A.   Our relationship depended on the actions of all three parties,

13     being the Muslims, the Serbs, and the UN, working together.  NATO was a

14     consequence based on a request from the UN, but the UN was the actual

15     requesting agency.  So I would agree that our relationship depended on

16     the actions of all parties.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

18             Can we now have document 65 ter 09691.

19             JUDGE KWON:  In the meantime, Mr. Karadzic and Mr. Tieger, having

20     followed the lines of questioning, in particular regarding the combat or

21     attack in the middle of September, the Chamber is of the view that we

22     have sufficient basis now to admit 1D2623, which is one of the Main Staff

23     documents dated 16th of September, in terms of contextualisation.  So

24     we'll mark it for identification, pending translation.

25             THE REGISTRAR:  As MFI D777, Your Honours.

Page 8118

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 2        Q.   Can you please now look at this regular report of the UN, dated

 3     the 17th November 1994.  Do you recognise this regular out-going fax sent

 4     by UNPROFOR?

 5        A.   I recognise the cover sheet.  I would like to see the details,

 6     yeah.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we look at the next page,

 8     please.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Do you agree that UNPROFOR here reports about a series of

11     incidents that took place on the 16th and 17th of November?  Between 2300

12     and 2330 on the 16th of November, the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina

13     fired four rounds from the area bounded by the Presidency, the residency,

14     and Kosevo Hospital.  The round impacted in the area of Rajlovac and

15     Slavino Brdo.

16             Do you agree that Rajlovac and Slavino Brdo are Serb-held

17     territories or, rather, Serb settlements in the town?

18        A.   I acknowledge the report, and the areas that you mentioned were

19     Serb controlled.

20        Q.   Thank you.  Then on the 17th, from early dawn, i.e., from 7.15

21     until 8.00, you can see that artillery rounds, 105 millimetres, were

22     fired by the BH Army.  Three impacted inside the compound of the

23     electrical transformer station, nine rounds landed in a civilian area.

24     Two civilians were injured, one seriously.  The firing point was in

25     Goviniste.

Page 8119

 1             Do you agree that this was again the Serbian area being targeted

 2     and that water supply for the entire city of Sarajevo depended on this

 3     electrical transformer station?

 4        A.   I agree that the rounds were fired from the Muslim side into a

 5     Serbian area.  I'm not -- I can't remember if that transformer controlled

 6     water.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  In paragraph 3, the Army of Republika Srpska, the

 8     Bosnian Serbs, replied with 120 mortar from the weapon collection point

 9     at Ilidza.  Six rounds landed in Kovacici, near the HQ of the 4th

10     Brigade.  Do you remember that there was the 4th Brigade in Hrasnica

11     under the Command of Fikret Revenjak [phoen], and that this reference to

12     Kovacici actually refers to the HQ of that brigade?

13        A.   I remember the brigade and the commander.  I just can't remember

14     the exact location.

15        Q.   Thank you.  And paragraph 4:

16             "At 800 hours, the Serbian side replied at Ilidza.  Three rounds

17     landed in Hrasnica, near the rear of the HQ of the 4th Brigade."

18             Do you agree that the UNPROFOR here identified that target?

19        A.   Yes, UNPROFOR identified the target.

20        Q.   Thank you.  Paragraph 5 states that the building of the

21     Presidency was attacked from a Maljutka, and two 82-millimetre rounds.

22     They hit the south wall of the building, and that this was a response to

23     fire the previous night which came from the vicinity of the Presidency;

24     is that correct?

25        A.   I'm just trying to read the document and listen to you at the

Page 8120

 1     same time.

 2             I would agree that the rounds were hit -- the Presidency was hit,

 3     and probably in connection with the attack the night before.  That would

 4     be fair to say.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  And now on this page that we can see, UNPROFOR is

 6     asking for meetings to be held with Mladic, another meeting with

 7     Hajrulahovic, and that the issue of opening heavy weaponry fire from the

 8     town should be opened, which violates the exclusion zone, and then the

 9     check-point system for the collection of weapons should cease immediately

10     and there should be an agreement with more stricter rules.  And it says:

11             "Any future abuse of this system could result in military

12     action."

13             They're probably thinking of NATO here.

14             General, sir, do you agree that the Serbs reached for their

15     weapons, which is what we can see on the basis of these documents, only

16     after they were attacked, doing so a few hours after the fact?  [No

17     interpretation]

18        A.   The Serbs, to answer your question, reached for their weapons

19     after the attacks, in contravention of the weapon collecting point

20     agreement.

21        Q.   Thank you.  And the last item here says additional measures are

22     going to be requested, which have already been agreed in principle, for

23     the demilitarisation of Sarajevo.  Are you aware that the Serbian side

24     was always in favour of the demilitarisation of Sarajevo and for placing

25     Sarajevo under the administration of the United Nations?

Page 8121

 1        A.   I'm not aware of that position, but that's not to say that my

 2     boss wasn't.  I just wasn't aware of it.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 4             I would like to tender this document, please.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Exhibit D778.

 6             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 7        Q.   General, I would like to ask you to understand the need of the

 8     Defence to be more specific about the statements and positions so that we

 9     could separate those for which there is evidence from those which are

10     based on impressions.  I don't want you to understand as if I were

11     attacking the United Nations or any person within the United Nations.  I

12     would just like us to differentiate between an impression -- between

13     information from the Bosnian side and what has been established beyond

14     any doubt by the United Nations.

15             I would like you now to focus on sniper activity in Sarajevo.  Do

16     you recall that there were screens between positions of the Army of

17     Republika Srpska and the Muslim territory?

18        A.   Yes, I remember those screens or sea cans, yes.

19        Q.   Thank you.  And do you agree that these screens could protect

20     civilians and others in Muslim territory from Serb fire, but not from

21     fire from Muslim forces?

22        A.   That's correct, because they were designed to protect from the

23     Serb side.

24        Q.   Thank you.  Did you have the intention and did you put in any

25     efforts to erect any more of such barricades and to increase this safety

Page 8122

 1     measure against infantry fire?

 2        A.   We had a concerted effort to erect barricades to increase safety

 3     throughout the city, where they were needed, not just simply on

 4     Sniper Alley.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  Is it correct that the authorities in the Muslim part

 6     of Sarajevo did not agree, and that this effort to erect barricades was

 7     halted?  You can look at page 24 of your statement, if you like:

 8             [In English] "The sector tried to improve the situation as

 9     regards the barriers by putting more."

10             [No interpretation]

11             [In English] "Sometimes the city wanted it; sometimes they

12     didn't."

13        A.   I won't dispute that.  And in every case, as I recall, the safety

14     of the citizens was paramount, and we would do what we thought was right

15     to protect citizens.

16        Q.   [Interpretation] Thank you.  Do you have an explanation why the

17     town -- or the administration of the Muslim part of Sarajevo did not

18     follow you in these efforts, why they were against the erection of these

19     barriers?

20        A.   I don't have an explanation for it.

21        Q.   Is my explanation acceptable to you, that they needed to have

22     their citizens victimised in order to keep attention on themselves and

23     draw the sympathies of the international community?

24        A.   It's an explanation.  It's a pretty sad commentary, but I -- I

25     don't ever recall asking the Muslims why they didn't -- what was behind

Page 8123

 1     the fact that they didn't want certain barricades.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  Do you recall that the so-called Sniper Alley is a

 3     limited area, stretching some 200 to 300 metres from Marin Dvor to the

 4     Marsal Tito Barracks?

 5        A.   I recall the area.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  And do you agree that in your observations about

 7     General Galic and General Milosevic, you did not consider them to be

 8     unintelligent and irrational people?  You considered them to be quite

 9     intelligent people; is that correct?

10        A.   I did.

11        Q.   Thank you.  General, sir, can you tell us who benefitted,

12     politically, from the events in that Sniper Alley area from Marin Dvor to

13     the Marsal Tito Barracks?  Who benefitted, politically, from the things

14     that happened in that area?

15        A.   Probably the Muslim side.

16        Q.   Thank you.  Can we conclude, then, that two generals who are not

17     stupid or mad would not deliberately and consciously allow, never mind

18     order, something that would harm not only the other side, but would harm

19     the Serbian side quite considerably as well?

20             If you are not able to say, then I am going to withdraw the

21     question.  But you decide.

22        A.   I would acknowledge that both the corps commanders demonstrated a

23     degree of professionalism and intelligence, experience, control over

24     their forces.  And that said, they did control the actions of what

25     happened there, which included sniping, based on my assessment of how

Page 8124

 1     they were running their operations.  So I guess I'm left with a question,

 2     myself, is:  Why would somebody who demonstrated command and control

 3     would allow sniping in this area that would actually benefit the other

 4     side, politically, from a tactical military action?  I mean, they were

 5     not dumb people, but dumb things happened; that they would go after

 6     non-combatants, and, you know, the results were for the world to judge.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Is it correct you said that -- that in the criminal

 8     legal sense, investigations conducted against civilians, Bosnians,

 9     Herzegovinians, people regardless of their faith, were conducted by local

10     police forces?

11             JUDGE KWON:  I think the witness has answered the question.

12     UNPROFOR did its investigation, as well as the local police.  That's what

13     he said yesterday.

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   UNPROFOR investigated incidents against UNPROFOR, not against

16     civilians; is that correct, General?

17             MR. TIEGER:  This is an attempt to circumvent the Court's

18     reminder that this series of questions was asked and answered.  In fact,

19     the questions were posed in precisely this order, and this --

20             JUDGE KWON:  I think the witness can answer the last question of

21     the accused.

22             Could you answer that question again: UNPROFOR investigated

23     incidents against UNPROFOR?

24             THE WITNESS:  We investigated all incidents, not just against

25     UNPROFOR.

Page 8125

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   Could we have this material, the documents relating to these

 3     investigations?

 4        A.   I don't have the documents in my possession.  I know I read a

 5     couple of documents since I've been here relating to some of the

 6     incidents, but the UN would have made a report for -- we made daily

 7     reports on incidents like this, and they were submitted up the chain.  So

 8     there's a record in the UN archives somewhere of the time that we were

 9     there.

10        Q.   Thank you, thank you.  I would be repeating myself.  When I asked

11     you about the criminal investigations, you said that this was something

12     that you did not do, that this was something that was done by the local

13     police; is that right?

14        A.   That is correct; we would investigate, but if there was a crime

15     committed, that would be done by the proper authorities, and our

16     investigation would end with just ascertaining the facts and if a

17     violation had been created by one of the warring factions.

18        Q.   Thank you.  Would you agree that the forces there were quite

19     close, and that frequently, near the Vrbanja Bridge and around the

20     Jewish cemetery, the proximity of the forces resulted in frequent

21     exchanges of fire?

22        A.   I agree.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Is it time for a break,

24     Your Honour?

25             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.  If it is convenient, we'll have a break.

Page 8126

 1             But, Mr. Karadzic, you'll have about three-quarters of an hour to

 2     conclude your cross-examination after the break.

 3             We'll resume --

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellency, I hope that the

 5     Trial Chamber will review its decisions.  Really, a vast number of facts

 6     has been touched upon, and statements by this esteemed witness -- can

 7     only be clarified with this esteemed witness, not with anyone else.  So

 8     I'm just trying to clarify with him whether something is established, or

 9     its second-hand information, or it's just an impression.  I cannot verify

10     this except on the basis of his statement and with this witness, and

11     there is a number of things that need to be specified in more detail.  So

12     I hope you will not miss the opportunity to permit the Defence to be

13     quite precise about a number of issues that will not be able to be

14     specified with any other witness other than this one.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, as we made it clear before, we'll

16     assess, at the end of your cross-examination, whether you would be

17     allowed further time for your cross-examination, but it depends upon the

18     efficiency of your cross-examination as well as the remaining issues,

19     considering all the circumstances.  We'll consider it after the 45

20     minutes which is still remaining and which can be used usefully and

21     efficiently by you.

22             We'll resume at 4.00.

23                           --- Recess taken at 3.35 p.m.

24                           --- On resuming at 4.02 p.m.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

Page 8127

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 2        Q.   Do you agree that you were not in a position to check on the Serb

 3     side, regarding Sniper Alley, whether there was visibility or a line of

 4     vision between the place that the fire was suspected to be coming from

 5     and the place of the incident?

 6        A.   For the most part, we were not in a position to check because the

 7     Serbs did not give us freedom of movement, although my general did visit

 8     at least one building on the Serbian side.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  And the buildings along the front-line were

10     frequently used for attacks or for defence -- or, rather, there were

11     holes on the walls of those buildings that you were able to observe; is

12     that right?

13        A.   That is right.

14        Q.   Thank you.  Also, do you agree that this did not mean that the

15     hole indicated a sniper's nest, but that it could also have been used for

16     infantry weapons during the defence of the line or in attack?

17        A.   It could have been used for that, yes.

18        Q.   Thank you.  Do you agree that the use of silencers also made it

19     difficult to identify the source of the fire?

20        A.   That is correct.

21        Q.   Thank you.  Now I want to ask you something about the trams.

22             Who decided whether trams should run and whether it was safe

23     enough for tram traffic to proceed?  More precisely, were you asked for

24     your position on this?

25        A.   The city authorities decided when the trams would run and not

Page 8128

 1     run, and I'm not sure if we were ever asked our opinion.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 3             Can we look at page 40 in e-court.  This is your answer on this

 4     topic from your amalgamated statement.  Your answer begins with the

 5     words:  "I don't ever recall ..."

 6             [In English] "I don't ever recall them coming to us, asking us

 7     for advice on running the tram."

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Do you agree that this answer of yours implies the position that

10     you were constantly being asked to do something and that, before that,

11     they complained about increased firing on the trams?

12        A.   I would agree that, yeah, sometimes they would ask us to do

13     something when the sniping was increasing, but, by the same token, we

14     were also putting up passive barriers.  But I would not abrogate the

15     responsibilities of the local officials to do the same thing themselves.

16        Q.   Thank you.  From your answer, it can be concluded or it can be

17     made as a conclusion, which is also our finding, that firing at trams, in

18     a way, was also a way to exert pressure on the United Nations to do

19     something; is that correct?

20        A.   No.

21        Q.   Do you agree that you observed that Muratovic and others, but

22     particularly Muratovic, was trying to get something for nothing, as you

23     put it; in other words, that they were trying to take some advantage from

24     your mediation?

25        A.   I agree that Muratovic tried to get as much out of the UN as he

Page 8129

 1     could, with the engagements that we had with him.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 3             Can we now have P435.  This will help us remind ourselves of this

 4     specific topic.

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   General, do you agree that the Vrbanja Bridge from the church at

 7     Marin Dvor is about 70 or 80 metres away?

 8        A.   To the best of my recollection, that would be -- that would be

 9     correct.

10        Q.   Thank you.  And if a tram were to be hit at Marin Dvor, near the

11     church, that would be 70, 80 metres, but if it were hit near the

12     Marsal Tito Barracks, that would be around 300 metres; is that correct?

13        A.   I'll take your -- your distances, okay.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now please have page 2,

15     page 10 in English, in this document.

16             [In English] "Assessment."

17             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

18        Q.   Can I kindly ask you to focus on this paragraph, which begins

19     "Assessment," which reads:

20             "Although the number of firing incidents decreased, tension is

21     likely to remain at an elevated level following the shooting incidents by

22     uncontrolled elements at the airport and against the tram."

23             Do you agree that the United Nations established that there was

24     fire opened by uncontrolled elements?

25        A.   There was a degree of uncontrolled elements, yes.

Page 8130

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now look at the previous

 2     page in English.  Can you please scroll down a bit.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   This passage, which starts:  "A tram travelling ...," speaks

 5     about an event of 27th February 1995.  As a result, a woman, who appeared

 6     here as a witness, was wounded.

 7             Can we scroll down more to see where you established -- only I am

 8     not sure whether this the right page, but it says:

 9             "The tram service was stopped after this incident.  Both sides

10     participated in the same period in an armed conflict 300 metres away, in

11     the area of the Vrbanja Bridge (BP 912589)."

12             Yes, this is -- this is the passage in the middle of the screen.

13             So it is clearly confirmed here by your observers that they knew

14     very well that there was exchange of fire 300 metres away, in the area of

15     the Vrbanja Bridge; is that correct?

16        A.   This report clearly states what happened in this case, where the

17     assessment is that the casualty was probably as a result of the

18     engagement by the two warring factions.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

20             Can we please now have P1773.  P1773.

21             Let's first identify the document.

22             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   Do you agree that this is an UNPROFOR report, it's Sarajevo

24     Sector, which contains a proposal for a meeting to be held concerning

25     sniper activities?  Is that correct?

Page 8131

 1        A.   That's correct.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 3             Can we now have page 3 in the English version, please.

 4             "The main problem now is that there is more and more victims from

 5     lost bullets, as exchanges of fire are increasing on the confrontation

 6     line close to inhabited areas."

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   Do you agree that this was an assessment of your command, which

 9     was to serve as the basis for the forthcoming meeting?

10        A.   This was an assessment of -- produced by this report.

11        Q.   Thank you.  General, do you recall that these buildings around

12     the Sniper Alley are to the north from the River Miljacka, and that these

13     buildings were also suitable to be used for combat operations, and that

14     they were, in fact, used for those purposes, such as Unis skyscraper, the

15     government building, and other such buildings?  Do you recall knowing

16     that?

17        A.   Yes, I recall that these buildings were used for combat

18     positions.

19        Q.   Thank you.  Let us now deal in more detail with the issue of

20     aerial bombs.

21             In our conversation, you were kind enough to say that you don't

22     remember any aerial bomb landing in an inhabited or an industrial zone;

23     is that correct?

24        A.   I think I said I don't remember it landing in an industrial zone.

25        Q.   Do you remember it landing in a residential area?  And if you do,

Page 8132

 1     where, exactly?

 2        A.   I would have to go back to refer to my previous testimony.  I do

 3     recall that aerial bombs were used, and I'd have to go back to refresh

 4     where we noted where they landed.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  First of all, let me ask you this:  In your opinion,

 6     what impact an aerial bomb of 100 to 250 kilograms can have on a building

 7     made of bricks?

 8        A.   A 250-kilogram bomb landing on a concrete or brick building, it

 9     might punch a hole in it.  Might.  If it's on an apartment block, it

10     would probably do little to no damage.  If it was a house that had brick

11     and mortar, it would probably have more of an effect, but it's a pretty

12     wide question you're asking me, because buildings run the gamut.  But 250

13     kilograms against an apartment building, little to no damage.

14        Q.   What would happen if it landed on the ground?  What would the

15     consequences be?

16        A.   Landing on the ground, it would probably have a greater impact,

17     in the sense of just sending up shrapnel and fragments to the radius of

18     whatever that size bomb is, and that would be determined by whatever --

19     the size of the warhead and the type of ground that it hit.

20        Q.   Thank you.  But without a doubt, it would create a large crater.

21     250 kilograms equals --

22             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreters didn't catch the figure of TNT.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, could you repeat your last digit?

24             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   A 250-kilogram aerial bomb has about 100 kilograms of TNT.  Do

Page 8133

 1     you agree with that, and do you agree that it would create a considerably

 2     large crater?

 3        A.   That is a big bomb that would create a big hole in the ground,

 4     yes.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  Do you know and do you agree that the aerial bombs

 6     were propelled by rocket motors that had their performances and range

 7     tables, on the basis of which it was possible to establish their range

 8     and their precision of engaging targets?

 9        A.   I'm sure that the rocket motors used had some fairly detailed

10     specifics for range.  When you strap on the rocket onto another -- the

11     bomb itself, the characteristics of the rocket motors themselves will

12     have changed because of the aerodynamics, and that's something that I

13     would have to read the report on how effective -- or what's the result

14     when you strap on two different items together when you launch it.  So

15     rocket motors, by themselves, are probably pretty well defined, but when

16     you add that to a bomb, that gives you a different set of parameters.  So

17     that would be -- that would be something that I would ask more questions

18     about.

19        Q.   Do you agree if this was tested and fired, then these

20     performances can be identified and established precisely?

21        A.   If tested and fired, yes, you could determine the performance.

22     "Precisely" would be a function of the warhead, whether or not it was

23     guided or just ballistic.

24        Q.   Can I kindly ask you now -- or, rather, to remind you, and for

25     that I would need P1782.  P1782 refers to Hrasnica, which is something

Page 8134

 1     that you would surely recall.  This is a report of the Sarajevo

 2     Romanija Corps relating to attacks on Hrasnica.  This is already in

 3     evidence.

 4             And one can see in passage 1 that the Muslims were launching

 5     attacks from Hrasnica against Famos factory, that two women and a

 6     civilian were wounded.  And further on, we see that there were other

 7     casualties.

 8             And can we now look at the next page.

 9             Can I ask you to look at item 2, entitled "Our Forces."

10             Please scroll up.

11             And it says here that:

12             "Our forces responded to enemy fire from infantry weapons."

13             And then it says:

14             "... one 250-kilogram aerial bomb was launched at the centre of

15     Hrasnica."

16             Is this consistent with what you commented on with respect to

17     this Prosecution exhibit?

18        A.   Yes, I -- I recall stating that I saw this document, and it looks

19     like a 250-pound -- kilogram aerial bomb was launched at the centre of an

20     urban centre called Hrasnica.

21        Q.   Thank you.  Do you remember that this had been prepared two or

22     three days before to be engaged in targeting Hrasnica, and that this was

23     mentioned in another document?

24             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Tieger.

25             MR. TIEGER:  There's a reference to a particular document.

Page 8135

 1     I think it would be more appropriate to show that.  And I say that

 2     because I'm not -- based on the evidence we've heard thus far, I'm not

 3     sure what the accused is referring to.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  I think he can put the question.  And if the general

 5     cannot confirm it, he can show the document then.

 6             THE WITNESS:  I think, if I understand it, it's the 4th Brigade

 7     that Fikret was commanding, was in Hrasnica.  Is that what you're

 8     alluding to, the other document you showed me?

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   This report relates to the fire, but two days -- or one day

11     before that, General Milosevic ordered this launching.  I can call up

12     this document, it's in evidence, but let me ask you this:  Did that go --

13     did that go without saying that this bomb was actually to be launched at

14     a civilian area?

15        A.   Well, according to the document that's in front of me right now,

16     it seems to indicate that an aerial bomb was launched at the center of a

17     town called Hrasnica, which would suggest to me it's a civilian town.  It

18     said "launch," I think earlier: "... launch at the center -- launch at

19     the center of Hrasnica."

20             And the Muslims claimed that the Luna rocket landed.  So I'm just

21     taking from what it says here, that he's reporting he launched it and it

22     landed in the middle of a town.

23        Q.   Thank you.  That is why we need 1D2622.

24             Before this document appears, let me ask you this:  Do you agree

25     there was a certain kind of understanding or agreement between commanders

Page 8136

 1     that if a superior commander issues certain orders to his subordinate

 2     commander, that they both understand and know very well which targets

 3     they're talking about?

 4        A.   Not necessarily, no, no.  If a commander issues an order to a

 5     subordinate to engage a target, the definition of that target should be

 6     clearly spelled out for the subordinate.

 7        Q.   But if they had prior agreement and were -- the subordinate

 8     commands were briefed about the targets, does the full name of the target

 9     have to be repeated over and over again?

10        A.   The short answer is, yes, it's a common professional

11     understanding and procedural issue that when you issue orders to engage a

12     target, you are specific in the target you want to engage, i.e., the

13     white building at grid 123456 or latitude and longitude.  You specify

14     exactly where that target is that you want to engage.  Using generic

15     names, in anything that I've ever done in 30 years, is not detailed

16     enough for subordinates to execute on.  In fact, we actually put target

17     numbers on commonly repeated targets that are used over and over again.

18     We will actually give them a specific code to expedite the description or

19     the talking about.  We'll give it a number.

20        Q.   Thank you.  Can you please look at this.  The

21     4th Motorised Brigade, this is a report by the Sarajevo Romanija Corps,

22     or, rather, an order for further actions, and it says:

23             "In front of our forces from the 82nd Division ..."

24             That is, before the 1st Corps was reorganised and divided into

25     three divisions.

Page 8137

 1             Look at the one-but-last bullet point.  It says:

 2             "The 4th Motorised Brigade, 4.500 strong."

 3             And the last sentence says:

 4             "The disposition of the said brigade is as follows:"

 5             Can I please have the next page.  Next page, please:

 6             "The 4th Motorised Brigade, with its command post at the post

 7     office in Hrasnica, made up of four motorised battalions and military

 8     police companies, IDC Black Panthers, IDC Fikro's specials," and they are

 9     defending a certain area.

10             Then:

11             "The 4th Motorised Battalion has mortars, 120 millimetres in

12     Vukovi, 105 millimetres in Radeljevaca, 82 millimetres in Vrhovi Sector,

13     and again 82 millimetres in Bijela Kosa Sector."

14             So this is the deployment within Hrasnica, itself.  And the last

15     sentence says that they are deployed in some other areas as well.

16             So would you agree that all of this, particularly the post

17     office, were the places where their forces were deployed?

18        A.   From this document, it would appear that the brigade headquarters

19     was in the post office.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

21             Can we please have this document admitted into evidence?

22             JUDGE KWON:  Shall we mark it for identification, Mr. Tieger?

23     Yes, we'll do so.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  As MFI D779, Your Honours.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

Page 8138

 1             Can we now have 1D2625, please.

 2             Just briefly, let us identify this document, which says that the

 3     municipality of Hrasnica -- or, rather, Ilidza, and the post office are

 4     on Halid-bega Hrasnice Street number 8.

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Is that correct?

 7        A.   I'll take the accuracy of the document.  If that's where it says

 8     the address is, I'll accept that.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

10             Can we now have document 2626, which will show us where exactly

11     this Halid-bega Hrasnice Street is located.  1D2626.

12             Can you please enlarge it.

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   Do you agree that this is the map of the Hrasnica neighbourhood

15     and that Halid-bega Hrasnica Street is in the very center of Hrasnica?

16        A.   I see that.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Do we need to tender these two

18     documents into evidence?

19             JUDGE KWON:  Do we need translation?  Can I see the previous

20     document again, 1D2625.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] These are postal units or post

22     offices in Hrasnica where the command HQ was, was on Halid-bega Hrasnica

23     Street, and then the map shows the location of the street.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Tieger, would you need a translation of this

25     document or this will do as it is?

Page 8139

 1             MR. TIEGER:  Well, it's not the translation that immediately

 2     comes to mind as an issue, Your Honour, but several steps that I'm

 3     uncertain of here, including the relationship, temporally, between

 4     whatever this document indicates and where the post office was at the

 5     time.  I -- I mean, first of all, a translation would probably make it

 6     easier down the road, but of greater concern is:  What's the nature of

 7     this document, the source of this document in particular, and what's its

 8     relationship temporally between the period we're talking about and the

 9     period of time referred to in this document?  And --

10             JUDGE KWON:  I take it the Defence will admit that this is a very

11     contemporaneous or a recent document.  And then, as such, well, its

12     probative value will depend upon the other corroborating evidence.  So,

13     as such, there would be no problem in not admitting that?

14             MR. TIEGER:  Again, Your Honour, it's been referred to in court,

15     we know what it says now, but it's clear that whatever significance can

16     be attributed to it, it's going to -- we're going to have to know

17     whatever -- whether the post office remained in the same place --

18             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, that's a separate matter.

19             MR. TIEGER:  Right.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, we'll admit it, both of them.  The first one

21     will be marked for identification, then.

22             THE REGISTRAR:  Yes, Your Honour.  That will be MFI D780, and the

23     map will be Exhibit D781.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25             Can we now look at 1D2621, please, so that we can have a more

Page 8140

 1     complete overview of what is in Hrasnica.  This is an archival list of

 2     the Ministry of Defence of Republika Srpska.  It has its own ERN number

 3     at the top.

 4             Can we now look at the next page, please.

 5             The title is "Data on the Enemy in the Hrasnica Sector."

 6             And then it says:

 7             "4th Motorised Brigade (Vitez)."

 8             And then there is the sector of responsibility and the formation,

 9     the command, motorised battalion, logistics battalion, military police

10     company, Special Unit Fikro, Special Unit Crni Labudovi, Black Swans, POV

11     Britve, MAD Igman, and a signals unit.

12             Under "Command," it says "Prevljak, Fikret," whom you met, and

13     then his other associates:

14             "The Command of the 4th Brigade is located in the premises of the

15     new post office in Hrasnica and most probably will be relocated to

16     Sokolovic Kolonija.  The brigade numbers 4.500 soldiers."

17             First of all, I wanted to help the general, to remind him what

18     was the armed force located in Hrasnica, and ask him whether they knew of

19     the existence of this brigade and its deployment or disposition in

20     Hrasnica.

21             THE WITNESS:  I knew of the brigade.  The actual deployment of

22     the brigade would have been known by the French Battalion in the area.

23     That was not the level of detail that I was conversant in.

24             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25        Q.   I just wanted to remind you, I mean, 4.500 soldiers, 4th

Page 8141

 1     Motorised Battalion, 2nd Motorised Battalion -- can we look at the next

 2     page, please.

 3             3rd Battalion, 4th Battalion.  All of them were in different

 4     locations.  Logistics battalion, military police company, Special Unit

 5     Fikro, and we can see all the things that they had:  PATS, PAMs, mortars.

 6             Can we please look at the next page.

 7             Six Special Unit Black Panthers, and then Britve, then Igman,

 8     which also has a 152-millimetre Howitzer, five pieces, and 105

 9     millimetres, five of them.  And it also has a 130-millimetre cannon.

10     It's deployed as support for the 4th Brigade, 5th Motorised Brigade, and

11     the 102nd.  So it has five 102-millimetre mortar -- 152-millimetre mortar

12     and five 105-millimetre mortars.

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   So do you agree that Hrasnica was literally teeming from the

15     armed force of this brigade?

16        A.   What I see is a list of units.  I wouldn't expect any commander

17     to put them so much together that they would create a target of -- a

18     target-rich environment.  I would have had those forces spread out

19     throughout the entire area.  And I can't tell from this document, you

20     know, where -- exactly where they were located.  It just tells me what

21     was -- what was in the 4th Brigade, and some details, but I would have to

22     see the translation to see what exactly this means.

23        Q.   With all due respect, General, sir, you would not need to compare

24     yourself with Fikret, of whom you said in one of your statements that he

25     was a scoundrel; isn't that right?

Page 8142

 1        A.   I'd have to see what I said about him.

 2        Q.   Take my word for it.  You said that he was very bad and

 3     disobedient.

 4             Anyway, can we look at the next page.

 5             In this document it is said what they had.  And here is a table

 6     showing us what things looked like.  The 4th Motorised Brigade had 4.500

 7     soldiers, three tanks, five armoured personnel carriers, one Vidra, eight

 8     120-millimetre mortars, 19 82-millimetre mortars --

 9             JUDGE KWON:  You're simply wasting your time.  If the general

10     cannot confirm any of this, you're just simply wasting your time.  What's

11     the point of reading this document in such a detailed manner?  Put your

12     question to the witness.

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   General, sir, do you recall, in your dealings with Fikret, that

15     you called him some kind of a renegade, and you said that he wasn't

16     obedient enough to Karavelic, that he was a commander in Hrasnica; is

17     that correct?

18        A.   I recall that Fikret was difficult for Karavelic and that he

19     seemed to report to a higher authority than the corps commander.

20        Q.   Thank you.  You're not denying.  You don't have any elements to

21     be able to deny that this is the firing power of the 4th Motorised

22     Brigade that was under the command of that man; is that correct?

23        A.   It could have been, but they did not share their -- this document

24     or their combat power with us.  They kept it hidden from us.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

Page 8143

 1             Can we tender this document, please?

 2             JUDGE KWON:  I have to ask Mr. Tieger again.

 3             MR. TIEGER:  I was looking earlier for any references to the date

 4     of this document, the nature of this document, and I didn't hear any, so

 5     I'm at a loss at this point to advise the Court that I have no issues

 6     concerning its authenticity and reliability and that sort of -- in that

 7     sense.  And, of course, the witness was not in a position to offer much

 8     more about the document, other than it contained a reference to someone

 9     he had referred to earlier.

10             JUDGE KWON:  And he confirmed the existence of 4th

11     Motorised Brigade in that area.

12             MR. TIEGER:  Right, which I think had been done previously.

13                           [Trial Chamber confers]

14             JUDGE KWON:  Do you like to add, Mr. Karadzic?

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just that this document was

16     obviously received by the OTP investigators from the archives of the

17     Ministry of Republika Srpska, that it was obtained later, and that it

18     speaks about events about which the general is familiar.  It is important

19     to us to see whether Hrasnica was a civilian zone or whether there were

20     preconditions there for military targets.

21             JUDGE KWON:  You know well by now what matters when admitting

22     certain documents.  It's not an issue whether it is received by the

23     Prosecution or not.

24             As you indicate, this is a document originating from the Ministry

25     of Defence of Republika Srpska.  But Mr. Tieger raised the issue, when

Page 8144

 1     this was produced and by whom, and on what basis, but you didn't give an

 2     indication as to those questions.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think that this is stated in the

 4     document.  We're going to look at it.  This is 1994/1995.  That is the

 5     year.  The name of the command to whom the archival material belongs,

 6     Sarajevo Romanija Corps, keep permanently.  This relates to 1994/1995.

 7     The situation in this sector of the area of responsibility of the

 8     Sarajevo Romanija Corps, which bordered on Hrasnica, and its armed forces

 9     there.

10             JUDGE KWON:  So this is probably a report covering the period

11     from 1994/1995.  But you still are not aware of when this document was

12     produced.

13             MR. ROBINSON:  Excuse me, Mr. President.

14             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Robinson.

15             MR. ROBINSON:  Given that this has an ERN number and it was

16     produced to the Prosecution, how do you expect us to know that?  I think

17     it's for the Prosecutor to tell us, from their own records, when that

18     document was produced to them.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Tieger.

20             MR. TIEGER:  And let's be realistic about this.

21             I'm presented in court with -- we get, if we're lucky, these

22     documents immediately before cross-examination commences.  Now I have a

23     document in B/C/S.  I think I've reasonably asked for sufficient

24     information to respond to the Court's inquiry about admissibility.

25             Now, we do have some additional information provided by the

Page 8145

 1     accused, which seems to me could have been provided at the time it was

 2     tendered, as we were going through it.  It's not clear to me, on the

 3     basis of the document, what 1994 through 1995 represents.  I can't tell,

 4     reading it, if it's supposed to be a contemporaneous account of forces,

 5     if it's a retrospective -- contemporaneous retrospective, or if it's a

 6     retrospective created far later.  I think all of that does impact on the

 7     weight to be given this document.

 8             I also think the Defence is aware that the Prosecution has not

 9     attempted at all, during the course of this case, to impose any

10     formalistic barriers to the admissibility of documents, but just

11     reasonable ones.  And I think the questions I've posed in this context

12     have been quite reasonable.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I assist?

14             On the first page, it says it comes from 1994/1995, so it was

15     created or stems from 1994/1995 and was archived later by someone.  It

16     says here "originates from 1994/1995," so the document was created in

17     1994/1995, if that is of any help.

18             There is a large set of documents, but for this witness, for this

19     topic, we picked this situation in Hrasnica.

20                           [Trial Chamber confers]

21             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Tieger.

22             MR. TIEGER:  I -- sorry to interrupt the Court's deliberations --

23             JUDGE KWON:  No problem.

24             MR. TIEGER:  -- but since I think it began with an inquiry to me,

25     and I posed certain questions in an effort to respond:  While I have --

Page 8146

 1     well, I obviously have questions about the overall utility of this

 2     document in the context the broad issue in this case, and I have some

 3     questions about the weight to be given the document, in light of some of

 4     my earlier remarks.  I don't have the same issues that I raised before

 5     some of the additional information was provided that I did earlier, so

 6     I'm -- I would not object to the admission of this document, in light of

 7     the additional information.  It has been to be MFI'd, of course, and I

 8     again underscore my concerns about the weight to be given the document,

 9     but in trying to be consistent with our previous -- sorry, Your Honour.

10             JUDGE KWON:  I'm sorry to interrupt you, but which is what the

11     additional -- what is the additional information you've got in relation

12     to this document?

13             MR. TIEGER:  When I first stood, we hadn't -- we hadn't heard

14     anything about the timing of the document, what it purported, when it

15     purported to have been collected, when it purported to have been

16     assembled and made available.  Now, I think it's been -- if I understood

17     the responses correctly, all of which are dependent upon interpretations

18     which are not available to me, it seemed to be a roughly contemporaneous

19     account of a previous period.  Now, that previous period, it seems to me,

20     undercuts the weight to be given the document.  But if the accused's

21     position is that he wants the Court to consider it with respect to

22     whatever weight the Court might accord it, in light of that -- in light

23     of the fact that it seems to focus largely on whatever the 1994 through

24     1995 period is and whenever the transition of that period occurs, however

25     early in the year 1995, then I accept that -- if I understood, again, the

Page 8147

 1     answers of the accused, that it's a document that was -- that

 2     demonstrates on -- or indicates on its face it was roughly

 3     contemporaneously prepared by the Sarajevo Romanija Corps.  Now, if

 4     that's not the case, and it may not be because I've been receiving this

 5     on the fly through the explanations, our position might be different.

 6                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If I may -- before you make your

 8     decision, if I may explain.

 9             The previous document, MFI D779, precisely repeats the number of

10     soldiers, 4.500, as well as the deployment of the force.  This document

11     was drafted more or less at the same time and is quite consistent with

12     this document which was archived later, but its origin is in 1994, just

13     like Mr. Tieger said.

14             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, as regards the MFI'd 779, we can

15     understand in what context the document was produced and what it refers

16     to.  But in relation to this document, we are not satisfied on what basis

17     this document was produced, and we need to know that in order to properly

18     assess the weight and probative value of this document.

19             The part which the witness has confirmed has already been in

20     evidence, so we don't need to -- we don't feel the need to admit this.

21     And you'll have another opportunity to tender this.  So we'll not admit

22     this.

23             Mr. Karadzic, I noted that your time's up, so we need to discuss

24     whether or not to extend your time to cross-examine the general.

25             So could you briefly tell us -- tell the Chamber, without going

Page 8148

 1     into detail or going into merit, what areas you have to still cover and

 2     how much time you need to conclude your cross-examination.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 4             Well, I actually need just one more document in relation to this

 5     order, and then all that remains is to cover the question of the

 6     demilitarised zone in Igman, which the general touched upon, and then to

 7     specify, in the general's statements and also in the transcript, what he

 8     meant.  These are a number of things that the Defence needs to cover in

 9     more detail, because if they were left as they are, they could be a

10     source of major danger for the Defence.

11             Of course, we are counting on our position being made easier if

12     the documents we wish to submit through the Bar Table are accepted.

13             So we would like to use a substantial part of the next session to

14     clarify these matters, and that would bring us, then, to the end for

15     today.

16             MR. TIEGER:  I'm sorry, Your Honour.  If I may be permitted one

17     hopefully quick observation, and it's simply this:

18             This is a pattern that I think we've seen repeatedly, where the

19     usefulness of much of the time that preceded the request for additional

20     information -- for additional time that comes at the end, plus a

21     specification of the uses to which that time would be put, is -- where

22     there's a disparity between -- or at least an arguable disparity between

23     the two.

24             Now, in this case, it's difficult to tell from the vague

25     submissions the accused made about what he wants to further explore, how

Page 8149

 1     valuable that might be.  What I do know is if the accused was requesting

 2     time to explore some of the areas that he used his valuable time for

 3     earlier, I don't think the Court would be receptive to that, and I'm

 4     including such matters as the lengthy inquiries, and the

 5     black-marketeering, and other matters that occurred in the end, plus a

 6     fairly extensive commentary, plus the over-elaboration of certain areas

 7     that could be explored through cross-examination far more quickly.

 8             Now, I leave it to the Court as to what it wants to do, but I

 9     just fear that we're at risk of developing an approach where the accused

10     feels reasonably free to use his time as he wishes in the early phases

11     because he has some level of confidence that if he leaves until the end

12     topics he considers important, the Court will feel compelled to expand

13     his time, even though he hasn't heeded the admonition to use his time

14     more usefully.

15                           [Trial Chamber confers]

16             JUDGE KWON:  The Chamber agrees with the observation by

17     Mr. Tieger.  As I indicated to you, you should have prioritised your

18     questions.  You spent much of your time on the issues which have been, in

19     the view of the Chamber, only of limited value.

20             The Chamber will give you half an hour to conclude the

21     cross-examination of General Fraser.  It's up to you, how you use the

22     remaining time.  We'll have a break after that.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I just say one word?

24             From the point of view of the Defence, even the smallest

25     question, which can serve as the basis for a conviction, is a major

Page 8150

 1     question.  That is why we don't know which questions are not important.

 2     We've seen, from the practice of this Tribunal, that even a tiny question

 3     can serve as a ground for conviction -- for a conviction.

 4             Thank you for the additional time granted.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Please carry on.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 7             Can we look at 65 ter 10644.

 8             I am asking the other side not to be cross about this.  It's not

 9     on the list, but it arises from what we were talking about, and it stems

10     from the possible lack of understanding about the order of

11     General Milosevic.

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   General, sir, this is two days before the air-bomb was launched.

14     The 4th of April, two days before it was launched.

15             Can we look at the next page, please.  The next page, if we can

16     look at it both in the English and the Serbian.

17             And can you please look at the tasks:

18             "Prevent the enemy infantry from advancing."

19             That's the first part.  The second part is:

20             "Prevent the enemy swift breakthrough."

21             Then, continuing:

22             "Neutralise the activity of enemy artillery and mortars, and

23     immediately, upon taking up firing positions, proceed to make fire

24     adjustment with the battery's main artillery pieces and direct fire

25     artillery pieces upon the first detected target."

Page 8151

 1             General, do you agree that that order, which went into effect a

 2     day or two later, is in a kind of continuity in relation to this order?

 3        A.   This order looks -- it's clear to me what the commander is asking

 4     you to do.  This is very clear:

 5             "Make fire adjustments with the batteries main artillery pieces

 6     and direct fire artillery pieces upon the first detected target."

 7             That's very clear.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  So the order, issued a day or two later in light of

 9     this, was clear to the subordinate commander; he knew very well what his

10     commander was asking him to do?

11        A.   The person who signed this order was very clear, what he wanted,

12     and his subordinate should be fairly clear what he was looking for.  If

13     you go back up to the first paragraph, it says:

14             "Preparing barrage fire Alpha along the --" if I can fill in that

15     blank -- "axis and barrage fire Bravo along the village and other village

16     axis."

17             That's fairly clear, where he wants fire to go.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19             Can we have this document admitted into evidence, please ?

20             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D782, Your Honours.

22             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   Sir, you remember the crisis that emerged in relation to the

24     demilitarised zone at Igman.

25             So in that context, can we have 1D2609.

Page 8152

 1             Are you familiar with this layout of the separation line?

 2        A.   I am.  I've never seen it portrayed on a map like this before,

 3     though.

 4        Q.   Do you agree that one can see here that Sarajevo, through the

 5     airport, is connected with the wider area of Igman and Bjelasnica, as

 6     shown in this map?

 7        A.   That's correct.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  Do you remember that in the summer of 1993, we

 9     captured Igman and Bjelasnica, which became the source of the crisis

10     because only then was it considered that Sarajevo was under blockade, and

11     that was the reason for NATO to issue its ultimatum?

12        A.   Okay.

13        Q.   Do you agree that at that time we reached an agreement with the

14     United Nations for Igman and Bjelasnica to be converted into

15     demilitarised zones and to be handed over to the United Nations?

16        A.   I understand that, correct.

17        Q.   Thank you.  Then when you were already there, that is, on 6th of

18     October, 1994, you noticed a Bosnian Army unit passing through the

19     demilitarised zone and subsequently killing, according to you, 19, but

20     unfortunately we know that 20 members of the medical unit were killed.

21        A.   I recall that incident, and we protested strongly against the

22     Muslims for the operation going through the DMZ and for the fact that

23     they killed medical personnel.

24        Q.   Thank you.  Do you agree that the capturing of the demilitarised

25     zone by the Muslims generated a long-lasting crisis in terms of our

Page 8153

 1     relations with the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina and UNPROFOR alike?

 2        A.   I'm aware of that, and we were in constant dialogue with the

 3     Muslims to have them respect the terms of the DMZ.

 4        Q.   Do you remember that both General Rose and General Gobillard, and

 5     everybody from the UN, invested enormous efforts in an attempt to force

 6     the Muslim Army to abandon the DMZ and let the United Nations take

 7     charge, and that it took a long time before that happened?

 8        A.   I remember that.

 9        Q.   Do you remember that the French Battalion was even compelled to

10     use force and bulldozers, and that in the course of that operation, an

11     attack was launched by the BH Army, or, rather, Fikret's brigade, against

12     the French Battalion?

13        A.   I remember that because I was there.

14        Q.   Thank you.  Can you mark on this map, by using a pen, the

15     demilitarised zone that we handed over, to the best of your recollection?

16        A.   And I can't, at this stage of the game, remember that.  I'm

17     sorry.

18        Q.   Do you remember that entire units of the 1st Corps were going in

19     and out of Sarajevo through this territory that was linking Sarajevo and

20     Mount Igman?

21        A.   We were aware of that, yes.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

23             Can this map be admitted into evidence?

24             JUDGE KWON:  Unless it is objected to, we'll admit it as

25     Exhibit D783.

Page 8154

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   Let us now specify in more detail a number of things mentioned in

 3     your statement.

 4             On page 11, do you remember making reference to the existence of

 5     red dossiers that you did not have access to?

 6        A.   Yes, I do, and it's noted in my statement.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Do you agree that on page 13 it is written that all

 8     the reports were first returned to the sector, and then those that were

 9     more sensitive or had media implications were passed on to the command

10     for Bosnia-Herzegovina?  Can you explain to us why and in what sense the

11     sensitivity existed, as well as media implications, that could have

12     constituted a reason for concealing such reports from the public?

13        A.   That's on page 13?

14        Q.   Yes, it's in the Serbian, page 13.  I believe it's page 13 in

15     English as well, and the title is "Shelling."

16             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Tieger.

17             MR. TIEGER:  Two issues, Your Honour.

18             First of all, I think the page reference in English should be 12.

19     But more importantly, I think there's some confusion between the

20     amalgamated statement, to which the witness may be referring at the

21     moment, and the -- and just to make sure I'm right about that -- and

22     to --

23             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic is referring to his 1997 statement.

24             MR. TIEGER:  Correct, and I don't think the witness -- I'm not

25     certain, at any rate, that the witness was aware of that.

Page 8155

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I believe that this is the

 2     amalgamated statement.  Yes, it's possible that it's the 1997 statement

 3     and the portion relating to the shelling.

 4             [In English] "All reports came back."

 5             [Interpretation] "All reports came back."

 6             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   Can you tell us in what way these reports were sensitive, and

 8     what kind of media implications they had, and why was this material

 9     treated differently?

10        A.   Well, first of all, nothing was hidden or -- it's a normal

11     procedure that reports from subordinates, coming up to the sector, would

12     be vetted to meet the information requirements for our higher

13     headquarters, and it would be consolidated up -- into reports that would

14     be sent up to BH Command.  Any reports that would have any media

15     implications, i.e., that were going to generate interest in the media,

16     would be certainly put into those reports to alert the commanders and

17     information staff that what -- what they'd have to deal with.  But at no

18     stage in the game would I suggest, and it's not stated in here, that we

19     hid anything.  In fact, we're the UN, everything was in fact open.

20     That's why we didn't have intelligence sections, we just had information

21     sections, because we were not conducting operations against any of the

22     warring factions.

23             And as it says there, the information officers of both Sector and

24     BH Command were well aware of the situations and how to be prepared to

25     brief the media each morning, because there was a media scrum, and the

Page 8156

 1     media had freedom of movement over there so they could find out a lot of

 2     information themselves, which would come up in the form of questions to

 3     our information officers each day.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  In the meantime, Mr. Karadzic, you are not minded to

 5     tender this statement, are you?

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, no.  I just want to specify, in

 7     more detail, some views and opinions, and this is helpful to the Defence.

 8     But, however, we do not need to admit it into evidence.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  I'm asking you, if it is not admitted, what's the

10     point of clarifying some passage of this, but it's up to you.

11             Please go on.

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

13        Q.   Do you recall mentioning that on the 7th of May, everything

14     exploded in Sarajevo, and that the 5th Bihac Corps was in the process of

15     attacking?  This is stated on page 0055-5103 from your 1997 statement,

16     and I think it is also contained in your amalgamated statement.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Page 23, General.

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Do you remember this crisis that involved the 5th Corps and

20     Bihac?

21        A.   Yes, I do.

22        Q.   Do you agree that this crisis arose, first and foremost, because

23     the forces from the protected area of Bihac invaded a large territory

24     which was purely Serbian?

25        A.   The 5th Corps came out of the Bihac area and attacked into the

Page 8157

 1     Serbian-held territory up in the north-west corner of Bosnia, correct.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can I have, please, 1D --

 3             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  Could the accused please

 4     repeat the number.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Could you repeat the number, Mr. Karadzic .

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 1D2610.

 7             Can we please scroll down a bit more so that we can see the

 8     legend.  We need to go up a little bit more to see -- it's not possible.

 9     Very well.

10             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Do you agree that this full line was the separation line on the

12     23rd October 1994, and the dotted line is from the 1st of November, 1994,

13     and this is the area captured by the 5th Corps over the course of one

14     week?  Is that correct?

15             Can the general please be shown the whole map so that he can see

16     the dates attached to these two lines in the legend.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Can you tell us about the origin of this map,

18     Mr. Karadzic?

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, this question has already

20     been asked, so pardon me, but this is the CIA map, one from the entire

21     collection of maps produced on a daily basis and depicting the deployment

22     of forces.

23             MR. TIEGER:  Well, it may also be helpful to know the direct

24     providence of this map, Your Honour.  I mean, I understand that's the

25     accused's position on the basic source, but where -- whether this

Page 8158

 1     purports to be an original, which I presume it doesn't, where the copy of

 2     this map came from, did it come from some publication, from -- was it

 3     retrieved from some kind of archive, how is it that it is understood to

 4     be derived from a particular source?  That would be extremely helpful.  I

 5     mean, there's a lot of information on the map, as the Court can see, that

 6     purports to be more than geographic information.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  You didn't have it so far?

 8             MR. TIEGER:  Not --

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Could you hand it over to the witness, yes.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This has already been mentioned

11     here.  There's a whole set that we received courtesy of the United States

12     of America.  Some maps contained the name of the publisher, and the

13     publisher was identified as the CIA.

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   Can you please look at the front-line as of the 23rd of October

16     and of the 1st of November.  Is this consistent with what the Muslim Army

17     achieved, in terms of capturing territory during that week?

18        A.   That is consistent with what I remember.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

20             Can we now -- but before that, can we have this map admitted into

21     evidence?

22             JUDGE KWON:  It will be admitted as Exhibit D784.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now have 1D2611, please.

24             If we face the same problem with the legend, I would kindly ask

25     that the general be given a hard copy.

Page 8159

 1             Can you scroll down, please, and also can you deliver the hard

 2     copy to the general.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   So, General, let's try and see if we can find the legend.  This

 5     depicts the counter-offensive launched by the Serbian forces.  The legend

 6     is not completely visible, but can you tell me, does this correspond to

 7     what you knew about the Serbian counter-offensive against Bihac?

 8        A.   This does jive with what I remember of the counter-offensive.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

10             Can we have this map admitted into evidence?  And I need this

11     document, containing an order issued by General Delic in one sentence, to

12     be placed on the ELMO.

13             Is this map going to be admitted into evidence?  It's the map

14     showing the counter-offensive, whereas the previous one showed the

15     offensive.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Tieger.

17             MR. TIEGER:  Your Honour, based on the witness's answer, in a

18     manner similar to the previous document, I presume it's going to be

19     admitted.  However, I trust that the Defence will be co-operative with

20     the Prosecution as we attempt to obtain a bit more information to

21     identify with greater clarity the providence of this document.

22             JUDGE KWON:  I would expect the Defence to co-operate with you.

23             That will be admitted as Exhibit D785.

24             I note the time.  Have you almost concluded or are there --

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Nearly.  Thank you for your

Page 8160

 1     understanding concerning the map.

 2             And can we please now have this document on the ELMO.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   This is an order of General Rasim Delic, dated the 16th November

 5     1994, issued at the time of the Serbian counter-offensive.  Allow me to

 6     read it:

 7             "Intensifying of combat operations.  Order to the 1st, 2nd, 3rd,

 8     4th and 7th Corps.

 9             "Bearing in mind an extremely complex situation prevailing in the

10     5th Corps, and with a view to tying up as many aggressor forces as

11     possible, intensify combat operations to the maximum in your area of

12     responsibility."

13             General, do you remember that during our counter-offensive

14     against Bihac, the whole of Bosnia was on fire, all the front-lines were

15     active?

16        A.   I recall that.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

18             With the consent of the Prosecution, can we tender this document

19     into evidence?

20             JUDGE KWON:  We'll mark it for identification, pending

21     translation.

22             THE REGISTRAR:  As MFI D786, Your Honours.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just one more document I need to be

24     shown on the ELMO, and I would like the general simply to identify it.

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

Page 8161

 1        Q.   General, do you recognise this general?  Is that

 2     General Karavelic?

 3        A.   I can't tell from that picture.

 4        Q.   All right.  But it says in the text that it is General Karavelic.

 5             Can you please scroll down a bit.

 6             "Five offensives launched by the 1st Corps this year."

 7             The highlighted portion says:

 8             "This is testified to in the best way by our five offensives and

 9     one defensive launched during this year."

10             General, do you agree that it was the 1st Corps who initiated

11     fighting in Sarajevo, and that this interview confirmed that in the

12     course of that year, they launched five offensives and only one defensive

13     operation?  So that was the 1st Corps deployed in the area of Sarajevo.

14     Do you recall that the United Nations thought, as well, that it was them

15     who initiated the fighting?

16             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Tieger.

17             MR. TIEGER:  Well, because -- I mean, in part because we're at a

18     disadvantage, in light of the absence of translation, I was -- I tried to

19     be fairly attentive to the relationship between the question posed, the

20     representations made about what the document states, and what was read

21     out and translated.  And it seems to me that there's an expansion of what

22     was translated from the article and what the article purports to

23     represent.

24             The quote was:

25             "Five offensives launched by the 1st Corps this year."

Page 8162

 1             An expansion into the accused's version of where that took place,

 2     and so on.  And in fairness to the witness, if a question like that is

 3     going to be posed, then I think -- and if there's any hope of getting any

 4     kind of meaningful answer from the witness on that issue, then I think he

 5     has to be given the opportunity to know what's -- what General Karavelic

 6     purportedly said in this article, at least.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Despite that and albeit the compounded question was

 8     on five lines, and then I think the general can answer the question.

 9             THE WITNESS:  As to the number of 1st Corps offensives --

10     offensives they conducted, I can't tell you, off the top of my head.  Was

11     it five?  But if anything was done in -- you know, in contravention of

12     any of the rules and regulations and agreements we had, we would have

13     just protested against him as much as we would have done against the

14     other side.  That's -- that's all I can tell you.  Is the number five?  I

15     don't know.  We dealt with each case individually.

16             JUDGE KWON:  And whether it was the 1st Corps that initiated the

17     offensive?

18             THE WITNESS:  It did not matter what the unit was.  It only

19     mattered what side violated what, and we would go after that side, given

20     the agreements we were trying to uphold.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, General.

22             Mr. Tieger, I take it you have some questions for your redirect?

23             MR. TIEGER:  Yes, Your Honour, I do.  I think not more than 10 to

24     15 minutes is my estimate.

25             JUDGE KWON:  We'll have a break now, 25 minutes.  We'll resume at

Page 8163

 1     five past 6.00.

 2                           --- Recess taken at 5.43 p.m.

 3                           --- On resuming at 6.08 p.m.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Tieger.

 5             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I just ask if this interview

 7     can be tendered for identification?

 8             JUDGE KWON:  You know the position of the Chamber.

 9             Yes, Mr. Tieger.

10             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you, Mr. President.

11                           Re-examination by Mr. Tieger:

12        Q.   Good afternoon, General.

13             The accused asked you, at page 25 of today's transcript, General,

14     about screens that were set up to protect civilians from sniping by the

15     Bosnian Serb forces.  Now, I wanted to ask you a couple of questions

16     about those screens or barriers, General.

17             First of all, even after those screens were set up, did the

18     Anti-Sniping Task Force continue its efforts or cease its efforts?

19        A.   The efforts were continuous throughout, even before, during, and

20     after the screen emplacement.

21        Q.   And was that a reflection of the view that the screens alone

22     would not be sufficient to eliminate completely sniping against civilians

23     by the Bosnian Serb forces?

24        A.   Screens had a positive impact, but it just would move the problem

25     elsewhere.  The snipers would go elsewhere until they found a position

Page 8164

 1     where they can gauge targets.

 2        Q.   And, in fact -- and, in fact, was there a continuation of sniping

 3     against civilians by the Bosnian Serb forces after the establishment and

 4     placement of the screens, the protective screens?

 5        A.   Yes, there was.

 6        Q.   General, today, at page 34, you were asked some questions about

 7     Exhibit P435, and your attention was focused on a portion of the document

 8     relating to an incident on February 27th, 1995.

 9             And perhaps we can call up P435.

10             And just to remind you, General, there were two aspects of this

11     document that were brought to your attention by the accused.  One --

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I just make a brief

13     intervention.

14             Is this question a leading one if you say, Were the forces of

15     Bosnian Serbs firing at civilians, without evidence, without an

16     investigation?  I'm afraid that then this is a leading question.  What is

17     being provided as evidence that that is so?

18             JUDGE KWON:  The general has answered the question already, and

19     it follows the general's answer that the Anti-Sniping Task Force efforts

20     were continuous.

21             Let's continue, Mr. Tieger.

22             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you, Your Honour.

23             Sorry, one technical problem.  Thank you.

24        Q.   And, General, I just wanted to -- I was about to recall two areas

25     of focus about P435 asked by the accused, and one was with respect to a

Page 8165

 1     tram shooting, and the other with respect to an armed conflict in the

 2     area of Vrbanja Bridge.  I take it you recall that discussion generally?

 3        A.   I do.

 4        Q.   The accused did not note to you, and I want to bring your

 5     attention to it, that this was the subject of considerable discussion

 6     with you during the course of your testimony during the

 7     Dragomir Milosevic case.  In fact, it consumes quite a number of pages of

 8     that transcript, during which it appears this document was made available

 9     to you for a period of time and you were given an opportunity to review

10     it.  And you had an opportunity to review at that time, as reflected in

11     your amalgamated statement at pages, approximately, 46 through 50, not

12     only the portions brought to your attention by the accused, but also an

13     additional portion of P435 at page 23, and that's paragraph H of that

14     exhibit, which refers to a sniping incident against civilians on the

15     tram.

16             And, General, if I can -- in light of all the information you had

17     an opportunity to review during the course of your testimony during the

18     Milosevic case, let me ask you to turn your attention to what you said

19     beginning at page 49 of your amalgamated statement.

20             You were asked, toward the bottom of the page, whether it could

21     be concluded from the report that there was an exchange of fire, and that

22     as a consequence, the tram was shot.

23             "The consequence of this exchange of fire, is that something that

24     could be inferred from this report without really going into the

25     details?"

Page 8166

 1             And then you responded:

 2             "I also read in the report that, in fact, there appears almost

 3     two things happening here.  This was an engagement at a bridge, and there

 4     appears to have been some sort of sniping activity on the tram."

 5             If we continue on to the -- and you say:

 6             "So we could actually have two incidents actually being reported

 7     in one paragraph.  That's how I'm -- I'm actually referring from this

 8     report."

 9             Then continuing on to page 50, you note the deliberate nature of

10     sniper action.  The question is:

11             "So out of this report, do you read that it was a deliberate -- a

12     deliberate action?"

13             You answer:

14             "What I read from this is, as it appears from paragraph H, the

15     tram was sniped at."

16             And you continue to say, based on your review of the totality of

17     the document:

18             "There was no direct correlation made from there that the

19     fighting there actually impacted on the tram.  In fact, this tells me --

20     gives me, for detail, from that to say I think there were two things

21     happening in the same time-period, a fight at Vrbanja and sniping against

22     a tram.  That's what I'm getting out of this report."

23             And that's at page 50.  And you reaffirm the same thing in the

24     immediately subsequent answer, as you can see as you continue down the

25     page.  And you say:

Page 8167

 1             "Well, again having read the more details, again, I would infer

 2     from this that while there may have been fighting going on at Vrbanja

 3     Bridge, someone in this area might have directly targeted and sniped at

 4     the tram at the same time, because it -- again, when I put those two

 5     pieces together, that's the kind of picture I'm getting when I read this

 6     report."

 7             And, General, having now had the opportunity to see your

 8     amalgamated statement, and reflecting on your previous testimony and the

 9     opportunity at that time to see more excerpts from the document, do you

10     stand by that answer in your -- by those answers in your amalgamated

11     statement?

12             MR. ROBINSON:  Excuse me, Mr. President.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.

14             Before that, Mr. Robinson, can I see the passage which refers to

15     both sides being involved in a fire-fight 300 metres away in the area of

16     the Vrbanja Bridge in that exhibit?  What page was it?  Microphone.

17             MR. TIEGER:  I believe the reference was to page 9 of the

18     document, if I'm not mistaken.  There's also a similar reference at

19     page 2.  And I think, if I'm correct, that the reference was made to

20     page 2 and page 9 today, earlier.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

22             I'll hear from you, Mr. Robinson.

23             MR. ROBINSON:  Thank you, Mr. President.

24             First of all, this is a very leading examination and I think it's

25     really an improper re-direct examination to have led the witness in this

Page 8168

 1     manner.  This is not the way to refresh your witness's recollection, if

 2     his recollection needed refreshing in the first place.

 3             Secondly, I just point out it's a small point -- it's a small

 4     point, but we had a lot English -- reading of English text by Mr. Tieger

 5     that could have been read by the witness by himself and all of us could

 6     have read it, and you frequently admonish Mr. Karadzic abut that, and I

 7     couldn't let it pass that this is the same kind of thing that you say is

 8     a waste of time when it's being done by Dr. Karadzic.

 9             Thank you.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Given that we admitted his amalgamated statements

11     into evidence, I don't think Mr. Tieger's question was leading, and we'll

12     just -- since you admitted it's a small question, I will not address that

13     issue.

14             General, could you answer the question, having heard all these

15     questions and submissions?

16             THE WITNESS:  I stand by the -- what my statement said here in

17     the abbreviated -- in the document, this one [indicates], my abbreviated

18     submission.

19             MR. TIEGER:  I think "amalgamated" is the term we use here.

20             THE WITNESS:  Okay, "amalgamated statement," I stand by that

21     because you have to read the whole report and not just a couple lines to

22     get the entire sense, and we went through that in some detail in that

23     other trial, and I stand by what I said then.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

25             MR. TIEGER:

Page 8169

 1        Q.   Thank you, General.  And then one last area of inquiry.

 2             You were asked yesterday, at pages 8093 through 8094, about an

 3     issue I wanted to address.  You had testified, and you testified

 4     yesterday, about the targeting of civilian areas by the Bosnian Serbs,

 5     and about the firing of weapons which were incapable of distinguishing

 6     between military and civilian objects.  And in response, the accused

 7     confronted you with a portion of a statement by Bosnian 1st Corps

 8     Commander Karavelic, in which Karavelic made some observations, and your

 9     attention was brought to a portion of the statement where Karavelic made

10     some observations about the Sarajevo Romanija Corps use of standard types

11     of barrage fire, waves of fire, protective fire, selective fire, and

12     concentrated fire.  And then the accused said to you that, There is

13     nothing illegal in this characterisation, is there?

14             Do you recall that, General?

15        A.   Yes, I do.

16        Q.   Well, let me, therefore, show you another part of Mr. Karavelic's

17     report which the accused did not show you.

18             And if we can call up Exhibit 11377, please, and turn to page 16

19     of the English, page 17 of the B/C/S.  Sorry, you may not have heard

20     that.  11377.  You may be calling it a P number.  I think that's a 65 ter

21     number, isn't it?  65 ter, yeah.

22             And if we can highlight, please, the -- about the fourth

23     paragraph from the bottom, which begins:  "Throughout the war ..."  This

24     is the portion of General Karavelic's statement that you were not shown

25     and that I wanted to bring to your attention:

Page 8170

 1             "Throughout the war, the Serb forces made no distinction between

 2     military and civilian targets.  Anything that moved, including civilian

 3     pedestrians, came under fire.  Hospitals, schools, and historical

 4     buildings received direct artillery, tank and mortar fire on a regular

 5     basis, while houses, apartments and gathering places, such as markets and

 6     water lines, would be shelled without seeming pattern.  Nobody knew when

 7     and where a shell would hit, so every place was dangerous."

 8             Now, first of all, General, using the accused's formulation, is

 9     that a characterisation of Bosnian Serb shelling that indicates something

10     illegal?

11        A.   Yes, it is.

12        Q.   And, finally, is that generally consistent with what you observed

13     or were made aware of during your own tour of duty in Sarajevo?

14        A.   It distinctly resembles the pattern that we saw.

15             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you, General.

16             Nothing further, Your Honour.  Thank you.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I put two questions?

19             JUDGE KWON:  In response to what questions from Mr. Tieger?

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think that the witness, the

21     general, was misled in relation to the incident of the 27th of February.

22     He was not told or shown that the fire that wounded Alma Cehajic was a

23     burst of fire.  The first burst of fire missed the tram, the second burst

24     of fire hit the tram, so perhaps his position would have been different

25     in relation to sniper activity.  The first part has to do with

Page 8171

 1     Karavelic's statement, but the second part, actually, is part of an

 2     expert testimony.  So the question is:  Does the general know that we are

 3     talking about a burst of fire here?

 4             JUDGE KWON:  I think it's for the Chamber to assess the evidence

 5     later on.  We'll not allow you to put that question.

 6             That concludes your evidence, General Fraser.  On behalf of the

 7     Bench and the Tribunal as a whole, I thank you for your coming all the

 8     way to The Hague to give it.  Now you are free to go.

 9             THE WITNESS:  Thank you, sir.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

11                           [The witness withdrew]

12             JUDGE KWON:  We have about half an hour to conclude for today,

13     and I think we can continue.  The witness is waiting?

14             MR. TIEGER:  That's correct, Your Honour.

15             JUDGE KWON:  And I was advised that, because of protective

16     measures in effect, we need to break for five minutes in order to bring

17     the witness in.  So we'll break for five minutes.

18                           --- Break taken at 6.29 p.m.

19                           --- On resuming at 6.35 p.m.

20                           [The witness takes the stand]

21             JUDGE KWON:  Good evening, Mr. Vidovic.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good evening.

23             JUDGE KWON:  I apologise for your inconveniences, and I'd like to

24     thank you for your understanding.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well.

Page 8172

 1             JUDGE KWON:  And can I say that your oath is still in effect.

 2     Therefore, you don't have to repeat your solemn declaration.  And you

 3     will be cross-examined by the accused, Mr. Karadzic.

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand.

 5                           WITNESS:  BOGDAN VIDOVIC [Resumed]

 6                           [The witness answered through interpreter]

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 9                           Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic:

10             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Good evening, Mr. Vidovic.

12        A.   Good evening.

13        Q.   I would immediately like to move to an incident that you

14     processed.  This is incident number 8 from the F list.  This is the

15     sniper firing at the tram on the 19th of June, 1994.  Is this an incident

16     which happened at Marin Dvor, in front of St. Joseph's Church?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   Thank you.  Is it correct that the tram was moving from

19     Bascarsija towards Alipasino Polje?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   How many persons were wounded?  Is this number known?

22        A.   Well, I really couldn't be certain, but I think it's three

23     people.

24        Q.   I'm asking because the indictment states "four," so it would be

25     of assistance if we knew the precise number.

Page 8173

 1             Can we look at 1D02584 now, please.

 2             And can we ask the witness to help us to mark the place of the

 3     incident?

 4             Can we zoom in on this part, the part where it says "Marin Dvor,"

 5     and can we go a little bit towards the east.  Can we scroll down, please.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  The upper part.  Further up, further up.

 7             Do you like to zoom in further, Mr. Karadzic, or this is

 8     sufficient?

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think that it is sufficient, yes.

10     Thank you.

11             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

12        Q.   Are you familiar with this part of town, the part that we're

13     seeing on this map?

14        A.   Yes.  This is Marin Dvor, from what I can see.

15        Q.   And can I ask you to mark on the map the place of the incident?

16     Can you please mark the church and the other buildings that you need to

17     in order to specify the incident site?

18        A.   It's more or less here [marks], and this is where the church is,

19     from what I can see on the map.

20        Q.   Can I ask you to mark the precise incident site, because this

21     area is a little bit too big.

22        A.   This is the intersection where the accident -- or the incident

23     occurred.

24        Q.   Where?

25        A.   I don't know the exact location.

Page 8174

 1        Q.   The intersection is towards the Branimira Cosica Street.  What is

 2     the name of that street now?

 3        A.   I don't know that that was its name at the time.  I would know it

 4     by its new name.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  Can you please mark with the number 1 the incident

 6     site?

 7        A.   I don't understand.

 8        Q.   Number 1.  Can you please mark the place where the incident

 9     occurred with the number 1?

10        A.   All right, very well.  [Marks]

11        Q.   Thank you.  Would you agree with me that you did not manage to

12     establish exactly who fired, but in your findings, you assumed that this

13     was done by the Serbs?

14        A.   We established the direction from which the bullet came, and I

15     couldn't tell you more than that.

16        Q.   Can you mark the direction here on this map?

17        A.   [Marks].  It's more or less like this.

18        Q.   Can you make it longer, please?

19        A.   How much longer?

20        Q.   A little bit longer.

21        A.   [Marks]

22        Q.   Yes, like that, thank you.  And can you mark that line, the

23     direction, with the number 2, please?

24        A.   [Marks]

25        Q.   Thank you.  Do you see the OHR building, and would you agree that

Page 8175

 1     that is the former Unioninvest building?

 2        A.   Yes, as far as I know.

 3        Q.   Can you circle that place and mark it with the number 3, please?

 4        A.   [Marks]

 5        Q.   Thank you.  Do you know where the line of separation was here on

 6     the left bank of the Miljacka River?

 7        A.   As far as I know -- well, which is the left and which is the

 8     right side?  This is the left side [indicates].  As far as I know, it was

 9     along the Vilsonovo Setaliste, along the Miljacka, itself.

10        Q.   And can we agree that each bank was controlled by one of the

11     sides; is that correct?

12        A.   Yes, more or less.

13        Q.   But here, near the bridge, are you able to say where the line of

14     separation was here in relation to the direction where the bullet came

15     from?

16        A.   Well, I couldn't really tell you precisely, but I, again, would

17     say that it was along the Vilsonovo Setaliste Street, along the Miljacka.

18        Q.   You're talking about the right bank, are you?

19        A.   Yes.  And on the left side, I think somewhere, is where

20     Skenderija is.

21        Q.   Can you indicate that, according to what you know?

22        A.   Well, let's say that it was here [indicates] somewhere, as far as

23     I can find my way on this map.

24        Q.   Can you mark that place with the number 4, please?

25        A.   [Marks]

Page 8176

 1        Q.   As it is indicated here, then, the Unioninvest building would be

 2     under the control of the Serbian side; is that right?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 5             Can we now look at 1D2584, please.

 6             And, first of all, can we tender this map?

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   I would like to ask you to put your initials and the date.

 9        A.   My initials and my date?

10        Q.   Yes.  First, can you confirm that this is the incident location?

11     That's number 1.  Number 2 is the direction the bullet came from.

12     Number 3 is the Unioninvest building.  And number 4 is, in your opinion,

13     the area or the line of separation?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   So can you please put your initials or signature here and the

16     date.

17        A.   [Marks]

18        Q.   On the basis of these assumptions, you drew a conclusion about

19     the trajectory; is that correct?

20        A.   Yes.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

22             Can we tender this?

23             JUDGE KWON:  That will be admitted.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D787, Your Honours.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

Page 8177

 1             Can we look at 1D2584 now, please -- 1D02434.  1D02434.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   As a Sarajevan, is this a photograph well known to you?

 4             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please repeat his answer?

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Can you mark the incident site on this photograph?

 7             JUDGE KWON:  The interpreters couldn't hear your answer,

 8     Mr. Vidovic.  Did you say "yes" to the question?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I said that I am familiar with

10     this place.  This is the crossroads at Marin Dvor.

11             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

12        Q.   Would you agree that this photograph was taken from in front of

13     the St. Joseph's Church?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   Can I ask you to mark on this map the incident location?

16        A.   That would be the tram tracks, this part here [marks].  I'm not

17     able to say exactly which part of the intersection that would be.

18        Q.   Thank you.  Yes, can you mark that with the number 1?

19        A.   [Marks]

20        Q.   The incident site is marked with the number 1.  Can you mark the

21     street that goes towards the Vrbanja Bridge now, please?

22        A.   It's more or less here [marks].

23        Q.   I thought if you can mark it length-wise.  This is the

24     intersection.  Would you agree that Turcianska is at the back of the

25     photograph that goes towards the Strahimira [phoen] Kranjcevica Street,

Page 8178

 1     the second street goes towards the Dobrinja -- no, the Vrbanja Bridge?

 2        A.   Yes, this street goes towards the Vrbanja Bridge, like this

 3     [marks].

 4             THE ACCUSED:  Could you please delete the circle.

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   And can you please mark with the number 2 the line indicating the

 7     street that leads to the Vrbanja bridge?

 8        A.   [Marks]

 9        Q.   And do you recognise this hill up there?  Which hill is that?

10        A.   I don't know the name of the hill, but I know the hill.

11        Q.   Thank you.  And do you know where the line of separation is

12     between the two armies here?

13        A.   It would be at the end of the street leading to the Vrbanja

14     Bridge, so it would be at the Vrbanja Bridge along Vilsonovo Setaliste

15     Street, along the Miljacka River.

16        Q.   Can I ask you to concentrate at this edge, where the trees are.

17     Do you see the chapel there and the Jewish cemetery?

18        A.   Could we zoom in on that part a little bit, please?

19        Q.   We will lose the markings if we move the map.  Do you know where

20     the Jewish cemetery is?  Do you see a chapel up there along -- right next

21     to this green tree?

22        A.   I'm trying to find it now.

23             JUDGE KWON:  We can mark it again, but let's -- why don't we zoom

24     in further and then try to mark it again.

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

Page 8179

 1        Q.   Can you recognise the chapel now right in the -- right next to

 2     the foliage of the tree?

 3        A.   I assume it's somewhere here [indicates].  I can see it, more or

 4     less, here through the foliage.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can you move it to the left a

 6     little bit, please.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  We need to push a certain button in order to mark

 8     it.  Could you wait a minute, Mr. Vidovic.

 9             So we mark again the place of the incident around the tram rail.

10     Put number 1.  And number 2 for the road leading to the bridge.

11             THE WITNESS:  [Marks]

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   And can you please mark the chapel now and the Jewish cemetery?

14        A.   [Marks]

15        Q.   Mark it with the number 3, please.

16        A.   [Marks]

17        Q.   And what is this building, this layered building in the

18     forefront, this large building?

19        A.   That is the Assembly building.

20        Q.   Can you put the number 4 on the building?  Anywhere, please.

21        A.   [Marks]

22        Q.   Do you remember -- do you know who was in this building?  Who

23     held this Assembly building during the war, under whose control was it?

24        A.   It was under the control of the B and H Army.

25        Q.   Thank you.  Can I ask you to now look -- if you're familiar with

Page 8180

 1     the area, to look at the eastern boundary of the Jewish cemetery.

 2        A.   I think that it would be somewhere in this circle that I drew,

 3     but I'm not sure, and it's not very easy to see here.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Can you put your signature and the date on the

 5     photograph, please?

 6        A.   [Marks]

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Let the photograph remain on the

 8     monitor for a little bit longer.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Mr. Vidovic, I will ask you this:  If I were to tell you that in

11     the eastern part in relation to the Jewish cemetery, there were positions

12     of the Bosnia and Herzegovina Army, would you say if you knew that?

13        A.   Well, I don't know.  I don't know where these positions would be.

14        Q.   Are you aware that on the western boundary of the

15     Jewish cemetery, there were Serb positions?

16        A.   I don't know.  I didn't know that.

17        Q.   Can you see the western boundary of the Jewish cemetery from

18     here?

19        A.   No, not -- due to the tree.

20        Q.   Thank you.  Can you please tell us who was controlling the slope

21     of this hill during the war, the slope that we are looking at now in the

22     photograph?

23        A.   I really couldn't say exactly.  As far as I know, this part was

24     under the control of the Army of Republika Srpska, this part towards

25     Grbavica.

Page 8181

 1        Q.   Are you able to mark the positions that you know were held by the

 2     Army of Republika Srpska?  Can you use red to mark this?

 3        A.   I can just speculate or assume, but I don't know where their

 4     positions were.

 5        Q.   All right.  Can you just mark that in red?

 6             MR. GAYNOR:  Objection, Mr. President.  The witness has said he

 7     doesn't know what the positions are.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Vidovic said he can't.

 9             We'll admit this as Exhibit D788.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The interpretation was not correct.

11     I actually asked for this document to be tendered and not -- but, all

12     right, very well.

13             Can we now look at the previous map one more time, 1D2584.

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   Do you see the Jewish cemetery here, Mr. Vidovic?

16        A.   Excuse me.

17        Q.   Urjandedina to the east, and to the west, Locatelli.  Do you see

18     it?

19        A.   Yes, I do.

20        Q.   Are you aware that the Serbs were on the western boundary of the

21     Jewish cemetery, the Muslims were on the eastern boundary, and the rest

22     was no-man's land?

23        A.   I really don't know anything about the no-man's land.

24        Q.   You can't say anything about the lines here, then, can you?

25        A.   No, I can just speculate.

Page 8182

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 2             Thank you, we are not going to tender this.  We are not going to

 3     be marking anything here.

 4             Can we look at the photograph again, an unmarked one, 1D02 --

 5             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter did not hear the rest of the

 6     number.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Could you give the number again.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right, now it's back to me.

 9             Can we just leave the photograph as it is, without zooming in.

10     Can we show it as it is, please.

11             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

12        Q.   Mr. Vidovic, can I ask you to tell us, please, from where could

13     you fire on these tram tracks?  Was it possible to fire from the Assembly

14     building?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Thank you.  Was it possible to fire from the Kapela section?

17        A.   You could, yes, according to this photograph.

18        Q.   Were you able to fire from the area to the left of the chapel,

19     from the east side of the chapel on this photograph?

20        A.   Well, I assume that you could.

21        Q.   Thank you.  If I were to tell you that this entire slope that

22     looks on the intersection was under the control of the Army of Bosnia and

23     Herzegovina, what would you say to that?

24        A.   Nothing.

25        Q.   Is that acceptable to you?

Page 8183

 1        A.   Well, what do you want me to say?

 2        Q.   If I were to tell you that the Unioninvest building, which is now

 3     the OHR building, was controlled by the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina

 4     throughout the whole time, except for at the beginning of the war in

 5     1992, would that be acceptable to you, including the petrol pump that we

 6     saw and the OHR building?

 7        A.   Well, I really wouldn't know anything about that.

 8        Q.   All right.  Now, when we look at this photograph, would you be

 9     able to, only on the basis of the sound that you hear, to decipher that

10     the firing -- or the origin of the fire was the Jewish cemetery?

11             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please repeat his answer?

12             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.  That was the last question, but the

13     interpreters couldn't hear your answer because both the interpretation of

14     the question and your answer were overlapping.  So tomorrow, please put a

15     pause between the question and the answer.

16             What was your answer, Mr. Vidovic, to the last question?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, you could not.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.  That's it for today.

19             We'll adjourn for today and resume tomorrow at 2.15.

20             Have a nice evening, Mr. Vidovic.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

22                           [The witness stands down]

23                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.03 p.m.,

24                           to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 20th day of

25                           October, 2010, at 2.15 p.m.