1 Monday, 30 November 2015
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.32 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
6 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case
8 IT-09-92-T, the Prosecutor versus Ratko Mladic.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
10 No preliminaries were announced. Therefore, I take it,
11 Mr. Stojanovic, that you're ready to call your next witness, which is
12 Mr. Kovic.
13 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] It will be Professor
14 Milos Kovic.
15 [The witness entered court]
16 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Kovic.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Before you give evidence, the Rules require that you
19 make a solemn declaration that you'll speak the truth, the whole truth
20 and nothing but the truth. The text is now handed out to you. May I
21 invite to you make that solemn declaration.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
23 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
24 WITNESS: MILOS KOVIC
25 [Witness answered through interpreter]
1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, please be seated, Mr. Kovic.
2 Mr. Kovic, you'll first be examined by Mr. Stojanovic who is now
3 standing. Mr. Stojanovic is counsel for Mr. Mladic.
4 Please proceed, Mr. Stojanovic.
5 Examination by Mr. Stojanovic:
6 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Professor.
7 A. Good morning.
8 Q. I would like to ask you to speak slowly. We've already agreed to
9 speak slowly, haven't we?
10 Please give us your exact name and surname.
11 A. Milos Kovic.
12 Q. Professor, could you briefly tell us about your professional and
13 academic career and your education.
14 A. I teach at the University of Belgrade. I'm a lecturer of the
15 faculty of philosophy. I teach history of the new age. I got my masters
16 degree and my doctorate at that same university. I studied abroad as
17 well. I attended various conferences. I also published several dozen
18 professional papers, monographs, and other professional works. That is
19 what I have to say for the time being.
20 Q. Is this the first time that you appear as an expert witness
21 before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia?
22 A. Yes, this is my first time.
23 Q. Thank you. I'm just waiting for the interpretation.
24 A. I see that. Yes, I see that.
25 Q. Please don't hold it against me.
1 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please have
2 65 ter 1D05903 in e-court.
3 Q. You will see before you on the screen the document that I've
4 called up. That is your CV. And I would just like to ask you briefly:
5 Are there any changes to the CV that you attached to your report?
6 A. I've published a few new books in the meantime that are relevant.
7 For example, one about Gavrilo Princip who assassinated Franz Ferdinand
8 in Sarajevo, this is a compilation of documents about him; and another
9 paper that has to do with the attitude of the great powers towards
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina at the time of the Great Eastern Crisis. So these are
11 the publications that I would like to add at this point in time. There
12 were some others that are perhaps of no relevance for these proceedings.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like to
15 tender the CV of Milos Kovic, our expert witness.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Before you do that just a question. Mr. Kovic,
17 you said you studied abroad. Where did you study abroad?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At the University of Oxford, I
19 underwent some advanced training there. You have it here in my CV. In
20 2004, 2005, I was working on my doctorate and I was a visiting doctoral
21 student at the University of Oxford. You can see it in my CV here.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
24 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 1D5903 will be Exhibit D1367,
25 Your Honours.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Can the number be repeated.
3 JUDGE ORIE: I do learn that there is no B/C/S version.
4 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, 1D -- it's
5 65 ter 1D05903.
6 JUDGE ORIE: But let me just -- no. Is that a different number
7 from the ...
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE ORIE: It's the same number. There's no B/C/S version
10 uploaded in e-court.
11 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, there is no B/C/S
13 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I think we can live with it in view of the
14 character of the document and the impact on the Defence. But on --
15 Mr. Traldi.
16 MR. TRALDI: Just if we could confirm that the witness
17 understands the English language because otherwise it would be a little
18 unclear whether he was able to understand what he was looking at.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll ask him. Although studying in Oxford
20 without knowledge of the English language might not be that easy.
21 You read and speak English, Mr. Kovic?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course. However, I would prefer
23 to testify in my own language, in Serbian, and to have questions put to
24 me to the extent possible in that same language.
25 JUDGE ORIE: That's not the problem. The problem is that
1 there -- have you reviewed your CV which is exclusively available in the
2 English language? Have you reviewed it on its accuracy?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Then I think I already pronounced it was admitted.
5 Please proceed.
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes, it was admitted but we don't have the number
7 because there was so many speakers at the same time.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Registrar, the number would be?
9 THE REGISTRAR: That's Exhibit D1367, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE ORIE: D1367 is admitted.
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And at this point in time I would urge
12 Mr. Stojanovic and the witness to pause between question and answer.
13 Otherwise, it's not possible to follow.
14 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
15 Q. Professor Kovic, tell us, what was the specific task you were
16 given by the Defence of General Mladic?
17 A. I was given the task of studying four documents, these are
18 actually reports of two experts, Robert Donia and Patrick Treanor. Two
19 reports by Robert Donia: The background, policy and strategy of the
20 siege of Sarajevo from 1991 until 1995, and also relevant excerpts from
21 debates in the Assembly of Republika Srpska from 1992 until 1995. As
22 I've already said, these are two reports. There are, rather, two reports
23 by Patrick Treanor: The leadership of the Bosnian Serbs from 1990 until
24 1992 -- excuse me, and the leadership of the Bosnian Serbs from 1993
25 until 1995.
1 My task was to give my own assessment regarding the academic and
2 factual reliability of these documents. That is to say, as a historian,
3 to do everything that a historian is trained to do. Anybody involved in
4 the humanities. That is to say, to write a review of these four
6 Q. Thank you.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Witness, the last things you said, that they
8 appear in your report as well, There is no need to repeat what is already
9 in the report because that's in the introductory paragraphs, isn't it.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stojanovic.
12 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Professor, as for your paper and your task, did you actually
14 compile several reports?
15 A. Actually, I submitted two reports to the court.
16 Q. Thank you. First of all, I would like us to go through your
17 report briefly, the one that you entitled: Analysis of a report
18 entitled: The Bosnian Serb leadership, 1990 to 1992, and the Bosnian
19 Serb leadership from 1993 until 1995 by expert Professor Patrick Treanor
20 and the team.
21 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have 65 ter
22 1D05904 in e-court.
23 Q. Professor, is this the front page of one of these reports of
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Could we please briefly just go through some of the main
2 highlights of your report.
3 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] So in B/C/S, could we have
4 page 3, and in English, page 3, the second paragraph from the bottom of
5 the page.
6 Q. Professor, here, you dealt with the phrase "Bosnian Serbs" and
7 then you elaborated on that; namely, why you consider this phrase,
8 "Bosnian Serbs," to be incorrect professionally and historically.
9 Please do not repeat everything that is contained in your report,
10 but I would just like to ask you to briefly tell the Court about the key
11 points underlying this assessment; namely that this phrase should not be
12 included in the Prosecution expert reports.
13 A. It is imprecise. And it's even incorrect. It is imprecise
14 because all Serbs who were in the leadership of Republika Srpska that are
15 referred to these reports were not Bosnians. Some of them were from
16 Herzegovina. It would be the same thing like telling a person from
17 Utrecht that he is from The Hague. I don't know what else to say. For
18 example, Radovan Karadzic is from Herzegovina. Let me not repeat
19 everything that I've written. Telling him that is he a Bosnian, well, I
20 don't know how a person from Herzegovina would react that. So it is
22 Politically it is controversial because to tell somebody who
23 lives in Republika Srpska today that is he a Bosnian Serb, he would take
24 offence. He is a Serb from Republika Srpska. Somehow one would expect a
25 greater degree of caution, academic, methodological, and also a bit more
1 human fairness from someone who is supposed to be a serious author of
2 this kind of text. It is also a political issue because one of the
3 reasons for the war was certainly the rejection of the Serbs who live in
4 Bosnia-Herzegovina to be declared Bosnian Serbs.
5 It was a major political issue even in the socialist Yugoslavia;
6 namely, the literature from Sarajevo, would it be called the literature
7 of Bosnia-Herzegovina or literature from Bosnia-Herzegovina? One of the
8 greatest Muslim authors from Bosnia-Herzegovina, Mesa Selimovic, refused
9 to be an author of Bosnia-Herzegovinian literature. If you understand
10 what I'm saying. It's a question of dissatisfaction on the part of this
11 Muslim writer. And many Serbs, they viewed this as an attempt to be
12 assimilated into something that would be a Bosnian political entity or a
13 Bosnian nation.
14 Q. Thank you. Page 7, B/C/S, and page 6, third paragraph of the
15 report in English - your report, Professor - as you criticise
16 Mr. Treanor's paper you say, inter alia, that such research would have to
17 contain the sources of the other conflicting sides as well. In
18 historiography, each subject requires to be viewed from various angles
19 which allows for more nuanced conclusions especially when dealing with
20 wars and international crises. That is what you call the reason for
21 saying that these reports are one-sided.
22 My question: Is this a scientific approach by Mr. Treanor, and
23 would the conclusions based on such a methodological approach be
24 scientific and scholarly?
25 A. What I wrote was that this should not be the approach of a
1 historian. Quite simply, as far as wars are concerned, and here we do
2 have a civil war that is being dealt with, you cannot view the phenomenon
3 properly if you don't view it from different angles. Professor Treanor
4 used intercepts between Radovan Karadzic and his associates. That is of
5 interest and that is an interesting source, but then a reader wonders
6 where are the intercepted conversations of Alija Izetbegovic and
7 Ejup Ganic or, for example, Ejub Ganic and Abu Hamza Al-Masri, one of the
8 Mujahedin there. He is in Guantanamo Bay nowadays. So can one imagine
9 what would be contained there.
10 This is basic. This is something that is taught during one's
11 freshman year at university. Audiatur et altera pars. So dealing with
12 the Bosnian Serbs, that is fine, but he goes into political assessments.
13 He is judging the participants. In order to do that, you really have to
14 be very cautious and you have to study different sources from different
15 sides very carefully.
16 Q. Thank you. Let us look at page 9 of your report in B/C/S and
17 page 7, the last sentence in the fourth paragraph, where you say, among
18 other things -- again, speaking of the question of bias in the report by
19 Mr. Treanor:
20 "The author views the Serbian secession within Bosnia-Herzegovina
21 as something separate from what was happening in Yugoslavia. As we will
22 see, he does not attach any special importance even to the secessionism
23 of Bosnian Muslims and Croats from Yugoslavia."
24 Professor, tell us briefly, please, why you believe that such a
25 conclusion requires necessarily a broader context of the events in
2 A. There are three methodological objections.
3 First, one-sided sources. Second, bias, the bias that is obvious
4 in the language used. Analyse this discourse and you will see it. And,
5 three, he is taking facts out of their historical context.
6 The author, Patrick Treanor, wrote in his introduction that his
7 main purpose is to represent the real historical context of what was
8 going on in Bosnia-Herzegovina from 1990 to 1995. His two reports.
9 That's precisely the problem. You cannot understand the Serbian
10 secession within Bosnia-Herzegovina unless you understand the secession
11 of Muslims and Croats from Bosnia-Herzegovina or the Croats from
12 Yugoslavia. It's a far more complex problem than I can say in a few
14 Q. Not now, Professor, thank you, because our time is limited.
15 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Let us stay on the same page in
16 B/C/S. And, in the English version could we see page 8, the first
18 Q. Here, Professor, you say that the key moves of the Serbs in the
19 period from 1990 through 1995, and especially in 1992, 1992 -- in 1990 to
20 1992, were actually compelled, forced by the moves of the Muslims and
21 Croats. Why do you believe so?
22 A. In all secessionist wars, the one who secedes takes the lead.
23 Remember Belgium. That's the case almost everywhere in history where
24 secessionism is involved. The first actions were taken by Muslims and
25 Croats who wanted independence or, as Alija Izetbegovic put it,
1 sovereignty even at the price of peace; whereas the Serbs only wanted the
2 status quo to remain, to remain in Yugoslavia. So all the moves of the
3 Serbs were forced moves. Of course, during the war, one or the other
4 side would occasionally take the offensive, but the war in
5 Bosnia-Herzegovina started as a secessionist war in which the Serbs were
6 trying to respond to the moves of the secessionists.
7 Q. I want to ask you now how does the report of Mr. Treanor view the
8 theories that are you presenting today in the courtroom concerning forced
10 A. The problem is that the author forgets the context and thus the
11 actions of the Serb appear in a sort of vacuum. We don't see what's
12 going on around them. Every political move is an answer to something.
13 But when you exclude the context as the report of Mr. Treanor did, you
14 could say that France attacked Germany in 1914. You know that Germany
15 was preparing for war. You know how Britain was watching Hitler's
16 Germany before the Second World War.
17 Q. Thank you, Professor, we're still on the same subject. Let us
18 look at page 13 of your report in B/C/S and page 10, the last paragraph,
19 in English.
20 Among other things, you say, elaborating on this subject:
21 "... the planned Slovene, Croat, and Muslim breaking up of
22 Yugoslavia but the unitarian Bosnia-Herzegovina had to be defended at all
24 Is there a reasoning behind this description?
25 A. Of course. The problem in all these papers that I analysed is
1 inconsistency. Everyone has to defend their country, but not --
2 THE INTERPRETER: Could the -- could the -- could the witness
3 please start from the beginning.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, could you repeat your answer on from the
5 beginning. And could you slow down in speaking. So you were asked
6 whether there's a reasoning behind this description. You said: Of
7 course. And could you resume from there.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is clear that the secessionisms
9 of Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina and in Croatia as well as the
10 secessionisms of Muslims and Croats in Bosnia-Herzegovina are
11 interlinked. This is again another phenomenon which is the logical
12 inconsistency of the author. If you are for a multi-ethnic society - and
13 you are, and in my view it's a reasonable position - how can you then
14 support secessionist breaking up of a multi-ethnic Yugoslavia which was a
15 federal state, a federal country, while at the same time supporting the
16 preservations at all costs of a multinational unitarian
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina. In my view, it is illogical. Moreover, in the
18 report by Robert Donia, supporting also unitarian Croatia because the
19 right of Serbian Krajina to exist is disputed. So you are breaking up
20 the multi-ethnic Yugoslavia while wanting to preserve a unitarian
21 multi-ethnic Bosnia-Herzegovina. In my view, that is illogical.
22 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Apart from the fact that it is, indeed, illogical, what you've
24 just described --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojanovic, whether it is illogical or not, the
1 witness has told us. It is not for you to say that he is right in
2 telling us that. Yes?
3 Please proceed.
4 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] I just wanted to sum up,
5 Your Honours.
6 Q. What you have just told us, would it be scientifically also
7 unjustified to draw the conclusions Mr. Treanor drew?
8 A. Science requires consistency in work, so in that sense this is
9 inconsistent. I would just like to say that Professor John Fine, who is
10 a friend and associate and mentor of Professor Robert Donia, John Fine
11 who published a book together with Donia on Bosnia-Herzegovina, insists
12 on the illogical points that I underlined. John Fine says that if you
13 are for the preservation of Bosnia-Herzegovina, then it would be logical
14 for you to also support the preservation of Yugoslavia. The principle of
15 multi-nationalism and multi-culturality is at stake. Yugoslavia was
16 really the whole world -- Europe in a nutshell.
17 JUDGE ORIE: The name you said, John Fine. How is -- could you
18 spell the name Fine.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. [In English] F-i-n-e.
20 [Interpretation] That's his last name, F-i-n-e. John Fine. He is a
21 senior colleague and mentor of Robert Donia, like Milorad Ekmecic was in
22 Sarajevo with whom Professor Donia collaborated also. But John Fine
23 collaborated with Donia more closely and published a book together with
25 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Professor, could we now look at page 14 in B/C/S; and, in
2 English, that would be page 11, paragraph 3, where you say, among other
4 "As Robert Hayden says, the criteria that the Badinter Commission
5 applied to Yugoslavia when it concluded that it was in the process of
6 disintegration could logically and consistently have been applied to
7 Bosnia and Herzegovina as well. These criteria meant simple
8 encouragement for any separatist movement which would be able to declare
9 independence and withdraw from the central organs of government."
10 My first question is: Could you tell us in more detail, in a few
11 sentences, who is Robert Hayden?
12 And my second question: If, according to the Badinter
13 Commission, the SFRY was disintegrating, could Bosnia-Herzegovina also
14 under the same criteria be treated as a country in the process of
15 disintegration from your professional scientific point of view?
16 A. Robert Hayden is a professor at the University of Pittsburgh and
17 he teaches law, international relations and anthropology, so at the
18 University of Pittsburgh. And he is well known for his field research in
19 Yugoslavia and in India. I invoked the results that he obtained, and he
20 says that the criteria under which a state is in the process of
21 disintegration when it does not have control over its entire territory
22 and when all its parts are not represented in joint institutions, that
23 principle could have applied to Yugoslavia at the time of its dissolution
24 but also to Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1991 and 1992. That is his conclusion
25 and I believe it is rather convincing.
1 Q. Did Mr. Treanor deal with this issue in his report at all?
2 A. No, he didn't.
3 Q. Could you tell us while we stay on the same page in B/C/S and
4 move to page -- in fact, move to the last sentence on this page in
5 English and then turn the page as we are reading.
6 So page 12, the first sentence:
7 "In the opinion of Steven Burg and Paul Shoup, Bosnia-Herzegovina
8 was recognised prematurely under pressure from the USA. According to
9 them, independence should have been made conditional on an agreement
10 between the three sides on the constitutional order."
11 First of all, would you tell us who these two authors are, and
12 then tell us your views on the premature recognition of
13 Bosnia-Herzegovina as well as Mr. Treanor's treatment of this issue.
14 A. In one of the footnotes, Robert Donia recognises Steven Burg and
15 Paul Shoup as the most senior researchers of this issue. These are
16 people who did not start in this area yesterday. Professor Paul Shoup is
17 professor emeritus at the University of Virginia. He has many
18 publications that are not linked to these issues, such as Eastern Europe,
19 et cetera. Steven Burg teaches at a smaller university near Boston.
20 I'll remember the name of the university later.
21 I am inclined to agree with their conclusions. Instead of
22 organising the negotiations between the three parties to reach whatever
23 agreement could be reached, recognition was declared instead. That's
24 also the view of Lord Carrington and these two authors are not the only
25 people who say the same things. They say that in the case of Croatia as
1 in the case of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the sides should have been forced to
2 negotiate first. Instead, both Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina were
3 recognised prematurely and then what happened happened. I'm trying to
4 say that major powers, major countries, often make very serious mistakes
5 in their foreign policy and these mistakes are paid by the citizens of
6 the countries that make such mistakes as well as the citizens of the
7 countries that are the subject of such decisions. That is my opinion.
8 And the participants of these events are listed on the next page.
9 Q. Thank you, Professor.
10 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we now move to page 16 in
11 B/C/S, and page 13, paragraph 1, in English.
12 Q. Professor, as you analysed all these theses of Professor Treanor,
13 you present, inter alia, another interesting theory where you say Alija
14 Izetbegovic also rejected the so-called Belgrade initiative, an agreement
15 reached with Radovan Karadzic and Slobodan Milosevic in July 1991. On
16 the other side was Adil Zulfikarpasic, one of the founders of the SDA,
17 and his associates from the Muslim Bosniak association.
18 My question, my question: Do you think that an objective
19 analyst, a historian, should deal with the failure of this initiative in
20 his report as well and the consequences that followed in
22 A. Yes. The Belgrade initiative from July 1991 is not mentioned in
23 Professor Treanor's reports and it's not mentioned in Professor Donia's
24 reports. So this is yet another objection. That is to say, having
25 certain facts omitted. We haven't referred to that yet.
1 So one of the founders of the SDA, Adil Zulfikarpasic,
2 Muhamed Filipovic also, and their associates, in July 1991, reached
3 agreement first with the Serbs from Republika Srpska, then
4 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and then with Slobodan Milosevic. It had to do with
5 the preservation of Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia would have been organised as
6 a federal state and Bosnia-Herzegovina would have been organised as a
7 unitary federal unit. Serbs from Bosnia-Herzegovina were prepared to
8 give up on everything they had attained so far in terms of the
9 decentralisation of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Adil Zulfikarpasic wrote a lot
10 about that, and he showed that Alija Izetbegovic until the very last
11 moment supported the initiative and then abruptly he abandoned the entire
12 idea and Adil Zulfikarpasic himself. Why is this idea important? It
13 shows that the Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina were prepared to live in a
14 joint multi-ethnic Yugoslav state.
15 Everything that happened later were forced moves due to the
16 secession of the Bosnian Muslims and Croats. At the same time, it shows
17 that the Muslim leadership was not united. Adil Zulfikarpasic, who lived
18 in Switzerland for a long time in the west and he represented a more
19 liberal wing, and I would say that the difference between him and
20 Alija Zulfikarpasic [as interpreted] is that Alija Zulfikarpasic is an
21 Islamist whereas Zulfikarpasic is a nationalist. So that is something
22 that happened between the Bosnian Muslims themselves. Zulfikarpasic was
23 in favour of something else and also the -- the position of the president
24 of that state was offered to --
25 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please slow down.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- Alija Izetbegovic and --
2 So Alija Izetbegovic was offered the position of president of
3 that state and he refused that.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I just ask for clarification. Can I ask for
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please go ahead.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Kovic, at page 16, line 8, you are recorded as
8 having said Yugoslavia would have been organised as a federal state, and
9 Bosnia-Herzegovina would have been organised as a unitary federal unit.
10 I'm not quite sure I understand what a unitary federal unit is.
11 Are you -- if that's how you expressed it, can you give us an
12 explanation. Or if you were misquoted, can you give us the correct
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. What I said here was that
15 Bosnia-Herzegovina should remain within the Yugoslav Federation. That is
16 to say, Yugoslavia would be a federal state. It would consist of Serbia,
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, it would be a federal state. However,
18 Bosnia-Herzegovina itself would not be federalised as such.
19 Bosnia-Herzegovina would be one of the federal units. It would be
20 centralised in terms of its organisation. It would not have any separate
21 entities and so on. So Bosnia itself would be based on a unitary
22 principle. That is what Adil Zulfikarpasic asked for. He said that that
23 was the red line and he didn't want to go beyond that in negotiations.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you one question.
1 Herzegovina, is that exclusively Serb populated? Or are there
2 living Croats and Muslims as well?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no. Of course. The
4 Neretva River flows through Herzegovina. It is multi-ethnic by
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you've answered that question.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't have to go into details --
8 JUDGE ORIE: No. Page 16, line 17 and 18, you were talking about
9 what the Bosnian Muslims and Croats did. Now, would the Herzegovinian
10 Muslims and Croats be offended by the use of that language of yours?
11 Because you criticised Mr. Treanor that much about talking about Bosnian
12 Serbs because they could be from Herzegovina. You are using the term
13 "Bosnian Muslim and Croats," would they be -- would they feel similarly
14 offended by your language?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Frankly, I don't think so, because
16 there is something that is called the Bosniak idea. The Muslims do not
17 insist on these differences. If you wish, I can deal with this in
18 detail. The Bosnian nation that was created by Benjamin Kallay in the
19 19th century, the Austro-Hungarian authorities, there's this Bosniak and
20 Bosnian idea. Of course, Bosnian Muslims have their own view, but they
21 would not be offended the same way the Serbs would be offended in that
23 JUDGE ORIE: And for the Croats? Do they have a similar
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, as far as Croats are
1 concerned, there would be nuances involved. The majority of Croats in
2 Bosnia-Herzegovina live in Herzegovina. Although there are some in
3 Bosnia. They emphasize this kind of difference more. So this Bosnian
4 idea, one can say that Croats did not accept it. Just like Serbs did not
5 want to accept it.
6 I can elaborate on this, if you wish. All of these questions
7 have a historical dimension -- yes, I understand.
8 JUDGE ORIE: But you explained your criticism by referring to
9 people from -- I think from Utrecht would be offended if they would be
10 said to be from another town. You didn't give any nuance, you just said
11 because they were born elsewhere. Therefore I do understand now that
12 there's a lot of nuance in that and that it's not just a matter of
13 inaccuracy by a historian but that there is far more involved. And if I
14 understand you well, you are including a lot of things you have not
15 raised in your report in this respect about how offensive it would be or
16 would not be.
17 Is that -- would you agree with that?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, I understand. I think
19 that I understand what you tried to say. Yes, yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: And --
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I understand that. However,
22 may I just say one thing? I think that one should make a distinction
23 between what is written as an expert report and what is sometimes stated
24 in the course of a conversation. We always try not to offend anyone.
25 But when we write a document that is supposed to be admitted into
1 evidence, here we have to exercise additional caution. That is the only
2 thing I wished to say in addition to what I've already said, and I think
3 I understand the point that you made.
4 JUDGE ORIE: And such nuances on which you insist now are missing
5 in the portion where you say how offensive Mr. Treanor's language is.
6 Would you agree with that?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure that I understood your
8 question or perhaps it's a question of interpretation.
9 JUDGE ORIE: You say it's offensive to call someone from Utrecht
10 as if he was born elsewhere, without any further nuances whether some
11 people from Utrecht might feel, others might not. All those nuances are
12 not in your written report where you criticise Mr. Treanor, or did I miss
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I made an effort to take
15 these nuances into account. It is one thing where you make a mistake
16 when you're speaking and if you perhaps tell someone who is from Utrecht
17 that he is from The Hague and vice versa. However, if the person from
18 Utrecht is on trial, and if you are writing something that is supposed to
19 be evidence against that person --
20 JUDGE ORIE: No. There's no evidence against a person here.
21 There's evidence to give the Court the opinion of an expert. At least we
22 do not expect you to testify in favour of Mr. Mladic nor against
23 Mr. Mladic. We expect you to give your expert opinion in full
24 independence and in accordance with your profession.
25 Please proceed.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, as I've said --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Witness --
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- as far as the papers of
4 Patrick Treanor are concerned -- oh, I see. Oh, we should continue. Oh,
6 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Professor, just one more question related to your first report.
8 Thank you for the effort you have made.
9 Could we please take a look at page 21 in B/C/S and in the
10 English version of your report it is page 16, the last sentence. It then
11 continues on page 17.
12 This is what you say:
13 "Finally, the context cannot be even the confidently pronounced
14 value judgements and criticisms of only one side in a civil war. All in
15 all, this lack of context caused the authors writing about the basic
16 subject to seem unhistorical, completely void of cause and consequence or
17 a realistic temporal and spatial framework."
18 However, this is what my question is. You used a phrase here and
19 said that it was a civil war. Please tell us as briefly as possible why
20 you qualified the developments of Bosnia-Herzegovina in such a way, as a
21 civil war?
22 A. Well, I'm not the only one to qualify what happened in
23 Bosnia-Herzegovina in this way. This phrase is customary in science and
24 it is a subject of debate. However, in my view, this is yet another sad,
25 terrible war that has afflicted the population of our lands for
1 centuries. It is basically the fate of Bosnia-Herzegovina. These are
2 wars in which neighbours are at war, neighbours who speak the same
3 language. Now we call that language our language. It used to be called
4 Serbo-Croat before.
5 These are people who have different religions. And this is a
6 terrible fate of the Bosnian peoples, but they are not the only ones
7 responsible for that. Unfortunately, someone from outside wishes to
8 encourage such conflicts. For example, like in 16th-century France or
9 17th-century Germany. It's that kind of civil war. Can you call them
10 religious wars too. However, someone who is a believer cannot destroy a
11 place of worship of any religion. So it is a question of whether these
12 are religious wars or not.
13 However, the war went along religious lines like in the
14 16th century, like in the 17th century, like during the genocide against
15 the Serbs by the independent state of Croatia in the Second World War.
16 People being reduced to their religious affiliations and not paying
17 attention to what their joint interests are, their common fate, their
18 neighbourly relations. That's why I'm saying this is a civil war. It
19 had some other factors involved as well, but essentially, that is a
20 repetition of what happened there in 1941, 1945, of course, in a
21 different historical context, and then 1914 and 1918, and not to go into
22 the 19th century. In Europe, these wars ended when the Thirty Years' War
23 ended and also after the Treaty of Versailles. In Europe, wars do not
24 have this dimension. However, in the Balkans this continued because of
25 the wars between Austro-Hungary, Turkey, not to go into too much detail.
1 Q. Thank you, professor. Now that you took the solemn declaration
2 in this courtroom, now that we went through your report, today, do you
3 fully stand by your written report that you entitled: The leadership of
4 the Bosnian Serbs 1990-1992, and the analysis of Mr. Treanor's report for
5 1992 and 1993-1995? Is that your fully accepted report in this courtroom
6 today as well?
7 A. Yes.
8 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, after the
9 cross-examination, I would like to tender 1D05904 into evidence. That is
10 Professor Kovic's report.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Usually the decision is taken at the end of the
12 testimony of the witness, so may I take it that you want it to be marked
13 for identification?
14 Mr. Registrar.
15 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] That's right.
16 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be MFI D1368.
17 JUDGE ORIE: D1368 is marked for identification.
18 It's time for the break, Mr. Stojanovic.
19 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] That's right, Your Honour.
20 After the break, we're going to go through the other report, and I think
21 that I will stay within my time-limit.
22 JUDGE ORIE: We'd like to see you back in 20 minutes, Mr. Kovic.
23 You may follow the usher.
24 [The witness stands down]
25 JUDGE ORIE: We resume at ten minutes to 11.00.
1 --- Recess taken at 10.31 a.m.
2 --- On resuming at 10.52 a.m.
3 [The witness takes the stand]
4 JUDGE ORIE: You may proceed, Mr. Stojanovic.
5 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Professor, did you also make a report for the Defence of
7 General Mladic which you titled: Analysis of the expert report by
8 Robert Donia on the events in Bosnia-Herzegovina in the case Prosecutor
9 against Ratko Mladic, and submit that report?
10 A. Yes.
11 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we call up in e-court,
12 please, 65 ter 1D05905.
13 Q. Professor, is this the cover page of your report? You have it
14 before you.
15 A. Yes.
16 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we now display in e-court
17 page 6 in B/C/S. And in English that would be page 5, second
18 paragraph from the bottom.
19 Q. Professor, along the same principles we followed when discussing
20 your previous report and without repeating what is elaborated in detail
21 in your report, could you please highlight the main points that I ask you
23 Here, you say, I quote:
24 "The term 'siege' is contentious because the besieged maintained
25 links with the outside world through the UN peacekeeping forces ..."
1 And you go on to explain how and in which ways. And in the next
2 paragraph, which is on page 7 in B/C/S, you say:
3 "Sarajevo between 1992 and 1995 was a divided but not a besieged
5 My question is: Professor, why do you believe the term used by
6 Professor Donia, namely, the "siege of Sarajevo," is incorrect and that
7 the term "divided city" would be more appropriate?
8 JUDGE ORIE: Isn't this clearly explained in the report? I mean,
9 unless you'd like to add something to it, but then ask specifically on
10 what. But I think it's clearly explained in the report, isn't it? East
11 Sarajevo, west Sarajevo, well, it's all clearly explained, so why ask
12 again what we have read already?
13 So if you have any focussed question, please proceed, but don't
14 ask the witness to repeat what he has written down already in some
16 Please proceed.
17 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. I've already
18 said that I would not like to hear anything from the report repeated.
19 Q. But in view of what we discussed in the preparations for your
20 appearance in court, could you just tell us why, from the historical
21 point of view, the term "divided" is more appropriate than the term
23 A. In my view, there are two concepts that could be used. One is
24 used by Robert Donia in his second report, the struggle for Sarajevo.
25 And the second concept is a divided city.
1 What I did not write in my report and what I would like to say
2 now is this. If you take the centre of The Hague and proclaim it to be
3 The Hague and you say that Scheveningen is not The Hague, and if, God
4 forbid, Scheveningen gets into conflict with the centre of The Hague, and
5 then if you have proclaimed the centre of The Hague to be The Hague, then
6 could you call it the siege of The Hague. But if you treat these two
7 parts as two districts then, it would be a divided city. Of course, this
8 is a clearly hypothetical situation.
9 Also, and I didn't write this in my report, General Michael Rose
10 in his memoirs of his service in Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1994 says that his
11 opinion was that Sarajevo was not a besieged city because it maintained
12 links with the outside world thanks to the United Nations, and thanks to
13 a series of other details that can be further discussed. In Sarajevo,
14 you have, on the one hand, Serb forces; and on the other hand, you have
15 those whom Professor Donia calls defenders. And in his monograph on
16 Sarajevo, he says himself that 90 per cent of them were of Muslim
17 ethnicity, which means that you have two armies in conflict that belonged
18 to two different ethnic groups.
19 That's the point of view from which I treated the term "siege of
21 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we look at page 9 in B/C/S
22 and page 7 in English, paragraph 3.
23 Q. Again, briefly, Professor, when you talk about the contexts of
24 the reports made by Mr. Donia, you say again what is missing is the
25 previous history of the war in Sarajevo. Is that a general academic
1 objection to the -- to the approach taken by Professor Donia when writing
2 his report?
3 A. Certainly. Professor Donia himself says in his introduction that
4 he would be describing the context, and my main objection is precisely
5 the lack of context. Not only was insufficient attention paid to the
6 actions of the leaderships of the Croats and Muslims, and, if you wish,
7 the US and NATO because they were also parties to that conflict until
8 1995, there is also a lack of serious attention to the context of the
9 civil war.
10 I have a correction to make to the interpretation. They are
11 parties to that conflict from 1995, not until 1995.
12 There is no clear context that would encompass the war in Croatia
13 because the citizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina were involved in that war.
14 It's clear that somebody from Croatia would wish to cause a war in
15 Bosnia-Herzegovina as well, in my opinion. And what is lacking is a
16 longer historical introduction to what happened during the war in Bosnia
17 and Herzegovina. That would include at least the history of the NDH, the
18 independent state of Croatia, from World War II.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You were making a correction to the
20 translation. That's what we usually do not -- if you think that there's
21 a problem, you can tell us and then it will be verified. But it's not
22 for you to correct our translators. If you have some concerns in that
23 respect, you may raise that, and then it will be reviewed on the basis of
24 the audio, so we'll then know what you said how it was translated. But
25 it is not for you to correct them. Yes? But if there's any concern,
1 please do not hesitate to bring it to our attention.
2 Please proceed.
3 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
4 Q. Could we look at page 12 of your report in B/C/S, and page 9, the
5 middle of the second paragraph, where you express a methodological
6 objection to the report of Professor Donia, saying:
7 "That is why it is surprising that the author of this report uses
8 Muslim press reports from the war in Sarajevo and taking headlines from
9 Muslim newspapers as a source of information about the war without
10 comparing and cross-referencing these reports with those carried by, for
11 example, the Serbian or Croatian press."
12 Very briefly, Professor, in scientific practice and in historical
13 analysis, what is the scope, the potential and the quality of sources
14 such as newspapers of one of the warring parties?
15 A. For historians, press reports are a precious source, a valuable
16 source to establish what happened, but they are much more important as a
17 source of information about editorial policy and the political position
18 of a given newspaper. In that sense, historians are very cautious in
19 determining facts and events based on the press. The press is primarily
20 a source of the political position of a newspaper or a television studio.
21 When you have a war in which several parties are involved and you
22 see a headline from a newspaper Chetniks -- Sarajevo is targeted by
23 Chetniks, or in -- is in the cross-hairs of the Chetniks, "Chetniks"
24 being a very pejorative term, then it is very important to compare it to
25 the Serbian and Croatian press. Wherever you have a war, you have war
1 propaganda. That's why using such sources is methodologically very
3 Q. On the same page in the second paragraph from the bottom in
4 English you say, continuing to elaborate these objections to the report
5 by Professor Donia:
6 "The author also establishes the course of events in the former
7 Yugoslavia on the basis of published analyses and reports of the American
8 Central Intelligence Agency ... and elsewhere without comparing them with
9 data from other sources."
10 Why do you want to emphasise this particular objection in your
12 A. To this day, we continue to use materials from the CIA, but we
13 all know what the CIA is. Quite simply, it is necessary to show
14 methodological caution when using sources of such provenance. Of course,
15 we can use them. There are publications that are very valuable and
16 important among them, but there is a lack of sufficient caution here.
17 The CIA, the US, and NATO got involved in this conflict, and they were a
18 party to the war.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you the following question.
20 Have you considered -- because we're interested in what you're
21 telling us. In cross-referencing where Mr. Donia uses reports which you
22 say are one-sided, have you tried -- have you verified whether other
23 sources deal with the same matter and have you considered to bring that
24 to our attention? Because saying that Mr. Donia is wrong is one thing,
25 but to give us the full picture by making that cross-reference and say,
1 Well, what you consider to be propaganda on the one side, there's other
2 information. Have you considered to do that so that we would have a more
3 complete picture of what you say Mr. Donia is describing in a one-sided
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I have done that. Precisely
6 in this report. Specific examples are battles in the centre of Sarajevo
7 in 1992. The author described it only on one page, and I provided other
8 sources. And the fighting -- the massacre in Pofalici. There also I
9 provided Serbian sources where I called it a massacre of civilians more
10 cautiously. So comparing sources, if I understood your question.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I've seen examples. But have you
12 systematically done the same so as to give us the full picture on the
13 whole of the report of Dr. Donia?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My task was to review this report.
15 Had I tried to create a comprehensive picture as to how events should be
16 interpreted, that would have constituted a separate monograph. So in my
17 report, I gave proof concerning matters that are not contained in the
18 report. Therefore, the picture that I am portraying has to be a
19 fragmentary one by definition. I did not attempt to provide a
20 comprehensive picture of what happened. I am reviewing, criticizing,
21 Professor Donia and Professor Treanor, so this mosaic which is
22 incomplete, I am adding some tiles that would provide a more
23 comprehensive picture in terms of what had happened in Bosnia and
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I understand that in the context of the task
1 that was given to you by the Defence.
2 Please proceed, Mr. Stojanovic.
3 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
4 Q. Professor, now let us move on to page 23 in B/C/S of your report.
5 And it's page 17, the second paragraph from the bottom, in English.
6 As you analyse Professor Donia's reports in his chapter 2 that is
7 entitled: The transformation of the JNA, you say:
8 "The actions of the JNA were forced. Rather, the JNA was
9 therefore forced to act, and this can be said not only of its actions in
10 Bosnia and Herzegovina, but also the actions of the VRS. It was the
11 secessionists who set events in motion in Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia
12 and Herzegovina."
13 Professor, just briefly, in your view, how is this forced hand
15 A. As far as Sarajevo is concerned, if your barracks are encircled
16 and if they're opening fire at you - and that is, indeed, what happened
17 in Sarajevo - then, of course, they force your hand. So General Kukanjac
18 was seeking a response to something that was a specific challenge. That
19 goes for Croatia as well. So when Robert Donia is writing about JNA
20 attacks against Sarajevo, then it is only proper for him to say that
21 barracks are under siege. Barracks and facilities of the JNA. So you're
22 being attacked. What else can you do? You can either defend yourself or
23 can you surrender.
24 In this report, for example, there is not a single word about the
25 garrison in Varazdin that surrendered and the one in Virovitica, but
1 there are many that defended themselves, that did not surrender. And
2 then there are other matters that we discussed. Of course, I can provide
3 arguments for this later, if necessary.
4 Secessionists were more active, especially if they get support
5 from elsewhere. Then that is the basic precondition for the success of
6 secession. So that was the struggle waged by the American colonies, then
7 the Belgian independence, and, if you will, the former Yugoslavia as the
8 lands were freeing themselves from Ottoman rule. But that is a separate
9 question altogether.
10 Q. Let us please elaborate on this part of your sentence, where you
11 are saying that it's also the actions of the VRS that were forced.
12 A. It is true that Robert Donia referred to that in his report as
13 well; namely, that party-based armies were being set up, the SDA, the
14 HDZ, that they were working on establishing armed units. However, he
15 provides that information ten pages after he had -- presenting
16 incriminating views of Radovan Karadzic, so he is taking things out of
17 context. Chronology and context are very important in this respect.
18 There's a great deal of information involved - I imagine that I
19 don't have had to go into detail now - starting May 1990, when they
20 refused to surrender the weapons of the Territorial Defence, the -- that
21 is something that Donia refers to then. The first steps taken to
22 establish armed forces of the SDA. And so on and so forth. I don't want
23 to go into detail now.
24 Then what happened in western Herzegovina where the Army of the
25 neighbouring republic of Croatia came in. So you have the presentation
1 of Croatian armed forces in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina and that
2 is seemingly not one of the topics dealt with in this report.
3 Q. However, what is a key question, speaking of the point of view of
4 the tasks that were given to you, is as follows: An objective historian
5 writing such a report, would he have to taken into account that context
6 as well when drawing his conclusions?
7 A. Of course. Of course. That's why I said that in this way you
8 can prove anything. That France attacked Germany in 1914, for instance.
9 Or that Israel and only Israel is responsible for the 1967 war. So you
10 have to look at sources and actions of both sides not only one, and you
11 cannot take the actions of the other side out of context even when you do
12 mention them, and that is very rare here.
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I put one question to the witness, please.
14 Can I take you back to the war in the former Yugoslavia.
15 You were asked by Mr. Stojanovic, you should elaborate on this
16 part of your sentence where you are saying that it's also the actions of
17 the VRS that were forced.
18 You gave a very long answer but I didn't hear anything about how
19 the VRS was forced into action. Can you explain that briefly, please.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, very gladly.
21 The VRS was established in May 1992. It's the 12th of May that
22 is referred to. At that moment in Bosnia-Herzegovina, there was a --
23 already a war that was under way. That is to say, barracks were being
24 attacked as Donia himself says. In the beginning of 1992 there were
25 conflicts already. However, it was the worst in April and in May. I
1 provided that conversation between General Adzic and Alija Izetbegovic.
2 Artillery attacks, mortar attacks at the centre of the 2nd Military
3 District on the 2nd of May in Sarajevo. Then also it is well-known that
4 in the month of April the Green Berets and the Patriotic League, these
5 are party armies of the SDA, they grow into the Territorial Defence and
6 later on this is going to become the Army of the BH. I repeat, regular
7 troops of the Republic of Croatia enter the territory of
8 Bosnia-Herzegovina in Sijekovac, near Bosanski Brod, in May 1992. Serb
9 civilians were slaughtered and all of that preceded the establishment of
10 the VRS. So what were the Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina supposed to do
12 There's another thing that I did not mention. Then there is the
13 creation of the Croat party army as well.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Again, a very long answer, but you are not really
15 focussing on what you have written in your report. "Actions of the VRS
16 were forced." Not the -- the foundation of the VRS, according to your
17 report, but actions of the VRS. Which kinds of actions and how were they
18 forced? This was the question of Mr. Stojanovic. You really should
19 focus on questions.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure that I quite
21 understand your question. I spoke about the moment when the VRS was
22 established. That is to say, their hand was forced there. If you're
23 asking me about the actions that followed, on the one hand, you have
24 secessionists that are referred to in this sentence --
25 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Sorry to interrupt you again. I'm referring to
1 it the paragraph we see on the screen: "The JNA was therefore forced to
2 act ... but also the actions the VRS ..."
3 What does that mean? It stands alone and I don't know the
4 context, and Mr. Stojanovic asked you to elaborate about this short
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A very brief answer. This is the
7 Army of Republika Srpska. There is a war going on. There are adversary
8 armies that are armed. You have two possibilities. You can either
9 surrender or defend yourself.
10 The creation of party-based armies of the Muslims and Croats
11 preceded the establishment of the Army of Republika Srpska. In my view,
12 that is an answer to your question.
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
14 Mr. Stojanovic.
15 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Professor, I'll go back to that part that you mentioned, the part
17 of Professor Donia's report. And in that context, can we look at page 79
18 in B/C/S, your report. It is page 58, the third paragraph from the
19 bottom in the English version.
20 You give an example here of Professor Donia mentioning the
21 suffering of the Serbs in the Muslim part of Sarajevo, and you quote a
22 sentence of his:
23 "The lot of those Serbs had also become one of the most
24 controversial aspects of the siege."
25 And then you say:
1 "Of course, when they declared that the civil, ethnic war in
2 Sarajevo was a battle between good and evil, the persecution of Serbs had
3 to become controversial ..."
4 Question -- my question: Methodologically speaking, as you were
5 objecting to Professor Donia, why did you find it necessary to accentuate
6 this; namely, that when he mentions the fate of the Serbs in Sarajevo, he
7 says that that is the most controversial aspect of the siege, one of the
8 most controversial aspects of the siege?
9 A. This was taken from Donia's book, Sarajevo. It's actually not
10 even contained in the report that was submitted to this Court. This
11 sentence is not there either. So I said that in his monograph, the
12 author does have that one single sentence where he refers to Serb victims
13 in Sarajevo. And then there is this sentence about the battle of
14 Pofalici, which is again from his book, Sarajevo. It's not from his
15 report. In my view, to put it very mildly, it is very controversial, to
16 say the least, to write about the war in Sarajevo without any reference
17 to Serb victims, and that is exactly was done in this report. It is
18 shocking. This is a quotation from the author's book and it is
20 Let me not repeat what I wrote here, but if we take as a point of
21 departure that the war in Sarajevo is a war between good and evil, and
22 that the Serbs are evil and the others are the good ones, then perhaps
23 that is part of the answer to His Honour's question. Then you have what
24 happened in Pofalici and then the VRS took action. I don't need to
25 repeat this. In Pofalici, there was a showdown with Serb nationalists.
1 That's what Donia says in his book. You should at least mention the
2 civilian victims in Pofalici. What do Serb sources say about that?
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I'm not quite sure I understand your explanation.
4 Are you referring to a book published by Mr. Donia or his report provided
5 to the Court?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These quotations, these two
7 sentences that were read out are from the book. It's a monograph
8 entitled: Sarajevo, written by Robert Donia. And it's only there that
9 he mentions the fate of these Serbs. In the report that was submitted to
10 the Court here, there is no mention of that. The private prisons for
11 Serbs. No mention of that.
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
13 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Could we now take a look at page 83 in B/C/S - the B/C/S version
15 of your report, Professor - and that is page 61, second paragraph.
16 Underneath the heading, you quote Michael Rose, the commander of
17 UNPROFOR, where he said:
18 "By mid-1994, the Bosnian government undoubtedly stopped
19 supporting the UN peace efforts, believing that a cease-fire could turn
20 into a permanent freeze of the lines of conflict, which would then result
21 in an unfair division of the country."
22 Let me not read on. I will end with the following sentence:
23 "The Bosnian army had an additional goal, to draw the UN and NATO
24 into a land war."
25 Since this is a quotation from Mr. Rose's book, this is what I
1 have to ask you: As you studied developments in Bosnia-Herzegovina,
2 specifically in Sarajevo, did you find that these conclusions of Mr. Rose
3 were right, or, as an objective historian, could one come to a different
5 A. General Michael Rose is not the only one to have presented such a
6 view. In his memoirs, he keeps repeating it. He is very critical of the
7 Serb side as well. However, he is also convinced that in 1994, the
8 Presidency - Alija Izetbegovic and his associates - were trying to make
9 the US and NATO intervene. And bearing that goal in mind, they are
10 prepared to expose their own citizens to suffering. In the Islamic
11 Declaration of Alija Izetbegovic, which was reprinted in 1990, there is
12 that horrifying sentence that says a people who are asleep have to be
13 awakened with blows, and he is heralding an era of suffering for his own
14 people. That is almost verbatim what he says. I quoted it in my report.
15 It is horrifying and, of course, it is up to the historians of Sarajevo,
16 among others, to show what it was that happened there.
17 Q. Professor, finally, I would like to us look at page 87 of the
18 B/C/S version of your report --
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Stojanovic, before we do that, I have one
20 question with respect to the footnote 165 -- no, sorry, I mixed up two
21 matters. I withdraw, and please continue.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, perhaps I would have a question.
23 You said, Witness, that General Rose was also very critical about
24 the Serbs. Where is that exactly to be found in your report?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, you know what? In the report
1 that I analysed, there is ample criticism of the Serbian side and you
2 will find quite --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Would you please answer my question.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My task, my assignment was to
5 critique the text of Robert Donia and Patrick Treanor.
6 JUDGE ORIE: You apparently are explaining something. Do I have
7 to understand that you have not dealt with that for the reasons you start
8 explaining without telling us that you haven't dealt with the critical
9 remarks by General Rose in relation to the Serbs? You explained why you
10 left that out. Is that -- or why you didn't think it -- that you
11 needed -- yes. Okay.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct.
13 JUDGE ORIE: So the simple answer is: I didn't deal with it.
14 And then you can give the reasons or Mr. Stojanovic will ask for the
15 reasons and that's --
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well. I did not include it.
17 And the reason is that this report on 120 pages ...
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 Please proceed, Mr. --
20 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. I will go back to page 87 in B/C/S, and page 64, paragraph 3 from
22 the bottom, in the English version of your report.
23 There, Professor, you say:
24 "However, Robert Donia does not mention the
25 Zimmermann-Izetbegovic episode. On the contrary, he briefly announces,
1 in only one sentence, that the Cutileiro Plan was rejected by all three
2 sides. When discussing the discussion on responsibility, one would
3 expect that this controversial element of the role and responsibility of
4 the USA would at least be mentioned."
5 My question is: Is there any historical information about the
6 position of the US that the BH should not accept the Cutileiro Plan?
7 A. Of course. And I expected the author to mention at least some
8 basic things about it.
9 You have references to the writing of David Binder, a major
10 figure in American journalism, where Zimmermann describes his discussions
11 with Alija Izetbegovic. And he says that Alija Izetbegovic is unhappy
12 with the agreement and Zimmermann's answer is: Why did you sign it then?
13 It was published in the "New York Times" and there is an exact reference.
14 However, in his memoirs later, Zimmermann toned down his role in this
16 Donia refers to David Binder and he says today, meaning 1993,
17 when Binder published this -- who says, I think we were wrong when we
18 convinced Izetbegovic to reject it. So this discussion about the
19 Cutileiro Plan could be very different. From an objective historian, we
20 would at least expect that he explain to us what really happened there.
21 You have to present the basic things. All the time this basic
22 issue arises of history as a profession and the work of the court where
23 we, both of us, are trying to establish what really happened. But we see
24 that the ability of a historian to help, to be of assistance is rather
25 limited. I suppose that Mr. Donia did his best.
1 Q. In view of this answer, do you as a historian believe that in a
2 report such as the one authored by Mr. Donia, there should also be a
3 discussion of the consequences of rejecting the Cutileiro Plan on the
4 peoples in Bosnia-Herzegovina and the country as such?
5 A. I would even say that this kind of normative issue does not have
6 to be posed by a historian. The question of good fortune or bad fortune
7 depends also on the ideology of the historian. But in his two reports,
8 he actually presented some value judgements, his own positions, his
9 political positions, and that's why it be would a good thing if he had
10 posed that question. What did the rejection of the Cutileiro Plan bring
11 to the Croats, Muslims, and Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina? Considering
12 that later in Dayton Bosnia-Herzegovina was divided into entities after
13 all. This reminds us of the power of the major powers and their
14 statesmen and the mistakes they make which are later paid by the regular
15 citizens. And this is one of the major examples of a mistake made by the
16 USA. I hope -- I believe it was not intentional, that it was an honest
18 Q. Now that you've made the solemn declaration in this courtroom, do
19 you fully still stand by the report that you made for the needs of the
20 Defence of General Mladic where you analysed the report of Robert Donia?
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this completes my
23 direct examination of Professor Kovic. And I should like this exhibit,
24 1D05905, to be MFI'd pending the completion of the cross-examination of
25 Professor Kovic.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
2 THE REGISTRAR: That will be MFI D1369, Your Honours.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Marked for identification.
4 Mr. Kovic, you'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Traldi. You'll
5 find Mr. Traldi to your right. Mr. Traldi is counsel for the
7 Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.
8 Cross-examination by Mr. Traldi:
9 Q. Good morning, sir.
10 A. Good morning.
11 Q. The two reports that we've discussed today are your first
12 published works regarding events in the 1990s in Bosnia-Herzegovina;
14 A. Depends on what you understand "published works" to mean.
15 MR. TRALDI: Well, let's have Exhibit D1367.
16 Q. Now, this is the CV you provided to the Defence and reviewed and
17 was admitted into evidence earlier today.
18 Turning to page 2, we see what are described as your principal
19 publications. The first is a book: Disraeli and the Eastern Question.
20 Now Disraeli is Benjamin Disraeli, a 19th-century British prime
21 minister; right?
22 A. That's right.
23 Q. I want to draw your attention to one of these publications:
24 Historiography in Serbia, developments since 1989. Now "historiography"
25 is a term used for two ideas. First, the study of historian's
1 methodology; and second, the body of historical scholarship on a
2 particular subject. Right?
3 A. That's a question of terminology in the Serbian and English
4 languages. When we say "historiography" in Serbian -- I don't want to go
5 into too much detail. History is the science and history is also what
6 happened. Historiography is a synonym for history as a science. That's
7 how it was used here.
8 Q. Which means historiography since 1989 describes developments in
9 the science of history; right?
10 A. I think you are right. That is an overview of what Serbian
11 historians published from 1989 onwards. It's a critical analysis.
12 That's basically the same type of work that I did here. It's a critical
13 analysis of text. I treat historical production as events that I
14 analyse. That's similar to what I've done here.
15 Q. Now, is it right that your CV includes two articles about
16 World War II and the remainder about events in even earlier periods of
18 A. That is correct. But I would say that in this CV you have four
19 articles dedicated to Bosnia-Herzegovina in the 19th century. And if you
20 have read my book about Disraeli, you will see that Bosnia-Herzegovina is
21 in the focus of events and what I deal with is the treatment of major
22 powers of Bosnia-Herzegovina. You have to go back to the 19th century to
23 understand what's happening today. You will not understand the policies
24 of the Armenians if you don't understand the genocide against Armenians.
25 The same applies to the situation of Israel, et cetera.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, I was desperately trying to find it on
2 the present page. But you took us to page 4 of the CV where I
3 find historiography --
4 MR. TRALDI: I have it on page 3.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, it's not here.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but not on page 2. If you would always take us
7 to the page you're referring to.
8 MR. TRALDI: Thank you, Mr. President.
9 Q. Now, sir, it's right, then, now that we've gone through it, that
10 these two reports are your first published works directly dealing with
11 events that occurred in the 1990s in the former Yugoslavia; right?
12 A. Yes, you could say that. The war in Bosnia from 1992 through
14 Q. Now before I get into the topics you discussed on direct
15 examination, I have a couple of questions about other parts of your
17 On page 51 of your Donia report, that is your report responding
18 to expert Donia, you write:
19 "The suffering of civilians of all ethnic groups in Sarajevo
20 cannot be denied or justified."
21 Would you agree that in your report and your testimony this
22 morning you focus on the suffering of Serb civilians in Muslim-controlled
24 A. Yes. And if you allow me to explain, I can tell you for what
25 reason --
1 Q. Sir --
2 A. -- that is missing here.
3 Q. And you've given that explanation on direct.
4 A. Mm-hm.
5 Q. In what ways did you intend to convey in that sentence that
6 Muslim civilians in the city of Sarajevo suffered during the war?
7 A. You have quite enough information about that in the report of
8 Robert Donia that I analysed, which I reviewed. He avoids mentioning
9 Serbian victims as if some victims had a value and others did not.
10 Q. Should I take it, then, that you avoid mentioning Muslim victims
11 because you do not challenge Dr. Donia's description of what happened to
12 Muslim civilians inside the confrontation lines?
13 A. What I do challenge I mentioned in my report. I challenge it in
14 many ways that we've already discussed, but I'm not challenging the
15 suffering of Muslim civilians in Sarajevo or elsewhere in
16 Bosnia-Herzegovina. That was not job. My job was to make a critical
17 analysis of the text that I received. I have a lot of respect for
18 everybody's suffering.
19 Q. Do you challenge that Muslim civilians inside the confrontation
20 lines were terrorised by shelling and sniping?
21 A. You mentioned terrorise. That's a term used in the indictment.
22 And I believe that is wrong. And I explained why what happened in
23 Sarajevo happened. The purpose was not to terrorise. The purpose was to
24 maintain the military personnel of the Muslims, the armed force of the
25 BH, and there was an obvious choice to divide the city. The purpose was
1 not to terrorise. The victimisation was from indiscriminate shelling and
2 sniping. But there was sniping also against Serbs who lived in Dobrinje,
3 Nedzarici, Ilidza, and that is missing in Donia's report.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: I have a question for the gentleman.
5 You say the purpose was not to terrorise. My question to you is:
6 What was the effect?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Like in all wars, people suffer,
8 people are victimized. There was terror also against the Serbs. I
9 repeat, I critiqued the texts that were handed to me. If --
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry, I'm not asking you about the critiquing the
11 texts. I was just asking you what the effect was. You have told us
12 there was terror, so the effect was terrorising. Thank you so much.
13 MR. TRALDI:
14 Q. Now, you said a moment ago, as you say in your Donia report at
15 page 62, that you believe the purpose was to maintain the military
16 personnel of the Muslims, and you explain in the report, in a blockade.
17 Now, if you blockade the urban core of a city, everyone in that
18 urban core is stuck in there; right?
19 A. Could you please show me my report on my screen? I still see
20 only my CV. It would be easier for me to follow your question.
21 Let me go back, if I may, to the previous question. I did not
22 claim that terror was the aim. The aim was to keep the enemy personnel.
23 Even the issue of blockade is disputable. Look at the maps. All the
24 maps showing combat positions in Bosnia-Herzegovina including Sarajevo,
25 maps you can find on the Internet, you will see that Sarajevo is always
1 connected to its hinterland. All maps that were not made in Banja Luka,
2 you will see that Sarajevo is linked to its hinterland. It's not the
3 same as Srebrenica and Zepa. It's an open blockade. Yes, the Serbs
4 tried to block the eastern part and the Muslims were blocking Ilijas,
5 Hadzici, et cetera. The Muslim part of Sarajevo goes into that Serb
6 territory. If this Serbian part was also going into Muslim territory
7 ending with Hadzici, we could also treat it as under blockade.
8 MR. TRALDI: Could we have Exhibit P3. And I'll be looking for
9 page 54.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Meanwhile, may I seek -- did I hear you well when
11 you said: There was terror also against the Serbs. That's what you
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If we are talking about terror
14 against Muslims, then -- if we are using that term, then we should
15 certainly be talking also about terror against the Serbs. That, in my
16 opinion, would be logical.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's not what you said. You said:
18 "Like in all wars, people suffer, people are victimized. There
19 was terror also against the Serbs."
20 That's not: If you talk about terror against Muslims, then you
21 should talk about terror against Serbs as well. You said:
22 "There was also terror against Serbs."
23 It -- we -- I heard you well, or at least I heard the translation
24 well when you said that.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you for that question. In
1 fact, you helped me clarify my position.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I didn't ask to you do that.
3 But please proceed.
4 MR. TRALDI: Could we zoom in on the centre left part of this
5 map. On the left circle.
6 Q. Now, sir, this is an SRK military map. We see red and blue
7 lines. And we see in blue in what represents the urban part of Sarajevo
8 1K, and then we see the abbreviations for different SRK units ringing it.
9 That urban part of Sarajevo is ringed by red lines for VRS
10 forces; right?
11 A. Yes, yes. But please pay attention to the direction towards
12 Butmir, Igman, and Bjelasnica, and further towards the 4th Corps of the
13 BH army that can't be seen here, and further towards Konjic, Mostar, and
14 so on.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, I'm looking at the clock. I think it's
16 time for a break.
17 MR. TRALDI: I agree. Thank you, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: And perhaps this Chamber has heard a lot of evidence
19 about where what troops were around Sarajevo, in Sarajevo, and this
20 Chamber has also heard a lot of evidence that some people consider this
21 to be a siege or an encirclement whereas others describe it in other
22 terms. Now, the Chamber is very much inclined to rely on the facts and
23 we have not heard that much of dispute about the overall position of the
24 troops. Rather, rely on facts on how to qualify them.
25 MR. TRALDI: I take the point, Your Honour. Thank you.
1 JUDGE ORIE: We take a break. We'd like to see you back in
2 20 minutes, Witness.
3 [The witness stands down]
4 JUDGE ORIE: We resume at quarter past 12.00.
5 --- Recess taken at 11.56 a.m.
6 --- On resuming at 12.17 p.m.
7 [The witness takes the stand]
8 JUDGE ORIE: You may proceed, Mr. Traldi.
9 MR. TRALDI: Could we have 65 ter 33442.
10 Q. This is a book titled: "Lessons from Bosnia" by General Michael
11 Rose. You quote this book in your report; right?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And so you would have reviewed it yourself, read it yourself?
14 A. No, that's not the book -- oh, it is. It is "Fighting for
15 Peace," isn't it? Yes, that's the book. I read its Serbian translation.
16 Q. And you would have chosen which portions to include in your
17 report; right?
18 A. I'll tell you specifically, in the Serbian edition it was
19 pages 40 and 41, if my memory serves me well. Of course, in the Serbian
20 version as I have said. You'll see where it is here.
21 MR. TRALDI: If we could have page 25 of this document.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, I do not know how much attention you're
23 going to pay to the book or not, but the witness, I think, has explained
24 already that he has not paid any attention to criticism to the Serb side
25 for the reasons as he explained. And I was about to say to the witness
1 don't worry about that because the author has appeared here as a witness,
2 so we have a lot of information about his views on the matter.
3 Please keep this in the back of your mind. I don't know where
4 you're going, but it may be of some assistance to you.
5 MR. TRALDI: It will, I think. In two instances, I'll be testing
6 the witness's representation of what's in the book. Though that will
7 relate to criticisms of the Serb side, I'm afraid.
8 Q. We read at the start of the last paragraph here, the bottom of
9 the page:
10 "A state in danger of collapse, as Bosnia was in 1992, will
11 initially depend on the presence of UN forces for its survival."
12 Now, you leave this out and you start your quote:
13 By mid-1994, the Bosnian government had undoubtedly ceased to
14 support the peacekeeping efforts of the UN, believing that a cease-fire
15 might turn into a permanent freezing of the conflict line which would
16 then result in an unfair division" - turning to the next page at the
17 top - "of the country. It therefore ordered its army to move to
18 offensive operations to recover territory lost in previous battles with
19 the Serbs, thus bringing it into confrontation with the UN whose job it
20 was to restore peace to the country."
21 And this reference to lost territory you also exclude.
22 Now what I'm putting to you is that your recitation of this
23 paragraph leaves out the information that the VRS had conquered much of
24 the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina; right?
25 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, would you not try to interrupt Mr. Traldi
1 when is he speaking. But apparently there was something of concern to
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I beg your pardon. Yes, I can no
4 longer see the paragraph. Somehow it disappeared, the paragraph that
5 you're referring to. Is it between pages 8 and 9? I don't see it before
6 my eyes now. I don't see what it was that I omitted.
7 A few moments ago I saw it and now it's no longer there.
8 JUDGE ORIE: We moved from page 8 to page 9, I think. And
9 perhaps, Mr. Traldi, we could go back to page 8 again --
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well.
11 JUDGE ORIE: -- because as far as we are --
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There's no need. I mean, I
13 understand it now.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. TRALDI:
16 Q. So the part I'm putting to you you'd left out was that in 1992
17 the Bosnian government was -- and just to make sure I have the words
18 right, was in danger of collapse and dependant on the presence of the UN
19 forces for its survival.
20 Do you feel it's necessary to understand what General Rose is
21 saying in this portion to also have that text?
22 A. Can I see the sentence again? That is to say, page 8 first.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Could we move one page back.
24 MR. TRALDI: That's the start of the bottom paragraph.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well [In English] A state in
1 danger of collapse.
2 [Interpretation] I see the sentence. I don't see what is in
3 dispute there. So:
4 "A state in danger of collapse, as Bosnia was in 1992, would
5 initially depend on the presence of UN forces for its survival."
6 I don't see what your point is. Omitting this sentence, what
7 would that prove, in your opinion? Well, okay. I'll wait for you to say
8 what you had to say, yes.
9 MR. TRALDI:
10 Q. Is it your evidence that can you properly understand
11 General Rose's description here without his information that in 1992,
12 when the war began to sweep across Bosnia and Herzegovina, when the VRS
13 campaign began to sweep across Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Bosnian state
14 was in danger of collapse?
15 A. He does not mention any campaign of the Army of Republika Srpska
16 here at all. I mean, that's not contained in these sentences. So, yes,
17 I confirm that the quotation I provided reflects General Michael Rose's
18 position. There is no mention of the VRS here, as you say. You see,
19 it's not here. It is a state in danger of collapse and that was Bosnia
20 in 1992. It depends on the presence of UN forces for its survival. And
21 the leaders will -- I think that's quite clear. Yes, please go ahead.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Could you simply answer the question. Mr. Traldi
23 asked you whether you think that not including that first sentence, that
24 we would be able to fully understand the position General Rose took in
25 this book in this paragraph.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The answer is yes, of course.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please proceed.
3 MR. TRALDI:
4 Q. Now you called attention to the VRS not being explicitly
5 mentioned. In your expert opinion as a historian, who was endangering
6 the survival of the Bosnian state in 1992? Was it you, me, ghostbusters?
7 It was the VRS; right?
8 A. Since you're asking me as a historian, then you run the risk of
9 hearing a very lengthy answer to this question, how the war in Bosnia
10 came about. And I've already referred to that in other sources. If you
11 believe that the war started by Serbs, the VRS attacking someone -- yes,
12 please go ahead.
13 Q. Do you understand that this case isn't about who started the war
14 but about crimes committed during it?
15 A. You're putting a different question to you me now. Can we go
16 back to the first question that you put to me and then I can answer them
17 one at a time.
18 So you asked me about, what, the ghostbusters. What was it that
19 you were asking me about it? What do the ghostbusters have to do with
20 this and please could we be serious on this matter?
21 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, you seem to be very upset about the matter.
22 Please remain calm. You're not here to -- just answer the questions and
23 focus on that. Yes?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, so here's my answer.
25 I'm not upset at all. I just don't see what the ghostbusters
1 have to do with the suffering of people in Herzegovina in 1992.
2 JUDGE ORIE: The question simple was - and let me read it again
3 to you - who started -- no, no, that was -- the last question that was
4 put to you was whether you understand that this case is not about who
5 started the war but that the case is about crimes committed during the
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please, these are two questions. I
8 read the first one. I was asked, as a historian, who it was that
9 threatened the survival of the Bosnian state in 1992. Then came this
10 second question. Which question would you like me to answer? The second
12 JUDGE ORIE: If you would have listened well, you would have
13 known that I put the second question to you. We might go to the first
14 question as well. Could you please answer that second question without
15 starting a debate about what question I did put.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So I understand that crimes are the
17 topic. The reports I read and analysed have to do with who started the
18 war and crimes that were committed. So I'm going back to my task and the
19 topic at hand. And I believe that the reference to the ghostbusters
20 shows who it is that is upset here.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Apparently that upset you very much which even makes
22 you not answer the question. The question is not what your task is here,
23 but whether you understand that this case is not about who started the
24 war. And forget about the ghostbusters for a second. The case is not
25 about who started the war but the case is about crimes committed during
1 the war. Do you understand that?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Then Mr. Traldi may proceed.
4 Mr. Traldi, perhaps since the witness is apparently concerned
5 about a matter not having been dealt with, although he did not answer the
6 question right away, but could you repeat the previous question without
8 MR. TRALDI: I take the point, Your Honour.
9 Q. Sir, it was the VRS that was threatening the nascent state of
10 Bosnia's survival in 1992; right?
11 A. You know what? Separatists, secessionists amongst the leadership
12 of the Muslims and Croats in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina took
13 part in the destruction of the state of Yugoslavia. With their
14 paramilitary units, they attacked regular units. That is, the JNA, the
15 regular units of the federal Republic of Yugoslavia. So they jeopardized
16 the existence of Yugoslavia. Then the war in Bosnia ensued. You know
17 what the chronology was.
18 And in addition to that, if you allow me, Croatian troops, troops
19 of the Republic of Croatia were in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina at
20 least from March 1992 until the end of the war.
21 Q. Sir -- sir, I'm --
22 A. Is that perhaps jeopardy --
23 JUDGE ORIE: It seems that you want to say: No, it's not true.
24 Is that what you want to say?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Well, then tell us and just say: It is not true.
2 And then we'll see what next question of Mr. Traldi will be.
3 Furthermore, Mr. Mladic should refrain from in any way expressing
4 being happy or unhappy with answers.
5 And you should not in any way seek eye contact with the Defence.
6 It's Mr. Traldi who examines you, so please focus on him and on this
8 And, Mr. Mladic, if you would also turn in this direction and
9 avoid any inappropriate contact with the public gallery. Mr. Mladic, you
10 know what I'm talking about.
11 Please proceed.
12 MR. TRALDI:
13 Q. Sir, we saw on the next page that a reference to territories that
14 the Bosnian government had lost in battles with the Serbs, you recognise
15 those battles were primarily with the VRS; right?
16 A. That's the next page; right? I can't see that page here. It's
17 page 9, isn't it? May I please see that section?
18 Q. It's at the top of your page, sir.
19 A. Very well. So, yes, the government is ordering an offensive in
20 order to return territories that were --
21 Q. Sir, I'm going to ask you to answer my question. You recognise
22 that those battles in which the territory had been lost, those were
23 battles against the VRS; right? It was the VRS at that took that
25 A. Yes, I am answering. These were battles with the Army of
1 Republika Srpska.
2 Q. You don't mention at any point in either report what happened to
3 the non-Serbs that lived in the territory that the Bosnian government had
4 lost, do you?
5 A. Should I repeat what my task was as an expert witness? Analysing
6 the report of Robert Donia and Patrick Treanor, and there's no reference
7 to that in these reports. We can discuss the general history of the war
8 in Bosnia-Herzegovina but the question is where this is going to take us.
9 Q. Sir, I'm going to stop you --
10 A. I did not therefore write about --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, now you have given the reasons why. You
12 have not answered the question. The question is that you didn't, isn't
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Please.
16 MR. TRALDI:
17 Q. Turning to page 52, we read General Rose's comment at the top
19 During the war the Bosnian Muslims became the main victims of a
20 deliberate and systematic policy of ethnic cleansing and in certain areas
21 extermination. Although all three sides were to some extent guilty of
22 war crimes, genocide as defined by the UN Convention on Genocide did not
23 form part of official Bosnian government policy in the way that it so
24 clearly did with the Serbs.
25 Now what I put to you is you can't understand the part of the
1 text that you quoted without knowing what had happened in these
2 territories that had been lost, the deliberate and systematic policy of
3 ethnic cleansing, extermination, and genocide. That's the truth; right?
4 A. No. As for extermination and the fate of Muslims under the
5 territory that is held in Bosnian Serb hands, that is what Patrick
6 Treanor and Robert Donia write about extensively. That was not the
7 subject of my analysis. My topic was the analysis of their texts and
8 what you referred to just now is something that they deal with
9 extensively in their reports.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kovic, the question was a different one. The
11 question was whether you could understand the portion you quoted from
12 General Rose without taking into account this portion of his book as
13 well. That was the question. Not whether it's true or not, but whether
14 you could understand General Rose's position on the part you quoted
15 without also considering this portion of the book.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. One can understand where
17 I quoted him absolutely. Yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
19 MR. TRALDI:
20 Q. Now you talk -- you talked at length this morning about needing
21 to understand the motivations of historical actors. If the Bosnian
22 Presidency had discussed, for instance, the need to resist in peace
23 agreements solidifying and making permanent territorial changes caused by
24 ethnic cleansing and genocide, would that change your opinion as to
25 whether you needed to see this portion to understand the part you've
2 A. I must admit that I did not understand your question. Could you
3 please put a shorter and simpler question to me. Maybe it's a matter of
4 translation, interpretation.
5 MR. TRALDI: I'll try and be very quick and I'm going to just go
6 to a document, but before I do, I'd ask that an exhibit number be
7 reserved for excerpts from this book. It's been used with a couple of
8 different witnesses now.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
10 THE REGISTRAR: The number reserved will be P7718, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE ORIE: And that is reserved for excerpts still to be
12 uploaded into e-court of General Rose's book.
13 The witness asked, and I think that it's fair that he has an
14 opportunity to answer the question. The question -- let me see whether I
15 understood it, Mr. Traldi, because it, indeed, was a long question.
16 Do you think that these observations given by General Rose are
17 relevant for understanding why the Bosnian government resisted in peace
18 agreements which would solidify and make permanent territorial changes?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. That motivation of the
20 Bosnian government is in this part that I quoted. Do take a look at what
21 it was that I quoted. It says that they had put up resistance in 1994
22 because they thought that Serbs had taken an enormous area and they
23 wanted to take over that territory. So I quote that. Please take a look
24 at that.
25 MR. TRALDI:
1 Q. Sir --
2 A. I did refer to the motivation of that government there.
3 Q. Let me ask very specifically, the motivation to avoid solidifying
4 the results of ethnic cleansing and genocide, that's not explicitly in
5 the part you quote; right?
6 A. If you mention ethnic cleansing and genocide, it was committed
7 against the Serbs as well in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Perhaps the Serbs
8 wanted to regain some of these territories from which they had been
9 expelled. That would be my answer to your question.
10 So let me repeat. In the quotation that I provided in the book,
11 I refer to the motivation of the government, the Presidency of
12 Alija Izetbegovic, that they want to regain or, rather, take these
13 territories. You can see that. That is contained in that quotation. If
14 that's the question.
15 Q. Now, sir, I see you're returned once again to talking about what
16 had happened to Serbs. Do you contest that ethnic cleansing was
17 committed against Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats?
18 A. No, I'm not contesting that. And I've already said that crimes
19 were committed -- I mean, that's what Michael Rose says as well. There
20 were crimes that were committed by all sides and against all sides in
21 that war. I'm not denying that. But my task was not to write the
22 history of the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina. I repeat.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, it was a simple question without any claim
24 that you should have mentioned that in this question. So there's no need
25 to repeat that again and again. You've answered the question.
1 MR. TRALDI:
2 Q. Do you contest that ethnic cleansing of Bosnian Muslims and
3 Bosnian Croats was committed by, among others, the VRS?
4 A. That was not the subject of my work, and I was not called here to
5 answer that.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the question is now put to you. If can you
7 answer the question, please do so. If you can't answer that question,
8 then please tell us why you cannot answer the question.
9 First of all, that you cannot answer the question; and if asked,
10 why you can't answer the question.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So I can't. Because my task was to
12 analyse the reports of these two experts, not to write the history of
13 ethnic cleansing in parts of Bosnia-Herzegovina. I repeat: One report
14 is dedicated to Sarajevo, and I want to answer questions about Sarajevo.
15 I want to answer questions that have to do with my report and the reports
16 of the two Prosecution experts. We could go into the general history of
17 the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina but that's not why I was called here.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, you are called here to testify and answer
19 questions irrespective of whether you had on your mind that those
20 questions were relevant and should be put to you. The Defence called
21 you. The Prosecution, in cross-examination, can ask whatever relevant
22 questions they think that should be put to you.
23 So it's not for you to decide what the subject matter is. If you
24 don't know certain things, tell us. But don't tell us that you're not
25 here to answer these questions, because you're here to answer all
1 questions that are put to you which are not objected to by the other
2 party and which are considered to be relevant by this Chamber.
3 Please proceed.
4 MR. TRALDI:
5 Q. Now, sir, at page 8 of your report responding to Patrick Treanor,
6 now MFI D1368, you write that Treanor's conclusion summarizes "the road
7 covered by the Bosnian Serbs from the referendum on 9 and 10
8 November 1991 until the end of 1992 when they controlled 70 per cent of
9 the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina and engaged in ethnic cleansing."
10 Do you not express your own view of this conclusion directly in
11 the report. Should I take it from your answers this morning that you do
12 not contest it?
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojanovic.
14 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I should like to
15 ask the expert to be given this text on the screen so he can see the
16 context. Or maybe we could give him the English version in hard copy.
17 MR. TRALDI: I --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, I think it's a fair request.
19 MR. TRALDI: Of course. And I'd given the number. If we could
20 just have page 8 in the English for the witness.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would prefer to see it in
22 Serbian, if possible.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, if you would wait for a second until it
24 appears, then you'll see that the Serb version is there, even without you
25 insisting on it.
1 Please proceed. And we do not even have the English version at
2 this moment.
3 MR. TRALDI: I do, however, have clean copies in both languages
4 of the witness's Treanor report, which I can offer him.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You'll be provided with a hard copy, Witness,
6 so you're always in a position to ...
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I just saw it a moment ago, the
8 Serbian text. It was fine.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, if you have it --
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It has disappeared from the screen.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: We have on both sides the English version.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. You always -- if there's a B/C/S version, you
14 always have it on your screen, and for your own report you have hard
15 copies with you as well. So that should resolve the problem. Although
16 the hard copies were not shown to the -- Defence has refrained from
17 inspecting them.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. TRALDI: And I believe it's page 9 in the B/C/S.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please repeat your question, Mr. Traldi.
21 MR. TRALDI:
22 Q. Now, you referred to paragraph 4 of the Treanor report's
23 conclusion, you say that summarizes stage by stage the road covered by
24 the "Bosnian Serbs from the referendum on 9 and 10 November 1991 until
25 the end of 1992 when they controlled 70 per cent of the territory of
1 Bosnia and Herzegovina and engaged in ethnic cleansing."
2 Should I take it from your answers this morning that you do not
3 contest this conclusion of Mr. Treanor's?
4 A. No. I contest it, and I can explain.
5 Q. Go ahead.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, I don't know whether I found it. What
7 you were reading.
8 MR. TRALDI: Second full paragraph in the English on the
9 right-hand side, Mr. President.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, yes, I see it. Yes, I see it now.
11 Yes, please explain why you do contest.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the continuation of that
13 paragraph of mine, it's clear why I contest it. Because in this
14 conclusion in the report by Mr. Treanor which describes that path that,
15 quote/unquote, the Bosnian Serbs went, the ethnic cleansing by the other
16 sides is not even mentioned. I called that conclusion absurd.
17 And in paragraph 72 of that report, it is said that the VRS was
18 arming its followers in the autumn of 1991 with complete silence covering
19 the prior arming of the armies of the HDZ and SDA. And I must say that
20 the Defence provided me with reports on -- in hard copy, but I don't know
21 whether I should be concentrating instead on what I see on the screen.
22 MR. TRALDI:
23 Q. Do you contest that, as he says, the Bosnian Serbs engaged in
24 ethnic cleansing during 1992? Yes or no.
25 A. My answer can be only this: The ethnic cleansing was committed
1 in that war by all three sides. And that's also in the paragraph written
2 by Michael Rose, the one that you've read.
3 Q. One of those sides was the Bosnian Serbs; right?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Now, you testified at length this morning about the need to cite
6 sources from all sides. The most authoritative sources to evaluate
7 whether General Mladic intended or planned that ethnic cleansing, those
8 are his own words; right?
9 A. No. And I can say why.
10 Q. Go on.
11 A. You cannot write the history of the events in Bosnia-Herzegovina
12 based on one source. You have to compare it with other sources. I
13 should like Prosecutor, sir, if you had given us notes by Ejub Ganic or
14 Abu Hamza Al-Masri, the Mujahedin who was fighting on the side of the
15 Bosnian Muslims, and then I could answer your question.
16 Q. Sir, I understand that you would rather repeat the names of
17 Muslim figures. What would Abu Hamza Al-Masri's notes tell you about
18 General Mladic's intent?
19 A. In history --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mladic, this is --
21 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Excuse me, Your Honour, we did
22 not receive the interpretation of this question and that's what
23 Mr. Mladic was trying to draw our attention to.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Did you receive interpretation of the question?
25 Yes? Yes. That's surprising then that -- but could you please repeat it
1 because apparently Mr. Mladic did not -- neither did you,
2 Mr. Stojanovic.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me, no, what I saw is also
4 not clear, that there are Muslim figures mentioned but not Abu Hamza
5 Al-Masri. The question is really not clear.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Well, whether it's clear or not is a different
8 Could you please repeat the question, Mr. Traldi.
9 MR. TRALDI:
10 Q. What would those Muslim figures' notes tell you about
11 General Mladic's intent?
12 A. In history, there is no action that takes place without some
13 cause. All history of war is the history of action and reaction between
14 warring parties.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Would you answer the question, please. The question
16 is what those comments, those texts, would tell you about the intent of
17 Mr. Mladic. That was the question.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The answer to the question whether
19 the notes of General Mladic are the main source of information about
20 ethnic cleansing. The answer is no because it needs to be compared to
21 other sources. Cross-referencing between sources, just like the Court
22 compares statements and testimony by different witnesses.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You apparently, again, misinterpreted the
25 MR. TRALDI:
1 Q. In fact, the key source to cross-reference his statements would
2 have been the precise events on the ground that you say you intentionally
3 excluded from the ambit of your report; right?
4 A. No, I did not do that intentionally, nor any other way.
5 MR. TRALDI: Could I have 65 ter 00994.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, if you want an answers to your
7 questions, next time don't put two questions in one and take them one by
8 one, whether the key sources and then the second issue is whether it was
9 intentionally left out. Because you only got an answer to that last
10 portion of your question.
11 MR. TRALDI: I appreciate that.
12 Q. Sir, would you agree the events on the ground -- the events on
13 the ground would be the key source to cross-reference statements with to
14 determine a historical figure's intent?
15 A. Of course, the events on the ground, yes.
16 MR. TRALDI: Now, this is an article in Nin, an interview with
17 General Mladic titled: "I am just a soldier." If we could turn to page
18 3 in the English and 2 in the B/C/S, and the second column underneath the
19 picture. And I don't believe we have the correct page in the English.
20 Sorry, if we could have page 4 in the English.
21 Q. Now General Mladic has been asked about the reason for the
22 Muslim-Croat war. And he says, starting a few lines in:
23 "We all know who the Turks are. As a matter of fact, these
24 Muslims are not even Turks, they are converts. They have betrayed the
25 Serb people and repressed them for 500 years. That was the worst scum -
1 the Serb people who changed their religion."
2 This is the sort of statement that would assist a historian in
3 evaluating General Mladic's intent and purpose; right?
4 A. Again, I didn't want to interrupt, but I don't see the Serbian
5 version of this text. What is shown here is not the same.
6 In the meantime, I can answer --
7 JUDGE ORIE: We'll find -- if you insist, we'll find it.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Once we've found it, you may answer the
11 MR. TRALDI:
12 Q. It begins at the bottom of the first column but you can see in
13 the third line below the picture, I mentioned the words "500 years" that
14 are part of what I'd read out.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Could we move a little bit further to the left on
16 the picture so that we have ...
17 Yes, have you found it?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Would you then please answer the question.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Again, I'm answering as a
21 historian. That's why I'm here. You will find similar statements on the
22 side waging war against the Serbs. I mentioned a couple of names.
23 There's no need to repeat them. As a historian, I'm telling you you have
24 to compare.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, I'm stopping you again. Would you please
1 answer the question as it was put to you.
2 Mr. Traldi, perhaps you repeat the question.
3 MR. TRALDI:
4 Q. This is the sort of statement that would assist a historian in
5 evaluating General Mladic's intent and purpose; right?
6 A. In war, that is called war propaganda. What was stated in an
7 interview to a publication called Nin is proof of nothing that happened
8 on the ground.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Witness --
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- our people often say things that
11 don't mean -- unfortunately, especially in such circumstances. Words are
12 one thing. Actions are another.
13 JUDGE ORIE: So your simple answer is this does not assist in
14 understanding the intents of Mr. Mladic. Is that your answer?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This could be one of the sources.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Why don't you answer the question then
17 directly in that sense instead of taking us to all kind of reasoning.
18 Whereas we expect, first of all, an answer to the question. So now you
19 say this may be a source to better understand the intent of Mr. Mladic.
20 Next question, please.
21 MR. TRALDI: I tender this interview.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P7719, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
25 MR. TRALDI: Can we have P6647.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mladic, no speaking aloud. And this is the last
2 warning. You know what will happen if you continue.
3 [Defence counsel confer]
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Traldi, I missed out the 65 ter number of
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It was 65 ter 994.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
8 JUDGE ORIE: And we're still waiting for the English version of
9 the document you called. Yes, there we are.
10 MR. TRALDI: Now if we could go to the fifth paragraph here.
11 Q. This is a set of guide-lines for the work of the
12 Sarajevo-Romanija Corps's organ for legal, morale, and religious affairs
13 dated the 2nd of December, 1994, and authored by Luka Dragicevic. In
14 that fifth paragraph, he writes:
15 "Yes, we are genetically stronger, better, more handsome, and
16 cleverer. Try to remember how many Muslims there were among the top ten
17 pupils, students or soldiers. Only a few. Why? Because they are
18 Poturice, and only the weakest of the Serbs became Poturice."
19 Now what we see here is the dissemination of General Mladic's
20 attitude as expressed in that earlier interview through the organ for
21 morale to the troops in the VRS; right?
22 A. My answer has to be the same as the answer to what Robert Donia
23 said. This is only part of the history of the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
24 This is only one fragment.
25 Q. Sir --
1 A. We can talk --
2 Q. This is the fragment that you're currently being asked about.
3 Are you able to answer the question?
4 A. Yes. This is only part of all the facts about the civil war in
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kovic, it was not put to you that this is the
7 whole of the history. The question was put to you whether this
8 corresponds with what we just saw, what was reported as what Mr. Mladic
9 said in an interview. That's the question.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think I've answered that
12 JUDGE ORIE: No, you have not. And if you consistently continue
13 not to answer the questions, then we have to think about how to deal with
14 your testimony. Because you're consistently not answering the questions.
15 You say, This is not the whole history of the war. That wasn't the
16 question. The question was whether what is written down in this
17 paragraph which was read to you, whether that corresponds with what we
18 just saw as a published answer by Mr. Mladic in a newspaper or at least
19 in a -- in a publication.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well. As a historian, I
21 can -- I have to ask you who signed this document? Where does it come
22 from? What is the source for this document?
23 MR. TRALDI:
24 Q. Sir -- sir --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, you're not here -- you're here to answer
1 questions. The authenticity of this document is not something which is
2 discussed at this moment.
3 You're just -- a portion was read to you and the question is
4 whether that corresponds, as far as the content is concerned, with what
5 we saw a minute ago, as what was published as an interview with
6 Mr. Mladic.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And in addition to that at the beginning of the
8 question --
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: At the beginning of the question Mr. Traldi put
11 to you, he explained exactly what it is, what kind of document, who
12 signed it, who authored it, and where it came from. If you would have
13 listened to his question, you wouldn't have asked this again.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You know what? I'm trying to
15 follow what's going on here and find this passage. I cannot find it so
16 quickly. I see that what's written here is: Milenko Perendija,
17 information and guide-lines. I listened --
18 MR. TRALDI:
19 Q. Sir -- sir --
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Listen to the question. Just listen to the
21 questions. Nothing else.
22 MR. TRALDI:
23 Q. Look at the fifth paragraph, fifth full paragraph, beginning in
24 the second full sentence you'll see the portion I read. Does it
25 correspond to the opinion General Mladic expressed in the interview we
1 saw that the worst scum was Serbs who had changed their religion and
2 become Bosnian Muslims, yes or no?
3 A. No. No.
4 Q. Now, Poturice refers to Serbs who changed their religion and
5 became Muslims; right?
6 A. Yes, that's a derogatory term. And I can explain if you wish.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Microphone not activated]
8 MR. TRALDI:
9 Q. And you refused to agree that the statement that they were the
10 weakest of the Serbs, that Serbs are stronger, better, more handsome, and
11 cleverer corresponds to the view expressed by General Mladic; is that
13 A. May I just ask who the author of this text is?
14 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, Witness, that's not an issue at this
15 moment. This is a document which is -- is an exhibit number which is
16 admitted into evidence, and if there would be anyone -- first of all, it
17 has been explained to you. You're advised not to put such questions
18 again if it was explained to you, but you nevertheless do it again.
19 Could you please focus on the question.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, there's not a
21 cause-and-effect relationship, not necessarily.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Also that wasn't asked. But if you continue to give
23 answers to questions that were not put to you -- the only question is
24 whether they correspond as far as the content is concerned. That's the
25 question. Not whether the one followed the one, or the other followed
1 the one, causal relationships, none of that. Does the content of this
2 portion read to you correspond with what was read to you as what
3 Mr. Mladic would have said during an interview?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There is a certain similarity. You
5 don't need a historian to tell you that.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
7 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, I see we're close to the time for the
8 break. I'm about to turn to a new topic. In view of the length of any
9 individual question, I'd suggest for continuity we take the break now.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Then we take the break now. Witness, we'd like to
11 see you back in 20 minutes from now. You may follow the usher.
12 [The witness stands down]
13 JUDGE ORIE: We will resume at 25 minutes to 2.00.
14 --- Recess taken at 1.12 p.m.
15 --- On resuming at 1.35 p.m.
16 [The witness takes the stand]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, may I remind you that you really should
18 focus on answering the questions. The Defence has called you as a
19 witness, as an expert witness. That means that you're exposed to
20 cross-examination by the Prosecution. If you have concerns about the
21 Prosecution taking matters out of balance, then Mr. Stojanovic later has
22 an opportunity in re-examination to strike that balance again. Most of
23 the questions are not to strike the final historical balance but are very
24 simple ones, about facts, about your opinion, does the one correspond
25 with the other, yes or no. What that means or what conclusions one
1 should draw about that, as long as that is not asked, just leave it as it
3 I'm telling you this because it's important that we do not lose
4 your evidence and this Chamber is not -- there are limits to our patience
5 as far as you answering the questions is concerned. So we expect you to
6 give clear answers to clear questions.
7 Mr. Traldi, you may proceed.
8 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter --
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I beg your pardon. Do I have the
10 right to say something now?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Well, very briefly.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My expectation was that there would
13 be a discussion of what it was that I had written, what I had worked on.
14 This kind of questions really go very far away from what it was that I
15 was doing, so I must say that I am very focussed.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Then perhaps you were not really prepared
17 sufficiently by the party that was calling. But at this moment it's not
18 a matter of discussion. It's a matter of answering questions that are
19 put to you.
20 Mr. Traldi, your next question, please.
21 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter 07923.
22 Q. As it comes up, you mention regionalisation in your Treanor
23 report, now MFI D1368. The truth is the Bosnian Serbs pursued a policy
24 of regionalisation dictated from the highest levels; right?
25 A. It could be put that way too.
1 MR. TRALDI: Could we have page 5 in English, page 3 in B/C/S at
2 item 5.
3 Q. These are minutes of a meeting of the SDS Executive Board dated
4 the 7th of November, 1991. Item 5, we see reference to a report on
5 regionalisation, and that the former commission should prepare a
6 blueprint for the organisation of the regions and the manner of
7 functioning of their local authorities, and that conditions should be
8 created which would allow the observance of the principle that every
9 region should include and incorporate the national and territorial
10 treasures. This is one example of the policy of regionalisation being
11 controlled from the highest levels of the SDS; right?
12 A. Yes. But it's November 1991. That should be borne in mind as
13 well. That is a particular historical moment.
14 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter 03632.
15 Q. Now, these are the minutes of the SAO Romanija Assembly Session
16 held on the 11th of December, 1991, in Pale. We see in the introduction
17 that the prime minister designate is D. Blagojevic. Now turning to
18 page 5 in English, 4 in B/C/S, in the last paragraph, we see
19 Drago Blagojevic speak. And he says:
20 "This Assembly fully supports the SDS and its personnel policies,
21 as well as the Main Board of the SDS and the Assembly of the Serbian
22 People in BH."
23 This is a reflection of this SAO's support for the
24 Central Bosnian Serb authorities; right?
25 A. Should I answer the question? Yes, yes. This is already
1 December 1991. And the Muslims and Croats expressed themselves in favour
2 of secession and independence in Parliament in spite of the
3 democratically expressed will of the Serbs.
4 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter 02545.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could you repeat the number, please.
6 MR. TRALDI: 02545.
7 Q. Now, these are the minutes of the second meeting of the Serb
8 Assembly's ministerial council which was held on the 17th of January,
9 1992. Turning to page 4 in both languages, at the bottom of the page we
10 see a reference to the draft work programme of the ministerial council of
11 the Assembly of the Serbian People of BH. And we read that:
12 "The territory should be organised in such a way as to enlarge
13 the territory of the regions and encompass a larger number of" - turning
14 to the next page in the English only - "inhabitants wherever possible in
15 order to consolidated regions both ethnically and economically."
16 Now, ethnic consolidation was part of the goal of the
17 regionalisation process as we see here; right?
18 A. No. I can answer further, if you wish.
19 Q. Go ahead.
20 A. Ethnic territories -- this is January 1992. Let us not forget
21 the time when this is happening. All three ethnic communities are doing
22 that in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Croats in western Herzegovina had already
23 rounded off their own territories, consolidated their territories. The
24 Muslims and Croats had violated the constitution of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
25 That happened November 1991.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, I'll stop you again. You again and again
2 point at what the others did. The question was about regionalisation as
3 committed -- it doesn't mean -- that question doesn't mean that the
4 others may not have done the same. You do not know what evidence we have
5 for that already. So therefore there's no need to tell that -- what the
6 others did, but just focus on the question. And the question was whether
7 ethnic consolidation was part of the goal of the regionalisation process
8 as we see in this document.
9 Was it or was it not?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it was.
11 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, I tender the last three documents.
12 First, 65 ter 07923.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
14 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P7720, Your Honours.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted.
16 MR. TRALDI: 65 ter 03632.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
18 THE REGISTRAR: That's Exhibit P7721.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted.
20 MR. TRALDI: And 65 ter 02545.
21 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P7722, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I waited a second in order to give our
23 transcriber the time to write down all the numbers.
24 P7722 is admitted into evidence.
25 Please proceed.
1 MR. TRALDI: I --
2 JUDGE ORIE: The others -- the other ones -- yes, I think the
3 first one, 7720, was admitted already. And then 7722 is admitted into
4 evidence. And then I think there's still one missing.
5 MR. TRALDI: If I might assist, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. TRALDI: It was 65 ter 03632 which when I tendered it was
8 assigned P7721.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Is admitted hereby.
10 Please proceed.
11 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter 03580.
12 Q. Now this is a book by Warren Zimmermann. When you refer to his
13 memoirs in footnote 175 of your report and your testimony this morning,
14 this is the book you're referring to; right?
15 A. Yes, I mentioned the statement he gave to David Binder, and I
16 mentioned this book; I mean, Zimmermann.
17 Q. Turning to page 214. Now, I'm asking you about this in the
18 context of your reference to discussions of dividing Bosnia in 1991. We
19 read here Tudjman -- or Zimmermann says Tudjman told him he had spoken
20 with Milosevic, the Yugoslav army leadership, and the Bosnian Serbs, and
21 "they agreed that the only solution is to divide up Bosnia between Serbia
22 and Croatia."
23 He writes that Tudjman had said he didn't insist on a
24 50/50 division.
25 "Let Milosevic take the larger part. He controls it anyway. We
1 can do with less than 50 per cent. We're willing to leave the Muslims a
2 small area around Sarajevo."
3 You mention Zimmermann in the context of dividing Bosnia. Why do
4 you not refer to this part of his book?
5 A. Because my report would not be 90 pages long. It has to do with
6 the report on Professor Donia's report. It would be 200 pages long or
7 190 pages long. It doesn't say anything if it's is not compared to the
8 other ones.
9 Now did Tudjman say this? I assume that that's what he said to
10 Zimmermann, although that's not what you said just now. Now, did he
11 really say that to Zimmerman? Did Tudjman really talk to Milosevic about
12 that? Was it 50/50, was it --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, I'll stop you again. You have given an
14 answer to the question why you have left it out. You were not invited to
15 further comment on the truth of what Mr. Zimmermann wrote.
16 Please proceed.
17 MR. TRALDI:
18 Q. Turning to page 220, we see Zimmermann's reference to the Lisbon
19 negotiations which you discussed at the bottom. And then turning to
20 page 221, at the top, we see his description of discussions with Karadzic
21 in late February 1992, then scrolling down, that Karadzic was embarked on
22 what he calls a talk-fight strategy to play out the negotiations to get a
23 veto over independence and then threaten war if independence were carried
24 through. He says Karadzic and Milosevic had a common bottom line, a
25 division of Bosnia, leaving the Serbs in control of two-thirds of it.
1 These portions of Zimmermann's discussion of the Lisbon
2 negotiations were also all missing from your report; right?
3 A. Yes. And I can explain why.
4 Q. Go ahead.
5 A. It's barely relevant. Zimmermann, because of his support to
6 Alija Izetbegovic to reject the plan, has an unclear conscience. This is
7 interesting, this statement, it is noteworthy, but it doesn't prove a
9 Q. Turning to the top of the next page, we read that Izetbegovic had
10 heard about Karadzic's collusion with the Croats and was furious.
11 And turning back to the bottom of the previous page --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, I have some concerns about your
13 reference to page numbers. I think we're now at 221. Is that ...
14 MR. TRALDI: We --
15 JUDGE ORIE: In e-court.
16 MR. TRALDI: We'd gone to it and had now moved back to 220, I
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. What we see on the screen now is 221 in
20 MR. TRALDI: Okay. I appreciate the Registrar sensing what I was
21 looking for then.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's move on.
23 MR. TRALDI:
24 Q. At the bottom of the page, we read that:
25 "The Bosnian Serb leader met a day later with one of Tudjman's" -
1 turning to the next page - "closest aides to discuss the details of the
2 division of Bosnia."
3 So you also don't mention, in quoting Zimmermann, about the
4 Lisbon negotiations that part of Izetbegovic's reaction had been to
5 Karadzic seeking a separate agreement with the Croats; right?
6 A. Yes. I do not mention that in my text and I can explain why I
8 Q. Is it again that you consider Zimmermann barely relevant except
9 where he agrees with you?
10 A. No. He disagrees with himself. In my footnote, you have the
11 statement that he gave to David Binder. He said something that was
12 completely different to what is stated here. He opposes himself. And
13 one should deal in detail with the role that he played and, of course,
14 there's the question of his conscience as well.
15 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, again I'd ask that a number be
16 reserved for these excerpts.
17 JUDGE ORIE: A number to be reserved for the excerpts of this
18 book, Mr. Registrar, would be?
19 THE REGISTRAR: Will be P7723, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: And that number is reserved for this purpose.
21 MR. TRALDI: Can we have P356. And I'll be looking for page 73
22 in the English and 89 in the B/C/S. Sorry, we don't have B/C/S page, and
23 if I can just check my notes, my ambiguity may have caused that.
24 If we could have 89 in the B/C/S original, not in the transcript.
25 Q. Now we see here General Mladic's notes of a meeting with a
1 delegation from Croatia and Herceg-Bosna on the 26th of October, 1992.
2 Here, on the first page, we see Praljak's remarks. At the bottom,
3 General Mladic records him saying:
4 "We're on a good path to" -- and turning to the next page.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Next page in both languages.
6 MR. TRALDI: Yes.
7 Q. He writes:
8 "... compel Alija to divide Bosnia."
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: The page is not turned.
10 JUDGE ORIE: We don't have it yet in the English.
11 MR. TRALDI:
12 Q. At the bottom of the page, Praljak starts speaking again.
13 Turning to the next page in both languages, in the middle, the
14 third point, Mladic records Praljak say:
15 "It is in our interest that the Muslims get their own canton so
16 they have somewhere to move to."
17 Did you consider relevant in drafting your report that
18 General Mladic also met with Croatian leaders in Bosnia and Herzegovina
19 about dividing the country and moving the Muslims?
20 A. No, I did not mention that, and I did not consider it relevant.
21 And I can explain why.
22 Q. Go on.
23 A. I remind you again of the date. This is December 1992, if I'm
24 not mistaken. At that moment, the warring parties have their war --
25 Q. Sir, just to save time --
1 A. -- objectives.
2 Q. October 1992.
3 A. Very well. October 1992. It's been a while into the war. But
4 Izetbegovic and his associates want a unitarian Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbs
5 and Croats want to divide it. Those are facts. Everybody knows that.
6 One kind of division, in a reasonable way observing the borders of
7 Bosnia-Herzegovina, was tried already with the Cutileiro Plan. That did
8 not work. We know why. We know who prevented it.
9 As a historian, I must say that I'm seeing this text for the
10 first time and I can only take your word for it that it's authentic. I
11 would like to say that as well. So I'm seeing some things for the first
12 time now. I have some reservations and I have to take your word for it,
13 which I don't mind, by the way.
14 So every warring party has its war objective. You could have
15 easily shown me an agreement between Muslims and Croats or the Washington
16 Agreement, but the Judges will interrupt me again, to see what they
17 discussed over there under the aegis of the United States. I mean year
19 MR. TRALDI: Can we have P2003.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, would you also refrain from making comments
21 like you did. Whether you like it or not, if the Judges interrupt you,
22 there's a good reason for that.
23 Please proceed.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me, which comment do you
1 JUDGE ORIE: "But the Judges will interrupt me again."
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Oh, yes, I see.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please mind your words.
4 MR. TRALDI: If we zoom in on the left side of the page in B/C/S.
5 Q. These are strategic objectives for the Serbian people in Bosnia
6 and Herzegovina as published in the Official Gazette. These are the war
7 objectives of the Bosnian Serbs that you are referring to; right?
8 A. Yes. This is also discussed in the reports written by Donia and
9 Treanor. That is often mentioned there.
10 Q. These objectives are not discussed in your report -- either of
11 your reports; right?
12 A. That's right. And I can explain why.
13 Q. Go on.
14 A. Because Donia and Treanor have spoken sufficiently and
15 extensively about this. I showed what they did not mention, what is
16 lacking in their reports. That was my task.
17 Q. Should we take it you do not contest any of their evidence about
18 these objectives then?
19 A. As far as I can see, what kind of publication is this? This is
20 the Official Gazette of Republika Srpska. If this is the Official
21 Gazette, this is a formal proclamation of an official document; right?
22 So I would not contest it. You have just shown me number 386. I would
23 like to see the whole of the page and then say yes. But I can say yes,
24 they often use it. This looks like a formal document.
25 So the answer would be yes.
1 MR. TRALDI: If we could just zoom out briefly on the B/C/S.
2 Q. Are you satisfied, sir?
3 A. Yes, yes.
4 MR. TRALDI: Now can we have P7325.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: While this comes up, I would like to ask the
6 witness: Have you been aware of these six strategic objectives published
7 in the Official Gazette? Did you know that before?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course. I've already said they
9 are mentioned in the reports that I analysed in great detail.
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
11 MR. TRALDI: I am not sure we have the right document. If we
12 could have P7325.
13 Now, this is a document dated 19 May 1992 sent by General Gvero
14 to various corps identified by their JNA numbers and other units.
15 If we could turn to page 2 in both languages.
16 Q. Second paragraph, under the number II, we read:
17 "The state-building Serbian people living on around 65 per cent
18 of the territory and representing around 35 per cent of the population of
19 Bosnia and Herzegovina must fight for a total partition from the Muslim
20 and Croatian people and must create their own state."
21 Now that's a reference to the first of those strategic
22 objectives, ethnic separation; right?
23 A. Yes, that's correct. And I can explain why this is so. It is
24 May 1992, and it's clear. Let me not repeat what I've said already.
4 [Private session]
11 Pages 42028-42029 redacted. Private session.
16 [Open session]
17 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
19 Witness, we'd like to see you back tomorrow morning. But before
20 you leave this courtroom, I want to instruct you that you should not
21 speak or communicate in whatever way with whomever about your testimony,
22 whether that's testimony you've given today or whether it's testimony
23 still to be given.
24 If that's clear to you, you may follow the usher.
25 [The witness stands down]
1 JUDGE ORIE: We adjourn for the day, and we will resume tomorrow,
2 Tuesday, the 1st of December, 9.30 in the morning, in this same
3 courtroom, I.
4 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.21 p.m.,
5 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 1st day of
6 December, 2015, at 9.30 a.m.