Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 41940

 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]

Page 41941

 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.

Page 41942

 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.

Page 41943

 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

12     version.

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

Page 41944

 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.

Page 41945

 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

 5     documents.

 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

24     yours?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 41946

 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

21     imprecise.

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

Page 41947

 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

Page 41948

 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

Page 41949

 1     Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 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

13     words.

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

17     paragraph.

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,

Page 41950

 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

 9     secessionism?

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

23     costs."

24             Is there a reasoning behind this description?

25        A.   Of course.  The problem in all these papers that I analysed is

Page 41951

 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

Page 41952

 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

24     him.

25             MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

Page 41953

 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

 3     things:

 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.

Page 41954

 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

Page 41955

 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

21     Bosnia-Herzegovina?

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.

Page 41956

 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 YugoslaviaYugoslavia 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.

Page 41957

 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

 5     clarification.

 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

13     quote.

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.

Page 41958

 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

 5     definition.

 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

22     sense.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  And for the Croats?  Do they have a similar

24     position?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, as far as Croats are

Page 41959

 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

Page 41960

 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

13     it?

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.

Page 41961

 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,

 5     yes.

 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

Page 41962

 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.

Page 41963

 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.

Page 41964

 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

22     about.

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 ..."

Page 41965

 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

 4     city."

 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

15     detail.

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

22     "besieged."

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.

Page 41966

 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

20     Sarajevo."

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

Page 41967

 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,

Page 41968

 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

Page 41969

 1     propaganda.  That's why using such sources is methodologically very

 2     questionable.

 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

11     report?

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,

Page 41970

 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

 4     way?

 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

24     Herzegovina.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I understand that in the context of the task

Page 41971

 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

14     shown?

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

Page 41972

 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

Page 41973

 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

Page 41974

 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

11     then?

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

Page 41975

 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

 5     sentence.

 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:

Page 41976

 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

19     controversial.

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.

Page 41977

 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

Page 41978

 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

 4     conclusion?

 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

Page 41979

 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,

Page 41980

 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

15     discussion.

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.

Page 41981

 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

17     mistake.

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.

Page 41982

 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

 6     Prosecution.

 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;

13     right?

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

Page 41983

 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

17     history?

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.

Page 41984

 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

13     1995.

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

16     report.

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

23     Sarajevo?

24        A.   Yes.  And if you allow me to explain, I can tell you for what

25     reason --

Page 41985

 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

Page 41986

 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

Page 41987

 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

12     said?

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

Page 41988

 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.

Page 41989

 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

Page 41990

 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

Page 41991

 1     when is he speaking.  But apparently there was something of concern to

 2     you?

 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

Page 41992

 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.

Page 41993

 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

Page 41994

 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

 6     war.

 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

11     one?

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

Page 41995

 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

 7     ghostbusters.

 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.

Page 41996

 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

 7     Chamber.

 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

24     territory.

25        A.   Yes, I am answering.  These were battles with the Army of

Page 41997

 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

13     it?

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

18     that:

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

Page 41998

 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

Page 41999

 1     quoted?

 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:

Page 42000

 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.

Page 42001

 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

Page 42002

 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.

Page 42003

 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

Page 42004

 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

Page 42005

 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

Page 42006

 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

 7     matter.

 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

24     question.

25             MR. TRALDI:

Page 42007

 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 -

Page 42008

 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

10     question.

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

Page 42009

 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.

Page 42010

 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

 5     P7719.

 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 --

Page 42011

 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

 5     Bosnia-Herzegovina.

 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

11     question.

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

Page 42012

 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

Page 42013

 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

12     right?

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

Page 42014

 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

Page 42015

 1     should draw about that, as long as that is not asked, just leave it as it

 2     is.

 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.

Page 42016

 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

Page 42017

 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.

Page 42018

 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.

Page 42019

 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

Page 42020

 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.

Page 42021

 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

 8     thing.

 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

17     think.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  What we see on the screen now is 221 in

19     e-court.

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" -

Page 42022

 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

 7     don't.

 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

Page 42023

 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 --

Page 42024

 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

18     1994.

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

25     mean?

Page 42025

 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.

Page 42026

 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.

25   (redacted)


Page 42027

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4                           [Private session]

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 42028











11  Pages 42028-42029 redacted.  Private session.















Page 42030

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

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]

Page 42031

 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.