MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS: NOVEMBER 11, 2003
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - November 11, 2003

Robert Donia, a so-called expert witness, returned to finish his cross-examination today. Mr. Donia first testified on September 12, 2003.

Mr. Donia examined transcripts taken from the Republika Srpska assembly, and then “interpreted them” for the “court.”

The most important thing that Mr. Donia analyzed was two speeches that President Milosevic gave to the Republika Srpska assembly to convince the Bosnian-Serbs to accept the Vance-Owen peace plan. To illustrate the quality of Donia’s so-called “analysis” I will re-publish the text from President Milosevic’s two speeches and then I will tell you what conclusions that Donia drew from them:

///START FIRST SPEECH///

Let me say straight away that I consider that there's no alternative to a decision in favor of peace, a decision for peace and for the reinforcement of the signature put by Radovan Karadzic in Athens is in the interest of the Serbian people in Republika Srpska and in the interest of the whole Serbian people. The basic issue which has been raised from the very beginning - and we have jointly defined what the aim of the Serbian people in the Balkans is - I would say quite briefly the aim of the Serbian people in the Balkans has been and remains to be free and equal.

The offered proposal, in my opinion, for that very reason for the Serb people to be free and equal should be viewed from the standpoint to what extent that freedom and equality is ensured through such an approach.

 In the provinces which will not be under the control of the Serb authorities and there are still Serbs living there, it is explicitly stated that access will be denied to the HVO and Green Berets and that they will be accessed only by the UN, which means that they will provide a security zone which will make it possible for no one to have to leave their homes, which means that that freedom is guaranteed and a condition that has been achieved in the proposed solution, but it also means that this is a freedom that the Serbian people in Bosnia have won for themselves.

The plan also restores the status of a constituent people. You remember well that the conflict started when the rights of the Serbian people as a constituent people in Bosnia and Herzegovina were trampled upon, when decisions started to be made without consulting them and without their participation and against their will. This solution, the Vance-Owen Plan, envisages such equality in rights so that the Serbian people in BH can be said to have restored their position of a constituent people through their struggle.

Therefore, it is fully and equally in the hands of the Serbian people, as in the hands of other peoples. They have the right and ability to make decisions that decisively affect their destiny.

If that main issue and main goal of the Serbian people in the Balkans, that is, to be free and equal, is assessed from the standpoint of the solutions offered, then we see that it has restored freedom and equality and that after the struggle whereby it has won that freedom and equality, it can decide not to reject its remaining demands but to try and address those requests through peace and not war, at a conference table, through political negotiations, and not by sacrificing more victims. Every sacrifice has a justification if it achieves goals, but it has no justification if the solution offered guarantees freedom and equality.

Let me tell you in the end, don't tell us that you feel abandoned; we shared all your worries throughout this period. Not only did we worry for you, but we assisted you at the expense and sacrifice by 10 million Serbs.

///END FIRST SPEECH///

[Note: Between these two speeches R.S. MP's made their own speeches and debated whether or not to accept the plan.]

///START SECOND SPEECH///

 

I will try very briefly, but with the highest possible degree of responsibility to say a few words. But before doing that, I wish to convey to you my impressions. You spoke openly and from the heart. Most of what you said related to the cruelties and injustices of war. In the Serbian people, throughout their history, unfortunately there is too -- there are too many truthful testimonies of the horrors of war. However, all that we heard today regarding the testimony and the horrors of war, all of this can be formed into one single argument and a single statement and message, that the war should cease as soon as possible, that the war should cease immediately.

 

However, let me go back to the question we are addressing today. The question is not how much horrors -- how many horrors there were in this war. This people has felt this on their own shoulders throughout their history. The question today is whether we should consolidate what has been achieved and through a peaceful process, under conditions of security, achieve what remains to be done, what we call "outstanding matters." There were many outstanding issues, but the plan envisaged that those problems be addressed in negotiations.

 

So whether we should seek to address what we call 'outstanding problems' through negotiation or should we destroy what has been achieved at the expense of enormous sacrifice. That is the real issue that this Assembly should decide. So the question, when talking about the plan, is not whether we are departing from our goals. Of course not.

 

The question is whether that plan represents the path towards the ultimate goal. The plan is not the final fulfillment of the justified demands of the Serbian people, but it certainly represents the path towards the ultimate goal. But now we must make much more effort through our wisdom and less bloodshed. I think that should be an advantage, not a disadvantage. And this Assembly must have the courage and self-confidence under these circumstances on the basis of the plan, which must -- which is a sufficient basis to achieve our goal, rather than committing a tragic error which will cruelly cut across or put an obstacle on the way to success.

 

Will the Assembly opt for a reasonable or an unreasonable path? I think no one needs to persuade this Assembly about. I think peace is the reasonable, the sensible way. On the contrary, if the slogan is spread about that the Serbs don't want peace, that could only justify crimes against the Serbs, and this is something you should bear in mind. When the road towards peace is being opened, you must explain to the people that they -- why should they sacrifice their lives in even crueller ways up to now? You cannot explain the reasons to the Serbian people in Bosnia or in Serbia.

 

And let me say finally, one must sacrifice everything for the people except the people. You cannot sacrifice the people. You do not have the right to do that as an Assembly or as anyone else.

///END SECOND SPEECH///

President Milosevic stated quite unequivocally that there was no alternative to peace, that the war had to end immediately, that the aim is for the Serbian people in the Balkans is to be free and equal, and that their destiny will be in their hands, as it is in the hands of the other two peoples if they accept the Vance-Owen plan, and that things should be resolved by consensus and through negotiations.

Anybody with a brain can easily understand what President Milosevic was saying. Donia, on the other hand, claimed that with those two speeches President Milosevic was advocating “greater Serbia” and that he wasn’t seriously endorsing the Vance-Owen plan.

When Lord Owen testified he said quite unequivocally that Milosevic did seriously endorse the Vance-Owen peace plan, so who are we to believe? Should we believe Lord Owen who was one of the chief negotiators for whom the plan was named? Or should we believe some jerk who was working for Merrill-Lynch at the time?

This was typical for the quality of Donia’s analysis. The basic premise that Donia operated on was that Serbs are an evil scheming bunch who always mean the opposite of what they are actually saying.

Mr. Donia considered that eventhough the term “greater Serbia” never appeared in any of the transcripts that “greater Serbia” was exactly what the Serbs were trying to accomplish.

Mr. Donia only selectively analyzed RS assembly sessions, he didn’t even look at any of the documents issued by the assembly, and he selectively took quotes out of their proper context in order to misrepresent them so that they would fit his anti-Serb thesis.

On another occasion Radovan Karadzic was speaking about finding a political solution to the situation in Gorazde. Karadzic said quite literally in the transcript that “not a single shot should be fired.” And Donia interpreted this as meaning that Karadzic wanted to incite an armed conflict around Gorazde.

Mr. Donia, who was working for Merrill-Lynch in New York at the time, stated that he knew that VJ troops were in Bosnia even though none of the transcripts he that “analyzed” reflected such a thing. But when he was asked about Croatian troops all of the sudden he wasn’t a military expert and wasn’t competent to testify about such things as whose troops were where.

Mr. Donia was quick to defend Warren Zimmerman, saying that Zimmerman didn’t tell Izetbegovic to withdraw from the Cutliero plan. But when asked about the Cutlitero plan all of the sudden Donia remembered that it was outside of his mandate as a witness.

But because this so-called “expert witness” brought bits and pieces of the transcripts to the “court” with him some interesting things were established.

During the cross-examination by the Amicus Mr. Tapuskovic it was proven that Belgrade did not command the VRS. In the 39^th session transcript of the Republika Srpska assembly of March 1994 Radovan Karadzic says, “I am responsible to the people, and the commanders are responsible to me. I sign the orders.”

It was brought out by Mr. Tapuskovic that Dr. Karadzic signed military 7 directives. The 7^th directive stipulated that the VRS should thwart enemy war plans and prevent a breakthrough at Srebrenica. Donia, of course, misinterpreted this as meaning that Karadzic ordered a massacre at Srebrenica.

It was also brought out during President Milosevic’s cross-examination of Donia that according to the transcripts it was only by the grace of the R.S. Assembly that UN troops were allowed to deploy in Srebrenica, Gorazde and Zepa.

A 1993 speech of Karadzic’s was also read out where Karadzic is saying that it is good that UNPROFOR is in Srebrenica because if the VRS had taken it then there could have been “blood to the knees” because of the revenge that might have been taken by the soldiers who had had their families massacred by Muslim troops who were attacking out from Srebrenica.

Karadzic said that it was actually in the Republika Srpska’s strategic interest to stay out of Srebrenica, because a massacre there could jeopardize the very existence of Republika Srpska. Therefore, it is quite unlikely that Karadzic would order a massacre 2 years later, because he was certainly aware of what the consequences would be if there was one.

After Donia withdrew the secret witness B-1097 was recalled to finish his cross-examination. B-1097 had originally testified on July 25^th.

B-1097 claimed to have been taken prisoner at the Karakaj Technical School in Zvornik where a large number of Muslims were apparently killed.

 

B-1097 could not identify his captors, except as “Serbs.” He couldn’t say which unit they were from, and he didn’t see any executions.

 

After he got away from the technical school he went to Serbia. He lived freely in Novi Sad. Nobody mistreated him in Serbia, and he was even issued a passport by the FRY authorities.

 

B-1097 did have some interesting things to say about Zvornik. First of all he admitted that the Muslim paramilitary formation known as the Patriotic League was active there.

 

He also admitted, or should I say was forced to admit, that the Muslim T.O. in Zvornik had threatened to blow-up the hydroelectric dam. At first he tried to deny this. The Amicus Mr. Kay asked him 4 times if this had happened and B-1097 never answered the question, and so Mr. Kay pointed-out paragraph 7 of the whiteness’s own statement where it said that the Muslim T.O. had threatened to blow-up the dam.

After B-1097 was done, another secret witness came along. B-1399 was apparently a survivor of the Srebrenica massacre, and most of B-1399’s testimony was dealt with in secret - in so-called “closed session.”

From what could be gathered in open session it can be concluded that B-1097 is a liar. B-1097 claimed that Srebrenica had been demilitarized and that only UNPROFOR had weapons. B-1097 stated unequivocally that no Muslims in Srebrenica had any weapons, because UNPROFOR had taken them all away. B-1097 also stated that no Muslim-led attacks had emanated from Srebrenica.

B-1097’s testimony here is in direct contradiction of the UNPROFOR commander Rupert Smith’s testimony. According to Smith’s testimony on October 9, 2003 “UNPROFOR was not tasked with demilitarizing Srebrenica.” and the Muslim forces of the 28th Infantry Division were, “conducting raids out from Srebrenica into the Serb-held territory.”

B-1097 is scheduled to finish his cross-examination tomorrow.