May 31, 2009

Opel Sale May Deepen Russian Ties to Germany, Trump East Europe

Opel Sale May Deepen Russian Ties to Germany, Trump East Europe 

Share | Email | Print | A A A

 

By Leon Mangasarian

May 30 (Bloomberg) -- German Chancellor Angela Merkel's blessing of a Russian-backed bid for General Motors Corp.'s Opel unit augurs deeper ties between Moscow and Berlin that may trump concerns of ex-Soviet nations squeezed between the two capitals.

Merkel's government earlier today picked a partnership led by Magna International Inc., a Canadian auto-parts supplier, with Russia's biggest bank, OAO Sberbank, and Russian carmaker OAO GAZ as the buyer for Opel, the European division of GM, which will file for bankruptcy next week.

"This will fuel suspicion in east Europe over Germany and Russia and why the biggest economy in Europe has tied up with strange Russian tycoons to please the Kremlin," said Fredrik Erixon, director of the Brussels-based European Centre for International Political Economy. "Germany is playing off the Poles and the Baltic states against Russia."

Germany is Russia's biggest trade partner, a relationship underpinned by rising German gas and oil imports. Annual German trade with Russia increased five-fold to 68.2 billion euros ($96.2 billion) last year since 2000. With 6,000 German companies operating in Russia, business leaders in Berlin view the global recession as a speed-bump, with manufacturers set to win contracts as Russia diversifies from energy and rebuilds transport and health care.

"Economic ties between Germany and Russia are very important," Merkel said at a joint news conference with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in Berlin on March 31. "There's a lot of potential here."

Under Magna's initial proposal, the Canadian company would get a 20 percent stake in GM's Opel and Vauxhall divisions in Europe. Sberbank would own 35 percent, matching the remaining holding of Detroit-based GM. Magna Co-Chief Executive Officer Siegfried Wolf has described GAZ, based in Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, as its industrial partner.

Merkel-Putin Talks

Underscoring the political and commercial mix, Merkel spoke by phone to Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on May 26 about "trade and economic cooperation." That followed a May 23 conversation dedicated to Opel, said her spokesman, Ulrich Wilhelm.

Merkel's predecessor, Gerhard Schroeder, was hired by Russian state gas export monopoly Gazprom OAO months after leaving office in 2005 to head the construction of the Nord Stream pipeline that will provide Russian gas to Germany.

The Polish government fears that Nord Stream -- which will run from Russia directly to Germany under the Baltic Sea -- might allow Russia to cut gas supplies to east Europe while still supplying Germany and western Europe.

"Nothing's ever purely economic with the Russians, there's always political interest involved," Karol Karski, of Poland's opposition Law & Justice party and a member of parliament's foreign affairs committee, said in an interview.

Weight of History

German relations with eastern Europe are still burdened by the memory of Nazi crimes from World War II, while Russia's relations with the region are blighted by the post-1945 communist takeover by the Soviet Union.

"These countries are allergic to many things coming from Russia or Germany," Jan Techau, a European and security expert at the Berlin-based German Council on Foreign Relations, said in an interview. "Balancing Germany's ties with Russia and eastern Europe is one of the most difficult German foreign policy questions."

Techau said Opel is part of a bigger picture given that Russia views Germany as a key to its global economic policy.

"Russia wants to move massively into Western markets," he said. "Opel would be a real catch because they'd get a big technological advantage for their auto industry and a foot into one of the world's biggest economies."

Russian Market

The move makes sense for Opel because Russia is set to become Europe's largest car market, said Ferdinand Dudenhoeffer, director of the Center for Automotive Research at the University of Duisburg-Essen in Germany.

Russia is almost as crucial for German exports as China, and Merkel -- who grew up in communist East Germany -- has sometimes adopted policies linked to Russia that are opposed by eastern Europeans. These range from Nord Stream to her rejection of fast-tracking former Soviet republics Ukraine and Georgia for NATO membership.

For Germany, closer ties to Russia may also mark a bid to ensure a pivotal diplomatic role as the world's center of gravity shifts away from Europe and President Barack Obama focuses on the Middle East and Asia, says Techau.

"U.S.-Russian relations play out at a different level including security, the soft underbelly of Russia in Central Asia and North Korea," he said. "These are areas where Europe is a small player and it's the Europeans who should be concerned that the new Obama policy will squeeze them out of their old mediator role between Moscow and Washington."

To contact the reporter on this story: Leon Mangasarian in Berlin atlmangasarian@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: May 30, 2009 03:15 EDT 

May 18, 2009

Serbia: The Hoax Goes On

The Hoax that Continues a War

Posted by Julia Gorin
 
May 17th 2009 05:35:32 PM

We are still in the midst of the 10-year anniversary of our NATO attack on Serbia on behalf of bin Laden-trained/financed KLA terrorists, to help steal Serbian land because Albanians reached a majority in part of that country. The 1999 bombing lasted from March 24 to June 10, a symbolic and historic day for Albanian supremacism.

If Americans deign to recall, the "trigger" event that was used to touch off the NATO assault (which was already being planned for a year at that point), was something called "the Racak Massacre." Following is my account — written for a compilation of essays titled "Kosovo: The Score" — of the American-staged atrocity that led the free world to join the jihad:

Perhaps nothing is more Albanian than commemorating a massacre by Serbs even after the Albanians commemorating it admitted to having staged the massacre. Sometimes there is even a double punch line, as in January when Kosovo Albanians honored the American who avenged the massacre that didn't happen.

On January 15th, the tenth anniversary of "the Racak massacre" — disproved as such even in mainstream media such as the Toronto Sun — Kosovo "prime minister" Hashim Thaci and "president" Fatmir Sejdiu awarded the "Gold Medal of Humanity" to William Walker, head of the Kosovo Verifying Mission that ensured a NATO intervention on behalf of Walker's KLA friends and masters in 1999. (The ceremony, "dedicated to the martyrs of the Racak massacre," was reported by the KosovaLive news agency: "Kosovo leaders vow at Racak massacre memorial never to forget Serbian crimes.") There couldn't have been a better comedy roast for the year 2009, the tenth anniversary of NATO's war against Yugoslavia — launched by a staged atrocity in the town of Racak.

This comes nine years after Thaci himself admitted the Racak ploy the very year following its success. Canadian Major General Lewis MacKenzie, former UN Protection Force commander in Bosnia, cited the admission in an April 2008 statement to the Lord Byron Foundation:

The current Prime Minister Hashim Thaci was the leader of the KLA. He has admitted that the KLA orchestrated the infamous Racak "massacre" dressing their KLA dead in civilian clothes, machine gunning them and dumping them in a ditch and claiming it was a Serbian slaughter of civilians. NATO bought into the ruse and on its 50th birthday looking for a role in the post cold war world the alliance became the KLA's air force and bombed a sovereign nation from the safety of 10,000 ft.

In addition to telling BBC in January 1999, "We had a key unit in the region. It was a fierce battle. We regrettably had many victims. But so did the Serbs," Thaci boasted more recklessly in February of 2000 to a roomful of foreign correspondents. But most of them dutifully kept a lid on the most sensational story of the decade, leaving only Russian National Radio to report it. From a translated summary:

Pristina, March 7th - Leader of the Albanian terrorists in Kosmet [Kosovo-Metohija], Hashim Tachi, told recently foreign reporters, quoted by the Voice of Russia, about the methods of demonizing Serbs, i.e. how his terrorist KLA committed crimes in order to urgently provoke western military intervention in Yugoslavia…According to the foreign media reports, quoted by the Russian radio, obviously "carried away", Tachi mentioned the well known incident in the village of Racak….Tachi revealed a public secret and confessed that the KLA members committed the murder of four Serbian policemen in Racak.

…Indeed, a police action followed, but it was no punitive expedition of Serb special forces against Albanian farmers, but a legitimate operation against the Albanian extremists, who made their stronghold in Racak….[A]n independent international expertise followed, and the OSCE experts from Byelorussia and Finland, established that the bodies belonged to the KLA extremists. In spite of this, NATO and the leading western countries blamed Belgrade for the killing of the so-called Albanian farmers from Racak. That was the first in a series of accusations in an already worked out scenario for deceiving the international public, i.e. preparing the field for the NATO aggression on Yugoslavia, stressed the radio.

More recently, a biography came out last October about the Finnish forensic dentist Helena Ranta, revealing that her report on the massacre was coerced. Finland's Helsingin Sanomat newspaper, whose managing editor authored the book, reports:

Ranta says that officials of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs had tried to influence the content of her reports in 2000, when Ranta was commissioned by the European Union to investigate the events of Racak in Kosovo…"Three civil servants of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs expressed wishes by e-mail for more far-reaching conclusions", Ranta said. "I still have the e-mails."

More than 40 Albanians were killed in the village of Racak in January 1999. The investigation by Ranta's working group was very charged from the beginning. It was commonly assumed that Serb forces had perpetrated a massacre….According to Ranta, in the winter of 1999 William Walker, the head of the OSCE Kosovo monitoring mission, broke a pencil in two and threw the pieces at her when she was not willing to use sufficiently strong language about the Serbs.

Serbia's B92 news also carried the story:

"We all know what William Walker said," [Ranta states]. "He says to this day that it was a massacre and that the Serbs were to blame. But I never said that. I never made any reference to the perpetrators," says the pathologist. "I never said a single word about who stood behind what went on in Racak. That's for the judges to decide, while we forensic scientists just carry out the investigation," she tells daily Večernje Novosti in an exclusive interview.

Ranta claims that Walker is "putting words into my mouth," which was not allowed. "I didn't agree with him. He was angry with me," she says. "What angered him most was that I refused to use the word massacre and say who stood behind what happened in Račak."

A follow-up B92 article included a further detail:

…Ranta appeared in 2003 as one of the witnesses in the Hague trial of Slobodan Milošević. She told Berliner Zeitung newspaper in 2004 that [it] was "negative" that a part of the indictment against Milošević was related to the Račak events, based mostly on the version given by Walker.

Berliner Zeitung was the paper that Toronto Sun's Peter Worthington reported in 2001 had gotten access to the Finnish findings and concluded, "In all probability, there was no Racak massacre at all." Worthington wrote that the whole reason the EU called Ranta in is that the Serbian and Belorussian forensic people were suspicious about the massacre tale. Her report was not made public, but she "gave a press conference at which she was vague, admitting there was no evidence of mutilation or torture, and that Yugoslav authorities had cooperated. But she also called the killings 'a crime against humanity,' widely interpreted to mean Racak was indeed a cold-blooded massacre."

In 1999 independent journalist Richard Poe wrote:

When 45 bodies were found near the town of Racak, a U.S. media blitz accused the Serbs of slaughtering innocent civilians. NATO commander Wesley Clark personally confronted Milosevic with photos of the victims. "This was not a massacre," Milosevic cried. "This was staged."

The New York Times reported this exchange on April 18, 1999, three months after it occurred, but unfortunately failed to explain to readers that Milosevic was probably telling the truth. By the time that article was written, the Los Angeles Times, Le Monde, Die Welt, the BBC, and others had already raised doubts about the alleged massacre. Forensic investigators had concluded that the bodies were probably those of KLA guerrillas killed in action. The bodies appear to have been dressed in civilian clothes, then shot additional times and cut with knives several hours after death, in order to simulate a brutal massacre. [Indeed, Madeleine Albright told CBS's "Face the Nation" that there were "dozens of people with their throats slit" and that the only solution was "humanitarian air strikes."]

Below is an interview excerpt by the Serbian newspaper Glas Javnosti from October, with the investigating judge of the Pristina District Court and chief investigator of the Racak site, Danica Marinkovic, as translated by the website De-Consruct.net:

Reacting to the recent confession of the Finnish forensic dentist Helena Ranta…Judge Marinkovic said it was good Ranta had started telling the truth. Judge Marinkovic believes it was time for the state of Serbia to initiate certain legal procedures and the criminal lawsuit against Ranta, Walker, [the] OSCE mission and the others responsible for the criminal involvement in the Racak hoax.

Q: Please remind us, what took place in Racak on January 15, 1999?

DM: A classic battle between the Serbian police and the terrorist KLA [UCK] took place in Racak. In this region — just like in all of Kosovo and Metohija, after all, terrorists were constantly attacking and killing civilians and policemen from the ambush and the police went to find the culprits. By the way, Racak was a large and one of the staunchest KLA strongholds in Kosovo and Metohija. Police announced its action in a timely and professional manner to the OSCE, and OSCE observer[s] joined the police squad. Police clashed with the terrorists in the morning hours and there were casualties on both sides. After the battle, around 11 a.m., the police informed Pristina District Court about the clash.

Q: When did you arrive to Racak?

DM: We arrived to Racak around 14.00 hours [2 p.m.], with the other team members and the police, with intention to carry out the investigative activities. During the clearing of the terrain, among [other things], we found the Browning calibre 12.7mm [heavy machine gun], two Brownings with the pistol calibre 7.9mm with the enhanced charger, 36 automatic guns calibre 7.62mm, two sniper guns, five shoulder-held missile launchers of the Chinese make, 12 mines charged with the hand grenade charger, 22 hand grenades, around 8,000 pieces of ammunition of different calibre, three hand-held radio stations, medical equipment and military uniforms with KLA tags. Everything we found was photographed. So, we have found the entire weapons arsenal among the "peace-loving villagers"!

When we tried to move further to find any of the victims, the barrage fire was opened at us from all the sides — we barely managed to pull out alive. That was the day Walker had published a photo that circled the world, about the alleged massacre committed by the Serbian police. Then-head prosecutor of the Hague tribunal, Louise Arbour was also brought to Racak.

Q: Did you manage to inspect the scene?

DM: No, not even during the next two days. We tried to enter the village again on January 16, but we were again showered with bullets and we had to return. The next day, Walker's deputy John [Drewienkiewicz] arrived to Stimlje near Racak. He tried to coerce me to go in only with him, without the other members of the team. He was telling me that the "innocent villagers" from Racak will be distressed when they see me with the police, and that they will shoot. I asked him: "What are the innocent villagers doing with weapons?" He fell silent, turned around and left. But we didn't manage to visit the scene of the alleged crime on that day, January 17, either.

Only on the fourth day after the battle, on January 18, we were able to get over there. But there were no bodies in the village at all, not a trace. We did not see a single body Walker had shown to the world public, and was being horrified over. We went through the entire village, but all we could see were the trenches, shovels, empty bullet shells, numerous machine gun nests, a deserted KLA headquarters, uniforms… There wasn't a living soul in the village, we could not see a single woman or a child anywhere. And the bodies of the killed KLA terrorists were moved to the village mosque…

Q: What did you find in the mosque?

DM: All of the bodies were dressed in the civilian clothing, but many wore military pants, belts and boots. Underneath they had several pairs of pants or the other clothing, which clearly pointed to the fact they were dressed to spend long time outdoors. Out of 40 bodies of the "peace-loving villagers", 37 had gunpowder residue found on their hands, which unequivocally shows they were discharging firearms prior to being shot. [A] criminal investigation was conducted in entirety and, after the autopsies, it was decisively determined there was no massacre or a "genocide", but that the wounds were exclusively resulting from the bullets. There wasn't even one "massacred" body!

Later on, during the course of investigation, it was determined that [the] majority of the Racak victims were active members of the KLA. Most interestingly, the Belorussian and Finnish forensic specialists who also took part in the autopsies have reached exactly the same conclusions as our own forensic experts. However, Ranta did not want to state that for the public.

Indeed, at the trial of Slobodan Milosevic, Professor Slavisa Dobricanin — former director of the Institute for Forensic Medicine in Pristina, who was in charge of the forensics team that autopsied the Racak bodies — revealed that the British general in charge of planning the verification mission, John Drewienkiewicz, threatened "to ship Judge Marinkovic off to The Hague if she tried to conduct an onsite investigation in Racak," trial observer Andy Wilcoxson reported on April 13, 2005, adding:

It is worth noting that William Walker, the head of the OSCE-KVM, was given access to the village by the KLA while forensic investigators were kept out. Walker, instead of taking steps to secure the alleged crime scene, brought journalists to that gully and let them trample all over the place. One of the journalists was Franz Josef Hutsch, a German newspaper reporter.

According Mr. Hutsch, who testified at the trial on October 12, 2004, Walker just stood there while journalists moved the bodies around to take their pictures. He said that the bodies "were put upright, for example, at the edge of the slope so that they would have a bit of shade so that the excessive head wounds wouldn't be seen in a photo to be published. And they were taken from their original positions."

Interestingly, Helena Ranta started talking about the fraud as early as 2007:

German daily Berliner Zeitung…informed that the initial report by the Finnish forensics contained half-truths and contradictory claims, later admitted by Helena Ranta, but without any qualms regarding the dishonorable role she played…[Belgrade news agency Tanjug reports that] three teams of forensic experts — from Yugoslavia, Belarus and Finland — found only firearm wounds on the bodies of the victims…Helena Ranta backed Walker's statement prior to the bombings, saying that she was expressing her personal view. However, on Jan 23, 2007, Ranta admitted to Belgrade daily Blic that the final Finnish forensic report "did not contain proof about either a massacre or execution taking place in Racak."

The De-Construct.net website reported Professor Dobricanin's reaction to Ranta's recent soul-baring about the pressures she was under:

"I'm not surprised by the things Ranta is saying now, but she still hasn't admitted her own statements back then were false. I clearly remember she was constantly under surveillance by the German embassy and the Finnish ministry. The Finnish Minister for Human Rights…was at the Institute all the time, as well as the German embassy's Second Secretary. She was very nervous and constantly outside the autopsy room. She was always in the Institute hallways, talking to someone on her mobile phone", Professor Dobricanin [recalls].

…[Dobricanin] said that, after the autopsy reports were completed and jointly signed without any objections on behalf of the international forensic experts, the members of the international team decided to hold a press conference in Pristina. Members of the Serbian forensic team were not allowed to attend.

"William Walker was extremely nervous. He could barely stand still and he kept drumming his fingers on the chair. He did not speak. It was Helena Ranta that said all of it: that the killed were the unarmed civilians, that the massacre was committed, and that it was the crime against the civilians. The very three things a forensic specialist can not say," Dr. Dobricanin concluded his recollection.

…Danica Marinkovic and Slavisa Dobricanin both testified at the Hague, on behalf of the former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic's defense. As expert witnesses, they refuted prosecution charges, especially in respect to the names, gender and the age of the victims. Then-prosecutor Geoffrey Nice went as far as calling the Serbian judge and forensic pathologist "criminals". After a while, when the prosecution data on the Racak KLA victims was "reevaluated", he too quoted Marinkovic and Dobricanin, citing results of their investigation.

Following the evidence presented by the Judge Marinkovic and Professor Dobricanin, Hague prosecution removed Racak charges from all the indictments: from that of the late Yugoslav and Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic, from the process against the former Serbia's President Milan Milutinovic, and from the processes against another five former Yugoslav and Serbian functionaries.

Five days before beginning airstrikes, Bill Clinton thundered, "We should remember what happened in Racak…innocent men, women and children were taken from their homes to a gully, forced to kneel in the dirt and sprayed with gunfire." The London Times, Peter Worthington wrote in his Toronto Sun article, was even more imaginative, printing "that victims had their eyes gouged out, heads smashed in, faces blown away at close range, all 'farmers, workers, villagers, aged 12-74, men, women, children.'"

The New York Times, meanwhile, reports the website Srpska Mreza — which had been following the Kosovo war propaganda — caught something interesting:

On Friday, the day before American ambassador William Walker sensationally "discovered" the so-called massacre in the village of Racak in Kosmet, State Secretary Madeleine Albright held a meeting behind closed doors in Washington, at which she revealed to a few members of the team close to her that the agreement on normalization of relations in Kosmet was due to fall apart at any moment, The New York Times wrote on January 19.

The New York paper cites the statement of an anonymous official in the American administration who pointed out that Albright, obviously, had reliable information regarding events in Racak and practically announced them.

[The] text in The New York Times clearly shows that Washington knew in advance of the whole scenario….

As soon as Walker delivered his lines, Albright picked up her cue, calling Racak "the 'galvanizing incident' that meant peace talks at Rambouillet were pointless, 'humanitarian bombing' the only recourse," wrote Worthington, whose article was titled "The Hoax that Started a War."

Shedding light on what led up to the Racak hoax is Balkans analyst and writer Nebojsa Malic, who recalled that then U.S. Special representative Ambassador Richard Holbrooke had Milosevic sign an agreement in October, 1998 to withdraw Yugoslav army and police from Kosovo, in exchange for not getting bombed:

The KLA were not a party to the agreement and had no obligations under it. (Maybe Slobo, ever the sap, thought there was an implied obligation to restrain our clients. Fat chance!) The KLA responded to the withdrawal of the Yugoslav forces with an offensive that seized control of about half of Kosovo, forcing tens of thousands of Serbs to flee. Eventually, around December, Milosevic decided he had to send forces back in. The US responded with the usual threats and heavy breathing that he was going to be held accountable. Not sure when, but the OSCE observer mission with the orange vehicles was sent in to monitor Yugoslav behavior (not KLA behavior, of course) and watch out for any atrocities. (Wink wink, nudge nudge, let's have a trigger.) Racak duly occurred.

Indeed, between October 13, 1998 and January 14, 1999, continued the above-mentioned Srpska Mreza report from 1999:

Albanian separatists carried out a total of 599 terrorist attacks and provocations, of which 186 were against civilians, while 413 were against members of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the republic of Serbia. In these attacks, a total of 53 persons were killed (37 civilians and 16 policemen) and 36 persons suffered serious bodily injury (13 civilians and 23 policemen). A total of 43 persons were kidnapped (39 civilians and 4 policemen); of those, three were killed (one civilian and two policemen), while the fate of the other 22 civilians and one policeman remains unknown.

About the attacks on police that triggered the Serbian counteroffensive in Racak, the Greek daily Exusia fairly observed in a January 19 article titled "Serb killed by 'unarmed' Albanians":

Regardless of the fact that the Albanian side is responsible for the latest fighting, warnings continue to be directed only to Belgrade, along with the threat that NATO forces will be activated for military intervention.

Renaud Girard, reporter on the ground for French newspaper Le Figaro, described what he saw:

…At dawn intervention forces of the Serbian police encircled and then attacked the village of Racak, known as a bastion of [UCK/KLA] separatist guerrillas. The police didn't seem to have anything to hide, since at 8:30 a.m. they invited a television team (two journalists of AP TV) to film the operation. A warning was also given to the OSCE, which sent two cars with American diplomatic licenses to the scene. The observers spent the whole day posted on a hill where they could watch the village.

At 3 p.m., a police communique reached the international press center in Pristina announcing that 15 UCK "terrorists" had been killed in combat in Racak and that a large stock of weapons had been seized. At 3:30 p.m., the police forces, followed by the AP TV team, left the village….At 4:40 p.m., a French journalist drove through the village and met three orange OSCE vehicles. The international observers were chatting calmly with three middle-aged Albanians in civilian clothes. They were looking for [possible] civilian casualties. Returning to the village at 6 p.m., the journalist saw the observers taking away two very slightly injured old men and two women.

The scene of Albanian corpses in civilian clothes lined up in a ditch which would shock the whole world was not discovered until the next morning, around 9 a.m., by journalists soon followed by OSCE observers. At that time, the village was once again taken over by armed UCK soldiers who led the foreign visitors, as soon as they arrived, toward the supposed massacre site. Around noon, William Walker in person arrived and expressed his indignation.

All the Albanian witnesses gave the same version: at midday, the policemen forced their way into homes and separated the women from the men, whom they led to the hilltops to execute them without more ado.

The most disturbing fact is that the pictures filmed by the AP TV journalists — which Le Figaro was shown yesterday — radically contradict that version. It was in fact an empty village that the police entered in the morning, sticking close to the walls. The shooting was intense, as they were fired on from UCK trenches dug into the hillside.

The fighting intensified sharply on the hilltops above the village. Watching from below, next to the mosque, the AP journalists understood that the UCK guerrillas, encircled, were trying desperately to break out. A score of them in fact succeeded, as the police themselves admitted.

What really happened? During the night, could the UCK have gathered the bodies, in fact killed by Serb bullets, to set up a scene of cold-blooded massacre? A disturbing fact: Saturday morning the journalists found only very few cartridges around the ditch where the massacre supposedly took place…Intelligently, did the UCK seek to turn a military defeat into a political victory?

Le Monde reporter Christophe Chatelet corroborated Girard's account in his own dispatch that day, asking how the Serbian police could have managed "to gather a group of men and to peacefully lead them to the place of execution when they were under constant fire by the terrorists? How is it possible that the people living in the village, who returned before nightfall and the observers who spent over two hours in the village did not see the gully in which the bodies were found?"

It has also been widely noted that, like the ditch itself, the clothing of the dead "civilians" was curiously blood-free. Yet Walker unambiguously declared that the dead "obviously were executed where they lay," Worthington reported in his 2001 Toronto Sun article, adding, "His OSCE report spoke of 'arbitrary arrests, killings and mutilations of unarmed civilians' at Racak."

The very day that the Western monitors were helping stage and corroborate a "civilian massacre" for the KLA, the KLA couldn't resist shooting at them:

Peace Monitors 'Shot Deliberately' (BBC, January 16, 1999)

The head of the international monitoring mission in Kosovo says he believes that two monitors, shot and wounded on Friday, were deliberately targeted…The two men — a Briton and his locally-recruited interpreter — were in a convoy with Serbian police when they were hit. They were not seriously injured.

…The incident happened as the group were on their way to mediate in a confrontation between ethnic Albanian rebels and Serb forces in the western region of Pec. Mr Walker said: "What I've heard so far about the firing, it was not just one shot or two shots, it was sustained firing. That would lead me to believe that it was a deliberate shooting."

He pointed out that the monitors drove distinctive vehicles and that everyone in the area had been informed that they were going out on patrol…A spokesman for the international monitoring mission said the shots appeared to come from a sniper in territory held by the ethnic-Albanian Kosovo Liberation Army…UK Foreign Secretary Robin Cook said he was shocked and concerned about the shooting of two members of the KVM.

None of this, however, threw Western leaders off-program, as BBC reported the next day:

Nato is to hold an emergency session on Sunday to consider its response to the massacre of more than 40 ethnic Albanians in Kosovo. An American state department spokesman said there should be no doubt of Nato's resolve.

The Nato Secretary-General, Javier Solana, said it would not tolerate a return to all-out fighting and repression in Kosovo.

President Clinton and the head of the international observer mission in Kosovo both blamed Serbian forces for the killings…Those killed in the village of Racak, south of Pristina, were mostly men who had been rounded up and shot at close range. Some had been mutilated.

International monitors say they have also seen the bodies of three women and a 12-year-old boy.

The massacre has prompted the International War Crimes Tribunal on the former Yugoslavia to open an urgent inquiry…Local villagers say the slaughter of the victims, mostly men aged between 18 and 65, was carried out by Serb forces who rounded the group up on Friday night…The Kosovar Albanian political leader, Ibrahim Rugova, has declared Sunday a day of mourning in Kosovo.

Germany, which currently holds the presidency of the European Union, said the international community would not accept such acts of persecution and murder.

In Paris, the French Foreign Ministry expressed disgust at the massacre and called for a meeting of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to investigate who was responsible.

UK Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, said: "Those responsible for the crimes must be held to account before international justice."…The US special envoy, Richard Holbrooke, condemned the killings, saying they were the most serious offence since the outbreak of the violence which has plagued the province in recent months.

So notorious is the architect of the Racak incident, William Walker, that his name is known even to non-watchers of the Balkans, as a 1999 piece titled "Meet Mr. Massacre" by Mark Ames and Matt Taibbi, currently of Rolling Stone magazine, shows:

…After a brief review of the town's 40-odd bullet-ridden corpses, Walker searched out the nearest television camera and essentially fired the starting gun for the war. "From what I saw, I do not hesitate to describe the crime as a massacre, a crime against humanity," he said. "Nor do I hesitate to accuse the government security forces of responsibility."

We all know how Washington responded to Walker's verdict; it quickly set its military machine in motion, and started sending out menacing invitations to its NATO friends to join the upcoming war party.

How Russia responded is less well-known…It probably sent a chill up the community's collective spine, and pushed its generals into rapid preparations for a new cold war with the United States. As connoisseurs in the art of propaganda and the use of provacateurs [sic], they recognized a good job when they saw one.

…Walker was in Latin America virtually throughout his entire career, until he arrived in Kosovo. He had no experience in the region which qualified him to head the verification team in Yugoslavia….There is a widespread belief not only in Russia, but in other countries, that Walker's role in Racak was to assist the KLA in fabricating a Serb massacre that could be used as an excuse for military action. Already, two major mainstream French newspapers — Le Monde and Le Figaro — as well as French national television have run exposes on the Racak incident. These stories cited a number of inconsistencies in Walker's version of events, including an absence of shell casings and blood in the trench where the bodies were found, and the absence of eyewitnesses despite the presence of journalists and observers in the town during the KLA-Serb fighting.

Eventually, even the Los Angeles Times joined in, running a story entitled "Racak Massacre Questions: Were Atrocities Faked?"

Not that any of this might give U.S. media any pause before bestowing prime print space upon the likes of Walker, as the Washington Times did recently, so he could "refute" articles debunking his war. Walker used the space to re-bunk all the disproved propaganda. Despite the American terrorist's sordid history, Washington Times editors allowed him a free hand in responding to a piece by Serbian President Boris Tadic.

As with all things Balkans-related — wherein media and politicians embellish upon old facts even as new ones discredit them — this goes on simultaneously while the woman at the heart of the Racak matter is spilling the beans, or at least some of them. And no one notices. Ten years of proof that Racak wasn't a slaughter went duly unnoticed by Reuters, which last September 30th printed a photo with a caption reading, "The graves of people that were killed by Serbian forces in January 1999 are visited by relatives during the religious holiday of Eid-al-Fitr in the village of Racak, south of the Kosovo capital Pristina."

It's all part of the pattern in which Balkan-Muslim myths from the 90s are perpetuated by media, politicians, military, NGOs, Holocaust museums, filmmakers and artists even while the Muslims themselves admit to the farce. (Upon Karadzic's capture last year, Richard Holbrooke cited "300,000 deaths" in the Bosnian war — three years after Sarajevo's Investigation and Documentation Centre reduced the original inflated 250,000 figure to less than 100,000.) This is without even questioning why the supposedly secular Balkan Muslims would be visiting the Racak graves on a religious holiday, particularly since the KLA's was a "national" struggle, not a religious one, as we're repeatedly told. U.S. leaders have yet to admit what the KLA themselves have admitted, thereby out-KLAing the KLA itself.

Thaci, meanwhile, has never apologized for the KLA's crimes, while one apology after another is demanded, and extracted, from the Serbian side for what it did and didn't do to counter the terrorist attacks. In fact, the year before the staged Racak massacre — that is, in 1998 alone –Thaci killed 40 Serbs and Albanians, including six of his own lieutenants. Why wasn't this a green light for the world to bomb Albanians?

And given that 1990s Serbian crimes against Albanians, real or imagined, are the basis of the consensus that states Serbia lost all right to Kosovo, why haven't the Albanians who have been terrorizing the province's non-Albanians for the past 10 years (not to mention in preceding decades) lost any right to Kosovo? Perhaps for the same reason that Slobodan Milosevic remains "guilty" despite not having ordered a single crime while Kosovo's leaders are "innocent" despite having committed crimes with their own hands, in addition to ordering them directly.

Meanwhile, the decaying Walker marches on. Shortly after meeting with Walker last June, "opposition leader" Ramush Haradinaj told the UN to get out of Kosovo to make way for the EULEX law and order mission. Walker of course seconded his dangerous clients' motion, telling UNMIK to end the mission once Kosovo's constitution comes into effect.

For his dutifulness William Walker has been rewarded with, among other things, honorary Albanian citizenship. And like Bill Clinton, Bob Dole, Eliot Engel, George W. Bush, and Wesley Clark, Walker has a street named after him in Kosovo — like so many other KLA members to whom monuments have gone up all over Kosovo.

When he's not lying in newspapers about his last hoax, Walker is preparing the next one. He has been making frequent trips to Kosovo, where he has met with his old KLA contacts to make a plan for taking Kosovo's more ornery Serb parts by force. Walker's return to the region in March 2007 alarmed French intelligence, the newspaper Novosti reported at the time, in an item titled "William Walker Gives Tasks to Albanian Extremists for an Attack on Northern Kosovo":

The information of French intelligence officers is that [two weeks ago] Walker met with many former KLA members that he had personally trained for special operations against the Serbian forces. The goal of his arrival is the preparation of a scenario and ordering of guidelines to Albanian terrorists for taking measures to seize northern Kosovo…In Pec in the hotel "Metohija" he met with ex-members of [Ramush] Haradinaj's special unit which in 1999 conducted the [harshest] crimes against the Serbs and other non-Albanians…He also met with all of his old spies which he recruited during his Kosovo stay as leader of the UN Verification mission prior to the NATO bombardment.

…According to what the intelligence services of the big powers had informed their governments, Walker was on a mission of preparing terrorists and extremists for performing the final phase in the realization of the project on an independent Kosovo in case plans are not resolved "peacefully."

…The Americans are afraid that the French will give out such plans to the Serbs in northern Kosovo…Certain KFOR contingents that have forces in northern Kosovo received the task of systematically provoking the Serbs everywhere and causing their reactions…Certain KFOR contingents openly fear a sudden operation of Albanian terrorists towards the north, which is possible in the coming months…The plan is to provoke the Serbian security forces to react in the protection of Serb convoys and to then urgently request the intervention of international forces in the protection of the "jeopardized Albanian population in the Presevo Valley from Serbian security forces that are revenging over the loss of Kosovo."

No sooner did Walker have his meetings than Tanjug reported the following:

International representatives have observed, over the recent days, intensified regrouping of armed groups in black uniforms with insignia of the former Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) in the territory of Drenica, Pec and Djakovica in Kosovo and Metohija province, the Belgrade daily Vecernje novosti [Evening News] said on Saturday…Forces of the local United Nations (UN) administration UNMIK and the peacekeeping force KFOR have been given strict orders "not to engage in conflict or discussion with the armed groups, and, upon sighting them, to abandon their mission and immediately return to base," Vecernje novosti ["Evening News"] said.

In March 2008, that plan was put into effect when UN and NATO arrested and paraded the mostly female Serbian squatters who wanted their jobs back at the Mitrovica courthouse — in front of cameras and through an Albanian neighborhood. More recently, Albanian houses in Northern Kosovo were set ablaze, with news reports promptly attributing the explosions to Serbs. Since the Albanians haven't yet secured Northern Mitrovica as part of breakaway Kosovo, the completion of the Walker-KLA directive is still ahead for the Kosovo war, now in its tenth year.

http://www.juliagorin.com/wordpress/?p=2104

 

http://europenews.dk/en/node/23158

May 14, 2009

U.S. needs to stay out of Balkan feuds

U.S. needs to stay out of Balkan feuds

By WILLIAM S. LIND

Published: May 14, 2009 at 2:28 PM

Order reprints  |  Feedback

WASHINGTON, May 14 (UPI) -- A story I read years ago culminated with the protagonist holed up in a cheap hotel in the Balkans, listening unwillingly through the paper-thin wall as the man in the room next door beat his wife. As he pummeled her, she cried again and again, "Balkan! Balkan!" "Balkan," it seems, may be a term of opprobrium even in the Balkans.

Few episodes in American history have been more Balkan than our late war there. In case the folly of the war in Iraq and the futility of the war in Afghanistan have caused Americans to forget, the Clinton administration bombed Serbia for almost three months, for reasons no one quite remembers. Somewhere around 5,000 Serbian civilians were killed, and much of an already poor country's economic infrastructure was wrecked. As usual, the bombing had virtually no effect on military targets.

The Serbs caved when the Russians pulled the rug out from under them and the U.S.-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization dropped its most extreme demands. NATO could have gotten the same deal with no bombing, had the initial ultimatum to Serbia not been written to make acceptance impossible.

The truce, which is the most one can get in Balkan wars, required Serbian forces to evacuate the Serbs' ancestral homeland, Kosovo. That turned Kosovo's remaining Serbian civilians over to the tender mercies of the Albanians, who promptly ethnically cleansed most of them while NATO forces stood by. Serbia did not renounce its claim to Kosovo; no Serbian government could do that and survive.

Now, it seems, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wishes to revisit the scene of the crime. Perhaps looking about for something more promising than fighting Pashtuns, she is rumored to want another round with the Serbs. The demands, this time, are to be Serbian recognition of Kosovo's "independence." But Kosovo is not a country and never has been; there are no Kosovars, only Serbs and Albanians who live in Kosovo.

Clinton also wants the destruction of Republika Serbska, the Serbian portion of Bosnia. The effect would be to delegitimize the current moderate Serbian government and drive the remaining Serbs in Kosovo and Bosnia out as refugees.

Only people as shallow and self-absorbed as the Clintons could want to mess around in the Balkans. Talk about smoking in the powder magazine. The potential for disaster is always high, and the effects can spread, as the catastrophe of World War I between 1914 and 1918 might remind us.

In fact, the two previous rounds of Balkan fighting and American and NATO meddling since 1995 have left unstable situations needing only a spark to erupt. Bosnia is a hothouse creation, a figment of the globalist elite's imagination. Like Oakland, Calif., there is no there there. It is a Croat-Muslim "federation" that neither party accepts. The Croats want out, and the Muslims hate the Croats. All that keeps the lid on is the money that pours from the foreign troops who occupy the place.

Kosovo remains a festering boil, home to jihadists, drug distribution networks and other fourth-generation war elements of every sort. Serbia won't give it up, and the Albanians will not rest until every Serb is gone or dead and every Serbian church or cultural monument obliterated.

Clinton wants to push the United States back into this beehive, or so the rumor mill in Washington has it. We must pray that adults somewhere in the Obama administration won't let the children again set fire to the house so they can roast marshmallows over the embers. A few folks who, unlike the Clintons, know something of Balkan history are sponsoring a conference on Capitol Hill on May 27 to urge that we let sleeping dragons lie. Let's hope that for once someone listens.

--

(William S. Lind, expressing his own personal opinion, is director of the Center for Cultural Conservatism at the Free Congress Foundation.)

http://www.upi.com/Security_Industry/2009/05/14/US-needs-to-stay-out-of-Balkan-feuds/UPI-98351242325736/2/

The Hague: a tool of ‘legal vengeance’

This  article is an absolute gem. Phil Hammond writes with such 

devastating clarity. This abomination of a court has gone too far 

this time!


Wednesday 13 May 2009


The Hague: a tool of 'legal vengeance'


ESSAY: The ICTY's Kafkaesque decision to bump up a prisoners' sentence by 12 years shows that it is nothing like a proper court of law.
Philip Hammond

Imagine that you are convicted of a crime and sentenced to five years' imprisonment. But, just as you are about to finish serving your time, the court decides that its original verdict wasn't harsh enough and sends you back to prison for a further 12 years.

It's the sort of nightmarish thing you might think could happen only in a totalitarian regime. Yet it happened last week at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague, a court fêted by its supporters as a model of international justice.

The target of the ICTY's Kafkaesque brand of 'justice' was Veselin Šljivančanin, a former officer in the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA), who was originally convicted in September 2007 of 'aiding and abetting torture' during Croatia's war of secession from the federal Yugoslav state in 1991. At the time of his conviction, Šljivančanin had already been in the ICTY's custody for more than four years. He was released at the end of 2007, pending appeal. But last week the ICTY's Appeals Chamber overturned his original five-year sentence and imposed a 17-year term of imprisonment, while dismissing all counts of appeal entered by Šljivančanin and his co-defendant and former superior officer, Mile Mrkšić.

The Appeals Chamber's decision was not based on any new facts. No fresh evidence was brought to light to challenge the original verdict. The Appeals judges themselves noted that the 2007 judgement 'did not err in its factual findings'. Nevertheless, a majority of them (with two out of five judges dissenting) agreed with the prosecutor that 'a five years' imprisonment sentence does not adequately reflect the level of gravity of the crimes' (1).

The ICTY gave two key reasons for its new sentence. First, it argued that Šljivančanin had been wrongly acquitted at his original trial of aiding and abetting murder. On the basis of nothing more than the record of its own trial acquitting him of this charge, the ICTY now found him guilty. Second, it asserted that the five-year term imposed in 2007 – for aiding and abetting torture – had to be revised because it was not clear whether the judges had given sufficient weight to the suffering of the victims and their families. Both of these spurious arguments reveal more about the tribunal's flaws than about Šljivančanin's culpability.

The 'hospital massacre'

Šljivančanin's case concerns what is often – sensationally and misleadingly – referred to as the Vukovar 'hospital massacre'. You might imagine him marauding through wards attacking doctors and patients. Over the years, that is what many journalists and commentators have imagined. In the Observer, for example, Tim Judah described how 'Yugoslav army commanders went into the hospital and dragged out 200 of the wounded and hospital staff… beat them and shot them dead' (2). In the Telegraph, Julius Strauss wrote that Serbian forces 'took nearly 300 wounded from the hospital and executed them' (3). Such 'reports' bear little resemblance to what happened back in 1991.

After prolonged fighting, Croatian forces surrendered the city of Vukovar to the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA), on 18 November 1991. The JNA took prisoners of war to the nearby village of Ovčara and kept them there overnight before transferring them to a POW facility at Sremska Mitrovica in Serbia, where they were to be held with a view to arranging a future prisoner-exchange with Croatia.

Some Croatian fighters, however, had taken refuge in the city's hospital, hoping to be evacuated along with its civilian occupants to Croatian-held territory. On 20 November the JNA apprehended those in the hospital whom they suspected of being enemy combatants – over 200 men and two women – and took them to the local barracks. Contrary to what was often claimed in media reports after the event, these were not civilians seized on a pretext. The ICTY itself accepts that 'the evidence reveals that at least the vast majority of them, if not all, had been involved in Croat military formations active in the fighting at Vukovar' (4).

The original intention was evidently to send them to Sremska Mitrovica like the earlier group of POWs. But Serbian paramilitaries and local Territorial Defence men were out for revenge. The local Serbian civil authorities – an ad hoc government formed in opposition to Croatia's nationalist regime – were also unhappy about prisoners being transported out of the area. The prisoners were instead sent to the site at Ovčara used the previous day.

There, the POWs were severely beaten by the local Territorial Defence and paramilitaries. The JNA military police who had been sent to guard the prisoners made what the ICTY called 'inconsistent and insufficient' efforts to protect them from abuse. That evening, Mrkšić ordered the withdrawal of JNA troops from Ovčara. This left the prisoners at the mercy of the local Territorial Defence and paramilitaries, who subsequently took the revenge they had been waiting for and massacred them.

Neither Šljivančanin nor Mrkšić ordered, participated in, or was even present at the killing of prisoners. The charge of aiding and abetting murder – for which Šljivančanin was acquitted in 2007, but of which both men are now thought guilty by the ICTY – hinges on Mrkšić ordering the withdrawal of JNA personnel from Ovčara and Šljivančanin failing to disobey that order. In extending Šljivančanin's sentence, the Appeals Chamber found that, 'even though [he] no longer had de jure authority over the military police deployed at Ovčara, he could have informed [them] that Mr Mrkšić's order was in breach of the overriding obligation under the laws and customs of war to protect the prisoners of war' (5).

It is worth emphasising that this crucial decision was based, not on any new information or evidence, but simply on re-reading the trial record from 2007 when Šljivančanin had been acquitted of aiding and abetting murder. As one of the dissenting Appeals judges, Fausto Pocar, observed, the Appeals Chamber has made 'a conviction based on the trial record without having observed the witness testimony or the presentation of evidence, factors which may be particularly important in assessing witness credibility'. Noting the past 'inconsistent' practice and 'oscillating jurisprudence' of the Appeals Chamber, Pocar also disputed whether it even had the authority under its own rules to enter new convictions or impose longer sentences.

The other dissenting judge, Andrésia Vaz, went even further, pointing out that the new judgement was based on 'speculative suggestions as to what Šljivančanin should or could have done to prevent the crimes'. In particular, the Appeals Chamber's verdict hangs on the assertion that Šljivančanin could and should have acted after he learned about the decision to withdraw the military police from Ovčara, but does not establish when he learned about it. Complaining of a 'lack of precision' and an absence of 'clear evidence', Vaz doubted whether Šljivančanin had either the opportunity or the means to prevent the murders, and concluded that the prosecution had therefore 'far from [succeeded] in eliminating "all reasonable doubt"' as to his guilt (6).

The Appeals Chamber has substantially increased Šljivančanin's sentence despite the protestations of one of its own judges that it lacks the power to do so. And one of its key justifications for this decision is that Šljivančanin committed a crime of omission, of which he was previously acquitted, by failing to prevent murders carried out in his absence by people not under his command. As Judge Vaz put it, this decision violates the 'fundamental principle of criminal law' that 'where there is doubt, there can be no conviction entered'.

A hierarchy of victimhood

The charge on which Šljivančanin was found guilty in 2007 was another crime of omission: aiding and abetting torture by failing to ensure that, when JNA personnel were still at Ovčara, they protected the prisoners from abuse at the hands of the Territorial Defence and paramilitaries.

Media reports of last week's verdict have often noted that public opinion in Croatia was very critical of Šljivančanin's original five-year sentence for this crime as too lenient (7). The Appeals Chamber seemed to acknowledge this in explaining why the sentence now needed to be more than tripled, emphasising that it was unclear whether the original judgement had 'weighed the consequences of the torture upon the victims and their families, or whether or to what extent it considered the particular vulnerability of the prisoners, in the determination of Mr Šljivančanin's sentence' (8).

This is such a specious argument it defies belief. First, it is obvious that that original judgment did take account of the suffering of victims – by noting, for example, that 'close family members have been left without their loved ones. In almost all cases the anguish and hurt of such tragedy has been aggravated by uncertainty about the fate which befell these victims.' (9) According to the Appeals Chamber, such statements at the 2007 trial did not constitute full enough consideration of victims' suffering. Apparently, the 'correct' level of consideration could only have led to a 17-year sentence.

Second, it is clear from the ICTY's track record that some victims do not count as much as others. In 2006, for example, the ICTY convicted Bosnian Muslim commander Naser Orić of failing to prevent the ill-treatment and murder of Serbian prisoners by men under his command. The sentence? Two years. Since he had already been detained for longer than that during the trial, he was immediately released. Last summer, Orić's case also went to the Appeals Chamber, which promptly overturned the conviction and acquitted him. Orić became notorious for murdering Serb civilians during the Bosnian war: he even made bizarre snuff videos as trophies and showed them to journalists as he boasted about his exploits (10). In his case, however, the victims seem to have weighed hardly at all in the deliberations of the court.

It is worth asking why, as the ICTY puts it, there were such 'intense feelings of animosity harboured by the Serb Territorial Defence and paramilitary forces against members of the Croat forces' in Vukovar. This question is seldom asked, probably because the evil of the Serbs is simply assumed. Yet it was not just the pent-up anger and tension generated by weeks of fighting that sealed the fate of the Croatian POWs at Ovčara, but the long-standing grievances of local Serbs. As one reporter noted in 1999, 'Before the war, Vukovar was one of the most ethnically integrated cities in Croatia… But the relative harmony that prevailed here since World War II was upset in the late 1980s by an outburst of Croatian nationalism.' (11) This article was a rare exception to the general trend, which is to ignore or deny the plight of Serbs under Croatian nationalist rule.

Long prior to the battle of Vukovar – certainly since the election of Croatia's nationalist leader Franjo Tudjman in spring 1990 – Serbs in Croatia had become an increasingly persecuted minority, sacked from their jobs, driven out of their homes, attacked and killed. Even before the outbreak of war, 20,000 Serbs had fled Croatia (12). Tudjman's government revived the symbols of Croatia's fascist Second World War regime, which had exterminated Serbs along with Jews, Gypsies and other 'undesirables'. To ethnic Serbs in Croatia, there was plenty of evidence to suggest that they were once again becoming 'unpersons'.

The ICTY has always claimed to act on behalf of victims. 'For us the victims are the most important', said chief prosecutor Richard Goldstone 1996: 'The victims of the Yugoslav war want legal vengeance.' (13) The tribunal emphasises its advocacy for victims because it stands outside the societies to which it applies its 'international law'. Lacking any real connection with the people over whom it sits in judgement, the claim to speak for victims is a way to assert its legitimacy. Yet it is difficult to see how a mission of 'legal vengeance' is compatible with dispensing impartial justice. In practice, it leads to double standards and politicised judgements.

A political tool

Michael Scharf, a lawyer who helped to write the original ICTY statute for the US State Department, has acknowledged that 'the tribunal was widely perceived within the [US] government as little more than a public relations device and as a potentially useful policy tool'. The tribunal's usefulness in this regard was demonstrated most vividly during the 1999 Kosovo conflict, when it indicted Serbian president Slobodan Milošević at the very moment when NATO was bombing his country. For the British and American governments, Scharf observed, the ICTY was 'a useful tool in their efforts to demonise the Serbian leader and maintain public support for NATO's bombing campaign' (14).

From the outset, the ICTY has been fundamentally shaped by a simplistic, good-vs-evil narrative of the Yugoslav wars, perpetuated by Western politicians and the media. The 'hospital massacre' was one of the key events in establishing that narrative, and was one of the main events highlighted by the US State Department in 1992 when it first suggested that Milošević should be indicted for war crimes (15).

In 1999 it was raised again by those seeking to promote the argument that Milošević should be indicted. Prominent British human rights lawyer Geoffrey Robertson claimed to know of 'compelling evidence that he personally approved the massacre of 200 patients at Vukovar hospital' (16). Once the indictment had been issued, Robertson was beside himself, urging that Milošević should also be 'charged with ordering the Vukovar hospital massacre in 1991, when his army machine-gunned 260 Croatian patients, doctors and nurses into a mass grave' (17). This scenario existed only in Robertson's imagination. The beating and execution of prisoners of war is surely bad enough. Yet advocates of 'international justice' often appear driven to ladle on the horror in order to sustain their own fantasies of righteousness.

One key rationale often given for the existence of the ICTY is that the states involved in the Yugoslav wars would be incapable of holding the guilty to account themselves. Yet more than a dozen of those who – unlike Šljivančanin and Mrkšić – were directly involved in the mistreatment and murder of POWs at Ovčara have been convicted and sent to prison by Serbian courts. The ICTY, meanwhile, pursues its peculiar, politicised 'legal vengeance', supposedly on behalf of selected, 'worthy' victims.

In reality, the ICTY serves no useful purpose except as a political tool of its Western sponsors. In common with other international tribunals, as it sits in judgement on other people's wars it allows Western leaders to set themselves up as morally superior to weaker states, including those they bomb.

Philip Hammond is reader in media and communications at London South Bank University, and is the author of Media, War and Postmodernity, published by Routledge in 2007 (Buy this book from Amazon(UK)).

(1) Appeals Chamber Judgement, 5 May 2009 (pdf)

(2) This war criminal must be brought to justice, Tim Judah, Observer, 4 October 1998

(3) Massacre that started long haul to justice, Julius Strauss, Daily Telegraph, 30 June 2001

(4) Trial Chamber Judgement, 27 September 2007 (pdf). The judgement also notes that 'the two Croat women included with the men were also thought by the JNA to have been involved in the Croatian forces'

(5) Appeals Chamber Judgement Summary, 5 May 2009 (pdf)

(6) Appeals Chamber Judgement, 5 May 2009 (pdf)

(7) See, for example Hague triples Vukovar jail term, BBC News, 5 May 2009

(8) Appeals Chamber Judgement Summary, 5 May 2009 (pdf)

(9) Trial Chamber Judgement, 27 September 2007 (pdf)

(10) 'Weapons, cash and chaos lend clout to Srebrenica's tough guy', John Pomfret, Washington Post, 16 February 1994

(11) 'In the Misery of Vukovar Lies an Awful Model for Postwar Kosovo', Blaine Harden, International Herald Tribune, 3—4 April 1999

(12) 'A Brief History of Ethnic Cleansing', by Andrew Bell-Fialkoff, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 3, 1993, p118

(13) Quoted in Fools' Crusade, by Diana Johnstone, Pluto Press, 2002, p96

(14) Indicted for war crimes, then what?, Michael Scharf, Washington Post, 3 October 1999

(15) Michael Evans and Jamie Dettmer, US wants Serbia war crimes trials, The Times, 17 December 1992

(16) 'Should Milosevic be indicted as a war criminal?', Geoffrey Robertson, Guardian, 6 April 1999

(17) 'No right without wrong, no peace without justice', Geoffrey Robertson, Independent on Sunday, 30 May 1999

reprinted from: http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/6657/

 

reprinted from: http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/

6657/