Posted on 10/09/2004 5:21:08 PM PDT by Jane_N
Fresh controversy has hit the war crimes trial of Slobodan Milosevic with a claim from a senior intelligence analyst that the Yugoslav leader is innocent of genocide. Dr Cees Wiebes, a professor at Amsterdam University, now says there is no evidence linking Milosevic to the worst atrocity of the Bosnian war, the massacre of 7,000 Muslims at the town of Srebrenica.
Srebrenica, which was overrun by Serb forces in July 1995, forms the basis of the genocide charge against Milosevic, but Wiebes, a member of a Dutch government inquiry into the atrocity, said there is nothing to link Milosevic to the crime.
'In our report, which is about 7,000 pages long, we come to the conclusion that Milosevic had no foreknowledge of the subsequent massacres,' he says in a radio programme, The Real Slobodan Milosevic, to be broadcast by BBC Five Live tonight. 'What we did find, however, was evidence to the contrary. Milosevic was very upset when he learnt about the massacres.'
The prospect of the former Balkan strongman being cleared of the most serious charge he faces is a fresh blow to an already troubled case, which begins hearing defence evidence this week after several months of delays.
Any failure to prove genocide will cast a shadow not only over this case but over the whole practicality of holding tyrants to account in war crimes trials, most obviously in the case against Saddam Hussein.
Wiebes headed a team of intelligence specialists commissioned by the Dutch government to look into the massacre because its own forces were present in the town under the UN flag.
He had access to secret files, key diplomats and hundreds of witnesses to a massacre in which Muslim men and boys as young as 12 were butchered by Bosnian Serb forces. But while clearly implicating senior Serb field commanders, including General Ratko Mladic, the former Bosnian army chief still on the run, Wiebes says Milosevic played no part.
He said it was understandable that Milosevic was upset 'because in this phase of the war he was looking for a political settlement and this was not very good for him'.
Wiebes also says his team offered their evidence to the Hague tribunal chief prosecutor Carla del Ponte, but were brushed off. 'What I heard from good sources in The Hague is that Miss del Ponte thinks that we're too nuanced and not seeing things in black and white,' he said.
Hague prosecutors insist this is not so, saying that the report was not relevant. Prosecution spokeswoman Florence Hartmann said: 'The purpose of the report was not to deal with criminal cases relating to Srebrenica, and was commissioned... for other purposes.'
Wiebes is the first senior figure to say publicly what many Hague sources have been saying privately for some time - that there is simply no evidence to back the genocide charge.
Prosecutors have spent months trying to prove otherwise, but have drawn a series of blanks, despite the appearance of high-profile witnesses. These have included former Nato commander Wesley Clark, whose evidence in The Hague last December was that Milosevic told him he knew about the crime and tried to stop it.
Milosevic undoubtedly facilitated the killing by providing Bosnian Serb forces with guns, fuel and cash. But for a genocide conviction to stick, prosecutors must prove that he gave the order.
But hey, we gave Islam a foothold in Europe, so it wasn't a total loss.
Which, by virtue of command responsibility, makes him guilty of a crime.
Furthermore, Slobo's genocide charge in Bosnia is based upon the conduct of the war there starting in 1992 - he's guilty, he knows it, and that's exactly why he's kicking and screaming about having to mount a defence rather than continuing his legally moot posturing.
This is Slobodan Milosevic, an innocent man being tried by a so-called International Criminal Tribunal in the Hague, Holland, presumably for attempting to deport (or ethnically cleanse) albanian islammites from a Serbian province for barbaric conduct over a protracted period of time.
One assumes that the Dutch are practicing to try themselves for ethnic cleansing and genocide, since they themselves are now beginning to expell muslims from their own country, also for barbaric conduct over a protracted period of time.
One can only assume that barbaric conduct over protracted periods of time is a sort of an islammite specialty.
Now, one way to prevent yourself from being charged with hypocricy, is to start torturing people. For the same reason that nobody would ever charge Al Capone with shoplifting, nobody would ever charge somebody like Adolf Eichman or Joseph Mengele with hypocrisy.
Now, in an American courtroom, that would be the instantaneous end of the trial and the prosecutor's career (doing anything other than washing dishes in the courtroom cafeteria) right there.
Thus there should be a question of how Americans would want to be associated with this process even before you consider the fact that Americans soundly reject the entire premise of the ICC and have gone as far as to pass a law requiring the president of the United States to use military force to rescue any American being held by that "tribunal". In other words, Holland would face the armed might of the United States military were it to try to do to any American what it is doing to Milosevic.
Oh, I see our resident expert on the Balkans (who is more of an expert than the experts quoted in many sources) is still around. Was wondering where you've been hiding lately as I haven't seen anything from you. Nice to know somethings never change.
Yeah, right! Then slobo clinton should be in the dock too!
Not worth a damn, but understandable.
Democrats are very incompetant warriors.
Well according to Wesley Clark's testimony Milosevic did try to stop it...
Guess that makes your response "Not worth a damn, but understandable".
"Maybe this was the Wrong war at the Wrong place at the Wrong time...."
IMHO It's not a question of maybe.
As to your "Democrats are very incompetant warriors", I couldn't have put it better myself.
No, Jane. Slobo attempted to absolve himself of responsibility to placing the blame squarely on the shoulders of Mladic, who has to this day received no adverse consequences for his actions from any government of Serbia.
Mladic worked for Slobo, ergo, Milosevic bears ultimate responsibility.
Too hard for one such as you to understand, I know.
Kerry if elected might bring Mr. Holbrook and Mrs. Albright back so radical Muslims can be supported in the south of Russia.
HA HA HA HA You're still such a clown.
And the UN Court position of "command responsibilty" you support is garbage. Is Bush guilty of Abu-Gahrib then by virture of his "command responsibilty"?
Go bother someone else with your clueless prattling.
"And the UN Court position of "command responsibilty" you support is garbage. Is Bush guilty of Abu-Gahrib then by virture of his "command responsibilty"?"
According to Hoplite logic: "Mladic worked for Slobo, ergo, Milosevic bears ultimate responsibility."
That means: American prison guards in AbuGhraib prison worked for Bush, ergo, Bush bears ultimate responsibility for the crimes they committed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.