1 Wednesday, 4 February 2004

2 [Open session]

3 --- Upon commencing at 2.22 p.m.

4 [The accused entered court]

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Madam Registrar, could you call the case,

6 please.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. Good afternoon, Your Honours.

8 This is the Case Number IT-99-36-T, The Prosecutor versus Radoslav

9 Brdjanin.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Thank you.

11 Mr. Brdjanin, good afternoon to you. Can you follow the

12 proceedings in a language that you can understand?

13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honour. Yes, I

14 can follow in a language I understand. Thank you.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Please sit down.

16 Appearances for the Prosecution.

17 MS. KORNER: Joanna Korner, Ann Sutherland, assisted by Denise

18 Gustin, case manager. Good afternoon, Your Honours.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Good afternoon to you.

20 Appearances for Radoslav Brdjanin.

21 MR. ACKERMAN: Good afternoon, Your Honours. I'm John Ackerman

22 with David Cunningham and Aleksandar Vujic.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Good afternoon to you, too.

24 Just to inform the public, we are starting late because we had

25 some technical glitches which fortunately have now been sorted out.

1 Are there any preliminaries?

2 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, there are. May I ask that we go into

3 private session for the first one.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, let's go into private session for a while,

5 please.

6 [Private session]

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 [Open session]

22 JUDGE AGIUS: We are in open session, Ms. Korner.

23 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, as Your Honours know, when we last met

24 last week, I had a very brief opportunity to look at the report given that

25 it was only supplied in full on, I believe, Monday -- I think we've had it

1 just over a week. Your Honour, I'm raising at this stage the question of

2 what this evidence, the relevance of this evidence at all. Your Honour,

3 having gone through the report, it was said in the part of Mr. Ackerman's

4 submissions on witnesses that Professor -- or Mr. Shoup would be called.

5 He was the co-author of the book "The War in Bosnia and Herzegovina" which

6 is in evidence as DB1. He will discuss the conclusions in the book and

7 will review and discuss the testimonies of Donia and Treanor, and he will

8 prepare a report based on these and other materials.

9 Now, Your Honour, first of all, there's one reference to Dr. Donia

10 in the whole of this report. If Your Honour turns to page 14, when he

11 says, "The report of the expert witness for the Prosecution, Professor

12 Donia," he's actually a doctor, but I'm sure he won't mind being promoted,

13 "...has touched on the issue of how the Serbs of Bosanska Krajina

14 asserted their independence from the government in Sarajevo."

15 Well, he does more than that. But we would like to fill in the

16 picture supplied by Professor Donia, but have chosen not to do so in this

17 report, lacking an account of the emergence of national movements in the

18 Bosanska Krajina region.

19 So in other words, this author or this witness does not dispute

20 what Dr. Donia has said, and indeed nowhere in the report is there any

21 direct contradiction or report of anything that Dr. Donia said.

22 Mr. Treanor's report is never even mentioned. I don't know

23 whether he ever read it or looked at it. But there's no mention of it,

24 and certainly there's nothing to suggest that anything that Mr. Treanor

25 had to say was inaccurate or misconceived or anything of that nature.

1 Your Honour, what the report deals with in some detail is

2 international negotiations of which the Court has already heard evidence,

3 and then turns to deal with areas of Bosnia about which this Court has

4 heard absolutely no evidence. For example, a great deal of time is spent

5 on the Sarajevo and the marketplace bombings. Your Honour, I'm reinforced

6 in that by the exhibits that Mr. Ackerman finally -- we had real

7 difficulty in working out what it was from this huge Dutch report Mr.

8 Ackerman was going to refer to. But he has now given us copies. If Your

9 Honours look at what is marked DB364A, which is history and reminders in

10 East Bosnia. Now, unless I'm very much mistaken, this Court has been

11 dealing with northwest Bosnia.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: 364.

13 MS. KORNER: 364A, headed --

14 JUDGE AGIUS: 364A, what I have is Appendix 4. Yeah.

15 MS. KORNER: History and reminders of East Bosnia.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: And 365A is also history and reminders of East

17 Bosnia.

18 MS. KORNER: Yes.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: This is a continuation?

20 MS. KORNER: I haven't the faintest idea. It's a very odd report,

21 but it's different in any event because --

22 JUDGE AGIUS: Because even 369 is history and reminders in East

23 Bosnia.

24 MS. KORNER: It's a very oddly structured website. Because both

25 say chapter 4, and both say under communist rule, but they're different.

1 And Your Honour, that's one of the problems we had. But can I just --

2 JUDGE AGIUS: But you're referring to 364 anyway.

3 MS. KORNER: I am. Srebrenica in Tito's time. Your Honour,

4 gripping though that may be, and I did manage to -- or rather Ms. Gustin

5 managed to extract that one from the website, it has absolutely nothing

6 whatsoever to do with any of the issues that Your Honours are considering.

7 And this, I understand, is an exhibit that Professor Shoup is going to be

8 asked to look at.

9 Your Honour, one of the rules of admissibility of evidence, and

10 particularly where it comes to a Defence expert, is that it must be

11 relevant to issues that the Court has to decide and issues that are in

12 dispute in this case. Now, at the moment, I am unaware of what it is

13 precisely that this report of Professor Shoup, (a), is supposed to

14 contradict in whatever Dr. Donia and Mr. Treanor said; and (b), how a

15 ramble round Srebrenica under communist rule is going to help Your Honours

16 at all. So Your Honour, I'm merely raising at this stage for Mr. Ackerman

17 to explain to me, perhaps, and to the Court how this report and this

18 evidence is relevant.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman.

20 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I'm not sure this objection is even

21 very well placed. I first -- I know you don't have with you the report of

22 Dr. Donia, but I suppose I could argue that all the stuff in Dr. Donia's

23 report about Habsburg rule and the mountain wreath and what happened in

24 1847 and the Cvetkovic-Macek agreement, and I could go on and on about

25 stuff in this report of Donia that may not be relevant. But I think it

1 is. I don't think you can get a grasp of what happened in Bosnia in this

2 war in 1992 if you don't have a grasp of some background, some history,

3 because what happened -- you know, people act out of their past. They act

4 out of what they know from the past. They act out of history. So you

5 need to understand that history. The concept of how is anything that

6 happened in Srebrenica relevant? Well, I think I can show you how it is,

7 if you will just listen to Professor Shoup testify. And you have in the

8 record in this case, Your Honour, thousands of documents which I have

9 objected on relevance. And your response, I think, is correct in terms of

10 the law, we're going to sort that out at the end of this case. And so I

11 think you need to do is listen to this evidence, and if you find that some

12 of its not relevant to your consideration, then sort it out at the end of

13 the case. But I believe it's all relevant or I wouldn't be putting it in.

14 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, the difficulty is at this stage, is

15 this: That I appreciate Dr. Donia set the background, but nothing in what

16 is contained in Professor Shoup's report suggests that what Dr. Donia said

17 is in any way wrong. And therefore, Your Honours have heard that

18 evidence. And as I say, one of the rules is it is unnecessary to hear

19 further evidence on matters which are not in dispute.

20 In respect of documents, Your Honour, at no stage were any of the

21 documents objected to on grounds of relevance, but more on grounds of

22 authenticity or whatever because at no stage have we sought to put in to

23 this case documents which don't in some way directly relate to the area of

24 the Autonomous Region of Krajina or the greater part, which goes to the

25 joint criminal enterprise.

1 Now, Your Honour, all I say is this: Your Honours may, of course,

2 sit and listen to Mr. Ackerman explaining through Professor Shoup how this

3 is relevant, but it does open and it will open, I'm afraid, areas outside

4 those which Your Honours have considered so far and will have to consider

5 for the judgement.

6 As I say, Your Honours what we're about to hear from -- if the

7 report is to be made an exhibit, we're going to go into details of the

8 marketplace massacre in Sarajevo, about which there has already been a

9 trial. And -- just a moment, Mr. Ackerman, let me finish.

10 MR. ACKERMAN: Well --

11 MS. KORNER: It's no good Mr. Ackerman saying no. He may not be

12 taking Dr. Shoup through it, but it's there in the report which will be an

13 exhibit in the case. The report has not been edited in any way, and so

14 therefore we have to deal with matters that are in evidence, whether

15 directly addressed by the witness or in a document that becomes an

16 exhibit.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman.

18 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, Your Honour, I think I've said all I need to

19 say. I believe I've responded. The only thing I was getting up to say

20 was that we're not going into the Mahala marketplace thing. That's

21 clearly not relevant to any issue in this case.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.

23 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, that's just made my point for me. What

24 part of this report is relevant? But you can't just put in irrelevant

25 matters in a document which is part of evidence.

1 JUDGE AGIUS: But on the other hand, Ms. Korner, let's grant you,

2 for the sake of argument, that there are bits and pieces or parts of this

3 report which deal with matters or events which are completely irrelevant.

4 What's your solution? Strike the entire report because of some irrelevant

5 material contained in it, if it contains other events and other

6 considerations which are fundamentally important to the case before us?

7 What do you do?

8 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, I can tell Your Honours what I

9 would do, but I don't think it would be appropriate. Your Honours, what

10 I'm asking for -- as yet, Mr. Ackerman has given a sort of vague reply

11 that it is relevant, but he hasn't indicated to what issue this is

12 relevant.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. I read you loud and clear actually. But

14 let's discuss.

15 [Trial Chamber confers]

16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, we've discussed it very briefly. I don't know

17 if you could hear what we were saying, but more or less the position is as

18 follows, Ms. Korner, Mr. Ackerman: We believe that we should not dissect

19 the report pre-emptively before we have even started hearing the testimony

20 of Professor Shoup. Our position is that the report should be looked at

21 in its entirety as a whole, as a -- holistically, and if at any time in

22 the course of his testimony you would like to ask Professor Shoup about

23 relevant parts of his report, but it's up to you. I mean, you will be

24 free to do it. We may do the same --

25 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, absolutely I appreciate that. All I can

1 say is that Your Honours won't then be stopping me exploring areas of this

2 report about which I have to -- I wish to cross-examine but which have

3 absolutely nothing to do with this case.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: But you're following into a contradiction because

5 you're saying you want to go deeper into areas which you consider to be

6 irrelevant.

7 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, you are letting in what, I submit, and

8 Your Honours overruled me, a report which we would submit is irrelevant to

9 any issue that Your Honours need to decide. Once that's in, then I take

10 it Your Honours will not be stopping me from cross-examining on any areas

11 that are outside the ambit of this case because this is what this report

12 covers.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: We will hear the questions first, and then we will

14 decide, Ms. Korner. On principle, we are not going to stop you.

15 MS. KORNER: Thank you.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: Anything else before we start with Professor Shoup?

17 Am I pronouncing it well?

18 MR. ACKERMAN: It's Shoup, Your Honour. Shoup.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Usher, please could you escort Professor

20 Shoup in. Thank you.

21 Incidentally, Ms. Korner and Mr. Ackerman, I see here a number of

22 documents. These I know where they are, because they are the Defence

23 documents. Then I see other documents here. Banja Luka clinical medical

24 centre, the transcript of an intercept. What's this? Are you aware of

25 this, Mr. Ackerman?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, the Banja Luka Medical Centre

2 documents are the documents that we had suggested we were trying to get

3 regarding the 12 dead babies.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. These are yours.

5 MR. ACKERMAN: The intercept that you see was one that simply

6 early in the case we realised it had the wrong names where it showed

7 someone else speaking when it was actually Karadzic. That has just been

8 corrected. Ms. Gustin told me earlier about it today, so I'm familiar

9 with it and happy with it.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. That explains it then. Thank you,

11 Mr. Ackerman.

12 [The witness entered court]

13 JUDGE AGIUS: I take it these documents dealing with the children,

14 the oxygen babies, are you going to be dealing with those documents today?

15 No. So we can put them away.

16 MR. ACKERMAN: Yeah. We'll not deal with those at all. Just at

17 the close of the Defence case, I'll offer them as exhibits, Your Honour,

18 but that's it.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. I thank you.

20 Good afternoon, Professor Shoup.

21 THE WITNESS: Good afternoon.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: Welcome to this Tribunal.

23 THE WITNESS: Thank you. Good afternoon.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: Is it your first time here?

25 THE WITNESS: I have been here simply as an observer and as a

1 backup to Professor Vladimiroff, four or five years ago at the time of the

2 Tadic case.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: So welcome once more. I'll be very brief. You are

4 about to start giving evidence as an expert witness for the Defence.

5 Before you do so, our Rules require that you enter an solemn declaration

6 equivalent to an oath, that in the course of your testimony you will be

7 telling us the truth. The text is contained in the paper that the

8 usher -- Mr. Usher is going to hand to you now.

9 THE WITNESS: Yes.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Please read that aloud and that will be your solemn

11 declaration with us.

12 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the

13 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, sir. Please take a chair.

15 THE WITNESS: Just give me one moment, please. Just put these

16 things that may come in handy here in front of me. There we go.

17 Excuse me. It's the first time. Is that sufficient? Can you

18 hear me? Please, I'm ready to go.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. You're going first to be asked questions by

20 Mr. Ackerman.

21 THE WITNESS: Yes.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: Whom you know.

23 THE WITNESS: That's right.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: And he will then be followed -- I don't know exactly

25 when, whether it will be this week or next week. He will be followed by

1 Ms. Korner, who is the lead counsel for the Prosecution in this case.

2 THE WITNESS: I see. Is she here? Could she identify herself?

3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Korner.

4 THE WITNESS: I have no way of knowing otherwise.

5 MS. KORNER: I'm not in the habit of doing this, but I am

6 actually Ms. Korner, yes.

7 THE WITNESS: Good. It helps me to know.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman.

9 MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you, Your Honour.

10 WITNESS: PAUL SHOUP

11 Examined by Mr. Ackerman:

12 Q. Your name is Paul Shoup?

13 A. That's correct.

14 Q. You are a retired professor of political science from the

15 University of Virginia in Charlottesville, Virginia, USA?

16 A. That's right.

17 Q. You received your B.A. with Honours from Swarthmore College?

18 A. That's right.

19 Q. You then studied at the Russian Institute at Columbia University?

20 A. That's correct.

21 Q. The Law Faculty of Belgrade University?

22 A. That's correct.

23 Q. And the Department of Public Law and Government at Columbia

24 University?

25 A. That's right.

1 Q. Where you received your doctorate in 1960.

2 A. Right.

3 Q. Your doctoral dissertation was entitled, "Communism and the

4 National Question in Yugoslavia"?

5 A. That's correct.

6 THE INTERPRETER: Can you please make breaks before question and

7 answer. Interpreters can't follow.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Shoup. There is a problem.

9 THE WITNESS: I understand that, and I apologise. And I will be

10 more careful.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.

12 MR. ACKERMAN:

13 Q. You taught at Kenyon College from 1960 until 1963?

14 A. That's correct.

15 Q. And then spend the rest of your teaching career at University of

16 Virginia?

17 A. Correct.

18 Q. You received fellowships and grants from Fulbright Hayes?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. The Ford Foundation?

21 A. Correct.

22 Q. IREX, which stands for International Research and Exchanges Board?

23 A. Correct.

24 Q. And the National Council for Soviet and East European Research?

25 A. That's right.

1 Q. You were a Olin Fellow at Harvard university in 1989?

2 A. That's right.

3 Q. A fellow at the international programme for advanced international

4 studies at the federal institution for east European and international

5 studies in Cologne, Germany, in 1989?

6 A. That's correct.

7 Q. And a visiting scholar at Radio Free Europe in 1991?

8 A. Yes, that's correct.

9 Q. You served twice as director of Centre for Russian and East

10 European Studies at the University of Virginia?

11 A. That's correct.

12 Q. And you also served as president of the American Association for

13 Southeast European Studies between 1985 and 1989?

14 A. That's also correct.

15 Q. Your dissertation was also published by Columbia University Press?

16 A. That's right.

17 Q. You are the editor of "Problems of Balkan Security: Southeastern

18 Europe in the 1990s" published in 1990?

19 A. That's correct.

20 Q. You are the editor of "Bosnia Between War and Peace" published in

21 1992?

22 A. That's correct, in Serbo-Croatian, mm-hm.

23 Q. You are co-editor of the "Yugoslav War, Europe and the Balkans"

24 published in 1995?

25 A. That's correct.

1 Q. You are also the co-author, along with Professor Steven Burg of

2 Brandeis University of the study "The War in Bosnia-Herzegovina: Ethnic

3 Conflict and International Intervention" published in 1999?

4 A. That is also correct.

5 Q. And that is the book that you have there with you which is --

6 A. That's right.

7 Q. -- also DB1, Exhibit DB1 in this case. And this book won the

8 Ralph J. Bunche award of the American Political Science Association for

9 the year 2000 for the best scholarly work in political science which

10 explores the phenomenon of ethnic and cultural pluralism?

11 A. That's correct.

12 Q. Over the last few days, you have had an opportunity, have you not,

13 to review a couple of videos that we have shown you?

14 A. Yes, I have.

15 Q. And you know the two videos that I'm referring to? They are two

16 segments of a documentary. They are denominated for the record in this

17 case as DB358 and DB359?

18 A. I presume you're referring to the "Avoidable War".

19 Q. Yes.

20 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers please slow down for the

21 benefit of the interpreters, please. Thank you.

22 MR. ACKERMAN: Sorry. So hard at times.

23 Q. Before we begin presenting the videos to the Chamber, do you agree

24 with all the conclusions reached in this documentary?

25 A. No, I don't.

1 Q. The basic premise of the documentary seems to be this: That if

2 the Germans had not prematurely --

3 MS. KORNER: No, no, I don't think we'll have counsel giving

4 evidence, thank you. Your Honours can see the video. As to what the

5 basic premise is, Your Honours will be make up your own minds.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: I personally have no idea what video you're talking

7 about, Mr. Ackerman.

8 MR. ACKERMAN: They were given to you last week, Your Honour. You

9 were given two CDs with the videos on them.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: I see. Those are the ones. How am I supposed to

11 know which one you're referring to? Which one are you referring to?

12 MR. ACKERMAN: It's actually both of them, Your Honour. There are

13 two. They are DB358 and DB35 --

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. So let's refer specifically to which part of

15 the video you're questioning the witness about?

16 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, there's two ways to do this. I can do it now

17 or wait till it comes up in the video. Either way all I'm trying to do is

18 show that there's a portion of it that he doesn't really agree with. I

19 can do that many ways. I don't care how we do it.

20 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, the witness can say, as Mr. Ackerman

21 keeps pointing out to me, it's not for counsel to give evidence. The

22 witness can watch the videos, and he can say what parts he doesn't agree

23 with.

24 MR. ACKERMAN: I have no problem with that. I'm perfectly willing

25 to do it that way.

1 JUDGE AGIUS: I think that's the proper way to go about it.

2 Alternatively, if you have some particular part or excerpt of that video

3 which you have reason to believe that the witness may or may not agree

4 upon, you just point him directly to that part. But we need to be put in

5 a position to be able to follow, too.

6 MR. ACKERMAN: You will.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I hope so.

8 MR. ACKERMAN:

9 Q. Professor, even though you've told us that you disagree with some

10 portions of the video, do you believe it can assist this Trial Chamber,

11 and in some cases amplify and explain your own testimony to be given

12 later?

13 A. Yes, I do. I support that position. I think it shows that, first

14 of all, that there are many leading experts who are shown in the video who

15 felt at the time of the crisis in Yugoslavia that the question of the

16 Serbs outside of Serbia proper was a very difficult and complex question,

17 that it could not be reduced down to a simple proposition that Milosevic

18 was waging an aggressive war for a Greater Serbia. I won't say that these

19 experts were right or wrong, but you will see that they are very reputable

20 and knowledgeable people who have a great deal of experience and who are

21 looking at this war from a much more complicated point of view than

22 sometimes the media was at the time.

23 The other thing I think -- and I'll be quick about it -- is simply

24 that it shows you what the Serbs in Croatia and in Bosnia, too, were

25 thinking. It shows you how they viewed this conflict. It's really very

1 hard to get inside their minds and to see what they were thinking, and the

2 shock that this situation had on them at the time. This film, this

3 documentary is partly propaganda, let's face it, but it does show you in a

4 very emotional, vivid way how these people were viewing what was going

5 around them. So I don't think it's a very important documentary for the

6 Court to see, if they haven't seen it before.

7 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I propose now to begin running the

8 video. And we'll stop it on occasions for questions I might have or

9 questions. If you have questions, you can stop it. And Professor Shoup

10 will stop it occasionally to make comments also.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.

12 MR. ACKERMAN: So it should be on your screen on the computer

13 evidence button. And if everybody can see it, as soon as everybody is

14 comfortable with starting --

15 THE WITNESS: Simply a question, do I say to you "stop"?

16 MR. ACKERMAN: Yes, if there's something you want to comment on.

17 THE WITNESS: I'll motion to you.

18 MR. ACKERMAN: Just say "stop." I may not see your motioning.

19 THE WITNESS: Okay.

20 MR. ACKERMAN: Okay. Is everybody ready?

21 [Videotape played]

22 SPEAKER: I think the international community --

23 THE WITNESS: This is the point where I think I do disagree the

24 premise of the film. And I won't interrupt much more, but just to make

25 very clear, what the film is saying here, and that is that western

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 intervention actually expanded and intensified the war. And I can't, and

2 on the basis of my experience and what Professor Burg and I have written

3 here, agree with that premise.

4 [Videotape played]

5 MR. ACKERMAN: Just in case someone in the room doesn't know, can

6 you identify this person on the screen now for us?

7 A. Yes, this is Lord Peter Carrington who is the head of the EC

8 conference in the fall of 1991 that was trying to negotiate an agreement

9 between all of the six Yugoslav republics so they would not go to war with

10 one another.

11 [Videotape played]

12 MR. ACKERMAN:

13 Q. And this person, can you identify this person for the Trial

14 Chamber?

15 A. I know him well. Every now and then my mind does go blank. I do

16 apologise to the Judges. It's just sometimes that I will not remember a

17 name. Here's somebody I have seen for years and years.

18 Q. It is Kennan or Kenney?

19 A. Kenney. Kenney. George Kenney.

20 Q. Thank you. And who is George Kenney?

21 A. George Kenney was a state department -- young state department

22 official who in the summer of 1992 resigned from the state department in

23 protest because the state department had been slow to reveal the knowledge

24 that they had about labour camps in Bosnia. He then became a very

25 outspoken critic of Serbian policies towards the Bosnian Muslims but

1 changed his mind. And maybe after a year or two, for reasons that are

2 still very mystifying to me, he turned 180 degrees around and became very

3 critical of many of the things that were going on possibly, I think,

4 because he felt as a person of principle that the mystification and the

5 lies, if you will even, if that's not too strong a term, were now coming

6 from the other side.

7 [Videotape played]

8 MR. ACKERMAN:

9 Q. You have another person to identify.

10 A. This is -- excuse me, I'm talking too quickly, I understand. I'll

11 go more slowly.

12 This is Nora Beloff, B-e-l-o-f-f. Nora Beloff is a historian, a

13 British historian, who for years had written articles and a few books

14 about Yugoslavia. She is a very interesting person because she goes back

15 to a time that even I don't know. And she is extremely anti-fascist. And

16 I think this explains her position. She is very concerned about the

17 problem of the Croatian Ustasha.

18 [Videotape played]

19 MS. KORNER: [Previous audio continues] ... by the witness.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: I beg your pardon.

21 MS. KORNER: -- by the witness. I understand that the witness is

22 able to identify the speakers on this film. I would like --

23 THE WITNESS: Yes. Not all of them. Not all of them. But I'll

24 try, yes. I don't know this gentleman.

25 MR. ACKERMAN:

1 Q. Did you have a comment that you wanted to make?

2 A. I simply wanted to say that this -- I think this is the moment

3 when the documentary tries to simplify things down to the fact that the

4 Germans were conspiring with the Ustasha in the 1960s and '70s, and then

5 this somehow carries over, that bias, into the war in Croatia. I have

6 never seen this charge made before. I'm not going to deny that this might

7 have happened, but I must say I was rather startled when I saw this part

8 of the documentary.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Can we proceed? Let's proceed.

10 [Videotape played]

11 THE WITNESS: This is David Binder, correspondent with the

12 New York times. I think it's saying a word or two about David Binder; I

13 know him well. He had been a correspondent in Yugoslavia for many years

14 before the war. When the war broke out, he took a rather cautious

15 attitude towards what was happening. He didn't really feel strongly that

16 one side or the other should be blamed. He was critical of our

17 Ambassador, Warren Zimmerman, and wrote to this effect in the New York

18 Times. What happened was he was then placed in Washington DC and never

19 given a chance to write about Yugoslavia from that time on. He was a

20 great gentleman. I never heard -- for the four or five years that he was

21 in Washington, I have never heard him criticise the New York Times, but it

22 was obvious they had no use for him at that point.

23 [Videotape played]

24 THE WITNESS: This -- I don't know him well, but I believe this is

25 a Mr. -- or a -- he has a military rank, Colonel, perhaps, Hackworth who

1 is a specialist in military affairs who has a website, by the way, where

2 he continues to give his analyses of military events worldwide.

3 [Videotape played]

4 THE WITNESS: I don't know who this is. I'm sorry.

5 [Videotape played]

6 THE WITNESS: Not to delay things, but to relate an anecdote with

7 Warren Zimmerman on his book, "Tales about Markovic". When he was invited

8 to the United States, they refused to pay the costs of his hotel. He had

9 to pay for it himself.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Who refused to pay for --

11 THE WITNESS: The state department. He was given a free lunch by

12 the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington. That was the only time

13 anybody paid anything.

14 MS. KORNER: Who is this gentleman?

15 MR. ACKERMAN: That's Markovic.

16 Q. Professor, if you want me to stop the tape, please say, "Stop"

17 because I may not see you signalling.

18 A. Certainly, thank you. I'm sorry. Yes, and I'm still speaking too

19 quickly.

20 [Videotape played]

21 THE WITNESS: Stop. This is where David Binder is not quite

22 correct, and it's not fault of the documentary. They did pay a great deal

23 of attention to the CIA document which said that civil war was coming in

24 Yugoslavia in six months. And in fact, Eagleburger and the others who

25 were responsible for policy in Yugoslavia were probably the main --

1 provided the main input into the CIA conclusion that war was coming. In

2 fact, what happened was the Americans had simply washed their hands of

3 Yugoslavia. This was reflected both in American policy and in the CIA

4 document. But the charge that the American diplomats were uninformed

5 about Yugoslavia is extremely misleading.

6 [Videotape played]

7 THE WITNESS: Let's stop it right there.

8 I don't think this is correct. They could not count on the

9 support of the Germans at this particular point. In fact, a critic, a

10 very severe critic of the German foreign policy, the longtime German

11 correspondent for the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Viktor Meier, some

12 of you may have heard his name, backs me up on this in his book on

13 Yugoslavia and says that the German position was that Yugoslavia should

14 remain united, and this position only changed after the war had broken out

15 in Croatia.

16 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, may I ask Mr. Ackerman to stop for

17 moment.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, stop. Your Honour.

19 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, this is going to be impossible. I

20 thought I would check the transcript. We have no idea --

21 JUDGE AGIUS: I can't see the transcript and the video at the same

22 time.

23 MS. KORNER: I think, when the professor wishes to interrupt,

24 Mr. Ackerman must give the time that's shown on the screen because we're

25 never going to sort out what he's talking about. I mean, what the witness

1 has just said is, "I don't think this is correct." If you actually try

2 and relate it to the video, you can't do it. So we have no idea what he's

3 going to be saying is correct at a later stage. So I think the only way

4 of doing this, therefore, is for Mr. Ackerman, as I say, to read out the

5 timing counter on the video at that stage.

6 MR. ACKERMAN: I appreciate that, Your Honour, and she is

7 absolutely correct about that. And I should have been doing that; I just

8 didn't think of it. But she is absolutely right.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Let's do it that way, please.

10 Yes, sorry to interrupt you, Professor Shoup. Please proceed.

11 MR. ACKERMAN: I think the last --

12 THE WITNESS: I think my remark is -- I wasn't going to say

13 anything about this particular clip unless --

14 MR. ACKERMAN: The last remark that Professor Shoup made would

15 have been around 9.40 in the tape, and we'll just go forward from there,

16 then, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: In the tape. Yes.

18 [Videotape played]

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.

20 THE WITNESS: I don't know who this is, I'm sorry.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: That's a CNN or BBC correspondent.

22 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, and it's at 11.54, the person you're

23 referring to that we don't know who he is.

24 [Videotape played]

25 MR. ACKERMAN: I assume we don't have to identify this person. I

1 think everybody knows this is Jim Baker.

2 THE WITNESS: Secretary of state.

3 MR. ACKERMAN: Secretary of state. We're at 13.37.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.

5 THE WITNESS: I was slow to comment.

6 [Videotape played]

7 THE WITNESS: This is a professor, a good friend of mine. Here we

8 go again.

9 MR. ACKERMAN: We're at 16.53.08.

10 THE WITNESS: Sorry. I do apologise. Please be patient with me.

11 Susan Woodward. Who at the time was at Brookings Institution. She had

12 been an old Yugoslav hand, meaning that she had written about Yugoslavia

13 prior to the outbreak of the war. And her book, "The Balkan Tragedy", was

14 the first comprehensive analysis of the Yugoslav crisis. Many of you may

15 have read it.

16 [Videotape played]

17 THE WITNESS: Stop.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Stop.

19 THE WITNESS: Just to correct the historical record -- I'm sorry,

20 you need to say where we are.

21 MR. ACKERMAN: We're at 18.20.

22 THE WITNESS: Just to correct the historical record, members of

23 the White House staff, whom I know personally, attempted in 1990 to alert

24 the Europeans to the dangers of a civil war in Yugoslavia. This is

25 written about in a book by Robert Hutchings. The response of the

1 Europeans was indifference, but was especially, let's say, discouraging in

2 the case of the French more so than in the case of the Germans.

3 [Videotape played]

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Stop. Do you know who this gentleman is?

5 THE WITNESS: No, I do not know who this is.

6 MR. ACKERMAN: We're at 18.41 at this point.

7 [Videotape played]

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Stop. Have we, Professor Shoup, just in case you

9 can enlighten us on this. We have seen two gentlemen here, this one who

10 is making a speech, and just prior to that, this other gentleman showing

11 us --

12 THE WITNESS: Yes.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you know who they are?

14 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry again. I seem to be very weak with names

15 this afternoon. This gentleman was to become the minister of defence in

16 Croatia. He was the mastermind behind bringing arms into Croatia at the

17 time, but his name slips my mind.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: And the next one making speeches --

19 THE WITNESS: No, I don't know. He's probably one of the members

20 of the HDZ, the Croatian Nationalist Party of Tujman --

21 MR. ACKERMAN: We'll hear his name a little later. Your Honour,

22 we're at 19.30 on the tape right now. Your Honour, the second person

23 you're asking about will be at 19.36 on the tape.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Let's proceed. Thank you.

25 [Videotape played]

1 THE WITNESS: Stop.

2 MR. ACKERMAN: We're at 24.15 on the tape.

3 THE WITNESS: I don't know who this is. I don't know the basis of

4 this accusation, but to enter it in the record, it sounds to me

5 preposterous.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, let's proceed. Go ahead.

7 [Videotape played]

8 THE WITNESS: Stop.

9 MR. ACKERMAN: We're at 25.15.

10 THE WITNESS: I won't dwell on this overly much, but I think you

11 just can gather from the visual images that we're going to see here what a

12 shock it was for the Serb minority in Croatia to be faced with a man like

13 Tudjman. He was not a fascist. The Croatian Democratic Union, the party

14 that he led, was extremely nationalist, but there were even more extreme

15 parties in Croatia than his. But for him to adopt a flag which was

16 associated with the fascist era was really provocative in the extreme.

17 And it does require television images, I think, to bring that home very

18 forcefully, and this is why I think this video is useful to the Court.

19 [Videotape played]

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, stop. Can we go back.

21 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. I can't identify this individual.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: So we are at 26.28.29, and the speaker cannot be

23 identified by the witness. Do you know who he is? Do you know who he is?

24 Have you got an idea, Mr. Ackerman?

25 MR. ACKERMAN: No, I don't, Your Honour.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you, Ms. Korner?

2 MS. KORNER: It's not for counsel to give evidence, Your Honour.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Let's go ahead.

4 [Videotape played]

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Stop.

6 THE WITNESS: Yes. This, because of the writing on this, we can

7 sigh who this is. This is Tomislav Mercep, who is -- I can't read the

8 rest of it, let's see. He is one of the Croatian leaders of paramilitary

9 forces, I believe, around Vukovar.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, and we are at 26.51.

11 [Videotape played]

12 MR. ACKERMAN: We're at 27.47. And I think the screen now names

13 the person who we saw earlier with the gun as Branimir Glavas.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Branimir Glavas.

15 THE WITNESS: Yes.

16 [Videotape played]

17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Do you know who this gentleman is?

18 THE WITNESS: No, I don't. I think he's simply a recruit into the

19 forces of the party of the far right, which he mentions here in French, if

20 you can follow him. But other than that, I don't know.

21 MR. ACKERMAN: And we're at 28.44.

22 [Videotape played]

23 THE WITNESS: Stop. I think it's only fair at this point to say

24 that what the video is showing us here is not totally incorrect, but it's

25 simply a controversial issue. The extent to which the Serbs in Kosovo

1 were being openly or viciously or methodically persecuted on the one hand

2 or the extent to which they were leaving Kosovo because there were better

3 jobs elsewhere, there's no question about the underlying enmity between

4 the Serbs and the Albanians in Kosovo, but the reasons for this are under

5 dispute.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: And we are at 33.24.

7 How long is the video, Mr. Ackerman?

8 MR. ACKERMAN: I think it has got about another 20 minutes to go,

9 Your Honour. So I think it would be appropriate to have a break now.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. So we'll have a break now, 25 minutes.

11 Thank you.

12 --- Recess taken at 3.43 p.m.

13 --- On resuming at 4.17 p.m.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Can we go into private session for a while.

15 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, the witness is in Court.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: I think he can stay in Court, if I gave you

17 indications without mentioning names, I think you will understand.

18 MS. KORNER: Okay.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: If that is agreeable. If you insist, obviously, you

20 have every right.

21 MS. KORNER: No, Your Honour, I think the only -- provided there

22 are no names or anything identifying.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: All right, okay. Yes, please.

24 [Private session]

25 (redacted)

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 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 [Open session]

1 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]

2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Professor, we are going to proceed.

3 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, just for the record, we'll be starting

4 from tape counter 33.08.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, correct.

6 [Videotape played]

7 THE WITNESS: Stop.

8 MR. ACKERMAN: We are at 38.35.

9 THE WITNESS: This is such a crucial moment in the history of the

10 breakup of Yugoslavia that I feel it's necessary to say a word or two, and

11 I apologise to the Judges if you have been over this many, many times

12 before. But there is a little bit of misleading information here in the

13 documentary, and it helps us to understand what's going on later in

14 Bosnia.

15 Here we have a situation, first of all, where the European

16 conference under Lord Carrington has proposed that the six republics of

17 Yugoslavia form six independent states loosely tied in a confederation.

18 They insist that the borders of Croatia should remain where they are,

19 although they also insist that Zagreb should provide autonomy for the

20 Serbs within Croatia. Over the course of the fall of 1991, these points

21 are debated, including the fate of Kosovo. In the end, this is now

22 November of 1991, Milosevic stays firm on the position that the Serbs of

23 Croatia have the right to self-determination. He's willing to accept

24 practically -- virtually everything that the European Community proposes.

25 But his insistence on the right of self-determination for the Serbs of

1 Croatia means ultimately that the borders of Croatia are not sacrosanct

2 and therefore that the -- some basic principles of the European Union's

3 proposals are being, in effect, violated.

4 Now, it should be noted that the European Union stuck to its

5 position with German support all the way through October 1991. The

6 Germans did not defect from this common European position. And this

7 common European position was that no single ex-Yugoslav republic could be

8 recognised and given official recognition until there was a comprehensive

9 settlement of the problems that had arisen as a result of the

10 disintegration of Yugoslavia. And the reason for this was very simple,

11 and that is that Lord Carrington, leading the negotiations, felt that

12 recognition was the only tool that he had in order to force these

13 respective republics to make a concession here or a concession there that

14 would lead to a compromise and finally a peaceful outcome of the

15 discussions.

16 Finally, in December of 1991, after Milosevic had made clear that

17 he was going to remain adamant about the right of self-determination for

18 the Serbs in Croatia did Genscher, then, proclaim on December 8th that

19 Germany had decided that it would recognise simply two republics instead

20 of all of them, namely Croatia and Slovenia.

21 Lord Carrington was very upset by this. He felt that the one tool

22 that he had to force a compromise on the republics, that is, the right of

23 recognition, was being taken away from him. And he was also very upset

24 because he felt that this was a provocative act, and it could lead to

25 renewed fighting at a higher level in Croatia by the Serbs who would

1 respond to this move, and he was afraid, as well, that if Croatia and

2 Slovenia were recognised, that Bosnia would be recognised soon after.

3 And I might continue just for a minute or two, if we can break off

4 my narrative right now, or we can continue this for another five minutes

5 so we can see how this all works itself out, and perhaps the latter way

6 would be the best way to do it.

7 Remember that at this particular point, that the Americans also

8 are against the recognition of Croatia, so that the Americans and the

9 Germans are on the same side. Now, the Americans have not participated in

10 the conference at The Hague right here, the EEC conference we have been

11 talking about, but they are allying themselves with Lord Carrington's

12 position -- I'm sorry, I've made a mistake. The Americans are against

13 recognition. They are allying themselves with Lord Carrington's position,

14 not with the German position; I apologise. Let's back up a little bit. I

15 see a little confusion on the faces of some of the Judges.

16 MR. ACKERMAN: You have to slow down a little bit.

17 THE WITNESS: Yes, I'm sorry. Sure.

18 MR. ACKERMAN: You're going way too fast.

19 THE WITNESS: Okay, thank you.

20 At this particular point, the Americans in this debate over

21 whether to recognise Croatia do side with Lord Carrington. I don't think

22 that their motives were identical to those of Lord Carrington's. They,

23 the Americans, were not really interested in a negotiated solution within

24 the framework of the EC conference. They would have welcomed it, but they

25 weren't interested. Rather, they were convinced that the nub of the

1 problem lay in the aggressive intentions of Slobodan Milosevic. And

2 because they were afraid of Milosevic, they were afraid that recognition

3 of Croatia would lead to a reaction by the Serbs, that they would attack,

4 perhaps even occupy Zagreb, let's say hypothetically, and would attack

5 Bosnia as well.

6 And this was a crucial moment in the coming apart of Yugoslavia

7 because by December of 1991, the Serbs had agreed that they would pull

8 their troops out of those areas of Croatia which had been taken over by

9 the Serb minority, and in their place, place a UN force, the UNPROFOR. So

10 there was a truce momentarily in Croatia, and at the same time a civil war

11 had not taken on a violent turn yet in Bosnia. This was an opportunity,

12 then, in November, December, and January of 1992 to try to find some kind

13 an overall solution to the problem of the disintegration of Yugoslavia.

14 Let me just briefly tell you what happened, because it's very

15 interesting, and it's a comedy of errors in a way because things never

16 worked out the way they were supposed to. On the one hand, the fears that

17 Zimmerman, in particular I think, had that Milosevic would engage in

18 aggressive actions as a consequence of this recognition --

19 MR. ACKERMAN: Professor, you really do need to speak either more

20 slowly or pause at the end of each sentence, because you're going way

21 faster than the interpreters can keep up.

22 THE WITNESS: All right. I hope that's the last time you remind

23 me.

24 The situation was as I said a moment ago, that the Americans in

25 particular, Zimmerman, feared that there could be an attack on Croatia.

1 But in fact, things worked out quite differently. In fact, the

2 recognition by Germany on December 23rd of Croatia and Slovenia produced a

3 period in which the Serbs began to act more reasonably, rather than to

4 engage in any kind of an offensive against Croatia. And I mention this in

5 particular because after this had occurred, we can safely infer, because

6 this is nowhere in the memoirs of Warren Zimmerman or anywhere else, we

7 can safely infer that Warren Zimmerman decided at this point that, in

8 fact, the Germans were right, that they had done the right thing in

9 recognising Croatia, that Milosevic had become more reasonable as a

10 consequence, and then in turn the Americans decided in the spring of 1992

11 that they would apply the same tactic, which I might just liberally call

12 pre-emptive recognition, that they would apply the same tactic of

13 pre-emptive recognition to Bosnia, expecting the same results that had

14 occurred in Croatia. In fact, of course, this did not happen, and they

15 had completely misread Milosevic's intentions in this respect.

16 This leads us into the spring of 1992 when there might have been a

17 window in which to negotiate some kind of a peaceful resolution of all of

18 these complicated problems. But I'll stop here. The purpose of what I am

19 doing is to try to show you how extremely complex that situation was in

20 the fall of 1991. Thank you.

21 [Videotape played]

22 MS. KORNER: Before we move on.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, stop. Stop.

24 MS. KORNER: I wonder if the witness can assist and tell us who

25 that was.

1 JUDGE AGIUS: I think that's the same person we saw earlier on and

2 I had asked Mr. Ackerman whether he could recognise him, and he said no.

3 And I asked you, and you said --

4 MS. KORNER: I don't think he was.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: It's definitely the same person. But who he is, I

6 don't know, Ms. Korner. His face is familiar, to be honest. I don't know

7 who he is.

8 MS. KORNER: The gentleman who was just talking, the gentleman

9 with a foreign accent. He's not the same one that Your Honour thought was

10 a BBC reporter.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: No, no. The same BBC reporter you practically see

12 every day.

13 MS. KORNER: All right. Well, the answer is the witness clearly

14 doesn't know. So rather than discuss it.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: This one, I don't know. His face is familiar.

16 MS. KORNER: I know. This is the gentleman I am asking about, who

17 this is.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, exactly. I don't know.

19 MS. KORNER: I know Your Honour doesn't. I'm asking if the

20 witness knows.

21 THE WITNESS: No, I do not. Again, it's a familiar face, and I

22 apologise. I should know. I've seen this original tape in a video format

23 in which the names of the people are on it, but that was several years

24 ago. So I'm afraid I forget.

25 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry, that's a point. I was about to make the

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 point that I'd never before seen a documentary where not one single person

2 who is on it as named. If this is not an original version, then can I ask

3 where this comes from and where the original version is. I didn't object

4 because I assumed that this was an extraordinary documentary that had been

5 put out without anybody being named. But if it's not the original, and I

6 hear from the witness saying it isn't, can I be told where this comes from

7 and why the original isn't here.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I noticed in the beginning it didn't have a

9 title, who produced it, nothing. So that was one thing I was going to ask

10 at the end, actually.

11 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, this may not even be a proper copy. We

12 don't even know that either.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman.

14 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I really don't have an answer. I

15 don't know of another version of it that has names on it or anything else.

16 The only version I've ever seen is the one that you're looking at.

17 MS. KORNER: Can I ask where it comes from, please.

18 MR. ACKERMAN: And I got it because I asked an investigator in

19 Bosnia to try to find it for me. I heard it existed, and the investigator

20 was able to find it. There are credits at the end that tell you who

21 produce it had and how it was produced.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: I see.

23 MR. ACKERMAN: And the other thing I do know about it is that it

24 was produced by a person who is a friend of a friend of mine in Chicago,

25 but I've never talked to either one of those persons about it.

1 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, can I ask, and it's the same thing as

2 before, I'd like the actual provenance. It's all very well to say his

3 investigator got it. Where does it come from?

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. And in the meantime, I think Professor Shoup

5 has got -- if I could read him, where he has got some information.

6 THE WITNESS: Yes, first of all, I do have that original myself.

7 I hadn't seen it for some time. I would be glad to provide it for the

8 Court. I can get Mrs. Shoup to send it to us.

9 Secondly, I can tell -- although I haven't seen this for a year or

10 two, I can testify that this is the original. Something has been -- the

11 subtitles have been cut off in some fashion, but this is -- I would

12 immediately notice something that was different in this, if it was not a

13 copy of the original. It appears -- I'll slow down, I'm sorry. It

14 appears to me that there must have been part of the tape cut off in this

15 version. But I can provide the Court in a couple of days with the

16 original with the subtitles.

17 MS. KORNER: Can I ask again: Where does this tape actually come

18 from. How was it acquired?

19 MR. ACKERMAN: I think I've said that I have given you all the

20 information I have. I asked an investigator to find it. The investigator

21 found it and gave it me. That's all I know. That's all I know.

22 MS. KORNER: I suggest, please, that Mr. Ackerman overnight make

23 some inquiries from his investigator and tell us tomorrow about the source

24 of the tape.

25 MR. ACKERMAN: With all due respect, what difference does it make?

1 It's the original tape. The witness has just said it's the original tape.

2 I don't think I have to tell Prosecutor where it came from. I think

3 that's work product.

4 MS. KORNER: With respect, Your Honour, that's fine. I object to

5 the admission of this tape, same as the documents that were produced to a

6 witness until we are told where it comes from.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: Please, check, Mr. Ackerman, and give us the

8 information tomorrow. And in the meantime, we are going to proceed. And

9 if we can get the original through Professor Shoup, then it's even better.

10 Did I hear you say that there is part of it in the original which

11 is missing here?

12 THE WITNESS: What I said was that if I recollect from when I saw

13 this last, I have this in my house -- excuse me. I'll speak more slowly.

14 My recollection is that the tape that I have at the bottom, as these

15 people are speaking, identifies the individual.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: That's all. But you don't recollect anything in the

17 original which is not here?

18 THE WITNESS: No, this is it. I would immediately notice

19 something new here.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's proceed. Yes, Mr. Ackerman.

21 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I will do as the Court suggests, I'll

22 see if I can find out where my investigator actually got the tape. The

23 other thing that might be necessary, it might be necessary for me to

24 communicate with Professor Shoup just for the purpose of giving him a DHL

25 number for his wife to use to ship this tape over. He may have it,

1 because we used it for Balkan --

2 JUDGE AGIUS: That's not a problem. But I also, I mean, it was my

3 intention at the end to get some more information on this video because,

4 as I said, it doesn't tell you anything when it starts in the beginning.

5 So there's no title, there is nothing. So was it a documentary that was

6 shown on some TV? What's this?

7 MR. ACKERMAN: My understanding, there are significant credits at

8 the end, Your Honour, and you will see who produced it and --

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Credits, I could have produced it myself.

10 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm taking no point on that. I do have

11 a lot of information about this film, so I'm not taking any point on that.

12 But I am asking, and Your Honour has already ordered, that we be told the

13 actual source of this version.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Because obviously this is not the original. It may

15 be the original in the Serb -- with Serb subtitles, Serbo-Croat subtitles.

16 THE WITNESS: Excuse me.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.

18 THE WITNESS: Excuse me, Your Honour. But that is just the point

19 that I didn't notice. Of course, this has Serb subtitles on it, which my

20 version does not. So what has happened is that this has been prepared for

21 Serbs. Because the subtitles are here, probably they have omitted the

22 names of the individuals.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Let's go -- yes, Mr. Ackerman.

24 MR. ACKERMAN: Just one more thing for the record, Your Honour.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you remember who this gentleman is?

1 MR. ACKERMAN: No. But the tape, the actual VHS tape itself --

2 JUDGE AGIUS: Is in English.

3 MR. ACKERMAN: -- that this comes from -- no. The actual VHS tape

4 itself that I received myself from my investigator that I then had, with

5 the assistance of the Prosecutor's office, digitised, so we could use this

6 system was delivered to Michael Johnson of Prosecutor's office an hour and

7 a half or so before the session today. So Ms. Korner has in her

8 possession, I understand, the tape that I actually received from my

9 investigator, which has on it the name of my investigator and his office

10 number and his address and everything.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: That doesn't --

12 MR. ACKERMAN: It's not like I'm trying to hide anything from

13 Ms. Korner. I've given her what I have.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: No one accused you of hiding, Mr. Ackerman. That's

15 not the point. But I also --

16 MS. KORNER: I'm not suggesting for one moment that Mr. Ackerman

17 is trying to hide it. But what I want to know is, because it's clearly

18 material and relevant, where this version comes from. And work product

19 has nothing to do with it. It's exactly the same as Mr. Ackerman's

20 constant objections to our exhibits until he had where they came from.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: You're right, Ms. Korner. And we'll try and get

22 that information.

23 MS. KORNER: If he needs the telephone number of the investigator

24 back again from the video, then we'll give it to him.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: Anyone know when this video was made, which year?

1 MS. KORNER: Your Honour --

2 MR. ACKERMAN: It may be in the credits at the end.

3 MS. KORNER: -- I have information about that, but can I leave it.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Let's proceed, Professor.

5 [Videotape played]

6 JUDGE AGIUS: Hold it. We are at 42.54.

7 THE WITNESS: I cannot identify the person on the screen. I'm

8 sorry.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Yes.

10 [Videotape played]

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Stop. You know the gentleman?

12 MR. ACKERMAN: We are at 46.54.

13 Q. Do you know who he is, Professor Shoup?

14 A. [no verbal answer]

15 MS. KORNER: Can I perhaps, Your Honour, in order not to go back

16 to it in cross-examination a gentleman named Jatras, George, a historian?

17 THE WITNESS: Could you give me the name again, please?

18 MS. KORNER: Jatras, J-a-t-r-a-s. George.

19 THE WITNESS: It could be, but don't -- I'm sorry that I can't

20 confirm that.

21 MR. ACKERMAN: His name is going to actually appear, I think,

22 before we get to the end of this tape and we'll know who he is, I'm pretty

23 sure. And I'm pretty sure Ms. Korner is right, as a matter of fact.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.

25 [Videotape played]

1 THE WITNESS: Stop, stop.

2 JUDGE AGIUS: We are at 49.25.

3 THE WITNESS: Just to correct the record in this respect, these

4 negotiations which took place in July of 1991 and are analysed in the

5 book, "The War in Bosnia Herzegovina" did not come to fruition in part

6 because Izetbegovic and the Muslim side insisted that if Bosnia was to

7 remain in Yugoslavia or in what in Serbo-Croatian it would be called

8 "krnja" Yugoslavia and which I call rump Yugoslavia for -- because of

9 lack of a better word, if Bosnia was to remain in Yugoslavia, Croatia

10 would also have to be part of that Yugoslavia. And of course, by this

11 time, in July of 1991, it was clear that that was impossible.

12 And as we go along, and as my report to the Court has indicated,

13 this was a point which just could not be resolved. The insistence of

14 Bosnia -- of Izetbegovic that they would not join a rump Yugoslavia unless

15 Croatia was part of it.

16 [Videotape played]

17 THE WITNESS: Stop. Again, I apologise. Maybe Mr. Ackerman

18 should give the...

19 MR. ACKERMAN: We're at 53.40 basically.

20 THE WITNESS: It's difficult here in Court to clarify what are

21 obviously very complex, murky relationships, but I want to make one

22 remark. Let us remember that on March 10th of 1992 in Brussels, the

23 United States and the Europeans agreed that Bosnia would be recognised by

24 April 6th. Now, that meant for the Bosnians, that is, for Izetbegovic,

25 that there was absolutely no reason for him to make any concessions during

1 the course of the Cutileiro negotiations which followed March 10th.

2 Otherwise, he might jeopardise what was his only hope for salvation, which

3 was recognition of Bosnia, military assistance or whatever might follow.

4 So that the discussion we see here is in some ways beside the point.

5 Izetbegovic could clearly see that at this point it was not in his

6 interests if Bosnia was to survive for him to make any concessions and

7 become involved in lengthy negotiations and put off -- and put off

8 recognition.

9 [Videotape played]

10 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, that completes the playing of DB358,

11 and now we start DB359.

12 [Videotape played]

13 MR. ACKERMAN: We are at 8.36.

14 Q. Can you identify this individual?

15 A. Of course, I can. If I remember his name.

16 Q. How about Haris Saladzic.

17 A. Of course it's Haris Saladzic.

18 [Videotape played]

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.

20 THE WITNESS: I can't help you.

21 MR. ACKERMAN: We're at 9.19.

22 [Videotape played]

23 MR. ACKERMAN: We're at 11.39.

24 Q. Do you have any idea who this person is?

25 A. No, I don't. I'm sorry. Perhaps I should just mention to the

1 Court to clarify this debate over the amount of land that people could

2 claim in Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Serbs, of course, in terms of population

3 in the 1991 census were being 33 per cent of the population, so they could

4 hardly claim on that basis 60 or 70 per cent of the land. The Serbs

5 themselves made claims during the war that they owned something like 60

6 per cent of the land. This was a distortion because they were referring

7 to land -- much of the land was owned by the government and was not

8 private, so their claim for 60 per cent of the land might have really only

9 related to, you know, privately owned land which could have been any

10 percentage of the total.

11 At the same time, if you -- as we note in the book, there are maps

12 that have been drawn on the basis of what they call the cadastre, the

13 agricultural acre, so to speak. And if -- that's a more detailed map of

14 Bosnia and of who owns what. And in that case, the Serb claim that they

15 owned over 50 per cent of the land is confirmed, but certainly not 70 per

16 cent of the land. So this is just some little background on this ongoing

17 debate and how much land the Serbs did occupy, but they certainly occupied

18 more than 33 or 40 per cent of the land.

19 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I think I've learned that the BBC

20 reporter we've seen -- that you identified as a BBC reporter, his name is

21 Nick Gowing, I believe.

22 [Videotape played]

23 MR. ACKERMAN:

24 Q. Do you know who this person is?

25 A. General Rose. I think all of us --

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Stop, please. Can I ask you to start again,

2 Ms. Korner, because --

3 MS. KORNER: Sorry. If the professor is guessing, he ought not.

4 That is not General Rose.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Sorry?

6 MS. KORNER: General Rose is a British officer. That is an

7 American, unless I am much mistaken.

8 THE WITNESS: And what is his rank then, if I might ask?

9 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I don't think -- I think rather than

10 Professor Shoup guessing, or either Mr. Ackerman and I giving evidence, if

11 Professor Shoup doesn't know, then he should say so.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. We are at 13.22.

13 THE WITNESS: Mm-hm, mm-hm. Certainly, if he's not a general,

14 then I take that back.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: No, but what was pointed out by Ms. Korner, it's not

16 whether the gentleman is a general or some other rank, but whether we are

17 talking of the same person that you mentioned, particularly it was pointed

18 out to you that the gentleman that you see on the screen here and who was

19 speaking, talking, is American, and --

20 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, we're going to see -- if you go on with

21 the video, you'll see General Rose properly identified.

22 THE WITNESS: This is not Rose? Who is this?

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, if you don't know, just tell us you don't

24 know.

25 THE WITNESS: I will be quiet. Yes, I apologise.

1 [Videotape played]

2 MR. ACKERMAN:

3 Q. Do you now know who this is?

4 A. General Rose.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, let's -- we are at 14.51.

6 MR. ACKERMAN: We're at 14.54, I think now.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, okay.

8 [Videotape played]

9 MR. ACKERMAN:

10 Q. Do you know this person at all?

11 A. No, I'm sorry. I can't identify him.

12 MR. ACKERMAN: We are at 15.25.

13 [Videotape played]

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Stop.

15 Can we go back. This is the BBC -- do you recognise him now?

16 Yes, let's proceed.

17 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, with luck I think we'll be able to stop

18 guessing like mad when we get the proper tape.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, okay. Let's go ahead.

20 [Videotape played]

21 MR. ACKERMAN: We're at 23.08.

22 Q. Do you know this person?

23 A. I'm sorry, I do not know him.

24 [Videotape played]

25 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I think this might be a moment for a

1 break.

2 JUDGE AGIUS: How much more on this tape?

3 MR. ACKERMAN: It looks like 20 minutes. I think it goes to 55.

4 I think we can basically conclude the day with the rest of the tape.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. We'll have a 25-minute break. Thank

6 you.

7 --- Recess taken at 5.45 p.m.

8 --- On resuming at 6.16 p.m.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Professor Shoup.

10 MR. ACKERMAN: Ready to continue, Your Honour?

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Yes, can we proceed with the video. Thank

12 you.

13 [Videotape played]

14 MR. ACKERMAN:

15 Q. At 41.40, do you know who this person is?

16 A. No, I'm sorry. I can't tell you.

17 MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you.

18 [Videotape played]

19 MR. ACKERMAN: We're at 54.54.

20 Q. Do you know this person?

21 A. No, I don't.

22 MR. ACKERMAN: All right. Thank you.

23 [Videotape played]

24 JUDGE AGIUS: I think we can stop it here. It has come to an end,

25 no? Yes. It's the end.

1 MR. ACKERMAN: That's the end, Your Honour.

2 JUDGE AGIUS: I think we can stop here with the witness of

3 Professor Shoup today and give the few minutes that Ms. Korner required so

4 that we will discuss the agenda for next week.

5 Yes, Professor, tell me.

6 THE WITNESS: Perhaps the Judge or Judges could inform me as to

7 how I'm to go about getting this tape and what I can tell Mrs. Shoup.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Do we require the English edition of this tape? I

9 think we can live with what we have.

10 MS. KORNER: Let me put it this way: Shall we wait until the end

11 of Professor Shoup's evidence, and then we can see.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: So for the time being, don't worry about it.

13 THE WITNESS: Good, okay. That's fine, mm-hm.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Mr. Usher will escort you out of the

15 room, and we will meet again tomorrow. I think we are still sitting in

16 the afternoon tomorrow, if I remember well. I think it's only Friday that

17 we are sitting in the morning, if I remember well.

18 [The witness stands down]

19 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, what I was wondering is if Milosevic

20 wasn't sitting this week whether, (a), we couldn't get into a bigger

21 court, and (b) --

22 JUDGE AGIUS: I would be very pleased to accommodate, Ms. Korner.

23 MS. KORNER: Or even better, sit in the morning instead of the

24 afternoon.

25 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Madam Registrar.

2 THE REGISTRAR: We're going to have Blagojevic and Strugar in the

3 morning.

4 MR. ACKERMAN: Since Milosevic is not sitting, I thought

5 Courtroom I was open in the mornings now. Since Milosevic is sick.

6 THE REGISTRAR: Blagojevic moved to Courtroom I. They beat us.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: They beat us, okay. So in any case it's only

8 tomorrow.

9 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I think perhaps we better go into

10 private session.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's go into private session for a while, please.

12 [Private session]

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)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Page 24326 redacted, private session

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Page 24327 redacted, private session

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.45 p.m.,

12 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 5th day of

13 February, 2004, at 2.15 p.m.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25