150126ED

Page 30590

1 A. Good morning. My name is Nedo Blagojevic.

2 MR. IVETIC: I would like to call up 1D1719.

3 Q. Sir, looking at the first page of this document, there's a

4 signature. Can you identify whose signature we see here.

5 A. It's my signature.

6 MR. IVETIC: If we can please turn to the last page of the

7 document.

8 Q. On the last page, we also see a signature. Can you tell us whose

9 signature this is?

10 A. Again, it's my signature.

11 Q. Now the indicate that is recorded here, does it -- is it in

12 accord with your recollection of the date when you would have signed this

13 statement?

14 A. Yes, that's the right date.

15 Q. Sir, after signing this statement, did you have occasion to read

16 the same in the Serbian language during our proofing session to check to

17 see if everything is correctly recorded in it?

18 A. Yes, I've read it, and it's all right.

19 Q. If I were to ask you today questions based on the same topics as

20 in your written statement, would your answers, in substance, be the same?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And, sir, since you have taken a solemn declaration to tell the

23 truth, does that mean, then, that everything that is contained in your

24 statement is truthful?

25 A. Yes.

Page 30591

1 MR. IVETIC: Your Honours, at this time, I would tender the

2 statement 1D1719 as a public exhibit. There's also one associated

3 document which is 65 ter number 05636 which we would also tender at this

4 time.

5 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections. Madam Registrar, first the

6 document, the statement.

7 THE REGISTRAR: The statement receives D878, Your Honours.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.

9 And the associated exhibit.

10 THE REGISTRAR: Receives Exhibit Number D879, Your Honours.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Also admitted into evidence. And that was the

12 65 ter number as you mentioned it, Mr. Ivetic.

13 MR. IVETIC: Thank you.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed.

15 MR. IVETIC: At this time, Your Honours, I would read the public

16 witness summary of the statement.

17 The witness joined the VRS in May of 1992. He was a

18 communications officer that served as chief of communications for the

19 Drina Corps from 1 November 1992 through the end of the war, and, indeed,

20 until he was retired in 1997. He started as a major and attained the

21 rank of colonel in 1995.

22 For reasons of safety and security, at the beginning of the

23 operation in Srebrenica, the witnesses installed KZU-61 devices at the

24 RRU-1 at Pribicevac to protect conversations from being intercepted. He

25 personally installed KZU-63 devices on the RUP-12 devices being used by

Page 30592

1 units involved in the operation for the same purpose.

2 He likewise proposed that all combat activities be communicated

3 by way of encrypted written documents and it was done accordingly.

4 The frequencies used by the VRS did not change during the war as

5 there was no reason for that. These frequencies are reflected in the

6 associate exhibit which has now received the number D879.

7 That completes the public summary.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Ivetic. If you have any further

9 questions you may proceed.

10 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honour, I do.

11 Q. Sir, I would like to turn to page 4 in your statement in both

12 languages and focus on paragraph 21 briefly.

13 In this paragraph, you talk about the installation of some KZU-61

14 and KZU-63 devices at the beginning of the operation in Srebrenica.

15 First of all, can you clarify for us what Srebrenica operation is at

16 issue, whether by name or by date?

17 A. I don't know the date, but the operation was called Krivaja, I

18 think.

19 Q. Do you know the year?

20 A. The year was 1995.

21 Q. Next, sir, I would like to ask you: The acronym KZU, what does

22 it stand for?

23 A. KZU means encryption device.

24 Q. Okay. Now I'd like to ask you about these devices, both the

25 KZU-61 and the KZU-63. Could you please explain for us how those devices

Page 30593

1 functioned and what kind of radio communications did they affect?

2 A. KZU-61 was for the protection of speech on one line, one segment.

3 KZU-61 is a device that I installed on a relay device called RRU-1,

4 whereas KZU-63 also serves for the protection of speech and it's mounted

5 on RRU-12.

6 Q. And, sir, how do these devices protect speech communications?

7 How do they function?

8 A. KZU-61 and KZU-63 scramble speech to such an extent that you

9 can't listen to it without a special device.

10 Q. Now, sir, you say in your statement that you personally installed

11 the KZU-63 on the RUP-12 radios that the units involved in the Srebrenica

12 operation utilized. Could someone from the ABiH with the same type of

13 radio install a KZU-63 device and just turn on their radio and

14 automatically intercept the scrambled signal from these devices, or was

15 something else required?

16 A. Just plugging in an encryption device does not in itself imply

17 confidentiality. You also have to put in the code for the key, and these

18 keys inside the device ensure the confidentiality of speech. Without

19 inserting the key in the encryption device, the encryption device on its

20 own is useless.

21 Q. And this key that you're talking is it -- how is it input?

22 A. Manually, using a keyboard. On the device itself.

23 Q. Now, the RUP-12 that you discuss, was that a simplex or a duplex

24 radio system?

25 A. RUP-12 is a simplex communication. I speak, you listen, and then

Page 30594

1 vice versa.

2 Q. Now, sir, prior to 1995, prior to this point in 1995, had you

3 assisted in the setting up of any other encryption devices at Pribicevac,

4 and if so, when?

5 A. When the Tactical Group Pribicevac was established and a command

6 post was put in place in Pribicevac, we also installed the encryption

7 device KZU-31. It is a device for the encryption of written

8 communication, of text, for purposes of combat operations.

9 Q. Now, if we look at paragraph 22, which is at -- on the same page

10 in the Serbian and starts on the bottom of the same page in English and

11 flows onto the next page, here you are talking of how you asked for an

12 order to be issued --

13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic --

14 MR. IVETIC: Yes.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Could I just -- I see that you now are leaving

16 outside the technicalities of paragraph 21 --

17 MR. IVETIC: Okay.

18 JUDGE ORIE: First of all, Witness, you are recorded as having

19 referred to RRU-12, whereas in your statement, and later by Mr. Ivetic,

20 reference was made to RUP-12.

21 Did you intend to refer do anything else than the RUP-12?

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You said RRU-12? I don't think I

23 mentioned it.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Then where I take it where the transcript reads

25 "RRU-12," that we have to understand it as "RUP-12."

Page 30595

1 As far as the code is concerned, I think that you mainly

2 explained that the code was needed for encryption. If such radio signals

3 would be intercepted, would you need to have the same code apart from the

4 encryption devices, but would you need the same code in order to

5 understand what was said?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely. The same device, the

7 same code.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.

9 Please proceed, Mr. Ivetic.

10 MR. IVETIC:

11 Q. Sir, in paragraph 22, you are talking of how you asked for an

12 order to be issued that all communication as to combat activities be

13 transmitted by a written document. Can you tell us when this occurred?

14 A. That order that I wrote, I wrote it in the beginning of

15 December 1992.

16 Q. And, sir --

17 A. And it was signed by --

18 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter didn't hear the name.

19 MR. IVETIC:

20 Q. I'm sorry. Please continue.

21 A. I said I wrote the order in December 1992. It was signed by the

22 corps commander, and it was to the effect that all communications

23 regarding combat activities had to be encrypted and sent in writing

24 because it was possible. We had encryption devices for speech and for

25 written information, and I insisted that it be observed.

Page 30596

1 Q. Thank you, sir. Now I'd like to move to a different topic to

2 discuss the RRU-800 radio relay device. First of all, sir, how old were

3 the RRU-800 radio relay devices that were in use in the communications

4 system of the VRS?

5 A. RRU-800 were old, even when I was at the academy, 1965, 1966, and

6 1967 [as interpreted]. And in 1995 especially.

7 Q. With respect to these RRU-800 radio relay devices at the VRS,

8 would you describe the power usage of these machines, that is, could they

9 operate at 100 per cent of their original power output?

10 A. Considering that these devices were old, the useful range for

11 acceptable communication, in terms of speech or written information, was

12 25 per cent of the original range because it was obsolete.

13 Q. And, sir, were there any other situations when these RRU-800

14 radio relay devices would be purposefully operated at less than full

15 power?

16 A. If I understood the question correctly, no, such situations

17 didn't happen.

18 Q. Okay. Now --

19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic, just for my understanding, the whole

20 issue of the -- of the power and the use and all being old, is that to be

21 found somewhere in the statement or is it in addition to what -- I mean,

22 I see the 800 in paragraph 16.

23 MR. IVETIC: I believe it's all in addition to the statement,

24 Your Honours, supplementing the tactical details that were mentioned

25 in -- I believe actually earlier.

Page 30597

1 JUDGE ORIE: Do I also remember well that this was a hot issue

2 when we heard evidence by the Prosecution on the use of this? Then I'm a

3 bit surprised at what then turned out to be a real matter of dispute,

4 that that is not dealt with in this statement because that's what I would

5 expect then to focus on. Because that's my recollection that we had a

6 lot of questions about that, especially by the Defence. So I was

7 wondering why it doesn't appear here now, if that was one of the hot

8 items.

9 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, Mr. President. I am thinking the same

10 thing, but, of course, I also remembered this and was expecting to hear

11 it as we're hearing it now. So we're not surprised but we would have

12 preferred it to be, of course, in the statement.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But, of course, for the Chamber as well, we

14 have not studied the radio systems in detail. But I remember that, that

15 was one of the items. But it is clear now to me that I didn't miss

16 anything in the statement. It's in addition to what we find in the

17 statement.

18 Please proceed.

19 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honour. And I would also actually

20 bring to the attention -- Your Honour referenced paragraph 16 and then I

21 just turned to the prior paragraphs and I see the English translation has

22 RRU-880 instead of 800 for paragraphs 8 and 12 which I did not note

23 previously. I -- I don't know if I have a --

24 JUDGE ORIE: We have it in paragraph 8, we have the 880. We

25 have --

Page 30598

1 MR. IVETIC: And paragraph 12.

2 JUDGE ORIE: -- it in 12. Yes. Perhaps you clarify with the

3 witness whether in his statement -- if the original gives only one

4 number, only 800 and not 880, then we need a new translation. If,

5 however, the original also has various numbers, then we should clarify

6 with the witness whether these are the same or different --

7 MR. IVETIC: Looking at the Serbian original I only see RRU-800

8 and the other two devices that are identified, so it looks like a

9 scrivener's error in the English translation. So we'll have to upload a

10 corrected version of that.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. McCloskey, does --

12 MR. McCLOSKEY: We agree with that.

13 JUDGE ORIE: You agree with that. Then let's have a new

14 translation rather than to spend more time on it now.

15 Please proceed.

16 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

17 Q. Now, sir, I'd like to look at paragraph 10 and 12 --

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Before you do, I just have a little clarification

19 here to ask.

20 Sir, at page 9, line 4 of today's transcript, when you were first

21 asked about the RRU-800 you are recorded as having said:

22 "RRU-800 were old even when I was at the academy, 1965, 1966 and

23 1967."

24 Were you at the academy in those years?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know how this was

Page 30599

1 interpreted to you. What I said was 1975, 1976, and 1977. Not 1965 but

2 1975.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. That clarifies my problem.

4 Thank you.

5 MR. IVETIC:

6 Q. If we can look at page 3 in both versions, I'd like to look at

7 paragraphs 10 and 12.

8 First of all, sir, you identify the RUP-12 as supporting circular

9 communication in all horizontal directions; whereas you say the RRU-800

10 is uni-directional. What is the difference in layman's terms for these

11 two types of communication?

12 A. A RUP-12 is a radio device. Its antenna broadcasts a signal

13 within a circle of 360 degrees, whereas the radio relay device and its

14 antenna direct impasses in one direction, not 360 degrees. Just one

15 direction, one degree. This is the difference.

16 Q. Then for the purposes of locating and receiving that signal on

17 the other end, what does that mean?

18 A. The same device has to exist on the other side, and the antennas

19 have to face each other in order to enable communication. I'm talking

20 about a radio relay device. When it comes to a radio device, the

21 situation is entirely different. Those devices can be scattered all over

22 the area in a circle of 360 degrees.

23 Q. Okay. Now, sir, based upon your experience and in your opinion,

24 could the radio axes from Zvornik towards the VRS Main Staff be

25 intercepted by enemy forces?

Page 30600

1 A. First of all, from Zvornik towards the Main Staff, i.e., the

2 corps command, because Zvornik was subordinated to the corps, of course,

3 not to the Main Staff. But we used the relay hub of the Main Staff in

4 Veliki Zep. It was not a radio approach but a radio relay approach. A

5 radio relay station in Zvornik could not be intercepted by Muslim forces

6 because the radio relay station was in the Drina valley and some

7 200 metres behind it there was a natural obstacle, a slope, which was

8 about 100 to 150 metres above the radio relay station. It was towering

9 over it, as it were.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. McCloskey.

11 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, Mr. President, this was not in the

12 statement, this specific comment about the inability to intercept. And

13 this is not in prior testimony either.

14 MR. IVETIC: It is. It is in Popovic.

15 MR. McCLOSKEY: It -- this kind of information needs to be in

16 statements.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Is it in the statement, Mr. Ivetic?

18 MR. IVETIC: It is not in the statement otherwise I would have

19 directed to the statement. It is in the Popovic transcript which is

20 where I got it from.

21 MR. McCLOSKEY: If he could point that out, I would appreciate

22 it.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Could we --

24 MR. IVETIC: I can get that at the next break.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Mr. McCloskey, then we'll see that after the

Page 30601

1 next break.

2 I would have one question for the witness in this context.

3 Witness, you explained to us the difference between the radio

4 relay and radio. Radio being circular, 360 degrees. May I take it that

5 for radio relay, that at least there is a small range in which direction

6 the signals will be sent? I can imagine that it is 3 degrees or

7 5 degrees. Could you tell us anything about how broad that signal is

8 transmitted?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In degree terms, up to 1 degree, at

10 the most.

11 JUDGE ORIE: For example --

12 THE INTERPRETER: Kindly switch off all the unnecessary

13 microphones, please.

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] One degree is the breadth of the

15 signal at some 10 to 15 kilometres distance.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, which requires a very precise direction of the

17 signal in order not to miss the receiver, relay receiver station. Is

18 that well understood?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.

21 Please proceed, Mr. Ivetic.

22 MR. IVETIC:

23 Q. Sir, now I want to look at the associated exhibit mentioned in

24 paragraph 25; that is, D879. If we can call up the same in e-court, and

25 I believe you have a copy there at your location.

Page 30602

1 First of all, sir, I note there are some handwritten entries.

2 Can you tell us who generated these handwritten notations we see?

3 A. These handwritten entries were done by me personally in 1993.

4 Q. And were these handwritten notations communicated to the

5 recipient of this document?

6 A. Yes. This is actually my report to the chief of communications

7 of the Main Staff where I communicate the real frequencies in the field.

8 Q. And this is dated 2nd October 1993. What can you tell us about

9 the frequencies that were in use by the VRS for the same radio relay

10 points prior to this date?

11 A. These are the frequencies of the Drina Corps. I don't know why

12 the chief of communications of the Main Staff asked for this. Perhaps he

13 did not have all the necessary data in order to avoid any overlapping and

14 scrambling --

15 THE INTERPRETER: The connection was bad and the interpreter

16 missed one part of the answer.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And, as a result of that, I

18 communicated to him a the overview of the frequencies that were being

19 used.

20 MR. IVETIC:

21 Q. Sir, the interpreter did not catch your entire answer. Could you

22 please continue from where you told us that you did not have all the

23 necessary data in order to avoid any overlapping and scrambling. Could

24 you continue your answer from that point on.

25 A. The chief of communications of the Main Staff was a --

Page 30603

1 communicated this information on the current frequencies which were in

2 use at the time. This was supposed to help him with further planning.

3 This helped him to work normally.

4 Q. Now, sir, if someone is receiving a signal from an RRU-800

5 transmission, how many frequencies should be recorded for receipt of that

6 conversation?

7 A. As you can see in the document, the radio relay device has two

8 frequencies: One for transmission; one for receipt. We are talking

9 about RRU-800.

10 Q. Okay. Now, in paragraph 24, if we can return to your statement

11 which now has the number D878, and it is on page 5 in both languages. In

12 paragraph 24 --

13 MR. IVETIC: That should be the next page in the ... there we go.

14 Q. In paragraph 24, you say there was no reason to change the

15 frequencies. What do you mean by that?

16 A. What I meant was that it was impossible to communicate normally

17 on those frequencies for either technical reasons or because of weather

18 conditions or scrambling. Those were the main reasons why frequencies

19 needed to be changed.

20 Q. And did those reasons exist on the VRS side during the war such

21 that the frequencies needed to be changed?

22 A. No, there were no such reasons. Hence, there were no frequency

23 changes.

24 Q. Now, you also say here in this paragraph that you did not have

25 the right or power to change these frequencies. What entity or entities

Page 30604

1 would have had to have been involved in ordering a change in the

2 frequencies used by the VRS radio relay system?

3 A. Radio relay communications of the Main Staff and the Drina Corps

4 relied on the radio relay communications of the Army of the Federal

5 Republic of Yugoslavia. Therefore, the communications organs of the

6 Army of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia were involved in the planning

7 and organisation of radio relay communications.

8 Q. And, sir, could the VRS unilaterally change their -- their radio

9 relay frequencies without the Yugoslavian authorities being involved in

10 the same?

11 A. The chief of communications of the Main Staff and I, as the chief

12 the communications of the Drina Corps, were in a position to change

13 frequencies. However, our devices were directed towards the devices of

14 the Army of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia which means that we would

15 have been automatically cut off from communication.

16 Q. And, sir, my last question for you --

17 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Before do you that, just for my better

18 understanding.

19 In relation to the last answer, sir, you said that would mean

20 "that we would have been automatically cut off from communication."

21 Why that? The communication between the Drina Corps and the

22 Main Staff, would that be cut off?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that would have been cut off

24 because our hubs and the devices of the Army of the Federal Republic of

25 Yugoslavia were our mediators for communication. They were in between,

Page 30605

1 as it were.

2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And what about the communication between the

3 Drina Corps and subordinated units?

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know if you have a

5 schematic of the relay communications of the Drina Corps, if you had it

6 you would see that the Drina Corps, when it comes to the RRU-800 device,

7 to communicate with any brigade we had to go through the hub of the

8 Main Staff and relay hub of the Army of the Federal Republic of

9 Yugoslavia.

10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much.

11 MR. IVETIC:

12 Q. Sir, my last question. Police units and authorities, did they

13 utilize the -- this same VRS radio system that we are talking about?

14 A. Police units had their own system and that was mostly a radio

15 system. I did not hear the rest of your question. You mentioned the

16 police, but you also mentioned some other body. What was that?

17 Q. I only asked about the police units and police authorities.

18 A. Very well, then.

19 Q. Then, Colonel, I thank you for answering my questions.

20 MR. IVETIC: Your Honours, that completes my direct examination.

21 And I will get that transcript reference to Mr. McCloskey as soon as I

22 can.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Did I also -- looking at the 65 ter summary,

24 it doesn't say anything about impossibility of interceptions, whereas

25 that seems to be the clue of much of the witness -- of this witness's

Page 30607

1 Q. Colonel, you just said on temporary transcript page 12, line 18,

2 that the -- and I quote:

3 "Radio relay station in Zvornik could not be intercepted by

4 Muslim forces because the radio relay station was in the Drina valley and

5 some 200 metres behind it there was a natural obstacle, a slope, which

6 was about 100 to 150 metres above the radio relay station."

7 Now, to communicate to or from Zvornik, you would go from this

8 Zvornik hub you're talking about to the radio relay station in Serbia

9 called Gucevo; correct?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And from the radio relay station Gucevo in Serbia, the next link

12 in the chain was to another radio relay station in Serbia called Cer;

13 correct?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And you testified as a Defence witness for Vujadin Popovic many

16 years ago; I believe it was 2006. Correct?

17 A. Correct.

18 Q. And let me remind you of something you testified to in Popovic.

19 I take it you testified in Popovic truthfully?

20 A. Yes.

21 MR. McCLOSKEY: And this testimony can be found on page 36 --

22 it's 65 ter 31884, page 36 in e-court. It was at page 22296, lines 1

23 through 6 in the Popovic transcript.

24 Q. And, in part, you say:

25 "And as for Vlasenica-Veliki Zep, Cer-Gucevo and Gucevo-Zvornik,

Page 30608

1 this is where it was possible to listen in under the condition that you

2 enter the radio relay beam which was difficult because we applied

3 measures of anti-electronic protection. You could only intercept oral

4 communication, which was impossible with the written communication

5 because the written communication was always encrypted ..."

6 Sir, here, you say twice that it would be possible to intercept

7 along this path to Zvornik. You say it's difficult, but you said that if

8 it entered the radio beam, it can be intercepted. So which is correct:

9 Popovic back then or what you've just said to Mr. Ivetic today?

10 A. Both things are correct. Mr. Ivetic asked me about the

11 interception of conversations from Zvornik. As for the interception of

12 conversations taking place in Zvornik, since the antenna was directed

13 towards Gucevo, i.e., eastwards, and the Muslim forces and their

14 interception devices were westwards. On top of that, from the Zvornik

15 radio device, towards Muslim forces there was a natural obstacle and it

16 was impossible to intercept conversations. When it comes to Gucevo,

17 Vlasenica, Veliki Zep and Cer and from the direction of Gucevo which sent

18 a beam westwards from the station towards the Muslim forces, there it was

19 possible to intercept a signal and to record a conversation taking place

20 but only in that direction, from Gucevo in the direction of Zvornik.

21 Q. But all conversations from Zvornik had to go through the radio

22 relay hub Gucevo-Cer, didn't it?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And that's where the Muslims, even in your own testimony, could

25 intercept?

Page 30609

1 A. No. From Zvornik towards Gucevo the radio relay device sent a

2 signal on transmission frequency which was then forwarded so it could not

3 be intercepted at all.

4 Q. Sir, I didn't say Zvornik. I said Gucevo-Cer.

5 A. That applies to Gucevo-Cer as well. Muslims could not

6 intercepted those conversations because the axis is Zvornik-Gucevo-Cer

7 and they could not intercept any of those.

8 Q. Let me remind you what you said in Popovic one more and that you

9 also told us today that it was true.

10 "And as for Vlasenica-Veliki Zep, Cer-Gucevo, and Gucevo-Zvornik,

11 this is where it was possible to listen in under the condition that you

12 enter the radio relay beam which was difficult because we applied

13 measures of anti-electronic protection. You could only intercept oral

14 communications ..."

15 Is that a true statement?

16 A. Yes, and I stand by what I said and I re-confirm this. You

17 quoted the axis well, Vlasenica-Veliki Zep, Cer-Zvornik, but this is a

18 direction, and from that direction conversations could be intercepted.

19 However, when it comes to Zvornik, Gucevo, Cer and further on, that

20 direction could not be intercepted because we're talking about two

21 different frequencies, the transmission frequency on the one hand and the

22 receipt frequency on the other.

23 Q. They're both RRU-800, aren't they?

24 A. Yes, you're right.

25 Q. And you cannot protect RRU-800's speech, could you?

Page 30610

1 A. Speech on RRU-800 cannot be protected as a group. Particular,

2 separate channels can be protected on different frequencies --

3 THE INTERPRETER: And the interpreter missed the last bit of the

4 answer.

5 MR. McCLOSKEY:

6 Q. And, lastly, you mentioned a --

7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. -- could we hear the last part of the answer

8 which the interpreters missed.

9 MR. McCLOSKEY: Okay. Excuse me.

10 Q. I'm sorry, Colonel, I think you're going to have to repeat your

11 last answer, if you can, because we weren't able to interpret all of it.

12 A. A speech on RRU-800 could be protected with KZU-61 devices, but

13 only on separate channels on devices with such frequencies.

14 Q. Okay. Lastly, before the break, you mentioned a diagram.

15 MR. McCLOSKEY: And if it may be helpful, I would ask us to go to

16 65 ter 31858.

17 Q. And I won't ask you any questions about this, but perhaps you

18 could take a look at it at the break in case it will be helpful in

19 answering questions. This is -- it should be for an Operation Stit 1995

20 that you developed the comms plan for, I believe.

21 MR. McCLOSKEY: It should be page 25 in the English; page 15 in

22 the B/C/S.

23 Q. And I will leave it at that, since it's break time. Though we

24 can point out -- we can see Cer in the right-hand corner of this, going

25 over to Gucevo, going over to the first Zpbr, the Zvornik Brigade. And

Page 30611

1 these are the relay routes we have been talking about; correct?

2 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness take his time over the break to

3 check that because it might be difficult for him to immediately check

4 every detail of what is presented to him.

5 MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you, Mr. President.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Then before we take that break -- Mr. Ivetic.

7 MR. IVETIC: Yes, Your Honours. First of all, to correct, it's

8 the 2008 Popovic transcript, not 2006. The transcript reference I was

9 relying up is transcript page 22295, line 19, through 22296, 6.

10 And one last point, Your Honours, I received the cross documents

11 but a lot of the English translations are denied access in e-court. If

12 we can perhaps meet over the break to try to get that resolved so we can

13 get access to all the documents, that would be appreciated.

14 Thank you, Your Honours.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I take it that it will be investigated why the

16 English is not accessible.

17 Witness, before we take the break, I would have -- I seek one

18 clarification. When we started with the possibilities of intercepting

19 radio relay communication from Zvornik, you explained to us that it was

20 impossible to intercept those because -- well, to say it short, because

21 of the terrain not being accessible to the Muslims and the terrain

22 obstructing intercept from a different direction.

23 Now, later, you were asked about the later portions of the

24 trajectory the radio signals would travel and then you said, yes,

25 Vlasenica, Veliki Zep, Cer, Zvornik, you could intercept conversations

Page 30612

1 going in that direction but not -- and then you said from Zvornik,

2 Gucevo, Cer and further on. That seems to be the opposite direction.

3 You could not intercept those because we are talking about two different

4 frequencies.

5 What I do not understand yet is that if the terrain doesn't

6 oppose intercepting those conversations, how the frequencies, if you have

7 the equipment to listen in to two different frequencies, why couldn't you

8 intercept those radio signals with technical equipment which could

9 intercept on more than one frequency? Could you explain to us this

10 obstruction to intercept?

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When we talk about the direction of

12 radiation from Zvornik towards Gucevo and from Gucevo towards Cer, it is

13 guided radiation. The relay connection has guided, directed radiation.

14 So that from any of these places Zvornik, Gucevo, Cer, if we talk about

15 radiation from these parts, none of them are directed at Muslim

16 territory. This beaming is not directed at Muslim territory. So I claim

17 that this direction is impossible to intercept. From Zvornik towards

18 Gucevo and Cer is different from the opposite direction because it's

19 broadcast on one frequency. Whatever is broadcast towards Zvornik can be

20 intercepted. I never disputed that. But from Zvornik towards Gucevo and

21 Cer, it's not possible.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Now, in this last answer you introduce both

23 direction of the beam and frequency. Which of the two is it?

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Both are important. One goes with

25 the other.

Page 30613

1 JUDGE ORIE: I think I now do understand that you say if you

2 transmit in one direction, that if behind the target or on its way to the

3 reception station, if there are Muslim forces, they can intercept;

4 whereas you said that was not the case in one direction but it was the

5 case in the other direction. Is that well understood?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. We take a break, and we'll resume in

8 20 minutes from now, at 11.00.

9 --- Recess taken at 10.41 a.m.

10 --- On resuming at 11.04 a.m.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, I'd like to verify whether the

12 videolink is still functioning properly.

13 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Your Honours, I can confirm that

14 we can see and we can hear you, yes.

15 JUDGE ORIE: The same is true for this side.

16 Mr. McCloskey, you may proceed.

17 MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you, Mr. President.

18 Q. Colonel, on paragraph 22 of your statement, which is D878, you

19 said:

20 "Some of the communication lines were not safe."

21 And you would agree with me some of your RRU-800 lines were not

22 safe, meaning they could and were intercepted at times by the enemy;

23 correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. All right. And you had just told us that -- on temporary

Page 30614

1 transcript page 16, that there was no need to make any frequency changes

2 but that you also said that you and the Main Staff had the authority and

3 the ability to make changes if needed; correct?

4 A. I did not say that I and the Main Staff had authority to change

5 them. I said we did not have the authority to change them.

6 Q. You say, and I quote:

7 "The chief of communications of the Main Staff and I, as the

8 chief of the communications of the Drina Corps, were in a position to

9 change frequencies. However, our devices were directed towards the

10 devices of the Army of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which means

11 that we would have been automatically cut off."

12 So let me -- I apologise for saying "authority." I should have

13 said you could have changed the frequencies had you so desired; correct?

14 A. We could change the frequencies had we wanted to, but then our

15 connections would have been cut off.

16 Q. And that's because your communications relied on going through

17 Gucevo and Cer, which was in Serbia, and unless you coordinated the

18 frequency change with Serbia, you would be cut off; correct?

19 A. Correct.

20 Q. And you did communicate with your colleagues in the radio relay

21 station at Cer, didn't you?

22 A. I was not in contact with the colleague at Cer. I was in contact

23 with the colleague at Gucevo.

24 Q. Okay. Let me remind you of something you said in the Popovic

25 case. It's at e-court pages 60 and 61 at the transcript of the Popovic

Page 30615

1 case 22320, line 24. And you said:

2 "... I mentioned that when there were interruptions, the

3 operators could change the frequency, but they were duty-bound to inform

4 and update everybody concerned. They could do that in case they

5 suspected interferences or that they were being listened in."

6 So not only did you have the ability to change the frequencies as

7 well as the Main Staff, but these operators also could change the

8 frequency, your own operators could change the frequencies. Do you stand

9 by that statement you made in Popovic?

10 A. I do. These operators could change the frequencies but you

11 correctly stated in what circumstances. And simultaneously they had to

12 inform me, because I was in charge of Zvornik.

13 Q. All right. And you've testified today --

14 JUDGE ORIE: One second.

15 Witness, the answer you are giving now seems to be a bit of the

16 opposite, because you earlier said if you would change frequencies, the

17 system would collapse. And you now say you could change the frequencies,

18 though you had inform other partners in the whole trajectory.

19 Now, these answers make me urge you to tell us not only one

20 possibility, that is, that the system would collapse; but also that the

21 change of frequencies could be effected, could be made by informing your

22 counterparts in the whole system so that it would not collapse. So could

23 you please give us the full information if questions are asked.

24 Please proceed, Mr. McCloskey.

25 MR. McCLOSKEY:

Page 30616

1 Q. So, Colonel, did you mean - when you mentioned the collapse -

2 that that would only collapse if you didn't co-ordinate that frequency

3 change with your Serbian colleagues at Gucevo?

4 A. Precisely. One radio relay route between two participants.

5 Let's say, for example, Zvornik-Gucevo. In certain situations of

6 interference or impossibility of quality communication on that route, the

7 participants could, in agreement, simultaneously change the frequency and

8 inform thereof along the chain of command.

9 Q. And they could do that not just because of weather interference.

10 They could do that if they received jamming from the enemy too; correct?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. So you've now -- you've also said in your statement and you've

13 testified to that there was no need throughout the war to change the

14 frequencies. But you don't really mean that, do you, Colonel? With bad

15 weather and jamming, frequencies were changed, weren't they?

16 A. I said whatever I meant. I still mean the same thing, and I'm

17 saying it again.

18 Q. All right. Well, hang on to your -- your document D879, where

19 you list 14 frequencies for the RRU-800, and perhaps the diagram. We'll

20 be getting back to that a bit, but I would like to ask you a couple of

21 other areas.

22 And you were an officer in the Drina Corps in July 1995; correct?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And do you remember what date you were actually the duty officer

25 at the Drina Corps in July?

Page 30617

1 A. I don't remember the date.

2 Q. Let's --

3 A. I remember I was on duty.

4 MR. McCLOSKEY: Let's go to 65 ter 05789.

5 Q. And, Colonel, what you should be seeing is something we've picked

6 up from the -- what we call the Drina Corps archives and is a duty

7 officers' list for July. We believe this is 1995. And if you -- we can

8 blow up your side, we see your name at number 14. And if we go across

9 this document and we look in at the black filled-in square, we see that

10 it's filled in under 13. Does that mean you were the duty officer on

11 13 July?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And you recall the date that General Mladic came by the Vlasenica

14 headquarters when you were on duty on the 13th of July? You may recall

15 he promoted General Krstic to be the commander of the corps and retired

16 General Zivanovic.

17 A. I remember that, but whether it was on the 13th when I was on

18 duty or a day before or a day later, I'm not sure. But I was present

19 when it happened.

20 Q. You were present when what happened?

21 A. When Colonel Krstic was appointed corps commander.

22 Q. And can you briefly describe what Mladic did. Was there a

23 ceremony of sorts? Just briefly.

24 A. We were lined up in the corridor at the corps command, and

25 General Mladic said: From this day on, the corps commander is

Page 30618

1 Colonel Krstic.

2 Q. Who was lined up?

3 A. About ten of us who worked at the corps command.

4 Q. Who do you remember in particular? Was Krstic there?

5 A. There was General Mladic. I think Krstic was there too, but

6 General Mladic and General Zivanovic were there for sure.

7 Q. And roughly what time of day did this take place? For example,

8 was it dark or light outside?

9 A. It was about 7.00 or 8.00 in the evening.

10 Q. And how long had Mladic been at the Drina Corps headquarters

11 before this little lining-up ceremony at 7.00 or 8.00 in the evening?

12 A. I don't know how long he had been at the corps command. This

13 lining up and transition of duty of the corps commander lasted about

14 15 minutes. Now, how long after that Mladic stayed on, I don't remember.

15 Q. And do you recall him coming into the duty office and getting on

16 to the communications devices to call people? Did you help put him in

17 touch with people?

18 MR. IVETIC: Your Honour, I had let this go for some time but now

19 I think I do have to rise to object. We've been going approximately

20 15 minutes with topics that are neither arising from the statement nor

21 the direct examination of this witness.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --

23 MR. McCLOSKEY: I think the rules have been rather appropriately

24 flexible on that and this is something this witness has known about and

25 has talked about before. And this has to do with General Mladic and his

Page 30619

1 time and whereabouts, a pretty important topic.

2 [Trial Chamber confers]

3 JUDGE ORIE: The objection is denied. Questions relating to the

4 support of the Prosecution's case are allowed in cross-examination. The

5 witness apparently has knowledge about these events which the Prosecution

6 considers relevant. Therefore, Mr. McCloskey may proceed.

7 MR. McCLOSKEY:

8 Q. And, Colonel, my last question was: Do you recall him coming by

9 the duty office and communicating with -- with anyone?

10 A. I don't remember that detail.

11 Q. And he could have communicated, if he'd wanted to, with people in

12 Pale, like President Karadzic, couldn't he have, over your radio system?

13 A. With our communications, he could get in touch with anyone he

14 wanted to.

15 Q. And what would the route be from the Drina Corps headquarters in

16 Vlasenica to Pale? I can take you probably as far as Vlasenica,

17 Veliki Zep. Then where?

18 A. From Veliki Zep, I think it went to Jahorina.

19 Q. And that's right near Pale?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. All right. And briefly, just lastly on this document, the duty

22 officers' book, do you recognise number 3 there as Ignjat Milanovic?

23 That was an officer you worked for. We have him as the chief of the

24 anti-aircraft defence. You know him?

25 A. I knew him. He died about ten years ago.

Page 30620

1 Q. All right. And number 12, Lieutenant-Colonel Rajko Krsmanovic.

2 Did you know him and work with him?

3 A. I knew him, and I still know him.

4 Q. And according to this document, he would have been duty officer

5 on the 18th of July; correct?

6 A. Yes.

7 MR. McCLOSKEY: And I'd offer this into evidence.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

9 THE REGISTRAR: Document 05789 receives Exhibit Number P7055,

10 Your Honours.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.

12 Mr. McCloskey, if you ask the witness whether the document tells

13 us that, then we can read that, we can see that as well. If you expect

14 the witness to have any personal knowledge about it, then, of course, you

15 should ask him about it, whether he has any recollection about that date

16 and that person being on duty. But you asked about whether the document

17 tells us that. The Chamber can read. We leave it to that.

18 MR. McCLOSKEY: Okay.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed -- could I ask one question for the

20 witness.

21 Witness, we just looked at that document which was the list of

22 duty officers. Now, first of all, some of the boxes are blackened. Does

23 that mean that only on those dates you were present or was it that you

24 had a specific duty on those dates?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] During those days, we were assigned

Page 30621

1 to be duty operations officers at the corps command.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And it doesn't mean that on other dates you

3 would not have been present?

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Right.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Right, that it does not mean that you were not

6 present. So you could have been present on other dates as well?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you.

9 MR. McCLOSKEY: Did I offer that into evidence?

10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It was already entered.

11 MR. McCLOSKEY: Okay, thank you, Your Honour. [Microphone not

12 activated].

13 Could we go to another document, 65 ter 04106.

14 Q. And, Colonel, you'll see that this is a document with a signature

15 we believe is Radenko Jovicic. And as you can see, it's entitled: The

16 hand-over of the corps commander duties, and it's dated 13 July. And we

17 see that it talks about General Mladic in the first paragraph and the

18 hand-over.

19 Would this be the time that you were talking about when -- that

20 the hand-over duties were taken?

21 A. This document says so unequivocally.

22 Q. And if can you help us, we see this stamp at the bottom, and we

23 see that it's received at 2000 hours and processed at 2035, and does that

24 tell you that this ceremony where General Mladic promoted Krstic to the

25 commander occurred before this time? I'm guess I'm saying that the

Page 30622

1 announcement that he had become the commander would not have happened

2 until after the ceremony where he was made commander. Is that a fair

3 statement?

4 A. Yes. It was a fact the appointment and the transition of duties

5 was around 7.00. Then this document was drafted and sent to the

6 communications centre to be forwarded according to that list that you see

7 next to this stamp on the right-hand side.

8 Q. All right.

9 MR. McCLOSKEY: I'd offer this document into evidence.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

11 THE REGISTRAR: Document 04106 receives Exhibit Number P7056,

12 Your Honours.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted.

14 MR. McCLOSKEY: Could we now go to 65 ter 06073.

15 Q. And, Colonel, you may remember this document from the Popovic

16 case, but as you'll see it's -- soon, that it's dated 22 April 1993, that

17 same year that your frequency document, D879, came out. And if you take

18 a look at it, you'll see in that first paragraph, the chief of

19 intelligence for the Zvornik Brigade, Drago Nikolic is reporting that:

20 "We have a confirmation that the enemy is intensively

21 intercepting our radio and radio relay communications and particularly

22 active are their interception centres in Tuzla and Trovrh (Gorazde)."

23 Do you have any reason to disagree with Drago Nikolic's

24 assessment here?

25 A. There's no reason for me to disagree with that.

Page 30626

1 Main Staff. Let's see who it's from. Can we go to the next page.

2 All right. So we see it's General Mladic. Now let's go back to

3 the first page.

4 Q. So now we've jumped from 1993 to 17 June 1995, and I won't spend

5 much time with this, but you'll see that on the second paragraph, Mladic

6 says:

7 "According to the information available, the enemy is

8 persistently and very effectively using secret military information

9 obtained by intercepting our radio, radio relay, and PTT ...

10 communications."

11 So you agree with Mladic that this was the situation in

12 17 June 1995?

13 A. Yes.

14 MR. McCLOSKEY: I offer this into evidence.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

16 THE REGISTRAR: Document 13138 receives Exhibit Number P7058,

17 Your Honours.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted.

19 MR. McCLOSKEY: Could we go to 65 ter 24892.

20 Q. And you'll see this is a document from the command of the

21 Drina Corps, the -- Lieutenant-Colonel Vujadin Popovic, who we all know.

22 It looks like it's sent out to most of the brigades and units of the

23 Drina Corps. And that first paragraph states:

24 "Through reconnaissance on the enemy's radio communications and

25 information transmitted via radio, we've obtained information that our

Page 30627

1 units are extremely careless when using communications equipment and do

2 not verify the cryptographic data protection value of communications

3 equipment."

4 I won't read all the rest. We can see in the last paragraph he's

5 talking about there should be more frequent changes, working frequencies

6 and call-signs. So do you have any reason to object to or disagree with

7 these observations of Lieutenant-Colonel Popovic?

8 A. This document was drafted by the chief of security in the corps

9 command.

10 THE INTERPRETER: Please switch off all unnecessary microphones.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There's no reason for me not to

12 agree with what he wrote. As the chief of communications, I carried out

13 measures and procedures to deal with such situations.

14 MR. McCLOSKEY:

15 Q. So you would agree with me that you were being intensively

16 intercepted in June of 1995. And not only that, but the habits of the

17 radio -- of the radio operators and the people using the radios were

18 sloppy, according to Colonel Popovic; correct? He used the words

19 "extremely careless."

20 A. Yes. Such things happened as well.

21 Q. And that could amount to things like not making sure the voice

22 encryptor machine was properly working, not turning the key on the RUP-12

23 to make sure it's working, and other such things. Is that correct?

24 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. McCloskey, there seems to be a little bit of a

Page 30628

1 problem with the videolink connection.

2 Could we verify whether the other side of the videolink is able

3 to hear and see us? It looks as if it's gone down.

4 MR. McCLOSKEY: Perhaps the Defence would agree with me that this

5 is a result of a radio disturbance in the radio waves.

6 MR. IVETIC: Actually, no, because they're fibre-optic cables,

7 which is different technology, Counsel.

8 MR. McCLOSKEY: I think there are some radio towers that are

9 running the fibre optics with -- but we can argue about that later.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the Chamber wonders what the relevance is of

11 the reasons for this disruption for this case apart from that we can't

12 hear and see anything. But it has been restored, I do understand.

13 I now see again at the far end at least a picture, but I also see

14 a microphone crossed-out symbol. Could we check both whether we can see

15 you and whether we can hear you, Madam Registrar.

16 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Your Honours, I confirm that we

17 can see you and we can hear you.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the quality of the sound is -- that may be a

19 matter of microphones rather than anything else.

20 Please proceed, Mr. McCloskey.

21 MR. McCLOSKEY:

22 Q. Colonel, can you give me a couple of examples of the problems

23 that Popovic is talking about, the carelessness.

24 A. The problems of carelessness lie in the fact that people were

25 talking about operations, attacks, defence operations, transport of

Page 30629

1 troops along certain roads in open microphone, as it were, through radio

2 or relay communications. Code-names of units would be mentioned as well

3 as their intentions or goals of their missions, and so on and so forth.

4 Q. Did that include sometimes making mistakes regarding the use of

5 encryption devices where they wouldn't turn them on properly or would not

6 recognise they weren't working?

7 THE INTERPRETER: Please switch off your microphone. Thank you

8 very much.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When it comes to mistakes regarding

10 the use of encryption devices, as far as I know, in the Drina Corps there

11 were no such mistakes made.

12 MR. McCLOSKEY:

13 Q. Never? During the entire war? Some private didn't turn the key

14 on on his RUP-12 and --

15 A. Throughout the entire war.

16 Q. All right. Let's go to your -- it's D879. It's your 2 October

17 document, 1993, that you send up to the corps with a list of frequencies

18 for radio relay routes in use in the Drina Corps.

19 And on paragraph 25 of your statement, which is D878, you say

20 that:

21 "I have been shown a document of the Drina Corps command of

22 2 October and I recognise this document as mine. In regard to this

23 document, I can say briefly that the enemy was not able to intercept

24 conversations outside the frequency ranges listed in this document."

25 You have 14 frequencies listed in this document. Seven

Page 30630

1 transmitting; seven receiving. Are you saying that the enemy was not

2 able to intercept conversations other than these 14 frequencies?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Well, first of all, sir, are all the frequencies in use by the

5 VRS in the Drina Corps's zone of responsibility noted in this document?

6 A. All the frequencies in use by the VRS, they are not all specified

7 in this document. Veliki Zep was -- and the Main Staff were in the zone

8 of responsibility of the Drina Corps.

9 Q. So, sir, if not all the frequencies used by the VRS in this

10 document, you cannot conclude that the enemy was not able to intercept

11 conversations outside the frequency range listed in this document?

12 A. [No interpretation]

13 JUDGE ORIE: One second, please. One second, please. We did not

14 receive interpretation. Could the witness re-start his answer.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can talk about the frequencies

16 for which I was responsible as the chief of communications of the

17 Drina Corps. I can't talk about other frequencies because I was not

18 familiar with them. I don't know what their directions were. I don't

19 have information about them.

20 MR. McCLOSKEY:

21 Q. So then your statement cannot be correct, where you say that the

22 enemy was not able to intercept conversations outside the frequency

23 ranges listed in this document.

24 A. This document of mine refers to the radio relay frequencies of

25 the Drina Corps for which I was responsible. I stand by what I stated,

Page 30631

1 and I can reinstate that firmly.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Could we -- could we see whether there's any

3 confusion.

4 Witness, did you intend to say that the enemy was unable to

5 intercept any of the communication which went through the frequency as

6 listed in this document, or did you intend to say that the enemy was

7 unable to intercept any communication through frequencies which are not

8 mentioned in this document?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Precisely.

10 JUDGE ORIE: The letter --

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I continue?

12 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am speaking on behalf of the

14 chief of communications of the Drina Corps, and I take responsibility for

15 the radio frequencies in that document. Anything that was collected

16 beyond these frequencies, and I'm talking about the Drina Corps units,

17 what I'm claiming is that that was not possible.

18 JUDGE ORIE: It's still a bit unclear to me. Do you mean to say

19 that it was impossible that other frequencies were used?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Units of the Drina Corps used the

21 frequencies found in the document that I myself sent to the chief of the

22 Main Staff. The units of the Drina Corps did not use any other

23 frequencies.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. McCloskey.

25 MR. McCLOSKEY:

Page 30632

1 Q. There were frequencies not listed in your document -- no, let me

2 ask it this way.

3 You've already acknowledged that the enemy could intercept

4 between Gucevo and Cer. What was the frequency between Gucevo and Cer?

5 A. Between Gucevo and Cer, I don't know what the frequency was.

6 Even the chief of communications of the Main Staff didn't know that

7 because that was not in our area of responsibility. Gucevo and Cer were

8 in the territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

9 Q. All right. So my point now --

10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic.

11 MR. IVETIC: It's time for a break.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

13 MR. McCLOSKEY: If I can get just one question out of this area,

14 it might be helpful.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please.

16 MR. McCLOSKEY:

17 Q. My point, Colonel, now is the frequency between Gucevo and Cer is

18 interceptable, as you say it is, and it is not one of the frequencies

19 listed in your document. Therefore, you cannot say that the Muslims

20 couldn't intercept conversations outside the frequency ranges.

21 Gucevo-Cer is outside the frequency ranges and you've acknowledged they

22 can intercept that. So your statement is not correct in paragraph 25;

23 correct?

24 A. I don't agree with you.

25 Q. Okay. We can --

Page 30633

1 A. For the following reason: I am speaking about the units and

2 territory of the Drina Corps and the frequencies that they used there.

3 When we're talking about Cer-Gucevo route, that was used for our

4 communications as well. I agree with you in that respect, but only for

5 the Cer-Gucevo direction. And the Gucevo-Zvornik direction. But nothing

6 of that kind could happen in the opposite direction, absolutely

7 impossible. That would be that.

8 Q. And so, finally, you've made my point. You said there's an

9 exception to your statement in 25, that there is a frequency outside the

10 range in your document that they can intercept on. So we agree on that;

11 correct?

12 A. I agree with that. Only partly.

13 MR. McCLOSKEY: Maybe that's good enough for the break.

14 JUDGE ORIE: We'll take a break. Could you give us an

15 indication, Mr. McCloskey, how much more time you would need?

16 [Prosecution counsel confer]

17 MR. McCLOSKEY: I certainly won't be asking to go over the

18 two hours, but I hope to make this slightly more clear in the next

19 40 minutes or so.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You're aware that the witness is limited in

21 time. He cannot stay any longer than 2.00. But, therefore, even if we

22 take a break now, then we should be well within that time for you to

23 finish.

24 Mr. Ivetic, as far as matters stand now, and I am aware that

25 we're only halfway in the cross-examination.

Page 30634

1 MR. IVETIC: Fifteen minutes.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Fifteen minutes. Let's try to do our utmost best to

3 see whether we can conclude the testimony of this witness by 2.00.

4 We'll take a break and we'll resume at 20 minutes past midday.

5 --- Recess taken at 12.00 p.m.

6 --- On resuming at 12.23 p.m.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, I'd like to put on the record

8 that the videolink is not functioning in every respect perfectly,

9 especially the view the other side of the videolink has on the one

10 speaking here in The Hague may not be continuous and be interrupted now

11 and then.

12 Could I invite Madam Registrar at the other side of the videolink

13 to immediately report if this technical problem reaches such levels that

14 it disturbs the communication in such a way that we should reconsider to

15 continue, yes or no.

16 I also do understand that at least the audio is impeccable.

17 Therefore, our interpreters can hear what is said on the other side and

18 can interpret what we are saying. And I suggest to the parties that we

19 live with this small inconvenience and continue.

20 And, Mr. McCloskey, it's for you to do so.

21 Mr. Mladic is apparently busy in showing the content of books to

22 security where there is no need. If there's anything relevant in those

23 books, then it is for counsel to bring it to the attention of the

24 Chamber.

25 Let's move on. Mr. McCloskey.

Page 30635

1 MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you, Mr. President.

2 Q. Colonel Blagojevic, are you with us? All right, Colonel, can you

3 hear me okay?

4 A. Yes, I can hear you. Can you hear me?

5 Q. Yes, I hear you. I hear you fine.

6 Now, I want to take a short detour but I will get back to the

7 radio routes, but I want to ask you about some officers and soldiers you

8 may have worked with. We've gone over a bit on the duty officer roster,

9 but the -- you've mentioned the Main Staff. And did you -- were you

10 familiar with Radomir Prole? And who was he?

11 A. We kept the list of duty officers at the Drina Corps, whereas

12 Radomir Prole was the chief of communications for the Main Staff.

13 Q. All right. And did you work with some officers and soldiers from

14 the 67th Communications Regiment which was attached to the Main Staff?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. So you knew a Lieutenant-Colonel Nedeljko Gredo, the commander of

17 that unit?

18 A. I think he was also a colonel, Nedeljko Gredo; I knew him.

19 Q. And how about a Milisav Radakovic at the 67th? I have him as a

20 major but you may have known him as a lieutenant-colonel.

21 A. Milisav Radakovic. Yes, he was a colonel, major, later

22 lieutenant-colonel. At that time he was deputy chief of communications

23 for the Main Staff.

24 Q. And how about a -- I have him as a captain, Tihomir Stevanovic?

25 A. I don't remember him.

Page 30636

1 Q. A Goran Zobic.

2 A. I knew Goran Zobic.

3 Q. What was his job?

4 A. Zobic was the commander of the communications battalion in the

5 communications regiment.

6 Q. That's the 67th?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And how about a code clerk - in your language a "sifrer" - named

9 Ostojic?

10 A. I don't know him. I don't remember.

11 Q. You don't remember Tomo Ostojic?

12 A. No.

13 Q. How about Dragan Acamovic?

14 A. No.

15 Q. And Mirko Petrovic?

16 A. Mirko Petrovic. Both the name and surname are very common in our

17 parts. I knew one Mirko Petrovic who worked at the corps command with

18 us.

19 Q. What was his job?

20 A. He was a commanding officer, komandir, in the communications

21 section.

22 Q. What was the name of that communications section?

23 A. It was in the communications battalion, in the Drina Corps.

24 Q. Sir, you surely know of the 4th Radio Recon Platoon, the folks

25 that did intercepting for you and the Drina Corps? Mirko Petrovic would

Page 30637

1 send out reports regarding what they had intercepted to the corps. The

2 4th Radio Recon Platoon.

3 A. Yes, Mirko was the komandir of that platoon.

4 Q. So he wasn't what you had originally testified in the comms, he

5 was the commander of this special intercept unit, the 4th Radio Recon

6 Platoon?

7 A. Yes, you just reminded me. I had forgotten.

8 Q. All right. Let's go back to your October 2nd document. It's

9 D879. It's the one where you have the 14 frequencies written down. You

10 have already acknowledged there is a frequency you don't know that goes

11 from Gucevo to Cer.

12 Now, let me ask you: What was the frequency between Veliki Zep

13 and Jahorina, as you said, was the route to Pale?

14 A. I don't know that frequency either because it was the

15 responsibility of the chief of communications of the Main Staff, Prole.

16 Q. So that's another frequency that is not listed in your document

17 of 2 October 1993? Do you agree with me, it's not there?

18 A. Yes, I agree.

19 Q. In fact --

20 A. For what you're asking me, the communications chief should have

21 to -- may I continue?

22 Q. Of course.

23 A. More broadly than my competencies, the chief of communications of

24 the Main Staff and the chief of communications -- chiefs of

25 communications of the SFRY would be more informed, each within the area

Page 30638

1 of their own purview.

2 Q. My point here, Colonel, is that there are routes and frequencies

3 that are used by the VRS in the Drina Corps' zone of responsibility that

4 are not mentioned in this document; correct?

5 A. Possibly.

6 Q. We have intercepts in this case from Bratunac to Pale of certain

7 frequencies. So you would agree with me that it's possible for the

8 Muslims to have intercepted such communications?

9 A. It's possible regarding the one from Veliki Zep to Jahorina.

10 Q. Well, Veliki Zep in the Drina Corps's zone, all the way across to

11 Jahorina near Pale, that's a long distance. Is that -- is that just one

12 route, no towers in between?

13 A. From Veliki Zep to Jahorina, I think - because it was not all in

14 the area of the Drina Corps - I think it was direct. It was one route.

15 But when you were talking about Bratunac to Pale, that is not a single

16 route.

17 Q. I understand. All right. You're aware that the Main Staff had a

18 unit in Nova Kasaba called the 65th Protection Regiment. It was the

19 military police battalion. You surely were aware of that unit and that

20 they had radio relay communications; correct?

21 A. I don't know about Nova Kasaba.

22 Q. That's a Main Staff unit. You wouldn't be interested in it?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. So if they had a RRU radio device there, that would be another

25 set of frequencies that you do not have in your document; correct?

Page 30639

1 A. Possibly.

2 Q. Now let's go to number 6 in your document.

3 MR. McCLOSKEY: It's D879. It should be on page 2 in both

4 languages.

5 Q. We see that you've got a route listed Bratunac to Veliki Zep, and

6 you've noted that it's a RRU-1, which is, we recall, one of the other

7 radio relay devices that you used to communicate.

8 What frequencies was that operating on? You don't have it listed

9 here.

10 A. RRU-1 worked at a frequency of 150 to 1 -- 270 megahertz.

11 Q. We understand that that's the range. But what frequency -- you

12 say they never changed. What was the actual frequency that was used,

13 Bratunac to Veliki Zep? If we're going to be able to compare it to the

14 intercepts that we have, we need to know the frequency in order to make

15 sense of your statement.

16 A. Right now, I don't know what the frequency was then. But it was

17 not interesting to the chief of communications of the Main Staff, then

18 it's not listed.

19 Q. All right. And how about the forward command post at Pribicevac,

20 which the Court has heard a lot about. There was a route

21 Pribicevac-Veliki Zep, was there not?

22 A. Yes. When this document was written, the Tactical Group

23 Pribicevac was not at Pribicevac.

24 Q. So, again, your statement that -- about the Muslims being unable

25 to intercept anything but what's on your document is not correct.

Page 30640

1 We can go on. Let me -- so, tell us, Pribicevac-Veliki Zep, what

2 is the -- what's the radio device? RRU-1, RRU-800, some other, both,

3 what?

4 A. Pribicevac-Veliki Zep used RRU-1.

5 Q. In July 1995?

6 A. The same, RRU-1.

7 Q. In July --

8 A. It was used since it was installed.

9 Q. And that was in use in July 1995?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And what frequency, or frequencies?

12 A. I don't know.

13 Q. And we're also have heard evidence in this case about a forward

14 command post for the Zepa campaign. Are you aware of a route of a mobile

15 forward command post near Zepa to Veliki Zep?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. What device was used for that route?

18 A. RRU-1.

19 Q. And what was the frequency, or frequencies?

20 A. I don't know.

21 Q. And they're not listed in your document either.

22 A. No.

23 Q. All right. Let me take you to an intercept. It's 65 ter 20885.

24 And I recall you telling us that these --

25 MR. McCLOSKEY: It should not be broadcast.

Page 30641

1 Q. These intercept -- these frequencies stayed the same though you

2 have acknowledged people had the ability to change frequencies for

3 various reasons.

4 Now, we see that this is a -- in order to get the date, we have

5 to look at the B/C/S because we didn't translate the full date. It's the

6 18th of November, 1993, so just a month or so after your document that --

7 where you make your statement that is in paragraph ... well, the last

8 paragraph of your report that we're been talking about.

9 And you can see here -- well, first of all, this is captured

10 according to the Muslims, that this is captured at a frequency of 715000.

11 That's a RRU-800; correct?

12 MR. McCLOSKEY: It's page 7 in the B/C/S, excuse me.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Is that it? Could you please

14 repeat the question.

15 MR. McCLOSKEY:

16 Q. Yes. You can see that at the top it says: "Frequency 715000."

17 That's an RRU-800 frequency; correct?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And you'll agree with me that's not on the list of your document

20 of October 2nd.

21 A. No, it's not.

22 Q. And more importantly, if we look down the bottom of the page in

23 English, the Muslim intercept person says:

24 "We are sending you a list of active frequencies within the

25 RRU-800 frequency range, 610 to 960 megahertz, in the direction of

Page 30642

1 Vlasenica azimuth 115."

2 If we go to the next page in the English, we also see that

3 they've also given the results of the RRU-1 frequency range, 230 to 270,

4 in the direction of Vlasenica. And we see several frequencies where the

5 Muslims are indicating that they're active. And I'll note that we see a

6 frequency 680, and you'll note that that is the one frequency that is

7 noted in your -- in your document from the Drina Corps command to

8 Veliki Zep. But I can tell you that none of the others are mentioned in

9 your document.

10 So, sir, how do you explain that the Muslims are sending this

11 document showing that they are searching out many frequencies and finding

12 many, many frequencies that are active. You're telling us you only used

13 the very few that are in your document. How do you explain this?

14 A. The ones that are in the document are the frequencies for RRU-800

15 that were used by the chief of communications of the Main Staff.

16 Q. And my point is, how do you account that the Muslims have all

17 these frequencies, only one of which is in your document? There's

18 19 other frequencies not in your document. How do you explain that? Are

19 the Muslims just wrong, are they lying to themselves? Have they made a

20 mistake? You're a military man, how do you explain it? Is this a

21 creation? Have the made this up out of whole cloth and --

22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. McCloskey, that's five questions without giving

23 the witness an opportunity to answer. Perhaps your first question was

24 how to explain that there are so many other frequencies apparently

25 active, where the witness says that only the ones were used that are

Page 30643

1 stated in his document. And I take that you're focusing on the RRU-800

2 frequencies. Is that --

3 MR. McCLOSKEY: Right now, yes. And thank you, Mr. President.

4 You're absolutely right.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Let's first seek clarification from the

6 witness.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This document that you gave me

8 relates to the intercept group of the Muslim army and the frequencies

9 they were listening to. From this overview, I can't see what frequencies

10 are concerned. I see numbers, but those were not the frequencies that I

11 used as chief of communications for the Drina Corps.

12 MR. McCLOSKEY:

13 Q. So these frequencies could be the frequencies we've talked about

14 already, Cer, Gucevo, Veliki Zep to Jahorina?

15 A. They could have been.

16 Q. And if you just stuck with your 14 frequencies throughout the

17 entire war, like you say, that would make it pretty easy for the Muslims

18 just to find those frequencies and sit on them and listen to them.

19 Is that what you did? You really used those same 14 frequencies

20 throughout the war? And, before you answer that, recall the documents

21 we've seen, where the security officer is suggesting change frequencies.

22 A. What I said still stands. This document dealing with radio relay

23 frequencies of the Drina Corps is correct. Conversations could be

24 intercepted from Gucevo to Zvornik or, rather, those conversations, not

25 others.

Page 30644

1 Q. So it's possible these frequencies that are in front of you other

2 units of the VRS were using and you just didn't know about?

3 A. It is possible, and it doesn't have to mean that they were in the

4 territory of the Drina Corps.

5 Q. Now, we see from the intercept it's the direction Vlasenica.

6 So let's go to the RRU-1. None of those frequencies are listed

7 in your report but, of course, your report has no RRU-1 frequencies, so I

8 take it it's possible that you were communicating on some of the

9 frequencies noted in this Muslim report back in 1993?

10 A. Now, as to what was possible and what wasn't, I don't know. I

11 did use RRU-1. If you want me to tell you something more specific, I

12 will.

13 Q. Sir, it's simple. You've suggested that the only frequencies

14 that the Muslims could intercept were in your document. Now, looking at

15 these RRU-1 frequencies, you cannot exclude the fact that they -- that

16 you were communicating on those frequencies, can you?

17 A. I'm not contesting that at all.

18 Q. All right.

19 MR. McCLOSKEY: I would offer that document into evidence.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

21 THE REGISTRAR: Document 20885 receives Exhibit Number P7059,

22 Your Honours.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted under seal.

24 MR. McCLOSKEY: I -- yes.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you one question in relation to the last

Page 30645

1 question that was put to you by Mr. McCloskey.

2 He asked you whether you could exclude that you communicated on

3 those RRU-1 frequencies. You said, no, you can't exclude that.

4 Now, can you also not exclude that those communications could be

5 intercepted, those RRU-1 at, at this moment for you, unknown frequencies

6 but frequencies listed in this Muslim report?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct, yes.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Correct being that you can't exclude that.

9 Please proceed, Mr. McCloskey.

10 MR. McCLOSKEY: Can we go to 65 ter 564 --

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct, yes.

12 MR. McCLOSKEY: -- 0.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can you give the number again, Mr. McCloskey.

14 MR. McCLOSKEY: 5640.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

16 MR. McCLOSKEY: And I think I -- just looking at this, I would

17 ask that it be under seal. It's a --

18 JUDGE ORIE: Not to be shown to the public therefore.

19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: In your list there's no indication that it should

20 be under seal.

21 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yeah, we should have caught that. I see a name

22 and I know this is very sensitive information for the people involved. I

23 should have caught it before.

24 Q. All right, sir, we see that this is a document from the BiH Army.

25 We are now into 1995, 14 February, and we can see from this document that

Page 30646

1 the ABiH is searching the ranges, 230 to 270, and 610 to 960, that we've

2 learned are the RRU-1 and the RRU-800 ranges. And they say:

3 "In today's daily report I mention that it is necessary to bring

4 during the next shift rotation three pairs of terminal blocks in order to

5 make a quad for a RUP fully operational ..."

6 So we can see in 1995 the Muslims are making an effort to search,

7 but according to your testimony, they really didn't need to be searching

8 for new frequencies because you just had 14 the whole time? Unless, of

9 course, they didn't know those 14 during the whole war.

10 But let me ask you a clearer question. Isn't this an indication,

11 sir, that you were changing your frequencies and you had many, many more

12 frequencies than you've let on here?

13 A. We're talking about units of the Drina Corps and the frequencies

14 in the report. We haven't changed them. There was no need to change

15 them.

16 Q. All right.

17 MR. McCLOSKEY: I'd offer this into evidence.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.

19 THE REGISTRAR: Document 05640 receives Exhibit P7060,

20 Your Honours.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted, under seal.

22 MR. McCLOSKEY: Could we go to 65 ter 06074.

23 Q. Now, as this comes up, sir, you'll see it's from a group I'm sure

24 you're familiar with, the Tactical Group Visegrad Command. It's from a

25 person named Miso Planojevic, chief of communications. Did you know

Page 30647

1 Miso?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And if we look at this document, it says:

4 "As per your verbal request to select the frequencies of the best

5 quality to avoid the interferences by the tone carriers in the TV

6 channels, please find attached the list of frequencies that are the tone

7 carriers in the TV channels."

8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. McCloskey, I saw that Madam Registrar for a

9 moment was standing at the other side of the videolink.

10 Madam Registrar, was there anything you'd like to bring to our

11 attention?

12 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Yes, thank you, Your Honours.

13 Document with number 06064 [sic], we don't have here.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. McCloskey.

15 MR. McCLOSKEY: That's our mistake. We'll go on.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.

17 MR. McCLOSKEY:

18 Q. Okay. Colonel, I'll show you another intercept, 65 ter 22006.

19 This should be under seal.

20 And as it comes up, you'll see that's an intercept dated

21 3rd of September, 1995, it's from the BiH. It's at frequency 781.985

22 which, you'll agree, is not on your list. And we can see where it was

23 captured from but I won't say out loud. And the participants are

24 Radovan Karadzic, Colonel Obradovic, General Tolimir.

25 Now, we read this briefly. We see that Karadzic identifies

Page 30648

1 himself, says: "Good afternoon."

2 Colonel Obradovic: "Can I help you, President?

3 Now Colonel Obradovic identifies himself. You knew

4 Colonel Obradovic to be the chief of operations of the Main Staff, did

5 you not?

6 A. I didn't know Obradovic that well, actually. I knew

7 General Miletic.

8 Q. You knew Colonel Obradovic was the chief of operations of the

9 Main Staff?

10 A. No, I didn't know that. General Miletic was in charge of that,

11 as far as I know and as far as I remember.

12 Q. Do you recall Miletic being the chief of operations and training

13 and that Colonel Obradovic was the actual, under him, as the chief of

14 operations?

15 A. I've already told you and I repeat: I don't remember that I ever

16 knew Colonel Obradovic. I didn't know him.

17 Q. All right. Well, my question is this: Colonel Obradovic

18 testified in the Tolimir case and that testimony has been put in e-court.

19 It's 1D01133, page 76. I'm not sure we need to see it but we can if we'd

20 like to go there.

21 But he very clearly says that this is an authentic intercept that

22 he recalls. He's asked at line 23:

23 "Do you have -- do you remember it from the actual time or from

24 the last time we spoke about it in the Popovic case?

25 And he answers:

Page 30649

1 "I remember it from the actual time when it happened."

2 Next question:

3 "And have you had a chance to read the entire intercept in the

4 last few days?"

5 He says: "Yes."

6 The question is: "Is it genuine, as far as you know?"

7 "A. The part of it with me in it is, and I cannot go into

8 whether the rest of it is genuine or not."

9 So you have a senior officer of the VRS saying that this

10 intercept is genuine, this conversation is genuine, and this frequency is

11 not on your frequency list. How do you explain that the Muslims captured

12 this intercept?

13 A. First of all, the individuals that you're asking me about are --

14 were members of the Main Staff and the interception was of the relay

15 devices which beamed from the direction Veliki Zep. I don't know

16 anything about this conversation. I don't even know one of the

17 interlocutors, Obradovic, that is.

18 Q. So your comment in your statement that, in regard of the -- this

19 document, meaning your report listing the frequencies, "I can say briefly

20 that the enemy was not able to intercept conversations outside the

21 frequency ranges listed in this document," this is an intercept with a

22 frequency outside the ranges of your document but you're not contesting

23 the validity of this intercept at this time, are you?

24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic.

25 MR. IVETIC: I would object insofar as the witness has said:

Page 30650

1 "I don't know anything about this conversation. I don't even

2 know one of the interlocutors, Obradovic, that is."

3 So from that, I don't think we have a --

4 JUDGE ORIE: Well, validity of the intercept, I take it, was

5 meant in this context by Mr. McCloskey to mean that the use of the

6 frequency, et cetera, not the content of the speakers and that question

7 was certainly not put clearly to the witness. So, therefore, I take it

8 that Mr. McCloskey will clarify his question, since we all were able to

9 guess what he meant but the witness should hear what Mr. McCloskey means

10 to say.

11 MR. McCLOSKEY:

12 Q. Yes, Witness, the President is correct. I'm not asking you about

13 the substance of the intercept. I'm concerned about whether or not you

14 are challenging the authenticity of the fact of the intercept being

15 intercepted at this frequency. With the underlying foundation of the

16 question being that Obradovic said it happened.

17 So I'll try to make it clearer. This frequency is not in your

18 document. How do you explain this intercept? In your view, is it a

19 genuinely captured intercept or is it fiction?

20 A. My opinion, based on what I see, if the relay device RRU-800 and

21 the -- if one frequency is 755.85 megahertz, then it could not have been

22 a whole conversation. It could only be half a conversation because you

23 can only hear what is received from the antenna, which beams the relay

24 frequency or the transmission frequency. This is all I can say about

25 this conversation.

Page 30651

1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could you clarify about what frequency we are

2 talking about? I take it this intercept you are referring to,

3 Mr. McCloskey, is -- has an indication that the frequency was 781.985.

4 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, that's -- that's correct.

5 Q. So, Colonel, I take it you're saying that we know that these

6 conversations are transmitted on one frequency and they're received on

7 another. And what you're saying is that they could only have captured

8 one side of the conversation. Is that what you're saying? Because they

9 only have one frequency here.

10 A. Yes. And about this part here, where it says zone 2 and the

11 rest, where you mentioned the frequency, 781.985.

12 Q. What about it?

13 A. I'm talking about the two conversations which are intercepted

14 from RRU-800. In both of them, you can hear just one side. You can't

15 hear both sides. You can't hear the two interlocutors.

16 Q. So how do you explain that, according to this document, you can

17 hear both sides? You can hear people asking questions and answering.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. McCloskey, I think the witness said: Due to the

19 frequency, this cannot be heard. So contesting the validity or whatever

20 you would call it, so now you're asking in a different way just denying

21 what he says, and that's not fair to the witness.

22 MR. McCLOSKEY: No, I don't mean to be, Mr. President. I mean

23 how can he explain that the Muslims appear to have gotten both sides of

24 the conversation.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. This suggests - and you should make that

Page 30652

1 suggestion clear - that this is a true intercept. I mean, if it's

2 fabricated then, of course, you can put in it whatever you want. The

3 witness says: This is impossible. Therefore, one could think for many

4 explanations, either it is composed by a different sources or it is a

5 fake or whatever, but you can't just hide that if you put the next

6 question to the witness and put it for a fact that it's a true intercept.

7 [Trial Chamber confers]

8 MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, I am not hiding anything, and I

9 resent the implication.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I see, my colleagues draw my attention to the

11 fact that Mr. Obradovic apparently acknowledged that this was a true

12 conversation. So, therefore, either it's not true what Mr. Obradovic

13 says or it's not true what the witness now tells us. So, therefore, that

14 is the clear issue, and I think you should put that more clearly to the

15 witness. You understand what I mean?

16 MR. McCLOSKEY: I do and I will try.

17 JUDGE ORIE: As a matter of fact, you're putting to him that it's

18 the Prosecution's position that this is it a true intercept because

19 Mr. Obradovic testified to it to be authentic and how he then can say

20 that it cannot be intercepted in the way as it was intercepted, whereas

21 there are certainly reasons to assume that this intercept is authentic.

22 That's apparently the issue you are raising with the witness.

23 Try to do it in detail and try to do it with all accuracy even on minor

24 matters.

25 Please proceed.

Page 30653

1 MR. McCLOSKEY:

2 Q. Colonel, you're saying that -- can you explain to us if there was

3 some way that the Muslims could have heard both sides of this

4 conversation?

5 A. I can't, so I cannot answer your question.

6 Q. So let's take it from there. If you believe that the Muslims

7 could not have intercepted or heard both sides of the conversation, what

8 is your opinion on what the Muslims are doing and how did they get the

9 second half of the conversation? Do you think they created it? Or do

10 you have some other explanation?

11 A. You're now asking me to speculate. My answer was based on the

12 document that was shown to me. The document is -- let me not go into

13 that. In any case, it provides the location of the place from which

14 interception was being done. I can guarantee you, in view of the fact

15 that I know the technological specifications of the device, that from

16 that location the conversation could not be intercepted. In any case,

17 not all of it. Half of it, yes. I don't know what the route of the

18 conversation was and I can't comment, and I certainly hate to assume

19 things.

20 Q. All right. If you don't want to speculate on how they got the

21 other half of the conversation, I won't ask you.

22 Let's go to one last -- one last intercept and I should hopefully

23 be through.

24 MR. McCLOSKEY: I can offer that last one into evidence.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Could I, nevertheless, put another question to the

Page 30654

1 witness.

2 Witness, if simultaneously one would listen in on both

3 frequencies used, as you suggest to us, could you then create a full

4 record of the conversation?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. In that case, two can be

6 combined, put together, and made into one.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.

8 Please proceed.

9 [Trial Chamber confers]

10 JUDGE ORIE: You tendered the document.

11 Madam Registrar.

12 THE REGISTRAR: Document 22006 receives Exhibit Number P7061,

13 Your Honours.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence, under seal.

15 MR. McCLOSKEY: All right. Could we have 65 ter 31904a. It

16 should be under seal.

17 Q. All right. Colonel, this is another BiH intercept. We see this

18 one is dated on the 18th of July. This frequency is 255.850, another

19 frequency not on your list. We know that's a RRU-1 device. And it's

20 between Lieutenant-Colonel Krsmanovic at Zlatar and Uran 2.

21 Is Zlatar the code-name for the Drina Corps headquarters?

22 A. Zlatar was the code-name for the corps command.

23 Q. The Drina Corps command?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And you recall Uran being the code-name for the forward command

Page 30655

1 post of the Drina Corps, and 18 July you may recollect was the time that

2 General Krstic and part of the Drina Corps was advancing on Zepa. So

3 would Uran 2 be one of the forward command posts for Zepa?

4 A. It is possible, but I don't remember.

5 Q. All right. Well, I've got a code list later that I'll show you

6 that shows that.

7 So if we assume that this is a conversation between the Zepa

8 forward command post and the Drina Corps headquarters, you've already

9 told us it's a RRU-1 that goes from the forward command post at Zepa

10 onward; correct?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. So then the frequency here is consistent with a RRU-1. And let's

13 look at the conversation. Again, we see both sides of the conversation

14 have been recorded on this document.

15 Uran says: "Hello."

16 Krsmanovic says: "Yes, go ahead."

17 Uran asks: "Who are you?"

18 Krsmanovic says: "Lieutenant-Colonel Krsmanovic."

19 Uran said: "Hi, Krsman."

20 And Krsmanovic says: "Who are you?"

21 Uran says: "Uran 2."

22 So, in this case, you can see that Lieutenant-Colonel Krsmanovic

23 has identified himself according to this intercept as the duty operations

24 officer. And I'll take you back to the duty operations log-book. I

25 won't go back there, but you will recall that Krsmanovic was, in fact,

Page 30656

1 the duty operations officer on 18 July.

2 Let's go on. They're talking about -- Uran says:

3 "Is the telegram forwarded to Milanovic?"

4 And we spoke briefly about Ignjat Milanovic who you acknowledged

5 was also a duty officer on different dates.

6 And then there's the question: "Which one? Give me the number

7 of the telegram."

8 "Will do."

9 And then there's talking to someone: "Give me the number of the

10 telegram."

11 And then it has: "13/95."

12 And then Krsmanovic says: "13/95."

13 "Yes, what's it about?"

14 "I don't know."

15 And Uran says: "Communications."

16 Then Krsmanovic goes on, and Uran says:

17 "It was supposed to be there. The telegram was sent to him

18 forwarding through you and Dvorac."

19 Do you remember Dvorac as the code-name for the Milici Brigade?

20 A. I don't remember whether that's it.

21 Q. Could you perhaps scoot up and get a little closer to the

22 microphone? We're having a hard time hearing you.

23 A. I don't remember whether this Dvorac was Bratunac or something.

24 Q. All right. I'll show you a document as the last document to see

25 if it refreshes your recollection.

Page 30657

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. McCloskey, I'm looking at the clock. I'm

2 looking at the time as well. It's the time for a break, and you've used

3 your two hours as you indicated. Yes, therefore, could you try to finish

4 within the next three minutes.

5 MR. McCLOSKEY: I'll try, Mr. President.

6 Q. So we see in the reference in this document that in the middle

7 Uran says: "13/95 internal number."

8 Then if we go to - and I'll just say this for the record to save

9 time - 65 ter 31904b. This is a handwritten version of the same

10 intercept, sir, that was in a handwritten notebook; I'll just say that

11 for the record. So now we have two versions of it. And we went and

12 looked into the Drina Corps collection and came up with 65 ter 31905.

13 MR. McCLOSKEY: If we could have that up.

14 Q. And, sir, you can see that this is a document from the

15 Drina Corps Command, the Krivace forward command post, which I'm sure you

16 will agree is an area near Zepa. And the internal number we saw from

17 that intercept, 13- -- 13/95 is the strictly confidential number of this

18 document. And as mentioned in the intercept, it's -- it's to Colonel

19 Ignjat Milanovic, and it says:

20 "Personally deliver via the Milici Brigade commander."

21 And it's the Prosecution's position that Dvorac is the Milici

22 Brigade. And then we see that this is an order from General Krstic

23 regarding the Zepa battle-field.

24 So, sir, do you have an explanation, if according to you the

25 Muslims could not intercept outside the frequencies you've listed, how

Page 30658

1 they were able to get in information from an actual document, the

2 internal number, the people, the places where it was going? Can you

3 explain that? Do you have any explanation for that?

4 A. That conversation, too, was through RRU-1, and I maintain that

5 this side that was speaking to Krsmanovic could be intercepted; whereas

6 Krsmanovic could not be.

7 JUDGE ORIE: And could I then repeat my previous question, that

8 if you would simultaneously listen in on two frequencies, whether you

9 could possibly intercept such a conversation in its entirety?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In this case, since I know the

11 terrain, it was not possible to listen to both frequencies. One, yes.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Any further explanation as how the terrain

13 prohibited to intercept on one side?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the RRU-1, the antennas are

15 directed in one direction; whereas the direction of Krsmanovic's antenna

16 was opposite to the Muslim side.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you would say the location where it would be

18 intercepted might have been difficult to come to by the Muslim side. Is

19 that how I have to understand your answer?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Almost impossible.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Almost impossible.

22 Mr. McCloskey, it's time for a break. You've used your two

23 hours. May I take it that you want this to be in evidence?

24 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, please, and I should tender 31904a, b, and

25 31905, those are the ones I went over.

Page 30659

1 MR. IVETIC: Under seal.

2 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, please.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Both under seal. Madam Registrar, the numbers would

4 be?

5 THE REGISTRAR: Document 31904a receives Exhibit Number P7062

6 under seal.

7 And document number 31905 receives Exhibit Number P7063,

8 Your Honours.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Both admitted into evidence and under seal --

10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: No, the last one not under seal.

11 JUDGE ORIE: And the last one is not mentioned yet. That is the

12 one which is ...

13 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, 31904b.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, that would receive number?

15 THE REGISTRAR: Would receive number P7064, Your Honours.

16 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence, under seal. We'll --

17 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I doubt if P7063 should be under seal. I don't

18 think so.

19 MR. McCLOSKEY: I heard both at the same time the same thing, and

20 that's correct, that that last one doesn't need to be.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Then the status is hereby corrected, the one just

22 mentioned by Judge Fluegge not under seal.

23 Now, I'm looking at the clock. Mr. Ivetic, is your estimate

24 still the same?

25 MR. IVETIC: Yeah, about 15 to 18 minutes.

Page 30660

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, the Chamber was informed that the witness

2 has to -- to conclude at 2.00. One of the options we would have is to

3 re-examine the witness now right away and then have an early break.

4 Otherwise we would have to ask the witness to come back tomorrow for just

5 five or seven minutes. Perhaps you can consult with Mr. Mladic.

6 MR. IVETIC: My colleague will do so, Your Honours. I have no

7 problem proceeding, but ... we can continue, Your Honours.

8 JUDGE ORIE: That's very much appreciated, co-operative attitude.

9 Mr. Ivetic, you may re-examine the witness.

10 Witness, you'll now be re-examined by Mr. Ivetic, and we all try

11 hard to conclude not later than 2.00.

12 Please proceed.

13 MR. IVETIC: Thank you.

14 Re-examination by Mr. Ivetic:

15 Q. Colonel, your testimony regarding purported intercepts of RRU-800

16 and RRU-1 radio relay devices saying that where they had one frequency

17 they could only have had one side of the conversation, does that apply to

18 all intercepts or communications over those two radio relay devices?

19 JUDGE ORIE: Has the witness heard the question?

20 Do you hear me at this moment, Witness?

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can hear you.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic will now repeat his question.

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I heard the question.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then please answer it.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Ivetic asked me if it applies

Page 30661

1 to RRU-1 and RRU-800. In order to listen to both sides, the listening

2 has to be done from two locations, one close to one party, the other

3 close to the other party, in order to receive these two frequencies. One

4 frequency transmits one party; and the other frequency transmits the

5 other party. That's why it's called duplex connection.

6 MR. IVETIC:

7 Q. Thank you, Colonel.

8 MR. IVETIC: Now I'd like to call up P7057. That was

9 65 ter number 06073 as that might be easier for Madam Registrar over

10 there to locate. This is the report from Drago Nikolic.

11 Q. The question I have for you, sir: Would changing the frequencies

12 of radio relays in the VRS system have any effect on the ability of NATO

13 aeroplanes to perform jamming and reconnaissance as is complained of

14 here?

15 A. No, that doesn't matter. They could jam any frequency, just as

16 it's possible to intercept any other frequency.

17 Q. And, sir, this document recommends the use of TKT documents to

18 the maximum. What does the acronym TKT stand for?

19 A. Secret command of troops.

20 Q. Now, it was suggested to you during cross-examination that radio

21 operators could change frequencies and then they would have to report

22 back to you about the same. Did you ever receive information from any

23 operator that they had, in fact, changed the frequencies being used?

24 A. Changes in frequencies that I was in charge of were radio relays,

25 and it was brigade chiefs of communications who were in charge for

Page 30662

1 radio -- of radio frequencies in their areas of responsibility. This one

2 from Drago Nikolic relates mostly to radio relay frequencies.

3 Q. And did anyone ever inform you as to radio relay frequencies that

4 frequencies had been changed during the course of the war?

5 A. I just explained a moment ago, there was no need to do that with

6 radio relay frequencies. And within their areas of responsibility,

7 brigade chiefs of communications changed radio frequencies very often.

8 So let's make a distinction. Relay frequencies are one thing, and this

9 document related mainly to radio frequencies.

10 Q. I think that clarifies the point.

11 MR. IVETIC: Now, if we could go to P7058, which was

12 65 ter number 13138. This should be a document that is signed by

13 General Mladic.

14 Q. This document was presented to you, and it talks about

15 PTT communications. What are such devices identified as PTT devices?

16 A. PTT devices exist in various types. There were new ones and old

17 ones, but there were none of them within my responsibility. I didn't

18 have any, so I can't provide you with any proper answers.

19 Q. Okay. Fair enough. If we turn to the RUP-12, you were asked at

20 temporary transcript page 40 if carelessness could be if someone did not

21 turn the key on the RUP-12. If someone actually did not input the key on

22 their KZU-63 encryption device on a RUP-12, could that person communicate

23 at all with the others on the encrypted channel, either to transmit to

24 receive?

25 A. Without using the same key in the same devices, communication

Page 30663

1 would be impossible.

2 Q. And just to be clear, sir, for the Operation Krivaja 95, who was

3 it that was responsible for inputting the key on each RUP-12 device, that

4 is to say, on each KZU-63 encryption device attached to each RUP-12?

5 A. Every communication device of a subordinate unit of the corps

6 received the key directly from me. I personally installed them and

7 tested them, and that's the way they were used.

8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I seek clarification to the previous answer.

9 Sir, you answered:

10 "Without using the same key in the same devices, communication

11 would be impossible."

12 If both sides of the communication line would forget to use the

13 key, would it be, nevertheless, possible to communicate over that line?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It would. Because we're talking

15 about a group of participants in radio traffic, and there were seven or

16 eight participants. These seven or eight participants had to have the

17 same devices and the same keys. Otherwise, they would not be in

18 communication.

19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: When they used the key, then the communication is

20 safe. If they don't use the key on all sides, then it is more or less

21 open communication but the communication is possible. Did I understand

22 you correctly?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Do I then understand you well to say that you could

25 communicate without the KZU-63 being activated but more or less left

Page 30664

1 inactive?

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] For participants in telephone

3 traffic, if one KZU-63 is not operational, either unplugged or disabled,

4 that participant can no longer communicate with others who have KZU-63.

5 JUDGE ORIE: If the others have them active. But if the others

6 also have not activated them?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In that case, their devices are

8 quite uselessly connected to RUP-12.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you would say: Why use them if you do not

10 activate the encryption.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

13 MR. IVETIC:

14 Q. Sir, after you input the code for the KZU-63 encryption units on

15 the devices for Krivaja 95, how would those devices be deactivated? By

16 what process?

17 A. Quite simply, you disconnect it from RUP-12.

18 Q. So in that case, could it be done carelessly or would it have to

19 be done intentionally?

20 A. Yes. For the most part, it would be intentional.

21 MR. IVETIC: Now, if we could turn to D879, item number 6, I

22 believe, on page 2 in both languages, that should be 65 ter number 05636,

23 if that's easier.

24 Q. That's the associated exhibit to your statement. You were asked

25 about item 6 and the command of the Bratunac Brigade and the RRU-1 that

Page 30665

1 is present there and for which you do not have the frequencies. What do

2 the acronyms TLF and TGR next to RRU-1 denote or mean? What was this

3 device used for?

4 A. Through that radio relay channel, there was -- they went one

5 telegraph and one telegram channels [as interpreted]. Through the

6 telegraph, telegrams were sent. And the other one was a telephone

7 channel.

8 Q. Thank you. Now, at temporary transcript page 52 through 53, you

9 were asked about mobile command posts and the use of a RRU-1 for the

10 same. Could you describe for us what such a mobile RRU-1 communication

11 post would look like, first of all, and then I have one or two follow-up

12 questions, and then we'll be done.

13 A. A mobile command post with relay devices would look bad. Relay

14 devices have beams, beamed radiation and antennas. I don't know how they

15 would be able to direct their antennas given the mobility of the command

16 post. Relay devices should ideally be located in a fixed command post.

17 Q. Could such mobile communications units be used while moving; that

18 is to say, while the same was mobile?

19 JUDGE ORIE: That is not the same, Mr. Ivetic. I have to --

20 something which is mobile means that it can be moved. Whether it moves

21 is not identical to mobile.

22 Witness, could you answer the question whether such

23 communications units, mobile communications units, could be used while

24 you were actually moving?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There were mobile command posts as

Page 30666

1 well, but radio devices were used there because they allowed for mobile

2 command posts to exist. Radio relay devices could not do the same.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic, my mobile phone is really mobile. It

4 doesn't always move.

5 MR. IVETIC: And that was my question --

6 JUDGE ORIE: As a matter of fact, it's not moving at this moment.

7 It is on my desk.

8 MR. IVETIC: That was my precise question, Your Honour, I

9 thought.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Well --

11 MR. IVETIC: Can they do it while they're moving. That was my

12 question.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But then you said -- I had no problem with

14 that. That is to say, "while the same was mobile," that was what created

15 my confusion.

16 MR. IVETIC: I apologise for that.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Because it's mobile and nevertheless it cannot be

18 moving.

19 MR. IVETIC: Correct.

20 JUDGE ORIE: That was the issue I raised. If you would not have

21 added the last sentence, I would not have sought clarification.

22 Please proceed.

23 MR. IVETIC: Thank you.

24 Q. Sir -- I just lost it on my transcript.

25 Sir, you just answered one question by saying:

Page 30667

1 "Radio relay devices could not do the same."

2 Could you please explain for us why radio relay devices could not

3 do the same as radio devices.

4 A. Because of the way the signal was broadcast. A radio device uses

5 antenna to broadcast a signal across a 360-degree circle. They don't

6 have to be fixed. A radio relay device broadcasts its signal from an

7 antenna which needs to find an interlocutor on the other side, again, by

8 using an antenna. That's why a mobile command post using a radio relay

9 device is not feasible.

10 Q. Thank you. I think --

11 JUDGE ORIE: Could I seek clarification there again.

12 MR. IVETIC: Yeah.

13 JUDGE ORIE: You say a mobile command post cannot use a radio

14 relay device. I -- from your explanation, I understand why it cannot

15 when it is on the move. But once the mobile command post stops and stays

16 for a while, shorter or longer, on a location, could then a radio relay

17 equipment -- device, could it then be installed for the -- as long as the

18 command post stayed on the same location?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, in one place. But in order to

20 mount a radio relay device and in order to connect telephones and

21 teleprinters to it, one needs some time. At least half an hour,

22 approximately.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. That clarifies the matter for me.

24 Any further questions, Mr. Ivetic?

25 MR. IVETIC: Yes.