151130ED

Page 41941

1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, please be seated, Mr. Kovic.

2 Mr. Kovic, you'll first be examined by Mr. Stojanovic who is now

3 standing. Mr. Stojanovic is counsel for Mr. Mladic.

4 Please proceed, Mr. Stojanovic.

5 Examination by Mr. Stojanovic:

6 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Professor.

7 A. Good morning.

8 Q. I would like to ask you to speak slowly. We've already agreed to

9 speak slowly, haven't we?

10 Please give us your exact name and surname.

11 A. Milos Kovic.

12 Q. Professor, could you briefly tell us about your professional and

13 academic career and your education.

14 A. I teach at the University of Belgrade. I'm a lecturer of the

15 faculty of philosophy. I teach history of the new age. I got my masters

16 degree and my doctorate at that same university. I studied abroad as

17 well. I attended various conferences. I also published several dozen

18 professional papers, monographs, and other professional works. That is

19 what I have to say for the time being.

20 Q. Is this the first time that you appear as an expert witness

21 before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia?

22 A. Yes, this is my first time.

23 Q. Thank you. I'm just waiting for the interpretation.

24 A. I see that. Yes, I see that.

25 Q. Please don't hold it against me.

Page 41942

1 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please have

2 65 ter 1D05903 in e-court.

3 Q. You will see before you on the screen the document that I've

4 called up. That is your CV. And I would just like to ask you briefly:

5 Are there any changes to the CV that you attached to your report?

6 A. I've published a few new books in the meantime that are relevant.

7 For example, one about Gavrilo Princip who assassinated Franz Ferdinand

8 in Sarajevo, this is a compilation of documents about him; and another

9 paper that has to do with the attitude of the great powers towards

10 Bosnia-Herzegovina at the time of the Great Eastern Crisis. So these are

11 the publications that I would like to add at this point in time. There

12 were some others that are perhaps of no relevance for these proceedings.

13 Q. Thank you.

14 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like to

15 tender the CV of Milos Kovic, our expert witness.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Before you do that just a question. Mr. Kovic,

17 you said you studied abroad. Where did you study abroad?

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At the University of Oxford, I

19 underwent some advanced training there. You have it here in my CV. In

20 2004, 2005, I was working on my doctorate and I was a visiting doctoral

21 student at the University of Oxford. You can see it in my CV here.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.

24 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 1D5903 will be Exhibit D1367,

25 Your Honours.

Page 41943

1 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.

2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Can the number be repeated.

3 JUDGE ORIE: I do learn that there is no B/C/S version.

4 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, 1D -- it's

5 65 ter 1D05903.

6 JUDGE ORIE: But let me just -- no. Is that a different number

7 from the ...

8 [Trial Chamber confers]

9 JUDGE ORIE: It's the same number. There's no B/C/S version

10 uploaded in e-court.

11 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, there is no B/C/S

12 version.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I think we can live with it in view of the

14 character of the document and the impact on the Defence. But on --

15 Mr. Traldi.

16 MR. TRALDI: Just if we could confirm that the witness

17 understands the English language because otherwise it would be a little

18 unclear whether he was able to understand what he was looking at.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll ask him. Although studying in Oxford

20 without knowledge of the English language might not be that easy.

21 You read and speak English, Mr. Kovic?

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course. However, I would prefer

23 to testify in my own language, in Serbian, and to have questions put to

24 me to the extent possible in that same language.

25 JUDGE ORIE: That's not the problem. The problem is that

Page 41944

1 there -- have you reviewed your CV which is exclusively available in the

2 English language? Have you reviewed it on its accuracy?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Then I think I already pronounced it was admitted.

5 Please proceed.

6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes, it was admitted but we don't have the number

7 because there was so many speakers at the same time.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Registrar, the number would be?

9 THE REGISTRAR: That's Exhibit D1367, Your Honours.

10 JUDGE ORIE: D1367 is admitted.

11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And at this point in time I would urge

12 Mr. Stojanovic and the witness to pause between question and answer.

13 Otherwise, it's not possible to follow.

14 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

15 Q. Professor Kovic, tell us, what was the specific task you were

16 given by the Defence of General Mladic?

17 A. I was given the task of studying four documents, these are

18 actually reports of two experts, Robert Donia and Patrick Treanor. Two

19 reports by Robert Donia: The background, policy and strategy of the

20 siege of Sarajevo from 1991 until 1995, and also relevant excerpts from

21 debates in the Assembly of Republika Srpska from 1992 until 1995. As

22 I've already said, these are two reports. There are, rather, two reports

23 by Patrick Treanor: The leadership of the Bosnian Serbs from 1990 until

24 1992 -- excuse me, and the leadership of the Bosnian Serbs from 1993

25 until 1995.

Page 41945

1 My task was to give my own assessment regarding the academic and

2 factual reliability of these documents. That is to say, as a historian,

3 to do everything that a historian is trained to do. Anybody involved in

4 the humanities. That is to say, to write a review of these four

5 documents.

6 Q. Thank you.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Witness, the last things you said, that they

8 appear in your report as well, There is no need to repeat what is already

9 in the report because that's in the introductory paragraphs, isn't it.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stojanovic.

12 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

13 Q. Professor, as for your paper and your task, did you actually

14 compile several reports?

15 A. Actually, I submitted two reports to the court.

16 Q. Thank you. First of all, I would like us to go through your

17 report briefly, the one that you entitled: Analysis of a report

18 entitled: The Bosnian Serb leadership, 1990 to 1992, and the Bosnian

19 Serb leadership from 1993 until 1995 by expert Professor Patrick Treanor

20 and the team.

21 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have 65 ter

22 1D05904 in e-court.

23 Q. Professor, is this the front page of one of these reports of

24 yours?

25 A. Yes.

Page 41946

1 Q. Could we please briefly just go through some of the main

2 highlights of your report.

3 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] So in B/C/S, could we have

4 page 3, and in English, page 3, the second paragraph from the bottom of

5 the page.

6 Q. Professor, here, you dealt with the phrase "Bosnian Serbs" and

7 then you elaborated on that; namely, why you consider this phrase,

8 "Bosnian Serbs," to be incorrect professionally and historically.

9 Please do not repeat everything that is contained in your report,

10 but I would just like to ask you to briefly tell the Court about the key

11 points underlying this assessment; namely that this phrase should not be

12 included in the Prosecution expert reports.

13 A. It is imprecise. And it's even incorrect. It is imprecise

14 because all Serbs who were in the leadership of Republika Srpska that are

15 referred to these reports were not Bosnians. Some of them were from

16 Herzegovina. It would be the same thing like telling a person from

17 Utrecht that he is from The Hague. I don't know what else to say. For

18 example, Radovan Karadzic is from Herzegovina. Let me not repeat

19 everything that I've written. Telling him that is he a Bosnian, well, I

20 don't know how a person from Herzegovina would react that. So it is

21 imprecise.

22 Politically it is controversial because to tell somebody who

23 lives in Republika Srpska today that is he a Bosnian Serb, he would take

24 offence. He is a Serb from Republika Srpska. Somehow one would expect a

25 greater degree of caution, academic, methodological, and also a bit more

Page 41947

1 human fairness from someone who is supposed to be a serious author of

2 this kind of text. It is also a political issue because one of the

3 reasons for the war was certainly the rejection of the Serbs who live in

4 Bosnia-Herzegovina to be declared Bosnian Serbs.

5 It was a major political issue even in the socialist Yugoslavia;

6 namely, the literature from Sarajevo, would it be called the literature

7 of Bosnia-Herzegovina or literature from Bosnia-Herzegovina? One of the

8 greatest Muslim authors from Bosnia-Herzegovina, Mesa Selimovic, refused

9 to be an author of Bosnia-Herzegovinian literature. If you understand

10 what I'm saying. It's a question of dissatisfaction on the part of this

11 Muslim writer. And many Serbs, they viewed this as an attempt to be

12 assimilated into something that would be a Bosnian political entity or a

13 Bosnian nation.

14 Q. Thank you. Page 7, B/C/S, and page 6, third paragraph of the

15 report in English - your report, Professor - as you criticise

16 Mr. Treanor's paper you say, inter alia, that such research would have to

17 contain the sources of the other conflicting sides as well. In

18 historiography, each subject requires to be viewed from various angles

19 which allows for more nuanced conclusions especially when dealing with

20 wars and international crises. That is what you call the reason for

21 saying that these reports are one-sided.

22 My question: Is this a scientific approach by Mr. Treanor, and

23 would the conclusions based on such a methodological approach be

24 scientific and scholarly?

25 A. What I wrote was that this should not be the approach of a

Page 41948

1 historian. Quite simply, as far as wars are concerned, and here we do

2 have a civil war that is being dealt with, you cannot view the phenomenon

3 properly if you don't view it from different angles. Professor Treanor

4 used intercepts between Radovan Karadzic and his associates. That is of

5 interest and that is an interesting source, but then a reader wonders

6 where are the intercepted conversations of Alija Izetbegovic and

7 Ejup Ganic or, for example, Ejub Ganic and Abu Hamza Al-Masri, one of the

8 Mujahedin there. He is in Guantanamo Bay nowadays. So can one imagine

9 what would be contained there.

10 This is basic. This is something that is taught during one's

11 freshman year at university. Audiatur et altera pars. So dealing with

12 the Bosnian Serbs, that is fine, but he goes into political assessments.

13 He is judging the participants. In order to do that, you really have to

14 be very cautious and you have to study different sources from different

15 sides very carefully.

16 Q. Thank you. Let us look at page 9 of your report in B/C/S and

17 page 7, the last sentence in the fourth paragraph, where you say, among

18 other things -- again, speaking of the question of bias in the report by

19 Mr. Treanor:

20 "The author views the Serbian secession within Bosnia-Herzegovina

21 as something separate from what was happening in Yugoslavia. As we will

22 see, he does not attach any special importance even to the secessionism

23 of Bosnian Muslims and Croats from Yugoslavia."

24 Professor, tell us briefly, please, why you believe that such a

25 conclusion requires necessarily a broader context of the events in

Page 41949

1 Bosnia-Herzegovina?

2 A. There are three methodological objections.

3 First, one-sided sources. Second, bias, the bias that is obvious

4 in the language used. Analyse this discourse and you will see it. And,

5 three, he is taking facts out of their historical context.

6 The author, Patrick Treanor, wrote in his introduction that his

7 main purpose is to represent the real historical context of what was

8 going on in Bosnia-Herzegovina from 1990 to 1995. His two reports.

9 That's precisely the problem. You cannot understand the Serbian

10 secession within Bosnia-Herzegovina unless you understand the secession

11 of Muslims and Croats from Bosnia-Herzegovina or the Croats from

12 Yugoslavia. It's a far more complex problem than I can say in a few

13 words.

14 Q. Not now, Professor, thank you, because our time is limited.

15 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Let us stay on the same page in

16 B/C/S. And, in the English version could we see page 8, the first

17 paragraph.

18 Q. Here, Professor, you say that the key moves of the Serbs in the

19 period from 1990 through 1995, and especially in 1992, 1992 -- in 1990 to

20 1992, were actually compelled, forced by the moves of the Muslims and

21 Croats. Why do you believe so?

22 A. In all secessionist wars, the one who secedes takes the lead.

23 Remember Belgium. That's the case almost everywhere in history where

24 secessionism is involved. The first actions were taken by Muslims and

25 Croats who wanted independence or, as Alija Izetbegovic put it,

Page 41950

1 sovereignty even at the price of peace; whereas the Serbs only wanted the

2 status quo to remain, to remain in Yugoslavia. So all the moves of the

3 Serbs were forced moves. Of course, during the war, one or the other

4 side would occasionally take the offensive, but the war in

5 Bosnia-Herzegovina started as a secessionist war in which the Serbs were

6 trying to respond to the moves of the secessionists.

7 Q. I want to ask you now how does the report of Mr. Treanor view the

8 theories that are you presenting today in the courtroom concerning forced

9 secessionism?

10 A. The problem is that the author forgets the context and thus the

11 actions of the Serb appear in a sort of vacuum. We don't see what's

12 going on around them. Every political move is an answer to something.

13 But when you exclude the context as the report of Mr. Treanor did, you

14 could say that France attacked Germany in 1914. You know that Germany

15 was preparing for war. You know how Britain was watching Hitler's

16 Germany before the Second World War.

17 Q. Thank you, Professor, we're still on the same subject. Let us

18 look at page 13 of your report in B/C/S and page 10, the last paragraph,

19 in English.

20 Among other things, you say, elaborating on this subject:

21 "... the planned Slovene, Croat, and Muslim breaking up of

22 Yugoslavia but the unitarian Bosnia-Herzegovina had to be defended at all

23 costs."

24 Is there a reasoning behind this description?

25 A. Of course. The problem in all these papers that I analysed is

Page 41951

1 inconsistency. Everyone has to defend their country, but not --

2 THE INTERPRETER: Could the -- could the -- could the witness

3 please start from the beginning.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, could you repeat your answer on from the

5 beginning. And could you slow down in speaking. So you were asked

6 whether there's a reasoning behind this description. You said: Of

7 course. And could you resume from there.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is clear that the secessionisms

9 of Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina and in Croatia as well as the

10 secessionisms of Muslims and Croats in Bosnia-Herzegovina are

11 interlinked. This is again another phenomenon which is the logical

12 inconsistency of the author. If you are for a multi-ethnic society - and

13 you are, and in my view it's a reasonable position - how can you then

14 support secessionist breaking up of a multi-ethnic Yugoslavia which was a

15 federal state, a federal country, while at the same time supporting the

16 preservations at all costs of a multinational unitarian

17 Bosnia-Herzegovina. In my view, it is illogical. Moreover, in the

18 report by Robert Donia, supporting also unitarian Croatia because the

19 right of Serbian Krajina to exist is disputed. So you are breaking up

20 the multi-ethnic Yugoslavia while wanting to preserve a unitarian

21 multi-ethnic Bosnia-Herzegovina. In my view, that is illogical.

22 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Apart from the fact that it is, indeed, illogical, what you've

24 just described --

25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojanovic, whether it is illogical or not, the

Page 41952

1 witness has told us. It is not for you to say that he is right in

2 telling us that. Yes?

3 Please proceed.

4 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] I just wanted to sum up,

5 Your Honours.

6 Q. What you have just told us, would it be scientifically also

7 unjustified to draw the conclusions Mr. Treanor drew?

8 A. Science requires consistency in work, so in that sense this is

9 inconsistent. I would just like to say that Professor John Fine, who is

10 a friend and associate and mentor of Professor Robert Donia, John Fine

11 who published a book together with Donia on Bosnia-Herzegovina, insists

12 on the illogical points that I underlined. John Fine says that if you

13 are for the preservation of Bosnia-Herzegovina, then it would be logical

14 for you to also support the preservation of Yugoslavia. The principle of

15 multi-nationalism and multi-culturality is at stake. Yugoslavia was

16 really the whole world -- Europe in a nutshell.

17 JUDGE ORIE: The name you said, John Fine. How is -- could you

18 spell the name Fine.

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. [In English] F-i-n-e.

20 [Interpretation] That's his last name, F-i-n-e. John Fine. He is a

21 senior colleague and mentor of Robert Donia, like Milorad Ekmecic was in

22 Sarajevo with whom Professor Donia collaborated also. But John Fine

23 collaborated with Donia more closely and published a book together with

24 him.

25 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

Page 41953

1 Q. Professor, could we now look at page 14 in B/C/S; and, in

2 English, that would be page 11, paragraph 3, where you say, among other

3 things:

4 "As Robert Hayden says, the criteria that the Badinter Commission

5 applied to Yugoslavia when it concluded that it was in the process of

6 disintegration could logically and consistently have been applied to

7 Bosnia and Herzegovina as well. These criteria meant simple

8 encouragement for any separatist movement which would be able to declare

9 independence and withdraw from the central organs of government."

10 My first question is: Could you tell us in more detail, in a few

11 sentences, who is Robert Hayden?

12 And my second question: If, according to the Badinter

13 Commission, the SFRY was disintegrating, could Bosnia-Herzegovina also

14 under the same criteria be treated as a country in the process of

15 disintegration from your professional scientific point of view?

16 A. Robert Hayden is a professor at the University of Pittsburgh and

17 he teaches law, international relations and anthropology, so at the

18 University of Pittsburgh. And he is well known for his field research in

19 Yugoslavia and in India. I invoked the results that he obtained, and he

20 says that the criteria under which a state is in the process of

21 disintegration when it does not have control over its entire territory

22 and when all its parts are not represented in joint institutions, that

23 principle could have applied to Yugoslavia at the time of its dissolution

24 but also to Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1991 and 1992. That is his conclusion

25 and I believe it is rather convincing.

Page 41954

1 Q. Did Mr. Treanor deal with this issue in his report at all?

2 A. No, he didn't.

3 Q. Could you tell us while we stay on the same page in B/C/S and

4 move to page -- in fact, move to the last sentence on this page in

5 English and then turn the page as we are reading.

6 So page 12, the first sentence:

7 "In the opinion of Steven Burg and Paul Shoup, Bosnia-Herzegovina

8 was recognised prematurely under pressure from the USA. According to

9 them, independence should have been made conditional on an agreement

10 between the three sides on the constitutional order."

11 First of all, would you tell us who these two authors are, and

12 then tell us your views on the premature recognition of

13 Bosnia-Herzegovina as well as Mr. Treanor's treatment of this issue.

14 A. In one of the footnotes, Robert Donia recognises Steven Burg and

15 Paul Shoup as the most senior researchers of this issue. These are

16 people who did not start in this area yesterday. Professor Paul Shoup is

17 professor emeritus at the University of Virginia. He has many

18 publications that are not linked to these issues, such as Eastern Europe,

19 et cetera. Steven Burg teaches at a smaller university near Boston.

20 I'll remember the name of the university later.

21 I am inclined to agree with their conclusions. Instead of

22 organising the negotiations between the three parties to reach whatever

23 agreement could be reached, recognition was declared instead. That's

24 also the view of Lord Carrington and these two authors are not the only

25 people who say the same things. They say that in the case of Croatia as

Page 41955

1 in the case of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the sides should have been forced to

2 negotiate first. Instead, both Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina were

3 recognised prematurely and then what happened happened. I'm trying to

4 say that major powers, major countries, often make very serious mistakes

5 in their foreign policy and these mistakes are paid by the citizens of

6 the countries that make such mistakes as well as the citizens of the

7 countries that are the subject of such decisions. That is my opinion.

8 And the participants of these events are listed on the next page.

9 Q. Thank you, Professor.

10 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we now move to page 16 in

11 B/C/S, and page 13, paragraph 1, in English.

12 Q. Professor, as you analysed all these theses of Professor Treanor,

13 you present, inter alia, another interesting theory where you say Alija

14 Izetbegovic also rejected the so-called Belgrade initiative, an agreement

15 reached with Radovan Karadzic and Slobodan Milosevic in July 1991. On

16 the other side was Adil Zulfikarpasic, one of the founders of the SDA,

17 and his associates from the Muslim Bosniak association.

18 My question, my question: Do you think that an objective

19 analyst, a historian, should deal with the failure of this initiative in

20 his report as well and the consequences that followed in

21 Bosnia-Herzegovina?

22 A. Yes. The Belgrade initiative from July 1991 is not mentioned in

23 Professor Treanor's reports and it's not mentioned in Professor Donia's

24 reports. So this is yet another objection. That is to say, having

25 certain facts omitted. We haven't referred to that yet.

Page 41956

1 So one of the founders of the SDA, Adil Zulfikarpasic,

2 Muhamed Filipovic also, and their associates, in July 1991, reached

3 agreement first with the Serbs from Republika Srpska, then

4 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and then with Slobodan Milosevic. It had to do with

5 the preservation of Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia would have been organised as

6 a federal state and Bosnia-Herzegovina would have been organised as a

7 unitary federal unit. Serbs from Bosnia-Herzegovina were prepared to

8 give up on everything they had attained so far in terms of the

9 decentralisation of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Adil Zulfikarpasic wrote a lot

10 about that, and he showed that Alija Izetbegovic until the very last

11 moment supported the initiative and then abruptly he abandoned the entire

12 idea and Adil Zulfikarpasic himself. Why is this idea important? It

13 shows that the Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina were prepared to live in a

14 joint multi-ethnic Yugoslav state.

15 Everything that happened later were forced moves due to the

16 secession of the Bosnian Muslims and Croats. At the same time, it shows

17 that the Muslim leadership was not united. Adil Zulfikarpasic, who lived

18 in Switzerland for a long time in the west and he represented a more

19 liberal wing, and I would say that the difference between him and

20 Alija Zulfikarpasic [as interpreted] is that Alija Zulfikarpasic is an

21 Islamist whereas Zulfikarpasic is a nationalist. So that is something

22 that happened between the Bosnian Muslims themselves. Zulfikarpasic was

23 in favour of something else and also the -- the position of the president

24 of that state was offered to --

25 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please slow down.

Page 41957

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- Alija Izetbegovic and --

2 So Alija Izetbegovic was offered the position of president of

3 that state and he refused that.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I just ask for clarification. Can I ask for

5 clarification.

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please go ahead.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Kovic, at page 16, line 8, you are recorded as

8 having said Yugoslavia would have been organised as a federal state, and

9 Bosnia-Herzegovina would have been organised as a unitary federal unit.

10 I'm not quite sure I understand what a unitary federal unit is.

11 Are you -- if that's how you expressed it, can you give us an

12 explanation. Or if you were misquoted, can you give us the correct

13 quote.

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. What I said here was that

15 Bosnia-Herzegovina should remain within the Yugoslav Federation. That is

16 to say, Yugoslavia would be a federal state. It would consist of Serbia,

17 Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, it would be a federal state. However,

18 Bosnia-Herzegovina itself would not be federalised as such.

19 Bosnia-Herzegovina would be one of the federal units. It would be

20 centralised in terms of its organisation. It would not have any separate

21 entities and so on. So Bosnia itself would be based on a unitary

22 principle. That is what Adil Zulfikarpasic asked for. He said that that

23 was the red line and he didn't want to go beyond that in negotiations.

24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you one question.

Page 41958

1 Herzegovina, is that exclusively Serb populated? Or are there

2 living Croats and Muslims as well?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no. Of course. The

4 Neretva River flows through Herzegovina. It is multi-ethnic by

5 definition.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you've answered that question.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't have to go into details --

8 JUDGE ORIE: No. Page 16, line 17 and 18, you were talking about

9 what the Bosnian Muslims and Croats did. Now, would the Herzegovinian

10 Muslims and Croats be offended by the use of that language of yours?

11 Because you criticised Mr. Treanor that much about talking about Bosnian

12 Serbs because they could be from Herzegovina. You are using the term

13 "Bosnian Muslim and Croats," would they be -- would they feel similarly

14 offended by your language?

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Frankly, I don't think so, because

16 there is something that is called the Bosniak idea. The Muslims do not

17 insist on these differences. If you wish, I can deal with this in

18 detail. The Bosnian nation that was created by Benjamin Kallay in the

19 19th century, the Austro-Hungarian authorities, there's this Bosniak and

20 Bosnian idea. Of course, Bosnian Muslims have their own view, but they

21 would not be offended the same way the Serbs would be offended in that

22 sense.

23 JUDGE ORIE: And for the Croats? Do they have a similar

24 position?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, as far as Croats are

Page 41959

1 concerned, there would be nuances involved. The majority of Croats in

2 Bosnia-Herzegovina live in Herzegovina. Although there are some in

3 Bosnia. They emphasize this kind of difference more. So this Bosnian

4 idea, one can say that Croats did not accept it. Just like Serbs did not

5 want to accept it.

6 I can elaborate on this, if you wish. All of these questions

7 have a historical dimension -- yes, I understand.

8 JUDGE ORIE: But you explained your criticism by referring to

9 people from -- I think from Utrecht would be offended if they would be

10 said to be from another town. You didn't give any nuance, you just said

11 because they were born elsewhere. Therefore I do understand now that

12 there's a lot of nuance in that and that it's not just a matter of

13 inaccuracy by a historian but that there is far more involved. And if I

14 understand you well, you are including a lot of things you have not

15 raised in your report in this respect about how offensive it would be or

16 would not be.

17 Is that -- would you agree with that?

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, I understand. I think

19 that I understand what you tried to say. Yes, yes.

20 JUDGE ORIE: And --

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I understand that. However,

22 may I just say one thing? I think that one should make a distinction

23 between what is written as an expert report and what is sometimes stated

24 in the course of a conversation. We always try not to offend anyone.

25 But when we write a document that is supposed to be admitted into

Page 41960

1 evidence, here we have to exercise additional caution. That is the only

2 thing I wished to say in addition to what I've already said, and I think

3 I understand the point that you made.

4 JUDGE ORIE: And such nuances on which you insist now are missing

5 in the portion where you say how offensive Mr. Treanor's language is.

6 Would you agree with that?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure that I understood your

8 question or perhaps it's a question of interpretation.

9 JUDGE ORIE: You say it's offensive to call someone from Utrecht

10 as if he was born elsewhere, without any further nuances whether some

11 people from Utrecht might feel, others might not. All those nuances are

12 not in your written report where you criticise Mr. Treanor, or did I miss

13 it?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I made an effort to take

15 these nuances into account. It is one thing where you make a mistake

16 when you're speaking and if you perhaps tell someone who is from Utrecht

17 that he is from The Hague and vice versa. However, if the person from

18 Utrecht is on trial, and if you are writing something that is supposed to

19 be evidence against that person --

20 JUDGE ORIE: No. There's no evidence against a person here.

21 There's evidence to give the Court the opinion of an expert. At least we

22 do not expect you to testify in favour of Mr. Mladic nor against

23 Mr. Mladic. We expect you to give your expert opinion in full

24 independence and in accordance with your profession.

25 Please proceed.

Page 41961

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, as I've said --

2 JUDGE ORIE: Witness --

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- as far as the papers of

4 Patrick Treanor are concerned -- oh, I see. Oh, we should continue. Oh,

5 yes.

6 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

7 Q. Professor, just one more question related to your first report.

8 Thank you for the effort you have made.

9 Could we please take a look at page 21 in B/C/S and in the

10 English version of your report it is page 16, the last sentence. It then

11 continues on page 17.

12 This is what you say:

13 "Finally, the context cannot be even the confidently pronounced

14 value judgements and criticisms of only one side in a civil war. All in

15 all, this lack of context caused the authors writing about the basic

16 subject to seem unhistorical, completely void of cause and consequence or

17 a realistic temporal and spatial framework."

18 However, this is what my question is. You used a phrase here and

19 said that it was a civil war. Please tell us as briefly as possible why

20 you qualified the developments of Bosnia-Herzegovina in such a way, as a

21 civil war?

22 A. Well, I'm not the only one to qualify what happened in

23 Bosnia-Herzegovina in this way. This phrase is customary in science and

24 it is a subject of debate. However, in my view, this is yet another sad,

25 terrible war that has afflicted the population of our lands for

Page 41962

1 centuries. It is basically the fate of Bosnia-Herzegovina. These are

2 wars in which neighbours are at war, neighbours who speak the same

3 language. Now we call that language our language. It used to be called

4 Serbo-Croat before.

5 These are people who have different religions. And this is a

6 terrible fate of the Bosnian peoples, but they are not the only ones

7 responsible for that. Unfortunately, someone from outside wishes to

8 encourage such conflicts. For example, like in 16th-century France or

9 17th-century Germany. It's that kind of civil war. Can you call them

10 religious wars too. However, someone who is a believer cannot destroy a

11 place of worship of any religion. So it is a question of whether these

12 are religious wars or not.

13 However, the war went along religious lines like in the

14 16th century, like in the 17th century, like during the genocide against

15 the Serbs by the independent state of Croatia in the Second World War.

16 People being reduced to their religious affiliations and not paying

17 attention to what their joint interests are, their common fate, their

18 neighbourly relations. That's why I'm saying this is a civil war. It

19 had some other factors involved as well, but essentially, that is a

20 repetition of what happened there in 1941, 1945, of course, in a

21 different historical context, and then 1914 and 1918, and not to go into

22 the 19th century. In Europe, these wars ended when the Thirty Years' War

23 ended and also after the Treaty of Versailles. In Europe, wars do not

24 have this dimension. However, in the Balkans this continued because of

25 the wars between Austro-Hungary, Turkey, not to go into too much detail.

Page 41963

1 Q. Thank you, professor. Now that you took the solemn declaration

2 in this courtroom, now that we went through your report, today, do you

3 fully stand by your written report that you entitled: The leadership of

4 the Bosnian Serbs 1990-1992, and the analysis of Mr. Treanor's report for

5 1992 and 1993-1995? Is that your fully accepted report in this courtroom

6 today as well?

7 A. Yes.

8 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, after the

9 cross-examination, I would like to tender 1D05904 into evidence. That is

10 Professor Kovic's report.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Usually the decision is taken at the end of the

12 testimony of the witness, so may I take it that you want it to be marked

13 for identification?

14 Mr. Registrar.

15 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] That's right.

16 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be MFI D1368.

17 JUDGE ORIE: D1368 is marked for identification.

18 It's time for the break, Mr. Stojanovic.

19 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] That's right, Your Honour.

20 After the break, we're going to go through the other report, and I think

21 that I will stay within my time-limit.

22 JUDGE ORIE: We'd like to see you back in 20 minutes, Mr. Kovic.

23 You may follow the usher.

24 [The witness stands down]

25 JUDGE ORIE: We resume at ten minutes to 11.00.

Page 41964

1 --- Recess taken at 10.31 a.m.

2 --- On resuming at 10.52 a.m.

3 [The witness takes the stand]

4 JUDGE ORIE: You may proceed, Mr. Stojanovic.

5 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. Professor, did you also make a report for the Defence of

7 General Mladic which you titled: Analysis of the expert report by

8 Robert Donia on the events in Bosnia-Herzegovina in the case Prosecutor

9 against Ratko Mladic, and submit that report?

10 A. Yes.

11 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we call up in e-court,

12 please, 65 ter 1D05905.

13 Q. Professor, is this the cover page of your report? You have it

14 before you.

15 A. Yes.

16 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we now display in e-court

17 page 6 in B/C/S. And in English that would be page 5, second

18 paragraph from the bottom.

19 Q. Professor, along the same principles we followed when discussing

20 your previous report and without repeating what is elaborated in detail

21 in your report, could you please highlight the main points that I ask you

22 about.

23 Here, you say, I quote:

24 "The term 'siege' is contentious because the besieged maintained

25 links with the outside world through the UN peacekeeping forces ..."

Page 41965

1 And you go on to explain how and in which ways. And in the next

2 paragraph, which is on page 7 in B/C/S, you say:

3 "Sarajevo between 1992 and 1995 was a divided but not a besieged

4 city."

5 My question is: Professor, why do you believe the term used by

6 Professor Donia, namely, the "siege of Sarajevo," is incorrect and that

7 the term "divided city" would be more appropriate?

8 JUDGE ORIE: Isn't this clearly explained in the report? I mean,

9 unless you'd like to add something to it, but then ask specifically on

10 what. But I think it's clearly explained in the report, isn't it? East

11 Sarajevo, west Sarajevo, well, it's all clearly explained, so why ask

12 again what we have read already?

13 So if you have any focussed question, please proceed, but don't

14 ask the witness to repeat what he has written down already in some

15 detail.

16 Please proceed.

17 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. I've already

18 said that I would not like to hear anything from the report repeated.

19 Q. But in view of what we discussed in the preparations for your

20 appearance in court, could you just tell us why, from the historical

21 point of view, the term "divided" is more appropriate than the term

22 "besieged."

23 A. In my view, there are two concepts that could be used. One is

24 used by Robert Donia in his second report, the struggle for Sarajevo.

25 And the second concept is a divided city.

Page 41966

1 What I did not write in my report and what I would like to say

2 now is this. If you take the centre of The Hague and proclaim it to be

3 The Hague and you say that Scheveningen is not The Hague, and if, God

4 forbid, Scheveningen gets into conflict with the centre of The Hague, and

5 then if you have proclaimed the centre of The Hague to be The Hague, then

6 could you call it the siege of The Hague. But if you treat these two

7 parts as two districts then, it would be a divided city. Of course, this

8 is a clearly hypothetical situation.

9 Also, and I didn't write this in my report, General Michael Rose

10 in his memoirs of his service in Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1994 says that his

11 opinion was that Sarajevo was not a besieged city because it maintained

12 links with the outside world thanks to the United Nations, and thanks to

13 a series of other details that can be further discussed. In Sarajevo,

14 you have, on the one hand, Serb forces; and on the other hand, you have

15 those whom Professor Donia calls defenders. And in his monograph on

16 Sarajevo, he says himself that 90 per cent of them were of Muslim

17 ethnicity, which means that you have two armies in conflict that belonged

18 to two different ethnic groups.

19 That's the point of view from which I treated the term "siege of

20 Sarajevo."

21 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we look at page 9 in B/C/S

22 and page 7 in English, paragraph 3.

23 Q. Again, briefly, Professor, when you talk about the contexts of

24 the reports made by Mr. Donia, you say again what is missing is the

25 previous history of the war in Sarajevo. Is that a general academic

Page 41967

1 objection to the -- to the approach taken by Professor Donia when writing

2 his report?

3 A. Certainly. Professor Donia himself says in his introduction that

4 he would be describing the context, and my main objection is precisely

5 the lack of context. Not only was insufficient attention paid to the

6 actions of the leaderships of the Croats and Muslims, and, if you wish,

7 the US and NATO because they were also parties to that conflict until

8 1995, there is also a lack of serious attention to the context of the

9 civil war.

10 I have a correction to make to the interpretation. They are

11 parties to that conflict from 1995, not until 1995.

12 There is no clear context that would encompass the war in Croatia

13 because the citizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina were involved in that war.

14 It's clear that somebody from Croatia would wish to cause a war in

15 Bosnia-Herzegovina as well, in my opinion. And what is lacking is a

16 longer historical introduction to what happened during the war in Bosnia

17 and Herzegovina. That would include at least the history of the NDH, the

18 independent state of Croatia, from World War II.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You were making a correction to the

20 translation. That's what we usually do not -- if you think that there's

21 a problem, you can tell us and then it will be verified. But it's not

22 for you to correct our translators. If you have some concerns in that

23 respect, you may raise that, and then it will be reviewed on the basis of

24 the audio, so we'll then know what you said how it was translated. But

25 it is not for you to correct them. Yes? But if there's any concern,

Page 41968

1 please do not hesitate to bring it to our attention.

2 Please proceed.

3 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

4 Q. Could we look at page 12 of your report in B/C/S, and page 9, the

5 middle of the second paragraph, where you express a methodological

6 objection to the report of Professor Donia, saying:

7 "That is why it is surprising that the author of this report uses

8 Muslim press reports from the war in Sarajevo and taking headlines from

9 Muslim newspapers as a source of information about the war without

10 comparing and cross-referencing these reports with those carried by, for

11 example, the Serbian or Croatian press."

12 Very briefly, Professor, in scientific practice and in historical

13 analysis, what is the scope, the potential and the quality of sources

14 such as newspapers of one of the warring parties?

15 A. For historians, press reports are a precious source, a valuable

16 source to establish what happened, but they are much more important as a

17 source of information about editorial policy and the political position

18 of a given newspaper. In that sense, historians are very cautious in

19 determining facts and events based on the press. The press is primarily

20 a source of the political position of a newspaper or a television studio.

21 When you have a war in which several parties are involved and you

22 see a headline from a newspaper Chetniks -- Sarajevo is targeted by

23 Chetniks, or in -- is in the cross-hairs of the Chetniks, "Chetniks"

24 being a very pejorative term, then it is very important to compare it to

25 the Serbian and Croatian press. Wherever you have a war, you have war

Page 41969

1 propaganda. That's why using such sources is methodologically very

2 questionable.

3 Q. On the same page in the second paragraph from the bottom in

4 English you say, continuing to elaborate these objections to the report

5 by Professor Donia:

6 "The author also establishes the course of events in the former

7 Yugoslavia on the basis of published analyses and reports of the American

8 Central Intelligence Agency ... and elsewhere without comparing them with

9 data from other sources."

10 Why do you want to emphasise this particular objection in your

11 report?

12 A. To this day, we continue to use materials from the CIA, but we

13 all know what the CIA is. Quite simply, it is necessary to show

14 methodological caution when using sources of such provenance. Of course,

15 we can use them. There are publications that are very valuable and

16 important among them, but there is a lack of sufficient caution here.

17 The CIA, the US, and NATO got involved in this conflict, and they were a

18 party to the war.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you the following question.

20 Have you considered -- because we're interested in what you're

21 telling us. In cross-referencing where Mr. Donia uses reports which you

22 say are one-sided, have you tried -- have you verified whether other

23 sources deal with the same matter and have you considered to bring that

24 to our attention? Because saying that Mr. Donia is wrong is one thing,

25 but to give us the full picture by making that cross-reference and say,

Page 41970

1 Well, what you consider to be propaganda on the one side, there's other

2 information. Have you considered to do that so that we would have a more

3 complete picture of what you say Mr. Donia is describing in a one-sided

4 way?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I have done that. Precisely

6 in this report. Specific examples are battles in the centre of Sarajevo

7 in 1992. The author described it only on one page, and I provided other

8 sources. And the fighting -- the massacre in Pofalici. There also I

9 provided Serbian sources where I called it a massacre of civilians more

10 cautiously. So comparing sources, if I understood your question.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I've seen examples. But have you

12 systematically done the same so as to give us the full picture on the

13 whole of the report of Dr. Donia?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My task was to review this report.

15 Had I tried to create a comprehensive picture as to how events should be

16 interpreted, that would have constituted a separate monograph. So in my

17 report, I gave proof concerning matters that are not contained in the

18 report. Therefore, the picture that I am portraying has to be a

19 fragmentary one by definition. I did not attempt to provide a

20 comprehensive picture of what happened. I am reviewing, criticizing,

21 Professor Donia and Professor Treanor, so this mosaic which is

22 incomplete, I am adding some tiles that would provide a more

23 comprehensive picture in terms of what had happened in Bosnia and

24 Herzegovina.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I understand that in the context of the task

Page 41971

1 that was given to you by the Defence.

2 Please proceed, Mr. Stojanovic.

3 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

4 Q. Professor, now let us move on to page 23 in B/C/S of your report.

5 And it's page 17, the second paragraph from the bottom, in English.

6 As you analyse Professor Donia's reports in his chapter 2 that is

7 entitled: The transformation of the JNA, you say:

8 "The actions of the JNA were forced. Rather, the JNA was

9 therefore forced to act, and this can be said not only of its actions in

10 Bosnia and Herzegovina, but also the actions of the VRS. It was the

11 secessionists who set events in motion in Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia

12 and Herzegovina."

13 Professor, just briefly, in your view, how is this forced hand

14 shown?

15 A. As far as Sarajevo is concerned, if your barracks are encircled

16 and if they're opening fire at you - and that is, indeed, what happened

17 in Sarajevo - then, of course, they force your hand. So General Kukanjac

18 was seeking a response to something that was a specific challenge. That

19 goes for Croatia as well. So when Robert Donia is writing about JNA

20 attacks against Sarajevo, then it is only proper for him to say that

21 barracks are under siege. Barracks and facilities of the JNA. So you're

22 being attacked. What else can you do? You can either defend yourself or

23 can you surrender.

24 In this report, for example, there is not a single word about the

25 garrison in Varazdin that surrendered and the one in Virovitica, but

Page 41972

1 there are many that defended themselves, that did not surrender. And

2 then there are other matters that we discussed. Of course, I can provide

3 arguments for this later, if necessary.

4 Secessionists were more active, especially if they get support

5 from elsewhere. Then that is the basic precondition for the success of

6 secession. So that was the struggle waged by the American colonies, then

7 the Belgian independence, and, if you will, the former Yugoslavia as the

8 lands were freeing themselves from Ottoman rule. But that is a separate

9 question altogether.

10 Q. Let us please elaborate on this part of your sentence, where you

11 are saying that it's also the actions of the VRS that were forced.

12 A. It is true that Robert Donia referred to that in his report as

13 well; namely, that party-based armies were being set up, the SDA, the

14 HDZ, that they were working on establishing armed units. However, he

15 provides that information ten pages after he had -- presenting

16 incriminating views of Radovan Karadzic, so he is taking things out of

17 context. Chronology and context are very important in this respect.

18 There's a great deal of information involved - I imagine that I

19 don't have had to go into detail now - starting May 1990, when they

20 refused to surrender the weapons of the Territorial Defence, the -- that

21 is something that Donia refers to then. The first steps taken to

22 establish armed forces of the SDA. And so on and so forth. I don't want

23 to go into detail now.

24 Then what happened in western Herzegovina where the Army of the

25 neighbouring republic of Croatia came in. So you have the presentation

Page 41973

1 of Croatian armed forces in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina and that

2 is seemingly not one of the topics dealt with in this report.

3 Q. However, what is a key question, speaking of the point of view of

4 the tasks that were given to you, is as follows: An objective historian

5 writing such a report, would he have to taken into account that context

6 as well when drawing his conclusions?

7 A. Of course. Of course. That's why I said that in this way you

8 can prove anything. That France attacked Germany in 1914, for instance.

9 Or that Israel and only Israel is responsible for the 1967 war. So you

10 have to look at sources and actions of both sides not only one, and you

11 cannot take the actions of the other side out of context even when you do

12 mention them, and that is very rare here.

13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I put one question to the witness, please.

14 Can I take you back to the war in the former Yugoslavia.

15 You were asked by Mr. Stojanovic, you should elaborate on this

16 part of your sentence where you are saying that it's also the actions of

17 the VRS that were forced.

18 You gave a very long answer but I didn't hear anything about how

19 the VRS was forced into action. Can you explain that briefly, please.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, very gladly.

21 The VRS was established in May 1992. It's the 12th of May that

22 is referred to. At that moment in Bosnia-Herzegovina, there was a --

23 already a war that was under way. That is to say, barracks were being

24 attacked as Donia himself says. In the beginning of 1992 there were

25 conflicts already. However, it was the worst in April and in May. I

Page 41974

1 provided that conversation between General Adzic and Alija Izetbegovic.

2 Artillery attacks, mortar attacks at the centre of the 2nd Military

3 District on the 2nd of May in Sarajevo. Then also it is well-known that

4 in the month of April the Green Berets and the Patriotic League, these

5 are party armies of the SDA, they grow into the Territorial Defence and

6 later on this is going to become the Army of the BH. I repeat, regular

7 troops of the Republic of Croatia enter the territory of

8 Bosnia-Herzegovina in Sijekovac, near Bosanski Brod, in May 1992. Serb

9 civilians were slaughtered and all of that preceded the establishment of

10 the VRS. So what were the Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina supposed to do

11 then?

12 There's another thing that I did not mention. Then there is the

13 creation of the Croat party army as well.

14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Again, a very long answer, but you are not really

15 focussing on what you have written in your report. "Actions of the VRS

16 were forced." Not the -- the foundation of the VRS, according to your

17 report, but actions of the VRS. Which kinds of actions and how were they

18 forced? This was the question of Mr. Stojanovic. You really should

19 focus on questions.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure that I quite

21 understand your question. I spoke about the moment when the VRS was

22 established. That is to say, their hand was forced there. If you're

23 asking me about the actions that followed, on the one hand, you have

24 secessionists that are referred to in this sentence --

25 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Sorry to interrupt you again. I'm referring to

Page 41975

1 it the paragraph we see on the screen: "The JNA was therefore forced to

2 act ... but also the actions the VRS ..."

3 What does that mean? It stands alone and I don't know the

4 context, and Mr. Stojanovic asked you to elaborate about this short

5 sentence.

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A very brief answer. This is the

7 Army of Republika Srpska. There is a war going on. There are adversary

8 armies that are armed. You have two possibilities. You can either

9 surrender or defend yourself.

10 The creation of party-based armies of the Muslims and Croats

11 preceded the establishment of the Army of Republika Srpska. In my view,

12 that is an answer to your question.

13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.

14 Mr. Stojanovic.

15 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. Professor, I'll go back to that part that you mentioned, the part

17 of Professor Donia's report. And in that context, can we look at page 79

18 in B/C/S, your report. It is page 58, the third paragraph from the

19 bottom in the English version.

20 You give an example here of Professor Donia mentioning the

21 suffering of the Serbs in the Muslim part of Sarajevo, and you quote a

22 sentence of his:

23 "The lot of those Serbs had also become one of the most

24 controversial aspects of the siege."

25 And then you say:

Page 41976

1 "Of course, when they declared that the civil, ethnic war in

2 Sarajevo was a battle between good and evil, the persecution of Serbs had

3 to become controversial ..."

4 Question -- my question: Methodologically speaking, as you were

5 objecting to Professor Donia, why did you find it necessary to accentuate

6 this; namely, that when he mentions the fate of the Serbs in Sarajevo, he

7 says that that is the most controversial aspect of the siege, one of the

8 most controversial aspects of the siege?

9 A. This was taken from Donia's book, Sarajevo. It's actually not

10 even contained in the report that was submitted to this Court. This

11 sentence is not there either. So I said that in his monograph, the

12 author does have that one single sentence where he refers to Serb victims

13 in Sarajevo. And then there is this sentence about the battle of

14 Pofalici, which is again from his book, Sarajevo. It's not from his

15 report. In my view, to put it very mildly, it is very controversial, to

16 say the least, to write about the war in Sarajevo without any reference

17 to Serb victims, and that is exactly was done in this report. It is

18 shocking. This is a quotation from the author's book and it is

19 controversial.

20 Let me not repeat what I wrote here, but if we take as a point of

21 departure that the war in Sarajevo is a war between good and evil, and

22 that the Serbs are evil and the others are the good ones, then perhaps

23 that is part of the answer to His Honour's question. Then you have what

24 happened in Pofalici and then the VRS took action. I don't need to

25 repeat this. In Pofalici, there was a showdown with Serb nationalists.

Page 41977

1 That's what Donia says in his book. You should at least mention the

2 civilian victims in Pofalici. What do Serb sources say about that?

3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I'm not quite sure I understand your explanation.

4 Are you referring to a book published by Mr. Donia or his report provided

5 to the Court?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These quotations, these two

7 sentences that were read out are from the book. It's a monograph

8 entitled: Sarajevo, written by Robert Donia. And it's only there that

9 he mentions the fate of these Serbs. In the report that was submitted to

10 the Court here, there is no mention of that. The private prisons for

11 Serbs. No mention of that.

12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.

13 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. Could we now take a look at page 83 in B/C/S - the B/C/S version

15 of your report, Professor - and that is page 61, second paragraph.

16 Underneath the heading, you quote Michael Rose, the commander of

17 UNPROFOR, where he said:

18 "By mid-1994, the Bosnian government undoubtedly stopped

19 supporting the UN peace efforts, believing that a cease-fire could turn

20 into a permanent freeze of the lines of conflict, which would then result

21 in an unfair division of the country."

22 Let me not read on. I will end with the following sentence:

23 "The Bosnian army had an additional goal, to draw the UN and NATO

24 into a land war."

25 Since this is a quotation from Mr. Rose's book, this is what I

Page 41978

1 have to ask you: As you studied developments in Bosnia-Herzegovina,

2 specifically in Sarajevo, did you find that these conclusions of Mr. Rose

3 were right, or, as an objective historian, could one come to a different

4 conclusion?

5 A. General Michael Rose is not the only one to have presented such a

6 view. In his memoirs, he keeps repeating it. He is very critical of the

7 Serb side as well. However, he is also convinced that in 1994, the

8 Presidency - Alija Izetbegovic and his associates - were trying to make

9 the US and NATO intervene. And bearing that goal in mind, they are

10 prepared to expose their own citizens to suffering. In the Islamic

11 Declaration of Alija Izetbegovic, which was reprinted in 1990, there is

12 that horrifying sentence that says a people who are asleep have to be

13 awakened with blows, and he is heralding an era of suffering for his own

14 people. That is almost verbatim what he says. I quoted it in my report.

15 It is horrifying and, of course, it is up to the historians of Sarajevo,

16 among others, to show what it was that happened there.

17 Q. Professor, finally, I would like to us look at page 87 of the

18 B/C/S version of your report --

19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Stojanovic, before we do that, I have one

20 question with respect to the footnote 165 -- no, sorry, I mixed up two

21 matters. I withdraw, and please continue.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, perhaps I would have a question.

23 You said, Witness, that General Rose was also very critical about

24 the Serbs. Where is that exactly to be found in your report?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, you know what? In the report

Page 41979

1 that I analysed, there is ample criticism of the Serbian side and you

2 will find quite --

3 JUDGE ORIE: Would you please answer my question.

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My task, my assignment was to

5 critique the text of Robert Donia and Patrick Treanor.

6 JUDGE ORIE: You apparently are explaining something. Do I have

7 to understand that you have not dealt with that for the reasons you start

8 explaining without telling us that you haven't dealt with the critical

9 remarks by General Rose in relation to the Serbs? You explained why you

10 left that out. Is that -- or why you didn't think it -- that you

11 needed -- yes. Okay.

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct.

13 JUDGE ORIE: So the simple answer is: I didn't deal with it.

14 And then you can give the reasons or Mr. Stojanovic will ask for the

15 reasons and that's --

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well. I did not include it.

17 And the reason is that this report on 120 pages ...

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

19 Please proceed, Mr. --

20 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]

21 Q. I will go back to page 87 in B/C/S, and page 64, paragraph 3 from

22 the bottom, in the English version of your report.

23 There, Professor, you say:

24 "However, Robert Donia does not mention the

25 Zimmermann-Izetbegovic episode. On the contrary, he briefly announces,

Page 41980

1 in only one sentence, that the Cutileiro Plan was rejected by all three

2 sides. When discussing the discussion on responsibility, one would

3 expect that this controversial element of the role and responsibility of

4 the USA would at least be mentioned."

5 My question is: Is there any historical information about the

6 position of the US that the BH should not accept the Cutileiro Plan?

7 A. Of course. And I expected the author to mention at least some

8 basic things about it.

9 You have references to the writing of David Binder, a major

10 figure in American journalism, where Zimmermann describes his discussions

11 with Alija Izetbegovic. And he says that Alija Izetbegovic is unhappy

12 with the agreement and Zimmermann's answer is: Why did you sign it then?

13 It was published in the "New York Times" and there is an exact reference.

14 However, in his memoirs later, Zimmermann toned down his role in this

15 discussion.

16 Donia refers to David Binder and he says today, meaning 1993,

17 when Binder published this -- who says, I think we were wrong when we

18 convinced Izetbegovic to reject it. So this discussion about the

19 Cutileiro Plan could be very different. From an objective historian, we

20 would at least expect that he explain to us what really happened there.

21 You have to present the basic things. All the time this basic

22 issue arises of history as a profession and the work of the court where

23 we, both of us, are trying to establish what really happened. But we see

24 that the ability of a historian to help, to be of assistance is rather

25 limited. I suppose that Mr. Donia did his best.

Page 41981

1 Q. In view of this answer, do you as a historian believe that in a

2 report such as the one authored by Mr. Donia, there should also be a

3 discussion of the consequences of rejecting the Cutileiro Plan on the

4 peoples in Bosnia-Herzegovina and the country as such?

5 A. I would even say that this kind of normative issue does not have

6 to be posed by a historian. The question of good fortune or bad fortune

7 depends also on the ideology of the historian. But in his two reports,

8 he actually presented some value judgements, his own positions, his

9 political positions, and that's why it be would a good thing if he had

10 posed that question. What did the rejection of the Cutileiro Plan bring

11 to the Croats, Muslims, and Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina? Considering

12 that later in Dayton Bosnia-Herzegovina was divided into entities after

13 all. This reminds us of the power of the major powers and their

14 statesmen and the mistakes they make which are later paid by the regular

15 citizens. And this is one of the major examples of a mistake made by the

16 USA. I hope -- I believe it was not intentional, that it was an honest

17 mistake.

18 Q. Now that you've made the solemn declaration in this courtroom, do

19 you fully still stand by the report that you made for the needs of the

20 Defence of General Mladic where you analysed the report of Robert Donia?

21 A. Yes.

22 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this completes my

23 direct examination of Professor Kovic. And I should like this exhibit,

24 1D05905, to be MFI'd pending the completion of the cross-examination of

25 Professor Kovic.

Page 41982

1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.

2 THE REGISTRAR: That will be MFI D1369, Your Honours.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Marked for identification.

4 Mr. Kovic, you'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Traldi. You'll

5 find Mr. Traldi to your right. Mr. Traldi is counsel for the

6 Prosecution.

7 Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.

8 Cross-examination by Mr. Traldi:

9 Q. Good morning, sir.

10 A. Good morning.

11 Q. The two reports that we've discussed today are your first

12 published works regarding events in the 1990s in Bosnia-Herzegovina;

13 right?

14 A. Depends on what you understand "published works" to mean.

15 MR. TRALDI: Well, let's have Exhibit D1367.

16 Q. Now, this is the CV you provided to the Defence and reviewed and

17 was admitted into evidence earlier today.

18 Turning to page 2, we see what are described as your principal

19 publications. The first is a book: Disraeli and the Eastern Question.

20 Now Disraeli is Benjamin Disraeli, a 19th-century British prime

21 minister; right?

22 A. That's right.

23 Q. I want to draw your attention to one of these publications:

24 Historiography in Serbia, developments since 1989. Now "historiography"

25 is a term used for two ideas. First, the study of historian's

Page 41983

1 methodology; and second, the body of historical scholarship on a

2 particular subject. Right?

3 A. That's a question of terminology in the Serbian and English

4 languages. When we say "historiography" in Serbian -- I don't want to go

5 into too much detail. History is the science and history is also what

6 happened. Historiography is a synonym for history as a science. That's

7 how it was used here.

8 Q. Which means historiography since 1989 describes developments in

9 the science of history; right?

10 A. I think you are right. That is an overview of what Serbian

11 historians published from 1989 onwards. It's a critical analysis.

12 That's basically the same type of work that I did here. It's a critical

13 analysis of text. I treat historical production as events that I

14 analyse. That's similar to what I've done here.

15 Q. Now, is it right that your CV includes two articles about

16 World War II and the remainder about events in even earlier periods of

17 history?

18 A. That is correct. But I would say that in this CV you have four

19 articles dedicated to Bosnia-Herzegovina in the 19th century. And if you

20 have read my book about Disraeli, you will see that Bosnia-Herzegovina is

21 in the focus of events and what I deal with is the treatment of major

22 powers of Bosnia-Herzegovina. You have to go back to the 19th century to

23 understand what's happening today. You will not understand the policies

24 of the Armenians if you don't understand the genocide against Armenians.

25 The same applies to the situation of Israel, et cetera.

Page 41984

1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, I was desperately trying to find it on

2 the present page. But you took us to page 4 of the CV where I

3 find historiography --

4 MR. TRALDI: I have it on page 3.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, it's not here.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but not on page 2. If you would always take us

7 to the page you're referring to.

8 MR. TRALDI: Thank you, Mr. President.

9 Q. Now, sir, it's right, then, now that we've gone through it, that

10 these two reports are your first published works directly dealing with

11 events that occurred in the 1990s in the former Yugoslavia; right?

12 A. Yes, you could say that. The war in Bosnia from 1992 through

13 1995.

14 Q. Now before I get into the topics you discussed on direct

15 examination, I have a couple of questions about other parts of your

16 report.

17 On page 51 of your Donia report, that is your report responding

18 to expert Donia, you write:

19 "The suffering of civilians of all ethnic groups in Sarajevo

20 cannot be denied or justified."

21 Would you agree that in your report and your testimony this

22 morning you focus on the suffering of Serb civilians in Muslim-controlled

23 Sarajevo?

24 A. Yes. And if you allow me to explain, I can tell you for what

25 reason --

Page 41985

1 Q. Sir --

2 A. -- that is missing here.

3 Q. And you've given that explanation on direct.

4 A. Mm-hm.

5 Q. In what ways did you intend to convey in that sentence that

6 Muslim civilians in the city of Sarajevo suffered during the war?

7 A. You have quite enough information about that in the report of

8 Robert Donia that I analysed, which I reviewed. He avoids mentioning

9 Serbian victims as if some victims had a value and others did not.

10 Q. Should I take it, then, that you avoid mentioning Muslim victims

11 because you do not challenge Dr. Donia's description of what happened to

12 Muslim civilians inside the confrontation lines?

13 A. What I do challenge I mentioned in my report. I challenge it in

14 many ways that we've already discussed, but I'm not challenging the

15 suffering of Muslim civilians in Sarajevo or elsewhere in

16 Bosnia-Herzegovina. That was not job. My job was to make a critical

17 analysis of the text that I received. I have a lot of respect for

18 everybody's suffering.

19 Q. Do you challenge that Muslim civilians inside the confrontation

20 lines were terrorised by shelling and sniping?

21 A. You mentioned terrorise. That's a term used in the indictment.

22 And I believe that is wrong. And I explained why what happened in

23 Sarajevo happened. The purpose was not to terrorise. The purpose was to

24 maintain the military personnel of the Muslims, the armed force of the

25 BH, and there was an obvious choice to divide the city. The purpose was

Page 41986

1 not to terrorise. The victimisation was from indiscriminate shelling and

2 sniping. But there was sniping also against Serbs who lived in Dobrinje,

3 Nedzarici, Ilidza, and that is missing in Donia's report.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: I have a question for the gentleman.

5 You say the purpose was not to terrorise. My question to you is:

6 What was the effect?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Like in all wars, people suffer,

8 people are victimized. There was terror also against the Serbs. I

9 repeat, I critiqued the texts that were handed to me. If --

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry, I'm not asking you about the critiquing the

11 texts. I was just asking you what the effect was. You have told us

12 there was terror, so the effect was terrorising. Thank you so much.

13 MR. TRALDI:

14 Q. Now, you said a moment ago, as you say in your Donia report at

15 page 62, that you believe the purpose was to maintain the military

16 personnel of the Muslims, and you explain in the report, in a blockade.

17 Now, if you blockade the urban core of a city, everyone in that

18 urban core is stuck in there; right?

19 A. Could you please show me my report on my screen? I still see

20 only my CV. It would be easier for me to follow your question.

21 Let me go back, if I may, to the previous question. I did not

22 claim that terror was the aim. The aim was to keep the enemy personnel.

23 Even the issue of blockade is disputable. Look at the maps. All the

24 maps showing combat positions in Bosnia-Herzegovina including Sarajevo,

25 maps you can find on the Internet, you will see that Sarajevo is always

Page 41987

1 connected to its hinterland. All maps that were not made in Banja Luka,

2 you will see that Sarajevo is linked to its hinterland. It's not the

3 same as Srebrenica and Zepa. It's an open blockade. Yes, the Serbs

4 tried to block the eastern part and the Muslims were blocking Ilijas,

5 Hadzici, et cetera. The Muslim part of Sarajevo goes into that Serb

6 territory. If this Serbian part was also going into Muslim territory

7 ending with Hadzici, we could also treat it as under blockade.

8 MR. TRALDI: Could we have Exhibit P3. And I'll be looking for

9 page 54.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Meanwhile, may I seek -- did I hear you well when

11 you said: There was terror also against the Serbs. That's what you

12 said?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If we are talking about terror

14 against Muslims, then -- if we are using that term, then we should

15 certainly be talking also about terror against the Serbs. That, in my

16 opinion, would be logical.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's not what you said. You said:

18 "Like in all wars, people suffer, people are victimized. There

19 was terror also against the Serbs."

20 That's not: If you talk about terror against Muslims, then you

21 should talk about terror against Serbs as well. You said:

22 "There was also terror against Serbs."

23 It -- we -- I heard you well, or at least I heard the translation

24 well when you said that.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you for that question. In

Page 41988

1 fact, you helped me clarify my position.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I didn't ask to you do that.

3 But please proceed.

4 MR. TRALDI: Could we zoom in on the centre left part of this

5 map. On the left circle.

6 Q. Now, sir, this is an SRK military map. We see red and blue

7 lines. And we see in blue in what represents the urban part of Sarajevo

8 1K, and then we see the abbreviations for different SRK units ringing it.

9 That urban part of Sarajevo is ringed by red lines for VRS

10 forces; right?

11 A. Yes, yes. But please pay attention to the direction towards

12 Butmir, Igman, and Bjelasnica, and further towards the 4th Corps of the

13 BH army that can't be seen here, and further towards Konjic, Mostar, and

14 so on.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, I'm looking at the clock. I think it's

16 time for a break.

17 MR. TRALDI: I agree. Thank you, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE ORIE: And perhaps this Chamber has heard a lot of evidence

19 about where what troops were around Sarajevo, in Sarajevo, and this

20 Chamber has also heard a lot of evidence that some people consider this

21 to be a siege or an encirclement whereas others describe it in other

22 terms. Now, the Chamber is very much inclined to rely on the facts and

23 we have not heard that much of dispute about the overall position of the

24 troops. Rather, rely on facts on how to qualify them.

25 MR. TRALDI: I take the point, Your Honour. Thank you.

Page 41989

1 JUDGE ORIE: We take a break. We'd like to see you back in

2 20 minutes, Witness.

3 [The witness stands down]

4 JUDGE ORIE: We resume at quarter past 12.00.

5 --- Recess taken at 11.56 a.m.

6 --- On resuming at 12.17 p.m.

7 [The witness takes the stand]

8 JUDGE ORIE: You may proceed, Mr. Traldi.

9 MR. TRALDI: Could we have 65 ter 33442.

10 Q. This is a book titled: "Lessons from Bosnia" by General Michael

11 Rose. You quote this book in your report; right?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And so you would have reviewed it yourself, read it yourself?

14 A. No, that's not the book -- oh, it is. It is "Fighting for

15 Peace," isn't it? Yes, that's the book. I read its Serbian translation.

16 Q. And you would have chosen which portions to include in your

17 report; right?

18 A. I'll tell you specifically, in the Serbian edition it was

19 pages 40 and 41, if my memory serves me well. Of course, in the Serbian

20 version as I have said. You'll see where it is here.

21 MR. TRALDI: If we could have page 25 of this document.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, I do not know how much attention you're

23 going to pay to the book or not, but the witness, I think, has explained

24 already that he has not paid any attention to criticism to the Serb side

25 for the reasons as he explained. And I was about to say to the witness

Page 41990

1 don't worry about that because the author has appeared here as a witness,

2 so we have a lot of information about his views on the matter.

3 Please keep this in the back of your mind. I don't know where

4 you're going, but it may be of some assistance to you.

5 MR. TRALDI: It will, I think. In two instances, I'll be testing

6 the witness's representation of what's in the book. Though that will

7 relate to criticisms of the Serb side, I'm afraid.

8 Q. We read at the start of the last paragraph here, the bottom of

9 the page:

10 "A state in danger of collapse, as Bosnia was in 1992, will

11 initially depend on the presence of UN forces for its survival."

12 Now, you leave this out and you start your quote:

13 By mid-1994, the Bosnian government had undoubtedly ceased to

14 support the peacekeeping efforts of the UN, believing that a cease-fire

15 might turn into a permanent freezing of the conflict line which would

16 then result in an unfair division" - turning to the next page at the

17 top - "of the country. It therefore ordered its army to move to

18 offensive operations to recover territory lost in previous battles with

19 the Serbs, thus bringing it into confrontation with the UN whose job it

20 was to restore peace to the country."

21 And this reference to lost territory you also exclude.

22 Now what I'm putting to you is that your recitation of this

23 paragraph leaves out the information that the VRS had conquered much of

24 the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina; right?

25 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, would you not try to interrupt Mr. Traldi

Page 41991

1 when is he speaking. But apparently there was something of concern to

2 you?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I beg your pardon. Yes, I can no

4 longer see the paragraph. Somehow it disappeared, the paragraph that

5 you're referring to. Is it between pages 8 and 9? I don't see it before

6 my eyes now. I don't see what it was that I omitted.

7 A few moments ago I saw it and now it's no longer there.

8 JUDGE ORIE: We moved from page 8 to page 9, I think. And

9 perhaps, Mr. Traldi, we could go back to page 8 again --

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well.

11 JUDGE ORIE: -- because as far as we are --

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There's no need. I mean, I

13 understand it now.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

15 MR. TRALDI:

16 Q. So the part I'm putting to you you'd left out was that in 1992

17 the Bosnian government was -- and just to make sure I have the words

18 right, was in danger of collapse and dependant on the presence of the UN

19 forces for its survival.

20 Do you feel it's necessary to understand what General Rose is

21 saying in this portion to also have that text?

22 A. Can I see the sentence again? That is to say, page 8 first.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Could we move one page back.

24 MR. TRALDI: That's the start of the bottom paragraph.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well [In English] A state in

Page 41992

1 danger of collapse.

2 [Interpretation] I see the sentence. I don't see what is in

3 dispute there. So:

4 "A state in danger of collapse, as Bosnia was in 1992, would

5 initially depend on the presence of UN forces for its survival."

6 I don't see what your point is. Omitting this sentence, what

7 would that prove, in your opinion? Well, okay. I'll wait for you to say

8 what you had to say, yes.

9 MR. TRALDI:

10 Q. Is it your evidence that can you properly understand

11 General Rose's description here without his information that in 1992,

12 when the war began to sweep across Bosnia and Herzegovina, when the VRS

13 campaign began to sweep across Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Bosnian state

14 was in danger of collapse?

15 A. He does not mention any campaign of the Army of Republika Srpska

16 here at all. I mean, that's not contained in these sentences. So, yes,

17 I confirm that the quotation I provided reflects General Michael Rose's

18 position. There is no mention of the VRS here, as you say. You see,

19 it's not here. It is a state in danger of collapse and that was Bosnia

20 in 1992. It depends on the presence of UN forces for its survival. And

21 the leaders will -- I think that's quite clear. Yes, please go ahead.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Could you simply answer the question. Mr. Traldi

23 asked you whether you think that not including that first sentence, that

24 we would be able to fully understand the position General Rose took in

25 this book in this paragraph.

Page 41993

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The answer is yes, of course.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please proceed.

3 MR. TRALDI:

4 Q. Now you called attention to the VRS not being explicitly

5 mentioned. In your expert opinion as a historian, who was endangering

6 the survival of the Bosnian state in 1992? Was it you, me, ghostbusters?

7 It was the VRS; right?

8 A. Since you're asking me as a historian, then you run the risk of

9 hearing a very lengthy answer to this question, how the war in Bosnia

10 came about. And I've already referred to that in other sources. If you

11 believe that the war started by Serbs, the VRS attacking someone -- yes,

12 please go ahead.

13 Q. Do you understand that this case isn't about who started the war

14 but about crimes committed during it?

15 A. You're putting a different question to you me now. Can we go

16 back to the first question that you put to me and then I can answer them

17 one at a time.

18 So you asked me about, what, the ghostbusters. What was it that

19 you were asking me about it? What do the ghostbusters have to do with

20 this and please could we be serious on this matter?

21 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, you seem to be very upset about the matter.

22 Please remain calm. You're not here to -- just answer the questions and

23 focus on that. Yes?

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, so here's my answer.

25 I'm not upset at all. I just don't see what the ghostbusters

Page 41994

1 have to do with the suffering of people in Herzegovina in 1992.

2 JUDGE ORIE: The question simple was - and let me read it again

3 to you - who started -- no, no, that was -- the last question that was

4 put to you was whether you understand that this case is not about who

5 started the war but that the case is about crimes committed during the

6 war.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please, these are two questions. I

8 read the first one. I was asked, as a historian, who it was that

9 threatened the survival of the Bosnian state in 1992. Then came this

10 second question. Which question would you like me to answer? The second

11 one?

12 JUDGE ORIE: If you would have listened well, you would have

13 known that I put the second question to you. We might go to the first

14 question as well. Could you please answer that second question without

15 starting a debate about what question I did put.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So I understand that crimes are the

17 topic. The reports I read and analysed have to do with who started the

18 war and crimes that were committed. So I'm going back to my task and the

19 topic at hand. And I believe that the reference to the ghostbusters

20 shows who it is that is upset here.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Apparently that upset you very much which even makes

22 you not answer the question. The question is not what your task is here,

23 but whether you understand that this case is not about who started the

24 war. And forget about the ghostbusters for a second. The case is not

25 about who started the war but the case is about crimes committed during

Page 41995

1 the war. Do you understand that?

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Then Mr. Traldi may proceed.

4 Mr. Traldi, perhaps since the witness is apparently concerned

5 about a matter not having been dealt with, although he did not answer the

6 question right away, but could you repeat the previous question without

7 ghostbusters.

8 MR. TRALDI: I take the point, Your Honour.

9 Q. Sir, it was the VRS that was threatening the nascent state of

10 Bosnia's survival in 1992; right?

11 A. You know what? Separatists, secessionists amongst the leadership

12 of the Muslims and Croats in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina took

13 part in the destruction of the state of Yugoslavia. With their

14 paramilitary units, they attacked regular units. That is, the JNA, the

15 regular units of the federal Republic of Yugoslavia. So they jeopardized

16 the existence of Yugoslavia. Then the war in Bosnia ensued. You know

17 what the chronology was.

18 And in addition to that, if you allow me, Croatian troops, troops

19 of the Republic of Croatia were in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina at

20 least from March 1992 until the end of the war.

21 Q. Sir -- sir, I'm --

22 A. Is that perhaps jeopardy --

23 JUDGE ORIE: It seems that you want to say: No, it's not true.

24 Is that what you want to say?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

Page 41996

1 JUDGE ORIE: Well, then tell us and just say: It is not true.

2 And then we'll see what next question of Mr. Traldi will be.

3 Furthermore, Mr. Mladic should refrain from in any way expressing

4 being happy or unhappy with answers.

5 And you should not in any way seek eye contact with the Defence.

6 It's Mr. Traldi who examines you, so please focus on him and on this

7 Chamber.

8 And, Mr. Mladic, if you would also turn in this direction and

9 avoid any inappropriate contact with the public gallery. Mr. Mladic, you

10 know what I'm talking about.

11 Please proceed.

12 MR. TRALDI:

13 Q. Sir, we saw on the next page that a reference to territories that

14 the Bosnian government had lost in battles with the Serbs, you recognise

15 those battles were primarily with the VRS; right?

16 A. That's the next page; right? I can't see that page here. It's

17 page 9, isn't it? May I please see that section?

18 Q. It's at the top of your page, sir.

19 A. Very well. So, yes, the government is ordering an offensive in

20 order to return territories that were --

21 Q. Sir, I'm going to ask you to answer my question. You recognise

22 that those battles in which the territory had been lost, those were

23 battles against the VRS; right? It was the VRS at that took that

24 territory.

25 A. Yes, I am answering. These were battles with the Army of

Page 41997

1 Republika Srpska.

2 Q. You don't mention at any point in either report what happened to

3 the non-Serbs that lived in the territory that the Bosnian government had

4 lost, do you?

5 A. Should I repeat what my task was as an expert witness? Analysing

6 the report of Robert Donia and Patrick Treanor, and there's no reference

7 to that in these reports. We can discuss the general history of the war

8 in Bosnia-Herzegovina but the question is where this is going to take us.

9 Q. Sir, I'm going to stop you --

10 A. I did not therefore write about --

11 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, now you have given the reasons why. You

12 have not answered the question. The question is that you didn't, isn't

13 it?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Please.

16 MR. TRALDI:

17 Q. Turning to page 52, we read General Rose's comment at the top

18 that:

19 During the war the Bosnian Muslims became the main victims of a

20 deliberate and systematic policy of ethnic cleansing and in certain areas

21 extermination. Although all three sides were to some extent guilty of

22 war crimes, genocide as defined by the UN Convention on Genocide did not

23 form part of official Bosnian government policy in the way that it so

24 clearly did with the Serbs.

25 Now what I put to you is you can't understand the part of the

Page 41998

1 text that you quoted without knowing what had happened in these

2 territories that had been lost, the deliberate and systematic policy of

3 ethnic cleansing, extermination, and genocide. That's the truth; right?

4 A. No. As for extermination and the fate of Muslims under the

5 territory that is held in Bosnian Serb hands, that is what Patrick

6 Treanor and Robert Donia write about extensively. That was not the

7 subject of my analysis. My topic was the analysis of their texts and

8 what you referred to just now is something that they deal with

9 extensively in their reports.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kovic, the question was a different one. The

11 question was whether you could understand the portion you quoted from

12 General Rose without taking into account this portion of his book as

13 well. That was the question. Not whether it's true or not, but whether

14 you could understand General Rose's position on the part you quoted

15 without also considering this portion of the book.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. One can understand where

17 I quoted him absolutely. Yes.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

19 MR. TRALDI:

20 Q. Now you talk -- you talked at length this morning about needing

21 to understand the motivations of historical actors. If the Bosnian

22 Presidency had discussed, for instance, the need to resist in peace

23 agreements solidifying and making permanent territorial changes caused by

24 ethnic cleansing and genocide, would that change your opinion as to

25 whether you needed to see this portion to understand the part you've

Page 41999

1 quoted?

2 A. I must admit that I did not understand your question. Could you

3 please put a shorter and simpler question to me. Maybe it's a matter of

4 translation, interpretation.

5 MR. TRALDI: I'll try and be very quick and I'm going to just go

6 to a document, but before I do, I'd ask that an exhibit number be

7 reserved for excerpts from this book. It's been used with a couple of

8 different witnesses now.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.

10 THE REGISTRAR: The number reserved will be P7718, Your Honours.

11 JUDGE ORIE: And that is reserved for excerpts still to be

12 uploaded into e-court of General Rose's book.

13 The witness asked, and I think that it's fair that he has an

14 opportunity to answer the question. The question -- let me see whether I

15 understood it, Mr. Traldi, because it, indeed, was a long question.

16 Do you think that these observations given by General Rose are

17 relevant for understanding why the Bosnian government resisted in peace

18 agreements which would solidify and make permanent territorial changes?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. That motivation of the

20 Bosnian government is in this part that I quoted. Do take a look at what

21 it was that I quoted. It says that they had put up resistance in 1994

22 because they thought that Serbs had taken an enormous area and they

23 wanted to take over that territory. So I quote that. Please take a look

24 at that.

25 MR. TRALDI:

Page 42000

1 Q. Sir --

2 A. I did refer to the motivation of that government there.

3 Q. Let me ask very specifically, the motivation to avoid solidifying

4 the results of ethnic cleansing and genocide, that's not explicitly in

5 the part you quote; right?

6 A. If you mention ethnic cleansing and genocide, it was committed

7 against the Serbs as well in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Perhaps the Serbs

8 wanted to regain some of these territories from which they had been

9 expelled. That would be my answer to your question.

10 So let me repeat. In the quotation that I provided in the book,

11 I refer to the motivation of the government, the Presidency of

12 Alija Izetbegovic, that they want to regain or, rather, take these

13 territories. You can see that. That is contained in that quotation. If

14 that's the question.

15 Q. Now, sir, I see you're returned once again to talking about what

16 had happened to Serbs. Do you contest that ethnic cleansing was

17 committed against Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats?

18 A. No, I'm not contesting that. And I've already said that crimes

19 were committed -- I mean, that's what Michael Rose says as well. There

20 were crimes that were committed by all sides and against all sides in

21 that war. I'm not denying that. But my task was not to write the

22 history of the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina. I repeat.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, it was a simple question without any claim

24 that you should have mentioned that in this question. So there's no need

25 to repeat that again and again. You've answered the question.

Page 42001

1 MR. TRALDI:

2 Q. Do you contest that ethnic cleansing of Bosnian Muslims and

3 Bosnian Croats was committed by, among others, the VRS?

4 A. That was not the subject of my work, and I was not called here to

5 answer that.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the question is now put to you. If can you

7 answer the question, please do so. If you can't answer that question,

8 then please tell us why you cannot answer the question.

9 First of all, that you cannot answer the question; and if asked,

10 why you can't answer the question.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So I can't. Because my task was to

12 analyse the reports of these two experts, not to write the history of

13 ethnic cleansing in parts of Bosnia-Herzegovina. I repeat: One report

14 is dedicated to Sarajevo, and I want to answer questions about Sarajevo.

15 I want to answer questions that have to do with my report and the reports

16 of the two Prosecution experts. We could go into the general history of

17 the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina but that's not why I was called here.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, you are called here to testify and answer

19 questions irrespective of whether you had on your mind that those

20 questions were relevant and should be put to you. The Defence called

21 you. The Prosecution, in cross-examination, can ask whatever relevant

22 questions they think that should be put to you.

23 So it's not for you to decide what the subject matter is. If you

24 don't know certain things, tell us. But don't tell us that you're not

25 here to answer these questions, because you're here to answer all

Page 42002

1 questions that are put to you which are not objected to by the other

2 party and which are considered to be relevant by this Chamber.

3 Please proceed.

4 MR. TRALDI:

5 Q. Now, sir, at page 8 of your report responding to Patrick Treanor,

6 now MFI D1368, you write that Treanor's conclusion summarizes "the road

7 covered by the Bosnian Serbs from the referendum on 9 and 10

8 November 1991 until the end of 1992 when they controlled 70 per cent of

9 the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina and engaged in ethnic cleansing."

10 Do you not express your own view of this conclusion directly in

11 the report. Should I take it from your answers this morning that you do

12 not contest it?

13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojanovic.

14 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I should like to

15 ask the expert to be given this text on the screen so he can see the

16 context. Or maybe we could give him the English version in hard copy.

17 MR. TRALDI: I --

18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, I think it's a fair request.

19 MR. TRALDI: Of course. And I'd given the number. If we could

20 just have page 8 in the English for the witness.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would prefer to see it in

22 Serbian, if possible.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, if you would wait for a second until it

24 appears, then you'll see that the Serb version is there, even without you

25 insisting on it.

Page 42003

1 Please proceed. And we do not even have the English version at

2 this moment.

3 MR. TRALDI: I do, however, have clean copies in both languages

4 of the witness's Treanor report, which I can offer him.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You'll be provided with a hard copy, Witness,

6 so you're always in a position to ...

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I just saw it a moment ago, the

8 Serbian text. It was fine.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, if you have it --

10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It has disappeared from the screen.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: We have on both sides the English version.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. You always -- if there's a B/C/S version, you

14 always have it on your screen, and for your own report you have hard

15 copies with you as well. So that should resolve the problem. Although

16 the hard copies were not shown to the -- Defence has refrained from

17 inspecting them.

18 Please proceed.

19 MR. TRALDI: And I believe it's page 9 in the B/C/S.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Please repeat your question, Mr. Traldi.

21 MR. TRALDI:

22 Q. Now, you referred to paragraph 4 of the Treanor report's

23 conclusion, you say that summarizes stage by stage the road covered by

24 the "Bosnian Serbs from the referendum on 9 and 10 November 1991 until

25 the end of 1992 when they controlled 70 per cent of the territory of

Page 42004

1 Bosnia and Herzegovina and engaged in ethnic cleansing."

2 Should I take it from your answers this morning that you do not

3 contest this conclusion of Mr. Treanor's?

4 A. No. I contest it, and I can explain.

5 Q. Go ahead.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, I don't know whether I found it. What

7 you were reading.

8 MR. TRALDI: Second full paragraph in the English on the

9 right-hand side, Mr. President.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, yes, I see it. Yes, I see it now.

11 Yes, please explain why you do contest.

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the continuation of that

13 paragraph of mine, it's clear why I contest it. Because in this

14 conclusion in the report by Mr. Treanor which describes that path that,

15 quote/unquote, the Bosnian Serbs went, the ethnic cleansing by the other

16 sides is not even mentioned. I called that conclusion absurd.

17 And in paragraph 72 of that report, it is said that the VRS was

18 arming its followers in the autumn of 1991 with complete silence covering

19 the prior arming of the armies of the HDZ and SDA. And I must say that

20 the Defence provided me with reports on -- in hard copy, but I don't know

21 whether I should be concentrating instead on what I see on the screen.

22 MR. TRALDI:

23 Q. Do you contest that, as he says, the Bosnian Serbs engaged in

24 ethnic cleansing during 1992? Yes or no.

25 A. My answer can be only this: The ethnic cleansing was committed

Page 42005

1 in that war by all three sides. And that's also in the paragraph written

2 by Michael Rose, the one that you've read.

3 Q. One of those sides was the Bosnian Serbs; right?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Now, you testified at length this morning about the need to cite

6 sources from all sides. The most authoritative sources to evaluate

7 whether General Mladic intended or planned that ethnic cleansing, those

8 are his own words; right?

9 A. No. And I can say why.

10 Q. Go on.

11 A. You cannot write the history of the events in Bosnia-Herzegovina

12 based on one source. You have to compare it with other sources. I

13 should like Prosecutor, sir, if you had given us notes by Ejub Ganic or

14 Abu Hamza Al-Masri, the Mujahedin who was fighting on the side of the

15 Bosnian Muslims, and then I could answer your question.

16 Q. Sir, I understand that you would rather repeat the names of

17 Muslim figures. What would Abu Hamza Al-Masri's notes tell you about

18 General Mladic's intent?

19 A. In history --

20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mladic, this is --

21 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Excuse me, Your Honour, we did

22 not receive the interpretation of this question and that's what

23 Mr. Mladic was trying to draw our attention to.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Did you receive interpretation of the question?

25 Yes? Yes. That's surprising then that -- but could you please repeat it

Page 42006

1 because apparently Mr. Mladic did not -- neither did you,

2 Mr. Stojanovic.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me, no, what I saw is also

4 not clear, that there are Muslim figures mentioned but not Abu Hamza

5 Al-Masri. The question is really not clear.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Well, whether it's clear or not is a different

7 matter.

8 Could you please repeat the question, Mr. Traldi.

9 MR. TRALDI:

10 Q. What would those Muslim figures' notes tell you about

11 General Mladic's intent?

12 A. In history, there is no action that takes place without some

13 cause. All history of war is the history of action and reaction between

14 warring parties.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Would you answer the question, please. The question

16 is what those comments, those texts, would tell you about the intent of

17 Mr. Mladic. That was the question.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The answer to the question whether

19 the notes of General Mladic are the main source of information about

20 ethnic cleansing. The answer is no because it needs to be compared to

21 other sources. Cross-referencing between sources, just like the Court

22 compares statements and testimony by different witnesses.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You apparently, again, misinterpreted the

24 question.

25 MR. TRALDI:

Page 42007

1 Q. In fact, the key source to cross-reference his statements would

2 have been the precise events on the ground that you say you intentionally

3 excluded from the ambit of your report; right?

4 A. No, I did not do that intentionally, nor any other way.

5 MR. TRALDI: Could I have 65 ter 00994.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, if you want an answers to your

7 questions, next time don't put two questions in one and take them one by

8 one, whether the key sources and then the second issue is whether it was

9 intentionally left out. Because you only got an answer to that last

10 portion of your question.

11 MR. TRALDI: I appreciate that.

12 Q. Sir, would you agree the events on the ground -- the events on

13 the ground would be the key source to cross-reference statements with to

14 determine a historical figure's intent?

15 A. Of course, the events on the ground, yes.

16 MR. TRALDI: Now, this is an article in Nin, an interview with

17 General Mladic titled: "I am just a soldier." If we could turn to page

18 3 in the English and 2 in the B/C/S, and the second column underneath the

19 picture. And I don't believe we have the correct page in the English.

20 Sorry, if we could have page 4 in the English.

21 Q. Now General Mladic has been asked about the reason for the

22 Muslim-Croat war. And he says, starting a few lines in:

23 "We all know who the Turks are. As a matter of fact, these

24 Muslims are not even Turks, they are converts. They have betrayed the

25 Serb people and repressed them for 500 years. That was the worst scum -

Page 42008

1 the Serb people who changed their religion."

2 This is the sort of statement that would assist a historian in

3 evaluating General Mladic's intent and purpose; right?

4 A. Again, I didn't want to interrupt, but I don't see the Serbian

5 version of this text. What is shown here is not the same.

6 In the meantime, I can answer --

7 JUDGE ORIE: We'll find -- if you insist, we'll find it.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Once we've found it, you may answer the

10 question.

11 MR. TRALDI:

12 Q. It begins at the bottom of the first column but you can see in

13 the third line below the picture, I mentioned the words "500 years" that

14 are part of what I'd read out.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Could we move a little bit further to the left on

16 the picture so that we have ...

17 Yes, have you found it?

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Would you then please answer the question.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Again, I'm answering as a

21 historian. That's why I'm here. You will find similar statements on the

22 side waging war against the Serbs. I mentioned a couple of names.

23 There's no need to repeat them. As a historian, I'm telling you you have

24 to compare.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, I'm stopping you again. Would you please

Page 42009

1 answer the question as it was put to you.

2 Mr. Traldi, perhaps you repeat the question.

3 MR. TRALDI:

4 Q. This is the sort of statement that would assist a historian in

5 evaluating General Mladic's intent and purpose; right?

6 A. In war, that is called war propaganda. What was stated in an

7 interview to a publication called Nin is proof of nothing that happened

8 on the ground.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Witness --

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- our people often say things that

11 don't mean -- unfortunately, especially in such circumstances. Words are

12 one thing. Actions are another.

13 JUDGE ORIE: So your simple answer is this does not assist in

14 understanding the intents of Mr. Mladic. Is that your answer?

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This could be one of the sources.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Why don't you answer the question then

17 directly in that sense instead of taking us to all kind of reasoning.

18 Whereas we expect, first of all, an answer to the question. So now you

19 say this may be a source to better understand the intent of Mr. Mladic.

20 Next question, please.

21 MR. TRALDI: I tender this interview.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.

23 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P7719, Your Honours.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.

25 MR. TRALDI: Can we have P6647.

Page 42010

1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mladic, no speaking aloud. And this is the last

2 warning. You know what will happen if you continue.

3 [Defence counsel confer]

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Traldi, I missed out the 65 ter number of

5 P7719.

6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It was 65 ter 994.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

8 JUDGE ORIE: And we're still waiting for the English version of

9 the document you called. Yes, there we are.

10 MR. TRALDI: Now if we could go to the fifth paragraph here.

11 Q. This is a set of guide-lines for the work of the

12 Sarajevo-Romanija Corps's organ for legal, morale, and religious affairs

13 dated the 2nd of December, 1994, and authored by Luka Dragicevic. In

14 that fifth paragraph, he writes:

15 "Yes, we are genetically stronger, better, more handsome, and

16 cleverer. Try to remember how many Muslims there were among the top ten

17 pupils, students or soldiers. Only a few. Why? Because they are

18 Poturice, and only the weakest of the Serbs became Poturice."

19 Now what we see here is the dissemination of General Mladic's

20 attitude as expressed in that earlier interview through the organ for

21 morale to the troops in the VRS; right?

22 A. My answer has to be the same as the answer to what Robert Donia

23 said. This is only part of the history of the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

24 This is only one fragment.

25 Q. Sir --

Page 42011

1 A. We can talk --

2 Q. This is the fragment that you're currently being asked about.

3 Are you able to answer the question?

4 A. Yes. This is only part of all the facts about the civil war in

5 Bosnia-Herzegovina.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kovic, it was not put to you that this is the

7 whole of the history. The question was put to you whether this

8 corresponds with what we just saw, what was reported as what Mr. Mladic

9 said in an interview. That's the question.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think I've answered that

11 question.

12 JUDGE ORIE: No, you have not. And if you consistently continue

13 not to answer the questions, then we have to think about how to deal with

14 your testimony. Because you're consistently not answering the questions.

15 You say, This is not the whole history of the war. That wasn't the

16 question. The question was whether what is written down in this

17 paragraph which was read to you, whether that corresponds with what we

18 just saw as a published answer by Mr. Mladic in a newspaper or at least

19 in a -- in a publication.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well. As a historian, I

21 can -- I have to ask you who signed this document? Where does it come

22 from? What is the source for this document?

23 MR. TRALDI:

24 Q. Sir -- sir --

25 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, you're not here -- you're here to answer

Page 42012

1 questions. The authenticity of this document is not something which is

2 discussed at this moment.

3 You're just -- a portion was read to you and the question is

4 whether that corresponds, as far as the content is concerned, with what

5 we saw a minute ago, as what was published as an interview with

6 Mr. Mladic.

7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And in addition to that at the beginning of the

8 question --

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: At the beginning of the question Mr. Traldi put

11 to you, he explained exactly what it is, what kind of document, who

12 signed it, who authored it, and where it came from. If you would have

13 listened to his question, you wouldn't have asked this again.

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You know what? I'm trying to

15 follow what's going on here and find this passage. I cannot find it so

16 quickly. I see that what's written here is: Milenko Perendija,

17 information and guide-lines. I listened --

18 MR. TRALDI:

19 Q. Sir -- sir --

20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Listen to the question. Just listen to the

21 questions. Nothing else.

22 MR. TRALDI:

23 Q. Look at the fifth paragraph, fifth full paragraph, beginning in

24 the second full sentence you'll see the portion I read. Does it

25 correspond to the opinion General Mladic expressed in the interview we

Page 42013

1 saw that the worst scum was Serbs who had changed their religion and

2 become Bosnian Muslims, yes or no?

3 A. No. No.

4 Q. Now, Poturice refers to Serbs who changed their religion and

5 became Muslims; right?

6 A. Yes, that's a derogatory term. And I can explain if you wish.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Microphone not activated]

8 MR. TRALDI:

9 Q. And you refused to agree that the statement that they were the

10 weakest of the Serbs, that Serbs are stronger, better, more handsome, and

11 cleverer corresponds to the view expressed by General Mladic; is that

12 right?

13 A. May I just ask who the author of this text is?

14 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, Witness, that's not an issue at this

15 moment. This is a document which is -- is an exhibit number which is

16 admitted into evidence, and if there would be anyone -- first of all, it

17 has been explained to you. You're advised not to put such questions

18 again if it was explained to you, but you nevertheless do it again.

19 Could you please focus on the question.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, there's not a

21 cause-and-effect relationship, not necessarily.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Also that wasn't asked. But if you continue to give

23 answers to questions that were not put to you -- the only question is

24 whether they correspond as far as the content is concerned. That's the

25 question. Not whether the one followed the one, or the other followed

Page 42014

1 the one, causal relationships, none of that. Does the content of this

2 portion read to you correspond with what was read to you as what

3 Mr. Mladic would have said during an interview?

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There is a certain similarity. You

5 don't need a historian to tell you that.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

7 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, I see we're close to the time for the

8 break. I'm about to turn to a new topic. In view of the length of any

9 individual question, I'd suggest for continuity we take the break now.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Then we take the break now. Witness, we'd like to

11 see you back in 20 minutes from now. You may follow the usher.

12 [The witness stands down]

13 JUDGE ORIE: We will resume at 25 minutes to 2.00.

14 --- Recess taken at 1.12 p.m.

15 --- On resuming at 1.35 p.m.

16 [The witness takes the stand]

17 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, may I remind you that you really should

18 focus on answering the questions. The Defence has called you as a

19 witness, as an expert witness. That means that you're exposed to

20 cross-examination by the Prosecution. If you have concerns about the

21 Prosecution taking matters out of balance, then Mr. Stojanovic later has

22 an opportunity in re-examination to strike that balance again. Most of

23 the questions are not to strike the final historical balance but are very

24 simple ones, about facts, about your opinion, does the one correspond

25 with the other, yes or no. What that means or what conclusions one

Page 42015

1 should draw about that, as long as that is not asked, just leave it as it

2 is.

3 I'm telling you this because it's important that we do not lose

4 your evidence and this Chamber is not -- there are limits to our patience

5 as far as you answering the questions is concerned. So we expect you to

6 give clear answers to clear questions.

7 Mr. Traldi, you may proceed.

8 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter --

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I beg your pardon. Do I have the

10 right to say something now?

11 JUDGE ORIE: Well, very briefly.

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My expectation was that there would

13 be a discussion of what it was that I had written, what I had worked on.

14 This kind of questions really go very far away from what it was that I

15 was doing, so I must say that I am very focussed.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Then perhaps you were not really prepared

17 sufficiently by the party that was calling. But at this moment it's not

18 a matter of discussion. It's a matter of answering questions that are

19 put to you.

20 Mr. Traldi, your next question, please.

21 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter 07923.

22 Q. As it comes up, you mention regionalisation in your Treanor

23 report, now MFI D1368. The truth is the Bosnian Serbs pursued a policy

24 of regionalisation dictated from the highest levels; right?

25 A. It could be put that way too.

Page 42016

1 MR. TRALDI: Could we have page 5 in English, page 3 in B/C/S at

2 item 5.

3 Q. These are minutes of a meeting of the SDS Executive Board dated

4 the 7th of November, 1991. Item 5, we see reference to a report on

5 regionalisation, and that the former commission should prepare a

6 blueprint for the organisation of the regions and the manner of

7 functioning of their local authorities, and that conditions should be

8 created which would allow the observance of the principle that every

9 region should include and incorporate the national and territorial

10 treasures. This is one example of the policy of regionalisation being

11 controlled from the highest levels of the SDS; right?

12 A. Yes. But it's November 1991. That should be borne in mind as

13 well. That is a particular historical moment.

14 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter 03632.

15 Q. Now, these are the minutes of the SAO Romanija Assembly Session

16 held on the 11th of December, 1991, in Pale. We see in the introduction

17 that the prime minister designate is D. Blagojevic. Now turning to

18 page 5 in English, 4 in B/C/S, in the last paragraph, we see

19 Drago Blagojevic speak. And he says:

20 "This Assembly fully supports the SDS and its personnel policies,

21 as well as the Main Board of the SDS and the Assembly of the Serbian

22 People in BH."

23 This is a reflection of this SAO's support for the

24 Central Bosnian Serb authorities; right?

25 A. Should I answer the question? Yes, yes. This is already

Page 42017

1 December 1991. And the Muslims and Croats expressed themselves in favour

2 of secession and independence in Parliament in spite of the

3 democratically expressed will of the Serbs.

4 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter 02545.

5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could you repeat the number, please.

6 MR. TRALDI: 02545.

7 Q. Now, these are the minutes of the second meeting of the Serb

8 Assembly's ministerial council which was held on the 17th of January,

9 1992. Turning to page 4 in both languages, at the bottom of the page we

10 see a reference to the draft work programme of the ministerial council of

11 the Assembly of the Serbian People of BH. And we read that:

12 "The territory should be organised in such a way as to enlarge

13 the territory of the regions and encompass a larger number of" - turning

14 to the next page in the English only - "inhabitants wherever possible in

15 order to consolidated regions both ethnically and economically."

16 Now, ethnic consolidation was part of the goal of the

17 regionalisation process as we see here; right?

18 A. No. I can answer further, if you wish.

19 Q. Go ahead.

20 A. Ethnic territories -- this is January 1992. Let us not forget

21 the time when this is happening. All three ethnic communities are doing

22 that in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Croats in western Herzegovina had already

23 rounded off their own territories, consolidated their territories. The

24 Muslims and Croats had violated the constitution of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

25 That happened November 1991.

Page 42018

1 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, I'll stop you again. You again and again

2 point at what the others did. The question was about regionalisation as

3 committed -- it doesn't mean -- that question doesn't mean that the

4 others may not have done the same. You do not know what evidence we have

5 for that already. So therefore there's no need to tell that -- what the

6 others did, but just focus on the question. And the question was whether

7 ethnic consolidation was part of the goal of the regionalisation process

8 as we see in this document.

9 Was it or was it not?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it was.

11 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, I tender the last three documents.

12 First, 65 ter 07923.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.

14 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P7720, Your Honours.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted.

16 MR. TRALDI: 65 ter 03632.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.

18 THE REGISTRAR: That's Exhibit P7721.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted.

20 MR. TRALDI: And 65 ter 02545.

21 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P7722, Your Honours.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I waited a second in order to give our

23 transcriber the time to write down all the numbers.

24 P7722 is admitted into evidence.

25 Please proceed.

Page 42019

1 MR. TRALDI: I --

2 JUDGE ORIE: The others -- the other ones -- yes, I think the

3 first one, 7720, was admitted already. And then 7722 is admitted into

4 evidence. And then I think there's still one missing.

5 MR. TRALDI: If I might assist, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

7 MR. TRALDI: It was 65 ter 03632 which when I tendered it was

8 assigned P7721.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Is admitted hereby.

10 Please proceed.

11 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter 03580.

12 Q. Now this is a book by Warren Zimmermann. When you refer to his

13 memoirs in footnote 175 of your report and your testimony this morning,

14 this is the book you're referring to; right?

15 A. Yes, I mentioned the statement he gave to David Binder, and I

16 mentioned this book; I mean, Zimmermann.

17 Q. Turning to page 214. Now, I'm asking you about this in the

18 context of your reference to discussions of dividing Bosnia in 1991. We

19 read here Tudjman -- or Zimmermann says Tudjman told him he had spoken

20 with Milosevic, the Yugoslav army leadership, and the Bosnian Serbs, and

21 "they agreed that the only solution is to divide up Bosnia between Serbia

22 and Croatia."

23 He writes that Tudjman had said he didn't insist on a

24 50/50 division.

25 "Let Milosevic take the larger part. He controls it anyway. We

Page 42020

1 can do with less than 50 per cent. We're willing to leave the Muslims a

2 small area around Sarajevo."

3 You mention Zimmermann in the context of dividing Bosnia. Why do

4 you not refer to this part of his book?

5 A. Because my report would not be 90 pages long. It has to do with

6 the report on Professor Donia's report. It would be 200 pages long or

7 190 pages long. It doesn't say anything if it's is not compared to the

8 other ones.

9 Now did Tudjman say this? I assume that that's what he said to

10 Zimmermann, although that's not what you said just now. Now, did he

11 really say that to Zimmerman? Did Tudjman really talk to Milosevic about

12 that? Was it 50/50, was it --

13 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, I'll stop you again. You have given an

14 answer to the question why you have left it out. You were not invited to

15 further comment on the truth of what Mr. Zimmermann wrote.

16 Please proceed.

17 MR. TRALDI:

18 Q. Turning to page 220, we see Zimmermann's reference to the Lisbon

19 negotiations which you discussed at the bottom. And then turning to

20 page 221, at the top, we see his description of discussions with Karadzic

21 in late February 1992, then scrolling down, that Karadzic was embarked on

22 what he calls a talk-fight strategy to play out the negotiations to get a

23 veto over independence and then threaten war if independence were carried

24 through. He says Karadzic and Milosevic had a common bottom line, a

25 division of Bosnia, leaving the Serbs in control of two-thirds of it.

Page 42021

1 These portions of Zimmermann's discussion of the Lisbon

2 negotiations were also all missing from your report; right?

3 A. Yes. And I can explain why.

4 Q. Go ahead.

5 A. It's barely relevant. Zimmermann, because of his support to

6 Alija Izetbegovic to reject the plan, has an unclear conscience. This is

7 interesting, this statement, it is noteworthy, but it doesn't prove a

8 thing.

9 Q. Turning to the top of the next page, we read that Izetbegovic had

10 heard about Karadzic's collusion with the Croats and was furious.

11 And turning back to the bottom of the previous page --

12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, I have some concerns about your

13 reference to page numbers. I think we're now at 221. Is that ...

14 MR. TRALDI: We --

15 JUDGE ORIE: In e-court.

16 MR. TRALDI: We'd gone to it and had now moved back to 220, I

17 think.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. What we see on the screen now is 221 in

19 e-court.

20 MR. TRALDI: Okay. I appreciate the Registrar sensing what I was

21 looking for then.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's move on.

23 MR. TRALDI:

24 Q. At the bottom of the page, we read that:

25 "The Bosnian Serb leader met a day later with one of Tudjman's" -

Page 42022

1 turning to the next page - "closest aides to discuss the details of the

2 division of Bosnia."

3 So you also don't mention, in quoting Zimmermann, about the

4 Lisbon negotiations that part of Izetbegovic's reaction had been to

5 Karadzic seeking a separate agreement with the Croats; right?

6 A. Yes. I do not mention that in my text and I can explain why I

7 don't.

8 Q. Is it again that you consider Zimmermann barely relevant except

9 where he agrees with you?

10 A. No. He disagrees with himself. In my footnote, you have the

11 statement that he gave to David Binder. He said something that was

12 completely different to what is stated here. He opposes himself. And

13 one should deal in detail with the role that he played and, of course,

14 there's the question of his conscience as well.

15 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, again I'd ask that a number be

16 reserved for these excerpts.

17 JUDGE ORIE: A number to be reserved for the excerpts of this

18 book, Mr. Registrar, would be?

19 THE REGISTRAR: Will be P7723, Your Honours.

20 JUDGE ORIE: And that number is reserved for this purpose.

21 MR. TRALDI: Can we have P356. And I'll be looking for page 73

22 in the English and 89 in the B/C/S. Sorry, we don't have B/C/S page, and

23 if I can just check my notes, my ambiguity may have caused that.

24 If we could have 89 in the B/C/S original, not in the transcript.

25 Q. Now we see here General Mladic's notes of a meeting with a

Page 42023

1 delegation from Croatia and Herceg-Bosna on the 26th of October, 1992.

2 Here, on the first page, we see Praljak's remarks. At the bottom,

3 General Mladic records him saying:

4 "We're on a good path to" -- and turning to the next page.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Next page in both languages.

6 MR. TRALDI: Yes.

7 Q. He writes:

8 "... compel Alija to divide Bosnia."

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: The page is not turned.

10 JUDGE ORIE: We don't have it yet in the English.

11 MR. TRALDI:

12 Q. At the bottom of the page, Praljak starts speaking again.

13 Turning to the next page in both languages, in the middle, the

14 third point, Mladic records Praljak say:

15 "It is in our interest that the Muslims get their own canton so

16 they have somewhere to move to."

17 Did you consider relevant in drafting your report that

18 General Mladic also met with Croatian leaders in Bosnia and Herzegovina

19 about dividing the country and moving the Muslims?

20 A. No, I did not mention that, and I did not consider it relevant.

21 And I can explain why.

22 Q. Go on.

23 A. I remind you again of the date. This is December 1992, if I'm

24 not mistaken. At that moment, the warring parties have their war --

25 Q. Sir, just to save time --

Page 42024

1 A. -- objectives.

2 Q. October 1992.

3 A. Very well. October 1992. It's been a while into the war. But

4 Izetbegovic and his associates want a unitarian Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbs

5 and Croats want to divide it. Those are facts. Everybody knows that.

6 One kind of division, in a reasonable way observing the borders of

7 Bosnia-Herzegovina, was tried already with the Cutileiro Plan. That did

8 not work. We know why. We know who prevented it.

9 As a historian, I must say that I'm seeing this text for the

10 first time and I can only take your word for it that it's authentic. I

11 would like to say that as well. So I'm seeing some things for the first

12 time now. I have some reservations and I have to take your word for it,

13 which I don't mind, by the way.

14 So every warring party has its war objective. You could have

15 easily shown me an agreement between Muslims and Croats or the Washington

16 Agreement, but the Judges will interrupt me again, to see what they

17 discussed over there under the aegis of the United States. I mean year

18 1994.

19 MR. TRALDI: Can we have P2003.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, would you also refrain from making comments

21 like you did. Whether you like it or not, if the Judges interrupt you,

22 there's a good reason for that.

23 Please proceed.

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me, which comment do you

25 mean?

Page 42025

1 JUDGE ORIE: "But the Judges will interrupt me again."

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Oh, yes, I see.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Please mind your words.

4 MR. TRALDI: If we zoom in on the left side of the page in B/C/S.

5 Q. These are strategic objectives for the Serbian people in Bosnia

6 and Herzegovina as published in the Official Gazette. These are the war

7 objectives of the Bosnian Serbs that you are referring to; right?

8 A. Yes. This is also discussed in the reports written by Donia and

9 Treanor. That is often mentioned there.

10 Q. These objectives are not discussed in your report -- either of

11 your reports; right?

12 A. That's right. And I can explain why.

13 Q. Go on.

14 A. Because Donia and Treanor have spoken sufficiently and

15 extensively about this. I showed what they did not mention, what is

16 lacking in their reports. That was my task.

17 Q. Should we take it you do not contest any of their evidence about

18 these objectives then?

19 A. As far as I can see, what kind of publication is this? This is

20 the Official Gazette of Republika Srpska. If this is the Official

21 Gazette, this is a formal proclamation of an official document; right?

22 So I would not contest it. You have just shown me number 386. I would

23 like to see the whole of the page and then say yes. But I can say yes,

24 they often use it. This looks like a formal document.

25 So the answer would be yes.

Page 42026

1 MR. TRALDI: If we could just zoom out briefly on the B/C/S.

2 Q. Are you satisfied, sir?

3 A. Yes, yes.

4 MR. TRALDI: Now can we have P7325.

5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: While this comes up, I would like to ask the

6 witness: Have you been aware of these six strategic objectives published

7 in the Official Gazette? Did you know that before?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course. I've already said they

9 are mentioned in the reports that I analysed in great detail.

10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.

11 MR. TRALDI: I am not sure we have the right document. If we

12 could have P7325.

13 Now, this is a document dated 19 May 1992 sent by General Gvero

14 to various corps identified by their JNA numbers and other units.

15 If we could turn to page 2 in both languages.

16 Q. Second paragraph, under the number II, we read:

17 "The state-building Serbian people living on around 65 per cent

18 of the territory and representing around 35 per cent of the population of

19 Bosnia and Herzegovina must fight for a total partition from the Muslim

20 and Croatian people and must create their own state."

21 Now that's a reference to the first of those strategic

22 objectives, ethnic separation; right?

23 A. Yes, that's correct. And I can explain why this is so. It is

24 May 1992, and it's clear. Let me not repeat what I've said already.

25 (redacted)