Christopher Black: The Death of Milosevic and NATO Responsibility

Print Friendly

Ten years since after
The Death of Milosevic and NATO Responsibility

By Christopher Black

On March 11, 2006, President Slobodan Milosevic died in a NATO prison. No
one has been held accountable for his death. In the 10 years since the end
of his lonely struggle to defend himself and his country against the false
charges invented by the NATO powers, the only country to demand a public
inquiry into the circumstances of his death came from Russia when Foreign
Minister, Serge Lavrov, stated that Russia did not accept the Hague
tribunal’s denial of responsibility and demanded that an impartial and
international investigation be conducted. Instead, The NATO tribunal made
its own investigation, known as the Parker Report, and as expected,
exonerated itself from all blame.

But his death cannot lie unexamined, the many questions unanswered, those
responsible unpunished. The world cannot continue to accept the substitution
of war and brutality for peace and diplomacy. It cannot continue to tolerate
governments that have contempt for peace, for humanity, the sovereignty of
nations, the self-determination of peoples, and the rule of law.

The death of Slobodan Milosevic was clearly the only way out of the dilemma
the NATO powers had put themselves in by charging him before the Hague
tribunal. The propaganda against him was of an unprecedented scale. The
trial was played in the press as one of the world’s great dramas, as world
theatre in which an evil man would be made to answer for his crimes. But of
course, there had been no crimes, except those of the NATO alliance, and the
attempt to fabricate a case against him collapsed into farce.

The trial was necessary from NATO’s point of view in order to justify the
aggression against Yugoslavia and the putsch by the DOS forces in Belgrade
supported by NATO, by which democracy in Yugoslavia was finally destroyed
and Serbia reduced to a NATO protectorate under a Quisling regime. His
illegal arrest, by NATO forces in Belgrade, his illegal detention in
Belgrade Central Prison, his illegal rendition to the former Gestapo prison
at Scheveningen, near The Hague, and the show trial that followed, were all
part of the drama played out for the world public, and it could only have
one of two endings, the conviction, or the death, of President Milosevic.

Since the conviction of President Milosevic was clearly not possible after
all the evidence was heard, his death became the only way out for the NATO
powers. His acquittal would have brought down the entire structure of the
propaganda framework of the NATO war machine and the western interests that
use it as their armed fist.

NATO clearly did not expect President Milosevic to defend himself, nor with
such courage and determination. The media coverage of the beginning of the
trial was constant and front page. It was promised that it would be the
trial of the century. Yet soon after it began the media coverage stopped and
the trial was buried in the back pages. Things had gone terribly wrong for
Nato right at the start. The key to the problem is the following statement
of President Milosevic made to the judges of the Tribunal during the trial:

“This is a political trial. What is at issue here is not at all whether I
committed a crime. What is at issue is that certain intentions are ascribed
to me from which consequences are later derived that are beyond the
expertise of any conceivable lawyer. The point here is that the truth about
the events in the former Yugoslavia has to be told here. It is that which is
at issue, not the procedural questions, because I’m not sitting here because
I was accused of a specific crime. I’m sitting here because I am accused of
conducting a policy against the interests of this or another party.”

The prosecution, that is the United States and its allies, had not expected
a real defence of any kind. This is clear from the inept indictments,
confused charges, and the complete failure to bring any evidence that could
withstand even basic scrutiny. The prosecution case fell apart as soon as it
began. But once started, it had to continue. Nato was locked into a box of
its own making. If they dropped the charges, or if he was acquitted, the
political and geostrategic ramifications were enormous. Nato would have to
explain the real reasons for the aggression against Yugoslavia. Its leaders
themselves would face war crimes charges. The loss of prestige cannot be
calculated. President Milosevic would once again be a popular political
figure in the Balkans. The only way out for NATO was to end the trial but
without releasing Milosevic or admitting the truth about the war. This logic
required his death in prison and the abandonment of the trial.

The Parker Report contains facts indicating that, at a minimum, the Nato
Tribunal engaged in conduct that was criminal regarding his treatment and
that conduct resulted in his death. The Tribunal was told time and again
that he was gravely ill with heart problems that needed proper
investigation, treatment and complete rest before engaging in a trial.
However, the Tribunal continually ignored the advice of the doctors and
pushed him to keep going with the trial, knowing full well that the stress
of the trial would certainly kill him.

The Tribunal refused prescribed medical treatment in Russia seemingly for
political reasons and once again put the Tribunal’s interests, whatever they
are, ahead of Milosevic’s health. In other words they deliberately withheld
necessary medical treatment that could have lead to his death. This is a
form of homicide and is manslaughter in the common law jurisdictions.

However, there are several unexplained facts contained in the Parker Report
that need further investigation before ruling out poison or drugs designed
to harm his health: the presence of the drugs rifampicin and droperidol in
his system being the two key ones. No proper investigation was conducted as
to how these drugs could have been introduced into his body. No
consideration was given to their effect. Their presence combined with the
unexplained long delay in getting his body to a medical facility for tests
raises serious questions that need to be answered but which until today
remain unanswered.

The Parker Report, despite its illogical conclusions, exonerating the Nato
tribunal from blame, provides the basis for a call for a public inquiry into
the death of President Milosevic. This is reinforced by the fact that the
Commandant of the UN prison where President Milosevic was held, a Mr.
McFadden, was, according to documents exposed by Wikileaks, supplying
information to the US authorities about Milosevic throughout his detention
and trial, and is further reinforced by the fact that Milosevic wrote a
letter to the Russian Embassy a few days before his death stating that he
believed he was being poisoned. Unfortunately he died before the letter
could be delivered in time for a response.

All these facts taken together demand that a public international inquiry be
held into the entirety of the circumstances of the death of President
Milosevic, not only for his sake and the sake of his widow Mira Markovic and
his son, but for the sake of all of us who face the constant aggressive
actions and propaganda of the NATO powers. Justice requires it.
International peace and security demand it.