International Committee to Defend Slobodan
Milosevic
www.icdsm.org
Subscribe to the
ICDSM email list at
http://www.icdsm.org/maillist.htm
Receive articles posted at www.icdsm.org
Send the link to this text to a friend! If you are receiving this article via e-mail please forward it to a friend.
=================================
Slobodan Milosevic's Cross-Examination of
Croatian President Stjepan Mesic: PART V
Because the transcript of the cross-examination is 150 pages long we have
broken it into 12 easy to read segments. If you wish to read the whole thing
at once go to:
http://www.icdsm.org/more/mesic.htm
=================================
Page 10658
1 JUDGE MAY: Just a moment. Just a moment. The witness has said
2 he's telling the truth. Now, don't misrepresent the evidence. If you've
3 got a question, you can ask it.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think that we differ because of
5 the translation in your transcript, where it says nephew, and he says
6 relative or distant cousin, whereas otherwise there is no difference.
7 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Now, to get back to what you were just saying, that you had no
9 intentions of any kind, Globus, the paper, this is a special edition,
10 November 1, 1999, which says the following:
11 "Tudjman was in Canada, paid a state visit to Canada in 1988 and
12 1989 [As interpreted] -- 1998 and 1999, and dovetailed concepts, first
13 that Croatia had to be independent and autonomous, and so on and so
14 forth. Third, that the Serbs must be brought to the level of a national
15 minority, which meant that Croatia should have been more or less
16 ethnically pure. And fourth, if there are Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina to
17 the extent that they cannot all be expelled to Serbia, all that remains is
18 to carve up Bosnia-Herzegovina, which will ensure pure Croatian regions
19 and certain restructuring, and this would be joined onto an ethnically
20 pure Croatian state." Isn't that right, Mr. Mesic?
21 A. I don't know who said that.
22 Q. This is something that can be read in Globus about a plan that was
23 dovetailed in 1988 and 1989 [As interpreted] in Canada with the Ustasha
24 émigrés. Do you know at all about that?
25 A. I know nothing about that plan whatsoever.
Page 10659
1 Q. All right. Thank you. Now, on the basis of what you were saying
2 a moment ago, is it true and correct that Tudjman considered the
3 territories that belonged to the 1938 banovina, that it should be annexed
4 to Croatia? Is that what he thought? Is that right or not? Annexed.
5 A. He said that that was what Milosevic had proposed.
6 Q. Just a minute. I'm speaking about something else now. I don't
7 want to show you the transcript once again, but you can look at the
8 transcript from that same trial where you testified and the number of the
9 transcript line is 7130. But to avoid having to go into private session,
10 I just want to jog your memory and tell you that you did speak about the
11 subject at that particular time.
12 And just as like a moment ago, when you challenged the fact that
13 Tudjman thought that for Croatia the best solution would be the 1938
14 banovina solution, also from your testimony, on page 7129 and 7130, you
15 said what you said. So tell me now: Is it true that the HDZ party for
16 you was an extremist nationalistic --
17 MR. NICE: If this line of questioning is to be of any value at
18 all --
19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Mr. Nice.
20 MR. NICE: If this is to be of any value at all, the following
21 thing should happen: The Chamber will have to go into private session,
22 not because itself necessarily wants to. It simply that this was
23 protected evidence of another Chamber and we don't have rights to do
24 anything else. Second, the transcript will then have to be examined
25 properly with the witness being in a position to read it and the Chamber
Page 10660
1 being able to see the full context.
2 JUDGE MAY: At the moment I do not wish to go into private
3 session. It cuts up the cross-examination, makes it very difficult for
4 everybody else to follow. If there is a significant point here, no doubt
5 our attention can be drawn to it.
6 MR. NICE: Can I simply also then ask that the accused reminds me,
7 or through the Chamber, of what page he says its was on which the first
8 reference was to be found. He says 7266 but it doesn't match my page
9 numbering.
10 JUDGE MAY: That's the note we have, 7266.
11 Mr. Milosevic, you will have -- if you want to quote from the
12 transcript, if there's any significance in what was said earlier, do you
13 want to quote from the transcript, we have to go into private session.
14 Those are the rules which we have to follow. Now, if we can avoid doing
15 that, we should do so.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. May, but it is not proper
17 and correct that the public should not be able to see this, that
18 Mr. Mesic, for the most part --
19 JUDGE MAY: It doesn't matter about that. It is the Rules which
20 we have to follow. This was private session evidence, therefore it should
21 be dealt with in private session. Now, do you want to ask anything more
22 about that transcript or not?
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. I'll ask him something
24 about -- something else from the transcript in the Dokmanovic trial, where
25 he wasn't a protected witness.
Page 10661
1 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Is it correct that the HDZ is an extremist nationalistic party
3 which introduced a uniform, unilateral way of thought that captured people
4 in this way? Is that what you think? And you expressed words to that
5 effect in the Dokmanovic trial, where you were not a protected witness.
6 The transcript page is 1714 in the testimony against him, and that is
7 where you made a statement to that effect. You said that that was your
8 opinion later on, not straight away, not from the very outset. So when
9 did you come to think that way?
10 JUDGE MAY: Wait a moment. In order that the witness can deal
11 with this properly, have we got a copy of the transcript, Mr. Nice? First
12 of all, have we got a copy of the transcript.
13 MR. NICE: Yes.
14 JUDGE MAY: Secondly, can the witness follow it?
15 MR. NICE: It's in English, I'm afraid, so he probably can't
16 follow it, because his English is not probably at the level to deal with
17 that. But we have a copy for Your Honours if Your Honours haven't seen
18 it.
19 JUDGE MAY: We, we have it here.
20 Mr. Mesic -- I'll deal with it. Mr. Mesic, what is being put to
21 you in the passage which the accused is asking you about is counsel says,
22 counsel Mr. Fila, put: "We read that for you the HDZ is an extremist
23 nationalist party, a hindrance to democracy which introduced a single way
24 of thinking and which robbed the people. Is that what you really meant?"
25 And you replied: To look at this in terms of the period -- time period
Page 10662
Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and English transcripts.
Page 10663
1 involved. "Okay," said witness. "Have you said something like this?"
2 And you replied: "The statement of yours calls for clarification, namely,
3 when the HDZ was established first, when I was its member, when its
4 programme was elaborated, that was a party that was in favour of a
5 multiparty system for democratisation of free society. When the balance
6 of political forces in the HDZ changed, I left the HDZ and I became
7 critical of the policy."
8 So counsel then put: That is to say that this statement,
9 obviously referring to his earlier statement, is from the latter period.
10 And you replied: Yes, from the latter period.
11 Now, you're being asked about the comment that the HDZ was or
12 became an extreme nationalist party, a hindrance to democracy, introducing
13 a single way of thinking. Can you help us as to whether you said that,
14 and if you wish to elaborate on it, do.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When the HDZ was formed, just like
16 the other parties in Croatia, after the socialist model, I wanted to have
17 a multiparty system. That's what I was in favour of, of a contest of
18 opinion of democracy. That's what I wanted. Now, as the threats were
19 coming from Serbia, threats which the accused himself, via his rallies,
20 was sending out to Croatia, and they were coming from Vojvodina, from
21 Serbia, and from Kosovo, the so-called rallies for truth, where it was
22 stated that the people attending the rallies would go as far as Ljubljana
23 and that what they would do was to stop over in Zagreb, topple the
24 government there, and carry on by way of passing. I considered that the
25 HDZ could mobilise in Croatia people for setting up resistance to that
Page 10664
1 kind of policy on the part of Milosevic, and I joined the HDZ because I
2 considered that we would be able to protect the interests of the Republic
3 of Croatia. However, because of the erroneous policy which prevailed
4 later on, or rather, the erroneous policy towards and vis-a-vis
5 Bosnia-Herzegovina, the wrong model of privatisation which was seen and
6 the insufficient functioning of the rule of law in the country, the
7 insufficient functioning of the institutions inherent in the rule of law,
8 I left that policy behind. I stepped down from it, because finally I
9 could still go on being the president of the Sabor parliament. I had to
10 take part in that policy and politics. But as I did not agree with the
11 policies, I left the post of president of parliament and joined the
12 opposition.
13 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Mr. Mesic, you relinquished the post of president of parliament,
15 as you said a moment ago, only after the first quarter of 1994. However,
16 the destructive policy of the HDZ, according to you, began already in
17 March 1991; isn't that so?
18 A. Yes, you're quite right. From your agreement in Karadjordjevo.
19 Q. So you ascribe the destructive policy of the HDZ, you date it to
20 March 1991 and you ascribe it to me. Is that so, Mr. Mesic?
21 A. Well, if you offered the carving up and division of Bosnia, then
22 it is quite true that in part you did take part in the creation of the
23 wrong kind of policy.
24 Q. Well, as you well know, I never offered a division of Bosnia nor
25 was that our policy. And if you believe I did so, then please show me one
Page 10665
1 detail which would be illustrative of that?
2 A. Not only the division of Bosnia. It is sufficient that you paid
3 the army in Bosnia-Herzegovina. It is sufficient to read the book written
4 by General Veljko Kadijevic, the Federal Secretary for National Defence,
5 who speaks precisely of the Virovitica-Karlobag-Karlovac border and that
6 you stood behind that border, Mr. Accused. That same person Kadijevic,
7 the Federal Secretary for National Defence, Blagoje Adzic, General Blagoje
8 Adzic, who was the Chief of Staff of the General Staff of the Yugoslav
9 army, never came to me. They never, ever came to me in the Presidency,
10 although I embodied the Supreme Command. They never came to see me. I
11 insisted -- it was I who insisted on going to see them. They never came
12 to see me. But if you read Boro Jovic and his books and if you read
13 Mamula and his books, if you read Veljko Kadijevic and his books, you will
14 see that the agreements were only and exclusively made with the accused.
15 Q. First of all, that is not correct. I don't know what they say in
16 their books. Mamula retired even before the tensions mounted in Croatia,
17 and later on in Bosnia. But I assume that you are a passionate reader of
18 all these various books. But now tell me, please: As you were referring
19 to the HDZ just now, in 1991 it started acting destructively, so how can
20 you put up with this for a full three years, staying in that destructive
21 party for three years as its executive chief, that is, as president of the
22 Executive Board of the HDZ?
23 A. The point is something else. I was the president of the executive
24 board of the HDZ. Let me tell you -- just a moment. From the 29th of
25 December, 1991 until the 7th of August, 1992. This is the period in which
Page 10666
1 I was at the head of the Executive Board of the HDZ. The point is that as
2 soon as I saw that the policy was not the policy I had advocated, I could
3 have relinquished it. That is true. However, in Croatia, I would have
4 been seen as someone who refused to face the problems Croatia was facing
5 at that moment, and it would have been thought that I had not done enough
6 to correct the things that were going wrong in Croatia. I hoped that with
7 those who thought the same way I did, I could correct the HDZ policy, that
8 we could win. That is why, with other representatives, or rather, with 23
9 MPs of the Croatian parliament, I discussed our leaving the HDZ. This was
10 in 1993. In this way, we could have achieved cohabitation. The
11 opposition would have been the strongest in parliament, and HDZ would have
12 held executive power. Things would have been different had we succeeded.
13 But unfortunately, I was not successful. Only 11 MPs followed me, and we
14 had one vote less than we needed to be the majority in parliament.
15 If you want to make a big change, you need to have a critical mass
16 with you. I thought that 23 MPs in parliament would be sufficient. We
17 did not succeed, but I went over to the opposition. So I cannot pinpoint
18 a date and say up to that date the policy was right; after that date, the
19 policy was wrong. There was a continuity of events in politics. When
20 enough things happen, one responds. My response was to try to contribute,
21 in a positive way, to a better climate and a better policy in Croatia.
22 Q. Very well. That was two years after March 1991, when you say that
23 the destructive policy of the HDZ started. You say that to start with the
24 HDZ was a democratic party and so on. In the HDZ platform, which I assume
25 you contributed to, together with the other leaders of the HDZ, you say
Page 10667
1 that the programme is based, among other things, on the teachings of Ante
2 Starcevic. Let me just remind you what Ante Starcevic said -- or rather,
3 wrote about the Serbs. He called the Serbs -- I don't know if this can be
4 translated. I wouldn't be able to translate it. He called them filthy
5 spawn, horrible slaves, people who were fit for the axe, Austrian dogs,
6 inflated bags?
7 JUDGE MAY: When was this kind of thing written?
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Ante Starcevic wrote, for example,
9 in 1870, because the witness based his programme on that of Ante
10 Starcevic, who wrote --
11 JUDGE MAY: You're saying that. The witness hasn't said it. Help
12 us with Mr. Ante Starcevic, who wrote 130 years ago. Was your programme
13 based on his writings?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] First of all, I did not create the
15 HDZ platform or programme. It had already been adopted when I joined the
16 HDZ. Secondly, the teachings of Ante Starcevic do not consist of
17 particular statements that he made under various circumstances. Ante
18 Starcevic, who is referred to in Croatia as the father of the homeland,
19 advocated the idea that Croatia had to be independent. He struggled for
20 the independence of Croatia from Austria and Hungary. In essence, he was
21 a liberal. On the basis of Croatian state law, he demanded the
22 independence of Croatia. This is the part of his teaching that I find
23 acceptable, an independent republic of Croatia. This is what was taken
24 from Starcevic.
25 It was also mentioned, and the accused does not mention this, that
Page 10668
1 the programme was based on the anti-fascist tradition of the peoples
2 liberation struggle. The accused omitted this on purpose, on the
3 traditions of the anti-fascist struggle. So the ideas were not taken just
4 from one source, but from all sources contributing to a positive role for
5 Croatia and its citizens. That is why this was referred to in the
6 preamble to the programme. If we are to speak of history, the accused
7 should say what Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic wrote. He was a Serbian writer
8 who said that Serbs are all, everyone is a Serb, that the Croats were
9 nothing but Serbs of Catholic faith, so that all this should be Serbia.
10 JUDGE MAY: The Trial Chamber is not assisted by the exchange of
11 abuse, particularly abuse a hundred years ago.
12 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Is it true that the HDZ policy became more radical with time and
14 that elements who found inspiration in the Croatian state during World War
15 II grew stronger? I'm referring to the fascist independent state of
16 Croatia.
17 A. The more attacks were mounted against Croatia and its integrity,
18 more excesses arose, and more and more people referred to the independent
19 state of Croatia. I was against this. I'm still against this policy,
20 because in essence I am an anti-fascist, and those are the ideas I always
21 struggled for.
22 Q. Very well. I asked you about what you said about the HDZ, not
23 about what you say about yourself.
24 A. That's why I left the HDZ.
25 Q. Very well. In any case, I see that as the president of the
* Continued at: http://www.icdsm.org/more/mesic-6.htm
***** Urgent Message from Sloboda (Freedom) Association and the International Committee to Defend Slobodan Milosevic!
The Freedom Association in Belgrade and the ICDSM, based outside Yugoslavia, are the two organizations formed at the request of Slobodan Milosevic to aid in his defense.
Up until now our main work has been threefold. We have publicized the truth about The Hague's phony trial. We have organized research to help President Milosevic expose NATO's lies. And we have initiated legal action in the Dutch and European Courts.
Now our job has increased. The defense phase of the "trial" starts in May 2003. No longer will Mr. Milosevic be limited to cross-examining Hague witnesses. The prosecution will be forced further onto the defensive as victims of NATO's aggression and experts from Yugoslavia and the NATO countries tell what really happened and expose media lies. Moreover, Mr. Milosevic will call leaders, from East and West, some friendly and some hostile to the truth.
The controlled mass media will undoubtedly try to suppress this testimony as they have tried to suppress Mr. Milosevic's cross-examinations. Nevertheless this phase of the "trial" will be the biggest international forum ever to expose NATO's use of racism, violence and lies to attack Yugoslavia.
We urgently need the help of all people who care about what is happening in The Hague. Right now, Nico Steijnen , the Dutch lawyer in the ICDSM, is waging legal battles in the Dutch courts and before the European Court, about which more news soon. These efforts urgently require financial support. We now maintain a small staff of Yugoslav lawyers in Holland, assisting and advising Mr. Milosevic full-time. We need to expand our Dutch facilities, perhaps bringing in a non-Yugoslav attorney full-time. Definitely we must guarantee that we have an office and office manager available at all times, to compile and process evidence and for meetings with witnesses and lawyers and as a base for organizing press conferences.
All this costs money. And for this, we rely on those who want Mr. Milosevic to have the best possible support for attacking NATO's lies.
************
Here's how you can help...
************
* You may contribute by credit card. By the end of September we will have an ICDSM secure server so you can contribute directly on the Internet.
For now, you can contribute by credit card in two ways: *
You can Contribute by Credit Card over the Telephone by calling:
ICDSM office, USA: 1 617 916-1705
SLOBODA (Freedom) Association office, Belgrade: 381 63 279 819
You can
Contribute using PayPal at:
https://www.paypal.com/xclick/business=icdsm%40aol.com
PayPal accepts VISA
and
MasterCard
You can
Contribute by mail to:
ICDSM
831 Beacon St., #295
Newton Centre, MA 02459 (USA)
- OR -
You can Contribute by wire transfer to Sloboda Association
Intermediary:
UBS AG
Zurich, Switzerland
Swift Code: UBSWCHZH
Account with:
/ 756 - CHF
/ 840 - USD
/ 978 - EUR
Kmercijalna Banka AD
SV. Save 14, 11000 Belgrade, FR Yugoslavia
Swift Code: KOBBYUBG
Beneficiary: Account No. 5428-1246-16154-6
SLOBODA
Rajiceva 16, 11000 Belgrade, FR Yugoslavia
Thank you!