Number of Dutch Army Veterans Willing to Testify on Behalf of Karadžić has Quadrupled
The number of Dutch veterans, members of the battalion stationed in Srebrenica during the 1992-1995 civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, who are prepared to testify on behalf of Republika Srpska first President Radovan Karadžić, has more than quadrupled in the past few months, ever since one brave soldier — Marco Van Hees — courageously stepped out of the heavy media blackout surrounding Dutch troops, determined to help unearth the whole truth about Srebrenica.
“At this moment, 91 Dutch Army veteran, member of the battalion stationed in Srebrenica in 1995 is ready to tell the whole truth about the events in that enclave and thus defend Radovan Karadžić,” said Aleksandar Gavrilović, founder and president of the association Serbian Research from Netherlands.
Gavrilović, who is originally from the Serbian town of Čačak, has invested years in trying to present the full truth in Netherlands about the events in Srebrenica and the atrocious crimes committed against the Srebrenica municipality Serbs by the Bosnian Muslim war criminal, Srebrenica warlord Naser Orić and his savage gang of mujaheedins.
“The first Dutchbat veteran who publicly said he would testify in Radovan Karadžić’s defense was Marco Van Hees. His statement was ignored in Dutch media,” Gavrilovic said, adding that “when it turned out Van Hees is not alone and there are others among the former Blue Helmets who would testify on behalf of Karadžić in the Hague, a full-blown internet war begun: on various web pages a number of lies was bandied about, aimed at harming the credibility of the first witness”.
Gavrilović cited a number of outright lies and disinformation being plastered throughout the cyberspace, including the blatant fallacy shamelessly pushed forth by the Bosnian Muslims, alleging that Hees’ mother is Serbian.
“The purpose of these stories is to smear Marco and to tear down the credibility of his statements in which he denies the official Srebrenica myth. It is also incorrect that Marco was a member of one of the earlier Dutch battalions rather than the third [Dutchbat III]“, Gavrilović said.
Dutch War Veterans Wrongly Accused
Gavrilović explained that Dutch media is under the strict government control and no publicity is given to the case of their troops which were stationed in Srebrenica.
“By presenting their truth about Srebrenica, Dutch war veterans are also fighting for their own existence, because these people are entirely isolated in the Holland society, they are left with no employment and to their own devices. The reason for such (mis)treatment is fear that Dutchbat soldiers could threaten the official position taken by the former Dutch government, which accepted the blame both in its own and in the name of Dutchbat soldiers, and resigned,” Gavrilović said.
“These men who are trying to get their pensions, so their families would have something to live on, have been the victims of the postwar trauma syndrome. A number of them, in a bitter struggle to survive, have been driven to the edge of delinquency and few have committed suicide. But all that remains unknown to Dutch public. There is only immense pressure and no-one, not a single public person or an intellectual had expressed their solidarity with these men and women. Needless to say, Srebrenica as the subject is constantly present in Netherlands, but it is being approached only in the well known manner: Muslims are always only victims, and everything the Serbs present is treated as ‘propaganda’. This has been going on for years now,” Gavrilović said.
According to Ivan Miličić, member of the Serbian Research association, there is no real democracy in Netherlands and there is no freedom of speech.
“In a state where you can legally buy drugs and where the narco-tourism flourishes, there is no freedom of speech: not a single public person, including the NGO sector, is supporting Dutch soldiers in their justified efforts to take the blame off themselves for something that didn’t happen to begin with — the alleged ‘genocide’ against Bosnian Muslims”, Miličić said.
“We Could See Srebrenica Muslims Attack Serb Villages at Night”
Marco Van Hees said he would testify before the Hague tribunal to confirm that Srebrenica, declared a UN safe haven, was in fact a Muslim military base from which vicious armed attacks were carried out against the Bosnian Serb army and civilian population in the surrounding villages.
“We could see that at night, using the special binoculars and termographic cameras, but what could we do? On the other hand, Dutchbat troops were never allowed to talk to the Serbs, and I never noticed any attempts to open a dialog with the Serbs in that region”, Van Hees said.
An unnamed Dutchbat veteran who is also willing to testify before the Hague tribunal, claims that Muslim troops stationed in Srebrenica were secretly being armed by the “black fleights” — the Americans:
“I would see them going about in new uniforms and I talked to them in Serbian during the reconnaissance patrols,” he said in a statement in Gavrilović’s possession.
“They are rightfully embittered because they were stripped of their rights and isolated, since they are considered a ‘publicity risk’ for the Dutch government, and a threat to the common assumptions about the war events,” Gavrilović said.
Mujahedeen-Occupied Srebrenica was a Hellhole
Milivoje Ivanišević, member of President Karadžić’s defense team, said he was pleasantly surprised by the number of Dutch veterans willing to come forth and testify about the things they have witnessed first hand.
“In September , when I first spoke with Dutch soldiers, 21 veteran was prepared to testify in Radovan’s defense. In the meantime, that number had grown more than four times. This is a pleasant surprise for me, showing that these men and women have gotten rid of the pressure of their government and Muslim lobbies. Those soldiers were abused, the Dutch government mistreats them and the Bosnian Muslims are spitting on them,” Ivanišević said.
Regarding the possible testimonies of the Dutchbat troops in the Hague, he assessed that “all the facts have already been established”, but are differently interpreted:
“It is well known who was wounded when, who received a decoration or a promotion, and how many of those ‘executed’ were killed by the pieces of shrapnel. Dutch troops could tell about the chaos and the plunder in [Bosnian Muslim-run] Srebrenica which, in only three months, received 1,900 tons of humanitarian aid by the parachutes, and three times more by the roads — at the time when many were starving. They could tell a lot about the prostitution and offering of the daughters and girlfriends to the Dutch humanitarians, about the widespread crime and the inter-Muslim clashes,” Ivanišević said.
Everyone’s a “Srebrenica Massacre” Victim!
“It makes me very happy that those war veterans are willing to testify in defense of my brother,” Luka Karadžić said.
“The Dutch government had shamed them and blamed them for doing what they did not do and they simply wish to shake that shame off themselves. It makes me happy, not only because of Radovan, but to prove that Serbian nation is not ‘genocidal’, and that the entire Srebrenica story is a big lie. Bosnian Muslims were burying everyone as ‘Srebrenica massacre’ victims — including people killed before the war, people from the other towns, those who died in Srebrenica of natural causes, and those Naser killed himself. They also added the ones killed during the breakthrough to Tuzla, and those they were leaving behind in the battlefields, that Serb Army was left to bury…”, Luka Karadžić said.
Study Backs Bosnian Serb’s Claim of Immunity By MARLISE SIMONS PARIS — Every time Radovan Karadzic, the onetime Bosnian Serb leader, appears in court on war crimes charges, he has hammered on one recurring claim: a senior American official pledged that he would never be standing there.
The official, Richard C. Holbrooke, now a special envoy on Afghanistan and Pakistan for the Obama administration, has repeatedly denied promising Mr. Karadzic immunity from prosecution in exchange for abandoning power after the Bosnian war.
But the rumor persists, and different versions have recently emerged that line up with Mr. Karadzic’s assertion, including a new historical study of the Yugoslav wars published by Purdue University in Indiana.
Charles W. Ingrao, the study’s co-editor, said that three senior State Department officials, one of them retired, and several other people with knowledge of Mr. Holbrooke’s activities told him that Mr. Holbrooke assured Mr. Karadzic in July 1996 that he would not be pursued by the international war crimes tribunal in The Hague if he left politics.
Mr. Karadzic had already been charged by the tribunal with genocide and other crimes against civilians.
Two of the sources cited anonymously in the new study, a former senior State Department official who spent almost a decade in the Balkans and another American who was involved with international peacekeeping there in the 1990s, provided additional details in interviews with The New York Times, speaking on condition that they not be further identified.
The former State Department official said he was told of the offer by people who were close to Mr. Holbrooke’s team at the time. The other source said that Mr. Holbrooke personally and emphatically told him about the deal on two occasions.
While the two men agreed, as one of them put it, that “Holbrooke did the right thing and got the job done,” the recurring story of the deal has dogged Mr. Holbrooke.
Last summer, after more than a decade on the run, Mr. Karadzic was found living disguised in Belgrade, Serbia’s capital. He was arrested and sent to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague for his trial, which is expected to start this year.
Asked for comment for this article, Mr. Holbrooke repeated his denial in a written statement. “No one in the U.S. government ever promised anything, nor made a deal of any sort with Karadzic,” he said, noting that Mr. Karadzic stepped down in the summer of 1996 under intense American pressure.
“In subsequent meetings, as a private citizen, I repeatedly urged officials in both the Clinton and Bush administrations to capture Karadzic,” Mr. Holbrooke said. “I am glad he has finally been brought to justice, even though he uses his public platform to disseminate these fabrications.”
Mr. Holbrooke declined to accept further questions and did not address the specifics of the new accounts.
Mr. Karadzic, by insisting that he is exempt from legal proceedings, has now forced the war crimes tribunal to deal with his allegations, illustrating the difficulty of both administering international justice and conducting diplomacy.
In December, tribunal judges ruled that even if a deal had been made, it would have no bearing on a trial. They said no immunity agreement would be valid before an international tribunal in a case of genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity. Mr. Karadzic is charged with all three.
But Mr. Karadzic has appealed and filed motions demanding that prosecutors disclose every scrap of confidential evidence about negotiations with Mr. Holbrooke. He has asked his lawyers to seek meetings with American diplomats.
His demands have led the court to write to the United States government for clarification.
Peter Robinson, a lawyer for Mr. Karadzic, said that he had received a promise from Washington that he could interview Philip S. Goldberg, who was on the Holbrooke team meeting in Belgrade the night the resignation was negotiated.
“Goldberg took the notes at that meeting,” Mr. Robinson said. “The U.S. government has agreed to search for the notes and provide them if they find them.”
A State Department spokesman said that the government was cooperating with the tribunal, but would provide no further details.
Mr. Holbrooke, who brokered the peace agreement that ended the Bosnian war in 1995, returned to Belgrade in 1996 to press Mr. Karadzic to resign as president of the Bosnian Serb republic. Mr. Holbrooke’s memoirs recount a night of fierce negotiation on July 18, 1996, but make no mention of any pledge of immunity.
The Purdue University study, “Confronting the Yugoslav Controversies: A Scholars’ Initiative,” says that Mr. Holbrooke “instructed his principal assistant, Christopher Hill, to draft the memorandum to be signed by Karadzic,” committing him to give up power.
Mr. Ingrao said Mr. Holbrooke used Slobodan Milosevic, then the Serbian leader, and other Serbian officials as intermediaries to convey the promise of immunity and to reach the deal with Mr. Karadzic.
“The agreement almost came to grief when Holbrooke vigorously refused Karadzic’s demand, and Hill’s appeal, that he affix his signature to it,” the study says, citing unidentified State Department sources.
The study, the product of eight years of research by historians, jurists and social scientists from all sides of the conflict, was an effort to reconcile disparate views of the wars that tore the former Yugoslavia apart in the 1990s, Mr. Ingrao said.
Neither Mr. Hill nor Mr. Goldberg responded to requests for interviews for this article.
In an interview, the former State Department official, who had access to confidential reports and to members of the Holbrooke team, said that during that evening in 1996, Mr. Milosevic and other Serbian officials were on the phone with Mr. Karadzic, who was in Pale, Bosnia.
The former official said that Mr. Karadzic wanted written assurances that he would not be pursued for war crimes and refused to sign without them.
“Holbrooke told the Serbs, ‘You can give him my word he won’t be pursued,’ but Holbrooke refused to sign anything,” the official said. Mr. Holbrooke could make that promise because he knew that American and other Western militaries in Bosnia were not then making arrests, the official said.
There were some 60,000 American and NATO troops in Bosnia, but the soldiers had no orders to arrest indicted Bosnians, for fear of inciting local rebellion.
In the brief statement Mr. Karadzic eventually signed, he agreed to withdraw “from all political activities” and to step down from office. It carried the signatures of Mr. Milosevic and four other Serbian leaders acting as witnesses and guarantors. It did not include any Americans’ names and made no mention of immunity.
The American who was involved in peacekeeping insisted in an interview that Mr. Holbrooke himself told him that he had made a deal with Mr. Karadzic to get him to leave politics. He recalled meeting Mr. Holbrooke in Sarajevo, Bosnia, on the eve of Bosnian elections in November 2000, just after Mr. Milosevic had finally been ousted from power in Serbia.
Mr. Holbrooke was worried about the outcome of the Bosnian vote because he knew that Mr. Karadzic was still secretly running his nationalist political party and picking candidates, including mayors and police chiefs who had run prison camps and organized massacres.
“Holbrooke was angry; he was ranting,” the American recalled. He quoted Mr. Holbrooke as saying: “That son of a bitch Karadzic. I made a deal with him that if he’d pull out of politics, we wouldn’t go after him. He’s broken that deal and now we’re going to get him.”
Mr. Karadzic’s party won those elections in the Bosnian Serb republic. Shortly afterward, he disappeared from public view.
Ratko Mladic however, is guilty as hell, don't attack me for saying that, all 3 sides in the conflict did shit, n he as the highest military leader cannot possibly have clean hands.
Hmmm...this trial will be another circus like oj, slobo n seselj
Guilty of what? defending his people and territory? Whatever the evil devils in the USA or Western Europe do, its OK, but Serbia or Russia no, never, ever. The USA has committed far more war crimes in Serbia, Bosnia, Kosovo and even Iraq than the entire world combined. Clinton should be the first to face trial. He will pay when he meets his maker.
by Nebojsa Malic, March 06, 2010 Email This | Print This | Share This | Comment | Antiwar Forum The show trial of former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic continued on March 1 before the Hague Inquisition, but also in the media. Both in the West and in the Muslim world, Karadzic and the Bosnian Serbs have been convicted by the press of vilest atrocities long ago. One could almost feel the frustration of the commentators and reporters that there even has to be a trial in the first place, so strong are their convictions about Karadzic and the Bosnian War. Evidence? Facts? True believers need no such things. Nor do the Hague prosecutors, apparently.
Challenging Cherished Myths
Reading through the coverage of the trial inevitably reveals that reporters and editors aren’t so much telling what happened in the courtroom, but trying to argue with Karadzic’s defense. Take, for example, Ian Traynor of the Guardian, who "reports" from the trial as if he were the prosecutor rebutting Karadzic’s opening statement. Other journalists took a similar approach, typically presenting the accusations as indisputable facts then saying that Karadzic "denied" war crimes.
He did, in fact, challenge the Official Truth about several key episodes of the Bosnian War, saying that there was no genocide in Srebrenica, and that Sarajevo was divided rather than besieged. The Bosnian Muslims, he argued, used civilian buildings as fortifications, and often shot at their own people for propaganda purposes. Moreover, he also claimed the war was a result of Muslim desire to establish dominion over all of Bosnia, driven by a radical Islamic agenda. He says he has evidence to back all of this up. If he does, that is more than the prosecutors, the Tribunal itself, or the media have produced so far.
Consider a feature (video) by Al-Jazeera reporter Rageh Omar, which opened with the images of the grieving Muslims at the Srebrenica memorial and a video montage implying that the Bosnian Serb forces rounded up eight thousand or more Muslim civilians and executed them in broad daylight. Yet actual forensic evidence has found around 3800 bodies, 3600 of which were men aged 15 to 65 — legal age of conscription into the Bosnian (Muslim) Army. And less than five hundred had blindfolds or bindings, indicating executions. But the ICTY and the media continue to claim that the Serbs killed eight thousand people, and declare this to be genocide, based on questionable testimonies and badly mishandled evidence.
A Different Tune
The very same day Karadzic appeared in a Hague courtroom, one of his former adversaries was detained at Heathrow airport. Ejup Ganic, once the right hand of Muslim leader Alija Izetbegovic who styled himself the "vice-president" of Bosnia, was arrested by British police acting on a Serbian warrant.
Belgrade is charging Ganic with responsibility in the May 1992 ambush of the retreating Yugoslav Army column in Sarajevo. The crumbling federal army had made a deal with Bosnian and Macedonian authorities to depart unhindered. Izetbegovic’s forces violated that deal, and the resulting massacres of retreating Army columns ensured the bitter enmity of many Army officers, who then joined Karadzic’s nascent military.
One would think, then, that an opportunity to examine these events in a court of law would be greeted with enthusiasm by the politicians and the press that keep talking about the need for "justice, truth and reconciliation" in the Balkans. Yet the response in the very same media that have covered the Karadzic trial with so much zeal and emotion this week has been completely different when it came to Ganic.
The Economist, for example, dismissed the ambush as a matter of "forty rifles" and bemoaned the damage allegedly done to "Serbia’s attempts to rejoin the European fold" by "dragging up the past." Others focused not on what Ganic may or may not have done back in the 1990s, but on the "tensions" and "muddled ties" his arrest may cause, "feeding Balkans hysteria" in a year when Bosnia is having a general election.
What are they implying, that the Karadzic trial has no effect on Balkans relations, or tensions or ties? That the incessant propaganda about the Serbs as genocidal aggressors is good, perfectly normal and desirable while a mere mention that a Muslim could have been responsible for an atrocity is a cause for panic? Talk about a partisan press…
The Tribunal and the media maintain that the Bosnian Serbs, and Karadzic as their leader, sought to occupy Bosnia and destroy Croat and Muslim populations as part of some grand conspiracy to create an ethnically pure "Greater Serbia." Even a cursory look at the facts indicates that these charges are absurd. Alija Izetbegovic never denied being an Islamic revolutionary. He openly stated that he would "sacrifice peace for a sovereign Bosnia." Karadzic may have mishandled the Bosnian Serb war effort, both strategically and tactically, but there is no doubt that it was the Muslims who sought dominion over the Serbs and Croats, not the other way around.
One of the things Karadzic said in his opening statement was that the Bosnian Serb cause was "just and holy." He didn’t actually call the war itself holy — though the distinction escaped many reporters. ICTY translations have been notoriously unreliable. For example, a phrase attributed to Karadzic — "marble evidence" — does not actually exist in Serbian. He could have called evidence concrete, but never marble. So it isn’t surprising that Karadzic’s description of his "holy" cause — freedom from a Muslim government bent on dominance — is being miscast as some sort of crusade. The Tribunal and the media have twisted words before.
Exercise in Futility
Given that the countries sponsoring the Tribunal have also played a major role in supporting Izetbegovic’s drive for a centralized Bosnian state – before, during and after the war — and occupying a portion of Serbia to carve out an "independent," ethnically cleansed "state" of Kosovo, there is no chance of Radovan Karadzic getting anything even remotely resembling a fair trial. Too much political capital has been invested in the Bank of Collective Serbian Guilt for the investors to admit the error of their ways now.
But the persecution of Radovan Karadzic and other Serb leaders isn’t going to help the Empire any. Least of all will it inspire gratitude in the Muslim world, a goal several policymakers have openly alluded to in the past. Back in the 1990s, to an Empire in search of a cause it seemed like a no-brainer: claim a "genocide" through hysterical propaganda about the evil Serbs slaughtering innocent Muslims, step in to save the day, and emerge as a knight in shining armor. Over and over the Western leaders, from Bill Clinton to Tony Blair, have repeated this trope. The world’s Muslims didn’t buy it. Instead, the Muslim public opinion chose to regard the West as an evil, conniving force that stood idly by and watched the slaughter.
Ironically, that was one of the major talking points of the whole hysterical propaganda effort.
Where are the observers from Serbia? Russia? Bosnia, etc. to determine if he is having a fair trial? The piglets in Serbia only wish to suck off the shriveled tits of the EU Pig and soon will find that there is no milk, just like Poland and the other pathetic EU wannabes found out.
TsarSamuil: Browser is up, but I was doing other things..
Oct 12, 2020 18:58:52 GMT -5
Slavatar: OK.. Regards.
Oct 13, 2020 8:39:57 GMT -5
славянин: зиг хайль
Oct 22, 2020 15:41:37 GMT -5
славянин: дойчен зальдатен
Oct 22, 2020 15:41:56 GMT -5
Milo I.: Deutscher Sauerbraten?
Oct 28, 2020 9:59:34 GMT -5
White Cossack: Who's the best state leader currently?
Dec 6, 2020 8:57:53 GMT -5
TsarSamuil: Viktor Orban?
Dec 8, 2020 5:55:50 GMT -5
Gopnik: from leader's POV, i'd say Kim Jong Un as in north korea he is not forcing any pics of himself nor making a shit ton of songs praising him unlike his dad and grandfather, but instead he is attempting to get the nation out of the shithole it is in today.
Dec 13, 2020 17:16:43 GMT -5
Gopnik: but 1000000% not kim from a citizen's point of view, the Camps in North Korea are horrible.
Dec 13, 2020 17:18:52 GMT -5
White Cossack: You're both right, fellas.
Dec 18, 2020 11:17:53 GMT -5
eternal jew: indeed goys
Dec 18, 2020 12:13:55 GMT -5