Croat Muslim conflict – Croatia, the War, and the Future

Hague Appeals Chamber Reverses Trial Conclusion Against Croatia’s Leaders

July 27, 2016 by inavukic 23 Comments

From left: General Janko Bobetko,
President of Croatia Franjo Tudjman,
Croatia’s Defence Minister Gojko Susak
Croatia – early 1990’s
Photo: Cropix/Goran Sebelic

The Hague Tribunal ICTY rejected Monday 18 July 2016 the request of the Republic of Croatian to join the appeal case against the six former Bosnia and Herzegovina Croatian senior officials from the 1990’s Herceg-Bosna part of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Jadranko Prlic, Bruno Stojic, Slobodan Praljak, Milivoj Petkovic, Valentin Coric and Berislav Pusic. As farcical as the findings were seen by many, the ICTY Trial Chamber did find May 2013 the six men guilty for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina from 1992 to 1994 and pronounced a total of 111 years imprisonment.

Presiding judge last week, Judge Carmel Agius delivered the Appeal Chamber’s decision denying Croatia’s application to appear as amicus curiae (friend of the court) in the above six men’s appeal proceedings to dispute the Trial Chamber’s conclusions that the six accused participated in a Joint Criminal Enterprise (JCE) and that three Croatia’s officials – first Croatian President Franjo Tudjman, former foreign minister Gojko Susak and Croatian army general Janko Bobetko – were members of that JCE (Joint Criminal Enterprise).

Croatian’s application claimed that the 2013 Trial Chamber verdict violated the right of presumption of innocence under the European Convention on Human Rights of the three Croatian official’s – Tudjman, Susak and Bobetko, who were all deceased at the time ; that the three Croatian officials were innocent of allegation that they were members of JCE and that the Trial chamber’s conclusion is tantamount to “posthumous conviction”.

Six Croats from
Herceg-Bosna
at ICTY in The Hague, 2013
Photo: ICTY

The Appeals Chamber rejected Croatia’s application saying it would not assist the Appeals Chamber in its considerations of questions in issue at the appeal.

However, an unexpected bonus arrived from this application – the Appeal judges articulated their assessment that the original Trial Chamber findings that included conclusion regarding Croatia’s Franjo Tudjman, Gojko Susak and Janko Bobetko do not and cannot amount to a guilty verdict against these three Croatian officials (Full PDF version here):

“…the Appeals Chamber emphasises that findings of criminal responsibility made in a case before the Tribunal are binding only on the accused in a specific case. In this regard, Appeals Chamber observes that the Three Croatian Officials were not indicted or charged in the present case. Furthermore, the Trial Chamber made no explicit findings concerning their participation in the JCE and did not find them guilty of any crimes. Chamber considers that the Trial Chamber’s findings regarding the mere existence and membership of the lCE do not – and cannot – constitute findings of criminal responsibility on the part of any persons who were not charged and convicted in this case. Thus, the Trial Judgment is binding only on the Six Accused, and the presumption of innocence of the Three Croatian Officials is not impacted. The Appeals Chamber further observes that the Tribunal’s jurisdiction is restricted to “natural persons” and the Tribunal does not have the competency to make findings on state responsibility. Accordingly, the Appeals Chamber emphasises that the findings in the Trial Judgment regarding the Three Croatian Officials in no way constitute findings of responsibility on the part of the state of Croatia. The Appeals Chamber therefore finds Croatia’s submissions to be without merit and dismisses them.”

Luka Misetic Photo: Darko Tomas/Cropix

“The Appeals Chamber has essentially reversed the findings of the Prlic Trial Chamber about Tudjman, Susak and Bobetko’s alleged participation in a JCE. In a unique procedural maneuver, it did so in the context of a decision to reject an amicus curiae application. Scholars and practitioners of international criminal procedure should take note.

The Appeals Chamber went on to emphasize that “the presumption of innocence of the three Croatian officials is not impacted” by the Prlic Trial Chamber judgment, and furthermore “”the Appeals Chamber emphasizes that the findings in the Trial Judgment regarding the Three Croatian Officials in no way constitute findings of responsibility on the part of the state of Croatia.”

The ICTY Appeals Chamber has thus ruled that President Tudjman, Minister Susak and General Bobetko were not found to be members of a JCE in Bosnia and remain presumed innocent by the ICTY. Prosecutor Ken Scott stated publicly that the Trial Chamber in Prlic was ‘very clear and adamant about the significant role played by Tudjman and Susak’ and that these findings were ‘one of the most historical, remarkable things about the case.’ Those findings are now reversed.
Croatia could not have hoped for a better result from the Appeals Chamber even if the Appeals Chamber had granted Croatia amicus status,” says the US based, well-known attorney Luka Misetic.

This decision at the ICTY Appeals Chamber blows right out of the water the wild and evil claims that Croatia’s plan at the time was to create a Greater Croatia by joining to it the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina known as Herceg-Bosna and, hence, concluded that Croatia’s leaders were members of the JCE that was to achieve this goal. The Hague Prosecution did accuse the Six Croats of participating in a joint criminal enterprise that was intended to “permanently remove and ethnically cleanse Bosnian Muslims and other non-Croats” from the territory of the newly-established Herceg-Bosna, which they wanted to attach to a planned “Greater Croatia”. Now that the Appeal Chambers have found last week that Croatian leaders were not members of that JCE as Trial Chamber maintained it would stand to reason and truth that any Greater Croatia could not be created without Croatia. Appeal Chamber’s decision with regard to the Herceg-Bosna Six Croats is expected around November 2017. Given that many have considered the 2013 Trial Chamber verdict against them a farce and an utterly unfair and unjust, one awaits the outcome of the appeal with intense interest as it could turn the tides towards actual justice and truth and point to a different picture of the conflict between the Croats and Muslims in 1990’s in Bosnia and Herzegovina than the one painted by the ICTY Trial Chamber verdict. We can only pray for now. Ina Vukic, Prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Syd)

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: Berislav Pusic, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bruno Stojic, Carmel Agius, Croat Muslim conflict, Croatia, Franjo Tudjman, Gojko Susak, Hague, Herceg-Bosna, ICJ, ICTY, International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia, Jadranko Prlic, Janko, joint criminal enterprise, Luka Misetic, Milivoj Petkovic, Slobodan Praljak, Valentin Coric, war crimes

Liars, Liars, Liars And Herceg-Bosna

July 20, 2013 by inavukic 148 Comments

From left: Jadranko Prlic, Milivoj Petkovic, Bruno Stojic, Slobodan Praljak, Berislav Pusic, Valentin Coric
Photo: AFP/ jutarnji.hr

There come times in life when you just want to climb on the top of a mountain and shout: liar, liar liar! You want the world to hear you; the burden of desecrated truth weighs down heavily.

So, as I shout liars, liars, liars, this time, it’s in the direction of ICTY Trial Chamber’s recent judgment against the Six Croats of Herceg-Bosna in which the Trial Chamber ruled that they, together with Croatia’s leadership (including dr Franjo Tudjman) had participated in a joint criminal enterprise against Bosnian Muslims (Bosniaks) – all as part of some Greater Croatia expansion!

A great deal has been written in response to this shocking and politically carved judgment, that seems to have been cemented through efforts of channeling much hearsay and half-truths into the pen where ICTY’s “joint criminal enterprise” creation awaited fodder to give it life. It’s a part of human nature to become restless and distressed, to vent frustration and disappointment – pending an appeal to the Trial Chamber’s decision. So I’m shouting again – it takes a great deal of effort these days for truth to surface and stay there.

Ante Nazor of dnevno.hr portal has recently written a great article on the matter, which, I’m pleased to say, justifies and feeds my “liar, liar, liar” shout against the judgment and prosecution’s witnesses.

Ante Nazor writes (translation in italics):

This judgment, condemning the political and military leadership of Herceg-Bosna, and Croatia for “joint criminal enterprise” against Bosnia, shows how unconvincing ICTY’s “slogans” that guilt is individualised in its verdicts are. With this judgment it’s suggested that Croatia is responsible for aggression against Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), which is contrary to the historical facts.

Contrary to the claims made in the Trial Chamber judgment against 6 Croats of Herceg-Bosna the facts clearly show that Croatia had not committed aggression against Bosnia, nor had it conducted a “joint criminal enterprise”, but only reacted to the events that occurred in BiH, events the Croatian leadership could not ignore: firstly the Serbian aggression in April in 1992., and then the Bosniak (Muslim) – Croatian conflict in BiH, for which Croatia is not responsible, nor had it been caused by president Franjo Tudjman and defense minister Gojko Susak, but real threat of extinction of the Croats as one of the three constituent peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina appeared in the area where they had lived for centuries.

The ICTY prosecution did not hide its triumphalism after the verdict as it enthusiastically commented for television that the “Serbian Republic and Herceg-Bosna are the same”. (Reminder: Serbian Republic within Bosnia and Herzegovina was founded on genocide including Srebrenica massacre). Then there were some non-government organisation and individuals who, after the above said ICTY judgment, said through media that the public has argued for years that president Tudjman, defence minister Susak and almost the whole of the then Croatian authorities were joint criminals “and that Croatia is founded on crimes”. (Perhaps it’s good to remind ouselves here that those organisations and individuals were and are those die-hard communists at heart who never wanted a free Croatia anyway). But none of these “righteous” ones answered the question of what would happen to the Croats in BiH had they not organised themselves and had they not received help from Croatia? Who would defend them? Bosnia and Herzegovina? Europe? USA? NATO? Yugoslav People’s Army? Given the events in Croatia in 1991 (brutal Serb aggression) and given the experience with the area Croatian villages Ravno in BiH in October 1991 (of which the Hague prosecutor had to know) the only thing that remained for Croats in BiH was to organise their defence. The ICTY prosecutor also had to know the fact that even before the burning of village Ravno in BiH, Croatian Serb forces (aka Martic’s rebel forces) with their incursion into the territory of BiH Bosnian Grahovo in June 1991 extrtacted a sincere reaction from Alija Izetbegovic in the media: “at this moment we are not able to cope with the increasingly violent internal and external aggression” and that the country cannot resist external aggression (by Serb forces).

Therefore, it is an utter nonsense from ICTY prosecution to claim that Croats in BiH did not have a reason for self-organisation, when it is known that the institutions of BiH at the time, neither Croats nor other citizens, were not able to protect themselves against Serbian armed formations. Is it not cynical that the prosecutor in any court in Europe accuses Croats in BiH for the political and territorial organisation to defend themselves against the Serbian aggression, which, at the beginning, was the main reason for the establishment of the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna on 18th November 1991, in the circumstances when Europe’s arms embargo against the former Yugoslavia significantly impeded defence efforts of Croats and Bosniaks (Muslims) at the beginning of Serbian aggression?

All this and many more facts, as well as a chronology of events, were disregarded by the Hague prosecution in its effort to accuse Croatian leadership and Croatia of “joint criminal enterprise” in BiH.
Quoting excerpts from transcripts as evidence for its claim (which are generally presented in the media in Croatia), ignored the transcripts whose content is contrary to the allegations of the prosecution.

Contrary to Greater Serbia, the construction of theories about the creation of Greater Croatian is based on lies. Certainly, unlike Serbs, Croats did not attack other countries of former Yugoslavia so the ICTY prosecutor evidently went about concocting one through this court case.

For example, it was President Tudjman, whom the prosecution accuses of creating a “Greater Croatia” at the expense of BiH, who on 56th (Closed) session of the Government of Croatia on 25th November 199 (I.e. 7 days after the proclamation of the “Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna”) concluded that “in accordance with the Croatian policy and politics it builds itself upon, there cannot be any changes in the borders,” and so “Croats in BiH must ensure their interests within the state, as long as ii exists.”

He also noted that “we must be aware of the fact that the Serbian part of Bosnia and Herzegovina is fully in the hands of the Serbian government, that it is armed and in service of the Greater Serbia policy” and that “Muslims run their own politics which in fact, as far as the leadership is concerned, is on the line of maintaining Yugoslavia “.

Accordingly, looking at the politics led by President Tudjman BiH and his statesmanlike moves (no change to borders by force, the recognition of sovereignty and independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a union of the three constituent peoples, participation of Croats in BiH defence and liberation, and other facts) show that the role of Croatian President Tudjman and Serbian President Milosevic and Croatian and Serbian war in BiH, as well as the role of the Croatian Community Herceg-Bosna and the Serbian Republic, cannot be considered equal, despite the Hague prosecution’s and the domestic “lovers of justice” persistence in trying to make it so.

This is corroborated by the fact that most informed and most respected judge in the Trial Chamber which rendered the judgment previously cited Six Croats of Herceg-Bosna, Jean-Claude Antonetti, in his dissenting opinion states that President Tudjman at a meeting of the Supreme State Council 18th November 1991, when Herceg-Bosna was established, said he is not about creating a community of Herceg-Bosna, but a declaration that proves that the Croats of Bosnia and Herzegovina are working to establish a community with no separation of BiH, and that “this document does not support the theory of a Greater Croatia. ”

So I reiterate: with the exception of Judge Antonetti of ICTY Trial Chamber, the prosecution and its witnesses: liars, liars, liars. The saddest thing of all, pending a court appeal in this matter, the conflict and intolerance between Croats and Bosniaks in BiH deepens by the day – all because of this abominable politically wrapped judgment. I am certain that such a scenario was planned and fueled by those who want to legitimise the entity of Serbian Republic within BiH that was created on genocide, ethnic cleansing, rape and utter horror. Ina Vukic, Prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Zgb)

The Latest ICTY Verdict and Why You Should Care

The Ghost of Goebbels at The Hague

Is This A Joint Criminal Enterprise and Muslim Aggression Against Bosnia and Herzegovina?

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: Alija Izetbegovic, Berislav Pusic, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bruno Stojic, Croat Muslim conflict, Croatia, Franjo Tudjman, Franjo Tuđman, Gojko Susak, ICTY, Jadranko Prlic, Judge Jean-Claude Antonetti, Milivoj Petkovic, Slobodan Milosevic, Slobodan Praljak, Valentin Coric

ICTY Trial Chamber Convicts 6 Croats of Herceg-Bosna – Verdict of Joint Criminal Enterprise Farcical To The Hilt

May 29, 2013 by inavukic 38 Comments

From left: Jadranko Prlic, Milivoj Petkovic, Bruno Stojic, Slobodan Praljak, Berislav Pusic, Valentin Coric
Photo: AFP/ jutarnji.hr

Putting the issue of war crimes that may have been committed by individual persons aside, it is absolutely unacceptable and unjust that the ICTY Trial Chamber has today convicted six Bosnian Croat political and military leaders of joint criminal enterprise allegedly involving persecution, expulsion and murder of Muslims during Bosnia’s war as part of a plan supported by leaders in neighboring Croatia to establish a Croat state in Bosnia.

The verdict of joint criminal enterprise does not reflect the reality that was. I.e. Croatia was an ally to Croats and Muslims of Bosnia and Herzegovina when the war commenced in March1992 with Serb barricades in Sarajevo, aggression, ethnically cleansing of Croats, Muslims and other non-Serb population from the territory the world knows today as the political entity of Serbian Republic within Bosnia and Herzegovina. Croatia took hundreds of thousands (at least 400,000) Bosnian refugees (Croats and Muslims) and provided shelter and care for them at the time when the war of Serb aggression raged across Croatia and forced destitution of more than 700,000 Croatian refugees of non-Serb ethnicity.

Whether the Croat-Muslim conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 1992 – 1994 constitutes a joint criminal enterprise planned and executed by Croats could truly be justified in reality and justice is now a matter that will surely end up in the ICTY Appeal Chamber.

For, as things stand now this verdict is a farce, just as the one the Trial Chamber had delivered in 2011 against Croatian generals for the Operation Storm that liberated Serb occupied territory of Croatia.

This verdict does nothing but mirror the malicious concoctions and vile cocktails of hatred conjured up in order to blame something or someone for a situation that was a horrible reality that followed when Croatian and Bosnia and Herzegovina dared to seek democracy and secede from Yugoslavia.
To track back to how it was: the Vance Owen Peace Plan (VOPP), named after the international mediators Cyrus Vance and Lord Owen, first took shape in 1992 and its final version was completed in January 1993. It divided Bosnia into provinces with ethnic majorities.

The VOPP placed some Muslim majority areas under the control of the Croats; the Muslims vigorously rejected accepting this. The Muslims resisted a Bosnian Croat army (HVO) order, first made in January 1993 then repeated in April, to submit to its command in areas that were allocated to the Croats. The Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina, had by that time declared their “Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna” over much the same areas that were awarded to them by the VOPP.

Croats were determined to assert their command as, indeed, given that Alija Izetbegovic represented mainly the interests of Bosnian Muslims at the time, and Radovan Karadzic the interests of Bosnian Serbs – Mate Boban was placed in charge of the plights and needs to protect the interests of Bosnian Croats.

While Serbs pursued their lines of creating the Serbian Republic within Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Bosnian Croat determination to pursue command over areas allocated to them through VOPP and the Bosnian Muslim rejection of this was destined to end up in a bitter conflict between Croats and Muslims in these areas.

I have no doubts that the ICTY prosecution (headed by Carla del Ponte) maliciously constructed the idea of a joint criminal enterprise against Bosnian Muslims so that leadership of Croatia could somehow be pinned to such a constructed war crime. Certainly, such an idea would, I believe, have been sparked and fed by lies that led the world to believe that Croatia’s president Franjo Tudjman and Serbia’s president Slobodan Milosevic had met in Karadjordjevo and decided to divide Bosnia and Hercegovina between themselves. Hence, the utter lie that Croatia wanted to expand its borders into Bosnia and Herzegovina were born and fuelled by people such as Stjepan Mesic (of Croatia) who seemed to thrive on spreading hearsay, gossip and rumours about Tudjman as the truth.

Attempts and now an ICTY judgment to blame the Croats for the situation where even the evidence before the ICTY (when it comes to the idea of joint criminal enterprise) provides a swamp where it’s not possible to bring a completely safe conviction of joint criminal enterprise. Who attacked whom first? Who provoked who first? Whose crimes were the worst?

I guess the easiest thing for the ICTY Trial Chamber was to blame the alleged expansionist aspirations of Croatia for everything. Problem solved!? I don’t think so!

Back to ICTY Trial Chamber Wednesday 29 May: Jadranko Prlic, former president of the Croatian Defence Council (HVO), and later of the government of the Croatian Republic of Herceg-Bosna, was convicted to 25 years of imprisonment; Bruno Stojić, former head of the HVO department of Defence received 20 years in prison; Milivoj Petkovic, Chief of the HVO Main Staff and later deputy commander of the HVO forces – 20 years; Valentin Coric, Chief of the Military Police Administration and later on Minister of the Interior – 16 years. Slobodan Praljak, former Assistant Minister of Defence of Croatia and later Commander of the Main Staff of the HVO, received a sentence of 20 years of imprisonment. Berislav Pusic, former President of the HVO commission in charge of the exchange of prisoners and other persons and Head of the HVO Commission in charge of detention facilities, was unanimously acquitted of four counts. Convicted of 18 counts, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison.

A majority of the three-judge panel expressed the opinion that late- President Franjo Tudjman of Croatia was a key member of a plan to carve out a Croat mini-state in Bosnia with the aim of later uniting it with his country to create a greater Croatia, or leaving it as a separate independent state.
Presiding Judge Jean-Claude Antonetti said a majority of the three-judge panel ruled that Croatia had overall control over the Bosnian Croat entity and its armed forces and that Croat troops fought alongside Bosnian Croat forces.
The Chamber concluded by majority, Judge Antonetti dissenting, that the ultimate purpose of the joint criminal enterprise was to create a Croat entity, mostly within the borders of the Croatian Banovina in 1939, to unify the Croatian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Later these areas were to be either joined with the Republic of Croatia, or remain in close association with it.
The JCE as such existed approximately from January 1993 to April 1994.
Apart from the six accused, a number of persons joined, participated in and contributed to the JCE, including among others: Franjo Tudjman, the President of the Republic of Croatia; Gojko Susak, the Minister of Defence of the Republic of Croatia; Janko Bobetko, general in the Army of the Republic of Croatia; and Mate Boban, President of the Croatian Community (later Republic) of Herceg-Bosna. All of these men are dead and have passed away years before ICTY trial commenced – they were not there to give evidence or to defend themselves.

Given that the judgment does not seem to mention Cyrus Vance, Lord Owen, Lord Carrington and Jorge Cutileiro, who had all presented their version, on behalf of the international powers of the day – began to set some serious fuel into the already volatile situation – as to how Bosnia and Herzegovina was best divided by command among the three ethnic groups, one cannot but conclude that this judgment of joint criminal enterprise (relying on false conclusions regarding Croatian expansionist plans) is farcical to the hilt. Ina Vukic, Prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Syd)