Naumann on Milošević’s "solution"

lies, lies, lies. Funny how they put words sounding very similar to Hitler into Milosevic's mouth. While I didn't support many of his policies, Milosevic never had any intention to 'gather all the Albanians in one place and shoot them.' What ever happened to perjury - I guess NATO commanders aren't subject to that legal principle.

classic example of one-way legalism. in any other western court (including holland itself) this is INADMISSABLE AS HEARSAY. i was taught that in first year law school. serbia need not work with such a court. this is not a nationalistic stance but a matter of principle. working with the court means agreeing to rigged rules.

Milosevic was a criminal of Epic proportions. Considering he murdered his own people, completely destroyed the economy and sold out the Serbs of Krajina merely to consolidate his own power and prestige, I believe he was perfectly capable of considering the wholesale genocide of the Albanians an option. However, anyone who has studied the genocide of WWII knows that murdering 2 million people is not a simple task and it requires significant time and planning to carry out, especially considering the Albanians were fighting back as fiercely as they could. I believe its very possible he said something as stupid as this during negotiations, however in reality it was probably merely boastful swagger and no serious plans were in place to take out such an action. Typical of the Balkan mentality.

The interesting part of this article is the fact that the NATO negotiation team was completely ignorant of the History of the Balkans and therefore incapable of understanding the issues and facts that led up to the current conflict. If only the International Community knew what they were doing we might very well have been able to avoid a large portion of the bloodshed and violence that happened there.

Blag, there are exceptions to the hearsay rule that may be on point in this circumstance, such as the declarant being unavailable or possibly the Excited Utterance rule. However, that being said, I really don't know a lot about the law at the Hague or how its structured.

However, I do agree with you and don't understand the reasoning why these statements were admitted into the record. While they reflect on the mindset of Milosevic, I do not see how this applies to those currently accused as they sat silently by saying nothing. Clearly these statements are more prejudicial then informative and should have been excluded as such.

While I realize that these were introduced to show that Milosevic had a plan in place to exterminate the Albanians, the fact is what he stated was his plan clearly was not practical or plausible. It is simply impossible to murder so many people in such a fashion in so short a time and the value of admitting such statements into the record are extremely prejudicial and that outweighs any pertinent value these statements may have had.

Blag, I do believe you live in NY and I am supposed to be out there at the end of January for a conference. I would be more then happy to meet with you for a pivo if you like. I've worked in the legal industry for 12 years now, and we would probably find a great deal to talk about.

Well said Vic and Blag. I hate the guy guts he was a stupid politician and did no good for Serbia, But really ethnic cleansing in Kosovo is a lie, I find it annoying that the 10 000 toll does not divide the KLA death tole OR the fact that Albanian locals picked up their own rifles and weapons to use on Serbian forces there for loosing the title of Non combatants. Second the plan was NOT to kill Albanians but to move them buy bus to Albania and Macedonia this plan was not a good one either but killing was not the case. So here if the Serbs WANTED to KILL every single last Albanian why did they drive thousands to the border escorted by the army when they could have just killed everyone without a second thought? In fact your hero NATO was even responsible for killing a convoy of Albanian refugees being escorted to the border just because there was an army escort there! hmmm...says a lot of how NATO cared for you eh?

Actually, hearsay evidence is admissible when the original speaker is dead or otherwise unavailable.

The use of the term "Drenica model" is interesting. This refers to the massacre of the Jashari family. Adem Jashari was a terrorist, no question... he was a KLA commander and also, it seems, a generally obnoxious character. However, Belgrade's response was to surround his family compound and slaughter almost everyone inside, including women, children, and the elderly.

What's interesting is that this was hugely counterproductive... it turned Jashari into a martyr, and led to a surge of support for the KLA that made them much more dangerous.

Would Slobo have realized this in autumn 1998? Probably. Would he have used a term like "Drenica solution"? Hm.


Doug M.

"But really ethnic cleansing in Kosovo is a lie"
(*****, 14 December 2006, 21:59)

-If you are expelled from your own house and members of your family are murdered, how would you call it!

Actually the convoy and encampments NATO bombed were Albanians coming back to their homes. NATO apparently didn't like this so it bombed them.

Also at the Hague Tribunal last month, a KLA commander said the KLA ordered Albanians to evacuate after NATO started bombing and they (the KLA) were pulling out.

The Albanians only started flooding Macedonia after the NATO strikes. Before that it was mainly some internal displacement due to the KLA battling the Serb police.

Balkanites quote Nazis rather liberally. So Milosevic having a final solution means only that he had a plan beforehand. However, if that plan was a repeat of Drenica of post-WWII, that means something similar to Operation Horseshoe, i.e. what happenned in reality. Things make sense to me.

lies, lies, lies. Funny how they put words sounding very similar to Hitler into Milosevic's mouth. While I didn't support many of his policies, Milosevic never had any intention to 'gather all the Albanians in one place and shoot them.' What ever happened to perjury - I guess NATO commanders aren't subject to that legal principle.

classic example of one-way legalism. in any other western court (including holland itself) this is INADMISSABLE AS HEARSAY. i was taught that in first year law school. serbia need not work with such a court. this is not a nationalistic stance but a matter of principle. working with the court means agreeing to rigged rules.

Milosevic was a criminal of Epic proportions. Considering he murdered his own people, completely destroyed the economy and sold out the Serbs of Krajina merely to consolidate his own power and prestige, I believe he was perfectly capable of considering the wholesale genocide of the Albanians an option. However, anyone who has studied the genocide of WWII knows that murdering 2 million people is not a simple task and it requires significant time and planning to carry out, especially considering the Albanians were fighting back as fiercely as they could. I believe its very possible he said something as stupid as this during negotiations, however in reality it was probably merely boastful swagger and no serious plans were in place to take out such an action. Typical of the Balkan mentality.

The interesting part of this article is the fact that the NATO negotiation team was completely ignorant of the History of the Balkans and therefore incapable of understanding the issues and facts that led up to the current conflict. If only the International Community knew what they were doing we might very well have been able to avoid a large portion of the bloodshed and violence that happened there.

Blag, there are exceptions to the hearsay rule that may be on point in this circumstance, such as the declarant being unavailable or possibly the Excited Utterance rule. However, that being said, I really don't know a lot about the law at the Hague or how its structured.

However, I do agree with you and don't understand the reasoning why these statements were admitted into the record. While they reflect on the mindset of Milosevic, I do not see how this applies to those currently accused as they sat silently by saying nothing. Clearly these statements are more prejudicial then informative and should have been excluded as such.

While I realize that these were introduced to show that Milosevic had a plan in place to exterminate the Albanians, the fact is what he stated was his plan clearly was not practical or plausible. It is simply impossible to murder so many people in such a fashion in so short a time and the value of admitting such statements into the record are extremely prejudicial and that outweighs any pertinent value these statements may have had.

Blag, I do believe you live in NY and I am supposed to be out there at the end of January for a conference. I would be more then happy to meet with you for a pivo if you like. I've worked in the legal industry for 12 years now, and we would probably find a great deal to talk about.

Well said Vic and Blag. I hate the guy guts he was a stupid politician and did no good for Serbia, But really ethnic cleansing in Kosovo is a lie, I find it annoying that the 10 000 toll does not divide the KLA death tole OR the fact that Albanian locals picked up their own rifles and weapons to use on Serbian forces there for loosing the title of Non combatants. Second the plan was NOT to kill Albanians but to move them buy bus to Albania and Macedonia this plan was not a good one either but killing was not the case. So here if the Serbs WANTED to KILL every single last Albanian why did they drive thousands to the border escorted by the army when they could have just killed everyone without a second thought? In fact your hero NATO was even responsible for killing a convoy of Albanian refugees being escorted to the border just because there was an army escort there! hmmm...says a lot of how NATO cared for you eh?

Actually, hearsay evidence is admissible when the original speaker is dead or otherwise unavailable.

The use of the term "Drenica model" is interesting. This refers to the massacre of the Jashari family. Adem Jashari was a terrorist, no question... he was a KLA commander and also, it seems, a generally obnoxious character. However, Belgrade's response was to surround his family compound and slaughter almost everyone inside, including women, children, and the elderly.

What's interesting is that this was hugely counterproductive... it turned Jashari into a martyr, and led to a surge of support for the KLA that made them much more dangerous.

Would Slobo have realized this in autumn 1998? Probably. Would he have used a term like "Drenica solution"? Hm.


Doug M.

"But really ethnic cleansing in Kosovo is a lie"
(*****, 14 December 2006, 21:59)

-If you are expelled from your own house and members of your family are murdered, how would you call it!

Actually the convoy and encampments NATO bombed were Albanians coming back to their homes. NATO apparently didn't like this so it bombed them.

Also at the Hague Tribunal last month, a KLA commander said the KLA ordered Albanians to evacuate after NATO started bombing and they (the KLA) were pulling out.

The Albanians only started flooding Macedonia after the NATO strikes. Before that it was mainly some internal displacement due to the KLA battling the Serb police.

Balkanites quote Nazis rather liberally. So Milosevic having a final solution means only that he had a plan beforehand. However, if that plan was a repeat of Drenica of post-WWII, that means something similar to Operation Horseshoe, i.e. what happenned in reality. Things make sense to me.