The State of the Trial Part II: Milosevic's Vision of Serbia
Day 84
The State of the Trial Part II: Milosevic's Vision of Serbia
Day 84
By continuing to deny all evidence of any internal wrongdoing in Serbia, even evidence presented by witnesses like Bosko Radojkovic who are neither hostile victims nor hostile foreign officials, Milosevic has begun to compromise the only defense he claims to care about: his political defense of the Serbian nation. In broadest terms, this defense is based on a claim that the Tribunal and, in particular, Milosevic’s own trial, are tools of a sinister world order led by the United States and NATO and intent on “enslaving” nations who do not conform or submit to their demands. This rhetoric draws power from the international intervention in Kosovo, but also from Milosevic’s portrayal of the Serbian nation as historically and repeatedly threatened by outside forces, with NATO as only the most recent aggressor. Yet the vision Milosevic is presenting of his own role in Serbia’s history may not stand or fall on how eloquently he taps into a reservoir of nationalistic sentiment. To maintain the support of even his staunchest supporters, his courtroom pronouncements must also resonate with the lived experience of the people he claims to speak for.
It is impossible to know whether Radojkovic, for example, feels personally betrayed by Milosevic’s dismissal of what he must have experienced as he unloaded dead bodies from the refrigerator truck under cover of night. Ultimately, however, average Serbs will be forced to weigh Milosevic’s claims that he is vindicating his nation against his refusal to acknowledge any wrongdoing on any level, even in the face of overwhelming evidence. A similar public relations failure rears its head every time Milosevic asserts, as he did with Radomir Markovic, that any crimes committed by “rogue” police or military are appalling, contrary to orders, and must be prosecuted. If, as Markovic acknowledged, hundreds of such “aberrant” crimes were committed, then why has Milosevic withheld any hint of compassion for the vast majority of Kosovar Albanians who have appeared in court testifying to horrific abuses?
Milosevic has repeatedly claimed to be uninterested in a legal defense; what is surprising is the lack of nuance in his political defense, which is being crippled by this lack of compassion and by the denial of every element of witness testimony, no matter how well supported. This failure is highlighted by the emergence of two damning reinforcements of the prosecution’s case surrounding the refrigerator truck episode. One is a signed statement by Markovic attesting to a meeting in April 1999 in which Milosevic ordered the removal of crime evidence in Kosovo, including the unearthing and transport of corpses who could become the objects of investigations. In the statement, Markovic reports that he refused to allow his forces to become involved in the “morbid affair,” and that he subsequently heard complaints from those who carried out the “mopping-up” operations, with the refrigerated truck cited as an example of poor organization.
When the investigating police officer Dragan Karleusa mentioned this statement in court in support of his initial reports, Milosevic claimed first that the statement was fabricated, and then that it must have been made under extreme duress and torture during Markovic’s imprisonment. But when Markovic himself was later brought before the judges, he acknowledged that he had made and signed the statement, and that it had not been made under duress. He claimed, rather, that it was a “liberal interpretation” of oral remarks that he had signed without reading, and that no mention of crimes had been made at the meeting.
In a second blow to Milosevic’s “phantom” refrigerator truck position, the Spanish Institute of Toxicology has issued further findings from their DNA analyses indicating a high probability of Kosovar origin for the bodies exhumed from one of the mass graves. This new evidence broadens the DNA analysis of two bodies presented by investigator William Robert Fulton in May. Together with evidence from the policemen involved and from the man who drove bodies to a burial site, the report establishes a compelling link between attacks in Kosovo, the refrigerator truck, and the mass graves. Milosevic has maintained that no refrigerator truck corpses have ever been located or exhumed. When Milosevic’s pronouncements are shown to bear no relation to the claims of even the most sympathetic witnesses, or to increasingly convincing physical evidence, both his legal and his political defenses are jeopardized.
In the overriding interest of a fair trial, the court itself is responsible for ensuring that Milosevic’s legal defense is minimally effective. Even the prosecution has become concerned by his apparent disinterest in presenting a coherent challenge to the cumulative evidence; prosecutor Geoffrey Nice has taken pains to draw the court’s and Milosevic’s attention to the DNA findings, expressing concern that the accused understand the state of the evidence, especially given suggestions that the refrigerator truck corpses were trafficked immigrants.
Milosevic alone, however, is responsible for the integrity of his political position that he, and by extension, the Serb people, are the blameless victims of an illegitimate Tribunal. On one level, of course, he is sending a contradictory message about the court’s legitimacy through his insistence on total participation in the trial. Although he has called the proceedings a farce, he has also reminded the court - and his supporters at home - that he avails himself of every opportunity to “speak the truth.” During the recess, Milosevic will have an opportunity to reflect on the type of “truth-speaking” he has engaged in to date, and how his performance will ultimately be judged by those whom he claims to care about. In the end, a refusal to recognize any wrongdoing, even if unrelated to his own actions, and a complimentary refusal to acknowledge any suffering, may be Milosevic’s greatest betrayal of his country.
It is impossible to know whether Radojkovic, for example, feels personally betrayed by Milosevic’s dismissal of what he must have experienced as he unloaded dead bodies from the refrigerator truck under cover of night. Ultimately, however, average Serbs will be forced to weigh Milosevic’s claims that he is vindicating his nation against his refusal to acknowledge any wrongdoing on any level, even in the face of overwhelming evidence. A similar public relations failure rears its head every time Milosevic asserts, as he did with Radomir Markovic, that any crimes committed by “rogue” police or military are appalling, contrary to orders, and must be prosecuted. If, as Markovic acknowledged, hundreds of such “aberrant” crimes were committed, then why has Milosevic withheld any hint of compassion for the vast majority of Kosovar Albanians who have appeared in court testifying to horrific abuses?
Milosevic has repeatedly claimed to be uninterested in a legal defense; what is surprising is the lack of nuance in his political defense, which is being crippled by this lack of compassion and by the denial of every element of witness testimony, no matter how well supported. This failure is highlighted by the emergence of two damning reinforcements of the prosecution’s case surrounding the refrigerator truck episode. One is a signed statement by Markovic attesting to a meeting in April 1999 in which Milosevic ordered the removal of crime evidence in Kosovo, including the unearthing and transport of corpses who could become the objects of investigations. In the statement, Markovic reports that he refused to allow his forces to become involved in the “morbid affair,” and that he subsequently heard complaints from those who carried out the “mopping-up” operations, with the refrigerated truck cited as an example of poor organization.
When the investigating police officer Dragan Karleusa mentioned this statement in court in support of his initial reports, Milosevic claimed first that the statement was fabricated, and then that it must have been made under extreme duress and torture during Markovic’s imprisonment. But when Markovic himself was later brought before the judges, he acknowledged that he had made and signed the statement, and that it had not been made under duress. He claimed, rather, that it was a “liberal interpretation” of oral remarks that he had signed without reading, and that no mention of crimes had been made at the meeting.
In a second blow to Milosevic’s “phantom” refrigerator truck position, the Spanish Institute of Toxicology has issued further findings from their DNA analyses indicating a high probability of Kosovar origin for the bodies exhumed from one of the mass graves. This new evidence broadens the DNA analysis of two bodies presented by investigator William Robert Fulton in May. Together with evidence from the policemen involved and from the man who drove bodies to a burial site, the report establishes a compelling link between attacks in Kosovo, the refrigerator truck, and the mass graves. Milosevic has maintained that no refrigerator truck corpses have ever been located or exhumed. When Milosevic’s pronouncements are shown to bear no relation to the claims of even the most sympathetic witnesses, or to increasingly convincing physical evidence, both his legal and his political defenses are jeopardized.
In the overriding interest of a fair trial, the court itself is responsible for ensuring that Milosevic’s legal defense is minimally effective. Even the prosecution has become concerned by his apparent disinterest in presenting a coherent challenge to the cumulative evidence; prosecutor Geoffrey Nice has taken pains to draw the court’s and Milosevic’s attention to the DNA findings, expressing concern that the accused understand the state of the evidence, especially given suggestions that the refrigerator truck corpses were trafficked immigrants.
Milosevic alone, however, is responsible for the integrity of his political position that he, and by extension, the Serb people, are the blameless victims of an illegitimate Tribunal. On one level, of course, he is sending a contradictory message about the court’s legitimacy through his insistence on total participation in the trial. Although he has called the proceedings a farce, he has also reminded the court - and his supporters at home - that he avails himself of every opportunity to “speak the truth.” During the recess, Milosevic will have an opportunity to reflect on the type of “truth-speaking” he has engaged in to date, and how his performance will ultimately be judged by those whom he claims to care about. In the end, a refusal to recognize any wrongdoing, even if unrelated to his own actions, and a complimentary refusal to acknowledge any suffering, may be Milosevic’s greatest betrayal of his country.
