From notes@igc.apc.org Tue Oct 3 09:45:47 1995
Received: from cdp.igc.apc.org (192.82.108.1) by MediaFilter.org
 with SMTP (MailShare 1.0b10); Tue, 3 Oct 1995 09:45:48 -0500
Received: (from notes) by cdp.igc.apc.org (8.6.12/Revision: 1.207 ) id FAA16630 for "conf-zamir.chat"; Tue, 3 Oct 1995 05:46:24 -0700
Date: 03 Oct 1995 05:26:40
Reply-To: Conference "zamir.chat" 
From: f.h.riley@ucc.hull.ac.uk
Subject: UN in Bosnia
To: Recipients of zamir-chat-l 
Message-ID: <199510031226.FAA05365@igc3.igc.apc.org>
X-Gateway: conf2mail@igc.apc.org
Errors-To: owner-zamir-chat-l@igc.apc.org
Precedence: bulk
Lines: 470

From: f.h.riley@ucc.hull.ac.uk (Fred Riley)

This article appeared in various left-wing newsgroups but wasn't posted to
Bosnia-related newsgroups, which seems a little strange to me. Anyway, I
found it interesting.

========================================================================

From: PNEWS 
Newsgroups:
alt.politics.radical-left,alt.activism,misc.headlines,alt.politics.greens
Subject: UN in Bosnia
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 1995 06:05:37 -0400
Organization: Shadow Information Services, Inc.
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN
Message-ID: 



[*********PNEWS CONFERENCES************]



/* Written by peg:greenleft in igc:greenleft.news */

Title: The UN in Bosnia: creating apartheid in Europe



FRANCIS BOYLE is professor of international law at the University of

Illinois at Champaign-Urbana. He served as legal adviser to Bosnian

President Izetbegovic and Foreign Minister Haris Silajdzic during the

Owen-Stoltenburg negotiations in Geneva, and represented the Bosnian

government at the International Court of Justice. This interview by EDDY

JOKOVICH is excerpted from a new magazine, VolteFace.



Question: Initially, so-called great players wanted to keep Yugoslavia

intact, but when it became obvious that this wasn't going to be the case,

the west introduced a number of conferences and plans. If these plans

violated established human rights, racial discrimination, and apartheid

conventions, why have they been attempted?



The great powers have basically concluded that the Bosnians have lost the

war, and of course, the reason the Bosnians lost the war was that the great

powers at the Security Council imposed the arms embargo upon them. So when

the signal was given by President Milosevic to attack Bosnia, the Bosnian

people were totally defenceless.



Hence, the creation of the plans and schemes that violate every known

principle of international law. When I was instructed by President Alija

Izetbegovic to sue Britain in November 1993, I put out a statement at the UN

- which the ambassador circulated and then filed with the World Court

accusing Britain of aiding and abetting genocide - that the Owen-Stoltenburg

Plan violated the Racial Discrimination Convention. Anyone who knew anything

at all about that plan would have understood that. It also violated the

Apartheid Convention.



So any of the permanent members of the Security Council can be sued for

violating the Genocide Convention, the Racial Discrimination Convention and

the Apartheid Convention. But when President Izetbegovic instructed me to

sue Britain, the then Bosnian foreign minister, Ljubijankic, was called in

and told that if the Bosnian government was to continue with the lawsuit,

the humanitarian assistance being provided to the Bosnian people would be

cut. They were pressured by the French, the Germans and the Americans, as

well as Owen and Stoltenburg, to drop the whole case.



The Vance-Owen plan would have carved up Bosnia into 10 cantons on an ethnic

basis, but would not have destroyed Bosnia as a state. When Serbian

President Slobodan Milosevic and the Bosnian Serb leader, Radovan Karazdic,

and his so-called parliament rejected the Vance-Owen plan, the great powers

then moved on to the Owen-Stoltenburg plan. It would have carved up the

state itself.



The plan today, the so-called Contact Group plan, carves Bosnia into two

pieces. It will preserve the shell of the Bosnian state. They're still

trying to carve Bosnia up, and the land that they have allocated to the

so-called federation will make Bosnia an appendage of Croatia.



Question: The Washington plan instigated a confederation between Croatia and

Bosnia. If the Bosnian government can federate with Croatia, why can't the

Bosnian Serbs federate with Serbia?



The Washington agreements were designed by the State Department to carve up

Bosnia under the fiction of preserving the state of Bosnia, but consigning

these people to the control of Croatia. The federation with Croatia was

imposed on the Bosnians; it's not something that they wanted. So the

argument that the Serbs must have the same deal is just total hypocrisy.



But the point is, the Serbs have already been promised a confederation by

the great powers. That's why the federation-confederation was set up between

Croatia and Bosnia - to ultimately give the Serbs the same thing.



Question: Milosevic is perceived by the US and the west as someone that they

can do business with. Is this in terms of the arms trade, or economics, or

other geopolitical factors?



In control and domination of the Balkans. They're all saying the west can do

business with Milosevic, not only in respect to Bosnia, but in the whole

region. He can keep it under control.



When Yugoslavia was about to fall apart, George Bush sent his secretary of

state, Jim Baker, to meet with Milosevic and make the statement that the

United States supports the territorial integrity of Yugoslavia. Why? The

policeman theory: the US needs Belgrade to keep the Balkans under control.

That statement was the green light to Milosevic to invade Slovenia, then to

invade Croatia and then to invade Bosnia. And then the arms embargo was put

on.



Question: On the issue of the international arms embargo over the former

Yugoslav republics, the UN General Assembly voted to lift the embargo, the

US Congress voted to lift the embargo as well, yet it remains in place. Why

has the international arms embargo not been lifted?



First of all, Resolution 713 outlining the arms embargo was imposed on the

former Yugoslavia. There is no Security Council resolution at all that says

that independent Bosnia is subject to an arms embargo. The situation

consisted of the British, the French and the Americans deciding to prevent

the government of Bosnia from defending themselves from a genocidal assault.



It was the British Navy, the French Navy and the American Navy in the

Adriatic and the Air Force that made it quite clear that no weapons could go

into Bosnia. Eventually Congress forced Clinton to pull out, but the British

and the French are still there policing this embargo.



Belgrade, after some procrastination, went along with this because they

already had enough weapons, and therefore the embargo was not going to hurt

them, but hurt the Bosnians.



That's what the international community has been doing so far. ``You can't

have that; we're not giving it to you. All you have is a little apartheid

Muslim mini-state.''



The United Nations is an instrument, and in this sense, Boutros-Ghali is

correct in stating that the UN can only act according to its mandate. He

just does what the great powers tell him to do.



This is the first case in the post-World War II era where a formal

determination of the existence of genocide was produced, and of the trigger

of the Genocide Convention obligation. I won that World Court ruling on

April 8, 1992, and no-one did anything about it despite the existence within

the UN Convention of the obligation to stop genocide. Later on, of course,

the same thing happened in Rwanda and nothing was done there either.



What we are witnessing now is a degradation of any international commitments

to any principles at all. Even when genocide stares the great powers in the

face, they refuse to do anything to stop it. As Haris Silajdzic said in

Geneva, if you kill one person you're prosecuted; if you kill 10 people,

you're a celebrity; if you kill a quarter of a million people, you're

invited to a peace conference.



Question: What is the purpose of the War Crimes Tribunal, and what are the

problems that exist within its legal framework?



I don't mean to criticise any of the judges involved and I'm sure that

they're men and women of good faith, but essentially, the War Crimes

Tribunal is an exercise in public relations by the Security Council. The CIA

has made detailed reports, the State Department has made detailed reports,

they have their reconnaissance satellites and their airplanes; they know all

about the war crimes in Bosnia. But the Security Council decided to set up

the tribunal to make it appear as if something is being done, whereas in

fact what they are doing is negotiating with the very people they know are

responsible for the war crimes.



During the [1992] campaign Clinton had to appeal to a certain constituency

in the United States, the human rights lobby, and for them Bosnia is an

important issue. So Clinton has to make it appear as if something is really

being done on Bosnia, and the installation of the tribunal gave this

appearance.



It's just like what happened with the Bassiouni commission. Sharif Bassiouni

was put in charge of the commission to investigate war crimes in the former

Yugoslavia. The UN gave him no money. He had to go out and find his own

money. Then the UN put Bassiouni out of business because he was doing an

effective job even with all the financial obstacles. And when it was

proposed that Bassiouni should be the chief prosecutor, the British objected

because they couldn't control him - he might do an effective job; he might

do something silly like indict Milosevic.



The US knew about the death camps through their intelligence networks, but

they weren't saying anything about them, and they weren't going to do

anything about them. Then Roy Gutman, the courageous reporter from Newsday,

broke the story and it went out all over the world.



Question: There is one consistent factor in the conflicts in Bosnia,

Chechnya, Nagorno-Karabakh, the Gulf War - a toleration by the west of

atrocities committed against Muslim populations.



The west seems to be going to war with the Muslim world. The way that the

Palestinians are being treated by the Israelis is tantamount to genocide.

Libya is being attacked and destabilised because of oil and the fact that

Colonel Qadhafi will not take orders from the west. Iran is under assault by

the United States primarily at the beck and call of the Israelis. The entire

Gulf is under the control of the United States. The US sits on top of all

that oil - 50% of the world's oil supply. And the US is keeping Iraq in near

genocidal conditions. Chechnya again is a situation where more Muslim people

are being wiped out.



And we've heard Owen and others say, ``We don't want a Muslim state in

Europe''. This is the final cleansing and wiping out of a major concentrated

population of Muslims in Europe, and no-one really cares.



Question: What future do you see for the republic of Bosnia-Hercegovina?



The Bosnians are going to keep fighting. Where this will lead, I really

can't say, but as long as the Bosnians keep fighting, the pillars of the

post-World War II legal order are going to be shaken - the UN, NATO and the

World Court.



That arms embargo is the most critical factor now, as they need the heavy

weapons to defend their people. This is their right under Article 51 of the

UN Charter. It is also their obligation under the Genocide Convention.



Question: What future is there for the United Nations?



None. As I see it, if this continues the way that it's going, then the UN

means nothing, and it would be better to put it out of its misery, than a

continuation of the current hypocrisy.



The Security Council should be put out of business and all the functions for

any maintenance of international peace and security should be transferred to

the General Assembly. In this sense, there would be the capacity to have

some sort of democratic control, but this suggestion is not on anyone's

agenda. The Security Council is like a star chamber these days, where they

no longer even meet in public. It's just a little club of the most powerful

members of the world to order around everyone else.



First posted on the Pegasus conference greenleft.news by

Green Left Weekly. Correspondence and hard copy subsciption

inquiries: greenleft@peg.apc.org



Six-month airmail subscriptions (22 issues) to Green Left Weekly

are available for A$60 (North America) and A$75 (South America,

Europe & Africa) from PO Box 394, Broadway NSW 2007, Australia





@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

             ***** PEOPLE BEFORE PROFITS ******

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

PNEWS CONFERENCES  provide "radical" alternative views with an 

  emphasis on justice, humanitarian positions, protests, 

  boycott alerts, activism information, etc. 

                       ****************

       To subscribe, send request to: 

 "SUBSCRIBE PNEWS-L "

   @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

                           

 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred Riley
f.h.riley@langc.hull.ac.uk
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From OTVORENE-OCI_ST@ZAMIR-ZG.ztn.apc.org Tue Oct 3 10:12:27 1995
Received: from bi-node.zerberus.de (194.77.23.10) by MediaFilter.org
 with SMTP (MailShare 1.0b10); Tue, 3 Oct 1995 10:12:28 -0500
Received: from bionic.zerberus.de by bi-node.zerberus.de with zconnect
	(Smail3.1.29.1 #6) id m0t04dv-0002cmC; Tue, 3 Oct 95 11:32 MET
To: act@web.apc.org, antenna@earn.cvut.cz, Barnett_Rubin_at_CFR1@email.cfr.org,	 boyd@sociamedia.nl, bruno@bbeloff.demon.co.uk, eagro@igc.apc.org,	 G.R.Beckett@bradford.ac.uk, GSOA@gsoa.link-ch1.ch, idee@dgs.dgsys.com,	 ifor@gn.apc.org, igcnewsdesk@igc.org, maggie@gn.apc.org, newsdesk@igc.apc.org,	 nizichi@hrw.org, peacemedia@gn.apc.org, peacenews@gn.apc.org,	 pmiller@amnesty.gn.apc.org, pnbalkans@igc.org, radiopanik@gn.apc.org,	 sj@mediafilter.org, verforum@vub.ac.be, w04boj31@icineca.cineca.it,	 warreport@gn.apc.org, zukicn@wu1.wl.aecl.ca
CC: DEBRA@OLN.comlink.apc.org, HHO_ZG@ZAMIR-ZG.ztn.zer.de, GRADJ-ODB_ZG@ZAMIR-ZG.ztn.zer.de
Message-Id: <5vAN8hqC_7B@pz-balk.zamir-zg.ztn.apc.org>
From: OTVORENE-OCI_ST@ZAMIR-ZG.ztn.apc.org (Otvorene oci  )
Path: bionic.zerberus.de!zamir-zg.ztn.apc.org
Organization: Otvorene Oci
Subject: Evictions in Split and the role of the military
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 1995 08:36:00 +0100
X-Mailer: CrossPoint v3.02
X-Gateway: ZCONNECT bi-node.zerberus.de [UNIX/Connect v0.74a]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-ZC-Post: Male Putine 2/V; 41000 Zagreb CROATIA
X-ZC-Telefon: +385-21-553-610 +385-1-156-349
X-ZC-DDA: 19951003093408W+0
Lines: 257

DUE TO A PROBLEM IN RELAYING THIS ARTICLE (SOME RECIPIENTS
REPORTED THAT THEY ONLY RECEIVED THE HEADER) WE POST IT AGAIN.
EXCUSE US FOR THE INCONVENIENCE. OTVORENE OCI SPLIT

/////////////////////////////***\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\  
                     O T V O R E N E  O C I 
            Croatian Branch of the Balkan Peace Team           
             Male Putine 2/V  41000 Zagreb  CROATIA

                Zagreb:  tel/fax +385- 1-156-349        
                Split :  tel/fax +385-21-553-610               
              otvorene-oci_zg@zamir-zg.ztn.apc.org             
              otvorene-oci_st@zamir-zg.ztn.apc.org
/////////////////////////////***\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
          
       *EVICTIONS IN SPLIT AND THE ROLE OF THE MILITARY*


[Sunday, 01 October, 1995 -  Split]


This report focusses on the relation between recent
developments concerning evictions of tenants of former JNA
(Yugoslav People's Army) apartments in Split and the rising
influence and growing amount of activities of the Croatian
Military in the field of housing. These activities are even
more apparent since the Croatian Government enforced
amendments to the "Law on the Privatisation of Apartments
under Tenancy Right". A new wave of evictions has since then
descended on Split.

Rising engagement and growing power of the Military

Since the beginning of May when Croatian Army operation
"Flash" was carried out, the army gained even more credit,
status and power than it had before. Operation "Storm" added
to this significantly. All over the country the army has been
praised and warmly welcomed back to their home towns. On
September 2 the 4th Brigade was welcomed into Split by a
cheering crowd. Tenants who recently had been evicted from
their apartments definitely do not share the same enthusiasm.

Within the Croatian Military three main actors in the field of
housing can be distinguished. The Military Housing Commission
(MHC) deals with issues concerning the former JNA apartments
on an administrative level. Mr. Sveti Parlov is the head of
the MHC in Split. 
The Military Police, whose tasks include the actual evictions,
assists in the execution of administrative evictions and in
the removal of soldiers-evictors. According to a decree issued
by Mr. Mate Lausic (President of the Croatian Military Police)
on May 19, 1994, the Military Police is supposed to evict
perpretators of illegal evictions immediately. 
The 4th Brigade of the Croatian Army, which is based in Split,
did not always play such an open and dominant role in the
field of housing as it currently does. The soldiers that have
violently and illegally evicted tenants are all 4th Brigade 





soldiers, but previously it was not a common practice that 4th
Brigade soldiers arrived at the scene of an administrative
eviction to prevent the eviction of a colleague by the
eviction commission or to secure the eviction of tenants by
that commission, nor that 4th Brigade soldiers were members of
the MHC.

The links between the MHC and the 4th Brigade have been
strenghtened by the acceptance of soldiers-evictors as members
of the Presidency of the MHC. A soldier who violently and
illegally evicted the Masnic family, Mr. Aljinovic, has been
appointed a member. Mr. Zupic who illegallly evicted Mrs.
Filipovic and still resides in her flat is also a member. 

The power of the tandem MHC-4th Brigade can be effectively
illustrated by the well-known case of the Masnic family. This
case revealed the defiance of the MHC, towards the
Constitutional Court, when the Commission refused to intervene
when 4th Brigade soldier Mr. Aljinovic evicted the Masnic
family a day after the High Court had granted the Masnic's the
right to stay in their apartment. Furthermore, in defiance of
that decision, the MHC sent 4th Brigade soldier Reljanovic to
occupy the apartment when Aljinovic left two weeks later as
the MHC rewarded him with an apartment of his own.

The rising power of the tandem MHC-4th Brigade may also be
demonstrated by the comparison of the following two cases. In
the aforementioned case of Mrs. Masnic the illegal occupant of
the apartment, Mr. Reljanovic stated in court (12 February
1995) that the MHC had sent him to occupy the apartment. A
surprising statement and a testimony, which Otvorene Oci found
out that Mr. Parlov, the president of the MHC, was very
discontented with.
In June however, after 6th prevention of the administrative
eviction of a soldier illegally occupying the apartment of Mr.
Morovic, the MHC sent a letter to the Civil Housing Commission
stating that the soldier should not be evicted because it was
the MHC itself who had sent the soldier to take over that
apartment. 

A case illustrating the liberties that the MHC takes in
solving the housing problem in Split involves the Babelli
family. Representatives of the MHC summoned the family to come
to the Commission to discuss their apartment rights. On
return, they found their apartment sealed and were not allowed
to enter, not even to take out some essentials. The response
of the MHC was,"Come back after the weekend". They never
returned to their apartment.

4th Brigade in action

In May and June, soldiers of the 4th Brigade 6 times succeeded
in preventing the legal (`administrative') eviction of the 






soldier-evictor of Mr. Morovic and also prevented domestic
human rights activists, who came to monitor the eviction, from
entering the apartment. 
On July 24 the Spanovic family was supposed to be
administratively evicted at 08.30 am. The activists that
wanted to monitor this event arrived at the scene around
07.30, but by then the two entrances to the building were
already guarded by 4th Brigade soldiers, who, according to Mr.
Spanovic had arrived at 06.00am. The soldiers wanted no-one
but the eviction commission to enter the building. Mr.
Spanovic was threatened not to bring any activists the next
time. Mr. Spanovic is still afraid of the 4th Brigade soldiers
and does not want to undertake any further action. The
activists, who waited outside, were also threatened by the
soldiers.

Since the new "Law on the Privatisation of Apartments under
Tenancy Right" has been enforced on 17 August 1995, the 4th
Brigade has stepped up its activities. The law defines which
documents tenants of JNA apartments need to submit to the
Ministry of Defence in Zagreb to be able to buy their
apartments and within which time limits the documents need to
be submitted. October 17 is the last day that tenants can
submit their requests. This means that the concept of
apartment rights will from then on be a relic of Yugoslavia's
socialist past. The period up to 17 October is a period during
which Croatian Army soldiers are and will be illegally taking
over as many former JNA apartments as they can.

Reports from Zagreb are the same as from Split, and indicate
that there is a discernable new wave of evictions. In Split
the Dalmatian Committee of Solidarity, the Dalmatian Committee
for Human Rights and the Croatian Helsinki Committee receive
reports of new cases every week. A few examples will be given
to shed additional light on the manner in which the military
has recently been playing a role in these evictions.

The `new wave'

Mrs. Bodrozic was evicted while standing in one of the endless
lines in front of the police station in order to obtain a
document required for the purchase of her apartment. When she
returned to her apartment she found her apartment sealed with
a note on the door saying: "You enter at the responsibility of
the owner" signed by the Ministry of Defence of the Republic
of Croatia. The MHC did not permit her to return to her
apartment. A similar procedure was applied against the
Maksimovic family, the Benes family and Mr. Akerman. They too
found their apartments sealed by the Ministry of Defence (in
practice the MHC) and have not been allowed to return to their
domiciles.

The Petrovic family was evicted by a 4th Brigade soldier while
being on holiday on the island of Brac. The Military Police 




seems to ignore the aforementioned decree issued by Mr.
Lausic. The Split Military Police only allowed Mrs. Petrovic
to take some of her documents out of the apartment. The
Petrovic's have overcome their initial fear of the 4th Brigade
and have decided to start a criminal procedure against the
soldier currently occupying their apartment.

Upon her return from the town centre Mrs. Zora Pavela
discovered that she had been evicted by a 4th Brigade soldier.
She is a woman with a psychiatric past and because of the
shock she experienced related to her eviction she once again
resides in the psychiatric ward of a Split hospital. The
Military Police had been notified but undertook no action at
all.

Mrs. Kovacevic had soldiers knocking at her door several times
recently but she refused to open the door. A few weeks ago she
found a handwritten note on her door: "You are requested to
report yourself immediately at the subcommission of the
Military Housing Commission, Sukoisanka Street 6, room number
4, to arrange the papers concerning your apartment rights. You
may come on Friday, between 08.00 and 12.00". As the
possibility of her eviction was apparent, domestic activists
decided to be present in her apartment that Friday morning.
Nothing happened but Mrs. Kovacevic continues to live in fear.

Mr. Parlov, the MHC and its `subcommission'

The aforementioned `subcommission' is not mentioned in the
"Law on the Privatisation of Apartments under Tenancy Rights",
but such a subcommission definitely exists and its
representatives try to pursuade tenants to tell all people
living in former JNA apartments to visit them. No-one ever
receives an official invitation to visit this sub-commission.

According to Mrs. Raos, who also felt obliged to visit the
sub-commission, the representatives threaten them by claiming
that if these tenants will not visit the sub-commission, their
requests to buy their apartments will not be dealt with at the
Ministry of Defence in Zagreb. At home Mrs. Raos was visited
by a woman in uniform presenting herself as a representative
of the MHC without being able to identify herself as such. The
woman told her that, according to the rules of the new law her
apartment was too big for one person, and that she had to move
out. She assumed this was the truth and felt scared. The next
day she spoke to Mr. Parlov, the president of the MHC, who
stated that the woman in uniform did not represent the MHC and
that the woman's claims were unfounded. If an apartment is too
big according to the new guidelines, Mr. Parlov stated, the
tenant has the right to buy the surplus in square meters at
current market prices. 







Mr. Parlov told Mrs. Raos that the Military Housing Commission
does not visit tenants at their apartments. At the same time
domestic human rights organisations have received numerous
reports of visits by alleged representatives of the MHC. 

The role of Mr. Parlov apparantly is of an ambiguous nature. A
woman who wishes to remain anonymus stated that Mr. Parlov
himself had given her the advice to illegally occupy an
apartment. 

Shocked by the picture of Ante Pavelic (leader of the
"Independent State of Croatia" during World War II) in one of
the rooms of the sub-commission, Mrs. Raos lives in fear. She
has the feeling that there is no-one whom she can turn to. She
doe not trust the MHC and she knows of too many cases in which
neither the Civil Police nor the Military Police protected
evicted tenants. 

Domestic human rights groups are currently discussing what
action can be undertaken to stop these developments. ## CrossPoint v3.02 ##