MASS GRAVES AND OTHER ATROCITIES IN BOSNIA
US Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe
Washington, DC
Wednesday, DECEMBER 6, 1995
Chairman SMITH. Dr. Wolf, thank you for that very disturbing
testimony. You have reminded us what kind of atrocities we are actually
talking about when we see it in black and white and in color. I'd like to
begin the questioning and then yield to my colleagues for any questions they
might have. Mr. Rohde, you mentioned earlier that, when you were held by the
Bosnian Serbs, some of your guards with whom you had contact were obviously
more decent than others. They weren't into intimidation. They even gave you a
heads- up that things might turn out well for you. We've heard over and over
that all of the Bosnian Serbs are not acting with the same kind of impunity
in this war, and that there are some who really believe that these atrocities
are not taking place. Now, Hitler had his SS, he had his storm troopers, and
he had people who committed atrocities as a matter of course. General
Mladic-and Mr. Lupis, you might want to speak to this as well-must have a
very elite group or corps of people who are given to these kinds of
atrocities, who will follow orders to the letter, dotting the i's and
crossing the t's, and doing the kinds of terrible things that we see here. Is
there evidence that those people are being identified? I know there have been
a few names handed down, including Mladic, in terms of indictments. Are we
gathering evidence that indicates there is a core group of Bosnian Serbs that
committed the bulk of these atrocities? Mr. Lupis, would you want to start on
that? Mr. LUPIS. Yes. As a matter of fact, during this investigation, we've
been trying to piece together a chain of command linking the soldiers in the
field who committed these crimes and continue up the ladder until we get to
Mladic. In this case, for the Srebrenica offensive, most of the hard work has
been cut out for us because General Mladic was witnessed, was seen at many of
these massacre sites. The real problem now is to try to get the chain
established between the infantrymen and Mladic. Human Rights Watch, in the
last few days, has been successful in obtaining information, names of Bosnian
Serb commanders who operated during this offensive and who gave the orders to
the men. The harder thing right now is to establish precisely who from Serbia
proper-what military people from Serbia proper, what soldiers from Serbia
proper-were involved, because there's strong evidence to support that troops
from Serbia proper were also used in this offensive. We collected many
testimonies. People said they'd seen Serbian troops in Serbian uniforms,
distinguishable mainly by accents. The Serbian accent is very different from
the Bosnian accent. Also, the U.N. reports that Mazowiecki published also
collected testimonies of people seeing Serbian troops involved in this
offensive. So right now, we have a pretty good picture of who's involved from
the Bosnian Serb side. The more difficult question now is to see if we can
determine who was involved in Serbia proper. Chairman SMITH. Mr. Rohde? Mr.
ROHDE. I heard the same thing from survivors regarding Serbian accents and
that kind of thing. And experts I've talked with over there-U.N. officials,
various military officials-feel that President Milosevic of Serbia has one of
the best intelligence organizations in the former Yugoslavia. He has very
close ties. Serbians are able to slip into Bosnian Serb territory, so it's
very possible that he knew these executions were going on but did nothing to
stop them. Chairman SMITH. Given the allegations of mass executions which
have been spoken about today-and we've heard about previously-was there any
attempt by the United Nations, particularly as related to the safe haven
Srebrenica, to investigate those mass executions as they were occurring? Mr.
LUPIS. Well, the role of the United Nations is problematic in the fact that
the United Nations Dutch battalion in Srebrenica was in a very difficult
situation: undermanned and unable to protect the enclave from this attack.
The problem that Human Rights Watch has with the United Nations' role is that
even if they were helpless in stopping this from happening, there was crucial
information which was not released in a timely fashion. The Dutch
peacekeepers witnessed some of these atrocities taking place, and instead of
radioing it out real-time, these allegations and stories started coming out a
few days after the fall of Srebrenica. Now, Mazowiecki, the U.N. human rights
rapporteur, had written up a report based on testimonies taken from people
investigating the role of the U.N. troops there; and it has caused waves in
Holland. The Dutch Government has apparently suppressed information, a list
of men who were turned over to the Serbs. If you would like to read about
this more in detail, it's in our report, but right now, the U.N. is really
trying to feel out what it can do to explain this lack of action taken by it,
and as a result of the Srebrenica debacle, Mr. Mazowiecki resigned his post
in, I think, late August, early September. Mr. ROHDE. There's just one thing.
I also went to Holland and spoke to some of the peacekeepers who were in the
enclave themselves, and they spoke of being very frustrated about being
outmanned, outgunned, and almost being given an impossible mission to do. And
the specific thing was that there was a list of, I believe, 142 men - 239,
sorry-who were inside the U.N. enclave and ordered by the Dutch to leave. As
they left, they were separated from their families and taken away. All of
those men are missing, and one of the survivors that I spoke to said he was
also at Potocari, which leads me to believe that those men may very well be
in the grave that I found near the village of Cajnice. Chairman SMITH. Let me
ask one final question before yielding to Mr. Hoyer. Mr. Lupis, I think this
issue will especially apply to you as a researcher for a human rights
organization. Mr. Rohde and Dr. Wolf, you also may want to go back to some of
the places that you have visited. Do you believe that you will have access,
unfettered access, to the sites where suspected mass graves and other kind of
atrocities may have been held by all three sides? Mr. ROHDE. I believe,
according to the peace agreement, journalists do not have unfettered access
to Bosnian Serb territory. Mr. LUPIS. Yes, and this would be a good
opportunity to call the Serbs' bluff and promise access to these graves under
the Dayton peace agreement. I believe IFOR, the Implementation Force, has
unrestricted access to any place in Bosnia-Herzegovina. This would be a good
opportunity to bring human rights groups, as well as forensic experts, along
with IFOR troops, to the massacre sites. I believe eastern Bosnia, where
Srebrenica is, falls under U.S. jurisdiction, so a timely action would be to
deliver a forensic team and a human rights team to be escorted to these sites
by U.S. troops as soon as the Dayton peace agreement is signed. One thing I
think David said before, which may be dangerous, is that when he was
captured, his maps of the sites were confiscated from him and, as well, his
pictures were developed. Something like this should be done in a hurry;
otherwise, the Bosnian Serbs would be able to dig up these graves and remove
the bodies. I believe they've started in one place already. Chairman SMITH.
If I could follow up, is there something that should be coordinated with
Justice Goldstone and his prosecutors, or is it something that would be done
independently? How would you work that? Dr. Wolf, how did you work yours? Dr.
WOLF. Well, our trip was under the auspices of AmeriCares and in
collaboration with the Split Medical Center. There are several forensic teams
in place, a team in Split, a team in Zagreb. They have all of the knowledge
and techniques, including DNA technology, to do the identification process,
but basically we are talking about just a few forensic pathologists and
dentists. So I think we would need both the resources, in terms of monetary
resources, as well as assistance from other forensic experts. They are
certainly very appreciative of any forensic help in that regard. Chairman
SMITH. Mr. Lupis, how does your information make its way to Justice
Goldstone? Do you work with him, or do you feed them information? Mr. LUPIS.
No, we work independently. They have their own investigators, and we have
ours. But we work in a parallel fashion. Whatever we uncover or discover we
send immediately to them just to help them build the cases for the
indictments. But it's a solid system. So far, everything we've published
since 1991-1992 about the war has been handed over to the International
Criminal Tribunal, so it's effective. I think they could do a good job if
they fully carried it out. Mr. ROHDE. I just want to state that I don't work
in a parallel fashion with the War Crimes Tribunal. I just try to get the
information public and give it to the public. It would be good, though, if
this proposed trip you've talked about would include journalists so they
could also go, and we don't have unfettered access; but I'm sure that there
are journalists who would volunteer to go along if there were adequate
security guarantees. Chairman SMITH. I yield to the distinguished chairman of
the International Committee, Mr. Gilman. Mr. GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Smith. I
just wanted to commend you and Senator D'Amato and members of the Commission
for conducting this hearing at this time. It's very timely, and I hope that
the evidence unearthed by our investigators will get to the proper hands, the
tribunal that's examining the war crimes. Many of us in the Congress are very
much concerned about further pursuit of those war crimes, that they not get
buried in all of the paperwork that's going on in trying to give some peace
to that area. Thank you, Mr. Smith. I regret I'm being called to another
meeting. Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Hoyer. Mr. HOYER. Thank
you very much. I want to thank all three of you for your testimony, but much
more important than that, I want to thank you for the work you're doing. In
three different areas, you are critical players, making sure that the cycle
of vengeance and lack of justice and redress of atrocities that I talked
about will not occur. Let me ask a few questions. Dr. Wolf, you indicated
that there were, in fact, pathologists on the ground in Bosnia who are
competent and capable of doing good forensic work. Dr. WOLF. Very much so,
and I think this was really an example of science crossing political lines.
The techniques that we use in the United States were very much the same
techniques that they were using there, including the DNA laboratory in Split
. Mr. HOYER. The problem, I take it then, is the volume of work to be done
and the scarcity of numbers there to do the work? Dr. WOLF. The volume of
people to be identified, and the lack of available information which aids in
identification. The forensic teams have done a tremendous amount of work in
gathering whatever information is available about the missing persons. They
have a data bank and have gathered whatever dental or other medical
information about these missing persons, but in many cases, because the
entire towns are destroyed, there is very little to use. Traditionally with
identification of a decomposed body, we work with dental records, that sort
of thing. In many cases, those records aren't available there. So that puts a
greater need for DNA techniques. The laboratory in Split has been up and
running for about a year and they're now expanding beyond traditional DNA,
hopefully into the more sophisticated mitochondrial DNA techniques. I think
that's going to become very important in this process. In that way, samples
from relatives can be used to identify some of these missing people when
other methods of identification aren't available. Croatian scientists have
come to this country and spent time working with the technologies. Our DNA
experts, Dr. Lee, Dr. Schanfield, and others, have looked at their work and
the technology. The capabilities are certainly there. It's resources and
people that are needed. Mr. HOYER. Doctor, you have reflected upon the
identification of individuals who have been killed. Obviously your job is not
so much about identification, but to determine why they were killed,
particularly in trying to make some connection with a criminal act, in this
case, a war crime. Are you confident that we're going to be providing the
kind of forensics work that will be needed in the Hague? Dr. WOLF. As you
said, usually as a forensics pathologist, my work is in dealing with a
criminal situation. In this case, with this particular trip, the specific
decision had been made not to look for evidence of atrocities, although I
think, obviously, the mass graves themselves and the people in those graves,
in some part, speak for themselves. We didn't specifically examine the bodies
for torture or even cause of death. This trip was purely for identification.
Mr. HOYER. Identification. Dr. WOLF. It's work that certainly-looking for---
Mr. HOYER. Do you see the other happening? Dr. WOLF. As far as our work goes,
we made this trip. We don't have specific plans to go back. It's certainly
being documented by the team that we worked with from Split; but, at this
point, they're overwhelmed with just attempting to provide the families some
closure. As I mentioned, we're still identifying our remains being sent back
from Vietnam. Mr. HOYER. Vietnam? Dr. WOLF. And I think the feeling in Split
was that the people are well-aware of what's going on with atrocities in that
country and they're attempting to give the families the ability to go on and
just the overwhelming numbers of missing people have-each body is not being
autopsied for evidence of torture or atrocities. Mr. HOYER. I understand. Dr.
WOLF. We're only doing this for the purpose of the families. Mr. HOYER. Thank
you. Mr. Rohde, you mentioned on a couple of occasions the gravesites which
you had identified, took pictures of, and talked to survivors. You mentioned
on a number of occasions determining whether these were civilians or whether
they were soldiers-that the Serbs were claiming that these were soldiers.
Now, I wanted to follow up at that time and did not. That may or may not be
relevant. Obviously you can't kill soldiers that have been captured and are
unarmed and are no longer combatants. It is a war crime to murder them and
put them in a mass grave as much as it is any other individual. At that point
in time, they're essentially subject to the same protections that civilians
are, as I understand it. Was there a contention that these soldiers were
killed in battle? Is that the defense? Mr. ROHDE. That is the Bosnian Serbs'
explanation. They say these were all soldiers killed in combat, and for
sanitary reasons, the bodies were collected from the areas and put in these
mass graves. But again, the evidence I found contradicts that in terms of
civilian clothes, and all the evidence I found has buttressed the accounts of
the nine survivors who say civilians were executed. Mr. HOYER. OK. Mr. ROHDE.
It's also important to point out that I believe only a third of the men who
fled the enclave were armed. So the idea of combat going on is also difficult
to prove from that. Mr. HOYER. Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee is leaving
because she has another meeting to which I've also got to go on Bosnia and on
the peace agreement. But I appreciate her being here. Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Thank
you. Appreciate your testimony. Mr. HOYER. Mr. Rohde, you've testified, we've
seen pictures of the Dutch commanding general, as I recall, raising a glass
of wine or champagne with Ratko Mladic. I had an opportunity to take that
picture-it was on the front page of the Washington Post-before the House of
Representatives. I had a 1-minute observation, as scathing as I could
possibly muster, about raising a glass with a war criminal and a murderer,
Ratko Mladic. Why do you think Mladic addressed these folks? Why do you think
he was onsite? Mr. ROHDE. I was told that at that meeting or one of the
meetings with the Dutch commander, the initial meetings, Ratko Mladic had a
pig brought into a hotel room. He had a soldier cut the pig's throat and told
the Dutch, "you have to be able to watch this before we can talk." He then
told the Dutch he would shell the compound if they resisted any efforts his
troops made to take away the men at the site. So he was there. It was
negotiations. There are questions about the Dutch conduct, but to be fair,
talking to the Dutch people--- Mr. HOYER. I'm not so much questioning the
Dutch conduct. I was just offended by that picture and offended by the action
of that general. That aside, however, you referred in your comments about his
addressing those who subsequently became the victims. Mr. ROHDE. Yes. Mr.
HOYER. And represented to them they were going to be released. Mr. ROHDE.
Consistently on at least four different locations. Mr. HOYER. Now, I'm
wondering whether or not you had discussions with folks who were there or who
have analyzed that situation in trying to establish this chain of command and
the connection between Mladic and Milosevic, and those who actually inflicted
the death blows or death shots or however the death was brought. Mr. ROHDE.
He was only seen at the one site that I visited. According to one survivor,
he got out of the car and watched as the executions were going on. At other
locations, he spoke to prisoners a few hours before the shooting started.
Again, everything else that survivor told me matched perfectly in terms of
the description of the site and everything I found. Mr. HOYER. And we have
the names of those people? You talked to one witness who saw Mladic observing
the killing go on? Mr. ROHDE. Yes. Others put him at the site addressing
prisoners hours before they were executed. Mr. HOYER. Mr. Lupis, how many
witnesses do we have that fall in that category in number? Mr. LUPIS. How
many witnesses who have seen Mladic? Mr. HOYER. Yes. Mr. LUPIS. I believe we
talked to about six survivors of the massacres, I think of which four had
witnessed Mladic at different sites. Two of them saw Mladic in the Karakaj
area and two other ones had witnessed him in the Nova Kasaba area; he was
addressing the civilians, telling them that they would be taken care of and
they would be exchanged. And then after he left, they were massacred. Up in
the Karakaj area, he was apparently watching the massacres as they took
place. Mr. HOYER. Mr. Lupis, do you know what kind of protections are being
accorded to those whom I would perceive to be critical witnesses, as a result
of the critical nature of the testimony they could provide, I would think, in
great danger if they're in the area? Do we know what protections are being
accorded to them? Mr. LUPIS. At the moment, the Bosnian Government is taking
all measures to make sure their safety is guaranteed. They have already been
relocated to private homes, unknown to the public; and some of them are still
in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Others might have left, but at the moment, I think
they're quite safe. And also, once the Dayton peace plan is signed, they'll
fall into the-they'll be in the American sector up north. Mr. ROHDE. Just one
thing to add. My Bosnian Serb captors were very eager to know the names of
the survivors I had talked to, which is alarming in a sense; but I made up
fake Muslim names and did not name any of them. But the Bosnian Serb police
were extremely interested to know who they were and where they were now. Mr.
HOYER. My suspicion would be that they would be very interested because I
would imagine they would get pretty good rewards, in one way or another,
maybe not monetarily, but career-wise if they could identify and silence
these witnesses. Chairman SMITH. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. HOYER. Yes.
Chairman SMITH. If the gentleman will recall, that's one of the issues that
was raised in previous hearings by some of our witnesses, that there was not
enough money allocated for witness protection. We ourselves raised that with
Justice Goldstone and offered our support to try to get that amount of money
boosted so that if anyone does come forward with information, again, they're
not liable to be killed or in any way harmed. It's an excellent point. Thank
you for yielding. Mr. HOYER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Last question, and I've
already taken more time than I should have and I apologize to Mr. Porter
who's waiting patiently to ask his questions. I would like all three of you
to comment from your perspectives, which obviously are different, some more
long-term than others. I made the observation in my statement-and I think
generally you have also implied this, if not said it directly- that the
importance of the war crimes tribunal is that justice has to be obtained so
we don't have a continuing cycle of vengeance and violence. Could you comment
on the importance of bringing to justice those who have perpetrated the acts
which you have witnessed and investigated? Mr. LUPIS. I think that is the
fundamental principle which must be carried out to the end. Many of these
atrocities which have been committed during this war have come about as a
result of unhealed wounds from World War II when nationalists slaughtered
various ethnic groups. When Tito came into power, he just basically
suppressed any talk or any doings of resolving these issues. Many people we
talked to, especially Serbs, often refer to crimes committed against them.
The Muslims of eastern Bosnia have suffered many massacres by the Serbs over
the years, and nothing has been addressed. And the Croats as well have
suffered. So by bringing these war criminals to justice, I think it will help
resolve some of these feelings of complete loss and frustration and people
will be able to start the healing process. Right now, the American-backed
federation between the Bosnian Muslims and the Croats is at a very critical
juncture, because these issues have not been resolved. There are still war
criminals on both sides, more so on the Croat side, that have not been
removed from positions of power. And as long as they remain--- Mr. HOYER. May
I stop you 1 second, Mr. Lupis? Mr. LUPIS. Sure. Mr. HOYER. When you say
"both sides," you're talking about the federation, so you're talking about
Croats and Bosnian Muslims? Mr. LUPIS. I'm talking about both sides in the
federation, the Croats and the Muslims. There are still leaders who are war
criminals who are in positions of power who have not been removed and there
can't be any repatriation, any healing, while these people are still there.
So that's the most fundamental issue. For the Dayton peace agreement to be
successful, this is the first issue that has to be addressed. Mr. ROHDE. I
can't really comment on the importance issue. I can just tell you the
evidence I had just speaking to survivors from Srebrenica and going to some
military bases around that were filled with soldiers who had made it through
the woods. There are many Muslims calling for revenge for what happened-many
Muslims saying "My father and my brother are dead," and they are going to
carry out justice of their own if justice is not carried out by someone else.
One of the more chilling stories survivors told of these mass executions was
that the Serbs would line up these Muslims and would call them Bovia, which
is a slur for Muslims who fought with Fascist forces allied with Germany in
World War II. It was very clear that the rationalization in the heads of
these execution squads was that they were carrying out revenge for World War
II, 50 years later. The Serbs did suffer a tremendous amount in World War II.
So again, there's anecdotal evidence of the possibility of what you're
talking about. Dr. WOLF. I think the basis of my trip, my experience in
Bosnia and Croatia, was really not to address the question that you're
asking. I was dealing with individual families whose immediate concern was
really whether their husband or their son was alive or dead. Were they being
held prisoner somewhere and might be released? So I think that for the people
that I was dealing with, that was the immediate issue. To answer the question
that you're asking, I think, clearly what we have seen is that it will happen
again, it can happen again. But my own experience there was not to look at
that question. Mr. HOYER. Thank you, Dr. Wolf. Again, thank all three of you
and thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Hoyer. Mr.
Porter. Mr. PORTER. Mr. Chairman, let me thank you for holding this hearing
and for the focus that you've made on the situation in Bosnia. I think it has
been very helpful. I am very sorry I didn't get here until perhaps halfway
through Mr. Rohde's presentation and didn't hear Mr. Lupis. I want to ask one
thing. First, how were you allowed in? I guess you got in, Mr. Rohde, and
then were arrested or held? Mr. ROHDE. Yes. Throughout the war, the Bosnian
Serbs have limited access to their territory to both human rights groups and
journalists. The first time I was in was in August when I went to Nova
Kasaba. I was in reporting another story and without their permission went to
these graves. The second time I went in, I had changed the date on a Bosnian
Serb press accreditation and used that to get through checkpoints. It got me
into this area. Again, the Bosnian Serbs had denied access to anyone to the
Srebrenica area for 3 months, and I felt that action was warranted to see
what had really happened there. Mr. PORTER. Mr. Lupis, did you go in there
also? I didn't hear any of your testimony unfortunately. Mr. LUPIS.
Unfortunately, Human Rights Watch, and I think other human rights groups,
have consistently been denied access to Bosnian Serb-controlled territories.
So our job basically, the best we could do, was to travel to the Tuzla area
where many of these refugees were crossing over. The people who trekked
through the mountains crossed over into Tuzla where most of the men, elderly,
women, and children were bused to. From there, we basically went to the
refugee camps and attempted to interview people, trying to get their
accounts. It was a traumatic experience because many of these people had just
crossed over and they were still in shock about what had happened. The one
important thing is, I think, in order for something like the Dayton peace
plan to work, is that all territories in Bosnia-Herzegovina should be
accessible to human rights groups, to IFOR troops, in order to be able to
find out exactly what happened to everyone in the territories. At this
moment, and during the history of the U.N. presence in Bosnia, the majority
of Western aid organizations and Western efforts have been stationed in
federation territory, which is held by Croats and Muslims. The Bosnian Serbs
did not let many people into their territory and that was the biggest
problem. Mr. PORTER. Am I correct, because I wasn't here-are all the sites
that we are talking about sites where the perpetrators are Serb? Mr. ROHDE.
In terms of Srebrenica, yes, the alleged perpetrators would be Bosnian Serbs;
and I just want to point out that President Milosevic of Serbia, according to
U.S. officials, has twice promised the United States that there will be
access to these graves since the peace talks began in Dayton. He himself has
promised that. Mr. PORTER. Well, I want to go off the factual side. It seems
to me that unless the world does something about this, that 50 years from now
it will be the same story again. It will be a Bosnian whose father or
grandfather was killed in a mass grave in 1992 or '3 or '4, putting someone
else in another mass grave. If we look at what has happened even in recent
history to the Jews in World War II, where most of the world, including our
own country, did not help and certainly didn't recognize even until almost
the end of the war what was happening, even though they apparently knew it.
Looking at Cambodia recently where millions of people died and where one of
our members said today that they were in Cambodia and the first thing that
was said to them by a very perceptive Cambodian man was, "Where were you?
Where were you?" What's happened here in Bosnia, to a lesser extent what is
happening to the Kurdish people at the hands of the Iraqis and Turks and
others, how much of this is on our own hands? How much have we a
responsibility for having allowed this to go on when we knew it was going on
or at least it seemed fairly evident fairly early? And now, from your
testimony, from other testimony that we've heard, it's clear that it was
widespread, that it was repeated, that it was planned or premeditated in some
instances, it was decided at a high level. Let me have your thoughts on that.
Mr. ROHDE. I can just say that-I think Mr. Lupis can address this better, but
from seeing the Dutch peacekeepers on the ground here, the reason that
enclave fell was a lack of NATO air strikes to stop the Bosnian Serb attack.
There was no way the Dutch peacekeepers themselves could have stopped that,
and that was according to sources I spoke to for an article I wrote about it.
You know, there was no political will there among the international
community, and also there was no will or not a strong enough push from the
United States to actually have those air strikes carried out. Mr. LUPIS. I'd
like to answer your question in a more general sense. I would like to comment
that the whole experience of the war in the former Yugoslavia, which started
in 1991 until the present, the tragic thing about it is that the West was
right there. Everywhere, from the media, from television shots to the United
Nations to Western diplomats running in and out of the country. In
Bosnia-Herzegovina, the tragic thing is it's been happening in front of our
eyes and we keep on using the United Nations as the vehicle by which we pass
resolutions and we do nothing about them. This Srebrenica case is one of the
greatest examples of having Western presence right in the middle of it-in the
form of a United Nations safe area, and it was overrun. Resolutions were
passed, condemnations, those who have committed crimes against humanity and
that is proceeding, although my understanding is that the NATO forces will
not have authority to apprehend or arrest those accused of war crimes. So
that is taken off the table. What can we do in a broader sense about this,
not just Bosnia, but all of this genocide that goes on? What can we do to
change the apparent acceptance of it by the world? And I don't mean that in
an accusatory sense at all. I think that every American has been deeply
disturbed about what they have seen and understood about what has happened in
Bosnia. But what do we do beyond this? Do we pursue this judicial direction
only? Does Mr. Rohde write a book that reaches to our soul? Does the U.S.
Congress pass another resolution? What are your thoughts? Mr. LUPIS. Again, I
think the most important thing is to stop passing the buck to the United
Nations. The international community should stop relying on this convenient
bureaucratic machine to pass resolutions and not act. I believe NATO, now
being the legitimate military leader in this post-cold war era, should
formulate a concise and clear mission in order to try to bring these war
criminals to trial. Now it's off the table that IFOR can't apprehend these
criminals. It's starting to sound like another United Nations mission. The
War Crimes Tribunal should be supported by all means so at least these war
criminals can be tried and accused and the people who have lost families will
be able to receive some kind of justice. Therefore, this would set an example
for other countries, other situations where the International War Crimes
Tribunal would have some formidable stature. Mr. ROHDE. There is some talk,
and I believe the United States does support the formation of a permanent war
crimes tribunal that would exist permanently to address these kind of
situations. I really don't have an answer to that and don't feel qualified to
comment on it, but I can just tell you anecdotally that the power of
deterrence is tough to measure. My Bosnian Serb captors were very surprised
to find me so far into their territory and that I was able to get through
their checkpoints. I think they were shocked when the United States publicly
released these satellite photos. There's a case to be made in terms of
deterrence. I think one of the reasons they were convinced I was a spy was
because they themselves had to say only a spy could do such a thing. So I
just think they were very shook up by where they found me, by these photos,
and just anecdotally, it seemed to have an effect on them and maybe made them
curtail some of their behavior. It appears that executions of this size have
not occurred since these things were made public in August. Mr. PORTER. It
seems to me, and I thought this most strongly at the time of the Nigerian
Government's execution of the Agani 9, including Ken Saro-Wiwa, that if the
world can react strongly and overwhelmingly at a situation like that one to
cut off-and this does not necessarily apply to Bosnia because it's a
different situation-but to cut off all diplomatic, political, economic
intercourse with such a society until the government is changed, if we could
speak in a unified voice from Europe to Asia to North America and South
America and express our outrage in such a way that the country is completely
isolated. .. We did this, of course, over a much longer period of time in
South Africa, and it finally proved its worth. But if we could speak in that
voice about these kinds of horrible atrocities that shake all of us so much
that there would be a message to all others who would perpetrate them. To the
extent that we do not do that, to the extent that Shell Oil Company says to
the Nigerian Government, "Don't worry about the World Bank. We'll make up the
$100 million and the project will go ahead. We don't care that you killed
nine people. So what?" It seems that is exactly the kind of thing that
encourages this kind of conduct. I think we've reached-we should have reached
long since, but we have reached a level of information-sharing in a level of
common humanity that we ought to learn how to speak in one voice; and perhaps
the United Nations isn't the place to do it, but somehow we have to all rise
up in such righteous indignation about these things that they can't happen
again; that everything is brought to bear to prevent them. And unfortunately,
the world has just not done that. We can talk all we want in the United
States about our caring about human rights; but we know today that our
weapons supplied to the Turkish Government are used to kill Kurds without
trial, people who simply disappear, whose homes are plowed under or they're
driven from them; and yet we don't put that at high enough priority. I don't
know if you want to comment on that. It's more of a statement than a
question, but feel free if you'd like. Mr. LUPIS. In terms of Bosnia, the
Dayton peace plan seems to be the perfect opportunity to reverse the trend of
the last 4 years because with Rwanda and Bosnia, I think, leaders around the
world-nationalists who are thinking of carrying out some similar campaigns as
have been carried out in the aforementioned countries-are feeling pretty
comfortable because so far, no international action has been taken up that
really changed the tide of these conflicts. Mr. Rohde and I had spoken
earlier about, as soon as the Dayton peace agreement is signed, immediately
calling the Serbs' bluff and bringing a forensic team with human rights
people and journalists to these grave sites. Exposing these graves sites
would, I think, help start turning the mechanisms for the International War
Crimes Tribunal to issue more indictments and just get the ball moving with
the War Crimes Tribunal in general. So the Dayton peace plan, I think, offers
an opportunity where we can reverse the last 4 years. Mr. PORTER. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman. Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Porter. Before we conclude, I'd
like to ask one final question. Mr. Lupis, I noticed that you used the word
"calling their bluff" on two occasions, and I heartily agree. One of the
concerns that I have-and this has been picked up at least by my staff and
myself for months now-that there are some within the United Nations and some
who are part of this process in the international community who really don't
want the War Crimes Tribunal to succeed all that much. Perhaps a few
indictments, some show cases, and that's it, put the atrocities behind us and
move on. I think that would be a travesty if that were the case. That's why I
think there are some at the United Nations particularly who have made it very
hard for Justice Goldstone to proceed. From my perch as chairman of the
International Operations Subcommittee, we have tried to pressure the United
Nations, over which our committee has jurisdiction, as well as the
administration, really to be more aggressive, to make sure sufficient funds
are allocated in a timely fashion. You know very well how damning the Shell
study was in terms of what evidence was being lost. I met with administration
officials earlier this week who told me they don't have one shred of evidence
on Milosevic in terms of committing war crimes. I was astounded that this has
not been an ongoing fact-finding accumulative process, and I was very
disappointed, frankly, when the administration official told me this. As a
Commission we are in the process of putting together a letter that will ask a
number of serious questions about the War Crimes Tribunal as it relates to
IFOR. I'd like to point out, the Dayton agreement summary that was provided
to us by the State Department contained a paragraph that states, "The
agreement gives IFOR, the peace Implementation Force, the authority and
discretion to use military force to prevent interference with the free
movement of civilians, refugees, and displaced persons, and to respond
appropriately to violence against citizens, civilians. IFOR has the authority
to arrest any indicted war criminals it encounters or who interfere with its
mission, but it will not try to track them down." A review of the text of the
Dayton peace agreement, its annexes, and its appendices, and the accompanying
side letters failed to locate anywhere in these texts a provision or
provisions conferring upon IFOR "the authority to arrest any indicted war
criminal it encounters." In your read of the Dayton agreement, Mr. Lupis,
have you found anything that confers this capability upon the IFOR to make
these arrests? Because we haven't found it. Mr. LUPIS. Actually I haven't
read the fine print of the whole agreement. My colleague back in New York has
done that and is issuing a critique shortly. But what you just stated about
IFOR not having the authority to seek out and capture war criminals is
disturbing, and I think that's something that should be lobbied in order to
change it before the London conference coming up in a week. Our organization
is working actively to try to alert member states of the United Nations, and
the international community to try to put some pressure on the relevant
players at the London conference to reverse this IFOR role, because of the
Dayton agreement. If IFOR will have this diminished role, it will start to
look a lot like the United Nations operation in former Yugoslavia. Chairman
SMITH. I want to thank our very distinguished witnesses for your outstanding
testimony, for the good work you do on behalf of humanity, the Bosnians in
particular, and for taking the time to come and present your testimony to the
Commission. The hearing is adjourned. [Whereupon at 3:48 p.m., the Commission
adjourned.]
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
