Content
/ Colormap • Page 5631 • {1/111} (1)Tuesday, 25 July 2000 [Open session] [The witness entered court]
--- Upon commencing at 9.36 a.m. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Good morning, ladies and gentlemen; good morning to our technicians, interpreters; good morning to our legal assistants, court reporters, representatives of the Registry; good morning to the representatives of the Prosecution: Mr. Harmon, (10)Mr. Cayley, Mr. McCloskey; good morning to the Defence counsel: Mr. Petrusic, Mr. Visnjic; good morning, General Krstic. Good morning, General Dannatt. We have come back to continue with your testimony. I hope that you have had a good rest and that you are ready to continue. (15)However, before we continue with the witness, I should like to hear from the Prosecutor, perhaps Mr. Harmon, and to ask him to review his position regarding the documents. We would like to know what are the documents that you really wish to tender under seal and what are the remaining documents. So perhaps with the assistance of Madam Registrar it (20)would be convenient to rethink the issue and then we will make the ruling later on. Now, without much further ado, we will continue with the testimony of General Dannatt. Mr. Cayley, you have the floor. (25)
MR. CAYLEY: Thank you. Good morning, Mr. President, Your
JUDGE RIAD: Would 3.00 be enough, Mr. Cayley? (10)
MR. CAYLEY: I will do my best to finish my examination-in-chief
in the first session, and Mr. Visnjic has indicated to me that the Defence
possibly have two hours of cross-examination. The witness is prepared to
stay until tomorrow, Your Honour, but if we could finish today, that would
be helpful. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] I should like to ask the registrar if it is possible to work until 3.30 if it is necessary. In principle, we will go until 3.00; however, if it is necessary, I should like to continue until half past three. I think that we always have a (20)representative of the interpreters here. I don't know if there's going to be a problem with that. We will have a break for lunch. Madam Registrar. THE REGISTRAR: I will talk to the necessary persons dealing with the transcripts and security and see if it's a problem. (25)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] And then after the break -- yes,
MR. CAYLEY: Thank you, Mr. President. I realise much of this is dependent on my speed so I will go as efficiently as I can, and I thank the Court for allowing us to continue beyond our normal time. WITNESS: FRANCIS RICHARD DANNATT [Resumed] (10) • EXAMINED by Mr. Cayley: [Continued] • Q.: General, I wish to briefly return to Prosecutor's Exhibit 459, which is a report from Colonel Jankovic of the Main Staff to the Intelligence Department of the Drina Corps, so an officer from a superior headquarters reporting to a subordinate headquarters. (15)Can you explain to the Judges what, if anything, this document demonstrates to you? I've placed Exhibit 398 next to you so that that can assist you.
• A.: Your Honours, good morning.
Just in answer to that question, I would like to refer back, if I
(20)may, to an answer I gave yesterday when I introduced this particular
diagram which showed the relationship between a subordinate command's
intelligence and security functional area and the Higher Command's
intelligence and security functional area, and indicated that orders were
followed up the solid line, as it were, from the division to the corps and
(25)the corps to the division. That was the way that orders were passed. But
• A.: That's exactly so. I was using this diagram here, and in this situation, we have the Drina Corps in this box effectively and the Main Staff in this box, but the principle that I was describing is exactly the same. (10) MR. CAYLEY: If the witness can be provided with Prosecutor's Exhibit 483. • Q.: General, this is a document that's been provided to you by the Prosecutor. It's the combat order for operations in Zepa. You've read this document. What comments do you have for the Judges on this (15)particular document? The document is dated the 13th of July, 1995.
• A.: Your Honours, this document is quite clearly the operation order
produced by the Drina Corps Command for the operation to attack and
capture the enclave of Zepa.
Having reviewed it, it's a very good piece of Operational Staff
(20)work. It sets out very clearly the situation pertaining at the time; it
sets out the mission, the intention to move towards and to attack Zepa; it
details the subordinate units, brigades principally, of the Drina Corps
that are to take part in this operation; and it gives a certain amount of
coordinating instruction to make that attack happen. As I say, it is a
(25)very clear and well-organised and produced piece of Operational Staff
• Q.: General, one point from paragraph 10. It states that: "The Drina (10)Corps forward command post will be in Krivace and shall start work at 1800 hours on the 13th of July, 1995." Would it be right to assume that it would be the Corps Commander, the Corps Commander of the Drina Corps, who would have been at that command post after its establishment on the 13th of July, 1995? (15)
• A.: Yes. I would expect that to be the case. I think yesterday, in
my earlier evidence, I talked about in a division such as mine or a corps
such as the Drina Corps, that there are a number of headquarters. There
is the main headquarters where the majority of the staff are and where the
Chief of Staff usually is, where planning is conducted, and where
(20)operations, in the main, are controlled from. But that at certain times a
forward command post or a tactical command post can be established,
usually to which the commander, the overall commander, deploys in order to
command the immediate operation.
So what I see here is, from the Main Headquarters at another
(25)location, this forward command post, I would call it a tactical command
(10) MR. CAYLEY: If the witness could now be provided with Exhibit 463. • Q.: I want to move on, General, with the interception and the mopping up of the mixed the military-civilian column that left Srebrenica. You're aware of this event. (15)First of all, Exhibit 463, which is an order signed by General Krstic, what type of order is this? This document is dated the 13th of July, 1995.
• A.: This document is an order, and it's an order instituting another
operation, effectively a security operation, a search operation, in what I
(20)would describe as the rear area, away from the main combat zone perhaps,
of the corps. In this order, General Krstic, now signing a notice as
Commander of the corps, I'm reminded of the previous operation, of the
previous order we were looking at a moment ago, signed on the same date by
General Krstic as Chief of Staff. So that tells me that something has
(25)changed on that day, but, nevertheless, this operation is a separate
JUDGE WALD: Can I just ask one question? MR. CAYLEY: Please, Your Honour. JUDGE WALD: Does the terrain that's referred to in (15)paragraphs 1 and 2 of this order, that's going to be the object of the mop-up or the search, does that roughly encompass the area or any of the area that the column was going to be marching down or is that more the kind of normal mop-up you would have expected after the fall of Srebrenica when they thought ---or at least there's some evidence that they thought (20)that the 28th Brigade was still down by the Bandera Triangle, et cetera?
• A.: Your Honour, in general terms, the bits of geography referred to
here are a little south of where the 28th Division column, we now know,
was going north, although, they may not have known that or realised that
at the time. Hence, I've made several references to there was a lot going
(25)on in the Drina Corps area at the time. It was actually quite a
JUDGE WALD: But this particular -- if you read this, you read it with reference to what you would have thought was a normal mop-up operation after Srebrenica, extrinsic of the fact that you had a whole new (5)conceivable breakthrough. The last question is: Would it have been normal procedure for these people to wear special identifying material? Paragraph 5: "Shall wear a white band on their right shoulder." • A.: That's quite an intriguing point. I think it's quite a sensible (10)and clever point. I think by this stage of the war, not everyone had a regular uniform. I think there was probably a genuine possibility of mistake and muddle because, after all, in search-type operation, you've got people over a large area, some of whom are on your side, some are on the other side, and I think to have ordered some particular distinctive (15)identification mark was a sensible precaution. MR. CAYLEY: • Q.: General, now I'd like you to address from universal principles the operation to search the area and to intercept this column and to indicate on the chart in front of you the Staff Branches that you believe would (20)have been involved in controlling this kind of operation.
• A.: If you'd allow me to move to the ...
Your Honours, rather as I indicated yesterday, an operation such
as we're talking about now, which is the operation to identify, to find,
the 28th Division column and then to reduce it, would require a
(25)coordination from a number of parts of the Corps. Not shown on here
MR. CAYLEY: If the witness could be provided with Exhibit 464. • Q.: Now, General, this is an order from the Bratunac Brigade of the (10)14th of July, 1995. Rather than having you do it because the document speaks for itself, this is an order, Your Honours, that directly references Exhibit 463, the order from General Krstic. It, indeed, refers to the order of General Krstic of the 13th of July, 1995. General, what conclusion - perhaps it speaks for itself - can you (15)draw from the fact that Colonel Blagojevic is essentially issuing an order directly in response to General Krstic's order to his own subordinate battalions to conduct this search of the terrain?
• A.: Your Honour, that's exactly the deduction I draw from this
document. In the opening three lines here, the Brigade Commander of the
(20)Bratunac Light Infantry Brigade makes reference to the fact that he has
received an order from the Drina Corps, dated the 13th of July, and he is
now issuing his own orders to his own battalions. "The 1st Infantry
Battalion will search ..." and he's giving them all various details. "The
2nd Infantry Battalion will search ..." and so it goes on. "The 3rd
(25)Infantry Battalion will search ..."
MR. CAYLEY: If the witness could be shown Prosecutor's Exhibit (10)488. • Q.: Now, General, the previous document was an order from Colonel Blagojevic, and here is a daily combat report actually issued on the 13th of July of 1995 to the Drina Corps Command. This document discusses a search that is taking place. What can you say about this particular (15)document?
• A.: Well, again, there are a number of comments that I would make
about this.
First of all, it's issued by the Command of the Bratunac Light
Infantry Brigade; it's being sent to the Command of the Drina Corps. It
(20)calls itself, interestingly, a daily combat report and the content of it
gives an update of operational activity going on in the Bratunac Light
Infantry Brigade area. And it's following the format that I've seen in
several of these orders.
Interestingly, although the first three paragraphs give detail of
(25)what is going on, and that detail, I think, is not necessarily relevant,
JUDGE WALD: Excuse me. Doesn't paragraph 1 up there: "The last large enemy group has been successfully encircled in the area of Konjevic Polje/Kasaba ..." doesn't that indicate to us that that was sort of the (20)beginning of -- that was certainly one of the first incidents, massive incidents, that we're engaged with here? • A.: Your Honour, that's --
JUDGE WALD: There's a little bit of tension in the thing between
"no unexpected events" and "a large group." And then the second line in
(25)the second one: "The Brigade Command is working on a company to be sent
• A.: You're absolutely right. It's often a feature of military situation reports that people tend to say things are going perhaps a little bit better than they really are. So when in paragraph 4 he said, (5)"There are no unexpected events," most commanders want to show that they have got the whole thing thoroughly under control and that they're not being surprised by anything. So that doesn't, in itself, surprise me, although your point is right that the large enemy group around the Konjevic Polje/Kasaba area, we (10)now know was one of the first of the groups from the 28th Division. But I would suspect that at this stage they were still trying to piece the jigsaw together and their picture was not that clear. JUDGE WALD: Okay. MR. CAYLEY: If the witness could be provided with two exhibits (15)together, 540 and 597. • Q.: Now, General, we're moving to the Zvornik Infantry Brigade. 540 is a daily combat report of the 13th of July and 597 is a daily combat report of the 15th of July. Do these documents also show that the brigades were reporting to the Corps that they were engaged in combat with (20)the Muslim column that was moving up towards and out of their area?
• A.: Yes. This report from the Zvornik Brigade is more complex. It's
got more detail in it. I've already alluded to the fact that the Zvornik
Brigade was pretty much in the eye of the storm as far as all this is
concerned, and it's giving fairly detailed reporting here of various
(25)engagements that elements of the brigade had had with, quite clearly, the
• Q.: Indeed, there's no necessity to put 597 onto the ELMO, I will simply summarise what it says. Essentially it records the fact that (10)Bosnian army forces were launching a heavy artillery attack into the area, and then it goes on to say that the Zvornik Brigade units were involved in cutting off and destroying Muslim forces retreating from Srebrenica in the direction of Tuzla. Again, does this demonstrate that the Corps was receiving regular (15)information about what was happening within its subordinate brigades?
• A.: Very much so. All these reports of a similar type make exactly
that point, that good information, useful information, as far as the Corps
Headquarters was concerned, was being passed to them by their subordinate
brigades and would have given the Corps Headquarters a very clear picture
(20)of what was going on.
I've made reference a couple of times to the fact that the Zvornik
Brigade was very much in the thick of all this, and it doesn't surprise me
at all that subsequently the Commander of the Zvornik Brigade asks for
reinforcements because he was clearly under, really, quite a lot of
(25)pressure in his area at this time.
• Q.: General, the one particular paragraph that I'm interested in on this combat report, and it's dated the 15th of July from the Zvornik (5)Brigade to the Command of the Drina Corps, is, and I'll read it: "An additional burden for us is the large number of prisoners distributed throughout schools in the brigade area as well as obligations of security and restoration of the terrain." Now, purely from general principles, and I don't want you to (10)interpret what this means, but if you were a commander of a corps, would this not indicate to you, if you were receiving this report, that there were large numbers of prisoners in your area of responsibility?
• A.: That's exactly the meaning from the words that I see here, "An
additional burden for us is the large number of prisoners distributed
(15)throughout schools in the brigade area ..." This doesn't tell me where
those prisoners have come from, but noting again it's the Zvornik Brigade,
I can fully understand why the Commander later on in this situation
report, this combat report, asks for reserves.
He's actually fighting the 28th Division column himself and taking
(20)prisoners, and it seems to be slightly to his surprise that a large number
of prisoners are also being lodged in his brigade area. I think I can
understand his alarm, that if his manpower is already stretched in his
combat operations, to have a large number of prisoners he's got to guard
as well, if they were to break out from where they were held would provide
(25)a real threat to his security. I can understand him being concerned.
• Q.: General, you've mentioned already -- you've actually already come on to it, but if you could shown Prosecutor's Exhibit 404/7, tab 30, when you mentioned reinforcements, and this is a document from the Krajina Corps Command dispatching an Infantry Company within that corps to the (10)Zvornik area. What comments do you have about this document?
• A.: Well, this document is, as you say -- and I just draw Your
Honours' attention to the fact that it comes from the Krajina Corps, from
a different corps, and it's signed by the Corps Commander, General Talic,
at the bottom.
(15)It's clearly been in response, I would guess -- no, I don't guess,
I notice it here on the screen -- pursuant to the document by the Main
Staff. There's been a plea, if you like, from the Drina Corps to the Main
Staff for reinforcements, and the Main Staff have ordered the 1st Krajina
Corps to send a reserve formation across to the Drina Corps area to
(20)assist. And in response to that order from the Main Staff, General Talic
from the Krajina Corps is ordering the commander of one of his subordinate
brigades, the 16th Krajina Motorised Brigade, to prepare and dispatch an
Infantry Company to the Zvornik area where it will be assigned to the
Commander of the 1st Light Infantry Brigade.
(25)So this again shows to me that not only was the Drina Corps
• Q.: General, I just want to quote from your report at paragraph 58,
page 18, and this concludes the questioning I wish to have in this area.
(25)"It is very clear to me that the whole operation was coordinated
• A.: Your Honour, I think it's probably already fairly clear from what
I've said so far that with a number of major activities going on in the
Drina Corps area, and when I spoke from the chart just now, I indicated
(10)the number of areas of the staff that would have been involved and the
number of subordinate brigades that would have been involved in these
operations, and there are several focuses or several areas of operation,
the attack on Zepa; clearing up around Srebrenica; dealing with the
column, particularly in the Zvornik area. There was a lot going on in the
(15)Drina Corps area.
The issue of reserves underlines manpower was short. Request for
manpower had been made to the Main Staff, and as I've just described, had
been provided by the Krajina Corps. There is no way that this activity
could have been conducted unless it had been coordinated and thoroughly
(20)organised and expedited other than through the Corps Headquarters. And
this is the whole business and stuff of the Chief of Staff, to shift these
various reports coming in, to understand them, and to make recommendations
to his Commander about how operations should be developed.
So to me, it is quite clear that in this fairly complex situation
(25)for the Drina Corps, there is no alternative other than the fact that the
JUDGE WALD: Let me just ask you a puzzling question on that. Everything you've said has led to the conclusion, I think, that the Prosecutor's question indicated a coherent command system which people knew what their roles were and followed them, and yet you have as an (15)overlay to this what happened. In other words, some place you had a massive violation of not only internal but, I suppose, international rules and everything. How can that happen in a coherent command system in which people have roles, they have communications going back and forth, everything seems fine in terms of the three operations going on (20)simultaneously, but yet at the end of the line something completely out of range of normal military activity happens? I don't know if that's an answerable question but it keeps arising. • A.: Well, Your Honour, I've not been specifically asked about the detail about that, but I will offer a comment. (25)
JUDGE WALD: Just as a general proposition.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] General, was it possible to plan, to organise, and to execute all of these operations without the knowledge and without the participation of General Krstic?
• A.: No. I have to say that, because I go back, Your Honour, to one of
(25)my earlier points of yesterday, that command is a personal thing, and the
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Another question. We are here talking about the 10th, 11th, 12th, 16th of July. You are a General with a great deal of experience. How is it possible to explain the (10)substitution of General Zivanovic by General Krstic if such a substitution occurred, or replacement?
• A.: Your Honour, it's a very good question. It seems hard to explain
why you do not know why General Zivanovic was removed. There are a number
of theories, and I don't know, so I won't comment on why General Zivanovic
(15)was removed.
Undoubtedly, he was removed at some point and, undoubtedly, at
some point General Krstic became the Commander. It will be most unusual
to remove a Commander in the middle of an operation and most unusual to
remove him in middle of a battle other than if he became a casualty.
(20)However, the operation to capture Srebrenica was undoubtedly completed
11th, 12th, in that sort of time frame, and the operation to move to and
to try to capture Zepa was going to start 13th or 14th. Therefore, if I
was going to change a Corps Commander, I would do it between those two
principal operations. And given that General Krstic, as Chief of Staff,
(25)would have been principally responsible for the planning of the operation
(10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] We are talking about the good organisation, good communications, a military organisation that was functioning very well and that was well planned. So one could think that the evacuation of the population from Srebrenica was well planned and well thought out, so that they may reach territory controlled by the Muslim (15)army. Why did the executions then occur? Do you have any idea, from the military standpoint, why such a plan occurred?
• A.: If one applied a normal logic, Your Honour, it is difficult to see
why executions on the scale that are -- that undoubtedly took place
happened. I think one can only explain it by trying to dig into the
(20)unusual and rather bizarre logic that surrounds many events in the
Balkans. I think we are deep into issues of ethnic tension and
long-seated hatred which goes back over many centuries, and which had
undoubtedly been found by the three or four years of the civil war.
I think what I detect in here was a long-standing intention, and
(25)we see it from the political direction that I commented on yesterday, to
(10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Can one say that this decision was outside the military officials, that it had escaped the attention of the military officials?
• A.: I don't think I can comment, Your Honour, on who took that
decision. But once that decision had been taken, we're talking about
(15)operation, a black operation, if you like, a dark operation, which was
conducted over a relatively short period of time. It was an operation of
some magnitude which required considerable coordination of transport
facilities to move people to holding areas, which themselves had to be
identified and found; it involved identifying people who were able and
(20)willing to take part in the killing; it required other people with
machinery to dig holes, to dig graves; it required other people to provide
fuel for that equipment and fuel was in very short supply. So what I see
is a dark operation going on, but one that was also a complex operation.
That could not have been done other than by utilising the command
(25)and control structure which I've already shown that on the other
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much.
JUDGE RIAD: General Dannatt, before we go to another point, I
would like to understand more clearly some of your very basic statements,
whether in the report or right now.
(10)You spoke several times of the combat records. You spoke of the
chain of command which worked properly upwards and downwards and the
coordination which was extremely well done and vital, and you gave the
example of the Zvornik Brigade and so on. All this covered the military
aspect, apparently.
(15)Just for my knowledge, would you, as a General, be completely
involved in the military aspect and be seriously involved and capable and
leave the non-military thing as being irrelevant or even
counter-productive and not be bothered with it? I mean, just the fact
that you want to win the battles, let the soldiers go on killing, raping,
(20)whatever they do, what they do in wars, and if I exert more pressure on
them, it might defeat my own purpose.
So all this organisation, coordination which is the daily combat
reports, which are called combat reports, are only concerned with the
military aspect and let other things take their own course. Would you
(25)think that this applies to this very special situation in Srebrenica?
JUDGE RIAD: You just said that you can't accept -- of course, I know you are a great professor of military tactics and so on, and you gave us this distinction between the Befehlstaktik which was applied in the JNA. Is your direction based on this idea that the JNA was a (10)Befehlstaktik, where everything should be in the hands of the institutionalised commander, or is it on your direct observation? • A.: I think it's both, sir. The principle comes from central command and control and central, principally, top-down direction that undoubtedly is the doctrinal basis which I've observed from my theoretical studies. (15)But from my own knowledge of operating in the Balkans and from the knowledge that I've gained in studying this operation, it's my deduction from the facts that I see that this was the process that was going on. I don't mean to labour the point about combat reports coming up and orders coming down, but this shows a very clear chain of information (20)and chain of direction in place and being effectively used.
JUDGE RIAD: Just another question before we go to another point.
In your answer to the President, you seemed to indicate that the
executions were decided at a late stage, the massacres and so on. I just
saw in your report a statement where you said: "I have read the directive
(25)to the Drina Corps ..." and then you go on and say: "The document
• A.: Your Honour, I think the intention from the extract which you've just quoted was to create such a situation in Srebrenica that not only would the town more easily be captured in a military sense, but that the people who had such a sense of fear and no hope of further life, that they (10)would want to leave Srebrenica and go and live somewhere else so that it could become a Serb town. Now, I do not know and I'm offering purely a speculation. It could have been that a decision had been taken at an earlier stage to massacre a lot of the people. I do not know. It would seem to me that (15)the intention was, by one means or another, to remove the people in a deportation sense so that it could become a Serb town and that the option remains open that the decision to separate the men and to kill them perhaps was taken at a later stage. But I will offer this as a speculative point on my part, and I probably should not make too strong a (20)comment on it.
JUDGE RIAD: Well, you added, just in the same line: "There is a
strong implication that where there is no territory, there is no life."
You're saying they wanted Srebrenica without the people, and where there
is no territory, there is no life. You were almost aware of the fact that
(25)there is no other territory for these people.
JUDGE RIAD: You say: "... no life." "Where there is no territory, there is no life." • A.: One can interpret that, really, either way. It could be "life" as (10)in everyone having been killed or "no life" as in a community existence, a Muslim community continuing. No life, no living, no community existence, and that's, indeed, what we saw. JUDGE RIAD: Thank you very much, General. Thank you. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Cayley, perhaps we can go on (15)until 11.00. MR. CAYLEY: Thank you, Mr. President. Between the three of you, you've actually covered much of the rest of my examination-in-chief. But I do have some other points to raise with the witness. In fact, there is one area that requires closed session but I'll do that after the break. I (20)actually want to completely move to another area which I think will be of interest to the Court, and it is in respect of the intercepted radio communications. If Prosecutor's Exhibit 684 could be made ready for the witness.
• Q.: General, you're aware - you've seen some of them; you haven't seen
(25)all of them - that a large number of intercepted radio communications were
(5) MR. CAYLEY: If that exhibit could be placed next to the witness. This is simply one example. • Q.: General, is this document discussing information of an operative nature? • A.: Your Honour, this would appear to be a transcript of part of a (10)conversation, and I see in the top line that there's reference to "They," the Muslims, "had close to 10.000 men of military age in Srebrenica," and "Have they reduced them by half?" is the other half of the conversation. "Yes, it must be close to half. 4.000 to 5.000 have certainly kicked the bucket," "kicked the bucket" being a euphemistic expression for having (15)been killed. So there is information being discussed by these two people here about a large number of people of military age, 10.000, and about half of them, by one means or another, would appear to have been killed.
• Q.: General, I don't wish to go through this whole document, but it
(20)does contain, other than this piece of information, a lot of information
that appears to be of an operative nature of the activities of individuals
within the Drina Corps, of NATO activities, and, really, it's a general
question I have: Would individuals, in your opinion, speak about these
kinds of matters, which one would believe to be confidential, on a line,
(25)on a military communication line that they knew could be intercepted and
• A.: Military communications, Your Honour, ideally are conducted by
secure means, that you can, therefore, have a private conversation from
one person to another. Those secure communication means sometimes break
(5)down; sometimes the distances over which they've got to communicate make
them inoperative, and, therefore, often people revert to what they know is
an insecure means of communication. These days, increasingly mobile
telephones are used or, indeed, the normal civilian infrastructure
telephone network, a land line telephone network.
(10)Also, it's a feature of part of Bosnia and the Balkans that the
land line telephone system often has a radio link, in part, and we know
that some of the Serb-to-Serb communications were actually having to go
through Muslim-held territory, and everyone would have known that.
Therefore, people talking to one another, if they couldn't use a
(15)secure means of speech, may still have felt the need to talk and,
therefore, would have talked knowing they were going to be doing so on an
insecure means. Therefore, the way the military people try and get round
this is to talk in, what we refer to as, veiled speech. You think you're
hiding the meaning, but, in fact, when you actually analyse what is being
(20)said, it is pretty obvious.
Now, an expression such as I've just referred to, "kick the
bucket," that is not a very clever expression for people having been
killed. But in other of the transcripts that I have seen, there is quite
a lot of reference to people saying, "Don't say that. You know this is an
(25)open line," and I've seen another -- I've seen several where there are
• Q.: Now, General, I don't want you to make any comment on the reliability of all these documents, but based on what you've just said, do you believe it's quite possible that the Bosnian Muslim forces intercepted (10)and, indeed, recorded a large number of conversations between VRS units within the Drina Corps area?
• A.: Undoubtedly. In the Balkans, everyone is listening to everybody
else's communications.
For example, the British Battalion at about this time in Gorazde,
(15)one of the other enclaves, knew that all its communications were being
overheard, and because they are a Welsh battalion, they decided as a
matter of policy to speak in Welsh, a language that no one can understand
apart from themselves. It is a fact that everyone was overhearing
everybody else, and therefore it doesn't surprise me in the slightest that
(20)there were these intercepts going on.
I have to say that I think the quality of the intercepts are
remarkably high. I have seen three different independent reports from
three different interceptors of certain conversations, and the accuracy of
what they've reported, I think, do indicate that they are accurate
(25)intercepts and informative as a result.
(10)
• A.: Your Honour, your general point is a very fair one, and of course
misinformation is very much something that people practice.
The total amount of information and the total number of messages
that are received have all got to be evaluated, and it's very much the
responsibility of the Intelligence and Security Staff to analyse the
(15)massive information that comes in and to try and decide what is genuine
and what has, perhaps, been artificially fed in. It's easy to feed in a
piece of misinformation; it's quite difficult to feed it in in a
consistent and coherent fashion that doesn't reveal the fact, after a
period of time, that it's coming from an unauthorised source.
(20)With regard to the specifics here, as I've just commented, I'm
amazed by the vast amount of intercept information that there is, that it
comes from several different sources, several different people listening
to the same number of conversations and producing what, to me, are pretty
faithful and accurate reports of those conversations.
(25)So while I concede in principle it is possible for disinformation
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] General, you have reviewed and read these intercepts of conversations on the one hand; on the other, you have seen orders and possibly conversations relating to those orders, and, as you have said, you have seen intercepts of the same sort of information (10)but intercepted by different people. When you see this consistency of information, information captured by different people, is that information consistent or not? That is my first question. The second: Intercepts and what you read among the documents, orders, combat reports, and so on, is there a consistency there too? (15)
• A.: My short answer, Your Honour, is that there is a high degree of
consistency. Now, inevitably there are some things that it's quite
difficult to see exactly where they fit in, if it's only a part
conversation or it's not entirely clear who was talking to whom. At what
time is usually clear because that's actually fixed at a moment in time.
(20)But the remarkable thing is that given an order being passed --
let's say the order for the search operation issued on the 13th of July;
I've seen transcripts of intercepts that relate to that kind of
activity -- so there is a meshing in of one set of information with
another set of information but, to a very high degree of consistency, does
(25)fit the various parts of the jigsaw together.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Cayley -- MR. CAYLEY: It's four minutes past eleven. (10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] -- have you finished with this point? Is it a good moment for a break? MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, I actually want to go into closed session for the next part of the witness' evidence, so it's probably a good moment to take a break. (15) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well. We are going to have a half-hour break now. --- Recess taken at 11.04 a.m.
--- On resuming at 11.35 a.m.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] The registrar tells me that we are in public session. So you may continue, please. (20) MR. CAYLEY:
• Q.: General, I want to briefly and finally return to general
principles of command and the particular concept that you spoke about
early on in your testimony, that of command being a personal matter and of
responsibility for everything that goes on within one's command.
(25)General, if a senior officer receives from his superior an order
• A.: Your Honour, in those circumstances, a subordinate officer
obviously is in a difficult position, and he has a difficult choice to
(5)make between one or two courses of action. One course of action is to
immediately remonstrate, to raise the issue with the superior officer who
has given him the order that he believes is illegal, probably done
privately, General to General, and to point out to him that the order he
has given him is an illegal order and invite him to reconsider whether
(10)that is what he really wants to do.
If that fails, then the junior officer, really, I think, has three
choices: One is to comply with it on the basis that an order given by his
superior is an order to be carried out even if he believes it's illegal
and he doesn't like it; that's one end of the response spectrum. The
(15)other end of the response spectrum is, consistent with his view that it's
an illegal order, to refuse to comply with it and in so doing to offer his
resignation from his position as a subordinate general or a subordinate
officer, remain true to his own conscience and resign his command and take
whatever consequences there are.
(20)Or there is a central option, I suppose, that could be followed of
knowing that what you've been asked to do is wrong, you carry it through
on a minimalist basis. That, of course, is the worst, really, of all
options because it's indicating that you know what you're doing is wrong.
You're abdicating your responsibility, I think, to your subordinates and
(25)certainly abandon any pretense on being the moral high ground. So I think
JUDGE RIAD: Just to complete your spectrum. You said being (10)sacked. Is there something worse? Under the circumstances, in this very specific situation, was there something worse than being sacked? • A.: No, sir. By "sacked," I mean dismissed. Of course, it's up to an army to decide what it will do with a general who refuses to obey orders. There are many examples in history whereby a general who refuses to obey (15)orders is then shot. That, I think, is the far end of the spectrum. JUDGE RIAD: But in your experience, in this situation, was this a normal occurrence? • A.: I don't believe I have come across an incident in the Balkans whereby a general who refused to follow orders has been shot. That's a (20)sort of negative answer to that. I think there are cases of people being removed or dismissed from their position, which is quite common in military matters. THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
JUDGE RIAD: I'm sorry. You said: "I believe
[sic] I have come
(25)across an incident in the Balkans whereby a general who refused to follow
• A.: Not been shot. JUDGE RIAD: Not. • A.: Not. (5) JUDGE RIAD: Because they did not put "not." He has been shot. They have shot him here. • A.: I will clarify. I have not come across an incident myself in which a general who refused to follow orders has been shot. It may have happened; I've not come across it. (10) JUDGE RIAD: Correct it on the transcript. Thank you. MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, I've finished my examination-in-chief so I can offer the witness for cross-examination. Thank you. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, Mr. Cayley. (15)General Dannatt, you are now going to answer questions which Defence counsel will be putting to you. I see it is Mr. Petrusic who is going to cross-examine on behalf of the Defence. Mr. Petrusic, your witness. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] First of all, may I say good (20)afternoon, Mr. President and Your Honours, my learned friends across the way. • CROSS-EXAMINED by Mr. Petrusic: • Q.: Good afternoon, General.
MR. PETRUSIC:
[Int.] At the very beginning of this
(25)cross-examination, the Defence will start with Exhibits 425 and 426,
(5) • A.: I have got both. • Q.: General, looking at these two exhibits, these two directives and their contents, in terms of the objectives set to the Drina Corps, they are not identical. In Directive 7, issued by the then President of the Republic and (10)the Supreme Commander, Radovan Karadzic, there is the sentence that says: "... through daily planned and well-thought-out combat activities create a situation of total insecurity and no prospect for the continued survival and life of the inhabitants of Srebrenica and Zepa." In Directive 7/1, issued by the Main Staff of the army of (15)Republika Srpska - allow me to describe this as an objective - that objective laid down by President Karadzic is missing. My question is whether Directive 7, issued by the President of the Republic, is the basis for Directive 7/1, issued by the military leadership of Republika Srpska, that is, by the Main Staff? (20) • A.: Your Honour, I understand that question quite clearly, but I've been furnished with, I think, only the covering letter of 7/1 and I haven't got the substance of the order here. So before I can answer that question, I'm missing the second document in substance. Exhibit 426 is simply a four-line covering letter, and I haven't got the main document. (25)
JUDGE RODRIGUES: Madam Registrar, is it possible to do this.
• A.: If you don't mind, I'll just take a moment to look at this because (5)I want to make sure I've got the right document. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Take as much time as you need. THE WITNESS: Thank you, sir. • A.: Your Honour, the reason I paused to take some time to look at this is because the obvious thing to do is to simply compare the piece in the (10)first order relating to the Drina Corps with the piece in the second order just relating to the Drina Corps. If I just make that one direct comparison, in the second order, I don't see any reference to operations around Srebrenica which perhaps you would have expected to have been done given that in the order signed by President Karadzic it refers to (15)Srebrenica. When I look at the orders in the second document, signed by General Mladic, first looking at the Drina Corps specifically, there was no reference at this stage to Srebrenica. However, I've looked at the general statement in the second order which comes first, which describes (20)the overall conduct of the army's operations, and in that I see reference to operations to be conducted in the area of Srebrenica. The terminology about the survival or life of the inhabitants is not read across, but in the general statement of what the army is to do, it does indicate that operations should be mounted against Srebrenica. (25)
MR. PETRUSIC:
[Int.]
• A.: Yes. The normal military process is that when an order is written at a higher level, in this case we have at the highest level, an order (5)written by the President, it's then passed down to the next level. In this case, the next level is the Main Staff of the army. They all receive the order from above; they all read it; they all analyse it. I call it a process which we term as mission analysis. You look closely at what it is you are required to do. You then conduct your own estimate of the (10)situation, analyse the situation, think through all the various factors, and then make your own plan and express your own plan in your own operation order. What I see here is a high-level order received at the Main Staff level, analysed, thought about, a decision made, and then an operation (15)order issued; and of course going down, that operation order, 7/1, is then issued to the subordinate corps, and we would see a similar order being thought about and then being produced at the Drina Corps level. So what I'm looking at is two parts of the process that started with the President and found it's way down to lower levels. (20)
• Q.: If I understand the process correctly, the directive first reached
the Main Staff of the army of Republika Srpska which then analysed that
directive, and the directive of President Karadzic was used as a basis;
then a new number was given to that directive based on President
Karadzic's directive, and then the Main Staff issues to the Drina Corps
(25)this analysed directive for further analysis or, rather, for the
• A.: That is correct, sir. • Q.: General, if that is so, and you have just confirmed it, then the (5)aim that President Karadzic spelled out in his directive to create unbearable conditions for life in Srebrenica and Zepa does not reach the Drina Corps and operational plans are not prepared at that level accordingly.
• A.: If one is analysing the words, Your Honour, that are written down
(10)here, you're quite correct. I don't see a read across of the fairly
colourful language used in the order signed by Mr. Karadzic. But as I've
already said, what I do see in the Main Staff order is a reference to the
fact that attacks will be developed towards the enclaves, including
Srebrenica.
(15)As a military person, I would be very wary of including in my own
operation orders the kind of language and the kind of intent that is
actually written down in Mr. Karadzic's piece of paper. I perhaps would
have an eye to the future. I would have an eye to what is proper, in
military terms, and what is perhaps less proper, and I may well have
(20)carried the intent from the words written down at the political level,
which is what effectively Mr. Karadzic has done. But I think I would be
very wary of carrying that kind of language over into my military
document. Although I, analysing Mr. Karadzic's order, would have
understood what he had in mind, and I perhaps would have chosen not
(25)necessarily to have included that in the written part of my order.
• Q.: General, in the operational documents that you had occasion to (5)review in the course of your preparations for this testimony, the terms and concepts used by officers of the Drina Corps with reference to the attack on Srebrenica, were they proper in military terms? To be specific, regarding the order, the preparatory order for active combat activities, dated the 2nd of July, 1997, Exhibit 428, is it quite correct for the (10)commander to say in his order, when he determines the objective of those operations on page 2, " ... by surprise attack to isolate the enclaves of Srebrenica and Zepa, improve the tactical position of forces deep into the zone, and create conditions for the elimination of those enclaves?" From the point of view of military terminology and military orders, is that a (15)proper wording of a document of this kind?
• A.: Within the, Your Honour, overall military construct that I
described earlier of deep, close, and rear operations, and deep operations
being those things being done to give you a better chance of successfully
carrying out your close operation, your close combat operation, then the
(20)language that I see here is consistent with that. In other words, by
surprise, by artillery fire and shelling, that you would so reduce the
will of the defenders to continue to defend. I see references in here,
the task of carrying out offensive activities with three forces deep in
the Drina Corps zone. These kind of deep activities are designed to be
(25)unsettling and to reduce the will of the defenders to continue to defend
JUDGE WALD: General, let me ask you a question. In one of the (15)earlier documents we saw the objective defined as keeping the enclaves within their original boundaries, preventing the free flow of various activities going on in between, all of which sort of are consistent with the status quo or what people thought the status quo should be. If you get an avowed objective to create conditions for the elimination of (20)enclaves which have been set up for safe areas under an UN directive originally, do you run into a tension between correct military and lawful orders or objectives?
• A.: Yes, Your Honour. I can see what you're getting at, which I think
is why the Karadzic directive is -- although the terminology is quite
(25)colourful, I think its worded something quite carefully because it doesn't
(25)
MR. PETRUSIC:
[Int.]
(5) • A.: My understanding, Your Honour is that the 28th Muslim Division was within the general enclave, geographic enclave of Srebrenica, not just in the town but in the rather larger area knocked out by the enclave. That was the location of 28th Division. Whatever, I have to say, 28th Division was. I don't think it's got quite as I would term it, joined-up a (10)structure as the Drina Corps had. • Q.: Speaking of the members of the 28th Muslim Brigade, if they were the ones who were attacking or making incursions into the rear of the Serbian territory, Serbian-held territory, if they were attacking both the military and the civilian population, in that case, was the attack on the (15)28th Muslim Brigade a legitimate military objective, a legitimate military target? • A.: Your Honour, could I just clarify that question? That you mean that the attack on the 28th Muslim Division, once it had broken out of Srebrenica and while it was trying to regain Muslim lines in the direction (20)of Tuzla?
• Q.: Was the attack on the territory which was held on the 28th Muslim
Division, that is, at the beginning of July 1995 and on the 6th of July,
1995, when the attack on the VRS actually began, at that moment, at that
period of time, under the assumption that there had been attacks from the
(25)protected area and from the territory held by the 28th Muslim Division,
• A.: Thank you for clarifying that. I understand the question.
Within the enclave of Srebrenica there were Muslim forces which we
know to be named 28th Muslim Division. Of course, under the terms of the
(5)United Nations Security Council Resolution that had declared Srebrenica to
be a safe area, part and parcel of that Resolution was that military
forces within Srebrenica should have been disarmed and not existed.
Now, I think that's a separate issue which I don't want to comment
on too much, which was the extent to which those Muslim forces had been
(10)disarmed by United Nations forces in Srebrenica. But I think we all know
that there were a number of Muslim military men who were still bearing
arms in there.
The extent to which, therefore, the attack on Srebrenica was a
legitimate military act, according to general Geneva Convention norms, is
(15)my answer is yes, it is not unreasonable for the Serbs to have attacked
the enclave of Srebrenica in which there were known to be Muslim military
men.
That is a separate issue, in very general terms, to the more
specific issue as to whether it was right for Serb forces to have attacked
(20)Srebrenica, which was itself an United Nations Security Council resolved
safe area. That is a separate issue. And by terms of that United Nations
Security Council Resolution, that attack was an illegitimate attack. It
was against the Resolution of the Security Council. So I have two answers
to that question for whatever value that adds to these matters before the
(25)Court.
(5) • A.: When I hand over command of my division, I walk out of the door and get into my car and I drive away. The next day, my successor arrives and assumes command. There is not a process of time by which he and I work together and I hand over my responsibilities. That is the function of the staff. (10)It's a bit like a monarchy, I suppose. The king is dead, long live the king. I finish my time in command, I go away, the next man arrives, he assumes command. It's the function of the staff to make sure that the incoming commander is brought up to speed with current issues. In terms of handover of command, there is not a period of time when we (15)together. When I have in-staff positions, that is a different matter. One spends up to a week with the staff officer who is relieving you, going through the issues of substance to make sure that nothing falls between the gap. But the handover of command is what we would call a cliff-edge (20)affair. I go; the new man arrives. It could be the same day; it could be a day or two later. But we do not have a practice in my army, at either battalion, brigade, or division level, and I've handed over command in all these different areas, where I spent time with my successor. I go away, the new man comes. (25)
• Q.: So that happens at the level of the division and as regards the
(5) • A.: In my study of the VRS regulations, I can't bring to mind a regulation that stipulates whether there should be a formal handover-takeover period between commanders at the corps level. I can't recall seeing anything to that effect. So I can only comment, I'm afraid, on what my own practice is, and not offer -- I'm afraid I cannot help the (10)Court whether there is a regulation that specifies a handover-takeover period within the VRS. Actually, it's not the sort of normal thing in command terms because command is a personal thing. What my predecessor has done and what my successor will do are two different personal things, and I just (15)refer back to the general principle that command is a personal thing. It's the staff that must keep the continuity of detail going. The tone, the trend, the principle is set by the commander, and to have a sort of clean end to your command and the clean start to the next chap is the most effective way of that delivering that personal command. (20) • Q.: General Dannatt, while studying or, rather, while preparing yourself for your analysis, for your testimony, did you ever come across documents issued by the Drina Corps to certain units, such as brigades, after the 13th of July, 1995?
• A.: Yes, sir, I'm sure I have. I'm just trying to think. The 13th of
(25)July is obviously the date of Krivaja 95, the attack on Zepa; the 13th of
(5) • Q.: The documents or, rather, the regular combat reports coming from the Bratunac and Zvornik Brigades, were they addressed to the forward command post at Krivaca or to the command post or, rather, the headquarters of the Drina Corps in Vlasenica? • A.: Your Honour, I -- (10) • Q.: Excuse me, General. Just a second. Let me try to be more precise. I am referring to the 14th and the 15th of July.
• A.: Yes, Your Honour, I understand the question. I understood it
originally as being, had I seen orders coming down from the Drina Corps. I
understand the question to be, have I seen combat reports coming up from
(15)the subordinate brigades to the Drina Corps, and the answer is yes, I have
seen those.
I'm now trying to remember whether they were addressed to the
forward command post or the main Corps Command. If I say I can't
remember, in my own view, I don't think it really matters. I've already
(20)commented on the fact that the forward command post had communications
established to the main command post from 6.00 on the 14th of July, and
therefore, if the reports had gone to the forward command post or the main
command post, the information was equally available at both those
headquarters.
(25)Now, the usual way for a routine situation report to be passed is
• Q.: I will follow up on what you have just said. General, on the 14th and the 15th of July, at the Vlasenica command post, there is evidence about the presence of General Zivanovic at that command post. Was that of (15)any relevance?
• A.: Your Honour, we touched earlier on, I think it was this morning or
was it yesterday, on the departure of General Zivanovic. When he actually
disappeared is quite difficult to pin down. I see no evidence in any of
the orders, reports, or intercepts of any reference to General Zivanovic
(20)after the 15th. In fact, from the 16th onwards he seems to have sort of
dropped into a hole; he doesn't seem to appear at all.
The only period of confusion in my own mind is the 13th, 14th,
15th as to whether General Zivanovic was still the Corps Commander up
until the end of the 15th or whether, indeed, General Krstic had become
(25)the Corps Commander as early as the 13th. I think I've indicated that, to
(15) • Q.: Likewise, General Dannatt, since you've mentioned the conversations, we have an example of a conversation in which a lower-level officer was waiting for General Zivanovic upon his order, and also we have General Zivanovic addressing this lower-level officer, telling him, "You have to understand this as an order." (20)So my question in relation to that would be: Was there, of any relevance -- was the presence of General Zivanovic at the command post on the 14th and the 15th of July of any influence as regards the situation, bearing in mind the various combat reports that are coming from subordinate units at that time? (25)
• A.: Your Honour, I say again, I think General Zivanovic's position on
(20) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] If I may ask a question. General Dannatt, if he had not been the Commander but only a General, would it still have been possible for him to say, "Take this as an order"?
• A.: Your Honour, it's quite possible that he could have done that
(25)because he was a General and therefore more senior by rank to most other
(20) MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] • Q.: General, the then President, Mr. Karadzic, was the only person who had the authority to appoint the Corps Commander. Are you familiar with that regulation? • A.: Yes, I've read that regulation, Your Honour. (25)
• Q.: So in an organised army, as you have described the VRS -- strike
(5) • A.: In practice, Your Honour, yes, this can happen. I will give you an example from my time as a Battalion Commander. My adjutant, my Chief of Staff -- • Q.: General, I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I'm speaking about the level of a corps or, rather, a division, and the appointment of a division (10)commander in your army.
• A.: Right. Your Honour, I'll give you a different example in that
case.
At divisional level, in my divisional headquarters currently,
there is the Chief of Staff of one of my brigades. It's integral to the
(15)divisional headquarters. This officer was not performing satisfactorily,
and ten days ago I removed him from his post as Chief of Staff of the
Reconnaissance Brigade. I did that because it was the right thing to do.
However, the official posting authority is another officer called
the Military Secretary who issues the written orders for the removal of
(20)someone and the replacement of someone else. That subsequently had to
happen and took a number of days afterwards for the action that I had
taken to be authorised and approved and for a replacement to be posted
in.
I took the action to remove the officer that I felt needed to be
(25)removed on my own authority, and I sought formal authority subsequently.
JUDGE RIAD: Excuse me, General Dannatt. In the example you gave about you taking a decision and then being corroborated, suppose it was rejected. Weren't you running a risk? (10) • A.: Yes, Your Honour, I was. JUDGE RIAD: So that was not -- I mean, you took it at your own risk. • A.: I used my judgement and exercised my own personal decision-making process, believing that what I was doing was right. (15) JUDGE RIAD: It was strictly on an official basis -- not you, but I mean it would not have happened. • A.: If I had gone by the book, I would not have acted in that way. But I think it's true to say, if you do everything absolutely by the book, you don't necessarily always make the best decisions. (20) JUDGE RIAD: As far as General Krstic was concerned, was he the choice of Mladic or of Karadzic? • A.: I would have said, but I do not know, Your Honour, that he was the choice of General Mladic, the military Commander who knew General Krstic well; that he wanted him to command the attack on Zepa and -- (25)
JUDGE RIAD: Because we had a speech by Karadzic praising very
• A.: I think that's very fair. JUDGE RIAD: That's a speech we have. • A.: Yes, and I have seen that, Your Honour. I believe that in (5)professional military terms, I believe that General Krstic had a fine reputation and was, indeed, praised by Mr. Karadzic. Therefore, that does not surprise me. JUDGE RIAD: So that does not lead to a conflict between him and Mladic? (10) • A.: No. Maybe we're misunderstanding each other, sir. I said that I believe it was General Mladic's decision on the ground, if you like, to appoint General Krstic on the 13th of July to be the Commander of the Drina Corps so that he was there in the Command appointment before the attack on Zepa properly began, and it was subsequently approved by (15)Mr. Karadzic. But as you, Your Honour, point out, Mr. Karadzic, quite clearly, had a high opinion of General Krstic from the speech that you've just referred to, and therefore, General Mladic would probably have known that he was not running much of a risk by himself appointing General Krstic, knowing that Mr. Karadzic would, in all probability, subsequently (20)approve that appointment. JUDGE RIAD: With the result that Mladic and Krstic were almost on the same wavelength. • A.: I suspect at that time, sir, they were. JUDGE RIAD: Thank you very much. (25)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] General, before the break - I
• A.: Your Honour, if General Zivanovic was not in good health, then the (5)automatic thing to have happened would have been for General Krstic to have become the Corps Commander, because as the previous Chief of Staff, by regulation, he was the Deputy Commander. So if the former Commander is no longer available through ill-health, then, by regulation, General Krstic would automatically have become the Commander. (10)As I said before, I do not know why General Zivanovic was removed, whether it was health or whatever. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, but in that case, we could have General Krstic replace General Zivanovic and then afterwards there would be a formal appointment; am I correct in understanding you? (15) • A.: Yes. If, let's say, General Zivanovic had been unwell for a period of time, then quite naturally General Krstic would have exercised the function of Corps Commander until General Zivanovic had got better. That would have not required an order from Mr. Karadzic. The regulations provided for General Krstic to be in the Command appointment. (20)However, General Zivanovic did not come back so, therefore, I deduce that he was not replaced as a result of ill-health; he was replaced for some other reason. And my earlier comments, I think, are the comments that apply.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Mr. Petrusic, would this be a
(25)convenient time for a break?
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well, then. We will have a 45-minute break, and I still hope that we won't have to work until 3.30. A 45-minute break. (5) --- Recess taken at 1.08 p.m. --- On resuming at 1.55 p.m. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Petrusic, you may now continue, but please bear in mind that we have to make some effort and try to finish by 3.00, and only if it is necessary we will work until half (10)past three, in which case, we will have a short break for the benefit of General Krstic. If we have to make a break, it will be a 15-minute break only. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Mr. President, I do hope that we will be able to finish by that time and that we won't have to have a (15)break, but this also depends on the General and his answers. • Q.: General Dannatt, let us briefly deal with the following issue. We spoke about President Karadzic and General Mladic at some length, and I should like to know whether you know what kind of relations they had as regards the issue of commanding; that is, what is the relationship between (20)him as the Commander in Commander of Staff or the Supreme Commander and the Commander of the Main Staff? What were the relations at the time? Were they, so to speak, adequate? • A.: Your Honour, as much as I'd like to help the Court, I really don't think I can offer a useful comment on that particular topic. I'm sorry. (25)
• Q.: Do you have any knowledge as to the fact that at the beginning of
• A.: That was, I think, a matter that was quite widely reported, and I'm aware of that in general terms. JUDGE RIAD: Excuse me. Can I just ask you a speculative question (5)in this line? Could General Mladic have been able to interfere and stop the nomination of General Krstic had he wanted it? • A.: Your Honour, you asked me to speculate. My answer is a speculation. I believe that had General Mladic not been content, had not been approving of the appointment of General Krstic as Corps Commander, I (10)think he certainly would have said so to Mr. Karadzic, and indeed I think it's also quite possible that Mr. Karadzic may well have discussed with General Mladic his intention to appoint General Krstic as Corps Commander. Raising the issue to one of generality, certainly within my (15)country, within my army, the most senior appointments are recommended by the senior military for approval by the political heads and there is some discussion that goes on. So both the Chief of the General Staff, the Chief of the Defence Staff and the Secretary of State for Defence in my country both have to agree that a particular person would have a position (20)of appointment of such seniority as a corps commander. That's a general answer. JUDGE RIAD: Thank you. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.]
• Q.: General, on the assumption that Mladic appointed Krstic as a Corps
(25)Commander on the 13th of July, that is, are we speaking on the basis of an
• A.: Your Honour, it's my military opinion that logically, the sensible time to have changed the command of the corps would have been between the (5)Srebrenica operation and the Zepa operation, and, therefore, the date of the 13th of July would seem to be the most sensible. And my speculation is that this was a military decision, and that General Mladic probably made that decision and then sought, subsequently, approval from Mr. Karadzic. That is my military view, with some speculation added to (10)it. • Q.: Do you think that the chief of staff of a corps can take over the command duty over the corps only in the absence of the commander or in cases of his unavailability or in case that he is prevented from fulfilling that duty for any reason? (15) • A.: Yes, Your Honour. The regulations are quite clear that the general officer who holds the appointment of chief of staff is also the deputy commander, and he would exercise the command function in the absence for whatever reason, injury, illness, leave, of the appointed commander. Yes, that is a normal -- that is what the regulations provide (20)for.
• Q.: General, apart from an order for active combat operations in
respect of Srebrenica, do we have any other well thought out plan for the
implementation for the Directive 7/1?
I think that the Exhibit in question, 426, has been widely used.
(25)I don't think it is necessary for putting it on the ELMO once again.
• A.: I'm just reflecting for a moment to see what I can remember. Your Honour, I believe part of the answer to the question is that (5)the overall directive, which came from Mr. Karadzic, that then produced the Directive 7/1, which was the order for the attack on Srebrenica, it was same Karadzic-level produced document that provided the background for the subsequent operation order for the attack on Zepa, Krivaja 95. So I think the Karadzic-level document provided the higher-level instruction (10)for both of those. So the answer to the question is yes, there is a second operation order, and that's the Krivaja 95 operation order. • Q.: I see in the transcript "Zepa" in relation to the Krivaja 95 plan. I believe it's a mistake because the Krivaja 95 plan actually (15)concerns Srebrenica. • A.: Yes. I'm referring to the two separate operation orders, the one for the attack on Srebrenica and the one for the attack on Zepa subsequently, the one issued on the 13th of July, which was signed by General Krstic as Chief of Staff. (20)
MR. CAYLEY: Mr. Petrusic -- Mr. President, Excuse me. I don't
want to interrupt my learned friend because we want to move quickly. But
I do believe that if Defence counsel is making reference to documents, the
purpose of the cross-examination is not to conduct a memory test on the
General as to what he can remember. It would be better if he actually
(25)puts the documents in front of him because that would, I think, probably
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes. I think you're right, (5)Mr. Cayley. But I believe that Mr. Petrusic was trying to obtain the same result without the actual use of documents. But in any case, it is much better to have the General see the document so that he can remember things. I think it is an easier way to proceed. There is always a risk, when we want to act in a speedy manner. (10)So, Mr. Petrusic, it perhaps would be better if you ask the registrar to have the document be shown to the witness. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Mr. President, I believe that the witness has answered my question, so we don't believe there is any need to go back to the document and have it placed before the witness. (15) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you, Mr. Petrusic. You may continue. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.]
• Q.: General, in your analysis, you stated that you were not surprised
by the presence of Mladic and Gvero, that is, the Commander of the Main
(20)Staff and his assistant, and that as regards the structure of a military
command, it is a usual practice for the higher command to follow carefully
the main effort, the main events.
In relation to that and bearing in mind your experience in Bosnia
and Herzegovina, how do you interpret the fact that the superior officers
(25)were actively following duties of their subordinate officers but that they
(5)
• A.: I'm just making sure, Your Honour, that I follow the exact line of
the question.
I think, Your Honour, I rather disagree with the premise of the
question. What I have said hitherto is that the presence of
General Mladic and some of his assistants, some of his staff in the area
(10)of the Drina Corps, I don't find surprising because that's where the main
effort for the VRS at that time was. Because General Mladic was there, I
would expect him, quite properly and quite normally, to have endeavoured
to influence events. After all, he was superior by appointment and rank
to, we'll say, General Krstic, to the Corps Commander at the time, and,
(15)therefore, could well have given additional orders and sometimes
additional advice. There is a difference between the two. "You are to do
this," "I suggest you do that," but it's all done following the structure
of Mladic to Krstic and using the organ of the Drina Corps to carry out
those commands.
(20)The bit of the question that I don't follow is the implication
that's between General Mladic on the Main Staff level and General Krstic
and his Drina Corps level, there was a requirement to go apparently higher
to seek authority for a number of these sort of things. I don't see any
evidence that that happened. I think that from my understanding of events
(25)that took place leading up to the capture of Srebrenica and that which
JUDGE RIAD: Excuse me. "Between the Generals"? I thought there was one General. (5) • A.: Your Honour, I'm trying to address the issue of the fact that General Mladic was also present in the area of Srebrenica at the time and the fact that he undoubtedly would have had conversations; he may have given orders to General Krstic. So I use the term "Generals," plural; General Mladic and General Krstic. (10) JUDGE RIAD: And how would that interfere with the responsibility? • A.: It wouldn't at all. JUDGE RIAD: Then who would be responsible in that case? • A.: The normal passage of formal orders is as we've been describing over the last couple of days, of issuing a formal operation order from one (15)level to another. But it's perfectly proper for the Superior Commander, in this case, General Mladic, to give additional orders or additional instructions to General Krstic as Corps Commander, face to face, in a spoken way, at the time, telling him to do this or to do that. Then one would expect General Krstic then to issue instructions to his own people (20)within his Corps to carry out those instructions. This is the way that I would normally understand the senior commander being present to influence the conduct of operations in a given area, the key area of the main effort.
JUDGE RIAD: But there was no sign of General Mladic giving direct
(25)orders to the subordinates of General Krstic.
(5) JUDGE RIAD: Thank you. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] • Q.: General, if we are talking on the basis of the assumption that oral orders are also being issued, as you yourself have just mentioned, by General Mladic in this case, in the period of the 11th, the 12th, and the (10)13th of July, when General Krstic was the Chief of Staff, would it be natural or logical for General Mladic to issue such orders to the Corps Commander and not to the Chief of Staff of the Corps?
• A.: Your Honour, the normal and correct way of doing business would be
for General Mladic, if he felt it appropriate to issue some additional or
(15)fresh orders, to do it to the Corps Commander, that is, the strict chain
of command.
I think, however, having made quite a lot of, over the last couple
of days, the unique position of the Corps Chief of Staff as the principal
staff officer, also a general officer, that it would not be wrong for
(20)General Mladic to issue orders to the Corps Chief of Staff, in the clear
expectation that the Chief of Staff would immediately inform his Corps
Commander that he had been given those fresh orders.
It's quite usual, in my experience, for orders to be given and
received by a commander to a subordinate chief of staff in the expectation
(25)that there is an immediate discussion between the chief of staff and his
• Q.: As regards the regulations which were applicable within the VRS; namely, the regulations which had been adopted from the former JNA, in (10)accordance with those regulations, does the corps commander issue orders to his assistants? • A.: Could I just clarify, Your Honour, what Defence counsel means by "assistants"? Does he mean assistant commander as per that diagram or does he mean subordinates as in brigade commanders? (15) • Q.: The corps commander has his assistants for morale, religious issues, for logistics and for security, so I'm referring to those assistants. • A.: Yes, thank you for clarifying that. It would be perfectly normal for the corps commander to issue instructions to his assistants (20)responsible for those functional areas. • Q.: A corps commander also issues orders to his subordinate units such as brigades or, rather, to the commanders of those brigades. • A.: Yes.
• Q.: General, during the time that you spent working on this case, did
(25)you ever learn that the first documents relating to the transport, the
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Petrusic, I'm sorry to (5)interrupt you, but I think it would be useful to see the documents. Otherwise, we will be testing the General's memory which I trust is very good; however, it should not be tested here. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Yes, Mr. President, of course. If you can just give me a moment. (10)I will withdraw this question for the time being. But I should like the assistance of the usher to put Exhibit 459 on the ELMO, please. • Q.: General, this information comes from Colonel Jankovic, and it was issued from the forward command post in Bratunac on the 13th of July, 1995. (15)General, could you please tell us - you have already spoken about the subject this morning - why Colonel Jankovic, who is an intelligence officer of the Main Staff, is transmitting this to the Intelligence Sector of the Main Staff and to the Command of the Drina Corps and its Intelligence Department? Why is he transmitting this piece of information (20)to these two addressees?
• A.: Your Honour, I assume that he is doing that because he has been in
the area of operations covered by this report, probably in the company of
General Mladic, and he will have seen things going on, he will have seen
events going on, and felt it appropriate to pass on that information, in
(25)the same nature of the dialogue between one intelligence officer to
• Q.: Assistant Commander for Security in the Corps, is he in charge of (15)controlling the Security Organs in a professional way? • A.: Your Honour, he is responsible for coordinating all the people that work in the security and intelligence area in the same way that the other branch heads in the functional areas are responsible for their functional areas. But they are part of the Corps Headquarters structure (20)and, therefore, are answerable to the Chief of Staff, and then on upwards to the Corps Commander.
• Q.: From your research, do you think that this is the only
responsibility, the only duty? As regards the hierarchical structure, is
it going upwards to the Corps Commander, or, bearing in mind the nature of
(25)the work that they do, do they also have a responsibility in respect of
• A.: In general terms, the responsibility within the security and intelligence area is the same as the responsibilities for any functional (5)area. I can imagine, perhaps, some circumstances where there was some information of a very sensitive nature that was kept within the intelligence community, but that is usually for the purpose of the protection of the source of that information and is never intended to be denied to the commander. (10)Indeed, in my own experience, on operations when I've fulfilled the post of Commander British Forces, I have had intelligence officers who have come to brief me personally on relatively sensitive bits of information that aren't more generally known within the staff, and this is to invariably make sure that the source, where this information has come (15)from, has remained privileged and protected and can continue to be used. But in general terms, the intelligence function operates in the same way as the operations or the transport or the logistics function. • Q.: Again, the Intelligence Service, did it have its special rules and regulations of service? (20) • A.: As far as I'm aware, it has, within the overall regulations, some detailed provisions and requirements in the same way that all the functional areas have some detailed regulations and requirements laying down how they should do their business.
• Q.: Let me now go back to the question involving Exhibit number 437.
(25)General, if there was a plan to conduct a deportation, such a document or
• A.: I just want to look at the transcript of your question to make sure I understand it correctly. (5) • Q.: For the record, would such a document have been issued prior to the 12th of July, 1995?
• A.: I think, Your Honour, if I understand the question correctly,
we're trying to examine as to whether the deportation was a previously
planned event or whether it was the result of a late decision.
(10)I think it's quite difficult for me to speculate on that. All I
can say, from various reports and documents that I have seen, is that
undoubtedly there was an urgent request placed for buses and trucks to
remove people. I can't remember whether I have seen any such requests
that date before the 12th of July, but certainty the Exhibit 437, which we
(15)were discussing a moment ago, is dated the 12th of July, and that is one
of many documents related to the requisitioning and gathering together of
transport.
But I think I've already expressed the view that although there
was intention to apply pressure to Srebrenica and the long-held aspiration
(20)to capture it, it was something of a surprise, I think, to the Serb
military authorities to find that the United Nations, the International
Community were not responding to the beginnings of their attack on
Srebrenica. So, therefore, it was a relatively late decision to press
home the attack and actually capture the town and, therefore, start the
(25)process that led to the deportation of the people. If that presumption is
• Q.: General Dannatt, would the use of transport means be part of the functions of the Rear, the Logistics Services and the Transportation (10)Services? • A.: Your Honour, the transport is one of the branches of the Department for Rear Services shown on the left-hand side of that diagram under the Department for Rear Services. Yes, it's one of the functions of that part of the Corps Headquarters. (15) • Q.: To the very end, General Dannatt, it is not my intention to test your memory. I simply do not have at my disposal those exhibits. But while preparing for your testimony, did you note, in the area of Zepa and within the framework of another operation that was conducted from the 13th and 14th of July, did you note the presence of Intelligence Organs, (20)Intelligence and Security Organs in that area if you had access to any such materials in the course of your study? • A.: I'm afraid, Your Honour, I can't help you with that question. I understand the question, but I've got no information to give you by way of an answer. (25)
• Q.: General Dannatt, thank you very much.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, Mr. Petrusic. (5)Mr. Cayley, any additional questions? MR. CAYLEY: Very quickly, Your Honour. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Please proceed. • RE-EXAMINED by Mr. Cayley: MR. CAYLEY: If the witness could be provided with Exhibit 425, (10)please.
• Q.: General, if could I refresh your memory to the beginning of your
cross-examination when you were examined on whether or not the substance
of Directive 7/1, and rather, I think you called it inflammatory or
flowery language contained in the document was contained in subsequent
(15)orders down through subordinate units. If I could direct you to page 14
of Exhibit 425, paragraph 6.1, and it is the third paragraph from the
bottom of that page, and I will essentially summarise what the directive
is, and essentially the document states that: "UNPROFOR and humanitarian
organisations are to be restricted so that, in essence, logistical supply
(20)is strangled to the enclave both for UNPROFOR and resources to the Muslim
population, essentially making them dependent upon the goodwill of the
VRS."
Now, the one simple question I have for you, General, is: Are you
aware whether or not that actually happened on the ground at Srebrenica?
(25)Are you aware whether or not logistics were interfered with by the VRS and
• A.: Yes, Your Honour, I'm very much aware. The Dutch Battalion that was the UNPROFOR garrison experienced considerable, almost extreme difficulties in bringing supplies in. It got to the point where they (5)didn't have sufficient fuel for their vehicles and had to start foot patrols. Their food was considerably reduced and, in fact, as a result of roadblocks and checkpoints that were placed on their access into Potocari and into Srebrenica, the effect described by this paragraph here was very much the effect that happened on the ground. And as you would imagine, if (10)it was happening to the Dutch Battalion garrison of UNPROFOR, it was happening even more so to the Muslim population. And I think there was the same -- I know there was the same denial of UNHCR relief convoys into Srebrenica. So the intent to make life very difficult for the UNPROFOR (15)garrison and for the Muslim population was very much carried out on the ground. There is no doubt about that. • Q.: So you've been very clear, General, but in essence, this directive from the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces of the Republika Srpska was, in fact, carried out on the ground in Srebrenica by units far down the (20)chain of command?
• A.: There's no doubt about it because it would have been elements of
the Drina Corps, more than one brigade that were manning the confrontation
lines around Srebrenica, and the approach routes from the Muslim-held
territory where the support bases for UNPROFOR were located. They would
(25)have all responded to this instruction and in an orchestrated fashion have
• Q.: Thank you very much, General. MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President and Your Honours, I have no further (5)questions for the witness. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, Mr. Cayley. Judge Fouad Riad, do you have some more questions? JUDGE RIAD: [Int.] Yes, Mr. President. Thank you. • QUESTIONED by the Court: (10) JUDGE RIAD: General Dannatt, I would still like to have some precisions, although I have understood you very clearly. You spoke about of the daily combat reports, and I can just quote one part of your report. You say: "I have seen evidence of daily combat reports that are clearly in a layed-down format which provides a full account of all (15)activity." Did this daily combat report give an account of the massacres?
• A.: No, Your Honour. I have not seen direct reports of what you would
describe as massacres. As I said in an earlier answer, there were -- and
I wouldn't expect to do so either, because I think most people would have
(20)realised that to commit to paper, in a formal daily report matters like
that, was laying themselves open to subsequent investigation as indeed the
business of this court is all about.
But one does see in some places references to things that one
knows afterwards were indirect references, whether it's to prisoners, and
(25)I'm thinking now of the Zvornik Brigade's report complaining, if you like,
JUDGE RIAD: Now, to go further, if these daily combat reports were submitted to the Higher Command, so the Higher Command was not informed about the executions if they are not mentioned in the combat (10)reports. Just to follow the echelon. How would you know about it? • A.: In a direct sense, Your Honour, I agree with you and -- I would agree with that point, sir. JUDGE RIAD: But still it will -- he'll remain responsible? • A.: Certainly remains responsible, but there are two parts to this (15)information exchange process, Your Honour. There are upward reporting of what is going on, but then of course there is the downward ordering of what should be done. The mere fact that in the daily written combat report we don't see reports of that aspect of activity being reported up does not necessarily mean, on the one hand, it wasn't happening, and on (20)the other hand, that it hadn't been ordered from above. I think a sensible subordinate commander would not have included such material in his daily combat reports. JUDGE RIAD: And a sensible commander would not order it in written documents also, vice versa? (25)
• A.: If he has an eye to the future and what might happen, I think that
JUDGE RIAD: And in a well-disciplined army, this should still be done within the chain of command? • A.: Instructions to do things should still follow the chain of command, as I've just tried to clarify, but I wouldn't expect to see that (10)sort of thing written down. However, the sort of things that we're talking about are not the sort of activities that I would expect a civilised, disciplined army to actually do. There is no doubt that these dreadful things happened. They happened extensively and over a short period of time, and, therefore, I (15)have to make the dreadful deduction, if you like, that for this widespread activity to happen over a short period of time, it had to be facilitated by a disciplined, joined-up organisation to make such activity happen so quickly, and there was no other framework to enable this to happen other than the framework of the Drina Corps. (20) JUDGE RIAD: Now, you spoke of a civilised army. In one of your -- apparently when you were describing the plan Krivaja 95, you said it has a fairly barbaric logic. So that's not very much in harmony with what you said about a civilised army.
• A.: I think the term, Your Honour, that I've used mostly as been
(25)"disciplined," as disciplined as in following a chain of command,
JUDGE RIAD: Right now you did, five minutes ago. I'm not blaming you, I'm just telling you. (5) • A.: Well, I'm probably trying to clarify that there is a distinction, a sharp distinction, in my mind between "disciplined" and "organised" on the one hand and "civilised" on the other. JUDGE RIAD: So why do you say it was a fairly barbaric plan, the plan Krivaja? (10) • A.: The intention to shell, the intention to make life unsupportable, the intention to make life unbearable for principally civilians has a barbaric logic, and I think that comes into the uncivilised category. JUDGE RIAD: It carried already the intention of harming people. • A.: Going right back to the original document that we looked at (15)earlier, going back to the Karadzic-signed document which talks about there being no hope for life and making survival difficult, if there's a barbaric logic to that, and that implicitly -- that implies harm and casualty and fear being created amongst not only military people but amongst civilian people, that is not certainly civilised behaviour (20)either. JUDGE RIAD: You were discussing transportation and wondering why there were no written documents concerning it. Would you put this under the category of unwritten exchange of orders and documents?
• A.: To clarify, Your Honour, I said that I could not recall any
(25)written documents relating to transportation before about the 12th of
JUDGE RIAD: Thank you very much. (10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, Judge Fouad Riad. Madam Judge Wald. JUDGE WALD: General Dannatt, I have three questions. The first is a bit complex but be reassured the second two are very simple. (15) • A.: All right.
JUDGE WALD: I wonder if you would consider for a moment a
slightly different scenario, hypothetical, for the moment, obviously, than
the one discussed at length which was whether or not General Mladic might
have gone in and taken direct command of certain units of the Drina Corps
(20)and exercised that command. We also discussed at a later point whether or
not, and you agreed, a logical time for General Krstic to take over as
Commander would be at the end of the Srebrenica military campaign, the
beginning of the Zepa military campaign. And occasionally, a good
commander-in-chief jumps the box a bit and faces the consequences.
(25)Joining those two thoughts together, I would just like your
• A.: I think, Your Honour, it has to come into the highly unlikely category. (15) JUDGE WALD: Okay. You tell us why. • A.: And I'll tell you why. There can only be one commander in a military establishment at any one time. I think I alluded to one person behind the steering wheel of a car. It would flout all the norms of military conduct to have two commanders at any one time, and I think (20)that's a generalisation but I think it's a pretty strong generalisation. Secondly, General Zivanovic has completely disappeared off -- JUDGE WALD: Not until the 15th.
• A.: Yes, ma'am, that's correct. We see no further transcripts or
documents relating to General Zivanovic after the 15th, I would agree, but
(25)that mop-up operation was ongoing for some time; the search in the woods
JUDGE WALD: But some of the heaviest of the massacres had already finished by the 15th. (5) • A.: We're talking of two or three things here, I think, if I can just clarify. We're mopping up the column, the 28th Division column; we are dealing with the search operation - I was going to come to that - that was ordered on the 13th; and we're also dealing with what I've referred to previously as "the dark operation," to massacre a lot of people. I would (10)agree, in the main, the killing was largely over on the 15th but it did run to an extent on the 16th -- JUDGE WALD: Yes. • A.: -- the burial aspect went on beyond, and of course the digging up and reburial was well beyond. So even if General Zivanovic had been the (15)driving force behind that to start with, he very quickly stopped being so in that hypothesis and someone else, very early on, took it over. I would just come back to the other point which is the search operation, which was definitely not being ordered in the Zepa operation which was ordered on the 13th of July, and an order that was signed by (20)General Krstic. So for all those reasons, I can understand how one could arrive at that hypothesis, but I would put it into the highly unlikely category for the three or four reasons that I have just given.
JUDGE WALD: Okay. The two shorter questions.
(25)If you, as the commander of a corps or a division, suddenly found
• A.: If they're going to do it properly, then first of all a body of
troops, a unit of some sort, has got to be appointed to act as a guard
force for that. I mean, it might be that you would choose a military
police unit or it might be that you select an infantry battalion to be a
(15)guard force to prevent those people from escaping.
You would have to identify places that you were going to hold
those people. That might be buildings that you would be required to
identify which were large enough, warehouses or factories or anything like
that, to put people in, in other words, provide accommodation for them, or
(20)alternatively you would have to build pens very rapidly with wire
stockades and so on in which to put them.
You would then, knowing that you were dealing with large numbers,
have to make some arrangements for the provision of food and water for the
sustainment of those people and, on the presumption that these people were
(25)being taken prisoner after a period of combat, then provide medical
JUDGE WALD: Would it require that those holding places have enough food, medical care for a period of time? You mentioned that all during this war, the Bosnian war, there were these kinds of exchanges that went on between the BiH army and the Bosnian Serbs, exchanges of (10)prisoners, so I assume this would not be an entirely new situation. But would you have to assume that you might have to hold those prisoners for a period of time before such an exchange was -- in other words, it couldn't be done overnight. • A.: I think that's absolutely right. Exchanges take a little while to (15)organise. One's got to get in touch either directly with the other side or, as was often done, through the International Committee of the Red Cross, who acted as the intermediary in order to facilitate exchanges. That would certainly have taken a period of days; it may have taken a period of weeks. (20)Of course, this is going beyond a little bit, but if they had taken 4.000 or 5.000 prisoners at this stage in the war, exchange was one option, but continuing to detain them for a longer period of time might have been a better option rather than put 4.000 or 5.000 potentially back in uniform as rearmed soldiers to fight against them once more. (25)
JUDGE WALD: My last question. You said, I think I quote you
• A.: Well, the people, as I understand it, Your Honour, who were massacred came from two sources. JUDGE WALD: Right. • A.: Some were prisoners captured from the column -- (15) JUDGE WALD: The majority, yes. • A.: -- and some were men from Potocari who were separated out from the women. JUDGE WALD: That's right.
• A.: I guess that the decision to kill probably stemmed from the
(20)Potocari separation exercise and then carried on as a response to a number
of those who were captured as the column was rounded up. So after all
that, that took place over a number of days, and it was quite some time
before the last elements of the column had been rounded up.
So I believe that the decision to kill the men was a decision
(25)taken in the Potocari environment and then, to an extent, it was rolled
JUDGE WALD: Although, weren't some of the first executions of the column people done on the 13th whereas the Potocari people were bused and held around Bratunac before some of them were then dispersed to camps and (5)killed? That doesn't mean your answer can't be correct that the decision was made but ... • A.: I think, actually, some of the killings of prisoners from the column may well have come into the spontaneous category. I think that we may well have had a little revenge-taking going on there, and that may (10)have been a less-disciplined aspect of the whole thing. I think the more sinister aspect of this is the major decision that was taken to separate men from women and children and then to execute the men, and that originally stems from the large group of people rounded up in Potocari. I agree with your difference over the dates there. (15) JUDGE WALD: Thank you.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] General, I also have a few
questions.
My first question is the following: You said that it was normal
for General Mladic to be present in the field of operations and that he
(20)could give instructions or orders of an additional nature. I think that
you saw the video recording of the meetings held in the Fontana Hotel.
The fact that we saw Mladic alone conducting the negotiations - Krstic did
not speak; the other officers did not speak - how do you view that
situation? It would have been normal for Krstic or Zivanovic to be able
(25)to speak and not for Mladic. He was there just to support them.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Another question. I don't know
for the moment whether it is an order coming from the Main Staff to the
Drina Corps and all the other brigades - you will remember there was
(20)something very urgent - or whether it was the Drina Corps repeating an
order for the subordinate units. There is a point where it is noted "For
Information," and then in brackets it says:
[In English] "To be handed
directly to the Commander or Chief of Staff."
• A.: If your question is on that particular phrase, then I believe it does confirm exactly that; that there is this unique and special (5)relationship between the Commander and the Chief of Staff. It doesn't take anything away from the Commander as the boss, as the number 1. But the Chief of Staff has a very special relationship to him, and people recognise that you can tell something to the Chief of Staff and you're effectively telling it to the Commander, so they are bracketed together in (10)that regard. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Another question. We have seen that for the purpose of communication and information, there were direct relations between the Assistants for Security in the Main Staff and in the Drina Corps. Have you come across documents containing orders; that is to (15)say, is it necessary to make a distinction between information and orders? • A.: Your Honour, when you say have I come across documents, do you mean regulations or just -- JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Orders. Have you seen any documents containing orders that were passed directly between two (20)Assistants for Security?
• A.: I don't believe I have, sir, no. I'm just trying to think whether
I have. I think I have seen, as I mentioned before, communications
between the two facilitating a passage of information. I don't think I
can recall seeing an order.
(25)If I could just remind you, Your Honour, of one comment I made
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] General, just to summarise and maybe to finish off this question, there's another point. Seeing (10)communications between the Assistant for Security from the Main Staff and the Assistant for Security in the Drina Corps, one can agree that information is circulating; that is to say, is it necessary to make a distinction between orders which may or may not be passed on directly, or information which can always be passed on from one to the other? (15) • A.: I think, Your Honour, the point that I want to make and I want to stay with is that it's perfectly legitimate, and I have seen several examples of information being passed from the Security Staff at one level to the Security Staff at another. I have seen no orders being passed from one level to another. (20) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] My one last question, General. You said that you haven't seen documents relating to the buses prior to the 12th of July. My question is: Have you seen documents, prior to the 12th of July, which make mention of the evacuation? Perhaps all the documents would need to be reviewed. I'm sorry. (25)
• A.: I'm pausing because I'm thinking.
• A.: Your Honour, I've certainly made reference to the fact that one has seen the general stated intention going right back to the Karadzic order that to remove the Muslim population as a long-term aim from (10)Srebrenica was in mind. That is one thing. I don't think I can recall seeing a particular written order prior to the 12th of July. And those orders largely pertain to the gathering together of buses and so on for the purpose of moving the people. So I think I can safely say that my understanding is that there (15)always was an intention to remove the Muslim people from Srebrenica when at some point in the future the opportunity presented itself. I think that opportunity presented itself after the town had been captured, in a military sense, and that's when one begins to see written orders and transcripts of conversations and so on, gathering together (20)buses for that purpose. And I think the 12th of July is about the cut-off date or about the start date for that.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] So, General, I think we have
come to the end of your testimony. We have made every effort to release
you today.
(25)I should also like to take advantage of the opportunity to thank
THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] I was going to raise the
(10)question of documents. Perhaps I should also take a few minutes to
address some questions. We have come against a concrete difficulty, and
that is that Mr. McCloskey has asked for the admission into evidence of
the list of documents contained in Exhibit 394, specifically that exhibit
was tendered and requested to be admitted under seal because the list
(15)contains documents under seal. So that brought about this specific
difficulty as to finding out which of the specific documents which need to
be admitted under seal and which are the documents that can be admitted
normally.
So I don't know whether the Prosecutor is ready to answer this
(20)question or perhaps we can deal with it at some other time, because it was
not clear for me, during the discussion, whether the Defence took a
position only regarding the documents under seal. As you remember, the
Defence had an objection regarding the admission of certain documents, but
in my understanding, it did not state an opinion regarding the request of
(25)admitting certain documents under seal.
MR. HARMON: Good afternoon, Mr. President and Your Honours, (5)counsel. The situation in respect of the exhibits, many are under seal, many are not under seal, we have duplicate documents finding themselves in both situations, it's, frankly, very confusing. In order to resolve this issue, my proposal to the Trial Chamber is that Ms. Keith has been working (10)on a comprehensive list of documents and exhibits and is prepared tomorrow to present to the registrar the list of documents for which we are seeking a removal from the protection of the seal and the identity of documents which we believe should remain under seal, and we're prepared to submit that to the registrar and let that be regulated by the registrar in (15)conjunction with my colleague, Ms. Keith. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Harmon, are you ready to discuss the totality of those documents with the Defence, those under seal, those not under seal? MR. HARMON: We have engaged in those discussions throughout this (20)litigation. We will be meeting this afternoon -- I hope either this afternoon or tomorrow to have the list available to show to my colleagues from the Defence, and we will reach an agreement that is acceptable to both parties.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Mr. Petrusic, please, regarding
(25)this matter.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well then. We're going to wait then before we decide because for us, it was an insurmountable obstacle and we had to encourage your cooperation. (10)I see Mr. Cayley on his feet. Do you have a witness? MR. CAYLEY: I wouldn't dare announce that at this stage, Mr. President. There are some exhibits to be regulated for General Dannatt. Prosecutor's Exhibit 395, 396, 397, 398, and General Dannatt's report (15)which has been marked as Exhibit 385A, which is the English version, and "B" which is the B/C/S version. So if there are no objections from my learned friend Mr. Petrusic, I would ask for those to be admitted into evidence. If I can assist the Defence, they were the biographical documents that were presented at the beginning and then the document (20)showing the relationship between Security Organs within a corps and Divisional Command. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, Mr. Petrusic. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] We have no objection, Mr. President. (25)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Fine then. The documents have
MR. CAYLEY: Mr. Harmon has asked me to notify the Court that tomorrow there will be two witnesses who will be essentially giving the Court evidence of the impact of these crimes on the community in (5)Srebrenica, and they will be led by Mr. Harmon's legal officer, Magda Karagiannakas, and so she will be leading the evidence tomorrow. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well. Thank you very much, once again, to you all for your availability. So we meet again here tomorrow at 9.30. Have a good evening and success in your work. (10) --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.27 p.m., to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 26th day of July, 2000 at 9.30 a.m. |