|
|
OMRI Pursuing Balkan Peace, No. 32, 96-08-13
From: Open Media Research Institute <http://www.omri.cz>
Pursuing Balkan Peace
No. 32, 13 August 1996
CONTENTS
[01] HOW TO DEAL WITH INAT
[02] CROAT-MUSLIM AGREEMENT CHANGES NOTHING.
[03] OSCE CONCERNED OVER SERB STATEMENTS ON SOVEREIGN STATE.
[04] OSCE PUTS BOSNIAN SERB PARTY ON NOTICE OVER KARADZIC.
[05] SECURITY COUNCIL THREATENS SANCTIONS OVER KARADZIC, MLADIC.
[06] IFOR TESTED IN THE REPUBLIKA SRPSKA.
[07] "FROM KARADJORDJEVO TO VOULIAGMENI" -- A BREAKTHROUGH IN RELATIONS BETWEEN BELGRADE AND ZAGREB?
[08] KOSOVO: BOMB ATTACKS BRING ARKAN'S RETURN.
[01] HOW TO DEAL WITH INAT
Once again the international community has relearned an oft-forgotten lesson
from the wars of the Yugoslav succession: firmness backed by force brings
compliance, while cajoling, deal-making, and waffling are interpreted as
weakness and invite more trouble in the future. In the latest instance, the
Bosnian Serbs had continued their long-standing policy of displaying inat,
or spiteful defiance, in a constant test of NATO's patience and the limits of
the possible. On 10 August they blocked IFOR inspectors from seeing what they
wanted to at Gen. Ratko Mladic's mountain stronghold at Han Pijesak in what
NATO Secretary-General Javier Solana called "the most serious violation of the
Dayton accord" to date. But this time IFOR responded with resolution, the
Serbs buckled under, and the inspection went ahead.
Previously, NATO had been at pains to stress that all parties were basically
complying with the military aspects of the Dayton agreement. It appears,
however, that this was not the case (see below), but that few of the
violations managed to attract media attention or force the Atlantic alliance
into high-profile action. The incident on 10 August proved to be a rather
different matter and prompted IFOR to show an unusual degree of resolve.
First, on 11 August NATO opened talks with the Serbs but also took the
unprecedented step of pulling its liaison officers out of Pale. Then on 12
August, NATO activated Operation Fear Naught, which placed its own forces in
the Republika Srpska (RS) on a higher state of alert, consolidated them in
more readily defensible positions, and effectively ordered civilian aid
workers to leave. This was a preventive measure against Serb attacks or
hostage-taking, but could also be interpreted as setting the stage for NATO
military moves against Mladic's forces.
This point was quickly grasped in Pale, where IFOR was already talking to the
Serbs. That same afternoon Solana and NATO's commander in Europe, Gen. George
Joulwan, met with RS acting president Biljana Plavsic and other Serb officials,
who then said that the inspection at Han Pijesak could go ahead. Plavsic
called the whole matter "a small misunderstanding." On 13 August IFOR
commander Gen. Sir Michael Walker flew his helicopter from Sarajevo to Pale to
collect Plavsic en route to Han Pijesak to ensure that all went smoothly. U.S.
Secretary of State Warren Christopher, a man not known for bellicose behavior,
warned: "IFOR will carry out its responsibilities. It has the determination to
do so."
Whether this latest show of resolve will set a new pattern or prove to be an
isolated occurrence remains to be seen. The lesson of firmness had been
largely forgotten in major capitals since 1995, when NATO firepower and an
allied Croat-Muslim offensive forced the Serbs to stop a hostage-taking spree
and other displays of inat and come to the conference table. The result
was the Dayton agreement. Now the most serious threat to that treaty is not so
much the goings-on at Han Pijesak, but the attempts by nationalists on all
three sides to manipulate the 14 September elections. The nationalists in the
three ruling parties want to ensure the establishment of three "ethnically
pure" states in place of one, multi-ethnic Bosnia-Herzegovina. The question
is: might the lesson relearned these past few days be applied to save the
civilian aspects of the Dayton agreement, or is Bosnia already condemned to
partition? -- Patrick Moore
[02] CROAT-MUSLIM AGREEMENT CHANGES NOTHING.
And one place where the trend toward a division along ethnic lines can be best
observed is Mostar, the largest city in Herzegovina, now divided between
Croats and Muslims. The administrative deadlock was officially resolved on 6
August, when the Croats agreed to stop boycotting the city council elected in
the 30 June local elections. The deal averted a prolonged political standoff
that would have boded ill for the Bosnia-wide elections slated for next month.
However, nothing has changed in terms of concrete actions. Moreover, bearing
in mind the latest statements by both Croat and Muslim officials, tensions are
instead on the rise.
After several days of EU-mediated marathon talks, the two sides agreed to form
a city government based on the election returns, but taking Croat complaints
of voting irregularities to the Bosnian Federation constitutional
court. Originally it was agreed that the first session of the joint assembly
be held on 8 August, but then it was delayed. The EU on 9 August announced
that the council will meet on 14 August to elect a new mayor and deputy mayor.
Taking into account that the governor of the Neretva Canton will be a Muslim,
the mayor will be a Croat. Muslims and Croats also agreed to accept Joint
Action, the EU plan on the transfer of responsibilities from the EU
administrator to the local mayor and deputy mayor.
The agreement was signed by Mayor Mijo Brajkovic of Croat-held west Mostar and
Mayor Safet Orucevic of Muslim-held east Mostar after several days of
negotiations extending well beyond an EU 4 August deadline. The EU had
threatened to withdraw from Mostar by that date unless the Croats accepted the
election returns. The intensive pressure on Croats to stop boycotting the city
council started on 31 July with arrival of the U.S. envoy for Bosnia, John
Kornblum. He was also the first to announce the abolition of the Croat para-
state of Herceg-Bosna. But although even Croatian President Franjo Tudjman
promised his American counterpart Bill Clinton that Herceg-Bosna will be
dismantled by 8 August, Kornblum failed to win a commitment by Muslim and
Croat allies to launch the federation by that date. (It might be noted that
there have been numerous agreements since 1994 calling for the end of Herceg-
Bosna and the implementing of the federation.)
Meanwhile, during his official visit to the U.S. on 2 August, Tudjman assured
Clinton that the Croats would cooperate with the Muslims in Mostar and respect
the local election results. At the same time, the ruling Croatian Democratic
Community (HDZ) held its congress in the seaside resort of Neum. Brajkovic
said, however, that all the Croats' demands were justified and supported by
Tudjman himself.
In long negotiations that followed, the Croats repeatedly refused to accept
the EU proposal on a joint administration. They insisted on the city council
being a "provisional body" until their concerns were dealt with. But Sir
Martin Garrod, the EU administrator for Mostar, said that was unacceptable.
Finally, on 6 August an agreement was reached that was basically the EU
original proposal.
One may suspect that the local Croats realized that their time-tested
obstructionist tactics were not going to work and that they had no choice but
to accept the EU initiative. They nonetheless failed to get an agreement with
the Muslims on 8 August on the dissolution of Herceg-Bosna. Ethnic Muslim
Bosnian senior officials, such as Prime Minister Hasan Muratovic and federal
Vice President Ejup Ganic, said the Croats had presented new conditions for
abolishing Herceg-Bosna instead of simply doing so outright. But federal
President Kresimir Zubak -- a Croat from the Doboj region -- accused the
Muslims of preventing the functioning of the federation by not transferring
authority from the republic to it, as the Croats want as a precondition for
consigning Herceg-Bosna to history.
Kornblum then visited Croatia on 10 August to press Tudjman once again to
ensure that the Bosnian Croats will abide by the Dayton peace accords. But in
Mostar, the chief Bosnian Croat negotiator and the president of the HDZ in
that city, Mile Puljic, complained to Garrod that the council's Muslim
president, Hamdija Jahic, has not consulted his side over the date and agenda
of the meeting. In addition, Bozo Raic, the head of the Bosnian branch of the
HDZ, lashed out at Garrod for saying that new local elections will not be
repeated in Mostar in September although they will take place in all other
towns and cities in Bosnia-Herzegovina. -- Daria Sito Sucic
[03] OSCE CONCERNED OVER SERB STATEMENTS ON SOVEREIGN STATE.
Returning to the subject of the Serbs and their testing the limits of the
possible, an OSCE spokesman on 8 August expressed concern about officials'
statements asserting that the RS has the sovereignty of an independent state,
international agencies reported. Plavsic said repeatedly during her
preelection campaign that the September elections would "legalize the
sovereignty" of the RS, Reuters reported. The OSCE pointed out that Dayton
specifies that "Bosnia-Herzegovina shall consist of the two entities, the
Bosnian Federation and the Republika Srpska." Meanwhile, UN special envoy to
Bosnia Iqbal Riza discussed security arrangements for the elections with the
RS foreign minister and new leader of the governing Serbian Democratic Party
(SDS), Aleksa Buha. Buha was concerned over possible incidents if a large
number of voters crossed from one entity to the other, AFP reported on 8
August. -- Daria Sito Sucic
[04] OSCE PUTS BOSNIAN SERB PARTY ON NOTICE OVER KARADZIC.
Elsewhere, the OSCE's supervisor of the elections, Robert Frowick, told Buha
that indicted war criminal Radovan Karadzic must remain out of politics.
Frowick said that frequent references to Karadzic by SDS speakers at rallies,
his appearance in party advertisements, and the display of Karadzic posters at
SDS meetings and on private homes is a violation of the spirit of last month's
agreement. According to that deal Karadzic left the political scene and the
SDS was allowed to take part in the elections. Onasa on 6 August quoted
Frowick as telling Buha the previous day that the OSCE will not take any
action against the SDS for now but will "press [the party] to get it right."
The two men agreed that nothing can be done about posters on private homes but
that the SDS can control the other problems. -- Patrick Moore
[05] SECURITY COUNCIL THREATENS SANCTIONS OVER KARADZIC, MLADIC.
But the issue of Karadzic does not stop there. The UN's top body on 8 August
approved a non-binding resolution demanding that all sides cooperate with the
Hague-based war crimes tribunal, the BBC reported. The text added that "the
council is ready to consider the application of economic enforcement measures
to ensure compliance by all parties with the obligations under the peace
agreement," Reuters noted. The latest resolution singles out the Bosnian
Serbs' failure to hand over Karadzic and Mladic. Earlier sanctions hit
Belgrade and Pale hard and helped bring the Serbs to the peace talks in Dayton
last year. -- Patrick Moore
[06] IFOR TESTED IN THE REPUBLIKA SRPSKA.
Returning to the subject of IFOR and its dealings with those given to inat,
relations between the peacekeepers and the local armies are strained and in
decline. The compliance of all the ethnically organized forces with the
guidelines is not as complete as those charged with overseeing the military
part of the agreement have insisted (see above). In fact, all the parties have
been at different times called in and privately dressed down by IFOR. At the
moment, the largely Muslim forces of the ABiH and the Croat troops of the HVO
are regarded as living up to the letter of the plan. After all, both armies
have a vital interest in the continuation of the U.S. sponsored armament
program.
That is not the case, however, with the army of Republika Srpska (VRS), with
whom IFOR does have a problem. NATO commanders have long suspected that at
least some lower-level VRS commanders were secretly storing weapons and
ammunition in circumvention of Dayton agreement provisions calling for
delivering such materiel to openly declared depositories. But it was not until
the beginning of July that IFOR was moved to deliver an open warning to an
increasingly less cooperative VRS High Command, saying that it was not
prepared to tolerate violations.
This change of attitude occurred then after a stand-off between IFOR and
Bosnian Serb forces in Han Pijesak, which now seems to have been a sort of
prelude to the latest and more high-profile developments. In July VRS army
officers threatened to shoot down IFOR helicopters and organized hundreds of
angry civilians to stone IFOR soldiers and vehicles. Similar tactics, also
making use of civilian protesters, were soon repeated in Banja Luka, Prijedor
and Brcko. The hardening of the VRS's stance is viewed as part of a general
political strategy of the Pale regime and SDS party leadership. This has
overwhelming support from the majority of political parties in the RS, who in
the current election campaign back the separation of their territory from "the
Muslim-Croat Federation" and unification with Serbia proper, which is a clear
violation of the basic premise of Dayton (see above). "Analyze the RS media
and you are left with only one conclusion: they are testing the limits," says
an analyst in the Office of the High Representative.
Signaling its intent to keep control, IFOR confiscated and destroyed several
smaller caches of undeclared ammunition and land mines in the RS in the last
weeks. On 5 August, in the vicinity of Doboj, Polish and Danish IFOR
specialists blew up more than 500 kg of ammunition and land mines without
incident. Three days later U.S. IFOR detonated undeclared ammunition, but this
time the explosion damaged windows and roofs of houses in a nearby village
south of Prnjavor and caused a forest fire. Pale TV complained about the
"minimum professionalism" shown by U.S. IFOR forces. Pale TV made exhaustive
use of this incident to launch a full-fledged propaganda campaign critical of
IFOR's overall conduct.
That the illicit caches are highly incendiary in more ways than one was
demonstrated by what happened on 4 August in the village of Markovici
northeast of Sarajevo. After several tips from IFOR intelligence sources,
Italian IFOR units went to the village and found a building containing
ammunition boxes that proved to be "1,200 cubic meters of ammunition and land
mines." This would require 200 ten-ton trucks to be removed, an IFOR spokesman
said. The Italians started to load four trucks with the material when an angry
mob appeared -- reportedly led by local policemen -- and accused IFOR of theft
from a legal VRS depot. The Italians then unloaded the trucks and withdrew "to
prevent a conflict with civilians." In the evening, Pale TV claimed that only
popular will prevented "further provocations by IFOR." The mayor of nearby
Sokolac thanked "all patriots" for their support and threatened to cut all
contacts with IFOR if its command did not submit a written apology to the
people of Sokolac. The TV showed a 12 year-old boy declaring: "the army and
the nation are one. It is a matter of life and death not to give in."
Then on 6 August, IFOR spokesman Brett Boudreau said that the VRS had informed
IFOR about 17 additional ammunition and training sites in the RS, some of
which might have been previously declared by VRS but may have been overlooked
because of a variety of technical and administrative changes since they were
first reported. But after hedging and providing some face-saving versions for
the VRS, in the end he agreed that it all could have been due to "deception
by low-level VRS officers." On 9 August, Boudreau declared the case closed.
IFOR inspectors had counted rockets, TNT explosives and 5,000 boxes of mines
and small ammunition. It had become clear that the VRS had not previously
acknowledged the stockpile as required. The weapons were confiscated and
ordered to be destroyed.
In addition to the threat posed by secret arms caches, IFOR is also facing a
visible erosion of respect and authority in the RS. If it does not manage to
regain it well before September 14, it may bring a period of escalating
testing. The use of civilian crowds to protect illicit arms caches could grow
into even more provocative tactics such as blocking members of certain
communities from approaching voting areas. So far IFOR has insisted that it
will not take up "police functions" in the election process. But "everything
will depend on the security situation," said a representative of displaced
persons in Ilidza. "If IFOR continues to back off or let itself be fooled,
very few people will risk crossing into RS territory to vote where they plan
to." -- Yvonne Badal in Sarajevo
[07] "FROM KARADJORDJEVO TO VOULIAGMENI" -- A BREAKTHROUGH IN RELATIONS BETWEEN BELGRADE AND ZAGREB?
An old Mexican joke has it that when Washington sneezes, Mexico catches cold.
Many in Bosnia would update the barb to read: when Zagreb and Belgrade sneeze,
Bosnia catches pneumonia. With this in mind, there was obvious interest in
Bosnia last week when the presidents of Croatia and Serbia, Franjo Tudjman and
Slobodan Milosevic, met near Athens on 7 August and in principle agreed to
establish diplomatic relations. While the meeting and the resulting joint
statement may signal some breakthrough on the diplomatic front, questions
remain as to whether outstanding bilateral and regional problems can be
resolved soon. The basic question is whether Zagreb and Belgrade are willing
and able to reach a win-win compromise. Not everyone is convinced that this
can be the case. The Serbian opposition has already accused Milosevic of
sacrificing the Croatian Serbs on the negotiating table. Meanwhile, the
international media seem to be more concerned about whether Bosnia will have
to pay the price of the rapprochement between Belgrade and Zagreb. The Munich
Sueddeutsche Zeitung on 8 August ran an editorial titled "From Karadjordjevo
to Vouliagmeni," making a direct connection between a secret meeting in Tito's
Karadjordjevo hunting lodge in 1991, in which the two leaders reportedly
agreed to carve up Bosnia, and the Greek sea resort where the latest meeting
was held.
Tudjman's and Milosevic's first official meeting without international
mediation since Croatia declared its independence in 1991 had been arranged by
Greek Prime Minister Kostas Simitis at the request of both sides. After four
hours of closed-door talks, the two presidents agreed on a joint statement to
the effect that both sides are "ready to proceed to a full normalization." The
statement also addresses territorial disputes, humanitarian issues, and
possible economic cooperation.
After the meeting, Milosevic said it represented " a huge step for the
interests of [rump] Yugoslavia and Croatia ... [and] also for the entire
region." Returning to Zagreb, Tudjman said the statement means that both sides
"agreed on the normalization of relations in all fields, such as restoring
(sic) diplomatic relations. Foreign ministers will meet on 23 August and sign
final agreements." At present, only low-level liaison offices exist in
Belgrade and Zagreb. The date of the foreign ministers' meeting was confirmed
by Croatian Foreign Minister Mate Granic, who said he hopes that this will
open the way for Croatia's integration into European organizations, namely
the Council of Europe.
In an obvious reference to Bosnia, Granic's deputy, Ivan Simonovic, was quick
in pointing to the fact that the rapprochement between Zagreb and Belgrade "is
not about changing the balance between Croatia and its neighbors." But in
Belgrade on 9 August, the chairman of the nationalist Radical Party "Nikola
Pasic," Jovan Glamocanin, praised Milosevic's efforts and alluded to the
possibility of a deal at the Bosnian Muslim's expense. He dubbed the
presidents' summit "a highly significant step forward for the implementation
of the Dayton peace," and said Milosevic had defended Serbian national
interests. Glamocanin also hinted that Milosevic and Tudjman might have
discussed a territorial swap including Bosnian territory to resolve
outstanding bilateral issues.
Other opposition reactions in Belgrade ranged from guarded optimism for the
prospects of regional peace to harsh condemnation of Milosevic. On 9 August,
Nasa Borba, under the headline "Normalization--Yes, Ethnic Cleansing--No,"
reported that Vuk Draskovic's Serbian Renewal Movement (SPO) welcomed news of
a possible normalization of bilateral relations but also expressed concern
that such a development may not bode well for ethnic Serbs' rights in Croatia.
The SPO queried: "Why didn't Tudjman and Milosevic agree on normalization
three or four years ago? Why didn't agreement... come when nearly a million
Serbs lived in Croatia?... [But] waited until Croatia was cleaned out of
Serbs..." And Vojislav Seselj, accused war criminal and ultranationalist
leader of the Serbian Radical Party, said Milosevic once again "sold out"
Serbian national interests, especially by abandoning the Serbs in eastern
Slavonia -- the last part of Croatia still in rebel Serb hands -- by hinting
he would recognize Croatia's internationally valid borders. Seselj said that
every time Milosevic sits down with Tudjman, the Serbian people are victimized,
usually by having a part of what he considers rightfully Serb territory handed
to Croatia. Meanwhile in Podgorica, the Social Democratic Party of Montenegro
said the meeting served only to underscore that republic's "humiliation" and
second-class status within the federation. The party said that while Milosevic
"makes decisions relating to regional peace and war... Montenegrin authorities
have sovereignty in the decision-making of where to organize festivals and
beach-football contests."
Although both Milosevic and Tudjman hailed the talks and agreement as
landmarks and breakthroughs, outstanding questions -- both bilateral and
relating to the fate of Bosnia -- may put a brake on normalization of
relations.
Referring to bilateral developments, an unnamed Croatian government official
said that Belgrade has to recognize Croatia in its internationally accepted
borders before relations can be normalized. He specifically pointed to eastern
Slavonia as the last piece of Croatian territory not controlled by the central
government. He said that "Serbia's recognition is important for Croatia as a
signal to the Serb population in eastern Slavonia that they are a part of
Croatia." Another possible friction point is the strategically important
Prevlaka peninsula, which is under Croatian jurisdiction but claimed by rump
Yugoslavia. In the past, Tudjman has signaled that he may be willing to reach
a negotiated settlement over Prevlaka, but his own public's opinion has balked
at any hint that territory may be bargained away. Now, both sides
"reaffirmed their readiness to resolve [the issue] through negotiations."
Another dark cloud hanging over the summit is the broader regional question of
Bosnia-Herzegovina. The meeting between the two presidents has raised
speculation that the current rapprochement between Belgrade and Zagreb may be
detrimental to Bosnia. Such speculation is not without foundation, as rumors
surrounding the 1991 Karadjordjevo meeting show. Although that secret meeting
has been denied by both sides, rumors and allegations of its taking place were
never completely quelled. Apart from Karadjordjevo, there have been reports of
other meetings and partition deals -- including one session held in Graz,
Austria -- and others in conjunction with international meetings in London and
elsewhere.
Although Bosnia was not officially on the agenda of the Vouliagmeni meeting,
the Serbian opposition's reactions as well as remarks by the international
media suggest that Bosnia will be affected by the meeting. Not only the
Sueddeutsche Zeitung alluded to a possible deal between Tudjman and
Milosevic at Bosnia's expense. Reuters also noted that a possible accord
"squeezes Bosnia" between its two powerful neighbors. Indeed, if Zagreb and
Belgrade move towards normalization, the consequences will certainly be felt
in Bosnia-Herzegovina. While there is no proof that Tudjman and Milosevic
struck any deal concerning the neighboring republic, the real intent behind
the meeting could be revealed should the Bosnian Serbs and Croats now
increasingly turn to Belgrade and Zagreb for support. In such a scenario, the
Bosnian Muslims and the central government in Sarajevo would find
themselves increasingly marginalized. The most likely end result would be the
partitioning of Bosnia between its two neighbors. -- Stefan Krause and Stan
Markotich
[08] KOSOVO: BOMB ATTACKS BRING ARKAN'S RETURN.
Moving into Serbia, Kosovo may have been spared the outright warfare that
Bosnia has witnessed, but fear of a conflict there is usually just beneath the
surface. On 4 August the ultranationalist leader of the Party of Serbian Unity,
Zeljko Raznatovic "Arkan," held a parade of his private army -- the Tigers --
in the mainly ethnic Albanian province of Kosovo. The indicted felon and
accused war criminal's unexpected visit to the province came as a reaction to
three bomb attacks on police stations in Podujevo and Pristina on 2 August and
obviously was intended to intimidate the local Albanian population.
The visit, however, seems also to have served another purpose. Arkan has for
years played the role of Milosevic's stalking horse. Since Arkan, unlike some
other nationalists, never challenged Milosevic's hold on power, he has been
trusted and used in many ways. He has tested the waters as to how far
Milosevic himself could go with nationalist rhetoric. He has also served as
a counterbalance to Milosevic's ultranationalist challengers, such as
Vojislav Seselj, an accused war criminal and leader of the Serbian Radical
Party.
While Seselj attempted to endanger Milosevic's hold on power, Arkan remained
loyal and at the same time did Milosevic's dirty work. He, throughout the time,
kept a relatively low profile in parliamentary politics. In exchange, Arkan
got protection from the regime and a free hand to act and build his power base
as long as he did not get out of control. Thus he also served the function of
the "bad guy," as an example to the outside world on how reasonable Milosevic
was compared to Arkan and his followers.
This in particular seems to be Arkan's current function in Kosovo. Milosevic
is attempting to promote his image as a man of peace, striving for stability
in the region, but at the same time has no intention of addressing the
most burning human rights issues at home. It is Milosevic's turn to start a
serious dialogue with the ethnic Albanian Kosovar shadow state government, but
he has shown no sign of interest in easing the situation there. Instead, he
continues to let Kosovo simmer on low boil.
The bombs that prompted Arkan's show were only the last in a series of minor
terrorist attacks that took place since February. The newly emerged "Army for
the Liberation of Kosovo" claimed responsibility for most. The shadow state
has sharply denied the existence of that group and blamed the attacks on
agents provocateurs. Whatever the case may be, these incidents and the
reaction of ultranationalists like Arkan are in Milosevic's interest, since
they may further delay the beginning of a dialogue and give Milosevic an
argument to rule out concessions to the Albanians. Milosevic has repeatedly
talked about giving "autonomy" to Kosovo, but this seems to be more for
propaganda than for serious purposes. He has not undertaken even the most
basic steps towards reducing police violence in the region. This was
underscored by the presence of a large police force surrounding and protecting
Arkan's parade. -- Fabian Schmidt
Compiled by Patrick Moore
This material was reprinted with permission of the Open Media
Research Institute, a nonprofit organization with research offices in
Prague, Czech Republic.
For more information on OMRI publications please write to [email protected].
|