THE HAGUE/ZAGREB, April 3 (Hina) - Nojko Marinovic, a retired Croatian Army major general and commander of Dubrovnik's defence forces, on Thursday testified in the trial of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic at the
International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague.
THE HAGUE/ZAGREB, April 3 (Hina) - Nojko Marinovic, a retired
Croatian Army major general and commander of Dubrovnik's defence
forces, on Thursday testified in the trial of former Yugoslav
President Slobodan Milosevic at the International Criminal
Tribunal for former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague. #L#
General Marinovic, a disabled war veteran, testified via video-
link from Dubrovnik, and along with his verbal statement the
prosecution also introduced his written testimony.
The testimony, which had been postponed twice, was interrupted
several times due to communication glitches.
Due to a doctor's warning that Marinovic's testimony must be
limited to one hour, the witness was only asked to describe the
former Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) campaign against Dubrovnik in
the autumn of 1991, so that Milosevic, who is defending himself,
could have time to cross-examine him.
"The JNA command formed a special operative group including all
three branches of the armed forces to carry out an act of aggression
on southern Croatia," Marinovic said.
"The attack was to be carried out from several directions in eastern
Herzegovina and Montenegro, with the support of the navy and
airforce, so (the JNA) could fight its way to the Neretva River
valley and join the 10th Motorised Brigade from Mostar. After re-
grouping, the forces were supposed to continue towards Sinj, where
they were to join the Knin Corps and reach the planned Virovitica-
Karlovac-Karlobag line," the witness said.
Marinovic, a former JNA Lieutenant-Colonel and commander of the
Trebinje garrison, made himself available to Dubrovnik's defence
in September 1991.
The attack on Dubrovnik is one of some 20 individual attacks and
massacres Milosevic is charged with in his indictment for crimes
committed in Croatia.
During the cross-examination, Milosevic insisted on the JNA's
attack on Dubrovnik having been "provoked by the (Croatian)
National Guard Corps (ZNG) paramilitary forces for the sake of
media exploitation".
Precisely enumerating dates and other information, Marinovic
dismissed Milosevic's allegations, stating that the forces in the
city consisted only of several hundred policemen, reserve police
and "exactly 87 members of the ZNG", who were armed with light
weapons and some 30 mortars and anti-aircraft and light cannons,
which were obtained subsequently.
Milosevic then referred to a note the Croatian government sent to
the ICTY prosecution mentioning 1,203 soldiers, but Marinovic
explained that the figure referred to all people who participated
in the defence of the city in shifts. At the beginning of the attack,
there were 670 Croatian soldiers positioned along a 75-kilometre
line. A company with eighty-seven soldiers from the 116th Metkovic
Brigade came to aid and they were the core of the 163rd Dubrovnik
Brigade, Marinovic said.
The witness also stated that the city had been offered some
privileges, for example, it was offered the status of a free
republic in exchange for becoming part of "Serboslavia".
"I never heard of the term 'Serboslavia'," Milosevic said.
"You never heard of it, but you worked towards making it a reality,"
Marinovic replied.
What happened in the Dubrovnik area was not a "conflict" but a
"bloody war", Marinovic corrected Milosevic.
The witness confirmed statements from his written testimony on
Croatian military positions, weapons and manpower in Dubrovnik,
but he dismissed allegations that the city's historical centre had
been used for military purposes.
"The old part of the city is sacred for me and the country I was born
in and placing mortars and cannons there would have made me a
dilettante," he said.
Milosevic then started with general questions such as "What did
Serbia have to do with the attack on Dubrovnik?" and "Who started
the break-up of Yugoslavia?", to which the witness replied that
responsibility for that rested with the defendant.
The trial resumes on Monday with testimonies by new witnesses for
the prosecution.
(hina) rml sb