Radio Free Europa / Radio Liberty - South Slavic Report from 25 October 2001, Volume  3, Number  35 and 1 November 2001, Volume  3, Number  36. see http://www.rferl.org/southslavic/archives.html 

MEDIA AND WAR CRIMES

WILL THE GOEBBELS OF THE BALKANS GET OFF THE HOOK?

This is Part I of a translation of a program by RFE/RL journalists Mensur Camo, Ivana Lalic, and Nebojsa Bugarinovic that was broadcast on 19 October 2001. Part II will appear on 1 November. 

Item 26 of the [Hague] indictment against Slobodan Milosevic: "Slobodan Milosevic, acting alone and in concert with other members of the joint criminal enterprise, controlled, contributed to, or otherwise utilized Serbian state-run media outlets to manipulate Serbian public opinion by spreading exaggerated and false messages of ethnically based attacks by Croats against Serb people in order to create an atmosphere of fear and hatred among Serbs living in Serbia and Croatia. The propaganda generated by the Serbian media was an important tool in contributing to the perpetration of crimes in Croatia." 

RFE/RL: Item 26 of the indictment against Slobodan Milosevic has once again raised the issue of the responsibility of some Balkan media for war crimes committed during the 1991-1995 wars by indulging in vicious war propaganda, spreading hatred and fear, and openly encouraging war crimes. 

There have already been two cases in which media people were found guilty of war crimes committed while performing their professional media tasks. The first one is the death sentence handed down by the Nuremberg tribunal for Nazi publisher Julius Streicher. He was found guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity because of his fierce anti-Semitic propaganda. On 1 June 2000, the International War Crimes Tribunal for Rwanda referred to that case when the Belgian Georges Ruggiu, editor and journalist of radio RTLM, was sentenced to 12 years imprisonment. 

The role of some media during the wars in Croatia and in Bosnia-Herzegovina is widely regarded as manipulative and war-mongering. In the early 1990s, Belgrade newspapers spread hatred for and fear of the independence movements in Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina. Some sources claim that some Belgrade media sent encoded messages to certain groups of the population [there] in order to warn them about upcoming attacks. Bosnian Serb media were also known for their direct involvement in war operations.... 

What were the messages conveyed by the journalists of Belgrade television in 1991 and 1992? 

RFE/RL: A widely accepted way of reporting by state-run television in Serbia was by creating a stereotype of the entire Croatian people as genocidal, as well as by reminding Serbs of the horrible crimes committed by the Ustasha movement during World War II. 

Those reports used a vocabulary chosen to provoke emotional reactions, while stressing the victorious role of Serbian arms. Members of the Yugoslav People's Army, as well as [paramilitary] volunteers, were called liberators. Croatian armed forces were always labeled Ustashas and criminals. [Presentations of] the suffering civilian population were practically always [limited to] Serbs. 

Segment of a program item by Belgrade Television: "Tudjman's frantic mercenaries and criminals, who call themselves [national] guardsmen, are barricaded in the very center of Kostajnica, from whence they continue to fire indiscriminately. We have also been informed that a company of butchers of Tudjman's Black Legion left Zagreb earlier today heading for the front line in Banija. A band of mercenaries and murderers, bloodthirsty for the lives of Serbs, barricaded in Kostajnica, seems to be increasingly aware that they have been written off." 

RFE/RL: Every single day, TV Belgrade's audience was exposed to an exercise in dissection. 

Segment of a program item by Belgrade Television:
-- I am holding gold teeth. I was told that they were extracted with knives from people who were still alive and who were later killed.
-- Can you give us examples of those killed, slaughtered, or those who endured crimes like these?
-- I left earlier, and this is why I did not see it. But, from what I heard, there were killings.
-- What happened?
-- They cut throats and fingers, removed people's eyes and nails. We found some children in roasting pans they intended to bake.
-- Why have the Ustashas been resisting so long here in Vukovar? They must be supported by the population. What do you think?
-- You are asking me too much. I do not know.
-- Well, you are from Vukovar.
-- Well, you are right, people did support them. That is right, because we [Serbs] were forced to leave.
-- Why did people not oppose them?
-- Well, they did not want to oppose their fellow Croatians...
-- Who?
-- Those who are here.
-- Who are they?
-- Everybody knows. 

RFE/RL: TV Belgrade's female reporters -- contrary to all professional rules -- often behaved like they were conducting an interrogation: 

Segment of a program item by Belgrade Television:
-- Did you rape before butchering, and whom?
-- I raped a woman.
-- How old was she?
-- She was two years older than I.
-- Therefore, how old was she?
-- She was 25. But I did not cut her throat.
-- Who did it?
-- Zunic Ivica and Hasanovic, they cut her throat.
-- Where are they now?
-- They remained in the city.
-- How old are you?
-- Twenty-six.
-- And you?
-- Twenty-two.
-- What abut you?
-- Twenty.
-- And you?
-- Twenty-four.
-- You?
-- Twenty-one.
-- Where do you come from?
-- I am from Omis near Split.
-- What is your name?
-- Miroborski Ivica.
-- We were told that you were a member of the Black Legion.
-- No, that is not the truth. 

RFE/RL: Warnings about threats to the Serbian nation, as well as messages of hate coming from state-run television, mobilized thousands of volunteers in Serbia. The war propaganda was efficient: 

Segment of a program by Belgrade Television:
-- This is somehow unusual: a woman on the front line. Isn't it unusual? What do you think about it?
-- I do not find it unusual. I think that we should all respond to the call [to arms]. I am a mother of two minors.
-- Where do you come from?
-- I am from Pirot.
-- How old are you?
-- Thirty-three.
-- What made you decide to come here, to the front?
-- Whenever I watch TV, I see what is going on, and this is why I want to help. Our Serbia is worth dying for. 

RFE/RL: We are not surprised that our Belgrade correspondents were not able to persuade the former editors in chief of TV Belgrade [and the newspapers] "Politika," "Vecernje Novosti," and "Politika Ekspres" to talk to us. The only one who agreed is Ratko Dmitrovic, the former editor of the main newscast of TV Belgrade. He thinks that the only criterion for a possible criminal prosecution is: 

Dmitrovic: ...whether a person was telling the truth or lies. 

RFE/RL: Back in 1991, you were perceived as a person whose high-quality writing somehow provided legitimacy for those whom I have to call semi-journalists who came from Croatia and joined TV Belgrade.... Were you aware of the quality -- or the lack of quality -- of what they were doing, not only regarding professionalism but also...moral and other values? 

Dmitrovic: Yes, I certainly tried to do my job in a way that 10 years later I have not had to disown one single report or commentary I made. I tried to persuade the station's management to remove those involved in the brutal promotion of one party and one family.... 

I repeatedly urged that a media pool be created in order to wage a media war the way Slovenes, Croats, and some centers abroad hired by Croatian, Slovenian, and later Muslim lobbies were doing. What I wanted was to present the truth in an effective, modern way, instead of the way Milosevic's regime was doing it. However, I did not succeed. 

For instance, I demanded the station's management remove a few people who were irritating even the vast majority of the Serbian audience with their dubious and ham-fisted stories that lacked any evidence to support them, but I failed. This is why I left Radio-Television Serbia in late 1993, when it became obvious that it was being transformed into a typical one-party station, a station of one family.... 

RFE/RL: Did the reporting of, for example, Petko Koprivica, Vlado Slijepcevic, or Milijana Baletic help poison the atmosphere? Were they just telling the truth in a blunt fashion, or were they manipulating it? 

Dmitrovic: Well, you know, if one was 30 to 50 meters away from the place where a mortar shell killed five people or in a village where it killed two kids, then nothing can make him report objectively. From that moment on, that person considers himself a victim. I am not talking about the colleagues you just mentioned. I am talking about those on the Croatian and Muslim side. 

Now, as far as vocabulary is concerned -- which was, for instance, typical for my colleague Koprivica, for Milijana, and for some others -- when they said "Ustashas attacked," let me remind you that [Croatian forces] used to call themselves Ustashas and to name their units after famous Ustasha war criminals from World War II. 

RFE/RL: Did some Serbian journalists create a false image of a Croatian threat to the Serbian population? 

Dmitrovic: Regarding what they said about Croatia intending to occupy Zemun and Vojvodina, I mean, let us just compare the Croatian forces in 1991 with the [much more professional and better armed] Yugoslav People's Army. Saying that [the Croats] will attack Serbia...did have negative consequences. My opinion is that it was absolutely unnecessary [to say such things]. 

RFE/RL: Do you think that The Hague tribunal is justified in discussing the role of media in former Yugoslavia? 

Dmitrovic: The journalists who agreed to lie -- with horrible consequences -- at the request of politicians in Belgrade, Zagreb, and Sarajevo should be held responsible, either in The Hague or before national courts. They should be subject to investigations to determine how much they distorted the truth. 

However, I think that some people from abroad must be investigated as well. Let me tell you something that might sound heretical: I think that Florence Hartmann, the spokeswoman of The Hague tribunal who was "Le Monde's" Belgrade correspondent, should be subject to such an investigation, too. Let us also see CNN's Christiane Amanpour's reporting from Sarajevo -- how much hate and invective there was. 

Let us also see the writing of Carl Gustav Stroehm for the "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung," or of German journalist Viktor Meier [editor's note: Stroehm reported for "Die Welt," and Meier, who is Swiss, wrote for the "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung"]. Let us see whether [U.S. journalist] Roy Gutman reported truthfully from Bosnia [on Serbian concentration camps in 1992] or whether he really manipulated the truth, for which he was later awarded the Pulitzer Prize. 

If our profession needs a clean-up, we cannot hold responsible only the journalists from the region of former Yugoslavia, as if they were considered an inferior species. Bad journalistic practice in former Yugoslavia must be scrutinized, but this must include all the journalists involved.

1 November 2001, Volume  3, Number  36
This is Part II of a translation of a program by RFE/RL journalists Mensur Camo, Ivana Lalic, and Nebojsa Bugarinovic that was broadcast on 19 October 2001. Part I appeared on 25 October. 

RFE/RL: You have already said that you do not regret a single word you ever wrote. However, do you think you were somehow compromised by belonging to Radio-Television Serbia? 

Dmitrovic: ...What [some] people think about my work for Radio-Television Serbia from 1992 until the end of 1993 is that I was misused, or that I was serving Milosevic's policies. Gentlemen, please, the only thing I demand is that you point out where I was telling lies and where I was telling the truth. If it turns out that I was lying, I am ready to face the consequences. But I would like all of those with prejudice who want to go over my work to collect themselves in order to make a cool-headed analysis. 

RFE/RL: So, is The Hague tribunal going to indict some journalists and editors for war crimes? We asked Florence Hartmann, the spokeswoman for the tribunal's chief prosecutor, Carla Del Ponte. 

Hartmann: We have no documents about materials that urge people to kill. We are well aware of the role of media in all of this, and this is why in Milosevic's indictment you may read about the media as instruments in a criminal enterprise. But not separately, as it was in the case of Rwanda, where there was direct involvement of a director or ministers of information or propaganda, as well as some media houses and journalists. 

We do not have complete knowledge about the media's activities [in the Balkans]. As a former journalist, I do know that many local media were involved in the war on the territory of former Yugoslavia. 

Are we wrong to say that there was no direct incitement to kill? But on the basis of the materials the prosecution has right now, we cannot open a separate case [against the media]. And, one more thing: The Hague tribunal cannot investigate all the...violations of international humanitarian law committed in the former Yugoslavia, and this is why we might not be able to investigate the media.... 

RFE/RL: Does the prosecution plan to start? 

Hartmann: On the basis of the materials that we have, we are well aware of the role of the media, and this is why the subject was included in Milosevic's indictment as an instrument of a criminal policy. But the prosecution does not intend to investigate the media as a separate case, the way it was done with the Rwanda cases. 

We have no necessary documents that would enable us to start such a procedure. If something turned up, the picture might completely change, on the basis of some new evidence we might receive. But again,...no one has allowed us access to the archives or other key resources that would make us think about a serious investigation of the media. 

RFE/RL:Does it mean that if, for example, Belgrade Television invited you to investigate their archives, the tribunal would accept it? Or you would refuse, claiming that you do not have enough time, resources, or ambition to investigate? 

Hartmann: We cannot single out any one of the media, since we do not want to accuse anybody of anything without evidence. The other thing is that this is 2001, the tribunal has existed since 1994, and we have to admit that resources are one of our problems. That means the people who work for us, as well as the time factor. 

RFE/RL: But you did not answer my question. 

Hartmann: Of course we are interested in the TV archives..., but there are many other things that are [more] important for the work of the tribunal. 

RFE/RL: I put this question in the context of the conventional wisdom that there would not have been such wars in the Balkans if there had not been such media. It seems to me that, in the Balkans, quite an important role is attributed to the media that spread hatred and incited people to carry out crimes. Does Mrs. Del Ponte share this opinion about the importance of the media in these bloody conflicts? 

Hartmann: I understand, but I have no answer to that question. Does Mrs. Del Ponte see the things that way? A prosecutor always searches for individual responsibility. She is not a historian or a journalist. Do you understand me? 

RFE/RL: Yes, but if Slobodan Milosevic is considered the one most responsible for the wars -- and Mrs. Del Ponte has said so many times -- why not tell what the role of the media was in them? 

Hartmann: This is what we will see in the course of his trial.... 

RFE/RL: The head of the Yugoslav Lawyers' Committee for Human Rights, Biljana Kovacevic-Vuco, finds Florence Hartman's statements quite problematic. 

Kovacevic-Vuco: The announcement that delighted us all here -- that the role of the media in provoking war is going to be investigated -- is not reflected in the statements of Florence Hartmann and the rest of The Hague tribunal.... I am talking about Serbia, where the media directly encouraged war, hate, and xenophobia. 

We were all "bombed" by the media statements that called on us to hate each other and eventually to kill. This war could not have been waged without the media's logistical support. At the same time, in so many cases, the media even announced in advance what was going to happen.... 

According to the Statute of The Hague tribunal, and according to our penal code, an incitement to hatred, killing, genocide, or war represents a crime against humanity -- and has the same legal consequences for the perpetrator as an order [to kill] or an execution. This is why I see no obstacles for indictments to be issued for the designers of that policy of hate. 

I feel free to say, as someone who saw it all, that what happened was not the result of people exercising their freedom of speech. Those were not [normal] media. That was propaganda machinery that served the purposes of war and hate. 

As far as the legal aspect is concerned..., I find it easier to prove the responsibility of one of the media than, for example, the commander's responsibility among those who were issuing orders. 

The point is that the Statute of The Hague tribunal lists which crimes are to be prosecuted, and one of them is a direct and public incitement to genocide. Any layperson who was reading newspapers at that time -- and especially those who were watching television -- would be able to make a sort of a provisional indictment against the editors or anchors of the main news program of Radio-Television Serbia -- since they really incited viewers to genocide. 

RFE/RL: Florence Hartmann thinks that "if The Hague tribunal cannot investigate or has no time to investigate the media," local judicial systems might start those proceedings. 

Hartmann: Legal proceedings can be instituted before national courts. We are repeatedly being asked: "Why do you not try this or that?" The Hague tribunal has no monopoly to prosecute. We do have priority in cases of violations of international humanitarian law. 

However, if The Hague tribunal cannot do it, why do not national courts do it? The point is to prevent what happened here from happening again anywhere in the world, to prevent the use of media the way it was done here. 

RFE/RL: But Biljana Kovacevic-Vuco thinks that the chances are quite remote for national war crimes trials against media people. 

Kovacevic-Vuco: The writer Bora Cosic wrote about this in [the Croatian investigative weekly] "Feral Tribune." He gave the famous example of [Nazi propaganda film maker] Leni Riefenstahl, noting that so many Goebbels-like people got off the hook [after World War II] because they said they were simply carrying out their professional duties. 

That is what I am afraid of.... I fear that so many Serbian journalists were convinced that they were simply doing their job professionally at a particular, extraordinary time. 

To sum up, I am skeptical. I do not believe that our national legal system -- which to date has not been able to launch one single public and transparent legal proceeding for war crimes -- will be wise and courageous enough to indict the very designers of that policy: the media people. 

That will remain our problem. I think that the fight against this false professionalism has still to begin here. Whoever finally starts it, it will not be the state.

Compiled by Patrick Moore.
Translated by Teodora Kusovac. 

 source: RFE
published by: Roland Brunner rbr@medienhilfe.ch date of release on this site: 02-11-2001

go to top

P.O. Box, CH-8031 Zürich, Switzerland
Phone +41-1-272 46 37,  Fax +41-1-272 46 82, email: info@MEDIENHILFE.ch