A blog on Bosnia, the Balkans, and other random thoughts.
A new book by a former ICTY official offers a vivid insider's account of realpolitik at the Milosevic trial.
Shaina, I'm in the middle of reading the book. The article offers a pretty good account of some of the key points Hartmann raises.
Dear Shaina, This is not related to your post, but I didn't know another way to get in touch with you. I have always enjoyed your blog page. I wanted to call your attention to an article I recently published: http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/crisis_and_reform_a_turnaround_in_bosnia Also, have you linked your site to my brother's? http://www.glypx.com/BalkanWitness/ I'd be happy to correspond with you if you have the time and inclination -- my address is email@example.com new year and all good things, Peter Lippman
Can't wait to get my hands on a copy of this. Thanks for the heads up!
Owen-Are you reading the French language addition, or an English translation of her book? I wasn't aware that there was an English translation of her book (if that is what you are reading). Peter-Thanks for your commentary. I always enjoy reading Balkan Witness and use the site as an invaluable resource-I'm more than happy to add the link to my blog.Kirk-The Hartmann book looks interesting I also want to read it; I know that on justwatch-l there has been some heated discussions over the various allegations and context in the book (Hartmann also contributes to justwatch-l on occassion). On a related note-another book along similar subject lines, I'm also interested in reading "Srebrenica: A Genocide Fortold" by Sylvie Matton, especially after reading this review:http://www.bosnia.org.uk/bosrep/report_format.cfm?articleid=3119&reportid=171 Both of these books have raised important issues (and of course debates) and I would like the opportunity to explore these issues further. Unfortunately(for me), as far as I know, the Matton book is only in French.
I'm afraid it's the original, a friend brought me it back from France. I wouldn't say it's a cool, calm and collected academic tome, but it's very interesting.FH devotes quite a lot of time to the reluctance of the Prosecutor's Office to deal with genocide, the chain of command leading to Belgrade and the apparent unwillingness of Geoffrey Nice to try and pin Srebrenica or the siege of Sarajevo on Milosevic. She has little time for Geoffrey Nice's argument (according to her) that it was going to be very difficult to prove genocide against Milosevic so it was better to opt out of the attempt at an early stage.However FH does pay Nice the compliment of quoting his appreciation of the Milosevic defence strategy.According to FH, Nice remarked that to start with Milosevic had no idea how to conduct his cross-examinations. He was given advice and picked up the technique pretty quickly. He always followed the same approach. It was astonishing to watch him.He'd start with some political remarks. The judges would then tell him to concentrate on the points raised in the initial examination. He'd then complain he didn't have enough time allowed him, but he'd still keep going off at a tangent with his speechifying. Once the time allotted him was up he'd say that there were a lot of questions he still wanted to put to the witness. The judges would grant him an extension, and then in the last ten or twenty minutes he'd start asking the questions that an expert lawyer would have asked.His aim was always to drag out the proceedings and wait until the last moment to ask questions that would raise doubt in the judges' minds about the reliability of the witness's evidence.
Kirk, this would be up your street!
Post a Comment