DOCSLIB.ORG

The U.S. Air Force in the Air War Over Serbia, 1999

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The U.S. Air Force in the Air War Over Serbia, 1999 The U.S. Air Force in the Air War Over Serbia, 1999 6 AIR POWER History / SUMMER 2015 Daniel L. Haulman AIR POWER History / SUMMER 2015 7 (Overleaf) The A–10 he last major United States military The UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, acknowl- Thunderbolt II was a major aircraft in the air war over operation of the twentieth century was edged “excessive and indiscriminate use of force by Serbia. (All photos USAF.) noteworthy in a number of ways. It Serbian security forces and the Yugoslav Army marked the first time NATO took part in combat which has resulted in numerous civilian casualties operations against a sovereign nation. It was the last and…the displacement of more than 230,000 per- Ttime manned aircraft shot down manned enemy air- sons from their homes.” These words were incorpo- craft. The operation resulted in no American casual- rated into United Nations Security Council Resolu - ties. It ended one of the worst instances of genocide tion 1199 passed on September 23, that demanded a in a century of genocide. Most importantly, it was the ceasefire in Kosovo, dialogue between the warring first air campaign that produced victory without the parties, the end of action by security forces against use of ground forces. Operation Allied Force, or the civilians, and the safe return of refugees.2 Air War Over Serbia, resulted in victory without any Concurrently, the North Atlantic Treaty American or NATO “boots on the ground.” Organization prepared to exercise air strikes, if nec- In early 1998, violence erupted within Kosovo essary, to enforce UNSCR 1160. Dr. Javier Solana, between Yugoslavian (Serb) forces and the Kosovo Secretary-General of NATO, stated on September IN EARLY Liberation Army (KLA). As a result, a Contact 24, the day following the passage of UNSCR 1160, 1998, Group consisting of the foreign ministers of six that the alliance was preparing to act. Solana VIOLENCE nations, the United States, the Russian Federation, announced that the North Atlantic Council had just the United Kingdom, Germany, France, and Italy approved issuing an activation warning that ERUPTED met in London during March in an attempt to dis- increased its level of military preparedness and WITHIN cuss the growing war within Kosovo. Partly in allowed NATO commanders to begin identifying KOSOVO response to two statements from the Contact forces required for possible air operations.3 BETWEEN Group, dated March 9 and 25, the United Nations On October 12, 1998, Richard Holbrooke, YUGO - Security Council passed Resolution 1160 on March President Clinton’s special envoy to the Balkans, 31. It urged a political settlement of issues in flew to Belgrade and warned the Yugoslavian pres- SLAVIAN Kosovo, supported greater autonomy for Kosovo ident that if he failed to comply with UN resolu- (SERB) within Yugoslavia, and banned arms sales and tions, he risked NATO air strikes. Lt. Gen. Michael FORCES AND deliveries to Yugoslavia. The resolution also con- E. Short, USAF, who commanded NATO air forces THE KOSOVO demned the use of excess force by Serbian paramil- in the theater, accompanied Holbrooke. He spoke LIBERATION itary police forces against the civilian population, personally with Milosevic, telling him essentially ARMY (KLA) and denounced any terrorist activity such as that that the question was not whether NATO planes which the Serbs claimed the KLA performed.1 would be flying over Kosovo, but whether they In May and June, NATO leaders met in Brus - would be taking photographs or dropping bombs. sels to consider military options. In June, an agree- On October 13, NATO’s North Atlantic Council ment between Yugoslav President Slobodan authorized activation orders for air strikes. United Milosevic and Boris Yeltsin, President of Russia, States aircraft and aircrews deployed to Europe in allowed the formation of a Kosovo Diplomatic preparations for air strikes against Serbia.4 Observer Mission, consisting of representatives from The threat produced diplomatic results in several nations, to report on freedom of movement Belgrade. On October 15 and 16, Yugoslavian repre- and security conditions in the troubled province. The sentatives signed agreements to allow a Kosovo ver- six-nation Contact Group continued to meet, and ification mission on the ground and an air verifica- issued statements on June 12 and July 8 on the tion mission. On October 24, the United Nations increasing deterioration of conditions in Kosovo. Security Council passed Resolution 1203, which Serbian police security forces in Kosovo, in an effort endorsed the verification missions. However, to deprive the KLA of their civilian supporters, Milosevic, as president of Yugoslavia, had signed began to drive ethnic Albanians from their homes. neither agreement, suggesting that he could later Daniel L. Haulman is Chief, Organizational Histories, at the Air Force Historical Research Agency, Maxwell AFB, Alabama. After earning a BA from the University of Southwestern Louisiana and an ME (Master of Education) from the University of New Orleans, he earned a Ph.D. in history from Auburn University. Dr. Haulman has authored three books, including Air Force Aerial Victory Credits, The USAF and Humanitarian Airlift Operations, and One Hundred Years of Flight: USAF Chronology of Significant Air and Space Events, 1903-2002. He has written several pamphlets, composed sections of several other USAF publications, and compiled the list of official USAF aerial victories appearing on the AFHRA’s web page. He wrote the Air Force chapter in supplement IV of A Guide to the Sources of United States Military History and completed six studies on aspects of recent USAF operations that have been used by the Air Staff and Air University. He has also written a chapter in Locating Air Force Base Sites: History’s Legacy, a book about the location of Air Force bases. The author of fifteen published articles in various journals, Dr. Haulman has presented more than twenty historical papers at histori- cal conferences and taught history courses at Huntingdon College, Auburn University at Montgomery, and Faulkner University. He co-authored, with Joseph Caver and Jerome Ennels, the book The Tuskegee Airmen: An Illustrated History, published by New South Books in 2011. This work is extracted from another book chapter. An abridged version appeared in Air Force Magazine. 8 AIR POWER History / SUMMER 2015 (Near right) Slobodan Milošević was the President of Serbia from 1989-97 and President of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia from 1997 to 2000. (Far right) Lt. Gen. Michael E. Short, USAF, who com- manded NATO air forces in the theater. claim he had never made such a commitment him- tion, of all atrocities committed against civilians self. After intense negotiations between Milosevic and full cooperation with the International and Dr. Javier Solana, the Secretary General of Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, including com- NATO, with NATO military leaders present to rein- pliance with its orders, requests for information and force the threat of NATO air strikes, Milosevic investigations…”8. As a result of the resolution, an reluctantly agreed on October 25, to sign an agree- International Criminal Tribunal for the Former ment to remove “excess” Serb police and paramili- Yugoslavia convened, with Louise Arbour appointed tary forces from Kosovo and allow the verification as chief prosecutor.9 missions to proceed. Gen. Wesley K. Clark, USA, The crisis intensified in November and Supreme Allied Commander, Europe (SACEUR) December, 1998. Milosevic forbade the entrance of was present at the signing.5 United Nations war crimes investigators to deter- MILOSEVIC The aerial verification agreement allowed mine whether ethnic cleansing and genocide had RELUC- NATO reconnaissance aircraft such as USAF U–2s occurred in Kosovo. On November 17, the UN TANTLY and MQ–1 Predators, to verify the removal of Serb passed Security Resolution 1207, condemning AGREED ON forces from civilian areas of Kosovo. A week later, Yugoslavia for failing to arrest and transfer three OCTOBER 25, NATO formally approved aerial surveillance mis- individuals indicted by the International Criminal sions over Kosovo, Operation Eagle Eye, which Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.10 TO SIGN AN began on October 29, 1998. 6 The final crisis began in January 1999. On AGREEMENT Operation Eagle Eye aerial verification flights January 8 and 10, the KLA ambushed and killed TO REMOVE over Kosovo took place in conjunction with the four Serbian policemen near Stimlje, Kosovo. On “EXCESS” ground verification mission or KVM (Kosovo January 15, fighting erupted around the village of SERB POLICE Verification Mission). The Organization for Security Racak, as Yugoslavian police forces advanced into AND PARA- and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) provided the area. The KLA retreated from the town. Several approximately 1,400 personnel for that part of the people were shot and wounded during the advance. MILITARY verification process. The ground mission arrived in The Yugoslavian forces cornered about thirty men FORCES Kosovo in November under the leadership of and boys in the cellar of a house. Letting the boys FROM William Walker, a former U.S. ambassador to El go, they took the twenty-three men elsewhere. The KOSOVO Salvador.7 next day, villagers found their bodies. They had been Resolution 1203, in addition to endorsing the shot at close range. The Yugoslavs had apparently verification missions in Kosovo, also called for the targeted the men of the village, probably in retalia- enforcement of previous UN Security Council tion for the killing of their own police earlier in the Resolutions 1160 and 1199. The United Nations and month. International investigators soon determined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization spoke with that forty-five persons had died in Racak, including one voice on the need for Yugoslavia to reduce its two women and a twelve-year-old boy. Nine KLA military presence in Kosovo, to allow the return of soldiers were also found dead.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biography U N I T E D S T a T E S a I R F O R C E
    BIOGRAPHY U N I T E D S T A T E S A I R F O R C E LIEUTENANT GENERAL TIMOTHY D. HAUGH Lt. Gen. Timothy D. Haugh is the Commander, Sixteenth Air Force; Commander, Air Forces Cyber, and Commander, Joint Force Headquarters-Cyber, Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland, Texas. General Haugh is responsible for more than 44,000 personnel conducting worldwide operations. Sixteenth Air Force Airmen deliver multisource intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance products, applications, capabilities and resources. In addition, they build, extend, operate, secure and defend the Air Force portion of the Department of Defense global network. Furthermore, Joint Forces Headquarters-Cyber personnel perform operational planning as part of coordinated efforts to support Air Force component and combatant commanders and, upon approval of the President and/or Secretary of Defense, the execution of offensive cyberspace operations. In his position as Sixteenth Air Force Commander, General Haugh also serves as the Commander of the Service Cryptologic Component. In this capacity, he is responsible to the Director, National Security Agency, and Chief, Central Security Service, as the Air Force’s sole authority for matters involving the conduct of cryptologic activities, including the spectrum of missions related to tactical warfighting and national-level operations. The general leads the global information warfare activities spanning cyberspace operations, intelligence, targeting, and weather for nine wings, one technical center, and an operations center. General Haugh received his commission in 1991, as a distinguished graduate of the ROTC program at Lehigh University. He has served in a variety of intelligence and cyber command and staff assignments.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Literacy’, ‘Fosters Inclusion’ Foundational Competencies Now in Myvector Self-Assessment Tool
    THE SOUND OF FREEDOM | Wednesday, March 10, 2021 | 5 USAFE completes CJADC2 demonstration BY SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PUBLIC AFFAIRS RAMSTEIN AIR BASE, Germany (AFNS) -- U.S. Air Forces in Europe-Air Forces Africa, in conjunction with the Department of the Air Force’s Chief Ar- chitect’s O ce, conducted a Combined, Joint All-Domain Command and Control demonstration in international waters and airspace in and around the Baltic Sea. Participation included assets from U.S. Naval Forces Europe – Africa/U.S. 6th Fleet, U.S. Army Europe – Africa, U.S. Strategic Command, the Royal Air Force, the Royal Netherlands air force and the Polish air force. This demonstration was designed to test and observe the ability of the joint force, our allies and partners to integrate and provide command and control across multiple networks to multiple force capa- bilities. “Conducting a complex and real-world U.S. AIR FORCE PHOTO BY TECH. SGT. EMERSON NUÑEZ focused CJADC2 demonstration allowed A U.S. Air Force F-16 Fighting Falcon assigned to the 555th Fighter Squadron, Aviano Air Base, Italy, is refueled by a KC-135 our joint and allied team to nd areas Stratotanker assigned to the 100th Air Refueling Wing, RAF Mildenhall, United Kingdom, during a mission over the Black Sea, where we can innovate with systems we Jan. 14, 2021. U.S. military operations in the Black Sea enhance regional stability, combined readiness and capability with our already have and also to identify areas NATO allies and partners. where our war ghters need assistance from the Air and Space Forces’ Chief Ar- ported the demonstration.
    [Show full text]
  • DANCING in the the West, China and Russia in the Western Balkans
    DARKDANCING IN THE The West, China and Russia in the Western Balkans By Dr. Valbona Zeneli, Marshall Center professor | Photos by AFP/Getty Images n the new era of great power competition, Since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolu- China and Russia challenge Western and trans- tion of Yugoslavia, which brought bloody conflict to Atlantic security and prosperity, not least in the Europe in the1990s, the political West — the United I Western Balkans. The region has shaped the States and the European Union — and its clear foreign history of modern Europe and has been a gateway policy toward the Western Balkans have been crucial between East and West for centuries. In recent years, throughout the process of stabilization, reconstruc- external players have amplified engagement and tion, state consolidation and, finally, NATO and EU influence in the region. The authoritarian external integration. For Western Balkan countries, accession to presence in the Western Balkans could be classified Euro-Atlantic institutions has been viewed internally and as “grafting” — countries such as Russia and Turkey externally as the main mechanism for security, stabil- with a long history of engagement in the region — ity and democracy in a troubled region. Albania and and “grifting” — countries such as China and the Croatia joined NATO in 2009, Montenegro in 2017, Gulf states that bring to bear a more commercial and North Macedonia signed its accession document to and transactional approach. become the 30th NATO member in March 2020. PER CONCORDIAM ILLUSTRATION Democratization has been the key feature of “Europeanization,” while the “carrot” of membership was used to motivate the political elites in the accession countries to adopt and implement important democratic structural reforms.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    June 30, 2006 TTable of TTcontents Independence Day Air Force, U.S. CENTAF leaders offer messages for July 4: Page 2 “Teamwork” Capt. Dietrich speaks on working together to accomplish great things: Page 4 Commander’s Call Col. Orr highlights ‘fantastic job’ group has done through 30 days: Pages 5-6 Big Crane ECES helps move barriers for new Muscle Beach expansion: Page 6 Keeping track of it LRS supply team manages, issues mission items: Pages 7-8 Remembering Khobar Military commemorates 10th anni- versary of Khobar Tower bombing: Page 9 Around Iraq Latest news from around the the- ater: Page 9 Keeping cool Joint ECES effort generates, deliv- ers electricity: Page 10 Chapel corner Chaplain offers thoughts on religion versus relationship: Page 11 Looking for losers Muscle Beach looking for people willing to lose weight: Page 12 Blind volleyball PERSCO overwhelms ECS to take championship: Page 13 Movies and more Event schedules: Pages 14-16 Ali Times / June 30, 2006 Page 2 Air Force leaders send July 4 message Happy Birthday, America! For 230 years, this nation and its peo- ple have represented freedom and democracy. We earned that repu- Vol. 4, Issue 26 tation through courageous acts of June 30, 2006 patriotism by our founding fathers Col. and through bravery on battle- David L. Orr fields across the world. Today we Commander, 407th AEG mark not a resounding victory in Lt. Col. a great battle, but instead the day Richard H. Converse when we stood up as a free and Deputy Commander, Air Force Secretary Air Force Chief of Staff independent nation and told the 407th AEG Michael W.
    [Show full text]
  • UNDER ORDERS: War Crimes in Kosovo Order Online
    UNDER ORDERS: War Crimes in Kosovo Order online Table of Contents Acknowledgments Introduction Glossary 1. Executive Summary The 1999 Offensive The Chain of Command The War Crimes Tribunal Abuses by the KLA Role of the International Community 2. Background Introduction Brief History of the Kosovo Conflict Kosovo in the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Kosovo in the 1990s The 1998 Armed Conflict Conclusion 3. Forces of the Conflict Forces of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Yugoslav Army Serbian Ministry of Internal Affairs Paramilitaries Chain of Command and Superior Responsibility Stucture and Strategy of the KLA Appendix: Post-War Promotions of Serbian Police and Yugoslav Army Members 4. march–june 1999: An Overview The Geography of Abuses The Killings Death Toll,the Missing and Body Removal Targeted Killings Rape and Sexual Assault Forced Expulsions Arbitrary Arrests and Detentions Destruction of Civilian Property and Mosques Contamination of Water Wells Robbery and Extortion Detentions and Compulsory Labor 1 Human Shields Landmines 5. Drenica Region Izbica Rezala Poklek Staro Cikatovo The April 30 Offensive Vrbovac Stutica Baks The Cirez Mosque The Shavarina Mine Detention and Interrogation in Glogovac Detention and Compusory Labor Glogovac Town Killing of Civilians Detention and Abuse Forced Expulsion 6. Djakovica Municipality Djakovica City Phase One—March 24 to April 2 Phase Two—March 7 to March 13 The Withdrawal Meja Motives: Five Policeman Killed Perpetrators Korenica 7. Istok Municipality Dubrava Prison The Prison The NATO Bombing The Massacre The Exhumations Perpetrators 8. Lipljan Municipality Slovinje Perpetrators 9. Orahovac Municipality Pusto Selo 10. Pec Municipality Pec City The “Cleansing” Looting and Burning A Final Killing Rape Cuska Background The Killings The Attacks in Pavljan and Zahac The Perpetrators Ljubenic 11.
    [Show full text]
  • All Victims Matter. Reconciliation of the Balkan Faiths and Peoples: an Assessment of Recent Progress
    Occasional Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe Volume 40 Issue 10 Article 2 12-2020 All Victims Matter. Reconciliation of the Balkan Faiths and Peoples: An Assessment of Recent Progress Vjekoslav Perica University of Rijeka, Croatia Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/ree Part of the Christianity Commons, and the Eastern European Studies Commons Recommended Citation Perica, Vjekoslav (2020) "All Victims Matter. Reconciliation of the Balkan Faiths and Peoples: An Assessment of Recent Progress," Occasional Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe: Vol. 40 : Iss. 10 , Article 2. Available at: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/ree/vol40/iss10/2 This Article, Exploration, or Report is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ George Fox University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Occasional Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ George Fox University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ALL VICTIMS MATTER RECONCILIATION OF BALKAN FAITHS AND PEOPLES: AN ASSESSMENT OF RECENT PROGRESS By Vjekoslav Perica Vjekoslav Perica is a Croatian-American historian, author of, among other things, Balkan Idols: Religion and Nationalism in Yugoslav States (Oxford University Press, 2002; Belgrade, 2006). His most recent publication is “Serbian Jerusalem: Inventing a Holy Land in Europe’s Periphery, 1982- 2019,” Chapter IX, in Nadim N. Rouhana and Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian, eds. When Politics Are Sacralized: Comparative Perspectives on Religious Claims and Nationalism (Cambridge University Press, 2020). Perica holds a Ph.D. in history from the University of Minnesota Twin Cities, USA. In the 1970s in former Yugoslavia he was a basketball player, and before the war, a jurist and journalist until coming to America in 1991.
    [Show full text]
  • Der Krieg Gegen Die Bundesrepublik Jugoslawien 1999
    Der Krieg gegen die Bundesrepublik Jugoslawien - 24. März bis 10./20. Juni 1999 Inhalt 1. Zum Luftkrieg Verteidiger, Angreifer und die Verluste 2. Zum Hintergrund des Krieges: Literaturtips und einige Beiträge 3. Zu allen Zeiten: Propaganda 4. Die "Helden" der US-Air-Force: 509th Bomb Wing 5. Dokumentierte Abschüsse: F-117-Abschuß durch MiG-21 und Fla-Rakete MiG-29-Abschuß durch F-15 Eagle 6. andere Berichte: Links 1. Zum Luftkrieg Die jugoslawische Luftverteidigung Die jugoslawischen Luftabwehr hatte vorwiegend verschiedene sowjetische Raketensysteme in ihrem Bestand. Die etwa 60 bis 68 selbstfahrenden Systeme SA-6 Kub sollen besonders wirksam gegen tief fliegende Kampfflugzeuge und Raketen in einer Reichweite von 100 bis 200 Kilometern sein. Hinzu kamen noch - in geringen Stückzahlen - bei der Luftverteidigung die SA-8b, SA-9 und SA- 13. Die stationären Systeme SA-2 und SA-3 schützten vor allem die großen Städte, Militäreinrichtungen sowie wichtige Industrieanlagen. Hiervon standen jeweils 60 Abschußvorrichtungen zur Verfügung. Die jugoslawischen Luftstreitkräfte waren in zwei Fliegerkorps, eine Aufklärungsstaffel sowie eine Lufttransportbrigade unterteilt. Die "westlichen" Schätzungen der Stückzahlen an Flugzeugen schwanken zwischen 225 und 252 Maschinen [Zahlendreher?]. Gesichert scheint, zu Beginn des Krieges, der Bestand an 16 MiG-29 (darunter 2 zweisitzige Schulmaschinen) und 60 MiG-21. Die 65 Maschinen der jugoslawisch - rumänischen Koproduktion Soko Orao und die etwa 80 Maschinen vom Typ Galeb G-4 und G-2 sowie Jastreb sind als Trainer und leichte Erdkampfflugzeuge ausgelegt und dürften für Luftverteidigungsaufgaben nur sehr bedingt tauglich gewesen sein. Hinzu kamen rd. 70 Hubschrauber (andere Angaben sprechen von 110 oder gar 180) vom Typ Partizan (ca.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Air Force and Its Antecedents Published and Printed Unit Histories
    UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AND ITS ANTECEDENTS PUBLISHED AND PRINTED UNIT HISTORIES A BIBLIOGRAPHY EXPANDED & REVISED EDITION compiled by James T. Controvich January 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTERS User's Guide................................................................................................................................1 I. Named Commands .......................................................................................................................4 II. Numbered Air Forces ................................................................................................................ 20 III. Numbered Commands .............................................................................................................. 41 IV. Air Divisions ............................................................................................................................. 45 V. Wings ........................................................................................................................................ 49 VI. Groups ..................................................................................................................................... 69 VII. Squadrons..............................................................................................................................122 VIII. Aviation Engineers................................................................................................................ 179 IX. Womens Army Corps............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Law and Military Operations in Kosovo: 1999-2001, Lessons Learned For
    LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS IN KOSOVO: 1999-2001 LESSONS LEARNED FOR JUDGE ADVOCATES Center for Law and Military Operations (CLAMO) The Judge Advocate General’s School United States Army Charlottesville, Virginia CENTER FOR LAW AND MILITARY OPERATIONS (CLAMO) Director COL David E. Graham Deputy Director LTC Stuart W. Risch Director, Domestic Operational Law (vacant) Director, Training & Support CPT Alton L. (Larry) Gwaltney, III Marine Representative Maj Cody M. Weston, USMC Advanced Operational Law Studies Fellows MAJ Keith E. Puls MAJ Daniel G. Jordan Automation Technician Mr. Ben R. Morgan Training Centers LTC Richard M. Whitaker Battle Command Training Program LTC James W. Herring Battle Command Training Program MAJ Phillip W. Jussell Battle Command Training Program CPT Michael L. Roberts Combat Maneuver Training Center MAJ Michael P. Ryan Joint Readiness Training Center CPT Peter R. Hayden Joint Readiness Training Center CPT Mark D. Matthews Joint Readiness Training Center SFC Michael A. Pascua Joint Readiness Training Center CPT Jonathan Howard National Training Center CPT Charles J. Kovats National Training Center Contact the Center The Center’s mission is to examine legal issues that arise during all phases of military operations and to devise training and resource strategies for addressing those issues. It seeks to fulfill this mission in five ways. First, it is the central repository within The Judge Advocate General's Corps for all-source data, information, memoranda, after-action materials and lessons learned pertaining to legal support to operations, foreign and domestic. Second, it supports judge advocates by analyzing all data and information, developing lessons learned across all military legal disciplines, and by disseminating these lessons learned and other operational information to the Army, Marine Corps, and Joint communities through publications, instruction, training, and databases accessible to operational forces, world-wide.
    [Show full text]
  • Serbia and Montenegro
    ATTACKS ON JUSTICE – SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO Highlights Serbia and Montenegro (the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia until February 2003) entered the process of democratic transition, the creation of a system based on the rule of law, much later than other former socialist countries. On 4 February 2003 the new state union of Serbia and Montenegro was proclaimed. Under the Constitutional Charter of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro, there is only one instance of Serbia and Montenegro having a common judiciary – the Court of Serbia and Montenegro. Otherwise, each state – the Republic of Serbia and the Republic of Montenegro – has its own internal courts system. A set of important judicial reforms came into force on 1 March 2002 in the Republic of Serbia and in July 2002 amendments to these laws were made that violate the principle of separation of powers and the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. In Montenegro, several laws relating to the judiciary were passed or amended during 2003. On 19 March 2003, the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia dismissed 35 judges from office, including seven Supreme Court judges, amid accusations that the judiciary had failed to take tougher measures in dealing with remnants of the former regime as well as in prosecuting organized crime. The legal system in Serbia and Montenegro is still characterized by a number of contradictory and inconsistent regulations, resulting in legal insecurity. BACKGROUND On March 2002 officials of the Republic of Serbia and the Republic of Montenegro signed a procedural agreement for the restructuring of relations between both states in Belgrade, in the presence of the high representative of the EU,.
    [Show full text]
  • Evanthis Hatzivassiliou Greek-Yugoslav Relations Is A
    Evanthis Hatzivassiliou From Adversity to Alliance: Greece, Yugoslavia and Balkan Strategy, 1944-1959 Greek-Yugoslav relations is a subject of pivotal importance for understanding the shaping of twentieth century Balkan balances. In the post-war period this relationship became even more interesting: Greece and Yugoslavia had radically different political, economic and social systems; they were bitterly divided in 1944-1948, but then they norma­ lized relations, participated in a Balkan alliance together with Turkey, and when this alliance broke down, they continued their co-operation on a bilateral basis. In this paper it will be argued that the factor which divi­ ded Greece and Yugoslavia in 1944-1948 was not ideology, but strate­ gy; and it was strategy that brought them closer after Tito’s split with Stalin. After 1948 both countries shaped their policy on the basis of a mild realism, and their relationship was dominated by their perception of their respective national interests. In this paper, emphasis will be placed on Greek perceptions and assessments, but Yugoslav views will also be mentioned. I During the inter-war period Greece’s major problem with Yugo­ slavia derived from the latter’s great size: Belgrade was a powerful neighbour, capable of pressing Athens and of attracting support from the great powers, mainly France. At that time Greece was afraid of Yugo­ slavia’s hegemonist tendencies in the Balkans, as well as of its desire to pose as the protector of the Slav-speaking minority of Greece and as a suitor for the port of Thessaloniki. It was clear that, facing Bulgarian revisionism, it would be impossible for Athens to resist pressures from both its northern neighbours; this was why the possibility of a Bulgarian- Yugoslav rapprochement was the nightmare scenario of the Athens policy-makers'.
    [Show full text]
  • On 16 September 2004 the European Parliament Adopted A
    BACKGROUND - on 16 September 2004 the European Parliament adopted a resolution on harassment of minorities in Vojvodina where it, amongst others, "expressed deep concern at the repeated breaches of human rights in the province" and asked the delegation for relations with the countries of South East Europe to be authorised to conduct a fact-finding mission in that province; - the fact-finding mission took place from 28 to 31 January 2005 and the report was made available on 2 March 2005 (original in FR) and 31 March 2005 (translations); its main results were: 1. Vojvodina should remain a model region, because its multiculturalism goes hand in hand with a fairly harmonious cohabitation between the different nationalities living there. In order to preserve this, it is vital to combat attacks of any kind on the roots of each and every one of the region's traditional cultures. 2. It is essential that the province's multi-ethnic character be preserved, particularly in view of any future EU accession of Serbia and Montenegro, since the place of Voïvodina would then be a very special one, both geo-strategically and sociologically. For that reason, all existing forms of rapprochement need to actively supported (Interreg III/a, cooperation with European border regions). 3. The inter-ethnic incidents which plagued Voïvodina over a period of thirteen months appear to be the result of a conjunction of unfavourable factors, which was itself the outcome both of older situations and of more recent, and even highly specific circumstances: changes to the province's demographic make-up, influx of refugees in very difficult economic circumstances, the March 2004 Kosovo crisis, and tense election campaigns.
    [Show full text]