utorak, 19. srpnja 2022.

Iranian Arms Shipments to Bosnia: 1994 (https://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/ops/bosnia-arms.htm)


 Iranian Arms Shipments to Bosnia: 1994 (https://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/ops/bosnia-arms.htm)

The Balkan war began in 1991 when a conservative Serbian coalition in Belgrade, led by Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic and including the commanders of the old Yugoslavian army, decided to use all means fair and foul to keep Yugoslavia together. Croatia, which declared its independence at the same time, put up unexpected resistance. Serbs see themselves as the historically aggrieved party, as brave and sturdy defenders of an authentic Slavic culture against Turks and Teutons alike. Croats regard Serbs as non-European barbarians who lived so long under the Turks they became like them. Croats regard themselves as Central European rather than Balkan and heirs to centuries of Habsburg high culture and civilization. Outsiders can't tell them apart.

The Croats were terribly outgunned, relying on the meager arsenals of the territorial defense forces that had been set up in the old Yugoslavia. Croatia continued to mobilize and purchase equipment through a leaky arms embargo. Analysts claim that large amounts of Soviet-type arms and munitions from the defunct East German Volksarmee reached Croatia via a sympathetic Hungary. Germany clearly favored Croatia and pushed the rest of West Europe into diplomatic recognition of Zagreb in late 1991.

Bosnian Croats and Muslims claimed to have patched things up with the US-brokered agreement signed in Washington in March 1994. They agreed to form a Croat-Muslim federation within Bosnia and then confederate this with Croatia proper. This solidified Croatian power in Herzegovina and provides Bosnian Muslims with much-improved access to arms and munitions. The improved relations mean that Croatian airfields and ports serve as conduits for war materiel from sympathetic Islamic states. Quickly, outside support flowed into Bosnia via Croatia. The first week of May 1994, for example, an Iranian air force transport landed with 60 tons of explosives at Zagreb [See John Pomfret, "Iran Ships Material for Arms to Bosnians," The Washington Post, 13 May 1994, p. A1.]

In April 1996, the Los Angeles Times published an article alleging that in 1994 the Clinton administration had given a "green light" to the government of Croatia to allow Iranian arms destined for Bosnian Muslims fighting in theformer Yugoslavia to transit its country. At the time, a UN arms embargo was in effect forbidding shipments of arms to the former Yugoslavia, an embargo the United States had pledged to uphold. The press account also speculated the US government was engaged in a covert action, not reported to the congressional oversight committees, to facilitate the flow of arms from Iran to the Muslims in Bosnia.

As Reprasentative Diaz-Balart posed the question, "did the White House permit a mortal enemy of the United States to establish a military presence in Europe, or did the White House inspire a mortal enemy of the United States to establish a military presence in Europe? That is the essence of the question that this Congress will be investigating in the next months and that we at this time are authorizing funding for, the select subcommittee of the Committee on International Relations.

"The administration's policy, No. 1, directly contradicts the stated position of the Government of the United States. This Congress repeatedly tried to lift the arms embargo against Bosnia, and the administration opposed us, and the President vetoed our attempts to do so. The policy was also not revealed to the Congress, nor to the American people, and it has allowed the terrorist government of Iran to gain a strategic presence in Europe.

"The administration now admits that despite the fact that it opposed our attempts to openly permit the arming of the Bosnian people by the United States directly or through our allies or responsible Muslim governments, instead of doing that the administration opposed congressional efforts and engaged in this tactic of secretly giving a green light to the arming of the Bosnians by one of the most horrendous enemies of the American people."

House Speaker Newt Gingrich said 11 April 1996 that he, Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.) and other lawmakers had many meetings with Clinton about U.S. Bosnia policy over the last three years--while the United States was publicly upholding the international arms embargo against Bosnia. Never, he said, did Clinton indicate that the administration had given a green light to Iranian arms smuggling. Gingrich said that congressional leaders who supported lifting an arms embargo -- or who might have approved of covert U.S. efforts to encourage Muslim countries friendly to the United States to secretly arm the Bosnians -- were repeatedly rebuffed by the president. Clinton told them that such efforts would antagonize European allies and violate international agreements.

House Speaker Newt Gingrich said 26 April 1996 that the Clinton administration's secret policy of allowing Iranian arms shipments to Bosnia-Herzegovina may have violated covert-action laws. "President Clinton's policy of virtually inviting Iran into Europe could have disastrous results for America," Mr. Gingrich said in announcing the formation of a special committee to investigate the policy.

Both intelligence committees began investigations at the request of their respective leaderships. Ultimately, the committees found that the US ambassador to Croatia, when asked by Croatian government officials whether the United States would object to the transit of Iranian arms through the country, had responded that he had "no instructions" from Washington on the matter. This response, in turn, led the Croatian government to believe that the United States had no objection, and the flow of Iranian arms through its country expanded significantly.

DCI James Woolsey later contended that CIA had not been advised of the ambassador's response or of any change in the US position of support for the embargo. Indeed, as the Agency began to see signs of the expanded arms flow its own officers raised concerns that the United States might be covertly facilitating the flow of such arms, contrary to the UN embargo.

Beyond this, the committees reached somewhat differing conclusions. The HPSCI found that the US government had had no role in facilitating the arms flow, and thus no covert action had taken place. While the failure of the US ambassador to object to the transshipments had encouraged Croatia to allow them, HPSCI saw his conduct as "traditional diplomatic activity" rather than as covert action. The SSCI, on the other hand, was unable to reach agreement on whether a covert action had occurred but specifically rejected the notion that the ambassador's response to the Croatians constituted "traditional diplomatic activity." Both committees lauded the CIA officers for having raised their concerns to higher levels in the US government.

srijeda, 13. srpnja 2022.

Sumnjiva zapošljavanja u Međunarodnoj organizaciji za migracije: Kandidatima čestitali na novim pozicijama i prije nego je konkurs okončan (Žurnal, Z. Đelilović, 16.06.2022.)

 https://zurnal.info/clanak/kandidatima-cestitali-na-novim-pozicijama-i-prije-nego-je-konkurs-okoncan/25074

Sumnjiva zapošljavanja u Međunarodnoj organizaciji za migracije: Kandidatima čestitali na novim pozicijama i prije nego je konkurs okončan (Žurnal, Z. Đelilović, 16.06.2022.) 

 

Izvori Žurnala navode da se nekoliko uposlenika Službe za poslove sa strancima vodilo na platnoj listi IOM-a što iz ove Međunarodne organizacije ni ne poriču, već tvrde da oni na taj način "privremeno podržavaju Službu da pojačaju svoju radnu snagu kako bi se suočili sa povećanim brojem zadataka..."... Pitanje da li je legalno da jedna međunarodna organizacija po ugovoru plaća uposlenike koji bi trebali biti državni službenici za sada ostaje da visi u zraku...

 



Najveće malverzacije u Međunarodnoj organizaciji za migracije (IOM) BiH dešavaju se prilikom zapošljavanja: konkursne procedure se provode samo forme radi, a unaprijed je poznato ko će biti zaposlen, tvrde izvori Žurnala bliski ovoj organizaciji. 

U prilog tome govori i poruka iz oktobra prošle godine u kojoj tadašnja zamjenica kamp menadžera kampa Ušivak Zarfa Delić-Šorlija, tri do četiri dana prije okončanja konkursne procedure, čestita Kenanu Keseroviću i Stevanu Jugoviću na novim pozicijama.

Dobre vijesti iz TRC Blažuj, Mlt Cilkovski dobrodošao na novu poziciju u Blažuj, također čestitke Stevanu Jugoviću i Kenanu Keseroviću na novim pozicijama“, stoji u poruci koju smo dobili na uvid.

 

 

Mit Cilkovski bio je kamp menadžer u kampu Miral u Velikoj Kladuši, a Kenan Keserović njegov zamjenik. Pred kraj prošle godine, Cilkovski je putem internog transfera prebačen za kamp menadžera u kampu u Blažuju, dok njegova pozicija u Miralu ostaje upražnjena. 

Raspisuje se interni konkurs za kamp menadžera u kampu Miral i samo jedna osoba aplicira – Keserović. Zbog toga se konkurs produžuje i u međuvremenu se pojavljuje još nekoliko prijava: „Sumnjamo da su te druge prijave bile fiktivne i nikada nismo saznali ko se još prijavio na taj konkurs“. 

Sumnje u regularnost ovog konkursa potvrđene su 20. oktobra 2021. kada je Delić-Šorlija, koja je u međuvremenu prebačena za tim lidera u kamp u Blažuju, čestitala Keseroviću na novoj poziciji, iako je konkursna procedura bila u toku. Keserović je, inače, od 2014. do 2018. bio zastupnik DNZ u Skupštini USK, a nakon zatvaranja Mirala navodno je prebačen u kamp Lipa.

Naši izvori sumnjaju i u regularnost posljednjeg konkursa za kamp Ušivak. Na uvid su nam dostavili pitanja i odgovore, na engleskom i bosanskom jeziku, za koje tvrde da su ih dobili neki od kandidata. 

Neki od kandidata dobili su pitanja i pripremljene odgovore 

 

Javna je tajna ko im je dostavio pitanja i odgovore (identitet tih osoba je poznat redakciji Žurnala). Ovaj konkurs je i raspisan kako bi se eliminisale osobe koje su ranije radile na tim pozicijama, jer nekome u IOM-u nisu odgovarale. Konkurs je odlična prilika za eliminaciju tih osoba, a kako bi ih zamijenili sa podobnima”, navodi naš izvor. 

Upoznali smo IOM sa sadržajem sporne poruke, ali i sa pitanjima i odgovorima koje su dobili neki od kandidata, i u skladu s tim smo tražili određene odgovore. Pitali smo ih kada su raspisani i okončani konkursi na kojima su prošli Keserović i Jugović, s obzirom na to da ih mi sami nismo mogli pronaći na njihovoj zvaničnoj internet stranici. Naši izvori, inače, tvrde da se svi raniji oglasi brišu sa stranice.  

Također, pitali smo ih da li su upoznati sa situacijom da su pojedini kandidati unaprijed znali šta će biti pitani na intervjuu, te tražili komentar na tvrdnje da se konkursi provode forme radi i da se uslovi namještaju. 

 

Dio odgovora iz IOM-a

 

Zanimljivo je da iz IOM-a sporne dvije situacije nisu negirali, štaviše, uopće se nisu na njih konkretno osvrnuli. Samo su napomenuli da imaju “jasne procedure za prijavljivanje nedoličnog ponašanja, koje su dostupne svakom zaposlenom ili bivšem zaposleniku”. Istovremeno podsjećaju da je IOM nedavno prošao kroz proces smanjenja broja osoblja kako bi se odrazile smanjenju potreba na terenu. Proces je, kažu, bio kompetitivan i Misija je uložila sve napore da garantuje jednake šanse svim kandidatima. 

Nekoliko naših izvora, koji za sada žele ostati anonimni, navode da su se uslovi konkursa štimali prema sad već primljenim kandidatima. Za primjer navode konkurs iz oktobra 2019. kada su za poziciju „migrant assistant“ bile potrebne četiri godine iskustva, da bi ovu pozicija u martu ove godine prekvalificirali u "migrant protect assistant" i za nju su tražene tri godine iskustva. 

Iz IOM-a navode da su za spomenuti ugovor minimalni uslovi tri godine, te napominju da u procesu selekcije uzimaju u obzir nivo iskustva svakog kandidata koji ispunjava minimalne uslove. Zbog čega je ranije traženo četiri godine radnog iskustva nisu dodatno pojašnjavali, ali su dodali još da “iako postoje opšti minimalni zahtjevi za svaki stepen napredovanja, predispozicije za svaku poziciju se mogu prilagoditi na osnovu potreba projekta, vrste ugovora i trendova na tržištu rada”. Napominju da je IOM dinamična organizacija u kojoj se djelokrug rada njihovog osoblja mijenja brže nego u drugim kontekstima, pa se može dogoditi da se projektni zadaci prilagođavaju i ponovo oglašavaju kako bi se zadovoljile potrebe na terenu i promjena prirode posla. 

Zapošljavanje u IOM-u problematizirano je i u istraživanju za Heinrich Boll Stiftung pod nazivom - People on the Move in BiH 2019-2021 in Between: (UN)Welcome to no man's land, u kojem se navodi da je za kamp Lipa oficijelno zadužena Služba za strance BiH, ali da je, ipak, većinu radnika u ovom kampu uposlio upravo IOM: “Oni nemaju status ili prava državnih službenika, samo karte ugovore sa IOM-om za zapošljavanje u Lipi. Razgovarali smo s nekim od njih (nezvanično) i saznali smo da njihov status nije jasan. Iako javno rade za Službu za strance, oni su aplicirali za te pozicije putem javnih oglasa koje je objavio IOM i članovi ove organizacije su s njima obavili i intervjue. Većina njih, koji su ranije radili za različite organizacije, uključujući i IOM, otpušteni su, pa pozvani da ponovo apliciraju”. Sagovornici su za ovo istraživanje govorili o tome da imaju kratke ugovore, prema kojima su plaćeni samo za radno vrijeme, bez ikakvih drugih radnih privilegija. 

Sve ovo je potvrdio i izvor Žurnala kojem je poznato da je nekoliko radnika na platnoj listi IOM-a radilo za Službu za poslove sa strancima. Oni su sa inspektorima iz Službe vodili proces registracije korisnika u sistem izdavanja takozvanih "bijelih papira". 

Sav taj ugovor radnika Službe i IOM-a nije nam jasan, ali IOM finansira taj dio uposlenika Ministarstva sigurnosti koji rade u kampu Lipa, ali i ostalim kampovima u sklopu Službe za poslove sa strancima”, tvrdi naš izvor. 

IOM BiH priznaje da oni “privremeno podržavaju Službu za poslove sa strancima da pojačaju svoju radnu snagu kako bi se suočili sa povećanim brojem zadataka, a to su, kažu, zaposlenici koji imaju IOM ugovore, podnose izvještaje IOM-u, ali podržavaju SPS u njihovim svakodnevnim zadacima”. 

“Cilj u bliskom i srednjem roku je da SPS pojača svoje osoblje kako bi odgovorilo na ove povećane zadatke putem vlastitih sredstava ukoliko se za to odobri državni budžet”, odgovorili su nam iz IOM-a, istovremeno podsjećajući da je Služba od 2018. pružila usluge za više od 85.000 migranata koji su ušli u BiH. 

“Ovakvo povećanje obima rada SPS zahtijevalo je brzo pojačanje ljudskih resursa”, smatraju oni. 

I pored ovog objašnjenja i dalje je nejasno po kojem principu na platnoj listi Međunarodne organizacije za migracije BiH mogu biti osobe koje se vode kao uposlenici Službe za poslove sa strancima BiH i koje bi trebale biti državni službenici, ali to ipak nisu.  

(zurnal.info)

 

Interview: Morton Abramowitz On The 'End Of Bosnia' (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 13 August, 2011)


Interview: Morton Abramowitz On The 'End Of Bosnia'  (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 13 August, 2011)

https://www.rferl.org/a/interview_abramowitz_end_of_bosnia/24295787.html

 

Morton Abramowitz is a senior fellow at The Century Foundation and former president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He has served as ambassador to Turkey and Thailand and as assistant secretary of state for intelligence and research. The author of many books, he recently co-wrote an article in "The National Interest" titled "The Death of the Bosnian State." RFE/RL's Balkan Service director Gordana Knezevic asked him what he meant by this.

RFE/RL: The recent article you co-authored in "The National Interest" is kind of alarming. Do you think Bosnia-Herzegovina can really fall apart?

Morton Abramowitz:
To be frank, the title was put out by the editor; it was not our title. It's a rather alarming title. We had a much more subdued one.

On the other hand, I think there is a serious situation. The ethnic rivalry is hardening and it's like a frozen conflict in a sense. Leaving it that way is very dangerous, or potentially very dangerous. So we wanted to point out that one, this is a very uncertain and unsatisfactory situation and it had to be dealt with, and not a can to be kicked down the road. For example, the European Union approach to this seems to be that we will, over time, by providing aid assistance, make some progress in reducing tensions. This will culminate in some sort of better and more satisfactory relationship between the parties.

Clearly, I don't think it can work. There has to be a much more vigorous effort to deal with the situation. The center of the problem in my view -- a lot of people disagree with this -- both in Kosovo and in Bosnia is Serb domestic politics. And until that problem is resolved, I'm not optimistic we will see much progress made. That was the gist of the piece.

There was a relationship also between Kosovo and Bosnia in that as long as the Kosovo problem remained unresolved, the problem of north Kosovo, the problem of Bosnia, was likely to remain unresolved. And if for some reason north Kosovo was somehow partitioned, that would open a new channel for the exit of Republika Srpska (the Bosnian Serb entity) from Bosnia. It's a problem mainly of Serb domestic politics.

Now, the EU basically seeks to find some way to continue both in Bosnia and Kosovo ways that will indicate some progress in the Kosovo negotiations or through a new EU mission in Bosnia. This will lead to a situation that will enable Serbia to get the ability to win accession [to the EU] and permit [Serbian President Boris] Tadic to win [reelection] in Belgrade because they see him as the major source of progress on these Balkan issues. I think that's a very, very difficult row to hoe with very uncertain results.

RFE/RL: This is an amazing analysis.

 Abramowitz: The problem is one of how you produce constructive change in two very difficult situations in which there is a potential for sliding backward and even for some violence. We've seen a little violence occur in Kosovo and that should be a wake-up call to the West and Kosovo, to realize progress is simply not going to be made by the parties getting together in Brussels and producing advances in useful but small issues.

The issue is more fundamental than that and it's the issue of north Kosovo. It's easier to proceed in hopes that over time, attitudes will change and there will be a little more forthcoming relationships between the Serbs and the Kosovars, but I don't believe that is a productive way for resolving this problem. I feel you have to attack the main problem, which is the future of north Kosovo. I may be too pessimistic, but I don't believe this problem in Kosovo can be resolved without some resolution of the north Kosovo situation and that problem lies in Belgrade.

A European Future

RFE/RL: Do you have any explanation for why the European Union isn't applying pressure on Belgrade?

Abramowitz:
The European Union largely doesn't believe in pressure. The European Union basically believes in trying to find ways that are so-called constructive and enlist the parties in cooperation and over time produce a significant change in the situation. They also believe the promise of European accession will encourage the parties to compromise and find ways to get along better and produce an effective Bosnian government, etc. I would hope that to be the case, but I'm very skeptical.

RFE/RL: I'd like to ask you about the international community's Office of the High Representative (OHR) in Bosnia. It's seen by many as an obstacle to Bosnia's European future, but at the same time, it's an obstacle to the disintegration of Bosnia. At the very least, the office can declare null and void any unilateral proclamation of independence as it would be against the terms of the Dayton peace agreement.

Abramowitz:
That's been a view of many in the United States. The U.S. has always been the principal champion of the continuation of the OHR position.

The fact is the OHR is a skeleton of what it once was. Its ability to fashion its will is very difficult. Look at the way the OHR was undermined by the EU in its dealings on the proposed referendum in Serbia. They undermined OHR, gave them a kick in the ass. So I have always felt OHR was a useful institution, but right now, in the way it's operating, I don't think those powers are very effective.

RFE/RL: Do you think that Bosnia should join NATO and do you think it would provide some sense of security to all ethnic groups?

Abramowitz:
I think it would be useful if Bosnia could join NATO, as I believe it useful if the Greeks would stop preventing Macedonia from joining NATO. I think it would be a step forward, but I'm not quite sure that all parties in Bosnia would agree to it and I don't think it resolves the fundamental issue of how to reduce the ethnic abrasions and move forward. There are some people who are more optimistic about the impact of that; I'm not. But I'm obviously not opposed to it.

Healing Ethnic Divisions

RFE/RL: The fact that Bosnian Serbs, Bosnian Croats, and Bosnian Muslims are cooperating and standing shoulder-to-shoulder in NATO missions in Afghanistan and Iraq is sending us a clear message within the right framework and in a truly professional environment...

Abramowitz:
It doesn't deal with Bosnia's domestic politics. Maybe it will encourage change, I would hope that might be the case, but I'm not optimistic. Bosnian politicians are wedded to different things that are often inconsistent with what many people would want. I think there are a lot of people in Bosnia and in all quarters who want to see much more focus on the economy, much more growth, much more robust activity, but that doesn't seem to happen.

 

 Rather we have [President Milorad] Dodik in [Republika] Srpska and other politicians there who always go back to ethnic issues. And the ethnic parties tend to vote in an ethnic way. The Bosniaks vote for Bosniaks, Serbs vote for Serbs, and it doesn't break this down.

Now, how this is to be done I frankly don't know. I think the biggest problem is Republika Srpska and to change the climate that has been produced by Mr. Dodik and all his statements.

RFE/RL: The division of the country along ethnic lines was actually legitimized by the Dayton agreement...

Abramowitz:
Yes, of course, that's what they did; it consolidated the status quo and did nothing more. It did not provide adequately for the growth of a different country.

RFE/RL: And Dayton is now seen as a holy script for some....

Abramowitz:
Well, it's a holy script because no one knows how to replace it. No one's going to get together and produce another Dayton agreement that integrates the country. If they wanted to do that, the parties themselves could, but they're not.

Unless the West were to impose a totally new agreement, which they're certainly not prepared to do, I don't know how a new Dayton conference will achieve anything. If it were possible to achieve something by a new Dayton conference, which would change the way the country operates, obviously I would support it, but I don't see that happening.

Look, over the past year there have been all sorts of meetings, high-level officials came back and forth. Nothing's changed.

Papering Over The Cracks

RFE/RL: I think what we're seeing now in Kosovo is the bad politics and hypocrisy of the international community exploding. When Kosovo simply decided to guard its own border, we had a new crisis.

Abramowitz:
For whatever reason, [Kosovo Prime Minister Hashim] Thaci got mad and he decided to move ahead. Whether he talked to the Americans or not, I don't know; there's a lot of back-and-forth on this issue. Kosovars rarely do anything without American approval; Americans are their best friends.

But nevertheless he went and did it and I believe the status quo has been somewhat changed. I don't know where the negotiations are now. They may well go back to Brussels and try to restore the status quo. Further talks may solve the customs problem, but I don't think it's going to contribute to any long-term solution in the north.

Now, they may hope that over time good things will occur because they're cooperating more, but I don't think they're going to cooperate more.