The trial of Slobodan Milosevic in the Hague is in trouble, a worrying augury when former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein awaits further days in court.
The problem is not Milosevic's failing health. His trial has dragged on for two years and the prosecution has only now completed its case. He has been presented with 400,000 pages of evidence. One observer noted that, if the former Serbian leader read three pages a minute, 12 hours a day, seven days a week, it would take him more than six months to ingest the evidence. This would floor a well man.
Even if counsel is foisted on Milosevic, his lawyer will have to digest the mass of material.
ILLUSTRATION: LOUISE TING
Then there are the witnesses Milosevic intends to call: French President Jacques Chirac, British Prime Minister Tony Blair and former US president Bill Clinton. Milosevic doubtless wants to accuse the Western leaders of war crimes by sanctioning the bombing of Belgrade. He will point to international bullies, such as China, who have escaped their attention, and claim the tribunal represents "victors' justice." The potential embarrassment is unlimited.
This should come as no surprise. The trial of the Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem in 1961-2 is widely regarded as a crucial step along the path that leads to Milosevic and Saddam facing justice today. The prosecution of the man who organized the annihilation of Europe's Jews is celebrated for advancing the application of international law covering crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide. The Eichmann trial is also credited with raising public awareness of the Nazi persecution and mass murder of Jews. It is seen as a classic "historic trial."
Eichmann example
But scrutiny of the Eichmann trial, and the Nuremberg tribunal of 1945-46 on which it drew precedent, helps to explain why the Milosevic trial has run into trouble. It should also serve as a warning, rather than an inspiration, to those now contemplating the trial of Saddam.
As head of the Jewish Office of the Gestapo between 1941 and 1944, Eichmann oversaw the deportation of millions of Jews to death camps. He escaped to Argentina and remained undetected until 1957. In May 1960, the Israeli secret service kidnapped Eichmann in violation of Argentine sovereignty.
It is a myth that former Israeli prime minister David Ben Gurion wanted a trial to tell the world of the genocide of the Jews. But when the abduction was denounced at the UN, and prominent Jews demanded Eichmann appear before an international tribunal, Ben Gurion saw how a trial could demonstrate the rationale for Jewish statehood.
Eichmann would be tried in Jerusalem precisely to show that the Jews now determined their own fate -- and that of any enemy who fell into their hands.
Initially, preparation of the Eichmann case was handled by the Israeli police. They sought documents and witnesses that linked him directly to the genocide. This resulted in a case confined to geographical areas where there was a paper trail incriminating Eichmann.
But when the newly-appointed attorney general of Israel, Gideon Hausner, took over the prosecution he revamped the case. He wanted the trial to recall the genocidal campaign against Europe's Jews.
Hausner, under intense political pressure, doubled the number of witnesses to provide this scope and give the hearings an emotional edge. Ben Gurion intervened to ensure that his role in unsuccessful and controversial rescue negotiations with the Nazis was never mentioned. Former foreign minister Golda Meir wanted comparisons made with the fate of black Africans under colonialism.
Teddy Kollek, the director of Ben Gurion's office, set out to produce the media trial of the century, converting a theater into a courtroom and arranging for proceedings to be televised. Facilities were provided for 450 journalists.
The trial opened in a blaze of publicity but within days the press had gone. In terms of its immediate impact the Eichmann trial, like Nuremberg, was a flop. Those despairing of the minimal coverage of the Milosevic trial should have heeded these examples.
Long and dull
Historic trials are by their nature long and dull. They are self-defeating because the media cannot sustain interest in them. The journalist Rebecca West described Nuremberg as "boredom on a huge, historic scale." Telford Taylor, a prosecutor at Nuremberg who later covered Eichmann's trial, complained that journalists had not come to Jerusalem "to be bored to tears by long lectures and legal argument."
They can also be counterproductive, thanks to the antics of the defendants. At Nuremberg, Rudolf Hess, once deputy fuehrer, seemed a harmless lunatic. Goring, by contrast, tore into his accuser, Justice Jackson. Eichmann looked so inoffensive that Simon Wiesenthal suggested he be dressed in SS uniform to remind people of what he once was. The sight of Saddam in chains has aroused conflicting emotions, even among Iraqis glad of their freedom.
Some legal theorists argue that trials can have a cathartic effect, offering comfort to victims and helping a society move on from tyranny and atrocity. But this is not always how it seems.
Legal procedure means that the narrative is chopped and disjointed. At Nuremberg, information about the destruction of the European Jews got lost among other evidence. The survivors who testified against Eichmann were coached as to what they could say.
Trials can backfire. The first tactic of the defense is always to impugn the court's legitimacy. At Nuremberg, Goring pointed out that Russia, represented on the bench, had invaded Poland in 1939 and waged war against Finland in 1940. Robert Servatius, who defended Nazis at Nuremberg prior to acting for Eichmann, was quick to denounce "victors' justice." Milosevic intends to call the French, British and American leaders, almost certainly in the hope of questioning them over their alleged war crimes.
The Nuremberg tribunal, the Eichmann trial, and the prosecution of Milosevic demonstrate the same flaws. They were political and shaped by compromise. After initial publicity, media interest was ground down. Testimony given by survivors was hardly reported and the invisibility of the proceedings deprived the victims of satisfaction that justice was being seen to be done.
But the alternative, such as the kangaroo court that condemned former Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceausescu, is worse. These prolonged trials may be imperfect but they can reinforce democratic values by reasserting human rights and the rule of law over tyranny. They may not deliver instant understanding or reconciliation, but in the long run they establish a historical record that serves the future as testimony and admonition.
David Cesarani is research professor of history at Royal Holloway, London University.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs