FLASH
Shkruar nga Andi Bushati
The testimony of Madeline Albright's former spokesman has once again confirmed the de-heroizing strategy chosen by Hashim Thaçi's defense. He portrayed a weak KLA commander, without power and authority. Thus paving the way for the rewriting of the legend...
The testimony of James Rubin, former US Deputy Secretary of State and Madeleine Albright's confidant, today in The Hague, in the trial against the leaders of the KLA has raised the question of whether the glorious epic of the liberators really had a name. When former President Hashim Thaçi, along with Kadri Veseli, Jakup Krasniqi and Rexhep Selimi, learned that they would be indicted, a protest movement began in Kosovo and Albania under the slogan "Freedom has a name". Its meaning was that by imprisoning the leaders of the war for murder and crimes against humanity, the entire struggle of a people to escape Serbian aggression was being directly tarnished.
But, in fact, if you listened to the former US State Department spokesman's testimony before the court today, it would seem as if freedom had no proper names. There, the role of the former political leader of the KLA turned out to have been much more minor, insignificant and not commanding. James Rubin, questioned by the lawyers and the prosecutor, drew a more figurehead leader, a kind of foreign minister, he said - who could not order the commanders, but only conveyed their version to the internationals. Rubin emphasized that Thaçi had no authority or power to influence, that he could not order them, that the entire organization did not have a vertical structure, and that even Hashimi himself was afraid of its most extremist elements.
This de-heroized version of history has always been the main line of the defense lawyers of the former president of Kosovo. From the beginning of the process, they forced Thaçi himself to minimize his role and that of the political directorate in leading the war, transferring them to the local leaders of military operations.
Why this happened is easily understood if you familiarize yourself with the details of the indictment against Hashim Thaçi. Neither he, nor Kadri Veseli and the others are burdened with personal facts that they committed crimes with their own hands. There is no evidence in this regard.
But, for the nearly 100 victims, for the torture of civilians, the disappearance of political opponents within the country and that of Serbs or Roma, Thaçi is treated by prosecutors as a leader who was aware of what his commanders were doing. The charge of “joint criminal enterprise” is justified by the KLA’s goal of controlling the territory, cleansing it of traitorous Albanians and ethnic minorities. Within the framework of this strategy, the liberation leaders are accused of having known and accepted what was happening in the terrible prisons of Kukës and Cahan, which were located within Albanian territory, or that of Llapushnik in Kosovo.
Precisely to avoid responsibility for these already proven murders, deportations and tortures, the defense lawyers have chosen the tactic of a Hashim Thaçi who was not questioned by anyone, who had no power and from whom approval was not required for everything. This was also the essence of the testimony of their star witness, James Rubin, who will be one of the 12 selected to try to ease the former president's position in the eyes of the court.
Of course, this de-heroizing strategy, however immoral it may seem, may be the best legal way to deal with an absurd, non-transparent, protracted and disproportionate process against the leaders of the KLA. Against a political court that perhaps should not have existed at all, against a trial that ignores the broader framework of Serbian aggression and focuses on the crimes of Albanians, against the endless isolation and keeping of the accused in terrible conditions of isolation, perhaps the goal of achieving innocence is more important than the means through which it is achieved.
But whatever the outcome of this trial, next spring or a little later, this type of defense strategy cannot fail to leave its mark on tomorrow's history. Whether they are released or remain in prison, the real leaders of the KLA were forced to admit with their own mouths that the role they played during the war was not what is depicted in the legends about it.
The paradox of the movement that was born with the announcement of the indictment: “Freedom has a name” cracked and darkened in the courtroom. Because of the strategy that was chosen, Thaçi was portrayed as a weak commander, without power over the course of events and without the authority to lead the war against the Serbian army. He was forced to take off the hero’s mantle and this was the greatest punishment for the man, the politician and his role in history.
No one can guess what the course of events would have been if he had opted for a different defense strategy in the process. But by putting even the international protagonists of the time, such as James Rubin, in the mouths of the fact that he was a weak and weightless leader, he has opened the door to rewriting the events of that period. This is the first bad news coming from The Hague, long before the court gives its verdict. Its second damage is that the consequences will not only fall on the personal fate of those in the dock. ©Lapsi.al
Lini një Përgjigje