12.07.2015 Views

Writ of summons - Van Diepen Van der Kroef

Writ of summons - Van Diepen Van der Kroef

Writ of summons - Van Diepen Van der Kroef

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

know what Dutchbat itself would do to overcome the situation. Dutchbat Comman<strong>der</strong>Karremans, however, consi<strong>der</strong>ed his troops to be ‘too good to be sacrificed’ (see pages286 and 287 <strong>of</strong> the NIOD Report).104. General Nicolai informed the Serbs that UNPROFOR consi<strong>der</strong>ed the actions <strong>of</strong> the VRSas an attack on the Safe Area. He also acknowledged that the VRS used heavy weapons,while the heavy weapons <strong>of</strong> the Bosniacs had been collected in and then stored in theWeapon Collection Point. Nicolai warned the VRS that attacks on a blocking positionwould have serious consequences and that Close Air Support would be deployed (seepage 2151 <strong>of</strong> the NIOD Report). It is stated in the NIOD Report on page 2155 that thesetting up <strong>of</strong> the blocking positions nevertheless posed problems for Dutchbat. TheNIOD concluded in that respect:‘Following the Rules <strong>of</strong> Engagement could at any moment compel Dutchbat to returnfire and thereby to ‘green’ conduct. The battalion was neither equipped nor trained forthis and it certainly did not have the mindset for such an operation.’105. It follows from the above quotation that the UN and the State <strong>of</strong> the Netherlandsdispatched an army, whose equipment, training and state <strong>of</strong> mind was not equipped forits duties. The carrying out <strong>of</strong> a ‘green’ assignment, that is, an assignment where fightingmight be a possibility, is the essence and raison d’être <strong>of</strong> an army. Dispatching an armywithout the required means, that cannot and will not fight, is seriously culpable. Plaintiffrefers again to the assessment made by General Janvier on the question <strong>of</strong> what Frenchsoldiers would have done in the same situation (see the Report <strong>of</strong> the French Parliament,Part 2, page 123, cited above).Air support and other developments on 9 July 1995106. Air support was repeatedly refused until 9 July 1995 because the conditions for its usewould not have been met. From 9 July 1995 another reason for its refusal was putforward. Aircraft appeared above the enclave at 8.15 hours on that day in response to arequest for Close Air Support. The Air Operations Coordination Centre in Sarajevo wasinformed by Dutchbat that it did not want aircraft over the Safe Area. The Forward Air© <strong>Van</strong> <strong>Diepen</strong> <strong>Van</strong> <strong>der</strong> <strong>Kroef</strong> Advocaten 2007www.vandiepen.com53

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!