Part III
The fall of Srebrenica

9. A Line in the Sand: The Blocking Positions

Unaware of those Bosnian-Serb intentions, the UN headquarters in Zagreb almost simultaneously came to a decision to instruct Dutchbat to establish blocking positions. The aim was for Dutchbat to set up a blockade against the VRS advance to Srebrenica whether or not in combination with the deployment of Close Air Support, and thereby to stop the advance.[1]

On 9 July the front lines of the VRS troops were just over four kilometres into the enclave. When General Nicolai asked VRS General Tolimir for an explanation, Nicolai stated that UNPROFOR considered the actions of the VRS as an attack on the enclave. UNPROFOR demanded a withdrawal and Nicolai warned Tolimir that UNPROFOR would defend the enclave with all means at its disposal. Tolimir however countered with the argument that, in fact, Dutchbat was occupying Bosnian-Serb territory. Tolimir nevertheless reassured Nicolai that Dutchbat soldiers would not be threatened.[2] A few hours later the generals again established communication. Tolimir told Nicolai that he had been assured by local commanders that there were no problems with either Dutchbat or the population. To that Nicolai could only repeat that, while the VRS may not be having problems with either Dutchbat or the local population, it would certainly have to deal with UNPROFOR if it failed to withdraw across the borders of the enclave. The agreement with Morillon had to be respected. Thanks to the good discipline of the UN forces, Nicolai stated, they had not yet taken up arms against the VRS, but he could not guarantee that this would not happen. Tolimir said that he understood the message, and repeated that the VRS had no problem with Dutchbat and the population - only with the ABiH. According to Tolimir it was the actions of the ABiH from the demilitarised zone that violated the existing agreements, as well as the efforts to mutually connect Zepa and Srebrenica.

Nicolai could not see the connection. In his view this was about an attack on a Safe Area, and a threat to the local population. The VRS was the only party that was deploying heavy weaponry, as all ABiH weapons were still in the Weapon Collection Point. That was one sound reason for UNPROFOR to defend the Safe Area. Tolimir however did not agree that the ABiH had surrendered all their heavy weaponry. He claimed that the ABiH owned six armoured vehicles, which it had either bought or stolen from UNPROFOR. That led to a verbal exchange between Tolimir and Nicolai, who vehemently denied the latter statement. Tolimir was right about the armoured vehicles even though the vehicles, which had originated from the Ukraine via Zepa, were no longer in the enclave.[3] (The situation concerning the armoured vehicles was discussed in Chapter 4.)

Tolimir claimed that Nicolai did not understand the heart of the matter. The ABiH had continuously launched attacks from the Safe Area, which, in contrast to the agreement, had never been demilitarised. Serbian towns constantly went up in flames. Nicolai countered that the ABiH had been warned to that effect on several occasions. At this point, however, the VRS were taking measures that went far beyond the call for self-defence. Nicolai demanded – a complete withdrawal within two hours or UNPROFOR would be forced to deploy all means available against the VRS. Nicolai failed to specify the means.[4]

The threat was backed up by a formal warning by UNPF in Zagreb to the Bosnian Serbs. The offensive was ‘totally unacceptable’ and signified a serious escalation of the conflict. The VRS were to stop the offensive on the enclave immediately and to withdraw to the border of the enclave as agreed on 8 May 1993 with General Morillon. Moreover, all Dutchbat troops held captive by the VRS had to be released immediately with their equipment. The VRS were further informed that Dutchbat had been instructed to establish blocking positions, thereby closing off access to Srebrenica. The warning stated that Akashi and Janvier had decided to deploy Close Air Support in the event of a VRS attack on the blocking position. The warning reminded the VRS of the ‘grave consequences’ following disregard of a warning. The warning failed to mention what the grave consequences would be. Sarajevo sent the warning to General Mladic and also issued a press release.[5]

During the day of 9 July, Zagreb and Sarajevo worked feverishly to establish substance for this warning (which was later incorrectly viewed by many as an ultimatum). The UN headquarters in New York also had problems with the warning to the Bosnian Serbs. Reports of companies and several tanks in the vicinity of the town of Srebrenica had reached New York; however, as such, those reports signified nothing special. The UN headquarters did not expect anything special to occur until the alarm was signalled by the Situation Center in New York based on the continuous incoming reports and situation reports. Boutros-Ghali was abroad at the time, as was his deputy, Kofi Annan. Iqbal Riza thereby replaced both Annan and Boutros-Ghali.[6]

Riza was a Pakistani who was sympathetic to the Bosnian Muslims.[7] He asked the Military Advisor to the Secretary-General, Major General of the Marines, F.H. van Kappen, what to make of the situation reports. The information stream in New York was always somewhat behind the times due to the time difference, and delays caused by written reports via the headquarters. Moreover, much of the reporting to New York was devoid of military-tactical subjects. Although New York was reluctant to establish direct contact with field commanders, there seemed to be little choice other than to contact General Janvier directly for an explanation. Van Kappen failed to raise Janvier telephonically, but did manage to get in touch with Colonel De Jonge, who provided a clear sketch of the situation. New York found the situation disquieting: Something unforeseen had happened - the Bosnian Serbs were continuing their offensive. The reasons remained unknown to both Riza and Van Kappen. Riza nevertheless thought it essential to send a clear signal to the Bosnian Serbs to the effect that they had crossed a critical line. This resulted in a new round of communication between Van Kappen and De Jonge. De Jonge explained that Zagreb planned to establish blocking positions to provide the Bosnian Serbs with a clear and practical message: So far, and no further.[8]

Riza agreed to the notion of the blocking positions, however, he felt that it needed to entail a clear political-military signal. In his view it was essential to issue orders to offer real resistance and not only to fire over the heads of the offenders. Van Kappen said that he had pointed out to Riza that, from a military perspective, blocking positions did not make all that much sense, as infantry could easily bypass them. Riza accepted this and understood that half a battalion was not exactly capable of putting up an effective defence; however, he did consider the political message conveyed with the blocking positions important. That message had to be supported in a military sense, and Janvier had to give substance to that requirement. Riza wanted the political signal of the blocking positions to serve as a ‘line in the sand’. De Jonge was then informed by Van Kappen that New York considered the blocking positions a sound initiative as long as they presented a clear signal.

The issue of Close Air Support was also mentioned in that discussion. Van Kappen was informed that Zagreb was making preparations to that end, even though the staff did not believe an attack was about to be launched with much more than one company supported by two or three tanks.

After that, events unfolded very quickly and became extremely confusing to New York. This was partially due to the fact that the Bosnian Serbs had initially reacted with a denial of their intentions to take Srebrenica city and because New York was itself beginning to doubt whether this was not just another incident.[9]

After the take-over of one OP after the other, De Jonge in Zagreb began to fear that the VRS offensive could well signify more than a ‘salami tactics’ or an isolated incident. The intelligence staff in Zagreb still maintained that the operation was limited to the southern section of the enclave, and that it would not lead to further invasion of the Safe Area. However, De Jonge countered, if the rollup of OPs continued unabated, not much of the enclave would remain. The question was what could be done to avoid having to answer later to accusations to the effect that the enclave had been taken without any resistance or firm action on the part of the UN.

Decision to establish Blocking Positions

On the morning of 9 July, the Zagreb staff did another dry run of handling a Blue Sword Request to ensure that everyone was familiar with their roles in that bureaucratic procedure. After the exercise De Jonge came to the conclusion that the VRS had to be put into a position where they would be forced to admit their true intentions. This led him to the idea of the blocking positions. The aim was not to set Dutchbat up in a defensive position with all means available; however, the battalion would be authorised to take up positions from which it could fire upon the VRS. The aim was to establish whether the VRS were conducting lightning strikes that would be ceased at the first sign of resistance or whether they were really planning an assault on the entire enclave. In the case of a VRS attack on a blocking position it would be obvious that their intentions went well beyond isolated operations. De Jonge’s idea was thereby also to bring about a separation between the attacking and defending groups, preferably by one to two kilometres. That would present the opportunity to safely deploy Close Air Support against the VRS. After all, Close Air Support was not permitted if it posed a danger to friendly troops.[10]

De Jonge proposed his plan to Chief of Staff Kolsteren. Kolsteren favoured De Jonge’s idea partially based on the experience of UNPF at the fall of Sector West in Croatia, where UN troops present had taken no action against the advancing Croatians. A blocking position could fill the gap between Dutchbat’s light weaponry and Close Air Support. A substantial ‘gap’ existed between light and heavy weaponry due to the fact that, as was well known, Dutchbat’s anti-tank weapons were no longer in sound working order (more on that subject below).

Kolsteren stated that his consideration of De Jonge’s idea had also been based on another idea, namely, UNPF’s perception that, while there was a battalion in Srebrenica asking for Close Air Support, there were questions as to the actual role of that battalion. Dutchbat did its work - at least that was how Zagreb saw it – but it could hardly be said that they had shown courage or betrayed a sense of battle-readiness. Colonel De Jonge denied that such a notion was prevalent or that it had been uttered in Zagreb,[11] however, in Kolsteren’s view the battalion was not only in Srebrenica to observe and report. Matters were deteriorating ‘invitingly rapidly’. Obviously Zagreb was concerned about the safety of UNPROFOR personnel, but that was hardly license for Dutchbat to do absolutely nothing at all. The battalion would have to show its mettle. The blocking positions would have to provide the test of that mettle. It would have to provide Mladic with a clear demonstration that attacking the blocking position and advancing on Srebrenica city was a step too far.[12]

De Jonge then proposed his idea to Force Commander Janvier. Janvier was immediately convinced of the validity of the plan. Janvier responded to De Jonge as follows: ‘Then we will know Mladic’s real worth. Moreover, we will then be able to deploy Close Air Support.’[13] Janvier however first wanted to know whether this concerned a real offensive or merely a sham attack. According to Kolsteren, Janvier had not intend to give up the enclave without resistance even though he had previously presented that as an option to the Security Council.[14] Janvier also used the words ‘a line in the sand’. He wanted to attach an ultimatum to the blocking positions, so that Mladic would be clear about the consequences of continuing forward operations. Janvier’s staff would fill in the details. De Jonge said that he was then instructed to draft an order for the blocking positions, which Janvier would sign.[15]

Janvier and Akashi’s discussion in the early evening of 9 July culminated in the order for Dutchbat to block the route to Srebrenica. The commanders of UNPF in Zagreb, UNPROFOR in Sarajevo, and Akashi would, each at their own level, issue ‘a firm warning’ to the Bosnian Serbs. Deputy Force Commander Ashton talked to General Mladic and demanded the withdrawal of the VRS from Srebrenica.[16]

Simultaneous with Akashi and Janvier’s decision, early that evening, to establish blocking positions, the headquarters in Zagreb and Sarajevo were instructed to prepare for Close Air Support. The latter operation would serve as a reply in the event that the Bosnian Serbs were to undertake an ‘action directe’ against the UNPROFOR units that stood in their way.

Brigadier General Dave Sawyer, deputy Director of the CAOC in Vicenza, was recalled to his post to consult with Nicolai regarding Zagreb’s plans for the establishment of blocking positions designed to stop the VRS. The entry in the logbook of the Fifth Allied Tactical Air Force in Vicenza was testimony to the fact that the UN was planning ‘to slug it out with the VRS. If unsuccessful, NATO Close Air Support/Air Strikes would be used.’[17] Vicenza meanwhile issued orders for an airborne command post, code name Bookshelf,[18] to stand by for deployment at 06.00 hours on 10 July, and to conduct a radio check with Dutchbat’s Forward Air Controller, Windmill 02. Sawyer emphasized the importance of that action.

It was also established via the Dutch officer, Major Frentz, who worked at the Air Operations Coordination Center, that Windmill 02 would be available at that moment. Vicenza meanwhile drew the positions of the VRS tanks onto the map and was in possession of a target list, even though they knew that it might no longer be up to date. The exact locations of the blocking positions were not as yet known in Vicenza, and the fear was expressed that it would not be known until 06.00 hours on the following day.[19]

Around 21.00 hours that evening Janvier consulted with NATO Admiral Leighton Smith in Naples. They agreed that, as of 06.00 hours on 10 July, NATO aircraft would be in positions above the Adriatic Sea, ready for deployment at the request of Sarajevo in the event of a threat to Srebrenica. The final decision for deployment remained with Janvier and Akashi.[20] NATO was indeed ready for Close Air Support at 06.00 hours. The Air Operations Coordination Center in Sarajevo, for several hours more, remained under the impression that a Blue Sword Request would be honoured in advance if a blocking position were to have been attacked on 10 July.[21] That was however not the case, and the procedures remained as they had been established.

Zagreb did not conduct a risk analysis prior to issuing the order for the establishment of blocking positions. It also did not seem sensible to expect this of a headquarters four organisational levels above Dutchbat. The risk evaluation had to be left up to the commanders in the field.[22] De Jonge said that he had in fact raised the question of the Rules of Engagement (rules of conduct for opening fire), but the staff in Zagreb did not think it required amendment.

It was however clear that a risk was being taken and that the order posed Dutchbat with an enormous problem. The white UN armoured cars would be highly conspicuous and vulnerable on the hills. Following the Rules of Engagement could at any moment compel Dutchbat to return fire and thereby to ‘green’ conduct. The battalion was neither equipped nor trained for this and it certainly did not have the mindset for such an operation. Field Manuals warn never to issue sudden ‘green’ orders to troops trained only at ‘blue’ level, as this would be demanding the impossible of the troops (see Chapter 8 of Part II). De Jonge nevertheless felt that, in that instance, the risk had to be taken. Janvier, who had always shown extreme caution and circumspect, supported him in this. Sarajevo issued the order to Dutchbat. Zagreb did not at any time consult Karremans directly regarding the assignment.[23]

Like Zagreb, Sarajevo also did not amend the Rules of Engagement and did not instruct Dutchbat as to whether to fire directly at the VRS or not. The idea was that the threat of Close Air Support would serve as a deterrence and would be sufficient to stop the advancing VRS troops. For that reason the warning to the VRS had been supplemented with the message that a VRS attack of a blocking position would result in Close Air Support.[24] De Ruiter informed Karremans about the warning, as well as the availability of Close Air Support. According to De Ruiter, Karremans dismissed the Close Air Support with the words, ‘That will only result in an escalation of the situation.’[25]

In the event of the VRS firing on a blocking position, the normal Rules of Engagement dictated that fire could be returned in self defence. According to Nicolai in Sarajevo, Janvier wanted to implement an intermediary step between letters of protest and the deployment of air power in the form of a return of fire by Dutchbat with surface-to-surface weapons. According to Nicolai that strategy had been discussed with Karremans. In the event of a real threat of Srebrenica falling into Bosnian-Serb hands, or in the event of the VRS firing directly at UNPROFOR, Dutchbat was under order to return fire. The VRS would then have to pass through or around a blocking position.[26] When setting up the warning to the Bosnian Serbs, Zagreb believed that Mladic would think twice before moving into the enclave. That thinking was confirmed by Lieutenant Colonel Jim Baxter, the Military Assistant to General Smith. The interpretation of the warning was however primarily a Dutch issue.[27]

Warning or Ultimatum?

Dutchbat was confused about the nature of the warning issued to the Bosnian Serbs. Although a warning had been issued, both Karremans and Company Commander Groen, who was in charge of the execution of the blocking positions, initially spoke of an ultimatum. The difference being that an ultimatum encompasses a time limit and consequences, while a warning does not. The Inner Circle, Dutchbat’s internal information leaflet, also used the word ultimatum.[28] Karremans reiterated this in a report, at the end of August 1995, to the Minister of Defence.[29] That not withstanding, he did later state in his book, ‘Srebrenica, Who Cares?’ that, in the strict sense of the word, this could not be considered an ultimatum, but only a warning.[30] The report on the debriefing in Assen also mentions an ultimatum.[31] The question remains as to the extent to which Karremans adjusted his judgement in retrospect. In the publication, ‘Dutchbat in Vredesnaam’ (‘Dutchbat for Peace’s Sake’), Groen offers his impression of the staff meeting in which Karremans reported the directives as received from Sarajevo: ‘The UN’s first reaction finally came at 20.30 hours! It came in the form of an ultimatum to the VRS, and specified that all VRS troops had to have pulled back south of a line drawn about three kilometres south of the city by no later than 21.00 hours. Failure to comply with that instruction would result in a massive air strike on 10 July (the following day)!’[32] An anonymous author wrote in the same book that ‘in reaction to the VRS offensive, UNPROFOR sent the VRS an ultimatum on that same night.’[33] The section for military-civilian contacts (in military terms: Section 5) did the same when it announced the warning early on the morning of 10 July to the commander of the 28th Division, the president of the Opstina and the mayor.[34]

Colonel Brantz in Tuzla also referred to an ultimatum even though he had been aware that a VRS attack of a blocking position would only invoke consideration of a NATO deployment.[35] Karremans also viewed the ultimatum as a promise.[36] That was however not justifiable, as no decision had been taken at that point regarding the deployment of Close Air Support. The warning most certainly made no mention of air strikes. In other words, there was no question of an ultimatum with an associated sanction. This was clearly better understood at NATO (AFSOUTH in Naples) than by Dutchbat. To that effect, the Dutch representative at AFSOUTH, Colonel A.F. Koopmans, commented as follows on the warning to the VRS: ‘This ‘ultimatum’ will only be activated after obtaining the (renewed) permission of the UN!’[37] General Nicolai also notified The Hague that no ultimatum had been issued, but that withdrawal had been demanded with an associated sanction.[38] The point of the difference between a ‘warning’...