The Western connection in the assassination of Serbia’s Prime Minister Djindjic on March 14, 2003

Posted on the Saker, March 20, 2015

by Nikola Vrzic

Several days ago, on March 12th, Serbia marked another – twelfth – anniversary of the assassination of Serbia’s prime minister Zoran Djindjic. The official narrative of Djindjic, as a reformer who was killed by criminals and Serbian nationalists, this year was confronted with evidence revealing the story as much more complex, with a strong presence of Western, primarily British and US secret services…

The official version of Djindjic’s death, established on a day of his assassination in 2003 and later confirmed by the court, says that Djindjic, pro-Western reformer, “the quisling of Belgrade” as Neil Clark called him in The Guardian on March 14 2003, was killed by members of (Belgrade suburb) Zemun criminal clan and “red berets”, Serbian secret police unit for special operations which had fought in wars in Croatia, Bosnia, and Kosovo. Criminals, the story goes, wanted Djindjic dead as they wanted to avoid their imminent arrest, while the “red berets”, allegedly supported by nationalistic circles in Serbian society (in the army, in political parties, Serbian orthodox church…), wanted Djindjic dead for his cooperation with The Hague Tribunal and, broadly speaking, betraying Serbian national interests by collaborating with the West.

Djindjic was killed as his motorcade came to the building of Serbian government. According to the official version, he got out of his car, walked (on crutches, he previously injured his left leg playing football) to the door which was closed, turned against the door in an attempt to open it himself by pushing it with his back, and at that point he was shot with a single bullet (which was never recovered). After Djindjic was shot, there was a second shot which injured Djindjic’s bodyguard Milan Veruovic and, piercing his body, ended in a stone wall next to the door where Djindjic was shot.

That is the official version.

This is where our investigation started.

In a recently published book “The Third Bullet. The Political Background of the Assassination of Zoran Djindjic” by Milan Veruovic, Djindjic’s wounded bodyguard, and the author of this article, journalist Nikola Vrzic, the official version of Serbian PM’s assassination is scrutinized through comprehensive analysis of all the evidence presented to the court, testimonies, police documents…, and, as a result, the book refuted the official version of Djindjic’s assassination both in terms of what really happened on March 12 2003, as well as regarding the political motives that led to his death. In short, conspiracy seems to be much, much wider, going beyond Serbia’s borders.

Both witnesses’ testimonies and material evidence show there were three, not just two bullets fired on that day, which means – to make a longer story short – there was another sniper; again, both witnesses and all the material evidence prove that Djindjic was shot by that other sniper, as he did not turn his back to the government building trying to open the door himself (with nine bodyguards around him) – the door, in fact, was open – but he was shot facing the government building, meaning, from exactly the opposite direction than officially acknowledged; Djindjic’s entry wound (33×20 mm), consistent with damages on his clothes, is significantly larger than Veruovic’s entry wound (6×7 mm), which also proves that they were shot from two different rifles of different calibers, with Veruovic’s wound being consistent with the caliber (diameter of a bullet) 7,62 mm of the only rifle that was, officially, used on March 12 2003; as far as that rifle is concerned, the comparison of Serbian police’s documentation with the documentation of German police (which examined the rifle afterwards) show strong indications that different rifle was planted instead of the one originally found; in a days after Djindjic was shot, a man from Croatia, with criminal contacts, was identified as possibly being one of the assassins, however, Serbian police did not even present his photograph to the witnesses and did not follow up on this lead, but, instead, directed the public attention to an innocent Belgrade man in order to divert the attention from the Croatian trail; furthermore, the police concealed the automobile used by the Croatian man, and this automobile – black “Volvo” 240 – belonged to one of Serbian security services…

To cut a long story short, the official version proved to be the official lie about Djindjic’s assassination.

Which leads to the crucial question – who is guilty for this lie? One answer is obvious: police who investigated the crime, prosecutors and judges who confirmed the false official version, despite all the evidence and testimonies suggesting the opposite. Above them, Djindjic’s successors in his party and Serbian government, who had provided strong political support for the false official version, actively participating in establishing this, i.e. their version of Djindjic’s assassination.

These successors of Zoran Djindjic, it should be noted, are among the most pro-Western political forces in Serbia.

And this brings us to the, possibly, crucial aspect of the story. West’s involvement in the events preceding Djindjic’s assassination, as well as after it, in the establishment of the false official version, is profound.

Based on public documents, Serbian police and secret service documents, court testimonies, US diplomatic cables revealed by the WikiLeaks, we can be certain that:

– CIA’s agents in Hungary helped in arranging the protection of the crucial “protected witness” Ljubisa Buha Cume, former boss of Zemun criminal clan, who started the chain of events that led to Djindjic’s murder. British intelligence service also played its part in protecting this man, by arranging his transfer from Turkey to Slovakia when Zemun clan’s hitmen were after Buha.

– CIA had its agent inside the Zemun clan, Cedomir Mihajlovic (alias Igor Baruh). British service, according to court testimonies, also had the clan under the surveillance, and even had the information they were about to assassinate Djindjic – this according to Vladimir Popovic, former Djindjic’s associate with whom Djindjic parted in the fall of 2002.

– This man, Vladimir Popovic, who came to the government building exactly 5 minutes after Djindjic’s assassination and who can be regarded as the creator of the official version, was accused by former Serbian secret police chief Jovica Stanisic for being recruited by the British intelligence. Stanisic said this in the statement to the Serbian police when he was arrested. Popovic himself, in his court testimony, spoke about his contacts with British intelligence.

– UBPOK, Serbian police unit that conducted the investigation, was created shortly beforehand under the British auspice.

– Anthony Monckton, who was revealed as the MI6 agent in Serbia, also participated in the investigation, according to The Sunday Times and The Guardian.

– Special prosecutor Jovan Prijic, the author of the indictment based on the false official version, enjoyed political protection from then US ambassador in Belgrade Michael Polt, EU high representative Javier Solana and other Western diplomats, which was revealed when the government of Vojislav Kostunica tried to remove Prijic from the office. Eventually he was removed, however, on a condition to remain leading prosecutor in Djindjic’s case.

– US diplomatic cables, revealed by WikiLeaks, showed that US embassy in Belgrade, supervising the trial, was in constant contact with the presiding judge in Djindjic case, even consulting with him about who will, among Zemun clan members, become a protected witness, i.e. collaborator of the prosecution.

– Finally, German intelligence, during Djindjic’s lifetime, conducted a security check of his places of work and residence, which could mean that they knew exactly from which locations his life could be threatened. Their report was never presented to the Serbian authorities. Germans also officially participated in the investigation of Djindjic’s assassination.

And then, there is also Djindjic’s policy. Even though he was brought to power in Serbia with Western help, by the beginning of 2003, from being part of the solution when he was removing Slobodan Milosevic, he became part of the problem, endangering pax Americana in the Balkans by demanding Kosovo to remain part of Serbia and to immediately start negotiations on Kosovo’s final status, which was strongly opposed by both the US and the EU. He demanded Serbian police to return to Kosovo, according to the UN Security Council’s Resolution 1244. He threatened with the independence of Serbian republic in Bosnia in the case of Kosovo’s independence sponsored by Western powers. He refused to hand over the archives of Serbian police and army to The Hague Tribunal, refusing also to extradite Serbian generals which were about to be indicted by the Tribunal.

Before he was killed, Zoran Djindjic had been labeled as a “new Slobodan Milosevic” for his confronting the West.

After his death, this Djindjic’s policy of confronting the West was completely overturned by his successors, who made every attempt to make the public forget about Djindjic’s clash with the West prior to his assassination. Furthermore, Western engineering of Serbian political scene accelerated in the years following Djindjic’s death, eventually resulting in total consensus in Serbia’s parliament on country’s EU integrations.

Last, but not the least, after Djindjic’s death every party in Serbia held the power at some point. During this turmoil, everything could change but two things: Serbia continued to approach NATO – this also started after Djindjic’s assassination – and nobody dared to publicly question the official version of the murder of Zoran Djindjic. There must be a strong reason for this.

Breaking news: possible false flag in Moscow; opposition leader murdered

Reports are just beginning to come in on this story. Below is an article from the Saker. With the visit by Andriy Parubiy to Washington DC requesting arms, and media messages like this editorial in the Washington Post, the murder of Boris Nemtsov will be used as further “proof” against Russia in the fiction created by U.S. and NATO leadership.

From Vineyard of the Saker
February 27, 2015

Boris Nemtsov has been shot dead in Moscow.  He was one of the most charismatic leaders of the “liberal” or “democratic” “non-system” opposition in Russia (please understand that in the Russian context “liberal” and “democratic” means pro-US or even CIA-run, while “non-system” means too small to even get a single deputy in the Duma).  He was shot just a few days before the announced demonstration of the very same “liberal” or “democratic” “non-system” opposition scheduled for March 1st.

Nemtsov with Yushchenko

As I have already explained many times on this blog, the “liberal” or “democratic” “non-system” opposition in Russia has a popular support somewhere in the range of 5% (max). In other words, it is politically *dead* (for a detailed explanation, please read “From Napoleon to Adolf Hitler to Conchita Wurst“).  In the hopes of getting a higher number of people to the streets the “liberal” or “democratic” “non-system”opposition allied itself with the ultra-nationalists (usually useful idiots for the CIA) and the homosexual activists (also useful idiots for the CIA).  Apparently, this was not enough.

And now, in *perfect* timing, Nemtsov is murdered.

We all know the reaction of the AngloZionists and their propaganda machine.  It will be exactly the same as for MH-17: Putin the Murderer!!! Democracy Shot!! Freedom Killed!! etc. etc. etc. etc.

There is no doubt in my mind at all that either this is a fantastically unlikely but always possible case of really bad luck for Putin and Nemtsov was shot by some nutcase or mugged, or this was a absolutely prototypical western false flag: you take a spent politician who has no credibility left with anyone with an IQ over 70, and you turn him into an instant “martyr for freedom, democracy, human right and civilization”.

By the way if, as I believe, this is a false flag, I expect it to be a stunning success in the West and a total flop in Russia: by now, Russians already can smell that kind of setup a mile away and after MH-17 everybody was expecting a false flag.  So, if anything, it will only increase the hostility of Russians towards the West and rally them around Putin.  In the Empire, however, this will be huge, better than Politkovskaya or Litvinenko combined.  A “Nemtsov” prize will be created, a Nemtov statue will be place somewhere (in Warsaw?), the US Congress will pass a “Nemtsov law” and the usual combo package of “democratic hagiography” will be whipped-up.

What worries me most is that the Russian security services did not see this one coming and let it happen.  This is a major failure for the FSB which will now have a lot at stake to find out who did it.  I expect them to find a fall-guy, a patsy, who will have no provable contacts with any western services and who, ideally, might even have some contacts with the Russian services (like Andrei Lugovoi).

As for the “liberal” or “democratic” “non-system” – it will probably re-brand the upcoming protests as a “tribute to Nemtsov” thereby getting more people into the streets.

There are folks in Langley [CIA headquarters] tonight who got a promotion.

The Saker

ANNOUNCEMENT: Russian news site to pay expenses of foreign journalists, bloggers, to visit Donbass

Posted by the Saker, February 18, 2015

by Charles Bausman

I’m writing to let people know of an interesting opportunity.

A private Russian citizens’ initiative whose goal is to provide information about the Ukraine war not covered in the western media, is organizing a press tour to the Donbass and Moscow in the second half of March. The invitation is open to all journalists and bloggers, mainstream and alternative.

They are offering to cover all expenses in Russia, i.e. – accomodation in Moscow, transport to and from Donbass, and accomodation in Donbass. Participants would have to pay for their own transport to Moscow.

I am acquainted with the company organizing the tour, Europa Objectiv, and their CEO Andrei Stepanenko, and can confirm that they are a legitimate group and reliable people. They publish a German language news site providing news and analysis about what is going on in the Ukraine. Andrei asked me to share this information with our readership. Here is the announcement on their site in German.

They stress that they are a completely private initiative not funded by the Russian government, and from what I know about them, I believe this to be accurate, however, I should add the disclaimer that I cannot, obviously, confirm this absolutely.

There are a lot of these citizen initiatives in Russia, often organized by Russians frustrated with government policies they see as too hesitant, and many of them really are what they say they are. In the end analysis, I don’t think this is a critical issue. Participants should be aware that this group has a point of view they are trying to share, and factor that in to their reporting.

I think its a good opportunity for journalists with limited budgets, both alternative and mainstream, to have a chance to go to these regions and try to get to the truth.

I’m actually curious to see what the response will be, and curious to see what the ratio of mainstream to alternative journalists will be. Mainstream publications are also hampered by seriously slashed budgets. Lets see how many of them show an interest in this opportunity.

For those of you who sign up, the few of us from Russia Insider who are in Moscow would be delighted to meet you. We’ll also try to send someone on the tour.

Charles Bausman, Editor, Russia Insider

Full text of a letter from Europa Objectiv describing the tour follows below:


«Europa objektiv» (, being a non-government and non-commercial media project, offers the opportunity for journalists and bloggers to take part in the press tour in Donbas (Ukraine) and in Moscow (Russia).

The 5-day program assumes:

Stage 1 – Moscow (2 days)

– On the first day you will be able to meet with prominent Russian political scientists, experts on Ukraine, politicians, and hear their opinions on Ukraine crisis.

– On the second day you will be able to see the exclusive video footages, photo and audio recordings captured by Russian journalists since the beginning of the Ukraine crisis, which have never been broadcasted by the western mass media. Furthermore we’ll organize the meeting with the authors of these materials. You can freely use them to create your own materials.

Stage 2 – Donbas – (2 days, by request)

– we plan to meet with representatives of Donbas militia troops

– you will be able to talk to local citizens

– authorities of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic take over security issues and the possibility of maximum freedom of movement in Donetsk. As well as in Moscow “Europa Objektiv” will make video and audio recordings, these footages you can also use to create your own materials.

The aim of the press tour:

– to provide exclusive video and photo materials for alternative mass media in Europe

– to enable journalists to witness the truth about the events taking place in Donbas, to communicate with the victims of the war in the East Ukraine, to make your own decision about the reasons of the war in the contemporary Europe, to show the world community the facts, that are hidden by the mass media controlled by the current U.S. administration: the bloody revolution on the Maidan in Kiev, glorification and rebirth of the fascism in Ukraine, the reasons of the rebellion of the civil population in the East Ukraine.

In addition the opportunity to make your own journalistic materials, you will be able to take a part in the shooting of the collective documentary film (optional)

that is going to be spread among US and European mass media offices and on the Internet. The documentary will consist of 1.5-2 minutes reportages, that will be filmed by the participants of the press tour.


– Europa Objektiv provides accommodation in Moscow and in Donbas, and transport to and from Donbas. Participants will travel to Donbas by flying to Rostov (Russia), and then traveling by bus to Donetsk.

– All transport charges to Moscow to be paid by participants of the press tour.

Time constraints: approximately 16-22 or 23-29 of March. The dates could be discussed. Your desires will be taken into account.

Concerning participation in the press tour or

Western sanctions and Russian perceptions

From The Vineyard of the Saker
February 19, 2015

I parse the Russian media (corporate and social) on a daily basis and I am always amazed at the completely different way the issue of western sanctions is discussed.  I think that it is important and useful for me to share this with those of you who do not speak Russian.

First, nobody in Russia believes that the sanctions will be lifted.  Nobody.  Of course, all the Russian politicians say that sanctions are wrong and not conducive to progress, but these are statements for external consumption.  In interviews for the Russian media or on talk shows, there is a consensus that sanctions will never be lifted no matter what Russia does.

Second, nobody in Russia believes that sanctions are a reaction to Crimea or to the Russian involvement in the Donbass.  Nobody.  There is a consensus that the Russian policy towards Crimea and the Donbass are not a cause, but a pretext for the sanctions.  The real cause of the sanctions is unanimously identified as what the Russians called the “process of sovereignization”, i.e. the fact that Russia is back, powerful and rich, and that she dares openly defy and disobey the “Axis of Kindness”.

Third, there is a consensus in Russia that the correct response to the sanctions is double: a) an external realignment of the Russian economy away from the West and b) internal reforms which will make Russia less dependent on oil exports and on the imports of various goods and technologies.

Fourth, nobody blames Putin for the sanctions or for the resulting hardships.  Everybody fully understands that Putin is hated by the West not for doing something wrong, but for doing something right.  In fact, Putin’s popularity is still at an all-time high.

Fifth, there is a wide agreement that the current Russian vulnerability is the result of past structural mistakes which now must be corrected, but nobody suggests that the return of Crimea to Russia or the Russian support for Novorussia were wrong or wrongly executed.

Finally, I would note that while Russia is ready for war, there is no bellicose mood at all.  Most Russians believe that the US/NATO/EU don’t have what it takes to directly attack Russia, they believe that the junta in Kiev is doomed and they believe that sending the Russian tanks to Kiev (or even Novorussia) would have been a mistake.

The above is very important because if you consider all these factors you can come to an absolutely unavoidable conclusion: western sanctions have exactly zero chance of achieving any change at all in Russian foreign policy and exactly zero chance of weakening the current regime.  In fact, if anything, these sanctions strengthen the Eurasian Sovereignists by allowing them to blame all the pain of economic reforms on the sanctions and they weaken the Atlantic Integrationists by making any overt support for, or association with, the West a huge political liability.

But the Eurocretins in Brussels don’t care I suppose, as long as they feel relevant or important, even if it is only in their heads.

The Saker

News from the war in Ukraine

Here are links to some of the latest reports on the fighting in Ukraine: has been closely covering the situation with frequent updates.

Saker: End of 2014 report and a look at what 2015 might bring

By any measure 2014 has been a truly historic year which saw huge, I would say, even tectonic developments. This year ends in very high instability, and the future looks hard to guess. I don’t think that anybody can confidently predict what might happen next year. So what I propose to do today is something far more modest. I want to look into some of the key events of 2014 and think of them as vectors with a specific direction and magnitude. I want to look in which direction a number of key actors (countries) “moved” this year and with what degree of intensity. Then I want to see whether it is likely that they will change course or determination. Then adding up all the “vectors” of these key actors (countries) I want to make a calculation and see what resulting vector we will obtain for the next year. Considering the large number of “unknown unknowns” (to quote Rumsfeld) this exercise will not result in any kind of real prediction, but my hope is that it will prove a useful analytical reference.

The main event and the main actors
A comprehensive analysis of 2014 should include most major countries on the planet, but this would be too complicated and, ultimately, useless. I think that it is indisputable that the main event of 2014 has been the war in the Ukraine. This crisis not only overshadowed the still ongoing Anglo-Zionist attack on Syria, but it pitted the world’s only two nuclear superpowers (Russia and the USA) directly against each other. And while some faraway countries did have a minor impact on the Ukrainian crisis, especially the BRICS, I don’t think that a detailed discussion of South African or Brazilian politics would contribute much. There is a short list of key actors whose role warrants a full analysis. They are:

  1. The USA
  2. The Ukrainian Junta
  3. The Novorussians (DNR+LNR)
  4. Russia
  5. The EU
  6. NATO
  7. China

I submit that these seven actors account for 99.99% of the events in the Ukraine and that an analysis of the stance of each one of them is crucial.  So let’s take them one by one:

1 – The USA

Of all the actors in this crisis, the USA is by far the most consistent and coherent one.  Zbigniew Brzezinski, Hillary Clinton and Victoria Nuland were very clear about US objectives in the Ukraine:

Zbigniew Brzezinski: Without Ukraine Russia ceases to be empire, while with Ukraine – bought off first and subdued afterwards, it automatically turns into empire…(…)  the new world order under the hegemony of the United States is created against Russia and on the fragments of Russia. Ukraine is the Western outpost to prevent the recreation of the Soviet Union.

Hillary Clinton: There is a move to re-Sovietise the region (…) It’s not going to be called that. It’s going to be called a customs union, it will be called Eurasian Union and all of that, (…) But let’s make no mistake about it. We know what the goal is and we are trying to figure out effective ways to slow down or prevent it.

Victoria Nuland: F**k the EU!

Between the three, these senior US “deep-staters” have clearly and unambiguously defined the primary goal of the USA: to take control of the Ukraine to prevent Russia from becoming a new Soviet Union, regardless of what the EU might have to say about that.  Of course, there were other secondary goals which I listed in June of this year (see here):

As a reminder, what were the US goals in the Ukraine: (in no particular order) [Editor: I’ve substituted Saker’s colors for words]

  1. Sever the ties between Russia and the Ukraine [Still possible ]
  2. Put a russophobic NATO puppet regime in power in Kiev [Still possible ]
  3. Boot the Russians out of Crimea [Failed ]
  4. Turn Crimea into a unsinkable US/NATO aircraft carrier [Failed ]
  5. Create a Cold War v2 in Europe [Compromised ]
  6. Further devastate the EU economies [Still possible ]
  7. Secure the EU’s status as “US protectorate/colony” [Still possible ]
  8. Castrate once and for all EU foreign policies [Still possible ]
  9. Politically isolate Russia [Failed ]
  10. Maintain the worldwide dominance of the US dollar [Compromised ]
  11. Justify huge military/security budgets [Achieved ]

I have color-coded these objectives into the following categories:
Achieved – black 
Still possible – too early to call – blue
Compromised – pink
Failed – red

Current “score card”: 1 “achieved”, 5 “possible, 2 “compromised” and 3 “failed”.

Here is how I would re-score the same goals at the end of the year:

  1. Sever the ties between Russia and the Ukraine [Achieved ]
  2. Put a russophobic NATO puppet regime in power in Kiev [Achieved ]
  3. Boot the Russians out of Crimea [Failed ]
  4. Turn Crimea into a unsinkable US/NATO aircraft carrier [Failed ]
  5. Create a Cold War v2 in Europe [Still possible ]
  6. Further devastate the EU economies [Achieved ]
  7. Secure the EU’s status as “US protectorate/colony” [Achieved ]
  8. Castrate once and for all EU foreign policies [Achieved ]
  9. Politically isolate Russia [Failed ]
  10. Maintain the worldwide dominance of the US dollar [Compromised ]
  11. Justify huge military/security budgets [Achieved ]

New score card: 6 “achieved”, 1 “possible”, 1 “compromised” and 3 “failed”

At first glance, this is a clear success for the USA: from 1 achieved to 6 with the same number of “failed” is very good for such a short period of time.  However, a closer look will reveal something crucial: all the successes of the USA were achieved at the expense of the EU and none against Russia.  Not only that, but the USA has failed in its main goal: to prevent Russia from becoming a superpower, primarily because the US policy was based on a hugely mistaken assumption: that Russia needed the Ukraine to become a superpower again.  This monumental miscalculation also resulted in another very bad fact for the USA: the dollar is still very much threatened, more so than a year ago in fact.

This is so important that I will repeat it again: the AngloZionist Empire predicated its entire Ukrainian strategy on a completely wrong assumption: that Russia “needed” the Ukraine.  Russia does not, and she knows that.  As we shall see later, a lot of the key events of this year are a direct result of this huge miscalculation.

The US is now facing a paradox: “victory” in the Ukraine, “victory” in Europe, but failure to stop a rapidly rising Russia.  Worse, these “victories” came at a very high price which included creating tensions inside the EU, threatening the future of the US shale gas industry, alienating many countries at the UN, being deeply involved with a Nazi regime, becoming the prime suspect in the shooting down of MH17 and paying the costs for an artificially low price of gold.  But the single worst consequence of the US foreign policy in the Ukraine has been the establishment of a joint Russian-Chinese strategic alliance clearly directed against the United States (more about that later). Continue reading