Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Draza Mihailovic

Subpages

 * 1) JJG's Draft 2010-06-10
 * 2) Combined sections, 1st draft

Groundrules
The following groundrules have worked in other mediations to ensure that participants have a basis for collaboration. Note that you do not have to like each other, or even always see things the same way. The basis for the groundrules is respectful listening and problem-solving. We can customize these rules if we need to. But I suggest we try them. Sunray (talk) 21:02, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Focus on content rather than the contributor. Note: This is to be interpreted literally, as worded.
 * Be guided by WP content policies, particularly WP:V and WP:NPOV
 * Commit to being as economical as possible in posts to this discussion page.
 * Work towards consensus in editorial decisions.

Participants are requested to sign below with ~
 * I agree to follow these groundrules


 * 1) Agree.--Свифт (talk) 22:06, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Agree, --Nuujinn (talk) 01:46, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Agree. BoDu (talk) 17:13, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) Agree, FkpCascais (talk) 01:46, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Final draft of end of war, trial and execution
I've removed the editing marks of the section on "last days." It is posted here for final review before combining with other sections. Any final comments, or suggested changes? Discussion section is below. Next we can either look at the whole combined draft (along with sections of JJG's draft not yet included), or pick another section to finalize. Sunray (talk) 20:20, 9 May 2011 (UTC)



Continued fighting and capture
Mihailović travelled north with a group of several dozen Chetniks. In the village of Bulozi, near Goražde, on the night of 23 May 1945 Mihailović's son Vojislav was killed. During the next several days, Mihailović traveled toward the Drina River, with a group of 22 Chetniks, divided into several units for easy movement. Mihailović then crossed the river Drina, and remained in the vicinity of Krupanj and Bajina Bašta for some time, before returning to Višegrad. In February 1946, Mihailović fell ill of typhus fever. He was captured in a foxhold near Višegrad on 13 March 1946, when his hiding place was revealed by one of his chief lieutenants, Nikola Kalabić, either accidently or exchange for leniency. In his keynote address at the National Assembly, the Interior Minister of the Federal People Republic of Yugoslavia, Aleksandar Ranković, announced on 24 March 1946 that Mihailović had been detained in a communist prison. Ranković reported from Belgrade to Josip Broz, who was in Warsaw at the Cominform meeting, that Mihailović had been caught. Broz then phoned Joseph Stalin to report this important news. The news of Mihailović's arrest spread quickly, but there were differing interpretations of its significance, ranging from great enthusiasm in the communist East to skepticism and resentment in the democratic republic of the West.

The court process
The trial of General Mihailović was held from 10 June to 15  July 1946. Mihailović was tried with others in a group, including Slobodan Jovanović, Božidar Purić, Stevan Moljević, Mladen Mujović, Živko Topalović, Milan Gavrilović, Momčilo Ninčić, Živan Knezevic, Radoje Knežević, Konstantin Fotić, Đuro Vilović, Radoslav Radić, Slavoljub Vranješević, Milos Glišić, Petar Živković, Dragomir Jovanović, Tanasije Dinić, Velibor Jonić, Đuro Djokić, Kosta Mušicki, Boško Pavlović, Lazar Marković and Kosta Kumanudi.

The judges were Mihailo Đorđević (President of the Military Court), Milija Laković, Mihailo Janković, Nikola Stanković and Radomir Ilić. Todor Popadić served as Secretary. The prosecutor was Miloš Minić, who was helped by Miloš Jovanović. All were members of the Communist Party and had fought with the partisans during the war. In his closing argument Mihailović said:

I found myself in a whirlwind of events and policy ... Yet I stayed only a soldier. I am convinced that I was on the right track and I called all foreign correspondents, and even a mission of the Red Army to come to my Headquarters. Fate was merciless with me, cast me in such a cruel storm, the worst possible that could befall a man. (I strove for much, I undertook much, but the storm (galas) of the world have carried away both me and my work). I wanted so much, a lot of that I have started, but the gale of the world carried away me and my work.

The Allied airmen he had rescued in 1944 were not allowed to testify in his favor.

Of the 47 charges laid by Miloš Minić on 10 June 1946 in Belgrade, Mihailović was convicted on eight counts. The first was:

Is guilty because in that since the beginning of the second half of 1941, and for all time of war and enemy occupation, he led the organized armed formations of Chetniks known as "Mihailovic's Chetniks" and the so called Yugoslav Army in the Homeland, sought armed action and terror in cooperation with the occupying forces to support the occupation and suppress an armed uprising and freedom fight of the Serbian and other peoples of Yugoslavia.

On 15 July 1946, Mihailović was sentenced to death, permanent loss of political and civil rights and confiscation of all assets. His son and daughter had denounced Mihailović as a traitor and joined the Partisans earlier during the war, and his wife was the only member of his immediate family to visit him during his confinement prior to execution. Roberts asserts that the trial was "anything but a model of justice" and that "it is clear that Mihailović was not guilty of all, or even many, of the charges brought against him" although he notes that Tito would likely not have had a fair trial had positions been reversed. Mihailović was convicted of high treason and war crimes, and executed of July 17th, 1946 along with nine other officers in Lisičiji Potok, about 200 meters from the former Royal Palace. His body was reportedly covered with lime and the location of his unmarked grave was kept secret. Execution was carried out two days later, on 17 July 1946, at an unknown place. To this date, the location of the grave is unknown.

Discussion
This section obviously completes the sections on World War II and precedes the "Legacy" section. I will leave it here for a couple of days for a last look and then it should be combined in the "Combined draft" (see "Subpages." above). One possibility for a next step would be to add the combined draft to JJG's draft and then edit the whole shebang. If we get some energy working on this, we could have a re-vamped article up fairly soon. 00:07, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Moving toward closure
Not everything works as one might wish, but this mediation has actually made a great deal of progress, in my opinion. There is some more work to be done to bring this phase to a close. Following that we will resume work on the article page and [I hope civil] discussions on the article talk page. I would like to hear from participants who have constructive suggestions about what we need to do to get closure on the mediation talk page. Participants are requested to sign the groundrules, if they haven't already, in order to take part in the further discussions. Sunray (talk) 16:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: I've archived recent posts by DIREKTOR (Archive 21). I've done that for two reasons:
 * He has been topic banned and has chosen not to participate in the mediation for now.
 * I want participants to have a clean slate to decide how they want to wrap this up. To do that we have to stay on topic, i.e., focussing on the "issues to be mediated" and constructive comments about getting closure on the mediation.
 * My response to DIREKTOR can be found on his talk page. Sunray (talk) 19:46, 4 May 2011 (UTC)


 * My take is that we have a reasonable starting point for discussion, perhaps we could talk about one section at a time? The other thing I think we'll need to do is rely more on outside groups such as RSN and NOR noticeboards to get opinions regarding appropriate weights and sources. --Nuujinn (talk) 23:14, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Personally, I lost interest long ago in this mediation. IMHO, it should already have been closed down. As for the topic, I think the edited draft should be now used to rewrite the article. I should have done this many months ago (since last september actually). This may now be the time to do some serious work on the topic again, so we can hope to have a decent article on the subject (almost everything about Yugoslavia should be checked and rewritten, IMHO and as far as I could tell). Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 14:08, 7 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I think that these are both valid points of view. Nuujinn states that we have the draft sections as a starting point and suggests that we could talk about one section at a time. Jean-Jacques states that he lost interest some time ago, but agrees that it may now be time to do some serious work on the topic. The common interest that they share is producing a better article. Let's see if others care to add comments and then we can agree on the best course of action. Sunray (talk) 18:38, 8 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I have been putting sources "on papper" as promised, they are here. It will take me a few days, and there are still some books I would like to see if I can find an internet open edition. I am not planning to add all I have been writing there, but rather as general ideas, including obviously the fact that they can be usefull for sourcing. I am very happy JJG and Nuujinn are present, and I welcome any methodology of work they suggest as suitable for them. FkpCascais (talk) 19:16, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for compiling those sources and citations. They should be useful for finalizing the article. Sunray (talk) 06:04, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't see much energy to do further work on the combined draft. So, I think we should use what we have: JJG's original draft and the combined draft (as far as it goes). Can we meld the two together, using the combined draft for the sections it covers and JJG's original draft as the default for those sections the combined draft does not cover? Sunray (talk) 14:51, 13 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I think that approach makes sense, as it uses what progress we have made. My time has been short here of late, but it looks like a rainy weekend coming up, so I can devote some cycles the next couple of days. If folks like, I can go a gross cut and paste and we can from there. --Nuujinn (talk) 21:31, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem, I think that's what makes more sense. That's also what I personnally planned to do, although my time has been short too. I might work on it next week. I may add that, IMHO, the general atmosphere on this mediation has probably disgusted many users from contributing (at least, that was my case) and caused us to waste many months. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 09:10, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, no disagreement on that. We are all busy, so, time permitting, all that remains is to pull the two draft drafts together. Then we can poll the other participants for a "last look" and move it over. Sunray (talk) 21:40, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I started last night by moving parts of JJG's draft into the working draft we did here. It's a crude merge, I'll be able to put some time in tonight to clean up the references. For clarity's sake, I am not editing content for anything but style, since I know we'll have content issues to discuss. I would also suggest that we all take a deep cleansing breath and forget the past and try to start anew.... --Nuujinn (talk) 22:07, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Will you put it all in one page? FkpCascais (talk) 22:38, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe I have. --Nuujinn (talk) 10:30, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, great. Thanks. FkpCascais (talk) 16:55, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Nuujinn: I like your suggestion to "take a deep cleansing breath... and start anew." I will help out as best I can. Sunray (talk) 18:54, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I think the best tack to take at this point is to move the draft we have in to replace the current article, and I think it's the better version of the two. I am not happy with the quality of either, but we need to move forward. If no one objects, I'll proceed in a couple of days. --Nuujinn (talk) 11:05, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I noted that you did some further work on the combined draft. Is there anything more from JJG's original draft that should be added? Let's assemble the combined draft here for a final look and then move it into the article. I would like to poll participants one last time. Then we should add a note on the article talk page explaining that the new draft is the result of the mediation. Does that make sense? Sunray (talk) 06:09, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * [Moved private vendetta between two editors]. Sunray (talk) 03:29, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Restoration of case pages
In relation to a recent enquiry on my talk page, this message is to inform the participants in this mediation case that the histories of the case pages, which are currently hidden to preserve the privileged nature of mediation, will be undeleted tomorrow - absent further developments. The undeletion is pending the conclusion of private deliberations by the Mediation Committee on matters concerning this dispute. Thank you for your continued patience. For the Mediation Committee, AGK  [&bull; ] 23:32, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Now restored. For the Mediation Committee, AGK  [&bull; ] 11:33, 14 June 2011 (UTC)