-Caveat Lector- from: http://elint.server101.com/ <A HREF="http://elint.server101.com/">Elint : News with Intelligence </A> ----- 10 May 1999 U.S. secret agenda for the Balkans and Europe Yugoslavia enjoyed peace and growing prosperity since 1945. 1n 1967, when Yugoslavia was threatened by the Soviet Union, the US 6th Fleet cruised its coast as a protective force. In WW2, Tito was a staunch ally of the US and UK, as had been the Serbs in the previous world war. Since the days of Byzantium, the Christian Balkans have stood as a bulwark against invaders of Europe even when faced with overwhelming odds, such as invasion by the Ottoman Empire. How did these people recently become pariahs and their strategic position so unimportant that we would bomb them into evacuating their homeland? What agenda is at work that required the dismemberment of Yugoslavia? The change is recent: even as short a time ago as the late 1980s, when Russia was emerging from the Soviet Union, a secret meeting between the highest-ranking officers of the armed forces of Nato and Russia placed maintaining the security of Yugoslavia at the top of their agenda. With the objectives of the Nato and the Warsaw Pact redundant, these officers agreed a mutual interest - the protection of Europe from aggression arising from potentially hostile, Muslim states. The term "Europe" may be interpreted in a number of ways and one is "Christendom" - which may be seen as a shared religion, or set of values. It is these commonalties that link Moscow to Madrid, Athens to London and Oslo to Rome. When Islamic forces invaded Spain and France, it took some 600 years to liberate the region. Similarly, it took a combined European force to defeat the Ottoman invasion and lift the siege of Vienna; only this century were the Ottoman Turks in Europe pushed into the enclave around Constantinople and in this the Serbs played a major role. Christendom, or that area containing those who share the values of modern Europe, now extends to include Washington and Ottawa. Though these nations comprise peoples of many religions and races, they may be viewed as part of one, broad culture which is variously described as "the West", or "Western democracies." Whether or not it is proper to make this observation, there are those in senior positions throughout European governments and armed forces who do see themselves as part of this picture (the actions of Serbian sympathisers within Nato bears this out). One invasion route into Europe is from Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey), through the Balkans and into Eastern Europe. The Mongols considered this option and rejected it (choosing instead to invade Eastern Europe via Russia), whereas later, the Ottoman Turks succeeded in entering Europe through the Balkans. Geography dictates that it is in the strategic interest of Europe to safeguard the three invasion routes (via Spain and Russia being the two others). The disintegration of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the Warsaw Pact raised once again the potential threat to Europe along its south-eastern frontier. Various causes may be surmised for the rise of Fundamentalist Islam in recent decades and it may be coincidental that this period also saw the independence from the Soviet Union of its southern republics, some of which are Islamic. Taking advantage of this situation, Iran has struggled to achieve hegemony in the region and its main competitor is Turkey. The initial reaction of Russia and Nato was to see these turbulent and expansionist forces as a threat, though to Russia, the danger was more immediate. The governments of George Bush, Margaret Thatcher and Mikhail Gorbachev - and in particular senior officers within their armed forces - shared this concern and agreed that if any threat could exist now, or in the near future - it lay within the Islamic nations. There are various means by which this threat could manifest itself- terrorism, insurgency, rebellious immigrant groups, and missile attack from North Africa included - and land invasion is both traditional and the most dangererous. The USA, UK and Nato countries in general invested heavily in Russia, including retraining elements of the Russian armed forces in an attempt to shore up their south-eastern defences. One means by which I know this was effective is that during this period of the early 1990s I had meetings with a number of military officers from nations either bordering Russia, or nearby, who expressed considerable alarm at the new-found prowess of Russia's military machine. This state of unanimity of purpose was not to last. First, the leaderships of the USA, UK and Russia changed, as Bill Clinton, John Major and Boris Yelstin were elected. In the USA, the Democrats in general and Clinton's administration in particular, had a different set of concerns from both the Republicans and George Bush, Russia and Europe. Second, as the European Union grew bigger and stronger, the possibility of a European-based defence system - along the lines of the existing Western European Union (WEU) defence pact - that would replace Nato was increasing; collaterally to that, as the EU was becoming a serious economic rival to the USA, so the strategy of "divide and conquer" revealed itself. There are numerous divisions within Europe ready for exploitation. Elements within Germany remember with pride their people's leadership of the Holy Roman Empire, which extended into the Balkans. Some Italians similarly view the Balkans with ambition. And the bogeyman of Europe - Turkey - has been waiting in the wings for a grand entrance. Turkey is keen to enjoy the fruit it would harvest from joining the EU. The division between Turkey and Europe is more than either geographic, or economic, but also cultural: most Europeans do not see the Turks as European in origin, or culture. It could also be said that most Turks do not see themselves as European. Within this division of views and ambitions lay a potent lever with which the USA could - and would - use to weaken Europe. The Turks entered Europe from the steppes of Asia, via a stint as mercenaries for Persia. It took the Turks hundreds of years to succeed in their invasion and occupation of Asia Minor and in their doing so they destroyed Byzantium, the heir to the Eastern Roman Empire. The empire of the Ottoman Turks was dismembered largely in the 20th century by the Arab Revolt, the allies in WW1, and the liberation wars of Greece, Serbia and other nations within South East Europe. In WW2, the threat of Turkish invasion tied up 14 divisions of German troops in the Balkans. Greece still smarts from the more recent Turkish invasion of Cyprus. Now nominally a secular state, the forces of Fundamentalism swirl near the surface of Turkish society. This is reinforced by the nostalgia for the time when Turkey held sway over the Muslim world. There are also many Arabs who see their only realistic chance for equality (or superiority, or revenge) over Europe in the unity last found under Turkish rule. Turkey is a big stick for the USA to wave at Europe. The role Germany played in pulling Slovenia out of Yugoslavia is well known, as it the encouragement that Germany and Italy gave to Croatia. Italy has renewed its links with Albania (since being kicked out in WW2). During the Croatian conflict, the USA set up a covert base of operations on an Adriatic island, then quietly trained and equipped the Croatian army. Less well known is the assistance given by the USA to Turkey. I sat (as a guest) in an Greek military intelligence office in late 1992, watching a report come in of a Turkish merchant ship trying to break the UN blockade of Bosnia. On board were heavy weapons, including tanks and artillery. Meanwhile, as British and other Nato aircraft patrolled the Balkan airspace to enforce the arms embargo, the Turkish airforce was using Hercules transport aircraft to fly in weapons at night. The USA shipped F16s to Turkey, then provided them with the codes that would allow penetration of Nato airspace. Greece is caught in a cleft stick, knowing that helping Yugoslavia in an even-handed way (comparing Turkish support for its enemies) would result in a second invasion of Cyprus that would result in total Turkish occupation of that island. Germany and Italy are already compromised. Hungary is a new member of Nato and must show willing. Romania and Bulgaria await crumbs to fall from the EU table. Yugoslavia is isolated. The anticipated fallout from the secret US agenda for Europe includes having Turkey as a proxy for US interests in the Near East, with an influence across the southern Former Soviet Union (FSU) and the Middle East. Turkey has now an alliance with the other US proxy in the region - Israel. The human cost - Turkey crushing Kurdish hopes for autonomy - is negligible from the US point of view and meanwhile promotes the status quo, seen as stability for the region. This is a game of empires that the USA sees that it cannot lose. Kosovo repopulated by Muslims cannot be defended by Nato forever and will join up with Albania, which in turn will need development and military aid from Turkey. Turkey will then have more than the existing toe-hold in Europe, but a substantial presence. As an important player in EU affairs, Turkey will not have long to wait for a place at the top table, giving the US State Department another agent of influence within (weakened) European councils. However, just as Marxists saw history as inevitably on their side, so there are many opportunities for the US secret agenda to be derailed. Russia for instance, with the Ukraine and Belarus, is in an ideal position to commit itself to a conflict in defence of Yugoslavia - Russian poverty playing a factor. This would invite us to a millennium party of a kind no sane person would choose to attend. Any widening of the conflict would be likely to trigger direct and open Turkish military intervention within Europe. During the Bosnian conflict, one of my contacts in the Turkish military who was based in London was recalled to command a cavalry brigade on the Bulgarian border. It was clear that Turkey was prepared to invade on behalf of European Muslims. The Supreme Allied Commander of Nato is always American, a reflection of the fact that Nato is an extension of US, rather than European policy. The WEU is available to Europe as an alternative to Nato and has never been fully activated; the EU has yet to co-ordinate either foreign policy, or its extension - military forces. No European alternative to US policy is easily, or quickly available. A widening of the Balkans conflict would bring about an intriguing spectacle, of European forces fighting European forces on behalf of outside forces operating against European interests. Already, serving military officers in Nato armed services have expressed grave doubts as to the wisdom of the present course and there are at least two cases of Nato officers assisting the Yugoslav cause. There are many voices of political opposition to the current agenda; they cross the spectrum of parties and Nato nations. It is commonly agreed by independent commentators that bombing alone is most unlikely to achieve Nato goals and when that is taken aboard by those promoting the war, the opportunity will arise to revise the agenda. At that point, which way will they drag us, the public? It must be doubted that today's Europe, interconnected and interdependent, would survive another internecine bloodletting. The alternative demands a rejection of US leadership and a commitment to a unity that Europe has not enjoyed for many years. The challenge is daunting. ENDS ----- Aloha, He'Ping, Om, Shalom, Salaam. Em Hotep, Peace Be, Omnia Bona Bonis, All My Relations. Adieu, Adios, Aloha. Amen. Roads End Kris DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
