HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK ---------------------------If you can stomach this crap read on...
In a message dated 26/01/02 10:13:54 Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Subj:Some notes on NATOResolution of Partija Rada on the NATO Pact and Its Presence In Yugoslavia
Date:26/01/02 10:13:54 Eastern Standard Time
From:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent from the Internet
Troops of the NATO pact, together with its political headquarters, are on the territory of Yugoslavia, stationed in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Macedonia.
The American imperialists in co-operation with the imperialists of Western Europe created the NATO pact in 1947. Worried over the great victories of the Soviet Union, the creation of the socialist camp, the victory of the Red Army in China, and the mighty anti-colonial and anti-imperialist movement in countries of the Third world, they created the NATO pact as an aggressive military pact against the Soviet Union, China, and the liberation movements in the colonies. From the very beginning of its creation it was formed as a striking military fist to conquer the Soviet Union and other socialist countries, and to restore capitalism there. The direct interventions of NATO in Vietnam, Latin America and Africa are well known.
At the end of the eighties, the Soviet Union fell apart, the Warsaw pact was dissolved, and the countries in the framework of the Soviet Union, as well as the countries of Eastern Europe, liquidated socialism and proceeded to restore capitalism.
When the main adversary of the NATO pact - the Warsaw pact - disappeared, it would seem normal that the NATO pact would be dissolved. Instead, the NATO pact was strengthened, it was armed with new, most perfect weapons, and the military budgets of members of the NATO pact have grown. Using economic, diplomatic, political, and military pressure, it does everything to expand itself, not only to all countries of Eastern Europe, but also to all countries of the former Soviet Union, and thus to reach the borders of Russia. Its aim is thus to completely isolate Russia, force her to her knees, so that she and the other countries of the former Soviet Union would become some kind of semi-colonies, with undisturbed use their huge natural resources, the abundance of cheap labor power and vast market. It is obvious that the NATO pact is still an aggressive military force of imperialism, which does everything, not only by economic and financial means, but also by the military force of NATO, to insure the reign of imperialism in the whole world.
The NATO pact is a reactionary military force of American imperialism, the most dangerous enemy of socialism and of the peoples in the countries of the Third World.
Why did troops of the NATO pact come to Yugoslavia?
The USA and the NATO pact remain, after the destruction of the Soviet Union, the only superpower, the only global force in the world. One of the strategic aims of the USA and the NATO pact is not to allow events in the world to escape their control and start to develop without their influence and against them. They quietly watched several years of war in Slovenia, Croatia and especially in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and did not find the need to intervene. But they concluded that the continuation of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina would unavoidably lead to its spreading to Kosova, Macedonia, and the whole Balkans, and that Turkey and Greece, two important members of NATO, would join this war on opposite sides. The NATO pact then decided to send its troops to stop the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. They forced Milosevic and Tudjman to sign the Dayton agreement.
One other element seriously influenced them to speed up the implementation of the Dayton agreement and also to solve the question of Kosova and make possible a longer and stable peace in the Balkans. That was caused the possibility that soon Turkey would "explode," and with her the whole Middle East, so that they would eventually find themselves at war with the whole Moslem world which now numbers one billion one hundred million people.
What is the position of Partija Rada toward the presence of NATO on the
territory of Yugoslavia?
Partija Rada considers that this must be considered unemotionally and that one must determine whether in this situation the presence of NATO is good or bad for the peoples of Yugoslavia. Mostly because in history there have been cases when the interests of the imperialists, if there was a common enemy, may be identical to the interests of the people. That happened during World War 2 when the Soviet Union signed a pact with the two largest Imperialist powers of that time - the USA and England - because of the joint fight against the common enemy - Hitler's Germany.
In Yugoslavia, unfortunately, nationalism has gripped wide masses. The Great-Serb and Great-Croat chauvinists, indeed, with their policy of war, have endangered the global interests of the USA and NATO, which provoked the arrival of NATO in Yugoslavia. It is a fact that in Yugoslavia, because of widespread nationalist consciousness, forces could not be organized to oppose the dangerous, chauvinist policy of Milosevic and Tudjman. It is a fact that if NATO troops had not arrived and had not stopped the war by the force of arms, probably this year there would be another hundred thousand deaths, further destruction and new crimes.
The very act of stopping the war was positive. The effort to implement the Dayton agreement, to provide a united Bosnia and Herzegovina, for all refugees to return to their homes, and to convict all war criminals, PR considers as in the interest of the people of Yugoslavia. The implementation of the Dayton agreement and the solution of the question of Kosova will strike a final blow to the Great-Serb policy of war of conquest, and also to nationalism in Yugoslavia, which was its main basis in that policy. That is why PR in this and similar situations for now is not against the presence of NATO, because at this moment it is in the interest of the people of Yugoslavia.
But if, after the establishment of peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the solution of these basic problems, NATO troops remain in Yugoslavia, Partija rada would consider them as occupiers, which they really would be. Then PR, as a genuine patriotic party, would organize a political and other fight against the presence of NATO, up to an armed fight for the liberation of the country from the occupiers.
"Program and Statute of Partija rada"
Belgrade 1997.
*
* *
We are reprinting the resolution of Partija Rada below because overall it takes a correct position on the national question. There is no other party or organization in Yugoslavia that we know of that upholds the right to self-determination of the various nations there. That country has been torn by wars between the different nationalities, especially (but not only) in the last 10 years. Marxist-Leninists have long recognized the right to self-determination as the only democratic solution to the national question, a solution which can only help the development of the class struggle. We support the right to self-determination not because we are in favour of small states, but because we know that genuine unity can only be based on equality.
However, we cannot reprint this resolution without adding some strong criticism. Although it was written in 1997, two years before NATO’s barbaric attack on Yugoslavia, the resolution already showed clear signs of a serious misevaluation of the role of imperialism. For example, it states that ‘the intervention of the USA and Western powers… became a factor in the solution, not only of the question of Bosnia and Herzegovina… but also of Kosova and Montenegro.’
It should be clear to all anti-imperialists, and especially to Marxist-Leninists, that imperialism cannot be a positive factor in the solution of the national question. The imperialist intervention in Yugoslavia is solely for their own interests - to keep Yugoslavia under their total domination while they contend with each other over spheres of influence there. In particular, their 78-day war of bombardment, which caused so much misery to all the peoples of Yugoslavia, was certainly not intended to help the Kosovar Albanians, despite the hypocritical claims of the imperialists. Kosova, far from having gained its right to self-determination, has been turned into a virtual protectorate of NATO.
It will certainly be asked by some forces, given these criticisms, and the current situation in Yugoslavia - why reprint the resolution at all? There are two reasons. First, because the right to self-determination is crucial in multi-national Yugoslavia, for if Yugoslavia had recognized this right it would not only have deprived the imperialists of their excuse to intervene, but could have led to a united confrontation of all the nations of Yugoslavia with imperialism. And second, because the errors of Partija Rada are of a different nature than similar errors of organizations in imperialist countries. For groups in the U.S., Britain, France, Germany or Canada, any position other than a clear-cut denunciation of NATO’s role could be seen as, and would actually be, a form of conciliation with imperialism.
However, for an organization within Yugoslavia such as Partija Rada, their error does not stem from conciliation with imperialism, but from localism. Partija Rada sees its own local ruling class, at the time of the resolution, led by Milosevic, as representing the main enemy regardless of circumstance. It has taken a forthright stance against great-nation chauvinism, and in particular against Serb chauvinism, and sees this as the key question, again regardless of circumstance. Partija Rada’s error stems from always directing its main fight against its own local ruling class, not of conciliating with it.
However, their error is still a serious one. A comrade once correctly compared the situation in Yugoslavia to that of the Aztec empire at the time of the Spanish conquest. The Aztecs at that time actually oppressed many other people of what is now Mexico, particularly the Tlaxcalans. Cortez, the Spanish conqueror, made an alliance with the Tlaxcalans, which helped him defeat the Aztecs. Of course, the result was not freedom for the Tlaxcalans, but some 300 years of Spanish domination over all the peoples of Mexico. If we do not see that the main enemy in Yugoslavia today is imperialism and its local allies, then we will be looking at the world from the position of the Tlaxcalans.
George Gruenthal
"Revolutionary Democracy"
*
* *
The resolutions of Partija Rada on the national question and on the presence of NATO forces in former Yugoslavia have caused much criticism and dispute. Although these resolutions were written in 1997, they are still relevant today because of the position which one Marxist-Leninist party took in historical conditions that were full of contradictions.
We may distinguish a few positions on the war in former Yugoslavia, and on solving the national question, by parties which call themselves Marxist-Leninist.
The first position came from those parties which call themselves Marxist-Leninist, but which are essentially very nationalist, and some of them Orthodox-fundamentalist. All of these parties openly supported the regime of Slobodan Milosevic; they were his tool which the regime supported in certain activities. These parties are mainly from countries of the so-called Orthodox region.
The second position came from parties which think that anybody who opposes imperialism deserves support. That is why these parties agreed to participate in many gatherings for the ''unification of progressive forces'' to resist imperialism, organized by the Belgrade regime.
The third position came from those parties which made a correct evaluation of Slobodan Milosevic's regime, but believed that at the time of NATO's aggression against Yugoslavia, any position other than a condemnation of the aggression was a form of reconciliation with imperialism.
The fourth position agreed with the attitude of PR on the national question but was of the opinion that PR made serious mistakes because, instead of struggling against imperialism, it made its main goal the struggle against local-imperialism.
It is normal that there are positions on the national question and the presence of NATO forces in Yugoslavia that are similar to those of PR.
We recall that the essence of the criticism of PR's attitude was in the assertion "that the intervention of imperialism was in the interest of the Yugoslav peoples." The criticisms, here we emphasize the criticism of George Gruenthal published in Revolutionary Democracy, come from the understanding that imperialism can never play a progressive role, and that imperialism intervened in the Balkans for its own interests, and not to protect human rights, which was just an excuse for intervention.
PR in defense of its resolutions emphasizes:
Local-imperialism broke up Yugoslavia as a single entity. With that act it weakened the defensive power of the country, and facilitated the entry of NATO forces into Bosnia and Herzegovina and into Kosova.
In the area of former Yugoslavia there was no organized political and military force which could successfully oppose the military force of Slobodan Milosevic, and the full domination of nationalist ideology. There was a real threat of extermination of some nationalities. In such circumstances, the Bosnian and Albanian peoples were forced to begin armed struggle, although they were weaker militarily. That is why the Bosnian and Albanian peoples, as the most endangered, welcomed the NATO forces as liberators.
Local-imperialism, as an oppressor of other nations, could not play a role as the unifier of those nations for the struggle against imperialism. Milosevic’s local-imperialism did not even try to do that when his interests were in opposition to those of imperialism; he continued to suppress the Albanian population to achieve his goals.
The local-imperialist regime in Belgrade, because of its character, which was shown to be an open dictatorship, and which continued to rob its own people, did not have the support of its people for real resistance to imperialism.
With the crushing of local-imperialism (concretely the regimes in Belgrade and Zagreb), the obstacles to unification of the Balkans peoples were removed, as well as the obstacles to their unification in anti-imperialist struggle.
The relation between the imperialists and the puppet regimes in crushing any resistance to their policy, has created conditions for the rise of the anti-imperialist struggle in the Balkans to a higher level.
PR never denied that imperialism intervened in the Balkans for its own goals; quite the contrary. Also, PR did not claim that imperialism was a positive factor, but only that imperialism in that concrete situation was a factor in resolving the problem. That was due to the fact that it stopped the reactionary war, crushed the local-imperialisms and prevented the persecution and extermination of some nations. This role of imperialism in resolving the problem in the sense of stopping the war does not mean that it will solve the national question in the Balkans. Its oppressor role in new historical circumstances will bring all the Balkans peoples closer in unified struggle against imperialism. After all, PR in its resolution on the presence of NATO forces in former Yugoslavia concluded with the support for resistance to NATO as an occupying force.
Central Committee of Partija Rada
Belgrade, January 15th, 2002.
--------------------------- ANTI-NATO INFORMATION LIST
==^================================================================ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.a9WB2D Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================
--- Begin Message ------ End Message ---
Resolution of Partija Rada on the NATO Pact and Its Presence In Yugoslavia
Troops of the NATO pact, together with its political headquarters, are on the territory of Yugoslavia, stationed in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Macedonia.
The American imperialists in co-operation with the imperialists of Western Europe created the NATO pact in 1947. Worried over the great victories of the Soviet Union, the creation of the socialist camp, the victory of the Red Army in China, and the mighty anti-colonial and anti-imperialist movement in countries of the Third world, they created the NATO pact as an aggressive military pact against the Soviet Union, China, and the liberation movements in the colonies. From the very beginning of its creation it was formed as a striking military fist to conquer the Soviet Union and other socialist countries, and to restore capitalism there. The direct interventions of NATO in Vietnam, Latin America and Africa are well known.
At the end of the eighties, the Soviet Union fell apart, the Warsaw pact was dissolved, and the countries in the framework of the Soviet Union, as well as the countries of Eastern Europe, liquidated socialism and proceeded to restore capitalism.
When the main adversary of the NATO pact - the Warsaw pact - disappeared, it would seem normal that the NATO pact would be dissolved. Instead, the NATO pact was strengthened, it was armed with new, most perfect weapons, and the military budgets of members of the NATO pact have grown. Using economic, diplomatic, political, and military pressure, it does everything to expand itself, not only to all countries of Eastern Europe, but also to all countries of the former Soviet Union, and thus to reach the borders of Russia. Its aim is thus to completely isolate Russia, force her to her knees, so that she and the other countries of the former Soviet Union would become some kind of semi-colonies, with undisturbed use their huge natural resources, the abundance of cheap labor power and vast market. It is obvious that the NATO pact is still an aggressive military force of imperialism, which does everything, not only by economic and financial means, but also by the military force of NATO, to insure the reign of imperialism in the whole world.
The NATO pact is a reactionary military force of American imperialism, the most dangerous enemy of socialism and of the peoples in the countries of the Third World.
Why did troops of the NATO pact come to Yugoslavia?
The USA and the NATO pact remain, after the destruction of the Soviet Union, the only superpower, the only global force in the world. One of the strategic aims of the USA and the NATO pact is not to allow events in the world to escape their control and start to develop without their influence and against them. They quietly watched several years of war in Slovenia, Croatia and especially in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and did not find the need to intervene. But they concluded that the continuation of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina would unavoidably lead to its spreading to Kosova, Macedonia, and the whole Balkans, and that Turkey and Greece, two important members of NATO, would join this war on opposite sides. The NATO pact then decided to send its troops to stop the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. They forced Milosevic and Tudjman to sign the Dayton agreement.
One other element seriously influenced them to speed up the implementation of the Dayton agreement and also to solve the question of Kosova and make possible a longer and stable peace in the Balkans. That was caused the possibility that soon Turkey would "explode," and with her the whole Middle East, so that they would eventually find themselves at war with the whole Moslem world which now numbers one billion one hundred million people.
What is the position of Partija Rada toward the presence of NATO on the
territory of Yugoslavia?Partija Rada considers that this must be considered unemotionally and that one must determine whether in this situation the presence of NATO is good or bad for the peoples of Yugoslavia. Mostly because in history there have been cases when the interests of the imperialists, if there was a common enemy, may be identical to the interests of the people. That happened during World War 2 when the Soviet Union signed a pact with the two largest Imperialist powers of that time - the USA and England - because of the joint fight against the common enemy - Hitler's Germany.
In Yugoslavia, unfortunately, nationalism has gripped wide masses. The Great-Serb and Great-Croat chauvinists, indeed, with their policy of war, have endangered the global interests of the USA and NATO, which provoked the arrival of NATO in Yugoslavia. It is a fact that in Yugoslavia, because of widespread nationalist consciousness, forces could not be organized to oppose the dangerous, chauvinist policy of Milosevic and Tudjman. It is a fact that if NATO troops had not arrived and had not stopped the war by the force of arms, probably this year there would be another hundred thousand deaths, further destruction and new crimes.
The very act of stopping the war was positive. The effort to implement the Dayton agreement, to provide a united Bosnia and Herzegovina, for all refugees to return to their homes, and to convict all war criminals, PR considers as in the interest of the people of Yugoslavia. The implementation of the Dayton agreement and the solution of the question of Kosova will strike a final blow to the Great-Serb policy of war of conquest, and also to nationalism in Yugoslavia, which was its main basis in that policy. That is why PR in this and similar situations for now is not against the presence of NATO, because at this moment it is in the interest of the people of Yugoslavia.
But if, after the establishment of peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the solution of these basic problems, NATO troops remain in Yugoslavia, Partija rada would consider them as occupiers, which they really would be. Then PR, as a genuine patriotic party, would organize a political and other fight against the presence of NATO, up to an armed fight for the liberation of the country from the occupiers.
"Program and Statute of Partija rada"
Belgrade 1997.
*
* *
We are reprinting the resolution of Partija Rada below because overall it takes a correct position on the national question. There is no other party or organization in Yugoslavia that we know of that upholds the right to self-determination of the various nations there. That country has been torn by wars between the different nationalities, especially (but not only) in the last 10 years. Marxist-Leninists have long recognized the right to self-determination as the only democratic solution to the national question, a solution which can only help the development of the class struggle. We support the right to self-determination not because we are in favour of small states, but because we know that genuine unity can only be based on equality.
However, we cannot reprint this resolution without adding some strong criticism. Although it was written in 1997, two years before NATO’s barbaric attack on Yugoslavia, the resolution already showed clear signs of a serious misevaluation of the role of imperialism. For example, it states that ‘the intervention of the USA and Western powers… became a factor in the solution, not only of the question of Bosnia and Herzegovina… but also of Kosova and Montenegro.’
It should be clear to all anti-imperialists, and especially to Marxist-Leninists, that imperialism cannot be a positive factor in the solution of the national question. The imperialist intervention in Yugoslavia is solely for their own interests - to keep Yugoslavia under their total domination while they contend with each other over spheres of influence there. In particular, their 78-day war of bombardment, which caused so much misery to all the peoples of Yugoslavia, was certainly not intended to help the Kosovar Albanians, despite the hypocritical claims of the imperialists. Kosova, far from having gained its right to self-determination, has been turned into a virtual protectorate of NATO.
It will certainly be asked by some forces, given these criticisms, and the current situation in Yugoslavia - why reprint the resolution at all? There are two reasons. First, because the right to self-determination is crucial in multi-national Yugoslavia, for if Yugoslavia had recognized this right it would not only have deprived the imperialists of their excuse to intervene, but could have led to a united confrontation of all the nations of Yugoslavia with imperialism. And second, because the errors of Partija Rada are of a different nature than similar errors of organizations in imperialist countries. For groups in the U.S., Britain, France, Germany or Canada, any position other than a clear-cut denunciation of NATO’s role could be seen as, and would actually be, a form of conciliation with imperialism.
However, for an organization within Yugoslavia such as Partija Rada, their error does not stem from conciliation with imperialism, but from localism. Partija Rada sees its own local ruling class, at the time of the resolution, led by Milosevic, as representing the main enemy regardless of circumstance. It has taken a forthright stance against great-nation chauvinism, and in particular against Serb chauvinism, and sees this as the key question, again regardless of circumstance. Partija Rada’s error stems from always directing its main fight against its own local ruling class, not of conciliating with it.
However, their error is still a serious one. A comrade once correctly compared the situation in Yugoslavia to that of the Aztec empire at the time of the Spanish conquest. The Aztecs at that time actually oppressed many other people of what is now Mexico, particularly the Tlaxcalans. Cortez, the Spanish conqueror, made an alliance with the Tlaxcalans, which helped him defeat the Aztecs. Of course, the result was not freedom for the Tlaxcalans, but some 300 years of Spanish domination over all the peoples of Mexico. If we do not see that the main enemy in Yugoslavia today is imperialism and its local allies, then we will be looking at the world from the position of the Tlaxcalans.
George Gruenthal
"Revolutionary Democracy"
*
* *
OUR RESPONSE
The resolutions of Partija Rada on the national question and on the presence of NATO forces in former Yugoslavia have caused much criticism and dispute. Although these resolutions were written in 1997, they are still relevant today because of the position which one Marxist-Leninist party took in historical conditions that were full of contradictions.
We may distinguish a few positions on the war in former Yugoslavia, and on solving the national question, by parties which call themselves Marxist-Leninist.
The first position came from those parties which call themselves Marxist-Leninist, but which are essentially very nationalist, and some of them Orthodox-fundamentalist. All of these parties openly supported the regime of Slobodan Milosevic; they were his tool which the regime supported in certain activities. These parties are mainly from countries of the so-called Orthodox region.
The second position came from parties which think that anybody who opposes imperialism deserves support. That is why these parties agreed to participate in many gatherings for the ''unification of progressive forces'' to resist imperialism, organized by the Belgrade regime.
The third position came from those parties which made a correct evaluation of Slobodan Milosevic's regime, but believed that at the time of NATO's aggression against Yugoslavia, any position other than a condemnation of the aggression was a form of reconciliation with imperialism.
The fourth position agreed with the attitude of PR on the national question but was of the opinion that PR made serious mistakes because, instead of struggling against imperialism, it made its main goal the struggle against local-imperialism.
It is normal that there are positions on the national question and the presence of NATO forces in Yugoslavia that are similar to those of PR.
We recall that the essence of the criticism of PR's attitude was in the assertion "that the intervention of imperialism was in the interest of the Yugoslav peoples." The criticisms, here we emphasize the criticism of George Gruenthal published in Revolutionary Democracy, come from the understanding that imperialism can never play a progressive role, and that imperialism intervened in the Balkans for its own interests, and not to protect human rights, which was just an excuse for intervention.
PR in defense of its resolutions emphasizes:
- Local-imperialism broke up Yugoslavia as a single entity. With that act it weakened the defensive power of the country, and facilitated the entry of NATO forces into Bosnia and Herzegovina and into Kosova.
- In the area of former Yugoslavia there was no organized political and military force which could successfully oppose the military force of Slobodan Milosevic, and the full domination of nationalist ideology. There was a real threat of extermination of some nationalities. In such circumstances, the Bosnian and Albanian peoples were forced to begin armed struggle, although they were weaker militarily. That is why the Bosnian and Albanian peoples, as the most endangered, welcomed the NATO forces as liberators.
- Local-imperialism, as an oppressor of other nations, could not play a role as the unifier of those nations for the struggle against imperialism. Milosevic’s local-imperialism did not even try to do that when his interests were in opposition to those of imperialism; he continued to suppress the Albanian population to achieve his goals.
- The local-imperialist regime in Belgrade, because of its character, which was shown to be an open dictatorship, and which continued to rob its own people, did not have the support of its people for real resistance to imperialism.
- With the crushing of local-imperialism (concretely the regimes in Belgrade and Zagreb), the obstacles to unification of the Balkans peoples were removed, as well as the obstacles to their unification in anti-imperialist struggle.
- The relation between the imperialists and the puppet regimes in crushing any resistance to their policy, has created conditions for the rise of the anti-imperialist struggle in the Balkans to a higher level.
- PR never denied that imperialism intervened in the Balkans for its own goals; quite the contrary. Also, PR did not claim that imperialism was a positive factor, but only that imperialism in that concrete situation was a factor in resolving the problem. That was due to the fact that it stopped the reactionary war, crushed the local-imperialisms and prevented the persecution and extermination of some nations. This role of imperialism in resolving the problem in the sense of stopping the war does not mean that it will solve the national question in the Balkans. Its oppressor role in new historical circumstances will bring all the Balkans peoples closer in unified struggle against imperialism. After all, PR in its resolution on the presence of NATO forces in former Yugoslavia concluded with the support for resistance to NATO as an occupying force.
Central Committee of Partija Rada
Belgrade, January 15th, 2002.
