-Caveat Lector-
------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
Date sent: Fri, 14 May 1999 15:43:53 -0400
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: FAIR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [FAIR-L] FORGOTTEN COVERAGE OF RAMBOUILLET NEGOTIATIONS
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FAIR-L
Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting
Media analysis, critiques and news reports
FAIR Media Advisory:
May 14, 1999
FORGOTTEN COVERAGE OF RAMBOUILLET NEGOTIATIONS:
Was A Peaceful Kosovo Solution Rejected by U.S.?
Since the beginning of the NATO attack on Yugoslavia, the war has been
presented by the media as the consequence of Yugoslavia's stubborn
refusal to settle for any reasonable peace plan--in particular its
rejection of plans for an international security force to implement a
peace plan in Kosovo.
An article in the April 14 New York Times stated that Yugoslavian
President Milosevic "has absolutely refused to entertain an outside
force in Kosovo, arguing that the province is sovereign territory of
Serbia and Yugoslavia."
Negotiations between the Serb and Albanian delegations at the
Rambouillet meeting in France ended with Yugoslavia's rejection of the
document that had been adopted, after much prodding, by the Kosovo
Albanian party.
But is that the whole story?
There were two parts to the peace proposals: a political agreement on
autonomy for Kosovo; and an implementation agreement on how to carry out
the political deal--usually understood to require international
peacekeepers in Kosovo.
By the end of the first round of Rambouillet in February, the Serb side
had agreed to the essentials of a political deal. Agence France Presse
(2/20/99) quoted a U.S. official as saying that the "political part" of
a peace accord "is almost not a problem, while the implementation part
has been reconsidered many times."
The U.S. wanted the Kosovo plan to be implemented by NATO troops under a
NATO command, and had already made plans for a 28,000-troop force. The
Yugoslavian leadership was opposed to the idea, claiming such an
arrangement would amount to a foreign occupation of Kosovo by hostile
forces.
On February 20, the Russian ITAR-TASS news agency reported from
Rambouillet that unnamed "Contact Group members may offer, as a
compromise, Milosevic an option under which a multinational force will
be deployed under the U.N. or the OSCE flag rather than the NATO flag as
was planned before."
Agence France Presse reported the same day that the Serb delegation
"showed signs that it might accept international peacekeepers on
condition that they not be placed under NATO command" and added that the
head of the Serb delegation "insisted that the peacekeepers answer to a
non-military body such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe...or the United Nations." A U.S. official confirmed this to
AGP: "The discussions are on whether it should be a UN or OSCE force,"
the official said.
The next day, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright declared: "We accept
nothing less than a complete agreement, including a NATO-led force."
Asked on CNN the same day: "Does it have to be [a] NATO-led force, or as
some have suggested, perhaps a UN-led force or an OSCE...force? Does it
specifically have to be NATO-run?" she replied, "The United States
position is that it has to be a NATO-led force. That is the basis of our
participation in it."
Two days later, Albright repeated this position at a press conference:
"It was asked earlier, when we were all together whether the force could
be anything different then a NATO-led force. I can just tell you point
blank from the perspective of the United States, absolutely not, it must
be a NATO-led force."
Over the next month, this position was repeated countless times with
increasing vehemence by State Department officials. Furthermore, the
U.S. refused to allow the Serbs to sign the political agreement until
they first agreed to a NATO-led force to implement it.
"The Serbs have been acting as if there are two documents but they can't
pick and choose," Albright said (AGP, 3/13/99). "There is no way to have
the political document without the implementation force that has to be
NATO-led.... If they are not willing to engage on the military and
police chapters, there is no agreement."
Finally, on March 23, the day before the NATO bombing began, Ambassador
Richard Holbrooke met with Milosevic one last time to deliver his
ultimatum: Sign the agreement or be bombed. The response was delivered
that night by the Serbian parliament, which adopted resolutions again
rejecting the military portion of the accords, but expressing
willingness to review the "range and character of an international
presence" in Kosovo.
At a March 24 State Department press briefing, spokesman James Rubin was
asked about this development:
QUESTION: Was there any follow-up to the Serbian Assembly's yesterday?
They had a two-pronged decision. One was to not allow NATO troops to
come in; but the second part was to say they would consider an
international force if all of the Kosovo ethnic groups agreed to some
kind of a peace plan. It was an ambiguous collection of resolutions. Did
anybody try to pursue that and find out what was the meaning of that?
RUBIN: Ambassador Holbrooke was in Belgrade, discussed these matters
extensively with President Milosevic, left with the conclusion that he
was not prepared to engage seriously on the two relevant subjects. I
think the decision of the Serb Parliament opposing military-led
implementation was the message that most people received from the
parliamentary debate. I'm not aware that people saw any silver linings.
QUESTION: But there was a second message, as well; there was a second
resolution.
RUBIN: I am aware that there was work done, but I'm not aware that
anybody in this building regarded it as a silver lining.
In other words, the State Department was aware that the Serbs had once
again expressed openness to an "international presence," but this was
not seen as a "silver lining," apparently because only a NATO force was
acceptable to the U.S.
In an intriguing corollary to the insistence on NATO forces, a leaked
version of the Pentagon's 1994-1999 Defense Planning Guidance report
advises that the United States "must seek to prevent the emergence of
European-only security arrangements which would undermine NATO....
Therefore, it is of fundamental importance to preserve NATO as the
primary instrument of Western defense and security, as well as the
channel for U.S. influence and participation in European security
affairs."
This whole subject seems to have escaped the interest of the major
media.
Those who support the bombing of Yugoslavia argue that the motives are
humanitarian and that all peaceful options for arriving at a settlement
in Kosovo had been exhausted. Journalists need to do more reporting on
the Rambouillet process to see if that in fact was the case.
This media advisory was written by FAIR media analyst Seth Ackerman
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Contact: Steve Rendall < mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
________________________________________________________
NetZero - We believe in a FREE Internet. Shouldn't you?
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
----------
Feel free to respond to FAIR ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ). We can't reply to
everything, but we will look at each message. We especially appreciate
documented example of media bias or censorship. All messages to the
'FAIR-L' list will be forwarded to the editor of the list.
Also, please send copies of email correspondence, including any
responses, to us at: [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Feel free to spread this message around. Put it on conferences
where it is appropriate. We depend on word of mouth to get our message
out, so please let others know about FAIR and this mailing list.
Don't miss a single email from FAIR-L.
To subscribe to FAIR-L send a "subscribe FAIR-L enter your full name"
command to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The subscriber list is kept confidential, so no need to worry about
spammers.
You may leave the list at any time by sending a "SIGNOFF FAIR-L"
command to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please support FAIR by becoming a member.
You will receive FAIR's magazine, EXTRA! and its newsletter, EXTRA!
Update. You can become a member by calling 1-800-847-3993 from 9 to
5 Eastern Time (be sure to tell them you got the information
on-line) or by sending $19 with your name and address to:
FAIR/EXTRA! Subscription Service
P.O. Box 170
Congers, NY 10920-9930
FAIR
(212) 633-6700
http://www.fair.org/
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
list administrators: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A<>E<>R
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
A merely fallen enemy may rise again, but the reconciled
one is truly vanquished. -Johann Christoph Schiller,
German Writer (1759-1805)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that
prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
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
