The Committee for National Solidarity
Tolstojeva 34, Belgrade, YU
From: "Michel Collon" < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject:
After Kosovo, Macedonia (Article of Michel Collon in English) Date: Thu, Mar
22, 2001, 2:25 pm
Please find here an important
article about Macedonia, Kosovo, Nato and their future.
1. Is Macedonia
a strategic area? 2. KLA attack: is it a surprise? 3. What is surviving of the
official Nato version? 4. Is Washington playing double game? 5. Will KLA
provoke a new war? 6. What do the US really want? 7. Will it be possible for
Washington to keep playing with all sides? 8. Did they «forge a monster»? 9.
What shall be the role of the rivalry between USA and EU? 10. Is Kostunica
trapped? 11. Perspectives for Peace.
-- Michel
Collon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(For
fair use only)
After Kosovo, Macedonia. What is left of the explanations of NATO ?
A sinister repetition? After the Albanian separatists of the KLA have
attacked the villages of the Presevo valley in Serbia, after they have
killed 11 Serbian civilians of Kosovo by throwing a bomb in a bus, they are
waging now war in neighbouring Macedonia. And again refugees are on the
roads. Is there a new escalation in the Balkans? In fact, these events
allow to better understand what happened in 1999. In this complex situation
(because everything is done to disorientate the public opinion), let us
answer clearly to the main questions.
Michel
Collon
1. Is Macedonia a strategic region ?
Yes, as we have explained in our book Monopoly by citing
the general Jackson, commander of the NATO troops: "We will
certainly stay here for a long time in order to guarantee the safety of the
energy corridors which cross Macedonia". (1) 'Energy corridors' ?
We had presented the maps showing the projects of Europe (a whole net
of oil and gas pipe-lines connecting Europe via the Balkans to the huge oil
and gas resources of the former soviet Caucasus) and the ones of the US (a
pipe-line Bulgaria-Macedonia-Albania-Adriatic which would give to the US
oil multinationals the control of this road of oil and gas). These projects
are in fact rival. This is why all the great powers attempt for ten years
to control Yugoslavia. The road of oil and gas passes by. We had
also stressed that as soon as 1992 it is in Macedonia - however very far
away from the conflicts zones - and nowhere else that Washington had
decided to send a division. We have to be frank: even in the left
circles, some peoples found exaggerated to suspect Washington to have so
dark projects. But very recently, the respectable British newspaper
Guardian confirmed: "A project called the Trans-Balkan pipeline
has been little-reported in any British, European or American newspaper.
The line will run from the Black sea port of Burgas to the Adriatic at
Vlore, passing through Bulgaria, Macedonia and Albania. It is likely become
the main route to the west for the oil and gas now being extracted in
central Asia. It will carry 750,000 barrels a day. The project is necessary,
according to a paper published by the US Trade and Development Agency, because
it will "provide a consistent source of crude oil to American refineries",
"provide American companies with a key role in developing the vital
east-west corridor", and "advance the privatisation aspirations of the US
government in the region"." (2) Clear, isn't it ? Moreover, Bill
Richardson, the former US energy secretary, declared in 1998, that is
before the war: "This is about America's energy security".
When the US speak about 'energy security', one must know what it means: to
preserve the world domination and the profits of their oil multinationals.
And Richardson continues: "We would like these newly independent
countries reliant on Western commercial and political interests rather than
going another way. We've made a substantial political investment in the
Caspian, and it's very important to us that both the pipeline map and the
politics come out right." (3) And The Guardian adds this
essential comment: "On December 9, 98 (before the war), the
president of Albania attended a meeting on this subject in Sofia:"According
to my personal opinion, no solution which will stay strictly inside of the
Serbian borders will bring a sustainable peace." The message could hardly
be clearer: if you want the agreement of the Albanians for the
Trans-Balkans pipeline, you have to take the Kosovo away from the Serbs".
(4)
2. Is the offensive of the KLA a surprise?
The
US made thus a pact with the devil. Because many US diplomatic reports
testified it: the separatist KLA murdered not only Serbian policemen or
civilians, but also Albanians married with Serbs or simply accepting to
live in the Yugoslav state. And the special envoy of Washington in the
Balkans, Robert Gelbard, had himself claimed three times in front of the
international press, at the beginning of 1998: "I tell you that these
KLA peoples are terrorists". But three months later, these terrorists
were turned by miracle into 'freedom fighters' and NATO will soon become
their air force. Today the US simulate surprise faced to the "extremist
violence" (5) which attacks Macedonia. It is hypocrisy! As soon as June
98, the KLA distributed among its European sympathisers a map of 'Great
Albania'. In our book Monopoly (p.69), we reproduced this map and
made the following comment: "In addition to Kosovo, which is part of
Serbia, this great Albania would remove large territories in Macedonia,
Montenegro and Greece. Wars are unavoidable if the KLA is allowed to
realize its plans". This Greater Albania implies not only expansionism
but also ethnic cleansing. Today, under the eyes and with the tacit
agreement of NATO, 350,000 not-Albanians have already been expelled from
Kosovo: Serbs but also Gypsies, Gorani, Turks etc.. Kosovo is almost
'clean'. A surprise? Not really, since, on July 12, 1982 already, the
New York Times interviewed a Yugoslav official in Kosovo, a man of
Albanian ancestry, who said: "'The [Albanian] nationalists have a
two-point platform...first to establish what they call an ethnically clean
Albanian republic and then the merger with Albania to form a greater
Albania." Besides, during the anti-Yugoslav insurgency of 1981, the
Albanian nationalists had already established a close collaboration between
their units in Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro. All this didn't prevent
the influential US Senator Joseph Lieberman to declare in April 99:
"[The] United States of America and the Kosovo Liberation Army stand for
the same human values and principles... Fighting for the KLA is fighting
for human rights and American values."(6). In other words, the US and
the KLA share the same fight. Besides, anybody who travels through Kosovo can
see everywhere, for example in the petrol stations, the Albanian and US flags
closely associated.
3. Does the version of NATO still make any sense
?
What did NATO tell us to justify its murderous bombings? 1. That
its war was humanitarian. Wrong: it was for oil and to break an economy
which resisted to the Western multinationals and to the IMF. 2. That it
had tried everything to find a negotiated solution. Also wrong: we now know
that there was never any negotiation; Rambouillet was only a comedy to
justify a war which had already been decided. 3. That it was a clean war.
Wrong again: 2.000 Yugoslav civilians killed, a huge number of factories
and infrastructures destroyed, the use of forbidden and criminal
weapons: cluster bombs, depleted uranium. General Mangum just wote in
the very official journal of the Army War College: " The high- altitude
bombing did very little damage to the Serb military. It was only after NATO
began deliberately attacking civilian targets that the Serbs sued for
peace." (7) Now what was left of the official version
also collapses. We were told: `The problems of Kosovo are caused by
Milosevic'. The situation is not better with Kostunica and a government
which is subjected to the West ! By the way, the Time confess:
"Remember Kosovo? According to Clinton administration spin during the
1999 bombing campaign, NATO was rallying to the defense of helpless
ethnic Albanians and their brave champions in the Kosovo Liberation Army
who were fighting a David-vs.-Goliath struggle against Belgrade's genocidal
army. Well, guess what? Not only has NATO now declared armed Albanian
nationalists of the KLA stripe to be the primary security problem in the
region, the Western alliance is also considering asking the selfsame
Yugoslav army to help NATO troops police the border between Kosovo and the
neighboring former Yugoslavian republic of Macedonia. Once Yugoslavia
had elected a president with whom the West could do business, prospects for
winning NATO support for formal independence for Kosovo dimmed even
further." (8) So, you may say white today, and black tomorrow if
this useful for "business". Who will dare to come and speak to us about a
humanitarian war, newt time?
We were told that the intervention was
necessary to stop a Serbian genocide and to establish a multi-ethnic
Kosovo. But the German general Heinz Loquai has demonstrated that the
so-called 'horse-shoe plan' document presented by the German minister
Scharping was fake, that the genocide was a lie of the media and he just
qualified the war as 'unjustified', and accused NATO to have caused two
humanitarian catastrophes: a massive exodus of the Albanians and then
another exodus of the Serbs. And the general Michael Rose, who commanded
the UN forces in Bosnia, reproaches NATO "to have introduced a culture
of violence". (9) Finally, in order to find some excuse for the current
ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, the supporters of NATO and KLA have pretended
that it was 'revenge acts for what the Serbs had done'. And now, in
Macedonia, where nothing happened, under which pretext should one justify
the aggression of the KLA? It is time to acknowledge the only possible
explanation: the KLA aims to establish an ethnically clean state and can
only realise this program by the escalation of hatred and by
terrorism.
4. Does Washington play a double game?
The
United States make as if they were indignant at the current violences of
the KLA. But we must point out several things: 1. They didn't move a finger
when the KLA went out from Kosovo to attack the region of Presevo in
Central Serbia. Worse: the infiltration occurred from the US
occupation zone in Kosovo. 2. Washington and the NATO pretend today "to
try to stop the flux of weapons and fighters towards southern Serbia and
Macedonia".(10) But anybody who goes to Kosovo can observe
roadblocks and check-points of the KFOR every five kilometers. But the same
KFOR is working with interprets and other collaborators coming from the
KLA, which besides was transformed by KFOR into the very official 'Kosovo
Protection Corps'. So, the ones who don't look for the weapons of the KLA
will not find them. Moreover, the major Jim Marshall, spokesman of the US
KFOR, declared on March, 6: "We have identified between 75 and 150
rebels in Tanusevci (Macedonia), we saw them enter and go out from Kosovo,
and get rid of their equipments and weapons before to cross the
border." A little stupid question: what did prevent you to arrest them?
45,000 NATO soldiers are occupying Kosovo and can not arrest 150 terrorists
? Can not or don't want to? On March, 11, in the British newspaper
Observer, several European high officers of KFOR and also several
Macedonian officials accused explicitly the CIA to have encouraged the KLA
to start its summer offensive in the South of Serbia in order to undermine
the former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic. Today, who could
guarantee that these encouragements have stopped?
5. Will the
KLA start a new war ?
What will happen ? The current fights around
Tanusevce could well be the prelude of more important clashes. For example, to
take control of Tetovo, five kilometers away from the Kosovo border. In any
case, one thing is clear: the KLA, which lost the elections last year,
-because the large majority of the Albanians in Kosovo don't want to live
in a permanent state of war - can only regain ground by using
violence. Including in Macedonia where it pretends to defend the rights of
the Albanian minority, but one often forgets to remind that, for years,
every government of this country has been made of a coalition with Albanian
parties. To take power, and thus increase the range of its maffia - like
traffics, necessitates war. The tactics of the KLA is thus clear: to
cause an escalation by provoking the Macedonian and the Yugoslavian armies.
Hoping that the later will attack Albanian civilians as was done by some
Serbian forces during the first days of the NATO bombings. That will allow
to reach two goals: 1. To internationalise the conflict (we will come back
to it later). 2. To enrol new recruits in an Albanian youth which has been
fanatised by nationalism. In spite of the development of many little
traffics more or less legal, the Albanian community of Macedonia has an
unemployment rate of 60%; it is a potential where to recruit. To get
this escalation, the KLA will probably use again a method which has already
been put in practice. As a French observer of the OSCE explained it in
Kosovo in 1998: "Inside the OSCE, everybody knew that NATO, in
particular the US, didn't want our mission (of pacification) to succeed.
The massacres have been encouraged to justify a military intervention. One
day we got a message. We were told that Albanian fighters had been trained
by American instructors. They were explained that it was more strategic to
kill Serbian policemen to provoke important retaliations against the
Albanian community." (11) As in Bosnia and in Kosovo there can be some
time before that this tactics ends up in more important clashes. An
important step would be done by provoking the equivalent of the 'Racak
massacre'. In January 99, in this village of Kosovo that it had fortified,
the KLA had provoked, and lost, a fight between the two armies. But it made
believe that the victims were civilians coldly massacred by the Yugoslav
army. With the help of the CIA, one made believe this media-lie in the
international media and this allow to condition the Western public opinion
to make it accept a war decided for a long time by the US. Each war of
today is preceded by such a big media-lie, with shocking
pictures.
6. What are the US really looking for?
But
to do again the 'Racak trick' would necessitate a complicity of the US to
lead the Western media. If this would happen, that would certainly be the
sign that the US superpower would be preparing a new intervention. One can
oppose two objections to this hypothesis: First the US are qualifying today
the KLA as 'extremist forces' and condemn their actions, at least in words.
Answer: at the beginning of 98 also, they qualified the KLA as
'terrorists', as we have seen, but that didn't prevent them to support
unconditionally the KLA a few months later. If there is one principle to
remember in the action of the US for ten years, it is that there are no
principles! One can also ask why would the US intervene although they seem
to control the region and have installed there their military bases ? Of
course one doesn't know yet all the aspects of their current tactics. It
may be that behind the scene they push the KLA to create again some tension
in order to help the US troops to occupy the whole region. As soon as the
first incidents in the Presevo valley occurred, Washington had
generously proposed to station US troops in Serbia proper. One must also
remind that during the so-called 'negotiations' in Rambouillet before the
war, Madeleine Albright had required that NATO will be allowed to occupy
militarily the whole Yugoslavia. It may also be that new Bush
administration has not yet decided which is the best tactic to protect the
US interests in the Balkans, that it prefers to play for some time with
both sides and that the tactic of the KLA was precisely to force it to take
a decision or to act quicker. In both cases, one thing is sure: the US are
not there to defend peace or protect any people of the Balkans. They are
there to reign. And to reign you have to divide, as we know, and to divide
the best solution is a war, or at least a so-called 'low intensity' war, a
situation of 'neither war nor peace' with irregular clashes. Isn't it the
best way to justify the installation of US military bases in the Balkans
? Of course, the candidate George Bush had said that he wanted to move
the US troops out of Kosovo. But the president George Bush rapidly forgot
these electoral promises. Lets remind that in 1995 the candidate Bill
Clinton had promised that the US troops would have left Bosnia by
Christmas. Immediately afterwards, the commander of the UN troops in
Bosnia, the general MacKenzie, answered to a parliamentary commission:
"If I were you, I'd start training your grandchildren as Bosnia
peacekeepers." (12) Wether it wants to force Bush to intervene or acts
in collaboration with him, the goal of the KLA is in any case to
internationalise again the conflict, as did the Muslims of Izetbegovic in
Bosnia from 1992 and the KLA itself in Kosovo in 1998. By attacking
almost at the same time Macedonia and the South of Serbia, by denouncing in
racist terms any Slav presence on their territories, the leaders of the KLA
aim at provoking a reaction of Macedonia and Yugoslavia, but also of
Greece, close to the Serbs. And, as an indirect result, a retaliation of
their own allies: Albania and Turkey. That is an internationalisation of
the conflict which would force Washington to choose between its allies and,
as the KLA hopes, to definitely choose the Albanian side.
7.
Will Washington still be able to play on both sides?
To understand
the situation of the US, it is important to understand that they
systematically play on several sides at the same time. To support and to
manipulate discretely two adversaries - and even train them militarily
- does not embarrass them at all. For example, we can read in the British
Daily Telegraph of March 3: "The private company of security
which is the most appreciated by the US government has trained both sides
of the last ethnic conflict in the Balkans. Only two years ago the Albanian
rebels of Kosovo were trained by the society 'Military Professional
Resources' based in Virginia... One of the recent task of this society was
the training of the Macedonian army which is now shooting on the Albanian
guerrilla." One should not underestimate the role in the US military
system of the private companies and militia, led by former high officers.
Already in Bosnia, they had trained and led the Muslim militia of the
president Izetbegovic before that the US could openly intervene. And in
Croatia they helped the president Tudjman to realise the bloody ethnic
cleansing of the Serbian Krajina in august 95 (13). History repeats
itself. Having played in several sides, the US can be for a moment in a
difficult situation. From one side, they continue to use the KLA to get
more concessions from Serbia: the complete privatisation and the
elimination of the main opposition party, the SPS (by sending its president
Milosevic to the Court of the Hague). But on the other hand, if they let
the KLA going too far, they will have troubles with precious allies: 1.
The Macedonian government 2. Greece (also threatened by the demands of
the KLA) 3. The Yugoslav president Kostunica. The Macedonian government
has not much autonomy and one says that Washington could impose it what it
wants, including a federal state, prelude to a splitting. Moreover, the
Macedonian leaders are very weakened by various scandals, which have
revealed their links with the US. The left opposition claims to be more
independent, but its main candidate was put aside by terror during the last
elections. Macedonia, a too weak and unstable ally for Washington ? On
the other hand, the Greek leaders are important pawns in the NATO strategy
of Washington. But the Greek people is strongly against NATO, the influence
of the communist party is important and very recently one third of the
Greek soldiers have required and obtained to be moved out from Kosovo to
escape the dangers of depleted uranium. Finally by playing too openly with
the card of the KLA, the US would strongly endangered the president
Kostunica, who was elected with an ambiguous profile - anti-NATO and
pro-West - and who can not present to his opinion any positive result about
Kosovo, to the contrary. To allow him to make come again some Yugoslav
troops to watch the border is maybe a small concession to give some more
credit to Kostunica and to somehow balance the two 'friends' of the US. But
the reason can also be simply to avoid that US soldiers would be in first
line and risk to come back to the US in body-bags, which is always
embarrassing for the US opinion. And, in a more machiavellian way, that
would start again clashes between Serbs and Albanians. What if
Washington drops the KLA and reverses its alliance? Then it could be that
its German 'ally' -but also rival- supports again secretly the KLA as it
did at the beginning 98 (14). Which also explains that the KLA has interest
to make even more provocations. The rivalry between Western great powers is
thus another factor which increases the risks of war. Many European
politicians had already accused the US to be guilty of having uselessly
prolonged the war in Bosnia in order to eliminate their German competitor
which had got a too good position. (15) Reverse the alliance? One has
already seen everything in this respect from the US, for example between
Iran, Iraq and Syria. But their goal is to establish in the Balkans a
'plane-carrier' state, like Israel in the Middle-East. For this, an obvious
choice is still an Albanian state which would owe everything to Washington.
However, the European powers refuse a change of the borders in the Balkans.
This would cause new wars and destabilise the projects of 'corridors'
described above. One thing is sure: the intervention of NATO for some
hidden interests didn't bring and will not bring peace.
8. Do
they really ask themselves if they have created a monster?
It is
again in The Guardian that one could read, on March 12, a surprising
question: 'Did we create a monster ?'. Their special correspondent in
Pristina reports: "The West is stunned. Balkan nightmares were
supposed to have ended with the fall of Slobodan Milosevic. But
now Albanian nationalist militants are stirring ethnic rivalries in a
quest for a greater Kosovo. The liberated victims have become the
villains. In Washington and London, and in the offices of NATO and UN in
Pristina, a question is dominating: did we create a monster ?" The
correspondent of the Guardian led a quite vast investigation with
the staff of UN and KFOR and concludes: "The failure of KFOR to disarm
the KLA, protect the Serb minority and build a multi-ethnic society has
created a climate in which extremists flourish. For almost a year
it ignored intellectuals who urged a crackdown on KLA members who
seized assets and set up criminal networks. "Now it's too late, the
moderates won the election, but those who smuggle and run the rackets have the
real power," one officer serving there admits." Disastrous result,
and one understands that the former governor of Kosovo, Bernard Kouchner,
had quickly left the ship before that his self-satisfied TV statements have
been refuted. Because what The Guardian reports is true. I was
myself in Kosovo last December to make there a documentary movie "The
damned of Kosovo" (which will be ready next May). I discovered there a
hell for the Serbs and all non - Albanian minorities. Most of them have
been expelled from Kosovo: ethnic cleansing. The ones who have stayed live
in terror. To speak its own language in public constitutes a mortal danger.
Also to go on highways in non-Serbian zones. But the terror strikes also a
number of Albanians. KLA maffiosi kill Albanians also. To take houses,
companies or women. And many of the Albanian with who I was talking,
predicted a civil war - between Albanians - in two or three years
time. Quickly The Guardian mentions the theory of 'the mistake': The
West would 'have misunderstood the danger of Albanian nationalism'.
Of which 'West' are we talking here? If it is the public, it is indeed
true that it didn't understand because one hided to it carefully the truth.
When some analysts explained that the program of the KLA was the ethnic
cleansing, they were almost excluded of the media or even considered as
evils. But if one speaks about the leaders of this 'West' - the White
House, Tony Blair, Solana and Robertson, the CIA - they knew of course for
a long time because their own reports considered the KLA as
'terrorists'. In Kosovo, we have also seen that one has to distinguish
between a number of honest Western aid workers and militaries, and their
high-level officials. The former went to Kosovo with prejudices but also
with good will. The later have been sent to Kosovo to hide this truth, to
hide the secret goals of the US and their allies and to lie. It is
certainly in the first category that one must put Eric Torch, a UN aid
worker cited by The Guardian: "Albanians trace their lineage to the
Illyrans who controlled the territory in the 11th century BC. Underground
schools during Milosevic's rule inculcated ethnic hatred into generations."
Yes, you have read correctly: 'during Milosevic's rule'. This
confirms what have said some unconventional analysts: these parallel
Albanian schools, organized by the party of Rugova and financed by the US
taught racist anti-Serbian conceptions. It was wrong to say that the
responsibility of the conflict was entirely on the side of the
Serbs. Pushed by the US, the Albanian leaders of Kosovo refused to
negotiate seriously, they wanted only independence and taught the hatred
to achieve it.
9. Which role will play the rivalry US
-EU?
One can not understand the attitude of the US in these events
without replacing it in the context of their world strategy. One of the
key-men of the new Bush administration is called Wolfowitz. In our
book Liar's Poker we made comments about his shock-report of March
92: "The status of unique super-power of the US must be preserved by
a constructive behaviour and a sufficient military force to dissuade
any nation or group of nations to challenge the supremacy of the US. We
must act in order to prevent the appearance of a security system
exclusively European which could destabilise NATO" (16). The US
military budget began to blow up under Clinton and this will continue under
Bush. Three potential rivals at more or less long term are today the
potential targets of this dangerous strategy: the European Union, Russia,
China. The embassy of the later was bombed as a warning. It is considered
by the CIA as risking to overtake around 2015-2030 the power of the US.
Concerning Russia, the new US State secretary, Colin Powell, declared that
the objections of Moscow would not prevent the expansion of NATO to the
East or the militarisation of space by the so-called 'anti-missiles shield'
(NMD). His colleague Condoleezza Rice declared that she
sincerely "believes that Russia is a threat for the West" (17). And
the Defence secretary Rumsfeld attacked Russia for "its 'active
proliferation of missiles' to countries like Iran, Korea or India".
(18) Concerning Europe, Rumsfeld warned against any autonomous
European intervention force which would perturb the transatlantic relation
during the conference of Munich about global safety, beginning of February.
Answer of the German minister Joskha Fisher: the new Bush administration
wants to restart a new arms race. His colleague Scharping expressed
sympathy for the Russian views about NMD. Germany has, like France,
condemned the US bombings against Iraq. Moreover, the ambition of the US
to dictate their will to the whole world is currently braked by several
points of resistance that they don't succeed to eliminate. Iraq still
resists, as well as the Palestinians. The US intervention in Colombia could
transform itself into a new Vietnam. The communist guerrilla in Nepal
worries the American experts. Some of them think that it is time to find a
solution in the Balkans and to focus on other operations. All this on a
background of growing commercial rivalries and crisis which could only
worsen the tension USA-Europe. The game that these powers are playing in
the Balkans for ten years, each of them trying to get the biggest part of
the cake, this game will continue to cause damages to the peoples of the
region. When the elephants fight each other, it is the grass which is
smashed. And after all the gifts that the US have given to reward the
terrorism of the KLA, one can expect that this example will be contagious
for some fractions of the Albanian community in Macedonia and Montenegro or
for other secessionist movements in the world. One will use provocations
and terrorism to try to present oneself as 'victims'. The mistrust
between US and Europe about Kosovo increased when the candidate Bush
threatened to move out the US troops from the Balkans, letting the
Europeans alone in what one is forced to call a mess. Since then, many
European officials criticize -privately- the support of the US to
the terrorists of KLA. An expert of the French Institute of
International Relations (IFRI) has just declared: "The Dayton process is
dead. The whole system needs to be renegotiated. But no-one wants to open
the Pandora's box by calling it into question, risking poisoning
the situation on the ground. If for example, the Kosovo Albanians were
appeased with a state of their own, it would trigger a domino effect
that would see Serbia's junior partner in the rump Yugoslavia, Montenegro,
as well as Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian Croats all renewing their own
independence claims. For some time it appeared the Americans were
prepared to look at changing borders. I think that cannot happen now,
and if they did try it they would be opposed by Europe." (19))
What
will be the outcome? In fact, Bush has four options: 1. to redraw
his troops. That would have strongly embarrassed the Europeans. It is now
not possible anymore, especially with the depleted uranium scandal. 2. to
reverse the alliance and to support the Serbia of Kostunica. But the US
troops could become the targets of the KLA. And one is not sure that
Serbia will be a reliable partner for the long term. The spirit of
popular resistance is still alive there. 3. to support both sides by using
a strategy of tension. 4. to maintain the support to the KLA to create
an Albanian 'Israel-like' state while hiding its game as long as
possible. No one of the options is moral, we have seen that this criteria
is never relevant. But to realize their strategic long-term goals, the US
can well resort to changing and contradictory tactics. For now a
combination of the options 3 and 4 seems the most likely to us. But maybe
the US have not decided yet and they are waiting to see the most favourable
according to the reactions of their 'friends' ? In any case, the tactics
being changing, some docile media would have some trouble to explain to the
peoples that the good guys are not good anymore and that the bad guys are
on the other side. Let's hope that these troubles will cause a deep
reflexion. If one doesn't understand the economic interests at stake, and
first, the ones of the multinationals looking for new markets, working
forces and raw materials, it is impossible to understand all
these wars.
10. Is Kostunica in a trap ?
The president
Kostunica has been elected by defending an ambiguous position: on one hand,
he denounces the war of NATO, the occupation of Kosovo and the interference
of the US; on the other hand, he promises the reconciliation with this very
same West and an economic improvement thanks to Western aid. Till now
the least one can say is that he wasn't rewarded concerning Kosovo. On
March 6, he declared: "The representatives of the international
community in Kosovo are facing failure, because they did not provide
stability and peace, and the crisis spilled over into Macedonia. Kfor is
dealing with its own security, and not with the security of those because
of whom it is here."(20) Kostunica also accused KFOR of
"stimulating instead of curbing the aspirations of a Greater Albania. KFOR
is abandoning protection of the border and is inviting our army to be in
the crossfire" (21) He also expressed hope that the policy of the new
U.S. administration would be marked by "a high level of non-interference
in the problems of other states". (22) The paradox is that two days
after having warned so clearly against NATO and the interference of the US ,
the same Kostunica added that "he did not rule out Yugoslavia becoming a
formal alliance partner one day."(23) A NATO which is however the most
obvious tool of the interference spirit of the US ! In the same
declaration, the Yugoslav president declared himself disappointed: "When
I came to office, I did not expect the situation in the country to be quite
so difficult; it is discouraging," citing security and constitutional
problems as well as 40 percent unemployment and 800,000 refugees.
Surprising declaration as the 800,000 refugees (expelled from Croatia,
Bosnia and Kosovo) are living in Serbia for years. Concerning the
unemployed, did he lead his electoral campaign by ignoring that the Western
embargo and the state of the economy had such consequences ? And by not
reading the program of the economists of his own electoral coalition which
foresaw privatisations and massive dismissals ?
How to interpret
these contradictory statements ? In fact, as expected, the material
situation of the Serbian population has still worsened with the Djindjic
government. If the salaries of the university professors have been doubled,
the ones of the workers have only increased by 25% to 50%, and it is
completely insufficient to face the huge increases of the prices. The cubic
meter of gas has gone from three up to twelve dinars, the kilo of sausages
from 150 up to 300 dinars, the electricity bill of a household has
increased from 150 or 200 dinars a month to 500 dinars! The
electricity company of Belgrade indicates that 130,000 households of the
city have a very important debt: more than 30,000 dinars! And the price of
petrol also increases, all the more that the new government took control of
all the oil sector in order to eliminate the black market of petrol
(cheaper). As expected, the honeymoon didn't last. If the president
Kostunica is not considered as personally responsible for all this, the
rate of discontent towards the new government of Zoran Djindjic on the
other hand has already gone up to 60%: "He doesn't do anything for the
people. Even during the war, we had always had electricity, but with the
'great democracy', the cuts last for four hours during the day, three hours
at night" is it told everywhere. And many judge that elections are
unavoidable in 12 or 18 months time. The heterogeneous coalition of 18
parties should split quite soon. It is why one must dismiss Milosevic and
eliminate the risk of a come back of the socialist party, even if this
party has not yet gone up in the polls.
Which evolution is to
foresee inside Yugoslavia? The professors that are not from the
universities are on a prolonged strike. Many strikes occur also in the
industry, only broken by threats of collective dismissals. This didn't
prevent the new left trade-union 'Solidarity' to get at the car factory
Zastava an additional increase of salary of 25%. On the other hand, the
minority trade-union of government tendency had refused to join the strike.
'Solidarity' has announced the publication of a monthly newspaper and the
next months should see it increasing its influence. Did Kostunica fall in a
trap of the West? Was he expecting to get more support in the question of
Kosovo and for the economy? Till now he just got alms and the US make the
other credits depend on the extradition of Milosevic. What Kostunica can
not do otherwise he would contradict himself and commit a political
suicide. Thus, the US finance a new campaign of OTPOR to criminalize
Milosevic. The US, which, for fifty years, have supported, financed and
armed all the far-right and military dictatorships in the world, these US
which have protected the crimes of Pinochet, Mobutu, Franco, Salazar, the
Greek colonels and the Turkish fascist generals, these US pretend to judge
just one former head of state, precisely one who has resisted to them ? The
US deserve the Oscar of hypocrisy.
11.
Perspectives.
In a world marked by a looming economic crisis,
by an increase of the wars and a frightening increase of the military
budgets, it is important to fully draw the lessons of Kosovo and of the
current situation. 1. There are no 'humanitarian' wars, only economic and
strategic wars. 2. The US and NATO are not searching to solve the problems
but to dominate the world. Thus they create or excite the problems when it
is useful for them 3. The military intervention against Yugoslavia and in
favour of the KLA has worsened everything. 4. It is not 'by mistake' that
Washington supported the KLA, but consciously. It is urgent to reinforce
or to recreate a powerful peace movement on a grass-root level. The only
way to get there is to work with patience in establishing the dialog
between the peoples, who are all victims of this strategy of 'dividing to
conquer'. And for this, to debate of the results of this war and of the
real strategies of the great powers is the fundamental condition. The
struggle for peace begins with a lucid analysis.
12th of March
2001
Notes
(1)
Michel Collon, Monopoly - L'Otan à la
Conquête du monde, EPO, march 2000, p. 96. (English edition
prepared) (2) The Guardian, February 15, 2001. (3) Idem. (4) Idem. (5)
AFP-Skopje, March 6, 2001. (6) Washington Post, April 28, 1999. (7)
Pittsburgh Gazette, March 11, 2001. (8) Time, 8 mars 2001 (9) Both cited
in Kan Anders-Vredeskoerier (Holland), march 2001. (10) Declaration of
Robertson (NATO), AP, March 6. (11) L'Humanité, November 18, 1999 (12)
Pittsburgh Gazette, March 11, 2001 (13) Michel Collon, Poker menteur, EPO,
1998, p. 191. (Soon published in English version) (14) See Monopoly, pp.
70-71. (15) The European mediator in Bosnia, David Owen, cited in Michel
Collon, Poker menteur, EPO, 1998, p. 182. (16) Michel Collon, Poker
menteur, p. 116. (17) Le Figaro, February 10, 2001. (18) PBS, February
14, 2001. (19) AFP - Paris, March 8, 2001. (20) BBC, March 6. (21)
Reuters - Skopje, March 8, 2001. (22) BBC, March 6. (23) Reuters -
London, March 8, 2001
Mrs Jela Jovanovic, art historian
|