From: Vladimir Krsljanin
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 5:39 AM
POLICY OF INDEPENDENCE - Milosevic to La Stampa (integral version)
SPS CHAIRMAN SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC GAVE AN INTERVIEW TO THE ITALIAN NEWS PAPER
"LA STAMPA"
THE POLICY OF OUR COUNTRY WAS THE POLICY OF INDEPENDENCE
At a certain moment a small country become a hindrance to great powers and
their plans at the Balkans. Our people is a hero and a victim. Fear is now
ruling over Serbia and Yugoslavia. New authorities are treathening with the
trials for the crimes made up in their offices. Such practice of stage
managing belongs to the experiences of the darkest years of Nazism,
Stalinism and Mckartysm. Press is in the hands of the authorities and there
is no chance to hear different opinions. Hague Tribunal is an immoral and
illegal institution, devised as form of reprisal for disobedient
representatives of the peoples. What is going to happen with Yugoslavia?
Chairman of the Socialist Party of Yugoslavia Slobodan Milosevic gave an
interview to the respectable Italian paper "La Stampa". The interview was
published on February the 3rd 2001.
The interview was done in Belgrade by the "La Stampa" editor Giusepe
Zackaria. Editorial Board of the "24 Hours" is in the position to offer its
readers the integral version of the interview of the Chairman of the SPS
Slobodan Milosevic.
Question: Mr. Milosevic, how do you feel at this moment, betrayed by your
people? As a victim of an international conspiracy? Or, as someone who was
sacrificed as a metaphor to the opponents of the USA policies?
Answer: I do not consider being betrayed by the people. The people are
heroes and victims. I am not convinced that results of the September
elections are an expression of the people's will. The elections took place
under great pressures, both internal and external - there was the media,
psychological influence, military presence...
Secondly, one, but very powerful part of the international community was in
a very organised manner engaged in pressurising the Yugoslav public in the
eve of the presidential, federal and local elections in September. That was
not an international conspiracy, but it was an intertwened activity of one
part, the more powerful part, of the international community.
Thirdly, the variant of being sacrificed as a metaphor to opposing the
policies of the USA may partly be taken into account. Perhaps, to the
highest degree. If it is so, I would wish it is for the last time. I would
wish, most sincerely, for the sake of the other persons and other peoples,
but also for the sake of the USA that such policy is never again conducted,
that someone with the different opinion leading a small nation has to be
punished by the big nation for being disobedient. Is it not the contemporary
world that is, as its manifesto, advancing the ideas of freedom, democracy,
rights of peoples and citizens? How then, in the contents of such a
manifesto, fits an image of the powerful one who punishes disobedient
peoples with uranium, depleted or not, as with a whip once upon a time,
their leaders also disobedient, punishing with the elections lost, all the
forms of psychological and physical violence, compromising in the domestic
and foreign public and so on.
Though, variants you were mentioning are in a mutual connection.
Administration of the biggest country in the world with its negative
approach towards myself, because of the policy of autonomy and independence
that was applied in Yugoslavia and that I was personification of, had, of
course, an option to project such an approach towards myself and to its
allays in Europe, above all.
That administration was able to persuade its allays in large and developed
European states on the issues much more controversial than the position
towards the head of a small Balkans state.
Then, easily and logically, all of them together were able materially,
financially, in the media, politically, psychologically and diplomatically
to organise one powerful ambience of pressures towards the Yugoslav public
in favour of achieving the electoral results they were interested in.
Pressures, Fear, Corruption
Q: In your opinion, what are the reasons for the results of the latest
election?
A: In my opinion, three reasons had the decisive role: pressures, fear and
corruption.
There were three sorts of pressures.
First, media pressures - people and their authorities were for a long time
demonised. In time, that demonisation was more and more concentrated towards
the authorities, and then to the group of people in power and finally to one
person.
Second group of pressures were the economic ones. For almost a decade the
country was under sanctions that were going to be lifted when the
authorities in power were changed.
Third group of pressures were the military ones. Serbia was bombed daily for
three months and threats of renewed bombings were constantly present,
especially frequent in the eve of the elections. Serbia would have been
bombed again if the authorities were not changed at the elections.
As a particular group of reasons for electoral results I would wish to
single out corruption. Money, very large sums of money for our poor country
and our pauperised people played a very significant role in the events of
last two-three years, and especially last autumn. Not only that votes were
bought with that money, but also a group of citizens was convinced that the
sell-off of such nature is not immoral, that money they received is
electoral support - via their votes - to the establishing of the system in
which they are going to live better.
Arson, Beatings, Dismissals
Finally, within the last few months, significant influence to the behaviour
of the public and the election results had the naked fear. The burning of
state institutions, the beating up of people, in general, manifestations of
physical violence of non-European nature, (not seen) in contemporary Europe
or at least in Europe that the progressive people of Europe are striving
for, scared the people. They have to think: if like this, in a flash, the
Federal Assembly and national television are burning, why could it not
happen to my house, and my shop and my factory... If the director of the
state television and its well known journalist were beaten up, why could not
that happen to the members of my family?
And then, the wave of the dismissals began, the replacing of bank directors,
company managers, heads of health and educational establishments, deans of
faculties, chancellors of the universities... and all that under the
physical and psychological pressures.
Fear ruled Serbia and Yugoslavia and that fear become a political factor
that was manufactured with the aim to make things in the country develop in
line with the interests of these who were able to instigate such fear and to
incite it further and maintain it up to this day.
Q: What is your opinion of the Western countries that saw you as the person
that was the factor of stability at the Balkans up to the Dayton-Paris
Agreement and afterwards, their opposition?
Neither I Nor the Policy Changed
A: Western countries and their governments supported me while the stability
at the Balkans suited them. When instability at the Balkans began to satisfy
them more, I lost their support. So, there were no changes in my policy nor
in the role of Serbia, but in the interests of the great powers at the
Balkans. Serbia is, no doubt, of colossal significance for the stability of
the Balkans. The policy I was advocating for ten years in regard of Serbia,
was the policy of independence. Such policy for a period of time suited the
West, and then, after a while, it did not. They saw me as an allay as long
as the interests of such a policy conducted in Serbia was acceptable. But,
when such a policy started to be a hindrance, I become an adversary.
Q: What would be your short, personal reconstruction of the events in
Yugoslavia within the last ten years? Was it ethnic war, geo-strategical war
or something else that you know much better than anyone in the region of the
Balkans?
A: Western Europe, led by Germany and especially Germany itself, intoxicated
with the victory in the Cold War, got unified after the fall of the Berlin
Wall, decline of the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union, went into a campaign
to East Europe with the goal to put it under full control politically and
economically. All the economic an political institutions of the East
European countries were dismantled that, amongst other things, caused very
unfavourable economic effects, sudden pauperisation and easy buy-off of the
wrecked economies. That process lasted for ten years and is not over yet. No
East European country managed to revive the levels of industrial activity
from ten years ago.
Former Yugoslavia was not part of the East Europe, nor a member of the
Warsaw Pact and it was building its own system on the basis of the market
economy and, as an multi-national community, on the basis of national
equality. Its economy was growing from strength to strength.
We Were a Model of European Federalism
It may be freely said that Yugoslavia, in the real sense, was a model of the
future European federalism. By all its features, it was a "bad" example by
the criteria of the proponents of a new re-drawing of the old continent.
That's why its brake-up was induced from abroad, playing the card of
national, inter-republican tensions in the former federation.
At that, to every observer the naked facts may be visible that these parts
of the former Yugoslavia that, in W.W.II, were at the side of the Hitler's
axis were privileged in terms of all the means of economic and political
support - up to the quick as lightning recognition of independence of
Slovenia and Croatia, and later B&H, while these parts which in the W.W.II
fought at the side of the Anti-Hitler coalition were punished and subjected
to, up to then, unprecedented pressures. Then began the media satanisation
of the Serb people and Serbia, while in Croatia they were singing "Danke
Deutcshland" as a token of recognition and thanks for help in establishing
of the "Croatian state".
World War II in the Balkans was finished after almost half a century with a
change of the roles of victors and the defeated.
It is an absurd fact that one of major roles in the destruction of former
Yugoslavia was played by the Allied countries that in the W.W.II were
fighting against Anti-Hitler coalition. But, that was not the end.
The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, preserved in 1992 by Serbia and
Montenegro, become the new target.
A Small Country Became a Hindrance
This entire decade passed in the sign of struggle for freedom and
independence, for peace, for national dignity. Proponents of the new World
Order could not accept such a precedent - one small, Balkan country opposing
that wave of new colonialism. When all other means were exhausted, reasons
at Kosovo were invented so as to bring about, in 1999, the illegal and
criminal war against FRY. And when that war did not bring about expected
results and when the country got reconstructed with unprecedented speed, new
means were used to stop such a process.
Today, separatist tendencies are present in Montenegro, efforts to make the
independence of Kosovo and Metohia possible are under way, as well as to
induce crisis in Vojvodina and Rasko-polimski regions respectively.
That would be the shortest possible answer to your question, a question that
requires volumes, and not only an answer in an interview.
Q: How do you see the responsibility of Serbs in the situation in the last
ten years? Were they undeservedly demonised by the West or were they really
guilty for what was done?
Serbs Are Not Guilty
A: The responsibility of Serbs for events on the territory of former
Yugoslavia in the course of the last ten years is, certainly, far lesser
then the responsibility borne for these events by Croats, Slovenians and
others who took part in the destruction of their own country.
Serbs, more then others, endeavoured to preserve SFRY, former Yugoslavia,
perhaps because they have lived all over its territory. Because they were
everywhere. That's why it is totally unjust that Serbs, who most cared for
Yugoslavia, were most accused by the West for it's falling apart.
Unjustified accusations in these ten years were directed, for all purposes,
to the wrong address, both regarding the nation and individuals.
I am thinking about the Serb people and also about myself. Sometimes, it
seems to me that a person confronted with all these manipulations with the
truth and facts is powerless.
Means of information as a weapon, as any weapon, are in the possession of
the rich and mighty. Thanks to their riches and their might everything will
be the way they want it to be. The honest, brave and bright shall be ones
they decide to pick out. And the dishonest, cowardly, stupid and bad would
be, also, ones they, the rich and mighty, decide to pick out.
Q: Have you personally done everything to prevent war in former Yugoslavia?
Looking at it now, would you have done something differently?
They Were Not Irrelevant Nor Deceived
A: As far as I am concerned, I deem I did everything possible as an
individual and as a person at the helm of one of the republics of the
country being subjected to dismembering. How much I did, was I able to do
more, and in general, my role in the events leading to the destruction of
the former Yugoslavia is a topic the so-called international community is
constantly busy with. It is, to say the least, amazing why some questions,
with good reason, were not addressed to the heads of the other five of the
six republics former Yugoslavia was made off.
They also had some role in these events. They themselves are emphasising
their roles. Current president of the Croatian state, for example, is
publicly emhasizing his "credit" for the dismembering of former Yugoslavia.
With a good reason, of course. I know that very well. None of them considers
himself insignificant in these matters, nor manipulated, nor confused or
deceived.
Why then, does the so-called international community underestimate them in
every way, both politically and intellectually, and devote all its attention
to myself only?
That is, to say the least, offending for my colleagues from former
Yugoslavia.
Q: Do you think that in some respect you were late in your attempts to solve
the Kosovo problem? Were you surprised by the cruelty of the NATO bombing
and use of depleted uranium in Republic of Srpska as well as in Yugoslavia?
I am Embittered
A: I was not late. To the contrary. I moved the Kosovo issue in political,
moral and national sense back in 1986 when I was not the President of
Serbia, not even a candidate for the president of Serbia, when I did not
have even the intention to become statesman of the highest order. My
political role at that time was only within the Serbia and was not the most
important one. I just came to the helm of the Party and I was of the opinion
that one of the first issues, both Yugoslavia and especially Serbia should
be engaged with, was the situation at Kosovo, where the position of Serbs
for a long time already was very dissatisfying in a political, economic and
national sense.
As far as the bombing and uranium are concerned, I was not surprised. I am
embittered. As well as you are, I believe. As every normal person on the
planet is, I believe .
Q: Could you tell us something about your meeting with Mr. Holbrook in
Belgrade?
A: We used to have a successful co-operation until the negotiations in
Dayton were agrreed upon. He even crucially contributed to the reaching of
the cease-fire agreement when Serb forces were in a very difficult position.
Upon my categorical warnings that all further negotiations shall terminate,
he stopped the Croatian army in front of Prijedor at the moment when it was
quite clear they may take both Prijedor and Banja Luka.
Up to Dayton Only
In Dayton he was very obviously engaged in favour of the Federation of
Bosnia&Herzegovina and to the detriment of the Republic of Srpska, but still
within the limits of the real desire that everyone achieves success, so that
period of co-operation I may assess as successful.
However, shortly after Dayton and after fulfilling the obligation of the
Security Council of the United Nations to lift all the sanctions against
FRY, they did not keep their word, they unilaterally imposed the so-called
outer wall of sanctions and continued with the pressures.
When in 1998, completely without any basis and upon a false construction,
they opened the issue of Kosovo and Metohia I told him: "You are not
interested in Albanians at all, nor their interests, you have a different
objective". He asked : "Which one?". I answered: "To confirm your leading
role in Europe". He said: "It is true, but we are a super-power and we have
that interest."
If this could be correct in principle, it by no means could represent
explanation, even less justification for the illegal, criminal war against
FRY in 1999. That's why it would be necessary and useful if the new American
administration would pose one very simple question to it's predecessors:
"How did you serve the American national interests by making alliance with
the Albanian narco-mafia, white-slave traders, killers and terrorists?"
The answer to this question is something every citizen of their and our
country deserves. Especially the veterans of the two World Wars who fought
shoulder to shoulder for freedom.
Q: You were accused by the Western countries and DOS that you are not a
democratic personality and that you never received leaders of the opposition
for talks on the dramatic situation the country was going through. Would you
comment on that?
The Time of Power
A: Of course I would comment on that. Actually, I will deny every single
word relating to such assessments.
At the time of my "undemocratic" power, I proposed forming of the Government
of the National Unity back in 1993 in Serbia. Such a Government was formed
in Serbia in the course of the several terms of office and as such it lasted
up to October 2000. That month a new Government was formed with the members
of only one party. The Government of National Unity with several parties
making it existed in Serbia during two terms of office and was made up of
three parties, and in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in several terms of
office, made up of four or more parties.
In the course of my "undemocratic" power, 95 percent of the press was in the
hand of the opposition. Almost all the local television stations, about 500
of them, also. In those media, that were financially supported from abroad,
I and my family were offended in a most vulgar manner, were accused of all
the crimes in this world. No one was ever made responsible for that slander
and accusations though none of them had any grounds.
There were no forbidden books, theatre plays and movies, as it is common
both at the West and East when it is deemed that such contents are not in
the interest of the state, people or the current policy, and sometimes only
because they are offensive to the distinguished representatives in power.
And here such "artistic" works were quite plentiful.
In the course of my "undemocratic" authority, the doors of this country were
open to the thousands of foreign journalists, even to these for whom it was
known that they were coming with the texts prepared beforehand -
unprofessional and non-principled and offensive not only for the persons in
power, but also for the people. Doors were also open to all the diplomats,
even these who conducted themselves undiplomaticaly in respect of internal
affairs of the country and the interest of the people living in it,
something that the states sending them would not allow ever to happen in
their countries.
We Were Meeting
Of course, it is not true that I did not communicate, that I did not receive
leaders of the opposition parties. I was regularly receiving heads of all
parties who participated in the Cabinets. But, I was also receiving the
heads of parties that were not in the Cabinet, but were in the Parliament. I
received even the leaders of the parties that were not represented in the
Parliament.
I was receiving them in the manner they wanted to be received. Publicly or
for consultations without informing the public of such meetings.
I personally never expressed wish not to inform the public of my meeting
with any opposition leader. Why should I , really, have such desire? It was
in my favour. But, when there was a meeting the public did not know about,
it was in accord with the wishes of my collocutors.
Really, I do not know if they were avoiding the public when meeting me
because they were ordered so by their sponsors from abroad or because they
did not wanted their sponsors to know of the sins they committed.
Q: What do you think about censorship of the Yugoslav media, especially
during the course of your presidency?
They Were Competing in Slander
A: I think that censorship of the Yugoslav media while I was President of
Serbia and later Yugoslavia is an absolute and, really, dirty concoction. I
have just told you that approximately 95 percent of the press was in the
hands of the Serbian opposition. In the hands of the opposition also were
almost all the local TV stations, that is over 500 of them. Only at Kosovo,
for example, there were over 40 papers in the Albanian language, both daily
and periodical. All the media in the hand of the opposition were not
critical towards authorities in the sense of elaborating their own programme
and principled criticism of the social reality they disagreed with. These
were media totally committed to libel and slander against individuals. My
family and myself were at the top of the pyramid of libel and slander. And
it went on for years, for a whole decade. Perhaps my responsibility is
possible in the opposite sense, because I allowed the media, controlled by
the opposition, to lower down in the ethical sense, below the level a nation
should allow.
If I did so, what would have the West said then, so immersed with the
situation in Serbia, for such a policy in media, when liberal and really
without any control media was considered censored. Though, who knows,
perhaps they would have reproached me less if I really emulated them and
censored and punished everything in the state as they are doing in their
states.
Q: After the last election it was revealed that JUL does not have any
significant support of the citizens, and on the other hand SPS become the
largest opposition party. Do you think coalition with JUL was a mistake?
Important for the Unity of the Left
A: I do not think coalition with JUL was a mistake. Firstly, because I think
parties of the Left should politically work together for it means
strengthening the Left as a whole. Unity of the Left is of huge significance
not only for the left parties, but also for national interests. If the unity
of the Left was preserved, FRY would have a government of the Left today.
Then, I think it was not a mistake because with JUL we had better results at
the previous elections. December elections results are showing everything
except the real will of the citizens. After all, up to now the largest
numbers did not turn out to vote, as a consequence of the fact that
elections were held in the circumstances of lawlessness and violence. As far
as JUL itself in concerned, its December electoral results are showing that,
first of all, the very membership of JUL did not turn out to vote or they
voted in minimal numbers. That is a consequence of terrible demonisation of
JUL in all the media of the new government and the big pressures towards the
membership. It is known that the first and dramatic dismissals from the
leading positions occured at places where such positions were occupied by
the members of JUL. The largest number of dismissed and sacked persons,
mistreated individuals and even their children are from JUL. Apart from
that, there were some strange occurrences at the elections. I was told by
the people who voted for JUL with their families that at their voting places
JUL did not get a single vote.
Q: You met with Kostunica in the night of October the 6th . At that moment
the tension was absolute and danger of confrontation was essentially real.
What can you say us about that night? Were you afraid for you life, since
some of the DOS leaders wanted to arrest you that night as general Perisic
recently confirmed.
Everything is an Absolute Lie
A: You ask me several questions. I shall try to answer as briefly as
possible. As far as the meeting with Kostunica is concerned, on that
occasion he informed me that the Federal Constitutional Court passed a
decision confirming his (electoral) victory. I accepted that information.
However, I did not expect that violence and lawlessness of the previous day
shall continue. But, obviously there was a scenario to cause bloodletting at
the streets, that we luckily avoided. It is known who would have been
accused. There were attempts to impute to me such aspirations.
In my birth place, the town of Pozarevac, which is in the electoral unit
where the Left coalition won at presidential, parliamentary and local
elections respectively, they destroyed, robbed and put to fire everything my
son owned. That was obviously planned in advance. As well as , after all,
this four months long media satanisation of me and my family, especially my
26-year old son. Everything written about us is an absolute lie.
Now, new authorities are threatening me with the court trials for crimes
they are inventing in their offices. Such practice of stage managing of
court trials belongs to the experiences of the darkest years of Nazism,
Stalinism and Mckartysm. All the press is in the hands of the authorities,
there is no other press, nor are there any chances to change things until
violence and single-mindedness are stopped and democracy is established as
well as the right of free expression of political opinions and political
organisation.
Q: What do you think about president Kostunica? What do you think about the
Hague Tribunal? And what about the decision of Biljana Plavsic to
"voluntarily" go to Hague?
Tribunal Against Serbs
A: I have not yet made up my mind regarding the new President of Yugoslavia.
It is necessary that some time passes, at least from my point of view, to
assess efforts and results of the Head of State regarding peace in the
country, its independence, security of citizens, economic development,
social stability, position of the country in the international community,
his authority in the country, in the world etc.
The Hague Tribunal, as I always maintained , is an immoral an illegal
institution, devised as means of retorsion for disobedient representatives
of the disobedient nations. In the exactly same manner as at one time
concentration camps were designed for nonessential nations and superfluous
persons.
That court exists above all because of Serbs. In other words, its main task
is to block the struggle of the Serb people for its national interests by
putting on trial the most distinguished representatives of Serb people in
that struggle. That is a form of intimidation Nazis implemented over Jews,
and later also over the Slavic peoples. By her "volunatary" journey to The
Hague, Biljna Plavsic wanted to demonstrate her thrust in the Hague Tribunal
and the former American administration, which had just left the American
political scene.
>From a virile nationalist, almost a chauvinist, Biljana Plavsic transformed
herself into an allay and collaborator of the former American
administration. I do not know whether she got scared and hopped that by
changing orientation from extreme anti-Western to extreme pro-Western she
would get amnesty of their anger or she simply assessed that Serb
nationalism does not have prospective and turned her back to it. In any
case, she co-operated with them during the last few years with a great trust
in Western justice .
I am not amazed by the West. But I am amazed by her. In the West, their
Governments know, as all the people in the world know, perhaps, that one
should not and need not relay on turn-coats. I am amazed by her. Did she
really think they had a good intention regarding her?
Q: These days there are many rumours you will stand trail in Belgrade. Is
there any truth in the accusation of taking money out to your family
accounts? Could you comment on that?
We are Exposed to Daily Threats
A: I know what for they would try me in the Hague. These indictments are
invented as well as the reasons for war against FRY. But, in Belgrade..?
Unless there is an established branch of the Hague Tribunal in the capital
of Yugoslavia...? Sort of an extension office. Then it would be clear to me.
As far as my accounts abroad are concerned, they are searching for them ten
years now. I have said to Holbrooke a few years ago, when he threatened me
with blocking of may accounts abroad: "Do not block them. All you find, you
may take".
I have no accounts abroad. I never had them. My whole life I only had my
salary and that is all. Out of the salary I could not have an account in the
country, let alone abroad. Now, I do not have a salary. The new authorities
left me without a salary in October.
Q: There were some announcements that your security will be reduced as soon
as a new government in Serbia is established. How do you feel regarding your
personal safety and that of your family?
A: Setting up the status of the Head of State whose term of office expired
by the new Head of State is a matter of honour and moral of the new Head of
State. But, in that there is also a bit of morale and honour of others, the
whole nation, in the final account.
Regarding to the security of my family and myself, we do feel insecure. We
are exposed to so many threats every day. It's not strange that Europe sees
the Balkans as a part of the continent it would wish does not exist, which
compromises it.
They did not Have the Strength
Q: What is your opinion of Italian foreign policy at the Balkans?
A: Italian foreign policy is similar to Italy. It strives to be principled,
co-operative, honours others, takes account of its own interests, tries to
avoid strife with Europe, to be important in Europe. On many occasions
Minister Dini had a goodwill, principled, just and cordial position towards
our country in the difficult years and the days of our negotiations and
confrontations with some Western governments, especially during the war with
NATO. Unfortunately, Italy did not have the strength to confront the crazy
crime NATO inflicted against our people in 1999.
Q: What do you see in the future of the federation of Serbia and Montenegro?
You said once that Serbia and Montenegro are two eyes in one head. Do you
believe DOS will succeed in preserving the federation? How do you imagine
the future of the region?
What Next
A: That future depends on what political forces in Serbia and Montenegro
would have decisive influence on the circumstances in these republics. Both
in Serbia and Montenegro there are forces that are separatist and others,
who are in favour of preservation of the Yugoslav state. At this moment I
think that in both republics dominating forces are ones oriented towards the
weakening of Yugoslavia, towards its disintegration, perhaps eradication.
In regards to DOS I do not know whether it will manage to preserve the
federation. No one knows that, because in the DOS there are extreme
separatist and anti-Yugoslav oriented persons, but also those who are in
favour of Yugoslavia. Though, I think the latter are fewer.
Concerning my vision of the region, I have one, but on that in another
interview. Now is not the time to talk about that.
Q: How do you envisage your political future in the country?
A: I have no plans of such nature. What I was I never planned to be.
Q: Could you say to the Italian public something I omitted to ask you in
this interview?
A: No one may make a small man a great one, nor an honest man dishonest. Nor
the coward a courageous man. Nor the bad man a good one. Not even if such
endeavour is supported financially, technologically, media-wise,
diplomatically and psychologically, said SPS Chairman Slobodan Milosevic in
the interview to the reputable Italian daily "La Stampa".
_________________________________________________
KOMINFORM
P.O. Box 66
00841 Helsinki
Phone +358-40-7177941
Fax +358-9-7591081
http://www.kominf.pp.fi
General class struggle news:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
subscribe mails to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Geopolitical news:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________
