Answer of Serbian NGOs to pro-NATO letter from Helsinki Federation for
Human Rights ; Nation Editor Responds to Critics
AGAINST THE LOGIC OF WAR
LETTER TO THE INTERNATIONAL HELSINKI FEDERATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
Dear Friends and Esteemed Colleagues,
This letter is an answer to a "request" made by our associates and friends
of long standing, with whom we cooperated for a number of years on the
long-term and far-reaching programme of building a civic society in the FR
of Yugoslavia. This request, which we received in the midst of war,
"humanitarian intervention" and NATO aggression, that is, in the midst of a
collapse of the legitimate spheres of public and political life, at a time
of extraordinary decrees, military rule and summary trials in Yugoslavia,
asks of us to raise our voices and sharpen political criticism and moral
condemnation of the regime in Belgrade. Moreover, in this assault of severe
western Alliance action, which has transformed our society into a military
barracks and enthroned Milosevic a charismatic leader and Supreme
Commander, we are expected, if possible, to approve, even greet with
understanding the militarist interventionism of NATO in the FR of
Yugoslavia.
Let us say immediately: from the beginning of the destruction of former
Yugoslavia our "civic position" has been clear and unambiguous. We have
been equally opposed both to the ethnic cleansing in Croatia, Bosnia and
Herzegovina and today in Kosovo and to NATO's intervention in the FR of
Yugoslavia. In other words, we fought with equal decisiveness against the
lethal political self-will of the Belgrade regime and the pernicious
militarist self-will of the western alliance. In this context, we cannot be
expected to unilaterally denounce local totalitarianism and, at the same
time, express solidarity with the pretensions of global hegemonism. It is
our principal belief that the civic society should function as a permanent
corrective to the state reason, and that NGOs should be supportive of peace
and not war option of their governments.
It is unfounded to expect that the chain of violence and an expansionist
military option will lead to a rational political solution in Kosovo, in
the FR of Yugoslavia and in the Balkans. On the contrary, we fear that in
the name of so-called "humanitarian intervention" we are witnessing the
revival of the old, archaic "figure of war", which we hoped long banished
from our culture.
Finally, let us remind you: the brutal disintegration of the former
Yugoslavia, and the related nationalist conflicts which culminated in the
ethnic catastrophe in Kosovo, took place "in collusion" with European
policies and international diplomacy. It has been precisely these
unexpected shocks that have dangerously threatened the ideals and norms of
international democracy, which is still the successor to the liberal and
social heritage of defence of autonomy of the individual, groups and
peoples.
In spite of all circumstances, we shall continue to fight persistently and
enduringly for freedom of the individual, for those individual, civic,
collective and human rights which this war has again brought into peril.
Alternative Academic Educational Network
Association of Citizens for Democracy, Social Justice and Support for Trade
Unions
Belgrade Circle
Belgrade Women Studies Center
Center for Policy Studies NEZAVISNOST
Center for Transition to Democracy
Civic Initiatives
District 0230 Kikinda
EKO Center
European Movement in Serbia
Forum for Ethnic Relations and Foundation for Peace and Crisis Management
Foundation for Peace and Crisis Management
Group 484
Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia
Society for Peace and Tolerance (Backa Palanka)
Sombor's Peace Group (Sombor)
Student Union of Yugoslavia
Trade Union Confederation
Union for Truth About Anti-Fascist Resistance
Urban Inn (Novi Pazar)
VIN Weekly Video News
Women in Black
YU Lawyers' Committee for Human Rights
In Belgrade,
May 21, 1999
Original sender: International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Letter to Serbian NGOs
Letter to Serbian non-governmental organizations regarding the Appeal
of 6 April by Belgrade NGOs from the Norwegian Helsinki Committee and
the International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights Oslo, Vienna 18
May 1999
Dear friends and colleagues,
As human rights organizations devoted to the protection of civil
society, and after having cooperated with some of you for many years,
the Norwegian Helsinki Committee and the International Helsinki
Federation for Human Rights take your Appeal of 6 April with utmost
seriousness. The Executive Committee of the IHF, which met in New York
on 8.-9. May, discussed your Appeal at length. It should be mentioned
that the protection of human rights defenders and civic activists in
Serbia are one of our main messages to decision makers and media in
Europe, and that we have initiated support campaigns and letters for
Serbian independents and intellectuals.
However, we are deeply disturbed that the Appeal of 6 April -- and
subsequent open letters and appeals from intellectuals in Belgrade --
reflects a view of the Kosovo crisis to which we cannot subscribe, and
we feel a need to clarify our position on these issues. The Kosovo
Albanians who have arrived in Albania, Macedonia and Montenegro have
been extensively interviewed by members of various Helsinki
committees, as well as by news media. Their stories confirm beyond any
reasonable doubt that they were driven from their homes by Serbian
police and paramilitary forces; that seemingly thousands have been
systematically killed, maimed, raped and robbed. This is ethnic
cleansing on a horrific scale. Neither the NATO bombing campaign nor
military actions by the Kosovo Liberation Army are responsible for the
"unprecedented exodus" which you describe. Based on the extensive
information we have collected about the catastrophe in Kosovo, we
consider it intellectualy and morally unsound to equate these
campaigns.
We respect your lonely and courageous struggle for democratization in
the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, a struggle we have supported for
years. But unfortunately -- and we would very much like to be mistaken
in this -- it seems to us that hardly any of your fellow citizens have
supported a just settlement to the Kosovo issue, and that the crisis
has been caught in a downward spiral of radicalization for many years.
Thus when you say that "NATO military intervention has undermined all
results we have achieved,"one must ask if these results were of such a
scope and significance to bring hope that the plight of Kosovo could
be relieved by peaceful means.
As the Rambouillet negotiations came to a close, it seemed clear to us
that there was no such hope of a political settlement. The regime
scorned international -- and domestic -- pressure aimed at a peaceful
solution, and went ahead with the preparations for the campaign which
is currently unfolding in Kosovo. Faced with preparations for grave
crimes, how should one respond? That was the dilemma faced by the
international community in March, and in our view you also should
recognize -- even though you do not support it -- that, in principle,
the NATO intervention was not an arbitrary act of aggression.
We are in sympathy with your extremely difficult situation, but we
cannot agree with the conclusions you have drawn as to who bears
primary responsibility for improving it. It is our view that your
appeal should properly be addressed to the FRY and Serbian authorities
which bear the responsibility for systematic and grave crimes of war
and crimes against humanity in Kosovo, and for the dangers you, as
members of the civil sector in Serbia, are currently facing.
We express our solidarity with you. Also, we acknowledge the
sacrifices you must make, and the dilemmas and paradoxes you are faced
with as victims of a government whose policies you cannot support, and
bearing the costs attached to efforts to make that government act in
accordance with civilized standards. It is our hope and aim that the
enormous responsibility the NATO states have taken on by initiating
the military intervention, will entail a far more whole-hearted
support of the civil sector in the Serbian society, which more than
ever, is crucial to Serbia's restoration into Europe. Unless the
western states recognize the need for this kind of policy, it will be
difficult to describe the current NATO actions as a humanitarian
intervention.
We will soon face new challenges. This letter is meant to open a
dialogue on what we can do together to preserve the independent forces
in the Serbian society in order that they may resurface after the war.
We would very much welcome your recommendations as to how we, from the
outside, should address the new situation and how we can continue to
support you in your current plight.
Bjorn Engesland
Secretary General
The Norwegian Helsinki Committee
Aaron Rhodes
Executive Director
on behalf of the
Executive Committee of the IHF:
Ludmilla Alexeyeva
Ulrich Fischer
Stein-Ivar Aarsaether
Sonja Biserko
Holly Cartner
Bjorn Emgesland
Krassimir Kanev
Andrzej Rzeplinski
=========================================
Whose Kosovo Fantasy?
By Katrina vanden Heuvel
Monday, May 31, 1999; Page A23
Richard Cohen says that The Nation "more than any other
magazine, probably, speaks for American liberalism," and then
denounces the magazine's call for stopping the bombing of
Yugoslavia as a liberal fantasy [op-ed, May 14]. But whose is the
fantasy?
Advocates of this air war insisted it would forestall the mass
displacement, plunder and murder of the Albanian Kosovars.
Reality: The catastrophic effects of NATO's air war against
Serbia have subverted the Clinton administration's declared
humanitarian intentions. By forcing the removal of independent
observers and raining bombs on Serbia, NATO gave Slobodan
Milosevic the predictable strategic occasion to implement and
escalate his long-planned scheme to brutally remove Kosovar
Albanians.
Now the bombing intensifies with no humanitarian purpose,
destroying the very people and places it was meant to protect.
Innocent civilians -- Albanians and Serbs alike -- are dying as
"collateral damage," even as Milosevic's killing and displacement
of Albanian Kosovars goes on unimpeded. We are destroying a
country that we will end up rebuilding -- or, more likely, walking out
on. The bombing is destabilizing the entire region we promised to
bolster and spreading the war we intended to contain.
Cohen argues that we must nonetheless defend NATO's
credibility -- without which, he says, Russia might again prey on
the nations of Eastern Europe. The Cold War lives, if only in
Cohen's imagination. Reality: NATO's credibility is being
shredded across the world as the bombing intensifies and civilian
casualties mount, while America's moral reputation is being
degraded more effectively than Milosevic's military capabilities.
Polls show that public esteem for NATO -- from Central Europe to
Latin American -- has dropped dramatically, not because the
alliance is viewed as "weak and ineffective" but because it looks
like a bully, willing to kill innocent people but unwilling to risk
casualties. And while the bombing fuels anti-American anger in
Russia, China and other countries with negative consequences
for disarmament, economic reform and democratization, the
Clinton administration has been counting on the Russians to help
get it out of the mess.
Cohen says the war enforces the rule of law. Reality: The Clinton
administration and NATO are pursuing their objectives by
repeatedly discarding the very standards they claim to defend.
NATO chose to launch a war against a sovereign nation without
seeking U.N. sanction, thereby undermining the United Nations'
authority and thus weakening its ability to deal with future
conflicts. The president chose to launch a war without
congressional declaration. The House of Representatives
refused to endorse the air war, so now it continues in defiance of
the will of Congress. NATO's tactics -- the bombing of civilian
trains, refugee convoys and the economic infrastructure of Serbia
-- violate international accords that all NATO countries have
signed. The fact that Milosevic's brutal ethnic cleansing has
earned his indictment by the Hague War Crimes Tribunal does
not diminish the seriousness of NATO's violations. How can
NATO encourage recognition of international law if the alliance
itself views itself as above those standards?
But Cohen and others now demand further escalation of the war --
to win it no matter the cost or consequences. This may reflect the
desperation of the war's original architects and supporters, but no
just war destroys a society in order to save it or uses recklessly
disproportionate means. As for the ground war being proposed, it
would likely incite Milosevic to massacre remaining fighting-age
Kosovar men and use civilians as human shields.
Cohen complains that by halting the bombing, the alliance would
allow Milosevic to "retain Kosovo, not to mention his leadership."
But NATO has never proposed to oust Milosevic and at
Rambouillet compelled the Kosovars to drop their independence
demands. A negotiated settlement is NATO's official goal. The
argument is how to achieve it.
Considering the disastrous consequences of this war, what is the
danger of giving peace a real chance? Cohen admits that
NATO's strategy has been "incompetent" but suggests more of
the same will somehow solve its faults. That's not realism -- or any
liberalism worth the name. If we halt the bombing, however, it may
enable all the parties, including Russia, to negotiate productively.
We must now move boldly toward a political settlement, which
should include an effective international peacekeeping force
acting under U.N. authority to protect the Albanian Kosovars, the
opportunity for refugees to return safely, autonomy for Kosovo
and a plan for economic reconstruction. (Much of this has already
been officially proposed by the G-8 nations.) Only then will the
United States and its allies actually help the victims of Milosevic's
crimes.
The writer is editor of The Nation.
© Copyright 1999 The Washington Post Company
