C. Burford said: > The Serbs report that in addition to the 30 civilian deaths on Sunday, there has been an attack on an apartment block in the south of Serbia. They say the deaths total 50 in the last two days. > There is also the report that NATO bombed a bridge in the middle of 'market day,' then five or fifteen minutes later, when people were trying to assist victims of the bombing, they dropped another one in the same place. Textbook terrorist tactics. I'm ready to get off this bus. I see no movement towards efforts to protect Kosovars or their interests by Nato. In light of this deficiency, we've only got what amount to serial atrocities by Nato. I could see potential merit in a rescue invasion, if that's not an oxymoron, but my criteria would be: an explicit declaration of war by the U.S., ratified by Congress; war aims explicitly to secure the independence of Kosova or its annexation by Albania, and to stay out of Serbia except to protect Kosova; no economic dictat for any country in the region; a halt to any bombing of non-military targets, narrowly defined; a different U.S. president leading the campaign; the absence of Albright/Berger/Cohen in said U.S. Administration. Clinton is an evil, chicken-hearted swine who should be impeached. His policy to minimize U.S. casualties in order to make a symbolic gesture and forego a decline in his polling numbers has harmed Kosova no less than Milo. It could also cost more lives on all sides in the longer term. Failure of the Administration and Nato to specify any meaningful war aims underlines the likelihood that any deal in the offing will be a sell-out purely designed to save somebody's face, rather than Kosovar lives. Unfortunately Kosova looks to be a new entry to the international list of lost causes. I would still emphasize self-determination for Kosova, as for the Kurds, East Timor, etc. I still reject slurs on Kosovar nationalism, and note that 'militant' and 'fundamentalist' do not imply each other. The KLA is certainly militant, but it is not at all clear that it should be described as 'Islamic fundamentalist.' > > But there are real possibilities that the NATO command has shifted its concept of what is a legitimate target. This would be consistent with their impression that morale has broken in the Serb population in the last couple of weeks. It may be calculating that the deaths of 50 Serb civilians in two days, far from strengthening Serb resolve may weaken it ahead of a crucial sert of meetings determining the interpretation of the G8 conditions which Serbia has said it will accept. > As noted above, it doesn't seem to matter much now whether Nato or Serbia "win" this thing. 'Western' diplomats are about selling people out. > I was against the widening of the war to economic targets and I am against this further widening. But I would say to the many sincere, intelligent, informed , and committed left-wing subscbribers that it is not enough merely to oppose everything that western governments do as a matter of course. It is necessary to oppose them on the basis of a wider strategy challenging their claim to be the hegemonic arbiters of international justice and instead pinpoint the issues that would shape a juster concept of international world governance, which is being fashioned now, through such struggles. > Right. mbs
