Institute for Public Accuracy 915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * http://www.accuracy.org * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___________________________________________________ Wednesday, June 9, 1999 WAS THIS WAR NECESSARY? While many are claiming the peace agreement shows that Milosevic backed down, some analysts are suggesting that essentially the same agreement could have been achieved without bombing. They point to U.S. demands at Rambouillet in February that are absent from the current agreement. While some elements of the new accords remain unclear, apparent major differences between the Rambouillet text and the current agreement include: WHAT MILOSEVIC GAVE UP * Can keep only a few hundred, not a few thousand, troops in Kosovo WHAT NATO GAVE UP * The international force can be deployed only in Kosovo, not throughout Yugoslavia * International force under UN -- not NATO -- auspices, with Russian component * UNHCR, not NATO, supervises return of refugees * No referendum on Kosovo independence PHYLLIS BENNIS, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.zmag.org/zmag/kosovo.htm Author of "Calling the Shots: How Washington Dominates Today's UN" and a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, Bennis said: "This agreement might have been achievable months earlier, without the devastation of Yugoslavia and the escalation of the anti-Albanian 'ethnic cleansing' in Kosovo wrought by NATO's bombing campaign." MARJORIE COHN, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/article/0,1051,SAV-9905200 163,000.html Professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, Cohn said: "At Rambouillet, NATO presented Milosevic with an ultimatum impossible for him to accept. NATO has now diluted its demands but, to justify two months of bombing, claims Milosevic capitulated..." STEPHEN ZUNES, [EMAIL PROTECTED] An associate professor of politics and chair of the Peace and Justice Studies Program at the University of San Francisco, Zunes said: "Most crucially, the insistence at Rambouillet that NATO troops have 'unimpeded access throughout the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia' has been dropped, limiting their role only to Kosovo..." SETH ACKERMAN, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.fair.org A media analyst with Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting, Ackerman said: "Last week's Serb agreement was falsely reported as a total NATO victory. Then, when military talks broke down, it was claimed that the Serbs were reneging. In fact, those military talks were largely a NATO ploy -- unsuccessful -- to totally bypass the UN." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
