Informazione
“Evidence” in the “Milosevic case“: What’ s behind Carla’s promises?
By Cathrin Schütz
As stated by chief prosecutor Carla del Ponte, in the upcoming months
the prosecution in the trial against former Yugoslav president Slobodan
Milosevic in The Hague will focus on “Sarajevo“ and “Srebrenica“.[1]
According to some official reports, between 7.000 and 8.000 Bosnian
Muslims were killed in July 1995, when Serb units launched an attack on
the UN “save heaven” of Srebrenica. Doubts continue to surface
regarding the extent and nature of these alleged crimes because the
official side of the story is in many respects lacking in factual
verification.[2]
After del Ponte herself had to admit that the Kosovo-case (which
originally served as the grounds for the Milosevic indictment and the
former president’s abduction and delivery to the Hague tribunal) lacked
the charge of genocide because there is no evidence for that, the
prosecution came up with additional indictments for Croatia and Bosnia
and accused Milosevic for genocide in Bosnia, a point which is mainly
based on the events around Srebrenica.
Recently, the prosecution suffered from another big disappointment when
Slobodan Milosevic’s predecessor - former Yugoslav president Zoran
Lilic - testified in The Hague on June 17. Lilic stated that Mr.
Milosevic had not been involved in the Srebrenica massacre. The next
day media headlines announced “Srebrenica »outraged« Milosevic“.[3]
But just one day later, this positive message for Milosevic disappeared
and the international press reported an opposite line, saying: “Paper
could link Milosevic with massacre“.[4]
The paper in question is an official document provided to the
prosecution by the London-based “Institute for War and Peace Reporting“
(IWPR). It is an order signed on July 10, 1995 by Bosnian-Serb Interior
Minister Tomislav Kovac, which instructs that a Serbian police unit
should be moved from Sarajevo to Srebrenica to “crush the enemy
offensive being carried out from the UN safe heaven of Srebrenica“.[5]
But the statements appearing on the occasion of the presentation of the
paper appear to be to the advantage of former president Milosevic. Some
unusual comments were made about the lack of any evidence for the
involvement of Milosevic – except the new-found document. IWPR bureau
chief in The Hague, Stacey Sullivan, while praising the paper, stated:
“Up until now, it was generally assumed that there was no link between
what happened in Srebrenica and Belgrade.“ As stated in the NYT on June
19, an official in the prosecutors office said “for the moment, this is
the first such document relating to the July 1995 massacre”.[6] SFOR
news confirms this. Reporting about the new-found document, SFOR news
states on June 20, 2003: “To date, it was mostly assumed that until the
summer of 1995, Serbia had cut off all of its ties to the Bosnian Serb
leadership and that the former Serbian forces had not participated in
the military operation in Srebrenica”.[7]
According to Sullivan, the document shows for the first time that
police from Serbia participated in this operation. The “Coalition for
International Justice“ in Washington pointed out the contrary by saying
that the document does not prove any involvement of those units. And
what is still unknown, and what Sullivan had to admit herself, is
whether Milosevic actually knew about those troops.
The NYT, usually in line with the rest of the corporate media in
pre-convicting the former president, suddenly choose to leave no doubts
about the awareness of any lack of evidence against Milosevic in the
Srebrenica case. “Witnesses and even participants in the massacre have
told the tribunal the roles played by the army, police and paramilitary
fighters in the blood bath. But even during the trial of Gen. Radislav
Krstic, one of the commanders at Srebrenica, who was sentenced to 46
years in prison for genocide, prosecutors had no documents linking the
atrocities to Belgrade”.
Recalling the reactions following the first presentation of the paper,
it now looks like it got more attention than it actually deserved.
Apparently, it provides no "new evidence" against Milosevic. Florence
Hartmann, spokesperson of the prosecution, called the document later
only “an element“, and announced there will be additional elements and
special witnesses for Srebrenica. The assumption remains that the
document was presented at the exact moment when Lilic’s testimony of
Milosevic’s innocence was the number one topic, in order to deflect
attention from news headlines which could undermine the prosecution’s
credibility. The IWPR assertion that the paper had been “overlooked”
seems to be highly questionable. The assumption that the Institute
(which with its branch in The Hague enjoys a physical closeness to the
tribunal) played in the prosecutors hands, is bolstered by a look on
their own list of cooperating organizations and partners. Among these
is the “Open Society Institute“ of US-American Billionaire George
Soros, who also provides funds directly to the tribunal. With “USAID“
the institute receives money from the US-government. Aid is also coming
from the US-American organization “International Research & Exchanges
Board”(IREX). At the same time, IREX is financing basically a long list
of journalists from former Yugoslavia reporting from the
Milosevic-trial in The Hague – providing training, apartments,
computers, etc. According to their own web-side information, IREX
receives funds from the US Department of State as well as from media
giant CNN-AOL-Time Warner, the latter also contributes financially to
the ICTY.[8]
Since Slobodan Milosevic is not permitted by the ICTY to give
press-statements, Vladimir Krsljanin, one of his Belgrade assistants,
comments for junge Welt: “Carla del Ponte recently boasted to the press
that she was able to prove all charges – except that genocide would be
more difficult. But even that she said will succeed in the upcoming
months. But that was only her attempt to hide her complete failures in
this regard from the public, because even her position as
chief-prosecutor has come under question. Slobodan Milosevic’s guilt
cannot be proven because it does not exist. Everybody knows that he
publicly and consistently condemned every extremism and crime. In his
opening statement, he announced that he would prove the complicity of
Western secret services in the worst crimes in Bosnia and Croatia.“
Indeed, this enterprise seems more likely to be successful than the
prosecution’s attempt to present evidence for a connection between
Milosevic and the massacre at Srebrenica. And the report of the
commission of the Dutch Institute for War Documentation (NIOD), led by
Cees Wiebes, agrees. “For five years, Professor Cees Wiebes of
Amsterdam University has had unrestricted access to Dutch intelligence
files and has stalked the corridors of secret service headquarters in
western capitals, as well as in Bosnia, asking questions.“[9] The
German Berliner Zeitung in April 2002, in reference to the Dutch
report, stated, there were “no hints for a direct involvement of
Milosevic and Serb authorities from Belgrade“ in the attack on
Srebrenica. Meanwhile, the same report according to The Guardian,
revealed the direct involvement of external forces: “America used
Islamists to arm the Bosnian Muslims, The Srebrenica report reveals the
Pentagon's role in a dirty war. The official Dutch inquiry into the
1995 Srebrenica massacre, released last week, contains one of the most
sensational reports on western intelligence ever published.“ “Weapons
flown in during the spring of 1995 were to turn up only a fortnight
later in the besieged and demilitarized enclave at Srebrenica. When
these shipments were noticed, Americans pressured UNPROFOR to rewrite
reports, and when Norwegian officials protested about the flights, they
were reportedly threatened into silence“, reports The Guardian.
If del Ponte wants to keep her promise of proving the genocide charge,
she may need to follow what seems to be her common routine of
manipulating witnesses, as was seen in the case of Rade Markovic. The
former head of state security, supposedly a witness on behalf of the
prosecution, stated in his testimony that he was offered a deal in
order to deliver a statement against Slobodan Milosevic.[10] Del
Ponte’s mid-July statement – in which she hoped that indicted senior
political and military figures during Milosevics 13 years in power
would testify against their former leader[11] - sounds more and more
like an announcement of new attempts to “incriminate testimony for
extenuating circumstances“.
Published in "junge Welt” (Berlin), "Beweisnot in Den Haag", August 19,
2003
URL: http://www.jungewelt.de/2003/08-19/005.php
By Cathrin Schütz
As stated by chief prosecutor Carla del Ponte, in the upcoming months
the prosecution in the trial against former Yugoslav president Slobodan
Milosevic in The Hague will focus on “Sarajevo“ and “Srebrenica“.[1]
According to some official reports, between 7.000 and 8.000 Bosnian
Muslims were killed in July 1995, when Serb units launched an attack on
the UN “save heaven” of Srebrenica. Doubts continue to surface
regarding the extent and nature of these alleged crimes because the
official side of the story is in many respects lacking in factual
verification.[2]
After del Ponte herself had to admit that the Kosovo-case (which
originally served as the grounds for the Milosevic indictment and the
former president’s abduction and delivery to the Hague tribunal) lacked
the charge of genocide because there is no evidence for that, the
prosecution came up with additional indictments for Croatia and Bosnia
and accused Milosevic for genocide in Bosnia, a point which is mainly
based on the events around Srebrenica.
Recently, the prosecution suffered from another big disappointment when
Slobodan Milosevic’s predecessor - former Yugoslav president Zoran
Lilic - testified in The Hague on June 17. Lilic stated that Mr.
Milosevic had not been involved in the Srebrenica massacre. The next
day media headlines announced “Srebrenica »outraged« Milosevic“.[3]
But just one day later, this positive message for Milosevic disappeared
and the international press reported an opposite line, saying: “Paper
could link Milosevic with massacre“.[4]
The paper in question is an official document provided to the
prosecution by the London-based “Institute for War and Peace Reporting“
(IWPR). It is an order signed on July 10, 1995 by Bosnian-Serb Interior
Minister Tomislav Kovac, which instructs that a Serbian police unit
should be moved from Sarajevo to Srebrenica to “crush the enemy
offensive being carried out from the UN safe heaven of Srebrenica“.[5]
But the statements appearing on the occasion of the presentation of the
paper appear to be to the advantage of former president Milosevic. Some
unusual comments were made about the lack of any evidence for the
involvement of Milosevic – except the new-found document. IWPR bureau
chief in The Hague, Stacey Sullivan, while praising the paper, stated:
“Up until now, it was generally assumed that there was no link between
what happened in Srebrenica and Belgrade.“ As stated in the NYT on June
19, an official in the prosecutors office said “for the moment, this is
the first such document relating to the July 1995 massacre”.[6] SFOR
news confirms this. Reporting about the new-found document, SFOR news
states on June 20, 2003: “To date, it was mostly assumed that until the
summer of 1995, Serbia had cut off all of its ties to the Bosnian Serb
leadership and that the former Serbian forces had not participated in
the military operation in Srebrenica”.[7]
According to Sullivan, the document shows for the first time that
police from Serbia participated in this operation. The “Coalition for
International Justice“ in Washington pointed out the contrary by saying
that the document does not prove any involvement of those units. And
what is still unknown, and what Sullivan had to admit herself, is
whether Milosevic actually knew about those troops.
The NYT, usually in line with the rest of the corporate media in
pre-convicting the former president, suddenly choose to leave no doubts
about the awareness of any lack of evidence against Milosevic in the
Srebrenica case. “Witnesses and even participants in the massacre have
told the tribunal the roles played by the army, police and paramilitary
fighters in the blood bath. But even during the trial of Gen. Radislav
Krstic, one of the commanders at Srebrenica, who was sentenced to 46
years in prison for genocide, prosecutors had no documents linking the
atrocities to Belgrade”.
Recalling the reactions following the first presentation of the paper,
it now looks like it got more attention than it actually deserved.
Apparently, it provides no "new evidence" against Milosevic. Florence
Hartmann, spokesperson of the prosecution, called the document later
only “an element“, and announced there will be additional elements and
special witnesses for Srebrenica. The assumption remains that the
document was presented at the exact moment when Lilic’s testimony of
Milosevic’s innocence was the number one topic, in order to deflect
attention from news headlines which could undermine the prosecution’s
credibility. The IWPR assertion that the paper had been “overlooked”
seems to be highly questionable. The assumption that the Institute
(which with its branch in The Hague enjoys a physical closeness to the
tribunal) played in the prosecutors hands, is bolstered by a look on
their own list of cooperating organizations and partners. Among these
is the “Open Society Institute“ of US-American Billionaire George
Soros, who also provides funds directly to the tribunal. With “USAID“
the institute receives money from the US-government. Aid is also coming
from the US-American organization “International Research & Exchanges
Board”(IREX). At the same time, IREX is financing basically a long list
of journalists from former Yugoslavia reporting from the
Milosevic-trial in The Hague – providing training, apartments,
computers, etc. According to their own web-side information, IREX
receives funds from the US Department of State as well as from media
giant CNN-AOL-Time Warner, the latter also contributes financially to
the ICTY.[8]
Since Slobodan Milosevic is not permitted by the ICTY to give
press-statements, Vladimir Krsljanin, one of his Belgrade assistants,
comments for junge Welt: “Carla del Ponte recently boasted to the press
that she was able to prove all charges – except that genocide would be
more difficult. But even that she said will succeed in the upcoming
months. But that was only her attempt to hide her complete failures in
this regard from the public, because even her position as
chief-prosecutor has come under question. Slobodan Milosevic’s guilt
cannot be proven because it does not exist. Everybody knows that he
publicly and consistently condemned every extremism and crime. In his
opening statement, he announced that he would prove the complicity of
Western secret services in the worst crimes in Bosnia and Croatia.“
Indeed, this enterprise seems more likely to be successful than the
prosecution’s attempt to present evidence for a connection between
Milosevic and the massacre at Srebrenica. And the report of the
commission of the Dutch Institute for War Documentation (NIOD), led by
Cees Wiebes, agrees. “For five years, Professor Cees Wiebes of
Amsterdam University has had unrestricted access to Dutch intelligence
files and has stalked the corridors of secret service headquarters in
western capitals, as well as in Bosnia, asking questions.“[9] The
German Berliner Zeitung in April 2002, in reference to the Dutch
report, stated, there were “no hints for a direct involvement of
Milosevic and Serb authorities from Belgrade“ in the attack on
Srebrenica. Meanwhile, the same report according to The Guardian,
revealed the direct involvement of external forces: “America used
Islamists to arm the Bosnian Muslims, The Srebrenica report reveals the
Pentagon's role in a dirty war. The official Dutch inquiry into the
1995 Srebrenica massacre, released last week, contains one of the most
sensational reports on western intelligence ever published.“ “Weapons
flown in during the spring of 1995 were to turn up only a fortnight
later in the besieged and demilitarized enclave at Srebrenica. When
these shipments were noticed, Americans pressured UNPROFOR to rewrite
reports, and when Norwegian officials protested about the flights, they
were reportedly threatened into silence“, reports The Guardian.
If del Ponte wants to keep her promise of proving the genocide charge,
she may need to follow what seems to be her common routine of
manipulating witnesses, as was seen in the case of Rade Markovic. The
former head of state security, supposedly a witness on behalf of the
prosecution, stated in his testimony that he was offered a deal in
order to deliver a statement against Slobodan Milosevic.[10] Del
Ponte’s mid-July statement – in which she hoped that indicted senior
political and military figures during Milosevics 13 years in power
would testify against their former leader[11] - sounds more and more
like an announcement of new attempts to “incriminate testimony for
extenuating circumstances“.
Published in "junge Welt” (Berlin), "Beweisnot in Den Haag", August 19,
2003
URL: http://www.jungewelt.de/2003/08-19/005.php
Da: Rick Rozoff
A: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Data: Ven 29 Ago 2003 13:24:24
Oggetto: [yugoslaviainfo] Kosovo: The International Community's
'Success Story'
http://bhhrg.org/LatestNews.asp?ArticleID=24
British Helsinki Human Rights Group
August 28, 2003
Kosovo: The International Community’s ‘Success Story’
-Could the US Administration risk admitting that the
Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) has turned out to be
another monster out of control, once sponsored by
Washington now defying it? Or will America quietly
admit that fighting the KLA is one war on terrorism it
can do without?
British Helsinki Human Rights representatives last
visited Kosovo in late March, 2003 in the days leading
up to the US-led invasion of Iraq. While visiting the
enclave of Graèanica, outside Kosovo’s capital,
Priština, they learned that KFOR troops had
effectively stopped protecting its Serb inhabitants
and had even removed armoured protection from outside
the small town’s world-famous orthodox monastery
church. Local Serbs said that they feared for their
safety and that, although things were “quiet” at the
time, past experience indicated that such “quiet” was
invariably a prelude for violent attacks against them
by Albanian youths who would also taunt them while
driving through the enclave in their cars.
In Graèanica and other Serb enclaves BHHRG also noted
a serious deterioration with regard to sanitary
conditions and public health: the stream running
through the centre of Graèanica, for example, was
rust-coloured, presumably polluted by discarded metal
from things like old cars, tractors, etc. Garbage was
strewn everywhere; there appeared to be have been no
garbage collection by any central authority for some
time. Although local Albanians have deposited
mountains of garbage into the streets of Kosovo’s
towns and villages since their ‘liberation’ in 1999,
this was the first time in four years that BHHRG had
noted the same phenomenon in Serb-populated areas.
But, although Kosovo’s Albanians have been the winners
in their conflict with Serbia, many of them cannot
have imagined that liberation was going to turn out
quite as bleakly as it has done. Factories are closed
and there are few jobs for those who have failed to
gain employment in the magic circle of the UN and
other international agencies. Hope must have been
abandoned by many, as Kosovo’s once teeming villages
and small towns now appear eerily uninhabited – many
people have packed up and gone West. For those that
remain, daily life is a constant struggle. In March
2003, BHHRG watched as carts loaded with chopped wood
were being transported home for use as fuel.
Electricity supplies have never properly resumed since
Nato’s bombing campaign in 1999. (Iraqis living on
promises of an imminent renewal of transmission should
take note of Kosovo’s 4 years plus wait for
electricity to return once the “tyrant” had been
driven out.)
BHHRG returned to the UK but refrained from reporting
on conditions in Kosovo at the time preferring to
wait and see if the Graèanica Serbs were correct and
whether or not the “quiet” they talked about really
was the prelude to renewed violence. It seems that the
events of the past few weeks have proved them right.
Recorded below are just a few of the most extreme acts
of violence that have occurred in both Kosovo and
Serbia in summer, 2003.
The anti-Milosevic Western-backed radio station B-92
reported:
“Terrorist attack against Serb children near
Gorazdevac
Gorazdevac, - Unknown persons opened machine gun fire
on Serb children bathing in the Bistrica River not far
from Gorazdevac, Pec municipality. According to
preliminary information two Serb children were killed
and at least five others wounded. Panta Dakic (10) and
Ivan Jovovic (20) were pronounced dead at Pec Hospital
while Bogdan Bukumiric (15) and Nikola Bogicevic are
in critical condition. Also seriously wounded were
Dragana Srbljak (14), Djordje Ugrenovic (20) and Marko
Bogicevic, said Sladjana Todorovic of Gorazdevac, who
was with the wounded children in Pec Hospital.
Bogdan Bukumiric is scheduled to be transferred to
Belgrade by helicopter during the day. According to
reports from the field, Albanians stoned the vehicle
of Milovan Pavlovic while he was attempting to drive
some of the wounded children to Pec Hospital. Pavlovic
sustained arm injuries. Local sources report that the
attackers also beat the wounded child in Pavlovic's
vehicle.
The children were bathing today in the Bistrica
River, some 500 meters from the center of the village,
when they were targeted by machine gun fire by unknown
persons at about 13.30. Three rounds were fired. KFOR
and UNMIK police have not conducted an investigation
at the site of the attack, although members of the UN
military mission helped to get from Gorazdevac to Pec
Hospital, whose staff is really trying to help the
wounded children," explained Sladjana Todorovic.
Gorazdevac today is full of great unrest and fear. The
nuns of the Pec Patriarchate and the monks of Visoki
Decani have urgently requested KFOR to allow them to
enter Gorazdevac. The sisterhood of the Pec
Patriarchate could not get an escort and the Decani
monks are still waiting for a positive response from
KFOR to provide them with a military escort.
This is an unprecedented crime. In Kosovo and
Metohija for four years there has been no Serbian Army
or police, who Albanian terrorists claimed were their
enemies, and they are killing our children. In the
past Serb children have been the targets of grenades
and run over by cars, and now they are being
perfidiously killed when they are swimming in the
river - said Bishop Artemije of Raska and Prizren,
commenting on today's terrorist attack near
Gorazdevac. The Serb village of Gorazadevac is located
near Pec and security is provided by Italian KFOR
troops. It is still the home of some 1,000 Serbs, half
of the village population prior to the arrival of the
UN mission in Kosovo and Metohija. The village has a
primary school and two secondary schools, one
technical and one economic. In order to obtain basics
for life, residents are dependent on military and
police assistance or forced to travel to northern
Kosovska Mitrovica by escorted convoy.
GORAZDEVAC - Gorazdevac local Rajko Jandzikovic, who
was, after today's attack on Serbs, transporting the
wounded to the hospital in Pec together with Milivoje
Pavlovic, stated that they were attacked near the
farmer's market in that city by a group of Albanians
using their fists and stones.
A group of young people bathing in the Bistrica River
near Pec was targeted by machine gun fire in which two
people were killed and six wounded.
"Near the farmer's market our Opel Kadet with
Zrenjanin license plates ran out of fuel. I went to
the KFOR checkpoint some 50 meters away to ask if they
would give us a liter of fuel but the Italian soldiers
turned us down, despite the fact that I speak Italian
relatively well," said Jandzikovic."We were then
attacked by a group of young Albanians - with fists
and stones - while members of the Kosovo Police
Service nearby failed to react," he added.
Jandzakovic said that "there were two boys in the car
fighting for their lives" and added that he does not
understand "what is happening to people." "Somehow we
managed, with a KFOR military escort, to get to Pec
Hospital but once there we were mistreated even by the
physicians, who refused to give immediate assistance
to the wounded boys," said Jandzikovic, who returned
to Gorazdevac without his vehicle, together with KFOR.
His shirt is soaked with blood and there are several
bruises on his face.”
[See Radio B92, www.b92.net/English/news Beta News
Agency, Belgrade
13th August, 2003.]
PRISTINA, KLINA, BELGRADE -- Wednesday – Repatriate to
the village of Bica near Klina in Kosovo, Zoran
Doncic, who was wounded on Tuesday night, underwent a
surgery in the Spanish military hospital in Istok
andhis condition is stable, the Raska and Prizren
Eparchy announced.
UNMIK spokesman Andrea Angelli said that Doncic was
kept in the Spanish hospital because they could not
transport him to northern Kosovska Mitrovica as
demanded by the local people due to seriousness of his
wound. Bica village elder told B92 that Zoran Doncic
was shot by a sniper from the nearby hill while
driving a tractor.
Coordination Centre for Kosovo head Nebojsa Covic told
Beta that the wounding of Zoran Doncic was a message
to Serbia before adoption of the Kosovo declaration in
the Serbian Parliament, but also a message to the
international community that "terrorist gangs"
operating in Kosovo will not stop doing crimes.
He said it was appalling that UNMIK arrived to the
scene at 9 p.m. when the crime was committed at 6.20
p.m. Around fifty Serb families returned to the
village of Bica a year ago.
[See Beta News Agency, www.b92.net/english/news 27th
August, 2003.]
DOBROTIN: 27.8.03. Three unknown men attempted to
kidnap ten-year old Marina Damjanovic from the village
of Dobrotin near Lipljan in Kosovo yesterday around 8
p.m. According to the girl's testimony and claims of
eyewitnesses, three Albanians in a white Mercedes with
foreign registration plates stopped briefly beside the
girl and attempted to drag her inside the car. The
girl managed to free herself and flee into the
neighbourhood shouting for help, while the car sped
away.
The blockade set up by citizens of Dobrotin on the
local Lipljan-Janjevo road in protest yesterday has
been terminated today. UNMIK police and KFOR have set
up checkpoints at the village's entrance and exit.
[See B92 http://www.b92.net/english/news/index 27th
August, 2003.]
Ethnic Albanian violence is not only on the rise in
Kosovo. Incidents are constantly occurring in
neighbouring Macedonia as well as in the Preševo
valley in southern Serbia _ scene of a low-level
insurgency three years ago. BHHRG visited both Preševo
and Bujanovac in March 2003 and noted the increase in
the towns’ Albanian population. Hundreds of new
houses and other properties have been built since the
Group last visited the region in 2000. They stretch
across the narrow Preševo valley effectively cutting
Serbia proper off from Macedonia in the south. BHHRG
also noted the omnipresence of EU-sponsored
regeneration projects which do not seem, as the
following reports show, to have tamed the incipient
violence which seems to be second-nature to local
inhabitants.
Again, the pro-Western B-92 reported:
”Children wounded in Presevo grenade attack
PRESEVO -- Saturday – Two fifteen-year-old girls were
wounded in one of a series of explosions last night in
the courtyard of a cultural centre in the south
Serbian town of Presevo.
The local representative of Belgrade’s Coordination
Centre for Kosovo and South Serbia, Mica Markovic,
told B92 that a bomb crater at the site of the
explosion indicated that the weapon used had been
either a hand grenade or a 40mm grenade launcher.
Because of the direction of the attack, said Markovic,
it was possible that the adjacent police station had
been the target. One of the three grenades caused
major property damage to a neighbouring house.
The two injured girls were sitting on a bench close to
the cultural centre. One suffered wounds to the face
and the other to the legs.
Officers of the Coordination Centre and the EU
Monitoring Mission are supervising an investigation
into the bombing.
[See B92 http://www.b92.net/english/news/index 24th
August, 2003.]
PRESEVO A strong explosion last night shook the south
Serbian town of Presevo, close to the Municipal
Assembly building. A preliminary investigation has not
yet revealed whether the blast came from a missile
aimed at the Assembly or a bomb which exploded inside
a building. However police sources say that the likely
cause was a hand grenade thrown into a construction
site adjacent to the local mosque and opposite the
Assembly building.
Gunfire was reported last night in the neighbouring
municipality of Bujanovac, but sources in the security
forces described this as provocation. There were no
casualties in either incident.
Meanwhile, the head of the OSCE mission in
Serbia-Montenegro, Maurizio Massari, has cancelled
planned visit to the region. Massari, who was
scheduled to meet the mayors of Presevo and Bujanovac,
is reported to be unwell.
[See B92 http://www.b92.net/english/news/index 28th
August, 2003.]
Why is this violence allowed to go on? How can NATO
leaders still get away with calling the Kosovo
intervention a “great success” unchallenged? Anyobody
who wants different ethnic groups to live in harmony
and prosperity cannot call Kosovo a model. Sadly, one
of the reasons is the failure of the government in
Belgrade to protect Serbs in Kosovo or anywhere else
for that matter, including the Preševo valley.
Hand-wringing by politicians like Serbia’s deputy
prime-minister and points-man for Kosovo, Nebojša
Èovic and prime minister Zoran Živkovic is cynical
politicking and only serves to highlight the fact
that extreme Serbian “nationalism” was always a sham.
Strikingly, supporters of the apparently hardline
Bosnian Serb nationalists like the recently murdered
Serbian Premier, Zoran Djindjic, who was the last
Serbian politician to meet the indicted war criminal
Dr. Radovan Karadzic in 1996, turned out to be
indifferent to the daily attacks on ordinary Serbs.
His heirs and successors are similarly unconcerned,
apart from verbal protests.
Despite the media talk about Serbian intransigence and
blind nationalism, it is remarkable that neither in
Bosnia nor Kosovo have there been any guerrilla
attacks on the NATO-forces in de facto occupation.
This contrasts sharply with the growing difficulties
faced in Iraq by the Anglo-American troops there.
Will the passive attitude to the NATO troops remain
the same if Iraqi resistance continues to cause the
Allies difficulties? Militant Albanians in Kosovo have
shown a disregard for the NATO’s capacity to enforce
peace already in Kosovo, across the border with Serbia
and across the border with Macedonia. So far Serbs
have not imitated their enemies defiance of NATO’s
ostensible authority. Some Serbs abroad are already
denouncing their fellow Serbs’ passivity in view of
the apparent success of Iraqi guerrillas in forcing
Washington and her allies to seek a new UN mandate and
other concessions as a result of casualties.
This letter appeared on a widely distributed Serbian
website:
Dear Sirs,
Thank you for your regular articles. I recently read
the comment you published, written by "Cossack,"
titled "A Pox on Both Their Houses"
(http://www.artel.co.yu/en/glas_dijaspore/2003-08-26_3.html).
I disagree with Cossack's conclusion that the reason
that Yugoslavia is not the subject of debate in the
United States is simply a matter of the priorities of
the so-called US liberals and US neo-cons. His
argument puts the blame on others.
Instead, I think the reason why Yugoslavia is not a
point of international debate is because there has
been a very full and complete assumption of power by
willing collaborators in Serbia and Montenegro and
there have been no losses whatsoever to worry about
among US military forces. There has been no guerrilla
war, no resistance and not even a single Yugoslav
daily newspaper opposes the US-led occupation of the
country. Yugoslavia's leadership has been so weak and
divided that it even stooped so low as to adopt the
name arbitrarily given to the country by the United
States way back in 1992 - Serbia and Montenegro.
This utter lack of resistance of any sort leaves no
issue or problem for Americans to debate. That is the
real difference. For the US, Serbia was easy. And
Serbia continues to be easy.
Speaking as a Serb born abroad, I am very sorry to
have to point out this fact.
Milos Obilic would not be able to recognize the
Serbian nation today.
Most sincerely,
John Bosnitch
Journalist
Tokyo
Whether Serbs will copy their Albanian rivals and
resort to guerrilla warfare remains to be seen. But
already the “usual suspects” in the US Congress are
responding to the violence in the region by demanding
further concessions to those engaged in violence.
Already at the start of the year, the U.S. House of
Representatives heard a resolution backing Kosovan
independence:
One Hundred Eighth Congress
Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
January 27, 2003
Support the Independence of Kosova
Dear Colleague:
Today we introduced a resolution (H. Res. 28, which is
at the end of this email) expressing the sense of the
House of Representatives that the United States should
declare its support for the independence of Kosova.
Under the Yugoslav constitution of 1974, Kosova was
equivalent in most ways to Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia
and Herzegovina, and Macedonia . In its position as an
``autonomous province,'' Kosova, in practice,
exercised the same powers as a republic. It had its
own parliament, high courts, central bank, police
service, and defense force. Through its definition in
1968 as a part of the Yugoslav Federal System, it
gained equal representation at the federal level with
Serbia and the other juridical units of the former
Yugoslavia.
When Slovenia and Croatia demanded independence,
Western governments made similar arguments against
recognizing those countries. However, eventually the
same Western governments did recognize not only the
independence of Slovenia and Croatia, but
Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia as well, having
discovered that independence for those nations
involved not so much a change of borders as a change
in the status of existing borders. The lines on the
map remained the same, but their status was upgraded
from republican to national. It is fitting that the
Kosovars be allowed to follow the same path towards
independence.
Since the cessation of the1999 conflict with Serbia,
during which the Serbian military and paramilitary
forces killed more than ten thousand Kosovar Albanians
and expelled close to a million, Kosova remains under
a United Nations mandate. The Kosovars, the United
Nations, NATO, and the European Union are now making
efforts to rebuild Kosova, revitalize its economy,
establish democratic institutions of self-government,
and heal the scars of war.
It is time for the United States to abide by its
recognition that a right to self-determination exists
as a fundamental right of all people through declaring
its support for the independence of Kosova. To
cosponsor H.Res.28, please contact Keith O'Neil at
225-6735 (Lantos) or Greg Galvin (Hyde) at 225-5021.
Sincerely,
TOM LANTOS
HENRY HYDE
Member of Congress
Member of Congress
H. RES. 28
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives
that the United States should declare its support for
the independence of Kosova.
Whereas the United States and the international
community recognize that a right to self-determination
exists as a fundamental right of all people;
Whereas Kosova was constitutionally defined as a
sovereign territory in the First National Liberation
Conference for Kosova on January 2, 1944, and this
status was confirmed in the Constitution of the
Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia adopted in
1946, and the amended Yugoslav constitution adopted in
1974 preserved the autonomous status of Kosova as a de
facto republic;
Whereas prior to the disintegration of the former
Yugoslavia, Kosova was a separate political and legal
entity with separate and distinct financial
institutions, police force, municipal and national
government, school system, judicial and legal system,
hospitals and other independent organizations;
Whereas Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic rose to
power in 1987 on a platform of ultra nationalism and
anti-Albanian racism, advocating violence and hatred
against all non-Slavs and specifically targeting the
Albanians of Kosova;
Whereas Slobodan Milosevic subsequently stripped
Kosova of its self-rule, without the consent of the
people of Kosova;
Whereas the elected Assembly of Kosova, faced with
these intolerable acts, adopted a Declaration of
Independence on July 2, 1990, proclaimed the Republic
of Kosova, and adopted a constitution on September 7,
1990, based on the international legal principles of
self-determination, equality, and sovereignty;
Whereas in recognition of the de facto dissolution of
the Yugoslav federation, the European community
established principles for the recognition of the
independence and sovereignty of the republics of the
former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and
Kosova fully satisfied those principles as a de facto
republic within the federation;
Whereas a popular referendum was held in Kosova from
September 26-30, 1991, in which 87 percent of all
eligible voters cast ballots and 99.87 percent voted
in favor of declaring Kosova independent of the
Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia;
Whereas, from the occupation of Kosova in 1989 until
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) military
action against the Milosevic regime in 1999, the
Albanians of Kosova were subjected to the most brutal
treatment in the heart of Europe since the Nazi era,
forcing approximately 400,000 Albanians to flee to
Western Europe and the United States;
Whereas in the spring of 1999 almost 1,000,000 Kosovar
Albanians were driven out of Kosova and at least
10,000 were murdered by the Serbian paramilitary and
military;
Whereas Slobodan Milosevic was indicted by the
International War Crimes Tribunal and extradited to
The Hague in June 2001 to stand trial for war crimes,
crimes against humanity, and genocide in Kosova,
Bosnia, and Croatia;
Whereas the United Nations established Kosova as a
protectorate under Resolution 1244, ending the decade
long Serbian occupation of Kosova and Milosevic's
genocidal war in Kosova;
Whereas Kosovar Albanians, together with
representatives of the Serb, Turkish, Roma, Bosniak,
and Ashkali minorities in Kosova, have held free and
fair municipal and general elections in 2000 and 2001
and successfully established a parliament in 2002,
which in turn elected a president and prime minister;
Whereas 50 percent of the population in Kosova is
under the age of 25 and the unemployment rate is
currently between 60 and 70 percent, increasing the
likelihood of young people entering criminal networks,
the source of which lies outside of Kosova, or working
abroad in order to survive unless massive job creation
is facilitated by guaranteeing the security of foreign
investments through an orderly transition to the
independence of Kosova;
Whereas the Kosova parliament is committed to
developing a western-style democracy in which all
citizens, regardless of ethnicity, are granted full
human and civil rights and are committed to the return
of all noncriminal Serbs who fled Kosova during and
after the war; and
Whereas there is every reason to believe that
independence from Serbia is the only viable option for
Kosova, after autonomy has failed time and time again:
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of
Representatives that the United States should -
(1) publicly support the independence of
Kosova and the establishment of Kosova as a sovereign
and democratic state in which human rights are
respected, including the rights of ethnic and
religious minorities, as the only way to lasting peace
and stability in the Balkans;
(2) recognize the danger that delay in the
resolution of Kosova's final status poses for the
political and economic viability of Kosova and the
future of Southeast Europe;
(3) work in conjunction with the United
Nations, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and
other multilateral organizations to facilitate an
orderly transition to the independence of Kosova; and
(4) provide its share of assistance, trade,
and other programs to support the government of an
independent Kosova and to encourage the further
development of democracy and a free market economic
system.
At the moment, all the parties on the ground,
including the new UN representative to Kosovo, Harri
Holkeri, deny that anything other than Security
Council resolution 1244 defines the province’s
status. But, the ‘international community’ seems happy
to create ever more, albeit small and precarious,
independent states. As the vociferous support of
newly-independent (and destitute) East Timor for the
Iraq War showed such micro-states can be relied upon
to support this or that intervention when called upon
to do so by their more powerful sponsors.
Even if the ultimate goal of Kosovo’s independence is
postponed, the province looks unlikely to go back
under Belgrade’s wing. However, its “liberation” from
Serbian rule looks like a grim precedent for Iraq’s
fate after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime:
both seem set to continue to suffer from lack of
electricity and clean water, while unemployment and
persistent violence plague them.
Now the threat to NATO comes from the Alliance’s
former Albanian allies. Even if Serbs show no
inclination to mimic Iraqi resistance, Albanian
nationalists seem to be upping the tempo of violence
at a time when US and British forces are already fully
engaged in Iraq. Washington’s recent history of
waking up to find yesterday’s allies today’s enemies
has followed a tortuous path from the 1980s when both
Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and the Afghan Muslim
fundamentalists were allies to today’s bitter
animosities for Saddam and the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
Could the US Administration risk admitting that the
Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) has turned out to be
another monster out of control, once sponsored by
Washington now defying it? Or will America quietly
admit that fighting the KLA is one war on terrorism it
can do without?
A: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Data: Ven 29 Ago 2003 13:24:24
Oggetto: [yugoslaviainfo] Kosovo: The International Community's
'Success Story'
http://bhhrg.org/LatestNews.asp?ArticleID=24
British Helsinki Human Rights Group
August 28, 2003
Kosovo: The International Community’s ‘Success Story’
-Could the US Administration risk admitting that the
Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) has turned out to be
another monster out of control, once sponsored by
Washington now defying it? Or will America quietly
admit that fighting the KLA is one war on terrorism it
can do without?
British Helsinki Human Rights representatives last
visited Kosovo in late March, 2003 in the days leading
up to the US-led invasion of Iraq. While visiting the
enclave of Graèanica, outside Kosovo’s capital,
Priština, they learned that KFOR troops had
effectively stopped protecting its Serb inhabitants
and had even removed armoured protection from outside
the small town’s world-famous orthodox monastery
church. Local Serbs said that they feared for their
safety and that, although things were “quiet” at the
time, past experience indicated that such “quiet” was
invariably a prelude for violent attacks against them
by Albanian youths who would also taunt them while
driving through the enclave in their cars.
In Graèanica and other Serb enclaves BHHRG also noted
a serious deterioration with regard to sanitary
conditions and public health: the stream running
through the centre of Graèanica, for example, was
rust-coloured, presumably polluted by discarded metal
from things like old cars, tractors, etc. Garbage was
strewn everywhere; there appeared to be have been no
garbage collection by any central authority for some
time. Although local Albanians have deposited
mountains of garbage into the streets of Kosovo’s
towns and villages since their ‘liberation’ in 1999,
this was the first time in four years that BHHRG had
noted the same phenomenon in Serb-populated areas.
But, although Kosovo’s Albanians have been the winners
in their conflict with Serbia, many of them cannot
have imagined that liberation was going to turn out
quite as bleakly as it has done. Factories are closed
and there are few jobs for those who have failed to
gain employment in the magic circle of the UN and
other international agencies. Hope must have been
abandoned by many, as Kosovo’s once teeming villages
and small towns now appear eerily uninhabited – many
people have packed up and gone West. For those that
remain, daily life is a constant struggle. In March
2003, BHHRG watched as carts loaded with chopped wood
were being transported home for use as fuel.
Electricity supplies have never properly resumed since
Nato’s bombing campaign in 1999. (Iraqis living on
promises of an imminent renewal of transmission should
take note of Kosovo’s 4 years plus wait for
electricity to return once the “tyrant” had been
driven out.)
BHHRG returned to the UK but refrained from reporting
on conditions in Kosovo at the time preferring to
wait and see if the Graèanica Serbs were correct and
whether or not the “quiet” they talked about really
was the prelude to renewed violence. It seems that the
events of the past few weeks have proved them right.
Recorded below are just a few of the most extreme acts
of violence that have occurred in both Kosovo and
Serbia in summer, 2003.
The anti-Milosevic Western-backed radio station B-92
reported:
“Terrorist attack against Serb children near
Gorazdevac
Gorazdevac, - Unknown persons opened machine gun fire
on Serb children bathing in the Bistrica River not far
from Gorazdevac, Pec municipality. According to
preliminary information two Serb children were killed
and at least five others wounded. Panta Dakic (10) and
Ivan Jovovic (20) were pronounced dead at Pec Hospital
while Bogdan Bukumiric (15) and Nikola Bogicevic are
in critical condition. Also seriously wounded were
Dragana Srbljak (14), Djordje Ugrenovic (20) and Marko
Bogicevic, said Sladjana Todorovic of Gorazdevac, who
was with the wounded children in Pec Hospital.
Bogdan Bukumiric is scheduled to be transferred to
Belgrade by helicopter during the day. According to
reports from the field, Albanians stoned the vehicle
of Milovan Pavlovic while he was attempting to drive
some of the wounded children to Pec Hospital. Pavlovic
sustained arm injuries. Local sources report that the
attackers also beat the wounded child in Pavlovic's
vehicle.
The children were bathing today in the Bistrica
River, some 500 meters from the center of the village,
when they were targeted by machine gun fire by unknown
persons at about 13.30. Three rounds were fired. KFOR
and UNMIK police have not conducted an investigation
at the site of the attack, although members of the UN
military mission helped to get from Gorazdevac to Pec
Hospital, whose staff is really trying to help the
wounded children," explained Sladjana Todorovic.
Gorazdevac today is full of great unrest and fear. The
nuns of the Pec Patriarchate and the monks of Visoki
Decani have urgently requested KFOR to allow them to
enter Gorazdevac. The sisterhood of the Pec
Patriarchate could not get an escort and the Decani
monks are still waiting for a positive response from
KFOR to provide them with a military escort.
This is an unprecedented crime. In Kosovo and
Metohija for four years there has been no Serbian Army
or police, who Albanian terrorists claimed were their
enemies, and they are killing our children. In the
past Serb children have been the targets of grenades
and run over by cars, and now they are being
perfidiously killed when they are swimming in the
river - said Bishop Artemije of Raska and Prizren,
commenting on today's terrorist attack near
Gorazdevac. The Serb village of Gorazadevac is located
near Pec and security is provided by Italian KFOR
troops. It is still the home of some 1,000 Serbs, half
of the village population prior to the arrival of the
UN mission in Kosovo and Metohija. The village has a
primary school and two secondary schools, one
technical and one economic. In order to obtain basics
for life, residents are dependent on military and
police assistance or forced to travel to northern
Kosovska Mitrovica by escorted convoy.
GORAZDEVAC - Gorazdevac local Rajko Jandzikovic, who
was, after today's attack on Serbs, transporting the
wounded to the hospital in Pec together with Milivoje
Pavlovic, stated that they were attacked near the
farmer's market in that city by a group of Albanians
using their fists and stones.
A group of young people bathing in the Bistrica River
near Pec was targeted by machine gun fire in which two
people were killed and six wounded.
"Near the farmer's market our Opel Kadet with
Zrenjanin license plates ran out of fuel. I went to
the KFOR checkpoint some 50 meters away to ask if they
would give us a liter of fuel but the Italian soldiers
turned us down, despite the fact that I speak Italian
relatively well," said Jandzikovic."We were then
attacked by a group of young Albanians - with fists
and stones - while members of the Kosovo Police
Service nearby failed to react," he added.
Jandzakovic said that "there were two boys in the car
fighting for their lives" and added that he does not
understand "what is happening to people." "Somehow we
managed, with a KFOR military escort, to get to Pec
Hospital but once there we were mistreated even by the
physicians, who refused to give immediate assistance
to the wounded boys," said Jandzikovic, who returned
to Gorazdevac without his vehicle, together with KFOR.
His shirt is soaked with blood and there are several
bruises on his face.”
[See Radio B92, www.b92.net/English/news Beta News
Agency, Belgrade
13th August, 2003.]
PRISTINA, KLINA, BELGRADE -- Wednesday – Repatriate to
the village of Bica near Klina in Kosovo, Zoran
Doncic, who was wounded on Tuesday night, underwent a
surgery in the Spanish military hospital in Istok
andhis condition is stable, the Raska and Prizren
Eparchy announced.
UNMIK spokesman Andrea Angelli said that Doncic was
kept in the Spanish hospital because they could not
transport him to northern Kosovska Mitrovica as
demanded by the local people due to seriousness of his
wound. Bica village elder told B92 that Zoran Doncic
was shot by a sniper from the nearby hill while
driving a tractor.
Coordination Centre for Kosovo head Nebojsa Covic told
Beta that the wounding of Zoran Doncic was a message
to Serbia before adoption of the Kosovo declaration in
the Serbian Parliament, but also a message to the
international community that "terrorist gangs"
operating in Kosovo will not stop doing crimes.
He said it was appalling that UNMIK arrived to the
scene at 9 p.m. when the crime was committed at 6.20
p.m. Around fifty Serb families returned to the
village of Bica a year ago.
[See Beta News Agency, www.b92.net/english/news 27th
August, 2003.]
DOBROTIN: 27.8.03. Three unknown men attempted to
kidnap ten-year old Marina Damjanovic from the village
of Dobrotin near Lipljan in Kosovo yesterday around 8
p.m. According to the girl's testimony and claims of
eyewitnesses, three Albanians in a white Mercedes with
foreign registration plates stopped briefly beside the
girl and attempted to drag her inside the car. The
girl managed to free herself and flee into the
neighbourhood shouting for help, while the car sped
away.
The blockade set up by citizens of Dobrotin on the
local Lipljan-Janjevo road in protest yesterday has
been terminated today. UNMIK police and KFOR have set
up checkpoints at the village's entrance and exit.
[See B92 http://www.b92.net/english/news/index 27th
August, 2003.]
Ethnic Albanian violence is not only on the rise in
Kosovo. Incidents are constantly occurring in
neighbouring Macedonia as well as in the Preševo
valley in southern Serbia _ scene of a low-level
insurgency three years ago. BHHRG visited both Preševo
and Bujanovac in March 2003 and noted the increase in
the towns’ Albanian population. Hundreds of new
houses and other properties have been built since the
Group last visited the region in 2000. They stretch
across the narrow Preševo valley effectively cutting
Serbia proper off from Macedonia in the south. BHHRG
also noted the omnipresence of EU-sponsored
regeneration projects which do not seem, as the
following reports show, to have tamed the incipient
violence which seems to be second-nature to local
inhabitants.
Again, the pro-Western B-92 reported:
”Children wounded in Presevo grenade attack
PRESEVO -- Saturday – Two fifteen-year-old girls were
wounded in one of a series of explosions last night in
the courtyard of a cultural centre in the south
Serbian town of Presevo.
The local representative of Belgrade’s Coordination
Centre for Kosovo and South Serbia, Mica Markovic,
told B92 that a bomb crater at the site of the
explosion indicated that the weapon used had been
either a hand grenade or a 40mm grenade launcher.
Because of the direction of the attack, said Markovic,
it was possible that the adjacent police station had
been the target. One of the three grenades caused
major property damage to a neighbouring house.
The two injured girls were sitting on a bench close to
the cultural centre. One suffered wounds to the face
and the other to the legs.
Officers of the Coordination Centre and the EU
Monitoring Mission are supervising an investigation
into the bombing.
[See B92 http://www.b92.net/english/news/index 24th
August, 2003.]
PRESEVO A strong explosion last night shook the south
Serbian town of Presevo, close to the Municipal
Assembly building. A preliminary investigation has not
yet revealed whether the blast came from a missile
aimed at the Assembly or a bomb which exploded inside
a building. However police sources say that the likely
cause was a hand grenade thrown into a construction
site adjacent to the local mosque and opposite the
Assembly building.
Gunfire was reported last night in the neighbouring
municipality of Bujanovac, but sources in the security
forces described this as provocation. There were no
casualties in either incident.
Meanwhile, the head of the OSCE mission in
Serbia-Montenegro, Maurizio Massari, has cancelled
planned visit to the region. Massari, who was
scheduled to meet the mayors of Presevo and Bujanovac,
is reported to be unwell.
[See B92 http://www.b92.net/english/news/index 28th
August, 2003.]
Why is this violence allowed to go on? How can NATO
leaders still get away with calling the Kosovo
intervention a “great success” unchallenged? Anyobody
who wants different ethnic groups to live in harmony
and prosperity cannot call Kosovo a model. Sadly, one
of the reasons is the failure of the government in
Belgrade to protect Serbs in Kosovo or anywhere else
for that matter, including the Preševo valley.
Hand-wringing by politicians like Serbia’s deputy
prime-minister and points-man for Kosovo, Nebojša
Èovic and prime minister Zoran Živkovic is cynical
politicking and only serves to highlight the fact
that extreme Serbian “nationalism” was always a sham.
Strikingly, supporters of the apparently hardline
Bosnian Serb nationalists like the recently murdered
Serbian Premier, Zoran Djindjic, who was the last
Serbian politician to meet the indicted war criminal
Dr. Radovan Karadzic in 1996, turned out to be
indifferent to the daily attacks on ordinary Serbs.
His heirs and successors are similarly unconcerned,
apart from verbal protests.
Despite the media talk about Serbian intransigence and
blind nationalism, it is remarkable that neither in
Bosnia nor Kosovo have there been any guerrilla
attacks on the NATO-forces in de facto occupation.
This contrasts sharply with the growing difficulties
faced in Iraq by the Anglo-American troops there.
Will the passive attitude to the NATO troops remain
the same if Iraqi resistance continues to cause the
Allies difficulties? Militant Albanians in Kosovo have
shown a disregard for the NATO’s capacity to enforce
peace already in Kosovo, across the border with Serbia
and across the border with Macedonia. So far Serbs
have not imitated their enemies defiance of NATO’s
ostensible authority. Some Serbs abroad are already
denouncing their fellow Serbs’ passivity in view of
the apparent success of Iraqi guerrillas in forcing
Washington and her allies to seek a new UN mandate and
other concessions as a result of casualties.
This letter appeared on a widely distributed Serbian
website:
Dear Sirs,
Thank you for your regular articles. I recently read
the comment you published, written by "Cossack,"
titled "A Pox on Both Their Houses"
(http://www.artel.co.yu/en/glas_dijaspore/2003-08-26_3.html).
I disagree with Cossack's conclusion that the reason
that Yugoslavia is not the subject of debate in the
United States is simply a matter of the priorities of
the so-called US liberals and US neo-cons. His
argument puts the blame on others.
Instead, I think the reason why Yugoslavia is not a
point of international debate is because there has
been a very full and complete assumption of power by
willing collaborators in Serbia and Montenegro and
there have been no losses whatsoever to worry about
among US military forces. There has been no guerrilla
war, no resistance and not even a single Yugoslav
daily newspaper opposes the US-led occupation of the
country. Yugoslavia's leadership has been so weak and
divided that it even stooped so low as to adopt the
name arbitrarily given to the country by the United
States way back in 1992 - Serbia and Montenegro.
This utter lack of resistance of any sort leaves no
issue or problem for Americans to debate. That is the
real difference. For the US, Serbia was easy. And
Serbia continues to be easy.
Speaking as a Serb born abroad, I am very sorry to
have to point out this fact.
Milos Obilic would not be able to recognize the
Serbian nation today.
Most sincerely,
John Bosnitch
Journalist
Tokyo
Whether Serbs will copy their Albanian rivals and
resort to guerrilla warfare remains to be seen. But
already the “usual suspects” in the US Congress are
responding to the violence in the region by demanding
further concessions to those engaged in violence.
Already at the start of the year, the U.S. House of
Representatives heard a resolution backing Kosovan
independence:
One Hundred Eighth Congress
Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
January 27, 2003
Support the Independence of Kosova
Dear Colleague:
Today we introduced a resolution (H. Res. 28, which is
at the end of this email) expressing the sense of the
House of Representatives that the United States should
declare its support for the independence of Kosova.
Under the Yugoslav constitution of 1974, Kosova was
equivalent in most ways to Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia
and Herzegovina, and Macedonia . In its position as an
``autonomous province,'' Kosova, in practice,
exercised the same powers as a republic. It had its
own parliament, high courts, central bank, police
service, and defense force. Through its definition in
1968 as a part of the Yugoslav Federal System, it
gained equal representation at the federal level with
Serbia and the other juridical units of the former
Yugoslavia.
When Slovenia and Croatia demanded independence,
Western governments made similar arguments against
recognizing those countries. However, eventually the
same Western governments did recognize not only the
independence of Slovenia and Croatia, but
Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia as well, having
discovered that independence for those nations
involved not so much a change of borders as a change
in the status of existing borders. The lines on the
map remained the same, but their status was upgraded
from republican to national. It is fitting that the
Kosovars be allowed to follow the same path towards
independence.
Since the cessation of the1999 conflict with Serbia,
during which the Serbian military and paramilitary
forces killed more than ten thousand Kosovar Albanians
and expelled close to a million, Kosova remains under
a United Nations mandate. The Kosovars, the United
Nations, NATO, and the European Union are now making
efforts to rebuild Kosova, revitalize its economy,
establish democratic institutions of self-government,
and heal the scars of war.
It is time for the United States to abide by its
recognition that a right to self-determination exists
as a fundamental right of all people through declaring
its support for the independence of Kosova. To
cosponsor H.Res.28, please contact Keith O'Neil at
225-6735 (Lantos) or Greg Galvin (Hyde) at 225-5021.
Sincerely,
TOM LANTOS
HENRY HYDE
Member of Congress
Member of Congress
H. RES. 28
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives
that the United States should declare its support for
the independence of Kosova.
Whereas the United States and the international
community recognize that a right to self-determination
exists as a fundamental right of all people;
Whereas Kosova was constitutionally defined as a
sovereign territory in the First National Liberation
Conference for Kosova on January 2, 1944, and this
status was confirmed in the Constitution of the
Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia adopted in
1946, and the amended Yugoslav constitution adopted in
1974 preserved the autonomous status of Kosova as a de
facto republic;
Whereas prior to the disintegration of the former
Yugoslavia, Kosova was a separate political and legal
entity with separate and distinct financial
institutions, police force, municipal and national
government, school system, judicial and legal system,
hospitals and other independent organizations;
Whereas Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic rose to
power in 1987 on a platform of ultra nationalism and
anti-Albanian racism, advocating violence and hatred
against all non-Slavs and specifically targeting the
Albanians of Kosova;
Whereas Slobodan Milosevic subsequently stripped
Kosova of its self-rule, without the consent of the
people of Kosova;
Whereas the elected Assembly of Kosova, faced with
these intolerable acts, adopted a Declaration of
Independence on July 2, 1990, proclaimed the Republic
of Kosova, and adopted a constitution on September 7,
1990, based on the international legal principles of
self-determination, equality, and sovereignty;
Whereas in recognition of the de facto dissolution of
the Yugoslav federation, the European community
established principles for the recognition of the
independence and sovereignty of the republics of the
former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and
Kosova fully satisfied those principles as a de facto
republic within the federation;
Whereas a popular referendum was held in Kosova from
September 26-30, 1991, in which 87 percent of all
eligible voters cast ballots and 99.87 percent voted
in favor of declaring Kosova independent of the
Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia;
Whereas, from the occupation of Kosova in 1989 until
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) military
action against the Milosevic regime in 1999, the
Albanians of Kosova were subjected to the most brutal
treatment in the heart of Europe since the Nazi era,
forcing approximately 400,000 Albanians to flee to
Western Europe and the United States;
Whereas in the spring of 1999 almost 1,000,000 Kosovar
Albanians were driven out of Kosova and at least
10,000 were murdered by the Serbian paramilitary and
military;
Whereas Slobodan Milosevic was indicted by the
International War Crimes Tribunal and extradited to
The Hague in June 2001 to stand trial for war crimes,
crimes against humanity, and genocide in Kosova,
Bosnia, and Croatia;
Whereas the United Nations established Kosova as a
protectorate under Resolution 1244, ending the decade
long Serbian occupation of Kosova and Milosevic's
genocidal war in Kosova;
Whereas Kosovar Albanians, together with
representatives of the Serb, Turkish, Roma, Bosniak,
and Ashkali minorities in Kosova, have held free and
fair municipal and general elections in 2000 and 2001
and successfully established a parliament in 2002,
which in turn elected a president and prime minister;
Whereas 50 percent of the population in Kosova is
under the age of 25 and the unemployment rate is
currently between 60 and 70 percent, increasing the
likelihood of young people entering criminal networks,
the source of which lies outside of Kosova, or working
abroad in order to survive unless massive job creation
is facilitated by guaranteeing the security of foreign
investments through an orderly transition to the
independence of Kosova;
Whereas the Kosova parliament is committed to
developing a western-style democracy in which all
citizens, regardless of ethnicity, are granted full
human and civil rights and are committed to the return
of all noncriminal Serbs who fled Kosova during and
after the war; and
Whereas there is every reason to believe that
independence from Serbia is the only viable option for
Kosova, after autonomy has failed time and time again:
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of
Representatives that the United States should -
(1) publicly support the independence of
Kosova and the establishment of Kosova as a sovereign
and democratic state in which human rights are
respected, including the rights of ethnic and
religious minorities, as the only way to lasting peace
and stability in the Balkans;
(2) recognize the danger that delay in the
resolution of Kosova's final status poses for the
political and economic viability of Kosova and the
future of Southeast Europe;
(3) work in conjunction with the United
Nations, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and
other multilateral organizations to facilitate an
orderly transition to the independence of Kosova; and
(4) provide its share of assistance, trade,
and other programs to support the government of an
independent Kosova and to encourage the further
development of democracy and a free market economic
system.
At the moment, all the parties on the ground,
including the new UN representative to Kosovo, Harri
Holkeri, deny that anything other than Security
Council resolution 1244 defines the province’s
status. But, the ‘international community’ seems happy
to create ever more, albeit small and precarious,
independent states. As the vociferous support of
newly-independent (and destitute) East Timor for the
Iraq War showed such micro-states can be relied upon
to support this or that intervention when called upon
to do so by their more powerful sponsors.
Even if the ultimate goal of Kosovo’s independence is
postponed, the province looks unlikely to go back
under Belgrade’s wing. However, its “liberation” from
Serbian rule looks like a grim precedent for Iraq’s
fate after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime:
both seem set to continue to suffer from lack of
electricity and clean water, while unemployment and
persistent violence plague them.
Now the threat to NATO comes from the Alliance’s
former Albanian allies. Even if Serbs show no
inclination to mimic Iraqi resistance, Albanian
nationalists seem to be upping the tempo of violence
at a time when US and British forces are already fully
engaged in Iraq. Washington’s recent history of
waking up to find yesterday’s allies today’s enemies
has followed a tortuous path from the 1980s when both
Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and the Afghan Muslim
fundamentalists were allies to today’s bitter
animosities for Saddam and the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
Could the US Administration risk admitting that the
Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) has turned out to be
another monster out of control, once sponsored by
Washington now defying it? Or will America quietly
admit that fighting the KLA is one war on terrorism it
can do without?
(deutsch / english / italiano)
11 Settembre, nuovi libri e persino un convegno sulle menzogne
dell'establishment USA
1. CONVEGNO a Berlino il 7 settembre
2. NUOVO LIBRO dell'ex ministro tedesco Andreas von Bülow
3. THE TRUTH BEHIND SEPTEMBER 11 (by Michel Chossudovsky)
=== 1 ===
BERLINO 7 SETTEMBRE 2003
Tra gli invitati il magistrato Guido Salvini!
An international Research symposium on the open questions of 9/11
coming in Berlin.
demanding answers - demanding to stop the war
www.hintergrund.de
---
Widersprüche zum 11. September
Offene Fragen und die Forderung nach Antworten sowie der Offenlegung
der unter Verschluss gehaltenen Beweise
(UNANSWERED QUESTIONS - DEMANDING ANSWERS)
Wie versprochen geht es weiter:
Am 7. September 2003 ab 15 Uhr im Tempodrom Berlin
Diesmal, ebenfalls wie versprochen, mit engagierten Experten aus den
USA.
Wir lassen uns von der jetzigen US-Administration und der
Medienberichterstattung auch in Deutschland nicht beirren.
Wir bieten während des ganzen Tages am 7. September 2003, kurz vor dem
zweiten Jahrestag, Informationen zum 11. September für die Presse und
für jeden Interessierten und jede Interessierte. Wir fordern die
Offenlegung der maßgeblichen Dokumente, die den Tathergang am 11.
September 2001 belegen können, aber bis heute unter Verschluss gehalten
werden.
Zu den Widersprüchen des "11. September" sprechen:
Michael Ruppert (USA)
ehemaliger Polizist in Los Angeles, einer der bekanntesten 9/11-
Experten in den USA
Daniel Hopsicker (USA)
Autor, Recherchen bez. Flugschulen der angeblichen Terroristen
Kyle Hence/Tom Flocco
(live aus USA)
von „unanswered questions“
Nafeez Ahmed (GB)
Autor des Buches „Geheimsache 9/11“
Guido Salvini (I)
Untersuchungsrichter aus Mailand
Mathias Bröckers (D)
Autor des Buches „11.9.“ und „Fakten, Fälschungen und die unterdrückten
Beweise des 11. 9.“
Andreas Hauß (D)
Autor des Buches „Fakten, Fälschungen und die unterdrückten Beweise des
11. 9.“
Ekkehard Sieker (D)
Bekannt durch seine Beiträge für Monitor/WDR (z.B. Bin-Laden-Video)
Eckart Spoo (D)
langjähriger Korrespondent der Frankfurter Rundschau, Herausgeber der
Zeitschrift Ossietzky
Michael Opperskalski (D)
Geheimdienst-Experte und Redakteur der Zeitschrift Geheim
Regine Igel (D)
Autorin, z.B. das Buch „Andreotti – eine italienische Karriere“
Dieter Elken (D)
Rechtsanwalt
Sumit Bhattacharyya von Amnesty International hält einen Vortrag zum
Thema Menschenrechtsverletzungen als Folge des 11. September.
Es gibt nicht nur Vorträge und Diskussionen, eine Live-Schaltung in die
USA zu Kyle Hence, Tom Flocco etc., sondern auch Filme und die
Möglichkeit zu Einzelgesprächen. Und diesmal wird es Zeit für die
Beantwortung Ihrer Fragen geben, was in dieser Form am 30.6. in der
Humboldt Universität wegen des vorzeitigen Abbruchs nicht möglich war.
Diese Veranstaltung steht ganz im Zeichen der deutsch-amerikanischen
Kooperation.
Vielen Dank an dieser Stelle an meinen Co-Organisator Nicholas Levis
und die vielen Mitstreiter, die sich an der Vorbereitung dieser
Veranstaltung beteiligen.
Ihr Ronald Thoden
7. September 2003, Tempodrom im Zentrum von Berlin, Möckernstraße
(U Möckernbrücke oder U Potsdamer Platz/ S Anhalter Bahnhof)
---
More links:
www.911questions.netfirms.com
www.911truth.org
=== 2 ===
LIBRO-SHOCK DI UN NOTO POLITICO TEDESCO
http://www.piper.de/web/books/3492045456.html
Lügen, Täuschung, falsche Spuren
Andreas von Bülow
Die CIA und der 11. September
Internationaler Terror und die Rolle der Geheimdienste
Neuerscheinung
Vehement widerspricht Andreas von Bülow der offiziellen Version der
Anschläge vom 11. September: Ohne geheimdienstliche Unterstützung war
eine solche Operation nicht durchzuführen. Seine brisanten Thesen sind
ein Angriff auf die Verlogenheit der CIA.
Nur Stunden nach dem Terroranschlag vom 11. September hatte die
US-Regierung Fotos und Steckbriefe aller Attentäter, wußte sie Bescheid
über alle Drahtzieher und Hintermänner. Und blitzartig war auch
Präsident Bushs Strategie gegen die »Mächte des Bösen« fertig. Zufall?
Andreas von Bülow, früherer Bundesminister und nicht erst seit seinem
Standardwerk »Im Namen des Staates« als Geheimdienstexperte mit besten
Kontakten ausgewiesen, zweifelt die offizielle Version vehement an.
Präzise und vorurteilslos stellt er alle Ungereimtheiten des
offiziellen Tatherganges zusammen, von der unwahrscheinlichen Präzision
der von Flugschülern gelenkten Maschinen bis zu der auffälligen
Inaktivität der Abwehr. Kann es sein, so Bülow, daß dieser Anschlag der
US-Regierung in Wahrheit gelegen kam? Ohne Geheimdienste war eine
solche Operation nicht möglich – und die Spuren führen eindeutig zu
deren Netzwerk und nicht zuletzt zur CIA ...
Andreas von Bülow
Andreas von Bülow wurde am 17. Juli 1937 in Dresden geboren. 1956–1960
studierte von Bülow in Heidelberg und München Rechtswissenschaften,
1969 Promotion zum Dr. jur. Seit 1960 Parteimitglied der SPD, war
Andreas von Bülow von 1969 bis 1994 Mitglied des Bundestages, u.a. in
der Parlamentarischen Kontrollkommission für die »Dienste«. 1976–1980
war er Parlamentarischer Staatssekretär des Bundesministers für
Verteidigung, von 1980 bis 1982 Bundesminister für Forschung und
Technologie. Seit 1994 lebt von Bülow als Rechtsanwalt in Bonn. 1998
erschien bei Piper: »Im Namen des Staates. CIA, BND und die kriminellen
Machenschaften der Geheimdienste« (jetzt SP 3050).
271 Seiten Kartoniert
EUR(D) 13,- / sFr 22,70
ISBN 3-492-04545-6
---
http://www.perlentaucher.de/buch/14783.html
Andreas von Bülow
"Die CIA und der 11. September"
Internationaler Terror und die Rolle der Geheimdienste
Piper Verlag, München 2003
ISBN 3492045456, Kartoniert
272 Seiten, 13,00 EUR
[ Klappentext ]
Vehement widerspricht Andreas von Bülow der offiziellen Version der
Anschläge vom 11. September: Ohne geheimdienstliche Unterstützung war
eine solche Operation nicht durchzuführen. Seine brisanten Thesen sind
ein Angriff auf die Verlogenheit der CIA. Nur Stunden nach dem
Terroranschlag vom 11. September hatte die US-Regierung Fotos und
Steckbriefe aller Attentäter, wusste sie Bescheid über alle Drahtzieher
und Hintermänner. Und blitzartig war auch Präsident Bushs Strategie
gegen die Mächte des Bösen fertig. Zufall? Andreas von Bülow, früherer
Bundesminister, zweifelt die offizielle Version vehement an.
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung vom 04.08.2003
Wilfried von Bredow bescheinigt dem Autor in seiner Besprechung eine
"etwas schräg eingestellte Phantasie" und sieht ihm beim Kampf "um den
Preis der abenteuerlichsten Erklärung für die Terroranschläge in New
York und Washington" als klaren Sieger. Von Bredow zufolge lassen sich
von Bülows "Theorien (im Sinne von Hirngespinsten)" zu vier Hauptthesen
verdichten: Die Crash-Flugzeuge vom 11. September wurden nicht von den
19 jungen Muslimen entführt, sondern ferngelenkt. Über das nötige
Wissen verfügen allein amerikanische Stellen, die außerdem vermutlich
auch für die Sprengladungen im Innern des WTC verantwortlich sind, die
das Gebäude haben einstürzen lassen sowie für die Cruise Missile, von
der das Pentagon das getroffen wurde. Verantwortlich für diese Aktion
war von Bülow zufolge, wie von Bredow aus dem Buch zitiert, eine "wie
auch immer zusammengesetzte Geheimdienststruktur, die die amerikanische
Politik nach dem 11.9. vorauszusehen, zu berechnen und gezielt ins Werk
zu setzen in der Lage war", ihr Ziel war, "die Massen der westlichen
Demokratien hinter die zur geopolitischen Landnahme entschlossenen
politischen Eliten der USA" zu zwingen. Von Bredow Fazit: Bei von
Bülows Konstrukt bleibe "einem die Spucke weg."
---
http://www.ndrinfo.de/ndrinfo_pages_std/0,2758,OID143312_REF720,00.html
Politisches Buch
Die CIA und der 11. September
Andreas von Bülow
Andreas von Bülow kennt sich mit Geheimdiensten aus. 25 Jahre lang saß
er als SPD-Abgeordneter im Bundestag und hatte dort im Rahmen der
Parlamentarischen Kontrollkommission Zugang zu sensiblen Informationen
über die sogenannten "Dienste". Der ehemalige Bundesminister für
Forschung und Technologie hatte sich bereits in früheren Büchern mit
CIA und BND beschäftigt.
In diesem neuen nun listet er seine Zweifel an der offiziellen Version
über die Terroranschläge des 11. September auf. Erfreulicherweise gibt
er sich dabei nicht politischen Spekulationen darüber hin, was alles
wohl hätte sein können. Andererseits kommt er nach Würdigung vieler
technischer Details der vier Flugzeugentführungen zu dem äußerst
beunruhigenden Resumee: "Der eigentliche Tathergang war mit Sicherheit
anders. Die Flugzeuge sind mit aller Wahrscheinlichkeit durch
Fernsteuerung den Piloten aus der Hand genommen und in die Türme des
World Trade Centers gesteuert worden."
Die 19 musliminischen Selbstmordattentäter, von denen allseits die Rede
ist, waren nach Bülows Erkenntnissen unfähige Hobbyflieger, denen das
mit hoher Exaktheit durchgeführte Flugmanöver des Sturzes in die beiden
Türme des World Trade Center bzw. des Pentagon nicht zuzutrauen ist.
Doch geht man in die Details, stellten Fachleute fest, dass die beiden
Türme des Welthandelszentrums durch den Einschlag der Flugzeuge nicht
hätten zu Fall gebracht werden können. Geheimdienstexperte von Bülow
geht deshalb von zwei Taten aus: von dem Aufprall der Flugzeuge und
zeitlich synchron dazu einer kontrollierten Sprengung beider Türme.
Es ist äußerst starker Tobak, mit dem Andreas von Bülow aufwartet. Wer
soll eine solche Tat begangen haben? Von Bülow gibt zu, dass er sich
"auf schwankendem Boden" bewegt und Lücken der amtlichen Darstellung
durch möglichst plausible Mutmaßungen überspringen muss. Umso mehr
wundert sich der Autor über die geradezu empörende Unwilligkeit der
Bush-Regierung, die Hintergründe der Terrorakte ohne Ansehen der Person
aufzuklären: Warum wurden die Beweismittel für einen anderen als den
offiziellen Tathergang auf schnellstem Wege beseitigt? Was soll die
Geheimhaltung verbergen? Warum stürzte außer den beiden Türmen auch ein
Nebengebäude des World Trade Center ein, das von der CIA als
Anti-Terrorzentrale genutzt worden war?
Bülow formuliert in seinem Buch vorsichtig: "Vorwissen oder gar
Täterschaft der amerikanischen Regierung bleiben in der Katastrophe des
11. September 2001 problematisch."
Eindeutig ist jedoch, wie der angeblich ahnungslose Georg W. Bush die
Ereignisse nutzte, um eine schon vorab formulierte Politik eines "Neuen
Amerikanischen Jahrhunderts" im Zuge des Kampfes gegen den
internationalen Terror durchsetzen zu können.
Andreas von Bülow hat mit großem Detailwissen sämtliche Ungereimtheiten
um den 11. September zusammengetragen. Es wirkt höchst alarmierend, wie
sehr der amerikanische Regierungsapparat über all die Einseitigkeiten
der Ermittlung hinweggeht und die amerikanische Öffentlichkeit sich
dies gefallen lässt. Ein intensiv recherchiertes Buch, das jede Menge
Fragen offen lässt.
Die CIA und der 11. September
Andreas von Bülow
13,00 €
3492045456
Piper Verlag
---
ULTERIORE DOCUMENTAZIONE CON IL MOTORE DI RICERCA GOOGLE DIGITANDO:
"Andreas von Bülow September"
UNA INTERVISTA IN LINGUA ITALIANA A VON BÜLOW:
http://www.pasti.org/vonbulow2.htm
11 settembre: I conti non tornano
L’intervista ad Andreas Von Bülow, ex ministro della Ricerca e della
tecnologia della RFT, è stata publicata dal giornale tedesco
Tagesspiegel del 13 gennaio 2002
=== 3 ===
Da: "globalreseach.ca"
Data: Mer 27 Ago 2003 17:25:54 Europe/Rome
Oggetto: September 11
WAR AND GLOBALISATION
THE TRUTH BEHIND SEPTEMBER 11
by Michel Chossudovsky
Global Outlook(TM) and the Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG),
Shanty Bay, Ont. 2002, ISBN 0-9731109-0-2 2.
To Order online: http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html
US and Canada orders (toll free) by phone: 1-888-713-8500.
Overseas telephone orders: 1-705-720-6500
In this timely study, Michel Chossudovsky blows away the smokescreen,
put up by the mainstream media, that 9-11 was an "intelligence
failure". Through meticulous research, the author uncovers a
military-intelligence ploy behind the September 11 attacks, and the
coverup and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration.
According to Chossudovsky, the so-called "war on terrorism" is a
complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin
Laden, outwitted the $30 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus.
The "war on terrorism" is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final
march to the "New World Order", dominated by Wall Street and the U.S.
military-industrial complex.
September 11, 2001 was the moment the Bush Administration had been
waiting for, the so-called "useful crisis" which provided a pretext for
waging a war without borders.
The hidden agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American
Empire right around the world to facilitate complete U.S. corporate
control outside the U.S. and a police state on the inside.
Chossudovsky peels back the layers of rhetoric to reveal a huge hoax —
a complex web of deceit aimed at tricking the American people and the
rest of the world into accepting a military solution which threatens
the future of humanity.
Michel Chossudovsky is the author of the international best-seller "The
Globalisation of Poverty " published in eleven languages. He is
Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the
Centre for Research on Globalisation which hosts the critically
acclaimed website: www.globalresearch.ca
To Order online: http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html
US and Canada orders (toll free) by phone: 1-888-713-8500.
Overseas telephone orders: 1-705-720-6500
11 Settembre, nuovi libri e persino un convegno sulle menzogne
dell'establishment USA
1. CONVEGNO a Berlino il 7 settembre
2. NUOVO LIBRO dell'ex ministro tedesco Andreas von Bülow
3. THE TRUTH BEHIND SEPTEMBER 11 (by Michel Chossudovsky)
=== 1 ===
BERLINO 7 SETTEMBRE 2003
Tra gli invitati il magistrato Guido Salvini!
An international Research symposium on the open questions of 9/11
coming in Berlin.
demanding answers - demanding to stop the war
www.hintergrund.de
---
Widersprüche zum 11. September
Offene Fragen und die Forderung nach Antworten sowie der Offenlegung
der unter Verschluss gehaltenen Beweise
(UNANSWERED QUESTIONS - DEMANDING ANSWERS)
Wie versprochen geht es weiter:
Am 7. September 2003 ab 15 Uhr im Tempodrom Berlin
Diesmal, ebenfalls wie versprochen, mit engagierten Experten aus den
USA.
Wir lassen uns von der jetzigen US-Administration und der
Medienberichterstattung auch in Deutschland nicht beirren.
Wir bieten während des ganzen Tages am 7. September 2003, kurz vor dem
zweiten Jahrestag, Informationen zum 11. September für die Presse und
für jeden Interessierten und jede Interessierte. Wir fordern die
Offenlegung der maßgeblichen Dokumente, die den Tathergang am 11.
September 2001 belegen können, aber bis heute unter Verschluss gehalten
werden.
Zu den Widersprüchen des "11. September" sprechen:
Michael Ruppert (USA)
ehemaliger Polizist in Los Angeles, einer der bekanntesten 9/11-
Experten in den USA
Daniel Hopsicker (USA)
Autor, Recherchen bez. Flugschulen der angeblichen Terroristen
Kyle Hence/Tom Flocco
(live aus USA)
von „unanswered questions“
Nafeez Ahmed (GB)
Autor des Buches „Geheimsache 9/11“
Guido Salvini (I)
Untersuchungsrichter aus Mailand
Mathias Bröckers (D)
Autor des Buches „11.9.“ und „Fakten, Fälschungen und die unterdrückten
Beweise des 11. 9.“
Andreas Hauß (D)
Autor des Buches „Fakten, Fälschungen und die unterdrückten Beweise des
11. 9.“
Ekkehard Sieker (D)
Bekannt durch seine Beiträge für Monitor/WDR (z.B. Bin-Laden-Video)
Eckart Spoo (D)
langjähriger Korrespondent der Frankfurter Rundschau, Herausgeber der
Zeitschrift Ossietzky
Michael Opperskalski (D)
Geheimdienst-Experte und Redakteur der Zeitschrift Geheim
Regine Igel (D)
Autorin, z.B. das Buch „Andreotti – eine italienische Karriere“
Dieter Elken (D)
Rechtsanwalt
Sumit Bhattacharyya von Amnesty International hält einen Vortrag zum
Thema Menschenrechtsverletzungen als Folge des 11. September.
Es gibt nicht nur Vorträge und Diskussionen, eine Live-Schaltung in die
USA zu Kyle Hence, Tom Flocco etc., sondern auch Filme und die
Möglichkeit zu Einzelgesprächen. Und diesmal wird es Zeit für die
Beantwortung Ihrer Fragen geben, was in dieser Form am 30.6. in der
Humboldt Universität wegen des vorzeitigen Abbruchs nicht möglich war.
Diese Veranstaltung steht ganz im Zeichen der deutsch-amerikanischen
Kooperation.
Vielen Dank an dieser Stelle an meinen Co-Organisator Nicholas Levis
und die vielen Mitstreiter, die sich an der Vorbereitung dieser
Veranstaltung beteiligen.
Ihr Ronald Thoden
7. September 2003, Tempodrom im Zentrum von Berlin, Möckernstraße
(U Möckernbrücke oder U Potsdamer Platz/ S Anhalter Bahnhof)
---
More links:
www.911questions.netfirms.com
www.911truth.org
=== 2 ===
LIBRO-SHOCK DI UN NOTO POLITICO TEDESCO
http://www.piper.de/web/books/3492045456.html
Lügen, Täuschung, falsche Spuren
Andreas von Bülow
Die CIA und der 11. September
Internationaler Terror und die Rolle der Geheimdienste
Neuerscheinung
Vehement widerspricht Andreas von Bülow der offiziellen Version der
Anschläge vom 11. September: Ohne geheimdienstliche Unterstützung war
eine solche Operation nicht durchzuführen. Seine brisanten Thesen sind
ein Angriff auf die Verlogenheit der CIA.
Nur Stunden nach dem Terroranschlag vom 11. September hatte die
US-Regierung Fotos und Steckbriefe aller Attentäter, wußte sie Bescheid
über alle Drahtzieher und Hintermänner. Und blitzartig war auch
Präsident Bushs Strategie gegen die »Mächte des Bösen« fertig. Zufall?
Andreas von Bülow, früherer Bundesminister und nicht erst seit seinem
Standardwerk »Im Namen des Staates« als Geheimdienstexperte mit besten
Kontakten ausgewiesen, zweifelt die offizielle Version vehement an.
Präzise und vorurteilslos stellt er alle Ungereimtheiten des
offiziellen Tatherganges zusammen, von der unwahrscheinlichen Präzision
der von Flugschülern gelenkten Maschinen bis zu der auffälligen
Inaktivität der Abwehr. Kann es sein, so Bülow, daß dieser Anschlag der
US-Regierung in Wahrheit gelegen kam? Ohne Geheimdienste war eine
solche Operation nicht möglich – und die Spuren führen eindeutig zu
deren Netzwerk und nicht zuletzt zur CIA ...
Andreas von Bülow
Andreas von Bülow wurde am 17. Juli 1937 in Dresden geboren. 1956–1960
studierte von Bülow in Heidelberg und München Rechtswissenschaften,
1969 Promotion zum Dr. jur. Seit 1960 Parteimitglied der SPD, war
Andreas von Bülow von 1969 bis 1994 Mitglied des Bundestages, u.a. in
der Parlamentarischen Kontrollkommission für die »Dienste«. 1976–1980
war er Parlamentarischer Staatssekretär des Bundesministers für
Verteidigung, von 1980 bis 1982 Bundesminister für Forschung und
Technologie. Seit 1994 lebt von Bülow als Rechtsanwalt in Bonn. 1998
erschien bei Piper: »Im Namen des Staates. CIA, BND und die kriminellen
Machenschaften der Geheimdienste« (jetzt SP 3050).
271 Seiten Kartoniert
EUR(D) 13,- / sFr 22,70
ISBN 3-492-04545-6
---
http://www.perlentaucher.de/buch/14783.html
Andreas von Bülow
"Die CIA und der 11. September"
Internationaler Terror und die Rolle der Geheimdienste
Piper Verlag, München 2003
ISBN 3492045456, Kartoniert
272 Seiten, 13,00 EUR
[ Klappentext ]
Vehement widerspricht Andreas von Bülow der offiziellen Version der
Anschläge vom 11. September: Ohne geheimdienstliche Unterstützung war
eine solche Operation nicht durchzuführen. Seine brisanten Thesen sind
ein Angriff auf die Verlogenheit der CIA. Nur Stunden nach dem
Terroranschlag vom 11. September hatte die US-Regierung Fotos und
Steckbriefe aller Attentäter, wusste sie Bescheid über alle Drahtzieher
und Hintermänner. Und blitzartig war auch Präsident Bushs Strategie
gegen die Mächte des Bösen fertig. Zufall? Andreas von Bülow, früherer
Bundesminister, zweifelt die offizielle Version vehement an.
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung vom 04.08.2003
Wilfried von Bredow bescheinigt dem Autor in seiner Besprechung eine
"etwas schräg eingestellte Phantasie" und sieht ihm beim Kampf "um den
Preis der abenteuerlichsten Erklärung für die Terroranschläge in New
York und Washington" als klaren Sieger. Von Bredow zufolge lassen sich
von Bülows "Theorien (im Sinne von Hirngespinsten)" zu vier Hauptthesen
verdichten: Die Crash-Flugzeuge vom 11. September wurden nicht von den
19 jungen Muslimen entführt, sondern ferngelenkt. Über das nötige
Wissen verfügen allein amerikanische Stellen, die außerdem vermutlich
auch für die Sprengladungen im Innern des WTC verantwortlich sind, die
das Gebäude haben einstürzen lassen sowie für die Cruise Missile, von
der das Pentagon das getroffen wurde. Verantwortlich für diese Aktion
war von Bülow zufolge, wie von Bredow aus dem Buch zitiert, eine "wie
auch immer zusammengesetzte Geheimdienststruktur, die die amerikanische
Politik nach dem 11.9. vorauszusehen, zu berechnen und gezielt ins Werk
zu setzen in der Lage war", ihr Ziel war, "die Massen der westlichen
Demokratien hinter die zur geopolitischen Landnahme entschlossenen
politischen Eliten der USA" zu zwingen. Von Bredow Fazit: Bei von
Bülows Konstrukt bleibe "einem die Spucke weg."
---
http://www.ndrinfo.de/ndrinfo_pages_std/0,2758,OID143312_REF720,00.html
Politisches Buch
Die CIA und der 11. September
Andreas von Bülow
Andreas von Bülow kennt sich mit Geheimdiensten aus. 25 Jahre lang saß
er als SPD-Abgeordneter im Bundestag und hatte dort im Rahmen der
Parlamentarischen Kontrollkommission Zugang zu sensiblen Informationen
über die sogenannten "Dienste". Der ehemalige Bundesminister für
Forschung und Technologie hatte sich bereits in früheren Büchern mit
CIA und BND beschäftigt.
In diesem neuen nun listet er seine Zweifel an der offiziellen Version
über die Terroranschläge des 11. September auf. Erfreulicherweise gibt
er sich dabei nicht politischen Spekulationen darüber hin, was alles
wohl hätte sein können. Andererseits kommt er nach Würdigung vieler
technischer Details der vier Flugzeugentführungen zu dem äußerst
beunruhigenden Resumee: "Der eigentliche Tathergang war mit Sicherheit
anders. Die Flugzeuge sind mit aller Wahrscheinlichkeit durch
Fernsteuerung den Piloten aus der Hand genommen und in die Türme des
World Trade Centers gesteuert worden."
Die 19 musliminischen Selbstmordattentäter, von denen allseits die Rede
ist, waren nach Bülows Erkenntnissen unfähige Hobbyflieger, denen das
mit hoher Exaktheit durchgeführte Flugmanöver des Sturzes in die beiden
Türme des World Trade Center bzw. des Pentagon nicht zuzutrauen ist.
Doch geht man in die Details, stellten Fachleute fest, dass die beiden
Türme des Welthandelszentrums durch den Einschlag der Flugzeuge nicht
hätten zu Fall gebracht werden können. Geheimdienstexperte von Bülow
geht deshalb von zwei Taten aus: von dem Aufprall der Flugzeuge und
zeitlich synchron dazu einer kontrollierten Sprengung beider Türme.
Es ist äußerst starker Tobak, mit dem Andreas von Bülow aufwartet. Wer
soll eine solche Tat begangen haben? Von Bülow gibt zu, dass er sich
"auf schwankendem Boden" bewegt und Lücken der amtlichen Darstellung
durch möglichst plausible Mutmaßungen überspringen muss. Umso mehr
wundert sich der Autor über die geradezu empörende Unwilligkeit der
Bush-Regierung, die Hintergründe der Terrorakte ohne Ansehen der Person
aufzuklären: Warum wurden die Beweismittel für einen anderen als den
offiziellen Tathergang auf schnellstem Wege beseitigt? Was soll die
Geheimhaltung verbergen? Warum stürzte außer den beiden Türmen auch ein
Nebengebäude des World Trade Center ein, das von der CIA als
Anti-Terrorzentrale genutzt worden war?
Bülow formuliert in seinem Buch vorsichtig: "Vorwissen oder gar
Täterschaft der amerikanischen Regierung bleiben in der Katastrophe des
11. September 2001 problematisch."
Eindeutig ist jedoch, wie der angeblich ahnungslose Georg W. Bush die
Ereignisse nutzte, um eine schon vorab formulierte Politik eines "Neuen
Amerikanischen Jahrhunderts" im Zuge des Kampfes gegen den
internationalen Terror durchsetzen zu können.
Andreas von Bülow hat mit großem Detailwissen sämtliche Ungereimtheiten
um den 11. September zusammengetragen. Es wirkt höchst alarmierend, wie
sehr der amerikanische Regierungsapparat über all die Einseitigkeiten
der Ermittlung hinweggeht und die amerikanische Öffentlichkeit sich
dies gefallen lässt. Ein intensiv recherchiertes Buch, das jede Menge
Fragen offen lässt.
Die CIA und der 11. September
Andreas von Bülow
13,00 €
3492045456
Piper Verlag
---
ULTERIORE DOCUMENTAZIONE CON IL MOTORE DI RICERCA GOOGLE DIGITANDO:
"Andreas von Bülow September"
UNA INTERVISTA IN LINGUA ITALIANA A VON BÜLOW:
http://www.pasti.org/vonbulow2.htm
11 settembre: I conti non tornano
L’intervista ad Andreas Von Bülow, ex ministro della Ricerca e della
tecnologia della RFT, è stata publicata dal giornale tedesco
Tagesspiegel del 13 gennaio 2002
=== 3 ===
Da: "globalreseach.ca"
Data: Mer 27 Ago 2003 17:25:54 Europe/Rome
Oggetto: September 11
WAR AND GLOBALISATION
THE TRUTH BEHIND SEPTEMBER 11
by Michel Chossudovsky
Global Outlook(TM) and the Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG),
Shanty Bay, Ont. 2002, ISBN 0-9731109-0-2 2.
To Order online: http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html
US and Canada orders (toll free) by phone: 1-888-713-8500.
Overseas telephone orders: 1-705-720-6500
In this timely study, Michel Chossudovsky blows away the smokescreen,
put up by the mainstream media, that 9-11 was an "intelligence
failure". Through meticulous research, the author uncovers a
military-intelligence ploy behind the September 11 attacks, and the
coverup and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration.
According to Chossudovsky, the so-called "war on terrorism" is a
complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin
Laden, outwitted the $30 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus.
The "war on terrorism" is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final
march to the "New World Order", dominated by Wall Street and the U.S.
military-industrial complex.
September 11, 2001 was the moment the Bush Administration had been
waiting for, the so-called "useful crisis" which provided a pretext for
waging a war without borders.
The hidden agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American
Empire right around the world to facilitate complete U.S. corporate
control outside the U.S. and a police state on the inside.
Chossudovsky peels back the layers of rhetoric to reveal a huge hoax —
a complex web of deceit aimed at tricking the American people and the
rest of the world into accepting a military solution which threatens
the future of humanity.
Michel Chossudovsky is the author of the international best-seller "The
Globalisation of Poverty " published in eleven languages. He is
Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the
Centre for Research on Globalisation which hosts the critically
acclaimed website: www.globalresearch.ca
To Order online: http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html
US and Canada orders (toll free) by phone: 1-888-713-8500.
Overseas telephone orders: 1-705-720-6500
http://www.analisidifesa.it/articolo.shtm/id/3058/ver/IT
Analisi Difesa - n.36.9.1 - luglio/agosto 2003
INDISCRETO
LE INFO-OPS
di Luca Andreani
La guerra che si è recentemente combattuta nel deserto iracheno ha
portato alla ribalta uno strumento a disposizione dei comandanti che,
opportunamente impiegato, può essere devastante come il fuoco di una
intera brigata corazzata e al tempo stesso efficace come le armi che la
tecnologia rende sempre più precise e “quasi intelligenti”: le INFOOPS.
Innanzi tutto vediamo di capire cosa si intende con questo termine,
che intuitivamente possiamo correlare con l’intelligence o con i media.
In realtà le Infoops non sono una componente di nessuna di queste due
branche; ma loro strette parenti e da entrambe traggono elementi
importanti per la loro pianificazione e attuazione in operazioni di
tipo militare.
Volendo in qualche modo esplicitare ciò che si nasconde dietro questo
concetto operativo, si può dire che esse rappresentano l’insieme di
quelle azioni che si prefiggono di controllare o addirittura
influenzare le reazioni dell'opinione pubblica e del nemico attraverso
la gestione della comunicazione.Per comprendere a fondo questa
definizione è fondamentale percepire tutte le sfaccettature e le
applicazioni che può assumere il concetto di comunicazione nelle
operazioni militari moderne. Il punto di partenza per questo processo
di comprensione deve essere la considerazione che, negli attuali teatri
operativi, le notizie e gli avvenimenti possono giungere agli
ascoltatori, ai lettori e al nemico stesso, in tempo reale.Come
conseguenza di questo indiscutibile dato di fatto si può pertanto
facilmente dedurre che, chiunque oggi è messo nelle condizioni di avere
un’idea di ciò che sta succedendo. Diventa dunque fondamentale la
percezione dell'avvenimento e la conseguente reazione emotiva, che
spesso è alla base dei comportamenti umani. Lo scopo principale delle
Infoops è proprio quello di trasmettere messaggi che possano orientare
gli atteggiamenti e le reazioni nella direzione voluta e più favorevole.
Al fine di ottenere il risultato sopra indicato le Infoops coordinano
ed impiegano vari “strumenti”, tra cui i principali possono essere
considerati:
- le operazioni psicologiche
- la guerra elettronica
- i media
- la cooperazione tra civili e militari.
Come abbiamo potuto vedere anche in questi giorni, le fonti di
comunicazione presenti in un’ area d’operazioni sono numerosissime,
dando origine ad un considerevole flusso di messaggi che generano le
reazioni più disparate. Tale situazione rende assolutamente necessario
che ogni azione compiuta od ordine dato tenga conto delle ripercussioni
emotive che possono determinarsi nella mente di chi ne viene a
conoscenza, pertanto diventano vitali i modi e i termini con cui ogni
singolo fatto, anche quello apparentemente più insignificante, viene
riportato.
Il gran numero di civili in mezzo ai soldati, siano essi giornalisti,
rappresentanti di organizzazioni non governative oppure indigeni
coinvolti loro malgrado, rende necessaria una loro gestione che, da un
lato ne eviti l’interferenza nelle operazioni, e dall’altro addirittura
ne faciliti l'attuazione.Quest’aspetto rappresenta la componente
offensiva delle Infoops, ossia la capacità di individuare i mezzi ed
gli argomenti che permettono di indirizzare il comportamento e
l’opinione dei civili o dei soldati nemici a proprio favore. Lo scopo
ultimo di queste azioni è quello di creare una forte corrente di
pensiero che supporti i propri obiettivi in modo tale da condizionare
le azioni e le scelte delle opposte leadership militari e politiche. I
mezzi per ottenere questo risultato sono di vario genere e abbracciano
un’ampia gamma di azioni che possono essere non letali (operazioni
psicologiche, attività di guerra elettronica) o letali (azioni di
sabotaggio o di distruzione ).
Come logica conseguenza dell’esistenza delle Infoops offensive si può
parlare anche delle Infoops difensive, che si differenziano dalle prime
in quanto focalizzano le proprie azioni sulle truppe amiche. Esse
perseguono principalmente due scopi:
- protezione dell’informazione amica e conseguente mantenimento della
superiorità nella comunicazione
- cura del morale delle proprie truppe .
Le due tipologie di operazioni vanno condotte simultaneamente ed hanno
la stessa valenza nell’ambito dell’economia di un’operazione militare.
Affrontando il tema dal punto di vista normativo, esiste ancora molto
poco in merito alle Infoops e solamente americani e inglesi stanno
cercando di sviluppare una dottrina, ponendosi come modello di
riferimento per chiunque intenda dotarsi di questo strumento.La sua
adozione certamente necessita di un considerevole cambio di mentalità
nell’approccio alle problematiche relative alla conduzione delle
operazioni militari, approccio che non è facile trovare in eserciti che
hanno da sempre concepito la loro esistenza ed il loro impiego
nell’ottica del “pugnale in mezzo ai denti e bomba a mano”. Grande e
diffuso è lo scetticismo circa l’efficacia di azioni che si prefiggono
di raggiungere obiettivi militari, principalmente attraverso la forza
delle parole piuttosto che delle armi.
Questo però è il futuro che attende le Forze Armate, e soprattutto gli
eserciti per poter essere considerati strumenti di amplificazione dei
messaggi che qualunque società civile oggi vuole trasmettere. Il
messaggio che oggi deve essere raccolto può riassumersi nella seguente
frase: “le armi possono essere uno strumento il cui uso è accettabile,
ma bisogna impiegarle solo quando sono rimaste l’ultima risorsa
possibile e per il tempo strettamente necessario”. Nelle guerre di
oggi la vittoria può essere ottenuta solo attraverso la sinergia che
scaturisce dall’unione della potenza dei carri armati e di quegli
strumenti meno letali ma altrettanto efficaci che basano la propria
forza sui complessi meccanismi della comunicazione.In questo periodo
storico - definito come “l’era della comunicazione” - le Infoops sono
probabilmente destinate a diventare uno dei principali strumenti ai
quali fare ricorso per la pianificazione e la conduzione una qualunque
operazione militare.
Analisi Difesa - n.36.9.1 - luglio/agosto 2003
INDISCRETO
LE INFO-OPS
di Luca Andreani
La guerra che si è recentemente combattuta nel deserto iracheno ha
portato alla ribalta uno strumento a disposizione dei comandanti che,
opportunamente impiegato, può essere devastante come il fuoco di una
intera brigata corazzata e al tempo stesso efficace come le armi che la
tecnologia rende sempre più precise e “quasi intelligenti”: le INFOOPS.
Innanzi tutto vediamo di capire cosa si intende con questo termine,
che intuitivamente possiamo correlare con l’intelligence o con i media.
In realtà le Infoops non sono una componente di nessuna di queste due
branche; ma loro strette parenti e da entrambe traggono elementi
importanti per la loro pianificazione e attuazione in operazioni di
tipo militare.
Volendo in qualche modo esplicitare ciò che si nasconde dietro questo
concetto operativo, si può dire che esse rappresentano l’insieme di
quelle azioni che si prefiggono di controllare o addirittura
influenzare le reazioni dell'opinione pubblica e del nemico attraverso
la gestione della comunicazione.Per comprendere a fondo questa
definizione è fondamentale percepire tutte le sfaccettature e le
applicazioni che può assumere il concetto di comunicazione nelle
operazioni militari moderne. Il punto di partenza per questo processo
di comprensione deve essere la considerazione che, negli attuali teatri
operativi, le notizie e gli avvenimenti possono giungere agli
ascoltatori, ai lettori e al nemico stesso, in tempo reale.Come
conseguenza di questo indiscutibile dato di fatto si può pertanto
facilmente dedurre che, chiunque oggi è messo nelle condizioni di avere
un’idea di ciò che sta succedendo. Diventa dunque fondamentale la
percezione dell'avvenimento e la conseguente reazione emotiva, che
spesso è alla base dei comportamenti umani. Lo scopo principale delle
Infoops è proprio quello di trasmettere messaggi che possano orientare
gli atteggiamenti e le reazioni nella direzione voluta e più favorevole.
Al fine di ottenere il risultato sopra indicato le Infoops coordinano
ed impiegano vari “strumenti”, tra cui i principali possono essere
considerati:
- le operazioni psicologiche
- la guerra elettronica
- i media
- la cooperazione tra civili e militari.
Come abbiamo potuto vedere anche in questi giorni, le fonti di
comunicazione presenti in un’ area d’operazioni sono numerosissime,
dando origine ad un considerevole flusso di messaggi che generano le
reazioni più disparate. Tale situazione rende assolutamente necessario
che ogni azione compiuta od ordine dato tenga conto delle ripercussioni
emotive che possono determinarsi nella mente di chi ne viene a
conoscenza, pertanto diventano vitali i modi e i termini con cui ogni
singolo fatto, anche quello apparentemente più insignificante, viene
riportato.
Il gran numero di civili in mezzo ai soldati, siano essi giornalisti,
rappresentanti di organizzazioni non governative oppure indigeni
coinvolti loro malgrado, rende necessaria una loro gestione che, da un
lato ne eviti l’interferenza nelle operazioni, e dall’altro addirittura
ne faciliti l'attuazione.Quest’aspetto rappresenta la componente
offensiva delle Infoops, ossia la capacità di individuare i mezzi ed
gli argomenti che permettono di indirizzare il comportamento e
l’opinione dei civili o dei soldati nemici a proprio favore. Lo scopo
ultimo di queste azioni è quello di creare una forte corrente di
pensiero che supporti i propri obiettivi in modo tale da condizionare
le azioni e le scelte delle opposte leadership militari e politiche. I
mezzi per ottenere questo risultato sono di vario genere e abbracciano
un’ampia gamma di azioni che possono essere non letali (operazioni
psicologiche, attività di guerra elettronica) o letali (azioni di
sabotaggio o di distruzione ).
Come logica conseguenza dell’esistenza delle Infoops offensive si può
parlare anche delle Infoops difensive, che si differenziano dalle prime
in quanto focalizzano le proprie azioni sulle truppe amiche. Esse
perseguono principalmente due scopi:
- protezione dell’informazione amica e conseguente mantenimento della
superiorità nella comunicazione
- cura del morale delle proprie truppe .
Le due tipologie di operazioni vanno condotte simultaneamente ed hanno
la stessa valenza nell’ambito dell’economia di un’operazione militare.
Affrontando il tema dal punto di vista normativo, esiste ancora molto
poco in merito alle Infoops e solamente americani e inglesi stanno
cercando di sviluppare una dottrina, ponendosi come modello di
riferimento per chiunque intenda dotarsi di questo strumento.La sua
adozione certamente necessita di un considerevole cambio di mentalità
nell’approccio alle problematiche relative alla conduzione delle
operazioni militari, approccio che non è facile trovare in eserciti che
hanno da sempre concepito la loro esistenza ed il loro impiego
nell’ottica del “pugnale in mezzo ai denti e bomba a mano”. Grande e
diffuso è lo scetticismo circa l’efficacia di azioni che si prefiggono
di raggiungere obiettivi militari, principalmente attraverso la forza
delle parole piuttosto che delle armi.
Questo però è il futuro che attende le Forze Armate, e soprattutto gli
eserciti per poter essere considerati strumenti di amplificazione dei
messaggi che qualunque società civile oggi vuole trasmettere. Il
messaggio che oggi deve essere raccolto può riassumersi nella seguente
frase: “le armi possono essere uno strumento il cui uso è accettabile,
ma bisogna impiegarle solo quando sono rimaste l’ultima risorsa
possibile e per il tempo strettamente necessario”. Nelle guerre di
oggi la vittoria può essere ottenuta solo attraverso la sinergia che
scaturisce dall’unione della potenza dei carri armati e di quegli
strumenti meno letali ma altrettanto efficaci che basano la propria
forza sui complessi meccanismi della comunicazione.In questo periodo
storico - definito come “l’era della comunicazione” - le Infoops sono
probabilmente destinate a diventare uno dei principali strumenti ai
quali fare ricorso per la pianificazione e la conduzione una qualunque
operazione militare.
