http://www.antiwar.com/malic/
Imperial Relapse
Kosovo Pogrom Forgotten
by Nebojsa Malic
April 8, 2004
After the mid-March pogrom against Serbs in Kosovo, which clearly aimed
at their physical destruction, Empire's propaganda machine went into
full spin trying to cover up the extent of the occupiers' failure to
prevent such aggression. Albanian partisans in the West launched
passionate tirades about the necessity of giving the "Kosovars"
independence now, and helping them overcome the frustration with evil
Serbs that has provoked them into entirely justifiable – if not exactly
humanitarian – violence. The Serbian leadership once again demonstrated
ineptitude at dealing with a coordinated hostile media campaign,
mounting feeble and ineffective challenges to the onslaught of Albanian
advocacy. Meanwhile, the Empire escalated the issue of "war crimes,"
thus making sure that any news from the Balkans – if it gets past the
headlines about the meltdown in Mesopotamia – would deal with a topic
whose tone and targets it can easily dictate.
On Paper, Violence Continues
A wave of editorials supporting the Albanian cause began appearing in
leading Western papers on the second day of the pogrom, and has
continued unabated since. Though differing in tone and angle, the
commentaries overlap on several salient points: Albanians are the
majority in Kosovo, have been
oppressed by Serbs, and would never accept anything but independence,
therefore it is the only option; partition is also unacceptable to
Albanians, as Kosovo's borders are sacred; what caused the "violence"
in mid-March was fear of Serbs and frustration with uncertainty about
future, so the obvious way to solve the problem would be removing the
fear (by implication, removing Serbs?) by giving Albanians
independence. As days go by and the pogrom recedes in people's memories
– thanks to the widespread reluctance to publish graphic images of
Albanian destruction – the screeds get bolder in their assertions, and
more brazen in their denial of what has been happening for years.
Paul Williams and Bruce Hitchner co-authored an editorial advocating an
independent, Albanian Kosovo on March 23, in the Baltimore Sun. They
clamor that "the United States must reassert its leadership in the
region" by leading efforts to "provide for the emergence of an
independent Kosovo by fall."
Williams's claim to infamy is his role as the "legal advisor" to both
the Izetbegovic regime in Bosnia and the KLA, and involvement in both
the Dayton blackmail and the Rambouillet charade. Hitchner chairs a
"Dayton Peace Accords Project," and has advocated Kosovo independence
before, also in tandem with Williams.
Clinton's point-man in Kosovo James Dobbins claimed in the
International Herald Tribune on April 1 that "there are really only two
viable options for Kosovo, both involving independence." Of those, the
one that would avoid partition would be "most consistent with existing
U.S. and EU policies in the region, and provides the less bad
precedent."
The very same day, journalist Tim Judah "analyzed" the pogrom for BBC
by saying that "The problem, then, is how this province will ever be
reabsorbed into Serbia – and the likelihood is that it will not. In
that case, the problem is how to separate it." He further insinuated
that the Serbian government was willing to give up Kosovo, claiming
that a US envoy visiting
Belgrade "was reportedly stunned when a top Serbian officially proposed
that everyone simply dispense with the niceties and Kosovo be
partitioned sooner rather than later."
Perhaps forced to atone for his earlier sincerity, Nicholas Wood of the
New York Times produced a piece on April 3 describing the barbarous
destruction of medieval churches as a "cycle of revenge," invoking as
excuses the alleged Serb destruction of mosques during the war and the
attacks on mosques in Belgrade, Nis and Novi Sad during the pogrom.
Finally, on April 5, a former "media commissioner" and "political
adviser to the UN Kosovo protection corps coordinator" in occupied
Kosovo wrote the most overtly formulaic case for the Albanian cause in
The Guardian. Not only did Anna Di Lellio dispute the description of
the pogrom as "ethnic cleansing," she blamed it on the Serbs, much like
Hashim Taqi some ten days prior.
No Fighting Back?
Response to this media onslaught has been largely muted. Ivan Vujacic,
the hapless Serbian Ambassador to Washington, tried to answer Morton
Abramowitz's March 19 editorial with a "Yes, but" approach. One Serbian
parliamentarian even tried to present a pragmatic case for Serb
"minority self-rule" in Kosovo to the rabidly Serbophobic IWPR, which
sounded reasonable but appeared downright foolish in the medium's
context.
It fell to Western commentators – two Canadians and a Brit, with
Americans predictably absent – to offer a counter-argument, after a
fashion. On the pages of the National Post on March 22, George Jonas
described NATO's Kosovo intervention as an "ethnic cleansing… project
sponsored by the West." In the April 3 edition of the Spectator,
diplomatic correspondent Tom Walker describes how while "Kosovo goes to
Hell," he receives "regular emails from Albanian agencies in Pristina
arguing that when a Serb village is wiped from the map, it is somehow
Belgrade's fault." And former peacekeeper and retired General Lewis
MacKenzie opined on April 6 (in the National Post, again) that "We
bombed the wrong side," exposing the Albanians' goals and a deliberate
cover-up of information about the recent pogrom:
"The Kosovo-Albanians have played us like a Stradivarius. We have
subsidized and indirectly supported their violent campaign for an
ethnically pure and independent Kosovo. We have never blamed them for
being the perpetrators of the violence in the early '90s and we
continue to portray them as the designated victim today in spite of
evidence to the contrary."
Changing the Subject
The Empire is also trying hard to change the subject from the
uncomfortable topic of Kosovo. News from the Balkans over the past week
have been dominated by the "war crimes" issue, given a higher profile
by a set of new Inquisition indictments, a renewed hunt for Radovan
Karadzic, and escalation of Washington's pressure on Serbia.
A SFOR raid on a church in eastern Bosnia early last Wednesday did not
find Karadzic. It did result in severe injuries to the priest and his
son, who are still in a coma. NATO claims the two were injured by the
explosion used to demolish the church door, and claims the injuries
were "completely unintended and an unfortunate consequence," even as US
officials blamed the Bosnian Serbs for NATO's aggressive behavior and
presented the raid as "resolve".
But according to the head of the Serbian Orthodox Church, who protested
to the NATO commander in Bosnia, SFOR troops "savagely beat [Fr.
Jeremija and his son] using rifle butts, boots and whatever else they
had on hand."
Adding to the mystery is the fact that the two men were airlifted to a
hospital in Tuzla (where the US has a major military base), rather than
the much closer capital, Sarajevo.
Amidst public outcry over the attack, Bosnia's viceroy Ashdown launched
another assault on the Bosnian Serb republic, cutting off all
government compensation to the ruling SDS party, until it can submit a
financial report to "prove the claims [of somehow aiding Karadzic] were
false."
It is logically impossible to prove a negative, but Ashdown really
doesn't care even if they do; he has absolute power, and has conducted
a campaign to undermine the Serb Republic pretty much since he arrived
in office. One regional newspaper mentions him giving a statement
accusing the Serb Republic of "obstructing reform," after meeting with
its Croat and Muslim vice-presidents (but no Serbs).
On the other hand, Serbia was officially cut off from US foreign aid as
of March 31, having refused to submit to demands of the Hague
Inquisition. Previously touted as $100 million, the actual value of the
aid is closer to $26 million, most of which is going to Kosovo,
"democracy-building" and "humanitarian aid" anyway. That's right, the
supposedly "badly needed" aid to Serbia is nothing of the sort, as it
actually funds Albanian separatism, pays the missionary intellectuals,
and lines the pockets of American NGOs. Its withholding is more a
symbol of Washington's displeasure than anything else.
Wastelands Called Peace
Though it looked for a moment that the sheer vileness of the terror
unleashed in Kosovo might shake the pillars of perception, Empire's
aggressive relapse into the usual bullying patterns suggests that
impression was deceptive. Two weeks after their policies were burned to
cinders, Balkans' western occupiers are back on their hobbyhorse.
Outside powers have meddled in Balkans issues for centuries, with
increasingly disastrous consequences. Even if one stipulates that the
most recent meddling (in the 1990s) had a benevolent intent – for the
sake of argument, as this is obviously not true – the "problems" it
supposedly attempted to solve were by and large the symptoms of the
crisis, not its causes. Those causes have been so thoroughly
misidentified (often on purpose) that instead of resolving issues, the
intervention only made them worse.
By way of example: Bosnia was not a case of "external aggression," but
a conflict over centralized power that would enable one ethnic group to
dominate others. The problem in Kosovo was not one of "repression" or
"human rights violations," but of separatism based on ethnic cleansing.
The same applies to Macedonia.
Balkans interventions then paved the way to an invasion in the Middle
East.
Now Iraq has exploded – entirely predictably – just as the Balkans has
been imploding for years. In the war-torn leftovers of what was once
Yugoslavia, most people are reluctant to start a new war, with the
memories still fresh. But their children are growing up schooled not
just in hatred, but in the "value" of coercion. They will be the ones
fighting the next war, which the
Empire's insistence on imposing and perpetuating fiction is making just
about inevitable.
Nearly two millennia ago, in his Life of Agricola, Roman historian
Tacitus put these words in the mouth of a Germanic chieftain; Calgacus
describes the Romans thus: "Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant."
They create a wasteland, and call it peace.
For a nation that fancies itself the heir to Rome, this is entirely
fitting.
Imperial Relapse
Kosovo Pogrom Forgotten
by Nebojsa Malic
April 8, 2004
After the mid-March pogrom against Serbs in Kosovo, which clearly aimed
at their physical destruction, Empire's propaganda machine went into
full spin trying to cover up the extent of the occupiers' failure to
prevent such aggression. Albanian partisans in the West launched
passionate tirades about the necessity of giving the "Kosovars"
independence now, and helping them overcome the frustration with evil
Serbs that has provoked them into entirely justifiable – if not exactly
humanitarian – violence. The Serbian leadership once again demonstrated
ineptitude at dealing with a coordinated hostile media campaign,
mounting feeble and ineffective challenges to the onslaught of Albanian
advocacy. Meanwhile, the Empire escalated the issue of "war crimes,"
thus making sure that any news from the Balkans – if it gets past the
headlines about the meltdown in Mesopotamia – would deal with a topic
whose tone and targets it can easily dictate.
On Paper, Violence Continues
A wave of editorials supporting the Albanian cause began appearing in
leading Western papers on the second day of the pogrom, and has
continued unabated since. Though differing in tone and angle, the
commentaries overlap on several salient points: Albanians are the
majority in Kosovo, have been
oppressed by Serbs, and would never accept anything but independence,
therefore it is the only option; partition is also unacceptable to
Albanians, as Kosovo's borders are sacred; what caused the "violence"
in mid-March was fear of Serbs and frustration with uncertainty about
future, so the obvious way to solve the problem would be removing the
fear (by implication, removing Serbs?) by giving Albanians
independence. As days go by and the pogrom recedes in people's memories
– thanks to the widespread reluctance to publish graphic images of
Albanian destruction – the screeds get bolder in their assertions, and
more brazen in their denial of what has been happening for years.
Paul Williams and Bruce Hitchner co-authored an editorial advocating an
independent, Albanian Kosovo on March 23, in the Baltimore Sun. They
clamor that "the United States must reassert its leadership in the
region" by leading efforts to "provide for the emergence of an
independent Kosovo by fall."
Williams's claim to infamy is his role as the "legal advisor" to both
the Izetbegovic regime in Bosnia and the KLA, and involvement in both
the Dayton blackmail and the Rambouillet charade. Hitchner chairs a
"Dayton Peace Accords Project," and has advocated Kosovo independence
before, also in tandem with Williams.
Clinton's point-man in Kosovo James Dobbins claimed in the
International Herald Tribune on April 1 that "there are really only two
viable options for Kosovo, both involving independence." Of those, the
one that would avoid partition would be "most consistent with existing
U.S. and EU policies in the region, and provides the less bad
precedent."
The very same day, journalist Tim Judah "analyzed" the pogrom for BBC
by saying that "The problem, then, is how this province will ever be
reabsorbed into Serbia – and the likelihood is that it will not. In
that case, the problem is how to separate it." He further insinuated
that the Serbian government was willing to give up Kosovo, claiming
that a US envoy visiting
Belgrade "was reportedly stunned when a top Serbian officially proposed
that everyone simply dispense with the niceties and Kosovo be
partitioned sooner rather than later."
Perhaps forced to atone for his earlier sincerity, Nicholas Wood of the
New York Times produced a piece on April 3 describing the barbarous
destruction of medieval churches as a "cycle of revenge," invoking as
excuses the alleged Serb destruction of mosques during the war and the
attacks on mosques in Belgrade, Nis and Novi Sad during the pogrom.
Finally, on April 5, a former "media commissioner" and "political
adviser to the UN Kosovo protection corps coordinator" in occupied
Kosovo wrote the most overtly formulaic case for the Albanian cause in
The Guardian. Not only did Anna Di Lellio dispute the description of
the pogrom as "ethnic cleansing," she blamed it on the Serbs, much like
Hashim Taqi some ten days prior.
No Fighting Back?
Response to this media onslaught has been largely muted. Ivan Vujacic,
the hapless Serbian Ambassador to Washington, tried to answer Morton
Abramowitz's March 19 editorial with a "Yes, but" approach. One Serbian
parliamentarian even tried to present a pragmatic case for Serb
"minority self-rule" in Kosovo to the rabidly Serbophobic IWPR, which
sounded reasonable but appeared downright foolish in the medium's
context.
It fell to Western commentators – two Canadians and a Brit, with
Americans predictably absent – to offer a counter-argument, after a
fashion. On the pages of the National Post on March 22, George Jonas
described NATO's Kosovo intervention as an "ethnic cleansing… project
sponsored by the West." In the April 3 edition of the Spectator,
diplomatic correspondent Tom Walker describes how while "Kosovo goes to
Hell," he receives "regular emails from Albanian agencies in Pristina
arguing that when a Serb village is wiped from the map, it is somehow
Belgrade's fault." And former peacekeeper and retired General Lewis
MacKenzie opined on April 6 (in the National Post, again) that "We
bombed the wrong side," exposing the Albanians' goals and a deliberate
cover-up of information about the recent pogrom:
"The Kosovo-Albanians have played us like a Stradivarius. We have
subsidized and indirectly supported their violent campaign for an
ethnically pure and independent Kosovo. We have never blamed them for
being the perpetrators of the violence in the early '90s and we
continue to portray them as the designated victim today in spite of
evidence to the contrary."
Changing the Subject
The Empire is also trying hard to change the subject from the
uncomfortable topic of Kosovo. News from the Balkans over the past week
have been dominated by the "war crimes" issue, given a higher profile
by a set of new Inquisition indictments, a renewed hunt for Radovan
Karadzic, and escalation of Washington's pressure on Serbia.
A SFOR raid on a church in eastern Bosnia early last Wednesday did not
find Karadzic. It did result in severe injuries to the priest and his
son, who are still in a coma. NATO claims the two were injured by the
explosion used to demolish the church door, and claims the injuries
were "completely unintended and an unfortunate consequence," even as US
officials blamed the Bosnian Serbs for NATO's aggressive behavior and
presented the raid as "resolve".
But according to the head of the Serbian Orthodox Church, who protested
to the NATO commander in Bosnia, SFOR troops "savagely beat [Fr.
Jeremija and his son] using rifle butts, boots and whatever else they
had on hand."
Adding to the mystery is the fact that the two men were airlifted to a
hospital in Tuzla (where the US has a major military base), rather than
the much closer capital, Sarajevo.
Amidst public outcry over the attack, Bosnia's viceroy Ashdown launched
another assault on the Bosnian Serb republic, cutting off all
government compensation to the ruling SDS party, until it can submit a
financial report to "prove the claims [of somehow aiding Karadzic] were
false."
It is logically impossible to prove a negative, but Ashdown really
doesn't care even if they do; he has absolute power, and has conducted
a campaign to undermine the Serb Republic pretty much since he arrived
in office. One regional newspaper mentions him giving a statement
accusing the Serb Republic of "obstructing reform," after meeting with
its Croat and Muslim vice-presidents (but no Serbs).
On the other hand, Serbia was officially cut off from US foreign aid as
of March 31, having refused to submit to demands of the Hague
Inquisition. Previously touted as $100 million, the actual value of the
aid is closer to $26 million, most of which is going to Kosovo,
"democracy-building" and "humanitarian aid" anyway. That's right, the
supposedly "badly needed" aid to Serbia is nothing of the sort, as it
actually funds Albanian separatism, pays the missionary intellectuals,
and lines the pockets of American NGOs. Its withholding is more a
symbol of Washington's displeasure than anything else.
Wastelands Called Peace
Though it looked for a moment that the sheer vileness of the terror
unleashed in Kosovo might shake the pillars of perception, Empire's
aggressive relapse into the usual bullying patterns suggests that
impression was deceptive. Two weeks after their policies were burned to
cinders, Balkans' western occupiers are back on their hobbyhorse.
Outside powers have meddled in Balkans issues for centuries, with
increasingly disastrous consequences. Even if one stipulates that the
most recent meddling (in the 1990s) had a benevolent intent – for the
sake of argument, as this is obviously not true – the "problems" it
supposedly attempted to solve were by and large the symptoms of the
crisis, not its causes. Those causes have been so thoroughly
misidentified (often on purpose) that instead of resolving issues, the
intervention only made them worse.
By way of example: Bosnia was not a case of "external aggression," but
a conflict over centralized power that would enable one ethnic group to
dominate others. The problem in Kosovo was not one of "repression" or
"human rights violations," but of separatism based on ethnic cleansing.
The same applies to Macedonia.
Balkans interventions then paved the way to an invasion in the Middle
East.
Now Iraq has exploded – entirely predictably – just as the Balkans has
been imploding for years. In the war-torn leftovers of what was once
Yugoslavia, most people are reluctant to start a new war, with the
memories still fresh. But their children are growing up schooled not
just in hatred, but in the "value" of coercion. They will be the ones
fighting the next war, which the
Empire's insistence on imposing and perpetuating fiction is making just
about inevitable.
Nearly two millennia ago, in his Life of Agricola, Roman historian
Tacitus put these words in the mouth of a Germanic chieftain; Calgacus
describes the Romans thus: "Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant."
They create a wasteland, and call it peace.
For a nation that fancies itself the heir to Rome, this is entirely
fitting.