Jugoinfo
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Dr. Peter Strutynski <strutype@...-kassel.de>
Datum: Donnerstag, 23. November 2000 11:42
Betreff: Friedensratschlag: Interview mit Heinz Loquai
>Kassel, den 24. November 2000
>
>Pressemitteilung
>Brigadegeneral a.D. Heinz Loquai bei Kongress der Friedensbewegung
>Sperrfrist: 24. November
>
>Dr. Heinz Loquai wird auf dem bundesweiten und internationalen
>"Friedenspolitischen Ratschlag", der am 2./3. Dezember 2000 in Kassel
>stattfindet, über das Thema "Kriege vermeiden - Friedenschancen
>nutzen -
>Friedensbedingungen Verbessern" sprechen.
>Heinz Loquai war bis Juni 2000 Mitglied der Deutschen OSZE-Delegation
>in
>Wien. In dieser Eigenschaft hatte er an den Verhandlungen über
>Rüstungskontrolle im Rahmen des Dayton-Abkommens teilgenommen und war
>unmittelbar mit dem Kosovo-Konflikt befasst. In seiner Studie ("Der
>Kosovo-Konflikt - Wege in einen vermeidbaren Krieg", erschienen im
>NOMOS-Verlag) hat er die Zeit von Ende November 1997 bis März 1999
>genau
>untersucht und dabei die Vorgeschichte des NATO-Angriffs auf
>Jugoslawien
>analysiert. Der Bundesregierung wirft er vor, den Krieg gegen
>Jugoslawien mit groben Manipulationen vorbereitet und gegenüber der
>Öffentlichkeit gerechtfertigt zu haben.
>Mit Dr. Heinz Loquai sprachen wir im Vorfeld des Friedensratschlags.
>Das
>dabei entstandene Interview stellen wir Ihnen gern zur
>Veröffentlichung
>zur Verfügung.
>
>Frage: In Ihrer Studie zeigen Sie auf, dass der Jugoslawien-Krieg die
>Folge einer Eskalation war, bei der die NATO und insbesondere die USA
>bewusst auf eine militärische Konfliktlösung zugesteuert sind. Eine
>alternative, zivile Konfliktlösung wäre durchaus möglich gewesen.
>
>Heinz Loquai: Der Kosovo-Konflikt hat sich lange Zeit im Schatten der
>anderen Konflikte im ehemaligen Jugoslawien entwickelt. Trotz
>unterschiedlicher Appelle hat er nur gelegentlich die internationale
>Aufmerksamkeit auf sich gezogen. Geäußert hat sich der Konflikt durch
>eine seit 1989 ausgeübte Repressionspolitik der Bundesrepublik
>Jugoslawien und Serbiens gegen die Kosovo-Albaner und deren Versuch,
>diese Unterdrückung durch eine zunächst gewaltlose Strategie zu
>unterlaufen und faktisch immer mehr staatliche Selbständigkeit zu
>etablieren. Der politische Konflikt bestand darin, dass das Ziel der
>Albaner, die staatliche Unabhängigkeit durchzusetzen, mit dem Ziel
>der
>Bundesrepublik Jugoslawien, das Kosovo als serbische Provinz im
>jugoslawischen Staatsgebiet zu halten, unvereinbar war. Die
>gewaltsame
>Austragung des Konflikts, der von ethnischen, sozialen, religiösen
>und
>wirtschaftlichen Konflikten umlagert wurde, war ein Bürgerkrieg.
>Allerdings wurde er nicht von allen als Bürgerkrieg begriffen und
>beurteilt. So sah z. B. die Belgrader Führung das Problem im Kosovo
>nur
>in der Bekämpfung einer kleinen Gruppe von Terroristen und reagierte
>dementsprechend. Dabei versäumte es die serbische Staatsautorität,
>eine
>Perspektive und praktische, konkrete Ziele für eine friedliche Lösung
>des Konflikts zu entwickeln.
>
>Frage: Auf der anderen Seite die UCK, die die Unabhängigkeit durch
>einen
>bewaffneten Kampf erreichen wollte.
>
>Heinz Loquai: Bei der UCK lassen Strategie und Taktik deutlich
>erkennen,
>dass sich deren Führung konsequent an die Prinzipien eines
>Bürgerkriegs
>gehalten hat. Nachdem sich die NATO in den Konflikt eingeschaltet,
>deutlich Partei gegen die Serben ergriffen und ein militärisches
>Drohpotential, das nur gegen die Serben gerichtet war, aufgebaut
>hatte,
>eröffnete sich für die UCK zum ersten Mal eine ganz konkrete
>Perspektive
>für einen raschen Sieg im Bürgerkrieg. Die UCK hatte damit die
>stärkste
>Militärallianz der Welt als Verbündeten; als Luftwaffe der UCK gewann
>schließlich die NATO den Bürgerkrieg für die UCK.
>
>Frage: Welche weitergehenden Optionen hat die NATO dabei verfolgt?
>
>Heinz Loquai: Für die NATO selbst wurde das Kosovo immer mehr zu
>einer
>Arena, in der die Politik der NATO exemplarisch angewandt und auch
>getestet wurde. ... Die NATO war ja dabei, eine neue Strategie
>einzuführen, Einsätze außerhalb des Artikel 5 des NATO-Vertrages
>sollten
>in Zukunft ohne UN-Mandat möglich sein. Im Krieg gegen Jugoslawien
>setzte die NATO vorab ihre Strategie um. Bezeichnend hierzu ist, dass
>der amerikanische Präsident am 24. März 1999 in seiner Rede an das
>amerikanische Volk nicht die humanitäre Katastrophe, sondern die
>Glaubwürdigkeit des NATO-Bündnisses an die erste Stelle gestellt hat.
>Um
>jeden Preis sollte verhindert werden, dass die NATO - wie vorher die
>UN
>- als Papiertiger erschien.
>
>Frage: Die NATO hat Stellung zugunsten einer Partei bezogen. Hat sie
>sich damit nicht als Vermittler bei Konflikten eindeutig
>disqualifiziert
>?
>
>Heinz Loquai: Die NATO hat in diesem Konflikt einseitig Partei
>ergriffen
>und damit eine politische Lösung verhindert. Wer jedoch in einem
>Konflikt vermitteln will, muss das Vertrauen der Konfliktparteien
>haben
>und hier ist Voraussetzung, dass der Vermittler das Verhalten der
>Parteien mit gleichen Maßstäben bewertet und eventuelle Drohungen und
>Sanktionen gegen alle Vertragsbrüche und Gewalttäter auferlegt. Dies
>war
>im Kosovo nicht der Fall, hierzu ein Beispiel: In der Resolution 1203
>des UN-Sicherheitsrats vom 24.10.1998 wird von beiden Parteien das
>Ende
>der Gewalttaten und die Befolgung früherer Resolutionen verlangt. Die
>Jugoslawen kamen dieser Aufforderung nach, dennoch erhielt die NATO
>ihre
>Kriegsdrohung gegen sie aufrecht. Die UCK hielt sich nicht daran. Die
>internationale Gemeinschaft tat kaum etwas, um sie dazu zu zwingen
>...
>
>Frage: Zur Begründung für ein militärisches Eingreifen verweist die
>Bundesregierung immer wieder auf die Ereignisse von Racak.
>
>Heinz Loquai: Das sogenannte Massaker von Racak hat den Fortgang des
>Kosovo-Konflikts erheblich beeinflusst und den Weg zum Krieg gegen
>die
>Bundesrepublik Jugoslawien geebnet. Unstrittig ist wohl - dies gibt
>auch
>die serbische Führung zu -, dass die Toten in Racak auf das Konto der
>serbischen Sicherheitskräfte gingen. Unklar ist nach wie vor der
>Ablauf
>des Geschehens. Eine entscheidende Rolle spielte dabei der
>amerikanische
>Leiter der Kosovo-Verifikationsmission, Botschafter William Walker.
>Bei
>einer objektiven Betrachtung kommt man nicht umhin sein Verhalten als
>unangemessen und außerhalb aller normalen Regeln für eine Person mit
>diplomatischem Status zu bewerten. In Racak, am Ort des Geschehens,
>schien es ihm vor allem darum zu gehen, den von ihm mitgebrachten
>Journalisten freies Schalten und Walten zu ermöglichen. Walker machte
>keine Anstalten notwendigen Maßnahmen für eine kriminaltechnische
>Untersuchung einzuleiten, so z. B. das Gebiet abzusperren und den
>unerlaubten Zugang zu verhindern. Er beschuldigte aufgrund des
>Augenscheins und der Aussagen der Dorfbewohner die jugoslawischen
>Sicherheitskräfte und machte darüber hinaus falsche Angaben zu den
>Toten. Mit seinen vorschnellen Aussagen und Urteilen prägte er das
>Urteil anderer Organisationen und Regierungen, die ihrerseits seine
>"Feststellungen" mit fahrlässiger Leichtgläubigkeit ungeprüft
>übernahmen
>und zu einer Grundlage ihrer Politik machten. Mit seiner unbewiesenen
>Version von Racak zündete Walker die Lunte zum Krieg gegen
>Jugoslawien.
>
>Frage: Eine andere Inszenierung war wohl der sogenannte Hufeisenplan,
>den der Bundesverteidigungsminister Rudolf Scharping präsentierte.
>
>Heinz Loquai: Scharping behauptete zweierlei. Er sagte, er habe
>Beweise
>für einen militärischen Operationsplan der serbisch-jugoslawischen
>Führung, der die Vertreibung aller Albaner aus dem Kosovo zum Ziel
>habe.
>Hierzu ist zu sagen: Das, was der Minister als Beweise bisher
>vorgelegt
>hat, ist in sich äußerst widersprüchlich und fragwürdig und daher
>auch
>nicht beweiskräftig. Die Offenlegung der Dokumente verweigert der
>Minister mit fadenscheinigen Argumenten. Außerdem behauptet
>Scharping,
>dass dieser Plan bereits seit Ende 1998 ausgeführt wurde. Hierzu ist
>festzustellen: Sogar die Analysen der Nachrichtenexperten des
>Verteidigungsministeriums widersprechen praktisch dieser Behauptung
>des
>Ministers. Nach allem, was bisher in der Öffentlichkeit bekannt
>geworden
>ist, kann man schließen, dass der Hufeisenplan ein geschickt
>inszenierter Propagandacoup war, mit dem die aufkommende Kritik am
>Krieg
>gegen Jugoslawien erstickt wurde.
>
>Frage: Nach der Sprachregelung der Regierung wurde mit den
>Verhandlungen
>von Rambouillet ein letzter Versuch unternommen zu einer friedlichen
>Lösung zu gelangen.
>
>Heinz Loquai: Mit dem Beginn der Verhandlungen über ein
>Interimsabkommen
>im Februar 1999 auf Schloss Rambouillet waren die Kosovo-Albaner
>endlich
>dort, wohin sie politisch schon immer strebten, der Kosovo-Konflikt
>war
>nun wirklich internationalisiert. Damit war für sie ein wichtiger
>Zwischenschritt auf dem Weg zur Unabhängigkeit erreicht. Die
>Belgrader
>Führung hingegen musste eine wichtige Position aufgeben, der
>Kosovo-Konflikt war spätestens ab diesem Zeitpunkt keine innere
>Angelegenheit Serbiens mehr. Bei einer genaueren Analyse der
>Verhandlungen und vor allem bei der Betrachtung der
>Verhandlungsoptionen
>der einzelnen Parteien wird deutlich, dass die Verhandlungen im
>Prinzip
>als eine Fortsetzung des Bürgerkrieges mit anderen Mitteln und auf
>einem
>anderen Terrain verstanden werden können. Durch die Kontaktgruppe
>wurden
>bereits vor den Verhandlungen Prinzipien aufgestellt, die als nicht
>verhandelbar galten. ... Das Implementierungspapier sollte so wie es
>war, von den Parteien akzeptiert werden. Dies entsprach genau dem
>Verhandlungskonzept der Kontaktgruppe, wonach es eigentlich nur wenig
>zu
>verhandeln gab, verhandelbar war lediglich die technische
>Ausgestaltung
>der Prinzipien.
>
>Frage: Wer waren die Gewinner und wer die Verlierer dieser
>Verhandlungen?
>
>Heinz Loquai: Die großen Gewinner waren die Kosovo-Albaner,
>insbesondere
>die UCK. Sie wurde zur bestimmenden Kraft im Kosovo und auch am
>Verhandlungstisch. Durch eine ungemein geschickte
>Verhandlungsstrategie,
>durch flexible Taktiken und den Beistand und die Unterstützung vor
>allem
>der USA, war die UCK erfolgreich. Die UCK hat durch die Verhandlungen
>einen mächtigen Bündnispartner gewonnen, der durch seine
>Kriegsbeteiligung die militärischen Kräfteverhältnisse radikal zu
>ihren
>Gunsten verändert hat. Die Bundesrepublik Jugoslawien war objektiv
>gesehen der eigentliche Verlierer von Rambouillet. Letztendlich
>musste
>die serbische Führung zwischen Krieg und freiwilliger Kapitulation
>entscheiden.
>
>Frage: Sie haben unter anderem die Debatten des Deutschen Bundestages
>zum Thema Kosovo analysiert. Dabei fällt auf, dass in fast allen
>Reden
>das Wort "Krieg" vermieden wurde.
>
>Heinz Loquai: Vom Verteidigungsministerium wurde die argumentative
>Marschroute ausgegeben, dass es sich bei den Luftschlägen der NATO
>nicht
>um Kriegshandlungen handeln würde, schließlich habe es ja keine
>Kriegserklärung gegeben. Wenn man dieses Argument gelten lässt, dann
>waren Hitlers Überfälle auf Polen und auf die Sowjetunion auch keine
>Kriege. Daran zeigt sich die ganze Fragwürdigkeit dieses Arguments.
>Wenn
>jedoch allgemeine und militärwissenschaftliche Literatur herangezogen
>wird und die dortigen Definitionen betrachtet werden, so kann
>überhaupt
>nicht bestritten werden, dass die NATO als internationale
>Organisation
>und einzelne NATO-Staaten gegen die Bundesrepublik Jugoslawien einen
>Krieg geplant, begonnen und geführt haben.
>
>Frage: In ihren Äußerungen weisen Sie immer wieder auf Defizite in
>der
>Informationspolitik hin und wie im Bundestag damit umgegangen wurde.
>
>Heinz Loquai: ... Die Information der Parlamentarier war unpräzise,
>lückenhaft, ja sogar objektiv falsch. Insbesondere Scharping hat das
>Parlament über die tatsächliche Lage im Kosovo falsch informiert. Im
>Grunde genommen konnte das Parlament gar nicht wirklich beurteilen,
>ob
>sich eine humanitäre Katastrophe anbahnte, die es abzuwenden galt.
>Für
>eine sachgerechte Entscheidung über Krieg und Frieden fehlten ebenso
>zutreffende Informationen wie für die Ausübung einer
>Kontrollfunktion.
>Genauso wie der Großteil der Medien hat das Parlament
>regierungsamtliche
>Positionen völlig unkritisch übernommen. Wenn man sich darüber hinaus
>den Umgang mit Kritikern anschaut, dann muss der Regierung
>undemokratisches Verhalten attestiert werden. Demokratie zeigt sich
>im
>Umgang mit Andersdenkenden, mit den Kritikern, mit der Opposition.
>Und
>hier haben Regierungsvertreter versagt.
>
>Frage: Sie selbst sind schließlich durch Ihre Kritik zu einem "Opfer"
>geworden. Ihre Karriere bei der OSZE wurde durch das
>Bundesverteidigungsministerium beendet.
>
>Heinz Loquai: Als "Opfer" möchte ich mich nicht bezeichnen lassen.
>Man
>hat gegen mich einen kleinkarierten Racheakt verübt. Doch zu den
>Fakten.
>Scharping hatte ja diejenigen, die seine Version des Hufeisenplans
>anzweifelten, als naiv, ahnungslos, dumm und böswillig bezeichnet.
>Auch
>ich fühlte mich von diesen Anwürfen betroffen. Deshalb legte ich in
>einem Fernseh-Interview dar, was mir in einem offiziellen Gespräch
>die
>Experten des Ministers über den angeblichen Hufeisenplan gesagt
>hatten.
>Dies stand in krassem Gegensatz zu dem, was Scharping vor der
>Öffentlichkeit und im Parlament behauptet hatte. Die Reaktion hierauf
>war bezeichnend. In Berlin, Bonn und Wien wurde eine üble Posse gegen
>mich inszeniert, und ich musste meine Tätigkeit bei der OSZE auf
>Betreiben des Verteidigungsministeriums aufgeben, obwohl das
>Auswärtige
>Amt und die OSZE mich dort behalten wollten. Es war schon ein
>absurdes
>Theater: Weil ich die Wahrheit gesagt hatte, wurde ich abgestraft.
>__________________________________________________________
>Das vollständige Interview erscheint in der Ausgabe 3/2000
>(November/Dezember) der "Friedenspolitischen Korrespondenz", die vom
>Bundesausschuss Friedensratschlag herausgegeben wird. Es ist auch im
>Internet zu haben: www.friedensratschlag.de (unter der Rubrik "Themen" -
>"NATO-Krieg").
>
>Bei Rückfragen zum "Friedensratschlag" am 2./3. Dezember 2000:
>Peter Strutynski Tel. 0561/804-2314, FAX 0561/804-3738;
>e-mail: strutype@...-kassel.de
Von: Dr. Peter Strutynski <strutype@...-kassel.de>
Datum: Donnerstag, 23. November 2000 11:42
Betreff: Friedensratschlag: Interview mit Heinz Loquai
>Kassel, den 24. November 2000
>
>Pressemitteilung
>Brigadegeneral a.D. Heinz Loquai bei Kongress der Friedensbewegung
>Sperrfrist: 24. November
>
>Dr. Heinz Loquai wird auf dem bundesweiten und internationalen
>"Friedenspolitischen Ratschlag", der am 2./3. Dezember 2000 in Kassel
>stattfindet, über das Thema "Kriege vermeiden - Friedenschancen
>nutzen -
>Friedensbedingungen Verbessern" sprechen.
>Heinz Loquai war bis Juni 2000 Mitglied der Deutschen OSZE-Delegation
>in
>Wien. In dieser Eigenschaft hatte er an den Verhandlungen über
>Rüstungskontrolle im Rahmen des Dayton-Abkommens teilgenommen und war
>unmittelbar mit dem Kosovo-Konflikt befasst. In seiner Studie ("Der
>Kosovo-Konflikt - Wege in einen vermeidbaren Krieg", erschienen im
>NOMOS-Verlag) hat er die Zeit von Ende November 1997 bis März 1999
>genau
>untersucht und dabei die Vorgeschichte des NATO-Angriffs auf
>Jugoslawien
>analysiert. Der Bundesregierung wirft er vor, den Krieg gegen
>Jugoslawien mit groben Manipulationen vorbereitet und gegenüber der
>Öffentlichkeit gerechtfertigt zu haben.
>Mit Dr. Heinz Loquai sprachen wir im Vorfeld des Friedensratschlags.
>Das
>dabei entstandene Interview stellen wir Ihnen gern zur
>Veröffentlichung
>zur Verfügung.
>
>Frage: In Ihrer Studie zeigen Sie auf, dass der Jugoslawien-Krieg die
>Folge einer Eskalation war, bei der die NATO und insbesondere die USA
>bewusst auf eine militärische Konfliktlösung zugesteuert sind. Eine
>alternative, zivile Konfliktlösung wäre durchaus möglich gewesen.
>
>Heinz Loquai: Der Kosovo-Konflikt hat sich lange Zeit im Schatten der
>anderen Konflikte im ehemaligen Jugoslawien entwickelt. Trotz
>unterschiedlicher Appelle hat er nur gelegentlich die internationale
>Aufmerksamkeit auf sich gezogen. Geäußert hat sich der Konflikt durch
>eine seit 1989 ausgeübte Repressionspolitik der Bundesrepublik
>Jugoslawien und Serbiens gegen die Kosovo-Albaner und deren Versuch,
>diese Unterdrückung durch eine zunächst gewaltlose Strategie zu
>unterlaufen und faktisch immer mehr staatliche Selbständigkeit zu
>etablieren. Der politische Konflikt bestand darin, dass das Ziel der
>Albaner, die staatliche Unabhängigkeit durchzusetzen, mit dem Ziel
>der
>Bundesrepublik Jugoslawien, das Kosovo als serbische Provinz im
>jugoslawischen Staatsgebiet zu halten, unvereinbar war. Die
>gewaltsame
>Austragung des Konflikts, der von ethnischen, sozialen, religiösen
>und
>wirtschaftlichen Konflikten umlagert wurde, war ein Bürgerkrieg.
>Allerdings wurde er nicht von allen als Bürgerkrieg begriffen und
>beurteilt. So sah z. B. die Belgrader Führung das Problem im Kosovo
>nur
>in der Bekämpfung einer kleinen Gruppe von Terroristen und reagierte
>dementsprechend. Dabei versäumte es die serbische Staatsautorität,
>eine
>Perspektive und praktische, konkrete Ziele für eine friedliche Lösung
>des Konflikts zu entwickeln.
>
>Frage: Auf der anderen Seite die UCK, die die Unabhängigkeit durch
>einen
>bewaffneten Kampf erreichen wollte.
>
>Heinz Loquai: Bei der UCK lassen Strategie und Taktik deutlich
>erkennen,
>dass sich deren Führung konsequent an die Prinzipien eines
>Bürgerkriegs
>gehalten hat. Nachdem sich die NATO in den Konflikt eingeschaltet,
>deutlich Partei gegen die Serben ergriffen und ein militärisches
>Drohpotential, das nur gegen die Serben gerichtet war, aufgebaut
>hatte,
>eröffnete sich für die UCK zum ersten Mal eine ganz konkrete
>Perspektive
>für einen raschen Sieg im Bürgerkrieg. Die UCK hatte damit die
>stärkste
>Militärallianz der Welt als Verbündeten; als Luftwaffe der UCK gewann
>schließlich die NATO den Bürgerkrieg für die UCK.
>
>Frage: Welche weitergehenden Optionen hat die NATO dabei verfolgt?
>
>Heinz Loquai: Für die NATO selbst wurde das Kosovo immer mehr zu
>einer
>Arena, in der die Politik der NATO exemplarisch angewandt und auch
>getestet wurde. ... Die NATO war ja dabei, eine neue Strategie
>einzuführen, Einsätze außerhalb des Artikel 5 des NATO-Vertrages
>sollten
>in Zukunft ohne UN-Mandat möglich sein. Im Krieg gegen Jugoslawien
>setzte die NATO vorab ihre Strategie um. Bezeichnend hierzu ist, dass
>der amerikanische Präsident am 24. März 1999 in seiner Rede an das
>amerikanische Volk nicht die humanitäre Katastrophe, sondern die
>Glaubwürdigkeit des NATO-Bündnisses an die erste Stelle gestellt hat.
>Um
>jeden Preis sollte verhindert werden, dass die NATO - wie vorher die
>UN
>- als Papiertiger erschien.
>
>Frage: Die NATO hat Stellung zugunsten einer Partei bezogen. Hat sie
>sich damit nicht als Vermittler bei Konflikten eindeutig
>disqualifiziert
>?
>
>Heinz Loquai: Die NATO hat in diesem Konflikt einseitig Partei
>ergriffen
>und damit eine politische Lösung verhindert. Wer jedoch in einem
>Konflikt vermitteln will, muss das Vertrauen der Konfliktparteien
>haben
>und hier ist Voraussetzung, dass der Vermittler das Verhalten der
>Parteien mit gleichen Maßstäben bewertet und eventuelle Drohungen und
>Sanktionen gegen alle Vertragsbrüche und Gewalttäter auferlegt. Dies
>war
>im Kosovo nicht der Fall, hierzu ein Beispiel: In der Resolution 1203
>des UN-Sicherheitsrats vom 24.10.1998 wird von beiden Parteien das
>Ende
>der Gewalttaten und die Befolgung früherer Resolutionen verlangt. Die
>Jugoslawen kamen dieser Aufforderung nach, dennoch erhielt die NATO
>ihre
>Kriegsdrohung gegen sie aufrecht. Die UCK hielt sich nicht daran. Die
>internationale Gemeinschaft tat kaum etwas, um sie dazu zu zwingen
>...
>
>Frage: Zur Begründung für ein militärisches Eingreifen verweist die
>Bundesregierung immer wieder auf die Ereignisse von Racak.
>
>Heinz Loquai: Das sogenannte Massaker von Racak hat den Fortgang des
>Kosovo-Konflikts erheblich beeinflusst und den Weg zum Krieg gegen
>die
>Bundesrepublik Jugoslawien geebnet. Unstrittig ist wohl - dies gibt
>auch
>die serbische Führung zu -, dass die Toten in Racak auf das Konto der
>serbischen Sicherheitskräfte gingen. Unklar ist nach wie vor der
>Ablauf
>des Geschehens. Eine entscheidende Rolle spielte dabei der
>amerikanische
>Leiter der Kosovo-Verifikationsmission, Botschafter William Walker.
>Bei
>einer objektiven Betrachtung kommt man nicht umhin sein Verhalten als
>unangemessen und außerhalb aller normalen Regeln für eine Person mit
>diplomatischem Status zu bewerten. In Racak, am Ort des Geschehens,
>schien es ihm vor allem darum zu gehen, den von ihm mitgebrachten
>Journalisten freies Schalten und Walten zu ermöglichen. Walker machte
>keine Anstalten notwendigen Maßnahmen für eine kriminaltechnische
>Untersuchung einzuleiten, so z. B. das Gebiet abzusperren und den
>unerlaubten Zugang zu verhindern. Er beschuldigte aufgrund des
>Augenscheins und der Aussagen der Dorfbewohner die jugoslawischen
>Sicherheitskräfte und machte darüber hinaus falsche Angaben zu den
>Toten. Mit seinen vorschnellen Aussagen und Urteilen prägte er das
>Urteil anderer Organisationen und Regierungen, die ihrerseits seine
>"Feststellungen" mit fahrlässiger Leichtgläubigkeit ungeprüft
>übernahmen
>und zu einer Grundlage ihrer Politik machten. Mit seiner unbewiesenen
>Version von Racak zündete Walker die Lunte zum Krieg gegen
>Jugoslawien.
>
>Frage: Eine andere Inszenierung war wohl der sogenannte Hufeisenplan,
>den der Bundesverteidigungsminister Rudolf Scharping präsentierte.
>
>Heinz Loquai: Scharping behauptete zweierlei. Er sagte, er habe
>Beweise
>für einen militärischen Operationsplan der serbisch-jugoslawischen
>Führung, der die Vertreibung aller Albaner aus dem Kosovo zum Ziel
>habe.
>Hierzu ist zu sagen: Das, was der Minister als Beweise bisher
>vorgelegt
>hat, ist in sich äußerst widersprüchlich und fragwürdig und daher
>auch
>nicht beweiskräftig. Die Offenlegung der Dokumente verweigert der
>Minister mit fadenscheinigen Argumenten. Außerdem behauptet
>Scharping,
>dass dieser Plan bereits seit Ende 1998 ausgeführt wurde. Hierzu ist
>festzustellen: Sogar die Analysen der Nachrichtenexperten des
>Verteidigungsministeriums widersprechen praktisch dieser Behauptung
>des
>Ministers. Nach allem, was bisher in der Öffentlichkeit bekannt
>geworden
>ist, kann man schließen, dass der Hufeisenplan ein geschickt
>inszenierter Propagandacoup war, mit dem die aufkommende Kritik am
>Krieg
>gegen Jugoslawien erstickt wurde.
>
>Frage: Nach der Sprachregelung der Regierung wurde mit den
>Verhandlungen
>von Rambouillet ein letzter Versuch unternommen zu einer friedlichen
>Lösung zu gelangen.
>
>Heinz Loquai: Mit dem Beginn der Verhandlungen über ein
>Interimsabkommen
>im Februar 1999 auf Schloss Rambouillet waren die Kosovo-Albaner
>endlich
>dort, wohin sie politisch schon immer strebten, der Kosovo-Konflikt
>war
>nun wirklich internationalisiert. Damit war für sie ein wichtiger
>Zwischenschritt auf dem Weg zur Unabhängigkeit erreicht. Die
>Belgrader
>Führung hingegen musste eine wichtige Position aufgeben, der
>Kosovo-Konflikt war spätestens ab diesem Zeitpunkt keine innere
>Angelegenheit Serbiens mehr. Bei einer genaueren Analyse der
>Verhandlungen und vor allem bei der Betrachtung der
>Verhandlungsoptionen
>der einzelnen Parteien wird deutlich, dass die Verhandlungen im
>Prinzip
>als eine Fortsetzung des Bürgerkrieges mit anderen Mitteln und auf
>einem
>anderen Terrain verstanden werden können. Durch die Kontaktgruppe
>wurden
>bereits vor den Verhandlungen Prinzipien aufgestellt, die als nicht
>verhandelbar galten. ... Das Implementierungspapier sollte so wie es
>war, von den Parteien akzeptiert werden. Dies entsprach genau dem
>Verhandlungskonzept der Kontaktgruppe, wonach es eigentlich nur wenig
>zu
>verhandeln gab, verhandelbar war lediglich die technische
>Ausgestaltung
>der Prinzipien.
>
>Frage: Wer waren die Gewinner und wer die Verlierer dieser
>Verhandlungen?
>
>Heinz Loquai: Die großen Gewinner waren die Kosovo-Albaner,
>insbesondere
>die UCK. Sie wurde zur bestimmenden Kraft im Kosovo und auch am
>Verhandlungstisch. Durch eine ungemein geschickte
>Verhandlungsstrategie,
>durch flexible Taktiken und den Beistand und die Unterstützung vor
>allem
>der USA, war die UCK erfolgreich. Die UCK hat durch die Verhandlungen
>einen mächtigen Bündnispartner gewonnen, der durch seine
>Kriegsbeteiligung die militärischen Kräfteverhältnisse radikal zu
>ihren
>Gunsten verändert hat. Die Bundesrepublik Jugoslawien war objektiv
>gesehen der eigentliche Verlierer von Rambouillet. Letztendlich
>musste
>die serbische Führung zwischen Krieg und freiwilliger Kapitulation
>entscheiden.
>
>Frage: Sie haben unter anderem die Debatten des Deutschen Bundestages
>zum Thema Kosovo analysiert. Dabei fällt auf, dass in fast allen
>Reden
>das Wort "Krieg" vermieden wurde.
>
>Heinz Loquai: Vom Verteidigungsministerium wurde die argumentative
>Marschroute ausgegeben, dass es sich bei den Luftschlägen der NATO
>nicht
>um Kriegshandlungen handeln würde, schließlich habe es ja keine
>Kriegserklärung gegeben. Wenn man dieses Argument gelten lässt, dann
>waren Hitlers Überfälle auf Polen und auf die Sowjetunion auch keine
>Kriege. Daran zeigt sich die ganze Fragwürdigkeit dieses Arguments.
>Wenn
>jedoch allgemeine und militärwissenschaftliche Literatur herangezogen
>wird und die dortigen Definitionen betrachtet werden, so kann
>überhaupt
>nicht bestritten werden, dass die NATO als internationale
>Organisation
>und einzelne NATO-Staaten gegen die Bundesrepublik Jugoslawien einen
>Krieg geplant, begonnen und geführt haben.
>
>Frage: In ihren Äußerungen weisen Sie immer wieder auf Defizite in
>der
>Informationspolitik hin und wie im Bundestag damit umgegangen wurde.
>
>Heinz Loquai: ... Die Information der Parlamentarier war unpräzise,
>lückenhaft, ja sogar objektiv falsch. Insbesondere Scharping hat das
>Parlament über die tatsächliche Lage im Kosovo falsch informiert. Im
>Grunde genommen konnte das Parlament gar nicht wirklich beurteilen,
>ob
>sich eine humanitäre Katastrophe anbahnte, die es abzuwenden galt.
>Für
>eine sachgerechte Entscheidung über Krieg und Frieden fehlten ebenso
>zutreffende Informationen wie für die Ausübung einer
>Kontrollfunktion.
>Genauso wie der Großteil der Medien hat das Parlament
>regierungsamtliche
>Positionen völlig unkritisch übernommen. Wenn man sich darüber hinaus
>den Umgang mit Kritikern anschaut, dann muss der Regierung
>undemokratisches Verhalten attestiert werden. Demokratie zeigt sich
>im
>Umgang mit Andersdenkenden, mit den Kritikern, mit der Opposition.
>Und
>hier haben Regierungsvertreter versagt.
>
>Frage: Sie selbst sind schließlich durch Ihre Kritik zu einem "Opfer"
>geworden. Ihre Karriere bei der OSZE wurde durch das
>Bundesverteidigungsministerium beendet.
>
>Heinz Loquai: Als "Opfer" möchte ich mich nicht bezeichnen lassen.
>Man
>hat gegen mich einen kleinkarierten Racheakt verübt. Doch zu den
>Fakten.
>Scharping hatte ja diejenigen, die seine Version des Hufeisenplans
>anzweifelten, als naiv, ahnungslos, dumm und böswillig bezeichnet.
>Auch
>ich fühlte mich von diesen Anwürfen betroffen. Deshalb legte ich in
>einem Fernseh-Interview dar, was mir in einem offiziellen Gespräch
>die
>Experten des Ministers über den angeblichen Hufeisenplan gesagt
>hatten.
>Dies stand in krassem Gegensatz zu dem, was Scharping vor der
>Öffentlichkeit und im Parlament behauptet hatte. Die Reaktion hierauf
>war bezeichnend. In Berlin, Bonn und Wien wurde eine üble Posse gegen
>mich inszeniert, und ich musste meine Tätigkeit bei der OSZE auf
>Betreiben des Verteidigungsministeriums aufgeben, obwohl das
>Auswärtige
>Amt und die OSZE mich dort behalten wollten. Es war schon ein
>absurdes
>Theater: Weil ich die Wahrheit gesagt hatte, wurde ich abgestraft.
>__________________________________________________________
>Das vollständige Interview erscheint in der Ausgabe 3/2000
>(November/Dezember) der "Friedenspolitischen Korrespondenz", die vom
>Bundesausschuss Friedensratschlag herausgegeben wird. Es ist auch im
>Internet zu haben: www.friedensratschlag.de (unter der Rubrik "Themen" -
>"NATO-Krieg").
>
>Bei Rückfragen zum "Friedensratschlag" am 2./3. Dezember 2000:
>Peter Strutynski Tel. 0561/804-2314, FAX 0561/804-3738;
>e-mail: strutype@...-kassel.de
KOSOVO: Deja vue!
>Is history going to repeat itself? This is how it started in Kosovo,
>with KLA attacks against Serbian Security police forces. When Serbs responded
>to the provocations, they were condemned by the West, yet the US government
>wouldn't tolerate police being attacked in this country.
>
>Why should the Serbs?
>
>As the KLA see "independence" slipping through their fingers, it's not
>just the Serbs who are going to be the targets. Where once they thought of
>KFOR as their liberators, they will look upon them as their oppressors.
>
>Stella
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>AP International
>
> New Yugoslav Leadership Tested
>
> by ALEKSANDAR VASOVIC
> Associated Press Writer
>
> LUCANE, Yugoslavia (AP) -- Lying on
> his belly in the brush, the Serbian police
> officer gazed through his binoculars and
> pointed at the ethnic Albanian militant on
> the opposite hill. He knew the position
> well -- it used to be his.
>
> Just days after ethnic Albanians seized
> Serb police positions in the border region
> on the edge of Kosovo, the combatants
> have dug in to wait for the situation to be
> resolved. Yugoslavia's new leadership
> gave NATO peacekeepers a 72-hour
> deadline Friday to end an ethnic Albanian
> offensive in the buffer zone between the
> province and the rest of Serbia.
>
> If NATO doesn't act, the Serbs say they
> will move in on their own.
>
> ''Look at them! Look at them!'' said the
> officer who would only give his first
> name, Milan, as he watched the insurgents
> facing him. ''Now they are around the
> outpost. They are walking freely.''
>
> So close that they can watch each other's
> every move, this fragile front line offers a
> test to new President Vojislav Kostunica
> and to NATO peacekeepers on the other
> side of the boundary line.
>
> Under pressure at home to act against the
> insurgents, Kostunica is unlikely to
> simply stand by while they seize any
> ground in Serbia, Yugoslavia's dominant
> republic.
>
> If he acts too aggressively, however, he'll
> risk being compared to ousted President
> Slobodan Milosevic, whose belligerent
> policies forced Yugoslavia into wars and
> a pariah status it has only in recent weeks
> begun to shed.
>
> A Serb interior minister, Bozo Prelevic,
> said that in case NATO fails to prevent
> the ethnic Albanian incursions and force
> the militants back into Kosovo, Serb
> police ''will return to the territory of the
> republic of Serbia (in the buffer zone)
> with the means that are available.''
>
> Prelevic said the countdown starts Friday
> at 7.00 p.m. local time, meaning the
> deadline would expire Monday.
>
> ''We will not fool around,'' Prelevic said.
> ''They (NATO) are either incapable or
> they will show us the contrary.''
>
> The ethnic Albanians, however, have
> apparently decided that the moment to act
> is now in their goal to win independence
> from Serbia. They want to unite the
> predominantly ethnic Albanian Presevo
> Valley with Kosovo.
>
> Still, many Kosovo Albanians have mixed
> feelings about the events occurring just
> outside their administrative boundaries.
>
> Though their political parties sympathize
> with the demands by ethnic Albanians
> there for greater freedoms, they have been
> very careful of the issue of unification.
> The political leaders are fearful they
> might jeopardize their own dreams of
> independence.
>
> Even so, the Albanian community has
> long discussed the idea of uniting all the
> lands where Albanians live, and the
> spilling of blood may re-ignite the
> nationalistic sentiments.
>
> In the middle of all the tensions are tiny
> villages like Lucane, 220 miles from
> Belgrade.
>
> An ethnic Albanian village of about 1,000
> people tucked into a little valley,
> everyone in Lucane but the elderly have
> fled to neighboring villages. Fearing
> sniper fire, the elderly are holed up in
> their houses, which already bear the
> marks of gunfire.
>
> ''I remained here to guard the house,'' said
> Xavit Bislimi, 77, a local resident. ''The
> police didn't harm me or my livestock, but
> I am afraid of those armed people on the
> hills because they are shooting on the
> village every night, during last few days.''
>
> Evidence of gunfire is apparent near the
> police checkpoints. In the cellar of a
> house near the road being used by the
> officers, spent casings littered the ground.
> The police said that was from that the last
> day alone, stemming from attacks
> Thursday night and before dawn Friday.
>
> No one was injured Friday, but four
> police officers have died in the last week
> in attacks that gave the rebels control of a
> police checkpoint and the main road
> leading to Kosovo.
>
> Sporadic sniper fire continues, but for the
> moment the police have orders not to
> respond unless directly attacked.
>
> ''We are waiting for political approval
> from our state leadership and the
> international community,'' said Milan, the
> police officer, ''to take care of insurgents
> within Serbian territory.''
>
26/11/2000
>Is history going to repeat itself? This is how it started in Kosovo,
>with KLA attacks against Serbian Security police forces. When Serbs responded
>to the provocations, they were condemned by the West, yet the US government
>wouldn't tolerate police being attacked in this country.
>
>Why should the Serbs?
>
>As the KLA see "independence" slipping through their fingers, it's not
>just the Serbs who are going to be the targets. Where once they thought of
>KFOR as their liberators, they will look upon them as their oppressors.
>
>Stella
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>AP International
>
> New Yugoslav Leadership Tested
>
> by ALEKSANDAR VASOVIC
> Associated Press Writer
>
> LUCANE, Yugoslavia (AP) -- Lying on
> his belly in the brush, the Serbian police
> officer gazed through his binoculars and
> pointed at the ethnic Albanian militant on
> the opposite hill. He knew the position
> well -- it used to be his.
>
> Just days after ethnic Albanians seized
> Serb police positions in the border region
> on the edge of Kosovo, the combatants
> have dug in to wait for the situation to be
> resolved. Yugoslavia's new leadership
> gave NATO peacekeepers a 72-hour
> deadline Friday to end an ethnic Albanian
> offensive in the buffer zone between the
> province and the rest of Serbia.
>
> If NATO doesn't act, the Serbs say they
> will move in on their own.
>
> ''Look at them! Look at them!'' said the
> officer who would only give his first
> name, Milan, as he watched the insurgents
> facing him. ''Now they are around the
> outpost. They are walking freely.''
>
> So close that they can watch each other's
> every move, this fragile front line offers a
> test to new President Vojislav Kostunica
> and to NATO peacekeepers on the other
> side of the boundary line.
>
> Under pressure at home to act against the
> insurgents, Kostunica is unlikely to
> simply stand by while they seize any
> ground in Serbia, Yugoslavia's dominant
> republic.
>
> If he acts too aggressively, however, he'll
> risk being compared to ousted President
> Slobodan Milosevic, whose belligerent
> policies forced Yugoslavia into wars and
> a pariah status it has only in recent weeks
> begun to shed.
>
> A Serb interior minister, Bozo Prelevic,
> said that in case NATO fails to prevent
> the ethnic Albanian incursions and force
> the militants back into Kosovo, Serb
> police ''will return to the territory of the
> republic of Serbia (in the buffer zone)
> with the means that are available.''
>
> Prelevic said the countdown starts Friday
> at 7.00 p.m. local time, meaning the
> deadline would expire Monday.
>
> ''We will not fool around,'' Prelevic said.
> ''They (NATO) are either incapable or
> they will show us the contrary.''
>
> The ethnic Albanians, however, have
> apparently decided that the moment to act
> is now in their goal to win independence
> from Serbia. They want to unite the
> predominantly ethnic Albanian Presevo
> Valley with Kosovo.
>
> Still, many Kosovo Albanians have mixed
> feelings about the events occurring just
> outside their administrative boundaries.
>
> Though their political parties sympathize
> with the demands by ethnic Albanians
> there for greater freedoms, they have been
> very careful of the issue of unification.
> The political leaders are fearful they
> might jeopardize their own dreams of
> independence.
>
> Even so, the Albanian community has
> long discussed the idea of uniting all the
> lands where Albanians live, and the
> spilling of blood may re-ignite the
> nationalistic sentiments.
>
> In the middle of all the tensions are tiny
> villages like Lucane, 220 miles from
> Belgrade.
>
> An ethnic Albanian village of about 1,000
> people tucked into a little valley,
> everyone in Lucane but the elderly have
> fled to neighboring villages. Fearing
> sniper fire, the elderly are holed up in
> their houses, which already bear the
> marks of gunfire.
>
> ''I remained here to guard the house,'' said
> Xavit Bislimi, 77, a local resident. ''The
> police didn't harm me or my livestock, but
> I am afraid of those armed people on the
> hills because they are shooting on the
> village every night, during last few days.''
>
> Evidence of gunfire is apparent near the
> police checkpoints. In the cellar of a
> house near the road being used by the
> officers, spent casings littered the ground.
> The police said that was from that the last
> day alone, stemming from attacks
> Thursday night and before dawn Friday.
>
> No one was injured Friday, but four
> police officers have died in the last week
> in attacks that gave the rebels control of a
> police checkpoint and the main road
> leading to Kosovo.
>
> Sporadic sniper fire continues, but for the
> moment the police have orders not to
> respond unless directly attacked.
>
> ''We are waiting for political approval
> from our state leadership and the
> international community,'' said Milan, the
> police officer, ''to take care of insurgents
> within Serbian territory.''
>
26/11/2000
Balkan Express
by Nebojsa Malic
Antiwar.com
December 14, 2000
Déja Vu
Two leaders face off in a hotly contested election race, one which will
determine the fate of their nation. One is a leftist
liberal, entrenched in power, relying on a police apparatus and
propaganda; the other a conservative, enjoying an advantage
in funding and promising to restore dignity to office of the president.
There is a vote. But the results are contested, ballots
are miscounted, and the Supreme Court intervenes to resolve the
election. United States, December 2000? Try Yugoslavia,
this September.
Slobodan Milosevic’s government claimed the election was too close to
call. The opposition protested, claiming outright
victory. While Vojislav Kostunica was offering a recount ("Goodwill
gesture" from Yugoslav opposition could end
impasse, AFP, 29. September 2000), Milosevic was insisting on holding a
runoff election. When Zoran Djindjic and his
cohorts running Kostunica’s campaign refused to consider such an option,
the Yugoslav constitutional court (US Supreme
Court’s counterpart) annulled the election results (see NY Times,
"Belgrade Court Annuls Vote That Was Milosevic
Setback" by Steven Erlanger, 10/5/2000). This provoked a demonstration
in front of the parliament that led to the
overthrow of Milosevic and the inauguration of Kostunica as Yugoslav
president.
On the face of it, the similarities are eerie. Knowing that the United
States was deeply involved in this chain of events, they
become downright sinister.
MANIPULATORS
A week before the elections in Yugoslavia, a NATO naval expeditionary
force was moored off the Yugoslav coast; the
US-funded Montenegrin regime boycotted the election; and Madeleine
Albright asserted that the vote would be "stolen"
weeks before any ballots were actually cast. Then the Washington Post
ran a front-page story detailing the "$77 million
U.S. effort to do with ballots what NATO bombs could not – get rid of
Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic" [US
Funds Help Milosevic’s Foes in Election Fight, John Lancaster,
9/19/2000, A01] .
Kostunica promptly denounced the US for meddling, but his convincing
lead quickly melted away. As Milosevic thundered
against "traitors and foreign mercenaries," the Post just about admitted
his allegations were true!
Four days later, Jane Perlez wrote in the New York Times: "Even if, as
almost everyone expects, Mr. Milosevic simply
declares himself the victor, Washington is hoping that angry voters will
take to the streets in a way that eventually drives him
from office, much as Ferdinand E. Marcos was ousted in the Philippines
in 1986." (US Anti-Milosevic Plan Faces Major
Test at Polls, September 23). When the masses did exactly that on
October 5, everyone seemed surprised. Soon
thereafter, Kostunica’s coalition partners began boasting how they had
planned a violent overthrow of Milosevic. Was it
just them?
No, according to the Washington Post. This Monday, amidst the US
electoral controversy, the Post published another
report, detailing how the United States planned, funded and ran the
campaign against Milosevic this past fall.
CONSPIRACY REVEALED
Michael Dobbs, author of the article, claims that Americans and US-paid
consultants crafted the strategy to vote Milosevic
out of office; that retired military officers taught Otpor activists how
to organize demonstrations; that US taxpayers funded
5,000 cans of spray paint used to scrawl opposition graffiti across
Serbia; that President Clinton’s own pollsters – Penn,
Schoen & Berland Associates, Inc. – were involved in crafting
pro-opposition polls before the election.
It is startling and sickening to read how the US operatives exploited
Milosevic’s greatest weakness – his soft spot for the
democratic process. Says the Post,
"Had Yugoslavia been a totalitarian state like Iraq or North Korea,
the strategy would have stood little
chance. But while Milosevic ran a repressive police state, he was
never a dictator in the style of Iraqi President
Saddam Hussein. His authority depended on a veil of popular
legitimacy. It was this constitutional facade that
gave Serbian opposition leaders, and their Western backers, an
all-important opening."
Milosevic’s greatest weakness was that he was not ruthless enough? Such
a supreme irony, indeed, especially when coming
from the same media house that has denounced Milosevic as another Hitler
and gleefully published editorials advocating the
complete destruction of Serbia during the 1999 war.
A NEW KIND OF COVERT OP
The September 19 article described US meddling in Yugoslav elections as
"similar to previous campaigns in pre-democratic
Chile, South Africa and Eastern Europe." But Dobbs dwells on
"extraordinary US effort to unseat a foreign head of state,
not through covert action of the kind the CIA once employed in such
places as Iran and Guatemala, but by modern election
campaign techniques."
None of the countries and regions described above have profited from US
involvement. Quite to the contrary, it had
profoundly negative consequences. Guatemala plunged into a 20-year,
bloody civil war. In Iran, oppression of the people
by the American-dominated regime spawned the Islamic revolution. South
Africa and Eastern Europe have seen their state
institutions disintegrate, and have plunged into abject poverty. In
Chile, US-backed dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet was
responsible for numerous crimes against its citizens.
Based on this record, extensive American involvement in Yugoslav and
Serbian elections ought to cause every
freedom-loving human being to cringe with disgust. By definition, it
flies in the face of everything that has ever been said
about democracy, responsibility, freedom of choice and international law
– to mention just a few major points.
The US government may argue that its meddling helped the Serbs. The jury
is still out on whether Kostunica’s presidency
has made things better, though. International recognition is hardly a
compensation for famine, economic collapse and fuel
shortages that have descended on Serbia after Milosevic’s fall.
Kostunica’s election may yet prove to be a beneficial
development for the Serbs, plagued as they have been by ill fortune
throughout the 20th century. But that would come in
spite of Washington’s plots, not because of them.
TIMED FALLOUT
Those who consider Kostunica a US puppet have a hard time proving their
case. Though not exactly hostile, he is certainly
no big friend of Washington. His government has hardly been a pushover,
though it has been very flexible on many issues
Milosevic refused to yield ground over the years – such as the UN
membership, Yugoslav succession and, to an extent, war
crimes.
If he really were a US puppet, how would one explain the persistent
secessionism of Djukanovic’s regime in Podgorica, or
the ambivalence of NATO in face of the Albanian invasion of southern
Serbia? Kostunica’s party has supported the
Serbian Democratic Party (SDS) in Bosnia, which the US is endeavoring to
ban even though it won the elections there fair
and square. Kostunica has also insisted on territorial integrity of
Serbia and Yugoslavia, while the US has supported
separatist demands of its clients in Kosovo and Montenegro, even while
publicly claiming otherwise.
There are, however, leaders in Kostunica’s motley coalition that are
more inclined to serve foreign interests. Every nation
has its share of traitors and sellouts, and it is their direction one
needs to look when following the US money trail and the
conspicuous interference in Yugoslav and Serbian affairs.
Conspicuous is the key word here. The timing of this article’s
publication cannot be an accident. Even in its imperious
arrogance, the mainstream American press would never dare publicly
announce its government’s machinations in
Yugoslavia if doing so would hurt the efforts of Washington oligarchs.
It certainly marched in lockstep with the government
during American-led terror bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999.
The Washington Post’s September 19 article gave credence to Milosevic’s
claims of foreign interference and hurt
Kostunica’s coalition just a week before the federal elections. Soon
after Kostunica took over on October 5, as he was
trying to establish legitimacy and convince the people he was not a
stooge of NATO, US papers and politicians started
claiming credit for his success, praising the policies of bombing,
sanctions and separatism – along with propaganda and
"democratization" projects such as those detailed in the Post – as being
the real reason for Milosevic’s fall.
The newest article detailing the intricacies of the American conspiracy
– for how else would one call such a degree of
tampering in another country’s elections? – again comes at the worst
possible time for Kostunica. Albanian bandits have
invaded southern Serbia, Yugoslavia’s economy is tanking fast, and Zoran
Djindjic seems poised to sweep the December
elections and pull the rug out from under Kostunica’s feet.
TAKING SIDES
Indeed, though the December elections are described as the clash of
Kostunica’s DOS and the remnants of Milosevic’s
Socialists, the real power struggle will be between factions within DOS
– Kostunica and Djindjic.
The Post then dumps a cauldron of investigative pitch on the heads of
all involved, eroding Kostunica’s legitimacy and
deriding the efforts of the opposition (now government) in changing the
politics of Serbia. One is tempted to wonder if
Washington wants Kostunica to fail, or at least to be sufficiently
weakened to submit to US demands.
A WRENCH IN THE WORKS
Kostunica may be too American for the Empire’s comfort. He actually
believes in the constitution, rights and liberties,
limited government, patriotism and sovereignty – all issues the current
regime in Washington has undermined or sidelined
over the past eight years.
If the December 11 article was truthful – which seems likely – then it
represents an irrefutable proof that there really was a
US plan to overthrow Milosevic and install a friendlier regime,
dominated by pro-American politicians. Kostunica might
have fit into the plan as a figurehead, intended to be replaced by
Djindjic or someone else when the time was ripe.
Apparently no one told him that, since Kostunica went on to become a
true statesman and garner tremendous support
among the people. His strength now surpasses that of Djindjic’s party,
so much that Djindjic needs Kostunica’s support to
become Serbia’s Prime Minister after the elections in late December.
Hence comes the need to take Kostunica down a peg
an attack his honesty, integrity and independence, effectively propping
up Djindjic’s power grab. So the Post says:
"To many opposition activists, Kostunica’s denials ring a little
hollow. While it is true that his own party, the
Democratic Party of Serbia, rejected anything that smacked of US
aid, his presidential campaign benefited
enormously from the advice and financial support the opposition
coalition received from abroad, and
particularly from the United States."
SECRETS, BARGAINS AND LIES
Though the full fallout from the Post’s article will only be known in
the coming days, one of its unintended consequences
was to expose the extent of America’s illegal imperial adventures. Now
that it is known the US was so deeply involved in
Milosevic’s overthrow, maybe other secrets will also emerge – such as
its exact role in the events of October 5, and the
extent to which Kostunica’s peaceful takeover and Milosevic’s concession
were or were not a part of that plan. Perhaps
some day soon, the American public – and the Serbian public as well –
will find out what the puppet masters had in mind,
and which actors were (or were not) their puppets.
BOOMERANG
The penultimate irony, of course, is that the US found itself mired in a
similar situation just two months later. Could the ballot
manipulation in Florida be the consequence of similar practices abroad?
The temptation to use the ways and means of
empire-building at home are great, especially when the prize is the
Empire itself.
But let us be realistic. It is hard to envision masses of angry
Americans charging Capitol Hill of the White House and
inaugurating the candidate they consider the victor, or the US Supreme
Court annulling the election. Alas, neither of the US
candidates has the integrity of Vojislav Kostunica or the ruthless
political savvy and charm of Slobodan Milosevic. There
won’t be any bulldozers on the streets of Washington any time soon, and
more’s the pity.
---
Bollettino di controinformazione del
Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'"
Sito WEB : http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma
vengono fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al
solo scopo di segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only")
Archivio di JUGOINFO:
> http://www.ecircle.it/an_ecircle/articles?ecircleid%c2%91979 oppure
> http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
Per iscriversi al bollettino: <jugoinfo-subscribe@...>
Per cancellarsi: <jugoinfo-unsubscribe@...>
Contributi e segnalazioni: <jugocoord@...>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
eCircle ti offre una nuova opportunita:
Il tuo sondaggio sul web sugli argomenti che preferisci
Facile da gestire e con rappresentazioni grafiche dei risultati.
E' facile, veloce e gratuito!
Da oggi su
http://www.ecircle.de/ad616887/www.ecircle.it
by Nebojsa Malic
Antiwar.com
December 14, 2000
Déja Vu
Two leaders face off in a hotly contested election race, one which will
determine the fate of their nation. One is a leftist
liberal, entrenched in power, relying on a police apparatus and
propaganda; the other a conservative, enjoying an advantage
in funding and promising to restore dignity to office of the president.
There is a vote. But the results are contested, ballots
are miscounted, and the Supreme Court intervenes to resolve the
election. United States, December 2000? Try Yugoslavia,
this September.
Slobodan Milosevic’s government claimed the election was too close to
call. The opposition protested, claiming outright
victory. While Vojislav Kostunica was offering a recount ("Goodwill
gesture" from Yugoslav opposition could end
impasse, AFP, 29. September 2000), Milosevic was insisting on holding a
runoff election. When Zoran Djindjic and his
cohorts running Kostunica’s campaign refused to consider such an option,
the Yugoslav constitutional court (US Supreme
Court’s counterpart) annulled the election results (see NY Times,
"Belgrade Court Annuls Vote That Was Milosevic
Setback" by Steven Erlanger, 10/5/2000). This provoked a demonstration
in front of the parliament that led to the
overthrow of Milosevic and the inauguration of Kostunica as Yugoslav
president.
On the face of it, the similarities are eerie. Knowing that the United
States was deeply involved in this chain of events, they
become downright sinister.
MANIPULATORS
A week before the elections in Yugoslavia, a NATO naval expeditionary
force was moored off the Yugoslav coast; the
US-funded Montenegrin regime boycotted the election; and Madeleine
Albright asserted that the vote would be "stolen"
weeks before any ballots were actually cast. Then the Washington Post
ran a front-page story detailing the "$77 million
U.S. effort to do with ballots what NATO bombs could not – get rid of
Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic" [US
Funds Help Milosevic’s Foes in Election Fight, John Lancaster,
9/19/2000, A01] .
Kostunica promptly denounced the US for meddling, but his convincing
lead quickly melted away. As Milosevic thundered
against "traitors and foreign mercenaries," the Post just about admitted
his allegations were true!
Four days later, Jane Perlez wrote in the New York Times: "Even if, as
almost everyone expects, Mr. Milosevic simply
declares himself the victor, Washington is hoping that angry voters will
take to the streets in a way that eventually drives him
from office, much as Ferdinand E. Marcos was ousted in the Philippines
in 1986." (US Anti-Milosevic Plan Faces Major
Test at Polls, September 23). When the masses did exactly that on
October 5, everyone seemed surprised. Soon
thereafter, Kostunica’s coalition partners began boasting how they had
planned a violent overthrow of Milosevic. Was it
just them?
No, according to the Washington Post. This Monday, amidst the US
electoral controversy, the Post published another
report, detailing how the United States planned, funded and ran the
campaign against Milosevic this past fall.
CONSPIRACY REVEALED
Michael Dobbs, author of the article, claims that Americans and US-paid
consultants crafted the strategy to vote Milosevic
out of office; that retired military officers taught Otpor activists how
to organize demonstrations; that US taxpayers funded
5,000 cans of spray paint used to scrawl opposition graffiti across
Serbia; that President Clinton’s own pollsters – Penn,
Schoen & Berland Associates, Inc. – were involved in crafting
pro-opposition polls before the election.
It is startling and sickening to read how the US operatives exploited
Milosevic’s greatest weakness – his soft spot for the
democratic process. Says the Post,
"Had Yugoslavia been a totalitarian state like Iraq or North Korea,
the strategy would have stood little
chance. But while Milosevic ran a repressive police state, he was
never a dictator in the style of Iraqi President
Saddam Hussein. His authority depended on a veil of popular
legitimacy. It was this constitutional facade that
gave Serbian opposition leaders, and their Western backers, an
all-important opening."
Milosevic’s greatest weakness was that he was not ruthless enough? Such
a supreme irony, indeed, especially when coming
from the same media house that has denounced Milosevic as another Hitler
and gleefully published editorials advocating the
complete destruction of Serbia during the 1999 war.
A NEW KIND OF COVERT OP
The September 19 article described US meddling in Yugoslav elections as
"similar to previous campaigns in pre-democratic
Chile, South Africa and Eastern Europe." But Dobbs dwells on
"extraordinary US effort to unseat a foreign head of state,
not through covert action of the kind the CIA once employed in such
places as Iran and Guatemala, but by modern election
campaign techniques."
None of the countries and regions described above have profited from US
involvement. Quite to the contrary, it had
profoundly negative consequences. Guatemala plunged into a 20-year,
bloody civil war. In Iran, oppression of the people
by the American-dominated regime spawned the Islamic revolution. South
Africa and Eastern Europe have seen their state
institutions disintegrate, and have plunged into abject poverty. In
Chile, US-backed dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet was
responsible for numerous crimes against its citizens.
Based on this record, extensive American involvement in Yugoslav and
Serbian elections ought to cause every
freedom-loving human being to cringe with disgust. By definition, it
flies in the face of everything that has ever been said
about democracy, responsibility, freedom of choice and international law
– to mention just a few major points.
The US government may argue that its meddling helped the Serbs. The jury
is still out on whether Kostunica’s presidency
has made things better, though. International recognition is hardly a
compensation for famine, economic collapse and fuel
shortages that have descended on Serbia after Milosevic’s fall.
Kostunica’s election may yet prove to be a beneficial
development for the Serbs, plagued as they have been by ill fortune
throughout the 20th century. But that would come in
spite of Washington’s plots, not because of them.
TIMED FALLOUT
Those who consider Kostunica a US puppet have a hard time proving their
case. Though not exactly hostile, he is certainly
no big friend of Washington. His government has hardly been a pushover,
though it has been very flexible on many issues
Milosevic refused to yield ground over the years – such as the UN
membership, Yugoslav succession and, to an extent, war
crimes.
If he really were a US puppet, how would one explain the persistent
secessionism of Djukanovic’s regime in Podgorica, or
the ambivalence of NATO in face of the Albanian invasion of southern
Serbia? Kostunica’s party has supported the
Serbian Democratic Party (SDS) in Bosnia, which the US is endeavoring to
ban even though it won the elections there fair
and square. Kostunica has also insisted on territorial integrity of
Serbia and Yugoslavia, while the US has supported
separatist demands of its clients in Kosovo and Montenegro, even while
publicly claiming otherwise.
There are, however, leaders in Kostunica’s motley coalition that are
more inclined to serve foreign interests. Every nation
has its share of traitors and sellouts, and it is their direction one
needs to look when following the US money trail and the
conspicuous interference in Yugoslav and Serbian affairs.
Conspicuous is the key word here. The timing of this article’s
publication cannot be an accident. Even in its imperious
arrogance, the mainstream American press would never dare publicly
announce its government’s machinations in
Yugoslavia if doing so would hurt the efforts of Washington oligarchs.
It certainly marched in lockstep with the government
during American-led terror bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999.
The Washington Post’s September 19 article gave credence to Milosevic’s
claims of foreign interference and hurt
Kostunica’s coalition just a week before the federal elections. Soon
after Kostunica took over on October 5, as he was
trying to establish legitimacy and convince the people he was not a
stooge of NATO, US papers and politicians started
claiming credit for his success, praising the policies of bombing,
sanctions and separatism – along with propaganda and
"democratization" projects such as those detailed in the Post – as being
the real reason for Milosevic’s fall.
The newest article detailing the intricacies of the American conspiracy
– for how else would one call such a degree of
tampering in another country’s elections? – again comes at the worst
possible time for Kostunica. Albanian bandits have
invaded southern Serbia, Yugoslavia’s economy is tanking fast, and Zoran
Djindjic seems poised to sweep the December
elections and pull the rug out from under Kostunica’s feet.
TAKING SIDES
Indeed, though the December elections are described as the clash of
Kostunica’s DOS and the remnants of Milosevic’s
Socialists, the real power struggle will be between factions within DOS
– Kostunica and Djindjic.
The Post then dumps a cauldron of investigative pitch on the heads of
all involved, eroding Kostunica’s legitimacy and
deriding the efforts of the opposition (now government) in changing the
politics of Serbia. One is tempted to wonder if
Washington wants Kostunica to fail, or at least to be sufficiently
weakened to submit to US demands.
A WRENCH IN THE WORKS
Kostunica may be too American for the Empire’s comfort. He actually
believes in the constitution, rights and liberties,
limited government, patriotism and sovereignty – all issues the current
regime in Washington has undermined or sidelined
over the past eight years.
If the December 11 article was truthful – which seems likely – then it
represents an irrefutable proof that there really was a
US plan to overthrow Milosevic and install a friendlier regime,
dominated by pro-American politicians. Kostunica might
have fit into the plan as a figurehead, intended to be replaced by
Djindjic or someone else when the time was ripe.
Apparently no one told him that, since Kostunica went on to become a
true statesman and garner tremendous support
among the people. His strength now surpasses that of Djindjic’s party,
so much that Djindjic needs Kostunica’s support to
become Serbia’s Prime Minister after the elections in late December.
Hence comes the need to take Kostunica down a peg
an attack his honesty, integrity and independence, effectively propping
up Djindjic’s power grab. So the Post says:
"To many opposition activists, Kostunica’s denials ring a little
hollow. While it is true that his own party, the
Democratic Party of Serbia, rejected anything that smacked of US
aid, his presidential campaign benefited
enormously from the advice and financial support the opposition
coalition received from abroad, and
particularly from the United States."
SECRETS, BARGAINS AND LIES
Though the full fallout from the Post’s article will only be known in
the coming days, one of its unintended consequences
was to expose the extent of America’s illegal imperial adventures. Now
that it is known the US was so deeply involved in
Milosevic’s overthrow, maybe other secrets will also emerge – such as
its exact role in the events of October 5, and the
extent to which Kostunica’s peaceful takeover and Milosevic’s concession
were or were not a part of that plan. Perhaps
some day soon, the American public – and the Serbian public as well –
will find out what the puppet masters had in mind,
and which actors were (or were not) their puppets.
BOOMERANG
The penultimate irony, of course, is that the US found itself mired in a
similar situation just two months later. Could the ballot
manipulation in Florida be the consequence of similar practices abroad?
The temptation to use the ways and means of
empire-building at home are great, especially when the prize is the
Empire itself.
But let us be realistic. It is hard to envision masses of angry
Americans charging Capitol Hill of the White House and
inaugurating the candidate they consider the victor, or the US Supreme
Court annulling the election. Alas, neither of the US
candidates has the integrity of Vojislav Kostunica or the ruthless
political savvy and charm of Slobodan Milosevic. There
won’t be any bulldozers on the streets of Washington any time soon, and
more’s the pity.
---
Bollettino di controinformazione del
Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'"
Sito WEB : http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma
vengono fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al
solo scopo di segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only")
Archivio di JUGOINFO:
> http://www.ecircle.it/an_ecircle/articles?ecircleid%c2%91979 oppure
> http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
Per iscriversi al bollettino: <jugoinfo-subscribe@...>
Per cancellarsi: <jugoinfo-unsubscribe@...>
Contributi e segnalazioni: <jugocoord@...>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
eCircle ti offre una nuova opportunita:
Il tuo sondaggio sul web sugli argomenti che preferisci
Facile da gestire e con rappresentazioni grafiche dei risultati.
E' facile, veloce e gratuito!
Da oggi su
http://www.ecircle.de/ad616887/www.ecircle.it
The URL for this article is
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/tika/dogs2.htm
www.tenc.net
[Emperor's Clothes]
Pentagon Dogs
by Tika Jankovic (11-29-2000)
Part 1 - Preshevo Valley: A Strategic Prize
I landed in the San Francisco Airport a few hours ago, back from my trip
to Serbia and its turbulent
southern Preshevo Valley, bordering on Macedonia to the south, the
Serbian Province of Kosovo and
Metohija to the west, and reaching the border with Bulgaria, on the
east.
This is a stretch of land of the utmost geostrategic importance for
NATO's expansion to the east. It's a
bridge from Serbia to Macedonia, on the Belgrade-Skopje-Thesalonici
highway, the land
communication artery between Central Europe and the Aegean Sea. And it
is a piece of territory which
the NATO countries' oil pipeline is planned to transverse, connecting
oil terminals on the Black Sea, in
Bulgaria, and on the Adriatic Sea, in Albania. In addition, this region
has several mineral-rich mines and
is a center for textile, tobacco, furniture and other industrial
complexes, in addition to having world
acclaimed hot and cold water spas and several facilities which bottle
the sizzling mineral waters.
The rich soil in the Morava River Valley lends itself to corn, wheat,
vegtable and cattle farming,
providing a living for about half a million people. By seizing control
of this pocket, the US/NATO
would:
1. Cut Serbia off from Macedonia and Greece and deprive Serbia of a
considerable income and a
strategic territory;
2. Gain control of the North-South passageway, stretching from Central
Europe to the Aegean Sea;
3. Gain control of the route planned for the future oil pipeline to the
Adriatic;
4. Connect occupied Serbian Kosovo and Metohija with occupied Bulgaria
on the East and with
quisling-controlled Montenegro on the West, thus securing full control
of the Balkans' southern flank,
between the Adriatic and the Black Sea.
5. Get hold of this rich valley, the better to plunder its natural and
industrial resources, another colonial
acquisition of Yugoslav land. Another anguish for the people.
KLA Attack Dogs Assault PreshevoValley
On Nov. 22 I arrived in Bujanovac, a small city in the Preshevo Valley,
about 10 miles south from the
city of Vranje in Southern Serbia. That day, the KLA bands intensified
their attacks on Serbian police
forces. [The KLA is the terrorist secessionist group, the Kosovo
Liberation Army]
This latest attack had begun the day before I arrived, but one should
remember that KLA raids on this
valley actually started exactly on the day US troops arrived and took
control of the Eastern Sector of
Kosovo and Metohija, bordering the Preshevo Valley.
The battle raged about two miles from Bujanovac, in the hills, where
Serb police forces, armed only
with rifles, repulsed attacks by KLA battalions, heavily armed and
supported by mortar and artillery
fire.
In the afternoon of the previous day, the KLA raiders were also backed
by heavy artillery, apparently
coming from US troop positions to the west. Residents could see a canopy
of US helicopter gunships
hovering in the sky, protecting the KLA raiders from the use of
appropriate weapons by the Serbian
defenders. NATO Secretary Robertson had warned the Serbs that if they
used heavy guns in their
defense against these secessionist storm troopers NATO troops would
retaliate!. These gunships also
provided intelligence to the KLA attackers, guiding them in action.
One American military officer was recently reported killed, "in East
Kosovo, in the line of daily duty",
or so said the NATO official dispatch. East Kosovo is a euphemism, of
course, since the only area in
which there is combat is the Preshevo Valley.
The 13 wounded Serb police officers suffered mortar and artillery shell
injuries, as did the four who
were killed. Three missing Serbian officers were returned in body bags
by the US military. Their bodies
had been tortured and badly disfigured - the handiwork of the US junior
war buddies, the KLA.
The torture of these men was not mentioned in the Yugoslav press, which
is now entirely controlled by
the DOS government; hints of truth leak out because of feuds between the
various DOS factions. I
learned of the Serbian officers' tragic fate from medical personnel who
had viewed the bodies. The
DOS papers also forgot to mention the obvious fact that the U.S. is
spearheading the attacks in
Preshevo Valley. The KLA, is, as usual, providing window dressing,
sadism and cannon fodder for
their Pentagon groomers.
These KLA raids on Serbian territory, five miles beyond the militarized
zone of three miles along the
Kosovo and Metohija border with Serbia proper, and the evident US
military involvement in these
actions, speak volumes concerning the US/NATO true agenda in the region,
as I mentioned above. The
current Serb authorities gave the fascist-terrorists 72 hours to
retreat; the U.S. objected, and the
authorities immediately extended the time period. Why? Why do these
terrorists need extra time?
Clearly in order for the U.S.-led gangs to fortify the positions they
have seized and to bring in
reinforcements.
I interviewed several people from the region. The following account
comes from a Serbian man, a
person of the highest integrity, who witnessed the events described. I
spoke with him in Belgrade.
Part 2: Women and Shepherds Rout Marines
A few days before the raid by the US/KLA on the Preshevo Valley, the US
Marines raided three Serb
villages in the Brezovica area. This region is known for its ski resort
in the Sara-Mountain, in southern
Kosovo, bordering on Macedonia. The marines were allegedly searching for
weapons. You see, while
the KLA employs heavy weapons in its attacks on Serbs in Kosovo and in
the Preshevo Valley, and is
supported by U.S. helicopters and heavy guns, the Serbs must practice
strict nonviolence. It is their
moral duty.
They Marines broke down doors on the houses and went on a wild rampage,
smashing the furniture,
yelling at and kicking the peasants. But used to rough treatment by
various oppressors and attackers
through history, the villagers soon recovered. The women took to the
streets. Armed with heavy
wooden sticks, similar to the famous American 2 by 4's, they stormed the
Marines, who, surprised by
this resolute defense retreated towards their personnel carriers and
called "Bondsteel", the most heavily
fortified military installation in human history, for reinforcements.
This time, Real Attack Dogs
The rescue team came in the form of a pack of blood thirsty military
dogs, quickly airlifted to the
mountain villages, and unleashed on the women.
The women fought these vicious dogs with their sticks until their own
shepherd dogs, the world famous
"Sar-Planinac" 150-pounders came to rescue. With unexpected ferocity
these Serbian dogs, who easily
tackle packs of wolves and can handle any bear, stormed the American
counterparts, and in a brief
encounter the entire Pentagon barking brigade was finished off. No
survivors.
The Marines, stunned, did not have the chance to pull the triggers on
their weapons but fled the
battlefield, now strewn with the remains of the Pentagon elite. The Serb
village dogs sprinted back to
their sheep, returning to the duty of their ancestors. The Marines took
off and have not been seen since.
The moral of this real story is simple: let us handle these wolves in a
businesslike fashion and get them
off our backs - for good.
-- Tika Jankovic
***
Further Reading on the attack on Preshevo Valley
1) ''Boggling the Mind Department - Report from a UN Website'' by
Konstantin Kilibardi at
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/kilibarda/boggling.htm
2) "Terrorism in Southern 'Serbia Proper'" by Jared Israel at
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/fighting.htm
***
We may be free but we ain't cheap...
We don't charge a subscription fee for reading Emperor's Clothes, but of
course nothing is really free.
We rely mainly on volunteer labor. Nevertheless there are plenty of
bills so we also rely on our readers
for contributions. Small contributions help. Big contributions help even
more.
To make a donation please mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box
610-321, Newton, MA
02461-0321. (USA) Or if you have access to a computer, you can make a
donation using a credit
card by going to our secure server at
www.emperors-clothes.com/howyour.htm
You can also call 617 916-1705 between 9:30 AM and 5:30 PM, Eastern Time
(USA) and Bob will
take your credit card information over the phone.
Thanks for reading Emperor's Clothes.
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/tika/dogs2.htm
www.tenc.net
[Emperor's Clothes]
Pentagon Dogs
by Tika Jankovic (11-29-2000)
Part 1 - Preshevo Valley: A Strategic Prize
I landed in the San Francisco Airport a few hours ago, back from my trip
to Serbia and its turbulent
southern Preshevo Valley, bordering on Macedonia to the south, the
Serbian Province of Kosovo and
Metohija to the west, and reaching the border with Bulgaria, on the
east.
This is a stretch of land of the utmost geostrategic importance for
NATO's expansion to the east. It's a
bridge from Serbia to Macedonia, on the Belgrade-Skopje-Thesalonici
highway, the land
communication artery between Central Europe and the Aegean Sea. And it
is a piece of territory which
the NATO countries' oil pipeline is planned to transverse, connecting
oil terminals on the Black Sea, in
Bulgaria, and on the Adriatic Sea, in Albania. In addition, this region
has several mineral-rich mines and
is a center for textile, tobacco, furniture and other industrial
complexes, in addition to having world
acclaimed hot and cold water spas and several facilities which bottle
the sizzling mineral waters.
The rich soil in the Morava River Valley lends itself to corn, wheat,
vegtable and cattle farming,
providing a living for about half a million people. By seizing control
of this pocket, the US/NATO
would:
1. Cut Serbia off from Macedonia and Greece and deprive Serbia of a
considerable income and a
strategic territory;
2. Gain control of the North-South passageway, stretching from Central
Europe to the Aegean Sea;
3. Gain control of the route planned for the future oil pipeline to the
Adriatic;
4. Connect occupied Serbian Kosovo and Metohija with occupied Bulgaria
on the East and with
quisling-controlled Montenegro on the West, thus securing full control
of the Balkans' southern flank,
between the Adriatic and the Black Sea.
5. Get hold of this rich valley, the better to plunder its natural and
industrial resources, another colonial
acquisition of Yugoslav land. Another anguish for the people.
KLA Attack Dogs Assault PreshevoValley
On Nov. 22 I arrived in Bujanovac, a small city in the Preshevo Valley,
about 10 miles south from the
city of Vranje in Southern Serbia. That day, the KLA bands intensified
their attacks on Serbian police
forces. [The KLA is the terrorist secessionist group, the Kosovo
Liberation Army]
This latest attack had begun the day before I arrived, but one should
remember that KLA raids on this
valley actually started exactly on the day US troops arrived and took
control of the Eastern Sector of
Kosovo and Metohija, bordering the Preshevo Valley.
The battle raged about two miles from Bujanovac, in the hills, where
Serb police forces, armed only
with rifles, repulsed attacks by KLA battalions, heavily armed and
supported by mortar and artillery
fire.
In the afternoon of the previous day, the KLA raiders were also backed
by heavy artillery, apparently
coming from US troop positions to the west. Residents could see a canopy
of US helicopter gunships
hovering in the sky, protecting the KLA raiders from the use of
appropriate weapons by the Serbian
defenders. NATO Secretary Robertson had warned the Serbs that if they
used heavy guns in their
defense against these secessionist storm troopers NATO troops would
retaliate!. These gunships also
provided intelligence to the KLA attackers, guiding them in action.
One American military officer was recently reported killed, "in East
Kosovo, in the line of daily duty",
or so said the NATO official dispatch. East Kosovo is a euphemism, of
course, since the only area in
which there is combat is the Preshevo Valley.
The 13 wounded Serb police officers suffered mortar and artillery shell
injuries, as did the four who
were killed. Three missing Serbian officers were returned in body bags
by the US military. Their bodies
had been tortured and badly disfigured - the handiwork of the US junior
war buddies, the KLA.
The torture of these men was not mentioned in the Yugoslav press, which
is now entirely controlled by
the DOS government; hints of truth leak out because of feuds between the
various DOS factions. I
learned of the Serbian officers' tragic fate from medical personnel who
had viewed the bodies. The
DOS papers also forgot to mention the obvious fact that the U.S. is
spearheading the attacks in
Preshevo Valley. The KLA, is, as usual, providing window dressing,
sadism and cannon fodder for
their Pentagon groomers.
These KLA raids on Serbian territory, five miles beyond the militarized
zone of three miles along the
Kosovo and Metohija border with Serbia proper, and the evident US
military involvement in these
actions, speak volumes concerning the US/NATO true agenda in the region,
as I mentioned above. The
current Serb authorities gave the fascist-terrorists 72 hours to
retreat; the U.S. objected, and the
authorities immediately extended the time period. Why? Why do these
terrorists need extra time?
Clearly in order for the U.S.-led gangs to fortify the positions they
have seized and to bring in
reinforcements.
I interviewed several people from the region. The following account
comes from a Serbian man, a
person of the highest integrity, who witnessed the events described. I
spoke with him in Belgrade.
Part 2: Women and Shepherds Rout Marines
A few days before the raid by the US/KLA on the Preshevo Valley, the US
Marines raided three Serb
villages in the Brezovica area. This region is known for its ski resort
in the Sara-Mountain, in southern
Kosovo, bordering on Macedonia. The marines were allegedly searching for
weapons. You see, while
the KLA employs heavy weapons in its attacks on Serbs in Kosovo and in
the Preshevo Valley, and is
supported by U.S. helicopters and heavy guns, the Serbs must practice
strict nonviolence. It is their
moral duty.
They Marines broke down doors on the houses and went on a wild rampage,
smashing the furniture,
yelling at and kicking the peasants. But used to rough treatment by
various oppressors and attackers
through history, the villagers soon recovered. The women took to the
streets. Armed with heavy
wooden sticks, similar to the famous American 2 by 4's, they stormed the
Marines, who, surprised by
this resolute defense retreated towards their personnel carriers and
called "Bondsteel", the most heavily
fortified military installation in human history, for reinforcements.
This time, Real Attack Dogs
The rescue team came in the form of a pack of blood thirsty military
dogs, quickly airlifted to the
mountain villages, and unleashed on the women.
The women fought these vicious dogs with their sticks until their own
shepherd dogs, the world famous
"Sar-Planinac" 150-pounders came to rescue. With unexpected ferocity
these Serbian dogs, who easily
tackle packs of wolves and can handle any bear, stormed the American
counterparts, and in a brief
encounter the entire Pentagon barking brigade was finished off. No
survivors.
The Marines, stunned, did not have the chance to pull the triggers on
their weapons but fled the
battlefield, now strewn with the remains of the Pentagon elite. The Serb
village dogs sprinted back to
their sheep, returning to the duty of their ancestors. The Marines took
off and have not been seen since.
The moral of this real story is simple: let us handle these wolves in a
businesslike fashion and get them
off our backs - for good.
-- Tika Jankovic
***
Further Reading on the attack on Preshevo Valley
1) ''Boggling the Mind Department - Report from a UN Website'' by
Konstantin Kilibardi at
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/kilibarda/boggling.htm
2) "Terrorism in Southern 'Serbia Proper'" by Jared Israel at
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/fighting.htm
***
We may be free but we ain't cheap...
We don't charge a subscription fee for reading Emperor's Clothes, but of
course nothing is really free.
We rely mainly on volunteer labor. Nevertheless there are plenty of
bills so we also rely on our readers
for contributions. Small contributions help. Big contributions help even
more.
To make a donation please mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box
610-321, Newton, MA
02461-0321. (USA) Or if you have access to a computer, you can make a
donation using a credit
card by going to our secure server at
www.emperors-clothes.com/howyour.htm
You can also call 617 916-1705 between 9:30 AM and 5:30 PM, Eastern Time
(USA) and Bob will
take your credit card information over the phone.
Thanks for reading Emperor's Clothes.
