ARTEL GEOPOLITIKA
by www.artel.co.yu
office@...
Datum:14 juni 2002
===
AMERICA STAKES ON FORCE
by Valentin KUNIN, political observer
RIA Novosti
Moscow, June 14, 2002.
Following the concepts of "humanitarian intervention" and
"limited sovereignty" invented in Washington the United States
seems to be about to "please" the international community with
a new innovation. The George Bush administration is presently
developing a new strategic doctrine stipulating the
possibility of making "preventive strikes" against those
states which, according to Washington, threaten to use weapons
of mass destruction against the USA.
Referring to sources in the Bush administration, the
Washington Post reported that the new US national security
doctrine will be published in a few months. According to some
consultants from the US Department of Defence, by working out
the new doctrine George Bush attempts "to prepare the US
people for a certain preventive step" against Iraq. However,
strategists from the White House and the Pentagon are hardly
likely to reduce the "defensive intervention" concept to such
a limit.
By provoking the North Atlantic Alliance to stage an
unsanctioned aggression against Yugoslavia the Americans
clearly demonstrated what the "humanitarian intervention"
concept means in practice.
The result is world-known-thousands of civilians were killed,
a severe damage was done to the Yugoslav economy, Albanian
nationalists and militant leaders from the terrorist
organisation Kosovo Liberation Army came to power and the
situation in neighbouring Macedonia got destabilised.
However, the concepts of "humanitarian intervention" and
"limited sovereignty" just like the notorious thesis about the
"axis of evil" are becoming too "tight" for Washington.
Now the US should give more universal grounds for military
operations against any state if its policy does not for some
reasons suit the US administration. In a broader sense,
foundation is needed for the US policy aimed at taking the
world's power lead. It has been increasingly clear of late
that the incumbent US administration is prosecuting this very
policy without taking into consideration that it contradicts
the interests of the international community and the global
strategic stability.
The events of the past 18 months the George Bush
administration has been in office of the White House are
convincing of that. The first signal was the 2003 draft
federal budget Bush submitted to Congress past January. It
marked a sharp militarisation spiral of the country's economy.
The President proposed the largest over the past 20 years
increase in assignments for defence. Next year the Pentagon is
to be given $379 billion. This sum is to reach $451 billion in
2007. Bush's decision to abrogate the 1972 Soviet-US ABM
Treaty and to develop a national missile defence system is
also aimed at enhancing the US military power. Indeed, this
May the United States signed an agreement with Russia on
strategic offensive arms cuts under which both sides should
reduce their warheads to 1,700-2,200 by the year 2012.
However, next year the Pentagon is to receive tens of billions
of dollars for the purchase of new armaments, including
high-precision arms, which, according to experts, might in the
future replace ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads. By
2010 the US Department of Defence plans to develop a few tens
of thousands of cruise long-range missiles which experts
classify as high-precision weapons.
It's an open secret that the Bush administration has refused
to submit the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty for
ratification to Congress. In this context, the Pentagon's
repeated allegations concerning an urgent need to resume
nuclear tests and develop low-power nuclear munitions, which
are quite likely to be used in regional conflicts against
countries without nuclear potential, sound increasingly
alarming. It's hardly worth proving that such plans are
fraught with lowering the level of the possible use of nuclear
arms as a result of which the very approach to this problem
might change. If that happens, the new strategy may change the
status of nuclear weapons from deterrence means to tactical
munitions.
Together with regional instability, this approach of
Washington to the nuclear weapons use poses a great danger to
the whole international security system.
All these facts make the danger of the US administration's
intention to include provisions stipulating possible
"preventive strikes" and "defensive intervention" in the new
strategic doctrine being drafted now only too evident.
===
RIA "Novosti": AMERIKA STAVLJA AKCENAT NA SILU
Ruska informativna agencija RIA "Novosti"
Specijalno za ARTEL
(Moskva, 14. juna, RIA "Novosti")
Odmah nakon vasingtonskih izuma koncepcija "humanitarne
intervencije" i "ogranicenog suvereniteta" Sjedinjene Drzave
nameracile su da "obraduju" svetsku zajednicu jos jednom
novacijom: administracija Dzordza Bussa danas razradjuje novu
stratesku doktrinu, koja predvidja mogucnost nanosenja
"preventivnih udara" i ostvarivanje "odbrambene intervencije"
u odnosu na one drzave koje, po misljenju Vasingtona, prete da
ce primeniti oruzje za masovno unistavanje.
Ovo je, pozivajuci se na izvore u Bussovoj administraciji,
saopstio list "Vasington post", po cijim podacima ce nova
doktrina nacionalne bezbednosti SAD biti objavljena kroz
nekoliko meseci.
Po misljneju nekih konsultanata Ministarstva odbrane
Sjedinjenih Drzava, izradom nove doktrine Dzordz Buss
"pokusava da pripremi americki narod na nekakav preventivni
korak" protiv Iraka. Misljenja smo, medjutim, da stratezi Bele
kuce i Pentagona niposto ne planiraju da koncepciju
"odbrambene doktrine" ogranicavaju nekakvim lokalnim okvirima.
Sta prakticno znaci pojam "humanitarna intervencija"
Amerikanci su ocigledno demonstrirali, iniciravsi niccim
isprovociranu agresiju Severnoatlantske alijanse protiv
Jugoslavije. Rezultat je svima dobro poznat - hiljade
poginulih mirnih gradjana, gigantska steta ekonomici zemlje,
dolazak na vlast na Kosovu albanskih nacionalista i glavesina
terorista iz teroristicke organizacije "OVK", destabilizacija
situacije u susednoj Makedoniji.
Koncepcije "humanitarne intervencije" i "ogranicenog
suvereniteta", podjednako kao i zloglasna teza o "osovini zla"
po svoj prilici su za Vasington u najtesnjoj sprezi.
Potrebna je kudikamo univerzalnija argumentacija za svaku
vojnu akciju Sjedinjenih Drzava protiv ove ili one drzave,
cija politika se iz ovih ili onih razloga ne dopada americkoj
administraciji. A jos na sirem planu - argumentacija za kurs
aktuelne americke administracije koji se sve vise ispoljava u
pravcu vojne dominacije Sjedinjenih Drzava u svetu, bez
osvrtanja na to sto taj kurs otvoreno protivureci interesima
medjunarodnog mira i globalne strateske bezbednosti.
Dogadjaji iz osamnaest meseci koliko se Dzordz Buss i njegov
tim nalaze u Beloj kuci, svedoce o tome prilicno ubedljivo.
Prvi signal bio je upuceni u januaru ove godine od strane
Dzordza Bussa kongresu nacrt federalnog budzeta za 2003.
finansijsku godinu, koji je oznacio drasticnu spiralu
militarizacije americke ekonomike. Predsednik je predlozio
najvece u poslednje dve decenije povecanje izdvajanja za
odbranu. U iducoj godini Pentagon treba da dobije za svoje
potrebe 379 milijardi dolara. A u narednih pet godina ta suma
ce prema planu biti povecana za jos 125 milijardi dolara, tako
da ce vec 2007. godine izneti 451 milijardu dolara. U
kontekstu povecanja americke vojne moci lezi i odluka Bussove
administracije o istupanju iz sovjetsko-americkog sporazuma o
ogranicenju sistema protivraketne odbrane iz 1972. godine, i
stvaranje nacionalnog sistema protivraketne odbrane.
Da, Sjedinjene Americke Drzave potpisle su maja ove godine
sporazum sa Rusijom o uzajamnom radikalnom smanjenju
strateskih ofanzivnih potencijala do 2012. godine do nivoa
1700-2200 nuklearnih bojevih glava. Medjutim, Pentagon vec u
iducoj godini treba da dobije na desetine milijardi dolara za
kupovinu novog naoruzanja, pored ostalog visokosofisticiranog,
koje kako smatraju eksperti u perspektivi moze u potpunosti
zameniti balisticke rakete sa nuklearnim bojevim glavama. Do
2010. godine Ministarstvo odbrane SAD planira da instalira
nekoliko desetina hiljada krstarecih raketa velikog dometa,
koje strucnjaci svrstavaju u red visokopreciznog naoruzanja.
Kao sto je poznato, Bussova administracija odbila je da uputi
na ratifikovanje u kongresu Sporazum o sveobuhvatnoj zabrani
nuklearnih proba. S tim u vezi mora da nas navede na oprez
cinjenica, da se u poslednje vreme iz Pentagona sve cesce cuju
izjave o neophodnosti obnavljanja nuklearnih proba, o razradi
novih nuklearnih bojevih glava manjeg kapaciteta i mogucnosti
njihove primene protiv nenuklearnih drzava i u regionalnim
konfliktima.
Nije potrebno dokazivati da su ovakvi planovi bremeniti
snizavanjem praga eventualne primene nuklearnog oruzja, usled
cega se moze promeniti i sam prilaz tom problemu. A u tom
slucaju apsolutno je realna i promena strategije, kada se
nuklearno oruzje iz sredstva za zadrzavanje spusta na nivo
taktickog oruzja operativne primene.
U kombinaciji sa regionalnom nestabilnoscu, slican prilaz
Vasingtona eventualnom koriscenju nuklearnog oruzja
predstavlja ogromnu opasnost po citav sistem medjunarodne
bezbednosti.
U kontekstu svih tih cinjenica postaje ocigledna i sva
opasnost od namera americke administracije da u sada
razradjivanu novu stratesku doktrinu SAD ukljuci odrednice
kojima se predvidja mogucnost nanosenja "preventivnih udara" i
realizacija "odbrambene intervencije".
by www.artel.co.yu
office@...
Datum:14 juni 2002
===
AMERICA STAKES ON FORCE
by Valentin KUNIN, political observer
RIA Novosti
Moscow, June 14, 2002.
Following the concepts of "humanitarian intervention" and
"limited sovereignty" invented in Washington the United States
seems to be about to "please" the international community with
a new innovation. The George Bush administration is presently
developing a new strategic doctrine stipulating the
possibility of making "preventive strikes" against those
states which, according to Washington, threaten to use weapons
of mass destruction against the USA.
Referring to sources in the Bush administration, the
Washington Post reported that the new US national security
doctrine will be published in a few months. According to some
consultants from the US Department of Defence, by working out
the new doctrine George Bush attempts "to prepare the US
people for a certain preventive step" against Iraq. However,
strategists from the White House and the Pentagon are hardly
likely to reduce the "defensive intervention" concept to such
a limit.
By provoking the North Atlantic Alliance to stage an
unsanctioned aggression against Yugoslavia the Americans
clearly demonstrated what the "humanitarian intervention"
concept means in practice.
The result is world-known-thousands of civilians were killed,
a severe damage was done to the Yugoslav economy, Albanian
nationalists and militant leaders from the terrorist
organisation Kosovo Liberation Army came to power and the
situation in neighbouring Macedonia got destabilised.
However, the concepts of "humanitarian intervention" and
"limited sovereignty" just like the notorious thesis about the
"axis of evil" are becoming too "tight" for Washington.
Now the US should give more universal grounds for military
operations against any state if its policy does not for some
reasons suit the US administration. In a broader sense,
foundation is needed for the US policy aimed at taking the
world's power lead. It has been increasingly clear of late
that the incumbent US administration is prosecuting this very
policy without taking into consideration that it contradicts
the interests of the international community and the global
strategic stability.
The events of the past 18 months the George Bush
administration has been in office of the White House are
convincing of that. The first signal was the 2003 draft
federal budget Bush submitted to Congress past January. It
marked a sharp militarisation spiral of the country's economy.
The President proposed the largest over the past 20 years
increase in assignments for defence. Next year the Pentagon is
to be given $379 billion. This sum is to reach $451 billion in
2007. Bush's decision to abrogate the 1972 Soviet-US ABM
Treaty and to develop a national missile defence system is
also aimed at enhancing the US military power. Indeed, this
May the United States signed an agreement with Russia on
strategic offensive arms cuts under which both sides should
reduce their warheads to 1,700-2,200 by the year 2012.
However, next year the Pentagon is to receive tens of billions
of dollars for the purchase of new armaments, including
high-precision arms, which, according to experts, might in the
future replace ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads. By
2010 the US Department of Defence plans to develop a few tens
of thousands of cruise long-range missiles which experts
classify as high-precision weapons.
It's an open secret that the Bush administration has refused
to submit the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty for
ratification to Congress. In this context, the Pentagon's
repeated allegations concerning an urgent need to resume
nuclear tests and develop low-power nuclear munitions, which
are quite likely to be used in regional conflicts against
countries without nuclear potential, sound increasingly
alarming. It's hardly worth proving that such plans are
fraught with lowering the level of the possible use of nuclear
arms as a result of which the very approach to this problem
might change. If that happens, the new strategy may change the
status of nuclear weapons from deterrence means to tactical
munitions.
Together with regional instability, this approach of
Washington to the nuclear weapons use poses a great danger to
the whole international security system.
All these facts make the danger of the US administration's
intention to include provisions stipulating possible
"preventive strikes" and "defensive intervention" in the new
strategic doctrine being drafted now only too evident.
===
RIA "Novosti": AMERIKA STAVLJA AKCENAT NA SILU
Ruska informativna agencija RIA "Novosti"
Specijalno za ARTEL
(Moskva, 14. juna, RIA "Novosti")
Odmah nakon vasingtonskih izuma koncepcija "humanitarne
intervencije" i "ogranicenog suvereniteta" Sjedinjene Drzave
nameracile su da "obraduju" svetsku zajednicu jos jednom
novacijom: administracija Dzordza Bussa danas razradjuje novu
stratesku doktrinu, koja predvidja mogucnost nanosenja
"preventivnih udara" i ostvarivanje "odbrambene intervencije"
u odnosu na one drzave koje, po misljenju Vasingtona, prete da
ce primeniti oruzje za masovno unistavanje.
Ovo je, pozivajuci se na izvore u Bussovoj administraciji,
saopstio list "Vasington post", po cijim podacima ce nova
doktrina nacionalne bezbednosti SAD biti objavljena kroz
nekoliko meseci.
Po misljneju nekih konsultanata Ministarstva odbrane
Sjedinjenih Drzava, izradom nove doktrine Dzordz Buss
"pokusava da pripremi americki narod na nekakav preventivni
korak" protiv Iraka. Misljenja smo, medjutim, da stratezi Bele
kuce i Pentagona niposto ne planiraju da koncepciju
"odbrambene doktrine" ogranicavaju nekakvim lokalnim okvirima.
Sta prakticno znaci pojam "humanitarna intervencija"
Amerikanci su ocigledno demonstrirali, iniciravsi niccim
isprovociranu agresiju Severnoatlantske alijanse protiv
Jugoslavije. Rezultat je svima dobro poznat - hiljade
poginulih mirnih gradjana, gigantska steta ekonomici zemlje,
dolazak na vlast na Kosovu albanskih nacionalista i glavesina
terorista iz teroristicke organizacije "OVK", destabilizacija
situacije u susednoj Makedoniji.
Koncepcije "humanitarne intervencije" i "ogranicenog
suvereniteta", podjednako kao i zloglasna teza o "osovini zla"
po svoj prilici su za Vasington u najtesnjoj sprezi.
Potrebna je kudikamo univerzalnija argumentacija za svaku
vojnu akciju Sjedinjenih Drzava protiv ove ili one drzave,
cija politika se iz ovih ili onih razloga ne dopada americkoj
administraciji. A jos na sirem planu - argumentacija za kurs
aktuelne americke administracije koji se sve vise ispoljava u
pravcu vojne dominacije Sjedinjenih Drzava u svetu, bez
osvrtanja na to sto taj kurs otvoreno protivureci interesima
medjunarodnog mira i globalne strateske bezbednosti.
Dogadjaji iz osamnaest meseci koliko se Dzordz Buss i njegov
tim nalaze u Beloj kuci, svedoce o tome prilicno ubedljivo.
Prvi signal bio je upuceni u januaru ove godine od strane
Dzordza Bussa kongresu nacrt federalnog budzeta za 2003.
finansijsku godinu, koji je oznacio drasticnu spiralu
militarizacije americke ekonomike. Predsednik je predlozio
najvece u poslednje dve decenije povecanje izdvajanja za
odbranu. U iducoj godini Pentagon treba da dobije za svoje
potrebe 379 milijardi dolara. A u narednih pet godina ta suma
ce prema planu biti povecana za jos 125 milijardi dolara, tako
da ce vec 2007. godine izneti 451 milijardu dolara. U
kontekstu povecanja americke vojne moci lezi i odluka Bussove
administracije o istupanju iz sovjetsko-americkog sporazuma o
ogranicenju sistema protivraketne odbrane iz 1972. godine, i
stvaranje nacionalnog sistema protivraketne odbrane.
Da, Sjedinjene Americke Drzave potpisle su maja ove godine
sporazum sa Rusijom o uzajamnom radikalnom smanjenju
strateskih ofanzivnih potencijala do 2012. godine do nivoa
1700-2200 nuklearnih bojevih glava. Medjutim, Pentagon vec u
iducoj godini treba da dobije na desetine milijardi dolara za
kupovinu novog naoruzanja, pored ostalog visokosofisticiranog,
koje kako smatraju eksperti u perspektivi moze u potpunosti
zameniti balisticke rakete sa nuklearnim bojevim glavama. Do
2010. godine Ministarstvo odbrane SAD planira da instalira
nekoliko desetina hiljada krstarecih raketa velikog dometa,
koje strucnjaci svrstavaju u red visokopreciznog naoruzanja.
Kao sto je poznato, Bussova administracija odbila je da uputi
na ratifikovanje u kongresu Sporazum o sveobuhvatnoj zabrani
nuklearnih proba. S tim u vezi mora da nas navede na oprez
cinjenica, da se u poslednje vreme iz Pentagona sve cesce cuju
izjave o neophodnosti obnavljanja nuklearnih proba, o razradi
novih nuklearnih bojevih glava manjeg kapaciteta i mogucnosti
njihove primene protiv nenuklearnih drzava i u regionalnim
konfliktima.
Nije potrebno dokazivati da su ovakvi planovi bremeniti
snizavanjem praga eventualne primene nuklearnog oruzja, usled
cega se moze promeniti i sam prilaz tom problemu. A u tom
slucaju apsolutno je realna i promena strategije, kada se
nuklearno oruzje iz sredstva za zadrzavanje spusta na nivo
taktickog oruzja operativne primene.
U kombinaciji sa regionalnom nestabilnoscu, slican prilaz
Vasingtona eventualnom koriscenju nuklearnog oruzja
predstavlja ogromnu opasnost po citav sistem medjunarodne
bezbednosti.
U kontekstu svih tih cinjenica postaje ocigledna i sva
opasnost od namera americke administracije da u sada
razradjivanu novu stratesku doktrinu SAD ukljuci odrednice
kojima se predvidja mogucnost nanosenja "preventivnih udara" i
realizacija "odbrambene intervencije".