War propaganda in the German Historical Museum

By Johannes Stern 
9 October 2014

The German Historical Museum (DHM) in Berlin is currently showing an exhibition dealing with the horrors and crimes of the First World War. In the very same building, a meeting took place last week which proclaimed the necessity of new wars and war crimes.

In his contribution to the meeting, Jörg Baberowski, Chair of East European History at Humboldt University in Berlin, made the following remarks referring to US-NATO wars conducted against forces such as the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria: “And if one is not willing to take hostages, burn villages, hang people and spread fear and terror, as the terrorists do, if one is not prepared to do such things, then one can never win such a conflict and it is better to keep out altogether.”

Baberowski by no means rejects German participation in such wars. His precondition is, however, that one is prepared to follow it through to the end: “So on the one hand: Yes, of course, Germany should assume such a role and it is important that Germany accepts responsibility, especially in such conflicts which affect it. But one should consider (a) what type of war is one prepared for, and (b) whether one can win. And if you cannot win then one should leave it. That is my opinion on the matter.”

A little later he added: “In the case of an institution such as ISIS, the military can quickly deal with the head choppers. That's no problem. The Americans can solve this. One can liquidate the leaders of this band with hit squads. That’s no problem. This is doable. But then the question arises: If state structures have been completely destroyed by a long civil war and there is nothing there, then the question arises: Okay and what now?”

One has “to be aware that this will cost a great deal of money and you have to send soldiers and weapons into a power vacuum. In order to separate the parties from each other in the first place. And above all, and this is the most important thing ... you need the political will and political strategy and above all, you have to say that in order for this to work, we will go in. And it has to be worth it. That costs money. We have to send troops in. Countries like Iraq, Syria and Libya are no longer able to solve this problem themselves.”

Baberowski made these remarkable statements on October 1, as part of the so-called "Schlüterhofgesprächs” (Schlüter court discussions) in DHM. Under the topic heading "Interventionsmacht Deutschland?” (Germany as Intervention Force?), a group of prominent figures from academia and politics discussed the demand raised a year ago by President Gauck for Germany to end its post-World War II policy of military restraint.

Next to Baberowski on the podium sat Horst Teltschik, who played a central role in German reunification as vice chancellery chief for Helmut Kohl (chancellor 1982-1998) and head of the Munich Security Conference between 1999 to 2008. Other panelists included the military historians Sönke Neitzel and Michael Wolffsohn.

The event was hosted by Peter Voss, one of Germany's most prominent television political journalists, who currently has his own interview show "Voss fragt".

None of the participants in the discussion expressed any sort of discomfort with Baberowski's statements, which graphically evoked dreadful memories of the most horrific war crimes carried out by the Nazis. Prior to the start of the German onslaught on the Soviet Union in World War II, Hitler had called for "first rapid elimination of the Bolshevik leaders" and the use of the "most brutal methods" to win the war.

Baberowski's own demand to act with more brutality than the enemy, and not to fear taking hostages, burning villages, hanging people, sending “hit squads,” and spreading “fear and terror,” corresponds precisely to the logic of a war of annihilation.

All of those on the podium agreed that Germany is, and should be, a force for intervention. The discussion was dominated by calls for military force and a policy of imperialist war, recalling the rhetoric and methods of the German elite in the First and Second World Wars. Participants repeatedly attacked the foreign policy of the German government from the right, claiming that it lacked “any strategy,” and that it was neither ready to wage war with the necessary aggressiveness, nor to confront mass popular opposition.

Teltschik called for the formulation of clear war aims and for more soldiers to be sent on missions. “I told the defense minister at the time, tell the German people why Africa is so important to us. Do we have strategic interests in Africa and if that is the case ... then explain to the Germans the strategic importance of Africa for Europe and the west, and then you can say that is why we are now sending the German army to the Congo or Mali.”

In a cynically arrogant manner, he then called on the government to take less note of public opinion. It should not "just look at polls" and declare, “Wow, 70 percent are against the German army going here and there. Then you can just disarm on the spot and stay at home. It’s the same with every military intervention, the majority of Germans, for emotionally understandable reasons, will say, ‘No, we have no business there. We won't do it.’ On the contrary, in politics you sometimes have to make decisions.”

Voss suggested that the new intervention policy be anchored in law and argued for a change to the constitution. “But is it not necessary to say basically that, speaking generally, when human rights are in danger in the world we have to intervene militarily,” he said, “and the majority would be with you, then we will change the constitution with a two-thirds majority and carry out this discussion, so that even the ones who say they are very uncomfortable with it, shift position and join the rest.”

The open advocacy of militarism, war and dictatorship at a podium discussion in the middle of Berlin must be taken as a serious warning and wake-up call. One hundred years after the outbreak of World War I and 75 years after the start of World War II, politicians, historians and journalists are systematically downplaying and glossing over the historical crimes of German imperialism in order to prepare the way for new crimes.

Baberowski plays a central role in this campaign. Last February he declared in Der Spiegel: “Hitler was not a psychopath, he was not cruel.” In the same article, he defended the ultra-right historian Ernst Nolte, declaring that Nolte was “wrongly treated. Historically speaking he was right.”

What does Baberowski mean by this? The current issue of The European magazine features a contribution by Nolte in which he openly seeks to rehabilitate Hitler and National Socialism. Under the title "Break the Taboo," Nolte complains that after Germany's defeat, Hitler was transformed from a “liberator to the ‘absolute evil.’” Nolte concludes, “We are still hampered by this one-sided view today.”

If one takes the meeting in the DHM as an indicator of the plans of the ruling class, then this “one-sided” view is about to change.

The author also recommends:

An attempt to rehabilitate Hitler

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/09/24/nolt-s24.html

[24 September 2014]

Trieste: alcune considerazioni sulla mozione 1954/2014 del Consiglio Comunale. Come si reinventa la storia

Che questi tempi siano turbolenti è un dato di fatto incontestabile, ma a volte capita che in questa società i sentimenti nazionalistici riescono ad andare oltre ogni surrealismo, oltre ogni intento visionario, perché semplicemente riscrivono la storia inventandola ex novo. Il 21 luglio del 2014, il Consiglio Comunale di Trieste,ha approvato il seguente testo, come proposto da area di destra :

Preso atto che il 26 ottobre 2014 ricorre il sessantesimo anniversario del ritorno definitivo di Trieste all’Italia; Ricordato che il 2014 è l’anno delle celebrazioni dell’inizio della Prima Guerra Mondiale e del lungo Novecento che ha visto Trieste contesa fino al Memorandum di Londra che la riunificò alla Madre Patria; Evidenziato che in un anno ricco di celebrazioni non si può dimenticare questa data simbolo di tutto il Novecento per l’Italia, per Trieste e per tutto il confine orientale, compiendo atti di “giustizia storica” anche nei confronti di quanti si sacrificarono e morirono per l’italianità della Città; 

IMPEGNANO 

• il conferimento della Cittadinanza Onoraria all’VIII Reggimento Bersaglieri di cui facevano parte i reparti italiani che per primi giunsero in Città il 26 ottobre 1954; .l’intitolazione di una via cittadina o l’apposizione di una targa che commemori la fine dell’occupazione jugoslava il 12 giugno 1945 e la fine della seconda guerra mondiale per Trieste

Sul fatto che le truppe alleate venivano definite come occupanti, cosa che a qualcuno continua ancora a sfuggire, ciò non è un mistero, basta vedere i titoli dei giornali di quel tempo od i dibattiti emersi anche in sede istituzionale.

Dunque si omette volutamente un pezzo di storia in modo chiaro fazioso ed inequivocabile. Ma la cosa più grave è il voler fare coincidere la fine della seconda guerra mondiale per Trieste con il 12 giugno 1945, o con il 26 ottobre del 1954. Invenzione faziosa e nazionalistica di sana pianta della storia che comunque non lascerà certamente indifferenti. 

Ciò su cui ci deve invece interrogare è quanto può ancora essere accettato che il PD, o parte di esso, comunque la parte più rilevante, che vede anche una buona parte dei propri iscritti essere iscritti all'ANPI, sostenere  una prospettiva della storia che non può coincidere proprio per nulla con quella difesa dall'ANPI?

Insomma un nuovo esempio di memoria condivisa, nata a Trieste e che probabilmente troverà morte anche a Trieste, irrispettosa verso chi ha realmente lottato per la nostra libertà, sovversiva rispetto alla reale storia fattuale e non solo, folle e barbaricamente irrispettosa delle vittime dei carnefici italiani brava gente. Vittime che si continuano a dimenticare, o meglio volutamente a rimuovere dalle pagine di storia rientranti nella operazione memoria condivisa, condivisa dall'oblio, condivisa nella voluta ignoranza di fatti ed atti che minerebbero l'immagine postrisorgimentale dell'italiano eroe, dell'italiano vittima, dell'italiano che non ha mai colpe, perché le colpe sono sempre degli altri. 

Ed attenzione, perché la memoria condivisa, con la scusante artificiosa del superamento di ogni ideologia, come se questa non fosse operazione ideologica, porterà presto alla riabilitazione degli aspetti più rilevanti fondanti il fascismo o di parte di esso.

E diciamolo pure, il vero scopo di tutto ciò, della mozione ora commentata, è strumentalizzare il 26 ottobre 1954 per demonizzare i 42 giorni di amministrazione provvisoria di Trieste dei liberatori della città dal nazifascismo, è demonizzare il comunismo jugoslavo, è demonizzare i partigiani jugoslavi per santificare il nazionalismo italiano, è chiaro sentimento di ostilità ed avversità verso la Jugoslavia, condannando ex ante ogni processo rientrante nella contestualizzazione storica di quel periodo e rimuovendo ogni causa, plasmando nella mente del tempo delle generazioni che verranno l'idea che gli italiani non erano fascisti, ma povera umile ed innocente ed ingenua ed anche martire gente che hanno subito il fascismo; falsità storica tanto incredibile quanto credibile perché vicina al suo compimento.

Certo, molti furono indotti ad avere la tessera del PNF per non morire di fame, come diranno alcuni, ma la maggior parte degli italiani hanno sostenuto attivamente il fascismo, perché fascisti dentro e fuori. Poi da buoni opportunisti, quando il vento del potere è mutato, molti di loro diventeranno antifascisti, tradendo i propri alleati, per l'ennesima volta, unendosi, alcuni di loro, alla battaglia con i veri antifascisti, i partigiani, per poi realizzare e concretizzare, con operazioni mirate e studiate, quel distacco che prevede da un lato la totale equiparazione tra il secondo fascismo (perché è in corso l'assoluzione del primo fascismo) nazismo, prodotti reazionari del capitalismo, con il nemico assoluto del capitalismo, quale l'idea del comunismo, e dall'altro il senso del vittimismo di chi  ha subito, da buon martire, solamente il fascismo con lo scopo finale di assolvere gli italiani. Italiani mai puniti per i crimini contro l'umanità compiuti durante il fascismo.

l'Italia ha ottenuto l'estradizione dal Canada ponendolo a disposizione della Procura militare di Verona.

Condannato all'ergastolo in via definitiva, Miša, nato in Ucraina, risiedeva da oltre 50 anni a Vancouver in Canada, dove conduceva una vita tranquilla, frequentando la locale chiesa il cui parroco decise di stanziare dei fondi per la difesa del parrocchiano nazista.

"Anche Cristo fu condannato da un tribunale. Vuol dire forse che era colpevole? Sono passati 55 anni, le accuse contro Seifert sono incredibili"

Così ha cercato di giustificarsi l'ineffabile prete "benefattore" di Vancouver.

Misha compì i suoi brutali eccidi nei lager assieme al connazionale ucraino Otto Sein, tuttora latitante, così come liberi e impuniti rimangono tanti nazisti, quali gli autori della strage di Sant'Anna di Stazzema, condannati all'ergastolo in Italia e mai estradati dalla Germania.

Egidio Meneghetti, che incontrò Misha e Otto durante la sua detenzione a Bolzano

http://drna.di.univr.it/index.php/chi-siamo/egidio-meneghetti

dedicò loro una poesia in dialetto veneto (veronese), "Bortolo e l'ebreeta", che rievoca il martirio di Bartolo Pezzutti, che uccisero squarciandogli il ventre, e quello di una giovane ebrea, violentata e poi inchiodata in una cassa.

TRADUZ. E sempre notte e giorno i due Ucraini Misha e Otto, che sono delle SS. Nel blocco delle celle come Dio comandano gli Ucraini Misha e Otto: il tormento di tutti li seguono, e quando chiamano tutti si fanno avanti, e quando parlano tutti ascoltano, e quando tacciono tutti aspettano, e le donne disorientate li fissano come passeri fanno con la civetta.

Un friulano magro biondo con una bocchetta rossa da bambina aveva tentato di fuggire dal campo ed è finito nella cella nera. Tre giorni ha implorato Misha e Otto, tre giorni ha pianto “non voglio morire” tre giorni ha chiamato la sua mamma. E nella notte prima della Pasqua, si è sentito là dentro un gran trambusto, come di gente che insegue in furia e un urlo soffocato in rantolo.

Ma poi non si sente che un ansimo pesante e rauco e ingordo, come quando alle bestie del serraglio danno carne cruda da mangiare. E’ Pasqua. Di mattina. E lui in terra lungo tirato, duro come il ghiaccio: occhio sbarrato nella faccia nera, nuda la pancia con la carne in basso raggrumata di sangue e consunta.Nella pace di Pasqua tutti tacciono. Immobili. Di pietra. E nella cella nera tace il pianto di Bortolo Pissuti.

Stanotte si è spenta l’”ebreetta” come una candelina di cera consumata. Stanotte Misha e Otto han buttato nella cassa due grandi occhi in sogno e quattro poveri ossicini nascosti dalla pelle rattrapita. E adesso nella cassa piantano chiodi a colpi di martello e di bestemmie (dentro alle celle i cuori tremano e i chiodi vanno a piantarsi nel cervello). E a cavallo della cassa adesso cantano esequie e litanie: “sacro porco giudeo prega per noi, al diavolo porcheria prega per noi…”

Quel giorno che lei è entrata nella cella era morbida e bella, e matura per l’amore, ma nel viso piena di paura, sbatte i due occhi carichi di un dolore che si sprofnda in secoli di pena. L’hanno buttata sopra a un tavolaccio, l’hanno lasciata sola qualche giorno, finché una sera Misha e Otto si sono chiusi nella cella nera e rimasti per una intera notte. E dalla cella esce per ore e ore stanco un lamento di un bimbo che muore. Da quella notte non ha più parlato né più mangiato. E’ la risucchiata in terra, muta e quieta, nell’oscurità della cella a aspettare di morire.

Diventa sempre più magra e piccola, sempre più larghi gli occhi.

Drone flying “Greater Albania” flag provokes soccer riot in Serbia

By Paul Mitchell 
16 October 2014

The UEFA (Union of European Football Associations) 2016 qualifying soccer match between Serbia and Albania, the first game between the two countries since 1967, was abandoned on Tuesday night after a drone trailing a “Greater Albania” flag was flown across the pitch at the Partizan stadium in Belgrade.

As the flag flew over his head, Serbian defender Stefan Mitrovic grabbed it. A fight ensued among the two teams, officials, and supporters who ran onto the pitch. As Albania players left the pitch they were pelted with smoke bombs, flares and other missiles. Riot police poured into the stadium to separate the two groups of supporters.

Elsewhere, in Vienna police were also reported to have prevented a “major conflict” between Serbian and Albanian residents of the Austrian capital on Tuesday night.

“What happened is something we can’t comprehend at the moment,” Serbian captain and Chelsea player Branislav Ivanovic, said. “All I can say is that we wanted to carry on and that we shielded the Albanian players every step of the way to the tunnel.” UEFA is considering what action to take against the two countries.

The flag, with its symbols of Greater Albania and including Kosovo, other parts of Serbia and Greece and about half of Macedonia and Montenegro, was a deliberate provocation. Kosovo declared independence from Serbia in 2008 and half of the Albanian players are from the former Serbian province. As Kosovo is not a United Nations member state, it is not an official member of international soccer organisations and, although its national team can play friendly games, it cannot play in international competitions.

Either side of the map were pictures of Ismail Qemali and Isa Boletini, principal figures in the Albanian Declaration of Independence in 1912, signalling the end of almost 500 years of Ottoman rule. In 2004, Kosovan President, Ibrahim Rugova, awarded Boletini the highest order “Hero of Kosovo” and, in 2012, a statue of him was uncovered in the city of Mitrovica on the 100th anniversary of Albanian independence. Mitrovica still remains bitterly divided, with regular clashes between ethnic Albanians and Serbs, most recently in June this year.

Fears about possible violence had already led to a clampdown on fans. On the Saturday before the match, the Albanian Football Federation had announced Albanian fans would not be allowed to travel to the match and that that the same rule would apply to Serbian supporters at the return game in Albania next year. Three rings of police surrounded the stadium on the night of the game. A Belgrade police spokesman told reporters, “The whole event will be under video surveillance; we’ll also use metal detectors, dogs that track explosive devices, in other words, nothing will be left to chance.”

However, none of these measures were directed at visiting dignitaries, many of whom have been responsible for fomenting nationalism and ethnic divisions in the region. It is alleged that the Albanian Prime Minister’s brother, Olsi Rama, who was sitting in an executive box, has been implicated in the drone incident. Albanian News24 reported that Rama was detained for 40 minutes at the stadium and then driven to the airport. Upon returning to Tirana, Rama rejected “Serbian media speculation” that he was responsible for the incident and was controlling the drone.

“I was not arrested nor detained. I showed the police my American passport and camera. This lasted for a few minutes,” Rama added.

Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama, who is supposed to visit Serbia on October 20, the first official visit by an Albanian leader for nearly 70 years, told reporters, “I am proud because the red-and-blacks [Albanian team] have won a football war. At the same time, I am sorry because of our neighbours [Serbia] who sent an ugly image to the world.” 

Serbian Foreign Minister Ivica Dacic said that the incident was a deliberate and planned political provocation. “This has never happened at any football game and was prepared in advance. For me, the central question is how will the European Union and UEFA react, because had someone from Serbia unfurled a ‘Greater Serbia’ flag in Tirana or Pristina that would make it to the agenda of the UN Security Council.”

“This incident is particularly controversial because of the fact the brother of the Albanian prime minister, who is supposed to be a guest here, did it,” he added. “All this puts a political dimension of the whole event and this is a political provocation.” 

Serbian political analyst Dragomir Anjelkovic declared that, “the Albanian state and some EU centres of power” were behind the provocation, which was “systematically planned and carried out by those who do not wish [Vladimir] Putin to visit Belgrade, who do not wish to see a stable Serbia.”

The Russian president is visiting Belgrade today to attend a military parade to mark the 70th anniversary of the city’s liberation from Nazi occupation in World War II.

On Tuesday, the European Union once again warned Serbia, which has refused to impose EU sanctions on Russia, that it should use the occasion of Putin’s visit to prove how “serious” it is about future EU membership. Spokesperson Maja Kojicancic said the EU “takes note” of the visit and that “Serbia, as all candidate countries... has made a commitment for a convergence (of policies)... including the positions on restrictive measures.” She added that the EU expects that Serbia’s “pro-EU direction will also be confirmed during this visit.”

The events at the Partizan stadium on Tuesday are a far cry from the days when the former Yugoslavia national team, comprising players from all the ethnic nationalities, was a force in world football. It played in eight World Cups, four Euros, and won the Olympic football tournament in 1960.

Responsibility for the descent into the violence that erupted on Tuesday can be firmly laid at the door of the Western powers, led by Germany and the United States.

They played the decisive role in engineering the break-up of Yugoslavia in the late 1980s and early 1990s through their cultivation of communalist politicians in the region.

Ethnic tensions exploded following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the reunification of Germany in 1991. German imperialism promoted first the secession of Slovenia and then Croatia, as a means of countering Soviet influence and promoting its own in a region long-seen as a bulwark against any possible Soviet thrust into the Mediterranean.

The US abandoned its earlier opposition to the break-up of Yugoslavia in order to challenge Germany’s efforts to secure its own hegemony. Washington became the main sponsor of Bosnian, and then Kosovan independence against the dominant Serbian government’s efforts to maintain a unitary state.

The aim was the dismantling of the state-run economy and restoration of imperialist domination over Yugoslavia. Policies dictated by the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and the EU led to soaring inflation and huge job losses. There were mass strikes and protests in opposition, to which the rival ex-Stalinist bureaucrats responded by whipping up nationalism and competing for backing from the western powers. The result was civil war.

da www.glassrbije.org

Nikolic: scopo dell’incidente è la destabilizzazione della regione

У неким београдским медијима појавиле су се интерпретације да су званичници САД у контактима са званичницима Србије изразили подршку ставовима Србије поводом провокације на фудбалској утакмици Србија - Албанија, а не ставовима Тиране, те да САД не подржавају концепт Велике Албаније, председник Београдског форума за свет равноправних Живадин Јовановић сматра:

Са оценама ставова и политике САД не треба брзати, поготову, не треба бити лакомислен и наиван. И политику САД треба оцењивати не по томе шта њени представници говоре, већ како се америчка администрација понаша у пракси и какве последице за собом оставља. Стање и проблеми на Балкану, Авганистану, Ираку, Јемену, Сирији, Либији, Украјини призивају на да се присетимо и размислимо о томе шта су лидери администрација САД изјављивали о разлозима за „хуманитарне“, „антитерористичке“ и друге интервенције, шта су резултати потраге за оружјем за масовно уништавање, „заштите цивила“, шта је развој показао и шта су за собом остављале серије агресија и интервенција „вољних“, или „невољних“, уз „изузетност“ водеће силе.

Ако је реч о томе у чему САД „подржавају“ Србију, односно, шта од Србије захтевају, онда се, без ризика од веће грешке, актуелчни циљеви америчке политике према Србији могу сажети у три тачке: прво, признавање независности и државности Косова и Метохије, односно, сагласност за чланство у УН; друго, да Србија затражи чланство у НАТО, односно, да напусти концепт неутралности; и треће, да уведе санкције Русији. Реторика Београда у стилу да „то од нас нико није тражио, нити се са нама тако може разговарати“ је одраз - или наивности, или оцене да је неко други наиван.

Питање – да ли САД подржавају концепт Велике Албаније, је изведено, готово излишно. Вашингтон, разуме се, неће изјавити да подржава тај концепт, може чак рећи да је одлучно против њега, али истовремено, у пракси ништа неће предузимати да заустави наум Тиране. Вашингтон, тренутно, врши притисак на Владу у Београду да не одустане, чак и да не одлаже посету албанског премијера Раме. После провокације са заставом Велике Албаније на фудбалској утакмици, тај притисак потврђује да Вашингтон остаје нескривено укључен на страни Тиране и Приштине у незабележено понижавање Србије и консолидацију ефеката антисрпске провокације. Било какве умирујуће изјаве, или деманти Тиране, или Вашингтона нису ништа друго до “post festum” тривијалности. Пошто није успео да омете, па ни да баци најмању сенку на посету председника Путина Београду, може се очекивати да Вашингтон учини и неке «екстра» гестове према Београду не би ли изгладио «неравнине» које је сам узроковао, као што је јавно иступање америчког амбасадора у Београду против посете Путина. Али, битнијих промена у циљевима и политици Вашингтона према Србији почев од 1999. Па све до данас, тешко може бити у догледно време. Јер, однос Вашингтона према Београду је показатељ, резултанта његових циљева према Европи и према Русији. А ти циљеви нису од данас до сутра.

Својим ставовима о непризнавању државности Косова и Метохије, неувођењу санкција Русији и реафирмацијом своје неутралности, Србија на исправан начин брани своје легитимне интересе, али истовремено, свесно или несвесно, даје пример Европи, укључујући ЕУ, па чак и Немачкој, као најутицајнијој земљи Европе, признавали то Берлин и Брисел, или не. И гостопримство Београда Председнику Владимиру Путину је добар пример који ће, пре или касније, следити и друге европске престонице. Имале сличне јубилеје које Београд слави, или не. Реч је о трајним интересима Европе и сваког европског народа појединачно. Садашње тактизирање Европе према САД временски је ограничено. Треба издржати.

PROTIV IMPERIJALIZMA, PROTIV NACIONAL-ŠOVINIZMA, ZA JEDINSTVO RADNOG NARODA

Nova komunistička partija Jugoslavije (NKPJ) najoštrije osuđuje nacional-šovinističke incidente na fudbalskoj utakmici Srbija – Albanija koje su izazvali pripadnici zvanične delegacije Fudbalskog saveza Albanije lansiranjem drona koji je nosio zastavu fašističke tvorevine u Drugom svetskom ratu „Velike Albanije“. 

Isticanje te zastave nije uvreda samo za građane Srbije već i za sve antifašistički orijetnisani Albance čiji su se preci u Drugom svetskom ratu, isto kao i većina Srba borili protiv naci-fašističkih okupatora an Balkanu. Provokacija sa isticanjem zastave fašističke veštačke tvorevine „Velike Albanije“ najbolje ilustruje reakcionarnost pro-imperijalističkog buržoaskog režima u Tirani.

NKPJ ističe da odgovornost za sve što se desilo na stadionu Partizana i prekid utakmice snosi i organizacija UEFA. Reč je o organizaciji koja je potpuno pod kontrolom krupnog eksploatatorskog kapitala a do nemilih incidenata na utakmici Srbija – Albanija je došlo jer su čelnici UEFA zanemarili bezbedonosne aspekte iz servilnosti prema interesima zapadnog imperijalizma.NKPJ ističe da ni Fudbalski savez Srbije ni Ministarstvo unutrašnjih poslova Srbije nisu dobro uradili svoj posao kada je reč o obezbeđenju na utakmici i snose odgovornost za upad jednog broja navijača na teren koji su za cilj imali obračun sa igračima i stručnim štabom albanske reprezentacije.Umesto da se pozabavem slabostima u obezbeđenju tog važnog meča od strane policije, buržoaska pro-imperijalistička vlada u Beogradu a naročito ministar unutrašnjih poslova Nebojša Stefanović se bave besmislenim optužbama na račun Radio-televizije Srbije kako bi skrenuli pažnju sa sopstvene odgovornosti zbog nedovoljno kvalitetnih mera obezbeđenja utakmice.

NKPJ kategorično osuđuje nacional-šovinističke napade na pekare u vlasništvu Albanaca u Srbiji i zahteva da izgrednici budu najstrožije kažnjeni. Reč je o poštenim radnim ljudima, građanima Srbije koji na bilo koji način nisu učestvovali u incidentu u organizaciji šovinista iz Tirane tako da nema nikakvog opravdanja za napad na njih i njihovu imovinu od šovinista sa srpske strane.

NKPJ ističe da balkanski narodi ne smeju da dozvole da ih svađa zapadni imperijalizam zarad svojih osvajačkih i pljačkaških ciljeva. Radni narod Srbije i Albanije treba da sledi primer slavnih heroja Bore i Ramiza koji su se zajedno borili protiv naci-fašističkog okupatora u Drugom svetskom ratu. Po istom tom principu Albanci i Srbi zajedno sa drugim balkanskim narodima treba da istaknu parole „Balkan pripada balkanskim narodima“, i „NATO napolje sa Balkana“. NKPJ koristi i ovu priliku da zatraži da okupatorske trupe NATO odmah napuste teritoriju Kosova i Metohije i da se južna srpska pokrajina vrati u sastav matice Srbije. 

Sekretarijat Nove komunističke partije Jugoslavije

Beograd,

21.oktobar 2014. godine