Informazione
Benito Mussolini: a dictator for all seasons in Italy?
- The Guardian, Tuesday 1 January 2013
Pasquale Moretti pulls the latest Benito Mussolini calendar off the shelf at his Rome cafe and flips it open to a photo of the pouting, strutting dictator taking part in a grain harvest.
"I was born in that era and he put bread on the table," said the 78-year-old. "I cannot betray my culture."
Every year, around this time, Mussolini calendars appear in newspaper kiosks up and down Italy, offering a year's supply of photos of the fascist leader.
They are often tucked away with the specialist magazines, but according to the manager of one firm that prints them, they are much in demand.
"We are selling more than we did 10 years ago," said Renato Circi, the head of Rome printer Gamma 3000. "I didn't think it was still a phenomenon, but young people are now buying them too."
Sixty-eight years after the fascist dictator was strung up with piano wire from a petrol station in Milan following his crushing of Italian democracy, his racist laws and his disastrous alliance with Adolf Hitler, Mussolini has quietly taken his place as an icon for many Italians.
Among his adherents today are the masked, neo-fascist youths who mounted raids on Rome schools this autumn to protest against education cuts, lobbing smoke bombs in corridors and yelling "Viva Il Duce".
A masked mob that ambushed Spurs fans drinking in a Rome pub in November, was also suspected of neo-fascist sympathies. When Spurs played Lazio the following night, Lazio fans chanted "Juden Tottenham", using the German word for Jews in reference to the club's Jewish heritage.
But the cult of Il Duce has also slipped into the mainstream. The decision by a town south of Rome to spend €127,000 (£100,000) of public funds this year on a tomb for Rodolfo Graziani, one of Mussolini's most blood-thirsty generals, was met with widespread indifference.
Other more mundane examples include the leading businessman who proposed renaming Forli airport in Emilia Romagna – the region of northern Italy where the dictator was born – as Mussolini airport, or the headmaster in Ascoli Piceno who tried to hang a portrait of the dictator in his school.
The man who gets some credit for dusting off Mussolini's reputation isSilvio Berlusconi, who famously described the dictator's exiling of his foes to remote villages as sending them on holiday.
Berlusconi's subtle rehabilitation of Mussolini came as he brought Italy's post-fascists, led by Gianfranco Fini, into his governing coalition in 1994 and 2001, following the "years of lead" in the 1970s and early 80s, when neo-fascists and communist sympathisers battled in the streets.
"Today, Mussolini's racial laws against Jews remain an embarrassment, but people don't care about his hunting down anti-fascists," said Maria Laura Rodotà, a journalist at Italy's Corriere della Sera. "That became one of Berlusconi's jokes."
Admiration for Mussolini is common in Berlusconi's circle. Showbusiness agent Lele Mora, who is now on trial for allegedly pimping for the former prime minister, downloaded an Italian fascist song as his mobile ring tone, while Berlusconi's long-time friend, the senator Marcello Dell'Utri, has described Mussolini as an "extraordinary man of great culture".
After Mussolini's murder by partisans in 1945 – as the Allies pushed up through Italy – the country did not exorcise the ghosts of fascism, as Germany sought to. A 1952 law forbidding fascist parties or the veneration of fascism has never been seriously enforced.
"It was not used partly because banning parties was potentially anti-constitutional, and also due to a sneaking admiration for fascism," said James Walston, professor of politics at the American University of Rome.
Decades on, the memory of Mussolini as the strong man who put a post office in every piazza and made the trains run on time has been decoupled from the ideology of fascism, said writer Angelo Meloni.
"He is now a pop icon, an arch-Italian, a personality whose legend is linked to the years of consensus in Italy," he said. "Just as people who don't go to church like Padre Pio, so 90% of those who buy Mussolini calendars will never have voted for a fascist party," he said.
Gamma 3000 promotes Mussolini calendars on its website alongside ones featuring the Catholic saint and mystic Padre Pio, guerrilla leader Che Guevara, topless models and cute kittens.
But for Italy's modern neo-fascist groups, including CasaPound, Il Duce is still very much about ideology.
"Whoever buys the calendar admires his work – the two things cannot be separated," said the group's vice-president, Simone di Stefano.
"There is a need today for his politics, for someone who will put the banks and finance at the service of Italy," he said. "Youngsters who come to us already see Mussolini as the father of this country."
CasaPound's student offshoot organisation, Blocco Studentesco, is a mainstay in Rome youth politics, polling 11,000 votes in school council elections in 2009 and even enrolling the mayor of Rome's 17-year-old son, who was photographed on holiday in 2012 giving a straight-armed fascist salute with friends.
The well-to-do streets around Piazza Ponte Milvio, north of Rome's football stadium, are today plastered with posters and graffiti by numerous neo-fascist groups, including CasaPound, and the local bars have become a hangout for gangs of rightwing lads in regulation Fred Perry shirts and Ray-Ban Wayfarers.
"Many teenagers now avoid Ponte Milvio since the people who go there have shifted further to the right," said Rodotà.
Further down the road, the entrance to the stadium is marked by a massive fascist-era obelisk, still standing, with "Mussolini" written in huge letters down the front. Nearby, the bar run by Pasquale Moretti, where Lazio fans meet before games, contains a mini-supermarket of fascist memorabilia, from bottles of wine with Mussolini's portrait on the label, to fascist flags and T-shirts, and oil portraits of Il Duce.
"He built housing for workers, something no Roman emperor did," said Moretti. "How can I not respect that?"
Mussolini-Kult in Italien
Ciao "Duce"
Von Hans-Jürgen Schlamp, Rom
In Deutschland unvorstellbar, in Italien normal: Zum neuen Jahr werden Zigtausende Kalender mit Bildern von Mussolini, dem "Führer des Faschismus", in Büros und Küchen gehängt. Viele halten den "Duce" noch immer für einen Ehrenmann. Silvio Berlusconi nutzt das geschickt für seine Zwecke.
In Kampfuniform, die Hand zum faschistischen Gruß erhoben, hängt er an Zeitungskiosken aus, liegt in Buchläden bereit, wird im Internet angeboten: Benito Mussolini, Gründer und "Führer des Faschismus", Kurzform "Duce", erfreut sich in Italien als Kalender-Model großer Beliebtheit. Manchen Monat begleitet er im Stahlhelm, das Kinn markant nach vorne gereckt, den nächsten mit dem römischen Kurzschwert in der Hand, selbst dabei mit markigem Kinn. Auch seine tapferen, stahlbehelmten Soldaten marschieren alljährlich auf, in Farbe oder in Schwarz-Weiß, mit faschistischen Symbolen wie dem Hakenkreuz.
"Du bist der einzige Gott"
Das ganze Ausmaß des für viele Ausländer schwer nachvollziehbaren "Duce"-Kultes zeigt sich in Predappio. Das ist ein kleiner Ort in der Emilia-Romagna, mit knapp siebentausend Einwohnern, eigentlich keine Reise wert. Doch hier wurde am 29. Juli 1883 Benito Amilcare Andrea Mussolini als Sohn eines Schmiedes und einer Dorfschullehrerin geboren - Italiens "Duce", Vorläufer und in vielem auch Vorbild des "Führers" Adolf Hitler.
Damals hieß das trostlose Dorf noch Dovia. Doch dessen bekanntester Sohn ließ es zu einer Mustersiedlung faschistischer Architektur aus- und umbauen und in Predappio umbenennen. Später - nachdem er 1945 von italienischen Partisanen gefangen, erschossen und an einer Mailänder Tankstelle, mit dem Kopf nach unten hängend, zur Schau gestellt worden war - wurde der Ex-Diktator mit Vater, Mutter, Frau, Tochter, Schwägerin und Bruder in Predappio beigesetzt.
In der Familiengruft posieren heute regelmäßig junge Männer mit Glatze und langem schwarzen Umhang. In den Kondolenzbüchern stehen Sätze wie "Du bist der einzige Gott", und manche Besucher recken den rechten Arm nach vorn. Der sogenannte "römische Gruß" der italienischen Faschisten ist zwar etwas lockerer als die zackige Variante der deutschen Nazis, aber kein bisschen sympathischer.
"Mussolini war ein Ehrenmann"
Hunderttausend Besucher reisen alljährlich in den Ort, füllen Bars, Restaurants und vor allem die "Duce"-Devotionaliengeschäfte an der Hauptstraße. Dort kann man Brieföffner, Aschenbecher, Münzen, Hemden, Hosen, Kaffeedosen, Wein, Bierkrüge und Feuerzeuge kaufen, auf denen Sprüche stehen wie "Glauben, Gehorchen, Kämpfen" oder "Verdammt sei, wer aufgibt". Natürlich prangt überall Mussolini mit Kinn und Faschisten-Gruß. Es gibt Flaggen mit Hakenkreuz und SS-Runen und bronzefarbene Büsten vom "Duce", 38 Zentimeter hoch für 45 Euro.
Auch Hitler gibt es als Büste, mit 16 Zentimeter deutlich kleiner natürlich, dafür zum Schnäppchenpreis von 15 Euro. Das lockt manche deutsche Neonazis an - die greifen bei der Gelegenheit auch gern zur Flasche: Bier drin, Adolf-Bild draußen, mit Unterzeile "Der Kamerad", für drei Euro.
Italiener lassen die deutschen Nazi-Nostalgie-Artikel meistens liegen. Sie stören das im Lande weit verbreitete Geschichtsbild. Das beschrieb der erfolgreichste "Duce"-Souvenirhändler am Ort, Pierluigi Pompignoli, einmal so: "Hitler war ein Verbrecher, aber Mussolini war ein Ehrenmann."
Vergangenheit kollektiv verdrängt
Nun ist es keineswegs so, dass eine große Zahl von Italienern sich wieder dem Faschismus verschrieben hätte. Die meisten, auch der "Duce"-Fans, die nach Predappio reisen oder Mussolini-Kalender kaufen, wählen keine rechtsradikalen Parteien. Sie machen ihr Kreuz bei Silvio Berlusconis "Volk der Freiheit", bei den Christdemokraten oder den Mitte-Links-Parteien. Die Bürgermeister von Predappio kommen zum Beispiel seit vielen Jahren aus den Reihen der Linken.
Viele Italiener verherrlichen Mussolini, weil unter seiner Ägide Postämter in jeder italienischen Stadt eröffnet wurden, man die Sümpfe der südtoskanischen Maremma trocken legen und mit schnurgeraden Landstraßen durchschneiden ließ. Und, ach ja, weil die Züge zu seiner Zeit pünktlich fuhren, wie man sagt.
Die "Duce"-Verherrlichung ist vor allem eins - viel Gerede. Die Kenntnisse über dieses Kapitel der italienischen Geschichte sind gering, entsprechend verbreitet sind Mythen und Halbwahrheiten. Eine Auseinandersetzung mit dem Faschismus hat es nie gegeben: Die Faschisten waren bald nach dem Krieg wieder gut gelitten. Man brauchte sie im globalen wie im nationalen Kampf zwischen Kapitalismus und Kommunismus. Schon Mussolini war in seinen Anfangsjahren von Frankreich und britischem Geheimdienst finanziert und gefördert worden.
Die Italiener haben ihre Vergangenheit nicht aufgearbeitet, sondern kollektiv verdrängt. Italienische Giftgas-Angriffe auf die Bevölkerung Äthiopiens? Nie gehört oder vergessen. Überfälle auf Albanien und Griechenland? Unbekannt. Nur so konnte "der Mythos des guten italienischen Soldaten" entstehen, analysierte schon vor ein paar Jahren Lutz Klinkhammer vom Deutschen Historischen Institut in Rom.
Mussolinis Rassengesetze von 1938, der italienische Einsatz im Spanischen Bürgerkrieg an der Seite von Francisco Franco und Hitler, Deportationen, Geiselerschießungen? Kann nicht sein. Wir waren die Guten. Die Deutschen waren die Bösen. Und das bisschen Schlechte auf unserer Seite war eher harmlos. Wie die Verbannung kritischer Intellektueller in entlegene Dörfer, zum Beispiel. Das war doch, wie esBerlusconi noch als Regierungschef bezeichnete, "Urlaub in der Sommerfrische".
Gesund - dank der Rechten
Berlusconi setzte den Verdrängungsprozess der Nachkriegszeit erfolgreich fort. Er brauchte die übrig gebliebenen Spätfaschisten, als er Anfang der neunziger Jahre in die Politik zog, um Mehrheiten zu bekommen. Also machte er sie gesellschaftsfähig, koalierte mit ihnen, nahm sie in sein Kabinett.
Mirko Tremaglia, zeitweise Minister für die Belange der Italiener im Ausland, brüstete sich, Kämpfer der Nazi-treuen Salò-Regierung (von 1943 bis 1945) gewesen zu sein. Maurizio Gasparri kündigte als Minister für Kommunikation an, gezielt "rechte Kulturtalente" zu fördern, um die linke Dominanz in den Schulen und beim Staatssender RAI zu beenden. Auf sein Geheiß wurde der Katalog zur Ausstellung "Rom 1948 bis 1959" mit Sätzen verschönert, wie: "Dank der Kultur der Rechten ist Italien noch heute ein gesünderes Land als jene Demokratien, die dem Nihilismus entgegengehen."
Das hat rechtsextremen Randgruppen Mut gemacht, sich offener und gewalttätiger zu zeigen. Wenn selbsternannte Faschos angereiste britische Fußballfans zusammenschlagen und sie dazu - wie vor dem Europa-League-Spiel Lazio Rom gegen Tottenham Hotspurs - als Juden beschimpfen oder wenn Neo-Faschisten mit Rauchbomben in Schulen einfallen, um gegen Kürzungen im Bildungsbereich zu protestieren und dabei brüllen: "Es lebe der Duce", dann ist das auch die Saat der Berlusconi-Regentschaft.
Erst die hat den rechten Rand gesellschaftsfähig gemacht.
A Bruxelles si parlerà “ex-jugoslavo”?
Intervju: Snježana Kordić, lingvistkinja
Ćirilica u Vukovaru nije znak dvojezičnosti
Sva četiri nacionalizma predočavaju svoju priču da su im drugi ukrali jezik. Međutim, jezik nije predmet pa da se može ukrasti. Nitko nema ekskluzivno vlasništvo nad jezikom, nego jezik pripada svakome tko ga govori, kaže u razgovoru za eNovine hrvatska lingvistkinja Snježana Kordić, komentarišući između ostalog ponovljene političke dileme o višejezičnosti među govornicima unutar srpskohrvatskog dijasistema u Sandžaku, Slavoniji i drugim etnički mešovitim regijama na Balkanu
* Razgovor možemo započeti aktuelnom temom o kojoj bruje svi mediji. Naime, kao što je u nekim opštinama u Hrvatskoj uvedena dvojezičnost jer tamo više od trećine stanovništva govori manjinski jezik mađarski, tako sada hrvatska Vlada podupire da se i u Vukovaru uvede dvojezičnost jer se tamo na popisu stanovništva trećina stanovnika izjasnila da je srpske nacionalnosti. Ima li osnove za takvu paralelu?
Zalaganje Vlade da se u Vukovaru primijeni isti postupak kao u općinama s mađarskim protivno je Evropskoj povelji o regionalnim ili manjinskim jezicima, koju je potpisala i Hrvatska. U Povelji, naime, jasno piše da izraz "regionalni ili manjinski jezici" obuhvaća one jezike koji se razlikuju od službenog jezika dotične države i da ne obuhvaća dijalekte službenog jezika. Ne obuhvaća dijalekte zbog njihove nedovoljne razlike prema službenom jeziku. A jezik Srba se ne bi mogao klasificirati čak ni kao drugi dijalekt jer je sve to štokavica. Pa i hrvatski jezikoslovci priznaju da se od standardnog jezika u Hrvatskoj više razlikuju dijalekti kajkavski i čakavski, nego standardni jezik u Srbiji. To je i logično jer standardni jezik i u Hrvatskoj i u Srbiji je iz istog dijalekta - štokavice. Kratko rečeno, Hrvati i Srbi govore zajedničkim jezikom, dok Hrvati i Mađari govore međusobno stranim jezicima. Zato jezik Mađara može u Hrvatskoj biti manjinski jezik, a jezik Srba ne može.
* Izgleda da naši političari misle da ako postoji neka nacija, to automatski znači da mora da govori nekim drugim jezikom. Kako onda postoji austrijska nacija kad ona govori varijantu jezika kojim govore još dve nacije u susednim zemljama? Takvih slučajeva ima mnoštvo u svetu.
Da, to bi značilo da su naši političari vrlo neobrazovani ljudi jer njihova shvaćanja nacije su zaostala na pogledima iz 19. stoljeća. U 19. stoljeću je to bio dominantan pogled na naciju, zastupao ga je i Karl Marx. Ali od sredine 20. stoljeća je to potpuno napušteno jer je činjenica da niz nacija postoji, a imaju zajednički jezik s nekom drugom nacijom u drugoj državi. Različita nacionalna pripadnost ne znači automatski strani jezik, kako priželjkuju nacionalistički ekstremisti. Teofil Pančić je izvrsno pokazao da baš "vrućekrvni hrvatski domoljubi" imaju razloga za zadovoljstvo ovakvim zalaganjem političara za navodnu dvojezičnost u Vukovaru jer time se podržava "omiljeni desno-nacionalistički fantazam o hrvatskom i srpskom kao dva zasebna jezika".
* U Srbiji se koristi i latinica i ćirilica. A u Vukovaru bi ćirilica bila ta koja bi prezentirala Srbe dodavanjem u javne natpise. I onda se još ćirilica predstavlja kao dokaz da se radi o različitim jezicima.
Po izjavama političara ispalo bi da različito pismo znači da se radi o različitim jezicima. Ali to nije točno. Na primjer, ako tekst na ruskom jeziku prebacimo s ćirilice na latinicu, on i dalje ostaje na ruskom jeziku. Uostalom, kad bi pismo značilo drugi jezik, onda bi Srbi unutar Srbije bili dvojezični jer pišu i latinicom i ćirilicom.
* Svako čak i ako ne zna dobro engleski jezik odmah prepozna kad gleda film da li se u njemu govori američka ili britanska varijanta. Znači, razlike unutar jednog jezika su najnormalnija stvar. Vi pokazujete da se u lingvistici takav jezik naziva policentričan?
Svi veći evropski jezici su policentrični, a razlike među njihovim varijantama su veće nego u našem slučaju.
* Kakva su iskustva drugih policentričnih jezika? Postoje li neka zajednička regulativna tela?
Kako gdje i kako kad. Mogu postojati, ne moraju postojati. Evo na primjer slučaj Austrije i Njemačke. U 20. stoljeću su više puta prolazili i kroz fazu suradnje i kroz fazu nesuradnje. Međutim, postojanje ili nepostojanje zajedničkih regulativnih tijela, odnosno dogovaranja i suradnje, ništa ne utječe na činjenicu da je cijelo vrijeme to bio jedan policentrični jezik.
* U vašem kapitalnom delu Jezik i nacionalizam ubedljivo dokazujete da je jezik kojim razgovaramo isti jezik. Zašto je tako očiglednu činjenicu uopšte potrebno dokazivati?
Zato što su se ljudi pomalo izgubili u toj silnoj magli koju im već nekoliko desetljeća proizvode političari, mediji i raznorazni profesori.
* Unazad dve decenije naziv srpskohrvatski jezik je izbačen iz upotrebe, ali govorni jezik nije promenjen. No, imamo pojavu ne samo u Vukovaru, nego na primer i na Sandžaku i u Bosni i Hercegovini da decu u školama razdvajaju po nacionalnoj osnovi jer navodno govore različitim jezicima. Vi pokazujete da strani lingvisti to nazivaju jezičkim aparthejdom. Kakva je uloga forsiranja različitih naziva jezika u ovim slučajevima?
Nacionalistima je stalo da dobiju u ruke djecu da bi im usađivali svoj pogled na stvarnost. Zato su prognali zajedničko ime tog jezika da bi na osnovi različitih imena tvrdili da se radi o različitim jezicima i tako opravdali nužnost razdvajanja djece.
* Od ovdašnjih nacionalista možemo čuti da su drugi govornici zajedničkog jezika ukrali Srbima jezik. Ovakvu vrstu diskursa sebi dozvoljavaju čak i neki od lingvista, književnika i akademika. Čuju li se slične teze u Hrvatskoj i kako to komentirate? Može li neko nekome ukrasti jezik?
Sva četiri nacionalizma predočavaju svoju priču da su im drugi ukrali jezik. Međutim, jezik nije predmet pa da se može ukrasti. Nitko nema ekskluzivno vlasništvo nad jezikom, nego jezik pripada svakome tko ga govori. Ne postoji licenca ili autorska prava na jezik. Neko stanje iz prošlosti ne daje nikome za pravo da određuje ime jezika i njegov navodno neiskvaren oblik naspram navodno iskvarenog oblika tog jezika kod nekih drugih. Ovo važi za sve jezike u svijetu.
* Danas su neke reči, takozvani "srbizmi" u Hrvatskoj i "hrvatizmi" u Srbiji, žigosane kao nepoželjne. Dešavalo mi se da neke od reči koje koristim ne prođu u članak, pod obrazloženjem da to nije srpski jezik već hrvatski, ili obratno. Koliko je ovo lingvistički opravdano?
To uopće nije lingvistički opravdano. To je ograničavanje slobode korištenja jezika.
* Imate li neki predlog, šta mogu učiniti oni kojima je stalo do zajedničkog jezika? Mogu li bar književnici postići neki dogovor, osnovati neko zajedničko jezičko telo ili učiniti bilo što?
Razni kvalitetni pisci već i sada surađuju, i to će sigurno nastaviti još više jer je besmisleno zatvarati oči pred korisnom činjenicom da je jezik veći nego što sadašnje službene politike prikazuju. A loši pisci ne vole se izlagati konkurenciji, i bolje prolaze u užim nacionalnim književnim granicama. Inače, zadnjih godinu-dvije su mnogi hrvatski pisci, novinari i drugi intelektualci javno rekli da se radi o jednom zajedničkom jeziku, na primjer Predrag Matvejević, Miljenko Jergović, Oliver Frljić, Dubravka Ugrešić, Slobodan Šnajder, Igor Mandić, Vuk Perišić, Nikola Petković, jezgrena trojka Feralaca i mnogi, mnogi drugi. Tako doprinose da postaje najnormalnija stvar reći da je to isti jezik, i da se tome opušteno pristupa, bez političkih primisli. Jednostavno, jezik se ne podudara s državom i nacijom, i nikom ništa.
Dopo due decadi di dittature sanguinose, il processo di seconda indipendenza, di sovranità e di mantenimento della pace dell’America Latina, ha acquisito molta importanza ed è divenuto oggetto di contesa e strenua difesa da parte dei presidenti progressisti del Continente.
Intorno a questo tema cruciale si è svolta in Argentina la Conferenza Internazionale della Pace, del disarmo e dell’alternativa globale alla Nato.
Secondo Socorro Gomes, presidente del Consiglio Mondiale della Pace, oggi proprio la Nato è la più grande minaccia alla pace mondiale. L’evento, svoltosi dal 12 al 15 dicembre scorsi, si è tenuto significativamente in un luogo emblematico per l’Argentina e tutto il Sudamerica: all’Esma, la Scuola Superiore di Meccanica del Corpo della Marina, di Buenos Aires.
Sotto la direzione della Rete internazionale contro la guerra- No alla Nato, del Circolo latino-americano per gli studi internazionali (Messico) e dell’Assemblea permanente per i diritti umani APDH (Argentina), la Conferenza ha visto la partecipazione di rappresentanti della società civile di America Latina, Europa e Nord America. Tra i presenti è doveroso segnalare l’attivista per i diritti umani e Premio Nobel per la Pace Adolfo Perez Esquivel, la giornalista e scrittrice argentina Stella Calloni, la presidente del Movimento per la pace, sovranità e solidarietà coi popoli (MOPASOL) Rina Bertaccini, la brasiliana Socorro Gomes, presidente del Consiglio Mondiale della Pace (CMP) e del Centro brasiliano di solidarietà con i popoli e lotta per la pace (Cebrapaz).
Nell'intervista che segue, concessa al Portale Vermelho, Socorro parla dell’importanza di questa conferenza, e quali siano le minacce che oggi la Nato alimenta nel mondo ed in tutto il Sudamerica.
Nato: “La Nato è la più grande minaccia alla pace mondiale. Fin da quando è stata istituita, e pur caratterizzandosi come organizzazione di difesa, essa si è in realtà sviluppata come strumento di aggressione contro popoli e nazioni, specialmente del blocco socialista, e per fermare l’avanzata della lotta dei lavoratori. Oggi, la sua connotazione sono i crimini perpetrati contro le nazioni ed i loro popoli, contro le sovranità nazionali. Fanno parte di questo schema il genocidio e la distruzione della ex Jugoslavia, e con le stesse dinamiche, gli attacchi contro l’Afghanistan, la Libia e purtroppo oggi la Siria. La Nato non è però un’organizzazione autonoma, ma una macchina da guerra al servizio degli Stati Uniti d’America e delle potenze europee, le cui attività criminali si sviluppano oggi in tutto il mondo. Spesso cercano tra l’altro una legittimazione delle loro scorribande all’interno delle Nazioni Unite (ONU) attraverso la presentazione di false questioni riguardanti l’ambiente, la cibernetica, problemi etnici e di accesso alle fonti di energia.”
America Latina: “Il capitolo riguardante l’America Latina è molto serio e delicato perché qui ci sono i nostri paesi vicini. Da quando la Francia è rientrata nella Nato ( ve ne era uscita nel 1966) le basi militari francesi si sono convertite in basi dell’alleanza atlantica: esistono quindi basi nella Guyana francese, che confina col Brasile. Si possono considerare della Nato anche le postazioni britanniche situate nelle isole Falkland, che appartengono all’Argentina. Tutto ciò rappresenta una minaccia molto grave, dal momento che l’imperialismo è tecnicamente molto preparato e minaccioso, ed utilizza anche sistemi come il terrorismo di Stato, una pratica sistematica degli Stati Uniti, che se ne servono per ricattare i popoli.
In una fase cruciale come quella odierna, segnata dalla violenta crisi capitalistica, gli Usa insieme all’Europa, intendono riprendersi il nostro Continente, procedere ad una Restaurazione cancellando le nostre conquiste sociali, dominando i mercati, le fonti di risorse naturali ed i flussi delle materie prime. Vogliono controllare i continenti, gli oceani, lo spazio.”
Nuovi colpi di Stato: “Si registrano oggi vari interventi dell’Impero in America Latina. Utilizzando parlamenti reazionari, gli Stati Uniti ribaltano, come nel caso del Paraguay, esperienze di governo progressiste. Attraverso il controllo dei Media e della comunicazione, imbastiscono vere e proprie campagne propagandistiche di demonizzazione, come fu nel caso dell’ex presidente libico Gheddafi, e dell’ex presidente dell’Iraq Saddam Hussein. Spesso stimolano e fomentano conflitti etnici e sociali, allo scopo di eliminare i diritti dei lavoratori. Il ricorso all’uso dei mercenari è ampiamente diffuso e documentato, allo scopo di provocare questo tipo di conflitti e generare situazioni di caos che destabilizzano governi, come sta accadendo in questo momento in Siria.
Questa situazione, unita al controllo dei Media, crea un clima tale da legittimare un intervento esterno da parte delle potenze che vogliono distruggere e ridisegnare il Medio Oriente, per controllare la regione del Nord-Africa attraverso il Comando degli Stati Uniti per l’Africa (Africom) , al fine di rafforzare il loro dominio sulle regioni geostrategiche.”
Compattezza dell’America Latina: “In America Latina c’è stato il tentativo di assassinare il presidente venezuelano Chavez, e quello di secessione della Bolivia, sotto la direzione delle potenti oligarchie economiche delle regioni a nord est del paese, denominate forze della Mezzaluna. Qui stiamo dunque lottando per studiare nuovi strumenti di unità e integrazione di tutto il Sud-America. Le vittorie del Continente sono fondamentali per la resistenza al processo di restaurazione neo-coloniale, vittorie come quella che abbiamo ottenuto quando il progetto dell’Alca (Area di libero commercio delle Americhe) è stato sconfitto dai governi progressisti dell’America Latina. La creazione stessa della Celac (comunità degli stati latinoamericani e caraibici) è un grande passo avanti, perché in precedenza l’unica organizzazione multilaterale era stata la OEA (Organizzazione degli Stati Americani), di fatto un insediamento coloniale degli Usa, che mirava alla frammentazione, stabilendo chi poteva o non poteva partecipare a questo organismo, e tutto era finalizzato ad isolare Cuba. Adesso invece la Celac ospita tutti i paesi americani ad eccezione di Usa e Canada, ed è un grande cambiamento riguardo l’assetto geopolitico del Continente, perché cambia i rapporti di forza, fa avanzare i nostri processi di sovranità e indipendenza, rafforza il processo di progresso e giustizia.
Gli Stati Uniti non si arrenderanno, e infatti stanno cercando disperatamente di ritornare al periodo storico in cui eravamo considerati come il loro cortile di casa. Ma quel passato è stato sepolto, non esiste più.
Oggi c’è un’altra America Latina.
Vi è chiaramente una contraddizione tra queste due tendenze in lotta: una è una tendenza di indipendenza, di unità, integrazione e solidarietà. L’altra invece cerca, attraverso Paraguay, Cile, Colombia e Panama, di restaurare l’egemonia statunitense, ostacolare ed impedire il progresso. E’ un processo di lotta costante.”
Il posizionamento dell’Italia
L’Italia può dunque andare «a testa alta nel mondo». Monti non dorme però sugli allori e si propone, presiedendo un nuovo governo, di fare di più e di meglio: anzitutto rinsaldare fortemente il legame transatlantico con gli Stati uniti.
Allo stesso tempo, forte della sua collocazione geografica al centro del Mediterraneo, l’Italia deve guardare con più coraggio e con una visione strategica ai grandi cambiamenti della primavera araba e sostenere i percorsi di vera democratizzazione. Il programma di governo è dunque tracciato. In esso, spiega Monti, svolge un ruolo rilevante l’azione sul fronte internazionale, poiché il destino di ogni paese non si decide più nei suoi confini ma è strettamente intrecciato a quello del sistema di relazioni globali in cui è inserito.
È chiaro quale dovrà essere il «destino» dell’Italia: legarsi ancora più strettamente al carro da guerra degli Stati uniti, mettendo il nostro territorio ancor più a disposizione dei comandi e delle forze armate statunitensi, e partecipando, sotto comando Usa, a nuove guerre di aggressione con la motivazione ufficiale (ripetuta nell’agenda) del «contrasto al terrorismo internazionale».
Riguardo al sostegno che l’Italia dovrà dare, ancor più di oggi, ai «percorsi di vera democratizzazione» in Nordafrica e Medio Oriente, basta ricordare il ruolo che essa ha svolto nella guerra contro la Libia e quello che sta svolgendo, nel quadro della Nato, per far crollare la Siria con forze comandate, armate e infiltrate dall’esterno. E la strategia Usa/Nato prepara altre guerre, man mano che il suo centro focale si sposta verso est per contrastare la Cina e la Russia.
Assumendo crescenti compiti nel quadro di tale strategia, l’Italia potrà realizzare anche l’altro obiettivo enunciato nell’agenda, quello di rafforzare la sua posizione dentro l’Unione europea. Una «unione» nella quale le maggiori potenze gareggiano per avere più peso militare. A cominciare dalla Germania il cui dispiegamento di forze militari all’estero – ha dichiarato Angela Merkel agli inizi del 2013 – «coprirà presto l’’intero globo», la cui industria è al terzo posto mondiale (dopo quelle di Usa e Russia) nell’esportazione di armamenti, i cui missili Patriot vengono schierati (insieme a 400 militari tedeschi) in Turchia per imporre di fatto la no fly zone alla Siria.
Tutto ciò richiede un’alta spesa militare, pagata dai cittadini europei attraverso i tagli alle spese sociali. Non sono però questi che il gruppo Pd alla camera ha criticato l’11 dicembre, ma il fatto che «l’efficienza dello strumento militare del nostro paese è stata messa a repentaglio dai tagli irresponsabili operati dal precedente esecutivo» (dal governo Berlusconi). Il Pd ha quindi approvato la scelta del governo Monti di «riqualificare» la spesa militare, «al fine di restituire efficienza e funzionalità alle forze militari». L’Italia è posizionata proprio bene.
http://www.resistenze.org/sito/te/pe/mc/pemccm27-011956.htm
NKPJ NA 14. MEĐUNARODNOM SASTANKU KOMUNISTIČKIH I RADNIČKIH PARTIJA
Krajem svake godine održava se međunarodni sastanak komunističkih i radničkih partija, što predstavlja najznačajniji radni skup međunarodnog komunističkog pokreta u godini. To je prilika da se susretnu komunisti, odnosno autentične marksističko-lenjinističke snage sa svih kontinenata. Iako skupu prisustvuju partije iz socijalističkih i kapitalističkih zemalja, partije koje su na vlasti i koje su u opoziciji, parlamentarne i vanparlamentarne, velike i male, partije koje postoje gotovo čitav vek kao i one koje postoje tek desetak godina, sve su objedinjene i ravnopravne na skupu koji visoko ističe solidarnost među partijama borbenog fronta savremenog komunističkog pokreta, iako se mora istaći da među njima postoje i neke značajne nepodudarnosti u pogledu političke prakse, analize i ocene istorijskih događaja i zbivanja kao i partijske organizacione strukture i strategije delovanja.
Skup svake godine demonstrira međusobnu solidarnsot kao moćno oružje u borbi međunarodnog komunističkog pokreta, ali i solidarnost s narodom određene zemlje ili regiona u kom se skup organizuje. Otud je bilo odlučeno da se ovogodišnji skup organizuje u Bejrutu, glavnom gradu Libana, što na simboličan način pruža višestruku poruku solidarnoti s narodom ne samo Libana već i čitavog Bliskoistočnog, tj regiona Istočnog Mediterana, koji u najnovijim događanjima, poglavito u Palestini i Siriji na najočigledniji način trpi posledice rušilačkog karaktera imperijalističkog varvarstva. U besprekorno organizovanom od strane partije domaćina, Libanske komunističke partije, trodnevnom skupu koji je trajao između 22. i 25. novembra, učešće je uzelo 84 delegata iz 60 partija sa svih kontinenata. Mnoge partije su iz niza razloga bile sprečene da skupu prisustvuju ali su poslale svoje pismene referate čime su takođe doprinele radnom delu sastanka. Svaka partija je nastpuila tokom usmenog izlaganja koje je bilo vezano za tematski okvir ovogodišnjeg skupa naslovljenog: „Osnažimo borbu protiv eskalacije imperijalističke agresivnosti, za zadovoljenje socio-ekonomsko-demoktaskih prava i aspiracija ljudi, za socijalizam“. Na skupu je usvojena finalna „Deklaracija iz Bejruta“ u kojoj se između ostalog ističe da „je skup predstavljao kontinuiranu solidarnost i podršku borbi radničke klase i narodnih ustanaka u arapskim zemljama protiv imperijalističke agresivnosti i krupnog kapitala.Ovogodišnji 14. skup je potvrdio pređašnje konstatacije međunarodnog komunističkog pokreta u pogledu kapitalističke krize čiji koreni leže u kontradikcijama između kapitala i rada i koje nastavljaju da se produbljuju i intenziviraju. Imperijalistička reakcija na krizu je obeležena višestrukom ofanzivom protiv socijalnih, ekonomskih, demokratskih i nacionalnih prava naroda sa ciljem da se unište dostignuća izborena tokom radničkih i narodnih borbi u XX veku, kao i da se intenzivira nivo eksploatacije i ugnjetavanja. Imperijalizam pokušava da na širokoj skali destrukcije ekonomskih, socjalnih, političkih, kulturnih i nacionalnih prava agresivnošću pospeši regresivnu otuđenost rada i kapitala u korist kapitala. Reizbor Baraka Obame na čelo SAD neće povući agresivnu politiku SAD-a i NATO-a posebno utvrđenu na prethodnom NATO samitu u Čikagu pod tzv. platformom „pametne odbrane“. Kampanja militarističke agresije imperijalizma je upotpunjena drskim javnim političkim intervencijama protiv volje naroda koje imaju za cilj da u političku arenu ubace različite kontrarevolucionarne i reakcionarne političke snage poput neofašista, klerikalnih organizacija, drugih organizacija različitih reakcionarnih zaleđa, ne prezajući pritom ni od terorističkih napada, vojnih pučeva i drugih akcija u cilju prekrajanja granica, implementiranja principa tržišne ekonomije i imperijalističke dominacije koja se oslanja na svoje poluge koje uporno osnažuje, poput EU, MMF, Svetske banke... Sledstveno tome predlažemo zajedničke aktivnosti vezane za:
1. borba u cilju konfrontacije sa novim planovima imperijalizma na vojnom, političkom, ekonomskom i socijalnom polju u cilju prevencije svetske kontrole i rušilačkih tendencija imperijalista.
2. zahtvenaje povlačenja NATO vojnih baza kao i povlačenje iz imperijalističkih alijansi.
3. izražavanje klasne solidarnosti i pružanje podrške jačanju radničke klase i borbe naroda u kapitalističkim zemljama protiv politike daljeg opterećivanja naroda a za dobijanje boljih uslova života radnika i naroda kao efekta revolucionarnih promena.
4. potvrđivanje internacionalističke solidarnosti sa demokratskim narodnim pokretima i ustancima uprkos okupacionim i ugnjetavajućim režimima; kao i nepopustljivo odmacivanje imperijalističkih intervencija u tim zemljama.
5. konfrontacija sa antikomunističkim zakonima, merama i progonima; vođenje ideološke borbe protiv istorijskog revizionizma, za naglašavanje doprinosa komunista i radničkog pokreta u ljudskoj istoriji.
6. osuđivanje američke blokada Kube i podrška kubanskoj borbi u trenutnom podizanju zemlje. Osnaživanje kampanje za oslobađanje i povratak petorice kubanskih patriota na Kubu.
7. osuđivanje aktuelnih zverstava koje čine izraelske okpacione snage nad narodom Palestine, podrška njihovom pravu za otporom okupaciji, i kreiranjem njihove nezavisne države sa Jerusalimom kao glavnim gradom, kao i osnaženje kampanje za momentalno ukidanje blokade Gaze i za pravo na povratak raseljenjih.
8. promovisanje međunarodnog fronta u borbi protiv imperijalizma i podrška masovnim međunarodnim antiimperijliastičkim organizacijama, Svetskoj federaciji sindikata (WFTU), Svetskom savetu za mir (WPC), Svetskoj federaciji demokratske omladine (WFDY) i Međunarodnoj ženskoj demokratskoj federaciji (WIDF) u njihovim specifičnim nastojanjima u svakoj ponaosob zemlji.“
Naša Nova komunistička partija Jugoslavije s ponosom ističe da je na ovom 14. kao i na svim skupovima do sada uzela učešće i time doprinela ideološkom i organizacionom osnaženju međunarodnog komunističkog pokreta. NKPJ je ugledna članica međunarodnog komunističkog pokreta s bezrezervnom podrškom svih relevantnih sestrinskih autentično marksitističko-lenjinističkih partija u svetu. Na ovogodišnjem skupu našu partiju je predstavljao Izvršni sekretar Partije i Prvi sekretar SKOJ-a, drug Aleksandar Banjanac. Drug Banjanac je imao više bilateralnih sastanaka tokom skupa, što uključuje pored partijskih i sastanak sa rukovodstvom omladine Libankse komunističke partije. Drug Banjanac je tokom skupa pročitao zvanični refert koji je usvojio Sekretarijat NKPJ, a koji je dobio ovacije na skupu. Jako je važno istaći da je od strane naše Partije podnesena rezolucija „Ujedinjeni protiv imperijalističke poluge Međunarodnog kriminalnog tribunla za bivšu Jugoslaviju u Hagu“ koju je potpisala velika većina partija učesnica skupa.
Sekretarijat NKPJ,
Beograd, 28. novembar 2012.god.
Drage drugarice i drugovi,
najsrdačnije vas pozdravljam ispred Nove komunističke partije Jugoslavije i želim posebno da zahvalim Libanskoj komunističkoj partiji na organizovanju 14. međunarodnog susreta komunističkih i radničkih partija. Svesni ogromnog značaja međunarodih susreta komunističkih i radničkih partija, a posebno u periodu intenziviranja imperijalističke agresivnosti kao logične posledice sistemske krize kapitalizma, naša partija je redovno učestvovala na svim do sada skupovima. Rukovodeći se principima proleterskog internacionalizma naša partija je poseban akcenat, s pravom smatramo, pridavala međunarodnim sastancima komunističkih i radničkih partija i to predstavljena na najvišem nivou, uglavnom učešćem Generalnog sekretara naše partije, što je do ove godine bio drug Branko Kitanović koji na žalost više nije s nama. Drug Branko je preminuo prošle godine neposredno po održavanjau prethodnog 13. međunarodnog susreta komunističkih i radničkih partija u Atini u decembru prošle godine na kom je bio lider delegacije naše partije. Ovu priliku ću iskoristiti još jednom da srdačno zahvalim u ime NKPJ svim našim bratskim partijama koje su uputile iskrene izjave saučešća povodom gubitka istaknutog revolucinara i borca našeg pokreta, druga Branka Kitanovića.
Drage drugarice i drugovi, naša partija smatra radni naslov ovogodišnjeg skupa u celosti pravilnim, uzevši u obzir isticanje u prvi plan „borbe protiv eskaliranja imperijalističke agresivnosti“ koje je više nego očigledno u regionu Bliskog istoka tokom najnovijih događanja. Otud je održavanje ovogdišnjeg skupa upravo u regionu Bliskog istoka najbolji mogući vid jasne poruke solidarnosti progresivnog međunarodnog komunističkog pokreta s narodima koji trpe najsuroviji vid eksploatacije od krvožednog imperijalizma, a s kojim i naša partija, kao i narod naše domovine, ističe potpunu i bezrezervnu podršku i solidarnost. Novog starog predsednika SAD-a, sa starom nepromnjenom hegemonisrtičkom i zločinačkom spoljnom politikom SAD-a, koja u svojoj suštini predtsavlja egzamplarni primer imperijalizma, Izraelci su počastili granatiranjem oblasti Gaze uz novo prolivanje potoka krvi nevinih žrtava naroda nad kojim se vrši neviđeno zločinačko divljanje. Ovo je bio potez Izraelskog premijera Netanjahua kojem je potrebna pomoć svog najvećeg saveznika kako bi dobio još jedan mandat na predstojećim izborima. Ukoliko Netanjahu bude „uspešno“ vodio rat njegovo novo premijersko mesto je zagarantovano. Državna sekretarka SAD Hilari Klinton je sve to pozdravila nedavnim sastankom s Netanjahuom na kom je govorila o tome kako će „i nadalje nastaviti da se pomno konsultuje s Izraelom kao i do sada, gotovo svakodnevno između dve vlade, kako bi se pronašao najbolji put ka miru i stabilnosti za Izrael, za Sjedinjene Američke Države i svet“ i sve to dok bombe padaju na nevinu decu oblasti Gaze. Ovakvo licemerje dopunjuje osuda izraelskih napada od strane pojedinih evropskih predstavnika, predstavnika imperijalističke EU, Arapske lige među kojima su neki istaknuti saveznici ili direktni sprovodioci imperijalističke politike, kao i predstavnika vlasti u Turskoj, koji su svi skupa, kao što je poznato, na sve načine potpomogli imperijalističku intervenciju u Siriji. Najnoviji napadi u oblasti Gaze, uprkos trenutnim i kratkotrajnim političkim razvojnim procesima vezanim za izbore u Izraelu, nisu ništa drugo nego akcija koja ima za cilj generalizaciju imperijalističke agresivnosti prema Siriji i Iranu. NKPJ nedvosmisleno osuđuje cionističke napade u oblasti Gaze i zahteva hitnu i objektivnu istragu o ovim ratnim zločinima počinjenim nad nevinim narodom Palestine, za čiju se nezavisnu državu sa prestonicom u Istočnom Jerusalimu i punopravnim članstvom u UN mi zalažemo.
U slučaju Sirije mi ponavljamo naš stav da samo narod Sirije ima pravo da upravlja svojom sudbinom, i da se situacija u Siriji mora razrešiti bez stranog mešanja, bez NATO, USA, EU, Saudijske i Turske intervencije. NKPJ osuđuje najnovije zločine u Siriji, a taođe koristimo ovu priliku da još jednom izrazimo našu solidarnost s narodom Sirije i sirijskim komunistima i izrazimo zabrinutost povodom teške situacije u Siriji i novih najva otvaranja novih frontova imperijalističke agresije.
Stav naše partije je da su najnovija dešavanja u regionu direktan rezultat sistemske krize kapitalizma koji na najvarvarskije načine pokušava da odloži svoj konačan krah, prolivajući krv nevinih ljudi iz potrebe za potpunom ekonomskom, vojnom i političkom dominacijom u važnom geostrateškom regionu. Sаdаšnjа krizа je sаmo jednа u nizu krizа sistemа koji pokаzuje jаsno dа nigde gde vlаdа kаpitаlističko vаrvаrstvo nemа boljitkа, nemа lepših vremenа nа vidiku, nemа jаsnog rešenjа i idejа koje će u okviru kаpitаlističkog sistemа i svih njegovih vаrijаtetа ostаvariti bolje uslove životа grаđаnimа.Osnova kriza leži u samom sistemu kapitalističke privrede. Krize su imanentno svojstvene kapitalizmu, kapitalizam ne može da se razvija bez kriza. Da bi se uništile krize, treba uništiti kapitalizam, tj imperijalizam kao njegov vrhunski stadijum.
Na žalost narodima naše domovine, imperijalistička agresivnost nije nikakva nepoznanica. Ponavljamo da rušilački karakter imperijalizma nigde na tlu Evrope nije tako očigledan kao na primeru regiona Balkana, a posebno bivše Jugoslavije. Proces rasturanja Jugoslavije nikako nije prošla i neaktuelna stvar. Dokaz za to su najnovija događanja koja su vezana za polugu imperijalizma, Haški sud koji je navodno osmišljen kao međunarodni sud koji bi trebalo da objektivno istraži zločine počinjene tokom ratova na tlu bivše Jugoslavije. Jugoslavije više nema, ali razlog njenog nestanka ne možemo objasniti objektivno ako njeno nestajanje nazovemo naprosto raspadom. Jugoslavija se nije raspala, ona je nasilno i krvavo razbijena a glavna odgovrnost za to, sve stravične zločine i ogromnu materijalnu štetu koja je tokom bratoubilačkih ratova počinjena leži na krvavim rukama NATO, EU, američkih imperijalista i njihovih poluga kojima su se služili u rušenju zemlje ključne u geostrateškom smislu za kontrolu i dominaciju u regionu Balkana. Programska orijentacija naše partije je obnova Jugoslavije na osnovama ravnopravnosti svih naroda koji na njenom tlu žive, a što je nemoguće ostvariti bez baziranja na autentičnim principima naučnog socijalizma, marksizma-lenjinizma. Da bi svoju krivicu zataškali imperijalisti su se još tokom trajanja ratnih sukoba iskoristili stvaranjem suda u Hagu čija je jedina funkcija bila i ostala politička ucena i svaljivanje odgovornosti ponajviše na srpsku stranu. Takvim kreiranjem istorijskih osuda, težnja je bila da se prikriju činjenice koje vode do glavnih nalogodavaca rasturanja zemlje, a čiji krvavi imperijalistički trag vodi i do najnovijih ratnih operacija u Gazi, u Siriji, širom Bliskog istoka, do Libije, Iraka, Afganistana... Isti imperijalistički, hegemonistički ciljevi, baš kao i u slučaju bivše Jugoslavije, najodgovrniji su faktori nestabilnosti i rata na globalnom nivou. Prethodnica ratova za naftu u regionu Bliskog istoka morala je biti akcija pokoravnaja balkanskih naroda kao logistička, geostrateška i svaka druga potpora ratnim akcijama u neposredno bliskom regionu.
Da bi svoje prljave ciljeve ostvarili, imperijalisti su se koristili obilato i domaćom petom kolonom i secesionističkim i šovinističkim snagama na tlu same Jugoslavije, koje su u njenom rušenju i privatizaciji koja je potom useldila videli pre svega vlastiti ekonomski i politički profit. Takvi su bili i hrvatski generali Gotovina i Markač koje je pre nedelju dana sud u Hagu sramno oslobodio svake odgovornosti za pogrom srpskog stanovništva sa teritotrije Hrvatske. Skoro 2000 nevinih civilnih žrtava hrvatske vojne akcije „Oluja“, preko 250 000 raseljenih od kojih se ogromna većina nikada neće vratiti na svoja vekovna ognjišta ostali su bez ikakve pravde i utehe za sve stravično što im je rušenje Jugoslavije donelo. Ovakva strategija imperijalista, gotovo 20 godina po ratnim sukobima, ima za cilj samo jedno. Nastaviti potpunu dominaciju regionom, razjediniti narode s prostora Jugoslavije, produžiti šovinizam, mržnju i nacionalizam koji je oduvek bio saveznik imperijalista, svaliti svu krivicu gotovo isključivo na Srbe i time zatvoriti jednu totalnu istorijsku osudu u kojoj se ne može naći ni najsitniji trag odgovornosti imerijalističkih faktora za čiju direktnu umešanost u ratna zbivanja ima na hiljade nepobitnih dokaza. Nastavak ovakvog scenarija se može očekivati i u slučaju optužbi protiv albanskih ratnih zločinaca s Kosova čije bi pomilovanje i oslobađanje od svake krivice od strane imperijalista iz Brisla, Londona, Pariza i Vašingtona bilo u cilju opravdavanja stvaranja NATO države u srcu regiona, tj daljeg prekrajanja granica po želji imperijalista.
Mi ne možemo a da i ovom prilikom ne pomenemo da je deo Srbije, Kosovo i Metohija, još uvek pod NATO okupacijom, da taj čin predstavlja produženje procesa rasturanja naše domovine Jugoslavije i da svi narodi Kosova i Metohije, a naročito Srbi, žive pod stalnim pristiskom, strahom i terorom koji udruženo sprovode NATO okupatori i njihovi poslušnici, marionetska vlast u Prištini. Pitanje okupacije Kosova i Metohije nesagledivo je bez uloge koju igraju vlasti u Beogradu, takođe marionetske, koje se smenjuju ali konstatno predstavljaju političku ekspozituru EU imperijalista. Oni pristaju na sve zahteve nametnute iz Brisla pod platformom “puta bez povratka ka priključenju Srbije EU”. EU imperijalisti to vešto koriste, te svaki put isporučuju sve alavije zahteve. Nemačka kancelarka Angela Merkel je već otvoreno poručila da Srbija ne može biti primljena u EU dok ne prizna nezavisnost Kosova i Metohije.
Pitanje Kosova i Metohije je pitanje od velikog značaja i za političko delovanje naše partije. To pitanje determiniše ukupnu političku i ekonomsku situaciju kao i mnoge druge socijalne aspekte života u našoj zemlji koju karakteriše imperijalistička okupacija. Otud ne čudi što je kriza kapitalizma u Srbiji izuzetno frapantna za najšire narodne slojeve, standard građana i nezaposlenost koja je objektivno prešla 30%. Odnos prema “nezavisnoti” Kosova i Metohije nije samo teoretsko već duboko praktično pitanje odnosa prema imperijalizmu. Neosporno je da je “nezavisnost” Kosova i Metohije produkt imperijalnih interesa SAD i EU suprotno trajnim interesima svih onih koji žive na tom području, na području cele nekadašnje Jugoslavije. Mi jedino rešenje vidimo u jedinstvenoj anti imperijalnoj borbi balkanskih naroda za slobodu, mir, nezavisnot i potpunu ravnopravnost.
U takvim okolnostima naša partija, jedina u Srbiji, vodi doslednu borbu na osnovama naučnog soijalizma, uprkos neospornoj činjenici da u uslovima krize koherentni i dosledni politički zahtevi ustupaju primat otvorenom populizmu, oportunizmu i nedoslednim obećanjima najširim narodnim slojevima. Iz toga je jasno koliko su zadaci koji su pred nama naporni i ozbiljni. Tome treba pridodati i niz perfidnih načina kojima se buržoaska vlast vodi u svojoj antikomunističkoj borbi. Nezakonito, raznim smicalicama i pravnim mahinacijama, našoj partiji su prošle godine oduzete prostorije u kojima se nalazilo sedište centralnog komiteta naše partije od svog osnivanja. Danas se u tim prostorijama nalaze vladine kancelarije za pridruživanje Srbije EU. Buržoaska vlast je takođe izdejstvovala da izbriše našu partiju s liste registrovanih političkih partija u Srbiji što uzrokuje niz administrativnih problema u našem delovanju, posebno po pitanju izlaska na izbore. Mi smo otud bili onemogućeni da učestvujemo na ovogodišnjim izborima, parlamentarnim i predsedničkim na kojima je samo prividno došlo do promene vlasti. Proimperijalistička orijentacija nove vlasti ni najmanje se ne razlikuje od orijenatcije prethodne vlasti, nastavak privatizacije, zavisnost od IMF, kao i rehabilitacija antikomunističkih ratnih zločinaca iz perioda II svetskog rata, misija je koju u celosti produžava novoformljenja vlada u Beogradu.
Glavno uporište naše političke borbe ostaje sprovođenje našeg programa u radnim koilektivima, studentskim organizacijama, na radničkim demonstracijma i protestima, sindikalnim protestima, studentskim protestima, podrška radnicima u štrajkovima vezanim za privatizaciju, principijelna odbrana tekovina svih autenitčno socijalističkih aspekata izgradnje u našoj domovini, kao i odbrana antifašističkih tekovina i njihova dalja afirmacija među mladim generacijama.
Naša partija se bori i opstaje u izuzetno teškim uslovima za komunistički pokret u Srbiji i na prostoru bivše Jugoslavije, ali smo svesni da lakih i lepih vremena za našu borbu nikada, i ne samo u Jugoslaviji, nije ni bilo. Svesni smo da je to mukotrpna borba, ali pravedna, svesni smo da je ona teško ostvariva bez internacionalizma u pristupu, u doslovnoj svakodnevnoj primeni.
Zato, da živi proleterski internacionalizam, borimo se svi skupa kao ujedinjeni antiimperijalistički front, za budućnost socijaizma/komunizma!
Rezoluciju podnela NKPJ
Tribunal u Hagu predstavlja političku polugu imperijalizma koja je instrument permanentih ucena narodima bivše Jugoslavije. Tribunal u Hagu formiran je kako bi se prikrile činjenice koje vode do glavnih nalogodavaca krvavog rasturanja Jugoslavije, a čiji krvavi imperijalistički trag vodi i do najnovijih ratnih operacija u Gazi, u Siriji, širom Bliskog istoka, do Libije, Iraka, Afganistana... Radom tribunala u Hagu ostavruje se imperijalistički cilj potpune dominacije regionom, razjedinjenja naroda s prostora Jugoslavije, raspirivanje šovinizma, mržnje i nacionalizma koji su oduvek bili saveznici imperijalista, svaljivanje sve krivice gotovo isključivo na Srbe i time zatvoranje jedne totalne istorijske osude u kojoj se ne može naći ni najsitniji trag odgovornosti imerijalističkih faktora za čiju direktnu odgvoronost i umešanost u ratna zbivanja ima na hiljade nepobitnih dokaza.
Presude suda u Hagu ne izražavaju nikakvu istorijsku objektivnost, ne doprinose pomirenju naroda Jugoslavije te otud odbacujemo sve presude koje je donela ova institucija.
Dole sud nepravde, dole poluga imperijalizma, za trajni mir, napredak i solidarnsot među narodima bivše Jugoslavije i Balkana nemogućim bez socijalizma!
14° IMCWP - Dichiarazione conclusiva
Beirut 22-25 novembre 2012
Il 14° Incontro Internazionale dei Partiti Comunisti e Operai (IMCWP) si è tenuto a Beirut, capitale del Libano, fra il 22 e il 25 novembre 2012 con lo slogan:
“Rafforzare la lotta contro la crescente aggressività imperialista per affermare i diritti sociali, economici e democratici dei popoli, per il socialismo ".
All’incontro hanno partecipato 84 delegati in rappresentanza di 60 partiti, provenienti da 44 paesi dei cinque continenti, mentre sono state inviate lettere di scuse da parte dei partiti che per cause di forza maggiore non hanno potuto essere presenti.
Il meeting ha ripreso i contenuti dello straordinario incontro tenutosi nella regione araba, in Syria, nel 2009, incentrato sulla questione palestinese; e costituisce, dopo tre anni, una nuova opportunità per i partiti comunisti e operai per esprimere la loro solidarietà e il continuo sostegno alla lotta della classe operaia, alle battaglie popolari, alle rivolte nei paesi arabi contro le aggressioni imperialiste e l'oppressione del grande capitale, a favore di cambiamenti democratici. I dibattiti che si sono svolti durante il meeting hanno favorito lo scambio di opinioni riguardo alle evoluzioni che si stanno registrando in tutto in mondo e hanno portato ad una larga intesa in tema di sviluppo, per un’azione comune e convergente, finalizzata a portare avanti la lotta rivoluzionaria per il socialismo.
*****
Il 14° IMCWP ha riaffermato le sue prese di posizione espresse nei precedenti incontri, tenutisi tra il 2008 e il 2011, per quanto riguarda la crisi capitalistica di sovrapproduzione e sovra-accumulazione eccessiva di capitale, la cui radice si trova nell’acuirsi delle principali contraddizioni tra capitale e lavoro, oggi ancora più profonde e intense. Le diverse varianti borghesi volte alla gestione della crisi non sono riuscite a tenerla sotto controllo, e tutte hanno portato ai medesimi effetti barbari sui diritti dei popoli. La reazione imperialista alla crisi si è tradotta in un’ offensiva a più riprese contro i diritti sociali, economici, democratici e nazionali dei popoli, volta a distruggere le conquiste ottenute nel corso del XX secolo dalle lotte popolari e dei lavoratori e ad intensificare il livello di sfruttamento e di oppressione.
Questo dato, insieme all’aumento dell’aggressività delle guerre imperialiste e alriallineamento dei rapporti di forza internazionali, in cui il relativo indebolimento della posizione degli Stati Uniti coesiste con il crescente potere economico e politico di diversi paesi, solleva un insieme di questioni che indicano che il mondo si trova, ancora una volta, ad incrocio pericoloso e critico, dove le contraddizioni e le competizioni sono sempre più intense e dove grandi pericoli coesistono con reali opportunità di sviluppo delle lotte popolari e del lavoro.
A tal proposito è utile porre la domanda: in che modo si manifesta e quali forme assume la crescente aggressività imperialista su scala globale, in campo militare, politico, economico e sociale?
Primo: l’imperialismo sta portando avanti un’offensiva che mira alla distruzione su larga scala dei diritti economici, sociali, politici, culturali e nazionali e ad una regressione nella correlazione di forze ancor più a favore del capitale rispetto al lavoro. Sono in corso enormi operazioni finalizzate a concentrare e centralizzare ulteriormente il capitale. Allo stesso tempo, sono stati lanciati attacchi di ampia portata contro i diritti sociali e del lavoro, con una forte riduzione dei salari, disoccupazione di massa, privatizzazione e distruzione delle funzioni sociali degli Stati, privatizzazione di quasi tutti i settori economici e delle aree della vita sociale. Questo attacco antisociale è accompagnato da un'offensiva senza precedenti nei confronti dei diritti dei popoli, della democrazia, della nazione e del rispetto dell’ambiente. In particolare si è intensificato l'attacco ai diritti economici, sociali e al lavoro delle donne, provocando un brutale peggioramento delle loro condizioni di vita, sia in ambito pubblico che privato. Affrontare e sconfiggere questa accanimento è fondamentale, perché la battaglia per la parità delle donne è parte vitale della lotta contro il capitalismo.
Secondo: va sottolineato che il discorso di Barack Obama alle Nazioni Unite, dove ha dichiarato che il suo paese non ha intenzione di "ritirarsi" dal mondo, coincide con il programma approvato dalla NATO durante l’ultimo vertice di Chicago, che sottintende, in effetti, un maggiore intervento militare imperialista in tutto il mondo sotto lo slogan della "difesa intelligente".Ciò ha comportato e comporta l’avvio della prima fase di "scudo antimissile" o "Star Wars" in Europa e del programma globale di scudo antimissile, l'intervento militare diretto in Libia, minacce intermittenti all’Iran e alla Repubblica Democratica Popolare di Corea, aumento dell’attività militare, aggressioni e provocazioni in Medio Oriente, nella regione Asia-Pacifico e in tutto il continente africano, un inasprimento del militarismo imperialista in America Latina e nei Caraibi. L'aumento dell’ostilità e l’embargo contro Cuba continueranno, così come i complotti contro il Venezuela.
Terzo: la campagna di aggressione militare è accompagnata da interferenze aperte negli affari interni della maggior parte degli Stati del mondo; interventi che si manifestano attraverso l'impiego del capitale e dell’autoritarismo e che hanno come obbiettivo distorcere e falsificare la volontà dei popoli, manipolare, intimidire e impedire che i rappresentanti scelti dal popolo raggiungano il potere. Le forze imperialiste non esitano a ricorrere ai metodi peggiori pur di raggiungere i loro obiettivi, organizzando, ad esempio, attentati terroristici, colpi di stato militari, alleandosi con le forze neofasciste, promuovendo le autorità politico- religiose e le varie forze controrivoluzionarie di diversa estrazione ideologica: tutto per esercitare il controllo imperialista del pianeta, attraverso la progettazione di nuovi confini e la riorganizzazione dei mercati settoriali, in particolare del mercato dell'energia, con le risorse di petrolio e gas, e delle vie di comunicazione.
Quarto: tale campagna militare è accompagnata da un aumento di aggressività, che si traduce, ad esempio, nel massimo impiego delle risorse di varie agenzie e organizzazioni internazionali, in particolare il FMI, la Banca Mondiale e l'Unione europea, al fine di salvaguardare il potere del grande capitale.Per garantire i propri interessi ed obiettivi, oltre ad incrementare ulteriormente attacchi ed interventi autoritari nei paesi di tutto il mondo, il regime capitalista appare deciso ad attaccare la classe operaia internazionale e i suoi rappresentanti, attraverso una serie di misure, tra cui :
- - unanegazione del diritto fondamentale dell’uomo al lavoro e delle conquiste ad esso relative conseguite dalla classe operaia;
- - un’offensiva ideologica globale a livello mediatico, tesa a reprimere le lotte dei lavoratori e del popolo e a perseguitare tutte le forze sociali e politiche in conflitto con l'imperialismo, in particolar modo i Partiti comunisti e operai;
- - sforzi ed azioni congiunte in violazione di ciò che è stato incluso nella Carta delle Nazioni Unite e nella "Dichiarazione universale dei diritti umani": documenti redatti in condizioni differenti e con diversi rapporti di forza, determinati dalla presenza dell'Unione Sovietica e di altri paesi socialisti.
CIUDAD SIN DIOS
I INTRODUCCIÓN .................................................................................................................. 1
II SREBRENICA: ¿QUIEN, COMO, CUANDO, POR QUE? ................................................................ 3
¿Quién la necesitaba? ................................................................. 3
¿Cómo ocurrió todo? ................................................................... 5
Continuo baile de números no es más que otro disparo al corazón de las víctimas ....... 7
¿Quién determina la causa de la muerte de los cuerpos exhumados en zona de Srebrenica?
...................................................................................... 8
¿Quién ha sido condenado hasta ahora? ................................................. 9
III ELLOS ESTUVIERON ALLÍ ................................................................................................... 10
Un genocidio virtual: las mentiras y los juegos mediáticos ........................... 10
“Muyahidines cortaban las cabezas” ................................................... 15
IV LOS MEDIOS REINVENTAN LA HISTORIA ............................................................................. 17
La prueba que falta .................................................................. 17
Capitulo XIV ......................................................................... 23
Falta de censo permite juegos macabros con los muertos ............................... 25
V PROYECTO HISTÓRICO SREBRENICA .................................................................................. 27
Pruebas, contexto y política ......................................................... 28
Mentiras de Erdemović - oportunidad de Karadžić ...................................... 34
¿Por qué el asesinato de 8000 argentinos les convierte en víctimas de segunda y no se
considera un genocidio? .............................................................. 36
Entrevista con Stephan Karganovich ................................................... 39
VI JUICIOS ........................................................................................................................... 48
Naser Ori, otro criminal en libertad ................................................ 48
CIJ: Serbia inocente ¿y ahora qué? ................................................... 49
Aniversario de Srebrenica ............................................................ 51
El arresto del general Mladić y derecho internacional ................................ 54
VII TESTIGO CLAVE ................................................................................................................ 58
Srebrenica – testigo clave en La Haya ................................................ 59
La historia de Dražen Erdemović ...................................................... 63
Fechas clave ......................................................................... 67
El “testigo clave” en el proceso contra Karadžić ..................................... 69
El caso de D. Erdemović y la verdad oculta sobre Srebrenica .......................... 74
VIII LA DECLARACIÓN DEL PARLAMENTO SERBIO SOBRE SREBRENICA ........................................ 80
Gobierno de Tadić se disculpa a los musulmanes bosnios ............................... 80
Srebrenica: declaración sin reconciliación ........................................... 81
IX CIUDAD TRAICIONADA ...................................................................................................... 86
Srebrenica desde Noruega ............................................................. 87
Srebrenica: ciudad traicionada (Ole Flyum) ........................................... 89
X OTROS HAN ESCRITO ........................................................................................................ 92
La cancamusa serbia y el periodismo piltrafa ......................................... 92
Los condenados (juzgados) de La Haya ................................................. 94
Srebrenica, Cataluña y amantes del falso paralelismo ................................. 97
Srebrenica, la historia “ocultada” ................................................... 99
XI ALGUNOS APUNTES PARA RECORDAR ............................................................................... 103
http://www.semanarioserbio.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=4435
SREBRENICA HISTORICAL PROJECT
Postbus 90471,
2509LL
Den Haag, The Netherlands
+31 64 878 09078 (Holland)
+381 64 403 3612 (Serbia)
E-mail: srebrenica.historical.project@...
Web site: www.srebrenica-project.com
____________________________________________
ICTY Exaggerates Number of Prisoners Captured by Bosnian-Serbs in Srebrenica Operation
[If our associate Andy Wilcoxson is correct in his critical assessment of the evidence at the disposal of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia regarding the number of Muslims captured by Serbian forces in the immediate aftermath of the fall of Srebrenica on 11 July 1995, the implications are staggering. To name just two. First, since Mr. Wilcoxson argues from the logical premise that the Serbs could not have executed more prisoners than they had in their custody, his analysis would tend to show that the maximum number of victims of illegal executions could not have exceeded half the claimed figure of 7.000 to 8.000. Second, that the judges of the Hague Tribunal probably did not even bother to critically read their own evidence before issuing factual conclusions that were at variance with it, as demanded by the Prosecution.
With regard to the first implication, it should be noted that from it there does not follow the automatic conclusion that even that many persons were executed. It only means that about 3.500 is the maximum number of executed persons that the evidence presented to the judges will support. It is still up to the judges to carefully review that evidence and arrive at a figure that is credible. But one thing is certain. It is mathematically impossible for the number of executed prisoners to be greater than the number of prisoners that were captured.
The second implication is very disturbing. Viewed in the light most favorable to the judges and to the institution which employs them, it suggests that they are incompetent, lazy, and unfit for the position to which they were appointed. From a more critical perspective, it could also be said of the judges that they are obliged n’importe quoi to confirm in their verdicts conclusions that go beyond the evidence but which are mandated politically. There is a precedent that supports this view. Dr Ljubiša Simić’s meticulous analysis of the 3.568 Srebrenica autopsy reports prepared by forensic experts of the Office of the Prosecutor, who conducted on site exhumations between 1996 and 2001, demonstrated that the factual conclusions reached by various ICTY Chambers, that supposedly were based on that evidence, also were completely gratuitous and unsupported by the underlying data. That brings us back to the same dichotomy of possibilities. Either the Chambers acted incompetently, or they acted in bad faith and deliberately ignored and/or misrepresented evidence that was incompatible with the factual conclusions that it was expected of them to draw.
Whichever explanation we choose, the result is shocking. We extend our gratitude to Mr. Wilcoxson for his seminal analysis of this key unresolved aspect of Srebrenica. It removes another major prop from under the mythological account of these events.]
By Andy Wilcoxson
The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) claims that Bosnian-Serb forces captured and executed up to 7,826 Bosnian-Muslim prisoners when the Srebrenica enclave collapsed in July of 1995.[1]
This paper will expose the flaw in that thesis by demonstrating that the ICTY significantly over-estimates the number of prisoners captured by Bosnian-Serb forces in the Srebrenica operation, particularly with respect to the number of prisoners captured and detained at two sites: the Sandici Meadow and the Nova Kasaba football field.
General Overview of Where and When the Prisoners Were Captured
Bosnian-Serb forces captured prisoners from two groups of people when the Srebrenica enclave fell. They captured men from among refugees gathered at Potocari on July 12-13, and from July 12ththrough the 17th they captured Bosnian-Muslim men from a column of men that set out from the enclave on July 11th and 12th and crossed Bosnian-Serb territory to Tuzla.
The vast majority of people captured from the column were captured on July 12th and 13th as they attempted to cross the Bratunac – Konjevic Polje – Milici Road. These prisoners were detained at two main sites: the Sandici meadow and a football field in Nova Kasaba.
Smaller groups were captured at Konjevic Polje, Jadar River, Luke School, and in the general area around Burnice, Sandici, Kamenica, Krajinovici and Mratinci all the way until the 17th of July.
Most of the prisoners captured in Potocari and along the Bratunac – Konjevic Polje – Milici Road were sent to Bratunac on July 12-13, and from the morning of July 14 onwards most were sent north to the Zvornik region and murdered at various execution sites like Orahovac, Petkovci Dam, Pilica School, Branjevo Military Farm, Pilica Cultural Center, Kozluk, etc...
Obviously, it goes without saying that executing unarmed prisoners is a war crime regardless of the number killed, and the people responsible deserve to be punished. The point of calculating the number of prisoners is not to excuse what happened, but to establish accurate information about what happened.
Prisoners Captured At Potocari
Bosnian-Serb forces entered Potocari on the morning of July 12th and sometime between 10:00 AM and 1:00 PM they began taking military aged Bosnian-Muslim men as prisoners from among the refugees who had gathered there. The Tribunal estimates the number of prisoners captured in Potocari by Bosnian-Serb forces to be about 1,000 men.[2] The total number reported missing from Potocari on July 12-13 is 1,487 men.[3]
Prisoners Held on Nova Kasaba Soccer Field
The Krstic trial chamber "estimated 1,500 to 3,000 men captured from the column were held prisoner on the Nova Kasaba football field on 13 July 1995."[4] They base their finding on estimates provided by two of the prisoners who were held captive on the field: "Witness P" and "Witness Q."
However, better evidence exists than what was relied upon by the Tribunal. The best evidence is an aerial reconnaissance photograph produced by the United States that shows the group of prisoners held captive on the Nova Kasaba football field at approximately 2:00 PM on July 13th.
By overlaying the American reconnaissance photograph in Google Earth it is possible to measure how much ground space is occupied by the prisoners sitting captive on the soccer field. These measurements show that the prisoners occupied approximately 670 square meters of ground space.[5]
An average man sitting on the ground occupies about one square meter.[6] If we assume that each prisoner occupies approximately 1 to 0.85 square meters that would mean there was 670 to 790 prisoners in the 670 square meters occupied by them in the aerial reconnaissance photograph.
In addition to the aerial reconnaissance photograph, we have eye witness testimony from Lt. Vincentius Egbers, a soldier in the Royal Dutch Army who was deployed to the Srebrenica enclave with DutchBat III.
On July 12th he saw "between 100 and 200 men" lined up on the field "sitting on their knees with their hands in their neck."[7] On July 13th he passed by the field again in the morning and saw "there were still men on the football field and men who were brought towards the football field at the day before" he estimated their number to be "a few hundred".[8]
Zoran Malinic who was a Bosnian-Serb soldier tasked with guarding and compiling a list of prisoners testified in the Tolimir trial that the prisoners were held there until about 6:00 PM on July 13th when they were loaded on busses and sent to Bratunac. He estimated the total number of prisoners to be between 1,000 and 1,200.[9]
Bojan Subotic, commander of the Bosnian-Serb military police platoon tasked with loading the prisoners onto the busses and trucks, testified that at around 7 p.m. on 13 July, about fifteen vehicles arrived at the Nova Kasaba Football Field to transport the prisoners to Bratunac.[10] This is roughly consistent with the estimate of 1,000 to 1,200 prisoners made by Malinic if one assumes that 65 to 80 prisoners were loaded on to each vehicle.
The picture being painted here is consistent. There were 100 to 200 prisoners on the morning of the 12th, by the morning of the 13th the number had grown to "a few hundred", by 2:00 PM that number had grown to 670 to 790, and by 6:00 or 7:00 PM the number had reached 1,000 to 1,200 prisoners when they were loaded on the busses and sent to Bratunac.
Prisoners at Sandici Meadow and Kravica Warehouse
Throughout the morning and afternoon of July 13th Bosnian-Muslim men from the column surrendered to, or were captured by, Bosnian-Serb troops at Sandici meadow. Some of the prisoners were sent to Kravica warehouse 1.2 kilometers away and massacred there at approximately 5:00 PM that evening. The rest of the prisoners remained on the meadow before being sent to Bratunac later that day.
The Popovic trial chamber heard estimates from people detained on the meadow that there was a total of anywhere from 900 to 2,000 prisoners held captive there.[11] According to the Krstic trial verdict, "Between 1,000 and 4,000 Bosnian Muslim prisoners taken along the Bratunac-Konjevic Polje road were detained in the Sandici Meadow throughout 13 July 1995."[12] The Krstic trial chamber bases this estimate largely on Serbian radio communications allegedly intercepted by the Bosnian Army.
As was the case with the Nova Kasaba football field, better evidence exists than what has been relied upon by the Tribunal. Yet again, we have aerial reconnaissance photography taken at approximately 2:00 PM on July 13th showing the prisoners sitting on the Sandici Meadow. The prisoners in the photograph occupy roughly 478 square meters of ground space.[13] This means there was about 480 to 570 prisoners on the meadow at that time.
It is important to note that busses can be seen parked on the road by the meadow, and in another reconnaissance photo taken at about the same time; two busses can be seen parked in front of the Kravica warehouse.[14] It is clear from the photographs that the transfer of prisoners from Sandici Meadow to Kravica warehouse had already begun when the photographs were taken.
The ICTY's lead Srebrenica investigator, Jean-Rene Ruez testified about the reconnaissance photographs in the Popovic trial saying, "We knew from the Witness 37 that he was taken there by bus, before being taken inside this east part, and the picture, the aerial picture dated 13 July, shows that at that moment, just at that moment, two buses were parked in front of this east part of the warehouse."[15]
Witness 37 testified under the pseudonym PW-111 in the Popovic trial, and he did indeed testify that "two buses arrived [at the meadow], and they awaited us on the asphalt road. They made a selection. They didn't get everybody at the same time. This officer came, the one who stood in front of us with a knife, and he said, 'You, you, you, come out. Go down to the asphalt road and get on buses.' I was among them. He selected me, too."[16]
During his testimony PW-111 marked a photograph showing where the busses that brought him and the group of prisoners he was with to the warehouse were parked, and it corresponds exactly to aerial reconnaissance photograph.[17]
Most importantly, PW-111 testified that the prisoners he arrived with were the first ones to arrive at the warehouse.[18] And although he wasn't exactly sure how long the process of transporting prisoners from the meadow to the warehouse lasted, he estimated that it took an hour and a half to two hours.[19]Another survivor of the Kravica warehouse massacre testified that he was not brought from the meadow to the warehouse until 4:00 or 5:00 PM.[20]
Given that the distance from the meadow to the warehouse is only 1.2 kilometers; if the busses seen in the aerial reconnaissance photograph are the same busses that brought PW-111 to the warehouse, and if PW-111 was among the first to arrive at the warehouse, and if it took a couple of hours to bring the rest of the prisoners from the meadow to the warehouse that would mean that at 2:00 PM when the reconnaissance photos were taken that most of the prisoners would have still been at the Sandici meadow.
The 480 to 570 prisoners on the meadow, plus the two busloads of prisoners at Kravica warehouse which included PW-111 would put the most probable number of prisoners captured at Sandici Meadow somewhere in the neighborhood 700 or 800 prisoners assuming that some of them might have already been loaded on the busses seen waiting on the road at Sandici meadow in the photograph.
Prisoners Captured At Other Locations
Although I dispute the ICTY's findings regarding the number of prisoners captured at Sandici Meadow and the Nova Kasaba football field, I'm not going to bother disputing their claims regarding the number of prisoners captured at other locations.
According to the ICTY prosecution: On the evening of July 13th two busloads of prisoners held at an agricultural warehouse in Konjevic Polje were sent to Bratunac.[21] The busses were not completely full and stopped to pick up prisoners at Sandici Meadow on their way.[22] On the morning of July 13thsixteen men were captured by Bosnian-Serb forces and taken to a remote part of the Jadar River where they were killed on the spot.[23] On July 13th, six Bosnian Muslim men were captured, and then interrogated and killed at the Bratunac brigade headquarters.[24] Between July 13th and 17th 200 prisoners were captured in a sweep of the terrain between Sandici, Kamenica, Krajinovici and Mratinci towards Konjevic Polje.[25] On July 13th at Luke School near Tisca 22 men were captured off of busses transporting refugees and killed.[26]
By my reckoning, the ICTY prosecution claims to have adduced evidence showing that the number of prisoners captured and detained at places other than Potocari, Nova Kasaba, and Sandici meadow was about 350 to 400 prisoners.
Total Number of Prisoners
1,000 to 1,487 prisoners captured in Potocari, another 1,000 to 1,200 at the Nova Kasaba football field, 700 to 800 at Sandici Meadow, plus another 350 from other locations adds up to 3,050 to 3,837 prisoners that the Bosnian-Serbs could have captured, not the 7,000 to 8,000 that have been alleged by the Tribunal.
Another piece of information that lends credence to the thesis that the Serbs did not capture as many prisoners as alleged by the Tribunal is Momir Nikolic's testimony that he estimated the total number of prisoners held in Bratunac on the night of July 13th to be around 3,500 or 4,500.[27] Although Nikolic has credibility problems[28], as the assistant chief of security and intelligence for the Bratunac Brigade of the Bosnian Serb Army, Nikolic would have been one of the best placed people to make an estimate of this kind, and his estimate is at least in the same general ball park as our calculations here.
As shown above, the key flaw in the ICTY's findings is that they drastically over-state the number of prisoners captured by the Bosnian-Serbs at Sandici Meadow and the Nova Kasaba football field.
The Nature of the Evidence Relied Upon By the ICTY
Instead of determining the number of prisoners based on hard photographic evidence that can be precisely measured and objectively evaluated, the Tribunal opts instead to rely on wildly varying estimates provided by surviving massacre victims, hearsay evidence, and "intercepts" of alleged Serb radio traffic provided by the Bosnian Army.
As the Krstic trial chamber explained in its judgment, "Prominently featured in the evidence presented by the Prosecution in this case, were transcriptions of conversations between VRS personnel in July and August 1995 that were intercepted by intelligence officers from the ABiH. These documents were handed over to the OTP by the Bosnian government."[29]
The Tribunal assures us that it "considered all challenges made by the Defence, including the theory that the intercepts had been fabricated, evidence relating to the chain of custody, and the general lack of audio recordings" and in spite of that "the Trial Chamber remains satisfied, particularly in light of the evidence given by the intercept operators, that the intercepts are a contemporaneous record of intercepted VRS communications. It is satisfied that there is no deficiency in the chain of custody of the intercept materials, and finds there is no evidence in support of the Defence allegation that the intercepts were either fabricated or tampered with."[30]
The intercepts related to Srebrenica consist solely of written transcripts, and even though the audio recordings that the transcripts were allegedly produced from have not been provided, the Tribunal is unable to see how they might not be trustworthy evidence. There's a hole in that reasoning so big you could drive a bus through it, but I won't belabor such an obvious point. Without audio recordings to back them up, the intercepts have zero value as evidence -- especially when the people providing the intercepts are the military faction who fought against the Serbs in the war.
Flaws in the ICTY's Use of Forensic Evidence
The ICTY prosecution has produced a list of 7,661 persons missing and dead in connection with the fall of Srebrenica.[31] In addition, the ICMP has identified the remains of 6,838 persons in connection with the fall of Srebrenica through DNA analysis, and estimates the total number of missing to be between 8,000 and 8,100.[32]
You're probably asking yourself: If that many people are missing and dead, if almost 7,000 bodies have been found, and if the Serbs couldn't have executed more than the 3,050 to 3,837 prisoners that they had, then how did the rest of these people die? The most likely explanation is that those people died in combat or else they got caught in the cross-fire as the column fought its way across Bosnian-Serb territory to Tuzla.
In addition to the Tribunal's decision to attach less weight to photographic evidence than it does to far weaker evidence, the Tribunal misinterprets the forensic evidence that it has collected as well.
For example, the ICTY asserts that over 1,000 prisoners were executed at Kravica warehouse, and they base this finding on the number of victims found in mass-graves that have been linked to Kravica warehouse.[33]
Prosecution investigator Dusan Janc prepared an expert report in 2009 in which he concluded that the remains of 1,319 individuals had been found in primary and secondary graves associated with the Kravica Warehouse killings.[34]
What they do not take into consideration is the fact that the Kravica warehouse is a finite space that could have only housed a limited number of prisoners.
The total floor space of the two rooms of Kravica warehouse where the prisoners were held is 589.5 square meters; 262.5 square meters in the west room, and 327 square meters in the east room.[35]Therefore, we know that the number of prisoners who could have been seated on the floor of Kravica warehouse is somewhere in the region of 600 or 700 men if the warehouse were empty, which it wasn't. The warehouse was in use at the time of the massacre and part of the floor space was occupied by the material being stored inside of the warehouse.
One of the men who survived the massacre testified that inside the room of the warehouse where he was sitting there were containers, an old wire fence, and a dilapidated old car that were all being stored inside of the warehouse.[36]
Janc was forced to revise his 2009 findings when other evidence proved that a significant number of the bodies in the graves that he had linked to the Kravica warehouse massacre had in fact come from other locations.[37] We're not talking about one or two bodies either; we're talking about whole truck loads of bodies that were brought in from other places at different times to be buried in these graves and the forensic investigators who exhumed the graves and carried out the investigation never had a clue.
The forensic investigators knew there was plaster and building materials from the warehouse in the graves that they were examining, they knew that DNA found on the walls of the warehouse matched the DNA of some of the victims found in the graves[38], but they had no way of knowing the origin of all of the bodies in the grave. Just because some of the bodies came from the warehouse it didn't mean that all of the bodies had come from the warehouse.
The mistake that Janc made with regard to Kravica warehouse is repeated over and over again in the Tribunal's interpretation of the forensic evidence. If they find a link between a primary grave and a secondary grave they assume that all of the bodies in the secondary grave must have come from the primary grave. If they find a link between a grave and an execution site they assume that all of the bodies in the grave must have been killed at that execution site, even though they have no way of knowing whether some of the bodies in the grave might have been brought in from other places.
The graves are a huge mess because the Bosnian-Serbs dug up the "primary" graves where the victims were initially buried and then re-buried them in "secondary" graves, most probably to conceal evidence of the executions.
The graves are all within about a 50 mile radius of each other. It therefore seems likely that the combat casualties and the executed prisoners have all been mixed together in the same graves. Although the Krstic trial chamber found that "the majority of the victims were executed"[39], they did concede that one "cannot rule out the possibility that a percentage of the bodies in the gravesites examined may have been of men killed in combat."[40]
Conclusion
There is no compelling evidence to suggest that Bosnian-Serb forces managed to capture more than 3,000 to 4,000 prisoners. Photographic evidence showing the number of prisoners at the two main prisoner regroupment sites at Sandici meadow and the Nova Kasaba football field show that far fewer prisoners were captured at those locations than claimed by the Tribunal.
The number of prisoners executed by the Bosnian-Serbs is limited by the number of prisoners they captured. If the Tribunal's findin
(Message over 64 KB, truncated)
Serbian Brothers in Germany: Lusatian Serbs
“Serbia is Our Ancestral Land”
Just like in the 1990s, during the civil war in the territory of former Yugoslavia, in recent years too German media supported the decision of their government both when it came to recognizing the mafia state on Serbian territory — its Kosovo and Metohija province — and when it was decided Germany should be the first country in the world to raise their office in Priština to the level of embassy.
Only one political party, the Left (Die Linke), led by two prominent politicians Oskar Lafontaine (former German finance minister and ex chairman of the leading Social Democratic Party) and Gregor Gizi, distanced itself from those decisions. Last year was the first time Die Linke received a significant number of votes also on the territory of the former West Germany, in addition to its popularity in the former East Germany. But although Die Linke represents the opinion of many Germans, the mainstream media in Germany noted their opposition to imposed redrawing of Serbian borders only at the very bottom of newspapers, as a side note. Much greater attention was given to the information that “Lusatian Serbs oppose the secession of Kosovo province from Serbia.”
Later, when Łužica (Lusatian) Serbs (also called “Sorbs” in foreign sources, although they call themselves by the same name as their Balkan brothers — Serbs: Serbja, Serby) organized news conference at which they pointed to the alarming situation for ancient Serbian minority in Germany, many questions followed to which they replied that they consider Serbia their ancestral land, and that they sometimes view their Balkan compatriots as their “wandered-off offspring”.
Jan Nuk, President of the Union of Lusatian Serbs “Domowina” (Domovina, “homeland”), together with the other prominent representatives of the Western Serbs, stressed that Germans should worry about minorities in their own and not in someone else’s territory, adding that currently 60,000 Lusatian Serbs live in Germany (40,000 in Saxony and 20,000 in the neighboring province of Brandenburg). They are surrounded with 6.5 million Germans in those two provinces, and with 82 million Germans in the entire country.
At the same time, he asked how will the Kosovo Serbs, surrounded with Albanians, survive. With this heated issue, Nuk attracted attention of the local media and non-governmental organizations and, in response to numerous questions, explained who, according to the historical data, Lusatian Serbs are.
“We call ourselves Serbja, Serb, Serbonjka, and the Serbs in Serbia – South Serbja”, representative of the Serbian nation in Germany said.
He added that, from their initial settlements, Western Serbs were “forcibly pushed into the space between the Elbe River and the gates of Berlin, between Budyšin [Bautzen] and Kočebuz [Cottbus], formerly marshy and deserted land, which they turned into a fertile region with their hard work.”
The Fiercemen
Lusatian Serbs consisted of numerous tribes, the most prominent of which were the Milceni [Milčani] and Serbs, in the regions of Obodrit, Ljutiša, Velet, Gomačan and Stodoran. In the 7th century, Western Serbian Prefect Dervan joined the Samovoj country, and in the 8th and 9th century some tribes merged to create a strong defense front, but after the end of the fighting or death of the Prefects (some of them are known by the names, such as Miloduh, Dragovit) they were again separated. Western Serbs became victims of Franc and German feudal lords, but they survived that too. They fiercely defended their land and freedom, leading some historians to the conclusion that the Tribe Ljutić (Fiercemen) was a name given because they were fierce fighters, striking dread in the enemy.
“In 805, to insure the most efficient countering of the Serb defense, Charlemagne constituted Limes Sobaricus, the beltway region where it was strictly prohibited to sell weapons to the Serbs. Charlemagne’s order from the year 807 testifies that Serbs were far from being an easy prey. Here, he instructed his underlings: ‘if the Czechs attack us, third of the army should get into the battle; if the Serbs attack us, use the whole army’,” Nuk reminded.
Feudal German expansion lasted over 200 years. In the 10th century Lusatians were defeated, then Milčani, and by the end of the century all Lusatian Serb country was occupied by the Germans.
From the 12th century, the conquerors began ruthless colonization Lusatian Serbs are still opposing.
Many heroes are remembered to this day, fighters for the rights of Serbs. One of them is Serb Jan Čuška, who lead a passionate uprising in 1794, forcing Frederick William I of Prussia to engage both the regular army and cavalry against a handful of Serb leaders. In the end, he captured all of the 18 Serbian rural leaders and sentenced them to life in prison. What remained to this day are Čuška’s proud words, ringing through the centuries: Today, it is not you who has the power, but us!
The revolts against the German feudal lords continued throughout 16th century. In 1548, in the district of Lukovo, Serb rebels have managed to establish the self-rule, set up their king, abolish serfdom and taxes, but this attempt was also soon smothered in blood.
The wars kept storming through the Lusatian Serb land: Thirty Years’ War, Seven Years’ War, Napoleon wars, the First, then the Second World War.
The wars were followed by the plague, famine and emptying of the villages, and then re-colonizations by the Germans. Colonizations reinforced the Germanization. Serbs were prohibited from speaking their language even in their homes and within the family, they were not allowed to wear their national costumes (so the male national costumes were eventually completely lost), Serb girls were not allowed to wear any jewelry, Serb men could not wear traditional leather shoes.
In the region of Lower Lusatia it was even worse — young couples were not allowed to get married unless they spoke fluent German. At the same time, Serb tradesmen were being expelled from the guilds, and Lusatia Serbs were forced to attend the German church. If those Serbs who wished to live and work in the towns signed the obligatory oath, they were automatically renationalized and labeled Germans.
Still, by the 18th century Western Serbs who were stripped of most of their rights, their prefects and leaders, did not lose their traditions and intellectuals.
Several of them came to prominence during the era of Humanism: Kašpor Peucerus, who was publicly declaring himself a Serb (sentenced to 11 years in prison due to his “progressive ideas”), was successfully pursuing mathematics, astronomy, medicine and philosophy. He wrote a historical chronicle of Budyšin city. Jan Rak (Ragnus) was a professor in Wittenberg, poet and writer; Jan Bogas (Bokasius) was Doctor of Philosophy and poet; Jan Solfa was a medical doctor and author of medical books. Others have acquired titles of science masters, theology doctorates and were occupying high positions as deans and rectors of theological schools in Germany, Poland and the Czech Republic.
“Reformation which, in addition to political, also contained economic elements, was expanded to almost the entire Lusatia and preserved the national character by defending national interests,” writes historian Nada Đorđević in the treatise “History and Culture of Lusatian Serbs”.
From the 16th century Lusatian Serbs speak in two dialects, Upper and Lower Serbian. At the same time, there was a great pressure on the faith of Lusatian Serbs and since the 16th century they are divided on Protestants and Roman Catholics.
“Lutheranism, which in principle demanded the use of national languages in the church, was against the use of Serbian language, because Luther spoke very offensively about it. Only after his death Serbian priests started introducing Serbian language and opening the schools where it was taught. The first translation of the New Testament from Miklavž Jakubica, appeared in 1545. However, it remained in the manuscript form, as well as Catechism by Albin Moler and collection of songs by Vaclav Varihius,” Đorđević explains.
Maćica Serbska and Domowina
It was only in the 18th century that the broad Lusatian public learned they are not alone and that they have brothers in Eastern Europe, somewhere in the Balkans. At the time, Eastern Serbs were under the Ottoman rule, fighting against the Turkish empire. Western Serbs were receiving sporadic information from their Eastern brothers’ wars with Turks.
This encouraged Lusatian Serb Hendri Zejler (1804-1872) to write poetry, becoming the greatest poet of the Lusatian Romanticism. He lived in Lipsk (Leipzig), where he met with the prominent Eastern Serbian writer Sima Milutinović in 1826. It is assumed Milutinović helped Zejler to translate the first Serbian folk song “The Maiden chooses a Youth” into Lusatian Serbian. Zejler’s artistic circle later received collection of Serbian national poetry gathered and compiled by Vuk Karadzic.
Most of Serbian national epos, folk songs and poetry were translated by the well-known and dedicated Lusatian Serb fighter, author and artist Jurij Vjelan (1817-1892), who visited Belgrade and wrote about it enthusiastically in the newspaper of Lusatian Serbs. Mihal Hornjik (1833-1894), another Western Serb, remained faithful to the Serbian national poetry throughout his life, translating it tirelessly.
According to the texts of Lusatian Serb authors, several central events were most important for spreading Lusatian Serb culture and for maintaining Western Serbs’ national identity.
The first one was establishment of Serbian Society “Maćica Serbska” (in Lusatian Serbian, “Matica Srpska” in Serbian), principally thanks to the efforts of Arni Smoler and Hendri Zejler. Western “Maćica Serbska” was founded in 1847, twenty years after the Eastern “Matica Srpska” was established in Pest (today’s capital of Hungary, Budapest), the seat of which was later moved to the Serbian town of Novi Sad.
Forming of the Lusatian Serb society “Domowina” (“Domovina” in Serbian, ‘homeland’) in 1912 was equally important for preservation of the rich Western Serbian culture and, along with Maćica Serbska, “Domowina” represents the main pillar of the Lusatian Serb national development. Historian and archeologist Grga Novak pointed out that the language reform by Vuk Stefanović Karadžić, Serbian linguist and anthologist, which was in full swing at that time, provided great inspiration and enthusiasm in the Lusatian Serb culture.
No Autonomy for Serbs in Germany
So, that is how the history of Lusatian Serbs roughly went — the nation which after the First World War wanted its political autonomy, but neither the Weimar Republic nor the European superpowers would allow them the status of national minority. During this period the number of Lusatian Serbs was significantly reduced.
Nuk told reporters that at the time of Weimar Republic (1920-1930) there were 250,000 Lusatian Serbs, four times more than now. Under the Nazi regime, at the time of Hitler, they were massively persecuted, discriminated against and destroyed.
Although they were only formally recognized in East Germany (NDR) after the Second World War, they did have a cultural center in Dresden, along with their newspaper, while the language of Lusatian Serbs in the province, in the places where they live, was an official language.
Jurij Brezan, national writer and chronicler of Lusatian Serbs during the past century, published more than 20 books about the Western Serbs in his native tongue. According to him, the name of Lusatian Serbs which was first recorded by the ancient historians in 632 in the Fredeger Chronicle, today, in a unified Germany, where they live in the area east of Berlin, toward the Polish border and in the south-east towards the Czech Republic border, up to Dresden, is almost no longer allowed to be used.
Toponyms: “Berlin” was a Muddy Pond
Lusatian Serbs were the first to give names to the towns they were inhabiting since the 6th century. Thus, the city which is today called Dresden was originally named Drježdzen by the Western Serbs. Budyšin was germanized into Bautzen, Lipsk in Leipzig, Kamjenica into Chemnitz, river Sprjewja to Spree, Lubinjow to Lübbenau… They also gave the first name to today’s metropolis – Brljin, by the mud ponds the town was surrounded with, which was later turned into Berlin.
Faith in Slavic Svevid
Like all the other Slavs and their Balkan brothers, Lusatian Serbs were also pagans at first and believed in the same Slavic deities: Svevid, Svarog, Živa, Perun, Gromovnica and the other, lesser gods. Historians recorded that “during the union with Moravian principality, [Byzantine Greek missionaries and educators, Saints] Cyril and Methodius were spreading Christianity among the Lusatian Serbs, but the influence of German missionaries was stronger, because the Serbs defended their religion and their gods as persistently as their lands”. German religious missionaries initially had to preach in Serbian, which is why Emperor Otto I (962-73) in Magdeburg established the school where future missionaries had to learn Serbian language. Due to the great resistance of Lusatian Serbs, bishops were coercing Germans to settle among the Serbs, because “their land is rich”. The new German settlers established numerous convents, which were most often the hotbeds of Germanization.
At one point Lusatia was administered by the Poland and the Czech Republic, but this did not improve the conditions and position of this nation, because all the feudal lords protected exclusively their own interests. Thus, for example, Polish duke Mnjačko in 1030 destroyed 100 Serb villages as a punishment. Under the Polish and Czech rule, Lusatian Serbs were not allowed to settle in the cities, exceptionally only in the suburbs, where they were permitted to work in a limited number of trades, as fabric weavers, carpenters, fishermen, but without the right to enter into guilds. The first document written in the Lusatian Serb language is the text of the oath in the 16th century, which was taken upon joining the guild.
Hitler: “The Word ‘Serbs’ has to Disappear”
According to historians, restrictions and banning the language of Lusatian Serbs was quite similar to negation and prohibition of the language and Cyrillic script of the Balkan Serbs.
In 1334, Leipzig Parliament passed a regulation that everyone who utters the word in the Lusatian Serb language will be punished by death. That was the time when the Lusatian writers protested by writing in Latin, but not in the German language.
Hitler’s coming to power brought the new rules: “Limit as much as possible Wendish (Serbian) language; keep opening German kindergartens, so that Germanism is built from below and to primarily prevent the establishment of the Wendish political headquarters.”
Year 1937 marked the pogrom and arrest of the most prominent Lusatian Serbs, the abolition of all of their cultural and national organizations, confiscation of their property and persecution on all levels. Then, the following measures for “strengthening the Germanism” were undertaken: there must be no lectures about the “Wendish people and customs”, during the reading classes and especially on breaks, only the German language may be spoken, the “wealth of German games and songs” is to be transferred to children, the homeland toponyms are given only in German and written solely in German, only the teachers “of German blood” may be employed, the words “Wends” and “Serbs” must disappear…
Politically, the situation for Lusatian Serbs is not much better today. They have only one representative in Bundestag, Marija Mihalk (CDU), 49-year-old economist. In the parliamentary discussions, her voice is heard very rarely, almost never. Stanislav Tilih (49) recently became a premier of the province of Saxony. This is the highest function a Lusatian Serb was allowed to reach in Germany.
The Most Famous: Pavle Jurišić Šturm, Serbian Hero
In Serbia, the most famous Western Serb is Pavle Jurišić Šturm, born in 1848 as Paulus Sturm, Lusatian Serb who died as Serbian Army General, after distinguishing himself in the wars of liberation, from 1912-1918. He graduated at the Military Academy in Wroclaw, Silesia, and then as a Prussian officer participated in the Franco-Prussian War (1870-1871). Prior to the Balkan wars, he went to Serbia to teach at the Serbian Military Academy and stayed on, to fight in the Serbian-Turkish wars from 1876 to 1878.
Šturm commanded the Drina Division, which was especially distinguished in the Kumanovo battle, where it broke down Turkish defense. He faced the First World War at the helm of Serbia’s 3rd army, which has hindered the penetration of Austro-Hungarian troops in Serbia, enabling General Stepa Stepanović and the 2nd army to realign and win the first WWI victory for the Allied Forces over the Central Powers, in the Battle of Cer.
As commander of the 3rd army, he participated in operations of the Serbian Army during the autumn of 1914 and greatly contributed to the victory in the Battle of Kolubara. During the joint aggression against the Kingdom of Serbia in 1915, carried out by the Austro-Hungarian and German empires and Bulgarian kingdom, troops under Šturm’s command offered spirited resistance to the 11th German army, preventing its penetration toward Morava valley. This valiant hero chose to stay in the land of his forefathers. He married a Serbian woman, raised a son who also fought against the Austro-Hungary, and died in his Belgrade home in 1922.
During the WWII, Jurišić’s son, already veteran of WWI, fought against the German fascist occupier alongside Serbian Royal Guard (Chetniks) lead by General Draža Mihajlović. When Gestapo, which captured and interrogated him, learned his father came from Germany they wanted to release him. According to the records, Jurišić took this as an insult and told his captors: “Even if I had a drop of German blood in me, it was drained out on the Salonika front — I am the Serb!”
Afterwords, as he stood before the firing squad, Jurišić shouted the famous Chetnik salute: “Long live the King! Long live Motherland Serbia!”
Invita i tuoi amici e Tiscali ti premia! Il consiglio di un amico vale più di uno spot in TV. Per ogni nuovo abbonato 30 € di premio per te e per lui! Un amico al mese e parli e navighi sempre gratis: http://freelosophy.tiscali.it/
Robin de Ruiter: Who Killed Slobodan Milošević and Why
Sudden suspicious death of former Yugoslav and Serbian President Slobodan Milošević in Hague Tribunal’s detention cell continues to raise questions among the researchers and independent media six years later.
Robin de Ruiter, Dutch publicist and historian raised in Spain, wrote a fascinating book (soon to be published in Serbia, but still not available in English), which doesn’t question whether former Serbia’s president was killed in The Hague, but focuses on the parties responsible for commissioning and committing this crime.
Brutal Demonization Ending in Premeditated Murder
De Ruiter uses verifiable facts to dismantle the Western mainstream myth about the “butcher of Balkans”, and examines the reasons behind the brutal propaganda demonization aimed at turning former Serbian president into a monster, along with the entire Serbian nation.
Using a simple method of piecing together the portrait of an actual person and historical facts behind the grotesque caricatures created in the West, the author presents strong evidence for the main reason why NATO and Washington-led Western powers wanted Milošević silenced for good.
Contrary to the common mainstream claims and the basic premises of Hague prosecution’s indictment, “Milošević’s political goal was to preserve Kosovo within Serbia’s borders and to prevent Albanian majority to drive Serbian minority out of Kosovo. There was no incitement of nationalist hatred, nor has the ethnic cleansing been carried out. On the contrary, Milošević and Socialist Party members always stressed the advantages of multiethnicity for Serbia”, Robin de Ruiter writes.
The author, who felt obligated to write this book “for the sake of truth”, cites a number of legal experts, historians and independent investigative reporters who have helped him in a thorough research while piecing together presented material.
An Aspirin a Day Keeps the Doctor Away
On March 11, 2006, at 10 AM, 65-year-old Milošević was found dead in his detention cell located in the Scheveningen section of The Hague, Netherlands, while his trial for the alleged war crimes was in full swing, with Defense presenting evidence. According to the Dutch forensics, the cause of death was cardiac arrest. In addition to the autopsy, a toxicology analysis was requested.
According to the Hague officials, Milošević’s health which started to deteriorate abruptly and progressively when the trial began, was under constant supervision of the “highly qualified medical personnel”. The author points, however, that no one mentioned the fact only a single GP and one nurse were the whole team that comprised Hague detention center’s ‘highly qualified medical personnel’.
De Ruiter also reveals that the entire ‘therapy’ Milošević has been receiving during the first year of detention consisted of a single aspirin a day, despite the fact he was known to suffer from heart problems and high blood pressure.
Milošević’s lawyer Zdenko Tomanović claimed back then his client’s health is being systematically eroded.
When President Milošević died, Russian specialist Dr. Leo Bokeria, of the famous Bakulev Institute revealed to the media:
“During the past three years we have constantly insisted, without success, that Milošević needs to be sent to a hospital to be properly diagnosed. If Milošević was allowed access to any specialist clinic, he would have been given a proper treatment and would have lived many more years.”
Early on, in May 2003, group of thirteen German doctors addressed tribunal in writing, expressing their concern for Milošević’s health and lack of proper treatment. But all suggestions by medical specialists were discarded and the adequate therapy remained unavailable. Moreover, there was no response to this and further written protests by the same group of doctors.
Unknown Medications in Milošević’s Blood
A year after a miraculous aspirin-a-day treatment for a range of cardiovascular ailments, a group of medical doctors hand-picked by the tribunal bureaucrats issued the following diagnosis: secondary damage to various organs and extremely high blood pressure which, under certain conditions, could lead to stroke, coronary or cardiac arrest and premature death.
In contradiction to this finding, Hague Chief Prosecutor Carla del Ponte seemed to have known better and claimed Milošević “feels exceptionally well”.
Medical analysis in 2005 showed the presence of “unknown” chemical substances in Milošević’s bloodstream which are nullifying effects of medications for high blood pressure. Because of this finding, Milošević requested to be treated by the Russian specialists.
Even though the Russian Government on 18 January 2006 offered guarantees Milošević will be placed at tribunal’s disposal after the treatment, Milošević’s request was denied in February. Few weeks after it was already too late – Milošević suffered announced and expected fatal heart attack.
Among others, De Ruiter cites the conclusion of Dutch magazine Targets: “The very fact that judges [Robinson, Kwon and Bonomy] refused to comply with his request for treatment at this instance is sufficient cause to bring charges against the Tribunal for premeditated murder.”
Additional suspicions were raised by the fact that Milošević family’s repeated requests for an independent autopsy outside of Netherlands were denied and ignored.
Robin de Ruiter also cites statement by Hikeline Verine Stewart (sp?) of Amnesty International, who stressed Milošević’s untimely death was a direct consequence of the contraindicated medications found in his blood. “We are certain that is the cause of death. Death by natural causes is absolutely out of the question”, she said.
Potatoes Mashed with Rifampicin
The author examines a number of speculations about the prolonged poisoning of the former president in Scheveningen detention center and concludes they are far from being unfounded.
In 2002 it turned out Milošević was being given wrong medications which were raising his already high blood pressure. De Ruiter cites Dutch newspaper NRC Hadelsblad from 23 November 2002:
“Slobodan Milošević was being given wrong medications in Scheveningen detention, which raised his blood pressure. This was the reason the trial to a former Yugoslav president had to be paused at the start of November. One of Tribunal’s commentators claimed this was not an error. He refused all further comments.”
One piece of evidence showing that Milošević was probably being poisoned during his trial was an incident from the end of August 2004, when Scheveningen staff got very alarmed after discovering another detainee received Milošević’s supper.
In September 2004, during the trial, Milošević mentioned this incident:
“For three years doctors here regard me as healthy and capable of conducting my own defense. And then something really strange took place: all of a sudden some ‘independent’ doctor showed up from Belgium, country where NATO Headquarters is situated, announcing my health isn’t good enough for me to continue my own defense. And all the doctors here are suddenly in unanimous agreement over this [...]
“Feel free to reach your own conclusions, but please keep in mind I’m using medications your doctors have prescribed. I’m not quite sure what is going on here, but I could call on the entire detention staff to testify what took place when I was given a meal prepared for a person on the opposite side of the corridor. There was a major uproar to get me the food which was prepared for me in particular, even though all the meals appear exactly the same. I didn’t make a problem out of this, I had no idea what is happening. But I do have certain hypothesis which may be justified or not, but there is clear evidence...”
At that point, Judge Robinson silenced Milošević by turning his microphone off. This alarming incident was never discussed or investigated.
Meanwhile, Milošević’s health continued to rapidly deteriorate on a daily basis. He reported suffering daily from terrible pressure behind the eyes and in the ears.
Former Canadian Ambassador James Bissett testified after visiting Serbian president in Scheveningen that Milošević suddenly went horribly red in the face and grabbed his head in his hands. Milošević said his head echoed as if he spoke into a metal pan.
In March 2006, Milošević expressed his concerns for the umpteenth time:
“During five years in prison I didn’t take a single antibiotic, I didn’t have any infections except for one flu, and still, medical report from January 12, 2006 [which he received two months later] states there are medications in my blood that are used to treat tuberculosis and leprosy – Rifampicin.”
Commenting on these test results which discovered highly toxic Rifampicin in Milošević’s blood, Verine Stewart said:
- It is an inexplicable mystery why Milošević and his lawyers were given results of his January 12 medical tests the entire two months later, on March 7.
Another question that has also remained unanswered is why was Milošević’s death discovered so late, in this most secure, technologically advanced detention unit with cameras in every cell and round-the-clock half-an-hour checkups.
At the ensuing press conference Carla del Ponte claimed there were no controls every half an hour during the night when Milošević died. Furthermore, for some reason all the video cameras were turned off that night.
When asked why would that be, Del Ponte simply replied she’s “not responsible for things that happen in prison”.
German Ambassador: Milošević’s Indictment Not Worth the Paper it was Written On
In the meantime, according to De Ruiter, a number of official statements by the world-class international law and war crime experts surfaced, stressing that Milošević’s trial, at first advertised as the ‘trial of the century’ has turned into a secret trial.
According to the former German Ambassador Ralph Hartmann, “already in his opening speech, Milošević revealed sensational facts and water-tight evidence of the active role United States, Germany and other NATO countries played in dismemberment and wars in former Yugoslavia. One may ignore the truth, but one cannot defeat it”.
As the trial progressed it became evident the indictment was hardly worth the paper it was written on.
...Better if He Dies in the Docket
Many legal experts worldwide quickly caught on the Hague charade, publicly pointing out Hague’s prosecution clearly has no real evidence against Milošević and that the indictment against him is unceremoniously falling apart.
A number of commentators, some of whom De Ruiter cites, actually stressed the only way The Hague can get out of its predicament is if Milošević dies.
- It would be better if Milošević dies while he is still in the docket, – James Gaw, war crimes expert and Hague tribunal advisor said.
- Because, if the process is carried through to the end, the only thing he can possibly be convicted of is a minor violation of law, – said Gaw.
The author concludes that tribunal can undoubtedly be charged for the manslaughter, and possibly even for the premeditated murder for which, as some media reports claimed, the charges will be brought.
There is no doubt that the Hague Tribunal and Washington bear full responsibility for Milošević’s death, de Ruiter writes.
The Boomerang Effect
On August 25, 2005 Prosecutor Geoffrey Nice announced Milošević is no longer being accused of an attempt to create the mythological ‘Greater Serbia’.
Removal of such a major building block of an indictment against Serbian president has radically shaken the entire construction. Indeed, the whole foundation on which all parts of the indictment against Slobodan Milošević rested and which tied them all together was the premise that everything Milošević allegedly did had a single underlying motive – to create ‘Greater Serbia’.
Painfully, Tribunal realized its chances of reaching a nominally credible conviction were getting progressively slimmer.
Dutch lawyer N.M.P. Steijnen said:
“The chaos was getting more and more obvious. Accusations started to turn against the prosecutors, like a boomerang.
“Tribunal feared Milošević and his witnesses will reveal the role West played in dismemberment of Yugoslavia, how the West was systematically spreading lies about the alleged Serb drive for ‘Greater Serbia’, and the crimes committed by NATO in the war of aggression against Yugoslavia and Serbia – and, thus, that Milošević and his witnesses will conclusively demonstrate who it is that must be brought before the judges.
“Milošević presented over and over again, and with the help of witnesses from the Western countries, powerful evidence that Kosovo was not facing a ‘humanitarian catastrophe’ on the eve of NATO bombardment of Yugoslavia in 1999.
“It was not Milošević who was losing the trial, but the Tribunal.”
In one article Mr. Steijnen wrote:
“During years-long trial, in 466 sessions, prosecutors brought hundreds of witnesses against Milošević, they heaped over five thousand documents on him, and they proved nothing.
“This lack of actual evidence, this friendly haggling of prosecution with suspects who refused to testify against Milošević to get shorter sentences in return, all that was only damaging Tribunal’s case.
“Tribunal Worshipers in the role of reporters were carefully protecting public from knowing that Milošević, with his witnesses, struck fatal blows to the remnants of the indictment.”
Considerable Motives for Coldblooded Murder
De Ruiter notes the Hague was already in serious trouble, but things got much worse when it was finally Milošević’s turn to start his defense.
Witnesses who testified in Milošević’s defense were, without exception, eminent, authoritative and credible, and they were creating major headaches for the Tribunal, especially when one keeps in mind the fact most of the prosecution witness’ testimonies were debunked and exposed as falsehoods, sometimes to the point of becoming ludicrous and idiotic.
Situation became extremely tense when, at the end of February 2006, Milošević announced he will call Wesley Clark and Bill Clinton to the stand. He aimed to prove beyond any doubt that United States led an illegal war against Yugoslavia, and consciously and purposely bombed civilian targets – thus presenting the actual crime against humanity.
According to De Ruiter, Milošević’s intention wasn’t only unacceptable for NATO, but also for the tribunal, which would have been completely destroyed if such evidence was presented.
James Bissett, Canadian Ambassador for former Yugoslavia from 1990-1992, said:
“I have always been skeptical towards Tribunal, because I am convinced it is an instrument used by United States and its allies to mask their own mistakes in the Balkan tragedy. Tribunal serves to present Milošević and Serbian nation as the party responsible for all the ills which befell that unfortunate country.”
Russian General Leonid Ivashov said:
“Slobodan Milošević was the only one who could give crystal clear testimony about the role United States played in the bloody dismemberment of Yugoslavia during the nineties, and who could do so completely and down to tiniest details. That is precisely what he fought for while he was being tried.”
According to General Ivashov, if Milošević was declared innocent, such ruling would have far-reaching consequences both for the Tribunal and NATO. General Ivashov believes that is why Milošević was killed.
- It is a political assassination by a proxy, – Ivashov said.
“Slobodan Milošević died in his detention cell precisely at the time his defense was in full swing. He was worried over his health, but he burned with a desire to expose the truth about what really took place in the Balkans. He had no motive for suicide. On the other hand, Hague Tribunal had an obvious and considerable motive for murder.
“NATO, Tribunal’s initiator and financier, was losing control over Milošević case. Was Milošević silenced before he could exercise his right to speak up?”, Ruiter asks.
(Message over 64 KB, truncated)
6 décembre 2012
Depuis les années 1990 et en particulier depuis la guerre du Kosovo en 1999, les adversaires des interventions occidentales et de l’OTAN ont dû faire face à ce qu’on pourrait appeler une gauche (et une extrême-gauche) anti-anti-guerre, qui regroupe la social-démocratie, les Verts, et le plus gros de la gauche « radicale » (le Nouveau Parti Anticapitaliste (1), divers groupes antifascistes etc.) (2). Celle-ci ne se déclare pas ouvertement en faveur des interventions militaires occidentales et est parfois critique de celles-ci (en général, uniquement par rapport aux tactiques suivies et aux intentions, pétrolières ou géo-stratégiques, attribuées aux puissances occidentales), mais elle dépense le plus gros de son énergie à « mettre en garde » contre les dérives supposées de la partie de la gauche qui reste fermement opposée à ces interventions.
Elle nous appelle à soutenir les « victimes » contre les « bourreaux », à être « solidaires des peuples contre les tyrans », à ne pas céder à un « anti-impérialisme », un « anti-américanisme », ou un « anti-sionisme » simplistes, et, surtout, à ne pas s’allier à l’extrême-droite. Après les Albano-Kosovars en 1999 on a eu droit aux femmes afghanes, aux Kurdes irakiens, et plus récemment aux peuples libyen et syrien, que « nous » devons protéger.
On ne peut pas nier que la gauche anti-anti-guerre ait été extrêmement efficace. La guerre en Irak, qui était présentée sous forme d’une lutte contre une menace imaginaire, a bien suscité une opposition passagère, mais il n’y a eu qu’une très faible opposition à gauche aux interventions présentées comme « humanitaires », telles que celle du Kosovo, le bombardement de la Libye, ou l’ingérence en Syrie aujourd’hui. Toute réflexion sur la paix ou l’impérialisme a simplement été balayée devant l’invocation du « droit d’ingérence », de la « responsabilité de protéger », ou du « devoir d’assistance à peuple en danger ».
Une extrême-gauche nostalgique des révolutions et des luttes de libération nationale tend à analyser tout conflit à l’intérieur d’un pays donné comme une agression d’un dictateur contre son peuple opprimé aspirant à la démocratie. L’interprétation, commune à la gauche et à la droite, de la victoire de l’Occident dans la lutte contre le communisme, a eu un effet semblable.
L’ambiguité fondamentale du discours de la gauche anti-anti-guerre porte sur la question de savoir qui est le « nous » qui doit protéger, intervenir etc. S’il s’agit de la gauche occidentale, des mouvements sociaux ou des organisations de défense des droits de l’homme, on doit leur poser la question que posait Staline à propos du Vatican : « combien de divisions avez-vous ? » En effet, tous les conflits dans lesquels « nous » sommes supposés intervenir sont des conflits armés. Intervenir signifie intervenir militairement et pour cela, il faut avoir les moyensmilitaires de le faire. Manifestement, la gauche européenne n’a pas ces moyens. Elle pourrait faire appel aux armées européennes pour qu’elles interviennent, au lieu de celles des Etats-Unis ; mais celles-ci ne l’ont jamais fait sans un appui massif des Etats-Unis, ce qui fait que le message réel de la gauche anti-anti-guerre est : « Messieurs les Américains, faites la guerre, pas l’amour ! ». Mieux : comme, après leur débâcle en Afghanistan et en Irak, les Américains ne vont plus se risquer à envoyer des troupes au sol, on demande à l’US Air Force, et à elle seule, d’aller bombarder les pays violateurs des droits de l’homme.
On peut évidemment soutenir que l’avenir des droits de l’homme doit être confié aux bons soins et à la bonne volonté du gouvernement américain, de ses bombardiers et de ses drones. Mais il est important de comprendre que c’est cela que signifient concrètement tous les appels à la « solidarité » et au « soutien » aux mouvements sécessionnistes ou rebelles engagés dans des luttes armées. En effet, ces mouvements n’ont nul besoin de slogans criés dans des « manifestations de solidarité » à Bruxelles ou Paris, et ce n’est pas cela qu’ils demandent. Ils veulent des armes lourdes et le bombardement de leurs ennemis et, cela, seuls les Etats-Unis peuvent le leur fournir.
La gauche anti-anti-guerre devrait, si elle était honnête, assumer ce choix, et appeler ouvertement les Etats-Unis à bombarder là où les droits de l’homme sont violés ; mais elle devrait alors assumer ce choix jusqu’au bout. En effet, c’est la même classe politique et militaire qui est supposée sauver les populations « victimes de leur tyrans » et qui a fait la guerre du Vietnam, l’embargo et les guerres contre l’Irak, qui impose des sanctions arbitraires contre Cuba, l’Iran et tous les pays qui leur déplaisent, qui soutient à bout de bras Israël, qui s’oppose par tous les moyens, y compris les coups d’état, à tous les réformateurs en Amérique Latine, d’Arbenz à Chavez en passant par Allende, Goulart et d’autres, et qui exploite de façon éhontée les ressources et les travailleurs un peu partout dans le monde. Il faut beaucoup de bonne volonté pour voir dans cette classe politique et militaire l’instrument du salut des « victimes », mais c’est, en pratique, ce que la gauche anti-anti-guerre prône, parce que, étant donné les rapports de force dans le monde, il n’existe aucune autre instance capable d’imposer sa volonté par des moyens militaires.
Evidemment, le gouvernement américain sait à peine que la gauche anti-anti-guerre européenne existe ; les Etats-Unis décident de faire ou non la guerre en fonction de ses chances de succès, de leurs intérêts, de l’opposition interne et externe à celle-ci etc. Et, une fois la guerre déclenchée, ils veulent la gagner par tous les moyens. Cela n’a aucun sens de leur demander de ne faire que de bonnes interventions, seulement contre les vrais méchants, et avec des gentils moyens qui épargnent les civils et les innocents.
Ceux qui ont appelé l’OTAN à « maintenir les progrès pour les femmes afghanes », comme Amnesty International (USA) l’a fait lors du meeting de l’OTAN à Chicago (3), appellent de fait les EU à intervenir militairement et, entre autres, à bombarder des civils afghans et à envoyer des drones sur le Pakistan. Cela n’a aucun sens de leur demander de protéger et pas de bombarder, parce que c’est ainsi que les armées fonctionnent.
Un des thèmes favoris de la gauche anti-anti-guerre est d’appeler les opposants aux guerres à ne pas « soutenir le tyran », en tout cas pas celui dont le pays est attaqué. Le problème est que toute guerre nécessite un effort massif de propagande ; et que celle-ci repose sur la diabolisation de l’ennemi et, surtout, de son dirigeant. Pour s’opposer efficacement à cette propagande, il faut nécessairement dénoncer les mensonges de la propagande, contextualiser les crimes de l’ennemi, et les comparer à ceux de notre propre camp. Cette tâche est nécessaire mais ingrate et risquée : on vous reprochera éternellement la moindre erreur, alors que tous les mensonges de la propagande de guerre sont oubliés une fois les opérations terminées.
Bertrand Russell et les pacifistes britanniques étaient déjà, lors de la première Guerre mondiale, accusés de « soutenir l’ennemi » ; mais, s’ils démontaient la propagande des alliés, ce n’était pas par amour du Kaiser, mais par attachement à la paix. La gauche anti-anti-guerre adore dénoncer « les deux poids deux mesures » des pacifistes cohérents qui critiquent les crimes de leur propre camp mais contextualisent ou réfutent ceux qui sont attribués à l’ennemi du moment (Milosevic, Kadhafi, Assad etc.), mais ces « deux poids deux mesures » ne sont jamais que la conséquence d’un choix délibéré et légitime : contrer la propagande de guerre là où l’on se trouve (c’est-à-dire en Occident), propagande qui elle-même repose sur une diabolisation constante de l’ennemi attaqué ainsi que sur une idéalisation de ceux qui l’attaquent.
La gauche anti-anti-guerre n’a aucune influence sur la politique américaine, mais cela ne veut pas dire qu’elle n’a pas d’effets. D’une part, sa rhétorique insidieuse a permis de neutraliser tout mouvement pacifiste ou anti-guerre, mais elle a aussi rendu impossible toute position indépendante d’un pays européen, comme ce fut le cas pour la France sous De Gaulle, et même, dans une moindre mesure, sous Chirac, ou pour la Suède d’Olof Palme. Aujourd’hui, une telle position serait immédiatement attaquée par la gauche anti-anti-guerre, qui possède une caisse de résonance médiatique considérable, comme un « soutien au tyran », une politique « munichoise », coupable du « crime d’indifférence ».
Ce que la gauche anti-anti-guerre a accompli, c’est de détruire la souveraineté des Européens face aux Etats-Unis et d’éliminer toute position de gauche indépendante face aux guerres et à l’impérialisme. Elle a aussi mené la majorité de la gauche européenne à adopter des positions en totale contradiction avec celles de la gauche latino-américaine et à s’ériger en adversaires de pays comme la Chine ou la Russie qui cherchent à défendre le droit international (et ont parfaitement raison de le faire).
Un aspect bizarre de la gauche anti-anti-guerre c’est qu’elle est la première à dénoncer les révolutions du passé comme ayant mené au totalitarisme (Staline, Mao, Pol Pot etc.) et qu’elle nous met sans cesse en garde contre la répétition des « erreurs » du soutien aux dictateurs faite par la gauche de l’époque. Mais maintenant que la révolution est menée par des islamistes nous sommes supposés croire que tout va aller bien et applaudir. Et si la « leçon à tirer du passé » était que les révolutions violentes, la militarisation et les ingérences étrangères n’étaient pas la seule ou la meilleure façon de réaliser des changements sociaux ?
On nous répond parfois qu’il faut agir « dans l’urgence » (pour sauver les victimes). Même si on admettait ce point de vue, le fait est qu’après chaque crise, aucune réflexion n’est menée à gauche sur ce que pourrait être une politique autre que l’appui aux interventions militaires. Une telle politique devrait opérer un virage à 180° par rapport à celle qui est prônée actuellement par la gauche anti-anti-guerre. Au lieu de demander plus d’interventions, nous devrions exiger de nos gouvernements le strict respect du droit international, la non ingérence dans les affaires intérieures des autres états et le remplacement des confrontations par la coopération. La non ingérence n’est pas seulement la non intervention sur le plan militaire, mais aussi sur les plans diplomatique et économique : pas de sanctions unilatérales, pas de menaces lors de négociations et le traitement de tous les états sur un pied d’égalité. Au lieu de « dénoncer » sans arrêt les méchants dirigeants de pays comme la Russie, la Chine, l’Iran, Cuba, au nom des droits de l’homme, ce que la gauche anti-anti-guerre adore faire, nous devrions les écouter, dialoguer avec eux, et faire comprendre leurs points de vue politiques à nos concitoyens.
Evidemment, une telle politique ne résoudrait pas les problèmes des droits de l’homme, en Syrie, ou Libye ou ailleurs. Mais qu’est-ce qui les résout ? La politique d’ingérence augmente les tensions et la militarisation dans le monde. Les pays qui se sentent visés par cette politique, et ils sont nombreux, se défendent comme ils peuvent ; les campagnes de diabolisation empêchent les relations pacifiques entre états, les échanges culturels entre leurs citoyens et, indirectement, le développement des idées libérales que les partisans de l’ingérence prétendent promouvoir. A partir du moment où la gauche anti-anti-guerre a abandonné tout programme alternatif face à cette politique, elle a de fait renoncé à avoir la moindre influence sur les affaires du monde. Il n’est pas vrai qu’elle « aide les victimes » comme elle le prétend. A part détruire toute résistance ici à l’impérialisme et à la guerre, elle ne fait rien, les seuls qui agissent réellement étant, en fin de compte, les gouvernements américains. Leur confier le bien-être des peuples est une attitude de désespoir absolu.
Cette attitude est un aspect de la façon dont la majorité de la gauche a réagi à la « chute du communisme », en soutenant l’exact contrepied des politiques suivies par les communistes, en particulier dans les affaires internationales, où toute opposition à l’impérialisme et toute défense de la souveraineté nationale est vue à gauche comme une forme d’archéo-stalinisme.
La politique d’ingérence, comme d’ailleurs la construction européenne, autre attaque majeure contre la souveraineté nationale, sont deux politiques de droite, l’une appuyant les tentatives américaines d’hégémonie, l’autre le néo-libéralisme et la destruction des droits sociaux, qui ont été justifiées en grande partie par des discours « de gauche » : les droits de l’homme, l’internationalisme, l’antiracisme et l’anti-nationalisme. Dans les deux cas, une gauche désorientée par la fin du communisme a cherché une bouée de secours dans un discours « humanitaire » et « généreux », auquel manquait totalement une analyse réaliste des rapports de force dans le monde. Avec une gauche pareille, la droite n’a presque plus besoin d’idéologie, celle des droits de l’homme lui suffit.
Néanmoins, ces deux politiques, l’ingérence et la construction européenne, se trouvent aujourd’hui dans une impasse : l’impérialisme américain fait face à des difficultés énormes, à la fois sur le plan économique et diplomatique ; la politique d’ingérence a réussi à unir une bonne partie du monde contre elle. Presque plus personne ne croit à une autre Europe, à une Europe sociale, et l’Europe réellement existante, néo-libérale (la seule possible) ne suscite pas beaucoup d’enthousiasme parmi les travailleurs. Bien sûr, ces échecs profitent à la droite et à l’extrême-droite, mais cela uniquement parce que le plus gros de la gauche a abandonné la défense de la paix, du droit international et de la souveraineté nationale, comme condition de possibilité de la démocratie.
Jean Bricmont
version française du texte publié sur Counterpunch http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/12/04/beware-the-anti-anti-war-left/
(1) Sur cette organisation, voir Ahmed Halfaoui, Colonialiste d’« extrême gauche » ? Voir http://www.legrandsoir.info/colonialiste-d-extreme-gauche.html .
(2) Par exemple, en février 2011, un tract distribué à Toulouse demandait, à propos de la Libye et des menaces de “génocide” de la part de Kadhafi : “Où est l’Europe ? Où est la France ? Où est l’Amérique ? Où sont les ONG ? » et : « Est-ce que la valeur du pétrole et de l’uranium est plus importante que le peuple libyen ? ». C’est-à-dire que les auteurs du tract, signé entre autres par Alternative Libertaire, Europe Écologie-Les Verts, Gauche Unitaire, LDH, Lutte Ouvrière, Mouvement de la Paix (Comité 31), MRAP, NPA31, OCML-Voie Prolétarienne Toulouse, PCF31, Parti Communiste Tunisien, Parti de Gauche31, reprochaient aux Occidentaux de ne pas intervenir, en raison d’intérêts économiques. On se demande ce qu’ont du penser ces auteurs lorsque le CNT libyen a promis de vendre 35% du pétrole libyen à la France (et cela, indépendamment du fait que cette promesse soit ou non tenue ou que le pétrole soit ou non la cause de la guerre).
(3) Voir par exemple : Jodie Evans, Why I Had to Challenge Amnesty International-USA’s Claim That NATO’s Presence Benefits Afghan Women. http://www.alternet.org/story/156303/why_i_had_to_challenge_amnesty_international-usa’ .
Stenski koledar 2013 Tito:
Jugocoord su Telegram
Jugocoord su Facebook