Par Goran Čvorović
Informazione
La Chine a riposté aux critiques américaines contenues dans un rapport sur les droits de l’Homme, en publiant son propre document sur les droits de l’Homme aux Etats-Unis. « Comme les années précédentes, le rapport américain est plein d’accusations contre la situation des droits de l’Homme dans plus de 190 pays et régions, dont la Chine, mais ferme les yeux sur, ou évite et même dissimule les abus massifs des droits de l’Homme sur son propre territoire », a déclaré le Bureau de l’Information du Conseil des Affaires d’Etat (gouvernement chinois) dans son rapport sur les droits de l’Homme aux Etats-Unis.
Le Rapport sur les droits de l’Homme aux Etats-Unis en 2009 a été publié en réponse au rapport 2009 sur la situation des droits de l’Homme dans le monde, publié le 11 mars 2009 par le Département d’Etat américain.
Le rapport est « préparé pour aider les gens à travers le monde à comprendre la situation réelle des droits de l’Homme aux Etats-Unis », indique le rapport.
Le rapport a passé en revue la situation des droits de l’Homme aux Etats-Unis en 2009 à travers six thèmes : vie, propriété et sécurité personnelle ; droits civils et politiques ; droits culturels, sociaux et économiques ; discrimination raciale ; droits des femmes et des enfants ; violations des droits de l’Homme par les Etats-Unis contre d’autres pays.
Il critique les Etats-Unis pour avoir utilisé les droits de l’Homme comme « outil politique pour s’ingérer dans les affaires intérieures d’autres pays et diffamer l’image d’autres pays au profit de ses propres intérêts stratégiques ».
La Chine conseille au gouvernement américain de tirer des leçons de l’histoire, avoir lui-même une attitude correcte, d’oeuvrer pour améliorer sa propre situation des droits de l’Homme, et de rectifier ses actions dans le domaine des droits de l’Homme.
Il s’agit de la 11e année consécutive que le Bureau de l’Information du Conseil des Affaires d’Etat publie un article sur les droits de l’Homme aux Etats-Unis, en réponse au rapport annuel du Département d’Etat américain.
« A un moment où le monde souffre d’un grave désastre sur le plan des droits de l’Homme, causé par la crise financière mondiale provoquée par la crise des subprimes américaine, le gouvernement américain ignore toujours ses propres problèmes graves en matière de droits de l’Homme et se réjouit d’accuser d’autres pays. C’est vraiment dommage », indique le rapport.
Espionner les citoyens
Bien qu’il prône la « liberté d’expression », la « liberté de la presse » et la « liberté sur Internet », le gouvernement américain surveille et limite sans aucun scrupule la liberté des citoyens quand il s’agit de ses propres intérêts et besoins, indique le rapport.
Les droits des citoyens sur l’accès aux informations et de leur distribution sont sous stricte supervision, ajoute le rapport.
Selon les médias, l’Agence de sécurité nationale des Etats-Unis a commencé en 2001 à installer des appareils d’écoute spécialisés dans tout le pays pour surveiller les appels, les fax, les emails et recueillir les communications intérieures.
Les programmes d’écoute visaient tout au début les Américains d’origine arabe, mais se sont élargis ensuite à tous les Américains.
Après les attaques du 11 septembre, le gouvernement américain, sous prétexte d’anti-terrorisme, a autorisé ses départements d’intelligence à pirater les communications par email de ses citoyens et à surveiller et supprimer, à travers des moyens techniques, toute information sur Internet qui pourrait menacer les intérêts nationaux des Etats-Unis.
Les statistiques montrent qu’entre 2002 et 2006, le FBI a recueilli des milliers d’informations sur les appels téléphoniques de citoyens américains.
En septembre 2009, le pays a établi un organe de supervision de sécurité sur Internet, renforçant les inquiétudes des citoyens américains sur une utilisation éventuelle du gouvernement américain de la sécurité d’Internet comme prétexte pour surveiller et s’ingérer dans les systèmes personnels.
La soi-disant « liberté de la presse » aux Etats-Unis est en fait complètement subordonnée aux intérêts nationaux et manipulée par le gouvernement américain, souligne le rapport.
Fin 2009, le Congrès américain a passé un projet de loi pour imposer des sanctions contre plusieurs chaînes satellite arabes pour la diffusion de contenus hostiles aux Etats-Unis et incitant à la violence.
Hégémonie sous prétexte de "liberté sur Internet"
Les Etats-Unis renforcent leur hégémonie sous prétexte de « liberté sur Internet », souligne le rapport.
Actuellement, on compte 13 serveurs racines dans le monde d’Internet. Aux Etats-Unis se trouvent le seul principal serveur racine et neuf des douze autres serveurs racines, explique le rapport.
Les Etats-Unis profitent de leur contrôle sur les ressources d’Internet pour s’immiscer dans les affaires intérieures des autres pays sous divers moyens.
Les Etats-Unis possèdent une troupe spéciale de pirates informatiques, des pirates d’élite qu’ils ont recrutés dans le monde entier, ajoute le rapport.
Lors des troubles qui ont suivi les élections en Iran en été dernier, le camp de réformistes battu et ses partisans ont utilisé des moyens d’Internet comme Twitter pour diffuser leurs messages, rappelle le rapport.
Le département d’Etat américain a demandé aux opérateurs de Twitter de reporter sa maintenance prévue afin d’aider l’opposition à créer un élan favorable dans l’opinion public, poursuit le rapport.
En mai 2009, une société d’Internet, encouragée par le gouvernement américain, a bloqué ses services de messagerie instantanée dans cinq pays, dont Cuba, fait remarquer le rapport.
La discrimination raciale est un problème chronique
La discrimination raciale reste un problème chronique aux Etats-Unis, affirme le rapport.
La population noire et les autres minorités sont les groupes les plus pauvres des Etats-Unis.
Selon un rapport publié par le Bureau américain du recensement, le revenu médian réel des ménages américains, en 2008, ont été de 50 303 dollars américains, mais les revenus moyens des ménages hispaniques et noirs étaient d’à peu près 68% et 61,6% de ceux des ménages blancs non hispaniques.
Le revenu moyen des groupes minoritaires était d’environ 60% à 80% de celui des groupes majoritaires sous les mêmes conditions d’éducation et de compétence, ajoute le document.
Les minorités ethniques font l’objet d’une grave discrimination raciale sur les plans de l’emploi et du lieu de travail, inique ce rapport.
Les groupes minoritaires sont les plus touchés par le chômage. D’après le quotidien USA Today, le taux de chômage aux Etats-Unis en octobre 2009 était de 10,2%. Le taux des sans-emploi parmi les Américains d’origine africaine a atteint 15,7%, celui des Hispaniques, 13,1% et celui des Blancs, 9,5%.
Les groupes minoritaires sont victimes de discrimination dans l’éducation. Selon un rapport publié par le Bureau américain du recensement, 33% des Blancs non-hispaniques sont diplômés de l’université. La proportion des Noirs n’est que de 20% et de 13% chez les Hispaniques.
La discrimination raciale dans l’application de la loi et le système judiciaire est très marquée. Selon le Département américain à la Justice, fin 2008, dans la population noire, 3 161 hommes et 149 femmes sur 100 000 ont été condamnés à de la prison.
Un rapport publié par la police de New York, parmi les personnes impliquées dans les fusillades avec la police en 2008, 75% étaient Noirs, 22% Hispaniques et 3% Blancs.
Les crimes de haine ethnique sont fréquents. Selon des statistiques publiées par le Bureau fédéral américain des enquêtes, un total de 7 783 crimes relatifs à la haine ethnique ont été commis en 2008 aux Etats-Unis, dont 51,3% pour discrimination raciale, 19,5% pour raison religieuse et 11,5% en raison de conflits entre personnes de nationalités différentes.
La violence répandue aux Etats-Unis
La violence répandue aux Etats-Unis menace la vie, la propriété et la sécurité personnelle des Américains, indique le rapport.
En 2008, les Américains ont éprouvé 4,9 millions de crimes violents, 16,3 millions de crimes contre la propriété et 137 000 vols personnels, et le taux de crimes violents est de 19,3 victimes pour 1 000 personnes âgées de 12 ans et plus.
Chaque année, environ 30 000 personnes succombent à des accidents impliquant des armes à feu. Selon un rapport du FBI, il y a eu 14 180 victimes de meurtre en 2008, affirme le rapport.
Les campus sont des zones de plus en plus touchés par les crimes violents et les fusillades. La fondation américaine U.S. Heritage Foundation a rapporté que 11,3% des lycéens à Washington D.C. avaient reconnu avoir été « menacés ou blessés » par une arme durant l’année scolaire 2007-2008.
Abus de pouvoir
La police américaine fait souvent preuve de violence sur la population et les abus de pouvoir sont communs chez les exécuteurs de la loi, indique le rapport.
Les deux dernières années, le nombre de policiers new-yorkais placés sous révision pour avoir engrangé trop de plaintes a augmenté de 50%.
Dans les grandes villes américaines, la police arrête, interpelle et fouille plus d’un million de personnes chaque année, le nombre augmentant brusquement par rapport à il y a quelques années.
Les prisons aux Etats-Unis sont encombrées de détenus. Environ 2,3 millions de personnes ont été placées en garde à vue, soit un habitant sur 198, selon ce rapport.
De 2000 à 2008, la population carcérale américaine s’est accrue en moyenne annuelle de 1,8%.
Les droits fondamentaux des prisonniers aux Etats-Unis ne sont pas bien protégés. Les cas de viol de détenus commis par les employés de prison ont été largement rapportés, ajoute le document.
Selon le département américain de la justice, les rapports sur les délits sexuels à l’égard des détenus commis par les travailleurs de prison dans les 93 prisons fédérales du pays ont doublé au cours des huit années passées.
D’après une enquête fédérale sur plus de 63 000 prisonniers fédéraux ou de l’Etat, 4,5% ont avoué avoir été abusés sexuellement au moins une fois durant les 12 mois précédents.
Nombre croissant de suicides en raison de la pauvreté
Selon le rapport, la population pauvre est la plus importante depuis onze ans.
Le journal Washington Post a rapporté que 39,8 millions d’Américains vivaient dans la pauvreté fin 2008, en hausse de 2,6 millions par rapport à 2007. Le taux de pauvreté en 2008 était de 13,2%, le plus haut niveau depuis 1998.
La pauvreté a entraîné une forte croissance du nombre de cas de suicides aux Etats-Unis. Selon les informations, on enregistre chaque année 32 000 cas de suicides aux Etats-Unis, presque le double des cas de meurtre, dont le nombre est de 18 000, fait savoir le rapport.
Violation des droits des travailleurs
La violation des droits des travailleurs est très grave aux Etats-Unis, indique le rapport.
Selon le journal New York Times, environ 68% des 4 387 travailleurs à bas revenus interrogés lors d’une enquête disent avoir connu une réduction de salaires et 76% d’entre eux ont fait des heures supplémentaires sans être payés correctement.
Le nombre de personnes sans assurance santé n’a cessé d’augmenter pendant huit ans consécutifs, poursuit le rapport.
Les chiffres publiées par le Bureau de recensement des Etats-Unis montrent que 46,3 millions de personnes n’avaient pas d’assurance santé en 2008, représentant 15,4 % de la population totale, en comparaison avec les 45,7 millions en 2007, représentant une hausse consécutive pendant huit ans.
Femmes et enfants, souvent victimes de violence
Les femmes sont souvent victimes de violence et d’agression sexuelles aux Etats-Unis et les enfants sont exposés à la violence et vivent dans la crainte, indique le rapport.
Selon les informations, les Etats-Unis enregistrent le plus fort taux de viols parmi les pays qui fournissent ce genre de statistiques, soit 13 fois de plus que l’Angleterre et 20 fois plus que le Japon.
Reuters a rapporté que selon des interviews de 40 femmes militaires, 10 disent avoir été violées, cinq ont été attaquées sexuellement, y compris une tentative de viol, et 13 ont été victimes de harcèlement sexuel.
Selon USA Today, 1 494 jeunes de moins de 18 ans ont été assassinés en 2008 aux Etats-Unis.
Une enquête, menée entre janvier et mai 2008 par le Département américain à la Justice auprès de 4 549 enfants et adolescents âgés de 17 ans ou moins, a montré que, l’année précédente, 60% des enfants interrogés avaient été exposés de façon directe ou indirecte à la violence.
Piétiner la souveraineté et les droits de l'homme d'autres pays
Les Etats-Unis, avec leur forte puissance militaire, ont poursuit leur hégémonie dans le monde en piétinant la souveraineté d’autres pays et violé leurs droits de l’Homme.
En tant que plus important vendeur d’armes du monde, ses contrats ont aggravé énormément l’instabilité du monde. Les Etats-Unis ont augmenté leurs dépenses militaires qui étaient déjà les plus importantes du monde, de 10% en 2008 à 607 milliards de dollars, soit 42% du total mondial, a indiqué l’agence de presse américaine Associated Press (AP).
Au début de 2010, le gouvernement américain a annoncé un contrat de ventes de 6,4 milliards de dollars à Taiwan, malgré les fortes protestations du gouvernement et du peuple chinois, ce qui a sérieusement porté atteinte aux intérêts de la sécurité nationale de la Chine et excité une forte indignation parmi le peuple chinois.
Les guerres en Irak et en Afghanistan ont imposé un lourd fardeau sur le peuple américain et causé d’énormes pertes humaines et économiques aux peuples d’Irak et d’Afghanistan, indique le rapport.
L’abus sur les prisonniers est l’un des plus grands scandales concernant les droits de l’Homme aux Etats-Unis.
Selon une enquête menée par le Département de la Justice des Etats-unis, 2 000 soldats Talibans qui s’étaient rendus sont morts étouffés par les forces armées afghanes contrôlées par l’armée américaine, indique le rapport.
Les Etats-Unis construisent des bases militaires dans le monde entier et des violations des droits de l’Homme des habitants de ces endroits sont souvent observés.
Les Etats-Unis possèdent actuellement 900 bases militaires dans le monde. Plus de 190 000 militaires et 115 000 autres personnes y sont stationnés.
Ces bases causent de graves dégâts et pollutions à leur environnement. Des substances toxiques causées par des explosions de bombes coûtent la vie à des enfants du voisinage.
Selon certaines informations, vers la fin de la présence des bases militaires américaines de Subic et de Clark, jusqu’à 3 000 plaintes sur le viol de femmes philippines ont été déposées contre des militaires américains, mais elles ont été toutes rejetées, ajoute le rapport.
Source: Changement de société
La Corte Europea dei Diritti Umani ha accolto due giorni fa un ricorso contro la Croazia per la segregazione in classi elementari separate dei bambini rom tra il 1996 e il 2000. Ricordiamo che nello stesso periodo non c'erano classi separate per i bambini serbi perchè questi erano stati tutti espulsi dal paese con le operazioni di pulizia etnica "Lampo" e "Tempesta".
Da: Roma Virtual NetworkData: 18 marzo 2010 9:46:16 GMT+01:00Oggetto: [Romano Liloro] ERTF Press ReleaseEuropean Roma and Travellers Forum
Press ReleaseERTF says: Segregation is wrong yet remains widespread
Strasbourg 18 March: The European Roma and Travellers Forum welcomes the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 16th March 2010 which finds that Croatia violated the European Convention on Human Rights by placing Roma children in segregated classes in primary school.
The applicants are 15 Croatian nationals of Roma origin who were born between 1988 and 1994 and live in Orehovica, Podturen and Trnovec in northern Croatia. The case concerned the applicants’ complaint that they had been segregated at primary school because they were Roma. The applicants attended primary school in the villages of Macinec and Podutren at different times between the years 1996 and 2000. They participated in both Roma-only and mixed classes before leaving school at the age of 15. The applicants complained that they had been denied their right to education and discriminated against in this respect
The Court maintained that the right to primary education is a civil right under Article 2 of Protocol No 1 (right to education) and applicable to this case. It held that the segregation of Roma children is in violation of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) taken in conjunction with Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (right to education), as well as of Article 6 §1 (right to a fair trial within a reasonable time), given the undue delay before the Constitutional Court.
So, although at first glance, this judgement appears to be reassuring news and a positive step in the right direction, it should not overshadow the reality that in many Council of Europe Member States such segregation practices remain in force in one form or another. Yet why should Roma children be seperated in school from their non-Roma classmates? Why should Roma children be placed in “special schools” or classes for children with mental disabilities (despite not having any mental disability themselves)? Why should Roma children be segregated in mainstream Roma-only schools or classes? Why?
The ERTF believes that these tough questions should be asked, especially since we are not just talking about past or current practices but, even more alarmingly, possible future practices.
For example, the European Roma and Travellers Forum cannot but express its deepest concerns regarding the recent proposal by the Slovak Prime Minister to his government to set up a programme aimed at placing as many Roma children as possible in boarding schools and gradually separating them from their regular family lives.
Yet it goes without saying that the separation of children from their families reinforces segregation and exclusion which, in turn, produce emotional and psychological harm in Roma children, in terms of lower self-esteem and self-respect and problems in the development of their identity. So again, the ERTF asks, WHY? The European Roma and Travellers Forum urges the Slovak Prime Minister to withdraw his proposal.
Furthermore, ERTF echoes the recommendations outlined by many international human rights organizations to stop school segregation of Romani children and promote inclusive measures in education, by calling on all the Council of Europe Member States concerned to eliminate the systematic placing of Roma children in special schools and classes, to discontinue psychological testing as a means for assigning children into special education and to ensure inclusive education for all children.
“ERTF strongly believes that it is essential for state leaders to recognize that we have a common destiny in Europe where our children grow up together, knowing and respecting each other, incorporating all diverse backgrounds, and are given the proper educational tools to prepare them for success in our society. All children have the right to an education free from discrimination. Yet if we are to continue along a path of deepening separation and entrenched inequality, this will only diminish our common potential”, insisted Mr. Rudko Kawczynski, President of the European Roma and Travellers Forum.
* * *
The European Roma and Travellers Forum (ERTF), which has a partnership agreement with the Council of Europe and a special status with this institution, is Europe’s largest and most inclusive Roma and Traveller organisation. It brings together Europe’s main international Roma-NGOs and more than 1,500 national Roma and Traveller organisations from most of the Council of Europe member states.
European Roma and Travellers Forum
c/o Council of Europe
F – 67 075 StrasbourgTel.: 00 33 3 90 21 53 50
Email: ertf@...
(francais / italiano)
B. Kouchner: quelli come la Del Ponte sono "bastardi assassini"
In risposta ad un giornalista della edizione in lingua serba di "Voice of America" che gli chiedeva del suo presunto coinvolgimento nel traffico di organi rivelato sul libro di Carla Del Ponte, il Ministro degli Esteri francese Bernard Kouchner ha urlato: "Che idiozie... lei è pazzo, vada a farsi curare... Quale casa gialla? Non sono esistite case gialle, non è mai esistito alcun traffico di organi. Quelli che dicono questo sono dei bastardi e degli assassini!"
IL VIDEO:
Bernard Kouchner - The Yellow House - on serbian "organ harvest" propaganda!!! Kosovo - 1/03/2010
Kušner nazvao novinara ludakom - 3.3.2010
---
8 MARZO 2010
Bernard Kouchner ha negato le accuse di Carla del Ponte
In visita ufficiale in Kosovo, il ministro degli affari esteri francese, Bernard Kouchner, è stato intervistato da un giornalista, il 1° marzo, circa le voci secondo cui sarebbe stato coinvolto nello scandalo del traffico di organi. Diversi media serbi hanno accusato il signor Kouchner di aver coperto tali azioni, quando era alto rappresentante delle Nazioni Unite nella regione (1999-2001).
"Il caso della casa gialla", riferendosi al colore della clinica clandestina dove gli organi stati espiantati a più di 300 civili serbi prigionieri, prima di essere assassinati, è stata attestata dall’ex procuratrice internazionale per i crimini di guerra Carla del Ponte, nel suo libro La Caccia. Io e i criminali di guerra [Feltrinelli, 2009]. Quattro anni dopo le vicende, gli investigatori dalla signora Del Ponte hanno individuato la casa gialla a Burrell (Albania), ma non sono riusciti a trovare elementi di prova per ricostruire la filiera.
Su proposta della delegazione russa, l’Assemblea parlamentare del Consiglio d’Europa ha nominato il senatore svizzero Dick Marty, per aprire una nuova inchiesta.
Nel rispondere alla stampa, Bernard Kouchner non mostra alcuna compassione per le vittime e le loro famiglie. Assai stranamente, ha scelto di negare la complicità passiva a lui imputata, contestando l’esistenza del reato. Inoltre, egli definisce "bastardi assassini" coloro che hanno diffuso questa voce; dichiarazioni che includono anche Carla Del Ponte.
(Traduzione di Alessandro Lattanzio)
---
5 MARS 2010
Bernard Kouchner dément les accusations de Carla del Ponte
En visite officielle au Kosovo, le ministre français des Affaires étrangères, Bernard Kouchner, a été interrogé le 1er mars par un journaliste à propos des rumeurs selon lesquelles il serait impliqué dans le scandale des trafics d’organe.
Plusieurs médias serbes ont accusé M. Kouchner d’avoir couvert ces agissements lorsqu’il était Haut représentant des Nations Unies dans la région (1999-2001).
« L’affaire de la Maison jaune », par référence à la couleur de la clinique clandestine où des organes étaient prélevés sur plus de 300 prisonniers civils serbes avant qu’ils ne soient exécutés, a été attestée par l’ancienne procureur du Tribunal pénal international Carla del Ponte dans son livre La caccia. Io e i criminali di guerra[Version française : La Traque, les criminels de guerre et moi (éd. Héloïse d’Ormesson, 2009)]. Quatre ans après les faits, les enquêteurs de Mme Del Ponte ont localisé la Maison jaune à Burrell (Albanie), mais n’ont pu y trouver d’indices permettant de reconstituer la filière.
Sur proposition de la délégation russe, l’Assemblée parlementaire du Conseil de l’Europe a mandaté le sénateur suisse Dick Marty pour ouvrir une nouvelle enquête.
En répondant à la presse, Bernard Kouchner ne manifeste aucune compassion pour les victimes et leurs familles. Fort étrangement il choisit de démentir la complicité passive qu’on lui impute en niant l’existence du crime. En outre, il qualifie de « salauds et d’assassins » ceux qui colportent cette rumeur ; des propos qui incluent Carla Del Ponte.
---
Vecernje Novosti / B92
Kosovo : Kouchner voit rouge, « j’ai une tête à vendre des organes, moi ? »
Traduit par Persa Aligrudic et Philippe Bertinchamps
Publié dans la presse : 2 mars 2010
Mise en ligne : jeudi 4 mars 2010
Le ministre des Affaires étrangères français, Bernard Kouchner, était en visite le 26 février à Belgrade. L’intensification des rapports bilatéraux, le soutien de la France aux perspectives européennes serbes, l’engagement dans le développement de la région et l’amélioration des rapports entre Belgrade et Pristina, étaient à l’ordre du jour. Il a poursuivi son voyage au Kosovo, où, lors d’une conférence de presse, il a traité un journaliste de Voice of America de « fou ». Celui-ci lui demandait de commenter l’affaire de la « Maison jaune », portant sur le trafic d’organes de Serbes du Kosovo déportés en Albanie révélé par Carla Del Ponte.
Dans l’annonce de sa visite Bernard Kouchner a souligné que malgré le genre de discordances entre Belgrade et Pristina, il y a des domaines où l’on peut parvenir à des ententes avec l’aide de la mission Eulex.
Bernard Kouchner dans son interview exclusive à Novosti a souligné également que l’indépendance du Kosovo est irréversible pour la France, mais que sa reconnaissance n’est pas une condition pour la Serbie de continuer les intégrations européennes
Vecernje Novosti (VN) : Quels sont les messages que vous apportez à Belgrade ?
Bernard Kouchner (BK) : Je viens pour dire aux citoyens de Serbie que nous sommes, et que nous serons avec eux, sur la voie de leur pays vers l’Union européenne. Nous avons été et nous serons actifs au sein de l’UE afin d’accélérer le rapprochement de la Serbie. Après la libéralisation du régime des visas et de l’entrée en vigueur de l’Accord provisoire, il faut désormais avancer vers le statut de candidat et l’ouverture des négociations à l’adhésion.
VN : Comment estimez-vous les efforts actuels que fait la Serbie sur sa route vers l’UE ?
BK : Les efforts que fait la Serbie sont considérables et je le salue. Je connais l’engagement du Président Tadić et de tout le gouvernement afin que la Serbie continue ses avancées. Je me réjouis que ces efforts soient reconnus par tous les États membres lorsqu’ils ont décidé en décembre dernier de débloquer l’Accord provisoire en signe de reconnaissance pour les progrès de votre collaboration avec le Tribunal international pour les crimes en ex Yougoslavie. Mais il y a encore du chemin à faire pour atteindre la pleine collaboration avec le tribunal. La commission européenne est optimiste quant à la capacité de la Serbie de trouver rapidement des solutions aux divers problèmes techniques.
VN : Quand l’intégration à l’UE des pays des Balkans occidentaux, en particulier de la Serbie, aura-t-elle lieu ?
BK : Les progrès réalisés ces derniers mois ont été très importants en Serbie comme dans les autres pays de la région. Je pense en particulier à la libéralisation du régime des visas. L’intégration des pays pourrait, bien sûr, être plus rapide, mais soyons clairs : les délais nécessaires dépendent des progrès des pays candidats. C’est pourquoi il faut travailler, travailler et encore travailler. Le travail technique que l’on attend de tous les pays mais aussi le travail commun à la réconciliation qu’il reste à finir jusqu’au bout entre les pays de la région. La candidature de la Serbie, comme celle de ses voisins, sera évaluée selon ses mérites. Plus vite vous procéderez aux difficiles réformes, plus vite vous entrerez à l’UE. Je connais la détermination de votre gouvernement. J’ai confiance en lui pour qu’il redouble d’efforts et parvienne ainsi à s’intégrer à la famille européenne. Nous serons là pour l’aider dans chacune de ses étapes jusqu’à la conclusion des négociations.
VN :Comment voyez-vous le rôle stabilisant de la Serbie dans la région ?
BK : C’est un rôle crucial ! Ayant à l’esprit son histoire et son influence, la Serbie a une responsabilité particulière pour le renforcement de la paix et la poursuite du processus de réconciliation dans la région. Nous comptons sur elle pour modérer les rapports avec tous ses voisins, afin qu’ils continuent ensemble leur route vers l’Europe. A cet égard l’avancée a été importante ces dix dernières années, mais il reste encore beaucoup à faire pour que leurs rapports soient aussi forts et amicaux que ceux des pays de l’UE.
VN : Est-ce que la Serbie entrera dans l’UE avec ou sans le Kosovo ?
BK : L’indépendance du Kosovo est irréversible, il ne peut y avoir aucun doute à ce sujet. Naturellement, parmi les conditions à remplir pour l’adhésion, et que Belgrade connaît, il n’y a pas la reconnaissance de l’indépendance. Mais, c’est un fait que nous n’avons jamais caché car avec nos amis nous parlons franchement. La Serbie, comme tout autre pays candidat, doit régler ses problèmes avec ses voisins, tous ses voisins, avant d’entrer à l’UE, ses voisins qui ont également l’intention de devenir membres de l’UE.
Signature du partenariat stratégique
VN : Comment estimez-vous le niveau actuel des relations franco-serbes ?
BK : Nous avons de très bonnes relations bilatérales ! Les visites réciproques plus fréquentes entre Paris et Belgrade témoignent de nos étroites relations et de notre dialogue continu. Le secrétaire d’État chargé du commerce était chez nous, je suis là maintenant et j’espère que j’accompagnerai bientôt le Président Sarkozy en visite à Belgrade. Il faut en fait que nous allions plus loin : c’est l’objectif de l’Accord du partenariat stratégique et de la collaboration que souhaitent les présidents Sarkozy et Tadić, accord qui sera bientôt signé.
Bernard Kouchner s’emporte au Kosovo
Le mardi suivant, le ministre des Affaires étrangères s’est rendu au Kosovo, notamment dans l’enclave serbe de Gračanica.
Selon un bulletin de KIM Radio, la radio de l’enclave serbe de Gračanica, un journaliste de Voice of America, Budimir Ničić, a demandé au ministre français des Affaires étrangères Bernard Kouchner ce qu’il pensait de l’affaire dite de la « Maison jaune » qui avait éclaté à la suite d’allégations sur un trafic d’organes de Serbes du Kosovo kidnappés et déportés en Albanie en 1999.
En mars 2008, le Parquet de Serbie pour les crimes de guerre avait ouvert une enquête sur cette affaire. En janvier 2010, un rapporteur du Conseil de l’Europe, Dick Marty, se rendait au Kosovo accompagné de deux enquêteurs. Enfin, le 23 février dernier, un haut-fonctionnaire des Nations unies, Philip Alston, demandait à l’Albanie de coopérer pleinement à l’enquête.
Budimir Ničić a demandé au chef de la diplomatie française de réagir à des accusations de familles de victimes selon lesquelles il aurait pris part à ce trafic. Bernard Kouchner a répondu en s’esclaffant : « La ventes des organes ! Mais vous êtes malade, non ? J’ai une tête à vendre des organes, moi ? Mais vous êtes fou, vous croyez n’importe quelle connerie. Rada [Radmila Trajković, directrice de l’hôpital de Gračanica et représentante du Conseil exécutif du Comité national serbe du Kosovo et Metohija] et moi, on aurait volé des cadavres pour vendre des organes ? Mais à qui ? Ne croyez pas ces bêtises. ».
Quant à savoir s’il était au courant de l’existence de la « Maison jaune », Bernard Kouchner a répondu au journaliste de Voice of America : « C’est quoi, les maisons jaunes ? Quelles maisons jaunes ? Pourquoi jaunes ? Monsieur, vous devriez aller consulter. Il n’y a pas eu de maisons jaunes, il n’y a pas eu de ventes d’organes. Les gens qui disent ça sont des salauds et des assassins ! », a-t-il déclaré avant de s’en aller.
Les allégations de trafics d’organes avaient été rendues publiques dans un livre publié par l’ancienne Procureur générale du Tribunal pénal international pour l’ex-Yougoslavie (TPIY) Carla Del Ponte, La Traque. Des centaines de civils serbes auraient été kidnappés en 1999 au Kosovo par l’Armée de libération du Kosovo (UÇK) et transportés vers le nord de l’Albanie où leurs organes auraient été prélevés et vendus au marché noir.
Les individus kidnappés auraient été séquestrés et opérés dans une maison aux façades jaunes.
Bernard Kouchner, qui fut Haut représentant des Nations unies au Kosovo entre 1999 et 2001, était en visite ce mardi dans la nouvelle commune de Gračanica. Il s’est rendu au monastère, puis à l’hôpital où il s’est entretenu avec Radmila Trajković.
Budimir Ničić s’est dit « blessé et insulté » par la réaction de Bernard Kouchner. De son côté, Radmila Trajković a affirmé « comprendre » que le ministre se soit emporté.
---
BIRN
L’Albanie veut bien coopérer dans l’affaire du trafic d’organes
Traduit par Jacqueline Dérens
Publié dans la presse : 9 mars 2010
Mise en ligne : dimanche 14 mars 2010
Le ministre albanais des Affaires étrangères, Ilir Meta, a annoncé que Tirana acceptait de coopérer avec les institutions internationales dans l’affaire du trafic d’organes qu’aurait mené l’UCK. L’ancienne procureure du TPI, Carla Del Ponte a fait ressurgir cette affaire en l’évoquant dans ses mémoires.
Le ministre des Affaires étrangères albanais Ilir Meta a annoncé que son pays voulait bien coopérer avec les institutions internationales dans l’enquête sur l’affaire du trafic d’organes.
Dans un entretien avec l’agence de presse albanaise ATA, Ilir Meta a déclaré que le gouvernement albanais « a coopéré étroitement et sans réserves avec le Tribunal pénal international pour l’ancienne Yougoslavie, en particulier avec l’équipe qui s’est rendue en Albanie en 2003 pour enquêter sur des allégations qui se sont révélées infondées ».
Cependant, le rapporteur des Nations unies pour les droits de l’homme, Philip Alston, à la fin de sa visite en Albanie en février 2010 avait accusé l’Albanie d’entraver une enquête indépendante sur des soupçons concernant des combattants albanais qui auraient tué puis fait un trafic d’organes des Serbes prisonniers pendant le conflit au Kosovo en 1999.
Ilir Meta a qualifié ces accusations d’infondées, mais ajouté que le gouvernement albanais était déterminé à compléter la procédure d’enquête « une fois pour toutes ».
Après avoir recueilli preuves et témoignages auprès de plus de 130 témoins par le procureur de Serbie pour les crimes de guerre, la Serbie avait demandé une enquête sur des accusations selon lesquelles des combattants albanais auraient capturé près de 400 serbes au Kosovo puis les auraient tués en Albanie dans le but de vendre leurs organes au marché noir.
Carla Del Ponte, l’ancienne procureure générale du TPIY, parle à nouveau de ces allégations dans ses mémoires.
Tirana avait rejeté la requête de la Serbie l’an dernier, mais ces accusations réitérées avaient amené le Conseil de l’Europe à mandater l’ancien procureur suisse, Dick Marty, à ouvrir une enquête sur cette affaire, actuellement en cours.
(deutsch / english.
Sulla partecipazione del Montenegro alla occupazione neocoloniale dell'Afghanistan / On Montenegro and Afghanistan see also:
Clinton and Djukanovic: Montenegro in NATO... to provide soldiers for occupying Afghanistan / Montenegro as transit for drugs from Afghanistan / Monténégro : mercenaire en Afghanistan, un boulot qui rapporte gros
Montenegro drawing closer to NATO
1) Hilfstruppen (GFP 17.03.2010)
2) Hillary Rodham Clinton: Remarks With Montenegrin Prime Minister Milo Djukanovic After their Meeting (January 20, 2010)
3) Montenegro drawing closer to NATO (February 22, 2010)
=== 1 ===
Hilfstruppen
17.03.2010
Fest in russischer Hand
D-Mark und Euro
Die ersten Einsätze
Mit deutschen Waffen
Nummer vier
Il Coordinamento Nazionale per la Jugoslavia - onlus aderisce convintamente ed invita tutti a partecipare alla manifestazione antimilitarista che si terrà a Roma nell'ottavo anniversario della barbara aggressione contro l'Iraq ed a pochi giorni dall'undicesimo anniversario dei vigliacchi bombardamenti contro Serbia e Montenegro:
CONTRO TUTTE LE GUERRE – PER LA PACE PREVENTIVA19 marzo 2003 - 19 marzo 2010Non in nostro nomeCHIEDIAMOIl ritiro immediato di tutte le truppe occupanti dall’Afghanistan e dall’Iraq (inclusi i contractors)La fine della pulizia etnica israeliana a Gerusalemme Est e nelle altre città della Cisgiordania, dell’assedio di Gaza, della repressione in KurdistanLo stop ai preparativi di guerra contro l’IranNell’anniversario dei bombardamenti sull’Iraq nel 2003 scendiamo in piazza in Italia come negli Stati Uniti per dire basta alla complicità dei nostri paesi con la guerra, le occupazioni e l’oppressione coloniale contro altri popoli.Venerdi 19 marzo scendiamo in piazza in Italia insieme a chi il 20 marzo manifesterà nelle città degli Stati Uniti (Washington, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago) per il ritiro delle truppe dall’Afghanistan e dall’Iraq; insieme a chi in Gran Bretagna sostiene la battaglia di Joe Glenton e degli altri soldati che si rifiutano di continuare a uccidere ed essere uccisi in Afghanistan, insieme ai palestinesi che si stanno opponendo alla pulizia etnica israeliana a Gerusalemme e nelle altre città della Cisgiordania e all’assedio di Gaza, insieme al popolo curdo che resiste alla repressione turca.CHIEDIAMOLa riduzione delle astronomiche spese militari – sempre in aumento – in favore di maggiori investimenti sociali e la sostituzione della cultura di guerra al terrorismo (che ha prodotto Guantanamo, prigioni segrete e soppressione di molti diritti civili) con una cultura fondata sulla pace, il diritto e l’equa condivisione delle risorse attraverso veri negoziatiChe il governo italiano ritiri le truppe nel mattatoio afghano, smantelli le armi nucleari stoccate nelle basi militari di Aviano e Ghedi, cessi di sperperare miliardi di euro per armamenti e di fornire ufficialmente armi, investimenti economici, collaborazioni scientifiche al governo israeliano condannato dalle istituzioni internazionali per la costruzione del Muro di segregazione, per i crimini di guerra a Gaza e l’occupazione coloniale dei Territori Palestinesi. Chiediamo la revoca degli accordi militari, commerciali, scientifici, culturali tra le istituzioni italiane e quelle israeliane;Noi, in quanto cittadini italiani, statunitensi, europei, palestinesi, israeliani, curdi non accettiamo di essere considerati complici di questa politica di oppressione e di guerre preventive, chiediamo il ritiro delle truppe dall’Afghanistan e dall’Iraq, la cessazione di ogni complicità con gli apparati di guerra (basi militari, nuovi armamenti, spese militari), la revoca della partecipazione statunitense, italiana ed europea al vergognoso embargo contro la popolazione palestinese di Gaza ormai da quattro anni sotto assedioVenerdi 19 marzo, ore 17.00 Manifestazione a piazza MontecitorioCircolo Arci Arcobaleno, Statunitensi per la pace e la giustizia, Rete Disarmiamoli, Rete Sempreocontrolaguer ra, Forum Palestina, Un Ponte per..., Campagna Stop Agrexco, Coordinamento Kurdistan, Coordinamento Nazionale per la Jugoslavia - onlus ... (altre adesioni si stanno raccogliendo)
Avni Er, oppositore politico turco, è attualmente rinchiuso nel CIE di Bari Palese e a rischio di estradizione in Turchia.
Aggiornamenti:
- 15/3/2010
- aggiornamenti sull'appello di ARCI ed altri del 1/3/2010:
- 11/3/2010
- articolo uscito su Liberazione:
- 9/3/2010
- Il Re E Il Povero Garofano. Favola Di Avni Er
- 7/3/2010
- intervista a Radio Onda Rossa:
- Ascolta 15 minuti https://www.autistici.org/ondarossa/archivio/rep/100306er_avni.mp3
- 1/3/2010
- APPELLO PER AVNI ER:
- http://www.arci.it/dwn.php?trigger=8ZNAAA
- http://reteantirazzista.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/appello-per-avni-er/
- manifestazione di solidarietà a Torino:
- fine febbraio 2010:
- intervista a Radio Black Out di Torino:
La documentazione passata sul caso di Avni Er è sul nostro sito, alla pagina: https://www.cnj.it/INIZIATIVE/avni.htm
---
Avni Er, giornalista turco, da circa tre settimane è trattenuto nel CIE di Bari.
A seguito della richiesta d'asilo politico, la scorsa settimana è stato ascoltato dalla competente Commissione Territoriale che dovrà decidere se accogliere la sua richiesta o rigettarla. Nell'immediatezza del suo trasferimento a Bari, è stato promosso un appello che ha raccolto un grande consenso. Hanno aderito associazioni come l'Arci, l'Asgi, Libera e il Cir, rappresentanti di organizzazioni come il Cnca, Sos razzismo, Centro Astalli, Save the cildren, Banca Etica e ancora uomini e donne della politica e del mondo universitario.
Allo stato attuale, non si sa ancora nulla sul futuro di Avni Er.
Esprimiamo preoccupazione per la sua vicenda e per l'eventuale trasferimento in Turchia, e temiamo per la sua vita.
Infatti contro Avni pendono due ordini di arresto in contumacia emessi dalla Autorità Giudiziaria turca: nella misura in cui l'interessato dovesse essere espulso verso detta Nazione, sarebbe immediatamente arrestato e condotto in carcere.
Il timore è pertanto giustificato da quelle che appaiono le condizioni in cui sono costretti a vivere i detenuti arrestati o condannati per motivi politici, i quali vengono sottoposti a durissime condizioni di vita all'interno delle carceri di "tipo F", ove l'utilizzo di trattamenti disumani e degradanti, il ricorso alla tortura fino alla morte rappresentano pratiche di uso quotidiano secondo quanto costantemente denunciato dalle Organizzazioni internazionali Amnesty International e Human Right Watch nonché dalla Associazione per i Diritti Umani turca (IHD), tanto che la stessa Corte di Giustizia Europea ha reiteratamente condannato detta Nazione a causa delle violazioni delle disposizioni di Diritto internazionali previste in materia perpetrate dalla Turchia
In Turchia la semplice manifestazione delle proprie opinioni politiche, ove le stesse siano difformi da quelle espresse dal regime vigente, comporta la immediata carcerazione preventiva e l'applicazione di sanzione detentive che in Italia e in tutte le Nazioni ove vige lo Stato di diritto non avrebbero e non hanno ragion d'essere.
La recente messa al bando del Partito per una società democratica (DTP) , l'arresto di oltre 1500 componenti di detta formazione politica (membri del parlamento, consiglieri regionali, provinciali e comunali, sindaci, ecc.), la privazione della libertà imposta ad oltre 3.000 minorenni aventi una età ricompresa tra i 14 ed i 17 anni - con l'accusa di aver compiuto atti terroristici e che costringe i minori a vivere la reclusione in strutture penitenziarie insieme ad imputati o condannati maggiorenni -, rappresenta la ennesima prova di forza del governo turco contro la popolazione kurda.
Il tutto nonostante da oltre un anno le forze politiche e la popolazione kurda cerchino di promuovere una soluzione pacifica del conflitto che ha fino ad oggi prodotto tante morti ed un esodo forzato della popolazione anche in conseguenza della distruzione di interi villaggi da parte delle forze militari turche.
Facciamo appello al Governo italiano affinchè Avni Er possa restare in Italia, che venga applicata la normativa internazionale a tutela dei Diritti Umani ratificata e resa esecutiva nel nostro Paese; che Avni Er non venga espulso e che gli sia garantita ogni forma di tutela con il rilascio di un permesso di soggiorno che gli permetta di evitare la morte e ricostruirsi una vita dignitosa in Italia, sulla base dei principi affermati dalla Costituzione (art. 10 Cost.) e dai Trattati e dalla Convenzioni internazionali ovunque vigenti .
---
APPELLO PER AVNI ER
---
Qualche giorno fa è stato trasferito nel CIE di Bari il cittadino turco Avni Er rispetto al quale il governo turco di Ankara ha avanzato tempo addietro formale richiesta di estradizione.
Avni Er è colpevole solo di aver svolto nel corso degli anni una puntuale denuncia delle violazioni dei diritti umani e della libertà d’informazione in Turchia.
Avni Er è un oppositore politico, accusato di appartenere al partito comunista DHKP-C . Il 1° aprile 2004 un’operazione repressiva ha provocato l’arresto di 82 persone in Turchia ed altre 59 persone tra Germania, Olanda, Belgio, Grecia ed Italia.
Tra loro giornalisti dell’opposizione, membri di organizzazioni democratiche e per la difesa dei diritti umani, avvocati ed artisti.
Avni Er, a seguito di un processo scandaloso durante il quale testimoniarono contro di lui, a volto coperto, i torturatori turchi, fu condannato dalla Corte di Assise di Perugia nel 2006, con successiva conferma della Corte d’Appello di Perugia.
Seguì una vasta campagna di mobilitazione e sensibilizzazione cui aderirono diverse associazioni nazionali (Arci, CRVG- Conferenza nazionale del volontariato della giustizia, Antigone) e vari esponenti politici; ci fu una dichiarazione a tutela dell’incolumità di Avni Er e per il rispetto delle norme internazionali a difesa dei diritti dell’individuo da parte dell’europarlamentare Giulietto Chiesa; ci furono molti ordini del giorno da parte del Consiglio provinciale di Lecce (19 marzo 2008), del Consiglio Regionale della Toscana, della Sardegna e della Campania.
Anche il Consiglio Regionale della Puglia, in data 24 giugno 2008, sottoscrisse una mozione contro l’estradizione di Avni Er in Turchia, con esplicito riferimento all’art.10 della Costituzione italiana che recita: “Lo straniero, al quale sia impedito nel suo paese l’effettivo esercizio delle libertà democratiche garantite dalla Costituzione italiana, ha diritto d’asilo nel territorio della Repubblica secondo le condizioni stabilite dalla legge“.
Ricordiamo che secondo associazioni internazionali ed autorevoli come Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, nonché la Commissione ONU per i diritti umani ed il comitato Europeo per la prevenzione della tortura, in Turchia vi è il fondato timore di violazioni dei diritti, di trattamenti inumani e degradanti, di tortura.
Ricordiamo inoltre che il curdo Ocalan, nonostante il riconoscimento dell’asilo costituzionale rilasciato dal governo italiano, è da 11 anni detenuto in regime di isolamento totale nell’isola di Imrali. Infine, a dimostrazione della condizione politica in Turchia, citiamo il tentativo di qualche giorno fa dell’ennesimo colpo di stato manu militari.
Allo stato attuale, Avni Er ha inoltrato formale richiesta d’asilo nel nostro paese e, per quanto affermato, anche in considerazione che la Corte d’Appello d’Anversa il 7 febbraio 2008, impegnata a giudicare 11 militanti del DHKP-C, si è rifiutata di riconoscere tale organizzazione quale “gruppo terroristico”, prosciogliendo tutti gli imputati;
CHIEDIAMO
a tutte le forze democratiche, ai partiti, alle associazioni, alla società, ai sindacati, di aderire e sottoscrivere l’appello in favore di Avni Er, affinchè GLI VENGANO RICONOSCIUTE TUTTE LE FORME DI TUTELA ED IL PRINCIPIO DI NON RESPINGIMENTO.
Primi firmatari:
ARCI, Ass. Gruppo Lavoro Rifugiati (Bari), Reteantirazzista (Bari), Undesiderioincomune (Bari), Ass. Saro-wiwa (Bari) Rifondazione Comunista (Bari), Magda Terrevoli (assessore regione Puglia), Silvia Godelli (assessore regione Puglia), Piero Manni (consigliere regione Puglia), Patrizio Gonnella (Antigone), Fulvio Vassallo Paleologo (Università di Palermo), Walter Peruzzi (dir. Guerre e Pace), Paola Altrui (Roma), Patrizia Sentinelli, Loredana de Petris, Massimiliano Smeriglio (assessore Provincia di Roma), Gianluca Peciola (consigliere Provincia di Roma), Onofrio Romano (Università di Bari), Monica mc Britton (Università del Salento), Stefano Cristante (Università del Salento), Vito Lisi, veterinario di Tricase, Michele Rizzi (candidato alla presidenza della Regione Puglia), Massimo Bonfatti (presidente dell’organizzazione per il volontariato”Mondo in cammino”), Donato Pellegrino (consigliere regionale PSI), Vinicio De Vito (coordinamento regionale “Sinistra e Libertà”), Pati Luceri (docente del Liceo Stampacchia di Tricase), Gino Stasi (responsabile di Medicina Democratica, Brindisi), Bobo Aprile (responsabile COBAS di Brindisi), Simone Chiga (presidente Laboratorio delle idee, Zollino), Riccardo Rossi (Rete 28 Aprile, CGIL), Circolo aziendale ferrovieri”Spartaco Lavagnini” – Firenze, Circolo giovanile di Rifondazione comunista – Casamassima, Senza Confine (Roma), Sabino De Razza (segret. provinc. PRC – Bari), Teresa Masciopinto (Bari), Associazione Solidarietà Proletaria (ASP) – Napoli, Circoscrizione dei soci di Banca Etica Bari, Nicola Fratoianni, Onofrio Introna (ass. regione Puglia), Corsina De Palo (insegnante – Bari), Mara Clemente, Silvia Cigoli, Tonia Guerra (segreteria regionale PRC – Puglia), ...
MILANO: Dopo l'ennesima morte di un ragazzino in un rogo della povertà, lunedì 15 alle 18.00 a Palazzo Marino in consiglio comunale con il braccio listato a lutto, per dire BASTA agli sgomberi e chiedere un utilizzo a fini di politiche abitative e attive del lavoro dei 13 MILIONI stanziati per i Rom. Si invita a portare anche lumini e mazzi di fiori.
Se puoi cerca di venire e di trasmettere questo messaggio ai tuoi contatti. (a cura di Ivana K. e Consuelo P.)
Ancora un bambino vittima della caccia al Rom a Milano
Enea Emil è l’ennesimo bambino rom morto nel rogo provocato dalla stufa che doveva riscaldarlo. Viveva in un rifugio di fortuna dopo essere stato sgomberato con la sua famiglia dal campo di via Triboniano dove, se non altro, avrebbe avuto quel minimo che garantisce la sopravivenza di un essere umano e una piccola speranza per il proprio futuro.
Penso che la perdita della vita e del futuro di un bambino, stroncati in questo modo a Milano, la città dell’ EXPO, benestante e “accogliente”, significa una grande sconfitta della nostra società.
Come donna e madre, cittadina di questo paese e di questa città invito tutti coloro che hanno ancora un po’ di umanità nei loro cuori di non rimanere muti davanti alla politica feroce degli sgomberi e della “caccia al rom” che quotidianamente lascia centinaia di bambini al freddo e senza riparo, una politica che ritengo direttamente responsabile della morte di Emil. Questo mio appello è motivato dall’amore nei confronti del mio popolo, ma anche dall’amore per questo paese che sento mio e nel quale vorrei che a ciascuno, a cominciare dagli ultimi, venisse riconosciuta la dignità di essere umano.
Dijana Pavlovic
Vicepresidente Federazione Rom e Sinti insieme
dijana.pavlovic@ fastwebnet. it
Milano, 13 marzo 2010
Breaking Yugoslavia
interview
by Diana Johnstone
Global Research, March 10, 2010 | |
New Left Project - 2010-03-03 |
Diana Johnstone is the author of ‘Fools’ Crusade: Yugoslavia, NATO and Western Delusions’. She spoke to NLP on the wars in the former Yugoslavia, western involvement and the trial of Slobodan Milosevic. What was your view of Yugoslavia before its dissolution. What was admirable about that society? What was not so admirable? Every society has its good and bad points, and I am not qualified to make an overall judgement of such a complex society as former Yugoslavia. From my personal experience, what was not admirable was that in Tito’s lifetime it was a personal dictatorship. Tito didn’t run everything, but he had the right of final decision in case of conflict. The harshest repression was reserved for communists loyal to the Soviet Union after Tito’s break with Stalin in 1948. But repression is not all that is wrong with a dictatorship, a system which encourages hypocrisy and lack of recourse for unfair or unwise measures. Nevertheless, despite the undemocratic regime, it was always easy to find critical intellectuals in Yugoslavia who thought for themselves and said what they thought. Yugoslavia’s "self-managed socialism" was certainly an improvement over the Soviet model. It provided full employment, which is what people most acutely miss today. It is noteworthy that many former critics of the socialist system today declare that the so-called free market democracy they have now is much worse. As the only European member of the Non-Aligned Movement, Yugoslavia enjoyed privileged relations with Third World countries, notably in the Arab world. The Yugoslav passport was welcome everywhere, and Yugoslavs enjoyed their freedom to travel throughout the world as citizens of a country whose international prestige was great for its size. Tito’s policy toward the great ethnic diversity of Yugoslavia had been to give considerable cultural and linguistic rights to each group, a policy which is pursued today by Serbia – although not by Croatia and Slovenia. (For example, Serbia provides bilingual schools using the mother tongue of Hungarian, Romanian, Bulgarian, Albanian and Slovak minorities.) If, in 1990, there had been a national referendum on the subject, I have little doubt that an overwhelming majority of Yugoslavs would have voted to maintain the federation. But elections were held only within the various republics, enabling the bureaucracies of Croatia and Sloveniato promote their secessionist projects. You argue that Western governments bear significant responsibility for the wars in the former Yugoslavia by encouraging the secession of the constituent republics. Was the West not merely supporting those states in their struggle for self-determination? There is nothing in international law or diplomatic practice that justifies secession from an existing state on grounds of "self-determination". There is great confusion and hypocrisy on this point. First one can point to comparisons: Why did the United States not support the struggle of the Basques against Spain, which has been going on much longer? Why did they not support Corsicans against France, Scottish nationalists against Britain, the Kurds against Turkey – a violent struggle with deep historic roots, including Western promises to Kurds after World War I? Why did they not support the separatist "Padania" movement that was growing about the same time in northern Italy, seeking separation from the poorer south of Italy – a movement that had a great deal in common with the Slovenian separatist movement? The answer is obvious: theUnited States does not support separatist movements in countries they consider their allies. The targets are either countries they consider rivals, like Russia or China, or countries that are too weak to resist, and where they can obtain totally dependent client states from the breakup – which is what happened with Yugoslavia. Second there are the simple facts of the matter. History, to start with. Former Yugoslavia was not formed by conquest, but by a voluntary association after World War I as the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. The Croats and Serbs speak essentially the same south Slavic language, and Slovenian is quite similar. This association was sought by Croatian leaders who wished to leave Austro-Hungarian rule and who actually coined the word "Yugoslavia", meaning land of southern Slavs. Since Serbia already existed as an independent country, Serb leaders were wary of this union, but accepted it under urging from the Western powers, France and Britain. After Tito’s death in 1980, Yugoslavia entered an extremely clumsy phase of political transition, which was distorted by severe economic regression caused by the debt crisis. Since Tito’s method of rule had been to respond to unrest by decentralization rather than by democratization, the local Communist parties in each republic of the federal state, as well as the autonomous provinces within Serbia, enjoyed considerable autonomy. Rivalry between the party bureaucracies undermined national unity. The dynamic thus tended toward dissolution rather than democratization. This trend was encouraged by outside forces (German and Austrian organizations represented by the heir to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Otto von Habsburg, who was very active in this phase) which supported secession of the parts of Yugoslavia which had belonged to the Austro-Hungarian Empire before World War I, Croatia and Slovenia. Now, assuming that "self-determination" would lead to dissolution of the federation, there was the crucial issue of how this would be done. The Serbs interpreted the constitution to argue that Yugoslavia was a political union of three peoples – Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, who would have to negotiate the terms of secession. The Slovenes and especially the Croats maintained that the constituent units were the "republics" in the boundaries set for them by Tito during World War II, which left sizeable Serb populations in both Croatia (about 12%) and Bosnia-Herzegovina (a relative majority up until the 1971 census). Germany persuaded the United States and the European Union to accept the Croatian claim without ever seriously considering the Serbian argument. This was unacceptable to the Serb minority in Croatia who had been persecuted by Nazi-sponsored independent Croatia during World War II, and whose "self-determination" was thereby denied. This was the cause of the civil war in Croatia. Both Slovenia and Croatia enjoyed full equality and autonomy within Yugoslavia. In no way could they be considered oppressed minorities. Tito was a Croat as was the last functioning prime minister of Yugoslavia, Ante Markovic, not to mention a disproportionate number of senior officers in the Yugoslav armed forces. As the richest part of Yugoslavia, Slovenia’s desire to secede was based almost solely on the desire to "jump the queue" and join the rich EU ahead of the rest of the country, which it succeeded in doing. The Croatian secessionism movement was nationalistic, with strong racist overtones, and was strongly supported by a Croatian diaspora with crucial political influence in Germany and inWashington (in the office of Senator Bob Dole). In the absence of any legal justification for unnegotiated secession, nationalist leaders in bothSlovenia and Croatia provoked units of the Yugoslav army stationed in their territory and used the inevitable response as their justification for seceding. This succeeded only because it was supported by Western governments and media – otherwise the Yugoslav army would have held the country together. Instead, the collapsing Yugoslav army effort to preserve the federation, as it was supposed to do, was denounced as a "Serbian invasion". Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic handled this crisis badly, but he did not, as accused, instigate the dissolution ofYugoslavia. You have suggested that there are certain continuities between the policies of the German government and the objectives of the Third Reich in the Balkans. Can you describe those continuities for us? Even before the Third Reich, the government of Kaiser Wilhelm and even more the democratic Weimar Republic supported self-determination of ethnic minorities, and the Federal Republic of Germany continues to do so today, for reasons of national interest and ideology. The "revenge" against Serbia, and detachment of former Austro-Hungarian territories within Yugoslavia, harks back to World War I. Of course, the Third Reich cut Yugoslavia into pieces, and on that point the 1991 German policy was more than disturbingly reminiscent, it was essentially the same.Germany has reasons for wanting to bring Slovenia and Croatia into its own sphere of influence. In a sense I am more critical of Western governments which followed the German policy without bothering or daring to evaluate the situation clearly for themselves. As this turned out to be disastrous, they had to blame the devil Milosevic for everything, in order to cover their own mistakes. Why did the United States so strongly support Bosnian secession? I think this support was the product of a number of factors. One, pointed out by former State Department official George Kenney, was the influence of media reports, in turn heavily influenced by a propaganda campaign run by Ruder Finn public relations agency on behalf of the government of Croatia, and later the Bosnian Muslims, which succeeded in presenting the Serbs as "new Nazis". This public relations campaign was hugely successful with the public and politicians alike. American foreign policy-making can be vulnerable to the propaganda of lobbies, and the Croatian lobby was active and influential. The Bosnian lobby was smaller but very well connected, notably through Mohammed Sacirbey, the American son of a colleague of Bosnian Muslim leader Alija Izetbegovic who chose him to be Bosnia’s ambassador to the United States. There was a natural class affinity between American officials like Richard Holbrooke and the Bosnian Muslims, who had been the upper class under theOttoman Empire and presented themselves as more anti-communist than the Serbs. A second element was that since Germany was emerging as the sponsor of Croatia, the United States could have its own client state by supporting the Bosnian Muslims. Some US leaders thought that siding with the Muslim party in Bosnia would make a good impression in the Muslim world, counterbalancing US support to Israel. The late influential Congressman Tom Lantos, who was chairman of the House foreign affairs committee, called US support for the Bosnian Muslims and Kosovo independence "just a reminder to the predominantly Muslim-led governments in this world" that "the United States leads the way for creation of a predominantly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe." Support to Bosnian Muslims was strongly advocated by the pro-Israel neo-conservatives. It is hard to believe that neo-con guru Richard Perle served as advisor to Muslim leader Izetbegovic at the Dayton peace talks with no private agenda of his own. The Clinton administration found it natural to do a favor to the Afghan mujahidin (which then included Osama bin Laden), whom they had supported and used against the Soviet Union, by helping them fight the Orthodox Christian Serbs in the Bosnian civil war. But perhaps the main cause should be seen in the main effect: to reassert United States supremacy in Europe. The August 1995 NATO bombing "marked a historic development in post-Cold War relations between Europe and the United States", wrote Richard Holbrooke in his memoirs, citing columnist William Pfaff who alone seemed to get the point: "The United States today is again Europe’s leader: there is no other." (Richard Holbrooke, To End a War, Random House, 1998, p.101.) By the policy of an "even playing field", the United States created a stalemate between the Bosnian parties which allowed Holbrooke to take charge of what he called "the Bosnian end game" at Dayton. The United States was able to pose as "the indispensable nation". Some have accused you of downplaying or even denying the Srebrenica massacre. How do you respond to such accusations? First of all, I think these accusations are designed primarily to distract public attention from the main focus of my writing on Yugoslavia, and in particular my book, Fools’ Crusade: Yugoslavia, NATO and Western Delusions. That focus is political. As the title indicates, my book is not about Srebrenica. It is about the historical and political background, and the deception and self-deception involved in media coverage and Western policy-making that led to the illegal NATO war of aggression in 1999. The only reason I wrote about Srebrenica at all is that I could not very well avoid the subject, but I stated from the start I was not writing about what happened at Srebrenica (on which I claim no special knowledge) but about the political uses of it. I am not a war correspondent but a political analyst. The trouble is that some people do not welcome political analysis of the Balkan conflicts, and use Srebrenica to ban it. If mothers are weeping, how can anyone engage in such a heartless exercise as political analysis? Judging complex events solely on the basis of images and emotions, which are often deceptive, is infantile. But we are living in a period of infantile regression. For instance, the wives and mothers of the men who were killed deserve sympathy, but is their individual grief any greater if their son was one of several hundred or one of several thousand? Why this insistence on a particular number, which has not been clearly proved? Isn’t it possible, and even likely, that the genuine grief of mourning women is exploited for political ends? How many people are in a position to know exactly what happened at Srebrenica? Where are the documents, where are the photographs? Yet people who know nothing are ready to consider it scandalous if someone says openly, "I don’t know exactly what happened." I do know that from the very start of the Yugoslav tragedy, there were significant massacres of Serb civilians (for instance, in the town ofGospic in Croatia) that were studiously ignored in the West. But I do not care to engage in competitive victimhood. As for Srebrenica, certainly any execution of prisoners is a war crime and deserves punishment, even if the figure of 8,000 is certainly exaggerated, since it includes men who died in ambush while trying to escape, or even men who actually did escape. But whatever the number of victims, a single massacre of military-age men while sparing women and children cannot in my opinion be correctly described as "genocide" – unless the term "genocide" is redefined to fit the single case of Srebrenica. And this is precisely what was done by the International Criminal Tribunal on former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague. In order to convict General Radislav Krstic (who was not even present at the scene) of complicity in "genocide", the ICTY judges ruled in August 2001 that killing a large number of Muslim men from Srebrenica was "genocide" because of the "patriarchal" nature of their society. Women and children survivors were too insignificant in such a patriarchal society to matter! This preposterous verdict simply confirmed the obvious fact that ICTY is working for those who set it up, choose its judges and pay its expenses: that is, essentially, NATO. It is there to justify the NATO interpretation of the conflicts in former Yugoslavia, by putting the entire burden of blame on the Serbs. Unless an Orwellian future bans free historical inquiry, I am confident that my critical appraisal of ICTY will be justified by history. Why do you believe NATO carried out its bombing war against Serbia? The essential reason was to save NATO from obsolescence after the collapse of the Soviet bloc, whose supposed threat had been its ostensible raison d’être. The United States came up with a new "humanitarian mission", and the large-scale NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 served to prove that NATO could get away with it, without United Nations authorization. This was "the war to start wars". It is regularly cited by apologists as "the good war" which proves that "human rights" constitute the most efficient excuse for aggression. It was indeed a perfect little war, waged safely from the air with all the casualties on the ground, whether Serb or Albanian. How do you view the UK’s role in the conflicts of the former Yugoslavia? As absolutely shameful. The British foreign office certainly had experts able to understand the complexities of the Yugoslav situation, and indeed the conservative government hesitated. Lord Carrington and then Lord Owen, if supported, might have brokered an early peace inBosnia. But Tony Blair preferred to strut the stage of "humanitarian intervention", and most of the left swallowed the wild tale according to which the world’s most powerful military alliance was henceforth motivated by sentimental concern for the underdog. What did you make of the trial of Slobodan Milosevic? That trial actually aroused my first admiration for Slobodan Milosevic. He defended himself, and his country, with great courage and intelligence, and successfully disproved most of the charges against him, even though he died before the defense could make its case. The ICTY was set up largely to convict Milosevic, and would surely have found a way to do so regardless of the evidence. His death spared them that trouble. Of course, Western media failed totally to report fairly on the proceedings. You speak of your admiration for Milosevic "defending his country" in the Hague. But is there not a wider and more fundamental sense in which Milosevic’s rule was by no means beneficial for Serbia? V. P. Gagnon Jr. has written about how Milosevic used war as a tool against movements for democratic reform, by effectively changing the subject to whether people were pro or anti-Serb at any point where these movements became too strong. Karel Turza and Eric Gordy have written about the deleterious effect that Milosevic’s rule had on Serbian society and culture. Little of this speaks of a man worthy of admiration, even from a Serbian perspective. Was Milosovic defending Serbia, or just defending his regime? When I said that Milosevic on trial in The Hague aroused my first admiration for the man, I was obviously making the distinction between Milosevic as President and Milosevic as prisoner of a biased tribunal that had been set up to convict him. However unfortunate his policies as president, he became a victim when he was illegally shipped off to The Hague, in a rather sordid deal between prime minister Zoran Djindjic, who violated Serbian law in the hope of economic rewards, and the NATO powers, who needed the trial in order to justify their 1999 bombing campaign. What is meant by "democratic reforms"? Milosevic did introduce a multi-party system, which is the basic democratic reform. Whatever his faults, it is by no means clear that his political adversaries in the early 1990s would have been better for the Serbian people than he was. Now that Serbia has Western-approved "democratic" governments, major industries have been sold to Western corporations, the media are more uniform than ever, and the economic situation of the majority of the population has worsened considerably. Many people in Serbia who hated Milosevic when he was in office admired his defense at The Hague. His self-defense was automatically a defense of his country, since the totally arbitrary (and unproven) charge of a "joint criminal enterprise" in effect implicated collective guilt, since the alleged enterprise had no defined limits. Little blame for the Balkan wars appears to attach to the Serb side in your account. Yet Bosnian Serb figures such as Vojislav Šešelj, Radovan Karadžić and Ratko Mladić have stated publically that there was a drive for a Greater Serbia. Doubtless there have been many attempts to reduce the conflict to nothing more than a case of Serbian aggression, but while correcting for that is it not also important to still leave room for attaching the appropriate level of blame to the Serbian side? Testifying at the Milosevic trial, Vojislav Šešelj stated clearly that Milosevic was not in favor of Greater Serbia, and that he had slandered him politically for that very reason, because Šešelj himself did favor Greater Serbia. The meaning of "Greater Serbia" is complicated, and I have dealt with it in my book, "Fools’ Crusade". But Serbs were divided on the matter, and Milosevic for one did not advocate a "Greater Serbia". Milosevic was competing with politicians such as Vuk Draskovic and Zoran Djindjic, whom the West considers "democratic", but who were far more nationalistic than he was. No Serbian politician could be totally indifferent to Serb populations cut off from Serbia by the disintegration ofYugoslavia. Nevertheless, starting in 1992, Milosevic signed onto a series of potential peace accords that left Serbs outside of shrinkingYugoslavia, and were clearly incompatible with a greater Serbia. I do not presume to attach "appropriate levels of blame" to the various Yugoslav parties. I simply point out certain facts, and the only blame that really interests me is that of the Western powers and especially of the United States. That is my responsibility as an American citizen. It is the United States that exploited the tragedy to strengthen NATO, and the people of Yugoslavia who suffered and are still suffering. Many of our readers will find it hard to accept your expressing admiration for Milosovic. Its well understood that the West portrays its enemies dishonestly (take Saddam’s mythical WMD, for example). But to praise the "courage" of a man widely seen (including by those who are no fans of Western power) as having a lot of blood on his hands goes a good deal further than this. Is your choice of words here really appropriate? I am not going to change what I say because many of your readers, as you allege, have a limited capacity to understand the complexities of human character. Of course, all leaders of countries involved in wars can be said to "have blood on their hands". The stereotype of an inhuman Milosevic is a fictional propaganda creation, like the long line of "Hitlers" the West keeps discovering. But supposing the man was utterly ruthless, does that preclude courage? I fear our "humanitarian" age is adopting an unprecedentedly simplistic notion of what people are – either innocent lambs or savage beasts. Look at many of the heroes of ancient tragedy, who were complicated enough to be ruthless and courageous, and often displayed a mixture of good and bad qualities. If we are incapable of recognizing the humanity of our chosen enemies (and Milosevic was a chosen enemy, who actually liked the United States where he had lived as a banker, and never even slightly threatened the West), then there can be no peace in the world. What have been the consequences for the constituent republics of becoming independent states? In general, secession is beneficial to the bureaucrats. Someone who was only a minor official in a large country gets to be Cabinet Minister, or ambassador. So secession was a good thing for members of the bureaucracy in each statelet. It has also been good for a minority who live off crime and corruption. For the rest of the population, it was beneficial primarily to Slovenia, whose leaders succeeded in getting into the European Union ahead of the others. Of course it was not beneficial to the small population of Yugoslavs who were not ethnic Slovenians and found themselves living in Slovenia without any civil status. Croatia has the advantage of strong German support, but so far this has not yielded all the economic benefits hoped for. Most of the Serb population has been driven out, which is of course satisfying to the racist Croat nationalists, and does not seem to disturb the Western leftist multiculturalists. Otherwise, people who once were citizens of an independent, medium-sized European country find themselves confined in small mutually hostile statelets, dependent on outside powers and poorer than before. Outside intervention has served to exacerbate ethnic hatreds, and continues to do so, notably in Bosnia and Kosovo. The political situation of most of the successor states is precarious and further tragedy is almost certain. | |
Global Research Articles by Diana Johnstone --- Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article. To become a Member of Global Research The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@... www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner. For media inquiries: crgeditor@... © Copyright Diana Johnstone , New Left Project, 2010 The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=18030 | |
IN QUESTA CIVILISSIMA EUROPA UN "GIORNO DEL RICORDO" NON LO SI NEGA A NESSUNO
http://www.lernesto.it
In Lettonia le autorità consentono l’esaltazione delle SS e proteggono i criminali di guerra. Nell’indifferenza dei governi dell’Unione Europea.
Da qualche anno, nell’ignoranza pressoché totale dell’opinione pubblica europea, il 16 marzo è celebrato in Lettonia (repubblica ex sovietica appartenente all’Unione Europea) come “giornata del ricordo” della legione lettone delle Waffen SS, che ha partecipato, integrata nell’armata hitleriana, non solo alle operazioni di repressione della Resistenza, ma anche allo sterminio di decine di migliaia di ebrei e di appartenenti alle minoranze nazionali. Fin dal 2008, il lugubre rituale del “ricordo” si concretizza nell’organizzazione di marce, a cui prendono parte i criminali reduci del collaborazionismo e i loro simpatizzanti neofascisti. Adunate che godono della protezione delle autorità locali. Lo stesso presidente della Repubblica ebbe a dichiarare nel 2008 che “non considerava nazisti” i veterani della legione SS lettone. La vergognosa “sceneggiata”, che la dice lunga sulle caratteristiche “democratiche” dell’attuale
corso politico lettone e che dovrebbe suscitare l’indignazione di tutti i democratici e gli antifascisti europei, si ripeterà molto probabilmente anche il prossimo 16 marzo. E molto probabilmente anche questa volta passerà inosservata dalle nostre parti. Eppure, in questa occasione, non sono mancate le proteste del locale movimento antifascista. Il Consiglio delle Organizzazioni non governative ha chiesto al sindaco della capitale lettone, Riga, di proibire la manifestazione. E’ prevista, in concomitanza con la marcia, una mobilitazione delle organizzazioni antifasciste e dei partiti di sinistra, esattamente come è avvenuto in passato, quando l’adunata dei nazisti lettoni è stata vivacemente contestata dai manifestanti democratici.Come mostra il video girato il 16 marzo dello scorso anno.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrZ_xUbhp0I
In Lettonia le autorità consentono l’esaltazione delle SS e proteggono i criminali di guerra. Nell’indifferenza dei governi dell’Unione Europea.
Da qualche anno, nell’ignoranza pressoché totale dell’opinione pubblica europea, il 16 marzo è celebrato in Lettonia (repubblica ex sovietica appartenente all’Unione Europea) come “giornata del ricordo” della legione lettone delle Waffen SS, che ha partecipato, integrata nell’armata hitleriana, non solo alle operazioni di repressione della Resistenza, ma anche allo sterminio di decine di migliaia di ebrei e di appartenenti alle minoranze nazionali. Fin dal 2008, il lugubre rituale del “ricordo” si concretizza nell’organizzazione di marce, a cui prendono parte i criminali reduci del collaborazionismo e i loro simpatizzanti neofascisti. Adunate che godono della protezione delle autorità locali. Lo stesso presidente della Repubblica ebbe a dichiarare nel 2008 che “non considerava nazisti” i veterani della legione SS lettone. La vergognosa “sceneggiata”, che la dice lunga sulle caratteristiche “democratiche” dell’attuale
corso politico lettone e che dovrebbe suscitare l’indignazione di tutti i democratici e gli antifascisti europei, si ripeterà molto probabilmente anche il prossimo 16 marzo. E molto probabilmente anche questa volta passerà inosservata dalle nostre parti. Eppure, in questa occasione, non sono mancate le proteste del locale movimento antifascista. Il Consiglio delle Organizzazioni non governative ha chiesto al sindaco della capitale lettone, Riga, di proibire la manifestazione. E’ prevista, in concomitanza con la marcia, una mobilitazione delle organizzazioni antifasciste e dei partiti di sinistra, esattamente come è avvenuto in passato, quando l’adunata dei nazisti lettoni è stata vivacemente contestata dai manifestanti democratici.Come mostra il video girato il 16 marzo dello scorso anno.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrZ_xUbhp0I
Il criminale di guerra Ejup Ganic è di nuovo a spasso
Il Regno Unito è una grande democrazia occidentale. E nelle democrazie occidentali chi ha i soldi è sempre innocente.
Con 300 mila sterline di provenienza - diciamo così - bizzarra, è infatti ritornato a spasso Ejup Ganic, uomo politico bosgnacco (cioè nazionalista bosniaco-musulmano), già braccio destro di Izetbegovic. Uno di quelli ai quali va ascritto l'inizio della guerra fratricida per lo squartamento della Jugoslavia: in particolare con la strage della via Dobrovoljacka, quando la colonna dell'esercito jugoslavo che abbandonava la Bosnia in seguito alla secessione fu aggredita alle spalle anche per ordine di Ganic, allo scopo di scatenare la guerra. 42 morti, 73 feriti, 215 prigionieri, la prima grande strage di Sarajevo - mai ricordata da nessuno in Italia. Adesso "Repubblica" è costretta a parlarne, e la racconta a modo suo, usando comodi anacronismi e parlando di un "incidente". (a cura di Italo Slavo. Sull'arresto di Ganic a Londra si veda anche: http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/6692 )
---
Una protagonista del jet set inglese, ex rifugiata della guerra balcanica, crea un caso diplomatico
pagando la cauzione per l'allora presidente musulmano Ganic ricercato in Serbia
Londra, ex leader bosniaco libero
grazie ai soldi della bella Diana
dal nostro corrispondente ENRICO FRANCESCHINI
LONDRA - Lei è Diana Jenkins, una ex rifugiata bosniaca diventata la moglie di un banchiere della City miliardario. Emigrata di nuovo, stavolta con i soldi, i figli e il consenso del marito, a Malibù, la spiaggia più chic di tutta la California perché in Inghilterra si sentiva trattata dalle altre donne del suo ambiente come "una moglie comprata su catalogo", insomma come una puttana. Lui è Ejup Ganic, ex presidente della Bosnia, arrestato una settimana fa all'aeroporto londinese di Heathrow e sbattuto in un tetro carcere di Londra in attesa che il tribunale valuti la richiesta di estradizione nei suoi confronti presentata dalla Serbia con l'accusa di crimini di guerra. Una corte inglese aveva rifiutato la libertà provvisoria, mettendo una cauzione di 300 mila sterline, circa 350 mila euro, nel timore che il carcerato, se rilasciato, sarebbe fuggito. Ma la moglie del banchiere ha pagato la cauzione di tasca sua e lo ha fatto tornare libero.
Sembra una favola. "La bella e la bestia", la riassumono furibondi i serbi. Ma di fiabe ce ne sono almeno due, in questa storia dall'ancora incerto lieto fine. La prima riguarda soltanto la protagonista femminile, Diana maritata con Roger Jenkins, nata 36 anni fa a Sarajevo col nome di Sanela Dijana Catic, fuggita a piedi dalle macerie e dalle stragi dell'ex Jugoslavia, approdata a Londra senza conoscere nessuno, senza sapere l'inglese, senza un lavoro e senza una sterlina. Nella capitale britannica ha fatto i mestieri più umili, si è messa a studiare e un giorno a una lezione in una scuola di business ha conosciuto un professore estemporaneo il cui vero lavoro è fare il banchiere, anzi, il superbanchiere, anzi, uno dei banchieri più ricchi della City. E' amore a prima vista tra Diana e Roger, che si sposano e inziano a fare la bella vita nel jet-set londinese. Lei si rivela non solo affascinante e seducente come una top-model, ma anche intelligente e scaltra come un banchiere: durante una vacanza in Costa Smeralda diventa amica di un'altra musulmana, la moglie dello sceicco del Qatar, attraverso la quale suo marito conosce lo sceicco e ottiene un favoloso prestito da 7 miliardi di sterline con il quale salva dalla bancarotta la Barclays Bank. E il superbanchiere diventa ancora più ricco.Secondo capitolo della favola. Un bel giorno, o brutto dal suo punto di vista, Diana pianta tutti e se ne va. Dice che le feste e le cene a cui partecipa insieme al marito la fanno sentire "vuota, umiliata e perfino sporca", per il modo in cui la trattano le altre donne, le altre mogli, facendola sentire come una "moglie ordinata su catalogo", modo elegante di dire che la fanno sentire una bella puttana, "comprata" dal marito per la sua bellezza e basta. Così, stufa di sopportare, lei accusa Londra e l'Inghilterra di classismo, snobberia, discriminazione sessuale e razziale verso una ex-povera ma bellissima ragazza musulmana bosniaca, fa le valige e si trasferisce con i figli a Malibù, dove si vive un'atmosfera più democratica, dice lei. Il marito la viene a trovare quando può, ogni tanto fa un salto lei a Londra, e intanto si occupa di filantropia e cause nobili.
Il terzo capitolo della fiaba è, per adesso, l'ultimo. Una settimana fa viene arrestato mentre cerca di partire dall'aeroporto di Heathrow un professore di ingegneria bosniaco. Si chiama Ejup Ganic, è stato vicepresidente e poi presidente della Bosnia negli anni Novanta, durante la guerra civile che mandò in frantumi la Jugoslavia e fece scorrere fiumi di sangue in conflitti inter-etnici. Indagato a suo tempo dal tribunale internazionale dell'Aja, Ganic non venne perseguito. Ma ora la Serbia ci riprova e ha presentato alla Gran Bretagna, dove Ganic risiede, richiesta di estradizione. Il crimine di cui è accusato risale a 18 anni fa. E' un famoso incidente che risale ai giorni in cui le forze serbo-bosniache circondavano Sarajevo, all'inizio di un assedio che durò 44 mesi e in cui morirono 10 mila persone. L'allora leader bosniaco Alija Izetbegovic fu preso in ostaggio dalle forze serbe all'aeroporto di Sarajevo mentre rientrava da colloqui di pace in Portogallo. Come risposta, la principale caserma serba di Sarajevo fu circondata dalle truppe bosniache. Un negoziato ad alta tensione, mediato dall'Onu, produsse un accordo per la liberazione di Izetbegovic e simultaneamente dei soldati della caserma serba. Ganic, che era il vice di Izetbegovic, condusse la trattativa e comandava di fatto le truppe della Bosnia in quel delicato frangente. Sembrava che la crisi fosse risolta ma, mentre Izetbegovic veniva liberato, il convoglio su cui viaggiavano le truppe serbe, che stava lasciando la caserma circondata, fu attaccato. Nell'agguato morirono 40 soldati. I serbi accusano oggi Ganic di diretta responsabilità nella morte di 18 di essi.Frottole, protesta la bella Diana. "Che Ganic sia arrestato per un crimine che secondo il Tribunale dell'Aja non sussiste è uno scandalo", dice. "Ora potrà contrastare queste accuse ridicole da uomo libero". Lei non lo ha mai incontrato o conosciuto, precisa, ma non ha esitato a tirare fuori le 300 mila sterline per riparare "un'ingiustizia". A Sarajevo, migliaia di persone protestano da giorni davanti all'ambasciata britannica. E l'attuale presidente della Bosnia, Haris Silajdzic, è appena stato a Londra dove ha incontrato il ministro degli Esteri David Miliband, chiedendo il rilascio di Ganic e protestanto per il trattamento "irriguardoso" che ha sofferto: "In carcere gli hanno tolto le sue medicine e non gli hanno lasciato usare il telefono". Ma senza i soldi di Diana sarebbe rimasto in prigione. Il seguito alla prossima puntata.
La Repubblica 13-11-09
Da profuga bosniaca a protagonista della finanza lascia Londra e attacca l´alta società: mi ha snobbato
La moglie del banchiere "Ho salvato la City ma ora devo fuggire"
La sua storia «dalle stalle alle stelle» era già degna di un film: una giovane bellissima bosniaca fugge a piedi da Sarajevo mentre infuria la guerra, arriva miracolosamente in Inghilterra, fa la sguattera e la cameriera nella capitale, finché non incontra un ricco banchiere, che se ne innamora e la sposa. Lieto fine? Non ancora: in vacanza col marito in Costa Smeralda, diventa amica della moglie dello sceicco del Qatar, e lo convince a investire un po´ dei suoi soldini nella banca londinese per cui lavora il suo sposo banchiere. Lo sceicco inietta 8 miliardi di euro nella Barclays, salvandola dalla tempesta finanziaria, e il banchiere che ha mediato l´investimento, o meglio che l´ha ottenuto grazie alla simpatia e all´arte della persuasione di sua moglie, diventa ancora più ricco, il più ricco della City.Lieto fine? No, non ci siamo ancora per concludere il film della vita di Diana Jenkins, come si chiama ora, nata Sanela Catic nell´ex-Jugoslavia 36 anni fa. Con un´intervista di fuoco a Tatler, il mensile dell´high society inglese, adesso la moglie di Riger Jenkins, il banchiere più famoso di Londra, lancia un sorprendente «j´accuse» contro la metropoli che l´ha accolta. Non contro la città intera, bensì contro l´alta società, la classe dirigente, l´aristocrazia della finanza e della nobiltà, insomma il cerchio di persone di cui era parte da quando non faceva più la sguattera e si è sposata con un uomo da 50 milioni di euro l´anno.L´accusa è pesante: «Sono un branco di snob. Le mogli del bel mondo londinese mi hanno trattata in un modo da farmi sentire inutile, vuota, perfino sporca. Come se fossi stata scelta da mio marito su un catalogo di ragazze dell´est». Non dice: mi hanno trattato come se fossi una puttana slava, ma poco ci manca. Perciò Diana se n´è andata: via da Londra, lontano dalla classista Gran Bretagna, dove a farla accettare non bastavano nemmeno i suoi soldi e il diamante che portava al dito, «mio marito me ne comprò uno grosso così, perché stava male a vedere come mi snobbavano le altre». Ed è approdata, insieme ai figli e al marito (quando sarà libero dagli impegni di lavoro) in America, in California, a Los Angeles: per la precisione a Malibù, non proprio una località proletaria, essendo la spiaggia dei divi del cinema, ma dove per venire accettati è sufficiente esseri ricchi, belli e famosi, non importa avere frequentato Eton, Oxford e avere il sangue blu.Londra, per il momento, non l´ha presa bene. Sui giornali fioccano editoriali di due tipi: o la prendono in giro, notando che gli snob non mancano certamente neppure a Malibù; o contestano la sostanza delle sue accuse, affermando che Londra non è più la società classista di alcuni decenni or sono, bensì un ambiente democratico, vibrante, creativo, dove chiunque può fare fortuna, come in America, come del resto è capitato anche a lei. La stizzita reazione conferma che qualcosa di vero, nelle sue parole, c´è: un pizzico di Old England, nei salotti buoni della City, esiste e resiste. La snobberia di una nazione dove un accento rivela la provenienza non solo geografica, ma anche sociale, non è un´invenzione di Diana Jenkins. I padroni dell´universo, per citare il celebre romanzo di Tom Wolfe su Wall Street, non sono necessariamente più umili negli Stati Uniti: ma un tantino meno snob forse sì.Se diventerà un film o perlomeno un romanzo, questa vicenda, potrebbe essere lei stessa a produrlo o pubblicarlo. Ancora prima di trasferirsi a Hollywood, Diana era diventata amica di George Clooney, Elton John, Cindy Crawford e altre personalità dello show - business. Insieme a Clooney ha lanciato un´associazione di beneficenza che ha raccolto 10 milioni di dollari per i bambini del Darfur. «I soldi sono una cosa meravigliosa e li rispetto e mi piace spenderli, possono comprarti la libertà e anche darti la felicità, ma non sono tutto nella vita», dice a Tatler. «A certi party della buona società londinese con tutte le signore ingioiellate, mi chiedevo: cosa ci sto a fare io qui? Starei meglio a casa in pigiama a mangiare la pizza con i miei due figli». Diana ha portato via da Sarajevo i genitori, ma non ha fatto in tempo a salvare suo fratello, morto sotto le bombe. Su come fece a scappare lei, camminando dalla Bosnia alla Croazia nel mezzo della guerra, e poi a finire a Londra, preferisce tacere: «Non fu bello, ma non sono ancora pronta per raccontare come andò». Neanche i suoi primi tempi nella capitale britannica sono stati facili: «Parlavo a malapena la lingua. Mi aggiravo per le strade in cerca di qualcosa da mangiare o di un lavoro. Pensavo solo a sopravvivere. Certe settimane mangiavo solo una tavoletta di Toblerone». Poi ha trovato lavoro, si è messa a studiare business, si è iscritta a una palestra alla moda e lì un giorno ha conosciuto il banchiere. «Non sarei quello che sono oggi, se non avessi incontrato Diana», giura lui. Chiedere allo sceicco del Qatar, per una conferma.
La Repubblica 13-11-09
Da profuga bosniaca a protagonista della finanza lascia Londra e attacca l´alta società: mi ha snobbato
La moglie del banchiere
"Ho salvato la City ma ora devo fuggire"
La sua storia «dalle stalle alle stelle» era già degna di un film: una giovane bellissima bosniaca fugge a piedi da Sarajevo mentre infuria la guerra, arriva miracolosamente in Inghilterra, fa la sguattera e la cameriera nella capitale, finché non incontra un ricco banchiere, che se ne innamora e la sposa. Lieto fine? Non ancora: in vacanza col marito in Costa Smeralda, diventa amica della moglie dello sceicco del Qatar, e lo convince a investire un po´ dei suoi soldini nella banca londinese per cui lavora il suo sposo banchiere. Lo sceicco inietta 8 miliardi di euro nella Barclays, salvandola dalla tempesta finanziaria, e il banchiere che ha mediato l´investimento, o meglio che l´ha ottenuto grazie alla simpatia e all´arte della persuasione di sua moglie, diventa ancora più ricco, il più ricco della City.
Lieto fine? No, non ci siamo ancora per concludere il film della vita di Diana Jenkins, come si chiama ora, nata Sanela Catic nell´ex-Jugoslavia 36 anni fa. Con un´intervista di fuoco a Tatler, il mensile dell´high society inglese, adesso la moglie di Riger Jenkins, il banchiere più famoso di Londra, lancia un sorprendente «j´accuse» contro la metropoli che l´ha accolta. Non contro la città intera, bensì contro l´alta società, la classe dirigente, l´aristocrazia della finanza e della nobiltà, insomma il cerchio di persone di cui era parte da quando non faceva più la sguattera e si è sposata con un uomo da 50 milioni di euro l´anno.
L´accusa è pesante: «Sono un branco di snob. Le mogli del bel mondo londinese mi hanno trattata in un modo da farmi sentire inutile, vuota, perfino sporca. Come se fossi stata scelta da mio marito su un catalogo di ragazze dell´est». Non dice: mi hanno trattato come se fossi una puttana slava, ma poco ci manca. Perciò Diana se n´è andata: via da Londra, lontano dalla classista Gran Bretagna, dove a farla accettare non bastavano nemmeno i suoi soldi e il diamante che portava al dito, «mio marito me ne comprò uno grosso così, perché stava male a vedere come mi snobbavano le altre». Ed è approdata, insieme ai figli e al marito (quando sarà libero dagli impegni di lavoro) in America, in California, a Los Angeles: per la precisione a Malibù, non proprio una località proletaria, essendo la spiaggia dei divi del cinema, ma dove per venire accettati è sufficiente esseri ricchi, belli e famosi, non importa avere frequentato Eton, Oxford e avere il sangue blu.
Londra, per il momento, non l´ha presa bene. Sui giornali fioccano editoriali di due tipi: o la prendono in giro, notando che gli snob non mancano certamente neppure a Malibù; o contestano la sostanza delle sue accuse, affermando che Londra non è più la società classista di alcuni decenni or sono, bensì un ambiente democratico, vibrante, creativo, dove chiunque può fare fortuna, come in America, come del resto è capitato anche a lei. La stizzita reazione conferma che qualcosa di vero, nelle sue parole, c´è: un pizzico di Old England, nei salotti buoni della City, esiste e resiste. La snobberia di una nazione dove un accento rivela la provenienza non solo geografica, ma anche sociale, non è un´invenzione di Diana Jenkins. I padroni dell´universo, per citare il celebre romanzo di Tom Wolfe su Wall Street, non sono necessariamente più umili negli Stati Uniti: ma un tantino meno snob forse sì.
Se diventerà un film o perlomeno un romanzo, questa vicenda, potrebbe essere lei stessa a produrlo o pubblicarlo. Ancora prima di trasferirsi a Hollywood, Diana era diventata amica di George Clooney, Elton John, Cindy Crawford e altre personalità dello show - business. Insieme a Clooney ha lanciato un´associazione di beneficenza che ha raccolto 10 milioni di dollari per i bambini del Darfur. «I soldi sono una cosa meravigliosa e li rispetto e mi piace spenderli, possono comprarti la libertà e anche darti la felicità, ma non sono tutto nella vita», dice a Tatler. «A certi party della buona società londinese con tutte le signore ingioiellate, mi chiedevo: cosa ci sto a fare io qui? Starei meglio a casa in pigiama a mangiare la pizza con i miei due figli». Diana ha portato via da Sarajevo i genitori, ma non ha fatto in tempo a salvare suo fratello, morto sotto le bombe. Su come fece a scappare lei, camminando dalla Bosnia alla Croazia nel mezzo della guerra, e poi a finire a Londra, preferisce tacere: «Non fu bello, ma non sono ancora pronta per raccontare come andò». Neanche i suoi primi tempi nella capitale britannica sono stati facili: «Parlavo a malapena la lingua. Mi aggiravo per le strade in cerca di qualcosa da mangiare o di un lavoro. Pensavo solo a sopravvivere. Certe settimane mangiavo solo una tavoletta di Toblerone». Poi ha trovato lavoro, si è messa a studiare business, si è iscritta a una palestra alla moda e lì un giorno ha conosciuto il banchiere. «Non sarei quello che sono oggi, se non avessi incontrato Diana», giura lui. Chiedere allo sceicco del Qatar, per una conferma.
http://en.fondsk.ru/article.php?id=2749
Strategic Culture Foundation - February 3--9, 2010
New Balkan Wars Loom on the Horizon
Strategic Culture Foundation - February 3--9, 2010
New Balkan Wars Loom on the Horizon
Pyotr Iskenderov
-[T]he plan for a final solution for North Kosovo is similar to the one Georgian President M. Saakashvili had in mind launching an attack against South Ossetia in August, 2008. Even the stated objectives – the restoration of the constitutional jurisdiction in Saakashvili's wording – is the same in both cases...
Dr. Petr A. Iskenderov is a historian, senior researcher at the Institute for Slavic Studies of the Russian Academy of Science, and the Vremya Novostey and the Voice of Russia radio station international politics commentator.
===========================
Source :
Source :
Stop NATO http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato
Blog site: http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/
To subscribe, send an e-mail to: rwrozoff@...
or Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli.
Daily digest option available.
==============================
The contours of the Kosovo separatists' plan to suppress the Serbian resistance in the northern part of the province with the help of the US and the EU are becoming increasingly visible.
The statements emanating from Pristina and the intensifying international debates over the Kosovo theme do not only show that the Albanian separatists are preparing an attack against their opponents but also give an idea of its potential scenario, the distribution of roles in it, and the extent to which Hashim Thaci and other former leaders of the terrorist Kosovo Liberation Army are relying on international support in the process.
The debates at the January 22 open session of the UN Security Council on Kosovo were unprecedentedly heated. It was the first time since the summer of 2007 (when Russia managed to derail the Resolution recognizing Kosovo independence, proposed by the West on the basis of UN Special Envoy Martti Ahtisaari's plan) that the parties to the dispute over Kosovo defined their positions with such utmost clarity.
There was an impression that the world's major powers were speaking different languages. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, the US, and West European countries “urged flexibility” in admitting Kosovo to regional and international mechanisms and forums, whereas Russia and Serbia regarded the approach as an attempt to dilute the role of the UN in the province and to legitimize its independent status.
The discussions were centered around Pristina's so-called final solution plan for North Kosovo, which Thaci inadvertently unveiled several days prior to the session. He said the plan was being drafted jointly with international representatives and was aimed at strengthening what he called Kosovo sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Thaci said 2010 would be the year of consolidation for Kosovo. The priorities in the framework of the plan include the elimination of Serbian self-government established in Kosovska Mitrovica and nearby Serbian communities based on the May, 2008 elections held in accordance with the laws of Serbia. Another blow will be dealt to Serbian police forces and the custom service, which at the moment are maintaining at least partial control over the traffic across the administrative border between Kosovo and the rest of Serbia.
NATO's KFOR deployed in Kosovo will render military assistance to Albanians. There is information that on the whole the corresponding decision was made during Commander of Joint Force Command Naples, Admiral Mark Fitzgerald's January visit to Kosovo, after which he described the Serbian self-government as... a threat to the security of Kosovo. “All violations of UN Security Council Resolution 1244 pose a threat to security. Since the resolution does not approve of parallel institutions, they are cause for concern”, said Fitzgerald.
Pristina's priority is international support for the operation, which the US and the EU are supposed to ensure. The US will be blocking attempts by Russia and China to have a response resolution passed by the UN Security Council. At the same time Brussels will be exerting ever greater pressure on Serbia to make it deny support to the Serbs of Kosovo and seal off the border with the province so as not let Serbian volunteers reach Albania.
Chances are that the operation will be launched already this April after the International Court of Justice issues an indefinite verdict on the Kosovo independence and the establishment of the Mitrovica municipality headed by Albanians and the few Serbs ready to cooperate with them.
Serbia's pro-Western President Boris Tadic spoke with great caution of the anti-Serbian plan harbored by Pristina, NATO, and the EU, essentially saying little more than that the “final solution” promised nothing good to the Kosovo population. Russia's Deputy Permanent Representative to UN I. Shcherbak was much more outspoken. He said that from Russia's standpoint it is necessary to stop decisively any attempts to float concepts harmful to Kosovo regardless of their source, as they do not only breach UN Security Council Resolution 1244 but also destabilize the province and provoke tensions.
There is information that the plan was co-authored by EU Special Representative and UN Civil Administration head Peter Feith. The Administration was established in the spring of 2008, shortly after the declaration of Kosovo independence and its recognition by the US and major EU counties.
The Administration that no UN documents regulate comprises representatives of 14 EU and NATO countries and Switzerland, which are implementing the Ahtisaari plan, a EU brainchild the UN Security Council never approved.
It is noteworthy that Kosovo separatist government foreign minister Skender Hyseni who represented Kosovo at the UN Security Council session made no comments concerning the plan for the northern part of Kosovo. Speaking to the media after the session, he claimed without elaborating that the EU mission and the Civic Administration were not promoting any final solution for North Kosovo.
A survey of recent developments leads to the conclusion that the blueprint for suppressing the Serbian resistance in Kosovo is being drafted at a level much higher than that of the province. Given its basic parameters (a snap offensive supported by the NATO and EU pseudo-peacekeepers with international political backing plus the installation of a puppet administration), the plan for a final solution for North Kosovo is similar to the one Georgian President M. Saakashvili had in mind launching an attack against South Ossetia in August, 2008. Even the stated objectives – the restoration of the constitutional jurisdiction in Saakashvili's wording – is the same in both cases.
Even earlier, in August, 1995, a similar scenario was imposed on the Serbs of Krajina when Croatia sent regular army forces to attack them while the US and the EU backed the operation diplomatically. Actually, at that time the diplomatic support played no practical role as neither Yugoslavia nor the Russian leadership demonstrated any will to help Serbian Krajina in its tragedy....
It is hard to predict the outcome of the current developments as the Bosnian front, no less important to Serbs, Russia, and the Orthodoxy, is likely to gain a place on the map of the new Balkan war alongside the Kosovo one. Outgoing Croatian President Stipe Mesic said the Republic's army should launch an offensive against the Bosnian Serb Republic in case it holds a Kosovo-style self-determination referendum.
Blog site: http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/
To subscribe, send an e-mail to: rwrozoff@...
or Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli.
Daily digest option available.
==============================
The contours of the Kosovo separatists' plan to suppress the Serbian resistance in the northern part of the province with the help of the US and the EU are becoming increasingly visible.
The statements emanating from Pristina and the intensifying international debates over the Kosovo theme do not only show that the Albanian separatists are preparing an attack against their opponents but also give an idea of its potential scenario, the distribution of roles in it, and the extent to which Hashim Thaci and other former leaders of the terrorist Kosovo Liberation Army are relying on international support in the process.
The debates at the January 22 open session of the UN Security Council on Kosovo were unprecedentedly heated. It was the first time since the summer of 2007 (when Russia managed to derail the Resolution recognizing Kosovo independence, proposed by the West on the basis of UN Special Envoy Martti Ahtisaari's plan) that the parties to the dispute over Kosovo defined their positions with such utmost clarity.
There was an impression that the world's major powers were speaking different languages. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, the US, and West European countries “urged flexibility” in admitting Kosovo to regional and international mechanisms and forums, whereas Russia and Serbia regarded the approach as an attempt to dilute the role of the UN in the province and to legitimize its independent status.
The discussions were centered around Pristina's so-called final solution plan for North Kosovo, which Thaci inadvertently unveiled several days prior to the session. He said the plan was being drafted jointly with international representatives and was aimed at strengthening what he called Kosovo sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Thaci said 2010 would be the year of consolidation for Kosovo. The priorities in the framework of the plan include the elimination of Serbian self-government established in Kosovska Mitrovica and nearby Serbian communities based on the May, 2008 elections held in accordance with the laws of Serbia. Another blow will be dealt to Serbian police forces and the custom service, which at the moment are maintaining at least partial control over the traffic across the administrative border between Kosovo and the rest of Serbia.
NATO's KFOR deployed in Kosovo will render military assistance to Albanians. There is information that on the whole the corresponding decision was made during Commander of Joint Force Command Naples, Admiral Mark Fitzgerald's January visit to Kosovo, after which he described the Serbian self-government as... a threat to the security of Kosovo. “All violations of UN Security Council Resolution 1244 pose a threat to security. Since the resolution does not approve of parallel institutions, they are cause for concern”, said Fitzgerald.
Pristina's priority is international support for the operation, which the US and the EU are supposed to ensure. The US will be blocking attempts by Russia and China to have a response resolution passed by the UN Security Council. At the same time Brussels will be exerting ever greater pressure on Serbia to make it deny support to the Serbs of Kosovo and seal off the border with the province so as not let Serbian volunteers reach Albania.
Chances are that the operation will be launched already this April after the International Court of Justice issues an indefinite verdict on the Kosovo independence and the establishment of the Mitrovica municipality headed by Albanians and the few Serbs ready to cooperate with them.
Serbia's pro-Western President Boris Tadic spoke with great caution of the anti-Serbian plan harbored by Pristina, NATO, and the EU, essentially saying little more than that the “final solution” promised nothing good to the Kosovo population. Russia's Deputy Permanent Representative to UN I. Shcherbak was much more outspoken. He said that from Russia's standpoint it is necessary to stop decisively any attempts to float concepts harmful to Kosovo regardless of their source, as they do not only breach UN Security Council Resolution 1244 but also destabilize the province and provoke tensions.
There is information that the plan was co-authored by EU Special Representative and UN Civil Administration head Peter Feith. The Administration was established in the spring of 2008, shortly after the declaration of Kosovo independence and its recognition by the US and major EU counties.
The Administration that no UN documents regulate comprises representatives of 14 EU and NATO countries and Switzerland, which are implementing the Ahtisaari plan, a EU brainchild the UN Security Council never approved.
It is noteworthy that Kosovo separatist government foreign minister Skender Hyseni who represented Kosovo at the UN Security Council session made no comments concerning the plan for the northern part of Kosovo. Speaking to the media after the session, he claimed without elaborating that the EU mission and the Civic Administration were not promoting any final solution for North Kosovo.
A survey of recent developments leads to the conclusion that the blueprint for suppressing the Serbian resistance in Kosovo is being drafted at a level much higher than that of the province. Given its basic parameters (a snap offensive supported by the NATO and EU pseudo-peacekeepers with international political backing plus the installation of a puppet administration), the plan for a final solution for North Kosovo is similar to the one Georgian President M. Saakashvili had in mind launching an attack against South Ossetia in August, 2008. Even the stated objectives – the restoration of the constitutional jurisdiction in Saakashvili's wording – is the same in both cases.
Even earlier, in August, 1995, a similar scenario was imposed on the Serbs of Krajina when Croatia sent regular army forces to attack them while the US and the EU backed the operation diplomatically. Actually, at that time the diplomatic support played no practical role as neither Yugoslavia nor the Russian leadership demonstrated any will to help Serbian Krajina in its tragedy....
It is hard to predict the outcome of the current developments as the Bosnian front, no less important to Serbs, Russia, and the Orthodoxy, is likely to gain a place on the map of the new Balkan war alongside the Kosovo one. Outgoing Croatian President Stipe Mesic said the Republic's army should launch an offensive against the Bosnian Serb Republic in case it holds a Kosovo-style self-determination referendum.
***
The situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina will become strained soon as Bosnian Serbs hold a referendum on their constitutional status.
Its aim is not to let the leaders of Sarajevo, the US and EU put an end to Republika Srpska. The outgoing Croatian President, Stjepan Mesic, promised that in case the referendum takes place, the regular army of Croatia will enter the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina to cut off the 15-km Posavina corridor, which connects the western and the eastern parts of Republika Srpska in the area of Brcko, close to the Croatian border.
“If Milorad Dodik (Prime Minister of Republika Srpska) decides to hold a referendum on separation, I will send troops to divide the region inhabited by Bosnian Serbs”, the Croatian President said, adding that in case of success, a sovereign state of Bosnian Serbs will 'cease to exist'. He made the announcement during an informal press conference in Zagreb on January 18.
A military campaign against Banja Luka may be held simultaneously with an armed action by Kosovo`s Albanian authorities against the city of Kosovska Mitrovica and Serbian communities in Northern Kosovo.
In this case the US, NATO and the EU will manage to complete the separation of Serbian territories. The Serbian Republic will be surrounded by hostile states and thus will be no longer able to carry out an independent foreign policy. The defeat of the Kosovan and Bosnian Serbs will become Russia`s biggest loss in the Balkans over the past two decades and will harm Moscow's attempts to play an active role in other strategically important regions in Eurasia.
The first reaction of Serbia and Russia to such rude interference of the Croatian leader into the affairs of a neighboring state was surprisingly reserved. Serbia's President Boris Tadic made an attempt to respond to the remarks made by his Croatian counterpart at the UN Security Council meeting on Kosovo on January 22. But he commented on the issue not during his main speech (though parallels between what was going on then in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Kosovo were more than obvious). He spoke during the debates because he found such kinds of issues could not be discussed during official reports. Mr. Tadic also met the UN Chief Ban Ki-moon to tell him that Mesic`s 'dangerous words were unwelcome in political discourse' but immediately noted that Serbia did not want to worsen relations with Croatia.
Such peace-loving rhetoric was accepted in Zagreb. Croatia's Prime Minister Jadranka Kosor told journalists that Serbia and Croatia should abandon debates and work together to develop neighborly relations. However, the Prime Minister did not disavow the President's announcement.
Russia's reaction is still too vague. Summing up the results of 2009 at a press conference on January 22 in Moscow, Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov commented on Mr. Mesic`s announcement: “We insist that all sides involved respect the Dayton Agreement and avoid the use of force”. (1)
Meanwhile, the way the situation is developing in the region in recent months proves quite the contrary: the West and the leaders of Sarajevo are definitely going to undermine the Dayton agreement.
Two rounds of talks held by the heads of the Bosnian political parties in October 2009 at a NATO base in Butmir outside Sarajevo revealed the western strategy toward Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The Bosnian Serbs are demanded to abdicate their authorities settled in the Dayton Peace Agreement. Though formally Russia is a member of the Dayton Agreement Peace Implementation Council, it did not take part in the discussions in Butmir. So, it would be a fatal mistake to expect the US, EU and NATO to abandon their new political course. It would also mean to be inexcusably weak in regard to Russia's interests in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in the Balkans in general.
It was not accidental that the International Crisis Group, which traditionally deals with promoting western political propaganda in conflict regions, in every detail commented on the future of the Balkans a few months before recent events. Experts in the Group believe that Moscow and Belgrade remain the West`s major rivals in the region because “an international approach to the Balkans is dominated by concern over Serbia`s reaction to the independence of Kosovo”. In their opinion, Russia “has become stronger in opposing a Western policy it sees hostile to its interests”. (2)
Under these circumstances, Moscow should better revise its policy in the Balkans. Russian diplomats should no longer view the Dayton agreements as too weak to withstand political attacks.
This all will make it logical to put in question the political status of Bosnia and Herzegovina. This approach will help Moscow to no longer be an outsider in Bosnia and launch a series of international talks on territorial, political and ethnocultural problems in the Balkans, where peoples and their interests are in jeopardy.
Taking into consideration intentions of the West to put an end to the Serbian Orthodox community in the Balkans, revision of the existing borders in the conflict regions may become the only way for Russia to defend its interests. As of today, there are at least three self-proclaimed states whose status is in doubted: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and Macedonia. Their territorial and administrative revision could become the least painful way to avoid new wars in the Balkans.
It is remarkable that recently the authorities of Sarajevo have been urging Russia to contribute to the 'implementation of the Dayton Peace Agreement', the Bosniak Muslim member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Haris Silajdzic, said at a meeting with the Russian special envoy for Kosovo, Alexander Botsan-Kharchenko. And this is a very disturbing sign because Silajdzic has long been known for his extremist views about Republika Srpska. The majority of people in Western Europe cannot but be aware that the Bosnian Serbs remain the only counterbalance to radical pan-Islamic tendencies in Bosnia and Herzegovina. And this it what gives Russia the right to boost its activities in the Balkans.
(1) Http://www.mid.ru/brp_4.nsf
(2) Bosnia`s Incomplete Transition: Between Dayton and Europe. Sarajevo-Brussels, 2009. P.14
Its aim is not to let the leaders of Sarajevo, the US and EU put an end to Republika Srpska. The outgoing Croatian President, Stjepan Mesic, promised that in case the referendum takes place, the regular army of Croatia will enter the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina to cut off the 15-km Posavina corridor, which connects the western and the eastern parts of Republika Srpska in the area of Brcko, close to the Croatian border.
“If Milorad Dodik (Prime Minister of Republika Srpska) decides to hold a referendum on separation, I will send troops to divide the region inhabited by Bosnian Serbs”, the Croatian President said, adding that in case of success, a sovereign state of Bosnian Serbs will 'cease to exist'. He made the announcement during an informal press conference in Zagreb on January 18.
A military campaign against Banja Luka may be held simultaneously with an armed action by Kosovo`s Albanian authorities against the city of Kosovska Mitrovica and Serbian communities in Northern Kosovo.
In this case the US, NATO and the EU will manage to complete the separation of Serbian territories. The Serbian Republic will be surrounded by hostile states and thus will be no longer able to carry out an independent foreign policy. The defeat of the Kosovan and Bosnian Serbs will become Russia`s biggest loss in the Balkans over the past two decades and will harm Moscow's attempts to play an active role in other strategically important regions in Eurasia.
The first reaction of Serbia and Russia to such rude interference of the Croatian leader into the affairs of a neighboring state was surprisingly reserved. Serbia's President Boris Tadic made an attempt to respond to the remarks made by his Croatian counterpart at the UN Security Council meeting on Kosovo on January 22. But he commented on the issue not during his main speech (though parallels between what was going on then in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Kosovo were more than obvious). He spoke during the debates because he found such kinds of issues could not be discussed during official reports. Mr. Tadic also met the UN Chief Ban Ki-moon to tell him that Mesic`s 'dangerous words were unwelcome in political discourse' but immediately noted that Serbia did not want to worsen relations with Croatia.
Such peace-loving rhetoric was accepted in Zagreb. Croatia's Prime Minister Jadranka Kosor told journalists that Serbia and Croatia should abandon debates and work together to develop neighborly relations. However, the Prime Minister did not disavow the President's announcement.
Russia's reaction is still too vague. Summing up the results of 2009 at a press conference on January 22 in Moscow, Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov commented on Mr. Mesic`s announcement: “We insist that all sides involved respect the Dayton Agreement and avoid the use of force”. (1)
Meanwhile, the way the situation is developing in the region in recent months proves quite the contrary: the West and the leaders of Sarajevo are definitely going to undermine the Dayton agreement.
Two rounds of talks held by the heads of the Bosnian political parties in October 2009 at a NATO base in Butmir outside Sarajevo revealed the western strategy toward Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The Bosnian Serbs are demanded to abdicate their authorities settled in the Dayton Peace Agreement. Though formally Russia is a member of the Dayton Agreement Peace Implementation Council, it did not take part in the discussions in Butmir. So, it would be a fatal mistake to expect the US, EU and NATO to abandon their new political course. It would also mean to be inexcusably weak in regard to Russia's interests in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in the Balkans in general.
It was not accidental that the International Crisis Group, which traditionally deals with promoting western political propaganda in conflict regions, in every detail commented on the future of the Balkans a few months before recent events. Experts in the Group believe that Moscow and Belgrade remain the West`s major rivals in the region because “an international approach to the Balkans is dominated by concern over Serbia`s reaction to the independence of Kosovo”. In their opinion, Russia “has become stronger in opposing a Western policy it sees hostile to its interests”. (2)
Under these circumstances, Moscow should better revise its policy in the Balkans. Russian diplomats should no longer view the Dayton agreements as too weak to withstand political attacks.
This all will make it logical to put in question the political status of Bosnia and Herzegovina. This approach will help Moscow to no longer be an outsider in Bosnia and launch a series of international talks on territorial, political and ethnocultural problems in the Balkans, where peoples and their interests are in jeopardy.
Taking into consideration intentions of the West to put an end to the Serbian Orthodox community in the Balkans, revision of the existing borders in the conflict regions may become the only way for Russia to defend its interests. As of today, there are at least three self-proclaimed states whose status is in doubted: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and Macedonia. Their territorial and administrative revision could become the least painful way to avoid new wars in the Balkans.
It is remarkable that recently the authorities of Sarajevo have been urging Russia to contribute to the 'implementation of the Dayton Peace Agreement', the Bosniak Muslim member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Haris Silajdzic, said at a meeting with the Russian special envoy for Kosovo, Alexander Botsan-Kharchenko. And this is a very disturbing sign because Silajdzic has long been known for his extremist views about Republika Srpska. The majority of people in Western Europe cannot but be aware that the Bosnian Serbs remain the only counterbalance to radical pan-Islamic tendencies in Bosnia and Herzegovina. And this it what gives Russia the right to boost its activities in the Balkans.
(1) Http://www.mid.ru/brp_4.nsf
(2) Bosnia`s Incomplete Transition: Between Dayton and Europe. Sarajevo-Brussels, 2009. P.14
Gentili signore e signori,
Vi invio i miei ringraziamenti per la solidarietà che avete manifestato dichiarandovi pronti ad accettarmi per una cura medica. Vorrei informarvi della cosa seguente: credo che l'ostinazione con cui mi hanno rifiutato un trattamento in Russia sia motivata, in primo luogo, dal timore che in occasione di esami approfonditi, si scoprirebbe che sono stati effettuati interventi attivi e maliziosi allo scopo di nuocere alla mia salute. Questi interventi non possono restare nascosti a specialisti russi.
Per giustificare le mie accuse, vi presento un semplice esempio che troverete in allegato. Questo documento, che ho ricevuto il 7 marzo, mostra che il 12 gennaio una medicina particolarmente forte fu individuata nel mio sangue e che, come dichiarano loro stessi, essa è utilizzata per trattare la tubercolosi e la lebbra, benché io non abbia preso, durante questi cinque anni nella loro prigione, alcun antibiotico.
Durante tutto questo tempo, non ho mai avuto, a parte l'influenza, alcuna malattia contagiosa. Anche il fatto che i medici hanno impiegato due mesi (per informare sui risultati dell'esame, N.d.Red) può essere spiegato soltanto da una manipolazione. I responsabili di questi atti non possono realmente curare la mia malattia, e neppure quelli contro i quali ho difeso il mio paese in tempo di guerra e che hanno un interesse a farmi tacere.
Cari signori, voi sapete che medici russi sono giunti alla conclusione che l'esame ed il trattamento dei problemi dei vasi sanguigni nella mia testa sono necessari ed urgenti. Ecco perché mi rivolgo a voi, nella speranza che mi aiutiate a difendere la mia salute contro le attività criminali in questa istituzione che lavora sotto l'egida dell'ONU, e che io riceva prima possibile un trattamento adeguato nel vostro ospedale dai medici in cui nutro fiducia totale, come nella Russia.
Vi prego di accettare, signore e signori, l'espressione del mio rispetto profondo.
Slobodan Milosevic
(lettera inviata da Milošević l'8 marzo 2006, e ricevuta l'11 marzo all'Ambasciata russa in Olanda; traduzione originale: AP; fonte: quotidiano junge Welt (Germania) del 15 marzo 2006; versione italiana a cura di ICDSM-Italia.
Per la documentazione sull'assassinio di Milosevic da parte dei carcerieri dell'Aia si veda anche: https://www.cnj.it/MILOS/morte.htm )
---
Dear ladies and gentlemen,
With my acknowledgment for the solidarity and understanding which you expressed by accepting to receive me to come for medical treatment and by giving guarantees, I would like to inform you about the following:
I think that the persistence, with which the medical treatment in Russia was denied, in the first place is motivated by the fear that through careful examination it would be discovered, that there were active, willful steps taken, to destroy my health, throughout the proceedings of the trial, which could not be hidden from Russian specialists.
In order to verify my allegations, I'm presenting you a simple example which you can find in the attachment. This document, which I received on March 7, shows that on January 12th (i.e. two months ago), an extremely strong drug was found in my blood, which is used, as they themselves say, for the treatment of tuberculosis and leprosy, although I never used any kind of antibiotic during this 5 years that I'm in their prison.
Throughout this whole period, neither have I had any kind of infectious illness (apart from flu).
Also the fact that doctors needed 2 months (to report to me), can't have any other explanation than we are facing manipulation. In any case, those who foist on me a drug against leprosy surely can't treat my illness; likewise those from which I defended my country in times of war and who have an interest to silence me.
Dear Sirs, it is known to you that Russian physicians, who rank among the most respected physicians in the world, came to the conclusion that the examination and treatment of the vascular problems in my head are inevitable and urgent. I know very well that this is true, as I feel very bad.
I'm addressing you in expectation that you help me defend my health from the criminal activities in this institution, working under the sign of the U.N., and that I be enabled as soon as possible to get adequate treatment in your hospital, in whose physicians, as well as in Russia, I have absolute confidence.
Yours sincerely,
Slobodan Milosevic
With my acknowledgment for the solidarity and understanding which you expressed by accepting to receive me to come for medical treatment and by giving guarantees, I would like to inform you about the following:
I think that the persistence, with which the medical treatment in Russia was denied, in the first place is motivated by the fear that through careful examination it would be discovered, that there were active, willful steps taken, to destroy my health, throughout the proceedings of the trial, which could not be hidden from Russian specialists.
In order to verify my allegations, I'm presenting you a simple example which you can find in the attachment. This document, which I received on March 7, shows that on January 12th (i.e. two months ago), an extremely strong drug was found in my blood, which is used, as they themselves say, for the treatment of tuberculosis and leprosy, although I never used any kind of antibiotic during this 5 years that I'm in their prison.
Throughout this whole period, neither have I had any kind of infectious illness (apart from flu).
Also the fact that doctors needed 2 months (to report to me), can't have any other explanation than we are facing manipulation. In any case, those who foist on me a drug against leprosy surely can't treat my illness; likewise those from which I defended my country in times of war and who have an interest to silence me.
Dear Sirs, it is known to you that Russian physicians, who rank among the most respected physicians in the world, came to the conclusion that the examination and treatment of the vascular problems in my head are inevitable and urgent. I know very well that this is true, as I feel very bad.
I'm addressing you in expectation that you help me defend my health from the criminal activities in this institution, working under the sign of the U.N., and that I be enabled as soon as possible to get adequate treatment in your hospital, in whose physicians, as well as in Russia, I have absolute confidence.
Yours sincerely,
Slobodan Milosevic
(text of a handwritten letter dated March 8, 2006, written by Slobodan Milosevic to Russia asking for its help. Milosevic was found dead in his cell on March 11, 2006, less than 72 hours after writing this letter. The text of the letter was provided in an English translation by his lawyer Zdenko Tomanovic. Source: http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/sm030806.htm )
Jugocoord su Telegram
Jugocoord su Facebook