http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=72&ItemID=10731

ZMAG (USA)

Ethnic Cleansing: Constructive, Benign, and Nefarious
(Kafka Era Studies, No. 1)

by Edward S. Herman; August 09, 2006



Some years ago Noam Chomsky and I found it useful to distinguish
between three categories of terrorism--constructive, benign and
nefarious--the classification based strictly on the utility of the
terrorism to U.S. interests as perceived by the ruling political
elite [1]

Thus, when terrorism is seen by U.S. officials as highly advantageous
to U.S. interests, it is treated by those officials, and hence by the
media, as a positive development and hence "constructive." This was
the case with the vast massacres by Suharto and colleagues in
Indonesia in 1965-1966, that wiped out the base of a communist party
and cleared the ground for an open door to foreign investment and a
realignment of Indonesian foreign policy in favor of the West. In
this instance not only was there no moral indignation expressed at
the mass murder of many hundreds of thousands of civilians, it was
treated as a "dividend" from our policy of military aid to the
Indonesian army (Robert McNamara), and a "a gleam of light" in Asia
(James Reston). [2]

When the terrorism is not especially helpful to U.S. interests but is
carried out by an ally or client that U.S. officials want to placate
or protect, the killing of large numbers of civilians is treated as
of little interest and no evident moral concern-it is "benign"--as in
the case of Indonesia's invasion-occupation of East Timor in 1975 and
after, which resulted in the death of a third of the East Timorese
population, but which was aided and diplomatically protected by the
U. S. government, based on the perceived merits of the Suharto
dictatorship and kleptocracy. [3]

On the other hand, a terrorism carried out by a communist or any
other designated enemy state is given great attention, arouses great
moral fervor, and is treated as "nefarious." This was the case with
the killings by Pol Pot in Cambodia, the NLF in Vietnam, and Saddam
Hussein in Iraq--except during the period in the 1980s when Saddam
was serving U.S. interests by killing Iranians. This classification
system was and remains useful, and is notable in its successful
tracking not only official designations but media treatment as well.
For the first two kinds of terrorism, the media are reliably very
quiet, with little coverage, antiseptic and sometimes apologetic
treatment of murderous behavior where it is mentioned at all, [4] and
with no indignation. With nefarious terror, on the other hand,
coverage is intense, detailed, includes many personal stories of
suffering, and elicits great indignation. [5]

Over the past two decades, during which ethnic cleansing has
frequently been featured by Western officials, pundits and human
rights activists, a closely parallel system of official treatment and
media follow-on is also evident. As with terrorism, in the official
view ethnic cleansing can be constructive, benign, or nefarious, and
the media recognize this and adjust with almost clockwork precision
to the demands of state policy in treating its different manifestations.


Constructive Ethnic Cleansing: Croatia and the Krajina Serbs

As a model instance of constructive ethnic cleansing, we may take the
case of the Croat ethnic cleansing of Serbs from the Krajina region
of Croatia in August 1995. Long before that date the Clinton
administration had aligned itself with the Croats and Bosnian Muslims
in the externally stoked civil war that engulfed the region from 1991
onward: it had supported sanctions on the Serbs alone, sponsored and
used the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
(ICTY) as an anti-Serb political-PR-judicial instrument, [6]
encouraged the Bosnian Muslims to withdraw from the Lisbon agreement
in March 1992--an agreement that would have settled the conflict and
prevented the further large-scale blood-letting--helped organize an
alliance between the Muslims and Croats to help them better fight the
Serbs, and supported the import of arms and mujahadeen to help the
Muslims fight and kill more effectively, among other matters.

To further weaken the bargaining position of the Serbs, the Clinton
administration actively supported the Croatian army's attacks on the
Serb communities in Croatia in Operation Flash in May 1995 and then
in the massive ethnic cleansing of Krajina Serbs in Operation Storm
in August 1995. Richard Holbrooke visited Zagreb two days before the
beginning of Operation Storm, and clearly did not exercise any
restraining influence on the imminent cleansing operation. Active
U.S. support came in the form of military aid, the provision of
military "advisers" closely affiliated with the U.S. armed forces,
direct participation in the military operations via intelligence
provision and even selective bombing missions, and a refusal to
cooperate with the ICTY in providing information on possible war
crimes committed by the Croatian armed forces. [7]

Another form of U.S. support was an intense and indignant focus on
the Srebrenica massacre, [8] which took place during the month before
Operation Storm and helped justify and distract attention from the
Croatian ethnic cleansing and massacre. Operation Storm involved the
removal of some 200,000 to 250,000 Krajina Serbs, in contrast with
perhaps one-tenth that number of Bosnian Muslims removed from
Srebrenica. [9] Operation Storm may also have involved the killing of
more Serb civilians than Bosnian Muslim civilians killed in the
Srebrenica area in July: virtually all of the Bosnian Muslim victims
were fighters, not civilians, as the Bosnian Serbs bused the
Srebrenica women and children to safety. The Croats made no such
provision and hundreds of women, children and old people were
slaughtered in Krajina. [10] The ruthlessness of the Croats was
impressive: Tim Ripley notes that "UN troops watched horrified as
Croat soldiers dragged the bodies of dead Serbs along the road
outside the UN compound and then pumped them full of rounds from the
AK-47s. They then crushed the bullet-ridden bodies under the tracks
of a tank." [11]

Media treatment of the Srebrenica and Krajina cases followed the
familiar pattern of fixing victim worthiness and unworthiness in
accord with a political agenda. With the Serbs their government's
target, and their government actively aiding the massive Croat ethnic
cleansing program in Krajina, the media gave huge and indignant
treatment to the first, with invidious language, calls for action,
and little context. On the other hand, with Krajina, attention was
slight and passing, detailed reporting on the condition of the
victims was minimal, descriptive language was neutral, indignation
was absent, and the slight context offered made the cleansing and
killings acceptable.

The contrast in language is notable: the attack on Srebrenica
"chilling," "murderous," "savagery," "cold-blooded killing,"
"genocidal," "aggression," and of course "ethnic cleansing." With
Krajina, the media used no such strong language-even ethnic cleansing
was too much for them, even though this was an obvious, carefully
planned, and major case. The Croat assault was merely a big
"upheaval" that is "softening up the enemy," "a lightning offensive,"
explained away as a "response to Srebrenica" and a result of Serb
leaders "overplaying their hand." The Washington Post even cited U.S.
Ambassador to Croatia Peter Galbraith saying the "the Serb exodus was
not 'ethnic cleansing'." [12] The paper did not allow a challenge to
that judgment. In fact, however, the Croat operations in Krajina left
Croatia the most ethnically purified of all the former components of
the former Yugoslavia, although the NATO occupation of Kosovo allowed
an Albanian ethnic cleansing of Serbs, Roma and others that rivalled
that of Croatia in ethnic purification. [13]

Although in recent years there has been a trickle of expelled Serbs
returning to Croatian Krajina, in neither the Krajina nor Kosovo
cases has there been any effort by the NATO powers to organize the
return of the ethnically-cleansed Serbs to their homes from which
they were removed by force. Civilian victims associated with a
Western target are unworthy. Based on no substantive differences
whatever, their killers and ethnic cleansers are allowed to be
retaliating and taking revenge, rather than pursuing ethnic cleansing
for more sinister motives (racial hatred, land hunger), and these
unworthy victims have no right of return.

In the case of Kosovo, the UN is actually planning for 40,000
additional Serb refugees in case of an expected granting of full
independence to Kosovo and Kosovo Albanian control. [14] Thus, not
only are unworthy victims not treated with sympathy or allowed any
right of return, the international community will even plan to
collaborate in a further round of ethnic cleansing by a Western ally
or client, and the media won't complain or even notice.


Benign Ethnic Cleansing: Israel's Removal of the Palestinians to
"Redeem the Land"

As an illustration of benign ethnic cleansing, the case of Israel's
long-term expropriation and removal of Palestinians in Israel proper,
on the West Bank, in East Jerusalem, and Gaza is clear and very
important, morally and politically. It is "benign," because the
United States does not benefit from this process, which has a
negative feedback effect on Arab and many other peoples' view of the
United States; this is a case of the tail wagging the dog, with the
dog injuring itself as it spins around in service to its tail.

Its importance rests on several other considerations: This has been a
very obvious--even model--case of ethnic cleansing, in which one
ethnic group has used its military power and aid from the West
(mainly the United States) to evict another ethnic group that stands
in its way. This fundamental fact has been acknowledged by a long
line of Israeli officials and intellectual defenders of Israel, who
have admitted, sometimes regretfully, that to "redeem the land"
occupied by Palestinians in favor of the "chosen people" would
require systematic expropriation and associated killing and forced
transfer.

Back in 1948, David Ben-Gurion was clear that "We must use terror,
assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of
all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population." Fifty
years later, in 1998, Ariel Sharon made the same point about the
centrality of ethnic cleansing in Israeli policy: "It is the duty of
Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and
courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with
time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonization
or Jewish state without the eviction of the Arabs and the
expropriation of their lands." On May 24, 2006, Israeli Prime
Minister Ehud Olmert told a joint session of congress that "I
believed and to this day still believe, in our people's eternal and
historic right to this entire land."

Despite these and numerous other statements along the same line, [15]
the Western elites pretend that Israel's expropriations and ethnic
cleansing are not the basic (and profoundly immoral) causal force in
the struggle over Palestine, and in a Kafkaesque mode it is the
Palestinian resistance to their ethnic cleansing that is to be
condemned.

It should be noted that Israel's "eternal and historic right" to
Olmert's "entire land" may well underlie the current and renewed
Israeli aggression in Lebanon and huge ethnic cleansing and refugee
generation in southern Lebanon. Officially, Israel's ground invasion
of Lebanon is an act of self-defense against Hezbollah's threat,
aimed at creating a security buffer zone until the arrival of a
"multinational force with an enforcement capability." But
increasingly, as the initial goal of a narrow strip of only a few
kilometers has now been extended up to the Litani River deep in
Lebanon, the real motives behind Israel's invasion are becoming
crystal clear.

Back in the 1940s Ben Gurion declared that Israel's "natural borders"
extended to the Litani in the north and the Jordan to the east--
coincidentally the two sources of snow fed water in the region. Even
in their current announced plan to evacuate the West Bank the
Israelis intend to hold the Jordan "for security reasons." The Litani
is next. The Golan is also valued for its water. Thus, while
officially, Israel's ground invasion of Lebanon is claimed to be an
act of self-defense against Hezbollah's threat, aimed at creating a
security buffer zone until the arrival of a "multinational force with
an enforcement capability," the initial goal of a narrow strip of
southern Lebanon "has now been extended up to the Litani River deep
in Lebanon, [and] the real motives behind Israel's invasion are
becoming crystal-clear…. This is a war to annex a major chunk of
Lebanese territory without necessarily saying so, under the pretext
of security buffer and deterrence against future attacks on
Israel." [16]

This drive to "redeem the land," requiring the takeover of land in
the possession of others by force, also constitutes a model case of
a quest for a "Greater" entity--here a Greater Israel-a drive which
in the case of Milosevic's and the Serbs' alleged drive for a
"Greater Serbia" was presented as a prime element of illegal
activity in the ICTY indictment of Milosevic (see below under
Nefarious). In no case has this drive for a Greater Israel been
pointed to by U.S. officials or the U.S. mainstream media as an
immoral and illegal program that should call for international
intervention and prosecution in the mode of the Serb prosecution,
although the Israeli program has been explicitly designed to
ethnically cleanse a sizable civilian population.

This model case of ethnic cleansing also represents a clear instance
of applied racism, in which the militarily stronger and ethnic
cleansing state--its leaders, armed forces, and a major part of its
media, intellectuals and citizenry, who would be called "willing
executioners" if residing in a Western targeted state--in both words
and actions treat the population in process of removal as inferiors
(untermenschen in the Nazi mode). These inferiors are not merely
discriminated against but freely abused with beatings, harsh
treatment at checkpoints, home demolitions and expropriations in
accord with Israeli desires, theft of land and water, and killings
without penalty. As the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem states,
"Israel has established in the occupied Territories a separation cum
discrimination regime, in which it maintains two systems of laws, and
a person's rights are based on his or her national origin. This
regime is the only of its kind in the world, and brings to mind dark
regimes of the past, such as the Apartheid regime in South Africa."

High Israeli officials have for years described the Palestinians as
"cockroaches," "lice," "grasshoppers," "animals," "two-legged
beasts," a "cancer," along with other epithets of dehumanization, and
they have repeatedly devalued Palestinian life as compared with that
of Jews (most recently, Olmert's statement that "the lives and well-
being of Sderot's residents are more important than those of Gaza
residents"; more dramatically, Rabbi Yaacov Perin's "One million
Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail"). Palestinian numbers
represent what in Israel is called a "demographic threat," and
Israeli academic and human rights activist Jeff Halper states that
"schemes of 'transfer' have become an acceptable part of Israeli
political discourse...[as Israel] actively pursues policies of
displacement: exile and deportation, the revoking of residency
rights, economic impoverishment, land expropriations, house
demolitions, and other means of making life so unbearable as to
induce 'voluntary' Palestinian emigration." [17]

Hundreds of checkpoints make Palestinian movement difficult and
insecure, even between local neighborhoods, and they are closed on
Jewish holidays, paralyzing Palestinian economic and social life. As
of two years ago 79 Palestinians had died as a result of delays at
checkpoints and dozens of women had given childbirth (along with many
still-borns) at or near obstructed checkpoints. [18] There have been
over 11,000 Israeli demolitions of Palestinian homes since 1967,
fewer than 600 belonging to people accused of terrorist activities
or their families (the latter a form of collective punishment that is
a war crime). One Israeli cabinet minister, Yosef Lapid, a holocaust
survivor, caused an uproar at one weekly cabinet meeting, at which
the demolition of homes in the Rafah refugee camp was being
discussed, when he said that a picture of an old Palestinian women on
the rubble of her home reminded him "of my grandmother in the
Holocaust," adding that there "is no forgiveness for people who treat
an old woman this way." [19] His remarks, unreported in the New York
Times, had no influence on Israeli policy.

The demolitions are almost all to clear the ground for homes or roads
or "security zones" for the ubermenschen, with minimal notice and
zero indignation from the Western establishment. In Jerusalem,
"Jewish-Israeli homes are never demolished, although 80% of the
building violations take place on the Western side of the city." [20]
When the settlers were removed from Gaza, they had long notice and
received between $140,000 and $400,000 per family for this
dislocation. Palestinians whose houses are demolished rarely receive
even token compensation and, as Amnesty International notes, "the
family may only have 15 minutes to take out what belongings they have
before the furniture is thrown into the street and their home
bulldozed" [21] This racist double standard, as well as the
associated racist language and perspectives, has been normalized and
has caused no negative reaction toward the racist state in the West.

Israel's Western-approved ethnic cleansing program has been massive,
proceeding both in spurts of larger-scale cleansing and in continual
lower-intensity expropriations and removal for almost 60 years
(1947-2006). Some 750,000 Palestinians were ethnically cleansed in
1947-48, several hundred thousand were removed during and immediately
after the 1967 war, and an exodus, partially "voluntary," based on
Israeli violence, threats, fear, and impoverishment has been
continuous at other times up to the present day. The apartheid wall
under construction within the boundaries of the West Bank has
involved the removal of thousands, with larger numbers in prospect,
plus damage to a great many whose lands have been partly expropriated
or divided by the wall (which carefully avoids disturbing Jewish
settlements, but not Palestinian settlements or property). Large
numbers of Palestinians have simply moved out of their homeland,
adding a 2.4 million non-refugee diaspora to a refugee diaspora of
2.5 million (the total Palestinian population worldwide is estimated
to be 9.7 million).

It is an important fact that this durable and massive ethnic
cleansing process has taken place in daily violation of international
law, from which the ethnic cleansing state is exempt by virtue of
long-standing primary U.S. support, a lesser but real support by the
other great powers, and the weakness and compromised character of the
Arab and other members of the international community. Israel has
simply ignored dozens of Security Council and other UN rulings, the
Geneva Conventions applicable to an occupying power, and decisions of
the International Court. Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention
stipulates that "the occupying power shall not transfer parts of its
own civilian population into the territory it occupies," a clear ban
on settlements, ignored along with numerous other provisions of
international law (which illegalize the theft of water, the
checkpoints and abusive treatment, and the numerous other
restrictions on movement).

Israel's huge wall, built almost entirely within Palestinian
territory, inflicting serious damage on several hundred thousand
Palestinians and blatantly in violation of the Geneva Conventions,
was found illegal by the International Court on July 9, 2004, the
court requesting the international community "not to render any aid
or assistance to the wall and associated regime." But Israel has
simply ignored this legal ruling, with the crucial support of the
United States and de facto support of the international community,
the latter (including the World Bank), continuing to do normal
business with the outlaw and thus colluding in its law violations and
ethnic cleansing program. [22]

Israel has been able to violate international law and continue its
ethnic cleansing project without obstruction or any sort of penalty
to this day. The United States vetoed a demand for international
monitors during the second intifada in 2002, and has also prevented
any international intervention in the serial and brutal Israeli armed
attacks on Palestinian refugee camps and cities (e.g., Jenin, Nablus,
Ramallah in 2002) and currently Gaza and Lebanon once again.
Obviously, no tribunals have been established to deal with these
blatant and large-scale war crimes and massive ethnic cleansing.
This is benign ethnic cleansing.

The rationalizations for this systematic ethnic cleansing have been
extremely crude and question-begging, but effective in the West.
Israel is always allowed to be "retaliating" to terror, although
there is invariably a sequence of tit-for-tat violence that the
Western establishment regularly cuts off at the point of a
Palestinian action, ignoring the prior Israeli provocations. [23]
That the Israelis keep seizing large and small blocs of Palestinian-
occupied land in response to "terror" and for Israeli "security" is
laughable, and of course flies in the face of the long-standing
Israeli admission of plans for "redeeming the land," but the
Israelis have been allowed to get away with this laughable basis for
land theft and expulsions. Palestinian resistance to their removal is
allowed to be "terrorism" and not retaliation for Israeli violence,
which is never terrorism or causal.

The Palestinians are in a lose-lose situation: if they don't resist
removal they will be removed and the West will not help them; if they
resist without violence, as in the first intifada, the West will not
help them and they will continue to be removed; and if they resist
with their puny force, they will be "terrorists" and the West will
condemn their "violence" as it collaborates further in their ethnic
cleansing!

Arabs and Third World peoples more generally can see that despite the
preachings of the West on the enlightenment values of equality, the
value of each individual, tolerance, and the importance of the rule
of law, all of these values have been suspended in the conflict
between the Israelis and Palestinians, with the West providing
unstinting and hypocritical support to Israel's brutal ethnic
cleansing and applied racism. This has fed the anger of the Islamic
world and beyond by providing an ongoing and exceedingly clear
illustrative case of Western racism and discrimination, a case where
the West is engaged in a wholly unprovoked war of aggression and
colonial aggrandizement against a non-Western people. .


Nefarious Ethnic Cleansing: The Case of the Serbs in Kosovo

The best known case in which the West has denounced and fought
against ethnic cleansing has been that of the Serbs fighting in
Bosnia, Croatia and Kosovo. In fact the term really came into its own
in application to this case. The Serbs were also accused of genocide
in Bosnia and Kosovo, although there was the difficulty that after
the Kosovo bombing war was over in June 1999 and intensive forensic
searches yielded only some 4,000 bodies from all sides, the
hysterical claims of U.S. officials (which at a peak hit 500,000
Kosovo Albanian victims) were shown to be wild propaganda
exaggerations. Thus, to establish a charge of genocide against
Milosevic the ICTY had to extend his villainy to Bosnia and,
accordingly, he was belatedly made part of a "joint criminal
conspiracy" along with Bosnian Serb officials. [24]

There is no question but that there was ethnic cleansing in Bosnia in
the years 1991-1995, and that the Bosnian Serbs were implicated in
the ethnic cleansing operations of those years. But they were not
alone-the Croats and Bosnian Muslims were very active participants,
with substantial armed forces, imported mujahadeen fighters, and
growing aid from the United States and other external allies
(including Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia) that produced an
eventual military stalemate and threatened defeat for the Bosnian
Serbs. [25] And as noted earlier, the largest single ethnic cleansing
of the Yugoslavia wars was in Operation Storm, carried out by the
Croats against the Krajina Serbs, with active U.S. assistance. In
Bosnia the ethnic cleansing resulted from a struggle for land control
by three ethnic groups or "nations" in a civil conflict unleashed by
the unmediated breakup of Yugoslavia. None of the three was
powerless, and all suffered casualties, the Bosnian Muslims the most,
the Croats the least. [26]

One important difference from the case of Israel in Palestine is that
all three ethnic groups in Bosnia were seeking to improve their
strategic position, whereas in the Israel-Palestine case, only one
side has been seeking to take land from the other contestant. A
second difference is that in Bosnia and Croatia all three parties in
the struggle were well armed, and in the end the Bosnian Serbs were
even overbalanced by their military opponents, [27] whereas in the
Israel-Palestine case the contestants are one of the world's
strongest military powers (Israel), backed by a superpower, versus a
virtually defenseless population that doesn't even have the support
of several of its important local Arab neighbors. A third difference,
following plausibly from the second, is that whereas the ratio of
Muslim to Serb civilian deaths in Bosnia was perhaps two to one, the
ratio of Palestinian to Israeli civilian deaths was for many years
something like 25 to1, dropping in the second intifada to 3 or 4 to 1
(with a higher injury ratio). [28]

In Kosovo, the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) became very active in
1998 and the Yugoslav army responded with a crackdown that produced a
large number of internal refugees. NATO threats and an accord in
October 1998 forced the Serbs to accept a large body of OSCE
monitors and to withdraw Yugoslav army forces from Kosovo. The KLA
was not subject to any restraints by NATO and took advantage of the
new arrangements to occupy more Kosovo space, and they engaged in
numerous provocations to entice the Yugoslav police to crackdowns
that would help precipitate NATO intervention. The Racak "massacre"
of January 15, 1999, almost surely not a genuine massacre but an
incident in which KLA battle deaths were converted into a civilian
massacre by KLA-OSCE-ICTY and media cooperation, [29] helped
precipitate a NATO war on behalf of the Kosovo Albanians. The war
produced a flood of refugees fleeing the Yugoslav army, the KLA, and
the NATO bombs.

Was any of this "ethnic cleansing"? Before the NATO bombing war began
there had been many refugees created by Yugoslav army actions in
pursuit of the KLA and treating Albanian villagers sometimes very
harshly. There were, however, no cases reported of slaughters by the
Serbs comparable to the U.S. massacre at Haditha, nothing remotely
like the U.S. destruction of Falluja, and pre-bombing war civilian
casualties in Kosovo were only a very small fraction of those
produced by the U.S. forces in Iraq. [30] The Kosovo Albanians who
became refugees in that period were victims of a civil war within a
part of Serbia, whereas West Bank victims were in occupied territory
outside of Israel. Most relevant to the issue of ethnic cleansing,
Kosovo Albanians were not being pushed out to make way for Serb
settlers, as Palestinians were displaced by Jewish settlers in the
true case of ethnic cleansing on the West Bank. The German Foreign
office stated explicitly that the turmoil and refugee generation in
Kosovo before the bombing war was not a case of ethnic cleansing,
[31] and British officials even acknowledged that in the runup to the
bombing war the KLA killed more people in Kosovo, including Albanian
"traitors" as well as Serb police and civilians, than did the
Yugoslav army and police. [32]

Albanians who fled during the bombing war were war refugees, not
victims of ethnic cleansing, and Serbs in Kosovo fled with even
greater frequency than the Albanians. Nevertheless, in a remarkable
propaganda coup, the war propagandists made and actually got away
with the claim that the war was necessary to allow the return of
Albanians whose exit was a result of the war itself.

A number of consequences followed from the fact that the Serbs were
the targets of the United States and its allies. Flowing strictly
from this political alignment, Serb treatment of their antagonists in
the wars in Bosnia, Croatia and Kosovo was nefarious, and from 1991
onward the Serbs were the focus of attention and vilification and
subject to inflated claims, sanctions and legal (ICTY) attacks from
which others doing much the same thing were free. As regards ethnic
cleansing, the term was applied to them freely, not only in Bosnia
but in Kosovo, where it was not applicable. As noted earlier, ethnic
cleansing was extremely applicable to the removal of Serbs from
Croatian Krajina, but as this was done under U.S. auspices the term
was not applied there, nor was it applied to Israel on the West Bank
where ethnic cleansing was crystal clear.

In the three year period 1998 through 2000, the New York Times,
Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Time and Newsweek used the phrase
"ethnic cleansing" some 1,200 times in discussing Kosovo, in about
four-fifths of the cases in reference to Serb policy, whereas during
the entire decade of the 1990s they used the phrase only 14 times in
discussing Israel, and only five times referring to Israeli policy.
This reflects massive internalized bias.

Another consequence of the Serbs being U.S. targets was that they
were allegedly guilty of striving for a "Greater Serbia," an
important feature of the ICTY case against Milosevic. But this
accusation was silly and effectively fell apart during the Milosevic
trial when the prosecutor Geoffrey Nice admitted to the court that
Milosevic wasn't striving to enlarge Serb claims but merely to keep
all Serbs under one flag as Yugoslavia disintegrated-and there was a
great deal of evidence that Milosevic wasn't trying very hard even to
keep Serbs in one state. [33] The contrast here with Israel in
Palestine is dramatic-Israel has been openly trying to enlarge
Israeli territory at the expense of another people. But as noted
earlier, this is not something the U.S.-dominated international
community interferes with, and this model case of ethnic cleansing
isn't even worth discussing in the West. This is benign, not
nefarious ethnic cleansing.

In the case of Kosovo, the West was so upset at the effects of the
struggle there and victimization of the Kosovo Albanians that the
Serbs were warned that force might be employed against them if they
didn't restrain themselves, and the Serbs were compelled to accept a
large number of OSCE monitors, although as noted earlier no
restrictions were place by the OSCE on the KLA. Again the contrast
with the West Bank case is dramatic: there, where there was real
ethnic cleansing by Israel on behalf of settlers taking over
Palestinian property, and with massive Israeli operations in
violation of the Third and Fourth Geneva Convention, no monitors were
allowed, because the United States wouldn't support this, so ethnic
cleansing could proceed unhindered.

Then, with the excuse of Racak, the United States could go to war and
devastate Serbia and Kosovo, to protect those victims of Serbia in
Kosovo in a great moral crusade against "ethnic cleansing"! Racak
was not a massacre of civilians, the Serbs were not ethnically
cleansing in Kosovo, and the Serbs were not violating international
law in their civil war struggle in Kosovo as the Israelis were doing
on the West Bank, but the United States has been able to get away
with the active support of ethnic cleansing in the one case and
illegal war against a non-existent ethnic cleansing on the other
hand, with the support of the international community.


Conclusion

In the age of Kafka, ethnic cleansing is clearly acceptable when it
is serviceable to the United States or carried out by one of its
allies or clients, but it is assailed with great energy and
indignation and opposed by force when engaged in (or asserted to be
engaged in) by a U.S. target. In the former cases, the United States
and its allies may actively aid the ethnic cleansing state, and,
except for occasional nominal actions that the international
community does not attempt to enforce, and its occasional whimpers
calling for restraint, ethnic cleansing can proceed for decades in
violation of both international law and the moral rules supposedly
guiding the enlightened West. This of course requires great
discipline by the intellectual class and media, who must keep the
bulk of relevant facts out of sight and allow the ethnic cleansing
state to expropriate and remove its unwanted ethnic target population
under cover of a combination of silence and its alleged necessary
response to "terror" and inability to locate a "negotiating partner."

On the other hand, ethnic cleansing and claims of ethnic cleansing by
a target country like the former Yugoslavia is treated with an
intense focus of attention, great moral indignation, and aggressive
"humanitarian intervention," in keeping with Western enlightenment
values. In this case, sanctions may be imposed and international
monitors may be forced upon the delinquent country to constrain its
misbehavior, and an incident such as the killing of 40 Kosovo
Albanians by Yugoslav police can bring about a bombing war and
occupation of part of the villain's national territory. In this case
also an international tribunal can be organized to bring the ethnic
cleansing state's leaders and military commanders to justice.
Nefarious ethnic cleansing can be treated harshly.

In 1996 Israel could kill 104 Lebanese civilians, 86 of them
children, in a bombing raid on a UN refugee facility, and in July
2006 kill another 36 children in a UN facility along with killing 4
UN observers in July 2006, and lie about their knowledge of the
nature of the targets in all three cases, and receive no reprimand
from its U.S. sponsor and hence no serious response from the
"international community." In fact, Boutros-Boutros Ghali's taking
the 1996 killings a bit too seriously for Clinton administration
tastes may have hastened his replacement as UN leader. [34] This was
the same Clinton administration that found the 40 killed at Racak
(none children, one woman, all but the woman almost surely KLA
fighters) a really terrible event worthy of a violent international
response!

The hypocrisy involved in this applied double standard is breath-
taking. As noted earlier, whereas both the Croat leadership in
cleansing Serbs from Krajina and the Israeli leadership in removing
Palestinians were very clearly doing this to get rid of an unwanted
population to replace it with a competing ethnic group, the Yugoslav
actions in Kosovo were features of a civil war. Whereas the Israeli
leadership was and still is quite explicitly seeking a "Greater
Israel" by land theft and people expulsion, Milosevic was trying to
keep the Serbs of the former Yugoslavia within a single remnant
political entity and not trying to enlarge Serb territory at the
expense of some other ethnic group (as Prosecutor Geoffrey Nice
acknowledged during the Milosevic trial). Whereas the Israeli
leadership has for years described the Palestinians in extremely
derogatory and racist language, no such derogation of Kosovo
Albanians (or other nationalities) has ever been attributed to
Milosevic, and Albanians in Belgrade have never been subjected to
discrimination such as Arabs undergo in Israel (not to speak of the
occupied territories). In sum, the differential treatment of
Milosevic and Sharon, the one prosecuted--after a failed
assassination attempt-[35] and the other honored as a Free World
leader and "man of peace," was not only not based on the realities of
ethnic cleansing or any honest application of the law, it reflects
pure power and structured injustice in the age of Kafka.

-------------------------------------------
Endnotes:

1. Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman, The Washington Connection and
Third World Fascism (Boston; South End Press, 1979).

2. Ibid., chapter 4, sec. 4.1.

3. Ibid., chapter 3, section 3.4.4.

4. In a classic case, when Indonesian violence in East Timor reached
its peak in 1977-1978, New York Times coverage fell to zero; see
ibid.; see also Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing
Consent (New York: Pantheon, 1988, 2002), chapter 2, "Worthy and
Unworthy Victims.".

5. See Washington Connection, chap. 5, sec. 5.2; Noam Chomsky and
Edward S. Herman, After the Cataclysm (Boston: South End Press,
1979), esp. chap. 6.

6. See Michael Mandel, How America Gets Away With Murder (London:
Pluto, 2005), chaps. 4-6.

7. Raymond Bonner, "War Crimes Panel Finds Croat Troops 'Cleansed'
the Serbs," New York Times, March 21, 1999.

8. See Edward Herman, "<http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?
SectionID=74&ItemID=8244> The Politics of the Srebrenica Massacre,"
ZNet, July 7, 2005..

9. On August 10, 1995, Madeleine Albright cried out to the Security
Council that "as many as 13,000 men, women and children were driven
from their homes" in Srebrenica.. (<The">http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/
UNDOC/PRO/N95/858/

26/PDF/N9585826.pdf?OpenElement>The Situation in the Republic of
Bosnia and Herzegovina (<S/PV.3564">http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/
PRO/N95/858/26/PDF/N9585826.pdf?OpenElement>S/PV.3564), UN Security
Council, August 10, 1995, 5.30 p.m., pp. 6-7). Needless to say,
Albright did not cry out about the 200,000+ Karajina Serbs being
driven out of their homes in the same time frame as she wept for the
13,000.

10. The Krajina Serb human rights organization Veritas estimated that
1,205 civilians were killed in Operation Storm, including 358 women
and 10 children. See "Croatian Serb Exodus Commemorated," Agence
France Press, Aug. 4, 2004; also, Veritas at
www.veritas.org.yu'">http://www.veritas.org.yu/>www.veritas.org.yu'.
In the graves around Srebrenica exhumed through 2000, only one of
the 1,883 bodies was identified as female.

11. Tim Ripley, Operation Deliberate Force (Lancaster, UK: CDISS,
1999), p. 192.

12. "U.N. Report: Bosnian Serbs Massacred Srebrenica Muslims,"
Washington Post, Aug. 12, 1995. For illustrative language, see also
John Pomfret, "Investigators Begin Exhuming Group of Mass Graves in
Bosnia," Washington Post, July 8, 1996. "Upheaval" is in "Softening
Up The Enemy," Newsweek, Aug. 21, 1995.

13. Jan Oberg, "Misleading UN Report on Kosovo (Part A)," TFF
PressInfo 77, Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research,
Lund, Sweden, October 3, 1999, <http://www.transnational.org/pressinf/
pf77.html

14. "Europe Prepares to Evacuate 40,000 Kosovo Serbs," Focus News
Agency (Bulgaria), April 18, 2006.

15. For several dozen Israeli leaders' statements of racist
denigration and indication that ethnic cleansing is a necessary and
proper course, see "<Quotes">http://www.monabaker.com/
quotes.htm>Quotes," < The">The">http://www.monabaker.com/quotes.htm>
The Middle East Conflict (Personal Website of Mona Baker);
"<Israel's">http://www.just-international.org/article.cfm?
newsid=20001494>Israel's Barbaric and Primitive Action: Examples of
Hate Speech," International Movement for a Just World, 2005. Olmert's
speech can be found at http://www.pmo.gov.il/PMOEng/Communication/
PMSpeaks/speechcong240506.htm

16. Kaveh L Afrasiabi , "It's about annexation, stupid!": <">http://
www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HH05Ak01.html>
; see also. Paul Larudee, "The Clearing of South Lebanon: The
Lebanese Nakba and Israeli Ambitiions": http://www.counterpunch.org/
larudee08082006.html

17. Jeff Halper, Obstacles to Peace: A Re-Framing of the Palestinian-
Israeli Conflict (Carrboro, NC: The Israeli Committee Against House
Demolitions, 2004), p. 17.

18. Ibid, p. 18.

19. A.P., "Official Compares Israeli Action to Nazi's," Guardian, May
21, 2004.

20. Halper, Obstacles to Peace, p. 34.

21. AI, "Israel: Home Demolitions," Dec. 8, 1999.

22. See "Free Markets: Imprisoned People," in "Against 'Sustainable'
Apartheid & Occupation," www.stopthewall.org'">http://
www.stopthewall.org/>www.stopthewall.org'

23. This is dramatically evident in the cases of the recent Israeli
invasions of Gaza and Lebanon, where the U.S. mainstream media have
simply taken the captures of a few Israeli soldiers as the
precipitating events, neglecting both any prior Israeli actions and
the evidence of Israeli plans for these actions that were simply
waiting for the proper moment to execute.

24. For a discussion of "joint criminal enterprise," along with
other relevant matters, see Edward Herman and David Peterson,
"<Milosevic's">Milosevic's">http://www.electricpolitics.com/2006/05/
milosevics_death_in_the_propag.html>Milosevic's Death in the
Propaganda System," <ElectricPolitics.com">ElectricPolitics.com">
http://www.electricpolitics.com/index.html>
ElectricPolitics.com, May 14, 2006.

25. This military stalemate is discussed in Tim Fenton's "The
Military Context," in Edward S. Herman, ed., The Srebrenica Massacre:
Evidence, Context, Politics (forthcoming).

26. Ewa Tabeau and Jakub Bijak, "War-related Deaths in the 1992-1995
Armed Conflicts in Bosnia and Herzegovina: A Critique of Previous
Estimates and Recent Results," European Journal of Population, Vol.
21, No. 2-3, June, 2005, pp. 187-215; Mirsad Tokaca of the Sarajevo-
based Research and Documentation Center, as quoted in "Bosnian war
'claimed 100,000 lives'," Deutsche Presse-Agentur, November 21, 2005;
in Nedim Dervisbegovic, "Research halves Bosnia war death toll to
100,000," Reuters, November 23, 2005.

27. See note 25 above.

28. Ibid.; James Bennett, "MIDEAST TURMOIL: NEWS ANALYSIS; Mideast
Balance Sheet," New York Times, March 12, 2002 .

29. See Mandel, How America Gets Away With Murder, pp. 72-80; Edward
Herman, "Propaganda System Number 1," Z Magazine, July-Aug. 2001

30. The total killings in Kosovo in the year before the NATO bombing
war was estimated at some 2,000, with less than half of those
allocable to the Yugoslav army (see note 30). As the U.S. killings in
Iraq are surely greater than 50,000, we are talking about a ratio of
better than 50 to 1 in favor of the United States as killer.

31. Both the German foreign office, German courts, and British
intelligence denied that Serb actions in Kosovo before the war were
linked to ethnicity: see Noam Chomsky, A New Generation Draws the
Line [London: Verso, 2000], pp. 112-3.

32. British Minister of Defense George Robertson told the House of
Commons on March 24, 1999 that until mid-January 1999 "the KLA were
responsible for more deaths in Kosovo than the Yugoslav authorities
had been." (Cited in ibid., p. 106.)

33. See Herman and Peterson, "Death of Milosevic in the Propaganda
System."

34. In Ran HaCohen's "The UN from Qana to Jenin: Why the Secretary
General's Report Cannot Be Trusted," Letter From Israel, Aug. 14,
2002, HaCohen describes how back in 1996 then Secretary General
Boutros-Ghali had insisted on publishing a report on Israel's killing
of over a 100 civilians in Qana, over U.S. protests. The result was
that a week later, on May 13, 1996, U.S. Secretary of State Warren
Christopher informed Boutros-Ghali that the United States would veto
his re-election. Writing in 2002 HaCohen was explaining how the more
pliable Kofi Annan, in dealing with Jenin, "without visiting the
sceneŠissued a shameful report, echoing Israeli propaganda, ignoring
even 'embarrassing' material published in the Israeli press."

35. A U.S. missile attack targeted Milosevic's residence in Belgrade
on April 22, 1999, but failed to assassinate him.

From: icdsm-italia @...
Subject: [icdsm-italia] Momir Bulatovic: "Slobodan Milosevic -
Neizgovorena odbrana"
Date: August 9, 2006 10:23:05 PM GMT+02:00
To: icdsm-italia @yahoogroups.com

(srpskohrvatski / italiano)

LA MORTE DI SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC HA INTERROTTO LA PREPARAZIONE DELLA
DIFESA

Momir Bulatovic ha presentato il libro sulla testimonianza non
presentata all'Aia

Danas (Belgrado), 1 agosto 2006

Belgrado - L'ex primo ministro della RF di Jugoslavia Momir Bulatovic
ha presentato ieri il libro "Slobodan Milosevic - La difesa non
presentata", che parla del loro lavoro comune di preparazione della
testimonianza di Bulatovic al Tribunale dell'Aia. Bulatovic avrebbe
dovuto iniziare la sua testimonianza il 14 marzo di quest'anno, ma
ciò non è potuto avvenire a causa della morte di Slobodan Milosevic.
Immediatamente prima della morte di Milosevic i due preparavano la
testimonianza di Bulatovic. Nel libro si citano le domande e le
risposte che Milosevic e Bulatovic stavano preparando, insieme ad una
serie di trascrizioni e documenti delle sedute dei più alti organi
dello Stato. Il libro segue cronologicamente il periodo dalla
dissoluzione della Lega dei Comunisti di Jugoslavia alla fine del
1989, fino agli scontri in Kosovo e Metohija dieci anni più tardi.
Il ricavato della vendita del libro sarà devoluto a fini umanitari,
all'Istituto per la trasfusione del sangue della Serbia. Alla
conferenza stampa ha partecipato anche la ex segretaria personale di
Milosevic, Senta Milenkovic, che ha ricevuto il libro in dono da
Bulatovic. (Beta)

---

http://www.danas.co.yu/20060801/hronika3.html

SMRT SLOBODANA MILOŠEVIA SPREČILA PRIPREMLJENU ODBRANU

Momir Bulatovic predstavio knjigu o neizgovorenom haskom svedocenju

Danas (Beograd), 1 avgust 2006.

Beograd - Nekadasnji premijer SRJ Momir Bulatovic predstavio je jucer
knjigu "Slobodan Milosevic - Neizgovorena odbrana", koja govori o
njihovim zajednickim pripremama za svedocenje Bulatovica u Haskom
Tribunalu. Bulatovic je trebalo da zapocne svoje svedocenje 14. marta
ove godine, ali se to nije dogodilo zbog smrti Slobodana Milosevica.
Njih dvojca su neposredno pred Milosevicevu smrt pripremali
Bulatovicevo svedocenje. U knjizi se navode pitanja i odgovori koje
su Milosevic i Bumatovic pripremili, kao i niz stenograma i
dokumenata sa sednica najvisih drzavnih organa. Knjiga hronoloski
prati period od raspada Saveza komunista Jugoslavije krajem 1989.
godine do sukoba na Kosovu i Metohiji deset godina kasnije.
Prihod od prodaje knjige ce biti dat u humanitarne svrhe, Institutu
za transfuziju krvi Srbije. Konferenciji za novinare je prisustvovao
i bivsi licni Milosevicev pratilac Senta Milenkovic, koja je od
Bulatovica dobila knjigu na poklon. (Beta)

---

Neizgovorena odbrana
ICTY vs Slobodan Milošević
Autor: Bulatović Momir;
Cena: 745.00 din. Price: € 12.42
u prodaji, 312 strana, 24 cm, latinica
Izdavač: Zograf
Niš 2006.
ISBN 86-7578-137-7

http://www.knjizara.co.yu/index.php?gde=@http%3A//www.knjizara.co.yu/
pls/sasa/knjizara.knjiga%3Fk_id%3D114367@

---

http://www.dan.cg.yu/index.php?
nivo=3&rubrika=Aktuelnosti&datum=2006-07-22&clanak=66455

MOMIR BULATOVIĆ U INTERVJUU ZA “DAN” O HAŠKOM SVJEDOČENjU I
KNjIZI “NEIZGOVORENA ODBRANA”

Neću se odreći Miloševića

Mnogi misle da se parama može kupiti sve, pa prodaju čak i ono љto
nema cijenu, a moralo bi da ima visoku vrijednost. Čini mi se da
riječ “čojstvoĆ, Marka Miljanova, nema prevod na novocrnogorski
govor

Sa Momirom Bulatovićem, bivšim predsjednikom Crne Gore i Savezne
vlade SR Jugoslavije je lako uspostaviti kontakt, ali je gotovo
nemoguće dobiti izjavu, ili intervju. Kaže da mu je dosadilo da daje
izjave, a posebno se grozi postojeće zaglušujuće (i zaglupljujuće)
lavine dnevno-političkih lamentiranja. U neobaveznom tonu, ali veoma
odlučno, on je to saopštio ovom novinaru u svakom pokušaju da
dobije neki njegov javni iskaz. Ipak, priznajući posebnu naklonost
koju osjeća prema “Danu” pristaje na ovaj mini-intervju i to samo
vezano za njegovu knjigu koja upravo izlazi iz štampe.
~Knjiga “Neizgovorena odbranaĆ predstavlja Vaše svjedočenje u
procesu koji je Tribunal u Hagu vodio protiv Slobodana Miloševića, a
koje nije izgovoreno budući da je on umro u pritvorskoj jedinici.
Pomalo čudno, Vi kažete da je autor ove knjige Slobodan Milošević,
a da ste je Vi samo napisali...
- Moja uloga je bila – svjedok odbrane. Slobodan Milošević, koji
je branio sam sebe, trebalo je da vodi glavno ispitavanje. Bez obzira
što sam ja donio hiljade dokumenata, sa desetinama hiljada strana,
njihov izbor i komponovanje cjeline iskaza zavisilo je od
Miloševićevih odluka. Zato je on stvarni autor ove knjige.
Samo pisanje je zahtijevalo izuzetan napor. U formi planiranog
dijaloga, na više od tri stotine strana, izneseni su dokazi,
argumenti i činjenice koje (u to snažno vjerujem) optužnicu protiv
Slobodana Miloševića predstavljaju lažnom i razbijaju je po svim
osnovama. Razumije se da se o svim dokumentima govori sa pozivom, a
da se tek neznatni dio iznosi kao neposredan citat. Tako je moralo
biti urađeno da bi knjiga imala razuman broj strana, ali i sačuvala
privlačnost za čitaoca.
~Reklo bi se da ste kao pisac zadovoljni svojim djelom.
- Tužan sam zbog smrti svog prijatelja i zbog toga što ova odbrana
nije bila izgovorena u Hagu i pred očima cijelog svijeta. Zadovoljan
sam što je knjiga ispala baš onakvom kako sam je zamišljao. Ipak,
ona može biti samo blijeda kopija onoga što smo nas dvojica trebali
da kažemo u sudnici broj jedan haškog tribunala.
~Knjiga započinje nekom vrstom zakletve da ćete govoriti (napisati)
samo istinu i ništa drugo osim istine...
- Istina je jedina odbrana od laži i nabjeđivanja u krivicu. Nje se
čovjek mora držati pred zakonom i pravdom. Posebno tamo gdje zakona
ima malo, a pravde nimalo. U slučaju Slobodana Miloševića optuženo
je kompletno rukovodstvo jedne države, cijela Srbija i sav srpski
narod. Sve druge bivše jugoslovenske države promijenile su
nacionalnu strukturu i, mahom, prognale Srbe sa vjekovnih ognjišta.
Ali, Srbija i Crna Gora koje to nijesu radile, već bile otvorene za
prihvat i smještaj svih izbjeglih i raseljenih, tuže se i osuđuju
zbog etničkog čišćenja i genocida...Izmišljanjem lažne krivice,
nevini stradaju, a pravi krivci bivaju pošteđeni. Laž, ma koliko
bila moćna i glasna, ne smije da pobijedi istinu. Ne toliko zbog
sadašnje, već zbog svih budućih generacija, koje ne smiju da nose
teret “zločinačkih otaca".
~Pored, kako kažete, borbe za istinu, da li se ova knjiga može
doživjeti i kao neka oda prijateljstvu? Naime, Vi ste jedan od
malobrojnih koji se nije odrekao prijateljstva sa Slobodanom
Miloševićem.
- Volio bih da je čitaoci i tako dožive. Ja sam na ovo prijateljstvo
naročito ponosan jer je prošlo sva iskušenja – u dobru i u zlu, a
vrhunac doživjelo u zadnjim danima Slobodanovog života.
Nakon svega, ja se ipak osjećam dobro. Prija mi moj unutrašnji mir i
ravnodušnost sa kojom posmatram one koji su krenuli drugom stazom. Na
ovim prostorima, a posebno u Crnoj Gori, odomaćilo se shvatanje da
izdaja nije strašna, da se oceubistvo isplati, te da moral i čast
nemaju visoku cijenu. Mnogi misle da se parama može kupiti sve, pa
prodaju čak i ono što nema cijenu, a moralo bi da ima visoku
vrijednost. Čini mi se da riječ “čojstvoĆ, Marka Miljanova –
nema prevod na novocrnogorski govor.

D.ŽIVKOVIĆ

Honorar za donaciju

- Izborio sam se kod izdavača da honorar bude, za naše prilike,
veoma veliki. Honorar ću uplatiti kao ličnu donaciju Zavodu za
transfuziju krvi Srbije. Promocije knjige biće prilika da i druge
podstaknem da materijalno pomognu ovu ustanovu za koju lično znam
koliko je uspješna i važna.
Nadam se i vjerujem da će knjiga koju smo napisali Slobodan
Milošević i ja pomoći da barem jedan čovjek, žena ili dijete što
brže povrati zdravlje i ličnu sreću - kaže Bulatović.


==========================

IN DIFESA DELLA JUGOSLAVIA
Il j'accuse di Slobodan Milosevic
di fronte al "Tribunale ad hoc" dell'Aia"
(Ed. Zambon 2005, 10 euro)

Tutte le informazioni sul libro, appena uscito, alle pagine:
http://www.pasti.org/autodif.html
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/icdsm-italia/message/204

==========================
ICDSM - Sezione Italiana
c/o GAMADI, Via L. Da Vinci 27 -- 00043 Ciampino (Roma)
tel/fax +39-06-7915200 -- email: icdsm-italia @ libero.it
http://www.pasti.org/linkmilo.html
*** Conto Corrente Postale numero 86557006, intestato ad
Adolfo Amoroso, ROMA, causale: DIFESA MILOSEVIC ***
LE TRASCRIZIONI "UFFICIALI" DEL "PROCESSO" SI TROVANO AI SITI:
http://www.un.org/icty/transe54/transe54.htm (IN ENGLISH)
http://www.un.org/icty/transf54/transf54.htm (EN FRANCAIS)

http://www.michelcollon.info/articles.php?dateaccess=2006-07-21%
2007:27:46&log=invites

Slovénie : Un élève pas si modèle que ça !

Georges Berghezan


La paisible et prospère Slovénie entrera donc, le 1er janvier
prochain, dans le « club euro », seule parmi les dix nouveaux
adhérents de l’Union européenne à être jugée prête à utiliser la
monnaie unique. La réussite économique de cette ex-république
yougoslave de deux millions d’habitants ne devrait cependant pas
masquer d’autres aspects plus discutables des nouvelles institutions
slovènes.

L’accession à l’indépendance du pays a été marquée par une courte
guerre entre l’armée fédérale yougoslave, déployée aux frontières
internationales de la petite république, et des policiers et membres
de la « défense territoriale » slovène. Lors d’un de ces
affrontements, le 28 juin 1991, un cameraman de la chaîne
autrichienne ORF a filmé ce qui apparaît être l’exécution de trois
jeunes conscrits yougoslaves qui déployaient un drap blanc en signe
de reddition. Selon les Conventions de Genève, abattre des
prisonniers relève du crime de guerre et cet épisode, au poste de
Holmec, à la frontière autrichienne, serait dès lors le tout premier
cas de crime de guerre enregistré lors du démantèlement sanglant de
la Yougoslavie qui s’étendra tout au long des années ’90.

Il fallut attendre près de huit ans pour qu’un journal slovène révèle
l’affaire et que la séquence vidéo soit diffusée par la télévision
locale. Une enquête sera expédiée, concluant à l’inexistence de tout
crime qui aurait pu ternir la guerre d’indépendance : les soldats
auraient simulé leur exécution. L’affaire aurait été définitivement
enterrée si une ONG slovène de défense des droits humains, le
Helsinki Monitor (HMS), et sa présidente, Neva Miklavcic Predan, ne
s’en étaient emparées et n’aient entamé elles-mêmes leur propre
enquête. Ainsi, avec l’aide de la presse et d’ONG d’autres
républiques ex-yougoslaves, le HMS réussit à identifier des
survivants de la fusillade et des proches des victimes, un Croate
d’Herzégovine et deux Serbes de Vojvodine.

En 2003, Miklavcic Predan suscita le courroux des autorités de
Ljubljana en accusant Milan Kucan, alors encore président de
Slovénie, de faux témoignage pour avoir déclaré lors du procès de
Milosevic à La Haye que l’enquête sur l’affaire de Holmec suivait son
cours, tout en niant tout crime de guerre. Miklavcic Predan se
retrouva avec trois procès intentés à son encontre, dont un pour
diffamation à l’initiative d’une association d’anciens combattants.
Ce procès s’est achevé fin mai par l’acquittement de la prévenue, le
juge devant reconnaître qu’il n’y avait pas diffamation car l’accusée
n’imputait le crime à personne, mais réclamait simplement que leurs
auteurs soient identifiés et ne demeurent pas impunis.

Entre-temps, le procureur spécial pour crimes de guerre à Belgrade a
ouvert une enquête sur cet événement. Le Tribunal de La Haye, après
avoir d’abord manifesté son peu d’intérêt pour l’affaire – car il
s’agirait d’un « crime individuel », a donné son aval à la procédure
ouverte en Serbie.

Quinze ans après, les faits finiront donc peut-être par être établis
par une autorité judiciaire. En Slovénie également, l’affaire est
loin d’être close, car le procureur de Ljubljana vient de faire appel
contre l’acquittement de la présidente de HMS. Malmenées, voire
insultées par plusieurs médias slovènes, Miklavcic Predan et son ONG
viennent d’être maintenant la cible du Premier ministre Janez Jansa
qui a réclamé des mesures répressives à leur encontre, les accusant
d’être atteintes de « démence », de « faire chanter le gouvernement »
et de diffuser des « mensonges absurdes et pathologiques ». Il s’agit
là d’une immixtion et d’une pression manifeste sur un processus
judiciaire par le chef du gouvernement, en violation flagrante du
principe de séparation des pouvoirs.

Au-delà d’une pratique bien peu conforme avec les normes européennes
de démocratie, la réaction du Premier ministre montre que, comme les
autres républiques yougoslaves, la Slovénie est loin d’avoir tourné
la page des événements sanglants de la décennie précédente et d’être
en mesure d’examiner avec sérénité son passé récent. Ici comme
ailleurs, il est plus facile de se poser en innocente victime que
d’admettre ses propres torts. De plus, les remous causés par
l’affaire de Holmec dans toute l’ex-Yougoslavie (en contraste avec le
silence presque total des médias du reste du monde) ont permis la
mise à jour d’autres violations des Conventions de Genève par les
forces sécessionnistes slovènes. Et de revenir sur le scandale des «
effacés », ces dizaines de milliers de non-Slovènes qui, du jour au
lendemain, ont perdu toute identité administrative, et du même coup
leur droit au travail, à la pension, à la sécurité sociale… Un «
nettoyage ethnique » discret qui a fait bien moins de bruit que les
déportations et massacres commis dans les autres républiques.

L’Union européenne devrait être beaucoup plus attentive à
l’acharnement politico-judiciaire à l’encontre du HMS et de sa
présidente, ainsi qu’à d’autres dérives constatées parmi les nouveaux
adhérents, telle la réhabilitation du nazisme dans les pays baltes.
Faute de quoi, les discours sur la démocratie, où l’UE aime se poser
en exemple, sonneront de plus en plus creux et ne feront que
renforcer le camp de ceux qui ne voient dans l’Europe qu’un
instrument économique et financier, étranger aux réalités humaines.

Post scriptum:
En outre, quelques après sa rédaction, la répression s’est encore
durcie : Neva Miklavcic Predan est maintenant accusée d’avoir «
offensé l’Etat » (selon l’article 174 du Code Pénal), un délit
punissable de 2 ans d’emprisonnement. Le HMS est également sous la
menace d’une confiscation de son équipement et Neva pourrait perdre
son mobilier, afin de payer les frais judiciaires occasionnés par une
ancienne affaire, concernant une affaire d’éviction illégale d’un
appartement militaire jugée en 1999. D’autre part, le HMS reçoit un
nombre croissant de témoignages sur des crimes de guerre commis par
des paramilitaires slovènes en 1991, doit donc assumer un surcroît de
travail, alors qu'il est confronté à des difficultés financières de
plus en plus aiguës. Une demande de financement a été rejetée par la
Fondation Soros. Face aux mesures de plus en plus dures du
gouvernement et de l’appareil judiciaire slovènes, le HMS est donc en
recherche urgente de moyens d’encaisser le choc et de poursuivre sa
quête de la justice.


Ceux qui le peuvent sont donc invités à aider par des contributions
financières le HMS à poursuivre ses activités.
Adresse du HMS : Rimska Cesta 17, Ljubljana
Adresse de la banque : VIPA d.d.Ljubljana, Dunajska 48
Coordonnées bancaires : n° du compte : 005100 - 8000015997 ; IBAN :
SI 56-005100-8000015997 ; BIC : ABANSI2X.

(castillano / italiano / francais)



RSF al servizio della CIA


1. RSF ACCUSATA DI AVER INTASCATO FONDI DELLA CIA (aprile 2006)

2. Polémique : RSF payé par la CIA et les multinationales ? (Maxime
Vivas)
1) article initial (Métro 5 avril),
2) réponse de RSF aujourd’hui (Droit de réponse)
3) réponse à la réponse

3. Reporteros Sin Fronteras (RSF) Financiado por Instituto
Republicano Internacional /
Le financement de Reporters sans frontières par la NED/CIA
(par Diana Barahona, Jeb Sprague)

4. SUBSIDIOS DE 1.300.000 EUROS A "REPORTEROS SIN FRONTERAS"
Para cubrir a Robert Ménard, la UE se refugia en la burocracia

5. RSF, proxénète de l’information (Djamal Benmerad)


LINK: DOSSIER DE R.S.F.

http://emba.cubaminrex.cu/Default.aspx?tabid=3865


=== 1 ===

http://www.lsdi.it/versp.php?ID_art=262
14-04-2006

RSF ACCUSATA DI AVER INTASCATO FONDI DELLA CIA

Nuove polemiche in Francia scatenate da un’ intervista a Metro-France
dello scrittore Maxime Vivas , secondo cui Rsf avrebbe ricevuto
finanziamenti anche da oranizzazioni ‘’paravento della Cia’’ – ‘’Pura
disinformazione’’, ‘’menzogne spudorate’’, replica Rsf – Nel 2005,
controreplica Vivas a Rsf sono andati fondi per 40.000 dollari dal
National Endowment for Democracy (NED).



Riesplodono in Francia le polemiche su Reporters sans frontières, l’
associazione per la difesa della libertà di stampa accusata
nuovamente di utilizzare fondi e sostegni da parte di agenzie
governative Usa, soprattutto in relazione all’ America Latina.
La polemica è partita da una intervista di qualche giorno fa all’
edizione francese del quotidiano gratuito Metro rilasciata da Maxime
Vivas, scrittore francese vicino ad Attac-France e autore – insieme a
Danielle Bleitrach e Viktor Dedaj di "Les Etats-unis de mal empire
" (éd.Aden, 287 p., 20 €) un libro in cui – spiega lo stesso Vivas su
Bellaciao - http://bellaciao.org/fr/article.php3?id_article=25716
- , il sito dell’ omonimo collettivo italo-francese, si sosteneva
fra l’ altro che Reporters sans frontières ‘’era finanziata da
strutture paravento della Cia’’.
Rsf ha protestato duramente imponendo a Metro la pubblicazione di una
rettifica in cui respingeva seccamente le accuse e parlava di
‘’disinformazione’’, minacciando di ricorrere alla magistratura.
Vivas ha replicato con una risposta ancora più dura, definendo le
affermazioni di Rsf ‘’menzognere e minacciose’’ . Non mi
denunceranno, ne sono più che sicuro - sostiene Vivas – perché
‘’mentono spudoratamente’’.

****************
Nell’ intervista (Métro France du 05/04/06 - http://
www.metrofrance.com/site/home.php?
sec=contenu&Idarbo=21&Idarbo1=138&content=1&id=57398&resec=liste_complet
e&vi=0 ), dal titolo ‘’Il Sud, fronte del rifiuto’’, Vivas aveva
affermato in particolare:
''RSF, che non si occupa d’ altro che della stampa povera nei paesi
poveri, è stata la sola a felicitarsi con Pedro Carmona dopo il suo
colpo di Stato contro Chavez, riportato al potere dal popolo dopo
appena 48 ore. Bella lezione di democrazia da parte di una ong
finanziata da strutture paravento della Cia !’’.

‘’Alt alla disinformazione’’ : con questo titolo Metro pubblica la
rettifica dfi Rsf, secondo cui ‘’è falso’’ che Rsf si occuperebbe
‘’solo di stampa povera nei paesi poveri’’.
Noi – sostiene l’ associazione parigina diretta da Robert Ménard –
‘’siamo la sola organizzazione al mondo ad aver pubblicato, ad
esempio, un rapporto dettagliato su alcuni casi di giornalisti
imprigionati dagli Usa (cfr. "Quand l’Amérique emprisonne des
journalistes" su http://www.rsf.org ). Altro esempio : dall’ inizio
del 2006 siamo intervenuti a più riprese per denunciare gli attacchi
alla libertà di stampa in Germania, Australia, Canada, Spagna, Usa,
Francia, Italia, Giappone, Portogallo e Svizzera. Paesi che
difficilmente possono essere definiti... poveri’’.

Quanto al fatto che, secondo Vivas, Rsf si sarebbe felicitato con
Pedro Cardona dopo il golpe contro Chavez, si tratterebbe di ‘’una
invenzione’’. ‘’Se all’ epoca – aggiunge Rsf – abbiamo criticato l’
autoritarismo del presidente contro la stampa, abbiamo ugualmente
denunciato gli ‘eccessi dell’ anti-chavismo’ e la deriva di alcuni
media che non esitavano a pubblicare false informazioni, mettendo a
volte in pericolo giornalisti vicini a Chavez’’.

Infine, l’ affermazione secondo cui Rsf sarebbe una Ong ‘’finanziata
da strutture schermo della Cia’’ sarebbe ‘’una diffamazione pura e
semplice’’. ‘’I conti della nostra organizzazione, che è riconosciuta
di pubblica utilità, – afferma Rsf – sono certificati da revisori dei
conti indipendenti e pubblici. Nel 2005 il 52% delle nostre risorse
provenivano dalla vendita di libri fotografici, il20% da donazioni di
imprese, il 14% da sovvenzioni pubbliche e private e il 7% da
donazioni’’.

****************************
Nella sua controreplica – pubblicata su Bellaciao – Vivas ricorda che
Rsf il 12 aprile 2002, il giorno dopo il putsch antichavista si era
rivolto alle ‘’nuove autorità’’ parlando di Chavez come dell’ ‘’ex
presidente’’ e sostendo, ‘’falsamente’’, che Chavez aveva firmato le
proprie dimissioni.

Tra l’ altro, aggiunge lo scrittore, uno dei due corrispondenti di
Rsf a Caracas, Ewald Schwarenberg, era un giornalista di El Nacional
che in un editoriale del 12 aprile aveva salutato il golpe come una
‘’vittoria della democrazia’’. Mentre l’ altra corrispondente di Rsf,
la politologa Maria José Perez, era una consigliera dell’ opposizione
anti-chavistaeillère de l’opposition anti-chaviste.

Quanto alla lista fornita da Rsf per i suoi interventi contro i
‘’paesi ricchi’’, Vivas ribatte che si tratta di ‘’polvere negli
occhi’’. Nessuna di quelle denunce – aggiunge – figura sdulla home
page dell’ organizzazione, che raccoglie invece solo denunce contro
vicende relative a paesi poveri.

Rsf – spiega Vivas – ‘’protesta a volte contro i potenti, ma senza
nessuna azione spettacolare e soprattutto mai contro il paese che in
questi ultimi anni ha ucciso il maggior numero di giornalisti : gli
Stati Uniti’’.
Infine, sulla questione dei dollari Usa, Vivas cita un articolo dell’
11 marzo 2005 di Diana Barahona dans Northern California Media Guild,
secondo cui RSF avrebbe ricevuto ‘’fond governativi americani
attraverso la NED (National Endowment for Democracy,)’’ : « L’
avvocato Eva Golinger – sosteneva l’ articolo – ha scoperto che più
di 20 milioni di dollari sono stati versati da NED e USAID a gruppi
d’ opposizione e media privati del Venezuela, molti dei quali avevano
partecipat al golpe. La NED ha distribuito a Rsf circa 40.000 dollari
nel gennaio 2005...»

Un ex agente della Cia specializzato in America latina, Philip Agee,
ha rivelato in una intervsta al giornalista Jonah Gindin (25 marzo
2005) che – prosegue Vivas - la NED lavora con la Cia. In Nicaragua,
contro i sandinisti, « la CIA et la NED hanno messo in piedi un
fronte civico chiamato Via Civica ».
Altro sponsor di RSF dal 2002 – dice Vivas - il Center For a Free
Cuba, creato per rovesciare il potere cubano e diretto da un agente
della CIA, Frank Calzon.

Vivas rileva infine che sul suo sito, l’ 8 luglio 2005, Rsf
affermava : « ...Le sole sovvenzioni che noi riceviamo dagli Usa sono
quelle delle fondazioni Center for a Free Cuba e National Endowment
for Democracy (NED)».

‘’Sullo stesso sito, cercando bene, - conclude Vivas - si trova in
caratteri molto piccoli, nell’ elenco degli sponsor, un altro
paravento della Cia creato dal miliuardario e magnate della stampa
George Soros : l’Open Society Institute, molto attivo nel lavoro
sotteraneo di rovesciamento dei governi. Perché Rsf ha nascosto
questi suoi sponsor ai lettori Metro ?’’.


=== 2 ===

http://www.michelcollon.info/articles.php?dateaccess=2006-04-07%
2015:02:46&log=attentionm

Polémique : RSF payé par la CIA et les multinationales ?

Maxime Vivas


Trois courts documents à lire dans cet l’ordre :
1) mon article initial (Métro 5 avril),
2) la réponse de RSF aujourd’hui (Droit de réponse)
3) et ma réponse à la réponse (Réponse MV à RSF 6 avr) que Métro
ne va pas publier, je crois. Ils ont sans doute envie d’arrêter ça et
je peux comprendre, même si ça se termine par une menace. Dommage.
J’y démasque les menteurs.

Métro, 6 avril 2006

Mise au point de Reporters sans frontières.

Halte à la désinformation !

Reporters sans frontières souhaite rectifier les propos inexacts
tenus par Maxime Vivas, dans une interview intitulée "Le Sud, front
de refus", parue dans Métro, le mercredi 5 avril 2006, en page 5.
Maxime Vivas affirme, tout d'abord, que Reporters sans frontières "ne
s'occupe que de la presse pauvre dans les pays pauvres". C'est faux.
Nous sommes la seule organisation dans le monde à avoir publié, par
exemple, un rapport détaillé sur des cas de journalistes emprisonnés
par les Etats-Unis (cf. "Quand l'Amérique emprisonne des
journalistes" sur notre site : www.rsf.org). Autre exemple : depuis
le début de l'année 2006, nous sommes intervenus à plusieurs reprises
pour dénoncer des atteintes à la liberté de la presse en Allemagne,
en Australie, au Canada, en Espagne, aux Etats-Unis, en France, en
Italie, au Japon, au Portugal et en Suisse. Des pays que l'on peut
difficilement qualifier de... pauvres !
Ensuite, Maxime Vivas prétend que Reporters sans frontières a
"félicité" Pedro Carmona après son coup d'Etat contre Hugo Chavez, en
avril 2002. C'est une invention. Si, à l'époque, nous avons critiqué
l'autoritarisme du président Chavez envers la presse, nous avons
également dénoncé les "excès de l'anti-chavisme" et la dérive de
certains médias qui n'hésitaient pas à publier de fausses
informations, mettant parfois en danger des journalistes proches de
Chavez.
Enfin, il conclut en disant que Reporters sans frontières est une
"ONG financée par des officines écrans de la CIA". Diffamation pure
et simple. Les comptes de notre organisation – reconnue d'utilité
publique – sont certifiés par des commissaires aux comptes
indépendants et publics. En 2005, 52 % de nos ressources provenaient
de la vente de nos albums photos, 20 % du mécénat d'entreprise, 14 %
de subventions publiques et privées et 7 % de dons. Le détail de ces
comptes est consultable sur notre site Internet.

Au-delà de ce droit de réponse, Reporters sans frontières se réserve
le droit de poursuivre Maxime Vivas en justice.


RSF, CIA, Venezuela, dollars.

jeudi 6 avril 2006, par Maxime Vivas

J’ai accordé une interview au journal gratuit Métro hier sur le livre
"Les Etats-unis de mal empire " que j’ai co-écrit et j’ai terminé en
disant que Reporters sans frontières était financée par des officines
écrans de la CIA. Fureur de RSF qui a obtenu aujourd’hui un droit de
réponse aussi nul que mensonger et menaçant : l’officine se "réserve
le droit de me poursuivre". Ils ne le feront pas, j’ai tout bon et
ils mentent éhontément.

1. Extrait de l'interview de Vivas :
"La pluralité de la presse ne vaut rien si l'information est toujours
la même, si elle n'est pas un contre-pouvoir, n'en déplaise à
Reporters sans Frontières. RSF qui ne s'occupe que de la presse
pauvre dans les pays pauvres a quand même été la seule ONG à
féliciter Pedro Carmona après son coup d'Etat contre Chavez, remis au
pouvoir par le peuple 48 heures plus tard. belle leçon de démocratie
de la part d'une ONG financée par des officines écrans de la CIA. "
+++++++++++++++++++++

2. Droit de réponse de RSF
Métro, 6 avril 2006

Mise au point de Reporters sans frontières.

Halte à la désinformation !

Reporters sans frontières souhaite rectifier les propos inexacts
tenus par Maxime Vivas, dans une interview intitulée "Le Sud, front
de refus", parue dans Métro, le mercredi 5 avril 2006, en page 5.
Maxime Vivas affirme, tout d'abord, que Reporters sans frontières "ne
s'occupe que de la presse pauvre dans les pays pauvres". C'est faux.
Nous sommes la seule organisation dans le monde à avoir publié, par
exemple, un rapport détaillé sur des cas de journalistes emprisonnés
par les Etats-Unis (cf. "Quand l'Amérique emprisonne des
journalistes" sur notre site : www.rsf.org). Autre exemple : depuis
le début de l'année 2006, nous sommes intervenus à plusieurs reprises
pour dénoncer des atteintes à la liberté de la presse en Allemagne,
en Australie, au Canada, en Espagne, aux Etats-Unis, en France, en
Italie, au Japon, au Portugal et en Suisse. Des pays que l'on peut
difficilement qualifier de... pauvres !
Ensuite, Maxime Vivas prétend que Reporters sans frontières a
"félicité" Pedro Carmona après son coup d'Etat contre Hugo Chavez, en
avril 2002. C'est une invention. Si, à l'époque, nous avons critiqué
l'autoritarisme du président Chavez envers la presse, nous avons
également dénoncé les "excès de l'anti-chavisme" et la dérive de
certains médias qui n'hésitaient pas à publier de fausses
informations, mettant parfois en danger des journalistes proches de
Chavez.
Enfin, il conclut en disant que Reporters sans frontières est une
"ONG financée par des officines écrans de la CIA". Diffamation pure
et simple. Les comptes de notre organisation – reconnue d'utilité
publique – sont certifiés par des commissaires aux comptes
indépendants et publics. En 2005, 52 % de nos ressources provenaient
de la vente de nos albums photos, 20 % du mécénat d'entreprise, 14 %
de subventions publiques et privées et 7 % de dons. Le détail de ces
comptes est consultable sur notre site Internet.

Au-delà de ce droit de réponse, Reporters sans frontières se réserve
le droit de poursuivre Maxime Vivas en justice.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

3. RSF, CIA, Venezuela, dollars.
Maxime Vivas

RSF prétend dans Métro s’attaquer à la presse des pays riches, ne pas
empocher des dollars, n’avoir pas félicité les putschistes
vénézuéliens. Sur ce dernier point, je crois avoir dit lors de
l’interview téléphonique : « s’est félicité ». Dont acte. C’est un
problème de transcription qui n’exonère pas RSF.

1) Venezuela. Le coup d’Etat a eu lieu entre le 11 et le 14 avril 2002.
Dès le 12 avril, RSF s’adressait aux nouvelles « autorités » (ce qui
revenait à les reconnaître de facto). Elle y parlait de « l’ancien
président » et concluait : « Reclus dans le palais présidentiel, Hugo
Chávez a signé sa démission dans la nuit, sous la pression de
l’armée. » Or, Chavez n’avait pas démissionné, pour ne pas
démoraliser ses partisans dans l’Armée et dans la rue. Dire le
contraire était un acte hautement politique.
A Caracas, un des deux correspondants de RSF, Ewald Schwarenberg,
était journaliste à El Nacional dont l’édito du 12 avril saluait le
coup d’Etat comme une « victoire de la démocratie ». Par parenthèse,
le 25 juillet 2004, l’ex-président Carlos Andrés Pérez, confiera à El
Nacional : « Je travaille pour renverser Chavez. La violence nous
permettra de le renverser. Chavez doit mourir comme un chien. »
Mauvaise compagnie, RSF !
L’autre correspondant de RSF est la politologue Maria José Perez,
conseillère de l’opposition anti-chaviste. Elle lâchera à retardement
sa nostalgie dans El Universal du 22 novembre 2002 : « Mon coeur
vibre á la vue des militaires insurgés, de ces hommes vertueux qui
défilent sous nos couleurs nationales ».
2) Sur RSF et la presse pauvre. Lisons le livre de Ménard : « Ces
journalistes que l’on veut faire taire » (Albin Michel, mars 2001 ).
« ...pour défendre les journalistes dans le monde, nous avons besoin
du soutien consensuel de la profession, tandis que la réflexion
critique sur le métier de journaliste prête par définition à
polémique. Comment, par exemple, organiser un débat sur la
concentration de la presse et demander ensuite à Havas ou à Hachette
de sponsoriser un événement ? » Et d’insister par cet aveu que
l’hebdomadaire Marianne (5 au 11 mars 2001) qualifiait
sarcastiquement de « formidable » et de « courageux » : « Nous avons
décidé de dénoncer les atteintes à la liberté de la presse en Bosnie
et au Gabon et les ambiguïtés des médias algériens ou tunisiens...
mais de ne pas nous occuper des dérives françaises. »
Quant à la liste fournie par RSF sur ses interventions dans dix pays
riches, c’est de la poudre aux yeux, le minimum syndical. Aucun ne
figure d’ailleurs aujourd’hui en première page de son site, lequel
épingle huit pays pauvres. RSF « proteste » parfois contre les
puissants, mais sans aucune action spectaculairement affichée et
suivie et surtout pas contre le pays qui a tué le plus de
journalistes dans le monde ces dernières années : les USA.
3) Sur les dollars US. Un article daté du 11 mars 2005 de Diana
Barahona dans Northern California Media Guild révèle que RSF perçoit
des fonds gouvernementaux américains via la NED (National Endowment
for Democracy,) : « L’avocate des Droits de l’Homme, Eva Golinger, a
découvert que plus de 20 millions de dollars ont été versés par la
NED et USAID aux groupes d’opposition et médias privés du Venezuela,
dont beaucoup avaient participé au coup-d’état. La NED a accordé à
RSF prés de 40.000 dollars au mois de janvier 2005... » Un ancien
agent de la CIA spécialisé dans l’Amérique latine, Philip Agee, a
révélé dans une interview au journaliste Jonah Gindin (25 mars 2005)
que la NED travaille avec la CIA. Au Nicaragua, contre les
sandinistes, « la CIA et la NED ont mis en place un front civique
appelé Via Civica ». Autre sponsor de RSF depuis 2002 : le Center For
a Free Cuba, créé pour renverser le pouvoir cubain et dirigé par un
agent de la CIA, Frank Calzon.
Texte sur le site de RSF le 8 juillet 2005 (il y figure encore) :
« ... Les seules subventions que nous percevons en provenance des
Etats-Unis sont celles des fondations Center for a Free Cuba et
National Endowment for Democracy (NED). » Sur le même site, en
cherchant bien, on trouve, en tout petit, parmi la liste des
sponsors, un autre paravent de la CIA crée par le milliardaire et
magnat de la presse George Soros : l’Open Society Institute, très
active dans les travaux souterrains de reversements des
gouvernements. Pourquoi RSF cache-t-elle ces sponsors-là aux lecteurs
de Métro ?

Maxime Vivas


=== 3 ===

En castillano:

Reporteros Sin Fronteras (RSF)
Financiado por Instituto Republicano Internacional

por Diana Barahona*, Jeb Sprague*

El magnate de la prensa británica, Lord Northcliff, dijo, “Sólo
pueden llamarse noticias lo que alguien, de algún lugar, quisiera
ocultar, todo lo demás es publicidad.” Si es así el caso, el
financiamiento que recibe Reporteros Sin Fronteras del gobierno de
Bush debe de ser noticioso, porque la organización y sus amigos en
Washington han recurrido a medidas extraordinarias para ocultarlo...

http://www.voltairenet.org/article142714.html

---

http://www.voltairenet.org/article142884.html
Manipulation de la liberté de la presse

Le financement de Reporters sans frontières par la NED/CIA

par Diana Barahona, Jeb Sprague*

Nous avions déjà montré que Reporters sans frontières (RSF) est sous-
contrat d’une association paravent du département d’État états-
unien ; Diana Barahona et Jeb Sprague montrent désormais que RSF est
financé par des « prêts » non-remboursés de la NED/CIA. Dès lors, on
comprend mieux que l’association consacre l’essentiel de son activité
à des campagnes de diffamation contre les adversaires de Washington à
Cuba, en Haïti ou au Venezuela.
7 AOÛT 2006

Depuis Washington DC (États-Unis)



Le magnat britannique de la presse Lord Northcliff a dit un jour : «
L’info, c’est quelque chose que quelqu’un, quelque part, tient à
garder secret. Sinon, ça n’est que de la pub. » Si c’est vrai, alors
le financement par le gouvernement états-unien de Reporters sans
frontières (RSF) est sûrement une info, car il n’est aucun exploit
que cette organisation et ses amis de Washington n’aient déployé pour
tenter de l’occulter ! En dépit de quatorze mois d’obstruction de la
National Endowment for Democracy (CIA/NED) [1] au sujet d’une requête
de mise en application du Freedom of Information Act (Loi sur la
liberté de l’information) et malgré le déni total de la part de la
représentante de RSF à Washington, Lucie Morillon, cette fondation a
fini par avouer que RSF a reçu des prêts, au moins ces trois
dernières années, de la part de l’International Republican Institute
(IRI), la branche de la NED/CIA gérée par le Parti républicain.

(PHOTO: Otto Reich, ami de RSF et expert en coups d’État. Montage à
partir du logo de RSF et de celui de la campagne de l’association
contre « Les prédateurs de la liberté de la presse ». Pour en savoir
plus sur l’organisateur de coups d’État en Amérique latine, lire
notre article « Otto Reich et la contre-révolution ». - http://
www.voltairenet.org/article13891.html )

La NED continue à refuser de fournir les documents demandés, et même
à révélé les montants de ces prêts, mais on sait qu’ils sont
identifiés par les références suivantes : IRI 2002-022/7270, IRI
2003-027/7470 et IRI 2004-035/7473. Le journaliste d’investigation
Jeremy Bigwood a demandé à Mme Morillon, le 25 avril dernier, si son
association recevait des fonds de l’IRI. Elle l’a nié. Néanmoins,
l’existence des prêts a été confirmée par Patrick Thomas, l’assistant
du président de la NED.

La découverte de ces prêts met au jour une tromperie majeure de cette
association, qui niait depuis des années recevoir un traître dollar
de Washington, jusqu’au jour où des prêts relativement modestes de la
NED et du Centre pour un Cuba Libre ont été révélés par le Réseau
Voltaire [2]. Interrogé sur l’origine de ses importants revenus, RSF
a prétendu que l’argent provenait de la vente de livres ou de
photographies. Mais Salim Lamrani a démontré dans ces colonnes
l’improbabilité de cette affirmation. Même en prenant en compte le
fait que les livres sont publiés gratuitement, RSF aurait dû vendre
170 200 ouvrages en 2004 et 188 400 en 2005 pour gagner les plus de
deux millions de dollars que cette association prétend gagner
annuellement. Cela aurait représenté la vente de 516 livres par jour,
en 2005. Il fallait manifestement que l’argent provienne d’autres
sources, et il s’avère que tel est bien le cas.

L’IRI est spécialisé dans l’immixtion dans les élections de pays
étrangers, comme le montre très rapidement une consultation des
rapports annuels de la NED/CIA et du site Internet de l’IRI. Il
s’agit de l’un des quatre principaux allocataires de la NED, une
organisation fondée par le Congrès sous l’administration Reagan, en
1983, afin de se substituer aux programmes d’action secrète de la CIA
au sein des sociétés civiles, lesquels avaient été dévastés par leur
dénonciation par le Conseil des Églises, dans les années 1970 [3].
Les trois autres piliers de la NED/CIA sont le National Democratic
Institute du parti démocrate, le Centre de Solidarité du syndicat AFL-
CIO [4] et le Centre pour l’entreprise privée internationale de la
Chambre de commerce états-unienne.

(PHOTO: Les instituts satellites de la NED - USAID, Solidarity
Center AFL-CIO, CIPE, NDI, IRI)

Mais, de ces quatre organisations, l’IRI est le plus proche de
l’administration Bush, d’après un article récent du New York Times
dénonçant la part qu’il prit dans le renversement du président
haïtien Jean-Bernard Aristide : « Le président Bush a nommé son
président, Lorne W. Craner, pour gérer les efforts de meccano de la
démocratie déployés par son administration. L’Institut, agissant dans
plus de soixante pays, a vu ses financements fédéraux pratiquement
tripler en trois ans, passant de 26 millions de dollars en 2003 à 75
millions de dollars en 2005. Au printemps dernier, au cours d’une
“vente de charité” pour le financement de l’IRI, Bush a qualifié le
meccano de la démocratie de “secteur industriel en pleine croissance”
» [5].

L’arrosage en provenance de l’IRI constitue un problème majeur pour
la crédibilité de RSF en tant qu’organisation « défendant la liberté
de la presse », d’autant que cette organisation a fomenté une
campagne de propagande hostile aux gouvernements démocratiquement
élus du Venezuela et d’Haïti exactement en même temps que son
chaperon, l’IRI, était profondément engagé dans des actions visant à
leur renversement. L’IRI a ainsi financé l’opposition vénézuélienne
au président Hugo Chavez [6] et il a activement organisé l’opposition
haïtienne à Aristide, en coordination avec la CIA [7].

Le personnage qui fait le lien entre RSF et ces activités subversives
est un certain Otto Reich [8], qui a travaillé à la préparation des
coups tordus tout d’abord en tant que vice-secrétaire d’État pour les
affaires sud-américaines, puis, à partir de novembre 2002, en sa
qualité d’envoyé spécial en Amérique latine du Conseil de sécurité
nationale. En plus d’être salarié du Centre pour un Cuba libre,
subventionné par le gouvernement états-unien, lequel Centre alloue 50
000 dollars annuellement à RSF, Reich travaille, depuis le début des
années 1980, avec un ancien vice-président de l’IRI, Georges Fauriol,
membre lui aussi de l’Institut pour un Cuba libre. Mais c’est
l’expérience de Reich en matière de propagande qui importe plus
particulièrement. Dans les années 1980, il a été impliqué dans les
investigations sur la guerre illégale de l’administration Reagan
contre les Sandinistes. Le contrôleur général du budget a déterminé,
en 1987, que le Bureau de la diplomatie publique de Reich « était
engagé dans des activités interdites de propagande occulte » [9]. Au
début de l’année 2002, après que George W. Bush l’ait nommé à une
planque au département d’État, « Reich s’est rapidement vu confier la
tâche d’orchestrer une campagne médiatique internationale de grande
ampleur visant à diffamer Chavez. Une campagne qui se poursuit encore
aujourd’hui. » [10]

Reich a-t-il fait bénéficier RSF des prêts de l’IRI et a-t-il
cornaqué l’association dans ses actions de propagande contre
Aristide, Chavez et Cuba ? Un examen des méthodes de RSF montre que
c’est peut-être le cas [11] ; la propagande contre Aristide, un
ancien prêtre, était aussi vulgaire que l’une des diffamations
patentées de Reich à l’encontre de divers dirigeants latino-
américains. RSF a ainsi qualifié le président haïtien de « prédateur
de la liberté de presse », après l’avoir associé, sans la moindre
preuve, aux assassinats des journalistes Jean Dominique et Brignol
Lindor. RSF a affiché de manière particulièrement voyante les
photographies des corps de ces deux journalistes sur son site
Internet, les transformant en posters de victimes de la répression
alléguée d’Aristide envers la presse.

RSF écrivait, en 2002 : « à Petit-Goâve, un bourg situé à 70
kilomètres au sud-ouest de Port-au-Prince, un journaliste a été battu
à mort par une bande de tueurs liée aux autorités politiques locales
et se réclamant du mouvement Lavalas (l’Avalanche) du président Jean-
Bertrand Aristide (... ). Ce meurtre survient alors que la situation
de la liberté de la presse ne cesse de se dégrader en Haïti depuis
l’assassinat de Jean Dominique, directeur de Radio Haïti Inter.
» [12]. Remarquez la traduction erronée de Lavalas, un mot qui
signifie « inondation », et non « avalanche », ainsi que le fait que
RSF faisait un lien entre le gang de tueurs et le « mouvement Lavalas
d’Aristide », suggérant que le président haïtien en personne était
responsable de ce gang.

L’article est farci de ce genre d’insinuations et de mensonges
éhontés : « Dans ce contexte, l’assassinat de Brignol Lindor est
interprété comme un nouvel avertissement par l’ensemble de la
profession. » Ici, RSF tente carrément de mettre en cause Aristide en
suggérant qu’il aurait ordonné les assassinats des journalistes afin
d’envoyer un avertissement aux médias oppositionnels leur intimant
l’ordre de ne pas se montrer par trop critiques à son endroit. Mais
Jean Dominique a été assassiné en avril 2000, soit plusieurs mois
avant l’élection d’Aristide, et il n’existe par ailleurs aucune
preuve que le président haïtien ait été associé en quoi que ce soit à
l’assassinat de Lindor. Dans le même article, RSF qualifiait le
gouvernement Aristide de « régime autoritaire », l’accusant d’en
appeler à des lynchages au moyen de la méthode du « collier » [13],
concluant que toutes ces actions alléguées imputées par l’association
au gouvernement « s’intègre[nt] dans une stratégie plus large des
autorités de recourir à des milices paralégales pour intimider la
presse. »

C’était déjà là de la propagande passablement écœurante, même si RSF
n’avait pas été plus loin afin de contribuer à étrangler ce pays
désespérément pauvre et dépendant de l’aide extérieure - tactique que
RSF a tenté d’utiliser également contre Cuba [14]. Associated Press
cite le secrétaire général de RSF, Robert Ménard, faisant allusion à
l’abstention alléguée du gouvernement de traîner l’assassin de
Dominique devant un tribunal : « Le président Jean-Bertrand Aristide
est responsable de cette obstruction à la justice, et nous le
coucherons sur la liste des prédateurs de la liberté de la presse si
aucun progrès n’est fait au cours des prochains mois » [15].

L’article poursuivait : « Ménard a dit qu’il espérait que cette
liste, qui allait être envoyée à des institutions gouvernementales et
financières, contribuerait à influencer l’Union européenne dans sa
décision de prolonger ou de suspendre quelque 100 millions de dollars
en assistance financière à l’étranger. » Les sanctions économiques
imposées par les États-Unis ont provoqué une inflation en flèche et
ont privé le gouvernement des fonds dont il avait besoin tant pour
fonctionner que pour se défendre. Illustration du deux poids-deux
mesures de RSF : la Colombie a un triste « état de sévices » en
matière de non-jugement des assassins de journalistes, mais Ménard
n’a jamais dénié faire du lobbying ni auprès des États-Unis, ni
auprès de l’Union européenne, en vue de couper les fonds au
gouvernement Uribe.

Mais RSF n’aurait su se contenter d’une simple suppression des
aides : en janvier 2002, Ménard exhortait le Congrès des États-Unis
et l’Union européenne à prendre des « sanctions individuelles »
contre Aristide et le Premier ministre Yvon Neptune, incluant « le
refus d’entrée sur le territoire et les visas de transit », ainsi que
« le gel de tous les comptes bancaires qu’ils détenaient à l’étranger
» [16].

À la suite du renversement d’Aristide [17], le 29 février 2004, RSF a
ignoré quasi totalement toutes les violences et persécutions à
l’encontre des journalistes critiquant le gouvernement Latortue
imposé par l’étranger, affirmant bien au contraire que la liberté de
la presse avait progressé ! Les rapports de RSF pour les années 2005
et 2006 se sont abstenus de condamner l’exécution extrajudiciaire du
journaliste local et reporter radio Abdias Jean, dont des témoins
disent qu’il a été tué par la police après qu’il eut pris en photo
les corps de trois jeunes tués par la même police. RSF a ignoré
également les arrestations des journalistes Kevin Pina de Radio
Pacifica et Jean Ristil, et il n’a pas enquêté sérieusement sur la
mise à sac de plusieurs stations de radio pro-Lavalas.

Interrogé au sujet des informations concernant les prêts, Pina
déclara ceci : « Il était clair, depuis longtemps, que RSF et Robert
Ménard ne se comportaient nullement en gardiens objectifs de la
liberté de la presse en Haïti, mais bien plutôt comme des acteurs
centraux dans ce qui ne peut être qualifié autrement que de campagne
de désinformation dirigée contre le gouvernement Aristide. Leurs
tentatives d’impliquer Aristide dans l’assassinat de Jean Dominique
et leur silence, ensuite, quand le prétendu homme de main Dany
Toussaint, un sénateur Lavalas, a rejoint le camp anti-Aristide et
s’est présenté à la présidentielle en 2006 ne sont que quelques-uns
des multiples exemples révélant au grand jour la nature et le rôle
véritables d’organisations telles RSF. Elles fournissent de fausses
informations et des rapports biaisés afin de construire une
opposition interne à des gouvernements considérés incontrôlables et
imbuvables par Washington, tout en préparant le terrain à leur
éviction éventuelle en fournissant des justifications sous le
chapitre de prétendues attaques contre la liberté de la presse. »

Nous avons demandé à un expert de la politique haïtienne résidant à
Paris pourquoi RSF a-t-il ignoré l’assassinat d’Abdias Jean. Il nous
a répondu : « Nous avons interrogé la police au sujet de l’assassinat
d’Abdias Jean, et celle-ci nous a répondu qu’il s’agissait d’une
agression de la police, mais qu’elle ignorait qu’il s’agissait d’un
journaliste. Il était en train de prendre des photos. » Il a admis
qu’aucun des témoins de l’assassinat n’ont été interrogés, et que
toutes les informations inédites dont il disposait sur cette affaire
étaient basées sur les témoignages de la police, tristement connue
pour ses meurtres et ses exactions. Concernant l’arrestation de Pina
et de Ristil, il nous a dit : « Généralement, quand quelqu’un est
emprisonné, nous attendons pour voir combien de temps il va rester en
prison. Ils ont été relâchés, c’est la raison pour laquelle nous n
’avons pas pris cette affaire en compte. » Sachant que RSF n’a jamais
pris en compte le cas d’Abdias Jean, il est fort peu probable que
cette association se démène pour Pina.

C’est celui qui paie l’accordéoniste qui choisit la chanson. Recevant
indirectement ses consignes du département d’État, RSF a diabolisé
des gouvernement que les États-Unis désiraient renverser, comme ceux
du Cuba, du Venezuela et d’Haïti, tout en minimisant les atteintes
aux droits de l’homme perpétrés par des alliés stratégiques des États-
Unis comme le Mexique et la Colombie. Ayant été capable de dissimuler
les prêts de l’IRI qui auraient alerté les gens quant à ses fins
dernières, RSF a été un outil efficace au service des attaques
dissimulées de l’administration Bush contre certains dirigeants
latino-américains. Cette association a par ailleurs utilisé son image
de marque d’organisation indépendante de défense des droits de
l’homme pour faire passer son message dans les médias états-uniens et
européens et dans les manuels universitaires. Cela serait déjà un
succès impressionnant, pour un petit groupe d’individus, s’ils n’
avaient pas bénéficié des largesses du mécène le plus riche et le
plus puissant qui soit au monde.

IL REGNO DEI SERBI, DEI SERBI, E NEANCHE DI TUTTI I SERBI


Il "principe Alessandro II Karadjordjevic" si è recato recentemente
in... Slovenia alla ricerca del sostegno di gentaglia come Janez
Drnovsek - secessionista anti-jugoslavo della prima ora - al suo
progetto di ri-convertire la Serbia in una monarchia.

O Karađorđevićima i njihovim interesima u Sloveniji

17.7. došao je u postu Slovenije »naš« ex princ Aleksandar II.
Karađorđević sa suprogom. Lično ga pozvao predsednik Janez
Drnovšek. "Princ je došao, da proslavi svoj 61 rođendan..."
Slovenski mediji su paničarili, da če Karađorđevići dobiti ili
bar tražiti imovinu i nekretnine koja je bila nacionalizirana... puno
se spekuliralo. Premije Janez Janša se posvađao sa predsednikom
Drnovškom jer nije pitao vladu za odobrenje posjete ex Princa
Karađorđeviča.
U stvari je Karađorđević došao kod predsednika Slovenije Janeza
Drnovška, da LOBIRA, kako bi Srbija postala ustavna monarhija.
Drnovšek je glavni Janičar i Kvizling-zločinac koji je aktivno
razarao SFRJ. 8. maja 1990 je u Strasburu kod Saveta Europe spremao
zaveru za početak razaranja Jugoslavije. A istog dana se
»zabavljao« sa pevajkom beogradske opere Jadrankom Jovanović u
hotelu Hilton, koja mu je tada bila metresa.

(Revolucionarni biro javnega informisanja - Slovenija)

(english / castillano / italiano)

Jasenovac and the Holocaust in Yugoslavia

0. NEW BOOKS:
- Jasenovac and the Holocaust in Yugoslavia: Analyses and Testimonies
- Historiography In The Service of Politics / Istorografia U Sluzbi
Politike

1. LINKS

2. JRI Calls on the European Union to Demand Compensation for
Croatia's Holocaust Victims as a Condition for EU Membership (25
February 2005)

3. BREVI / IN SHORT:
- CROAZIA:CAMPO CONCENTRAMENTO CENTRO EUROPEO STUDIO OLOCAUSTO
(21/12/05)
- Corte suprema Usa dice sì a processo a Vaticano (gennaio 2006)
- Vatican Bank Lawsuit Progressing (23/2/06)


=== 0 ===

New Book on Jasenovac Available Now!

Jasenovac and the Holocaust in Yugoslavia: Analyses and Testimonies

Edited by Barry M. Lituchy, Published by JRI, 2006, 408 pp.

As scholarship and awareness of the Holocaust grew rapidly in the
1990's, information on Jasenovac and the genocides perpetrated
against Serbs, Jews and Romas in Yugoslavia during World War II was
absent from this discussion. This neglect posed some troubling
questions. How could the subject of Jasenovac be absent from public
and scholarly attention at the very moment when discussions of
genocide, war crimes and human rights in the Balkans were on the
front pages of every newspaper, and in the pronouncements of every
Holocaust and human rights institution and governement in the world?
How could any serious public discussion of genocide in the former
Yugoslavia begin without the necessary historical context?

In 1997 Kingsborough Community College in Brooklyn, New York hosted a
conference on Jasenovac and the Holocaust in Yugoslavia. The results
of that conference are presented here for the first time in an
accurate and authorized edition, prepared in cooperation with the
authors.

This book contains 30 chapters including a 40 page introduction.
There are 15 chapters of analyses by historians including Michael
Bernebaum, Christopher Simpson, Antun Miletic, Eli Rosenbaum, Charles
R. Allen Jr. and others, along with 15 chapters of unique Holocaust
testimonies by Jasenovac and other concentration camp survivors.
There are 97 photographs, 30 pages of appendices with never before
translated documents, maps, a twelve page double columned index with
detailed entries, 27 biographical entries on contributors, and
discussion of secondary source literature. The entire book is
annotated and expertly prepared. This book provides one of the most
extensive and accurate presentations of this subject in the English
language ever produced.

To order, send a check or money order for $32 paperback or $37
hardcover (includes shipping and handling) payable to:

Jasenovac Research Institue
PO Box 10-0674
Brooklyn, NY 11210
USA

You may also order on-line at www.jasenovac.org by clicking the
"financial contributions" button and paying through a paypal account.

---

Historiography In The Service of Politics

(Istorografia U Sluzbi Politike)

By Vasilije Krestic

Available for $25 (U.S.) in a beautiful hardcover edition.
The book contains both the original Serbian text and
the English translation; 127 pages, published in
Belgrade in 2004 (includes shipping costs).

JRI Review:

In this closely analyzed and penetrating study, Vasilije Krestic, one
of Serbia's leading historians, examines the corruption of certain
nationalist Croatian academics in North America and their promotion
of politicized graduate students to PhD's. Trained in the school of
Croatian nationalism, these academics aim to produce an ever larger
crop of newly minted PhD's in their own image.

The result is an emerging American academia dedicated to promoting
the political agenda of Croatian ultra-nationalism and Western neo-
colonialism in the Balkans. Dr. Krestic's book examines the infamous
school of Croatian nationalism under the tutelage of Ivo Banac at
Yale University and one of its most recent graduates William Brooks
Tomljanovich.

Tomljanovich's PhD dissertation on the 19th century Croatian Bishop
Josip Strossmayer now published in book form provides the case study
for Krestic's analysis. In his study Krestic notes:

"We decided to devote attention to V. Tomljanovich's
book not only because of the importance of its topic
but also in order to illustrate with his example the
course Croatian historiography is following, its
methods of work and aims, to what extent it is
science and to what extent in the service of daily
politics."

Noting in his conclusion that Dr. Tomljanovic has now found
employment as a "Balkans expert" at the U.N.'s Hague Tribunal,
Krestic concludes that

"... Tomljanovic is part of the Hague expert group
whose members could not care less for science and
moral standards. Their primary task is demonization
of the Serbs and distortion of history for political
reasons... ."

Dr. Krestic's analysis carefully exposes the numerous errors and
shortcomings in Tomljanovic's study and the ways in which the final
product manipulates the past for political purposes. This book is a
must read for anyone concerned with the history of the Balkans and
the current state of Balkans studies.

- Jasenovac Research Institute

The Jasenovac Research Institute is
pleased to make this book available in
North America in cooperation with
Gambit Publishers in Belgrade.

To order: mail your check or money
order for $25 US, payable to:

Jasenovac Research Institute
PO Box 10-0674
Brooklyn, NY 11210
USA

(30% discount available to JRI Associates)

e-mail your inquiries to: info @...


=== 1 === LINKS ===

La memoria di Jasenovac
(B92, 17 aprile 2005 / Osservatorio sui Balcani)

19.04.2005 - Sessanta anni fa venivano liberati i detenuti di
Jasenovac, l'orribile campo di concentramento creato dall'allora
Stato indipendente croato di Ante Pavelic, alleato nazi-fascista. Le
celebrazioni commemorative in una breve cronaca dell'emittente B92...

http://www.osservatoriobalcani.org/article/articleview/4140/1/51/

Croazia, il doloroso confronto con l’Olocausto

27.01.2006 Da Osijek, scrive Drago Hedl - 27 gennaio, giorno della
memoria. Le istituzioni croate si interrogano su come tramandare il
ricordo di quanto avvenuto durante il regime di Pavelic. Presto un
nuovo museo presso l'area memoriale di Jasenovac, ma alle
manifestazioni pro Gotovina c’erano anche giovani con i berretti
ustascia. Dal nostro corrispondente

http://www.osservatoriobalcani.org/article/articleview/5196/1/44/


---

VIDEO: Entrevista con Dinko Sakic, jefe del campo de concentración de
Jasenovac-Croacia (en español)

Descripción: Entrevista con el vampiro, en un VIDEO de la cadena
argentina, habla Dinko Sakic, el jefe del campo de concentración de
Jasenovac-Croacia (2,8 Mb)
Versión: Tamaño del archivo: 0 bytes
Agregado el: 11-Nov-2005 Descargas: 39

http://www.semanarioserbio.com/modules.php?
name=Downloads&d_op=getit&lid=9


---

JASENOVAC RESEARCH INSTITUTE
http://www.jasenovac.org

Jasenovac - The Croat Extermination Camp (by Milan Bulajic)
http://www.freenations.freeuk.com/news-2004-09-23.html

Jasenovac, Holocaust era in Croatia 1941-1945.
A cura dello United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/jasenovac/

Jasenovac: Industry of Death
http://www.jasenovac.info/cd/biblioteka/vecni_pomen/
jasenovac_en.html#childgenocide

THE USTASHA GENOCIDE
By Marko Attila Hoare - The South Slav Journal, Volume 25 No. 1 – 2
(95 – 96) Spring - Summer 2004
http://www.southslavjournal.com/mah.html

Exclusively on Jasenovac.org: A new translation of chapters from Jasa
Romano's "The Jews of Yugoslavia 1941-1945 - Victims of Genocide and
Participants in the War of National Liberation," on the Holocaust in
Kosovo and Albanian collaboration with the Nazi Final Solution -
translated by JRI Director Milo Yelesiyevich.
http://jasenovac.org/libraries/viewdocument.asp?DocumentID=147

Modern Nationalism and the Holocaust: The Cases of Germany and Croatia
By Carl K. Savich. Introduction: Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuehrer
http://www.serbianna.com/columns/savich/055.shtml


---

Three NY Times articles about the rebirth of Croatian fascism

A. Comment -Telling some Truth, 7 Years Late

1. Croatia Forced Thousands From Homes, Rights Group Says
by David Binder, NY Times
December 8, 1993

2. Fascists Reborn as Croatia's Founding Fathers
By Chris Hedges, NY Times
April 12, 1997

3. On My Mind; Back From the Grave
by A. M. Rosenthal, NY Times April 15, 1997

http://emperors-clothes.com/archive/dynamited.htm



--- LINKS 2005 : 60 YEARS AFTER LIBERATION ---

Sixty Years after Liberation (by Norman Markowitz)
http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/1005/1/91/?
PrintableVersion=enabled
http://news.serbianunity.net/bydate/2005/April_26/29.html

FIRST MONUMENT TO VICTIMS OF JASENOVAC IS UNVEILED IN NEW YORK CITY'S
HOLOCAUST PARK
NY Mayor Bloomberg: April 17th Will Be Jasenovac Memorial Day
http://balkanalysis.blogspot.com/2005/04/ny-mayor-bloomberg-
april-17th-will-be.html
http://www.vaticanbankclaims.com/jri418.htm

Information on the Jasenovac Research Institute (by Stella Jatras)
http://news.serbianunity.net/bydate/2005/January_10/6.html?w=p

AP via Ha'aretz: Wiesenthal Center renews pressure on Croatia
http://www.balkanpeace.org/hed/archive/jul05/hed7082.shtml

Wiesenthal Center Executive Director visits Pozega over Asner case
http://www.hina.hr/nws-bin/genews.cgi?TOP=hot&NID=ehot/politika/
H7043527.4yc

Croatia: Sixtieth Anniversary Of Liberation Of Balkans Auschwitz
Balkan 'Auschwitz' haunts Croatia (April 25, 2005)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4479837.stm

Pictures Tell the Tale: Vatican and Nazism in Germany and Croatia
(and more)
http://emperors-clothes.com/vatican/cpix.htm


=== 2 ===

JRI Calls on the European Union to Demand
Compensation for Croatia's Holocaust Victims
as a Condition for EU Membership

25 February 2005

President of the European Union
Rue Wiertz
B-1047, Brussels
Belgium

Reference: Croatia’s application for membership to the
European Union and article 17 of the E.U. Charter of
Fundamental Rights

25 February 2005

Dear Mr. President:

I am writing to you on behalf of a group of Survivors of
the Holocaust in Croatia with whom our organization is
working to obtain financial compensation for their stolen
properties in Croatia.

The names I am furnishing below represent just a small
number of individuals who were born in Croatia before
World War II and whose families were persecuted, murdered
and had properties confiscated by the Croatian government
for no other reason but that they were Jewish. The
confiscation of their property by the Croatian government
of 1941-1945 was part of a larger planned crime of
genocide perpetrated against all Jews, Serbs and Romas
under their rule.

The names of the first group of individuals on whose
behalf we are writing are:

Eva Deutsch Costabel, ( - address given - )
Michael Danon, ( - address given - )
Leonard Danon, ( - address given - )
Otto Friedmann, ( - address given - )
George Bozo Radan, ( - address given - )
Ricki Danon Soltan, ( - address given - )

All of these individuals are naturalized American citizens
and Holocaust Survivors. In some cases, these individuals
hold dual Croatian and American citizenship. In other
cases their birthright to Croatian citizenship has been
denied by the current government of Croatia. All of the
individuals named have been denied compensation for their
property. The present government of Croatia is
deliberately attempting to dispossess and deprive these
and other victims of World War II Croatian crimes of
genocide, and evade responsibility
for such crimes prior to joining the European Union. In
the process they are engaging in the most extreme forms
of Holocaust denial.

The Croatian government has adamantly refused either to
return the properties of the above named individuals or to
compensate them in any way. Legislation passed by the
Croatian government makes it virtually impossible for
anyone to qualify for compensation. Talks with
representatives of the United States on a bilateral
agreement to compensate American citizens (but not their
heirs) for their loss of property have been taking place
for years without result. This agreement would, in any
case, contradict the individual’s right to bequeath
property, as guaranteed by the constitution of the
European Union.

Article 17, of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights
states that:

“The right to property is a traditional fundamental right
in democratic and liberal societies. It is contained in
all national constitutions and has been established by the
jurisprudence of the Court of Justice.”

“Everyone has the right to own, use, dispose of and
bequeath his or her lawfully acquired Possessions. No one
may deprived of his or her possessions, except in the
public interest and in the cases and under then conditions
provided for by law, subject to fair compensations being
paid in good time for their loss. ”

Croatia’s refusal to come to terms with its past crimes is
in direct contravention of the laws and practices of the
European Union. To allow Croatia entry in to the European
Union without forcing it to resolve its longstanding
disputes with its own Holocaust victims would constitute
both an in insult and an injury to these victims as well
as a travesty of immense proportions.

To allow Croatia’s entry under such conditions would
inevitably harm and undermine the reputation and stature
of the E.U., for these are claims that will never go away
or be forgotten. They must be settled legally and it is
yours and the European Union’s responsibility to recognize
this beforehand. I feel certain you will agree.

I urge you to make the return of properties to the
rightful owners without conditions a mandatory requirement
for Croatia’s admission to the European Union. In doing
so, Croatia will not only fulfill the requirements of the
European Union constitution but it will also join the rest
of the European community in closing this painful chapter
of its history.

Sincerely,

(signed)

Barry Lituchy, National Coordinator
Jasenovac Research Institute


cc.: U.S. Ambassador Edward B. O’Donnell, Jr.
cc.: D. Sprajic, Secretary General, Jewish
Communities in Croatia
cc.: U.S. Senator Charles Schumer of New York
cc.: U.S. Senator Hilary Clinton of New York
cc.: U.S. Representative Anthony Weiner of New York
cc.: Claims Conference


=== 3 ===

CROAZIA:CAMPO CONCENTRAMENTO CENTRO EUROPEO STUDIO OLOCAUSTO

(ANSA) - ZAGABRIA, 21 DIC - Il memoriale di Jasenovac, dove nella
Seconda guerra mondiale ci fu il maggiore campo di concentramento in
Croazia voluto dal regime filonazista degli ustascia, diventera' il
primo centro di una rete europea per l'insegnamento sull'Olocausto.
Lo riferisce l'agenzia di stampa 'Hina'. L'iniziativa del progetto,
ha spiegato la direttrice del centro di Jasenovac, Natasa Jovicic, e'
partita dall'istituto Yad Vashem di Gerusalemme che il 27 gennaio
prossimo, in occasione della Giornata internazionale della memoria
della Shoah, inviera' in Croazia una delegazione per concretizzare il
programma di cooperazione tra le due istituzioni. Accanto alla
creazione di una rete europea di memoriali, di cui Jasenovac dovrebbe
essere punto di partenza, la cooperazione prevede anche lo scambio di
esperti e la fondazione di un centro di educazione e di ricerca
sull'Olocausto. ''Con questo progetto Jasenovac diventera' un centro
di prestigio internazionale nel campo dell'insegnamento
sull'Olocausto'', ha spiegato Jovicic. A Jasenovac, secondo recenti
stime di storici, tra il 1941 e il 1945 morirono circa 70.000
persone, tra serbi, ebrei, Rom e croati antifascisti. (ANSA). COR
21/12/2005 18:33

---

Olocausto: Corte suprema Usa dice sì a processo a Vaticano

Washington - La Corte Suprema americana ha dato oggi il suo via
libera al
processo che un gruppo di sopravvissuti dell'Olocausto ha intentato alla
banca vaticana, lo Ior (Istituto opere di religione), e all'ordine
francescano, accusandoli di essersi appropriati, alla fine della
guerra, di
beni di vittime del brutale regime Ustascia, al potere in Croazia dal
1941
al 1945.

Quei beni, secondo l'accusa, sarebbero stati trasferiti illegalmente dai
francescani croati nelle casse della banca vaticana e sarebbero
serviti a
finanziare la fuga di gerarchi ustascia e altri criminali nazisti
transitati proprio attraverso la città pontificia verso destinazioni
sicure
in Sudamerica e altrove.

Il processo era stato bloccato nel 2003 su ricorso di un giudice
federale,
il quale aveva sostenuto che si trattava di questioni da affrontare a
livello di governo statunitense e non di tribunale. La Corte Suprema ha
respinto oggi il ricorso e ha deciso che il processo, avviato nel
1999 da
un gruppo di ebrei davanti ad una Corte di San Francisco, deve andare
avanti.

fonte: Sda-Ats / Ecumenici, gennaio 2006

---

Interessanti sviluppi nel processo di San Francisco contro la Banca
Vaticana accusata di aver riciclato il denaro del tesoro degli
Ustascia (sottratto alle vittime del genocidio del regime di Pavelic)
dopo la fine della seconda guerra mondiale.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Update: Vatican Bank Lawsuit Progressing
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 22:31:19 -0500
From: Jon Levy

February 23, 2006

For Immediate Release:
Jonathan Levy and Tom Easton Attorneys
resistk@...
202-318-2406
http://www.vaticanbankclaims.com

Current Update

Vatican Bank Lawsuit Progressing


San Francisco: Attorneys for plaintiffs in Alperin v. Vatican Bank a
lawsuit seeking recovery of assets looted from Yugoslavia during the
Second World War and converted post-war by the Vatican Bank and
Franciscan Order reports progress on several fronts:

The trial court has approved a Fourth Amended Lawsuit that
substantially enhances the existing claims and adds the Serbian
Republic of Krajina in Exile as a Plaintiff. Additional facts about
how the Ustasha Treasury came to the Vatican Bank, Vatican dealings in
gold bullion and the involvement of the Franciscan Order in Rome and
Chicago have been added.

The deposition of the only known witness to the Vatican and Franciscan
money laundering, former Army Counterintelligence Special Agent William
Gowen is set to continue in Dallas on March 9, 2006. Gowen’s
eyewitness testimony has revealed so far that Vatican official Fr.
Krunoslav Draganovic admitted to Gowen that he received up to ten
truckloads of loot in 1946 at the Franciscan controlled Croatian
Confraternity of San Girolamo. Gowen also testified that the leader of
the treasure convoy, Ustasha Colonel Ivan Babic, boasted to Gowen of
using British uniforms and trucks to move the gold from Northern Italy
to Rome. As for the Ustasha Treasury’s ultimate destination, Gowen
concurred that it could have gone nowhere but the Vatican Bank.

Gowen’s testimony is likely to remain unchallenged by any living
witness given the recent death of former longtime Vatican Bank
President, Archbishop Paul Marcinkus, who likely knew of the Ustasha
transaction but never spoke of it.

Further the United States Supreme Court has denied a Vatican Bank and
Franciscan Appeal to halt the lawsuit. The US State Department has
also denied previous requests by the Vatican Secretariat to dismiss the
lawsuit.


For more information contact:

Jonathan Levy, Esq.
resistk@...
202-318-2406

(italiano / francais / srpskohrvatski / english)


--- ENGLISH ---

OPEN LETTER

G.A.MA.DI. (Group of the Atheists and Dialectic Materialists, Italy)
ASKS:

IS THERE ANYBODY?...

We ask: is there anybody among the deputies and senators of our
government, among the left-wing parties, who remembers the
circumstances of the arrest of Slobodan Milosevic - who had not
committed any aggression against any people, who had never bombed
innocent children nor destroyed his or anyone else’s country.

And we ask: if this somebody can remember the hasty and the anti-
democratic zeal with which Madame Carla Del Ponte organized his
infamous capture, by paying in dollars to bounty hunters.
Now: if this dirty world has to continue like that, we ask Madame Del
Ponte, or whoever at her place, to also arrest Prime Minister Ehud
Olmert because of a gratuitous genocide, criminality, lack of respect
for civilization and humanity.
We, veterans of the liberation movement that fought against nazi-
fascism, ask for Olmert’s immediate arrest and we demand respect for
the Palestinian and Lebanese peoples' rights, as well as the
indemnification of the people suffering the damages.

Rome, 31 July 2006

G.A.MA.DI.

Miriam Pellegrini Ferri

Spartaco Ferri

La VOCE (mensile)



Franco Costanzi - Roma

Maria Fierro - Roma

Mario Albanesi - Roma

Andrea Martocchia - Bologna

Enzo Valentini - Roma

Olga Daric - Paris

Savez Progresivnih Zena Jugoslavije - Beograd

Dr Amelie Glissant - Paris

Nada Znirdasic - Paris

Marie – Francoise Zlatkovic - Paris

Antonio Ginetti - Pistoia

Giuseppe Aragno - Roma

Paolo Valentini - Roma

Guido Carpi - Pisa

Fabrizio Rossi - Roma

Vincenzo Brandi - Roma

Mauro Cristaldi - Roma

SKOJ (Lega della Gioventù Comunista di Jugoslavia)

Rudolf Baloh (Slovenia)


to join the appeal: gamadilavoce @...


--- FRANCAIS ---

Lettre Ouverte aux sénateurs et les députés ...

Nous demandons s'il y a quelqu'un parmi les députés et les sénateurs,
des responsables du gouvernement et des membres des partis de gauche
qui se souviennent de l'arrestation de S. Milosevic, qui n'avait
agressé aucun peuple, qui n'avait bombardé aucun enfant innocent, ni
détruit son pays ni d'autres pays. Et nous demandons aussi si
quelqu'un se rappelle la méthode expéditive et antidémocratique avec
laquelle Madame Carla del Ponte a organisé l'infâme capture contre
versement de dollars aux "chasseurs de tète."

Donc, si c'est ainsi que tourne ce triste monde, nous demandons à
Madame Carla del Ponte, ou à tout autre personne compétente,
d'arrêter Monsieur Ehud Olmert pour génocide gratuit, pour
criminalité et pour atteint à tous les principes de l'humanité civilisé.

Nous vétérans et anciens partisans de la lutte contre le nazi-
fascisme, nous demandons l'arrestation immédiate de Olmert et le
respect des droits des peuples palestinien et libanais. En outre,
nous demandons le dédommagement pour les dégâts provoqués en
Palestine et au Liban.

Roma, Italie, 31 juillet 2006

Miriam Pellegrini Ferri, G.A.Ma.Di. - gamadilavoce @...


--- SRPSKOHRVATSKI ---

Grupa Ateisti Materijalisti Dijalekticari G.A.MA.DI.
u novom broju svog glasnika "La Voce" objavljuje poziv na akciju
protiv krvnika Palestinskog i Libanskog naroda:

<< Ima li iko od poslanika ili senatora u vladi, Ima li iko od
partija na levici da se seti hapsenja Slobodana Milosevica, drzavnika
koji niti je ikada napao neki narod, niti bombardovao neduznu decu i
razarao druge, pa ni svoju drzavu ? Takodje pitamo, Ima li iko da se
seti sa kakvom je munjevitom revnoscu, grubo gazeci sve vazece
demokratske procedure, gospodja Karla del Ponte sprovela u delo to
sramno hapsenje i kako su "lovci na ucene" isplaceni u dolarima.
Pa posto je to nacin, u ovom poganom svetskom poretku, trazimo od
gospodje Karle del Ponte, ili kog drugog na njenom mestu, da smesta
uhapsi g.dina Ehuda Olmerta, zbog genocida, zbog zlocina nad
covecnoscu, zbog bezdusnog gazenja vrednosti svekolike ljudske
civilizacije.
Mi, bivsi borci antifasistickog NOB-a, trazimo danas da Olmert bude
smesta uhapsen. Trazimo postovanje za narod Palestine i Libana !
Takodje trazimo materijalno obestecenje za sve koji su pretpeli
stetu. >>

Rim, Italija - 31. jula, 2006.

(prevod: Olga J.)


--- ITALIANO ---
Il G.A.MA.DI. chiede:

c’è qualcuno?

Chiediamo se c’è qualcuno, tra i deputati e i senatori del nostro
governo, tra i membri dei partiti della sinistra, che ricorda l’
arresto di Slobodan Milosevic che non aveva aggredito alcun popolo,
che non aveva bombardato nessun bambino innocente, né distrutto il
suo o altri paesi. E chiediamo anche se questo qualcuno ricorda con
quale zelante metodo sbrigativo e antidemocratico la signora Carla
del Ponte ne ha organizzato la infame cattura col versamento in
dollari ai “cacciatori di taglie”.
Allora, se così deve andare questo sporco mondo, chiediamo alla
signora Del Ponte o a chi per essa, di arrestare il signor Ehud
Olmert per genocidio gratuito, per criminalità, per il mancato
rispetto di ogni principio di civiltà e di umanità.

Noi, già partigiani contro il nazifascismo, chiediamo l’ arresto
immediato di Olmert e il rispetto dei popoli palestinese e libanese
nonché il risarcimento ai colpiti dei danni provocati.

31 luglio 2006

(per aderire: gamadilavoce @... )

SIDUN / SIDONE


U mæ ninin u mæ
u mæ
lerfe grasse au su
d'amë d'amë
tûmù duçe benignu
de teu muaè
spremmûu 'nta maccaia
de staë de staë
e oua grûmmu de sangue ouëge
e denti de laete
e i euggi di surdatti chen arraggë
cu'a scciûmma a a bucca cacciuéi de baë
a scurrï a gente cumme selvaggin-a
finch'u sangue sarvaegu nu gh'à smurtau a qué
e doppu u feru in gua i feri d'ä prixún
e 'nte ferie a semensa velenusa d'ä depurtaziún
perchè de nostru da a cianûa a u meü
nu peua ciû cresce ni ærbu ni spica ni figgeü
ciao mæ 'nin l'eredítaë
l'è ascusa
'nte sta çittaë
ch'a brûxa ch'a brûxa
inta seia che chin-a
e in stu gran ciaeu de feugu
pe a teu morte piccin-a.


trad.:

Il mio bambino il mio
il mio
labbra grasse al sole
di miele di miele
tumore dolce benigno
di tua madre
spremuto nell’afa umida
dell’estate dell’estate
e ora grumo di sangue orecchie
e denti di latte
e gli occhi dei soldati cani arrabbiati
con la schiuma alla bocca cacciatori di agnelli
a inseguire la gente come selvaggina
finché il sangue selvatico non gli ha spento la voglia
e dopo il ferro in gola i ferri della prigione
e nelle ferite il seme velenoso della deportazione
perché di nostro dalla pianura al molo
non possa più crescere albero né spiga né figlio
ciao bambino mio, l’eredità
è nascosta
in questa città
che brucia che brucia
nella sera che scende
e in questa grande luce di fuoco
per la tua piccola morte.


La canzone "Sidun", scritta con Mauro Pagani, è stata cantata e
incisa in "Creuza de mä" da Fabrizio De André nel 1984. Queste le
parole con cui lui stesso la commentò:

"Sidone è la città libanese che ci ha regalato oltre all'uso delle
lettere dell'alfabeto anche l'invenzione del vetro. Me la sono
immaginata, dopo l'attacco subito dalle truppe del generale Sharon
del 1982, come un uomo arabo di mezz'età, sporco, disperato,
sicuramente povero, che tiene in braccio il proprio figlio macinato
dai cingoli di un carro armato. (...) La piccola morte a cui accenno
nel finale di questo canto, non va semplicisticamente confusa con la
morte di un bambino piccolo. Bensì va metaforicamente intesa come la
fine civile e culturale di un piccolo paese: il Libano, la Fenicia,
che nella sua discrezione è stata forse la più grande nutrice della
civiltà mediterranea".

DEJÀ-VU


"Gli avvenimenti degli ultimi decenni rientrano nel processo di
balcanizzazione del Vicino Oriente, funzionale per i sionisti ed
elaborato nel 1982 dall'israeliano Oded Yinon che postulava la
frantumazione degli Stati arabi che verrebbero sostituiti da una
miriade di microstati si basi etnico-religiose con Israele quale
garante della coesistenza tra le diverse comunità..."

(Mirella Galletti in "Storia della Siria contemporanea", Bompiani;
citato da F. Sabahi su Il Sole 24 Ore del 6/7/2006)

il manifesto
23 Luglio 2006

Lubiana, vedi alla voce Europa

di Carla Casalini

«Qualcuno doveva aver diffamato Josef K., perché, senza che avesse
fatto nulla di male, una mattina venne arrestato...». L'incipit del
Processo sovviene immediato, come le cose trovate senza cercarle, il
mondo kafkiano è già lì, sfondo adeguato alla percezione in parole
dei «cancellati»: le donne e uomini nati o comunque vissuti e
residenti da anni in Slovenia, che senza capire improvvisamente si
sono trovati il vuoto intorno, anzi sono divenuti essi stessi il
«vuoto»,fantasmi, coloro che appaiono ma non sono. Privati
d'improvviso dei diritti e fin dei documenti - di quello statuto
della «cittadinanza» che nel moderno via via diviene indispensabile
conferma dell'essere e dell'essere riconoscibili agli altri - privati
perciò delle «basi legali dell'esistenza».
L'angoscia persecutoria del non sapere perché evocata da Kafka, vive
immediata nelle parole di Milan Makuc, che al trovarsi
improvvisamente straniero in patria, presenza illegale sul territorio
sloveno in cui è vissuto, pensa che la causa deve essere stata un
misteriore errore. Poi la polizia davanti a casa, le sue cose giù in
strada, l'incubo si materializza. E non ci sono neppure le parole per
dirlo, come si fa a spiegare che quelli come lui sono stati
cancellati con un'operazione segreta del ministero degli interni?
Come si fa a tradurre la dismisura formale di quell'atto nella lingua
materna concreta del vivere quotidiano? «Forse la cancellazione è
troppo complessa per una persona comune, e poi, se uno capisse
comincerebbe a dubitare della giustizia...».
Milan e altri «cancellati» chiedono ora se quella giustizia può
esistere alla Corte europea dei diritti umani, ricorrono contro la
Repubblica slovena che pure ha una Costituzione in cui è scritto che
garantisce «la protezione dei diritti umani e delle libertà
fondamentali a tutte le persone che si trovano sul suo territorio,
indipendentemente dalla loro origine nazionale, senza alcun tipo di
discriminazione». Dismisura di nuovo della forma, per un agire che
viceversa tenta una base «etnica» per la cittadinanza.
Ma è una peculiarità aberrante delle istituzioni slovene, o non
piuttosto un caso concreto esplosivo, quello dei «cancellati», che
rinvia diritto alle ambigue basi della «cittadinanza europea»? In
quella Costituzione che è stata bocciata l'Unione rinculava di fronte
alla stessa prima definizione fondamentale: sancendo che non potevano
dirsi «cittadini europei» tutti coloro che «risiedono» sul
continente, ma solo quelli che già sono riconosciuti tali nei singoli
stati nazionali, o che i singoli stati decidono, a discrezione, nei
modi e nei tempi, di promuovere all'ambito titolo - se si tratta di
donne e uomini venuti da fuori, pur se a milioni vivono e «risiedono»
permanentemente da anni sul loro territorio. Quel fondamento è da
riscrivere.


Clandestini in casa Slovenia

1992, la neonata Repubblica slovena priva decine di migliaia di
persone della cittadinanza. Da allora i «cancellati» vivono come
spettri. Oggi, contro questa «pulizia etnica amministrativa»
ricorrono alla Corte europea dei diritti umani

Roberto Pignoni

Uno spettro vaga per l'Europa: è lo spettro dei «cancellati». Si è
materializzato a Strasburgo, in un corposo fascicolo che giace sul
tavolo della Corte europea dei diritti umani. Milan Makuc e 10 altri
accusano lo Stato sloveno di gravissime violazioni dei loro diritti
fondamentali, in un ricorso presentato da un gruppo di avvocati
coordinato da Anton Giulio Lana e sostenuto da una rete di
associazioni e movimenti sloveni e italiani,come Karaula MiR-
MigrazioniResistenze, Dostje!, Civilna Iniciativa Izbrisanih
Aktivistov. Le vicende dei ricorrenti sono una carrellata di abusi e
violenze, subite ormai da quattordici anni: famiglie divise, neonati
«sequestrati» in ospedale, lavoratori privati di casa e impiego,
ridotti all'indigenza ed esposti a vessazioni continue da parte delle
autorità... E ancora: espulsioni senza mandato, internamento nei Cpt,
malati gravissimi cui è negato l'accesso alle cure mediche...
Il ricorso non si limita a denunciare le conseguenze dell'operazione
che il 26 febbraio 1992 privò decine di migliaia di persone,
residenti in Slovenia, delle basi legali della loro esistenza. Ma
invita a leggerne la prospettiva più ampia, che mette in luce
l'incapacità della società europea di elaborare alcuni nodi
fondamentali, quali il rapporto fra diritti umani e diritti di
cittadinanza, e il principio della «cittadinanza di residenza».
La cittadinanza di residenza, o qualcosa di analogo, era uno dei
cardini dell'organizzazione della Repubblica federativa socialista
jugoslava. Lo status di cittadino era stratificato su tre livelli:
sul piano generale, la cittadinanza jugoslava garantiva, in linea di
principio, tutti i diritti civili e politici. Vi era poi la
cittadinanza di una Repubblica: le persone venivano formalmente
iscritte nel Registro dei cittadini di una delle sei Repubbliche
comprese, fino al '91, nella Jugoslavia. Ma l'istituto era
sconosciuto alla gente comune: i più ignoravano quale fosse la loro
classificazione burocratica di «cittadini di una Repubblica».
Infine, un terzo livello: la «residenza permanente», che si otteneva
in modo pressoché automatico nel luogo di residenza abituale - spesso
diverso da quello in cui si era registrati come cittadini di una
Repubblica -, e rendeva operativi i diritti politici, economici,
sociali (elettorato attivo e passivo, casa, lavoro, istruzione,
assistenza sanitaria...) assicurati, in linea teorica, dalla
cittadinanza jugoslava. Solo attraverso di essa i cittadini jugoslavi
diventavano cittadini nel pieno senso del termine, secondo
un'accezione di cittadinanza funzionale-relazionale e non «etnica».
Il 26 febbraio 1992, con un'operazione segreta, il Ministero degli
Interni della Repubblica slovena ha cancellato dai registri di
residenza permanente tutti i cittadini jugoslavi che, pur essendovi
nati o vivendo in Slovenia da anni, non erano iscritti nel registro
dei cittadini della Repubblica slovena e non avevano richiesto e
ottenuto la nazionalità slovena. La cancellazione ha precipitato
decine di migliaia di abitanti nella condizione di apolidi, o di
«stranieri» senza permesso di soggiorno. Questi «stranieri in
flagrante» (come li ha definiti nel '96 il Ministro degli Interni
Ster) si sono visti privare di ogni diritto: casa, lavoro, assistenza
sanitaria... Molti sono stati rinchiusi nel Cpt di Lubiana, prima di
essere espulsi dal paese.
Si è consumata, in questo modo, un'imponente e silenziosa operazione
di «pulizia etnica amministrativa», che ha avuto l'effetto di creare
il capro espiatorio necessario per canalizzare le ansie di una
popolazione che vedeva gettare alle ortiche, insieme alle istituzioni
jugoslave, un complesso patrimonio di garanzie sociali, divenuto
incompatibile con le esigenze del mercato «europeo».
Migliaia di cancellati furono costretti a emigrare, molti hanno
varcato le frontiere dell'Unione, nella totale indifferenza delle
istituzioni comunitarie che fingevano di non accorgersi
dell'accaduto. Un atteggiamento complice che non è mutato nemmeno
dopo i ripetuti pronunciamenti della Corte costituzionale slovena,
che ha dichiarato illegale la «cancellazione» e ordinato di
riconoscere le ragioni dei cancellati e ripristinare i loro diritti.
La mancata esecuzione delle sentenze della Corte fa della Slovenia un
caso unico in Europa e dimostra che il governo e il parlamento di un
paese dell'Unione possono operare indisturbati per anni, in una
condizione di incostituzionalità conclamata. Una situazione che non
depone certo a favore dello stato di salute della democrazia slovena
- e nemmeno di quella europea, dal momento che la Slovenia assumerà,
fra poco più di un anno, la Presidenza della Ue.
Oggi, la mobilitazione dei «cancellati» spesso si salda alle
manifestazioni sul lato italiano del confine: la loro presenza contro
il Cpt di Gradisca, ha lanciato un segnale forte - anche perché, per
chi è privo di documenti, varcare la frontiera non è esente da rischi.
Con il ricorso alla Corte di Strasburgo, le vittime della
cancellazione si impongono come un soggetto politico capace di
legarsi ai movimenti di altri paesi e di scatenare una limpida
battaglia per ripristinare lo stato di diritto e riconquistare la
«cittadinanza di residenza» illegalmente revocata quattordici anni
fa. E ricordano alla sinistra europea che quello che si è cercato di
esorcizzare in Slovenia nel '92, non era tanto il passato socialista
jugoslavo, quanto l'idea di un'Europa aperta, in grado di adottare
una nozione di cittadinanza depurata da ogni connotazione «etnica».


Vita invisibile di Milan Makuc

«Io, sloveno, da un giorno all'altro mi sono ritrovato straniero
illegale. Pensavo a un misterioso errore....»

Ursula Lipovec

Cebron Qualche giorno fa Milan mi ha detto: «Sem na koncu», sono alla
fine. Voleva dire che non ne può più della vita del barbone, con il
male che gli mangia la faccia e gli ha già portato via il labbro
superiore. Se continua così, morirà. La vita non è stata sempre
questa, per Milan Makuc. Nato poco dopo la seconda guerra mondiale a
Rasa (nell'Istria croata) da genitori sloveni, ricorda un'infanzia
felice. Da ragazzo si è convinto che uno deve conoscere il mondo,
girare, non fermarsi mai. È cresciuto a Pirano, in Slovenia. Dopo le
scuole, ha cominciato a viaggiare. La sera, davanti a un bicchiere di
refosco, parla della Boca, dei porti brasiliani, dei colori
dell'America centrale che si interecciano con le memorie
dell'Australia, e poi l'Africa, soprattutto l'Angola, dove ha visto
la guerra da vicino. Ha fatto altri lavori, sempre in riva al mare,
sulla stretta costa tra Pirano e Portorose. Ventidue anni, durante i
quali pagava diligentemente i contributi, compresa la pensione, e
l'assistenza sanitaria. Nel '92, da un giorno all'altro, si è trovato
«cancellato»: straniero illegale, senza documenti né diritti. «Per
lunghi anni non ho capito cosa mi fosse accaduto. Mi domandavo
perché. Mi sento sloveno, i miei genitori erano sloveni, da 53 anni
vivo in Slovenia. Ho persino votato per l'indipendenza della
Slovenia...» dice Milan con uno sguardo disperato, e tuttavia ancora
fiducioso. Il fatto è che Milan aveva un «difetto»: essere nato a
Rasa, in Croazia, ed essere iscritto all'anagrafe croata. Questo
«dettaglio» era passato inosservato sia a lui, sia ai suoi genitori.
Del resto, commenta, «anche se lo avessimo saputo, non ci avremmo
fatto caso». Ai computer del Ministero degli interni il «dettaglio»
non sfugge. Milan Makuc viene «cancellato» dal registro dei residenti
permanenti e diviene clandestino, in Slovenia. Non appena se ne rende
conto, si reca negli uffici dell'Unità amministrativa. Alcuni
impiegati si rifiutano di rivolgergli la parola, altri rispondono
freddamente. Qualcuno gli suggerisce di «tornare in Croazia». Perso
il lavoro, l'affitto di casa si è fatto insostenibile. Milan sentiva
avvicinarsi il naufragio, non sapeva a chi rivolgersi. Guardava i
vicini con invidia: grazie alla cittadinanza, potevano comprarsi la
casa «sociale» a prezzi di saldo. Nei primi tempi, era certo che
tutto fosse dovuto a un misterioso errore, che sarebbe stato presto
riparato. La vita avrebbe ripreso il suo corso normale. Un pomeriggio
del '94, rientrando, ha trovato la polizia davanti a casa. Le sue
cose erano sparse in mezzo alla strada. A quel punto è crollato. «Ho
vagato per giorni senza meta, senza sapere dove fossi. Ero perso. Ho
cominciato a vivere come un barbone e, come vedi, non ho mai smesso»
sorride amaramente, cercando di sdrammatizzare. Nei luoghi dove
viveva da sempre si vide costretto, sotto lo sguardo di vicini e
conoscenti, a dormire sulle panchine e a frugare nell'immondizia in
cerca di cibo. C'era chi, a volte, gli offriva un tetto, in una
baracca fatiscente o in un garage. Ogni tanto un amico, tra una
partita a carte e l'altra, gli preparava la cena. Milan provava a
spiegare a queste «persone di buon cuore» - come le definisce - che
cosa gli era accaduto. Dai loro sguardi e dall'inquieto agitarsi
delle braccia, si rendeva conto di non venire compreso: «Forse la
cancellazione è troppo complessa per una persona comune. E poi, se
uno capisse, comincerebbe a dubitare della giustizia in generale. Chi
sono io, per aprire questa porta». Milan è malato. L'altro giorno
l'ho accompagnato all'ambulatorio «di strada» di Lubiana. Vi si
rivolgono molti cancellati, privi di assistenza sanitaria. Quando
Milan ha lasciato la stanza, il medico, Aleksander Doplihar, si è
girato verso di me: «Com'è possibile? Lasciare una persona ridursi a
questo punto!». Mi ha consegnato un certificato per l'ospedale, c'era
scritto urgente a grandi lettere. All'ospedale, il corpo di Milan
pareva oggetto d'intenso interesse scientifico. C'era chi lo
osservava con stupore, e chi gli ha chiesto ripetutamente: «Signore,
come ha potuto trascurare così la sua salute?». Milan, pazientemente,
cercava di spiegare la sua situazione a ogni nuovo venuto: per 14
anni, nessun medico aveva voluto visitarlo. L'infermiera che ci
accompagnava alla stanza era certa che i medici avessero preso la
decisione sbagliata. «Lei non è assicurato e le cure saranno costose.
Chi pagherà? Lei o la signorina? Si pentirà di aver insistito tanto.
Quando la direzione saprà che è un cancellato non le daranno i
trattamenti dovuti, si limiteranno all'indispensabile». I sanitari di
Lubiana sono persone di buon cuore, direbbe Milan. Hanno accettato di
ricoverarlo, e fra qualche giorno dovrebbe essere operato. Nel
frattempo, il suo caso è approdato a Strasburgo.


L'operazione

La legge sugli stranieri

Ljubljana, 27-2-1992. Circolare n. 0016/4-14968. (...) È realistico
aspettarci molti problemi con le persone che, in data 28-2-1992,
diventeranno stranieri, e che non hanno richiesto né la residenza
temporanea né quella permanente. Vi avvertiamo che i loro documenti -
benché rilasciati dagli organi responsabili del nostro Stato e
tuttora formalmente validi - non hanno più valore legale, per via del
mutato status di queste persone (...) Allo straniero che arriva nel
nostro territorio in modo illegale e vi risiede senza permesso, si
applica l'art. 28 della Legge sugli stranieri: se si trattiene più a
lungo di quanto previsto dal par. primo dell'art.13, o dal decreto
che concede la residenza temporanea - il funzionario responsabile può
condurlo al confine dello Stato e avviarlo ad attraversare la
frontiera senza alcun decreto dell'Organo amministrativo.

---

il manifesto
30 Luglio 2006

Apolidi per forza. Velimir lo scacchista, e Black

Roberto Pignoni

Solo Ljubica, sua madre, gli tiene testa con gli scacchi. È stata lei
a istillargli la passione e negli anni del liceo Velimir non
conosceva rivali, a Capodistria.
I Dabetic erano saliti dal Montenegro negli anni '60, in cerca di
lavoro. Il porto di Capodistria, cocktail di industrie in una cornice
mediterranea, esercitava un'attrazione irresistibile.
Con i primi guadagni, il padre di Velimir si aggiustò una casetta
sulla collina che domina il golfo. Era il suo rifugio e non aveva
bisogno d'altro. Velimir, dopo il liceo, andò a lavorare in una
fabbrica di Vicenza. Nel complesso, per i Dabetic l'esistenza
scorreva tranquilla.
La crisi arrivò nel '91, con la secessione dalla Jugoslavia. La
«guerra» aveva deluso i nazionalisti sloveni: due sole settimane,
senza spargimento di sangue, troppo poco per alimentare un mito. La
frustrazione si scaricò sul «nemico interno». Un vicino denunciò i
Dabetic alla polizia, accusandoli di nascondere dei «cetnici».
Arrivarono di notte e costrinsero il fratello di Velimir ad andare
sulle ginocchia per 2 chilometri, con una pistola puntata al collo.
Giunti alla casetta dei genitori cominciarono a sparare, distruggendo
la cisterna dell'acqua e varie altre cose. Sfondata la porta, li
incalzavano, tenendoli sotto tiro: «Dove sono i cetnici?». Inutile
dirgli che era una follia: oltretutto, il nonno di Velimir era un
eroe partigiano, nemico mortale dei cetnici. Dopo aver frugato
ovunque, i poliziotti si convinsero di aver preso un granchio e li
lasciarono stare.
L'anno seguente i Dabetic si resero conto di essere stati
«cancellati» e di non esistere più come «cittadini», in Slovenia.
Nemmeno Velimir, nato e cresciuto a Capodistria.
La «cancellazione» è una bomba a tempo. In Italia, Velimir ha potuto
lavorare regolarmente per 12 anni, grazie all'unico documento
rimastgli: il passaporto rosso della Repubblica socialista jugoslava.
Ma quando è scaduto definitivamente, ha perso il permesso di
soggiorno, la casa e l'impiego: il destino di ogni «cancellato».
Senza perdersi d'animo, lo scacchista di Capodistria ha individuato
una delle poche mosse possibili e si è trasformato in artista di
strada. Il cagnolino che lo accompagna, Black, ha 4 anni: la stessa
età del nuovo Velimir, nato dalla «cancellazione» da parte della
Questura di Verona. I due amici si muovono lungo la costa, fiutando
l'odore del mare. Ogni tanto, la polizia li ferma. «Ti mandiamo in
Jugoslavia» gli hanno detto alla Questura di Ancona (un ambiente nel
quale le nozioni geopolitiche sull'altra sponda dell'Adriatico non
paiono aggiornatissime). «Mandatemi in Marocco, forse lì mi vogliono»
ha replicato Velimir, sconsolato.
Tre mesi fa, il questore di Pesaro gli ha ordinato di «lasciare il
territorio dello Stato entro il termine di 5 giorni attraverso la
frontiera di Milano Malpensa»; in caso contrario, «la pena
dell'arresto da sei mesi a un anno». Un'espulsione verso lo spazio
intergalattico: Velimir è apolide, il suo paese natale lo ha
«cancellato», non c'è uno stato disposto ad accoglierlo.
Il 16 giugno lo hanno incarcerato a Mantova, mentre Black veniva
chiuso in un C.P.T. per cani. Processato per direttissima, è stato
assolto e rimesso in libertà. Per la prima volta un tribunale
italiano ha riconosciuto le ragioni di un «cancellato», ma al
Ministero degli Interni questo non basta. Velimir continua a vagare
clandestino per le piazze, insieme a Black, guadagnandosi da vivere
con torce e birilli.
Ogni tanto tira fuori la scacchiera. Si tiene in allenamento.

---

SULLA ASSENZA DI DIRITTI IN SLOVENIA VEDI ANCHE:

Slovenia: a rischio il diritto d'asilo

[Franco Juri] Sarà praticamente impossibile ottenere asilo in
Slovenia, e molto verrà lasciato alla discrezionalità della polizia
di frontiera. In Slovenia si sta andando verso una riforma in senso
del tutto restrittivo della legge sul diritto d'asilo.
Associazionismo ed Alto commissariato per i rifugiati protestano,
l'UE sta zitta

http://www.osservatoriobalcani.org/article/articleview/5035/1/51/