Informazione
1. Socijalna bomba kuca u Srbiji: Zbog privatizacije bez posla æe
ostati jo¹ 800.000 radnika
2. Diplomiraj, pa emigriraj
=== 1 ===
--- In Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli., "Miroslav Antic" wrote:
Socijalna bomba kuca u Srbiji
Zbog privatizacije bez posla æe ostati jo¹ 800.000 radnika
Ekonomista Branko Draga¹ apeluje da vlada odustane od neoliberalnih
opita MMF da bi se izbegao argentinski scenario. Trgovinski deficit
veæi nego u vreme prethodnog re¾ima, industrijska proizvodnja zamrla,
nelikvidnost se kao zaraza ¹iri u privredi, rasprodaja nacionalne
imovine se bezdu¹no nastavlja. Sve u svemu, svi podaci govore da se sa
ovakvim reformama srlja u propast
"Odmah da ka¾em, zbog zlonamernih koji bespogovorno sprovode politiku
MMF-a, da nisam protivnik te institucije. Protiv sam zloupotrebe te
znacajne medunarodne institucije od strane njene birokratije,
trecerazrednih studenata Harvarda (kako ih je nazvao ©tiglic), koji,
umi¹ljeni u svojoj neoliberalnoj teoriji, guraju jedan propali
ekonomski koncept", istice ekonomista Branko Draga¹ i dodaje: "Sve
zemlje u razvoju koje se danas nalaze u ekonomskim problemima, dospele
su u nevolju zbog striktnog pridr¾avanja rigidnog koncepta birokrata
iz MMF-a".
Najgora situacija je u Argentini. Uprkos doslednog pridr¾avanja
nametnutog koncepta, uprkos silnim pohvalama za istrajnost u
sprovodenju ¹ok-terapije, vreme je, ipak, pokazalo da je Argentina
postala ¾rtva neoliberalnih opita. Za¹to bi Srbija ponovila istu
gre¹ku? Reformatori danas u Srbiji poku¹avaju da proguraju taj
koncept. Oni ne ¾ele da cuju dobronamerne savete domacih strucnjaka.
Kao svi malogradani na vlasti, opcinjeni su mocnijim i bogatijim od
sebe. Nemaju viziju razvoja sopstvene dr¾ave, arogantni su i bahati
jer znaju da ih podr¾avaju birokrate iz medunarodnih institucija. Zar
im nije va¾nije da ih hvale sopstveni gradani? Zar gradani na izborima
ne biraju svoju vlast? Jesmo li mi to vec postali protektorat?
Podaci za 2001. godinu krajnje su zabrinjavajuci i jasno govore kojim
putem su reforme krenule. Ne samo da nije do¹lo do ¾eljenog oporavka
privrede, vec su se pogor¹ali uslovi privredivanja. Trgovinski deficit
je dostigao iznos od 2,93 mld $ i za 47,2% je veci nego u vreme
prethodong re¾ima. Posebno zabrinjava ¹to je industrijska proizvodnja
ostala nepokrenuta, rast od jedva 0,6 odsto, mada nema ekonomskih
sankcija i smenjen je jedan despotski re¾im. Ukupan privredni rast bio
je svega 5,5 odsto, a to mo¾emo zahvaliti jedino rodnoj godini u
poljoprivredi. Reformatori su najavili da ce stopa privrednog rasta u
2002. godini biti - 4 odsto. Gradani moraju da znaju da cemo sa tako
niskom stopom rasta tek za 25 godina stici u 1989. god. Jesu li oni
spremni toliko dugo da trpe? Privatizacijom ce ostati bez posla
sigurno jo¹ 800.000 ljudi i nema nikakvog obja¹njenja gde ce toliki
nezaposleni da se zaposle. Socijalna bomba kuca u Srbiji. To je
posledica divlje liberalizacije i dirigovane privatizacije. S jedne
strane otpu¹taju se ljudi i zatvaraju firme, a sa druge strane ne
pokrece se proizvodnja, niti se otvaraju nova preduzeca. Inflacija je
pro¹le godine iznosila 40 odsto, plate su porasle na 230 DM, ali je
njihova kupovna moc bila svega 90 DM. Potro¹acka korpa ne mo¾e da
zadovolji osnovne egzistencijanalne potrebe i sve veci broj ljudi - 74
odsto, ¾ivi na svega 2$ dnevno. Preko 40 odsto ljudi ¾ivi na 1$
dnevno. Za prosecnu cetvoroclanu porodicu potrebno je mesecno 38.010
din da bi nekako placala sve narasle tro¹kove ¾ivota. Kako zaraditi
tolike pare u posrnuloj privredi? Ni pokazatelji za prvi kvartal
2002., na¾alost, nisu ni¹ta bolji. I dalje se nastavlja
pad industrijske proizvodnje: januar 5,5 odsto u odnosu na isti period
pro¹le godine, februar 4,9, a mart oko 4 odsto. Trgovinski deficit je
vec dostigao 756 mil $ za prva tri meseca. Nelikvidnost se kao zaraza
¹iri u privredi. U prva tri meseca 2002. godine bilo je nelikvidno
44.345 preduzeca u kojima je radilo 1.200.379 radnika. Neprekidno je
nelikvidno 25.546 preduzeca u kojima radi 699.870 zaposlenih i dug je
narastao na 95,5 milijardi dinara. Medutim, dok pada industrijska
proizvodnja rastu prihodi javnog sektora. Za prva dva meseca ove
godine ti prihodi su veci za 102 odsto u odnosu na isti period pro¹le
godine.
Nerealan porast zarada doveli su do natprosecnog rasta poreza na
dohodak za citavih 159 odsto.
Sve u svemu, svi podaci govore da moramo ozbiljno da preispitamo
dosada¹nji koncept reformi. Kao iskusni strucnjak iz privrede,
poku¹avam javnost da opomenem na pogubno delovanje dana¹njih
reformatora. Po¹to su 28. decembra 2001. godine prodali tri cementare
u zemlji, a nekoliko dana kasnije urgentno zatvorili cetiri nacionalne
banke, pla¹im se da ce se nastaviti rasprodaja nacionalne imovine. A
ako ne zaustavimo takvu bezdu¹nu rasprodaju po nalogu MMF-a, postavlja
se pitanje kako cemo upravljati dr¾avom ako rasprodamo strate¹ke
grane? Kako cemo voditi nezavisnu ekonomsku politiku? Kakva ce nam
dr¾ava biti u buducnosti?
Zabrinut sam nad svim ovim pitanjima. Ima li izlaza iz ove situacije?
Ima. Pogre¹no je mi¹ljenje da moramo da sprovodimo naredbe
medunarodnih birokrata koji ni¹ta ne znaju o na¹oj privredi. Potrebno
je naci zajednicki interes izmedu MMF-a i na¹e zemlje. Ni MMF-u ne
odgovara da se u Srbiji ponovi argentinski scenario. Zbog toga je
va¾no da preko na¹ih poslovnih prijatelja lobiramo u MMF-u da se
odustane od neoliberalnog koncepta. Jedna strucna, sposobna i otresita
ekipa na¹ih privrednika napravila bi prezentaciju Programa za spas
Srbije u Medunarodnim finansijskim institucijama i tra¾ila bi podr¹ku
krupnog privatnog kapitala za svoj projekat. Tek kada oni prihvate taj
Program i nadu interes u njemu, mo¾emo da uspemo. Medunarodne
finansijske birokrate sprovodice naloge krupnog privatnog kapitala,
jer ce te¾iti da odbrane njihove interese. Tako ce se na¹i dr¾avni,
nacionalni gradanski i privredni interesi poklopiti sa interesima
medunarodnih institucija.
Niti ce se one stideti za pogre¹an koncept reformi, niti cemo mi
rizikovati da izgubimo dr¾avu i upadnemo u socijalnu anarhiju. MMF ce
obavljati svoju izvornu funkciju zbog koje je i osnovan. Mi cemo biti
plate¾no sposobni da vracamo preuzete obaveze. Gradani se nece
iseljavati u potrazi za poslom. Nece biti pritiska na razvijene
dr¾ave.
Evo puta za globalni oporavak svetske ekonomije i trajno re¹enje
ekonomskih problema zemalja u razvoju. Vrlo brzo bi se smanjile
tenzije izmedu razvijenih i nerazvijenih, izmedu bogatih i siroma¹nih.
Planeta bi postala mesto za ugodan ¾ivot. Revolucije bi definitivno
oti¹le u zaborav. Nestala bi i ukleta Fondrmacija. Uginula bi
sedmoglava sablast ¹to pro¾dire siroma¹ne zemlje i narode kako bi
nahranila sopstvenu prazninu. Pohlepom se covecanstvo ne mo¾e spasiti.
Du¹evni mir i skromnost postace utoci¹te za sve posrnule duhove.
Smisao i svrha svega bice mere vrednosti. Korisnost ce se meriti
davanjem. A niko nece ni¹ta hteti da uzme, pre nego ¹to ne ponudi
izbavljenje. Naravno, za sve.
---
Jaèi tlaèi
Danas 358 najbogatijih ljudi na svetu ima neto vrednost kapitala
jednak zajednickom godi¹njem prihodu 2,53 milijardi najsiroma¹nijih
ljudi.
Humanitarna organizacija Oxam international (OI) napravila je izve¹taj
o stanju svetske trgovine i do¹la do zakljucka koji je nama, ¹to
¾ivimo u nerazvijenim zemljama, svakodnevno vidljiv. Strucnjacima iz
ove studije je postalo jasno da su pravila medunarodne trgovine
smi¹ljena u korist bogatih zemalja. Od svakih 100 dolara zarade od
izvoza proizvoda u svetu, 97 odsto odlazi u razvijene i srednje
razvijene zemlje , a samo tri odsto sti¾e u siroma¹ne zemlje.
Tako Svetska tgovinska organizacija (WTO) slu¾i bogatim zemljama da
jo¹ vice uvecaju svoja nemala bogatstva. Nerazvijeni nisu sposobni da
se na otvorenom tr¾i¹tu bore sa mnogo mocnijim od sebe . To je dovelo
do apsurdne pozicije, da danas 358 najbogatijih ljudi na svetu ima
neto vrednost kapitala jednak zajednickom godi¹njem prihodu 2,53
milijardi najsiroma¹nijihljudi. Raslojavanja se i dalje nastavljaju,
tako da je u 2.000, ukupan iznos spoljnih i unutra¹njih dugova
dostigao cifru od 400.000 milijardi dolara. Koliko je to veliki iznos
najbolje se vidi kad uporedimo sa ostvarenim bruto svetskim proizvodom
u istoj godini, koji iznosi 42.000 milijardi dolara.
Najsiroma¹nije zemlje su u poslednjih 20 godina platile na svaki dolar
zajma vi¹e od 9 dolara kamate, a da nisu otplatile dug. Kuda to vodi?
Od cetiri milijarde stanovnika nerazvijenih zemalja, njih 1,3
milijarde nemaju vi¹e od dolara dnevno. Na¾alost, medu njima se nalazi
i najveci deo na¹ih gradana. Istovremeno, devizno tr¾i¹te obavi
svakodnevno transakcije oko 1.500 milijardi dolara, a desi se da,
recimo, vrednost nemackog Telekoma samo u jednom danu poraste za 20
milijardi DM. Gde je kraj finansijskim ¹pekulacijama bogatih?
Ono ¹to posebno zabrinjava, prema izve¹taju OI, jeste saznanje da su
sisroma¹ne zemlje pod velikim pritiskom kako NJTO, tako i MMF-a i
Svetske banke da odmah otvore svoja tr¾i¹ta, da liberalizuju cenei
izvr¹e brzu privatizaciju , ne vodeci racuna o socijalnim posledicama
takve ucenjivacke neoliberlane politike. U isto vreme, vlade
razvijenih zemalja uprkos blagom protivljenju i osudi administracije
iz NJTO, uvode necarinske barijere koje su se u EU povecale u periodu
1986-1998 sa 15 na 58 odsto ili u SAD sa 27 na 57 odsto.
---
http://www.skynemesis.org/ekon/sicg/1004.htm
--- End forwarded message ---
=== 2 ===
--- In Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli., "Miroslav Antic" wrote:
Glas istra¾uje: Da li i posle 5. oktobra 2000. istim tempom
odlaze mladi i obrazovani iz Srbije?
Diplomiraj, pa emigriraj
U poslednjoj deceniji oti¹lo 200.000 mozgova i u tome smo prvaci
sveta.
Da li ta pamet vredi 20 milijardi dolara
Marijana ®ivkoviæ iz Beograda oti¹la je jo¹ pre dve godine u
Australiju da zavr¹i studije. Vratila se pro¹le godine, ali je pre
nekoliko meseci ponovo spakovala kofere put Melburna: "Ovde i dalje
nema ¾ivota".
Tempo odlaska mladih, struènih ljudi iz Jugoslavije se nastavio, istim
intenzitetom kao i pre 5. oktobra 2000. godine. Procene struènjaka su
da æe ovaj fenomen nastaviti da se javlja u istoj meri iduæih tri
do pet godina, jer se ljudi jo¹ ne oseæaju dovoljno politièki,
ekonomski sigurnim u zemlji. Tako, mo¾emo da oèekujemo da æe desetine
hiljada Jugoslovena otiæi u svet da rade i ¾ive.
Odliv mozgova
- ©to se tièe povratka u zemlju, veliki uticaj ima porodièno
stanje èoveka. Ako je, na primer, o¾enjen strankinjom, ¹ansa da se
vrati je zanemarljiva. Trenutak povratka èesto je vezan za uzrast dece
- da li kreæe u ¹kolu ili kada razmi¹lja da zasnuje porodicu... Ipak,
za to bi uslovi ¾ivota ovde trebalo da budu polunormalni, a to nije
bio sluèaj.
Kod dijaspore je "bela kuga" malo "belja" nego u regionu. Od ukupnog
broja migranata, oko 42 odsto su samci, oko 38 odsto su u braku, ali
nemaju decu, 12 imaju dvoje dece, pet odsto jedno, a tek tri odsto
troje dece. Razlozi su kako mnogo radnih sati, tako i èeste selidbe
zbog posla u druge gradove - navodi dr Bogojeviæ.
Samim tim ¹to je i osamdesetih godina, kad je dr¾ava omoguæavala
pristojne uslove za ¾ivot, odlazilo oko dva odsto stanovni¹tva,
pokazuje se da je to prirodan "odliv mozgova", pravi resurs ove
zemlje.
Devedesetih, zbog ratova, besparice, ovaj se broj utrostruèio,
uz oscilacije 1993. i 2000. godine, pre izbora, kada je procenat
popeo na fantastiènih 19 odsto. Iako je masovan odlazak mladih pre 5.
oktobra bio prevashodno be¾anje iz zemlje, koja nije mogla ni¹ta da im
pru¾i, ljudi i dalje tra¾e sreæu po svetu, isto kao i pre deset
godina.
Ministarstvo prosvete Srbije, a i Rektorat Beogradskog univerziteta
nemaju podatak o tome koliko je ljudi zaista napustilo zemlju.
Iako ne postoji neka precizna statistika, nevladina organizacija
Obrazovni forum i Unesko procenili su da je devedesetih oti¹lo bar
400.000 ljudi.
Jugoslavija je po ovakvom izvozu svojih struènjaka prva u svetu.
Iako èitav region jugoistoènih zemalja ima isti fenomen, za na¹u
dr¾avu je karakteristièno da je izvezla najvi¹e struènih,
kvalifikovanih ljudi.
- Odlazak za vreme starog re¾ima, devedesetih godina, drugaèiji je po
karakteru od migracija posle Drugog rata. Ovoga puta su u pitanju
veæinom mladi, obrazovaniji ljudi, struèni, dok se ranije odlazilo u
druge zemlje ili iz politièkih razloga ili su to bili nekvalifikovani,
koji su i¹li da rade bilo ¹ta u inostranstvu. Devedesetih godina su
ljudi bukvalno "be¾ali iz zatvora" - ka¾e za "Glas" dr Aleksandar
Bogojeviæ iz Obrazovnog foruma i Instituta za fiziku.
Jedan od razloga zbog kojih ljudi i dalje odlaze, istièe
Kristina Vujièiæ, donedavno predsednica Saveza studenata Beograda i
èlan Otpora, jeste i ¹to se i dalje, za odreðene polo¾aje, ljudi
biraju prema politièkoj podobnosti, a ne prema struènosti.
- Sve u ¹ta smo verovali, nije se ostvarilo. Pre svega smo
nezadovoljni institucijama, jer svaki student ¾eli da zavr¹i fakultet
i da radi. To je bilo i ostalo nemoguæe, pogotovu kad mlad èovek vidi
da neko "dobro stoji", a da to nije stekao svojim radom. Vlast nije
obezbedila elementarni izbor, kako mladima, tako i drugima da njih
biraju, jer su sposobni.
Zato se i de¹ava da su predstavnici omladine DS-a, na primer, dobro
situirani, dok drugi ostaju na cedilu. Profesori na fakultetima, koji
nisu mogli da dobiju potreban broj glasova od svojih kolega, postali
su èlanovi saveta Vlade, ¹to je nonsens. Ko se brine o studentima
èiji je prosek preko devet?
Izgubljenih veæ 40.000
Danas je najvi¹e na¹ih ljudi izmeðu 26 i 30 godina u inostranstvu, oko
33 odsto od ukupnog broja, i izmeðu 31 i 35 godina - oko 22 odsto -
ukupno oko 200.000. To su ljudi, koji veæ imaju spoj fizièke i
psihièke snage i ovladali su nekim znanjima. Devedesetih godina su
odlazili i ljudi sa vi¹e od 40 godina, koji su ovde imali neku
karijeru, ali, isto tako, danas u inostranstvu ima oko osam odsto
na¹ih ljudi sa 21 do 25 godina.
- Oni su odlazili posle srednje ¹kole ili pre nego ¹to je zavr¹e. Kad
odu tako mladi, a nisu imali dovoljno vremena da se ve¾u za zemlju,
¹anse da se vrate su mnogo manje. Ako se uzme u obzir da je njih oko
deset odsto, onda imate armiju od oko 40.000 nepovratno oti¹lih
- ka¾e dr Bogojeviæ.
U drugim dr¾avama bi se firme veæ otimale o tog sposobnog mladog
èoveka, a on ovde mo¾e samo da ma¹ta da ode u inostranstvo. Kako neko
ovde da se doka¾e, kad veæ postoje podobni kadrovi - izrièita je
Vujièiæeva.
Domaæi studenti su se pokazali kao veoma uspe¹ni u svetu, a mi, ka¾e
Vuièiæeva, nemamo moguænosti da zadr¾imo jednog diplomiranog
japanologa ili matematièara.
- Studenti su bitni samo kad im treba ugu¹iti ¹trajk. Èeda Jovanoviæ,
koji je nekada bio u na¹im redovima, nije pokazao interesovanje da,
kada je do¹ao na polo¾aj, uèini ne¹to za svoje kolege. A svi su nas
dizali u nebo pre 5. oktobra - ka¾e Vujièiæeva.
Veæinom, èak 60 odsto na¹ih ljudi, nastanili su se u Severnoj Americi.
Brojèano ih je najvi¹e u SAD-u, ali u odnosu na broj stanovnika zemlje
u koju su oti¹li ljudi s ovih prostora, onda je Kanada èetiri puta
ispred svih drugih, jer je u to vreme bila najotvorenija. Ljudi s ovih
prostora tamo sada èine veliku manjinu, ¹to izaziva i odreðene promene
u dru¹tvu.
Preko okeana
Ne¹to vi¹e od 30 odsto nalazi se u zemljama Evrope, dok su svi drugi
rasporeðeni na Australiju, Novi Zeland, Afriku, Aziju i Ju¾nu Ameriku.
- Kad se pogledaju struèni profili ljudi koji su oti¹li, dominantna je
nauka. To ne znaèi da se svi oni i danas bave naukom tamo, veæ su
prosto pre¹li na primenu znanja, jer to i donosi vi¹e novca.
Tehnologija je druga struka, s kojom su odlazili magistri ili
diplomci. Kompjuterske, tehnolo¹ke nauke su ujedno i najtra¾eniji
profili sada u Evropi. Sve ostale kategorije - umetnost, pravo,
finansije, medicina, zastupljene su u manjoj meri, i to sa po
otprilike dva do ¹est odsto - navodi dr Bogojeviæ.
Materijalno-socijalni polo¾aj zaposlenih u nauènim institucijama je
vi¹e nego lo¹. Iz Instituta Vinèa u poslednje dve godine oti¹lo je
35 istra¾ivaèa, uglavnom magistara i doktora. Od 1990. oti¹lo je 90
istra¾ivaèa iz Instituta za biolo¹ka istra¾ivanja, od kojih 40 sa
doktorskom diplomom.
Sindikat zaposlenih u nauèno-istra¾ivaèkoj delatnosti Srbije navodi da
je proseèna neto zarada po zaposlenom za prvih ¹est meseci ove godine
u Istorijskom institutu SANU bila 6.736 dinara, Etnografskom 8.676,
Institutu za knji¾evnost i umetnost 10.652.
U Institutu za politehnièke studije, proseèna zarada je tek 5.938
dinara. Iz bud¾eta Srbije za nauku se izdvaja 0,30 odsto, dok,
poreðenja radi, susedna Albanija za ove namene izdvaja duplo vi¹e
novca, istièu u Sindikatu.
Zato nije ni èudno ¹to za Srbiju mo¾e da se ka¾e da je za deset godina
svaki dvadeseti stanovnik oti¹ao! ©to se tièe susednih zemalja, Bosna
i Hercegovina prema broju stanovnika ima veæu dijasporu, ali nju ne
karakteri¹e samo odlazak struènjaka, veæ, kao ¹to je to
karakteristièno za zemlje zahvaæene ratovima, ljudi su prvenstveno
be¾ali da bi pre¾iveli. Hrvatska ima oko 140.000 migranata u zemlje
sveta.
- Prema nekim procenama, imamo oko dva miliona ljudi u inostranstvu,
koji su odlazili jo¹ od Drugog svetskog rata, ¹to je prilièno veliki
broj, ako se uzme u obzir da zemlja ima èetiri puta vi¹e stanovnika.
Ovo je masovan fenomen, gde na¹a zemlja le¾i na jednom gigantskom
resursu, a da li æe ga iskoristiti zavisi od nje same. Svi vole da
prièaju o uspostavljanju veze s dijasporom, posebno pred izbore, ali
niko ne radi ni¹ta po tom pitanju na nivou dr¾ave. Tako je Obrazovni
forum pokrenuo projekat "Brejndrejn" pro¹le godine.
Posle nekoliko meseci mogli smo da formuli¹emo i odreðene rezultate.
Ovaj projekat je progla¹en za jedan od pet prioritetnih programa
Uneska, jer je u jugoistoènoj Evropi fenomen odlaska iz zemlje
izuzetno izra¾en, a s druge strane u zapadnim zemljama postoji glad za
struènjacima - obja¹njava dr Bogojeviæ.
Ipak, najvi¹e se, i danas, odlazi za vreme studiranja, posle diplome
ili magistrature. Ti ljudi su postali bolji struènjaci i onda ova
zemlja raspola¾e ogromnim blagom u inostranstvu.
- Osamdesete godine su pokazale da postoji prirodni odliv ljudi i u
normalnim uslovima ¾ivota. Ovo je ipak mali sistem, u kome ne mogu svi
da doðu do izra¾aja, te je sasvim prirodno ¹to je tih godina oko dva
odsto stanovni¹tva oti¹lo iz zemlje. To je i na¹a velika prednost u
odnosu na druge jugoistoène zemlje - stanovni¹tvo je bilo vi¹e
integrisano u Evropu.
Ali, kad je devedesetih situacija postala politièki i ¾ivotno
nestabilna, broj odlazaka je odmah skoèio, i to tri puta. To je veæ
pokazatelj da se odavde be¾alo. Odliv nije, sam po sebi, lo¹, ako je
kontrolisan. Ali, tri puta se poveæao, a da je zemlja ostala ista.
Naroèito je bila izra¾ena 1993. godina, kad je oti¹lo èak 12 odsto
ljudi.
Ali, 2000. godine, pre 5. oktobra, ovaj broj skaèe na oko 19 odsto,
¹to je tri puta vi¹e nego tempo odlazaka devedesetih. Posle
demonstracija 1996/7. i jo¹ dve godine bez ikakvih promena, narod je
verovatno pomislio "ovi nikad neæe otiæi s vlasti". Onda se desilo
ovih 19 odsto - obja¹njava dr Bogojeviæ.
Posle 5. oktobra 2000. ovaj procenat se vratio na karakteristiènih
¹est odsto iz devedesetih godina. Do¹lo je do promene vlasti, ne¹to
je poèelo da se menja, ali ljudi, posle svega, nemaju toliko poverenja
da æe ovde uskoro zaista moæi normalno da se ¾ivi, i odlaze i dalje.
I dalje æe iæi
Nedavno se u medijima pojavila raèunica da je na¹a zemlja, ako
je oti¹lo 200.000 obrazovanih ljudi u zemlje razvijenog zapada, kroz
izvoz inteligencije, otplatila kredit od 20 milijardi dolara. Jer,
"godi¹nje svaki privatni univerzitet naplati od studenta oko 20.000
evra, a studira se u proseku pet godina, plus magistrature i
doktorati, pa neka svaki od tih ljudi "iznese" 140.000 dolara, koje su
ova zemlja i narod ulo¾ili u njih".
Dr Bogojeviæ ka¾e da to nije tako.
- To su gluposti, jer se ljudi bave brojkama da bi postigli nekakve
politièke poene. Ljudi su ovde emotivni i idu u krajnosti - "ili smo
mi geniji ili smo budale". Nisu taène brojke, a nije tako i zato ¹to
niko ne raèuna ¹ta smo dobili. Ako vam ode sto ljudi, a vrati vam se
jedan isfiltrirani èovek, on vredi vi¹e od onih sto - ka¾e dr
Bogojeviæ.
- Ni¹ta se bitno neæe promeniti u ovom smislu ni sledeæe tri do pet
godina. Tek, dakle, kad se broj odlazaka smiri na nivo osamdesetih,
moæi æe da se ka¾e da se odliv stabilizovao. To, s druge strane, ide
paralelno sa politièkom, ekonomskom stabilno¹æu u zemlji.
Ne verujem da æe biti nekih velikih, negativnih poteza vlasti, tako da
ovaj broj opet poraste, pa dostigne 2000. godinu. Ali, ipak je u
pitanju inercija odla¾enja, koja ne mo¾e tek tako da se suzbije. To
znaèi da æe u tom periodu otiæi desetine hiljada ljudi - ka¾e dr
Bogojeviæ.
Dobro je ¹to ljudi odlaze sa 25 godina u sredine, koje æe ih nauèiti
da rade, gde æe biti u takmièarskom svetu, da naðu sebi neku poziciju,
ka¾e dr Bogojeviæ, ali je lo¹e ¹to je odliv nekontrolisan i ¹to nema
mnogo nagove¹taja da æe se ovi ljudi vratiti u zemlju. Ni nivo odlaska
iz osamdesetih godina nije dobar, ako se niko nikad ne vrati.
- Na kraju bi se zemlja ispraznila. Kad smo pitali na¹e ljude u svetu
da li planiraju da se vrate, 60 odsto je odgovorilo sa "da", 24 sa
"mo¾da" i 16 sa "ne, nikad", s tim ¹to svi podrazumevaju neke uslove,
koji bi prethodno trebalo da se zadovolje, da bi se oni vratili. Ako
biste imali idealan povratak, bili biste najbogatija zemlja na svetu -
istièe dr Bogojeviæ.
Dr¾ava mora da zna, ka¾u struènjaci, da nauka mo¾e da pobolj¹a
ekonomsku situaciju u zemlji. Ako je zemlja siroma¹na, ne sme da
dozvoli da nema nauku, jer biæe jo¹ siroma¹nija.
DANIJELA ÆIROVIÆ
http://www.glas-javnosti.co.yu/danas/srpski/vest-dana.shtml
--- End forwarded message ---
ostati jo¹ 800.000 radnika
2. Diplomiraj, pa emigriraj
=== 1 ===
--- In Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli., "Miroslav Antic" wrote:
Socijalna bomba kuca u Srbiji
Zbog privatizacije bez posla æe ostati jo¹ 800.000 radnika
Ekonomista Branko Draga¹ apeluje da vlada odustane od neoliberalnih
opita MMF da bi se izbegao argentinski scenario. Trgovinski deficit
veæi nego u vreme prethodnog re¾ima, industrijska proizvodnja zamrla,
nelikvidnost se kao zaraza ¹iri u privredi, rasprodaja nacionalne
imovine se bezdu¹no nastavlja. Sve u svemu, svi podaci govore da se sa
ovakvim reformama srlja u propast
"Odmah da ka¾em, zbog zlonamernih koji bespogovorno sprovode politiku
MMF-a, da nisam protivnik te institucije. Protiv sam zloupotrebe te
znacajne medunarodne institucije od strane njene birokratije,
trecerazrednih studenata Harvarda (kako ih je nazvao ©tiglic), koji,
umi¹ljeni u svojoj neoliberalnoj teoriji, guraju jedan propali
ekonomski koncept", istice ekonomista Branko Draga¹ i dodaje: "Sve
zemlje u razvoju koje se danas nalaze u ekonomskim problemima, dospele
su u nevolju zbog striktnog pridr¾avanja rigidnog koncepta birokrata
iz MMF-a".
Najgora situacija je u Argentini. Uprkos doslednog pridr¾avanja
nametnutog koncepta, uprkos silnim pohvalama za istrajnost u
sprovodenju ¹ok-terapije, vreme je, ipak, pokazalo da je Argentina
postala ¾rtva neoliberalnih opita. Za¹to bi Srbija ponovila istu
gre¹ku? Reformatori danas u Srbiji poku¹avaju da proguraju taj
koncept. Oni ne ¾ele da cuju dobronamerne savete domacih strucnjaka.
Kao svi malogradani na vlasti, opcinjeni su mocnijim i bogatijim od
sebe. Nemaju viziju razvoja sopstvene dr¾ave, arogantni su i bahati
jer znaju da ih podr¾avaju birokrate iz medunarodnih institucija. Zar
im nije va¾nije da ih hvale sopstveni gradani? Zar gradani na izborima
ne biraju svoju vlast? Jesmo li mi to vec postali protektorat?
Podaci za 2001. godinu krajnje su zabrinjavajuci i jasno govore kojim
putem su reforme krenule. Ne samo da nije do¹lo do ¾eljenog oporavka
privrede, vec su se pogor¹ali uslovi privredivanja. Trgovinski deficit
je dostigao iznos od 2,93 mld $ i za 47,2% je veci nego u vreme
prethodong re¾ima. Posebno zabrinjava ¹to je industrijska proizvodnja
ostala nepokrenuta, rast od jedva 0,6 odsto, mada nema ekonomskih
sankcija i smenjen je jedan despotski re¾im. Ukupan privredni rast bio
je svega 5,5 odsto, a to mo¾emo zahvaliti jedino rodnoj godini u
poljoprivredi. Reformatori su najavili da ce stopa privrednog rasta u
2002. godini biti - 4 odsto. Gradani moraju da znaju da cemo sa tako
niskom stopom rasta tek za 25 godina stici u 1989. god. Jesu li oni
spremni toliko dugo da trpe? Privatizacijom ce ostati bez posla
sigurno jo¹ 800.000 ljudi i nema nikakvog obja¹njenja gde ce toliki
nezaposleni da se zaposle. Socijalna bomba kuca u Srbiji. To je
posledica divlje liberalizacije i dirigovane privatizacije. S jedne
strane otpu¹taju se ljudi i zatvaraju firme, a sa druge strane ne
pokrece se proizvodnja, niti se otvaraju nova preduzeca. Inflacija je
pro¹le godine iznosila 40 odsto, plate su porasle na 230 DM, ali je
njihova kupovna moc bila svega 90 DM. Potro¹acka korpa ne mo¾e da
zadovolji osnovne egzistencijanalne potrebe i sve veci broj ljudi - 74
odsto, ¾ivi na svega 2$ dnevno. Preko 40 odsto ljudi ¾ivi na 1$
dnevno. Za prosecnu cetvoroclanu porodicu potrebno je mesecno 38.010
din da bi nekako placala sve narasle tro¹kove ¾ivota. Kako zaraditi
tolike pare u posrnuloj privredi? Ni pokazatelji za prvi kvartal
2002., na¾alost, nisu ni¹ta bolji. I dalje se nastavlja
pad industrijske proizvodnje: januar 5,5 odsto u odnosu na isti period
pro¹le godine, februar 4,9, a mart oko 4 odsto. Trgovinski deficit je
vec dostigao 756 mil $ za prva tri meseca. Nelikvidnost se kao zaraza
¹iri u privredi. U prva tri meseca 2002. godine bilo je nelikvidno
44.345 preduzeca u kojima je radilo 1.200.379 radnika. Neprekidno je
nelikvidno 25.546 preduzeca u kojima radi 699.870 zaposlenih i dug je
narastao na 95,5 milijardi dinara. Medutim, dok pada industrijska
proizvodnja rastu prihodi javnog sektora. Za prva dva meseca ove
godine ti prihodi su veci za 102 odsto u odnosu na isti period pro¹le
godine.
Nerealan porast zarada doveli su do natprosecnog rasta poreza na
dohodak za citavih 159 odsto.
Sve u svemu, svi podaci govore da moramo ozbiljno da preispitamo
dosada¹nji koncept reformi. Kao iskusni strucnjak iz privrede,
poku¹avam javnost da opomenem na pogubno delovanje dana¹njih
reformatora. Po¹to su 28. decembra 2001. godine prodali tri cementare
u zemlji, a nekoliko dana kasnije urgentno zatvorili cetiri nacionalne
banke, pla¹im se da ce se nastaviti rasprodaja nacionalne imovine. A
ako ne zaustavimo takvu bezdu¹nu rasprodaju po nalogu MMF-a, postavlja
se pitanje kako cemo upravljati dr¾avom ako rasprodamo strate¹ke
grane? Kako cemo voditi nezavisnu ekonomsku politiku? Kakva ce nam
dr¾ava biti u buducnosti?
Zabrinut sam nad svim ovim pitanjima. Ima li izlaza iz ove situacije?
Ima. Pogre¹no je mi¹ljenje da moramo da sprovodimo naredbe
medunarodnih birokrata koji ni¹ta ne znaju o na¹oj privredi. Potrebno
je naci zajednicki interes izmedu MMF-a i na¹e zemlje. Ni MMF-u ne
odgovara da se u Srbiji ponovi argentinski scenario. Zbog toga je
va¾no da preko na¹ih poslovnih prijatelja lobiramo u MMF-u da se
odustane od neoliberalnog koncepta. Jedna strucna, sposobna i otresita
ekipa na¹ih privrednika napravila bi prezentaciju Programa za spas
Srbije u Medunarodnim finansijskim institucijama i tra¾ila bi podr¹ku
krupnog privatnog kapitala za svoj projekat. Tek kada oni prihvate taj
Program i nadu interes u njemu, mo¾emo da uspemo. Medunarodne
finansijske birokrate sprovodice naloge krupnog privatnog kapitala,
jer ce te¾iti da odbrane njihove interese. Tako ce se na¹i dr¾avni,
nacionalni gradanski i privredni interesi poklopiti sa interesima
medunarodnih institucija.
Niti ce se one stideti za pogre¹an koncept reformi, niti cemo mi
rizikovati da izgubimo dr¾avu i upadnemo u socijalnu anarhiju. MMF ce
obavljati svoju izvornu funkciju zbog koje je i osnovan. Mi cemo biti
plate¾no sposobni da vracamo preuzete obaveze. Gradani se nece
iseljavati u potrazi za poslom. Nece biti pritiska na razvijene
dr¾ave.
Evo puta za globalni oporavak svetske ekonomije i trajno re¹enje
ekonomskih problema zemalja u razvoju. Vrlo brzo bi se smanjile
tenzije izmedu razvijenih i nerazvijenih, izmedu bogatih i siroma¹nih.
Planeta bi postala mesto za ugodan ¾ivot. Revolucije bi definitivno
oti¹le u zaborav. Nestala bi i ukleta Fondrmacija. Uginula bi
sedmoglava sablast ¹to pro¾dire siroma¹ne zemlje i narode kako bi
nahranila sopstvenu prazninu. Pohlepom se covecanstvo ne mo¾e spasiti.
Du¹evni mir i skromnost postace utoci¹te za sve posrnule duhove.
Smisao i svrha svega bice mere vrednosti. Korisnost ce se meriti
davanjem. A niko nece ni¹ta hteti da uzme, pre nego ¹to ne ponudi
izbavljenje. Naravno, za sve.
---
Jaèi tlaèi
Danas 358 najbogatijih ljudi na svetu ima neto vrednost kapitala
jednak zajednickom godi¹njem prihodu 2,53 milijardi najsiroma¹nijih
ljudi.
Humanitarna organizacija Oxam international (OI) napravila je izve¹taj
o stanju svetske trgovine i do¹la do zakljucka koji je nama, ¹to
¾ivimo u nerazvijenim zemljama, svakodnevno vidljiv. Strucnjacima iz
ove studije je postalo jasno da su pravila medunarodne trgovine
smi¹ljena u korist bogatih zemalja. Od svakih 100 dolara zarade od
izvoza proizvoda u svetu, 97 odsto odlazi u razvijene i srednje
razvijene zemlje , a samo tri odsto sti¾e u siroma¹ne zemlje.
Tako Svetska tgovinska organizacija (WTO) slu¾i bogatim zemljama da
jo¹ vice uvecaju svoja nemala bogatstva. Nerazvijeni nisu sposobni da
se na otvorenom tr¾i¹tu bore sa mnogo mocnijim od sebe . To je dovelo
do apsurdne pozicije, da danas 358 najbogatijih ljudi na svetu ima
neto vrednost kapitala jednak zajednickom godi¹njem prihodu 2,53
milijardi najsiroma¹nijihljudi. Raslojavanja se i dalje nastavljaju,
tako da je u 2.000, ukupan iznos spoljnih i unutra¹njih dugova
dostigao cifru od 400.000 milijardi dolara. Koliko je to veliki iznos
najbolje se vidi kad uporedimo sa ostvarenim bruto svetskim proizvodom
u istoj godini, koji iznosi 42.000 milijardi dolara.
Najsiroma¹nije zemlje su u poslednjih 20 godina platile na svaki dolar
zajma vi¹e od 9 dolara kamate, a da nisu otplatile dug. Kuda to vodi?
Od cetiri milijarde stanovnika nerazvijenih zemalja, njih 1,3
milijarde nemaju vi¹e od dolara dnevno. Na¾alost, medu njima se nalazi
i najveci deo na¹ih gradana. Istovremeno, devizno tr¾i¹te obavi
svakodnevno transakcije oko 1.500 milijardi dolara, a desi se da,
recimo, vrednost nemackog Telekoma samo u jednom danu poraste za 20
milijardi DM. Gde je kraj finansijskim ¹pekulacijama bogatih?
Ono ¹to posebno zabrinjava, prema izve¹taju OI, jeste saznanje da su
sisroma¹ne zemlje pod velikim pritiskom kako NJTO, tako i MMF-a i
Svetske banke da odmah otvore svoja tr¾i¹ta, da liberalizuju cenei
izvr¹e brzu privatizaciju , ne vodeci racuna o socijalnim posledicama
takve ucenjivacke neoliberlane politike. U isto vreme, vlade
razvijenih zemalja uprkos blagom protivljenju i osudi administracije
iz NJTO, uvode necarinske barijere koje su se u EU povecale u periodu
1986-1998 sa 15 na 58 odsto ili u SAD sa 27 na 57 odsto.
---
http://www.skynemesis.org/ekon/sicg/1004.htm
--- End forwarded message ---
=== 2 ===
--- In Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli., "Miroslav Antic" wrote:
Glas istra¾uje: Da li i posle 5. oktobra 2000. istim tempom
odlaze mladi i obrazovani iz Srbije?
Diplomiraj, pa emigriraj
U poslednjoj deceniji oti¹lo 200.000 mozgova i u tome smo prvaci
sveta.
Da li ta pamet vredi 20 milijardi dolara
Marijana ®ivkoviæ iz Beograda oti¹la je jo¹ pre dve godine u
Australiju da zavr¹i studije. Vratila se pro¹le godine, ali je pre
nekoliko meseci ponovo spakovala kofere put Melburna: "Ovde i dalje
nema ¾ivota".
Tempo odlaska mladih, struènih ljudi iz Jugoslavije se nastavio, istim
intenzitetom kao i pre 5. oktobra 2000. godine. Procene struènjaka su
da æe ovaj fenomen nastaviti da se javlja u istoj meri iduæih tri
do pet godina, jer se ljudi jo¹ ne oseæaju dovoljno politièki,
ekonomski sigurnim u zemlji. Tako, mo¾emo da oèekujemo da æe desetine
hiljada Jugoslovena otiæi u svet da rade i ¾ive.
Odliv mozgova
- ©to se tièe povratka u zemlju, veliki uticaj ima porodièno
stanje èoveka. Ako je, na primer, o¾enjen strankinjom, ¹ansa da se
vrati je zanemarljiva. Trenutak povratka èesto je vezan za uzrast dece
- da li kreæe u ¹kolu ili kada razmi¹lja da zasnuje porodicu... Ipak,
za to bi uslovi ¾ivota ovde trebalo da budu polunormalni, a to nije
bio sluèaj.
Kod dijaspore je "bela kuga" malo "belja" nego u regionu. Od ukupnog
broja migranata, oko 42 odsto su samci, oko 38 odsto su u braku, ali
nemaju decu, 12 imaju dvoje dece, pet odsto jedno, a tek tri odsto
troje dece. Razlozi su kako mnogo radnih sati, tako i èeste selidbe
zbog posla u druge gradove - navodi dr Bogojeviæ.
Samim tim ¹to je i osamdesetih godina, kad je dr¾ava omoguæavala
pristojne uslove za ¾ivot, odlazilo oko dva odsto stanovni¹tva,
pokazuje se da je to prirodan "odliv mozgova", pravi resurs ove
zemlje.
Devedesetih, zbog ratova, besparice, ovaj se broj utrostruèio,
uz oscilacije 1993. i 2000. godine, pre izbora, kada je procenat
popeo na fantastiènih 19 odsto. Iako je masovan odlazak mladih pre 5.
oktobra bio prevashodno be¾anje iz zemlje, koja nije mogla ni¹ta da im
pru¾i, ljudi i dalje tra¾e sreæu po svetu, isto kao i pre deset
godina.
Ministarstvo prosvete Srbije, a i Rektorat Beogradskog univerziteta
nemaju podatak o tome koliko je ljudi zaista napustilo zemlju.
Iako ne postoji neka precizna statistika, nevladina organizacija
Obrazovni forum i Unesko procenili su da je devedesetih oti¹lo bar
400.000 ljudi.
Jugoslavija je po ovakvom izvozu svojih struènjaka prva u svetu.
Iako èitav region jugoistoènih zemalja ima isti fenomen, za na¹u
dr¾avu je karakteristièno da je izvezla najvi¹e struènih,
kvalifikovanih ljudi.
- Odlazak za vreme starog re¾ima, devedesetih godina, drugaèiji je po
karakteru od migracija posle Drugog rata. Ovoga puta su u pitanju
veæinom mladi, obrazovaniji ljudi, struèni, dok se ranije odlazilo u
druge zemlje ili iz politièkih razloga ili su to bili nekvalifikovani,
koji su i¹li da rade bilo ¹ta u inostranstvu. Devedesetih godina su
ljudi bukvalno "be¾ali iz zatvora" - ka¾e za "Glas" dr Aleksandar
Bogojeviæ iz Obrazovnog foruma i Instituta za fiziku.
Jedan od razloga zbog kojih ljudi i dalje odlaze, istièe
Kristina Vujièiæ, donedavno predsednica Saveza studenata Beograda i
èlan Otpora, jeste i ¹to se i dalje, za odreðene polo¾aje, ljudi
biraju prema politièkoj podobnosti, a ne prema struènosti.
- Sve u ¹ta smo verovali, nije se ostvarilo. Pre svega smo
nezadovoljni institucijama, jer svaki student ¾eli da zavr¹i fakultet
i da radi. To je bilo i ostalo nemoguæe, pogotovu kad mlad èovek vidi
da neko "dobro stoji", a da to nije stekao svojim radom. Vlast nije
obezbedila elementarni izbor, kako mladima, tako i drugima da njih
biraju, jer su sposobni.
Zato se i de¹ava da su predstavnici omladine DS-a, na primer, dobro
situirani, dok drugi ostaju na cedilu. Profesori na fakultetima, koji
nisu mogli da dobiju potreban broj glasova od svojih kolega, postali
su èlanovi saveta Vlade, ¹to je nonsens. Ko se brine o studentima
èiji je prosek preko devet?
Izgubljenih veæ 40.000
Danas je najvi¹e na¹ih ljudi izmeðu 26 i 30 godina u inostranstvu, oko
33 odsto od ukupnog broja, i izmeðu 31 i 35 godina - oko 22 odsto -
ukupno oko 200.000. To su ljudi, koji veæ imaju spoj fizièke i
psihièke snage i ovladali su nekim znanjima. Devedesetih godina su
odlazili i ljudi sa vi¹e od 40 godina, koji su ovde imali neku
karijeru, ali, isto tako, danas u inostranstvu ima oko osam odsto
na¹ih ljudi sa 21 do 25 godina.
- Oni su odlazili posle srednje ¹kole ili pre nego ¹to je zavr¹e. Kad
odu tako mladi, a nisu imali dovoljno vremena da se ve¾u za zemlju,
¹anse da se vrate su mnogo manje. Ako se uzme u obzir da je njih oko
deset odsto, onda imate armiju od oko 40.000 nepovratno oti¹lih
- ka¾e dr Bogojeviæ.
U drugim dr¾avama bi se firme veæ otimale o tog sposobnog mladog
èoveka, a on ovde mo¾e samo da ma¹ta da ode u inostranstvo. Kako neko
ovde da se doka¾e, kad veæ postoje podobni kadrovi - izrièita je
Vujièiæeva.
Domaæi studenti su se pokazali kao veoma uspe¹ni u svetu, a mi, ka¾e
Vuièiæeva, nemamo moguænosti da zadr¾imo jednog diplomiranog
japanologa ili matematièara.
- Studenti su bitni samo kad im treba ugu¹iti ¹trajk. Èeda Jovanoviæ,
koji je nekada bio u na¹im redovima, nije pokazao interesovanje da,
kada je do¹ao na polo¾aj, uèini ne¹to za svoje kolege. A svi su nas
dizali u nebo pre 5. oktobra - ka¾e Vujièiæeva.
Veæinom, èak 60 odsto na¹ih ljudi, nastanili su se u Severnoj Americi.
Brojèano ih je najvi¹e u SAD-u, ali u odnosu na broj stanovnika zemlje
u koju su oti¹li ljudi s ovih prostora, onda je Kanada èetiri puta
ispred svih drugih, jer je u to vreme bila najotvorenija. Ljudi s ovih
prostora tamo sada èine veliku manjinu, ¹to izaziva i odreðene promene
u dru¹tvu.
Preko okeana
Ne¹to vi¹e od 30 odsto nalazi se u zemljama Evrope, dok su svi drugi
rasporeðeni na Australiju, Novi Zeland, Afriku, Aziju i Ju¾nu Ameriku.
- Kad se pogledaju struèni profili ljudi koji su oti¹li, dominantna je
nauka. To ne znaèi da se svi oni i danas bave naukom tamo, veæ su
prosto pre¹li na primenu znanja, jer to i donosi vi¹e novca.
Tehnologija je druga struka, s kojom su odlazili magistri ili
diplomci. Kompjuterske, tehnolo¹ke nauke su ujedno i najtra¾eniji
profili sada u Evropi. Sve ostale kategorije - umetnost, pravo,
finansije, medicina, zastupljene su u manjoj meri, i to sa po
otprilike dva do ¹est odsto - navodi dr Bogojeviæ.
Materijalno-socijalni polo¾aj zaposlenih u nauènim institucijama je
vi¹e nego lo¹. Iz Instituta Vinèa u poslednje dve godine oti¹lo je
35 istra¾ivaèa, uglavnom magistara i doktora. Od 1990. oti¹lo je 90
istra¾ivaèa iz Instituta za biolo¹ka istra¾ivanja, od kojih 40 sa
doktorskom diplomom.
Sindikat zaposlenih u nauèno-istra¾ivaèkoj delatnosti Srbije navodi da
je proseèna neto zarada po zaposlenom za prvih ¹est meseci ove godine
u Istorijskom institutu SANU bila 6.736 dinara, Etnografskom 8.676,
Institutu za knji¾evnost i umetnost 10.652.
U Institutu za politehnièke studije, proseèna zarada je tek 5.938
dinara. Iz bud¾eta Srbije za nauku se izdvaja 0,30 odsto, dok,
poreðenja radi, susedna Albanija za ove namene izdvaja duplo vi¹e
novca, istièu u Sindikatu.
Zato nije ni èudno ¹to za Srbiju mo¾e da se ka¾e da je za deset godina
svaki dvadeseti stanovnik oti¹ao! ©to se tièe susednih zemalja, Bosna
i Hercegovina prema broju stanovnika ima veæu dijasporu, ali nju ne
karakteri¹e samo odlazak struènjaka, veæ, kao ¹to je to
karakteristièno za zemlje zahvaæene ratovima, ljudi su prvenstveno
be¾ali da bi pre¾iveli. Hrvatska ima oko 140.000 migranata u zemlje
sveta.
- Prema nekim procenama, imamo oko dva miliona ljudi u inostranstvu,
koji su odlazili jo¹ od Drugog svetskog rata, ¹to je prilièno veliki
broj, ako se uzme u obzir da zemlja ima èetiri puta vi¹e stanovnika.
Ovo je masovan fenomen, gde na¹a zemlja le¾i na jednom gigantskom
resursu, a da li æe ga iskoristiti zavisi od nje same. Svi vole da
prièaju o uspostavljanju veze s dijasporom, posebno pred izbore, ali
niko ne radi ni¹ta po tom pitanju na nivou dr¾ave. Tako je Obrazovni
forum pokrenuo projekat "Brejndrejn" pro¹le godine.
Posle nekoliko meseci mogli smo da formuli¹emo i odreðene rezultate.
Ovaj projekat je progla¹en za jedan od pet prioritetnih programa
Uneska, jer je u jugoistoènoj Evropi fenomen odlaska iz zemlje
izuzetno izra¾en, a s druge strane u zapadnim zemljama postoji glad za
struènjacima - obja¹njava dr Bogojeviæ.
Ipak, najvi¹e se, i danas, odlazi za vreme studiranja, posle diplome
ili magistrature. Ti ljudi su postali bolji struènjaci i onda ova
zemlja raspola¾e ogromnim blagom u inostranstvu.
- Osamdesete godine su pokazale da postoji prirodni odliv ljudi i u
normalnim uslovima ¾ivota. Ovo je ipak mali sistem, u kome ne mogu svi
da doðu do izra¾aja, te je sasvim prirodno ¹to je tih godina oko dva
odsto stanovni¹tva oti¹lo iz zemlje. To je i na¹a velika prednost u
odnosu na druge jugoistoène zemlje - stanovni¹tvo je bilo vi¹e
integrisano u Evropu.
Ali, kad je devedesetih situacija postala politièki i ¾ivotno
nestabilna, broj odlazaka je odmah skoèio, i to tri puta. To je veæ
pokazatelj da se odavde be¾alo. Odliv nije, sam po sebi, lo¹, ako je
kontrolisan. Ali, tri puta se poveæao, a da je zemlja ostala ista.
Naroèito je bila izra¾ena 1993. godina, kad je oti¹lo èak 12 odsto
ljudi.
Ali, 2000. godine, pre 5. oktobra, ovaj broj skaèe na oko 19 odsto,
¹to je tri puta vi¹e nego tempo odlazaka devedesetih. Posle
demonstracija 1996/7. i jo¹ dve godine bez ikakvih promena, narod je
verovatno pomislio "ovi nikad neæe otiæi s vlasti". Onda se desilo
ovih 19 odsto - obja¹njava dr Bogojeviæ.
Posle 5. oktobra 2000. ovaj procenat se vratio na karakteristiènih
¹est odsto iz devedesetih godina. Do¹lo je do promene vlasti, ne¹to
je poèelo da se menja, ali ljudi, posle svega, nemaju toliko poverenja
da æe ovde uskoro zaista moæi normalno da se ¾ivi, i odlaze i dalje.
I dalje æe iæi
Nedavno se u medijima pojavila raèunica da je na¹a zemlja, ako
je oti¹lo 200.000 obrazovanih ljudi u zemlje razvijenog zapada, kroz
izvoz inteligencije, otplatila kredit od 20 milijardi dolara. Jer,
"godi¹nje svaki privatni univerzitet naplati od studenta oko 20.000
evra, a studira se u proseku pet godina, plus magistrature i
doktorati, pa neka svaki od tih ljudi "iznese" 140.000 dolara, koje su
ova zemlja i narod ulo¾ili u njih".
Dr Bogojeviæ ka¾e da to nije tako.
- To su gluposti, jer se ljudi bave brojkama da bi postigli nekakve
politièke poene. Ljudi su ovde emotivni i idu u krajnosti - "ili smo
mi geniji ili smo budale". Nisu taène brojke, a nije tako i zato ¹to
niko ne raèuna ¹ta smo dobili. Ako vam ode sto ljudi, a vrati vam se
jedan isfiltrirani èovek, on vredi vi¹e od onih sto - ka¾e dr
Bogojeviæ.
- Ni¹ta se bitno neæe promeniti u ovom smislu ni sledeæe tri do pet
godina. Tek, dakle, kad se broj odlazaka smiri na nivo osamdesetih,
moæi æe da se ka¾e da se odliv stabilizovao. To, s druge strane, ide
paralelno sa politièkom, ekonomskom stabilno¹æu u zemlji.
Ne verujem da æe biti nekih velikih, negativnih poteza vlasti, tako da
ovaj broj opet poraste, pa dostigne 2000. godinu. Ali, ipak je u
pitanju inercija odla¾enja, koja ne mo¾e tek tako da se suzbije. To
znaèi da æe u tom periodu otiæi desetine hiljada ljudi - ka¾e dr
Bogojeviæ.
Dobro je ¹to ljudi odlaze sa 25 godina u sredine, koje æe ih nauèiti
da rade, gde æe biti u takmièarskom svetu, da naðu sebi neku poziciju,
ka¾e dr Bogojeviæ, ali je lo¹e ¹to je odliv nekontrolisan i ¹to nema
mnogo nagove¹taja da æe se ovi ljudi vratiti u zemlju. Ni nivo odlaska
iz osamdesetih godina nije dobar, ako se niko nikad ne vrati.
- Na kraju bi se zemlja ispraznila. Kad smo pitali na¹e ljude u svetu
da li planiraju da se vrate, 60 odsto je odgovorilo sa "da", 24 sa
"mo¾da" i 16 sa "ne, nikad", s tim ¹to svi podrazumevaju neke uslove,
koji bi prethodno trebalo da se zadovolje, da bi se oni vratili. Ako
biste imali idealan povratak, bili biste najbogatija zemlja na svetu -
istièe dr Bogojeviæ.
Dr¾ava mora da zna, ka¾u struènjaci, da nauka mo¾e da pobolj¹a
ekonomsku situaciju u zemlji. Ako je zemlja siroma¹na, ne sme da
dozvoli da nema nauku, jer biæe jo¹ siroma¹nija.
DANIJELA ÆIROVIÆ
http://www.glas-javnosti.co.yu/danas/srpski/vest-dana.shtml
--- End forwarded message ---
Riceviamo oggi 11/11/2002 questo appello urgente dall'associazione
SLOBODA e dal Comitato Internazionale per la Difesa di Slobodan
Milosevic (ICDSM):
---
MESSAGGIO URGENTE AI COMITATI NAZIONALI, AI PARTITI ED ALLE
ORGANIZZAZIONI PROGRESSISTE, ED A TUTTE LE PERSONE DI BUONA VOLONTA'
Il "tribunale" dell'Aia ha ricevuto una "mozione" vergognosa da parte
di Carla del Ponte, nella quale si chiede che il Presidente Milosevic
sia messo a tacere imponendogli un collegio di difesa contro la sua
volonta'.
Dunque, il messaggio della giustizia targata NATO e' che il Presidente
Milosevic deve morire oppure tacere!
Il "tribunale" sta tenendo i media all'oscuro di tutti gli appelli, le
richieste e le petizioni che voi inviate! Solo la voce di Carla si
deve sentire!
E' la "decisione" finale del "tribunale" potrebbe venire gia' domani!
Pertanto, vi preghiamo di continuare ad inviare a costoro le vostre
opinioni. E, per quanto possibile, di rivolgervi al pubblico ed ai
media.
LA VITA DEL PRESIDENTE MILOSEVIC, LA VERITA' SULLA JUGOSLAVIA E LA
LIBERTA' DEL POPOLO SERBO VANNO PROTETTI!
NOI CHIEDIAMO CHE AL PRESIDENTE MILOSEVIC SIA IMMEDIATAMENTE CONCESSO
DI OTTENERE UNA TERAPIA MEDICA SPECIALISTICA ED UN PERIODO DI
RIABILITAZIONE A BELGRADO, SOTTO LA SUPERVISIONE DEI MEDICI CHE DA
ANNI SEGUONO LA SUA SALUTE.
DOPODICHE' EGLI DOVREBBE AVERE IL DIRITTO DI POTER CONTINUARE LA SUA
BATTAGLIA PER LA VERITA' ALL'AIA, MA FUORI DI PRIGIONE. EGLI HA GIA'
AFFERMATO CHE NON SI SOTTRARRA' MAI A QUESTA BATTAGLIA!
Belgrado, 10 novembre 2002
SLOBODA - ICDSM
*** COME AGIRE ***
Cari amici,
il processo politico dell'Aia e' stato aggiornato alla prossima
settimana a causa del deterioramento delle condizioni di salute del
Presidente Milosevic.
Il Presidente Milosevic viene trattato come un prigioniero di guerra
in un campo di concentramento nazista [oltreche' per le modalita'
della detenzione del processo, questa affermazione va intesa alla
lettera: durante la Seconda Guerra Mondiale la prigione di
Scheveningen era usata dagli occupatori nazisti per tenere i
prigionieri politici, ndt].
Vi preghiamo di leggere con attenzione gli appelli di cui sotto.
E' ESSENZIALE agire SUBITO!
Vi preghiamo di inviare le vostre domande al "tribunale". Chiedete
agli avvocati ed ai medici che conoscete di fare lo stesso.
Rivolgetevi al Consiglio di Sicurezza dell'ONU!
Scrivete ai vostri parlamentari!
Prendete posizione pubblicamente!
In rappresentanza dell'Associazione SLOBODA
Vladimir Krsljanin
tel. +381 63 8862 301
fax +381 11 3282 491
SCRIVETE
alla Corte-fantoccio dell'Aia
("International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia",
"ICTY", fax +3170 512 8637)
e dite la vostra opinione!
Il Consiglio di Sicurezza dell'ONU e' responsabile per il lavoro (ed
anche per i crimini) del "tribunale". Come raggiungerli:
Permanent Mission of the Peoples' Republic of China
(UN SC President for November 2002)
Address: 350 East 35th Street, New York, NY 10016
Telephone: 212-655-6100
Fax: 212-634-7626
E-mail: chinamission_un@...
Permanent Representative and Ambassador Wang Yingfan
Tel: 212-655-6191
Invitiamo gli avvocati a scrivere al "Presidente dell'ICTY"
Claude Jorda ed al "Presidente della Terza Corte" Richard May, nonche'
ai loro "Amici Curiae" Steven Kay e Branislav Tapuskovic (usando lo
stesso numero di fax) per dirgli cosa pensate della "futura conduzione
del caso"!
Noi abbiamo scritto quanto segue:
<< The actual deterioration of the health of Mr. Slobodan
Milosevic, long time President of the Republic of Serbia and of the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is a direct and dramatic consequence of
the way the process has been conducted and of the fact that you have
neglected the recommendations of the physicians appointed by ICTY in
order to determine the state of Mr. President's health.
Even after of numerous warnings that, considering the state
of health of President Milosevic, detention conditions and rhythm and
conduct of the process can cause his death, you still continue to
conduct your political process in the same way. We remain you and warn
you once again that eminent Yugoslav cardiologists have concluded in
their objective and impartial expertise, which got consent of the
physicians appointed by you, that the way this political process has
been conducted represent a threat to the life of President Milosevic.
In spite the claim that ICTY is an international court of
UN, you in severest way violate the Resolutions and documents of the
UN General Assembly, related to health of persons in custody.
The first principle of the Resolution 3794 on the principles
of medical ethics, adopted by the UN General Assembly on December
18, 1982, establishes an obligation to protect prisoners or detainees
from torture and other cruel, inhumane or humiliating sanctions or
behavior. The same Resolution obliges you to secure the medical
treatment of the same quality and based on same standards as for the
persons who are not in prison or in detention. But in violation to
that, you have not provided President Milosevic with medical therapy
nor even with medical care of the same quality and based on same
standards as for persons who are not in detention. This way you also
violate the Article 6 of the Codex of behavior of persons responsible
for application of the Law, adopted by UN General Assembly on December
17, 1979.
In addition to violation of the mentioned Resolutions, you
also violate your own Statute, namely its Article 21, point 4b, which
obliges you to provide every defendant with appropriate time and
facilities for preparation of his defense.
The astonishing rhythm of this political process, purpose of
which is not determination of the truth, but total endangering of
the health of President Milosevic, leads us to a conclusion that the
fatal outcome is your intention.
Experience with other persons in detention who faced
dramatic deterioration of heath or even loss of life, is also obliging
you to decide to allow Slobodan Milosevic to obtain medical therapy
and recovery in Belgrade by medical specialists who followed his
health condition for years, due to existence of special circumstances
and to resume the process after the improvement of his health.
We warn you that it is your obligation to harmonize your
Rules and practices with all UN documents on human rights protection,
as well as with the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights.
Belgrade, November 02, 2002
President of the Freedom Association -
Yugoslav Committee for the Defense of Slobodan Milosevic
Bogoljub Bjelica >>
---
PER MAGGIORI INFORMAZIONI E DOCUMENTAZIONE SULLA ILLEGITTIMITA' DEL
"TRIBUNALE" DELL'AIA, SUL TRATTAMENTO VESSATORIO CUI E' SOTTOPOSTO
MILOSEVIC, SULL'ANDAMENTO DEL "PROCESSO", SULLE TRASCRIZIONI INTEGRALI
DELLE UDIENZE - CHE LA NOSTRA STAMPA NON PUO' ALTRO CHE CENSURARE -
NONCHE' SULL'AGGRAVARSI DELLE CONDIZIONI DI SALUTE DI MILOSEVIC
RIMANDIAMO AI SITI:
http://hague.bard.edu/video.html
ARCHIVIO COMPLETO DEL "PROCESSO"
http://emperor.vwh.net/icdsm/
ICDSM
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
ARCHIVIO "JUGOINFO"
(a cura di I. Slavo)
SLOBODA e dal Comitato Internazionale per la Difesa di Slobodan
Milosevic (ICDSM):
---
MESSAGGIO URGENTE AI COMITATI NAZIONALI, AI PARTITI ED ALLE
ORGANIZZAZIONI PROGRESSISTE, ED A TUTTE LE PERSONE DI BUONA VOLONTA'
Il "tribunale" dell'Aia ha ricevuto una "mozione" vergognosa da parte
di Carla del Ponte, nella quale si chiede che il Presidente Milosevic
sia messo a tacere imponendogli un collegio di difesa contro la sua
volonta'.
Dunque, il messaggio della giustizia targata NATO e' che il Presidente
Milosevic deve morire oppure tacere!
Il "tribunale" sta tenendo i media all'oscuro di tutti gli appelli, le
richieste e le petizioni che voi inviate! Solo la voce di Carla si
deve sentire!
E' la "decisione" finale del "tribunale" potrebbe venire gia' domani!
Pertanto, vi preghiamo di continuare ad inviare a costoro le vostre
opinioni. E, per quanto possibile, di rivolgervi al pubblico ed ai
media.
LA VITA DEL PRESIDENTE MILOSEVIC, LA VERITA' SULLA JUGOSLAVIA E LA
LIBERTA' DEL POPOLO SERBO VANNO PROTETTI!
NOI CHIEDIAMO CHE AL PRESIDENTE MILOSEVIC SIA IMMEDIATAMENTE CONCESSO
DI OTTENERE UNA TERAPIA MEDICA SPECIALISTICA ED UN PERIODO DI
RIABILITAZIONE A BELGRADO, SOTTO LA SUPERVISIONE DEI MEDICI CHE DA
ANNI SEGUONO LA SUA SALUTE.
DOPODICHE' EGLI DOVREBBE AVERE IL DIRITTO DI POTER CONTINUARE LA SUA
BATTAGLIA PER LA VERITA' ALL'AIA, MA FUORI DI PRIGIONE. EGLI HA GIA'
AFFERMATO CHE NON SI SOTTRARRA' MAI A QUESTA BATTAGLIA!
Belgrado, 10 novembre 2002
SLOBODA - ICDSM
*** COME AGIRE ***
Cari amici,
il processo politico dell'Aia e' stato aggiornato alla prossima
settimana a causa del deterioramento delle condizioni di salute del
Presidente Milosevic.
Il Presidente Milosevic viene trattato come un prigioniero di guerra
in un campo di concentramento nazista [oltreche' per le modalita'
della detenzione del processo, questa affermazione va intesa alla
lettera: durante la Seconda Guerra Mondiale la prigione di
Scheveningen era usata dagli occupatori nazisti per tenere i
prigionieri politici, ndt].
Vi preghiamo di leggere con attenzione gli appelli di cui sotto.
E' ESSENZIALE agire SUBITO!
Vi preghiamo di inviare le vostre domande al "tribunale". Chiedete
agli avvocati ed ai medici che conoscete di fare lo stesso.
Rivolgetevi al Consiglio di Sicurezza dell'ONU!
Scrivete ai vostri parlamentari!
Prendete posizione pubblicamente!
In rappresentanza dell'Associazione SLOBODA
Vladimir Krsljanin
tel. +381 63 8862 301
fax +381 11 3282 491
SCRIVETE
alla Corte-fantoccio dell'Aia
("International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia",
"ICTY", fax +3170 512 8637)
e dite la vostra opinione!
Il Consiglio di Sicurezza dell'ONU e' responsabile per il lavoro (ed
anche per i crimini) del "tribunale". Come raggiungerli:
Permanent Mission of the Peoples' Republic of China
(UN SC President for November 2002)
Address: 350 East 35th Street, New York, NY 10016
Telephone: 212-655-6100
Fax: 212-634-7626
E-mail: chinamission_un@...
Permanent Representative and Ambassador Wang Yingfan
Tel: 212-655-6191
Invitiamo gli avvocati a scrivere al "Presidente dell'ICTY"
Claude Jorda ed al "Presidente della Terza Corte" Richard May, nonche'
ai loro "Amici Curiae" Steven Kay e Branislav Tapuskovic (usando lo
stesso numero di fax) per dirgli cosa pensate della "futura conduzione
del caso"!
Noi abbiamo scritto quanto segue:
<< The actual deterioration of the health of Mr. Slobodan
Milosevic, long time President of the Republic of Serbia and of the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is a direct and dramatic consequence of
the way the process has been conducted and of the fact that you have
neglected the recommendations of the physicians appointed by ICTY in
order to determine the state of Mr. President's health.
Even after of numerous warnings that, considering the state
of health of President Milosevic, detention conditions and rhythm and
conduct of the process can cause his death, you still continue to
conduct your political process in the same way. We remain you and warn
you once again that eminent Yugoslav cardiologists have concluded in
their objective and impartial expertise, which got consent of the
physicians appointed by you, that the way this political process has
been conducted represent a threat to the life of President Milosevic.
In spite the claim that ICTY is an international court of
UN, you in severest way violate the Resolutions and documents of the
UN General Assembly, related to health of persons in custody.
The first principle of the Resolution 3794 on the principles
of medical ethics, adopted by the UN General Assembly on December
18, 1982, establishes an obligation to protect prisoners or detainees
from torture and other cruel, inhumane or humiliating sanctions or
behavior. The same Resolution obliges you to secure the medical
treatment of the same quality and based on same standards as for the
persons who are not in prison or in detention. But in violation to
that, you have not provided President Milosevic with medical therapy
nor even with medical care of the same quality and based on same
standards as for persons who are not in detention. This way you also
violate the Article 6 of the Codex of behavior of persons responsible
for application of the Law, adopted by UN General Assembly on December
17, 1979.
In addition to violation of the mentioned Resolutions, you
also violate your own Statute, namely its Article 21, point 4b, which
obliges you to provide every defendant with appropriate time and
facilities for preparation of his defense.
The astonishing rhythm of this political process, purpose of
which is not determination of the truth, but total endangering of
the health of President Milosevic, leads us to a conclusion that the
fatal outcome is your intention.
Experience with other persons in detention who faced
dramatic deterioration of heath or even loss of life, is also obliging
you to decide to allow Slobodan Milosevic to obtain medical therapy
and recovery in Belgrade by medical specialists who followed his
health condition for years, due to existence of special circumstances
and to resume the process after the improvement of his health.
We warn you that it is your obligation to harmonize your
Rules and practices with all UN documents on human rights protection,
as well as with the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights.
Belgrade, November 02, 2002
President of the Freedom Association -
Yugoslav Committee for the Defense of Slobodan Milosevic
Bogoljub Bjelica >>
---
PER MAGGIORI INFORMAZIONI E DOCUMENTAZIONE SULLA ILLEGITTIMITA' DEL
"TRIBUNALE" DELL'AIA, SUL TRATTAMENTO VESSATORIO CUI E' SOTTOPOSTO
MILOSEVIC, SULL'ANDAMENTO DEL "PROCESSO", SULLE TRASCRIZIONI INTEGRALI
DELLE UDIENZE - CHE LA NOSTRA STAMPA NON PUO' ALTRO CHE CENSURARE -
NONCHE' SULL'AGGRAVARSI DELLE CONDIZIONI DI SALUTE DI MILOSEVIC
RIMANDIAMO AI SITI:
http://hague.bard.edu/video.html
ARCHIVIO COMPLETO DEL "PROCESSO"
http://emperor.vwh.net/icdsm/
ICDSM
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
ARCHIVIO "JUGOINFO"
(a cura di I. Slavo)
Z Magazine
a political monthly
http://www.ZMag.org/
February 2002 Issue
Fog Watch
The NATO-Media Lie Machine
"Genocide" in Kosovo?
By Edward S. Herman & David Peterson
NATO's "humanitarian" enterprise in Kosovo was built on a structure of
lies, many of them flowing from NATO headquarters and officials of the
NATO powers, and uncritically passed along by the mainstream media of
the NATO countries.
One of the great ironies of Operation Allied Force, NATO's brief 1999
war against Serbia, was that Yugoslavia's broadcasting facilities were
bombed by NATO on the claim that they were a "lie machine" serving the
Yugoslav apparatus of war. This was contrasted with the NATO media,
which in the view of NATO officials, and in that of media personnel as
well, were "objective" and provided what Richard Holbrooke described
as "exemplary" coverage. It never occurred to media leaders and
journalists that Holbrooke's accolade should embarrass them-although
were Slobodan Milosevic to have lauded the Serb media's performance as
"exemplary" we suspect their NATO-bloc counterparts would have
interpreted this as proof of the "lie machine" accusation. The double
standard runs deep.
An important reason for the congruity between Holbrooke's and the
media's views was the sense of self-righteousness that accompanied
Operation Allied Force. The belief that NATO was fighting a "just war"
against an evil enemy had been so well cultivated over the prior
decade that for the media, "getting on the team" and thereby promoting
the war effort seemed perfectly consistent with "objective" news
reporting. This perspective, which was not shared by most governments
and media outside NATO, or by a vigorous but marginalized media within
the NATO countries, was ideal from the viewpoint of the NATO war
managers, as it made their mainstream media into de facto propaganda
arms of NATO.
Ultimately, this gave NATO and its dominant governments a freedom to
ignore both international opinion and international law-and to destroy
and kill-that would have been far more difficult to achieve if their
media's performance had been less "exemplary."
Genocide Politicized
One of the many successes of the NATO-media lie machine was
effectively pinning the label of "genocide" on the Serbs for their
operations in Kosovo. "Genocide," like "terrorism," is an invidious
but fuzzy word, that has long been used in propaganda to describe the
conduct of official enemies. It conjures up images of Nazi death camps
and is frequently used along with the word "holocaust" to describe
killings that are being condemned. On the Nazi-Jewish Holocaust model,
genocide implies the attempt to wipe out an entire people. But in the
Genocide Convention of 1948 the word was defined more loosely as any
act "committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a
national, ethnic, racial or religious group as such." The Convention
even included in genocide acts that were causing serious "mental harm"
or inflicting "conditions of life" aimed at such destruction. This
vagueness has contributed to its politicization, and Peter Novick
notes how in the 1950s its users "focused almost exclusively on the
crimes-sometimes real, sometimes imagined-of the Soviet bloc" (The
Holocaust in American Life).
It is a notorious fact that the Clinton administration carefully
refrained from using the word genocide to apply to the huge 1994
Rwanda massacres of Tutsis by the Hutus. To have allowed the word to
be used there would have suggested a need to act, and having decided
not to act, the decision to avoid using an emotive word that might
have mobilized public opinion on the need to act followed accordingly.
By contrast, in the case of Kosovo, the decision to act demanded the
mobilization of opinion to support violent intervention, so the
aggressive use of the word genocide followed.
In the context of the wars over the disintegration of Yugoslavia, and
in its opportunistic use elsewhere, the word genocide has been applied
loosely wherever people are killed who are deemed "worthy" victims. In
our view this is not only opportunism but also a corruption of meaning
of a word whose unique sense implies not just killing or massacre but
an attempted extermination of a people, in whole or substantial part.
Genocide Pinned on Serbia
The word genocide was applied to the Serbs in the early 1990s by some
Western analysts and journalists who had aligned themselves with other
Yugoslav factions (notably the Bosnian Muslims), but it came into
intense use during the NATO 78-day bombing campaign and briefly
thereafter. In good part this escalated usage was a result of the
virtual hysteria of NATO leaders at the Serb reaction to their
bombing, which had been put forward as necessary to stop Serb
brutalities against the Kosovo Albanians but which caused their
exponential increase. With the help of the media, and cries of
genocide, Tony Blair, Bill Clinton, Gerhard Schroeder, and other NATO
spokespersons were able to transform the consequences of their bombing
strategy-the refugee crisis-into its retrospective justification.
To make their case the NATO leaders needed generous numbers of
victims, stories of Serb terror, and images of women and children in
flight or being put on expulsion trains, allowing recollections of
trains to Auschwitz. The number allegedly "missing" and suggested to
represent massacre victims by William Cohen on May 16 was 100,000, a
figure which peaked at 500,000 in a State Department estimate. Both
during and after the bombing campaign the main interest of the
cooperative NATO media was in finding victims; a scramble to unearth
and report on "mass graves" was launched. There were many victims, but
the media's appetite for them was insatiable and their gullibility led
them to make numerous errors, exaggerations, and misrepresentations
(see Philip Hammond and Edward S. Herman, eds., Degraded Capability:
The Media and the Kosovo Crisis, forthcoming from Pluto press, for
many illustrations). Numerous published images of departing Albanian
woman and children were linked to the "Holocaust," although as one
British commentator noted "the Nazis did not put Jews on the train to
Israel, as the Serbs are now putting ethnic Albanian Kosovars on the
train to Albania" (Julie Burchill, Guardian, April 10, 1999).
The word genocide was applied to Serb operations in Kosovo even before
the NATO bombing, although the number killed in the prior 15 months
was perhaps 2,000 on all sides and despite the fact that there was no
evidence of an intent to exterminate or expel all Albanians. The
Kosovo conflict was a civil war with defining ethnic overtones and
brutal but not unfamiliar repression (less ferocious than that carried
out by the Croatian army against the Krajina Serbs in August 1995, in
which some 2,500 civilians were slaughtered in the course of a few
days).
Even for the period of the bombing the term genocide is ludicrously
inapplicable. The Serb reaction to bombing, while frequently savage,
was based on their correct understanding that the KLA was linked to
NATO and that NATO was giving it air support (Tom Walker and Aidan
Laverty, "CIA Aided Kosovo Guerrilla Army," Sunday Times [London],
March 13, 2000). Their brutalities and expulsions were concentrated in
KLA stronghold areas, and those expelled were sent not to death camps
but to safe havens outside Kosovo. The intensive postwar search for
killings and mass graves has produced under 3,000 dead bodies from all
causes-killings of the same order of magnitude as the 1995 Krajina
massacres of Serbs, carried out with U.S. support.
In short, the use of the word genocide for Serb actions in Kosovo was
gross propaganda rhetoric designed to mislead as to the facts and to
provide the moral basis for aggressive intervention. It paralleled the
use of the War Crimes Tribunal to indict Milosevic in the midst of the
NATO bombing campaign-an indictment that was also designed to justify
NATO's increasingly civilian-oriented (and illegal) bombing of Serbia
by demonizing the head of the state under NATO attack.
Media & Left NATO Propaganda
Having encouraged the disintegration of Yugoslavia from 1991, and
actually obstructed peaceful solutions to the problem of protecting
minorities in breakaway states, the policies of Germany and the United
States in particular assured ethnic violence. Their chosen villain was
Serbia, and an intense official and media focus on Serb crimes
followed. This involved not only selectivity of outrage and a
misreading of causes and locus of responsibility, but also a
demonization process helped along by the one-sided, ahistorical
portrayal of events frequently infused with disinformation (as in the
British news station ITN's fabrication of a "death" or "concentration"
camp at the Trnopolje refugee center in 1992; see Thomas Deichmann,
"The Picture That Fooled the World," Living Marxism, Feb. 1997).
Demonization and the continuous purveying of atrocity news created a
moral environment receptive to charges of genocide. This reached
deeply into the liberal and left communities and media, with many
liberals or leftists passionate supporters of "doing something,"
including the NATO bombing war. This was to be expected of the New
Republic, where the notion of collective Serb guilt a la Daniel Jonah
Goldhagen's Hitler's Willing Executioners, conveniently justifying
attacking Serbian civil society and committing war crimes, found a
happy home. (Stacy Sullivan, "Milosevic's Willing Executioners," New
Republic, May 10, 1999). But it also affected the Nation, whose UN
Correspondent Ian Williams was pleased to see the UN bypassed in the
interest of humanitarian bombing (April 2, 1999), and where Kai Bird
(June 14, 1999) and Christopher Hitchens (November 29, 1999, among
others) both found Serb behavior "genocidal" in the course of their
quasi-defenses of NATO policy. Only Hitchens seemed to suggest that
the Serbs were trying to exterminate a people (based on ludicrous
arguments; see Herman, "Hitchens on Serbia and East Timor," Z
Magazine, April 1999).
In the mainstream media, genocide was used even more lavishly and
uncritically. Often it was presented in the form of assertions by
officials, with numbers like Cohen's 100,000, but reporters or
commentators rarely if ever challenged the figures or questioned
whether the actions designated as genocidal were intended to
exterminate a people. It was rare indeed to mention the difference
between trains to Auschwitz and to the Albanian border, as did Julie
Churchill in the Guardian.
Genocide was used as a symbol of aversion and disapproval, justifying
extreme measures against the "dictator" and his people-the media felt
impelled to call Milosevic a "dictator" even though this put a crimp
in condemning "ordinary Serbs" as responsible for his actions, but
they managed to do both at the same time (Anthony Lewis, "The Question
of Evil," NYT, June 22, 1999). Some commentators were carried away by
their own passion, David Rieff, a New York Times, Wall Street Journal,
and Chistopher Hitchens favorite, asserting that "the Milosevic regime
was trying to eradicate an entire people" ("Wars Without End?," NYT,
September 23, 1999). But most commentators were satisfied with using
the word without getting specific as to meaning or providing facts.
They never acknowledged any military rationale to the post-bombing
expulsions and killings: it was evil people doing evil things for evil
reasons.
In a masterpiece of the NATO anti-genocide apologetics genre, the New
York Times provided Sebastian Junger's "A Different Kind of Killing"
(NYT Magazine, February 27, 2000), where it is explained that even if
the number of bodies found in Kosovo were not of genocidal scope and
some stories turned out to be untrue, nevertheless "A single murder
can be considered an act of genocide if it can be shown that there was
an intent to kill everyone else in that person's group." Junger then
recounts his visit to the site of an unclaimed body of a teenage
woman, allegedly kidnapped, raped, and killed by Serbian "irregular
forces." Junger then says that, "it was not until this century that a
mechanized army carried out such crimes in the service of its
government. That is genocide; the rest is just violence." Junger makes
not the slightest effort to show that the "irregular forces" had done
this as part of a government plan and "in the service of its
government" rather than on their own, or that the KLA or U.S. army
didn't carry out similar acts. In short, this is completely worthless
nonsense-but it pins the word genocide on the official enemy, and
therefore the New York Times allows this travesty to appear in its
sunday magazine.
Some Comparative Data
We can also measure the spectacular politicization of the word
genocide by comparing its lavish use in describing Serb conduct in
Kosovo with its minimal use for Turkey's treatment of its Kurds in the
1990s (indeed, for decades) and Indonesia's treatment of East Timorese
in 1999 as well as in earlier years. The force of this comparison is
strengthened by the facts that Turkey killed far more Kurds in the
1990s than the Serbs killed Albanians in Kosovo, not only before the
bombing (whose number presumably elicited the "humanitarian"
intervention) but even including those killed during the 78-day
bombing and war (see Chomsky's New Military Humanism). Indonesia's
invasion-occupation led to the death of almost a third of the East
Timor population (1975-1980), and Indonesia was subsequently
responsible for the 1998-1999 slaughter and expulsion of a still
untold number of East Timorese associated with a UN-sponsored
election. The number of East Timorese killed in this latest round of
Indonesian terror far exceeded the pre-bombing total of Kosovo
Albanian victims-estimates run from 3,000-6,000 killed even before the
August 30, 1999 referendum unleashed unrestrained Indonesian
destruction and murder-and the grand total for 1999 is surely far
larger than the overall total of Kosovo Albanians killed by the Serbs
in 1998 and 1999.
But as Turkey and Indonesia are clients of the United States and the
recipients of aid, military supplies, and diplomatic support from the
United States, Britain, and the Western powers generally, their human
rights crimes are never referred to by Western officials as genocide.
In fact, in a droll feature of the NATO campaign against Serb genocide
in Kosovo, Turkey, a member of NATO, took part in the war against
Yugoslavia with direct bombing missions and the provision of bases for
flights of other NATO powers, perhaps generously reallocating its own
forces from the ethnic cleansing of Kurds to "humanitarian" NATO
service.
Given this warm relationship between the NATO powers and Turkey and
Indonesia, we would expect the NATO media to follow in the footsteps
of their leaders and treat Turkey and Indonesia kindly, refraining
from serious investigative effort and the enthusiastic searches for
"mass graves" they pursued in Kosovo, and avoiding the use of an
invidious word like genocide in reference to these client states, no
matter how applicable and inconsistent with their usage of the word as
regards Serbia. This expectation is fully realized.
We will limit ourselves here to usage in the New York Times, although
we believe the findings applicable to the general run of mainstream
media. In the Times the bias is startling, and has some unexpected
sidelights. The accompanying table shows that in the year 1999, the
word genocide was ascribed to the Serbs in Kosovo in 85 different
articles, including 15 that began on the front page, and in 16
editorials and op-ed columns. In some of these articles the word was
used repeatedly. (In one remarkable example, during the current year
and outside our sample proper, Michael Ignatieff repeated the word
genocide 11 times in a single op-ed [February 13, 2000]).
By contrast, the word showed up in the Times in only 9 items referring
to East Timor in 1999, only once in an editorial or opinion piece, and
only 15 times for East Timor in the entire decade of the 1990s. The
word was never used in a front-page article during the 1990s.
Furthermore, no Times reporter or editorial writer ever used the word
genocide in application to East Timor over the entire period,
1975-1999. (That is to say, in all instances where the word did
appear, it did not express the opinion of the Times writer, but was
attributed to another source.) Anthony Lewis, who repeatedly referred
to Serb action as genocidal and called for Western intervention there,
spoke of "human rights abuses in East Timor" (July 12, 1993), but he
never called it genocide or urged intervention. Barbara Crossette
repeatedly complimented Suharto for bringing "stability" to the
region. In a notable mention of the word genocide, veteran Times
reporter Henry Kamm explicitly denied its application to East Timor,
calling such usage "hyperbole," and allocating the mass deaths to
"cruel warfare and the starvation that accompanied it on this
historically food-short island" (February 15, 1981).
Equally remarkable, the table also shows that the word genocide was
never once used in application to Turkey and its treatment of its
Kurds in 1999, and was used only five times for such a relationship in
the decade of the 1990s, never in a front-page article. However, in a
wonderful illustration of how the Times follows the line of U.S.
foreign policy, the table shows that Iraq's mistreatment of its Kurds
in the years 1990-1999 was described as genocidal 22 times, in five
cases in front-page articles.
In short, only "worthy victims"-that is, the victims of officially
designated enemies like Yugoslavia and Iraq-suffer from genocide;
those that are unworthy, like East Timorese and the Turkish Kurds, are
merely subject to "cruel warfare" and adverse natural forces, as Henry
Kamm explained in regard to East Timor. So the Western media and
"international community" will be mobilized on behalf of the former,
and the latter will be compelled to suffer in silence. But as we have
stressed, there never was genocide in Kosovo, so that the NATO war
there was based on a lie. And that lie, like the May 27 indictment of
Milosevic by the War Crimes Tribunal, served mainly to provide a moral
cover that allowed NATO to bomb the hostage population of Serbia into
submission. That population now joins Iraq's in being subject to
further "sanctions of mass destruction" whose effects offer a much
closer fit to "genocide" than the Serb actions which, allegedly,
precipitated NATO's war.
Questions? Comments? Contact us at sysop@....
a political monthly
http://www.ZMag.org/
February 2002 Issue
Fog Watch
The NATO-Media Lie Machine
"Genocide" in Kosovo?
By Edward S. Herman & David Peterson
NATO's "humanitarian" enterprise in Kosovo was built on a structure of
lies, many of them flowing from NATO headquarters and officials of the
NATO powers, and uncritically passed along by the mainstream media of
the NATO countries.
One of the great ironies of Operation Allied Force, NATO's brief 1999
war against Serbia, was that Yugoslavia's broadcasting facilities were
bombed by NATO on the claim that they were a "lie machine" serving the
Yugoslav apparatus of war. This was contrasted with the NATO media,
which in the view of NATO officials, and in that of media personnel as
well, were "objective" and provided what Richard Holbrooke described
as "exemplary" coverage. It never occurred to media leaders and
journalists that Holbrooke's accolade should embarrass them-although
were Slobodan Milosevic to have lauded the Serb media's performance as
"exemplary" we suspect their NATO-bloc counterparts would have
interpreted this as proof of the "lie machine" accusation. The double
standard runs deep.
An important reason for the congruity between Holbrooke's and the
media's views was the sense of self-righteousness that accompanied
Operation Allied Force. The belief that NATO was fighting a "just war"
against an evil enemy had been so well cultivated over the prior
decade that for the media, "getting on the team" and thereby promoting
the war effort seemed perfectly consistent with "objective" news
reporting. This perspective, which was not shared by most governments
and media outside NATO, or by a vigorous but marginalized media within
the NATO countries, was ideal from the viewpoint of the NATO war
managers, as it made their mainstream media into de facto propaganda
arms of NATO.
Ultimately, this gave NATO and its dominant governments a freedom to
ignore both international opinion and international law-and to destroy
and kill-that would have been far more difficult to achieve if their
media's performance had been less "exemplary."
Genocide Politicized
One of the many successes of the NATO-media lie machine was
effectively pinning the label of "genocide" on the Serbs for their
operations in Kosovo. "Genocide," like "terrorism," is an invidious
but fuzzy word, that has long been used in propaganda to describe the
conduct of official enemies. It conjures up images of Nazi death camps
and is frequently used along with the word "holocaust" to describe
killings that are being condemned. On the Nazi-Jewish Holocaust model,
genocide implies the attempt to wipe out an entire people. But in the
Genocide Convention of 1948 the word was defined more loosely as any
act "committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a
national, ethnic, racial or religious group as such." The Convention
even included in genocide acts that were causing serious "mental harm"
or inflicting "conditions of life" aimed at such destruction. This
vagueness has contributed to its politicization, and Peter Novick
notes how in the 1950s its users "focused almost exclusively on the
crimes-sometimes real, sometimes imagined-of the Soviet bloc" (The
Holocaust in American Life).
It is a notorious fact that the Clinton administration carefully
refrained from using the word genocide to apply to the huge 1994
Rwanda massacres of Tutsis by the Hutus. To have allowed the word to
be used there would have suggested a need to act, and having decided
not to act, the decision to avoid using an emotive word that might
have mobilized public opinion on the need to act followed accordingly.
By contrast, in the case of Kosovo, the decision to act demanded the
mobilization of opinion to support violent intervention, so the
aggressive use of the word genocide followed.
In the context of the wars over the disintegration of Yugoslavia, and
in its opportunistic use elsewhere, the word genocide has been applied
loosely wherever people are killed who are deemed "worthy" victims. In
our view this is not only opportunism but also a corruption of meaning
of a word whose unique sense implies not just killing or massacre but
an attempted extermination of a people, in whole or substantial part.
Genocide Pinned on Serbia
The word genocide was applied to the Serbs in the early 1990s by some
Western analysts and journalists who had aligned themselves with other
Yugoslav factions (notably the Bosnian Muslims), but it came into
intense use during the NATO 78-day bombing campaign and briefly
thereafter. In good part this escalated usage was a result of the
virtual hysteria of NATO leaders at the Serb reaction to their
bombing, which had been put forward as necessary to stop Serb
brutalities against the Kosovo Albanians but which caused their
exponential increase. With the help of the media, and cries of
genocide, Tony Blair, Bill Clinton, Gerhard Schroeder, and other NATO
spokespersons were able to transform the consequences of their bombing
strategy-the refugee crisis-into its retrospective justification.
To make their case the NATO leaders needed generous numbers of
victims, stories of Serb terror, and images of women and children in
flight or being put on expulsion trains, allowing recollections of
trains to Auschwitz. The number allegedly "missing" and suggested to
represent massacre victims by William Cohen on May 16 was 100,000, a
figure which peaked at 500,000 in a State Department estimate. Both
during and after the bombing campaign the main interest of the
cooperative NATO media was in finding victims; a scramble to unearth
and report on "mass graves" was launched. There were many victims, but
the media's appetite for them was insatiable and their gullibility led
them to make numerous errors, exaggerations, and misrepresentations
(see Philip Hammond and Edward S. Herman, eds., Degraded Capability:
The Media and the Kosovo Crisis, forthcoming from Pluto press, for
many illustrations). Numerous published images of departing Albanian
woman and children were linked to the "Holocaust," although as one
British commentator noted "the Nazis did not put Jews on the train to
Israel, as the Serbs are now putting ethnic Albanian Kosovars on the
train to Albania" (Julie Burchill, Guardian, April 10, 1999).
The word genocide was applied to Serb operations in Kosovo even before
the NATO bombing, although the number killed in the prior 15 months
was perhaps 2,000 on all sides and despite the fact that there was no
evidence of an intent to exterminate or expel all Albanians. The
Kosovo conflict was a civil war with defining ethnic overtones and
brutal but not unfamiliar repression (less ferocious than that carried
out by the Croatian army against the Krajina Serbs in August 1995, in
which some 2,500 civilians were slaughtered in the course of a few
days).
Even for the period of the bombing the term genocide is ludicrously
inapplicable. The Serb reaction to bombing, while frequently savage,
was based on their correct understanding that the KLA was linked to
NATO and that NATO was giving it air support (Tom Walker and Aidan
Laverty, "CIA Aided Kosovo Guerrilla Army," Sunday Times [London],
March 13, 2000). Their brutalities and expulsions were concentrated in
KLA stronghold areas, and those expelled were sent not to death camps
but to safe havens outside Kosovo. The intensive postwar search for
killings and mass graves has produced under 3,000 dead bodies from all
causes-killings of the same order of magnitude as the 1995 Krajina
massacres of Serbs, carried out with U.S. support.
In short, the use of the word genocide for Serb actions in Kosovo was
gross propaganda rhetoric designed to mislead as to the facts and to
provide the moral basis for aggressive intervention. It paralleled the
use of the War Crimes Tribunal to indict Milosevic in the midst of the
NATO bombing campaign-an indictment that was also designed to justify
NATO's increasingly civilian-oriented (and illegal) bombing of Serbia
by demonizing the head of the state under NATO attack.
Media & Left NATO Propaganda
Having encouraged the disintegration of Yugoslavia from 1991, and
actually obstructed peaceful solutions to the problem of protecting
minorities in breakaway states, the policies of Germany and the United
States in particular assured ethnic violence. Their chosen villain was
Serbia, and an intense official and media focus on Serb crimes
followed. This involved not only selectivity of outrage and a
misreading of causes and locus of responsibility, but also a
demonization process helped along by the one-sided, ahistorical
portrayal of events frequently infused with disinformation (as in the
British news station ITN's fabrication of a "death" or "concentration"
camp at the Trnopolje refugee center in 1992; see Thomas Deichmann,
"The Picture That Fooled the World," Living Marxism, Feb. 1997).
Demonization and the continuous purveying of atrocity news created a
moral environment receptive to charges of genocide. This reached
deeply into the liberal and left communities and media, with many
liberals or leftists passionate supporters of "doing something,"
including the NATO bombing war. This was to be expected of the New
Republic, where the notion of collective Serb guilt a la Daniel Jonah
Goldhagen's Hitler's Willing Executioners, conveniently justifying
attacking Serbian civil society and committing war crimes, found a
happy home. (Stacy Sullivan, "Milosevic's Willing Executioners," New
Republic, May 10, 1999). But it also affected the Nation, whose UN
Correspondent Ian Williams was pleased to see the UN bypassed in the
interest of humanitarian bombing (April 2, 1999), and where Kai Bird
(June 14, 1999) and Christopher Hitchens (November 29, 1999, among
others) both found Serb behavior "genocidal" in the course of their
quasi-defenses of NATO policy. Only Hitchens seemed to suggest that
the Serbs were trying to exterminate a people (based on ludicrous
arguments; see Herman, "Hitchens on Serbia and East Timor," Z
Magazine, April 1999).
In the mainstream media, genocide was used even more lavishly and
uncritically. Often it was presented in the form of assertions by
officials, with numbers like Cohen's 100,000, but reporters or
commentators rarely if ever challenged the figures or questioned
whether the actions designated as genocidal were intended to
exterminate a people. It was rare indeed to mention the difference
between trains to Auschwitz and to the Albanian border, as did Julie
Churchill in the Guardian.
Genocide was used as a symbol of aversion and disapproval, justifying
extreme measures against the "dictator" and his people-the media felt
impelled to call Milosevic a "dictator" even though this put a crimp
in condemning "ordinary Serbs" as responsible for his actions, but
they managed to do both at the same time (Anthony Lewis, "The Question
of Evil," NYT, June 22, 1999). Some commentators were carried away by
their own passion, David Rieff, a New York Times, Wall Street Journal,
and Chistopher Hitchens favorite, asserting that "the Milosevic regime
was trying to eradicate an entire people" ("Wars Without End?," NYT,
September 23, 1999). But most commentators were satisfied with using
the word without getting specific as to meaning or providing facts.
They never acknowledged any military rationale to the post-bombing
expulsions and killings: it was evil people doing evil things for evil
reasons.
In a masterpiece of the NATO anti-genocide apologetics genre, the New
York Times provided Sebastian Junger's "A Different Kind of Killing"
(NYT Magazine, February 27, 2000), where it is explained that even if
the number of bodies found in Kosovo were not of genocidal scope and
some stories turned out to be untrue, nevertheless "A single murder
can be considered an act of genocide if it can be shown that there was
an intent to kill everyone else in that person's group." Junger then
recounts his visit to the site of an unclaimed body of a teenage
woman, allegedly kidnapped, raped, and killed by Serbian "irregular
forces." Junger then says that, "it was not until this century that a
mechanized army carried out such crimes in the service of its
government. That is genocide; the rest is just violence." Junger makes
not the slightest effort to show that the "irregular forces" had done
this as part of a government plan and "in the service of its
government" rather than on their own, or that the KLA or U.S. army
didn't carry out similar acts. In short, this is completely worthless
nonsense-but it pins the word genocide on the official enemy, and
therefore the New York Times allows this travesty to appear in its
sunday magazine.
Some Comparative Data
We can also measure the spectacular politicization of the word
genocide by comparing its lavish use in describing Serb conduct in
Kosovo with its minimal use for Turkey's treatment of its Kurds in the
1990s (indeed, for decades) and Indonesia's treatment of East Timorese
in 1999 as well as in earlier years. The force of this comparison is
strengthened by the facts that Turkey killed far more Kurds in the
1990s than the Serbs killed Albanians in Kosovo, not only before the
bombing (whose number presumably elicited the "humanitarian"
intervention) but even including those killed during the 78-day
bombing and war (see Chomsky's New Military Humanism). Indonesia's
invasion-occupation led to the death of almost a third of the East
Timor population (1975-1980), and Indonesia was subsequently
responsible for the 1998-1999 slaughter and expulsion of a still
untold number of East Timorese associated with a UN-sponsored
election. The number of East Timorese killed in this latest round of
Indonesian terror far exceeded the pre-bombing total of Kosovo
Albanian victims-estimates run from 3,000-6,000 killed even before the
August 30, 1999 referendum unleashed unrestrained Indonesian
destruction and murder-and the grand total for 1999 is surely far
larger than the overall total of Kosovo Albanians killed by the Serbs
in 1998 and 1999.
But as Turkey and Indonesia are clients of the United States and the
recipients of aid, military supplies, and diplomatic support from the
United States, Britain, and the Western powers generally, their human
rights crimes are never referred to by Western officials as genocide.
In fact, in a droll feature of the NATO campaign against Serb genocide
in Kosovo, Turkey, a member of NATO, took part in the war against
Yugoslavia with direct bombing missions and the provision of bases for
flights of other NATO powers, perhaps generously reallocating its own
forces from the ethnic cleansing of Kurds to "humanitarian" NATO
service.
Given this warm relationship between the NATO powers and Turkey and
Indonesia, we would expect the NATO media to follow in the footsteps
of their leaders and treat Turkey and Indonesia kindly, refraining
from serious investigative effort and the enthusiastic searches for
"mass graves" they pursued in Kosovo, and avoiding the use of an
invidious word like genocide in reference to these client states, no
matter how applicable and inconsistent with their usage of the word as
regards Serbia. This expectation is fully realized.
We will limit ourselves here to usage in the New York Times, although
we believe the findings applicable to the general run of mainstream
media. In the Times the bias is startling, and has some unexpected
sidelights. The accompanying table shows that in the year 1999, the
word genocide was ascribed to the Serbs in Kosovo in 85 different
articles, including 15 that began on the front page, and in 16
editorials and op-ed columns. In some of these articles the word was
used repeatedly. (In one remarkable example, during the current year
and outside our sample proper, Michael Ignatieff repeated the word
genocide 11 times in a single op-ed [February 13, 2000]).
By contrast, the word showed up in the Times in only 9 items referring
to East Timor in 1999, only once in an editorial or opinion piece, and
only 15 times for East Timor in the entire decade of the 1990s. The
word was never used in a front-page article during the 1990s.
Furthermore, no Times reporter or editorial writer ever used the word
genocide in application to East Timor over the entire period,
1975-1999. (That is to say, in all instances where the word did
appear, it did not express the opinion of the Times writer, but was
attributed to another source.) Anthony Lewis, who repeatedly referred
to Serb action as genocidal and called for Western intervention there,
spoke of "human rights abuses in East Timor" (July 12, 1993), but he
never called it genocide or urged intervention. Barbara Crossette
repeatedly complimented Suharto for bringing "stability" to the
region. In a notable mention of the word genocide, veteran Times
reporter Henry Kamm explicitly denied its application to East Timor,
calling such usage "hyperbole," and allocating the mass deaths to
"cruel warfare and the starvation that accompanied it on this
historically food-short island" (February 15, 1981).
Equally remarkable, the table also shows that the word genocide was
never once used in application to Turkey and its treatment of its
Kurds in 1999, and was used only five times for such a relationship in
the decade of the 1990s, never in a front-page article. However, in a
wonderful illustration of how the Times follows the line of U.S.
foreign policy, the table shows that Iraq's mistreatment of its Kurds
in the years 1990-1999 was described as genocidal 22 times, in five
cases in front-page articles.
In short, only "worthy victims"-that is, the victims of officially
designated enemies like Yugoslavia and Iraq-suffer from genocide;
those that are unworthy, like East Timorese and the Turkish Kurds, are
merely subject to "cruel warfare" and adverse natural forces, as Henry
Kamm explained in regard to East Timor. So the Western media and
"international community" will be mobilized on behalf of the former,
and the latter will be compelled to suffer in silence. But as we have
stressed, there never was genocide in Kosovo, so that the NATO war
there was based on a lie. And that lie, like the May 27 indictment of
Milosevic by the War Crimes Tribunal, served mainly to provide a moral
cover that allowed NATO to bomb the hostage population of Serbia into
submission. That population now joins Iraq's in being subject to
further "sanctions of mass destruction" whose effects offer a much
closer fit to "genocide" than the Serb actions which, allegedly,
precipitated NATO's war.
Questions? Comments? Contact us at sysop@....
1. SPS ZAHTEVA OD DRZAVNIH ORGANA I MEDJUNARODNIH INSTITUCIJA DA
ZASTITE ZIVOT PREDSEDNIKA MILOSEVICA (8/11/2002)
2. APEL BEOGRADSKOG FORUMA ZA URGENTNO LE?ENJE SLOBODANA MILOSEVI?A
IZVAN ZATVORA (7/11/2002)
3. SUDJENJE SLOBODANU MILOSEVI?U: SAOPSTENJE ZA JAVNOST BEOGRADSKOG
FORUMA (4/11/2002)
=== 1 ===
Subject: SPS za zivot i slobodu predsednika Milosevica
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 14:25:29 +0100
From: "Vladimir Krsljanin"
SOCIJALISTICKA PARTIJA SRBIJE
ZAHTEVA OD DRZAVNIH ORGANA I MEDJUNARODNIH INSTITUCIJA
DA ZASTITE ZIVOT PREDSEDNIKA MILOSEVICA
Zivot predsednika Slobodana Milosevica je u opasnosti. To potvrdjuju i
lekari koji su ga pregledali. I sam Tribunal u Hagu priznaje da je
okoncanje procesa ovim dovedeno u pitanje.
Najadekvatniji nacin da se izbegne tragedija je da predsednik
Milosevic odmah zapocne lecenje i oporavak u svojoj zemlji, pod
nadzorom lekara koji dobro poznaju njegovo zdravstveno stanje.
Apelujemo na sve ljude dobre volje - u Srbiji, Jugoslaviji,
jugoslovenskoj dijaspori, Evropi, Americi, u citavom svetu - da daju
podrsku i pridruze se zahtevu za njegovo urgentno lecenje izvan
zatvora, kao i za dalju odbranu sa slobode.
Podsecamo na Rezoluciju Generalne skupstine UN broj 3794, od 18. 12.
1982. godine, koja nalaze doktorima medicine i drugom zdravstvenom
osoblju da licima koja su u pritvoru ili zatvoru "pruze lecenje istog
kvaliteta i u skladu sa istim normama kao i za lica koja nisu u
zatvoru ili pritvoru", kao i na cl. 6. Kodeksa ponasanja lica
odgovornih za primenu zakona koji je donela Generalna skupstina OUN
17. 12. 1979. godine, koji obavezuje sve sudove da vode racuna o
potpunoj zastiti zdravlja ljudi.
Jugoslovenskoj i svetskoj javosti je poznato da Slobodanu Milosevicu u
Seveningenu, nije pruzana zdravstvena zastita u skladu sa tim odlukama
UN, drugim medjunarodnim standardima, niti u Seveningenu postoje
uslovi za to. Naprotiv, uslovi pritvora i nacin rada samog tribunala,
glavni su razlog pogorsanja njegovog zdravstvenog stanja. Svima je
poznato da je predsednik Milosevic namerno zatrpan ogromnom kolicinom
pisanog i drugog materijala tuzilastva, cije citanje i pregled,
prevazilaze mogucnosti ljudskog bica.
To, kao i intenzitet sudjenja i drugih obaveza predsednika Milosevica
u vezi sa postupkom, narusavanje njegovih prava na svakodnevni odmor -
predstavljaju glavne uzroke ubrzanog narusavanja njegovog zdravlja.
"Tribunal" se oglusio o misljenje medicinskih strucnjaka, ostavio
predsednika Milosevica bez ikakvog lekarskog nadzora i cak povecao
trajanje i intenzitet dnevnih obaveza u takozvanom sudjenju.
Jugoslovenske vlasti nisu dosad nista preduzele da se predsedniku
Milosevicu obezbedi fer sudjenje, pomogne njegova odbrana i zastite
njegova ljudska prava, a pre svega pravo na zdravlje i odgovarajucu
lekarsku negu.
Podsecamo vlasti Jugoslavije i Srbije da imaju izricitu ustavnu
obavezu da svojim drzavljanima u inostranstvu pruze odgovarajucu
zastitu kao sto to cine druge drzave stiteci svoje drzavljane i
drzavno dostojanstvo. Pozivamo ih da tu svoju obavezu izvrse prema
Slobodanu Milosevicu, tako sto ce od Saveta bezbednosti u Njujorku,
Komisije za ljudska prava u Zenevi, i od "tribunala" u Hagu zvanicno
zatraziti prekid postupka radi lecenja i oporavka Slobodana Milosevica
u Jugoslaviji, pod nadzorom njegovih licnih lekara, do potpunog
izlecenja i dati odgovarajuce drzavne garancije.
Upucujemo apel Generalnoj skupstini, Savetu bezbednosti i nevladinim
organizacijama u sistemu Ujedinjenih nacija, kao i onima izvan tog
sistema, da podrze ovu humanitarnu inicijativu i na taj nacin
doprinesu zastiti zivota i osnovnih ljudskih prava Slobodana
Milosevica.
Pozivamo sve intelektualce, advokate, naucnike, politicare, umetnike,
javne licnosti i njihova udruzenje iz citavog sveta da podrze ove
humanitarne zahteve.
Dvojica pritvorenika su vec izgubili zivot u Hagu, a jos dvojica su
oslobodjeni prekasno, odnosno, tek kada im, po opstoj oceni, vise nije
bilo spasa. To vise ne sme da se ponovi. Mora se spreciti zlocin pod
okriljem UN.
Polazeci od ljudske i medicinske etike, kao i od osnovnih normi
medjunarodnog humanitarnog prava, Socijalisticka partija Srbije
zahteva od svih odgovornih u zemlji i svetu da ispune svoje obaveze,
zastite ljudski zivot i ne dozvole da budu saucesnici u zlocinu.
Usvajajuci ove stavove, Izvrsni odbor Glavnog odbora SPS usvojio
je i plan konkretnih aktivnosti poslanickih grupa, organa Partije na
svim nivoima i partijskog clanstva, koje, s obzirom na tezinu i
dramaticnost situacije, nece prestajati do konacnog ispunjenja
zahteva.
Beograd, 8. novembra 2002. g.
To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sps.org.yu/ (official SPS website)
http://www.belgrade-forum.org/ (forum for the world of equals)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)
icdsm temporary address:
http://emperor.vwh.net/icdsm/index.htm
for your donations:
http://emperor.vwh.net/icdsm/donations.htm
=== 2 ===
www.artel.co.yu
office@...
Datum: 07 novembar 2002
APEL BEOGRADSKOG FORUMA
ZA URGENTNO LE?ENJE SLOBODANA MILOSEVI?A IZVAN ZATVORA
BEOGRADSKI FORUM ZA SVET RAVNOPRAVNIH
07. novembar 2002. godine
Zdravlje G-dina Slobodana Milosevi?a, bivseg jugoslovenskog
predsednika, pogorsalo se poslednjih sedmica do te mere da je njegov
?ivot u opasnosti. Apelujemo na sve ljude dobre volje ' u Srbiji,
Jugoslaviji, jugoslovenskoj dijaspori, Evropi, Americi, u ?itavom
svetu ' da daju podrsku i pridru?e se zahtevu za njegovo urgentno
le?enje izvan zatvora, kao i za odbranu sa slobode.
Zdravlje G-dina Milosevi?a neprekidno se pogorsavalo od njegovog
zatvaranja u pritvorsku jedinicu u Seveningenu, da bi poslednjih
sedmica, po priznanju samog sudijskog ve?a, postalo alarmantno.
Sedmodnevna pauza u sudjenju koja je u toku, ne mo?e resiti ovaj
problem i otkloniti opasnost po ?ivot G-dina MIlosevi?a, osim prekida
procesa i omogu?avanja le?enja izvan zatvora, do potpunog izle?enja.
Podse?amo na Rezoluciju skupstine UN broj 3794, od 18. 12. 1982.
godine, koja nala?e doktorima medicine i drugom zdravstvenom osoblju
da licima koja su u pritvoru ili zatvoru "pru?e le?enje istog
kvaliteta i u skladu sa istim normama kao i za lica koja nisu u
zatvoru ili pritvoru", kao i na ?l. 6 Kodeksa po9nasanja lica
odgovornih za primenu zakona koji je donela Generalna skupstina OUN
17. 12. 1979. godine, koji obavezuje sve sudove da vode ra?una o
potpunoj zastiti zdravlja ljudi.
Jugoslovenskoj i svetskoj javnosti je poznato da Slobodanu Milosevi?u
u Seveningenu nije pru?ana zdravstvena zastita u skladu sa tim
odlukama UN, drugim medjunarodnim standardima, niti u Seveningenu
postoje uslovi za to.
Takodje je poznato da je Milosevi? namerno zatrpan ogromnom koli?inom
pisanog i drugog materijala tu?ilastva, ?ije ?itanje i pregled
prevazilazi mogu?nosti ljudskog bi?a. To, kao i intenzitet sudjenja i
drugih obaveza gospodina Milosevi?a u vezi sa postupkom, narusavanje
njegovih prava na dnevni odmor - predstavljaju dopdatne uzroke
ubrzanog narusavanja njegovog zdravlja.
Zato se obra?amo predsedniku Tribunala G-dinu Klodu ?ordi i
predsedavaju?em sudiji Ri?ardu Meju da prekinu postupak i omogu?e
le?enje Slobodana Milosevi?a izvan zatvora, u skladu sa medjunarodnim
standardima, u odgovaraju?oj zdravstvenoj ustanovi u Jugoslaviji, uz
anga?ovanje njegovih li?nih lekara do potpunog izle?enja.
Jugoslovenske vlasti nisu dosad nista preduzele da se Slobodanu
Milosevi?u obezbedi fer sudjenje, ppomogne njegova odbrana i zastite
njegova ljudska prava, a pre svega pravo na zdravlje i odgovaraju?u
lekarsku negu.
Podse?amo vlasti Jugoslavije i Srbije da imaju izri?itu ustavnu
obavezu da svojim dr?avljanima u inostranstvu pru?e odgovaraju?u
zastitu kao sto to ?ine druge dr?ave stite?i svoje dr?avljane i
dr?avno dostaojanstvo. Pozivamo ih da tu svoju obavezu izvrse prema
Slobodanu Milosevi?u, tako sto ?e od Saveta bezbednosti u Njujorku,
Komisije za ljudska prava u ?enevi, i od Medjunarodnog haskog
tribunala zvani?no zatra?iti prekid postupka radi le?enja Slobodana
Milosevi?a u Jugoslaviji, od strane njegovih li?nih lekara, do
potpunog izle?enja i da ti odgovaraju?e dr?avne garancije.
Upu?ujemo apel Generalnoj skupstini , Savetu bezbednosti i nevladinim
organizacijama u sistemu Ujedinjenih nacija, kao i onima izvan tog
sistema, da podr?e ovu humanitarnu inicijativu i na taj na?in
doprinesu zastiti osnovnih ljudskih prava Slobodana Milosevi?a.
Pozivamo sve intelektualce, advokate, nau?nike, politi?are, umetnike,
javne li?nosti i njihova udru?enja iz ?itavog sveta da podr?e ove
humanitarne zahteve.
Bilo je dosta tragi?nih slu?ajeva Srba zatvorenih u Seveningenu da bi
se nebrigom odgovornih i ?utanjem ljudi dobre volje - dopustili novi,
pod znamenjem UN.
=== 3 ===
www.artel.co.yu
office@...
Datum: 06 novembar 2002
SUDJENJE SLOBODANU MILOSEVI?U: SAOPSTENJE ZA
JAVNOST BEOGRADSKOG FORUMA (4)
BEOGRADSKI FORUM ZA SVET RAVNOPRAVNIH
U Beogradu, 4. novembar 2002. godine
Beogradski forum za svet ravnopravnih (Forum)
izra?ava svoju najdublju zabrinutost zbog
prihvatanja svedo?enja iz druge ruke na sudjenju g.
Slobodanu Milosevi?u pred Medjunarodnim krivi?nim
tribunalom za bivsu Jugoslaviju (ICTY). Ovo pitanje
je ponovo isplivalo na povrsinu na po?etku procesa
za Hrvatsku i Bosnu, kada je Predsedavaju?i sudija
Mej objavio da ?e ovakva svedo?enja biti prihva?ena.
On je takodje naveo da su takva svedo?enja
"prihvatljiva u gradjansko-pravnim (kontinentalnim)
pravnim sistemima". Forum odlu?no protestuje protiv
ovakvih pravno neodr?ivih koncepcija i ose?a se
obaveznim da ospori ovakav stav sudije Meja.
U modernim kontinentalnim pravnim sistemima svedok
je definisan kao neko ko ima NEPOSREDNO opa?anje
dogadjaja koji je video ili na drugi na?in LI?NO
do?iveo. U jugoslovenskom krivi?nom procesnom pravu
ni jedan optu?eni ne mo?e biti osudjen za krivi?no
delo na osnovu svedo?enja svedoka koji bi izjavio da
je o tom delu ?uo iz medija ili od nekog drugog
lica. Ni jedan jugoslovenski krivi?ni sud ne bi
dozvolio tu?ilastvu da takvog svedoka izvede da
svedo?i, jer bi to bilo bespredmetno. Drugim re?ima,
jugoslovensko krivi?no procesno pravo ne poznaje
praksu po kojoj bi neko bio osudjen za, recimo,
krivi?no delo ubistva na osnovu svedo?enja svedoka
koji bi izjavio da je za to delo ?uo sa televizije,
od nekoga drugog ili da je o njemu ?itao u novinama.
Tvrdimo da takvu praksu ne poznaju ni ameri?ki ni
britanski precedentni pravni sistemi.
Ovo pitanje je ponovo zaostreno sa pojavom novinara
u ulozi svedoka koji su svedo?ili o svojim
intervjuima sa odredjenim licima (kao g.
Anastasijevi?, na primer). Osnovni problem ovde je:
na koji na?in g. Milosevi? mo?e tokom unakrsnog
ispitivanja utvrditi da li je novinar - svedok ta?no
preneo re?i onoga koga je intervjuisao? Odgovor je:
ni na koji na?in. Stoga Forum smatra da su ovakva
svedo?enja nista drugo do svedo?enja iz druge ruke
(rekla-kazala) najviseg ranga. Tokom svedo?enja g.
Erika Bakarda, eksperta za sudsku medicinu, sudija
Mej je prihvatio njegov stav da test parafinske
rukavice predstavlja zastarelu forenzi?ku tehniku
(?ak i u slu?aju kada 37 testiranih u?esnika istog
dogadjaja testira pozitivno). U skladu s tim, Forum
o?ekuje od sudije Meja i poziva Tribunal da takodje,
prihvati moderne standarde i u oblasti svedo?enja iz
druge ruke i ovakvu vrstu svedo?enja (rekla-kazala)
proglasi neprihvatljivom. Forum je takodje zabrinut
zbog do sada nedovoljno definisanog prava g.
Milosevi?a da ponovo ispituje svedoke nakon sto ih
je tu?ilastvo izlo?ilo dodatnom unakrsnom
ispitivanju. Do sada ovo pravo je sudija Mej g.
Milosevi?u dodeljivao arbitrarno. Ve?e kona?no mora
odrediti kada i do koje mere g. Milosevi? mo?e
koristiti ovo pravo.
Forum tako|e isti?e ?iwenicu da u ovoj novoj fazi
postupka Kancelarija tu?ilastva pose?e za totalno
neprihvatljivom praksom koja se sastoji od
podnosenja pisanih izjava svedoka koje se kasnije,
prilikom njihovog usmenog svedo?enja, poka?u kao -
neta?ne. Sada nije vise nista novo da svedoci pred
Ve?em izjave da uopste nisu izjavili ono sto stoji u
"njihovim" pisanim izjavama (svedoci Samard?i?,
Lazarevi? itd.). "Ovakva praksa tu?ilastva se
grani?i sa krivokletstvom", izjavila je gdja
Ljiljana Smajlovi?, dopisnik NIN-a iz Haga. Forum
isti?e da je odista za najdublju zabrinutost to sto
sudsko Ve?e do sada nije osetilo potrebu da opomene
ili ukori tu?ilastvo zbog ovog blatantnog krsewa
prava na posteno sudjenje g. Milosevi?a.
Forum takodje bele?i izjavu sudije Meja koja se ti?e
odgovornosti za razbijanje bivse Jugoslavije. "To je
pitanje o kome ?e Ve?e morati da odlu?i", saopstio
je sudija Mej za vreme svedo?enja Stjepana Mesi?a,
hrvatskog Predsednika. Forum smatra da je pitanje
odgovornosti za razbijanje SFRJ nesto o ?emu sudsko
Ve?e, niti Tribunal, nisu nadle?ni da odlu?uju. To
pitanje nije predmet sudjenja g. Milosevi?u. Ali ?ak
i da jeste, sudija Mej je dobio odgovor o
odgovornosti od samog g. Mesi?a i to 10. oktobra.
Prilikom optu?ivanja g. Milosevi?a za razbijanje
SFRJ prakti?no za sve, g. Mesi? je izjavio pred
Ve?em " da su on i g Ku?an bili za labavu
konfederaciju, dok je on, g. Milosevi?, bio za
?vrstu jugoslovensku federaciju. U takvoj situaciji,
mi (Hrvatska i Slovenija) smo odlu?ili da odemo, da
se odvojimo". Ova izjava g. Mesi?a je potpuno jasna.
Medjutim, ono sto Forumu nije jasno je slede?e: kako
neko ko je bio za ?vrstu jugoslovensku federaciju
istovremeno mo?e biti odgovoran za njen raspad!?
Pozivamo sudsko Ve?e da ponovo pro?ita zapisnik
sudjenja od 10. oktobra i najzad shvati istinu za
sebe.
Na kraju, Forum zapa?a izra?enu zabrinutostkoju je
Ve?e izrazilo 1. novembra povodom okon?anja
sudjenja, kao i za stanje zdravlja g. Milosevi?a.
Imaju?i u vidu da se on sam brani, da je prosto
zatrpan ogromnom koli?inom dokumenata kojima ga
zasipa tu?ilastvo, kao da je i stanje njegovog
zdravlja daleko od zadovoljavaju?eg, pozivamo sudsko
Ve?e da napravi presedan i po slu?benoj du?nosti
donese odluku o privremenom pustanju g Milosevi?a i
njegovoj odbrani sa slobode. Jedino takva odluka i
odbrana sa haske adrese mo?e sa?uvati zdravlje g.
Milosevi?a. Isto tako, jedino takvom odlukom se mo?e
obezbediti jednakost strana (tj.oru?ja) u postupku,
a ta ravnopravnost izmedju tu?ilastva i g.
Milosevi?a je trenutno - nepostoje?a. Briga o
bezbednosti g. Milosevi?a (spre?avanje eventualnih
napada na njegovu li?nost) koji bi se eventualnom
sudskom odlukom branio sa haske adrese ne mo?e imati
ve?u te?inu od brige za njegovo zdravlje. Ovo sudsko
ve?e mora imati u vidu.
BEOGRADSKI FORUM ZA SVET RAVNOPRAVNIH
11000 Beograd, Misarska 6/II, Jugoslavija
Tel./Fax: (++381 11) 3245601
E-Mail: info@...
www.belgrade-forum.org
ZASTITE ZIVOT PREDSEDNIKA MILOSEVICA (8/11/2002)
2. APEL BEOGRADSKOG FORUMA ZA URGENTNO LE?ENJE SLOBODANA MILOSEVI?A
IZVAN ZATVORA (7/11/2002)
3. SUDJENJE SLOBODANU MILOSEVI?U: SAOPSTENJE ZA JAVNOST BEOGRADSKOG
FORUMA (4/11/2002)
=== 1 ===
Subject: SPS za zivot i slobodu predsednika Milosevica
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 14:25:29 +0100
From: "Vladimir Krsljanin"
SOCIJALISTICKA PARTIJA SRBIJE
ZAHTEVA OD DRZAVNIH ORGANA I MEDJUNARODNIH INSTITUCIJA
DA ZASTITE ZIVOT PREDSEDNIKA MILOSEVICA
Zivot predsednika Slobodana Milosevica je u opasnosti. To potvrdjuju i
lekari koji su ga pregledali. I sam Tribunal u Hagu priznaje da je
okoncanje procesa ovim dovedeno u pitanje.
Najadekvatniji nacin da se izbegne tragedija je da predsednik
Milosevic odmah zapocne lecenje i oporavak u svojoj zemlji, pod
nadzorom lekara koji dobro poznaju njegovo zdravstveno stanje.
Apelujemo na sve ljude dobre volje - u Srbiji, Jugoslaviji,
jugoslovenskoj dijaspori, Evropi, Americi, u citavom svetu - da daju
podrsku i pridruze se zahtevu za njegovo urgentno lecenje izvan
zatvora, kao i za dalju odbranu sa slobode.
Podsecamo na Rezoluciju Generalne skupstine UN broj 3794, od 18. 12.
1982. godine, koja nalaze doktorima medicine i drugom zdravstvenom
osoblju da licima koja su u pritvoru ili zatvoru "pruze lecenje istog
kvaliteta i u skladu sa istim normama kao i za lica koja nisu u
zatvoru ili pritvoru", kao i na cl. 6. Kodeksa ponasanja lica
odgovornih za primenu zakona koji je donela Generalna skupstina OUN
17. 12. 1979. godine, koji obavezuje sve sudove da vode racuna o
potpunoj zastiti zdravlja ljudi.
Jugoslovenskoj i svetskoj javosti je poznato da Slobodanu Milosevicu u
Seveningenu, nije pruzana zdravstvena zastita u skladu sa tim odlukama
UN, drugim medjunarodnim standardima, niti u Seveningenu postoje
uslovi za to. Naprotiv, uslovi pritvora i nacin rada samog tribunala,
glavni su razlog pogorsanja njegovog zdravstvenog stanja. Svima je
poznato da je predsednik Milosevic namerno zatrpan ogromnom kolicinom
pisanog i drugog materijala tuzilastva, cije citanje i pregled,
prevazilaze mogucnosti ljudskog bica.
To, kao i intenzitet sudjenja i drugih obaveza predsednika Milosevica
u vezi sa postupkom, narusavanje njegovih prava na svakodnevni odmor -
predstavljaju glavne uzroke ubrzanog narusavanja njegovog zdravlja.
"Tribunal" se oglusio o misljenje medicinskih strucnjaka, ostavio
predsednika Milosevica bez ikakvog lekarskog nadzora i cak povecao
trajanje i intenzitet dnevnih obaveza u takozvanom sudjenju.
Jugoslovenske vlasti nisu dosad nista preduzele da se predsedniku
Milosevicu obezbedi fer sudjenje, pomogne njegova odbrana i zastite
njegova ljudska prava, a pre svega pravo na zdravlje i odgovarajucu
lekarsku negu.
Podsecamo vlasti Jugoslavije i Srbije da imaju izricitu ustavnu
obavezu da svojim drzavljanima u inostranstvu pruze odgovarajucu
zastitu kao sto to cine druge drzave stiteci svoje drzavljane i
drzavno dostojanstvo. Pozivamo ih da tu svoju obavezu izvrse prema
Slobodanu Milosevicu, tako sto ce od Saveta bezbednosti u Njujorku,
Komisije za ljudska prava u Zenevi, i od "tribunala" u Hagu zvanicno
zatraziti prekid postupka radi lecenja i oporavka Slobodana Milosevica
u Jugoslaviji, pod nadzorom njegovih licnih lekara, do potpunog
izlecenja i dati odgovarajuce drzavne garancije.
Upucujemo apel Generalnoj skupstini, Savetu bezbednosti i nevladinim
organizacijama u sistemu Ujedinjenih nacija, kao i onima izvan tog
sistema, da podrze ovu humanitarnu inicijativu i na taj nacin
doprinesu zastiti zivota i osnovnih ljudskih prava Slobodana
Milosevica.
Pozivamo sve intelektualce, advokate, naucnike, politicare, umetnike,
javne licnosti i njihova udruzenje iz citavog sveta da podrze ove
humanitarne zahteve.
Dvojica pritvorenika su vec izgubili zivot u Hagu, a jos dvojica su
oslobodjeni prekasno, odnosno, tek kada im, po opstoj oceni, vise nije
bilo spasa. To vise ne sme da se ponovi. Mora se spreciti zlocin pod
okriljem UN.
Polazeci od ljudske i medicinske etike, kao i od osnovnih normi
medjunarodnog humanitarnog prava, Socijalisticka partija Srbije
zahteva od svih odgovornih u zemlji i svetu da ispune svoje obaveze,
zastite ljudski zivot i ne dozvole da budu saucesnici u zlocinu.
Usvajajuci ove stavove, Izvrsni odbor Glavnog odbora SPS usvojio
je i plan konkretnih aktivnosti poslanickih grupa, organa Partije na
svim nivoima i partijskog clanstva, koje, s obzirom na tezinu i
dramaticnost situacije, nece prestajati do konacnog ispunjenja
zahteva.
Beograd, 8. novembra 2002. g.
To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sps.org.yu/ (official SPS website)
http://www.belgrade-forum.org/ (forum for the world of equals)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)
icdsm temporary address:
http://emperor.vwh.net/icdsm/index.htm
for your donations:
http://emperor.vwh.net/icdsm/donations.htm
=== 2 ===
www.artel.co.yu
office@...
Datum: 07 novembar 2002
APEL BEOGRADSKOG FORUMA
ZA URGENTNO LE?ENJE SLOBODANA MILOSEVI?A IZVAN ZATVORA
BEOGRADSKI FORUM ZA SVET RAVNOPRAVNIH
07. novembar 2002. godine
Zdravlje G-dina Slobodana Milosevi?a, bivseg jugoslovenskog
predsednika, pogorsalo se poslednjih sedmica do te mere da je njegov
?ivot u opasnosti. Apelujemo na sve ljude dobre volje ' u Srbiji,
Jugoslaviji, jugoslovenskoj dijaspori, Evropi, Americi, u ?itavom
svetu ' da daju podrsku i pridru?e se zahtevu za njegovo urgentno
le?enje izvan zatvora, kao i za odbranu sa slobode.
Zdravlje G-dina Milosevi?a neprekidno se pogorsavalo od njegovog
zatvaranja u pritvorsku jedinicu u Seveningenu, da bi poslednjih
sedmica, po priznanju samog sudijskog ve?a, postalo alarmantno.
Sedmodnevna pauza u sudjenju koja je u toku, ne mo?e resiti ovaj
problem i otkloniti opasnost po ?ivot G-dina MIlosevi?a, osim prekida
procesa i omogu?avanja le?enja izvan zatvora, do potpunog izle?enja.
Podse?amo na Rezoluciju skupstine UN broj 3794, od 18. 12. 1982.
godine, koja nala?e doktorima medicine i drugom zdravstvenom osoblju
da licima koja su u pritvoru ili zatvoru "pru?e le?enje istog
kvaliteta i u skladu sa istim normama kao i za lica koja nisu u
zatvoru ili pritvoru", kao i na ?l. 6 Kodeksa po9nasanja lica
odgovornih za primenu zakona koji je donela Generalna skupstina OUN
17. 12. 1979. godine, koji obavezuje sve sudove da vode ra?una o
potpunoj zastiti zdravlja ljudi.
Jugoslovenskoj i svetskoj javnosti je poznato da Slobodanu Milosevi?u
u Seveningenu nije pru?ana zdravstvena zastita u skladu sa tim
odlukama UN, drugim medjunarodnim standardima, niti u Seveningenu
postoje uslovi za to.
Takodje je poznato da je Milosevi? namerno zatrpan ogromnom koli?inom
pisanog i drugog materijala tu?ilastva, ?ije ?itanje i pregled
prevazilazi mogu?nosti ljudskog bi?a. To, kao i intenzitet sudjenja i
drugih obaveza gospodina Milosevi?a u vezi sa postupkom, narusavanje
njegovih prava na dnevni odmor - predstavljaju dopdatne uzroke
ubrzanog narusavanja njegovog zdravlja.
Zato se obra?amo predsedniku Tribunala G-dinu Klodu ?ordi i
predsedavaju?em sudiji Ri?ardu Meju da prekinu postupak i omogu?e
le?enje Slobodana Milosevi?a izvan zatvora, u skladu sa medjunarodnim
standardima, u odgovaraju?oj zdravstvenoj ustanovi u Jugoslaviji, uz
anga?ovanje njegovih li?nih lekara do potpunog izle?enja.
Jugoslovenske vlasti nisu dosad nista preduzele da se Slobodanu
Milosevi?u obezbedi fer sudjenje, ppomogne njegova odbrana i zastite
njegova ljudska prava, a pre svega pravo na zdravlje i odgovaraju?u
lekarsku negu.
Podse?amo vlasti Jugoslavije i Srbije da imaju izri?itu ustavnu
obavezu da svojim dr?avljanima u inostranstvu pru?e odgovaraju?u
zastitu kao sto to ?ine druge dr?ave stite?i svoje dr?avljane i
dr?avno dostaojanstvo. Pozivamo ih da tu svoju obavezu izvrse prema
Slobodanu Milosevi?u, tako sto ?e od Saveta bezbednosti u Njujorku,
Komisije za ljudska prava u ?enevi, i od Medjunarodnog haskog
tribunala zvani?no zatra?iti prekid postupka radi le?enja Slobodana
Milosevi?a u Jugoslaviji, od strane njegovih li?nih lekara, do
potpunog izle?enja i da ti odgovaraju?e dr?avne garancije.
Upu?ujemo apel Generalnoj skupstini , Savetu bezbednosti i nevladinim
organizacijama u sistemu Ujedinjenih nacija, kao i onima izvan tog
sistema, da podr?e ovu humanitarnu inicijativu i na taj na?in
doprinesu zastiti osnovnih ljudskih prava Slobodana Milosevi?a.
Pozivamo sve intelektualce, advokate, nau?nike, politi?are, umetnike,
javne li?nosti i njihova udru?enja iz ?itavog sveta da podr?e ove
humanitarne zahteve.
Bilo je dosta tragi?nih slu?ajeva Srba zatvorenih u Seveningenu da bi
se nebrigom odgovornih i ?utanjem ljudi dobre volje - dopustili novi,
pod znamenjem UN.
=== 3 ===
www.artel.co.yu
office@...
Datum: 06 novembar 2002
SUDJENJE SLOBODANU MILOSEVI?U: SAOPSTENJE ZA
JAVNOST BEOGRADSKOG FORUMA (4)
BEOGRADSKI FORUM ZA SVET RAVNOPRAVNIH
U Beogradu, 4. novembar 2002. godine
Beogradski forum za svet ravnopravnih (Forum)
izra?ava svoju najdublju zabrinutost zbog
prihvatanja svedo?enja iz druge ruke na sudjenju g.
Slobodanu Milosevi?u pred Medjunarodnim krivi?nim
tribunalom za bivsu Jugoslaviju (ICTY). Ovo pitanje
je ponovo isplivalo na povrsinu na po?etku procesa
za Hrvatsku i Bosnu, kada je Predsedavaju?i sudija
Mej objavio da ?e ovakva svedo?enja biti prihva?ena.
On je takodje naveo da su takva svedo?enja
"prihvatljiva u gradjansko-pravnim (kontinentalnim)
pravnim sistemima". Forum odlu?no protestuje protiv
ovakvih pravno neodr?ivih koncepcija i ose?a se
obaveznim da ospori ovakav stav sudije Meja.
U modernim kontinentalnim pravnim sistemima svedok
je definisan kao neko ko ima NEPOSREDNO opa?anje
dogadjaja koji je video ili na drugi na?in LI?NO
do?iveo. U jugoslovenskom krivi?nom procesnom pravu
ni jedan optu?eni ne mo?e biti osudjen za krivi?no
delo na osnovu svedo?enja svedoka koji bi izjavio da
je o tom delu ?uo iz medija ili od nekog drugog
lica. Ni jedan jugoslovenski krivi?ni sud ne bi
dozvolio tu?ilastvu da takvog svedoka izvede da
svedo?i, jer bi to bilo bespredmetno. Drugim re?ima,
jugoslovensko krivi?no procesno pravo ne poznaje
praksu po kojoj bi neko bio osudjen za, recimo,
krivi?no delo ubistva na osnovu svedo?enja svedoka
koji bi izjavio da je za to delo ?uo sa televizije,
od nekoga drugog ili da je o njemu ?itao u novinama.
Tvrdimo da takvu praksu ne poznaju ni ameri?ki ni
britanski precedentni pravni sistemi.
Ovo pitanje je ponovo zaostreno sa pojavom novinara
u ulozi svedoka koji su svedo?ili o svojim
intervjuima sa odredjenim licima (kao g.
Anastasijevi?, na primer). Osnovni problem ovde je:
na koji na?in g. Milosevi? mo?e tokom unakrsnog
ispitivanja utvrditi da li je novinar - svedok ta?no
preneo re?i onoga koga je intervjuisao? Odgovor je:
ni na koji na?in. Stoga Forum smatra da su ovakva
svedo?enja nista drugo do svedo?enja iz druge ruke
(rekla-kazala) najviseg ranga. Tokom svedo?enja g.
Erika Bakarda, eksperta za sudsku medicinu, sudija
Mej je prihvatio njegov stav da test parafinske
rukavice predstavlja zastarelu forenzi?ku tehniku
(?ak i u slu?aju kada 37 testiranih u?esnika istog
dogadjaja testira pozitivno). U skladu s tim, Forum
o?ekuje od sudije Meja i poziva Tribunal da takodje,
prihvati moderne standarde i u oblasti svedo?enja iz
druge ruke i ovakvu vrstu svedo?enja (rekla-kazala)
proglasi neprihvatljivom. Forum je takodje zabrinut
zbog do sada nedovoljno definisanog prava g.
Milosevi?a da ponovo ispituje svedoke nakon sto ih
je tu?ilastvo izlo?ilo dodatnom unakrsnom
ispitivanju. Do sada ovo pravo je sudija Mej g.
Milosevi?u dodeljivao arbitrarno. Ve?e kona?no mora
odrediti kada i do koje mere g. Milosevi? mo?e
koristiti ovo pravo.
Forum tako|e isti?e ?iwenicu da u ovoj novoj fazi
postupka Kancelarija tu?ilastva pose?e za totalno
neprihvatljivom praksom koja se sastoji od
podnosenja pisanih izjava svedoka koje se kasnije,
prilikom njihovog usmenog svedo?enja, poka?u kao -
neta?ne. Sada nije vise nista novo da svedoci pred
Ve?em izjave da uopste nisu izjavili ono sto stoji u
"njihovim" pisanim izjavama (svedoci Samard?i?,
Lazarevi? itd.). "Ovakva praksa tu?ilastva se
grani?i sa krivokletstvom", izjavila je gdja
Ljiljana Smajlovi?, dopisnik NIN-a iz Haga. Forum
isti?e da je odista za najdublju zabrinutost to sto
sudsko Ve?e do sada nije osetilo potrebu da opomene
ili ukori tu?ilastvo zbog ovog blatantnog krsewa
prava na posteno sudjenje g. Milosevi?a.
Forum takodje bele?i izjavu sudije Meja koja se ti?e
odgovornosti za razbijanje bivse Jugoslavije. "To je
pitanje o kome ?e Ve?e morati da odlu?i", saopstio
je sudija Mej za vreme svedo?enja Stjepana Mesi?a,
hrvatskog Predsednika. Forum smatra da je pitanje
odgovornosti za razbijanje SFRJ nesto o ?emu sudsko
Ve?e, niti Tribunal, nisu nadle?ni da odlu?uju. To
pitanje nije predmet sudjenja g. Milosevi?u. Ali ?ak
i da jeste, sudija Mej je dobio odgovor o
odgovornosti od samog g. Mesi?a i to 10. oktobra.
Prilikom optu?ivanja g. Milosevi?a za razbijanje
SFRJ prakti?no za sve, g. Mesi? je izjavio pred
Ve?em " da su on i g Ku?an bili za labavu
konfederaciju, dok je on, g. Milosevi?, bio za
?vrstu jugoslovensku federaciju. U takvoj situaciji,
mi (Hrvatska i Slovenija) smo odlu?ili da odemo, da
se odvojimo". Ova izjava g. Mesi?a je potpuno jasna.
Medjutim, ono sto Forumu nije jasno je slede?e: kako
neko ko je bio za ?vrstu jugoslovensku federaciju
istovremeno mo?e biti odgovoran za njen raspad!?
Pozivamo sudsko Ve?e da ponovo pro?ita zapisnik
sudjenja od 10. oktobra i najzad shvati istinu za
sebe.
Na kraju, Forum zapa?a izra?enu zabrinutostkoju je
Ve?e izrazilo 1. novembra povodom okon?anja
sudjenja, kao i za stanje zdravlja g. Milosevi?a.
Imaju?i u vidu da se on sam brani, da je prosto
zatrpan ogromnom koli?inom dokumenata kojima ga
zasipa tu?ilastvo, kao da je i stanje njegovog
zdravlja daleko od zadovoljavaju?eg, pozivamo sudsko
Ve?e da napravi presedan i po slu?benoj du?nosti
donese odluku o privremenom pustanju g Milosevi?a i
njegovoj odbrani sa slobode. Jedino takva odluka i
odbrana sa haske adrese mo?e sa?uvati zdravlje g.
Milosevi?a. Isto tako, jedino takvom odlukom se mo?e
obezbediti jednakost strana (tj.oru?ja) u postupku,
a ta ravnopravnost izmedju tu?ilastva i g.
Milosevi?a je trenutno - nepostoje?a. Briga o
bezbednosti g. Milosevi?a (spre?avanje eventualnih
napada na njegovu li?nost) koji bi se eventualnom
sudskom odlukom branio sa haske adrese ne mo?e imati
ve?u te?inu od brige za njegovo zdravlje. Ovo sudsko
ve?e mora imati u vidu.
BEOGRADSKI FORUM ZA SVET RAVNOPRAVNIH
11000 Beograd, Misarska 6/II, Jugoslavija
Tel./Fax: (++381 11) 3245601
E-Mail: info@...
www.belgrade-forum.org
1. NATO bombing of Yugoslav factories may have health and
environmental effects - with implications for Iraq, study says
[ In base ad uno studio, il bombardamento delle fabbriche jugoslave da
parte della NATO puo' avere effetti sulla salute e sull'ambiente. Le
implicazioni per l'Iraq ]
(Environmental News Network, 5/11/2002)
2. Yugoslavia Bombs May Harm Environment
[ Le bombe sulla Jugoslavia possono danneggiare l'ambiente ]
(AP 5/11/2002)
3. Ancora senza esito l'esposto della Uil Puglia sui militari italiani
impegnati nell'ex Jugoslavia
(Barisera 1 giugno 2002)
Altri articoli d'archivio sul DU sul sito dell' OSSERVATORIO MONOPOLI
4. Depleted Uranium: UN addresses issue
[ Uranio impoverito: l'ONU considera il problema ]
UNEP Team Terminates DU Inspection of Bosnia
[ Il team UNEP conclude le ispezioni sul D.U. in Bosnia ]
(PRAVDA.Ru 7/11/2002, 23/10/2002)
5. URAN-MUNITION GEFUNDEN
[ Trovate munizioni all'Uranio impoverito ]
(B92/SRNA 2/11/2002)
=== 1 ===
http://www.enn.com/news/wire-stories/2002/11/11052002/ap_48881.asp
Environmental News Network
NATO bombing of Yugoslav factories may have health and
environmental effects - with implications for Iraq,
study says
Tuesday, November 05, 2002
By Edith M. Lederer, Associated Press
UNITED NATIONS - The bombing of factories during the
1999 NATO air campaign in Yugoslavia may have
long-term environmental and health effects, a new
environmental report says, raising questions about
targets in possible future conflicts such as Iraq.
The report, obtained Monday by the Associated Press,
warns that precision bombing of industrial facilities
can lead to contamination that is very difficult to
clean up and may violate international humanitarian
law.
Civilians living near the targets may also be exposed
to greater health risks from contamination of the air,
water, and food products, said the report by the
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, a
nonprofit organization based near Washington that
investigates scientific issues.
"Precision targeting may be intended to minimize
civilian damage, but the choice of targets may still
violate the international laws of war, including the
Geneva Conventions," said Nicole Deller, a lawyer and
co-author of the study. "The deliberate targeting of
industrial facilities that hold little military value
yet can cause severe health and environmental damage
appear to violate these laws."
The study noted that "precision weapons have been used
in Afghanistan and are likely to be a major part of
the military strategy in any proposed war with Iraq if
it is carried out."
The institute expressed hope that legal, health, and
environmental issues raised by the study will be
applied to other armed conflicts. It said these issues
"should not be dismissed out of hand because countries
are ruled by ruthless dictators."
The institute studied the NATO bombings of the Zastava
car factory in Kragujevac, some 100 kilometers (60
miles) south of Belgrade, and a petrochemical plant, a
fertilizer plant, and an oil refinery in Pancevo,
about 20 kilometers (12 miles) northeast of the
capital. The two sites were designated as
environmental "hot spots" by the U.N. Environment
Program Balkans Task Force as a result of the
bombings.
"There is no doubt that the bombings released large
quantities of contaminants such as mercury, but it is
impossible to precisely determine their effects
because of lack of data about pre-conflict pollution
levels," said Sriram Gopal, a scientist at the
institute who was the report's main author.
In Pancevo, the bombings resulted in major releases of
the toxic chemicals dichloroethane and mercury,
pollution created by bomb-related fires, and other
environmental damage, the report said. In Kragujevac,
bombed transformer stations at the car factory leaked
toxic PCBs or polychlorinated biphenyls, which have
been linked to some cancers.
The institute said its investigation was hampered
because the U.S. Department of Defense rejected its
Freedom of Information Act request for the targeting
criteria used during the bombings, handing over 42
blank pages that were marked declassified. An analysis
of the Yugoslav bombing campaign carried out this year
by the U.S. General Accounting Office, the
investigative arm of Congress, also remains
classified, it said.
Despite these setbacks and the incomplete data, the
institute said the report shows the need to redefine
how targets are chosen and how collateral damage
caused by a bombing attack is evaluated. "Currently
collateral damage is measured in terms such as the
number of civilian casualties or the cost of replacing
property," Gopal said. "Long-term harm to the
environment can be much more difficult to quantify and
evaluate, despite its very significant costs."
In the case of the two Yugoslav sites, the study said,
the PCBs and mercury and some of the other pollutants
last for generations in the environment and can have
long-term effects on the health of civilians living
nearby.
"As modern warfare becomes more technologically
sophisticated and targeting more precise, it is
essential not to succumb to the idea that the damage
on the ground is also precise and limited," the
institute said. "As this study indicates, the health
and environmental consequences of precision bombing
can affect unborn generations far into the future,
even when the bombs are entirely successful in finding
their targets."
=== 2 ===
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20021105/ap_on_re_eu/un_p=
recision_bombing_2
Yugoslavia Bombs May Harm Environment
Tue Nov 5, 5:18 PM ET
By EDITH M. LEDERER, Associated Press Writer
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The bombing of factories during the 1999 NATO
air campaign in Yugoslavia may have long-term effects on health,
raising questions about targets in possible future conflicts such as
Iraq, according to a new report by an environmental group.
Precision bombing of industrial plants can lead to contamination that
is difficult to remove and may violate international humanitarian law,
the report found.
Civilians living near the targets may also be exposed to greater
health risks from contamination of the air, water, and food, said the
report released this week by the Institute for Energy and
Environmental Research, a research organization based in Takoma Park,
Md.
Maj. Robert Ditchey, a spokesman for the U.S. European Command, said
Tuesday he could not comment on the report because the military had
not seen it. Ditchey referred questions to NATO, where a spokesman did
not return telephone messages Tuesday.
The study noted that "precision weapons have been used in Afghanistan
and are likely to be a major part of the military strategy in any
proposed war with Iraq."
It called on countries to consider the legal, health and environmental
issues raised by attacking industrial targets and the collateral
damage caused by bombing.
These issues "should not be dismissed out of hand because countries
are ruled by ruthless dictators," the study said.
"Currently collateral damage is measured in terms such as the number
of civilian casualties or the cost of replacing property," said Sriram
Gopal, the report's main author. "Long-term harm to the environment
can be much more difficult to quantify and evaluate, despite its very
significant costs."
Co-author Nicole Deller, a lawyer, said that "precision targeting may
be intended to minimize civilian damage, but the choice of targets may
still violate the international laws of war, including the Geneva
Conventions."
"The deliberate targeting of industrial facilities that hold little
military value yet can cause severe health and environmental damage
appear to violate these laws," she said.
The institute studied the NATO bombing of an industrial complex in
Pancevo which resulted in releases of the toxic chemicals
dichloroethane and mercury. It also studied the bombing of the Zastava
car factory in Kragujevac, 60 miles south of Belgrade, where a
transformer station leaked toxic PCBs or polychlorinated biphenyls -
which have been linked to some cancers.
Gopal said it was impossible to precisely determine the effects of the
bombings because of a lack of data pollution in the area before the
conflict.
The institute said its investigation was hampered because the
Department of Defense rejected its Freedom of Information Act request
for targeting criteria used during the Yugoslav bombings. An analysis
of the Yugoslav bombing campaign by the General Accounting Office also
remains classified, it said.
=== 3 ===
http://www.osservatoriomonopoli.it/Curiosit%c3%a0/Curiosit%c3%a0_080602_uranio.htm
Ancora senza esito l'esposto della Uil Puglia sui militari italiani
impegnati nell'ex Jugoslavia
Uranio impoverito e dimenticato
Barisera 1 giugno 2002
La notizia secondo cui 200 militari italiani impegnati negli anni
scorsi in missioni nella ex Jugoslavia (e venuti a contatto con il
famigerato uranio impoverito contenuto negli ordigni Nato), siano
ammalati di tumore, riporta di attualità una vicenda che le autorità
istituzionali della Puglia hanno purtroppo sottovalutato.
Preoccupazione è stata espressa dalla Uil di Puglia che ha presentato
già a gennaio del 2000 un esposto alla Procura della Repubblica del
Tribunale di Bari, chiedendo che il Ministero della Difesa rispondesse
di lesioni personali e omicidio colposo in merito alla morte di alcuni
militari italiani che avevano prestato servizio per le missioni in
Bosnia ed in Kosovo e che sarebbero venuti a contatto con il micidiale
uranio impoverito.
"E' un esposto di cui ad oggi non si ha ancora alcuna risposta - dice
il segretario generale, Aldo Pugliese - eppure non soltanto si sono
registrate morti sospette tra i soldati di altri eserciti che hanno
prestato servizio nei Balcani, ma si registra anche la nascita di
sette bambini con malformazioni, figli di altrettanti militari
italiani di stanza in quella zona".
Nell'esposto è stata riportata la tesi del prof. Sandro Degetto,
dell'Istituto di Chimica e delle tecnologie inorganiche e dei
materiali avanzati, del Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche di Padova,
secondo la quale "ci sono rischi per l'organismo umano, in particolare
per il rene, con effetti sui tessuti che possono provocare gravi casi
di insufficienza renale nonché la comparsa di proteine nelle urine".
Per la Uil, che ha dato incarico di procedere all'avv. Nicola
Putignano, esisteva, ed esiste, il pericolo che si aprissero scenari
delicatissimi per la salute pubblica e per la Puglia.
La Uil ha lanciato un appello alla Regione Puglia perché si attivi
sulla vicenda, anche in considerazione del fatto che durante la guerra
in Kosovo dalle basi pugliesi di Amendola e Gioia del Colle partivano
i jet della Nato su cui venivano caricate le bombe ad uranio
impoverito.
Non solo. "C'é la questione della bonifica del mare Adriatico -
puntualizza Pugliese - nel quale i velivoli hanno scaricato centinaia,
forse migliaia, di ordigni inesplosi che giacciono ancora sul fondo.
E' stata promessa una bonifica che non è mai stata attuata. L'erosione
del mare potrebbe provocare fuoriuscita di materiale che inquinerebbe
il mare stesso, con grave e conseguente danno per la salute di tutti,
visto che il pesce pescato in Adriatico è quello che finisce sulle
nostre tavole".
GLI ALTRI ARTICOLI SUL D.U. SUL SITO DELL'OSSERVATORIO MONOPOLI:
http://www.osservatoriomonopoli.it/Curiosit%c3%a0.htm
Il poligono della paura
In principio fu la sindrome del Golfo, con migliaia di veterani
statunitensi che rientravano dall'Iraq e si ammalavano. Poi vennero la
Somalia, la Bosnia, il Kosovo. E l'uranio impoverito cominciò a
spaventare anche i soldati italiani, inviati in missione di pace senza
sapere che il vero nemico poteva essere l'aria che respiravano. -
Panorama maggio 2002 - Francesca Folda
«Uranio, sono malati sette figli di soldati»
Denuncia a Rainews 24: i militari italiani erano stati in Bosnia e
Somalia Colpiti da leucemie e malformazioni neurologiche. Chiesto
l'intervento del ministro Martino - Corriere della sera 27 aprile
2002
Al sito: http://www.osservatoriomonopoli.it/Curiosit%c3%a0.htm
=== 4 ===
http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/11/07/39269.html
PRAVDA (RUSSIA)
16:49 2002-11-07
Depleted Uranium: UN addresses issue
In a message to the international community on the occasion of the
International day for Preventing the Exp+loitation of the Environment
in War and Armed Conflict, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan
specifically referred to Depleted Uranium yesterday, stating that it
was damaging to the environment.
It will be remembered that US military aircraft deployed tonnes of
weapons coated or tipped with depleted uranium in southern Iraq and in
Yugoslavia during conflicts in the 1990s. Systematic claims by the
Iraqi Health Authorities, published in Pravda.Ru, were scorned or
ignored and constant complaints by the Yugoslav authorities concerning
alarmingly high clusters of cancerous diseases among civilians living
near areas in which DU weaponry was deployed, were investigated - but
met with systematic denial by the Pentagon and by NATO.
In his speech, Kofi Annan stated that "While environmental damage is a
common consequence of war, it should never be a deliberate
aim.although international conventions govern nuclear, chemical and
biological weapons, new technologies, such as depleted uranium
ammunition, threaten the environment".
Timothy BANCROFT-HINCHEY
PRAVDA.Ru
http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/10/23/38596.html
20:06 2002-10-23
UNEP Team Terminates DU Inspection of Bosnia
UNEP terminates its inspection of sites suspected of being targeted by
Depleted uranium military ordnance during the conflict in
Bosnia-Herzegovina in the 1990s, according to UNEP sources.
Samples of water, soil, vegetation and air have been taken from six
sites identified by NATO as possibly having been targeted with DU,
while six other sites denounced by local residents as being
radioactive have also been inspected.
WHO experts are analysing data on increased rates of cancer in cluster
areas around where DU ordnance was supposedly deployed, namely in
Sarajevo and Banya Luka.
Pekka Haavisto, Chairman of the Depleted Uranium Assessment Team of
UNEP, stated that the purpose of the visit was to assess whether or
not DU ordnance posed a health risk to the local population "either
now or in the future".
Previous studies conducted in Kosovo and Southern Serbia led to
recommendations by UNEP that local populations should take
precautionary action "to avoid contact with the substance", described
by WHO sources as having "significant chemical toxicity".
Timothy BANCROFT-HINCHEY
PRAVDA.Ru
=== 5 ===
TROVATI ALMENO 150 PROIETTILI AL DU DURANTE RICERCHE NEI PRESSI DI
BUJANOVAC
Balkan-Telegramm, 02. November 2002 - http://www.amselfeld.com
+++ URAN-MUNITION GEFUNDEN
BUJANOVAC. Im Dorf Bratoselce, Landkreis Bujanovac im Süden
Serbiens, wurden von Experten des Instituts für Nuklearphysik mehr
als 150 Projektile mit angereichertem Uran, welche während der
NATO-Aggression auf die BR Jugoslawien von der NATO benutzt
wurden, gefunden. NATO-Angaben zufolge, haben die Bomber der
nordatlantischen Allianz im Frühjahr 1999 1200 solcher Projektile
abgeworfen. B92 / SRNA +++
environmental effects - with implications for Iraq, study says
[ In base ad uno studio, il bombardamento delle fabbriche jugoslave da
parte della NATO puo' avere effetti sulla salute e sull'ambiente. Le
implicazioni per l'Iraq ]
(Environmental News Network, 5/11/2002)
2. Yugoslavia Bombs May Harm Environment
[ Le bombe sulla Jugoslavia possono danneggiare l'ambiente ]
(AP 5/11/2002)
3. Ancora senza esito l'esposto della Uil Puglia sui militari italiani
impegnati nell'ex Jugoslavia
(Barisera 1 giugno 2002)
Altri articoli d'archivio sul DU sul sito dell' OSSERVATORIO MONOPOLI
4. Depleted Uranium: UN addresses issue
[ Uranio impoverito: l'ONU considera il problema ]
UNEP Team Terminates DU Inspection of Bosnia
[ Il team UNEP conclude le ispezioni sul D.U. in Bosnia ]
(PRAVDA.Ru 7/11/2002, 23/10/2002)
5. URAN-MUNITION GEFUNDEN
[ Trovate munizioni all'Uranio impoverito ]
(B92/SRNA 2/11/2002)
=== 1 ===
http://www.enn.com/news/wire-stories/2002/11/11052002/ap_48881.asp
Environmental News Network
NATO bombing of Yugoslav factories may have health and
environmental effects - with implications for Iraq,
study says
Tuesday, November 05, 2002
By Edith M. Lederer, Associated Press
UNITED NATIONS - The bombing of factories during the
1999 NATO air campaign in Yugoslavia may have
long-term environmental and health effects, a new
environmental report says, raising questions about
targets in possible future conflicts such as Iraq.
The report, obtained Monday by the Associated Press,
warns that precision bombing of industrial facilities
can lead to contamination that is very difficult to
clean up and may violate international humanitarian
law.
Civilians living near the targets may also be exposed
to greater health risks from contamination of the air,
water, and food products, said the report by the
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, a
nonprofit organization based near Washington that
investigates scientific issues.
"Precision targeting may be intended to minimize
civilian damage, but the choice of targets may still
violate the international laws of war, including the
Geneva Conventions," said Nicole Deller, a lawyer and
co-author of the study. "The deliberate targeting of
industrial facilities that hold little military value
yet can cause severe health and environmental damage
appear to violate these laws."
The study noted that "precision weapons have been used
in Afghanistan and are likely to be a major part of
the military strategy in any proposed war with Iraq if
it is carried out."
The institute expressed hope that legal, health, and
environmental issues raised by the study will be
applied to other armed conflicts. It said these issues
"should not be dismissed out of hand because countries
are ruled by ruthless dictators."
The institute studied the NATO bombings of the Zastava
car factory in Kragujevac, some 100 kilometers (60
miles) south of Belgrade, and a petrochemical plant, a
fertilizer plant, and an oil refinery in Pancevo,
about 20 kilometers (12 miles) northeast of the
capital. The two sites were designated as
environmental "hot spots" by the U.N. Environment
Program Balkans Task Force as a result of the
bombings.
"There is no doubt that the bombings released large
quantities of contaminants such as mercury, but it is
impossible to precisely determine their effects
because of lack of data about pre-conflict pollution
levels," said Sriram Gopal, a scientist at the
institute who was the report's main author.
In Pancevo, the bombings resulted in major releases of
the toxic chemicals dichloroethane and mercury,
pollution created by bomb-related fires, and other
environmental damage, the report said. In Kragujevac,
bombed transformer stations at the car factory leaked
toxic PCBs or polychlorinated biphenyls, which have
been linked to some cancers.
The institute said its investigation was hampered
because the U.S. Department of Defense rejected its
Freedom of Information Act request for the targeting
criteria used during the bombings, handing over 42
blank pages that were marked declassified. An analysis
of the Yugoslav bombing campaign carried out this year
by the U.S. General Accounting Office, the
investigative arm of Congress, also remains
classified, it said.
Despite these setbacks and the incomplete data, the
institute said the report shows the need to redefine
how targets are chosen and how collateral damage
caused by a bombing attack is evaluated. "Currently
collateral damage is measured in terms such as the
number of civilian casualties or the cost of replacing
property," Gopal said. "Long-term harm to the
environment can be much more difficult to quantify and
evaluate, despite its very significant costs."
In the case of the two Yugoslav sites, the study said,
the PCBs and mercury and some of the other pollutants
last for generations in the environment and can have
long-term effects on the health of civilians living
nearby.
"As modern warfare becomes more technologically
sophisticated and targeting more precise, it is
essential not to succumb to the idea that the damage
on the ground is also precise and limited," the
institute said. "As this study indicates, the health
and environmental consequences of precision bombing
can affect unborn generations far into the future,
even when the bombs are entirely successful in finding
their targets."
=== 2 ===
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20021105/ap_on_re_eu/un_p=
recision_bombing_2
Yugoslavia Bombs May Harm Environment
Tue Nov 5, 5:18 PM ET
By EDITH M. LEDERER, Associated Press Writer
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The bombing of factories during the 1999 NATO
air campaign in Yugoslavia may have long-term effects on health,
raising questions about targets in possible future conflicts such as
Iraq, according to a new report by an environmental group.
Precision bombing of industrial plants can lead to contamination that
is difficult to remove and may violate international humanitarian law,
the report found.
Civilians living near the targets may also be exposed to greater
health risks from contamination of the air, water, and food, said the
report released this week by the Institute for Energy and
Environmental Research, a research organization based in Takoma Park,
Md.
Maj. Robert Ditchey, a spokesman for the U.S. European Command, said
Tuesday he could not comment on the report because the military had
not seen it. Ditchey referred questions to NATO, where a spokesman did
not return telephone messages Tuesday.
The study noted that "precision weapons have been used in Afghanistan
and are likely to be a major part of the military strategy in any
proposed war with Iraq."
It called on countries to consider the legal, health and environmental
issues raised by attacking industrial targets and the collateral
damage caused by bombing.
These issues "should not be dismissed out of hand because countries
are ruled by ruthless dictators," the study said.
"Currently collateral damage is measured in terms such as the number
of civilian casualties or the cost of replacing property," said Sriram
Gopal, the report's main author. "Long-term harm to the environment
can be much more difficult to quantify and evaluate, despite its very
significant costs."
Co-author Nicole Deller, a lawyer, said that "precision targeting may
be intended to minimize civilian damage, but the choice of targets may
still violate the international laws of war, including the Geneva
Conventions."
"The deliberate targeting of industrial facilities that hold little
military value yet can cause severe health and environmental damage
appear to violate these laws," she said.
The institute studied the NATO bombing of an industrial complex in
Pancevo which resulted in releases of the toxic chemicals
dichloroethane and mercury. It also studied the bombing of the Zastava
car factory in Kragujevac, 60 miles south of Belgrade, where a
transformer station leaked toxic PCBs or polychlorinated biphenyls -
which have been linked to some cancers.
Gopal said it was impossible to precisely determine the effects of the
bombings because of a lack of data pollution in the area before the
conflict.
The institute said its investigation was hampered because the
Department of Defense rejected its Freedom of Information Act request
for targeting criteria used during the Yugoslav bombings. An analysis
of the Yugoslav bombing campaign by the General Accounting Office also
remains classified, it said.
=== 3 ===
http://www.osservatoriomonopoli.it/Curiosit%c3%a0/Curiosit%c3%a0_080602_uranio.htm
Ancora senza esito l'esposto della Uil Puglia sui militari italiani
impegnati nell'ex Jugoslavia
Uranio impoverito e dimenticato
Barisera 1 giugno 2002
La notizia secondo cui 200 militari italiani impegnati negli anni
scorsi in missioni nella ex Jugoslavia (e venuti a contatto con il
famigerato uranio impoverito contenuto negli ordigni Nato), siano
ammalati di tumore, riporta di attualità una vicenda che le autorità
istituzionali della Puglia hanno purtroppo sottovalutato.
Preoccupazione è stata espressa dalla Uil di Puglia che ha presentato
già a gennaio del 2000 un esposto alla Procura della Repubblica del
Tribunale di Bari, chiedendo che il Ministero della Difesa rispondesse
di lesioni personali e omicidio colposo in merito alla morte di alcuni
militari italiani che avevano prestato servizio per le missioni in
Bosnia ed in Kosovo e che sarebbero venuti a contatto con il micidiale
uranio impoverito.
"E' un esposto di cui ad oggi non si ha ancora alcuna risposta - dice
il segretario generale, Aldo Pugliese - eppure non soltanto si sono
registrate morti sospette tra i soldati di altri eserciti che hanno
prestato servizio nei Balcani, ma si registra anche la nascita di
sette bambini con malformazioni, figli di altrettanti militari
italiani di stanza in quella zona".
Nell'esposto è stata riportata la tesi del prof. Sandro Degetto,
dell'Istituto di Chimica e delle tecnologie inorganiche e dei
materiali avanzati, del Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche di Padova,
secondo la quale "ci sono rischi per l'organismo umano, in particolare
per il rene, con effetti sui tessuti che possono provocare gravi casi
di insufficienza renale nonché la comparsa di proteine nelle urine".
Per la Uil, che ha dato incarico di procedere all'avv. Nicola
Putignano, esisteva, ed esiste, il pericolo che si aprissero scenari
delicatissimi per la salute pubblica e per la Puglia.
La Uil ha lanciato un appello alla Regione Puglia perché si attivi
sulla vicenda, anche in considerazione del fatto che durante la guerra
in Kosovo dalle basi pugliesi di Amendola e Gioia del Colle partivano
i jet della Nato su cui venivano caricate le bombe ad uranio
impoverito.
Non solo. "C'é la questione della bonifica del mare Adriatico -
puntualizza Pugliese - nel quale i velivoli hanno scaricato centinaia,
forse migliaia, di ordigni inesplosi che giacciono ancora sul fondo.
E' stata promessa una bonifica che non è mai stata attuata. L'erosione
del mare potrebbe provocare fuoriuscita di materiale che inquinerebbe
il mare stesso, con grave e conseguente danno per la salute di tutti,
visto che il pesce pescato in Adriatico è quello che finisce sulle
nostre tavole".
GLI ALTRI ARTICOLI SUL D.U. SUL SITO DELL'OSSERVATORIO MONOPOLI:
http://www.osservatoriomonopoli.it/Curiosit%c3%a0.htm
Il poligono della paura
In principio fu la sindrome del Golfo, con migliaia di veterani
statunitensi che rientravano dall'Iraq e si ammalavano. Poi vennero la
Somalia, la Bosnia, il Kosovo. E l'uranio impoverito cominciò a
spaventare anche i soldati italiani, inviati in missione di pace senza
sapere che il vero nemico poteva essere l'aria che respiravano. -
Panorama maggio 2002 - Francesca Folda
«Uranio, sono malati sette figli di soldati»
Denuncia a Rainews 24: i militari italiani erano stati in Bosnia e
Somalia Colpiti da leucemie e malformazioni neurologiche. Chiesto
l'intervento del ministro Martino - Corriere della sera 27 aprile
2002
Al sito: http://www.osservatoriomonopoli.it/Curiosit%c3%a0.htm
=== 4 ===
http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/11/07/39269.html
PRAVDA (RUSSIA)
16:49 2002-11-07
Depleted Uranium: UN addresses issue
In a message to the international community on the occasion of the
International day for Preventing the Exp+loitation of the Environment
in War and Armed Conflict, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan
specifically referred to Depleted Uranium yesterday, stating that it
was damaging to the environment.
It will be remembered that US military aircraft deployed tonnes of
weapons coated or tipped with depleted uranium in southern Iraq and in
Yugoslavia during conflicts in the 1990s. Systematic claims by the
Iraqi Health Authorities, published in Pravda.Ru, were scorned or
ignored and constant complaints by the Yugoslav authorities concerning
alarmingly high clusters of cancerous diseases among civilians living
near areas in which DU weaponry was deployed, were investigated - but
met with systematic denial by the Pentagon and by NATO.
In his speech, Kofi Annan stated that "While environmental damage is a
common consequence of war, it should never be a deliberate
aim.although international conventions govern nuclear, chemical and
biological weapons, new technologies, such as depleted uranium
ammunition, threaten the environment".
Timothy BANCROFT-HINCHEY
PRAVDA.Ru
http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/10/23/38596.html
20:06 2002-10-23
UNEP Team Terminates DU Inspection of Bosnia
UNEP terminates its inspection of sites suspected of being targeted by
Depleted uranium military ordnance during the conflict in
Bosnia-Herzegovina in the 1990s, according to UNEP sources.
Samples of water, soil, vegetation and air have been taken from six
sites identified by NATO as possibly having been targeted with DU,
while six other sites denounced by local residents as being
radioactive have also been inspected.
WHO experts are analysing data on increased rates of cancer in cluster
areas around where DU ordnance was supposedly deployed, namely in
Sarajevo and Banya Luka.
Pekka Haavisto, Chairman of the Depleted Uranium Assessment Team of
UNEP, stated that the purpose of the visit was to assess whether or
not DU ordnance posed a health risk to the local population "either
now or in the future".
Previous studies conducted in Kosovo and Southern Serbia led to
recommendations by UNEP that local populations should take
precautionary action "to avoid contact with the substance", described
by WHO sources as having "significant chemical toxicity".
Timothy BANCROFT-HINCHEY
PRAVDA.Ru
=== 5 ===
TROVATI ALMENO 150 PROIETTILI AL DU DURANTE RICERCHE NEI PRESSI DI
BUJANOVAC
Balkan-Telegramm, 02. November 2002 - http://www.amselfeld.com
+++ URAN-MUNITION GEFUNDEN
BUJANOVAC. Im Dorf Bratoselce, Landkreis Bujanovac im Süden
Serbiens, wurden von Experten des Instituts für Nuklearphysik mehr
als 150 Projektile mit angereichertem Uran, welche während der
NATO-Aggression auf die BR Jugoslawien von der NATO benutzt
wurden, gefunden. NATO-Angaben zufolge, haben die Bomber der
nordatlantischen Allianz im Frühjahr 1999 1200 solcher Projektile
abgeworfen. B92 / SRNA +++
BELGRADO: STUDENTI 'SEQUESTRANO' MINISTRO
Gli studenti della facolta' di legge di Belgrado hanno impedito per
alcune ore al ministro della pubblica istruzione Gaso Knezevic di
abbandonare l'edificio della facolta', allo scopo di ottenere da lui
la promessa di una riduzione delle tasse di iscrizione universitarie.
Queste ultime a partire dalla fine del 2000 - dopo l'insediamento del
nuovo regime iper-liberista - hanno raggiunto cifre inaudite,
dell'ordine delle centinaia di euro, assolutamente proibitive per le
famiglie serbe.
Il movimento degli studenti di Belgrado viene oggi ignorato dalla
"sinistra" italiana, che attraverso i suoi organi di stampa ha
appoggiato la "svolta" filo-occidentale dell'ottobre 2000 in Serbia ed
e' ora costretta a tacere omertosamente sulle attuali condizioni di
vita in quel paese.
(A cura di I.S., fonte: ANSA 08/11/2002 - http://www.ansa.it/balcani)
Gli studenti della facolta' di legge di Belgrado hanno impedito per
alcune ore al ministro della pubblica istruzione Gaso Knezevic di
abbandonare l'edificio della facolta', allo scopo di ottenere da lui
la promessa di una riduzione delle tasse di iscrizione universitarie.
Queste ultime a partire dalla fine del 2000 - dopo l'insediamento del
nuovo regime iper-liberista - hanno raggiunto cifre inaudite,
dell'ordine delle centinaia di euro, assolutamente proibitive per le
famiglie serbe.
Il movimento degli studenti di Belgrado viene oggi ignorato dalla
"sinistra" italiana, che attraverso i suoi organi di stampa ha
appoggiato la "svolta" filo-occidentale dell'ottobre 2000 in Serbia ed
e' ora costretta a tacere omertosamente sulle attuali condizioni di
vita in quel paese.
(A cura di I.S., fonte: ANSA 08/11/2002 - http://www.ansa.it/balcani)
Ovaj tekst na SRPSKOHRVATSKOM:
https://www.cnj.it/sh/inicijative.htm
ili
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/files/sh_16_11.html
Questo testo in FORMATO HTML:
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/files/vola_16_11.html
Questo testo in FORMATO WORD (volantino):
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/files/vola_16_11.doc
--- CONVEGNO ---
Coordinamento Nazionale per la Jugoslavia
Italijanska Koordinacija za Jugoslaviju
Trieste 16 novembre 2002 ore 10.30
(Trattoria sociale di Contovello-Trieste, Contovello 152)
Convegno
Sulle macerie del Muro di Berlino parlavano di pace e di progresso.
In tutti questi anni abbiamo visto invece solamente un crescendo di
guerre e di miserie: dall'Iraq all'Afghanistan alla Palestina, per
ritornare di nuovo all'Iraq
... PASSANDO SEMPRE PER LA JUGOSLAVIA...
In Jugoslavia, al centro dell'Europa, l'aggressione e' stata
inininterrotta e la spoliazione procede oggi a gonfie vele. Quale e'
la vera situazione economica e sociale sul terreno, al di la' della
disinformazione o dell'omerta' dei mass-media? Come far procedere le
tante iniziative di solidarieta' verso la popolazione bombardata?
Interventi programmati:
* Igor Canciani (PRC Trieste): Introduzione al convegno
* Andrea Catone (CNJ / Most za Beograd, Bari): "Imperialismo e
guerre: l'aggressione alla RFJ"
* Gordana Pavlovic (Ass. Decja Istina, Belgrado): "La situazione
sociale nella RFJ due anni dopo il 5-10-2000"
* Vladimir Kapuralin (Partito Socialista Operaio, Pola): "La
situazione economica e sociale nelle repubbliche ex-jugoslave oggi. Il
caso croato"
* Lino Anelli (CGIL Lombardia): "Il caso Zastava"
* Fabio Sebastiani (Liberazione, Roma): "Le iniziative di
solidarieta'"
* Renato Kneipp (CGIL Trieste): "L'immigrazione jugoslava a Trieste"
* Ivan Pavicevac (CNJ / "Voce Jugoslava" su Radio Citta' Aperta,
Roma): "La disinformazione di guerra: il caso jugoslavo"
Presiede: Gilberto Vlaic (CNJ / ZASTAVA Trieste)
Organizzano:
Coordinamento Nazionale per Jugoslavia, Gruppo ZASTAVA Trieste
Partecipa:
PRC - Federazione di Trieste
L'iniziativa durera' tutta la giornata.
C'e' la possibilita' di pranzare in loco a prezzi modici (si prega di
prenotare al numero: 040-225168)
Per ulteriori informazioni:
338-9116688 - 339-6587490 - <jugocoord@l...>
Coordinamento Nazionale per la Jugoslavia - https://www.cnj.it/
Gruppo ZASTAVA Trieste - http://digilander.libero.it/zastavatrieste/
--- INFORMAZIONI LOGISTICHE ---
Coordinamento Nazionale per la Jugoslavia
Italijanska Koordinacija za Jugoslaviju
Trieste 16 novembre 2002 ore 10.30
(Trattoria sociale di Contovello-Trieste, Contovello 152)
Convegno: "... PASSANDO SEMPRE PER LA JUGOSLAVIA..."
INFORMAZIONI LOGISTICHE
Per chi arriva in macchina:
Dall'autostrada, passato il casello di Monfalcone, si percorrono altri
6-7 Km circa di superstrada verso Trieste. Si esce allo svincolo di
Sgonico.
Prendere a sinistra in direzione Trieste; dopo un chilometro circa si
entra a Prosecco; in centro paese girare a destra per Trieste e dopo
500 metri si e' a Contovello, di fronte alla Trattoria Sociale /
Drustvena Gostilna di Contovello / Kontovel. Chiunque sia del posto sa
indicarla.
Per chi viene da Fernetti: uscire a Prosecco e seguire le indicazioni
Prosecco/Contovello, poi come sopra.
Per chi arriva in treno:
Gli autobus urbani per arrivare a Contovello sono il 42 e il 44 con
capolinea in piazza Oberdan, a circa 300 metri dalla stazione
ferroviaria. Il tragitto dura circa 15 minuti. Chiedere all'autista di
scendere alla Trattoria Sociale di Contovello.
Partenze autobus n. 42 da Piazza Oberdan:
8.25 8.40 9.05 9.50 10.30 11.10 11.50
Partenze autobus n. 44 da Piazza Oberdan:
8.45 9.25 10.05 10.45 11.25
Per chi dovesse pernottare:
Di seguito riportiamo la lista delle pensioni economiche con qualche
disponibilita' di posti per la notte del 15 e/o per la notte del 16;
chi dovesse prenotare deve farlo con urgenza. Le pensioni sono tutte
vicinissime alla stazione e a Piazza Oberdan.
Nuovo Albergo Centro
Via Roma 11, tel. 040-3478790
(solo camere doppie: 42 euro senza bagno, 62 con bagno)
Rittmeyer
Via de Rittmeyer 2, tel. 040-762233
(24 euro singola senza bagno, 40 doppia senza bagno, 55 doppia con
bagno)
Affittacamere
Via Roma 13, tel. 040-636249
(26 euro singola senza bagno, 40 doppia senza bagno)
C'e' poi l'Ostello della Gioventu', a circa mezzora di autobus dalla
Stazione Centrale. Attenzione! L'Ostello chiude alle 23:30, l'ultimo
autobus che lo collega alla citta' termina il servizio attorno alle
21:00.
Ostello Tergeste
Viale Miramare 331, tel. 040-567722.
Costo 12 euro + 5.5 euro (tessera)
https://www.cnj.it/sh/inicijative.htm
ili
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/files/sh_16_11.html
Questo testo in FORMATO HTML:
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/files/vola_16_11.html
Questo testo in FORMATO WORD (volantino):
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/files/vola_16_11.doc
--- CONVEGNO ---
Coordinamento Nazionale per la Jugoslavia
Italijanska Koordinacija za Jugoslaviju
Trieste 16 novembre 2002 ore 10.30
(Trattoria sociale di Contovello-Trieste, Contovello 152)
Convegno
Sulle macerie del Muro di Berlino parlavano di pace e di progresso.
In tutti questi anni abbiamo visto invece solamente un crescendo di
guerre e di miserie: dall'Iraq all'Afghanistan alla Palestina, per
ritornare di nuovo all'Iraq
... PASSANDO SEMPRE PER LA JUGOSLAVIA...
In Jugoslavia, al centro dell'Europa, l'aggressione e' stata
inininterrotta e la spoliazione procede oggi a gonfie vele. Quale e'
la vera situazione economica e sociale sul terreno, al di la' della
disinformazione o dell'omerta' dei mass-media? Come far procedere le
tante iniziative di solidarieta' verso la popolazione bombardata?
Interventi programmati:
* Igor Canciani (PRC Trieste): Introduzione al convegno
* Andrea Catone (CNJ / Most za Beograd, Bari): "Imperialismo e
guerre: l'aggressione alla RFJ"
* Gordana Pavlovic (Ass. Decja Istina, Belgrado): "La situazione
sociale nella RFJ due anni dopo il 5-10-2000"
* Vladimir Kapuralin (Partito Socialista Operaio, Pola): "La
situazione economica e sociale nelle repubbliche ex-jugoslave oggi. Il
caso croato"
* Lino Anelli (CGIL Lombardia): "Il caso Zastava"
* Fabio Sebastiani (Liberazione, Roma): "Le iniziative di
solidarieta'"
* Renato Kneipp (CGIL Trieste): "L'immigrazione jugoslava a Trieste"
* Ivan Pavicevac (CNJ / "Voce Jugoslava" su Radio Citta' Aperta,
Roma): "La disinformazione di guerra: il caso jugoslavo"
Presiede: Gilberto Vlaic (CNJ / ZASTAVA Trieste)
Organizzano:
Coordinamento Nazionale per Jugoslavia, Gruppo ZASTAVA Trieste
Partecipa:
PRC - Federazione di Trieste
L'iniziativa durera' tutta la giornata.
C'e' la possibilita' di pranzare in loco a prezzi modici (si prega di
prenotare al numero: 040-225168)
Per ulteriori informazioni:
338-9116688 - 339-6587490 - <jugocoord@l...>
Coordinamento Nazionale per la Jugoslavia - https://www.cnj.it/
Gruppo ZASTAVA Trieste - http://digilander.libero.it/zastavatrieste/
--- INFORMAZIONI LOGISTICHE ---
Coordinamento Nazionale per la Jugoslavia
Italijanska Koordinacija za Jugoslaviju
Trieste 16 novembre 2002 ore 10.30
(Trattoria sociale di Contovello-Trieste, Contovello 152)
Convegno: "... PASSANDO SEMPRE PER LA JUGOSLAVIA..."
INFORMAZIONI LOGISTICHE
Per chi arriva in macchina:
Dall'autostrada, passato il casello di Monfalcone, si percorrono altri
6-7 Km circa di superstrada verso Trieste. Si esce allo svincolo di
Sgonico.
Prendere a sinistra in direzione Trieste; dopo un chilometro circa si
entra a Prosecco; in centro paese girare a destra per Trieste e dopo
500 metri si e' a Contovello, di fronte alla Trattoria Sociale /
Drustvena Gostilna di Contovello / Kontovel. Chiunque sia del posto sa
indicarla.
Per chi viene da Fernetti: uscire a Prosecco e seguire le indicazioni
Prosecco/Contovello, poi come sopra.
Per chi arriva in treno:
Gli autobus urbani per arrivare a Contovello sono il 42 e il 44 con
capolinea in piazza Oberdan, a circa 300 metri dalla stazione
ferroviaria. Il tragitto dura circa 15 minuti. Chiedere all'autista di
scendere alla Trattoria Sociale di Contovello.
Partenze autobus n. 42 da Piazza Oberdan:
8.25 8.40 9.05 9.50 10.30 11.10 11.50
Partenze autobus n. 44 da Piazza Oberdan:
8.45 9.25 10.05 10.45 11.25
Per chi dovesse pernottare:
Di seguito riportiamo la lista delle pensioni economiche con qualche
disponibilita' di posti per la notte del 15 e/o per la notte del 16;
chi dovesse prenotare deve farlo con urgenza. Le pensioni sono tutte
vicinissime alla stazione e a Piazza Oberdan.
Nuovo Albergo Centro
Via Roma 11, tel. 040-3478790
(solo camere doppie: 42 euro senza bagno, 62 con bagno)
Rittmeyer
Via de Rittmeyer 2, tel. 040-762233
(24 euro singola senza bagno, 40 doppia senza bagno, 55 doppia con
bagno)
Affittacamere
Via Roma 13, tel. 040-636249
(26 euro singola senza bagno, 40 doppia senza bagno)
C'e' poi l'Ostello della Gioventu', a circa mezzora di autobus dalla
Stazione Centrale. Attenzione! L'Ostello chiude alle 23:30, l'ultimo
autobus che lo collega alla citta' termina il servizio attorno alle
21:00.
Ostello Tergeste
Viale Miramare 331, tel. 040-567722.
Costo 12 euro + 5.5 euro (tessera)
SERBIA-MONTENEGRO: 845ML EURO I COSTI DELLA NUOVA "UNIONE"
La creazione della nuova "Unione di Serbia e Montenegro", imposta dalla
politica secessionista di Djukanovic e dalle pressioni internazionali
che mirano a cancellare la "Jugoslavia" dalla cartine geografiche,
costera' subito alle casse dei due stati 845 milioni di euro.
E' quanto e' stato previsto dai ministri delle finanze di Belgrado e
Podgorica/Titograd, Bozidar Djelic e Miroslav Ivanisevic. I due
annunciano che solo 3.000 degli attuali 10.400 impiegati della
federazione manterranno il posto di lavoro: 4.000 verranno ricollocati
nelle "nuove" amministrazioni, gli altri saranno sbattuti immediatamente
per strada.
Considerato pero' che lo status di "Unione" sara' solo transitorio (tre
anni, dopodiche' Djukanovic sara' libero di spaccare definitivamente
cio' che resta del paese), anche le sorti dei 7000 "fortunati"
resteranno a dir poco incerte.
(Fonte ANSA, 8/11/2002:
http://www.ansa.it/balcani/jugoslavia/20021108112232380071.html )
La creazione della nuova "Unione di Serbia e Montenegro", imposta dalla
politica secessionista di Djukanovic e dalle pressioni internazionali
che mirano a cancellare la "Jugoslavia" dalla cartine geografiche,
costera' subito alle casse dei due stati 845 milioni di euro.
E' quanto e' stato previsto dai ministri delle finanze di Belgrado e
Podgorica/Titograd, Bozidar Djelic e Miroslav Ivanisevic. I due
annunciano che solo 3.000 degli attuali 10.400 impiegati della
federazione manterranno il posto di lavoro: 4.000 verranno ricollocati
nelle "nuove" amministrazioni, gli altri saranno sbattuti immediatamente
per strada.
Considerato pero' che lo status di "Unione" sara' solo transitorio (tre
anni, dopodiche' Djukanovic sara' libero di spaccare definitivamente
cio' che resta del paese), anche le sorti dei 7000 "fortunati"
resteranno a dir poco incerte.
(Fonte ANSA, 8/11/2002:
http://www.ansa.it/balcani/jugoslavia/20021108112232380071.html )
1. La RF di Jugoslavia presa in trappola.
Fintantoche' non passa la nuova Costituzione - che sancisce la
cancellazione della "Jugoslavia" dalle cartine geografiche e prevede una
transitoria "Unione di Serbia e Montenegro" - il Consiglio d'Europa e le
altre istituzioni euro-atlantiche continueranno ad emarginare il paese.
Se viceversa la nuova Costituzione viene approvata, il Kosovo secede.
Il "governatore coloniale" UNMIK per il Kosovo, Michael Steiner, rincara
ambiguamente: "Lo status del Kosovo e' questione aperta" ("open
issue"),
ed ancora: "Confido nel fatto che I'Unione Europea condivida il punto di
vista per cui quello che e' scritto nel progetto [costituzionale - che
prevede che il Kosovo resti provincia della Serbia e dunque parte
integrante dello Stato -] non possa in alcun modo determinare il futuro
del Kosovo, che alla fine sara' deciso dal Consiglio di Sicurezza
dell'ONU."
2. UN Security Council: Progress in Kosovo 'slow-going' / Cutileiro
"dissatisfied"
Notizie e prese di posizione di fonte ONU sulla vergognosa situazione
nel Kosmet.
3. CILIEGINA: Ma intanto i debiti del Kosovo li paga sempre la
Jugoslavia...
=== 1 ===
KOSOVO: LA RF DI JUGOSLAVIA PRESA IN TRAPPOLA
Selezione di articoli
===
KOSOVO: PARLAMENTO CONTRO COSTITUZIONE SERBIA-MONTENEGRO
(ANSA) - PRISTINA, 7 NOV - Il Parlamento del Kosovo si e' opposto oggi
apertamente al progetto costituzionale dell'Unione serbo-montenegrina
secondo il quale la provincia a maggioranza albanese resta parte della
Repubblica serba. ''L'assemblea dichiara che la definizione
costituzionale legata al Kosovo e' inaccettabile e non valida'', si
legge in una risoluzione approvata da tutti i deputati albanesi e delle
altre minoranze, tranne i rappresentanti serbi, che hanno abbandonato
l'aula. Nella stessa risoluzione si afferma che ''lo status finale del
Kosovo sara' determinato in un altro momento dalle istituzioni
democratiche e dal popolo del Kosovo, in collaborazione con il fattore
internazionale'' [sic]. Il Parlamento del Kosovo si e' rivolto al
Consiglio di Sicurezza dell'Onu e all'Unione europea perche' si
oppongano ''ai tentativi della Serbia e del Montenegro di condizionare
il futuro del Kosovo e la sua annessione, rischiando di compromettere la
pace e la stabilita' nella regione''.
Attualmente lo status del Kosovo viene regolato dalla risoluzione 1244
del Consiglio di Sicurezza dell'Onu, che prevede la presenza di
un'amministrazione civile internazionale e le unita' della Kfor (Forza
di pace a guida Nato) che garantiscono l'ordine e la sicurezza. La
stessa risoluzione continua a considerare il Kosovo come parte della
Federazione jugoslava che si trasformera' nell'unione
serbo-montenegrina.
L'amministratore Onu del Kosovo Michael Steiner aveva dichiarato ieri
che ''il progetto costituzionale tra Serbia e Montenegro non puo' essere
applicato in Kosovo, qualora dovesse essere approvata''. (ANSA). BLL
07/11/2002 18:16
===
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20021105/ap_wo_en_po/eu_kosovo_3
Kosovo PM warns of independence drive if Serb constitution plan wins
international backing
Tue Nov 5, 5:18 PM ET
By PAUL AMES, Associated Press Writer
BRUSSELS, Belgium - Kosovo's prime minister warned the province could
declare independence if the international community backs proposals to
include it as part of Serbia under the constitution of a new union of
Serbia and Montenegro.
Bajram Rexhepi was responding Tuesday to lawmakers and legal experts in
Serbia and Montenegro who are drawing up a draft constitution for the
new union and want to include a preamble stating that Kosovo remains
part of Serbia.
"We do believe the (European Union) will not accept this kind of
preamble," Rexhepi told a news conference. "If accepted ... probably we
will go to parliament to make a declaration about independence."
Kosovo's international administrators fear a sudden declaration of
independence by Kosovo could re-ignite tensions in the Balkans.
They have advised the EU and other international players not to accept
any clause in the constitution of the new Serbia-Montenegro entity that
includes Kosovo as part of Serbia.
"I'm confident the EU shares the view that whatever is written in the
draft (constitution) does not affect the future of Kosovo, which in the
end will be decided by the Security Council of the United Nations," said
Michael Steiner, the U.N. special representative.
Rexhepi and Steiner were at EU headquarters in Brussels for an
international donors conference where participants were told that Kosovo
needs another 500 million euro (dlrs 499 million) to help public
investment and budget shortfalls up to 2005.
The EU is supporting a plan to form a new country that turns Serbia and
its junior partner in Yugoslavia, the republic of Montenegro, into a
loose union.
Serbia and Montenegro would share a common defense and foreign policy.
They would also have a joint seat at the United Nations, but each would
maintain a separate economy, currency and customs service.
After three years, each republic could vote to secede.
Kosovo has effectively been run as an international protectorate since
NATO intervened to stop a 1999 war between Yugoslav forces and ethnic
Albanian rebels seeking to cut ties with Serbia. NATO-led peacekeeping
troops and U.N. administrators back an interim government formed largely
from the ethnic Albanians who make up some 90 percent of the population.
Under the U.N. resolution that governs Kosovo, Yugoslavia retains
territorial integrity over the province but the issue of its permanent
status remains to be resolved.
The U.N. administration has sought to delay a decision on the
territory's final status while efforts continue to stabilize the region
and build up its moribund economy.
===
KOSOVO PREMIER: IF PREAMBLE IS ADOPTED, WE WILL DECLARE INDEPENDENCE
PRISTINA,Nov5 (Beta)-Kosovo Premier Bajram Rexhepi said on Nov. 5 that
if the international community should recognize the Constitutional
Charter of Serbia and Montenegro with a preamble stating that Kosovo and
Vojvodina are parts of Serbia, the Kosovo Assembly will declare
independence of Kosovo.
At the final news conference in Brussels following the end of a
coordinating donors' conference, Rexhepi said he is certain the clause
of U.N. Security Council resolution 1244, which says that the status of
Kosovo is to be discussed in two or three years, will be respected.
The head of the UNMIK administration, Michael Steiner, told reporters
that he has received assurances from European Union officials that
Resolution 1244 has greater internationallegal weight than any national
law.
The three leading Kosovo Albanian parties submitted a proposal to the
Kosovo Assembly on Nov. 5 that the draft of a resolution declaring the
preamble invalid should be discussed under urgent procedure at the
Assembly's session on Nov. 7.
===
KOSOVO ASSEMBLY ADOPTS RESOLUTION ON CONSTITUTIONAL CHARTER PREAMBLE
PRISTINA,Nov7 (Beta)The Kosovo Assembly on Nov. 7 adopted a resolution
declaring the provision in the draft Constitutional Charter of Serbia
and Montenegro that describes Kosovo as a part of Serbia, as
"unacceptable and invalid."
Sixtyfour deputies voted in favor of the resolution and one abstained.
There are 110 deputies in the Kosovo Assembly.
Twentytwo deputies of the Serbian Return coalition left the session
during the agenda debate because their proposal that the parliament
declare its stand on observing and implementing UN Security Council
Resolution 1244 had been rejected.
The resolution, adopted at the request of the deputies of the three
strongest Kosovo Albanian parties, emphasizes that the final status of
Kosovo will be determined later "by democratic institutions and the
people of Kosovo in cooperation with international factors."
===
UNMIK CHIEF DECLARES ALBANIAN DEPUTIES RESOLUTION NULL AND VOID
PRISTINA,Nov7 (Beta)UNMIK chief Michael Steiner on Nov. 7 declared the
Resolution the Albanian Kosovo Assembly deputies had adopted null and
void.
The Resolution declares the preamble of the Constitutional Charter of
Serbia and Montenegro invalid in the part which refers to Kosovo as a
constituent part of Serbia.
In the press release submitted to BETA, Steiner said that "Kosovo is
under the jurisdiction of the U.N. Security Council Resolution 1244.
Accordingly, neither Belgrade nor Pristina have the right to anticipate
or decide on the future status of Kosovo."
"The future status of Kosovo is an open issue to be decided upon in the
U.N. Security Council, and thus any unilateral declaration which does
not have the UN SC approval has no legal effect on the future status of
Kosovo," said Steiner.
===
SERBIAN ORTHODOX DIOCESE OF RASKA AND PRIZREN
KOSOVO AND METOHIJA
INFORMATION SERVICE
ERP KIM Info - Service
SERB DELEGATION WALKS OUT OF KOSOVO AND METOHIJA PARLIAMENT
Dr. Rada Trajkovic: We will not return to the Parliament as long as
institutional discrimination by Albanian deputies remains in effect
Gracanica
November 7, 2002
The Serb delegation in the Kosovo and Metohija parliament
demonstratively walked out of a parliamentary session today after the
Albanian majority refused to accept a vote on UN Security Council
Resolution 1244. At the beginning of the session a majority of Albanian
deputies adopted the proposal to discuss the Preamble to the
Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro in which Kosovo and
Metohija is mentioned as an integral part of the Republic of Serbia.
This proposal
by Albanian deputies appeared after a series of blunt public statements
by leading Albanian politicians, especially prime minister Rexhepi, who
warned the public that the parliament would proclaim the independence of
Kosovo if the name of the Province was included in the Preamble to the
Charter.
Dr. Rada Trajkovic attempted to explain from the parliamentary podium
that according to Resolution 1244 Kosovo and Metohija is an integral
part of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and therefore of the future
joint state of Serbia and Montenegro, and that according to the
Constitution it represents a constitutive part of the Republic of
Serbia. "Resolution 1244 clearly upholds the sovereignty of FRY although
many of its provisions with regard to sovereignty have not yet been
implemented in
practice," said Dr. Trajkovic. In the ensuing heated debate, Dr.
Trajkovic, who is the head of the Povratak (Return) Coalition caucus,
demanded that the Kosovo and Metohija parliament urgently vote on
whether it upheld Resolution 1244 or not in order to determine whether
there was any point in continuing the discussion.
However, the Albanian deputies not only refused to support this proposal
but what is more, according to Trajkovic, the parliamentary speaker
launched an avalanche of insults after which the Serb deputies
demonstratively walked out of the parliament building and subsequently
left Pristina with a police escort.
"We have firmly resolved that under these conditions we cannot continue
to work in the parliament and as long as institutional discrimination is
in effect Serb deputies will not attend parliamentary sessions," Dr.
Trajkovic announced for the ERP KIM Info Service. "Serb deputies can
work in Kosovo and Metohija institutions only if these institutions
respect the mandate of UN Security Council Resolution 1244; otherwise,
these institutions are working against the mandate of the
international community and as such have no legitimacy," said Dr.
Trajkovic.
The ERP KIM Info Service has learned that UNMIK head Michael Steiner has
called for an urgent meeting with the Serb parliamentary deputies in
order to resolve existing problems.
===
EUROPARAT: OHNE VERFASSUNG KEINE AUFNAHME
STRASSBURG. Das ausführende Komitee des Europarates lehnte
gestern die Aufnahme Jugoslawiens in den Europarat zum
gegebenen Zeitpunkt ab, und appellierte an die Regierungen der BR
Jugoslawien und der Republiken Serbien und Montenegro die unter
Javier Solana´s Vermittlung ausgearbeitete Verfassungsvorlage
umzusetzen. Dies wurde ausdrücklich als Bedingung für eine
Aufnahme in den Europarat genannt. TANJUG+++
Balkan-Telegramm, 8. November 2002 - http://www.amselfeld.com
ALBANER LEHNEN NEUE VERFASSUNG AB
PRISTINA. Das Regionalparlament von Kosovo und Metochien stimmte
gestern mit 64 Stimmen dafür und einer Enthaltung für eine
Deklaration mit welcher die neue Bundesverfassung Jugoslawiens vorab
als für das Territorium Kosovo und Metochiens ungültig erklärt wird.
In der neuen Verfassung Jugoslawiens bzw. Serbien-Montenegros wird
präzisiert sein, daß Kosovo und Metochien ein integraler Teil Serbiens
sind.
Der Text der Deklaration wurde von einer Kommission erstellt, in der
sich ausschließlich Abgeordnete der drei größten albanischen Parteien
befanden.
Die serbischen Abgeordneten im Regionalparlament verließen bereits vor
der Sitzung den Parlamentssaal - aus Protest gegenüber der ständigen
albanischen Majorisierung und Intoleranz und der Mißachtung der
Menschenrechte anderer Volksgruppen im Regionalparlament und in Kosovo
und Metochien an sich. TANJUG+++
Balkan-Telegramm, 8. November 2002 - http://www.amselfeld.com
=== 2 ===
UN Security Council
http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/6686f45896f15dbc852567ae00530132/abcc9e08d88fbb91
85256c690079246c?OpenDocument
RELIEF WEB
Source: UN News Service
Date: 6 Nov 2002
Progress in Kosovo 'slow-going,' Security Council told
===
http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/6686f45896f15dbc852567ae00530132/8a591cfa4169e521
49256c6a001e89ca?OpenDocument
RELIEF WEB
Source: UN Security Council
Date: 6 Nov 2002
Security Council focuses on Kosovo municipal elections, security of
minorities
SC/7563
4643rd Meeting (PM)
===
http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/6686f45896f15dbc852567ae00530132/0dbc20505a13737f
c1256c6a0053e092?OpenDocument
RELIEF WEB
Source: European Union
Date: 6 Nov 2002
Security Council: The situation in Kosovo
Statement by
H.E. Ambassador Ellen Margrethe Løj
Permanent Representative of Denmark to the UN
on behalf of the European Union at the open meeting of the Security
Council
NEW YORK
November 6, 2002
Check against delivery
===
Politika, Belgrade
UN envoy in Kosmet (Kosovo and Metohija)
CUTILIERO DISSATISFIED
UN official emphasizes poor return of Serbs and endangerment of their
rights
November 4, 2002
Kosovska Mitrovica, November 3 (Tanjug) - The UN special representative
for human rights Jose Cutiliero stated today that the human rights
situation in Kosovo and Metohija has not improved in the past year and
that he is especially dissatisfied with the poor return of Serbs.
"Since February of last year when I last visited Kosovo, nothing has
changed with regard to an improvement of the status of human rights,"
Cutiliero told reporters in Kosovska Mitrovica after talking with
Kosovo parliamentary presidency member Oliver Ivanovic.
He emphasized that he was especially dissatisfied with the fact that the
process of Serb returns to Kosovo and Metohija is poor and as yet
unsustainable.
During talks with Cutliero, Oliver Ivanovic emphasized dissatisfaction
with the fact that the fate of 1,300 kidnapped and missing Serbs
remains unknown, as well as because none of the Albanian terrorists who
were members of the terrorist Kosovo Liberation Army during the war
have been indicted by The Hague.
"I expect that Mr. Cutiliero upon returning to New York will write a
report regarding the real situation in Kosovo and Metohija, like the
Council of Europe or Kosovo ombudsman Marek Antony Nowitzky," said
Ivanovic. He added that some reports from Kosovo are outright
fabrications and do not accurately reflect the situation on the ground,
especially the unenviable position of the Serbs.
===
Human rights situation in Kosovo "far from good": UN representative
BELGRADE, Nov 7 (AFP) - The human rights situation in Kosovo,
particularly of Serbs and other non-Albanians, is "far from good," UN
Commission for Human Rights' special representative Jose Cutileiro said
Thursday.
"The situation in most parts of Kosovo is far from good," Cutileiro, the
commission's special representative for Bosnia and Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia, told reporters at the end of his visit to Serbia and its
mainly ethnic Albanian-populated province of Kosovo.
"The return of the bulk of internally displaced people is still poor.
There is restricted movement for non-Albanians," he added.
More than 200,000 Serbs have fled Kosovo since the end of war in 1999,
taking shelter in the rest of Serbia and Montenegro, its smaller partner
in the Yugoslav federation.
Some 80,000 Kosovo Serbs remain in the province, living in enclaves
protected by NATO-led peacekeeping troops (KFOR).
"Everything possible should be done to help internally displaced people
go back to their homes and all efforts should be made to ensure that
they have a decent life before going home," Cutileiro said.
However, the UN representative noticed an improvement in the situation
in Kosovo,
particularly after Serbs there had taken part in last year's general
elections and local polls last month.
He also praised progress regarding human rights in central Serbia, but
warned of a difficult economic climate and "perilous situation for
internally displaced persons and Romas" in the region.
Cutileiro was to travel to Sarajevo for a one-week visit to Bosnia.
===
CUTILIERO: DESPITE PROGRESS, HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION UNSATISFACTORY
BELGRADE,Nov7 (Beta)The U.N. Human Rights Special Envoy in the former
Yugoslavia, Jose Cutiliero, said on Nov. 7, that despite progress,
there are still numerous problems regarding respect for human rights in
Yugoslavia.
"Certain aspects are not even close to being settled. A general
evaluation of all the places I have toured is the poor economic
situation, and progress in the human rights field requires a
satisfactory economic situation," Cutiliero told the press in Belgrade.
He also said it was necessary to "do everything to enable those who
wish to return to Kosovo to do so, but also to create the appropriate
conditions for them in their current places of residence."
During his third tour of the region, Cutiliero visited Belgrade, Novi
Sad, Pristina, Novi Pazar, and Podgorica, and will depart for
BosniaHerzegovina on Nov. 7.
Cutiliero is to submit a report on the human rights situation in the
former Yugoslavia at the session of the U.N. Human Rights Commission,
to be held in Geneva next spring.
=== 3 ===
KOSOVO: JUGOSLAVIA ACCETTA PAGARE PARTE DEBITO
(ANSA) - BELGRADO, 8 NOV - La Jugoslavia ha accettato di ripagare parte
dei crediti concessi dalla Banca mondiale al Kosovo, ha detto il
vicedirettore dell'istituto finanziario internazionale Christian
Portman. La Banca mondiale, ha aggiunto Portman, ha garantito a Belgrado
crediti per 550 milioni di dollari anche per questa disponibilita',
oltre che per la ''buona impressione suscitata dalla velocita' e dalla
profondita' delle riforme portate avanti nel paese''. (ANSA). OT
08/11/2002 11:12
YUGOSLAVIA AGREES TO REPAY KOSOVO'S DEBTS
PRISTINA,Nov7 (Beta)The vice president of the World Bank (WB)
department for southeastern Europe, Christian Poortmann, said on Nov.
7, that Yugoslavia has agreed to repay the bank loan that had been used
in Kosovo.
"Yugoslavia has decided to repay a part of the WB loan used in Kosovo
at the time of the country's reintegration into the bank, and then
Yugoslavia took on the obligation to repay a part of the loan allocated
to Kosovo," Poortmann told the press.
He added that the WB has approved Yugoslavia loans worth $US550
million, with a 0.75 interest rate, which, as he put it, is almost a
gift.
Poortmann underlined that the WB has already indicated its stand that
it is impressed with the swiftness and quality of the reforms in
Yugoslavia.
Fintantoche' non passa la nuova Costituzione - che sancisce la
cancellazione della "Jugoslavia" dalle cartine geografiche e prevede una
transitoria "Unione di Serbia e Montenegro" - il Consiglio d'Europa e le
altre istituzioni euro-atlantiche continueranno ad emarginare il paese.
Se viceversa la nuova Costituzione viene approvata, il Kosovo secede.
Il "governatore coloniale" UNMIK per il Kosovo, Michael Steiner, rincara
ambiguamente: "Lo status del Kosovo e' questione aperta" ("open
issue"),
ed ancora: "Confido nel fatto che I'Unione Europea condivida il punto di
vista per cui quello che e' scritto nel progetto [costituzionale - che
prevede che il Kosovo resti provincia della Serbia e dunque parte
integrante dello Stato -] non possa in alcun modo determinare il futuro
del Kosovo, che alla fine sara' deciso dal Consiglio di Sicurezza
dell'ONU."
2. UN Security Council: Progress in Kosovo 'slow-going' / Cutileiro
"dissatisfied"
Notizie e prese di posizione di fonte ONU sulla vergognosa situazione
nel Kosmet.
3. CILIEGINA: Ma intanto i debiti del Kosovo li paga sempre la
Jugoslavia...
=== 1 ===
KOSOVO: LA RF DI JUGOSLAVIA PRESA IN TRAPPOLA
Selezione di articoli
===
KOSOVO: PARLAMENTO CONTRO COSTITUZIONE SERBIA-MONTENEGRO
(ANSA) - PRISTINA, 7 NOV - Il Parlamento del Kosovo si e' opposto oggi
apertamente al progetto costituzionale dell'Unione serbo-montenegrina
secondo il quale la provincia a maggioranza albanese resta parte della
Repubblica serba. ''L'assemblea dichiara che la definizione
costituzionale legata al Kosovo e' inaccettabile e non valida'', si
legge in una risoluzione approvata da tutti i deputati albanesi e delle
altre minoranze, tranne i rappresentanti serbi, che hanno abbandonato
l'aula. Nella stessa risoluzione si afferma che ''lo status finale del
Kosovo sara' determinato in un altro momento dalle istituzioni
democratiche e dal popolo del Kosovo, in collaborazione con il fattore
internazionale'' [sic]. Il Parlamento del Kosovo si e' rivolto al
Consiglio di Sicurezza dell'Onu e all'Unione europea perche' si
oppongano ''ai tentativi della Serbia e del Montenegro di condizionare
il futuro del Kosovo e la sua annessione, rischiando di compromettere la
pace e la stabilita' nella regione''.
Attualmente lo status del Kosovo viene regolato dalla risoluzione 1244
del Consiglio di Sicurezza dell'Onu, che prevede la presenza di
un'amministrazione civile internazionale e le unita' della Kfor (Forza
di pace a guida Nato) che garantiscono l'ordine e la sicurezza. La
stessa risoluzione continua a considerare il Kosovo come parte della
Federazione jugoslava che si trasformera' nell'unione
serbo-montenegrina.
L'amministratore Onu del Kosovo Michael Steiner aveva dichiarato ieri
che ''il progetto costituzionale tra Serbia e Montenegro non puo' essere
applicato in Kosovo, qualora dovesse essere approvata''. (ANSA). BLL
07/11/2002 18:16
===
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20021105/ap_wo_en_po/eu_kosovo_3
Kosovo PM warns of independence drive if Serb constitution plan wins
international backing
Tue Nov 5, 5:18 PM ET
By PAUL AMES, Associated Press Writer
BRUSSELS, Belgium - Kosovo's prime minister warned the province could
declare independence if the international community backs proposals to
include it as part of Serbia under the constitution of a new union of
Serbia and Montenegro.
Bajram Rexhepi was responding Tuesday to lawmakers and legal experts in
Serbia and Montenegro who are drawing up a draft constitution for the
new union and want to include a preamble stating that Kosovo remains
part of Serbia.
"We do believe the (European Union) will not accept this kind of
preamble," Rexhepi told a news conference. "If accepted ... probably we
will go to parliament to make a declaration about independence."
Kosovo's international administrators fear a sudden declaration of
independence by Kosovo could re-ignite tensions in the Balkans.
They have advised the EU and other international players not to accept
any clause in the constitution of the new Serbia-Montenegro entity that
includes Kosovo as part of Serbia.
"I'm confident the EU shares the view that whatever is written in the
draft (constitution) does not affect the future of Kosovo, which in the
end will be decided by the Security Council of the United Nations," said
Michael Steiner, the U.N. special representative.
Rexhepi and Steiner were at EU headquarters in Brussels for an
international donors conference where participants were told that Kosovo
needs another 500 million euro (dlrs 499 million) to help public
investment and budget shortfalls up to 2005.
The EU is supporting a plan to form a new country that turns Serbia and
its junior partner in Yugoslavia, the republic of Montenegro, into a
loose union.
Serbia and Montenegro would share a common defense and foreign policy.
They would also have a joint seat at the United Nations, but each would
maintain a separate economy, currency and customs service.
After three years, each republic could vote to secede.
Kosovo has effectively been run as an international protectorate since
NATO intervened to stop a 1999 war between Yugoslav forces and ethnic
Albanian rebels seeking to cut ties with Serbia. NATO-led peacekeeping
troops and U.N. administrators back an interim government formed largely
from the ethnic Albanians who make up some 90 percent of the population.
Under the U.N. resolution that governs Kosovo, Yugoslavia retains
territorial integrity over the province but the issue of its permanent
status remains to be resolved.
The U.N. administration has sought to delay a decision on the
territory's final status while efforts continue to stabilize the region
and build up its moribund economy.
===
KOSOVO PREMIER: IF PREAMBLE IS ADOPTED, WE WILL DECLARE INDEPENDENCE
PRISTINA,Nov5 (Beta)-Kosovo Premier Bajram Rexhepi said on Nov. 5 that
if the international community should recognize the Constitutional
Charter of Serbia and Montenegro with a preamble stating that Kosovo and
Vojvodina are parts of Serbia, the Kosovo Assembly will declare
independence of Kosovo.
At the final news conference in Brussels following the end of a
coordinating donors' conference, Rexhepi said he is certain the clause
of U.N. Security Council resolution 1244, which says that the status of
Kosovo is to be discussed in two or three years, will be respected.
The head of the UNMIK administration, Michael Steiner, told reporters
that he has received assurances from European Union officials that
Resolution 1244 has greater internationallegal weight than any national
law.
The three leading Kosovo Albanian parties submitted a proposal to the
Kosovo Assembly on Nov. 5 that the draft of a resolution declaring the
preamble invalid should be discussed under urgent procedure at the
Assembly's session on Nov. 7.
===
KOSOVO ASSEMBLY ADOPTS RESOLUTION ON CONSTITUTIONAL CHARTER PREAMBLE
PRISTINA,Nov7 (Beta)The Kosovo Assembly on Nov. 7 adopted a resolution
declaring the provision in the draft Constitutional Charter of Serbia
and Montenegro that describes Kosovo as a part of Serbia, as
"unacceptable and invalid."
Sixtyfour deputies voted in favor of the resolution and one abstained.
There are 110 deputies in the Kosovo Assembly.
Twentytwo deputies of the Serbian Return coalition left the session
during the agenda debate because their proposal that the parliament
declare its stand on observing and implementing UN Security Council
Resolution 1244 had been rejected.
The resolution, adopted at the request of the deputies of the three
strongest Kosovo Albanian parties, emphasizes that the final status of
Kosovo will be determined later "by democratic institutions and the
people of Kosovo in cooperation with international factors."
===
UNMIK CHIEF DECLARES ALBANIAN DEPUTIES RESOLUTION NULL AND VOID
PRISTINA,Nov7 (Beta)UNMIK chief Michael Steiner on Nov. 7 declared the
Resolution the Albanian Kosovo Assembly deputies had adopted null and
void.
The Resolution declares the preamble of the Constitutional Charter of
Serbia and Montenegro invalid in the part which refers to Kosovo as a
constituent part of Serbia.
In the press release submitted to BETA, Steiner said that "Kosovo is
under the jurisdiction of the U.N. Security Council Resolution 1244.
Accordingly, neither Belgrade nor Pristina have the right to anticipate
or decide on the future status of Kosovo."
"The future status of Kosovo is an open issue to be decided upon in the
U.N. Security Council, and thus any unilateral declaration which does
not have the UN SC approval has no legal effect on the future status of
Kosovo," said Steiner.
===
SERBIAN ORTHODOX DIOCESE OF RASKA AND PRIZREN
KOSOVO AND METOHIJA
INFORMATION SERVICE
ERP KIM Info - Service
SERB DELEGATION WALKS OUT OF KOSOVO AND METOHIJA PARLIAMENT
Dr. Rada Trajkovic: We will not return to the Parliament as long as
institutional discrimination by Albanian deputies remains in effect
Gracanica
November 7, 2002
The Serb delegation in the Kosovo and Metohija parliament
demonstratively walked out of a parliamentary session today after the
Albanian majority refused to accept a vote on UN Security Council
Resolution 1244. At the beginning of the session a majority of Albanian
deputies adopted the proposal to discuss the Preamble to the
Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro in which Kosovo and
Metohija is mentioned as an integral part of the Republic of Serbia.
This proposal
by Albanian deputies appeared after a series of blunt public statements
by leading Albanian politicians, especially prime minister Rexhepi, who
warned the public that the parliament would proclaim the independence of
Kosovo if the name of the Province was included in the Preamble to the
Charter.
Dr. Rada Trajkovic attempted to explain from the parliamentary podium
that according to Resolution 1244 Kosovo and Metohija is an integral
part of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and therefore of the future
joint state of Serbia and Montenegro, and that according to the
Constitution it represents a constitutive part of the Republic of
Serbia. "Resolution 1244 clearly upholds the sovereignty of FRY although
many of its provisions with regard to sovereignty have not yet been
implemented in
practice," said Dr. Trajkovic. In the ensuing heated debate, Dr.
Trajkovic, who is the head of the Povratak (Return) Coalition caucus,
demanded that the Kosovo and Metohija parliament urgently vote on
whether it upheld Resolution 1244 or not in order to determine whether
there was any point in continuing the discussion.
However, the Albanian deputies not only refused to support this proposal
but what is more, according to Trajkovic, the parliamentary speaker
launched an avalanche of insults after which the Serb deputies
demonstratively walked out of the parliament building and subsequently
left Pristina with a police escort.
"We have firmly resolved that under these conditions we cannot continue
to work in the parliament and as long as institutional discrimination is
in effect Serb deputies will not attend parliamentary sessions," Dr.
Trajkovic announced for the ERP KIM Info Service. "Serb deputies can
work in Kosovo and Metohija institutions only if these institutions
respect the mandate of UN Security Council Resolution 1244; otherwise,
these institutions are working against the mandate of the
international community and as such have no legitimacy," said Dr.
Trajkovic.
The ERP KIM Info Service has learned that UNMIK head Michael Steiner has
called for an urgent meeting with the Serb parliamentary deputies in
order to resolve existing problems.
===
EUROPARAT: OHNE VERFASSUNG KEINE AUFNAHME
STRASSBURG. Das ausführende Komitee des Europarates lehnte
gestern die Aufnahme Jugoslawiens in den Europarat zum
gegebenen Zeitpunkt ab, und appellierte an die Regierungen der BR
Jugoslawien und der Republiken Serbien und Montenegro die unter
Javier Solana´s Vermittlung ausgearbeitete Verfassungsvorlage
umzusetzen. Dies wurde ausdrücklich als Bedingung für eine
Aufnahme in den Europarat genannt. TANJUG+++
Balkan-Telegramm, 8. November 2002 - http://www.amselfeld.com
ALBANER LEHNEN NEUE VERFASSUNG AB
PRISTINA. Das Regionalparlament von Kosovo und Metochien stimmte
gestern mit 64 Stimmen dafür und einer Enthaltung für eine
Deklaration mit welcher die neue Bundesverfassung Jugoslawiens vorab
als für das Territorium Kosovo und Metochiens ungültig erklärt wird.
In der neuen Verfassung Jugoslawiens bzw. Serbien-Montenegros wird
präzisiert sein, daß Kosovo und Metochien ein integraler Teil Serbiens
sind.
Der Text der Deklaration wurde von einer Kommission erstellt, in der
sich ausschließlich Abgeordnete der drei größten albanischen Parteien
befanden.
Die serbischen Abgeordneten im Regionalparlament verließen bereits vor
der Sitzung den Parlamentssaal - aus Protest gegenüber der ständigen
albanischen Majorisierung und Intoleranz und der Mißachtung der
Menschenrechte anderer Volksgruppen im Regionalparlament und in Kosovo
und Metochien an sich. TANJUG+++
Balkan-Telegramm, 8. November 2002 - http://www.amselfeld.com
=== 2 ===
UN Security Council
http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/6686f45896f15dbc852567ae00530132/abcc9e08d88fbb91
85256c690079246c?OpenDocument
RELIEF WEB
Source: UN News Service
Date: 6 Nov 2002
Progress in Kosovo 'slow-going,' Security Council told
===
http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/6686f45896f15dbc852567ae00530132/8a591cfa4169e521
49256c6a001e89ca?OpenDocument
RELIEF WEB
Source: UN Security Council
Date: 6 Nov 2002
Security Council focuses on Kosovo municipal elections, security of
minorities
SC/7563
4643rd Meeting (PM)
===
http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/6686f45896f15dbc852567ae00530132/0dbc20505a13737f
c1256c6a0053e092?OpenDocument
RELIEF WEB
Source: European Union
Date: 6 Nov 2002
Security Council: The situation in Kosovo
Statement by
H.E. Ambassador Ellen Margrethe Løj
Permanent Representative of Denmark to the UN
on behalf of the European Union at the open meeting of the Security
Council
NEW YORK
November 6, 2002
Check against delivery
===
Politika, Belgrade
UN envoy in Kosmet (Kosovo and Metohija)
CUTILIERO DISSATISFIED
UN official emphasizes poor return of Serbs and endangerment of their
rights
November 4, 2002
Kosovska Mitrovica, November 3 (Tanjug) - The UN special representative
for human rights Jose Cutiliero stated today that the human rights
situation in Kosovo and Metohija has not improved in the past year and
that he is especially dissatisfied with the poor return of Serbs.
"Since February of last year when I last visited Kosovo, nothing has
changed with regard to an improvement of the status of human rights,"
Cutiliero told reporters in Kosovska Mitrovica after talking with
Kosovo parliamentary presidency member Oliver Ivanovic.
He emphasized that he was especially dissatisfied with the fact that the
process of Serb returns to Kosovo and Metohija is poor and as yet
unsustainable.
During talks with Cutliero, Oliver Ivanovic emphasized dissatisfaction
with the fact that the fate of 1,300 kidnapped and missing Serbs
remains unknown, as well as because none of the Albanian terrorists who
were members of the terrorist Kosovo Liberation Army during the war
have been indicted by The Hague.
"I expect that Mr. Cutiliero upon returning to New York will write a
report regarding the real situation in Kosovo and Metohija, like the
Council of Europe or Kosovo ombudsman Marek Antony Nowitzky," said
Ivanovic. He added that some reports from Kosovo are outright
fabrications and do not accurately reflect the situation on the ground,
especially the unenviable position of the Serbs.
===
Human rights situation in Kosovo "far from good": UN representative
BELGRADE, Nov 7 (AFP) - The human rights situation in Kosovo,
particularly of Serbs and other non-Albanians, is "far from good," UN
Commission for Human Rights' special representative Jose Cutileiro said
Thursday.
"The situation in most parts of Kosovo is far from good," Cutileiro, the
commission's special representative for Bosnia and Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia, told reporters at the end of his visit to Serbia and its
mainly ethnic Albanian-populated province of Kosovo.
"The return of the bulk of internally displaced people is still poor.
There is restricted movement for non-Albanians," he added.
More than 200,000 Serbs have fled Kosovo since the end of war in 1999,
taking shelter in the rest of Serbia and Montenegro, its smaller partner
in the Yugoslav federation.
Some 80,000 Kosovo Serbs remain in the province, living in enclaves
protected by NATO-led peacekeeping troops (KFOR).
"Everything possible should be done to help internally displaced people
go back to their homes and all efforts should be made to ensure that
they have a decent life before going home," Cutileiro said.
However, the UN representative noticed an improvement in the situation
in Kosovo,
particularly after Serbs there had taken part in last year's general
elections and local polls last month.
He also praised progress regarding human rights in central Serbia, but
warned of a difficult economic climate and "perilous situation for
internally displaced persons and Romas" in the region.
Cutileiro was to travel to Sarajevo for a one-week visit to Bosnia.
===
CUTILIERO: DESPITE PROGRESS, HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION UNSATISFACTORY
BELGRADE,Nov7 (Beta)The U.N. Human Rights Special Envoy in the former
Yugoslavia, Jose Cutiliero, said on Nov. 7, that despite progress,
there are still numerous problems regarding respect for human rights in
Yugoslavia.
"Certain aspects are not even close to being settled. A general
evaluation of all the places I have toured is the poor economic
situation, and progress in the human rights field requires a
satisfactory economic situation," Cutiliero told the press in Belgrade.
He also said it was necessary to "do everything to enable those who
wish to return to Kosovo to do so, but also to create the appropriate
conditions for them in their current places of residence."
During his third tour of the region, Cutiliero visited Belgrade, Novi
Sad, Pristina, Novi Pazar, and Podgorica, and will depart for
BosniaHerzegovina on Nov. 7.
Cutiliero is to submit a report on the human rights situation in the
former Yugoslavia at the session of the U.N. Human Rights Commission,
to be held in Geneva next spring.
=== 3 ===
KOSOVO: JUGOSLAVIA ACCETTA PAGARE PARTE DEBITO
(ANSA) - BELGRADO, 8 NOV - La Jugoslavia ha accettato di ripagare parte
dei crediti concessi dalla Banca mondiale al Kosovo, ha detto il
vicedirettore dell'istituto finanziario internazionale Christian
Portman. La Banca mondiale, ha aggiunto Portman, ha garantito a Belgrado
crediti per 550 milioni di dollari anche per questa disponibilita',
oltre che per la ''buona impressione suscitata dalla velocita' e dalla
profondita' delle riforme portate avanti nel paese''. (ANSA). OT
08/11/2002 11:12
YUGOSLAVIA AGREES TO REPAY KOSOVO'S DEBTS
PRISTINA,Nov7 (Beta)The vice president of the World Bank (WB)
department for southeastern Europe, Christian Poortmann, said on Nov.
7, that Yugoslavia has agreed to repay the bank loan that had been used
in Kosovo.
"Yugoslavia has decided to repay a part of the WB loan used in Kosovo
at the time of the country's reintegration into the bank, and then
Yugoslavia took on the obligation to repay a part of the loan allocated
to Kosovo," Poortmann told the press.
He added that the WB has approved Yugoslavia loans worth $US550
million, with a 0.75 interest rate, which, as he put it, is almost a
gift.
Poortmann underlined that the WB has already indicated its stand that
it is impressed with the swiftness and quality of the reforms in
Yugoslavia.
"Vesti", quotidiano serbo stampato a Francoforte, pubblica una
interessante intervista al professor Emil Vlajki.
Originario di Dubrovnik, di famiglia croata ed ebrea, Vlajki era un
tempo docente di scienze politiche a Sarajevo, poi ha insegnato ad
Ottawa (Canada). Sullo squartamento della RFS di Jugoslavia ha scritto
tra l'altro il libro "DEMONIZATION OF SERBS - WESTERN IMPERIALISM AND
MEDIA WAR CRIMINALS" (Ed. REVOLT, Ottawa), di cui si puo' trovare un
sunto in lungua inglese alla URL:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/859
Su questa lista ne abbiamo ospitato anche altri testi, tra cui:
U POTRAZI ZA NOVIM OKTOBROM
(kako od ' Banana- Republike' doæi do suverene drzave)
> http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/1332
ed un commento sulla secessione del Montenegro
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/316
(Olga e Andrea)
=== * ===
PROF. DR EMIL VLAJKI O DALJEM RAZBIJANJU JUGOSLAVIJE I SRBIJE
SRBIMA GOLGOTA TEK PREDSTOJI
06.11.2002.
Tvorci tzv. novog svetskog totalitarnog poretka, pre svega Sjedinjene
Americke Dr¾ave, jo¹ nisu zavr¹ili posao na Balkanu. Da bi se ometao
dalji integracioni proces Evropske unije, SAD nameravaju da nastave sa
rastakanjem teritorija biv¹e Jugoslavije - dr¾ave koja se u krvi
raspala pre 10 godina, a cije je ru¹enje planski izazvano spolja, pre
svega od SAD uz asistenciju Austrije, Nemacke i Vatikana. Sada je na
redu dezintegracija Srbije, tako da kalvarija (golgota) srpskog naroda
tek pocinje, ocenio je u razgovoru za "Vesti" prof. dr Emil Vlajki iz
Pariza.
- Ja bih voleo da nisam u pravu i da se moje procene ne obistine, ali
niz cinjenica, na ¾alost, idu u prilog ovom stavu. Naime, nakon
propasti Sovjetskog Saveza i socijalistickog bloka u Evropi, SAD su
ostale jedina svetska velesila, a najveci konkurent je ujedinjena
Evropa. SAD smatraju da se ne sme nikom dozvoliti, pa ni Evropskoj
uniji, da Americi preotme vodstvo u dominaciji nad svetom. O tome
govore i pentagonski dokument iz 1992. godine, kao i B¾e¾inski, glavni
geostrateg SAD.
On u svojoj knjizi "Velika ¹ahovnica", izdatoj 1996. godine, ka¾e da
se dr¾ave u Evropi smatraju vazalima SAD i treba da slu¾e interesima
SAD. Glavni cilj Amerike je ovladavanje teritorije koju B¾e¾inski
naziva Evroazijom. On ka¾e: "Ko vlada Evroazijom, taj vlada svetom", i
sve vreme u knjizi poredi SAD sa Rimskim carstvom. Pored toga smatra,
i ne samo on, da su SAD novi Jerusalim, da treba da postanu centar
sveta odakle ce se ¹iriti istina - veli na¹ sagovornik.
Povratak islama
Da bi sprecila istinsko ujedinjenje Evrope po De Golovoj zamisli, od
Atlantika do Urala, Amerika prvo izaziva seriju balkanskih ratova i
tako ranjava Evropu i njeno ujedinjenje, a istovremeno preko NATO
kontroli¹e dobar deo evropskih integracionih procesa.
Drugo ¹to cini je stvaranje niza muslimanskih entiteta na Balkanu cime
prakticno vracaju islam u Evropu, protiv cega se Evropa borila 13
vekova. Treca stvar je obnavljanje hladnog rata protiv Rusije. Sve to,
po oceni dr Vlajkija, spada u americku strategiju za sprecavanje
istinskog ujedinjenja Evrope, zbog cega ce se i produ¾iti razbijanje
sada¹nje Jugoslavije i Srbije.
- Oni ce nastaviti sa Vojvodinom, Ra¹kom, odnosno Sand¾akom i ju¾nim
delom centralne Srbije: u Bujanovcu, Medvedi i Pre¹evu. Ja mislim da u
Vojvodini i Sand¾aku samo cekaju mig velikog americkog brata sa
akcijama, slicnim onima u Bosni. Da se pocne sa optu¾ivanjem kako su
Srbi genocidan narod, da pljackaju, da siluju muslimanske ¾ene u
Sand¾aku, odnosno madarske u Vojvodini. To nije problem iscenirati i
propagirati po¹to SAD kontroli¹u vi¹e od 90 posto svetskih medija
direktno ili indirektno. Takode, iz najnovije istorije nije nepoznato
kad god je neko tra¾io autonomiju na ovim na¹im prostorima, to se
zavr¹avalo ratom - opominje dr Vlajki.
Osim toga, podseca on, jo¹ pre dve godine je u americkom Senatu
izglasana Rezolucija koja govori o navodnom genocidnom nastupu Srba
prema vojvodanskim Madarima, da oni moraju napu¹tati svoja ognji¹ta u
Vojvodini zbog srpske represije, isto kao ¹to su to morali i Albanci
na Kosovu, te da se Srbi po svaku cenu moraju spreciti u tom
etnocidnom pohodu, pa se preporucuje predsedniku SAD da sve ucini kako
bi se sprecio dalji genocid koji vr¹e Srbi nad ostalim narodima.
- Ne treba zaboraviti ni cinjenicu da je 1999. godine na redovnoj
godi¹njoj konferenciji ministara inostranih poslova islamskih zemalja
sveta, uz Hrvatsku i Sloveniju, u svojstvu gosta bio prisutan i
Sand¾ak koji je pozvan kao nezavisna dr¾ava. ©to se Vojvodine
tice, mislim da ce doci do njene potpune dezintegracije. Hrvati imaju
aspiracije prema jednom delu, Madari ka drugom, pa bi se ti krajevi
mogli pripojiti pomenutim dr¾avama, a s druge strane ovim autonoma¹ima
je samo stalo da budu predsednici ne znam cega - opominje na¹
sagovornik.
Velika Albanija
Na jugu centralnog dela Srbije, ukazuje on, vec postoji paralelni
albanski sistem vlasti koji, po americkom nalogu, toleri¹e aktuelni
re¾im Srbije. Tamo se vec vijori i dr¾avna zastava Albanije, kao i na
Kosovu i u delovima Crne Gore i Makedonije. - Kada je o Kosovu rec, tu
vi¹e nema Srba, Crnogoraca, Jevreja, Hrvata. Sve su ih isterali, ali
sada ima Nemaca, Engleza, Amerikanaca, itd. I multietnicitet je, da
zlobno primetim, zaista osiguran - ka¾e dr Emil Vlajki. - Kosovo ce po
nalogu iz Amerike dobiti samostalnost nakon razdvajanja Srbije i Crne
Gore. Po Rezoluciji UN 1244 ova pokrajina je u sastavu SRJ, te kad nje
vi¹e ne bude u SAD ce se protumaciti da je Kosovo automatski
nezavisno. A i zahtevi za nezavisno¹cu ove pokrajine ucestalo se
pojavljuju u americkoj administraciji.
Po oceni na¹eg sagovornika, fakticki vec postoji velika Albanija, iako
ne zvanicno, i pitanje je vremena kada ce se balkanske teritorije koje
naseljavaju Albanci politicki i dr¾avnoujediniti sa Albanijom. Ta
mogucnost, po proceni dr Vlajkija, ukazace se vec nakon tri godine
UNMIK uprave na Kosovu i Metohiji, kao i trogodi¹njeg prelaznog
perioda unije Srbije i Crne Gore, posle cega ce se one razdvojiti.
Profesor Vlajki smatra da ni buduca Ustavna povelja o redefinisanim
odnosima Srbije i Crne Gore nece sacuvati zajednicku dr¾avu ove dve
republike.
- To je jedna ve¹tacka tvorevina koja ne funkcioni¹e i nema niceg
zajednickog, te je samo u pitanju odlaganje onoga ¹to, po meni, tek
ocekuje SRJ i posebno Srbiju.
Prakticno Jugoslavije vi¹e nema, a ova tzv. unija Srbije i Crne Gore
za one koji upravljaju novim svetskim poretkom samo je dobijanje
vremena dok ne odluce kako nastaviti dalje razbijanje Srbije, i dok ne
zavr¹e sa svojom serijom malih ratova u Avganistanu, Iraku ili
Somaliji. Tako da se trenutno cini kao da Evropska unija ¾eli da
se proces dezintegracije Srbije i SRJ zaustavi, ali ja mislim da time
i dalje diriguju Amerikanci, jer su patolo¹ko megalomanski
raspolo¾eni, i jednaki su fanatici kao i islamski fundamentalisti.
Nikakve razlike medu njima nema. Osim toga SAD su nedavno dobile
pravo od UN da mogu samostalno napasti bilo koju zemlju u svetu
ukoliko procene da otud preti terorizam - ukazuje dr Vlajki.
Rastakanje Srbije, nastavlja on, trebalo bi da se dogada etapno po vec
videnom scenariju od pre 10 godina.
- Da je Milo¹evic ostao na vlasti iz Amerike bi bio dirigovan
gradanski rat u Crnoj Gori i njeno otcepljenje. Ovako, su za izvesno
vreme zaustavili Mila Ðukanovica, koji je inace njihova marioneta i
kojeg dr¾e pod pretnjom Ha¹kog tribunala po¹to je bio crnogorski
premijer u vreme rata u Hrvatskoj, kao i pod pretnjom zatvora zbog
¹verca koji su mu prethodno dozvolili - smatra na¹ sagovornik.
Nacionalni interes
Upitan kad i gde bi se, po njegovoj proceni, mogao zaustaviti raspad
Srbije, profesor Vlajki ka¾e: "Ko ce to znati. Sve to mo¾e potrajati
jo¹ 10 godina. Moguce je i da ovih 100.000 Albanaca u Beogradu jednog
dana proglase autonomiju. Kad dode do rastakanja teritorije zavlada
neko ludilo, ne¹to iracionalno, svi pocinju bivati separatisti,
nastaje rat svih protiv svih". Zato bi, porucuje na¹ sagovornik,
prevashodno trebalo da se misli o integritetu Srbije, da to bude u
prvom planu svakoj ekipi koja je na vlasti:
- Raspad koji se vec 10 godina dogada na Balkanu tra¾i u Srbiji snagu
jedne politicke partije koja ce imati jasnu dugorocnu viziju
predvidljive buducnosti i koja ce voditi racuna o dr¾avnom i
nacionalnom interesu. Potreban je voda koji ce ocuvati srpski narod i
teritoriju, koji ce umeti da se postavi prema silama koje vladaju
svetom, kao i prema satelitima koji sprovode naloge tih sila. Takvog
vodu ovo podrucje nema. Nema ni politickog programa ni politicke snage
za taj program i to je jo¹ jedan od razloga daljih dezintegracija
Srbije - opominje prof. dr Emil Vlajki.
Ekonomski interesi SAD
- Pored ¾elje za svetskom moci i dominacijom nad celim svetom, interes
SAD u Evroaziji je i ekonomski. Oni u ovom casu, kao jedina velesila,
znaju da ce se u dogledno vreme pojaviti i nove sile: Kina, Rusija i
Indija, te nastoje da u¹icare ¹to vi¹e, osiguraju najva¾nije
geostrate¹ke tacke i velike resurse nafte iz biv¹ih sovjetskih
republika stave pod svoju kontrolu. Zbog toga je takode izvr¹ena
okupacija Makedonije i Kosova. Da se osigura americki naftovod kojim
bi tekla nafta iz Crnog mora preko Bugarske, Makedonije, Kosova i
Albanije do luke Flora. Naftovod bi donosio milijarde dolara profita
godi¹nje, a u taj poduhvat SAD su vec ulo¾ile tri milijarde -
poja¹njava prof. dr Vlajki.
Nadam se da gre¹im
- U naucnim krugovima postoji teorija koja ka¾e da ce Amerika sada
ostaviti Srbiju na miru, po¹to je na vlast postavila ekipu koja ce
slu¾iti njenim interesima, te da je ona sad zadovoljna i da se
kalvarija Srbije i srpskog naroda nece nastaviti. Mislim da postoje
odredene ¹anse da i ta teorija bude tacna, mada moj stav i cinjenice o
kojima sam govorio idu u pravcu daljeg rastakanja - ka¾e prof. dr Emil
Vlajki, napominjuci da bi on veoma voleo da nije u pravu i da ne dode
do razbijanja Srbije.
R. Koncar
interessante intervista al professor Emil Vlajki.
Originario di Dubrovnik, di famiglia croata ed ebrea, Vlajki era un
tempo docente di scienze politiche a Sarajevo, poi ha insegnato ad
Ottawa (Canada). Sullo squartamento della RFS di Jugoslavia ha scritto
tra l'altro il libro "DEMONIZATION OF SERBS - WESTERN IMPERIALISM AND
MEDIA WAR CRIMINALS" (Ed. REVOLT, Ottawa), di cui si puo' trovare un
sunto in lungua inglese alla URL:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/859
Su questa lista ne abbiamo ospitato anche altri testi, tra cui:
U POTRAZI ZA NOVIM OKTOBROM
(kako od ' Banana- Republike' doæi do suverene drzave)
> http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/1332
ed un commento sulla secessione del Montenegro
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/316
(Olga e Andrea)
=== * ===
PROF. DR EMIL VLAJKI O DALJEM RAZBIJANJU JUGOSLAVIJE I SRBIJE
SRBIMA GOLGOTA TEK PREDSTOJI
06.11.2002.
Tvorci tzv. novog svetskog totalitarnog poretka, pre svega Sjedinjene
Americke Dr¾ave, jo¹ nisu zavr¹ili posao na Balkanu. Da bi se ometao
dalji integracioni proces Evropske unije, SAD nameravaju da nastave sa
rastakanjem teritorija biv¹e Jugoslavije - dr¾ave koja se u krvi
raspala pre 10 godina, a cije je ru¹enje planski izazvano spolja, pre
svega od SAD uz asistenciju Austrije, Nemacke i Vatikana. Sada je na
redu dezintegracija Srbije, tako da kalvarija (golgota) srpskog naroda
tek pocinje, ocenio je u razgovoru za "Vesti" prof. dr Emil Vlajki iz
Pariza.
- Ja bih voleo da nisam u pravu i da se moje procene ne obistine, ali
niz cinjenica, na ¾alost, idu u prilog ovom stavu. Naime, nakon
propasti Sovjetskog Saveza i socijalistickog bloka u Evropi, SAD su
ostale jedina svetska velesila, a najveci konkurent je ujedinjena
Evropa. SAD smatraju da se ne sme nikom dozvoliti, pa ni Evropskoj
uniji, da Americi preotme vodstvo u dominaciji nad svetom. O tome
govore i pentagonski dokument iz 1992. godine, kao i B¾e¾inski, glavni
geostrateg SAD.
On u svojoj knjizi "Velika ¹ahovnica", izdatoj 1996. godine, ka¾e da
se dr¾ave u Evropi smatraju vazalima SAD i treba da slu¾e interesima
SAD. Glavni cilj Amerike je ovladavanje teritorije koju B¾e¾inski
naziva Evroazijom. On ka¾e: "Ko vlada Evroazijom, taj vlada svetom", i
sve vreme u knjizi poredi SAD sa Rimskim carstvom. Pored toga smatra,
i ne samo on, da su SAD novi Jerusalim, da treba da postanu centar
sveta odakle ce se ¹iriti istina - veli na¹ sagovornik.
Povratak islama
Da bi sprecila istinsko ujedinjenje Evrope po De Golovoj zamisli, od
Atlantika do Urala, Amerika prvo izaziva seriju balkanskih ratova i
tako ranjava Evropu i njeno ujedinjenje, a istovremeno preko NATO
kontroli¹e dobar deo evropskih integracionih procesa.
Drugo ¹to cini je stvaranje niza muslimanskih entiteta na Balkanu cime
prakticno vracaju islam u Evropu, protiv cega se Evropa borila 13
vekova. Treca stvar je obnavljanje hladnog rata protiv Rusije. Sve to,
po oceni dr Vlajkija, spada u americku strategiju za sprecavanje
istinskog ujedinjenja Evrope, zbog cega ce se i produ¾iti razbijanje
sada¹nje Jugoslavije i Srbije.
- Oni ce nastaviti sa Vojvodinom, Ra¹kom, odnosno Sand¾akom i ju¾nim
delom centralne Srbije: u Bujanovcu, Medvedi i Pre¹evu. Ja mislim da u
Vojvodini i Sand¾aku samo cekaju mig velikog americkog brata sa
akcijama, slicnim onima u Bosni. Da se pocne sa optu¾ivanjem kako su
Srbi genocidan narod, da pljackaju, da siluju muslimanske ¾ene u
Sand¾aku, odnosno madarske u Vojvodini. To nije problem iscenirati i
propagirati po¹to SAD kontroli¹u vi¹e od 90 posto svetskih medija
direktno ili indirektno. Takode, iz najnovije istorije nije nepoznato
kad god je neko tra¾io autonomiju na ovim na¹im prostorima, to se
zavr¹avalo ratom - opominje dr Vlajki.
Osim toga, podseca on, jo¹ pre dve godine je u americkom Senatu
izglasana Rezolucija koja govori o navodnom genocidnom nastupu Srba
prema vojvodanskim Madarima, da oni moraju napu¹tati svoja ognji¹ta u
Vojvodini zbog srpske represije, isto kao ¹to su to morali i Albanci
na Kosovu, te da se Srbi po svaku cenu moraju spreciti u tom
etnocidnom pohodu, pa se preporucuje predsedniku SAD da sve ucini kako
bi se sprecio dalji genocid koji vr¹e Srbi nad ostalim narodima.
- Ne treba zaboraviti ni cinjenicu da je 1999. godine na redovnoj
godi¹njoj konferenciji ministara inostranih poslova islamskih zemalja
sveta, uz Hrvatsku i Sloveniju, u svojstvu gosta bio prisutan i
Sand¾ak koji je pozvan kao nezavisna dr¾ava. ©to se Vojvodine
tice, mislim da ce doci do njene potpune dezintegracije. Hrvati imaju
aspiracije prema jednom delu, Madari ka drugom, pa bi se ti krajevi
mogli pripojiti pomenutim dr¾avama, a s druge strane ovim autonoma¹ima
je samo stalo da budu predsednici ne znam cega - opominje na¹
sagovornik.
Velika Albanija
Na jugu centralnog dela Srbije, ukazuje on, vec postoji paralelni
albanski sistem vlasti koji, po americkom nalogu, toleri¹e aktuelni
re¾im Srbije. Tamo se vec vijori i dr¾avna zastava Albanije, kao i na
Kosovu i u delovima Crne Gore i Makedonije. - Kada je o Kosovu rec, tu
vi¹e nema Srba, Crnogoraca, Jevreja, Hrvata. Sve su ih isterali, ali
sada ima Nemaca, Engleza, Amerikanaca, itd. I multietnicitet je, da
zlobno primetim, zaista osiguran - ka¾e dr Emil Vlajki. - Kosovo ce po
nalogu iz Amerike dobiti samostalnost nakon razdvajanja Srbije i Crne
Gore. Po Rezoluciji UN 1244 ova pokrajina je u sastavu SRJ, te kad nje
vi¹e ne bude u SAD ce se protumaciti da je Kosovo automatski
nezavisno. A i zahtevi za nezavisno¹cu ove pokrajine ucestalo se
pojavljuju u americkoj administraciji.
Po oceni na¹eg sagovornika, fakticki vec postoji velika Albanija, iako
ne zvanicno, i pitanje je vremena kada ce se balkanske teritorije koje
naseljavaju Albanci politicki i dr¾avnoujediniti sa Albanijom. Ta
mogucnost, po proceni dr Vlajkija, ukazace se vec nakon tri godine
UNMIK uprave na Kosovu i Metohiji, kao i trogodi¹njeg prelaznog
perioda unije Srbije i Crne Gore, posle cega ce se one razdvojiti.
Profesor Vlajki smatra da ni buduca Ustavna povelja o redefinisanim
odnosima Srbije i Crne Gore nece sacuvati zajednicku dr¾avu ove dve
republike.
- To je jedna ve¹tacka tvorevina koja ne funkcioni¹e i nema niceg
zajednickog, te je samo u pitanju odlaganje onoga ¹to, po meni, tek
ocekuje SRJ i posebno Srbiju.
Prakticno Jugoslavije vi¹e nema, a ova tzv. unija Srbije i Crne Gore
za one koji upravljaju novim svetskim poretkom samo je dobijanje
vremena dok ne odluce kako nastaviti dalje razbijanje Srbije, i dok ne
zavr¹e sa svojom serijom malih ratova u Avganistanu, Iraku ili
Somaliji. Tako da se trenutno cini kao da Evropska unija ¾eli da
se proces dezintegracije Srbije i SRJ zaustavi, ali ja mislim da time
i dalje diriguju Amerikanci, jer su patolo¹ko megalomanski
raspolo¾eni, i jednaki su fanatici kao i islamski fundamentalisti.
Nikakve razlike medu njima nema. Osim toga SAD su nedavno dobile
pravo od UN da mogu samostalno napasti bilo koju zemlju u svetu
ukoliko procene da otud preti terorizam - ukazuje dr Vlajki.
Rastakanje Srbije, nastavlja on, trebalo bi da se dogada etapno po vec
videnom scenariju od pre 10 godina.
- Da je Milo¹evic ostao na vlasti iz Amerike bi bio dirigovan
gradanski rat u Crnoj Gori i njeno otcepljenje. Ovako, su za izvesno
vreme zaustavili Mila Ðukanovica, koji je inace njihova marioneta i
kojeg dr¾e pod pretnjom Ha¹kog tribunala po¹to je bio crnogorski
premijer u vreme rata u Hrvatskoj, kao i pod pretnjom zatvora zbog
¹verca koji su mu prethodno dozvolili - smatra na¹ sagovornik.
Nacionalni interes
Upitan kad i gde bi se, po njegovoj proceni, mogao zaustaviti raspad
Srbije, profesor Vlajki ka¾e: "Ko ce to znati. Sve to mo¾e potrajati
jo¹ 10 godina. Moguce je i da ovih 100.000 Albanaca u Beogradu jednog
dana proglase autonomiju. Kad dode do rastakanja teritorije zavlada
neko ludilo, ne¹to iracionalno, svi pocinju bivati separatisti,
nastaje rat svih protiv svih". Zato bi, porucuje na¹ sagovornik,
prevashodno trebalo da se misli o integritetu Srbije, da to bude u
prvom planu svakoj ekipi koja je na vlasti:
- Raspad koji se vec 10 godina dogada na Balkanu tra¾i u Srbiji snagu
jedne politicke partije koja ce imati jasnu dugorocnu viziju
predvidljive buducnosti i koja ce voditi racuna o dr¾avnom i
nacionalnom interesu. Potreban je voda koji ce ocuvati srpski narod i
teritoriju, koji ce umeti da se postavi prema silama koje vladaju
svetom, kao i prema satelitima koji sprovode naloge tih sila. Takvog
vodu ovo podrucje nema. Nema ni politickog programa ni politicke snage
za taj program i to je jo¹ jedan od razloga daljih dezintegracija
Srbije - opominje prof. dr Emil Vlajki.
Ekonomski interesi SAD
- Pored ¾elje za svetskom moci i dominacijom nad celim svetom, interes
SAD u Evroaziji je i ekonomski. Oni u ovom casu, kao jedina velesila,
znaju da ce se u dogledno vreme pojaviti i nove sile: Kina, Rusija i
Indija, te nastoje da u¹icare ¹to vi¹e, osiguraju najva¾nije
geostrate¹ke tacke i velike resurse nafte iz biv¹ih sovjetskih
republika stave pod svoju kontrolu. Zbog toga je takode izvr¹ena
okupacija Makedonije i Kosova. Da se osigura americki naftovod kojim
bi tekla nafta iz Crnog mora preko Bugarske, Makedonije, Kosova i
Albanije do luke Flora. Naftovod bi donosio milijarde dolara profita
godi¹nje, a u taj poduhvat SAD su vec ulo¾ile tri milijarde -
poja¹njava prof. dr Vlajki.
Nadam se da gre¹im
- U naucnim krugovima postoji teorija koja ka¾e da ce Amerika sada
ostaviti Srbiju na miru, po¹to je na vlast postavila ekipu koja ce
slu¾iti njenim interesima, te da je ona sad zadovoljna i da se
kalvarija Srbije i srpskog naroda nece nastaviti. Mislim da postoje
odredene ¹anse da i ta teorija bude tacna, mada moj stav i cinjenice o
kojima sam govorio idu u pravcu daljeg rastakanja - ka¾e prof. dr Emil
Vlajki, napominjuci da bi on veoma voleo da nije u pravu i da ne dode
do razbijanja Srbije.
R. Koncar
URL for this article: http://emperors-clothes.com/milo/gw.htm
www.tenc.net * [Emperor's Clothes]
=======================================
Expert on psychology of ethnic conflict
changes his mind about Yugoslavia -
Media Misrepresentation Of
Milosevic's Words: A Review
Of The Evidence
by Professor Francisco Gil-White
[posted February 9, 2002]
=======================================
Note from Emperor's Clothes: The following article was sent to us by
Francisco Gil-White. He is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at the
University of Pennsylvania and a Fellow at the Solomon Asch Center for
Study of Ethnopolitical Conflict.
Professor Gil-White informs us that:
"I study and write about the psychology that makes racism and
ethnic hatred possible, and which exacerbates ethnic conflicts when
compared to other sorts of conflicts."
The following views are those of Professor Gil-White and not
necessarily the University of Pennsylvania or the Solomon Asch Center.
-- Jared Israel
Media Misrepresentation of Milosevic's Words
by Francisco Gil-White
A couple of months ago I chanced upon the Emperor's Clothes Website
because of their coverage of 9-11.
I noticed their startling claim that we have been systematically
lied to about Yugoslavia, including Slobodan Milosevic. As they told
it, he was an honorable leader; perhaps a great one.
Since their views sharply contradicted my own, I started
systematically checking their references by obtaining the relevant
original documents. I have yet to find a single claim in error.
This was particularly surprising regarding the famous speech that
Slobodan Milosevic delivered at Kosovo Field in 1989 at the 600th
anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo. According to what I had read,
this was an ultranationalist diatribe in which Milosevic manipulated
memories of a famous defeat to stir mob hatred of Muslims, especially
Albanians.
Emperor's Clothes posted what they claimed was the official U.S.
government translation of that speech (done by the National Technical
Information Service, a dependency of the Commerce Department) at
http://emperors-clothes.com/milo/milosaid.html
The posted speech was certainly not hateful.
But was this the real speech? The text contradicted everything I had
been led to expect from Slobodan Milosevic and everything I had read
about this speech.
I obtained, through my university library, a copy of the microfilm
of the BBC's translation. I compared this text to the one posted at
Emperors Clothes.
They matched almost exactly.
The speech is not devoid of a certain poetry and - amazingly - it is
*explicitly tolerant*.
But if the reports that this speech was viciously hateful were
false, what about the rest of my information about Yugoslavia? After
all, it came from the same sources. I began to read voraciously, to
see how academics, politicians and the media had reported what
happened in Yugoslavia.
I have found an enormous amount of misinformation, and it is hard to
dispel the impression that much of this is *deliberate*. This is quite
important for my field because students of ethnic conflict, like
myself, need to know what it is that we are supposed to explain. Our
case data comes from historians and journalists who describe ethnic
conflicts for us. Until recently, I was assuming that those who wrote
about Yugoslavia could at least be trusted to try to report things
accurately.
I have changed my mind. What I now know suggests that the problem is
not merely that reporters and academics are misinformed. I have
observed that a source may report the facts accurately and then, in
another place, usually later, report them completely inaccurately. How
can one explain this as a result of ignorance? It suggests a conscious
effort to misinform.
Furthermore, it appears that these inaccuracies are calculated to
exploit the human tendency to essentialize [basically, to stereotype -
ed.] racial, national, and ethnic groups. in order to solidify the
prejudice that Serbs are virulent nationalists. This prejudice then
frames the conflict in Yugoslavia so as to serve the interests of the
powers which dismembered Yugoslavia.
As an example of what is done, I have assembled excerpts from
various sources regarding Milosevic?s famous speech at Gazimestan (the
location is often referred to as Kosovo Polje or Kosovo Field) in
1989.
I have provided Emperor's Clothes with a pdf version of the
microfilm of the BBC translation so that they may post it, allowing
readers to compare the US government and the BBC versions for
themselves. The BBC microfilm can be obtained from some university
libraries. If you are an academic, you can get it at your library or
through an inter-library loan, in the same way that I did.
[[ Note from Emperor's Clothes: You may read the pdf of the BBC
translation at
http://www.icdsm.org/milosevic/milosevic1.pdf
http://www.icdsm.org/milosevic/milosevic2.pdf
and
http://www.icdsm.org/milosevic/milosevic3.pdf
To help you compare, U.S. government translation can be read at
http://emperors-clothes.com/milo/milosaid.html
END Note from Emperor's Clothes
For those with access to university libraries, the text of
Milosevic's speech is also here:
Krieger, Heike, ed. 2001. The Kosovo conflict and international
law: An analytical documentation 1974-1999, Cambridge International
Documents Series, Volume II. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.(p.10) ]]
What follows below is a compilation (certainly not complete) of
misquotations, misrepresentations, misattributions, and
mischaracterizations of Milosevic?s 1989 speech in the media and by
academics along with some excerpts from the speech and my comments.
It is important to keep the following in mind: this speech is the
media's favorite piece of evidence that Milosevic is an
ultra-nationalist racist. It is said over and over in the media that
Milosevic used this speech to incite the Serbs to nationalistic
hatred.
It should be obvious that incitement is a public behavior. If
Milosevic was going to become an ultra-nationalist populist
politician, then he had to make ultra-nationalist speeches, for one
can hardly incite the masses in secret. It is thus noteworthy that
this speech-supposedly the best example of Milosevic virulently
inciting people-is explicitly tolerant, and that in order to suggest
otherwise all sorts of fabrications that in fact appear nowhere in the
speech have been necessary. If there was something better to quote or
cite as evidence of Milosevic?s ultra-nationalistic demagoguery,
surely the media would have used it long ago. Why fabricate if
evidence is on hand?
Below are examples that reveal either willful misinformation or
pathologically low journalistic standards in the media. Following
that, in the second part of my analysis, I quote newspaper reports
made on or immediately after June 28, 1989, the day Milosevic spoke.
These accounts, published immediately after his speech, were accurate,
and this demonstrates that the truth was easily available if someone
had wanted to report it later on.
[The Excerpt from Balkan Report Starts Here]
Views on Vidovdan (St Vitus day - June 28th)
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, or RFE/RL's Albanian-language
broadcasters included in their 28 June programming reflections by
several prominent individuals on Yugoslav President Slobodan
Milosevic's speech at Gazimestan. He gave that address ten years ago
to mark the 600th anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo Polje.
Azem Vllasi, who is a former ethnic Albanian SKJ chief in
Kosova, was in the infamous Mitrovica prison on Vidovdan 1989: In
effect the war against the Albanians in Kosova had started 1988. In
Gazimestan, Milosevic announced that he would also launch a war
against the other peoples of Yugoslavia. The Serbs had great hopes
that they could turn the war that they lost 600 years ago into a
victory. Milosevic misused the Serbian myth about Kosova to create
victims and cause pain to peoples other than we Albanians, but after
ten years he turned it into a great loss for the Serbs themselves."
Reprinted from Balkan Report, 2 July 1999, Volume 3, Number 26
(Translated by Fabian Schmidt, notes by Patrick Moore)
http://www.rferl.org/balkan-report/1999/07/26-020799.html
[The Excerpt from Balkan Report Ends Here]
COMMENT: Slobodan Milosevic did not say that. But here is something
that he did say:
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Starts Here]
Equal and harmonious relations among Yugoslav peoples are a
necessary condition for the existence of Yugoslavia and for it to find
its way out of the crisis and, in particular, they are a necessary
condition for its economic and social prosperity. In this respect
Yugoslavia does not stand out from the social milieu of the
contemporary, particularly the developed, world. This world is more
and more marked by national tolerance, national cooperation, and even
national equality. The modern economic and technological, as well as
political and cultural development, has guided various peoples toward
each other, has made them interdependent and increasingly has made
them equal as well [medjusobno ravnopravni]. Equal and united people
can above all become a part of the civilization toward which mankind
is moving. If we cannot be at the head of the column leading to such a
civilization, there is certainly no need for us to be at is tail.
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Ends Here]
* * *
[The Excerpt from Vladimir Zerjavic Starts Here]
"...when the 600th Anniversary of the Kosovo Battle with the
Turks was held at Gazimestan in 1989, Slobodan Milosevic stated that
he will "unite all Serbs into one state, either with institutional or
non-institutional measures, even with weapons if necessary", what was
done in 1991."
Written by Vladimir Zerjavic, retiree of UN
Zagreb, July 1997, revised in December 1997.
http://www.hr/darko/etf/bul.html
[The Excerpt from Vladimir Zerjavic Ends Here]
COMMENT: Mr. Zerjavic (a Croat) puts actual quotation marks around
words that never appear in the text of Milosevic?s speech. That is
bold. As bold, perhaps, as the claims by the same Mr. Zerjavic, in his
book Population Losses of Yugoslavia in the World War II, to the
effect that the number of Yugoslavs (especially Serbs) who lost their
lives in the Ustashe (Croatian Nazi) death camps has been wildly
exaggerated.
* * *
[The Excerpt from London Independent Starts Here]
June 1989
On the stump at Kosovo Polje
Serbia's leader sets out his agenda at a rally of more than a
million Serbs at the Battle of Kosovo 600th anniversary celebrations,
as he openly threatens force to hold the six-republic federation
together.
-- From an alleged chronology of events in "Milosevic on Trial:
Fall of a Pariah"; Newspaper Publishing PLC, Independent on Sunday
(London); July 1, 2001, Sunday, SECTION: FOREIGN NEWS; Pg. 21
[The Excerpt from London Independent Ends Here]
COMMENT: No such threat appears in the text of the speech. This
allusion to an "open threat" sounds like the Independent is probably
using Dr. Vladimir Zerjavic as source. They certainly have not seen
the text of the speech.
* * *
[The Excerpt from Irish Times Starts Here]
It was at Kosovo Polje in 1389 that Serbs fought their most
historic battle, losing to a Turkish army and later enduring 500 years
of Ottoman rule. From here they fled again nearly three centuries
later, led by their Orthodox patriarch, after a failed rebellion. And
here, 10 years ago this month, the Yugoslav President, Mr Slobodan
Milosevic, made his name telling a crowd of 500,000 Serbs, "Serbia
will never abandon Kosovo".
from "Serbs make ragged retreat from their historic cradle"; The
Irish Times; June 16, 1999, CITY EDITION; SECTION: WORLD NEWS; CRISIS
IN THE BALKANS; Pg. 13
[The Excerpt from Irish Times Ends Here]
COMMENT: The Irish Times does not borrow the quote from Dr. Vladimir
Zerjavic, but they do borrow the boldness. They have put quotation
marks around a phrase that appears nowhere in the text.
* * *
[The Excerpt from Croatian Student Online Starts Here]
The now infamous speech by Milosevic at Gazimestan in Kosovo in
1989 was aimed at this very mentality - at the superiority complex,
and the feelings of cultural insecurity which are common among lower
and middle-class Serbs. It also created an "us versus them" atmosphere
- the "them" factor seen as almost a non-entity. This sociopolitical
dualism did hold some truth, although another way of looking at it is
as racist fatalism in a late 20th century context. But, in itself, it
was only a component of Greater Serbianism. And that imperialistic and
aggressive heresy is, after all, the reason why Croats and Bosnians
die while the Serbs make up excuses and lie to the world.
- - from The Croatian Student Online
"Causes of Serbian Aggression" by Branko Mletic
posted at: http://www.algonet.se/~bevanda/aggression3.htm
[The Excerpt from Croatian Student Online Ends Here]
COMMENT: Notice how casually the Croatian Student evokes "the
superiority complex, and the feelings of cultural insecurity which are
common among lower and middle-class Serbs." This reads like an ethnic
slur, although Serbs have been so thoroughly demonized in the media
that most readers will hardly notice it, or else will consider it a
probably just appraisal.
Below is another excerpt from Milosevic?s speech. How does one
create an "us versus them" atmosphere with these words? (They do seem
ineptly chosen for this purpose):
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Starts Here]
?unity in Serbia will bring prosperity to the Serbian people in
Serbia and each one of its citizens, irrespective of his national or
religious affiliation.
(?)
Serbia has never had only Serbs living in it. Today, more than
in the past, members of other peoples and nationalities also live in
it. This is not a disadvantage for Serbia. I am truly convinced that
it is its advantage. National composition of almost all countries in
the world today, particularly developed ones, has also been changing
in this direction. Citizens of different nationalities, religions, and
races have been living together more and more frequently and more and
more successfully.
(?)
The only differences one can and should allow in socialism are
between hard working people and idlers and between honest people and
dishonest people. Therefore, all people in Serbia who live from their
own work, honestly, respecting other people and other nations, are in
their own republic.
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Ends Here]
* * *
[The Excerpt from Balkans Paces Starts Here]
For the first time a documentary (produced in Montenegro 2 weeks
ago) about war crimes committed in the name of Greater Serbia was
shown on the Serbian TV - "Called From Gazimestan" - a reference to
the 'historic' speech of Slobodan Milosevic at the location where
Serbs lost to Ottoman Turks in 1389 - when he outlined the plan to
conquer Yugoslavia.
-- From Balkans Paces
http://www.igc.org/balkans/conclusion-slobo.html
[The Excerpt from Balkans Paces Ends Here]
COMMENT: No such "plan" was "outlined". Note that the writer speaks
of "the plan" not "a plan" thus suggesting that the existence of said
plan is common knowledge?
* * *
[The Excerpt from OPPRESSION Starts Here]
The culmination of this fanaticism was reached when the 'Nero'
of the Balkans, Milosevic - then still a communist leader - delivered
a certain speech in Gazimestan on the 600th memorial of the
Serbian-Ottoman War of Kosovo in 1989. Milosevic, who in this speech
also opened the way to the genocide in Bosnia-Herzegowina, for the
first time used slogans like, "Serbia is a whole and Kosovo is an
inseperable part of Serbia; We rather give our lives than deliver
Kosovo; This territory is a fortress of Christian Europe against
Islam", demonstrating thereby clearly the extent of the abominable
Serbian nationalism.
from Oppression.org (1999)
http://www.oppression.org/europe/kosovo_in_the_circle_of_fire.html
[The Excerpt from OPPRESSION Ends Here]
COMMENT: Oppression.org gets high marks for boldness. Others merely
put quotation marks around a fabricated sentence. They have put
quotations around an entirely fabricated paragraph.
* * *
[The Excerpt from The Economist Starts Here]
But it is primitive nationalism, egged on by the self-deluding
myth of Serbs as perennial victims, that has become both Mr
Milosevic?s rescuer (when communism collapsed with the Soviet Union)
and his nemesis. It was a stirringly virulent nationalist speech he
made in Kosovo, in 1989, harking back to the Serb Prince Lazar?s
suicidally brave battle against the Turks a mere six centuries ago,
that saved his leadership when the Serbian old guard looked in danger
of ejection. Now he may have become a victim of his own propaganda.
-- From The Economist, " What next for Slobodan Milosevic?" June 5,
1999
[The Excerpt from The Economist Ends Here]
COMMENT: The passages from Milosevic?s speech quoted above already
make it clear that this was not a "stirringly virulent nationalist
speech." The Economist would have you believe that Milosevic was
literally foaming at the mouth, and wanted to use the memories of
Prince Lazar and the defeat at Kosovo Polje as a catalyst for arousing
ultra-nationalistic feelings. This is how Milosevic actually
introduced his remarks about that historical event:
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Starts Here]
Today, it is difficult to say what is the historical truth about
the Battle of Kosovo and what is legend. Today this is no longer
important. Oppressed by pain and filled with hope, the people used to
remember and to forget, as, after all, all people in the world do, and
it was ashamed of treachery and glorified heroism. Therefore it is
difficult to say today whether the Battle of Kosovo was a defeat or a
victory for the Serbian people, whether thanks to it we fell into
slavery or we survived in this slavery. The answers to those questions
will be constantly sought by science and the people. What has been
certain through all the centuries until our time today is that
disharmony struck Kosovo 600 years ago. If we lost the battle, then
this was not only the result of social superiority and the armed
advantage of the Ottoman Empire but also of the tragic disunity in the
leadership of the Serbian state at that time. In that distant 1389,
the Ottoman Empire was not only stronger than that of the Serbs but it
was also more fortunate than the Serbian kingdom.
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Ends Here]
COMMENT: Is this a virulent nationalist speaking? Milosevic sounds
positively professorial. He sounds like an academic, showing a
grandfatherly understanding for the human frailties that lead people
to conveniently forget things in order to make legends out of history
in a romantic and nationalistic manner. And he is talking about the
famous battle at Kosovo Polje, in the very place where that battle was
fought. The truth of what happened, he says, is for scientists to
establish! Is this a nationalist using a myth of the people to rouse
their passions? Does he sound ?injured? and ?insecure??
TIME Magazine had a similar slant:
[The Excerpt from TIME Magzaine Starts Here]
It was St. Vitus' Day, a date steeped in Serbian history, myth
and eerie coincidence: on June 28, 1389, Ottoman invaders defeated the
Serbs at the battle of Kosovo; 525 years later, a young Serbian
nationalist assassinated Austro-Hungarian Archduke Franz Ferdinand,
lighting the fuse for World War I. And it was on St. Vitus' Day, 1989,
that Milosevic whipped a million Serbs into a nationalist frenzy in
the speech that capped his ascent to power.
Time International, July 9, 2001 v158 i1 p18+
[The Excerpt from TIME Magzaine Ends Here]
And so did the New York Times:
[The Excerpt from NEW YORK TIMES Starts Here]
In 1989 the Serbian strongman, Slobodan Milosevic, swooped down
in a helicopter onto the field where 600 years earlier the Turks had
defeated the Serbs at the Battle of Kosovo. In a fervent speech before
a million Serbs, he galvanized the nationalist passions that two years
later fueled the Balkan conflict.
The New York Times, July 28, 1996, Sunday, Late Edition -
Final, Section 1; Page 10; Column 1; Foreign Desk, 1384 words,
Serbs in Pragmatic Pullout from Albanian Region, By JANE PERLEZ,
PRISTINA, Serbia, July 22
[The Excerpt from NEW YORK TIMES Ends Here]
And the Washington Post:
[The Excerpt from WASHINGTON POST Starts Here]
A military band and a dozen chanting monks from the Serbian
Orthodox Church struggled unsuccessfully this morning to lift the dour
mood hanging over a small crowd of Serbs marking the 609th anniversary
of the Battle of Kosovo here at the most revered site in Serbia's
nationalist mythology.
(?)
Nine years ago today, Milosevic's fiery speech here to a million
angry Serbs was a rallying cry for nationalism and boosted his
popularity enough to make him the country's uncontested leader.
The Washington Post, June 29, 1998, Monday, Final Edition, A
SECTION; Pg. A10, 354 words, Bitter Serbs Blame Leader for Risking
Beloved Kosovo, R. Jeffrey Smith, Washington Post Foreign Service,
KOSOVO POLJE, Yugoslavia, June 28
[The Excerpt from WASHINGTON POST Ends Here]
But does Milosevic sound like his purpose is "whipping a million
Serbs into a nationalist frenzy" with his remembrance of the events of
1389? Is this a "fervent speech" meant to "galvanize the nationalist
passions"? Is it a "rallying cry for nationalism"?
The following excerpt is relatively long but it is worth reading
because of the juxtaposition of Milosevic with Tudjman and
Izetbegovic. (If you wish to skip forward to the Comment on T.W.
Carr's article, click here.)
[The Excerpt from T.W. CARR'S ARTICLE Starts Here]
Three leaders emerged within the collapsing Federal
Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia. Each used the emotive
appeal of patriotism (nationalism), history and religious
heritage in their bid for political control of one of the
three nation "nation states", Orthodox Christian Serbia,
Roman Catholic Christian Croatia and Islamic
Bosnia-Herzegovina.
SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC
On June 28, 1989, Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic marked
the 600th anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo against the
"Ottoman Islamist Empire" at Gazimestan by addressing more
than one million Serbs, recounting the heroism of the
Serbian nation and their Christian Orthodox faith in
resisting the spread of Islam into Europe. He reassured his
audience, that the Autonomous Province of Kosovo would
remain an integral part of Serbia and Yugoslavia, despite
the then current and often violent, problems of separatism
demanded by the Muslim Albanian majority living in Kosovo.
In the Serbian presidential election of November 12, 1989,
Mr. Milosevic won 65.3 percent of the vote, his nearest
rival, Mr. Vuk Draskovic, polled only 16.4 of the votes
cast.
ALIJA IZETBEGOVIC
At the same time, Alija Izetbegovic, who had been released
early from jail in 1988 (serving only six years of a 14 year
sentence for pro-Islamic anti-state activities), visited
Islamic fundamentalist states in the Middle East, returning
to Bosnia-Herzegovina to found the SDA (Muslim Party of
Democratic Action). His 1970 manifesto, "Islamic
Declaration", advocating the spread of radical
pan-Islamism-politicised Islam-throughout the world, by
force if necessary, was reissued in Sarajevo at this time.
His Islamic Declaration is imbued with intolerance towards
Western religion, culture and economic systems. This is also
the theme projected in his book, Islam between East and
West, first published in the US in 1984, and in Serbo-Croat
in 1988, shortly after he was released from prison in the
former Yugoslavia. In his writings he states that Islam
cannot co-exist with other religions in the same nation
other than a short-term expediency measure. In the longer
term, as and when Muslims become strong enough in any
country, then they must seize power and form a truly Islamic
state.
In the multy-party elections held in Bosnia-Herzegovina on
November 18, 1990, the population voted almost exclusively
along communal lines. The Muslim Democratic Action Party
secured 86 seats, the Serbian Democratic Party 72, and the
Croatian Democratic Union (ie: union with Croatia) Party 44
seats. As the leader of the largest political party, Mr.
Izetbegovic, became the first President of Bosnia-
Herzegovina, albeit for just one year, for under the new
constitution of B-H, the presidency was to revolve each year
between the three parties, each of which represented one
ethnic community.
Under constitutional law, in January 1992, Mr. Izetbegovic
should have handed over the Presidency to Mr. Radovan
Karadzic, the Serbian Democratic leader. He failed to honor
the constitution and being true to his writings, he seized
power, acting undemocratically and illegally. Therefore, at
no time since January 1992 should Mr. Izetbegovic have been
acknowledged by the international community as the legal
President of B-H.
FRANJO TUDJMAN
Towards the end of World War II, while still a young man,
Franjo Tudjman took the pragmatic option and joined the
communist Partisans. He had probably realized that Germany
could not win the war and that Tito and his Partisans would
gain control of Yugoslavia, with the full support of both
Soviets and the British Prime Minister Sir Winston
Churchill.
Some time after the end of World War II, Tudjman joined the
communist Yugoslav Army as a regular officer and rose to the
rank of Major-General during the early part of President
Tito´s period in office.
During the late 1960´s and in 1979, ultra right fascism
began to re-surface in Croatia, showing the same World War
II fascist face of nationalism and the requirement that a
nation state must be racially pure. This was the first
attempt anywhere in Europe to resurrect German National
Socialism following the fall of the Third Reich in 1944.
Hitler created Croatia when his forces over-ran Yugoslavia
in 1941, installing as Fuher, Ante Pavelic, leader of the
fascist Croatian Ustashi movement. Pavelic had spent the
previous 10 years in exile in Italy as head of a Croatian
terrorist group, shielded by the Vatican and the Italian
Fascist party.
Mr. Tudjman was deeply involved in the attempted revival of
fascism, allowing his national socialism ethos to come to
the fore with the publication of his treatise, The
Wastelands. In it he attempted to re-write major sections of
the history of World War II, downplaying the Holocaust, and
with it , the more than one-million Jews, Serbs and Gypsies
murdered by the Croatian ultra-nationalist Ustashi, which
included priests of the Holy Roman Church, at the Croatian
Ustashi concentration camp of Jasenovac and other locations
within Yugoslavia.
For his nationalistic, anti-state activities at this time,
Mr. Tudjman went to jail for three years. After being
released from jail, Mr. Tudjman went politically low key for
a few years, but re-emerged on the scene when President Tito
died in 1980, gradually building a power base among the
Croatian right wing and creating the HDZ Party.
In the multy-party elections held in Croatia in May 1990,
Mr. Tudjman´s HDZ Party won control of the Sabor (Croatian
Parliament) and Mr. Tudjman became President of Croatia when
it was still part of the Yugoslav Federation.
from "A CAREFUL COINCIDENCE OF NATIONAL POLICIES?"
by T.W. Carr (Ass. Publisher, Defense & Foreign Affairs
Publications. London)
http://www.aikor.de/InterTribunal/doku/twcarr1.htm
[The Excerpt from T.W. CARR'S ARTICLE Ends Here]
COMMENT: Contrary to Carr?s claim, Milosevic did not speak about the
status of Kosovo in the 1989 speech.
It is known from other sources, of course, that he certainly did not
want Kosovo to be split from Yugoslavia (for good reasons having to do
with the security of Serbs, Roma, Slavic Muslims, Jews, Albanians and
everyone else in Kosovo and his conviction that Kosovo was
legitimately part of the country he was after all helping lead. How
many leaders want their countries broken up?) But that does not mean
that in this speech he said, "that the Autonomous Province of Kosovo
would remain an integral part of Serbia and Yugoslavia, despite the
then current and often violent, problems of separatism demanded by the
Muslim Albanian majority living in Kosovo." So this is false.
Moreover, Milosevic never referred to the Ottoman Empire as
"Islamist." On the contrary, Milosevic?s remarks on the Ottoman Empire
showed no real animosity. He even acknowledged certain strengths:
"In that distant 1389, the Ottoman Empire was not only stronger
than that of the Serbs but it was also more fortunate than the Serbian
kingdom." (Milosevic, Speech at Kosovo Field)
More importantly, however, notice that Carr pairs the three leaders,
Milosevic, Izetbegovic, and Tudjman, and prefaces his remarks by
saying all three rose to prominence by manipulating nationalism. But
does Milosevic belong in this company? Whereas a good and effortless
case can be made for Izetbegovic and Tudjman being ultra-nationalists
(see above), all we get as evidence for Milosevic?s
"ultra-nationalism" is a false allusion to a declaration he never made
in the Kosovo Polje speech about the fact that he did not want Serbia
to be partitioned, which in itself would not even be evidence of
intolerant ultra-nationalism anyway. Moreover, the speech Carr refers
us to is the antithesis of an ultra-nationalistic speech.
Milosevic at his alleged worst, in other words, is not unlike Ghandi
or Martin Luther King.
Finally, I must observe that Carr is arguing that the US and Germany
are carving zones of interest in Europe and that this is the central
reason for the troubles in Yugoslavia.
In other words, he is not sympathetic to the official propaganda
about the causes of the wars in Yugoslavia.
Yet even he seems blithely to assume that Milosevic is a virulent
nationalist, even though he provides no evidence. (Izetbegovic and
Tudjman, both US allies, certainly do sound like bad guys, on the
other hand). The propaganda against Milosevic has been so successful
that even a critic like Carr believes it, though he can only give us
one short paragraph to support his belief, and that paragraph refers
to a consummately tolerant speech.
Is this the worst one can say about Milosevic?
* * *
[The Excerpt from International Crisis Group Article Starts Here]
On this date in 1948, Tito?s Yugoslavia was expelled at Stalin?s
behest from the Communist Information Bureau (Cominform). It was also
on this day in 1989 that Slobodan Milosevic addressed up to one
million Serbs at Gazimestan in Kosovo to commemorate the sixhundredth
anniversary of the Kosovo Battle. That speech contained the first open
threat of violent conflict by a Socialist Yugoslav leader:"Six
centuries later, again, we are in battles and quarrels. They are not
armed battles, although such things cannot be excluded".
BALKANS Briefing, Belgrade/Brussels, 6 July 2001
International Crisis Group
http://www.intl-crisis-group.org/projects/balkans/
serbia/reports/A400345_06072001.pdf
[The Excerpt from International Crisis Group Article Ends Here]
COMMENT: This quote does appear in the speech.
Any observer of Yugoslavia at this time knew that it was possible
that armed battles could break out. Why should the observation of such
an obvious fact be interpreted as a threat?
One could just as well interpret it as a worry.
Any state trying to contain irredentist terrorists may find itself
in the position of having to deploy its army to protect its
citizens-Milosevic was just stating the obvious. It is really
necessary to omit any reference to any other part of the speech, and
to ignore the facts of Yugoslavia at this time, for the
quote-completely out of context-to appear as a threat. Even then it
does not look very threatening (you have to be told that it is a
threat, for otherwise how could you reliably infer it?). But it pays
to see this quote in its minimal context: the paragraph in which it
appears:
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Starts Here]
Six centuries later, now, we are being again engaged in battles
and are facing battles. They are not armed battles, although such
things cannot be excluded yet. However, regardless of what kind of
battles they are, they cannot be won without resolve, bravery, and
sacrifice, without the noble qualities that were present here in the
field of Kosovo in the days past. Our chief battle now concerns
implementing the economic, political, cultural, and general social
prosperity, finding a quicker and more successful approach to a
civilization in which people will live in the 21st century. For this
battle, we certainly need heroism, of course of a somewhat different
kind, but that courage without which nothing serious and great can be
achieved remains unchanged and remains urgently necessary.
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Ends Here]
COMMENT: This minimal context is already quite informative. The
"chief battle" has nothing to do with armed conflict. And it requires
"heroism, of course of a somewhat different kind." If one further puts
this paragraph into the larger context of the speech it is obvious
that Milosevic is hardly making threats. For example, elsewhere in the
speech Milosevic says:
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Starts Here]
For as long as multinational communities have existed, their
weak point has always been the relations between different nations.
The threat is that the question of one nation being endangered by the
others can be posed one day -- and this can then start a wave of
suspicions, accusations, and intolerance, a wave that invariably grows
and is difficult to stop. This threat has been hanging like a sword
over our heads all the time. Internal and external enemies of
multi-national communities are aware of this and therefore they
organize their activity against multinational societies mostly by
fomenting national conflicts. At this moment, we in Yugoslavia are
behaving as if we have never had such an experience and as if in our
recent and distant past we have never experienced the worst tragedy of
national conflicts that a society can experience and still survive.
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Ends Here]
COMMENT: Milosevic was warning that nationalism was being used by
"internal and external enemies of multi-national communities" to
destroy Yugoslavia. He was chiding his fellow Yugoslavs for failing to
remember World War II and other catastrophes during which the Balkans
"experienced the worst tragedy of national conflicts that a society
can experience and still survive." Does this sound like a man whipping
up the population to go to war against other ethnic groups?
* * *
[The Excerpt from LONDON TIMES Starts Here]
Vidovdan, the feast of St Vitus, is one of the most sacred in
the Orthodox church, but it is also the day on which Mr Milosevic
began his political career. Twelve years before, in a dusty and
sweltering field at Kosovo Polje, he had whipped up Serb nationalism
among a ferocious and frustrated crowd. "No one will ever beat you!"
he had shouted, commemorating the defeat of the Serbs by the Turks at
Kosovo Polje in 1389. Yesterday Mr Milosevic was a beaten man on
suicide watch in Scheveningen prison in The Netherlands. Prison
officials, who will interview the former Yugoslav President to check
that he is not worried about being threatened by other inmates, are
also believed to be paying particular attention to the threat he made
earlier this year, to shoot himself rather than submit to
international justice.
from "Milosevic on suicide watch in Dutch prison"; Times
Newspapers Limited; The Times (London); June 30, 2001, Saturday
[The Excerpt from LONDON TIMES Ends Here]
COMMENT: This one comically gets it wrong. Milosevic probably never
said, "No one will ever beat you!" He more likely said something like
"No one will be allowed to beat you like that!" In any event, he did
not say it at the commemoration of the battle at Kosovo Polje (the
speech we have been discussing here). Those words were uttered at
Kosovo Polje but two years earlier, in 1987. At that time, Milosevic
met with Serbs and Montenegrins, mostly peasants, who had serious
grievances: they said they were being mistreated by prejudiced
Albanian authorities in Kosovo and violently harassed by radical
Albanian terrorists. They wanted to speak directly with Milosevic but
he was only meeting with a relatively small group in the hall.
Here is an account of this:
[The Excerpt from SERPENT Starts Here]
When members of the throng outside the hall again tried to break
through police lines and into the building, they were brutally clubbed
and beaten back by the police (composed mainly of Albanian officers,
but including some Serbs). Informed of what was taking place outside,
Milosevic exited the building and approached the still highly volatile
crowd. According to eyewitness reports at the time, the Serbian leader
was visibly upset, physically shaken, and trembling. When a dialogue
ensued between the demonstrators and Milosevic, they implored him to
protect them from the police violence. Acting on a journalist?s
suggestion, Milosevic re-entered the hall, and proceeded to a second
floor window. From that vantage point he nervously addressed the
frenzied demonstrators, and uttered his soon-to-be legendary remarks:
"No one will be allowed to beat you! No one will be allowed to beat
you!" Milosevic also invited the demonstrators to send a delegation
into the hall to discuss their grievances.- Cohen, L. J. 2001. Serpent
in the bosom: The rise and fall of Slobodan Milosevic. Boulder,
Colorado: Westview.
[The Excerpt from SERPENT Ends Here]
Milosevic said, "No one will be allowed to beat you!"
Is this nationalistic incitement?
Or is he reassuring a nervous crowd that their civil rights will be
respected? After all, he is an official with responsibilities to
citizens who were being beaten by police before his eyes.
But in the London Times article the context of the peasant Serbs
getting beaten is no longer evident. The utterance has been
transformed into, "No one will ever beat you" which has an eternal,
mythical overtone, and which therefore fits well with the new and
excellent location that the Times has found for this utterance: the
speech to commemorate the battle of Kosovo Polje.
Two different events have been fused into one, and Serbian mythology
has been joined to an injured cry, providing a total impression of a
syndrome of victimization that lashes out as a reborn and vicious
nationalism. "No one will be allowed to beat you" is supposed to mean,
"We will beat them."
I want to emphasize that Cohen?s book Serpent in the bosom, which I
quoted above, is an attack on Milosevic. If Cohen?s description has a
bias it is to suggest that Milosevic is a virulent nationalist. For
example, although he has Albanian policemen beating peasant Serbs
brutally, this is not described as ethnic animosity (the remark that
some of these policemen are Serbs seems to have been inserted in order
to dispel any such impression). But Milosevic?s attempt to reassure a
crowd whose basic human rights are being trampled right in front of
his eyes-that is nationalism, as Cohen goes on to explain in what
remains of the chapter.
Everybody else has done the same. The 1987 events are supposed to
mark a turning point on Milosevic?s road to becoming a virulent
nationalist (Cohen calls it "the epiphanal moment").
However, notice that despite these attempts, it is difficult not to
see Milosevic?s behavior as perfectly natural, indeed laudable.
Why not reassure a crowd of your constituents, who are being
bludgeoned by policemen, that this will not be allowed to happen? What
else should he have morally done? By what stretch of the imagination
is this utterance transformed into a nationalistic call to arms? Well,
it helps to omit the context in which the utterance was made, and it
also helps to insert it into a speech commemorating the defeat of the
Serbs at Kosovo Polje, as the Times has done.
* * *
[The Excerpt from NEWSDAY Starts Here]
Picture this: Milosevic (pronounced mee-LOH-sheh-vitch) was sent
to Kosovo Polje, the small village near the sacred site of the Serbs
defeat by the Turks in 1389. His orders were to speak to disgruntled
Serbian and Montenegrin activists who claimed they were being badly
mistreated by the majority ethnic Albanians who lived there.
Serbs: A Frightened Minority
While Milosevic was speaking in the town's cultural center, a
huge crowd of angry Serbs gathered outside the building, chanting in
support of the party activists inside. They were attacked by local
police, most of them Albanians, who began beating the Serbs with their
clubs.
Breaking off his meeting, Milosevic hurried out onto a balcony.
With national television cameras recording everything, he invoked the
memory of the 1389 Battle of Kosovo at the nearby Field of Blackbirds.
"No one should dare to beat you!" Milosevic shouted, and the
crowd went into a frenzy, beginning to chant, "Slo-bo! Slo-bo!
Slo-bo!" The Serbian masses had found a hero, and Milosevic had found
a nickname.
"With a skill which he had never displayed before, Milosevic
made an eloquent extempore speech in defense of the sacred rights of
the Serbs," wrote Noel Malcolm in his recent book, "Kosovo: A Short
History." "From that day, his nature as a politician changed; it was
as if a powerful new drug had entered his veins."
from "Student Briefing Page On The News"; Newsday, Inc.; Newsday
(New York, NY); April 16, 1999, Friday, ALL EDITIONS; SECTION: NEWS;
Page A48
[The Excerpt from NEWSDAY Ends Here]
COMMENT: Notice what has happened here. First, for Newsday,
apparently, it is enough that Noel Malcolm said something. The same
can probably also be said for The Times of London, which paper, as we
saw above, parroted a similar line to the one we see here: utterances
to the effect that "nobody will beat you" are supposed to allude to
the defeat of the Serbs at Kosovo Polje in 1389.
This is a fusion of the events of 1987 and 1989 and, since this
connection does not seem to appear prior to 1999 (which is the year
Noel Malcolm?s book appeared), it is at least a reasonable guess that:
a) Malcolm is the originator of this confusion and
b) ever since, newspapers like The Times of London and Newsday have
been fusing remarks that Milosevic made in two different years and in
two very different contexts (neither of them even remotely damning).
This is worth a pause and a reflection.
Academics typically get their facts about what happened in a
particular time and place from journalists. But here we have
newspapers getting their facts from an academic. It would be fine for
the newspaper to report the interpretation or theory of an academic,
but isn?t the world turned upside down when a newspaper gets the basic
facts of what happened from some bookish professor who wasn?t there?
The second observation is that what Milosevic actually said, "no one
will be allowed to beat you!" has been changed to "no one should dare
to beat you!" With this change the utterance dovetails nicely with
Malcolm?s reference to Milosevic?s supposed lyricism concerning the
"sacred rights of the Serbs". So not only is this fusing of the events
of 1987 and 1989 apparently an innovation of Malcolm?s, it is one he
seems to work hard at, modifying other facts as well, to give the
fusion plausibility.
In any case, it should be obvious that it is quite a stretch of
interpretation to say that one is invoking a moment in history by
making assurances to peasant Serbs that no one should beat them, when
those peasant Serbs are at that very moment being "attacked by local
police, most of them Albanians." How about the hypothesis that rather
than making "an eloquent extempore speech in defense of the sacred
rights of the Serbs", Milosevic was saying that the Albanian policemen
right below him should not be beating the peasant Serbs?
* * *
[The Excerpt from CIGAR Starts Here]
?in an emotionally charged speech at Gazimestan on June 28,
1989, on the sixth hundredth anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo,
Milosevic had signaled his government?s intention to extend the
nationalist agenda beyond Serbia?s borders. When coupled with active
measures being undertaken in neighboring republics, his emphasis that
the "Serbs have always liberated themselves and, when they had a
chance, also helped others to liberate themselves" seemed to commit
Serbia to a forcible redrawing of Yugoslavia?s long-established
internal borders in pursuit of "liberating" the Serbs outside of
Serbia?
Cigar, Norman 1995. Genocide in Bosnia. College Station, Texas:
Texas A&M University Press. (p.34)
[The Excerpt from CIGAR Ends Here]
COMMENT: The quote from Milosevic's speech is accurate, but it is
difficult to do justice to the distortions in this paragraph with the
appropriate superlatives. Cigar is, in second-order Orwellian fashion,
claiming that Milosevic?s speech is Orwellian. When Milosevic
contrasts Serbs to "others", this means (according to Cigar) other
Serbs! That is a very interesting code. And when Milosevic talks about
liberation, he really means that Serbs should oppress non-Serbs.
But just a tiny little bit of history suggests a different
hypothesis.
In World War I, the Serbs were the only Balkan people to side with
the allies. This means they simultaneously fought for their
independence against two empires (Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian), while
the Croats, Muslims, Albanians, etc. fought on the side of the
empires. The Serbs won, but instead of creating a ?Greater Serbia?, as
many a victor might have, they spearheaded the creation of a joint
kingdom, and they even shared the name (the Kingdom of Serbia,
Croatia, and Slovenia, which later got an even more inclusive name
when it was renamed Yugoslavia - land of the Southern Slavs).
Thus, they had liberated these other peoples from the clutches of
the empires, and did not create an empire themselves.
Contrast this with the treatment that Germany got from the
victorious allies.
Then, in World War II, the Croats, Slovenes, Yugoslav Muslims, and
the Albanians for the most part betrayed Yugoslavia and allied
themselves with the invading Nazis. The Hungarians, Bulgarians, and
Romanians also either allied themselves outright or reached an
understanding with the Nazis. The Serbs were surrounded but fought the
invaders anyway, and they were practically alone. Tito?s ethnically
dogmatically tolerant Partisans, who won the war in Yugoslavia, were
mostly Serbs. Once again, the result was not a ?Greater Serbia?, but a
magnanimous recreation of Yugoslavia (and this, despite the fact that
Serbs had suffered a Holocaust during the war very much like that of
the Jews).
Could it be that when Milosevic said that the Serbs had always
fought for their liberation, and that of others when possible, he was
merely saying what he meant?
The examples of how this speech has been maligned could be
multiplied. But we gain a valuable perspective by taking a look at how
the speech was reported the very moment it happened:
[The Excerpt from BBC Starts Here]
Copyright 1989 The British Broadcasting Corporation
BBC Summary of World Broadcasts
June 29, 1989, Thursday
SECTION: Part 2 Eastern Europe; 2. EASTERN EUROPE; EE/0495/ i;
LENGTH: 249 words; HEADLINE: The anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo
Polje
BODY:
The events in Kosovo to commemorate the 600th anniversary of the
battle on 28th June were relayed live by Belgrade radio. At the
Gracanica monastery over 100,000 people attended a liturgical service
conducted by Patriarch German, head of the Serbian Orthodox Church,
and at Gazimestan around 1,500,000 people gathered at a central
ceremony in the presence of SFRY President Janez Drnovsek and Serbian
President Slobodan Milosevic. The radio noted that more people were
expected to arrive at Gazimestan. Addressing the crowd, Milosevic said
that whenever they were able to the Serbs had helped others to
liberate themselves, and they had never used the advantage of their
being a large nation against others or for themselves, Tanjug
reported. He added that Yugoslavia was a multi-national community
which could survive providing there was full equality for all the
nations living in it. Speaking with reporters at the beginning of the
Gazimestan celebrations, Kosovo LC President Rahman Morina said that
no innocent people were being placed in isolation in Kosovo, and had
isolation not been implemented much more severe measures would have
been needed today, Tanjug reported. He also said that former ethnic
Albanian leader Azem Vlasi would deserve everything that happened to
him. Reporting on the security situation in Kosovo on the 28th, the
agency noted that there were no major problems apart from those caused
by the large number of vehicles travelling to the celebrations.
[The Excerpt from the BBC Ends Here]
COMMENT: It does not appear that the BBC reporter had the impression
Milosevic's speech produced a nationalist incitement. On the contrary,
the reporter has explicitly highlighted the tolerance of the speech.
The London Independent, which had reporters covering the speech, had
a similar impression:
[The Excerpt from THE INDEPENDENT Starts Here]
ON the poppy-flecked Kosovo Polje, the Field of Blackbirds,
looking out over a sea of a million people, Slobodan Milosevic
yesterday assumed the mantle of a statesman and Yugoslavia's natural
leader.
The climax of the two years of Serbian national awakening he has
led - the 600th anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo Polje - brought an
unexpectedly conciliatory the Serbian President made not one
aggressive reference to 'Albanian counter-revolutionaries' in Kosovo
province. Instead, he talked of mutual tolerance, 'building a rich and
democratic society' and ending the discord which had, he said, led to
Serbia's defeat here by the Turks six centuries ago.
'There is no more appropriate place than this field of Kosovo to
say that accord and harmony in Serbia are vital to the prosperity of
the Serbs and of all other citizens living in Serbia, regardless of
their nationality or religion,' he said. Mutual tolerance and co-
operation were also sine qua non for Yugoslavia: 'Harmony and
relations on the basis of equality among Yugoslavia's people are a
precondition for its existence, for overcoming the crisis.' The cries
of 'Slobo, Slobo' which greeted his arrival on the vast monument to
the heroes of 1389 soon gave way to a numb silence. 'I think people
were a little disappointed, it became very quiet after the beginning,'
an educated-looking woman from Belgrade said. But most others, in a
straw poll, insisted the occasion did not merit the raucous chanting
characteristic of the heady protest rallies of last year. 'People were
satisfied, after all it wasn't a protest rally,' said another pilgrim.
Everyone seemed a little stunned.
The Independent, June 29 1989, Thursday, Foreign News ; Pg.
10, 654 words, Milosevic carries off the battle honours, From EDWARD
STEEN and MARCUS TANNER in Kosovo Polje
[The Excerpt from THE INDEPENDENT Ends Here]
COMMENT: The quotes from Milosevic are accurate.
This account, a day after the event, suggests that the speech was
not "emotionally charged," as Cigar claims, and neither was it a
speech designed to whip up "a million Serbs into a nationalist
frenzy"-as Time Magazine untruthfully alleges.
It is clear that there was no "ferocious and frustrated crowd," as
the Times of London would have it. It was not a "fervent speech
?[that]? galvanized the nationalist passions" as The New York Times
stated.
Finally, for good measure, it was not a "fiery speech?to a million
angry Serbs [and] a rallying cry for nationalism," as the Washington
Post reported.
From the story above we even learn that one observer thought people
had been disappointed, although this impression is belied by the
opinion of the locals who said this was not a protest rally.
Indeed, it didn?t sound like one, if one reads the speech. The
framing of the events is that Milosevic was conciliatory.
How should we describe the fact that The Independent, which paper
had reporters on the ground, and which had accurately reported this
speech when it was given, later said that this was Milosevic setting
his agenda "as he openly threatens force to hold the six-republic
federation together" (see above)?
Scandalous?
Or perhaps we should show sympathy for the harried journalists at
The Independent, who apparently cannot find the time to read their own
paper!
And what about the other, 1987, speech? This is how it was reported
by the New York Times, immediately after it happened:
[The Excerpt from NEW YORK TIMES Starts Here]
The police clashed briefly today with a crowd of about 10,000 in
the ethnically tense province of Kosovo, Yugoslav news organizations
said.
The incident occurred when thousands gathered outside the Hall
of Culture in the city of Kosovo Polje.
The Communist Party chief of Serbia, Slobodan Milosevic, was on
hand to listen to complaints that minorities had been harassed by the
ethnic Albanian majority in Kosovo, the Yugoslav television reported.
Witnesses said about 300 delegates from the crowd of Serbs and
Montenegrins were admitted to the hall to talk to Mr. Milosevic, but
10,000 to 15,000 people waiting outside also wanted to be at the
talks.
Police Used Truncheons
The clash started at about 6:30 P.M., half an hour after Mr.
Milosevic began to listen to the complaints, when police officers
trying to control the crowd pushed people away from the entrance and
across the street, witnesses said.
The national press agency, Tanyug, said ''a number of citizens
threw stones at police.'' Witnesses said policemen used truncheons
during the clash, which lasted about 10 minutes. [According to
Reuters, Tanyug reported that several people were lightly injured.]
Tanyug said Mr. Milosevic emerged at 7 P.M. and ''was greeted with
applause, shouts and chanting.'' Witnesses quoted him as telling the
crowd that the police had no right to use truncheons so
indiscriminately.
The New York Times, April 25, 1987, Saturday, Late City Final
Edition, Section 1; Page 5, Column 1; Foreign Desk, 356 words,
YUGOSLAVIA POLICE AND 10,000 CLASH DURING A PROTEST OVER ETHNIC BIAS,
AP, BELGRADE, Yugoslavia, April 24
[The Excerpt from NEW YORK TIMES Ends Here]
COMMENT: It is clear from how that speech was reported at the time
that Milosevic had simply meant to reassure the assembled Serb
peasants that the police certainly did not have the right to beat them
like that. It was not a nationalistic call to arms nor was it supposed
to have overtones to the battle of Kosovo Polje. Why should it? What
was happening in front of his eyes was not metaphorical. Policemen
were beating peasants.
Final Remarks
This is how a myth is constructed: we hear the same story
everywhere. The repetition of the story convinces us that the story
has been confirmed. But, of course, repetition is hardly confirmation.
If it were, every urban legend would be true.
It is important to pause and reflect on what this means. If the
media can lie so blatantly about what Milosevic had said in 1989, and
if they do it consistently and across the board, something is wrong.
The question is: how wrong?
The US government obviously has an interest in demonizing the people
it bombed. Although its own translation of the speech is a rebuke to
how the speech has been portrayed, we should not expect the US
government to criticize the misinformation. This is unjustifiable, and
corrupt, but understandable.
Explaining the behavior of the BBC, on the other hand, is not so
easy. The BBC is not the US government. Its role is supposedly to give
us the truth, as best it can. Moreover, the BBC is supposed to be in
competition with other media outlets. Since the BBC translated the
speech, they were in a position to lay bare that what was being
written about the speech was misinformation. They have not done it,
and this is a very serious sin of journalistic omission.
If only this was their biggest sin!
On April 1, 2001, the BBC wrote the following:
[The Excerpt from the BBC Starts Here]
In 1989, on the 600-year anniversary of the battle of Kosovo
Polje, he [Milosevic] gathered a million Serbs at the site of the
battle to tell them to prepare for a new struggle.
He then began to arm and support Serb separatists in Croatia and
Bosnia. Other nationalists were coming to power throughout the
republics of the old federation.
Yugoslavia's long nightmare of civil war was beginning.
("The downfall of Milosevic ", Sunday, 1 April, 2001, 07:17 GMT 08:17
UK; http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/
europe/newsid_1204000/1204857.stm):
[The Excerpt from the BBC Ends Here]
The BBC here makes it seem as though Milosevic was indeed talking
about preparing the Serbs for aggression against other people.
But the BBC translated the live relay of the speech!
They know Milosevic did no such thing in 1989 at Kosovo Polje. The
BBC piece continues:
[The Excerpt from the BBC Starts Here]
Darker motives
Mr Milosevic was never really a nationalist, never a true
believer. He skillfully exploited the myth of Kosovo Polje - where the
Serbs refused to surrender even though that brought defeat and
subjugation - but he was always a pragmatist.
(BBC, "The downfall of Milosevic "
[The Excerpt from the BBC Ends Here]
Again: the BBC translated the speech. They know that he spoke in
skeptical and professorial tones about the famous battle at Kosovo
Polje, rather than manipulating it for ultra-nationalist ends.
This is not an isolated instance. Here is the BBC again, in a
different piece:
[The Excerpt from the BBC Starts Here]
Serbs to remember Historic battle
Religious ceremonies are being held today in Kosovo to
commemorate the anniversary of a fourteenth century battle in which
the Ottoman Turks crushed the Serbian army.
A BBC correspondent in Kosovo says most Serbs will mark the
anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo Polje hesitantly, if at all.
He says some believe the security situation is still too fragile
for any large gathering; others feel too threatened to risk travelling
on the roads.
Ten years ago, more than one-million Serbs turned out to
celebrate the battle's six-hundreth anniversary, when President
Slobodan Milosevic vowed Serbia would never again lose control of
Kosovo.
From the newsroom of the BBC World Service * Monday, June 28,
1999 Published at 09:21 GMT 10:21 UK * World: Europe
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_379000/379847.stm
[The Excerpt from the BBC Ends Here]
But?but?the BBC knows that what it is reporting here is not true.
They translated the speech. Milosevic did not vow any such thing in
1989 at the Kosovo Polje commemoration. He may have vowed it elsewhere
(and the vow in and of itself is perfectly consistent with his desire
to keep Yugoslavia whole, and does not indict him of anything). But he
certainly made no such vow in the 1989 speech.
Why is the BBC not reporting what it knows to be true?
Since this is possible, I am forced to wonder what else is possible.
What can we believe about what has been written about Milosevic in
particular, and Yugoslavia more generally? After all, the demonization
of Milosevic, and the Serbs more generally, perfectly fits with the
propaganda aims of the NATO powers that went to war against
Yugoslavia, including the US and Britain. Here we have seen that the
media establishment in these two countries has produced stories about
Milosevic?s speech that are consistent with such a deliberate
propaganda campaign.
-- Slobodan Milosevic's speech at Kosovo Field can be read at
http://emperors-clothes.com/milo/milosaid.html
Join our email list at http://emperors-clothes.com/f.htm
Receive about one article/day.
Email the link to this article to a friend.
=======================================
Emperor's Clothes Urgently Needs Your Help!
=======================================
Emperor's Clothes has only one source of income - your donations. We
want everyone to read our articles, whether they can afford to
contribute money or not.
But if you can contribute, please do; we urgently need the help.
Many have responded to our recent fundraising drive, and this has been
a big help, but we are still considerably behind on rent, Internet
costs, utilities, and our long distance and overseas telephone bill.
Since September 11 our readership has increased more than 600%. We now
transfer over 1 gigabyte of data a day. But our income has not kept up
with increasing expenses.
To keep Emperor's Clothes publishing please send whatever
contributions you can! $20, $50, $100, $500, $1000 or more. Every
penny will be used to get articles to more people.
You can make a donation using Paypal at
https://www.paypal.com/xclick/business=emperors1000@...&no_shipping=1
You can make a credit card donation by going to our secure server at
http://emperors-clothes.com/howyour.html#donate
Or Mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA
02461-0321. (USA)
Or make a donation by phone at the donation line, (U.S.) 617 916-1705.
We can now accept donations through e-gold. Our account # is 444982.
Note: If you mail a donation or make one by secure server, please let
us know by email at emperors1000@... to make sure we receive it.
Thanks!
Thank you for reading Emperor's Clothes.
www.emperors-clothes.com or
www.tenc.net
[Emperor's Clothes]
This Website is mirrored at http://emperor.vwh.net/ and at
http://globalresistance.com
www.tenc.net * [Emperor's Clothes]
=======================================
Expert on psychology of ethnic conflict
changes his mind about Yugoslavia -
Media Misrepresentation Of
Milosevic's Words: A Review
Of The Evidence
by Professor Francisco Gil-White
[posted February 9, 2002]
=======================================
Note from Emperor's Clothes: The following article was sent to us by
Francisco Gil-White. He is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at the
University of Pennsylvania and a Fellow at the Solomon Asch Center for
Study of Ethnopolitical Conflict.
Professor Gil-White informs us that:
"I study and write about the psychology that makes racism and
ethnic hatred possible, and which exacerbates ethnic conflicts when
compared to other sorts of conflicts."
The following views are those of Professor Gil-White and not
necessarily the University of Pennsylvania or the Solomon Asch Center.
-- Jared Israel
Media Misrepresentation of Milosevic's Words
by Francisco Gil-White
A couple of months ago I chanced upon the Emperor's Clothes Website
because of their coverage of 9-11.
I noticed their startling claim that we have been systematically
lied to about Yugoslavia, including Slobodan Milosevic. As they told
it, he was an honorable leader; perhaps a great one.
Since their views sharply contradicted my own, I started
systematically checking their references by obtaining the relevant
original documents. I have yet to find a single claim in error.
This was particularly surprising regarding the famous speech that
Slobodan Milosevic delivered at Kosovo Field in 1989 at the 600th
anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo. According to what I had read,
this was an ultranationalist diatribe in which Milosevic manipulated
memories of a famous defeat to stir mob hatred of Muslims, especially
Albanians.
Emperor's Clothes posted what they claimed was the official U.S.
government translation of that speech (done by the National Technical
Information Service, a dependency of the Commerce Department) at
http://emperors-clothes.com/milo/milosaid.html
The posted speech was certainly not hateful.
But was this the real speech? The text contradicted everything I had
been led to expect from Slobodan Milosevic and everything I had read
about this speech.
I obtained, through my university library, a copy of the microfilm
of the BBC's translation. I compared this text to the one posted at
Emperors Clothes.
They matched almost exactly.
The speech is not devoid of a certain poetry and - amazingly - it is
*explicitly tolerant*.
But if the reports that this speech was viciously hateful were
false, what about the rest of my information about Yugoslavia? After
all, it came from the same sources. I began to read voraciously, to
see how academics, politicians and the media had reported what
happened in Yugoslavia.
I have found an enormous amount of misinformation, and it is hard to
dispel the impression that much of this is *deliberate*. This is quite
important for my field because students of ethnic conflict, like
myself, need to know what it is that we are supposed to explain. Our
case data comes from historians and journalists who describe ethnic
conflicts for us. Until recently, I was assuming that those who wrote
about Yugoslavia could at least be trusted to try to report things
accurately.
I have changed my mind. What I now know suggests that the problem is
not merely that reporters and academics are misinformed. I have
observed that a source may report the facts accurately and then, in
another place, usually later, report them completely inaccurately. How
can one explain this as a result of ignorance? It suggests a conscious
effort to misinform.
Furthermore, it appears that these inaccuracies are calculated to
exploit the human tendency to essentialize [basically, to stereotype -
ed.] racial, national, and ethnic groups. in order to solidify the
prejudice that Serbs are virulent nationalists. This prejudice then
frames the conflict in Yugoslavia so as to serve the interests of the
powers which dismembered Yugoslavia.
As an example of what is done, I have assembled excerpts from
various sources regarding Milosevic?s famous speech at Gazimestan (the
location is often referred to as Kosovo Polje or Kosovo Field) in
1989.
I have provided Emperor's Clothes with a pdf version of the
microfilm of the BBC translation so that they may post it, allowing
readers to compare the US government and the BBC versions for
themselves. The BBC microfilm can be obtained from some university
libraries. If you are an academic, you can get it at your library or
through an inter-library loan, in the same way that I did.
[[ Note from Emperor's Clothes: You may read the pdf of the BBC
translation at
http://www.icdsm.org/milosevic/milosevic1.pdf
http://www.icdsm.org/milosevic/milosevic2.pdf
and
http://www.icdsm.org/milosevic/milosevic3.pdf
To help you compare, U.S. government translation can be read at
http://emperors-clothes.com/milo/milosaid.html
END Note from Emperor's Clothes
For those with access to university libraries, the text of
Milosevic's speech is also here:
Krieger, Heike, ed. 2001. The Kosovo conflict and international
law: An analytical documentation 1974-1999, Cambridge International
Documents Series, Volume II. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.(p.10) ]]
What follows below is a compilation (certainly not complete) of
misquotations, misrepresentations, misattributions, and
mischaracterizations of Milosevic?s 1989 speech in the media and by
academics along with some excerpts from the speech and my comments.
It is important to keep the following in mind: this speech is the
media's favorite piece of evidence that Milosevic is an
ultra-nationalist racist. It is said over and over in the media that
Milosevic used this speech to incite the Serbs to nationalistic
hatred.
It should be obvious that incitement is a public behavior. If
Milosevic was going to become an ultra-nationalist populist
politician, then he had to make ultra-nationalist speeches, for one
can hardly incite the masses in secret. It is thus noteworthy that
this speech-supposedly the best example of Milosevic virulently
inciting people-is explicitly tolerant, and that in order to suggest
otherwise all sorts of fabrications that in fact appear nowhere in the
speech have been necessary. If there was something better to quote or
cite as evidence of Milosevic?s ultra-nationalistic demagoguery,
surely the media would have used it long ago. Why fabricate if
evidence is on hand?
Below are examples that reveal either willful misinformation or
pathologically low journalistic standards in the media. Following
that, in the second part of my analysis, I quote newspaper reports
made on or immediately after June 28, 1989, the day Milosevic spoke.
These accounts, published immediately after his speech, were accurate,
and this demonstrates that the truth was easily available if someone
had wanted to report it later on.
[The Excerpt from Balkan Report Starts Here]
Views on Vidovdan (St Vitus day - June 28th)
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, or RFE/RL's Albanian-language
broadcasters included in their 28 June programming reflections by
several prominent individuals on Yugoslav President Slobodan
Milosevic's speech at Gazimestan. He gave that address ten years ago
to mark the 600th anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo Polje.
Azem Vllasi, who is a former ethnic Albanian SKJ chief in
Kosova, was in the infamous Mitrovica prison on Vidovdan 1989: In
effect the war against the Albanians in Kosova had started 1988. In
Gazimestan, Milosevic announced that he would also launch a war
against the other peoples of Yugoslavia. The Serbs had great hopes
that they could turn the war that they lost 600 years ago into a
victory. Milosevic misused the Serbian myth about Kosova to create
victims and cause pain to peoples other than we Albanians, but after
ten years he turned it into a great loss for the Serbs themselves."
Reprinted from Balkan Report, 2 July 1999, Volume 3, Number 26
(Translated by Fabian Schmidt, notes by Patrick Moore)
http://www.rferl.org/balkan-report/1999/07/26-020799.html
[The Excerpt from Balkan Report Ends Here]
COMMENT: Slobodan Milosevic did not say that. But here is something
that he did say:
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Starts Here]
Equal and harmonious relations among Yugoslav peoples are a
necessary condition for the existence of Yugoslavia and for it to find
its way out of the crisis and, in particular, they are a necessary
condition for its economic and social prosperity. In this respect
Yugoslavia does not stand out from the social milieu of the
contemporary, particularly the developed, world. This world is more
and more marked by national tolerance, national cooperation, and even
national equality. The modern economic and technological, as well as
political and cultural development, has guided various peoples toward
each other, has made them interdependent and increasingly has made
them equal as well [medjusobno ravnopravni]. Equal and united people
can above all become a part of the civilization toward which mankind
is moving. If we cannot be at the head of the column leading to such a
civilization, there is certainly no need for us to be at is tail.
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Ends Here]
* * *
[The Excerpt from Vladimir Zerjavic Starts Here]
"...when the 600th Anniversary of the Kosovo Battle with the
Turks was held at Gazimestan in 1989, Slobodan Milosevic stated that
he will "unite all Serbs into one state, either with institutional or
non-institutional measures, even with weapons if necessary", what was
done in 1991."
Written by Vladimir Zerjavic, retiree of UN
Zagreb, July 1997, revised in December 1997.
http://www.hr/darko/etf/bul.html
[The Excerpt from Vladimir Zerjavic Ends Here]
COMMENT: Mr. Zerjavic (a Croat) puts actual quotation marks around
words that never appear in the text of Milosevic?s speech. That is
bold. As bold, perhaps, as the claims by the same Mr. Zerjavic, in his
book Population Losses of Yugoslavia in the World War II, to the
effect that the number of Yugoslavs (especially Serbs) who lost their
lives in the Ustashe (Croatian Nazi) death camps has been wildly
exaggerated.
* * *
[The Excerpt from London Independent Starts Here]
June 1989
On the stump at Kosovo Polje
Serbia's leader sets out his agenda at a rally of more than a
million Serbs at the Battle of Kosovo 600th anniversary celebrations,
as he openly threatens force to hold the six-republic federation
together.
-- From an alleged chronology of events in "Milosevic on Trial:
Fall of a Pariah"; Newspaper Publishing PLC, Independent on Sunday
(London); July 1, 2001, Sunday, SECTION: FOREIGN NEWS; Pg. 21
[The Excerpt from London Independent Ends Here]
COMMENT: No such threat appears in the text of the speech. This
allusion to an "open threat" sounds like the Independent is probably
using Dr. Vladimir Zerjavic as source. They certainly have not seen
the text of the speech.
* * *
[The Excerpt from Irish Times Starts Here]
It was at Kosovo Polje in 1389 that Serbs fought their most
historic battle, losing to a Turkish army and later enduring 500 years
of Ottoman rule. From here they fled again nearly three centuries
later, led by their Orthodox patriarch, after a failed rebellion. And
here, 10 years ago this month, the Yugoslav President, Mr Slobodan
Milosevic, made his name telling a crowd of 500,000 Serbs, "Serbia
will never abandon Kosovo".
from "Serbs make ragged retreat from their historic cradle"; The
Irish Times; June 16, 1999, CITY EDITION; SECTION: WORLD NEWS; CRISIS
IN THE BALKANS; Pg. 13
[The Excerpt from Irish Times Ends Here]
COMMENT: The Irish Times does not borrow the quote from Dr. Vladimir
Zerjavic, but they do borrow the boldness. They have put quotation
marks around a phrase that appears nowhere in the text.
* * *
[The Excerpt from Croatian Student Online Starts Here]
The now infamous speech by Milosevic at Gazimestan in Kosovo in
1989 was aimed at this very mentality - at the superiority complex,
and the feelings of cultural insecurity which are common among lower
and middle-class Serbs. It also created an "us versus them" atmosphere
- the "them" factor seen as almost a non-entity. This sociopolitical
dualism did hold some truth, although another way of looking at it is
as racist fatalism in a late 20th century context. But, in itself, it
was only a component of Greater Serbianism. And that imperialistic and
aggressive heresy is, after all, the reason why Croats and Bosnians
die while the Serbs make up excuses and lie to the world.
- - from The Croatian Student Online
"Causes of Serbian Aggression" by Branko Mletic
posted at: http://www.algonet.se/~bevanda/aggression3.htm
[The Excerpt from Croatian Student Online Ends Here]
COMMENT: Notice how casually the Croatian Student evokes "the
superiority complex, and the feelings of cultural insecurity which are
common among lower and middle-class Serbs." This reads like an ethnic
slur, although Serbs have been so thoroughly demonized in the media
that most readers will hardly notice it, or else will consider it a
probably just appraisal.
Below is another excerpt from Milosevic?s speech. How does one
create an "us versus them" atmosphere with these words? (They do seem
ineptly chosen for this purpose):
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Starts Here]
?unity in Serbia will bring prosperity to the Serbian people in
Serbia and each one of its citizens, irrespective of his national or
religious affiliation.
(?)
Serbia has never had only Serbs living in it. Today, more than
in the past, members of other peoples and nationalities also live in
it. This is not a disadvantage for Serbia. I am truly convinced that
it is its advantage. National composition of almost all countries in
the world today, particularly developed ones, has also been changing
in this direction. Citizens of different nationalities, religions, and
races have been living together more and more frequently and more and
more successfully.
(?)
The only differences one can and should allow in socialism are
between hard working people and idlers and between honest people and
dishonest people. Therefore, all people in Serbia who live from their
own work, honestly, respecting other people and other nations, are in
their own republic.
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Ends Here]
* * *
[The Excerpt from Balkans Paces Starts Here]
For the first time a documentary (produced in Montenegro 2 weeks
ago) about war crimes committed in the name of Greater Serbia was
shown on the Serbian TV - "Called From Gazimestan" - a reference to
the 'historic' speech of Slobodan Milosevic at the location where
Serbs lost to Ottoman Turks in 1389 - when he outlined the plan to
conquer Yugoslavia.
-- From Balkans Paces
http://www.igc.org/balkans/conclusion-slobo.html
[The Excerpt from Balkans Paces Ends Here]
COMMENT: No such "plan" was "outlined". Note that the writer speaks
of "the plan" not "a plan" thus suggesting that the existence of said
plan is common knowledge?
* * *
[The Excerpt from OPPRESSION Starts Here]
The culmination of this fanaticism was reached when the 'Nero'
of the Balkans, Milosevic - then still a communist leader - delivered
a certain speech in Gazimestan on the 600th memorial of the
Serbian-Ottoman War of Kosovo in 1989. Milosevic, who in this speech
also opened the way to the genocide in Bosnia-Herzegowina, for the
first time used slogans like, "Serbia is a whole and Kosovo is an
inseperable part of Serbia; We rather give our lives than deliver
Kosovo; This territory is a fortress of Christian Europe against
Islam", demonstrating thereby clearly the extent of the abominable
Serbian nationalism.
from Oppression.org (1999)
http://www.oppression.org/europe/kosovo_in_the_circle_of_fire.html
[The Excerpt from OPPRESSION Ends Here]
COMMENT: Oppression.org gets high marks for boldness. Others merely
put quotation marks around a fabricated sentence. They have put
quotations around an entirely fabricated paragraph.
* * *
[The Excerpt from The Economist Starts Here]
But it is primitive nationalism, egged on by the self-deluding
myth of Serbs as perennial victims, that has become both Mr
Milosevic?s rescuer (when communism collapsed with the Soviet Union)
and his nemesis. It was a stirringly virulent nationalist speech he
made in Kosovo, in 1989, harking back to the Serb Prince Lazar?s
suicidally brave battle against the Turks a mere six centuries ago,
that saved his leadership when the Serbian old guard looked in danger
of ejection. Now he may have become a victim of his own propaganda.
-- From The Economist, " What next for Slobodan Milosevic?" June 5,
1999
[The Excerpt from The Economist Ends Here]
COMMENT: The passages from Milosevic?s speech quoted above already
make it clear that this was not a "stirringly virulent nationalist
speech." The Economist would have you believe that Milosevic was
literally foaming at the mouth, and wanted to use the memories of
Prince Lazar and the defeat at Kosovo Polje as a catalyst for arousing
ultra-nationalistic feelings. This is how Milosevic actually
introduced his remarks about that historical event:
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Starts Here]
Today, it is difficult to say what is the historical truth about
the Battle of Kosovo and what is legend. Today this is no longer
important. Oppressed by pain and filled with hope, the people used to
remember and to forget, as, after all, all people in the world do, and
it was ashamed of treachery and glorified heroism. Therefore it is
difficult to say today whether the Battle of Kosovo was a defeat or a
victory for the Serbian people, whether thanks to it we fell into
slavery or we survived in this slavery. The answers to those questions
will be constantly sought by science and the people. What has been
certain through all the centuries until our time today is that
disharmony struck Kosovo 600 years ago. If we lost the battle, then
this was not only the result of social superiority and the armed
advantage of the Ottoman Empire but also of the tragic disunity in the
leadership of the Serbian state at that time. In that distant 1389,
the Ottoman Empire was not only stronger than that of the Serbs but it
was also more fortunate than the Serbian kingdom.
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Ends Here]
COMMENT: Is this a virulent nationalist speaking? Milosevic sounds
positively professorial. He sounds like an academic, showing a
grandfatherly understanding for the human frailties that lead people
to conveniently forget things in order to make legends out of history
in a romantic and nationalistic manner. And he is talking about the
famous battle at Kosovo Polje, in the very place where that battle was
fought. The truth of what happened, he says, is for scientists to
establish! Is this a nationalist using a myth of the people to rouse
their passions? Does he sound ?injured? and ?insecure??
TIME Magazine had a similar slant:
[The Excerpt from TIME Magzaine Starts Here]
It was St. Vitus' Day, a date steeped in Serbian history, myth
and eerie coincidence: on June 28, 1389, Ottoman invaders defeated the
Serbs at the battle of Kosovo; 525 years later, a young Serbian
nationalist assassinated Austro-Hungarian Archduke Franz Ferdinand,
lighting the fuse for World War I. And it was on St. Vitus' Day, 1989,
that Milosevic whipped a million Serbs into a nationalist frenzy in
the speech that capped his ascent to power.
Time International, July 9, 2001 v158 i1 p18+
[The Excerpt from TIME Magzaine Ends Here]
And so did the New York Times:
[The Excerpt from NEW YORK TIMES Starts Here]
In 1989 the Serbian strongman, Slobodan Milosevic, swooped down
in a helicopter onto the field where 600 years earlier the Turks had
defeated the Serbs at the Battle of Kosovo. In a fervent speech before
a million Serbs, he galvanized the nationalist passions that two years
later fueled the Balkan conflict.
The New York Times, July 28, 1996, Sunday, Late Edition -
Final, Section 1; Page 10; Column 1; Foreign Desk, 1384 words,
Serbs in Pragmatic Pullout from Albanian Region, By JANE PERLEZ,
PRISTINA, Serbia, July 22
[The Excerpt from NEW YORK TIMES Ends Here]
And the Washington Post:
[The Excerpt from WASHINGTON POST Starts Here]
A military band and a dozen chanting monks from the Serbian
Orthodox Church struggled unsuccessfully this morning to lift the dour
mood hanging over a small crowd of Serbs marking the 609th anniversary
of the Battle of Kosovo here at the most revered site in Serbia's
nationalist mythology.
(?)
Nine years ago today, Milosevic's fiery speech here to a million
angry Serbs was a rallying cry for nationalism and boosted his
popularity enough to make him the country's uncontested leader.
The Washington Post, June 29, 1998, Monday, Final Edition, A
SECTION; Pg. A10, 354 words, Bitter Serbs Blame Leader for Risking
Beloved Kosovo, R. Jeffrey Smith, Washington Post Foreign Service,
KOSOVO POLJE, Yugoslavia, June 28
[The Excerpt from WASHINGTON POST Ends Here]
But does Milosevic sound like his purpose is "whipping a million
Serbs into a nationalist frenzy" with his remembrance of the events of
1389? Is this a "fervent speech" meant to "galvanize the nationalist
passions"? Is it a "rallying cry for nationalism"?
The following excerpt is relatively long but it is worth reading
because of the juxtaposition of Milosevic with Tudjman and
Izetbegovic. (If you wish to skip forward to the Comment on T.W.
Carr's article, click here.)
[The Excerpt from T.W. CARR'S ARTICLE Starts Here]
Three leaders emerged within the collapsing Federal
Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia. Each used the emotive
appeal of patriotism (nationalism), history and religious
heritage in their bid for political control of one of the
three nation "nation states", Orthodox Christian Serbia,
Roman Catholic Christian Croatia and Islamic
Bosnia-Herzegovina.
SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC
On June 28, 1989, Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic marked
the 600th anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo against the
"Ottoman Islamist Empire" at Gazimestan by addressing more
than one million Serbs, recounting the heroism of the
Serbian nation and their Christian Orthodox faith in
resisting the spread of Islam into Europe. He reassured his
audience, that the Autonomous Province of Kosovo would
remain an integral part of Serbia and Yugoslavia, despite
the then current and often violent, problems of separatism
demanded by the Muslim Albanian majority living in Kosovo.
In the Serbian presidential election of November 12, 1989,
Mr. Milosevic won 65.3 percent of the vote, his nearest
rival, Mr. Vuk Draskovic, polled only 16.4 of the votes
cast.
ALIJA IZETBEGOVIC
At the same time, Alija Izetbegovic, who had been released
early from jail in 1988 (serving only six years of a 14 year
sentence for pro-Islamic anti-state activities), visited
Islamic fundamentalist states in the Middle East, returning
to Bosnia-Herzegovina to found the SDA (Muslim Party of
Democratic Action). His 1970 manifesto, "Islamic
Declaration", advocating the spread of radical
pan-Islamism-politicised Islam-throughout the world, by
force if necessary, was reissued in Sarajevo at this time.
His Islamic Declaration is imbued with intolerance towards
Western religion, culture and economic systems. This is also
the theme projected in his book, Islam between East and
West, first published in the US in 1984, and in Serbo-Croat
in 1988, shortly after he was released from prison in the
former Yugoslavia. In his writings he states that Islam
cannot co-exist with other religions in the same nation
other than a short-term expediency measure. In the longer
term, as and when Muslims become strong enough in any
country, then they must seize power and form a truly Islamic
state.
In the multy-party elections held in Bosnia-Herzegovina on
November 18, 1990, the population voted almost exclusively
along communal lines. The Muslim Democratic Action Party
secured 86 seats, the Serbian Democratic Party 72, and the
Croatian Democratic Union (ie: union with Croatia) Party 44
seats. As the leader of the largest political party, Mr.
Izetbegovic, became the first President of Bosnia-
Herzegovina, albeit for just one year, for under the new
constitution of B-H, the presidency was to revolve each year
between the three parties, each of which represented one
ethnic community.
Under constitutional law, in January 1992, Mr. Izetbegovic
should have handed over the Presidency to Mr. Radovan
Karadzic, the Serbian Democratic leader. He failed to honor
the constitution and being true to his writings, he seized
power, acting undemocratically and illegally. Therefore, at
no time since January 1992 should Mr. Izetbegovic have been
acknowledged by the international community as the legal
President of B-H.
FRANJO TUDJMAN
Towards the end of World War II, while still a young man,
Franjo Tudjman took the pragmatic option and joined the
communist Partisans. He had probably realized that Germany
could not win the war and that Tito and his Partisans would
gain control of Yugoslavia, with the full support of both
Soviets and the British Prime Minister Sir Winston
Churchill.
Some time after the end of World War II, Tudjman joined the
communist Yugoslav Army as a regular officer and rose to the
rank of Major-General during the early part of President
Tito´s period in office.
During the late 1960´s and in 1979, ultra right fascism
began to re-surface in Croatia, showing the same World War
II fascist face of nationalism and the requirement that a
nation state must be racially pure. This was the first
attempt anywhere in Europe to resurrect German National
Socialism following the fall of the Third Reich in 1944.
Hitler created Croatia when his forces over-ran Yugoslavia
in 1941, installing as Fuher, Ante Pavelic, leader of the
fascist Croatian Ustashi movement. Pavelic had spent the
previous 10 years in exile in Italy as head of a Croatian
terrorist group, shielded by the Vatican and the Italian
Fascist party.
Mr. Tudjman was deeply involved in the attempted revival of
fascism, allowing his national socialism ethos to come to
the fore with the publication of his treatise, The
Wastelands. In it he attempted to re-write major sections of
the history of World War II, downplaying the Holocaust, and
with it , the more than one-million Jews, Serbs and Gypsies
murdered by the Croatian ultra-nationalist Ustashi, which
included priests of the Holy Roman Church, at the Croatian
Ustashi concentration camp of Jasenovac and other locations
within Yugoslavia.
For his nationalistic, anti-state activities at this time,
Mr. Tudjman went to jail for three years. After being
released from jail, Mr. Tudjman went politically low key for
a few years, but re-emerged on the scene when President Tito
died in 1980, gradually building a power base among the
Croatian right wing and creating the HDZ Party.
In the multy-party elections held in Croatia in May 1990,
Mr. Tudjman´s HDZ Party won control of the Sabor (Croatian
Parliament) and Mr. Tudjman became President of Croatia when
it was still part of the Yugoslav Federation.
from "A CAREFUL COINCIDENCE OF NATIONAL POLICIES?"
by T.W. Carr (Ass. Publisher, Defense & Foreign Affairs
Publications. London)
http://www.aikor.de/InterTribunal/doku/twcarr1.htm
[The Excerpt from T.W. CARR'S ARTICLE Ends Here]
COMMENT: Contrary to Carr?s claim, Milosevic did not speak about the
status of Kosovo in the 1989 speech.
It is known from other sources, of course, that he certainly did not
want Kosovo to be split from Yugoslavia (for good reasons having to do
with the security of Serbs, Roma, Slavic Muslims, Jews, Albanians and
everyone else in Kosovo and his conviction that Kosovo was
legitimately part of the country he was after all helping lead. How
many leaders want their countries broken up?) But that does not mean
that in this speech he said, "that the Autonomous Province of Kosovo
would remain an integral part of Serbia and Yugoslavia, despite the
then current and often violent, problems of separatism demanded by the
Muslim Albanian majority living in Kosovo." So this is false.
Moreover, Milosevic never referred to the Ottoman Empire as
"Islamist." On the contrary, Milosevic?s remarks on the Ottoman Empire
showed no real animosity. He even acknowledged certain strengths:
"In that distant 1389, the Ottoman Empire was not only stronger
than that of the Serbs but it was also more fortunate than the Serbian
kingdom." (Milosevic, Speech at Kosovo Field)
More importantly, however, notice that Carr pairs the three leaders,
Milosevic, Izetbegovic, and Tudjman, and prefaces his remarks by
saying all three rose to prominence by manipulating nationalism. But
does Milosevic belong in this company? Whereas a good and effortless
case can be made for Izetbegovic and Tudjman being ultra-nationalists
(see above), all we get as evidence for Milosevic?s
"ultra-nationalism" is a false allusion to a declaration he never made
in the Kosovo Polje speech about the fact that he did not want Serbia
to be partitioned, which in itself would not even be evidence of
intolerant ultra-nationalism anyway. Moreover, the speech Carr refers
us to is the antithesis of an ultra-nationalistic speech.
Milosevic at his alleged worst, in other words, is not unlike Ghandi
or Martin Luther King.
Finally, I must observe that Carr is arguing that the US and Germany
are carving zones of interest in Europe and that this is the central
reason for the troubles in Yugoslavia.
In other words, he is not sympathetic to the official propaganda
about the causes of the wars in Yugoslavia.
Yet even he seems blithely to assume that Milosevic is a virulent
nationalist, even though he provides no evidence. (Izetbegovic and
Tudjman, both US allies, certainly do sound like bad guys, on the
other hand). The propaganda against Milosevic has been so successful
that even a critic like Carr believes it, though he can only give us
one short paragraph to support his belief, and that paragraph refers
to a consummately tolerant speech.
Is this the worst one can say about Milosevic?
* * *
[The Excerpt from International Crisis Group Article Starts Here]
On this date in 1948, Tito?s Yugoslavia was expelled at Stalin?s
behest from the Communist Information Bureau (Cominform). It was also
on this day in 1989 that Slobodan Milosevic addressed up to one
million Serbs at Gazimestan in Kosovo to commemorate the sixhundredth
anniversary of the Kosovo Battle. That speech contained the first open
threat of violent conflict by a Socialist Yugoslav leader:"Six
centuries later, again, we are in battles and quarrels. They are not
armed battles, although such things cannot be excluded".
BALKANS Briefing, Belgrade/Brussels, 6 July 2001
International Crisis Group
http://www.intl-crisis-group.org/projects/balkans/
serbia/reports/A400345_06072001.pdf
[The Excerpt from International Crisis Group Article Ends Here]
COMMENT: This quote does appear in the speech.
Any observer of Yugoslavia at this time knew that it was possible
that armed battles could break out. Why should the observation of such
an obvious fact be interpreted as a threat?
One could just as well interpret it as a worry.
Any state trying to contain irredentist terrorists may find itself
in the position of having to deploy its army to protect its
citizens-Milosevic was just stating the obvious. It is really
necessary to omit any reference to any other part of the speech, and
to ignore the facts of Yugoslavia at this time, for the
quote-completely out of context-to appear as a threat. Even then it
does not look very threatening (you have to be told that it is a
threat, for otherwise how could you reliably infer it?). But it pays
to see this quote in its minimal context: the paragraph in which it
appears:
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Starts Here]
Six centuries later, now, we are being again engaged in battles
and are facing battles. They are not armed battles, although such
things cannot be excluded yet. However, regardless of what kind of
battles they are, they cannot be won without resolve, bravery, and
sacrifice, without the noble qualities that were present here in the
field of Kosovo in the days past. Our chief battle now concerns
implementing the economic, political, cultural, and general social
prosperity, finding a quicker and more successful approach to a
civilization in which people will live in the 21st century. For this
battle, we certainly need heroism, of course of a somewhat different
kind, but that courage without which nothing serious and great can be
achieved remains unchanged and remains urgently necessary.
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Ends Here]
COMMENT: This minimal context is already quite informative. The
"chief battle" has nothing to do with armed conflict. And it requires
"heroism, of course of a somewhat different kind." If one further puts
this paragraph into the larger context of the speech it is obvious
that Milosevic is hardly making threats. For example, elsewhere in the
speech Milosevic says:
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Starts Here]
For as long as multinational communities have existed, their
weak point has always been the relations between different nations.
The threat is that the question of one nation being endangered by the
others can be posed one day -- and this can then start a wave of
suspicions, accusations, and intolerance, a wave that invariably grows
and is difficult to stop. This threat has been hanging like a sword
over our heads all the time. Internal and external enemies of
multi-national communities are aware of this and therefore they
organize their activity against multinational societies mostly by
fomenting national conflicts. At this moment, we in Yugoslavia are
behaving as if we have never had such an experience and as if in our
recent and distant past we have never experienced the worst tragedy of
national conflicts that a society can experience and still survive.
[The Excerpt from Milosevic's 1989 Speech Ends Here]
COMMENT: Milosevic was warning that nationalism was being used by
"internal and external enemies of multi-national communities" to
destroy Yugoslavia. He was chiding his fellow Yugoslavs for failing to
remember World War II and other catastrophes during which the Balkans
"experienced the worst tragedy of national conflicts that a society
can experience and still survive." Does this sound like a man whipping
up the population to go to war against other ethnic groups?
* * *
[The Excerpt from LONDON TIMES Starts Here]
Vidovdan, the feast of St Vitus, is one of the most sacred in
the Orthodox church, but it is also the day on which Mr Milosevic
began his political career. Twelve years before, in a dusty and
sweltering field at Kosovo Polje, he had whipped up Serb nationalism
among a ferocious and frustrated crowd. "No one will ever beat you!"
he had shouted, commemorating the defeat of the Serbs by the Turks at
Kosovo Polje in 1389. Yesterday Mr Milosevic was a beaten man on
suicide watch in Scheveningen prison in The Netherlands. Prison
officials, who will interview the former Yugoslav President to check
that he is not worried about being threatened by other inmates, are
also believed to be paying particular attention to the threat he made
earlier this year, to shoot himself rather than submit to
international justice.
from "Milosevic on suicide watch in Dutch prison"; Times
Newspapers Limited; The Times (London); June 30, 2001, Saturday
[The Excerpt from LONDON TIMES Ends Here]
COMMENT: This one comically gets it wrong. Milosevic probably never
said, "No one will ever beat you!" He more likely said something like
"No one will be allowed to beat you like that!" In any event, he did
not say it at the commemoration of the battle at Kosovo Polje (the
speech we have been discussing here). Those words were uttered at
Kosovo Polje but two years earlier, in 1987. At that time, Milosevic
met with Serbs and Montenegrins, mostly peasants, who had serious
grievances: they said they were being mistreated by prejudiced
Albanian authorities in Kosovo and violently harassed by radical
Albanian terrorists. They wanted to speak directly with Milosevic but
he was only meeting with a relatively small group in the hall.
Here is an account of this:
[The Excerpt from SERPENT Starts Here]
When members of the throng outside the hall again tried to break
through police lines and into the building, they were brutally clubbed
and beaten back by the police (composed mainly of Albanian officers,
but including some Serbs). Informed of what was taking place outside,
Milosevic exited the building and approached the still highly volatile
crowd. According to eyewitness reports at the time, the Serbian leader
was visibly upset, physically shaken, and trembling. When a dialogue
ensued between the demonstrators and Milosevic, they implored him to
protect them from the police violence. Acting on a journalist?s
suggestion, Milosevic re-entered the hall, and proceeded to a second
floor window. From that vantage point he nervously addressed the
frenzied demonstrators, and uttered his soon-to-be legendary remarks:
"No one will be allowed to beat you! No one will be allowed to beat
you!" Milosevic also invited the demonstrators to send a delegation
into the hall to discuss their grievances.- Cohen, L. J. 2001. Serpent
in the bosom: The rise and fall of Slobodan Milosevic. Boulder,
Colorado: Westview.
[The Excerpt from SERPENT Ends Here]
Milosevic said, "No one will be allowed to beat you!"
Is this nationalistic incitement?
Or is he reassuring a nervous crowd that their civil rights will be
respected? After all, he is an official with responsibilities to
citizens who were being beaten by police before his eyes.
But in the London Times article the context of the peasant Serbs
getting beaten is no longer evident. The utterance has been
transformed into, "No one will ever beat you" which has an eternal,
mythical overtone, and which therefore fits well with the new and
excellent location that the Times has found for this utterance: the
speech to commemorate the battle of Kosovo Polje.
Two different events have been fused into one, and Serbian mythology
has been joined to an injured cry, providing a total impression of a
syndrome of victimization that lashes out as a reborn and vicious
nationalism. "No one will be allowed to beat you" is supposed to mean,
"We will beat them."
I want to emphasize that Cohen?s book Serpent in the bosom, which I
quoted above, is an attack on Milosevic. If Cohen?s description has a
bias it is to suggest that Milosevic is a virulent nationalist. For
example, although he has Albanian policemen beating peasant Serbs
brutally, this is not described as ethnic animosity (the remark that
some of these policemen are Serbs seems to have been inserted in order
to dispel any such impression). But Milosevic?s attempt to reassure a
crowd whose basic human rights are being trampled right in front of
his eyes-that is nationalism, as Cohen goes on to explain in what
remains of the chapter.
Everybody else has done the same. The 1987 events are supposed to
mark a turning point on Milosevic?s road to becoming a virulent
nationalist (Cohen calls it "the epiphanal moment").
However, notice that despite these attempts, it is difficult not to
see Milosevic?s behavior as perfectly natural, indeed laudable.
Why not reassure a crowd of your constituents, who are being
bludgeoned by policemen, that this will not be allowed to happen? What
else should he have morally done? By what stretch of the imagination
is this utterance transformed into a nationalistic call to arms? Well,
it helps to omit the context in which the utterance was made, and it
also helps to insert it into a speech commemorating the defeat of the
Serbs at Kosovo Polje, as the Times has done.
* * *
[The Excerpt from NEWSDAY Starts Here]
Picture this: Milosevic (pronounced mee-LOH-sheh-vitch) was sent
to Kosovo Polje, the small village near the sacred site of the Serbs
defeat by the Turks in 1389. His orders were to speak to disgruntled
Serbian and Montenegrin activists who claimed they were being badly
mistreated by the majority ethnic Albanians who lived there.
Serbs: A Frightened Minority
While Milosevic was speaking in the town's cultural center, a
huge crowd of angry Serbs gathered outside the building, chanting in
support of the party activists inside. They were attacked by local
police, most of them Albanians, who began beating the Serbs with their
clubs.
Breaking off his meeting, Milosevic hurried out onto a balcony.
With national television cameras recording everything, he invoked the
memory of the 1389 Battle of Kosovo at the nearby Field of Blackbirds.
"No one should dare to beat you!" Milosevic shouted, and the
crowd went into a frenzy, beginning to chant, "Slo-bo! Slo-bo!
Slo-bo!" The Serbian masses had found a hero, and Milosevic had found
a nickname.
"With a skill which he had never displayed before, Milosevic
made an eloquent extempore speech in defense of the sacred rights of
the Serbs," wrote Noel Malcolm in his recent book, "Kosovo: A Short
History." "From that day, his nature as a politician changed; it was
as if a powerful new drug had entered his veins."
from "Student Briefing Page On The News"; Newsday, Inc.; Newsday
(New York, NY); April 16, 1999, Friday, ALL EDITIONS; SECTION: NEWS;
Page A48
[The Excerpt from NEWSDAY Ends Here]
COMMENT: Notice what has happened here. First, for Newsday,
apparently, it is enough that Noel Malcolm said something. The same
can probably also be said for The Times of London, which paper, as we
saw above, parroted a similar line to the one we see here: utterances
to the effect that "nobody will beat you" are supposed to allude to
the defeat of the Serbs at Kosovo Polje in 1389.
This is a fusion of the events of 1987 and 1989 and, since this
connection does not seem to appear prior to 1999 (which is the year
Noel Malcolm?s book appeared), it is at least a reasonable guess that:
a) Malcolm is the originator of this confusion and
b) ever since, newspapers like The Times of London and Newsday have
been fusing remarks that Milosevic made in two different years and in
two very different contexts (neither of them even remotely damning).
This is worth a pause and a reflection.
Academics typically get their facts about what happened in a
particular time and place from journalists. But here we have
newspapers getting their facts from an academic. It would be fine for
the newspaper to report the interpretation or theory of an academic,
but isn?t the world turned upside down when a newspaper gets the basic
facts of what happened from some bookish professor who wasn?t there?
The second observation is that what Milosevic actually said, "no one
will be allowed to beat you!" has been changed to "no one should dare
to beat you!" With this change the utterance dovetails nicely with
Malcolm?s reference to Milosevic?s supposed lyricism concerning the
"sacred rights of the Serbs". So not only is this fusing of the events
of 1987 and 1989 apparently an innovation of Malcolm?s, it is one he
seems to work hard at, modifying other facts as well, to give the
fusion plausibility.
In any case, it should be obvious that it is quite a stretch of
interpretation to say that one is invoking a moment in history by
making assurances to peasant Serbs that no one should beat them, when
those peasant Serbs are at that very moment being "attacked by local
police, most of them Albanians." How about the hypothesis that rather
than making "an eloquent extempore speech in defense of the sacred
rights of the Serbs", Milosevic was saying that the Albanian policemen
right below him should not be beating the peasant Serbs?
* * *
[The Excerpt from CIGAR Starts Here]
?in an emotionally charged speech at Gazimestan on June 28,
1989, on the sixth hundredth anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo,
Milosevic had signaled his government?s intention to extend the
nationalist agenda beyond Serbia?s borders. When coupled with active
measures being undertaken in neighboring republics, his emphasis that
the "Serbs have always liberated themselves and, when they had a
chance, also helped others to liberate themselves" seemed to commit
Serbia to a forcible redrawing of Yugoslavia?s long-established
internal borders in pursuit of "liberating" the Serbs outside of
Serbia?
Cigar, Norman 1995. Genocide in Bosnia. College Station, Texas:
Texas A&M University Press. (p.34)
[The Excerpt from CIGAR Ends Here]
COMMENT: The quote from Milosevic's speech is accurate, but it is
difficult to do justice to the distortions in this paragraph with the
appropriate superlatives. Cigar is, in second-order Orwellian fashion,
claiming that Milosevic?s speech is Orwellian. When Milosevic
contrasts Serbs to "others", this means (according to Cigar) other
Serbs! That is a very interesting code. And when Milosevic talks about
liberation, he really means that Serbs should oppress non-Serbs.
But just a tiny little bit of history suggests a different
hypothesis.
In World War I, the Serbs were the only Balkan people to side with
the allies. This means they simultaneously fought for their
independence against two empires (Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian), while
the Croats, Muslims, Albanians, etc. fought on the side of the
empires. The Serbs won, but instead of creating a ?Greater Serbia?, as
many a victor might have, they spearheaded the creation of a joint
kingdom, and they even shared the name (the Kingdom of Serbia,
Croatia, and Slovenia, which later got an even more inclusive name
when it was renamed Yugoslavia - land of the Southern Slavs).
Thus, they had liberated these other peoples from the clutches of
the empires, and did not create an empire themselves.
Contrast this with the treatment that Germany got from the
victorious allies.
Then, in World War II, the Croats, Slovenes, Yugoslav Muslims, and
the Albanians for the most part betrayed Yugoslavia and allied
themselves with the invading Nazis. The Hungarians, Bulgarians, and
Romanians also either allied themselves outright or reached an
understanding with the Nazis. The Serbs were surrounded but fought the
invaders anyway, and they were practically alone. Tito?s ethnically
dogmatically tolerant Partisans, who won the war in Yugoslavia, were
mostly Serbs. Once again, the result was not a ?Greater Serbia?, but a
magnanimous recreation of Yugoslavia (and this, despite the fact that
Serbs had suffered a Holocaust during the war very much like that of
the Jews).
Could it be that when Milosevic said that the Serbs had always
fought for their liberation, and that of others when possible, he was
merely saying what he meant?
The examples of how this speech has been maligned could be
multiplied. But we gain a valuable perspective by taking a look at how
the speech was reported the very moment it happened:
[The Excerpt from BBC Starts Here]
Copyright 1989 The British Broadcasting Corporation
BBC Summary of World Broadcasts
June 29, 1989, Thursday
SECTION: Part 2 Eastern Europe; 2. EASTERN EUROPE; EE/0495/ i;
LENGTH: 249 words; HEADLINE: The anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo
Polje
BODY:
The events in Kosovo to commemorate the 600th anniversary of the
battle on 28th June were relayed live by Belgrade radio. At the
Gracanica monastery over 100,000 people attended a liturgical service
conducted by Patriarch German, head of the Serbian Orthodox Church,
and at Gazimestan around 1,500,000 people gathered at a central
ceremony in the presence of SFRY President Janez Drnovsek and Serbian
President Slobodan Milosevic. The radio noted that more people were
expected to arrive at Gazimestan. Addressing the crowd, Milosevic said
that whenever they were able to the Serbs had helped others to
liberate themselves, and they had never used the advantage of their
being a large nation against others or for themselves, Tanjug
reported. He added that Yugoslavia was a multi-national community
which could survive providing there was full equality for all the
nations living in it. Speaking with reporters at the beginning of the
Gazimestan celebrations, Kosovo LC President Rahman Morina said that
no innocent people were being placed in isolation in Kosovo, and had
isolation not been implemented much more severe measures would have
been needed today, Tanjug reported. He also said that former ethnic
Albanian leader Azem Vlasi would deserve everything that happened to
him. Reporting on the security situation in Kosovo on the 28th, the
agency noted that there were no major problems apart from those caused
by the large number of vehicles travelling to the celebrations.
[The Excerpt from the BBC Ends Here]
COMMENT: It does not appear that the BBC reporter had the impression
Milosevic's speech produced a nationalist incitement. On the contrary,
the reporter has explicitly highlighted the tolerance of the speech.
The London Independent, which had reporters covering the speech, had
a similar impression:
[The Excerpt from THE INDEPENDENT Starts Here]
ON the poppy-flecked Kosovo Polje, the Field of Blackbirds,
looking out over a sea of a million people, Slobodan Milosevic
yesterday assumed the mantle of a statesman and Yugoslavia's natural
leader.
The climax of the two years of Serbian national awakening he has
led - the 600th anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo Polje - brought an
unexpectedly conciliatory the Serbian President made not one
aggressive reference to 'Albanian counter-revolutionaries' in Kosovo
province. Instead, he talked of mutual tolerance, 'building a rich and
democratic society' and ending the discord which had, he said, led to
Serbia's defeat here by the Turks six centuries ago.
'There is no more appropriate place than this field of Kosovo to
say that accord and harmony in Serbia are vital to the prosperity of
the Serbs and of all other citizens living in Serbia, regardless of
their nationality or religion,' he said. Mutual tolerance and co-
operation were also sine qua non for Yugoslavia: 'Harmony and
relations on the basis of equality among Yugoslavia's people are a
precondition for its existence, for overcoming the crisis.' The cries
of 'Slobo, Slobo' which greeted his arrival on the vast monument to
the heroes of 1389 soon gave way to a numb silence. 'I think people
were a little disappointed, it became very quiet after the beginning,'
an educated-looking woman from Belgrade said. But most others, in a
straw poll, insisted the occasion did not merit the raucous chanting
characteristic of the heady protest rallies of last year. 'People were
satisfied, after all it wasn't a protest rally,' said another pilgrim.
Everyone seemed a little stunned.
The Independent, June 29 1989, Thursday, Foreign News ; Pg.
10, 654 words, Milosevic carries off the battle honours, From EDWARD
STEEN and MARCUS TANNER in Kosovo Polje
[The Excerpt from THE INDEPENDENT Ends Here]
COMMENT: The quotes from Milosevic are accurate.
This account, a day after the event, suggests that the speech was
not "emotionally charged," as Cigar claims, and neither was it a
speech designed to whip up "a million Serbs into a nationalist
frenzy"-as Time Magazine untruthfully alleges.
It is clear that there was no "ferocious and frustrated crowd," as
the Times of London would have it. It was not a "fervent speech
?[that]? galvanized the nationalist passions" as The New York Times
stated.
Finally, for good measure, it was not a "fiery speech?to a million
angry Serbs [and] a rallying cry for nationalism," as the Washington
Post reported.
From the story above we even learn that one observer thought people
had been disappointed, although this impression is belied by the
opinion of the locals who said this was not a protest rally.
Indeed, it didn?t sound like one, if one reads the speech. The
framing of the events is that Milosevic was conciliatory.
How should we describe the fact that The Independent, which paper
had reporters on the ground, and which had accurately reported this
speech when it was given, later said that this was Milosevic setting
his agenda "as he openly threatens force to hold the six-republic
federation together" (see above)?
Scandalous?
Or perhaps we should show sympathy for the harried journalists at
The Independent, who apparently cannot find the time to read their own
paper!
And what about the other, 1987, speech? This is how it was reported
by the New York Times, immediately after it happened:
[The Excerpt from NEW YORK TIMES Starts Here]
The police clashed briefly today with a crowd of about 10,000 in
the ethnically tense province of Kosovo, Yugoslav news organizations
said.
The incident occurred when thousands gathered outside the Hall
of Culture in the city of Kosovo Polje.
The Communist Party chief of Serbia, Slobodan Milosevic, was on
hand to listen to complaints that minorities had been harassed by the
ethnic Albanian majority in Kosovo, the Yugoslav television reported.
Witnesses said about 300 delegates from the crowd of Serbs and
Montenegrins were admitted to the hall to talk to Mr. Milosevic, but
10,000 to 15,000 people waiting outside also wanted to be at the
talks.
Police Used Truncheons
The clash started at about 6:30 P.M., half an hour after Mr.
Milosevic began to listen to the complaints, when police officers
trying to control the crowd pushed people away from the entrance and
across the street, witnesses said.
The national press agency, Tanyug, said ''a number of citizens
threw stones at police.'' Witnesses said policemen used truncheons
during the clash, which lasted about 10 minutes. [According to
Reuters, Tanyug reported that several people were lightly injured.]
Tanyug said Mr. Milosevic emerged at 7 P.M. and ''was greeted with
applause, shouts and chanting.'' Witnesses quoted him as telling the
crowd that the police had no right to use truncheons so
indiscriminately.
The New York Times, April 25, 1987, Saturday, Late City Final
Edition, Section 1; Page 5, Column 1; Foreign Desk, 356 words,
YUGOSLAVIA POLICE AND 10,000 CLASH DURING A PROTEST OVER ETHNIC BIAS,
AP, BELGRADE, Yugoslavia, April 24
[The Excerpt from NEW YORK TIMES Ends Here]
COMMENT: It is clear from how that speech was reported at the time
that Milosevic had simply meant to reassure the assembled Serb
peasants that the police certainly did not have the right to beat them
like that. It was not a nationalistic call to arms nor was it supposed
to have overtones to the battle of Kosovo Polje. Why should it? What
was happening in front of his eyes was not metaphorical. Policemen
were beating peasants.
Final Remarks
This is how a myth is constructed: we hear the same story
everywhere. The repetition of the story convinces us that the story
has been confirmed. But, of course, repetition is hardly confirmation.
If it were, every urban legend would be true.
It is important to pause and reflect on what this means. If the
media can lie so blatantly about what Milosevic had said in 1989, and
if they do it consistently and across the board, something is wrong.
The question is: how wrong?
The US government obviously has an interest in demonizing the people
it bombed. Although its own translation of the speech is a rebuke to
how the speech has been portrayed, we should not expect the US
government to criticize the misinformation. This is unjustifiable, and
corrupt, but understandable.
Explaining the behavior of the BBC, on the other hand, is not so
easy. The BBC is not the US government. Its role is supposedly to give
us the truth, as best it can. Moreover, the BBC is supposed to be in
competition with other media outlets. Since the BBC translated the
speech, they were in a position to lay bare that what was being
written about the speech was misinformation. They have not done it,
and this is a very serious sin of journalistic omission.
If only this was their biggest sin!
On April 1, 2001, the BBC wrote the following:
[The Excerpt from the BBC Starts Here]
In 1989, on the 600-year anniversary of the battle of Kosovo
Polje, he [Milosevic] gathered a million Serbs at the site of the
battle to tell them to prepare for a new struggle.
He then began to arm and support Serb separatists in Croatia and
Bosnia. Other nationalists were coming to power throughout the
republics of the old federation.
Yugoslavia's long nightmare of civil war was beginning.
("The downfall of Milosevic ", Sunday, 1 April, 2001, 07:17 GMT 08:17
UK; http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/
europe/newsid_1204000/1204857.stm):
[The Excerpt from the BBC Ends Here]
The BBC here makes it seem as though Milosevic was indeed talking
about preparing the Serbs for aggression against other people.
But the BBC translated the live relay of the speech!
They know Milosevic did no such thing in 1989 at Kosovo Polje. The
BBC piece continues:
[The Excerpt from the BBC Starts Here]
Darker motives
Mr Milosevic was never really a nationalist, never a true
believer. He skillfully exploited the myth of Kosovo Polje - where the
Serbs refused to surrender even though that brought defeat and
subjugation - but he was always a pragmatist.
(BBC, "The downfall of Milosevic "
[The Excerpt from the BBC Ends Here]
Again: the BBC translated the speech. They know that he spoke in
skeptical and professorial tones about the famous battle at Kosovo
Polje, rather than manipulating it for ultra-nationalist ends.
This is not an isolated instance. Here is the BBC again, in a
different piece:
[The Excerpt from the BBC Starts Here]
Serbs to remember Historic battle
Religious ceremonies are being held today in Kosovo to
commemorate the anniversary of a fourteenth century battle in which
the Ottoman Turks crushed the Serbian army.
A BBC correspondent in Kosovo says most Serbs will mark the
anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo Polje hesitantly, if at all.
He says some believe the security situation is still too fragile
for any large gathering; others feel too threatened to risk travelling
on the roads.
Ten years ago, more than one-million Serbs turned out to
celebrate the battle's six-hundreth anniversary, when President
Slobodan Milosevic vowed Serbia would never again lose control of
Kosovo.
From the newsroom of the BBC World Service * Monday, June 28,
1999 Published at 09:21 GMT 10:21 UK * World: Europe
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_379000/379847.stm
[The Excerpt from the BBC Ends Here]
But?but?the BBC knows that what it is reporting here is not true.
They translated the speech. Milosevic did not vow any such thing in
1989 at the Kosovo Polje commemoration. He may have vowed it elsewhere
(and the vow in and of itself is perfectly consistent with his desire
to keep Yugoslavia whole, and does not indict him of anything). But he
certainly made no such vow in the 1989 speech.
Why is the BBC not reporting what it knows to be true?
Since this is possible, I am forced to wonder what else is possible.
What can we believe about what has been written about Milosevic in
particular, and Yugoslavia more generally? After all, the demonization
of Milosevic, and the Serbs more generally, perfectly fits with the
propaganda aims of the NATO powers that went to war against
Yugoslavia, including the US and Britain. Here we have seen that the
media establishment in these two countries has produced stories about
Milosevic?s speech that are consistent with such a deliberate
propaganda campaign.
-- Slobodan Milosevic's speech at Kosovo Field can be read at
http://emperors-clothes.com/milo/milosaid.html
Join our email list at http://emperors-clothes.com/f.htm
Receive about one article/day.
Email the link to this article to a friend.
=======================================
Emperor's Clothes Urgently Needs Your Help!
=======================================
Emperor's Clothes has only one source of income - your donations. We
want everyone to read our articles, whether they can afford to
contribute money or not.
But if you can contribute, please do; we urgently need the help.
Many have responded to our recent fundraising drive, and this has been
a big help, but we are still considerably behind on rent, Internet
costs, utilities, and our long distance and overseas telephone bill.
Since September 11 our readership has increased more than 600%. We now
transfer over 1 gigabyte of data a day. But our income has not kept up
with increasing expenses.
To keep Emperor's Clothes publishing please send whatever
contributions you can! $20, $50, $100, $500, $1000 or more. Every
penny will be used to get articles to more people.
You can make a donation using Paypal at
https://www.paypal.com/xclick/business=emperors1000@...&no_shipping=1
You can make a credit card donation by going to our secure server at
http://emperors-clothes.com/howyour.html#donate
Or Mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA
02461-0321. (USA)
Or make a donation by phone at the donation line, (U.S.) 617 916-1705.
We can now accept donations through e-gold. Our account # is 444982.
Note: If you mail a donation or make one by secure server, please let
us know by email at emperors1000@... to make sure we receive it.
Thanks!
Thank you for reading Emperor's Clothes.
www.emperors-clothes.com or
www.tenc.net
[Emperor's Clothes]
This Website is mirrored at http://emperor.vwh.net/ and at
http://globalresistance.com
IL PREZZO DELLA GRAZIA
Si sono fatte sempre più forti, nelle ultime settimane, le voci che
hanno dato per certa la grazia ad Adriano Sofri subito dopo che la
Legge Cirami fosse passata in Parlamento.
Detto-fatto: appena passata la Legge Cirami, e' sceso in campo
nientepopodimeno che il Presidente del Consiglio, quell'onest'uomo di
Silvio Berlusconi, promettendo che il bravo intellettuale italiota
otterra' la grazia.
La otterra' "anche alla luce dei suoi scritti": e per capire meglio a
quali scritti si riferisca Berlusconi invitiamo a leggere piu' avanti
l'"Elogio dello sceriffo globale". A cotanto intellettuale il Palazzo
dovra' certo assegnare il dicastero della "Pubblica Disinformazione"
per meriti acquisiti.
(a cura di Luca, Claudio e Andrea)
===
Roma, 11:07
Sofri, Berlusconi: matura decisione favorevole a grazia
Il presidente del Consiglio Silvio Berlusconi ritiene che "sia matura
una decisione favorevole alla grazia" per Adriano Sofri, condannato a
22 anni di carcere per l'omicidio del commissario Calabresi. Una
posizione nata dalla convinzione che proprio per il comportamento
tenuto in questi anni dall'ex leader di Lotta Continua ("entrato in
carcere per due volte con le sue gambe, pur considerando oltraggiosa
l'accusa formulata contro di lui e dichiarandosi non colpevole") e
anche alla luce dei "suoi scritti", "la societ non pu attendersi dalla
sua detenzione un qualunque beneficio in termini di rieducazione" e
"la pena rischia di risultare soltanto afflittiva".
Il premier ha affidato il suo pensiero ad una lettera pubblicata oggi
da il Foglio. (red)
===
Ecco cosa Sofri scriveva su "Panorama" in edicola a fine ottobre:
===
ELOGIO DELLO SCERIFFO GLOBALE
Con il dilagare dei crimini contro l'umanità, è urgente che alla
nozione e all'azione di guerra subentri quella di polizia
internazionale. Per tutelare, almeno, l¹incolumità di chi non c'entra.
di ADRIANO SOFRI
La discussione sul pacifismo e le condizioni del ricorso alla forza è
resa ogni giorno più attuale dalla triste inflazione di violenza che
attrversa la Terra. È un peccato che la discussione sembri
ricominciare ogni volta daccapo, tenersi a opposte e universali
dichiarazioni di principio (trasformate presto in slogan), e
specialmente a una contrapposizione fra pace e guerra per un verso
sacra e ovvia, fino al tabù, per l'altro inadeguata al problema reale.
Il problema reale è quello di un mondo così ravvicinato che persone,
merci, informazioni, culture e violenze lo percorrono in lungo e in
largo senza lasciarsi arrestare dalle frontiere degli stati sovrani.
Doppia è la ragione che ha spinto al diritto sovrannazionale di
ingerenza negli affari interni dei diversi paesi. La prima è nella
definizione di crimini contro l'umanità che eccedono l'ambito
esclusivo delle legislazioni nazionali. Molto spesso sono gli stati a
commettere quei crimini contro i loro stessi cittadini. Un'altra
ragione, sempre più urgente, sta nella sfida mossa alla sicurezza e
alla libertà civile da bande internazionali, diffuse in paesi e
continenti diversi e impegnate a colpire in paesi e continenti
diversi. Nei confronti dei crirnini contro l'umanità (fino al
genocidio, contro il quale la legge internazionale prevede un obbligo
di intervento, eluso di fatto dalla viltà o dall'ipocrisia delle
potenze, anche nei casi più tragicamente limpidi, come in Ruanda) come
nella lotta contro il terrorismo internazionale, la legislazione
intemazionale arranca, e l'intervento pratico anche. Quando, sempre in
extremis, dopo aver ignorato la prevenzione di malattie divenute così
incurabili, la comunità internazionale si risolve a intervenire con la
propria forza, non riesce a immaginare altro modo di farlo se non
nella forma (e col nome) della guerra.
La "guerra" del Kosovo, per esempio.
Di fatto, benché il ricorso alla forza militare sia quello tipico
della guerra, si tratta in genere di una sua contraffazione, per la
(benedetta) schiacciante sproporzione delle forze. È stato così nel
Golfo, poi nella Serbia, poi nello stesso Afghanistan. Benché a volte
ricorra all'espressione di "polizia internazionale", la comunità
internazionale e i suoi padroni (primi gli Stati Uniti, per distacco)
non sanno pensare il soccorso e la tutela della legalità
internazionale se non col titolo e con la pratica della guerra. E
dunque la contrapposizione dei suoi cittadini fra fautori della pace e
della guerra. Col risultato, oltretutto, di far passare i fautori
della pace per rassegnati all'omissione di soccorso e all'impunità
dei tiranni. E, reciprocamente, i fautori di un intervento
internazionale in soccorso di vittime inermi e a tutela del diritto,
per guerrafondai.
C'è una criminalità "comune", ammesso che si possa ancora chiamarla
così, che ha anch'essa, anzi spesso in anticipo sugli altri, fatto
tesoro del villaggio globale per infrangere le frontiere ed estendere
la sua presa attraverso i continenti fino a confiscare interi stati e
govemi. Il traffico di armi, di droga, di corpi umani, assecondato
dall'ottusità di proibizionismi gridati e impotenti, ingrassa le
multinazionali criminali. A esse si oppongono polizie internazionali,
incomparabilmente deboli di fronte alla potenza di mezzi e uomini e
brutalità della grande crirninalità. Benché sempre più spesso adotti
strumenti e modalità militari e guerresche, in Colombia per esempio,
questa azione intemazionale conserva, in omaggio alla sua origine
dalla lotta alla criminalità "comune", il nome di polizia; mentre
l'altra, indirizzata contro i crin?ini degli stati o delle
organizzazioni terroristiche, non sa liberarsi del nome di guerra.
Ora, non è solo l'intreccio sempre più stretto fra le due (pensate
alla questione dell'oppio in Afghanistan) a consigliare una
riflessione radicale sulla questione della polizia internazionale.
Solo un'abitudine tenace e pigra alla sovranità statale come limite
insuperabile della legge e della sua fonte impedisce di vedere
l'affinità crescente (non dico l'identità) fra la necessità di una
polizia locale, nazionale, federale, dove ci sia un'unità
sovrannazionale (per esempio nell'Europa dopo Schengen), e la
necessità di una polizia (e una legge, un codice, un tribunale)
internazionale. La prima è un'ovvietà per chiunque, anche per un bravo
anarchico. La seconda è ancora uno scandalo o una bizzarria per i più.
Nessuno esiterebbe a chiamare la polizia di fronte all'aggressione a
un inerme a un angolo di strada. Molti esitano, e parecchi anzi si
oppongono, all'appello a una polizia che faccia finire il massacro
di Sarajevo, impedisca e punisca lo sterminio di Srebrenica,
interrompa il genocidio ruandese.
È difficile liberarsi delle proprie convinzioni consolidate, e
diventate pregiudizi. La diffidenza nei confronti delle violazioni
aggressive all'indipendenza nazionale è così recente che non ci si
vuol staccare da quella trincea. Purtroppo questa resistenza facilita
la confusione fra guerra e azione di polizia internazionale: sicché
quando un'azione di forza internazionale diventa inevitabile, né la
sua legalità, né il suo esercizio proporzionato diventano l'impegno di
chi ama la pace secondo giustizia. A quel punto, semplicemente, la
mano passa dai governanti ai generali. Le polizie locali e nazionali,
sebbene debbano sempre guardarsi dalla tentazione all'abuso
connaturata ai corpi separati e armati (e troppo spesso a quella
tentazione cedano) hanno un obbligo statutario e un costume più o
meno consolidato, più in Gran Bretagna meno in California, a
commisurare l'impiego della forza al compito da realizzare, e alla
tutela dell'incolumità delle persone estranee che potrebbero esserne
coinvolte. Una analoga proporzione, una analoga cura per l'incolumità
dei terzi, è oggi assente dagli impieghi della forza in quelle che
dovrebbero essere azioni di polizia internazionale, e continuano a
essere guerre.
Si sono fatte sempre più forti, nelle ultime settimane, le voci che
hanno dato per certa la grazia ad Adriano Sofri subito dopo che la
Legge Cirami fosse passata in Parlamento.
Detto-fatto: appena passata la Legge Cirami, e' sceso in campo
nientepopodimeno che il Presidente del Consiglio, quell'onest'uomo di
Silvio Berlusconi, promettendo che il bravo intellettuale italiota
otterra' la grazia.
La otterra' "anche alla luce dei suoi scritti": e per capire meglio a
quali scritti si riferisca Berlusconi invitiamo a leggere piu' avanti
l'"Elogio dello sceriffo globale". A cotanto intellettuale il Palazzo
dovra' certo assegnare il dicastero della "Pubblica Disinformazione"
per meriti acquisiti.
(a cura di Luca, Claudio e Andrea)
===
Roma, 11:07
Sofri, Berlusconi: matura decisione favorevole a grazia
Il presidente del Consiglio Silvio Berlusconi ritiene che "sia matura
una decisione favorevole alla grazia" per Adriano Sofri, condannato a
22 anni di carcere per l'omicidio del commissario Calabresi. Una
posizione nata dalla convinzione che proprio per il comportamento
tenuto in questi anni dall'ex leader di Lotta Continua ("entrato in
carcere per due volte con le sue gambe, pur considerando oltraggiosa
l'accusa formulata contro di lui e dichiarandosi non colpevole") e
anche alla luce dei "suoi scritti", "la societ non pu attendersi dalla
sua detenzione un qualunque beneficio in termini di rieducazione" e
"la pena rischia di risultare soltanto afflittiva".
Il premier ha affidato il suo pensiero ad una lettera pubblicata oggi
da il Foglio. (red)
===
Ecco cosa Sofri scriveva su "Panorama" in edicola a fine ottobre:
===
ELOGIO DELLO SCERIFFO GLOBALE
Con il dilagare dei crimini contro l'umanità, è urgente che alla
nozione e all'azione di guerra subentri quella di polizia
internazionale. Per tutelare, almeno, l¹incolumità di chi non c'entra.
di ADRIANO SOFRI
La discussione sul pacifismo e le condizioni del ricorso alla forza è
resa ogni giorno più attuale dalla triste inflazione di violenza che
attrversa la Terra. È un peccato che la discussione sembri
ricominciare ogni volta daccapo, tenersi a opposte e universali
dichiarazioni di principio (trasformate presto in slogan), e
specialmente a una contrapposizione fra pace e guerra per un verso
sacra e ovvia, fino al tabù, per l'altro inadeguata al problema reale.
Il problema reale è quello di un mondo così ravvicinato che persone,
merci, informazioni, culture e violenze lo percorrono in lungo e in
largo senza lasciarsi arrestare dalle frontiere degli stati sovrani.
Doppia è la ragione che ha spinto al diritto sovrannazionale di
ingerenza negli affari interni dei diversi paesi. La prima è nella
definizione di crimini contro l'umanità che eccedono l'ambito
esclusivo delle legislazioni nazionali. Molto spesso sono gli stati a
commettere quei crimini contro i loro stessi cittadini. Un'altra
ragione, sempre più urgente, sta nella sfida mossa alla sicurezza e
alla libertà civile da bande internazionali, diffuse in paesi e
continenti diversi e impegnate a colpire in paesi e continenti
diversi. Nei confronti dei crirnini contro l'umanità (fino al
genocidio, contro il quale la legge internazionale prevede un obbligo
di intervento, eluso di fatto dalla viltà o dall'ipocrisia delle
potenze, anche nei casi più tragicamente limpidi, come in Ruanda) come
nella lotta contro il terrorismo internazionale, la legislazione
intemazionale arranca, e l'intervento pratico anche. Quando, sempre in
extremis, dopo aver ignorato la prevenzione di malattie divenute così
incurabili, la comunità internazionale si risolve a intervenire con la
propria forza, non riesce a immaginare altro modo di farlo se non
nella forma (e col nome) della guerra.
La "guerra" del Kosovo, per esempio.
Di fatto, benché il ricorso alla forza militare sia quello tipico
della guerra, si tratta in genere di una sua contraffazione, per la
(benedetta) schiacciante sproporzione delle forze. È stato così nel
Golfo, poi nella Serbia, poi nello stesso Afghanistan. Benché a volte
ricorra all'espressione di "polizia internazionale", la comunità
internazionale e i suoi padroni (primi gli Stati Uniti, per distacco)
non sanno pensare il soccorso e la tutela della legalità
internazionale se non col titolo e con la pratica della guerra. E
dunque la contrapposizione dei suoi cittadini fra fautori della pace e
della guerra. Col risultato, oltretutto, di far passare i fautori
della pace per rassegnati all'omissione di soccorso e all'impunità
dei tiranni. E, reciprocamente, i fautori di un intervento
internazionale in soccorso di vittime inermi e a tutela del diritto,
per guerrafondai.
C'è una criminalità "comune", ammesso che si possa ancora chiamarla
così, che ha anch'essa, anzi spesso in anticipo sugli altri, fatto
tesoro del villaggio globale per infrangere le frontiere ed estendere
la sua presa attraverso i continenti fino a confiscare interi stati e
govemi. Il traffico di armi, di droga, di corpi umani, assecondato
dall'ottusità di proibizionismi gridati e impotenti, ingrassa le
multinazionali criminali. A esse si oppongono polizie internazionali,
incomparabilmente deboli di fronte alla potenza di mezzi e uomini e
brutalità della grande crirninalità. Benché sempre più spesso adotti
strumenti e modalità militari e guerresche, in Colombia per esempio,
questa azione intemazionale conserva, in omaggio alla sua origine
dalla lotta alla criminalità "comune", il nome di polizia; mentre
l'altra, indirizzata contro i crin?ini degli stati o delle
organizzazioni terroristiche, non sa liberarsi del nome di guerra.
Ora, non è solo l'intreccio sempre più stretto fra le due (pensate
alla questione dell'oppio in Afghanistan) a consigliare una
riflessione radicale sulla questione della polizia internazionale.
Solo un'abitudine tenace e pigra alla sovranità statale come limite
insuperabile della legge e della sua fonte impedisce di vedere
l'affinità crescente (non dico l'identità) fra la necessità di una
polizia locale, nazionale, federale, dove ci sia un'unità
sovrannazionale (per esempio nell'Europa dopo Schengen), e la
necessità di una polizia (e una legge, un codice, un tribunale)
internazionale. La prima è un'ovvietà per chiunque, anche per un bravo
anarchico. La seconda è ancora uno scandalo o una bizzarria per i più.
Nessuno esiterebbe a chiamare la polizia di fronte all'aggressione a
un inerme a un angolo di strada. Molti esitano, e parecchi anzi si
oppongono, all'appello a una polizia che faccia finire il massacro
di Sarajevo, impedisca e punisca lo sterminio di Srebrenica,
interrompa il genocidio ruandese.
È difficile liberarsi delle proprie convinzioni consolidate, e
diventate pregiudizi. La diffidenza nei confronti delle violazioni
aggressive all'indipendenza nazionale è così recente che non ci si
vuol staccare da quella trincea. Purtroppo questa resistenza facilita
la confusione fra guerra e azione di polizia internazionale: sicché
quando un'azione di forza internazionale diventa inevitabile, né la
sua legalità, né il suo esercizio proporzionato diventano l'impegno di
chi ama la pace secondo giustizia. A quel punto, semplicemente, la
mano passa dai governanti ai generali. Le polizie locali e nazionali,
sebbene debbano sempre guardarsi dalla tentazione all'abuso
connaturata ai corpi separati e armati (e troppo spesso a quella
tentazione cedano) hanno un obbligo statutario e un costume più o
meno consolidato, più in Gran Bretagna meno in California, a
commisurare l'impiego della forza al compito da realizzare, e alla
tutela dell'incolumità delle persone estranee che potrebbero esserne
coinvolte. Una analoga proporzione, una analoga cura per l'incolumità
dei terzi, è oggi assente dagli impieghi della forza in quelle che
dovrebbero essere azioni di polizia internazionale, e continuano a
essere guerre.
Jugocoord su Telegram
Jugocoord su Facebook