PAGLIACCIO E BUFFONE

(si veda anche:
http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/330?&start=301 )

Domanda: "Perche' non la sentiamo dire pubblicamente che queste vergogne
[le violenze continue in Kosmet contro i non-albanesi e contro gli
albanesi democratici] devono finire?..."

LORD GEORGE ROBERTSON (*): "Per 10 anni, da quando Milosevic e' al
potere, sono stati negati i piu' elementari diritti... una
discriminazione sistematica che potremmo anche chiamare apartheid
[sembra quasi di sentire Alberto L'Abate, n.d.CRJ]... L'OSCE ci ha detto
che i serbi colpivano appositamente i bambini... si proprio un anno fa
trafiggevano i bambini sulla punta delle baionette allo scopo di
terrorizzare la popolazione civile... Ecco quello che stava succedendo,
ecco quello che e' successo per piu' di 50 anni [SIC!!!]..."

Fonti:
http://www.jonathandimbleby.co.uk/TX20000611_Robertson/transcript.html
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/europe/july-dec99/robertson_11-2.html

(*) Questo personaggio e' il Segretario generale della NATO.


--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------

* Polonia: gli agricoltori contro l'Unione Europea (The Guardian)
* Lo stato della Russia (Golos Kommunista)
* La NATO ed il nazionalismo ungherese (The Rockford Institute)
* Polonia: i CRETTINs - COALITION OF ROBBERS AND EXPLOITERS OF
TECHNOLOGY TUMOR INFESTED NATIONS - stanno distruggendo il paese (M.
Glogoczowski)
* Romania: l'embargo contro la Jugoslavia e la politica interna (IWPR)
* Ucraina: Ritornano i latifondisti (STOPNATO)
* Ucraina: rispettati gli impegni con gli strozzini mondiali (Reuters)
* Romania: esercitazioni militari (US Army)


---

>Polish farmers declare war over EU membership
>
>Thousands of smallholders claim they are being pushed
>to the wall in the Warsaw government's rush to
>negotiate with Brussels on entry
>The European Commission: special report
>
>Tony Paterson in Augustow, north-east Poland
>Tuesday April 18, 2000
>The Guardian
>
>Poland's politicians may be embracing early membership
>of the European Union but its farmers are furious
>about the move, which could wipe out their
>livelihoods.
>
>This week, as the European commission finalises its
>draft plan for the inclusion of Poland, Hungary, the
>Czech Republic, Estonia, Slovenia and Cyprus in the
>union, many of the fields around Augustow remain a
>wasteland.
>
>"Polish agriculture is already ruined," said one
>farmer, Stanislaw Bojkowski, 67, who tills 50 acres
>near Augustow.
>
>"Farming was worthwhile under communism, but Warsaw's
>European Union madness is driving us out of business."
>
>
>He is not alone. According to estimates from the
>Polish Peasants' party, only 600,000 of the country's
>2m farms will survive the process of joining the EU.
>
>Yet Warsaw's liberal-conservative coalition government
>is adamant that Poland must join as soon as possible.
>
>Mr Bojkowski is cultivating only half of his land this
>year - he cannot afford the fertilisers needed for the
>rest.
>
>"The money I get for the wheat and potatoes I manage
>to produce hardly makes it worthwhile. The bulk of my
>income these days derives from my old-age pension," he
>said.
>
>Two miles away, Mieczyslaw Suchocki, 43, has tried to
>offset his farming losses by taking a share in a
>grocery store.
>
>In the 1980s his 74-acre farm, producing potatoes,
>wheat and tobacco, was subsidised by the state. A
>single tobacco crop earned Mr Suchocki enough to buy a
>car.
>
>Now the terms of growing are set by the multinational
>British American Tobacco company. "Starting next year,
>BAT is only buying tobacco from farmers who plant and
>dry it with the special drying equipment we can buy
>from them.
>
>"I would need a $10,000 loan to purchase the equipment
>and I simply can't afford it. Producing tobacco on a
>small scale is out," he said.
>
>The collapse of small-scale farming is a dilemma faced
>by all the EU candidate countries but it is acute in
>Poland, where some 26% of the working population is in
>agriculture.
>
>Roman Jagielinski of the Polish Peasants' party argues
>that the state must make social security provision for
>farmers forced out of business. He wants the rest to
>receive subsidies from Brussels.
>
>But Brussels has so far turned a deaf ear. The common
>agricultural policy subsidy budget, which amounts to
>more than £25bn a year in direct aid to EU farmers,
>has been fixed until 2006.
>
>It contains no provision for EU candidate countries,
>although Poland is still aiming for a 2003 entry date.
>
>
>The anger of Polish farmers boiled over last year,
>when the militant agricultural workers' union
>Samoobrona (Self- Defence) staged countrywide protests
>against the flood of cheap EU imports.
>
>This persuaded Warsaw to temporarily ban grain imports
>and raise the amounts paid for home-grown pork.
>
>But the moves were not enough to satisfy Samoobrona's
>leader, Andrej Lepper, who will run as a candidate in
>the presidential election this autumn.
>
>"Poland is not being treated as a partner by the EU.
>We are simply being used as a dumping ground for their
>surplus products," he said.
>
>Two-thirds of large farm owners recently declared
>their readiness to take part in further militant
>protests.

---

L?état de la Russie

Selon le rapport des Nations unies, à présent la Russie est 71ème sur
174 pays, sur l?échelle du
Potentiel de développent humain. Le plus grand et, en ressources
naturelles, un des plus riches
pays dans le monde, avec une population des mieux éduquées, la Russie
traîne derrière le
Venezuela, le Panama, le Mexique, Grenade, la Malaisie, Cuba, la
Biélorussie, Fiji, la Thaïlande et
la Roumanie sur la liste des Nations unies.... Peut-être, néanmoins, que
la Russie puisse être
«fière» d?un meilleur niveau de vie que la Lituanie, l?Ukraine et la
plupart des pays dans le
Caucase et l?Asie centrale...
Le Produit national brut par habitant est tombé à la 116 place (!) dans
la liste des pays - après
avoir été la seconde puissance industrielle dans le monde.... Tels pays
que le Barbados, la
République Dominicaine, la Turquie, le Liban, le Gabon , Trinidad,
Panama et l?Île Maurice
produisent actuellement plus par tête d?habitant que la Russie! Dans 13
pays ce taux est dix fois
supérieur à celui de la Russie, alors qu?au Luxembourg et en Suisse il
est de 16 fois supérieur!
Les Russes aujourd?hui mangent moins et vivent moins longtemps qu?en
1970. Alors, l?espérance
de vie était en général de 68,7 ans, maintenant elle est de 66,6.
Entre temps le gouvernement russe se prépare à retarder l?âge de départ
en retraite, pour les
hommes de 60 à 65 ans, et pour les femmes de 55 à 65. La plupart des
hommes russes, ne vivront
pas assez longtemps pour prendre leurs retraites... C?est précisément
l?objet de cette réforme:
économiser de l?argent sur les retraites!). Actuellement les habitants
de pays tels que le Panama,
le Costa Rica, le Honduras et le Surinam ont commencé à vivre plus
longtemps!
Les Russes consomment maintenant moins de calories que les Tunisiens,
les Algériens, les
Malais, les Indonésiens, les Turcs, les Iraniens, les Chiliens e les
Argentins.
En même temps la Russie détient le plus grand taux d?incarcération dans
le monde 1538 sur
100.000 habitants. Le petit Swaziland vient en seconde place, avec
presque la moitié de ce taux,
967...
La Russie est aussi un des pays en tête en ce qui concerne le nombre de
suicides. Chaque année
73 hommes et 14 femmes sur 100.000 de la population se suicident, suit
la Lituanie avec 79
hommes et 15 femmes. À noter que d?autres pays de l?Europe de l?Est et
de la Baltique suivent la
Russie de très près....Voilà le «bonheur» des réformes?
Selon des enquêtes sociologiques, la plupart des femmes russes ont un
sentiment «d?horreur et
renoncent à vouloir vivre» quand elles se découvrent enceinte.
Eh bien, merci beaucoup pour cet «avenir brillant» de notre nation,
Monsieur Gorby et K!

(source Golos Kommunista, avril 2000)
[Traduit par I.R et A.M.]
Diffuso dalla Editions Democrite, Francia

---

The Rockford Institute

July 3, 2000

NATO AND NASCENT HUNGARIAN REVISIONISM

by Gabriel Neagu

In his remarkable article “Bad treaty that won’t go away,” published in
The Washington Times on June 4
(www.washtimes.com), Balint Vazsonyi, director of the Center for the
American Founding, made an impassioned and
unrestrained plea for the revision of the Treaty of Trianon, named for
the palace in Versailles where peace was concluded
between Hungary and the Entente powers in 1920. Dr. Vazsonyi’s article
is a timely prompt to appraise NATO’s impact on
the geopolitical architecture of the Danubian basin, with particular
reference to Hungary’s nascent revisionism

The article contains references to non-Hungarian ethnic groups that are
conceited and in poor taste, if not grossly insulting. If,
for example, “Slovaks had lived in the Northern counties of Hungary for
a thousand years, and their only path to social
advancement was to become Hungarianized,” there is no more to say about
their right to self-determination. If Transylvania as
a Hungarian province “had everything, including enormous historic
importance to Hungary,” it is implicit that no such
importance can be attached to its original and all-time majority
inhabitants, the Romanians. The statement that “the towns, the
great centers in Slovakia, in Transylvania, in Vojvodina were not built
by Slovaks, Rumanians or Serbs” is disingenuous:
pre-Hungarian Europeans did not wait for the Hungarians to build their
towns, schools, churches, and societies.

Something is wrong when a director of the “Center for the American
Founding” states that “something is not right about the
manner in which the plight and cultural destruction of the Hungarian
millions in Slovakia, Romania and Serbia has been
ignored.” How many millions of Hungarians were destroyed in Slovakia,
Romania, and Serbia? When and where? On what
sources is that audacious claim based? In Serbia Hungarians have enjoyed
for decades – and still do, even under the
disgraceful Mr. Milosevic - the rights and privileges on par with any
West European country’s treatment of its minorities.
Romania’s Hungarian minority has grown in numbers since Trianon. At the
same time, Hungary’s Romanian minority -
numerous at the end of World War I - has decreased dramatically. “There
is nothing to show for the untold suffering of
millions of Hungarians,” laments Dr. Vazsonyi. But his attempt to
include his compatriots in the list of approved victimhood
rests on the flimsiest of grounds.

An optimist might say that Dr. Vazsonyi is a harmless nostalgist, that
his irredentist dreams cannot be taken seriously in view of
Hungary’s desire to become integrated in the political and defense
structures of “the West.” But will NATO curb or boost
Hungary’s revisionism? The record is ominous: NATO is Washington’s
military arm and, after its aggression against
Yugoslavia, a criminal organization. Washington has developed one of the
most sophisticated webs of deceitful relationships in
human history. By virtue of wielding ultimate power, Washington remains
its key puppeteer. When there was a USSR, the
U.S. did make elaborate efforts to feed the illusion that international
organizations were not its own instruments, but real
international forums. A decade ago Washington attacked Iraq only after
having maneuvered the UN into giving its blessing and
the “international community” into “building a consensus.” Such finesse
is no longer needed.

Like father, like son: the “new” NATO has violated its own charter, the
US Constitution, the UN Charter, international laws
and conventions, and has committed war crimes. Its policy is based on
double standards, duplicity, and favoritism. Even in the
old days NATO did not have a history of restraining its more bellicose
members. What did NATO do to prevent its member
Turkey from invading northern Cyprus in 1974? It still keeps that
territory under illegal military occupation, but NATO does
not look offended. More recently, Washington and London have declared
no-fly zones in northern and southern Iraq, claiming
that they want to protect the Kurds in the north and Shiites in the
south against Saddam. However, Turkey is allowed to
violate Iraq’s borders and to murder with impunity the Kurds in northern
Iraq. And only a few weeks ago, acting as UN
Security Council proxies of Washington, NATO members USA, France, and
Britain banned Yugoslavia from an international
discussion on the future of the Balkans and, implicitly, of Yugoslavia
itself. In their warped view of the world, if they disdain a
country, that country should not be allowed to discuss its own future,
let alone have a say in deciding it.

Such spirit of NATO encourages an openly revisionist Hungarian policy.
According to a Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
(RFE/RL) report of October 21, 1998,

“After just a few months in office, it has become clear that the
new Orban government is taking a more vigorous
approach to supporting the claims of ethnic Hungarians living in
the neighboring countries of Romania, Slovakia and
former Yugoslavia.” (Hungary: New Government Feels Responsible For
Minorities Abroad by Kitty McKinsey)
Citing only Hungarian sources, the RFE/RL report went on to enumerate
many Hungarian claims, which were uncritically
presented as legitimate. Hungarian Undersecretary of State Tibor Szabo
was approvingly quoted as saying that “the Hungarian
nation does indeed not coincide with the borders of Hungary.” Given that
RFE/RL is one of Washington’s basest propaganda
agencies, the biased views presented by that report might well be just
another expression of Washington’s preferences. It does
not mind Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban declaring that “the
Constitution of Hungary defines our responsibility for
Hungarians living outside the borders” at the conference Hungary and
Hungarian Minorities Living Abroad in February
1999. In plain language, this implies Hungary’s constitutional “right”
of direct interference in its neighbors’ internal affairs,
which is very different from the normal, and legitimate, concern for the
well-being of one’s compatriots in other countries.

In conclusion, NATO will not curb Hungary’s revisionism if it can
contribute to the destruction of national sovereignty and of
the historically constituted national states. Some Hungarians may hope
to ride on the coat-tails of the project, but they, too, will
be its victims. The NWO seeks a world in which a minuscule, rootless,
and unprincipled financial oligarchy will exploit
everybody, without respect for borders, traditions, religions, cultures,
nations, or any other loyalty that can withstand the
upcoming enslavement. Its “democracy” and “human rights” are strictly
selective (the Serbs, for example, have none), and they
are invoked – to reward or to punish – only inasmuch as they serve the
oligarchy’s interests.

The phenomenon is not new. When the late Rumanian dictator Nicolae
Ceausescu was deemed to serve the interests of the
then still concealed NWO, the Queen of England decorated him and treated
him to a tour of London in her own blazoned
carriage. His appalling human rights record was deemed irrelevant. But
when he paid off Romania’s international debt and
started turning a profit in an economy that was not based on “free
market” fallacies, he became a “nationalist” and was
dispatched by the Romanian subsidiary of the globalist project.

New NATO member Hungary undoubtedly feels encouraged in its revisionism.
It should remember that any short-term
rewards may soon prove to have carried an exorbitant price tag.

Mr. Neagu, a native of Rumania and a former Radio Free Europe analyst,
writes from Washington D.C.

---

The speech of Marek Glogoczowski, a Poland's representative at the
European
Future Congress held at Bratislava, July 2nd, 2000.

The economic and social reality we encounter at present in Poland is
much
the same as the one, described before me, by representatives of
Slovakia,
Estonia and Latvia. In particular, our Estonian friend told us that his
country is producing only 40 percent of food it consumes, and the rest
is
imported from European Union. In "communist" posteriority Poland had
well
developed agriculture, but due to "reforms" it also follows this pattern
of
development: ten years ago milk production in my country attained 16
millions tons, and last year it has dropped to only 8 millions. The same
holds in practically all other industries, and due to it, imports exceed
exports up to 12 billions dollars per year. This means that every
working
man and woman in my country receives from the West yearly up to thousand
dollars high "subvention" to his salary. My monthly salary - as of an
academic lecturer in philosophy - is precisely 200 dollars, which means
that it is in half "sponsored" by the West, which since ten years takes
care for the Poland's development. It is evident that for this,
"implanted"
by Coalition of Global Investors, Polish national debt, we will pay in
the
future with remnants of our national treasures, our forests and
agriculture
lands, and even with our children and houses.
As a philosopher "proletarized" by the West, I would like to put some
professional light at the process of globalization, for it was not
invented
out of nothing. Everyone, who studied the Bible in more detail, knows
the
religious root of this process. The well known prophets of this Book,
like
Zechariah or Isaiah, prophesized the oncoming "Thousand years of
Unified,
Global Kingdom", where there will be "One Lord and one His name", and
the
"Nation or kingdom that will not serve Him shall be utterly laid waste".
As
show it statistics, in United States half of the population believes in
these prophecies. Therefore it is evident that such Bible-directed
public
automatically backs American government, which tries to realize orders
given by the Holy Scripture.
As the idea of "globalization of the Globe" is already more than 2,5
thousand years old, the idea of "Europeanization of Europe" is
relatively
fresh. It is a product of scientific revolution of last two hundred
years,
and it was elaborated with high transparency by French positivist
philosopher August Comte, in the middle of 19th century. According to
his
fertile ideas, European nations should be homogenized, and Europe
unified
in a form of a super-state, consisting of smaller Euro-regions, each
inhabited by about 3 million people. The imagined by Comte future
positivistic society should be divided in castes: atop should be a
narrow
elite of bankers and their associates, below soldiers performing the
role
of police damping eventual disorders, and underneath the caste of
proletarians, working essentially for the glory - and moral values - of
the
work. According to the proposal of this philosopher, members of lower
castes should have no permission to form their individual,
non-controlled
by rulers, views. We may say that in such "positivistic" society,
democracy
might be only decoracy, a decoration masking the utterly despotic
character
of the modern state. As pointed it out a known Polish philosopher Leszek
Kolakowski, August Comte was in large extend the prophet of fascist
movements characterizing first half of 20th century.
How does it look, in this religious and philosophical setting, Europe at
the eve of 21st century? All vital for us decisions are taken at
semi-secret meetings of various informal associations of bankers and
media
owners, such as the Bildberg Group. One of illustrious participants of
these semi-secret, big-business linked associations, an American
publicist
Thomas Friedman defined recently, in very transparent terms, goals of so
called "globalization of the Globe". He did it in "New York Times", only
four days before the start of "friendly bombings" of Yugoslavia:
"For globalization to work, America can't be afraid to act like the
almighty superpower that it is. The hidden hand of the market will never
work without the hidden fist. McDonalds cannot flourish without
McDonnel-Douglas, the maker of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps
the
world safe for the Silicon Valley technologies is called the US Army,
Navy,
air force and Marine Corps."
Here we have at least an overt statement what kind of totalitarian
future
prepares for us this "almighty" Coalition (in German Koalizion) of
Global
Investors, known in literature under the abbreviation of KGI. "Adapt
yourself to US-invented life technologies or perish". That's the
essential
message of our Corporate Masters.
Screening the list of participants of these semi-secret Bildberg
"seminars", we may find names of heirs of the last century "Robber
Barons",
which ravaged our Earth from New York to Shanghai. For this historical
reason I propose to supplant the KGI term by a more suggestive
abbreviation
CRETTIN (with double T) - COALITION OF ROBBERS AND EXPLOITERS OF
TECHNOLOGY
TUMOR INFESTED NATIONS.
For a keen observer it is evident that this, parasiting on our vanity
and
stupidity, CRETTIN (with double T) has a well developed internal
structure,
covering practically all aspects of our culture, our science, and even
our
religion. Here I would like to concentrate on commercial youth
organizations affiliated to the CRETTIN establishment. Those numerous -
at
least in Central and Eastern Europe - youth organizations are raising
specific "scouts", which efficiently facilitate the "liberal
transformation" of KGI targeted nations.
The "Invisible Leader" of these "scouts of commercial freedom" is with
no
doubt the wordily known financier and philanthropist George Soros, He is
a
kind of Baden Powell of our post-modernist times. For this reason I will
call the organized by him youth movement "Soros Jugend", in the memory
of
German youth organization in 30ies and 40ties. (As George Soros recalls
it
in his writings, during his adolescent times he belonged to the
Hungarian
analogue of Hitlerjugend. He even participated, as this organization
activist, in the deportation of Hungarian Jews towards Auschwitz.)
To the Soros-controlled panoply of organizations belong Open Society
Foundations, which play essential role in politics of many countries,
especially of those freshly liberated from communism. George Soros
revealed
himself, in his book "Underwriting Democracy" published in 1993, the
goal
of all these noble institutions. He informs there that (his idea was)
"the
creation of an international web ... at the heart of which will be the
computerized base of (personal) data, which enable the Western
Multinational Societies to find candidates, which they are searching
for".
In short, all these Soros-educated young men and women are prepared to
fulfil functions comparable to that of Japanese geishas. These Young
Urban
Professionals, thanks to their multiple, delicate social contacts with
bureaucracy in target countries, facilitate the implementation in their
homelands of KGI run businesses. According to information gathered by
Schiller's Institute, the George Soros right arm in European Commission
is
professor Romano Prodi. It means that "the web" of Soros-led politicians
embraces all the Europe: according to our information in Russia with
this
banker's "web" are linked ex-(vice)PM Tchoubais, Kirilenko and Niemcov.
In
Poland we speak overtly that Soros is in fact an "invisible emperor",
which
is trying, with the help of his Legion of Geishas (or "Scouts") of the
Open
Society, to unify Europe according to the pattern traced earlier by
Napoleon and Hitler. One wonders, how many years will survive this new
version of "Thousand Jahre Reich". Of course, I have a project how to
humanize this latest, logical accomplishment of our positive, born with
French Revolution, European dreams. This my proposal is contained at the
end of a longer article "Quo vadis Europe?" which I've prepared for the
Ljubljana Euro-Future meeting.
(Below is only its short outline. It is based on experiences of my
youth,
when Yugoslavia was for me a positive model of communisto-capitalistic
country, where people were living in much better way than in the nearby,
sterile Austria. To my surprise, a similar opinion has Austrian writer
Peter Handke, and also the French historian Yves Bataille, whom I met
for
the first time two years ago at Prague, at the Slavic Congress. Of
course I
will be happy to rebuild - and even extend - the country which I have in
my
positive memory. How to realize it? In last month's municipal elections
in
Montenegro, the victorious (in an overall score) coalition "Pro
Yugoslavia"
consisted of honest socialist, nationalist and even communist parties,
all
of which I have in esteem. Such an "alliance of retrogrades" stirs an
overt
hostility of ruling at present in Europe - and also in Montenegro -
coalition "For better life", which in reality realizes anti-social
interests of supranational financial gangsters, backed by local
Mafia-linked "geishas".
Why not to project the extension of Montenegrin "Pro Yugoslavia"
coalition
onto other European countries? What about the revitalization of the
project
of de Gaulle's dreamed "Europe of nations", from Mediterranean to the
Atlantic Ocean? All this may sound like an irresponsible dream, but to
all
renegades of student 1968 movement I want to recall a slogan written on
walls of Paris in May 1968 "Soyez réalistes, demandez l'impossible".
From
my own experience is evident that - in a long term - it is better to
stay
together with those who proved to be courageous, smart and honest, than
to
go "down the drain", together with those who proved to be greedy liars,
prfessional swindlers and cowards.)

P.S. Few days after my speech at Bratislava, where I proposed the term
"Coalition of Robbers and Exploiters" (CRE), I've found in N. Chmsky's
book
"What Uncle Sam Really Wants" a following, CRE related statement: "Who
is
going to win the race (in Eastern Europe) for robbery and exploitation.
Is
it going to be German-led Western Europe, or Japan, or the United
States?".
In fact it is a good question for the European Future Congress.

---

<< ROMANIAN SMUGGLING SCANDAL SPARKS POLITICAL TURMOIL

A political row has broken out in Romania over claims that senior
Romanian
politicians helped to organise the smuggling of oil to Yugoslav nearly
a
decade ago.

By Marian Chiriac in Bucharest

The scandal over illegal Romanian oil shipments to Yugoslavia during
the
Bosnian war has taken a new political twist with President Emil
Constantinescu accusing two prominent politicians of involvement in the
case.

Constantinescu alleges that his predecessor, Ion Iliescu, and former
Foreign
Minister, Teodor Melescanu, were involved in transporting the fuel, in
breach of a UN embargo against Yugolavia.

"Huge quantities of petrol were exported under the cover of the
darkness,"
Constantinescu said, claiming the Romanian secret service played a role
in
the smuggling, operating on "orders from above" - a clear reference to
the
country's former political leadership.

The president said Iliescu and Melescanu would be held responsible,
"regardless of whether they knew about it."

Melescanu immediately retaliated, accusing Constantinescu of attempting
to
discredit his rivals ahead of presidential elections in
November."Constantinescu is turning the presidential seat into a
soapbox
from which he can heap abuse on his political opponents," the former
minister said.

Without formally denying the accusations, Iliescu said the president's
remarks carried "a strong dose of electioneering." It was "unacceptable
and
dangerous" for the president to "take over the role of the judiciary,"
Iliescu said.

The smuggling operation followed the UN Security Council's decision in
1992
to impose an oil embargo on Yugoslavia to pressure Belgrade to stop
supplying fuel to the Bosnian Serbs.

Romanian police launched an investigation into the country's violations
of
the UN embargo three years ago. Local press reports earlier this year
said
Romanian investigators had established around 1,000 railway wagons
carrying
tonnes of fuel were smuggled across the Romanian-Serbian frontier at
Jimbolia.

According to the reports, secret service agents accompanied the trains,
which passed the Jimbolia crossing at night with their lights off.

"Operation Jimbolia blew a hole of $100 million in the public purse,"
the
daily paper, Evenimentul Zilei, reported. "The operation was financed
by the
state through preferential credits allotted to cronies of the former
government under the co-ordination of the Romanian Intelligence
Service."

Romanian judicial officials have refused to comment on the media
reports,
but say the investigation is continuing.

On July 5, however, former intelligence chief, Virgil Magureanu, said
in an
interview with the most popular daily paper Adevarul, "Romania's
violation
of the embargo against Yugoslavia was indeed a political decision, made
at
the highest level."

Magureanu said Western governments had also approved the shipments
because
the oil was meant only for humanitarian purposes. "Other countries like
Bulgaria, Hungary and Ukraine also carried out similar special
operations,"
he said.

Although international observers said UN rules had not been breached,
Romania is known to have a poor record of observing UN sanctions. The
embargo presented many people with an opportunity to ferry barrels of
oil
across the Danube in small boats. Hundreds of luxury villas, built on
the
proceeds of this lucrative trade, soon dotted the landscape.

But most Romanians look upon Constantinescu's sanction busting attack
on
Iliescu as nothing more than a political bluff. Iliescu was ousted by
the
reformist Constantinescu in the 1996 elections, but looks poised to win
back
the presidency in the November elections.

Constantinescu may also be sending a signal to the international
community
ahead of November's poll. Critics have accused Iliescu of maintaining
warm
relations with Yugoslav President, Slobodan Milosevic. "The allegations
against Iliescu are unlikely to enhance Romania's bid to join NATO and
the
European Union," says Eliade Balan of the daily paper, Romania Libera,
"but
they should serve as reminder his election victory could complicate the
situation in the Balkans."

Marian Chiriac is news editor at the MediaFax News Agency in Bucharest
and
editor of Foreign Policy, a quarterly published by the Romanian
Academic
Society. >>

Fonte: IWPR'S BALKAN CRISIS REPORT, NO. 156, July 14, 2000 www.iwpr.net

---

The landlord returns to the Ukraine


By Lem Harris

Before the breakup of the Soviet Union, the Ukraine, about the size of
France, was
known as the bread basket of the Soviet Union. Today, elimination of all
collective
farms is underway. Ukrainian President Kuchma, by decree, and with no
confirmation by
the Ukrainian Parliament, removed all financial support, including
production credit,
from all collective farms. The decree includes the privatization of all
collective
farm land by assigning all such land in equal shares to former members
of the
collective.

One does not need a crystal ball to foresee what will happen. The New
York Times
reports that one enterprising Cossack, Vasily Kluga, member of a
dissolved collective,
saw an opportunity and took advantage of it.

Kluga, along with other members of his collective received title to
acres of the
collective by an earlier decree. That was a first step in the "reform"
policy for
doing away with collectives and opening the way for private ownership of
farm land.

Kluga moved fast. He borrowed money from what the Times correspondent
characterized as
a local "oligarch," that is one of the local insiders who bought some
former
state-owned enterprise for a song and is now comfortably rich. With this
money, Kluga
bought enough five-acre shares from his fellow members of the collective
to accumulate
title to over 200 acres. He also acquired necessary implements at fire
sale prices. Of
course, Kluga's oligarch was no philanthropist. He charged 40-percent
interest on the
loan, but Kluga was able to pay it off out of his harvest.

Then Kluga made his big move. Like many others, his collective was
bankrupt. Their
bankruptcy was a direct result of government "reform" measures. Under
Soviet
conditions many collective farms were prosperous. I have visited
collective farms in
this very area near Poltava, where Kluga lives, as well as in many other
regions. On a
number of occasions I sat down with the accountant of a collective to
examine a farm's
financial reports.

On one such farm in the North Caucasus, I still have the figures for the
1984 season
showing the net profit of 2.5 million rubles for that year's operations.
That profit
was distributed as follows:

. 30 percent for new construction of roads and buildings

. 40 percent for new tractors, trucks and implements

. 15 percent for bonuses (usually a 13th month wage payment)

. vouchers covering low-cost vacations in mountain or seaside resorts

. and new facilities for improving living standards

. 15 percent to the state fund of the Ministry of Agriculture.

At that time, living standards on well-run collective farms were equal
to those of
working families in the cities. But not any more. In both Russia and the
Ukraine, the
collective farms were sabotaged. Then Russian President Boris Yeltsin
tried to issue
decrees like Kuchma, but the Communist-dominated Russian Congress
stopped him by
passing laws protecting the collectives. However, often collectives had
to wait many
months before receiving payment for their grain and other farm products
shipped to the
government. During the delay in payment, inflation dropped the value of
the ruble,
resulting in a heavy loss for the farms. Also, for many years Yeltsin
bypassed the
collectives by buying dairy and meat products from abroad, seriously
cutting in to the
sales of domestically grown products.

Kluga saw his chance when Kuchma issued a new decree last December
privatizing all
Ukrainian collective farms! The decree divided the title of the farms'
land equally
among the farm's members. All further support for the collective was
terminated.

At this point Kluga's collective offered him the chairmanship of the
farm. But Kluga
was not one to assume responsibility for the collective's large debt. So
he made a
counteroffer. The collective could become bankrupt, but he would rent
the land now
owned by the 120 members, about 1,200 acres, and pay this rent with
shares of his
harvest - a smart deal, worthy of a young Carnegie. In this way, the
Times reports, he
would bypass the collectives' debts and probably become owner of all the
collective's
land and equipment in about two years. The collective, with little other
choice,
accepted his offer and now Kluga controls 1,730 acres, nearly three
square miles of
rich farm land.

Of course all was not clear sailing for Kluga. He had to borrow $10,000
more from the
oligarch for fuel and additional equipment. "I am running a very big
risk in taking
another loan, for everything depends on a good harvest," he said. "If we
are lucky, it
will rain."

Kluga's fortunes will depend on much more than rain. More critical will
be how free
enterprise Ukraine will determine grain prices. Will the "reform" policy
copy the
American experience and hold grain prices down to levels below his
costs?

If Kluga survives one is tempted to say he represents the return of
"kulaks," the
farmers in czarist days who exploited their poor neighbors. Kluga is
already bigger
than any kulak. He is the new landlord, like the hated czarist
"pomestchoki."

Working for him are 20 of the best workers of the former collective.
These include
72-year-old Ivan Nimchin, a skilled combine harvester operator. "The old
system was
better," Nimchin said, "but it is nice to get a paycheck once more."

Nimchin reminded me of an old man I met on my most recent trip to
Russia. He was on
horseback, herding cattle on the open prairie somewhere in the North
Caucasus. His
clothing was badly torn. "Look at me," he said. "I get paid almost
nothing. Things
were better under communism."

Fonte: STOP NATO: ¡NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM

---

Ukraine Meets Its First Half Debt Obligations in Full

KIEV, Jul 16, 2000 -- (Reuters) The Ukrainian government fully met its
debt
obligations in the first half of the year, paying $494 million of
foreign
debt and 1.075 billion hryvnias ($197.66 million) of domestic debt, the
prime
minister said on Friday.

"We as the government do not have any overdue payments either on
domestic
debts or foreign," Viktor Yushchenko told parliament. "The government
did not
receive a kopeck of foreign loans this year."

The International Monetary Fund and other lenders froze credits to
Ukraine
last September over slow reforms and the government has failed to
persuade
them to resume financing.

Yushchenko said a deal agreed in April to reschedule foreign debts did
not
increase the total amount of state debt. "Finally, Ukraine is living in
a
regime of reducing debts," he said.

The government restructured $2.37 billion in short-term commercial
obligations, converting the obligations into new seven-year Eurobonds
earlier
this year.

It still plans to restructure another $782 million in debts, including
$500
million to the Paris Club of sovereign creditors and $282 million to
Turkmenistan.

The government stopped payments on Paris Club debts in January but
cannot
formally approach the Paris Club until the IMF resumes disbursements.

Central Bank Chairman Volodymyr Stelmakh said earlier this month Ukraine
had
to spend $750 million on foreign debt payments in the second half of the
year.

Stelmakh said at the time that Ukraine had spent $955 million servicing
government and central bank foreign debt obligations in the first six
months
of the year.

(C)2000 Copyright Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or
redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited
without the prior written consent of Reuters Limited.

---

Subject: U.S. sponsors disaster-relief exercise in Romania
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 18:12:02 -0400
From: ArmyLINK News Story <armylinknews_sender@...>
To: ARMYLINKNEWS-L@...


Content-Length: 5211

Text Version



CONSTANTA, Romania (Army News Service, July 18, 2,000) --
Approximately 2,500 troops from 13 NATO and other partner nations are
participating this week in Exercise Rescue Eagle 2000 in areas
surrounding Constanta, Romania.
United States forces have joined participants and observers from
Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Moldova,
Slovakia and Turkey, Hungary and South Africa. The U.S. forces include a
large contingent from the Tennessee and Alabama Army National Guard.
U.S. Ambassador to Romania, Jim Rosapepe, visited the exercise
and participated in a mass casualty drill July 17. Rosapepe shed his
business suit and tie to don the apparel and simulated injuries of an
earthquake victim during the drill.
Wearing moulage to simulate a serious shoulder injury sustained
in a major earthquake, and wrapped in a shoulder sling, the ambassador
was processed and treated with other exercise participants before being
taken by helicopter to the field military hospital for further medical
treatment.
"...I was handled and treated by a combined team of American,
Romanian, and Moldaovan soldiers," he said. "I could see with my own
eyes the kind of cooperation that we have in the PfP (Partnership for
Peace) and in NATO."
Romania has expressed its interest in pursuing a path toward
eventual NATO membership, and the ambassador stressed the significance
of the Rescue Eagle exercise in supporting that vision.
"We in the United States in particular want Romania to be a
strong candidate for NATO membership and these types of exercises are
part of the process of strengthening Romania's candidacy for NATO,"
Rosapepe said. "I think you build relationships by working together, and
joint exercises of this sort are what it takes for our American
military, Romanian military, and other partners to develop the kind of
partnerships that lead to partnership and alliance," he said.
The exercise is designed to improve the ability of joint forces
to accomplish humanitarian assistance and disaster relief-type
operations, officials said, by using the scenario of a mock earthquake.
They said training objectives are specifically aimed at small units and
enhancing the abilities of forces to work together.
"This is part of our effort to try to help the Romanian Military
and our other partner countries to become modern, efficient and
interoperable with NATO," Rosapepe said. "The leaders of the government
of Romania, and the leaders of the United States very much want to
strengthen our relations-- particularly in the military realm -- and
bringing Rescue Eagle, which is one of the major exercises done in the
spirit of the Partnership for Peace this year, is a very important
signal."
During opening ceremonies for the exercise July 12, Constantin
Degeratu, consular of the President of Romania, stood alongside other
dignitaries to highlight the importance of the exercise before the
assembled nations' forces.
"It is a very important day because the exercise is occurring in
an unprecedented context, as today we are celebrating three years since
Romania and the United States signed a Strategic Partnership Agreement,"
Degeratu said. "I am confident that the experience accumulated [in this
training] allows us to start any kind of [humanitarian assistance]
activity from the same level as our partner nations."
Maj. Gen. David F. Bice, deputy commander of U.S. Marine Corps
Forces Europe, from Stuttgart, Germany, represented the lead U.S. unit,
and emphasized the significant future dividends the exercise will pay.
"There is an old saying that a warrior's biggest fear is letting his
buddies down," Bice said. "The result [of this training] is that we
[partner nations] can look to each other in times of disaster or
national crisis and say to ourselves, 'we won't let our partner nations
down.'"
The United States-sponsored, Romanian-hosted joint, combined exercise
will occur through July 20, and includes some 800 active-duty and
reserve U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. The second largest
U.S. exercise of its kind this year in Europe, Rescue Eagle is being
conducted in the spirit of the Partnership for Peace Program.
The stabilizing effect of exercises of this sort was a common theme
throughout the opening ceremony.
"Through exercises of this sort our men and women in uniform can cement
the bonds of fraternity and teamwork which promote peace and stability
throughout this region of the world," Bice said.
Speaking from the site of a massive tent camp erected to house the
exercise participants, Gen. Mircea Chelaru, chief of the Romanian
General Staff, echoed the same sentiment.
"If this exercise has a main goal of intervention for humanitarian
assistance, then there is nothing more humanitarian than keeping and
preserving the peace status," Chelaru said.
"We're looking to have as many exercises here as we can," Ambassador
Rosapepe said. "Certainly the support that Romania provided to NATO in
bringing rapid end to the war in Kosovo last year increased the interest
that NATO has in exercises in the region."


Link to original news item:
http://www.dtic.mil/armylink/news/Jul2000/a20000718eagleex.html



--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------

UN TEDESCO PENSAVA CHE ADOLF HITLER FOSSE UN SERBO


Tra le ultime grida levatesi contro la dirigenza jugoslava - colpevole
di far passare in Parlamento, anziche' in TV e a colpi di referendum
come in Italia, le proprie riforme populiste - ci giungono quelle del
premier tedesco Schroeder: "Milosevic e' il nuovo Hitler - lasciatecelo
dire a noi, che ce ne intendiamo!"
Infatti Schroeder, che e' tra i responsabili dei bombardamenti della
NATO contro la RF di Jugoslavia e delle relative violazioni del diritto
tedesco ed internazionale, da circa due anni guida il suo paese alla
riconquista coloniale dei Balcani e dell'Europa orientale in continuita'
con Bismarck ed Hitler. In particolare, soldati tedeschi dopo 50 anni
nuovamente occupano il territorio kosovaro ed assistono alle operazioni
di pulizia etnica compiute dai loro alleati nazionalisti pan-albanesi.


> Milosevic copies Hitler's power grab - Schroeder
>
> By Gernot Heller
>
>
> OKINAWA, Japan, July 23 (Reuters) - Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder accused
> Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic on Sunday of grabbing power in Belgrade
> in the same way Adolf Hitler established the Nazi dictatorship in Germany in
> 1933.
>
> In the toughest foreign criticism to date, Schroeder said constitutional
> amendments Milosevic pushed through the Serb-dominated Yugoslav parliament
> this month were like the Enabling Act that gave Hitler sweeping powers.
>
> Schroeder's criticism came a day after he and Italian Prime Minister Giuliano
> Amato told the Group of Eight summit on this southerly Japanese island that
> the international community must not recognise any Yugoslav elections based
> on the new laws.
>
> A G8 statement on the Balkans voiced concern about the amendments, which
> opened the door for Milosevic to serve another eight years as president, and
> expressed support for the Western-leaning government in Montenegro.
>
> ``I don't want to beat around the bush,'' Schroeder told journalists at the
> summit. ``The constitutional amendments Milosevic has pushed through amount
> to an Enabling Act.
>
> ``We've already experienced that once before,'' he said in an ominous
> reference to the 1933-1945 Nazi period in Germany.
>
> Democratically elected in January 1933, Hitler soon pushed his Enabling Act
> through the Reichstag to establish his Nazi dictatorship. He promptly shut
> down the parliament, banned political parties and trade unions and sent about
> 200 deputies to concentration camps where 88 died.
>
> WEST FEARS MORE BALKAN CONFLICT
>
> Milosevic, an international pariah indicted for war crimes by a U.N.
> tribunal, had the constitution amended to let him win reelection when his
> present term expires in mid-2001.
>
> The amendments also introduced direct voting for the upper house of the
> federal parliament, thereby bypassing the assembly in the much smaller
> republic of Montenegro.
>
> The West worries that Milosevic is pushing Montenegro to hold a referendum on
> independence, a move that could spark off another Balkan conflict like the
> struggle for Kosovo last year and prompt Kosovo Albanians to seek their own
> state as well.
>
> Montenegran President Milo Djukanovic has said his republic, with only
> 650,000 inhabitants, would boycott federal elections held under the new rules
> because they denied it equality with 10-million-strong Serbia in the rump
> Yugoslav federation.
>
> Briefing journalists on Saturday, Schroeder's diplomatic adviser Michael
> Steiner said: ``The chancellor and Italian Prime Minister Amato stressed
> there could be no international recognition of any electoral results achieved
> on the basis of the recent constitutional changes that Milosevic has
> staged.''
>
> Steiner said both Schroeder and French President Jacques Chirac stressed that
> ``the reestablishment of democracy in Yugoslavia was in the interests of both
> the G8 and Europe.''
>
> The G8 includes the United States, Japan, Germany, France, Italy, Canada and
> Russia. At Chirac's request, the European Union plans to hold a conference in
> Croatia in November on security issues in the western Balkans.
>
> During a lively discussion on the Balkans, Steiner added, Russian President
> Vladimir Putin made clear he would join G8 efforts to pressure Milosevic
> towards more democracy but not try to press for sympathy for Belgrade as
> Moscow did during the Kosovo crisis.
>
> In that crisis, Moscow openly played the ``Slavic card'' by stressing the
> common heritage of Slavic languages and Orthodox Christian faith that Russia
> and Serbia shared.
>
> ``Putin wanted to say he is in the G8 boat and...is not ready to play a part
> on the other side,'' Steiner said. ``There will not be the G7 and a
> 'G-Eighth' who tries to win
>
> 01:32 07-23-00



--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------

ENZO BETIZZZZA E PAOLO RUMIZZZZ


> Continuano a pervenirci interessanti commenti sulla nostra
> Ciliegina 172
> ( http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/328?&start=301 e
> http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/332?&start=313 ). Li
> riproduciamo di seguito insieme ad alcune nostre precisazioni
> (in fondo al testo):

---

Pienamente d'accordo per quanto riguarda Bettiza, dissento sull'opinione
su Rumiz
(la zeta credo sia friulana non croata). Rumiz ha parlato male di alcuni
dirigenti
serbi, croati ecc. ma non ha mai parlato male dei rispettivi popoli, che
ha
dimostrato di amare più della media degli italiani.
Grazie a lui ho avuto uno spazio eccezionale per denunciare su IL
PICCOLO il
comportamento della NATO in Kosovo, proprio durante i bombardamenti ed
il generale
silenzio stampa.

M. Andolina

---

... infatti sig.Betica - Bettiza, non ha negato mai le sue
origini slave, ma si è sempre comportato e dimostrato per quello che è:
il nazionalista nazifascio - ustasca croato "cattolico"!

Noi sappiamo che lui è un dalmata, poi il Spalato/Split
era e lo è una delle roccaforte degli nazifascio - ustascia,
specialmente i paesini intorno il Spalato ...

Io dico sempre nazifascio-ustascia perché si tarata di seguaci
della politica sanguigna del Ante Pavelic, il quale
ha vissuto un po' di anni, primo della seconda guerra mondiale
in Italia durante il regime fascista di Mussolini. I Servizi
segreti di allora lo avevano pure aiutato ... c'era un poligono
di addestramento sul territorio italiano che appoggiava gli
estremisti, appunto priprio nazifascio-ustascia croati per
destabilizzare
la Jugoslavia monarchica di allora perché corrispondeva alle
esigenze della politica estera imperialista del regime fascio di
Mussolini !

Quando finì la 2° Guerra mondiale, Ante Pavelic fu aiutato
dal Vaticano - gli avevano procurato il passaporto per fuggire in
America
Latina.

Lo sapevate questo???

La Storia è una materia che bisogna studiare, così si possono prevenire
ripetizione degli orrori e errori commessi nel passato !

Effettivamente, ci vuole un bel'coraggio a leggere le cose che
scrive sig.Betica - Bettiza e i suoi simili !

A prescindere dagli orientamenti e ideologie politiche, personalmente
credo che in Italia di oggi, ci sono delle persone di buon senso
che non accettano e non potranno mai accettare certi atti barbari e
malvagi e le persone che gli approvano !

Danica Razlag

---

> Non e' raro che anche l'affermazione fanatica della propria
> "croaticita'" risponda allo stesso spirito antijugoslavo,
> di solito anzi sostanzialmente slavofobo, al quale ci riferivamo:
> la Croazia come "antemurale Christianitatis", come baluardo
> dell'Occidente contro un mondo balcanico-bizantino-slavo del quale
> si ha paura.
>
> Dunque probabilmente, per ignoranza, sbagliavamo ad attribuire
> a Bettiza "italianissime" velleita', dovremmo piuttosto definirlo
> un fanatico antijugoslavo italo-croato.
>
> Su Rumiz, invece, ci si consenta di insistere: fosse anche di origini
> friulane, a maggior ragione sarebbe da considerare un "sangue
> misto", visto che il Friuli e' terra di confine, e ci abitano
> centinaia di migliaia di sloveni, italianizzati o meno. Le
> desinenze dei cognomi dimostrano proprio la ricchezza delle componenti
> e delle provenienze...
>
> Ma indipendentemente da questo, Rumiz dimostra nelle cose che scrive
> sui giornali come nelle affermazioni pubbliche la stessa sindrome
> slavofoba; la sua comprensione per le sofferenze di quei popoli
> ci sembra retorica e di circostanza (non e' il solo ad usare
> la peggiore retorica ed ipocrisia sui nostri media...). Lo ricordiamo
> ad esempio autore di descrizioni ridicole e lombrosiane delle
> classi dirigenti dei paesi slavi, nonche' di un articolo, scritto
> alla fine dei bombardamenti della NATO, nel quale dava ad intendere
> che le truppe della KFOR avrebbero camminato sulle "montagne di
> cadaveri" lasciati sul terreno (della sua fantasia) dalle milizie
> serbe.
> Suggeriamo anzi la lettura del suo libro "Maschere per un massacro"
> (Editori Riuniti), che anziche' svelare e stigmatizzare la
> disinformazione strategica usata in questi anni per frantumare la
> RFS di Jugoslavia, dividerne le genti ed occuparla militarmente,
> aggiunge disinformazione a disinformazione criminalizzando oltre ogni
> ragionevole misura i serbi della Bosnia. Si tratta probabilmente
> del peggiore libro sulla crisi jugoslava uscito in Italia in questi
> anni.
>
> Italo Slavo


--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------

* Mercenari dagli USA per compiere atti terroristici in Jugoslavia
* Clinton vuole "s-balcanizzare i Balcani" !!!
* American Barbarism and the Big Lie Technique
* "School of the Americas": centro di addestramento per terroristi


---

Politika Expres, Beograd, 15/7/2000:

E' gia' arrivata la gran parte delle unita' terroristiche americane
"CANI DA GUERRA" IN KOSMET
Pristina - agli inizi di luglio 120 specialisti americani di terrorismo
(...) sono arrivati nella base di Camp Bondsteel, presso Urosevac, nel
Kosmet. Questi specialisti sono stati addestrati nella base militare di
Fort Bragg, nel North Carolina (USA), armati fino ai denti ed istruiti a
parlare bene il serbo e l'albanese, per poter compiere azioni
terroristiche (...)
Sono arrivati nella regione serba attraverso il valico di Bozaj, sulla
frontiera jugoslavo-albanese. Questi "cani da guerra" (cioe' mercenari)
sono terroristi spietati. L'amministrazione americana gia' nella scorsa
primavera aveva creato l'unita' speciale denominata "cacciatori di
teste", formata da circa 120 terroristi con licenza di catturare, ma
anche di liquidare, i serbi che sarebbero inclusi in varie liste -
pubbliche o segrete - come indiziati di vari crimini. Dunque non bastano
la KFOR, l'UNMIK con a capo Kouchner, che assistono benevolmente alla
repressione ed alla uccisione dei serbi (...)

Stigla glavnina americke teroristicke jedinice
"PSI RATA" NA KOSMETU
Pristina - Glavnina americke teroristicke jedinice od oko specijalaca,
koji su tokom visemesecnih priprema u vojnoj bazi Fort Bragu, Severna
Karolina (USA), obucavali za teroristicke akcije, ukljucujuci i
najbrutalnije likvidacije, naoruzavani i cak nauceni da tecno govore
srpski i albanski jezik, stigla je pocetkom Jula u bazu Baunstel,
nadomak Urosevca, na Kosovu i Metohiji...

American terrorist units are preparing
attacks on Ministry of Internal Affairs
of Serbia

July 15, 2000

Pristina, July 14 (Tanjug) - Main part of the
American terrorist unit, composed of 120
specialists who were trained for terrorist
actions, including the most brutal liquidations,
armed and even taught to speak Serbian and
Albanian language fluently, during the several
months' preparations in the military base in
Fort Brag in north Carolina (USA), came to
the base Bondsteel near Urosevac in Kosovo
and Metohija, at the beginning of July.

Cruelled and armed to the teeth "dogs of war", who
have experience in
wars around the world and in war territory of
Chechnya, came in the
southern Serbian province through boundary
crossing
of Bozaj, at
Yugoslav-Albanian boundary.

Their aim is clear: with frequent attacks on
members
of Serbian Ministry
of Internal Affairs in the region of Presevo,
Bujanovac and Medvedje and
synchronic terrorist actions in the small ghettoes
in
Kosovo and Metohija,
in which Serbs and other citizens of non-Albanian
nationality survive, in
spite of their exile, physical maltreating and
constant threat of physical
liquidations, and during that they are completely
deprived of KFOR and
UNMIK protection, American specialists have to
continue with agony of
survival of those citizens, speed up their exodus
and
provoke reaction of
Serbian security forces.

In that way, according to the large number of
analysts, the USA would
have the alibi in front of the international
public
in order to interfere in one
of the, probably, last chapter of Kosovo's drama.

Immediately after their arrival and under
supervision
of American military
commanders, hundreds of the hardest militant
ethnic
Albanian
extremists-members of, officially dissolved,
so-called KLA and one unit
from American KFOR contingent joined mentioned
terrorist group.

All of that was done as a part of perfidious,
long-term strategy of
Washington in order to destabilize political
situation in Serbia and to exert
pressure on authorities in Belgrade, thus,
secretly
and besides knowing of
European alliances in military mission of the UN
Security Council in
Kosovo and Metohija.

Small part of that terrorist unit stayed stationed
at
airport Petrovac near
Skoplje, where are several pilotless planes.

The government of the USA is continuing with
sowing
seeds of violence
and terror wherever it can, although it is
declaratively against terrorism
and is fighting against that demon of modern world
with all means on its
territory.

In that way, this summer, American administration
has
formed special unit
of "hunters on blackmailed heads", consisting of
almost 120 terrorists and
gave it "authority" to arrest and even liquidates
Serbs who are suspected
of war crimes in some public and secret lists of
the
Hague Tribunal,
including those who only looks like suspects (case
of
brothers twins Milan
and Miroslav Vuckovic).

That will be, doubtless, written in one of the
darkest charters of
international terrorism. In the same charter, in
which had already been
written that the USA, last year, began and leaded,
against international
law and without any reason and cause, brutal
aggression on one sovereign
European state and its people.

Although the group for the International public
informing (IPI) - supreme
censor of all media in the USA, which formed
American
administration in
order to stop publishing compromising facts-is
trying
to stop break of
truth about responsibility and Washington's
participation in all events, vital
for the survive of recent federation, and with
dramatic events in the
territory of FR of Yugoslavia, facts about that
are
inexorable breaking
through.

Recently published book "Censured 2000", by
respectable professor
from the California University "Sonoma", Peter
Philips, about brutal
informative restriction of all American newspapers
during the aggression
on FR of Yugoslavia, agitated world public, just
like
publishing of facts in
British media about participation of specialists
from
the England in
massive, brutal execution of Muslim civilians in
the
vicinity of Srebrenica,
during the civil war in FR of Yugoslavia - of what
Serbs were accused.

Hand of justice is maybe slow but inevitable.

---

Sad Day: Clinton postures about 'de-Balkanizing the Balkans'
by Raymond Kent (6-4-00)

Question from Emperors-clothes: Is it by reversing whatever Clinton says
that
one arrives at the truth about U.S. foreign policy?

www.tenc.net [emperors-clothes]

President Clinton's current statements about being "for Peace in
Europe,"
"de-Balkanizing the Balkans," and "including Yugoslavia into Europe,"
reveal
once more that contradictions and historical ignorance hardly bother
this
Baby-Boomer.

The accepted dictionary version of "Balkanize" is to "divide (a region
or
territory) into small, often hostile, units." The term derives "from
the
division of Balkan Countries by the Great Powers early in the 20th
Century."
The Clinton Administration, along with Germany, has had a major role in
"Balkanizing" Yugoslavia, a process still on hand at Kosovo, with
Montenegro
on the brink and Vojvodina still "on the menu." Since its inception
after
World War I, Yugoslavia has been in Europe by virtue of geography as
well as
by way of an educational and economic system.

Despite its industrial underdevelopment in comparison with Western
Europe it
was a modern European state before being dismantled by the Third Reich.
It
did not orbit out of Europe under 40 years of Communist rule. It has not
done
so in its truncated state. Its modern infrastructure was just destroyed
by
the 78 days of US/NATO "humanitarian" bombs. It has not been allowed to
be a
part of the rest of Europe by the economic sanctions demanded and
imposed by
Mr. Clinton himself. His sanctions are still in place as he calls for
"de-Balkanization of the Balkans" and economic integration of Yugoslavia
into
the European Union, a mission impossible.

As for "Peace in Europe," it should be recalled that three times within
the
last decade peace in ex-Yugoslav space was more than possible if it had
not
been actively opposed and torpedoed by the Clinton foreign-policy team.
It
had a chance in Lisbon in 1992. It had a chance with the Vance-Owen
Plan
subsequently. It even had a chance at Kosovo via Rambouillet. All
three
chances were deliberately killed by the Clinton Administration.

It is now known that the British shipped arms and related equipment to
Slovenia before it orbited out of Yugoslavia, that Germany and Hungary
were
secretly arming Croatia, that we allowed Iran to arm the Bosnian
Muslims,
that we trained both the Croat and Bosnian Muslim armies to fight
against the
Serbs, that NATO already bombed the Bosnian Serbs, and that we have
actively
supported Albanian terrorists at Kosovo and still do. "Peace" in Europe,
Mr.
Clinton?

The recent killings in Belgrade more than suggest a CIA involvement in
destabilizing Serbia and the sub-rosa pressure for Montenegro to secede
is in
force. Only Mr. Clinton can promote peace while actively promoting war
which
becomes a "virtual war" never a "real war" and aimed at a single leader
not
at all a people. Now you see it and now you do not. Might makes Right.
Only
the bombs of the mighty can be humanitarian. The Ends justify the Means.

Oh, yes, the only "peace" at Kosovo, with 40,000 NATO troops, happens to
show
some signs of life in the parts ethnically cleansed of all the Serbs and
other minorities. We have already spent 20 billion dollars for Bosnia
and
Kosovo without solving anything in a lasting way. If absence of
shooting,
without removing the underlying causes, problems and foreign
interferences,
becomes "peace" by edict it has already cost the American people too
much and
there is no end in sight for other billions on the way. With that kind
of
money we could revamp Medicare to help our own needy instead of spending
it
on egregious foreign policy stupidities masked as "victories" for "Human
Rights" by people who are horrifed about the killing of an Albanian by a
Serb
but hardly blink when our planes and bombs kill a couple of thousand
Serbs,
en passant, while our NATO generals throw tantrums for not being allowed
to
kill a couple of million Serbs.

How can our Military-Industrial Complex make the big bucks without
hoisting
NATO on an increasingly uneasy Europe? We need more wars, not peace.
Without
them half of the present foreign policy elites would not be able to make
a
living even as dog catchers for a county. Was it not George Orwell, the
great
prophet of our moment in time, who concluded that Peace is War and War
is
Peace? He was only wrong about the place at which this would become
true. It
was not Moscow. It is Washington, D.C. It is not a Stalinist who does it
but
our own Democratic Baby-Boomer who blows up a country in order to make
us
forget the cigar.

Raymond K. Kent is Professor Emeritus, History Department University of
California, Berkeley

***

If you find emperors-clothes useful, we can use your help...

(The Soros Foundation doesn't fund us.)

We rely on volunteer labor and on donations to cover necessary expenses.
These include: Internet fees, Lexis, our main Internet research tool,
phone
bills (we use the phone to do interviews and discuss editorial changes )
and
producing a new movie which will deal with lies Kosovo.

To use our secure server , please go to
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/howyour.htm . Or mail a check to
Emperor's
Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA 02461-0321. (USA)

Thanks for reading and for helping!

www.tenc.net [emperors-clothes]

-

http://www.roa.org/nsr/1299nsr1.html

NATIONAL SECURITY REPORT:

De-Balkanizing the Balkans:
Security and Stability in Southeastern Europe

By Andrew J. Pierre
DECEMBER 1999

---

American Barbarism and the Big Lie Technique
Author: Barry Lituchy
Organisation: History Department, Kingsborough Community College,
CUNY (US), June 28, 1999

http://www.users.bigpond.com/wattyler/19990718lituchy.htm
http://www.zoran.net/afp/text/submitted/american_barbarism.htm

---

eGroups : floridaleft Messages :Message 4006 of 4010
http://www.egroups.com/message/floridaleft/4006?&start=3981

From: reporter2 <reporter2@m...> Date:
Sat May 20, 2000 5:21pm

Subject: [Take Action] Shut Down the Army School of the Americas!

1) House Votes To Keep Army's School of Americas Open But With A Name
Change
2) NATIONAL DAY OF RESISTANCE TO CLOSE THE SOA! MAY 24, 2000
To learn more, visit The School of the Americas Watch,
http://www.soaw.org
The US Army School of Americas, based in Fort Benning, Georgia, trains
Latin American soldiers in combat, counter-insurgency, and
counter-narcotics. Graduates of the SOA have been responsible for some
of
the worst human rights abuses in Latin America. Among the SOA's nearly
60,000 graduates are notorious dictators Manuel Noriega and Omar
Torrijos
of Panama, Leopoldo Galtieri and Roberto Viola of Argentina, Juan
Velasco
Alvarado of Peru, Guillermo Rodriguez from Ecuador, and Hugo Banzer
Suarez
of Bolivia. Lower-level SOA graduates have participated in human rights
abuses that include the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero and the
El
Mozote Massacre of 900 civilians.
SOA Watch is an independent organization that seeks to close the US Army
School of the Americas through vigils and fasts, demonstrations and
nonviolent protest, as well as media and legislative work.
******

Published on Saturday, May 20, 2000 in the New York Times
House Votes To Keep Army's School of Americas Open But With A Name
Change

by Steven Lee Myers
Dogged by years of controversy over its mission and its graduates, the
Army's School of the Americas is on the verge of getting a new charter,
a
new curriculum and a new name. It appears likely, however, to face the
same old protests.
The Army's plans to reorganize the school, which has trained generations
of
soldiers from Central America and South America, cleared a major hurdle
this week when the House narrowly rejected an amendment that would have
closed it down.
If the Senate goes along, as expected, the school that critics have
linked
to human rights violations by former students will officially "close"
and
"reopen" later this year as the Defense Institute for Hemispheric
Security
Cooperation.
The Army proposed the changes last month, prompted by rising opposition
to
the school from religious
groups and, more importantly, from some members of Congress, who nearly
succeeded in cutting off the school's financing last year.
Opened in Panama in 1946 and moved to its current location at Fort
Benning,
Ga., in 1984, the school has been the primary training ground for more
than
60,000 Latin American military and police.
Some were later implicated in the region's most notorious abuses, like
the
murder of six Jesuit priests in El Salvador in 1989.
The secretary of the Army, Louis Caldera, said in an interview that
critics
have unfairly tarnished the
school's reputation because of the actions of very few. Nonetheless, he
said, the changes would give the school a focus that was more academic
and
less strictly military.
"I thought it would be a mistake to close the school down," Mr. Caldera
said, "because that would be turning our backs on the countries of Latin
America."
Because Congress chartered the school, the Army had to seek approval for
its changes.
In addition to having a new name, the school would have an advisory
board
to review its curriculum and
report to Congress. Authority over the school would be transferred from
the
Army to the Department of Defense, and students would be required to
have
at least eight hours of instruction in human rights in each course.
Mr. Caldera said the Army would try to increase the number of civilian
students, and emphasize training political and military leaders in the
proper role of the military under the region's emerging democratic
governments.
The school would remain at Fort Benning and still offer courses
involving
purely military tactics and strategies, prompting opponents to denounce
the
changes as cosmetic.
When the Army's proposal came before the House on Thursday as part of
the
defense authorization bill, four members sponsored an amendment to shut
the
school and create a committee to review military training for Latin
Americans.
"Even with a new coat of paint, the School of the Americas has trained
far
too many killers of innocent people to remain a part of our foreign
policy," said one of the sponsors, Representative John J. Moakley,
Democrat
of Massachusetts.
But the amendment lost on a roll-call vote of 214 to 204 after lobbying
by
Army, Pentagon and Clinton administration officials. A day before the
vote,
Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen and Secretary of State Madeleine
K.
Albright sent members a joint letter saying the Army's proposal would
"allow us to move past what had become a contentious annual debate on
the
school's legacy and focus on the question of how best to engage
militarily
our friends and allies in the hemisphere."
The Army's proposal won approval when the House overwhelmingly approved
the
larger authorization
bill late Thursday.
The Rev. Roy L. Bourgeois, a priest who has organized protests against
the
school for a decade from
his apartment at Fort Benning's main gate, said the changes would not
diminish the movement against the school. The protests have grown from a
handful of opponents to a crowd in November that was estimated at more
than
8,000.
"After thinking this thing out, we realized what they're really talking
about is a name change," he said in a telephone interview today. "For
us,
this is the same old school doing what it's always been doing."
Copyright 2000 The New York Times Company
***
[from http://www.soaw.org]
We are calling on
affinity-groups from all over the country to organize and act on
Wednesday,
May 24, the
NATIONAL
DAY OF RESISTANCE TO CLOSE THE SOA!
WEDNESDAY
MAY 24th
"Nothing but organized
nonviolence can check the organized violence" of the United States
Government!--
Gandhi
On Thursday, May 18, the U.S. Congress dismissed the Moakley Amendment,
accepted the Pentagon proposal to close the SOA and open an SOA Clone
the
very next day. The House opted to change the SOA's name rather than
close
its doors. The name is basically all that is changed. The Pentagon's
deceptive proposal is not a move towards responsible policy for Latin
America. It is merely an attempt to silence those working for human
rights
and justice. It is an attempt to silence the bloody truth about the
School
of Assassins, but THE TRUTH CANNOT BE SILENCED!
Support in the House was strong and the amendment lost by only ten
votes!
All week long people fighting to close the SOA lobbied on Capitol Hill,
but
human rights activists weren't the only ones lobbying. Secretary of the
Army Caldera, Col. Weidner and Colin Powell were there lobbying to keep
the SOA open at any cost. This shows we are the threat of a good
example,
we are winning and now is the time to rise up!
Register your outrage at the congressional vote to accept the Pentagon's
SOA Clone. Let the White House, the Pentagon and Congress know that we
are
not falling for the Pentagon deception and we REJECT THE SOA CLONE!
Come to Washington to participate in civil disobedience and
demonstrations
at the White House, Pentagon and other locales, hook into organizing in
your own community or organize yourself! Bring your spirit of hope and
resistance, bring your outrage, bring your passion, bring your
creativity
and bring
your puppets and banners and help send the message that the SCHOOL OF
THE AMERICAS MUST BE CLOSED! (...)

http://www.soaw.org



--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------

Atene 10 - 13 maggio

Assemblea del Consiglio Mondiale per la Pace

Dal 10 al 13 maggio scorso nella capitale greca si è tenuta - ospitata
dall'Associazione greca per la Distensione internazionale e la Pace
(EEDYE) - la Conferenza internazionale e l'Assemblea del Consiglio
Mondiale per la Pace (CMP), con la partecipazioni di delegazioni dei
movimenti per la pace di tutto il mondo, dai cinesi della Associazione
per la Pace e il Disarmo ai cubani del Movimento per la Pace, dai
vietnamiti, ai coreani, dagli statunitensi dell'International Action
Center alle numerose delegazioni europee. Per l'Italia era presente la
Fondazione Pasti, che è entrata ufficialmente a far parte del direttivo.
Nella situazione caratterizzata dall'estrema aggressività
dell'imperialismo, l'Assemblea ha rappresentato anche un momento di
necessaria verifica politica dell'attività passata dell'organizzazione,
e ha visto la messa sotto accusa dell'associazione francese facente capo
al PCF per la responsabilità del governo francese a partecipazione
comunista nella guerra contro la Jugoslavia e l'immobilismo in cui è
stato tenuto il CMP. Riportiamo l'intervento di Thanassis Pafilis ,
segretario generale dell'EEDYE e già coordinatore dei movimenti per la
pace europei, sulla nuova dottrina NATO e il rapporto tra NATO e UE. Il
movimento greco, molto attivo nell'opposizione alla guerra, è stato
incaricato del coordinamento internazionale


La NATO principale nemico della pace

Intervento di Thanassis Pafilis, segretario generale dell'EEDYE
(Associazione greca per la Distensione internazionale e la Pace)
pronunciato all'Assemblea del Consiglio Mondiale per la Pace, Atene
10-13 maggio.
La NATO, la sua espansione e la sua nuova dottrina strategica sono stati
giustamente al centro dell'attenzione mondiale perchè tutti gli sviluppi
degli ultimi anni dimostrano che la nuova NATO del XXI secolo sarà una
macchina repressiva su vasta scala. E' una potente organizzazione
militare e politica che cercherà di imporre il nuovo ordine
internazionale imperialista con il terrorismo, la minaccia di guerra e
la guerra, schiacciando ogni resistenza.
Dal 1990, e in particolare dopo lo scioglimento del Patto di Varsavia, è
iniziata l'attività volta ad attribuire alla NATO la possibilità di
intervenire al di là della sua area di azione. La prima questione sorta
fu: chi è il nemico e che cosa costituisce una minaccia per l'Alleanza?
Nel testo fondamentale sul nuovo punto di vista strategico della NATO
formulato nell'incontro di vertice del 7-8 novembre 1991 a Roma, il
punto 13 afferma che la sicurezza dell'Alleanza deve essere considerata
in un contesto globale. Vi si dice anche che gli interessi di sicurezza
dell'Alleanza possono essere messi in questione da una serie di minacce
di varia natura, compresa la proliferazione delle armi di distruzione di
massa, l'interruzione del flusso di risorse vitali e atti di "terrorismo
e sabotaggio".
Si è aperta così la strada all'emendamento dell'articolo 4 dello statuto
della NATO, che limitava il suo raggio d'azione al territorio dei paesi
dell'Alleanza, ratificato a Washington (punto 4). In questo modo cinico
e provocatorio vengono "legittimate" operazioni come l'intervento nel
Kosovo perchè si pretende che la sicurezza dell'Europa sarebbe
minacciata. Se poi si considera per esempio il punto sull'interruzione
del flusso di risorse vitali, si vede bene che si ritengono
"legittimati" a intervenire dovunque, con il pretesto del petrolio o di
altre fonti energetiche.
Il primo intervento della NATO in Jugoslavia col pretesto di imporre la
pace ha costituito in realtà l'estensione di fatto della sua area di
azione. Si è trattato di un intervento condotto con l'approvazione
dell'ONU, benchè violasse il diritto internazionale.
Ma la guerra NATO contro la Jugoslavia nel marzo 1999 ha rappresentato
l'applicazione piena della nuova dottrina proprio in forza del fatto che
è stata condotta senza l'approvazione dell'ONU.
La questione fondamentale dell'ONU e della responsabilità di questo
organismo nel mantenimento della pace e della sicurezza viene trattata
nella dichiarazione della NATO firmata a Washington il 23 aprile 1999 al
punto 38, in cui si afferma che i paesi della NATO auspicano lo sviluppo
di ulteriori contatti e lo scambio di informazioni con l'ONU finalizzate
alla prevenzione dei conflitti, al governo delle crisi e agli interventi
(!) in risposta alle crisi. Si conclude poi dicendo che l'Alleanza
stabilirà le possibilità di cooperazione futura in questo senso caso per
caso. Quest'ultima frase, attribuendosi la possibilità di decidere di
fare la guerra, abolisce di fatto il Consiglio di Sicurezza e l'ONU.
Parallelamente a queste decisioni, la NATO ha iniziato a espandersi ad
altri paesi con le seguenti modalità: - Con trattative dirette e la
decisione di accettare nuovi membri (Repubblica Ceca, Polonia,
Ungheria).
- Con la creazione della "Partnership for Peace" (gennaio 1994) tra la
NATO e i paesi ex socialisti.
- Con la creazione del Consiglio di Cooperazione Nordatlantico che
comprende i paesi della NATO più 28 altri paesi dell'Europa centrale e
orientale e dell'ex Unione Sovietica e altri paesi neutrali.
- Iniziando trattative e collaborazioni con paesi del Medio Oriente e
dell'Africa settentrionale (Egitto, Israele, Giordania, Tunisia,
Marocco, Mauritania).
La NATO si sta così allargando ad est verso l'Asia e a sud, in Africa,
diventando così una forza globale. Nel 1999 anche l'Argentina è stata
designata interlocutore privilegiato dell'Alleanza, ponendo così le
premesse per un'espansione in Sudamerica. La NATO sta già pensando a una
formula che le consenta di partecipare all'intervento in Colombia.
Il nuovo ruolo della NATO va di pari passo con la sua rustrutturazione,
i cui tratti essenziali sono stati tracciati nell'incontro dei ministri
della difesa del 2 dicembre 1997 a Bruxelles. Il concetto fondamentale
della nuova struttura militare è la realizzazione delle forze di
intervento, le Combined Joint Task Forces (CJTF). Si tratta di forze
militari puramente offensive, con partecipazione multinazionale, che
combinano in modo flessibile diverse specialità. La ristrutturazione
procede contemporaneamente a promuovere la Identità Europea di Sicurezza
e di Difesa [European Security and Defense Identity (ESDI)] nel quadro
della NATO che comporta il coordinamento con le forze della Unione
dell'Europa Occidentale (UEO).
Oltre a queste strutture militari, ne vengono create altre che
consistono di forze NATO e unità di paesi appartenenti alla Partnership
for Peace (ex paesi socialisti). Un esempio è la creazione della Brigata
Balcanica.
Un altro aspetto importante è il rapporto tra la NATO e l'Unione
Europea.
Se constatiamo, come è necessario, che la guerra contro la Jugoslavia ha
dissolto qualsiasi illusione circa il ruolo della NATO, dobbiamo anche
aggiungere che ha fatto cadere la maschera dall'Unione Europea. L'Unione
Europea non è stata trascinata in una guerra lanciata dagli Stati Uniti.
No! I governi degli USA e dell'UE hanno deciso insieme di fare questa
guerra e perciò l'UE è una delle cause della guerra.
La responsabilità criminale di entrambi i soggetti è dimostrata anche
dal fatto che i ministri degli esteri dell'UE si sono subito affrettati
ad approvare a adottare le decisioni della NATO e hanno preso anche
misure unilaterali come l'embargo, il congelamento dei conti, ecc. La
posizione unitaria dei dirigenti dell'UE - dal conservatore Aznar al
laburista Blair, dal socialdemocratico Schroeder al "socialista"
Simitis, fino al cosddetto centro-sinistra di D'Alema - dimostra che
alla base della UE c'è la costruzione di un'Europa aggressiva e
imperialista delle multinazionali, un'Europa di guerra, di povertà e di
ingiustizia sociale.
Il rapporto tra la NATO e l'UE è chiaramente delineato al punto 9 della
dichiarazione di Washington, in cui si dice che i firmatari salutano la
nuova spinta verso il rafforzamento della politica comune europea di
sicurezza e di difesa venuta dal Trattato di Amsterdam e le riflessioni
fatte in seguito in sede UEO e poi con la Dichiarazione di Saint Malo
nell'UE, comprese le conclusioni del Consiglio Europeo di Vienna. Si
tratta di un processo che ha ripercussioni per tutti gli alleati. Essi
affermano che un più forte ruolo dell'Europa contribuirà alla vitalità
dell'Alleanza, base della difesa collettiva dei suoi membri, nel XXI
secolo.
A questo proposito il testo:
a. Riconosce la ferma decisione dell'UE di mettersi in grado di agire
autonomamente, per poter prendere decisioni e approvare azioni militari
nelle situazioni in cui non ci sia l'impegno di tutta l'Alleanza.
b. Afferma che, con l'avanzare di questo processo, la NATO e l'UE devono
assicurare un efficace sistema di consultazione reciproca, cooperazione
e trasparenza da costruire a partire dai meccanismi già esistenti tra
NATO e UEO.
c. Applaude alla ferma decisione dei membri della UE e di altri alleati
europei di prendere le misure necessarie al rafforzamento delle loro
capacità di difesa, particolarmente in vista di nuove missioni, evitando
inutili duplicazioni.
d. Attribuisce la massima importanza a che venga assicurato, nelle
operazioni condotte dalla UE in risposta a una crisi, il più ampio
coinvolgimento possibile degli alleati europei non appartenenti alla UE
sulla base dei regolamenti e dei progetti discussi in sede UEO.
Per dare un'immagine chiara dell'Europa e dell'Unione Europea che si sta
costruendo vorrei illustrare la nuova struttura della NATO in Europa:
- Comando strategico per l'Europa (sede a Mons, Belgio).
- Due comandi centrali per il Nord e per il Sud.
- La regione Sud (con sede centrale a Napoli, Italia, a cui è
subordinata la Grecia) è suddivisa in due comandi generali: Air Force e
Navy South (anch'essi a Napoli) e quattro comandi subregionali:
Sud-ovest (sede a Madrid, Spagna), Sud (sede a Verona, Italia),
Centro-Sud (sede a Larissa, Grecia) e Sud-est (sede a Izmir, Turchia).
I cambiamenti nela struttura NATO hanno reso necessari anche cambiamenti
nella struttura degli eserciti dei paesi membri e l'avvio di nuovi
programmi di armamento. La grecia per esempio si è impegnata per un
programma di armamenti del valore di 20 miliardi di dollari. Somme
simili e anche molto maggiori saranno spese da altri paesi. Vorrei
richiamare la vostra attenzione sulla azione della NATO in Jugoslavia, e
in particolare in Bosnia, perchè è considerata, come dissero il ministro
della difesa tedesco Volker Rühe e anche esponenti americani, un modello
"pilota" di intervento in situazioni di crisi.
In che cosa è consistito l'intervento della NATO?
1. Attacchi aerei, bombardamenti, intervento militare.
2. Imposizione dell'accordo di Dayton con metodi terroristici.
3. Invasione, presa e occupazione del territorio con un esercito di
60.000 uomini.
4. Imposizione di un sistema politico e scelta delle forze autorizzate a
partecipare alle elezioni.
5. Elezioni sotto tutela armata della NATO.
6. Repressione delle manifestazioni di massa che protestavano contro la
presenza delle truppe straniere.
Il culmine della "democrazia" di marca NATO è stato poi raggiunto con la
rimozione del presidente eletto della Repubblica Serba di Bosnia da
parte del comandante NATO.
La nuova guerra della NATO contro la Jugoslavia e l'occupazione del
Kosovo sono una ripetizione del primo intervento e dimostrano la piena
applicazione della nuova dottrina strategica.
Cari amici, tra il 1991 e il 1998 la NATO ha posto le basi per il nuovo
ruolo che si prepara a svolgere nel XXI secolo. Il 23 e 24 aprile 1999
al vertice di Washington il nuovo concetto strategico e la nuova
dottrina sono stati adottati formalmente.
La nuova strategia, che comporta ufficialmente il rovesciamento di
disposizioni fondamentali del diritto internazionale, è stata approvata
all'unanimità. I principi del non intervento negli affari interni di uno
stato e dell'astensione dalla minaccia o dall'uso della violenza sono
stati abrogati. Al loro posto è stato collocato il nuovo principio per
cui la politica e la diplomazia sono efficaci se sorrette dalla minaccia
della guerra e dalla guerra.
Si ritorna così a una situazione in cui nelle relazioni internazionali
domina il principio per cui tutto è consentito al potente.
Noi pensiamo che la NATO sia oggi il principale nemico per un futuro di
pace dell'umanità, un nemico che tutti i movimenti per la pace e tutti i
popoli si trovano di fronte.
La NATO è sempre più strettamente correlata con la militarizzazione
crescente delle relazioni internazionali e con il rovesciamento del
diritto internazionale. Prima o poi i popoli, nel tentativo di costruire
una società giusta, si troveranno a combattere contro questa
organizzazione imperialista.
Ecco perchè la lotta per l'abolizione della NATO e di tutte le alleanze
militari è più decisiva e necessaria che mai.
Thanassis Pafilis

---

ATENE, 23-25 GIUGNO 2000

INCONTRO INTERNAZIONALE DEI PARTITI COMUNISTI ED OPERAI

Dal 23 fino al 25 Giugno 2000 il Partito Comunista di Grecia (KKE),
ospiterà per il terzo anno consecutivo l'incontro internazionale dei
partiti comunisti ed operai.
L'incontro avrà come tema centrale di discussione: "Le esperienze di
lotta, le alleanze e le collaborazioni dei comunisti oggi."
L'iniziativa costituisce un impegno comune, mirante all'obiettivo di
contribuire al rafforzamento dell'identità comunista, della solidarietà
e dell' azione comune dei partiti comunisti ed operai.
Al centro del dibattito, si porranno le grandi mobilitazioni e le lotte
a Seattle e a Washington, le lotte contro la NATO e la guerra in
Yugoslavia, le grandi lotte operaie in Sud Africa, America Latina,
India, Corea del Sud, Portogallo, la situazione nei Balcani e negli
ex-paesi socialisti, la sempre maggiore contestazione di massa
dell'imperialismo in Palestina, Colombia, Venezuela, Equador e in altri
paesi, ed i passi necessari da intraprendere per affrontare tale
situazione.
Le questioni riguardanti le zone del Mediterraneo Orientale e del Medio
Oriente occuperanno una sessione specifica.
Fino ad oggi hanno dichiarato la loro partecipazione 64 partiti
comunisti ed operai, provenienti da 53 paesi di tutto il mondo.
Si tratta dei seguenti partiti:

ALBANIA: P.C d'Albania
ALGERIA: Partito Algerino per la Democrazia ed il Socialismo(PADS)
ARMENIA: P.C d'Armenia
AUSTRALIA: P.C d'Australia
AUSTRIA: P.C d'Austria
BAHREIN: Fronte di Liberazione Nazionale del Bahrein
BELGIO: -Partito dal Lavoro di Belgio(PTB)
-P.C del Belgio
BIELORUSSIA:P.C della Bielorussia
BRETAGNA:-Nuovo P.C di Bretagna(NCPB)
-P.C di Bretagna(CPB)

BULGARIA: -P.C Bulgaro-"Georghi Dimitrov"
-P.C di Bulgaria
-Piattaforma Marxista del Partito Socialista
Bulgaro
CANADA: P.C del Canada
CATALOGNA: Partito dei Comunisti della Catalogna
CIPRO: Partito Progressista del Popolo Lavoratore(AKEL)
COLOMBIA: P.C di Colombia
COREA-RPD: Partito Coreano del Lavoro
CUBA: P.C di Cuba
DANIMARCA:P.C in Danimarca
EGITTO: P.C d'Egitto
FILIPPINE: P.C delle Filippine
FINLANDIA: P.C di Finlandia
GERMANIA: P.C Tedesco(DKP)
GIORDANIA: P.C Giordano
GRECIA: P.C di Grecia(KKE)
INDIA: P.C Indiano
IRAK: -P.C Irakeno
-P.C Curdo/Irak
IRAN: Tudeh
IRLANDA: Partito Irlandese del Lavoro
ISRAELE: P.C d'Israele
ITALIA: -Partito della Rifondazione Comunista
-Partito dei Comunisti Italiani
LETTONIA: Partito Socialista di Lettonia
LIBANO: P.C Libanese
MOLDAVIA: Partito dei Comunisti della Repubblica Moldava
NEPAL: P.C del Nepal
NORVEGIA: P.C di Norvegia
OLANDA: Nuovo P.C d'Olanda
PALESTINA: P.C di Palestina
PORTOGALLO: P.C Portoghese
REP.CECA: P.C di Boemia-Moravia
ROMANIA: P.C Romeno
RUSSIA: -Unione dei P.C-PCUS
-P.C della Federazione Russa
-P.C Operaio della Russia
SIRIA: -P.C Siriano
-P.C di Siria
SLOVACHIA: P.C della Slovachia
SPAGNA: -P.C dei Popoli di Spagna(PCPE)
-Sinistra Unita(IU)
SRI-LANKA: P.C Sri-Lanka
SUD AFRICA: P.C Sudafricano
SUDAN: P.C del Sudan
SVEZIA: P.C di Svezia
TURCHIA: Partito del Lavoro(EMEP)
UCRAINA: -P.C d'Ucraina
-Unione dei Comunisti d'Ucraina
USA: P.C Usa
UNGHERIA: Partito dei Lavoratori (MUNKASPART)
VIETNAM: P.C Vietnamita
YUGOSLAVIA: Nuovo Partito Comunista di Yugoslavia

Dal quotidiano "RIZOSPASTIS"-organo del C.C del Partito Comunista di
Grecia (KKE)

Traduzione:Giorgio Apostolou
---

23.6.2000
Fonte:
Macedonia Press Agency
www.mpa.gr

ATENE, 23-25 GIUGNO 2000
INCONTRO INTERNAZIONALE DEI PARTITI COMUNISTI ED OPERAI

Con la relazione introduttiva della segretaria generale del C.C del
Partito Comunista di Grecia(KKE), Aleka Papariga, sono stati aperti i
lavori dell'incontro internazionale al quale partecipano 64 partiti
provenienti da 53 paesi di tutto il mondo.
Alcuni stralci dalla relazione introduttiva:
" Sì alla politica delle alleanze ma la questione di fondo è: con chi,
in quale direzione e per quale obiettivo? "
"Ogni giorno ci convinciamo sempre più, dalle nostre esperienze e da
quelle internazionali, che la base minima d'unità deve esprimere la
decisione e la volontà di controbattere le scelte del capitale
monopolistico e delle unioni imperialiste e la contrapposizione ,fino al
livello del conflitto, al regime dei monopoli."
" La Grecia non fa parte semplicemente di un processo di adattamento
alle organizzazioni imperialiste, Unione Europea e NATO; è già
incorporata e partecipa attivamente ai piani imperialisti riguardanti la
zona Balcanica."
In seguito, la segretaria generale del KKE ha fatto riferimento a
"l'internazionalizzazione della lotta contro l'imperialismo, la quale
non può raggiungere dei risultati positivi, se non esiste a livello
nazionale, un forte movimento popolare, un movimento operaio con
orientamento di classe, un forte Partito Comunista con un'adeguata
politica delle alleanze che conduce alla soluzione della questione del
potere ed allo strappo del paese dal sistema imperialista
internazionale."

Traduzione di Giorgio Apostolou


--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------

k

* U. S. Nationalism is the most dangerous of all nationalisms
* Chronology of 234 U.S. 'Humanitarian Interventions,' 1798-1993
* A Brief History of United States Interventions, 1945 to the Present

* IN ITALIANO: 20 maggio 1999, a "Moby Dick" Luttwak ammette...


---

U. S. Nationalism

by Ezekiel Gonzalez
[Patriot and Pro-Independence Activist in Puerto Rico]

U. S. Nationalism is the most dangerous of all nationalisms. It is a
nationalism based on artificial grounds, on the
idolatry of ideals and on the collective trauma brought on by the
barbarism of the civil war. In reality, the united States
is not "one nation" but a federation. The nationalist identity springs
from the identification with a society within its
ecological environment. This is why nations don't have great territorial
areas. As environments change from region to
region, regional identities also change.

The united States cover many different ecosystems, from Alaska to
Hawaii, from Puerto Rico to New England. In a
natural progression, the inhabitants of each of these regions will
develop their own national collective identity. It is an
historical fact that this is what happened when the southern states
developed a different national identity from the northern
states. Unfortunately, the secessionist desire and struggle of these
states was combined with the fight to preserve the
nefarious institution of slavery. A just cause - national independence -
was amalgamated with an unjust cause - the
preservation of slavery.

The civil war was extremely savage. Millions of people died; the
southern states were devastated. The psychological
trauma was terrible. Uncle Sam astutely had the blame for this tragedy
placed not on federal government imperialism, nor
on the slavist philosophy of the southerners, but on "secessionist
nationalism." In that way, this natural nationalism was
turned into "something evil" in itself, in a collective trauma of
historical proportions.

Taking advantage of the situation and to satisfy the need for a
collective national identity, the federal government
invented the great lie of U. S. Nationalism. Before the civil war, for
example, there were two federal flags: a military
one and a civil one. Moreover, the military federal flag only flew over
federal military installations, and the civil federal flag
flew only over federal civil facilities. Over state facilities, the only
flag that flew was the state flag, exclusively, the one with
which the inhabitants of each state identified politically and
emotionally. After the civil war, the federal civil flag was
forgotten and the federal military flag was imposed on every government
facility, whether military, civil, federal or state.

Natural nationality is not based on ideologies, but on the natural
love the individual has for his native soil and the society
established there. U. S. Nationality, however, is based on the adoration
of certain ideals, on the so-called "American
Dream," as if this were the exclusive property of the American union.
This is an idolatrous nationality, based on fear of the
natural nationality, one which has been sold to Americans as the "U. S.
Nationality." It is a great lie, based on a terrible
historical trauma.

Due to the fear that sustains it and the mistaken idea that the
united States is the "headquarters for liberty and justice
in the world," U. S. Nationality has become an irrational force that
cannot look at itself objectively, but fanatically claims
superiority over every other culture or nationality. It is deathly
afraid to look at itself. Suddenly to discover that the
aspirations which supposedly make up the very foundation of U. S.
Nationality are not really the exclusive property of the
American People, but rather that they're part of the cultural heritage
of the world, threatens the very essence of said
nationality. Justice, freedom and the pursuit of liberty are everyone's
property. Every nation of people, including for
example, the Vietnamese, who fought against the United States not so
long ago, have always held these values to be their
own.

If we put aside the pathological fear of natural nationality, if we
accept the fact that the great values of the so-called
American Dream are really the property of all the nations of the world,
then, what do we have left as a U. S. Nationality? If
anything, maybe we could refer to what is called the "pop culture," and
even that isn't an American cultural asset, but rather
is also something common to every industrialized nation, from Japan to
Germany, from Finland to Chile.

When we look at the really defining elements of nationality:
folklore, religion, history, economy, language, etc., we'll see
that each region, and frequently each state of the union, has its own
features which identify it from among the other regions
and/or states. The only thing many of these regions or states are
lacking to become nations, sociologically
speaking, is to break away from "the pathological fear of proclaiming
its own nationality," which originated in
the tragedy of the civil war, which was instigated by Uncle Sam.

The united States, then, due to the tragedy of the civil war, is
made up of a series of nations which due to their historical
trauma do not dare to proclaim their own nationalities, and they
continue to be subjected to the great lie of a "sole
national identity" proclaimed by the Central Government and undergirded
by the great interstate and international
economic interests.

This great lie of the "Sole National Identity" promotes an
artificial nationalism characterized by: (1) the idea that the
united States is the "most just and the most democratic and most perfect
country in the world,"(2) that the rest of the
world is going from bad to worse and (3) consequently the United States
is "justified" in imposing its culture, political
system and domination on the world. Obviously, this nationalism serves
the imperialist interests of the federal government
and it "authorizes" it to impose its dominion internally (over the
states of the union) as well as externally (over supposedly
independent and sovereign nation-states). Due to the pathological fear
of facing up to the tragedy of the civil war and the
errors committed in it, the U. S. Nationality refuses to engage in
self-evaluation and self-criticism. This characteristic
prevents it from overcoming its own defects.

---

http://www.history.navy.mil/wars/foabroad.htm.


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY -- NAVAL HISTORICAL CENTER
805 KIDDER BREESE SE -- WASHINGTON NAVY YARD
WASHINGTON DC 20374-5060
(NOTE: The following represents the views of the
author and not necessarily the views of the Naval
Historical Center.)

Instances of Use of United States Forces Abroad, 1798
- 1993
by Ellen C. Collier, Specialist in U.S. Foreign
Policy,
Foreign Affairs and National Defense Division
Washington DC: Congressional Research Service --
Library of Congress -- October 7, 1993

Summary


This report lists 234 instances in which the United
States has used its armed forces abroad in situations
of conflict or potential conflict or for other than
normal peacetime purposes. It brings up to date a 1989
list that was compiled in part from various older
lists and is intended primarily to provide a rough
sketch survey of past U.S. military ventures abroad. A
detailed description and analysis are not undertaken
here.


The instances differ greatly in number of forces,
purpose, extent of hostilities, and legal
authorization. Five of the instances are declared
wars: the War of 1812, the Mexican War of 1846, the
Spanish American War of 1898, World War I declared in
1917, and World War II declared in 1941.


Some of the instances were extended military
engagements that might be considered undeclared wars.
These include the Undeclared Naval War with France
from 1798 to 1800; the First Barbary War from 1801 to
1805; the Second Barbary War of 1815; the Korean War
of 1950-53; the Vietnam War from 1964 to 1973; and the
Persian Gulf War of 1991. In some cases, such as the
Persian Gulf War against Iraq, Congress authorized the
military action although it did not declare war.


The majority of the instances listed were brief Marine
or Navy actions prior to World War II to protect U.S.
citizens or promote U.S. interests. A number were
actions against pirates or bandits. Some were events,
such as the stationing of Marines at an Embassy or
legation, which later were considered normal peacetime
practice. Covert actions, disaster relief, and routine
alliance stationing and training exercises are not
included here, nor are the Civil and Revolutionary
Wars and the continual use of U.S. military units in
the exploration, settlement, and pacification of the
West.

(...)

---

> Subject: Fw: Blum - A brief history of US interventions
>
> Author William Blum offers us a very brief account of US
> interventions since they took over the role of world predators from
> Adolf's legions of Waffen SS and Gestapo terrorists. The history is
> well known to the managers of Western information control, but like
> the Goebbels gang, such realities must remain behind the iron
> curtain of omission - the propagandists' favorite weapon. RR --
>
> http://www.zmag.org/ZMag/articles/blum.htm
> Content-Type: text/html;
> A Brief History of United States Interventions, 1945 to the Present
> By William Blum
>
> The engine of American foreign policy has been fueled not by a
> devotion to any kind of morality, but rather by the necessity to
> serve other imperatives, which can be summarized as follows:
>
> 1) making the world safe for American corporations;
>
> 2) enhancing the financial statements of defense contractors at home
> who have contributed generously to members of congress;
>
> 3) preventing the rise of any society that might serve as a
> successful example of an alternative to the capitalist model;
>
> 4) extending political and economic hegemony over as wide an area as
> possible, as befits a "great power."
>
> This in the name of fighting a supposed moral crusade against what
> cold warriors convinced themselves, and the American people, was the
> existence of an evil International Communist Conspiracy, which in
> fact never existed, evil or not.
>
> The United States carried out extremely serious interventions into
> more than 70 nations in this period. Among these were the following:
>
>
> China 1945-49: Intervened in a civil war, taking the side of Chiang
> Kai-shek against the communists, even though the latter had been a
> much closer ally of the United States in the world war. The U.S. used
> defeated Japanese soldiers to fight for its side. The communists
> forced Chiang to flee to Taiwan in 1949.
>
>
> Italy 1947-48: Using every trick in the book, the U.S. interfered in
> the elections to prevent the Communist Party from coming to power
> legally and fairly. This perversion of democracy was done in the name
> of "saving democracy" in Italy. The Communists lost. For the next few
> decades, the CIA, along with American corporations, continued to
> intervene in Italian elections, pouring in hundreds of millions of
> dollars and much psychological warfare to block the specter that was
> haunting Europe.
>
>
> Greece 1947-49: Intervened in a civil war, taking the side of the
> neo-fascists against the Greek left which had fought the Nazis
> courageously. The neo-fascists won and instituted a highly brutal
> regime, for which the CIA created a new internal security agency,
> KYP. Before long, KYP was carrying out all the endearing practices of
> secret police everywhere, including systematic torture.
>
>
> Philippines 1945-53: U.S. military fought against leftist forces
> (Huks) even while the Huks were still fighting against the Japanese
> invaders. After the war, the U.S. continued its fight against the
> Huks, defeating them, and then installing a series of puppets as
> president, culminating in the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos.
>
>
> South Korea 1945-53: After World War II, the United States suppressed
> the popular progressive forces in favor of the conservatives who had
> collaborated with the Japanese. This led to a long era of corrupt,
> reactionary, and brutal governments.
>
>
> Albania 1949-53: U.S. and Britain tried unsuccessfully to overthrow
> the communist government and install a new one that would have been
> pro-Western and composed largely of monarchists and collaborators
> with Italian fascists and Nazis.
>
>
> Germany 1950s: The CIA orchestrated a wide-ranging campaign of
> sabotage, terrorism, dirty tricks, and psychological warfare against
> East Germany. This was one of the factors which led to the building
> of the Berlin Wall in 1961.
>
>
> Iran 1953: Prime Minister Mossadegh was overthrown in a joint U.S.
> and British operation. Mossadegh had been elected to his position by
> a large majority of parliament, but he had made the fateful mistake
> of spearheading the movement to nationalize a British-owned oil
> company, the sole oil company operating in Iran. The coup restored
> the Shah to absolute power and began a period of 25 years of
> repression and torture, with the oil industry being restored to
> foreign ownership, as follows: Britain and the U.S., each 40 percent,
> other nations 20 percent.
>
>
> Guatemala 1953-1990s: A CIA-organized coup overthrew the
> democratically-elected and progressive government of Jacobo Arbenz,
> initiating 40 years of death-squads, torture, disappearances, mass
> executions, and unimaginable cruelty, totaling well over 100,000
> victims -- indisputably one of the most inhuman chapters of the 20th
> century. Arbenz had nationalized the U.S. firm, United Fruit Company,
> which had extremely close ties to the American power elite. As
> justification for the coup, Washington declared that Guatemala had
> been on the verge of a Soviet takeover, when in fact the Russians had
> so little interest in the country that it didn't even maintain
> diplomatic relations. The real problem in the eyes of Washington, in
> addition to United Fruit, was the danger of Guatemala's social
> democracy spreading to other countries in Latin America.
>
>
> Middle East 1956-58: The Eisenhower Doctrine stated that the United
> States "is prepared to use armed forces to assist" any Middle East
> country "requesting assistance against armed aggression from any
> country controlled by international communism." The English
> translation of this was that no one would be allowed to dominate, or
> have excessive influence over, the middle east and its oil fields
> except the United States, and that anyone who tried would be, by
> definition, "communist." In keeping with this policy, the United
> States twice attempted to overthrow the Syrian government, staged
> several shows-of-force in the Mediterranean to intimidate movements
> opposed to U.S.-sported governments in Jordan and Lebanon, landed
> 14,000 troops in Lebanon, and conspired to overthrow or assassinate
> Nasser of Egypt and his troublesome middle-east nationalism.
>
>
> Indonesia 1957-58: Sukarno, like Nasser, was the kind of Third World
> leader the United States could not abide by. He took neutralism in
> the cold war seriously, making trips to the Soviet Union and China
> (though to the White House as well). He nationalized many private
> holdings of the Dutch, the former colonial power. And he refused to
> crack down on the Indonesian Communist Party, which was walking the
> legal, peaceful road and making impressive gains electorally. Such
> policies could easily give other Third World leaders "wrong ideas."
> Thus it was that the CIA began throwing money into the elections,
> plotted Sukarno's assassination, tried to blackmail him with a phoney
> sex film, and joined forces with dissident military officers to wage
> a full-scale war against the government. Sukarno survived it all.
>
>
> British Guiana/Guyana, 1953-64: For 11 years, two of the oldest
> democracies in the world, Great Britain and the United States, went
> to great lengths to prevent a democratically elected leader from
> occupying his office. Cheddi Jagan was another Third World leader who
> tried to remain neutral and independent. He was elected three times.
> Although a leftist -- more so than Sukarno or Arbenz -- his policies
> in office were not revolutionary. But he was still a marked man, for
> he represented Washington's greatest fear: building a society that
> might be a successful example of an alternative to the capitalist
> model. Using a wide variety of tactics -- from general strikes and
> disinformation to terrorism and British legalisms, the U.S. and
> Britain finally forced Jagan out in 1964. John F. Kennedy had given a
> direct order for his ouster, as, presumably, had Eisenhower.
>
>
> One of the better-off countries in the region under Jagan, Guyana, by
> the 1980s, was one of the poorest. Its principal export became
> people.
>
>
> Vietnam, 1950-73: The slippery slope began with siding with the
> French, the former colonizers and collaborators with the Japanese,
> against Ho Chi Minh and his followers who had worked closely with the
> Allied war effort and admired all things American. Ho Chi Minh was,
> after all, some kind of communist. He had written numerous letters to
> President Truman and the State Department asking for America's help
> in winning Vietnamese independence from the French and finding a
> peaceful solution for his country. All his entreaties were ignored.
> For he was some kind of communist. Ho Chi Minh modeled the new
> Vietnamese declaration of independence on the American, beginning it
> with "All men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator
> with ... " But this would count for nothing in Washington. Ho Chi
> Minh was some kind of communist.
>
>
> Twenty-three years, and more than a million dead, later, the United
> States withdrew its military forces from Vietnam. Most people say
> that the U.S. lost the war. But by destroying Vietnam to its core,
> and poisoning the earth and the gene pool for generations, Washington
> had in fact achieved its main purpose: preventing what might have
> been the rise of a good development option for Asia. Ho Chi Minh was,
> after all, some kind of communist.
>
>
> Cambodia 1955-73: Prince Sihanouk, yet another leader who did not
> fancy being an American client. After many years of hostility towards
> his regime, including assassination plots and the infamous
> Nixon/Kissinger secret "carpet bombings" of 1969-70, Washington
> finally overthrew Sihanouk in a coup in 1970. This was all that was
> needed to impel Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge forces to enter the fray.
> Five years later, they took power. But five years of American bombing
> had caused Cambodia's traditional economy to vanish. The old Cambodia
> had been destroyed forever.
>
>
> Incredibly, the Khmer Rouge were to inflict even greater misery upon
> this unhappy land. To add to the irony, the United States supported
> Pol Pot, militarily and diplomatically, after their subsequent defeat
> by the Vietnamese.
>
>
> The Congo/Zaire 1960-65: In June 1960, Patrice Lumumba became the
> Congo's first prime minister after independence from Belgium. But
> Belgium retained its vast mineral wealth in Katanga province,
> prominent Eisenhower administration officials had financial ties to
> the same wealth, and Lumumba, at Independence Day ceremonies before a
> host of foreign dignitaries, called for the nation's economic as well
> as its political liberation, and recounted a list of injustices
> against the natives by the white owners of the country. The poor man
> was obviously a "communist." The poor man was obviously doomed.
>
>
> Eleven days later, Katanga province seceded, in September Lumumba was
> dismissed by the president at the instigation of the United States,
> and in January 1961 he was assassinated at the express request of
> Dwight Eisenhower. There followed several years of civil conflict and
> chaos and the rise to power of Mobutu Sese Seko, a man not a stranger
> to the CIA. Mobutu went on to rule the country for more than 30
> years, with a level of corruption and cruelty that shocked even his
> CIA handlers. The Zairian people lived in abject poverty despite the
> plentiful natural wealth, while Mobutu became a multibillionaire.
>
>
> Brazil 1961-64: President Joao Goulart was guilty of the usual
> crimes: He took an independent stand in foreign policy, resuming
> relations with socialist countries and opposing sanctions against
> Cuba; his administration passed a law limiting the amount of profits
> multinationals could transmit outside the country; a subsidiary of
> ITT was nationalized; he promoted economic and social reforms. And
> Attorney-General Robert Kennedy was uneasy about Goulart allowing
> "communists" to hold positions in government agencies. Yet the man
> was no radical. He was a millionaire land-owner and a Catholic who
> wore a medal of the Virgin around his neck. That, however, was not
> enough to save him. In 1964, he was overthrown in a military coup
> which had deep, covert American involvement. The official Washington
> line was ... yes, it's unfortunate that democracy has been overthrown
> in Brazil ... but, still, the country has been saved from communism.
>
>
> For the next 15 years, all the features of military dictatorship
> which Latin America has come to know and love were instituted:
> Congress was shut down, political opposition was reduced to virtual
> extinction, habeas corpus for "political crimes" was suspended,
> criticism of the president was forbidden by law, labor unions were
> taken over by government interveners, mounting protests were met by
> police and military firing into crowds, peasants' homes were burned
> down, priests were brutalized ... disappearances, death squads, a
> remarkable degree and depravity of torture ... the government had a
> name for its program: the "moral rehabilitation" of Brazil.
>
>
> Washington was very pleased. Brazil broke relations with Cuba and
> became one of the United States' most reliable allies in Latin
> America.
>
>
> Dominican Republic, 1963-66: In February 1963, Juan Bosch took office
> as the first democratically elected president of the Dominican
> Republic since 1924. Here at last was John F. Kennedy's liberal anti-
> communist, to counter the charge that the U.S. supported only
> military dictatorships. Bosch's government was to be the long sought
> "showcase of democracy" that would put the lie to Fidel Castro. He
> was given the grand treatment in Washington shortly before he took
> office.
>
>
> Bosch was true to his beliefs. He called for land reform; low-rent
> housing; modest nationalization of business; and foreign investment
> provided it was not excessively exploitative of the country; and
> other policies making up the program of any liberal Third World
> leader serious about social change. He was likewise serious about the
> thing called civil liberties: Communists, or those labeled as such,
> were not to be persecuted unless they actually violated the law.
>
>
> A number of American officials and congressmen expressed their
> discomfort with Bosch's plans, as well as his stance of independence
> from the United States. Land reform and nationalization are always
> touchy issues in Washington, the stuff that "creeping socialism" is
> made of. In several quarters of the U.S. press Bosch was red-baited.
>
>
> In September, the military boots marched. Bosch was out. The United
> States, which could discourage a military coup in Latin America with
> a frown, did nothing.
>
>
> Nineteen months later, a revolt broke out which promised to put the
> exiled Bosch back into power. The United States sent 23,000 troops to
> help crush it.
>
>
> Cuba 1959 to present: Fidel Castro came to power at the beginning of
> 1959. A U.S. National Security Council meeting of 10 March 1959
> included on its agenda the feasibility of bringing "another
> government to power in Cuba." There followed 40 years of terrorist
> attacks, bombings, full-scale military invasion, sanctions, embargos,
> isolation, assassinations ... Cuba had carried out The Unforgivable
> Revolution, a very serious threat of setting a "good example" in
> Latin America.
>
>
> The saddest part of this is that the world will never know what kind
> of society Cuba could have produced if left alone, if not constantly
> under the gun and the threat of invasion, if allowed to relax its
> control at home. The idealism, the vision, the talent, the
> internationalism were all there. But we'll never know. And that of
> course was the idea.
>
>
> Indonesia 1965: A complex series of events, involving a supposed coup
> attempt, a counter-coup, and perhaps a counter-counter-coup, with
> American fingerprints apparent at various points, resulted in the
> ouster from power of Sukarno and his replacement by a military coup
> led by General Suharto. The massacre that began immediately -- of
> communists, communists sympathizers, suspected communists, suspected
> communist sympathizers, and none of the above -- was called by the
> New York Times "one of the most savage mass slayings of modern
> political history." The estimates of the number killed in the course
> of a few years begin at half a million and go above a million.
>
>
> It was later learned that the U.S. embassy had compiled lists of
> "communist" operatives, >from top echelons down to village cadres, as
> many as 5,000 names, and turned them over to the army, which then
> hunted those persons down and killed them. The Americans would then
> check off the names of those who had been killed or captured. "It
> really was a big help to the army. They probably killed a lot of
> people, and I probably have a lot of blood on my hands," said one
> U.S. diplomat. "But that's not all bad. There's a time when you have
> to strike hard at a decisive moment."
>
>
> Chile, 1964-73: Salvador Allende was the worst possible scenario for
> a Washington imperialist. He could imagine only one thing worse than
> a Marxist in power -- an elected Marxist in power, who honored the
> constitution, and became increasingly popular. This shook the very
> foundation stones upon which the anti-communist tower was built: the
> doctrine, painstakingly cultivated for decades, that "communists" can
> take power only through force and deception, that they can retain
> that power only through terrorizing and brainwashing the population.
>
>
> After sabotaging Allende's electoral endeavor in 1964, and failing to
> do so in 1970, despite their best efforts, the CIA and the rest of
> the American foreign policy machine left no stone unturned in their
> attempt to destabilize the Allende government over the next three
> years, paying particular attention to building up military hostility.
> Finally, in September 1973, the military overthrew the government,
> Allende dying in the process.
>
>
> Thus it was that they closed the country to the outside world for a
> week, while the tanks rolled and the soldiers broke down doors; the
> stadiums rang with the sounds of execution and the bodies piled up
> along the streets and floated in the river; the torture centers
> opened for business; the subversive books were thrown to the
> bonfires; soldiers slit the trouser legs of women, shouting that "In
> Chile women wear dresses!"; the poor returned to their natural state;
> and the men of the world in Washington and in the halls of
> international finance opened up their check-books. In the end, more
> than 3,000 had been executed, thousands more tortured or disappeared.
>
> Greece 1964-74: The military coup took place in April 1967, just two
> days before the campaign for national elections was to begin,
> elections which appeared certain to bring the veteran liberal leader
> George Papandreou back as prime minister. Papandreou had been elected
> in February 1964 with the only outright majority in the history of
> modern Greek elections. The successful machinations to unseat him had
> begun immediately, a joint effort of the Royal Court, the Greek
> military, and the American military and CIA stationed in Greece. The
> 1967 coup was followed immediately by the traditional martial law,
> censorship, arrests, beatings, torture, and killings, the victims
> totaling some 8,000 in the first month. This was accompanied by the
> equally traditional declaration that this was all being done to save
> the nation from a "communist takeover." Corrupting and subversive
> influences in Greek life were to be removed. Among these were
> miniskirts, long hair, and foreign newspapers; church attendance for
> the young would be compulsory.
>
> It was torture, however, which most indelibly marked the seven-year
> Greek nightmare. James Becket, an American attorney sent to Greece by
> Amnesty International, wrote in December 1969 that "a conservative
> estimate would place at not less than two thousand" the number of
> people tortured, usually in the most gruesome of ways, often with
> equipment supplied by the United States.
>
> Becket reported the following:
>
> Hundreds of prisoners have listened to the little speech given by
> Inspector Basil Lambrou, who sits behind his desk which displays the
> red, white, and blue clasped-hand symbol of American aid. He tries to
> show the prisoner the absolute futility of resistance: "You make
> yourself ridiculous by thinking you can do anything. The world is
> divided in two. There are the communists on that side and on this
> side the free world. The Russians and the Americans, no one else.
> What are we? Americans. Behind me there is the government, behind the
> government is NATO, behind NATO is the U.S. You can't fight us, we
> are Americans."
>
> George Papandreou was not any kind of radical. He was a liberal anti-
> communist type. But his son Andreas, the heir-apparent, while only a
> little to the left of his father had not disguised his wish to take
> Greece out of the cold war, and had questioned remaining in NATO, or
> at least as a satellite of the United States.
>
> East Timor, 1975 to present: In December 1975, Indonesia invaded East
> Timor, which lies at the eastern end of the Indonesian archipelago,
> and which had proclaimed its independence after Portugal had
> relinquished control of it. The invasion was launched the day after
> U.S. President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had
> left Indonesia after giving Suharto permission to use American arms,
> which, under U.S. law, could not be used for aggression. Indonesia
> was Washington's most valuable tool in Southeast Asia.
>
> Amnesty International estimated that by 1989, Indonesian troops, with
> the aim of forcibly annexing East Timor, had killed 200,000 people
> out of a population of between 600,000 and 700,000. The United States
> consistently supported Indonesia's claim to East Timor (unlike the UN
> and the EU), and downplayed the slaughter to a remarkable degree, at
> the same time supplying Indonesia with all the military hardware and
> training it needed to carry out the job.
>
> Nicaragua 1978-89: When the Sandinistas overthrew the Somoza
> dictatorship in 1978, it was clear to Washington that they might well
> be that long-dreaded beast -- "another Cuba." Under President Carter,
> attempts to sabotage the revolution took diplomatic and economic
> forms. Under Reagan, violence was the method of choice. For eight
> terribly long years, the people of Nicaragua were under attack by
> Washington's proxy army, the Contras, formed from Somoza's vicious
> National Guardsmen and other supporters of the dictator. It was all-
> out war, aiming to destroy the progressive social and economic
> programs of the government, burning down schools and medical clinics,
> raping, torturing, mining harbors, bombing and strafing. These were
> Ronald Reagan's "freedom fighters." There would be no revolution in
> Nicaragua.
>
> Grenada 1979-84: What would drive the most powerful nation in the
> world to invade a country of 110 thousand? Maurice Bishop and his
> followers had taken power in a 1979 coup, and though their actual
> policies were not as revolutionary as Castro's, Washington was again
> driven by its fear of "another Cuba," particularly when public
> appearances by the Grenadian leaders in other countries of the region
> met with great enthusiasm.
>
> U.S. destabilization tactics against the Bishop government began soon
> after the coup and continued until 1983, featuring numerous acts of
> disinformation and dirty tricks. The American invasion in October
> 1983 met minimal resistance, although the U.S. suffered 135 killed or
> wounded; there were also some 400 Grenadian casualties, and 84
> Cubans, mainly construction workers. What conceivable human purpose
> these people died for has not been revealed.
>
> At the end of 1984, a questionable election was held which was won by
> a man supported by the Reagan administration. One year later, the
> human rights organization, Council on Hemispheric Affairs, reported
> that Grenada's new U.S.-trained police force and counter-insurgency
> forces had acquired a reputation for brutality, arbitrary arrest, and
> abuse of authority, and were eroding civil rights.
>
> In April 1989, the government issued a list of more than 80 books
> which were prohibited from being imported. Four months later, the
> prime minister suspended parliament to forestall a threatened no-
> confidence vote resulting from what his critics called "an
> increasingly authoritarian style."
>
> Libya 1981-89: Libya refused to be a proper Middle East client state
> of Washington. Its leader, Muammar el-Qaddafi, was uppity. He would
> have to be punished. U.S. planes shot down two Libyan planes in what
> Libya regarded as its air space. The U.S. also dropped bombs on the
> country, killing at least 40 people, including Qaddafi's daughter.
> There were other attempts to assassinate the man, operations to
> overthrow him, a major disinformation campaign, economic sanctions,
> and blaming Libya for being behind the Pan Am 103 bombing without any
> good evidence.
>
> Panama, 1989: Washington's mad bombers strike again. December 1989, a
> large tenement barrio in Panama City wiped out, 15,000 people left
> homeless. Counting several days of ground fighting against Panamanian
> forces, 500-something dead was the official body count, what the U.S.
> and the new U.S.-installed Panamanian government admitted to; other
> sources, with no less evidence, insisted that thousands had died;
> 3,000-something wounded. Twenty-three Americans dead, 324 wounded.
>
>
> Question from reporter: "Was it really worth it to send people to
> their death for this? To get Noriega?"
>
> George Bush: "Every human life is precious, and yet I have to answer,
> yes, it has been worth it."
>
> Manuel Noriega had been an American ally and informant for years
> until he outlived his usefulness. But getting him was not the only
> motive for the attack. Bush wanted to send a clear message to the
> people of Nicaragua, who had an election scheduled in two months,
> that this might be their fate if they reelected the Sandinistas. Bush
> also wanted to flex some military muscle to illustrate to Congress
> the need for a large combat-ready force even after the very recent
> dissolution of the "Soviet threat." The official explanation for the
> American ouster was Noriega's drug trafficking, which Washington had
> known about for years and had not been at all bothered by.
>
> Iraq 1990s: Relentless bombing for more than 40 days and nights,
> against one of the most advanced nations in the Middle East,
> devastating its ancient and modern capital city; 177 million pounds
> of bombs falling on the people of Iraq, the most concentrated aerial
> onslaught in the history of the world; depleted uranium weapons
> incinerating people, causing cancer; blasting chemical and biological
> weapon storages and oil facilities; poisoning the atmosphere to a
> degree perhaps never matched anywhere; burying soldiers alive,
> deliberately; the infrastructure destroyed, with a terrible effect on
> health; sanctions continued to this day multiplying the health
> problems; perhaps a million children dead by now from all of these
> things, even more adults.
>
> Iraq was the strongest military power amongst the Arab states. This
> may have been their crime. Noam Chomsky has written: It's been a
> leading, driving doctrine of U.S. foreign policy since the 1940s that
> the vast and unparalleled energy resources of the Gulf region will be
> effectively dominated by the United States and its clients, and,
> crucially, that no independent, indigenous force will be permitted to
> have a substantial influence on the administration of oil production
> and price.
>
> Afghanistan 1979-92: Everyone knows of the unbelievable repression of
> women in Afghanistan, carried out by Islamic fundamentalists, even
> before the Taliban. But how many people know that during the late
> 1970s and most of the 1980s, Afghanistan had a government committed
> to bringing the incredibly backward nation into the 20th century,
> including giving women equal rights? What happened, however, is that
> the United States poured billions of dollars into waging a terrible
> war against this government, simply because it was supported by the
> Soviet Union. Prior to this, CIA operations had knowingly increased
> the probability of a Soviet intervention, which is what occurred. In
> the end, the United States won, and the women, and the rest of
> Afghanistan, lost. More than a million dead, three million disabled,
> five million refugees, in total about half the population.
>
> El Salvador, 1980-92: Salvador's dissidents tried to work within the
> system. But with U.S. support, the government made that impossible,
> using repeated electoral fraud and murdering hundreds of protestors
> and strikers. In 1980, the dissidents took to the gun, and civil war.
>
> Officially, the U.S. military presence in El Salvador was limited to
> an advisory capacity. In actuality, military and CIA personnel played
> a more active role on a continuous basis. About 20 Americans were
> killed or wounded in helicopter and plane crashes while flying
> reconnaissance or other missions over combat areas, and considerable
> evidence surfaced of a U.S. role in the ground fighting as well. The
> war came to an official end in 1992; 75,000 civilian deaths and the
> U.S. Treasury depleted by six billion dollars. Meaningful social
> change has been largely thwarted. A handful of the wealthy still own
> the country, the poor remain as ever, and dissidents still have to
> fear right-wing death squads.
>
>
> Haiti, 1987-94: The U.S. supported the Duvalier family dictatorship
> for 30 years, then opposed the reformist priest, Jean-Bertrand
> Aristide. Meanwhile, the CIA was working intimately with death
> squads, torturers and drug traffickers. With this as background, the
> Clinton White House found itself in the awkward position of having to
> pretend -- because of all their rhetoric about "democracy" -- that
> they supported Aristide's return to power in Haiti after he had been
> ousted in a 1991 military coup. After delaying his return for more
> than two years, Washington finally had its military restore Aristide
> to office, but only after obliging the priest to guarantee that he
> would not help the poor at the expense of the rich, and that he would
> stick closely to free-market economics. This meant that Haiti would
> continue to be the assembly plant of the Western Hemisphere, with its
> workers receiving literally starvation wages.
>
>
> Yugoslavia, 1999: The United States is bombing the country back to a
> pre-industrial era. It would like the world to believe that its
> intervention is motivated only by "humanitarian" impulses. Perhaps
> the above history of U.S. interventions, can help one decide how much
> weight to place on this claim."

---

Scandalo a Moby Dick. Luttwak ammette:
bombardiamo apposta il popolo Serbo (20 maggio 1999)

Durante la trasmissione odierna di Michele Santoro, Moby Dick su
Italia 1, escono vari retroscena inquietanti. Tra gli invitati: Brutti,
D'Amato, Luttwak, i pescatori dell'Adriatico.

La prima parte della trasmissione è dedicata all'omicidio di
D'Antona e si capisce lo scopo destabilizzante nei confronti del
Governo tant'è che D'Alema ribadisce: non ci lasceremo intimidire.

Subito dopo, i pescatori dell'Adriatico che temono incidenti e la
contaminazione dal contatto con le armi. Le bombe a grappolo
(e non solo) contengono l'Uranio (DU), mentre poco si dice su
eventuali armi chimiche impiegate. Brutti rassicura: le ripescheremo.
Tuttavia emerge che le bombe sono state sganciate dalla Nato anche
in zone non previste. I pescatori, per paura, non escono a pescare.
Inoltre emerge qualcos'altro: la Nato è restia a dare i dati all'Italia
su dove vengono sganciati gli ordigni: ma insomma, nella Nato,
ci siamo o non ci siamo anche noi? Perché se ne parla come
di un'entità separata? [Siamo allo scollamento istituzionale.
Probabilmente ormai la NATO rappresenta solo Blair e Clinton.]

Interviene una Serba. Il popolo Serbo non si farà imporre un
governo dall'esterno. Ribatte Luttwak: infatti il nostro nemico
è il popolo Serbo, non Milosevic. "Se uccidessimo lui, chissà chi
potrebbero ancora eleggere i Serbi..." e continua: "La guerra
l'abbiamo fatta per smembrare la Serbia... e contro il popolo
Serbo (sic!)". [E qui ormai siamo al terrorismo puro.] D'Amato
e poi Santoro chiedono a Luttwak se per caso Luttwak si sente
bene, se è ubriaco o drogato. Luttwak ribatte debolmente che in
fondo non sono poi così cattivi, tant'è che un po' di bombe finiscono
in mare invece che sulla testa dei Serbi. - break pubblicitario e
la trasmissione non viene ripresa senza nemmeno che siano
mandati i titoli di testa. Che sarà successo?

Non è che il terrorismo USA sta un po' esagerando?

(fonte: Marco Saba)


--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------

E' recentemente uscita la terza edizione del libro

"IO ACCUSO - Note critiche sul ruolo della Unione Europea, della NATO e
degli USA in Jugoslavia - Scandali ed inganni in Kosovo"

di Rajko Dolecek, Ed. Dauphin / Studio Forma, Praga 2000 (in lingua
inglese: "I ACCUSE!").

Il testo e' disponibile anche in lingua ceca - ZALUJI! - Ed. Futura,
Praga 1999, oppure in lingua serbocroata - OPTUZUJEM! - Ed. Rivel Co.,
Belgrado 1998. Dolecek, medico e professore universitario, nel suo paese
e' anche un noto saggista e scrittore: ha pubblicato centinaia di
articoli scientifici ma persino tre libri di fantascienza, ed e' stato
spesso presente sui media. Negli ultimi sette anni si e' dedicato in
particolare alla crisi jugoslava, anche per i vincoli affettivi che lo
legano a quel paese e a quei popoli.

Il testo inglese della precedente edizione di "I ACCUSE", che e'
aggiornata al marzo 1999 e dunque non contiene le vergogne sulla
aggressione della NATO e sulla occupazione coloniale della provincia del
Kosmet, si puo' leggere in internet alla URL:

http://www.srpska-mreza.com/ddj/Kosovo/articles/Dolecek.html

Di seguito riproduciamo invece un suo articolo che puo' essere
considerato quasi una sintesi dell'intero libro.

---

http://www.inaffairs.org.yu
Review of International Affairs
April-June 2000

THE LOSS OF CREDIBILITY BY THE WEST AND BY ITS INSTITUTIONS AS A
CONSEQUENCE OF NATO AGGRESSION

By Prof. Dr. Rajko Dolecek Ostrava, Czech Republic

I am now almost 75 and, to be frank - in spite of many disappointments
(e.g.
Vietnam) - I dreamt the dream of Western democracy all the way to 1991.
But
the dismemberment of Yugoslavia, a campaign of denigration of the Serbs,
so
wholeheartedly prepared and supported by the official West
(NATO, the European Community, later Union, the USA), taught me really a
harsh lesson. It started with all this fantastic disinformation, even
lies
about the events in Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, spread by
Western leaders and media, including all those frame-ups about the three
big
explosions in Sarajevo, about rape and death camps run by the Serbs,
about
Srebrenica, etc. In the sad story about refugees, the western
politicians
and media almost forgot that around a million Serbs had been expelled
from
Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. Then came the illegal and unjust
sanctions,
the expulsion of Yugoslavia from the World Health Organization. The ad
hoc
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was
created, mainly to show how bad the Serbs are. However, nobody here
argues
that some were innocent in the civil-ethnic-religious war in Yugoslavia,
but
it was utterly unfair, almost criminal, to blame just one side for all
the
crimes that happened there. The Dayton dictate opened the door to the
despotism of the occupiers of Bosnia-Herzegovina who undemocratically
manipulated the elections there; whose high civilian representatives
even
sacked the freely elected president of the Republika Srpska.

But the final blow to the credibility of the present official West was
its
dirty role in Kosovo and Metohija, which culminated in the NATO
aggression
against the sovereign state of Yugoslavia.

The tragedy of Kosovo and Metohija, of its inhabitants, was meticulously
prepared by a part of the West, by a part of its leadership. Germany as
a
front-runner helped organize and train the "KLA" (Kosovo Liberation
Army) or
"UCK" terrorists whose aim was to destroy and kill in Kosovo and
Metohija,
to expell all non-Albanians from there, to secede the province from
Serbia,
Yugoslavia. The Germans had the full support of the USA - they finally
accepted the "KLA" terrorists as their allies, with a lot of support
from
the British, the official European Union (EU) as a whole. Nobody stopped
the
continuous flow of money, volunteers, uniforms and weapons from the West
(and from some Islamic countries) to the "KLA". To prepare the terrain
ideologically, most Western media started their work, even historians in
vogue successfully manipulated history to show inconspicuously the need
to
re-assess the situation in Kosovo, to present its Albanian population in
bright colors, to make the Serbs bad guys. The book by Noel Malcolm
KOSOVO -
A Short History1 of 1998 may be used as an example. It is intelligently
written, but it manipulates history. Some historians even used glaring
lies
to denigrate the Serbs. The British historian David Price-Jones wrote
such a
flat-out lie when he published his article "Kosovo, from Scratch".2 He
wrote
there that the Serbs had operated the most notorious concentration camp
Jasenovac in the fascist, Ustasha Croatia (1941-1945). It is the same as
if
he would write that the Jews had operated the Auschwitz concentration
camp
where they tortured and killed the poor SS soldiers. Even now, when many
fabrications of the Western media and leaders about Kosovo had been
exposed,
the well known National Geographic magazine published two absolutely
biased,
one-sided articles3, without objectivity, about Kosovo: "Albanians", and
"Eyewitness Kosovo" spreading desinformation and ignorance of history.

But let us turn now to the events of 1999. It is quite clear that NATO
committed a criminal act of aggression when its air planes started to
rain
bombs on civilian and military targets throughout Yugoslavia, Serbia,
killing and wounding many civilians and destroying a lot of property and
facilities. Western leaders and media, bragging about democracy,
nicknamed
that crime a "humanitarian", "just", even "ethical" war. (Hitler used to
call the war he had started in 1939, a "just" war too). The pretext for
the
NATO aggression was the alleged protection of the Albanian civilians,
threatened by ethnic cleansing carried out by the Serbs all over Kosovo
and
Metohija. The Rambouillet fraud, engineered by Mrs. Albright, had the
same
objective. The Racak affair, so aptly orchestrated by the "KLA" and Mr.
William Walker ("the veteran of criminal intervention of the State
Department in Central America"4) should have helped to persuade the
world
public of the criminal behavior of Serbs in Kosovo. Thus the criminal
NATO
aggression started. As a consequence of heavy aerial bombardment, day
and
night, and due heavy fighting between the Yugoslav army and police
against
the "KLA" terrorists, hundreds of thousands of refugees started to flee
from
Kosovo and Metohija, not only Albanians, but Serbs, Montenegrins, Roma,
ethnic Turks, Goranies, as well. To make palatable the heavy losses of
civilian lives, called "collateral damage", Western leaders and media
started to talk about an incredible genocide that was taking place in
Kosovo
and Metohija, some of them even talked about a holocaust. The Albanian
refugees, in refugee camps in Albania and Macedonia, well indoctrinated
by
the omnipresent "KLA" members, told hair-raising stories about
atrocities
perpetrated by the Serbs in Kosovo (alas, there were atrocities
perpetrated
by all sides in the Kosovo conflict, not by one side only and not in the
monstrous proportions as misrepresented by the refugees). Hardly anyone
ever
mentioned the plight of the pro-Yugoslav Albanians who were especially
cruelly killed by "KLA" squads.

A really terrifying "eyewitness account" told about the bodies of 700
Albanians that the Serbs dumped in the shafts of Trepca mines. That
story
was officially accepted by the West, by NATO. The British Daily Mirror
even
wrote: "Trepca - the name will live alongside those of Belsen, Auschwitz
and
Treblinka", while the New York Times (to give its report more
authenticity)
informed about an "unusual, pungent bitter-sweet smell... to be burning
bodies... the bodies were disposed of entirely in the mine's huge vats
of
hydrochloric acid". The above information was spread when the bombs were
still being dropped on Kosovo. But, alas, when the investigators from

ICTY, from The Hague came there, their spokeswoman Ms. Kelly Moore had
to
say that nothing was found there, no corpses. What a fantastic
fabrication!
But there were many such fabrications. The "eyewitnesses" told during
the
aggression, that in Ljubenic, near Pec, Serbs killed 350 Albanians and
that
their dead bodies were buried in a mass grave. When the investigators
went
there, they found just 7 bodies. In Pusto Selo, another "eyewitness
account"
referred to about 106 villagers killed by the Serbs, whose bodies may be
found in mass graves there - but nothing was found. An American
journalist,
Mr. Alexander Cockburn, listed such "eyewitness accounts" in his article
"Where's the Evidence of Genocide of Kosovar Albanians?"5 The Spanish
forensic and police experts went to Kosovo and published (Mr. Pablo
Ordaz)
an article in El Pais (September 23, 1999), with the headline "Crimes of
war-Yes; Genocide-No". They were told that they were going to the worst
zone
in Kosovo, that more then 2,000 autopsies awaited them - but they found
only
187 bodies, in nine villages, in individual graves, turned towards
Mecca,
there were no signs of torture. Mr. Emilio Perez Pujo, a forensic
expert,
ridiculed the successive counts of the dead in Kosovo by the "allies".
The
UN started with 44,000, then it lowered it to 22,000, and still later to
11,000. But the official count (not yet from all the graves) was in
November
1999, is just 2,108, including the Serbs and other nationalities.6

The eyewitness accounts from Kosovo are incredibly exaggerated, but,
unfortunately, people died there, not in thousands but in hundreds,
because
the "KLA" terrorists started there their bloody campaign at the
beginning of
1998 that prompted the authorities to restore law and order. And people
died, because the NATO bombs were killing them, destroying their
property
and infrastructure, because NATO used prohibited weapons, such as
cluster
bombs and depleted uranium ammunition.

However, the real records in disseminating disinformation were achieved
by
the top leaders of the West, Mrs. Albright's gang being one of the most
successful. The US Defense Secretary said (May 16, 1999) on CBS' "Face
the
Nation", about the Kosovo Albanians: "We've now seen about 100,000
militarily-capable men missing. They may have been murdered". Mrs.
Albright's "speaking-trumpet", Mr. J. Rubin, was even more outspoken:
"Based
on past practice, it is chilling to think where those 100,000 men are.
We
don't know, but what we do know is that civilian casualties are the
objective of president Milosevic's policy".7 But the real climax of all
this
disinformation (lies) was reached by Mr. David Scheffer ("Ambassador at
large for War Crimes Issues", from the State Department). He said in
mid-May
1999:8 "A total of 225,000 ethnic Albanian men aged between 14 and 59
(it is
strange how he got those figures) are missing". Then the lie continued:
"With the exception of Rwanda in 1994 and Cambodia in 1975, you would be
hard pressed to find a crime scene anywhere in the world since World War
II
where a defenceless civilian population has been assaulted with such
ferrocity and criminal intent", blah, blah, blah. Mr. Robin Cook was
also
among those who spoke about those 100,000 feared dead. Mr. Robertson
(the
British Minister of Defense) spread more fabrications of the eyewitness
accounts, like Mr. R. Scharping, the German Defense Minister. President
Clinton wasn't narrow-minded either. During a press conference (June 25,
1999) he spoke about tens of thousands of people (Albanians) killed in
Kosovo on Yugoslav president Milosevic's orders. What epithets could a
normal man or woman give to all those Clintons, Albrights, Cooks,
Cohens,
Blairs, Robertsons, Scharpings, etc.

If somebody would like to portray briefly a big part of the Western
activities in Kosovo (EU, USA, NATO, and even OSCE during 1998-99), he
would
need only three letters to begin with: LIE, then disinformation, fraud,
one-sidedness, frame-ups. It must be stressed again that nobody is
innocent,
with bloodless hands during the Kosovo ordeal. But the spectacle,
masterminded by the so-called West, in addition to all those lies,
disinformation, fabrications, deceptions, etc., was followed by murder
and
devastation, well orchestrated in advance - just to get bases in Kosovo
and
Metohija.

As for the excessive and more or less absurd use of emotion laden
expressions like genocide and even holocaust, those who use them,
including
presidents, prime ministers, foreign ministers, journalists and their
editors, ought to consult dictionaries about their meaning beforehand,
or
read the words of Mr. Ellie Wiesel, the Nobel Prize winner: "Serbian
acts in
Kosovo do not constitute genocide... Genocide is the intent and desire
to
annihilate a people..." He continues: "As early as 1992, media coverage
of
the war in Bosnia mistakenly compared Serbian ethnic cleansing to the
Holocaust... Holocaust was conceived to annihilate the last Jew on the
planet. Does anybody believe that Milosevic and his accomplices
seriously
planned to exterminate all the Bosnians, all the Albanians, all the
Muslims
in the World?" That is why, "the Kosovo genocide" appears now to be the
most
outrageous lie, not only in the last two years, but even in the last
decade.
But a sort of genocide did start in Kosovo, after the NATO-led KFOR took
over from the Yugoslav army. When talking about the "KLA" leaders, the
well
known American journalist, Chris Hedges (Foreign Affairs, May-June
1999),
had this to say: "... they are wary of the outside world and given to
secrecy, paranoia and appalling mendacity..."

It is strange that all those framers, disinformers, liars, etc. never
mentioned the fact, that during the bloody "KLA" campaign in the spring
of
1998, the Serbian Ministry of Health (with some help from WHO)
vaccinated
100,000 children of all nationalities in Kosovo and Metohija against
poliomyelitis (there had been an epidemic of polio in Albania during
1995-96). Would the government in Belgrade have done this,
time-consuming
and dangerous, (the "KLA" squads were roaming around and shooting
indiscriminately), had it planned to commit genocide?

Isn't it funny - and very sad, that the NATO's chief executioner in
Yugoslavia, general Wesley Clark, accused the Serbs and the government
in
Belgrade, and president Milosevic, naturally too, of being responsible
for
the troubles in Kosovska Mitrovica, because the nasty Serbs did not want
to
allow the return of the Albanians, expelled from the northern part of
the
town. Neither the general nor the media have ever mentioned that more
than
500 Serb families had been expelled from the southern part of Kosovska
Mitrovica. But, who cares for them?! Nobody talks about their ordeal,
nobody
tried to do something about their return.

The NATO aggression against Yugoslavia, that made it into a criminal
organization (it was a honest organization until the 1990s), has
affected
various levels of the Western community.

1. The people - too many people swallowed quite easily the hook of the
propaganda machine in the West. Nobody defended the poor people from
various
frame-ups and lies, or from crazy articles like the article in the most
popular British tabloid, The Sun, of April 14, 1999, which proclaimed
that
Serbian soldiers should be killed like mad dogs.

2. Media - a big part of the media failed the exam in the Yugoslav
tragedy.
Their lack of objectivity was a consequence of ignorance, arrogance,
"received wisdom", or it was for - money. They did not want to hear the
other side.

3. The leaders - who could trust them after all the disinformation that
they
had spread, after all those criminal acts they had committed, after so
many
international conventions, agreements, treaties that they had violated.
Who
could trust president Clinton who lied under oath during the Lewinsky
affair?

4. Institutions - The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former
Yugoslavia (ICTY) is incredibly one-sided, biased, paid and organized by
the
USA (and some Islamic countries), whose partiality for the Muslims, and
now
for the Albanians, is now evident. It was created to prove how bad the
Serbs
are. The United Nations did not fulfil its obligations, mostly thanks to
its
Secretary General, Mr. Kofi Annan, who is "more like an Under-Secretary
of
State (of Mrs. Albright)" (Raju Thomas, 2000). Now it is quite evident
why
he received so strong support for his present job by president Clinton's
administration.

5. The Army - The NATO pilots behaved like executioners, because they
did
not fight to protect their country or to help a friendly nation,
according
to the UN Charter, that had been attacked. They just showed how it was
possible to destroy and kill in "electronic" games, at an altitude of
15,000
feet, without courage, without ideals, where neither human life nor
traditional values are respected. OSCE failed too - it obeyed too much
the
powerful, it did not hesitate to throw away its ideals.

Will NATO and the EU and the USA apologize to Yugoslavia for their
crimes,
will they pay the damages?



1 Noel Malcolm, KOSOVO - A Short History, 1998.

2 David Price-Jones, "Kosovo, from Scratch", National Review, July 12,
1999.

3 "Albanians" & "Eyewitness Kosovo", National Geographic, February
2000.

4 Balkan Infos, Paris, No. 42, March 2000.

5 Alexander Cockburn, "Where's the Evidence of Genocide of Kosovar
Albanians?", Los Angeles Times, October 29, 1999.

6 Maggie Farley, "2,108 corpes dug up in Kosovo effort so far", Los
Angeles
Times, November 11, 1999.

7 J. Rubin, State Department Briefing, April 19, 1999.

8 AIM Report, December A and B, 1999.


--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------

VIGNETTE SATIRICHE (IN FRANCESE)


http://balkans.infos.free.fr/dessins.htm


--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------

Da "Il Manifesto" del 18 Luglio 2000:

Contro la Nato denuncia a Strasburgo

Appello alla Corte europea per i diritti umani dei
familiari delle vittime del raid sulla tv serba
S. D. B.

Non fu e non venne giustificato come un "effetto
collaterale". Anzi, i vertici dell'Alleanza atlantica
affermarono che la sede della televisione di stato serba,
colpita nell'aprile del 1999 durante la campagna di
bombardamenti contro la Jugoslavia, era un legitimate
target. Nell'attacco morirono 16 giornalisti e tecnici e
tutti i reporter occidentali a Belgrado definirono il
bombardamento un crimine di guerra e contro la libertà di
stampa.
Esattamente con questa accusa e chiamando in causa
l'articolo 2 del trattato istitutivo della Corte europea
per i diritti umani, che protegge il diritto alla vita, le
famiglie di quei giornalisti e di quei tecnici si sono
rivolte a uno studio legale inglese per denunciare alla
Corte che ha sede a Strasburgo i governi di 17 paesi della
Nato. Nella stesura dei capi d'accusa convergono i
risultati dei dossier sui crimini della Nato preparati da
Amnesty international e da Human rights watch e rifiutati,
nonostante la mole di prove e argomentazioni addotte, dal
procuratore generale del Tribunale dell'Aja, Carla Del
Ponte, che ha deciso, senza nemmeno aprire un'indagine, per
l'innocenza della Nato.
Ma la battaglia legale per portare davanti ad un tribunale
internazionale i vertici politici e militari dell'Alleanza
non è conclusa, nonostante il "non luogo a procedere" della
Del Ponte. Dopo i risultati del "Tribunale indipendente
Ramsey Clark" (ex ministro della giustizia Usa, da non
confondere con il generale Wesley Clark, ex comandante
della Nato), che ha "condannato" la Nato per i crimini di
genocidio, distruzione ambientale e violazione delle
Convenzioni di Ginevra sulle regole di guerra, la denuncia
presentata ieri apre la concreta possibilità (anche se con
i tempi del tribunale di Strasburgo, che rivaleggia in
lentezza con i tribunali italiani) che i governi della Nato
siano condannati per aver deliberatamente ucciso dei civili
e debbano risarcire le famiglie delle vittime; alle quali,
per di più, si tentò anche di negare la qualifica
professionale.
Al momento della "conta dei caduti" che ogni anno fa la
stampa internazionale, Information sans frontières li
incluse nella lista dei professionisti dell'informazione
caduti in guerra, mentre Reporter sans frontières accolse
la tesi della Nato: uccidere un giornalista o un addetto al
montaggio è colpire la propaganda.

---

[Please send this to others who might be interested]

Permanent Commission on (Dutch) war crimes in Yugoslavia
Rode Kruislaan 709
1111 NX Diemen
The Netherlands
phone/fax: +206900742
e-mail: despot@...

INTERNATIONAL PRESS COMMUNIQUÉ

Dutch court in Amsterdam: war crimes not ruled out; war against
Yugoslavia being against international law
not ruled out

First decision in appeal to higher court

On 6 July 2000, the court in Amsterdam decided on the lawsuit, brought
by Dedovic and 28 other Yugoslav citizens,
mainly living in Serbia. This lawsuit is directed directly against the
Dutch Prime Minister Kok, Foreign Minister Van
Aartsen, and Defence Minister De Grave.

This was the first decision in appeal to higher court of a series of
lawsuits, organized by the PC [“Permanente Commissie”;
Permanent Commission on (Dutch) war crimes in Yugoslavia].

The PC was founded on the initiative of the Anti-Fascist Former
Resistance [against Nazi occupation of The Netherlands,
1940-1945] Fighters’ League, the Lawyers for Peace League, and the
Balkan Peace Coalition.

The PC’s lawsuits

So far, the PC has organized four lawsuits in Dutch courts, as summary
proceedings. In all those cases, different groups of
Yugoslav persons, mainly living in Yugoslavia, were plaintiffs.

The first case was organized in February 1999, when NATO aggression was
still only a threat. The demand, then asked
from Dutch judges, was that The Netherlands should no longer support
NATO in those threats, which violated the United
Nations Charter, point 2 sub 4.

The second summary proceedings were in April 1999, when the NATO
aggression against Yugoslavia had already
started. This time, ten Yugoslavs, who had received a call up to serve
as conscripts in the army, were plaintiffs. They
demanded before the Dutch judges that The Netherlands, as a NATO member,
would stop participating in the war, stop
using them as targets in this unlawful war.

The third and fourth cases were shortly after one another in the
beginning of May 1999, as it became clear that NATO
aggression was directed more and more against civilians and civilian
targets, and also in other respects was completely
disproportional. The third summary proceedings were at the The Hague
court, the fourth summary proceedings were at
the Amsterdam court.

Also in these two latest summary proceedings, different groups of
Yugoslav persons were plaintiffs. The demand at the
The Hague court was directed against the State of The Netherlands, and
at the Amsterdam court against the Dutch
government ministers Kok, Van Aartsen, and De Grave personally. In the
last case, this was because of the Nuremburg
trial 1945 rules, saying that everyone involved in war crimes is also
personally responsible and individually liable, also
if they are government functionaries. In these two latest court cases,
the demand was that the defendants - the State of the
Netherlands, and the three ministers personally- would do everything in
their power to get The Netherlands out of this
dirty war.

What happened at these court cases

In all cases, the demand was refused. However, also in all these cases,
the plaintiffs appealed to higher courts in The
Hague and Amsterdam. This happened when the bombings had already
stopped.

Of course, in all these cases the demands had to be adapted, as, of
course, now it could no longer be demanded that the
court would force the State of The Netherlands, or the Dutch ministers,
to end the Dutch participation in the war. That war
had already stopped.

So, the new demand on appeal became that the court would oblige the
State of The Netherlands, or the Dutch ministers,
not to start again a war against Yugoslavia without explicit permission
from the Security Council of the United Nations.
And also, that the court would rule post facto that the war had been
against international law, and as a consequence had
hurt the interests of the Yugoslav plaintiffs.

The PC arranged that the appeal of the fourth summary proceedings would
come first: at the Amsterdam court, with a
more ‘liberal’ reputation than the court in the [Government city] The
Hague; where the appeals in the three other lawsuits
will have to be.

The decision by the Amsterdam court

So, the Amsterdam court made a decision in the case Dedovic and others
vs. Kok, Van Aartsen, and De Grave, on 6
July 2000. The court did not take it easy. In a 26 pages long decision
the Amsterdam court discusses the case extensively.
Such an extensive decision is really unique for summary proceedings.

In itself, this is important and a striking gain: so, judges in The
Netherlands state that they have the right to judge on the
participation of the Dutch state in the NATO bombings. And even on the
personal roles in this of the Dutch ministers.
And that they can call them to account for this.

The Dutch state and the ministers in all lawsuits had stated as their
first line of defence that Dutch judges should keep
out of all those issues. These were ‘political affairs.’ However, this
defence was rejected in all the court cases so far;
including now, again, at the Amsterdam court.

The issues at stake in the case Dedovic versus Kok

In this case, basically four issues were at stake. The three most
important ones were:

1. The demand by the Yugoslav plaintiffs that the court should order Kok
c.s. to do everything possible to not get The
Netherlands involved again in a possible new NATO aggression against
Yugoslavia, without explicit permission from the
Security Council of the United Nations.

2. The question whether the war, in which The Netherlands participated
within the NATO alliance, and which was waged
without explicit permission from the Security Council of the United
Nations, was, or was not, against international law.

3. The question whether, once that war had started in March 1999, war
crimes were committed during it or not, like
attacks on civilian targets and the use of disproportional violence.

The fourth issue was the question whether the Dutch ministers, might, or
might not, be held personally responsible for war
crimes.

In the extensive decision, the Amsterdam court dealt at length with all
those issues.

The court decision on two of these issues

On the fourth issue, the court concluded that the Dutch ministers could
not be held personally responsible for this war.

According to the court, the 29 Yugoslav plaintiffs should sue the Dutch
state, not the ministers personally. So, the court
here rejected the personal liability of the Dutch ministers.

It was different with the three other issues.

On the first issue - so, asking that the court should forbid that The
Netherlands would ever again participate in a possible
new NATO aggression against Yugoslavia, without explicit permission from
the Security Council of the United Nations,
the court found that no decision on this might be made now. Because
right now, new aggression is not yet already a really
concrete threat. If there would come an acute threat of new NATO
accession, then first the state should have the chance
to make a decision on this. Only then the judges can decide, according
to the court.

So, the court does not reject the demand definitively. The court
basically says: on this point, the plaintiffs are too early with
their demand. Just let them come back with their demand if there will be
real decision making by the Dutch state about
new aggression against Yugoslavia.

The court decision on the issues 2 and 3

In the two other issues -so, the question whether waging war against
Yugoslavia without explicit permission from the
Security Council was, or was not, against international law, and the
question whether, once that war had started, war
crimes were committed during it or not, like attacks on civilian targets
and the use of disproportional violence- the decision
by the lower level courts had always been, in all four court cases, that
in no way the law had been violated in this. And
that, of course, The Netherlands and NATO had been fully justified in
their attacks on Yugoslavia.

However, the higher level court turns out to think very differently on
this. In both questions, that court decides that it is
unable to decide either for or against.

So, the court indicates that possibly, the Yugoslav plaintiffs are right
here. And that this war was against international law,
and that war crimes were as well committed during this war. Another
possibility is that NATO and The Netherlands are
right, that this war was allowed, and that no war crimes were committed.

The court continues to say: in order to decide who is right here, the
Yugoslav plaintiffs or the Dutch state and the ministers,
really much more research is needed. However, for that, such concise
circumstances like summary proceedings are not
really fitting.

Because the court does not know for whom it should decide on those most
important points of the court case, for the
Yugoslav plaintiffs or for the Dutch ministers, finally still all
demands are not upheld. Because if the court cannot
decide who is right, then the plaintiff loses; as usually in court
cases.

Differently from when lower level courts decided on this case, this
higher level court on the two most crucial points at
stake during this court case, no longer takes the side of the Dutch
state and NATO.

Here, the court says: I do not know. Both sides have a point. More
research is needed in other, more extensive legal
proceedings.

Further perspectives

The Dutch state and the Dutch ministers will certainly not be happy with
this! It is a big blow for them. Because it shows
that the support in the courts for their criminal war policy is clearly
crumbling.

Concerning the issue that the court thinks that new, more extensive
proceedings are needed to come to conclusions on
the core questions, we can bring important news.

In this, the court will get what it asked for.

Shortly, the PC will start with lawsuits, for compensation for the
victims of the bombing of the RTS broadcasting studio in
Belgrade. Now, with the backing of the higher level court in Amsterdam,
that the war was possibly against international
law, and that during this war, possibly war crimes were committed!

However, there will also be an appeal in the case Dedovic versus Kok, to
the highest Dutch court, the Hoge Raad
[‘Supreme Court’]. There will also be appeals in the three other cases
which are still going on.

Historical duty

Really, in every NATO country the fight should be waged at national
level courts on the question whether war may be
waged just like that against small countries like Yugoslavia. While we
have international laws, explicitly prohibiting this.

We know that after the Second World War, all nations and peoples have
committed themselves in the United Nations
charter to outlaw ‘the scourge of war’.

The PC in The Netherlands makes a start. For the first time since the
Nuremburg and Tokyo trials against the
German and Japanese war criminals, government leaders have to take
responsibility at a court of law for
possible war crimes and crimes against peace.

It is an historical mission of lawyers and all supporters of the rule of
law, to also in the other NATO countries make the
government leaders take responsibility at their national courts of law.
This is possible at lawsuits for indemnities for the
victims of the bombings of Yugoslavia.

The PC asks urgently, to make the front against the NATO leaders
broader, as soon as possible!


The PC

---


Subject: Nato-Verbrecher müssen vor ordentliche Gerichte
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 18:07:50 +0200
From: Jug Öster Solibeweg <joesb@...>


Die JÖSB unterstützt folgende Resolution, denn wenn die westlichen
Länder
für sich in Anspruch nehmen rechtsstaatlich zu sein, dann muss die NATO
zumindest vor Gericht gestellt (und zweifellos auch verurteilt) werden.
Dass
es sich weder um rechtsstaatliche noch demokratische Länder, sondern um
die
Diktatur der Neuen Weltordnung handelt, beweist die Farce des Haager
Tribunals, das eine Anklage gegen die NATO trotz erdrückender Beweise
für
den Bruch der elementarsten Normen des Völkerrechts rundweg abgelehnt
hat.

**********

Resolution:

Die nachfolgenden Organisationen und Einzelpersonen fordern auf
Grundlage
der Ergebnisse der Tribunale [siehe weiter unten]:

* Unverzüglich Strafverfahren gegen die in der Anklageschrift genannten
Angeklagten vor ordentlichen Gerichten einzuleiten

* Beobachter aus unabhängigen Staaten zu diesen Verfahren zuzulassen, da
die
Befangenheit der nationalen Gerichte zu befürchten ist

* Die Angeklagten für die Dauer der Verfahren unverzüglich aus ihren
Ämtern
zu entfernen

Wir schließen uns auch den sich aus den Urteilen ergebenden politischen
Forderungen der Tribunale an:

* Sofortige Beendigung aller Embargos, Sanktionen und sonstiger
Strafmaßnahmen gegen Jugoslawien

* Rückzug aller NATO-Truppen aus der Balkanregion und die Beendigung
aller
Operationen gegen Jugoslawien

* Vollständige Reparationen für Tod, Verletzung, wirtschaftliche und
ökologische Zerstörungen durch Krieg und Sanktionen

Falls es vorerst keine strafrechtlichen Konsequenzen für die
Verantwortlichen des NATO-Krieges geben sollte, so geben wir hiermit
unserer
Hoffnung Ausdruck, daß die Verbrecher dieses Krieges ihr Leben mit der
wachsenden Sorge verbringen mögen, daß man sie eines Tages wie Augusto
Pinochet doch noch für ihre Verbrechen auf die Anklagebank bringen
wird. In
diesem Fall wird es historisches Beweismaterial geben, das dafür
garantieren
wird, daß der Gerechtigkeit Genüge getan wird.

Erstunterzeichner:

Heidelberger Forum gegen Militarismus und Krieg · VVN/Bund der
AntifaschistInnen HD · DGB·Rhein-Neckar-Heidelberg · AKAS (Arbeitskreis
antiimperialistische Solidarität) · Friedensladen HD · Prof. Dr. Dieter
Fehrenz, Heidelberg · Dr. theol. Hannelis Schulte, PDS, Stadträtin
Heidelberg · DKP Heidelberg · Freidenker Heidelberg · Eckart Spoo,
Journalist, IG Medien, Berlin · Prof. Dr. Ulrich Duchrow, Heidelberg ·
CONTRASTE - Monatszeitung für Selbstorganisation · „Freiheit f. Mumia
Jamal
HD“ · H. Rick, Gesundheitspartei · Cuba Solidarität Heidelberg e.V. ·
DFG/VK Heidelberg · A. de Jager, DGB HD · Janine Hebert ÖTV HD · Günter
Zink ÖTV HD · Sabine Ritzberger SPD HD · Angelo Taurino ÖTV HD
sowie 45 weitere Einzelpersonen aus HD

********

Es sei uns, der JÖSB, noch eine Anmerkung gestattet: Wir würden
bevorzugen
den Fall Pinochet nicht als Vorbild zu verwenden. Denn mit dieser
Anklage
und dem Prozess wollen sich jene reinwaschen, die in 100%er Kontinuität
mit
den Pinochet-Verbrechern stehen, allen voran die USA und die EU. Wohin
es
führt, wenn sich diese als Hüter der Menschenrechte aufspielen haben wir
an
den humanitären Bomben im Jugoslawienkrieg gesehen. Wir dürfen die
Herstellung einer weiteren Geschichtslüge nicht zulassen, laut der der
Imperialismus weder für den Faschismus noch für die Diktatur in Chile
verantwortlich wäre. Die Herrschenden haben angesichts ihrer Verbrechen
allen Grund ihre eigene Geschichte zu verleugnen.

Die Wahrheit ist eine Waffe im Kampf gegen das westliche Monster und
kann
nur von Volksgerichten angewandt werden, nicht von käuflichen Gerichten
wie
jenem in Den Haag und in Santiago de Chile.

********

INTERNATIONALE TRIBUNALE ÜBER DEN NATO-KRIEG GEGEN JUGOSLAWIEN
Führer der NATO-Staaten wegen Kriegsverbrechen schuldig gesprochen!

Unabhängige Tribunale
Bisher haben sich die nationalen Gerichte der NATO-Staaten geweigert,
strafrechtlichen Ermittlungen gegen die Verantwortlichen des Krieges
gegen
Jugoslawien aufzunehmen. Auch das von den westlichen Staaten getragene,
sehr
parteiische Jugoslawientribunal in Den Haag hat trotz der Vorlage von
erdrückendem Beweismaterial durch namhafte internationale JuristInnen
sich
bisher geweigert, ein Verfahren einzuleiten.

Aus 16 Ländern (u.a. USA, Kanada, Deutschland, Italien, Griechenland,
Rußland und Österreich) haben sich daher JuristInnen,
WissenschaftlerInnen,
Parlamentsausschüsse und NGOs zusammengetan, um in der Tradition der
Russel-Tribunale gegen den Vietnamkrieg, in eigener Regie internationale
Tribunale über den NATO-Krieg abzuhalten. Eine große Zahl namhafter
Persönlichkeiten haben sich an der Durchführung beteiligt. Neben dem
ehemaligen Justizminister der USA, Ramsey Clark, der frühere kanadische
Außenminister James Bisset, der ehem. Botschafter in Jugoslawien Ralph
Hartmann, der Hamburger Völkerrechtler Prof. Norman Paech, der
Umweltforscher Prof. Knut Krusewitz, der frühere Admiral E. Schmähling,
und
viele andere.

Angeklagte
Angeklagt sind die Regierungschefs, Außenminister und
Verteidigungsminister
der beteiligten NATO-Staaten, die verantwortlichen Funktionsträger der
NATO
und des Militärs dieser Länder, sowie die Parlamentarier die dem Krieg
zustimmten, obwohl er offensichtlich gegen Völkerrecht, nationale
Verfassungen und internationale Verträge verstieß.
Die Anklage erstreckte sich auf Verbrechen gegen den Frieden,
Kriegsverbrechen, Verbrechen gegen die Menschheit und anderer
Verletzungen
der Prinzipien des Nürnberger Tribunals, der Haager Abkommen, der Genfer
Abkommen, der Charta der Vereinten Nationen und anderer Normen des
Völkerrechts und nationaler Gesetze.

* der Vorbereitung und Durchführung eines Angriffskrieges, bei dem
mindestens 500, wahrscheinlich mehr als 2.000 unbeteiligte Menschen
getötet
wurden, mehr als ein Drittel davon Kinder.

* der massiven Irreführung der Öffentlichkeit und der Parlamente
sowie folgender Kriegsverbrechen:

* Bombardierung überwiegend ziviler Ziele und Zerstörung der
Lebensgrundlagen des ganzen Landes

* Schwere Schädigung von Menschen und Umwelt durch die Bombardierung von
Anlagen und Fabriken bei denen vorhersehbar umweltschädliche (z.T.
hochgiftige) Chemikalien freigesetzt wurden.

* Einsatz geächteter Waffen, wie Uranmunition, die das Einsatzgebiet auf
lange Zeit radioaktiv verseucht haben oder sogenannte Clusterbomben,
deren
nicht explodierte Submunition ganze Landstriche vermint hat.

Weitere Anklagen
Auch Amnesty International (AI) wirft der NATO Kriegsverbrechen bei den
Luftangriffen auf Jugoslawien 1999 vor. Durch die Tötung von
Zivilpersonen
habe die NATO das humanitäre Völkerrecht verletzt, erklärte die
Menschenrechtsorganisation am 6. Juni in Bonn und fordert die
verdächtigen
NATO-Kriegsverbrecher vor Gericht zu stellen. Ganz klar sei die
Bombardierung der Zentrale des serbischen Staatsrundfunks im April
vergangenen Jahres ein bewußter Angriff auf ein ziviles Objekt und damit
ein
Kriegsverbrechen gewesen Ebenso wie die Angriffe auf Brücken, die nicht
gestoppt wurden, obwohl bemerkt wurde, daß sie Zivilisten treffen.

****
Jugoslawisch-Österreichische Solidaritätsbewegung (JÖSB)
PF 217, A-1040 Wien, Österreich
Tel/Fax +43 1 924 31 61
joesb@...
www.vorstadtzentrum.net/joesb
Kto-Nr. 9282, RB Schwechat, BLZ 32823


--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------

NEW YORK - BERLIN


>Via Workers World News Service Reprinted from the June 22, 2000
>issue of Workers World newspaper
>
>
>U.S. /NATO GUILTY OF WAR CRIMES IN YUGOSLAVIA
> By John Catalinotto New York
>
>An international panel of judges has found that U.S. and NATO
>political and military leaders were guilty of war crimes against
>Yugoslavia during and before the March 24- June 10, 1999, assault on
>that country.
>
>Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark was the lead prosecutor at
>the International Tribunal on U.S./NATO War Crimes against
>Yugoslavia, which met here on June 10. He urged the 500 people
>attending the all-day event to carry out this verdict by organizing a
>campaign to abolish the NATO military pact.
>
>Ben Dupuy, a former ambassador-at-large from Haiti, the Rev. Kiyul
>Chung, representing the Korean movement for democracy and
>reunification, and auto worker Martha Grevatt, national secretary of
>Pride At Work, the AFL-CIO's constituency group of lesbian, gay, bi,
>and trans workers, read the three parts of the verdict.
>
>A panel of 16 judges from 11 countries heard eyewitnesses and
>researchers who had visited Yugoslavia, renowned political and
>economic analysts, historians, physicists, biologists, military
>experts, journalists and lay researchers.
>
>Over the past 15 months, speaking to worldwide audiences, many of
>these witnesses have presented a complete picture of the war NATO
>waged against Yugoslavia. For this tribunal, however, all limited
>themselves to a single area of expertise.
>
>Together, they provided comprehensive evidence against the political
>and military leaders of the United States and the other NATO
>countries.
>
>The judges decided that the individual testimonies taken together
>constructed a proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused are
>guilty of crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and war
>crimes.
>
>MANIPULATION OF THE MEDIA
>
>The witnesses described how NATO used the media to spread lies
>demonizing the Serbs and their leadership, and to prepare Western
>public opinion for a war. Speakers detailed the real economic and
>geopolitical motives of the imperialist powers of the United States
>and Western Europe: to seize economic control of the area, from the
>Balkans to the oil-rich Caspian Sea.
>
>A pattern of similar criminal behavior by the United States, most
>notably in the Korean and Vietnam wars, was established.
>
>Speakers demonstrated how Washington rigged the phony "Racak
>massacre" for the media and then used the so-called Rambouillet
>accord--in reality an ultimatum demanding military control of all
>Yugoslavia for NATO--to provoke the war. Taken together, this all
>proved a crime against peace.
>
>They also showed that using illegal weapons, purposely choosing
>civilian targets, and destroying the environment and the civilian
>infrastructure added up to war crimes.
>
>Expelling hundreds of thousands of people from Kosovo and Metohija,
>after the NATO bombing began, were crimes against humanity.
>
>The witnesses' presentations were accompanied in many cases by slides
>and videotape displayed on a large screen on the stage of the
>auditorium at Martin Luther King Jr.High School in Manhattan. They
>were visible to the judges, who sat on the stage, and to the hundreds
>in the audience.
>
>In addition, pictures and videotapes were on display in the hall
>outside the auditorium. Documentary evidence was offered in books and
>research papers.
>
>The material illustrated deliberate targeting of civilians: the
>bombing of a Belgrade television station; the bombing of refugees;
>the bombing of the Chinese Embassy; the bombing of hospitals,
>schools, railroads and bridges; the destruction of the industrial and
>civil infrastructure; the use of pellet bombs and depleted uranium;
>damage to the environment through bombing petrochemical plants; and
>the tactic of repeat bombing of the same target after 10 to 15
>minutes to kill and wound members of emergency rescue teams.
>
>MANY TRIBUNALS CULMINATE IN NEW YORK
>
>The International Action Center, founded by Ramsey Clark and other
>activists in 1992, organized this final session of the tribunal.
>Similar tribunal hearings have taken place in Germany, Italy,
>Austria, Russia, Ukraine, Yugoslavia and Greece. In Athens last
>November, thousands declared U.S. President Bill Clinton a war
>criminal.
>
>Some of the witnesses in New York had also participated in these
>European tribunals.
>
>Representatives of the governments of Yugoslavia and Cuba made
>important presentations.
>
>Ismael Guadalupe from Vieques, Puerto Rico, explained in a powerful
>speech that U.S. Navy bombing exercises against his small island have
>laid the basis for U.S./NATO aggression around the world, including
>in Kosovo, Yugoslavia.
>
>The IAC registered 511 people at the event, including justices,
>witnesses and staff. Invited speakers, witnesses and judges came from
>Haiti, Spain, Turkey, Korea, Puerto Rico, India, Germany, United
>States, Canada, Italy, Yugoslavia, Russia, Britain, Belgium, Iraq,
>Greece, Austria, France and Portugal.
>
>The U.S. government refused visas to four people from Ukraine,
>including three parliamentary deputies. Their message was read from
>the stage.
>
>There were also representatives of the Roma people--often referred to
>by the derogatory term "gypsy." Shani Rifati, a Roma witness who was
>born in Pristina, capital of Kosovo, told how NATO occupation has led
>to the expulsion of 100,000 Romas. He pointed out that the verdict
>condemned the persecution of Roma people, the first time this has
>happened in any international tribunal.
>
>Five television crews taped the entire proceedings. They included
>Serbian television and a three-camera crew from Australia, as well as
>alternate media sources in the United States such as the Peoples
>Video Network.
>
>WITNESSES IN PART I: CRIMES AGAINST PEACE * LENORA FOERSTEL of Women
>for Mutual Security and editor of the recently published book "War,
>Lies * Videotape: How media monopoly stifles truth."
>
>* JARED ISRAEL, producer of the film "Judgment" showing how the
>corporate media distorted a photograph taken in Bosnia.
>
>* JEAN HATTON Britain--anti-war activist, on how massacre stories
>were used to justify the war.
>
>* CHRISTOPHER BLACK Canada--one of a group of Canadian attorneys who
>filed a suit charging NATO with war crimes at what is called the
>International Criminal Court for the Former Yugoslavia at the Hague,
>on how that court was part of the preparation for war.
>
>* MONICA MOOREHEAD, of Millions for Mumia and contributing editor to
>Workers World newspaper, on the prison-industrial complex in the
>United States.
>
>* MICHEL COLLON Belgium--author of two books on the Balkans, "Liar's
>Poker" and "Monopoly," and contributor to the weekly newspaper
>Solidaire, on the geopolitical aims of the war--to dominate the
>Caspian oil pipelines.
>
>* KADOURI AL KAYSI Iraqi-American--on the impact of sanctions on
>Iraq.
>
>* STRATIS KOUNIAS Greece--vice-president of the Greek Committee for
>Peace and Professor at the University of Athens, on NATO's role in
>Greece and the Greek anti-war movement.
>
>* JOHN CATALINOTTO, journalist and researcher who represented the IAC
>at tribunals in Vienna and Belgrade, on Washington's premeditated
>plan regarding NATO and the attack on Yugoslavia.
>
>* ROLAND KEITH Canada--monitor for the Observer Mission that was
>supposed to maintain the peace in Kosovo in 1998 before the war, on
>the real role of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in
>Europe.
>
>* PRESTON WOOD, who participated in hearings in Novi Sad and who
>organized opposition to the war in Los Angeles, especially in the
>lesbian/gay/bi/trans community, on the supposed massacre in Racak,
>Kosovo, used to justify the attack on Yugoslavia.
>
>* RICHARD BECKER, West Coast co-coordinator for the IAC, on the role
>of talks held in Rambouillet, France, in February and March 1999.
>
>* GREGOR KNEUSSEL Austria--on Austria's role in delivering the NATO
>ultimatum to Yugoslavia.
>
>WITNESSES IN PART II: WAR CRIMES & CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY
>
>*Prosecutor GLORIA LA RIVA on how U.S./NATO bombs hit civilian
>targets, from hospitals to bridges to factories, using the video she
>produced, "NATO Targets."
>
>*SARAH SLOAN, IAC Commission of Inquiry researcher, on NATO's claim
>that it tried to minimize damage to civilian facilities in
>Yugoslavia.
>
>* ELLEN CATALINOTTO, a midwife who has delivered over 1,200 babies to
>mostly poor women in New York City, on the NATO bombing of 33
>hospitals including damage to the maternity ward at Dragisa Micovic
>hospital in Belgrade.
>
>* PROF. IVAN YATSENKO Russia--former Soviet officer and foreign
>representative who now teaches law in Moscow, on damage to Yugoslav
>industrial infrastructure and how it cost half a million jobs.
>
>*ELMAR SCHMAEHLING Germany--former West German admiral and leading
>spokesperson for the German tribunal movement, on the aggressive
>posture of NATO since the collapse of the USSR and its illegal attack
>on Yugoslavia.
>
>*JUDI CHENG, IAC researcher, on the bombing of the Chinese Embassy in
>Belgrade.
>
>*DR. JANET EATON Canada--biologist and environment expert, on
>destruction of the environment in Yugo slavia, especially the damage
>from attacks on the petrochemical plant at Pancevo and other
>industrial targets.
>
>*DR. CARLO PONA Italy--physicist who participated in a conference in
>Belgrade about depleted uranium, on why DU is dangerous to humans
>and how it was used in Yugoslavia.
>
>* FULVIO GRIMALDI Italy--videographer and journalist who recently
>completed editing a film on Iraq and Yugoslavia, on the combined
>impact of bombing and sanctions on the population of Yugoslavia.
>
>* DEIRDRE GRISWOLD, editor of Workers World newspaper who recently
>visited sites of U.S. war crimes in south Korea, on the pattern of
>criminal conduct of the U.S. military in Korea and Vietnam.
>
>* SHANI RIFATI, originally from the Romani community in Kosovo and
>publisher of an English-language newsletter about Romani affairs, on
>the horrors faced by the Roma people in Kosovo under K-FOR and KLA
>occupation.
>
>* MILOS RAICKOVICH Serb-American--composer and anti-war activist, on
>the destruction of churches and cultural sites in occupied Kosovo and
>Metohija.
>
>* PROF. MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY Canada--historian and economist, on the
>role of the KLA and its ties to U.S. and German intelligence
>services, NATO and UN Rep. Bernard Kouchner.
>
>* SCOTT TAYLOR Canada--former Canadian soldier and publisher of
>magazine Esprit de Corps, on the expulsion of the Serb population
>from the Krajina in Croatia by an army led by KLA General Ceku.
>
>* PROF. BARRY LITUCHY, recently returned from Yugoslavia, on how K-
>FOR participated in expelling people from Kosovo.
>
>*PROF. GREGORY ELICH, recently returned from the Balkans, on the
>anti-humanitarian nature of NATO's occupation of Kosovo.
>
>* GILLES TROUDE France--member of the editorial board of Balkans-
>Info, on France's role in the war and in suppressing dissent at home.
>
>* PROFESSOR JORGE CADIMA Portugal--a regular contributor to Avante,
>the weekly newspaper of the Portuguese Communist Party, on the role
>of NATO in Portugal since 1949 and on popular resistance to the war.
>
>MESSAGES OF SOLIDARITY AND STRUGGLE
>
>* ISMAEL GUADALUPE Puerto Rico, Committee for the Rescue and
>Development of Vieques, on how the U.S. used Vieques for target
>practice to prepare for the war against Yugoslavia.
>
>* SORAYA ALVAREZ Cuba, First Secretary of the Cuban Mission to the
>United Nations, on Cuba's suit against the U.S. for the costs of the
>embargo.
>
>* VLADISLAV JOVANOVIC, Yugoslav Ambassador to the UN, on his own
>government's charges against the U.S. and NATO for war crimes.
>
>
>JUDGES & PROSECUTORS
>
>1. BEN DUPUY Haiti--former Ambassador at Large for Haiti under the
>first government of Jean-Bertrand Aristide and currently secretary
>general of the Popular National Party (PPN) of Haiti.
>
>2. ANGELES MAESTRO MARTIN Spain--elected member of Spanish
>parliament from Madrid and a leader in the movement to end sanctions
>against Iraq.
>
>3. CIMILE CAKIR Turkey--journalist for newspaper serving Kurdish
>community and member of Turkish Human Rights Association. Imprisoned
>four years in Turkey for human rights activity.
>
>4. REV. KIYUL CHUNG Korea--chairperson of the Executive Committee of
>the Congress for Korean Unification in North America.
>
>5. JOHN NICKELS Roma--U.S. representative of the International
>Romani Union and also a judge in the Romani community in the U.S.
>
>6. JORGE FARINACCI Puerto Rico--leader of the Socialist Front of
>Puerto Rico and a long-time leader of the independence movement in
>Puerto Rico.
>
>7. RAY LAFOREST Haitian-American--labor unionist in the American
>Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and a leader of
>the Haitian Coalition for Justice, an organization that fights police
>brutality in New York.
>
>8. UMA KUTWAL United States, originally from India-- president of
>Local 375 of the Civil Service Technical Union District Council 37 of
>American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
>
>9. DR. CHRISTA ANDERS Germany--doctor of medicine and an organizer
>of the German/European Tribunal.
>
>10. RANIERO LA VALLE Italy--former senator who has served 14 years
>in the Italian parliament, an anti-war leader in Catholic circles and
>spokesperson for the Italian War Crimes Tribunal movement.
>
>11. DR. WOLFGANG RICHTER Germany--Chairperson of the Society for the
>Protection of Civil Rights and Human Dignity and a leader of the War
>Crimes Tribunal movement in Germany.
>
>12. MARTHA GREVATT United States--National Secretary of Pride at
>Work, the AFL-CIO organization for lesbian/gay/bi/trans workers'
>rights, and active in the United Auto Workers.
>
>13. MICHAEL RATNER United States--civil rights attorney on the
>National Board of the Center for Constitutional Rights who took the
>U.S. government to court for violating the War Powers Act in its
>undeclared war against Yugoslavia.
>
>14. YOLE STANESIC Yugoslavia & Russia--Montenegrin poet and writer
>living in Russia, member of the tribunals in Yaroslav, Kiev and
>Belgrade.
>
>15. JOHN BLACK United States--retired President of the Health and
>Hospital Workers Union in Pennsylvania, responsible for bringing many
>thousands of hospital workers into the union. As a teenager in
>Germany he was active in the anti-Nazi underground resistance.
>
>16. DR. BERTA JOUBERT-CECI Puerto Rico & U.S.--psychiatrist working
>in public health and organizer of Puerto Rican and African American
>anti-racist activities in Philadelphia.
>
>THE PROSECUTOR TEAM
>
>* RAMSEY CLARK, former U.S. attorney general and founder of the
>International Action Center.
>
>* PAT CHIN, Jamaican-American, International Action Center
>spokesperson for solidarity with Haiti and Yugoslavia and other
>issues.
>
>* SARA FLOUNDERS, International Action Center national co-director,
>participant in numerous tribunal hearings.
>
>* GLORIA LA RIVA, a leader of International Peace for Cuba Appeal,
>producer of video "NATO Targets."
>
>All were in Yugoslavia, either during the war or as participants in
>seminars or meetings after the war.
>
>FINDINGS
>
>The Members of the Independent Commission of Inquiry to Investigate
>U.S./NATO War Crimes Against the People of Yugoslavia, meeting in
>New York, having considered the Initial Charges and Complaint of the
>Commission dated July 31, 1999, against President William J.
>Clinton, Gen. Wesley Clark, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright,
>Prime Minister Tony Blair, Chancellor Gerhard Schroder, President
>Jacques Chirac, Prime Minister Massimo D'Alema, Prime Minister Jose
>Maria Azmar, the Governments of the United States and the other NATO
>member states, former Secretary General Javier Solana and other NATO
>leaders, and others with 19 separate Crimes Against Peace, War Crimes
>and Crimes Against Humanity in violation of the Charter of the United
>Nations, the 1949 Geneva Conventions, other international agreements
>and customary international law, find the accused Guilty on the basis
>of the evidence against them and that each of the 19 separate crimes
>alleged in the Initial Complaint has been established to have been
>committed beyond a reasonable doubt. These are:
>
>1. Planning and executing the dismemberment, segregation and
>impoverishment of Yugoslavia.
>
>2. Inflicting, inciting and enhancing violence between and among
>Muslims and Slavs.
>
>3. Disrupting efforts to maintain unity, peace and stability in
>Yugoslavia.
>
>4. Destroying the peace-making role of the United Nations.
>
>5. Using NATO for military aggression against, and occupation of,
>non-compliant poor countries.
>
>6. Killing and injuring a defenseless population throughout
> Yugoslavia.
>
>7. Planning, announcing and executing attacks intended to assassinate
>the head of government, other government leaders and selected
>civilians in Yugoslavia.
>
>8. Destroying and damaging economic, social, cultural, medical,
>diplomatic--including the embassy of the People's Republic of China
>and other embassies--and religious resources, properties and
>facilities throughout Yugoslavia.
>
>9. Attacking objects indispensable to the survival of the population
>of Yugoslavia.
>
>10. Attacking facilities containing dangerous substances and forces.
>
>11. Using depleted uranium, cluster bombs and other prohibited
>weapons.
>
>12. Waging war on the environment.
>
>13. Imposing sanctions through the United Nations that are a
>genocidal crime against humanity.
>
>14. Creating an illegal ad-hoc criminal tribunal to destroy and
>demonize the Serbian leadership. The illegitimacy of this tribunal is
>further demonstrated by its failure to bring any case regarding the
>oppression of the Romani people, who have suffered the highest rate
>of casualties of any people in the region.
>
>15. Using controlled international media to create and maintain
>support for the U.S. assault and to demonize Yugoslavia, Slavs, Serbs
>and Muslims as genocidal murderers.
>
>16. Establishing the long-term military occupation of strategic parts
>of Yugoslavia by NATO forces.
>
>17. Attempting to destroy the sovereignty, right to self-
>determination, democracy and culture of the Slavic, Muslim, Roma and
>other peoples of Yugoslavia.
>
>18. Seeking to establish U.S. domination and control of Yugoslavia
>and to exploit its people and resources.
>
>19. Using the means of military force and economic coercion in order
>to achieve U.S. domination.
>
>The Members hold NATO, the NATO states and their leaders accountable
>for their criminal acts and condemn those found guilty in the
>strongest possible terms. The Members condemn the NATO bombardments,
>denounce the international crimes and violations of international
>humanitarian law committed by the armed attack and through other
>means such as economic sanctions. NATO has acted lawlessly and has
>attempted to abolish international law.
>
> RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION The Members urge the immediate revocation
>of all embargoes, sanctions and penalties against Yugoslavia because
>they constitute a continuing crime against humanity. The Members call
>for the immediate end to the NATO occupation of all Yugoslav
>territory, the removal of all NATO and U.S. bases and forces from the
>Balkans region, and the cessation of overt and covert operations,
>including the "International Criminal Tribunal for the Former
>Yugoslavia" in The Hague, aimed at overthrowing the government of
>Yugoslavia.
>
>The Members further call for full reparations to be paid to the
>Federal Republic of Yugoslavia for death, injury, economic and
>environmental damage resulting from the NATO bombing, economic
>sanctions and blockades. Further, other states in the region which
>have suffered economic and environmental damage due to the NATO
>bombing and economic sanctions on Yugoslavia must also be awarded
>reparations. The Members condemn the threat or use of military
>technology against life, both civilian and military, as was used by
>the NATO powers against the people of Yugoslavia.
>
>The Members urge public action and mobilization to stop new and
>continued sanctions and aggressions by the U.S. and other NATO powers
>against Iraq, Cuba, north Korea, the countries of Eastern Europe and
>the former Soviet Union, Puerto Rico, Asia, Sudan, Colombia and other
>countries. We ask for the immediate cessation of overt/covert
>activities by the U.S. and NATO in such countries.
>
>The Members believe that the interests of peace, justice and human
>progress require the abolition of NATO, which has proved itself
>beyond any doubt to be an instrument of aggression for the dominant,
>colonizing powers, particularly the United States. The Pentagon, the
>central and key element of NATO and the greatest single threat to the
>people of the world, must be disbanded.
>
>The Members urge the Commission to provide for the permanent
>preservation of the reports, evidence and materials gathered to make
>them available to others, and to seek ways to provide the widest
>possible distribution of the truth about the U.S./NATO war on
>Yugoslavia.
>
>We urge all people of the world to act on recommendations developed
>by the Commission to hold power accountable and to secure social
>justice on which lasting peace must be based.
>
>Done in New York this 10th day of June, 2000.
>
> - END -
>
>(Copyleft Workers World Service. Everyone is permitted to copy and
>distribute verbatim copies of this document, but changing it is not
>allowed. For more information contact Workers World, 55 W. 17 St.,
>NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: ww@.... For subscription info send
>message to: info@.... Web: http://www.workers.org)
>

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

International European Tribunal

Concerning the NATO War against Yugoslavia

Verdict

June 3, 2000:

At the conclusion of two days of hearing, with testimony presented by
various witnesses from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia1) and numerous
international experts2) and based upon the material derived from 2
previous hearings - Oct. 1999 in Berlin and April 2000 in Hamburg - the
jury of this International European Tribunal has reached the following
verdict.

The heads of governments and the foreign and defense ministers of the
NATO member states3), the commanding officials of NATO4), the members of
the Federal Parliament of the Federal Republic of Germany, who voted in
favor of the participation of the German armed forces in the military
intervention against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia5),

have been found guilty of serious violations of International Law

through the military aggression carried out against the Federal Republic
of Yugoslavia from March 24, to June 10, 1999.


1) The aggression is a violation of the absolute prohibition of the use
of force as formulated in the UN Charter, Art. 2 Nr. 4, in connection
with interdiction of aggression as contained in the UN General Assembly
(G.A.) Resolution 3314 (XXIX) (14. Dec. 1974), as well as a violation of
the territorial sovereignty of a sovereign state, as formulated in Art.
2 number 4 of the UN Charter in connection with the interdiction of the
violation of the territorial integrity and the political independence of
a state as laid out in the Declaration of International Principles for
Friendly Relations and Cooperation between States in the spirit of the
Charter of the United Nations, Resolution of the UN G.A. 2625 (XXV) (24.
Oct. 1970) and Art. 2 Statutes of the International European Tribunal.

Without themselves having been attacked by the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia and while consciously and deliberately circumventing a
Security Council mandate, as called for in Art. 39, and 42, 48 of the UN
Charter, NATO states carried out military aggression against a sovereign
state. This constitutes a serious violation of prevailing, compulsory
International Law.

Nor was this aggression to be justified as being - as the Federal
Republic of Germany and other NATO member states allege - an act of
emergency aid through a so-called humanitarian intervention. Aside from
the fact that in prevailing International Law emergency aid to a state,
victim of aggression, exists only in the framework of self-defense in
the context of Art. 51 of the UN Charter, which does not apply in the
present case, in the opinion of this Tribunal, formed after intensive
examination of the evidence and expert testimony presented here, that
even the factual prerequisites for such an "humanitarian intervention"
are lacking.

The Tribunal reached the conviction, that a humanitarian catastrophe, as
was invoked particularly by the German ministers Fischer and Scharping,
never existed. The instrumentalization of the Holocaust through the
insinuation of a genocide comparable to what took place in Auschwitz
concentration camp, as was done by the German Foreign Minister, is
viewed by this Tribunal as being highly irresponsible and disgraceful
behavior. It is true that the civil war in Kosovo, that ignited between
the separatist movement of the KLA and the police and army of
Yugoslavia, led to a large number of casualties on both sides, led to
the destruction of houses and villages, to the displacement of people -
Albanians, as well as Serbs, Croats, Romany and members of other ethnic
groups - and to serious human rights violations. As deplorable as this
is, the plight of these victims does not justify the superlative
characterization of the situation as being a "humanitarian catastrophe".
NATO and its member governments stand exposed for their innumerable
exaggerations, dramatizations and falsifications.

But even if this Tribunal would assume — which it does not — that a
"humanitarian catastrophe" had existed in the years 1998, 1999,
preceding the bombing, this would not have legitimated a military
intervention as was carried out by NATO. In the customs of states, from
which international common law has evolved, as well as in the vast
majority of international legal opinion, humanitarian intervention is
not recognized as an institution legitimating an exemption from the
absolute prohibition of the use of force. The verdict handed down by the
World Court in The Hague in the lawsuit Nicaragua vs. the United States
on 27 June 1986 has lost nothing of its validity concerning
"humanitarian interventions": "The use of force could not be the
appropriate method to monitor or ensure respect for human rights. With
regard to the steps actually taken, the protection of human rights, a
strictly humanitarian objective, cannot be compatible with the mining of
ports, the destruction of oil installations, (...). The Court concludes
that the argument derived from the preservation of human rights in
Nicaragua cannot afford a legal justification for the conduct of the
United States." (ICJ Rep. 1986 §268) In spite of what some would have us
believe, this standpoint of international law prevails.

Even if "humanitarian intervention" could be admitted as a legitimate
exemption from the absolute prohibition of the use of force, - which
this Tribunal does not do — one cannot overlook the fact that NATO not
only has failed to attain its proclaimed goal, the re-establishment of
acceptable conditions for human rights, but has dramatically
deteriorated the already precarious situation. The number of dead, of
wounded and of those robbed of all their possessions was multiplied
through the initiation of the bombing campaign. For this suffering of
the Yugoslavian people, NATO alone bears full responsibility in
accordance with Art. 3, IV Hague Convention concerning the Laws and
Customs of War on Land, 18 October 1907.

2) The bombing of Yugoslavia violated even the NATO Treaty itself. Art.
5 stipulates that NATO's exclusive function is defense, not military
interventions in regions of civil war and interstate strife. This
responsibility lies solely within the framework of the powers granted
the UN Security Council, particularly through Chapter 7 of the UN
Charter. Art. 7 of the NATO Treaty explicitly recognizes this
responsibility of the Security Council. For the prevention or subsequent
pacification of crisis regions, states have a multitude of non-violent
political and economic instruments at their disposal within the
frameworks of the UN and OSCE. They were deliberately circumvented. The
NATO Treaty does not mandate military intervention outside of the
defense of the territorial boundaries of the alliance.

3) Beyond these, particularly the Federal German Republic is guilty of
violating the Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany "4
+ 2 Treaty" of 12 Sept. 1990, in which it committed itself that only
peace "will emanate from German territory". Both governments - the
former Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic -
in proclaiming their unification also declared in Art. 2 that "the
United Germany will never employ any of its weapons except in accordance
with its constitution and the Charter of the United Nations." Through
its substantial participation in the war against Yugoslavia, the FRG
consciously violated these obligations.

4) The Tribunal is also of the opinion that the accusations concerning
the German Government's violations of constitutional (particularly Art.
26 GG) and penal law (§ 80 StGB.) were confirmed. There are also good
grounds for presuming violations of martial law by the German military.
But in accordance with the limitations imposed by its Statutes, this
Tribunal cannot pronounce a verdict concerning these violations. It
rather transmits these questions for subsequent investigations and
Tribunals to the legal systems of all participating nations and appeal
for a continuation of the search for the truth concerning this war.

5) This Tribunal would like to express its apprehension that the war
against Yugoslavia has played a role in the formulation of NATO's new
strategic concept in April 1999, attaining a geostrategic significance
extending far beyond the Balkans and Eurasia to become a model for
future military interventions in the name of a new world order. To
thwart the globalization of these military imperial instruments, it is
absolutely necessary to further examine the prerequisites, objectives
and consequences of the war against Yugoslavia and simultaneously draw
attention to these possible geostrategic perspectives.

6) After hearing extensive testimony of witnesses and experts, the
Tribunal has arrived at the conviction that the methodology of warfare
employed by the defendants also constituted serious and repeated
violations of international humanitarian law, as spelled out in the
Statutes of this Tribunal based upon the Hague and Geneva Conventions.
The Tribunal intensively deliberated the question of whether the
parliamentarians of the Federal German Parliament bare the same
responsibility for the violations of international law in how the war
was waged, as those members of government administrations, who had
ordered the expansion of the bombing from the targeting of purely
military objects to include civilian targets, as provided for in the
so-called 3-phase plan. The members of the Tribunal could not ignore the
fact, that even though the parliamentarians had not directly
participated in deciding how the war would be waged, they took no
initiative to halt the gross violations of international law, as the
consequences of the bombing campaign became evident.

The Tribunal could not be convinced by NATO and its governments'
defense, that the heavy damages of civilian objects were only
unintentional collateral damages. All witnesses and experts confirm that
the hospitals, villages or the RTS radio station were attacked
repeatedly, which, due to the repeatedly praised precision of the bombs
and guided missiles, excludes the element of error. The prosecution
presented statements of high-ranking military and government
representatives, sufficient to prove a strategic plan to destroy civil
structures, in order to pressure the population into opposing, in one
way or another, the Milosevic administration. Solely in the case of the
bombardment of the Dragisa Misovic Hospital Complex in Belgrade (Point 3
of the indictment) could no evidence be presented substantiating
repeated bombing attacks. Other eye witnesses and expert witnesses
furnished evidence to the fact that several hospitals in various cities,
including Belgrade had suffered repeated bombing attacks.

The Tribunal has also arrived at the conclusion, that none of the
civilian targets listed in the indictment or mentioned by the experts
and witnesses housed or were in the vicinity of military establishments.
In only one case, was it reported that a police academy was at a
distance of 6-800 meters, but this hospital in question, was clearly
discernible - even from the air - through the Red Cross symbol.

The proceedings have led to the conclusion that the prosecution's
selection of attacked civilian targets and persons, are only exemplary
for a war strategy that evidently in its third stage, systematically
attempted to implicate the civil population in order to reach its
political goal: the overthrow of the government of President Milosevic.
This war strategy is in clear violation of the central norms of the IV
Geneva Convention concerning the protection of civilians in times of war
(12. Aug. 1949) and its First Additional Protocol to the Geneva
Conventions (8. June 1977) (Art. 5a, b, Statute of the International
European Tribunal).

7) The use of depleted uranium and so called cluster bombs constitutes a
particularly serious violation. According to recent reports, NATO is
said to have dropped approximately 31,000 bombs over Yugoslavia leaving
behind 10 tons of depleted uranium residue. Experience with the United
States' and Great Britain's deployment of this material in Iraq, shows
that this weapon constitutes a time bomb of incalculable health
impairment. Such weapons are inadmissible under terms of the prohibition
of weapons inflicting superfluous injury and unnecessary and long term
suffering as well as the prohibition of weapons of indiscriminate
destruction. The use of these weapons represents a grave violation of
international humanitarian law as prescribed by the First Additional
Protocol to the Geneva Convention (Art. 35. ff. I and Art. 48 ff,;
Additional Protocol I; Geneva Protocol for the Prohibition of Poisonous
Gases and Bacteriological Methods of Warfare (17. June 1925); Art. 5 and
5c of the Statutes of the International European Tribunal). The same
applies to the so-called cluster bombs - who's unexploded remnants left
on the ground have the effect of landmines - are also prohibited. Both
of these weapons fall supplementary under the prohibition of weapons of
indiscriminate destruction and particularly cruel weapons (Art. 51 First
Additional Protocol, Art. 5b, j, k, Statutes of the International
European Tribunal).

8) The aggression carried out against the radio/television station RTS
represents not only a forbidden attack against a civilian installation -
which, as confirmed by witness testimony, was never used for military
communications - but also an infringement upon the freedom of
information. This was one of those targets which, as the bombing
continued, was pushed ever higher on NATO's scale of priorities, not
only in order the Yugoslav viewers and listeners, but also to deprive
the viewers and listeners outside Yugoslavia of the information
broadcast by the Yugoslav government. The question of the objectivity of
the content of this information is, in this respect, of no importance.
In the final analysis the answer would hardly be different when raised
concerning NATO's information and broadcasts from NATO states.

9) The Tribunal is well aware that the examples presented by the
prosecution and those supplemented during the course of these
proceedings, represent only a segment of the war scenario, that evolved
during the 78 days of bombardment, which with growing awareness of its
failure, distanced itself ever further from the norms of humanitarian
international law, until finally placing Might over Right. That NATO
propaganda could seduce so many into passive - even active - support for
this lawless war, is a particularly sad aspect. We cannot avoid
mentioning that several of Yugoslavia's neighboring states, such as
Macedonia, Bulgaria, Rumania, Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina and others by
granting over-flight rights, by placing bases and other facilities at
the disposal of the aggressors, have made themselves guilty of at least
aiding and abetting these violations.

10) These Tribunal proceedings must not be allowed to constitute a
conclusion to efforts to learn the truth about that war against
Yugoslavia. The problems that brought war to the entire region, are far
too serious and remain completely unresolved. It is imperative not only
that the physical and material damage, but also the psychological
wounds, the humiliation, be further researched and unambiguously exposed
to the public. This war must not be permitted to become a model for a
new world order. We must make it absolutely clear to politicians and the
military, that with warfare neither human rights nor civilization can be
saved, that warfare can no longer be an instrument of politics.

Berlin, June 3, 2000

Jury:

Prof. Dr. Norman Paech (Germany) - President

Prof. Dr. Claudia von Werlhof (Austria) - Vice President

Wolfgang Schulz (Germany) - Tribunal Secretary

Dr. Reszö Banyasz (Hungary)

Prof. Dr. Svetomir Skaric (Macedonia)

Paolo Pioppi (Italy)

Dr. Barbara Krygier (Poland)

Lea Launokari (Finland)

Heinz Moll (Switzerland)

Dr. Stanislav Patejdl (Czech Republic)

Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Richter (Germany)

Dr. Wilja Nikolajewitsch Romastschenko (Ukraine)

Laura von Wimmersperg (Germany)



Prosecution:

Ulrich Dost, (Germany)

Pierre Kaldor (France)

Prof. Dr. Velko Valkanoff (Bulgaria)



Defense:

Valentina Strauss (Russia)





Defendants:

1. The following states in their functions as members of both the United
Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (4. April 1949),
represented through their heads of state, their foreign and defense
ministers:

a) the USA,

represented by: William J. Clinton, Madeleine Albright, William Cohen

b) the Federal Republic of Germany,

represented by: Gerhard Schröder, Joseph Fischer, Rudolf Scharping

c) the United Kingdom,

represented by: Tony Blair, Robin Cook, George Robertson

d) France,

represented by: Jacques Chirac, Hubert Védrine, Alain Richard

e) Belgium,

represented by: Jean-Luc Dehaene, B. Derycke, J.-P. Poncelet

f) Portugal,

represented by: A. Guterres, Jaime Jose Matos da Gama, V. Simao

g) Italy,

represented by: D’Alema, Lamberto Dini, C. Scognamiglio

h) Spain,

represented by: J. M. Aznar, Abel Matutes, Eduardo Serra Rexach

i) Canada,

represented by: Jean Chrétien, Lloyd Axworthy, Arthur Eggleton

j) Netherlands,

represented by: Willem Kok, Jozias van Aartsen, Frank de Grave

k) Denmark

represented by: P. N. Rassmussen, Niels Helveg Petersen, Hans Haekkerup

l) Greece

represented by: K. Simitis, George Panpandreou, Akis Tsohatzopoulus

m) Island

represented by: D. Oddson, Halldor Asgrimsson, Gunnar Palson

n) Luxemburg

represented by: J.-C. Juncker, J. Poos, Alex Bodry

o) Norway

represented by: K. M. Bonderik, K. Vollebaek, D.-J. Fjaervoll

p) Poland

represented by: J. Buzek, Bronislaw Geremek, Janusz Onyszkiewicz

q) Czech Republic

represented by: Milos Zeman, Jan Kavan, Vladimir Verchy

r) Turkey

represented by: E. Ecevit, Ismail Cem, H. S. Turk

s) Hungary

represented by Viktor Orban, János Martony, Janos Szabo

2. following members of the German Federal Parliament:

MPs of the Social Democratic Party of Germany

Brigitte Adler, Gerd Andres, Robert Antretter, Rainer Arnold, Hermann
Bachmaier, Ernst Bahr, Doris Barnett, Dr. Hans-Peter Bartels, Eckhardt
Barthel (Berlin), Gerd Bauer, Ingrid Becker-Inglau, Wolfgang Behrendt,
Dr. Axel Berg, Hans Berger, Hans-Werner Bertl, Friedhelm Julius Beucher,
Petra Bierwirth, Rudolf Bindig, Kurt Bodewig, Klaus Brandner, Anni
Brandt-Elsweier, Willi Brase, Tilo Braune, Dr. Eberhard Brecht, Rainer
Brinkmann (Detmold), Bernhard Brinkmann (Hildesheim), Hans-Günter
Bruckmann, Edelgard Buhlmahn, Ursula Burchardt, Dr. Michael Bürsch, Hans
Büttner (Ingolstadt), Hans Martin Bury, Marion Caspers-Merk,
Wolf-Michael Catenhusen, Peter Conradi, Dr. Herta Däubler-Gmelin,
Christel Deichmann, Karl Diller, Peter Dreßen, Rudolf Dreßler, Detlef
Dzembritzki, Dieter Dzewas, Dr. Peter Eckardt, Sebastian Edathy, Ludwig
Eich, Marga Elser, Peter Enders, Gernot Erler, Petra Ernstberger,
Annette Faße, Elke Ferner, Lothar Fischer (Homburg), Gabriele
Fograscher, Iris Follak, Eva Folta, Norbert Formanski, Rainer Fornahl,
Hans Forster, Dagmar Freitag, Peter Friedrich (Altenburg), Lilo
Friedrich (Mettmann), Harald Friese, Anke Fuchs (Köln), Arne Fuhrmann,
Monika Ganseforth, Konrad Gilges, Iris Gleicke, Günter Gloser, Uwe
Göllner, Renate Gradistanac, Günter Graf (Friesoythe), Angelika Graf
(Rosenheim), Dieter Grasedieck, Monika Griefahn, Achim Großmann,
Wolfgang Grotthaus, Karl-Hermann Haack (Extertal), Hans-Joachim Hacker,
Klaus Hagemann, Manfred Hampel, Christel Hanewinckel, Alfred Hartenbach,
Klaus Hasenfratz, Dr. Ingomar Hauchler, Nina Hauer, Hubertus Heil,
Dieter Heistermann, Reinhold Hemker, Frank Hempel, Dr. Barbara
Hendricks, Gustav Herzog, Monika Heubaum, Reinhold Hiller (Lübeck),
Stephan Hilsberg, Gerd Höfer, Jelena Hoffmann (Chemnitz), Walter
Hoffmann (Darmstadt), Iris Hoffmann (Wismar), Frank Hofmann (Volkach),
Ingrid Holzhüter, Erwin Horn, Eike Hovermann, Christel Humme, Lothar
Ibrügger, Wolfgang Ilte, Barbara Imhof, Brunhilde Irber, Gabriele
Iwersen, Renate Jäger, Jann-Peter Janssen, Ilse Janz, Dr. Uwe Jens,
Volker Jung (Düsseldorf), Johannes Kahrs, Ulrich Kasparick, Sabine
Kaspereit, Susanne Kastner, Ernst Kastning, Hans-Peter Kemper, Klaus
Kirschner, Marianne Klappert, Siegrun Klemmer, Hans-Ulrich Klose, Dr.
Hans-Hinrich Knaape, Walter Kolbow, Fritz Rudolf Körper, Karin Kortmann,
Anette Kramme, Nicolette Kressl, Volker Kröning, Thomas Krüger, Angelika
Krüger-Leißner, Horst Kubatschka, Ernst Küchler, Eckart Kuhlwein, Helga
Kühn-Mengel, Ute Kumpf, Dr. Uwe Küster, Werner Labsch, Oskar Lafontaine,
Christine Lambrecht, Brigitte Lange, Christian Lange (Backnang), Detlev
von Larcher, Christine Lehder, Waltraud Lehn, Robert Leidinger, Klaus
Lennartz, Dr. Elke Leonhard, Eckhart Lewering, Götz-Peter Lohmann
(Neubrandenburg), Klaus Lohmann (Witten), Erika Lotz, Dr. Christine
Lucyga, Dieter Maaß (Herne), Winfried Mante, Dirk Manzewski, Tobias
Marhold, Lothar Mark, Dorle Marx, Ulrike Mascher, Christoph Matschie,
Ingrid Matthäus-Maier, Heide Mattischeck, Markus Meckel, Ulrike Mehl,
Ulrike Merten, Herbert Meißner, Angelika Mertens, Dr. Jürgen Meyer
(Ulm), Ursula Mogg, Christoph Moosbauer, Siegmar Mosdorf, Michael Müller
(Düsseldorf), Jutta Müller (Völklingen), Christian Müller (Zittau),
Franz Müntefering, Andrea Nahles, Volker Neumann (Bramsche), Gerhard
Neumann (Gotha), Dr. Edith Niehuis, Dr. Rolf Niese, Dietmar Nietan,
Günter Oesinghaus, Eckhard Ohl, Leyla Onur, Manfred Opel, Holger Ortel,
Adolf Ostertag, Kurt Palis, Albrecht Papenroth, Dr. Willfried Penner,
Dr. Martin Pfaff, Georg Pfannenstein, Johannes Pflug, Dr. Eckhart Pick
,Joachim Poß, Rudolf Purps, Hermann Rappe (Hildesheim), Karin
Rehbock-Zureich, Margot von Renesse, Bernd Reuter, Dr. Edelbert Richter,
Reinhold Robbe, Dr. Ernst Dieter Rossmann, Michael Roth (Heringen),
Birgit Roth (Speyer), Gerhard Rübenkönig, Thomas Sauer, Dr. Hansjörg
Schäfer, Gudrun Schaich-Walch, Dieter Schanz, Rudolf Scharping, Bernd
Scheelen, Dr. Hermann Scheer, Siegfried Scheffler, Horst Schild, Otto
Schily, Dieter Schloten, Günter Schluckebier, Horst Schmidbauer
(Nürnberg), Ulla Schmidt (Aachen), Silvia Schmidt (Eisleben), Dagmar
Schmidt (Meschede), Wilhelm Schmidt (Salzgitter), Regina Schmidt-Zadel,
Heinz Schmitt (Berg), Carsten Schneider, Dr. Emil Schnell, Walter
Schöler, Olaf Scholz, Karsten Schönfeld, Fritz Schösser, Ottmar
Schreiner, Gerhard Schröder, Gisela Schröter, Dr. Mathias Schubert,
Richard Schuhmann (Delitzsch), Brigitte Schulte (Hameln), Reinhard
Schultz (Everswinkel), Volkmar Schultz (Köln), Ilse Schumann, Ewald
Schurer, Dr. R. Werner Schuster, Dietmar Schütz (Oldenburg), Dr.
Angelica Schwall-Düren, Ernst Schwanhold, Rolf Schwanitz, Bodo
Seidenthal, Lisa Seuster, Erika Simm, Johannes Singer, Dr. Cornelie
Sonntag-Wolgast, Wieland Sorge, Wolfgang Spanier, Dr. Margrit Spielmann,
Jörg-Otto Spiller, Dr. Ditmar Staffelt, Antje-Marie Stehen, Ludwig
Stiegler, Rolf Stöckel, Rita Streb-Hesse, Dr. Peter Struck, Joachim
Stünker, Joachim Tappe, Jörg Tauss, Dr. Bodo Teichmann, Jella Teuchner,
Dr. Gerald Thalheim, Wolfgang Thierse, Franz Thönnes, Uta Titze-Stecher,
Adelheid Tröscher, Hans-Eberhard Urbaniak, Rüdiger Veit, Siegfried
Vergin, Günter Verheugen, Karsten D. Voigt (Frankfurt), Simone Violka,
Ute Vogt (Pforzheim), Hans Georg Wagner, Hedi Wegener, Dr. Konstanze
Wegner, Wolfgang Weiermann, Reinhard Weis (Stendal), Matthias Weisheit,
Gunter Weißgerber, Gert Weisskirchen (Wiesloch), Dr. Ernst Ulrich von
Weizsäcker, Hans-Joachim Welt, Dr. Rainer Wend, Hildegard Wester, Lydia
Westrich, Inge Wettig-Danielmeier, Dr. Margrit Wetzel, Dr. Norbert
Wieczorek, Helmut Wieczorek (Duisburg), Jürgen Wieczorek (Leipzig),
Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, Dieter Wiefelspütz, Heino Wiese (Hannover),
Klaus Wiesehügel, Brigitte Wimmer (Karlsruhe), Engelbert Wistuba,
Barbara Wittig, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, Verena Wohlleben, Hanna Wolf
(München), Waltraud Wolff (Zielitz), Heidemarie Wright, Uta Zapf, Dr.
Christoph Zöpel, Peter Zumkley,

MPs of the Christian Democratic Union and Christian Social Union

Ulrich Adam, Ilse Aigner, Peter Altmaier, Anneliese Augustin, Jürgen
Augustinowitz, Dietrich Austermann, Franz Peter Basten, Norbert Barthle,
Dr. Wolf Bauer, Günter Baumann, Brigitte Baumeister, Meinrad Belle, Dr.
Sabine Bergmann-Pohl, Otto Bernhardt, Hans-Dirk Bierling, Dr.
Joseph-Theodor Blank, Renate Blank, Dr. Heribert Blens, Peter Bleser,
Dr. Norbert Blüm, Friedrich Bohl, Dr. Maria Böhmer, Sylvia Bonitz,
Jochen Borchert, Wolfgang Börnsen (Bönstrup), Wolfgang Bosbach, Dr.
Wolfgang Bötsch, Klaus Brähmig, Dr. Ralf Brauksiepe, Paul Breuer, Georg
Brunnhuber, Klaus Bühler (Bruchsal), Hartmut Büttner (Schönebeck),
Dankward Buwitt, Peter Harry Carstensen (Nordstrand), Cajus Caesar, Leo
Dautzenberg, Wolfgang Dehnel, Hubert Deittert, Gertrud Dempwolf, Albert
Deß, Renate Diemers, Wilhelm Dietzel, Thomas Dörflinger, Werner
Dörflinger, Marie-Luise Dött, Dr. Alfred Dregger, Maria Eichhorn,
Wolfgang Engelmann, Rainer Eppelmann, Anke Eymer, Ilse Falk, Dr. Hans
Georg Faust, IJochen Feilcke, Ulf Fink, Ingrid Fischbach, Axel Fischer
(Karlsruhe-Land), Dirk Fischer (Hamburg), Leni Fischer (Unna), Herbert
Frankenhauser, Dr. Gerhard Friedrich (Erlangen), Dr. Hans-Peter
Friedrich (Naila), Erich G. Fritz, Jochen-Konrad Fromme, Hans-Joachim
Fuchtel, Dr. Jürgen Gehb, Norbert Geis, Dr. Heiner Geißler, Georg
Girisch, Michael Glos, Wilma Glücklich, Dr. Reinhard Göhner, Peter Götz,
Dr. Wolfgang Götzer, Joachim Gres, Kurt-Dieter Grill, Hermann Gröhe,
Claus-Peter Grotz, Manfred Grund, Horst Günther (Duisburg), Carl-Detlev
Freiherr von Hammerstein, Gottfried Haschke (Großhennersdorf), Gerda
Hasselfeldt, Norbert Hauser (Bonn), Hansgeorg Hauser (Rednitzhembach),
Otto Hauser (Esslingen), Klaus-Jürgen Hedrich, Helmut Heiderich, Ursula
Heinen, Manfred Heise, Siegfried Helias, Dr. Renate Hellwig, Hans Jochen
Henke, Ernst Hinsken, Peter Hintze, Klaus Hofbauer, Martin Hohmann,
Klaus Holetschek, Josef Hollerith, Elke Holzapfel, Dr. Karl-Heinz
Hornhues, Siegfried Hornung, Joachim Hörster, Hubert Hüppe, Peter
Jacoby, Susanne Jaffke, Georg Janovsky, Helmut Jawurek, Dr. Dionys
Jobst, Dr.-Ing. Rainer Jork, Michael Jung (Limburg), Ulrich Junghanns,
Dr. Egon Jüttner, Dr. Harald Kahl, Bartholomäus Kalb, Steffen Kampeter,
Dr. Dietmar Kansy, Manfred Kanther, Irmgard Karwatzki, Volker Kauder,
Eckart von Klaeden, Ulrich Klinkert, Dr. Helmut Kohl, Hans-Ulrich Köhler
(Hainspitz), Manfred Kolbe, Norbert Königshofen, Eva-Maria Kors, Hartmut
Koschyk, Manfred Koslowski, Thomas Kossendey, Annegret
Kramp-Karrenbauer, Rudolf Kraus, Wolfgang Krause (Dessau), Andreas
Krautscheid, Arnulf Kriedner, Dr. Martina Krogmann, Dr. Paul Krüger, Dr.
Hermann Kues, Werner Kuhn, Karl Lamers, Dr. Karl A. Lamers (Heidelberg),
Dr. Norbert Lammert, Helmut Johannes Lamp, Armin Laschet, Herbert
Lattmann, Dr. Paul Laufs, Karl-Josef Laumann, Vera Lengsfeld, Werner
Lensing, Peter Letzgus, Ursula Lietz, Editha Limbach, Walter Link
(Diepholz), Eduard Lintner, Dr. Klaus Lippold (Offenbach), Dr. Manfred
Lischewski, Wolfgang Lohmann (Lüdenscheid), Julius Louven, Sigrun
Löwisch, Heinrich Lummer, Dr. Michael Luther, Erich Maaß
(Wilhelmshaven), Dr. Dietrich Mahlo, Erwin Marschewski, Günter Marten,
Dr. Martin Mayer (Siegertsbrunn), Wolfgang Meckelburg, Rudolf Meinl, Dr.
Michael Meister, Dr. Angela Merkel, Friedrich Merz, Rudolf Meyer
(Winsen), Hans Michelbach, Meinolf Michels, Dr. Gerd Müller, Bernward
Müller (Jena), Elmar Müller (Kirchheim), Engelbert Nelle, Bernd Neumann
(Bremen), Johannes Nitsch, Claudia Nolte, Günter Nooke, Franz Obermeier,
Dr. Rolf Olderog, Friedhelm Ost, Eduard Oswald, Norbert Otto (Erfurt),
Dr. Gerhard Päselt, Dr. Peter Paziorek, Hans-Wilhelm Pesch, Ulrich
Petzold, Anton Pfeifer, Dr. Friedbert Pflüger, Beatrix Philipp, Dr.
Winfried Pinger, Ronald Pofalla, Dr. Hermann Pohler, Ruprecht Polenz,
Marlies Pretzlaff, Dr. Albert Probst, Dr. Bernd Protzner, Dieter
Pützhofen, Hans Raidel, Dr. Peter Ramsauer, Peter Rauen, Otto
Regenspurger, Christa Reichard (Dresden), Klaus Dieter Reichardt
(Mannheim), Erika Reinhardt, Hans-Peter Repnik, Dr. Norbert Rieder,
Klaus Riegert, Dr. Heinz Riesenhuber, Franz Romer, Hannelore Rönsch
(Wiesbaden), Heinrich-Wilhelm Ronsöhr, Dr. Klaus Rose, Kurt Rossmanith,
Adolf Roth (Gießen), Norbert Röttgen, Dr. Christian Ruck, Volker Rühe,
Dr. Jürgen Rüttgers, Roland Sauer (Stuttgart), Anita Schäfer, Ortrun
Schätzle, Dr. Wolfgang Schäuble, Hartmut Schauerte, Norbert Schindler,
Ulrich Schmalz, Heinz Schemken, Karl-Heinz Scherhag, Gerhard Scheu,
Dietmar Schlee, Bernd Schmidbauer, Andreas Schmidt (Mühlheim), Christian
Schmidt (Fürth), Dr.-Ing. Joachim Schmidt (Halsbrücke), Hans-Otto
Schmiedeberg, Michael von Schmude, Birgit Schnieber-Jastram, Dr. Andreas
Schockenhoff, Dr. Rupert Scholz, Reinhard Freiherr von Schorlemer, Dr.
Erika Schuchardt, Wolfgang Schulhoff, Dr. Dieter Schulte (Schwäbisch
Gmünd), Gerhard Schulz (Leipzig), Frederik Schulze (Sangershausen),
Diethard W. Schütze (Berlin), Clemens Schwalbe, Dr. Christian
Schwarz-Schilling, Wilhelm Josef Sebastian, Horst Seehofer, Marion Seib,
Heinz Seiffert, Rudolf Seiters, Johannes Selle, Bernd Siebert, Werner
Siemann, Jürgen Sikora, Johannes Singhammer, Bärbel Sothmann, Margarete
Späte, Carl-Dieter Spranger, Wolfgang Steiger, Erika Steinbach, Dr.
Wolfgang Freiherr von Stetten, Dr. Gerhard Stoltenberg, Andreas Storm,
Dorothea Störr-Ritter, Max Straubinger, Matthäus Strebl, Thomas Strobl,
Michael Stübgen, Egon Susset, Dr. Rita Süssmuth, Dr. Susanne Tiemann,
Gottfried Tröger, Dr. Klaus-Dieter Uelhoff, Dr. Hans-Peter Uh,l Gunnar
Uldall, Arnold Vaatz, Angelika Volquartz, Andrea Voßhoff, Dr. Horst
Waffenschmidt, Dr. Theodor Waigel, Alois Graf von Waldburg-Zeil, Peter
Weiß (Emmendingen), Gerald Weiß (Groß-Gerau), Kersten Wetzel, Annette
Widmann-Mauz, Heinz Wiese (Ehingen), Hans-Otto Wilhelm (Mainz),
Klaus-Peter Willsch, Matthias Wissmann, Werner Wittlich, Dr. Fritz
Wittmann, Dagmar Wöhrl, Elke Wülfing, Peter Kurt Würzbach, Cornelia
Yzer, Wolfgang Zeitlmann, Benno Zierer, Wolfgang Zöller,

MPs of the Alliance 90/ The Greens

Elisabeth Altmann (Pommelsbrunn), Marieluise Beck (Bremen), Volker Beck
(Köln), Angelika Beer, Matthias Berninger, Ekin Deligöz, Dr. Thea
Dückert, Franziska Eichstädt-Bohlig, Dr. Uschi Eid, Hans-Josef Fell,
Andrea Fischer (Berlin), Joseph Fischer (Frankfurt), Katrin
Göring-Eckardt, Rita Grießhaber, Winfried Hermann, Antje Hermenau,
Kristin Heyne, Uli Höfken, Ulrike Höfken, Michaele Hustedt, Dr. Manuel
Kiper, Dr. Angelika Köster-Loßack, Dr. Helmut Lippelt, Dr. Reinhard
Loske, Oswald Metzger, Klaus Wolfgang Müller (Kiel), Kerstin Müller
(Köln), Winfried Nachtwei, Christa Nickels, Egbert Nitsch (Rendsburg),
Cem Özdemir, Gerd Poppe, Simone Probst, Christine Scheel, Rezzo
Schlauch, Albert Schmidt (Hitzhofen), Wolfgang Schmitt (Langenfeld),
Waltraud Schoppe, Werner Schulz (Leipzig), Christian Sterzing, Jürgen
Trittin, Dr. Antje Vollmer, Ludger Volmer, Sylvia Ingeborg Voß, Helmut
Wilhelm (Amberg), Margareta Wolf (Frankfurt),

MPs of the Free Democratic Party

Ina Albowitz, Dr. Gisela Babel, Hildebrecht Braun (Augsburg), Rainer
Brüderle, Ernst Burgbacher, Jörg van Essen, Dr. Olaf Feldmann, Ulrike
Flach, Paul K. Friedhoff, Horst Friedrich (Bayreuth), Rainer Funke, Dr.
Wolfgang Gerhardt, Hans-Michael Goldmann, Dr. Karlheinz Guttmacher,
Klaus Haupt, Dr. Helmut Haussmann, Ulrich Heinrich, Walter Hirche,
Birgit Homburger, Dr. Werner Hoyer, Ulrich Irmer, Dr. Klaus Kinkel,
Detlef Kleinert (Hannover), Roland Kohn, Dr. Heinrich Kolb, Jürgen
Koppelin, Dr.-Ing. Karl-Hans Laermann, Ina Lenke, Uwe Lühr, Jürgen W.
Möllemann, Dirk Niebel, Günther Friedrich Nolting, Hans-Joachim Otto
(Frankfurt), Detlef Parr, Lisa Peters, Cornelia Pieper, Dr. Günter
Rexrodt, Dr. Klaus Röhl, Dr. Edzard Schmidt-Jortzig, Gerhard Schüßler,
Dr. Irmgard Schwaetzer, Marita Sehn, Dr. Hermann Otto Solms, Carl-Ludwig
Thiele, Dr. Dieter Thomae, Jürgen Türk, Dr. Wolfgang Weng (Gerlingen),
Dr. Guido Westerwelle;

3. the commanding functionaries of NATO,

Secretary General, Javier Solana, Supreme Allied Commander Europe, Gen.
Wesley K. Clark, Commander Allied Air Forces, Lt. Gen. Michael C. Short
and the Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, Gen. Klaus Naumann;

4. The commanding functionaries of the German militar (Bundeswehr),

Air Force Inspector Gen. Rolf Portz and the deployed air squadron
commander, Col. Jochen Both und Col. Peter Schelzig.

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

>Here is the English language version of my report on the Berlin Tribunal,
>for ZNet.
>Diana.
>
>THE BERLIN TRIBUNAL: MORE SERIOUS THAN THE HAGUE
>
> Last June 3, two tribunals reached opposite conclusions concerning
>accusations of war crimes brought against NATO for its 1999 bombing
>campaign against Yugoslavia. In The Hague, Carla Del Ponte, chief
>prosecutor at the "International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia"
>(ICTY), created by the UN Security Council at the initiative of the United
>States, announced that she saw no grounds even to open an inquiry. NATO
>made "some mistakes", she acknowledged. But Ms Del Ponte was "very
>satisfied" that there had been no deliberate targeting of civilians during
>NATO's bombing campaign.
> No wonder. Indicting NATO would have meant biting the hand that
>feeds this Tribunal, whose former presiding judge Gabrielle Kirk McDonald
>once described Madeleine Albright as its "mother". It was hardly
>conceivable that the ICTY would allow itself to get too interested in
>crimes committed by the NATO powers who provide it with funding, equipment
>and investigators... not to mention its basic political agenda, which is to
>justify the diplomatic isolation of Serbian leaders by labeling them as
>"indicted war criminals".
> In Berlin, on the same day, another Tribunal concluded a far more
>serious examination of the charges against NATO. This unofficial "European
>Tribunal" was genuinely independent of all the governments involved in the
>1999 war. In contrast to The Hague, the conclusions were based on several
>public hearings (already published in two illustrated volumes*), precise
>references to international law, detailed presentation and analysis of the
>relevant facts and finally the direct testimony of six victims who came
>from Yugoslavia to recount their experience as civilian targets under the
>78-day rain of NATO bombs and missiles.
> The Berlin Tribunal was presided by a distinguished Hamburg
>University professor of international law, Dr. Norman Paech, who insisted
>that the verdict would be based on strictly legal criteria. And indeed the
>deliberations of this European Tribunal in Berlin, supported by over sixty
>peace, civic and human rights groups, stuck very strictly to the subject of
>the NATO war against Yugoslavia, to the exclusion of other political issues
>(in contrast to the similar Tribunal organized by the International Action
>Center in New York on June 10, which chose to link issues). Berlin's
>proximity to Eastern Europe was reflected in the composition of the panel
>of jurists, who had come from Austria, Italy, Hungary, Poland, Belarus, the
>Czech Republic, Russia and Macedonia.
> The long and detailed indictment, presented by lawyer Ulrich Dost,
>was divided into two main sections: first, responsibility for deliberately
>preparing the war against Yugoslavia to the exclusion of peaceful
>negotiated solutions to the Kosovo problem, and second, violations of
>international law in the conduct of the war. The former East German
>ambassador to Belgrade, Ralph Hartmann, a genuine expert on the region,
>presented a recapitulation of key events and statements that clearly
>demonstrated the major responsibility of the Federal Republic of Germany in
>preparing the war, both by actively encouraging armed ethnic Albanian
>separatists and by pushing other NATO allies toward military intervention.
> Retired Bundeswehr General Heinz Loquai, who served as German
>military observer at the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe
>(OSCE) headquarters in Vienna, contributed a damning report on how the
>German Defense Ministry itself invented "Operation Horseshoe", the supposed
>Serbian plan to expel the Albanian population from Kosovo, which was
>"revealed" by Defense Minister Scharping in April 1999 to justify the
>bombing as it began to lose public support. Hartmann and Loquai are among
>the authors of a growing number of German books which are devastating in
>their refutation of NATO claims. Indeed, if certain German media and the
>German government bear major international responsibility for initiating
>the violent disintegration of Yugoslavia in 1991, by the same token German
>critics of the process are perhaps the best informed and most thorough in
>their denunciations. Nobody understands the German right better than the
>German left.
> Such a "people's tribunal", like the Russell Tribunal formed to
>condemn the U.S. war in Vietnam, obviously has no power to carry out a
>sentence. Its verdict is purely moral, and serves to point up two things:
>the existence of flagrant violations of the law, and the absence of any
>existing institutional recourse. It does not settle but rather raises a
>number of questions.
> The verdict, as expected, found the top officials of NATO and its
>member states guilty of having committed an aggression in violation of all
>the relevant treaties and international agreements, from the United Nations
>Charter to the NATO Treaty itself, as well as numerous conventions. Far
>from being legitimately "humanitarian", NATO's intervention ignored and
>blocked Belgrade's various compromise offers and dramatically worsened an
>already difficult situation, causing a sharp increase in the number of
>victims.
> Such a verdict is similar to the finding of a "truth commission",
>and shows at least that a prima facie case exists against NATO. A careful
>examination of the Berlin results, as well as those of other "people's
>tribunals", is enough to expose the uselessness of Ms Del Ponte's ICTY when
>it comes to establishing the facts, let alone justice.
> The Berlin Tribunal pinpointed an important treaty violation
>scarcely mentioned in other NATO countries: by sending its warplanes to
>bomb Yugoslavia, the Federal Republic of German was in flagrant violation
>of the so-called "4 plus 2" treaty of 1990 by which Moscow consented to the
>unification of the two German states. By that Treaty, the German government
>undertook a solemn commitment that "never again would war emanate from
>German territory" and that Germany's military engagements would remain
>strictly within the norms of the United Nations Charter.
> The Berlin Tribunal condemned not only Chancellor Gerhard
>Schroeder, defense minister Rudolf Scharping and foreign minister Joschka
>Fischer, but also all the members of the Bundestag who had voted in favor
>of a military engagement that clearly violated the Federal Republic's
>international engagements.
> The Tribunal expressed concern at the role played by the war
>against Yugoslavia in the formulation of NATO's new "strategic concept",
>whose significance "extends far beyond the Balkans and across Eurasia as a
>model for a future world military order". To prevent such military
>globalization, the Tribunal said it was imperative to pursue examination of
>the preconditions, objectives and consequences of the war against
>Yugoslavia and to draw attention to its eventual geostrategic implications.
> On the matter of civilian targets, the Berlin Tribunal cited
>statements from various NATO officials and military officers proving that
>the choice of civilian targets was indeed part of the "third stage" of a
>strategy aimed at putting pressure on the civilian population to rise up
>against its own government, a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions.
>Moreover, the use of such weapons as depleted uranium and cluster bombs
>clearly endangered the civilian population, both during and after the
>actual bombing, and constituted a particularly grave violation of
>international humanitarian law.
> About 600 people attended the two-day proceedings in the handsome
>Protestant Church of the Holy Cross in the Kreuzberg section of Berlin,
>whose pastor Jürgen Quandt in his welcoming speech rejected the concept of
>"just" war.
> The Berlin Tribunal condemned the deliberate destruction of the
>Belgrade studios of Radio Television Serbia (RTS) not only as an attack
>against a civilian installation, but also as an assault on freedom of
>information. The purpose was to deprive not only the Yugoslavs but also
>audiences around the world of the pictures and information concerning the
>bombing broadcast by RTS. Whether or not that information was "objective"
>was irrelevant, the verdict stated, since the same could be said of
>information broadcast by NATO media.
> This condemnation of the bombing of RTS was echoed a few days later
>by Amnesty International which, accusing NATO of war crimes, specifically
>cited the deliberate bombing of the Belgrade television studies, which
>killed 16 employees -- a flagrant crime which failed to interest Ms Del
>Ponte.
> In conclusion, the Tribunal presided by Dr. Paech emphasized the
>need to pursue the search for truth. The underlying problems in the Balkans
>remain serious and unresolved. "It is imperative for the public to be
>informed not only of the physical and material damage, but also of the
>psychological wounds inflicted ... This war must not be the model for a new
>world order. We must finally make it clear to politicians and the military
>that neither human rights nor civilization are to be saved by war, that war
>must no longer be used as a political instrument."
>
>* The two volumes are published by Schkeuditzer Buchverlag,
>Badeweg 1, 04435 Schkeuditz, Federal Republic of Germany.
>Wolfgang Richter, Elmar Schmaehling, Eckart Spoo (editors),
>(1) _Die Wahrheit über den NATO-Krieg gegen Jugoslawien_.
>(2) _Die deutsche Verantwortung für den NATO-Krieg gegen Jugoslawien_.
>
> Diana Johnstone, 19 June 2000

---

>Hallo Leute,
>
>Es ist da! Unser "Message Board" für http://nato-tribunal.de ist jetzt
>eingebaut worden. Also, ganz unten an der "Startseite" oder "Logoseite"
>clicked man
>einfach auf die Ikone "VISIT OUR MESSAGE BOARD". Man kommt auch direkt
>ans Message Board durch die URL:
>http://boardserver.mycomputer.com/list.html?u=jost&f=1
>
>Also, schreibt was rein! Und laß die anderen davon wissen...
>
>Alles Gute,
>
>Alant Jost
>
>
>
>Hello People,
>
>The Message Board for our website http://nato-tribunal.de is installed.
>Since the site is in the languages German, English and French, postings
>in these languages are of course welcomed, but why not post in whatever
>language you want?
>
>Just click on the icon "VISIT OUR MESSAGE BOARD" at the bottom of the
>website page and start writing! Or you can enter the Message board
>directly at: http://boardserver.mycomputer.com/list.html?u=jost&f=1
>
>
>Enjoy the message board, and let the discussions begin.
>
>Alant Jost


Bericht vom Berliner und New Yorker Tribunal


New York
Am 10. Juni fand vor über 500 Zuhörern in New York das Internationale
Tribunal zu den USA/NATO-Kriegsverbrechen gegen Jugoslawien statt. Rund
30
Zeugen aus 14 Ländern sagten vor dem Richtergremium aus. Zunächst wurde
un<br/><br/>(Message over 64 KB, truncated)

POZIV NA ANTI-IMPERIJALISTICKI LETNJI KAMP 2000 god.

od 31. jula do 6. avgusta , Italija

"Ne" globalizaciji!

Od Seattle do San Vicente Caguan –
otpor protiv imperijuma nepravde koraca napred!

Tok istorije podvrgnut je zastrašujucem ubrzavanju. Kapitalisticke
države su
sa globalizacijom i pod kontrolom SAD (sa NATO-om na celu) ojacale
odnose
izmedu sebe. Njima je uspelo da svojim neprijateljima izdele
uništavajuce
udarce. S tim je ojacala i protivrecnost i stvorile su se nove
nesaglasnosti. Sve više što se kapitalizam širi i produktivne snage se
razvijaju, sve manje kapitalizmu uspeva da zadovolji potrebe covecanstva
i
sve više uništava osnov civilizacije. Dok na periferiji
imperijalistickih
centara narod gladuje vec decenijama, širi se i u "bogatim" zemljama
stara i
nova beda. Eksploatacija i otudivanje, znaci efekti potrošackog modela
neoliberalizma, rastu. Kapitalizam i imperijalizam su pobedili, ali naš
svet
nezna više šta je mir - nestabilnost je zavladala. Cak ni oni zlocinci
onih
vlada u SAD i zapadnoj Evropi neznaju kuda nas vode.

Pobuna u Seattle probudila je citav zapad. Ta pobuna predkaziva, iako je
imala svoja ogranicavanja, jednu prekretnu tacku. "Belle epoque" je
došao
kraj, zaopcaravanje koje nas je cinilo da verujemo da je ovaj sistem
najbolji od svih sistema, to zaopcaravanje, s kim je kapitalizam
zaslepljavao mase, se ruši. Polako, ali ipak, izlazimo iz tame: period
zanosnog mira je prošao, duh pobune kruži opet ne samo u
polu-kolonijalnim
zemljama, nego i u srcu imperijalizma. Dok je predanjski radnicki pokret
–
pogotovo na zapadu – pao u stanje paralize, pojavile su se snage, koje
se
zalažu za spas i dobrobit citavog covecanstva. Njihov motor je
instinktivan,
izvoran anti-kapitalizam, iako te snage još nemaju jedinstvenu
formaciju.

Kako da odgovorimo na globalizaciju, na ovu novu formu kolonijalizma,
koja
uništava najsiromašnije zemlje? Kako da odgovorimo na politicko-kulturni
amerikanizam, koji guši Evropu i Japan? Kako da iskoristimo
medu-imperijalisticke protivrecnosti? Kako da sprecimo Ešelon, špijunski
sistem globalnog totalitarizma informisanja, koji sprecava i potiskuje
individualnu slobodu i politicka i demokratska osnovna prava? Kako da
ujedinimo borbu masa u polu-kolonijalnim zemljama sa pobunama u srcu
imperijalistickih zemalja? Kako da spojimo klasnu borbu radnika sa
borbom za
odbranu prirodne okoline, sa odbranom za nauku i informacije od
zloupotrebe
kapitalizma? Kakav odgovor da damo na problem migracije, rasizma i
neo-fašizma? Kako da suocimo situaciju, da postoju narodni pokreti koji
se
boru protiv imperijalisticke globalizacije, ali koji su ujedno
religiozno
orientisani? Kako dati kaosu razum? Kako pretvoriti pobunu u veliki
revolucionarni pokret?

Moramo se pripremiti, moramo obezbediti i omoguciti borbu, da bi
uklonili
vladavinu svetskog kapitalizma. Mi pozivamo sve anti-imperijaliste, koji
su
u prethodnim decenijama davali junacki otpor, da brane jedinstvo koje su
stekli i da sa nama urade jedan korak napred.

U tim smislu organizujemo u prvoj nedelji u avgustu u Italiji jedan
anti-imperijalisticki kamp, jedan veliki medunarodni susret, koji bi
trebao
da nam omoguci zajedno da zakljucimo bilans, da odlucimo buduci pravac
naše
politike i da utvrdimo perspektivu zajednickog fronta.

Na kampu cu se održati forumi, koji cu se baviti sa problemima i
dogadajima
anti-imperijalisticke borbe uz nekoliko vecih tema, gde cu govoriti
cuveni
gosti:

- Pobuna u Seattle. Šta znaci globalizacija i kako možemo da se
borimo
protiv nje.
- Kolumbija: Narodnooslobodilacka borba i podizanje vlasti naroda.
- Jugoslavija: zlocin NATO-a nesme ostati nekažnjen.
- Ešelon: kako spreciti totalitarizam informisanja kroz SAD i NSA?
- Politicki zatvorenici
- Protiv kapitalistickog "razvitka": kako odbraniti ekološki
sistem, koji je
osnova civilizacije
- Islam i Novi svetski poredak

I druge.


Anti-imperijalisticki kamp podržavaju sledece organizacije:

Marksisticka Lenjinisticka Komunisticka Partija (Brazil)
Medunarodni Forum (Danska)
Federacija Studenata Venecuele
BAJAN (Filipine)
Sindikat Volta Redonda (Brazil)
Vernost prema coveku i zemlji (Palestina/Libanon)
Revolucionarna Komunisticka Liga (Tiringija, Nemacka)
Crvena Akcija (Duisburg, Nemacka)
Radnicki Pokret (Jugoslavija)
Narodnooslobodilacki Front (Šri Lanka)
Irska Republikanska Socijalisticka Partija
Savez Anti-imperijalista, Komunista i Socijalista (Nemacka)
Pokret Slobodna Otadžbina (Paraguaj)
Biskajski Komunisti
Redskin-Otpor Bogota (Kolumbija)
Radnicka Stranka Jugoslavije
Socijalisticka Narodna Stranka Jugoslavije
SKJ – Komunisticka Partija Srbije
SKJ – Komunisti Crne Gore
Nezavisni Front Francisco Villa (Meksiko)
Demokratska Levica Naroda (Meksiko)
Medunarodni Lenjinisticki Pokret
Ruski politicki savez "Radnik"
Pokret Nova Levica (Rusija)
Radnicki Sindikat (Perm, Rusija)
Komunisticka Izgradnja (Minhen, Nemacka)
Komunisticka Partija Naroda Španije
Ruska Partija Komunista
Sindikat "Radnicka Pomoc" (El Salvador)
CLAJADEP – Koordinacija pravnika i naucnika za demokratsku alternativu
naroda u Brazilu
Slobodni centar za pozorište i umetnost (Meksiko)
Sardinia Nazione
Savez za politicke zatvorenike (Španija)
Grupa Mukadele (Nemacka)
Komunisticka Partija Pakistan
Gerila Fadaee Naroda Irana
Afrikanske Oslobodilacke Snage (Mauricius)
Narodni Pokret (Palestina/Libanon)
Revolucionarni Narodnooslobodilacki Front (Turska)
Koordinacija protiv institucionalizacije represije (Argentina)
Elias Letelier – pisac, bivši oficir Sandinisticke Nacionalne
Oslobodilacke
Armije (Nikaragua)
Nicky Hager – strucnjak za Ešelon sistem, elektronski nadzor i špijunažu
(Novi Zeland)



Medunarodni Lenjinisticki Pokret

Bec/Rim,
U Julu 2000 god.


International Antiimperialist Summercamp
No to Globalisation!

>From Seattle to San Vicente Caguán —
The Revolt against the Dominion of Injustice is Advancing!

Assisi, Italy, 30th Juli-6th August
http://summercamp.cjb.net

Europe

* Grazia Francescato, president of the Italian Green Party
* Sard Nation
* Father Jean Marie Benjamin; French popular Priest, activist against
globalisation, responsible for cultural affairs at the UNICEF
* Paul Emile Dupret; adviser for the United European Left in the
European
Parliament
* Communist Party of the Peoples of Spain
* Asociation of Relatives and Friends of Political Prisoners (Spain)
Basque Communists
* Oleg Shein (Russia); Member of the State Duma and independent trade
union
leader
* Russian Party of Communists
* Russian political union "Worker"
* Movement New Left (Russia)
* Worker’s Union Perm (Russia)
* Co-ordination Committee of the Workers Movement (Ucraine)
* Communist Construction (Munich, Germany)
* Workers Movement Kragujevac (Yugoslavia)
* Worker’s Party of Yugoslavia
* Socialist People’s Party (Yugoslavia)
* League of Communists of Yugoslavia – Communist Party of Serbia
* League of Communists of Yugoslavia – Communists of Montenegro
* Red Action (Duisburg, Germany)
* Revolutionary Communist League (Thuringia, Germany)
* Group Mücadele
* League of Anti-imperialists, Communists and Socialists (Germany)
* Irish Republican Socialist Party
* Revolutionary People’s Liberation Front (Turkey)
* International Leninist Current
* International Forum (Denmark)

Latin America

* Latinamerican Coordination of Jurists, Social Scientists and Marginal
Groups for a Democratic and Popular Alternative (Brasil)
* Marxist Leninist Communist Party (Brasil)
* Trade Union of Public Empoyed (Volta Redonda, Brasil)
* Independent Popular Front Francisco Villa (Mexico)
* Democratic Popular Left (Mexico)
* Free Center for Artist and Theatre Experimentation (Mexico)
* Federation of University Students of Venezuela
* Movement Free Fatherland (Paraguay)
* Coordination against Police and Institutional Repression (Argentine)
* Elías Letelier, poet from Chile and ex-official of the Sandinista
Liberation Army
* Movement of the Revolutionary Left (Chile)
* People’s and Indigenous Network Chile
* Redskin Resistance (Bogota, Colombia)
* Labor Worker’s Help (El Salvador/USA)
* Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo (Argentine)
* Support Group to Free Lori Berenson (Peru)
* Liberation Party (Argentine)
* General Council of Strike (UNAM, Mexico)
* Emancipation Project, Popular Junta of Buenos Aires for the Bolivarian
Congress of Latin America and the Caribbean Countries (Argentine)

North America

* International Action Center

Middle East

* Loyalty for Men and Earth (Palestine/Lebanon)
* Movement of Commoners (Libanon)
* Revolutionary Patriotic Organisation Bethnarin (Assyria)
* Revolutionary People's Liberation Front (DHKC, Turkey/Kurdistan)

Africa

* African Liberation Forces of Mauretania
* All-African Peoples’ Revolutionary Party (Ghana)
* African Party for Democracy and Socialism (Senegal)

Australasia

* Nicky Hager (New Zealand); expert for Echelon and electronic
surveillance-systems


For further information and inscription:


***************************************
International Leninist Current (ILC)
Corriente Leninista Internacional (CLI)
PF 23, A-1040 Wien, Austria
Tel & Fax +43 1 504 00 10
ilc@...
www.comports.com/ilc
summercamp.cjb.net





--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------