Informazione
LE INCREDIBILI AVVENTURE DEL SIGNOR KOUCHNER (4)
Il capo della missione civile dell'ONU (UNMIK) in Kosmet Bernard
Kouchner e' molto tollerante verso chi commette "errori" nel processo
inarrestabile (?) di democratizzazione del suo protettorato (leggi: le
bande di assassini finanziati, addestrati ed appoggiati dalla NATO), ma
non altrettanto verso chi la pensa diversamente da lui.
Quando alla conferenza stampa tenutasi nel primo anniversario della
occupazione coloniale del Kosmet gli e' stato chiesto cosa ne pensasse
delle opinioni di Jiri Dinstbier, il suo collega dell'ONU inviato
speciale per i diritti umani nella ex-RFSJ che sostiene che
l'amministrazione Kouchner ha chiuso un occhio verso i criminali
dell'UCK compromettendo la convivenza sul territorio kosovaro, Kouchner
e' diventato furioso ed ha detto che Dinstbier non sa niente della
realta' di quel territorio, e che lui che ha speso 30 anni della sua
vita a proteggere i diritti umani non puo' essere criticato in tal senso
da nessuno.
Kouchner si rifiuta di incontrare Dinstbier, e la rabbia e' tale che non
vuole ricevere nemmeno il connazionale di Dinstbier, il presidente ceco
Havel, che pure invece non ha mai mostrato perplessita' nei confronti
delle politiche razziste dell'UNMIK in Kosmet. Per chiudere la
discussione sull'argomento, Kouchner ha urlato "Mr. Dinstbier, shut up!"
("Chiudi il becco Dinstbier!") dinanzi ai giornalisti convenuti.
Fonte:
>UN's Kouchner tells critic Shut up!
>http://www.abcnews.go.com/wire/World/reuters20000612_2132.html
>PRISTINA, Yugoslavia, June 12 (Reuters)
Per le puntate precedenti si veda:
http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/218?
http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/219?&start=218
http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/231?&start=218
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
Il capo della missione civile dell'ONU (UNMIK) in Kosmet Bernard
Kouchner e' molto tollerante verso chi commette "errori" nel processo
inarrestabile (?) di democratizzazione del suo protettorato (leggi: le
bande di assassini finanziati, addestrati ed appoggiati dalla NATO), ma
non altrettanto verso chi la pensa diversamente da lui.
Quando alla conferenza stampa tenutasi nel primo anniversario della
occupazione coloniale del Kosmet gli e' stato chiesto cosa ne pensasse
delle opinioni di Jiri Dinstbier, il suo collega dell'ONU inviato
speciale per i diritti umani nella ex-RFSJ che sostiene che
l'amministrazione Kouchner ha chiuso un occhio verso i criminali
dell'UCK compromettendo la convivenza sul territorio kosovaro, Kouchner
e' diventato furioso ed ha detto che Dinstbier non sa niente della
realta' di quel territorio, e che lui che ha speso 30 anni della sua
vita a proteggere i diritti umani non puo' essere criticato in tal senso
da nessuno.
Kouchner si rifiuta di incontrare Dinstbier, e la rabbia e' tale che non
vuole ricevere nemmeno il connazionale di Dinstbier, il presidente ceco
Havel, che pure invece non ha mai mostrato perplessita' nei confronti
delle politiche razziste dell'UNMIK in Kosmet. Per chiudere la
discussione sull'argomento, Kouchner ha urlato "Mr. Dinstbier, shut up!"
("Chiudi il becco Dinstbier!") dinanzi ai giornalisti convenuti.
Fonte:
>UN's Kouchner tells critic Shut up!
>http://www.abcnews.go.com/wire/World/reuters20000612_2132.html
>PRISTINA, Yugoslavia, June 12 (Reuters)
Per le puntate precedenti si veda:
http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/218?
http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/219?&start=218
http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/231?&start=218
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
* Uno scambio di vedute su diritto internazionale e legalita' borghese
* Amnesty International sul Tribunale "ad hoc" dell'Aia
* Carla del Ponte, criminale di guerra impunita
* Richiesta di dimissioni per Carla del Ponte
* Il governo olandese sotto processo
---
DIRITTO INTERNAZIONALE E LEGALITA' BORGHESE
In seguito al nostro ultimo messaggio sui crimini della NATO
(http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/286?&start=263)
abbiamo ricevuto da Luca il seguente commento:
> Ho letto l' articolo sulle leggi di guerra.
> A me pare pericoloso appoggiare le critiche alla guerra ed alla nato in
> particolare seguendo un approccio "legalitario".
>
> Le forze borghesi amano le cosiddette convenzioni di guerra perche' esse
> fanno parte della copertura ideologica della guerra ....Forse si
> dovrebbero mostrare le inconsistenze logiche insite negli argomenti
> legalisti. Soprattutto per quanto concerne
> i "coccodrilli " del manifesto
>
> o no?
Sicuramente! Tuttavia sottolineare queste come altre violazioni della
legalita' borghese commesse da parte della stessa borghesia ha un suo
significato. In pratica si tratta del "sovversivismo
delle classi dirigenti", lo stesso fenomeno che ci ha portato al
fascismo ed al nazismo, quando la classe dirigente rompe le leggi che
essa stessa ha formulato. Questo puo' avere due ricadute:
- o si prefigura come scontro inter-borghese (inter-imperialista);
- oppure semplicemente significa una deriva autoritaria, quando anche le
garanzie, gli spazi della democrazia borghese ci vengono sottratte;
oppure tutte e due le cose insieme. Percio' ci sembra importante
evidenziare quando questo succede. CRJ
---
Subject: YUGOSLAVIA: Amnesty International's initial comments
on the review by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former
Yugoslavia of NATO's Operation Allied Force
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 09:06:13 -0400
From: amnesty@...
Reply-To: owner-amnesty-l@...
To: amnesty-L@...
* News Release Issued by the International Secretariat of Amnesty
International *
Amnesty International Public document
AI Index EUR 70/029/2000
News Service Nr. 116
13 June 2000
Amnesty International's initial comments on the review by the
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia of NATO's
Operation Allied Force
The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has
published today the Final Report to the Prosecutor by the Committee
Established to Review the NATO Bombing Campaign Against the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia. The report examines general issues and five
specific incidents and recommends to the ICTY Prosecutor not to commence
a criminal investigation "in relation to the NATO bombing campaign or
incidents occurring during the campaign" (para 91).
Ms Carla Del Ponte, ICTY's Prosecutor, informed the United Nations'
Security Council on 2 June 2000 that she had decided to accept this
recommendation. She specifies that although some mistakes were made by
NATO, "the Prosecutor is satisfied that there was no deliberate
targeting of civilians or unlawful military targets by NATO during the
campaign".
Amnesty International has received a copy of the 45-page ICTY report and
is examining it carefully. All five incidents examined in the report by
ICTY's review committee were included in the Amnesty International
report, Collateral Damage or Unlawful Killings?, Violations of the Laws
of War by NATO during Operation Allied Force, published last week (AI
Index: EUR 70/18/00).
Amnesty International welcomes the unusual publication by the ICTY of
the reasoning behind the decision not to open an investigation related
to NATO's bombing campaign. The organization believes that this step
contributes greatly to the Tribunal's transparency, offering important
perspectives on the interpretation of the laws of war.
Amnesty International also respects the discretion enjoyed by the ICTY's
Prosecutor in deciding whether or not to open criminal investigations.
The organization understands that, as with other cases, the Prosecutor
may still decide to open an investigation into the NATO bombing should
additional relevant information become available.
Amnesty International notes that the report of the ICTY assessment
indicates that when NATO was requested "to answer specific questions
about specific incidents, the NATO reply was couched in general terms
and failed to address the specific incidents." The report also points
out that the "committee has not spoken to those involved in directing or
carrying out the bombing campaign". These facts must have contributed to
the information gaps that the committee itself acknowledges in its
report. Amnesty International also notes the following overall
conclusion of the review committee (para 90):
"NATO has admitted that mistakes did occur during the bombing campaign;
errors of judgment may also have occurred. Selection of certain
objectives for attack may be subject to legal debate. On the basis of
the information reviewed, however, the committee is of the opinion that
neither an in-depth investigation related to the bombing campaign as a
whole nor investigations related to specific incidents are justified. In
all cases, either the law is not sufficiently clear or investigations
are unlikely to result in the acquisition of sufficient evidence to
substantiate charges against high level accused or against lower accused
for particularly heinous offences."
The report does not explain what difficulties are envisaged by the
Office of the Prosecutor in gathering sufficient evidence against any
NATO or NATO member state official.
With regard to the bombing of the headquarters and studios of Serbian
state television and radio (Radio Televisija Srbije, RTS) in Belgrade on
23 April 1999, the report states (para 76):
"The committee finds that if the attack on the RTS was justified by
reference to its propaganda purpose alone, its legality might well be
questioned by some experts in the field of international humanitarian
law. It appears, however, that NATO's targeting of the RTS building for
propaganda purposes was an incidental (albeit complementary) aim of its
primary goal of disabling the Serbian military command and control
system and to destroy the nerve system and apparatus that keeps
Milosevic in power."
Earlier (para 55) the report made the following observation regarding
the role of the media in general:
"The media as such is not a traditional target category. To the extent
particular media components are part of the C3 (command, control and
communications) network they are military objectives. If media
components are not part of the C3 network then they may become military
objectives depending upon their use. As a bottom line, civilians,
civilian objects and civilian morale as such are not legitimate military
objectives. The media does have an effect on civilian morale. If that
effect is merely to foster support for the war effort, the media is not
a legitimate military objective. If the media is used to incite crimes,
as in Rwanda, it can become a legitimate military objective. If the
media is the nerve system that keeps a war-monger in power and thus
perpetuates the war effort, it may fall within the definition of a
legitimate military objective."
Amnesty International reiterates that the explanation it sought and
received by NATO regarding the attack on the RTS headquarters was that
the attack was carried out because the RTS was a propaganda organ. In a
letter to Amnesty International dated 17 May 1999 and quoted in ICTY's
report (para 73), NATO's then Secretary General Javier Solana said that
NATO made "every possible effort to avoid civilian casualties and
collateral damage by exclusively and carefully targeting the military
infrastructure of President Milocevic", adding that the RTS facilities
"are being used as radio relay stations and transmitters to support the
activities of the FRY military and special police forces, and therefore
they represented legitimate military targets". However, as also
indicated in the Amnesty International report published last week, at a
meeting with Amnesty International in Brussels on 14 February 2000 NATO
officials clarified that this reference to relay stations and
transmitters was to other attacks on RTS infrastructure and not this
particular attack on the RTS headquarters. They insisted that the attack
on the RTS headquarters was carried out because RTS was a propaganda
organ and argued that propaganda is direct support for military action.
The point relating to propaganda has been made repeatedly, most recently
by General Wesley Clark, Supreme Allied Commander in Europe at the time
of Operation Allied Force. In an address at the Brookings Institution on
8 June 2000 he is quoted as saying:
"I noticed on the news today there is criticism of the attack on the
Serb media. Well, of course, that was a controversial target. But the
Serb media engine was feeding the war. It was a crucial instrument of
Milosevic's control over the Serb population. And it exported fear,
hatred and instability into neighbouring regions. And so it was a
legitimate target of war, validated by lawyers in many countries and
validated by the International Criminal Tribunal. But it sure eased our
minds a lot to know that our elected political leaders took the
responsibility for that strike."
As explained in its report last week, Amnesty International recognizes
that disrupting government propaganda may help to undermine the morale
of the population and the armed forces. However, the organization
believes that justifying an attack on such grounds stretches the meaning
of "effective contribution to military action" and "definite military
advantage" -- essential requirements of the definition of a military
objective -- beyond the acceptable bounds of interpretation. As such,
Amnesty International takes the view that the attack on the RTS
headquarters was directed at a civilian object and points out that
"[I]ntentionally directing attacks against civilian objects" is a war
crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
Amnesty International regrets the lack of full cooperation by NATO in
resposnding to ICTY's inquiries. The organization stresses that the fact
that the ICTY Prosecutor has decided not to open a criminal
investigation against NATO should not lead NATO to ignore the detailed
and nuanced contents of the ICTY report, or dismiss recommendations made
by Amnesty International and other organizations.
Amnesty International calls again on NATO and NATO member states to heed
the recommendations it made in its report published last week, including
the need for all NATO member states to ratify without reservations
Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949; ensure a common
interpretation of international humanitarian law in line with the
highest international standards; reflect these standards in NATO's rules
of engagement; and clarify NATO's chain of command, so as to ensure
clear lines of responsibility.
NATO and NATO member states should also conduct their own investigation
into reported breaches of the rules of war during Operation Allied
Force, whether or not they may amount to war crimes, so as to take
appropriate measures against anyone found responsible, provide redress,
including compensation, to victims of such violations, and learn lessons
for the future. ...
ENDS.../
Amnesty International, International Secretariat, 1 Easton Street,
WC1X 8DJ, London, United Kingdom
****************************************************************
You may repost this message onto other sources provided the main
text is not altered in any way and both the header crediting
Amnesty International and this footer remain intact. Only the
list subscription message may be removed.
****************************************************************
To subscribe to amnesty-L, send a message to <majordomo@...>
with "subscribe amnesty-L" in the message body. To unsubscribe,
send a message to <majordomo@...> with "unsubscribe amnesty-L"
in the message body. If you have problem signing off, contact
<owner-amnesty-L@...>. <owner-amnesty-L@...> handles
only messages concerning list administration. Past and current Amnesty
news services can be found at <http://www.amnesty.org/news/>.
Visit <http://www.amnesty.org> for information about Amnesty
International
and for other AI publications. Contact amnestyis@... if you
need to get in touch with the International Secretariat of Amnesty
International.
---
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/indexe.htm
The Emperor's New Clothes
Louise Arbour: Unindicted War Criminal
by Christopher Black and Edward S. Herman (6-14-00)
Among the many ironies of the NATO war against Yugoslavia was the role
of the International Criminal Tribunal and its chief prosecutor, Louise
Arbour, elevated by Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien to Canada's
highest court in 1999. It will be argued here that as Arbour and her
Tribunal played a key role in EXPEDITING war crimes, an excellent case
can be made that in a just world she would be in the dock rather than in
judicial robes.
Arbour To NATO's Rescue
In the midst of NATO's 78-day bombing campaign against Yugoslavia,
Arbour participated in an April 20 press conference with British Foreign
Secretary Robin Cook to receive from him documentation on Serb war
crimes. Then on May 27, Arbour announced the indictment of Serb
President Slobodan Milosevic and four of his associates for war crimes.
The inappropriateness of a supposedly judicial body doing this when
Germany, Russia and other powers were trying to find a diplomatic
resolution to the conflict, was staggering.
At the April 20 appearance with Cook, Arbour stated that
"It is inconceivable...that we would agree to be guided by the political
will of those who may want to advance an agenda."
But her appearance with Cook and the followup indictments fitted
perfectly the needs of the NATO leadership. There had been growing
criticism of NATO's increasingly civilian infrastructure-oriented
bombing of Serbia. Arbour's and the Tribunal's intervention declaring
the Serb leadership to be guilty of war crimes was a public relations
coup that justified the NATO policies and helped permit the bombing to
continue and escalate. This was pointed out repeatedly by NATO leaders
and propagandists: for example, Madeleine Albright noted that the
indictments
"make very clear to the world and the publics in our countries that this
[NATO policy] is justified because of the crimes committed, and I think
also will enable us to keep moving all these processes [i.e., bombing]
forward" (CNN, May 27).
Arbour herself noted that "I am mindful of the impact that this
indictment may have on the peace process," and although indicted
individuals are "entitled to the presumption of innocence until they are
convicted, the evidence upon which this indictment was confirmed raises
serious questions about their suitability to be guarantors of any deal,
let alone a peace agreement." (CNN, May 27). So Arbour not only
understood the political significance of her indictment, she suggested
that interference with diplomatic efforts was justified because the
indicted individuals, though not yet found guilty, were not suitable to
negotiate. This hugely unjudicial political judgment, along with the
convenient timing of the indictments, points up Arbour's and the
Tribunal's highly political role.
The Tribunal's Politicization
Arbour's service to NATO in indicting Milosevic was the logical outcome
of the Tribunal's de facto control and purpose. Established by the
Security Council in the early 1990s to serve the Balkan policy ends of
its dominant members, the Tribunal's funding and interlocking functional
relationship with the leading NATO powers have made it NATO's
instrument. (1)
Although Article 32 of the Tribunal's Charter declares that its expenses
shall be provided in the general budget of the United Nations, this
proviso has been regularly violated. In 1994-1995 the U.S. government
provided it with $700,000 in cash and $2.3 million in equipment, and
numerous other U.S.-based governmental and non- governmental agencies
have provided the Tribunal with resources.
Article 16 of the Tribunal's charter states that the Prosecutor shall
act independently and shall not seek or receive instruction from any
government. This section also has been systematically violated. NATO
sources have regularly made claims suggesting their authority over the
Tribunal: "We will make a decision on whether Yugoslav actions against
ethnic Albanians constitute genocide," states a USIA Fact Sheet, and
Cook asserted at his April 20 press conference with Arbour that "we are
going to focus on the war crimes being committed in Kosovo and our
determination to bring those responsible to justice, " as if he and
Arbour were a team jointly deciding on who should be charged for war
crimes.
Tribunal officials have even bragged about "the strong support of
concerned governments and dedicated individuals such as Secretary
Albright," further referred to as "mother of the Tribunal" (by Judge
Gabrielle Kirk McDonald, president of the Tribunal). In 1996 Arbour met
with the Secretary-General of NATO and its supreme commander to
"establish contacts and begin discussing modalities of cooperation and
assistance." Numerous other meetings have occurred between prosecutor
and NATO, which was given the function of Tribunal gendarme.
Arbour acknowleged (April 20) that "the real danger is whether we would
fall into [following somebody's political agenda] inadvertently by being
in the hands of information-providers who might have an agenda that we
would not be able to discern." But even an imbecile could discern that
NATO had an agenda and that simply accepting the flood of documents
offered by Cook and Albright entailed ADVERTENTLY following that agenda.
Arbour's April 20 reference to the "morality of the [NATO] enterprise"
and her remarks on Milosevic's possible lack of character disqualifying
him from negotiations, as well as her rush to help NATO with an
indictment, point to quite clearly understood political service.
The Arbour-Tribunal bias was dramatically illustrated by the disposition
of an internal Tribunal report on Operation Storm, which described war
crimes committed by the Croatian armed forces in their expulsion of more
than 200,000 Serbs from Krajina in August 1995. (6) In only four days
"at least 150 Serbs were summarily executed, and many hundreds
disappeared," totals that exceeded the 241 victims of the Serbs named in
the indictment of Milosevic. But as the United States supported the
Croat's ethnic cleansing of Serbs in Krajina, and refused to provide
requested information, no indictment of any Croat officer named in the
report, or head of state Tudjman, was ever brought by the Tribunal.
Tribunal's Kangaroo Court Processes
According to Arbour, the Tribunal was "subject to extremely stringent
rules of evidence with respect to the admissibility and the credibility
of the product that we will tender in court," thus precluding
"unsubstantiated, unverifiable, uncorroborated allegations" (April 20).
This is a gross misrepresentation of what John Laughland described in
the Times (London) as "a rogue court with rigged rules" (June 17, 1999).
The Tribunal violates virtually every standard of due process: among
others, it fails to separate prosecution and judge; witnesses can
testify anonymously; confessions are presumed free and voluntary unless
the contrary can be established by the prisoner; and "rules against
hearsay, deeply entrenched in Common Law, are not observed and the
Prosecutor's office has even suggested not calling witnesses to give
evidence but only the tribunal's own 'war crimes investigators'"
(Laughland).
As noted, Arbour presumes guilt before trial; the concept of "innocent
till convicted" is rejected, and she can declare that people linked with
Arkan "will be tainted by their association with an indicted war
criminal" (March 31). Arbour clearly does not believe in the basic rules
of Western jurisprudence. And within a month of her elevation to the
Canadian Supreme Court she joined a court majority that grafted onto
Canadian law the dangerous Tribunal practice of permitting a more
liberal use of hearsay evidence in trials. (2) The consequent corruption
of the Canadian justice system, both by her appointment and her impact,
mirrors that in the Canadian political system, whose leading members
supported the NATO war without question.
NATO's Crimes
In bombing Yugoslavia from March 24 to June 8 1999, NATO violated the UN
Charter requirement that it not use force without UN Security Council
sanction. (3) It was also guilty of aggression in attacking a sovereign
state that was not going beyond its borders. In its defense, NATO
claimed that "humanitarian" concerns demanded these actions and
justified seemingly serious law violations. (4) This reply sanctions law
violations on the basis of self-serving judgments that contradict the
rule of law, but it is also dubious on its own grounds. The NATO bombing
made "an internal humanitarian problem into a disaster" in the words of
Rollie Keith, the returned Canadian OSCE human rights monitor in Kosovo.
Furthermore, NATO refused to negotiate a settlement in Kosovo and
insisted on a violent solution; in the words of one State Department
official, NATO deliberately "raised the bar" and precluded a compromise
resolution because Serbia "needed to be bombed." These counter- facts
suggest that the alleged humanitarian basis of the law violations was a
cover for starkly political and geopolitical objectives.
NATO was also guilty of more traditional war crimes, including some that
the Tribunal had found indictable when [allegeldy] carried out by Serbs.
Thus on March 8, 1996, the Serb leader Milan Martic was indicted for
[allegeldy] launching a rocket cluster-bomb attack on military targets
in Zagreb in May 1995, on the ground that the rocket was "not designed
to hit military targets but to terrorize the civilians of Zagreb." But
the same case could be made for numerous NATO bombing raids, as in the
cluster-bombing of Nis on May 7, 1999, in which a market and hospital
far from any military target were hit in separate strikes--but no
indictment has yet been handed down against NATO.
But NATO was also guilty of bombing non-military targets as systematic
policy. On March 26, 1999, General Wesley Clark said that "We are going
to very systematically and progressively work on his military
forces...[to see] how much pain he is willing to suffer." But this focus
on "military forces" wasn't effective, so NATO quickly turned to "taking
down...the economic apparatus supporting" Serb military forces
(Clinton's words); targets were gradually extended to factories of all
kinds, electric power stations, water and sewage processing facilities,
transport, public buildings, and even schools and hospitals. In effect,
it was NATO's strategy to bring Serbia to its knees by gradually
escalating its attacks on the civil society.
But international law makes civilian targets off limits; the "wanton
destruction of cities, towns or villages or devastation not justified by
military necessity" is prohibited (Sixth Principle of Nuremberg,
formulated in 1950 by a UN-sponsored international law commission).
"Military necessity" does not allow the destruction of a civil society
to make it more difficult for the country to support its armed forces,
any more than civilians can be killed directly because they pay taxes
supporting the war machine or might some day become soldiers. Making an
entire population a hostage is a blatant violation of international law
and its implementing acts are war crimes.
In December 1999, it was finally reported that post-Arbour prosecutor
Carla Del Ponte was reviewing the conduct of NATO, at the urging of
Russia and several other "interested parties" ("U.N. Court Examines
NATO's Yugoslavia War," NYT, Dec. 29, 1999). But the news report
indicates that the focus is on the conduct of NATO pilots and their
commanders, not the NATO decision-makers who decided to target the
civilian infrastructure. It also suggests the public relations nature of
the inquiry, which would "go far in dispelling the belief...that the
tribunal is a tool used by Western leaders to escape accountability."
The report also indicates the delicate matter that the tribunal "depends
on the military alliance to arrest and hand over suspects." It also
quotes Del Ponte saying that "It's not my priority, because I have
inquiries about genocide, about bodies in mass graves." We may rest
assured that no indictments will result from this inquiry.
Beyond Orwell
NATO's leaders, frustrated in attacking the Serb military machine, quite
openly turned to smashing the civil society of Serbia as their means of
attaining the desired quick victory. Arbour and the Tribunal helped NATO
by indicting Milosevic, thereby giving NATO the moral cover needed for
escalated attacks on the hostage population.
Arbour and the Tribunal thus present us with the amazing spectacle of an
institution supposedly organized to contain, prevent, and prosecute for
war crimes actually knowingly facilitating them. Furthermore, petitions
submitted to the Tribunal during Arbour's tenure had called for
prosecution of the leaders of NATO, including Canadian Prime Minister
Jean Chretien, for the commission of war crimes. If she had been a
prosecutor in Canada, Britain or the United States, she would have been
subject to disbarment for considering and then accepting a job from a
person she had been asked to charge. But Arbour was elevated to the
Supreme Court of Canada by Chretien with hardly a mention of this
conflict of interest and immorality. **
About the authors...
Christopher Black (5) is part of the team of Canadian lawyers who have
attempted to bring war crimes charges against NATO before the War Crimes
Tribunal. At present, Mr. Black is serving as the attorney for one of
the defendant at the Rwandan war crimes hearings. He believes that
Western meddling is in large measure responsible for the horrendous
killing in Rwanda. He plans to write an article for Emperors-Clothes on
the subject.
Edward S. Herman is the author of many books including 'Real Terror
Network: Terrorism in Fact and Propaganda' (June 1998) and 'Triumph of
the Market: Essays on Economics, Politics, and the Media' (October
1995).
Further reading...
(1) See Money Talks - US Funds ICTY Public Relations at
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/press.htm
(2) Back to the dark ages by Jared Israel at
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/bac.htm
(3) See NATO's War & World Security by Prof. Raju G. C. Thomas at
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/analysis/security.htm
(4) See HUMANITARIAN WAR: Making the Crime Fit the Punishment by Diana
Johnstone at
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/articles/Johnstone/crime.htm
(5) See An Impartial Tribunal? Really? by Christopher Black at
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/analysis/Impartial.htm
(6)See Conditions of Serbs in Croatia, by Alice Mahon, MP at
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/articles/mahon/croatia.htm
---
>Tribunal Watch archives are on-line at:
>http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/archives/
>==========================================
>
>CANA (Christians Against NATO Aggression)
>Statement from William Spring, Director
>
>CARLA DEL PONTE SHOULD RESIGN AS WAR CRIMES PROSECUTOR
>
>Carla del Ponte should resign as war crimes prosecutor for the Hague
>Tribunal responsible for War Crimes in the area of the Former Yugoslavia.
>She has brought international law into disrepute by her decision announced
>to the Security Council June 2nd not to prosecute NATO leaders for war
>crimes committed by NATO forces in relation to the illegal military attack
>on Yugoslavia last year.
>
>Thomas Fuller, as quoted by the late Lord Denning, Master of the Rolls,
>said: "whoever you are the law is above you." In effect Carla del Ponte has
>put NATO civilian & military leaders beyond the law - has given them
>immunity to engage in whatever criminal action they like. A disgrace to
>the legal profession she should be replaced forthwith by the UN Secretary
>General.
>
>Her investigation into allegations made, not only by the Russian, Yugoslav
>& Chinese Governments concerning NATO war crimes, but also by ordinary
>people across the world, (in which I include CANA, as we detailed specific
>NATO atrocities in a dossier sent to her January 28th this year) was at
>best cursory; at worst her inaction can be interpreted as the frantic
>manoeuvrings of a mafia judge eager to please her mafia paymasters.
>Someone should do an investigation into the War Crimes Tribunal & her
>role, & that of of her predecessor, Ms Arbour. How is this body financed?
>Is it a legal entity? Does the UN Charter allow for new Institutions to be
>created simply on the say so of the Security Council?
>
>What has happened is a juridical nightmare; a nominally independent
>prosecutor, who in fact is leaned on, & responds to pressure from
>representatives of whatever coalition of powers happens to hold most
>influence in the Security Council at any one time.
>
>Her willingness to receive Jamie Shea, & Robin Cook, in her office at the
>Hague, while still theoretically engaged in an investigation as to whether
>NATO had committed war crimes was reprehensible, indicating collusion &
>undue influence. She should have had the courage to stand up to gangsters
>who 'fix' international Courts in the same way as Clinton fixed Congress to
>avoid impeachment.
>
>Her Office wrote to me 15th March stating "aerial warfare is a complex
>area of military international law involving difficult issues of targeting
>& execution." That may be so, but is not an excuse to duck the moral
>questions involved. The Prosecutor gets NATO off the hook by saying she is
>not satisfied there was 'intent' on the part of the NATO authorities to
>cause civilian casualties, which misses the point entirely: all deaths
>caused by those responsible for a war of aggression, whether they be
>military or civilian, are unlawful homicides, & it's not necessary to prove
>intent for every act which flowed from the decision to engage in aggressive
>war. But in the 15th March letter Gavin Ruxton said "The Prosecutor has no
>locus to consider the lawfulness or otherwise of the NATO decision to
>launch its air campaign": which means the Tribunal is disqualified from
>making any finding acquitting NATO of war crimes. (There is of course
>unambiguous evidence of NATO's intent to cause civilian casualties.)
>
>___________________________________________________________________________
___
>For further info tel 02088022144 cana@... also diarise
>House of Lords Cttee Room 4 12 noon 28th June 2000 Press Conference by
>Justin/Cana/Planning for Peace
>
>===========================================================================
=
>To unsubscribe from TWATCH-L: Send an e-mail to
LISTSERV@...
> In your message, type in the command: SIGNOFF TWATCH-L
>
>To resubscribe to TW, send this message to the same address: SUBSCRIBE
TWATCH-L [name of person]
>Send questions, comments, suggestions to:
> twatch-l-request@...
---
From: Herman de Tollenaere <hermantl@...>
To: right-left@...,Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli.;,
Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli.
Subject: 9 June Amsterdam: report on Dutch ministers on trial for NATO
bombing
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 00:24:20 +0200
[Unofficial report, hastily written by a non-lawyer]
On Friday 9 June, at the "Paleis van Justitie" [court house] in
Amsterdam,
Dutch Government Ministers were on trial for the NATO bombing of
Yugoslavia
in 1999.
As I walk to the court house, posters of a beer brand proclaim
"Yugoslavs
like our drink". Maybe, like people in Colombia or in Sierra Leone. All
these people, however, might think one drinks more safely if there is
less
chance of dying by a bomb or other weapon made in a NATO country.
Opening
headline of the day of daily De Volkskrant: the Dutch UN representative
says
that the Netherlands armed forces should get over their Balkans trauma
by
sending a thousand soldiers to Sierra Leone. The British NATO allies
would
like that. Might the Dutch soldiers not find out too late they go there,
like to the Balkans, not really for peace; but maybe for British diamond
millionaires, fighting out their conflict with French diamond
millionaires
at the cost of lives of European soldiers and [especially] African
soldiers,
including child soldiers, and civilians? Remember racism and escalating
violence, when troops from NATO countries were supposed to bring peace
to
Somalia?
Police had not allowed a demonstration, which would have started at 10
o'clock. The case starts 11 o'clock at the "Paleis van Justitie",
Prinsengracht 434 in Amsterdam. Long before the start, people gather
outside. Pro peace leaflets change hands. A big banner goes aloft: NATO
OUT
OF THE BALKANS. It is held by a local anti war committee member, and by
a
twentyish Amsterdam university student. She is here with others of De
Socialist magazine, also present at earlier peace demonstrations.
Celine is there as well. Though more than fifty-five years ago, the Nazi
occupiers of The Netherlands put her in a camp, today she still fights
against racism and war. She is of De Anti Fascist. This is the magazine
of
the Bond van Anti Fascisten [Anti Fascist League], founded by ex members
of
the 1940-1945 resistance against German Nazi occupation. Later, younger
fighters against present day racism and other forms of discrimination
joined. The Anti Fascist League is a main source making it financially
possible to have this case: as the Yugoslav plaintiffs are very poor,
having
often lost jobs and everything by the war.
Speaking of media: a TV crew of the local [multicultural] Amsterdam TV
records the scene outside and the court case inside. Radio The
Netherlands
World Broadcasting is there; as are correspondents of De Volkskrant and
Bosnian media. Yesterday, an article in Ganashakti daily, all the way in
India, told its readers of the case.
In 1999, 29 citizens of Yugoslavia, victims of the bombs, started this
civil
court case against Ministers Kok [Prime Minister], Van Aartsen [Foreign
Affairs], and De Grave [Defense]. In May/June 1999, the judge did not
grant
their request for summary proceedings. However, he also did not throw
out
the case, as pro-war politicians might have liked. Similar court cases
are
on their way in other NATO countries; though often, in these countries
the
legal system works a little slower, or is more expensive for plaintiffs,
than in The Netherlands. In The Netherlands, there are now also cases
against the State [so, not against ministers individually, like in this
case]; other Dutch civil cases against individuals; and World Court
cases
for violation of UN Charter point 2 sub 4, against military aggression.
In a
few months' time, the case brought by surviving families of the bombed
Belgrade television studio crew members will start in The Netherlands.
Before a full big court room, Mr Van Schendel, court president, first
arranges for the media representatives' reporting. Then, he calls upon
the
bombs victims' lawyers to speak. He grants them one hour. As twenty
minutes
is usual for lawyers in civil cases, this indicates some sense of the
juridical importance of this case.
These lawyers are Mr Steijnen and Mr Olof, of Juristen voor de Vrede
[Lawyers for Peace] and the Permanente Commissie [Permanent Legal
Commission
against Dutch War Crimes]. Lawyers for Peace have a long history of
legal
challenges to the Dutch government for allowing NATO nuclear weapons in
The
Netherlands [officially, the people are not allowed to know whether the
nuclear weapons are there or not].
Mr Olof pointed out NATO's war was against the United Nations charter
and
international law. Mr Steijnen pointed out that the Dutch government,
like
NATO, claims NATO's targets were all military. The civilian victims
supposedly were "collateral damage". Really? asked Mr Steijnen. NATO
destroyed fifty churches and monasteries, over three hundred schools;
many
bridges unsuited for military vehicles; buses; passenger trains; TV
studios;
cigarette factories; 100% of chemical industry and 100% of agricultural
fertilizer industry in Yugoslavia; even apart from depleted uranium
ammunition radiation, creating enormous environmental damage. NATO used
cluster bombs.
Conservative pro NATO estimates say 1000 civilians died, 6000 were
wounded.
The MEAT report of the United States Air Force, quoted by Newsweek and
others, says all the weeks of air war destroyed 14 Yugoslav tanks, 18
armed
vehicles, 20 pieces of artillery. If we base ourselves on the
conservative
estimate of civilian victims: then, 70 civilians died for every Yugoslav
tank. Would it not be more accurate to say civilians and civilian
targets
were the real targets, and the damage against Yugoslav army vehicles and
artillery really was "collateral" damage? NATO leaders themselves
basically
admitted this [eg, when asked: why did the Yugoslav government finally
admit NATO troops in Kosovo? Eg, General Short said on BBC television
the
first target [to his regret, only destroyed later] should have been the
"rock and roll bridge" in Belgrade, where young people had concerts
against
the bombing].
Concluding, Mr Steijnen named three random examples of the plaintiffs.
One
worked as a car mechanic in Montenegro. The war started; very worried
about
his family in Belgrade, he went there, and parked his car. NATO bombs
fell
and destroyed the car. This loss meant also the loss of his mechanic's
job.
Now, he has nothing.
Another plaintiff worked in a small businessman's garage. A bomb
destroyed
the garage and the cars in it. Now, the employer is jobless and hungry.
So
is the employee.
A third example: this man used to work in a metal working factory. Bombs
totally destroyed the factory. Like its other 8000 workers, now he is
jobless.
For the ministers, Mr Houtzagers spoke. He quoted from a political
government statement, claiming NATO became involved as it worried about
stability of Albania and Macedonia [both non NATO members; and how did
the
war 'help stability' of these countries, let alone of Kosovo? Mr
Steijnen
replied]. And 'Yugoslavia had refused to negotiate seriously in
Rambouillet
[and how about NATO's proposed Appendix B, amounting to de facto
occupation
of all Yugoslavia?]'. Repeatedly interrupted by judges' critical
questions,
Mr Houtzagers talked about the legal base for the NATO attack. He
admitted
that UN Resolution 1199 was not such a legal base; nevertheless, the
government used it as justification. Mr Steijnen pointed out that only
one
member of the Dutch parliament, Mr Van Middelkoop, had known about
Resolution 1199. So, then, how about democratic control by parliament on
whether The Netherlands were at war or not [not even Prime Minister Kok
knew
when the bombing started]?
Mr Houtzagers also said the ministers could not be sued, 'as they had
acted
as organs of the State'. In reply, Mr Steijnen pointed out that at the
1945
Nuremberg trials, the court had rejected such a defense. *Individuals*
commit war crimes. The Nuremburg decisions are important in
international
law; though in its defence the Dutch government now more or less tries
to
dismiss them. They were part of the precedents claimed, by, for
instance,
the 1993 establishment of the court on Yugoslavia in The Hague. Mr
Steijnen
said: "How would a court react to General Pinochet claiming he had not
been
an individual, only '"an organ of the state"?
To the argument: "the war is over now, so the plaintiffs have no case
anymore. [Two of the plaintiffs last year complained, as the war had
made
them join the Yugoslav army as conscripts, thus putting them in danger
involuntarily]", Mr Steijnen replied the plaintiffs still were in
danger,
also if they would all continue to be civilians as at the moment; as
there
was only a cease fire, not peace. If one listens today to Dutch and
other
NATO leaders they may not yet have learned not to start a similar war
again
against Yugoslavia [or against another country].
President Van Schendel concluded the session by saying that the court
decision will, in principle, become public at 6 July, at 11.30 in the
same
court house. However, Mr Van Schendel left open the possibility that the
court would need more time for the legal complexities of the case; then,
the
verdict would be later.
Even if Lawyers for Peace lose the case in Amsterdam, they will appeal,
all
the way up to the European Court.
After the court case, Mr Houtzagers, contrary to the bombs victims'
lawyers,
refused to answer media questions. Later that day, there was a meeting.
Other Dutch ministers may also face civil cases. So may F16 pilots. So
may
pro-war Members of Parliament like Mr Blaauw of the ["Rightist Liberal"]
VVD
government party: Blaauw, during the Balkan war, talked of glorious
profit
opportunities for Dutch construction millionaires in Kosovo, after the
NATO
bombs would have done their job. Mr Blaauw is also a leader of the Press
Now
organization; officially for 'independent' [in fact, NATOish] media in
the
Balkans. Maybe, also a civil case by people hurt by the bombs, against
Mr De
Hoop Scheffer of the ["Christian Democrat"] CDA [very pro bombing,
though
officially in opposition].
And, maybe also civil damages claims against Marcel Rüter, businessman,
and
leader of the extreme Rightist Voorpost ["Vanguard"] movement, not
represented in government or parliament, which made pro bombing
propaganda.
Mr Rüter is an ex leader of the Centrumpartij'86, members of which used
to
rally for Adolf Hitler and his deputy, Rudolf Hess. Used to, *as
Centrumpartij'86 people*; because a few years ago, the courts banned
this
party for racism; after members had gone to jail for violence. In 1999
Voorpost tried a political comeback on the wave of pro-war and
anti-Serb-anti-Roma-and-anti-other-foreigner propaganda in the 'popular'
media. Maybe an opportunity for the Anti Fascist League to figuratively
"kill the two birds, of war and racism, with one stone"?
Best wishes,
Herman de Tollenaere
---
http://www.counterpunch.com
CounterPunch [Originally published at Swans: http://www.swans.com]
June 4, 2000
An Impartial Tribunal, Really?
By Christopher Black
-
http://www.serbianna.com/dorich/stories/00_06_09.html
The Road To Hell Is Paved With Good Intentions
By William Dorich
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
* Amnesty International sul Tribunale "ad hoc" dell'Aia
* Carla del Ponte, criminale di guerra impunita
* Richiesta di dimissioni per Carla del Ponte
* Il governo olandese sotto processo
---
DIRITTO INTERNAZIONALE E LEGALITA' BORGHESE
In seguito al nostro ultimo messaggio sui crimini della NATO
(http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/286?&start=263)
abbiamo ricevuto da Luca il seguente commento:
> Ho letto l' articolo sulle leggi di guerra.
> A me pare pericoloso appoggiare le critiche alla guerra ed alla nato in
> particolare seguendo un approccio "legalitario".
>
> Le forze borghesi amano le cosiddette convenzioni di guerra perche' esse
> fanno parte della copertura ideologica della guerra ....Forse si
> dovrebbero mostrare le inconsistenze logiche insite negli argomenti
> legalisti. Soprattutto per quanto concerne
> i "coccodrilli " del manifesto
>
> o no?
Sicuramente! Tuttavia sottolineare queste come altre violazioni della
legalita' borghese commesse da parte della stessa borghesia ha un suo
significato. In pratica si tratta del "sovversivismo
delle classi dirigenti", lo stesso fenomeno che ci ha portato al
fascismo ed al nazismo, quando la classe dirigente rompe le leggi che
essa stessa ha formulato. Questo puo' avere due ricadute:
- o si prefigura come scontro inter-borghese (inter-imperialista);
- oppure semplicemente significa una deriva autoritaria, quando anche le
garanzie, gli spazi della democrazia borghese ci vengono sottratte;
oppure tutte e due le cose insieme. Percio' ci sembra importante
evidenziare quando questo succede. CRJ
---
Subject: YUGOSLAVIA: Amnesty International's initial comments
on the review by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former
Yugoslavia of NATO's Operation Allied Force
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 09:06:13 -0400
From: amnesty@...
Reply-To: owner-amnesty-l@...
To: amnesty-L@...
* News Release Issued by the International Secretariat of Amnesty
International *
Amnesty International Public document
AI Index EUR 70/029/2000
News Service Nr. 116
13 June 2000
Amnesty International's initial comments on the review by the
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia of NATO's
Operation Allied Force
The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has
published today the Final Report to the Prosecutor by the Committee
Established to Review the NATO Bombing Campaign Against the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia. The report examines general issues and five
specific incidents and recommends to the ICTY Prosecutor not to commence
a criminal investigation "in relation to the NATO bombing campaign or
incidents occurring during the campaign" (para 91).
Ms Carla Del Ponte, ICTY's Prosecutor, informed the United Nations'
Security Council on 2 June 2000 that she had decided to accept this
recommendation. She specifies that although some mistakes were made by
NATO, "the Prosecutor is satisfied that there was no deliberate
targeting of civilians or unlawful military targets by NATO during the
campaign".
Amnesty International has received a copy of the 45-page ICTY report and
is examining it carefully. All five incidents examined in the report by
ICTY's review committee were included in the Amnesty International
report, Collateral Damage or Unlawful Killings?, Violations of the Laws
of War by NATO during Operation Allied Force, published last week (AI
Index: EUR 70/18/00).
Amnesty International welcomes the unusual publication by the ICTY of
the reasoning behind the decision not to open an investigation related
to NATO's bombing campaign. The organization believes that this step
contributes greatly to the Tribunal's transparency, offering important
perspectives on the interpretation of the laws of war.
Amnesty International also respects the discretion enjoyed by the ICTY's
Prosecutor in deciding whether or not to open criminal investigations.
The organization understands that, as with other cases, the Prosecutor
may still decide to open an investigation into the NATO bombing should
additional relevant information become available.
Amnesty International notes that the report of the ICTY assessment
indicates that when NATO was requested "to answer specific questions
about specific incidents, the NATO reply was couched in general terms
and failed to address the specific incidents." The report also points
out that the "committee has not spoken to those involved in directing or
carrying out the bombing campaign". These facts must have contributed to
the information gaps that the committee itself acknowledges in its
report. Amnesty International also notes the following overall
conclusion of the review committee (para 90):
"NATO has admitted that mistakes did occur during the bombing campaign;
errors of judgment may also have occurred. Selection of certain
objectives for attack may be subject to legal debate. On the basis of
the information reviewed, however, the committee is of the opinion that
neither an in-depth investigation related to the bombing campaign as a
whole nor investigations related to specific incidents are justified. In
all cases, either the law is not sufficiently clear or investigations
are unlikely to result in the acquisition of sufficient evidence to
substantiate charges against high level accused or against lower accused
for particularly heinous offences."
The report does not explain what difficulties are envisaged by the
Office of the Prosecutor in gathering sufficient evidence against any
NATO or NATO member state official.
With regard to the bombing of the headquarters and studios of Serbian
state television and radio (Radio Televisija Srbije, RTS) in Belgrade on
23 April 1999, the report states (para 76):
"The committee finds that if the attack on the RTS was justified by
reference to its propaganda purpose alone, its legality might well be
questioned by some experts in the field of international humanitarian
law. It appears, however, that NATO's targeting of the RTS building for
propaganda purposes was an incidental (albeit complementary) aim of its
primary goal of disabling the Serbian military command and control
system and to destroy the nerve system and apparatus that keeps
Milosevic in power."
Earlier (para 55) the report made the following observation regarding
the role of the media in general:
"The media as such is not a traditional target category. To the extent
particular media components are part of the C3 (command, control and
communications) network they are military objectives. If media
components are not part of the C3 network then they may become military
objectives depending upon their use. As a bottom line, civilians,
civilian objects and civilian morale as such are not legitimate military
objectives. The media does have an effect on civilian morale. If that
effect is merely to foster support for the war effort, the media is not
a legitimate military objective. If the media is used to incite crimes,
as in Rwanda, it can become a legitimate military objective. If the
media is the nerve system that keeps a war-monger in power and thus
perpetuates the war effort, it may fall within the definition of a
legitimate military objective."
Amnesty International reiterates that the explanation it sought and
received by NATO regarding the attack on the RTS headquarters was that
the attack was carried out because the RTS was a propaganda organ. In a
letter to Amnesty International dated 17 May 1999 and quoted in ICTY's
report (para 73), NATO's then Secretary General Javier Solana said that
NATO made "every possible effort to avoid civilian casualties and
collateral damage by exclusively and carefully targeting the military
infrastructure of President Milocevic", adding that the RTS facilities
"are being used as radio relay stations and transmitters to support the
activities of the FRY military and special police forces, and therefore
they represented legitimate military targets". However, as also
indicated in the Amnesty International report published last week, at a
meeting with Amnesty International in Brussels on 14 February 2000 NATO
officials clarified that this reference to relay stations and
transmitters was to other attacks on RTS infrastructure and not this
particular attack on the RTS headquarters. They insisted that the attack
on the RTS headquarters was carried out because RTS was a propaganda
organ and argued that propaganda is direct support for military action.
The point relating to propaganda has been made repeatedly, most recently
by General Wesley Clark, Supreme Allied Commander in Europe at the time
of Operation Allied Force. In an address at the Brookings Institution on
8 June 2000 he is quoted as saying:
"I noticed on the news today there is criticism of the attack on the
Serb media. Well, of course, that was a controversial target. But the
Serb media engine was feeding the war. It was a crucial instrument of
Milosevic's control over the Serb population. And it exported fear,
hatred and instability into neighbouring regions. And so it was a
legitimate target of war, validated by lawyers in many countries and
validated by the International Criminal Tribunal. But it sure eased our
minds a lot to know that our elected political leaders took the
responsibility for that strike."
As explained in its report last week, Amnesty International recognizes
that disrupting government propaganda may help to undermine the morale
of the population and the armed forces. However, the organization
believes that justifying an attack on such grounds stretches the meaning
of "effective contribution to military action" and "definite military
advantage" -- essential requirements of the definition of a military
objective -- beyond the acceptable bounds of interpretation. As such,
Amnesty International takes the view that the attack on the RTS
headquarters was directed at a civilian object and points out that
"[I]ntentionally directing attacks against civilian objects" is a war
crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
Amnesty International regrets the lack of full cooperation by NATO in
resposnding to ICTY's inquiries. The organization stresses that the fact
that the ICTY Prosecutor has decided not to open a criminal
investigation against NATO should not lead NATO to ignore the detailed
and nuanced contents of the ICTY report, or dismiss recommendations made
by Amnesty International and other organizations.
Amnesty International calls again on NATO and NATO member states to heed
the recommendations it made in its report published last week, including
the need for all NATO member states to ratify without reservations
Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949; ensure a common
interpretation of international humanitarian law in line with the
highest international standards; reflect these standards in NATO's rules
of engagement; and clarify NATO's chain of command, so as to ensure
clear lines of responsibility.
NATO and NATO member states should also conduct their own investigation
into reported breaches of the rules of war during Operation Allied
Force, whether or not they may amount to war crimes, so as to take
appropriate measures against anyone found responsible, provide redress,
including compensation, to victims of such violations, and learn lessons
for the future. ...
ENDS.../
Amnesty International, International Secretariat, 1 Easton Street,
WC1X 8DJ, London, United Kingdom
****************************************************************
You may repost this message onto other sources provided the main
text is not altered in any way and both the header crediting
Amnesty International and this footer remain intact. Only the
list subscription message may be removed.
****************************************************************
To subscribe to amnesty-L, send a message to <majordomo@...>
with "subscribe amnesty-L" in the message body. To unsubscribe,
send a message to <majordomo@...> with "unsubscribe amnesty-L"
in the message body. If you have problem signing off, contact
<owner-amnesty-L@...>. <owner-amnesty-L@...> handles
only messages concerning list administration. Past and current Amnesty
news services can be found at <http://www.amnesty.org/news/>.
Visit <http://www.amnesty.org> for information about Amnesty
International
and for other AI publications. Contact amnestyis@... if you
need to get in touch with the International Secretariat of Amnesty
International.
---
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/indexe.htm
The Emperor's New Clothes
Louise Arbour: Unindicted War Criminal
by Christopher Black and Edward S. Herman (6-14-00)
Among the many ironies of the NATO war against Yugoslavia was the role
of the International Criminal Tribunal and its chief prosecutor, Louise
Arbour, elevated by Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien to Canada's
highest court in 1999. It will be argued here that as Arbour and her
Tribunal played a key role in EXPEDITING war crimes, an excellent case
can be made that in a just world she would be in the dock rather than in
judicial robes.
Arbour To NATO's Rescue
In the midst of NATO's 78-day bombing campaign against Yugoslavia,
Arbour participated in an April 20 press conference with British Foreign
Secretary Robin Cook to receive from him documentation on Serb war
crimes. Then on May 27, Arbour announced the indictment of Serb
President Slobodan Milosevic and four of his associates for war crimes.
The inappropriateness of a supposedly judicial body doing this when
Germany, Russia and other powers were trying to find a diplomatic
resolution to the conflict, was staggering.
At the April 20 appearance with Cook, Arbour stated that
"It is inconceivable...that we would agree to be guided by the political
will of those who may want to advance an agenda."
But her appearance with Cook and the followup indictments fitted
perfectly the needs of the NATO leadership. There had been growing
criticism of NATO's increasingly civilian infrastructure-oriented
bombing of Serbia. Arbour's and the Tribunal's intervention declaring
the Serb leadership to be guilty of war crimes was a public relations
coup that justified the NATO policies and helped permit the bombing to
continue and escalate. This was pointed out repeatedly by NATO leaders
and propagandists: for example, Madeleine Albright noted that the
indictments
"make very clear to the world and the publics in our countries that this
[NATO policy] is justified because of the crimes committed, and I think
also will enable us to keep moving all these processes [i.e., bombing]
forward" (CNN, May 27).
Arbour herself noted that "I am mindful of the impact that this
indictment may have on the peace process," and although indicted
individuals are "entitled to the presumption of innocence until they are
convicted, the evidence upon which this indictment was confirmed raises
serious questions about their suitability to be guarantors of any deal,
let alone a peace agreement." (CNN, May 27). So Arbour not only
understood the political significance of her indictment, she suggested
that interference with diplomatic efforts was justified because the
indicted individuals, though not yet found guilty, were not suitable to
negotiate. This hugely unjudicial political judgment, along with the
convenient timing of the indictments, points up Arbour's and the
Tribunal's highly political role.
The Tribunal's Politicization
Arbour's service to NATO in indicting Milosevic was the logical outcome
of the Tribunal's de facto control and purpose. Established by the
Security Council in the early 1990s to serve the Balkan policy ends of
its dominant members, the Tribunal's funding and interlocking functional
relationship with the leading NATO powers have made it NATO's
instrument. (1)
Although Article 32 of the Tribunal's Charter declares that its expenses
shall be provided in the general budget of the United Nations, this
proviso has been regularly violated. In 1994-1995 the U.S. government
provided it with $700,000 in cash and $2.3 million in equipment, and
numerous other U.S.-based governmental and non- governmental agencies
have provided the Tribunal with resources.
Article 16 of the Tribunal's charter states that the Prosecutor shall
act independently and shall not seek or receive instruction from any
government. This section also has been systematically violated. NATO
sources have regularly made claims suggesting their authority over the
Tribunal: "We will make a decision on whether Yugoslav actions against
ethnic Albanians constitute genocide," states a USIA Fact Sheet, and
Cook asserted at his April 20 press conference with Arbour that "we are
going to focus on the war crimes being committed in Kosovo and our
determination to bring those responsible to justice, " as if he and
Arbour were a team jointly deciding on who should be charged for war
crimes.
Tribunal officials have even bragged about "the strong support of
concerned governments and dedicated individuals such as Secretary
Albright," further referred to as "mother of the Tribunal" (by Judge
Gabrielle Kirk McDonald, president of the Tribunal). In 1996 Arbour met
with the Secretary-General of NATO and its supreme commander to
"establish contacts and begin discussing modalities of cooperation and
assistance." Numerous other meetings have occurred between prosecutor
and NATO, which was given the function of Tribunal gendarme.
Arbour acknowleged (April 20) that "the real danger is whether we would
fall into [following somebody's political agenda] inadvertently by being
in the hands of information-providers who might have an agenda that we
would not be able to discern." But even an imbecile could discern that
NATO had an agenda and that simply accepting the flood of documents
offered by Cook and Albright entailed ADVERTENTLY following that agenda.
Arbour's April 20 reference to the "morality of the [NATO] enterprise"
and her remarks on Milosevic's possible lack of character disqualifying
him from negotiations, as well as her rush to help NATO with an
indictment, point to quite clearly understood political service.
The Arbour-Tribunal bias was dramatically illustrated by the disposition
of an internal Tribunal report on Operation Storm, which described war
crimes committed by the Croatian armed forces in their expulsion of more
than 200,000 Serbs from Krajina in August 1995. (6) In only four days
"at least 150 Serbs were summarily executed, and many hundreds
disappeared," totals that exceeded the 241 victims of the Serbs named in
the indictment of Milosevic. But as the United States supported the
Croat's ethnic cleansing of Serbs in Krajina, and refused to provide
requested information, no indictment of any Croat officer named in the
report, or head of state Tudjman, was ever brought by the Tribunal.
Tribunal's Kangaroo Court Processes
According to Arbour, the Tribunal was "subject to extremely stringent
rules of evidence with respect to the admissibility and the credibility
of the product that we will tender in court," thus precluding
"unsubstantiated, unverifiable, uncorroborated allegations" (April 20).
This is a gross misrepresentation of what John Laughland described in
the Times (London) as "a rogue court with rigged rules" (June 17, 1999).
The Tribunal violates virtually every standard of due process: among
others, it fails to separate prosecution and judge; witnesses can
testify anonymously; confessions are presumed free and voluntary unless
the contrary can be established by the prisoner; and "rules against
hearsay, deeply entrenched in Common Law, are not observed and the
Prosecutor's office has even suggested not calling witnesses to give
evidence but only the tribunal's own 'war crimes investigators'"
(Laughland).
As noted, Arbour presumes guilt before trial; the concept of "innocent
till convicted" is rejected, and she can declare that people linked with
Arkan "will be tainted by their association with an indicted war
criminal" (March 31). Arbour clearly does not believe in the basic rules
of Western jurisprudence. And within a month of her elevation to the
Canadian Supreme Court she joined a court majority that grafted onto
Canadian law the dangerous Tribunal practice of permitting a more
liberal use of hearsay evidence in trials. (2) The consequent corruption
of the Canadian justice system, both by her appointment and her impact,
mirrors that in the Canadian political system, whose leading members
supported the NATO war without question.
NATO's Crimes
In bombing Yugoslavia from March 24 to June 8 1999, NATO violated the UN
Charter requirement that it not use force without UN Security Council
sanction. (3) It was also guilty of aggression in attacking a sovereign
state that was not going beyond its borders. In its defense, NATO
claimed that "humanitarian" concerns demanded these actions and
justified seemingly serious law violations. (4) This reply sanctions law
violations on the basis of self-serving judgments that contradict the
rule of law, but it is also dubious on its own grounds. The NATO bombing
made "an internal humanitarian problem into a disaster" in the words of
Rollie Keith, the returned Canadian OSCE human rights monitor in Kosovo.
Furthermore, NATO refused to negotiate a settlement in Kosovo and
insisted on a violent solution; in the words of one State Department
official, NATO deliberately "raised the bar" and precluded a compromise
resolution because Serbia "needed to be bombed." These counter- facts
suggest that the alleged humanitarian basis of the law violations was a
cover for starkly political and geopolitical objectives.
NATO was also guilty of more traditional war crimes, including some that
the Tribunal had found indictable when [allegeldy] carried out by Serbs.
Thus on March 8, 1996, the Serb leader Milan Martic was indicted for
[allegeldy] launching a rocket cluster-bomb attack on military targets
in Zagreb in May 1995, on the ground that the rocket was "not designed
to hit military targets but to terrorize the civilians of Zagreb." But
the same case could be made for numerous NATO bombing raids, as in the
cluster-bombing of Nis on May 7, 1999, in which a market and hospital
far from any military target were hit in separate strikes--but no
indictment has yet been handed down against NATO.
But NATO was also guilty of bombing non-military targets as systematic
policy. On March 26, 1999, General Wesley Clark said that "We are going
to very systematically and progressively work on his military
forces...[to see] how much pain he is willing to suffer." But this focus
on "military forces" wasn't effective, so NATO quickly turned to "taking
down...the economic apparatus supporting" Serb military forces
(Clinton's words); targets were gradually extended to factories of all
kinds, electric power stations, water and sewage processing facilities,
transport, public buildings, and even schools and hospitals. In effect,
it was NATO's strategy to bring Serbia to its knees by gradually
escalating its attacks on the civil society.
But international law makes civilian targets off limits; the "wanton
destruction of cities, towns or villages or devastation not justified by
military necessity" is prohibited (Sixth Principle of Nuremberg,
formulated in 1950 by a UN-sponsored international law commission).
"Military necessity" does not allow the destruction of a civil society
to make it more difficult for the country to support its armed forces,
any more than civilians can be killed directly because they pay taxes
supporting the war machine or might some day become soldiers. Making an
entire population a hostage is a blatant violation of international law
and its implementing acts are war crimes.
In December 1999, it was finally reported that post-Arbour prosecutor
Carla Del Ponte was reviewing the conduct of NATO, at the urging of
Russia and several other "interested parties" ("U.N. Court Examines
NATO's Yugoslavia War," NYT, Dec. 29, 1999). But the news report
indicates that the focus is on the conduct of NATO pilots and their
commanders, not the NATO decision-makers who decided to target the
civilian infrastructure. It also suggests the public relations nature of
the inquiry, which would "go far in dispelling the belief...that the
tribunal is a tool used by Western leaders to escape accountability."
The report also indicates the delicate matter that the tribunal "depends
on the military alliance to arrest and hand over suspects." It also
quotes Del Ponte saying that "It's not my priority, because I have
inquiries about genocide, about bodies in mass graves." We may rest
assured that no indictments will result from this inquiry.
Beyond Orwell
NATO's leaders, frustrated in attacking the Serb military machine, quite
openly turned to smashing the civil society of Serbia as their means of
attaining the desired quick victory. Arbour and the Tribunal helped NATO
by indicting Milosevic, thereby giving NATO the moral cover needed for
escalated attacks on the hostage population.
Arbour and the Tribunal thus present us with the amazing spectacle of an
institution supposedly organized to contain, prevent, and prosecute for
war crimes actually knowingly facilitating them. Furthermore, petitions
submitted to the Tribunal during Arbour's tenure had called for
prosecution of the leaders of NATO, including Canadian Prime Minister
Jean Chretien, for the commission of war crimes. If she had been a
prosecutor in Canada, Britain or the United States, she would have been
subject to disbarment for considering and then accepting a job from a
person she had been asked to charge. But Arbour was elevated to the
Supreme Court of Canada by Chretien with hardly a mention of this
conflict of interest and immorality. **
About the authors...
Christopher Black (5) is part of the team of Canadian lawyers who have
attempted to bring war crimes charges against NATO before the War Crimes
Tribunal. At present, Mr. Black is serving as the attorney for one of
the defendant at the Rwandan war crimes hearings. He believes that
Western meddling is in large measure responsible for the horrendous
killing in Rwanda. He plans to write an article for Emperors-Clothes on
the subject.
Edward S. Herman is the author of many books including 'Real Terror
Network: Terrorism in Fact and Propaganda' (June 1998) and 'Triumph of
the Market: Essays on Economics, Politics, and the Media' (October
1995).
Further reading...
(1) See Money Talks - US Funds ICTY Public Relations at
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/press.htm
(2) Back to the dark ages by Jared Israel at
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/bac.htm
(3) See NATO's War & World Security by Prof. Raju G. C. Thomas at
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/analysis/security.htm
(4) See HUMANITARIAN WAR: Making the Crime Fit the Punishment by Diana
Johnstone at
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/articles/Johnstone/crime.htm
(5) See An Impartial Tribunal? Really? by Christopher Black at
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/analysis/Impartial.htm
(6)See Conditions of Serbs in Croatia, by Alice Mahon, MP at
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/articles/mahon/croatia.htm
---
>Tribunal Watch archives are on-line at:
>http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/archives/
>==========================================
>
>CANA (Christians Against NATO Aggression)
>Statement from William Spring, Director
>
>CARLA DEL PONTE SHOULD RESIGN AS WAR CRIMES PROSECUTOR
>
>Carla del Ponte should resign as war crimes prosecutor for the Hague
>Tribunal responsible for War Crimes in the area of the Former Yugoslavia.
>She has brought international law into disrepute by her decision announced
>to the Security Council June 2nd not to prosecute NATO leaders for war
>crimes committed by NATO forces in relation to the illegal military attack
>on Yugoslavia last year.
>
>Thomas Fuller, as quoted by the late Lord Denning, Master of the Rolls,
>said: "whoever you are the law is above you." In effect Carla del Ponte has
>put NATO civilian & military leaders beyond the law - has given them
>immunity to engage in whatever criminal action they like. A disgrace to
>the legal profession she should be replaced forthwith by the UN Secretary
>General.
>
>Her investigation into allegations made, not only by the Russian, Yugoslav
>& Chinese Governments concerning NATO war crimes, but also by ordinary
>people across the world, (in which I include CANA, as we detailed specific
>NATO atrocities in a dossier sent to her January 28th this year) was at
>best cursory; at worst her inaction can be interpreted as the frantic
>manoeuvrings of a mafia judge eager to please her mafia paymasters.
>Someone should do an investigation into the War Crimes Tribunal & her
>role, & that of of her predecessor, Ms Arbour. How is this body financed?
>Is it a legal entity? Does the UN Charter allow for new Institutions to be
>created simply on the say so of the Security Council?
>
>What has happened is a juridical nightmare; a nominally independent
>prosecutor, who in fact is leaned on, & responds to pressure from
>representatives of whatever coalition of powers happens to hold most
>influence in the Security Council at any one time.
>
>Her willingness to receive Jamie Shea, & Robin Cook, in her office at the
>Hague, while still theoretically engaged in an investigation as to whether
>NATO had committed war crimes was reprehensible, indicating collusion &
>undue influence. She should have had the courage to stand up to gangsters
>who 'fix' international Courts in the same way as Clinton fixed Congress to
>avoid impeachment.
>
>Her Office wrote to me 15th March stating "aerial warfare is a complex
>area of military international law involving difficult issues of targeting
>& execution." That may be so, but is not an excuse to duck the moral
>questions involved. The Prosecutor gets NATO off the hook by saying she is
>not satisfied there was 'intent' on the part of the NATO authorities to
>cause civilian casualties, which misses the point entirely: all deaths
>caused by those responsible for a war of aggression, whether they be
>military or civilian, are unlawful homicides, & it's not necessary to prove
>intent for every act which flowed from the decision to engage in aggressive
>war. But in the 15th March letter Gavin Ruxton said "The Prosecutor has no
>locus to consider the lawfulness or otherwise of the NATO decision to
>launch its air campaign": which means the Tribunal is disqualified from
>making any finding acquitting NATO of war crimes. (There is of course
>unambiguous evidence of NATO's intent to cause civilian casualties.)
>
>___________________________________________________________________________
___
>For further info tel 02088022144 cana@... also diarise
>House of Lords Cttee Room 4 12 noon 28th June 2000 Press Conference by
>Justin/Cana/Planning for Peace
>
>===========================================================================
=
>To unsubscribe from TWATCH-L: Send an e-mail to
LISTSERV@...
> In your message, type in the command: SIGNOFF TWATCH-L
>
>To resubscribe to TW, send this message to the same address: SUBSCRIBE
TWATCH-L [name of person]
>Send questions, comments, suggestions to:
> twatch-l-request@...
---
From: Herman de Tollenaere <hermantl@...>
To: right-left@...,Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli.;,
Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli.
Subject: 9 June Amsterdam: report on Dutch ministers on trial for NATO
bombing
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 00:24:20 +0200
[Unofficial report, hastily written by a non-lawyer]
On Friday 9 June, at the "Paleis van Justitie" [court house] in
Amsterdam,
Dutch Government Ministers were on trial for the NATO bombing of
Yugoslavia
in 1999.
As I walk to the court house, posters of a beer brand proclaim
"Yugoslavs
like our drink". Maybe, like people in Colombia or in Sierra Leone. All
these people, however, might think one drinks more safely if there is
less
chance of dying by a bomb or other weapon made in a NATO country.
Opening
headline of the day of daily De Volkskrant: the Dutch UN representative
says
that the Netherlands armed forces should get over their Balkans trauma
by
sending a thousand soldiers to Sierra Leone. The British NATO allies
would
like that. Might the Dutch soldiers not find out too late they go there,
like to the Balkans, not really for peace; but maybe for British diamond
millionaires, fighting out their conflict with French diamond
millionaires
at the cost of lives of European soldiers and [especially] African
soldiers,
including child soldiers, and civilians? Remember racism and escalating
violence, when troops from NATO countries were supposed to bring peace
to
Somalia?
Police had not allowed a demonstration, which would have started at 10
o'clock. The case starts 11 o'clock at the "Paleis van Justitie",
Prinsengracht 434 in Amsterdam. Long before the start, people gather
outside. Pro peace leaflets change hands. A big banner goes aloft: NATO
OUT
OF THE BALKANS. It is held by a local anti war committee member, and by
a
twentyish Amsterdam university student. She is here with others of De
Socialist magazine, also present at earlier peace demonstrations.
Celine is there as well. Though more than fifty-five years ago, the Nazi
occupiers of The Netherlands put her in a camp, today she still fights
against racism and war. She is of De Anti Fascist. This is the magazine
of
the Bond van Anti Fascisten [Anti Fascist League], founded by ex members
of
the 1940-1945 resistance against German Nazi occupation. Later, younger
fighters against present day racism and other forms of discrimination
joined. The Anti Fascist League is a main source making it financially
possible to have this case: as the Yugoslav plaintiffs are very poor,
having
often lost jobs and everything by the war.
Speaking of media: a TV crew of the local [multicultural] Amsterdam TV
records the scene outside and the court case inside. Radio The
Netherlands
World Broadcasting is there; as are correspondents of De Volkskrant and
Bosnian media. Yesterday, an article in Ganashakti daily, all the way in
India, told its readers of the case.
In 1999, 29 citizens of Yugoslavia, victims of the bombs, started this
civil
court case against Ministers Kok [Prime Minister], Van Aartsen [Foreign
Affairs], and De Grave [Defense]. In May/June 1999, the judge did not
grant
their request for summary proceedings. However, he also did not throw
out
the case, as pro-war politicians might have liked. Similar court cases
are
on their way in other NATO countries; though often, in these countries
the
legal system works a little slower, or is more expensive for plaintiffs,
than in The Netherlands. In The Netherlands, there are now also cases
against the State [so, not against ministers individually, like in this
case]; other Dutch civil cases against individuals; and World Court
cases
for violation of UN Charter point 2 sub 4, against military aggression.
In a
few months' time, the case brought by surviving families of the bombed
Belgrade television studio crew members will start in The Netherlands.
Before a full big court room, Mr Van Schendel, court president, first
arranges for the media representatives' reporting. Then, he calls upon
the
bombs victims' lawyers to speak. He grants them one hour. As twenty
minutes
is usual for lawyers in civil cases, this indicates some sense of the
juridical importance of this case.
These lawyers are Mr Steijnen and Mr Olof, of Juristen voor de Vrede
[Lawyers for Peace] and the Permanente Commissie [Permanent Legal
Commission
against Dutch War Crimes]. Lawyers for Peace have a long history of
legal
challenges to the Dutch government for allowing NATO nuclear weapons in
The
Netherlands [officially, the people are not allowed to know whether the
nuclear weapons are there or not].
Mr Olof pointed out NATO's war was against the United Nations charter
and
international law. Mr Steijnen pointed out that the Dutch government,
like
NATO, claims NATO's targets were all military. The civilian victims
supposedly were "collateral damage". Really? asked Mr Steijnen. NATO
destroyed fifty churches and monasteries, over three hundred schools;
many
bridges unsuited for military vehicles; buses; passenger trains; TV
studios;
cigarette factories; 100% of chemical industry and 100% of agricultural
fertilizer industry in Yugoslavia; even apart from depleted uranium
ammunition radiation, creating enormous environmental damage. NATO used
cluster bombs.
Conservative pro NATO estimates say 1000 civilians died, 6000 were
wounded.
The MEAT report of the United States Air Force, quoted by Newsweek and
others, says all the weeks of air war destroyed 14 Yugoslav tanks, 18
armed
vehicles, 20 pieces of artillery. If we base ourselves on the
conservative
estimate of civilian victims: then, 70 civilians died for every Yugoslav
tank. Would it not be more accurate to say civilians and civilian
targets
were the real targets, and the damage against Yugoslav army vehicles and
artillery really was "collateral" damage? NATO leaders themselves
basically
admitted this [eg, when asked: why did the Yugoslav government finally
admit NATO troops in Kosovo? Eg, General Short said on BBC television
the
first target [to his regret, only destroyed later] should have been the
"rock and roll bridge" in Belgrade, where young people had concerts
against
the bombing].
Concluding, Mr Steijnen named three random examples of the plaintiffs.
One
worked as a car mechanic in Montenegro. The war started; very worried
about
his family in Belgrade, he went there, and parked his car. NATO bombs
fell
and destroyed the car. This loss meant also the loss of his mechanic's
job.
Now, he has nothing.
Another plaintiff worked in a small businessman's garage. A bomb
destroyed
the garage and the cars in it. Now, the employer is jobless and hungry.
So
is the employee.
A third example: this man used to work in a metal working factory. Bombs
totally destroyed the factory. Like its other 8000 workers, now he is
jobless.
For the ministers, Mr Houtzagers spoke. He quoted from a political
government statement, claiming NATO became involved as it worried about
stability of Albania and Macedonia [both non NATO members; and how did
the
war 'help stability' of these countries, let alone of Kosovo? Mr
Steijnen
replied]. And 'Yugoslavia had refused to negotiate seriously in
Rambouillet
[and how about NATO's proposed Appendix B, amounting to de facto
occupation
of all Yugoslavia?]'. Repeatedly interrupted by judges' critical
questions,
Mr Houtzagers talked about the legal base for the NATO attack. He
admitted
that UN Resolution 1199 was not such a legal base; nevertheless, the
government used it as justification. Mr Steijnen pointed out that only
one
member of the Dutch parliament, Mr Van Middelkoop, had known about
Resolution 1199. So, then, how about democratic control by parliament on
whether The Netherlands were at war or not [not even Prime Minister Kok
knew
when the bombing started]?
Mr Houtzagers also said the ministers could not be sued, 'as they had
acted
as organs of the State'. In reply, Mr Steijnen pointed out that at the
1945
Nuremberg trials, the court had rejected such a defense. *Individuals*
commit war crimes. The Nuremburg decisions are important in
international
law; though in its defence the Dutch government now more or less tries
to
dismiss them. They were part of the precedents claimed, by, for
instance,
the 1993 establishment of the court on Yugoslavia in The Hague. Mr
Steijnen
said: "How would a court react to General Pinochet claiming he had not
been
an individual, only '"an organ of the state"?
To the argument: "the war is over now, so the plaintiffs have no case
anymore. [Two of the plaintiffs last year complained, as the war had
made
them join the Yugoslav army as conscripts, thus putting them in danger
involuntarily]", Mr Steijnen replied the plaintiffs still were in
danger,
also if they would all continue to be civilians as at the moment; as
there
was only a cease fire, not peace. If one listens today to Dutch and
other
NATO leaders they may not yet have learned not to start a similar war
again
against Yugoslavia [or against another country].
President Van Schendel concluded the session by saying that the court
decision will, in principle, become public at 6 July, at 11.30 in the
same
court house. However, Mr Van Schendel left open the possibility that the
court would need more time for the legal complexities of the case; then,
the
verdict would be later.
Even if Lawyers for Peace lose the case in Amsterdam, they will appeal,
all
the way up to the European Court.
After the court case, Mr Houtzagers, contrary to the bombs victims'
lawyers,
refused to answer media questions. Later that day, there was a meeting.
Other Dutch ministers may also face civil cases. So may F16 pilots. So
may
pro-war Members of Parliament like Mr Blaauw of the ["Rightist Liberal"]
VVD
government party: Blaauw, during the Balkan war, talked of glorious
profit
opportunities for Dutch construction millionaires in Kosovo, after the
NATO
bombs would have done their job. Mr Blaauw is also a leader of the Press
Now
organization; officially for 'independent' [in fact, NATOish] media in
the
Balkans. Maybe, also a civil case by people hurt by the bombs, against
Mr De
Hoop Scheffer of the ["Christian Democrat"] CDA [very pro bombing,
though
officially in opposition].
And, maybe also civil damages claims against Marcel Rüter, businessman,
and
leader of the extreme Rightist Voorpost ["Vanguard"] movement, not
represented in government or parliament, which made pro bombing
propaganda.
Mr Rüter is an ex leader of the Centrumpartij'86, members of which used
to
rally for Adolf Hitler and his deputy, Rudolf Hess. Used to, *as
Centrumpartij'86 people*; because a few years ago, the courts banned
this
party for racism; after members had gone to jail for violence. In 1999
Voorpost tried a political comeback on the wave of pro-war and
anti-Serb-anti-Roma-and-anti-other-foreigner propaganda in the 'popular'
media. Maybe an opportunity for the Anti Fascist League to figuratively
"kill the two birds, of war and racism, with one stone"?
Best wishes,
Herman de Tollenaere
---
http://www.counterpunch.com
CounterPunch [Originally published at Swans: http://www.swans.com]
June 4, 2000
An Impartial Tribunal, Really?
By Christopher Black
-
http://www.serbianna.com/dorich/stories/00_06_09.html
The Road To Hell Is Paved With Good Intentions
By William Dorich
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
EMBARGO CONTRO IL POPOLO IRACHENO:
L'ITALIA "NON PUO' FAR NULLA"?!?
Si è svolto oggi (13/6) alla Camera dei Deputati la discussione generale
sulle mozioni per la revoca dell'embargo all'Iraq.
La petizione "per la dissocizione italiana dll'embargo" è stata
annunciata in aula e l'On Cento ha letto un intervento a
nome dei firmatari della petizione.
Gli intervenuti (il dibattito integrale si può leggere sul sito della
camera www.camera.it) si sono unanimemente espressi
per la revoca delle sanzioni all'Iraq.
Il sottosegretario Intini, invece, nella sostanza ha sostenuto che
l'Italia non può far nulla senza un preventivo consenso
europeo (cioè mai, vista la posizione inglese) e senza la integrale
applicazione delle risoluzioni Onu, rimettendosi quindi
nelle mani degli Stati Uniti. Negando così ancora una volta le
responsablità italiane.
Per ora i testi delle mozioni presentate si limitano a impegnare il
Governo ad operare per la revoca delle sanzioni e, vista
la posizione espressa da Intini, si rischia ancora di avere una
risoluzione senza conseguenze.
Invitiamo tutti a mantenere la pressione sul Parlamento inviando a
posta@... e-mail con oggetto "Cari
deputati" che saranno redirette verso tuttii deputati.
campagna Rompere l'embargo
---
MILANO
Sabato 17 giugno 2000
alle ore 15
presso la libreria esoterica ecumenica Falcone
di piazza Missori, Milano
Il Prof. Marco Aurelio Rivelli
si incontrerà con il pubblico per parlare del suo libro “
L'ARCIVESCOVO DEL GENOCIDIO
sul “beato” Stepinac.
Il 28 giugno l’autore sarà in Grecia per presentare l’edizione greca di
questo libro.
Prossimamente entra in stampa il nuovo libro su Pio XII e le
responsabilità della Chiesa nei genocidi (nei vari paesi europei)
durante la Seconda guerra mondiale.
---
TORINO
CENA BENEFIT PER L'OSPEDALE DI KRAGUJEVAC
23 GIUGNO 2000 ORE 20
CSOA ASKATASUNA TORINO
Il coordinamento Torinese per la Jugoslavia sta organizzando per la
serata
del 23 giugno una cena jugoslava, destinando i proventi alla raccolta di
fondi necessari per l'acquisto di medicinali destinati all'ospedale
"KBG" di
Kragujevac.
Durante la serata saranno proiettati video documentari sulla situazione
in
Jugoslavia.
Chi ha intenzione di partecipare alla serata benefit è pregato di
prenotare
telefonando a Flavio 0338 1755563 o via e-mail a
lamonaca@...
entro il 19 giugno alle ore 12.
I disoccupati e gli studenti sottoscriveranno una quota di £ 15.000,
tutti
gli altri £ 25000.
L'ospedale di Kragujevac assiste malati di tutta la regione della
Sumadia e
delle regioni intorno; oggi dopo le devastazioni criminali della NATO,
l'ospedale cura circa 2.000.000 di malati, solo per pediatria e
oncologia.
A questa popolazione si sono aggiunti circa 20.000 profughi dal Kosovo
che
vanno a sommarsi alle decine di migliaia di profughi provenienti da
Croazia
e Bosnia.
Gli effetti devastanti dei bombardamenti su obiettivi civili, sulle
industrie chimiche hanno incrementato esponenzialmente i tumori della
pelle
e i calcinomi uterini e mammellari, oltre ai disturbi psichici e
nervosi, ma
anche febbri e problemi gastro intestinali.
A questi problemi si aggiunge il criminale embargo e le sanzioni contro
la
Jugoslavia: negli ospedali mancano ormai tutti i tipi di medicinali e
soprattutto anestetici, citostatici, antibiotici e medicine per la
psichiatria e la pediatria.
Torino 12 giugno 2000
COORDINAMENTO TORINESE PER LA JUGOSLAVIA
---
CAMPO ANTIMPERIALISTA
http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/281?&start=252
Piccola rettifica di ordine amministrativo
Molti compagni ci hanno inviato dei messaggi facendoci notare un errore
contenuto nel
nostro comunicato di ieri.
In effetti, indicando il conto corrente postale n.12134623 intestato al
centro Studi P. Tresso
su cui fare il versamento per la prenotazione abbiamo omesso di indicare
il recapito del C/C
stesso.
Chi effettuasse il versamento deve compilare il modulo postale come
segue:
Conto Corrente Postale n.12134623 intestato al centro Studi P.
Tresso
Casella Postale 43 - 06034 Foligno (PG)
Ce ne scusiamo coi lettori.
Il Comitato Organizzativo del Campo.
---
BARI
Most za Beograd - Un ponte per Belgrado in terra di Bari
Associazione culturale di solidarietà con la popolazione jugoslava
c/o RdB, via M. Cristina di Savoia 40, BARI. e-mail: ponte@...
mercoledì 21 giugno ore 17.00
Facoltà di Lingue
via Garruba 4 Bari
Jugoslavia 2000. Quale situazione? Quali prospettive?
Relazioni e interventi di:
Ugo Villani, ordinario di diritto internazionale - Università di Bari:
L'ONU e la crisi del Kosovo un anno dopo
Dragan Mraovic, console capo della Repubblica Federale di Jugoslavia a
Bari: La Serbia, tra ricostruzione ed embargo
Intermezzo recitato a cura dell'associazione teatrale Grammelot di
Molfetta
- Le 15 bugie di Jamie Shea
- Gott mit uns: il monologo di Wesley Clark
- Carla dei miracoli alla corte dell'Aja
Jasna Tkalec, redattrice della rivista Hrvatska Ljevica (sinistra
croata): Croazia: la pesante eredità dell'era Tudjman e le prospettive
future
Nico Perrone, docente di Storia contemporanea - Università di Bari
Giuseppe Belviso, giornalista e telecineoperatore di RAI 3
coordina Andrea Catone, dell'associazione Most za Beograd
---
[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]][[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]][[[[]]]]][[[[]]]
"Senza Censura"
Per rilanciare il dibattito su repressione e carcere
[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]][[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]][[[[]]]]][[[[]]]
Sommario n.2/2000:
- Mumia Abu-Jamal:
L'irragionevolezza del caso.
Dal Braccio della Morte!
Tributo ad Albert "Nuh" Washington
Dal carcere di Novara, per Mumia
- Strategia della Controrivoluzione
L'U.E. grande potenza
Adriatico: avamposto permanente per la guerra nei Balcani
Il Montenegro
Ad un anno dalla guerra
Il punto di vista della controrivoluzione
- Ristrutturazione e Controllo:
Repressione e mondo del lavoro
Ristrutturazione e processo penale
"Nuove" tecniche di controllo
Il grande fratello
Trasporti e diritto di sciopero
Legge e ordine "made in U.s.a."
- Repressione e Lotte:
Il caos come normalità (cronologia ragionata)
L'editoriale:
Questo secondo numero, uscito secondo la tabella di marcia che prevede
Senza
Censura in distribuzione ogni quattro mesi, lo presentiamo ai lettori
con
particolare soddisfazione.
Come tutte le scommesse (editoriali e non) la seconda uscita e' un po'
la
cartina di tornasole dell'intero progetto: dopo gli sforzi del primo
numero
e' qui infatti che si comincia a verificare se effettivamente il lavoro
fatto ha dei riscontri, se riesce cioe' a 'girare' al di la' dello
sforzo
volontaristico della redazione.
E a gudicare dai materiali raccolti (siamo stati costretti ad aumentare
il
numero di pagine previste) e dal lavoro di distribuzione fatto in questi
mesi, il bilancio puo' dirsi senz'altro positivo.
Molte sono state le serate di presentazione organizzate in varie citta'
italiane, ancora di piu' sono stati i momenti di confronto "informali"
tra
compagni e compagne che hanno avuto come centro di discussione la
rivista e
piu' in generale la problematica della repressione con essa trattata.
Molte, naturalmente, le critiche, i suggerimenti, i contributi.
La difficolta' maggiore e' senz'altro quella di rendere organico il
lavoro,
di fare intravedere nella successione degli articoli e degli argomenti
quella traccia, quel filo rosso che vorremmo evidenziare tra aspetti
anche
cosi' diversi della questione "repressione".
Soprattutto nel primo numero, il rischio "collage" era forte. Ancora
piu'
forte, forse, il rischio di non riuscire a collocare questo lavoro
all'interno di una chiara lettura di classe che vede la repressione non
come
un "fenomeno" oggetto di studi quasi sociologici a se' stanti, ma come
uno
strumento strategico del capitale a livello internazionale per governare
la
propria crisi, per affiancare e sostenere i tentativi di
ristrutturazione
che a livello globale vengono messi in campo per mantenere intatto il
proprio dominio sulle classi sfruttate di tutto il mondo.
E infine, ma non meno importante, per mettere una costante ipoteca sulla
possibilita' di sviluppo di qualsiasi forma di organizzazione che
all'interno di questa crisi tenta di riaffermare prospettive di
trasformazione/liberazione al di fuori delle compatibilita' stabilite
dai
vari potentati in ogni angolo del pianeta.
Del resto, in questo anno "post-bellico", proprio su questo terreno
l'Italia
ha visto una progressione repressiva degna degli anni '80, con decine di
arresti e centinaia di perquisizioni che hanno "scandagliato" le piu'
diverse esperienze dell'organizzazione di classe nel costante tentivo di
ostacolare o comunque condizionare pesantemente lo sviluppo di qualsiasi
anche minimo livello di critica politica dell'esistente.
Ci sembra comunque che un po' alla volta, anche dal lavoro della
redazione,
comincino a delinearsi alcuni terreni di approfondimento che puntano con
decisione nella direzione prefissata, trovando numerosi riscontri e
raccogliendo diversi contributi non fini a se' stessi ma che pian piano
evidenziano filoni di dibattito ben precisi da sviluppare in avanti.
In questa direzione si conferma ancora efficace la divisione della
rivista
nelle quattro sezioni individuate nel numero scorso: Strategie della
Controrivoluzione, Ristrutturazione e Controllo, Repressione delle
Lotte,
oltre alla immancabile sezione di aggiornamente sulla campagna contro
l'assassinio di Mumia Abu-Jamal, che cerca ancora una volta di fare il
punto
su una vicenda che ci vede impegnati da anni insieme a milioni di
persone in
tutto il mondo determinate a strappare questo rivoluzionario dalle mani
del
boia.
E cosi' l'analisi dei processi di ristrutturazione della Nato, con le
sue
pesanti implicazioni su tutta l'area Sud-Orientale che fanno dell'Europa
uno
scacchiere fondamentale per le strategie di controllo imperialiste a
livello
globale, ci sembra consolidarsi come un terreno importante di confronto
e di
approfondimento politico della rivista.
Come pure, sulle questioni del lavoro, la circolazione di riflessioni e
contributi tesi non solo a smascherare una chiara tendenza
antiproletaria
delle "nuove" legislazioni e delle "nuove" forme di organizzazione della
produzione ma che cominciano a riaffrontare un po' alla volta anche la
questione dell'organizzazione di classe in un settore dove da anni lo
scoramento e la mancanza di prospettive dominavano la scena, ci sembra
un
aspetto senza dubbio interessante.
Un'altra questione su cui si sta sviluppando un importante lavoro di
approfondimento che proseguira' nei prossimi numeri e' l'analisi del
complesso carcerario negli USA, un sentiero "dannato" che ci porta nei
meandri della "bestia" aiutandoci a comprendere meglio una realta'
spesso
solo intravista tra le veline dei giornali ma, nostro malgrado, specchio
premonitore di molte trasformazioni gia' riconoscibili nelle strategie
politiche dei padroni nostrani.
E in ultimo, un tentativo di rendere un po' piu' immediato e fruibile il
frammentato resoconto di notizie, buone e cattive, che per forza di cose
si
accavallano tra un numero e l'altro, proposto ora nella forma di un
"calendario" che alterna in ordine cronologico flash a piccoli articoli
piu'
approfonditi.
Non ci stancheremo mai di ripetere, prima di lasciarvi alla lettura
della
rivista, come per noi sia assolutamente fondamentale che al lavoro della
redazione si affianchi la collaborazione e il contributo di quanti,
singoli
individui o esperienze collettive, pensano di avere qualcosa da dire
sulle
molte tematiche proposte, nella convinzione che questo possa fornire un
piccolo ma importante strumento nelle mani di chi ha scelto di opporsi
alle
brutalita' e alle aberrazioni della societa' del capitale.
[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]][[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]][[[[]]]]][[[[]]]
Per chi volesse inviarci del materiale per la
pubblicazione su "Senza Censura" deve indirizzare a:
Centro di Documentaqzione "Krupskaja"
(specificando: per Senza Censura)
Via del Verrocchio 12/N
40138 - Bologna
E-mail: senzacensura@...
[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]][[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]][[[[]]]]][[[[]]]
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
L'ITALIA "NON PUO' FAR NULLA"?!?
Si è svolto oggi (13/6) alla Camera dei Deputati la discussione generale
sulle mozioni per la revoca dell'embargo all'Iraq.
La petizione "per la dissocizione italiana dll'embargo" è stata
annunciata in aula e l'On Cento ha letto un intervento a
nome dei firmatari della petizione.
Gli intervenuti (il dibattito integrale si può leggere sul sito della
camera www.camera.it) si sono unanimemente espressi
per la revoca delle sanzioni all'Iraq.
Il sottosegretario Intini, invece, nella sostanza ha sostenuto che
l'Italia non può far nulla senza un preventivo consenso
europeo (cioè mai, vista la posizione inglese) e senza la integrale
applicazione delle risoluzioni Onu, rimettendosi quindi
nelle mani degli Stati Uniti. Negando così ancora una volta le
responsablità italiane.
Per ora i testi delle mozioni presentate si limitano a impegnare il
Governo ad operare per la revoca delle sanzioni e, vista
la posizione espressa da Intini, si rischia ancora di avere una
risoluzione senza conseguenze.
Invitiamo tutti a mantenere la pressione sul Parlamento inviando a
posta@... e-mail con oggetto "Cari
deputati" che saranno redirette verso tuttii deputati.
campagna Rompere l'embargo
---
MILANO
Sabato 17 giugno 2000
alle ore 15
presso la libreria esoterica ecumenica Falcone
di piazza Missori, Milano
Il Prof. Marco Aurelio Rivelli
si incontrerà con il pubblico per parlare del suo libro “
L'ARCIVESCOVO DEL GENOCIDIO
sul “beato” Stepinac.
Il 28 giugno l’autore sarà in Grecia per presentare l’edizione greca di
questo libro.
Prossimamente entra in stampa il nuovo libro su Pio XII e le
responsabilità della Chiesa nei genocidi (nei vari paesi europei)
durante la Seconda guerra mondiale.
---
TORINO
CENA BENEFIT PER L'OSPEDALE DI KRAGUJEVAC
23 GIUGNO 2000 ORE 20
CSOA ASKATASUNA TORINO
Il coordinamento Torinese per la Jugoslavia sta organizzando per la
serata
del 23 giugno una cena jugoslava, destinando i proventi alla raccolta di
fondi necessari per l'acquisto di medicinali destinati all'ospedale
"KBG" di
Kragujevac.
Durante la serata saranno proiettati video documentari sulla situazione
in
Jugoslavia.
Chi ha intenzione di partecipare alla serata benefit è pregato di
prenotare
telefonando a Flavio 0338 1755563 o via e-mail a
lamonaca@...
entro il 19 giugno alle ore 12.
I disoccupati e gli studenti sottoscriveranno una quota di £ 15.000,
tutti
gli altri £ 25000.
L'ospedale di Kragujevac assiste malati di tutta la regione della
Sumadia e
delle regioni intorno; oggi dopo le devastazioni criminali della NATO,
l'ospedale cura circa 2.000.000 di malati, solo per pediatria e
oncologia.
A questa popolazione si sono aggiunti circa 20.000 profughi dal Kosovo
che
vanno a sommarsi alle decine di migliaia di profughi provenienti da
Croazia
e Bosnia.
Gli effetti devastanti dei bombardamenti su obiettivi civili, sulle
industrie chimiche hanno incrementato esponenzialmente i tumori della
pelle
e i calcinomi uterini e mammellari, oltre ai disturbi psichici e
nervosi, ma
anche febbri e problemi gastro intestinali.
A questi problemi si aggiunge il criminale embargo e le sanzioni contro
la
Jugoslavia: negli ospedali mancano ormai tutti i tipi di medicinali e
soprattutto anestetici, citostatici, antibiotici e medicine per la
psichiatria e la pediatria.
Torino 12 giugno 2000
COORDINAMENTO TORINESE PER LA JUGOSLAVIA
---
CAMPO ANTIMPERIALISTA
http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/281?&start=252
Piccola rettifica di ordine amministrativo
Molti compagni ci hanno inviato dei messaggi facendoci notare un errore
contenuto nel
nostro comunicato di ieri.
In effetti, indicando il conto corrente postale n.12134623 intestato al
centro Studi P. Tresso
su cui fare il versamento per la prenotazione abbiamo omesso di indicare
il recapito del C/C
stesso.
Chi effettuasse il versamento deve compilare il modulo postale come
segue:
Conto Corrente Postale n.12134623 intestato al centro Studi P.
Tresso
Casella Postale 43 - 06034 Foligno (PG)
Ce ne scusiamo coi lettori.
Il Comitato Organizzativo del Campo.
---
BARI
Most za Beograd - Un ponte per Belgrado in terra di Bari
Associazione culturale di solidarietà con la popolazione jugoslava
c/o RdB, via M. Cristina di Savoia 40, BARI. e-mail: ponte@...
mercoledì 21 giugno ore 17.00
Facoltà di Lingue
via Garruba 4 Bari
Jugoslavia 2000. Quale situazione? Quali prospettive?
Relazioni e interventi di:
Ugo Villani, ordinario di diritto internazionale - Università di Bari:
L'ONU e la crisi del Kosovo un anno dopo
Dragan Mraovic, console capo della Repubblica Federale di Jugoslavia a
Bari: La Serbia, tra ricostruzione ed embargo
Intermezzo recitato a cura dell'associazione teatrale Grammelot di
Molfetta
- Le 15 bugie di Jamie Shea
- Gott mit uns: il monologo di Wesley Clark
- Carla dei miracoli alla corte dell'Aja
Jasna Tkalec, redattrice della rivista Hrvatska Ljevica (sinistra
croata): Croazia: la pesante eredità dell'era Tudjman e le prospettive
future
Nico Perrone, docente di Storia contemporanea - Università di Bari
Giuseppe Belviso, giornalista e telecineoperatore di RAI 3
coordina Andrea Catone, dell'associazione Most za Beograd
---
[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]][[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]][[[[]]]]][[[[]]]
"Senza Censura"
Per rilanciare il dibattito su repressione e carcere
[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]][[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]][[[[]]]]][[[[]]]
Sommario n.2/2000:
- Mumia Abu-Jamal:
L'irragionevolezza del caso.
Dal Braccio della Morte!
Tributo ad Albert "Nuh" Washington
Dal carcere di Novara, per Mumia
- Strategia della Controrivoluzione
L'U.E. grande potenza
Adriatico: avamposto permanente per la guerra nei Balcani
Il Montenegro
Ad un anno dalla guerra
Il punto di vista della controrivoluzione
- Ristrutturazione e Controllo:
Repressione e mondo del lavoro
Ristrutturazione e processo penale
"Nuove" tecniche di controllo
Il grande fratello
Trasporti e diritto di sciopero
Legge e ordine "made in U.s.a."
- Repressione e Lotte:
Il caos come normalità (cronologia ragionata)
L'editoriale:
Questo secondo numero, uscito secondo la tabella di marcia che prevede
Senza
Censura in distribuzione ogni quattro mesi, lo presentiamo ai lettori
con
particolare soddisfazione.
Come tutte le scommesse (editoriali e non) la seconda uscita e' un po'
la
cartina di tornasole dell'intero progetto: dopo gli sforzi del primo
numero
e' qui infatti che si comincia a verificare se effettivamente il lavoro
fatto ha dei riscontri, se riesce cioe' a 'girare' al di la' dello
sforzo
volontaristico della redazione.
E a gudicare dai materiali raccolti (siamo stati costretti ad aumentare
il
numero di pagine previste) e dal lavoro di distribuzione fatto in questi
mesi, il bilancio puo' dirsi senz'altro positivo.
Molte sono state le serate di presentazione organizzate in varie citta'
italiane, ancora di piu' sono stati i momenti di confronto "informali"
tra
compagni e compagne che hanno avuto come centro di discussione la
rivista e
piu' in generale la problematica della repressione con essa trattata.
Molte, naturalmente, le critiche, i suggerimenti, i contributi.
La difficolta' maggiore e' senz'altro quella di rendere organico il
lavoro,
di fare intravedere nella successione degli articoli e degli argomenti
quella traccia, quel filo rosso che vorremmo evidenziare tra aspetti
anche
cosi' diversi della questione "repressione".
Soprattutto nel primo numero, il rischio "collage" era forte. Ancora
piu'
forte, forse, il rischio di non riuscire a collocare questo lavoro
all'interno di una chiara lettura di classe che vede la repressione non
come
un "fenomeno" oggetto di studi quasi sociologici a se' stanti, ma come
uno
strumento strategico del capitale a livello internazionale per governare
la
propria crisi, per affiancare e sostenere i tentativi di
ristrutturazione
che a livello globale vengono messi in campo per mantenere intatto il
proprio dominio sulle classi sfruttate di tutto il mondo.
E infine, ma non meno importante, per mettere una costante ipoteca sulla
possibilita' di sviluppo di qualsiasi forma di organizzazione che
all'interno di questa crisi tenta di riaffermare prospettive di
trasformazione/liberazione al di fuori delle compatibilita' stabilite
dai
vari potentati in ogni angolo del pianeta.
Del resto, in questo anno "post-bellico", proprio su questo terreno
l'Italia
ha visto una progressione repressiva degna degli anni '80, con decine di
arresti e centinaia di perquisizioni che hanno "scandagliato" le piu'
diverse esperienze dell'organizzazione di classe nel costante tentivo di
ostacolare o comunque condizionare pesantemente lo sviluppo di qualsiasi
anche minimo livello di critica politica dell'esistente.
Ci sembra comunque che un po' alla volta, anche dal lavoro della
redazione,
comincino a delinearsi alcuni terreni di approfondimento che puntano con
decisione nella direzione prefissata, trovando numerosi riscontri e
raccogliendo diversi contributi non fini a se' stessi ma che pian piano
evidenziano filoni di dibattito ben precisi da sviluppare in avanti.
In questa direzione si conferma ancora efficace la divisione della
rivista
nelle quattro sezioni individuate nel numero scorso: Strategie della
Controrivoluzione, Ristrutturazione e Controllo, Repressione delle
Lotte,
oltre alla immancabile sezione di aggiornamente sulla campagna contro
l'assassinio di Mumia Abu-Jamal, che cerca ancora una volta di fare il
punto
su una vicenda che ci vede impegnati da anni insieme a milioni di
persone in
tutto il mondo determinate a strappare questo rivoluzionario dalle mani
del
boia.
E cosi' l'analisi dei processi di ristrutturazione della Nato, con le
sue
pesanti implicazioni su tutta l'area Sud-Orientale che fanno dell'Europa
uno
scacchiere fondamentale per le strategie di controllo imperialiste a
livello
globale, ci sembra consolidarsi come un terreno importante di confronto
e di
approfondimento politico della rivista.
Come pure, sulle questioni del lavoro, la circolazione di riflessioni e
contributi tesi non solo a smascherare una chiara tendenza
antiproletaria
delle "nuove" legislazioni e delle "nuove" forme di organizzazione della
produzione ma che cominciano a riaffrontare un po' alla volta anche la
questione dell'organizzazione di classe in un settore dove da anni lo
scoramento e la mancanza di prospettive dominavano la scena, ci sembra
un
aspetto senza dubbio interessante.
Un'altra questione su cui si sta sviluppando un importante lavoro di
approfondimento che proseguira' nei prossimi numeri e' l'analisi del
complesso carcerario negli USA, un sentiero "dannato" che ci porta nei
meandri della "bestia" aiutandoci a comprendere meglio una realta'
spesso
solo intravista tra le veline dei giornali ma, nostro malgrado, specchio
premonitore di molte trasformazioni gia' riconoscibili nelle strategie
politiche dei padroni nostrani.
E in ultimo, un tentativo di rendere un po' piu' immediato e fruibile il
frammentato resoconto di notizie, buone e cattive, che per forza di cose
si
accavallano tra un numero e l'altro, proposto ora nella forma di un
"calendario" che alterna in ordine cronologico flash a piccoli articoli
piu'
approfonditi.
Non ci stancheremo mai di ripetere, prima di lasciarvi alla lettura
della
rivista, come per noi sia assolutamente fondamentale che al lavoro della
redazione si affianchi la collaborazione e il contributo di quanti,
singoli
individui o esperienze collettive, pensano di avere qualcosa da dire
sulle
molte tematiche proposte, nella convinzione che questo possa fornire un
piccolo ma importante strumento nelle mani di chi ha scelto di opporsi
alle
brutalita' e alle aberrazioni della societa' del capitale.
[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]][[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]][[[[]]]]][[[[]]]
Per chi volesse inviarci del materiale per la
pubblicazione su "Senza Censura" deve indirizzare a:
Centro di Documentaqzione "Krupskaja"
(specificando: per Senza Censura)
Via del Verrocchio 12/N
40138 - Bologna
E-mail: senzacensura@...
[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]][[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]][[[[]]]]][[[[]]]
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
QUELLI CHE AMANO GLI ANIMALI PIU' CHE GLI ESSERI UMANI
I diplomatici jugoslavi a Berlino stanno ricevendo in questi giorni
numerose lettere di protesta da organizzazioni caritatevoli e per la
protezione degli animali, nelle quali si chiede la cessazione degli
"eccidi di massa di cani" in Serbia. Queste organizzazioni sostengono di
essere venute a conoscenza delle programmata liquidazione di 350 cani,
probabilmente randagi, in Serbia entro il 15 giugno 2000.
"Vi preghiamo di evitare questo nuovo genocidio", c'e' scritto su una di
queste lettere. "Non e' stato gettato abbastanza sangue nelle guerre di
questi anni?"
In tutti questi mesi la missione diplomatica jugoslava a Berlino non ha
ricevuto neanche una singola lettera di protesta, nemmeno per
conoscenza, relativamente alla uccisione di piu' di mille persone nella
provincia del Kosmet.
(Fonte: www.Serbia-Info.com, 14/6/2000)
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
I diplomatici jugoslavi a Berlino stanno ricevendo in questi giorni
numerose lettere di protesta da organizzazioni caritatevoli e per la
protezione degli animali, nelle quali si chiede la cessazione degli
"eccidi di massa di cani" in Serbia. Queste organizzazioni sostengono di
essere venute a conoscenza delle programmata liquidazione di 350 cani,
probabilmente randagi, in Serbia entro il 15 giugno 2000.
"Vi preghiamo di evitare questo nuovo genocidio", c'e' scritto su una di
queste lettere. "Non e' stato gettato abbastanza sangue nelle guerre di
questi anni?"
In tutti questi mesi la missione diplomatica jugoslava a Berlino non ha
ricevuto neanche una singola lettera di protesta, nemmeno per
conoscenza, relativamente alla uccisione di piu' di mille persone nella
provincia del Kosmet.
(Fonte: www.Serbia-Info.com, 14/6/2000)
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
WHY HUMAN RIGHTS ARE WRONG
Mail version: the complete version, with links, is at
http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/human.rights.html
--------------------------------------
A Serbian child who is shot to enforce human rights, suffers just as
much
pain, as an American or British child. Yet the US and British
governments do
not kill or injure their own citizens, to protect their human rights.
That
fate is reserved for East Europeans, Africans, and Asians. The western
human
rights lobby claims, that it is wrong to deny people human rights. They
claim
opposition to human rights is based on 'ethical relativism', and that
their
own 'moral universalism' is superior. Yet they would never subject their
own
fellow citizens to the same treatment as (for instance) the inhabitants
of
Belgrade. Clearly, the 'moral universalism' is itself relative. More
likely,
it is just a propaganda slogan anyway. Increasingly, the doctrine of
human
rights is the cause of suffering, oppression and injustice.
Increasingly, the
argument that superpowers have a 'moral duty' to enforce human rights,
is used
in the same way as the doctrine of the 'civilising mission' once was
used to
justify colonialism. This text presents a clear rejection of human
rights,
without any appeal to cultural relativism / ethical relativism.
The ethical system of rights
-----
In the claims made by advocates of human rights, rights generally have
the
following characteristics...
-- a right is declared by one person or organisation, for another
person
-- usually, a right is declared by one person or organisation, for all
human beings
-- the consent of the other person or persons is not necessary, for the
right
to be declared
-- there are certain actions (or restraint from certain actions) which
constitute 'respect' of the right
-- these actions (or restraint from action) may legitimately be taken
-- there is usually a moral duty to take these actions (or this
restraint
from action)
-- the person with the right has no moral grounds to oppose this action
-
even if they have not consented to the right in the first place
-- therefore there are certain actions which may legitimately be taken
against another, since they fulfil a moral obligation to respect a
right, and
these actions do not constitute a harm
-- since there is a moral obligation to these actions, they are not
wrong,
even if consent for them is explicitly refused, and even if the person
affected considers them a harm
These are the far-reaching claims made by all advocates of rights, and
especially by the human rights lobby. It is obvious, even from this
summary,
that the logic of rights interferes with the principle of moral
autonomy.
Some people in history have indeed claimed the rights that were conceded
to
them - but most have had their rights declared for them by others. They
are
not allowed to renounce these 'declared rights'. The idea that a person
must
accept all rights declared for them (by others), clearly contradicts the
idea
of political freedom. The human-rights tradition includes no element of
consent. 'Declared rights' are by definition authoritarian. It is these
aspects, which make the doctrine of human rights a license for
oppression.
The Prizren water supply
-----
The logic of rights can be illustrated with a familiar example, addition
of
substances to drinking water. Consider these examples...
-- The United Nations declares a right to healthy drinking water.
Therefore
the UN administration in Prizren decides to filter the drinking water to
remove bacteria. It does not inform the residents of the city, or ask
their consent.
That seems relatively harmless, and indeed desirable. But the moral
logic is
no different in the following examples....
-- The United Nations declares a right to healthy drinking water.
Therefore
the UN administration in Prizren decides to add chlorine to the
drinking
water, to kill bacteria. It does not inform the residents of the city,
or ask
their consent.
-- The United Nations declares a right to healthy drinking water.
Therefore
the UN administration in Prizren decides to add fluoride to the
drinking
water, to improve dental health. It does not inform the residents of the
city,
or ask their consent.
-- The United Nations declares a right to healthy drinking water.
Therefore
the UN administration in Prizren decides to add contraceptives to the
drinking water, since the high birth rate is overloading the health-care
system. It does not inform the residents of the city, or ask their
consent.
-- The United Nations declares a right to healthy drinking water.
Therefore
the UN administration in Prizren decides to add Prozac to the drinking
water,
to reduce the incidence of post-traumatic depression. It does not inform
the
residents of the city, or ask their consent.
-- The United Nations declares a right to healthy drinking water.
Therefore
the UN administration in Prizren decides to add a genetically modified
HIV
virus to the drinking water, as a form of vaccination against an AIDS
epidemic. It does not inform the residents of the city, or ask their
consent.
The list shows how easy it is to extend the range of a right (and indeed
the
UN administration in Kosovo has taken extraordinary steps to control
cultural
and political life there). The United Nations decided, without
consulting me,
that I have a right not to be tortured - and that is considered morally
legitimate. But what is to stop them deciding tomorrow, that I have a
right to
be tortured? The United Nations decided that I have a right to life. But
what
is to stop them deciding tomorrow, that I have a right to death?
But this type of argument - the 'slippery slope ', or 'consequentialism'
- is
rejected anyway by many moral philosophers. They would claim that, just
because a principle has undesirable consequences in certain cases, that
does
not rule it out as a moral principle. But it is the principle itself
which is
wrong here - the principle that certain actions are in effect exempt
from
moral judgment, because they constitute 'respect' of a right.
Human rights: opposing principles
-----
The best way to illustrate this is to look at how rights could be
ethically
acceptable. That could be through these alternative principles...
***
1 "Rights are voluntary. They can not be imposed on a person without
consent."
2 "Every person is free to chose their own rights, if any."
3 "It is not in itself good to respect a right. Every right is itself
subject
to ethical assessment, to moral judgment. It can be wrong to respect a
right,
even a right that has been consented to."
4 "An action done to a person, to respect the rights of that person, can
be a
harm to that person. Each person is morally autonomous in deciding what
constitutes a harm to themselves."
5 "Specifically, the state or international organisations may not
declare
rights for persons, unless those persons participated in the formulation
of
those rights, and expressed their consent."
6 "Rights may be renounced at any time."
7 "There must be an impartial procedure of appeal against rights.
Obviously
this function can not be exercised by pro-rights organisations, such as
the
United Nations."
8 "An agreement on rights can not bind persons, who have not entered
into the agreement."
9 "Objections of conscience to any right are valid."
***
This list only shows how different the present human rights idea is, in
comparison. No supporter of human rights would ever accept anything like
these principles.
The UN-declared human rights
-----
The present debate on human rights and sovereignty is largely concerned
with a
specific set of rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This
Declaration was approved by the United Nations in December 1948. In this
case,
the failure of ethical legitimacy is clear. The human rights lobby
claims,
that this document is morally binding on the whole world, forever. But
what
basis does that have?
-- The document was approved by the diplomatic representatives of UN
member
states. No other persons or organisations participated in the
negotiations on
the text.
-- These states were the victorious allied powers of 1945, and their
allies,
with a few others. They did not even approximate the present membership
of the
United Nations.
-- In many cases, the government and political system in these states
had
been installed in 1944 and 1945 by Allied military action. (In Europe
especially, the Soviet Union and the US manipulated the political
process to
obtain the desired government, inside their new spheres of influence).
Even by
the limited standards of parliamentary elections, they governments did
not
'represent' their inhabitants. In some countries, such as Greece and
China, a
civil war was in progress.
-- Some of the signatory states were, at the time, de facto
protectorates of
Allied powers - such as Persia, Egypt and Iraq. Others were self-ruled
colonies, but with a whites-only government, such as Australia and South
Africa.
-- Several of the states excluded large sections of the population from
any
political influence - such as the remains of the German minorities in
Eastern
Europe at the time. Germany and Japan themselves were under military
occupation, and not represented.
-- Some of the States - Afghanistan, for instance - had no modern
political
system of any kind.
-- Most notably, Africa was 'represented' by colonial powers. At the
time,
most held no elections of any kind, in most of their colonial territory.
Often, all political activity by 'natives' was forbidden.
-- Probably only five governments decided, without outside pressure,
their
position on the Declaration: the United States, Britain, the Soviet
Union,
Sweden, and Mexico. All others were, to a greater or lesser extent,
dependent
on their protecting power (or colonial power).
-- The text was ultimately a compromise, between the United States and
the
Soviet Union. The USA was the initiator in this process, and the Soviet
Union
was on the defensive. The Declaration is, without doubt, a primary
historical
text of the Cold War.
-- Most of the world population never even saw the text, before it was
approved. Probably the majority could not even understand the few
official
languages in which it was written. The text is still not available, in
the
majority of the languages spoken on earth.
-- No election was held in any country, with the text as an election
issue.
-- No referendum, or any other form of test, was held to approve the
text, in
any country. There was no ratification procedure of any kind, since it
was not
a Treaty.
-- No individual ever formally consented to the document as an
individual:
the United Nations never organised such a consent procedure.
-- I am obliged to accept the contents, even though it was approved
before I
was born, and any influence on its contents was therefore impossible.
-- There is no procedure for revision of the declaration.
-- There is no procedure for periodic review, let alone periodic
re-approval,
of the Declaration.
-- The Declaration is therefore considered to apply indefinitely,
beyond the
lifetime of those who drafted it, and without any possibility of
amending it
or annulling it. Their descendants will, apparently, forever be bound by
the Declaration.
-- There is no independent appeal against its contents, or against the
rights
imposed, or against the application of the Declaration by the United
Nations
-- Specifically, there is no independent appeal procedure, against
military
action to enforce it. If the UN decides tomorrow, that it is necessary
to
destroy Beijing with a nuclear weapon, to enforce human rights, then
no-one
can take any legal steps against this decision. Neither the individual
residents, nor the Chinese government, nor any organisation, can appeal
-
certainly not to the International Court. The Universal Declaration of
Human
Rights is considered beyond appeal, in fact beyond all legal procedure.
For a document conferring such powers, this is a very weak ethical
basis. Even
more so, because it is now treated as the basic document of the United
Nations
(in contrast to the UN Charter, which guarantees national sovereignty).
If the
United States recolonises Africa over the next 15 years, then it will
almost
certainly refer to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - as the
legal
basis for its actions. And since the United States is now the only
superpower
capable of doing this, and no other power can successfully oppose it,
the
temptation will be great. Because of its claimed universal and absolute
force,
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is an emergent license for
global
conquest, in a uni-polar world.
Human rights are clearly political
-----
There is no doubt, that the doctrine of human rights belongs within a
specific
political tradition: the broad European liberal tradition. Human rights
have
also become a central element, in recent Anglo-American democratic
liberalism
(the type of political philosophy represented by John Rawls). But the
liberal
tradition is only one section of European political thought. Not only
are
human rights not universal, they are not even 'western' or 'European'.
This
text completely rejects human rights, but from a background which is as
European as liberalism. It is certainly not an African (or Asian, or
Slavic)
cultural or philosophical viewpoint. Human rights are not culturally
specific,
they are politically specific. The human rights doctrine is a classic
political ideology.
The imposition of human rights on the world, is the imposition of that
political ideology. And with it comes the rest of the liberal package.
The
supporters of human rights are also the supporters of free trade,
democracy,
an open society and the free market. The two recent explicit military
interventions to protect rights, in Timor and Kosovo, have also brought
open
free-market economies to these regions. In organisations like the NATO
or the
OSCE, the free market and human rights are always referred to together,
as if
they were the same thing. And because of that, in practice, they are.
--
Paul Treanor
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
Mail version: the complete version, with links, is at
http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/human.rights.html
--------------------------------------
A Serbian child who is shot to enforce human rights, suffers just as
much
pain, as an American or British child. Yet the US and British
governments do
not kill or injure their own citizens, to protect their human rights.
That
fate is reserved for East Europeans, Africans, and Asians. The western
human
rights lobby claims, that it is wrong to deny people human rights. They
claim
opposition to human rights is based on 'ethical relativism', and that
their
own 'moral universalism' is superior. Yet they would never subject their
own
fellow citizens to the same treatment as (for instance) the inhabitants
of
Belgrade. Clearly, the 'moral universalism' is itself relative. More
likely,
it is just a propaganda slogan anyway. Increasingly, the doctrine of
human
rights is the cause of suffering, oppression and injustice.
Increasingly, the
argument that superpowers have a 'moral duty' to enforce human rights,
is used
in the same way as the doctrine of the 'civilising mission' once was
used to
justify colonialism. This text presents a clear rejection of human
rights,
without any appeal to cultural relativism / ethical relativism.
The ethical system of rights
-----
In the claims made by advocates of human rights, rights generally have
the
following characteristics...
-- a right is declared by one person or organisation, for another
person
-- usually, a right is declared by one person or organisation, for all
human beings
-- the consent of the other person or persons is not necessary, for the
right
to be declared
-- there are certain actions (or restraint from certain actions) which
constitute 'respect' of the right
-- these actions (or restraint from action) may legitimately be taken
-- there is usually a moral duty to take these actions (or this
restraint
from action)
-- the person with the right has no moral grounds to oppose this action
-
even if they have not consented to the right in the first place
-- therefore there are certain actions which may legitimately be taken
against another, since they fulfil a moral obligation to respect a
right, and
these actions do not constitute a harm
-- since there is a moral obligation to these actions, they are not
wrong,
even if consent for them is explicitly refused, and even if the person
affected considers them a harm
These are the far-reaching claims made by all advocates of rights, and
especially by the human rights lobby. It is obvious, even from this
summary,
that the logic of rights interferes with the principle of moral
autonomy.
Some people in history have indeed claimed the rights that were conceded
to
them - but most have had their rights declared for them by others. They
are
not allowed to renounce these 'declared rights'. The idea that a person
must
accept all rights declared for them (by others), clearly contradicts the
idea
of political freedom. The human-rights tradition includes no element of
consent. 'Declared rights' are by definition authoritarian. It is these
aspects, which make the doctrine of human rights a license for
oppression.
The Prizren water supply
-----
The logic of rights can be illustrated with a familiar example, addition
of
substances to drinking water. Consider these examples...
-- The United Nations declares a right to healthy drinking water.
Therefore
the UN administration in Prizren decides to filter the drinking water to
remove bacteria. It does not inform the residents of the city, or ask
their consent.
That seems relatively harmless, and indeed desirable. But the moral
logic is
no different in the following examples....
-- The United Nations declares a right to healthy drinking water.
Therefore
the UN administration in Prizren decides to add chlorine to the
drinking
water, to kill bacteria. It does not inform the residents of the city,
or ask
their consent.
-- The United Nations declares a right to healthy drinking water.
Therefore
the UN administration in Prizren decides to add fluoride to the
drinking
water, to improve dental health. It does not inform the residents of the
city,
or ask their consent.
-- The United Nations declares a right to healthy drinking water.
Therefore
the UN administration in Prizren decides to add contraceptives to the
drinking water, since the high birth rate is overloading the health-care
system. It does not inform the residents of the city, or ask their
consent.
-- The United Nations declares a right to healthy drinking water.
Therefore
the UN administration in Prizren decides to add Prozac to the drinking
water,
to reduce the incidence of post-traumatic depression. It does not inform
the
residents of the city, or ask their consent.
-- The United Nations declares a right to healthy drinking water.
Therefore
the UN administration in Prizren decides to add a genetically modified
HIV
virus to the drinking water, as a form of vaccination against an AIDS
epidemic. It does not inform the residents of the city, or ask their
consent.
The list shows how easy it is to extend the range of a right (and indeed
the
UN administration in Kosovo has taken extraordinary steps to control
cultural
and political life there). The United Nations decided, without
consulting me,
that I have a right not to be tortured - and that is considered morally
legitimate. But what is to stop them deciding tomorrow, that I have a
right to
be tortured? The United Nations decided that I have a right to life. But
what
is to stop them deciding tomorrow, that I have a right to death?
But this type of argument - the 'slippery slope ', or 'consequentialism'
- is
rejected anyway by many moral philosophers. They would claim that, just
because a principle has undesirable consequences in certain cases, that
does
not rule it out as a moral principle. But it is the principle itself
which is
wrong here - the principle that certain actions are in effect exempt
from
moral judgment, because they constitute 'respect' of a right.
Human rights: opposing principles
-----
The best way to illustrate this is to look at how rights could be
ethically
acceptable. That could be through these alternative principles...
***
1 "Rights are voluntary. They can not be imposed on a person without
consent."
2 "Every person is free to chose their own rights, if any."
3 "It is not in itself good to respect a right. Every right is itself
subject
to ethical assessment, to moral judgment. It can be wrong to respect a
right,
even a right that has been consented to."
4 "An action done to a person, to respect the rights of that person, can
be a
harm to that person. Each person is morally autonomous in deciding what
constitutes a harm to themselves."
5 "Specifically, the state or international organisations may not
declare
rights for persons, unless those persons participated in the formulation
of
those rights, and expressed their consent."
6 "Rights may be renounced at any time."
7 "There must be an impartial procedure of appeal against rights.
Obviously
this function can not be exercised by pro-rights organisations, such as
the
United Nations."
8 "An agreement on rights can not bind persons, who have not entered
into the agreement."
9 "Objections of conscience to any right are valid."
***
This list only shows how different the present human rights idea is, in
comparison. No supporter of human rights would ever accept anything like
these principles.
The UN-declared human rights
-----
The present debate on human rights and sovereignty is largely concerned
with a
specific set of rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This
Declaration was approved by the United Nations in December 1948. In this
case,
the failure of ethical legitimacy is clear. The human rights lobby
claims,
that this document is morally binding on the whole world, forever. But
what
basis does that have?
-- The document was approved by the diplomatic representatives of UN
member
states. No other persons or organisations participated in the
negotiations on
the text.
-- These states were the victorious allied powers of 1945, and their
allies,
with a few others. They did not even approximate the present membership
of the
United Nations.
-- In many cases, the government and political system in these states
had
been installed in 1944 and 1945 by Allied military action. (In Europe
especially, the Soviet Union and the US manipulated the political
process to
obtain the desired government, inside their new spheres of influence).
Even by
the limited standards of parliamentary elections, they governments did
not
'represent' their inhabitants. In some countries, such as Greece and
China, a
civil war was in progress.
-- Some of the signatory states were, at the time, de facto
protectorates of
Allied powers - such as Persia, Egypt and Iraq. Others were self-ruled
colonies, but with a whites-only government, such as Australia and South
Africa.
-- Several of the states excluded large sections of the population from
any
political influence - such as the remains of the German minorities in
Eastern
Europe at the time. Germany and Japan themselves were under military
occupation, and not represented.
-- Some of the States - Afghanistan, for instance - had no modern
political
system of any kind.
-- Most notably, Africa was 'represented' by colonial powers. At the
time,
most held no elections of any kind, in most of their colonial territory.
Often, all political activity by 'natives' was forbidden.
-- Probably only five governments decided, without outside pressure,
their
position on the Declaration: the United States, Britain, the Soviet
Union,
Sweden, and Mexico. All others were, to a greater or lesser extent,
dependent
on their protecting power (or colonial power).
-- The text was ultimately a compromise, between the United States and
the
Soviet Union. The USA was the initiator in this process, and the Soviet
Union
was on the defensive. The Declaration is, without doubt, a primary
historical
text of the Cold War.
-- Most of the world population never even saw the text, before it was
approved. Probably the majority could not even understand the few
official
languages in which it was written. The text is still not available, in
the
majority of the languages spoken on earth.
-- No election was held in any country, with the text as an election
issue.
-- No referendum, or any other form of test, was held to approve the
text, in
any country. There was no ratification procedure of any kind, since it
was not
a Treaty.
-- No individual ever formally consented to the document as an
individual:
the United Nations never organised such a consent procedure.
-- I am obliged to accept the contents, even though it was approved
before I
was born, and any influence on its contents was therefore impossible.
-- There is no procedure for revision of the declaration.
-- There is no procedure for periodic review, let alone periodic
re-approval,
of the Declaration.
-- The Declaration is therefore considered to apply indefinitely,
beyond the
lifetime of those who drafted it, and without any possibility of
amending it
or annulling it. Their descendants will, apparently, forever be bound by
the Declaration.
-- There is no independent appeal against its contents, or against the
rights
imposed, or against the application of the Declaration by the United
Nations
-- Specifically, there is no independent appeal procedure, against
military
action to enforce it. If the UN decides tomorrow, that it is necessary
to
destroy Beijing with a nuclear weapon, to enforce human rights, then
no-one
can take any legal steps against this decision. Neither the individual
residents, nor the Chinese government, nor any organisation, can appeal
-
certainly not to the International Court. The Universal Declaration of
Human
Rights is considered beyond appeal, in fact beyond all legal procedure.
For a document conferring such powers, this is a very weak ethical
basis. Even
more so, because it is now treated as the basic document of the United
Nations
(in contrast to the UN Charter, which guarantees national sovereignty).
If the
United States recolonises Africa over the next 15 years, then it will
almost
certainly refer to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - as the
legal
basis for its actions. And since the United States is now the only
superpower
capable of doing this, and no other power can successfully oppose it,
the
temptation will be great. Because of its claimed universal and absolute
force,
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is an emergent license for
global
conquest, in a uni-polar world.
Human rights are clearly political
-----
There is no doubt, that the doctrine of human rights belongs within a
specific
political tradition: the broad European liberal tradition. Human rights
have
also become a central element, in recent Anglo-American democratic
liberalism
(the type of political philosophy represented by John Rawls). But the
liberal
tradition is only one section of European political thought. Not only
are
human rights not universal, they are not even 'western' or 'European'.
This
text completely rejects human rights, but from a background which is as
European as liberalism. It is certainly not an African (or Asian, or
Slavic)
cultural or philosophical viewpoint. Human rights are not culturally
specific,
they are politically specific. The human rights doctrine is a classic
political ideology.
The imposition of human rights on the world, is the imposition of that
political ideology. And with it comes the rest of the liberal package.
The
supporters of human rights are also the supporters of free trade,
democracy,
an open society and the free market. The two recent explicit military
interventions to protect rights, in Timor and Kosovo, have also brought
open
free-market economies to these regions. In organisations like the NATO
or the
OSCE, the free market and human rights are always referred to together,
as if
they were the same thing. And because of that, in practice, they are.
--
Paul Treanor
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
* SENTENZA CONCLUSIVA E LISTA DEI PARTECIPANTI
alla giornata finale del Tribunale "Clark", New York 10/6/2000
* Un articolo da WORKERS WORLD
* CONCLUSIONI DEI LAVORI DELLE SEZIONI TEDESCA/EUROPEA ED AUSTRIACA
* GLI ADERENTI ALLA SEZIONE ITALIANA (aggiornamento primo giugno 2000)
---
Subject: U.S./NATO found guilty of war crimes against Yugoslavia
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 21:42:52 -0400
From: iacenter@...
To: "International" <iacenter@...>
GUILTY!
On Saturday, June 10, 2000, the International Tribunal on U.S./NATO
War Crimes Against the People of Yugoslavia found U.S. and
NATO political and military leaders guilty of war crimes. At this
people's tribunal meeting in New York, held before over 500 people, a
panel of 16 judges from 11 countries rendered this verdict regarding
the March 24-June 10, 1999 U.S./NATO assault on Yugoslavia.
Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, the lead prosecutor at
the International Tribunal on U.S./NATO War Crimes Against
Yugoslavia, urged those present and those they represented from the
21 countries participating to carry out a sentence of organizing a
campaign to abolish the NATO military pact.
Ben Dupuy, former ambassador at large during the Aristide
Administration in Haiti, the Rev. Kiyul Chung of Korea, and auto
worker Martha Grevatt, who heads the AFL-CIO’s official
constituency group Pride at Work, read the three parts of the verdict
(included below).
Participants taking the witness stand included eyewitnesses,
researchers who visited Yugoslavia, renowned political and
economics analysts, historians, physicists, biologists, military
experts,
journalists and lay researchers. (A list of all the judges, and the
witnesses and their topics is included below.)
Many of these witnesses have in the past 15 months presented to
audiences worldwide a complete picture of the war NATO waged
against Yugoslavia. For the tribunal, however, all limited themselves
to a single area of expertise that made up a single part of the
evidence against the political and military leaders of the United States
and the other NATO countries.
Taken together, the judges decided, each single part contributed to
construct a proof that beyond a reasonable doubt proved the guilt of
the accused, just as the proper placing of single tiles can build a
mosaic.
The witnesses described how NATO forces used the media to spread
lies to demonize the Serbs and their leadership in order to prepare
public opinion to prepare for war. Then they showed the real
economic and geopolitical interests of the imperialist powers--the U.S.
and Western Europe—in seizing economic control of the area from
the Balkans to the oil-rich Caspian Sea.
Finally they demonstrated how Washington rigged the “Racak
massacre” and then used the so-called Rambouillet accord—in reality
an ultimatum demanding NATO's military control of all of Yugoslavia-
-to provoke the war. Taken together this all proved a crime against
peace.
They also showed the use of illegal weapons, the purposeful choice of
civilian targets and the destruction of the environment and the civilian
infrastructure that add up to war crimes. And the expulsion of
hundreds of thousands of people from Kosovo and Metohija that
prove crimes against humanity.
The witnesses’ presentations were accompanied in many cases by
slides and videos displayed on a large screen on the stage of the
auditorium at Martin Luther King Jr. High School in Manhattan. This
screen was easily visible both to the judges, who sat on the stage, and
to the hundreds in the audience, many of whom stayed throughout the
nine-hour day.
In addition, pictures and videos were on display in the hall outside the
auditorium, and documentary evidence was offered in books or in
research papers.
The International Action Center, founded by Clark in 1992, organized
this final session of the tribunal. There was also participation by
those
who had organized similar tribunal hearings in Germany, Italy, Austria,
Russia, Ukraine, Yugoslavia and Greece, where thousands declared
U.S. President Clinton a war criminal last November in Athens.
In addition to the witnesses, there were also important guest
presentations from representatives of the governments Yugoslavia
and Cuba. In addition, Ismael Guadalupe from Vieques, Puerto Rico
showed in a powerful speech how the practice runs against his small
island laid the basis for U.S./NATO aggression around the world.
According to the IAC organizers, total registration, including justices,
witnesses and staff was 511. 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, whose message was read
from the stage.
There were also representatives of the Roma people—often referred
to by the derisive 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 different television crews taped the entire proceedings, including
Serbian television and a three-camera crew from Australia, as well as
alternate media sources in the U.S. like the Peoples Video Network.
FINAL JUDGEMENT OF THE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY TO
INVESTIGATE U.S./NATO WAR CRIMES AGAINST THE
PEOPLE OF YUGOSLAVIA
Final Judgement
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 nineteen 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;
Having the right and obligation as citizens of the world to sit in
judgement regarding violations of international humanitarian law;
Having heard the testimony from Commissions of Inquiry and
Tribunals held within their own countries during the past year and
having received reports from numerous other Commission hearings
which recite the evidence there gathered;
Having been provided with documentary evidence, eyewitness
statements, photos, videotapes, special reports, expert analyses and
summaries of evidence available to the Commission;
Having access to all evidence, knowledge and expert opinion in the
Commission files or available to the Commission staff;
Having been provided by the Commission, or otherwise obtained,
various books, articles and other written materials on various aspects
of events and conditions in Yugoslavia and other countries in the
Balkans, and in the military and arms establishments;
Having considered newspaper coverage, magazine and periodical
reports, special publications, TV, radio and other media coverage and
public statements by the accused, other public officials and public
materials;
Having heard the presentations of the Commission of Inquiry in public
hearing on June 10, 2000, and the testimony, evidence and summaries
there presented;
And having met, considered and deliberated with each other and with
Commission staff and having considered all the evidence that is
relevant to the nineteen charges of criminal conduct alleged in the
Initial Complaint, make the following findings:
FINDINGS
The Members of the International War Crimes Tribunal find the
accused Guilty on the basis of the evidence against them and that
each of the nineteen 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
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
TRIBUNAL SCHEDULE AND LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
10 a.m. Doors open. Registration, if possible, show videos in the
cafeteria or auditorium.
11:00 a.m. - 11:30 p.m Catrin Schuetz and Anya Mukarji-Connolly
introduce judges and prosecutors: List of judges for the International
Tribunal on U.S./NATO War Crimes against Yugoslavia--New York,
June 10, 2000
LIST OF 16 JUDGES
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--Rev. Ki Yul Chung, 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 Cutwal -originally from India, Uma Cutwal is 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 and 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 the AFL-
CIO for Lesbian/Gay/Bi/Trans Labor Organization called Pride at
Work, 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 and he 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--Puerto Rico--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--originally from Jamaica, 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 the Peace for Cuba Committee, producer
of video NATO Targets.
(All were in Yugoslavia either during the war or participating in
seminars or meetings after the war.)
Short opening remarks by Ramsey Clark, who will be lead prosecutor.
Opening greetings from Mikhail Kuznetsov of the International
Peoples Tribunal organized from Russia and Ukraine and other
former Soviet countries.
Part I: Crimes against peace. (11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.)
Our first witness is Lenora Foerstel (Maryland) of Women for Mutual
Security. She has recently edited a book War, Lies and Videotape;
about the control of the media.
Jared Israel (Massachusetts). Jared Israel produced a film called
Judgement showing how the corporate media distorted a picture to
produce a Big Lie.
Jean Hatton (Great Britain), from the anti-war movement in Britain.
Spoke of how massacre stories were used to justify the war.
Christopher Black (Canada), one of a group of Canadian attorney’s
who filed a suit charging NATO with war crimes at what is called the
International Criminal Court for the Former Yugoslavia at the Hague.
Speaks on ICFTY, how the Hague Tribunal was a part of the
preparation for war.
Monica Moorehead (U.S.) of Millions for Mumia and contributing
editor to Workers World newspaper, an expert 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 geo-political aims of the war, the Caspian pipelines.
Kadouri Al Kaysi an Iraqi American who has organized to expose the
impact of sanctions on Iraq.
Stratis Kounias, 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 (New York), journalist and researcher who has
represented the International Action Center at tribunals in Vienna and
Belgrade, on Washington’s premeditated plan regarding NATO and
the attack on Yugoslavia.
Roland Keith (Canada), a 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’s Observer mission in Kosovo and Metohija.
Preston Wood (California), 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 to present to the tribunal the
truth about the supposed massacre in Racak, Kosovo, used to justify
the attack on Yugoslavia.
Richard Becker (California), who has written and spoken extensively
on the role of the talks held in Rambouillet, France in February and
March 1999. Rambouillet ultimatum as provocation.
Gregor Kneussel (Austria), from the Austrian tribunal about the role
of Constitutionally neutral Austria regarding Yugoslavia and in
delivering this NATO ultimatum.
Part II. War Crimes & Crimes Against Humanity
La Riva, Gloria Prosecutor (California), used the video she produced,
NATO Targets, to show how the U.S./NATO bombs hit civilian
targets, from hospitals to bridges to factories.
Sarah Sloan (New York), IAC Commission of Inquiry researcher on
NATO claim it tried to minimize damage to civilian facilities in
Yugoslavia. She used a March 15, 2000 Newsweek article that
exposed that NATO hit very few military targets.
Ellen Catalinotto (New York) is a midwife who has delivered over
1,200 babies to mostly poor women in the New York City. She also
cares for HIV infected women and is involved in research on ways to
prevent the transmission of HIV from pregnant women to their
babies. She reported on NATO’s 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, now teaches law in Moscow. He described damage to
Yugoslav industrial infrastructure and how it cost a half-million jobs.
Admiral Elmar Schmaehling (Germany), former admiral and leading
spokesperson for the German tribunal movement. He spoke on the
aggressive posture of NATO since the collapse of the USSR and its
illegal attack on Yugoslavia.
Judi Cheng (New Jersey), IAC researcher. She showed how
unreasonable it was to believe that the bombing of Chinese embassy
in Belgrade was an accident.
Dr. Janet Eaton (Canada), biologist and environment expert Dr. Janet
Eaton to the stand, on destruction of the environment in Yugoslavia,
especially the damage from attacks on the petrochemical plant at
Pancevo and other industrial targets.
Dr. Carlo Pona (Italy) A physicist who attended a conference in
Belgrade about depleted uranium and has written about this subject,
Pona explained why DU is dangerous to humans and how it was used
in Yugoslavia.
Fulvio Grimaldi (Italy), video maker and journalist. Grimaldi, who has
just completed edited a film on sanctions in Iraq and Yugoslavia,
described the combined impact of impact of bombing and sanctions on
the population of Yugoslavia.
Deirdre Griswold (New York) has recently visited sites of U.S. war
crimes in south Korea, is editor in chief of Workers World
newspaper. She spoke about the pattern of criminal conduct of the
U.S. military and how the 1950 war crimes led to a continuing 50-
year occupation of Korea.
Shani Rifati (Roma), originally from the Romani community in
Kosovo, publishes an English-language newsletter about Romani
affairs named Voice of Roma. He spoke of the horrors the Roma
people faced in Kosovo under K-FOR and KLA occupation.
Milos Raickovich Serb-American composer and anti-war activist,
spoke on the destruction of churches and cultural sites in occupied
Kosovo and Metohija.
Professor Michel Chossudovsky (Canada), an expert historian and
economist, showed the role of the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army
and its ties to U.S. and German intelligence services, ties to NATO
and the United Nations Rep. Bernard Kouchner.
Scott Taylor (Canada), former soldier, who now publishes the Ottawa-
based magazine, Espirit de Corps, celebrated for its unflinching
scrutiny of the Canadian military. He also appears regularly in the
Canadian media as a military analyst. He witnessed the expulsion of
the Serb population from the Krajina in Croatia by an army led by
KLA General Ceku.
Professor Barry Lituchy (New York), who has recently returned
from a trip to Yugoslavia, described how the NATO occupying forces
known as K-FOR have participated in expelling parts of the
population from Kosovo.
Professor Greg Elich (United States), has recently visited the
Balkans. He spoke on the un-humanitarian nature of . NATO’s
occupation of Kosovo.
Gilles Troude (France), on the editorial board of Balkans-Info, a pro-
Yugoslavia, anti-NATO monthly published in Paris, France since
1996. He described France’s role in the war and in suppressing
dissent at home.
Professor Jorge Cadima (Portugal), a regular contributor on NATO-
related subjects to to Avante, the weekly newspaper of the
Portuguese Communist Party, spoke on the role of NATO in Portugal
since 1949 and on popular resistance to the war.
5:30-6:15 Messages of solidarity and struggle
Ismael Guadalupe (Puerto Rico) The Committee for the Rescue and
Development of Vieques on the relationship of Vieques to
Yugoslavia. He showed how the U.S. used Vieques for target
practice to prepare for the war against Yugoslavia, and they do so for
all foreign aggression.
Representative of Cuban Interest Section, spoke on Cuba’s suit
against U.S. for the costs of the embargo.
UN Ambassador Jovanovic of Yugoslavia, gave evidence of his own
government’s charges against the U.S. and NATO for war crimes.
His talk was in fact a summary of much of the day’s proceedings.
Brian Becker, co-director of the IAC, spoke on the need to form a
worldwide movement to abolish NATO.
Ramsey Clark reiterated some of the main points developed during
the day and stressed the need to come to a unified conclusion that
would find NATO guilty over a broad spectrum of charges—the 19
charges included in the original indictment—and lead to a struggle to
abolish NATO.
International Action Center
39 West 14th Street, Room 206
New York, NY 10011
email: iacenter@...
web: www.iacenter.org
CHECK OUT THE NEW SITE www.mumia2000.org
phone: 212 633-6646
fax: 212 633-2889
---
http://www.workers.org
-------------------------
Via Workers World News Service
Reprinted from the June 15, 2000
issue of Workers World newspaper
-------------------------
Hague tribunal denounced for exonerating NATO war criminals
By John Catalinotto
Anti-war organizations and individuals around the world reacted in
indignation to the announcement June 2 that the International Criminal
Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia was exonerating NATO of all charges
of war crimes committed against Yugoslavia.
Carla Del Ponte, chief prosecutor for the tribunal at The Hague, said
that the court had examined charges brought against NATO by various
forces. She said that after considerable study the court decided there
was no reason to pursue any of these charges.
Lawyers' groups in Canada, Russia, Greece, France, Yugoslavia and the
United States had brought charges before the court. Charges included the
use of cluster bombs and depleted uranium weapons, as well as dropping
bombs on civilian targets. The civilian targets included the Serb
television station, the Chinese Embassy, a train crossing a bridge and a
convoy of refugees in Kosovo--most of which have been reported in the
mainstream media.
International Action Center co-director Sara Flounders said Del Ponte's
announcement shows that "a people's court has to bring charges against
U.S. and NATO leaders if we want to preserve the truth of this war for
history."
The IAC initiated such a people's tribunal on July 31, 1999, and will
hold its final hearing this June 10 in New York. Flounders said anti-war
activists, elected representatives and prominent personalities from 18
nations will participate in the International Tribunal on U.S./NATO War
Crimes against Yugoslavia.
Flounders noted that "Del Ponte made her announcement just as people's
tribunals were taking place in Rome and Berlin that were finding NATO
leaders guilty of war crimes. And we were preparing our final tribunal
for the following week. In the Netherlands, lawyers are bringing charges
against government leaders on June 9.
"There is no doubt U.S. and NATO leaders planned the aggressive war
against Yugoslavia over a long period, that they purposely bombed
civilian targets, and that they used weapons illegal under international
treaties. And there is no doubt Del Ponte was told to make this
announcement now in an attempt to counter the success of these people's
tribunals in bringing U.S./NATO crimes to the light of day," charged
Flounders.
"We note that the article in the June 3 New York Times on Del Ponte's
announcement described the lawyers who brought charges to the ICTFY
court as 'paid by Yugoslavia.' We know for a fact that the lawyers in
many different countries--including Canada, France, Russia and
Greece--do their work out of their personal conviction. They often do
this at great personal sacrifice, and they have succeeded in exposing
the ICTFY as a corrupt court in the pay of the U.S. and other NATO
powers."
'A corrupt tribunal is worse
than none at all'
Workers World spoke with Prof. Michael Mandel, one of a group of
Canadian attorneys who had brought charges to the ICTFY court.
Mandel said that Del Ponte's decision was no surprise to him, and that
his group had denounced the tribunal as a farce and a disgrace in March.
"The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia is a
corrupt institution," said Mandel. "It declared its own corruption with
the announcement by the prosecutor, Carla Del Ponte, that she is
completely satisfied that NATO did not commit war crimes in Yugoslavia
and for that reason is not going to open an inquiry.
"You might want to ask how she became satisfied of their innocence
without an inquiry.
"NATO committed every crime from mass murder on down in front of the
world and it confessed its guilt in every press conference of Jamie
Shea," said Mandel.
"A corrupt tribunal is worse than no tribunal at all. This one should be
shut down and Del Ponte fired, to find work in some other department of
the Pentagon," said Mandel. He noted that the first prosecutor of the
tribunal, Canadian Louise Arbour, was rewarded with a life appointment
to the Supreme Court of Canada by Premier Jean Chretien.
In Italy, former senator and religious philosopher Raniero La Valle
denounced the ICTFY as a "victor's tribunal" that was set up
specifically to persecute the Milosevic government in Yugoslavia. La
Valle said that "it is important that justice be found also outside of
its traditional seats and be proclaimed before the tribunal of public
opinion." He was referring specifically to the tribunals to be held June
3 in Rome and June 10 in the U.S. inspired by former U.S. Attorney
General Ramsey Clark.
La Valle will participate at the June 10 tribunal in New York, which
will take place from 11 a.m. to 7 p.m. at the Martin Luther King High
School Auditorium at 66th Street and Amsterdam Ave. in Manhattan. The
doors open at 10 a.m.
---
Subject: Berliner Tribunal gegen die NATO
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 23:56:01 +0200
From: Jug Öster Solibeweg <joesb@...>
To: <joesb@...>
„Die Tribunalbewegung fortsetzen“
Vorstellungsbeitrag der JÖSB beim Europäischen Tribunal gegen die Nato
in
Berlin am 2./3. Juni 2000
Die 90er Jahre wurden als der Beginn des Zeitalters der Menschenrechte,
der
Freiheit und der Demokratie ausgerufen, eben als Anfang einer „Neuen
Weltordnung“.
Doch sehr schnell stellte sich diese als ihr genaues Gegenteil heraus.
Das
Jahrzehnt begann mit einer gewaltigen Krieg gegen den Irak, einer
Aggression
die bis heute andauern und bereits Millionen das Leben gekostet hat. Und
das
Jahrzehnt endete wie es begonnen hatte, nämlich abermals mit einem
Bombenkrieg, diesmal gegen Jugoslawien. Dieser Krieg war nur der
vorläufige
Höhepunkt einer Aggression zur Zerschlagung Jugoslawiens, die ebenso
bereits
Jahre andauert.
Viele werden sich fragen woher diese Aggressivität kommt? Es ist
unmodern
geworden den Grund auf den Punkt, auf den Begriff zu bringen. Man muss
sich
gefallen lassen, als Dinosaurier bezeichnet zu werden. Doch es gibt
keinen
Begriff, der den Sachverhalt besser darstellen könnte – es handelt sich
schicht und einfach um Imperialismus! [anhaltender Applaus] Und die NATO
ist
die Speerspitze dieses Imperialismus.
Solange die NATO und der Imperialismus existiert wird es den Frieden,
für
den wir uns alle einsetzen, niemals geben.
Darum ist das Ziel des Wiener Tribunals nicht nur die öffentliche
Verurteilung der Regierung für den Bruch der in der Verfassung
festgelegten
Neutralität, sondern die Verhinderung des Beitritts Österreichs zur NATO
und
der Erhalt unserer Neutralität. Wir kämpfen für die Auflösung der NATO,
was
angesichts des zu erwartenden Widerstands nichts anderes als ihre
Zerschlagung bedeuten kann.
*******
DAS URTEIL DES EUROPAEISCHEN TRIBUNAL
(http://www.jungewelt.de/2000/06-05/012.shtml)
sowie eine umfangreiche Dokumentation kann in der Berliner
Tageszeitung "JUNGE WELT" abgerufen werden.
Die Ergebnisse des Wiener Tribunal können auf der Netzseite der JÖSB
eingesehen werden: http://www.vorstadtzentrum.net/joesb
****************************
INDICTMENT BY THE VIENNA TRIBUNAL
(submitted to the international tribunal against NATO war crimes in New
York
on the fortcoming weekend)
I Preamble
1) NATO, the United States of America, the Federal Republic of Germany,
the
United Kingdom, Turkey, Spain, the Netherlands, Croatia, Hungary, Italy,
France and others - after failing to force the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia at the so-called "peace negotiations" in Paris and
Rambouillet to
accept an extortionate ultimatum which in fact aimed at the occupation
of
the entire territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and had been
declared a condition sine qua non - without a declaration of war and
without
a resolution by the United Nations Security Council launched warlike
rocket
and bombing attacks against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,
deliberately
murdering Serbs, Kosovo-Albanians, Roma, Muslims, Orthodox-Christians,
Catholics and foreign nationals.
By doing this they destroyed and damaged economic, social, cultural,
medical, diplomatic and religious resources.
In the course of their criminal war of aggression, NATO and the
above-mentioned states cut off the population of Yugoslavia from food,
water, electric energy, food production, medicines and medical services.
By
means of rocket and aerial bombing attacks they systematically destroyed
and
damaged waterworks and agricultural irrigation installations, factories,
fertilisers and vegetation, pharmaceutical production works, hospitals
and
health service installations as well as other objects needed for human
survival. The aggressors attack chemical factories, oil refineries,
petrol
and natural gas stores, fertiliser plants, installations and localities
with
the aim of releasing, on a wide scale, radioactive and other dangerous
substances into the atmosphere, the soil, the ground-water and the
foodchain, poison the environment and harm the population. They employed
banned arms, attacked the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia with rockets,
bombs
and missiles which contained Depleted Uranium (DU) and released
radioactive
substances into the atmosphere the soil, the ground-water, the foodchain
as
well as into solid objects, thus exposing the Yugoslav population to
health
hazards for generations to come.
2) With these actions NATO and the above-mentioned states violated
International Law, especially art. 2 chapter 7 of the UN-Charter; the
Declaration on Non-intervention; the Resolution on the Definition of
Aggression, 1997 UNGA 3314; articles 52 and 53 of the Convention on the
Law
of Treaties of 23 May, 1969; the Treaty on the Banning of War, the
Briand-Kelog-Pact of Paris, 1928, articles 1 and 2; the Hague
Conventions,
especially the Fourth Hague Convention of 18 October, 1907; the Geneva
Convention on the Protection of Civilians in Times of War, 1949; the
Statutes of the Nuremberg Tribunal, principles VI a, b and c; the Geneva
Additional Protocol 1977, articles 48 and 51; the Geneva Protocol on the
Use
of Asphyxiating, Poisonous and Similar Gases as well as of
Bacteriological
Substances in Wars, of 1925; the European Convention on the Peaceful
Settlement of conflicts, of 29 April, 1957 and also violated national
penal
codes concerning murder, duresse, dangerous threat, wilful destruction,
arson, damage to the environment, formation of gangs for the purpose of
carrying out criminal plots and genocide.
II THE VIENNA TRIBUNAL BRINGS A POLITICAL INDICTMENT AGAINST:
The Federal Government of the Republic of Austria
Chancellor Mag. Victor Klima
Vice Chancellor and Minister of Foreign Affairs Dr. Wolfgang Schüssel
Minister of Defence Dr. Werner Fasslabend
Former EU-Special Representative Dr. Wolfgang Petritsch, present High
Representative for Bosnia
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs Dr. Alois Mock
a) in particular against former minister of foreign affairs Dr. Alois
Mock
on the basis of the well-founded suspicion of openly taking position
(politically, economically and logistically) and intervening in a civil
war - thereby violating neutrality - by abetting the destruction of the
sovereign Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, through furthering -
in
contravention of international law - and politically supporting the
secession by force of member republics of the SFR of Yugoslavia by way
of
the official recognition - in violation of international law and the
status
of neutrality - of member republics of the SFR of Yugoslavia which had
seceded with the use of force.
(Violation of the neutrality law; of the UN-Charter; of the principle
regarding the obligation of non-intervention in matters which, according
to
the Charter, pertain to the national competence of a state; Declaration
of
the United Nations)
b) in particular against the former EU-Special Representative Dr.
Wolfgang
Petritsch on the basis of his collaboration in the "peace accords"
elaborated in the course of the so-called "peace negotiations" in Paris
and
Rambouillet, including Annex B which contains an extortionate occupation
diktat postulating, as conditio sine qua non, the occupation of the
entire
national territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia with the
threat, in
case of non-compliance, of immediate war actions through bombing attacks
against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
(Jeopardizing of neutrality according to Austrian penal code, paragraph
320;
violation of chapter 1 art. 2 and chapter 7 of the UN-Charter; the
Declaration on Non-intervention of 24 October, 1970; the
Briand-Kelog-Pact
of 27 August, 1928; of art. 52 and 53 of the Convention on the Law of
Treaties; violation of paragraphs 105, 106 of the Austrian penal code
/severe duresse/)
c) against the Austrian Federal Government and the above-mentioned
statesmen
on the grounds of the well-founded suspicion of having abetted the
aggressive actions of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (see above
I/1)
which, having mandated itself, without decision or mandate by the
Security
Council, by violating the obligation under international law to renounce
on
the use of force in international relations and in relations among
states,
waged a war of aggression against the territory of a sovereign state,
and
thus, on the well-founded suspicion of having violated Austria's
Everlasting
Neutrality, enshrined in international law, by not adhering to the
obligations of an everlastingly neutral state to always comport itself
in
times of war and of peace in a manner that excludes favouring one side
of a
conflict and also on the grounds of the well-founded suspicion of openly
taking sides - politically, economically and logistically - in a civil
war.
c2) and in particular against Federal Chancellor Mag. Victor Klima and
foreign Minister Dr. Wolfgang Schüssel on the basis of their open
support
for and abetting of the NATO war of aggression - violating international
law - at the EU-summit in Berlin and the 50th anniversary NATO-summit in
Washington.
(accessory to the violation of the UN-Charter; the Briand-Kelog-Pact;
the
Declaration on Non-intervention; the Declaration on Non-interference;
the
Resolution on the Definition of Aggression; art. 22 and 23 of the fourth
Hague Concention as well as of the other norms of international law set
out
under I/2, and of the violation of the law on neutrality)
d) on the basis of the well-founded suspicion of abetting the violation
of
the ban on waging "ecological war" carried out by NATO - see I/1 on the
perpetration of criminal actions (i.e. bombing of oil refineries,
chemical
factories and others, damaging and destroying installations, thereby
causing
negative effects on the environment, locally and regionally) as well as
the
use of banned weapons (cluster bombs and munition made of depleted
uranium,
DU)
(Violation of the UN-Charter and the other norms of international law
listed
under I/2, in particular the 1925 Geneva Agreement on the Banning of
Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases; the Convention on the Banning of
the
Use of Means Affecting the Environment, 1977; the Geneva Convention of
12
August, 1949 on the Protection of Civilians in Times of War)
e) on the basis of the well-founded suspicion that at the time of war
the
Austrian Federal Government did not verify violations of the Austrian
air
space by NATO-airforces with regard to their armaments not did it
protest
against such violations, although it would have been obliged to do so
according to international law as well as according to Austrian
neutrality
law - violations which, although not authorised in this case by Austria,
increased massively during that period, according to information
provided by
Austrian air traffic control (which fact does not elucidate how many of
these overflights possibly took place in support of the NATO air war);
based
also on the fact repeated transits through Austria by NATO vehicles to
bases
in Hungary for a long time previously, which can be assumed to have been
not
solely "humanitarian" transports.
(Violation of the 1965 Declaration on Non-intervention; of the Agreement
on
the Peaceful Settlement of International conflicts - First Hague
Convention
on the Outbreak of Hostilities; of the Third Hague Convention of 18
October,
1907; of the Austrian Neutrality Law; of the Austrian Federal Law of 18
October, 1977 on the import, export and transit of war material)
f) based on a well-founded suspicion of transmitting perceptions,
regardless
of their content of truth, pertaining to the intelligence department,
regarding activities on the territory of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia,
by Austrian authorities to NATO services, which fact must lead to the
assumption of violation of neutrality obligations by Austria.
(Violation of the Declaration of Non-interference; of the
Briand-Kelog-Pact
of 1928; of the UN-Charter; of the Austrian law on neutrality)
g) based on the well-founded suspicion of restraining the effectuation
of
non-military and non-violent possibilities of conflict resolution; such
as
the prevention by neutral Austria of tasks ascribed to the OSCE,
possibly by
means of a "withdrawal order" addressed to NATO; of handing over, for
the
first time ever, of a mandate to a US-representative, in this case US
Ambassador William Walker (during whose period as US Ambassador in El
Salvador the dirty war in El Salvador, carried out with the complicity
of
the USA, reached its climax); failure on the part of the Federal
Government
to oppose the - improper - use of the OSCE in the strategic preparation
of
the War against Yugoslavia and the logistic support of NATO as well as
failure to eliminate the suspension of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia as
member of the organisation with a view to favour attempts at bringing
about
negotiated settlements.
(Violation of the stipulations of the CSCE and OSCE; of the Austrian law
on
neutrality; violation of the agreement on protection and compromise
procedures within the OSCE, Stockholm, 15 December, 1992)
h) on the basis of the well-founded suspicion of at least tacitly
consenting
to inflammatory reporting, especially regarding the Serbian sector of
the
population of the Yugoslav Republic; on the well-founded suspicion of
inciting population groups on the territory of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia against each other, especially in media subjected to public
law
and of omitting - on the part of the Federal Government of Austria - to
intervene in order to insist on publishing denials, thus raising doubts
regarding Austria's everlasting neutrality.
(Violation of the braodcasting law and the Austrian neutrality law)
III
On the basis of the suspicion outlined above, the representatives of the
preparatory committee of the Vienna Tribunal demand that the Vienna
Tribunal
of 4 December, 1999 indict the Federal Government of Austria and the
statesmen listed above on the grounds of favouring and supporting the
NATO
aggression against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and of being
accessory
to a conspicuous violation of international law; as well as on the
well-founded suspicion of approval (which has to be rejected out of
political, moral and humanist convictions) of a "New World Order" which
was
a consequence of this war and which contains a continuously proclaimed
right
of "humanitarian intervention" on the part of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organisation (NATO) that is to be carried out with the force of arms and
the
backing - on a global scale - of the strongest military power.
The verdict will be placed at the disposal of the International
Tribunal,
represented by Mr. Ramsey Clark, for the general indictment before the
International Court of Justice in The Hague.
*****
The Vienna tribual on December 4th, 1999 has judged the persons and
institutions named above to be guilty for the crimes stated.
****************************
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
---
TRIBUNALE ITALIANO CONTRO I CRIMINI DELLA NATO IN YUGOSLAVIA
065181048- FAX 068174010
E-MAIL: s.deangelis@... ponac@...
ADESIONI AGGIORNATE AL I° GIUGNO
FALCO ACCAME
GRUPPO DIRITTO E GIUSTIZIA DELLA FED. ROMANA DI RIF.COMUNISTA
Ti invio l'adesione all'assemblea del 3 giugno del Coordinamento
Nazionale
delle delegate e dei delegati RSU (il nostro sito è
<http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/>
Aderisco fermamente all'iniziativa
Sergio Mauri - Associazione Culturale Telematica Sottovoce: le parole
sono importanti
Chers Camarades
Nous vous prions de ne pas oublier que nous ausi, le Front
anti-imperialiste, se
joint à votre initiative.
Salutations communistes
Alexandre Moumbaris, président FAI
Roberto Sacco University of Edinburgh
CERN-EP Geneva
ADERIAMO CON ASSOLUTA CONVINZIONE ALL'INIZIATIVA DEL TRIBUNALE CONTRO I
CRIMINI DELLA NATO IN JUGOSLAVIA.
VINCA LA VERITA' DEI POPOLI CONTRO LA MENZOGNA E LA PROTERVIA DEI
POTENTI.
MARISA MANTOVANI, GUIDO CRISTINI - MANTOVA
Donatella Cavani Bologna
Adriana Samaritani Bologna
Marco Palmieri Bologna
Rita Zappa Bologna
Jonhatan Palmieri Bologna
Elena Rainaldi Bologna
Leonardo Trozzi Bologna
Ilaria Bussoni Roma
Alberto Burgio Bologna
Aderiamo molto volentieri al Tribunale Internazionale per i crimini
della
Guerra NATO in Jugoslavia consapevoli che il proseguimento della
battaglia
perchè giustizia e informazione siano fatte è la condizione necessaria
per
avviare uno sbocco positivo alla storia recente della Jugoslavia, e per
una
rimessa in discussione dell'attuale sistema di "sicurezza" NATO.
Cobas scuola sardegna
Aderisco all'iniziativa, anche se non potrò parteciparvi personalmente.
Gli errori ed orrori che una fantomatica sinistra legittima in nome di
una democrazia dei cannoni si pagano, anche in termini elettorali,
preoccupazione principe della sinistra che non governa pur stando al
governo.
Con l'augurio di buon lavoro
umberta torti
Chiara Giorgi Bologna
Roberto Bui Roma
Elio Pagani Venegono Inf. VA
Marco Tambolini Varese
Angelo Sacco Varese
Dino De Simone Varese
Eugenia Gioia Varese
Vincenzo Scalia Bologna
Giovanni Turbanti S. Pietro in Casale BO
Simona Galeotti Bologna
Felice Minicozzi Bologna
Giancarlo Gaeta Bologna
Fabio Rizzoli Bologna
Guido Bartolucci Bologna
Paola Maiardi Bologna
Giovanni Giuseppe Nicosia Bologna
Mirella Agostini Budrio BO
Silvia Scatena Pescia PT
Comitato Sardo Gettiamo le Basi
Aderiamo all'appello,
Obiettori Caritas di Fidenza (pr)
Aderiamo all'appello contenente i capi d'accusa contro le massime
autorità
istituzionali del nostro paese, pur non potendeo partecipare
personalmente
alla sessione del tribunale che si terrà il 3 giugno. La verità verrà
alla
luce e alla coscienza dei popoli.
Giuliana Beltrame , Antonino Morvillo - Padova
nel comunicarvi che abbiamo girato a tutta la nostra rete l'appello per
il 3
giugno, vi comunichiamo la nostra adesione e cercheremo anche di esserci
.
DONNE IN NERO ROMA----
condividendo i punti di accusa contro la Nato aderisco all'appello
promosso
dal Tribunale Internazionale contro i crimini della Nato in Yugoslavia
carla francone, direttore periodico comunista nuova unità
La Lega per i diritti dei popoli aderisce all'iniziativa
Luciano Ardesi
segretario nazionale
-Lega per i Diritti dei Popoli
Le Donne in Nero contro la guerra di Firenze aderiscono all'appello
contro
i crimini commessi dalla Nato durante la guerra in Kosovo.
Vedremo di partecipare a >Roma il 3 giugno 2000 all'ultima sessione
italiana del tribuynale internazionale indipendente contro i crimini
commessi dalla Nato.
DiN - Firenze
Adesione dell'Osservatorio Etico Ambientale all'iniziativa del
Tribunale Internazionale del 3 giugno 2000
Caro Stefano,
Ti comunico la nostra adesione preannunciando la presentazione
della Dichiarazione di Arresto e Mandato di Cattura a carico del
Procuratore capo della Procura di Roma reo di NON aver iniziato
l'azione penale nei confronti dei governanti colpevoli, già denunciati
dal Popolo Sovrano.
Cordiali saluti,
Marco Saba
Osservatorio Etico Ambientale
Mandato di cattura a carico di Vecchione
Milano, 29 maggio 2000
Egregio Avv. Mattina,
facendo riferimento al documento da Lei inviato in rete nel febbraio
scorso contenente tra l'altro il decreto di archiviazione da parte
del Dr. Vecchione in merito alle denunce presentate dal Popolo Sovrano;
L'Osservatorio Etico Ambientale emette una Dichiarazione di
Arresto e Mandato di cattura a carico del Procuratore capo della
Procura di Roma reo di NON aver iniziato l'azione penale nei
confronti dei governanti colpevoli dei reati di tentata modifica
dell'ordinamento costituzionale tramite metodi non consentiti,
reati già denunciati.
Tale Mandato verrà presentato in occasione della riunione del
Tribunale Internazionale il 3 giugno prossimo. Contiamo di
incontrarLa in tale data per decidere assieme l'intervento.
Cordiali saluti,
Marco Saba
Osservatorio Etico Ambientale
Aderisco alla giornata del 3 giugno; in questo momento però non posso
muovermi da Bologna. Appena ho un pò di soldi vi manderò un contributo.
Ma il manifesto e liberazione stanno semplicemente zitti o adducono
ragioni per la non pubblicazione?
A presto
Fabrizio Giuliani
Do la mia personale adesione al testo "Processiamoli"
Paolo Nerozzi
Aderiamo molto volentieri all'appello PAX CHRISTI - PUNTO PACE BOLOGNA
UN Ponte per..
Fabio Alberti
L'Associazione per la Pace aderisce e partecipa al Tribunale Clark e
sarà
presente all'iniziativa del 3 giugno a Roma.
Davide Berruti
Coordinatore Nazionale
Dani Flop
Aderisco all'iniziativa del tribunale contro i crimini NATO in
Jugoslavia di
cui condivido i capi d'accusa.
Il Comitato 7 Dicembre per l'abolizione della legislazione speciale
contro
il terrorismo (già Comitato per la libertà di Sergio Spina -
Bologna)aderisce all'iniziativa del 3 Giugno a Roma.
p. Angelo Cavagna e tutto il GAVCI aderiscono fermamente
al Tribunale Internazionale ed alle sue attivita'.
Purtroppo per diversi impegni non potremo essere a Roma.
Saluti di Pace.
Marco Cervino
fisico / physicist
Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, CNR-ISAO, (ex IMGA e FISBAT)
Istituto di Scienze dell'Atmosfera e dell'Oceano
Torino : Enrico Vigna, Associazione SOS Yugoslavia e coordinatore del
Tribunale a Torino.
Ci vediamo a Roma.
Ovviamente io aderisco e con me il "Collettivo Studenti a Sinistra"
dell'Università di Cagliari
A presto
Walter Falgio, Cagliari
aderisco anche se non potro' essere fisicamente presente
============================
Spartaco Vitiello
Con questa lettera aderisco alle attività del "TRIBUNALE
INTERNAZIONALE INDIPENDENTE CONTRO I CRIMINI DELLA NATO IN JUGOSLAVIA",
promosso da Ramsey Clark, con la stesura di 19 punti di accusa contro la
NATO ed i governi occidentali.
Sandro Mazzi.
Desidero aderire alle iniziative del Tribunale Clark, condividendone i
principi ed essendo stato testimone oculare dei crimini della NATO sia
in
Serbia che in Kosovo. Ricordo di essere stato in Kosovo due volte
durante la
guerra, ed altrettante prima e dopo a Pristina, Lipjan e Prizren.
Non posso garantire la mia presenza venerdì prossimo per turno di
servizio
in
ospedale; auguri di buon lavoro
Marino Andolina
Seguiamo con grande interesse le vostre iniziative, ma fino al 29 maggio
siamo molto impegnati contro le multinazionali di tebio qui a Genova
Per favore, continuate a tenerci al corrente!
Grazie-ciao
p. il Centro Ligure di documentazione per la pace
Norma Bertullacelli
Stefano de Angelis
Carlo Pona (ENEA)
Paolo Pioppi
Fulvio Grimaldi
Pasquale Vilardo
Marinella Correggia, Un ponte per...
Giovanni Russo Spena (capogruppo Senato PRC)
Gabriele Cerminara, magistrato
Domenico Gallo
Elettra Deiana
Nella Ginatempo
Forum delle donne del PRC
Fausto Sorini (direzione nazionale PRC)
Lidia Campagnano
prof. Angelo Baracca (università Firenze)
Ambretta Rampelli
Giulia Baroni, università di Roma
Aldo Bernardini, università di Teramo
Luisa Morgantini (parlamentare europea PRC)
Ivan Pavicevac
Anna Kosic
Comitato contro al guerra e la NATO - Ravenna
Coordinamento romagnolo contro la guerra e la NATO
Centro di documentazione "Patrizia Gatto" di Napoli.
Luigi Cortesi, rivista "Giano"
Giovanna Ricoveri, direttrice della rivista telematica Ecologia politica
Giorgio Nebbia, professore emerito università di Bari
Lavoratori autorganizzati Slai-Cobas di Ravenna
Alberto Bernardini (università di Padova)
Alessandra Areni
Eduardo Missoni
Paolo Rosignoli (editore, Ed. Achab)
Daniel Amit (Università di Roma)
Lucio Chiappetti (IFCTR/CNR - Milano)
Daniele Barbieri, cantieri sociali di Imola
Roberto Foco
Patrizio E. Tressoldi (Universita' di Padova)
Francesco Magnocavallo
Giorgio Cortellessa
Cesare ASCOLI (C.N.R. Pisa)
Franco Marenco (Enea)
Comitato contro la guerra di Bologna
Commissione esteri Federazione PRC di Bologna
Christian Fischer
Stefano Corradino
Missoni Eduardo
Fabio Baglioni (Casale Podere Rosa, Roma) -
GianLuca Schiavon
Fabiana Fantinel
Antonino Drago
Fabio Marcelli
Andrea Catone
Gennaro Carotenuto
Daniella Ambrosino
Lucio Triolo (ENEA)
Luca Nencini (ENEA)
Beatrice De Blasi (Pres. SCI)
Vincenzo Caffarelli (ENEA)
Roberto Verdi
Claudio Delbianco
Franco Romanò
Lorenzo Savioli, World Health Organization
Mario Patuzzo - Verona
Enrico Giardino (Forum DAC)
Francesca Lepori
Massimo Zucchetti, politecnico Torino
Marco Spada
Alessandra Filabozzi - LURE Centre Universitaire Paris Sud
Alberto Tarozzi
Libero Vitiello Universita' di Padova
Enrico Peyretti Torino
Vincenzo Brandi ENEA
Archivio Disarmo (Ornella Cacciò)
AIASP (Associazione Internazionale di amicizia e solidarietà con i
Popoli)
Rete Associazioni Popolari
OVD (Operatori volontari Difesa)
Casa dei Popoli di Roma
Coordinamento "Magma/Uscita di Sikurezza"
Most za beograd - un Ponte per Belgrado in terra di Bari
SCI
DP (Democrazia Popolare - Sinistra Unita)
Forum DAC tel. 06-3016877
Coordinamento Romano per la Jugoslavia
La redazione della rivista MAREA
Cipax - Centro Interconfessionale per la Pace - Roma -
Circolo "Puletti" del PRC ENEA Casaccia
Elena Fido e Stefano Minello
Kollettivo Estrella Roja, Cesena
Luigia Spaccamonti, Bologna
Associazione Italia-Nicaragua, Circolo di Viterbo
Andrea Fumagalli (Docente di Economia Politica)
Associazione culturale di solidarietà con la popolazione jugoslava
(BARI)
Andrea Catone
Red Ghost (materiali per la controinformazione e la lotta) - Ravenna,
Spazio Libero Autogestito PelleRossa - Cesena
Gordon Poole
Roberto Sensi
Giulio Sensi
Centro di Comunicazione Antagonista - Cremona
Sergio Ruggieri, Segretaria Federazione di Ancona P.R.C.
Rossana Montecchiani, Comitato Politico Nazionale P.R.C.
Antonio Bruno (Vice Presidente del Consiglio Comunale di Genova)
Fosco Valentini
Michele Melera
Enrico Peyretti, Torino
Maurizio Poletto - della segreteria CGIL -Torino.
Mensile "la nostra lotta"
Mauro Cristaldi
Mariacarla Castagna
Giorgio Cadoni
Valerio Gennaro
Medici per l'Ambiente (ISDE-Genova)
Roberto Spaccia
Antonio Moscato (docente università di Lecce)
Paolo Trezzi
Gruppo KHORAKHANE'
Antonio Onorati, presidente Centro Internazionale Crocevia
John Gilbert Coordinatore Nazionale Lettori Universitari SNUR-CGIL
(Universita' e Ricerca)
Coordinamento Romano per la Jugoslavia
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
alla giornata finale del Tribunale "Clark", New York 10/6/2000
* Un articolo da WORKERS WORLD
* CONCLUSIONI DEI LAVORI DELLE SEZIONI TEDESCA/EUROPEA ED AUSTRIACA
* GLI ADERENTI ALLA SEZIONE ITALIANA (aggiornamento primo giugno 2000)
---
Subject: U.S./NATO found guilty of war crimes against Yugoslavia
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 21:42:52 -0400
From: iacenter@...
To: "International" <iacenter@...>
GUILTY!
On Saturday, June 10, 2000, the International Tribunal on U.S./NATO
War Crimes Against the People of Yugoslavia found U.S. and
NATO political and military leaders guilty of war crimes. At this
people's tribunal meeting in New York, held before over 500 people, a
panel of 16 judges from 11 countries rendered this verdict regarding
the March 24-June 10, 1999 U.S./NATO assault on Yugoslavia.
Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, the lead prosecutor at
the International Tribunal on U.S./NATO War Crimes Against
Yugoslavia, urged those present and those they represented from the
21 countries participating to carry out a sentence of organizing a
campaign to abolish the NATO military pact.
Ben Dupuy, former ambassador at large during the Aristide
Administration in Haiti, the Rev. Kiyul Chung of Korea, and auto
worker Martha Grevatt, who heads the AFL-CIO’s official
constituency group Pride at Work, read the three parts of the verdict
(included below).
Participants taking the witness stand included eyewitnesses,
researchers who visited Yugoslavia, renowned political and
economics analysts, historians, physicists, biologists, military
experts,
journalists and lay researchers. (A list of all the judges, and the
witnesses and their topics is included below.)
Many of these witnesses have in the past 15 months presented to
audiences worldwide a complete picture of the war NATO waged
against Yugoslavia. For the tribunal, however, all limited themselves
to a single area of expertise that made up a single part of the
evidence against the political and military leaders of the United States
and the other NATO countries.
Taken together, the judges decided, each single part contributed to
construct a proof that beyond a reasonable doubt proved the guilt of
the accused, just as the proper placing of single tiles can build a
mosaic.
The witnesses described how NATO forces used the media to spread
lies to demonize the Serbs and their leadership in order to prepare
public opinion to prepare for war. Then they showed the real
economic and geopolitical interests of the imperialist powers--the U.S.
and Western Europe—in seizing economic control of the area from
the Balkans to the oil-rich Caspian Sea.
Finally they demonstrated how Washington rigged the “Racak
massacre” and then used the so-called Rambouillet accord—in reality
an ultimatum demanding NATO's military control of all of Yugoslavia-
-to provoke the war. Taken together this all proved a crime against
peace.
They also showed the use of illegal weapons, the purposeful choice of
civilian targets and the destruction of the environment and the civilian
infrastructure that add up to war crimes. And the expulsion of
hundreds of thousands of people from Kosovo and Metohija that
prove crimes against humanity.
The witnesses’ presentations were accompanied in many cases by
slides and videos displayed on a large screen on the stage of the
auditorium at Martin Luther King Jr. High School in Manhattan. This
screen was easily visible both to the judges, who sat on the stage, and
to the hundreds in the audience, many of whom stayed throughout the
nine-hour day.
In addition, pictures and videos were on display in the hall outside the
auditorium, and documentary evidence was offered in books or in
research papers.
The International Action Center, founded by Clark in 1992, organized
this final session of the tribunal. There was also participation by
those
who had organized similar tribunal hearings in Germany, Italy, Austria,
Russia, Ukraine, Yugoslavia and Greece, where thousands declared
U.S. President Clinton a war criminal last November in Athens.
In addition to the witnesses, there were also important guest
presentations from representatives of the governments Yugoslavia
and Cuba. In addition, Ismael Guadalupe from Vieques, Puerto Rico
showed in a powerful speech how the practice runs against his small
island laid the basis for U.S./NATO aggression around the world.
According to the IAC organizers, total registration, including justices,
witnesses and staff was 511. 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, whose message was read
from the stage.
There were also representatives of the Roma people—often referred
to by the derisive 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 different television crews taped the entire proceedings, including
Serbian television and a three-camera crew from Australia, as well as
alternate media sources in the U.S. like the Peoples Video Network.
FINAL JUDGEMENT OF THE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY TO
INVESTIGATE U.S./NATO WAR CRIMES AGAINST THE
PEOPLE OF YUGOSLAVIA
Final Judgement
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 nineteen 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;
Having the right and obligation as citizens of the world to sit in
judgement regarding violations of international humanitarian law;
Having heard the testimony from Commissions of Inquiry and
Tribunals held within their own countries during the past year and
having received reports from numerous other Commission hearings
which recite the evidence there gathered;
Having been provided with documentary evidence, eyewitness
statements, photos, videotapes, special reports, expert analyses and
summaries of evidence available to the Commission;
Having access to all evidence, knowledge and expert opinion in the
Commission files or available to the Commission staff;
Having been provided by the Commission, or otherwise obtained,
various books, articles and other written materials on various aspects
of events and conditions in Yugoslavia and other countries in the
Balkans, and in the military and arms establishments;
Having considered newspaper coverage, magazine and periodical
reports, special publications, TV, radio and other media coverage and
public statements by the accused, other public officials and public
materials;
Having heard the presentations of the Commission of Inquiry in public
hearing on June 10, 2000, and the testimony, evidence and summaries
there presented;
And having met, considered and deliberated with each other and with
Commission staff and having considered all the evidence that is
relevant to the nineteen charges of criminal conduct alleged in the
Initial Complaint, make the following findings:
FINDINGS
The Members of the International War Crimes Tribunal find the
accused Guilty on the basis of the evidence against them and that
each of the nineteen 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
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
TRIBUNAL SCHEDULE AND LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
10 a.m. Doors open. Registration, if possible, show videos in the
cafeteria or auditorium.
11:00 a.m. - 11:30 p.m Catrin Schuetz and Anya Mukarji-Connolly
introduce judges and prosecutors: List of judges for the International
Tribunal on U.S./NATO War Crimes against Yugoslavia--New York,
June 10, 2000
LIST OF 16 JUDGES
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--Rev. Ki Yul Chung, 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 Cutwal -originally from India, Uma Cutwal is 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 and 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 the AFL-
CIO for Lesbian/Gay/Bi/Trans Labor Organization called Pride at
Work, 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 and he 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--Puerto Rico--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--originally from Jamaica, 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 the Peace for Cuba Committee, producer
of video NATO Targets.
(All were in Yugoslavia either during the war or participating in
seminars or meetings after the war.)
Short opening remarks by Ramsey Clark, who will be lead prosecutor.
Opening greetings from Mikhail Kuznetsov of the International
Peoples Tribunal organized from Russia and Ukraine and other
former Soviet countries.
Part I: Crimes against peace. (11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.)
Our first witness is Lenora Foerstel (Maryland) of Women for Mutual
Security. She has recently edited a book War, Lies and Videotape;
about the control of the media.
Jared Israel (Massachusetts). Jared Israel produced a film called
Judgement showing how the corporate media distorted a picture to
produce a Big Lie.
Jean Hatton (Great Britain), from the anti-war movement in Britain.
Spoke of how massacre stories were used to justify the war.
Christopher Black (Canada), one of a group of Canadian attorney’s
who filed a suit charging NATO with war crimes at what is called the
International Criminal Court for the Former Yugoslavia at the Hague.
Speaks on ICFTY, how the Hague Tribunal was a part of the
preparation for war.
Monica Moorehead (U.S.) of Millions for Mumia and contributing
editor to Workers World newspaper, an expert 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 geo-political aims of the war, the Caspian pipelines.
Kadouri Al Kaysi an Iraqi American who has organized to expose the
impact of sanctions on Iraq.
Stratis Kounias, 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 (New York), journalist and researcher who has
represented the International Action Center at tribunals in Vienna and
Belgrade, on Washington’s premeditated plan regarding NATO and
the attack on Yugoslavia.
Roland Keith (Canada), a 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’s Observer mission in Kosovo and Metohija.
Preston Wood (California), 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 to present to the tribunal the
truth about the supposed massacre in Racak, Kosovo, used to justify
the attack on Yugoslavia.
Richard Becker (California), who has written and spoken extensively
on the role of the talks held in Rambouillet, France in February and
March 1999. Rambouillet ultimatum as provocation.
Gregor Kneussel (Austria), from the Austrian tribunal about the role
of Constitutionally neutral Austria regarding Yugoslavia and in
delivering this NATO ultimatum.
Part II. War Crimes & Crimes Against Humanity
La Riva, Gloria Prosecutor (California), used the video she produced,
NATO Targets, to show how the U.S./NATO bombs hit civilian
targets, from hospitals to bridges to factories.
Sarah Sloan (New York), IAC Commission of Inquiry researcher on
NATO claim it tried to minimize damage to civilian facilities in
Yugoslavia. She used a March 15, 2000 Newsweek article that
exposed that NATO hit very few military targets.
Ellen Catalinotto (New York) is a midwife who has delivered over
1,200 babies to mostly poor women in the New York City. She also
cares for HIV infected women and is involved in research on ways to
prevent the transmission of HIV from pregnant women to their
babies. She reported on NATO’s 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, now teaches law in Moscow. He described damage to
Yugoslav industrial infrastructure and how it cost a half-million jobs.
Admiral Elmar Schmaehling (Germany), former admiral and leading
spokesperson for the German tribunal movement. He spoke on the
aggressive posture of NATO since the collapse of the USSR and its
illegal attack on Yugoslavia.
Judi Cheng (New Jersey), IAC researcher. She showed how
unreasonable it was to believe that the bombing of Chinese embassy
in Belgrade was an accident.
Dr. Janet Eaton (Canada), biologist and environment expert Dr. Janet
Eaton to the stand, on destruction of the environment in Yugoslavia,
especially the damage from attacks on the petrochemical plant at
Pancevo and other industrial targets.
Dr. Carlo Pona (Italy) A physicist who attended a conference in
Belgrade about depleted uranium and has written about this subject,
Pona explained why DU is dangerous to humans and how it was used
in Yugoslavia.
Fulvio Grimaldi (Italy), video maker and journalist. Grimaldi, who has
just completed edited a film on sanctions in Iraq and Yugoslavia,
described the combined impact of impact of bombing and sanctions on
the population of Yugoslavia.
Deirdre Griswold (New York) has recently visited sites of U.S. war
crimes in south Korea, is editor in chief of Workers World
newspaper. She spoke about the pattern of criminal conduct of the
U.S. military and how the 1950 war crimes led to a continuing 50-
year occupation of Korea.
Shani Rifati (Roma), originally from the Romani community in
Kosovo, publishes an English-language newsletter about Romani
affairs named Voice of Roma. He spoke of the horrors the Roma
people faced in Kosovo under K-FOR and KLA occupation.
Milos Raickovich Serb-American composer and anti-war activist,
spoke on the destruction of churches and cultural sites in occupied
Kosovo and Metohija.
Professor Michel Chossudovsky (Canada), an expert historian and
economist, showed the role of the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army
and its ties to U.S. and German intelligence services, ties to NATO
and the United Nations Rep. Bernard Kouchner.
Scott Taylor (Canada), former soldier, who now publishes the Ottawa-
based magazine, Espirit de Corps, celebrated for its unflinching
scrutiny of the Canadian military. He also appears regularly in the
Canadian media as a military analyst. He witnessed the expulsion of
the Serb population from the Krajina in Croatia by an army led by
KLA General Ceku.
Professor Barry Lituchy (New York), who has recently returned
from a trip to Yugoslavia, described how the NATO occupying forces
known as K-FOR have participated in expelling parts of the
population from Kosovo.
Professor Greg Elich (United States), has recently visited the
Balkans. He spoke on the un-humanitarian nature of . NATO’s
occupation of Kosovo.
Gilles Troude (France), on the editorial board of Balkans-Info, a pro-
Yugoslavia, anti-NATO monthly published in Paris, France since
1996. He described France’s role in the war and in suppressing
dissent at home.
Professor Jorge Cadima (Portugal), a regular contributor on NATO-
related subjects to to Avante, the weekly newspaper of the
Portuguese Communist Party, spoke on the role of NATO in Portugal
since 1949 and on popular resistance to the war.
5:30-6:15 Messages of solidarity and struggle
Ismael Guadalupe (Puerto Rico) The Committee for the Rescue and
Development of Vieques on the relationship of Vieques to
Yugoslavia. He showed how the U.S. used Vieques for target
practice to prepare for the war against Yugoslavia, and they do so for
all foreign aggression.
Representative of Cuban Interest Section, spoke on Cuba’s suit
against U.S. for the costs of the embargo.
UN Ambassador Jovanovic of Yugoslavia, gave evidence of his own
government’s charges against the U.S. and NATO for war crimes.
His talk was in fact a summary of much of the day’s proceedings.
Brian Becker, co-director of the IAC, spoke on the need to form a
worldwide movement to abolish NATO.
Ramsey Clark reiterated some of the main points developed during
the day and stressed the need to come to a unified conclusion that
would find NATO guilty over a broad spectrum of charges—the 19
charges included in the original indictment—and lead to a struggle to
abolish NATO.
International Action Center
39 West 14th Street, Room 206
New York, NY 10011
email: iacenter@...
web: www.iacenter.org
CHECK OUT THE NEW SITE www.mumia2000.org
phone: 212 633-6646
fax: 212 633-2889
---
http://www.workers.org
-------------------------
Via Workers World News Service
Reprinted from the June 15, 2000
issue of Workers World newspaper
-------------------------
Hague tribunal denounced for exonerating NATO war criminals
By John Catalinotto
Anti-war organizations and individuals around the world reacted in
indignation to the announcement June 2 that the International Criminal
Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia was exonerating NATO of all charges
of war crimes committed against Yugoslavia.
Carla Del Ponte, chief prosecutor for the tribunal at The Hague, said
that the court had examined charges brought against NATO by various
forces. She said that after considerable study the court decided there
was no reason to pursue any of these charges.
Lawyers' groups in Canada, Russia, Greece, France, Yugoslavia and the
United States had brought charges before the court. Charges included the
use of cluster bombs and depleted uranium weapons, as well as dropping
bombs on civilian targets. The civilian targets included the Serb
television station, the Chinese Embassy, a train crossing a bridge and a
convoy of refugees in Kosovo--most of which have been reported in the
mainstream media.
International Action Center co-director Sara Flounders said Del Ponte's
announcement shows that "a people's court has to bring charges against
U.S. and NATO leaders if we want to preserve the truth of this war for
history."
The IAC initiated such a people's tribunal on July 31, 1999, and will
hold its final hearing this June 10 in New York. Flounders said anti-war
activists, elected representatives and prominent personalities from 18
nations will participate in the International Tribunal on U.S./NATO War
Crimes against Yugoslavia.
Flounders noted that "Del Ponte made her announcement just as people's
tribunals were taking place in Rome and Berlin that were finding NATO
leaders guilty of war crimes. And we were preparing our final tribunal
for the following week. In the Netherlands, lawyers are bringing charges
against government leaders on June 9.
"There is no doubt U.S. and NATO leaders planned the aggressive war
against Yugoslavia over a long period, that they purposely bombed
civilian targets, and that they used weapons illegal under international
treaties. And there is no doubt Del Ponte was told to make this
announcement now in an attempt to counter the success of these people's
tribunals in bringing U.S./NATO crimes to the light of day," charged
Flounders.
"We note that the article in the June 3 New York Times on Del Ponte's
announcement described the lawyers who brought charges to the ICTFY
court as 'paid by Yugoslavia.' We know for a fact that the lawyers in
many different countries--including Canada, France, Russia and
Greece--do their work out of their personal conviction. They often do
this at great personal sacrifice, and they have succeeded in exposing
the ICTFY as a corrupt court in the pay of the U.S. and other NATO
powers."
'A corrupt tribunal is worse
than none at all'
Workers World spoke with Prof. Michael Mandel, one of a group of
Canadian attorneys who had brought charges to the ICTFY court.
Mandel said that Del Ponte's decision was no surprise to him, and that
his group had denounced the tribunal as a farce and a disgrace in March.
"The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia is a
corrupt institution," said Mandel. "It declared its own corruption with
the announcement by the prosecutor, Carla Del Ponte, that she is
completely satisfied that NATO did not commit war crimes in Yugoslavia
and for that reason is not going to open an inquiry.
"You might want to ask how she became satisfied of their innocence
without an inquiry.
"NATO committed every crime from mass murder on down in front of the
world and it confessed its guilt in every press conference of Jamie
Shea," said Mandel.
"A corrupt tribunal is worse than no tribunal at all. This one should be
shut down and Del Ponte fired, to find work in some other department of
the Pentagon," said Mandel. He noted that the first prosecutor of the
tribunal, Canadian Louise Arbour, was rewarded with a life appointment
to the Supreme Court of Canada by Premier Jean Chretien.
In Italy, former senator and religious philosopher Raniero La Valle
denounced the ICTFY as a "victor's tribunal" that was set up
specifically to persecute the Milosevic government in Yugoslavia. La
Valle said that "it is important that justice be found also outside of
its traditional seats and be proclaimed before the tribunal of public
opinion." He was referring specifically to the tribunals to be held June
3 in Rome and June 10 in the U.S. inspired by former U.S. Attorney
General Ramsey Clark.
La Valle will participate at the June 10 tribunal in New York, which
will take place from 11 a.m. to 7 p.m. at the Martin Luther King High
School Auditorium at 66th Street and Amsterdam Ave. in Manhattan. The
doors open at 10 a.m.
---
Subject: Berliner Tribunal gegen die NATO
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 23:56:01 +0200
From: Jug Öster Solibeweg <joesb@...>
To: <joesb@...>
„Die Tribunalbewegung fortsetzen“
Vorstellungsbeitrag der JÖSB beim Europäischen Tribunal gegen die Nato
in
Berlin am 2./3. Juni 2000
Die 90er Jahre wurden als der Beginn des Zeitalters der Menschenrechte,
der
Freiheit und der Demokratie ausgerufen, eben als Anfang einer „Neuen
Weltordnung“.
Doch sehr schnell stellte sich diese als ihr genaues Gegenteil heraus.
Das
Jahrzehnt begann mit einer gewaltigen Krieg gegen den Irak, einer
Aggression
die bis heute andauern und bereits Millionen das Leben gekostet hat. Und
das
Jahrzehnt endete wie es begonnen hatte, nämlich abermals mit einem
Bombenkrieg, diesmal gegen Jugoslawien. Dieser Krieg war nur der
vorläufige
Höhepunkt einer Aggression zur Zerschlagung Jugoslawiens, die ebenso
bereits
Jahre andauert.
Viele werden sich fragen woher diese Aggressivität kommt? Es ist
unmodern
geworden den Grund auf den Punkt, auf den Begriff zu bringen. Man muss
sich
gefallen lassen, als Dinosaurier bezeichnet zu werden. Doch es gibt
keinen
Begriff, der den Sachverhalt besser darstellen könnte – es handelt sich
schicht und einfach um Imperialismus! [anhaltender Applaus] Und die NATO
ist
die Speerspitze dieses Imperialismus.
Solange die NATO und der Imperialismus existiert wird es den Frieden,
für
den wir uns alle einsetzen, niemals geben.
Darum ist das Ziel des Wiener Tribunals nicht nur die öffentliche
Verurteilung der Regierung für den Bruch der in der Verfassung
festgelegten
Neutralität, sondern die Verhinderung des Beitritts Österreichs zur NATO
und
der Erhalt unserer Neutralität. Wir kämpfen für die Auflösung der NATO,
was
angesichts des zu erwartenden Widerstands nichts anderes als ihre
Zerschlagung bedeuten kann.
*******
DAS URTEIL DES EUROPAEISCHEN TRIBUNAL
(http://www.jungewelt.de/2000/06-05/012.shtml)
sowie eine umfangreiche Dokumentation kann in der Berliner
Tageszeitung "JUNGE WELT" abgerufen werden.
Die Ergebnisse des Wiener Tribunal können auf der Netzseite der JÖSB
eingesehen werden: http://www.vorstadtzentrum.net/joesb
****************************
INDICTMENT BY THE VIENNA TRIBUNAL
(submitted to the international tribunal against NATO war crimes in New
York
on the fortcoming weekend)
I Preamble
1) NATO, the United States of America, the Federal Republic of Germany,
the
United Kingdom, Turkey, Spain, the Netherlands, Croatia, Hungary, Italy,
France and others - after failing to force the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia at the so-called "peace negotiations" in Paris and
Rambouillet to
accept an extortionate ultimatum which in fact aimed at the occupation
of
the entire territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and had been
declared a condition sine qua non - without a declaration of war and
without
a resolution by the United Nations Security Council launched warlike
rocket
and bombing attacks against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,
deliberately
murdering Serbs, Kosovo-Albanians, Roma, Muslims, Orthodox-Christians,
Catholics and foreign nationals.
By doing this they destroyed and damaged economic, social, cultural,
medical, diplomatic and religious resources.
In the course of their criminal war of aggression, NATO and the
above-mentioned states cut off the population of Yugoslavia from food,
water, electric energy, food production, medicines and medical services.
By
means of rocket and aerial bombing attacks they systematically destroyed
and
damaged waterworks and agricultural irrigation installations, factories,
fertilisers and vegetation, pharmaceutical production works, hospitals
and
health service installations as well as other objects needed for human
survival. The aggressors attack chemical factories, oil refineries,
petrol
and natural gas stores, fertiliser plants, installations and localities
with
the aim of releasing, on a wide scale, radioactive and other dangerous
substances into the atmosphere, the soil, the ground-water and the
foodchain, poison the environment and harm the population. They employed
banned arms, attacked the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia with rockets,
bombs
and missiles which contained Depleted Uranium (DU) and released
radioactive
substances into the atmosphere the soil, the ground-water, the foodchain
as
well as into solid objects, thus exposing the Yugoslav population to
health
hazards for generations to come.
2) With these actions NATO and the above-mentioned states violated
International Law, especially art. 2 chapter 7 of the UN-Charter; the
Declaration on Non-intervention; the Resolution on the Definition of
Aggression, 1997 UNGA 3314; articles 52 and 53 of the Convention on the
Law
of Treaties of 23 May, 1969; the Treaty on the Banning of War, the
Briand-Kelog-Pact of Paris, 1928, articles 1 and 2; the Hague
Conventions,
especially the Fourth Hague Convention of 18 October, 1907; the Geneva
Convention on the Protection of Civilians in Times of War, 1949; the
Statutes of the Nuremberg Tribunal, principles VI a, b and c; the Geneva
Additional Protocol 1977, articles 48 and 51; the Geneva Protocol on the
Use
of Asphyxiating, Poisonous and Similar Gases as well as of
Bacteriological
Substances in Wars, of 1925; the European Convention on the Peaceful
Settlement of conflicts, of 29 April, 1957 and also violated national
penal
codes concerning murder, duresse, dangerous threat, wilful destruction,
arson, damage to the environment, formation of gangs for the purpose of
carrying out criminal plots and genocide.
II THE VIENNA TRIBUNAL BRINGS A POLITICAL INDICTMENT AGAINST:
The Federal Government of the Republic of Austria
Chancellor Mag. Victor Klima
Vice Chancellor and Minister of Foreign Affairs Dr. Wolfgang Schüssel
Minister of Defence Dr. Werner Fasslabend
Former EU-Special Representative Dr. Wolfgang Petritsch, present High
Representative for Bosnia
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs Dr. Alois Mock
a) in particular against former minister of foreign affairs Dr. Alois
Mock
on the basis of the well-founded suspicion of openly taking position
(politically, economically and logistically) and intervening in a civil
war - thereby violating neutrality - by abetting the destruction of the
sovereign Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, through furthering -
in
contravention of international law - and politically supporting the
secession by force of member republics of the SFR of Yugoslavia by way
of
the official recognition - in violation of international law and the
status
of neutrality - of member republics of the SFR of Yugoslavia which had
seceded with the use of force.
(Violation of the neutrality law; of the UN-Charter; of the principle
regarding the obligation of non-intervention in matters which, according
to
the Charter, pertain to the national competence of a state; Declaration
of
the United Nations)
b) in particular against the former EU-Special Representative Dr.
Wolfgang
Petritsch on the basis of his collaboration in the "peace accords"
elaborated in the course of the so-called "peace negotiations" in Paris
and
Rambouillet, including Annex B which contains an extortionate occupation
diktat postulating, as conditio sine qua non, the occupation of the
entire
national territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia with the
threat, in
case of non-compliance, of immediate war actions through bombing attacks
against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
(Jeopardizing of neutrality according to Austrian penal code, paragraph
320;
violation of chapter 1 art. 2 and chapter 7 of the UN-Charter; the
Declaration on Non-intervention of 24 October, 1970; the
Briand-Kelog-Pact
of 27 August, 1928; of art. 52 and 53 of the Convention on the Law of
Treaties; violation of paragraphs 105, 106 of the Austrian penal code
/severe duresse/)
c) against the Austrian Federal Government and the above-mentioned
statesmen
on the grounds of the well-founded suspicion of having abetted the
aggressive actions of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (see above
I/1)
which, having mandated itself, without decision or mandate by the
Security
Council, by violating the obligation under international law to renounce
on
the use of force in international relations and in relations among
states,
waged a war of aggression against the territory of a sovereign state,
and
thus, on the well-founded suspicion of having violated Austria's
Everlasting
Neutrality, enshrined in international law, by not adhering to the
obligations of an everlastingly neutral state to always comport itself
in
times of war and of peace in a manner that excludes favouring one side
of a
conflict and also on the grounds of the well-founded suspicion of openly
taking sides - politically, economically and logistically - in a civil
war.
c2) and in particular against Federal Chancellor Mag. Victor Klima and
foreign Minister Dr. Wolfgang Schüssel on the basis of their open
support
for and abetting of the NATO war of aggression - violating international
law - at the EU-summit in Berlin and the 50th anniversary NATO-summit in
Washington.
(accessory to the violation of the UN-Charter; the Briand-Kelog-Pact;
the
Declaration on Non-intervention; the Declaration on Non-interference;
the
Resolution on the Definition of Aggression; art. 22 and 23 of the fourth
Hague Concention as well as of the other norms of international law set
out
under I/2, and of the violation of the law on neutrality)
d) on the basis of the well-founded suspicion of abetting the violation
of
the ban on waging "ecological war" carried out by NATO - see I/1 on the
perpetration of criminal actions (i.e. bombing of oil refineries,
chemical
factories and others, damaging and destroying installations, thereby
causing
negative effects on the environment, locally and regionally) as well as
the
use of banned weapons (cluster bombs and munition made of depleted
uranium,
DU)
(Violation of the UN-Charter and the other norms of international law
listed
under I/2, in particular the 1925 Geneva Agreement on the Banning of
Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases; the Convention on the Banning of
the
Use of Means Affecting the Environment, 1977; the Geneva Convention of
12
August, 1949 on the Protection of Civilians in Times of War)
e) on the basis of the well-founded suspicion that at the time of war
the
Austrian Federal Government did not verify violations of the Austrian
air
space by NATO-airforces with regard to their armaments not did it
protest
against such violations, although it would have been obliged to do so
according to international law as well as according to Austrian
neutrality
law - violations which, although not authorised in this case by Austria,
increased massively during that period, according to information
provided by
Austrian air traffic control (which fact does not elucidate how many of
these overflights possibly took place in support of the NATO air war);
based
also on the fact repeated transits through Austria by NATO vehicles to
bases
in Hungary for a long time previously, which can be assumed to have been
not
solely "humanitarian" transports.
(Violation of the 1965 Declaration on Non-intervention; of the Agreement
on
the Peaceful Settlement of International conflicts - First Hague
Convention
on the Outbreak of Hostilities; of the Third Hague Convention of 18
October,
1907; of the Austrian Neutrality Law; of the Austrian Federal Law of 18
October, 1977 on the import, export and transit of war material)
f) based on a well-founded suspicion of transmitting perceptions,
regardless
of their content of truth, pertaining to the intelligence department,
regarding activities on the territory of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia,
by Austrian authorities to NATO services, which fact must lead to the
assumption of violation of neutrality obligations by Austria.
(Violation of the Declaration of Non-interference; of the
Briand-Kelog-Pact
of 1928; of the UN-Charter; of the Austrian law on neutrality)
g) based on the well-founded suspicion of restraining the effectuation
of
non-military and non-violent possibilities of conflict resolution; such
as
the prevention by neutral Austria of tasks ascribed to the OSCE,
possibly by
means of a "withdrawal order" addressed to NATO; of handing over, for
the
first time ever, of a mandate to a US-representative, in this case US
Ambassador William Walker (during whose period as US Ambassador in El
Salvador the dirty war in El Salvador, carried out with the complicity
of
the USA, reached its climax); failure on the part of the Federal
Government
to oppose the - improper - use of the OSCE in the strategic preparation
of
the War against Yugoslavia and the logistic support of NATO as well as
failure to eliminate the suspension of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia as
member of the organisation with a view to favour attempts at bringing
about
negotiated settlements.
(Violation of the stipulations of the CSCE and OSCE; of the Austrian law
on
neutrality; violation of the agreement on protection and compromise
procedures within the OSCE, Stockholm, 15 December, 1992)
h) on the basis of the well-founded suspicion of at least tacitly
consenting
to inflammatory reporting, especially regarding the Serbian sector of
the
population of the Yugoslav Republic; on the well-founded suspicion of
inciting population groups on the territory of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia against each other, especially in media subjected to public
law
and of omitting - on the part of the Federal Government of Austria - to
intervene in order to insist on publishing denials, thus raising doubts
regarding Austria's everlasting neutrality.
(Violation of the braodcasting law and the Austrian neutrality law)
III
On the basis of the suspicion outlined above, the representatives of the
preparatory committee of the Vienna Tribunal demand that the Vienna
Tribunal
of 4 December, 1999 indict the Federal Government of Austria and the
statesmen listed above on the grounds of favouring and supporting the
NATO
aggression against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and of being
accessory
to a conspicuous violation of international law; as well as on the
well-founded suspicion of approval (which has to be rejected out of
political, moral and humanist convictions) of a "New World Order" which
was
a consequence of this war and which contains a continuously proclaimed
right
of "humanitarian intervention" on the part of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organisation (NATO) that is to be carried out with the force of arms and
the
backing - on a global scale - of the strongest military power.
The verdict will be placed at the disposal of the International
Tribunal,
represented by Mr. Ramsey Clark, for the general indictment before the
International Court of Justice in The Hague.
*****
The Vienna tribual on December 4th, 1999 has judged the persons and
institutions named above to be guilty for the crimes stated.
****************************
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
---
TRIBUNALE ITALIANO CONTRO I CRIMINI DELLA NATO IN YUGOSLAVIA
065181048- FAX 068174010
E-MAIL: s.deangelis@... ponac@...
ADESIONI AGGIORNATE AL I° GIUGNO
FALCO ACCAME
GRUPPO DIRITTO E GIUSTIZIA DELLA FED. ROMANA DI RIF.COMUNISTA
Ti invio l'adesione all'assemblea del 3 giugno del Coordinamento
Nazionale
delle delegate e dei delegati RSU (il nostro sito è
<http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/>
Aderisco fermamente all'iniziativa
Sergio Mauri - Associazione Culturale Telematica Sottovoce: le parole
sono importanti
Chers Camarades
Nous vous prions de ne pas oublier que nous ausi, le Front
anti-imperialiste, se
joint à votre initiative.
Salutations communistes
Alexandre Moumbaris, président FAI
Roberto Sacco University of Edinburgh
CERN-EP Geneva
ADERIAMO CON ASSOLUTA CONVINZIONE ALL'INIZIATIVA DEL TRIBUNALE CONTRO I
CRIMINI DELLA NATO IN JUGOSLAVIA.
VINCA LA VERITA' DEI POPOLI CONTRO LA MENZOGNA E LA PROTERVIA DEI
POTENTI.
MARISA MANTOVANI, GUIDO CRISTINI - MANTOVA
Donatella Cavani Bologna
Adriana Samaritani Bologna
Marco Palmieri Bologna
Rita Zappa Bologna
Jonhatan Palmieri Bologna
Elena Rainaldi Bologna
Leonardo Trozzi Bologna
Ilaria Bussoni Roma
Alberto Burgio Bologna
Aderiamo molto volentieri al Tribunale Internazionale per i crimini
della
Guerra NATO in Jugoslavia consapevoli che il proseguimento della
battaglia
perchè giustizia e informazione siano fatte è la condizione necessaria
per
avviare uno sbocco positivo alla storia recente della Jugoslavia, e per
una
rimessa in discussione dell'attuale sistema di "sicurezza" NATO.
Cobas scuola sardegna
Aderisco all'iniziativa, anche se non potrò parteciparvi personalmente.
Gli errori ed orrori che una fantomatica sinistra legittima in nome di
una democrazia dei cannoni si pagano, anche in termini elettorali,
preoccupazione principe della sinistra che non governa pur stando al
governo.
Con l'augurio di buon lavoro
umberta torti
Chiara Giorgi Bologna
Roberto Bui Roma
Elio Pagani Venegono Inf. VA
Marco Tambolini Varese
Angelo Sacco Varese
Dino De Simone Varese
Eugenia Gioia Varese
Vincenzo Scalia Bologna
Giovanni Turbanti S. Pietro in Casale BO
Simona Galeotti Bologna
Felice Minicozzi Bologna
Giancarlo Gaeta Bologna
Fabio Rizzoli Bologna
Guido Bartolucci Bologna
Paola Maiardi Bologna
Giovanni Giuseppe Nicosia Bologna
Mirella Agostini Budrio BO
Silvia Scatena Pescia PT
Comitato Sardo Gettiamo le Basi
Aderiamo all'appello,
Obiettori Caritas di Fidenza (pr)
Aderiamo all'appello contenente i capi d'accusa contro le massime
autorità
istituzionali del nostro paese, pur non potendeo partecipare
personalmente
alla sessione del tribunale che si terrà il 3 giugno. La verità verrà
alla
luce e alla coscienza dei popoli.
Giuliana Beltrame , Antonino Morvillo - Padova
nel comunicarvi che abbiamo girato a tutta la nostra rete l'appello per
il 3
giugno, vi comunichiamo la nostra adesione e cercheremo anche di esserci
.
DONNE IN NERO ROMA----
condividendo i punti di accusa contro la Nato aderisco all'appello
promosso
dal Tribunale Internazionale contro i crimini della Nato in Yugoslavia
carla francone, direttore periodico comunista nuova unità
La Lega per i diritti dei popoli aderisce all'iniziativa
Luciano Ardesi
segretario nazionale
-Lega per i Diritti dei Popoli
Le Donne in Nero contro la guerra di Firenze aderiscono all'appello
contro
i crimini commessi dalla Nato durante la guerra in Kosovo.
Vedremo di partecipare a >Roma il 3 giugno 2000 all'ultima sessione
italiana del tribuynale internazionale indipendente contro i crimini
commessi dalla Nato.
DiN - Firenze
Adesione dell'Osservatorio Etico Ambientale all'iniziativa del
Tribunale Internazionale del 3 giugno 2000
Caro Stefano,
Ti comunico la nostra adesione preannunciando la presentazione
della Dichiarazione di Arresto e Mandato di Cattura a carico del
Procuratore capo della Procura di Roma reo di NON aver iniziato
l'azione penale nei confronti dei governanti colpevoli, già denunciati
dal Popolo Sovrano.
Cordiali saluti,
Marco Saba
Osservatorio Etico Ambientale
Mandato di cattura a carico di Vecchione
Milano, 29 maggio 2000
Egregio Avv. Mattina,
facendo riferimento al documento da Lei inviato in rete nel febbraio
scorso contenente tra l'altro il decreto di archiviazione da parte
del Dr. Vecchione in merito alle denunce presentate dal Popolo Sovrano;
L'Osservatorio Etico Ambientale emette una Dichiarazione di
Arresto e Mandato di cattura a carico del Procuratore capo della
Procura di Roma reo di NON aver iniziato l'azione penale nei
confronti dei governanti colpevoli dei reati di tentata modifica
dell'ordinamento costituzionale tramite metodi non consentiti,
reati già denunciati.
Tale Mandato verrà presentato in occasione della riunione del
Tribunale Internazionale il 3 giugno prossimo. Contiamo di
incontrarLa in tale data per decidere assieme l'intervento.
Cordiali saluti,
Marco Saba
Osservatorio Etico Ambientale
Aderisco alla giornata del 3 giugno; in questo momento però non posso
muovermi da Bologna. Appena ho un pò di soldi vi manderò un contributo.
Ma il manifesto e liberazione stanno semplicemente zitti o adducono
ragioni per la non pubblicazione?
A presto
Fabrizio Giuliani
Do la mia personale adesione al testo "Processiamoli"
Paolo Nerozzi
Aderiamo molto volentieri all'appello PAX CHRISTI - PUNTO PACE BOLOGNA
UN Ponte per..
Fabio Alberti
L'Associazione per la Pace aderisce e partecipa al Tribunale Clark e
sarà
presente all'iniziativa del 3 giugno a Roma.
Davide Berruti
Coordinatore Nazionale
Dani Flop
Aderisco all'iniziativa del tribunale contro i crimini NATO in
Jugoslavia di
cui condivido i capi d'accusa.
Il Comitato 7 Dicembre per l'abolizione della legislazione speciale
contro
il terrorismo (già Comitato per la libertà di Sergio Spina -
Bologna)aderisce all'iniziativa del 3 Giugno a Roma.
p. Angelo Cavagna e tutto il GAVCI aderiscono fermamente
al Tribunale Internazionale ed alle sue attivita'.
Purtroppo per diversi impegni non potremo essere a Roma.
Saluti di Pace.
Marco Cervino
fisico / physicist
Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, CNR-ISAO, (ex IMGA e FISBAT)
Istituto di Scienze dell'Atmosfera e dell'Oceano
Torino : Enrico Vigna, Associazione SOS Yugoslavia e coordinatore del
Tribunale a Torino.
Ci vediamo a Roma.
Ovviamente io aderisco e con me il "Collettivo Studenti a Sinistra"
dell'Università di Cagliari
A presto
Walter Falgio, Cagliari
aderisco anche se non potro' essere fisicamente presente
============================
Spartaco Vitiello
Con questa lettera aderisco alle attività del "TRIBUNALE
INTERNAZIONALE INDIPENDENTE CONTRO I CRIMINI DELLA NATO IN JUGOSLAVIA",
promosso da Ramsey Clark, con la stesura di 19 punti di accusa contro la
NATO ed i governi occidentali.
Sandro Mazzi.
Desidero aderire alle iniziative del Tribunale Clark, condividendone i
principi ed essendo stato testimone oculare dei crimini della NATO sia
in
Serbia che in Kosovo. Ricordo di essere stato in Kosovo due volte
durante la
guerra, ed altrettante prima e dopo a Pristina, Lipjan e Prizren.
Non posso garantire la mia presenza venerdì prossimo per turno di
servizio
in
ospedale; auguri di buon lavoro
Marino Andolina
Seguiamo con grande interesse le vostre iniziative, ma fino al 29 maggio
siamo molto impegnati contro le multinazionali di tebio qui a Genova
Per favore, continuate a tenerci al corrente!
Grazie-ciao
p. il Centro Ligure di documentazione per la pace
Norma Bertullacelli
Stefano de Angelis
Carlo Pona (ENEA)
Paolo Pioppi
Fulvio Grimaldi
Pasquale Vilardo
Marinella Correggia, Un ponte per...
Giovanni Russo Spena (capogruppo Senato PRC)
Gabriele Cerminara, magistrato
Domenico Gallo
Elettra Deiana
Nella Ginatempo
Forum delle donne del PRC
Fausto Sorini (direzione nazionale PRC)
Lidia Campagnano
prof. Angelo Baracca (università Firenze)
Ambretta Rampelli
Giulia Baroni, università di Roma
Aldo Bernardini, università di Teramo
Luisa Morgantini (parlamentare europea PRC)
Ivan Pavicevac
Anna Kosic
Comitato contro al guerra e la NATO - Ravenna
Coordinamento romagnolo contro la guerra e la NATO
Centro di documentazione "Patrizia Gatto" di Napoli.
Luigi Cortesi, rivista "Giano"
Giovanna Ricoveri, direttrice della rivista telematica Ecologia politica
Giorgio Nebbia, professore emerito università di Bari
Lavoratori autorganizzati Slai-Cobas di Ravenna
Alberto Bernardini (università di Padova)
Alessandra Areni
Eduardo Missoni
Paolo Rosignoli (editore, Ed. Achab)
Daniel Amit (Università di Roma)
Lucio Chiappetti (IFCTR/CNR - Milano)
Daniele Barbieri, cantieri sociali di Imola
Roberto Foco
Patrizio E. Tressoldi (Universita' di Padova)
Francesco Magnocavallo
Giorgio Cortellessa
Cesare ASCOLI (C.N.R. Pisa)
Franco Marenco (Enea)
Comitato contro la guerra di Bologna
Commissione esteri Federazione PRC di Bologna
Christian Fischer
Stefano Corradino
Missoni Eduardo
Fabio Baglioni (Casale Podere Rosa, Roma) -
GianLuca Schiavon
Fabiana Fantinel
Antonino Drago
Fabio Marcelli
Andrea Catone
Gennaro Carotenuto
Daniella Ambrosino
Lucio Triolo (ENEA)
Luca Nencini (ENEA)
Beatrice De Blasi (Pres. SCI)
Vincenzo Caffarelli (ENEA)
Roberto Verdi
Claudio Delbianco
Franco Romanò
Lorenzo Savioli, World Health Organization
Mario Patuzzo - Verona
Enrico Giardino (Forum DAC)
Francesca Lepori
Massimo Zucchetti, politecnico Torino
Marco Spada
Alessandra Filabozzi - LURE Centre Universitaire Paris Sud
Alberto Tarozzi
Libero Vitiello Universita' di Padova
Enrico Peyretti Torino
Vincenzo Brandi ENEA
Archivio Disarmo (Ornella Cacciò)
AIASP (Associazione Internazionale di amicizia e solidarietà con i
Popoli)
Rete Associazioni Popolari
OVD (Operatori volontari Difesa)
Casa dei Popoli di Roma
Coordinamento "Magma/Uscita di Sikurezza"
Most za beograd - un Ponte per Belgrado in terra di Bari
SCI
DP (Democrazia Popolare - Sinistra Unita)
Forum DAC tel. 06-3016877
Coordinamento Romano per la Jugoslavia
La redazione della rivista MAREA
Cipax - Centro Interconfessionale per la Pace - Roma -
Circolo "Puletti" del PRC ENEA Casaccia
Elena Fido e Stefano Minello
Kollettivo Estrella Roja, Cesena
Luigia Spaccamonti, Bologna
Associazione Italia-Nicaragua, Circolo di Viterbo
Andrea Fumagalli (Docente di Economia Politica)
Associazione culturale di solidarietà con la popolazione jugoslava
(BARI)
Andrea Catone
Red Ghost (materiali per la controinformazione e la lotta) - Ravenna,
Spazio Libero Autogestito PelleRossa - Cesena
Gordon Poole
Roberto Sensi
Giulio Sensi
Centro di Comunicazione Antagonista - Cremona
Sergio Ruggieri, Segretaria Federazione di Ancona P.R.C.
Rossana Montecchiani, Comitato Politico Nazionale P.R.C.
Antonio Bruno (Vice Presidente del Consiglio Comunale di Genova)
Fosco Valentini
Michele Melera
Enrico Peyretti, Torino
Maurizio Poletto - della segreteria CGIL -Torino.
Mensile "la nostra lotta"
Mauro Cristaldi
Mariacarla Castagna
Giorgio Cadoni
Valerio Gennaro
Medici per l'Ambiente (ISDE-Genova)
Roberto Spaccia
Antonio Moscato (docente università di Lecce)
Paolo Trezzi
Gruppo KHORAKHANE'
Antonio Onorati, presidente Centro Internazionale Crocevia
John Gilbert Coordinatore Nazionale Lettori Universitari SNUR-CGIL
(Universita' e Ricerca)
Coordinamento Romano per la Jugoslavia
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
PAROLE-CHIAVE E TECNICHE DEL DIS-ORDINE PUBBLICO
http://www.ilrestodelcarlino.it/chan/24/14:1008312:/2000/06/12
Il Resto del Carlino del 12 Giu 2000 04:01
Addestrati per intercettare i contestatori
m. t.
La sicurezza per la Conferenza dell'Ocse non è solo quella visibile,
fatta da reparti mobili di polizia e carabinieri in assetto
antiguerriglia. Dietro l'apparato composto da migliaia di uomini pronti
ad intervenire (sono state installate in moltissimi punti della città
decine di microtelecamere grandi come un pennarello), c'è un sistema
raffinatissimo, ma invisibile, fatto da uomini dell'intelligence del
ministero dell'Interno e dei carabinieri.
Di cosa si tratta è presto detto. Quando, alcune settimane fa, si tenne
al Viminale un vertice sul problema dell'Ocse, era presente un team
addestrato ad ascoltare le frequenze delle radio e ad intercettare le
conversazioni dei telefoni mobili. Tra questi uomini, diversi
provenivano dalle questure delle città italiane più "calde" in fatto di
ordine pubblico. In ogni centro importante (come Milano, Padova,
Mestre) ogni gruppetto di autonomi e di contestatori usa un particolare
linguaggio fatto spesso di frasi e termini dietro i quali si nasconde
un messaggio, un avvertimento, ma anche l'ordine di evitare un percorso
scegliendone uno alternativo.
In questi giorni a Bologna (il luogo è tenuto rigorosamente segreto) è
operativo questo team di specialisti in grado di intercettare le
comunicazioni dei contestatori, ma soprattutto di interpretare le loro
intenzioni traducendole dal linguaggio. L'ausilio determinante a questo
lavoro di intelligence arriva, oltre che dalla conoscenza del
linguaggio, da sofisticati apparati radio riceventi e dall'ascolto
delle conversazioni (spesso si tratta di una o due parole chiave) dei
telefonini i cui numeri sono - naturalmente - conosciuti. Il resto lo
fanno alcuni radiolocalizzatori installati su furgoni assolutamente
anonimi (modello, colore e targa vengono cambiati ogni giorno) sulle
strade non distanti a quelle dei cortei...
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.ilrestodelcarlino.it/chan/24/14:1008312:/2000/06/12
Il Resto del Carlino del 12 Giu 2000 04:01
Addestrati per intercettare i contestatori
m. t.
La sicurezza per la Conferenza dell'Ocse non è solo quella visibile,
fatta da reparti mobili di polizia e carabinieri in assetto
antiguerriglia. Dietro l'apparato composto da migliaia di uomini pronti
ad intervenire (sono state installate in moltissimi punti della città
decine di microtelecamere grandi come un pennarello), c'è un sistema
raffinatissimo, ma invisibile, fatto da uomini dell'intelligence del
ministero dell'Interno e dei carabinieri.
Di cosa si tratta è presto detto. Quando, alcune settimane fa, si tenne
al Viminale un vertice sul problema dell'Ocse, era presente un team
addestrato ad ascoltare le frequenze delle radio e ad intercettare le
conversazioni dei telefoni mobili. Tra questi uomini, diversi
provenivano dalle questure delle città italiane più "calde" in fatto di
ordine pubblico. In ogni centro importante (come Milano, Padova,
Mestre) ogni gruppetto di autonomi e di contestatori usa un particolare
linguaggio fatto spesso di frasi e termini dietro i quali si nasconde
un messaggio, un avvertimento, ma anche l'ordine di evitare un percorso
scegliendone uno alternativo.
In questi giorni a Bologna (il luogo è tenuto rigorosamente segreto) è
operativo questo team di specialisti in grado di intercettare le
comunicazioni dei contestatori, ma soprattutto di interpretare le loro
intenzioni traducendole dal linguaggio. L'ausilio determinante a questo
lavoro di intelligence arriva, oltre che dalla conoscenza del
linguaggio, da sofisticati apparati radio riceventi e dall'ascolto
delle conversazioni (spesso si tratta di una o due parole chiave) dei
telefonini i cui numeri sono - naturalmente - conosciuti. Il resto lo
fanno alcuni radiolocalizzatori installati su furgoni assolutamente
anonimi (modello, colore e targa vengono cambiati ogni giorno) sulle
strade non distanti a quelle dei cortei...
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
"Il Manifesto", 03 Giugno 2000
Le leggi di guerra
Convenzione sulle Leggi ed i Costumi della Guerra di terra (1899),
appendice 3.1, articolo XXII: Il diritto dei belligeranti di
adottare mezzi di distruzione del nemico non illimitato.
Convenzione sulle Alterazioni Ambientali (1977), appendice 3.4,
articolo
1.1: Ogni parte contraente della Convenzione si
impegna a non intraprendere azioni militari o altre azioni ostili con
tecniche in grado di determinare alterazioni ambientali
estese, protratte nel tempo e che possano avere effetti gravi, come
mezzo
di distruzione, danneggiamento o danno
avverso altre parti contraenti.
Protocollo sulla Protezione delle Vittime di Conflitti Armati
Internazionali (1977), appendice 3.5, articolo XXXV: E' vietato
applicare metodi o tecniche di guerra dirette a creare, o per le quali
siano ipotizzabili, estesi, duraturi e gravi danni
all'ambiente naturale.
Articolo LV.1: Nel corso dei conflitti, deve essere fatta la massima
attenzione per proteggere gli ambienti naturali da danni
estesi, gravi e duraturi nel tempo. Questa protezione include il
divieto
dell'uso di metodi e tecniche di guerra dirette a
determinare, o per le quali si pu ipotizzare, questi danni al
patrimonio
naturale e quindi a pregiudicare la salute o la
sopravvivenza delle popolazioni.
Appendice 3.6, articolo XIV: L'affamamento dei civili come metodo di
combattimento vietato. E' quindi vietato attaccare,
distruggere, rimuovere o rendere inutilizzabili oggetti indispensabili
per la sopravvivenza dei civili, come riserve alimentari,
aree agricole destinate alla produzione di generi alimentari,
coltivazioni, allevamenti, installazioni delle acque potabili e
irrigazione.
---
IL RAPPORTO DI AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL SUI CRIMINI DELLA NATO:
-> sintesi in italiano:
http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/270?&start=256
-> testo completo in inglese (73 pagine formato PDF):
http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/intcam/kosovo/index.html
http://www.abolishnato.com/abolishnato/warcrimes/warcrimes2.htm
-
Subject: [STOPNATO] AI report - hell is opening for NATO
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 23:55:16 -0700
From: Peter Bein
STOP NATO: ¡NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM
1. Some pages in the newest AI report don't print, turn into blanks
after
scrolling. Same problem at AI site. Anybody knows how to fix it?
2. This is another NATO 'pussy cat' report, in spite of appearances.
- like HRW report about casualties it starts with an assertion of the
legitimacy of NATO 'humanitarian intervention', referring to Rambouillet
as
'peace talks' instead of an international scam designed to bully
Yugoslavia
into submission,
- has a pretence to objective investigations, but forgot that int'l
forensic teams found next to nothing in Kosovo dirt compared to NATO
'promises',
- wants to be taken seriously but ignores that Racak is a 100%
fabrication
- maybe they should demand public release of the final report from Dr
Ranta's forensic team first, if they really want to get to the guts of
the
NATO problem,
- it hangs on to the 400-600 number of casualties (as HRW) despite FRY's
detailed records of much more,
- it makes a disclaimer that only NATO's own statements are used to
prove
the allegations, but does not discuss Observer/Guardian/Politiken
article
on the embassy bombing which quotes high-ranking NATO sources; instead,
it
dwells on CIA 'punishment' of the 'guilty' thus legitimizing yet another
NATO lie in a series that starts to look more boring than puky to my
taste,
- among 9 example cases is bombing 'by accident' of the train on the
bridge
in Grdelica; this case is documented to be a lie of top NATO brass incl.
Clark -- the train WAS THE TARGET as is obvious from analysis of first
and
second AGM-130 films (I will post the website that proves it in
technical
detail, based on analysis of both gun camera films - it will make you
speechless)
3. I am unable to share your enthusiasm, Stormie. You are only proving
to
Maj. Kahrs that anti-natonites can be gullible. If anything, I would
suspect another PsyOps project. No matter how HRW and AI castigate NATO
there is no int'l institution that can get to NATO's throat. But reports
from those NGOs serve to legitimize blatant NATO distortions and lies at
a
low cost, while appearing "objective' to the average public opinion. At
the
time that the hell is opening for NATO it would be a logical thing to
do.
Peter
At 03:10 PM 06/06/00 -0400, Stormie wrote:
>STOP NATO: ¡NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM
>
>Dear friends :
>
>I have place a copy of Amnesty International document on the NATO bombing
>on my site on the "NATO War Crimes" page at
>www.abolishnato.com/abolishnato/warcrimes/warcrimes2.htm
>It is in PDF format and is downloadable as a zip file.
>It is 73 pages in length and that is why it is in such a format.
>
>Read it people! It is really a breath of fresh air and as I was reading it
>over I was cheering, applauding and licking my chops over it!!!! I really
>enjoy to the max anything that sticks it to the NATO Alliance!!
>
>I have always known that there is a night and day difference B/T Human
>Rights Watch and Amnesty International. For starters, take a look at their
>coverage of Kosovo events: AI seems truly interested in the welfare of
>Kosovo Serbs and their detention at a muddy, cold gymnasium. HRW reads like
>a Western newspaper, engaging in on anti-Serb demonization after another,
>with the style of the New York Times. I will write about that later on!
>Take a looooooong look at both Human Rights Watch's website and that of
>Amnesty International.
>Do you notice anything?! Hummm. . .
>
>ENJOY!
>
>"Stormie"
>
---
FONTI VARIE SULLE DISTRUZIONI OPERATE DALLA NATO SUL TERRITORIO
DELLA REPUBBLICA FEDERALE DI JUGOSLAVIA:
http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/180?&start=176&threaded=1
---
ALTRI LINK SEGNALATI:
http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/2000/06/12/fp7s1-csm.shtml
Christian Science Monitor
June 12, 2000
Families of NATO bomb victims demand accounting
On June 2, UN ruled airstrikes were not war crimes. Human rights group
disagrees.
Alex Todorovic - Special to The Christian Science Monitor
PODGORICA, YUGOSLAVIA
-
http://www.jonathandimbleby.co.uk/TX20000611_Robertson/transcript.html
ITV - interview with NATO's George Robertson
(Broadcast 11th June 2000, ITV)
-
http://commondreams.org/views/061000-103.htm
http://www.progressive.org/webex.htm
Sunday June 11 , 2000
Published on Saturday, June 10, 2000 by The Progressive
War Criminals? Who Us?
by Matthew Rothschild
-
http://www.grdelica-case.org/index.htm
NATO's BAD CONSCIENCE
The authors of these pages dedicate their work to justice, truth and
honesty, to the duties of Rule of Law.
That's what democracy stands for. That's what ICTY stands for. That's
what we thought.
The Grdelica Case
The Dakovica Case
The Izbica Miracle
-
http://www.originalsources.com
Clinton: The First American President to Commit Genocide in Europe
Serbs are being systematically exterminated in Kosovo
By: Mary Mostert, Analyst, Original Sources
May 30, 2000
-
http://www.pravda.ru/archive/days/1999/june/28/14-19-28-06-1999.htm.
"Pravda - Internet" correspondent, Andrei Krushinski,
reflects on the tragedy in Yugoslavia and compares it
with Vietnam and Czechoslovakia which he observed as a
Pravda correspondent in these countries.
TRAGEDY AND FARCE
NATO Aggression in Yugoslavia - through the prism of
Historical Parallels
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
Le leggi di guerra
Convenzione sulle Leggi ed i Costumi della Guerra di terra (1899),
appendice 3.1, articolo XXII: Il diritto dei belligeranti di
adottare mezzi di distruzione del nemico non illimitato.
Convenzione sulle Alterazioni Ambientali (1977), appendice 3.4,
articolo
1.1: Ogni parte contraente della Convenzione si
impegna a non intraprendere azioni militari o altre azioni ostili con
tecniche in grado di determinare alterazioni ambientali
estese, protratte nel tempo e che possano avere effetti gravi, come
mezzo
di distruzione, danneggiamento o danno
avverso altre parti contraenti.
Protocollo sulla Protezione delle Vittime di Conflitti Armati
Internazionali (1977), appendice 3.5, articolo XXXV: E' vietato
applicare metodi o tecniche di guerra dirette a creare, o per le quali
siano ipotizzabili, estesi, duraturi e gravi danni
all'ambiente naturale.
Articolo LV.1: Nel corso dei conflitti, deve essere fatta la massima
attenzione per proteggere gli ambienti naturali da danni
estesi, gravi e duraturi nel tempo. Questa protezione include il
divieto
dell'uso di metodi e tecniche di guerra dirette a
determinare, o per le quali si pu ipotizzare, questi danni al
patrimonio
naturale e quindi a pregiudicare la salute o la
sopravvivenza delle popolazioni.
Appendice 3.6, articolo XIV: L'affamamento dei civili come metodo di
combattimento vietato. E' quindi vietato attaccare,
distruggere, rimuovere o rendere inutilizzabili oggetti indispensabili
per la sopravvivenza dei civili, come riserve alimentari,
aree agricole destinate alla produzione di generi alimentari,
coltivazioni, allevamenti, installazioni delle acque potabili e
irrigazione.
---
IL RAPPORTO DI AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL SUI CRIMINI DELLA NATO:
-> sintesi in italiano:
http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/270?&start=256
-> testo completo in inglese (73 pagine formato PDF):
http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/intcam/kosovo/index.html
http://www.abolishnato.com/abolishnato/warcrimes/warcrimes2.htm
-
Subject: [STOPNATO] AI report - hell is opening for NATO
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 23:55:16 -0700
From: Peter Bein
STOP NATO: ¡NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM
1. Some pages in the newest AI report don't print, turn into blanks
after
scrolling. Same problem at AI site. Anybody knows how to fix it?
2. This is another NATO 'pussy cat' report, in spite of appearances.
- like HRW report about casualties it starts with an assertion of the
legitimacy of NATO 'humanitarian intervention', referring to Rambouillet
as
'peace talks' instead of an international scam designed to bully
Yugoslavia
into submission,
- has a pretence to objective investigations, but forgot that int'l
forensic teams found next to nothing in Kosovo dirt compared to NATO
'promises',
- wants to be taken seriously but ignores that Racak is a 100%
fabrication
- maybe they should demand public release of the final report from Dr
Ranta's forensic team first, if they really want to get to the guts of
the
NATO problem,
- it hangs on to the 400-600 number of casualties (as HRW) despite FRY's
detailed records of much more,
- it makes a disclaimer that only NATO's own statements are used to
prove
the allegations, but does not discuss Observer/Guardian/Politiken
article
on the embassy bombing which quotes high-ranking NATO sources; instead,
it
dwells on CIA 'punishment' of the 'guilty' thus legitimizing yet another
NATO lie in a series that starts to look more boring than puky to my
taste,
- among 9 example cases is bombing 'by accident' of the train on the
bridge
in Grdelica; this case is documented to be a lie of top NATO brass incl.
Clark -- the train WAS THE TARGET as is obvious from analysis of first
and
second AGM-130 films (I will post the website that proves it in
technical
detail, based on analysis of both gun camera films - it will make you
speechless)
3. I am unable to share your enthusiasm, Stormie. You are only proving
to
Maj. Kahrs that anti-natonites can be gullible. If anything, I would
suspect another PsyOps project. No matter how HRW and AI castigate NATO
there is no int'l institution that can get to NATO's throat. But reports
from those NGOs serve to legitimize blatant NATO distortions and lies at
a
low cost, while appearing "objective' to the average public opinion. At
the
time that the hell is opening for NATO it would be a logical thing to
do.
Peter
At 03:10 PM 06/06/00 -0400, Stormie wrote:
>STOP NATO: ¡NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM
>
>Dear friends :
>
>I have place a copy of Amnesty International document on the NATO bombing
>on my site on the "NATO War Crimes" page at
>www.abolishnato.com/abolishnato/warcrimes/warcrimes2.htm
>It is in PDF format and is downloadable as a zip file.
>It is 73 pages in length and that is why it is in such a format.
>
>Read it people! It is really a breath of fresh air and as I was reading it
>over I was cheering, applauding and licking my chops over it!!!! I really
>enjoy to the max anything that sticks it to the NATO Alliance!!
>
>I have always known that there is a night and day difference B/T Human
>Rights Watch and Amnesty International. For starters, take a look at their
>coverage of Kosovo events: AI seems truly interested in the welfare of
>Kosovo Serbs and their detention at a muddy, cold gymnasium. HRW reads like
>a Western newspaper, engaging in on anti-Serb demonization after another,
>with the style of the New York Times. I will write about that later on!
>Take a looooooong look at both Human Rights Watch's website and that of
>Amnesty International.
>Do you notice anything?! Hummm. . .
>
>ENJOY!
>
>"Stormie"
>
---
FONTI VARIE SULLE DISTRUZIONI OPERATE DALLA NATO SUL TERRITORIO
DELLA REPUBBLICA FEDERALE DI JUGOSLAVIA:
http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/180?&start=176&threaded=1
---
ALTRI LINK SEGNALATI:
http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/2000/06/12/fp7s1-csm.shtml
Christian Science Monitor
June 12, 2000
Families of NATO bomb victims demand accounting
On June 2, UN ruled airstrikes were not war crimes. Human rights group
disagrees.
Alex Todorovic - Special to The Christian Science Monitor
PODGORICA, YUGOSLAVIA
-
http://www.jonathandimbleby.co.uk/TX20000611_Robertson/transcript.html
ITV - interview with NATO's George Robertson
(Broadcast 11th June 2000, ITV)
-
http://commondreams.org/views/061000-103.htm
http://www.progressive.org/webex.htm
Sunday June 11 , 2000
Published on Saturday, June 10, 2000 by The Progressive
War Criminals? Who Us?
by Matthew Rothschild
-
http://www.grdelica-case.org/index.htm
NATO's BAD CONSCIENCE
The authors of these pages dedicate their work to justice, truth and
honesty, to the duties of Rule of Law.
That's what democracy stands for. That's what ICTY stands for. That's
what we thought.
The Grdelica Case
The Dakovica Case
The Izbica Miracle
-
http://www.originalsources.com
Clinton: The First American President to Commit Genocide in Europe
Serbs are being systematically exterminated in Kosovo
By: Mary Mostert, Analyst, Original Sources
May 30, 2000
-
http://www.pravda.ru/archive/days/1999/june/28/14-19-28-06-1999.htm.
"Pravda - Internet" correspondent, Andrei Krushinski,
reflects on the tragedy in Yugoslavia and compares it
with Vietnam and Czechoslovakia which he observed as a
Pravda correspondent in these countries.
TRAGEDY AND FARCE
NATO Aggression in Yugoslavia - through the prism of
Historical Parallels
--------- 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: ricetta per liquidare un paese
BULGARIA: rottami di bombe NATO piovono sul territorio; teatrino
parlamentare ed inglobamento nelle strutture euroatlantiche
ROMANIA: privatizzazioni
UCRAINA: il Primo Ministro ospite al quartier generale della NATO
LITUANIA: Conferenza stampa congiunta con il Ministro della Difesa USA
ALTRI LINK:
LE BORSE DI TUTTI I PAESI "IN TRANSIZIONE" ON LINE:
Excellent FINANCIAL web site (CEE)
http://www.skatefn.com/
http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/dem.wrong.html
The costs of transition to market and democracy
---
POLONIA
From: Peter Bein <pbein@...>
To: stopnato@...
STOP NATO: ¡NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM
Marek Glogoczowski, a Polish dissident writer analysed the covert
methods,
allegedly used by the Soviets to subdue Poland after WW2, to those
currently observed. Here is my digested translation of the article, with
an
analogy to the present in brackets. I have expanded the analogies with
my
own observations from Poland (in Italics).
1. Direct agricultural policy concerning individual farming so as to
make
farming unprofitable, … cause national agriculture to become deficient
in
fully covering national food needs and make food supply dependent on
imports. [Collective farming concept from that time is now replaced by
strict dependency of farmers from foreign concerns who monopolise food
processing, dictate dumping prices for farm products.]
2. Cause all directives and legislation in legal, economic and
administrative domains to be imprecise. [Unchanged. One of the first
'reforms' of the new government was an astronomical expansion of the
bureaucracy at the county and regional level. The new posts are manned
with
"verified" persons loyal to the central party in power in order to
assure
total control.]
3. Cause that several commissions, offices, social institutions be
created
for every matter, but none of them should have powers to make final
decisions. [Unchanged.]
4. Workers self-governance at places of work should not have any
influence
on the direction of activities of the enterprise. [Unchanged.]
5. When creating and expanding enterprises make sure that industrial
effluent discharges into drinking water reservoirs and rivers. [Present
liquidation of industry entails ensuring that post-consumption waste is
disposed of upstream of drinking water supply. Recycling of waste
materials
such as paper, glass, plastic or aluminum cans should be made as
difficult
as possible. Municipal policy should be steered so as to create as many
uncontrolled waste dumps and other waste disposal places as possible,
especially near passenger rail routes and railway stations. This way the
population will constantly see apparent shabbiness of their own country.
Industrial lobbies press for conversion of solid waste to toxic air
pollution - out of sight out of mind.]
6. Expand the administration at all levels as much as possible.
[Unchanged.
Creation of local governments was advertised as giving power to the
people.
In effect the central government still controls funding, while local
politicians bureaucrats largely stifle any progressive initiative,
unless
they get their personal share in the deal.]
7. Place the Church under special observation and direct its educational
activities so as to cause widespread disgust to this institution.
[Unchanged.]
8. In primary and in trade education and particularly in secondary and
higher education cause lack of correlation between subjects, limit
publication of source materials, eliminate Latin, Greek, philosophy,
etc.
[Unchaged.]
9. Inspire national celebrations of the nation's struggle with invaders,
especially Germans, and the struggle for socialism. [Now celebrations
condemn crimes of communism, especially those committed by Soviet
Russia.
September the 1st, the anniversary of Hitler's invasion of Poland is
modestly announced as "start of WW2", and 17 days later -- "invasion of
Poland by Soviet Russia" (under German-Soviet secret treaty).
Significant
economic achievements of Poles in the communist era are denigrated as
"50
years of wasted time" by a government who has ruined the society and
economy over the last 10 years.]
10. Make sure that people in executive positions are periodically
replaced
by nominees with the lowest qualifications. [Unchanged.]
People who dare to point out the analogies are instantly demoted or
fired.
Glogoczowski gives an example of chief editor of dissident "Trybuna,"
who
was fired January 16, 2000, for that reason.
Glogoczowski expands the above list with quotes from Aleksander
Zinoviev's
"La grande rupture".
11. Crucial, typical characteristics of the social system of the nation
slated for colonialization should be discredited.
12. The country being colonized should be destabilized, its economic,
political and ideological crises - fanned.
13. The population should be divided into antagonistic groups,
opposition
movement should be supported and the intellectual elites tied to the
privileged groups.
14. At the same time widespread propaganda should glorify Western way of
life. [Fuck the cola, fuck the pizza, Serbs have their slivovica.]
15. A desire for wel-being similar to that in the West should be
stimulated
among the people.
16. An illusion should be created that the well-being can be reached in
a
very short time, provided the country embarks on a process of reforms
dictated by the West.
17. All shortcomings of Western societies should be presented among the
people as virtues expressing personal freedom.
18. Parasitism should be developed with all possible means. Economic aid
should only serve to destroy domestic manufacture.
19. The West should be presented as a benevolent saviour who liberates
the
country from mistakes of its former existence.
Zinoviev ends his book (translation back into English from Polish, may
not
be verbatim - P.B.);
"The country being colonialized is put into such state that in all
domains
it becomes unable to exist on its own. It is de-militarized to such
degree
that any military resistance on its part becomes impossible. Its
military
can at the most be used to control protests and to extinguish possible
insurrections. National culture is marginalized to a level of
vegetating.
Its place is taken by the culture, or more appropriately the
sub-culture,
of the West."
Glogoczowski postulates that both covert and overt subjugation
programmes
presently implemented by the West (USA) are much more precise and
tighter
compared to the Soviet model from 50 years ago. The new genre of
Western
monoculture is unusually aggressive and immune to any criticisms for its
feelings of "racial" superiority.
Zinoviev makes a similar remark at the end of his book:
"Westernization of our planet […] makes it impossible to preserve any
seat
from which some form of evolution different form that being copied from
the
West could evolve. By appropriating the world, though only for the
purpose
of deriving profits from it, the West is nipping in the bud all
potential
directions of evolution that could rival it."
---
BULGARIA
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 10:45:55 -0500 (CDT)
From: rrozoff@... (Rick Rozoff)
To: stopnato@...
STOP NATO: ¡NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM
[Can any sane, or decent, person retain a single doubt that, unless
these mad NATO militarists are soon thrown in cages, the world will be
incinerated?]
Missile Part Hits Bulgaria Resort
SOFIA, Bulgaria (AP) -- Part of an air defense missile fell on a Black
Sea resort during army exercises, damaging two bungalows, the Defense
Ministry said Friday.
Nobody was injured in the mishap, which occurred Thursday afternoon in
the resort of Rusalka, some 311 miles northeast of Sofia, as air defense
units were training at a nearby shooting range.
According to a preliminary investigation, the bungalows were hit by the
engine of a missile that was being used as a target. It veered off
course after being hit by an anti-aircraft missile.
No one was in the bungalows at the time of the accident.
>>www.emperors-clothes.com
>>
>>PARVANOV TAKES (IS GIVEN?) POWER. SO WHAT?
>>
>>by Blagovesta Doncheva (5-15-00)
>>
>>
>>First our cast of characters (alas, mostly villains):
>>
>>The Union of Democratic (Demonic?) Forces or UDF. The UDF was formed by
the
>>Bulgarian Communist Party Political Bureau, headed by Lukanov. In 1989 the
>>Communists had more than a million members. The leadership was in a hurry
>to
>>turn themselves into good capitalists and needed an 'opposition', that is
a
>>controlled opposition, to frighten their members into submitting to the
new
>>(capitalist) line.
>>
>>At first the UDF was composed of officers of the Secret Police, sons and
>>daughters of powerful members of the BSP and a host of Communist officials
>>at various levels. It was not an authentic grassroots organization.
>>
>>It was created in December, 1989, after which the manipulated dreamers for
>>freedom and rights (like me, alas!) rushed to join and give it substance.
>>
>>When I realized what I had gotten myself into, my first thought was to
>>rename the UDF 'Union of Secret Police'.
>>
>>The Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP).
>>
>>This party is what remained of the Bulgarian Communist Party after its rib
>>was removed to form the UDF. The BSP is without clear ideology. They say
>>they are leftist but the leadership and many members are bankers, owners
of
>>export-import firms, etc. They are ridiculous. The BSP has about 200,000
>>members. At its last Congress, the BSP (remarkably) declared itself
>NATOite.
>>Many are leaving.
>>
>>Ivan Kostov, Bulgarian Premier and
>>head of the UDF. An ardent Globalisation groupie and NATOist; very much
>'our
>>guy' for both Uncle Sam and the European Union (EU) Social-Democrats.
Would
>>sell mama without hesitation but the price must be right. Or at least
>>reasonable, for he is a man of principle.
>>
>>Georgi Sedefchov Parvanov. A Leader of the BSP; a former and newly elected
>>Secretary of the BSP; a newly-converted NATOist; an MP; he is called
>>"Sedefcho' by some BSP members. (This diminutive suggests lack of
>character,
>>readiness to bend for the powerful.)
>>
>>Has he ever had an opinion of his own? Perish the thought. Or, if one had
>>the bad luck of falling into his skull, he shed it fast. One can never be
>>too cautious. A small man, gray, most convenient for the Globalisation and
>>NATO boys.
>>
>>Ms. Tatjana Doncheva, lawyer, MP, member of the BSP leadership; anti-NATO
>in
>>1999, passionately pro-NATO in 2000. She told the dumbfounded BSP members
>in
>>the town of Shumen in January that loyalty to the party means loyalty to
>>NATO. I have been told by friends from the town of Gabrovo that during the
>>local elections she did her best to make sure the independent candidate,
>>officially supported by the BSP, lost to the UDF candidate. The
independent
>>candidate won despite this help because he had sense enough to organize an
>>independent team of experts and ignore Tatjana Doncheva.
>>
>>Roumen Ovcharov, member of the BSP Supreme Council, MP. Ovcharov ran as
the
>>BSP candidate for a Mayor of Sofia.
>>
>>Or perhaps I should say 'pretended to run.' Because in fact the BSP and
UDF
>>privately agreed that the Mayor of Sofia would be Stefan Sofianski from
the
>>UDF. Mr Ovcharov's election campaign was thus purely symbolic, like a
>>drawing or statue of a campaign. He used this pantomime to declaim the
>BSP's
>>new pro-NATO position, saying on the TV show 'Seven Days' that only NATO
>>membership can protect the sovereignty of Bulgaria.
>>
>>US Ambassador Richard Miles, Sofia, Bulgaria. Miles is the former
>Ambassador
>>to Afghanistan and Belgrade. In other words, trouble follows him like a
>>faithful dog.
>>
>>Bulgarian Civil Airlines, BGA 'Balkan' Recently privatized. The pilots
>>expect that Zeevi Group, the new owner, will liquidate 'Balkan' after the
>>end of the tourist season. We think the same.
>>
>>Now for the Play. It is a tragic-comedy: Theater of the Grimly Absurd.
>>
>>Parvanov Takes (Is Given?) Power.
>>
>>So what?
>>
>>Georgi Sedefchov Parvanov, the former and newly elected Secretary of the
>>Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP) is marching boldly to power under a halo
of
>>approval and promises of support from kind Uncle Sam and the Euro
>>social-democrats. That approval and support has been earned after two
>months
>>of dining regularly with the US Ambassador in Sofia, Richard Miles, plus a
>>five minutes visit with Schroeder The Great - time enough for Parvanov to
>>pledge loyalty to NATO and 'euro-atlantic values'.
>>
>>The Bulgarian media have for some time noted with relish the dinner talks
>>between Amb. Miles and Mr. Parvanov. According to them Miles has given
>>Parvanov a firm promise of much money and the promise that Parvanbov will
>>be allowed to come to power.
>>
>>According to the newspapers, this delicious reward only requires that
>>Parvanov fill Bulgarian political space with passionate statements such
as:
>>'My party and I have reassessed our position and we love NATO!' and so on.
>>
>>(These newspaper rumors have produced no angry letters of denial from the
>>BSP.)
>>
>>And since Parvanov and Company have been praising NATO for some months,
>>power shall surely follow.
>>
>>On May 1st our group of protestors against the USA/NATO war on Yugoslavia
>>went to the BSP May Day rally together with some young people from 'Che
>>Guevara', the revolutionary youth group. We chanted slogans against NATO
>>and the BSP NATOites. The disciplined elderly BSP members pushed and hit
us
>>violently, but they are not to blame, poor things; they have been taught
>for
>>45 years to identify the Party with its leaders, to accept questionable
>>decisions and shout 'Hurray!' ('Theirs not to reason why. Theirs but to do
>>and die!' - Tennyson, 'The Charge of the Light Brigade.' Suitable for the
>>occaision, no?)
>>
>>I wonder why these enraged old women and men who attacked everybody who
>>dared hold Parvanov guilty for betraying the very basis of his party - I
>>wonder why they don't ask themselves: what will in fact happen if Parvanov
>>and Company relax their well fed bodies in Kostov and Company's luxurious
>>chairs? Will anything change?
>>
>>1/ Will "structural reform" continue under the controlling hands of the
>>International Monetary Fund and World Band?
>>
>>What is in fact the meaning of "structural reforms"? Why has nobody taken
>>the risk of clearly explaining what the IMF/WB are demanding?
>>
>>Doesn't structural reform mean the cruelest elimination of all forms of
>>social protection, actually existing and potential?
>>
>>Doesn't it mean the annihilation of Bulgarian industry through
liquidation,
>>privatisation, etc.?
>>
>>The case of the Bulgarian airline, BGA "Balkan" is a clear demonstration
of
>>this extermination scheme. BGA 'Balkan' was sold for next to nothing to
>>Zeevi Group, the Israeli corporation, which started closing lines and
>>offices abroad, selling planes, firing hostesses and pilots, turning plane
>>sheds into warehouses, and so on. Pilots' salaries were set humiliatingly
>>low compared with their colleagues abroad. And the pilots were the first
to
>>raise the alarm, trying to draw public attention to the fact that Zeevi
>>Group is liquidating our 50 year old national airline. They went on strike
>>and began talking. The most important of their demands was to nullify the
>>deal itself - the privatization. Here for the first time a privitization
>has
>>been attacked! (But lest foreign investors are disturbed as they wallow in
>>their luxuries, take note: The pilots' protest was successfully
smothered.)
>>
>>Let's continue with 'Structural Reform'.
>>
>>Doesn't it mean the total wrecking of Bulgarian agriculture?
>>
>>Won't it hit the Bulgarian natural environment, rivers, forests, until-
>>now-protected reserves, with deadly pollution?
>>
>>In the not so long run, doesn't it mean the extermination of the Bulgarian
>>people and state, of Bulgaria itself?
>>
>>Since 1989 Bulgarian governments have not ceased saluting those emissaries
>>of Corporate Globalization, the IMF and World Bank; in return they've
>>excitedly received various sums of money, all of which managed to
>disappear,
>>nobody knows where. Will something change if Parvanov and Co. take power?
>>
>>2/ "Entering Europe". This is the second important issue, a mantra
repeated
>>for 10 years and more, filling the media and political space to the brim.
>>
>>(Entering Europe? Where has Bulgaria been for the past 13 plus centuries?)
>>
>>Again one waits in vain for some journalist (or newspaper) to take the
risk
>>of listing the negative consequences of "Entering Europe."
>>
>>And just what are those "European Values" about which you preach to us,
>>Messrs. Politicians? Messrs. Journalists?
>>
>>Is the vicious breaking of all international laws a European value? Is
>>killing a European country a European value? Is butchering a child a day
>>during the 78 day bombing of Yugoslavia considered European? Has the
>>ecological genocide in the Balkans, produced by this bombing, added to
>>"European values"?
>>
>>Is there some "value" I'm missing?
>>
>>As for the negative consequences of "Entering Europe," here are two:
>>
>>First negative consequence: the closing of the Bulgarian Nuclear Station
>>"Kozlodui". The European Union demands we close it - and turn Bulgaria
from
>>a country that exports energy to a country that imports energy, either
from
>>the Nuclear Station under construction in Turkey or from European
countries
>>with surplus energy production, such as Germany or France.
>>
>>Question: What percent of the Bulgarian population, staying by chance
>alive,
>>will be able to afford this imported energy?
>>
>>Second negative consequence: the removal of customs tariffs on European
>milk
>>and meat products. It has already been decided that these products will
>flow
>>tax free like a river into Bulgaria starting July 1, 2000.
>>
>>Question: Will Bulgarian farmers manage to overcome competition from the
>>tariff-free import of European milk and meat products, supported as they
>are
>>by the various European governments? We must lower the shield so that they
>>may more easily insert the sword.
>>
>>General Question: Don't these two 'reforms' smell of hypocrisy? Ahh,
>perhaps
>>hypocrisy is that so-mysterious European value.
>>
>>What is the position of Parvanov and Co on the destruction of Bulgarian
>>farming and energy production?
>>
>>The same as the position of Kostov and Co. Why then replace Kostov with
>>Parvanov?
>>
>>3/ 'European-Atlantic Values'. For the uninitiated: that is code for -
>NATO.
>>
>>To be honest, the UDF is a step ahead here. They organised a pro-NATO
>>meeting during the bombing of our neighbour; they fed their European
>friends
>>"Podkova"(Horseshoe), a story concocted in Bulgaria but marketed as an
>>Official Yugoslav Government Plan to force Albanians out of Kosovo; this
>>hoax was used to manipulate European and US public opinion during the
>>bombing. Kostov's government is overflowing with passionate NATOites
(e.g.,
>>the Minister of Defense.)
>>
>>What about their brother Party, the BSP?
>>
>>In April and May 1999 Tatjana Doncheva from the BSP made us cry from the
>>emotional stories she told in Parliament of her visit to wartime
>>Yugoslavia... In March 2000 the same lady tells the dumbfounded local BSP
>>members in Shumen that loyalty to the party means loyalty to NATO.
>>
>>In April and May of last year there were BSP meetings and protests against
>>NATO aggression in Yugoslavia. This year the same people are for linking
>>party and country to "Euro-Atlantic Values."
>>
>>Should one laugh or cry?
>>
>>It's a wonder the BSP members aren't schizophrenic. Some are leaving the
>>party; others think they should stay and try to replace the leaders and
>>'fight from inside' to set things straight . (They have been setting
things
>>straight for 10 years now...poor souls.)
>>
>>The crushing result of the BSP's endorsement of NATO is: there is no
>>organized opposition in Bulgaria. The BSP left the pilots to fight all
>>alone. The BSP hasn't said a word in support of other protests going on in
>>Bulgaria. It hasn't moved a finger to unite people and lead their attempts
>>to fight the hydra of Globalization. Even now the BSP behaves like a
ruling
>>party.
>>
>>Neither Parvanov nor any other member of his Loyal Company show the least
>>discomfort from this unprincipled behaviour.
>>
>>For what is principle, actually?
>>
>>Can one buy a palace, race around Europe and the world at the expense of a
>>rapidly dying population or provide a suitably sweet life for deserving
>>relatives with principle?
>>
>>Parvanov and friends do not eat grass. They are reasonable to gaze
>hopefully
>>at the right hand of Uncle M. from his big Embassy in central Sofia - and
>at
>>the slightly smaller (but nearby) hand of Schroeder. Honey may not flow
>from
>>those hands but surely it will trickle, though not into the mouths of
those
>>sad persons who flailed us at the May Day meeting, those who, for lack of
>>thinking, are cheated, again and again....
>>
>>Parvanov takes (is given?) power.
>>
>>So what?
>>
>>Blagovesta Doncheva
>>Sofia, Bulgaria
>>The Balkans
>>
>>***
>>
>>Further reading...
>>
>>For other articles by Blagovesta Doncheva, go to Articles by Author at
>>http://emperors-clothes.com/artbyauth.html, click on "D".
---
ROMANIA
http://www.globalbizgroup.com/perotopstory.shtm
The New Privatization Wave
Over the past three years, a key issue between the Romanian Government
and
the World Bank has been the privatization of the state-owned farms, the
former IAS. Stuck for years in political disputes over the scope of the
process, the privatization of the IAS was recently unlocked and the
first
farm has been privatized. Chances are that in no time Nicolae Havrilet,
the Agriculture Ministry Director in charge of the IAS privatization,
will
become a new star of the Romanian privatization process.
Q: Who is actually privatizing the state-owned farms, the so-called IAS?
The Agriculture Ministry, the State Ownership Fund or both?
A: Generally speaking, the legal basis of the Romanian privatization
process is Law 99, issued last year. However, that law is a general one
that concerns the sell-off of any state-owned company, regardless of the
industry. Given the economic and social importance of the IAS -
companies
that farm the land owned by the state, whether we are talking about the
state's public or private domain - a special law was considered
necessary.
The draft law was enforced by government decree 198, issued last year.
It
provides for the sale of the farms excluding the land. The state's
concession of the agricultural land will be for 49 years (with a
possible
extension of 25 years.) The new owners will have to pay a royalty,
either
in cash or in kind. From the 1.8 million hectares of land that we are
talking about, the state could expect the equivalent of 500,000 tons of
wheat per year. To answer your question, the decree also provides that
the
state's stake in the IAS is to be transferred from the SOF to the
Agriculture Ministry, where a privatization department has been set up.
The State Domain Agency has also been set up; it is in charge with the
land concession and the royalties. These two bodies will work jointly.
The privatization department within the ministry will also work together
with the experts of the SOF as our closest consultants. We have not
decided yet upon the actual form of co-operation with the SOF, but
there's
no doubt we will use their expertise.
Decree 198 cleared the lower chamber of the parliament and has yet to be
discussed by the Senate, but I think it is unlikely that it will undergo
major changes.
Q: So, when the law becomes operational, everything will proceed
smoothly?
A: Besides the above-mentioned law, there is another major issue that
has
to be solved - the debt burden of the state-owned farms. We are talking
about roughly 600 state-owned farms, whose outstanding debt burden
totals
some 28 trillion Romanian lei, the equivalent of $1.5 billion. The debt
includes commercial debt, as well as debt to the state budget and to the
social insurance budget. There is a lot of pressure being made in this
respect, but I think it is unrealistic to believe this entire amount
could
be transferred to the public debt. We have already prepared the
methodological norms for the IAS privatization law, and they would be
approved after the law gets the parliament's approval. These norms
provide
that a certain part of this debt, namely the commercial debt, would be
transferred to the public debt.
Q: Or to the Assets Recovery Agency, AVAB?
A: Eventually. The problem with AVAB is that they recover debts by
selling
assets, rather than businesses. Take an IAS, sell its assets piecemeal,
and you won't get much for it. These are companies whose value lies in
the
integration between the assets - buildings, warehouses, machinery - and
the arable land.
When the law gets approved - something that we expect in June or July -
there will be room for negotiations with the potential buyers on the
balance between the price of the share purchase and the volume of debt
assumed by the buyer.
Q: This means that the privatization method employed will be direct
negotiations?
A: Depending on the financial situation of the respective farm, there
will
be either direct negotiations, or an open auction. The selection of one
method or another will be approved by the Agriculture Minister on a case
by case basis. In the negotiation process we will also pay attention to
issues other than the price, the debts and the royalties - such as the
investment pledged, the commitment of the buyer to preserve jobs, to
farm
the land properly and so on.
Q: What are your targets for this year?
A: This is a very difficult question, every IAS has a different
situation.
There are about 60 farms where the SOF has already transferred its stake
to the SIFs, local investment funds - these are private farms now. Other
farms have sold their debts. Then, the restitution law that has recently
been promulgated might bring along new claims from former owners.
However, I would say that a couple of trillion lei is a rather
pessimistic
estimate.
Interview by Catalin DIMOFTE
Last updated :
Thu, Apr 20 2000
-
STOP NATO: NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM
"Does anybody here in Romania realize what's going on?"- this is the
question I keep asking
myself a lot lately. Because I fear that in spite of all economic crisis
and social desaster the
Romanians still believe in a fairytale- that of western democracy. 2000
is electoral year here-
what will happen? What is waiting for us again?
I look around and all I see is dirt covered in a very devious manner
with a polished illusion of
a good life. The western type life. Lots of lights and expensive shops
in the center of the
town, a MacDonald' s in almost every periferic district of Bucharest.
Young people smilling
happily while chewing sugar- free gum and listening to crappy dance
music that talks about
money and cars. And beautiful women, of course. It all smells to me like
a rotten American
dream, artificially implanted in this part of the Balkans... PRO TV and
ACASA (both
belonging to the same American press trust and from which the first one,
PRO TV, is the
most influential TV station in the country- but imagine the NATOite
propaganda!) keep
inoculating illusions into people' s minds.
For a while a had an illusion myself: that people here will finally
realize what a bunch of fools
we all have been. But this was just a brief moment (to place it in time,
I will tell you that it was
last year, during the NATO attacks on Serbia). But it seems that the
indoctrination has
completely reached its target: this people definitely believes that
NATO and EU are the
salvation.
Somebody told me once in an e- mail that this is perfectly
understandable, as the Romanians
had a cult for the USA for more than 50 years. And he was right. They
waited for the
Americans to come and save them in the WWII. The Americans just came to
drop some
bombs... But the most typical feature of Romanians is their forgiveness.
So they kept
worshiping the Americans. And so it was during the comunist era. And so
it is today. I
remember the way Clinton was received - like a superhero. (But on the
other hand this is
just another feature of the Romanian people - they are always too
welcoming...).
Unofficially, the electoral campaign (for parliament and presidency) has
already started. And
again I see how the politicians have so simply divided the world in two:
the good ones, i.e.
pro- western (NATO, EU...) ones and the bad- everybody else who has a
different oppinion
(no matter which is that).
Some people here woke up and saw that the so praised western- type
democracy is not so
democratic and that the government from which everybody expected a lot,
is in fact no good.
And due to all of these things I get even angrier watching the news
lately. And I do not mean
here the internal ones, but those concerning Serbia. And I shiver
thinking that there could
happen the same thing like here. I watched CNN last night and I heard
things matching some
sort of already well known pattern, and I had again that deja vu
feeling. All this talk about
democracy...
Here we have to get a visa to get to the "civilized" countries but in
most of the cases this
countries won' t give it. What kind of embargo are we under? An
undeclared one, for sure,
as it seems that this is more than a pattern, it is a custom, a sort of
law for the NATO
countries. We are the Balkans, and that is equal to nothing for them.
They just want us all
reduced to simple dummies. Be aware!
NO PASARAN!
NEXT YEAR IN KOSOVO!
---
UCRAINA
STOP NATO: NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM
Those of you on these lists who live in the Ukraine need to get busy!!!
Is this guy on of those NATOite idiots who locked himself in a room in
their
Parliament Building
and threatened to burn himself alive if Ukraine was not admitted to NATO
a
few months back!
-----Original Message-----
From: NATODOC <natodoc@...>
To: NATODATA@...
<NATODATA@...>
Date: Monday, May 22, 2000 4:02 AM
Subject: Press Release (2000) 051 - VISIT TO NATO BY THE PRIME MINISTER
OF
UKRAINE
>Press Release (2000) 051 19
>May 2000
>
>VISIT TO NATO BY THE PRIME MINISTER OF UKRAINE, MR. VIKTOR YUSCHENKO
>ON 22 MAY 2000
>
>
>INFORMATION
>
>The Prime Minister of Ukraine, Mr. Viktor Yuschenko, will visit NATO
>Headquarters on Monday, 22 May 2000. He will meet the Secretary General.
>The visit will begin at 17.00.
>
>MEDIA ADVISORY
>(not for publication)
>
>PROGRAMME OF THE VISIT
>
>17:00 NATO main entrance. Arrival of Mr. Yuschenko. Open coverage on a
>first-come, first-served basis.
> Immediately followed by meeting with Secretary General in the
Private Office.
>
>17:30 NATO main entrance. Joint Point de presse with Secretary General
and
>Prime Minister of Ukraine.
>
>ACCREDITATION
>
>Journalists wishing to cover the visit of the Prime Minister of Ukraine
>will be allowed into
>the NATO premises on presentation of a NATO accreditation pass or a valid
>press pass.
>Photographers and cameramen wishing to be part of the Restricted Pool
>should contact
>Mr. A. Chahtahtinsky.
>
>ENQUIRIES
>
>General press arrangements
>Mr. A. Chahtahtinsky 32.2.707.1933
>Mr. J. Karwatsky 32.2.707.1255
>Films, Video, TV, Radio
>Mr. J.M. Lorgnier 32.2.707.5006
>Photos
>Ms. Patricia Doling 32.2.707.5018
---
LITUANIA
Subject:
Joint Press Conference at Vilnius, Lithuania
Date:
Sat, 10 Jun 2000 21:25:02 -0400
From:
dltranscripts_sender@...
Reply-To:
dltranscripts-l-request@...
To:
DODTRANSCRIPTS-L@...
= N E W S B R I E F I N G
=
= OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
= (PUBLIC AFFAIRS)
= WASHINGTON, D.C. 20301
====================================================
DoD News Briefing
Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen
Saturday, June 10, 2000
Joint press conference at Vilnius, Lithuania
(Also participating: Ceslovas Stankevicius, minister of Defense of
Lithuania)
Secretary Cohen: Let me express my delight in being in Vilnius to attend
the third Nordic-Baltic-U.S. Defense Ministerial and to meet with
Lithuanian leaders. The Baltic states have become a leading example of
the benefits of regional defense cooperation. The Baltic peacekeeping
battalion has just completed its third rotation in SFOR helping to make
Bosnia and Europe more stable. Lithuania has made a firm commitment to
improve its ability to work with other nations for security, operating
very much in the spirit of Nordic-Baltic-U.S. framework. Lithuanian
defense budgets are increasing to finance military reform and
modernization programs. I am particularly impressed with the steps
Lithuania is taking to lift the quality of life for the soldiers by
improving barracks and training facilities. Lithuania is also making
progress under the NATO Membership Action Plan. NATO will review the
enlargement process in 2002 and it is, of course, too early to predict
what, if any, action th!
!
!
ey will then take. But Lithuanian determination to lift its military
capability, to work productively with NATO and non-NATO countries to
improve its relations with Russia, and play an active role in regional
security structures all are very good steps up that long and difficult
staircase to possible NATO membership. As it has in the past, the United
States will continue to assist Lithuania's participation in the
Partnership for Peace program and the cooperative regional projects such
as the Baltnet Regional Air Surveillance Network and through its
concentration on improved security through regional cooperation.
Lithuania continues to build a future that is much brighter than its
past. With that, I will yield to the Minister.
Minister Stankevicius: I would like to speak in English. First of all, I
would like to express my gratitude to Secretary Cohen for coming for
this visit to Lithuania and for this very high evaluation of our
progress which we have made as well as for his attendance at the
Ministerial Conference, 1+5+3, which was held today. We had a good
opportunity to exchange views on our broad cooperation in the security
and defense area. I would particularly stress that the United States is
the strongest Lithuanian partner in this cooperation. But I would also
like to say that the other Nordic countries also are strong contributors
to our common Baltic projects as well as our bilateral projects. This
cooperation helps us to hasten our progress and to strengthen our own
efforts, which will make for modernization of our forces.
Q: Mr. Secretary, I understand that at a meeting this morning you all
discussed the need for greater engagement between the Baltic countries
and Russia. Would this be to try to improve relations with Russia at
NATO's review of the membership in 2002 and how would you go about
overcoming Russia's concerns about NATO expansion in the Baltics?
Cohen: First, let me separate out the issue of NATO membership from
establishing better relations with Russia. Whatever takes place with
NATO enlargement, it is important that the Baltic states and other
members of the European Community and NATO itself seek to find ways in
which we can cooperate on many levels with Russia -- be it in
environmental protection, disaster relief, peacekeeping operations --
where ever we can. In so separating it apart from NATO, we think that it
is important that Lithuania and the other Baltic states -- Sweden,
Norway, and all the other EU members and non-EU members -- must find
ways to constructively engage Russia. So, in addition to that, I think
there is a positive benefit to the extent that when such measures are
undertaken, I think it does contribute to a sense of security on the
part of the Russian people and Russian leaders. And that too will be
important as the debate unfolds on future NATO membership.
Q: I want to know if military expenditures were one of the main issues
when the membership question arose for Baltic states and other
countries?
Cohen: We have indicated that the door to NATO remains open. We
reiterate that no nation should be excluded by virtue of either
geography or history. What we also have said is that membership in NATO
requires a number of important steps: to modernize its militaries, to
ensure that there is civilian control over the military, and to take
such steps that are necessary to ensure that each member contributes to
the collective security of NATO members and is not simply a consumer of
the security benefits. That will require necessarily the increased
expenditure of funds for defense modernization. We understand that
Lithuania and other Baltic states have been going through some difficult
economic times, but nonetheless they have also taken steps to improve
their military capability. They are working very closely with the
Partnership for Peace, the Membership Action Plan, and all of that will
be important as the consideration of future NATO membership comes up
again in 2002.
Q: Russia says it plans to declare its opposition to the Baltic States'
admission into NATO. Such declarations are always threatening to
Lithuania, so how is it possible to solve this issue with Russia?
Cohen: First of all, it should be clear that Russia does not have a veto
over NATO decisions. One of the reasons that we established the
NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council was to give Russia a voice -- as
Secretary [of State Madeleine] Albright has said, but not a veto.
Namely, that we always want to take into account Russian concerns and
Russian interests when we make our decisions in terms of how we carry
out our action today and what we may do tomorrow. But that is internal
to our decisions and Russia does not have a veto over those decisions.
So NATO members will decide in the year 2002 whether there should be an
enlargement and we will take into account all of the factors that I
mentioned before -- the progress made by aspiring members to modernize
their militaries, to adopt those measures that would satisfy the
requirements, including a market economy and other criteria, and then a
decision will be made at that time. I will stop here for the moment and
then add a few wo!
!
!
rds.
(pauses for translation)
I want to add just a few more words. You may recall that when the wall
came down in Germany the question arose as to whether a unified and
united Germany could remain a member of NATO. At that point Russia took
strong opposition to that. We believed that a united Germany could
remain and should remain a part of NATO and that steps could be taken to
ameliorate or take into account any concerns on the part of the Russians
that it would somehow pose a military threat to them. And we did that.
And I think the Russian concerns were legitimate; they wanted to make
sure that they were not going to be in any way put in an inferior
position militarily by virtue of a united Germany still remaining a
member of NATO. I believe that they also expressed opposition to
enlargement of NATO this past round. I believe that as we engage Russia,
as we show that this is a defensive alliance, that we can take into
account their legitimate concerns and nonetheless do what is required
for NATO itself.!
!
!
And so I believe that by engaging them and by possibly discussing and
taking up issues of their concern and dealing with them in a responsible
fashion, that we can overcome objections in the future. But a lot of
work has to done and that is the reason why I have stressed the need to
cooperatively engage Russia on a number of different levels.
Q: I have a question for both of you. Were there any concrete steps
discussed in terms of engaging Russia? And also I would like to ask you,
sir, given the history of your country, what do you think about this
wanting Russia to be more involved?
Cohen: The next step is that I am on my way to Moscow. I will be
engaging Russian leaders, including my counterpart Marshal Sergeyev. I
hope and plan to meet with President Putin while I am there. I will meet
with members of the Russian Duma. This will not be the first time; I
have met with members of the Russian Duma in my office at the Pentagon
as well as in Moscow in the past. And so I will certainly personally
continue these efforts, but we will do so on a government-wide basis
because it is in our interest to have this engagement with Russia. All
of us have stated at the various meetings we have attended, and all of
the NATO members, EU members, and partnership members understand that
Russia must be stable and engaged with the rest of the European
membership. So this is something that we will do on a constructive
basis. There is an exercise taking place today with Iceland, Russia and
Iceland, and we will have other exercises that we will continue in the
future -- all in a!
!
!
n effort to build a sense of mutual confidence, to reduce suspicion or
apprehension so that we can take measures in the future that will
provide for security and stability and promote prosperity.
Stankevicius: May I say some words in this context? During this
conference, we got an opportunity to introduce our view on cooperation
with Russia and I would like to give only one example. Recently, Russia
accepted Lithuania's initiatives on confidence, directed to confidence
building. Russia agreed with the Lithuanian proposal to exchange some
additional inspection in the Kaliningrad region as well as in Lithuania,
and also to exchange additional information in the framework of the
Vienna document. Along with our cooperation with Russia, I would like to
particularly express our cooperation with the people and government of
the Kaliningrad region. We are building confidence; confidence between
us and Russia and the Kaliningrad region. This confidence will very
positively serve both countries. The Russians see that Lithuania has and
shows good will and is ready to cooperate with them in all possible
areas.
Cohen: Could I add that that is a mutual responsibility? Establishing a
good neighbor policy also requires Russia to act in ways that are
cooperative and constructive and so it is always very much of a two way
street and that is how mutual confidence and respect is established.
-END-
NOTE: This is a plain text version of a web page.
If your mail program did not properly format this
information, current Transcripts are online at
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/#BRIEFINGS
====================================================
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
BULGARIA: rottami di bombe NATO piovono sul territorio; teatrino
parlamentare ed inglobamento nelle strutture euroatlantiche
ROMANIA: privatizzazioni
UCRAINA: il Primo Ministro ospite al quartier generale della NATO
LITUANIA: Conferenza stampa congiunta con il Ministro della Difesa USA
ALTRI LINK:
LE BORSE DI TUTTI I PAESI "IN TRANSIZIONE" ON LINE:
Excellent FINANCIAL web site (CEE)
http://www.skatefn.com/
http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/dem.wrong.html
The costs of transition to market and democracy
---
POLONIA
From: Peter Bein <pbein@...>
To: stopnato@...
STOP NATO: ¡NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM
Marek Glogoczowski, a Polish dissident writer analysed the covert
methods,
allegedly used by the Soviets to subdue Poland after WW2, to those
currently observed. Here is my digested translation of the article, with
an
analogy to the present in brackets. I have expanded the analogies with
my
own observations from Poland (in Italics).
1. Direct agricultural policy concerning individual farming so as to
make
farming unprofitable, … cause national agriculture to become deficient
in
fully covering national food needs and make food supply dependent on
imports. [Collective farming concept from that time is now replaced by
strict dependency of farmers from foreign concerns who monopolise food
processing, dictate dumping prices for farm products.]
2. Cause all directives and legislation in legal, economic and
administrative domains to be imprecise. [Unchanged. One of the first
'reforms' of the new government was an astronomical expansion of the
bureaucracy at the county and regional level. The new posts are manned
with
"verified" persons loyal to the central party in power in order to
assure
total control.]
3. Cause that several commissions, offices, social institutions be
created
for every matter, but none of them should have powers to make final
decisions. [Unchanged.]
4. Workers self-governance at places of work should not have any
influence
on the direction of activities of the enterprise. [Unchanged.]
5. When creating and expanding enterprises make sure that industrial
effluent discharges into drinking water reservoirs and rivers. [Present
liquidation of industry entails ensuring that post-consumption waste is
disposed of upstream of drinking water supply. Recycling of waste
materials
such as paper, glass, plastic or aluminum cans should be made as
difficult
as possible. Municipal policy should be steered so as to create as many
uncontrolled waste dumps and other waste disposal places as possible,
especially near passenger rail routes and railway stations. This way the
population will constantly see apparent shabbiness of their own country.
Industrial lobbies press for conversion of solid waste to toxic air
pollution - out of sight out of mind.]
6. Expand the administration at all levels as much as possible.
[Unchanged.
Creation of local governments was advertised as giving power to the
people.
In effect the central government still controls funding, while local
politicians bureaucrats largely stifle any progressive initiative,
unless
they get their personal share in the deal.]
7. Place the Church under special observation and direct its educational
activities so as to cause widespread disgust to this institution.
[Unchanged.]
8. In primary and in trade education and particularly in secondary and
higher education cause lack of correlation between subjects, limit
publication of source materials, eliminate Latin, Greek, philosophy,
etc.
[Unchaged.]
9. Inspire national celebrations of the nation's struggle with invaders,
especially Germans, and the struggle for socialism. [Now celebrations
condemn crimes of communism, especially those committed by Soviet
Russia.
September the 1st, the anniversary of Hitler's invasion of Poland is
modestly announced as "start of WW2", and 17 days later -- "invasion of
Poland by Soviet Russia" (under German-Soviet secret treaty).
Significant
economic achievements of Poles in the communist era are denigrated as
"50
years of wasted time" by a government who has ruined the society and
economy over the last 10 years.]
10. Make sure that people in executive positions are periodically
replaced
by nominees with the lowest qualifications. [Unchanged.]
People who dare to point out the analogies are instantly demoted or
fired.
Glogoczowski gives an example of chief editor of dissident "Trybuna,"
who
was fired January 16, 2000, for that reason.
Glogoczowski expands the above list with quotes from Aleksander
Zinoviev's
"La grande rupture".
11. Crucial, typical characteristics of the social system of the nation
slated for colonialization should be discredited.
12. The country being colonized should be destabilized, its economic,
political and ideological crises - fanned.
13. The population should be divided into antagonistic groups,
opposition
movement should be supported and the intellectual elites tied to the
privileged groups.
14. At the same time widespread propaganda should glorify Western way of
life. [Fuck the cola, fuck the pizza, Serbs have their slivovica.]
15. A desire for wel-being similar to that in the West should be
stimulated
among the people.
16. An illusion should be created that the well-being can be reached in
a
very short time, provided the country embarks on a process of reforms
dictated by the West.
17. All shortcomings of Western societies should be presented among the
people as virtues expressing personal freedom.
18. Parasitism should be developed with all possible means. Economic aid
should only serve to destroy domestic manufacture.
19. The West should be presented as a benevolent saviour who liberates
the
country from mistakes of its former existence.
Zinoviev ends his book (translation back into English from Polish, may
not
be verbatim - P.B.);
"The country being colonialized is put into such state that in all
domains
it becomes unable to exist on its own. It is de-militarized to such
degree
that any military resistance on its part becomes impossible. Its
military
can at the most be used to control protests and to extinguish possible
insurrections. National culture is marginalized to a level of
vegetating.
Its place is taken by the culture, or more appropriately the
sub-culture,
of the West."
Glogoczowski postulates that both covert and overt subjugation
programmes
presently implemented by the West (USA) are much more precise and
tighter
compared to the Soviet model from 50 years ago. The new genre of
Western
monoculture is unusually aggressive and immune to any criticisms for its
feelings of "racial" superiority.
Zinoviev makes a similar remark at the end of his book:
"Westernization of our planet […] makes it impossible to preserve any
seat
from which some form of evolution different form that being copied from
the
West could evolve. By appropriating the world, though only for the
purpose
of deriving profits from it, the West is nipping in the bud all
potential
directions of evolution that could rival it."
---
BULGARIA
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 10:45:55 -0500 (CDT)
From: rrozoff@... (Rick Rozoff)
To: stopnato@...
STOP NATO: ¡NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM
[Can any sane, or decent, person retain a single doubt that, unless
these mad NATO militarists are soon thrown in cages, the world will be
incinerated?]
Missile Part Hits Bulgaria Resort
SOFIA, Bulgaria (AP) -- Part of an air defense missile fell on a Black
Sea resort during army exercises, damaging two bungalows, the Defense
Ministry said Friday.
Nobody was injured in the mishap, which occurred Thursday afternoon in
the resort of Rusalka, some 311 miles northeast of Sofia, as air defense
units were training at a nearby shooting range.
According to a preliminary investigation, the bungalows were hit by the
engine of a missile that was being used as a target. It veered off
course after being hit by an anti-aircraft missile.
No one was in the bungalows at the time of the accident.
>>www.emperors-clothes.com
>>
>>PARVANOV TAKES (IS GIVEN?) POWER. SO WHAT?
>>
>>by Blagovesta Doncheva (5-15-00)
>>
>>
>>First our cast of characters (alas, mostly villains):
>>
>>The Union of Democratic (Demonic?) Forces or UDF. The UDF was formed by
the
>>Bulgarian Communist Party Political Bureau, headed by Lukanov. In 1989 the
>>Communists had more than a million members. The leadership was in a hurry
>to
>>turn themselves into good capitalists and needed an 'opposition', that is
a
>>controlled opposition, to frighten their members into submitting to the
new
>>(capitalist) line.
>>
>>At first the UDF was composed of officers of the Secret Police, sons and
>>daughters of powerful members of the BSP and a host of Communist officials
>>at various levels. It was not an authentic grassroots organization.
>>
>>It was created in December, 1989, after which the manipulated dreamers for
>>freedom and rights (like me, alas!) rushed to join and give it substance.
>>
>>When I realized what I had gotten myself into, my first thought was to
>>rename the UDF 'Union of Secret Police'.
>>
>>The Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP).
>>
>>This party is what remained of the Bulgarian Communist Party after its rib
>>was removed to form the UDF. The BSP is without clear ideology. They say
>>they are leftist but the leadership and many members are bankers, owners
of
>>export-import firms, etc. They are ridiculous. The BSP has about 200,000
>>members. At its last Congress, the BSP (remarkably) declared itself
>NATOite.
>>Many are leaving.
>>
>>Ivan Kostov, Bulgarian Premier and
>>head of the UDF. An ardent Globalisation groupie and NATOist; very much
>'our
>>guy' for both Uncle Sam and the European Union (EU) Social-Democrats.
Would
>>sell mama without hesitation but the price must be right. Or at least
>>reasonable, for he is a man of principle.
>>
>>Georgi Sedefchov Parvanov. A Leader of the BSP; a former and newly elected
>>Secretary of the BSP; a newly-converted NATOist; an MP; he is called
>>"Sedefcho' by some BSP members. (This diminutive suggests lack of
>character,
>>readiness to bend for the powerful.)
>>
>>Has he ever had an opinion of his own? Perish the thought. Or, if one had
>>the bad luck of falling into his skull, he shed it fast. One can never be
>>too cautious. A small man, gray, most convenient for the Globalisation and
>>NATO boys.
>>
>>Ms. Tatjana Doncheva, lawyer, MP, member of the BSP leadership; anti-NATO
>in
>>1999, passionately pro-NATO in 2000. She told the dumbfounded BSP members
>in
>>the town of Shumen in January that loyalty to the party means loyalty to
>>NATO. I have been told by friends from the town of Gabrovo that during the
>>local elections she did her best to make sure the independent candidate,
>>officially supported by the BSP, lost to the UDF candidate. The
independent
>>candidate won despite this help because he had sense enough to organize an
>>independent team of experts and ignore Tatjana Doncheva.
>>
>>Roumen Ovcharov, member of the BSP Supreme Council, MP. Ovcharov ran as
the
>>BSP candidate for a Mayor of Sofia.
>>
>>Or perhaps I should say 'pretended to run.' Because in fact the BSP and
UDF
>>privately agreed that the Mayor of Sofia would be Stefan Sofianski from
the
>>UDF. Mr Ovcharov's election campaign was thus purely symbolic, like a
>>drawing or statue of a campaign. He used this pantomime to declaim the
>BSP's
>>new pro-NATO position, saying on the TV show 'Seven Days' that only NATO
>>membership can protect the sovereignty of Bulgaria.
>>
>>US Ambassador Richard Miles, Sofia, Bulgaria. Miles is the former
>Ambassador
>>to Afghanistan and Belgrade. In other words, trouble follows him like a
>>faithful dog.
>>
>>Bulgarian Civil Airlines, BGA 'Balkan' Recently privatized. The pilots
>>expect that Zeevi Group, the new owner, will liquidate 'Balkan' after the
>>end of the tourist season. We think the same.
>>
>>Now for the Play. It is a tragic-comedy: Theater of the Grimly Absurd.
>>
>>Parvanov Takes (Is Given?) Power.
>>
>>So what?
>>
>>Georgi Sedefchov Parvanov, the former and newly elected Secretary of the
>>Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP) is marching boldly to power under a halo
of
>>approval and promises of support from kind Uncle Sam and the Euro
>>social-democrats. That approval and support has been earned after two
>months
>>of dining regularly with the US Ambassador in Sofia, Richard Miles, plus a
>>five minutes visit with Schroeder The Great - time enough for Parvanov to
>>pledge loyalty to NATO and 'euro-atlantic values'.
>>
>>The Bulgarian media have for some time noted with relish the dinner talks
>>between Amb. Miles and Mr. Parvanov. According to them Miles has given
>>Parvanov a firm promise of much money and the promise that Parvanbov will
>>be allowed to come to power.
>>
>>According to the newspapers, this delicious reward only requires that
>>Parvanov fill Bulgarian political space with passionate statements such
as:
>>'My party and I have reassessed our position and we love NATO!' and so on.
>>
>>(These newspaper rumors have produced no angry letters of denial from the
>>BSP.)
>>
>>And since Parvanov and Company have been praising NATO for some months,
>>power shall surely follow.
>>
>>On May 1st our group of protestors against the USA/NATO war on Yugoslavia
>>went to the BSP May Day rally together with some young people from 'Che
>>Guevara', the revolutionary youth group. We chanted slogans against NATO
>>and the BSP NATOites. The disciplined elderly BSP members pushed and hit
us
>>violently, but they are not to blame, poor things; they have been taught
>for
>>45 years to identify the Party with its leaders, to accept questionable
>>decisions and shout 'Hurray!' ('Theirs not to reason why. Theirs but to do
>>and die!' - Tennyson, 'The Charge of the Light Brigade.' Suitable for the
>>occaision, no?)
>>
>>I wonder why these enraged old women and men who attacked everybody who
>>dared hold Parvanov guilty for betraying the very basis of his party - I
>>wonder why they don't ask themselves: what will in fact happen if Parvanov
>>and Company relax their well fed bodies in Kostov and Company's luxurious
>>chairs? Will anything change?
>>
>>1/ Will "structural reform" continue under the controlling hands of the
>>International Monetary Fund and World Band?
>>
>>What is in fact the meaning of "structural reforms"? Why has nobody taken
>>the risk of clearly explaining what the IMF/WB are demanding?
>>
>>Doesn't structural reform mean the cruelest elimination of all forms of
>>social protection, actually existing and potential?
>>
>>Doesn't it mean the annihilation of Bulgarian industry through
liquidation,
>>privatisation, etc.?
>>
>>The case of the Bulgarian airline, BGA "Balkan" is a clear demonstration
of
>>this extermination scheme. BGA 'Balkan' was sold for next to nothing to
>>Zeevi Group, the Israeli corporation, which started closing lines and
>>offices abroad, selling planes, firing hostesses and pilots, turning plane
>>sheds into warehouses, and so on. Pilots' salaries were set humiliatingly
>>low compared with their colleagues abroad. And the pilots were the first
to
>>raise the alarm, trying to draw public attention to the fact that Zeevi
>>Group is liquidating our 50 year old national airline. They went on strike
>>and began talking. The most important of their demands was to nullify the
>>deal itself - the privatization. Here for the first time a privitization
>has
>>been attacked! (But lest foreign investors are disturbed as they wallow in
>>their luxuries, take note: The pilots' protest was successfully
smothered.)
>>
>>Let's continue with 'Structural Reform'.
>>
>>Doesn't it mean the total wrecking of Bulgarian agriculture?
>>
>>Won't it hit the Bulgarian natural environment, rivers, forests, until-
>>now-protected reserves, with deadly pollution?
>>
>>In the not so long run, doesn't it mean the extermination of the Bulgarian
>>people and state, of Bulgaria itself?
>>
>>Since 1989 Bulgarian governments have not ceased saluting those emissaries
>>of Corporate Globalization, the IMF and World Bank; in return they've
>>excitedly received various sums of money, all of which managed to
>disappear,
>>nobody knows where. Will something change if Parvanov and Co. take power?
>>
>>2/ "Entering Europe". This is the second important issue, a mantra
repeated
>>for 10 years and more, filling the media and political space to the brim.
>>
>>(Entering Europe? Where has Bulgaria been for the past 13 plus centuries?)
>>
>>Again one waits in vain for some journalist (or newspaper) to take the
risk
>>of listing the negative consequences of "Entering Europe."
>>
>>And just what are those "European Values" about which you preach to us,
>>Messrs. Politicians? Messrs. Journalists?
>>
>>Is the vicious breaking of all international laws a European value? Is
>>killing a European country a European value? Is butchering a child a day
>>during the 78 day bombing of Yugoslavia considered European? Has the
>>ecological genocide in the Balkans, produced by this bombing, added to
>>"European values"?
>>
>>Is there some "value" I'm missing?
>>
>>As for the negative consequences of "Entering Europe," here are two:
>>
>>First negative consequence: the closing of the Bulgarian Nuclear Station
>>"Kozlodui". The European Union demands we close it - and turn Bulgaria
from
>>a country that exports energy to a country that imports energy, either
from
>>the Nuclear Station under construction in Turkey or from European
countries
>>with surplus energy production, such as Germany or France.
>>
>>Question: What percent of the Bulgarian population, staying by chance
>alive,
>>will be able to afford this imported energy?
>>
>>Second negative consequence: the removal of customs tariffs on European
>milk
>>and meat products. It has already been decided that these products will
>flow
>>tax free like a river into Bulgaria starting July 1, 2000.
>>
>>Question: Will Bulgarian farmers manage to overcome competition from the
>>tariff-free import of European milk and meat products, supported as they
>are
>>by the various European governments? We must lower the shield so that they
>>may more easily insert the sword.
>>
>>General Question: Don't these two 'reforms' smell of hypocrisy? Ahh,
>perhaps
>>hypocrisy is that so-mysterious European value.
>>
>>What is the position of Parvanov and Co on the destruction of Bulgarian
>>farming and energy production?
>>
>>The same as the position of Kostov and Co. Why then replace Kostov with
>>Parvanov?
>>
>>3/ 'European-Atlantic Values'. For the uninitiated: that is code for -
>NATO.
>>
>>To be honest, the UDF is a step ahead here. They organised a pro-NATO
>>meeting during the bombing of our neighbour; they fed their European
>friends
>>"Podkova"(Horseshoe), a story concocted in Bulgaria but marketed as an
>>Official Yugoslav Government Plan to force Albanians out of Kosovo; this
>>hoax was used to manipulate European and US public opinion during the
>>bombing. Kostov's government is overflowing with passionate NATOites
(e.g.,
>>the Minister of Defense.)
>>
>>What about their brother Party, the BSP?
>>
>>In April and May 1999 Tatjana Doncheva from the BSP made us cry from the
>>emotional stories she told in Parliament of her visit to wartime
>>Yugoslavia... In March 2000 the same lady tells the dumbfounded local BSP
>>members in Shumen that loyalty to the party means loyalty to NATO.
>>
>>In April and May of last year there were BSP meetings and protests against
>>NATO aggression in Yugoslavia. This year the same people are for linking
>>party and country to "Euro-Atlantic Values."
>>
>>Should one laugh or cry?
>>
>>It's a wonder the BSP members aren't schizophrenic. Some are leaving the
>>party; others think they should stay and try to replace the leaders and
>>'fight from inside' to set things straight . (They have been setting
things
>>straight for 10 years now...poor souls.)
>>
>>The crushing result of the BSP's endorsement of NATO is: there is no
>>organized opposition in Bulgaria. The BSP left the pilots to fight all
>>alone. The BSP hasn't said a word in support of other protests going on in
>>Bulgaria. It hasn't moved a finger to unite people and lead their attempts
>>to fight the hydra of Globalization. Even now the BSP behaves like a
ruling
>>party.
>>
>>Neither Parvanov nor any other member of his Loyal Company show the least
>>discomfort from this unprincipled behaviour.
>>
>>For what is principle, actually?
>>
>>Can one buy a palace, race around Europe and the world at the expense of a
>>rapidly dying population or provide a suitably sweet life for deserving
>>relatives with principle?
>>
>>Parvanov and friends do not eat grass. They are reasonable to gaze
>hopefully
>>at the right hand of Uncle M. from his big Embassy in central Sofia - and
>at
>>the slightly smaller (but nearby) hand of Schroeder. Honey may not flow
>from
>>those hands but surely it will trickle, though not into the mouths of
those
>>sad persons who flailed us at the May Day meeting, those who, for lack of
>>thinking, are cheated, again and again....
>>
>>Parvanov takes (is given?) power.
>>
>>So what?
>>
>>Blagovesta Doncheva
>>Sofia, Bulgaria
>>The Balkans
>>
>>***
>>
>>Further reading...
>>
>>For other articles by Blagovesta Doncheva, go to Articles by Author at
>>http://emperors-clothes.com/artbyauth.html, click on "D".
---
ROMANIA
http://www.globalbizgroup.com/perotopstory.shtm
The New Privatization Wave
Over the past three years, a key issue between the Romanian Government
and
the World Bank has been the privatization of the state-owned farms, the
former IAS. Stuck for years in political disputes over the scope of the
process, the privatization of the IAS was recently unlocked and the
first
farm has been privatized. Chances are that in no time Nicolae Havrilet,
the Agriculture Ministry Director in charge of the IAS privatization,
will
become a new star of the Romanian privatization process.
Q: Who is actually privatizing the state-owned farms, the so-called IAS?
The Agriculture Ministry, the State Ownership Fund or both?
A: Generally speaking, the legal basis of the Romanian privatization
process is Law 99, issued last year. However, that law is a general one
that concerns the sell-off of any state-owned company, regardless of the
industry. Given the economic and social importance of the IAS -
companies
that farm the land owned by the state, whether we are talking about the
state's public or private domain - a special law was considered
necessary.
The draft law was enforced by government decree 198, issued last year.
It
provides for the sale of the farms excluding the land. The state's
concession of the agricultural land will be for 49 years (with a
possible
extension of 25 years.) The new owners will have to pay a royalty,
either
in cash or in kind. From the 1.8 million hectares of land that we are
talking about, the state could expect the equivalent of 500,000 tons of
wheat per year. To answer your question, the decree also provides that
the
state's stake in the IAS is to be transferred from the SOF to the
Agriculture Ministry, where a privatization department has been set up.
The State Domain Agency has also been set up; it is in charge with the
land concession and the royalties. These two bodies will work jointly.
The privatization department within the ministry will also work together
with the experts of the SOF as our closest consultants. We have not
decided yet upon the actual form of co-operation with the SOF, but
there's
no doubt we will use their expertise.
Decree 198 cleared the lower chamber of the parliament and has yet to be
discussed by the Senate, but I think it is unlikely that it will undergo
major changes.
Q: So, when the law becomes operational, everything will proceed
smoothly?
A: Besides the above-mentioned law, there is another major issue that
has
to be solved - the debt burden of the state-owned farms. We are talking
about roughly 600 state-owned farms, whose outstanding debt burden
totals
some 28 trillion Romanian lei, the equivalent of $1.5 billion. The debt
includes commercial debt, as well as debt to the state budget and to the
social insurance budget. There is a lot of pressure being made in this
respect, but I think it is unrealistic to believe this entire amount
could
be transferred to the public debt. We have already prepared the
methodological norms for the IAS privatization law, and they would be
approved after the law gets the parliament's approval. These norms
provide
that a certain part of this debt, namely the commercial debt, would be
transferred to the public debt.
Q: Or to the Assets Recovery Agency, AVAB?
A: Eventually. The problem with AVAB is that they recover debts by
selling
assets, rather than businesses. Take an IAS, sell its assets piecemeal,
and you won't get much for it. These are companies whose value lies in
the
integration between the assets - buildings, warehouses, machinery - and
the arable land.
When the law gets approved - something that we expect in June or July -
there will be room for negotiations with the potential buyers on the
balance between the price of the share purchase and the volume of debt
assumed by the buyer.
Q: This means that the privatization method employed will be direct
negotiations?
A: Depending on the financial situation of the respective farm, there
will
be either direct negotiations, or an open auction. The selection of one
method or another will be approved by the Agriculture Minister on a case
by case basis. In the negotiation process we will also pay attention to
issues other than the price, the debts and the royalties - such as the
investment pledged, the commitment of the buyer to preserve jobs, to
farm
the land properly and so on.
Q: What are your targets for this year?
A: This is a very difficult question, every IAS has a different
situation.
There are about 60 farms where the SOF has already transferred its stake
to the SIFs, local investment funds - these are private farms now. Other
farms have sold their debts. Then, the restitution law that has recently
been promulgated might bring along new claims from former owners.
However, I would say that a couple of trillion lei is a rather
pessimistic
estimate.
Interview by Catalin DIMOFTE
Last updated :
Thu, Apr 20 2000
-
STOP NATO: NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM
"Does anybody here in Romania realize what's going on?"- this is the
question I keep asking
myself a lot lately. Because I fear that in spite of all economic crisis
and social desaster the
Romanians still believe in a fairytale- that of western democracy. 2000
is electoral year here-
what will happen? What is waiting for us again?
I look around and all I see is dirt covered in a very devious manner
with a polished illusion of
a good life. The western type life. Lots of lights and expensive shops
in the center of the
town, a MacDonald' s in almost every periferic district of Bucharest.
Young people smilling
happily while chewing sugar- free gum and listening to crappy dance
music that talks about
money and cars. And beautiful women, of course. It all smells to me like
a rotten American
dream, artificially implanted in this part of the Balkans... PRO TV and
ACASA (both
belonging to the same American press trust and from which the first one,
PRO TV, is the
most influential TV station in the country- but imagine the NATOite
propaganda!) keep
inoculating illusions into people' s minds.
For a while a had an illusion myself: that people here will finally
realize what a bunch of fools
we all have been. But this was just a brief moment (to place it in time,
I will tell you that it was
last year, during the NATO attacks on Serbia). But it seems that the
indoctrination has
completely reached its target: this people definitely believes that
NATO and EU are the
salvation.
Somebody told me once in an e- mail that this is perfectly
understandable, as the Romanians
had a cult for the USA for more than 50 years. And he was right. They
waited for the
Americans to come and save them in the WWII. The Americans just came to
drop some
bombs... But the most typical feature of Romanians is their forgiveness.
So they kept
worshiping the Americans. And so it was during the comunist era. And so
it is today. I
remember the way Clinton was received - like a superhero. (But on the
other hand this is
just another feature of the Romanian people - they are always too
welcoming...).
Unofficially, the electoral campaign (for parliament and presidency) has
already started. And
again I see how the politicians have so simply divided the world in two:
the good ones, i.e.
pro- western (NATO, EU...) ones and the bad- everybody else who has a
different oppinion
(no matter which is that).
Some people here woke up and saw that the so praised western- type
democracy is not so
democratic and that the government from which everybody expected a lot,
is in fact no good.
And due to all of these things I get even angrier watching the news
lately. And I do not mean
here the internal ones, but those concerning Serbia. And I shiver
thinking that there could
happen the same thing like here. I watched CNN last night and I heard
things matching some
sort of already well known pattern, and I had again that deja vu
feeling. All this talk about
democracy...
Here we have to get a visa to get to the "civilized" countries but in
most of the cases this
countries won' t give it. What kind of embargo are we under? An
undeclared one, for sure,
as it seems that this is more than a pattern, it is a custom, a sort of
law for the NATO
countries. We are the Balkans, and that is equal to nothing for them.
They just want us all
reduced to simple dummies. Be aware!
NO PASARAN!
NEXT YEAR IN KOSOVO!
---
UCRAINA
STOP NATO: NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM
Those of you on these lists who live in the Ukraine need to get busy!!!
Is this guy on of those NATOite idiots who locked himself in a room in
their
Parliament Building
and threatened to burn himself alive if Ukraine was not admitted to NATO
a
few months back!
-----Original Message-----
From: NATODOC <natodoc@...>
To: NATODATA@...
<NATODATA@...>
Date: Monday, May 22, 2000 4:02 AM
Subject: Press Release (2000) 051 - VISIT TO NATO BY THE PRIME MINISTER
OF
UKRAINE
>Press Release (2000) 051 19
>May 2000
>
>VISIT TO NATO BY THE PRIME MINISTER OF UKRAINE, MR. VIKTOR YUSCHENKO
>ON 22 MAY 2000
>
>
>INFORMATION
>
>The Prime Minister of Ukraine, Mr. Viktor Yuschenko, will visit NATO
>Headquarters on Monday, 22 May 2000. He will meet the Secretary General.
>The visit will begin at 17.00.
>
>MEDIA ADVISORY
>(not for publication)
>
>PROGRAMME OF THE VISIT
>
>17:00 NATO main entrance. Arrival of Mr. Yuschenko. Open coverage on a
>first-come, first-served basis.
> Immediately followed by meeting with Secretary General in the
Private Office.
>
>17:30 NATO main entrance. Joint Point de presse with Secretary General
and
>Prime Minister of Ukraine.
>
>ACCREDITATION
>
>Journalists wishing to cover the visit of the Prime Minister of Ukraine
>will be allowed into
>the NATO premises on presentation of a NATO accreditation pass or a valid
>press pass.
>Photographers and cameramen wishing to be part of the Restricted Pool
>should contact
>Mr. A. Chahtahtinsky.
>
>ENQUIRIES
>
>General press arrangements
>Mr. A. Chahtahtinsky 32.2.707.1933
>Mr. J. Karwatsky 32.2.707.1255
>Films, Video, TV, Radio
>Mr. J.M. Lorgnier 32.2.707.5006
>Photos
>Ms. Patricia Doling 32.2.707.5018
---
LITUANIA
Subject:
Joint Press Conference at Vilnius, Lithuania
Date:
Sat, 10 Jun 2000 21:25:02 -0400
From:
dltranscripts_sender@...
Reply-To:
dltranscripts-l-request@...
To:
DODTRANSCRIPTS-L@...
= N E W S B R I E F I N G
=
= OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
= (PUBLIC AFFAIRS)
= WASHINGTON, D.C. 20301
====================================================
DoD News Briefing
Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen
Saturday, June 10, 2000
Joint press conference at Vilnius, Lithuania
(Also participating: Ceslovas Stankevicius, minister of Defense of
Lithuania)
Secretary Cohen: Let me express my delight in being in Vilnius to attend
the third Nordic-Baltic-U.S. Defense Ministerial and to meet with
Lithuanian leaders. The Baltic states have become a leading example of
the benefits of regional defense cooperation. The Baltic peacekeeping
battalion has just completed its third rotation in SFOR helping to make
Bosnia and Europe more stable. Lithuania has made a firm commitment to
improve its ability to work with other nations for security, operating
very much in the spirit of Nordic-Baltic-U.S. framework. Lithuanian
defense budgets are increasing to finance military reform and
modernization programs. I am particularly impressed with the steps
Lithuania is taking to lift the quality of life for the soldiers by
improving barracks and training facilities. Lithuania is also making
progress under the NATO Membership Action Plan. NATO will review the
enlargement process in 2002 and it is, of course, too early to predict
what, if any, action th!
!
!
ey will then take. But Lithuanian determination to lift its military
capability, to work productively with NATO and non-NATO countries to
improve its relations with Russia, and play an active role in regional
security structures all are very good steps up that long and difficult
staircase to possible NATO membership. As it has in the past, the United
States will continue to assist Lithuania's participation in the
Partnership for Peace program and the cooperative regional projects such
as the Baltnet Regional Air Surveillance Network and through its
concentration on improved security through regional cooperation.
Lithuania continues to build a future that is much brighter than its
past. With that, I will yield to the Minister.
Minister Stankevicius: I would like to speak in English. First of all, I
would like to express my gratitude to Secretary Cohen for coming for
this visit to Lithuania and for this very high evaluation of our
progress which we have made as well as for his attendance at the
Ministerial Conference, 1+5+3, which was held today. We had a good
opportunity to exchange views on our broad cooperation in the security
and defense area. I would particularly stress that the United States is
the strongest Lithuanian partner in this cooperation. But I would also
like to say that the other Nordic countries also are strong contributors
to our common Baltic projects as well as our bilateral projects. This
cooperation helps us to hasten our progress and to strengthen our own
efforts, which will make for modernization of our forces.
Q: Mr. Secretary, I understand that at a meeting this morning you all
discussed the need for greater engagement between the Baltic countries
and Russia. Would this be to try to improve relations with Russia at
NATO's review of the membership in 2002 and how would you go about
overcoming Russia's concerns about NATO expansion in the Baltics?
Cohen: First, let me separate out the issue of NATO membership from
establishing better relations with Russia. Whatever takes place with
NATO enlargement, it is important that the Baltic states and other
members of the European Community and NATO itself seek to find ways in
which we can cooperate on many levels with Russia -- be it in
environmental protection, disaster relief, peacekeeping operations --
where ever we can. In so separating it apart from NATO, we think that it
is important that Lithuania and the other Baltic states -- Sweden,
Norway, and all the other EU members and non-EU members -- must find
ways to constructively engage Russia. So, in addition to that, I think
there is a positive benefit to the extent that when such measures are
undertaken, I think it does contribute to a sense of security on the
part of the Russian people and Russian leaders. And that too will be
important as the debate unfolds on future NATO membership.
Q: I want to know if military expenditures were one of the main issues
when the membership question arose for Baltic states and other
countries?
Cohen: We have indicated that the door to NATO remains open. We
reiterate that no nation should be excluded by virtue of either
geography or history. What we also have said is that membership in NATO
requires a number of important steps: to modernize its militaries, to
ensure that there is civilian control over the military, and to take
such steps that are necessary to ensure that each member contributes to
the collective security of NATO members and is not simply a consumer of
the security benefits. That will require necessarily the increased
expenditure of funds for defense modernization. We understand that
Lithuania and other Baltic states have been going through some difficult
economic times, but nonetheless they have also taken steps to improve
their military capability. They are working very closely with the
Partnership for Peace, the Membership Action Plan, and all of that will
be important as the consideration of future NATO membership comes up
again in 2002.
Q: Russia says it plans to declare its opposition to the Baltic States'
admission into NATO. Such declarations are always threatening to
Lithuania, so how is it possible to solve this issue with Russia?
Cohen: First of all, it should be clear that Russia does not have a veto
over NATO decisions. One of the reasons that we established the
NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council was to give Russia a voice -- as
Secretary [of State Madeleine] Albright has said, but not a veto.
Namely, that we always want to take into account Russian concerns and
Russian interests when we make our decisions in terms of how we carry
out our action today and what we may do tomorrow. But that is internal
to our decisions and Russia does not have a veto over those decisions.
So NATO members will decide in the year 2002 whether there should be an
enlargement and we will take into account all of the factors that I
mentioned before -- the progress made by aspiring members to modernize
their militaries, to adopt those measures that would satisfy the
requirements, including a market economy and other criteria, and then a
decision will be made at that time. I will stop here for the moment and
then add a few wo!
!
!
rds.
(pauses for translation)
I want to add just a few more words. You may recall that when the wall
came down in Germany the question arose as to whether a unified and
united Germany could remain a member of NATO. At that point Russia took
strong opposition to that. We believed that a united Germany could
remain and should remain a part of NATO and that steps could be taken to
ameliorate or take into account any concerns on the part of the Russians
that it would somehow pose a military threat to them. And we did that.
And I think the Russian concerns were legitimate; they wanted to make
sure that they were not going to be in any way put in an inferior
position militarily by virtue of a united Germany still remaining a
member of NATO. I believe that they also expressed opposition to
enlargement of NATO this past round. I believe that as we engage Russia,
as we show that this is a defensive alliance, that we can take into
account their legitimate concerns and nonetheless do what is required
for NATO itself.!
!
!
And so I believe that by engaging them and by possibly discussing and
taking up issues of their concern and dealing with them in a responsible
fashion, that we can overcome objections in the future. But a lot of
work has to done and that is the reason why I have stressed the need to
cooperatively engage Russia on a number of different levels.
Q: I have a question for both of you. Were there any concrete steps
discussed in terms of engaging Russia? And also I would like to ask you,
sir, given the history of your country, what do you think about this
wanting Russia to be more involved?
Cohen: The next step is that I am on my way to Moscow. I will be
engaging Russian leaders, including my counterpart Marshal Sergeyev. I
hope and plan to meet with President Putin while I am there. I will meet
with members of the Russian Duma. This will not be the first time; I
have met with members of the Russian Duma in my office at the Pentagon
as well as in Moscow in the past. And so I will certainly personally
continue these efforts, but we will do so on a government-wide basis
because it is in our interest to have this engagement with Russia. All
of us have stated at the various meetings we have attended, and all of
the NATO members, EU members, and partnership members understand that
Russia must be stable and engaged with the rest of the European
membership. So this is something that we will do on a constructive
basis. There is an exercise taking place today with Iceland, Russia and
Iceland, and we will have other exercises that we will continue in the
future -- all in a!
!
!
n effort to build a sense of mutual confidence, to reduce suspicion or
apprehension so that we can take measures in the future that will
provide for security and stability and promote prosperity.
Stankevicius: May I say some words in this context? During this
conference, we got an opportunity to introduce our view on cooperation
with Russia and I would like to give only one example. Recently, Russia
accepted Lithuania's initiatives on confidence, directed to confidence
building. Russia agreed with the Lithuanian proposal to exchange some
additional inspection in the Kaliningrad region as well as in Lithuania,
and also to exchange additional information in the framework of the
Vienna document. Along with our cooperation with Russia, I would like to
particularly express our cooperation with the people and government of
the Kaliningrad region. We are building confidence; confidence between
us and Russia and the Kaliningrad region. This confidence will very
positively serve both countries. The Russians see that Lithuania has and
shows good will and is ready to cooperate with them in all possible
areas.
Cohen: Could I add that that is a mutual responsibility? Establishing a
good neighbor policy also requires Russia to act in ways that are
cooperative and constructive and so it is always very much of a two way
street and that is how mutual confidence and respect is established.
-END-
NOTE: This is a plain text version of a web page.
If your mail program did not properly format this
information, current Transcripts are online at
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/#BRIEFINGS
====================================================
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
ASSISI 30 LUGLIO - 6 AGOSTO 2000
>
> Il Campo Antimperialista "Da Seattle a S. Vicente. Le lotte contro l'impero
> dell'ingiustizia" ha già ricevuto adesioni da circa 26 paesi dei vari
> continenti.
>
> Senza dubbio il Campo è la più grande occasione a livello internazionale di
> unità, confronto e dibattito tra tutte le forze antimperialiste. Il
> Programma che alleghiamo qui sotto è di massima, poiché continuano a
> giungere adesioni, ciò che ci obbligherà a ritocccare il palinsesto per
> dare la parola a quanti più delegati è possibile.
>
> ----------
> Ricordiamo a tutti coloro che fossero interessati che il costo a persona
> per una settimana intera in tenda (compresi due pasti giornalieri) è di L.
> 310mila. In Bungalow è di L. 400mila, in camera d'albergo è di L. 500mila.
> Si può venire in roulotte.
>
> Ovviamente è possibile soggiornare anche per alcuni giorni, un paio o uno
> solo.
> Tuttavia è importante prenotare per evitare di non trovare posto.
>
> La prenotazione avviene versando sul C/C postale n.12134623, intestato al
> centro Studi P. Tresso, specificando nella causale le ragioni del
> versamento, il periodo di soggiorno e il tipo di servizio che si chiede.
>
> Per ulteriori informazioni telefonare all'ufficio del Campo: tel/fax:
> 075.42686 (martedì, mercoledì e venerdì dalle ore 17 alle 19)
> o al cellulare 0333.3543251).
>
> Oppure riferirsi ai nostri indirizzi di posta elettronica:
>
> Comitato Internazionalista Arco Iris: ale.ramon@...
> Comitato organizzativo del campo: campo2000@...
> ----------
> Programma
> del Campo Antimperialista 2000
> Assisi, 30 luglio - 06 agosto
>
> Domenica 30 luglio, arrivi
>
> ore 21,00
> Presentazione del programma e delle delegazioni ospiti. Lettura saluti e
> messaggi.
>
> Ore 22,30
> Concerto.
>
> Durante tutto il Campo
> Laboratorio Informatico di Comunicazione Alternativa
> A cura di Elías Letelier
> (fondatore della Rete dei Familiari ed Amici
> dei Prigionieri Politici del Cile)
>
> Lunedì, 31 luglio
>
> Ore 9,30
> Forum n.1: Incontro con la delegazione iugoslava
> Forum n.2: Incontro con le delegazioni polaccha e ceca
> Forum n.3: Incontro con la delegazione russa
>
> Ore 15,30
> 1. Sessione plenaria: I crimini NATO nei Balcani
> Introduzione a cura del Tribunale R. Clark
>
> Ore 21,30
> Forum n.1: Sopravivere alle armi delle guerre umanitarie. Introduce: M. Saba
> Forum n.2: Dall'emarginazione alla resistenza, percorsi di dignità nel
> Brasile d'oggi . Introduce il Professor J. (Coordinamento Latinoamericano
> di Giuristi, Ricercatori Sociali e Gruppi Emarginati per una Alternativa
> Democratica e Popolare).
> Forum n.3: Questione nazionale e socialismo: tavola rotonda coi movimenti
> di liberazione.
>
> Martedì, 1 agosto
>
> ore 9,30
> Forum n.1: Incontro con le delegazioni messicane
> Forum n.2: Incontro con la delegazione paraguayana
> Forum n.3: Incontro con la delegazione brasiliana
>
> Ore 15,30
> 2. Sessione plenaria: La lotta di liberazione in Colombia
> Introduzione delle FARC
>
> Ore 21,30
> Forum n.1: Violenza o non-violenza? Forme di lotta contro la globalizzazione
> Forum n.2: Le nuove strategie NATO per la supremazia planetaria
> Forum n.3: La Solidarietà Internazionalista, da percorsi diversi per un
> obiettivo comune. tavola rotonda tra esponenti della Chiesa di base,
> organizzazioni non governative e associazionismo.
>
> Mercoledì, 2 agosto
>
> ore 9,30
> Forum n.1: "Teoria e pratica dell'autonomia per il potere popolare",
> introduce il Prof. J.
> Forum n.2: incontro con la delegazione irlandese
> Forum n.3: incontro con le delegazioni basche, catalane e sarde
>
> Ore 15,30
> 3. Sessione plenaria: Echelon: sorveglianza informatica mondiale e
> contromisure democratiche. Tavola rotonda con alcuni esperti: Elias
> Letelier, Marco Saba e altri.
>
> ore 21,30
> Forum n.1: Immigrazione e lotta contro il razzismo nell¹Europa di Shengen
> Forum n.2: Le lotte operaie nella russia di Putin. Incontro con Oleg
> Shein, deputato comunista alla Duma
> Forum n.3: Nuova destra e antifascismo: relatore W. Fisher della Germania Est
>
> Giovedì, 3 agosto
>
> ore 9,30
> Forum n.1: incontro con le delegazioni palestinese e libanese
> Forum n.2: incontro con la C.L.I.
> Forum n.3: incontro con la delegazione dello Sri lanka
>
> Ore 15,30
> 4. Sessione plenaria: Islam e nuovo ordine mondiale
>
> ore 21,30
> Forum n.1: La resistenza libanese contro il sionismo. Incontro con Hezbollah
> Forum n.2: La prassi dei comunisti nel mondo che cambia. Tavola rotonda
> Forum n.3: I cristiani e la lotta per la giustizia sociale: in contro con
> Don Vitaliano della Sala
>
> Venerdì, 4 agosto
>
> ore 9,30
> Forum n.1: incontro con le delegazioni degli U.S.A.
> Forum n.2: incontro con la delegazione filippina
> Forum n.3: Incontro con la delegazione venezuelana
>
> Ore 15,30
> 5. Sessione plenaria: Amnistia! Repressione, prigionia politica, violazione
> dei diritti umani e civili nel tempo della globalizzazione.
>
> ore 21,30
> Forum n.1: Reddito di cittadinanza o lavoro come diritto inalienabile?
> Forum n.2: La prassi dei comunisti nel mondo che cambia. Tavola rotonda
> Forum n.3: Il Messico alle soglie di storiche elezioni: via parlamentare e
> via rivoluzionaria
>
> Sabato, 5 agosto
>
> ore 9,30
> 6. Sessione plenaria: Inquinamento, transgenica e bio-tech: un nuovo
> terreno della lotta anticapitalista.
>
> Ore 15,30
> 7. Sessione plenaria: Seattle : valore e limiti della rivolta contro il WTO
> Introduce lo International Action Center degli U.S.A.
>
> ore 21,30
> Concerto e festa di chiusura
>
> Domenica 6 agosto
> Partenze
>
Main forums
(Overview as attachment or http://summercamp.cjb.net)
Monday, 31st July
The NATO crimes in the Balcans - International Tribunal against NATO
=> International Action Center (USA, requested)
Tuesday, 1st August
The liberation struggle in ColombiaIntroduction
=> Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia-People’s Army (FARC-EP)
Wednesday, 2nd August
Echelon and the electronic observation
=> Round table with Fulvio Grimaldi, Marco Saba (Italy) Elias Letelier
(Chile)
Thursday, 3rd August
The Islam and the New World Order
=> Representatives of Liberation movements from Libanon and Palestine
Friday, 4th August
Amnesty! Repression, prisoners of conscience and disregard of the human
rights in the world of globalisation
=> Round table with representatives from Northern Ireland, Basque
Country,
Italy, …
Saturday, 5th August
The Revolt of Seattle: a forward-looking example for the resistance in
the
West?
=> International Action Center, USA (requested) and Bayan, Philippines
***********
Information about the Summer Camp
1. Place and Date
The Summer Camp takes place at a camp site near the umbrian town Assisi.
The
opening of the Summer Camp will be held on Sunday, the 30th July in the
evening. The political discussions will start on Monday, 31st July. The
Summer Camp ends at Sunday, 6th August.
2. Order of events
The main languages at the Summer Camp will be English and Spanish. The
different thematical discussions will only be translated partly.
3. Journey to the Camp
The participants who travel by plane have to tell the Organization
Committee
the airport (Rome), the date, the time of their arrival and the flight
number and the airline. They will be taken from the airport to the place
of
the Summer Camp.
If participants do not travel by plane they can ask the Organization
Committee for a map to find the place where the Summer Camp takes place.
4. Booking
The participants have to book until the 30th of June and to pay USD 65,-
on
the account written on the next page. After the booking the participants
will get a detailed programme and the statute of the Camp. The remaining
money has to be paid at the inscription at the Summer Camp.
5. Prices
The price includes housing, lunch and dinner. It also includes a
contribution to support the journeys of the international guests from
countries of the “Third World”.
1 Week in tent: USD 145,-
1 Week in caravan: USD 185,-
1 Week in hotel: USD 230,-
Prices for one night (in brackets: prices for one night without food)
Tent: USD 25,- (USD 14,-)
Caravan: USD 30,- (USD 20,-)
Hotel: USD 35,- (USD 28,-)
Prices of food for guests, who do not sleep at the camp:
USD 8,- for lunch or dinner
Booking (with name, adress, telephone number, e-mail)
e-mail: ilc@...
Adress: ILC, Pf. 23, A-1040 Vienna, Austria
Telephone: ++43/1/504 00 10
The booking is valid as soon as USD 65,- are transferred to the account:
PSK-Vienna, Austria
Account-Number: 92.125.137
Bank Code Number: 60000
*********
Supporter:
* International Forum (Denmark)
* Federation of University Students of Venezuela
* BAYAN International (Philippines, European Office)
* Trade Union of Public Empoyed (Volta Redonda, Brasil)
* Loyalty for Men and Earth (Palestine/Lebanon)
* Revolutionary Communist League (Thuringia, Germany)
* Red Action (Duisburg, Germany)
* People’s Liberation Front (Sri Lanka)
* Irish Republican Socialist Party
* League of Anti-imperialists, Communists and Socialists (Germany)
* Movement Free Fatherland (Paraguay)
* Basque Communists
* Marxist Leninist Communist Party (Brasil)
* 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
* Independent Popular Front Francisco Villa (Mexico)
* Democratic Popular Left (Mexico)
* International Leninist Current
* Russian political union "Worker" (Perm)
* Movement New Left (Russia)
* Worker’s Union Perm (Russia)
* Redskin Resistance (Bogota, Colombia)
* Communist Construction (Munich, Germany)
* Communist Party of the Peoples of Spain
* Russian Party of Communists
* Sindical Worker’s Aid (El Salvador/USA)
* Latinamerican Coordination of Jurists, Social Scientists and Marginal
*
Groups for a Democratic and Popular Alternative (Brasil)
* Free Center for Artist and Theatre Experimentation (Mexico)
* Sard Nation
* Association of families and friends of political prisoners (Spain)
**************************************
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
> Carissimi Amici ed Amiche,
>
> Dopo la bella iniziativa organizzata con la Confederazione delle
> Nazionalità Indigene dell'Ecuador, iniziativa che ha visto partecipare
> insieme organizzazioni non governative, fondazioni, centri sociali,
> sindacati, partiti politici, associazioni e gruppi di solidarietà, vorremmo
> proporvi la possibilità di organizzare iniziative con una serie di delegati
> che parteciperanno all'Incontro << NO ALLA GLOBALIZZAZIONE, da Seattle a S.
> Vicente avanza la rivolta contro l'impero dell'ingiustizia >> (dal 30
> Luglio al 6 Agosto di quest'anno, ad Assisi).
>
> Tutti sono invitiati a partecipare a questo incontro, rispetto al quale vi
> invieremo il programma dettagliato nei prossimi giorni. Lanciamo però
> adesso un appello affinchè, chiunque fosse interessato ad organizzare una
> iniziativa (a ridosso dell'incontro, orientativamente dal 15 luglio fino al
> 14 agosto) con uno o più degli elencati delegati, ci contatti urgentemente.
>
> Il vostro interesse, unitamente ad un vostro contributo economico,
> potrebbero favorire la partecipazione di altri delegati che al momento non
> siamo in grado di portare in Italia.
>
> Invitiamo in particolare gli organizzatori del VI Meeting Internazionale
> Antirazzista, che si terrà a Cecina dal 15 al 22 Luglio, a valutare la
> possibilità di invitare alcuni dei "nostri" delegati alla loro iniziativa.
> Estendiamo poi l'appello soprattutto ai collettivi universitari, anche se
> il periodo a disposizione non è agevole.
>
> Confidando nella vostra partecipazione e nel vostro interesse, vi inviamo i
> nostri fraterni saluti.
>
> NOTA IMPORTANTE (ECUADOR):
> ----------------------------------------------
> Vorremmo organizzare per sabato 24 giugno l'Incontro Nazionale in
> Solidarietà con i Popoli dell'Ecuador. Al momento le adesioni ci fanno
> propendere per Firenze come luogo per tale incontro (invece di Ancona).
> Invitiamo tutti coloro che hanno partecipato all'organizzazione del tour
> della CONAIE a farci pervenire le loro impressioni, le loro idee su come
> sviluppare una solidarietà concreta verso l'Ecuador. L'idea generale è
> quella di poter adottare un Progetto a livello nazionale. Ma il tutto
> dipenderà da alcune indicazioni che dovrebbero giungere dalla CONAIE stessa
> nei prossimi giorni.
>
>
> ELENCO DEI DELEGATI E DELLE DELEGAZIONI DISPONIBILI PER INIZIATIVE
> (maggiori dettagli verranno forniti agli interessati)
>
> ELIAS LETELIER RUZ (CILE)
> -------------------------
> Poeta cileno, di religione ebraica. Parla inglese, francese e spagnolo. E'
> stato il fondatore della pagina web sulla Prigionia Politica in Cile,
> ovvero della Rete dei Familiari e Amici dei Prigionieri Politici in Cile.
> E' un esperto di "internet e della comunicazione globale" a tal punto da
> essere stato più volte minacciato dai paramilitari cileni, oltre che dagli
> stessi servizi di sicurezza del governo cileno.
>
> SINTESI DAL CURRICULUM:
>
> Alcune Opere Pubblicate:
> Histoire de la Nuit. 1998 [ Editotial l'Hexagone - Montreal, Quebec ]
> Silence. 1997, (Edizione in Francese) [ Editorial l'Hexagone - Montreal,
> Quebec ]
> Ich Frage Sie. 1993 [ Antifad, Frankfurt ] (Poesia per il movimento
> antinazista)
> Silence. 1992 [ tradotto da Ken Norris. - The Muses' Company - Dorion,
> Quebec ]
> Symphony. 1988 [ tradotto da Ken Norris.- The Muses' Company - Dorion,
> Quebec ]
>
> Antologie:
> "Compañeros: Una antologia di scritti sull'America Latina"
> [ Ed. Hugh Hazelton and Gary Geddes. Montreal: Cormorant Books 1990. p.
> 263-264. ]
> "I Grandi Poeti" [ La Habana, Cuba: Ed. Monte Verde 1984 p. 39-46. ]
> "Sei Poeti Cileni". [ Caracas Venezuela: Ed. El Tucan 1980 p. 184-189. ]
>
> Lavori Culturali:
> Cofondatore del Comitato Consultivo (Consigliere) della Federazione degli
> Scrittori di Lingua Inglese del Quebec
> Direttore ed Editore del Consiglio Nazionale della Cultura del Nicaragua
> (Nov. 1989 - Luglio 1990)
> Coordinatore sul Nord America della Biblioteca Nazionale del Nicaragua
> (1990 - 1991)
>
> Interviste:
> "Intervista con Ernesto Cardenal" [ Zymergy Literary Review Autunno 1990:
> p. 57-70 ]
> "Intervista con Jimmy Carter, Ex -presidente degli USA". [ El tiempo.
> Madrid, Spain Autunno 1990: 3-15 ]
> "Intervista con il Segretario Generale della OEA" [ CBC, BBC Giugno 1990 ]
>
> Conferenze:
> Una conferenza sulla "La poesia e la lotta antinazista". [ Marzo 1993.
> Frankfurt, Germania Federale]
> "Ich Frage Sie" (Ausländerbeirat der Stadt Gießen). [ Conferenza su "La
> spada e l'invenzione del potere". Febbraio 1993. Gießen, Germania Federale]
> "Vida, Muerte y Poesía." (Universidad Autónoma de Nicaragua). [ Due
> conferenze sul diritto di esprimere ciò che sentiamo. Giugno 1990.
> Managua, Nicaragua ]
> "Dos poetas una voz" (Sistema Sandinista de Televisión) [ Sulla libertà di
> stampa con Ernesto Cardenal e Elías Letelier-Ruz. Maggio 1990. Managua,
> Nicaragua ]
> "La poesie dans mon exile au Canada." Maison de L'Amerique Latine. 10
> Marzo 1989. Parigi, Francia.
> "Emily Dickinson and freedom." Croce Rossa Svedese. [ La libertà è un
> stato astratto della mente. 24 Aprile, 1989. Växjö, Svezia. ]
> "We have to sing together." USSR Academy of Science. [ I poeti devono
> essere uno specchio della loro società. 24 Aprile 1989. Leningrado, URSS ]
>
> Membro di:
> Federation of English-Language Writers of Quebec.
> The Writer's Federation of Nova Scotia.
> Union des Ecrivans du Quebec
> The Writers' Union of Canada.
>
> Borse di studio:
> Consiglio dell'Arte del Canada[EL1], 1993
> Ministero dell'Educazione del Quebec, 1993
> Ministero dell'Educazione dell'Ontario, 1995
> Consiglio dell'Arte dell'Arte del Quebec, 1996
>
>
> PROFESSOR J. (CLAJADEP, BRASILE)
> --------------------------------
> Professore universitario di Filosofia e di Diritto Alternativo, nonché
> assessore di movimenti popolari di base. Coordina attualmente CAUSA
> (Coordinamento delle Autonomie di São Paulo), GPDA (Gruppo di Ricerca del
> Diritto Alternativo in Brasile) e CLAJADEP (Coordinamento Latinoamericano
> di Giuristi, Ricercatori Sociali e Gruppi Emarginati per una Alternativa
> Democratica e Popolare). E' inoltre collaboratore del Movimento dei Sem
> Terra, della Centrale dei Movimenti Popolari e delle Occupazioni. E'
> inoltre autore del libro "Introduzione alla Scienza del Diritto e del
> Diritto Alternativo" [edizione in portoghese, ed. Hapirus, São Paulo]. Il
> Prof. J. ha adottato un nuovo tipo di corso per investigatori, attivisti ed
> agenti culturali delle autonomie in lotta, per operare con gruppi di
> emarginati e/o poveri della città e delle campagne, attualizzando la
> metodologia di Paulo Freire e sollevando la tesi della ricostruzione
> dell'identità di gruppo a partire dalla ricollocazione dell'arte di pensare
> ed elaborare idee all'interno dei collettivi di base.
>
> PROPOSTA DI SEMINARI CON IL PROF. J.
> Si propongono due tipologie di seminari (l'elaborazione è avvenuta per
> facilitare l'organizzazione di iniziative con le università): 1) Il Diritto
> Alternativo 2) Teoria e pratica della autonomia per il potere popolare.
>
> TEMI DEI SEMINARI
> < Diritto Alternativo > la nascita del diritto / relazioni tra il diritto,
> l'economia e la politica / il pluralismo giuridico / uso alternativo del
> diritto / il potere popolare come base del diritto alternativo / dal
> dogmatismo della generalità alla pragmatica della singolarità / il
> neoliberismo e la modificazione della relazione organica del capitale /
> diritto indigeno / diritto alla occupazioni di terra del Movimento dei Sem
> Terra / diritto nelle zone liberate dalle guerriglie / la fine del diritto
>
> < Teoria e pratica della autonomia per il potere popolare> elementi teorici
> e dottrinari del dibattito sulla autonomia / indipendenza di classe e
> autogestione / erano autonomi la Comune di Parigi e i soviets? / Autonomia
> e idologia / Autonomia e produzione del pensiero nuovo. Può esserci
> autonomia con un pensiero prodotto fuori da essa? / Autonomia e diversità
> etnica, culturale, nazionale, classista, di genere ecc.. / Autonomia,
> potere popolare e organizzazione rivoluzionaria / Autonomia, lotta
> rivendicativa e lotta politica / Autonomia, coordinamenti, fronti e blocchi
> popolari / Lo zapatismo / L'esempio dell'Ecuador / Esperienze in Brasile.
>
>
> DELEGATO DELLA FEDERAZIONE DEGLI STUDENTI UNIVERSITARI DEL VENEZUELA (FEUV)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Si tratta di una delle più combattive federazioni studentesche dell'America
> Latina, partecipante alla Organizzazione Continentale Latinoamericana e
> Caraibica degli Studenti. Per capire quale sia la risposta (a livello
> latinoamericano) degli studenti di fronte alle nuove esclusioni dalla
> scienza e dalla conoscenza, per capire da dove nascono le proteste degli
> studenti della UNAM in Messico, le lotte degli studenti nicaraguensi, di
> quelli salvadoregni, dei colombiani ecc.. ma anche per capire l'attualità
> venezuelana, cosa è cambiato e cosa dovrebbe cambiare con la gestione del
> Presidente Chavéz.
>
>
> DELEGATO DELLA ORGANIZZAZIONE BAYAN, BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN (FILIPPINE)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Si tratta di una organizzazione sorta nel 1985. BAYAN (ovvero "Nuova
> Allenza Patriottica") è un fronte ampio di organizzazioni popolari che
> lottano in favore della democrazia e della libertà per il popolo delle
> Filippine. Attualmente è composta da circa mille organizzazioni,
> raggruppando più di un milione di persone, di diverse classi sociali e
> settori.
>
> BAYAN si sviluppò durante la dittatura come centro di coordinamento per le
> mobilitazioni delle masse, organizzando manifestazioni imponenti nella
> capitale e coordinando diversi scioperi nazionali nelle principali città
> del paese, mobilitazioni che condussero poi alla destituzione del regime di
> Marcos.
>
>
> DELEGATO DI ASKAPENA (PAESI BASCHI) [* da confermarsi]
> -----------------------------------
> ASKAPENA è una organizzazione internazionalista basca di solidarietà. E'
> nata nel 1987 dopo diversi dibattiti all'interno dei Comitati
> Internazionalisti e di diversi settori che lavoravano nell'area della
> solidarietà.
>
> Fin dalla sua origine, ASKPENA si è definita come una organizzazione di
> massa, della sinistra "abertzale" ed anticapitalista, intendendo la
> solidarietà "come un contributo ai popoli che lottano per la loro
> liberazione nazionale e sociale ed ai popoli che costruiscono un nuovo
> futuro di progresso e sviluppo".
>
> A partire da allora, ASKAPENA ha sviluppato una moltitudine di attività,
> arrivando ad avere delegazioni permanenti in vari luoghi dell'America
> Centrale. La sua opera si è poi concentrata nel fare conoscere l'esperienza
> di altri processi nei Paesi Baschi, opera che è stata sviluppata negli
> ultimi anni con il progetto di ambasciatori della pratica basca all'estero.
> In quanto all'attività solidaria, è stato posto in marcia un sistema di
> brigate che annualmente si recano in vari paesi per partecipare a progetti
> tanto di ricostruzione nazionale come di appoggio. L'Assemblea Nazionale di
> ASKAPENA è l'organo che definisce la linea di lavoro dell'organizzazione.
>
>
> DELEGAZIONE DELL'IRISH REPUBLICAN SOCIALIST PARTY
> -------------------------------------------------
> (PARTITO SOCIALISTA REPUBBLICANO IRLANDESE)
> -------------------------------------------
> Il Partito Socialista Repubblicano Irlandese nasce nel 1974. Come lo Sinn
> Fein ed il Partito dei Lavoratori, le sue radici si ritrovano nella lunga
> tradizione repubblicana dell'Irlanda ed in particolare in James Connolly e
> nell'Esercito dei Cittadini Irlandesi (Irish Citizens Army).
>
> Fin dalle sue origini l'IRSP si è impegnato in tutti gli aspetti della
> battaglia politica d'Irlanda, partecipando alla campagna per il
> riconoscimento dello status politico dei prigionieri socialisti
> repubblicani, culminato negli scioperi della fame del 1980/81 che costarono
> la vita a dieci prigionieri, dei quali 3 volontari dell'INLA (Esercito
> Nazionale di Liberazione d'Irlanda) Patsy O'Hara, Kevin Lynch e Micky
> Devine; infine partecipando a numerose campagne contro la repressione. Al
> tempo stesso l'IRSP si è costantemente battuto nelle battaglie di classe,
> nella lotta contro i tagli degli investimenti alla salute ed alla
> educazione, contro la tassa sull'acqua, partecipando in prima linea alla
> campagna che introdusse il divorzio nell'Irlanda del Sud e sostenendo
> sempre gli scioperi dei lavoratori.
>
>
> DELEGATO DEL MOVIMENTO PATRIA LIBRE (PARAGUAY)
> ----------------------------------------------
> Si tratta di una organizzazione marxista leninista, sorta alla fine del
> 1989, che nel coinvolgimento di tutte le forze patriottiche, democratiche e
> popolari, aspira per il Paraguay all'istaurazione del Potere Popolare
> Democratico Rivoluzionario. Da sempre il MPL si batte contro la
> partecipazione del Paraguay al MERCOSUR, partecipazione che solo favorisce
> i grandi capitali transnazionali, colpendo la produzione interna ed in
> particolare i piccoli e medi imprenditori e produttori agricoli. A livello
> latinoamericano il Movimento Patria Libre dichiara il proprio appoggio
> incondizionale alla Rivoluzione Cubana e piena solidarietà al movimento
> delle Forze Armate Rivoluzionarie della Colombia, all'Esercito di
> Liberazione Nazionale della Colombia, all'insorgenza Zapatista in Messico
> oltre che a tutte le forze popolari, progressiste, democratiche ed
> antiimperialiste del Continente. Il MPL recentemente si è poi battuto
> contro l'ondata delle privatizzazioni delle imprese strategiche del paese
> ed anche contro il tentativo golpista di maggio dei settori militari legati
> al generale Oviedo.
>
>
> DELEGATO DEL PARTITO COMUNISTA MARXISTA LENINISTA DEL BRASILE
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Il PCML è discendente diretto del Movimento 5 Luglio, un movimento di
> carattere operaio e popolare, il cui obiettivo è il socialismo, attraverso
> la conquista del potere politico, nella lotta contro l'imperialismo, contro
> i monopoli e contro il latifondo, per la liberazione del popolo brasiliano
> e del paese dalla catastrofe neoliberista, mettendo in atto un Programma di
> Emergenza contro la fame, la disoccupazione e la mancanza di abitazioni
> (programma che si articola nelle seguenti rivendicazioni: nazionalizzazione
> dei monopoli nazionali e stranieri imperialisti; statalizzazione di tutta
> la rete bancaria; fine della disoccupazione, lavoro per i senza terra ed
> abolizione del lavoro minorile; diritto all'abitazione per tutta la
> popolazione urbana e rurale; salute pubblica e gratuita per tutta la
> popolazione; educazione pubblica gratuita ed integrale per tutti e
> scolarizzazione di tutti gli analfabeti)
>
> Il Movimento 5 di Luglio sorse a partire da un gruppo di rivoluzionari,
> riuniti in una organizzazione - la OPPL, Organizzazione Popolare Per
> Lottare (Organização Popular Prá Lutar) - che, attraverso un lavoro
> politico ed ideologico, svolto nelle principali regioni del paese, riuscì
> ad unificare diversi gruppi di rivoluzionari, in particolare parte di
> coloro che avevano in Luiz Carlos Prestes un riferimento politico. Il 4
> febbraio 1996, la OPPL, riunita in Congresso, e già ampliatasi grazie alla
> partecipazione di altri gruppi, decise di prendere il nome di "Movimento 5
> di Luglio.
>
> Oggi, il PCML, nato dal Mov. 5 Luglio, è presente nei principali stati del
> paese, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Paraná, Minas Gerais e Ceará. La sua
> direzione è costituita da rivoluzionari storici e da altri leaders con
> molta esperienza (degli anni settanta). Il suo presidente onorario è Zola
> Florenzano, la cui lotta iniziò negli anni 30.
>
>
> DELEGATI PROVENIENTI DALLA RUSSIA [* da confermarsi]
> ---------------------------------
> Dalla Russia dovrebbero confermare la loro venuta alcuni dirigenti
> sindacali e responsabili di organizzazioni politiche. Al momento sembra
> possibile la partecipazione di rappresentanti dell'Unione Operaia di Perm,
> del Movimento Nuova Sinistra, della Unione Politica degli Operai della
> Russia ed il PRK, il Partito Russo dei Comunisti, liderato da Kriuchkov.
>
>
> DELEGATI DI IZQUIERDA DEMOCRATICA POPULAR (MESSICO)
>
> E' un raggruppamento politico che nasce nel gennaio 1999. Alla conferenza
> di fondazione c'erano delagati per un totale di diecimila membri. Si tratta
> della più forte organizzazione della sinistra rivoluzionaria messicana,
> frutto di un processo di unficazione di numerose organizzazioni politiche e
> sociali autorganizzate. IDP è particolarmente impegnata tra i campesinos e
> le comunità indigene di almeno 7 stati.
>
> Molto forte tra i subborghi della capitale dove organizza l'autogestione di
> interi quarteri popolari (servizi, scuola, autodifesa ecc). Forte anche nel
> sindacalismo di base.
>
> Impegnata anche nell'appoggio a tutte le forme di lotta, tra cui quelle
> armate dell'EPR e dell'EZLN. Molti dei suoi militanti sono stati arrestati
> durante la repressione della lotta all'UNAM, alcuni dei cui leaders del
> comitato di sciopero.
>
> IDP è poi molto impegnata nella lotta contro la prigionia politica e la
> repressione ed il suo Presidente è il Prof. Alberto Hijar Serrano.
>
>
> DELEGATO DELLA ONG "FEDELTA' ALL'UOMO ED ALLA TERRA" (LIBANO/PALESTINA)
> ----------------------------------------------------
> La LOYALTY FOR MAN AND EARTH è una organizzazione non governativa che
> lavora nella difesa dei diritti umani. Loyalty, con particolare riferimento
> alla gioventù. I suoi obiettivi sono presi dalla Dichiarazione Universale
> dei Diritti Umani e la propria attività è organizzata attraverso i mezzi di
> comunicazione e programmi varii promossi dai propri aderenti o da altri
> giovani.
>
>
> C.L.E.T.A. (Messico) [* da confermarsi]
> ---------------------
> < Al momento mancano finanziamenti per favorire la loro partecipazione >
>
> Si tratta del Libero Centro di Sperimentazione Teatrale ed Artistica
> (Centro Libre de Experimentación Teatral y Artística, CLETA), centro che ha
> alle spalle 27 anni di attività. La partecipazione di CLETA si
> strutturerebbe su due tipologie di attività:
>
> 1. Attività artistiche: presentazione di musica e teatro popolare e
> rivoluzionario.
>
> 2. Presentazione di due ricerche:
>
> - Sulla lotta non ancora terminata del Consiglio Generale in Sciopero
> della UNAM (a cui CLETA partecipa)
>
> - Sul ruolo della cultura nei processi rivoluzionari.
> =======================================
> Informazione Diffusa a Cura del
> Comitato Internazionalista Arco Iris
> Via Don Minzoni 33
> 25082 Botticino Sera (BS)
> E-mail: ale.ramon@...
> Tel/Fax 030-2190006
> ========================================
>
The course of history is subject to an alarming acceleration. Capitalist
countries have closer relations than ever due to globalisation under the
aegis of the USA and its military arm on an international scale, NATO.
They
succeeded to deal destructive blows to their enemies. Nevertheless the
main
contradictions have become more acrid and new contradictions have
emerged.
Expanding and developing its forces of productions, capitalism is less
and
less capable to provide for the needs of the majority of humankind, and
capitalism is destroying the basis of civilisation. In the periphery of
the
imperialist centres, ever more people are starving, and even in the
“rich”
countries old and new misery is spreading, exploitation and alienation,
side
effects of the consumerist pattern. Capitalism and imperialism did win,
but
we do not see any peace and the world became more unstable than ever
before.
Not even the great masters of the US and European governments know where
they are leading us.
The battle of Seattle has caused the whole West to awake. This revolt is
a
turning point, in spite of its limitations. The belle époque is over,
the
enchantment that wants to lead us to believe that this system is the
best
possible system, this enchantment which capital has cast over the
masses, is
collapsing. We slowly emerge from the darkness: The peace of
intoxication is
over, the ghost of revolt is haunting again, not only in the
semi-colonial
countries, where the flame of revolution has never been extinguished
despite
great difficulties, but even in the heart of imperialism. The
traditional
workers’ movement seems to have lapsed into a condition of paralysis,
but
new actors are ascending to the stage, driven by those contradiction, to
devote themselves to the cause of humanity, political passion and an
instinctive, primitive anti-capitalism.
What should be the answer to globalisation, to new colonialism that is
destroying the poorest countries, to political-cultural Americanism that
is
strangling Europe and Japan? How can we exploit the contradictions among
the
imperialist countries? How can we work against Echelon, international
computer totalitarianism, that is oppressing individual freedom as well
as
basic political and democratic rights? How can we unite the mass
struggles
in the semi-colonial countries with the revolts in the hearts of the
imperialist countries? How can we join workers’ class struggle with the
fight to defend our environment, for a non-capitalist use of science,
information, nutrition and knowledge? What should be our answer to mass
migration, to racism, to xenophobia and neo-fascism? How shall we deal
with
the religious popular movements that fight imperialist globalisation?
How
can we render a meaning to the meaningless chaos? How can we convert the
revolt into a great revolutionary movement?
We have to prepare for the great struggles of resistance, to decide the
challenge of world capitalism to our favour. We call on all
anti-imperialists who have led a heroic struggle to resist in this
decade,
to defend the unity we have reached already, and to go one step further.
In this sense we shall organise in the first week of August 2000 an
anti-imperialist camp in Italy, a great international meeting to enable
us
to draw a balance together, to define a path for the future.
On the camp there are going to be various discussions on problems and
events
of anti-imperialist struggle, and especially seven great topics with
contributions by renown guests:
1. The revolt of Seattle. What is globalisation and how can we
fight it.
2. Columbia: liberation struggle and construction of people’s power.
3. Yugoslavia: the NATO criminals shall not get away without being
punished.
4. Echelon: how to resist the USA/NSA information totalitarianism?
5. Amnesty! The political prisoners and the special security laws in
Italy
and Europe.
6. Against capitalist “development”: Defence of the ecological system as
a
precondition for civilisation.
7. Islam and the New World Order.
Numerous guests have already confirmed their active participation, and
we
address all those who share the spirit of this call and who want to
support
the summer camp and who want to actively participate in it. We invite
you to
an introductory plenum on May 27th in Italy to decide on the programme
and
agenda, the international delegations and the speakers.
The preparatory committee for the Anti-Imperialist Camp
Italy, February 2000
> Si svolgera' in Italia, nella settimana dal 30 luglio al 6 agosto
>
> UN NUOVO CAMPO ANTIMPERIALISTA
>
> per informazioni, contatti e adesioni:
> ale.ramon@... e campo2000@...
>
>
>
> NO ALLA GLOBALIZZAZIONE!
> Da Seattle a S.Vicente avanza la rivolta contro l¹impero
> dell¹ingiustizia
>
>
>
> La storia sta subendo un¹inquietante accelerazione. Gli stati capitalisti, con la globalizzazione, hanno stretto rapporti
> sempre più fitti, ponendosi sotto l¹ombrello protettivo degli U.S.A. (di cui la NATO è il braccio armato mondiale) e
> sono riusciti a sferrare colpi micidiali a tutte le forze loro ostili. Tuttavia le contraddizioni fondamentali si sono acuite,
> mentre nuove si sono imposte. Il capitalismo, più si allarga e sviluppa le sue forze produttive, meno riesce a soddisfare i
> bisogni della gran parte degli esseri umani, più distrugge le basi della civilizzazione. Se nelle periferie dei centri imperiali
> le masse sono sempre più alla fame, nei paesi ³ricchi² avanzano vecchie e nuove miserie, si accrescono lo sfruttamento e
> l¹alienazione che il modello consumistico porta con sé. Il capitalismo e l¹imperialismo hanno vinto, ma il mondo non ha
> pace ed è più instabile che mai. Nemmeno i grandi stregoni al governo negli U.S.A. e in Europa sanno dove ci stanno
> conducendo.
> La rivolta di Seattle ha dato la sveglia a tutto l¹Occidente. Essa segna, malgrado i suoi profondi limiti, uno spartiacque. E¹
> finita la belle epoque, sta crollando l¹incantesimo con cui il Capitale ha addormentato le masse, quello per cui questo è il
> migliore dei mondi possibili. Stiamo uscendo dal buio: la pace drogata è finita, lo spettro della rivolta si aggira di nuovo,
> non solo nei paesi semi-coloniali, dove tra tante difficoltà la fiaccola della rivoluzione non si è mai spenta, ma pure nel
> cuore dei paesi imperialisti. Mentre il movimento operaio tradizionale sembra essere precipitato in uno stato di catalessi,
> giungono sulla scena nuovi protagonisti spinti da queste contraddizioni ad abbracciare la passione politica per le sorti
> dell¹umanità e un¹istintivo e primordiale anticapitalismo.
>
> Come rispondere alla mondializzazione? al nuovo colonialismo che devasta i paesi piu' poveri?
> all¹americanismo politico-culturale che strangola l¹Europa e il Giappone? Come utilizzare le contraddizioni
> inter-imperialistiche? Come contrastare ³Echelon², il totalitarismo informatico mondiale che soffoca le libertà
> individuali e i diritti politici e democratici? Come saldare le lotte popolari nei paesi semi-coloniali con le
> rivolte nel cuore dei paesi imperialisti? Come legare la lotta di classe degli operai a quella per la difesa
> dell¹ambiente, per un uso non capitalistico della scienza, dell¹informazione, dell¹alimentazione e dei saperi?
> Come rispondere alle migrazioni di massa, al razzismo, alla xenofobia e al neofascismo? Come rapportarci ai
> movimenti religiosi popolari ostili alla globalizzazione imperialista? Come dare senso ad un caos insensato?
> Come trasformare le rivolte in un grande movimento rivoluzionario?
>
> Dobbiamo attrezzarci, impostare le battaglie di resistenza per vincere la grande sfida col capitalismo globale. Noi
> chiamiamo gli antimperialisti che in questo decennio hanno condotto un¹eroica lotta di resistenza a difendere l¹unità
> acquisita ed a compiere un passo avanti verso forme stabili di coordinamento.
> E¹ in questa prospettiva che, per la prima settimana di agosto, organizzeremo in Italia un Campo antimperialista, un
> grande incontro mondiale per fare un bilancio, tracciare la rotta futura consolidando la prospettiva di un fronte comune.
> Il Campo, accanto ai numerosi tavoli di discussione su questioni e vicende riguardanti le lotte contro l¹imperialismo, si
> articolerà su sette grandi tematiche sulle quali interverranno i protagonisti:
>
> 1- La rivolta di Seattle. Cos¹e' la globalizzazione e come combatterla. 2- Colombia: lotta di liberazione e
> costruzione del potere popolare. 3- Iugoslavia: i crimini della NATO non debbono restare impuniti. 4-
> Echelon: come contrastare il totalitarismo telematico targato USA-NSA? 5- Amnistia! La prigionia politica e
> la legislazione speciale in Italia e in Europa. 6- Contro lo ³sviluppo² capitalistico: difesa dell¹eco-sistema come
> paradigma di civiltà. 7. Islam e nuovo ordine mondiale.
>
> Mentre molte forze antimperialiste hanno già assicurato la loro attiva partecipazione, ci rivolgiamo a coloro che
> condividono lo spirito di questo appello ad aderire e partecipare al Campo antimperialista e alla assemblea di
> presentazione che si svolgerà sabato 27 maggio a Firenze. In questa assemblea verranno presentati il palinsesto completo
> del Campo, le delegazioni internazionali ospiti e i relatori.
>
> Comitato Promotore del Campo antimperialista
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Il Campo Antimperialista "Da Seattle a S. Vicente. Le lotte contro l'impero
> dell'ingiustizia" ha già ricevuto adesioni da circa 26 paesi dei vari
> continenti.
>
> Senza dubbio il Campo è la più grande occasione a livello internazionale di
> unità, confronto e dibattito tra tutte le forze antimperialiste. Il
> Programma che alleghiamo qui sotto è di massima, poiché continuano a
> giungere adesioni, ciò che ci obbligherà a ritocccare il palinsesto per
> dare la parola a quanti più delegati è possibile.
>
> ----------
> Ricordiamo a tutti coloro che fossero interessati che il costo a persona
> per una settimana intera in tenda (compresi due pasti giornalieri) è di L.
> 310mila. In Bungalow è di L. 400mila, in camera d'albergo è di L. 500mila.
> Si può venire in roulotte.
>
> Ovviamente è possibile soggiornare anche per alcuni giorni, un paio o uno
> solo.
> Tuttavia è importante prenotare per evitare di non trovare posto.
>
> La prenotazione avviene versando sul C/C postale n.12134623, intestato al
> centro Studi P. Tresso, specificando nella causale le ragioni del
> versamento, il periodo di soggiorno e il tipo di servizio che si chiede.
>
> Per ulteriori informazioni telefonare all'ufficio del Campo: tel/fax:
> 075.42686 (martedì, mercoledì e venerdì dalle ore 17 alle 19)
> o al cellulare 0333.3543251).
>
> Oppure riferirsi ai nostri indirizzi di posta elettronica:
>
> Comitato Internazionalista Arco Iris: ale.ramon@...
> Comitato organizzativo del campo: campo2000@...
> ----------
> Programma
> del Campo Antimperialista 2000
> Assisi, 30 luglio - 06 agosto
>
> Domenica 30 luglio, arrivi
>
> ore 21,00
> Presentazione del programma e delle delegazioni ospiti. Lettura saluti e
> messaggi.
>
> Ore 22,30
> Concerto.
>
> Durante tutto il Campo
> Laboratorio Informatico di Comunicazione Alternativa
> A cura di Elías Letelier
> (fondatore della Rete dei Familiari ed Amici
> dei Prigionieri Politici del Cile)
>
> Lunedì, 31 luglio
>
> Ore 9,30
> Forum n.1: Incontro con la delegazione iugoslava
> Forum n.2: Incontro con le delegazioni polaccha e ceca
> Forum n.3: Incontro con la delegazione russa
>
> Ore 15,30
> 1. Sessione plenaria: I crimini NATO nei Balcani
> Introduzione a cura del Tribunale R. Clark
>
> Ore 21,30
> Forum n.1: Sopravivere alle armi delle guerre umanitarie. Introduce: M. Saba
> Forum n.2: Dall'emarginazione alla resistenza, percorsi di dignità nel
> Brasile d'oggi . Introduce il Professor J. (Coordinamento Latinoamericano
> di Giuristi, Ricercatori Sociali e Gruppi Emarginati per una Alternativa
> Democratica e Popolare).
> Forum n.3: Questione nazionale e socialismo: tavola rotonda coi movimenti
> di liberazione.
>
> Martedì, 1 agosto
>
> ore 9,30
> Forum n.1: Incontro con le delegazioni messicane
> Forum n.2: Incontro con la delegazione paraguayana
> Forum n.3: Incontro con la delegazione brasiliana
>
> Ore 15,30
> 2. Sessione plenaria: La lotta di liberazione in Colombia
> Introduzione delle FARC
>
> Ore 21,30
> Forum n.1: Violenza o non-violenza? Forme di lotta contro la globalizzazione
> Forum n.2: Le nuove strategie NATO per la supremazia planetaria
> Forum n.3: La Solidarietà Internazionalista, da percorsi diversi per un
> obiettivo comune. tavola rotonda tra esponenti della Chiesa di base,
> organizzazioni non governative e associazionismo.
>
> Mercoledì, 2 agosto
>
> ore 9,30
> Forum n.1: "Teoria e pratica dell'autonomia per il potere popolare",
> introduce il Prof. J.
> Forum n.2: incontro con la delegazione irlandese
> Forum n.3: incontro con le delegazioni basche, catalane e sarde
>
> Ore 15,30
> 3. Sessione plenaria: Echelon: sorveglianza informatica mondiale e
> contromisure democratiche. Tavola rotonda con alcuni esperti: Elias
> Letelier, Marco Saba e altri.
>
> ore 21,30
> Forum n.1: Immigrazione e lotta contro il razzismo nell¹Europa di Shengen
> Forum n.2: Le lotte operaie nella russia di Putin. Incontro con Oleg
> Shein, deputato comunista alla Duma
> Forum n.3: Nuova destra e antifascismo: relatore W. Fisher della Germania Est
>
> Giovedì, 3 agosto
>
> ore 9,30
> Forum n.1: incontro con le delegazioni palestinese e libanese
> Forum n.2: incontro con la C.L.I.
> Forum n.3: incontro con la delegazione dello Sri lanka
>
> Ore 15,30
> 4. Sessione plenaria: Islam e nuovo ordine mondiale
>
> ore 21,30
> Forum n.1: La resistenza libanese contro il sionismo. Incontro con Hezbollah
> Forum n.2: La prassi dei comunisti nel mondo che cambia. Tavola rotonda
> Forum n.3: I cristiani e la lotta per la giustizia sociale: in contro con
> Don Vitaliano della Sala
>
> Venerdì, 4 agosto
>
> ore 9,30
> Forum n.1: incontro con le delegazioni degli U.S.A.
> Forum n.2: incontro con la delegazione filippina
> Forum n.3: Incontro con la delegazione venezuelana
>
> Ore 15,30
> 5. Sessione plenaria: Amnistia! Repressione, prigionia politica, violazione
> dei diritti umani e civili nel tempo della globalizzazione.
>
> ore 21,30
> Forum n.1: Reddito di cittadinanza o lavoro come diritto inalienabile?
> Forum n.2: La prassi dei comunisti nel mondo che cambia. Tavola rotonda
> Forum n.3: Il Messico alle soglie di storiche elezioni: via parlamentare e
> via rivoluzionaria
>
> Sabato, 5 agosto
>
> ore 9,30
> 6. Sessione plenaria: Inquinamento, transgenica e bio-tech: un nuovo
> terreno della lotta anticapitalista.
>
> Ore 15,30
> 7. Sessione plenaria: Seattle : valore e limiti della rivolta contro il WTO
> Introduce lo International Action Center degli U.S.A.
>
> ore 21,30
> Concerto e festa di chiusura
>
> Domenica 6 agosto
> Partenze
>
Main forums
(Overview as attachment or http://summercamp.cjb.net)
Monday, 31st July
The NATO crimes in the Balcans - International Tribunal against NATO
=> International Action Center (USA, requested)
Tuesday, 1st August
The liberation struggle in ColombiaIntroduction
=> Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia-People’s Army (FARC-EP)
Wednesday, 2nd August
Echelon and the electronic observation
=> Round table with Fulvio Grimaldi, Marco Saba (Italy) Elias Letelier
(Chile)
Thursday, 3rd August
The Islam and the New World Order
=> Representatives of Liberation movements from Libanon and Palestine
Friday, 4th August
Amnesty! Repression, prisoners of conscience and disregard of the human
rights in the world of globalisation
=> Round table with representatives from Northern Ireland, Basque
Country,
Italy, …
Saturday, 5th August
The Revolt of Seattle: a forward-looking example for the resistance in
the
West?
=> International Action Center, USA (requested) and Bayan, Philippines
***********
Information about the Summer Camp
1. Place and Date
The Summer Camp takes place at a camp site near the umbrian town Assisi.
The
opening of the Summer Camp will be held on Sunday, the 30th July in the
evening. The political discussions will start on Monday, 31st July. The
Summer Camp ends at Sunday, 6th August.
2. Order of events
The main languages at the Summer Camp will be English and Spanish. The
different thematical discussions will only be translated partly.
3. Journey to the Camp
The participants who travel by plane have to tell the Organization
Committee
the airport (Rome), the date, the time of their arrival and the flight
number and the airline. They will be taken from the airport to the place
of
the Summer Camp.
If participants do not travel by plane they can ask the Organization
Committee for a map to find the place where the Summer Camp takes place.
4. Booking
The participants have to book until the 30th of June and to pay USD 65,-
on
the account written on the next page. After the booking the participants
will get a detailed programme and the statute of the Camp. The remaining
money has to be paid at the inscription at the Summer Camp.
5. Prices
The price includes housing, lunch and dinner. It also includes a
contribution to support the journeys of the international guests from
countries of the “Third World”.
1 Week in tent: USD 145,-
1 Week in caravan: USD 185,-
1 Week in hotel: USD 230,-
Prices for one night (in brackets: prices for one night without food)
Tent: USD 25,- (USD 14,-)
Caravan: USD 30,- (USD 20,-)
Hotel: USD 35,- (USD 28,-)
Prices of food for guests, who do not sleep at the camp:
USD 8,- for lunch or dinner
Booking (with name, adress, telephone number, e-mail)
e-mail: ilc@...
Adress: ILC, Pf. 23, A-1040 Vienna, Austria
Telephone: ++43/1/504 00 10
The booking is valid as soon as USD 65,- are transferred to the account:
PSK-Vienna, Austria
Account-Number: 92.125.137
Bank Code Number: 60000
*********
Supporter:
* International Forum (Denmark)
* Federation of University Students of Venezuela
* BAYAN International (Philippines, European Office)
* Trade Union of Public Empoyed (Volta Redonda, Brasil)
* Loyalty for Men and Earth (Palestine/Lebanon)
* Revolutionary Communist League (Thuringia, Germany)
* Red Action (Duisburg, Germany)
* People’s Liberation Front (Sri Lanka)
* Irish Republican Socialist Party
* League of Anti-imperialists, Communists and Socialists (Germany)
* Movement Free Fatherland (Paraguay)
* Basque Communists
* Marxist Leninist Communist Party (Brasil)
* 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
* Independent Popular Front Francisco Villa (Mexico)
* Democratic Popular Left (Mexico)
* International Leninist Current
* Russian political union "Worker" (Perm)
* Movement New Left (Russia)
* Worker’s Union Perm (Russia)
* Redskin Resistance (Bogota, Colombia)
* Communist Construction (Munich, Germany)
* Communist Party of the Peoples of Spain
* Russian Party of Communists
* Sindical Worker’s Aid (El Salvador/USA)
* Latinamerican Coordination of Jurists, Social Scientists and Marginal
*
Groups for a Democratic and Popular Alternative (Brasil)
* Free Center for Artist and Theatre Experimentation (Mexico)
* Sard Nation
* Association of families and friends of political prisoners (Spain)
**************************************
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
> Carissimi Amici ed Amiche,
>
> Dopo la bella iniziativa organizzata con la Confederazione delle
> Nazionalità Indigene dell'Ecuador, iniziativa che ha visto partecipare
> insieme organizzazioni non governative, fondazioni, centri sociali,
> sindacati, partiti politici, associazioni e gruppi di solidarietà, vorremmo
> proporvi la possibilità di organizzare iniziative con una serie di delegati
> che parteciperanno all'Incontro << NO ALLA GLOBALIZZAZIONE, da Seattle a S.
> Vicente avanza la rivolta contro l'impero dell'ingiustizia >> (dal 30
> Luglio al 6 Agosto di quest'anno, ad Assisi).
>
> Tutti sono invitiati a partecipare a questo incontro, rispetto al quale vi
> invieremo il programma dettagliato nei prossimi giorni. Lanciamo però
> adesso un appello affinchè, chiunque fosse interessato ad organizzare una
> iniziativa (a ridosso dell'incontro, orientativamente dal 15 luglio fino al
> 14 agosto) con uno o più degli elencati delegati, ci contatti urgentemente.
>
> Il vostro interesse, unitamente ad un vostro contributo economico,
> potrebbero favorire la partecipazione di altri delegati che al momento non
> siamo in grado di portare in Italia.
>
> Invitiamo in particolare gli organizzatori del VI Meeting Internazionale
> Antirazzista, che si terrà a Cecina dal 15 al 22 Luglio, a valutare la
> possibilità di invitare alcuni dei "nostri" delegati alla loro iniziativa.
> Estendiamo poi l'appello soprattutto ai collettivi universitari, anche se
> il periodo a disposizione non è agevole.
>
> Confidando nella vostra partecipazione e nel vostro interesse, vi inviamo i
> nostri fraterni saluti.
>
> NOTA IMPORTANTE (ECUADOR):
> ----------------------------------------------
> Vorremmo organizzare per sabato 24 giugno l'Incontro Nazionale in
> Solidarietà con i Popoli dell'Ecuador. Al momento le adesioni ci fanno
> propendere per Firenze come luogo per tale incontro (invece di Ancona).
> Invitiamo tutti coloro che hanno partecipato all'organizzazione del tour
> della CONAIE a farci pervenire le loro impressioni, le loro idee su come
> sviluppare una solidarietà concreta verso l'Ecuador. L'idea generale è
> quella di poter adottare un Progetto a livello nazionale. Ma il tutto
> dipenderà da alcune indicazioni che dovrebbero giungere dalla CONAIE stessa
> nei prossimi giorni.
>
>
> ELENCO DEI DELEGATI E DELLE DELEGAZIONI DISPONIBILI PER INIZIATIVE
> (maggiori dettagli verranno forniti agli interessati)
>
> ELIAS LETELIER RUZ (CILE)
> -------------------------
> Poeta cileno, di religione ebraica. Parla inglese, francese e spagnolo. E'
> stato il fondatore della pagina web sulla Prigionia Politica in Cile,
> ovvero della Rete dei Familiari e Amici dei Prigionieri Politici in Cile.
> E' un esperto di "internet e della comunicazione globale" a tal punto da
> essere stato più volte minacciato dai paramilitari cileni, oltre che dagli
> stessi servizi di sicurezza del governo cileno.
>
> SINTESI DAL CURRICULUM:
>
> Alcune Opere Pubblicate:
> Histoire de la Nuit. 1998 [ Editotial l'Hexagone - Montreal, Quebec ]
> Silence. 1997, (Edizione in Francese) [ Editorial l'Hexagone - Montreal,
> Quebec ]
> Ich Frage Sie. 1993 [ Antifad, Frankfurt ] (Poesia per il movimento
> antinazista)
> Silence. 1992 [ tradotto da Ken Norris. - The Muses' Company - Dorion,
> Quebec ]
> Symphony. 1988 [ tradotto da Ken Norris.- The Muses' Company - Dorion,
> Quebec ]
>
> Antologie:
> "Compañeros: Una antologia di scritti sull'America Latina"
> [ Ed. Hugh Hazelton and Gary Geddes. Montreal: Cormorant Books 1990. p.
> 263-264. ]
> "I Grandi Poeti" [ La Habana, Cuba: Ed. Monte Verde 1984 p. 39-46. ]
> "Sei Poeti Cileni". [ Caracas Venezuela: Ed. El Tucan 1980 p. 184-189. ]
>
> Lavori Culturali:
> Cofondatore del Comitato Consultivo (Consigliere) della Federazione degli
> Scrittori di Lingua Inglese del Quebec
> Direttore ed Editore del Consiglio Nazionale della Cultura del Nicaragua
> (Nov. 1989 - Luglio 1990)
> Coordinatore sul Nord America della Biblioteca Nazionale del Nicaragua
> (1990 - 1991)
>
> Interviste:
> "Intervista con Ernesto Cardenal" [ Zymergy Literary Review Autunno 1990:
> p. 57-70 ]
> "Intervista con Jimmy Carter, Ex -presidente degli USA". [ El tiempo.
> Madrid, Spain Autunno 1990: 3-15 ]
> "Intervista con il Segretario Generale della OEA" [ CBC, BBC Giugno 1990 ]
>
> Conferenze:
> Una conferenza sulla "La poesia e la lotta antinazista". [ Marzo 1993.
> Frankfurt, Germania Federale]
> "Ich Frage Sie" (Ausländerbeirat der Stadt Gießen). [ Conferenza su "La
> spada e l'invenzione del potere". Febbraio 1993. Gießen, Germania Federale]
> "Vida, Muerte y Poesía." (Universidad Autónoma de Nicaragua). [ Due
> conferenze sul diritto di esprimere ciò che sentiamo. Giugno 1990.
> Managua, Nicaragua ]
> "Dos poetas una voz" (Sistema Sandinista de Televisión) [ Sulla libertà di
> stampa con Ernesto Cardenal e Elías Letelier-Ruz. Maggio 1990. Managua,
> Nicaragua ]
> "La poesie dans mon exile au Canada." Maison de L'Amerique Latine. 10
> Marzo 1989. Parigi, Francia.
> "Emily Dickinson and freedom." Croce Rossa Svedese. [ La libertà è un
> stato astratto della mente. 24 Aprile, 1989. Växjö, Svezia. ]
> "We have to sing together." USSR Academy of Science. [ I poeti devono
> essere uno specchio della loro società. 24 Aprile 1989. Leningrado, URSS ]
>
> Membro di:
> Federation of English-Language Writers of Quebec.
> The Writer's Federation of Nova Scotia.
> Union des Ecrivans du Quebec
> The Writers' Union of Canada.
>
> Borse di studio:
> Consiglio dell'Arte del Canada[EL1], 1993
> Ministero dell'Educazione del Quebec, 1993
> Ministero dell'Educazione dell'Ontario, 1995
> Consiglio dell'Arte dell'Arte del Quebec, 1996
>
>
> PROFESSOR J. (CLAJADEP, BRASILE)
> --------------------------------
> Professore universitario di Filosofia e di Diritto Alternativo, nonché
> assessore di movimenti popolari di base. Coordina attualmente CAUSA
> (Coordinamento delle Autonomie di São Paulo), GPDA (Gruppo di Ricerca del
> Diritto Alternativo in Brasile) e CLAJADEP (Coordinamento Latinoamericano
> di Giuristi, Ricercatori Sociali e Gruppi Emarginati per una Alternativa
> Democratica e Popolare). E' inoltre collaboratore del Movimento dei Sem
> Terra, della Centrale dei Movimenti Popolari e delle Occupazioni. E'
> inoltre autore del libro "Introduzione alla Scienza del Diritto e del
> Diritto Alternativo" [edizione in portoghese, ed. Hapirus, São Paulo]. Il
> Prof. J. ha adottato un nuovo tipo di corso per investigatori, attivisti ed
> agenti culturali delle autonomie in lotta, per operare con gruppi di
> emarginati e/o poveri della città e delle campagne, attualizzando la
> metodologia di Paulo Freire e sollevando la tesi della ricostruzione
> dell'identità di gruppo a partire dalla ricollocazione dell'arte di pensare
> ed elaborare idee all'interno dei collettivi di base.
>
> PROPOSTA DI SEMINARI CON IL PROF. J.
> Si propongono due tipologie di seminari (l'elaborazione è avvenuta per
> facilitare l'organizzazione di iniziative con le università): 1) Il Diritto
> Alternativo 2) Teoria e pratica della autonomia per il potere popolare.
>
> TEMI DEI SEMINARI
> < Diritto Alternativo > la nascita del diritto / relazioni tra il diritto,
> l'economia e la politica / il pluralismo giuridico / uso alternativo del
> diritto / il potere popolare come base del diritto alternativo / dal
> dogmatismo della generalità alla pragmatica della singolarità / il
> neoliberismo e la modificazione della relazione organica del capitale /
> diritto indigeno / diritto alla occupazioni di terra del Movimento dei Sem
> Terra / diritto nelle zone liberate dalle guerriglie / la fine del diritto
>
> < Teoria e pratica della autonomia per il potere popolare> elementi teorici
> e dottrinari del dibattito sulla autonomia / indipendenza di classe e
> autogestione / erano autonomi la Comune di Parigi e i soviets? / Autonomia
> e idologia / Autonomia e produzione del pensiero nuovo. Può esserci
> autonomia con un pensiero prodotto fuori da essa? / Autonomia e diversità
> etnica, culturale, nazionale, classista, di genere ecc.. / Autonomia,
> potere popolare e organizzazione rivoluzionaria / Autonomia, lotta
> rivendicativa e lotta politica / Autonomia, coordinamenti, fronti e blocchi
> popolari / Lo zapatismo / L'esempio dell'Ecuador / Esperienze in Brasile.
>
>
> DELEGATO DELLA FEDERAZIONE DEGLI STUDENTI UNIVERSITARI DEL VENEZUELA (FEUV)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Si tratta di una delle più combattive federazioni studentesche dell'America
> Latina, partecipante alla Organizzazione Continentale Latinoamericana e
> Caraibica degli Studenti. Per capire quale sia la risposta (a livello
> latinoamericano) degli studenti di fronte alle nuove esclusioni dalla
> scienza e dalla conoscenza, per capire da dove nascono le proteste degli
> studenti della UNAM in Messico, le lotte degli studenti nicaraguensi, di
> quelli salvadoregni, dei colombiani ecc.. ma anche per capire l'attualità
> venezuelana, cosa è cambiato e cosa dovrebbe cambiare con la gestione del
> Presidente Chavéz.
>
>
> DELEGATO DELLA ORGANIZZAZIONE BAYAN, BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN (FILIPPINE)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Si tratta di una organizzazione sorta nel 1985. BAYAN (ovvero "Nuova
> Allenza Patriottica") è un fronte ampio di organizzazioni popolari che
> lottano in favore della democrazia e della libertà per il popolo delle
> Filippine. Attualmente è composta da circa mille organizzazioni,
> raggruppando più di un milione di persone, di diverse classi sociali e
> settori.
>
> BAYAN si sviluppò durante la dittatura come centro di coordinamento per le
> mobilitazioni delle masse, organizzando manifestazioni imponenti nella
> capitale e coordinando diversi scioperi nazionali nelle principali città
> del paese, mobilitazioni che condussero poi alla destituzione del regime di
> Marcos.
>
>
> DELEGATO DI ASKAPENA (PAESI BASCHI) [* da confermarsi]
> -----------------------------------
> ASKAPENA è una organizzazione internazionalista basca di solidarietà. E'
> nata nel 1987 dopo diversi dibattiti all'interno dei Comitati
> Internazionalisti e di diversi settori che lavoravano nell'area della
> solidarietà.
>
> Fin dalla sua origine, ASKPENA si è definita come una organizzazione di
> massa, della sinistra "abertzale" ed anticapitalista, intendendo la
> solidarietà "come un contributo ai popoli che lottano per la loro
> liberazione nazionale e sociale ed ai popoli che costruiscono un nuovo
> futuro di progresso e sviluppo".
>
> A partire da allora, ASKAPENA ha sviluppato una moltitudine di attività,
> arrivando ad avere delegazioni permanenti in vari luoghi dell'America
> Centrale. La sua opera si è poi concentrata nel fare conoscere l'esperienza
> di altri processi nei Paesi Baschi, opera che è stata sviluppata negli
> ultimi anni con il progetto di ambasciatori della pratica basca all'estero.
> In quanto all'attività solidaria, è stato posto in marcia un sistema di
> brigate che annualmente si recano in vari paesi per partecipare a progetti
> tanto di ricostruzione nazionale come di appoggio. L'Assemblea Nazionale di
> ASKAPENA è l'organo che definisce la linea di lavoro dell'organizzazione.
>
>
> DELEGAZIONE DELL'IRISH REPUBLICAN SOCIALIST PARTY
> -------------------------------------------------
> (PARTITO SOCIALISTA REPUBBLICANO IRLANDESE)
> -------------------------------------------
> Il Partito Socialista Repubblicano Irlandese nasce nel 1974. Come lo Sinn
> Fein ed il Partito dei Lavoratori, le sue radici si ritrovano nella lunga
> tradizione repubblicana dell'Irlanda ed in particolare in James Connolly e
> nell'Esercito dei Cittadini Irlandesi (Irish Citizens Army).
>
> Fin dalle sue origini l'IRSP si è impegnato in tutti gli aspetti della
> battaglia politica d'Irlanda, partecipando alla campagna per il
> riconoscimento dello status politico dei prigionieri socialisti
> repubblicani, culminato negli scioperi della fame del 1980/81 che costarono
> la vita a dieci prigionieri, dei quali 3 volontari dell'INLA (Esercito
> Nazionale di Liberazione d'Irlanda) Patsy O'Hara, Kevin Lynch e Micky
> Devine; infine partecipando a numerose campagne contro la repressione. Al
> tempo stesso l'IRSP si è costantemente battuto nelle battaglie di classe,
> nella lotta contro i tagli degli investimenti alla salute ed alla
> educazione, contro la tassa sull'acqua, partecipando in prima linea alla
> campagna che introdusse il divorzio nell'Irlanda del Sud e sostenendo
> sempre gli scioperi dei lavoratori.
>
>
> DELEGATO DEL MOVIMENTO PATRIA LIBRE (PARAGUAY)
> ----------------------------------------------
> Si tratta di una organizzazione marxista leninista, sorta alla fine del
> 1989, che nel coinvolgimento di tutte le forze patriottiche, democratiche e
> popolari, aspira per il Paraguay all'istaurazione del Potere Popolare
> Democratico Rivoluzionario. Da sempre il MPL si batte contro la
> partecipazione del Paraguay al MERCOSUR, partecipazione che solo favorisce
> i grandi capitali transnazionali, colpendo la produzione interna ed in
> particolare i piccoli e medi imprenditori e produttori agricoli. A livello
> latinoamericano il Movimento Patria Libre dichiara il proprio appoggio
> incondizionale alla Rivoluzione Cubana e piena solidarietà al movimento
> delle Forze Armate Rivoluzionarie della Colombia, all'Esercito di
> Liberazione Nazionale della Colombia, all'insorgenza Zapatista in Messico
> oltre che a tutte le forze popolari, progressiste, democratiche ed
> antiimperialiste del Continente. Il MPL recentemente si è poi battuto
> contro l'ondata delle privatizzazioni delle imprese strategiche del paese
> ed anche contro il tentativo golpista di maggio dei settori militari legati
> al generale Oviedo.
>
>
> DELEGATO DEL PARTITO COMUNISTA MARXISTA LENINISTA DEL BRASILE
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Il PCML è discendente diretto del Movimento 5 Luglio, un movimento di
> carattere operaio e popolare, il cui obiettivo è il socialismo, attraverso
> la conquista del potere politico, nella lotta contro l'imperialismo, contro
> i monopoli e contro il latifondo, per la liberazione del popolo brasiliano
> e del paese dalla catastrofe neoliberista, mettendo in atto un Programma di
> Emergenza contro la fame, la disoccupazione e la mancanza di abitazioni
> (programma che si articola nelle seguenti rivendicazioni: nazionalizzazione
> dei monopoli nazionali e stranieri imperialisti; statalizzazione di tutta
> la rete bancaria; fine della disoccupazione, lavoro per i senza terra ed
> abolizione del lavoro minorile; diritto all'abitazione per tutta la
> popolazione urbana e rurale; salute pubblica e gratuita per tutta la
> popolazione; educazione pubblica gratuita ed integrale per tutti e
> scolarizzazione di tutti gli analfabeti)
>
> Il Movimento 5 di Luglio sorse a partire da un gruppo di rivoluzionari,
> riuniti in una organizzazione - la OPPL, Organizzazione Popolare Per
> Lottare (Organização Popular Prá Lutar) - che, attraverso un lavoro
> politico ed ideologico, svolto nelle principali regioni del paese, riuscì
> ad unificare diversi gruppi di rivoluzionari, in particolare parte di
> coloro che avevano in Luiz Carlos Prestes un riferimento politico. Il 4
> febbraio 1996, la OPPL, riunita in Congresso, e già ampliatasi grazie alla
> partecipazione di altri gruppi, decise di prendere il nome di "Movimento 5
> di Luglio.
>
> Oggi, il PCML, nato dal Mov. 5 Luglio, è presente nei principali stati del
> paese, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Paraná, Minas Gerais e Ceará. La sua
> direzione è costituita da rivoluzionari storici e da altri leaders con
> molta esperienza (degli anni settanta). Il suo presidente onorario è Zola
> Florenzano, la cui lotta iniziò negli anni 30.
>
>
> DELEGATI PROVENIENTI DALLA RUSSIA [* da confermarsi]
> ---------------------------------
> Dalla Russia dovrebbero confermare la loro venuta alcuni dirigenti
> sindacali e responsabili di organizzazioni politiche. Al momento sembra
> possibile la partecipazione di rappresentanti dell'Unione Operaia di Perm,
> del Movimento Nuova Sinistra, della Unione Politica degli Operai della
> Russia ed il PRK, il Partito Russo dei Comunisti, liderato da Kriuchkov.
>
>
> DELEGATI DI IZQUIERDA DEMOCRATICA POPULAR (MESSICO)
>
> E' un raggruppamento politico che nasce nel gennaio 1999. Alla conferenza
> di fondazione c'erano delagati per un totale di diecimila membri. Si tratta
> della più forte organizzazione della sinistra rivoluzionaria messicana,
> frutto di un processo di unficazione di numerose organizzazioni politiche e
> sociali autorganizzate. IDP è particolarmente impegnata tra i campesinos e
> le comunità indigene di almeno 7 stati.
>
> Molto forte tra i subborghi della capitale dove organizza l'autogestione di
> interi quarteri popolari (servizi, scuola, autodifesa ecc). Forte anche nel
> sindacalismo di base.
>
> Impegnata anche nell'appoggio a tutte le forme di lotta, tra cui quelle
> armate dell'EPR e dell'EZLN. Molti dei suoi militanti sono stati arrestati
> durante la repressione della lotta all'UNAM, alcuni dei cui leaders del
> comitato di sciopero.
>
> IDP è poi molto impegnata nella lotta contro la prigionia politica e la
> repressione ed il suo Presidente è il Prof. Alberto Hijar Serrano.
>
>
> DELEGATO DELLA ONG "FEDELTA' ALL'UOMO ED ALLA TERRA" (LIBANO/PALESTINA)
> ----------------------------------------------------
> La LOYALTY FOR MAN AND EARTH è una organizzazione non governativa che
> lavora nella difesa dei diritti umani. Loyalty, con particolare riferimento
> alla gioventù. I suoi obiettivi sono presi dalla Dichiarazione Universale
> dei Diritti Umani e la propria attività è organizzata attraverso i mezzi di
> comunicazione e programmi varii promossi dai propri aderenti o da altri
> giovani.
>
>
> C.L.E.T.A. (Messico) [* da confermarsi]
> ---------------------
> < Al momento mancano finanziamenti per favorire la loro partecipazione >
>
> Si tratta del Libero Centro di Sperimentazione Teatrale ed Artistica
> (Centro Libre de Experimentación Teatral y Artística, CLETA), centro che ha
> alle spalle 27 anni di attività. La partecipazione di CLETA si
> strutturerebbe su due tipologie di attività:
>
> 1. Attività artistiche: presentazione di musica e teatro popolare e
> rivoluzionario.
>
> 2. Presentazione di due ricerche:
>
> - Sulla lotta non ancora terminata del Consiglio Generale in Sciopero
> della UNAM (a cui CLETA partecipa)
>
> - Sul ruolo della cultura nei processi rivoluzionari.
> =======================================
> Informazione Diffusa a Cura del
> Comitato Internazionalista Arco Iris
> Via Don Minzoni 33
> 25082 Botticino Sera (BS)
> E-mail: ale.ramon@...
> Tel/Fax 030-2190006
> ========================================
>
The course of history is subject to an alarming acceleration. Capitalist
countries have closer relations than ever due to globalisation under the
aegis of the USA and its military arm on an international scale, NATO.
They
succeeded to deal destructive blows to their enemies. Nevertheless the
main
contradictions have become more acrid and new contradictions have
emerged.
Expanding and developing its forces of productions, capitalism is less
and
less capable to provide for the needs of the majority of humankind, and
capitalism is destroying the basis of civilisation. In the periphery of
the
imperialist centres, ever more people are starving, and even in the
“rich”
countries old and new misery is spreading, exploitation and alienation,
side
effects of the consumerist pattern. Capitalism and imperialism did win,
but
we do not see any peace and the world became more unstable than ever
before.
Not even the great masters of the US and European governments know where
they are leading us.
The battle of Seattle has caused the whole West to awake. This revolt is
a
turning point, in spite of its limitations. The belle époque is over,
the
enchantment that wants to lead us to believe that this system is the
best
possible system, this enchantment which capital has cast over the
masses, is
collapsing. We slowly emerge from the darkness: The peace of
intoxication is
over, the ghost of revolt is haunting again, not only in the
semi-colonial
countries, where the flame of revolution has never been extinguished
despite
great difficulties, but even in the heart of imperialism. The
traditional
workers’ movement seems to have lapsed into a condition of paralysis,
but
new actors are ascending to the stage, driven by those contradiction, to
devote themselves to the cause of humanity, political passion and an
instinctive, primitive anti-capitalism.
What should be the answer to globalisation, to new colonialism that is
destroying the poorest countries, to political-cultural Americanism that
is
strangling Europe and Japan? How can we exploit the contradictions among
the
imperialist countries? How can we work against Echelon, international
computer totalitarianism, that is oppressing individual freedom as well
as
basic political and democratic rights? How can we unite the mass
struggles
in the semi-colonial countries with the revolts in the hearts of the
imperialist countries? How can we join workers’ class struggle with the
fight to defend our environment, for a non-capitalist use of science,
information, nutrition and knowledge? What should be our answer to mass
migration, to racism, to xenophobia and neo-fascism? How shall we deal
with
the religious popular movements that fight imperialist globalisation?
How
can we render a meaning to the meaningless chaos? How can we convert the
revolt into a great revolutionary movement?
We have to prepare for the great struggles of resistance, to decide the
challenge of world capitalism to our favour. We call on all
anti-imperialists who have led a heroic struggle to resist in this
decade,
to defend the unity we have reached already, and to go one step further.
In this sense we shall organise in the first week of August 2000 an
anti-imperialist camp in Italy, a great international meeting to enable
us
to draw a balance together, to define a path for the future.
On the camp there are going to be various discussions on problems and
events
of anti-imperialist struggle, and especially seven great topics with
contributions by renown guests:
1. The revolt of Seattle. What is globalisation and how can we
fight it.
2. Columbia: liberation struggle and construction of people’s power.
3. Yugoslavia: the NATO criminals shall not get away without being
punished.
4. Echelon: how to resist the USA/NSA information totalitarianism?
5. Amnesty! The political prisoners and the special security laws in
Italy
and Europe.
6. Against capitalist “development”: Defence of the ecological system as
a
precondition for civilisation.
7. Islam and the New World Order.
Numerous guests have already confirmed their active participation, and
we
address all those who share the spirit of this call and who want to
support
the summer camp and who want to actively participate in it. We invite
you to
an introductory plenum on May 27th in Italy to decide on the programme
and
agenda, the international delegations and the speakers.
The preparatory committee for the Anti-Imperialist Camp
Italy, February 2000
> Si svolgera' in Italia, nella settimana dal 30 luglio al 6 agosto
>
> UN NUOVO CAMPO ANTIMPERIALISTA
>
> per informazioni, contatti e adesioni:
> ale.ramon@... e campo2000@...
>
>
>
> NO ALLA GLOBALIZZAZIONE!
> Da Seattle a S.Vicente avanza la rivolta contro l¹impero
> dell¹ingiustizia
>
>
>
> La storia sta subendo un¹inquietante accelerazione. Gli stati capitalisti, con la globalizzazione, hanno stretto rapporti
> sempre più fitti, ponendosi sotto l¹ombrello protettivo degli U.S.A. (di cui la NATO è il braccio armato mondiale) e
> sono riusciti a sferrare colpi micidiali a tutte le forze loro ostili. Tuttavia le contraddizioni fondamentali si sono acuite,
> mentre nuove si sono imposte. Il capitalismo, più si allarga e sviluppa le sue forze produttive, meno riesce a soddisfare i
> bisogni della gran parte degli esseri umani, più distrugge le basi della civilizzazione. Se nelle periferie dei centri imperiali
> le masse sono sempre più alla fame, nei paesi ³ricchi² avanzano vecchie e nuove miserie, si accrescono lo sfruttamento e
> l¹alienazione che il modello consumistico porta con sé. Il capitalismo e l¹imperialismo hanno vinto, ma il mondo non ha
> pace ed è più instabile che mai. Nemmeno i grandi stregoni al governo negli U.S.A. e in Europa sanno dove ci stanno
> conducendo.
> La rivolta di Seattle ha dato la sveglia a tutto l¹Occidente. Essa segna, malgrado i suoi profondi limiti, uno spartiacque. E¹
> finita la belle epoque, sta crollando l¹incantesimo con cui il Capitale ha addormentato le masse, quello per cui questo è il
> migliore dei mondi possibili. Stiamo uscendo dal buio: la pace drogata è finita, lo spettro della rivolta si aggira di nuovo,
> non solo nei paesi semi-coloniali, dove tra tante difficoltà la fiaccola della rivoluzione non si è mai spenta, ma pure nel
> cuore dei paesi imperialisti. Mentre il movimento operaio tradizionale sembra essere precipitato in uno stato di catalessi,
> giungono sulla scena nuovi protagonisti spinti da queste contraddizioni ad abbracciare la passione politica per le sorti
> dell¹umanità e un¹istintivo e primordiale anticapitalismo.
>
> Come rispondere alla mondializzazione? al nuovo colonialismo che devasta i paesi piu' poveri?
> all¹americanismo politico-culturale che strangola l¹Europa e il Giappone? Come utilizzare le contraddizioni
> inter-imperialistiche? Come contrastare ³Echelon², il totalitarismo informatico mondiale che soffoca le libertà
> individuali e i diritti politici e democratici? Come saldare le lotte popolari nei paesi semi-coloniali con le
> rivolte nel cuore dei paesi imperialisti? Come legare la lotta di classe degli operai a quella per la difesa
> dell¹ambiente, per un uso non capitalistico della scienza, dell¹informazione, dell¹alimentazione e dei saperi?
> Come rispondere alle migrazioni di massa, al razzismo, alla xenofobia e al neofascismo? Come rapportarci ai
> movimenti religiosi popolari ostili alla globalizzazione imperialista? Come dare senso ad un caos insensato?
> Come trasformare le rivolte in un grande movimento rivoluzionario?
>
> Dobbiamo attrezzarci, impostare le battaglie di resistenza per vincere la grande sfida col capitalismo globale. Noi
> chiamiamo gli antimperialisti che in questo decennio hanno condotto un¹eroica lotta di resistenza a difendere l¹unità
> acquisita ed a compiere un passo avanti verso forme stabili di coordinamento.
> E¹ in questa prospettiva che, per la prima settimana di agosto, organizzeremo in Italia un Campo antimperialista, un
> grande incontro mondiale per fare un bilancio, tracciare la rotta futura consolidando la prospettiva di un fronte comune.
> Il Campo, accanto ai numerosi tavoli di discussione su questioni e vicende riguardanti le lotte contro l¹imperialismo, si
> articolerà su sette grandi tematiche sulle quali interverranno i protagonisti:
>
> 1- La rivolta di Seattle. Cos¹e' la globalizzazione e come combatterla. 2- Colombia: lotta di liberazione e
> costruzione del potere popolare. 3- Iugoslavia: i crimini della NATO non debbono restare impuniti. 4-
> Echelon: come contrastare il totalitarismo telematico targato USA-NSA? 5- Amnistia! La prigionia politica e
> la legislazione speciale in Italia e in Europa. 6- Contro lo ³sviluppo² capitalistico: difesa dell¹eco-sistema come
> paradigma di civiltà. 7. Islam e nuovo ordine mondiale.
>
> Mentre molte forze antimperialiste hanno già assicurato la loro attiva partecipazione, ci rivolgiamo a coloro che
> condividono lo spirito di questo appello ad aderire e partecipare al Campo antimperialista e alla assemblea di
> presentazione che si svolgerà sabato 27 maggio a Firenze. In questa assemblea verranno presentati il palinsesto completo
> del Campo, le delegazioni internazionali ospiti e i relatori.
>
> Comitato Promotore del Campo antimperialista
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
L'ERNESTO - mensile comunista
direttore: Fosco Giannini
distribuzione: per abbonamento
per abbonarsi: versamento su c.c. postale n. 14176226
intestato a "L'Ernesto, Via del Sale 19, 26100 Cremona"
annuale ordinario: lire 40.000
annuale sostenitore posta prioritaria: lire 100.000
e-mail: l_ernesto@...
SOMMARIO DELL'ULTIMO NUMERO (2/2000):
ITALIA/LAVORO
- Prc e svolta politica (G.Pegolo)
- A proposito di lavoratori interinali (V. Rieser)
- Capitale e lavoro: rimozione del conflitto e risposte illusorie (R.
Bellofiore)
- "Cambiare rotta" (G. Cremaschi)
- Involuzione della CGIL e necessita' di una nuova dialettica interna
(D. Greco)
- Le anomalie del capitalismo italiano (S. Cararo)
SPAGNA
- Le elezioni in Spagna e la crisi delle sinistre (J. Kopenik)
- I comunisti spagnoli e la crisi di IU (F. Serrano)
- Spagna: accordo sul programma di governo
FRANCIA
- Il 30.mo congresso del Partito Comunista Francese
- Come leggere i documenti congressuali; La discussione
- "Una regressione democratica grave" (M. Gremetz)
- Botta e risposta con il PC della Federazione Russa
INTERNAZIONALE
- Russia: La nuova era di Putin, continuita' o rottura? (A. Catone)
- Iran: una difficile transizione (G. Lannutti)
- USA, Cina e Taiwan: analisi di un conflitto (E. Collotti Pischel)
- Sud-Est asiatico: la devastante penetrazione dell'imperialismo (F.
Grimaldi)
- Dalla vittoria del Vietnam una spinta antimperialista mondiale (S.
Ricaldone)
- Il ruolo del Partito Comunista Vietnamita (P. Tagliazzucchi)
- Indipendenza, ricostruzione, sviluppo: la via vietnamita (E. Penati)
- Sesto congresso della PDS tedesca
- Giappone: elezioni a Osaka e Tokio; straordinaria avanzata del PC
JUGOSLAVIA
- Il Quarto congresso del Partito Socialista della Serbia
- Dietro l'attacco "umanitario" (M. Dinucci)
- DOSSIER: La guerra in Jugoslavia, una sfida per la sinistra (P.
Theuret)
- Intervista a Ljubisa Ristic, presidente della JUL (C. Lohbauer)
TEORIA
- La via tracciata da Lenin (B. Steri)
- RIVISTE: Montag; Marxismo Oggi
- "Geostoria dell'Africa" di M. Dinucci
- Abitare l'Utopia? Si, ma da utopisti concreti (B. Casati)
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
direttore: Fosco Giannini
distribuzione: per abbonamento
per abbonarsi: versamento su c.c. postale n. 14176226
intestato a "L'Ernesto, Via del Sale 19, 26100 Cremona"
annuale ordinario: lire 40.000
annuale sostenitore posta prioritaria: lire 100.000
e-mail: l_ernesto@...
SOMMARIO DELL'ULTIMO NUMERO (2/2000):
ITALIA/LAVORO
- Prc e svolta politica (G.Pegolo)
- A proposito di lavoratori interinali (V. Rieser)
- Capitale e lavoro: rimozione del conflitto e risposte illusorie (R.
Bellofiore)
- "Cambiare rotta" (G. Cremaschi)
- Involuzione della CGIL e necessita' di una nuova dialettica interna
(D. Greco)
- Le anomalie del capitalismo italiano (S. Cararo)
SPAGNA
- Le elezioni in Spagna e la crisi delle sinistre (J. Kopenik)
- I comunisti spagnoli e la crisi di IU (F. Serrano)
- Spagna: accordo sul programma di governo
FRANCIA
- Il 30.mo congresso del Partito Comunista Francese
- Come leggere i documenti congressuali; La discussione
- "Una regressione democratica grave" (M. Gremetz)
- Botta e risposta con il PC della Federazione Russa
INTERNAZIONALE
- Russia: La nuova era di Putin, continuita' o rottura? (A. Catone)
- Iran: una difficile transizione (G. Lannutti)
- USA, Cina e Taiwan: analisi di un conflitto (E. Collotti Pischel)
- Sud-Est asiatico: la devastante penetrazione dell'imperialismo (F.
Grimaldi)
- Dalla vittoria del Vietnam una spinta antimperialista mondiale (S.
Ricaldone)
- Il ruolo del Partito Comunista Vietnamita (P. Tagliazzucchi)
- Indipendenza, ricostruzione, sviluppo: la via vietnamita (E. Penati)
- Sesto congresso della PDS tedesca
- Giappone: elezioni a Osaka e Tokio; straordinaria avanzata del PC
JUGOSLAVIA
- Il Quarto congresso del Partito Socialista della Serbia
- Dietro l'attacco "umanitario" (M. Dinucci)
- DOSSIER: La guerra in Jugoslavia, una sfida per la sinistra (P.
Theuret)
- Intervista a Ljubisa Ristic, presidente della JUL (C. Lohbauer)
TEORIA
- La via tracciata da Lenin (B. Steri)
- RIVISTE: Montag; Marxismo Oggi
- "Geostoria dell'Africa" di M. Dinucci
- Abitare l'Utopia? Si, ma da utopisti concreti (B. Casati)
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
L'IGNORANZA / 1.
"La componente piu' violenta della societa' e' l'ignoranza"
Emma Goldman
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
"La componente piu' violenta della societa' e' l'ignoranza"
Emma Goldman
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
Jugocoord su Telegram
Jugocoord su Facebook