TITOLO: Pulizia etnica? Un falso! Parola di generale
AUTORE: Gordon Poole
TESTO:
Il giornale inglese "Sunday Times" (2/4/2000) ha pubblicato un articolo
di
John Goetz e Tom Walker sulle rivelazioni diHeinz Loquai, generale di
brigata a riposo tedesco, secondo il quale non sarebbe mai esistito
alcun
piano jugoslavo per effettuare la pu lizia etnica della popolazione
albanese del Kosovo. Interessantissimo, considerando che la rivelazione
del piano, chiamato "Operazione ferro di cavallo", da parte di Joschka
Fischer, ministro degli esteri tedesco, convinse una parte dell'opinione
pubblica tedesca sin'allora contraria alla guerra ad accettare la
partecipazione della Luftwaffe ai bombardamenti NATO, in contraddizione
con la stessa costituzione della RFT. Dal 6 aprile 1999 in poi, quando
l'esistenza del piano di Belgrado fu rivelata - i bomb ardamenti
duravano
già da due settimane - tutte le conferenze stampa NATO teletrasmesse,
orchestrate dall'esperto di propaganda Jamie Shea, si riferivano
ritualmente ad "Operation Horseshoe". Ancora nel marzo scorso James
Rubin,
portavoce del Dipartimento di Stato americano, ha citato quel piano in
giustificazione dei bombardamenti.
Heinz Loquai, invece, sostiene in un recente libro sulla guerra che il
presunto piano sia stato creato dal nulla, sulla base di vaghi rapporti
dei servizi segreti bulgari su normali operazioni militari.
L'ex-generale,
che lavora ora per l'OSCE (Organisati on for Security and Co-operation
in
Europe), accusa Rudolf Scharping, ministro della difesa tedesco, di
essere
responsabile del falso. Intervistato dal "Sunday Times" Loquai ha detto
di
essere giunto alla conclusione che nessuna operazione del genere sia mai
esistita, aggiungendo che in Germania "Le critiche nei confronti della
guerra, che erano diventate un incendio quasi incontrollabile, furono
completamente spente grazie ad 'Operazione ferro di cavallo'".
Indipendentemente il giornale tedesco "Die Woch e" ha sostenuto che le
mappe, acquisite dalla NATO e diffuse dai giornali in tutto il mondo
come
prova dell'esistenza del piano di pulizia etnica serbo, siano state
create
nel quartiere generale tedesco della difesa nella città di Hardthoehe.
In
verità, secondo Loquai, il rapporto dei servizi segreti di Sofia
concludeva che lo scopo delle forze armate serbe era, comprensibilmente,
di distruggere l'UCK, non di espellere l'intera popolazione albanese,
come
invece hanno sostenuto sia Scharping ch e i leader della NATO.
Secondo Diana Johnstone, in un articolo che uscirà sulla rivista
"Giano",
l'operazione "ferro di cavallo" è banalmente una tecnica o tattica
insegnata in tutti i manuali militari, che prevede un attacco su tre
lati
contro un luogo fortificato, lasciando i l quarto lato libero per
permettere la fuga degli occupanti, così da evitare una difesa ad
oltranza. Essa sarebbe stata impiegata contro alcuni villaggi nel Kosovo
che erano stati occupati dall'UCK, abbandonati dagli abitanti e
trasformati praticamente in fortezze.
La NATO ha respinto le affermazioni di Loquai, pur dovendo ammettere di
non poter provare l'esistenza di un piano di pulizia etnica "Horseshoe".
Il "Sunday Times" cita una fonte NATO, non identificata, la quale
riferisce che: "Non c'è mai una sicurezza as soluta in queste cose.
Tuttavia, l'idea che non ci fosse nulla di pre-arrangiato è
anti-intuitiva. Basta pensare alla velocità con cui i serbi si sono
mossi.
Finché non entriamo in Belgrado e cominciamo a fare a pezzi gli archivi,
non saremo mai sicuri - e questo non succederà mai".
A Belgrado, fonti governative sostengono che diversi ufficiali
dell'esercito jugoslavo hanno liquidato l'idea di un' "Operazione ferro
di
cavallo" come semplicemente un'invenzione della guerra propagandistica
della NATO.
[diffusione a cura del Tribunale Indipendente per i crimini NATO]
---
New WORD Order:
Exodus, justified, bombing
-About the plan "potkovA"-
Dragan Pavlovic
Editor in chief, Dialogue, Paris
Explaining human aggression requires knowledge, patience, and a lot of
humanism. We are fragile, scared but very sophisticated beings. Still,
justifying aggressivity requires much more. Let us see what is this
more.
The NATO intervention in Yugoslavia is being justified, by those who
poured
bombs, by the number of Albanian refugees (1.5 million they say), by
the
conditions in Kosovo prior bombing, by hidden desires of Balkan
dictators,
viciousness of the Serbs, etc. What will be used depends of the moment
when
the argument is used. Today this is the number of Albanian refugees
(after
the bombing!), planed action which deserved bombing before the exodus
(German Secretary of Defense, R. Scharping). A piece of Copenhagen
variant
of quantum mechanics theory, I presume. Hope you follow. But let us see
the
facts to start with.
First of all this was a war, and quite bad one. The victims
(NATO
victims) were just from one side, the other side acting from the
distance
with high level of security. This makes particular atmosphere and
increases
the urge to hide, run away. The number of displaced people is difficult
to
estimate, though.
The number of refugees going south (Shiptars/Kosovo Albanians)
is
probably about 600 000. The number of 1.5 million, advanced recently is
of
course ridiculous. Total number of Shiptars (Kosovo Albanians) in
Kosovo
just prior the bombing was about 1.5 million. The reports from Kosovo
during
the NATO bombing were showing that significant number of Albanians was
still at their homes and the numbers of how many were in refugees camps
outside Kosovo was permanently changing from 600 000, to close to 1
million, and sank, just before the end of bombing, to 700 000. Also
pregnant with logic, of course. On the return of the refugees, at the
end of
bombing, TV reports showed this clearly, those who were awaiting
refugees in
the "abandoned" villages, obviously outnumber them.
Those who were displaced north, east or west include about 200
000
Serbs, Romes and others. Certainly more then 1 million of population
from
Serbia was displaced, close to their homes, or farther to the Republika
Srpska, Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary. Those who obtained visas went to
the
other European countries or oversee. I slept more then 10 nights during
that
time away from my home, which is close to one military object and a
target
for NATO bombs. I was afraid. My family sent my niece and her father 200
km
away to the relatives in a quite village. This is what everyone did. Be
away
from the target, away from the military personnel, vehicles etc, was
the
thought which persisted in the minds of people during that time. The
explosions were terrifying, although in a big city they were often at
considerable distance and close just for those living in the
neighborhood of
the particular target. In a small city all explosions were close. I
suspect that Kosovo Albanians did the same thing (all detonations are
close
in villages and small cities) and, if they were surrounded by Yugoslav
army
"objectives", as they were, it is clear why they run away. On my way
to
Serbia I was twice in Budapest, twice in Sophia, spent 30 days in
Yugoslavia
during the bombing, travelled all along the country tree times from
the
north to the south. On all occasions, Budapest and Sophia were full of
Yugoslavs, busses were constantly living the country packed by people
who
were escaping the disaster. This lasted for more then two months. How
many
of them were displaced, all aspects of displacement taken into account?
As I
said, I do not believe that there were less then 1 million.
Herr Scharping may finally be "right": about 1.5 displaced
people,
and two third of those probably emigrating abroad, but Yugoslavs (!),
all
together, including Shiptars, Serbs, Romes, Hungarians etc.
But this is not whole explanation. Let us see about the
"plans".
1. When the bombing started there were strong confrontations
between Yu-army and KLA which was, quickly, just a couple of days
after,
pushed to the Albanian border. This did not make many people hesitate
what
to do in the circumstances.
2. KLA was encouraging, pushing, and forcing the population to
leave the country. They even distributed red leaflets (like Albanian
flag)
instructing the population to go to NATO refugees camps over the
borders.
Brutal violence and even killing were used, when "needed".
3. NATO, accompanied by journalists, NGOs etc, was announcing
reception of the refugees. Many of the refugees were hoping to finish
somewhere in California. They were filmed by the accompanying TV crews
marching along slippery hills of Kosovo covered with massive snow
(although
there was no snow in Kosovo at that time of the year).
4. In the regions of fighting Yu-army facilitated transport of
refugees, which they found reasonable since they probably believed that
massive exodus could stop the bombing.
5. Yu-army could have also believed that it had all strategic
reasons to get rid (in quite brutal military way) of potential KLA
fighters
behind its back and was on the search for KLA members, which further
scared
the population.
6. Rare paramilitary actions from the side of the Serbs were
reported which could have further encouraged the population to go.
So, probably (just probably though) there was a plan, or plans:
Serbian army believed that massive exodus would: 1. stop the bombing,
2.
destabilize NATO alliance, 3. bring the sides to the negotiation table,
and
4. permit the return of only Shiptars i.e. non-KLA population,
excluding
immigrants from Albania and KLA members.
NATO planned (not probably but surely), as declared, to win
militarily, which required: 1. that all Albanians abandon Kosovo
(temporarily), 2. carpet-bombing of Yugoslav army in Kosovo, and 3.
repetition of "Hiroshima" strategy, destruction of one or more Serbian
cities, which would force Serbian army to surrender.
As we know now, both "plans" did not work. The moment is
difficult
since European politicians have to justify something they cannot
justify,
and which could be "justified" only if the plan worked. Serbian position
is
considerably better since they can show that the population ran away in
even
bigger numbers from the regions (in Serbia proper) where only one
factor,
NATO bombing, was at work, without the Serbian army facilitating exodus,
and
without armed conflicts with KLA forces.
These are of course, speculations. Only sure thing which would
stand all
challenges is that nobody, just nobody - except pore population - did
not
sincerely want that the Kosovo Albanians stay at their homes, and this
was
clearly shown by the NATO, International community behaviour, KLA,
Serbian
forces, journalists, NGOs. Why should they stay then?
Justifying the exodus will mean now showing that the situation
in
Kosovo prior to the bombing justified bombing. The OSCE Report from
October
last year is a document of reference. Unfortunately, the vagueness of
the
OSCE Report, particularly of its first part (which speaks of what
happened
before bombing), does not support the argument. In addition, the Racak
Incident, being the main and only "clear-cut" Serbian crime cited in
the
first part of the Report, is shown now to be a set-up. This is
disappointing. Since the Racak Incident proved to be no "incident",
European
politicians are trying a well-known maneuver, "ignoratio elenhi" - to
change the thesis, forgetting Racak Incident and referring only to the
Serbian "plan" to chase all Albanians over the frontiers. Unfortunately
this leads even further into the logical labyrinth - they are namely
trying
to use a typical "post hoc ergo ante hoc" argument i.e., maintain that
the
result produced its cause. "Since there were 1.5 million refugees, to
achieve this the Serbs must have had a plan", meaning they were bombed
because of that "plan". You are puzzled? They are confident. To prove
the
thesis, requires not only a political skills of excellence, but also
quite
vicious mind, and they do not doubt in their capacities. If the idea is
to
justify NATO bombing of Yugoslavia then, the justification had to be
look
for in post hoc events since, they certainly know that, there is not
much to
find in propter hoc events. Understood?
We will take the liberty of reminding Herr Scharping that the
humanitarian situation in Kosovo pre NATO bombing was taken by the
"international community" to be critical and this was the basis for the
decision to break International Law (not entirely though, some articles
were spared), go far beyond the humanitarian objectives (in order to
achieve a "final solution") and impose the Rambouillet ultimatum, which
meant (Annex B) partial occupation of Yugoslavia by the NATO forces
and, in
two years, the secession of Kosovo, following a referendum of Kosovo
Albanians. Responsible for the critical humanitarian situation were, we
are
told, Serbian police forces and militaries. We are not told that those
Serbian forces were there to oppose imported Albanian armed secession,
the
long process which for more then half of the century could not attract
the
rural Albanian population of Kosovo. This was possible (Western
intelligence help included) only when illegal immigration from
neighboring
Albania reached a critical level, when Pristina university produced
enough
indoctrinated intellectuals who become the main revolutionary force,
and
finally, when the vertical hierarchy of the communist regime dissolved.
As
in the other regions of Yugoslavia, local powers understood well that
their
ambitions could only be achieved inside some previously imposed
frontiers.
Bosnia and Herzegovina was a problem, being very unhomogeneous. The
relative
Muslim majority had to be helped by the International community to
impose
its power and, following ethnic cleansing, achieve a homogenous
territory.
Kosovo was in that respect a simple problem. For whom, we may
ask.
The results of that turmoil will tell us. If we would, in the end, want
to
know what a politician thinks, not listening to what he declares but
seeing
what he does, we would have to conclude the following. It was desired
that
the Serbs be ethnically cleansed and ethnic (and by definition unjust)
states be established in the Balkans, that the NATO forces establish a
stronghold in the Balkans (the two military bases, in Macedonia and
Kosovo,
are not meant as a balance for dangerous Serbia, of course, but have a
much
more ambitious purpose). Etc. Who was responsible for the humanitarian
crisis in Kosovo was not really important, as clearly the best possible
solution for those people living there was not to be even considered.
That
was not the real problem for our politicians, they knew what they were
doing
and everything was, no doubt, done with a clear objective in mind. They
will
show us, one day, what is it; I do not worry about this.
What troubles me is that we, staying quiet, let them believe
that we not only do not see what they do, but also do not hear what they
say. They might even wary how the demagogy is going to work if we do not
listen to them. Let us reassure them that we did not overhear that they
shamelessly, in their power delirium, misuse what is sacred - the wisdom
of
antiquity. Unfortunately, this time this is not a coherent political
game.
The power-corrupted are finally exposing to us their weak points: their
simple and miserable ignorance, and this is, WE know it, a dangerous
thing.
I was told a long time ago that in some ancient times, when
people
discovered the power of syllogism of Aristotle, it was permitted to
execute
those who pretended to be wise but did not know syllogism. Indeed, here
we
just had one, fallacious, syllogism.
J'accuse? Non. Pourtant, J'attend...
(http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/NewsRoundUp)
“OPERATION HORSESHOE”: KOSOVO FORGERY
REVEALED
The eminent German daily Frankfuhrter Rundshau reported a fortnight ago
that Bulgarian and
German secret services had forged a “secret Serb plan” that
was used as
justification for NATO air strikes on Yugoslavia last year
(“General bezweifelt Existenz
des serbischen Kriegskonzepts,” March 21). The plan, code-named
“Horseshoe,” purported to prove that the Serbs had planned
ethnic cleansing of
Kosovo Albanians well before the NATO bombing campaign. The German paper
quoted Heinz
Loquai, a retired Bundeswehr brigadier general, who says that the
“plan” was no
more than an intelligence assessment written in Sofia and subsequently
embellished in Bonn.
But during the NATO war “Horseshoe” was given top billing.
It was first revealed
by Joschka Fischer, the German foreign minister, on April 6 last year,
almost two weeks after
bombing had started. Two days later, on April 8, 1999 it was mentioned
again at a press
conference by the Bundeswehr Inspector-General Hans-Peter von Kierbach.
The general claimed
that this document provided evidence that Belgrade wanted to liquidate
the KLA “even if
that would mean extermination of the Albanians in Kosovo.”
Then “Horseshoe” crossed the Atlantic. On April 15 it was
invoked by William Pfaff
in the International Herald Tribune in support of his claim that it
would be “immoral”
to stop the bombing. Pfaff treated “Horseshoe” as a given
fact:
Mr. Milosevic and his government are attempting to solve their Kosovo
problem by producing a
basic demographic change in the province through deporting its Albanian
population, the
overwhelming majority. According to German government sources, this
program for purging
Kosovo of its Albanian population was prepared at the end of last year
under the code name
“Horseshoe.” … Horseshoe was designed to produce a
permanent solution,
and was launched even before the Rambouillet discussions in February,
which the Serbian
leadership did not take seriously.
On April 24, 1999, Bulgarian Prime Minister Kostov also quoted the
“Horseshoe” to
justify the pending Bulgarian collaboration with NATO: “Operation
‘Horseshoe’ began on February 26 and aimed at two things: to
exterminate the KLA
and to turn Kosovo into a desert.” It was subsequently used by a
whole host of NATO
apologists, and most recently by State Department’s James Rubin
only two weeks ago.
But in Europe it is now common knowledge that Operation Horseshoe was
yet another Kosovo
Lie. On April 2 The Sunday Times of London followed the Rundschau story
up with a
comprehensive and conclusive report (“Serbian ethnic cleansing
scare was a fake, says
general,” by John Goetz in Berlin and Tom Walker):
Horseshoe - or "Potkova", as the Germans said it was known in Belgrade -
became a staple of
Nato briefings. It was presented as proof that President Slobodan
Milosevic of Yugoslavia had
long planned the expulsion of Albanians. James Rubin, the American state
department spokesman,
cited it only last week to justify Nato's bombardment. However, Heinz
Loquai, a retired brigadier
general, has claimed in a new book on the war that the plan was
fabricated from run-of-the-mill
Bulgarian intelligence reports. Loquai, who now works for the
Organisation for Security and
Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), has accused Rudolf Scharping, the German
defence minister, of
obscuring the origins of Operation Horseshoe. “The facts to
support its existence are at
best terribly meagre,” he told The Sunday Times. “I have
come to the conclusion
that no such operation ever existed. The criticism of the war, which had
grown into a fire that was
almost out of control, was completely extinguished by Operation
Horseshoe.”
Loquai claims that the German defense ministry turned a vague report
from Sofia into a "plan", and
even coined the name Horseshoe.
But this eagerness to embellish it in order to produce a convincing
forgery resulted in the
fundamental flaw: the Germans named the operation “Potkova,”
which is the
CROATIAN word for horseshoe. The Serbian for horseshoe is Potkovica. It
is a bit like claiming
that a secret IRA document was called “Operation
Londonderry” –
impossible by definition. “A state prosecutor would never think of
going to trial with the
amount of evidence available to the German defense ministry,” said
General Loquai. But
how about Carla Ponte? “Horseshoe” is now proven to be a
lie, but it may yet be
used to indict a few more Serbs by the “tribunal” at The
Hague.
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
AUTORE: Gordon Poole
TESTO:
Il giornale inglese "Sunday Times" (2/4/2000) ha pubblicato un articolo
di
John Goetz e Tom Walker sulle rivelazioni diHeinz Loquai, generale di
brigata a riposo tedesco, secondo il quale non sarebbe mai esistito
alcun
piano jugoslavo per effettuare la pu lizia etnica della popolazione
albanese del Kosovo. Interessantissimo, considerando che la rivelazione
del piano, chiamato "Operazione ferro di cavallo", da parte di Joschka
Fischer, ministro degli esteri tedesco, convinse una parte dell'opinione
pubblica tedesca sin'allora contraria alla guerra ad accettare la
partecipazione della Luftwaffe ai bombardamenti NATO, in contraddizione
con la stessa costituzione della RFT. Dal 6 aprile 1999 in poi, quando
l'esistenza del piano di Belgrado fu rivelata - i bomb ardamenti
duravano
già da due settimane - tutte le conferenze stampa NATO teletrasmesse,
orchestrate dall'esperto di propaganda Jamie Shea, si riferivano
ritualmente ad "Operation Horseshoe". Ancora nel marzo scorso James
Rubin,
portavoce del Dipartimento di Stato americano, ha citato quel piano in
giustificazione dei bombardamenti.
Heinz Loquai, invece, sostiene in un recente libro sulla guerra che il
presunto piano sia stato creato dal nulla, sulla base di vaghi rapporti
dei servizi segreti bulgari su normali operazioni militari.
L'ex-generale,
che lavora ora per l'OSCE (Organisati on for Security and Co-operation
in
Europe), accusa Rudolf Scharping, ministro della difesa tedesco, di
essere
responsabile del falso. Intervistato dal "Sunday Times" Loquai ha detto
di
essere giunto alla conclusione che nessuna operazione del genere sia mai
esistita, aggiungendo che in Germania "Le critiche nei confronti della
guerra, che erano diventate un incendio quasi incontrollabile, furono
completamente spente grazie ad 'Operazione ferro di cavallo'".
Indipendentemente il giornale tedesco "Die Woch e" ha sostenuto che le
mappe, acquisite dalla NATO e diffuse dai giornali in tutto il mondo
come
prova dell'esistenza del piano di pulizia etnica serbo, siano state
create
nel quartiere generale tedesco della difesa nella città di Hardthoehe.
In
verità, secondo Loquai, il rapporto dei servizi segreti di Sofia
concludeva che lo scopo delle forze armate serbe era, comprensibilmente,
di distruggere l'UCK, non di espellere l'intera popolazione albanese,
come
invece hanno sostenuto sia Scharping ch e i leader della NATO.
Secondo Diana Johnstone, in un articolo che uscirà sulla rivista
"Giano",
l'operazione "ferro di cavallo" è banalmente una tecnica o tattica
insegnata in tutti i manuali militari, che prevede un attacco su tre
lati
contro un luogo fortificato, lasciando i l quarto lato libero per
permettere la fuga degli occupanti, così da evitare una difesa ad
oltranza. Essa sarebbe stata impiegata contro alcuni villaggi nel Kosovo
che erano stati occupati dall'UCK, abbandonati dagli abitanti e
trasformati praticamente in fortezze.
La NATO ha respinto le affermazioni di Loquai, pur dovendo ammettere di
non poter provare l'esistenza di un piano di pulizia etnica "Horseshoe".
Il "Sunday Times" cita una fonte NATO, non identificata, la quale
riferisce che: "Non c'è mai una sicurezza as soluta in queste cose.
Tuttavia, l'idea che non ci fosse nulla di pre-arrangiato è
anti-intuitiva. Basta pensare alla velocità con cui i serbi si sono
mossi.
Finché non entriamo in Belgrado e cominciamo a fare a pezzi gli archivi,
non saremo mai sicuri - e questo non succederà mai".
A Belgrado, fonti governative sostengono che diversi ufficiali
dell'esercito jugoslavo hanno liquidato l'idea di un' "Operazione ferro
di
cavallo" come semplicemente un'invenzione della guerra propagandistica
della NATO.
[diffusione a cura del Tribunale Indipendente per i crimini NATO]
---
New WORD Order:
Exodus, justified, bombing
-About the plan "potkovA"-
Dragan Pavlovic
Editor in chief, Dialogue, Paris
Explaining human aggression requires knowledge, patience, and a lot of
humanism. We are fragile, scared but very sophisticated beings. Still,
justifying aggressivity requires much more. Let us see what is this
more.
The NATO intervention in Yugoslavia is being justified, by those who
poured
bombs, by the number of Albanian refugees (1.5 million they say), by
the
conditions in Kosovo prior bombing, by hidden desires of Balkan
dictators,
viciousness of the Serbs, etc. What will be used depends of the moment
when
the argument is used. Today this is the number of Albanian refugees
(after
the bombing!), planed action which deserved bombing before the exodus
(German Secretary of Defense, R. Scharping). A piece of Copenhagen
variant
of quantum mechanics theory, I presume. Hope you follow. But let us see
the
facts to start with.
First of all this was a war, and quite bad one. The victims
(NATO
victims) were just from one side, the other side acting from the
distance
with high level of security. This makes particular atmosphere and
increases
the urge to hide, run away. The number of displaced people is difficult
to
estimate, though.
The number of refugees going south (Shiptars/Kosovo Albanians)
is
probably about 600 000. The number of 1.5 million, advanced recently is
of
course ridiculous. Total number of Shiptars (Kosovo Albanians) in
Kosovo
just prior the bombing was about 1.5 million. The reports from Kosovo
during
the NATO bombing were showing that significant number of Albanians was
still at their homes and the numbers of how many were in refugees camps
outside Kosovo was permanently changing from 600 000, to close to 1
million, and sank, just before the end of bombing, to 700 000. Also
pregnant with logic, of course. On the return of the refugees, at the
end of
bombing, TV reports showed this clearly, those who were awaiting
refugees in
the "abandoned" villages, obviously outnumber them.
Those who were displaced north, east or west include about 200
000
Serbs, Romes and others. Certainly more then 1 million of population
from
Serbia was displaced, close to their homes, or farther to the Republika
Srpska, Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary. Those who obtained visas went to
the
other European countries or oversee. I slept more then 10 nights during
that
time away from my home, which is close to one military object and a
target
for NATO bombs. I was afraid. My family sent my niece and her father 200
km
away to the relatives in a quite village. This is what everyone did. Be
away
from the target, away from the military personnel, vehicles etc, was
the
thought which persisted in the minds of people during that time. The
explosions were terrifying, although in a big city they were often at
considerable distance and close just for those living in the
neighborhood of
the particular target. In a small city all explosions were close. I
suspect that Kosovo Albanians did the same thing (all detonations are
close
in villages and small cities) and, if they were surrounded by Yugoslav
army
"objectives", as they were, it is clear why they run away. On my way
to
Serbia I was twice in Budapest, twice in Sophia, spent 30 days in
Yugoslavia
during the bombing, travelled all along the country tree times from
the
north to the south. On all occasions, Budapest and Sophia were full of
Yugoslavs, busses were constantly living the country packed by people
who
were escaping the disaster. This lasted for more then two months. How
many
of them were displaced, all aspects of displacement taken into account?
As I
said, I do not believe that there were less then 1 million.
Herr Scharping may finally be "right": about 1.5 displaced
people,
and two third of those probably emigrating abroad, but Yugoslavs (!),
all
together, including Shiptars, Serbs, Romes, Hungarians etc.
But this is not whole explanation. Let us see about the
"plans".
1. When the bombing started there were strong confrontations
between Yu-army and KLA which was, quickly, just a couple of days
after,
pushed to the Albanian border. This did not make many people hesitate
what
to do in the circumstances.
2. KLA was encouraging, pushing, and forcing the population to
leave the country. They even distributed red leaflets (like Albanian
flag)
instructing the population to go to NATO refugees camps over the
borders.
Brutal violence and even killing were used, when "needed".
3. NATO, accompanied by journalists, NGOs etc, was announcing
reception of the refugees. Many of the refugees were hoping to finish
somewhere in California. They were filmed by the accompanying TV crews
marching along slippery hills of Kosovo covered with massive snow
(although
there was no snow in Kosovo at that time of the year).
4. In the regions of fighting Yu-army facilitated transport of
refugees, which they found reasonable since they probably believed that
massive exodus could stop the bombing.
5. Yu-army could have also believed that it had all strategic
reasons to get rid (in quite brutal military way) of potential KLA
fighters
behind its back and was on the search for KLA members, which further
scared
the population.
6. Rare paramilitary actions from the side of the Serbs were
reported which could have further encouraged the population to go.
So, probably (just probably though) there was a plan, or plans:
Serbian army believed that massive exodus would: 1. stop the bombing,
2.
destabilize NATO alliance, 3. bring the sides to the negotiation table,
and
4. permit the return of only Shiptars i.e. non-KLA population,
excluding
immigrants from Albania and KLA members.
NATO planned (not probably but surely), as declared, to win
militarily, which required: 1. that all Albanians abandon Kosovo
(temporarily), 2. carpet-bombing of Yugoslav army in Kosovo, and 3.
repetition of "Hiroshima" strategy, destruction of one or more Serbian
cities, which would force Serbian army to surrender.
As we know now, both "plans" did not work. The moment is
difficult
since European politicians have to justify something they cannot
justify,
and which could be "justified" only if the plan worked. Serbian position
is
considerably better since they can show that the population ran away in
even
bigger numbers from the regions (in Serbia proper) where only one
factor,
NATO bombing, was at work, without the Serbian army facilitating exodus,
and
without armed conflicts with KLA forces.
These are of course, speculations. Only sure thing which would
stand all
challenges is that nobody, just nobody - except pore population - did
not
sincerely want that the Kosovo Albanians stay at their homes, and this
was
clearly shown by the NATO, International community behaviour, KLA,
Serbian
forces, journalists, NGOs. Why should they stay then?
Justifying the exodus will mean now showing that the situation
in
Kosovo prior to the bombing justified bombing. The OSCE Report from
October
last year is a document of reference. Unfortunately, the vagueness of
the
OSCE Report, particularly of its first part (which speaks of what
happened
before bombing), does not support the argument. In addition, the Racak
Incident, being the main and only "clear-cut" Serbian crime cited in
the
first part of the Report, is shown now to be a set-up. This is
disappointing. Since the Racak Incident proved to be no "incident",
European
politicians are trying a well-known maneuver, "ignoratio elenhi" - to
change the thesis, forgetting Racak Incident and referring only to the
Serbian "plan" to chase all Albanians over the frontiers. Unfortunately
this leads even further into the logical labyrinth - they are namely
trying
to use a typical "post hoc ergo ante hoc" argument i.e., maintain that
the
result produced its cause. "Since there were 1.5 million refugees, to
achieve this the Serbs must have had a plan", meaning they were bombed
because of that "plan". You are puzzled? They are confident. To prove
the
thesis, requires not only a political skills of excellence, but also
quite
vicious mind, and they do not doubt in their capacities. If the idea is
to
justify NATO bombing of Yugoslavia then, the justification had to be
look
for in post hoc events since, they certainly know that, there is not
much to
find in propter hoc events. Understood?
We will take the liberty of reminding Herr Scharping that the
humanitarian situation in Kosovo pre NATO bombing was taken by the
"international community" to be critical and this was the basis for the
decision to break International Law (not entirely though, some articles
were spared), go far beyond the humanitarian objectives (in order to
achieve a "final solution") and impose the Rambouillet ultimatum, which
meant (Annex B) partial occupation of Yugoslavia by the NATO forces
and, in
two years, the secession of Kosovo, following a referendum of Kosovo
Albanians. Responsible for the critical humanitarian situation were, we
are
told, Serbian police forces and militaries. We are not told that those
Serbian forces were there to oppose imported Albanian armed secession,
the
long process which for more then half of the century could not attract
the
rural Albanian population of Kosovo. This was possible (Western
intelligence help included) only when illegal immigration from
neighboring
Albania reached a critical level, when Pristina university produced
enough
indoctrinated intellectuals who become the main revolutionary force,
and
finally, when the vertical hierarchy of the communist regime dissolved.
As
in the other regions of Yugoslavia, local powers understood well that
their
ambitions could only be achieved inside some previously imposed
frontiers.
Bosnia and Herzegovina was a problem, being very unhomogeneous. The
relative
Muslim majority had to be helped by the International community to
impose
its power and, following ethnic cleansing, achieve a homogenous
territory.
Kosovo was in that respect a simple problem. For whom, we may
ask.
The results of that turmoil will tell us. If we would, in the end, want
to
know what a politician thinks, not listening to what he declares but
seeing
what he does, we would have to conclude the following. It was desired
that
the Serbs be ethnically cleansed and ethnic (and by definition unjust)
states be established in the Balkans, that the NATO forces establish a
stronghold in the Balkans (the two military bases, in Macedonia and
Kosovo,
are not meant as a balance for dangerous Serbia, of course, but have a
much
more ambitious purpose). Etc. Who was responsible for the humanitarian
crisis in Kosovo was not really important, as clearly the best possible
solution for those people living there was not to be even considered.
That
was not the real problem for our politicians, they knew what they were
doing
and everything was, no doubt, done with a clear objective in mind. They
will
show us, one day, what is it; I do not worry about this.
What troubles me is that we, staying quiet, let them believe
that we not only do not see what they do, but also do not hear what they
say. They might even wary how the demagogy is going to work if we do not
listen to them. Let us reassure them that we did not overhear that they
shamelessly, in their power delirium, misuse what is sacred - the wisdom
of
antiquity. Unfortunately, this time this is not a coherent political
game.
The power-corrupted are finally exposing to us their weak points: their
simple and miserable ignorance, and this is, WE know it, a dangerous
thing.
I was told a long time ago that in some ancient times, when
people
discovered the power of syllogism of Aristotle, it was permitted to
execute
those who pretended to be wise but did not know syllogism. Indeed, here
we
just had one, fallacious, syllogism.
J'accuse? Non. Pourtant, J'attend...
(http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/NewsRoundUp)
“OPERATION HORSESHOE”: KOSOVO FORGERY
REVEALED
The eminent German daily Frankfuhrter Rundshau reported a fortnight ago
that Bulgarian and
German secret services had forged a “secret Serb plan” that
was used as
justification for NATO air strikes on Yugoslavia last year
(“General bezweifelt Existenz
des serbischen Kriegskonzepts,” March 21). The plan, code-named
“Horseshoe,” purported to prove that the Serbs had planned
ethnic cleansing of
Kosovo Albanians well before the NATO bombing campaign. The German paper
quoted Heinz
Loquai, a retired Bundeswehr brigadier general, who says that the
“plan” was no
more than an intelligence assessment written in Sofia and subsequently
embellished in Bonn.
But during the NATO war “Horseshoe” was given top billing.
It was first revealed
by Joschka Fischer, the German foreign minister, on April 6 last year,
almost two weeks after
bombing had started. Two days later, on April 8, 1999 it was mentioned
again at a press
conference by the Bundeswehr Inspector-General Hans-Peter von Kierbach.
The general claimed
that this document provided evidence that Belgrade wanted to liquidate
the KLA “even if
that would mean extermination of the Albanians in Kosovo.”
Then “Horseshoe” crossed the Atlantic. On April 15 it was
invoked by William Pfaff
in the International Herald Tribune in support of his claim that it
would be “immoral”
to stop the bombing. Pfaff treated “Horseshoe” as a given
fact:
Mr. Milosevic and his government are attempting to solve their Kosovo
problem by producing a
basic demographic change in the province through deporting its Albanian
population, the
overwhelming majority. According to German government sources, this
program for purging
Kosovo of its Albanian population was prepared at the end of last year
under the code name
“Horseshoe.” … Horseshoe was designed to produce a
permanent solution,
and was launched even before the Rambouillet discussions in February,
which the Serbian
leadership did not take seriously.
On April 24, 1999, Bulgarian Prime Minister Kostov also quoted the
“Horseshoe” to
justify the pending Bulgarian collaboration with NATO: “Operation
‘Horseshoe’ began on February 26 and aimed at two things: to
exterminate the KLA
and to turn Kosovo into a desert.” It was subsequently used by a
whole host of NATO
apologists, and most recently by State Department’s James Rubin
only two weeks ago.
But in Europe it is now common knowledge that Operation Horseshoe was
yet another Kosovo
Lie. On April 2 The Sunday Times of London followed the Rundschau story
up with a
comprehensive and conclusive report (“Serbian ethnic cleansing
scare was a fake, says
general,” by John Goetz in Berlin and Tom Walker):
Horseshoe - or "Potkova", as the Germans said it was known in Belgrade -
became a staple of
Nato briefings. It was presented as proof that President Slobodan
Milosevic of Yugoslavia had
long planned the expulsion of Albanians. James Rubin, the American state
department spokesman,
cited it only last week to justify Nato's bombardment. However, Heinz
Loquai, a retired brigadier
general, has claimed in a new book on the war that the plan was
fabricated from run-of-the-mill
Bulgarian intelligence reports. Loquai, who now works for the
Organisation for Security and
Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), has accused Rudolf Scharping, the German
defence minister, of
obscuring the origins of Operation Horseshoe. “The facts to
support its existence are at
best terribly meagre,” he told The Sunday Times. “I have
come to the conclusion
that no such operation ever existed. The criticism of the war, which had
grown into a fire that was
almost out of control, was completely extinguished by Operation
Horseshoe.”
Loquai claims that the German defense ministry turned a vague report
from Sofia into a "plan", and
even coined the name Horseshoe.
But this eagerness to embellish it in order to produce a convincing
forgery resulted in the
fundamental flaw: the Germans named the operation “Potkova,”
which is the
CROATIAN word for horseshoe. The Serbian for horseshoe is Potkovica. It
is a bit like claiming
that a secret IRA document was called “Operation
Londonderry” –
impossible by definition. “A state prosecutor would never think of
going to trial with the
amount of evidence available to the German defense ministry,” said
General Loquai. But
how about Carla Ponte? “Horseshoe” is now proven to be a
lie, but it may yet be
used to indict a few more Serbs by the “tribunal” at The
Hague.
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------