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/
------------------------------------------------------------