[Only the first part of this message is displayed. The entire message has been
turned into a text attachment, which you can retrieve by selecting Download.
Once downloaded, open it with a word processor or text editor for reading.]
-> SNETNEWS Mailing List
From: http://www.mfa.gov.yu/Aktuelno/MK060199_e.html
SECRET STRATEGIES ON KOSOVO
By Mishel Collon
Why is Kosovo on the agenda again? What are the Great powers' real aims in
this region? And are they the ones we are being told about?
The Kosovo internal problems can not be apprehended without analyzing the
Great powers' secret strategies towards the entire Balkans. Our text is
therefore going to clarify two questions:
1) What are Bonn and Washington common goals?
2) Where do the interests of these two powers collide?
Let us first look into the theory of "fire fighters" � WE are being told
that the western powers intervene in the Balkans in order to protect the
people and reduce the clashes. What, in fact, had the Great powers do since
Albania fell under the Salih Berisha corrupt dictatorship that ruined his
own people? Nothing. Berisha was acceptable because he renewed capitalism
and opened wide the door to the multinational companies.
When the Albanian people started rebelling against Berisha, what were we to
see? An international army arrived at the very same minute to occupy
Albania, whose independence was not jeopardized by any neighboring country.
Who was in command of these armed forces? Italy. By chance, the biggest
investor in Albania. So the issue was to protect the stability of
multinational companies from the people's revolt. These two items should be
borne in mind while analyzing the situation in Kosovo. The first rule of
the game in the Balkans is that the West is appropriating the right of
deciding in the people's place.
This is the origin of the second rule of the new game in the Balkans - the
contest of the Great powers: where I have dominance over, I demand certain
stability; where you have dominance, I destabilize... To be more exact,
Washington has the dominance in the South of the Balkans (Greece, Turkey,
Albania, Macedonia, Bosnia), while Bonn plays the main role in th
-> SNETNEWS Mailing List
From: http://www.mfa.gov.yu/Aktuelno/MK060199_e.html
SECRET STRATEGIES ON KOSOVO
By Mishel Collon
Why is Kosovo on the agenda again? What are the Great powers' real aims in
this region? And are they the ones we are being told about?
The Kosovo internal problems can not be apprehended without analyzing the
Great powers' secret strategies towards the entire Balkans. Our text is
therefore going to clarify two questions:
1) What are Bonn and Washington common goals?
2) Where do the interests of these two powers collide?
Let us first look into the theory of "fire fighters" � WE are being told
that the western powers intervene in the Balkans in order to protect the
people and reduce the clashes. What, in fact, had the Great powers do since
Albania fell under the Salih Berisha corrupt dictatorship that ruined his
own people? Nothing. Berisha was acceptable because he renewed capitalism
and opened wide the door to the multinational companies.
When the Albanian people started rebelling against Berisha, what were we to
see? An international army arrived at the very same minute to occupy
Albania, whose independence was not jeopardized by any neighboring country.
Who was in command of these armed forces? Italy. By chance, the biggest
investor in Albania. So the issue was to protect the stability of
multinational companies from the people's revolt. These two items should be
borne in mind while analyzing the situation in Kosovo. The first rule of
the game in the Balkans is that the West is appropriating the right of
deciding in the people's place.
This is the origin of the second rule of the new game in the Balkans - the
contest of the Great powers: where I have dominance over, I demand certain
stability; where you have dominance, I destabilize... To be more exact,
Washington has the dominance in the South of the Balkans (Greece, Turkey,
Albania, Macedonia, Bosnia), while Bonn plays the main role in the North
(Croatia, Slovenia). And each covets the part belonging to the other side.
But we will get back to this.
Is the real issue the protection of civilians?
The media inform us that "the Great powers must intervene in order to
protect the population in danger"�Can we believe that the protection of
civilians is really the issue? To protect their interest in some
strategically important regions, the United States did not hesitate to
massacre innocent civilians in Lebanon, Somalia, Panama, Iraq...
The Great powers' only motivating force is their wish to control the
Balkans. This is the reason Germany ignited the war in 1991. It supported,
financed and even armed the Croatian and Slovenian separatists, as we have
proved in our book "Poker trickster"1. The goal: break up Yugoslavia into a
chain of weak little states, to be easily controlled. Soon after, the US
shifted this war to Bosnia to get hold of the cards Bonn already had in its
hands. The unbelievable statement of Lord Owen, European Special Envoy in
Bosnia should not be forgotten: " I highly respect the United States.
However, during the last few years this Country' diplomacy bears
responsibility for the unnecessary prolongation of war in Bosnia" . Owen
knew what he was talking about.
Today, the same scenario is being repeated in Kosovo. In order to gain
control over a strategically important region, the Great powers are again
ready to drag whole nations into warring, deportations, massacres� To
invite them to put the fire down, means in fact to call for them to make it
burst into flames.
1. Which are the goals common both to Bonn and Washington?
One goal is common to all the western powers: to prevent the restoration of
socialism in the East. Is the "danger" real? "The Wall Street Journal", the
agency of big finance, reported in 1996: "Around 60 percent of the Polish
population could be considered "losers" in the post-Communist
transformation, especially the workers and the farmers. All in all, the
percentage of the ones availing of the benefit of the new economic order
does not exceed 20 percent of the entire population .
We can not find this truth in the media intended for the common people.
They should have believed that socialism is Hell and the capitalism is
Paradise (or, at least, the promise of the Paradise). However, the
businessmen reading the Wall Street Journal do not need the propaganda;
they need real facts, lucid analyses to decide where to invest their money.
They want to know what dangers should the New World order expect to meet in
the East. The West has promised growth, but the growth is intended for the
nouveau-riche only and, particularly for the multinational companies: they
are growing on the ruins of the socialist economies, where they find most
qualified and the cheapest manpower.
Sooner or later, these injustices will provoke indignation. NATO is getting
ready for this, as explained by NATO Secretary General Javier Solana. He
sees the stock-taking of the war recently over in Bosnia in this way: "The
experience gained in Bosnia can be used in NATO future operations".4
What wars is NATO getting ready for? The question is answered by the
Belgium aircraft forces Headquarters Commander: "In case it happens in
Russia (read: in case the pro-westerns forces loose control), we will have
Yugoslavia ten times larger. It is possible that the Western Europe, for a
medium term, will have to intervene not only by political but also military
actions in our own interest (sic)"5 And this is exactly what the West is
getting ready for.
Four strategic goals
What is today happening in the Balkans is a part of wider strategic aims.
As we have shown in "The Poker Trickster"4 the Great powers have four
strategic aims:
1. To dominate in the Balkans, the key region for the control of the oil
roads. Not only those coming from the Near East, but also the ones from the
former Soviet Union (Caucasus, the Caspian Sea, Kazakhstan �)
2. To dominate in the Eastern Europe, a valuable source of raw materials,
qualified work force, export markets.
3. Prevent Russia's controlling the mentioned riches and prevent it from
becoming the Western powers' contender.
4. Secure military bases. By establishing new bases in Albania, Bosnia and
Macedonia, the US have placed themselves all over the South of Europe and
the former Soviet Union.
Regarding these four goals, the Great powers are sometimes unified (against
the mutual enemy) and sometimes opposed (each of them wants a bigger piece
of cake).
As always, "Divide and rule"
Who are their mutual enemies in the Balkans? At the moment, the West is met
with two main focuses of resistance: in Serbia and in Albania.
In Albania, the economic break down increased the number of the ones now
missing socialism and communism. In another word, the NATO Review reminds
in the summer of 1998 that "under the Communist dictatorship Albania has
adopted the total defense system and armer a large number of population".
The Albanians never returned the weapons. The discontent in the most
poverty-stricken state in Europe is enormous and, in middle term, this
country might be the one closest to revert to socialism.
In Serbia, large portions of the population do not want to forsake their
social achievements and to resign to wild liberalism. Let us recall that in
1989 the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank wanted to impose
the dismissal of the two-thirds of Yugoslav workers, and mass strikes broke
out in all the republics and to prevent it, the local bourgeoisie ignited
nationalism.
In order to remove any inclination to a different society from the map of
Europe, the old tactics of "divide and rule" was applied. The western
powers consider the conflict between the Serbs and the Albanians as
positive. While these conflicts last, there is no risk of these two nations
uniting to mutually resist the invasion of the multinational companies and
political interfering.
The cause is easily found
The West's immediate aim is the systematic weakening of Yugoslavia. The war
in Bosnia, embargo and at present the destabilization of Kosovo, the region
of vital importance to the country because of its assets: electricity, tin
and silver mines, excellent agricultural soil�
And following Kosovo? Yugoslavia is in danger of being amputated of Sandzak
or the rich soil of Vojvodina (in the North). Moreover, the West is
instigating the Republic of Montenegro against Serbia, to cut Serbia off
from accessing the sea. Mr. Rudolf Sarping, Chief of the German
Parliamentary fraction SDP said: " The Dayton Accord is far from solving
all the open issues in the eastern Slavonia, Vojvodina, Sandzak, Macedonia,
and particularly in Kosovo"4. In short, the offensive against Belgrade is
continued.
There will be no air strikes against the Turkish Army. In return, those
fascist generals, tied to Mafia, are killing thousands of opponents and
massacring the Kurd populations. But the West endorses them."I will not
answer the provocative questions against Turkey, the US esteemed Ally",
said the State Department Spokesman on March 10,1998 answering the
reporter's too daring question.
The Allies can do what pleases them, while the unyielding will be broken on
any pretext.
SECRET STRATEGIES ON KOSOVO
Contrary to this, the West is opposed to Yugoslavia. Why? There are two
reasons. The first is that this country, although not a socialist one,
managed to maintain a large part of public enterprises and important social
institutions. At the time the wild liberalism is being installed in the
entire East Europe, Serbia gives bad example. Which should be eliminated.
Secondly, Serbia is not bending before NATO, contrary to all the new
regimes installed in the East. Serbia has maintained an independent defense
system. NATO, again, attempts to establish its control over the entire
Continent. In June, 1998, the Pentagon representatives had warned President
Clinton that any air strike should be preceded by systematic bombing of
sixty rocket launchers and 21 Yugoslav combat planes. A more modest version
of the Desert Storm (against Iraq) operation.4
In reality, NATO was prepared to exterminated an entire nation that
rebelled, and striking Yugoslavia was just a warning "See what are you in
for if�"
Sovereignty or the right of interfering?
"The protection of national minorities" gives the Great powers the cause to
impose the right of interfering into the sovereign countries' internal
affairs. In March 1998, a renowned American commentator wrote: " Washington
should stop observing the outmoded concept of territorial integrity
maintained by force not only in Serbia, but also in Iraq, Indonesia or in
China".
The list of countries tells us that the Americans cherish other ideas, and
the more important matter is, this list in not limited. However, Madeleine
Albright, the US State Secretary has just stated that Washington does not
recognize the UN Charter, observing the internal sovereignty of states.
Washington is today reconsidering the concessions it was forced to make in
the sixties and
in the seventies. The space gendarme does not want to be restricted by any
international laws. Its intentions to put to trial its opponents by an
International Criminal Court by its own rules have the same goal: to revoke
the sovereignty of those countries that dare fight back.
This is what the ones screaming about the "people's self-determination" in
Kosovo should think about.
"Self-determination"? Is it logical?
To stop the suffering of people, we are told that Bosnia should be further
torn apart and that Kosovo must gain independence. But, why are some
entitled to self-determination and others are not?
By the end of 1991, the Great powers endorsed the secession of Croatia.
They decided that 19 percent of Croats has the sacred right to secede from
Yugoslavia under the excuse that they are subjugated by the 36 percent of
Serbs. The consequence: a dreadful war.
Only a few months later, those same powers decided that 31 percent of Serbs
have no right of seceding from Bosnia dominated by 41 percent of Moslems
and ruled by the integrationist Izetbegovic. The consequence: yet another war.
Finally, in 1995, the same powers decided that Franjo Tudjman, the Lord of
Croatia, had the right to prevent the Serbian population in Krajina to
secede, as well as the right to "cleanse" this region by fascist methods.
This had caused the greatest exodus of refugees in this war.
Is it logical? The Great powers recognize or deny the right of
self-determinations according to their own interests and according to
whether someone is conceding to them or not.
"Independence"? What will it really be?
What are the consequences of such "independence" gained under the NATO
flag? According to the provisions of the Agreement, signed in 1993 with the
International Monetary Fund, the Croats Government has no control over its
own budget, its finances, total recolonization.
In Bosnia, the real power is in the hands of the parallel government
consisting of the representatives of the West. The Constitution does not
even grant the right of a Bosnian becoming the Governor of the Central
Bank! Also, the European Bank for the reconstruction and development is the
one that decides upon the person who will responsible for the
privatization.4 In short, total recolonization.
An "independent" Kosovo of two million inhabitants would, of course, take
the same road. What if it gets unified with Albania? Since the rulers in
Tirana are already subjugated to the West, the multinational companies
already control the main assets of this country, the Farmers' Unions are
abolished, the plantations of tropical fruits and the olive trees
unattended, the swamps restored and brought back malaria, as well. The
illiteracy is back. In Tirana, the girls are again wearing the veils"4. The
United States took over the controlling of the military apparatus. And
where is the independence?
Is NATO interested in "peace"?
In most of the Balkan countries, the West has found the obedient elite,
ready to "call for help" at the adequate time. Ibrahim Rugova is America's
child. He never stops asking for the international "protectorate", meaning
the Bosnian pattern of colonization. His Minister of Information, Jaffer
Satri "wants a rapid NATO intervention" and pushes the Montenegrins to "cut
short the federation with Serbia".5
Like the Albanian Prime Minister, the Government of Macedonia also calls
for the NATO troops to increase their number in the region. "At first, the
United Nations will guard the borders between Macedonia and Kosovo with
enforced troops, supported by NATO. The final option will be the open
deployment of a NATO division". Like in Bosnia, the United Nations will
play the role of the bay leaf as well as of the advance guard.
What is NATO real interest? The maintaining of tension. A situation that
will be neither war not peace, meaning, a conflict of low intensity that
would justify the occupational strategy decided upon in Luxemburg, May 28,
1998:"To strengthen the cooperation with Albania and Macedonia, open a NATO
cell in Tirana, joint military maneuvers, establishing training centers,
allow the visits of the permanent naval NATO force in the Mediterranean to
the Albanian Port of Durres.4
Three months later, NATO made a significant move by organizing impressive
military maneuvers in the poorest country in Europe, bringing in the
soldiers from eleven countries - members and fifteen countries from the
East, with a remarkable arsenal: German "tornado", French "jaguars",
Belgian F-16, Albanian MIG-21�
When is Moscow on the agenda?
For NATO, Kosovo is just a cause. Its intention is to become the world
gendarme. It had just held maneuvers in� Africa, in Kenya! It suggests that
it is in charge of security of the oil fields in Central Asia and the gas
deposits in Algiers. To justify the future wars, the media lies are being
fabricated again.
It is therefore not a coincidence that Kosovo has burst into flames right
now. To protect the western multinational companies interests in the East,
NATO has started the process of spreading its army that will bing them at
the threshold of Moscow. In spite of the fact that many are sliding down
into poverty, billions of dollars are being spent on armament leading us to
the edge of a Great War.
Some of the American businessmen who consider that the expansion toward the
East is endangering their interests, are now beginning to place paid-for
adds over the whole page in the American newspaper saying: "Would NATO
pushing toward the Russia's door make the Russian people feel more
secure?". That would be the same feeling of security and peace would, for
example, the Russians enter the military union with Canada or Mexico,
excluding the United States. We would then sleep more relaxed, would not we?4
In the United States, in just a few months, the percent of public opinion
supporting this expansion toward the East has decreased from 63 to 49.
Therefore, in order to push forward its policy, to impose itself as the
world gendarme, NATO must "direct" the public opinion.
Someone could say:" But, is there no people and media in the West demanding
NATO to stop interfering?" At first sight, there are. This is the moment to
recall of the Hitler's statement in 1938, at the reception held for the
German press:" It is necessary to prepare the German people psychologically
at this time. You must prove that these aims can not be reached peacefully
and that violence is needed. To reach this goal you can not just resort to
violence today. You need the political situation abroad that you will
present in such a way that the German people will demand the use of
violence by itself".
Even when it seems that the western media are "pushing" the political and
military executives, they are only acting upon the already written scenario.
2. At what point do the Great powers collide?
In the Balkans, the Great powers have divided their spheres of influence.
Beside the North (Croatia, Slovenia), the German Mark is the main currency
in other countries. And in the South, the United States have gained
privileged positions: they have the dominance and military bases in Greece
and Albania, 1200 soldiers in Macedonia, are dominant in Montenegro,
established colonization and bases in Bosnia�
Today, the crisis is moving toward the South. Germany is attempting to
destabilize the region where Washington is dominant. In Frankfurt and
Stuttgart, Germany assented to the Kosovo "Government" in exile Bureaus
establishing. In March 1998, The New York Times reported that this country
has cut off the flow of weapons from this country to the Albanian guerrilla.
It all recalls of a programmed and announced destabilization. Already in
October 1997, an American newspaper reported: "A secret armed force seems
to be ready to start the secessionist war that could draw this country into
a crisis similar to the second civil war in Bosnia".4
Recently, a young Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) officer told the Sued
Deutsche Zeitung: "We are grateful to Germany for all it did for us". The
report continues: " All around Malishevo, the links of KLA and Germany are
visible: German vehicles driven, German spoken".4
Where Washington dominates, Bonn destabilizes
But this is not all of it. The former Yugoslav Republic Macedonia,
neighboring to Kosovo and Albania, also has the decisive strategic
importance. The road going from the Central Europe to Greece, meaning to
the Near East, is on its territory. In order to control this road, the
Americans have deployed �1200 soldiers.
Or, for example, the attempt of assassinating and eliminating Kiro
Gligorov, the pro-American President of Macedonia. The investigation in
Bulgaria proved that it was the act of the Bulgarian fascists, coveting
Macedonia and supported by� Germany.
In Albania, the spectacular turns of political unions are also to be
thought about. From 1991 till 1995, the United States were supporting
President Berisha, while the Europeans counted upon the Fatos Nano
Socialist Party. The US then abandoned Berisha and brought Nano into power.
And who is today supporting Berisha? Germany! This tactics is aimed at
pushing Albania into a conflict between the North (i.e. Salih Berisha and
his troops) and the South (where the Socialist Party is in power). Or:
where from do the Kosovo nationalists get the weapons and where are their
bases? In the northern Albania. Germany is the one pulling the strings.
Also, Bonn is the one goading into the military intervention against the
Serbs. Germany Minister of Defense, Volker Ruehe, practically declared war:
"The problem must be solved there where it is, in Kosovo and in Belgrade.
Serbia is dictatorship". Nothing about the revisionist Tudjman, ruling in
Zagreb, nothing about the integrationist Izetbegovic, ruling in Sarajevo.
The real sin of Serbia is in preventing the German expansion toward the
Mediterranean. And the total control of the River of Danube, a strategic
river for the communications in the next century.
His colleague, Kinkel, demanded the air strikes. For the first time after
1945, Germany had raised its aviation to "semi-combat" degree, sending its
planes of "tornado" type to the Balkans.
And the reason for this aggressiveness? Already in 1991, this question was
answered by Rupert Schultz, an influential German editorialist: "The
aftermaths of the Second World War are surmounted, it remains to liquidate
the aftermaths of the Great War�"4. The German imperialism never got over
the two defeats suffered in Yugoslavia.
In order to start the military intervention, the public opinion is being
manipulated. In June, a Dutch daily reported that NATO intervention would
be most easily supported if preceded by dramatic scenes on television.4 It
was not long after that the German media invented the mass vault in Kosovo.
Already the day after. the European observers denied this story entirely.
The story will be better prepared next time.
The German Chancellor has already announced the humanitarian catastrophe in
Kosovo in winter 1998/1999 and again demanded NATO intervention. Germany is
expelling the refugees, while at the same time goading the war, pushing
thousand of Albanians into painful exile in this way. People are just pawns.
Regarding the military aspect, Washington plays the role of "The Lone Ranger"
Officially, Bonn rejects the idea of the independent Kosovo. But this is
not the first time it plays a double role. Already in the eighties, Bonn
pretended to be respectful of Yugoslavia's integrity. At the same time, its
secret service BND was covertly preparing for the secession (and arming) of
Croatia, as shown in our book "The Poker Trickster".
The German leaders learned some lesson from the Slovenian-Croats secession
when they floored their Allies. They are still advancing hidden behind the
European Mask. But their ambitions are the same.
Bonn is bothered by the United States dominations. North of the Albanian
City of Shkoder 800 American soldiers are deployed securing the vital
observations tower of the US aviation (Albania is called "the Land of the
eagles", linked to the Taszar base in Hungary and another one in Macedonia.
All in accordance with the bilateral agreements, Washington reached
directly with these countries.
"These three American bases", writes the Belgian Professor Bardos, "operate
beyond the Euro-Atlantic NATO frames, in other words, out of the range of
the European Allies' inspection". Since 1992, from these bases in the
direction of Yugoslavia large spying aircrafts "AWACS" take off, which,
because of this, are allowed to fly over numerous Middle European
countries. "In this way", continues Bardos, "these aircraft can through
electronic gadgets "see and hear" all the way to Moscow. The Albanian ports
are at the American Navy disposition, thus encircling the strategic
advantages leaning on the largest naval base in the Mediterranean (at the
eastern part of Corfu). This base is controlled by the Americans, as well.4
Albania is a strategic stronghold. During the 1997 uprising, Washington was
forced to evacuate from this small country more than four thousand people:
the multinational companies' staff, non-governmental organization that in
fact are not what they claim to be, diplomats, missionaries, in short CIA
in all its robes
Bardos is right. Far from placing all his bets on NATO, Washington plays
the role of the Lone Ranger in military aspects. In April, 1996, the
Governments in the Balkans were developing Agreements on security and
cooperation. This was not in accordance with the United States aims and
their Secretary of State, William Perry, convened a conference in Tirana.
The most obedient countries were invited: Turkey, Bulgaria, Macedonia,
Albania and Italia, being at the United States' side. Not invited were:
Yugoslavia, but also Germany or France, rivals the United States wanted to
dispose of.4
The United States double talk
Having established firm positions regarding Germany, it is in the United
States' interest to maintain "stability". They are not favoring
"independent" Kosovo or "Great Albania", embracing all the Albanians,
because this would cause tumults in Macedonia where a rather large Albanian
minority lives. It might also provoke the conflict between its prot�g�es -
Greece and Turkey - wanting to play the roles of "regional powers".
This is why Clinton stated that "the territory of Kosovo is the legal part
of Serbia" and that "negotiations"4 should take place. In fact, the United
States often support both sides and can thus, rather quickly, break off
their associations. Last spring, obviously, the States made promises to
both sides.
Favorable breezes revealed the subject matters of the meeting held in March
last year between the Clinton's Special Envoy and Rugova, the Kosovo
Albanians President. Basically, this is what was said:
Holbrooke: " Go negotiate with Milosevic. Your goal must be an autonomous
republic within Yugoslavia. In Montenegro, a leader favoring us will soon
come into power. With two votes against one (Montenegro and Kosovo against
Serbia -our note), we will control Yugoslavia".
Rugova: " I do thank you, but I am being cautious. Our key word is
independence. It is not possible within Yugoslavia. But I will do what you
are asking me to do".
Holbrooke: "Do it for the time being. We shall see about later".
The United States are now opposing Kosovo independence, but under the
influence of Germany, they might make a step further and bet on the Kosovo
Albanians separatism. As they did in Bosnia, supporting the Moslem
nationalist Izetbegovic.
The immediate tactics is unimportant. Each Great power has its own double
talk and the behind the scene maneuvers differ from the official
statements. In any case, no nation can give its trust to any Great power.
To believe that the "oppression" could be avoided by hurling itself into
the embrace of the wester multinational companies, NATO, CIA or BND means
daydreaming.
A progressive alternative
To believe that the Great powers want to make the Balkan nations happy,
means believing in Santa. The nazi Germany brought only destruction into
this region. "Old history, different regime", will be certainly the answer�
But the "democratic" United States supported the Colonels' military coup in
Greece in the same way they are supporting the fascist generals in Turkey.
In Yugoslavia, both Bonn and Washington stir up the most belligerent
forces. The only thing that matters are their egoistic interests.
For the Balkan nations to democratically and peacefully solve their
problems, the first precondition is to prevent the Great powers'
influencing. As only unity bring strength, it is in the interest of these
nations to put their common interest before the United States and Germany
domination.
However, it is impossible to build such unity if each nation does not fight
its own chauvinism, if each nation does not fight the national minorities'
oppression. This is the responsibility of all the progressive and truly
peace-loving forces: to actively pursue dialogue in order to bring the
Balkan nations together against the common enemies.
01. Michel Collon, Pokeur manteur, Editions EPO, Brussels 1998.
02. El Pais (Spanija), November 12, 1995.
03. Wall Street Journal, June 7, 1996.
04. Revue de l'Otan, mars 1996., p.4.
05. Etudes marxistes (Belgija), Septembre 1996.
06. Michel Collon, op. cit.
07. Unsere Zeit, June, 28 1998.
08. Solidaire, 1 er juillet 1998.
09. Michel Collon, op. cit. p.334.
10. Solidaire, June 24, 1998.
11. Le Matin, May 28, 1998.
12. Sunday Telegraph, May 3, 1998.
13. Le Soir, May 29, 1998.
14. The Guardia (Kanada), 6 May 1998.
15. International Herald Tribune, October 20, 1997.
16. Suddeutsche Zeitung, 4 juillet 1998.
17. Solidaire, 1 er juillet 1998.
18. NRC Handelsblad, 6 juin 1998.
19. Sentiers de la paih, mai 1998.
20. Borba, March 9, 1998.
21. Arta (SAD), 7 May 1998.
>From "SMISAO" The Serbia Socialist Party Theoretic Periodical January 1999,
No. 6 Publicist, Free University, Brussels, Belgium
____________________________________________________________
New Dawn Magazine,
GPO Box 3126FF,
Melbourne, VIC 3001
AUSTRALIA
http://www.newdawnmagazine.com.au
-> Send "subscribe snetnews " to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-> Posted by: Support <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
