----- Original Message ----- 
From: Rick Rozoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2000 7:41 AM
Subject: [STOPNATO] Human Rights And Peace Groups Want To Take NATO To The Hague


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

http://www.fr-aktuell.de/english/index.htm
Frankfurter Rundschau
June 8, 2000  



Nato-Tribunal 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ALTERNATIVE TRIBUNAL WIDENS CHARGES OVER KOSOVO WAR 

Human rights and peace groups want to take Nato to The
Hague 

By Peter Nowak 

Berlin - An alternative "European tribunal" in Berlin
passed judgment on Nato at the weekend, finding the
transatlantic organisation guilty of crimes committed
in the war over Kosovo.

The white dove of peace is normally a rare sight, yet
it was the centre of attention as it rested on the
altar of Berlin's Church of the Holy Cross. For two
days the church provided the venue for the unofficial
"European Tribunal for the Nato War Against
Yugoslavia" and its more than 300 participants.
Patterned along the lines of the Russell Tribunal set
up to investigate the Vietnam War, the "case" against
Nato was prepared by more than 60 human rights and
peace groups, including the International League for
Human Rights, medico international and the Christian
Peace Conference.

The chair was taken by the Hamburg-based international
lawyer Norman Paech who stressed that the tribunal was
exclusively concerned with the legal judgment of the
war. The charge, read by jurist Ulrich Dost, accused
Nato members of having provoked the war and, through
the conduct in the war, of having seriously breached
international law.

The tribunal then heard numerous witnesses, both lay
and expert.

Most of their arguments are well-known. Ralph
Hartmann, Communist East Germany's former ambassador
to Yugoslavia, for example, accused the German
government of having deliberately pursued policies to
speed the breakup of Yugoslavia since the early 1990s,
while author Diana Johnstone opined that geostrategic
considerations had prompted the United States
government to back the war in early 1999.

On trial at the mock court, naturally in absentia,
were the leaders and top generals of all Nato states,
as well as German parliamentarians who had voted for
military intervention. None of them deigned to follow
the invitation to defend themselves before the
tribunal thus clearing the way for Russian jurist
Valentina Strauss to assume the part of court-assigned
defence counsel. She claimed that the role of
international organisations such as the United Nations
at the outbreak of war was not adequately covered by
the indictment.

But there was no doubt over the tribunal's verdict:
that the defendants are guilty as charged. Next
weekend, a similar tribunal will be staged in New York
under the chairmanship of former US Attorney General
Ramsey Clark. The next step is to pass the judgments
to the International Court in The Hague, although as
announced at the Berlin Tribunal, the war crimes court
in The Hague has already rejected calling Nato to
account on the ground that it had not deliberately
targeted civilians. "The tribunal in The Hague," said
a disgruntled Paech, "is a Nato-financed, one-eyed
talking shop which only serves to rule on Serb war
crimes." 

 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com


______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
______________________________________________________________________
Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com

Reply via email to