>From: "John Catalinotto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: "Yugoslavia in crisis--reports and analysis" from IAC
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

>
>
>Yugoslavia in Crisis--reports and analyses
>
>Dear Friends
>
>In light of the grave events in Belgrade Oct. 5, 2000 and
>the threat of a complete U.S.-NATO takeover of Yugoslavia,
>the International Action Center has decided to set up a new
>section on its web site called "Yugoslavia in
>Crisis--reports and analyses." Here we will reproduce some
>of the reports and analyses from sources independent of the
>corporate media, both organizationally and ideologically.
>Where possible this will include reports from Yugoslavia
>written by honest journalists who have proven themselves
>opposed to the NATO bombing campaign and war of 1999.
>
> The articles include reports from Michel Collon, author of
>two books on the Balkan crisis and a resolute anti-war and
>anti-NATO activist, Ruediger Goebel, an editor and
>correspondent from the German progressive daily newspaper,
>Junge Welt, who was in Yugoslavia during the NATO bombing
>campaign writing daily articles, and Tanja Djurovic, a Junge
>Welt correspondent from Belgrade. We will also publish IAC
>analyses and those from other non-corporate sources.
>
>Where we receive articles not in English, we will include
>the original language as well as our English translation.
>
>You can find this material at www.iacenter.org on the home
>page under the above title. For your information, we include
>some sample reports from the correspondents.
>
>Yours in struggle,
>Sara Flounders and John Catalinotto
>October 9, 2000
>
>
> BELGRADE JOURNAL - Friday October 6, 3 p.m.
>
>Michel Collon
>
>
>
>The 8 questions of the day
>
> I shall try to answer the 8 questions that sum up the
>events : 1. Did the TV show all ? 2. Did we experience a
>well-prepared coup-d'Etat ? 3. What is the U.S. trying to
>accomplish in the current situation ? 4. Did people vote for
>Kostunica or against Milosevic ? 5. Why did those in power
>not forsee their electoral setback ? 6. Were the elections
>truly free and fair ? 7. Are those people who support
>Kostunica also for the United States ? 8. What is going to
>happen ?
>
>1. Did the TV show all ? Nothing to add to the images
>presented by BBC and CNN. In effect there was an enormous
>crowd, the police put up a very weak resistance and above
>all looked for ways to avoid serious confrontations. But
>what I didn't see exposed on the Western networks was the
>plundering of the headquarters of the Socialist Party (while
>Kostunica had announced that there should be no
>revenge-taking toward the parties), and the buildings of
>various public enterprises. Neither was shown the broken
>windows of a certain number of stores in the center, which
>were subsequently looted. I personally saw demonstrators
>leave center city by the bridge over the Sava, while
>carrying on their shoulders stolen computers. In the center
>also, those not demonstrating found it deplorable that
>people were destroying public property : " We'll have to pay
>for it. " But the most important thing is that the
>opposition succeeded in bringing out an enormous
>mobilization and that those in power were unable to oppose
>it with a counter-mobilization.
>
>2. Carefully prepared coup d'Etat ? The demonstrators were
>led by some hundreds of very active young people, most of
>whom had come from Cacak, Kragujevac and other opposition
>strongholds (Belgrade is luke-warm). You could say that they
>proceeded methodically to take control of a series of key
>places. First of all, the Parliament. Obviously a symbol.
>Still one could notice that Mr. Kostunica, always presented
>as a convinced legalist and constitutionalist, had taken
>over the Parliament at the moment when that Parliament had
>just been elected and that the opposition was not
>challenging the results of the parliamentary elections. What
>does the USA want ? We shall soon see. Next, the television
>station RTS. Just like in Romania in 1989 and in each coup
>d'Etat, to take over the big media centers and deprive the
>enemy of the right of response seems to have become
>Objective Number 1. The other media centers and certain
>buildings of public enterprises followed.
>
> This systematic and well-planned character of the action
>reminded one that the real chief of the opposition, Zoran
>Djindjic, had declared several months ago to Greek TV that
>if they failed to win the elections, they would take over
>parliament. This was nothing new. In 1993 in Moscow, Yeltsin
>- backed by the U.S. - had burned down Parliament [the
>Russian Duma] and killed a number of deputies that had been
>resisting him. Another opposition leader, Mrs. Pesic, had
>raised the need to " create a Bucharest syndrome. " These
>things were prepared long in advance.
>
>3. Why is the U.S. still pushing for a test of strength ?
>Why this attempt at a total confrontation ? Why do they
>refuse all negociated compromise that would permit them to
>avoid the risk of a bloodbath ? Because they know that the
>opposition that they are about to lead to power suffers two
>serious weaknesses that could be fatal to it, and without
>needed to wait long years for these weaknesses to show. What
>are these weaknesses ?
>
>First, the DOS coalition is completely heterogenous.
>Nineteen (18 ?) parties that have nothing in common but the
>will to take power and a taste for dollars from Washington.
>In this coalition you can find people who have fought each
>other more or less to the death for years (Djindjic had
>pushed out Kostunica and many others), monarchists and
>republicans, Serbian nationalists and separatists (from
>Sandjak and Vojvodinje) whose programs are diametrically
>opposed. Once in office, it is clear they will once again
>begin making the gravest splits and conflicts of interests.
>It will be absolutely impossible to carry out the programs
>of all the parties. The magic of " Unity behind Kostunica "
>won't last long.
>
>In addition, and this is the second factor, the DOS will
>strongly disillusion its electors. Those voters, financially
>and morally exhausted by 10 years of sanctions, desire to "
>live normally, " (that's the idea that was most frequently
>expressed to me by the demonstrators that I questioned on
>October 5), that is to have a standard of living as close as
>possible to that of the West. But, as we have already
>explained in an earlier article, the opposition's G-17
>program forsees the liquidation of social protections and
>the public enterprises, massive layoffs and carte blanche
>for the multinational corporations to buy the enterprises
>they are interested in and to more effectively exploit the
>workers. A few people will live better, many will live
>worse.
>
>With the result that, sooner or later, Kostunica will
>disillusion his supporters and they will give up hope. Will
>there be an alternative then ? Could the left parties and
>those who defend the independence of the country return to
>power (on the condition that they carry out certain
>self-examinations, as we will see) as could be the case in
>the next elections in three neighboring countries :
>Macedonia, the Serb Republic in Bosnia and Romania ? It is
>just to avoid this possibility of a legitimate return to
>power in the next elections that the U.S. is trying so hard
>to break the current governmental apparatus and that of the
>left parties in Yugoslavia.
>
>In the last elections in Macedonia, the left candidate was
>leading, but violent incidents grew to the point that the
>leader of the left finally pulled back for fear of very
>violent confrontations. We should point out that U.S. and
>other troops occupy this country and there is no doubt their
>intervention is aimed at stopping the left. We add that for
>the West that claims it is so careful of legality, the
>elections in Macedonia were " perfect. "
>
>4. Did people vote for Kostunica or against Milosevic ? The
>latter answer is correct according to many people I spoke
>with. Despite his 10 years in power, Milosevic had acquired
>a great prestige during the war for firmly resisting NATO,
>which is what corresponded to the will of all his people.
>But the party in power wasted its opportunities by commiting
>two major errors.
>
> First, it permitted, even favored the growth of social
>inequalities. Yes, sanctions (embargo) are a crime the West
>imposed that made the population suffer cruelly. But that
>public had also seen certain outrageously large fortunes
>grow up under its eyes. It is incorrect to claim, as the
>Western media does, that " all the nomenklatura lives in
>luxury. " I managed to visit the appartments of certain
>mid-level ministry officials - they were just as modest as
>those of the neighbors, in the socially constructed
>buildings that had nothing of luxury about them.
>Nevertheless, there were also scandalous life-styles of
>those in business and in trafficking. To hold onto its
>support, the regime would have to fight against the interest
>of those with large fortunes and devote more effort to
>social services to aid the poorest people.
>
>In addition, the communication strategy of the leadership as
>well as the public media had not proven fruitful. A number
>of jokes circulated about RTS television and messages from
>the top leadership had lost their credibility when it was
>constantly repeated that all was going well.
>
>5. Why didn't Milosevic see it coming ? How could it be that
>Milosevic had decided to call these early elections himself
>? And that, up to the last minute, the parties in power
>showed themselves sure of winning, so much so that they were
>taken completely aback when they had to " manage " their
>defeat ?
>
>A certain bureaucratism is involved in the answer. You can
>find among the officials and functionaries many very devoted
>people, full of enthusiasm to defend their country. You also
>find a certain number of bureaucrats who never tire of
>looking for solutions to problems. And one has the very
>clear impression that the reports that they send to the "
>top " are of the sort : " All is very well, your grace. "
>Those in power had not taken into consideration that they
>had lost a great part of the popularity they had during the
>war. They believed that the elections were in their pocket.
>And their campaign strategy was not good : Milosevic absent,
>the self-satisfied discourses on reconstrution that is real,
>but also negating the social problem and a systematic
>message of the sort that " all will be very well " that had
>lost its credibility.
>
> 6. Were the elections truly free and fair ? Of course, this
>attempt at an analysis of the weaknesses of the parties in
>office removes nothing from what we have already shown. Yes,
>the elections were not at all free and fair. When you
>bombard a people, destroy their factories, their electricity
>and heating plants, their roads and their bridges, when you
>throw horrible weapons like fragmentation bombs and depleted
>uranium at them, when you submit the population to a
>disgusting extortion - " Vote for the pro-West parties or
>you will continue to starve " -- when you spread hundreds of
>millions of dollars to aid certain political parties to
>deceive the people with the help of advisers specialized in
>scientific methods of organizing campaigns based on lies,
>they one has to conclude that if these elections are as free
>and fair, then Jamie Shea [spokesperson for NATO during the
>bombing campaign] is a sincere and objective person.
>
>7. Are those people who support Kostunica also for the
>United States ? A argued with Kostunica's supports. It was
>instructive. Since the opposition parties are financed -
>grossly - by Washington, one could believe that Kostunica's
>supporters were also partial to the United States.
>
>False. A proverb that the Serbs apply to themselves with a
>sort of self-mocking, points this out : " If you have two
>Serbs, you will have three opinions. " Many demonstrators
>spontaneously told me " We are not NATO. " A hairdresser of
>French origin, having recognized me in the street (following
>my television appearances), came spontaneously to let me
>know that he greatly appreciated my criticisms against NATO,
>but that I had been wrong to put the opposition parties in
>the same bag. " We here detest the Americans, we know very
>well what they are and what their interests are. "
>
>" But we want no more of Milosevic. We want to live normally
>without sanctions and like you others in the West. " Like
>the unemployed and those on welfare in the West or like the
>rich of the West ? Doesn't he realize that the Western
>multinational corporations will not bring prosperity here
>but a harsher exploitation ? No, this type of talk, for the
>moment, they don't want to hear : " You could be right, but
>we have to try it, we want change, change ! And if these new
>leaders don't keep their promises, we will change again ! "
>That though is a grand illusion, to believe that NATO will
>permit a " step back. " But that is the current mood.
>
>Another element to take notice of is that the DOS election
>campaign strategy succeeded in promoting a strange but
>effective idea : Milosevic was in fact a tool of the United
>States - he served them and helped maintain their influence.
>That idea doesn't hold up - why would the U.S. do everything
>it could to eliminate the one that served them so well - but
>certain people bought it anyway. Indeed, it was a classic
>method of advertising : those who steal, cry " Stop, thief.
>" Those who are paid by the [north] Americans, seem to by
>crying " Down with the United States ! "
>
>8. Que va-t-il se passer? Cette apres-midi, une vie plus ou
>moins normale a repris dans les rues, encore que les
>commerces restent fermes. Mais l'opposition veut maintenir
>ses troupes dans le centre, pour eviter toute intervention
>policiere de reprise en mains. Elle annonce une mobilisation
>plus importante encore. D'une part, l'opposition DOS cherche
>a conclure une alliance au parlement en faisant eclater le
>parti montenegrin de Bulatovic et en y trouvant les voix qui
>leur manquent pour acquerir la majorite. On peut etre
>certain que les dollars de Washington servent d'appat. De
>l'autre cote, le gouvernement cherche la parade sans l'avoir
>trouve. Il affirme ne pas vouloir lancer l'arm�e pour eviter
>un bain de sang, il demande que la l�galit� soit respectee.
>Il s'efforce de retrouver un m�dia qui lui permette de faire
>passer son message. Mais sa strat�gie de communication
>s'avere toujours aussi lente et chaotique. On attend en vain
>une prise de position officielle. Ilosevic pourrait
>prononcer un discours... On attend. A bientot!
>
>8. What will happen ? This afternoon [Oct. 6], a
>more-or-less normal life returned to the streets, although
>the shops remained closed. But the opposition wants to keep
>its troops in the center to avoid all possible police
>intervention to retake it. It announced an even larger
>mobilization. On the one hand, the DOS opposition is looking
>to conclude a parliamentary alliance by splitting up
>Bulatovic's Montenegrin party and finding there teh votes
>that they lack to obtain a majority. One can be certain that
>Washington's dollars will serve as bait. On the other hand,
>the government is looking for a path of action without
>finding it. It affirms it doesn't want to call out the army
>because it wants to avoid a bloodbath, and demands that
>legality be respected. It tries to find a media that will
>allow it to spread its message. But its strategy of
>communication is still slow and chaotic. One waits in vain
>for an official position. Milosevic could be making a speech
>� one waits. Soon.
>
>
>
> NATO is getting ready to pick up the harvest. By Tanja
>Djurovic, Belgrade
>
>"I've just received information from official sources that
>Vojislav Kostunica won the elections. I congratulate Mr.
>Kostunica on his election victory...", said recent Yugoslav
>president Slobodan Milosevic in his address to the nation
>broadcast on Yu-Info TV channel on Friday (Oct. 6),
>admitting defeat in the presidential elections by his
>opponent Vojislav Kostunica, candidate of Democratic
>opposition of Serbia (DOS).
>
>"I personally intend to take a short break, to spend more
>time with my family, and then, afterwards, to primarily
>strengthen my party...Socialist party of Serbia will be a
>very strong opposition" finished Milosevic his address
>making it clear that he has no intention of fleeing the
>country, or leaving political life.
>
>This seems to be the epilogue of election crisis in
>Yugoslavia and two-week long fight between Milosevic and
>Kostunica for presidency of FRY, which culminated on
>Thursday in Belgrade with mass and violent protests
>orchestrated by DOS.
>
>Vojislav Kostunica made his oath on Saturday night in
>Belgrade "Sava Center", by which he officially became new
>president of Yugoslavia. On the joint constitutive sessions
>of both chambers of Federal Parliament, Kostunica bounded
>himself to "respect and implement the Constitution of FRY
>and federal laws, to preserve the sovereignty, independence
>and integrity of FRY..."
>
>Earlier in the night, both chambers of the Yugoslav
>Parliament were constituted for the new session. The Chamber
>of Citizens verified 119 out of 138 deputy mandates, and
>Chamber of Republics 39 out of 40 mandates.
>
>In both chambers of the Federal Parliament the
>representatives of Milosevic's left coalition have the
>majority. This was clear from the start, and even DOS
>representatives agreed to it.
>
>Still, Milosevic's obvious presence in Yugoslav capital and
>appearance on TV, putting the end to rumors and wild guesses
>as to his whereabouts and intentions, came as a shock to DOS
>leaders and their supporters, who had been convinced that
>ex-Yugoslav president had long since left Belgrade, if not
>indeed the country. That, coupled with the fact that a
>leftist government might be formed soon, is casting a shadow
>on DOS's present advantage.
>
>Zoran Djindjic, DOS campaign manager, gave a statement to
>the press immediately after Milosevic's address on Friday,
>saying that Slobodan Milosevic is just preparing a blow from
>the back and intends to consolidate the police forces, so he
>could come back on scene as a tough hand. Obviously afraid
>that someone or something can still endanger their
>"democratic revolution", Djindjic finished rather
>paranoically: "I do not trust Milosevic!"
>
>Still, if Milosevic is not to be trusted, why not accept the
>assurances and congratulations offered to Kostunica by
>thehighest representatives of the army and police? It seems
>that DOS's fear of one man and his presence is so great,
>that not even the fact that those institutions didn't react
>during Thursday's vandalistic demonstrations can reassure
>the Serbian opposition.
>
>Perhaps the DOS is simply being aware of its own fragility:
>from the very beginning, it has been highly dependent on
>foreign support and money. This ad hoc alliance of some 18
>parties has only one common ground and program - to oust
>Milosevic.
>
>Not to forget that the DOS candidate, newly-proclaimed FRY
>president Kostunica, is a leader of a small party with low
>support from the people, and a man of low significance. The
>person running the show for this particular puppet on a
>string is Zoran Djindjic, who in his own turn is a puppet of
>the administration in Washington.
>
>Not to forget that over 2 million Yugoslav citizens voted
>against Kostunica precisely for the above mentioned reasons,
>knowing who the powers behind DOS are and not wanting to be
>a part of "Pax Americana".
>
>"Slobodan Milosevic had very little or no chance at all"
>said Petar Raskov (70), a Federal court judge on pension,
>underlining that pressure exercised on Serbia, of power,
>money and media combined, was too heavy for Serbian people
>not to yield. "Milosevic was the only man to preserve the
>FRY resistance to NATO's "Drang nach Osten" (Push to the
>East) strategy. I couldn't vote for NATO, not even if it
>puts on a disguise of Serbian nationalist with anti-American
>policy".
>
>As for those who did - a gun at man's temple can be a good
>incentive, and endlessly repeated "international community"
>treats to Serbian people that as long as Milosevic is
>Yugoslav president, sanctions against their country won't be
>lifted, obviously influenced the ultimate decision,
>especially with the young people.
>
>"I didn't vote for Kostunica, he is nobody!" says Milan
>Ristic (24), a student from Belgrade. "But his victory might
>bring better days for Yugoslavia. I voted against Milosevic,
>because the whole world was against him!"
>
>Therefore, after plowing Yugoslav land with bombs and
>missiles in Spring of 1999, after fertilizing it for over a
>year with media-launched lies and money, Military Alliance
>of the West is getting ready to pick up the harvest.
>
>END
>
>


_______________________________________________________

KOMINFORM
P.O. Box 66
00841 Helsinki - Finland
+358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081
e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.kominf.pp.fi

_______________________________________________________

Kominform  list for general information.
Subscribe/unsubscribe  messages to

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Anti-Imperialism list for anti-imperialist news.

Subscribe/unsubscribe messages:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________________


Reply via email to