Živadin Jovanović
NATO Aggression against Yugoslavia - 17 years after
THE START OF GLOBAL INSTABILITY[i]
As clearly demonstrated by ensuing developments, NATO aggression of 1999
against Serbia (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) was the beginning of a
series of aggression and interventionism. This has evolved into a dominant
global trend of use of force, accompanied by huge problems such as the
devastation of sovereign countries, massive influx of refugees, spreading of
terrorism and militarization of international relations. Adding to this
prolonged financial and economic crisis, the continuous deepening of the gap
between the developed and the developing parts of the world and the growing
distrust and confrontation, the resulting outcome is a global instability.
After NATO aggression on the FRY, there followed the assault of the
"coalition of the willing" comprising mainly NATO members and the occupation
of Afghanistan in 2001. Next was the armed aggression against Iraq.
The "willing ones", led by the USA, invaded Afghanistan in order to crush
Al-Qaeda and those responsible for the attack on the World Trade Centre in
New York and the Pentagon in Washington. In parallel, the fight against
terrorism spread onto the territories of other states, notably -
neighbouring Pakistan and also onto Iraq, Yemen, Somalia and some other
countries. In reality we have witnessed is the unprecedented expansion of
terrorism in the Near and Middle East, Africa and its subsequent spill-over
to Europe - ranging from Turkey through France and Belgium to Spain and the
United Kingdom. Up to now.
Since the first attack of "the willing", hundreds of thousands of Afghan
civilians, including women, children, wedding parties, doctors and medics
have been killed. The production of heroin in occupied Afghanistan
skyrocketed for more than 40 times over. As for Pakistan, many people have
been killed as the victims of both - terrorists and "the willing" ones
fighting the terrorists.
When it comes to Iraq, we have to recall that the aggression, also without
the Security Council mandate, was launched under the false pretext of
searching for the weapons of mass destruction. The crimes committed in
infamous Abu Ghraib, Basra, and the hundreds of thousands of killed
civilians were, in cold blood, declared to be the victims of "worthy
causes"! Neither Clinton, or Albright or Blair ever took to explain what
causes could justify hundreds of thousands of killed civilians, women and
children!
Then followed attacks by individual NATO members against Libya, in breach of
the United Nations Security Council mandate, that continue to the present
day. Among the casualties of the latest attacks of the United States armed
forces on Libya were also two Serbian diplomats. Today, our hearts and minds
go to them and their families and the Serbian diplomacy; they are also the
victims of the globalized interventionism inasmuch as were the victims of
NATO aggression in 1999. In one form or another, external aggressions kept
relentlessly spreading to Yemen, Mali, Somalia, Syria, up to the coup in
Kiev. The blueprint for all of them was established in 1999 and 2000 in
Serbia (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia).
A new "democratic" standard: the might above the law
The military interventionism by the US-led NATO has developed into a global
phenomenon. Its goal is also global - to forcibly introduce full control
over all major resources on the planet, from geopolitical, infrastructural
and economic ones to natural and human resources, by means of violating all
norms of the international relations and by devastating international
institutions that happen to be in the way of the ruthless greed and
expansion.
The force of the law is replaced by the right of the might, as demonstrates
the motto of NATO after the aggression on Serbia (the FRY) in 1999. "The
might should be above the law" - is an excerpt from the US strategy
presented in the famous letter Willy Wimmer addressed to Chancellor Gerhard
Schroeder, dated 2 May 2000[1]. Thus the way was paved for the globalization
of authoritarianism, this time dressed in the dress of democracy.
And what these "fighters" for democracy, civilians, human rights and
minority rights, protectors of the self-proclaimed "national interests" have
left behined? In short, they left chaos; millions of killed and wounded,
tens of millions of refugees and displaced people; warring nations, tribes,
religions; devastated communities and state territories torn apart; the
so-called Islamic State and the globalized terrorism; militarization; the
arms race; the global distrust and confrontation.
Equality and partnership without wars
Our friend Zahari Zahariev from Bulgria, has voiced a warning about the risk
of global conflict. We hope and make all what we can to avoid it. Our hopes
and expectations are stemming from the profound changes in the global
constellation of power shifting in favour of the forces of peace,
cooperation on an equal footing, observance of the international law and,
most notably, observance of the principle of sovereign equality and the
restoration of the role of the United Nations as the umbrella organization
of the global community of nations. The era of the one polar world order and
the system of liberal corporative capitalism are on an irreversible path to
history; we hope and believe that, together with them, also go NATO as their
key lever and the relic of the Cold War. Still, in spite of this, we must
not ignore the fact that the minds of the ideologues of 'exceptionalism' and
'missionary role' do not function in the same fashion as the minds of
ordinary people. Judging by their classifications of 'the good' versus 'the
evil', of 'friends' vs. 'foes', 'justice' vs. 'injustice', 'terrorists' vs.
'moderate opposition', or their definitions of 'fighters for freedom and
democracy', we cannot help concluding that there is still a big number of
'strategists' who believe that any means is allowed in the defending of
privileges in international affairs and grabbing other people`s assets.
The most dangerous ones are the 'shadow structures' and the powerful ones
who deem that history, which refuses to voluntary accept its own end, may be
destroyed, punished or at least halted. They deny everything and everyone
that pose an obstacle to the lawlessness and the sheer egotism they had used
over the past decades and centuries. It is slowly dawning on them that they
can no more rely on privileges and 'exceptionalism' in international
relations, yet not wish to relinquish them voluntarily. Russia, China and
other BRICS countries, just like the majority of states in the world
community do not accept to submit to anybody else's will. So, are the
proponents of the 'exceptionalism' theory going to concede to equality and
partnership in global affairs, or are they going to reach for the weapons
including, maybe, the nuclear ones, in a bid to preserve the old and to
acquire new privileges? Are they going to admit the true goals of their
continuous military expansion to the East since 1999, ranging from USA Camp
"Bondsteel" to 'rotating commands' and the so-called missile defense shields
deployed along the Russian borders? The future peace and stability depend on
the answers to these and similar questions.
Militarization and totalitarism
Those who have been enjoying impunity while trampling the fundamental
principles of the United Nations Charter, generating chaos and
'low-intensity conflicts', toppling and appointing leaders of other nations,
those who pay no regard to the legitimate interests of other nations and
states, those used to making others pay for the failures of their own
policies, and those used to always have the last say, even deceiving their
own people and the world public, will certainly not stop short of taking
chances! And this is precisely the source of a great danger.
Shortly after NATO aggression of 1999, on Serbian territory near the town of
Uroševac, was built the largest US military base in Europe, some say the
largest in the world outside the US soil, Camp "Bondsteel". This was the
first in the chain of the mushrooming American military bases. The next
three bases were erected in Bulgaria, whereas the additional four in
Romania. The chain continues up to the so-called anti-missile defense
shields in Poland, Romania and some other countries, creeping closer to the
borders of Russia.
Europe of today hosts more American and NATO military bases than at the
pinnacle of the Cold War! The Berlin Wall is long gone, as is the Warsaw
Pact, there is no more Soviet Union or the two confronting social systems,
or the 'axis of evil'. So, what could be the objective of the skyrocketing
number of foreign military bases in Europe, the amassing of troops and
military hardware on European soil, the militarization of the process of
political decision-making, the militarization of the media, and the growth
in military spending? Is there a plausible answer to these questions?
Given that we are under domination of pro-NATO oriented media, worldwide and
especially in Europe, including Serbia, and being burdened by the growing
social and economic problems, we have less and less possibility and time to
spare to reconsider the veracity of messages sent from TV stations, NATO
newsrooms and other militarization-dominated places. We should ponder the
objective of the introducing of airspace control ranging from the Baltic Sea
to Anatolia, in a line resembling the times of the Roman Empire. These all
are significant new moments that deserve to be taken into account.
A consequence of 1999 NATO aggression against Serbia (the FRY) was the
militarization, not only in terms of physical buildup of weaponry and
troops, but also in terms of militarization of the process of political
decision-making. European institutions, national and regional, have
increasingly been morphing into global tendency of making decisions in
narrow circles in the matters like military spending, new foreign bases,
privileges and immunity of NATO troops, up to the matter of membership to
military alliances and the question of war and peace. Washington concept of
democracy was introduced as universal obligation for all, especially for
countries in transition. Wherever is not accepted voluntarily, it is imposed
by subversive methods and force.
The funds are being allocated to weapons, while millions of people leave
their homes in the Middle East seeking jobs in Europe. They are not sluggish
lazy people seeking easy life, as maliciously depicted, nor ones striving to
disrupt the Europeans' wellbeing. These are people expelled from their homes
as collateral of actions of the West and their Arab allies, they are people
struggling to survive and in search for the daily bread. These people have
no alternatives for survival. This is why they cannot be stopped by fences
or patrols, on land or at seas. The West holds the key to their plight. That
key is - stop aggressions, wars, interventions! First of all, the West
should stop funding, arming, and training of terrorists! Disrupt supplying
of the so-called "moderate opposition; tell conservative regimes in the
region not to finance and arm ISIS! Instead of making deals with Turkey,
they should resort to investments and development of the countries in the
Middle East and Central Asia, and thus offer to younger generations a
different, better alternative than the one offered by the ideologists of
jihad.
It should be noted that Russia and China have already evolved into global
factors in international economic and political relations. The establishment
of the Asian Infrastructure Development Bank with some 60 signatories, the
BRICS Development Bank, and some other brand new institutions and projects
of global relevance (such as the 21st Century New Silk Road) are clearly
witnessing that the era of monopoly in regulating international affairs has
ended.
There are no major international problems that could be solved without an
equal participation of Russia and China. I also hold this to be the
presumption for a just and sustainable solution of the status of Kosovo and
Metohija, in line with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244. The
deals tabled by the commissionaires in Brussels and Washington requesting
Serbia to renounce her constitutional order, homeland, historical identity,
and adherence to UNSCR 1244, for the sake of a 'realism' and 'European
agenda' can hardly amount to anything else than an apparent simulacrum and
an illusion of an ersatz solution.
NATO's version of history
The revision of history was not triggered, but instead accelerated by NATO
1999 aggression. The process history revision involves great many interests
and participants, but a special role has been assigned to the Hague
Tribunal. This is a mechanism that, among other things, aims to replace the
historians and leave its own - or rather, NATO's - version of history, in
particular a part refereeing to the last decades of history of former
Yugoslavia. For the vast majority of people in Serbia, the Hague Tribunal is
but an extended arm of NATO, one that does not dispense justice but instead
pronounces verdicts, primarily against the members of the Serbian peoples.
Tomorrow, on March 24rth is 17th anniversary of the beginning of the NATO
aggression. Tomorow the Hague tribunal is scheduled to pronounce the
sentencing of Radovan Karadžić, formerly the first President of the Republic
of Srpska. Although not proponents of the conspiracy theories, we deem it is
not mere coincidence that the sentencing of Radovan Karadžić was scheduled
on the anniversary of the beginning of the aggression against Serbia (the
FRY). "Coincidence" is aimed at diverting the public attention from yet
another public exposure of NATO crimes committed against the Serbian nation
and citizens 17 years ago, onto the sentencing of President Karadžić. From
tomorrow onwards, we are expected to engage in commenting the verdict and
the regional animosities the verdict stirs, so to cast a shadow over the
tributes paid to thousands of victims in Serbia and Montenegro, to avoid
hearing the people still voicing their concerns on the devastation of
civilian facilities, use of weapons filled with depleted uranium, use of
cluster, graphite and other illicit bombs, to avoid seeing and hearing of
the crimes performed by NATO against Serbia, the region, against Europe and
the system of international relations.
The statistics reveal that, out of 89 persons convicted by the Hague
Tribunal to the total of 1,380 years of prison, 67 are Serbs, which make
more than 2/3 of the total number of the convicted, to 1,125 years of
imprisonment; 14 are Croats, sentenced to 183 years; five are Bosniaks
sentenced to 41 years; two are Albanians sentenced to 19 years; and one is
Macedonian sentenced to 12 years of imprisonment. Is this the reflection of
reality of civil wars in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia? Who is
responsible for the crimes committed against the Serbian people in Sarajevo,
Eastern Bosnia, in Croatia`s operations "Flash" and "Storm", and other
locations!? Who has been convicted for trade of human organs taken from
abducted Serbs, how was it possible that documentation on such horrible
crimes disappeared while under custody of Hague Tribunal!?
Aggressor-friendly reform of the Army
On this 17th anniversary of NATO aggression a special merit is addressed to
our Army, its soldiers and generals who have professionally and
patriotically defended the country and the nation. The toll of the struggle
took 1,008 soldiers and policemen. Today, we remember them, as well as more
than 2,500 killed civilians, among whom there were more than 80 children. We
pay tribute to all of them and express our condolences to their families and
relatives.
Immediately after the aggression, our Army had undergone so called reform.
Almost all generals and admirals who led the defense against NATO aggression
were retired. Let us recall the executors of this reform. It was directed by
NATO generals headed by British general Beak and French general Holland, in
the capacity of advisors to then-minister of defense, Boris Tadić!
The reform's outcome is best known to members of the Serbian Army. Part of
the "reform" was disarming the Army. American Ambassador was supervising
this operation while American company US Steel has melted all tanks,
howitzers and other heavy-duty weaponry in the Smederevo Steelworks,
yielding the cheapest and highest quality steel. Once smelting was over, the
US Steel said it was no more profitable for them to operate Smederevo
Steelworks, packed their bags, and left, leaving behind empty factory and
some new debts!
Let us recollect what the goals of the aggression were. Deployment of US
troops in the Balkans, notably in the territory of Serbia, as the first step
in building the chain of US military bases closer to the Russian borders.
Expansion to the East was pronounced NATO doctrine. In fact it was not quite
original, because infamous "Drang nach Osten"doctrine was German, much older
doctrine. In 1999 NATO has also provided a blueprint for the new type of
military interventions in any part of the world, disregarding basic
principles of International Law and the role of UN Security Council. The
aggression against Serbia (FRY) was unique for, at least two, additional
reasons. First, NATO took in alliance terrorist organization called KLA.
And, second, it convinced its European allies, to take part in a war which
in fact was the war against Europe! In the meantime, foreign analysts have
revealed that banks and corporations from NATO member countries, over the
period from 2001 - 2011, had sucked out over $ 50 billion through the
so-called privatizations. The most valuable enterprises located in the
Province of Kosovo and Metohija, built by funds of Serbia and former
Yugoslavia, fell prey to the hands of companies from USA and some other NATO
states. Priority right in privatization in the Province of Kosovo and
Metohija was accorded to some prominent figures in the Clinton
administration, proponents of, "humanitarian intervention". A coincidence?
Silvio Berlusconi, former Prime minister of Italy has publicly divulged that
French President confided to him that France had militarily intervened in
Libya because she also had a right to get hold of some Libyan oil wells!
What a magnitude of altruism in the fight for the "protection of civilians"!
One can hardly comprehend such cynicism that politicians use to deceive
their peoples by the allegedly righteous motives of military interventions!
And their background consists of utter egoism, despoilment and sheer
gluttony.
Wesley Clark, NATO commander-in-chief in 1999, in an interview to a US TV
station, said that the Pentagon had provided a list of countries the USA was
going to bomb in future. When asked why, Clark replied that he assumed
because of oil.
The way
out?
The way out is in accepting the new realities in global relations, which do
not support the setup of superior and subordinate actors, the privileged and
the disenfranchised ones, the "exceptional" and the handicapped. The way out
is in restoration of observance of the fundamental principles of
international relations and international law, and most notably, in
observance of the principle of sovereign equality of all states. In a
broader sense, the way out is in strengthening the role of the United
Nations and respect of the UN Security Council as the most responsible body
for the matters of peace and security; in acknowledging that the
multipolarization of global relations is a process that cannot be halted or
stopped by any means; in the light of the increased powers of Russia, China
and other BRICS countries, it multipolarity is inevitable; in orientation
towards democratization of global relations which, in essence, means the
recognition that medium and small countries also have a right to own
interests; in renouncing the misuse of fight against terrorism so to spread
and impose the geopolitical interests of major powers; in cutting the
funding, arming, training, and dispatching terrorists to the crisis areas;
in paying priority attention to solving growing socio-economic problems in
Africa, Near and Middle East and in all other parts of the world,
especially, those originating all kinds of extremism, terrorism and
international organized crimes.
At present, for peace and security it is vital to identify a peaceful
political solution for the war in Syria, while respecting the interests of
all political factors, excluding the terrorists of all kinds and of any
political ilk.
Terrorism has become a global problem due to double standards, and the
misuse and manipulations with terrorism for geopolitical objectives. We
learned this lesson in 90-ies during civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
when the Western powers, and especially the USA, have directly and
indirectly assisted the transfer of terrorists from the Middle East,
Chechnya and the Maghreb countries, their subsequent training, arming and
organizing into units that fought on the side of forces of Alija
Izetbegović. We still vividly remember the "El Mujahedeen" Brigade, whose
members posed with severed Serbian heads for photo sessions. These
mujahedeen have, later on, redeployed to Kosovo and Metohija, strengthening
the troops of the terrorist KLA. The KLA itself was a NATO ally, its ground
force infantry in NATO aggression of 1999. Therefore, nobody should be
surprised that both Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo and Metohija have
continuously been the source locations in recruiting the highest ration of
foreign fighters for the ISIS. What else is to be told about the parts of
B&H beyond the control of the official authorities of the B&H Federation,
but rather under the control of the Wahhabi leadership? More than 60% of
Islamic religious institutions have also severed their connections with the
official Islamic religious community.
We propose to hold a world conference on fight against terrorism under the
auspices of the United Nations. Given its complexity, to eradicate terrorism
many decades of multidimensional struggle is needed. That is why, a proposed
conference should only launch preparation of World convention on the fight
against terrorism. If we seek to avoid new killings and prevent further
spreading of terrorism in Europe and elsewhere, this initiative should be
considered in the nearest future. Of course, it does not exclude any other
initiative which is based on the fact that global problem could be solved by
global strategy under the auspices of United Nations.
For Serbia, the way out means establishing and reinforcing genuine
neutrality, and in raising this commitment to the level of a basic
constitutional principle. Serbia should follow the example of neutral
Austria and other neutral European states. Respecting own historic
experiences and geopolitical position, Serbia should adopt a policy of
balanced foreign policy, full openness for win win cooperation on an equal
footing, leaving behind practice of unilateral concessions to any specific
country or a group of countries. This is certainly possible providing firm
and lasting political will. Serbia`s way out is firm orientation to own
interests and capacities, to moral, human, scientific, cultural,
geopolitical, natural, and economic resources as the precondition for open,
partnership cooperation with all other countries and integrations.
Živadin Jovanović
President of the Beglrade Forum for a World of Equals
_____
[1] Current issues in foreign policy, Page 75, Belgrade Forum for a World of
Equals, 2007
_____
[i] Address at the Panel on consequences of NATO aggression, held on 23
March 2015, in Belgrade
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"serbia" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/serbia.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
