ETS! encourages comments, feedback, tips, corrections, and info! Please keep them as concise as possible so we can print as many different voices as possible: ETS!, P.O. Box 85541, Seattle WA 98145, or e-mail ets@scn.org.

Much More on the Serbian Bombing

Maria,

Here is some more info on Yugoslavia which I hope is insightful.

1. Bombable Serbia

Yugoslavia's Serbs are the latest in a long line of demonized bombables. Its president, Slobodan Milosevic, is furiously denounced by editorialists as a world class villain, and cartoonists can portray "the Serbs" as pigs without being reprimanded for racism. The crimes for which the Serbs must be severely chastised, however, are frequently equalled or exceeded by that of U.S. client states, who can remain beneficiaries of western aid even while engaging in genocide in an invaded territory (Indonesia's Suharto regime in East Timor). Mass murder alone is not enough to merit demonization and bombability. Behind the carefully channeled outrage lies the geostrategic interest of the U.S. and its leading Western allies.

While great understanding is displayed for the "security concerns" that drive U.S. clients to violence, instances of violence by the bombables are attributed to a defiant and perverse desire to "test the resolve" of Western leaders. This unlikely motive is played up, while any genuine fears of a country that finds itself singled out for pariah treatment are ignored. Yugoslavia's post-World War II leader Tito may have been a communist dictator, but his quarrel with Stalin turned him into an ally of the West. Yugoslavia was relatively open and prosperous, and received lavish Western credits. The resulting debt burden was a major factor in splitting the country along economic and ethnic lines in the 1980s. Once the Soviet Union collapsed, Yugoslavia lost its strategic interest to the U.S. The newly reunited Germany, along with Austria, could resume its traditional hostility to a unified Yugoslavia, sponsoring Croatian and Albanian nationalism against the Serbs. German clout forced rapid international acceptance of an unnegotiated breakaway of Slovenia and Croatia, turning the Yugoslav army into an "aggressor" on its own territory. For the Serbs, who had seen Nazi German conquerors carve Yugoslavia into separate pieces in 1941, it was deja vu all over again.

Under pressure from media always on the lookout for villains, the U.S. soon got on board this destabilization bandwagon, largely to reassert its leadership role in Europe, and also to forge new ties with its closest Near Eastern allies (Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia) by creating a new area of domination in the Balkans at the expense of what had been a relatively autonomous and less amenable power. Yugoslavia, after all, had been known both for its own special brand of "self-management socialism," in contrast to the Soviet model, and for its international role as co-founder of the Non-Aligned Movement, with close ties to Third World countries. These were aberrations that U.S. leaders were only too happy to get rid of once and for all.

As ethnic Serbs had been targeted for liquidation in the "Independent State of Croatia" (which included Bosnia) run by the Nazi-backed Croatian Utasha movement during World War II, German support for the breakaway of Croatia under a nationalist leadership openly sympathetic to the Ustasha tradition, posed a real security threat to the large Serb population in Croatia. This could only strengthen nationalist forces in Serbia. In various ways, Western policy encouraged Croatian, Slovenian, and Albanian nationalist movements to seek to exit from the Yugoslav state. By thus endorsing ethnic identity as the basis for territorial sovereignty, the West encouraged all factions in Yugoslavia to seek spatial domination--which entailed pushing out members of rival ethnic groups, often by murdering them to scare the rest. The Serbs participated aggressively in this terrible process, but they were not alone. Leaving aside the question of who started what and who killed and drove out more people in the "ethnic cleansing" in Croatia and Bosnia between 1991 and 1995, what is certain is that the U.S. media focused on Serb crimes and played down those committed by Croats and Muslims. There was no great display of moral indignation in the media and from Western leaders when a quarter of a million Serbs in Krajina were driven out of their homes by Croatian forces in August 1995 (with substantial killing). In fact, those Croatian forces had been (illegally) rearmed with German weapons, trained by U.S. "retired" generals and given the green light by the U.S. ambassador. Moreover, it was just as this was happening that NATO designated the Serbs as their first bombable target on the European continent since the end of the Cold War.

When trouble flared this year in the Serbian province of Kosovo, the most difficult trouble spot in all the troubled Balkans, the West immediately reverted to its stance in Bosnia: the Serbs are to blame and must be bombed. Knowing this, the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), which seeks to detach Kosovo from Serbia and form a Greater Albania has a simple strategy: depend on Serbian repression to bring in NATO forces to attack the Serbs and allow the KLA to take over.

This scenario has been obvious and predictable from the start. For several years the KLA assassinated not only policemen and Serbian officials, but also ethnic Albanians who opposed the violent secessionist movement. In the summer of 1998 the Serbian security forces finally took the bait and went into the Kosovo countryside to root out the KLA. As usual in such cases, hapless civilians suffered and the guerrillas simply regrouped. Untold thousands of civilians were driven from villages believed to be sheltering KLA fighters before security forces battered down walls and set family compounds on fire. Between 500 and 1,000 people have been killed in this conflict. Both sides have massacred civilians, with the stronger Serb army very likely responsible for a disproportionate share. But only the Serb side is threatened with any kind of NATO action.

In this way, the U.S. propensity to bomb becomes an instrument that can be wielded even by a relatively small armed rebellion to break up a recognized nation. The KLA may be the first "liberation" movement in history to consider NATO its virtual air force. This opens up new horizons for the uses of NATO.

The Turkish armed forces have generously offered to take time off from destroying Kurdish villages in and beyond Turkey's borders to participate in NATO's humanitarian crusade against the Serbs for having done roughly the same, but on a much smaller scale and only within Serbia. The selectivity of the West's humanitarian concern is blatant. And in this case,

Western policy has actually fanned the flames of conflict. Whereas fair and friendly mediation is called for, the West's bias toward one side, and contradictory signals have made it virtually impossible for the Serbs and Albanians to work out a solution among themselves.

The ethnic Albanians say they want to secede. The West rules that out, as it would set a bad precedent for the Bosnian Serbs who want to secede from Bosnia. Some Serbs suggest partitioning Kosovo between Serbia and the Albanians. The West rules that out, as it would set a bad precedent for Macedonia, where Albanians would then also want to secede. The Serbs offer to negotiate without preconditions, the Albanians refuse to sit down at the table, and the West thereupon threatenss to bomb the Serbs "to force them to the negotiating table."

However provoked, Serbian security forces are almost surely guilty as charged of "using excessive force." In its righteous indignation, NATO has assembled a mighty armada of warplanes, stealth bombers, and cruise missiles which threaten to wipe out Yugoslavia's entire national defense capacity, including command and control centers. This is because NATO abhors the use of "excessive force."

From "Bombing A La Mode" by Edward S. Herman www.zmag.org/ZMag/articles/dec98herman.htm

2. Racak Massacre, William Walker and the CIA at www.iacenter.org/warhawk.htm

3. A year before the breakup of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, on Nov. 5, 1990, the U.S. Congress passed the 1991 Foreign Operations Appropriations Law 101-513. This bill was a signed death warrant. One provision in particular was so lethal that even a CIA report described three weeks later in the Nov. 27, 1990, New York Times predicted it would lead to a bloody civil war.

From "The Bosnian Tragedy" by Sara Flounders of International Action Center www.iacenter.org/bosnia/tragedy.htm

Thanks

--Milutin, via e-mail

ETS!,

Here's what I think we should do in reaction to the wars we're fighting right now. Stop partying, stop enjoying ourselves publicly in any way. I suggest a massive boycot of the entertainment industry, sports events, movies, eating out, drinking coffee and beer in public places, etc. until our country stops bombing other peoples' homes, bridges and factories. Tomorrow is the first day of the baseball season and I'd like noone to go and participate. That would send strong message to the powers that be that we don't approve of war and we're willing to stop the economy in protest. So, please join me in my personal boycott of all public partying and entertainment. Stay home, read a book, write a letter to Eat the State! and help end these wars.

Sincerely,

--Albert Kaufman, Seattle

ETS!,

Well, I must say the article about "where is the Peace Movement" kind of pissed me off, because it was so condescending and not very helpful in helping us form a clear idea about what we might suggest the government do if we were organized. I mean, excuse me if I am a little confused. I was reading Eat the State! because I was looking for clarity, as there has been a daunting lack of dialogue about the war amongst the people I see every day, and I didn't find much.

So here is what I wrote and sent out to my friends, in an attempt to start a dialogue that would help us all get somewhere in our thinking: print it if you want. I don't care.

Out of Sight, Out of Mind

There's a war going on in Yugoslovia and my laundry still isn't done. There are reports of women being "systematically raped" as I spend my days talking about capture card drivers and online video streaming. I do not feel guilty, for this terrible event has nothing to do with me, but I feel helpless. We all feel helpless.

In my commitment to fight the depression and isolation of my own culture, I must block it out a few days at a time, but to stay in line with my personal values of human compassion I must read as much as I can, accept the facts as facts, and use the Internet to peel back the glossy layer of the North American press.

They say that the reason why the whales have come so close to the shores of Seattle in such great numbers is because they are hungry. What a wonderful sight! Come down and gaze at the beautiful whales! If I had a video camera I would run down there to experience the awe. Yes I would, but not without deep sorrow for their dilemma. If they weren't forced to come so close in search for food, we would not be so touched by their vast beings. Not without having seen them we would not be able to personally care for them in the same way.

If the images of the Albanian refugees did not reflect back our own white faces we would feel slightly alienated from their experience. Slightly. Like understands like. People absorb most deeply what has been personally experienced. The press attempts to use this cheap trick by saying, "Look at the Kosova Albanians. They had computers. They had houses and cars. They were like you and me. They had. They had." implying that we all have or that the viewers that matter all have. No one at work mentions a word about the war. We are all too busy. If I bring it up, it instills guilt.

It is preposterous to think that we are responsible for everything. I say, pick your battles, follow your passion, do good in the world, don't hurt yourself over it. A broken, burned out person isn't worth anything to anybody else. That's right, heal thyself. But healing means protection and for me that meant leaving my work as an organizer with the homeless. I retreated, north of Lake Union to only come downtown when on errands. Out of sight, out of mind. I had discovered two things: that I was too emotionally sensitive to be around homelessness every day and maintain my sanity, and that the plight of homelessness was not one I have long-term passion around. The media and how fucked up it is, is what I have long-term passion around. All that multiplied equaled the simple fact that I must write and eventually put out confrontative, constructive media. Does that make me a bad person? In order to do that, I must work in a place where I can make enough money to gain the tools, where the most common social topics are about buying things: houses, cars, palm pilots, computers, cell phones, going out on the town: sci-fi movies, concerts, expensive dinners, alternative clubs. Is it OK to have fun in the face of human disaster that I have no control over?

I look to the activist press for direction. Eat the State! is sarcastic and wrist slapping. "Where is the Peace Movement?" it screams with insipid disappointment without presenting a platform for such imaginary movement to stand on. If NATO pulled out, it would be a disaster, their staying is sure disaster.

The Kosova Liberation Army had been fighting in the mountains, valiantly, without international press coverage. All of the names listed of those killed in their ranks the last few days were far older than I expected. 50. 60. 70. I don't know if this means the Serbians are killing mostly old people or if that means the nimble are surviving, but it changes my picture of who the freedom fighters are. In this country, to do radical things means to be young. This is not a protest. It is a struggle for life. I know, had I been born in Kosova and had I a strong back, I would be out there sleeping with my assault rifle, next to my friends, if I had any left. I would be there not because it is right but because that is who I am, just as I am here writing instead of downtown monitoring an illegal sidewalk shelter, because it is what I am better at.

Ten days ago the Kosova Provisional Government was brought into being by the many leaders within Kosova to bring some sense of direction, voice, and order to their shattered people and the allies who want to help. I haven't seen it in the NY Times nor has Clinton mentioned his perception of the will of Kosova's Albanian people. I suppose, thanks to Michele's idea (the current homeless women's organizer of SHARE), that the only clear point I would want to make to the U.S. "leaders" would be: Listen to the people. Ask them what they want. Help but do not strip them of their voice. It's not your cue, it's theirs.

I know that wailing about the Albanian's losses or the tragedy of our Pacific Northwest Whales will not do me nor anyone else any good. Holding back my life's goals out of guilt for those I cannot help will not either. I will let the tears roll out of me as I scan the news because I am a human, and I will let this information encourage me to be more proficient at affecting the world I can touch, without losing track of who I am. I don't know what else to do. We all have our little boxes and I'm sure I'm not the only one who gets trapped in them. What do you think?

Jen Domeier, via e-mail

ETS!,

And then she goes across the street to find the paper has already gone out. Thank you for focusing on giving more information, and most importantly, the broader perspective from Erik and Rick's letters, which had some points I had not mulled over.

Jen Domeier, via e-mail

Geov & ETS!,

You stated that the U.S./NATO is exacerbating the human rights catastrophe in Kosovo and Serbia; I assume you meant the occasional "missile fell short of its target," the civilians that were killed by the bombings, the factory that was blown up (although there were humans shielding them). But judging from the photos in the New York Times, etc. of destroyed and crumbling buildings in Pristina and Belgrade, I can only imagine the intense trauma that this causes a country. We have targeted structures used by civilians, such as bridges, factories, and post offices, creating a war-zone atmosphere. Even when government buildings are targeted, the destruction of once-beautiful architectural landmarks is undoubtedly a terrorist act.

The damage our bombing creates to the infrastructure of the impoverished Balkans--not only Serbia, but neighboring countries such as Romania, Bulgaria, etc. is severe. The destruction of bridges seems an especially brutal act which immobilizes the populace and needlessly wastes millions of civilian tax dollars that were spent to create them. U.S./NATO could have easily blockaded them and spared them the expense, but the real cost is the terror that is induced. We United States citizens can safely read about these bombing campaigns and see pictures of wrecked houses, but we can only feel mildly appalled compared to what they must experience.

Milosevic will never willingly allow the Kosovo region to secede, yet the U.S. will not cease fire until he capitulates. Attacking the region's infrastructure is one of the worst possible things that the U.S. could do to soothe the conflict; instead, it invites comparison of Clinton/NATO to Hitler.

Long after the conflict is "resolved" the U.S. will never deign to pay for physical and psychological damage to the Serbians, the Kosovans or anyone that suffers from this ordeal.

The "human rights catastrophe" is not only a few civilians that lost their lives due to a technical mistake; it is a legacy of calculated violence and the resulting economic fallout that will resonate throughout the Balkans.

(It's very ironic that here in the Bay Area, Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown and the US military just spent millions of dollars to train U.S. soldiers for "humanitarian missions" in the "Urban Guerilla" program. Wasn't this the kind of situation it was supposedly meant for?)

Cory Wenger, Berkeley, CA

Dear Geov,

It may have been harder to maintain the "information blockade" but, the mass media's "official line" has been consistent and relentless. Even the opinion writers in whom I have most confidence have swallowed, and now regurgitate, the "standard" rationale for the NATO/U.S./Yugoslavia War.

I agree that the Internet "has also allowed a clearer, more thoughtful presentation of the opposing side's view than we usually get in a war." That presentation is, I believe, restricted to a relatively small audience, available only to those with Internet access and then, only to those who are persistent in their efforts to find pertinent sites. Seeking these out is the proverbial problem of finding the needle in the haystack. Putting information on the Internet is something like putting a message in a bottle and throwing it out to sea. Better than nothing, but...

Some of the sources I've found that present commentary differing from the official line are:

IWPR http://www.iwpr.net WSWS http://www.socialequality.com MOJO http://motherjones.com ETS! http://EatTheState.org ZNet http://www.zmag.org

If you know of others, please share them with me.

Two questions I haven't been able to find answers for:

1. Is Germany dropping bombs on Belgrade? (The American Media does not mention this.)

2. Why is the US leading this NATO military action? I fear the REAL REASON(s) are hidden by the welter of rhetoric, are far from benign. There is not even much speculation about alternative explanations.

Are there alternative explanations? (I am certain there are.)

Roland Dion, San Diego