NATO'S WAR OF AGGRESSION:AN OVERVIEW

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 22:32:28 -0400
From: Michel Chossudovsky <chossudovsky@sprint.ca>
Subject: NATO's  War of Agression: Overview 

        NATO'S WAR OF AGGRESSION AGAINST YUGOSLAVIA: AN OVERVIEW

                                                                            
   
by

Michel Chossudovsky

Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and author of The
Globalization of Poverty, Impacts of IMF and World Bank Reforms, Third World
Network, Penang and Zed Books, London, 1997. Member of the Ad Hoc Committee 
to
Stop Canada's Participation in the War in Yugoslavia. 

C Copyright by Michel Chossudovsky, Ottawa, 1999. All rights reserved. 


LOW INTENSITY NUCLEAR WAR


With NATO air-strikes entering their third month, a new stage of the War has
unfolded. NATO's "humanitarian bombings" have been stepped up leading to
mounting civilian casualties and human suffering. Thirty percent of those
killed in the bombings are children.1 In addition to the use of cluster 
bombs,
the Alliance is waging a "low intensity nuclear war" using toxic radioactive
shells and missiles containing depleted uranium. Amply documented, the
radioactive fall-out causes cancer potentially affecting millions of people 
for
generations to come. According to a recent scientific report, "the first 
signs
of radiation on children including herpes on the mouth and skin rashes on 
the
back and ankles" have been observed in Yugoslavia since the beginning of the
bombings.2 

In addition to the radioactive fall-out which has contaminated the 
environment
and the food chain, the Alliance has also bombed Yugoslavia's major chemical
and pharmaceutical plants. The bombing of Galenika, the largest medicine
factory in Yugoslavia has contributed to releasing dangerous, highly toxic
fumes. When NATO forces bombed plants of the Pancevo petrochemical complex 
in
mid-April "fire broke out and huge quantities of chlorine, ethylene 
dichloride
and vinyl chloride monomer flowed out. Workers at Pancevo, fearing further
bombing attacks that would blow up dangerous materials, released tons of
ethylene dichloride, a carcinogen, into the Danube."3 


NATO TO THE "RESCUE OF ETHNIC ALBANIANS"

Ethnic Albanians have not been spared by NATO air raids. Killing ethnic
Albanians in Kosovo is said to be "inevitable" in carrying out a 
"humanitarian
operation on behalf of ethnic Albanians". In addition to the impacts of the
ground war between the KLA and the Yugoslav Armed Forces, the bombings and 
the
resulting radioactive fall-out in Kosovo have been more devastating than in 
the
rest of Yugoslavia. 

Presented as a humanitarian mission, the evidence amply confirms that NATO's
brutal air raids of towns and villages in Kosovo have triggered the exodus 
of
refugees. Those who have fled their homes to refugee camps in Macedonia and
Albania have nothing to return to, nothing to look forward to... An entire
country has been destroyed, its civilian industry and public infrastructure
transformed into rubble. Bridges, power plants, schools and hospitals are
displayed as "legitimate military targets" selected by NATO's Combined Air
Operations Centre (CAOC) in Vicenza, Italy and carefully "validated prior
to the pilot  launching his strike." 

With the "diplomatic shuttle" still ongoing, the Alliance is intent on
inflicting as much damage on the Yugoslav economy (including Kosovo) as
possible prior to reaching a G8 brokered "peace initiative" which will 
empower
them to send in ground troops. "Allied commanders have steadily widened 
their
list of economic targets... Increasingly, the impact of NATO air strikes has
put people out of work... causing water shortages in Belgrade, Novi Sad and
other Serbian cities. ... [T]he effect was to shut down businesses, strain
hospitals' ability to function and cut off water..."4. Some 115 medical
institutions have been damaged of which several have been totally 
demolished.
And hospital patients --including children and the elderly-- are dying due 
to
the lack of water and electricity...5 

General Wesley Clark, NATO's Supreme commander in Europe, confirmed in late 
May
that "NATO'S air campaign has not reached its peak yet and the alliance 
should
be prepared for more civilian casualties."6. General Clark also confirmed 
that
"he would be seeking to increase the number of air strikes in Kosovo and 
expand
the range of targets.7 As the bombings entered their third month, there was
also a noticeable change in "NATO rhetoric". The Alliance had become
increasingly unrepentant, NATO officials were no longer apologising for
civilian casualties, claiming that the latter were contributing to "helping
Milosevic's propaganda machine."  

EXTENDING THE CONFLICT BEYOND THE BALKANS 

Drowned in the barrage of media images and self-serving analyses, the 
broader
strategic interests and economic causes of the War go unmentioned. The late
Sean Gervasi writing in 1995 had anticipated an impending War. According to
Gervasi, Washington's strategic goals stretched well beyond the Balkans. 
They
largely consisted in  "installing a Western-style regime in Yugoslavia and
reducing the geographic area, power and influence of Serbia to a 
minimum...."8 

In this context, the installation of American power in Southern Europe and 
the
Mediterranean also constitutes a step towards the extension of Washington's
geopolitical sphere of influence beyond the Balkans into the area of the
Caspian Sea, Central Asia and West Asia. 

In this regard, NATO's military intervention in Yugoslavia (in violation of
international law) also sets a dangerous precedent. It provides 
"legitimacy" to
future military interventions. To achieve its strategic objectives, national
economies are destabilised, regional conflicts are financed through the
provision of covert support to armed insurgencies... In other words, the
conflict in Yugoslavia creates conditions which provide legitmacy to future
interventions of the Alliance into the "internal affairs of sovereign 
nations".


The consolidation of American strategic interests in Eastern Europe, the
Balkans (and beyond) was not only marked by the enlargement of NATO (with 
the
accession of Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic as NATO members) barely 
two
weeks before the beginning of the bombings, the War in Yugoslavia also
coincided with a critical split in geopolitical alignments within the
Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). 

In late April, Georgia, the Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and Moldava 
signed
a pact in Washington, creating GUUAM, a regional alliance which lies
strategically at the hub of the Caspian oil and gas wealth, "with Moldava 
and
the Ukraine offering [pipeline] export routes to the West".9 This 
geopolitical
split bears a direct relationship to the crisis in Yugoslavia. The region is
already unstable marked by nationalist conflicts and separatist movements.

The members of this new pro-NATO political grouping not only tacitly support
the bombings in Yugoslavia, they have also agreed to "low level military
cooperation" with NATO while insisting that "the group is not a military
alliance directed against any third party, namely Moscow."10 

Dominated by Western oil interests, the formation of GUUAM is not only 
intent
on excluding Russia from the oil and gas deposits in the Caspian area but 
also
in isolating Moscow politically thereby potentially re-igniting Cold War
divisions... 

THE WAR HAS STALLED NUCLEAR ARMS CONTROLS 

In turn, the War in Yugoslavia has significantly stalled nuclear 
arms-control
initiatives leading to the cancellation of an exchange program "that would 
have
had US and Russian nuclear weapons officers in constant contact at year's 
end
to prevent any launches as a result of Year 2000 computer troubles."11 

Moreover,  Russia's military has also voiced its concern "that the bombing 
of
Yugoslavia could turn out in the very near future to be just a rehearsal for
similar strikes on Russia."12. 

According to Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford, co-president of the Nobel Peace Prize
winning International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), 
the
impact of NATO bombings of Yugoslavia "on nuclear weapons policy is an
extremely   serious development... Russians feel a sense of betrayal by the
West... because NATO took this action outside the UN."13 

Aleksander Arbatov, deputy chairman of the Defence Committee of the Russian
State Duma U.S.-Russian relations describes the War in Yugoslavia as the 
"worst
most  acute, most dangerous juncture since the U.S.-Soviet Berlin and Cuban
missile crises."14 According to Arbatov: 

"START II is dead, co-operation with NATO is frozen, co-operation on missile
defence is out of the question, and Moscow's willingness to co-operate on
non-proliferation issues is at an all-time low. Moreover, anti-U.S. 
sentiment
in Russia is real, deep and more wide-spread than ever, and the slogan
describing NATO action - "today Serbia, tomorrow Russia," is "deeply 
planted in
Russian's minds."...15 

Mary-Wynne Ashford also warns that whereas Russia was moving towards
integration with Europe, they [the Russians] now: 


".... perceive their primary threat from the West. Officials in [Russia's]
Foreign Affairs (Arms Control and Disarmament) told us that Russia has no
option but to rely on nuclear weapons for its defence because its 
conventional
forces are inadequate.... Even if the bombings stop now, the changes in
Russia's attitude toward the West, its renewed reliance on nuclear weapons 
with
thousands on high alert, and its loss of confidence in international law 
leave
us vulnerable to catastrophe.... This crisis makes de-alerting nuclear 
weapons
more urgent than ever. To those who say the Russian threat is all rhetoric, 
I
reply that rhetoric is what starts wars".16 



THE MEDIA WAR: "SILENCING THE SILENT MAJORITY"


This war is also "a War against the Truth". With protest movements 
developing
around the World, NATO has reinforced its clutch over the mass media. In a
stylised ("wag the dog") media mascarade, the Alliance is relentlessly
portrayed  as  "the saviour of ethnic Albanian Kosovars". A full-fledged 
"cover-up operation" has been set in motion with a view to thwarting 
public debate on the War. 

The hidden agenda is to "silence the silent majority." The Western media
heeding to the Alliance's demands has blatantly misled public opinion. 
Casually
portrayed on TV screens, civilian deaths are justified as inevitable
"collateral  damage". According to the Pentagon, "there is no such thing as
clean combat."17 

Meanwhile, anti-war commentators (including former ambassadors and OSCE
officials) have been carefully removed from mainstream public affairs
programmes, TV content is closely scrutinised, the images of civilian deaths
and destruction relayed from Belgrade are seldomly and selectively 
displayed,
journalists are under tight supervision. While the media does not hesitate 
to
criticize NATO for having committed "errors" and "tragic mistakes", the
legitimacy of the military operation and its "humanitarian mandate" are not
questioned: 

"Public opinion is confronted with a loaded question which allows only one
answer. In the present war, that question is, "Doesn't ethnic cleansing 
have to
be stopped?" This simplification allows the media to portray Yugoslavia 
rather
than NATO as the aggressor. The alliance, in a complete inversion of 
reality,
is presented as conducting an essentially defensive war on behalf of the
Kosovar Albanians..." when in fact ethnic Albanians are the principle 
victims
of NATO's "humanitarian bombings."18 



According to NATO's propaganda machine, "ethnic Albanians do not flee the
bombings" and the ground war between the KLA and the Yugoslav Army. 
According
to Diana Johnstone this makes them "nearly unique [because] throughout 
history,
civilians have fled from war zones.... No, as we have heard repeatedly from
NATO spokesmen and apologists, Kosovo Albanians run away from only one 
thing:
brutal ethnic cleansing carried out by Serbs."19 

The refugee crisis we are told by NATO is limited to Kosovo. Yet the 
evidence
(withheld by the Western media) confirms that people throughout Serbia are
fleeing major cities: 


Reliable estimates put the number of refugees who have left Belgrade to 
escape
the bombing at 400,000. Most are women and children, as with the Kosovo
Albanians.  At least another 500,000 have left Serbia's other cities, 
notably
Novi Sad and Nish, where NATO bombing has caused air pollution, cut the 
water
supply, and struck purely civilian targets such as market squares.  
Altogether,
according to the Italian daily "Il Manifesto", the NATO bombing has 
produced at
least a million refugees in Serbia. Predrag Simic, foreign policy adviser to
Serbian opposition leader Vuk Draskovic, told a Paris conference [in late 
May]
that Kosovo was being so thoroughly devastated by NATO bombing that nobody,
neither Albanians nor Serbs, would be able to go back and live there".20 



WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WAR CRIMES?


Public "disapproval" of NATO bombings is immediately dismissed as "Serb
propaganda". Those who speak out against NATO are branded as "apologists of
Milosevic". While most anti-War critics in NATO countries are not defenders 
of
the Milosevic regime, they are nonetheless expected to be "balanced" in 
their
arguments. "Looking at both sides of the picture is the rule": anti-war
commentators are invited to echo NATO's fabricated media consensus, to
unequivocally "join the bandwagon" against Milosevic. Under these
circumstances, an objective understanding and analysis of the role of the
Milosovic government since the civil War in Bosnia and in the context of the
present crisis in Kosovo has been rendered virtually impossible.

Media double standards? Whereas President Milosevic and four members of his
government were indicted by the Hague International Criminal Tribunal (ICTY)
(late May) for organising a policy of "ethnic cleansing" in Kosovo, the news
media failed to mention that several parallel law suits were launched at The
Hague Tribunal (ICTY), accusing NATO leaders of "crimes against 
humanity."21 

It is also worth mentioning that the UK government (whose Prime Minister 
Tony
Blair is among the list of accused in one of the parallel law suits) has
provided The Hague Tribunal with "intelligence on the situation within 
Kosovo"
since the beginning of the bombings.22 Part of this intelligence material 
was
relayed by the KLA with which British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook has been 
in
frequent contact as well as through British Special Forces (SAS) directly
collaborating with the KLA. 



LAW SUIT DIRECTED AGAINST NATO LEADERS


In May, a group of 15 Canadian lawyers and law professors together with the
American Association of Jurists (with members in more than 20 countries)
launched a suit against NATO leaders at the ICTY in the Hague.23 The suit
points to "open violation" of the United Nations Charter, the NATO treaty, 
the
Geneva Conventions and the "Principles of International Law Recognized by 
the
Nuremberg Tribunal". The latter makes: "planning, preparation, initiation or
waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international 
treaties,
agreements or assurances" a crime.24 

The list of crimes allegedly committed by NATO leaders includes: 


"wilful killing, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body 
or
health, extensive destruction of property,... employment of poisonous 
weapons
[implying radioactive fall-out] or other weapons to cause unnecessary
suffering, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation 
not
justified by military necessity,... "25 



Under the terms of reference of the ICTY "a person who planned, instigated,
ordered, committed or otherwise aided and abetted in the planning, 
preparation
or execution of a crime shall be individually responsible for the crime" and
"the official position of any accused person, whether as Head of State or
Government or as a responsible Government official, shall not relieve such
person of criminal responsibility or mitigate punishment."26 

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson (and former
President of Ireland) confirmed in Geneva on 30 April that the Prosecutor of
the War Crimes Tribunal (ICTY) has the mandate not only to prosecute Serb
forces but that the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) and NATO may also come 
under
scrutiny, "if it appears that serious violations of international 
humanitarian
law have occurred."

According to Walter J. Rockler, former prosecutor of the Nuremberg War 
Crimes
Trials: 


"The bombing war also violates and shreds the basic provisions of the United
Nations Charter and other conventions and treaties; the attack on Yugoslavia
constitutes the most brazen international aggression since the Nazis 
attacked
Poland to prevent "Polish atrocities" against Germans. The United States has
discarded pretensions to international legality and decency, and embarked 
on a
course of raw imperialism run amok."27  


SHAKY EVIDENCE OF A "HUMANITARIAN CATASTROPHE" PRIOR TO THE BOMBINGS 


In the course of "covering-up" the real motivations of NATO in launching the
War, the international media has also failed to mention that an official
intelligence report of the German Foreign Ministry (used to establish the
eligibility of political refugees from Kosovo) confirmed that there was no
evidence of "ethnic cleansing" in Kosovo in the months immediately preceding
the bombings. Who is lying? German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer had
justified NATO's intervention pointing to a "humanitarian catastrophe", yet 
the
internal documents of his own ministry say exactly the opposite: 

"Even in Kosovo an explicit political persecution linked to Albanian 
ethnicity
is not verifiable. The East of Kosovo is still not involved in armed 
conflict.
Public life in cities like Pristina, Urosevac, Gnjilan, etc. has, in the 
entire
conflict period, continued on a relatively normal basis. The actions of the
security forces [were] not directed against the Kosovo-Albanians as an
ethnically defined group, but against the military opponent [KLA] and its
actual or alleged supporters."... 28 

[W]ith an agreement made with the Serbian leadership at the end of 1998 ...
both the security situation and the conditions of life of the 
Albanian-derived
population have noticeably improved... Specifically in the larger cities 
public
life has since returned to relative normality."29 

The above assessments are broadly consistent with several independent
evaluations of the humanitarian situation in Kosovo prior to the onslaught 
of
the bombing campaign. Roland Keith, a former field office director of the 
OSCE
Kosovo Verification Mission (KVM), who left Kosovo on March 20th reported 
that
most of the violence in Kosovo was instigated by the Kosovo Liberation Army
(KLA): 


"Upon my arrival the war increasingly evolved into a mid intensity conflict 
as
ambushes, the encroachment of critical lines of communication and the [KLA]
kidnapping of security forces resulted in a significant increase in 
government
casualties which in turn led to major Yugoslavian reprisal security
operations... By the beginning of March these terror and counter-terror
operations led to the inhabitants of numerous villages fleeing, or being
dispersed to either other villages, cities or the hills to seek refuge... 
The
situation was clearly that KLA provocations, as personally witnessed in
ambushes of security patrols which inflicted fatal and other casualties, 
were
clear violations of the previous October's agreement [and United Nations
Security Council Resolution 1199]. The security forces responded and the
consequent security harassment and counter-operations led to an intensified
insurrectionary war, but as I have stated elsewhere, I did not witness, nor 
did
I have knowledge of any incidents of so-called "ethnic cleansing" and there
certainly were no occurrences of "genocidal policies" while I was with the 
KVM
in Kosovo. What has transpired since the OSCE monitors were evacuated on 
March
20, in order to deliver the penultimate warning to force Yugoslavian 
compliance
with the Rambouillet and subsequent Paris documents and the commencement of 
the
NATO air bombardment of March 24, obviously has resulted in human rights 
abuses
and a very significant humanitarian disaster as some 600,000 Albanian 
Kosovars
have fled or been expelled from the province. This did not occur, though,
before March 20, so I would attribute the humanitarian disaster directly or
indirectly to the NATO air bombardment and resulting anti-terrorist
campaign."30 



CHRONOLOGY OF NATO PLANNING 


Carefully removed from the public eye, preparations for both "the air 
campaign"
and "the ground War" have been ongoing for almost a year prior to the 
beginning
of NATO's "humanitarian bombings" on March 24th 1999. 

Responding to broad strategic and economic objectives, the Alliance's first
priority was to secure the stationing of armed combat troops in Macedonia on
the immediate border with Kosovo. US Secretary of Defense William Cohen had
travelled to Skopje in late December 1997 for discussions with the 
Macedonian
government and Military. These high levels talks were followed a few months
later by the visit of Macedonia's Defense Minister L. Kitanoski to 
Washington
for meetings at the Pentagon. On the agenda: the establishment of a NATO 
base
in Macedonia.31 

No time was lost: on May 6, 1998, the NATO Council met "to review alliance
efforts" in the region; a major military exercise entitled "Cooperative Best
Effort" was slated to take place in Macedonia in September. NATO nonetheless
"reassured the international community" that the military exercise was not
meant to be "a rehearsal", rather it was to enable "NATO military
authorities to study various options. Decisions on whether to
 execute any of those options would be a matter for future decision."32 

Largely the consequence of KLA terrorism, the deterioration of the security
situation in Kosovo conveniently provided NATO with a pretext to build up 
its
ground forces in Macedonia (composed largely of British and French troops).
According to NATO, it was therefore necessary to envisage "a more 
complicated
and ambitious [military] exercise [in Macedonia] to send a clear political
signal [to Belgrade] of NATO's involvement".33 


THE ROLE OF THE KOSOVO LIBERATION ARMY 


In parallel with the setting up of its military operations in Albania and
Macedonia, NATO had established direct links with the Kosovo Liberation Army
(KLA). A US Department of Defense briefing confirms in this regard that
"initial contacts" between the KLA and NATO had taken place by mid-1998: 

"...the realization has come to people [in NATO] that we [NATO] have to have
the UCK [acronym for KLA in Albanian] involved in this process because they
have shown at least the potential to be rejectionists of any deal that 
could be
worked out there with the existing Kosovo parties. So somehow they have to 
be
brought in and that's why we've made some initial contacts there with the
group, hopefully the right people in the group, to try and bring them into 
this
negotiating process. 34 



While these "initial contacts" were acknowledged by NATO officially only in
mid-1998, the KLA had (according to several reports) been receiving "covert
support" and training from the CIA and Germany's Bundes Nachrichten Dienst
(BND) since the mid-nineties.35 

The concurrent building up of KLA forces was part of NATO planning. By 
mid-1998
"covert support" had been gradually replaced --despite the KLA's links to
organised crime-- by official ("overt") support by the military Alliance in
violation of UN Security Council Resolution UNSCR 1160 of 31 March 1998 
which
condemned: "...all acts of terrorism by the Kosovo Liberation Army or any 
other
group or individual and all external support for terrorist activity in 
Kosovo,
including finance, arms and training." 

On 24 September 1998, another key UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR 
1199)
was adopted which called "upon the authorities in Belgrade and the
leadership of  the  Kosovar Albanian community urgently to enter without 
preconditions into a meaningful dialogue on political status issues." 
It also required Belgrade to withdraw its troops from Kosovo. 

Following a renewed wave of KLA terrorism, the Yugoslav authorities were 
blamed
for the "crackdowns on ethnic Albanians" providing NATO defense ministers
meeting in Vilmoura Portugal (September 24th on the same day as the 
adoption 
of UNSCR 1199) with the "justification" to issue an "activation warning" 
for a
campaign of air strikes against Serb positions. The Vilmoura statement 
called
upon Belgrade to "take immediate steps to alleviate the humanitarian
situation..., stop repressive actions against the population and seek a
political solution through negotiations with the Albanian majority".36 


This so-called "activation warning" was followed in mid-October by "an
activation order" by the North Atlantic Council authorising NATO's Supreme
Commander for Europe General Wesley Clark to initiate "limited air strikes" 
and
a "phased air campaign" ... should the Yugoslav authorities refuse to comply
with UNSCR 1199.37 

Under the impending threat of air strikes, a partial withdrawal was carried 
out
by Belgrade (following the adoption of UNSCR 1199) creating almost 
immediately
conditions for the KLA to occupy positions previously held by retreating 
Serb
forces. In turn, the strengthening of the KLA was accompanied by renewed
terrorist activity and a consequent "worsening of the security situation".
NATO's hidden objective, in this regard, was to use the KLA insurgency to
further provoke ethnic tensions and generate social strife in Kosovo. 

In the meantime, US envoy Richard Holbrooke had entered into discussions 
with
President Milosovic. Forged under the threat of NATO air strikes, 
negotiations
on Kosovo's political status had also been initiated in Pristina between a
Serbian delegation led by President Milan Milutinovic and Ibrahim Rugova,
President of the Democratic League (DLK) representing ethnic Albanians. 
While
Mr Christopher Hill, the US envoy had been invited as an observer to these
meetings, Milutinovic had insisted that the negotiations (which proceeded 
from
UNSCR 1199) were an internal matter. 

Following the agreement between US envoy Richard Holbrooke and President
Slobodan Milosevic, Yugoslavia was to complete negotiations on "a framework 
for
a political settlement" by the 2nd of November 1998. Moreover, a 
Verification
Mission to establish compliance with resolutions UNSCR 1160 and UNSCR 1199, 
was
put in place in Kosovo under the auspices of the Organization for Security 
and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). A parallel NATO air verification mission
(complementing the OSCE verification mission)  was established following an
agreement signed in Belgrade on 15 October 1998 by the Yugoslav Chief of
General Staff and NATO Supreme Allied Commander for Europe, General Wesley
Clark. 

The terms of both the OSCE and NATO verification agreements were 
subsequently
embodied in UNSCR 1260 of October 24th. Whereas Belgrade was given a 96 hour
"deadline for compliance", the Alliance decided to postpone the initiation 
of
air strikes following talks in Belgrade (October 25-26) between President
Slobodan Milosevic and General Wesley Clark. According to the Alliance
statement: "NATO will remain prepared to carry out air operations should
they be necessary" 38. In the meantime, NATO launched Operation Eagle Eye 
using unarmed aircraft and unmanned predator aerial vehicles (UAVs). 
Eagle Eye surveillance activities were coordinated with the 
"ground verification" mission conducted by OSCE observer teams 
and by the Kosovo Diplomatic Observer Mission (KDOM).



A FORMER "IRAN-CONTRAGATE" OFFICIAL HEADS THE OSCE VERIFICATION MISSION 


In the meantime, a career US diplomat, Ambassador William G. Walker was
appointed Head of the OSCE Kosovo Verification Mission (KVM). A tailor-made
assignment: Walker was well-known for his role in the "Iran-Contragate" 
scandal
during the Reagan administration. The KLA insurgency was in many regards a
"carbon copy" of the Nicaraguan Contras which had also been funded by drug
money with covert support from the CIA. 

Well documented by court files, William G. Walker --in association with 
Oliver
North-- played a key role in channelling covert funding to the Nicaraguan
Contras while serving as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for 
Inter-American
Affairs in the Reagan Administration. In this capacity, he became a special
assistant to Assistant Secretary of State Elliot Abrams, "a figure whose 
name
would soon be making its way into the headlines on a daily basis in 
connection
with ... the "Iran-Contra" affair."39 

William G. Walker had been involved in the so-called Nicaraguan Humanitarian
Assistance Office ("NHAO") in the State Department which was a cover-up fund
whereby covert military aid was supplied to the Contras. The objective was 
to
circumvent the so-called "Boland Amendments", --ie. "riders" to the 
Department
of Defense Appropriation Act, "which prohibited the [US] government from
spending money for the purpose of overthrowing the government of 
Nicaragua". 40
Confirmed by files of the US Court of Appeal (District of Columbia), "Walker
attended some meetings of the Restricted Interagency Group for Central 
America,
of which Oliver North was a member".41 

Walker was never indicted for criminal wrong-doings in the Iran- Contragate
scandal. Upon completing his work with Oliver North, he was appointed US
Ambassador to El Salvador. His stint in El Salvador coincided with the rise 
of
the death squadrons and a period during which the country was virtually 
"under
the grip of US sponsored State terror."42 

In Kosovo, William G. Walker applied his skills in covert operations 
acquired
in Central America. As head of the Kosovo Verification Mission (KVM), Walker
maintained close links to the KLA military command in the field.43 From the
outset of his mission in Kosovo, he used his position to pursue the 
interests
of the Alliance. 


"THE RACAK MASSACRE"


The so-called "Racak massacre" occurred shortly before the launching of the
Rambouillet "peace initiative". although it turned out to be a fake, the 
Racak
massacre nonetheless played a key role in "setting the stage" for NATO's air
raids. William Walker declared (in his capacity as head of KVM) that the
Yugoslav police had carried out a massacre of civilians at Racak on January
15th. The Yugoslav authorities retorted that local police had in fact 
conducted
an operation in this village against the Kosovo Libération Army and that
several KLA soliders had died in cross-fire. As later reported by several
French newspapers (Le Monde, Le Figaro and Liberation), it was confirmed 
that
the "Racak massacre" was indeed a fake put together with a view to 
discrediting
Belgrade: 

"Eventually, even the Los Angeles Times joined in, running a story entitled
"Racak Massacre Questions: Were Atrocities Faked?" The theory behind all 
these
exposés was that the KLA had gathered their own dead after the battle, 
removed
their uniforms, put them in civilian clothes, and then called in the
observers."44. 



THE RAMBOUILLET PROCESS


On January 22, senior officials of the so-called "Contact Group" of six
countries (including the US, Russia, Britain, France, Germany and Italy)
meeting in London called for a peace conference which would bring together 
the
Yugoslav government and "representatives of ethnic Albanians." In turn, NATO
warned that it was "ready to act" if the peace plan to be finalised by the
Contact Group were rejected. United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan
concurred during a visit to NATO headquarters in Brussels that the threat of
force was "essential" to press both sides into a settlement.45 

In the meantime, while supporting the KLA insurgency on the ground, the
Alliance had also contributed to spearheading KLA leader Hashim Thaci (a 29
year "freedom fighter") into heading the Kosovar delegation to Rambouillet, 
on
behalf of the ethnic Albanian majority. The Democratic League headed by 
Ibrahim
Rugova had been deliberately side-stepped. The Alliance was relying on its 
KLA
puppets (linked to organised crime) to rubber-stamp an agreement which would
have transformed Kosovo into an occupied territory under NATO military 
rule. 

While negotiations were ongoing in Rambouillet, NATO decided to increase the
readiness of its assigned forces "so as to make them able to execute the
operation within 48 hours".46 In other words, "peace negotiations" had been
initiated in Rambouillet (contrary to the Vienna Convention) under the 
threat
of impending air strikes. NATO had granted a three weeks period to the 
parties
meeting in Rambouillet to conclude negotiations. 

On February 19, one day prior to the deadline, NATO Secretary General Javier
Solano reaffirmed that, "if no agreement is reached by the deadline set by 
the
Contact Group, NATO is ready to take whatever measures are necessary to 
avert a
humanitarian catastrophe".47 And on 22 March 1999, NATO'S North Atlantic
Council authorised"the Secretary General to decide, subject to further
consultations, on a broader range of air operations if necessary."48 
And on 23 March 1999, NATO's Secretary General directed the Supreme 
Allied Commander in Europe General Wesley Clark to initiate air operations
 in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Air operations commenced on 24 
March 
1999 under the nickname "Operation Allied Force."49 


SENDING IN GROUND TROUPS UNDER A G-8 "PEACE PLAN"


Since the brutal onslaught of the air campaign on March 24, the Alliance has
continued to build up its ground combat troops on the Macedonian border in
anticipation of an impending military invasion. Initially NATO had 
envisaged a
Kosovo occupation force of 50,000 troops which could be increased to 60,000
with a larger US share than the 4,000 initially envisaged under 
Rambouillet. 

In other words, the proposed invasion force was to be more than double that
under Rambouillet (28,000 troops) while also enforcing all the normative
clauses of the initial Rambouillet agreement including the "free movement" 
of
NATO combat units throughout Yugoslavia. 

In the meantime, NATO's military establishment was forcing the pace of
international diplomacy. The Alliance hinted in May that a ground offensive
could be launched prior to reaching a "peace agreement" sanctioned by the G8
and ratified by the United Nations Security Council. 

In addition to the 16,000 ground troops already stationed (well before the
beginning of the bombings) in Macedonia (of which almost half are British),
some 7000 NATO troops and "special forces" were also present in Albania, 
not to
mention the NATO troops stationed in Bosnia-Herzegovina under Operation 
Joint
Endeavour: 

"We've already put quite a lot of troops in Macedonia as the nucleus of that
operation", said British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook. "There are over 
12,000
there already... and last weekend [14-15 May] we committed another two and a
half thousand to go there. We need to build up - actually we need to build 
up
now..."50.  



In late May, the 60,000 troops target was revised to 150,000. Alliance
officials estimating that "if the alliance later decides to mobilize for a 
land
attack ... an invasion force could number more than 150,000 soldiers."51 
Prime
Minister Tony Blair in a separate statement had (without any form of
parliamentary debate) confirmed the sending of 50,000 British troops as 
part of
the 150,000 invasion force. 


In early June, a NATO led invasion under a bogus G8-UN peace initiative was 
put
forth. While the latter served to appease and distract public opinion, it
usefully provided the Alliance with a semblance of legitimacy under the UN
Charter. It also purported to overcome the hesitation of elected politicians
including German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and Italian Prime Minister
Massimo D'Alema. The US Administration also required the "rubber stamp" of 
the
United Nations Security Council so as to acquire the assent of the 
Republican
dominated Congress: 

"House and Senate Democrats agree there is little support at this point for
launching ground troops... even if Clinton and other NATO leaders could 
reach a
consensus on such a dramatic shift in tactics. For now, Clinton has said he 
is
opposed to ground troops."52 

The US House of Representatives (in what appeared to be a partisan
"anti-Clinton" vote) has declined to even endorse the air campaign while
signifying its refusal to authorize a "ground war" without congressional
approval. In early April, Republicans and Democrats joined hands in the 
House
and threw out a proposed "declaration of war on Yugoslavia" by an 
overwhelming
427-2 vote. 

In late May, seventeen members of Congress launched a suit against President
Clinton pointing to the blatant breach of the US Constitution: 

"that the Defendant, the President of the United States, is 
unconstitutionally
continuing an offensive military attack by United States Armed Forces 
against
the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia without obtaining a declaration of war or
other explicit authority from the Congress of the United States as required 
by
Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution, and despite Congress'
decision not to authorize such action." 53



The law suit launched in District Court (District of Columbia) also pointed 
to
the violation of the War Powers Resolution of 1973, a Vietnam War-era
legislation which requires "the sitting President congressional approval for
the "introduction into hostilities" of the U.S. armed forces for longer 
than 60
days": 

Plaintiffs also seek a declaration that a report pursuant to Section 
1543(a)(1)
of the War Powers Resolution was required to be submitted on March 26, 1999,
within 48 hours of the introduction into hostilities in the Federal 
Republic of
Yugoslavia of United States Armed Forces. Additionally, Plaintiffs seek a
declaration that, pursuant to Section 1544(b) of the Resolution, the 
President
must terminate the use of United States Armed Forces engaged in hostilities
against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia no later than sixty calendar days
after March 26, 1999. The President must do so unless the Congress declares 
war
or enacts other explicit authorization, or has extended the sixty day 
period,
or the President determines that thirty additional days are necessary to 
safely
withdraw United States Armed Forces from combat.54



NATO AS "PEACE-KEEPERS"


Echoing the barrage of self-serving NATO propaganda, the media scam now
consists in skilfully portraying Alliance ground troops as bona fide
"peace-keepers". Public opinion should not be deluded as to the meaning of a
G8-UN brokered diplomatic solution. 

An "international presence" consisting largely of NATO troops under the G8
proposal (ratified by the Serbian Parliament in early June) could include a
token participation of "non-NATO forces" including Russia and the Ukraine.
While Moscow agreed in early June that all Yugoslav forces be withdrawn from
Kosovo alongside the disarmement of the KLA, Russian envoy Viktor 
Chernomyrdin
nonetheless insisted that the command structure of the proposed 
international
force be under the control and jurisdiction of the United Nations. 

Despite his perfunctory condemnation of NATO bombings, Russian President 
Boris
Yeltsin is a Western puppet. Chernomyrdin writing in the Washington Post had
earlier warned that a continuation of the air raids could hurt US-Russian
relations: "The world has never in this decade been so close as now to be on
brink of nuclear war..." adding that "Russia would pull out of the 
negotiating
process if  NATO bombing, which started March 24, doesn't stop soon."55 

In the meantime, the Alliance, however, had persisted in maintaining a 
unified
NATO command structure (which was unacceptable to Moscow and Belgrade). NATO
has also stepped up the bombings as a means of pressuring Belgrade into
accepting (without prior negotiation) NATO's "five conditions". 

If the G-8 proposal were to be ratified, NATO would first send in US Marines
into Kosovo from the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit in the Adriatic Sea. The
Marines would be part of a so-called "Enabling Force" prior to the moving 
in of
a force of 50,000 troops. 

A G-8 "peace proposal" (implying a de facto military occupation of Kosovo)
could be formally ratified at the Cologne G7-G8 Summit in mid-June. All G7
heads of government and heads of State together with President Boris Yeltsin
will be in attendance at Cologne in what is hoped to be a highflown display 
of
unity in favour of a (G8 sanctioned) NATO led invasion. NATO nonetheless 
warned
in early June that should the diplomatic initiative not succeed, the 
Alliance
would proceed with a ground invasion involving 150,000 troops.... 


THE SENDING IN OF "SPECIAL FORCES"


In the meantime, an incipient undeclared ground War has already commenced:
special British, French and American forces were reported to be advising the
KLA in the conduct of ground combat operations against regular units of the
Yugoslav Army. To support this initiative, a Republican sponsored bill was
launched in the US Congress to provide direct military aid to the KLA. 

These "special forces" are "advising the rebels at their strongholds in
northern  Albania, where the KLA has launched a major recruitment and 
training operation. According to high-ranking KLA officials, the [British] 
SAS is using two camps near Tirana, the Albanian capital, and another 
on the Kosovar border to teach KLA officers how to conduct 
intelligence-gathering operations on Serbian positions".56 
In May, three French special forces officers wearing uniforms of
the French Armed Forces ("Parachutistes") were reported killed on the
Albania-Yugoslavia border by the Yugoslav daily Vecernje Novosti. 
According to the French daily Libération, the three men were allegedly 
"instructors in charge of coordinating ground war activities by the 
KLA..."57. 


AN UNHOLY "MARRIAGE OF CONVENIENCE" 


In addition to the dispatch of Western special forces, Mujehadeen 
mercenaries
and other Islamic fundamentalist groups (financed inter alia by Iran and 
Saudi
financier Osmane Bin Laden) have been collaborating with the KLA in the 
ground
war. 


"[B]y early December 1997, Iranian intelligence had already delivered the 
first
shipments of hand grenades, machine-guns, assault rifles, night vision
equipment, and communications gear... Moreover, the Iranians began sending
promising Albanian and UCK [KLA] commanders for advanced military training 
in
al-Quds [special] forces and IRGC camps in Iran...58. 



Bin Laden's Al Qa'ida allegedly responsible for last year's African embassy
bombings "was one of several fundamentalist groups that had sent units to 
fight
in Kosovo, ... Bin Laden is believed to have established an operation in
Albania in 1994 ... Albanian sources say Sali Berisha, who was then 
president,
had links with some groups that later proved to be extreme 
fundamentalists".59 


NATO IN CLOSE LIAISON WITH KLA GROUND OPERATIONS 


According to Jane Defence Weekly (10 May 1999), the KLA's new chief of 
staff is
former Croatian Armed Forces Brigadier General Agim Ceku (an ethnic 
Albanian)
who is currently under investigation by the War Crimes Tribunal in the Hague
(ICTY) for his role in "summary executions, indiscriminate shelling of 
civilian
populations and `ethnic cleansing' during the War in Bosnia."60 

NATO spokesman Jamie Shea's response to the appointment of a War criminal as
KLA chief of staff was communicated in a Press Briefing: 


"I have always made it clear, and you have heard me say this, that NATO has 
no
direct contacts with the KLA. Who they appoint as their leaders, that is
entirely their own affair. I don't have any comment on that whatever.61  

Shea's statement that NATO has "no direct contacts with the KLA" is a lie. 
It
is in overt contradiction with other Alliance statements: "I speak 
regularly to
Hashim Thaci, the leader of the Kosovo Liberation Army who's in Kosovo. I 
spoke
to him at the end of last week" said British Foreign Secretary Robin 
Cook.62 


Operations on the ground (led by the KLA and NATO Special forces) are now 
being
carefully coordinated with the air campaign. Moreover, some 50 Canadian 
armed
forces "are working with the KLA in Kosovo" to help report "where the bombs 
are
falling" so they can better target "where the next bomb should go."63 


PENTAGON SPONSORED MERCENARIES IN KOSOVO


The KLA has also been provided with "a long-term training deal with
Military and Professional Resources International [MPRI], a mercenary 
company run by former American officers who operate with semi-official 
approval from the Pentagon and played a key role in building up 
Croatia's armed forces [during the War in Bosnia]."64 And General 
Brigadier Agim Ceku (despite his role in "ethnic cleansing" in Bosnia), 
is currently collaborating closely with the Pentagon's mercenary outfit 
MPRI on behalf of the KLA. 


THE KLA TO FORM A "POST-CONFLICT GOVERNMENT"


A self-proclaimed provisional KLA government of Kosovo has been established.
With KLA leader Hashim Thaci as Prime Minister designate, the KLA has 
already
been promised a central role in the formation of a "post-conflict 
government". 

While openly promoting a "freedom movement" with links to the drug trade, 
NATO
was also intent in bypassing the civilian Kosovo Democratic League and its
leader Ibrahim Rugova who had earlier called for an end to the bombings. 
Rugova
was branded as a "traitor" by the KLA. According to Albanian state-run TV, 
the
KLA had sentenced Rugova to death accusing him of being "an agent of the 
regime
in Belgrade."65 

In April, Fehmi Agani, one of Rugova's closest collaborators in the 
Democratic
League was killed. The Serbs were blamed by NATO spokesperson Jamie Shea for
having assassinated Agani. According to  Skopje paper Makedonija Danas 
quoting
reliable sources in Albania:  "Agani was killed... on the orders of Tirana
where Thaci is located with the members of his illegal government".66 

According to a report of the Foreign Policy Institute: 


"...the KLA have [no] qualms about murdering Rugova's collaborators, whom it
accused of  the "crime" of moderation. Most recently, although Rugova's 
recent
meeting with Milosevic  may well have been under duress, the KLA declared
Rugova a "traitor" - yet another step  toward eliminating any competitors 
for
political power within Kosovo."67   

The KLA military regime had replaced the duly elected (by ethnic Albanians)
civilian provisional Kosovar government of President Ibrahim Rugova. In a
statement issued in April, the KLA considered the (parallel) "parliamentary
elections" organised by the Democratic League and held in March 1998 to be
invalid. 

The self-proclaimed Kosovar administration is made up of the KLA and the
Democratic Union Movement (LBD), a coalition of five opposition parties 
opposed
to Rugova's Democratic League (LDK). In addition to the position of prime
minister, the KLA controls the ministries of finance, public order and 
defence.
In the words of US State Department spokesman James Foley: 

`We want to develop a good relationship with them [the KLA] as they
transform themselves into a politically-oriented organization,' ...`[W]e
believe that we have a lot of advice and a lot of help that we can provide 
to
them if they become precisely the kind of political actor we would like to 
see
them become.'68 



With the KLA poised to play a central role in the formation of a "post
conflict" government, the tendency is towards the installation of a "Mafia
State" with links to the drug trade. The US State Department's position is 
that
the KLA would "not be allowed to continue as a military force but would
have the chance to move forward in their quest for self government under 
a 'different context'" meaning the inauguration of a de facto 
"narco-democracy"

under NATO protection: "If we can help them and they want us to help them 
in that effort  of transformation, I think it's nothing that anybody can 
argue
with."69 


In recent developments, the Alliance, however, has sought through the
intermediation of US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to reconcile
divisions between Thachi, Rugova and other ethnic Albanian leaders 
"primarily
with a view to strengthening its [the Alliance's] own position in the
region."70 
        

IMPOSING "FREE MARKET" REFORMS


Wall Street analysts concur that "war is good for business" particularly 
during
a period of "economic slowdown". The US Congress has approved increased
budgetary allocations to finance the War in Yugoslavia which will result in
multi-billion contracts for America's Defense industry. In turn, the War 
will
boost the military-industrial complex and its related high tech sectors in 
the
US and Western Europe. A ground war combined with a prolonged military
occupation (as in Bosnia) will prop up military spending. In turn, covert
support and financing of "freedom fighters" (extending beyond the Balkans 
into
Central Asia and the Middle East) will contribute to boosting the lucrative
contraband in small arms for an expanding market of insurgent nationalist
movements. 


"ECONOMIC RECONSTRUCTION"


The "post conflict" agenda (under the proposed G8 "peace initiative" 
consists
in establishing in Kosovo an occupied territory under Western administration
(broadly on the same model as the 1995 Dayton Agreement imposed on
Bosnia-Herzegovina). 

"Free market reforms" are envisaged for Kosovo under the supervision of the
Bretton Woods institutions. Article I (Chapter 4a) of the Rambouillet 
Agreement
stipulates that: "The economy of Kosovo shall function in accordance with 
free
market principles".  

"Civilian administration [in Kosovo] and reconstruction would be carried 
out by
non-military bodies including the EU and the OSCE, with input from the World
Bank and the IMF to rebuild war-damaged infrastructure and rehouse 
refugees.71 



In close liaison with NATO, the Bretton Woods institutions had already 
analyzed
the consequences of an eventual military intervention leading to the 
military
occupation of Kosovo: almost a year prior to the beginning of the War, the
World Bank conducted "simulations" which "anticipated the possibility of an
emergency scenario arising out of the tensions in Kosovo".72 The 
"simulations"
conducted in Washington have in fact already been translated into a panoply 
of
"emergency recovery loans" for Macedonia and Albania, and there is more to
come... Since the imposition of the embargo, Yugoslavia, however, is no 
longer
considered a member of the Bretton Woods institutions and will not be 
eligible
for IMF-World Bank loans until the sanctions are lifted.  

The proposed "Marshall Plan" for the Balkans is a delusion. We recall that 
in
Bosnia, the costs of reconstruction were of the order of 50 billion dollars.
Western donors initially pledged $3 billion in reconstruction loans, yet 
only a
meagre $518 million dollars were granted in December 1995, part of which was
tagged (under the terms of the Dayton Peace Accords) to finance some of the
local civilian costs of the Implementation Force's (IFOR) military 
deployment
as well as repay debt arrears with international creditors.73  

The eventual "reconstruction" of Yugoslavia formulated in the context of the
"free market" reforms and financed by international debt largely purport to
create a safe haven for foreign investors rather than rehabilitate the
country's economic and social infrastructure. The IMF's lethal "economic
medicine" will be imposed, the national economy will be dismantled, European
and American banks will take over financial institutions, local industrial
enterprises which have not been totally destroyed will be driven into
bankruptcy. The most profitable State assets will be transferred into the 
hands
of foreign capital under the World Bank sponsored privatisation programme. 
In
turn, "strong economic medicine" imposed by external creditors will 
contribute
to further boosting a criminal economy (already implanted in Albania and
Macedonia) which feeds on poverty and economic dislocation. 

"The Allies will work with the rest of the international community  to help
rebuild Kosovo once the crisis is over: The International Monetary Fund and
Group of Seven industrialized countries are among those who stand ready to
offer financial help to the countries of the region. We want to ensure 
proper
co-ordination of aid and help countries to respond to the effects of the
crisis. This should go hand in hand with the necessary structural reforms in
the countries  affected -- helped by budget support from the international
community.74 



In turn, the  so-called "reconstruction" of the Balkans by foreign capital 
will
signify multi-billion contracts to multinational firms to rebuild roads,
airports and bridges which will eventually be required (once the embargo is
lifted) to facilitate the "free movement" of capital and commodities. 

The proposed "Marshall Plan" financed by the World Bank and the European
Development Bank (EBRD) as well as private creditors will largely benefit
Western mining, petroleum and construction companies while fuelling the
region's external debt well into the third millennium. And the countries of 
the
Balkans are slated to reimburse this debt through the laundering of dirty 
money
in the domestic banking system which will be deregulated under the 
supervision
of Western financial institutions. Narco-dollars from the multi-billion 
dollar
Balkans drug trade will be recycled (through the banking system) and 
channelled
towards servicing the external debt as well as "financing" the costs of
"reconstruction".  

The pattern for Kosovo is, in this regard, similar to that of Macedonia and
Albania. Since the early 1990s, the IMF's reforms have impoverished the
Albanian population while spearheading the national economy into bankruptcy.
The IMF's deadly economic therapy transforms countries into open 
territories.
In Albania and Macedonia it has fostered the growth of illicit trade and the
criminalisation of State institutions. 

Moreover, even prior to the influx of refugees, NATO troops in Macedonia and
Albania had already occupied civilian facilities (including hotels, schools,
barracks and even hospitals) without compensating the national governments 
for
the use of local services.75 

In a cruel irony, a significant part of these incurred costs as well as 
those
associated with the refugee crisis are now to be financed not by the 
Alliance
but by the national governments on borrowed money: 

"[T]he Albanian government's formal structures have been paralysed by the
crisis. The country's treasury has been emptied by the initial efforts to 
help
the refugees."76  
 

WHO WILL PAY WAR REPARATIONS?


The extensive destruction of Yugoslavia, would normally require the 
Alliance to
"pay war reparations" to Belgrade. However, following a pattern set in both
Vietnam and Iraq, the Alliance will no doubt compel Belgrade "to pay for the
costs" of Operation Allied Force (including the cruise missiles and 
radioactive
shells) as a condition for the "normalisation of relations" and the lifting 
of
the economic embargo. 

We recall in this regard that whereas Vietnam never received War reparations
payments, Hanoi was compelled --as a condition for the "normalisation" of
economic relations and the lifting of the US embargo in 1994--, to recognize
the "bad debts" of the defunct Saigon regime which were largely used to 
finance
the US War effort. By recognizing (in a secret Paris Club agreement 
negotiatied
in 1993) the legitimacy of these debts, Vietnam had accepted "to pay war
reparation damages" to her former enemy.77 

Similarly Baghdad has been "billed for the costs of the Gulf War", --ie.
accumulated Iraqi debts including private claims against Iraq have been
carefully recorded by a special unit of the UN Security Council. The
recognition of these debts by Baghdad at some future date will be a 
condition
for the lifting of sanctions on Iraq.





ENDNOTES

1. Statement by UNICEF Representative in Belgrade, quoted in Yugoslav Daily
Survey, Belgrade, 23 May 1999, No. 4351.

2. Report by Dr Siegwart-Horst Guenther, meeting of the PBS (Federal
Socialists), Bonn, 17 May 1999.

3. International Action Center, "NATO Bombing Unleashes Environmental
Catastrophe in Europe", Press Release, 14 May 1999). 
 
4. Joseph Fitchett, "Is Serb Economy the True Target? Raids Seem Aimed at
Bolstering Resistance to Milosevic", International Herald Tribune, Paris, 26
May  1999.

5. Tanjug Press Release, 25 May 1999.

6. Statement to Ambassadors of 19 NATO Countries, quoted in Daily Telegraph,
London, 28 May 1999.

7. Ibid.

8. Sean Gervasi, Bosnia and Vietnam, draft text, 1995.

9. Financial Times, London, 6 May 1999, p. 2.

10. Ibid. 

11. The Boston Globe, 8 April 1999.

12. According to Viktor Chechevatov, a Three-star General and Commander of
ground forces in Russia's Far East, quoted in The Boston Globe, 8 April 1999

13. Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford, "Bombings Reignite Nuclear War Fears", The 
Victoria
Times-Colonist. 13 May 1999, page A15. Mary-Wynne Ashford is co-president
of the
Nobel Peace Prize winning IPPNW.

14. Quoted in Mary-Wynne Ashford, op. cit.

15  Quoted by Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford, op. cit. 
 
16. Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford, op cit.

17. Quoted in The Washington Post, May 9, 1999, page A20.

18. World Socialist Website editorial, 24 May 1999.

19. Diana Johnstone, On Refugees, Paris, 30 May 1999.

20. Ibid.

21. See "Lawyers Charge NATO Leaders Before War Crimes Tribunal", Toronto, 6
May 1999.

22. See Financial Times, 27 May 1999.

23. See "Lawyers Charge NATO Leaders Before War Crimes Tribunal", Toronto, 6
May 1999; see also Jude Wanniski, "Memo to US House Majority Leader",
Polyeconomics, New York, 10  May 1999.

24. Lawyers Charge NATO, op cit. 

25. Ibid.

26. Ibid.       

27. Chicago Tribune, 10 May 1999.
28. Intelligence Report from the German Foreign Office, January 12, 1999 to 
the
Administrative Court of Trier.

29. Status Report of the German Foreign Office, November 18, 1998 to the 
Upper
Administrative Court at Münster, February 24, 1999.

30. See, Roland Keith, "Failure of Diplomacy, Returning OSCE Human Rights
Monitor Offers A View From the Ground in Kosovo", The Democrat, May 1999.

31. US Department of Defense Press Release, 6 April 1999. The stated 
purpose of
the mission was "to discuss a range of security issues with the recent 
ethnic
clashes in Kosovo." In Skopje, the agenda consisted in examining security
arrangements to be implemented after the termination of United Nations 
UNPREDEP
programme. 

32. Background briefing by a Senior Defense Official at NATO Headquarters,
Thursday, June 11, 1998.

33. Ibid.

34. US Department of Defense, Background Briefing, July 15, 1998.

35. For further details see Michel Chossudovsky, Kosovo `Freedom Fighters'
Financed by Organised Crime, Ottawa, 1999. 

36. Quoted in The Daily Telegraph, London, 25 September 1998.

37. See Federation of American Scientists, "Operation Determined Force", 24
March 1999, see also Financial Times, October 12, 1998.

38. Quoted in Federation of American Scientists, op. cit.

39. See Roland Keith, Appendix, op. cit.

40. United States Court of Appeals, for the District of Columbia Circuit, 
Filed
January 23, 1996, Division No. 86-6, in Re: Oliver L. North.

41. Ibid.

42. Roland Keith, Appendix, op. cit.

43. Confirmed by several press reports as well as statements of the KLA, see
also Radio 21 Dispatch, Tirana, February 28, 1999.

44. Roland Keith, Appendix, op cit.        
  
45. Daily Telegraph, London, 29 January 1999.

46. Federation of American Scientists, op. cit.

47. Ibid.

48. Ibid.

49. Ibid.

50. "Margaret Warner talks with Cook about the latest developments in the
Yugoslav conflict", Jim Lehrer News Hour, 21 May 1999.

51. New York Times, 26  May 1999.

52. Washington Post, 23 May 1999.

53. Action launched in United States District Court for the District of
Columbia, Complaint for Declaratory Relief,
Preliminary Statement, District of Columbia, 27 May 1999.

54. Ibid., see also Truth in Media, Phoenix, 23 May 1999. 

55. Washington Post, 27 May 1999. 

56. Sunday Telegraph, London, 18 April 1999.

57. Libération, Paris, 19 May 1999.

58. Yossef Bodansky, "Italy Becomes Iran's New Base for Terrorist 
Operations,"
Defense and Foreign Affairs Strategic Policy, London, February 1998. 
Bodansky
is Director of the US House Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and
Unconventional Warfare

59. Chris Steven, "Bin Laden Opens European Terror Base in Albania", Sunday
Times, London, 15 November 1998.   
  
60. "War Crimes Panel Finds Croat Troops 'Cleansed' the Serbs," New York 
Times,
21 March 1999.

61. NATO Press Briefing, 14 May 1999.

62. Jim Lehrer News Hour, op cit.    

63. According to Canadian MP David Price, April 19, 1999, UPI Press 
Dispatch.
64. Sunday Telegraph, London, 18 April 1999.

65. "US Is Trying to Reconcile Ethnic-Albanian Separatists", 
Belgrade, Tanjug Press Dispatch, 30 May 1999. 
 
66. Quoted in Tanjug Press Dispatch, 14 May 1999.

67. See Michael Radu, "Don't Arm the KLA", CNS Commentary from the Foreign
Policy Research Institute, 7 April, 1999). 

68. New York Times, 2 February 1999.
  
69. Ibid. 

70. Tanjug Press Dispatch, 30 May 1999.

71. See World Bank Development News, Washington, 27 April 1999.  

72. Ibid.

73. See Michel Chossudovsky, Dismantling Yugoslavia, Colonising Bosnia, 
Covert
Action Quarterly, No. 56. Spring 1996.

74. Statement by Javier Solano, Secretary General of NATO, published in The
National Post, Toronto  May 1999).
  
75. See Jan Oberg, Press Info, no. 59, Insecuring Macedonia, Transnational
Foundation TFF, March 18, 1999.

76. Jane Intelligence Review, June 1999.

77. See Michel Chossudovsky, The Globalisation of Poverty, Impacts of IMF 
and
World Banks Reforms, Third World Network Penang and Zed Books, 1997, 
chapter 8.

*     *     *


Permission is granted to post this text on community internet sites, 
provided
the essay remains intact and the copyright note is displayed. To publish 
this
text in printed and/or in any other form (including commercial internet 
sites)
or to publish excerpts contact the author at chossudovsky@sprint.ca, fax:
1-514-4256224.


 

Michel Chossudovsky 
Professor of Economics,  University  of Ottawa
Member of the Ad Hoc Committee to Stop Canada's  
Participation  in the War in Yugoslavia 

Voice 613-5625800, Ext. 1415 
email chossudovsky@sprint.ca

On the KLA:  http://www.transnational.org/features/crimefinansed.html
On the break-up of Yugoslavia: 
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/62/022.html
and  http://www.lbbs.org/yugoslavia.htm
On the impact of the bombings:
http://www.diaspora-net.org/food4thought/chossudovsky.htm