Events in the Balkans
Britain and France, through the ‘Rambouillet’ negotiations, attempted to put an end to the current conflict in Kosova
between the Serbs and the Kosova Albanians. However America intervened in the negotiations and her threats and
insistence on making the NATO alliance the only guarantor of any peace agreement between the warring sides was what
foiled the talks at ‘Rambouillet’ in Paris and pushed Slobodan Milosevic, the Serbian leader, to mobilise Serbian troops in
Kosova. As a consequence this led to the expulsion, killing and torture of the Muslims and the committing of horrendous
crimes against them. This was the issue which granted the American administration the pretext for Nato’s military
intervention in the Balkans.
America’s choice of the Balkan area is not borne of a vacuum. She knows the area’s racial and ethnic propensity for
fragmentation and balkanisation. Consequently, starting a fire or putting it out is one of the easy actions which the
American administration is inclined to carry out in Europe, which aim to set Europe alight and drown her in a sea of
domestic problems within the European sanctuary itself. Also demonstrating Europe’s inability to deal with her own
problems herself, and proving her urgent need for America and NATO at all times.
However, the issue which is of greater importance to American than all of this, is the complete termination of Russia’s role
as a regional power in Europe, just as her role as a superpower with global interests was brought to an end. After Poland,
the Czech Republic and Hungary have all joined the NATO alliance, there remains no European state from the former
Warsaw Pact countries with an alliance with Russia, with the exception of Yugoslavia. The Baltic countries which used to
be part of the Soviet Union have also forwarded their requests to join NATO. Slovakia and Romania are waiting their turn to
be admitted into the NATO alliance. Whereas Bulgaria and Moldova are expressing their friendship and welcoming
cooperation with the Alliance. This is what the recent crises in the Balkans has shown.
Through this, the cutting of the close ties which attached Russia with her traditional allies in Eastern Europe have become
complete. Only Yugoslavia and in particular the Serbs in the Serbian republic and republic of Montenegro remain (loyal) to
Russia and have established good relations with her. Therefore, America set about to clip the wings of Yugoslavia. It
separated four of the original six republics from Yugoslavia. Being; Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia and Macedonia. And the
republic of Montenegro remains on the path of separation. By weakening the Serbs of Yugoslavia and isolating them from
Russia, a weakening of Russia is achieved. And by losing whatever interests and ties that remained in Eastern Europe she
loses her regional role in Europe, just as she lost her global role following the fall of the Soviet Union.
If we consider the demise of the Soviet Union and America’s leadership of the Allies in the second Gulf war as two
indications of the end of Russia’s role as a great power, then it is also possible to consider the war of Kosova as an
indication of the end of Russia’s regional role in Europe.
As for the Russian arsenal in terms of its huge nuclear and military weaponry; that is of no value as she has lost the high
logistic and technological aspect which has rendered them ineffective. In addition to this, the shocking collapse of the
Russian economy has meant that she is unable even to run the everyday lives of Russian citizens let alone undertake the
costly actions required of a world superpower.
The basic aim of America, therefore, is to take the Balkans from Russia and Western Europe, in terms of what is marked
out as a strategically important area which separates Russia from Europe, and which provides the potential for America to
place a lasting foothold in Europe and swiftly extend her influence.
America timed the NATO intervention in Kosova with the beginning of a new stage of negotiations between the IMF and
Russia. So, Michel Camdessus, the director of the IMF, didn’t leave Moscow from the time the air strikes on Serbia began.
He negotiated for many hours throughout the week in order to grant Russia a new loan amounting to billions of dollars and
which enable Russia to pay off the outstanding accumulated interest from previous loans.
The military intervention of NATO is a serious precedent in Europe which means the marginalisation of the role of the UN
and the Security Council. America has come to use the UN when it suits her and to marginalise it when it does not serve
her interests. He who follows the news media reports is almost unable to differentiate between a NATO intervention and an
American intervention in Yugoslavia. Thus, America’s leadership of NATO means all actions that are imposed are to serve
America alone.
The Clinton administration has taken the displacement of civilians in Kosova and their torture as a strong media reason to
justify America’s intervention. Clinton stated on March 24th: ‘We are moving to protect thousands of innocent people from
the rising military attacks. We are moving to avert the extension of the war and removal of the fuse from each barrel of
gunpowder in the heart of Europe which has exploded twice during the present century.’ So, Clinton is aware of Europe’s
weak point represented in the Balkans. He is also aware that it is a barrel of gunpowder in the heart of Europe and that it is
liable to be set off at any moment. In Clinton’s discussion during the meeting in the foreign office on March 30th he hinted
at the independence of Kosova when he attacked the Serbian leader for: ‘Using racial and religious hatred as a justification
for the extermination and killing of innocent and peaceful civilians to clear the road for his absolute rule.’ He added that the
NATO campaign will destroy his forces: ‘He will see a steady increase in the destruction to Serbia’s quest to control
Kosova.’ And when James Rubin, the spokesman for the American foreign office, was asked to comment on what Clinton
had stated he said: ‘The atrocities that are being committed by the Serbian forces against the majority of Albanians in
Kosova makes it difficult for us to envisage that the Serbs and Albanians will live together in the future.’
It is quite apparent till now that America intends to extend the time-span of the military actions. And, if she can, she
intends to transfer the war to neighbouring countries such as Macedonia, Albania and even Montenegro. She does not wish
to use ground troops to resolve the issues that cannot be resolved by air power alone. In this regard the American defence
minister Cohen said on March 25th: ‘The ground troops under NATO do not from a part of this specific operation.’ This
means that the ground war that is required is meant to take place between the countries in the area and their peoples,
taking new dimensions, and so that the entire area is thrown into the arms of the United States of America after a great
level of tiredness and exhaustion is reached.
After the bombing operations Clinton time and again announced that: ‘A cessation of NATO’s bombing is conditional on the
achievement of one of two things: Either Milosevic accepts the peace agreement or the Serbian army’s military capability is
degraded.’ It is not expected that one of these two will be realised, because it is not possible that Milosevic will accept the
peace agreement which entails the admission of NATO troops into Kosova leading to the independence of the province.
And they will not be realised because the Serbian Army’s capability is substantial and requires a longer period of time until
it is degraded. Which means that the war will continue for a greater period of time and the influx of refugees to the
neighbouring countries will continue. And as well it will continue the creation of a complex problem in the heart of Europe
which will be difficult to solve quickly. Therefore, it is natural for America and with her the Alliance to refuse the mediation of
Primakov and the Serbian offer for NATO to stop its bombing in return for Milosevic’s agreement to reduce the Serbian
forces in the province and the taking back of refugees. That is because America is of the view that the time for putting out
the fire in the Balkans has not come, under the claim that the Serbian offer is not good enough and due to a reluctance in
giving Russia any role which would portray her as a regional power with interests in Europe.
As for the Europeans generally, but Britain and France specifically, their vision with respect to the Balkan problem, differs
from America. France has held for a long time the necessity of setting up a core European military force which will assume
the task of intervening in the European continent and solving problems free from NATO which has an American dominating
leadership. Therefore, we find her at one time in agreement with Germany to establish a core European army and at
another time negotiating with Britain to form a bilateral military force for that purpose. However, these attempts - it seems -
will not see the light of day and Europe will continue to be forced to depend on America and NATO for a long time yet under
a pure American leadership. As for Britain, she sees the policy of adaptation according to the contradictions as the ideal
policy to secure her interests. So at the time when she is sponsoring the peace negotiations in Paris, free from American
domination, she stays close to America immediately after the negotiations failed and participates with her in bombing
Serbian targets which were drawn up by America.
As for Russia the Russian legislature is sympathetic towards the Serbs for they are from the same racial origin (Slav). The
Russian government knows that America is aiming at the last place belonging to her in which she acts as a super power or
at least as a regional super power. But she is unable to do anything. As for the measures she has taken and the
statements made by officials in Russia, they have no other purpose than to give vent to the angry emotions that have
overwhelmed the Russian Duma. Because her need of American support in getting further loans from the IMF is pressing.
Thus America has been able to throw her weight at the heart of the crisis, ignite a huge fire in Europe, force Russia to
retreat, and force Europe to be led by her. Whilst she has been able, at the same time, to establish the West’s continuous
need for NATO’s presence, which had lost its justification for existence after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact.
01/04/1999
http://www.hizb-ut-tahrir.com/leaflets/english/april0199.htm