Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 10:34:23 -0400
From: roger <pelecat-AT-bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Why Tony Needed A War




Erik wrote:

<snip>

> Why was the peaceful resistance in the region not given any chance (we
> can't intervene in domestic politics was the excuse).
> Why was it not good there was internal resistance to Milosevic (the NATO
> actions up till today got two clear results : a speedup of the ethnic
> cleansing in Kosovo and a reinforcement of Milosevics position).

hi, erik.  did you catch *olivia tremor control* when they were in sproutland
(if you recall my post a while back)?  they're opening for *rem* in august on
the first leg of their tour (which may or may not impress you).

as to the subject of your post, it would take a long post to review the recent
history of kosovo and to account for the rise of the KLA and the increased
ethnic and religious tensions over the past 10 years.  i'm sure you're aware of
the general outlines of the situation by now:  90% of the population are ethnic
albanian muslims while 10% are slav eastern orthodox christians, mostly serb.
in 1987, milosovic first rose to prominence in tito's yugoslavia by playing the
"serb" card in kosovo and revoking the autonomous status the province had
enjoyed under the yugoslav federal constitution since 1974 (i think).  it's
just gotten worse since then.

atrocities multiplied (on both sides; in fact many more serbs were displaced in
the early 90's, when i was there, than albanians), but it has only been in the
past 18 months or so, with the rise of the KLA, that open conflict has become a
real threat.  the reasons for this are complex, and i haven't heard them
convincingly presented in the press.

in my opinon, the rise of the KLA is primarily a function of the chaotic (as
opposed to anarchistic) situation in albania proper.  the conjuction of the
rise of large, well organized crimminal gangs in albania with the sponsorship
of several international actors (syria maybe, i'm not sure) led to the
introduction of small arms and the beginnings of the KLA, which is much more
like a street gang than an army.

the recent crisis began last fall when serb brown shirts (i'm sure you
recognize what a brown shirt is) ran at least 150000 albanians out of their
homes and forced them to flee into the hills at the beginning of the winter.

i agree that nato bears a heavy responsibility for this mess.  the bombing is
clearly, as you imply, the excuse and justification for the serbs (at least
rhetorically) and it also is solidifying support for millivanilli himself.  if
nato sincerely wanted to protect the muslims, then they should have PROTECTED
the muslims, not bomb irrelevant serb targets.  it's stupid.  i can't tell you
what they were thinking, erik.  maybe they sincerely thought that serbia would
back off and not move in the troops.  it appears that they were wrong.

what do you think about all this?  regardless of nato ineptitude (they appear
to be far better at shooting down italian lift gondolas than they are at
stopping genocide), the fact remains that serbia invaded kosovo with about
27000 heavily armed troops and 15000 gestapo.  i fear that we will discover
that while we've all had this pleasant little debate and fretted over the
cupability of nato, some very horrible, horrible things have been done to the
kosovars.  erik, what if the serbs really have massacred all the young men?
all of them?  tens or hundreds of thousands of them?

>
>
> I have so many questions which our regular news ofcourse won't address.
>
> But the biggest question is : how come nationalism seems so deeply rooted
> that convicted anti-authoritarians feel the need to defend politics that
> never were theirs ? Why do we, as an international group of people fall so
> easily in the lines of nationalism ?

whom do you mean?  if you mean by "international group" the -AT--list, then i
don't see nationalism at work at all.  most people, especially europeans, have
remained absolutely silent.  we loud-mouthed americans are split pretty much
down the middle (as far as i can tell from the posts) about whether to support
nato action, while it's the euro left that seems to have a single, official
anarchist party position.  so who's being nationalist, here?  what i do note is
a curious silence about the fate of the kosovars.  and absolutely no
suggestions about how to help them.  if i ever have a house and it catches
fire, i sure as hell hope there ain't a bunch of euro-anarchs as neighbors.
they'll have to check and see if  it's theoretically permissible to put it
out!  just joking, erik.  i know that this is a tough situation for a lot of
people, but you have to admit that, on this list at least, few if any europeans
seem to dwell long on the plight of the kosovars.


roger