Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 14:20:22 -0700
From: Michael Pugliese <debsian-AT-pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: AUT: Serbia


   I'm inclined to believe a factor in the NATO intervention was Caspian Sea
Oil but, Chris Burford, here below, has some comments. Also, go to the
website of the Nixon Center. There are some interesting docs from the horses
mouth to buttress a case that Mobil/Exxon, Chevron et. al. are
in intense geo-political struggles vis vis the Russians and others as to
which bloc, which set of capitalists is gonna get the final nod, on
pipelines and access.
Michael Pugliese

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 23:06:01 +0100
From: Chris Burford <cburford-AT-gn.apc.org>
Subject: Re: Trans-Balkan pipeline behind US intervention in Kosovo

At 04/07/01 22:50 +0200, you wrote:

>Original Guardian article at:
>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4136440,00.html


George Monbiot was incorrect in this article to say

>The pipeline does not pass through the former Yugoslavia,

because it passes through the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

Certainly the US and Western European imperialisms were looking at
smoothing out the geopolitical map in the interests of their finance
capitalists. That is the reason why they did not want communalism, wars,
massacres, and hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of refugees, and a
generation of embittered victims willing to blow up oil installations.

Whether their strategy in Kosovo will pay off in stabilising Macedonia is
still not clear.

Chris Burford

London

------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "cwright" <cwright-AT-21stcentury.net>
To: <aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 11:53 AM
Subject: Re: AUT: Serbia


> Thanks, good stuff!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter Jovanovic" <peterzoran-AT-hotmail.com>
> To: <aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 12:35 AM
> Subject: Re: AUT: Serbia
>
>
> > hi all
> >
> > Chris Wright wrote:
> > >I phrased that poorly.  My point was simply that we should oppose the
> > >bombing of Serbia not because we back Milsevic or have illusions in
some
> > > >Serbian "socialist state" or because Serbia somehow represented a
> > >challenge >to capital (both arguments I have heard), but because the US
> and
> > >NATO >bombing had no, and could have no , ability to actually help the
> > >Kosovars.
> >
> > i'm inclined to say we should oppose any use of state military force.
both
> > because it will be bad for the people immediately affected and
ultimately
> > bad for us.
> >
> > >Their intent was to divide the area further and break down any kind of
> > >resistance to their interests.  I can't help but think that the US and
> NATO
> > > >are eyeballing the Caspian Sea oil reserves, as well as what it will
> take
> > >to >control the workers of that area, and a policy of micronationalisms
> > >suites >that policy well, IMO.
> >
> > there have been a lot of fairly unconvincing rationales for the NATO
> bombing
> > and i think the Caspian pipeline is one of them. two i prefer are the
one
> in
> > the 1999 issue of Aufheben, that it was a US signal to both the russian
> > nationalists/Communists who were opposed to neoliberalism and it's
> european
> > allies that they couldn't go it alone. from Greek group TPTG (see
> > http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2379/yugoslavia.htm) is the
> idea
> > that it was to facilitate the development of capitalism in Kosovo by
> > displacing the agricultural population, something Milosevic had proved
> > unable to do.
> >
> > >Well, I am not opposed to killing cops.  Unlike some people who see
them
> as
> > > >workers, I see them as the straight enemy, far more reliable and
> hardened
> > > >than soldiers conscripted into the military.  They are full-time
watch
> > >dogs >and the direct, daily enforcers of capital's power.
> >
> > No argument there
> >
> > >Similarly in England.  They all went to the Serbian nationalist
> > >demonstrations.
> >
> > i'm not sure about that. i know the anti-war demonstrations in the UK
> > included serb nationalists and various leftists and communists but i
don't
> > know who organised them. as both Aufheben and the Anarchist Federation
> have
> > said most of the non-leninist activists were gearing up for j18. and
many
> > were mired in support for the kla which left revolutionaries unable to
> > organise anything much separately against the bombing.
> >
> > in italy there was a one day strike of over a million workers against
the
> > war and at least one pretty impressive demonstration/riot outside Aviano
> > airbase where a lot of the NATO planes were flying from. unfortunately i
> > don't know much about the politics of those involved.
> >
> > >If you wanted to intervene in either of these, i think you
> > >had to call for NATO to stop bombing, but also for Serbia out of
Kosova,
> > > >with a sharp critique of Serbian Nationalism as reactionary and
> defending
> > > >the right of the Kosovars to choose how they want to live, while
> showing
> > > >exactly how the KLA's nationalist politics would make that
impossible.
> >
> > i'm pretty sure that didn't happen in australia but the wildcat anecdote
i
> > mentioned in an earlier post suggests it might have in the UK.
> >
> > >At the same time, unity between Serbian, Kosovar, and other workers in
> the
> > >region would only be possible if Serbian workers demanded the complete
> > >withdrawal of Serbian forces from Kosova and the overthrow of the
Serbian
> > >regime.
> >
> > that seems a bit utopian, while i don't think there was much of an
> organised
> > anti-war movement in Serbia a lot of Serbian workers were practically
> > anti-war through individual draft refusal and later mass desertions and
> > mutinies. the kla didn't offer any chance of building on that resistance
> by
> > their attacks on serbian civilians and support for the NATO bombing. BTW
> the
> > earlier pacifist leadership of the kosovars was actually quite complicit
> in
> > milosevic staying in power. in all the serbian elections of the 90s they
> > organised a boycott rather than standing candidates who might have
joined
> > with the serbian opposition to topple milosevic. i'm not much in favour
of
> > standing for parliament but this wasn't done in any principled way but
> > rather with the calculation that the only way kosovo would get support
for
> > independence from the west would be if milosevic stayed in power. also
> > something unlikely to endear anti-milosevic serb workers to the kosovar
> > struggle.
> >
> > >Of course, which is why, although I supported the Kosovars desire to
> expel
> > > >the Serbian military and Serbian control, I refused to support the
KLA.
> > >In >this case, I don't think that we had an organization to defend, but
> > >that >does not mean we did not have an obligation to defend Kosova.
> >
> > peter
> >
_________________________________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com.
> >
> >
> >
> >      --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
> >
>
>
>
>      --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---



     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---