More Delightful Insight from Jared

["Owen Jones" <owen.jones@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

 Comrade,

         In response to Jared's reply to comrade Monaghan.

> This description of Rugova is false; the falsehood is included as a given, as
> in "do you still beat your wife?"  Here the key  words are "resistance" and
> "mass expulsions" - they are assumed (though untrue) in passing.

 Rugova is nothing more than a bourgeois-liberal pacifist. His form of
resistance against national oppression was very much in the Ghandi fashion,
or that employed by black Americans in the 60s as inspired by Martin Luther
King. If the KLA could kill him then they would, but that would make him a
martyr, so instead his followers are intimidated and sometimes
murdered/expelled. In the last Kosovan general election - not recognised by
the Yugoslav State - he won around 95% of the vote.

> First, "resistance" is wrong - Rugova led a planned campaign of
> destabilization, a giant experiment in black ops for Western consumption; it
> is only described as moderate by comparison to current period when the US
> dumped Rugova in order to switch to the gangster-terrorist KLA .  Different
> tools for different times.

 A "planned campaign of destabilisation" - oh please. That how the
bourgeoisie describe general strikes - those selfish greedy workers causing
intentional chaos. From 89-99 the Kosovar Albanians were an oppressed
nationality, and the incorrect tactic championed by Rugova and his followers
was peaceful resistance against it. However it was still supportable, if
critically, as a struggle against oppression, in the same way as, for
example, the American blacks in the 60s.

 If your State sacks you from your jobs wholesale, removes your democratic
rights, and discriminates against you, then it is your duty to fight back.
Not simply by boycotting general elections (a rather stupid thing to do) and
instruments of the State like the police and army (which they were
discriminated against in a long way back - particularly after the Paracin
Massacre which was used a pretext to remove Albanians from armed active
service), but if necessary to use arms for defence. Though in reality the
only solution for Kosovo was for the Kosovar Albanian working class to unite
with the other Yugoslav working classes, but such was the ethnic hostility
stirred up by ex-Stalinist bureaucrats for purpose of restoring capitalism,
this was not very likely.

 The KLA were an imperialist proxy army, fighting not for self-determination
but rather imperialist annexation, gangster rule (particularly from Northern
Albania); it did not defend the oppressed Kosovar Albanians, instead
devoting itself to be NATO's land army and fighting Yugoslav forces on the
Kosovan borders or over some irrelevant villages; indeed it itself expelled
and killed Kosovar Albanians, mainly from its former 'left' faction; and
presently it would be disgusting to give a drop of any support to what has
become a semi-fascist organisation co-ordinating the mass expulsion of whole
Kosovar nationalities and of Albanian progressives.

 Some advice, Jared: stop calling it things like "secessionist" and
"terrorist" and "gangster-terrorist", etc..., because it serves only to make
you look like a hysterical Serbian nationalist. They are in fact no grounds
on themselves to criticise the KLA, since the Turkish State say the same
about the PKK and the British State against the IRA.

> That left him out in cold and the Yugoslav government intelligently has tried
> to play him against the US, since he does have a base of "moderate"
> disrupters.  The Yugo's also have different strokes for different times...

 I think what Jared is saying here is that it is impossible for someone of
Albanian ethnicity to have independence from US imperialism and therefore
the Yugoslav government must have been behind it. Though please explain what
specifically you are referring to, oh please do.

> In the earlier period, when the West supported Rugova'a (A Nazi's son, I have
> been told - but this is not confirmed; the story I heard is dad died during
> the post war Nazi rebellion described by Thompson at tenc.net in "The Roots
> of Kosovo Fascism")

 That's irrelevant, and almost certainly a lie though that probably won't
stop you putting it in your next article. Several Albanian nationalists
supported Fascist occupation just like in the Ukraine and other occupied
Soviet republics. However you insist on using the term 'Nazi' when in fact
it was the Italian Fascists - a mere historical fact you consistently
overlook, although German Nazism took over LATER.

 You seem to be implying that a bourgeois-liberal is fascist-influenced
because of his father's alleged fascism. Perhaps Mussolini was
socialist-influenced because of his pre-war politics. Oswald Mosley was a
social-democrat-turned-fascist. The person who oversaw Hitler's own show
trials after an attempted assassination during the war was a former
Bolshevik. And yet you are going as far as to prove a bourgeois-liberal is a
fascist because of some gossip you heard in questionable circles about
Rugova's father being a "Nazi". Perhaps we should focus on the actual
politics expressed by Rugova rather than those of his fathers.

 One almost feels sorry for a meek bourgeois-liberal character like Rugova.
The Serbian nationalists and their sympathisers see him as an evil
disruptive native whilst the Albanian nationalists of the KLA breed
denounced him as a traitor when he started shaking Milo's hand and holding
talks with him.

 Please note that the only two nations in Eastern Europe that overthrew
capitalism via revolution rather than by having Stalinism directly imposed
by the Soviet bureaucracy were Yugoslavia and Albania. So really if we are
going to go by your absurd and reactionary method of cultural/genetic
predisposition to reactionary / progressive politics, Albanians would come
off in the latter category since they had their own guerrilla movement and
resistance, which was active in Kosovo. And after the Yugoslav movement
liberated Kosovo from fascism, to say the least there was a bloody crackdown
on suspected fascists; an estimated 45,000 were killed (perhaps a necessary
evil?), and then harsh rule was enforced under Rankovic whom the bureaucracy
later ousted for severe national oppression of Kosovan Albanians.

 Yes, I've read that article (on some web site of the Yugoslav state or
other....), but I got sick of it about half way down with its wailing about
how great progressive all Serbs are historically and how reactionary
Albanians are and Fascist Albanians are taking over the world with their
Martian allies...

>  - during the earlier period when the west supported
> planned campaign of destabilization, they used the "moderate" Rugova who
> "only"attempted to paralyze Serbia by sabatoge, work stoppages, beatings, and
> so on,

 That's just sheer falsification of history for reactionary ends. Rugova,
for good or for bad, was catapulted to lead the struggle against national
oppression in Kosovo, and he was so poor and incapable it wasn't exactly
hard for US imperialism to gain an armed force to fill the vacuum - the
frustration many Albanians had at the failure of pacifistic resistance and
civil disobedience was bound to make such a force as the KLA look
attractive. Rugova lead a campaign that was not intended to "paralyse"
Serbia - it was a political boycott in response to systematic oppression by
the Yugoslav State that affected only the areas within the borders of
Kosovo. The Albanians didn't think: "oh, let's really get at those Serbs we
hate so much and disrupt their state, hee hee hee aren't we evil." It was a
natural response to oppression. "Beatings"??? The only beatings I have
knowledge of are those by the forces of the Yugoslav State. Evidence please,
and make sure it hasn't been doctored.

 What about that damn "moderate" Martin Luther King and his disruption of
the American South. Or Ghandi's callous civil disobedience campaign which
was intended to hurt great progressive shining Britain. That is your view
applied to these contexts.

 Basically, Jared, you are denouncing the struggle of the oppressed. I would
say the violence of the oppressed, which is wholly supportable, but there
was none - it was all 'pluralistic', constitutional pacifism which was not
going to liberate Kosovo from the clutches of a State run by a regime that
includes outright fascists and far-right reactionaries who demand the
re-instatement of the monarchy and a Greater Serbia encompassing Montenegro,
parts of Bosnia and Croatia and Macedonia.

> working in conjunction wit the West openly - as illustrated by the
> visit of Dole, D'Amato etc when these great progressive rebels chanted USA
> USA - like du-uh.... which I posted.

 How about the meetings of the Milosevic regime with the IMF to discuss
enforcing austerity measures and mass privatisation? Or the Milosevic
regime's agreement with imperialism at Dayton when the US described him as a
"man we can do business with"? Or perhaps the selling off of industries such
as telecommunications to the Italian / Greek bourgeoisie?

 Yes, US imperialism ostensibly came to the defence of a small oppressed
nationality; imperialism has always used national oppression as a pretext
before, like Tsarist Russia with Serbia in 1914 and British imperialism with
Belgium in the same year. That doesn't mean the oppression isn't true,
otherwise it could not be used as a pretext. The truth is, the vacuum left
by the destruction of the Communist movement by 60 years of Stalinism means
that oppressed groups will naively fall into the arms of imperialism which
uses such oppression to further its own interests. Maybe if we looked like a
viable alternative in this epoch it wouldn't happen.

> This campaign culminated in the
> "passive" boycott of all institutions - including refusal to pay electric
> bills and taxes - which the Yugoslavs tolerated for 8 years

 Actually the Yugoslav State imprisoned the entire Kosovan Albanian
leadership, brutally attacked demonstrations, including the Trepca strikes
and the last Titoist strike in the history of Yugoslavia by the miners,
sacked thousands from their jobs, imposed brutal direct rule,
institutionally discriminated against Albanians, etc...

 I don't know about the specifics of the Yugoslav State's reaction to the
boycott of a state that the Kosovar Albanians boycotted in pacifistic
protest at their severe oppression. Maybe the attempt to forcibly remove the
entire Kosovan Albanian population from Yugoslavia was because they had
refused to pay their bills and taxes and so had outstayed their welcome,
hmmm?

 I'm sorry, Jared, but an entire people don't boycott general elections,
hold their own unofficial elections, refuse to pay bills, and wage a
campaign of civil disobedience over nothing. To say they would put
themselves through such hardship simply because they were racist anti-Serb
chauvinists is such a load of bullshit I challenge you to say it's what you
believe.

> - ostracization
> and beatings of loyalist Albanians,

 You could accuse the IRA of the same thing of "traitor" Catholics.

> continued sabotage (tied to international
> cries of racism when saboteurs were fired!),

 Please give evidence of this "sabotage". The Stalinists said a lot of their
victims were saboteurs before they were shot, a meaningless word that was
just used to destroy a selected person from old Bolshevik to a worker who
didn't meet their target.

> boycott of autonomous cultural
> institutions (schools, hospitals with Albanian-speaking staff, courts) and so
> on.  The boycotts were accompanied by creation of crummy subsitutte
> institutions and then - unbelievable huzpah! - they would invite western
> journalist to see what terrible hosptials they wre FORCED to resort to
> (failing to mention they were boycotting the state hospitals...)

 So you are telling me a people would face destroying their own health care
and well being and education, indeed risk their very life, just so they
could show Western journalists they were badly treated. You are basically
saying Albanians are purposefully creating their own oppression, a bit like
a person torturing themselves for sympathy.

 Maybe it had something to do with the fact Albanians were actually
segregated and, as part of national oppression, denied access to these
facilities.

 There is a point when apologia for such oppression descends into complete
absurdity.

> Rugova  was useful during the 1987-97 period, so he had full US backing; when
> the time came to change to full assault, the US dumped him.  He tried to hang
> on, for example supporting the call for bombing Belgrade in Oct. 1998 (thus
> showing he was even better than Ghandi, because WITH bombs!) but he couldn't
> make the switch.  He wasn't the force at the head of the gangster-terrorist
> KLA - so bye bye Rugova. NATO cares not for persons.

 Actually he started making statements opposing the war until he went
awfully quiet when in Italy after being effectively sidelined by the KLA,
and then he visited Belgrade for tea and biscuits with Slobo.

 Imperialism always discards its own former allies. It discarded people like
Suharto, Saddam Hussein - and indeed Slobodan Milosevic, all without so much
as a bunch of flowers and a note thanking them for their services "but
American imperial interests over-rule personal affections!" (Che Milosevic
must have been particularly devastated by the loss of Richard Holbrooke, a
person at Dayton whom he stayed up till the early hours drinking with
amicably).

 Rugova might once have been used as an unwitting pawn, but his pacifistic
stance was useless to imperialism, hence the KLA.

> Regarding "mass expulsions":  there is considerable evidence that in fact the
> "mass expulsions" during bombing were largely staged - that is, Albanians
> were ordered to leave by KLA and clan leaders who had switched to backing the
> KLA when they saw the US meant business.

 Jared, haven't you been reading what I have written? I have already
explained that, as an unnamed Albanian - who I invited round to try a few
luminous mushrooms I picked specially - informed me, the trauma of bombing
causing a mass psychological phenomenon which made the Albanians think
themselves a herd of cows being sent for milking on the Albanian and
Macedonian border. Or perhaps they heard of a rumour of a huge sale in the
Hitler-Is-Great shopping centre in a Macedonian border town. This combined
with hearing of a Serbian peasant who had a heart attack on the border, and
such was the hysterical level of racism amongst the Albanian population,
they all ran down to give him a kick.

 Oh please. Quit this downright INSANE falsification of history. This is so
absurd I'm not even sure why anyone gives your work two cents, since your
grip on reality appears to be speedily deteriorating. 800,000 Albanians
apparently left everything behind, torched their own houses and property
despite their already desperate poverty in the poorest region of
former-Yugoslavia, in cases often killed their owns sons/husbands, massacred
the occasional group of fellow Albanians, and then stumbled across the
Kosovan countryside with little food or supplies with little children to
live in dirty refugee camps full of disease and hunger for a few months. The
entire Albanian population did this to gain a bit of sympathy to fuel the
bombing of the Serbs they hated so much, I take it. Sure, they were
destroying their own lives in the process, but they were so hysterically
insane with hatred of Serbs THIS was the lengths they would go too...Not
only that, we are expected to believe 1.8 million Albanians are lying and
Jared's explanation is totally correct despite no evidence. Yeah, Ok.

 I think this happens to people if they sit at their computer for too
long...reality just seeps away.

the evidence from the OSCE's own
> report is that, percentage wise, far more Serbs (percentage) left Kosovo
> during that time than Albanians - because the KLA was the one doing the
> ethnic cleansing.

 ...or maybe the Yugoslav Army was attempting to expel 1.8 million Albanians
whilst the KLA did the same to whatever Serb they came across. The KLA did
expel some Albanians - but these were specific dissidents that won't top
more than a few dozen, compared to the 800,000 of the Yugoslav State.
However there is a difference between an entire state machinery focusing its
energy on attempting to forcibly remove 1.8 million Albanians and a small
petty-bourgeois imperialist proxy army expelling 100,000 Serbs. Anyway, the
majority of Serbs that fled did so because they feared what would happen to
them when NATO came in...especially when George Robertson and Co. said:
"NATO in, Serbs out."

 Not only that, but just after the NATO bombardment, the KLA - a guerrilla
group as opposed to state machinery - were restricted mainly to the borders
and in most of Kosovo had ZERO presence and instead spent their time
fighting over a couple of villages...and yet still managed to expel nearly a
million people?

> Interestingly, we know of two instances when NATO
> slaughtered Albanians trying to return home.  The KLA you will recall was
> acting as NATO spotters on the ground.  (They were REVOLUTIONARY NATO
> spotters, a new category...)

 Please give some evidence of this. I think we all know by now that the KLA
was a proxy army...so? And it's remarkable how much compassion [though it's
all relative] you'll show for Albanians killed by the KLA ("Albanian"
oppression against Albanians), but not when they're killed by the Yugoslav
State.

> For which see Chossudovsky COOKING THE BOOKS at tenc.net, just scroll a bit
> and you'll find it.  On Rugova, see TENC.net, articles by author, Johnstone,
> "Yugoslavia through a dark glass."

 Your articles use dubious sources and are full of pro-Serbian nationalist
diatribes and rants against Albanian "secessionism" and "fascists". This
limits their use, and their reliability as historical documents is zilch.

> Really, this stuff is proven fact.

 So proven that you don't even need to prove the facts!

> Why not spend some time at tenc.net and
> read the documents - even Chomsky, who has played a terrible role,

 [i.e. He didn't hero-worship Milosevic, deny all oppression of Kosovar
Albanians and blatantly falsify history]

> is now
> admitting it is mostly bullshit.  This thing is about as black and white (or
> fascist vs. antifascist, if you will) as one gets. The repetition of
> disproved apologies for the racists  ("Rugova was a moderate" and so on) is
> really quite mind boggling.  Like saying "Yes, but the world is flat."

 Fascist vs. anti-fascist? As simple as that? Perhaps not when the Belgrade
regime includes a very strong fascist element led by Sesijl. In other words
the Yugoslav regime is party fascist. Draskovic is also an arch-reactionary
royalist fanatic who proposed back in 1990 to expel the Albanian population
and extent Serbia to Macedonia [aka 'Southern Serbia', Montenegro, and parts
of Croatia and Bosnia.

 Perhaps after denouncing the "reactionary" Albanians, you will just cast
your critical eye to Serbian politics. A fascist party in government, a
reactionary ultra-nationalist far-right royalist party, a pseudo-leftist
party led by Milo's wife who recently declared that both socialism and
capitalism were dead that includes prominent businessmen, a party led by
Milosevic that has undertook capitalist counter-revolution and demolished
Titoism, and a few parties that are puppets of imperialism. Is THIS
progressive? Methinks not.

> Another useful background piece on this is the debate I had with a guy named
> Frye on the NONVIOLENCE BOARD (War Resisters League and so on) - after the
> debate, the powers that was closed the board...

 Probably Greater Albanian nationalists...first the Nonviolence Web Board,
then the world...

 Cheers

       Owen