[PEN-L:4657] prepare public opinion for ground war

["Frank Durgin" <fdurgin1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

 World Socialist Web Site
                   US, NATO prepare public opinion for
                   ground war against Serbia

                   By the Editorial Board
                   30 March 1999

                   Less than one week ago, according to no less an
authority
                   than President Bill Clinton, most Americans had never
                   heard of Kosovo and would not know where to find it on a
                   world map.

                   Now, after several days of massive bombing, the
                   escalating media campaign over the fate of the Kosovan
                   Albanians is setting the stage for the commitment of US
                   troops in the war against Serbia and the long-term
                   military occupation of Kosovo.

                   In an article that is typical of what has been appearing
in
                   American newspapers and television over the last three
                   days, Charles A. Kupchan, who served on the staff of the
                   National Security Council during Clinton's first term,
                   wrote in the Los Angeles Times:

                   "Now that the air campaign is underway, the president
                   has no choice but to prepare the country and America's
                   armed forces for a major ground war in the Balkans ...

                   "Air attacks will no doubt weaken Yugoslav defenses and
                   soften up the units operating in and around Kosovo. But
                   it may take ground forces to expel them from Kosovo and
                   stop the killing of Albanians."

                   In interviews conducted on national television, two
                   leading senators--Shelby of Alabama and McCain of
                   Arizona--stated that the Clinton administration must be
                   prepared to place troops on the ground in Kosovo. "I
don't
                   know myself of any war," Shelby said, "that's been
totally
                   won by air power." Warning that the desire to avoid
                   casualties should not determine US strategic aims,
                   McCain declared, "We're in it, and we have to win it.
This
                   means we have to exercise every option."

                   While the Clinton administration continues to state that
it
                   does not "intend" to order ground forces into battle, it
has
                   signaled an impending change in policy by claiming that
                   the violence of Serb army attacks on Kosovan Albanians
                   has come as a surprise. If this were true, it would mean
                   that the policy pursued by the Clinton administration in
                   launching the bombing was not merely reckless, but also
                   extraordinarily stupid. It is, however, impossible to
believe
                   that the tragic events that have been the first fruits
of this
                   war were not foreseen by the US government.

                   The very nature of the US-NATO demands--that Serbia
                   cede control of Kosovo, acquiesce in the expulsion of
the
                   Serb minority from the province, submit to foreign
                   occupation and the destruction of its national
sovereignty,
                   and accept the revision of its international
borders--could
                   not but lead to an eruption of violence against the
                   Kosovan Albanians once full-scale war broke out.

                   It is the height of cynicism for the United States to
feign
                   horrified surprise over the fate of the Kosovan
Albanians
                   when similar methods were employed by Croatia, with US
                   political support and military assistance, during the
                   Croatian offensive against Serbs in Krajina province in
                   1995. As even the New York Times admits, "the West
                   looked the other way" as 200,000 Serbs were "ethnically
                   cleansed" from Krajina and tens of thousands more were
                   driven from their homes in Bosnia because the actions of
                   Croatia served the strategic interests of the United
States.

                   It would not be difficult to prove that the Clinton
                   administration's invocation of "human rights" and
                   "self-determination" as a justification for its
onslaught
                   against Serbia is shot through with duplicity and
                   hypocrisy. (We invite our readers to review an earlier
                   article, " Whom will the United States bomb next?")

                   But what concerns us here are the implications of the
                   accelerating pace and escalating scale of US military
                   violence. Serbia is the fourth country to have been
                   bombed by the United States in less than seven months.
                   Since August 1998, US cruise missiles and bombs have
                   been launched against the Sudan, Afghanistan, and, of
                   course, Iraq.

                   The war against Serbia promises to become the bloodiest
                   and most ambitious exercise of all. This extraordinary
                   projection of US military power portends a major turning
                   point in the history of American imperialism.

                   Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, US government,
                   military and academic think tanks have been engaged in
                   a protracted debate over the extent and potential of
                   American hegemony. A continuous source of frustration
                   has been the persistent and widespread opposition within
                   the United States, despite the outcome of the gulf war,
to
                   foreign military engagements.

                   With increasing frequency articles are appearing in
                   policy journals deriding this opposition as an
unfortunate
                   legacy of isolationist traditions and the Vietnam
debacle,
                   and making blunt declarations that the United States
                   must be willing to use its vast power to secure and
defend
                   its global interests.

                   A significant attempt to provide a popular justification
for
                   imperialist militarism appeared in the influential New
                   York Times Sunday Magazine. The Times' principal
                   columnist on foreign affairs, Thomas Friedman, argued
                   that the aggressive use of American military power is
the
                   natural corollary of US preeminence in the new
                   globalized economy.

                   "As the country that benefits most from global economic
                   integration, we have the responsibility of making sure
                   that this new system is sustainable. This is
particularly
                   important at a time when the world has been--and will
                   continue to be--rocked by economic crises that can
spread
                   rapidly from one continent to another ...

                   "Sustaining globalization is our overarching national
                   interest ... Globalization-is-US."

                   And in his most provocative remarks, Friedman declared:

                   "The hidden hand of the market will never work without
                   a hidden fist--McDonald's cannot flourish without
                   McDonnell Douglas, the builder of F-15. And the hidden
                   fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley's
                   technologies is called the United States Army, Air
Force,
                   Navy and Marine Corps.... Without America on duty,
                   there will be no America Online."

                   For all its smug self-satisfaction, Friedman's article
is
                   significant in that it highlights the indissoluble link
                   between economic globalization and the drive of the
                   United States to world hegemony. In contrast to all
other
                   major capitalist powers which--in deference to
historical
                   experience and present conditions--are obliged to place
                   certain limits on their ambitions, the American
                   bourgeoisie interprets its activities in uniquely global
                   terms. The integration of global markets is conceived of
as
                   being synonymous with the domination of American
                   transnational corporations. The triumph of world
                   capitalism is seen as the triumph of the United States.

                   Some 65 years ago, in a brilliant insight into the
dynamic
                   of American imperialism, Leon Trotsky wrote: "For
                   Germany it was a question of 'organizing Europe.' The
                   United States must 'organize' the world. History is
                   bringing humanity face to face with the volcanic
eruption
                   of American imperialism."

                   That day is now at hand.

                   See Also:
                   Worldwide protests against US-NATO bombing of
                   Yugoslavia
                   [30 March 1999]
                   US military uses Yugoslavia as testing ground for
                   high-tech weaponry
                   [27 March 1999]
                   Whom will the United States bomb next?
                   [26 March 1999]

                                           Top of page

                      Readers: The WSWS invites your comments. Please send
e-mail.



                                        Copyright 1998-99
                                      World Socialist Web Site
                                        All rights reserved