[PEN-L:4664] Re: Re: Moral Blindness of Serb "liberals"

[phillp2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (ts99u-2.cc.umanitoba.ca [130.179.154.225]) by]

Date sent:      	Tue, 30 Mar 1999 11:00:07 -0500
From:           	Wojtek Sokolowski <sokol@xxxxxxx>
Subject:        	[PEN-L:4658] Re: Moral Blindness of Serb "liberals"
To:             	lbo-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Copies to:      	pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Send reply to:  	pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Bravo Wojtek,
You (at least) have got it right.

Paul
Paul Phillips,
Economics,
University of Manitoba
> Goebbels is credited with saying that a thousand words is more effective
> than a thousand guns.  Although he got it mixed up, he should have said
> that a thousand words is more effective when backed by a thousand guns, he
> correctly saw propaganda as in important instrument of war.
>
> It is truly amazing to see how otherwise intelligent and critical people
> shed their crtical thinking and jump on the bandwagon as soon as shots are
> being fired and bombs are being dropped -- even though the official casus
> belli behind the Yugoslav adventure raises more doubts that brings assurances.
>
> We are told of attrocities committed by the military and paramilitary
> forces as the reason of the NATO invasion.  Cognizant of the attrocities
> committed in South Africa, Chile, El Salvador, Indonesia, etc.  the
> bleeding hearts start pounding and say "yeah, bomb them" while failing to
> listen to reason.
>
> A moment of critical reflection reveals that there is a fundamental
> difference between South Africas and El Salvadors on the one hand and
> Yugoslavia on the other.  The stories of attrocities in the foremer were
> told by independent international human rights organizations that had no
> stakes in the ongoing conflicts, while the latter are blasted by the
> propaganda machine of governments and armies that _are the combatants_.
>
> Wars are nasty business, and I have no doubts that innocent people are
> being killed in Kosovo.  That is truly reprehensible and no sane person
> will condone it.  But before we blame anyone for these death, determining
> the circumstances under which those deaths occurred can make quite a big
> difference.  And there is plenty of reasonable doubt that raise serious
> questions about the official casus belli of the Kosovo invasion.  Here are
> some of them.
>
> 1. We do not know what share of the civilian loss of life is "collateral
> damage" of the guerilla war (by NATO military's own admission, a
> "legitmate" form of killing civilians), what share is a provocation staged
> to outrage foreign public opinion, and what share results from deliberate
> pacification campaigns.
>
> 2. There have been reports in the European press that some of the massacres
> (cf. Racak) were in fact, deaths directly resulting from a combat between
> guerillas and the government forces (i.e. the combatants themselves being
> killed) or collateral damage resulting from that combat.  Such reports are
> not a proof, but they at least raise a reasonable doubt about the official
> story.
>
> 3. There have been reports of the combatants in the Yugoslav conflict
> staging spectatcular attacks against their own population (especially the
> Muslims) to outrage the international public opinion and draw foreign
> powers to the war on their side.
>
> Such provocations are nothing unusual in the history of modern war - the
> Nazis first torched the Reichstag and blamed that on Communists to justify
> their assault on democratic institutions of Weimar Germany, and later
> staged attacks against German population in Poland as well as an assault on
> a radio station in Gleiwitz to fabricate their causus belli againts Poland
> and start 2nd World War.  American staged an attack on their own navy
> vessel in the Tonkin Gulf to justfy their escalation of Vietnam war, etc.
> etc.
>
> Again, these are not proofs that all the civilian death toll in Yugoslavia
> is all but fabrication, but they raise reasonable suspcion that at least
> some of them might be.
>
> 3.  Even if some of the civilian casualties are the victims of deliberate
> killings, it is important to know the precise circumstances under those
> deaths occurred.
>
> No one in his right mind called for the bombing of Washington, DC for the
> My Lai massacre even though it was known from beginning that it was
> committed by the US military forces.  In Yugoslavia, we do not even know
> who the killers are and what is their motivation.  Are they regular units
> executing orders?  If so, whose orders?  Or are they armed mobs or
> "militias" acting on their own?  And if so, for what ends?  political
> gains? Revenge? Robbery?
>
> That raises enough reasonable doubt to refrain from blaming the Yugoslav
> government for the supposed "ethnic cleansing" - at least until some
> convincing evidence is produced.
>
> 4. Furthermore, the NATO propaganda machine claims that military action is
> necessary because negotiations failed, since the Belgrade regime broke its
> promises.  Yet a moment of critical reflection reveals the absurdity of
> this claim.
>
> No state in the world will ever negotiate its own dissolution or
> dismemberment.  The independence of Ulster, the Palestinian state within
> Israel, the separation of the Basque region from Spain, or the separation
> of the Native Americans from the US (which under the US law are considered
> separate nations) are NOT negotiable issues. Period.
>
> So the fact that the Yugoslav government agreed to even negotiate the
> Kosovo issue shows that it is much more flexible on the issue of sepratism
> taht the governments of the UK, Israel, Spain, or the US.  (the same, BTW,
> can be said of x-USSR).  But the NATO propaganda machine twists that around
> and blames them for not being flexible enough. That is absurd.
>
> 5. Finally, how is the campaign of terror bombing supposed to achieve its
> stated objective of stopping the violence.  There is not single shred of
> evidence that aerial bombardment has even achieved that, but plenty of
> evidence that armed conflicts lead to an increase in civilian violence.
>
> Again, these are reasonable doubts that that any critically thinking person
> should have regarding this conflict.  Doubts are not exonerations - they
> simply tell that the government is yet to make its case against the
> Yugoslav government as weall as the case for its proposed solution of the
> problem.  The propaganda blitz waged by the NATO with the help of the
> mainstream media has provided neither.  In fact, NATO is acting as the
> prosecutor, the judge, and the executioner on issues that are to the
> international tribunals to decide.
>
> regards,
>
> Wojtek
>