|nettime maillist on Wed, 16 Jun 1999 09:01:05 +0200 (CEST)|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|Saverio_Ciraci: Not Really a Peace Yet!|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <email@example.com> is the temporary home of the nettime-l list while desk.nl rebuilds its list-serving machine. please continue to send messages to <firstname.lastname@example.org> and your commands to <email@example.com>. nettime-l-temp should be active for approximately 2 weeks (11-28 Jun 99). - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From: Saverio_Ciraci@PolimeriEuropa.IT To: nettime-l@Desk.nl Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 15:13:02 +0200 Subject: Not Really a Peace Yet! Warning: it's not really a peace yet ! Keep you awake, peace people. Best regards _______ forwarded from Committee for Peace in the Balkans ------------- Anti-war movement to keep campaigning and fight for a just peace News release Thursday 10 June 1999 Alice Mahon MP, Chair of the Committee for Peace in the Balkans, said: 'It is to be hoped that NATO's illegal bombing of Yugoslavia will finally end today. But vital questions remain to be answered: 1. No indications have been given as to how and when the demilitarisation of the KLA will be accomplished in line with the G8 Agreement. 2. No guarantees of safety have been provided to the Serbian population of Kosovo - and statements from the Pentagon have indicated what amounts to acquiescence in their possible ethnic cleansing. 3. Nothing seems to have been agreed yet as to the location, numbers and command structure of the Russian component of the UN force - it would clearly be preferable to Serbs and Albanians alike for the Russians to be deployed in the Serb areas of Kosovo. 4. Given that NATO told the world that it had no quarrel with the civilian population of Yugoslavia, NATO states must pay for the reconstruction of the deliberate damage done to the civilian infrastructure of the country. Attempts to put political conditions on economic aid indicate that the goal of the United States in the Balkans is not human rights but its own economic and political hegemony. 5. In these circumstances, the question must be asked as to whether the presence of NATO troops in Kosovo will be followed by further attempts to dismantle the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia by outside intervention, and whether NATO is already planning its next war in the Balkans if the Serbian people continue to elect governments which NATO dislikes. 6. Other states throughout the world will also be asking whether at some point NATO will abrogate to itself the right to intervene into their country, particularly in the light of NATO's new strategic concept providing for offensive operations throughout the Euro-Atlantic region. 'For all of these reasons, and to assist all of the peoples of Yugoslavia whose country has been devastated by more than ten weeks of round-the-clock bombing, the anti-war movement which has campaigned against the bombing will be continuing its activities for the foreseeable future and seeking to build links with the similar anti-war coalitions which have emerged around the world.' FUTURE ACTIVITIES INCLUDE: Saturday 26 June 1999: International Conference: Consequences of NATO's war on Yugoslavia 10am to 5pm, Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, London WC1. NATO countries must pay for the reconstruction of Yugoslavia News release Wednesday 9 June 1999 The Committee for Peace in the Balkans said today: 'With apparent progress towards a UN Security Council resolution on Kosovo, it is quite clear that NATO's continued bombing is the main obstacle to peace in Yugoslavia. It is absurd to demand that there be evidence of a Yugoslav withdrawal before bombing stops because this exposes troops and civilians seeking to leave to NATO air attack and to KLA attacks backed by NATO. 'As for the deployment of an international force in Kosovo, it would clearly be preferable to deploy Russian troops in areas whose population has been predominantly Serb. NATO's rejection of this, and statements by Pentagon spokespeople that they expect many Serb civilians to leave, indicates NATO acquiescence in the ethnic cleansing of the Serbs from Kosovo, in the same way as the United States effectively backed the ethnic cleansing of Serbs from Croatia. These legitimate fears are reinforced by the fact that the KLA's military command is now headed by a leader of the ethnic cleansing operation carried out by the Croatian army. 'Finally, NATO has retreated from its demands at Rambouillet in February,effectively admitting that its ultimatum at that time was of a character which no sovereign state could accept. Yet much of Yugoslavia has been reduced to rubble, and thousands of people have been killed and injured by NATO, in a war whose aim was declared to be the `non-negotiable' Rambouillet document. In those circumstances, it is obviously incumbent upon the NATO states to pay for the reconstruction of what they have destroyed and for the UN war crimes tribunal to demonstrate for the first time some independence from the US by indicting those responsible for NATO's massacres of civilians and destruction of their means of life in terms of electricity and water supplies, factories, schools, hospitals, roads, railways and bridges. 'The Committee for Peace in the Balkans believes that NATO intervention into the Balkans region has deepened divisions between its peoples, fostered conflicts and thrown the economic development of the region back by decades. Internationally, it has made the world a far more dangerous place, horrified the populations of Russia and China, and will undoubtedly lead many states to believe that faced with the threat of unilateral attack by NATO they need to acquire weapons of mass destruction.' FUTURE ACTIVITIES INCLUDE: Saturday 26 June 1999 International Conference: Consequences of NATO's war on Yugoslavia 10am to 5pm, Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, London WC1.