NATO's War of Aggression in Yugoslavia:
Who are the War Criminals?
by Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, March 21, 2006
This article was first written almost
seven years ago in May 1999 at the height of the bombing of Yugoslavia.
__The causes and consequences of this war have been the object
of a vast media disinformaiton campaign, which has sought to camouflage
NATO and US war crimes. __It is important to note that a large
segment of the "Progressive Left" in Western Europe
and North America were part of this disinformation campaign,
presenting NATO military intervention as a necessarry humanitarian
operation geared towards protecting the rights of ethnic Albanians
in Kosovo. __The intervention was in violation of internaional
law. President Milosevic at the Rambouillet talks had refused
the stationing of NATO troops inside Yugoslavia.__The demonization
of Slobodan Milsovic by so-called "Progressives" has
served over the years to uphold the legitimacy of the NATO bombings.
It has also provided credibility to "a war crimes tribunal"
under the jurisidiction of those who committed extensive war crimes
in the name of social justice. __The Just War thesis was also
upheld by several prominent intellectuals including Richard Falk
who viewed the Kosovo war as: "a Just War because it was
undertaken to avoid a likely instance of "ethnic cleansing"
undertaken by the Serb leadership of former Yugoslavia, and it
succeeded in giving the people of Kosovo an opportunity for a
peaceful and democratic future" (Richard Falk). __In turn
the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) was upheld by several "Leftists"
as a bona fide liberation movement rooted in Marxism. __The KLA
was and remains a paramilitary army supported by Western intelligence,
financed and trained by the US and NATO. It has ties to organised
crime. It has links to Al Qaeda, which is also supported by US
Michel Chossudovsky, March 2006
Low Intensity Nuclear War
With NATO air-strikes entering their third
month, a new stage of the War has unfolded. NATO's "humanitarian
bombings" have been stepped up leading to mounting civilian
casualties and human suffering. Thirty percent of those killed
in the bombings are children.1 In addition to the use of cluster
bombs, the Alliance is waging a "low intensity nuclear war"
using toxic radioactive shells and missiles containing depleted
uranium. Amply documented, the radioactive fall-out causes cancer
potentially affecting millions of people for generations to come.
According to a recent scientific report, "the first signs
of radiation on children including herpes on the mouth and skin
rashes on the back and ankles" have been observed in Yugoslavia
since the beginning of the bombings.2
In addition to the radioactive fall-out
which has contaminated the environment and the food chain, the
Alliance has also bombed Yugoslavia's major chemical and pharmaceutical
plants. The bombing of Galenika, the largest medicine factory
in Yugoslavia has contributed to releasing dangerous, highly toxic
fumes. When NATO forces bombed plants of the Pancevo petrochemical
complex in mid-April "fire broke out and huge quantities
of chlorine, ethylene dichloride and vinyl chloride monomer flowed
out. Workers at Pancevo, fearing further bombing attacks that
would blow up dangerous materials, released tons of ethylene dichloride,
a carcinogen, into the Danube."3
Nato to the "Rescue of Ethnic Albanians"
Ethnic Albanians have not been spared
by NATO air raids. Killing ethnic Albanians in Kosovo is said
to be "inevitable" in carrying out a "humanitarian
operation on behalf of ethnic Albanians". In addition to
the impacts of the ground war between the KLA and the Yugoslav
Armed Forces, the bombings and the resulting radioactive fall-out
in Kosovo have been more devastating than in the rest of Yugoslavia.
Presented as a humanitarian mission, the
evidence amply confirms that NATO's brutal air raids of towns
and villages in Kosovo have triggered the exodus of refugees.
Those who have fled their homes to refugee camps in Macedonia
and Albania have nothing to return to, nothing to look forward
to... An entire country has been destroyed, its civilian industry
and public infrastructure transformed into rubble. Bridges, power
plants, schools and hospitals are displayed as "legitimate
military targets" selected by NATO's Combined Air Operations
Centre (CAOC) in Vicenza, Italy and carefully "validated
prior to the pilot launching his strike."
With the "diplomatic shuttle"
still ongoing, the Alliance is intent on inflicting as much damage
on the Yugoslav economy (including Kosovo) as possible prior to
reaching a G8 brokered "peace initiative" which will
empower them to send in ground troops. "Allied commanders
have steadily widened their list of economic targets... Increasingly,
the impact of NATO air strikes has put people out of work... causing
water shortages in Belgrade, Novi Sad and other Serbian cities.
... [T]he effect was to shut down businesses, strain hospitals'
ability to function and cut off water..."4. Some 115 medical
institutions have been damaged of which several have been totally
demolished. And hospital patients --including children and the
elderly-- are dying due to the lack of water and electricity...5
General Wesley Clark, NATO's Supreme commander
in Europe, confirmed in late May that "NATO'S air campaign
has not reached its peak yet and the alliance should be prepared
for more civilian casualties."6. General Clark also confirmed
that "he would be seeking to increase the number of air strikes
in Kosovo and expand the range of targets.7 As the bombings entered
their third month, there was also a noticeable change in "NATO
rhetoric". The Alliance had become increasingly unrepentant,
NATO officials were no longer apologising for civilian casualties,
claiming that the latter were contributing to "helping Milosevic's
Extending the Conflict Beyond the Balkans
Drowned in the barrage of media images
and self-serving analyses, the broader strategic interests and
economic causes of the War go unmentioned. The late Sean Gervasi
writing in 1995 had anticipated an impending War. According to
Gervasi, Washington's strategic goals stretched well beyond the
Balkans. They largely consisted in "installing a Western-style
regime in Yugoslavia and reducing the geographic area, power and
influence of Serbia to a minimum...."8
In this context, the installation of American
power in Southern Europe and the Mediterranean also constitutes
a step towards the extension of Washington's geopolitical sphere
of influence beyond the Balkans into the area of the Caspian Sea,
Central Asia and West Asia.
In this regard, NATO's military intervention
in Yugoslavia (in violation of international law) also sets a
dangerous precedent. It provides "legitimacy" to future
military interventions. To achieve its strategic objectives, national
economies are destabilised, regional conflicts are financed through
the provision of covert support to armed insurgencies... In other
words, the conflict in Yugoslavia creates conditions which provide
legitmacy to future interventions of the Alliance into the "internal
affairs of sovereign nations".
The consolidation of American strategic
interests in Eastern Europe, the Balkans (and beyond) was not
only marked by the enlargement of NATO (with the accession of
Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic as NATO members) barely
two weeks before the beginning of the bombings, the War in Yugoslavia
also coincided with a critical split in geopolitical alignments
within the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).
In late April, Georgia, the Ukraine, Uzbekistan,
Azerbaijan and Moldava signed a pact in Washington, creating GUUAM,
a regional alliance which lies strategically at the hub of the
Caspian oil and gas wealth, "with Moldava and the Ukraine
offering [pipeline] export routes to the West".9 This geopolitical
split bears a direct relationship to the crisis in Yugoslavia.
The region is already unstable marked by nationalist conflicts
and separatist movements.
The members of this new pro-NATO political
grouping not only tacitly support the bombings in Yugoslavia,
they have also agreed to "low level military cooperation"
with NATO while insisting that "the group is not a military
alliance directed against any third party, namely Moscow."10
Dominated by Western oil interests, the
formation of GUUAM is not only intent on excluding Russia from
the oil and gas deposits in the Caspian area but also in isolating
Moscow politically thereby potentially re-igniting Cold War divisions...
The War Has Stalled Nuclear Arms Controls
In turn, the War in Yugoslavia has significantly
stalled nuclear arms-control initiatives leading to the cancellation
of an exchange program "that would have had US and Russian
nuclear weapons officers in constant contact at year's end to
prevent any launches as a result of Year 2000 computer troubles."11
Moreover, Russia's military has also voiced
its concern "that the bombing of Yugoslavia could turn out
in the very near future to be just a rehearsal for similar strikes
According to Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford, co-president
of the Nobel Peace Prize winning International Physicians for
the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), the impact of NATO bombings
of Yugoslavia "on nuclear weapons policy is an extremely
serious development... Russians feel a sense of betrayal by the
West... because NATO took this action outside the UN."13
Aleksander Arbatov, deputy chairman of
the Defence Committee of the Russian State Duma U.S.-Russian relations
describes the War in Yugoslavia as the "worst most acute,
most dangerous juncture since the U.S.-Soviet Berlin and Cuban
missile crises."14 According to Arbatov:
"START II is dead, co-operation with
NATO is frozen, co-operation on missile defence is out of the
question, and Moscow's willingness to co-operate on non-proliferation
issues is at an all-time low. Moreover, anti-U.S. sentiment in
Russia is real, deep and more wide-spread than ever, and the slogan
describing NATO action - "today Serbia, tomorrow Russia,"
is "deeply planted in Russian's minds."...15 Mary-Wynne
Ashford also warns that whereas Russia was moving towards integration
with Europe, they [the Russians] now:
".... perceive their primary threat
from the West. Officials in [Russia's] Foreign Affairs (Arms Control
and Disarmament) told us that Russia has no option but to rely
on nuclear weapons for its defence because its conventional forces
are inadequate.... Even if the bombings stop now, the changes
in Russia's attitude toward the West, its renewed reliance on
nuclear weapons with thousands on high alert, and its loss of
confidence in international law leave us vulnerable to catastrophe....
This crisis makes de-alerting nuclear weapons more urgent than
ever. To those who say the Russian threat is all rhetoric, I reply
that rhetoric is what starts wars".16
The Media War: "Silencing the Silent
This war is also "a War against the
Truth". With protest movements developing around the World,
NATO has reinforced its clutch over the mass media. In a stylised
("wag the dog") media mascarade, the Alliance is relentlessly
portrayed as "the saviour of ethnic Albanian Kosovars".
A full-fledged "cover-up operation" has been set in
motion with a view to thwarting public debate on the War. The
hidden agenda is to "silence the silent majority." The
Western media heeding to the Alliance's demands has blatantly
misled public opinion. Casually portrayed on TV screens, civilian
deaths are justified as inevitable "collateral damage".
According to the Pentagon, "there is no such thing as clean
Meanwhile, anti-war commentators (including
former ambassadors and OSCE officials) have been carefully removed
from mainstream public affairs programmes, TV content is closely
scrutinised, the images of civilian deaths and destruction relayed
from Belgrade are seldomly and selectively displayed, journalists
are under tight supervision. While the media does not hesitate
to criticize NATO for having committed "errors" and
"tragic mistakes", the legitimacy of the military operation
and its "humanitarian mandate" are not questioned:
"Public opinion is confronted with
a loaded question which allows only one answer. In the present
war, that question is, "Doesn't ethnic cleansing have to
be stopped?" This simplification allows the media to portray
Yugoslavia rather than NATO as the aggressor. The alliance, in
a complete inversion of reality, is presented as conducting an
essentially defensive war on behalf of the Kosovar Albanians..."
when in fact ethnic Albanians are the principle victims of NATO's
According to NATO's propaganda machine,
"ethnic Albanians do not flee the bombings" and the
ground war between the KLA and the Yugoslav Army. According to
Diana Johnstone this makes them "nearly unique [because]
throughout history, civilians have fled from war zones.... No,
as we have heard repeatedly from NATO spokesmen and apologists,
Kosovo Albanians run away from only one thing: brutal ethnic cleansing
carried out by Serbs."19
The refugee crisis we are told by NATO
is limited to Kosovo. Yet the evidence (withheld by the Western
media) confirms that people throughout Serbia are fleeing major
Reliable estimates put the number of refugees
who have left Belgrade to escape the bombing at 400,000. Most
are women and children, as with the Kosovo Albanians. At least
another 500,000 have left Serbia's other cities, notably Novi
Sad and Nish, where NATO bombing has caused air pollution, cut
the water supply, and struck purely civilian targets such as market
squares. Altogether, according to the Italian daily "Il Manifesto",
the NATO bombing has produced at least a million refugees in Serbia.
Predrag Simic, foreign policy adviser to Serbian opposition leader
Vuk Draskovic, told a Paris conference [in late May] that Kosovo
was being so thoroughly devastated by NATO bombing that nobody,
neither Albanians nor Serbs, would be able to go back and live
Who is Responsible for War Crimes?
Public "disapproval" of NATO
bombings is immediately dismissed as "Serb propaganda".
Those who speak out against NATO are branded as "apologists
of Milosevic". While most anti-War critics in NATO countries
are not defenders of the Milosevic regime, they are nonetheless
expected to be "balanced" in their arguments. "Looking
at both sides of the picture is the rule": anti-war commentators
are invited to echo NATO's fabricated media consensus, to unequivocally
"join the bandwagon" against Milosevic. Under these
circumstances, an objective understanding and analysis of the
role of the Milosovic government since the civil War in Bosnia
and in the context of the present crisis in Kosovo has been rendered
Media double standards? Whereas President
Milosevic and four members of his government were indicted by
the Hague International Criminal Tribunal (ICTY) (late May) for
organising a policy of "ethnic cleansing" in Kosovo,
the news media failed to mention that several parallel law suits
were launched at The Hague Tribunal (ICTY), accusing NATO leaders
of "crimes against humanity."21
It is also worth mentioning that the UK
government (whose Prime Minister Tony Blair is among the list
of accused in one of the parallel law suits) has provided The
Hague Tribunal with "intelligence on the situation within
Kosovo" since the beginning of the bombings.22 Part of this
intelligence material was relayed by the KLA with which British
Foreign Secretary Robin Cook has been in frequent contact as well
as through British Special Forces (SAS) directly collaborating
with the KLA.
Law Suit Directed Against Nato Leaders
In May, a group of 15 Canadian lawyers
and law professors together with the American Association of Jurists
(with members in more than 20 countries) launched a suit against
NATO leaders at the ICTY in the Hague.23 The suit points to "open
violation" of the United Nations Charter, the NATO treaty,
the Geneva Conventions and the "Principles of International
Law Recognized by the Nuremberg Tribunal". The latter makes:
"planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of
aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements
or assurances" a crime.
The list of crimes allegedly committed
by NATO leaders includes:
"wilful killing, wilfully causing
great suffering or serious injury to body or health, extensive
destruction of property,... employment of poisonous weapons [implying
radioactive fall-out] or other weapons to cause unnecessary suffering,
wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation
not justified by military necessity,... "25
Under the terms of reference of the ICTY
"a person who planned, instigated, ordered, committed or
otherwise aided and abetted in the planning, preparation or execution
of a crime shall be individually responsible for the crime"
and "the official position of any accused person, whether
as Head of State or Government or as a responsible Government
official, shall not relieve such person of criminal responsibility
or mitigate punishment."26
United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights Mary Robinson (and former President of Ireland) confirmed
in Geneva on 30 April that the Prosecutor of the War Crimes Tribunal
(ICTY) has the mandate not only to prosecute Serb forces but that
the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) and NATO may also come under
scrutiny, "if it appears that serious violations of international
humanitarian law have occurred."
According to Walter J. Rockler, former
prosecutor of the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials:
"The bombing war also violates and
shreds the basic provisions of the United Nations Charter and
other conventions and treaties; the attack on Yugoslavia constitutes
the most brazen international aggression since the Nazis attacked
Poland to prevent "Polish atrocities" against Germans.
The United States has discarded pretensions to international legality
and decency, and embarked on a course of raw imperialism run amok."27
Shaky Evidence of a "Humanitarian
Catastrophe" Prior to the Bombings
In the course of "covering-up"
the real motivations of NATO in launching the War, the international
media has also failed to mention that an official intelligence
report of the German Foreign Ministry (used to establish the eligibility
of political refugees from Kosovo) confirmed that there was no
evidence of "ethnic cleansing" in Kosovo in the months
immediately preceding the bombings. Who is lying? German Foreign
Minister Joschka Fischer had justified NATO's intervention pointing
to a "humanitarian catastrophe", yet the internal documents
of his own ministry say exactly the opposite:
"Even in Kosovo an explicit political
persecution linked to Albanian ethnicity is not verifiable. The
East of Kosovo is still not involved in armed conflict. Public
life in cities like Pristina, Urosevac, Gnjilan, etc. has, in
the entire conflict period, continued on a relatively normal basis.
The actions of the security forces [were] not directed against
the Kosovo-Albanians as an ethnically defined group, but against
the military opponent [KLA] and its actual or alleged supporters."...
[W]ith an agreement made with the Serbian
leadership at the end of 1998 ... both the security situation
and the conditions of life of the Albanian-derived population
have noticeably improved... Specifically in the larger cities
public life has since returned to relative normality."29
The above assessments are broadly consistent
with several independent evaluations of the humanitarian situation
in Kosovo prior to the onslaught of the bombing campaign. Roland
Keith, a former field office director of the OSCE Kosovo Verification
Mission (KVM), who left Kosovo on March 20th reported that most
of the violence in Kosovo was instigated by the Kosovo Liberation
"Upon my arrival the war increasingly
evolved into a mid intensity conflict as ambushes, the encroachment
of critical lines of communication and the [KLA] kidnapping of
security forces resulted in a significant increase in government
casualties which in turn led to major Yugoslavian reprisal security
operations... By the beginning of March these terror and counter-terror
operations led to the inhabitants of numerous villages fleeing,
or being dispersed to either other villages, cities or the hills
to seek refuge... The situation was clearly that KLA provocations,
as personally witnessed in ambushes of security patrols which
inflicted fatal and other casualties, were clear violations of
the previous October's agreement [and United Nations Security
Council Resolution 1199]. The security forces responded and the
consequent security harassment and counter-operations led to an
intensified insurrectionary war, but as I have stated elsewhere,
I did not witness, nor did I have knowledge of any incidents of
so-called "ethnic cleansing" and there certainly were
no occurrences of "genocidal policies" while I was with
the KVM in Kosovo. What has transpired since the OSCE monitors
were evacuated on March 20, in order to deliver the penultimate
warning to force Yugoslavian compliance with the Rambouillet and
subsequent Paris documents and the commencement of the NATO air
bombardment of March 24, obviously has resulted in human rights
abuses and a very significant humanitarian disaster as some 600,000
Albanian Kosovars have fled or been expelled from the province.
This did not occur, though, before March 20, so I would attribute
the humanitarian disaster directly or indirectly to the NATO air
bombardment and resulting anti-terrorist campaign."30
Chronology of Nato Planning
Carefully removed from the public eye,
preparations for both "the air campaign" and "the
ground War" have been ongoing for almost a year prior to
the beginning of NATO's "humanitarian bombings" on March
Responding to broad strategic and economic
objectives, the Alliance's first priority was to secure the stationing
of armed combat troops in Macedonia on the immediate border with
Kosovo. US Secretary of Defense William Cohen had travelled to
Skopje in late December 1997 for discussions with the Macedonian
government and Military. These high levels talks were followed
a few months later by the visit of Macedonia's Defense Minister
L. Kitanoski to Washington for meetings at the Pentagon. On the
agenda: the establishment of a NATO base in Macedonia.31
No time was lost: on May 6, 1998, the
NATO Council met "to review alliance efforts" in the
region; a major military exercise entitled "Cooperative Best
Effort" was slated to take place in Macedonia in September.
NATO nonetheless "reassured the international community"
that the military exercise was not meant to be "a rehearsal",
rather it was to enable "NATO military authorities to study
various options. Decisions on whether to execute any of those
options would be a matter for future decision."32
Largely the consequence of KLA terrorism,
the deterioration of the security situation in Kosovo conveniently
provided NATO with a pretext to build up its ground forces in
Macedonia (composed largely of British and French troops). According
to NATO, it was therefore necessary to envisage "a more complicated
and ambitious [military] exercise [in Macedonia] to send a clear
political signal [to Belgrade] of NATO's involvement".33
The Role of the Kosovo Liberation Army
In parallel with the setting up of its
military operations in Albania and Macedonia, NATO had established
direct links with the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). A US Department
of Defense briefing confirms in this regard that "initial
contacts" between the KLA and NATO had taken place by mid-1998:
"...the realization has come to people
[in NATO] that we [NATO] have to have the UCK [acronym for KLA
in Albanian] involved in this process because they have shown
at least the potential to be rejectionists of any deal that could
be worked out there with the existing Kosovo parties. So somehow
they have to be brought in and that's why we've made some initial
contacts there with the group, hopefully the right people in the
group, to try and bring them into this negotiating process. 34
While these "initial contacts"
were acknowledged by NATO officially only in mid-1998, the KLA
had (according to several reports) been receiving "covert
support" and training from the CIA and Germany's Bundes Nachrichten
Dienst (BND) since the mid-nineties.35
The concurrent building up of KLA forces
was part of NATO planning. By mid-1998 "covert support"
had been gradually replaced --despite the KLA's links to organised
crime-- by official ("overt") support by the military
Alliance in violation of UN Security Council Resolution UNSCR
1160 of 31 March 1998 which condemned: "...all acts of terrorism
by the Kosovo Liberation Army or any other group or individual
and all external support for terrorist activity in Kosovo, including
finance, arms and training."
On 24 September 1998, another key UN Security
Council Resolution (UNSCR 1199) was adopted which called "upon
the authorities in Belgrade and the leadership of the Kosovar
Albanian community urgently to enter without preconditions into
a meaningful dialogue on political status issues." It also
required Belgrade to withdraw its troops from Kosovo.
Following a renewed wave of KLA terrorism,
the Yugoslav authorities were blamed for the "crackdowns
on ethnic Albanians" providing NATO defense ministers meeting
in Vilmoura Portugal (September 24th on the same day as the adoption
of UNSCR 1199) with the "justification" to issue an
"activation warning" for a campaign of air strikes against
Serb positions. The Vilmoura statement called upon Belgrade to
"take immediate steps to alleviate the humanitarian situation...,
stop repressive actions against the population and seek a political
solution through negotiations with the Albanian majority".36
This so-called "activation warning"
was followed in mid-October by "an activation order"
by the North Atlantic Council authorising NATO's Supreme Commander
for Europe General Wesley Clark to initiate "limited air
strikes" and a "phased air campaign" ... should
the Yugoslav authorities refuse to comply with UNSCR 1199.37
Under the impending threat of air strikes,
a partial withdrawal was carried out by Belgrade (following the
adoption of UNSCR 1199) creating almost immediately conditions
for the KLA to occupy positions previously held by retreating
Serb forces. In turn, the strengthening of the KLA was accompanied
by renewed terrorist activity and a consequent "worsening
of the security situation". NATO's hidden objective, in this
regard, was to use the KLA insurgency to further provoke ethnic
tensions and generate social strife in Kosovo.
In the meantime, US envoy Richard Holbrooke
had entered into discussions with President Milosovic. Forged
under the threat of NATO air strikes, negotiations on Kosovo's
political status had also been initiated in Pristina between a
Serbian delegation led by President Milan Milutinovic and Ibrahim
Rugova, President of the Democratic League (DLK) representing
ethnic Albanians. While Mr Christopher Hill, the US envoy had
been invited as an observer to these meetings, Milutinovic had
insisted that the negotiations (which proceeded from UNSCR 1199)
were an internal matter.
Following the agreement between US envoy
Richard Holbrooke and President Slobodan Milosevic, Yugoslavia
was to complete negotiations on "a framework for a political
settlement" by the 2nd of November 1998. Moreover, a Verification
Mission to establish compliance with resolutions UNSCR 1160 and
UNSCR 1199, was put in place in Kosovo under the auspices of the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). A
parallel NATO air verification mission (complementing the OSCE
verification mission) was established following an agreement signed
in Belgrade on 15 October 1998 by the Yugoslav Chief of General
Staff and NATO Supreme Allied Commander for Europe, General Wesley
The terms of both the OSCE and NATO verification
agreements were subsequently embodied in UNSCR 1260 of October
24th. Whereas Belgrade was given a 96 hour "deadline for
compliance", the Alliance decided to postpone the initiation
of air strikes following talks in Belgrade (October 25-26) between
President Slobodan Milosevic and General Wesley Clark. According
to the Alliance statement: "NATO will remain prepared to
carry out air operations should they be necessary" 38. In
the meantime, NATO launched Operation Eagle Eye using unarmed
aircraft and unmanned predator aerial vehicles (UAVs). Eagle Eye
surveillance activities were coordinated with the "ground
verification" mission conducted by OSCE observer teams and
by the Kosovo Diplomatic Observer Mission (KDOM).
A Former "Iran-Contragate" Official
Heads the OSCE Verification Mission
In the meantime, a career US diplomat,
Ambassador William G. Walker was appointed Head of the OSCE Kosovo
Verification Mission (KVM). A tailor-made assignment: Walker was
well-known for his role in the "Iran-Contragate" scandal
during the Reagan administration. The KLA insurgency was in many
regards a "carbon copy" of the Nicaraguan Contras which
had also been funded by drug money with covert support from the
Well documented by court files, William
G. Walker --in association with Oliver North-- played a key role
in channelling covert funding to the Nicaraguan Contras while
serving as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American
Affairs in the Reagan Administration. In this capacity, he became
a special assistant to Assistant Secretary of State Elliot Abrams,
"a figure whose name would soon be making its way into the
headlines on a daily basis in connection with ... the "Iran-Contra"
William G. Walker had been involved in
the so-called Nicaraguan Humanitarian Assistance Office ("NHAO")
in the State Department which was a cover-up fund whereby covert
military aid was supplied to the Contras. The objective was to
circumvent the so-called "Boland Amendments", --ie.
"riders" to the Department of Defense Appropriation
Act, "which prohibited the [US] government from spending
money for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Nicaragua".
40 Confirmed by files of the US Court of Appeal (District of Columbia),
"Walker attended some meetings of the Restricted Interagency
Group for Central America, of which Oliver North was a member".41
Walker was never indicted for criminal
wrong-doings in the Iran- Contragate scandal. Upon completing
his work with Oliver North, he was appointed US Ambassador to
El Salvador. His stint in El Salvador coincided with the rise
of the death squadrons and a period during which the country was
virtually "under the grip of US sponsored State terror."42
In Kosovo, William G. Walker applied his
skills in covert operations acquired in Central America. As head
of the Kosovo Verification Mission (KVM), Walker maintained close
links to the KLA military command in the field.43 From the outset
of his mission in Kosovo, he used his position to pursue the interests
of the Alliance.
"The Racak Massacre"
The so-called "Racak massacre"
occurred shortly before the launching of the Rambouillet "peace
initiative". although it turned out to be a fake, the Racak
massacre nonetheless played a key role in "setting the stage"
for NATO's air raids. William Walker declared (in his capacity
as head of KVM) that the Yugoslav police had carried out a massacre
of civilians at Racak on January 15th. The Yugoslav authorities
retorted that local police had in fact conducted an operation
in this village against the Kosovo Libration Army and that several
KLA soliders had died in cross-fire. As later reported by several
French newspapers (Le Monde, Le Figaro and Liberation), it was
confirmed that the "Racak massacre" was indeed a fake
put together with a view to discrediting Belgrade:
"Eventually, even the Los Angeles
Times joined in, running a story entitled "Racak Massacre
Questions: Were Atrocities Faked?" The theory behind all
these exposs was that the KLA had gathered their own dead after
the battle, removed their uniforms, put them in civilian clothes,
and then called in the observers."44.
The Rambouillet Process
On January 22, senior officials of the
so-called "Contact Group" of six countries (including
the US, Russia, Britain, France, Germany and Italy) meeting in
London called for a peace conference which would bring together
the Yugoslav government and "representatives of ethnic Albanians."
In turn, NATO warned that it was "ready to act" if the
peace plan to be finalised by the Contact Group were rejected.
United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan concurred during a
visit to NATO headquarters in Brussels that the threat of force
was "essential" to press both sides into a settlement.45
In the meantime, while supporting the
KLA insurgency on the ground, the Alliance had also contributed
to spearheading KLA leader Hashim Thaci (a 29 year "freedom
fighter") into heading the Kosovar delegation to Rambouillet,
on behalf of the ethnic Albanian majority. The Democratic League
headed by Ibrahim Rugova had been deliberately side-stepped. The
Alliance was relying on its KLA puppets (linked to organised crime)
to rubber-stamp an agreement which would have transformed Kosovo
into an occupied territory under NATO military rule.
While negotiations were ongoing in Rambouillet,
NATO decided to increase the readiness of its assigned forces
"so as to make them able to execute the operation within
48 hours".46 In other words, "peace negotiations"
had been initiated in Rambouillet (contrary to the Vienna Convention)
under the threat of impending air strikes. NATO had granted a
three weeks period to the parties meeting in Rambouillet to conclude
On February 19, one day prior to the deadline,
NATO Secretary General Javier Solano reaffirmed that, "if
no agreement is reached by the deadline set by the Contact Group,
NATO is ready to take whatever measures are necessary to avert
a humanitarian catastrophe".47 And on 22 March 1999, NATO'S
North Atlantic Council authorised"the Secretary General to
decide, subject to further consultations, on a broader range of
air operations if necessary."48 And on 23 March 1999, NATO's
Secretary General directed the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe
General Wesley Clark to initiate air operations in the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia. Air operations commenced on 24 March 1999
under the nickname "Operation Allied Force."49
Sending in Ground Troups Under a G-8
Since the brutal onslaught of the air
campaign on March 24, the Alliance has continued to build up its
ground combat troops on the Macedonian border in anticipation
of an impending military invasion. Initially NATO had envisaged
a Kosovo occupation force of 50,000 troops which could be increased
to 60,000 with a larger US share than the 4,000 initially envisaged
In other words, the proposed invasion
force was to be more than double that under Rambouillet (28,000
troops) while also enforcing all the normative clauses of the
initial Rambouillet agreement including the "free movement"
of NATO combat units throughout Yugoslavia.
In the meantime, NATO's military establishment
was forcing the pace of international diplomacy. The Alliance
hinted in May that a ground offensive could be launched prior
to reaching a "peace agreement" sanctioned by the G8
and ratified by the United Nations Security Council.
In addition to the 16,000 ground troops
already stationed (well before the beginning of the bombings)
in Macedonia (of which almost half are British), some 7000 NATO
troops and "special forces" were also present in Albania,
not to mention the NATO troops stationed in Bosnia-Herzegovina
under Operation Joint Endeavour:
"We've already put quite a lot of
troops in Macedonia as the nucleus of that operation", said
British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook. "There are over 12,000
there already... and last weekend [14-15 May] we committed another
two and a half thousand to go there. We need to build up - actually
we need to build up now..."50.
In late May, the 60,000 troops target
was revised to 150,000. Alliance officials estimating that "if
the alliance later decides to mobilize for a land attack ... an
invasion force could number more than 150,000 soldiers."51
Prime Minister Tony Blair in a separate statement had (without
any form of parliamentary debate) confirmed the sending of 50,000
British troops as part of the 150,000 invasion force.
In early June, a NATO led invasion under
a bogus G8-UN peace initiative was put forth. While the latter
served to appease and distract public opinion, it usefully provided
the Alliance with a semblance of legitimacy under the UN Charter.
It also purported to overcome the hesitation of elected politicians
including German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and Italian Prime
Minister Massimo D'Alema. The US Administration also required
the "rubber stamp" of the United Nations Security Council
so as to acquire the assent of the Republican dominated Congress:
"House and Senate Democrats agree
there is little support at this point for launching ground troops...
even if Clinton and other NATO leaders could reach a consensus
on such a dramatic shift in tactics. For now, Clinton has said
he is opposed to ground troops."52
The US House of Representatives (in what
appeared to be a partisan "anti-Clinton" vote) has declined
to even endorse the air campaign while signifying its refusal
to authorize a "ground war" without congressional approval.
In early April, Republicans and Democrats joined hands in the
House and threw out a proposed "declaration of war on Yugoslavia"
by an overwhelming 427-2 vote.
In late May, seventeen members of Congress
launched a suit against President Clinton pointing to the blatant
breach of the US Constitution:
"that the Defendant, the President
of the United States, is unconstitutionally continuing an offensive
military attack by United States Armed Forces against the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia without obtaining a declaration of war
or other explicit authority from the Congress of the United States
as required by Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution,
and despite Congress' decision not to authorize such action."
The law suit launched in District Court
(District of Columbia) also pointed to the violation of the War
Powers Resolution of 1973, a Vietnam War-era legislation which
requires "the sitting President congressional approval for
the "introduction into hostilities" of the U.S. armed
forces for longer than 60 days":
Plaintiffs also seek a declaration that
a report pursuant to Section 1543(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution
was required to be submitted on March 26, 1999, within 48 hours
of the introduction into hostilities in the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia of United States Armed Forces. Additionally, Plaintiffs
seek a declaration that, pursuant to Section 1544(b) of the Resolution,
the President must terminate the use of United States Armed Forces
engaged in hostilities against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
no later than sixty calendar days after March 26, 1999. The President
must do so unless the Congress declares war or enacts other explicit
authorization, or has extended the sixty day period, or the President
determines that thirty additional days are necessary to safely
withdraw United States Armed Forces from combat.54
NATO as "Peace-keepers"
Echoing the barrage of self-serving NATO
propaganda, the media scam now consists in skilfully portraying
Alliance ground troops as bona fide "peace-keepers".
Public opinion should not be deluded as to the meaning of a G8-UN
brokered diplomatic solution.
An "international presence"
consisting largely of NATO troops under the G8 proposal (ratified
by the Serbian Parliament in early June) could include a token
participation of "non-NATO forces" including Russia
and the Ukraine. While Moscow agreed in early June that all Yugoslav
forces be withdrawn from Kosovo alongside the disarmement of the
KLA, Russian envoy Viktor Chernomyrdin nonetheless insisted that
the command structure of the proposed international force be under
the control and jurisdiction of the United Nations.
Despite his perfunctory condemnation of
NATO bombings, Russian President Boris Yeltsin is a Western puppet.
Chernomyrdin writing in the Washington Post had earlier warned
that a continuation of the air raids could hurt US-Russian relations:
"The world has never in this decade been so close as now
to be on brink of nuclear war..." adding that "Russia
would pull out of the negotiating process if NATO bombing, which
started March 24, doesn't stop soon."55
In the meantime, the Alliance, however,
had persisted in maintaining a unified NATO command structure
(which was unacceptable to Moscow and Belgrade). NATO has also
stepped up the bombings as a means of pressuring Belgrade into
accepting (without prior negotiation) NATO's "five conditions".
If the G-8 proposal were to be ratified,
NATO would first send in US Marines into Kosovo from the 26th
Marine Expeditionary Unit in the Adriatic Sea. The Marines would
be part of a so-called "Enabling Force" prior to the
moving in of a force of 50,000 troops.
A G-8 "peace proposal" (implying
a de facto military occupation of Kosovo) could be formally ratified
at the Cologne G7-G8 Summit in mid-June. All G7 heads of government
and heads of State together with President Boris Yeltsin will
be in attendance at Cologne in what is hoped to be a highflown
display of unity in favour of a (G8 sanctioned) NATO led invasion.
NATO nonetheless warned in early June that should the diplomatic
initiative not succeed, the Alliance would proceed with a ground
invasion involving 150,000 troops....
The Sending in of "Special Forces"
In the meantime, an incipient undeclared
ground War has already commenced: special British, French and
American forces were reported to be advising the KLA in the conduct
of ground combat operations against regular units of the Yugoslav
Army. To support this initiative, a Republican sponsored bill
was launched in the US Congress to provide direct military aid
to the KLA.
These "special forces" are "advising
the rebels at their strongholds in northern Albania, where the
KLA has launched a major recruitment and training operation. According
to high-ranking KLA officials, the [British] SAS is using two
camps near Tirana, the Albanian capital, and another on the Kosovar
border to teach KLA officers how to conduct intelligence-gathering
operations on Serbian positions".56 In May, three French
special forces officers wearing uniforms of the French Armed Forces
("Parachutistes") were reported killed on the Albania-Yugoslavia
border by the Yugoslav daily Vecernje Novosti. According to the
French daily Libration, the three men were allegedly "instructors
in charge of coordinating ground war activities by the KLA..."57.
An Unholy "Marriage of Convenience"
In addition to the dispatch of Western
special forces, Mujehadeen mercenaries and other Islamic fundamentalist
groups (financed inter alia by Iran and Saudi financier Osmane
Bin Laden) have been collaborating with the KLA in the ground
"[B]y early December 1997, Iranian
intelligence had already delivered the first shipments of hand
grenades, machine-guns, assault rifles, night vision equipment,
and communications gear... Moreover, the Iranians began sending
promising Albanian and UCK [KLA] commanders for advanced military
training in al-Quds [special] forces and IRGC camps in Iran...58.
Bin Laden's Al Qa'ida allegedly responsible
for last year's African embassy bombings "was one of several
fundamentalist groups that had sent units to fight in Kosovo,
... Bin Laden is believed to have established an operation in
Albania in 1994 ... Albanian sources say Sali Berisha, who was
then president, had links with some groups that later proved to
be extreme fundamentalists".59
Nato in Close Liaison with KLA Ground
According to Jane Defence Weekly (10 May
1999), the KLA's new chief of staff is former Croatian Armed Forces
Brigadier General Agim Ceku (an ethnic Albanian) who is currently
under investigation by the War Crimes Tribunal in the Hague (ICTY)
for his role in "summary executions, indiscriminate shelling
of civilian populations and `ethnic cleansing' during the War
NATO spokesman Jamie Shea's response to
the appointment of a War criminal as KLA chief of staff was communicated
in a Press Briefing:
"I have always made it clear, and
you have heard me say this, that NATO has no direct contacts with
the KLA. Who they appoint as their leaders, that is entirely their
own affair. I don't have any comment on that whatever.61
Shea's statement that NATO has "no
direct contacts with the KLA" is a lie. It is in overt contradiction
with other Alliance statements: "I speak regularly to Hashim
Thaci, the leader of the Kosovo Liberation Army who's in Kosovo.
I spoke to him at the end of last week" said British Foreign
Secretary Robin Cook.62
Operations on the ground (led by the KLA
and NATO Special forces) are now being carefully coordinated with
the air campaign. Moreover, some 50 Canadian armed forces "are
working with the KLA in Kosovo" to help report "where
the bombs are falling" so they can better target "where
the next bomb should go."63
Pentagon Sponsored Mercenaries in Kosovo
The KLA has also been provided with "a
long-term training deal with Military and Professional Resources
International [MPRI], a mercenary company run by former American
officers who operate with semi-official approval from the Pentagon
and played a key role in building up Croatia's armed forces [during
the War in Bosnia]."64 And General Brigadier Agim Ceku (despite
his role in "ethnic cleansing" in Bosnia), is currently
collaborating closely with the Pentagon's mercenary outfit MPRI
on behalf of the KLA.
The KLA to Form a "Post-conflict
A self-proclaimed provisional KLA government
of Kosovo has been established. With KLA leader Hashim Thaci as
Prime Minister designate, the KLA has already been promised a
central role in the formation of a "post-conflict government".
While openly promoting a "freedom
movement" with links to the drug trade, NATO was also intent
in bypassing the civilian Kosovo Democratic League and its leader
Ibrahim Rugova who had earlier called for an end to the bombings.
Rugova was branded as a "traitor" by the KLA. According
to Albanian state-run TV, the KLA had sentenced Rugova to death
accusing him of being "an agent of the regime in Belgrade."65
In April, Fehmi Agani, one of Rugova's
closest collaborators in the Democratic League was killed. The
Serbs were blamed by NATO spokesperson Jamie Shea for having assassinated
Agani. According to Skopje paper Makedonija Danas quoting reliable
sources in Albania: "Agani was killed... on the orders of
Tirana where Thaci is located with the members of his illegal
According to a report of the Foreign Policy
"...the KLA have [no] qualms about
murdering Rugova's collaborators, whom it accused of the "crime"
of moderation. Most recently, although Rugova's recent meeting
with Milosevic may well have been under duress, the KLA declared
Rugova a "traitor" - yet another step toward eliminating
any competitors for political power within Kosovo."67
The KLA military regime had replaced the
duly elected (by ethnic Albanians) civilian provisional Kosovar
government of President Ibrahim Rugova. In a statement issued
in April, the KLA considered the (parallel) "parliamentary
elections" organised by the Democratic League and held in
March 1998 to be invalid.
The self-proclaimed Kosovar administration
is made up of the KLA and the Democratic Union Movement (LBD),
a coalition of five opposition parties opposed to Rugova's Democratic
League (LDK). In addition to the position of prime minister, the
KLA controls the ministries of finance, public order and defence.
In the words of US State Department spokesman James Foley:
`We want to develop a good relationship
with them [the KLA] as they transform themselves into a politically-oriented
organization,' ..`[W]e believe that we have a lot of advice and
a lot of help that we can provide to them if they become precisely
the kind of political actor we would like to see them become.'68
With the KLA poised to play a central
role in the formation of a "post conflict" government,
the tendency is towards the installation of a "Mafia State"
with links to the drug trade. The US State Department's position
is that the KLA would "not be allowed to continue as a military
force but would have the chance to move forward in their quest
for self government under a 'different context'" meaning
the inauguration of a de facto "narco-democracy" under
NATO protection: "If we can help them and they want us to
help them in that effort of transformation, I think it's nothing
that anybody can argue with."69
In recent developments, the Alliance,
however, has sought through the intermediation of US Secretary
of State Madeleine Albright to reconcile divisions between Thachi,
Rugova and other ethnic Albanian leaders "primarily with
a view to strengthening its [the Alliance's] own position in the
Imposing "Free Market" Reforms
Wall Street analysts concur that "war
is good for business" particularly during a period of "economic
slowdown". The US Congress has approved increased budgetary
allocations to finance the War in Yugoslavia which will result
in multi-billion contracts for America's Defense industry. In
turn, the War will boost the military-industrial complex and its
related high tech sectors in the US and Western Europe. A ground
war combined with a prolonged military occupation (as in Bosnia)
will prop up military spending. In turn, covert support and financing
of "freedom fighters" (extending beyond the Balkans
into Central Asia and the Middle East) will contribute to boosting
the lucrative contraband in small arms for an expanding market
of insurgent nationalist movements.
The "post conflict" agenda (under
the proposed G8 "peace initiative" consists in establishing
in Kosovo an occupied territory under Western administration (broadly
on the same model as the 1995 Dayton Agreement imposed on Bosnia-Herzegovina).
"Free market reforms" are envisaged
for Kosovo under the supervision of the Bretton Woods institutions.
Article I (Chapter 4a) of the Rambouillet Agreement stipulates
that: "The economy of Kosovo shall function in accordance
with free market principles".
"Civilian administration [in Kosovo]
and reconstruction would be carried out by non-military bodies
including the EU and the OSCE, with input from the World Bank
and the IMF to rebuild war-damaged infrastructure and rehouse
In close liaison with NATO, the Bretton
Woods institutions had already analyzed the consequences of an
eventual military intervention leading to the military occupation
of Kosovo: almost a year prior to the beginning of the War, the
World Bank conducted "simulations" which "anticipated
the possibility of an emergency scenario arising out of the tensions
in Kosovo".72 The "simulations" conducted in Washington
have in fact already been translated into a panoply of "emergency
recovery loans" for Macedonia and Albania, and there is more
to come... Since the imposition of the embargo, Yugoslavia, however,
is no longer considered a member of the Bretton Woods institutions
and will not be eligible for IMF-World Bank loans until the sanctions
The proposed "Marshall Plan"
for the Balkans is a delusion. We recall that in Bosnia, the costs
of reconstruction were of the order of 50 billion dollars. Western
donors initially pledged $3 billion in reconstruction loans, yet
only a meagre $518 million dollars were granted in December 1995,
part of which was tagged (under the terms of the Dayton Peace
Accords) to finance some of the local civilian costs of the Implementation
Force's (IFOR) military deployment as well as repay debt arrears
with international creditors.73
The eventual "reconstruction"
of Yugoslavia formulated in the context of the "free market"
reforms and financed by international debt largely purport to
create a safe haven for foreign investors rather than rehabilitate
the country's economic and social infrastructure. The IMF's lethal
"economic medicine" will be imposed, the national economy
will be dismantled, European and American banks will take over
financial institutions, local industrial enterprises which have
not been totally destroyed will be driven into bankruptcy. The
most profitable State assets will be transferred into the hands
of foreign capital under the World Bank sponsored privatisation
programme. In turn, "strong economic medicine" imposed
by external creditors will contribute to further boosting a criminal
economy (already implanted in Albania and Macedonia) which feeds
on poverty and economic dislocation.
"The Allies will work with the rest
of the international community to help rebuild Kosovo once the
crisis is over: The International Monetary Fund and Group of Seven
industrialized countries are among those who stand ready to offer
financial help to the countries of the region. We want to ensure
proper co-ordination of aid and help countries to respond to the
effects of the crisis. This should go hand in hand with the necessary
structural reforms in the countries affected -- helped by budget
support from the international community.74
In turn, the so-called "reconstruction"
of the Balkans by foreign capital will signify multi-billion contracts
to multinational firms to rebuild roads, airports and bridges
which will eventually be required (once the embargo is lifted)
to facilitate the "free movement" of capital and commodities.
The proposed "Marshall Plan"
financed by the World Bank and the European Development Bank (EBRD)
as well as private creditors will largely benefit Western mining,
petroleum and construction companies while fuelling the region's
external debt well into the third millennium. And the countries
of the Balkans are slated to reimburse this debt through the laundering
of dirty money in the domestic banking system which will be deregulated
under the supervision of Western financial institutions. Narco-dollars
from the multi-billion dollar Balkans drug trade will be recycled
(through the banking system) and channelled towards servicing
the external debt as well as "financing" the costs of
The pattern for Kosovo is, in this regard,
similar to that of Macedonia and Albania. Since the early 1990s,
the IMF's reforms have impoverished the Albanian population while
spearheading the national economy into bankruptcy. The IMF's deadly
economic therapy transforms countries into open territories. In
Albania and Macedonia it has fostered the growth of illicit trade
and the criminalisation of State institutions.
Moreover, even prior to the influx of
refugees, NATO troops in Macedonia and Albania had already occupied
civilian facilities (including hotels, schools, barracks and even
hospitals) without compensating the national governments for the
use of local services.75
In a cruel irony, a significant part of
these incurred costs as well as those associated with the refugee
crisis are now to be financed not by the Alliance but by the national
governments on borrowed money:
"[T]he Albanian government's formal
structures have been paralysed by the crisis. The country's treasury
has been emptied by the initial efforts to help the refugees."76
Who Will Pay War Reparations?
The extensive destruction of Yugoslavia,
would normally require the Alliance to "pay war reparations"
to Belgrade. However, following a pattern set in both Vietnam
and Iraq, the Alliance will no doubt compel Belgrade "to
pay for the costs" of Operation Allied Force (including the
cruise missiles and radioactive shells) as a condition for the
"normalisation of relations" and the lifting of the
We recall in this regard that whereas
Vietnam never received War reparations payments, Hanoi was compelled
--as a condition for the "normalisation" of economic
relations and the lifting of the US embargo in 1994--, to recognize
the "bad debts" of the defunct Saigon regime which were
largely used to finance the US War effort. By recognizing (in
a secret Paris Club agreement negotiatied in 1993) the legitimacy
of these debts, Vietnam had accepted "to pay war reparation
damages" to her former enemy.77
Similarly Baghdad has been "billed
for the costs of the Gulf War", - --ie. accumulated Iraqi
debts including private claims against Iraq have been carefully
recorded by a special unit of the UN Security Council. The recognition
of these debts by Baghdad at some future date will be a condition
for the lifting of sanctions on Iraq.
1. Statement by UNICEF Representative
in Belgrade, quoted in Yugoslav Daily Survey, Belgrade, 23 May
1999, No. 4351.
2. Report by Dr Siegwart-Horst Guenther,
meeting of the PBS (Federal Socialists), Bonn, 17 May 1999.
3. International Action Center, "NATO
Bombing Unleashes Environmental Catastrophe in Europe", Press
Release, 14 May 1999).
4. Joseph Fitchett, "Is Serb Economy
the True Target? Raids Seem Aimed at Bolstering Resistance to
Milosevic", International Herald Tribune, Paris, 26 May 1999.
5. Tanjug Press Release, 25 May 1999.
6. Statement to Ambassadors of 19 NATO
Countries, quoted in Daily Telegraph, London, 28 May 1999.
8. Sean Gervasi, Bosnia and Vietnam, draft
9. Financial Times, London, 6 May 1999,
11. The Boston Globe, 8 April 1999.
12. According to Viktor Chechevatov, a
Three-star General and Commander of ground forces in Russia's
Far East, quoted in The Boston Globe, 8 April 1999
13. Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford, "Bombings
Reignite Nuclear War Fears", The Victoria Times-Colonist.
13 May 1999, page A15. Mary-Wynne Ashford is co-president of the
Nobel Peace Prize winning IPPNW.
14. Quoted in Mary-Wynne Ashford, op.
15 Quoted by Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford, op.
16. Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford, op cit.
17. Quoted in The Washington Post, May
9, 1999, page A20.
18. World Socialist Website editorial,
24 May 1999.
19. Diana Johnstone, On Refugees, Paris,
30 May 1999.
21. See "Lawyers Charge NATO Leaders
Before War Crimes Tribunal", Toronto, 6 May 1999.
22. See Financial Times, 27 May 1999.
23. See "Lawyers Charge NATO Leaders
Before War Crimes Tribunal", Toronto, 6 May 1999; see also
Jude Wanniski, "Memo to US House Majority Leader", Polyeconomics,
New York, 10 May 1999.
24. Lawyers Charge NATO, op cit.
27. Chicago Tribune, 10 May 1999. 28.
Intelligence Report from the German Foreign Office, January 12,
1999 to the Administrative Court of Trier.
29. Status Report of the German Foreign
Office, November 18, 1998 to the Upper Administrative Court at
Mnster, February 24, 1999.
30. See, Roland Keith, "Failure of
Diplomacy, Returning OSCE Human Rights Monitor Offers A View From
the Ground in Kosovo", The Democrat, May 1999.
31. US Department of Defense Press Release,
6 April 1999. The stated purpose of the mission was "to discuss
a range of security issues with the recent ethnic clashes in Kosovo."
In Skopje, the agenda consisted in examining security arrangements
to be implemented after the termination of United Nations UNPREDEP
32. Background briefing by a Senior Defense
Official at NATO Headquarters, Thursday, June 11, 1998.
34. US Department of Defense, Background
Briefing, July 15, 1998.
35. For further details see Michel Chossudovsky,
Kosovo `Freedom Fighters' Financed by Organised Crime, Ottawa,
36. Quoted in The Daily Telegraph, London,
25 September 1998.
37. See Federation of American Scientists,
"Operation Determined Force", 24 March 1999, see also
Financial Times, October 12, 1998.
38. Quoted in Federation of American Scientists,
39. See Roland Keith, Appendix, op. cit.
40. United States Court of Appeals, for
the District of Columbia Circuit, Filed January 23, 1996, Division
No. 86-6, in Re: Oliver L. North.
42. Roland Keith, Appendix, op. cit.
43. Confirmed by several press reports
as well as statements of the KLA, see also Radio 21 Dispatch,
Tirana, February 28, 1999.
44. Roland Keith, Appendix, op cit.
45. Daily Telegraph, London, 29 January
46. Federation of American Scientists,
50. "Margaret Warner talks with Cook
about the latest developments in the Yugoslav conflict",
Jim Lehrer News Hour, 21 May 1999.
51. New York Times, 26 May 1999.
52. Washington Post, 23 May 1999.
53. Action launched in United States District
Court for the District of Columbia, Complaint for Declaratory
Relief, Preliminary Statement, District of Columbia, 27 May 1999.
54. Ibid., see also Truth in Media, Phoenix,
23 May 1999.
55. Washington Post, 27 May 1999.
56. Sunday Telegraph, London, 18 April
57. Libration, Paris, 19 May 1999.
58. Yossef Bodansky, "Italy Becomes
Iran's New Base for Terrorist Operations," Defense and Foreign
Affairs Strategic Policy, London, February 1998. Bodansky is Director
of the US House Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional
59. Chris Steven, "Bin Laden Opens
European Terror Base in Albania", Sunday Times, London, 15
60. "War Crimes Panel Finds Croat
Troops 'Cleansed' the Serbs," New York Times, 21 March 1999.
61. NATO Press Briefing, 14 May 1999.
62. Jim Lehrer News Hour, op cit.
63. According to Canadian MP David Price,
April 19, 1999, UPI Press Dispatch. 64. Sunday Telegraph, London,
18 April 1999.
65. "US Is Trying to Reconcile Ethnic-Albanian
Separatists", Belgrade, Tanjug Press Dispatch, 30 May 1999.
66. Quoted in Tanjug Press Dispatch, 14
67. See Michael Radu, "Don't Arm
the KLA", CNS Commentary from the Foreign Policy Research
Institute, 7 April, 1999).
68. New York Times, 2 February 1999.
70. Tanjug Press Dispatch, 30 May 1999.
71. See World Bank Development News, Washington,
27 April 1999.
73. See Michel Chossudovsky, Dismantling
Yugoslavia, Colonising Bosnia, Covert Action Quarterly, No. 56.
74. Statement by Javier Solano, Secretary
General of NATO, published in The National Post, Toronto May 1999).
75. See Jan Oberg, Press Info, no. 59,
Insecuring Macedonia, Transnational Foundation TFF, March 18,
76. Jane Intelligence Review, June 1999.
77. See Michel Chossudovsky, The Globalisation
of Poverty, Impacts of IMF and World Banks Reforms, Third World
Network Penang and Zed Books, 1997, chapter 8.
Michel Chossudovsky is a frequent contributor
to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Michel Chossudovsky