Balkans War article, part 3

Louis Proyect lnp3 at
Sun Aug 8 18:23:35 MDT 1999

IV.     A War Based on Deceit

        a) The Humanitarian Pretext in General

The US/NATO aggression against Yugoslavia is the first time since the end
of the Cold War that war has been used as a means of enforcing ‘democracy’
and a ‘humanitarian’ war has been conducted for ‘moral values’. These
‘moral values’ will be the basis of a ‘new world order’ because, it is
claimed, there is no other alternative to the capitalist system. Samuel
Huntington described the values that give moral justification for global US
leadership: "the United States must maintain its international primacy for
the benefit of the world because, alone among nations, its national
identity is defined by a set of universal political and economic values,
namely liberty, democracy, equality, private property, and markets,
accordingly the promotion of democracy, human rights and markets [sic] are
far more central to American policy than to the policy of any other country."

Although the immediate pretext for the airstrikes against Yugoslavia was
the  refusal of President Milosevic to sign the Rambouillet Accord, the
fundamental justification offered the public for NATO’s military
intervention was stopping ‘ethnic cleansing’.  NATO countries claim that
the Yugoslav government was trying to eliminate an entire community because
of their ethnicity.  The terms "ethnic cleansing" and "genocide" are used
interchangeably and parallels are drawn between Milosevic’s Yugoslavia and
Hitler’s Germany.

Historically, the term "ethnic cleansing" was first used by the US with
specific regard to Yugoslavia. It does not have any basis in international
human rights law, nor does it figure in any international human rights
instrument and, hence, does not have a legal definition. The closest
equivalent in international law is ’genocide’,  a term which both NGOs and
non-NATO member states of the UN have refused to apply to the situation in
Yugoslavia. It is within this international context that NATO states are
seeking to impose the new concept, ‘ethnic cleansing’, on the international
community by making it part of common usage in their own countries.

Such parallels were drawn to justify a war that US/NATO leaders have said
will end only in unconditional capitulation and the departure of Milosevic.
Only this and the creation of  a Western "protectorate" can, they insist,
guarantee peace and security in Kosovo, the Balkans, and even Europe.
American historian Daniel Jonah Goldhagen,  author of Hitler’s Willing
Executioners and ardent promoter of this policy, described its further
implications for NATO action. According to Goldhagen, NATO must conquer,
occupy, and re-educate Serbia in order to end the genocide. After all,
Germany and Japan also had to be defeated and occupied in 1945; the victors
then had to force both countries to adopt democratic institutions.

In Report from Iron Mountain, the fifteen American experts pointed out
"there must be an enemy" to ensure the maintenance and functioning of a
system based on war:
        The critical point is that the enemy that defines the cause must seem
genuinely formidable.... [T]he presumed power of the "enemy"¼must be
proportionate to the size and complexity of the society. Today, of course,
the power must be one of unprecedented magnitude and frightfulness.... The
existence of an accepted external menace, then, is essential to social
cohesiveness as as well as to the acceptance of political authority. The
menace must be believable, it must be of a magnitude consistent with the
complexity of the society threatened, and it must appear, at least, to
affect the entire society.

By linking demands for support against ‘atrocities’ to a moral obligation
to enforce ‘universal democratic values’, Western governments have
temporarily succeeded in neutralising a section of public opinion,
including many on the left.

As we have said, we do not question the existence of massive human rights
violations on both sides of the conflict in Yugoslavia. The evidence before
us shows, however, that before the bombing there was no discernible plan or
policy intentionally to destroy or eliminate a whole people because of
their ethnic identity (see ‘Operation Horseshoe’ below). Numerous reports
demonstrate that the violations of human rights, of which Kosovo-Albanians
have been the primary victims, were occurring, before and after the
bombing, in the particular context of an armed conflict between, on the one
hand, an extremist chauvinist armed group, the KLA, claiming to be the sole
representative of the Kosovo-Albanian people and demanding a separate state
and, on the other hand, Yugoslav armed forces defending the territorial
integrity of their country, along with Serb para-military groups which have
demonstrably terrorised Kosovo Albanians. Various reports and eyewitness
accounts also reveal that prior to the bombardment the human-rights
violations were concentrated in areas of KLA operations and were aimed at
actual or alleged KLA supporters.  Major cities, such as Pristina, were
largely unaffected.  Once the immediate bombing threat began on March 15,
the West’s point about ‘ethnic cleansing’ was rendered moot since all-out
war would allow the Federal government (and Serb para-militaries) to blur
the distinction between excesses committed against the Kosovo Albanians and
the now more vigorous clearing out of the latter from areas of conflict and
military operations, and border regions, a population movement which they
could claim, with some plausibility, was necessitated by the air strikes
combined with KLA activity.

        b) Yugoslavia as a Dictatorship

We cannot here enter into a detailed analysis of the political system of
Yugoslavia, but it is important to point out that, with all its
shortcomings, Yugoslavia remains a country with numerous political parties,
a parliamentary opposition, and regular elections. Yugoslavia has a
multi-party system, and President Milosevic himself was elected three
times. In an open letter to France’s President Chirac, Régis Debray
reported how Milosevic was described by opposition politicians that he met
in Yugoslavia in May 1999: "He may be an autocrat, fraudulent, manipulator,
and populist, but he was elected not less than three times; dictators are
elected only once, not twice. He respects the Yugoslav Constitution. It is
not a one-party system. His own party has a minority in Parliament. There
are no political prisoners since coalitions change... One can criticise him
without hiding oneself..."

The comparison with Nazi Germany has no historical basis. Germany in the
1930s was the world’s second largest economy and a great power with the
industrial and military capability to challenge its rivals. The Serb army
has no great military or industrial power behind it. Debray, responding to
comparisons made with Hitler’s Munich, said: "To speak of Munich in
relation to [Milosevic] is to invert the relationship between the weak and
the powerful and to think that an isolated and poor country of 10 million
inhabitants, which covets nothing beyond the frontiers of former
Yugoslavia, can be compared to Hitler’s conquering and over-equipped

Unlike Hitler, Milosevic does not advocate racial purity or racial
superiority. According to Jean-Arnault Dérens, "If one adds the Hungarians
of Vojvodina and other minorities to the Albanians, Serbia
constitutes--paradoxically--the most multi-ethnic state in the Balkans."
On the contrary, other nationalist parties and ultra-nationalists have
accused Milosevic of betraying the Serbs in Bosnia when he accepted the
1995 Dayton Accord imposed by the US after a bombing campaign. Today, in
relation to his acceptance of the G-8/NATO demands for Kosovo, he is being
accused of betraying the ten percent of the remaining Serb population in

The hypocrisy of the US stance toward ‘ethnic-cleansing’ in former
Yugoslavia is obvious  in view of the US’s support for Croatia’s violently
anti-Muslim President Franjo Tudjman who, with US backing, carried out the
well-known "ethnic cleansing" in the Krajina which led to the displacement
of 200,000 Serbs in 1995 and who publicly advocated the practice of
genocide: "Genocide is a natural phenomenon in keeping with human social
and mythological divine nature. It is not only allowed, but even
recommended."  In Bosnia, in 1994, the US/NATO gave military support for an
armed attack by Alija Izetbegovic, an Islamic fundamentalist, against the
elected government of Fikret Abdic which had declared its autonomy from the
US-backed government based in Sarajevo. The Muslim group led by Abdic
advocated co-operation and trade with the other nationalities of the
region, whereas Izetbegovic said that "there can be neither peace nor
coexistence between the Islamic faith and non-Islamic social and political
institutions" and advocated an "ethnically pure Bosnia-Herzegovina".

        c) Who are the KLA?

In order to understand the situation on the ground and before making
judgements or drawing easy conclusions, it is important to take account of
the real nature of the KLA, which has also established itself in Albania
and Macedonia. The KLA is a ruthless clandestine armed group which, since
1996, has been recruited, equipped, and trained by the German secret
service, which had similarly armed and trained the Croatian militia. Shock
troops of the military secret service in Berlin (Kommandos Spezialkräfte)
provided operational training, arms, transmission material, and black
uniforms taken from the left-over Stasi supplies of the former GDR. In
mid-1998, NATO and the US entered into contact with the KLA and decided to
back, i.e., instrumentalise, the organisation.   The KLA has 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."  The new KLA chief of staff, Agim
Ceku, was formerly Croatian Armed Forces Brigadier General   and is
currently under investigation by the War Crimes Tribunal for his role in
"summary executions, indiscriminate shelling of civilian populations and
‘ethnic cleansing’ during the war in Bosnia."  In this regard, it is
significant that, according to documents and officials of the International
War Crimes Tribunal, the US has failed to provide critical evidence
requested by the tribunal during its three-year investigation into the 1995
"ethnic cleansing" of Serbs in the Krajina by the Croatian Army, carried
out with the tacit blessing of the US.

Since the NATO war began, training of the KLA by ‘special forces’ of NATO
countries has intensified. According to senior KLA officials, the British
SAS were using three camps in Albania to instruct KLA officers on the
conduct of intelligence-gathering operations on Serbian positions.
According to the Times of February 24, 1999, "Ms Albright offered
incentives intended to show that Washington is a friend of Kosovo ...
Officers in the Kosovo Liberation Army would ... be sent to the United
States for training in transforming themselves from a guerrilla group into
a police force or a political entity."

Its funding comes essentially from an internationally organised crime
network.  According to Jane’s publications, confirmed by numerous other
reports, the KLA is closely linked to "the extensive Albanian crime network
that extends throughout Europe and into North America."  Jane’s
Intelligence Review refers to Western Intelligence reports that
        UCK [KLA] has been re-arming with the aid of money from drug-smuggling
through Albania, along with donations from the Albanian diaspora in Western
Europe and North America ... Albania’s criminal gangs are actively
supporting the war in Kosovo. Many of them have family links to Albanian
groups in Kosovo and support them with arms and other supplies ... These
links mean the UCK fighters have a secure base area and reasonably good
lines of communication with the outside world. Serb troops have tried to
seal the border but with little success.

The KLA made its military debut on February 11, 1996 by bombing five
Serbian refugee camps in the Krajina. In 1997 alone, the KLA carried out 14
attacks in Kosovo and one in Macedonia. All ‘traitors’ were systematically
eliminated. On January 7, 1998, the KLA announced that it would carry the
war to Macedonia. In other words, it was fighting not only for the
independence of Kosovo but for the creation of a Greater Albania, which
would include Albania, Kosovo, one-third of Montenegro, and the western
half of Macedonia. In mid-February 1998 it launched its first major
offensive and within 5 months ‘liberated’ some 30% of the territory of
Kosovo. In the ‘liberated’ areas, the KLA prohibited all political parties,
physically attacked other minorities, Serbs, gypsies, and the Goran
(Macedonian Muslims) [Macedonian or Serb Muslims? E.C.], and denounced
Ibrahim Rugova, his political party, and the Kosovan parliament.

        d) ‘Operation Horseshoe’

With regard to accusations of ‘ethnic cleansing’ and ‘genocidal policies’
by Yugoslav forces, Rollie Keith, a Canadian international monitor
belonging to the OSCE Kosovo Verification Mission (KVM), is categorical:
"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 KVM in Kosovo." He attributes the violence in
the province to "KLA provocations, as personally witnessed in ambushes of
security patrols which inflicted fatal and other casualties" which were
"clear violations of the previous October’s agreement.  The security forces
responded with the consequent security harassment and counter-operations."
He insists that widespread abuses of human rights and the massive exodus of
the Kosovo Albanians occurred only after the withdrawal of the OSCE team on
March 20   and NATO bombardment on March 24, which "obviously 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 ...
There were no international refugees over the last five months of OSCE’s
presence within Kosovo, and Internal Displaced Persons only numbered a few
thousand in the weeks before the air bombardment commenced ... so I would
attribute the humanitarian disaster directly or indirectly to the NATO air
bombardment and resulting anti-terrorist campaign."

The German Section of The International Association of Lawyers Against
Nuclear Arms (IALANA)  rejected claims by the German Defense Minister,
Rudolf Scharping, and the Foreign Minister, Joschka Fischer, of the
existence of a pre-bombing planned programme, under the name ‘Operation
Horseshoe’, for the ‘ethnic cleansing’ of Kosovo Albanians. Referring to a
document on the ‘Operation’ given to her by Scharping, Louise Arbour, Chief
Prosecutor of UN Criminal Court for Yugoslavian Affairs in the Hague
stated: "I have my doubts as to its capacity to prove anything. If it were
a document with cover, date and signature, it would be fantastic. But
mostly such things look more like verbal descriptions and conclusions."
Paul-Marie de la Gorce, after a visit to Kosovo during the bombing,
summarised the situation in these terms:
        Before the launching of the war the situation was bad, characterised as it
was by the activities of the KLA and by counter-offensives of the
province’s militia and later Yugoslav forces ... There were population
movements provoked by the fighting; there were human losses as always
happens in such situations, but it was nothing compared to what happened

German Foreign Ministry intelligence reports and judgements of German
tribunals prior to NATO bombardment also strongly indicate the falsity of
claims of ‘ethnic cleansing’ and ‘massacres’ by the Yugoslav Government.
These unpublished intelligence reports sent to various state tribunals
insisted that there was no evidence of a ‘humanitarian catastrophe’ facing
the population of Kosovo. According to information provided to the High
Court of Lower Saxony, "the measures of the security forces are primarily
aimed at combating the KLA, which through terrorist means are fighting for
the independence of Kosovo and, according to some of its spokesmen, even
for the creation of ‘Greater Albania’."  Another document of January 12,
1999 sent to the Administrative Court of Trier states:
        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, Gnjilane,
etc. has, in the entire conflict period, continued on a relatively normal
basis¼  The actions of the security forces (were) not directed against the
Kosovo-Albanians as an ethnically defined group, but against the military
opponent and its actual or alleged supporters.

With regard to the reasons for the mass exodus after NATO airstrikes began,
however, the charge of forced expulsions has been raised even by Gregor
Gysi, Chairman of the PDS (Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus)
parliamentary delegation and a committed opponent of the bombardments.
After meeting with several refugees in the Spitalle refugee camp in
Albania, Gysi wrote to President Milosevic: "In all their stories, the
reason given me [for their refugee status] was their expulsion by the
Yugoslav army and police".   Other independent observers who visited
Kosovo, Macedonia, and Albania have shown, however, that stories of forced
expulsions depend on where the refugees came from or the period when the
expulsions were said to have occurred.  For example, according to a
Washington Times report, most refugees from Pristina interviewed in
Macedonia say that they were not forced to leave:
        Most residents of the provincial capital say they are leaving of their own
accord and are not being forced out at gunpoint, as residents of several
western cities and villages in Kosovo say has been happening to them ...
Pristina residents who made it to Macedonia said their city is still
largely intact, despite the targeting of ethnic Albanian businesses by
Serbian gangs and several direct hits from NATO airstrikes in the city

A report by Paul-Marie de la Gorce on his return from Kosovo also indicates
that the situation of Kosovo Albanians may differ according to their place
of origin. The reasons for the exodus are "diverse and complex":
First, the fear of reprisals by Yugoslav forces or the Serbian population.
Second, obviously, the bombardment; it is useless to deny it. We know from
experience of contemporary war that bombings force populations to flee
whatever their political sentiments. The third reason is the existence of
zones of combat. Finally, perhaps wherever there is a concentration of the
Yugoslav army, it does not wish to see at its side an Albanian population,
reputedly hostile.

In his open letter to France’s President Chirac, Régis Debray conveyed his
observations after a visit to Serbia, Kosovo, and Macedonia. Debray
describes the situation that reigned on the first three days which had led
to the expulsions:
        ¼the sudden superimposition of an international aerial war on a local
civil war of extreme cruelty¼  The KLA claimed it had 6,000 underground
fighters in Pristina and its snipers, I was told, went into action with the
first bombs. The Serbs, considering that they could not fight on two
fronts, apparently decided to evacuate, manu militari, ‘NATO’s fifth
column’, ‘its ground forces’, that is, the KLA, particularly from the
villages where it merged with, and melted into, the civilian population...
Localised, but incontestably, these evacuations, dubbed ‘Israeli style,’ ¼
have left their traces here and there: houses burnt, villages deserted.
Debray described the reasons for the exodus that continued after these
first days "but on a smaller scale":
        by KLA order, anxiety to find their families, fear of being considered
‘collaborators’, fear of the bombardment--which does not distinguish, from
6,000 metres, between Serbs, Albanians and others--, to join their cousins
who had left, because their livestock were dead, because it was an
opportunity to emigrate to Switzerland, Germany or elsewhere...

Audrey Gillan,  a Guardian correspondent in Macedonia who investigated the
allegations by UNHCR spokesman, Ron Redmond, of mass murder and rapes in
the villages of Sllovi, Hallac Evogel, and Riberi Evogel, said that she had
found no evidence or eyewitnesses among refugees from these villages in the
Stankovac camp to confirm these events. Later on, Redmond was forced to
admit that "we have no way of verifying those reports of rape." With regard
to allegations made by the UK Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, that ‘rape
camps’ existed in Gjakova, Rahovec, Suhareka, Prizren, and Skenderaj, the
KLA representative in London, Dr. Pleurat Sejdiu, said, "I don’t think that
we will get the evidence until we go with ground troops."  [Still to come:
a sentence.on the continuing trend of the facts disproving allegations of
mass graves and rape camps.]

It must be recalled that, prior to the bombardment, most of the information
on the human rights situation in Kosovo relayed to the West came from the
OSCE KVM in Kosovo. A report  by an Italian monitor, published under the
pseudonym ‘Ulisse’, shows how the US used the OSCE mission to provide
partial and fabricated information for public consumption. The supposedly
"neutral and civilian" observer mission was in reality primarily a military
mission headed by US Ambassador Walker, who travelled in an OSCE vehicle
brandishing an American flag. The sordid career of William Walker shows
that he was chosen to head the OSCE Kosovo Verification Mission not for any
commitment to human rights but because of his willingness to lie or to keep
quiet.   According to ‘Ulisse’, "the military, which constituted more than
70% of the so-called ‘civilian’ mission, could, if they wished, later
return in uniforms, as NATO soldiers. At the end of November, only a dozen
Italians remained, of whom only two were civilian, to save face." All
information activities were immediately placed under "Anglo-American"
control.  In addition, the British and US diplomatic missions had
privileged links to KLA factions ... even after the arrival of the
observers.  They continued to carry out so-called shadow operations
(particularly the English), i.e. secret operations providing cover to the
Kosovar guerrilla, gathering reports and sending carefully ‘cleansed’
copies to the observers." "The Russians were immediately excluded from the
intelligence sector of the head office."  "We noted a clear contradiction
between the Anglo-American and the Franco-German positions. ..." "Some
Italian members came across reports drafted by American officers and local
Albanian personnel (sic!) regarding mostly Italians, Russians and Dutch
observers accused of being pro-Serb because they had reported cases of
human rights violations by the Albanians and members of KLA."

        e) Racak and a certain William Walker

Serious doubts raised by numerous Western dailies and foreign observers
about the circumstances of the so-called ‘Racak massacre’ illustrate why
information provided by NATO governments about ‘genocide’ must be treated
with great caution. The OSCE KVM had been utilised by NATO governments to
distort and fabricate information. It will be recalled that it was the
‘discovery’ by KVM Chief US Ambassador William Walker of an alleged
massacre that provided the key event in NATO’s case for humanitarian
intervention. On January 16, 1999, Walker accused Yugoslav security forces
of massacring 45 civilians in the village of  Racak. Walker’s version was
repeated by Albanian reporters hand-picked by Walker to accompany him. He
had refused to allow representatives of the domestic media to be present.
According to the Albanian "eyewitnesses," in the middle of the day, the
police raided the village, separated women from men, and subsequently
killed the latter. The announcement was made before any investigation could
be carried out.  David Brown, the OSCE KVM medical co-ordinator who had
served in the British army reported that their own investigations on 28
bodies carried out on the morning of the discovery had shown that the vast
majority were hit at short range or cut to death.

The version that there had been a massacre of civilians was immediately
challenged by Yugoslav authorities. The Foreign Ministry reported that
there had been an armed confrontation in the vicinity of Racak on January
15 when KLA fighters attacked Serb police undertaking the arrest of
terrorists who had killed a police officer, Svetislav Przic, five days
earlier. The OSCE KVM was duly informed about the beginning of the arrests
and had arrived at the scene of fighting.   Renaud Girard, correspondent in
Yugoslavia for the French daily Le Figaro, pointed out that the Serb police
had nothing to hide.  An Associated Press TV crew had been  invited to film
the operation, the aim of which was to arrest KLA members in Racak (a known
KLA base), who had been accused of carrying out multiple acts of terrorism.
The OSCE KVM had also been informed of the campaign; this was subsequently
confirmed by a British member of the mission, Neil Strachan.   A mixed team
of British and American KVM monitors were also present,  travelling in two
vehicles bearing US diplomatic plates.

Various Western dailies cast further doubt on the OSCE KVM version,
pointing to evidence that the bodies had been moved and that it was likely
that the bodies were those of KLA members killed in the fighting with Serb
police, which were later gathered together by KLA forces and brought to the
gully to give the impression of a massacre.  There were very few cartridge
shells and very little blood around the gully where 23 people were found
with multiple bullets in their heads. Foreign and domestic experts noted
the unnatural position of the victims' bodies. There were tracks and traces
of brain particles showing that the bodies had been dragged. Despite the
presence of journalists and observers in the town during the KLA-Serb
fighting, there were no eyewitnesses to the ‘massacre’, and the bodies were
‘discovered’ only on the day after the fighting. It is doubtful that Serb
forces could have shot at close range when film shot by Associated Press
showed that the Serb police could only move around stealthily and under
cover. At the time of the ‘massacre’, the village was under the control of
the KLA.  The residents of the abandoned village of Racak did not recognise
among the victims any of their neighbours from the village.

According to reports, internally, the OSCE KVM had reached the conclusion
that the ‘massacre’ had indeed been fabricated by the KLA. Officials of the
Mission, who had asked to remain anonymous, stated that they had inspected
15 bodies and determined that some of them had been moved.  According to
one monitor, most of the bodies were brought from the surrounding area.
Many were KLA fighters killed in armed combat with Serb forces and "were
subsequently dressed in civilian clothes."  Willy Wimmer, Vice-President of
the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly told the  commercial German television
channel NTV that he rejected with disgust the way in which the television
pictures had been manipulated with the intention of provoking an
intervention by NATO in Kosovo and Metohija: "Everything is directed toward
provoking a certain reaction so that certain pictures create the desire to
immediately issue orders to our soldiers to go into action."  [Where did
you find the transcript of this broadcast? E.C.]

The veracity of the original information provided by Walker has also been
questioned because of attempts by the US Chief of  KVM and by NATO
governments to impede the orderly investigation of the ‘massacre’. Firstly,
Walker prevented the investigating judge from carrying out an on-site
investigation on January 16 by demanding that she go without police
protection. Having prevented the country’s judicial and state authorities
from carrying out their duty, Walker himself arrived at the scene on the
same day, accompanied by foreign and Albanian journalists, and made the
dramatic declaration. Outraged by the arrogance of a US Ambassador behaving
like the representative of an occupation force, the Yugoslav Government
accused Walker of "intervention in the internal affairs of a sovereign

Moreover, before any investigation could begin, Walker had allowed Albanian
reporters he had brought with him to walk all over the site thus covering
up some of the tracks, even though, under normal circumstances, the site of
a death is cordoned off to prevent evidence from being removed or covered
up. Later on, the EU President, German Chancellor Schröder, used procedural
and other arguments against the release, during the Rambouillet meeting, of
a report by an EU team of forensic experts that had investigated the
circumstances of death.  The OSCE itself admitted indirectly to this.
Reportedly, the head of the forensic expert team, Finland’s Dr. Helena
Ranta, was instructed by Bonn not to reveal the contents and to follow
directions given by German authorities.

Walker’s announcement served NATO governments to prepare public opinion for
the aggression that was to follow. Immediately after the announcement,
German Chancellor Schröder warned that, for the first time in 54 years,
German troops could be sent to the Balkans and that the event justified
"direct intervention on humanitarian grounds" without a mandate from the UN
Security Council.  NATO General Secretary Javier Solana himself identified
this event as a turning point in the development of the crisis. It was
after Walker’s announcement of the "Racak massacre" that the governments of
the ‘Contact Group’ summoned the Government of Yugoslavia to Rambouillet
threatening military reprisals should it refuse to present itself.

Louis Proyect

More information about the Marxism mailing list