Lessons from
the U.S. War on the Balkans
9/23/99
Clinton stands before the nation and the world to claim "victory" and says "we should be proud of our troops and what they've accomplished." First of all, what exactly is there to be proud of? Where is the honor in an imperialist war? The NATO air campaign shattered the economic backbone of Yugoslavia--destroying bridges, passenger trains, highways, electrical plants, water supply systems, refineries and factories. NATO's bombs found civilian targets, including the U.S.'s sinister arsenal of anti-personnel cluster bombs. The targets hit included hospitals, schools, prisons and television stations. NATO admitted to killing 11,300 Serbian and Albanian people, and wounding 20,000 more.
This was no victory for the people. We need to recognize the difference between "victory" for the imperialists and victory for the people. The U.S. led NATO to carry out its slaughter and destruction of Yugoslavia very much like it led the UN against Iraq during the Gulf War. The umbrella of NATO helped provide the appearance of world consensus supporting the predominantly U.S. war. Using lofty words about opposing ethnic cleansing and ensuring that the Kosovo Albanians would gain autonomy, the U.S./NATO bombing in fact made conditions much worse for the people of the Balkans. The bombing campaign was successful in causing a flood of refugees that overwhelmed neighboring countries. These refugees were immediately used as media fodder for the war effort and, in many cases, actual fodder for U.S./NATO bombing sorties.
No, this is not the victory that Clinton and the military war-mongers are proclaiming. The U.S. may well have accomplished some of their goals. But this war must be seen for what it is, nothing more than a big high-tech bully showing that it can throw its might around and call it right. It is something we have seen too many times in the past and will see again and again as long as the U.S. is allowed to act with impunity.
While the bombing has stopped this war is not over. This writing is an effort to go more deeply into some of the questions that arose during the struggle. This is our contribution toward the kind of dialogue we think is needed in order to strengthen ourselves and the anti-war movement for the other current and inevitable future battles.
Didn't the U.S./NATO Bomb for Humanitarian Reasons?
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union imperialist intervention has been sugar-coated with the UN peace shield and shoved down our throats as "humanitarian intervention." During this war, NATO was also being promoted as the defender of peace and democracy. The people are being called upon to put their hopes and dreams into the hands of the imperialists. When in fact these are the same forces who through their "tinkering" and interventions created these horrible conflicts for people in the Balkans to begin with.
Citing compassion and "globalization," the U.S. imperialists claim the right to intervene and attack with their military force anywhere in the world. They even go so far as declaring that the principle of "non-interference" in the internal affairs of other countries is obsolete for them now! But as the U.S./NATO troops took up their positions in Kosovo, their "humanitarian" justifications were repeatedly exposed as lies:
One horrifying example published in a newspaper in Ireland was when NATO aircraft bombed a bridge that crossed a river in a small Serbian town. The first bomb was dropped as people from surrounding villages were crossing the bridges to go to the market. A number of people were wounded or killed, their bodies literally torn to pieces. The second and third bombs were dropped 14 minutes later, as townspeople, rescue workers, and ambulances arrived to help the victims of the first explosion. This bridge was too narrow for tanks to cross. Villagers said that the NATO aircraft were flying low enough to see what was going on. The fact is, NATO bombed, waited 15 minutes for help to arrive, and bombed again! What kind of twisted peace comes from acts like this?
People's confusion over how to oppose ethnic cleansing led some to mistakenly support the bombing. In the name of humanitarianism the movement was held back. It is a critical point we need to continue to expose.
If We Oppose the Bombing aren't we Supporting Ethnic Cleansing?
Yes, we all want to help, but this is not the question. It's also true we must do something. The question is what should we be doing. There are a couple things wrong with thinking bombing and imperialist war are going to help the people in the Balkans.
1) The people have a right to determine their own future. To think that the solution to the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia must come from outside "saviors" is to play into the hands of the U.S. imperialists. The people of this region have lived together and resolved their differences in the past and they can save themselves. What we in the belly of the beast must do is to get imperialism off the people's backs--INCLUDING OUR OWN! If you look to the roots of the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia there are imperialist finger prints all over it. What happened to national sovereignty? The U.S./NATO's intervention adds up to nothing more than neo-colonialism.
2) BOMBING THEM IS NOT GOING TO HELP THEM!!! The Vietnam War rationalization, "We destroyed your village in order to save it," is the imperialist logic at play here. Even the U.S. will admit their surgical bombs have been proven they are not so precise. Thousands of people, many innocent to the conflict, were slaughtered by the U.S. "bomb them to save them" strategy.
Is the War over because the Bombing has Stopped?
Not for the people of the Balkans! They are in a state of military occupation. They face the consequences of the war every day. One U.S. economist estimated that it would take 41 years--two generations--for Yugoslavia to rebuild its economy to pre-1999 levels of production without foreign investment. The purpose of the NATO troops occupation of the Balkans is to expand the interests of the big nations--not to liberate, or even help, the people of the Balkans, Serbian or Albanian. This is the reality. If you look at Iraq you realize as horrifying as the Gulf War was, the worst of the devastation actually began after the bombing stopped. 9 years later, the U.S./UN continues their brutal sanctions on Iraq. The obliteration of Iraq's infrastructure and the continued economic sanctions make life a daily struggle. The Iraqi people live in a place where medical treatment, clean water and electricity are luxuries most cannot afford. The blood of the 1.7 million Iraqis, who've died of disease and starvation, are on the hands of the U.S. and the UN. Sanctions are an act of war aimed at the people.
We are anti-imperialists. That means we oppose occupation, sanctions, "peace-keeping troops" or any other form of strangulation backed by any justification. We must demand troops out and oppose any moves for sanctions against the Balkans.
Wouldn't it have been better if the war had been led by the UN?
You mean like in Iraq! The United Nations is an arm of U.S. imperialism. It seems that some people who have been calling out the UN crimes and hypocrisy in Iraq are also among those claiming the UN should have led the War on the Balkans! THEY SEEM TO TRULY BELIEVE UNITED NATION TROOPS CAN SOLVE THE CONFLICT IN EAST TIMOR!!!
A naive reader of any UN document could be swept into the fairy tale picture they paint. The preamble of the UN charter reads, "We the people of the United Nations determined, To save succeeding generations from the scourge of war...To reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights..." It reminds us of the U.S. Constitution in its use of lofty words and talk of freedom and equality. Many argue that the intent of these words is what is the important thing--the real problem is in the application and enforcement of international law. The arguments continue: What we really need is to more clearly define the rules and laws for when humanitarian intervention is OK. Or, The real problem is with the structure... it's too heavily weighted to the western powers. Or, The UN isn't perfect but it's the best we have. We argue for people to look at the real world to see what this institution really means to the people of the world. We challenge that in order to truly understand the United Nations we must look at what actions they have taken, what the results have been, who they have served, and why it was set up in the first place.
The UN is committing genocide right now--in Iraq! Bottom line--the people of the world are not represented at the conference tables of the UN, NATO or any other imperialist agency.
Didn't the U.S. come out of this War Stronger?
Short term--the U.S. does appear to have come out stronger. But they didn't get everything they wanted and they also didn't get away with it in the eyes of the people. Long term--it remains to be seen. One of the U.S. government's key goals in this war was to make sure that Europe's major powers--Britain, France and especially Germany--carry out their global moves within a framework dominated by the U.S. The U.S. vision of the "new world order" is as undisputed superpower-where new imperialist rivalries and challenges are contained and controlled by U.S.-dominated alliances (UN/NATO). The U.S. wanted NATO to be the military alliance through which new political and economic order was imposed in Eastern Europe. But what really happened during NATO's attack on Yugoslavia? The U.S. lent its air force to carry out the great bulk of this brutal campaign--to impose a NATO order on the southwestern flank of Europe and to make sure that Turkey did not get distracted from crucial U.S.-led plans for the control of Caspian oil. However, on June 3--the very day that Milosevic agreed to NATO's war demands--the European imperialist powers announced they had reached an agreement about moving in a new direction. The headline in the New York Times read, "European Union Vows to Become Military Power." In a meeting in Cologne, the leaders of 15 European countries decided to make the European Union a military power for the first time in its 42-year history--complete with command headquarters and armed forces of their own. European imperialists have announced, in the aftermath of the Balkan War, that they intend to develop their own arsenals of military satellites, smart bombs, and bomber fleets--so that they would be in a position to unleash threats and attacks on other countries, independent of the U.S. This plan for European militarization is not what the U.S. has in mind. In fact it undermines U.S. plans for how they will control of the region. It is also a reminder that, among imperialists, collaboration is conditional and temporary, while the workings of the system itself repeatedly brings rivalries and conflicts sharply to the surface.
Russia's Military Move--One of the most startling examples of ongoing imperialist rivalry pressing to the surface were the actions of the Russia imperialists during the occupation of Kosovo. While NATO was announcing "We are in control," Russian troops suddenly showed up in Kosovo's capital first, and before the eyes of the world pressed Russia's demands for their own "zone" within Kosovo. The Russian ruling class has been more and more deeply disturbed by the escalating reorganization of Eastern Europe and Central Asia that has been carried out by the U.S. and its NATO allies. Meanwhile, the U.S. has been pressing forward with its plans for an oil pipeline through Turkey to the Mediterranean that would end Russian control of key Caspian oil reserves.
After the "accidental" bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Kosovo, the Chinese government was very critical of the U.S. and it's NATO campaign. Shortly there-after the U.S. further antagonized China by accusing them of stealing and spying on their nuclear program. The massive protests to the bombing reverberated around the world. Literally millions of people hit the streets. The war helped reunite the German anti-war movement and became a strong rallying point here in the U.S. This is a significant step. Many made connections between the attacks on Iraq and Yugoslavia, and united around opposing them both. People around the world see the need to stop the big powers from attacking smaller and weaker nations. More people are beginning to understand that there is a fundamental problem with the way the U.S. operates and relates to the rest of the world. As the U.S. desperately tries to fend off the challenges of rival imperialist powers in the world economy, they're compelled to also suck some blood from their 'own people'--cutting welfare, slashing schools, and shrewdly constructing more prisons for the people who will struggle to survive by rebelling against them. Many loyalties on their home front are crumbling. Now the U.S. is forced to maneuver their military invasions in an even more sophisticated way.
So the USS New World Order isn't all tied up in a nice neat package for the U.S. Imperialists to open at their leisure. In fact, like Nazi Germany, the U.S. is still trying to make patriotism mandatory. The renewed attempt now in congress to sanctify the U.S. flag, to make it's desecration illegal, is nothing more than a sick and pathetic attempt to wash away the blood of the Yugoslavians, the Iraqis and the countless millions of people slaughtered under that banner!
Why Didn't We Stop the War?
The U.S. has claim to a short term "victory," but the anti-war forces have not been defeated! We didn't stop the war and many people who protested are trying to figure out why and what that means. What it doesn't mean is that our actions have no effect. We made important contributions toward preventing the U.S. and NATO from having a totally free hand and brought out the truth for millions of people to see. The movement made gains in reforging opposition to U.S. intervention--both in the U.S. and internationally as we stood with our sisters and brothers around the world. This is something to be proud of.
We should recognize that we have made these gains, and that we can build on them. Though we've made progress, much more is required. The protest and opposition in this country is not at the level it needs to be. There are many reasons for this. The main thing is not that we just need to try harder, or that we need to stop the infighting, or that the anti-war movement is sexist, or racist, thought these things may hold some truth. When it comes to really understanding the impact and consequences of war, the people in the U.S. are, without-a-doubt, very ignorant. We have not experienced having bombs dropped on our heads or our country destroyed. Our struggle for a living, for the most part, is not as desperate as many of those around the world. Our own lives do not literally depend on us stopping war--YET!
There are also other major pulls and errors in thinking that have slowed our movement and held it back from being all it could be. As anti-imperialists we see 2 major illusions we must expose: 1) The belief that somehow the U.S. government can act in a humanitarian way; 2) That the United Nations can act as an organization independent from U.S. imperialism.
We must reach out to millions of people from all walks of life, ripping off the humanitarian mask the U.S. is using to carry out its interventions and challenging all who see through the lies to oppose every war crime. Only the efforts of the people can stop further U.S. intervention in the Balkans, Iraq and elsewhere. This means we rely on the people, NOT the UN, NOT NATO, NOT the politicians, etc. It means we have a global frame of reference--we need to be internationalists. We need to fight to break down any barriers that separate us from the people of the world and our common struggle against imperialism.
Our experiences in an imperialist military--acting as instruments of U.S. intervention and war--caused us to question much of what we were taught about this country. We learned that the reasons for the death and destruction caused by the U.S. are not about "freedom and democracy" but are about capital seeking capital--no matter the human cost. These lessons are seared into our brains and sometimes keep us from closing our eyes at night. These lessons cause us to hold strong opinions about war--from avowed pacifism, to "only for self-defense," to nationalism, even to the need for revolutionary people's war. These lessons unite us under the common pledge of "Never Again!" These lessons have made us anti-imperialists.
Humanitarian, United Nations, NATO, U.S. Intervention; it all adds up to Imperialism. Imperialism is compelled to protect itself. As long as the world is dominated and controlled by imperialism we will have the extreme economic lopsidedness, invasions, war and crimes against humanity--that is the nature of the beast. When people think of imperialism as a policy it tends to let the whole system off the hook.
Saying we have to support the bombing or the UN or NATO because it's all we have is short-sighted. It's like calling for economic sanctions to avoid a war, or saying Agent Orange is more humanitarian than napalm, or that Clinton is better than Dole. We cannot allow them to frame our choices. You cannot support the United Nations, NATO or even U.S. troops without supporting U.S. imperialism.
NATO's attacks against Yugoslavia once more showed what the people of the world have been experiencing throughout the 20th century--the imperialists rule the world through gangster-ism. When not openly waging war, the imperialists protect their bloody rule by waging hidden wars and covert actions. The lesson people draw from the "example of Yugoslavia" may not be the lesson the U.S. war-makers wanted to teach. The world is getting a close new look at the bullying, arrogant, bloodstained "Ugly American." The word "imperialist" is being heard over and over again. Think about it. For this system to function, millions in the Third World must starve, millions in imperialist countries must lose their jobs, while in this richest of all countries--more and more jails are being built for the oppressed.
The imperialists will never put down their weapons. Any illusions that those whose hands are dripping in blood will ever do anything good for the people must be cast a side. We need to recognize war, not as crimes committed by a fallible government, but as the most devastating concentration of imperialism, a system that is willing to sink to any depths to protect and advance their empire. And we need to imagine a world without imperialism--how we can contribute to lifting that incredible load off the backs of our sisters and brothers everywhere, so we can all get down to the path breaking task of creating a new world that serves the common good.
We need to out-maneuver the government's maneuvering. We've got be more scientific than the war mongers in fighting, analyzing our achievements and mistakes, and moving forward. The movement must be prepared to oppose whatever they throw at us. The Bombing in the Balkans, the "police action" in Vietnam, the invasions of Panama, Somalia and Haiti, the economic sanctions against Iraq, Mexico, East Timor, Peru--there is no lack of examples of the many different ways the U.S. fights, and the variety of guises they use to lie and to confuse people.
Many of us recognize that the movement to oppose the Gulf War was built on the shoulders of the Vietnam anti-war movement. That legacy of resistance taught us to hit the streets immediately, don't trust the politicians, and if you're a GI, refuse to fight! We knew that to end a war, you need to make a War at Home. The anger that propelled our actions came from finding out for the first time, or knowing all along, that the nature of the imperialist beast had not changed.
Certain events in history cause people to step forward. Anti-imperialists need to be poised to welcome and unleash these new energies at every upsurge. We must pass on the lessons of the struggle to the next generation of fighters. When we do this, each war, each struggle, whether the movement was able to stop it or not, brings us closer to defeating U.S. imperialism once and for all.
Oppose the U.S./NATO War on the Balkans
Be Anti-Imperialist! Join VVAW AI
The creation of the UN after WW2 was presented to the world as international cooperation to prevent future wars--for peace. However, the UN was dominated by the Western Imperialist countries--the U.S., England and France--and a newcomer--the Soviet Union. Touted as a democratic loving institution, it's obvious to any onlooker that the decisions made in the UN are not made democratically. The Security Council of the UN concentrates the power in the organization. The stated purpose of the council is the "primary responsibility for maintaining peace and security." The truth is the set-up is unequal--on purpose! Of the 185 countries who are members of the United Nations, the Security Council has but 15 members. Only 5 of these are permanent members-China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. A decision cannot be taken if there is a negative vote by a permanent member--known as a "veto." Only permanent members can veto. [RETURN]