|
|
|
|
Web-only Exclusives November 30, 2000 From Our Correspondent: Hirohito and the War A conversation with biographer Herbert Bix From Our Correspondent: A Rough Road Ahead Bad news for the Philippines - and some others From Our Correspondent: Making Enemies Indonesia needs friends. So why is it picking fights? |
VIEWPOINT:
A WAY OUT OF NATO'S WAR
The raids must stop, and Milosevic accept mediation
YANG DAZHOU is senior fellow (retired) at the U.S. Institute,Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, in Beijing
and one of China's foremost experts on the Balkans
THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION IS WAGING wholly unjustified war against Yugoslavia. Since March 24, the 13-member NATO, led by the U.S., has mobilized 1,000 planes, carried out over 6,000 sorties, delivered several thousand missiles and bombs, including cruise missiles, and even employed cluster- and slow-activating bombs that are banned under international law. The bombs have killed more than 500 (Serbian) civilians and injured 4,000 people. Military facilities apart, the raids have destroyed schools, hospitals, bridges, roads, factories and living quarters, causing billions of dollars in losses. Yugoslavia has not succumbed, but displayed singularly firm resolve in protecting its national sovereignty and independence.
On the NATO side, the first 24 days of war cost the American military alone over $4 billion. But the original objective - pressuring President Slobodan Milosevic to surrender - has not been attained. The war machine thus continues to press forward. How might this conflict be ended? The first possibility: Yugoslavia is crushed by NATO and accepts its demands. The most outrageous demands are to accept the presence of 28,000 NATO troops in Kosovo and disband Yugoslavia's armed forces. The prospect of this happening is next to zero. Why?
First, the Serbians have a glorious tradition of defying brute force. They prefer to "die standing than live on one's knees." Already this century, they've been confronted with three ultimatums - the first, in 1914, under the Austro-Hungarian Empire; in 1941, from Germany and Italy; and the third, the Cominform Affair of 1948-49, when they faced Stalin. They were willing to die, but achieved victories in the end.
Also, drawing on their history, the Serbians have written into their constitution: "No person possesses the right to recognize or sign a document of surrender." Nor can they "accept or recognize" the occupation of their territory. A person who does is deemed anti-constitutional and treasonous. That this is unthinkable for Milosevic or any other Yugoslav politician is something the West failed to take into account in starting this war.
The second possibility: In view of the many points of consensus reached by Milosevic and the moderate Albanian Kosovar, Ibrahim Rugova, on a political resolution, and given Rugova's many calls for NATO to stop the bombings, the U.S. and its allies could do just that - halt their sorties. Also improbable. Why? The pretext for NATO's action was to "prevent a humanitarian disaster from occurring in Kosovo." But before the bombings, there was no humanitarian disaster in terms of a refugee outflow. The disaster was caused by NATO. Its leaders mistakenly believe that modern weapons can solve everything. By now war fever has set in and nothing will stop the NATO machine. It will not allow a Serbian-Kosovar dialogue. (As for the suppression of the Kosovo Liberation Army, this is legitimate. Let me ask: What about Britain's attacks against the Irish Republican Army?)
The third possibility: The United Nations or an influential group of countries intervenes to help negotiate a ceasefire. Another zero. Why? The U.S. and its allies trampled on the U.N. charter and ignored the U.N. in bombing Yugoslavia. Even if a group such as the Nonaligned movement intervenes, some war-crazed people in the U.S. wouldn't pay any attention. Their only concerns are those 6,000 Russian warheads and long-distance delivery systems.
The fourth possibility: War gradually escalates, drawing in other countries. There are already danger signs. Russia announced that it has severed its relations with NATO. If it means the European Conventional Forces Treaty and Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty could be annulled, I think NATO's leaders will begin to wake up. Another sign: Russia, Belarus and Yugoslavia may form an alliance. The Russian Duma has just voted in favor of one. If it becomes fact, the implications are grave indeed.
What will resolve the crisis? First, NATO must immediately stop the bombing. More important, it must not increase its weaponry and amass troops in neighboring countries, and absolutely avoid escalating the conflict. It needs also to declare that it will abandon plans to send troops into Kosovo because this is unacceptable to Yugoslavia. Second, NATO should compensate Yugoslavia for war losses as well as the relatives of those killed and enterprises that suffered damage. Third, Milosevic should agree to accept mediation by the "foreign community" - meaning the U.N., the Nonaligned movement, or countries not involved in this war and trusted by Yugoslavia, such as China or India. Fourth, Belgrade should enter negotiations with Rugova or a representative of other Kosovo Albanian factions - pursuing an agreement that grants a high degree of autonomy to Kosovo. The "foreign community" can monitor implementation.
We Chinese have a saying: "The person who tied the knot should untie it." Those who initiated this war should reflect, repent, and mend their ways. They've already caused a refugee crisis and instability in the Balkan region. There is still time to correct their mistakes. Otherwise, they should beware of "dropping stones on their own feet."
 |
