DEMARCATION: KOSOVA

PART 6: The Real War Aims of the USA-Led NATO Imperialists in The Balkan War of 1999

(1) THE FIRST REAL REASON FOR THE WAR: THE INTER-IMPERIALIST STRUGGLE FOR MASTERY OF THE WORLD – "GLOBALISATION" AND POWER BLOCKS
The USA's Need to "Degrade" and render the United Nations Irrelevant
A Desire to Open Serbia’s Monopoly, and to enforce a "free market"
The Inter-imperialist Struggle Between NAFTA and EEC Imperialism – The Hijack of the EEC
The Oskar Affair
The European Commission And Exposure Of Its "Corruption".
The Euro’s Poor Performance In International Trading
The Anglo-German Accord
The Nature of The "Temporary Truce" - the EEC And Its' Army Debate

(2) THE SECOND UNDERLYING REAL REASON FOR WAR:OIL IN THE NEAR EAST

(3) THE THIRD UNDERLYING REAL REASON FOR WAR: THE REFINEMENT AND TESTING OF WAR TACTICS

Launching The War

The war was launched under totally false claims. In this section of Alliance 33, we discuss the real underlying war aims. We also briefly show how the NATO allies effected their goals, by sabotaging the Rambouillet talks.

It is quite clear that the essential policy of USA imperialism in the Balkans was formulated some time ago. The Wall Street Journal, identified it as one of deferring to Milosevic at every point:

Sections Of Marxist-Leninist Left Take Only A Partial View

We have already pointed out (See parts 1 & 2 this issue Alliance 33) that the Left was divided upon the matter of Kosova. Equally so is the right also split:

Lalkar should also tell us whether they think massacres did occur in Bosnia and in Kosova – instead of glibly parroting Milosevic and instead of focusing solely on the current attacks on Serbs in the Kosova region. Lalkar even has the "moral fibre" to discredit Kosovar claims of Serb brutality, by saying that in war neither side can be trusted. Does Mr. Brar really want further independent corroboration? ………… A brief look at non-Milosevic puppet sources might reveal:

 Claims of the Imperialists -"Humanitarian" Intervention In The Balkans

Pompously, imperialists claimed the war was launched for "humanitarian aims" to protect Kosovars. But this was spurious and should take in no Marxist-Leninist. Even large sections of the liberal intelligentsia saw through this. As Le Monde put it:

1) The most important was the overwhelming geo-political strategic needs of USA imperialism to stamp its own world domination over the European map;

i) related to this was the paramount need to degrade the capacity and what remained of the prestige of the United Nations;
ii) Assisting all this was a recent take-over of the rival imperialists block of the EEC – by the new co-partners of the USA – the UK and Germany;
iii) Essential was to further block the development of a EEC Defence force and to enhance the future of NATO- USA’s leg in Europe;

The Overall Strategy Of The War

Before the war itself, the Western imperialists refused to arm the KLA, and they refused to countenance independence for Kosova. Instead, the game plan of the Western imperialist was to partition the territory of Kosova. To further enable this, they wished to allow Milosovic to "take" as much land as possible in a land grab, and create a massive refugee crisis. They could then pose as the "liberators" of Kosova and exploit the now incandescent desire for revenge of the Kosovars – to justify a partition and the continuation of foreign NATO troop presence.

To facilitate all this, they staged the farce of the Rambouillet talks in France. It was deliberately allowed to fail. The KLA was made an appendage of NATO by the forcing out of its most principled leaders, in particular Adem Demaci. Then to ensure the Serb refusal of the proposals, a clause was included that was already know to be totally unacceptable to Milosevic- the presence of NATO troops on Kosovar soil. It was known in advance of placing this demand, that the Serbs would refuse. Placing the demand in that form on the table, was tantamount to ordering the air fleet to start bombing.

The USA and the EEC imperialists were enabled to launch NATO’s "Air war". To further encourage the massive displacement of the Kosovars and the Serbian land grab, the NATO leaders also declared loud and often that they would not use land force. It was quite clear that the Milosevic led fascists would quickly accelerate the depopulation of Kosova, and create a massive refugee wave. The editor of Le Monde Diplomatique, Ramonet, got it right:

It is not well understood that the Rambouillet talks were designed to fail; and that the Serb leaders had basically agreed to all the conditions except one - the type of force placed in. The imperialists knew that the Milosevic fascists had made it clear they would not accept NATO troops.

That is why we term the negotiations as a "farce". They contained a clause destined to provoke rejection, they became the pretext for the war the imperialists wanted:

(1) THE FIRST REAL REASON FOR THE WAR:
THE INTER-IMPERIALIST STRUGGLE FOR MASTERY OF THE WORLD – "GLOBALISATION" AND POWER BLOCKS

The USA's Need to "Degrade" and render the United Nations Irrelevant

    We previously labeled the UN as a negotiating and bargaining table - a clearing house -where the dominant imperialist nation would hold sway. It is not surprising that as USA capitalism has become renascent, overcoming its decaying rusting economy – that it has expressed frustration at its plans being limited by potentially "troublesome" debates at the UN. It thus got rid of Boutros Boutros-Ghali, and increasingly has exerted policy decision away from the UN. Its’ refusal to pay its debt to the UN is a small reflection of the contempt of the USA towards the UN.

The term "hyper-power" was coined by the French foreign minister Vedrine – to describe the relatively unchallenged dominance of the USA following the fall of the USSR as a rival imperialist state. The final engineering of the USSR state downfall, involved USA economists like Sachs to ensure self-destruction. This of itself allowed the penetration of the USA capitalists hungry for new markets. (We have described aspects of this in our analysis of the Russian state and Chechnya). This "un-balancing", continues to take its toll.  It allows the erst-while nuisance of the UN – the camouflage for imperialist design and strategy - to be discarded like a useless cloth:

Capital will erode all in its path towards an ever increasing market share. In its simplest and crudest, Serbian statehood was a small resistance that would be swept away. The Serbian state – whether under its previous state capital era of Yugoslavia, or later, never was socialist. But it nonetheless operated under special conditions. It had been transformed into a special monopoly market run for the benefit of Milosevic and friends. This was nothing more than the old state capitalism transformed by an extremely narrow oligarchic group into a tight monopoly. Moreover that monopoly was closely linked to elements of Russian capital:

The Inter-imperialist Struggle Between NAFTA and EEC Imperialism – The Hijack of the EEC

It is true that there were real interests at work for the EEC capitalists in Kosova as well as for the USA. These include the need to ensure the borders of the EEC were stable; to limit the effects of refugees into the EEC, and to limit the penetration of criminal elements into the EEC from the Balkans. The recent disintegration of the Albanian Pyramid scheme under the active guidance of the USA (described by Alliance previously) is a prime example of how state destabilisation on the boundaries creates a crisis situation. Le Monde describes an interesting new version of the concept of "strategic stability" in the light of new technology based on informatics and electronics:

In a previous issue (Alliance 18: Events In Former Yugoslavia : Tito & Roots Of Great Serb Chauvinism October 1995":  See Subject Index of Alliance web-site) we identified a major motive force for the USA Balkan strategy as being the inter-imperialist contradictions between NAFTA and the EEC. We identified this contradiction as the reason why the Bosnians were forced into a severely compromised position; up to the Dayton Talks, which were held suddenly just as the Bosnians were turning the tides of war.

In yet an earlier work (Alliance 3: Crisis In Capital And Its' "Solution" - Free Trade And Protectionism In Developed countries at:
http://www22.brinkster.com/harikumar/AllianceIssues/ALLIANCE3ECONOMICS.html) we identified the rise of the trading and political-economic blocs of the EEC and NAFTA. We pointed out, that at an earlier stage the British imperialists had acted as hidden agents of the USA and attempted to "scuttle" the EEC. That explained De Gaulle’s intense suspicions of British attempts at entering the EEC. But later as the USA entered a slump, the majority of the British capitalists accepted the need to join EEC.

However it should not be surprising that political currents have changed. Firstly the USA reliance on high tech computer informatics, reversed its prior slump. Secondly, key European leaders –Tony Blair and Gerard Schroder – clearly supports the USA. This is a major change, and Tony Blair is best seen as an "inside" agent for the USA within European ruling class circles. All this had already signaled to the USA, that a united allied war front - with the European powers following the lead of USA imperialism - was possible. Moreover, a severe acute crisis within the EEC – signaled that it was a highly propitious time for the USA to ensure the support of the ruling classes of the EEC countries.

NATO started the war with the assistance of the major European powers, and without any approval from the UN. Although these are led by Social Democrats, only the naïve can expect them to behave in a socialist manner. Le Monde Diplomatique described their behavior as a "collective unwillingness to disturb the inherited status quo":

The forced resignation of Oskar Lafontaine; the forced "collective suicide" (Guardian Weekly; 28 March 199; p.15) of the Brussels EEC executive led by the discredited ex President of the EEC Commission Jaques Santer; the severe slow-down of the German economy and the consequent depreciation for the Euro of European Monetary Union; the increasing link-up of German capital and industrial sectors and those of the USA; and finally the impact of the "Banana wars" i.e. the intense competition for rights of market entry for foodstuff including bananas.

These events have allowed the temporary hijack of EEC policy-making by the USA.

In the whole saga – a never ending law of Marxist economics is again revealed: -that of the Uneven Development of Capitalism. It is of course improbable that this hijack will not itself foster a struggle against the pro-USA forces in the EEC. But for now the pro-EEC forces led by Tony Blair of the UK, and Schroeder of Germany, control the states of the UK and Germany.

The Oskar Affair

The timing of the "USA assisted" failure of the Rambouillet talks, and precipitation of war, coincides with the pushing out of Oskar Lafontaine from the German Finance Ministry. His departure came only three months after the EEC had launched its new currency the Euro, in January 1999. Oskar Lafontaine had acceded to the Finance Ministry under the Chancellorship of Gerard Schroeder of Germany, but had been a thorn in the side for significant sections of not just German, but pan-European capital:

That Lafontaine represented the views of Keynsian economics is clear:

The European Commission And Exposure Of Its "Corruption".

Revelations about the corruption of high officialdom occur regularly in capitalist society. There can be no doubt that these are not driven by the high mindedness of the bourgeois press – controlled as they are by the capitalist class. What lies behind these revelations is the on-going inter-capitalist war. This allows us to make sense of the exposure of the corruption of the senior governing body of the EEC, which led to the entire body – the European Commission – resigning en masse. The exposure used the revelations of an auditor, Paul van Buitenen, who had previously been excoriated and abused, by those hit by his "whistle-blowing":

The Independent is skeptical about the anodyne phrasing of the new accord.

This is also seen in the recent negotiations on trade, which adopt now a less confrontational tone. The ostensible reason for the talks at this time was an impasse over the appointment of the new head of the World Trade Organisation that oversees the trade negotiations:

 The Nature of The "Temporary Truce" - the EEC And Its' Army Debate

Again – this truce is likely to be temporary. Already there are signs of a continued slow but steady progress to an independent European strike and defense force. But even though the Summit Meeting of the EEC in Cologne approved a force, it means less to some countries than others. Currently even Germany is endorsing it. This should be seen as another sign that Germany is currently with Britain – acting on the behest of the USA - likely to weaken its independence:

In broad terms we agree with this and present their analysis, which in full is to be found at the following page on the web: http://www.plp.org/cd99/cd0414.html#Why Kosovo?  We present their argument:

 First the PLP identify the valuable resource of oil, and point out both that the USA have engaged in deadly war in the Middle East for this; and that the former Soviet Union has oil resources on the fringes of the "Middle East":

ii) They under-estimate the significance of the EEC-USA contradiction.

We believe that the placement of Russia geo-politically, needs to take account of this crucial factor. It appears that the major thrust currently is for links with the EEC capitalists.

"Anatoly Chubais, a key figure in Russia's market reform policies who now chairs RAO UES, the Russian power grid holding company, is pushing hard for western credits and support for the construction of a new Dollars 800m gas fired power station in Kaliningrad. This would be linked to the proposed Baltic grid and provide a needed boost to Kaliningrad's flagging economy. .. It has attracted credits from the World Bank, the European Investment Bank and other official lenders to supplement locally raised funds. …Thus far the opportunities for Russia in general and St Petersburg in particular that have been opened up by the transformation of the eastern Baltic from stagnant Soviet lake to dynamic trade and investment highway have only been dimly perceived by a political class still deeply influenced by Soviet attitudes, especially in the communist-controlled duma. Many politicians, including powerful Moscow mayor, Yuri Luzhkov, have been more inclined to lament the loss of Russian control over the Baltic republics and the reduced status of Russian and other minorities in the newly independent states than to figure out ways of ensuring that Russia extracts full benefit from the rising prosperity of its newly independent neighbours. But that is destined to change as Russians re-assess their place in the world after decades of super power rivalry with the US. Younger Russians in particular argue that the time has now come to refocus on business, trade and other links with Russia's neighbours - especially Europe and China. International relations are no longer the exclusive domain of a monolithic party and the state."
"Baltic Sea Region: Potential Sighted Through 'Window On The West': by Anthony Robinson in Moscow: The first steps are being taken to integrate more closely with potentially one of Europe's most dynamic economic areas"; Financial Times ; 11-Jun-1999.

iii) As an aside, we believe that it is possible that the PLP under-estimate the development of the alternative oil shales industry of oil in the USA itself. In this light - the significance of the oil pipelines we feel might not be so much to obtain access to oil – as in the inverse – to deny its enemies the oil.

We will be happy of course, to further debate these matters. The strategic direction of our common enemy – imperialism – must be understood. The PLP analysis is basically a new and important insight into the ticking of USA imperialism.

New technical strides have radically affected the conduct of war. That technological improvements feed into military operations – was noted by Engels:

It was a test ground, where the USA and its allies knew there would be virtually no serious force that could withstand it. It was a laboratory where they tested out both new weaponry, and related to it new strategy. The most obvious one was the one of the "pure air war". Ever since Barcelona aerial bombing performed by the German Fascists as a prelude to the Spanish Civil War, the air force was an integral part of military assaults.

However, the limitations of a pure air-war had been previously exposed especially in the USA imperialist aggression in Vietnam. New technology needed to be tested, that could possibly overcome these previously noted limitations.

For instance, the USA was already aware they lacked an ability to "target in real-time", a deficiency that became apparent from the un-just Gulf War against the Iraqi peoples:

"Shares in British Aerospace Britain’s tope Defence Company have risen from 410p when the bombing began on March 24^th, to 464 p.. the effect has been felt internationally. In America… Wall Street has begun focusing on the value of defence stocks. Shares in Boeing the aerospace and military giant have risen from $35 on March 14 to $41… A war in one part of the world puts countries elsewhere on alert. Other countries in or near the Balkans such as Slovenia, the Czech Republics, Bulgaria and Romania are likely to be looking to their own defence forces…" Lalkar July August 1999; p.155.

 Le Monde is rightly scathing about the so-called "socialism" of the EEC social democrats:

"NATO provoked a wave of Serbian atrocities and expulsions, giving Milosevic the catastrophe he wanted, all of which "Was entirely predictable", remarked General Clark, forgetting the script. What kind of humanitarian victory leaves 10,000 innocent civilians dead or maimed, their country and region poisoned, and Kosovo in ruins, littered with explosives and atomic dust from depleted uranium? what kind of just cause undermines the very democratic forces capable of removing a vicious tyrant? " Pilger John; "Moral Sightseeing by the West"; Guardian Weekly; June 20^th; 1999; p.3.

__________________________________________