Lies of War
Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr.
gave three reasons for his military intervention in the heart of
Europe. A quick look shows them to be models of the state disinformation
we've come to expect in wartime.
First, he says he is dropping bombs to prevent the spread of war.
But this is straight out of Orwell. Escalating war does not prevent
its spread. It encourages it. It brings about more property destruction,
suffering, and death. It inflames tempers, entrenches positions,
sows indelible hatreds, and draws others into long-lasting conflicts.
Second, he says he wants to curb the ability of Milosevic to build
up his defenses and enforce Serbian territorial claims. This line
was copyright at the beginning of the ten-year war on Iraq. Substitute
the name Saddam and it's a perfect fit. This policy plays right
into the hands of the respective country's leader, making him more
popular than ever and unifying the people against the foreign aggressor.
Incidentally, how many days before we hear that Serbia is building
"weapons of mass destruction"?
Third, Clinton says he wants to underscore the credibility of Nato.
The truth is that Nato has had no credibility since the collapse
of the Cold War took away its official reason for existence. The
entire world now sees this organization for what it is a
fig leaf for U.S. imperialism. Nato has become a threat to peace
in Europe because the U.S. believes Nato must fight wars to preserve
U.S. hegemony. The conflict in Kosovo comes down to this: Serbia
believes that the territory belongs to it, and bases this claim
on history dating back 600 years. Serbia cites the presence of ancient
churches and monasteries central to the Serbian Orthodox faith in
Kosovo, which in turn are wrapped up tightly with Serbian nationalist
feelings. On the other hand, Kosovo is today inhabited by a Moslem
population that demands the right to self-determination.
Which principle should prevail: the claims of history or the political
rights of the majority in a polyglot territory? Look at American
history. Both the claims of history and the rights of the majority
were solidly in favor of Southern secession. But the U.S. decided
on union by force. Ever since then, the U.S. has generally opposed
secession, not only at home but around the world.
The U.S. tried to keep the Soviet Union together when Latvians,
Lithuanians, Ukranians, Estonians, and all the rest were demanding
the right of independence. In the same way, the US backed unitary
Nigerian, Congolese, and Rwandan states against tribal secessionist
Currently, the U.S. backs Britain against the claims of Irish and
Scottish nationalism, France against Breton and Corsican nationalism,
Italy against Lombardian nationalism, Spain against Catalan nationalism,
Russia against Chechnyan nationalism, and Mexico against secessionists
Will the U.S. now reverse its current position against all these
regional majorities subjugated by alien nation states?
during the First World War did the U.S. back self-determination,
when the fanatical Woodrow Wilson used this venerable principle
as a weapon against the multinational monarchies he was dead-set
on destroying. It was political propaganda, both then and now.
Clinton administration says it supports the Kosovo Liberation Army.
In truth, this support is narrow and temporary. The analogy is the
support the U.S. provided to the Kurds in Iraq. This support was
quickly withdrawn when the U.S. believed it had achieved its real
objective, which was to punish anyone who dared question the right
of the U.S. to run the world.
The hypocrisy is nowhere as clear as in U.S. opposition to Kurdish
demands for separation from the Turkish government. The U.S. sees
Turkey as a reliable vassal, so the U.S. turns a blind eye to ethnic
oppression of the most brutal sort. It turns out, then, that the
principle is not that downtrodden ethnic groups ought to have autonomy,
but that the U.S. ought to manage the entire map of the world.
And how well does the U.S. do this? In the same region the U.S.
is now bombing, the Clinton administration enforced a unified, multicultural
Bosnia, where U.S. troops are permanently stationed, against the
pleas of every ethnic group that resides there for independence.
This is the peace of a prison camp. It also deprived Serbia of an
area with a Serbian majority, an act which inflamed the present
Ironically, Bosnia also provides a model for what the U.S. would
like to do across the region become an occupying force that
overrides everyone else's rights at the point of a gun. The U.S.
government has come to view itself as a god-like figure that will
purge the entire world of ancient claims and prejudices, and selectively
impose a deracinated ideology of democratic equality. This is nothing
short of millennialist insanity.
So who is right in the present dispute? The Kosovo independence
movement that claims to be speak on behalf of the Moslem majority,
or the Milosevic government that claims to represent the Christian
Serbian majority's desire for a Serbian-controlled province?
The short answer is: this is not for the U.S. government to decide.
Indeed, the U.S. has no position that squares with reality. It says
that Kosovo should be neither independent nor Serbian. The "peace
agreement" Clinton hails was nothing but blanket permission
for Nato as a permanent occupying force, which is why Milosevic
But Clinton says if he doesn't drop bombs and settle border disputes,
we would repeat the errors of the past. Really? It was US involvement
in Europe that turned a limited conflict into a global one in the
First World War. The later attempt to punish its opponents and redraw
borders helped bring Hitler to power. And it was U.S. refusal to
choose diplomacy over terror that deepened and widened another ghastly
global bloodbath, to be followed again by a disastrous redrawing
of borders and the fastening of communism on half of Europe.
Yet here we go again, imposing sanctions, lobbing bombs, and redrawing
maps. We are not learning from the errors of the past but repeating
them. Clinton's missiles have already caused irreparable damage.
Orthodox Christians are horrified that the US would back the claims
of Moslems, and we can now add Serbians to the growing list of groups
that have sworn eternal enmity to the U.S. world empire.
When we consider the original American vision of a peaceful,
commercial republic would be a beacon of freedom, trading with all
and staying out of the endless quarrels of the Old World
we can only be utterly alienated from the regime that rules a country
conceived in liberty. It is clearer than ever that the U.S. warfare
state must be dismantled, so that it can no longer threaten the
world, or trample on true American ideals.
article appeared on Yugoslavia's
INET News Website, which reprinted it from WorldNetDaily.