Letters

Big lie

The attack against targets in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia by the war machine of US and Nato imperialism represents an ongoing effort to break up the former workers' state along ethnic and national lines.

Just before 8pm on March 24, Tomahawk cruise missiles slammed into cities and military bases across Yugoslavia. A short time later, warplanes from bases in Italy, Germany and the Adriatic Sea began to criss-cross the country, dropping laser-guided bombs. This included a pair of B-2 'stealth' bombers.

Russia's government immediately withdrew its observers from Nato and the 'Partnership for Peace' military coalition. Moreover, Russian president Boris Yeltsin warned that the Yugoslav ally would mobilise its military to "defend itself and its interests" in the region.

Workers in the US are not buying the imperialists' propaganda about why it is necessary to bomb Yugoslavia. In opinion polls, only a minority supports the bombing; opposition to the bombing is prevalent among all sectors of the American public. In the end, the main victims of these attacks will be the workers of Yugoslavia.

The primary excuse of the imperialists is the ongoing civil war in the Serb province of Kosovo. Since the end of the civil war in Bosnia in 1996, the imperialists have continued to look for ways to continue the break-up of Yugoslavia.

While tensions in the province have existed for many years, it was not until after the implementation of the Dayton Accords, which codified the break-up of the former multi-ethnic workers' state, that imperialists turned their eyes to the mostly Albanian area of Kosovo. Much like with Bosnia and Croatia in 1990, the imperialists have had a hand in the conflict in Kosovo, covertly sending arms and money to elements of the Kosovo independence movement, including the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA).

Initially, the KLA embodied contradictions; some important sectors of the guerrilla army refused aid from imperialism. But as the 'peace' talks in Rambouillet, France, intensified, all but a few miniscule currents cast their lot with imperialism.

All sides of the KLA agreed to place Nato troops in Kosovo, as part of the process of developing Kosovo 'autonomy'. After the Yugoslav delegation refused to sign the deal, the KLA spokespeople 'did their job' by agreeing to imperialist troops, and called on Nato to 'hold up their end' by bombing the Yugoslav state into submission.

When the conflict between Belgrade and the Kosovo Albanians began, it appeared to be a case of an oppressed minority fighting for the right of self-determination. However, as the conflict escalated, more and more of the Albanian political organisations in the province looked to imperialism to be their muscle. At the moment that the KLA and other Albanian forces formed an unholy alliance with imperialism, the struggle ceased to be a question of self-determination. The KLA transformed from a guerrilla force of 'liberation' into a proxy force for imperialism, with the goal of the continued break-up of the country.

Whereas we may have defended the KLA against Yugoslavia in the past, and supported their right of self-determination, we should now reject such a position, as it would be giving back-handed support to imperialism. For us, the bourgeois right of self-determination is conditional and can be overshadowed by more central principles. Anti-imperialism is one of these central principles, and imperialist intervention under the cloak of 'self-determination' is unsupportable under any circumstances.

Much like with Bosnia, the imperialist propaganda machine has been in high gear preparing for the bombing. The imperialists are again bandying about the buzzword of "ethnic cleansing". Milosevic is this month's 'Hitler', and 'appeasement' is not an option. The bosses and their representatives in the US and western European governments are attempting to resurrect the 'Serb fascist' lie. But facts are stubborn things. Many of the charges of "ethnic cleansing", levelled by the US and European capitalists against the Yugoslavs, have been shown to be questionable at best. Both sides - the KLA and the Yugoslav military - have engaged in such attacks on residents of the region. But the imperialists have deliberately played up and even created stories of such acts by the Yugoslav military, while ignoring those acts committed by the KLA.

During the civil war in Bosnia, some of the worst acts of 'ethnic cleansing' were committed by the Bosnian muslim and Croatian forces. But this did not stop the pro-imperialist media from lying to the world and putting forward the big lie of 'poor little Bosnia'. The grossest example of misleading of the public was the British ITN news company staging scenes of alleged 'concentration camps' for Bosnian muslims.

When the magazine Living Marxism exposed this lie, ITN set out to gag them using the brutal libel laws of Britain. The lawsuit all but destroyed the magazine. But the truth is more important than legal action, and it is the duty of Marxists to bring the truth to the light of day.

The same goes for today in Kosovo. The January incident of alleged 'ethnic cleansing' in Racak, Kosovo, was not a massacre of civilians. Rather, according to the Milosevic government - and backed up by French investigators - the so-called 'massacre' was a military engagement between the KLA and the Yugoslav Army. The KLA tried to turn a military defeat into a political victory. They gathered up their dead, carried them to a trench, stripped off their fatigues, dressed them in civilian clothes and then called the US government officials. The Racak fabrication was meant to create the image of 'poor little Kosovo'. Unfortunately for the imperialists, it fell through due to poor organisation.

But the imperialists do not need truth on their side - only a cheap excuse.

The US bosses are working hand in hand with German imperialism in Nato. But at the same time, these two capitalist great powers are also in a fierce struggle over who is to get the spoils. The US imperialists' rush to plant both feet securely in Yugoslavia before other imperialists get there may explain why they have moved so aggressively, even before being able to secure political support at home.

The US was a 'Johnny come lately' to the civil war in Bosnia. While the US imperialists were still mulling over how lucrative a 'unified' Yugoslav market would be, the German bosses were already shuttling billions in no-interest loans to the Tudjman and Izetbegovic regimes in Croatia and Bosnia respectively. When the German imperialists began to stumble in Bosnia, the US took the lead. The trickle of arms to Croatian and Bosnian muslim forces was increased to a flood. The US even lent out the Afghan mujahedin terrorists to Izetbegovic.

Even though it was the US who brokered the Dayton 'peace' deal, the Wall Street bosses felt their interests were 'underrepresented' in Sarajevo. When the conflict in Kosovo started to warm up - even before the Bosnia civil war was over - the US made sure they would take the lead.

The end of the 'Cold War' yielded new markets ripe for plunder by the US and European imperialists. Since 1991, the western capitalists have been in a mad dash for markets in the former workers' states of eastern Europe and the former USSR. The ongoing conflict in Yugoslavia is part and parcel of this. While the bombs fly in the Balkans, the US and the European Union are gearing up for a trade war over agricultural imports.

The Marxist Workers' Group (USA) openly and forthrightly opposes imperialist action around the world. We defend Yugoslavia against imperialist aggression, as we have done in the past. The attack on Yugoslavia is designed to further imperialism's presence in the Balkans. It is essential that workers in the US oppose the imperialists' attacks on Yugoslavia. The forces behind the bombing of Belgrade are the same as those behind the breaking of strikes and the busting of unions - from the Detroit Newspapers to American Airlines.

The elements that swore to 'degrade' the Yugoslav military to the point of subservience are the same as those who swore to 'degrade' the assets of the American Airlines union to the point of being "able to fit in the overhead compartment of a Piper Cub" airplane.

For the MWG, the main enemy is not in Belgrade ... the main enemy is at home!

We seek to organise a broad working-class movement against the imperialist terror bombing of Yugoslavia. We call on working people to mobilise against the US/Nato imperialists, using the tested methods of struggle: strikes, demonstrations and 'hot cargoing' of war supplies. The fight against the US/Nato terror bombing of Yugoslavia is an international struggle. Workers around the world must join together in an international movement against imperialism and imperialist aggression.

The ongoing conflict in Yugoslavia cannot be solved by imperialist bombs any more than it can by inter-ethnic fighting. It will take a united struggle by workers throughout the Balkans to forever end the vicious circle. We fight for a socialist federation of the Balkans, part of a united socialist states of Europe and the world.

Defend Yugoslavia! Defeat US/Nato imperialism! Imperialist troops out of the Balkans!

James Paris Marxist Workers' Group (USA)

Russian threat?

Under repeated questioning from the world's media, Clinton and Blair insist that Nato's war aims can be achieved without sending in ground troops. They are fools, liars or both. If they are telling porkies, then they are gambling that, by a process of 'mission creep', they can finesse Europe into our very own Vietnam.

Either by cock-up or conspiracy, Clinton and Blair are taking an enormous gamble with the popular authority enjoyed by the western alliance. This is the real reason why so many conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic are expressing grave doubts about this war. They are no less troubled by the fact that even if the public can be persuaded to tolerate the sending of ground troops (and this seems inconceivable in the US), they would then be forced to fight for a settlement, and then administer a peace, which neither the Serbs nor the Kosovo Albanians are prepared to live with. In such an eventuality, Nato troops would be destined to be shot by both sides.

The humanitarian public relations offensive used by Clinton and Blair to bolster popular opinion carries further risks for the western powers. Whatever happens in Kosovo, pressure will surely build upon Robin Cook to take another look at how he applies his "ethical foreign policy" in other parts of the globe. Perhaps he should stop arming the genocidal regime which has, for decades, massacred the East Timorese. Perhaps he should start bombing the Indonesians instead. Given the suspicion of collusion between British security forces and loyalist death squads in the assassination of human rights lawyers in Belfast, perhaps Nato should bomb London. Nato member Turkey has surely been oppressing the Kurds for long enough. Let Nato bomb them also.

If there is no prospect of Nato bombing a nuclear power like China, Israel or Britain, the conclusion all non-nuclear powers are going to draw is not a very palatable one. Every nation state, without exception, now knows it had better develop its own nuclear defence capability. You do not have to be a socialist, or even a consistent democrat, to be worried by any of this. You just have to be capable of rational thought. And as if cued by some divine director in the sky, the Dr Strangelove, the anti-war classic par excellence, graced our screens at the weekend. It provided the timeliest possible reminder of the flaw in the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) theory of nuclear deterrents.

The pertinent question posed by Stanley Kubric was: what if those with their fingers on the button themselves go MAD? And if the drunken buffoon Yeltsin doesn't quite fit the bill, there are candidates aplenty lining up to take their turn. Paramount among them is fascist demagogue Vladimir Zhiranovsky. He, or someone equally barking, is poised to ride this tidal wave of hostility to Nato's illegal bombing of Serbia. To ride it all the way into the Kremlin.

Why would Russian generals and politicians think twice before entering this war? They can be expected to do so both to establish a level killing field for their fellow Slavs and to remind Nato that they had better stop taking Russia for granted. Threatening to throw their hat into the ring is not so much possible as inevitable. And, let us not forget, war escalation has a logic of its own - even if Clinton and his British poodle are blissfully ignorant of it. Once Russia enters the fray, military power may very well fall into the hands of those who reason along the following lines: If Russia is being elbowed off the stage of world history, then it may as well drag everyone else with it. Clinton and Blair may only be spared scathing reviews in the history books, because history books, and their subject matter, are about to go out of fashion for good.

Tom Delargy Paisley

Solidarity

The ethnic Albanians of Kosova face ethnic cleansing on a massive scale. Over 150,000 have fled Kosova in the last few days. Over 500,000 are on the move, having been threatened by Serb forces; many have been killed.

Nato has no answers. Its bombing hits Serb civilians and the political effect inside Serbia is to strengthen Milosevic's position. The bombing has given the Serb chauvinist regime an excuse to step up its terror against the Kosovars. More Nato bombing will not stop the ethnic cleansing.

We appeal to you to help set up a solidarity campaign on the following basis: Independence for Kosova! Yugoslav state out of Kosova! Nato - stop the bombing!

We do not consider 'Stop the bombing', on its own, a good enough political basis for a campaign. On its own it transforms socialists into political satellites of the Serb chauvinist state.

Mark Osborn AWL

Unwavering

Your article, 'SWP in crisis' (March 25 1999) continues a disturbing trend in the Weekly Worker's criticism of the SLP. Increasingly your polemics lack political depth and smack of nothing more than a bitter vendetta against Arthur Scargill. The dismissal of the SLP Euro-election slogan of 'Vote us in to get us out' as encapsulating a "policy little different in substance from that of the Tory rightwing Europhobes" does not constitute a critique, Marxist or otherwise, and is merely a part of the ongoing attempt to slander Scargill and the SLP as left nationalists.

Apart from the fact that the SLP's unequivocal anti-imperialist position on Ireland, the bombing of Iraq and of Yugoslavia, support for Cuba, the Kurds etc clearly reflect the party's internationalism, the policy on Europe also is unambiguous. The SLP is opposed to the EU because it is a capitalist economic and political bloc inimical to the interests of the working class both within Europe and the rest of the world. The EU is the actual concrete form taken by imperialism in post-war Europe and to oppose imperialism means opposition to the EU and all it represents.

Scargill's opposition to the EU and its predecessors has been long-standing, principled and unwavering. How could the SLP enter into an electoral slate with 'left' groups whose view of Europe is ambivalent and/or abstentionist? It is unlikely that the Socialist Alliances will get their act together to register and put up a slate anyway.

On the issue of Europe, as on many other questions vital to the class struggle, the SAs are building nothing but a Tower of Babel. They set out the same construction project, but all end up speaking a different language. They have not even agreed on the foundations yet and are unlikely to do so.

The SLP will work with anyone to support workers in struggle and the cause of oppressed people anywhere. How can this be described as "dogged sectarianism"? What the SLP will not to do is get dragged into futile electoral pacts with petty sects who are only interested in imposing their programme and poaching members. If Scargill's attempt to create a serious socialist opposition to Europe is regarded as imposing "a veto" on the arrogant, self-important workerism of dilettante groups like the AWL, then that can only enhance the "considerable resonance" which you admit is still associated with the Scargill name. This is a reflection, not of any blind adulation of "King Arthur", but a recognition of the leading role he has played in the post-war British labour movement and the organic link of Scargill's politics with the class struggle.

Theoretically refined enough for middle class 'revolutionaries' these politics may not be. And Scargill has made mistakes before and may do so again. Criticise these by all means. But to condemn his single-mindedness and devotion to socialist principles and the working class as "sectarian vanity", "intransigence" and dictatorship is an act of crass sectarianism, which benefits only those in the state out to destroy a man who is still regarded as the most dangerous single 'enemy within'.

Delphi