Вновь о Косово
часть 1
источник: https://wou.edu/history/files/2015/08/Francesca-Morrison.pdf
Francesca E. Morrison
Paramilitaries, Propaganda, and Pipelines The NATO Attack on Kosovo and Serbia, 1999
“The light shone by the media is not the regular sweep of the lighthouse, but a random searchlight directed at the whim of its controllers.”
Former British Foreign Secretary Lord Douglas Hurd
When NATO launched Operation Allied Force against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in the late afternoon of 24 March, 1999, American television screens were filled with images of mass graves, rape victims, and thousands of evacuees fleeing the Yugoslav military. Somber reporters confirmed that there was no alternative to war: diplomacy had been attempted, and had failed. NATO leaders had worked with Balkan leaders to find a peaceful end to the tensions at the Rambouillet Conference but Slobodan Milosevic, the FRY President, had refused to accept the terms. He had left the negotiation table and a humanitarian catastrophe was looming ahead.
There are many Western sources that justify the NATO attack against Serbia in 1999 on moralistic, humanitarian grounds; however, there are an ever increasing number of new opinions that are defying these grand narratives and their images of one-sided genocide and human rights atrocities. These new sources discuss pipelines, politics, and paramilitaries, and offer new perspectives regarding the New York public relations firm, Ruder Finn, and how it manipulated the US public, and the US media, into supporting the attack on Serbia and Kosovo, based on humanitarian grounds.
The US and NATO had a different motive for the attack. Their agenda was to establish a security corridor for pipelines to transport oil from the Caspian Sea, through the Balkan region and onto the Mediterranean. (see map 1) This quest for oil would bring the U.S. government into a ring of drug cartels, liars, known terrorists, and armed insurgencies, and may also have jeopardized U.S. national security by installing permanent bases in the Balkans.
Interviews with Rudder Finn, the media firm in New York, who were hired by the Kosovo Liberation Army, (KLA) acknowledge that the ultimate goal of the KLA marketing campaign was for NATO military intervention against Serbia, independence for Kosovo Albanians, and the re-establishment of a Greater Albania. (See map 2).
Other interviews that demonstrate this manipulation by Ruder Finn include confessions of captured KLA members. They admit that human rights atrocities were being committed equally by both Serbians and Albanians alike. New research into the KLA underground reveals that they have established financial and political networks throughout the world and are supported by politicians, drug dealers, and even Osama Bin Laden. These contacts supply the KLA terrorists with money, weapons, intelligence, or training.
Eye witness accounts from NATO forces allege that the KLA staged attacks for the US media cameras in order to gain US public support for the attack on Serbians. Racak, in Kosovo, is one such staged attack. The media reported that a massacre had taken place however, when the truth later surfaced, it revealed that bodies had probably been relocated from the region to Racak, and that the bodies were probably dead soldiers. The event was considered staged by experts however, the media omitted to inform the US public that the Albanians were fabricating such genocide scenes to manipulate popular opinion.
Public opinion to support the attack was vital and, hence, politicians and profiteers have endeavored to hide the critical truth that military security was key to the success of the pipelines in the Balkans. Without it, potential investors would not be satisfied that the oil would be safe from sabotage as it crossed the region and therefore could not commit. These investors and corporations were eager to solve the security issue, build the pipeline and share in the profits. Large contracts, worth billions, were awarded based on the US and NATO’s attack and occupation of Kosovo. Camp Bondsteel, the largest US military base built since Vietnam, was to be built in Kosovo and other contracts were awarded for other military bases across the Balkans and in Albania. A security platform would be brought to the region: a protectorate for the trans-Balkan pipeline and huge profits for Halliburton and its subsidiaries.
An examination of sources reveals that Serbia and Kosovo were attacked by the US, and NATO, ultimately to ensure access to oil reserves in the Caspian Sea. With Russian and Greek competition for oil pipelines across the region, speed was of the essence to establish routes. So, when the experienced Ruder Finn presented an account of genocide at Racak, in January 1999, that outraged the US public into supporting an attack on Serbians, the US government was grateful for the genocide angle but they already had a plan anyway.
President Bill Clinton’s administration had already decided to attack Kosovo. On May 18, 1999, less than one month after the attack, Jim Jatras, a foreign policy aide to Senate Republicans, reported in a speech at the Cato Institute in Washington D.C., that he had it "on good authority" that a "senior Administration official told media at Rambouillet, that "We [the USA] intentionally set the bar too high for the Serbs to comply. They need some bombing, and that's what they are going to get."[1] pre-planned that the diplomatic negotiations for peace at the Rambouillet conference would fail on 23 March, 1999, and that the bombing of Serbia and Kosovo would take place, without NATO approval, the very next day. Serbia had declined occupation of their sovereign state in a previous peace negotiation: they would refuse it again.
Paramilitaries, propaganda, and pipelines were critical influences upon the decision by NATO to bomb Serbia and Kosovo for 78 days. Approximately 2,500 people were killed from the NATO bombs, including 557 civilians, and over 12,000 were wounded. Material damage was estimated at $100 billion. [2] The US government, the Kosovo Liberation Army, international oil companies and politicians were all involved in the decision to bomb, yet remarkably, they all had their own specific agendas, each with independent motivations and long term goals.
The memories of the brutal Bosnian war of March 1992 - November 1995 were still vivid in the minds of the US public and the scenes from Kosovo being shown on the television and in newsprint were the same images of empty homes, destroyed villages, and refugees carrying children and suitcases, that had left 200,000 dead and 2 million displaced. [3] The attack on Serbia and Kosovo was needed however, as justification for American soldiers to be stationed in the Balkan region. This was the critical component of security in the region in order to satisfy the fears, and to encourage the foreign oil investors. If the US press and therefore the people of the US had not been manipulated by Ruder Finn, employed by the KLA, into believing that there was a one-sided genocide taking place, there would have been no bombing of Kosovo or Serbia. The attack was created by public relations manipulation and was not for genocide reasons. Inspired to help the Albanian Kosovars escape the clutches of Milosevic, whose Yugoslav military forces were supposedly committing genocide and other unprovoked violent acts, the US people chose to support Clinton’s new doctrine and the attack on Serbia: they believed they were preventing a humanitarian catastrophe, not supporting a corporate security decision.
President Bill Clinton, had visited Kigali, Rwanda, in March, 1998, and had become the first US leader to apologize to the Rwandans for the failure of his own administration to intervene in the ethnic slaughter of up to 1 million people . [4] The United States generally avoided intervention in the internal affairs of sovereign nations, especially in secessionist issues, regardless of any human-rights issues. Clinton, however developed, a bold new doctrine that urged intervention in order to prevent such crimes…"where our values and our interests are at stake." [5] The US intervened in the Balkans for oil values and corporate interests. Serbia already had allegiance with Russia: the US had no alternative than to build the pipeline to the Mediterranean through Albania.
The American Association of Jurists, (AAJ) a non-government association with consultative rights before the United Nations, along with a body of lawyers and law professionals in Toronto, Canada. Recognizing these interests on May 7, 1999, as the bombs of this great NATO action fell onto innocent civilians, the AAJ laid a complaint before the War Crimes Tribunal in Brussels. They charged President Clinton, Prime Minister Blaire of the UK, and all the NATO leaders with "willful killing, willfully causing great suffering … serious injury to body or health, …employment of poisonous weapons…[all] to cause unnecessary suffering, …not justified by military necessity, attack, or bombardment, by whatever means.” [6] This professional body of educated middle class North Americans sought legal accountability for the NATO actions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY), which they perceived as aggressive, and more importantly, illegal. [7]
The AAJ’s opinion was one of many heard as the world considered the roles of the US government, the KLA, the media, and NATO in the attack on Kosovo: scholars and historians alike are still scrutinizing the realities behind the events. The immediate reports and analysis’ issued after the attack mostly came from journalists and must be considered bias themselves, for the journalists and media were manipulated by the Ruder Finn-KLA campaign too. Also, journalists were not familiar with the historical, political or financial depth of the Kosovo attack. Five narratives; three books, a documentary, a journal essay, and an interview with a Bulgarian student, have been considered in order to understand the manipulation of, and the role of, the media in the attack on Kosovo and Serbia in March, 1999.
The first, “Spinning Kosovo: Media and Propaganda in a Post Modern War”, by Srdjan Stojanovic, [8] a journalist at the London School of Economics, who lives both in London and Yugoslavia, explores the influence of the new media on war. He argues that the Kosovo war was the first international conflict to be fought on the Internet, the airwaves and on the television screens, and questions the moral and political aspects of this approach of media war.
In a personal interview with former British Foreign Secretary Lord David Owen, less than a week before the NATO bombing started, Stojanovic establishes that even without the necessary UN Security Council Resolution, the intervention would go on; that NATO had already decided to go to war, and that the traditional media was simply trying to form public opinion by using television reports of Albanians being murdered by Serbian soldiers.
Stojanovic questions the policies of the US media networks that, in 1998, reported that the KLA was a terrorist and Muslim organization, supported by organized crime with “established links with Osama Bin Laden,” [9] yet, in 1999, the same media networks dropped the Muslim reference and exchanged it for “an ally inside Kosovo.” [10] Stojanovic continues to identify, and to place blame on, America’s “bold and inconsiderate actions and conduct [which] undermine the whole international order …and their flawed US policies [make] media manipulation necessary to cover dubious actions” [11] while solving none of the problems. Stojanovic recognizes the manipulation, however, he assumes that the media networks are aligned with the US government when they were in fact a part of the manipulative plan of Ruder Finn: the government was simply allowing the manipulation to perpetuate because they already had the Rambouillet plan.
Stojanovic’s resources include interviews with government officials, including Margaret Thatcher, many monographs from historians, and reports from such journalists as Tim Marshall (Sky News), Brent Saddler (CNN), and Tom Walker (The Times). “Spinning Kosovo” is an informed report and concludes that the media are poised to “transform in to tools of propaganda, promoters of dubious national interests [and] fierce proponents of very undemocratic actions”. [12]
Although Stojanovic identifies the media networks as “tools of propaganda” he does not illuminate the benefits of such manipulated publicity or that US trade embargos, placed upon Serbia, prevented FRY from employing a public relations corporation: a critical fact which Michael Ignatieff, a London-based journalist, discusses.
In his book, “Virtual War”, Ignatieff identifies Milosevic’s plight of no media propaganda and brilliantly notes that when NATO bombs hit the Belgrade Television and Radio station on April 23, Milosevic surprised the world by inviting CNN and the BBC to broadcast the disastrous event, which killed 14 people, in order to gain some media influence and, hence, popular support for Serbia.
Ignatieff argues that Serbian intelligence had identified the station as a target for NATO prior to the attack because many journalists had started to utilize its technological resources and transmit contradictory images of the situation in Kosovo to the west which would not be good for the US-NATO image. He also argues that Milosevic was playing the same game of virtual war when some employees were ordered, by Serbian leaders, to stay in the building for the sole purpose of having innocent victims when the attack came: “instead of fighting NATO in the air he [Milosevic] fought NATO on the air-waves”. [13]
By having the devastating images of NATO bombing Serbian civilians broadcast throughout the west by CNN and the BBC, Milosevic attempted to represent a challenge to the humanitarian philosophy of the KLA-Ruder Finn campaign and, therefore, destabilize and deflect Western public opinion to the Serbian side, or to at least discredit the fabricated good-NATO, bad-Serbian, image.
Ignatieff’s argues that history is wrought with propaganda and modern wars, like Kosovo, are dependent upon the techniques of modern media. When viewed on the screen, like a video game, full of manipulations and technical strategies, Ignatieff states that media manipulation acts as a blinker on the Western spectators’ opinion and creates a virtual war: a surreal experience.
Although Ignatieff supports his arguments with many political opinions, through a barrage of quotes, and interviews with the major players of the Kosovo crisis, which includes US negotiator Richard Holbrook, US General Wesley Clark, and British Prime Minister Tony Blaire. He interjects their official agenda reports with accounts from witnesses, nationals, and from members of the international media, including Tom Ricks of the Wall Street Journal; Glyn Jones of the BBC; and from NATO members, such as Paul Risley from The Hague. He does not explain however, why, once the truth of manipulations and lies, and the reality of civilian deaths and injustice on both sides was exposed, the media did not seek to find the whole truth but instead continued to promote the lies of genocide.
George Bogdanich, a documentary filmmaker from New York, and Martin Lettmayer, a German television producer based in Munich, sought further details about the attack on Kosovo and produced a provocative documentary, “Yugoslavia: The Avoidable War.” [14] They argue that the war in Kosovo could have been avoided and implicate Western media sources for their role in, and their perpetuation of, the multi-ethnic cleansing tragedy of Kosovo.
Winner of "Best Social Documentary" at the New York International Independent Film and Video Festival, the documentary exposes the manipulation of news coverage by all involved in Kosovo. Explosive and brutal footage and interviews with renowned journalists, such as David Binder of the New York Times, and scholars like Susan Woodward and Ted Galen Carpenter, explore the reasoning for manipulative propaganda techniques needed to justify the war by NATO.
Lettmayer and Bogdanich’s editing technique is critical as it clearly reveals contradictions and obvious lies that offer a deeper level of understanding of the KLA’s political agenda, of independence, that promoted the whole bloody and painful political strategy of Kosovo. An example of this editing is the US Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, talking to CNN, in February 1999, claiming 80,000 Muslim deaths in genocide attacks by Serbians, as she reports to the US public the need for humanitarian intervention. This footage was immediately followed by a NATO report claiming only 2,246 deaths and 3,800 missing persons in Kosovo, including all ethnic groups. Allbright had no evidence to support her claim, yet the media were broadcasting it as fact, without research or collaborating facts, which is supposedly a part of their responsibility.
This documentary agrees that the media played a critical role for the Clinton administration by manipulating them, through images and distorted facts, to believe that there was genocide being committed in Kosovo by the Serbs only. The documentary is enriched with resources from NATO documents, interviews with Sir Michael Rose (former Military Correspondent), and former Pentagon Chief of Staff General Colin Powell. It proves many tragedies, not before mentioned, such as the US involvement in the Racak tragedy and the extreme illegal actions the Muslim leaders took there in order to win the media war against Serbia.
The documentary’s argument is that the media was critical to the perception of good Albanians over evil Serbians and, therefore, responsible for creating a bias against the Serbians in Kosovo. The US, NATO, Serbian, and Muslim leaders were victims and perpetrators alike: Serbs murder Albanians, US stealth bombers destroyed civilian trains and murdered Serbians, and Albanians dress their dead militia in civilian clothes to imply unjustified murder by Serbs. Each side claims innocence and points to the next while people are deceived in order to justify huge profits from the oil in the Caspian Sea.
Lettmayer and Bogdanich’s documentary clearly exposed the thesis that all parties were guilty of foul play in the war in Kosovo, and that the Clinton administration did not attack Kosovo for humanitarian reasons, however, like most narratives on the subject, they omitted to explain that the reason for the attack was to establish US and NATO troops in the region as a protectorate for Caspian oil.
Bulent Gokay, a Senior lecturer at Kelle University, makes this connection and also explains that the dismantling of the USSR, in 1991, released the oil-rich nations around the Caspian Sea from Russian grip and, therefore, transformed global politics. Gokay acknowledges that “a race has begun amongst the powerful transnational corporations of the world” [15] and that “the US administration sees its military might as a trump card …over its rivals in the struggle for political hegemony and resources.” [16]
Gokay does not establish the willingness of the US to use this military “trump card” as a deterrent for terrorists along the AMBO pipeline. However, the US Secretary of Energy, Bill Richardson, acknowledged the security issue in November of 1998, when he said “this is about America’s energy security…we’ve made a substantional political investment in the Caspian and it’s very important to us that both the pipeline map and the politics come out right.” [17] US military presence was going to ensure the investments of the pipeline and politics came out right.
Other forms of investments were also coming from the US. In her book, “Be Not Afraid For You Have Sons In America,” Stacy Sullivan, a thirty-six-year-old journalist who reported on the Balkan wars for Newsweek, reveals an entire network, based in New York, that raises millions of dollars every year for the KLA. In interviews with Albanian Kosovars, who are now US citizens, Sullivan uncovered the plan that “… the West will come round to the idea of a democratic and independent Kosovo…we collect $365 million dollars a year in the United States alone” says Harry Bajraktari, who sells real estate in New York. This money buys Radio Shack walkie-talkies, US army surplus clothing, and US-made high powered sniper rifles which he transports via Albania, to his family clan, for the guerrillas, in Kosovo. [18]
Although Sullivan misses the oil connection, she reveals critical details regarding the political network of the group, which, headed by Florin Krassniqi, an Albanian who fled Kosovo in 1988 and who actively lobbies powerful American politicians to support the Albanian struggle against Serbia. Both Wesley Clark and Richard Holbrooke, and some of Washington’s most powerful politicians, recently attended one of their fundraising events, in 2005, which raised $30 million, money which was used for lobbying efforts. The KLA know that to get independence in Kosovo, they need the influence of US Senators.
продолжение - часть 2
[1] Seth Ackerman, “What Reporters Knew about Kosovo Talks.” Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting. June 1999. http://www.fair.org/press-releases/kosovo-talks.html
[2] Glas Javnosti, “Milosevic Found Dead in his Cell.” Kosovo News. March 2007 http://www.kosovo.net/news/archive/2007/March_25/1.htm
[3] Breaking News English. Milosevic War Crimes. March 2006.
http://www.breakingnewsenglish.com/0603/060312-milosevic-e.html
[4] Frank Smyth. The Genocide Doctrine. May 1999. http://www.franksmyth.com/A5584C/clients/franksmyth/frankS2.nsf/3f410d0a3f7450d885256b6c0 0561187/492 36a501337c1c685256b7b007906a7?OpenDocument
[5] Smyth.
[6] Ministry of Foreign Affairsof FR Yugoslavia. “International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.” http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/icty.htm.
[7] Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair. “NATO War Crimes Complaint Filed.” Counter Punch.1999. http://www.counterpunch.org/natocrimespr.html.
[8] Srdjan D. Stojanovic, “Spinning Kosovo: Media and Propaganda is a Post Modern War”, The Center for Peace in the Balkan, 1999, 13 March 2000, http://www.balkanpeace.org/library/spinn1.html.>
[9] Ibid., 3.
[10] Ibid., 3.
[11] Stojanovic, , 8.
[12] Ibid.,10.
[13] Michael Ignatieff, Virtual War: Kosovo and Beyond. Los Angeles: Graphics Management Press, 1999. p.52.
[14] “Yugoslavia: The Avoidable War”, produced by George Bogdanich and Martin Lettmayer, 3 hours, Films for the Humanities and Sciences, 2002, videocassette.
[15] Gokay, Bulent, “Introduction: oil, war and geopolitics from Kosovo to Afghanistan”, in B. Gokay (ed.), The Politics of Caspian Oil, Palagrave, Basingstoke, 2001, 6.
[16] Gokay, 9.
[17] George Monbiot, “A discreet Deal in the Pipeline.” The Guradian Newspapers Limited, February 15, 2001, page 24 http://web.lexisnexis.com/universe/document_m=10a7e20a6490880248bbcea6406533
[18] US News and World Report, 03/01/99, vol. 126 issue 8, P42, 2/3P, 1