The leading countries of NATO are said to have agreed to an UN-lead force. Seemingly, they have given up the immediate demand for an occupation force for Kosovo controlled by NATO and moreover for occupation rights for the whole of Serbia. Thus the Rambouillet treaty which was the starting point for the bombing is no longer upheld in its immediate form. This is being celebrated as a success of diplomacy. But it is the question if this is really a success of diplomacy.

If now the UN gets into action upon the fundament of what NATO has in fact done, namely to destroy Serbia‘s civil industry, it will provide a retrospective legitimation for this aggression and a stimulus to repeat similar behavior in the future. NATO has bombed with the demands of Rambouillet and now wants to very simply continue under the official leadership of the UN.

If the Russian diplomacy which is under financial pressure from the West now gives in in this matter and seemingly creates a solution, but in fact helps the fathers of this crime out of the jam, one should not forget that NATO has plans which reach far beyond Serbia and threaten in particular also Russia itself. One should be grateful to the small Serbian people of 10 millions for so decidedly having resisted the pressure up to now, and in doing so to have laid open NATO‘s intentions as in a showcase in front of a multitude of peoples and nations. This might be important also for Russia.

If now Serbia is diplomatically isolated, this is just a momentary success which in the further development will lead to the biggest disadvantages, particularly also for Russia and all those threatened by NATO. One must not have illusions about NATO‘s intentions. It is not at all about the refugees‘ movement in Kosovo, it is about bringing under its control, in the end, the whole substantial nuclear and other highly-developed military potential. Did NATO not start also a cooperation with Russia, accompanied by promising phrases - and what has become of it today? Beyond all of this cooperation such wars are lead, and, if need be, even in the contact group Russia is simply left outside. The minimum which must be achieved is that the responsible people of the UN officially distance themselves from NATO‘s aggression, otherwise the UN‘s activity is worthless, otherwise it will even retrospectively legitimate he aggression. At least the NATO aggressors must demonstratively not be allowed to have a decisive part in the UN‘s intervention force. The extraordinary efforts of the German diplomacy which is needed also by the US and Great Britain who in the same time are acting as the inexorables, should give the cause to this unequivocal demand. We do not hope that Serbia‘s spirit of resistance which increasingly is looked upon with esteem by the peoples, causes fear in the circles of the Russian government and diplomacy.

The denounciation also of the organs of UN which are silent in face of the NATO aggression or even further the break of the UN charter, has by far not been sufficient. Especially in the case of aggression those who are treading softly and are watering down the resistance are acting a very dangerous role. 

Editorial staff of Neue Einheit
Originally published in German, May 6, 1999