NATO threatens air strikes against Serbia. Richard Holbrooke continues discussions with Milosevic. These two courses of action are inextricably linked. Both are designed to impose a solution on Kosova's Albanian majority a long way short of self-determination. Socialist Outlook is totally opposed to NATO attacks on Serbia, despite our hostility to the brutal Milosevic regime. NATO is an imperialist political and military alliance: its role is to make the world safe for capitalism. It never has been, and never will be, an agency for 'peace' or 'democracy'.
Opposition to 'repressive' regimes has never figured highly in NATO's aims. We understand why many Kosovars, who have suffered the brutality of Milosevic's troops, would like NATO air-strikes on Belgrade, and even why many supporters of the Kosova struggle in the west support this. However, they are profoundly wrong. NATO intervention whether military or political is directed primarily against the major demand of the Kosovars - the right to independence. This is demonstrated by Richard Holbrooke's plan for 'autonomy' in Kosova, which would have given Kosovars less autonomy than they NATO's man for stability: Slobodan Milosevic enjoyed under Tito and left them at the mercy of a Serb dominated police force.
This was so unlikely to be accepted by even the most moderate Albanians that Holbrooke didn't even bother showing his plan to a single Kosova Albanian.
As far as he was concerned, the fate of the Albanian population was simply a matter to be discussed between himself and Milosevic. Albanian hostility forced Holbrooke to modify this plan and remove the proposal for a largely Serb police force.
UN resolutions and NATO statements show that military threats are not solely directed at Milosevic. They call on both sides to cease armed actions.
Earlier this year Holbrooke was arguing that the KLA were not 'terrorists' and had to be included in any talks. Today the KLA have become terrorists again in his eyes and are being sidelined in favour of the self-styled President of Kosova, the pacifist Ibrahim Rugova.
The KLA has recently announced a unilateral cease-fire. This may be an astute political move on their part, focusing attention on Serbian responsibility for continuing violence. It may reflect a genuine desire for peace by Kosovars.
At the same time it is a recognition of their military weakness, both against Milosevic and - even more so - against NATO. The KLA cease-fire is, in essence, imposed by NATO.
We should not however denounce the KLA for calling off their armed struggle: the Kosovar people have the right to conduct their struggle by peaceful as well as military means.
We do reject the right of NATO to force the KLA to abandon armed struggle. An active, armed KLA is a major stumbling block to western policy: imposing a 'solution' within the framework of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. This is surely one reason why NATO threatens strikes now, when it hopes the KLA have been defeated by Serbia. No western government has even hinted that it would consider the creation of an independent Kosova state. On this central question there is full agreement between the west and Milosevic. Against independence NATO military intervention -especially if it included ground 'troops - would be directed primarily to ensuring Kosova never achieved independence. NATO rhetoric may be directed at Milosevic at the moment. There may even be some limited military actions, designed to push Milosevic into making sufficient concessions to the Kosova Albanian majority to undermine support for independence. NATO's and Milosevic's aims are not opposed: they are fundamentally the same. NATO does not seek the overthrow of Milosevic. It desperately needs him to restore 'stability' in the region. NATO simply wants him to be a bit more compliant. In many ways the current sabre rattling has little to do with Kosova. Nor is it merely an attempt by Clinton to divert attention from his domestic problems in the hope of Democratic Party success in the November 3 elections. The major problem for the west is that its imposed solution in Bosnia is in danger of falling apart. Bosnia is of much greater concern than Kosova. The recent Bosnian elections saw a rise in support for Serb nationalists in the Serb 'entity' with a member of the extreme right-wing Serbian Radical Party winning the election for President.
The Dayton accords, which allowed for the imposition of 'peace' on Bosnia, require Milosevic to play the key role in limiting Serb nationalist demands. Indeed, Dayton was impossible without a major role for Milosevic. That has not changed. NATO threats against Milosevic are simply designed to show him who is boss and to encourage him to act 'responsibly' again, so he can resume his allotted role in maintaining the effective partition of Bosnia imposed at Dayton.
The people of Kosova would be well advised to consider the devastation wreaked by Dayton on Bosnia before supporting NATO intervention in their affairs.