|
WSWS : Readers'
forums :
US-NATO
attack Yugoslavia
Two Wrongs Don't Make a Right: A Cartographer's View of the
Yugoslav War
By Zoltan Grossman
20 April 1999
The brutal ethnic cleansing underway in Kosovo and the NATO
bombing of Yugoslavia seem on the surface to be mutually contradictory
forms of violence. NATO claims the bombing is a "humanitarian
intervention" to prevent the sort of ethnic cleansing that
has escalated since the air strikes began, and claims that it
favors a multiethnic future for Kosovo and the rest of the Balkans.
Yet the recent history of the region shows that NATO has not only
failed to prevent ethnic cleansing and ethnic partition, but has
itself helped to recarve new ethnic boundaries in the Balkans.
The map of the Balkans has changed several times in this century
as a result of war. Secessions from the Ottoman Empire before
World War I, and from the Austro- Hungarian Empire during the
war, led to the creation of Yugoslavia in 1918. (Even the name
"land of the South Slavs" omitted Albanians.) During
World War II, Axis powers redrew the map to divide Yugoslavia
along ethnic lines, at the same time as they interned many Serbs
and Jews in concentration camps. Croatia seceded to become a German
satellite state, and annexed Bosnia. The Italian colony of Albania
annexed Kosovo. Hungary and Montenegro also annexed parts of Serbia.
Yugoslavia reassembled its constituent parts after 1945, but
never resolved the bitterness left by the war. As the country
has fallen apart in the 1990s, the map of the region increasingly
resembles the map of the early 1940s. Croatia is again independent,
and controls part of Bosnia. Ethnic Albanians in Kosovo want independence,
and Montenegro may be next. In this process, Americans want to
see "white hats" and "black hats," but the
reality we can only see "gray hats," with ethnic cleansing
affecting civilians of all ethnic groups.
*In Croatia in 1991, secession from Yugoslavia ignited a war
with the Croatian Serb minority. A 1995 offensive by the Croatian
Army ethnically cleansed at least 100,000 Serbs from the Krajina
region, where they had lived for centuries. Washington not only
failed to object to the violent ethnic cleansing, but helped facilitate
it. Retired U.S. generals had trained the Croatians, and the U.S.
Air Force bombed a Serb airfield in Croatia on the eve of the
offensive into Krajina and western Bosnia. Many of the expelled
Serbs were resettled in Kosovo, exacerbating the ethnic tensions
that have now erupted into war.
*In Bosnia in 1995, the Croatian victory over the Serbs, along
with Serb cleansing of Muslim communities, helped set the stage
for the Dayton Accords. In Dayton, the U.S. rubber-stamped the
de facto ethic partition of the country, dooming any hope for
a multiethnic future that includes Muslims, Croats and Serbs.
Bosnia retains a fictive independence as a NATO "protectorate,"
with Westerners at the helm of its political and economic structures.
But the two sections of Bosnia now have two currencies, two political
systems, and two armies, linked to Croatia or Serbia. Croatian
President Franjo Tudjman and Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic
split Bosnia between them in 1995 much as Hitler and Stalin divided
Poland in 1939.
*Now in Yugoslavia in 1999, we are told that NATO bombers are
attacking Milosevic and "the Serbs." Yet the bombs have
fallen on neutral Montenegro, ethnic Albanian Kosovo, the ethnically
Hungarian northern region of Vojvodina, and Serbian democratic
opposition cities such as Nis. The war may yet result in the ethnic
partition of what remains of Yugoslavia into two or three countries.
In another scenario, Milosevic may decide to give up Kosovo to
NATO, in return for taking full control over Montenegro, or even
formally annexing the Serb region of Bosnia.
Two wrongs don't make a right. NATO bombing and Serbian ethnic
cleansing are not proving to be in contradiction to each other.
As Commanding General Wesley Clark has said, the Serbian offensive
against Kosovo civilians was "entirely predictable."
The bombing did not prevent the cleansing, but served as a catalyst
for a self-fulfilling prophecy. The two forms of violence are
mutually reinforcing, and feed off of each other in numerous ways.
They may also result in the same outcome: the redrawing of the
map of Yugoslavia into small and powerless ethnic enclaves.
For the past decade, the U.S. could have backed the efforts
of the Serbian opposition and Albanian civil resistance, but waited
until war broke out to pay attention. We should listen to the
anti-Milosevic Serbs who oppose the bombings (and other Milosevic
critics such as parts of the Serbian Orthodox Church), and the
Albanians who tried to avoid war. We should support a settlement
of the conflict, through the United Nations rather than only NATO
and Belgrade.
Zoltan Grossman is a Wisconsin professional cartographer
and doctoral student in Geography, who writes on issues of
geopolitics and indigenous peoples. zoltan@geography.wisc.edu
608-246-2256
Links opposing both Milosevic's ethnic cleansing and NATO's
bombing campaign:
Institute for Public
Accuracy
Z Magazine--Kosovo
page
The
Nation--Kosovo Destroyed
The Progressive
Common Dreams-- News
and Views for Progressives
War Resisters League
International Action Center
A Century of
U.S. Interventions--from Wounded Knee to Yugoslavia
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |