|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: The
Balkan Crisis
Clinton, NATO generals discuss expansion of Yugoslavia war
By Martin McLaughlin
6 May 1999
US President Bill Clinton flew to Belgium Wednesday for talks
with top NATO officials, including General Wesley Clark, the commander
of the air war against Yugoslavia, amid press reports that the
US and NATO are planning intervention with ground troops in Kosovo
no later than July.
Few details were made public about the substance of the talks
at NATO headquarters in Brussels, but the clear purpose of the
trip is to reaffirm and expand the US-NATO war in the Balkans.
Clinton followed up the Brussels meeting with a speech to US soldiers
at Ramstein Air Force Base in Germany, where he reiterated the
goal of expelling all Serbian and Yugoslav military forces from
the province of Kosovo and declared, "We will continue to
pursue this campaign in which we are now engaged. We will intensify
it in an unrelenting way until these objectives are met.''
General Clark said that NATO warplanes had stepped up their
air strikes in the 48 hours since the release of three American
soldiers captured by the Yugoslav Army. The heaviest bombing was
in Kosovo province, but the city of Novi Sad, the country's third
largest and the capital of Vojvodina province, was also hard hit.
Bombs and missiles hit the city's television station, power plants,
oil refinery and factories.
American media coverage of the war is so one-sided that it
fails to convey the vast scale of the destruction inflicted by
the air war on the people of Yugoslavia. According to General
Klaus Naumann, military adviser to NATO Secretary-General Javier
Solana, US and NATO warplanes have dropped 15,000 bombs and missiles
in the 42 days since the attacks began, on a country with the
size and population of the state of Ohio.
With the size of a bomb or missile warhead ranging from 500
to 2,000 pounds, this means that between 4,000 and 15,000 tons
of explosive have already been expended--an amount equivalent
to the atomic bomb which the United States dropped on Hiroshima.
Opposition in Europe
The catastrophic impact of the bombing campaign has fueled
a growing hostility towards the United States in Europe. The widespread
opposition to the war, especially in Germany, is virtually unknown
to the American public. Two significant events took place during
the demonstrations and ceremonies over May Day.
Oscar Lafontaine, the former chairman of the ruling Social
Democratic Party, spoke out publicly against the war in front
of a working class audience, and was widely supported. Lafontaine
resigned his post as Finance Minister of Germany only a week before
the launching of the war, virtually without explanation.
At another workers' rally, Defense Minister Rudolf Scharping,
another leading Social Democrat, was shouted down and called a
murderer. Scharping has been the most strident defender of the
bombing campaign, in which German warplanes are participating,
in their first military action since World War II.
Clinton's trip was motivated in large part by the need to counter
the deep disquiet, nervousness and even outright opposition to
the war which is emerging in Europe, where it is widely believed
that the decision by NATO to go to war in the Balkans is a mistake
of catastrophic proportions.
Or worse, so disastrous has been the outcome of the air war
and so crude the supposed "miscalculations"--i.e., about
the consequences of bombing for the Kosovar Albanians--that in
some circles the conviction is growing that the United States
deliberately engineered the collapse of the Rambouillet talks
and the showdown with Yugoslavia in order to draw the European
countries into a war which they had long resisted, and which serves
the long term interests of America, not Europe.
One German newspaper commentator observed that the broader
American design appeared to be to transform NATO into a "deputy
for the American sheriff," so that the alliance would become
active in any part of the world where its interests--as defined
by the United States--were at stake.
The response of the United States and Britain to such concerns
has been to escalate both the rhetorical onslaught against the
government of President Slobodan Milosevic and the scale of military
operations. Ominously, three separate press reports Wednesday
suggested that the US was now moving towards the launching of
a ground war against Yugoslavia.
Wednesday's issue of the Wall Street Journal carried
an article describing in some detail the methods by which 60,000
NATO troops, 20,000 of them American, would enter Kosovo once
bombing was deemed to have sufficiently worn down the resistance
of the Yugoslav Army, creating what was described as a "semi-permissive"
environment--i.e., without any negotiated agreement with the government
of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic.
The "concept of operations," a general outline of
the plan, was said to be the subject of discussion in the Clark-Clinton
talks in Brussels. Combat troops would be flown into Kosovo by
helicopter to bypass roads and bridges either destroyed by bombing
or mined by the Yugoslav military. Bases in both Albania and Macedonia
would be utilized for the forced entry, while other NATO troops
would be positioned in Hungary, Bulgaria and aboard ships in the
Adriatic Sea, to keep Belgrade guessing about the direction of
the coming attack.
Occupation of Kosovo would be followed by weeks of military
operations against the Yugoslav Army and any Serb civilians who
resisted the NATO force. The Journal said that the invasion
would have to begin by late July so that the province could be
completely "pacified" before weather conditions became
too difficult.
CNN carried a similar report on its broadcasts and website
Wednesday, describing the 60,000 troops as double the size of
the 28,000 soldiers proposed as a NATO occupation force under
the Rambouillet accords signed by NATO and the KLA but rejected
by Yugoslavia. This report attributed the much greater number
of troops, not to expected resistance by Yugoslavia, but to the
requirements for engineering and road and bridge repair to make
troop movements in the province possible.
The third report came in the annual review of the London-based
Institute for International Strategic Studies, a hawkish study
group which was highly critical of the Clinton administration
for ruling out ground troops in the initial stages of the war.
The IISS said that at least 60,000 troops would be required in
the initial stages of an invasion of Kosovo, a military operation
which would have to get underway by late July in order to be completed
before the onset of winter weather.
These accounts are strikingly similar, both in the number of
troops anticipated and in the late July deadline given as the
last possible time to begin the ground war. There is no doubt
that, while perhaps containing a considerable amount of disinformation
about specific details, especially the timing, these reports suggest
the direction which US and NATO policy is now heading.
A ground war could begin much earlier than these reports suggest--as
early as the second week of June, according to Jane's Defence
Weekly. The British publication quoted retired US military
officers who said that it would require only 30 days to move additional
troops, vehicles and helicopters to the region from bases in Germany
and the United States. There are already nearly 30,000 US and
European troops in Albania and Macedonia, and another 15,000 deployed
as a peacekeeping force in Bosnia, on Yugoslavia's western border.
The number of troops could also be much higher than 60,000.
Earlier US scenarios for a ground war in the Balkans called for
100,000 troops to seize Kosovo--against the anticipated opposition
of 40,000 Yugoslav soldiers in the province--and 200,000 or more
to go all the way to Belgrade.
The US-NATO bombing raids triggered the unprecedented exodus
of refugees from Kosovo and spread political instability and crisis
throughout the Balkans--precisely the outcome which Clinton claimed
the bombing would prevent. There is no reason to believe that
the war planners in Washington and Brussels can foresee the outcome
of a ground war with any greater foresight than they exhibited
in launching the air war.
The reckless escalation of military violence by American imperialism,
backed by its European allies, presages a conflagration on a far
wider scale than that which is already underway, threatening even
a confrontation between the US and Russia, the two principal nuclear
powers. A ground war in the Balkans would have incalculable but
surely devastating consequences, for the people of Yugoslavia,
of the Balkans, of Europe and the world.
See Also:
The fraud of NATO humanitarianism
What are the reasons for the war in Yugoslavia?
[5 May 1999]
Wall Street celebrates stepped-up bombing
of Serbia
[5 May 1999]
Blair outlines his vision
of the new military world order
[29 April 1999]
The Munich Agreement and the
US-NATO war against Yugoslavia: The real lessons of appeasement
in the 1930s
[23 April 1999]
War in
the Balkans
[WSWS Full Coverage]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |