<nettime> hidden agendas and Kosovo

[Geert Jan Kraan <gkraan@usa.net>]

Dear list,

Here's something from another list which might interest you.

Kind regards,

Geert Jan Kraan
--------

SECRET STRATEGIES ON KOSOVO

By Mishel Collon

Why is Kosovo on the agenda again? What are the Great powers'
real aims in
this region? And are they the ones we are being told about?

The Kosovo internal problems can not be apprehended without
analyzing the
Great powers' secret strategies towards the entire Balkans. Our
text is
therefore going to clarify two questions:

1) What are Bonn and Washington common goals?

2) Where do the interests of these two powers collide?

Let us first look into the theory of "fire fighters" =85 WE are being
told
that the western powers intervene in the Balkans in order to protect
the
people and reduce the clashes. What, in fact, had the Great
powers do
since Albania fell under the Salih Berisha corrupt dictatorship that
ruined his own people? Nothing. Berisha was acceptable because
he renewed
capitalism and opened wide the door to the multinational
companies.

When the Albanian people started rebelling against Berisha, what
were we
to see? An international army arrived at the very same minute to
occupy
Albania, whose independence was not jeopardized by any
neighboring
country. Who was in command of these armed forces? Italy. By
chance, the
biggest investor in Albania. So the issue was to protect the
stability of
multinational companies from the people's revolt. These two items
should
be borne in mind while analyzing the situation in Kosovo. The first
rule
of the game in the Balkans is that the West is appropriating the
right of
deciding in the people's place.

This is the origin of the second rule of the new game in the Balkans
- the
contest of the Great powers: where I have dominance over, I
demand certain
stability; where you have dominance, I destabilize... To be more
exact,
Washington has the dominance in the South of the Balkans
(Greece, Turkey,
Albania, Macedonia, Bosnia), while Bonn plays the main role in the
North
(Croatia, Slovenia). And each covets the part belonging to the other
side.
But we will get back to this.


Is the real issue the protection of civilians?

The media inform us that "the Great powers must intervene in order
to
protect the population in danger"=85Can we believe that the
protection of
civilians is really the issue? To protect their interest in some
strategically important regions, the United States did not hesitate to
massacre innocent civilians in Lebanon, Somalia, Panama, Iraq...

The Great powers' only motivating force is their wish to control the
Balkans. This is the reason Germany ignited the war in 1991. It
supported,
financed and even armed the Croatian and Slovenian separatists,
as we have
proved in our book "Poker trickster"1. The goal: break up
Yugoslavia into
a chain of weak little states, to be easily controlled. Soon after, the
US
shifted this war to Bosnia to get hold of the cards Bonn already had
in
its hands. The unbelievable statement of Lord Owen, European
Special Envoy
in Bosnia should not be forgotten: " I highly respect the United
States.
However, during the last few years this Country' diplomacy bears
responsibility for the unnecessary prolongation of war in Bosnia" .
Owen
knew what he was talking about.

Today, the same scenario is being repeated in Kosovo. In order to
gain
control over a strategically important region, the Great powers are
again
ready to drag whole nations into warring, deportations,
massacres=85 To
invite them to put the fire down, means in fact to call for them to
make
it burst into flames.

1. Which are the goals common both to Bonn and Washington?

One goal is common to all the western powers: to prevent the
restoration
of socialism in the East. Is the "danger" real? "The Wall Street
Journal",
the agency of big finance, reported in 1996: "Around 60 percent of
the
Polish population could be considered "losers" in the post-
Communist
transformation, especially the workers and the farmers. All in all,
the
percentage of the ones availing of the benefit of the new economic
order
does not exceed 20 percent of the entire population .

We can not find this truth in the media intended for the common
people.
They should have believed that socialism is Hell and the capitalism
is
Paradise (or, at least, the promise of the Paradise). However, the
businessmen reading the Wall Street Journal do not need the
propaganda;
they need real facts, lucid analyses to decide where to invest their
money.


They want to know what dangers should the New World order
expect to meet
in the East. The West has promised growth, but the growth is
intended for
the nouveau-riche only and, particularly for the multinational
companies:
they are growing on the ruins of the socialist economies, where
they find
most qualified and the cheapest manpower.

Sooner or later, these injustices will provoke indignation. NATO is
getting ready for this, as explained by NATO Secretary General
Javier
Solana. He sees the stock-taking of the war recently over in Bosnia
in
this way: "The experience gained in Bosnia can be used in NATO
future
operations".4

What wars is NATO getting ready for? The question is answered by
the
Belgium aircraft forces Headquarters Commander: "In case it
happens in
Russia (read: in case the pro-westerns forces loose control), we
will have
Yugoslavia ten times larger. It is possible that the Western Europe,
for a
medium term, will have to intervene not only by political but also
military actions in our own interest (sic)"5 And this is exactly what
the
West is getting ready for.

Four strategic goals

What is today happening in the Balkans is a part of wider strategic
aims.
As we have shown in "The Poker Trickster"4 the Great powers have
four
strategic aims:

1. To dominate in the Balkans, the key region for the control of the
oil
roads. Not only those coming from the Near East, but also the
ones from
the former Soviet Union (Caucasus, the Caspian Sea, Kazakhstan
=85)

2. To dominate in the Eastern Europe, a valuable source of raw
materials,
qualified work force, export markets.

3. Prevent Russia's controlling the mentioned riches and prevent it
from
becoming the Western powers' contender.

4. Secure military bases. By establishing new bases in Albania,
Bosnia and
Macedonia, the US have placed themselves all over the South of
Europe and
the former Soviet Union.

Regarding these four goals, the Great powers are sometimes unified
(against the mutual enemy) and sometimes opposed (each of them
wants a
bigger piece of cake).

As always, "Divide and rule"

Who are their mutual enemies in the Balkans? At the moment, the
West is
met with two main focuses of resistance: in Serbia and in Albania.

In Albania, the economic break down increased the number of the
ones now
missing socialism and communism. In another word, the NATO
Review reminds
in the summer of 1998 that "under the Communist dictatorship
Albania has
adopted the total defense system and armer a large number of
population".
The Albanians never returned the weapons. The discontent in the
most
poverty-stricken state in Europe is enormous and, in middle term,
this
country might be the one closest to revert to socialism.

In Serbia, large portions of the population do not want to forsake
their
social achievements and to resign to wild liberalism. Let us recall
that
in 1989 the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank
wanted to
impose the dismissal of the two-thirds of Yugoslav workers, and
mass
strikes broke out in all the republics and to prevent it, the local
bourgeoisie ignited nationalism.

In order to remove any inclination to a different society from the
map of
Europe, the old tactics of "divide and rule" was applied. The western
powers consider the conflict between the Serbs and the Albanians
as
positive. While these conflicts last, there is no risk of these two
nations uniting to mutually resist the invasion of the multinational
companies and political interfering.

The cause is easily found

The West's immediate aim is the systematic weakening of
Yugoslavia. The
war in Bosnia, embargo and at present the destabilization of
Kosovo, the
region of vital importance to the country because of its assets:
electricity, tin and silver mines, excellent agricultural soil=85


And following Kosovo? Yugoslavia is in danger of being amputated
of
Sandzak or the rich soil of Vojvodina (in the North). Moreover, the
West
is instigating the Republic of Montenegro against Serbia, to cut
Serbia
off from accessing the sea. Mr. Rudolf Sarping, Chief of the German
Parliamentary fraction SDP said: " The Dayton Accord is far from
solving
all the open issues in the eastern Slavonia, Vojvodina, Sandzak,
Macedonia, and particularly in Kosovo"4. In short, the offensive
against
Belgrade is continued.

There will be no air strikes against the Turkish Army. In return,
those
fascist generals, tied to Mafia, are killing thousands of opponents
and
massacring the Kurd populations. But the West endorses them."I
will not
answer the provocative questions against Turkey, the US esteemed
Ally",
said the State Department Spokesman on March 10,1998
answering the
reporter's too daring question.

The Allies can do what pleases them, while the unyielding will be
broken
on any pretext.

SECRET STRATEGIES ON KOSOVO

Contrary to this, the West is opposed to Yugoslavia. Why? There
are two
reasons. The first is that this country, although not a socialist one,
managed to maintain a large part of public enterprises and
important
social institutions. At the time the wild liberalism is being installed
in
the entire East Europe, Serbia gives bad example. Which should be
eliminated.

Secondly, Serbia is not bending before NATO, contrary to all the
new
regimes installed in the East. Serbia has maintained an
independent
defense system. NATO, again, attempts to establish its control
over the
entire Continent. In June, 1998, the Pentagon representatives had
warned
President Clinton that any air strike should be preceded by
systematic
bombing of sixty rocket launchers and 21 Yugoslav combat planes.
A more
modest version of the Desert Storm (against Iraq) operation.4


In reality, NATO was prepared to exterminated an entire nation that
rebelled, and striking Yugoslavia was just a warning "See what are
you in
for if=85"

Sovereignty or the right of interfering?

"The protection of national minorities" gives the Great powers the
cause
to impose the right of interfering into the sovereign countries'
internal
affairs. In March 1998, a renowned American commentator wrote: "
Washington should stop observing the outmoded concept of
territorial
integrity maintained by force not only in Serbia, but also in Iraq,
Indonesia or in China".

The list of countries tells us that the Americans cherish other
ideas, and
the more important matter is, this list in not limited. However,
Madeleine
Albright, the US State Secretary has just stated that Washington
does not
recognize the UN Charter, observing the internal sovereignty of
states.

Washington is today reconsidering the concessions it was forced
to make in
the sixties and

in the seventies. The space gendarme does not want to be
restricted by any
international laws. Its intentions to put to trial its opponents by an
International Criminal Court by its own rules have the same goal: to
revoke the sovereignty of those countries that dare fight back.

This is what the ones screaming about the "people's self-
determination" in
Kosovo should think about.

"Self-determination"? Is it logical?

To stop the suffering of people, we are told that Bosnia should be
further
torn apart and that Kosovo must gain independence. But, why are
some
entitled to self-determination and others are not?

By the end of 1991, the Great powers endorsed the secession of
Croatia.
They decided that 19 percent of Croats has the sacred right to
secede from
Yugoslavia under the excuse that they are subjugated by the 36
percent of
Serbs. The consequence: a dreadful war.

Only a few months later, those same powers decided that 31
percent of
Serbs have no right of seceding from Bosnia dominated by 41
percent of
Moslems and ruled by the integrationist Izetbegovic. The
consequence: yet
another war.

Finally, in 1995, the same powers decided that Franjo Tudjman,
the Lord of
Croatia, had the right to prevent the Serbian population in Krajina to
secede, as well as the right to "cleanse" this region by fascist
methods.
This had caused the greatest exodus of refugees in this war.


Is it logical? The Great powers recognize or deny the right of
self-determinations according to their own interests and according
to
whether someone is conceding to them or not.

"Independence"? What will it really be?

What are the consequences of such "independence" gained under
the NATO
flag? According to the provisions of the Agreement, signed in 1993
with
the International Monetary Fund, the Croats Government has no
control over
its own budget, its finances, total recolonization.

In Bosnia, the real power is in the hands of the parallel government
consisting of the representatives of the West. The Constitution
does not
even grant the right of a Bosnian becoming the Governor of the
Central
Bank! Also, the European Bank for the reconstruction and
development is
the one that decides upon the person who will responsible for the
privatization.4 In short, total recolonization.

An "independent" Kosovo of two million inhabitants would, of
course, take
the same road. What if it gets unified with Albania? Since the
rulers in
Tirana are already subjugated to the West, the multinational
companies
already control the main assets of this country, the Farmers'
Unions are
abolished, the plantations of tropical fruits and the olive trees
unattended, the swamps restored and brought back malaria, as
well. The
illiteracy is back. In Tirana, the girls are again wearing the veils"4.
The United States took over the controlling of the military
apparatus. And
where is the independence?

Is NATO interested in "peace"?

In most of the Balkan countries, the West has found the obedient
elite,
ready to "call for help" at the adequate time. Ibrahim Rugova is
America's
child. He never stops asking for the international "protectorate",
meaning
the Bosnian pattern of colonization. His Minister of Information,
Jaffer
Satri "wants a rapid NATO intervention" and pushes the
Montenegrins to
"cut short the federation with Serbia".5

Like the Albanian Prime Minister, the Government of Macedonia
also calls
for the NATO troops to increase their number in the region. "At
first, the
United Nations will guard the borders between Macedonia and
Kosovo with
enforced troops, supported by NATO. The final option will be the
open
deployment of a NATO division". Like in Bosnia, the United Nations
will
play the role of the bay leaf as well as of the advance guard.

What is NATO real interest? The maintaining of tension. A situation
that
will be neither war not peace, meaning, a conflict of low intensity
that
would justify the occupational strategy decided upon in Luxemburg,
May 28,
1998:"To strengthen the cooperation with Albania and Macedonia,
open a
NATO cell in Tirana, joint military maneuvers, establishing training
centers, allow the visits of the permanent naval NATO force in the
Mediterranean to the Albanian Port of Durres.4

Three months later, NATO made a significant move by organizing
impressive
military maneuvers in the poorest country in Europe, bringing in the
soldiers from eleven countries - members and fifteen countries from
the
East, with a remarkable arsenal: German "tornado", French
"jaguars",
Belgian F-16, Albanian MIG-21=85

When is Moscow on the agenda?

For NATO, Kosovo is just a cause. Its intention is to become the
world
gendarme. It had just held maneuvers in=85 Africa, in Kenya! It
suggests
that it is in charge of security of the oil fields in Central Asia and
the
gas deposits in Algiers. To justify the future wars, the media lies are
being fabricated again.

It is therefore not a coincidence that Kosovo has burst into flames
right
now. To protect the western multinational companies interests in
the East,
NATO has started the process of spreading its army that will bing
them at
the threshold of Moscow. In spite of the fact that many are sliding
down
into poverty, billions of dollars are being spent on armament leading
us
to the edge of a Great War.


Some of the American businessmen who consider that the
expansion toward
the East is endangering their interests, are now beginning to place
paid-for adds over the whole page in the American newspaper
saying: "Would
NATO pushing toward the Russia's door make the Russian people
feel more
secure?". That would be the same feeling of security and peace
would, for
example, the Russians enter the military union with Canada or
Mexico,
excluding the United States. We would then sleep more relaxed,
would not
we?4

In the United States, in just a few months, the percent of public
opinion
supporting this expansion toward the East has decreased from 63
to 49.
Therefore, in order to push forward its policy, to impose itself as the
world gendarme, NATO must "direct" the public opinion.

Someone could say:" But, is there no people and media in the
West
demanding NATO to stop interfering?" At first sight, there are. This
is
the moment to recall of the Hitler's statement in 1938, at the
reception
held for the German press:" It is necessary to prepare the German
people
psychologically at this time. You must prove that these aims can
not be
reached peacefully and that violence is needed. To reach this goal
you can
not just resort to violence today. You need the political situation
abroad
that you will present in such a way that the German people will
demand the
use of violence by itself".

Even when it seems that the western media are "pushing" the
political and
military executives, they are only acting upon the already written
scenario.

2. At what point do the Great powers collide?


In the Balkans, the Great powers have divided their spheres of
influence.
Beside the North (Croatia, Slovenia), the German Mark is the main
currency
in other countries. And in the South, the United States have gained
privileged positions: they have the dominance and military bases in
Greece
and Albania, 1200 soldiers in Macedonia, are dominant in
Montenegro,
established colonization and bases in Bosnia=85

Today, the crisis is moving toward the South. Germany is
attempting to
destabilize the region where Washington is dominant. In Frankfurt
and
Stuttgart, Germany assented to the Kosovo "Government" in exile
Bureaus
establishing. In March 1998, The New York Times reported that
this country
has cut off the flow of weapons from this country to the Albanian
guerrilla.

It all recalls of a programmed and announced destabilization.
Already in
October 1997, an American newspaper reported: "A secret armed
force seems
to be ready to start the secessionist war that could draw this
country
into a crisis similar to the second civil war in Bosnia".4

Recently, a young Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) officer told the
Sued
Deutsche Zeitung: "We are grateful to Germany for all it did for us".
The
report continues: " All around Malishevo, the links of KLA and
Germany are
visible: German vehicles driven, German spoken".4

Where Washington dominates, Bonn destabilizes

But this is not all of it. The former Yugoslav Republic Macedonia,
neighboring to Kosovo and Albania, also has the decisive strategic
importance. The road going from the Central Europe to Greece,
meaning to
the Near East, is on its territory. In order to control this road, the
Americans have deployed =851200 soldiers.

Or, for example, the attempt of assassinating and eliminating Kiro
Gligorov, the pro-American President of Macedonia. The
investigation in
Bulgaria proved that it was the act of the Bulgarian fascists,
coveting
Macedonia and supported by=85 Germany.

In Albania, the spectacular turns of political unions are also to be
thought about. From 1991 till 1995, the United States were
supporting
President Berisha, while the Europeans counted upon the Fatos
Nano
Socialist Party. The US then abandoned Berisha and brought Nano
into
power. And who is today supporting Berisha? Germany! This
tactics is aimed
at pushing Albania into a conflict between the North (i.e. Salih
Berisha
and his troops) and the South (where the Socialist Party is in
power). Or:
where from do the Kosovo nationalists get the weapons and where
are their
bases? In the northern Albania. Germany is the one pulling the
strings.


Also, Bonn is the one goading into the military intervention against
the
Serbs. Germany Minister of Defense, Volker Ruehe, practically
declared
war: "The problem must be solved there where it is, in Kosovo and
in
Belgrade. Serbia is dictatorship". Nothing about the revisionist
Tudjman,
ruling in Zagreb, nothing about the integrationist Izetbegovic, ruling
in
Sarajevo. The real sin of Serbia is in preventing the German
expansion
toward the Mediterranean. And the total control of the River of
Danube, a
strategic river for the communications in the next century.

His colleague, Kinkel, demanded the air strikes. For the first time
after
1945, Germany had raised its aviation to "semi-combat" degree,
sending its
planes of "tornado" type to the Balkans.

And the reason for this aggressiveness? Already in 1991, this
question was
answered by Rupert Schultz, an influential German editorialist: "The
aftermaths of the Second World War are surmounted, it remains to
liquidate
the aftermaths of the Great War=85"4. The German imperialism
never got over
the two defeats suffered in Yugoslavia.

In order to start the military intervention, the public opinion is being

manipulated. In June, a Dutch daily reported that NATO intervention
would
be most easily supported if preceded by dramatic scenes on
television.4 It
was not long after that the German media invented the mass vault in
Kosovo. Already the day after. the European observers denied this
story
entirely. The story will be better prepared next time.

The German Chancellor has already announced the humanitarian
catastrophe
in Kosovo in winter 1998/1999 and again demanded NATO
intervention.
Germany is expelling the refugees, while at the same time goading
the war,
pushing thousand of Albanians into painful exile in this way. People
are
just pawns.


Regarding the military aspect, Washington plays the role of "The
Lone
Ranger"

Officially, Bonn rejects the idea of the independent Kosovo. But
this is
not the first time it plays a double role. Already in the eighties,
Bonn
pretended to be respectful of Yugoslavia's integrity. At the same
time,
its secret service BND was covertly preparing for the secession
(and
arming) of Croatia, as shown in our book "The Poker Trickster".

The German leaders learned some lesson from the Slovenian-
Croats secession
when they floored their Allies. They are still advancing hidden
behind the
European Mask. But their ambitions are the same.

Bonn is bothered by the United States dominations. North of the
Albanian
City of Shkoder 800 American soldiers are deployed securing the
vital
observations tower of the US aviation (Albania is called "the Land of
the
eagles", linked to the Taszar base in Hungary and another one in
Macedonia. All in accordance with the bilateral agreements,
Washington
reached directly with these countries.

"These three American bases", writes the Belgian Professor
Bardos,
"operate beyond the Euro-Atlantic NATO frames, in other words,
out of the
range of the European Allies' inspection". Since 1992, from these
bases in
the direction of Yugoslavia large spying aircrafts "AWACS" take off,
which, because of this, are allowed to fly over numerous Middle
European
countries. "In this way", continues Bardos, "these aircraft can
through
electronic gadgets "see and hear" all the way to Moscow. The
Albanian
ports are at the American Navy disposition, thus encircling the
strategic
advantages leaning on the largest naval base in the Mediterranean
(at the
eastern part of Corfu). This base is controlled by the Americans, as
well.4

Albania is a strategic stronghold. During the 1997 uprising,
Washington
was forced to evacuate from this small country more than four
thousand
people: the multinational companies' staff, non-governmental
organization
that in fact are not what they claim to be, diplomats, missionaries,
in
short CIA in all its robes

Bardos is right. Far from placing all his bets on NATO, Washington
plays
the role of the Lone Ranger in military aspects. In April, 1996, the
Governments in the Balkans were developing Agreements on
security and
cooperation. This was not in accordance with the United States
aims and
their Secretary of State, William Perry, convened a conference in
Tirana.
The most obedient countries were invited: Turkey, Bulgaria,
Macedonia,
Albania and Italia, being at the United States' side. Not invited were:
Yugoslavia, but also Germany or France, rivals the United States
wanted to
dispose of.4


The United States double talk

Having established firm positions regarding Germany, it is in the
United
States' interest to maintain "stability". They are not favoring
"independent" Kosovo or "Great Albania", embracing all the
Albanians,
because this would cause tumults in Macedonia where a rather
large
Albanian minority lives. It might also provoke the conflict between
its
prot=E9g=E9es - Greece and Turkey - wanting to play the roles of
"regional
powers".

This is why Clinton stated that "the territory of Kosovo is the legal
part
of Serbia" and that "negotiations"4 should take place. In fact, the
United
States often support both sides and can thus, rather quickly, break
off
their associations. Last spring, obviously, the States made
promises to
both sides.

Favorable breezes revealed the subject matters of the meeting held
in
March last year between the Clinton's Special Envoy and Rugova,
the Kosovo
Albanians President. Basically, this is what was said:

Holbrooke: " Go negotiate with Milosevic. Your goal must be an
autonomous
republic within Yugoslavia. In Montenegro, a leader favoring us will
soon
come into power. With two votes against one (Montenegro and
Kosovo against
Serbia -our note), we will control Yugoslavia".

Rugova: " I do thank you, but I am being cautious. Our key word is
independence. It is not possible within Yugoslavia. But I will do
what you
are asking me to do".

Holbrooke: "Do it for the time being. We shall see about later".

The United States are now opposing Kosovo independence, but
under the
influence of Germany, they might make a step further and bet on
the Kosovo
Albanians separatism. As they did in Bosnia, supporting the
Moslem
nationalist Izetbegovic.


The immediate tactics is unimportant. Each Great power has its
own double
talk and the behind the scene maneuvers differ from the official
statements. In any case, no nation can give its trust to any Great
power.
To believe that the "oppression" could be avoided by hurling itself
into
the embrace of the wester multinational companies, NATO, CIA or
BND means
daydreaming.

A progressive alternative

To believe that the Great powers want to make the Balkan nations
happy,
means believing in Santa. The nazi Germany brought only
destruction into
this region. "Old history, different regime", will be certainly the
answer=85 But the "democratic" United States supported the
Colonels'
military coup in Greece in the same way they are supporting the
fascist
generals in Turkey. In Yugoslavia, both Bonn and Washington stir
up the
most belligerent forces. The only thing that matters are their
egoistic
interests.

For the Balkan nations to democratically and peacefully solve their
problems, the first precondition is to prevent the Great powers'
influencing. As only unity bring strength, it is in the interest of
these
nations to put their common interest before the United States and
Germany
domination.

However, it is impossible to build such unity if each nation does not
fight its own chauvinism, if each nation does not fight the national
minorities' oppression. This is the responsibility of all the
progressive
and truly peace-loving forces: to actively pursue dialogue in order to
bring the Balkan nations together against the common enemies.


01. Michel Collon, Pokeur manteur, Editions EPO, Brussels 1998.
         02. El Pais (Spanija), November 12, 1995.
         03. Wall Street Journal, June 7, 1996.
         04. Revue de l'Otan, mars 1996., p.4.
         05. Etudes marxistes (Belgija), Septembre 1996.
         06. Michel Collon, op. cit.
         07. Unsere Zeit, June, 28 1998.
         08. Solidaire, 1 er juillet 1998.
         09. Michel Collon, op. cit. p.334.
         10. Solidaire, June 24, 1998.
         11. Le Matin, May 28, 1998.
         12. Sunday Telegraph, May 3, 1998.
         13. Le Soir, May 29, 1998.
         14. The Guardia (Kanada), 6 May 1998.
         15. International Herald Tribune, October 20, 1997.
         16. Suddeutsche Zeitung, 4 juillet 1998.
         17. Solidaire, 1 er juillet 1998.
         18. NRC Handelsblad, 6 juin 1998.
         19. Sentiers de la paih, mai 1998.
         20. Borba, March 9, 1998.
         21. Arta (SAD), 7 May 1998.


>From "SMISAO" The Serbia Socialist Party Theoretic Periodical January
1999,
No. 6 Publicist, Free University, Brussels, Belgium
---
#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@desk.nl and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner@desk.nl