Geert Lovink on Sun, 25 Apr 1999 22:35:41 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> (fwd) My personal view on Kosovo |
>Date: 12/04/99 21:05 > >RE: My personal view on Kosovo > >Dear friends, > >I can no longer resist an impulse to write to you and share my personal >view on the Kosovo war and the role of European human rights defenders in >the current and future course of events. I do not speak on behalf of the >organization I direct, the European Roma Rights Center. This letter is >personal. > >I believe that when an abusive government engages in gross and systematic >human rights violations, the international community must intervene, if >necessary, by military force. Therefore, I trusted that the NATO decision >to bomb Yugoslavia, once the peace talks came to a dead end, was justified. >I believed that military action would be an enforcement of that basic >principle which most of us share, i.e. that human rights are of >international concern. If we don't act to defend the victims, we >accommodate with the slaughterers. It would not be moral, and it has not >been moral in the past, to sit back and watch when thousands of people are >killed, tortured, evicted from their homes, and abused in a number of ways. > > >But at this stage, I strongly oppose further military strikes of whatever >kind. It seems to me that the continuation of the NATO air campaign - and >even more so a follow-up by introduction of ground troops in Kosovo - is >likely to cause bigger loss of life and more severe violations of human >rights than if an immediate cease fire is opted for today. > >Of course, it should be feared that if NATO stops its offensive now, the >status quo imposed by Milosevic - the status quo of an ethnically cleansed >Kosovo - will prevail. But, if the armed conflict rages on and on - and >even if in the end NATO achieves the goal of completely reversing the >ethnic cleansing - what will be the price for such a victory? I believe >that it will be the unjustifiably high price of hundreds and probably >thousands of further deaths and devastated lives - events definitely less >reversible than the current status quo. > >At this stage, the continuation of the air strikes and even more so the >possible quagmire of a ground warfare, will likely bring about more >violations of human rights (particularly of the Kosovo Albanians >themselves) than it can possibly prevent or punish. Only in the case of a >miraculously fast and enormously efficient blitz offensive this may be >untrue, but the prospect of winning a blitz war against Milosevic is now >slim. Even partial achievement of NATO's goals will take weeks and months. >And time will work against the civilian population of Kosovo, as well as >against the innocent civilians of Serbia. Retaliation against remaining >Kosovars will intensify if strikes continue, and will become truly >apocalyptic if ground troops invade Yugoslavia. How will NATO prevent the >mass executions that may follow? The Serb population will also be heavily >taxed - as if living under Milosevic has not been enough. Whole >communities, including the Roma everywhere in Yugoslavia, will be decimated >by the realities of war. Therefore, continuation of military action cannot >be justified by human rights concerns. > >And this is where I have lost my peace of mind. My human rights equation >wouldn't solve. I calculate in terms of lives first, and in lives lived in >dignity, second. Listening to NATO and the mainstream media supportive of >its actions, I realize that they are trapped into calculating according to >a different scale of success and failure. NATO experts- very predictably >--build their strategy according to the quite different rationality of >military victory. As the days passed, and as the pictures of refugees >pouring out of Kosovo became more and more haunting, while the bombs were >falling on Yugoslavia, I began to witness how, with a tragic inevitability, >the game changed. From a campaign to defend the lives and rights of Kosovo >Albanians, which I, like many others from the human rights community, >understood and supported, it metamorphosed into something other: the >monster of a prolonged and escalated war. > >There have been moments in human history, when projects based on a good >principle, once put into practice, have taken a course according to a logic >of their own, not envisioned by the proponents of the good principle. The >process of realization can start to fire back and ultimately defeat the >good principle. This is an essential aspect of our human existence: our >fallibility. It takes genuine courage, openness and humility to >acknowledge the failure of a principle one believes in, and to surrender to >reality. Because human life is part of reality before it is grasped in any >kind of principle, even the most humane. > >The human rights community in the region is confused. We read and circulate >dozens of messages on Kosovo every day, but have been trying not to abandon >our traditional political neutrality. Since March 24, we have limited our >statements only to reporting on human rights violations. We are taking no >clear stand on what the western alliance should do next. We have left this >question to the military and political decision-makers. But we must not >overlook that our silence on the issue of what should be done is >interpreted as continued support for NATO military strikes. > >Dear friends from Eastern Europe, we should want to be opinion makers on >the destiny of our part of the world, should we not? Our region is probably >heading toward a war. I think we should speak out as soon as we have a >viewpoint, even if we are not asked. (And, judging by who dominates the >discussions on the mainstream western media: we are not asked.) In addition >to our political neutrality, at least three further factors overwhelm our >judgement. First, the democratic forces of our societies have opted for >NATO membership and we are afraid not to risk our chances of being admitted >in the alliance, if strong voices from within our countries criticize NATO. > Second, our very status and jobs as human rights defenders have been made >sustainable by the generous support of western donors, and we see no future >for our movement and even for civil society itself without continued >support from them. Third, we are already caught in the politics of Cold >War: we fear that whatever we say immediately places us in one of two >camps: we are either for or against NATO, and if we are against some action >of NATO now, we side with Russia and China, and therefore we are enemies to >democracy, etc. The western political scholars and analysts can still >afford a more nuanced view. While here, whatever we say, will be >interpreted as taking sides and used manipulatively. Sophistication first, >a little later freedom of judgement, and finally simple, everyday common >sense, are all too often casualties of war. > >Having taken into account all of the above, I nevertheless emerge from >these crucifying dilemmas with a conviction that we should speak out as >soon as possible, before it is too late. It is up to us to make human >rights matter. We need a human rights discussion and a human rights >argumentation, arriving at recommendations based on human rights concerns. >I hope that many of us will prefer to voice their concerns too. > >Several years ago I bought in the United States a wall plate saying, "War >doesn't decide who is right but only who is left". I kept in on my wall >during the Bosnian war. Now I will do three things. First, I will search >among my possessions to find that plate, and will put it above my desk >again. Second, I will act accordingly: will send a letter and encourage >others to send letters to the parties to the Kosovo conflict, appealing to >them to stop immediately any military action and return to the negotiating >table. Third, I will keep my mind open to your thoughts and reactions in >these tragic days. > >Warmest regards, >Dimitrina Petrova >Human rights activist >Budapest, 12 April 1999 --- # 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: [email protected] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/ contact: [email protected]