Syndicate: Accidental KILLING

[Slobodan Markovic <twiddle@eunet.yu>]

    THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN ACCIDENTAL MURDER! Every civilian casualtie
    is a terrible thing and should be treated as a topmost crime. The following
    article is not written by me, but by one other Slobodan (working at the
    Belgrade University as a teaching assistant).

    So, please REMEMBER: There can be no justification for killings!

    Greetings,

            Slobodan Markovic   | http://solair.eunet.yu/~twiddle
            Internodium Project | http://www.internodium.org.yu

    ==============================================================================

    NATO KILLS CIVILIANS ACCIDENTALLY AND SERBS DO IT INTENTIONALLY

    It certainly seems like this from the western point of view. On the other hand,
    according to Serbian official media it seems totally different: NATO is killing
    civilians intentionally and Serbian military by accident. Is the truth only on
    one of these sides, or is it somewhere in between?

    For example, Serbian officials from the beginning of the conflict have been
    claiming that all they have been taking precausionary measures in order to
    avoid any civilian casualties. In real life, in conflicts with the KLA (which
    is operating usually from Albanian villages), Serbian security forces blow up
    from a safe distance with grenades the houses from which the KLA are defending
    and most oftenly killing much more civilians, women, children and elderly
    people than the armed KLA soldiers. This is justified by the fact that the
    security forces do not want to risk the lives of it's members by sending them
    to fight from house to house.

    On the other hand, NATO is claiming that they are bombing only military,
    communication and infrastructure targets and that they are undertaking all
    possible means of precaution in order to avoid any civilian casualties. In real
    life, NATO pilots are bombing from high altitude and before the attack they do
    not fly low so they could, for example, checked whether the target on the road
    is a civilian or military. Or before hitting the rail bridge to fly over the
    railway in order to check to whether a train is not near crossing the bridge.
    This is justified by the fact that NATO does not want to risk the lives of it's
    pilots, because if they were to fly low the bigger is risk that the Yugoslav
    Army would shoot them down. In both cases a great number of civilians are
    wounded. Sometimes, NATO hits only civilian villages by accident, sometimes
    not. Sometimes the Serbian forces by accident hit the houses in which only
    civilians are, sometimes not.

    Serbian authorities claim that they are fighting in Kosovo against the Albanian
    terrorists and not against the Albanian citizens, with a humanitarian cause to
    secure a peaceful life and to protect the human rights of all the people who
    live there. In real life, mostly civilians are wounded and suffer and the KLA
    strengthens.

    On the other hand, NATO claims to be fighting against the regime of Milosevic
    and not against the Serbian people, with a humanitarian cause which was at first
    supposed to stop the humanitarian catastrophe and when the catastrophe
    happened, to secure the return of the refugees, a peaceful life and to protect
    the human rights of all the people who live there. In real life, mostly
    civilians are the ones being wounded and suffer and the regime of Milosevic is
    strengthening.

    NATO sometimes admits, as it was the case with the Serbian TV, that they are
    hitting civilian targets on purpose and causing civilian casualties (technicians,
    auxiliary staff). That is justified by claim that the television is propaganda
    machine and legitimate military target. When the question of civilian casualties
    is raised it is said to be 'a target of great value', so it is easier to accept
    civilian casualties.

    By targeting strategic, infrastructure and communication targets NATO hits
    civilian population in 99% of the attacks. Bridges, railways, tunnels, factories,
    electric and water installations are used mainly by the civilians and seldomly
    by the army. But, if NATO estimates that something has even a slight military
    significance it becomes a legitimate military target. In real life, it is not
    important that the civilians are being wounded and suffer. In real life NATO is
    expecting that the sufferings and woundings of the civilians come to a
    dissatisfaction which would result with a pressure on authorities in Belgrade.
    That may help the NATO to achieve its military and political aims. That, is
    obviously not working.

    The authorities are claiming that the kosovar refugees are not running away from
    the Serbian military but only from NATO bombing. But, anyone with a reasonable
    mind can not fall for that story. But, following NATO's logic of magnifying its
    military's significance, the ethnic cleansing can be viewed from a totally
    different angle and may gain a positive and even a humanitarian mean. Every
    successful military commander who has the aim to oppose any ground troops shall,
    in case the local population is hostile toward his forces cleans the territory.
    That was unofficially confirmed by many Western experts and commentators but
    hardly anybody dares to say such a 'heretic' thought on the leading western
    media since NATO's strongest propaganda trump-card is the disaster of the
    Albanian refugees by which they are justifying their attacks on Yugoslavia. In
    that case, it seems that the ethnic cleansing, from the military point of view,
    is legitimate. So someone may say (for example Jamie Shea, in case he was the
    spokesman of the Yugoslav Army) that the ethnic cleansing besides the military
    even has a humanitarian justification since in that way the population is
    protected from mass killings in case of the invasion of NATO ground troops in
    Kosovo. The fact that the Serbian forces, according to unofficial sources, kill
    or rape someone so the other would be in the refugee convoys, someone could
    justify by the fact that it is better to sacrifice some in order to save the
    majority. In real life, the fact that the civilians are suffering and being
    wounded is not so important. The most important thing is that there is a
    military or political justification.

    In real life, the Serbian authorities are expecting that the tragedy of the
    kosovar refugees shall bring to a dissatisfaction in western media which would
    result with a pressure on the NATO to stop the bombing of Yugoslavia in order
    to help the refugees which are still inside of Kosovo and which are suffering
    the most. But obviously this is not succeeding. Nor do the Serbian authorities
    nor does NATO care alot for the civilians. In real life, when things are viewed
    from an objective point of view, there is not much difference between NATO
    forces and the Serbian authorities.

                                              Slobodan,
                                              age 30, university teaching assistant


------Syndicate mailinglist--------------------
 Syndicate network for media culture and media art
 information and archive: http://www.v2.nl/east/
 to unsubscribe, write to <syndicate-request@aec.at>
 in the body of the msg: unsubscribe your@email.adress