Well for someone who is surprised that Mr Rugova does not know that a number of other Albanian leaders have been killed, I am not impressed that Hinrich suggests I should wake up.
But I appreciate him taking the challenge of my post, even if in limited form.
His proposition is demonstrably false that
>This violation of international law cannot be legitimized by
>>the official argument that this violation is necessary in order to halt a
>>humanitarian catastrophe in Kosovo.
The argument seems to amount no more than to "it must be so because it seems so to me. But millions see hundreds of thousands forced to flee their homes and feel compassion.
I accept that in the context of German politics there is a special role for the law in regulating the constitution and that the PDS has challenged the legality of offensive actions by the German armed forces.
International declarations of law are words and not abstract eternal truths. The international declaration of human rights for example is mainly a progressive document but it defends the private ownership of the means of production.
There are no absolute laws.
I want to take the opportunity of commenting on your post about World War III.
I would point out that I had previously drawn attention to the PDS position and the statement of Gregor Gysi, as particularly important. However I think he over-emphasised the argument that there can be no peace without the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union is accepted already as part of the dramatis personae. The visit of Michel Camdessus to Moscow on Monday, was the prelude to Primakov's visit to Belgrade on Tuesday. Primakov said the proposal he brought to Schroeder was a start.
Primakov has played his cards carefully since he has to straddle a number of conflicting interests. Only last month he was publically criticised by one of the President's spokesmen, suggesting he might be sacked. However he has got an IMF loan, after publically turning his plane back en route to Washington. And he has been photographed with Milosevic which defuses the Russian nationalist constituency. He knows well that the first proposal in negotiations is likely to be turned down. But he has positioned himself to be a channel of communications between NATO and Serbia.
While the link was originally with France, he has made it directly with Schroeder. He is recognised as having been a go-between between the US and Iraq and he can play the role too with Serbia.
This NATO action may become more desperate than they had originally intended but I do not see how it is a step towards WWIII. The postions of the main players are too well discounted already.
>This evening German Chancellor and acting President of the EU Council
>Gerhard Schroeder (Social Democratic Party of Germany) repudiated the Prime
>Minister of Russia, Primakov, and his political initiative of mediation
>between Yugoslavia and the NATO states. Hence the NATO war of aggression
>against Yugoslavia has gone a step further on its move to expand to WWIII.
I do wonder if there is a streak of pacifism in the PDS postion. What is the theoretical basis on which the PDS seeks to uphold the German constitution against offensive military enterprises?
There may be historical reasons why that is in the German constitution but it cannot realistically be expected to be in every state's constitution.
I would like to repeat the general thrust of the propostion I put under this thread title: the broadest international united front for the defence of human social rights.
Chris Burford
London