The enemy is at home

D.L. boddhisatva at
Thu Apr 15 20:47:18 PDT 1999

To whom...,

C. Heartfield's post is excellent, as usual, but particularly. It shows how compelling he can write when he eschews excess. I disagree with nothing in the post but it creates a question. If the West is wrong in thinking that war can be progressive, certainly the Milosovic regime embraced the same fallacy (still, C. Heartfield is quite right in pointing out that NATO has a far greater capacity to engage in this anti-progressive behavior). The question is who has the greater potential to do progressive work? The next question is who, if not the present players, has the potential to do progressive work in Kosovo.

The first candidate is the putative ruler of Kosovo, the rump Yugoslav regime. It is impossible to marry chauvinist politics and progressivism and this regime lacks financial wherewithal. The second candidate is NATO. If NATO made Kosovo a protectorate it would have the wherewithal and it has liberal traditions enough to improve the civil society there. However, NATO clearly has its own chauvinism and Western powers have no positive reputation bringing there liberal traditions to a protectorate. The KLA is probably a nightmare. The Albanian regime is a possibility, but it has less wherewithal even than Serbia and its involvement would insure a perpetual border dispute.

I have a friend whose intelligence I respect who favored the NATO campaign. I disagreed with him and still do. However, he makes the point that NATO is probably the only power currently stable enough and militarily strong enough to keep border conflicts at bay and inject adequate infrastructure. I think NATO could not create a legitimate regime. However, let me give my friend his due and forward the idea that NATO may be the only structure who can give the *support* a legitimate regime will need. Now it may be that the OSCE or the United Nations are the embodiment of NATO power that can do the work the best, but it will be NATO guns and ammo that backs up either of those organizations. What do you think? Who else can insure peace in this region? I don't necessarily accept the idea of NATO inevitability, but as a practical matter who else can do it?


More information about the lbo-talk mailing list