>In an ideal world, international law backed by a global set of institutions
>run democratically outside the dominance of great powers would address such
>incidents of mass murder, ethnic clensing and genocide.
>
>But at the moment, that isn't an alternative. The alternative seems to be
>either a world of ethnic hatred and killing in disintegrating nation-states
>(fed by global capital and great powers) versus imperial hegemony by the US
>and its allies (supported by other parts of global capital and great
>powers).
I think this is one crucial point. The UN could be reformed by pressure for a more representative Security Council, by more debates on the floor of the General Assembly, by abolition of the impractical veto, and instead making the Security Council a body for advising the General Assembly on the justice of a cause, by majority vote.
But Nathan is right. It is fair in polemic to attack imperialist powers for violating the UN, but there is no authority that stands above classes and real power structures. The shape of a future, united, juster world order is being created now in the skirmishing for dominance by groups of big powers. The court is public opinion, and if the evidence mounts that the western imperialists have entered into this war *exclusively* for selfish reasons and with no justice on their side, they will lose. If the Serbs for all their bravery, continue to condone the clearing of Kosovo, they will lose.
What is more important is therefore not whether one totally supports or totally opposes the western imperialists but how one supports or opposes them. This can have a small but real effect.
The US seems already to be signalling that it will leave the economic protectorate of Kosovo to the European Union, as is the case with Bosnia, together with the organisation of the police force. I think it would be progressive for leftists in the USA particularly to campaign against US ground troops, and especially against a land war against the whole of Serbia. Also against continuation of massive bombing high level bombing. They should be pressed to say what is the difficulty about deploying more helicopted gunships.
I think the left in Britain and France should also campaign for the US to keep out of ground troops, and their own countries to send in ground troops. Also to campaign for the restriction of US air power.
Nathan is right in his argument that the east of Europe is not a major strategic ally of world revolution in the way the colonies and semi-colonies were in the fifty years after the Russian revolution. The countries of Eastern Europe are being economically and culturally assimilated into a united Europe. No one raised a protest on this list when earlier this month Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic quietly jointed NATO. This incorporation of countries is not a form of national oppression, it is usually done gradually. Some countries may be more eager to join, than the EU is to have them, in the short term.
But the left, fighting in different countries and emphasing particular weaknesses in the NATO campaign, could restrict the destructiveness of the war.
Another goal would be that Europe should take responsibility from the USA for the peaceful management of South West Europe. It is progressive to have a multi-polar globe rather than one dominated by the alliance between the EU and the USA. The emergence of a European superstate would be progressive.
>If someone has a line of argument for how to move from defense of
>Milosevic's Yugoslavia to a global socialist system, I honestly would like
>to hear it. And to be honest, it is the failure of the anti-imperialist
>viewpoint to articulate such a positive vision that accounts for a large
>part of the defection of progressives in the case of Kosovo. If evil lies
>down every long-term path, than short-term opportunistic alliances, even
>with the bombers of NATO, look more attractive than an anti-imperial line
>promising no hope at all.
Yes, I think the prevailing line on a list such as this is strategically not more complex than to be simply against one's own ruling class. But ordinary people can see how complicated this war is. Such a simple line will not be effective and is a form of pacifism. Only by getting into trying to target in a reformist or a revolutionary way, some aspects of the war, will it be possible to link more effectively with larger numbers of people, and actually amass sufficient strength to force the ruling circles to make some retreats.
Progressive connections could be made between the struggle for democratic rights in Kosovo and other struggles for democratic rights. The movement will learn more from some practical struggle connected with this, than by purely propagandist opposition to one's own ruling class.
I do detect in Nathan's post a bit of a "lesser evil" argument. I suggest this leaves the initiative in the hands of pure pacifists, whereas there are some positive goals to win in this latest development.
For a just peace in the Balkans.
Chris Burford
London