What is interesting and significant is the report that China has now said it will block discussion on the Security Council of any UN peace plan for Yugoslavia until NATO bombing stops.
What we are seeing here throughout this crisis is a complicated set of manoevres whereby the US and its closest allies sometimes find it in their interests to move alone, sometimes to win wider consensus.
It is more important to analyse the process than to argue that only one set of procedures is fair. We are watching a process I suggest not of the imperialist division of the world between rival imperialist powers but the attempts by a hegemonic block to win the right to enforce its version of peace and justice across the globe.
When the consensus is not with it, it may either decide to act unilaterally, or it may try to argue diplomatically for that consensus. Its hegemonic power is constrained by its need to get consensus at certain times. For example some of the imperialist features of this war such as the massive bombing of Serbia are also the result of the smaller members of NATO in effect having a veto over ground troops if the action is to be carried out in NATO's name. But Blair and Clinton clearly decided that they could not send in ground troops alone because their domestic focus groups were not ready for it.
Every action by the hegemons therefore is subject to a dialectic of initiative and criticism. In the course of this process new standards are being forged for civil rights throughout the world.
The battleground of the formation of world government necessarily involves many contentious legal, ethical, political and economic questions, but take the form of judging the claims of the self-appointed guardians of global justice.
The report Henry posted of detailed discussions between the leaders of China and Russia shows that China is playing shrewdly for something much bigger than an apology for using out of date maps. It is strengthening the bargaining hand of the Russians, who are now playing the role of indispensible brokers, by saying China will veto UN security council discussion until the NATO bombing stops. This is not an insuperable obstacle for the west, as it has many ways of shaping up consensus about some compromise supervisory force in Kosovo, but it is significant. What it is most significant for, is the emergence of a bloc again of countries opposed to US hegemonism in polical and financial affairs. The emotion in both Russia and China will be important for strengthening this tactical alliance into something more strategic.
Chernomyrdin is a representative of the Russian comprador bourgeoisie, and is a useful agent for the west, but there are contradictions in his position, and China's initiative sharpens those contradictions.
It is of course for the same global strategic reasons that I welcome the call by Romano Prodi for a European Union army. Had there been such an army Europe could have decided a more proportionate, political, economic and military response to the unacceptable crimes against humanity being committed in its own backyard first in Bosnia, now in Kosovo.
Chris Burford
London