The weakness of the anti-war movement

[Chris Burford]

At 09:41 20/05/99 -0400, you wrote:
>> For all people's extensive unhappiness about the NATO war 
>> against Serbia in
>> the west, the anti-war movement in the west is weak in its ability to
>> influence the agenda. 
>
>Izzat so? Tell that to the Germans, Chris.  From today's NY Times:
>
>"The British plan [to prepare for a NATO ground assault against Serbian
>troops], however, was greeted Wednesday with undisguised contempt by
>Chancellor Gerhard Schröder of Germany. Under political pressure from
>pacifists in his own coalition Government, Schröder told a closed-door
>meeting of NATO ambassadors that Germany wanted the air war to continue
>but would not back a ground attack."
>
>Carl Remick 

I would concede this: that ironically there has been some partial pacifist
influence on the *way* this war has been waged, and the result is to
restrict it to a massively destructive cowardly bombing campaign designed
to preserve the lives and the privileges of the citizens of the advanced
imperialist countries at the expense of both the Serbs and the Kosovans,
rather than a more limited, appropriate use of force and duress focussed
solely on supporting the right to self determination of the Kosovans. 

Chris Burford

London