KOSOVO
WHAT SHOULD CONCERNED PEOPLE BE THINKING & DOING NOW?
Stated purpose of NATO bombing: To prevent humanitarian catastrophe, ethnic cleansing, mass refugees.
Method of implementation: Massive bombing of Kosovo, Montenegro, and Serbia with weapons including missiles containing depleted uranium under offiial U.S. policy in armed conflict, bombs being supplied and paid for by the people of the U.S. Possibility of ground troops officially eliminated by NATO prior to commencement of hostilities.
Initial Outcome: Humanitarian catastrophe, ethnic cleansing, mass refugees.
Question: If that is the stated purpose, and it's not working, shouldn't the methods be changed?
If that is not the real purpose, then we deserve to know what the real purpose is.
NATO Conclusion: Intensify the bombing.
Further NATO methods: cluster bombs.
Further outcomes: Intentionally bombing noncombatant Serbian press, killing some media; destruction of infrastructure throughout Kosovo, Montenegro, and Serbia including bridges, water supplies, electric power, oil and gas facilities, factories, hospitals, schools, airports, train stations, churches, and monasteries; halting international shipping on Danube River. Accidental strikes on Bulgaria, on Chinese embassy in Belgrade, on buses containing civilians, on refugees and noncombatants of all nationalities. Collateral damage: Destruction of opposition to Milosevic in Montenegro and Serbia; destruction of nonviolent opposition to Milosevic in Kosovo; scattering of unexploded cluster bombs; cessation of Russian participation in international talks relating to Y2K preparedness of nuclear weapons, power plants, and related facilities.
Unknown long-term effects: Extent of rise in cancer rates, other illnesses, and birth defects due to depleted uranium and other toxic chemicals including chlorine gas; number of deaths and maimings due to future detonations of stray cluster bombs; environmental damage due to oil and gas spills caused by bombing; pollution of Danube River and underground aquifers; duration and cost of reconstruction; nuclear damage from Y2K due to cessation of international talks with Russia.
Unknown long-term effects on citizens of NATO countries: length of time Americans, British,
Germans and other Allies will be despised and mistrusted throughout the region, in Russia, in
China, and around the world. Unknown damage to the United Nations, to international law, to the U.S. Constitution.
Unmeasurable damage to local, state, national, and international programs to feed, clothe, house,
educate, employ, and care for people, and to protect the environment.
Question: How many bridges to the twenty-first century is NATO bombing?
BRIEFING:
YUGOSLAVIA v. U.S., U.K., FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY,
NETHERLANDS, BELGIUM, CANADA, PORTUGAL, and SPAIN
in the International Court of Justice
for an order that the use of force cease immediately
and provide compensation for the damage done
filed in The Hague on April 29, 1999
The governments of the United States, Yugoslavia, the United Kingdom, and all the NATO countries all
j oined the United Nations and agreed to obey the UN Charter, a treaty that became part of "the supreme
l aw of the land" on ratification in 1945, under the Constitution of the United States.
The Charter was written and signed by government leaders who had experienced massive violations of human rights and wars and negotiations for peace. The Charter lists a series of steps that nations must take when situations arise that threaten peace. The whole purpose of the UN Charter is to establish steps to ensure that peace will not be broken between nations, or between peoples within nations.
By ratifying the Charter, each nation agreed, in Article 2 paragraph 3,
to "settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace,
and security, and justice, are not endangered." and in Article 2 paragraph 4:
to "refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial
integrity or political independence of any member of state, or in any other manner inconsistent
with the pruposes of the United Nations." By ratifying Chapter VI, on the Pacific Settlement of Disputes, in Article 33, each state agreed that:
"The party to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance
of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, inquiry,
mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or
arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice."
U.S./NATO began bombing Yugoslavia on March 24. On April 29, the government of Yugoslavia filed a case in the International Court of Justice, (also known as the World Court): 1) asking the Court to order an end to the bombings immediately as a Provisional Measure, (what we would call an injunction);
2) seeking a full trial of the facts and for appropriate relief, including compensation for the damage due to the bombing.
The Facts: Yugoslavia alleged that the U.S., "together with the Governments of other Member States of NATO, took part in the acts of use of force against" Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia listed "both military and civilian targets [that] have come under attack during the bombings, causing many casualties. The document then lists:
18 cities that the U.S./NATO bombed, killing "about 1,000 civilians, including 19 children, ..."
(The names of many of the dead are listed.)
More than 4,500 sustained serious injuries).
Enormous damage to 200 schools,
16 hospitals and health care centers,
23 TV transmitters,
9 cultural monuments and 18 places of worship,
the destruction of 26 bridges,
damage to 12 bridges;
8 airports;
13 roads and bus stations,
16 railway lines, and
51 factories and industrial facilities, including a pharmaceutical company, automobile factory, 18
oil refineries and a warhouse storing raw materials and chemicals intended for oil and chemical
industry,
5 agricultural complexes,, forest firest destroyed 25 hectares of farm land, and pubic housing
facilities for tens of thousands of people were also destroyed. resulting in serious health and
environmental damage.
The Law: As the legal basis for its claims, Yugoslavia cites the obligations not to use force against another State and not to intervene in its internal affairs in the Charter, the provisions of the Geneva Convention of 1949 and of the Additional Protocol No. 1 of 1977 on the Protection of Civilians and Civilian Objects in Time of War, the 1948 Convention on Free Navigation on the Danube, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Yugoslavia further points out that the activities of the States involved are "contrary to Article 53, paragraph 1, of the Charter of the United Nations, which requires Security Council approval of actions by regional agencies.
The procedures:
When a nation is sued in the World Court and no judge from that nation is one of the 15
permanent judges on the Court, a judge from that nation is selected by that nation and may sit with
the 15 judges. In this case, that means that judges from five NATO states are sitting specially with
the 15 regular judges.
Because the President of the Court is now from the U.S., one of the defendants in the suit, the
Vice President is presiding over this case, Judge Weeramantry. He is from Sri Lanka and wrote
a highly-respected, lengthy dissent in the case on the Legality or Illegality of Nuclear Weapons,
saying that the law requires an absolute, clear-cut Court opinion that such weapons are illegal.
In arguing that Yugoslavia had not presented sufficient "real evidence" to support its allegation
that its rights under the genocide convention had been violated, the U.S. lawyer cited the case that
Nicaragua had filed against the U.S. for minimng its harbor and quoted the World Court's nothing
"that the Applicant in that case had presented a number of items of evidence of various types in
support of its charges." In that case, of course, the Court did reject the U.S. assertion that the
Court had no jurisdiction and rejected the U.S. objection to provisional measures, which the Court
did issue. The U.S. did stop mining the harbors after the Court's action, although the U.S. never
admitted that it took this step because of or as a result of the Court order. But this is perhaps the
first time the U.S. has cited Nicaragua v. U.S. to bolster an argument, particularly since the U.S.
had rejected Nicaragua's claim that the U.S. had violated the law by mining the harbor.
Actually, the U.S. had been worried about ratifying the Genocide Convention, so the U.S. added
a formal "Understanding" that "acts in the course of armed conflicts committed without the
specific intent required by Article II are not sufficient to constitute genocide as defined by this
Convention." In other words, the U.S. military convinced the U.S. civilian government to permit
it to take actions that might otherwise be construed as genocide without facing that charge.
The Official U.S. Response to the charges by Yugoslavia: Michael J. Matheson, Deputy Legal Adviser to the Department of State said:
"United States and NATO actions are conventional military operations that do not, by any stretch of
imagination, have as their objective the destrubtion of any such group, in whole or in part."
[¶ 3.9 in Verbatim report of proceedings at http://www.icj-cij.org for 11 May 99.]
However, these "conventional military operations" are not available to any other nation on the planet because they cost too much money.
Yugoslavia asserted "that NATO operations were directed at imposing harmful conditions of life on the Yugoslav nation as a whole through attacks on its electric power system and the use of ammunition containing depleted uranium. The suggestion was made that such operations imply intent to destroy a nationa group. With respect, if this was really intended as an explanation of the charge of genocide, it is simply preposterous.
"Proportionate attacks on infrastructure targets, such as electric power systems, that contribute
to the military effort are common aspects of modern warfare and can in no way be treated as
genocide. Similarly, munitions containing depleted uranium are standard weapons in the United
States inventory for use against armoured vehicles, and their use in no way implies genocidal
intent." ¶ 3.11
In its defense against the suit, the attorney for the U.S. said:
"In the current case, no credible evidence has been presented that would support any concern that the
United States or other NATO countries have committeed or would commit genocide in the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia." ¶ 3.13
STEPS WE NEED TO TAKE TODAY AND TOMORROW:
Convince the U.S. Government to stop bombing Yugoslavia.
Convince the U.S. and Yugoslavia and every other nation involved to stop human rights violations.
Convince the U.S. to stop the policy of using depleted uranium in armed conflict.
Remember: U.S. did stop mining harbors in Nicaragua after Nicaragua sued U.S. in World Court.
Convince the U.S. to start obeying the UN Charter: by not using force, by not attacking, and by using
peacekeeping forces.
Convince the U.S. to take the problem to UN Security Council and all relevant UN organs and
specialized agencies.
Suggest that the U.S. and NATO countries file charges of human rights abuses against Yugoslavia in
the World Court.
Convince the U.S. to be prepared to obey all opinions of the World Court in Yugoslavia v. U.S., et al.(argued May 10-12)
Study and Support Cong. Campbell, et al v. Clinton (in federal District Court in D.C.) seeking declaratory
relief against war without vote of Congress and requiring compliance with War Powers Act.
Convince the Media to cover all sides accurately, in Kosovo, Yugoslavia, Montenegro, U.S.
demonstrations, etc.
Work to close down the CIA and DOD and NATO, which we did without for the first 150 years of this
country, and really work for peace.
For more material, speakers, updates: MEIKLEJOHN CIVIL LIBERTIES INSTITUTE, Box 673, Berkeley, CA 94701-0673, mcli at igc.org 510) 848-0599 FAX 510) 848-6008