>Observer (London) - November 28, 1999
>
>The Chinese embassy bombing
>Truth behind America's raid on Belgrade
>
>The US claimed it was a tragic blunder. But the pinpoint accuracy of
>the attack was in fact a deadly signal to Milosevic: seek outside
>help in Kosovo at your peril
This would appear to confirm that NATO's strategy was to hit the military and economic infrastructure of Serbian Yugoslavia, rather than to help the Kosovans on the ground.
Extraordinarily confrontational, especially when you compare it to their current imperialist policy of appeasement of Yeltsin's attack on Chechnya.
Enough skeletons have come to light about NATO's war for the west to be more prudent next time.
The meeting this week on unification of a French and British defence force is interesting in this context.
I wrote on this list on 8th May:
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 07:10:25 +0100 To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com, marxism at lists.panix.com From: Chris Burford <cburford at gn.apc.org> Subject: Re: NATO bombs Chinese Embassy in Belgrade
There is no one moment that makes a certain outcome inevitable, but this comes closest to the one which may make Henry's prediction come true: that this war will lead to the break-up of NATO.
This attack is not just shocking. It is bound to be extremely embarrassing for NATO, even if the pictures are not particularly striking and even if they claim Arkan's base was near by.
Not quickly, but over the next five years, there could be a strengthening of moves to manage Europe on a European, and rather than on a transatlantic basis. Including without massive air-superiority.
That will be bad for US hegemonism, and better for global governance.
Chris Burford
London