Re:'peace' silence?

Indeed you are wrong again. Milosevic did NOT 'capitulate' before NATO.
If anything, its the other way around, since at least on paper
the settlement is for what Milosevic offered before teh bombing started
and NATO got none - repeat none - of its 'non-negotiable' demands
in the G-8 agreement he accepted. Indeeed, almsot none eitehr in the UN
Security council resolution  in which US did pull a couple of fast
ones, which is what it  TRIED but FAILED to do after the
agreement during the negotiatioins in Belgrade, thats why they were
stalled, and then again the negotiatioins at the Macedonian border which 
also stalled for the same reason [that NATO wanted things that had NOT 
been agreed to], and then again at the Security Council, and of course
now again on the ground, where they may get something - especially if the 
Russians caved in today on the new 'agreements' about their troops etc.  
Incidentally when Milosevic agreed [not caved in] it was to
the Russians telling him thats all he could get from them, not to NATO
which wanted much more but never got it, principally:
1.a unified NATO command - the agreement and the UN resolution say UN
force, and all UN countries can supply forces NOT under NATO command.
2. NATO to have unlimited access to all Yugoslavia [as per Ramboulleit].
they got NONE outside of Kosovo
3. a three year period to a referendum in Kosovo. NO mention in
agreeement.
4. KLA- disarming was changed to demilitarization, true and  so far
KLA has remained on the rampage. its gonna be a big problem for everyone,
including NATO.

True the UN resolution was quite deficient still [for iunstance it was/is 
under Chapter 7 rather than 6 of the Charter], and US/UK is trying to
run tanks though the loopholes, and it depends on how much of that the
Russians   and Chinese will swallow of that and/or  what the US will buy
them off with.
My June 2 long posting, in its part 3, foresaw and proposed preventive
action in the UN against, its renwed takeover by the US/UK as a fig leafe
for its their naked war-making on the ground in Kosovo in the guise of a
UN 'peace' force. 

Ther are a couple of things you are right on in re the Iraq comparison,
however
1. Miolsevic and Hussein are still there
2. China abstained, so the Cahrter requirment of 'concurring votes'
of all permament members was not met and therefore the 'UN' action is
illegal already under Chapter 27 of the Charter, not to mention many
others
3. NATO wantonly  bobmed civilioans and destroyed civilian facilities
including especially water supplies, of courre bridges etc.
and uxsed all kinfs of inhumane/illegal weapons, especialy cluster bombs
and depented unranium shells.
4. US killed hundreds of soldiers in a few minutes for aboslutely NO
reason at all in the last day of bombing, in Iraq the infamous
road of death of teh retreating soldiers, in Serbia the concentration of
Serb troops drawn by KLA attacks, so the US diverted a B 52 from its
original mission to go cluster bomb these conscropt sodliers, and kill
about 500 of tehm in one minute, WHUILE THE END OF THE WAR WAS DELAYUED
BECAUSE THE US TRIED TO PULL ANOTHeR FAST ONE AT THE MACEDONIAN BORDER
TALKS. 


I wonder whether Richard Hutchison lives in Clinton/CNN/ABC/Lehrer land?
If so, better look at the REAL  world system.

Does anyone want me to  crosspost a couple of analyses of the agreements,
etc?
On Fri, 18 Jun 1999, Richard N Hutchinson wrote:

> Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 17:46:24 -0700 (MST)
> From: Richard N Hutchinson <rhutchin@U.Arizona.EDU>
> To: WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK <wsn@csf.colorado.edu>
> Subject: silence?
> 
> World System Network-
> 
> I have noticed a deafening silence since Milosevic capitulated to NATO.
> 
> Of course the situation is far from over, but at this juncture it seems
> that events have contradicted many dire predictions made in this forum.
> 
> I personally thought the NATO campaign was immoral, and my view has not
> changed.
> 
> But I also thought it unlikely to succeed, and on that score I have to say
> that I was wrong.  The Empire seems to have won again -- 2 for 2 along
> with the war on Iraq.
> 
> This is discouraging, but my point in this post is to provoke some honest
> reflection among a group that seems in general unwilling to concede that
> it is ever wrong.
> 
> 
> Richard Hutchinson
> 
> 
> 
> 


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                   ANDRE GUNDER FRANK
250 Kensington Ave - Apt 608     Tel: 1-514-933 2539    
Westmount/Montreal PQ/QC         Fax: 1-514-933 6445 
Canada H3Z 2G8              e-mail:agfrank@chass.utoronto.ca 

Personal/Professional Home Page> http://csf.colorado.edu/archive/agfrank/
My NATO/Kosovo Page> http://csf.colorado.edu/archive/agfrank/nato_kosovo/       
My professional/personal conclusion is the same as Pogo's - 
            We have met the enemy, and it is US 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~