Belgrade – Destabilization, promotion of terrorist, extremist and separatist groups and creation of new ethno-regional blood lines have been common practice for more than half a century since the Bernard Lewis Plan for achieving a new world order and securing US world domination. The means that were and are used could not be more inhumane.
Also in ex-Yugoslavia, the levers of the power of the few have been stretched to breaking point, showing another climax of the pathetic record of lies, crimes and genocide, which are still staged today in show trials against the former Serbian generals at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, accompanied by outrageous evidence, errors, faked evidence, fictitious figures, and paid witnesses to prove something that never happened in the first place and which, based on numerous pieces of circumstantial evidence, raises serious doubts about its veracity. Darkness covers the earth, when basic legal principles are trampled on in the highest courts, in the interest of the few, who decide in the name of greed and the exploitation of mankind, with their crimes and law bending, on the fate of whole peoples.
„Mene, Mene Tekel … God has counted the days of your reign, you have been weighed and found too light, destroyed is your kingdom.“
In Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and former Yugoslavia, the terrorist organization NATO proved to the world that it can attack any country without nuclear weapons at its own discretion and without a UN mandate. The Kosovo war and the war in Iraq created for the first time at the end of the 20th century the world political framework for the 21st century and set the course for initiated secessionist struggles and war crimes. The war in Yugoslavia was also a result of destabilization, which began in June 1991 and threw into chaos the peaceful transition of a southeastern European country to a market economy. It was preceded by the collapse of the USSR through destabilization of its southern flank by the U.S. in the Islamic republics, but destabilization also helped dismantle an entire nation in Iran, through the installation of Ayatollah Khomeini and deposition of the Shah, and with the Iran-Iraq War initiated by the West and Arab states as a result, with more than 1 million dead. Although Saddam Hussein could not win the war and, as the aggressor, crossed the Arvandrud on September 20, 1980 and invaded the Iranian province of Khuzestan, Iran has not yet been able to obtain a UN resolution condemning Iraq to pay reparations for the war damages. In total, after 8 years of war, the war damages in Iran amounted to more than 1 trillion USD – and this alone makes the UN and the UN Security Council a farce and useless international body for interstate conflict resolution.
The reasons for the destruction – brakeup of Yugoslavia
Eleven days before the beginning of the NATO operations against Yugoslavia on 13 March 1999, high-ranking European OSCE representatives had spoken of findings according to which „the Albanians found in the Kosovo village of Račak in mid-January were not victims of a Serbian massacre of civilians. … Internally, according to the OSCE, it has long been assumed that the „Albanian side“ staged the massacre,“ wrote the Berliner Zeitung at the time. On March 18, 1999, six days before the start of the war: „The then EU Council President Joschka Fischer is presented with the overall expert report on „Račak“ prepared by a Finnish team of pathologists.“ Immediately this report is put under secrecy! “
Would the Kosovo war have come about if the Red-Green government had published this report?“ asks Matthias Küntzel in the introduction to his 2000 book „The Road to War.“ Regardless of this, the German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer and the terrorist organization NATO legitimized their war preparations primarily with that „Racak massacre“, for which not the Albanian, but the Serbian side -against better knowledge- was held responsible, especially by Rudolf Scharping (SPD), the then Federal Minister of Defense. The war of the terrorist organization NATO against Belgrade and the destruction of Yugoslavia had long been decided, in Washington, but also in Berlin.
Southern Europe has long been seen by Germany as Germany’s hinterland for the exploitation of raw materials, agricultural products and cheap labor. In the modern geopolitics of Western states, it is seen as a possible transit country for pipeline corridors from the Middle East and the Caucasus for the future energy supply of Western states whose thirst for energy seems unquenchable. Germany has long wanted to eliminate Russia’s influence in southeastern Europe. „Serbia was not a state in the European sense, but a band of robbers. The Slavs were not born to rule, but to serve, and they had to be taught that,“ was the view of the German Emperor Wilhelm II in 1914, and even then German soldiers went to war against Serbia. At the end of 1915 Serbia was almost completely destroyed under the battle cry „Serbia must die“.
During World War II, the German „Blitzkrieg“ against Yugoslavia then began with bombs on Belgrade on April 6, 1941 and was crushed by Nazi Germany. Northern Kosovo was placed under German military protectorate, creating an ally, with the resulting Ustasha state of Croatia, including Bosnia-Herzegovina, while Slovenia was divided between Germany and Italy. Expulsions and the attempt to exterminate the Slavic race by Mussolini’s Italy and Hitler’s III Reich were pushed forward. Already since the 1920s, Italy had tried to forcibly Italianize Julian Veneto’s Slavic population. From 1941 onwards, a brutal approach was taken against Slavic resistance groups. After the occupation of Yugoslavia, which was only possible with the help of Germany, the 2nd Italian Army set in motion a systematic exploitation of the Slovene and Croatian population in Yugoslavia and led the people to organized forced labor. The rural population was subjected to a starvation policy in an inhumane manner, depriving them of everything except the most basic necessities of survival. „Insurgents“ were usually shot on the spot, and it was not uncommon to see additional reprisals against civilians. The commanders of the 2nd Italian Army, Generals Vittorio Ambrosio and Mario Roatta issued detailed written instructions in this regard. There, among other things, it was also stipulated that villages that supported resistance fighters or participated in armed resistance against the occupying forces were to be ruthlessly burned down. These villages and their fields could be confiscated and awarded to Italian settlers, – a policy of expulsion and ethnic cleansing – a war crime that was never atoned for. If they were not immediately murdered, they were sent to concentration camps in Chiesanuova near Padova, Fiume/Rijeka Laurana/Lovran, Buccari/Bakar, Porto Ré/Kraljevica, Gonars near Palmanova, Monigo near Treviso, Kampor concentration camp, Renicci near Arezzo, Visco near Palmanova, as part of massive deportations.
Wegen der systematischen Aushungerungspolitik in den Lagern kamen abertausende Menschen ums Leben. Nach dem Krieg gab es kaum Bemühungen, die italienischen Kriegsverbrecher zur Rechenschaft zu ziehen. Die westlichen Alliierten behinderten de facto alle jugoslawischen Bemühungen in dieser Richtung und auch die italienische Justiz, war trotz öffentlicher Forderungen, wenig daran interessiert, diese Kriegsverbrechen aufzuarbeiten. In Jasenovac, an der Grenze zu Bosnien wurde 1941 das größte Konzentrationslager Jugoslawiens von Ante Pavelic, einem Massenmörder mit engen Verbindungen zum Vatikan, und seiner Ustascha errichtet. In diesem kroatischen Vernichtungslager wurden bis zu 700.000 Serben, Sinti, Roma und Juden von den kroatischen NS-Kollaborateuren ermordet. Das von Tito errichtete Memorial Jasenovac, wurde während des jugoslawischen Bürgerkrieges von den Kroaten zerstört.
Since the late 1970s, the Federal Republic of Germany fomented separatism in Yugoslavia and the BND established intelligence relations with Croatia and Albania. Erich Schmidt Eenboom wrote in „Der Schattenkrieger“ (The Shadow Warrior): „It would go beyond the scope of this article to even attempt to describe all of the intelligence activities from Pullach aimed at intensifying the war of secession in the former Yugoslavia and subsequently expanding the intelligence zone of influence in the Balkans. It should be noted that the majority of the arms imported by Croatia are of German origin and would not have entered the country under the conditions of a UN embargo without the intelligence support of the BND.“ Schmidt Eenboom further writes: „After the BND gained complete control over the new Croatian intelligence services, it demanded a „purge.“ Miroslav Tudjman, the president’s son, became the new head of the National Security Office in March 1993.“
Yugoslavia had been in economic crisis since the 1980s. Now the wealthier states of Slovenia and Croatia demanded secession, in a separation from the socialist federal republic of Yugoslavia, massively supported by Germany, until it was unilaterally implemented in a referendum in 1991 by their radical right-wing representatives. The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, had disintegrated after the victory of the „West“ over the Soviet Union destabilized by the U.S. in its southern flank, in its Muslim republics, and because of an endless war against Afghanistan and the Taliban supported by the U.S., now in the focus of the West, because the „Iron Curtain“ ceased to exist. Now Yugoslavia, especially because of Belgrade’s political proximity to Moscow, was the last state standing in the way of the European powers, as well as the U.S. as a new economic area and future pipeline corridors for crude oil and natural gas from the Middle East. The breakup of Yugoslavia, was part of the larger plan (Bernard Lewis Plan) to monitor the Caspian Pipeline on its way to Europe. Yugoslavia was a possible obstacle in the way of coming oil pipelines from the Caspian Sea, and Belgrade’s proximity to Russia, was a thorn in the side of the Western states. Thus, even before the war, they used their foreign intelligence services to help radical nationalist organizations in Croatia, Bosnian Serbs in Bosnia, radical Islamic and separatist movements in Bosnia and Kosovo, and supplied them with weapons and money long before the war began. Yugoslavia’s geographic location led to this support of various extreme nationalist and fascist organizations that channeled and guaranteed the dismemberment of Yugoslavia. Sean Gervasi wrote in an article titled „Germany, the U.S., and the Yugoslav Crisis,“ „The goal of a covert policy of the West and its allies, primarily Germany, the United States, Britain, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, was the dismemberment of Yugoslavia into its ethnic components, it was a process of national fragmentation and fratricidal war[…], i.e., the dismantling of Yugoslavia.“ Germany expected much from the newly emerging economic space of a fragmented Yugoslavia. Ex-Brigarde General Loquai wrote in this context: „At a time when the other NATO member countries were not yet thinking of it, German policy set out to spearhead a direct military deployment in Kosovo.“
Fascist organizations supported and promoted by Western states, especially by Germany and the USA, were the far-right anti-Serbian Croatian Right Party in Yugoslavia, the terrorist organization UÇK in Kosovo, radical Islamic currents in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Yugoslavia, had once been a successful multi-ethnic state, a model state of the Eastern Bloc, which had managed to successfully combine the elements of socialism with the elements of capitalism. Today’s mini-states are a mere shadow of their former selves in economic and political terms. Poverty and economic instability on the brink of state bankruptcy are the legacies of this tragedy and the policies of Western states.
Croatian, as well as Serbian, politicians and Bosnian jihadists fomented national ethnic hatred and the civil war in Yugoslavia began with the 1991 „10-Day War“ in Slovenia. William Engdahl wrote in his book, A Century Of War: Anglo American Oil Politics And the New World Order, „In late June 1991, U.S. Secretary of State Baker went to Belgrade, refused to talk with representatives of Croatia and Slovenia, and publicly stated „that Washington would not diplomatically recognize any constituent republic of Yugoslavia that declared itself independent.“ As a result, the war broke out first, because the Serb-dominated federal army under Slobodan Milosevic thus received a green light from the U.S. for its attacks on Slovenia and its war against Croatia and the Muslims in Bosnia, and the U.S. prolonged the war effort in the Balkans by not recognizing Slovenia’s sovereignty, which the rest of the European states blindly followed.“ But this was only tactics to trigger the war. The FAZ wrote at the time on January 7, 1992, „Behind the European rejection front, the United States is increasingly emerging.“ The FAZ went on to write, „Slovenian and Croatian politicians are wondering about the causes of this American attitude. Slovenia’s Foreign Minister Rupel wrote a letter to the American Secretary of State Baker asking him about the reasons for American anti-Slovenianism. In Ljubljana, politicians are increasingly coming to the conclusion that Baker not only gave Federal Prime Minister Marcovic a free hand in his army mission against Slovenia during the summer, but directly encouraged him to do so. Likewise, it is believed, the United States apparently had long had no objection to the war against Croatia either.“ Engdahl writes further, „What previously British diplomats only whispered privately and then sought to deny publicly, that the rejection of the independence of individual republics and the creation of some new Yugoslavia, was a struggle against the German zone of power in the Balkans, can now be read more or less openly in Anglo-Saxon and also other newspapers.“ But it turned out that besides the USA, Germany was most interested in breaking up Yugoslavia and they, together with the USA, used the Serbs as a scapegoat. Already 80 years earlier, Great Britain used its relations with Serbia to plunge the Balkans into the momentous Balkan wars that lasted from 1912 to 1914. Here, the Serbs were again used as an instrument of destabilization in Central Europe, with the aim of weakening Germany, which was most affected economically.
The civil war in the Balkans
This was continued in the Croatian war from 1991 to 1995 and in the Bosnian war from 1992 to 1995. The largest ethnic cleansing was committed by the Croats when in the summer of 1995 they murdered or expelled some 300,000 Serbs from the Krajina, who had lived there for centuries. They were equipped with from 1990 dissolved NVA stocks to commit this genocide. Jihadists from all over the world, and also an old friend of the USA, Osama Bin Laden, fought in Bosnia against the Serbs, leaving scorched earth and mutilated corpses in the area around Srebrenica. Only Ariel Sharon, former Defense Minister of Israel and member of Knesset, supported Prime Minister Slobodan Milošević with weapons, recognizing the one-sided portrayal of the conflict and the terrorist actions of fanatical Islamists and fanatical right-wing Catholics.
The Srebrenica Lie
Testifying before The Hague War Crimes Tribunal in 2004, former British Foreign Secretary Lord Owen said, „…EU recognition of Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia was a grave mistake, […] the Yugoslav wars were civil wars not Serb aggression, Bosnian Muslims were by no means mere victims and Croatian President Franjo Tudman is far worse than Slobodan Milošević.“ Naser Orić, the commander of the Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica, a war criminal to the core, boasted of 21 inch video footage documenting his trophies in the heinous mass murders of Bosnian Serbs. He was the person responsible for serious war crimes against Bosnian Serbs in and around Srebrenica, committing genocide there that went unpunished. When the Bosnian Serb general, Ratko Mladic reached the town of Srebrenica, there were hardly any more Muslim fighters, who committed mass murders of the Serb population in the surrounding area between 1992 and 1995. They left Srebrenica with armed civilians before the Serb invasion on July 11, 1995. Their commander, Naser Orić, had previously been flown out with his officers by the French military. Orić’s departure caused chaos among his soldiers, and internal fighting broke out. To Potocari fled the civilians left behind, women, old men, children. The Serbs brought several hundred of these men to Bratunac for questioning. On July 17, 1995, representatives of the Muslim civilian authorities and the UN confirmed that the Muslim civilians wanted to leave Srebrenica at their own request and be evacuated to Muslim-controlled territory. The Serbs would have carried this out correctly. From The Hague War Crimes Tribunal, Bosnian Muslim Naser Orić was acquitted for his serious war crimes in 2nd instance and returned home a rich man. Carlos Martins Branco, a Portuguese UN officer who served as deputy chief of the Operations of the UN Population Fund (UNPF) responsible for receiving reports prepared by UN military observers posted in Srebrenica, stated that „the estimates of 7,000 deaths in Srebrenica have been „misused and manipulated for propaganda purposes.“ In 1998, he wrote that „there is little doubt that at least 2,000 Bosnian Muslims died in three years of bitter fighting against the better trained and better led Bosnian Serb Army (BSA). This number is similar to those dead found by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in years of recovery work in the Srebrenica region through 2001 (2,028), leading former U.N. officer Branco to suggest that many, if not most, of these dead may have died before Srebrenica was captured.“ Izetbegovic, is said to have made these revelations to Kouchner himself, as well as to then-U.S. negotiator Richard Holbrooke, according to a book by Bernard Kouchner, now the French foreign minister, who was a member of the non-governmental organization Médecins Sans Frontières at the time of the Bosnian wars. „There were no extermination camps, however terrible these places may have been“. Meaning the POW camps set up by Serbs, as well as Croats and Muslims, and criticized by the International Red Cross alike, Izetbegović, the man who dreamed of an Islamic state of God in Bosnia promised to him by the Americans, is said to have acknowledged and further stated: „I thought my revelations would speed up the bombings,“ by which he meant the U.S. airstrikes against Serb positions and civilian facilities that actually took place in the spring of 1999, ostensibly in response to the „Srebrenica massacre.“
The Dayton Agreement ended the civil war between the three warring parties in 1995.
The arming of the terrorist group UÇK with German participation against Serbia
An estimated 5,000 ethnic Albanians had fought against the Serbs in the Yugoslav wars on the side of Croatia or the Muslim-Croat Federation of Bosnia. Some of them later joined the UÇK, the Western-backed terrorist organization founded in 1992. From 1996 to 1998, the terrorist organization UÇK, committed murders of Serbian civilians, Serbian police officers and non-collaborating Albanians in order to impose an independent state of Kosovo with terror and was also militarily equipped and trained by Germany and the USA during this period, although they were on the international terror list. Beginning in 1998, the UÇK began its military offensives in Kosovo against Serbian units. These military clashes forced 50,000 to 60,000 people to flee. In 1998, according to KFOR, between 15,000 – 25,000 UÇK fighters fought against Serb units. Some of the arming also came from NATO countries. For example, according to a dpa report of April 12, 1999, Italian police unearthed an extensive weapons cache that, the report said, „was destined for the UÇK. About 30 tons of war material, including anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles, grenade launchers and machine guns. The weapons were said to have been hidden in trucks with Bosnian license plates, originating from Germany, and declared as a Caritas aid delivery for war refugees in Albania.“ It remained unclear where the trucks had loaded the weapons – which included more than 1,000 from a NATO arsenal in Germany.
UÇK training began in 1996, and from 1998 onward, instructors from the private U.S. firm Military Professional Resources Incorporated, as well as members of British and German private security firms, trained the UÇK. Between 1998 and July 1999, UÇK members were supported, or trained, in Italy, Turkey, Germany, and Kosovo. German and British instructors were unofficially active in training camps in Albania during the Kosovo war. CIA advisors helped the UÇK, at least since 1999, with military manuals on training and with advice on how to fight Serbian police and army units. It is unclear exactly when such assistance began to be provided. Since the open war against Serbia, they were no longer a terrorist organization in the West, but mutated overnight into freedom fighters, while large parts of the money to finance the war came from drug deals, forced and child prostitution, and human and organ trafficking by Kosovo Albanians in the EU, where it has been proven that Kosovo Albanians play a leading role in organized crime in the EU. These were the protégés, of the red-green coalition of Mr. Schroeder, Mr. Scharping and Mr. Fischer, when they decided to start their war of aggression against Yugoslavia on 24.03.1999 on the basis of a lie, which is against international law.
Deliberate manipulation and lies about the alleged Račak massacre by German and American politicians and media
The trigger for this criminal act of violation of international law by the terrorist organization NATO was the alleged Račak massacre, in which 45 people were found shot dead in and near the village of Račak in Kosovo on January 15 and 16, 1999, killed by Yugoslav security forces. It is now considered certain that those killed were UÇK terrorists killed in combat with Serbian security forces. This had nothing to do with a massacre of civilians.
Wikipedia reports in detail: „Even before a more detailed investigation into the circumstances of the killing, the incident was immediately blamed on the Serbian-Yugoslavian government as a crime against humanity and a massacre through diplomatic channels and in the media, and later, more than any other single event, it was used to legitimize the NATO air strikes against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which were conducted without a UN mandate. […] The so-called „Račak massacre“ has become a significant example of polarized reporting and political instrumentalization. The media are accused of having become the mouthpiece of the respective warring party. For the dissemination of unverifiable images of the alleged massacre in Račak, as well as later of Rogovo, UÇK-affiliated organizations also used the Internet, which was used for the first time in the Kosovo war for targeted war propaganda. Contradictions arising from reports by OSCE KVM, human rights organizations, forensic expert teams, Yugoslav authorities, UÇK organs, and the trials before the Hague Tribunal, among others, have revealed a great deal of blatant misreporting and misinformation, but important documents have not been released and the actual events have not been clarified.“
„After the war, however, when the Berliner Zeitung came into possession of forensic „protocols“ of Ranta’s Finnish colleagues and revealed in March 2000 that, according to these documents, there was still no known evidence of a massacre, Helena Ranta stated to the newspaper that she had been misunderstood at her press conference on March 17, 1999 to mean that the Finnish team’s negative findings of gunshot residue using modern detection methods had referred to a test on the hands of the deceased. Until then, Ranta had been understood by the public as saying that the Finnish investigations using the SEM-EDX tests had shown an absence of gunshot residue on the hands of the dead, i.e. that those killed were civilians or at least not demonstrably combatants, which thus refuted the findings of the other teams obtained with the kerosene tests, according to which 37 of those killed had apparently still been shooting before their death. In fact, as Ranta explained in response to the Berliner Zeitung’s inquiry, her team had not examined the victims‘ hands for traces of gunshot. Instead, she had only searched for traces of an execution by mounted or close-range shots, i.e. for gunshot residue on body parts other than the hands. The proof of the absence of gunshot residue by the Finnish investigation mentioned in the press conference had referred to these other body parts. Thus, quite contrary to the public impression at the press conference, the Finnish forensic examination had not only not confirmed an execution scenario, but rather contradicted it. Mandel points out another highly misleading and so subtle element in these statements of Ranta’s, which again deviates from this account, that it was practically impossible to understand it correctly just by reading her press statement. According to a written communication from Helena Ranta to Michael Mandel dated July 12, 2001, Ranta’s sentence from the press release: „Test samples for SEM-EDX were taken and proved to be negative“ did not refer to the corpses from Račak, but to samples that Ranta had had sent to her from completely different crime scenes and thus completely different corpses. By „test“ she had therefore meant only a test application of the SEM-EDX procedure, but not the application of the SEM-EDX test procedure to the corpses from Račak. Such would have had to take place as early as two to three hours after death to be meaningful. When Ranta appeared as a prosecution witness before The Hague Tribunal on March 12, 2003, it was clear from the prosecutor’s confusion at Ranta’s statements that Ranta had not even conveyed this important detail to the prosecution. Even on the witness stand, she did not make up for it. When Deputy Chief Prosecutor Geoffrey Nice asked her about the modern test he believed she had used on the bodies to check for gunshot residue and that it had come up negative in all cases, she initially evaded the question. When asked again by Nice, she merely replied in a confused, contradictory, and seemingly disorganized manner: Tests on the hands of the corpses were no longer useful at that point and her team had not conducted the tests on the hands; it had taken samples of clothing and bones, but conducting SEM-EDX tests was not useful; such tests had to be conducted three to six hours after the weapon was fired; the team had conducted these tests on selected clothing and on pieces of a skull bone; all of these tests had been negative; the team had conducted some tests for the sake of transparency in its work in the area. Already in 1999, after the war, Ranta had pointed out that she had received her instructions in the Račak period basically from the German Foreign Ministry and that Ambassador Christian Pauls, as a representative of the then German EU Presidency, had also instructed her shortly before the March 17, 1999 press conference. In January 2004, Helena Ranta informed: „that quite a number of governments were interested in a version of the Racak events that held the Serbian side solely responsible. […] However, I could not provide them with this version“. When she agreed to participate in the press conference of March 17, 1999, she had assumed that she would be supported by the Western European diplomats who were present. However, she had felt abandoned at the conference by these two diplomats, namely the German Ambassador to Yugoslavia Wilfried Gruber, representing the German EU Presidency, and the Ambassador for Human Rights Timo Lahelma, representing the Finnish Foreign Ministry. Even shortly before the press conference, Ranta had a meeting with William Walker, which she later described as a „really very unpleasant experience“ and in which Walker had disagreed with Ranta’s views. After the Walker-dominated press conference, most media outlets saw the version of a Serb massacre of Albanian civilians confirmed. Even in publications that did not consider an execution scenario to be proven, the false report persisted that, because of negative forensic findings of gunshot residue, the dead had therefore been unarmed civilians according to forensic medical judgment. Ranta’s formulation „There was no indication that the people had been anything other than unarmed civilians“ was also interpreted in this direction, which she later presented as going beyond her statement. Moreover, on several points at the press conference, Ranta had simply referred to what she had been told by William Walker or his staff. For example, on the extremely important issue of whether the 22 men who were shot in the gully were where they were found, Ranta said, „Based on information received from KVM and KDOM observers, a total of 22 men were found in a gully [gully] near Racak. They were most likely shot where they were found.“ She made this statement, based entirely on hearsay, despite the warnings she herself presented at the press conference that the forensic team was hampered by the facts of the case, that it did not arrive until a week after the deaths occurred, or that there was no unbroken chain of evidence from the time of death. Contrary to her rather careful wording in the written press release, in ad libitum responses to questions from the audience, which included William Walker, she overstepped her professional jurisdiction by saying, „This is a crime against humanity, yes. With this, Ranta characterized the incident in Račak, for which she rejected the term „massacre,“ on the other hand, when asked, nevertheless, using the term „crime against humanity,“ which is legally relevant for prosecution by the Hague Tribunal, although neither the autopsy results nor her press release drew this conclusion. This designation as a „crime against humanity“ dominated the headlines in the press the next day. Subsequently, after the 1999 war, Ranta expressed that she had used the term „crimes against humanity“ in a moral rather than a legal sense, and again qualified its application to Račak by pointing out that there had been crimes against humanity „by both sides“ in Kosovo since March 1998. Another ambiguity was that Ranta on the one hand gave the press version the official title „Report of the EU Forensic Expert Team on the Racak Incident,“ but at the same time referred to it as her personal view.“
The press conference, which was perceived by the public as a „report by the Ranta team,“ was, as Matthias Rüb put it, tantamount to a portent, coming to the public’s attention at a time when the peace negotiations on Kosovo were already heading for a definitive breakdown. On the evening of March 18, 1999, the Kosovo-Albanian negotiating delegation led by Hashim Thaçi signed the agreement referred to in the Treaty of Rambouillet, after the UÇK had been persuaded by the United States to sign it and the Balkan Contact Group had set March 16 as the end of the conference and judged that it no longer made sense to extend the negotiations. On March 19, the conference chairs issued a statement announcing „that the Rambouillet and Paris negotiations would be suspended“ because of the attitude of the Serbian-Yugoslav delegation.“ Serbia was to agree to the „Rambouillet ultimatum,“ which called in a secret supplementary agreement (Annex B) for NATO to have unimpeded freedom of movement not only in Kosovo but also on Serbian territory. No country in the world would have signed such an addendum. At the same time, all Serbian concessions were rejected by Western countries at Rambouillet. On February 16, 1999, for example, Serbia agreed to an international military force on Yugoslav territory and proposed that implementation to resolve the Kosovo conflict be entrusted to an OSCE mission reinforced to 6,000 members. This was rejected because NATO’s destruction of the rest of Yugoslavia had long been a done deal.
„OSCE Council Chairman Vollebaek, who had claimed in an OSCE press release on March 17 in his commentary on the Finnish forensic report that Finnish forensic team leader Helena Ranta had established the killing of at least 40 unarmed civilians for the Račak incident, and who had thus explicitly repeated his condemnation of the „atrocity against innocent civilians“ of 16. January 1999, announced on March 18 that all 1380 KVM personnel would be immediately withdrawn from the province for Macedonia, as the safety of the personnel could no longer be guaranteed after the failed Paris talks. At the same time, the evacuation of embassy staff of Western missions from Belgrade also began. On March 19, 1999, Bill Clinton, speaking to the world public in memory of the Račak „massacre“ in which „innocent men, women and children“ were forced to „kneel in the dirt“ and executed, urged immediate, active action, as the only way to prevent further massacres of defenseless civilians in Kosovo villages, as in Račak.“
NATO bombing of rest of Yugoslavia in violation of international law
The „Two Plus Four Treaty“ cleared the way for German reunification, and was signed in Moscow on September 12, 1990, and entered into force with an official ceremony on March 15, 1991, the day the last instrument of ratification was deposited. Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher signed the treaty for the Federal Republic of Germany, Lothar de Maizière for the GDR, Roland Dumas for France, Eduard Shevardnadze for the USSR, Douglas Hurd for Great Britain and James Baker for the USA. There it was agreed, among other things, that „The Governments of the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic declare that united Germany will never use any of its weapons except in accordance with its Constitution and the Charter of the United Nations. (Art. 2, Sentence 3)“ – a clear breach of the Two Plus Four Treaty! A disregard of the German Basic Law, international law, the NATO Treaty and the Geneva Conventions, in which a war of cities, i.e. the bombing of Belgrade, Niš and others in the spring of 1999 and the use of cluster bombs, constitutes a war crime.
For the third time in a single century, German soldiers killed foreign civilians without being attacked or threatened and also for the third time in Serbia. In Serbia, the coming to terms with the past of Auschwitz took place in an unprecedented campaign of lies by Gerhard Schroeder, Joschka Fischer and Rudolf Scharping, Slobodan was declared Adolf and Srebrenica was declared Auschwitz. Federal Minister of Defense Rudolf Scharping freely invented the „Hufeneisenplan“ for the allegedly planned ethnic cleansing of Kosovo from Kosovo Albanians by the Serbs and invented concentration camps, the Racak massacre, the lie of Srebrenica and much more. Ex-Brigadier General Heinz Loquai wrote: „An analysis of written documents from Scharping himself and from the Ministry of Defense already raises considerable doubts as to whether a Yugoslav operational plan „Horseshoe“ actually existed. These doubts are further strengthened when one considers the actual behavior of the Yugoslav armed forces, as it emerges from the detailed reports on the ground, but also from the relevant reports of military intelligence in the Ministry of Defense. It shows that, for all the brutality of the Yugoslav action, there can be no question of a planned and large-scale expulsion of the Albanians from Kosovo before the air strikes began. Scharping himself provides evidence of this. In his book, on page 233, there is a graph on the development of refugees in Kosovo. There, a strong increase of refugees can be seen only from March 27, 1999, that is, three days after the beginning of the NATO air strikes!“
For 78 days, German Tornados alone, without a UN mandate, flew 390 sorties and shot down 244 Harm missiles and, together with British and American bombers, murdered children in school buses, preferentially bombing civilian targets, production facilities and, incidentally, the Chinese embassy. They used radioactive uranium shells and cluster bombs outlawed by the Geneva Conventions, and while Serbian mothers searched for the torn-off limbs of their mangled children, suddenly nothing was seen of the otherwise so active German peace movement.
2700 civilians were murdered during the attacks, including 89 children and an additional 1031 members of the military and police. 6000 civilians were injured, some seriously, including 2,700 children who were severely maimed, and another 5,173 members of the Serbian army and police. A dozen people are still missing to this day. More than half of all victims of NATO air strikes on Yugoslavia were Albanians in Kosovo and Metohija, and this despite the fact that the Western allies argued like „angels of mercy“ that the raid was inevitable to protect Kosovo Albanians against a humanitarian catastrophe caused by the Serbs.
129 times sirens sounded in Niš alone during the NATO terror to warn the civilian population of imminent bombardments. In the Serbian city of Niš, residents had to spend 52 days, an average of five hours and 14 minutes a day in shelters and shelters during the bombings, which is almost 70% of the days on which the air raids took place. During the air raids, 56 residents of the city were murdered and more than 200 were injured. 120 buildings were completely destroyed and 3,400 residential, commercial and military facilities were severely damaged. During the air raids, 324 guided missiles were fired at the city of Niš, 161 bombs and 36 containers of cluster bombs were dropped, 71 cruise missiles and 8 graphite rockets were fired at the city. On 07 May 1999 alone, cluster bombs killed 15 inhabitants of the city of Niš and seriously injured dozens. The attacks destroyed the city’s marketplace and a residential neighborhood near the University of Niš, as well as the city’s clinic center. An employee of the RTS news agency Duško Korać, who was in the RTS building in Abarevoj on a fateful night, said: „Young journalists and editors became a favorite target of NATO military attacks and were not seen as civilian targets.“ The attacks on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia began on March 24, 1999, and that same evening the government of Serbia declared a state of war. During the bombardments, which lasted without interruption for 78 days, commercial buildings were severely damaged, as well as schools, hospitals, infastructure, media facilities and cultural monuments. A total of 1852 public buildings were damaged and 1365 were totally destroyed; of which 907 public buildings of civilian nature were damaged and 119 public buildings of civilian nature were totally destroyed. There were 109 power plants, 100 educational institutions and 176 religious, cultural and sports facilities damaged . Taking into account only the destroyed and damaged public buildings, the material damage amounts to about 1.5 billion US dollars. After the bombing, the regime of Slobodan Milosevic estimated the total damage at about $100 billion. This amount was also demanded as compensation by NATO members. A group of Serbian economists put the damage at around $29.6 billion. This does not include the consequential damage from rising cancer rates due to NATO’s use of irradiated uranium shells.
The Nineteen Country Alliance began bombing ships in the Adriatic Sea, from four airfields in Italy and other bases in Western Europe, and was later supported by the United States. At first there were targeted attacks on barracks and air defenses in FRY Batajnici, Mladenovcu, Pristina and other places. There was hardly a city in Serbia that was not the target of the aggression several times during the 78 days of the attack. The bombardments destroyed and damaged 25,000 residential buildings, 470 kilometers of roads and 595 kilometers of railroad tracks. They damaged 14 airports, 19 hospitals, 20 health centers, 18 kindergartens, 69 schools, 176 cultural monuments and 44 bridges, 38 of which were totally destroyed.
NATO’s aggressions consisted of 2300 air strikes on 995 facilities throughout the country, the use of a total of 1150 missiles, and close to 420,000 other projectiles with a total weight of 22,000 tons. NATO launched 1300 cruise missiles and used 37,000 cluster bombs, killing 200 people and injuring hundreds, and used a banned enriched uranium munition. NATO terrorist attacks destroyed a third of the country’s electricity capacity, bombed two refineries in Pancevo and Novi Sad, and used so-called graphite bombs for the first time to disable the power system. The last missiles in Serbia hit near Kosovska Kamenica at 1:15 p.m. on June 10, meaning that the bombing of Serbia lasted not 78 but actually 79 days.
It was the same scenario as in Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan, it started with demonization of the regime and lots of lies, support of radical militant groups and then people were exposed to bomb and missile attacks. What NATO has committed in Serbia is nothing but naked terror. The bombing ended on June 10, 1999, but the war of the terrorist organization NATO against Serbian civilians continued afterwards by other means. The day NATO and the Serbian military government signed a ceasefire, the Serbs knew that the NATO „peace process“ would turn into a „peace farce.“ would turn into. On June 10, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1244 and sent 37,300 KFOR troops from 36 countries with the mission of providing peace and security.
Over the next five months, according to the International Red Cross, close to 1,000 Kosovo Serbs were murdered by the terrorist organization UÇK under the eyes and protection of 37,300 KFOR soldiers, nearly 1,000 of them were abducted, and more than 180,000 of them were displaced from their ancestral homes. Apart from a few small enclaves on the Serbian border, there were no Serbs left in Kosovo after the NATO invasion. But the ethnic cleansing also affected Jews, Sinti and Roma. Today, after the NATO terror, Kosovo is free of Jews.
In the critical aftermath of the Bush and Clinton-images (1)administration’s Balkan policy, the Kosovo war, along with the Bosnian war, occupies an essential role. The conflict is still not over, nor are the proceedings in The Hague. Critics point to the dramatic economic and social decline of the Western Balkans during the intervention period and accuse politicians and media representatives of having pursued primarily short-sighted, selfish interests. Joschka Fischer’s slogan, „Never again war, but also never again Auschwitz,“ had misused the unrest in the Balkans for its own purposes until a new regional trouble spot came into focus: Iraq
Domestic German Criticism of the Red-Green Coalition’s NATO Deployment
On May 3, Spiegel editor Rudolf Augstein accused the U.S. of „imposing military conditions in Rambouillet that no school-educated Serb could have signed.“ SPD politician Oskar Lafontaine, PDS chairman Gregor Gysi, German Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger (FDP), and former German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt (SPD) criticized NATO attacks on Yugoslavia. Former OSCE vice president and member of the Bundestag Willy Wimmer (CDU), spoke of an „ordinary war of aggression“ and accused the German government of the time, especially Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer and Defense Minister Rudolf Scharping, of „manipulations.“
CSU politician Peter Gauweiler said, „Both the U.S. intervention in Iraq and NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia and its capital Belgrade happened without a mandate from the United Nations. This has been correctly and emphatically described by German international law doctrine as a
The perpetrator Rudolf Scharping
contrary to international law.“ Heinz Loquai, then a senior general and military adviser at the German OSCE representation in Vienna, leveled serious accusations against Rudolf Scharping in 2000, calling the portrayals of the Kosovo conflict in the German media „mostly one-sided and one-dimensional, viewing the conflict, up to and including the NATO war, as solely the fault of the Belgrade leadership. The image of the Kosovo conflict in German public opinion, politics, and academia, he said, from Yugoslav repressive policies from 1989 onward to the crimes committed against Kosovo Albanians after NATO air strikes began, was viewed from a perspective that reduced events as consequences of Serb nationalism, but did not evaluate them in the context of a civil war.“ General Naumann in Kosovo „was because of an idea.
The perpetrator Joschka Fischer
war was waged, not because of interests“ Loquai said that „the German government had only camouflaged its own, purely interest-based policy with the moralizing application of the U.S. concept of the „rogue state.“ Instead of focusing on its own interests thus veiled, he said, the public’s gaze had been directed to the enormous personalization of Yugoslav policy as a „rogue,“ the Yugoslav president, whose motives for action were portrayed as base and irrational, thus paving the way for a diplomatic
The Perpetrator Bill Clinton
solution had been unnecessarily obstructed. The main interest of the new German government, thus concealed, had been to demonstrate foreign policy reliability and continuity. For the United States, too, the national interest was the core of its Kosovo policy. Besides economic interests, the prestige of the U.S. as a world power and the position of the U.S.-dominated NATO in the hierarchy of international organizations would have been in the foreground.“ Most of the media followed the campaign of lies by Federal Defense Minister Scharping and Federal Foreign Minister Fischer and Chancellor Schroeder. In Germany, the February 8, 2001.
The perpetrators George H. W Bush Sr.
George H. W Bush Sr.
„It began with a lie“, a WDR documentary shown on February 8, 2001, whose content aimed at proving that the justification of wanting to „prevent a humanitarian catastrophe in Kosovo“ with the NATO air strikes (Gerhard Schröder, March 24, 1999) was based on lies and manipulations with the intention of deliberate deception. This report was in turn massively criticized by the FAZ and the magazine Der Spiegel for selective reproduction of witness statements and „unclean“ research methods. This criticism was echoed by Rupert Neudeck and Norbert Blüm, who both reviewed the WDR film through their own research. by conducting their own research. The WDR editor Mathias Werth, co-author of the documentary, replied to the criticism in an interview with the „Stadtzeitung für Südbaden“: „They saw the work of their correspondents on the ground discredited by this film. I have some understanding for that, because some may recognize in the film a criticism of how this war has been reported. […] The question is, what remains at the end in terms of factual accusations against the film. And there hasn’t been a single accusation left standing until today.“ WDR stood by its account.
The Kosovo war was again brought into the debate in the spring of 2010 in the debate about the Bundeswehr’s Afghanistan mission, as this initiated the active military presence of German soldiers in NATO missions. Barbara Supp criticized in Spiegel that propaganda became a means of politics in the Kosovo war, using Fischer’s Auschwitz comparison as an example: „And then Joschka Fischer spoke of a new Auschwitz that the Serb Milošević was planning and that could only be prevented by war. Auschwitz – the ultimate means. So the Kosovo war, although international law spoke against it, was just and without alternative. It was called ‚humanitarian intervention‘. Those who opposed it would be allies of the Serbian murderers.“ – Antidemocratic and dictatorial mindsets of upstarts in the throes of power.
The memory of the visionary Josip Broz Tito, of his multi-ethnic federalist state of Yugoslavia, was never and nowhere immune from the stupidity and greed of the people. Unfortunately, the 21st century is still populated by old demons and the world will continue to be terrorized by a small circle that holds power in its hands. The exploitation of entire peoples and the suffering of the people are legion. And the attempt persists to replace the concrete with the imperceptible, truth with lies, right with wrong, information with disinformation and orientation with manipulation. In this way, victims are turned into perpetrators and perpetrators into victims. In the 21st century, we will see many more Yugoslavias, Iraqs, Afghanis, Libyans and Syrians – crimes committed in the name of humanity, freedom and democracy.