Welcome to Issue 14

This issue presents two articles on the new faces of modern racism. The first concerns the blatant racism in the serb’s ethnic cleansing of kosovo. The second article explores the more insidious forms of racism - inter-racist relationships. This article is a slight departure from the usual mundi club concerns since it covers social relationships rather than geophysiological issues - although the conclusions it reaches are in line with our views about geophysiological matters. Whilst the first article is simply an after-the-conflict reflection on the events in kosovo, the second article turns out to be much more timely given that two of the most prominent multi-cultural relationships in the country have recently disintegrated, or started to disintegrate, as a result of black male indiscretions.

The mundi club is anti racist, anti-sexist, anti-ageist, anti-genderist, and anti-speciesist. However, we accord this respect only to those who also possess such values. So, for example, we aren’t going to be anti-sexist to women or blacks who eat meat. Multi-culturalism is about people sharing values and if women and blacks aren’t going to share our values then we don’t see why we should give them the benefit of sharing theirs. This stance is not a license for indulging in rampant racism, sexism, etc. What it means is that we direct our comments specifically to those being anti-speciest. Thus if a woman states how lovely it was sticking her fork into a “nice bit of lamb” that had just had its throat slit then she’s liable to receive a few criticisms about her own cherished values just so that she can appreciate the revulsion in which her activities are held.[1]

There are those who believe retaliatory responses are wrong. They argue that those who support Animals should perservere with the eco-nazis and continue setting an example by being anti-racist and anti-sexist in the hope that this will lead them to a more civilized way of life. This is an entirely legitimate tactic which deserves respect. But the tactic has its limitations as anyone attending one of those leftie conferences where it’s all anti-sexist and anti-racist political correctness before everyone goes off to the local macdonald’s for a quick carcass. We believe that bullies won’t stop until they’re stopped.

I’ve opposed all the wars waged by the west during my adulthood starting with the vietnam war, and then the malvinas war, and the gulf war.[2] But this opposition was based not on pacifism but the criteria of justice. Pacifism seems incomprehensible in the light of the horrors perpetrated during the second world war.

Balkan Stakes

Definitions.

To start off a discussion about the massive scale of the serbs’ murder, rape, and deportations in kosovo by discussing definitions may seem insensitive but these events are clearly different from our normal understanding of what constitutes a war. During the first four weeks of the kosovo campaign most commentators assumed that, sooner or later, nato troops would be going into kosovo. The air campaign was the prelude to a ground campaign and would thus follow the normal pattern of modern wars where the enemy is softened up from the air before the full invasion is launched. If the political debate between those who supported, and those who opposed, nato’s invasion of kosovo had eventually been won by the latter then the events in kosovo could still have been regarded as something similar to a war - except that the second stage had been prematurely truncated. But given clinton’s reluctance to support a ground war, and then the american congress’s decision not to support the sending of troops to kosovo, it gradually became evident that this conflict was going to be fought solely from the air.

There are many reasons it’s difficult to describe this conflict as a war. Firstly, in wars, countries do not announce beforehand what they are, and are not, going to do. They don’t refuse to use the most important weapon in their military arsenal - ground troops. It is difficult to define a conflict as a war when ground troops are not used. The aerial bombardment was more like a judicial punishment for crimes committed under the cover of the aerial bombardment.

Secondly, when the serb army invaded kosovo they did not attack an opposing army, nor an armed population. They simply slaughtered thousands of unarmed people. This too cannot be regarded as a war. It was a plain case of mass slaughter, ethnic cleansing. Those in the serbian militia can’t be regarded as fighters or soldiers; they were murderers and, in many cases, also rapists, thieves, looters and pillagers.

In war, words are valued even less than they are during peacetime and there have been some surprising intellectual follies from brutish commentators about nato’s bombardment policy. Simon jenkins argued that brutland should have nothing to do with the conflict because it was a civil war - implying the kosovan people had the means not merely of defending themselves, but of retaliating against the heavily armed serbian military.[3] It also implied the kosovans were partly to blame for the misfortune which poured down upon them.

On the other hand, the serbs’ slaughter of innocent, unarmed people was not a case of genocide. If this was genocide, the serbs would not have deported people but would have closed the borders and stuffed them into concentration/extermination camps. The serbs committed crimes against humanity; they did not commit genocide. It is a harsh reality but, thankfully, the slaughter was nothing like as bad as the historical precedent which was the origin of the term genocide.

Redeeming Aspects of the Bombardment.

It has been argued that for the west the redeeming aspect of the bombardment was that it was the world’s first humanitarian war. This is not true, firstly, because this was no war and, secondly, because there have been earlier humanitarian wars. However, it did have a redeeming feature - that nato fought to defend the rights of an islamic people. Over the past few decades, nato’s actions have shown a marked anti-islamicism. It has propped up israel allowing the country to develop nuclear and biological weapons which it is preventing arab countries from acquiring; it fomented the war between iran and iraq; it engaged in the gulf war; it gave tacit support to the algerian army’s mass slaughter of islamic fundamentalists, and it allowed turkey to carry out a mass slaughter of kurds in northern iraq. At long last the west showed it was not anti-islamic.

A Justified Bombardment.

The bombardment of serbia was entirely justified. Tony blair was quite right when he justified nato’s bombardment as a matter of humanitarianism and justice. Blair was the most vociferous nato leader demanding the use of ground troops and he was right in asserting that serb atrocities justified a full scale invasion, a proper war. We either prop up the values of civilization or allow the poisonous spread of barbarism. No country, especially one in europe, a continent which has an appalling record of barbarism throughout this century, should be allowed to get away with crimes against humanity.

An Outbreak of Primitivism in Russia.

One of the major shocks of this war was the discovery of the russian people’s vehement opposition to the bombing of serbia. Whilst life in the west proceeded quite normally during the bombing campaign, the russians grew angrier and more resentful against nato’s actions. It is appalling that the russian people gave more support to their racist allegiances with the serbs than to halting the serbs’ crimes against humanity. From the russian perspective, it seems as if crimes against humanity are evil except when they are carried out by slavs.

Many russians are not in the least bit bothered about the slaughter and deportation of kosovans because their hatred of islamic peoples has grown in intensity over the last few decades. It is believed there are more islamic people living in russia than europeans so doubtlessly animosities arise from these everyday ethnic differences but what boosted this hatred beyond domestic quarrels was firstly, the afghanistan war in which nearly 30,000 russians were killed by islamic guerrilla fighters and, then the war in chechnia in which, once again, many russian troops were killed before the russian army was forced to withdraw.

Poverty, Instability, Desperation and Humiliation.

A number of commentators pointed out that the bombing of serbia made many russians frightened of a nato attack. A saying became common currency in russia, ‘First nato invades iraq, then yugoslavia, and eventually it will be russia.’[4]

To most people living in nato countries such an idea may seem as preposterous as nato invading china but there are explanations, although not excuses, for this paranoia. Over the last decade, russia has been in a state of economic, social, political, and military, contraction verging on collapse. Widescale unemployment and poverty has engendered anxiety; the constantly changing political landscape has created confusion and instability; and, as the poverty stricken military disintegrates, feelings of insecurity have become pervasive . On top of all this, the russians are humiliated by the collapse of the russian empire and the loss of their global status as a superpower. Even worse, given the collapse of huge swathes of russian industry, it is difficult recognizing the country as a modern european industrial state. In a little more than a decade, russia has collapsed from being an industrial and military superpower dominating huge portions of the Earth, to a third world country struggling for survival. These social, economic, political, and military, changes are causing a range of psychological traumas in huge numbers of russians which could easily be exploited by a demagogue. It is possible that, sooner or later, elections will see the rise to power of extreme right wing or communist parties.

So intense was the build up of russians’ animosity towards nato during the kosovo conflict that some prominent russians suggested the balkan bombardment could lead to a third world war. This could not be taken lightly. Such a war could have been a huge benefit for russia - it could have abolished unemployment, rejuvenated the economy, rekindled grandiose imperialist dreams, and unified a country on the verge of disintegration. This is not as bizarre as it sounds. After all, during nato’s bombing campaign the world’s stock exchange reached record highs as speculators bought up shares in military arms’ manufacturers and associated industries.

Many russians may have been in such an agitated psychological state they would have had difficulty in calculating rationally about their future prospects. They may even have experienced apocalyptic feelings of resentment that if they couldn’t have the good life then nobody around the world should be allowed to do so either. But russia also had a lot to fear from a third world war - besides the obvious nuclear obliteration of towns and cities and generations of genetically deformed babies. It is highly vulnerable to an attack from china which is bursting at the seams with a billion people many of whom are desperate for land. There are also tens of million of islamic peoples living in the southern parts of russia who want independence from the succession of geriatric russian dictators they’ve had to put up with over the last couple of decades. Russia could have started a world war and found itself losing half of its territory. A world war could even have led to the complete carve up of russia.

The Trigger for a War with Russia.

There were two obvious flash points which might have driven the russians to war. Firstly, the deployment of nato troops in kosovo. Even if nato managed to get away with sending in troops without immediate russian retaliation it is possible the tales of atrocities committed by nato troops would have eventually stirred a military response.[5]

The second trigger could have been Nato’s economic blockade of serbia. Towards the end of april, nato belatedly began to stop oil and arms from reaching serbia. The only way the russians could supply the serbs with oil was by sea and if they tried to breech nato’s oil blockade this could have led to a confrontation.

Nato, however, was circumspect enough to ensure there was no escalation of the conflict that could be seen as provocative by the russians. This was one of reasons for the appalling inadequacy of nato’s campaign to end serbian criminality.

The Serbian Broadcasting Corporation.

One of the strangest aspects of this conflict which shows, yet again, how different it was from a normal war, was brutish television companies’ prolific use of serbian television footage of nato’s bombardment. These companies used so much of this footage that at least half of the u.k’s coverage of the conflict came either directly from serbia or featured nato spokespeople being forced to respond to serbian propaganda. There have been few other conflicts where the media has indulged its enemies’ propaganda with such moral abandon. There was a blatant imbalance between the extensive coverage given to the minuscule number of serb victims and the non-existent coverage of albanian victims - except when they appeared as refugees on the kosovan border. The brutish broadcasting authorities should have demanded that they would use serbian footage of events in serbia only if the serbs also provided a proportionate level of footage on what serb murderers were doing in kosovo. If the proportion was in the region of one minute’s footage per person killed - the serbs would have been constantly broadcasting the murders being carried out by its thugs in kosovo whilst serb deaths would have been relegated to footnotes. It has to be wondered whether brutish broadcasters are so addicted to images that they no longer care about where, how and why, these images are acquired.

Many commentators were appalled by the bombing of the serbian television centre which killed a dozen people. The protesters assumed the employees were civilians rather than military personnel but this really was stretching the definition of civilian to meaninglessness. These people were employed to serve serbian propaganda. They were actively engaged in supporting serbian war aims and covering up serbian atrocities and yet, according to some commentators in this country, they were to be regarded as civilians. The head of serbian state television carried out the same function as goebbals and his cronies during the second world war and few people in this country would have protested about the obliteration of the nazi propaganda machine. Anyone helping to produce the vile propaganda being spewed out by serbian television was as guilty as the murderers in kosovo and were thus a legitimate target - this goes not only for the producers but the tea boy, make-up artists, and news readers.

Serb Calculations.

There are many reasons the serbs did not submit earlier to nato’s bombardment. The first was undoubtedly their fighting spirit. During the second world war they held up the nazi army for many years and it is unlikely their rugged, indomitable spirit has been lost over the last half century. The second was that, over the last decade or so, huge numbers of serb soldiers have enjoyed killing, torturing, looting, pillaging and raping, tens of thousands of people thereby generating a lust for war amongst a significant proportion of serbian society. Thirdly, was their belief that russia would protect them or, at the very least, put a sufficient limit on nato’s actions to enable them to win the war in the long run. The last factor, was nato’s refusal to use ground troops and its indifference to crimes against humanity. Whilst in america, clinton and much of the right wing congress were shifting towards isolationism, in europe some european countries decided they only wanted to use their military to defend themselves; one country was impotent because, fifty years after the event, it is still in a state of international disgrace about its military past; and finally, one nato country even supported serbian crimes against humanity e.g. greece.[6] (Apparently the greek orthodox church believes that crimes against humanity are evil except when they are carried out by orthodox christians). Saddam hussein made similar calculations after annexing kuwait, and lost, but the serbs’ gamble didn’t have to face such overwhelming odds.

The Shame of the Americans.

History has come full circle within a generation. Thirty years ago the united states’ invaded vietnam. It had no justification for intervening in that civil war especially since there were no large scale massacres. The invasion generated a huge, and ultimately successful, anti-war protest movement. One of these anti-war protesters eventually became president of the united states and then refused to embark upon a justified war in kosovo. It is shocking that after the apparent nobility of the vietnam protests, these same protesters should end committing a moral depravity greater than the one they railed against three decades earlier.[7] Clinton’s refusal to launch a ground war was an act of moral cowardice and an abnegation of his responsibilities as leader of the world’s sole superpower.

Clinton was terrified of sending troops into kosovo for fear of creating a new vietnam in which large numbers of body bags were returned to the united states. This fear of death sits perversely with the fact that some 33,000 americans are shot every year by fellow americans. Even worse was that during the crisis a couple of american schoolboys killed over 20 of their schoolmates, “At least 23 schoolchildren were shot and injured yesterday as two pupils went berserk with guns and bombs (columbine high, usa).”[8]

It has to be stated, however, that there are three extenuating factors to the degeneracy of clinton’s indifference.[9]. Firstly, without america there would have been no action whatsoever against serbia either recently or in the past which would have allowed the serbs to carry out the ethnic cleansing of all yugoslavia years ago. Secondly, it was impossible to say for sure during the conflict that the aerial bombardment wouldn’t defeat the serbs. After all, the economic damage inflicted on serbia was colossal, “The five week air campaign .. has halved economic output and thrown more than 100,000 people out of work, western trained and independent economists said.”[10] It is unlikely that serbia will ever again become a rich country. Where is it going to get the capital from to reinvest in its infrastructure? Russia is bankrupt and needs all the funds it can get.

The third extenuating factor was that whereas all american presidents after the second world war have been willing to defend europe, clinton is the first to make repeated statements that because of the collapse of the soviet empire and the unification of germany, america’s goal is to reduce its military commitment to europe. Right from the start of his presidency, clinton stated that the europeans should do more to defend themselves. The europeans have had years of such warnings but have done nothing.

The Humiliation of Europe.

The balkan bombardment has demonstrated just how feeble and pathetic european governments and peoples are at policing their own neighbourhood - despite all the stark lessons of the last world war and the most basic tenets of common sense. Europeans deserve far more admonition than americans for allowing a crime against humanity to be committed on their doorstep. They ought to be disgusted with themselves for allowing a government to go on militarizing to such an extent that it could move from ethnically cleansing a few villages and towns to doing the same to an entire country.

There were mitigating circumstances for this shameful european indifference but no excuses. German participation in the war would have antagonized the situation considerably.[11] Italy lies across the adriatic from the former yugoslavia and there are huge numbers of serbs living in italy; many italians have relationships with serbs; and many italians live, work, or take holidays in what was yugoslavia. Greece and bulgaria are so disgusted by albanians they applauded serbian terror. But perhaps the country which ought to be most ashamed of itself was france. The french had few mitigating circumstances for not being more fully involved.

The most appalling aspect of the behaviour of european governments was allowing the conflict to get so out of hand that a petty dictator, in a minor european country, eventually became a threat to world peace. How european governments could allow this piddling dictator to create a million refugees, murder ten of thousands of people, and then push the world onto a path leading to the third world war, is political stupidity and moral depravity. It is becoming apparent that europe has sunk far deeper into the mire of consumerist self indulgence than america. In this war, tony blair and brutland have emerged with the greatest glory.

There is only one solution to this european reluctance to defend civilized values in europe and that is to create a european defence force that could stop such crimes without being limited by nationalistic considerations. If the german army was submerged in a european army it would no longer be possible for its reputation to prevent it from getting involved in future conflicts. It is said that nato could not back out of the kosovo conflict without losing credibility. But it has to be suggested that, since milosovic came into power, most european countries have had no credibility.

The Greens’ First War.

This is the first war in which greens have had a significant input. The result has been disastrous. The vast majority of greens are pacifists and were thus opposed to the war.[12] In germany the greens were the junior partners in a coalition with social democrats. After only a week of the conflict, germany’s foreign minister, a green, made a fool of himself by proposing a ‘peace’ plan with the serbs. The greens eventually threatened to bring down the german government if it got too deeply involved in the war, “The german government of chancellor gerhard schroder faces the biggest threat of its seven month life today when his junior coalition partner, the greens, issues a formal and binding call for unilateral suspension of the nato bombing of the serbs. ... the greens will oppose the balkan policies of a cabinet that includes four green ministers.”[13] In america, one of the major obstacles preventing greater american involvement in the war was vice-president, al gore - a green. He believed his chances of being elected as president in 2000 would be undermined if america was bogged down by a war in europe.

The Pacifists.

Pacifists were, of course, opposed to nato action. However, most of these so-called pacifists are meat eaters which raises fundamental doubts about the legitimacy of their stance. There are perfectly valid objections to most wars but what the serbs did in kosovo had nothing to do with war, it was just a barbaric act of slaughter, a crime against humanity. It is shocking that pacifists and greens cannot differentiate between a war in which two military forces fight for victory within the rules of war and the illegal, uncivilized, slaughter carried out by groups of terrorists in military uniform against innocent, unarmed people. It has to be suggested that it isn’t possible to create a green world by appeasing those perpetrating crimes against humanity.

Yet another drawback of pacifism was that the pacifists didn’t seem to have any way of stopping serb terrorists from murdering kosovans. They kept on demanding there should be negotiations but they had no idea what to do if the serbs conducted negotiations simply to make it easier for them to carry out the slaughter without being attacked by nato. The pacifist stance was completely undermined after milosovic was indicted for war crimes. It was vile having to listen to pacifists demanding that negotiations ought to be carried out with war criminals. What utter naiveté.

Pacifism has some virtues but in many cases it’s just a cover-up for moral indifference or plain cowardice. The only form of pacifism which possesses any meaningful legitimacy is when pacifists put themselves between the aggressors and their victims - i.e. putting themselves between serbian terrorists and those they are murdering and raping. It was deplorable that labour mp alice mahon showed her commitment to peace by standing on a serbian bridge to prevent it from being bombed by nato even though the bridge was being used by mass murderers supplying arms to continue the carnage. It was a pity she didn’t try doing something meaningful in kosovo.

Media Personalities against the War.

There were a number of public figures who opposed the war:

Richard Norton Taylor: “Robertson justified the foolish and unethical bombing of serbian television’s headquarters 10 days ago which killed a dozen media workers on the grounds that “the media is an extension of the brains behind the brutality.””[14]

John Pilger: .. “Milosevic, with whom clinton and blair share responsibility for emptying most of kosovo. (The allies are using depleted uranium which is heavy enough to penetrate serbian tanks). “The truth is that the US and Britain are engaged in a form of nuclear warfare in the Balkans.”[15]

Germaine greer: condemns the bombardment as a form of punishment beating.[16]

The Serbian Choice.

At one point or other, the serbs had to decide whether they were going to submit or whether they were going to escalate the war. Having suffered the decimation of a large part of their infrastructure, the only way they could economically recoup their losses would have been through inciting civil war in bosnia, macedonia, and montenegro - perhaps even invading these countries. What would have made this more likely is if a military or right wing coup in russia had ousted yeltsin in favour of a government committed to pan slavism. The serbs could then have spread the war and thereby made it even less likely that nato would want to intervene over an even wider area. They could then, at long last, re-embark upon the creation of greater serbia and ethnically cleanse those countries they had been prevented from doing so before. This could have led to the deportation of millions of people. There are those who believe that milosovic is the great serbian loser in a tradition of serbian losers. However, this fails to recognize that the territorial losses the serbs suffered before the aerial bombardment were not militarily irredeemable. Virtually all of the land lost could have been recovered through an all out war.

Serbian Primitivism.

The serbs’ atrocities over the last decade have been a revolting outbreak of primitivism. This is by far the most appalling conflict since the second world war. During the kosovan conflict the majority of politicians and commentators tried to make a distinction between milosovic and the serbian people. For instance, tony blair argued the war was against milosovic not the serbs. Virtually all of the commentators who supported the war went out of their way to defend the serbian people. But the vast majority of serbs knew roughly what was being done in kosovo just as, during the second world war, most germans knew what was going on in eastern europe. The serbian military contains huge numbers of people. A significant number of families in the country had one or more relatives in the army. A significant proportion of serbs knew the thugs who raped, murdered and deported people from kosovo just as they did those who carried out similar atrocities in bosnia. The majority of serbians supported the ethnic cleansing of kosovo and must bear responsibility for these crimes. The reason that so many serbs fled kosovo after the war was not fear of becoming an innocent victim but fear of being exposed for their part in the slaughter of kosovan people.

The End of the War.

It is not yet clear what brought about the end of the war. Some argue the war was won by aerial power alone. Others argue that milosevic gave in after clinton decided to support the use of ground troops. Toward the end of may, it was reported that milosevic was to be prosecuted as a war criminal, “President milosovic and four henchmen were charged with mass murder yesterday. Judge louise arbour, war crimes prosecutor at the Hague ..”[17] A few days before this announcement president clinton’s officials had given an off-the-record briefing in which they had stated the president was looking for a negotiated settlement with milosevic. It is believed that the the war crimes decision made clinton realize he could not negotiate with a war criminal (even though it was obvious a long time before the announcement that milosovic was a war criminal) and that the use of ground forces was the only option left. Whether this is true or not is not known. If it is true then it is a little odd that a few days later the finish president, martti ahtisaari, set off to negotiate an end to the war with milosovic. Despite all the pressure that blair had exerted on clinton to support a ground war, it is possible he changed his mind only after the announcement by the war crimes commission. It seems as if the conflict with milosovic which was initiated because of humanitarian principles was ended by a war crimes commission.

The Stench of Omission.

The balkans campaign suddenly exposed the fact that europe is not quite so civilized and glamorous as its high-tech, consumerist lifestyle seems to suggest. There was not merely the vile slaughter of innocent people by a heavily armed european country, there was also the depravity of some european countries applauding serb aggression against people living in one of the poorest countries in europe. There was the revolting, self centeredness of european countries standing by and allowing crimes against humanity just as long as they happened a step away from their doorstep. And there was the appalling spectre of pacifists all over europe irrationally demanding negotiations with mass murderers who used negotiations as a means of conducting war. But, what reveals most clearly the superficiality of european civilization was the presence, once again, of vast numbers of racists who put racial/cultural solidarity above justice and humanity. This does not augur well for the future.

Learning to live with Evil.

There is a great deal of pride to enjoy from living in a country which fought a terribly bloody war and vanquished those responsible for one of the worst barbarities that oomans have ever committed. But there is now the prospect of living in a europe which exudes the gross stench of mass murderers who are still on the loose. It is possible that milosovic and his leading terrorists won’t even be deposed from office let alone deported to be tried as criminals against humanity. Europe may have to live for years with these terrorists roaming free.

Although the terrorists have been forced to leave kosovo, and good has triumphed over evil, serb crimes against humanity make it obvious that oomans still haven’t risen above their petty tribal/racial allegiances. They still seem unable to take justice and humanity seriously, let alone the Earth and the rights of those even less powerful than the albanians. It seems as if barbarism, and indifference to barbarism, is still deeply embedded in european people. The trappings of civilization have not extirpated it. Europe has never been in a better financial condition to create a civilized world than it has been since the second world war and if it fails now the prospects will fade as economic conditions deteriorate. One racial war in europe was dreadful enough and might be excused as a unique tragedy. But this second racial slaughter should force oomans to face up to the possibility that the first had not been an accident after all. Even with such a dreadful crime relatively fresh in their minds they were not able to avoid a repetition of such barbarism. This raises the spectre that oomans are incapable of learning the fundamentals of civilization and thus changing their ways. It reveals what, from the perspective of the Earth and its Wildlife, has been all too manifest for millennia - that oomans are the Earth’s barbarians. This has not changed even with the cola/burger/disney/hollywood/four-wheeled garnishing of civilization.