The Kosovo War: “Humanitarian Intervention” or Undeclared War Against Yugoslavia?

Hits: 1400

The armed conflict between the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) and Serbian forces started in 1992 with the KLA attacks on Serbian police officers, non-Albanians that lived in Kosovo and Albanians loyal to Serbia (Johnstone, 2002; Kozyris, 1999).  This low level conflict escalated in 1996 with the KLA attacking refugee camps as well as other civilians and policemen resulting in dozens of innocent deaths (Johnstone, 2002; Kozyris, 1999).  At this point of time and all up to late 1998, the KLA was regarded as a terrorist organisation (Gelbard, cited in Parenti, 2000:99; Jatras, 2002; Johnstone, 2002; Kepruner, 2003; Rubin, cited in BBC). 

Following the collapse of communism in Albania and this country falling into anarchy, many army storage facilities were ransacked and truckloads of weapons were smuggled into neighbouring Kosovo.  Increased criminal activities such as drugs and people trafficking as well as compulsory taxing of Albanians working abroad also provided funding for the KLA (Antic, 1999; Jatras, 2002). 

Increased KLA terrorist activities were met with a harsh response by the Serbian police and army resulting in some civilian deaths and displacement.  Consequent UN resolutions 1160, 1199 and 1203 as well as the Holbrook-Milosevic agreement in 1998 (Littman, 1999) demanded Serbian forces reduce in numbers and withdrawal to pre-conflict positions.  Serbian government complied with most of these demands, but the demands were not met fully because of several reasons. The KLA was not disarmed and did not comply with resolutions and increased their terrorist activities. The KLA was constantly provoking Serbian forces, purposely endangering civilians (Thaci, cited in BBC, -) as they knew that “the more civilians were killed, the chances of international interventions were bigger…” (Gorani, cited in BBC, -). 


They also re-occupied positions Serbian forces were previously holding and at some points of time controlled up to 40 % of Kosovo territory.  The KLA was re-enforced by hundreds of mercenaries and mujahideens, and started receiving support from the CIA, DIA, MI6 and German Intelligence BND (Bowman, 1999: 8; Marsden, 1999; Chossudovsky, 2001; GN TV, 2005: 1; WSWS 1999). 

The KLA was also supported by Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda (Chossudovsky, 2001; Deliso, 2001; GN TV, 2005: 1; Johnstone, 2002:11).  Even though the KLA did not comply with UN resolutions and the Holbrook-Milosevic agreement, and it was responsible for most breaches of ceasefire (Robertson, cited in Chomsky, 2004: 56) there was a significant reduction in hostilities and almost all refugees returned to their places of living (Bowman, 1999; Littman, 1999).   

The most significant event occurred on January 15, 1999 with the alleged Racak massacre which was wrongly but consciously attributed to Serbian forces by William Walker, the head of the Kosovo Verification Mission who was previously involved in the cover up of atrocities in El Salvador (Bowman, 1999; Berliner Zeitung, cited in Free Republic, 2000; Chomsky, 2004: 56; Fleming, 1999; Gowans, 2001; Johnstone, 2002:239; Parenti, 2000:104; Wilcoxson, 2006). 

Allegations that Serbian forces massacred 45 innocent men, women and children were dismissed by Serbian, Belarus and Finnish forensic experts who found that these people have not been massacred or killed from close range as well as that most of them had traces of gunpowder residue on their hands, confirming that they actually were KLA fighters. 

The reports also state there was only one woman and one adolescent boy among the dead as well as that only one person was possibly but not explicitly shot from a close range (Berliner Zeitung, cited in Free Republic, 2000; Fleming, 1999; Johnstone, 2002).  Even though this was a crucial document, the report was not made public immediately (Berliner Zeitung, cited in Free Republic, 2000; Johnson, 2002). 

This was followed by Rambouillet negotiations, which was actually an ultimatum, that the Yugoslav government, or any other government, could not accept (Bennis, 2004: 240-241; Fraser, cited in SBS, 2000; Johnson, 2002: 245-247; Littman, 1999; Miller, 2003: 243; Muller, 1999; Parenti, 2000: 108-114; Pugh, 2001; Trifkovic, 1999).  After this the Kosovo Verification Mission was withdrawn and NATO humanitarian intervention or rather aggression began and lasted 78 days.

Numerous scholars (Mertus, 1999; Muenzel, 1999; Power, 2003; Stephen 2004; Urquhart, 2002; Williams, 2003; Young, 2003 and others), International Commission on Kosovo (cited in Neier, 2001:34) and politicians, especially those coming from the NATO countries, who advocate that NATO intervention is justified on the grounds of preventing ethnic cleansing, genocide and even new holocaust as well as securing peace and stability in the region.  They base their arguments on the United Nations Chapter VII, the humanitarian international law and the Universal Declaration of Human rights.  Falk (cited in Chossudovsky, 2003:1) states that:

 The Kosovo War was a just war because it was undertaken to avoid likely instance of “ethnic cleansing” undertaken by the Serb leadership of former Yugoslavia… It was a just war despite being illegally undertaken without authorization by the United Nations, and despite being waged in a manner that unduly caused Kosovar and Serbian civilian casualties while minimizing the risk of death or injury on the NATO side.

However, many other scholars advocate and demonstrate NATO intervention was illegal and unnecessary.  According to William Rockler (cited in Chossudovsky, 2003:1), former prosecutor of the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal: 

The [1999] bombing war violates and shreds the basic provisions of the United Nations Charter and other conventions and treaties; the attack on Yugoslavia constitutes the most brazen international aggression since the Nazis attacked Poland to prevent “Polish atrocities” against Germans. The United States has discarded pretensions to international legality and decency, and embarked on a course of raw imperialism run amok.

The NATO intervention was illegal as NATO action was unilateral, avoided Security Council and therefore it was in violation of several provisions of the UN Charter, specifically Article 2 (3), Article 2 (4) and Article 53 as well as it breached NATO Charter First Article (Bisset, 2002).  The Rambouillet negotiations also breached Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969) Section 2: Invalidity of Treaties Article 51 and Article 51 (Hatchett, 1999).

NATO officials insisted that this is a humanitarian intervention, but Lt. Gen. Mike Short, Commander of Allied Forces, admitted that NATO intervention was actually a war against Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (BBC, -):

 I certainly acknowledge that there were people within Allied that felt we weren’t at war, but as commander … in my mind I was at war and people under my control were, and that’s how we had to do our business…

As this was an undeclared war, it also breached Constitutions of NATO countries involved and Geneva Convention Article 52.2.  NATO breached this Article numerous times and committed war crimes by bombing schools, hospitals, TV and radio installations, bridges, factories, civilian suburbs of many cities, water treatment and electricity facilities, and deliberately targeting civilians such as in the case of Grdelica train and convoy of Albanian refugees near Djakovica when 75-100 refugees were killed (Bennis, 2004; Savich, 2007; Shen, 1999). Additionally, Captain Adolfo Luis Martin de la Hoz (cited in Morales, 1999), Spanish pilot engaged in NATO aggression, admitted that NATO was deliberately targeting the civilian population. According to the BBC (-) this was decided by Havier Solana and Gen. Klaus Nauman without consulting other NATO countries.  Hayden (1999) states that this was a deliberate act:

The Wall Street Journal reported on April 27 that NATO had decided to attack “political, rather than just military, targets in Serbia.” On April 25, the Washington Times reported that NATO planned to hit “power generation plants and water systems, taking the war directly to civilians.”

NATO also breached the Geneva Convention trying to assassinate President Milosevic by bombing his private residence (Guardian, 1999; Malic, 2003) as well as bombing the Chinese embassy.

Moreover, Littman (1999: 8) states

“It cannot be said that the use of force is necessary unless it can be clearly demonstrated that all measures short of force (and in particular measures of diplomacy) have been exhausted.” 

The Rambouillet negotiations fall very short of Littman’s statement.  The Yugoslav government accepted all political provisions of the agreement and was ready to negotiate on the military part of the agreement.  However, NATO’s ‘Appendix B’ of the agreement was presented to the Yugoslav delegation one day before the final date as a non-negotiable agreement.  This meant NATO de-facto occupation of Yugoslavia and therefore could not be accepted, however the Yugoslav government was ready to further negotiate military proposals.  To prove this, Yugoslav officials (23 February 1999) as well as the Serbian Assembly resolution (23 March 1999) declared that Yugoslavia would accept international force under the UN command (Littman, 1999).  However, NATO demanded full compliance with the military part of the Rambouillet agreement and according to senior US State Department official (Kenney, cited in Hatchett, 1999:1) “the United States ‘deliberately set the bar higher than the Serbs could accept.’ The Serbs needed, according to the official, a little bombing to see reason.”  Dr Kissinger (cited in Littman, 2004:5) clearly states that:

The Rambouillet text, which called on Serbia to admit NATO troops throughout Yugoslavia, was a provocation, an excuse to start bombing.  Rambouillet is not a document that an angelic Serb could have accepted.  It was a terrible diplomatic document that should never have been presented in that form.

Furthermore, many scholars and politicians regarded Serbs as perpetrators engaged in ethnic cleansing and genocide.  Certainly, there were atrocities including murder, looting and taking revenge on innocent civilians committed by Serbian paratroops and petty criminals. However, these atrocities were not supported by the Yugoslav government and were nothing even close to what NATO and media were reporting (Johnstone, 2002; Mitchell, 1999; Parenti, 2000).  The UN Secretary General reported to the UN on 17 March 1999 that situation in Kosovo is characterised by constant and persistent KLA attacks and disproportionate use of force by Yugoslav authorities (Littman, 2004).  Kosovo Verification Mission report also states that during the period (Littman, 2004:5)

22 January and 22 March 1999, passed on by NATO to the UN, show that in this period the total fatalities were 27 for the Serbs and 30 for the Kosovo Albanians. Another estimate puts the total Albanian fatalities over five months from 16 October 1998 to 20 March 1999) at 46; an average of 2 a week. By contrast, in 11 weeks of the NATO war from 25 March 1999 to 10 June 1999 NATO killed 1500 civilians and wounded 8000.  This is an average of 136 deaths a week and 30 times as many deaths as the total prior to the war.

Prior to the NATO intervention there were approximately 100,000 refugees on all sides, however after the bombing started this number very quickly escalated to more than 800,000 with 100,000 Serbians, Albanians and others moving into Central Serbia. The question here is did Serbs ethnically ‘cleanse’ their own people from Kosovo?  The simple truth is most of the refugees left because of the NATO bombing and increased fighting between the KLA and Serb forces.  Lt. Gen. Satish Nambier (1999:2), the Force Commander and Head of Mission of the United Nations Forces in the former Yugoslavia, also acknowledges that there was no intention by Yugoslavs to ethnically cleanse Kosovo.  Similarly, Lord Carrington (cited in Littman, 2004:8) declared that:

I think what NATO did by bombing Serbia actually precipitated the exodus of the Kosovo Albanians into Macedonia and Montenegro.  I think the bombing did cause the ethnic cleansing… NATO’s action in Kosovo was mistaken… what we did made things much worse.

The testimony of Jacques Prod’homme (cited in Rouleau, 1999), a French member of the OSCE observer mission about period before NATO intervention “during which he moved freely throughout the Pec region, neither he nor his colleagues observed anything that could be described as systematic persecution, either collective or individual murders, burning of houses or deportations.”

Also, there were reports that Serbian forces had plans to clear entire Kosovo of Albanian population by engaging in ‘Operation Horseshoe’ which later proved to be German Intelligence propaganda (Littman, 2004; WSWS, 1999).  Other allegations of mass murder of Kosovo Albanians include the US State Department Ambassador Scheffer’s claims (cited in Parenti, 2000) that up to 225,000 Kosovo Albanians aged 14 to 59 were not unaccounted as well as British Foreign Office Minister Hoon claim that in more than 100 massacres more than 10,000 people were killed by Serbian forces.  Also, there were allegations that Serbian forces used Trepca mineshafts to dispose bodies of killed Albanians as well burning Albanian bodies in furnaces. 

All these allegations were later dismissed as nonsense and NATO propaganda by FBI, French and Spanish forensic experts (Parenti, 2000).  The Wall Street journal (cited in Parenti, 2000) reported that by November 1999 about 2,100 bodies were found and these include those killed by Serbian forces, the KLA, NATO bombs and those who died of natural causes.  In fact one of the largest mass graves, found near town of Malisevo, contained 24 Serb and non-Albanian bodies mutilated by the KLA (BBC, CNN, Reuters, cited in ERP KIM, 2005)

Finally, the human, economic and environmental costs of NATO aggression were enormous.  The total estimate of human losses in FR Yugoslavia, excluding Kosovo, is 2500 with 557 civilians killed and 12,500 wounded (Dedeic, 2007).  The total economic costs include £2.5bn direct NATO costs (BBC, 1999) and somewhere between $30 billion and $100 billion costs to Yugoslav devastated economy and infrastructure (Dedeic, 2007). 

Environmental costs are not possible to estimate.  For instance, NATO planes deliberately targeted chemical complexes in Pancevo causing approximately 100,000 tonnes of highly toxic and cancerogenic chemicals and 8 tonnes of mercury contaminating the air, soil, underground waters as well as the largest river Danube (Djuric, 2005).  In Novi Sad, NATO destroyed 150 oil tanks causing more than 120,000 tonnes of oil derivates burning for days and spilling into underground waters and Danube.  In Kragujevac and Bor NATO destroyed electricity sub-stations causing more than 50 tonnes of highly toxic dioxin contaminate large areas (Djuric, 2005).  In Kosovo and Southern Serbia several areas were repeatedly bombarded with ammunitions containing depleted uranium.  Some estimates suggest that more than 10 tonnes of depleted uranium was dumped onto Yugoslavia.  Srbljak reported in early 2005 (cited in Djuric, 2005:4) that the rate of people suffering from cancers of lung, bones, liver and other organs were in some parts of Kosovo up 120 times higher than in the same period in 2004.

Overall, NATO ‘humanitarian’ intervention was not at all about humanitarian issues.  This was an illegal aggression and an undeclared war against sovereign state of Yugoslavia and violation of the UN Charter and Geneva Convention.  NATO intervention caused much greater suffering of all civilians, it devastated environment of Yugoslavia and surrounding countries as well as Yugoslav economy and infrastructure.  It also increased antagonism between Kosovo Albanians and Serbs and other non-Albanians minimising chances of coexistence.  This was proved by the exodus of 250,000 refugees after NATO occupied Kosovo and Albanian refugees and the KLA returned to Kosovo.  It also caused radical Muslim ideas spreading into other parts of former Yugoslavia and further destabilising Sandzak, Southern Serbia and Macedonia.  Russia also became concerned with NATO’s action and it increased their military spending thus re-starting arm race.

The actual reasons for NATO aggression are hard to establish.  Many authors believe that this intervention was about establishing a new role and the credibility of NATO in the post-Cold War era.  Others see this as the result of US imperialism and hegemony as well as economic expansion as Fleming (1999) states “one way to open the market is to concur it”.  Some authors also believe that this is a part of the US strategic expansionism towards the East, which involved decade’s long fight against communism and attempts to minimise Russian influence in the world.  Yugoslavia was the only country in Europe that was at the time still under communist rule and therefore under Russian influence. 

There are certainly those who genuinely believe that NATO intervention was done because of a just cause, thus attempting to prevent humanitarian catastrophe in the middle of Europe.  However, their understanding of the whole situation was distorted by the KLA/NATO sophisticated propaganda, media frenzy and the lack of full understanding of the situation on the ground.     


Antic, O.  1999.  “Kosovar Independence”: Muenzel’s Biased Pro-Greater Albania Approach.  Retrieved on 30.03.2007 from: 

BBC.  – .  Exact date and tittle of the TV documentary unknown. (TV documentary about Rambouillet negotiations and NATO intervention in Kosovo) 

BBC News.  1999. World: Europe Kosovo war cost £30bn.  Retrieved on 02.04.2007 from: 

Beloni, R.  2002.  Kosovo and beyond: Is humanitarian intervention transforming international society?  Retrieved on 25.03.2007 from: 

Bennis, P.  2004.  Calling the shots: How Washington dominates today’s UN.  Arriss Books, Gloucestershire. 

Bisset, J.  2002.  Anniversary of shame: March 1999 – March 2002.  Retrieved on 30.03.2007 from:  

Bowman, R. M.  1999.  Chronology of the conflict in Kosovo.  Retrieved on 30.03.2007 from: 

Chomsky, N.  2004.  Hegemony or survival: America’s quest for global dominance.  Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest, NSW. 

Chomsky, 2006.  Failed states: The abuse of power and the assault on democracy.  Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest, NSW. 

Coady, C.A.J.  2003.  War for humanity: a critique.  In Ethics and foreign intervention.  Eds. D.K. Chatterjee & D.E. Scheid,  Cambridge University Press, pp. 274-295.

Chossudovsky, M.  2001.  “Osamagate” [sic.].  Retrieved on 30.03.2007 from: 

Chossudovsky, M.  2001.  The Just War theory.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from:

Chossudovsky, M.  2001.  NATO and US Government War Crimes in Yugoslavia.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from:

Dedeic, S. 2007.  Danas se navrsava osam godina od pocetka bombardovanja SR Jugoslavije.  Retrieved on 02.04.2007: 

Deliso, C.  2001.  Bin Laden, Iran and the KLA: How Islamic terrorism took root in Albania.  Retrieved on 30.03.2007 from: 

Durch, J. W.  1997.  Introduction to anarchy: Humanitarian intervention and “State building” in Somalia.  In UN: Peacekeeping, American policy and the uncivil wars of the 1990s, ed. William J. Durch.  MacMillan Press, London, pp. 311-365. 

Djuric, V.  2005.  Istina koja opominje.  Retrieved on 02.04.2007. from: 

ERP KIM Info Service.  2005.  Another mass grave with Serb bodies found in Kosovo.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from: 

Free Republic, 2000. “Berliner Zeitung” disputes massacre claims: Racak a hoax.  Retrieved on 31.03.2007 from: 

Fleming, T.  1999.  Serbian Studies Foundation Forum – Macquarie University.  Personal encounter on 09.05.1999. 

German Network TV (GN TV).  2005.  German Intelligence and the CIA supported Al Qaeda sponsored Terrorists in Yugoslavia.  Retrieved on 30.03.2007 from: 

Gowans, S.  2001.  Sorting through the lies of the Racak massacre and other myths of Kosovo.  Retrieved on 31.03.2007 from: 

Guardian.  2002.  Ground troops ‘may go in within four weeks’.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from:,,206951,00.html 

Hapmson, F.O.  1997.  ‘The Pursuit of human rights: The United Nations in El Salvador’.  In UN: Peacekeeping, American policy and the uncivil wars of the 1990s, ed. William J. Durch.  MacMillan Press, London, pp. 68-102. 

Hatchett, R.L.  1999.  Serbs had little choice: Kosovo peace accord not what we think.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from: 

Hayden, R.  1999.  Humanitarian Hypocrisy.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from:

Jatras, S.L.  2002. The crimes of the KLA: Who will pay?  Retrieved on 30.03.2007 from:

Johnstone, D.  2002.  Fool’s crusade: Yugoslavia, NATO and Western delusions.  Monthly Review Press, New York. 

Kepruner, K.  2003.  Putovanja u zemlju ratova: Dozivljaji jednog stranca u Yugoslaviji, book review by Carl Savich.  Retrieved on 30.03.2007 from: 

Kozyris, P.J.  1999.  Delayed learning from Kosovo: Any chance of common understanding of facts and law.  Retrieved on 28.03.2007 from: 

Krasno, J.E. & Sutterlin, J.S.  2003.  The United Nations and Iraq: Defanging the viper.  Praeger Publishers, Connecticut.  

Littman, M. (QC).  1999.  Kosovo: law & diplomacy.  Retrieved on 28.03.2007 from: 

Littman, M. (QC).  2004.  Do you remember Kosovo.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from: 

Malic, N.  2003.  Citizen Clark? Or, why electing a mass murderer is a really bad idea.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from:

Mertus, J.  1999.  Kosovo & Yugoslavia: Law in crisis.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from: 

Miller, R.W.  2003.  ‘Respectable oppressors, hypocritical liberators: morality, intervention, and reality’.  In Ethics and foreign intervention.  Eds. D.K. Chatterjee & D.E. Scheid,  Cambridge University Press, pp. 215-250.  

Mitchell, A.  Serbian Studies Foundation Forum – Macquarie University.  Personal encounter on 09.05.1999. 

Morales, J.L.  1999.  Spanish pilot admits NATO attacked civilians.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from: 

Muenzel, F.  1999.  “What does Public International Law have to say about Kosovar independence?” Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from: 

Muller, R.F.  1999.  Serbian Studies Foundation Forum – Macquarie University.  Personal encounter on 09.05.1999. 

Neier, A.  ‘The quest for justice’, The New York Review of Books (8 March 2001), pp. 31-35.

Parenti, M.  2000.  To kill a nation: The attack on Yugoslavia.  Verso, London. 

Posner, E.A.  2006.  The humanitarian war myth.  Retrieved on 27.03.2007 from: 

Power, S.  ‘Conclusion’.  In ‘A problem from hell’: America and the Age of Genocide.  Flamingo, London, pp. 503-516 

Pugh, M.  ‘Peacekeeping and humanitarian intervention’. In Brian White, Richard Little and Michael Smith (eds.)  Issues in world politics.  Palgrave, Basingstoke, 2001, pp. 113-131 

Rouleau, J.  1991.  French diplomacy adrift in Kosovo.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from:

Savich, C.  2007.  Anatomy of NATO war crimes: The Grdelica passenger train bombing.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from: 

Satish, N. Lt. Gen.  1999.  The fatal flaws underlying NATO’s intervention in Yugoslavia.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from: 

SBS.  2000.  Exact tittle of the TV documentary unknown (Malcolm Fraser on CARE Australia involvement in former Yugoslavia).

Shen, J.  1999.  A Politicized ICTY Should Come to an End.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from: 

Shinoda, H.  2000.  The politics of legitimacy in international relations: The case of NATO’s intervention in Kosovo.  Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from:

Stephen, C.  2004.  Judgement day: The trial of Slobodan Milosevic.  Atlantic Books, London.

Stokes, D.  2003.  Why the end of Cold War doesn’t matter: the US war of Terror in Columbia.  Retrieved on 25.03.2007 from:–02.pdf 

Thomas, R.G.C.  1997.  NATO and International Law.  Retrieved on 01.004.2004 from:

Trifkovic, S.  1999.  Serbian Studies Foundation Forum – Macquarie University.  Personal encounter on 09.05.1999.

Urquhart, B.  ‘In the name of humanity’.  The New York Review of Books (27 April 2000).  pp. 19-22.

Urquhart, B.  ‘Shameful neglect’.  The New York Review of Books (25 April 2002).  pp. 11-14.

Wheeler, N.J. & Bellamy, A. J.  2005.  Chapter 15 ‘Humanitarian intervention in world politics’.  In The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, 3rd ed.  Eds. J. Baylis and S. Smiths.  Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 556-578.

Wilcoxson, A. 2006.  The 1999 Racak massacre: KLA had been planning to fabricate “Serbian crimes”.  Retrieved on 31.03.2007 from: 

Williams, L.  ‘Altered States’, The Sydney Morning Herald (22-23 November 2003)

Whitman, J.  – . After Kosovo: The Risks and Deficiencies of Unsanctioned Humanitarian Intervention.  Retrieved on 01.03.2004 from:

World Socialist Web Site (WSWS).  1999.  Why is NATO at war with Yugoslavia? World power, oil and gold.  Retrieved on 30.03.2007 from:

World Socialist Web Site (WSWS).  1999.  “Operation Horseshoe” – propaganda and reality: How NATO propaganda misled public.   Retrieved on 01.04.2007 from: 

Young, I.M.  2003.  Violence against power: critical thoughts on military intervention.  In Ethics and foreign intervention.  Eds. D.K. Chatterjee & D.E. Scheid,  Cambridge University Press, pp. 251-273.

Originally published on 2019-03-14

Author: Dragan Vladić

Source: Global Research

Origins of images: Facebook, Twitter, Wikimedia, Wikipedia, Flickr, Google, Imageinjection & Pinterest.

Read our Disclaimer/Legal Statement!

Donate to Support Us

We would like to ask you to consider a small donation to help our team keep working. We accept no advertising and rely only on you, our readers, to keep us digging the truth on history, global politics and international relations.

** FILE ** President Bush declares the end of major combat in Iraq as he speaks aboard the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln off the California coast, in this May 1, 2003 file photo. Democratic congressional leaders on Tuesday, May 1, 2007 sent Iraq legislation setting timetables for U.S. troop withdrawals to President George W. Bush and a certain veto.  On the fourth anniversary of the president's "Mission Accomplished" speech, Senate Majority Democratic Leader Harry Reid said that Bush "has put our troops in the middle of a civil war. A change of course is needed."  (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
Origins of images: Facebook, Twitter, Wikimedia, Wikipedia, Flickr, Google, Imageinjection & Pinterest. Read our Disclaimer/Legal Statement! Donate to Support Us We would like to ask you to consider a small donation to help our team keep working. We accept no advertising and rely only on you, our readers, to keep us digging the truth on history, global politics and international relations.  
A Biography of Kurt Waldheim (Austria) – A Fourth U.N. Secretary-General
The U.N. Organization was established in 1945 for the very security reason – to preserve the peace in the world. We believe that the governmental bodies and administrative structures of the U.N. have to be composed by the proved democratically oriented politicians and magistrates but above all this requirement has to be applied to the post and function of the U.N. Secretary-General. Nevertheless, in the history of the U.N. there is at least one (extremely) problematic appointment to the post of the U.N. Secretary-General: Kurt Waldheim from Austria. On the official website of the U.N. about its fourth Secretary-General one can ...
The Croatian National Revival Movement (1830–1847) and the Serbs (I)
Top personalities of the Croatian Revival MovementPreface This text investigates the question of relations between the Croatian national revival movement and the Serbs from 1830 to 1847. Special investigation attention is put on the problem of how the language influenced ethnonational group identity among the Croats and Serbs in Dalmatia, Croatia and Slavonia (the so-called Triune Kingdom) during the period of the Croatian national revival movement that was officially and not only formally named as the Illyrian Movement. This investigation is an attempt to reconstruct the mainstream of the politics by the leaders of the movement and their outlines on how ...
Can You Imagine? Readers on Еx-Yugoslavia
Recommended alternative reading list on the Yugoslav studies not used by mainstream corporative Western mass-media and top Western universities dealing with global security, world politics and international relations. Reading proposed readers below you can complete picture on the Yugoslav studies out of the official Western approach. March Pogrom 2004 Book and Photo Evidence KOSOVSKA GOLGOTA Intervju 1988 20 Principal Misconceptions on Kosovo Issue The Srebrenica Massacre Evidence Context Politics Edward S Herman Phillip Corwin Kosovo Murky Reality Lista Diane Budisavljevic 1941 Do 1945 by Владислав Б. Сотировић/Vladislav B. Sotirović Josip Broz Tito Bez Maske! by Владислав Б. Сотировић/Vladislav B. Sotirović Hayden Mass Killings and Images of Genocide in ...
The USA – The Real Reason Why They Are Never Winning Their Wars
This essay is inspired by Professor James Petras’s article, describing that the US never wins wars despite trillions of investments in her war budget and obvious military superiority. Professor Petras is of course right, the United States is currently engaged in seven bloody wars around the globe (Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya) and has not been winning one, including WWII. The question is: Why is that? To these wars, you may want to add the totally destructive and human rights adverse war that literally slaughters unarmed civilians, including thousands of children, in an open-air prison, Gaza, the US proxy war ...
Kosovo is not Serbia’s Kurdistan, but Balkan’s IS/Daesh
In the article “Kurdistan – Turkey’s Kosovo” Prof. Sotirović compared different aspects of Turkish Kurdistan case to the Kosovo one, found some parallels and pointed out Turkey’s hypocrisy.While Prof. Sotirović is right in his assessment that Turkey is hypocritical to say at least, he failed to expose the fundamental differences between Kurdistan and Kosovo. His article contains some inaccuracies, misinterpretations and lacks in detail. Such an imprecise comparison may lead a reader who is not familiar with Balkans to acquire a false impression. A reader might come to conclusion that Kosovo Albanians had experienced the same level of suffering and ...
Understanding Balkan Geopolitics
In his latest interview for Serbia’s National Public Service Radio, Srdja Trifkovic discusses the geopolitical significance of the Balkan Peninsula, through the centuries, in the context of today’s complex strategic equation in Southeastern Europe. Q: The Balkan Peninsula is an area where empires, cultures and religions have clashed for centuries. For starters, can we define the geostrategic significance of the Balkans, or at least to outline some of its permanent features? ST: Those permanent features are primarily geographic. The peninsula is the land bridge between Central Europe and the Middle East. At the same time, it is the point of encounter and ...
From Cold to “Hot War”? Operation Barbarossa II
I stated some months ago, while assembling a criminal dossier against the NATO powers for the ultimate war crime of aggression, that the build-up of NATO forces in Eastern Europe, particularly American, concentrated on the Baltic states and Ukraine, presaged hybrid war operations against Russia leading to a general war. This build up of forces and ancillary developments I termed Operation Barbarossa II in light of the remarkable similarities to the build up of forces by Nazi Germany for the invasion of the USSR in 1941 which the Germans code-named Operation Barbarossa. Events have only confirmed my views. The degradation of ...
French Documentary Exposes Ukraine’s Far-Right: “Ukraine – The Masks of the Revolution”
The activities of aggressive nationalist and neo-Nazi armed movements in present-day Ukraine are the focal point of Moreira’s documentary.  Their existence is not denied by any of his leading critics in France — even as they try to find excuses to justify their actions. On Wednesday, 3 February, as I was about to start assembling this article on the very important documentary about the Maidan broadcast by the French independent television channel Canal + on Monday evening, 1 February, I was headed off by breaking news on Russia Insider, carrying links to the first half of the documentary in English voice-over ...
Impeachment in American Political System
What is impeachment?Linguistically, the noun impeachment is a synonym for charging and it comes from the verb to impeach meaning to charge someone. In political science, the verb to impeach has two meanings: Formerly, to charge a person with treason or other very serious crime against the state or/and nation before the Parliament or National Assembly. Contemporary, to charge head of state (the President or similar) or minister with treason or with crimes against the state.As a noun with political meaning, impeachment means the charging of treason or other very serious crime which is brought against a head of state ...
Endless Atrocities: The US Role In Creating The North Korean Fortress-State
Paul Atwood, a Senior Lecturer in American Studies at the University of Massachusetts Boston, provides a concise summary of the history that informs North Korea’s “relations with the United States” and “drives its determination never to submit to any American diktat”. Excerpts from Atwood’s summary are here used as a framework, with other sources where indicated. Atwood notes it is an American “myth” that the “North Korean Army suddenly attacked without warning, overwhelming surprised ROK defenders.”  In fact, the North/South border “had been progressively militarized and there had been numerous cross border incursions by both sides going back to 1949.” Part of what ...
Trump Buys Lithuania, EU cannot Stop It
The US President Donald Trump is no doubt a successful businessman who rules his country as if it is a huge enterprise. And this kind of management, to his mind, should lead to success. And very often it really works. As a wise leader he uses different tools to reach his goals. Thus, the most cunning one, which the US exploits in Europe – is indirect influence on the EU countries to gain the desired aim. The EU just becomes a tool in “capable hands” of the US.Let us give the simple example. Last week the Ministry of National Defence ...
Bosnia, Cyprus and Kosovo: America and Islamism in the Balkans
The conflicts that engulfed the former Yugoslavia still remain unresolved in the political arena and open to Western political shenanigans and covert meddling from Turkey and Saudi Arabia in Bosnia and Kosovo.  Orthodox Christianity faces many attacks and only a naïve individual would claim that America and the hands of Turkey and Saudi Arabia are clean. Central Bosnia in 2016: Flags of the ISIS America and other Western nations did little to stop Turkey invading Cyprus in 1974 and creating a de-facto nation and altering the demographics of northern Cyprus and using this area for military purposes. Irrespective of the rights and wrongs ...
CIA:  The Politics of a Global Secret Police Force
The Senate Report’s revelations of CIA torture of suspects following the 9/11 bombing is only the tip of the iceberg.  The Report omits the history and wider scope of violent activity in which the CIA has been and continues to be involved.  CIA organized large scale death squad activities and extreme torture in Vietnam (Phoenix Project);  multiple assassinations of political leaders in the Congo, Chile, Dominican Republic, Vietnam, the Middle East, Central America and elsewhere; the kidnapping and disappearance of suspected activists in Iraq and Afghanistan; massive drug-running and narco-trafficking in the “Golden Triangle” in Southeast Asia and Central America (the Iran-Contra war).The Senate Report fails to locate ...
Video: The Dirty War on Syria – Prof. Tim Anderson on GRTV
Government propaganda and NGO misinformation have coloured the story of the war on Syria from its inception. Stepping in to set the record straight, Dr. Tim Anderson explores the real beginnings of the conflict, the players behind it, and their agenda in his new book, “The Dirty War on Syria: Washington, Regime Change and Resistance.”The Dirty War on Syria has relied on a level of mass disinformation not seen in living memory. In seeking ‘regime change’ the big powers sought to hide their hand, using proxy armies of ‘Islamists’, demonising the Syrian Government and constantly accusing it of atrocities. In ...
Albanian Organized Crime in UK and Mainstream Media
The anti Serbian hysteria, ignorance, corrupted officials, media and  public is something the British have to take consequences for.  The consequences are: blooming criminal,  narco business, robberies, theft, prostitution, kidnappings, radicalism, terrorism and other criminal officially supported (and) by Great Britain activities. But only while on Serbian soil. The Serbs were not allowed to defend their state form the criminals; there were NATO bombs to support Neonazi regime(s) in Croatia, radical Islamists in Bosnia and Islamofascists Albanian quasi state Kosovo, built on drug trade, prostitution and Serbian harvested organs.Since Albanians were not happy with ‘Kosovo’ state anymore, and after they ...
Is it an Empire? See the Facts
Origins of images: Facebook, Twitter, Wikimedia, Wikipedia, Flickr, Google, Imageinjection, Public Domain & Pinterest.Read our Disclaimer/Legal Statement!Donate to Support UsWe would like to ask you to consider a small donation to help our team keep working. We accept no advertising and rely only on you, our readers, to keep us digging the truth on history, global politics and international relations.SaveSave
How the Bosnian War paved the way for ISIS in Europe
ISIS has new turf, this time in Europe. The German magazine Der Spiegel reports that there are now remote villages in the mountains of northern Bosnia where where the ISIS flag flies, and residents live under Sharia law. Roughly half of Bosnians are Muslim, and the radical ultra-devout make up a very small percentage. But it appears that percentage is growing — and growing violent — as extremists are gaining a foothold in rural Bosnian society.There are between 200 and 300 Bosnians fighting with ISIS in Syria and Iraq, more than from any other European nation besides Belgium. The Der ...
Science in Serbia
There is nothing extraordinary in the science in Serbia. It would not deserve particular attention of the European scientific community, if it were not for the fact that  the case of Serbia turns out extraordinary, indeed.Let us start with an extraordinary question: would it be possible a state in contemporary Europe to sucumbe to a fashist rule (or  communist or any other totalitarian government)? The answer is extraordinary too - yes. The case in point is Serbia.The trick is marked by Kosovo (see, e.g. P. Grujić, Kosovo Knot, 2014). When this southern province of Serbia, Kosovo and Metohia (Kosovo in ...
Neocon 101: What do Neoconservatives Believe?
“Neocons” believe that the United States should not be ashamed to use its unrivaled power – forcefully if necessary – to promote its values around the world. Some even speak of the need to cultivate a US empire. Neoconservatives believe modern threats facing the US can no longer be reliably contained and therefore must be prevented, sometimes through preemptive military action.Most neocons believe that the US has allowed dangers to gather by not spending enough on defense and not confronting threats aggressively enough. One such threat, they contend, was Saddam Hussein and his pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. Since ...
9/11: The Questions
A Biography of Kurt Waldheim (Austria) – A Fourth U.N. Secretary-General
The Croatian National Revival Movement (1830–1847) and the Serbs (I)
Can You Imagine? Readers on Еx-Yugoslavia
The USA – The Real Reason Why They Are Never Winning Their Wars
Kosovo is not Serbia’s Kurdistan, but Balkan’s IS/Daesh
Understanding Balkan Geopolitics
From Cold to “Hot War”? Operation Barbarossa II
French Documentary Exposes Ukraine’s Far-Right: “Ukraine – The Masks of the Revolution”
Impeachment in American Political System
Endless Atrocities: The US Role In Creating The North Korean Fortress-State
Trump Buys Lithuania, EU cannot Stop It
Bosnia, Cyprus and Kosovo: America and Islamism in the Balkans
CIA: The Politics of a Global Secret Police Force
Video: The Dirty War on Syria – Prof. Tim Anderson on GRTV
Albanian Organized Crime in UK and Mainstream Media
Is it an Empire? See the Facts
How the Bosnian War paved the way for ISIS in Europe
Science in Serbia
Neocon 101: What do Neoconservatives Believe?

Written by Policraticus

SHORT LEGAL DISCLAIMER: The website’s owner & editor-in-chief has no official position on any issue published at this website. The views of the authors presented at this website do not necessarily coincide with the opinion of the owner & editor-in-chief of the website. The contents of all material (articles, books, photos, videos…) are of sole responsibility of the authors. The owner & editor-in-chief of this website is not morally, scientifically or legally responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in the contents of all material found on this website. The owner & editor-in-chief of this website is not responsible for the content of external internet sites. No advertising, government or corporate funding for the functioning of this website. The owner & editor-in-chief and authors are not morally, scientifically or legally responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in the text and material found on the website