On the evening of 24 March, local time, NATO's
order for air strikes against the Yugoslav Federation [FRY] was
translated into action. This was the first time in its 50 years of
existence that NATO has taken military action against a sovereign state.
Kosovo is a province of the Serb Republic of the FRY, and its ethnic
contradictions and bloody conflicts are in the final analysis an internal
affair of the FRY. In launching military action against a sovereign state
in this fashion without UN Security Council authorization, NATO is
obviously violating to a serious degree the "UN Charter" and the
principles of international law. Why are the western countries headed by
the United States so keen on interfering in the Kosovo crisis and are now
launching a major attack on the FRY?
The United States and other western countries have declared that their
intervention in the Kosovo crisis is for the sake of preserving "human
rights" and preventing a "genocidal" mass slaughter there, and also
preventing this conflict from involving neighboring countries and
threatening European security.
Are these the true facts? No.
Having absorbed Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary, NATO has the
insatiable desire to continue to expand toward the area of the former
Soviet Union. And the FRY is a state in an extremely important strategic
position in the Balkans and also has good relations with Russia; it has
thus become an obstacle on the road of NATO's further eastward expansion.
Today NATO forces are waving the signboard of "peacekeeping" and
attempting in vain to hit the FRY with air strikes and to forcibly occupy
Kosovo, thus to split and weaken the FRY and then further reduce Russia's
sphere of influence and establish a European security pattern dominated
by NATO. This is the first strategic conspiracy of the United States and
other western countries.
US Secretary of Defense Cohen has said that NATO's credibility is on
the line in Kosovo. Why should he say that? After the end of the cold
war, NATO should have died a natural death following the demise of the
Warsaw Pact. Yet in addition to ceaselessly expanding eastward, NATO also
wants to formulate a so-called new strategy of development in the next
century, and the core of this new strategy is to expand NATO's functions
and scope and to intervene militarily, without UN authorization, in all
crises outside NATO's defense area that are held to threaten the security
of the alliance. Next month NATO will hold a summit in Washington to
discuss this new strategy, and it so happens that the Kosovo crisis has
become a "touchstone" for the United States to test this new strategy.
This is another conspiracy of the United States and other western
Since the end of the cold war, it has been the consistent aim of the
United States to establish a one-pole world dominated by itself. US
Secretary of State Albright said undisguisedly, regarding the Kosovo
peace accord, that it would be "a table without legs" unless there were
troops stationed there.
This means that if the FRY signs the peace
accord, NATO forces will enter Kosovo without firing a shot; and if the
FRY refuses to sign, NATO forces will fight their way into Kosovo -- no
matter whether the accord is reached or not, NATO troops will enter and
Having occupied Kosovo, NATO forces could directly press up to the CIS,
dismantle Russian control over the CIS, and then directly
insert NATO force southward into the Middle East. In this way the road
would be open for the United States to use NATO to intervene throughout
the globe and dominate the world. Russian Strategic Studies Center
Director Korokin recently pointed out that NATO's recent moves were
driven by US interests. These words are not without basis. This is the
most important US strategic conspiracy in the Kosovo issue.
The military attack will naturally damage the FRY, but the question now
is, is there no danger in NATO's military intervention in Kosovo?