 |  |  |
| Return to: Left History: a digital archive | Return to: Say no to imperialist wars! | Return to: NATO-Yugoslav War Internet Resources |
| | |
| Return to: Left History: a digital archive | Return to: Say no to imperialist wars! | Return to: NATO-Yugoslav War Internet Resources |
The CC of the CPG, at its meeting on 10 July 1999, examined the situation taking shape in the Balkan region after NATO's attack against Yugoslavia and the imposition of the G8 agreement on 'peace-keeping in the region and stabilisation in the Balkans'.
1. The imperialist war launched by the US and its NATO allies on 24 March 1999 against the peoples of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia on the pretext of the rights of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo confirms the assessments and correctness of the CPG predictions that were expressed as early as 1992 in the 'Positions of the CC on developments in the Balkans' (25.2.1992), in the decisions of the Party's15th Congress (May 1996), and the CC Resolution on 'The situation taking shape in the Balkans and in the Aegean after the Dayton Accord. Developments in the Cyprus issue' (22 February 1997).
The conditions that came into being after the reversal of the socialist system in Europe, the self-abolition of the Warsaw Pact and the disintegration of the Soviet Union showed clearly that the peoples had lost their great support in the struggle against imperialism, imperialist oppression and capitalist exploitation, and in their struggle for progress, development, democracy and socialism.
The victory of the counter-revolution also revealed the real face of capitalism to the broader masses. The desire of monopoly capital to be supreme gives rise to a constant battle over the distribution and redistribution of markets. It sharpens rivalries between imperialist forces, increases the oppression and reactionary spirit that characterise all the manifestations of imperialism, and opposes countries, peoples, and popular movements that fight back. The reversals unleashed the aggressiveness of imperialism and helped it put its plans into action more easily, by weakening the forces of resistance.
The war and the instruments being used by the imperialist forces ever more frequently these days to impose their own interests are inherent in the nature of the system, which is why we must resist, reveal and fight against them. These instruments include:
The aggression and reaction that characterise international relations are integrally linked to the offensive against the labour and popular gains in each country, through extensive privatisations, mergers and buy-outs that foster the creation of monopoly giants.
With these developments, the CC believes that the war against the F.R. of Yugoslavia constitutes the most comprehensive application of the new NATO action doctrine at the present time. The first form of the new doctrine was tested in the Balkans in the war against Bosnia-Herzegovina which ended in the imperialist agreement of Dayton. The new NATO doctrine is part of the efforts being made by imperialism under present conditions, headed by the US and the EU, to 'protect and consolidate the global capitalist system' in the western hemisphere from the dangers that threaten it.
2. The CC believes that there are rapidly increasing dangers to the life and safety of the peoples from the multiple and profound effects of the economic crises, the battle between the imperialist forces on an international and regional level over who will get the fattest share of the new markets being created after the reversal of the socialist system. Despite the fact that imperialism dominates world-wide and the resistance movement is still in retreat, the imperialists do not feel confident. They can foresee the processes taking place in the minds of the people, the upsurge of the popular movements. They want to avert any dispute of their supposedly universal power. They have become aware that the peoples of Europe are not easily persuaded either of the need for war or that EMU is the only road. In addition, their abilities to use the classical methods and recipes for intervention are limited, particularly on a national-state level, but also on the inter-state level, which they have used in the past to mitigate some of the effects of the crisis, to defuse the peoples' opposition with temporary 'concessions'.
The imperialists have chosen to organise an even stronger aggressive policy against the peoples and to militarise international relations by escalating the arms race. They want to bring the peoples to their knees with the violence of war and terrorism. Their strategy intensifies instability, creating the risk of regional wars and even of a generalised military conflict.
3. The attack on Yugoslavia, the way in which it was planned with the meetings at Rambouillet and in Paris, show clearly that the Balkan region continues to be the focal point of the rivalry between the imperialist forces, and that it retains its geostrategic importance: the Balkans' neighbours are the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, the Mediterranean, North Africa, the Gulf countries and the former Soviet Republics, and the region is the connecting link for Eurasian energy routes (oil and gas pipelines etc.).
The US is facing the difficulties of implementing the agreements on Palestine, with the opposition of countries in North Africa and the hurdles being raised by the objections of some countries to the achievement of the US objective of creating a zone of exclusive US interests from the Balkans to the Caucasus and the Indian Ocean.
In the Balkans, the rivalry between Germany and the US has resulted in the dismemberment of the united Yugoslavia, war in Bosnia-Herzegovina, war in Kosovo and more generally the destabilisation of the region. These two countries are trying to create weak satellite states in the Balkans so as to consolidate their influence in the region by setting up weak governments or governments that are submissive to the major powers.
The F.R. of Yugoslavia constituted a barrier to these plans, as it refused to take part in the New World Order being built by the imperialists in the region and resisted it in all ways. The present situation and the attempt to impose a solution through the NATO military intervention and through the violation of Yugoslavia's territorial sovereignty and of the international legality which had been established at least statutorily have created an explosive situation with a chain of effects starting from the dissolution.
A change of frontiers in Kosovo, with the help of the NATO occupation army and force of arms, would create intense disruptive pressures in FYROM with the direct involvement of Serbia, Bulgaria, Albania, Turkey and Greece.
The CC believes that there is real danger of a generalised change of frontiers and of a more general war. But the imperialists' threat to declare a new war will be used to demand the region's full submission to their plans.
The pushing aside of the UN on decisions as important as attacking a sovereign state shows that NATO will not tolerate any type of control, not even in the formal sense, over its decisions. The US and NATO want complete freedom of movement and are now making rules that support the concept that might is right.
4. The bombing of the F.R. of Yugoslavia marked the entry of Europe and of humanity in general, into a new and even more reactionary period. This war is the living proof of what the new NATO doctrine means, and what the true objectives of the EU are in the century we are preparing to enter. The attack on the F.R. of Yugoslavia led humanity into an age of completely arbitrary action, with the most characteristic viewpoint and practice being all forms of intervention against governments and peoples, against movements, and against elementary sovereign and democratic rights. NATO already admits that a cause for war is not only the hypocritical argument about 'protecting human rights', but obtaining full control of the flow and exploitation of a country's natural resources, its political and economic system, etc.
The war against Yugoslavia showed that the process of destabilising the Balkans continues. It was inaugurated with the dissolution of the united Yugoslavia, continued with the Dayton accord and the conversion of Bosnia-Herzegovina into a NATO protectorate, and proceeded further with the open military intervention of the NATO countries in Albania within the framework of the 'Alba' operation, where the member states of the Western European Union helped 'reorganise' the Albanian armed forces and police, with the prominent presence of Italy and Greece; then through the conversion of Albania essentially into a US and western European protectorate. The NATO presence increased in Bosnia and FYROM, while all the countries in the region are facing ever graver economic and social problems and a very high degree of political instability. In Bosnia, just 100,000 of the 800,000 refugees, of whom 300,000 are Serbs, have returned to their homes and NATO has extended its presence there indefinitely; at the same time the all-round failure of the Dayton agreement is admitted.
The CPG emphasises to the Greek people that these facts are anything but solely local in meaning. They prepare the ground for the full legitimisation of a new international law according to which imperialist war is sanctified, the principles of non-intervention in the domestic affairs of a state are abolished even formally, and any concept of national independence or sovereign rights is dispensed with.
The danger to our country is immediate, as with the active contribution and compliance of the Greek government but also the consent of the majority of the political forces, the road has been opened to new interventions in the region to the detriment of Greece: through the exploitation, among other things, of any differences that exist and may be cultivated with neighbouring countries such as Turkey, but also with countries on our northern frontiers, as protectorate states are being created. Processes are under way that will lead to legalising the partition of the Aegean and of Cyprus.
The stance taken by the Greek government is exceptionally dangerous, as is that of the other parties who finally adopt, in one form or another, the position that participation in the imperialist world order must be accompanied by something in return, in the logic of sharing the booty. Only the Greek plutocracy can gain from war or from the knife-to-the-throat policy. The Greek people and the peoples of the neighbouring countries will be the losers; they will find themselves facing new dangers.
5. Developments show that the leadership of Russia, despite the opposition and mood prevailing among its people, has been treated as part of the imperialist system, as a tool to bring pressure on the government of Yugoslavia to accept the supremacy of NATO in Kosovo as an occupation force. The war also showed that rivalry is increasing between the leading forces of NATO, especially the US, and the Russian Federation. Russia, despite its cautious attitude, will find itself confronting dangers in its region through the constant intervention of the US and European countries who want the former republics of the USSR to be adversaries. The magnet here is the exploitation of Eurasian raw materials; this is what determines the stance of the imperialist forces against the peoples of the former USSR. Along the way, rivalry may lead to a more or less open confrontation. It has been demonstrated that today's Russia cannot play the role of the counterweight once played by the USSR with its orientation and power.
6. The agreement signed by the G8 countries on 10 June 1999 expresses the adverse correlation of forces among the 19 countries that precipitated the war, and the leadership of the F.R. of Yugoslavia. Most of the ambitions of NATO and the EU were satisfied in the agreement, an effort was made to divide up the markets and the booty; temporary balances were formed between the adversaries, without ending the conflict between them. The so-called 'Stability Agreement', the distribution of the Balkans to the detriment of the peoples, is the most flagrant form of extortion. The presence of NATO in all the arrangements foreseen under the agreement is paramount. The economic and political situation comes under the direct control of the imperialist governments and organisations such as the IMF, the World Bank, the European Investments Bank and the European Reconstitution and Development Bank.
The CC believes that the real 'Balkanisation' is beginning now. The terms included in the agreement leave no doubt about this. They dictate political and economic commitments to these countries, from the way they organise their elections to the opening of their markets to foreign trade and to monopoly capital with a mandatory programme of privatisations, etc. and with no form of control.
The heroic people of the F.R. of Yugoslavia, who have been devastated by the criminal NATO bombing, are being openly blackmailed into overthrowing its political leadership in order to ensure reconstruction of their ruined country, and the Republic of Montenegro is being called upon openly to differentiate its position and to become one of the instruments used to make Yugoslavia submit to the will of the imperialists. The uncontrolled actions by the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army (UCK) under the aegis of NATO shows clearly what sort of peace the imperialists want in the Balkans.
7. Regarding the stance of the Greek government, the reference in the CPG Programme passed at the 15th Congress, confirmed that 'the Greek oligarchy maintains close ties with all three imperialist centres. It aspires to play an intermediary role between the European Union and NATO on the one hand and between Balkan and Mediterranean countries on the other, and to strengthen its economic, political and military presence in the region. These aims make it more willing to participate in expansionist imperialist plans.'
The Greek government bears historic responsibilities. The PASOK government acted contrary to the opinion of the large majority of the Greek people who deplored in various ways not only the war but also Greek participation in it. The government defied the feeling and reason of the Greek people with its two-faced stance, and while participating in the war, declared peace. The decision of Greece to take part in the war also reflects the aggressive stance of the country's hard core big capital which intends to become active in the markets of the Balkans and beyond. Since the beginning of the Kosovo crisis, the government acted as it had previously, with measures against Yugoslavia, and accepted the EU and NATO plans for war in Yugoslavia. It undertook to play the role defined by NATO and the EU in their effort to isolate the F.R. of Yugoslavia from the other Balkan countries. It signed the Joint Communique of Sofia which attributed blame for the tension to the Yugoslavs and hoped for the intervention of the 'international community'; immediately afterward, first the Minister of Foreign Affairs Th. Pangalos and then the Minister of Defence A. Tsohatzopoulos issued statements containing 'ideological' coverage for the war, citing the ethnic cleansing by the Serbs, and falling absolutely into line with the 'arguments' of the US and NATO.
Apart from this, the Greek government not only actively supported the Rambouillet plan at all stages, but it also attempted to draw the other Balkan countries into the position of supporting the plan actively. It agreed with all NATO and EU decisions and willingly conformed to their demands of support for the military operations. Beyond the facilities accorded by Greece, which constituted a violation of international law and of the Constitution, Greece is seriously involved in the military presence in Bosnia and in FYROM through its 'military co-operation with Albania'.
All the government's initiatives moved in the direction of bringing pressure to bear on the F.R. of Yugoslavia to adopt NATO choices in the different variations that were put forward from time to time. It aimed to play a special role in promoting the agreement on 'Stability in the Balkans', stepping up its rivalry with Italy and Turkey in the region. Already it has taken significant initiatives in the direction of studying the problems of rebuilding the Balkans and within this framework seeks to promote Greek capital when the pie is divided up.
8. After the G8 agreement and the formal termination of the war against Yugoslavia, the other opposition parties backed down significantly from any positive positions they had shown, to one degree or another, during the war.
Nea Demokratia has adopted the imperialist agreement completely, endorsing the presence of NATO troops, and opposing the government, for party partisan reasons, regarding the level of anything that it has secured, or failed to secure, in exchange.
The Synaspismos in particular, and DIKKI too, did not oppose the NATO presence in the Balkans. They did not request the return of the Greek military units; they approved the demand that Thessaloniki constitute the centre of the 'reconstruction' of the Balkans. But they know very well that 'reconstruction' is an integral part of the new NATO doctrine and that the policy of forced restructuring will constitute a further strike against the suffering peoples of the Balkans. They attach no weight to strengthening the anti-NATO and anti-war movement under the new conditions.
9. Despite the situation prevailing in the US and in Western Europe, it is a fact that the war against the F.R. of Yugoslavia ran into much stronger opposition and protest than did the previous NATO intervention in Bosnia. Contributing to the popular awakening was the heroic and proud stance of the people of Yugoslavia who found themselves at the mercy of an overt offensive and devastating sanctions.
In the vanguard of this movement stood Communist, Workers' and Left parties, as well as broader peace-loving forces. The movement against the war and NATO in Europe would certainly have taken on much wider dimensions, and would have exercised more decisive pressure on governments, had the communist movement in Europe been in better shape from the point of view of orientation and common action.
Slowly but surely, however, the political and social base of this resistance seems to be growing. The role of the centre-left governments was revealed, who proved themselves to be equally as aggressive as the US, for they played a leading part in the undeclared war.
Unfortunately, some of these governments found support for this aggressive role from the communist parties in their own countries. The French CP, member of the Jospin government, provided a pretext for the war by proclaiming ethnic cleansing as its cause. An analogous stance was adopted by the Italian Communists who, despite their opposition to the war, remained in the government justifying their choice by saying that they were able to bring pressure from within to stop the war. Finally, the choices of these parties were used by the imperialist governments in the attempt to persuade their peoples that the war against Yugoslavia was a just war.
Our Party, from the first moment, raised the banner in opposition to this criminal war. It called the Greek people to unity and resistance and took significant initiatives in the Balkans, among the parties of the NATO member-states and among the parties with whom it collaborates in the European Parliament and in the Council of Europe.
There was a positive impact from the Joint Communique of the Communist and Workers' Parties of the Balkan countries. It helped mobilise anti-NATO forces in the Balkans, particularly in Bulgaria. Important voices were raised and active protests made by the Communist Movement in FYROM, and particularly by the Union of Communists of Macedonia and by some forces in Croatia. The decision by most of the CPs in the Balkan countries to organise a common day of action on 2 June 1999 was significant.
On the initiative of the CPG, there was the Joint Communique by 16 Communist, Workers' and Left Parties of the NATO member-states, including Turkey, which condemned NATO's war.
Significant mobilisations took place in Russia, the Czech Republic, and Hungary. The Democratic Socialist Party of Germany was also active, and despite its differing assessments of the internal situation in Yugoslavia, developed noteworthy anti-war activity.
The Joint Communique of Nicosia should be regarded as a significant initiative, as should the fact that, on the initiative of the CPG, the Council of Europe invited a parliamentary delegation from the F.R. of Yugoslavia to Strasbourg.
There was also the Joint Communique of the Communist Parties in the Arab countries. Another important contribution was the Common Appeal by 48 Communist and Workers' Parties against the NATO attack which was issued in May at the international conference on globalisation that took place in Athens.
The mobilisations in the Balkan countries and in Europe took on an increasingly mass character, contributing decisively to the shift in public opinion which, influenced by misinformation, was initially in agreement with the war. Our efforts must be stepped up to reinforce activities in the Balkans and in Europe, to expand them and to develop joint initiatives with the anti-imperialist movements in our neighbouring countries.
10. The agreement that was signed after 77 days of relentless bombing should not allow us to relax our vigilance or to become complacent. From the moment the guarantor of the 'peace' agreement is NATO, which was responsible for the war, all possibilities are open.
Our people must be vigilant and ready for action, because there is a chain of effects possible, such as a redrawing of borders, a new cycle of artificial conflicts and frictions, a new wave of migrants, and the intensification of nationalism and racism.
Greece, through the policy of the PASOK government, is already involved in the war. Greece is part of the crisis and not part of the solution, as the government claims.
Our Party once more warns that NATO and membership in it represents the number one danger to our country's territorial integrity and sovereign rights, to the dreams and expectations of our people to live in a Greece in which they will be in charge and will be able to decide on their own fate, on the social and economic system under which they want to live.
The manifestations of solidarity and support for the Yugoslav people must continue, together with the demand for reparation of all material damages, without the conditions imposed by those who ordered the criminal bombing.
The primary and most basic demand remains that the NATO army withdraw from the Balkans and that Greek participation in the occupation army cease. That the US and NATO military installations be removed from Greece, as they have converted our country into a centre for military and espionage operations against neighbouring peoples.
Popular mobilisations must be stepped up so that the Greek units return from Kosovo, but also from other Balkan countries, such as Bosnia and Albania. Our army is there within the framework of an imperialistic agreement, as an occupation army under US orders, and is acting in spite of and in opposition to its oath. The missions in Bosnia and Albania should return as should the naval ships that are in the service of NATO. The government bears a historic responsibility for sending Greek soldiers and military personnel into the jaws of the lion.
The popular struggle must continue in order to prevent our land, skies and sea from being used by planes and reconnaissance craft, and our ports from harbouring naval ships and providing transit facilities to military ordnance.
Thus it is necessary for the anti-NATO and anti-war front to be further strengthened, for its social base to be expanded, for the broadest possible forces to come together from all parties that want to resist, even if their leaderships have a different stance.
It is essential to create a socio-political alliance against the war and NATO. Developments show that strong evidence of indignation and rage against the imperialist new world order is beginning to appear.
New correlations of forces are being shaped from 'below', significant action is taking place � as has already been seen from the Ocalan case � which has culminated recently in the direction of anti-imperialist, anti-NATO alliances. These initiatives must be stepped up, especially in the workplace, among the working class and young people in order for this movement to acquire continuity and consistency, to isolate effectively the expressors of submission and chauvinism.
This unifying mass movement, which is more capable today owing to the rich experience it has gained recently, must rely on those who oppose the war and NATO consistently, who oppose the imperialist tactics of the EU which in new world order is co-responsible for the conditions its decides on and the practices it follows against the peoples of Europe and other continents.
The CPG is on the side of every people or minority (national, linguistic, religious, cultural) who claim their rights. Minorities can and should constitute bridges of friendship between peoples. Our Party notes that minorities should never become instruments in the hands of imperialism, and especially not now when, throughout the length and breadth of the Earth, they are being used as tools allowing the imperialists to intervene and to justify war and operations of all kinds. The imperialists are not at all interested in peoples and minorities, but only in promoting geostrategic interests by provoking a confrontation, and indeed in the most extreme forms such as war. Under the conditions of the class society and international action by imperialism, minorities must demand their rights in conjunction and in joint action with the people of the country they live in. Common class interests are the basis for confronting divisive efforts, whether they come from local governments or from the foreign factor, whether from their own leaders, who often pursue secession or autonomy not to liberate their people from oppression, but to oppress it themselves or to enjoy the rewards of falling in with the strategic plans of the imperialist countries.
The CPG rejects deliberate the theoretical tricks and fabrications that seek to impose on the people the logic of participation in imperialism's new world order, the logic of greedy participation in the distribution of the booty. It calls on the people to reject categorically any sermon involving a slavish or servile mentality, to turn their backs on the devious theory of so-called realism. It rejects categorically the crafty incitements to the people to adjust the ideas of patriotism and internationalism to the idea that the imperialist world order is inevitable. It condemns the systematic ideological effort by the centre of imperialism, but also by the government and most of the political forces in Greece, who make opposition to the new NATO doctrine and to the imperialist war appear to be a conservative and nationalistic stance.
The Greek people, and the great majority of the peoples on earth, are equipped with the experience of the 20th century that was marked by great struggles of world-shaking significance against powerful enemies and adversaries, both at home and on the international level. The Greek people, as all the peoples on earth, have passed through fire and the sword, through various ordeals, they have lived through storms, and they know that a people united and resolute cannot be beaten. Imperialism is not invincible.
The CPG will contribute on both the national and international level, with all its forces, with initiatives that will support and strengthen these directions. It will continue and step up its initiatives for common action by all anti-imperialist forces in the Balkans, Europe and the Mediterranean.