|
International Network of Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation |
 |
 |
|
I do not feel alone in opposing the weight of government thinking on this matter. Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter criticized the NATO campaign, stating: "The decision to attack the entire nation has been counterproductive, and our destruction of civilian life has ... become senseless and excessively brutal." Former Soviet Leader Mikhail Gorbachev said the possibilities for a political solution were not used, and NATO's disregarding the views of countries like Russia, China, and India has placed the world "in a very, very difficult situation." Pope John Paul II deplored the human suffering caused by the bombing. Here in Canada, James Bissett, former Canadian Ambassador to Yugoslavia, said: "NATO's unprovoked attack is a blatant violation of every precept of international law." The historian Michael Bliss said NATO's action was "ill-considered and reckless."
Let us consider for a moment what actually happened. Using 700 aircraft and 20 ships, NATO flew nearly 35,000 sorties, dropping 20,000 bombs on 600 cities, towns and villages. There were 13,000 civilian casualties, including 2,500 dead. Utilities, roads, bridges, hospitals, clinics and schools were destroyed along with military targets. There has been no spring planting and, thus, there will be no autumn harvest. Countless wells, which are the principal water source, have been poisoned with human bodies, dead animals, and toxic substances like paint and gasoline. The NATO bombardment, which cost NATO countries about $100 million a day, has set much of Yugoslavia back into a pre-industrial state and the cost of rebuilding the demolished infrastructure will be between $50 billion and $150 billion.
Western media have downplayed the fact that the negotiations between U.S. envoys and Milosevic were on the verge of an agreement. The Serb Parliament was ready to accept the withdrawal of the bulk of Serb forces from Kosovo, and permit the entry into Kosovo of 1,800 unarmed international inspectors, and would allow overflights by NATO planes. NATO threatened air strikes to force a peace agreement to be monitored exclusively by NATO's ground troops. The negotiations foundered on NATO's threat to bomb. Once NATO had issued this threat, it felt compelled to follow through. Thus, when Milosevic rebelled, NATO - without a legal mandate - started bombing. NATO persisted in the bombing because the credibility of NATO had become the issue.[...]
The consequences of the imposition of force by the nuclear-armed Western military alliance have been startling. The military action has virtually halted Russian-American consultations on nuclear disarmament, buried the START II Treaty, and has bred a dangerous trend pushing some countries out of the non-proliferation regime. China, whose Belgrade embassy was bombed, has excoriated the U.S. and NATO for bullying tactics. NATO should learn that humiliating the Russians and the Chinese is no way to build world peace. Only a decade after the end of the Cold War, the hopes for a cooperative, global security system have been dashed on the rocks of power. The trust, engendered during the early post-Cold War years, is now shattered. New arms races are under way.
It has been said that the NATO action was a "just war," and Senator Grafstein cited Hugo Grotius, the father of international law, to advance this idea. However, two of the requirements for a "just war" are limitation and proportionality. The damage must be limited to combatants and no greater than the securing of a military objective. Such rules were formulated before the technological development of modern warfare. Killing and damage, as Kosovo showed, are now indiscriminate. The phrase "collateral damage" is military doublespeak, covering up the killing of innocent people. It was said that the bombing was to stop the ethnic cleansing of the Kosovars. When the bombing started, there were 45,000 Kosovar refugees who had fled. After the strikes began, the number of refugees swelled to 855,000. Bombing worsened their situation. [...]
It is a tragic irony that, after all the NATO blundering, we are back to where we were before the bombing - with the U.N. Security Council now determining how to maintain international peace and security. Moreover, the potential sovereignty for Kosovo, the stumbling block of the Rambouillet agreement, has now been removed. It is only through the United Nations that the whole international community can jointly pursue such basic Charter values as democracy, pluralism, human rights and the rule of law. As Secretary General Kofi Annan has stated: "Unless the Security Council is restored to its preeminent position as the sole source of legitimacy on the use of force, we are on a dangerous path to anarchy."
Excerpts from a speech in the Canadian Senate, June 15, 1999.
The Pancevo complex, a combined petrochemical, fertilizer and polyvinyl chloride manufacturing complex, was bombed repeatedly in April 1999. Chemical storage tanks there reportedly released into the air, soil, and water large amounts of ammonia, ethylene dichloride, and vinyl chloride. Also reportedly released were 100 tons of mercury, 800 tons of hydrochloric acid, 3000 tons of caustic soda, and 250 tons of liquid chlorine. (The New York Times, July 14,1999, p. Al)
The burning of chlorinated chemicals creates other toxic byproducts, such as dioxins. Traces of phosgene, a highly dangerous World War I chemical warfare agent also used as a common industrial chemical, were also reportedly found. It is unclear whether phosgene was stored at the plant or whether it was the by- product of the combustion of other chemicals.
The bombing of the plant sent toxic fumes into the air of the city of Pancevo and nearby areas. Favorable winds appear to have prevented large-scale immediate casualties. The plant premises are apparently so contaminated that western journalists who inspected the rubble more than a month after the bombings „became violently sick from breathing in the Pancevo air" (May 24 National Public Radio report). The New York Times reported on July 14 that people in Pancevo have suffered a „surge of unexplained symptoms," like headaches, skin rashes and increasing miscarriages.
Since toxic fumes from large fires typically travel quite far, they could affect a wide region, including some of the member countries of NATO. Further, since the fires can last for hours or days, the spread of the toxic fumes would likely be along many wind directions, rather than in one elongated pattern in a single principal direction characteristic of a short-term accidental release.
In order to prevent large-scale poisoning of the air in the area, the plant authorities released some of the chemicals, including highly toxic ethylene dichloride, into a nearby channel that flows into the Danube River. As of May 24, the ethylene dichloride was at the bottom of the canal and had not yet entered the river (ethylene dichloride is insoluble in and denser than water). The Danube is the source of drinking water for millions of people downstream in Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Moldova. Pollutants in the river water may also cause increased damage to ecosystems in reservoirs downstream created by two dams, known as Djerdap Dam I and Djerdap Dam II. The generating systems are partly owned by Yugoslavia and partly by Romania.
Source: Ecological and Health Implications of NATO Bombing in Yugoslavia, Science for Democratic Action, Vol.7, No.4, July 1999.
Douglas Roche was Canadian Ambassador for Disarmament, and is Chair of the Middle Powers Initiative.
|
|
|