Fredhavn d. 10.05.99

Til interesserede og ansvarlige. Jeg tillader mig at fremsende nedenstående opsummering af og kommentar til den nye såkaldte G8-fredsplan - skrevet af Jan Øberg d. 7. maj.

Uanset om man kan tilslutte sig alle Jan Øbergs 10 kritikpunkter, så vil alle sikkert mene, at de bør indgå i den nødvendige drøftelse for at komme ud af den på alle måder ubærlige situation vi befinder os i i øjeblikket. Øberg har jo allerede fået ret i sin analyse af planen i og med at NATO bare intensiverer bombningen. (Og Øberg skrev jo før fejlbombningen af den kinesiske ambasade. )

Og at FN's hjælpekasse til krigsflygtningene nu er tømt som følge af EU's og EU(NATO)-landenes svig med betalinger ( - efter at man tidligere sagde, at det var bedst for flygtningene at blive i nærområdet fremfor at hente dem i "hvide buser") . Det fortæller at kosovaalbanerne forbliver brikker der først oversees, så (mis)bruges som legitimering og nu som krigsflygtninge ofres efter NATO/EU-politikernes økonomiske prioritering af krigen fremfor flygtningehjælp. Altså prioritering af en fortsat luftkrig uden ligposer. Vel for kynisk at bevare vælgernes opbakning. Også her i et udholdenhedskapløb med Milosevic og Sesselj: Hvem er bedst til at styre sine medier? Når danskerne er de allerivrigste til at bakke krigen op - samtidig med at de frivilligt vil hjælpe flygtninge som aldrig før - har det så noget at gøre med mediernes neglicering af den serbiske organiserede fredsoppositions appeller i over 1 måned nu?

De nævnte begivenheder understreger behovet for at de ledere, der har ført os ind i militarismens blingyde nu tager bestik af situationen og med et åbent sind begynder at læse alternative fredspolitiske tænkere - som f.eks Jan Øberg her.

Venligst Arne Hansen


On Fri, 7 May 1999 09:46:00 +0200, Transnational Foundation TFF <> wrote:

P r e s s I n f o # 6 7

G 8 K O S O V O P R I N C I P L E S -


May 7, 1999

"The G8 foreign ministers' declaration of principles to resolve the Kosovo

"crisis" is a mishmash of face-saving elements for the West and addresses

none of the root causes of the conflict or the failure of the West as a

mediator," says TFF director Jan Oberg. "This declaration may be used to

justify continued bombing and, if implemented, promises a very sad future

for the Balkans. But 'conflict illiteracy' abounds, so leading media call

it a peace plan - repeating their treatment of Rambouillet." Here follows

the full G8 text of principles as published by BBC on May 6.

- - - - -

"The following general principles must be adopted and implemented to

resolve the Kosovo crisis:

* Immediate and verifiable end of violence and repression in Kosovo.

* Withdrawal from Kosovo of military, police and paramilitary forces.

* Deployment in Kosovo of effective international civil and security

presences, endorsed and adopted by the United Nations, capable of

guaranteeing the achievement of the common objectives.

* The establishment of an interim administration for Kosovo, to be decided

by the Security Council of the United Nations to ensure conditions for a

peaceful and normal life for all inhabitants for Kosovo.

* The safe and free return of all refugees and displaced persons and

unimpeded access to Kosovo by humanitarian aid organisations.

* A political process towards the establishment of an interim political

framework. An agreement providing for substantial self-government for

Kosovo, taking full account of the Rambouillet accords and the principles

and sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of

Yugoslavia and other countries of the region and the demilitarisation of

the UCK.

* Comprehensive approach to the economic development and stabilisation of

the crisis region."

- - - - -

"Here are 10 reasons why this declaration can be seen as another peace plan


1. The ministers call this a "crisis" and not a "conflict" or a "war." That

indicates that their purpose is to create a face-saving formula for the

crisis created by NATO's Balkan bombing blunder. People in

Yugoslavia (FRY), the Kosovars in particular and the surrounding countries

see it as a conflict that exploded in war and aggression. The principles

grasp none of the deep roots of the conflict itself and focus on none of

the needs of the peoples living in the region.

2. They avoid reference to NATO's bombing and under what conditions it

would stop.

3. The ministers begin with withdrawal of FRY forces (which, all or some,

from where to where?) and ends with a general reference to (later)

demilitarisation of the UCK under the point "political process." This

continues the lack of balance - introduced last year by ambassador

Holbrooke - in dealing with two fighting parties/forces in a civil war.

4. It does not state whether all or some FRY forces shall be withdrawn. It

mentions 'demilitarization' of UCK, but can there be an Army without

weapons? If so, is this an endorsement of the KLA-dominated 'government'

recently formed outside the constitution and political framework of Kosova?

5. The ministers avoid defining the international "presences;" but the

wording 'international civil and security' does represent an important

move away from "NATO alone" over "NATO lead" and "international security

force with a NATO core." Good that the UN is, finally, to play a role, but

will it be as leader or as a hostage holding the rubber stamp?

6. Reference to the territorial integrity and sovereignty of FRY is not

enough. The declaration does not mention that FRY shall be consulted about

its own future. The UN Security Council shall decide about an interim

administration and the interim political framework shall take full account

of the Rambouillet accords. But they violated the integrity and sovereignty

of FRY and were no 'accords.'

7. The ministers seem to believe that it is an 'interim administration for

Kosovo' rather than a socio-psychological, people-based peace-building

process which will bring peace to the region. This continues the disastrous

top-down 'engineering' or 'managerial' approach to conflict where a shift

to consultation, trust-building, and regeneration of civil society is much


8. The declaration is most interesting for what it does not say a word

about, namely: a) local and regional trust- and confidence-building, b)

consulting with FRY and KLA/UCK and Dr. Rugova, c) negotiations between the

conflict's core parties, and d) a Balkan regional approach and process.

9. The ministers avoid mentioning any regret or apology to the peoples of

Yugoslavia for the civilian deaths and damage caused - and thus fails

pitifully to open the door to reconciliation between NATO countries and the

10 million citizens of FRY. Lacking both in self-criticism and empathy, the

G8 believes that NATO countries can get away with first failing in

violence-prevention, then in impartial mediation and now in aggression and

then become a trusted, legitimate peacemaker!

10. With so many crucial issues left out and so much vagueness, FRY is

likely to ask for clarifications or say no - and then NATO can legitimate

continued bombing of those who say no to 'peace principles.'

This document fails to open a single door to genuine conflict-solution. It

addresses neither the original roots causes of the Albanian-Serb conflict,

nor the much worse regional and world crisis created by NATO's disastrous


The obscurities, the omissions, the shortness, the contradictions and the

absence of any expression of empathy with human suffering indicate the deep

divisions among the drafters. Russia is 'on board' this - if they are -

only because the West is more important to it than Kosovo. I would be

surprised if Yugoslavia perceives it as anything but window-dressing. It is

tragic that the most powerful leaders have learnt no lessons about

conflict-resolution. To paraphrase Einstein, with NATO's bombings since

March 24, everything has changed except the most powerful leaders' way of

thinking about conflict and 'peace' and thus we drift towards more

catastrophes," predicts Jan Oberg.

© TFF 1999

You are welcome to reprint, copy, archive, quote or re-post this item, but

please retain the source.


Dr. Jan Oberg

Director, head of the TFF Conflict-Mitigation team

to the Balkans and Georgia


Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research

Vegagatan 25, S - 224 57 Lund, Sweden

Phone +46-46-145909 (0900-1100)

Fax +46-46-144512



NB.Hvis nogen allerede abbonnerer på TFF's emails, så vil jeg gerne om man lige vil melde det tilbage herom, så I kan slippe for 2 emails en anden gang?

Andre har mulighed for selv at tilmelde sig jævnfør TFF's email- og internetadresse her over.