Powered by public netbase t0 -- please sign
uns bitte eure Nachrichten, Meldungen und Ideen.
MUND findet Ihr eine Rubrik, die eine Konsequenz aus der redaktionsinternen
Debatte um die Notwendigkeit, sexistische, antisemitische und rassistische
Beiträge nicht zu veröffentlichen, einerseits, die Problematik von
Zensur andererseits versucht: unter "B) Eingelangt, aber nicht aufgenommen"
wird - in anonymisierter Form - auf angehaltene Beiträge hingewiesen
und eine kurze Begründung der/des Tagesredaktuers für die Nichtaufnahme
geliefert. Die AbsenderInnen werden hiervon informiert.
Und für nächsten Donnerstag:
...und was mache ich eigentlich gegen rassisten?
01 Peace in Balkans Seminar REMINDER
From: "Carol Turner" <email@example.com>
Peace in the Balkans seminar takes place this Tuesday, 24th September, at 7pm. Details below. Please note the venue is Friends House, Euston Rd.
Public Seminar Series IV - Autumn/Winter 2002
War, terrorism and the media
With Michael Gavrilovic and Philip Hammond
Philip Hammond, co-author of Degraded capability: the media and the Kosovo crisis, joins Michael Gavrilovic to discuss the media's response to the United States war on terrorism, in Afghanistan, the Balkans, and elsewhere - against the looming threat of war on Iraq.
Philip Hammond is Senior Lecturer in Media at South Bank University. He has written about the media's coverage of NATO's bombing of Yugoslavia for newspapers such as the Independent and The Times.
7pm n Room 10-11, Friends Meeting House, 173 Euston Road, London NW1 (opposite Euston station)
Wednesday 16th October, 7pm, House of Commons - Tam Dalyell MP
Tuesday 26th November, 7pm, House of Commons - Alice Mahon MP
For further details, contact the Committee for Peace in the Balkans
c/o Alice Mahon MP, House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA
Tel 020 7582 6263 Email peaceinbalkans@freeserve .co.uk
Web site www.peaceinbalkans.freeserve.co.uk
Donations to the above address
MELDUNGEN UND KOMMENTARE
02 SPÖ-Wien will Prostitution kriminalisieren
From: "RA Univ.-Lekt. Dr. Helmut Graupner" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Mit der von der SPÖ geplanten Gesetzesnovelle würde die (1989 entkriminalisierte) homosexuelle Prostitution wieder zur Gänze kriminalisiert werden, weil in Wien nicht einmal 10 der männlichen Prostituierten registriert sind.
Selbst mit den wenigen registrierten wird Kontakt strafbar sein, wenn er nicht dem Gesetz gemäß erfolgt, also zB in einer Wohnung stattfindet, in einer Verbotszone angebahnt wird oder vom Prostituierten in "anstößiger" Weise angebahnt wird.
Für die Tatbegehung reicht Fahrlässigkeit (§ 5 VStG)! Samt Beweislastumkehr: die Fahrlässigkeit ist zu vermuten, wenn der "Täter" nicht glaubhaft macht, daß ihn kein Verschulden trifft (§ 5 VStG)!!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: "RA Univ.-Lekt. Dr. Helmut Graupner" <email@example.com>
To: "BASJ" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>; <rklist@RKLambda.at>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 11:23 PM
Subject: SPÖ-Wien will Prostitution kriminalisieren
> OTS184 5 II 0253 DS10005 CI 19.Sep 02
> SPÖ-Wehsely ad Prostituiertengesetz: "Freier werden erstmals zur
> Verantwortung gezogen!" =
> Utl.: Keine Strafverschärfungen für betroffene Frauen, sondern
> erstmals Strafen für die Freier illegaler Prostituierter
> Wien (SPW-K) - "Es geht nicht darum, den betroffenen Frauen zu
> schaden, sondern die Freier in die Pflicht zu nehmen: Die bestehende
> Regelung sieht bereits eine Strafe für illegale Prostitution vor -
> das weiß aber die Grüne Gemeinderätin Dr. Vana offensichtlich nicht",
> reagierte heute SPÖ-Gemeinderätin Mag. Sonja Wehsely auf Aussagen
> der grünen Gemeinderätin Vana zur anstehenden Novelle des Wiener
> Prostitutionsgesetzes. "Jetzt sollen erstmals auch die Männer, die
> die Dienste illegaler Prostituierter in Anspruch nehmen, bestraft
> werden!" ****
> Selbstverständlich würden von Stadträtin Renate Brauner im Vorfeld
> der Gesetzesnovelle "noch Gespräche mit ExpertInnen der Polizei und
> aus dem Sozialarbeiterbereich geführt", so Wehsely weiter. "Denn
> diese Menschen sind vor Ort tätig und können am besten beurteilen,
> welche Maßnahmen für die betroffenen Frauen eine Hilfestellung
> darstellen!" Insgesamt sei jedenfalls geplant, "die bestehenden
> niederschwelligen Einrichtungen und Angebote an
> Gesundheitsuntersuchungen für Prostituierte um das Angebot an
> HIV-Tests zu erweitern", unterstrich die SPÖ-Gemeinderätin. "Weiters
> sollen die eingenommenen Strafgelder von den Freiern ganz konkret für
> Ausstiegsprojekte für die Betroffenen verwendet werden."
> "Und was die Anerkennung der Sexarbeit als Erwerbszweig betrifft,
> sollte Frau Vana eigentlich wissen, dass das Bundessache ist.
> Generell würde ich mir mehr Sensibilität im Umgang mit dem Thema
> wünschen - geht es doch dabei um wichtige Verbesserung für viele vom
> Leben benachteiligte Frauen in unserer Stadt", schloss Wehsely.
> Rückfragehinweis: SPÖ Klub Rathaus, Presse
> Mag. Michaela Zlamal
> Tel.: (01) 4000-81930
> Mobil: 0699/1 944 77 40
> *** OTS-ORIGINALTEXT UNTER AUSSCHLIESSLICHER INHALTLICHER
> VERANTWORTUNG DES AUSSENDERS ***
> OTS184 2002-09-19/14:20
> 191420 Sep 02
03 gipfelinfo 20.9.2002
öffentlicher rundbrief der infogruppe [berlin]
- PRESSEERKLÄRUNG DER UNTERSTÜTZUNGSGRUPPE FÜR AHMED
- PRESS RELEASE FROM THE COLLECTIVE TO SUPPORT AHMED
- COMMUNIQUE DE PRESSE DU COLLECTIF DE SOUTIEN A
- THE ANTI-GLOBALIZATION ACTIVIST AHMED MEGUINI WILL
STAY IN PRISON.
- DÄNEMARK: AKTIONSGRUPPE BESETZTE ABSCHIEBEKNAST
PRESSEERKLÄRUNG DER UNTERSTÜTZUNGSGRUPPE FÜR AHMED -
Ahmed Meguini, der seit dem 26. Juli 2002 im
Untersuchungsgefängnis von Straßburg-Elsau sitzt,
erschien heute vor dem Berufungsgericht von Colmar,
um zum dritten Mal seine Freilassung zu fordern, was
abermals abgelehnt wurde, obwohl der Beschuldigte
alle nötigen Garantien für sein Wiedererscheinen
Seine elf FreundInnen, die gekommen waren, um ihn zu
unterstützen, wurden von einer übermäßigen
Polizeipräsenz rund um das Gerichtsgebäude empfangen
(15 Polizeibusse) und mußten ihre Papiere am Eingang
hinterlegen. Selbst Ahmeds Mutter mußte sich dieser
Ahmed wird vorgeführt als Beispiel der gerichtlichen
und repressiven Verbissenheit gegen die
TeilnehmerInnen des Grenzcamps. Der Staatsanwalt
eröffnete sein Plädoyer, indem er diese
TeilnehmerInnen als "organisierte Gruppe"
bezeichnete, die "Stadtguerilla" betreibe! Er
schilderte auch die Ahmed vorgeworfenen Taten als
extrem schwerwiegend; der Beschuldigte hat diese
Taten immer bestritten.
Die gerichtlichen Behörden wollen Ahmed nicht frei
zu seiner Berufungsverhandlung erscheinen lassen,
die am 8. Oktober um 8 Uhr vor dem Berufungsgericht
Colmar stattfindet. Wir prangern die richterliche
Verbissenheit an, unter der Ahmed seit seiner
Verhaftung zu leiden hat, und wir fordern ihre
Wir fordern die sofortige Einstellung der Verfahren
gegen die Personen der Straßburger
Unterstützungsgruppe für Ahmed wegen der Besetzung
der Außenstelle des Justizministeriums in Straßburg.
Wir fordern die sofortige Einstellung aller
Verfahren gegen TeilnehmerInnen des Grenzcamps.
Wir lassen uns nicht terrorisieren!
[Unterstützungsgruppe für Ahmed]
PRESS RELEASE FROM THE COLLECTIVE TO SUPPORT AHMED
Ahmed Meguini, who has been incarcerated in the
Elsau Jail in Strasbourg since July 26 2002, had a
hearing on Tuesday, September 17, in front of the
Appeals Court in Colmar, for his third request for
release from pretrial detention, which was rejected
once again, even though he presented every possible
guarantee that he would appear for trial (proof of
residence, proof of work, pledges from friends and
Eleven of his friends who had come to support him
were welcomed by an inordinate police presence
around the courthouse (fifteen police vans) and were
obliged to leave identity cards at the entrance.
Even Ahmed's mother herself was subjected to this
Ahmed exemplifies the repressive judiciary
persecution that has been targeting the participants
of the No Border camp. The attorney general began
his argument by calling the participants and
"organized group" aimed at "urban guerrilla
warfare"! He denounced the actions of which Ahmed is
accused, as being extremely serious; however, Ahmed
has always denied these accusations.
The judicial authorities do wish to see Ahmed arrive
in handcuffs at his sentencing appeal, on October 8
at 8 a.m., at the Colmar appeals court; the
prosecutor himself had made this sentencing appeal,
as he felt that Ahmed's sentence was not stiff
enough, despite the fact that Ahmed was condemned in
the face of numerous prosecutorial inconsistencies
and procedural errors.
We denounce the juducial persecution that Ahmed has
been subjected to since his arrest and we demand his
release. We demand an immediate halt to all
prosecutions against people from the Strasbourg
Collective to Support Ahmed since the occupation of
hte Ministry of Justice district office in
Strasbourg. We demand an immediate halt to all
prosecutions engaged against participants of the NO
We will not be terrorized.
[Collective to Support Ahmed]
COMMUNIQUE DE PRESSE DU COLLECTIF DE SOUTIEN A AHMED
Ahmed Meguini, incarcéré à la Maison d'Arrêt de
l'Elsau depuis le 26 juillet 2002, passait
aujourd'hui devant la Cour d'Appel de Colmar, pour
une troisième demande de mise en liberté, encore une
fois rejetée, alors que le prévenu présentait toutes
les garanties de représentation nécessaires. Ses 11
amiEs venuEs le soutenir ont été acceuilliEs par une
présence policière démesurée autour du tribunal (une
quinzaine de fourgons) et ont dû déposer leur pièce
d'identité à l'entrée. La mère d'Ahmed a, elle
aussi, dû se soumettre à ce contrôle. Ahmed est
montré en exemple de l'acharnement judiciaire et
répressif qui vise les participantEs au camp No
Border. L'avocat général a débuté son réquisitoire
en qualifiant ces participants de "groupe organisé"
qui s'adonne à la "guérilla urbaine" ! Il a aussi
dénoncé les faits qui sont reprochés à Ahmed comme
extrèmement grave; le prévenu a toujours contesté
Les autorités judiciaires ne souhaitent pas voir
Ahmed comparaître libre lors de son appel qui aura
lieu le 8 octobre à 8H, à la Cour d'Appel de Colmar.
Nous dénonçons l'acharnement judiciaire subi par
Ahmed depuis son arrestation et nous exigeons sa
relaxe. Nous exigeons l'arrêt immédiat des
poursuites envers les personnes du Collectif
strasbourgeois de soutien à Ahmed suite à
l'occupation de l'annexe du ministère de la justice
à Strasbourg. Nous exigeons l'arrêt immédiat de
toutes les poursuites engagées contre des
participants au camp No Border.
Nous ne nous laisserons pas terroriser !
[Collectif de soutien à Ahmed]
THE ANTI-GLOBALIZATION ACTIVIST AHMED MEGUINI WILL
STAY IN PRISON.
COLMAR, 17 September (AFP) - Ahmed Meguini, member
of the antiglobalization collective No Border,
imprisoned in Strasbourg, announced himself that his
request for release from pretrial detention had been
rejected by the Colmar appeals court, as he left the
hearing room on Tuesday morning. A dozen activists
from the No Border Network, the collective that
organized a camp that gathered 2,000 people from
July 15 to 28 in Strasbourg, had come to the
courtroom to support their comrade. "The district
attorney talked about actions that Ahmed is not
accused of, such as graffiti during protests in
July," denounced a No Border activist, who explained
that after 38 days of solitary confinement without
visits, Mr. Meguini has since been placed in the
section for sex offenders in the Strasbourg jail.
This young man, co-founder of "Spontaneous Movement
of Citizens in the Street," the evening of the
primary presidential elections in France, (which
left the general elections with only the choice of
two right-wing candidates, Jacques Chirac and Jean-
Marie Le Pen) will have his sentence reviewed on
October 8 by the appeals court of Colmar. Ahmed
Meguini, 25 years old, was sentenced on August 21 by
the correctional tribunal of Strasbourg to eight
months in prison with a parole hearing after 3
months, for having hit a police captain with a
baton, breaking his hand, during the protest on July
24. The activist denies that he is responsible for
Hi fist request for release from pretrial detention
was rejected on August 6, so Mr. Meguini stayed in
preventative detention. Between 200 and 300 members
of the Collective of Friends of Ahmed Meguini
(Collective to Support Ahmed) demonstrated on Monday
in Paris to call for the immediate liberation of
this activist and to denounce the growing repression
against social movements.
A petition, "Free Ahmed Meguini," which has notably
received the support of AC!, ATTAC(Association for
the Taxation of Transactions for Aid to Citizens),
the national coordination of undocumented
immigrants, the Peasants' Union, Rights First, the
Revolutionary Communist League, and the Group of
Ten, has been signed by several hundreds of people,
thanks to the Collective of Friends of Ahmed Meguini
(Collective to Support Ahmed).
[Agence France Press]
DÄNEMARK: AKTIONSGRUPPE BESETZTE ABSCHIEBEKNAST
Am 12.9. - einen Tag vor dem Treffen der EU-Innen-
und Justizminister in Kopenhagen - besetzten 25
AktivistInnen der dänischen Gruppe "Global Roots"
das Dach des Abschiebeknasts nahe dem Städtchen
A few moments ago, activists from the Global Roots
occupied the closed asylum prison of Sandholmlejren.
The action is a protest against the EU refugee laws.
It is launched the day before the meeting of the EU
ministers of justice and the ministers of the
interior in Copenhagen.
Nikolaj Heltoft of Global Roots says: "The refugees
in this prison are living under dreadful conditions.
5 people sharing 15 square meters of space, having
to do their dishes and go to the toilet in the same
The majority of inmates are not convicted of any
crime, they are awaiting their deportation. Their
only crime is their search for a better life. The
conditions of Sanholmlejren mirrors the way that the
EU treats immigrants. Since the year 1993, 3000
human lives have been lost trying to enter the
fortified European Union.
Seen through the eyes of the Global Roots the
current number of refugees is a result of global
inequality. Nikolaj Heltoft says: "It would be an
Utopian idea to believe that a world of such
inequality would not cause migration. The migration
from the poor parts of the world is not a criminal
act. It is a healthy disobedience against an unjust
The Global Roots reject the current European asylum
policies: "Only people who can prove themselves to
be victims of political persecution can dream of
getting asylum in Europe. In our opinion people
fleeing conditions of poverty have the same right.
People must have the right to live wherever they
want. At the same time we must commit ourselves to a
fair distribution of the world's wealth, thus
ensuring that nobody are forced to flee their home.
The Global Roots will continue the direct actions
for boundless human dignity.
- No borders!!!
- No human is illegal!!
Contact Global Roots: +45 40 97 86 59 -
About Global Roots:
'Rødder', plural form of the Danish word 'rod',
which has the double meaning of 'root' as well as
'undisciplined social outcast'.
Civil disobedience? Uncivilized obedience!
We view the global neo-liberal order of today as an
unjust system of exploitation and privileges in
favour of powerful minority. This order rests on our
consent - and can be changed only if we take action
to do so.
Therefore we exert our right and duty to react
against injustice in a non-violent manner, although
we respect other people's motives for different
actions and strategies.
What are you up to? Copenhagen 2002
Our main project for the time being is the
mobilization and preparations against the upcoming
EU-summit in Copenhagen in December 2002. Our goal
is to ensure, that the European administers of
global capital will be met by mass disobedience.
Nota: ottimo video da TV-stop Denmark:
Die Berliner Gipfelsoli-Infogruppe ist
hervorgegangen aus der Infogruppe der
Genuagefangenen. Wir sind unter firstname.lastname@example.org zu
erreichen. Wir haben einen Email-Verteiler angelegt,
über den aktuelle Nachrichten zu Prozessen in
Göteborg und Genua (und andere Aktivitäten wie z.B.
die Mobilisierung zu EU-, G 8- oder Nato-Gipfeln
oder internationalen Camps) verschickt werden.
Die AutorInnen der Beiträge, so sie nicht von uns
verfasst sind, sind mit eckigen Klammern versehen.
Wir können leider keine Verantwortung für die
Richtigkeit der Beiträge garantieren.
Wenn ihr in den Verteiler aufgenommen (oder
gelöscht) werden wollt, schickt einfach eine Mail.
04 Bunter Demonstrationszug gegen Eurofighter und Euro-Armee
From: "Gerald Oberansmayr" <email@example.com>
OÖ-Plattform Nein zu Abfangjägern
p. A. Friedenswerkstatt Linz
Plattform Nein zu Abfangjägern/Demonstration/Widerstand gegen Abfangjäger
Bunter Demonstrationszug gegen Eurofighter und Euro-Armee
Rund 100 vorwiegend junge Menschen demonstrierten am Freitag, 20. September
durch die Linzer Fußgängerzone. Die zentralen Forderungen des lautstarken
und bunten Demonstrationszuges: Nein zu Abfangjägern, keine Fighter für die
Euro-Armee, Bildung und Sozialpolitik statt Aufrüstung.
Breite politische Unterstützung für die Plattform Nein zu Abfangjägern
Der Aufruf der OÖ-Plattform Nein zu Abfangjäger wurde breit unterstützt:
AK-Präsident Hubert Wipplinger und AK-Vizepräsident Johann Kalliauer
erklärten in einer Grußbotschaft für die Fraktion Sozialdemokratischer
Gewerkschafter ihre volle Unterstützung für den Aufruf der Plattform Nein zu
Abfangjägern. Weiters unterstützten den Aufruf die Alternativen und Grünen
GewerkschafterInnen, der Gewerkschaftlichen Linksblock, die sozialistischen
Jugendorganisationen, die Grünen OÖ, Pax Christi, KPÖ, Internationaler
Versöhnungsbund, ATTAC, sowie eine Reihe von Friedens-, Kultur- und
In dem Aufruf Nein zu Abfangjäger heißt es u. a.: "Wir sagen Nein zu
Abfangjägern, weil es nicht einzusehen ist, dass viele Milliarden für neues
Kriegsgerät bereitstehen, während bei PensionistInnen, SchülerInnen und
Studierenden, ArbeitnehmerInnen und Arbeitslosen an allen Ecken und Enden
gespart wird; weil diese vielen Milliarden viel sinnvoller eingesetzt werden
könnten zur Behebung der Hochwasserschäden und für Arbeitsplätze in den
Bereichen Gesundheit, Bildung, Kultur, Umweltschutz und soziale Sicherheit;
weil der wahre Grund für den Ankauf der Eurofighter die Beteiligung
Österreichs an globalen Kriegseinsätzen im Rahmen der EU-Armee ist."
Keine Soldaten, keine Waffen und kein Euro für die Euro-Armee
Bei der Abschlusskundgebung hob Boris Lechthaler von der Friedenswerkstatt
Linz hervor, dass es ein Erfolg der 625.000 UnterzeichnerInnen des
Anti-Abfangjäger-Volksbegehrens gewesen ist, dass der Ankauf der
Euro-Fighter bislang verhindert werden konnte. Das zeigt, dass Widerstand
wirksam ist. Entwarnung aber ist nicht angesagt, denn die Abfangjägerlobby
wartet auf ihre nächste Chance. Ab kommenden Jahr soll die Euro-Armee
einsatzbereit sein, eine klassische Angriffsarmee, die erklärtermaßen für
Interventionen in Afrika und am asiatischen Kontinent eingesetzt werden
soll. Der Euro-Fighter ist das Paradeprojekt dieser EU-Armee. Neue
Kriegsgeräte, wie z. B. die Radpanzer Pandur und Ulan sollen in nächster
Zeit für "Auslandseinsätze" (Scheibner) des Bundesheeres angekauft werden.
Die Führungen aller Parlamentsparteien in Österreich treten derzeit für die
Teilnahme Österreichs an der Euro-Armee ein. Die Friedensbewegung ist daher
gefordert weiter Druck gegen die Militarisierung Österreichs zu machen.
Lechthaler abschließend: "Die Neutralität ist ein Zukunftskonzept, weil sie
auf Überwindung der Militärblöcke, Dialog und Abrüstung in den
internationalen Beziehungen baut. Die Neutralität steht in diametralen
Gegensatz zur Teilnahme an der Euro-Armee. Daher keine Soldaten, keine
Waffen und kein Euro für die Euro-Armee."
05 RAWNEWS - 20/9/02
From: "RAWNEWS" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
RAWNEWS - 20/9/02
1) What Britannia taught Bush - The Guardian
2) Weapons of Silent Mass Destruction - Depleted Uranium Watch
3) US approach to overthrowing Hussain follows pattern set in Cuba in 1898 - Guardian (UK)
4) Russia, US on collision course - Asia Times
5) India to back Russia on Georgia
6) Yugoslav families sue Germany over 1999 NATO bombing - AFP
What Britannia taught Bush
In Wednesday's G2, Jonathan Freedland argued that America is the new Roman empire. Historian Linda Colley says there are stronger parallels closer to home
Friday September 20, 2002
In 1774, a British journalist wrote a sketch about American tourists in London 200 years in the future. These imaginary visitors, he anticipated, would find the capital a rubble-strewn ruin, stripped of much of its wealth, and robbed of its most enterprising traders and manufacturers. And why? Because by 1974, this writer predicted, Britain would have fallen to a similar decay and ruin as ancient Rome. The torch of economic and global power would have passed to the empire of America.
This was not an isolated piece of futurology. In the era of the American revolution, predictions that dominion would shift from one side of the Atlantic to the other were commonplace. If Americans continued to double and double in number, wrote the Englishman Samuel Johnson on the eve of the revolution, their own hemisphere would not contain them. Nor were the colonists themselves diffident about their aspirations. One of the reasons they rebelled was that Great Britain had tried to restrict their expansion westwards. (Not for nothing did most native Americans fight in the revolution on the British side.) And one of the very first episodes of the War of Independence was the revolutionaries invasion of Canada to make it part of the American empire.
The current excitement about the United States posturing as the new Rome is therefore, at one level, almost touchingly ahistorical. From the very beginning, Americans have exhibited a taste for expansion, an appetite for empire. One of the fundamental reasons for this is very clear. Like every other western empire that has ever existed, Americans may claim to have inherited the mantle of ancient Rome. And they have certainly provided themselves with a Senate, a Capitol, and an eagle for an emblem. But the real model for their imperialism lies elsewhere. Before they became Americans, most white inhabitants of the 13 colonies considered themselves British. It was predictable, therefore, that they would lust after empire, because this was exactly what their counterparts on the other side of the Atlantic also did. America's attitude towards empire has consequently always been schizoid. On the one hand, its roots as an independent power lie in an armed struggle against the imperial armies of George III. Yet, even as they triumphed over the empire, white Americans' British roots ensured that many were eager to emulate and surpass it.
America, declared Alexander Hamilton (who fought against the British), would be an empire, in many respects the most interesting. The parallels between the British and American forms of imperialism are not hard to detect. Both were nurtured by Protestant ideology, the conviction that Great Britain, on the one hand, and the US, on the other, was God Land, as Conor Cruise O'Brien calls it. Just as Victorian Britons felt confident that the God who made them mighty would make them mightier still, so Americans have always believed, in Ronald Reagan's words, that theirs is the promised land.
This sense that they were the city on the hill's chosen could, at times, foster aloofness from contaminating foreign entanglements. In both British and American history, fervent imperialism has always coexisted with bouts of fierce isolationism. But the belief that they are in God Land has also supplied Britons and Americans with a powerful legitimation for expansion and intervention, because it has encouraged them to conflate and confuse their own foreign policy objectives with the global good. In both cases, such arrogance has been made easier by the fact that, in part, it has seemed justified. In its imperial heyday, Great Britain was in some respects a freer, more prosperous, and better governed society than many of the lands it invaded. By the same token, American conceit and ambition today rests on the secure base of its democratic culture, matchless wealth and egalitarianism, and undoubted generosity. Yet there is a sense in which the real qualities of first Great Britain and now America have actually made their respective imperialisms even more insidious. Since both countries have viewed themselves uniquely blessed and free, both have found it hard to accept that they are capable of malign imperialism. Those exposed to their respective attentions have naturally taken a rather different view.
In the past, Britons were scathing about the cruelties of the old Roman empire and the excesses of Catholic empire builders such as the Spanish and the French. They convinced themselves that their empire was different and benign because it rested on sea power and trade rather than on armies. In much the same way, Americans have always been critical of the old European empires, and played a major part in dismantling them. And they, too, have convinced themselves that their brand of empire is unique and good because it rests not on colonisation, but on the dollar and the export of democracy and consumerism. In both the British and the American case, imperialism has actually been facilitated by the comforting belief that empire is a practice characteristic of other cultures not theirs.
There are other parallels too. Both Great Britain and the US have been fiercely maritime cultures. The British empire was made possible by a paramount navy that for two centuries allowed it a unique mobility of power. By the same token, once America, by means of internal colonisation, had extended from sea to shining sea, its rulers quickly became aware of what the naval pundit AT Mahan called, in 1886, the "influence of power upon history". Today, the US navy dwarfs all other navies in firepower and oceanic spread, and this is for the same reasons that the Royal Navy once ruled the waves. For America in 2002, as for Britain in 1902, naval supremacy provides mobility of power and safeguards a global system of capitalism. In many respects, then, current American empire is old British empire writ large, but this is also the point of crucial difference. The British empire was, for a brief period, the biggest in global history, but it was also always constrained and made vulnerable by the smallness at its core. The roots of American empire are far more substantial and it is therefore likely to last very much longer.
Great Britain and Ireland together make up only 125,000 square miles; the US, by contrast, is 3,000 miles across and covers more than 3.5 million square miles. In the 19th century, imperial Britain's own army rarely contained more than 150,000 men; today, the Pentagon routinely stations far more men than that overseas, with tens of thousands more troops at home to spare. At its peak, the British empire had military bases in 35 different countries and colonies, whereas there are American bases now in at least 60 countries. But America's brand of empire is more secure than Britain's for reasons other than its vastly greater size and military muscle.
America also has cultural and technological means of influence at its disposal that Pax Britannica never dreamt of. Unlike the British, it does not have to occupy countries to keep them under surveillance. Its spy satellites can do that. And when its politicians, TV channels, and Hollywood want to communicate the American point of view to the globe, they can do so knowing that 30% of the world's inhabitants understand English. By contrast, in the past, the British capacity for soft empire was always hobbled by the degree to which English remained a minority language. Even in 1947, only 2% of Indians spoke English with proficiency, because Britons in the subcontinent had been too sparse in number and too technologically ill-equipped to impose their culture.
The lessons of all this history are many and various. Postwar Europeans have been too ready to believe that, because their own empires have collapsed, the future necessarily belongs to nation states. Yet, not only is America an empire of a kind: so, too, in their own fashion are China, Russia, Indonesia, and even India. We may live in a post-colonial world. We do not yet live in a post-imperial world; and it remains unclear whether Europe will be able to hold its own against these massive power blocs unless the EU, too, becomes an empire of a kind. And there is a more specific point. Tony Blair may genuinely believe that Saddam Hussein is a danger to world peace. He may even be right. But the reasons why he is moved so docilely to back American global adventures go much deeper than this. American empire has always mirrored British empire while in the end exceeding it. And in clambering on the head of the American eagle like a small but determined mouse, successive postwar British leaders have sought and found a final, vicarious share of imperial experience. The torch of empire has indeed been passed across the Atlantic, but the British still seek to bask in its glow.
· Linda Colley is Leverhulme research professor of history at the London School of Economics. Jonathan Freedland's programme, Rome: The Model Empire, is on Channel 4 on Saturday at 6.50pm.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002
[Posted on Depleted Uranium Watch on September 19, 2002. http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch]
Weapons of Silent Mass Destruction
by Joanne Baker
Whilst we in Britain are debating the possible hazard of Iraq acquiring biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, the Iraqi people need be in no doubt at all that the formidable array of munitions now being ranged against them by the US and allies will contain substantial amounts of radioactive material, which like all other weapons of mass destruction, will continue to kill for generations after the attack is over. Although our Ministers of Defence, like Dr. Moonie, would have us believe that the risks of depleted uranium are minimal, previous experience in Iraq, the Balkans and more recently Afghanistan, has shown otherwise. According to Dr. Moonie, "there are two potential hazards arising from the use of DU: a low level radiation hazard....; and a chemical toxicity hazard, similar to that posed by other heavy metals such as lead." These are not, he assures us, "'of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering' within the meaning of Article 5 of the first Protocol additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949."
How strange then that an epidemiological study made by Professor Alim Yacoub*, shows that it is in precisely those areas where depleted uranium munitions were used and where levels of contamination of soil, plants and water are highest, that a substantial increase in childhood malignancies and leukaemias have been recorded. There has been a steady percentage rise in cases since 1993 due to the cumulative effects of exposure. The figures for the year 2000 were a 300% rise in leukaemias and 384.2% rise in malignancies. His study shows a shift of incidences in leukaemias in recent years towards younger children consistent with exposure to ionising radiation. There has also been a marked rise in congenital diseases and birth malformations in Iraq. Down's syndrome has increased by 4.5 fold with many of the mothers below the age of 35. Many of the birth defects, especially those in southern Iraq, are multi-malformational, reminiscent of children born after Hiroshima and Nagasaki or after the nuclear testing in the Pacific. Babies are born without limbs, eyes, genitalia, internal organs or with additional abnormal organs and many with extraordinary tumours. There is an increase in hydocephaly and anencephaly. These children are either born to mothers who were living in the areas of southern Iraq where depleted uranium was most heavily used or their fathers were veterans from these same areas. In most of these cases there is no previous history of genetic disorder in the families. Many women are now terrified of giving birth and the sanctions prevent proper ante natal care and scanning.
Should Dr. Moonie ever visit the hospitals of Iraq, he would see for himself ample evidence of 'superfluous injury and unnecessary suffering'. Ward after ward of children and adults dying, in all probability, from the effects of internal radiation: tiny ceramicaerosolised particles which have entered the body through inhalation or ingestion to lodge in the deep lung or migrate to the lymph or bone giving off a steady pulse of alpha radiation. The one year old baby with a huge stomach cancer, the two year old bleeding hopelessly from the ear and throat, the eight year old leukaemia victim who buries her head in the pillow to hide her silent tears. These are not Saddam's propaganda pieces any more than the valiant doctors, who for all their training and skills, must simply watch them die. Since sanctions were imposed on Iraq, no child has survived leukaemia. All die in pain with
even morphine denied. Parents sell everything they have ever possessed to buy cancer drugs and still the children die.
Depleted uranium is also known to cause neurological disorders, immune breakdown with AIDS like symptoms and rare bowel and kidney problems. Many Iraqi children have suffered from a fatal epidemic of swollen abdomens due to kidney failure. Lowered potassium levels, the result of kidney damage, can lead to cardiac arrest and potassium has also been banned at times as a dual use item. Healthcare under the 'oil for food' deal is criminally inadequate. British government officials tell us that the Iraqis
could have as much medicine as they wanted but the figures published by the United Nations prove otherwise. Money for healthcare amounts to less than $1 a month per person - this in a country which prior to 1990 had the best modern health service in the region.
A quantitative analysis of depleted uranium isotopes in British, Canadian, and U.S. Gulf War Veterans by Col. Asaf Durakovic, published recently in the journal 'Military Medicine', shows that more than 50% of those tested were expelling depleted uranium in their urine more than nine years after the end of the Gulf War. An autopsy of a Canadian veteran who died, showed depleted uranium in the lung and bone. These same people are suffering from a range of health problems which include chronic fatigue, rare bowel and kidney disorders, respiratory problems, neurological problems, depression and mood swings, skin disorders, loss of hair and teeth, painful joints and cancer. The body not only attempts to rid itself of the radioactivity through the urine, but through the semen. This can lead to painful internal burning for the partner after intercourse, known as 'burning semen syndrome' and causes genetic damage to the foetus. Many veterans have produced children with rare genetic disorders and birth defects. British troops now being cheered on to war by Blair and Bush would do well to mind the words of Carol Picau, a US Gulf War veteran:
"Take us in our basic training, firing our weapons, climbing mountains, rapelling, doing all these wonderful things the army teaches you to do, and then show us now, with our crippled bones, our incontinence. Take all of us in our wheelchairs, missing arms and legs, and dying of cancers and brain tumours. Take our graves and put that on a commercial."
Depleted uranium is a by-product of the nuclear enrichment process which removes most of the isotopes U-235 and U-234 used in fission. The resulting radioactive 'waste' is known as depleted uranium hexaflouride, around 99.7% of which is composed of the
alpha emitting isotope U-238. It is 40% less radioactive that natural uranium and can be transformed into an oxide or a metal. As a metal, it has qualities which are very advantageous to the military. It has a hardness and density similar to tungsten, a melting point similar to copper, is very malleable, highly pyrophoric and the nuclear industry is happy to give it away to save itself the high costs of radioactive waste disposal. Depleted uranium is most dangerous when it burns, creating a fine dust which is easily airborne. Left in the soil, the metal will quickly oxidise and enter the water and food chain. The clean up of testing grounds in the United States has been costed at $1000 per cubic metre. In munitions, depleted uranium is usually alloyed with metals such as titanium, niobium, molybdenum or beryllium. Beryllium dust is itself known to cause severe respiratory problems. Some batches of depleted uranium are contaminated with spent nuclear fuel. This means they contain small amounts of plutonium, americanium, neptunium, telechnecium and U-236. Anti- tank penetrators analysed in Kosovo by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) found definite traces of U-236 and plutonium 239/240. Damacio Lopez, director of the International Depleted Uranium Study Team, took readings of penetrators and holes in tank armour in Iraq in January 2001 and found readings as high as 2 100 - 2 450 counts/minute. He himself received radiation burns.
An urgent question to put to the US and UK governments while they threaten to launch another attack on Iraq, is how much depleted uranium is being used in current weaponry? Both governments have long since admitted to its use in anti tank penetrators and tank armour and it is now known to be used in shape charged warhead technology. According to Jane's web site , depleted uranium is also used to increase the penetration effect of some guided weapons. There is a high probability that it is the main component of the advanced unitary penetrator war heads used in guided bomb systems. These were used extensively in Afghanistan and will be used again in Iraq. With weights between 100 - 1500 kg and a deep penetrating effect, the result could mean the flooding of ground water systems with large amounts of radioactivity. In November last year Dr. Moonie stated that "whether DU is used in munitions for the United States forces is a matter for the US Government". Surely it is also a matter for the civilians of target countries and the countries which border them, as well as for allied and regional troops. The more extensively depleteduranium is used, the more extensive the cover up hasto be. If the truth were admitted, compensation claims to the US and UK governments from troops and civilians would already be phenomenal. Instead we have veterans hounded by MI5, scientists fired from their jobs and journalists threatened and harassed.
One of the propaganda designs of recent wars has been to avoid troops coming home in body bags and reassure domestic populations that civilians are not really being targeted. "We have no quarrel with the people of Iraq, the Balkans, Afghanistan...." , our politicians assure us. On this note we can be comforted by the possible deployment of new 'non-lethal' weapons designed to attack electronic systems without inflicting 'visible' collateral damage. In a recent article in the New Scientist, David Windle writes:
"US intelligence reports indicate that key elements of the Iraqi war machine are located in heavily-fortified nderground facilities or beneath civilian buildings such as hospitals. This means the role of non-lethal and precision weapons would be a critical factor in any conflict. High Power Microwave (HPM) devices are designed to destroy electronic equipment in command, control, communications and computer targets and are available to the US military. They produce an electromagnetic field of such intensity that their effect can be far more devastating than a lightning strike."
We do not know what microwave weapons will do to human health but our bodies are electrochemical in nature and any force that seriously disrupts their molecular functioning will cause irreparable damage. Microwaves, for example, are used in gene altering technology to weaken the cell membrane. Impaired cells are open to viruses, fungi and other microorganisms. Russian research on thousands of workers exposed to microwaves during their work with radar in the 1950s showed serious health effects known as 'microwave sickness'. This is described in Robert O. Becker's book, 'The Body Electric'.
"It's [Microwave sickness] first signs are low blood pressure and slow pulse. The later and most common manifestations are chronic excitation of the sympathetic nervous system [stress syndrome] and high blood pressure.
This phase also often includes headache, dizziness, eye pain, sleeplessness, irritability, anxiety, stomach pain, nervous tension, inability to concentrate, hair loss, plus an increased incidence of appendicitis, cataracts, reproductive problems, and cancer.
The chronic symptoms are eventually succeeded by crisis of adrenal exhaustion and ischemic heart disease [the blockage of coronary arteries and heart attacks]."
The effect of heart seizure was emphasised in a US Defence Intelligence Agency Report 'Biological Effects of Radiowaves and Microwaves' 1973, along with the other vital issue of electronic mind control.
As Iraq has already been bombed back to the stone age (1991), does the US government really believe an electronics blackout would be anything very unusual? Is it worth targeting these weapons at the already chronically malnourished and cancer ridden children in the Baghdad hospitals? Are we to believe that to zap them with electric bolts far greater than lightning will do them no harm at all or are our politicians and military cynical enough to think that as they are dying anyway, no one will know nor care?
It would seem that as weapons technology advances so the victims themselves become less and less visible. No bloody massacre or mushroom cloud to shock and appal - just hundreds of thousands of slow, lingering, silent deaths. Some conditions might take many years to unfold, others are passed on from generation to generation. The result is an irreversible and insidious deterioration of our common gene pool.
Pandora DU Research Project
Joanne has visited Iraq four times since 1999.
* Alim Yacoub, MBChB, DPH, MSc., PhD, MFCM
Dean and Professor, College of Medicine,
Al-Mustansiriya University, Baghdad
The US approach to overthrowing Iraq's government closely follows the pattern first set in Cuba in 1898
Thursday September 19, 2002
The promotion of "regime change" in foreign countries is not a new phenomenon in American history. The tradition began 104 years ago when the US decided to invade Cuba in 1898 - and to seize Puerto Rico, the Philippines and Guam at the same time. American newspapers had long reviled the "evil empire" of Spain that had presided over these islands for nearly four centuries, and the American public had been thirsting for action. The veteran Spanish prime minister in Madrid, Antonio Cánovas, and his satrap in Cuba, General Valeriano Weyler, were demonised in the 1890s as the figures responsible for "breaches of human rights".
With reason. Cuba had been ruled under martial law for more than 75 years, and Weyler, appointed by Cánovas to crush a local rebellion, had embarked on a scorched earth policy, "waging war against his own people". Half a million peasants were "concentrated" into unhealthy camps outside the towns. Their sufferings were retailed regularly to the US readers of the new mass circulation papers by American reporters in Havana, who wrote about "a policy of extermination".
Two unlooked-for events accelerated US military intervention. The hardline Cánovas was assassinated in the Basque country in August 1897 by an Italian anarchist funded by the Cuban rebels. It was an example of terror that worked. The impact of the assassination was immediate: Cánovas was replaced by a new prime minister in Madrid who favoured home rule for Cuba. Weyler was withdrawn, and replaced by a more emollient officer, pledged to seek a negotiated end to the rebellion. The American press and the Cuban rebels were thrilled by the news, foreseeing an imminent victory for the Cubans. But anti-American sentiment was strengthened in Havana among the die-hard Spanish "empire loyalists", and early in 1898, the US battleship Maine was sent out to Cuba to provide protection for US citizens.
A second unexpected development, in February 1898, was the mysterious explosion and sinking of the Maine, at anchor in Havana harbour. As many as 258 American sailors were killed, and the Spanish were held responsible for the tragedy. The US declared war on Spain, and invaded Cuba. (No one claimed responsibility for the explosion, and it was revealed a century later to have been an accident.)
The American reaction to this affront was similar to that created by the destruction of the twin towers in New York in 2001. Arriving there in April 1898, the correspondent of the Manchester Guardian, John Black Atkins, described scenes of public rejoicing: "The United States flag was everywhere hung across the streets and from the windows. Warlike sentiments and war bulletins were stuck in the shop windows ... Everywhere one saw the legend 'Remember the Maine!'"
Volunteers flocked to the colours, the most colourful regiment being the Rough Riders, led by Teddy Roosevelt, the assistant secretary of the navy, and General Leonard Wood, President McKinley's doctor. Roosevelt claimed that the arrival of the Spanish fleet in Cuban waters, representing the "weapons of mass destruction" of his day, was more a threat to the US than to the Cuban rebels.
The Spanish empire collapsed in August, the Americans having destroyed its Atlantic fleet off Santiago in July and its Pacific fleet in Manila bay in April. Soon Wood was the governor of Cuba, and Roosevelt (after the assassination of McKinley in 1901) was the president of the US.
The Americans now embarked on "nation building" in their new colony, as difficult then as it is today. The US Congress had promised to "pacify" Cuba, and then "leave the government of the island to its people". General Wood had other ideas. He believed that "sensible" Cubans favoured annexation by the United States. If elections could be rigged to ensure that the "sensible" Cubans won, then Cuba could legitimately be incorporated into the union. Elections were easily fixed, but even the rigged franchise produced a majority for the supporters of independence.
After a four-year occupation, the Americans were obliged to withdraw - in 1902. But there was a fly in the ointment for the Cubans. Senator Orville Platt introduced an amendment in the US Congress that Cuba was obliged to incorporate into its new constitution. This gave the Americans the right to intervene in the country whenever they felt the need.
The Americans were to intervene several times over the next 30 years, sometimes at the request of the Cubans, sometimes on their own initiative. "Nation building" needed their constant attention, but many Cubans found the tutelage humiliating, and this fuelled the resentment that led to Fidel Castro's revolution in 1959 - and it lasts to this day.
The final clause of the Platt amendment gave the Americans a right to construct military bases on the island. The US naval base at Guantánamo is still there - in use for purposes that were never envisaged 100 years ago.
· Richard Gott is writing a history of Cuba. email@example.com
Russia, US on collision course
Asia Times, 18 september 2002
By Hooman Peimani
The September 11 meeting in Moscow of an American State Department
delegation with Russian Foreign Ministry officials failed to help the
Americans secure Russia's approval of their proposed war against
Iraq. Unsurprisingly, the Russians expressed their opposition to such
war to the delegation led by John Bolton, the American under-
secretary of state. Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov warned that
a new war in the Persian Gulf could ruin international cooperation
against terrorism, while his deputy Vyacheslav Trubnikov stressed
that the proposed war was "absolutely unacceptable" for Russia.
The surfacing Russian opposition to the American policy towards Iraq,
where Russia has vested interests, is yet another clear indication of
a growing schism between Russia and the United States and the
practical end to an era of cooperation between the two nuclear
powers. Undoubtedly, one should expect frequent clashes of interests
between the two countries over respected vested interests that are of
strategic importance to each side. Russia's arms sales to and non-
military nuclear relations with Iran aside, they include the
political, economic and security direction of the Central Asian and
Caucasian countries and the eastward expansion of the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization (NATO).
As opposition to an American attack on Iraq has been a well-known
Russian stance for some time, the mentioned expression of opposition
did not surprise anyone. Russia has clear interests in Iraq, which
make it concerned about any development with a destabilizing impact
on that country. What gave significance to the event was its
revealing of an emerging drastic change in Russian-American
relations. In the post-Soviet era, both Russia and the United States
have sought to forge tension-free relations, but such relations have
gradually changed their cooperative element, especially since the
election of President Vladimir Putin. This is not a phenomenon
attributable to the personal characteristics of the Russian
president, but it is a logical outcome of a changing political,
economic and security environment.
In the 1990s, the severity of their domestic problems made Russia
pursue a very cautious foreign policy. Added to this, Russia's
worsening economic situation and its growing need for foreign
economic assistance made it more cautious in its dealing with major
Western economic powers, including the United States, its hoped-for
source of financial assistance and trade. Thus, the need for Western
economic assistance and the necessity of a long period of peace for
addressing domestic problems motivated Russia not to seek its
Today, Russia has yet to address many domestic issues, but the
growing expansion of American political and military influence in its
vicinity and its loss of hope of receiving substantial economic
assistance from Western countries have convinced it to change its
policy of cooperation with the United States. Certain recent events
have demonstrated the growing schism between Russia and the US. They
have included Russia's expanding economic and political ties with
Iran, Iraq and North Korea, the members of the so-called axis of
evil, and the worsening Russian-Georgian ties over Georgia's alleged
tolerance of the Chechen rebels in its territory.
Against this background, the growing schism between Moscow and
Washington will likely lead to open conflicts in certain regions of
special importance to Russia. Being evident in the recent events,
Central Asia and the Caucasus will be two major candidates. As the
American economic, political and military presence is expanding in
those neighboring regions of which three countries (Kyrgyzstan,
Uzbekistan and Georgia) are hosting American military forces, fear of
encirclement will motivate Russia to use all the means at its
disposal to force those countries to limit their ties with the
Added to its geographical proximity, years of membership in the
Russian and Soviet political entities have created many ethnic,
economic and political ties between Russia and its southern
neighbors, which enable the Russians to pressure these countries, in
one way or another. Pressure tactics could include Russia's
manipulation of their domestic dissident movements and its limiting
or blocking the international trade of those countries passing
through its territory or through other Commonwealth of Independent
States (CIS) countries. For example, it could seek to prevent or to
prolong the construction of the Baku-Tiblisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline due
to begin this week, a feasible scenario given the existence of a wide
range of armed dissident and separatist groups in Azerbaijan and
Georgia and Russia's opposition to its construction. Military
showdowns, as evident in the ongoing conflict over Georgia's Pankisi
Valley or in the August naval maneuver in the Caspian Sea, will also
be used by Russia in cases when other means prove to be not
Russia's use of such measures against countries with close ties with
the United States will likely make them appeal to the Americans to
help them relieve the Russian pressure. In such case, an American
reaction in a military or non-military form will not be surprising,
although it will clearly worsen American-Russian relations. As a few
predictable non-military measures, the Americans could use their
economic power to deny Russia loans or credits from American or
American-dominated financial institutions, to create barriers to its
trade with them and their allies, and to impose economic sanctions on
Russia. They could also block Russia World Trade Organization
membership, which it has aspired to for quite some time. Depending on
the situation, the Americans could also react by beefing up the
military force of the affected country or by expanding their military
presence there to deter any possible Russian military operation.
Tension and conflict between Russia and the United States in Central
Asia and or over Russia's relations with Iran will go beyond those
issues to affect negatively their cooperation on certain areas.
Therefore, one should expect the rise of conflict over issues on
which the two sides have reached an understanding. As NATO considers
the membership applications of many eastern European and CIS
countries, the NATO eastward expansion will probably become a source
of tension when that organization begins its new round of membership
selection in the near future. Russia's recent affiliation with NATO
will unlikely be a strong incentive for the Russians to avoid
conflicts with NATO at the time when American military presence is
expanding along their southern borders.
The failure of Bolton to secure Russia's approval of the American
policy towards Iraq indicated one more time Russia' s emerging
conflicts with the United States arising from its national interests.
As also reflected in its dealing with Iran and North Korea, Russia is
determined to pursue its interests in Iraq and in the rest of the
rich Middle East requiring a foreign policy different from the
American one seen by many Arabs as hostile and pro-Israeli. Although
short-term diplomatic considerations may demand flexibility and
compromise in the Russian policy towards the US, the recent history
of Russian-American relations leaves little doubt, if any at all,
that Moscow is heading towards an era of growing conflict and tension
with the Americans over pursuing their national interests.
Dr Hooman Peimani works as an independent consultant with
international organizations in Geneva and does research in
India to back Russia on Georgia
-"Like Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, Georgian President Eduard
Shevardnadze wants to internationalize the issue by bringing NATO
observers into the bilateral format."
-Shevardnadze, in New Delhi's view has no business to bring NATO into
New Delhi, Sept 17, IRNA (Iran) -- India would back Russia if it
launches military strikes in Georgia' Pankisi Gorge where hundreds of
Chechen and other militants are said to be holed up for anti-Russian
operations, reported media on
According to the Hindustan Times, a New Delhi-based English daily, the
Russia-Georgia dispute brought New Delhi and Moscow closer in the fight
It also pits both countries diametrically against the US which has
opposed Russian President Vladimir Putin's threat of military strike
against Georgia where US troops are
An Indian official said, "There are close parallels between India's
experience with cross-border terrorism from bases inside Pakistan and
what is going on in the
"Like Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, Georgian President Eduard
Shevardnadze wants to internationalize the issue by bringing NATO
observers into the bilateral format," he
India shares Putin's assessment that only a joint Russian-Georgian
framework for cooperation against the Chechens in the Pankisi Gorge
region can work.
Shevardnadze, in New Delhi's view has no business tobring NATO into
The matter came up for discussions during India's External Affairs
Minister Yashwant Sinha's recent talks with his Russian and Chinese
counterparts in New
Yugoslav families sue Germany over 1999 NATO bombing
BONN, Sept 17 (AFP) - Relatives of civilians killed in the Serbian town
of Vavarin during NATO's 1999 bombing campaign against Yugoslavia filed
a suit for 3.5 million euros (3.3 million dollars) damages against
Germany Tuesday, justice officials said.
The suit, lodged by lawyers for a group of 35 Yugoslav citizens, will be
heard in a civil court, the first hearing of its kind in a European
tribunal, and could serve as a test case for seeking damages from NATO's
Ten Serb civilians were killed and more than 30 were injured on May 30,
1999, when two NATO airplanes launched missiles into Varvarin, striking
the town's bridge.
Three people, including a 15-year-old girl, were killed and five badly
injured when the planes first struck.
A second attack a few minutes later killed seven and injured 12, most of
them people who had come to help the earlier victims.
A lawyer for the relatives said Germany knew of and approved the bombing
of the town, which was some 200 kilometres (125 miles) outside the
The lawyer, Ulrich Dost, has said that the attack was a deliberate act
meant to hit the civilian population and that Germany must take
responsibility for the deaths and violations of human rights.
According to Yugoslav President Vojislav Kostunica, 1,500 Serb
civilians, including 81 children, died during NATO's
two-and-a-half-month air campaign to force an end to Belgrade's
repression against ethnic Albanians in Kosovo.
21. September 2002, 23.00 Uhr
Diese Ausgabe hat rainer firstname.lastname@example.org
Fehler möge frau/man mir nachsehen!
21. September 2002, 23.00 Uhr