In These New Times

A new paradigm for a post-imperial world

Belgrade Forum’s Position on Serbia–NATO Relationship

Posted by seumasach on December 31, 2009

Zivadin Jovanovic

Global Research

30th December, 2009

1. Serbia as a small peace-loving country should remain militarily neutral. Serbia should not be a member of any military alliance. Serbia differs from the rest of the countries in the region, firstly, in that Serbia had never been a member of either the Warsaw Pact or of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and, secondly, no country in the region has ever been the victim of a NATO attack except Serbia. Serbian neutrality has been defined by the National Assembly Resolution binding the government.

2. As Serbia has already joined the Partnership for Peace program, this also is part of the political reality. Austria, Ireland, Sweden, Finland, Malta and Switzerland are constitutionally neutral countries but members of the PFP.

3. Since its aggression against Serbia (Yugoslavia) in 1999, NATO has demonstrated that it was meant to be a precedent for launching similar attacks and military interventions in other regions out of its jurisdiction defined by the NATO Founding Act. Its offensive character was later confirmed in Iraq and elsewhere. In addition, NATO has demonstrated its ignorance of basic international principles and laws and the role of Uinted Nations Security Council.

4. Having played a leading role in supporting the unilateral, illegal secession of Kosovo and Metohija from Serbia in 2008, the U.S. government and NATO proved that their prime interest in 1999 was to establish a NATO state on 15 percent of Serbian state territory [Kosovo].

The U.S. first established the Camp Bondsteel military base in Kosovo and Metohija in 1999, the biggest American military camp outside of American soil. The U.S. government didn’t have Serbia’s or the UN’s authorization to establish such a base. It was an impetus to spread military bases further to the East (for example, threein Bulgaria , another four in Romania and so on). The U.S. and other NATO countries have established an “independent Kosovo’s Army” by “transforming” the terrorist KLA/UCK.

5. Surveys of public opinion show that about 75 percent of Serbia’s population is against Serbia’s membership in NATO.

6. As the part of the present government is clearly pro-NATO, they may be tempted to ignore the will of the majority and force a short-cut road towards NATO membership. That’s why many civil society associations, including the Belgrade Forum, as well as many political parties keep publically cautioning that the final decision on NATO membership is exclusively in the hands of the people who will have a say at a referendum.

7. Formally the government agrees with the inevitability of a referendum. But in practice nobody dares to organize it as the result is quite clear in advance.

So Serbia is faced with NATO advocates’ tactics – step by step getting deeper involved in NATO structures and operations directing the process to the point of no return.

At the same time NATO and the government spend huge amounts of money propagating NATO as the guardian of paradise. The masters of this operation count the effects of promises of a “better life” to the nation suffering from poverty, unemployment and confusion.

Zivadin Jovanovic is the President of the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: