Was Europe the real target in the bombing of Serbia?

The following article is intriguing. In it, Tanjug, news agency of the left-leaning Yugoslav government, comments on an article in Area, magazine of the conservative Italian party, the National Alliance. The article concerns Washington's economic motives in the Balkans. What is striking is it appears that Tanjug and Area agree. Is this indicative of a growing European awareness of Washington's goals?

[Note: The Tanjug article came to Emperors-clothes.com in translation from Serbo-Croatian. It has been edited for readability. The content has not been altered. Some notes, concerning trade routes, have been added. Please feel free to distribute but please include all text including this message. Thanks.]


Rome, September 17, 1999 (Tanjug) - From the geopolitical point of view, Yugoslavia is the central country on the Balkans map. Moreover it is most attractive for its production and consuming potentials.

This is argued in the comment of Area, magazine of the Italian National Alliance. The Alliance, together with other parties of the opposition and right-center block in the Italian parliament, played a disgraceful role in supporting the NATO war against Yugoslavia.

In the latest issue, Area throws new light on that war. Enitled "Pact for Balkans (non)Stability", the article points out that shrewd observers of the recent "Great Westerners" meeting in Sarajevo could not miss a huge missing piece: Yugoslavia wasn't allowed. Its exclusion and NATO bombing, had been arranged in Washington. As usual, the Europeans were reduced to the role of yes-men.

How can the reconstruction of Yugoslavia be conceived without -- Yugoslavia? asks Area. Important land and water routes pass through Yugoslavia. These provide real and potential lines of communication between Europe, the Middle East in Asia, the North Sea and the Caucasus-Caspian zone. Those are the places with largest oil resources in the world. Thus leaving Yugoslavia out of the reconstruction of the Balkans could damage Europe more then Yugoslavia.

Area argues that NATO's attack on Yugoslavia aimed to achieve by force something American diplomacy could not: occupation of Yugoslavia, as Annex B of the Rambouillet Accord openly demanded. We might raise another question: why have Washington strategists tried so hard to occupy the Yugoslavia through the weapon of economic blackmail and through the mobilization of an internal, pro-American opposition in Serbia?

This alliance, stimulated by a flood of U.S. dollars and by the Serbian opposition's foolish illusion that Washington was motivated by friendship was destroyed by NATO bombs. Washington cares about strategic targets, based on the geopolitical, geoeconomical and geostrategic properties of Yugoslavia.

A direct objective of the Washington strategists was the literal destruction of the commercial-traffic route called Corridor Ten. It goes from Budapest, Hungary in the north via Belgrade to Salonika, a major port and Greece's second largest city, in the south. This is the shortest, most logical, the most economical connection between Western Europe and the Middle East.

The Danube water route is equally important. It connects the North Sea with the Black Sea and the Caucasus-Caspian zone. This vitally important Euro-Asian route was first drastically narrowed by sanctions imposed by the U.S. regime against Yugoslavia. And now the Danube water route has been virtually broken due to NATO's bombing of the bridges across the Danube in Novi Sad.

US policy has opposed developing Corridor Ten for some time, particularly building an oil pipeline from the Rumanian port of Constanta to Trieste, Italy. This line would enable Europe to get oil directly from Russia without American intermediaries. It would open a entirely new doorway, allowing Russian access to the furthest European markets. It would bypass the only presently existing doorway - the Straits of Bosporus, the necessity of using which currently allows Turkey to impose blackmailing restrictions.

Washington's strategy in Rome and Paris is to encourage the development of Corridor Eight, from the Bulgarian port of Varna, via Skopje in Macedonia, to Durres on the Albanian coast across the Adriatic Sea from Italy.

In Paris, pro-American lobbyists have been showing only the indirect "advantages" of this project, giving incentive to a chronic and poorly hidden anti-American mood, because any closing of Corridor Ten would cause a lot of problems for the Germans. They would not have the opportunity to spread Southeast, towards Central Asia and the Middle East, as they have dreamed of doing for a century.

Meanwhile in Rome, pro-American lobbyists are counting on the geographic ignorance of people in government. They have been "explaining" to them that Corridor Eight is more realistic and more profitable because it is closer to Italy. As if Durres is in Italy.

Emperors-clothes.com note: Let's sort this out a bit. It appears we are talking about 4 routes here. Three, according to Area and Tanjug, are opposed by the U.S. The fourth, called Corridor Eight, is favored by Washington. A bit of explanation for the geographically challenged:

1)Corridor Ten. This is the traditional route, for trade and conquest, through Yugoslavia. Starts in Budapest, Hungary, in the north, located on the economically important Danube River. It proceeds southward, by land, over the Panonian Plain, the bed of the ancient Panonian Sea. The Panonian Plain is highly fertile and lies over oil fields. And it is, of course, flat. Good for transporting goods.

Proceeding south, Corridor Ten stays with the Panonian Plain into Yugoslavia. It passes through northern Serbia, or Vojvodina. It then enters mountainous areas, minimizing these obstacles by using two valleys. First, the Morava Valley, in Serbia, and then the Vardar Valley which goes through Central Macedonia and into Greece. There Corridor Ten terminates at the important Greek port of Salonika.

This route is disliked by Washington since it mainly travels through Serbia and Greece. Tanjug and Area are saying that Washington made sure NATO bombed important transportation targets along Corridor Ten during the 78 day NATO war on Yugoslavia. (You know, the scary thing about really good horror movies is - the monster is always a kind of machine. It kills of necessity and without feeling for its own reasons. And Washington is a bit like a horror movie monster, wouldn't you say? To bomb Corridor Ten targets - not out of anger, not for military reasons, but to further economic goals! If this scenario had appeared in a Soviet novel, everyone in the West would have laughed - but here it is, today, in a conservative - very conservative Italian magazine - stated as an obvious truth. Obstacles to the monster's goal - which is economic subjugation of vast numbers of people - are destroyed dispassionately. It is, as Thomas Friedman, the NY Times columnist said (approvingly): "McDonalds needs Macdonald Douglas," or words to that effect - that is, the guns are used to clear the way for the rapacious US economic machine. Just by the by, how could anyone believe this ruthless machine could possibly help the people of East Timor, or any other oppressed group?)

2) The second route which Washington holds in disfavor is the Constanta (on Rumania's Black Sea coast) to Trieste (on Italy's Adriatic Sea coast) route. It also makes use of the Panonian Plain. Starting in Rumania, it passes through Serbia, then Croatia and Slovenia, ending in northern Italy. For most of the trip the route is over flat terrain. This route is excellent for Russia, since it goes from the Black Sea, near Russian and the Ukraine, to northern Italy, thus linking up with the European market. It minimizes US control - by using Italy and Serbia as well as two former-Yugoslav Republics, Slovenia and Croatia, both areas of strong German influence.

Again, Tanjug and Area suggest Washington deliberately bombed Serbian targets that are part of this route.

Tanjug and apparently the article in Area comment: "The Constanta (Rumania) to Trieste (Italy) route passes through the Panonian plain without any natural obstacles. Moreover, this route already has a network of local pipelines and refineries in place. They only need re-connecting." Interesting question: did NATO bomb some of the oil facilities along this route?

3) The third route is the Danube River. The Danube is a natural European water-highway, starting in Germany and flowing mainly East, passing through much of Europe: Germany, Austria, Slovakia, Hungary, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), Croatia, Bulgaria and Romania .

Again, disliked by Washington. Naturally links Western to Eastern Europe. NATO bombed several Danube bridges, effectively blocking commercial traffic and affecting their economies of the above-named European states.

4) Corridor Eight. This is the route favored by Washington. It proceeds East/West, from the Bulgarian Black Sea Port of Varna through the Southern Balkans, where US influence is very strong, especially with the US-controlled NATO/UN occupation of Kosovo, to Durres, in Albania, also an area of US strength.

The late Sean Gervasi, a keen analysis, noted in 1995 that the US planned to extend Corridor Eight South into Turkey, thus creating a Middle East to European route through the Southern Balkans. End Emperors-clothes.com note]

Contrary to Washington's anti-European strategy, it is clear that opening Corridor Ten is of vital for the Italian economy. This requires the government in Belgrade to resist American pressures and to defend not only its own interests but those of Europe as well.

But, that requires the aid of Europe, for the benefit of all Europeans, concludes the magazine. [End Tanjug article.]

* * *

If you're reading this article in a site other than Emperors-Clothes.com and would like to see more articles please click here or go to http://emperors-clothes.com

For an excellent discussion of Washington's geopolitical strategy, see: http://emperors-clothes.comArticles/Sean%20Gervasi/Why.htm