|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: Germany
German parliament votes to send troops to Macedonia
By Peter Schwarz
31 August 2001
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
In a special session Wednesday, the Bundestag voted to send
German troops to participate in the NATO operation Essential
Harvest in Macedonia.
On August 23 the Social Democratic-Green Party government had
decided to send a total of 500 troops as part of a French-led
battalion. In line with a 1994 ruling by the German Constitutional
Court, such decisions must be ratified by parliament.
The measure passed by a wide margin, with 497 deputies voting
in favour of German engagement, 130 voting against, and 8 abstaining.
A majority for German involvement was regarded as assured, although
a number of Social Democratic (SPD) and a handful of Green deputies
had indicated they were prepared to vote against the governments
resolution.
After initially expressing opposition to German involvement,
the leadership of the conservative Christian Democratic Union
(CDU) declared Tuesday they would support the government, following
indications that a section of the party would defy the leadership
and support the SPD-Green Party resolution.
Following deployments in Bosnia and Kosovo, this new intervention
is the riskiest operation involving the German army in the Balkans.
Officially, the entire operation is due to last just 30 days and
is limited to collecting weapons voluntarily given up by the Albanian
separatist National Liberation Army (NLA). However, few informed
military or political observers seriously believe that the operation
will stop at that. There are many indications that Essential Harvest
will prove to be the first step in establishingafter Bosnia
and Kosovoa third NATO protectorate in the Balkans.
The peace plan jointly worked out by the head of foreign policy
for the European Union (EU), Javier Solana, and NATO General Secretary
George Robertson stipulates that as soon as the NLA has handed
over a third of its weapons, the Macedonian parliament is to assemble
in order to agree minority rights for the Albanian community.
This arrangement is endangered, however, by the enormous discrepancy
between the number of weapons to be turned in and the number actually
in the hands of the NLA. The Macedonian government reckons the
NLA has 85,000 weapons; the NLA says it has only 2,000. NATO has
agreed a figure of 3,300, obviously much closer to the number
claimed by the NLA.
Even leading NATO representatives have conceded that the figure
of 3,300 is unrealistic, especially in light of the fact that
the NLA is able without difficulty to obtain new weapons within
a few days. In recent days, the NLA moved many of its weapons
across the border to Kosovo, whence they originated.
The process of disarmament thus assumes a purely symbolic character.
It is a measure of trust aimed at supporting
the political process in the country, according to NATO
spokesman Yves Brodeur.
In reality, there is good reason to believe that the intervention
by NATO will have a contrary effect and intensify the civil war
in Macedonia.
A manoeuvre by the NLA
The NLA is playing a double game. While the organisation officially
supports the peace plan, it has intensified its attacks
on important cultural and economic targets. In the last few days
explosions devastated an orthodox church in the cloister of Lesok,
the main car licensing office in Tetovo, and the Brioni motel
in the village of Celopek.
The culprits proceeded with particular brutality in their action
against the motel. Two Macedonian waiters were tied to the motels
pillars, and bombs were attached to their bodies. They died in
the explosion that wrecked the building.
Recently a split-off from the NLA has emergedthe mysterious
Albanian National Army (ANA)which officially rejects the
peace plan. It remains unclear, however, whether the new group
constitutes a genuine split-off, or merely reflects a division
of labour within the NLA.
In either case, from the standpoint of the NLA there are advantages
to continuing terror attacks while officially collaborating with
NATO. From the very start the organisations tactics were
directed at using violence to inflame relations between the Slavic
and Albanian communities and precipitating a NATO intervention
in the country.
In Kosovo, the Albanian separatist Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA)the
parent organisation of the NLA in Macedoniawas able to register
successes with a similar tactic. Originally the KLA was denounced
by Western governments as a terrorist group, but was subsequently
promoted to the status of a negotiating partner, and then supplied
arms by NATO. Since then, as a NATO protectorate, Kosovo has in
practice severed its ties with the Serbian state, while the KLA
has gained control of the levers of power in the former Serbian
province. In other words, the KLA has been able largely to realise
its aims with NATO help.
The situation in Macedonia has proceeded in a similar fashion.
Originally, attacks were carried out by a few groups of guerrillas
mainly operating from inside Kosovo. Since then Macedonia has
been brought to the brink of civil war.
As in Kosovo, the KLA-sponsored NLA has been able to exploit
legitimate grievances of the Albanian minority population, which
faces various forms of discrimination at the hands of the bourgeois
Macedonian state.
The terrorist activities of the NLA have polarised the situation
and strengthened extreme nationalist elements on the Macedonian
side. Should NATO find itself caught between the two sides, it
could be drawn into a civil war. It would then face the alternative
of a humiliating retreat or a large-scale military intervention.
A likely result would be the division of the country into Macedonian
and Albanian enclaves, a development that would coincide with
the aims of the NLA.
The NLA is very much a product of NATO policies. With its support
for and arming of the Albanian nationalists in Kosovo, NATO established
the conditions for the KLA to extend its operations into Macedonia
under the guise of the NLA. The US, in particular, has worked
closely with the NLA.
Not without reason, therefore, is NATO regarded by considerable
sections of the Macedonian population to be an accomplice of the
Albanian nationalists, who are seeking to divide the country and
strip it of its independence. These feelings were expressed in
demonstrations and blockades set up at border crossings to protest
the NATO intervention. The first victim of operation Essential
Harvest, a British soldier, was killed on Monday when he was struck
by a chunk of concrete thrown at his vehicle by a Macedonian youth.
The aims of NATO
When one considers the broader historical background to Essential
Harvest, it becomes clear that NATO is pursuing aims that are
quite different from its stated goal of preserving peace and promoting
democracy in the region.
Since the break-up of Yugoslavia, the Western powers have regularly
intervened in the Balkans along definite lines. First, they have
encouraged separatist and nationalist tensions. Then, after the
inevitable eruption of bloody conflicts, they have intervened
militarily. At the heart of these interventions has been their
own economic and strategic interests.
In particular, Germanya country that had close economic
links to the former Yugoslaviaregards the Balkans as its
own backyard. It is by no means accidental that the German deutsche
mark is the most important second currency in most of the Balkan
states.
In 1991, German insistence on the hasty recognition of Slovenia
and Croatia, which had seceded from Yugoslavia with German support,
led to the outbreak of the communal conflicts that have since
devastated the region. Under the former Yugoslav state, ethnic
minorities in the component republics had enjoyed a certain degree
of legal protection. Once these republics seceded, however, the
legal status of minorities, such as the Serbs in Croatia, was
undermined.
There were sufficient warnings of the likely consequences of
the German policy: the EU envoy to Yugoslavia, Lord Carrington,
UN General Secretary Perez de Cuellar, and US Secretary of State
Cyrus Vance all sent letters to German Foreign Minister Hans Dietrich
Genscher, without success. Since then, Berlin has established
the closest relations with the governments in Ljubljana and Zagreb.
Following the decisive first step by the German government,
the US insisted on independence for Bosnia-Herzegovina. This led
to a communal bloodbath in which hundreds of thousands were killed
and many thousands more were expelled from their homes. The outcome
of the Bosnian civil war is a division of the tiny country into
ethnic enclaves, policed by Western occupation forces.
The next state that came to the attention of the Western powers
was Serbia, which had been enlisted to help enforce the Dayton
accords that ended the war in Bosnia. As a potential regional
power, Serbia came to be regarded as an obstacle to the further
division of the region.
Yugoslav President Milosevic was targeted as the Wests
main enemy, and support was given to Albanian nationalism in Kosovo.
When Serbia refused to accept Western ultimatums, the country
was subjected to a four-month bombardment that eventually made
it possible to replace Milosevic with a more pliable government.
As in the cases of Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia, there were
a host of warnings about the consequences of an escalation in
Kosovoabove all, that the encouragement of Albanian nationalism
would lead to a destabilisation of Macedonia, where independence
in 1991 had ushered in an uneasy balance of forces between the
Macedonian and Albanian communities.
Any escalation of the conflict in Macedonia now threatens to
spread into Albania itself, as well as Bulgaria and the NATO states
of Greece and Turkey.
A significant factor in the escalation of the Macedonian conflict
has been the growth of tensions between the US and Europe as a
whole, and Germany in particular. A clear indication of such tensions
is the claim in the European press that the US has been secretly
supporting the NLA.
Operation Essential Harvest primarily came about as an initiative
by European NATO members, who urged action to prevent a further
destabilisation of Macedonia. It is the first large-scale NATO
operation in which the US is not playing a leading military role.
By far, the biggest contingent of soldiers is being supplied by
Great Britain, followed by France, Italy, Greece and Germany.
The overall commander is a Dane, with the US limiting its support
primarily to logistics.
The tensions between the US and Europe, the unrealistic nature
of the official mandate, and the heated atmosphere in Macedonia
are sufficient to ensure that Essential Harvest will be a highly
explosive mission. The death of a British soldier in the first
days of the intervention indicate that the risks for the personnel
involved are far greater than have been officially conceded.
The debate in the German parliament
Such issues were barely mentioned in the Bundestag debate.
The PDS (Party of Democratic Socialismsuccessor party to
the ruling Stalinist party of the former East Germany) was the
only party to vote as a whole against the intervention. In line
with its Stalinist tradition, the party has generally refused
to support such engagements by the German army. Nevertheless,
the PDS has indicated for some time that it is prepared to change
its stance in exchange for a more influential role in German politics.
Otherwise, agreement exists amongst all the parties that German
participation in the operation is a national political necessity,
or, to use the formulation favoured by German Chancellor Gerhard
Schröder, a vital aspect of German national interests.
Until German unification in 1990, military interventions by
the German army outside NATO territory were generally regarded
as taboo. Since then, however, the official standpoint has evolved
to the insistence that Germany can secure its economic interests
on a world scale only when it is able to support its foreign policy
goals with military means.
First the CDU government of Helmut Kohl, and now the SPD-led
government of Gerhard Schröder, have emphasised the necessity
of strengthening Europes military power as a counterweight
to the US, while building up Germanys military authority
inside Europe. In this respect German participation in NATO interventions
in the Balkans are regarded as indispensable, which is why such
decisions on past occasions have been approved by large majorities
drawn from across the spectrum of German bourgeois politics.
Nevertheless, the risks involved in the latest intervention
in Macedonia led to considerable tensions in the run-up to Wednesdays
vote. Some deputies fear that a military reversal in Macedonia
could undercut plans for a further build-up of the German army;
others regard the army as under-financed and lacking the necessary
equipment. Deputies are also concerned that significant numbers
of German casualties could lead to a negative reaction by the
German population, which has evinced markedly less enthusiasm
for militarism than its parliamentarians.
It is noteworthy that the least resistance to this latest military
intervention is offered by the Green Party, which in the past
argued most vehemently against German military engagements. The
Green Party central council decided by a vote of ten to one on
Monday to recommend that its deputies in parliament support the
mission. The party, which was shaken by considerable internal
conflict over German participation in the Kosovo war, has now
made its peace with Germanys new role as a military power.
Prior to the vote, a group of around 30 SPD deputies indicated
it would vote no. In a joint statement the deputies
declared: A renewed, massive military intervention by NATO
in the Balkans, the course and results of which cannot be predicted,
would contribute to a further destabilisation of the region.
According to these deputies, it as an error to think one can resolve
ethnic conflicts by military means.
Prior to the vote, CDU Chairperson Angela Merkel, the head
of the CDU parliamentary fraction, Friedrich Merz, and former
Defence Minister Volker Rühe attempted to bind the fraction
to a vote against the intervention. They hoped to put pressure
on Schröder, linking CDU agreement on the NATO operation
to a demand that the SPD-Green government increase its budget
for the army by half a billion marks.
This manoeuvre by the party leadership met with stiff opposition
inside the party itself, where the partys expert on foreign
policy, Karl Lamers, and the predecessor of Merz, Wolfgang Schäuble,
opposed an attempt to subordinate such a fundamental decision
to tactical party considerations. As the party leadership was
appealing for a vote against NATO participation, Schäuble
and Lamers went public with a proposal for doing away with parliamentary
ratification of such military operations.
When it became clear that the parliamentary representatives
of the liberal FDP (Free Democratic Party) and many CDU deputies
were prepared to provide Schröder with a majority, Merkel
and Merz were forced to make an embarrassing retreat.
Initially, the FDP had indicated it would oppose the participation
of German troops, but changed its position at the end of last
week when it became clear that by taking sides with the SPD in
the vote, the party could increase its chances of replacing the
Greens as coalition partners of the SPD following new elections.
As expected, the Bundestag has voted by a large majority for
the Macedonian intervention. Such a majority, however, does not
correspond to the general mood in the country. The broad mass
of the population is uneasy over Germanys military and foreign
policy. Given the lack of any genuine opposition within the political
establishment, however, it remains largely in the dark over the
real motives and aims of the Macedonian mission.
See Also:
Tensions deepen as NATO begins Macedonia
mission
[25 August 2001]
US-European antagonisms sharpen over Macedonia
[22 August 2001]
German troops to join NATO
force in Macedonia
[13 July 2001]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |