Macedonia Capitulates
by Christopher Deliso
November 20, 2001

A NEW WAR, OR JUST THE OLD ONE AGAIN?

After September 11^th, life has gone on in Macedonia, though the world has taken but little notice. Violence too has continued unabated, though Macedonia's complaints of Albanian terrorism have fallen on deaf ears in the West. The failure to get the NLA labeled as "terrorists" has led to its logical conclusion: the passing of major constitutional capitulations, as envisaged in the treacherous Treaty of Ochrid.

The US has announced, with much fanfare, that the "war on terrorism" will not be a conventional one – it is and will be fought militarily, diplomatically, and economically. There was talk immediately after 9/11 that American policy towards Macedonia might actually undergo a complete reversal; evidence that bin Laden and other mujaheedin had connections with the Albanians would seem to justify a more pro-Macedonia position. Yet for all this the US continues to thwart Macedonia, even without the enforcement of most of its relocated NATO troops. And as the dictates of the new "unconventional" war spell out, the war against Macedonia – being fought on behalf of the NLA – will largely be conducted surreptitiously. The media's recent focus on all things Afghani has aided US duplicity against Macedonia, which is, as usual, utterly helpless.

A PROLOGUE ON SPADES

A few weeks ago at Stanford University, I saw the Indian Consul-General and his Russian counterpart speak out against "terrorism." To a credulous crowd of graying Americans, they bemoaned a common problem: the lack of a commonly understood definition of terrorism. "It's high time," declared Consul Viswanathan, "for us to call a spade a spade, and recognize these people for what they are – terrorists."

By "these people," of course, Mr. Viswanathan was referring to the Pakistanis in Kashmir. That this seminar on spades was being used as merely a public relations tool for two powerful US allies was further illustrated by Consul-General Popov's condemnation of "terrorists" in Chechnya. Yet my own write-in question, about why Albanian terrorism in Macedonia has gone unrecognized, was not answered.

Folks, I'm not interested in saying if they're right or wrong. All around the world, one man's sadistic terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. All I want to point is that this hard-fought battle of pens and keyboards (over who deserves the loaded "terrorist" appellation), has enormous consequences for political – and military – intervention. Indeed, semantic control translates immediately into political power; what might be a useful "spade" for a major power like India or Russia is, for little Macedonia, only a tool to be used for digging its own grave. Yet in this respect, the war was over before it even started.

BEWARE THE IDES OF MARCH…

Macedonia's downfall was set up a long time ago, way back in March 2001. Given US support for the KLA in Kosovo, it was not hard to see how this friendly relationship would be extended southward, in the event of an Albanian uprising against Macedonia. Anything otherwise would have meant the embarrassing admission that the US-instigated war in Kosovo had been an absolute disaster – something NATO had not the stomach to admit.

SETTING A PATTERN: MEDIA COVERAGE IN THE EARLY DAYS OF THE WAR

The most faithful barometer of US policy in the media has traditionally been the New York Times. Last winter, when the "National Liberation Army" first reared its ugly head in Macedonia, the coverage in the Times would prove decisive to Macedonia's fate. Would it win or lose the PR war? Were claims of terrorism justified, and even if they were, would the United States (then happily terrorist-free) even care?

During March 2001, the New York Times covered or mentioned Macedonia in 29 articles and 4 editorials. As always, choice of adjectives was crucial to developing a coherent policy. And so, we find that the NLA was described as "gunmen" (4 times); as "irregulars" (1 time); as "militants" (11 times); as "extremists" (7 times); and as "fighters" (14 times). On 24 occasions, the NLA was linked to an "insurgency;" on 4 others, to a "rebellion." Most telling were the number of times they were described as "ethnic" (64 times), and, most crucial of all, as "rebels" (153 times).

The Times only mentioned the NLA as "terrorists" on 8 occasions. The first (on 3/19) was in reporting the French government's labeling of the NLA as terrorists. The second (3/20), in apparent reaction to the French designation, quoted an NLA commander who said "don't call us terrorists." On the same day, Javier Solana called the NLA "terrorists." Fourth was on 21 March, when the Times referred to the NLA "as a group it (the Macedonian government) calls terrorists." References 5-8 derive from quotes made by Macedonian officials; respectively, President Trajkovski, Spokesman Milososki, Trajkovski again, and National Security Advisor Nikola Dimitrov.

THE WEAPON MACEDONIA WILL NEVER GET

Reviewing the evidence, a general pattern becomes clear. Even in the earliest days of the war, the US media had made up its mind about which side to back. As was noted even then, despite the rhetoric, time would be on the side of armed militants. Although the Times coverage was not then especially pro-NLA, it tolerated the Albanian position well enough by being NLA-neutral, and branding their members as overwhelmingly "ethnic rebels." The maintenance of this neutrality was essential: it allowed a gradual change in the media, towards the unabashed love of the NLA that resulted in Frowick's secret deal in Prizren, the MPRI farce at Aracinovo, and the latest US betrayal, which we will soon discuss.

Perhaps back in March, the reticence of journalists to use the loaded term "terrorists" made the less-accurate "rebels" a more palatable choice for New York Times correspondents. Yet surely, no such reluctance remains now: in the wake of 9/11, the word "terrorists" has been repeated ad nauseam throughout the media. One could not even begin to count the frequency of the word's recent usage: it would be like trying to count the grains of sand on a beach, or the specks of dirt in a freshly-dug grave.

This leads to the obvious conclusion that the word "terrorist" is just another lethal weapon in the arsenals of powerful countries, like Russia, India, and chief of all, the United States. Indeed, it would be an easier task for little Macedonia to develop a comprehensive nuclear weapons program, than for it to acquire this one crucial word for its own defense. The obvious double standard at work, however, has not been lost on some.

LATCHING ON

Many commentators have latched on to this contradiction – the alleged presence of terrorists in Afghanistan, but not in Macedonia. The former Canadian ambassador to Yugoslavia, James Bissett, reiterated it last week. Joseph Farah also commented on the strange dichotomy. Yet perhaps Nebosja Malic, equipped with that perverse Balkan sense of humor, put it best when he said that Macedonia "continues to be framed for its own murder" by NATO and Western diplomats, urging the country to give in to NLA demands – and in doing so, show that violence gets results.

MACEDONIA AFTER 9/11 – THE CONFLICT SEETHES

One would have thought that, between the onset of colder weather and the embarrassment of being linked to bin Laden, the NLA would have gone on its winter vacation by now. Yet quite the reverse has occurred. Since 9/11, NATO has increased pressure on Macedonia to amnesty the NLA – the very individuals who had spent the last few months blowing up police stations, bombing churches, and carving up the bodies of civilians. Under the fiction of being peacefully "disarmed," the NLA (according to NATO) now no longer poses a threat to Macedonian stability. The truth is, the militants merely handed over a few rusty guns, sent the good stuff to Kosovo, and disappeared into the civilian community – to reappear, no doubt, when the mountain snows melt next Spring.

Although most of the world has not cared to know, the violence has continued in Macedonia since 9/11. Sporadic gun battles go on still around Tetovo and in western Macedonian villages. If the Macedonian authorities even try to reclaim their territory, like on 1 October, they are shot at. An unexplained car bomb three days later killed one Macedonian. In a miniature version of the "Kosovo scenario" on 17 October, two Albanians were killed by "friendly fire" – that is, by rival Albanians. Indeed, if western Macedonia becomes "liberated" (as its neighbor to the north is) such anarchic, fratricidal violence may soon become commonplace.

It was déjà vu in Tearce on 22 October, when a police station was bombed – a repeat of the very same attack that inaugurated the terrorist campaign in January 2001. Reality Macedonia reported (on 15 November) that the general lawlessness near Kumanovo has resulted in house robberies. On the same day, Albanian gunmen near Tetovo "severely attacked" Macedonian security forces.

ANOTHER ARACINOVO?

Yet for all this, the worst violence in recent weeks may have been orchestrated by an American "diplomat," James Pardew. If the allegations are in fact true, then it is clear that the US is playing a reckless game of Russian roulette, attacking bin Laden affiliates around the world – but continuing to defend his former Albanian allies in Macedonia.

On 12 November, three Macedonian policemen were ambushed and killed while attempting to take control of a suspected mass grave. During the firefight, Albanian terrorists also kidnapped 100 Macedonian civilians and held them hostage. It was supposed to be a routine operation; the Macedonian police called in to Pardew and NATO beforehand, giving them explicit details of the operation. It was meant to be coordinated with NATO, completely nonviolent, and Pardew agreed to help.

Yet somehow, it all went wrong. Macedonia's Dnevnik claims that Pardew set up the slaughter. After meeting with the Macedonians, and promising logistical help in cordoning off the area, he hastily met with Albanian-friendly advisors – to deliberately sabotage the move:

"The American envoy made his final decision at this meeting: 'No logistics will be sent. We'll leave [the Macedonians] alone, so they can learn their lesson.' Pardew ordered his assistants to instantly inform those in the 'crisis terrain' about the coming of the police, with an added suggestion to prepare a 'welcome.' The epilogue: a black day ending with three killed policemen, two wounded policemen, and about a hundred kidnapped civilians."

WESTERN MEDIA WOLVES SCENT FRESH KILL

This story, of course, is not mentioned in the mainstream media. In what amounted to an apology for the NLA and the Ochrid "peace treaty," a recent Reuters report (16 November), tried to justify Pardew's brazen betrayal:

"Hardline (Macedonian) nationalists had almost wrecked the peace accord days before when the hawkish police minister sent special forces into the rebel Albanian heartland, leading to fighting, arrests and retaliatory kidnappings."

The Reuters reporter, of course, does not explain the reason for the police's visit to the "rebel Albanian heartland." It is all made to seem like yet another oppressive and heavy-handed Macedonian attack on defenseless Albanian civilians. Yet, we must remember how to read such reports. Indeed, it would be more accurate to replace "hardline nationalists" with "patriots," and "peace accord" with "forced capitulation of sovereignty." The level of anti-Macedonian rhetoric present in this report rises to levels not seen since August – when the US was comfortably terrorism-free, and able to make blasé statements about the need for "confidence-building" measures and "political solutions." Yet in reality, the Macedonians were forced to capitulate by changing their constitution, under the threat of continued violence from US-trained Albanian militants. This would be like giving bin Laden a pen and saying, "go for it, Osama, throw in a new amendment to the US Constitution! Go crazy! Just don't attack us again, please!"

THE NEXT ALBANIAN OFFENSIVE?

Would that a scrap of paper was Macedonia's only problem. Yet the NLA has learned in 2001 that violence gets results – and also legitimizes its perpetrators. Now that Ali Ahmeti has become a political personality in his own right, the agenda of terrorism has won out in Macedonia. We should have no illusions, however, that the violence will stop, or the ridiculous claims end. While NATO chooses to look the other way to the fact that criminals and terrorists have assumed political power in Kosovo and Macedonia, the reality that Balkans terrorism is rewarded becomes glaringly obvious.

Given NATO's disinterest, it's no wonder that Macedonia and Serbia are planning new defense cooperation against Albanian terrorists operating on their common border. And, indeed, not a moment too soon:

"Dnevnik daily says a large-scale offensive will be launched by the ethnic Albanians in Macedonia, Kosovo and southern Serbia, following the elections in Kosovo on November 17th. Roughly 200 ethnic-Albanian gunmen, NLA members and members of Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC) had stationed near Skopje's village of Radusa. The terrorists are to deliver a severe and swift blow on Macedonian security forces at Radusa-Blace region in Macedonia and Strbce-Brezovica region in Kosovo."

MEET THE ALBANIAN NATIONAL ARMY

With the allegedly disarmed NLA now elevated to the level of respectable negotiating partners, and Macedonia's constitutional capitulations made, one would think that the Albanians would be satisfied. Yet what would be the fun of life without terrorism? The NLA, therefore, has metamorphosed beautifully into the ANA – the "Albanian National Army." Just as the NLA was once known as the KLA, the slippery shift of nomenclature continues – a total farce to everyone with a pulse – excepting, of course, Western "peacemakers."

Yet, unlike the "equal rights" posturing of the NLA, its clear from the ANA's own press releases that they will be satisfied with nothing less than complete separation and autonomy:

"All territories where (a) majority of Albanians live, where the Albanians' properties were attacked, massacred and destroyed are declared as forbidden zone for the Macedonian repressive forces, so if they enter would be considered as legitimate targets and would be attacked without any warning."

A BITTER PILL

Western diplomats continue to try and justify their cooperation with Albanian extremists in Kosovo and Macedonia, in the face of all right reason and everything that has been seen in 2001. The acronym is unimportant; whether you call it the KLA, the NLA, the ANA, or the Liberation Army of Presevo, Medvedja, and Bujanovac, the organization and its goal are one and the same: to create an ethnically homogenous "Greater Albania," at the expense of its neighbors' sovereignty. This is as true now as it was last year, as true as it was in 1878, when the Albanian "League of Prizren" first advocated the idea. After all the unabating violence in Macedonia this year, the US and its allies remain in serious denial (or secret complicity) if they have other beliefs on the matter.

Yet somehow, over the past 10 months, this objective has been forgotten, or concealed. It is especially bitter to recall that early on, the West briefly saw the situation for what it was. Thus EU security chief Javier Solana, back on March 20 ("Macedonia gives rebels ultimatum," New York Times). Speaking about the NLA, Solana declared:

"Nothing, and I mean nothing, will be obtained by violent means… it is a mistake to negotiate with terrorists in this particular case, and we do not recommend it."

There is nothing left to say; the betrayal speaks for itself.