WHAT DO SLOBODAN AND SADDAM HAVE IN COMMON?

By William Markiewicz

-- That both wanted at any price to avoid a war they could not win and could expect nothing from winning.

The West, on the other hand, wanted those wars at any price. Why with Iraq? Clearly for the oil. Why with Yugoslavia? The map of the Balkans could easily have been changed without war; the humiliating peace treaties that Milosevic signed are the best proof of it. But it didn't help him; the West wanted the war just for war. Let future historians speculate why the Serbs, who won in WW2, had to lose the peace sixty years later. Had Milosevic defied Nato, refused those ridiculous treaties, and engaged in defending the Serbs in Krajina, Bosnia, Kosovo, he'd have lost the war and been stigmatized as a war criminal, which happened anyway, but, as one Serb wrote, he'd have been a hero for the Serbian people forever.

A similar fate of conflict of interests awaited Gorbachev when he initiated Perestroika. How could he have dreamed that he wouldn't be helped and that instead Russia would be pushed into years of ruin and starvation? "Russia is too big," said various politicians and columnists. What did they have in mind? They hoped, as Russia weakened, for chunks of Siberia, Caucasus ... If Gorbachev could have foreseen the true nature of the NWO, he wouldn't have rushed into Perestroika without requiring guarantees in advance.

What is in the future? Can it still be called future? The present stage of simmering clashes seem here to stay. This is probably the best the NWO can achieve, while dreaming of further conquests -- for security reasons of course. In the meantime, people in the Middle East and Central Asia will continue to learn how to live dangerously.

Back to the index of the Vagabond
© Copyright 2003 E-mail to: William Markiewicz