By William Markiewicz

The Spectator's August 29th editorial of this title, strongly criticizes British involvement in 'terraforming' future Balkan history. While agreeing with The Spectator's negative judgement on the NWO's Balkan adventure I question the arguments it uses to support its thesis:

"...From the point of view of British national interest, what is at stake in Macedonia? The answer, of course, is nothing; which is precisely why Mr Blair is able to act with such decisive firmness in sending troops there. As with the bombing of Serbia, it requires not a jot or tittle of moral courage to do so, certainly by comparison with the courage a refusal to do so would have required. When nothing is at stake, Mr Blair is firm as a rock; but where matters of deep national interest are concerned, he has all the strength of wet blotting-paper."
Further on:

"... Our armed forces exist to defend our national interests, and their morale is sustained by their awareness of being the heirs of those who have done so for hundreds of years. What better way could there be of undermining this traditional understanding of their role in national life than to make them perform fatuous and ineffective peacekeeping duties in a country in which we have no interests, economic, strategic or political?"

It sounds like a 19th Century political credo. On the international scene many things have changed since then and the notion of national interests has broadened. From left wing to right wing we accept that we live in a global community, so "meddling" is inevitable. The question is, which kind of meddling? A far-reaching vision is needed because something that now seems irrelevant to national interests may in the future reveal itself as overwhelmingly positive. Woodrow Wilson chose the right path after WWI by honoring the smaller European nations' longing for freedom. Unfortunately the victors couldn't resist a temptation to "punish" the defeated Germany, which lead to the birth of Hitlerism. The post WWII situation led to perhaps the most visionary act in history; the Marshall Plan, made no distinction between allies and former enemies while helping to rebuild their countries. Today, a vision of such magnitude would be impossible to even think about, but the inspired post WWII statesmen understood that equilibrium is the basis for a safe and healthy world. Yes, our national and global interests agree; we have to help the economic balance in the world wherever it is needed. We have a duty to help the oppressed who are beyond our national borders by isolating their oppressors, but NEVER through military engagement. Here the interventionists become entangled in local cabales about which they don't have a slightest clue, are manipulated by the smarter ones, and the line between help and imperialism blurs. In unhealthy situations, the mafiosi spirit prevails. The Spectator seems aware of this as it states in the same editorial:

"... Nato feels morally entitled, or perhaps even obliged, to return to the region. But there is no question of forgiving it because it knows not what it does. The good intentions of Wilsonian imperialism are as nothing when weighed in the balance against the foreseeable violent havoc of such imperialism's practical effects. "

We see imperialism at work whether in its open, hidden or not yet clearly defined intentions: after all the master players are not monoliths. Right now in the Balkans we see: permanent military bases, pipelines, obedient, enthusiastically collaborating, or doomed regimes, a clone situation to the times of the Nazis in the Balkans with former allies and former enemies switching roles. Regarding their far-reaching plans, the imperialists are more discrete because the "international community" (a laughable notion) is not yet ready; they are not completely aware that we are on the way to a full return to the savage Capitalism of the Industrial Revolution. Business is business, and the rich Caucasus, Siberia, Manchuria are insufficiently protected. The present little wars in the Balkans and over Iraqi skies go back and forth as a prelude to the much bigger confrontation to come in the East.

Back to the index of the Vagabond
© Copyright 2001 E-mail to: William Markiewicz