Disappearing Genocide

[Guest guest]

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 12:20:23 UT

" Medialens Media Alerts " <noreply

Disappearing Genocide - The Media And The Death Of Slobodan

Milosevic

 

 

 

 

MEDIA LENS: Correcting for the distorted vision of the corporate media

 

March 20, 2006

 

 

MEDIA ALERT: DISAPPEARING GENOCIDE

 

The Media And The Death Of Slobodan Milosevic

 

 

" If we don't know history, then we are ready meat for carnivorous

politicians and the intellectuals and journalists who supply the carving

knives. But if we know some history, if we know how many times presidents

have lied to us, we will not be fooled again. " (Howard Zinn, historian)

 

 

Introduction - 2003 And All That

 

Three years on, it is clear that the case for war against Iraq was

based on lies. Despite the cover-ups, insider compromise and silence,

there

can be no serious doubt that the lies were conscious and carefully

planned.

 

The real target of Western 'intelligence' was not Iraq, but the British

and American public - the goal was to frighten and deceive us to

support a war fought for elite interests. It was to persuade us to

send our

troops to kill and die for profits. It was to persuade us to ignore

clear warnings that, in all likelihood, we would be subject to terrorist

reprisals. Such risks were clearly deemed a small price to pay for the

prize that mattered - control of Iraqi oil and enhanced influence in the

region and beyond.

 

This is the ugly reality behind 'patriotic' governments `supporting our

boys' and protecting 'national security'.

 

Iraq, of course, never posed any kind of threat to the West. Even if

portions of Saddam's WMD had been retained, they would have been no

danger to America, Britain and Israel bristling with veritable doomsday

weapons. Saddam Hussein may be an animal, but he is a political animal

- a

survivor, not someone who would have committed national suicide by

launching WMD at the West.

 

An honest press would be hyper-sensitive to these issues - it would be

keenly aware that Bush and Blair had lied, and would be re-evaluating

earlier wars, earlier claims of " humanitarian intervention " , in light of

what they now know.

 

Given this context, something truly astonishing is revealed by media

coverage of the death of Slobodan Milosevic. Because it could not be

clearer from current media reporting that journalists have come to

understand that the 78-day NATO bombing of Serbia from March 24 to

June 10,

1999 was also based on lies. It is therefore clear to them that the

government deceived the public and, once again, the media supported the

deception. And yet, despite this, despite the endless horror of Iraq,

journalists cannot bring themselves to expose either the earlier lies of

government or their own complicity in them.

 

Virtually to a man and woman, journalists sold the lie to the public in

1999. This makes them complicit in the killing of 500 Serb civilians

and $100 billion worth of destruction. More importantly (for the media),

the lies about Kosovo provided a template and justification for the

subsequent lies surrounding the " humanitarian intervention " in Iraq. An

Observer editorial gives an idea of the significance, explaining that the

West's " belated response to political thuggery " in the Balkans resulted

in " a new doctrine of humanitarian intervention " . It was led " at first

by President Clinton over Bosnia, and again in Kosovo. The rationale

behind those interventions was then invoked for the invasion of Iraq " .

(Leader, `Let a dictator's death remind us of the evil of unchecked

nationalism,' The Observer, March 12, 2006)

 

Dissident writer Alexander Cockburn translates this into meaningful

English: " the legal, military and journalistic banditry that have

accompanied the Iraq enterprise from the start were all field-tested

in the

late 1990s in the Balkans " . (Cockburn, `Did Milosevic or His Accusers

" Cheat Justice " ? The Show Trial That Went Wrong,' CounterPunch, March 14,

2006; http://www.counterpunch.org/)

 

 

Kosovo - Genocide It Wasn't

 

Just as they knew Iraq possessed WMD in 2003, so in 1999 politicians

and journalists knew exactly what the Serbs were doing in Kosovo. Bill

Clinton, then President, talked of " deliberate, systematic efforts at

ethnic cleansing and genocide " . (John M. Broder, `Clinton underestimated

Serbs, he acknowledges,' New York Times, June 26, 1999)

 

British defence Secretary, George Robertson, insisted that intervention

in Kosovo was vital to stop " a regime which is intent on genocide " .

(Nic North, Kevin Maguire And Harry Arnold, `A pilot saved,' Daily

Mirror,

March 29, 1999)

 

A year later, Robertson conjured up the ghost of Nazism to justify

NATO's action:

 

" We were faced with a situation where there was this killing going on,

this cleansing going on - the kind of ethnic cleansing we thought had

disappeared after the second world war. You were seeing people there

coming in trains, the cattle trains, with refugees once again. " (ITV,

Jonathan Dimbleby programme, June 11, 2000)

 

US Defence Secretary, William Cohen, claimed: " We've now seen about

100,000 military-aged men missing... They may have been murdered. "

(Quoted, Philip Hammond and Edward S. Herman, Degraded Capability, Pluto

Press, 2000, p.139)

 

Across the spectrum, the media instantly rallied to the cause. A Daily

Mail news report was titled: " Flight from genocide; as half a million

Kosovans flee their homes in terror from Milosevic, a haunting echo of

another war 60 years ago. " (Steve Doughty, Daily Mail, March 29, 1999)

 

The Mirror referred to " Echoes of the Holocaust. " (Quoted, John Pilger,

`The lies that brought hell,' Morning Star, December 13, 2004) The News

of the World declared: " The aim of this war is to stop Serbian genocide

in Kosovo. " (Cited, Monitor, The Independent, April 19, 1999) A 2002

BBC documentary on the alleged Serbian genocide, 'Exposed', was billed as

a programme marking Holocaust Memorial Day. (Exposed, BBC2, January 27,

2002)

 

As we will see, this constitutes a tiny sample - in fact British media

were filled with hundreds of claims of genocide in Kosovo. A Lexis

Nexis database search similarly showed that between 1998-1999, the Los

Angeles Times, New York Times, Washington Post, Newsweek and Time used

'genocide' 220 times to describe the actions of Serbia in Kosovo.

 

And yet, following the war, NATO sources reported that 2,000 people had

been killed in Kosovo on all sides in the year prior to bombing. In

November 1999, the Wall Street Journal published the results of its own

investigation. Instead of " the huge killing fields some investigators

were led to expect... the pattern is of scattered killings (mostly) in

areas where the separatist Kosovo Liberation Army had been active " .

 

The Journal concluded that NATO had stepped up its claims about Serb

killing fields when it " saw a fatigued press corps drifting toward the

contrarian story - civilians killed by NATO bombs. The war in Kosovo was

cruel, bitter, savage. Genocide it wasn't. " (Quoted, Pilger, op., cit)

 

In 2004, Neil Clark, a Balkans specialist, reviewed Milosevic's trial

in the Guardian, noting that the charges relating to the war in Kosovo

were expected to be the strongest part of the case. But " not only has

the prosecution signally failed to prove Milosevic's personal

responsibility for atrocities committed on the ground, the nature and

extent of

the atrocities themselves has also been called into question " . (Neil

Clark, `The Milosevic trial is a travesty,' The Guardian, February 12,

2004)

 

Philip Hammond of South Bank University summarised the extent of the

political and media deception:

 

" We may never know the true number of people killed. But it seems

reasonable to conclude that while people died in clashes between the

KLA and

Yugoslav forces... the picture painted by Nato - of a systematic

campaign of Nazi-style `genocide' carried out by Serbs - was pure

invention. "

(Degraded Capability, The Media and the Kosovo Crisis, edited by Philip

Hammond and Edward S. Herman, Pluto Press, 2000, p.129)

 

 

What A Difference Seven Years Make - The Genocide Disappears

 

Without recognising their earlier role in propagandising for war

against Serbia, and without drawing attention to the implications for

US-UK

criminality, the media has completely re-written its own history on

Milosevic. A media database search by Media Lens has failed to turn up a

single example of any British journalist describing Kosovo as 'genocide'

since Milosevic's death.

 

The Sunday Express provides a typical example of the kind of language

used:

 

" He [Milosevic] was facing 66 counts of genocide and crimes against

humanity for his central role in the wars in Bosnia, Croatia and Kosovo

during the 1990s, in which 200,000 people died. The worst incident was

the massacre at Srebrenica in 1995, when an estimated 8,000 Bosnian men

were murdered. " (Tominey, `Milosevic cheats justice by dying in his jail

cell,' Sunday Express, March 12, 2006)

 

Thus, also, the Guardian website:

 

" Milosevic faced 66 charges including genocide in Croatia, Bosnia and

Kosovo. The most egregious act committed under his watch was the

Srebrenica massacre, in which up to 8,000 Muslim men and boys died. "

(Guardian

Unlimited, `Closure perhaps, but no justice,' March 11, 2006)

 

It seems the earlier massacre at Srebrenica in 1995 is now Milosevic's

worst crime. Of the 1999 `genocide' in Kosovo, the alleged mass

slaughter of tens of thousands, there is not a word.

 

And yet in 1999, the Guardian's Timothy Garton Ash observed that the

Nato attack on Serbia was intended to stop " something approaching

genocide " . (Garton Ash, 'Imagine no America,' The Guardian, September 19,

2002)

 

Francis Wheen ridiculed opponents of the war who believed, " that

genocide is a lesser evil than bombing military installations " .

(Wheen, `Why

we are right to bomb the Serbs,` The Guardian, April 7, 1999)

 

Also in the Guardian, Jonathan Freedland wrote of Milosevic`s plan " to

empty a land of its people " . (Freedland, 'No way to spin a war,' The

Guardian, April 21, 1999)

 

A Guardian editorial described the war as nothing less than " a test for

our generation " . (Leader, The Guardian, March 26, 1999)

 

This month, Ian Traynor of the Guardian wrote of Milosevic`s death:

 

" ... he left a legacy of more than 200,000 dead in Bosnia and 2 million

people (half the population) homeless. He ethnically cleansed more than

800,000 Albanians from their homes in Kosovo " . (Ian Traynor, 'Obituary:

Slobodan Milosevic,' The Guardian, March 13, 2006)

 

Traynor mentions forced displacement in Kosovo, but does not mention

the `genocide' described by the Guardian in 1999.

 

Admirably, John Laughland has even noted in the Guardian how " witnesses

have been trooping into The Hague for nearly two years now, testifying

that there was neither genocide in Kosovo nor any plan to drive out the

civilian ethnic Albanian population " . (Laughland, `Criminal

proceedings,' The Guardian, March 14, 2006)

 

But Laughland made no mention of what virtually the entire British

media, including the Guardian, had been insisting just seven years

earlier.

 

In 1999, a team of Observer reporters wrote:

 

" His [slobodan Milosevic's] troops in Serbia are out of barracks. But

in Kosovo they are scouring the fields, villages and towns, pursuing

their own version of a Balkan Final Solution. " (Peter Beaumont, Justin

Brown, John Hooper, Helena Smith and Ed Vulliamy, 'Hi-tech war and

primitive slaughter,' The Observer, March 28, 1999)

 

An Observer leader declared:

 

" There are already grounds for considering events in Kosovo as

genocide. " (Leader, `Time, now, to raise the stakes,' April 4, 1999)

 

Leading Observer commentator, Andrew Rawnsley, wrote of how Milosevic

had " embarked on his latest campaign of 'ethnic cleansing', that vile

euphemism for genocide " . (Rawnsley, `You can't deal with barbarism by

washing your hands – nor by wringing them,' The Observer, March 28, 1999)

 

But `genocide' has now also disappeared from the Observer's vocabulary:

 

" Europe and the US watched and failed to act for far too long. The

consequences were the massacres of Srebrenica and Gorazde, the prolonged

siege of Sarajevo and the forced displacement of a large part of Kosovo's

Albanian population. " (`Leading article: Let a dictator's death remind

us of the evil of unchecked nationalism,' The Observer, March 12, 2006)

 

Again, the emphasis is on Srebrenica. Again, the crime is " forced

displacement " rather than `genocide'.

 

In 1999, David Aaronovitch - then employed by the Independent -

described Serbian actions in Kosovo as " the worst crime against humanity

committed in Europe since the Second World War " . (Aaronovitch, `The

reality

is that war, tragedy and incompetence go together,` The Independent,

May 11, 1999)

 

In a tragicomic moment, Aaronovitch even asked:

 

" Is this cause, the cause of the Kosovar Albanians, a cause that is

worth suffering for?... Would I fight, or (more realistically) would I

countenance the possibility that members of my family might die? "

 

His answer: " I think so. " (Aaronovitch, `My country needs me,' The

Independent, April 6, 1999)

 

And yet in reviewing the death of Milosevic in the Times last week,

Aaronovitch wrote of the 1995 massacre in Srebrenica:

 

" In front of our eyes, just about, with our full knowledge, thousands

were taken to European fields - just as they had been 50 years earlier -

and murdered en masse. It was the most shaming moment of my life. We

had let it happen again. " (Aaronovitch, `The meaning of Milosevic: how

the Butcher of the Balkans changed us,' Times, March 14, 2006)

 

Aaronovitch made passing mention of Kosovo four times in the article,

but he made no mention at all of the extent of the killing. Instead, he

wrote:

 

" If Bosnia was the betrayal through inaction and appeasement,

Srebrenica the consequence and Kosovo the determination not to let it

happen

again, then the line runs clear. "

 

But, according to Aaronovitch in 1999, Kosovo was all about the fact

that " it " +had+ happened again in a more extreme form. We wrote to

Aaronovitch:

 

" Why no mention of this, given that Kosovo was `the worst crime against

humanity committed in Europe since the Second World War`? Do you still

believe there was a genocide in Kosovo 1998-1999? If so, what is your

evidence for this? " (Email, March 14, 2006)

 

We have received no reply.

 

In 1999, Marcus Tanner wrote in the Independent:

 

" NATO stepped up the air war against Yugoslavia last night in what

appeared a desperate race against time to stop the Serbs from committing

`genocide' against Albanian civilians in Kosovo. " (Tanner, `NATO targets

troops as refugees flee genocide and tells Serbs to pull back or die,'

The Independent, March 29, 1999)

 

A month later, Tanner wrote:

 

" RTS [Radio Televisija Serbija] has turned into a vehicle that whips up

genocidal passions, a vital cog in the business of psychologically

preparing the entire Serbian nation for the necessity of exterminating

its

enemies. " (Tanner, 'I watched as " TV Slobbo " turned into voice of

hate,' The Independent, April 24, 1999)

 

This month, Tanner notes that in the spring of 1998 a new group, the

Kosovo Liberation Army - which in fact was funded by the CIA - organised

an insurrection that spread rapidly across the province:

 

" Milosevic responded with the ruthless brutality that had become his

trademark, pouring special police units and paramilitaries into the

province and burning down villages where the rebels were based. " (Marcus

Tanner, `Obituaries: Slobodan Milosevic,' The Independent, March 13, 2006)

 

Tanner writes of how the " conflict worsened " and how " the policy of

burning villages and expelling Kosovar Albanians was stepped up,

massively

so after Nato began air strikes " - but about the alleged " genocide "

there is not one word.

 

Likewise, an Independent leader last week referred, not to `genocide',

but to " thousands killed in Kosovo and Croatia " . (`Leader, `A death

that cheats justice and Serbia's democracy,' The Independent, March 13,

2006)

 

The Independent on Sunday also noted blandly: " 1998: Milosevic sends

troops to crush uprising in Kosovo. " (`The bloody life and times of the

butcher of Belgrade,' The Independent on Sunday, March 12, 2006)

 

In 1999, in an article titled, `Europe's turn in the killing fields,'

Jon Swain wrote in the Sunday Times:

 

" The symbols of death found in Cambodia under Pol Pot are everywhere in

Kosovo today - in the blackened ruins of houses where the victims of

`ethnic cleansing' lie, in the broken and homeless people on the move in

their tens of thousands.

 

" Only this is Europe. This continent has not seen such a procession of

human misery since the end of the second world war, and for it to be

allowed to happen again has diminished us all. " (Swain, `Europe's turn in

the killing fields,' Sunday Times, April 4, 1999)

 

Last week, the same newspaper argued:

 

" It was only in 1998-99, when Milosevic reacted to Albanian guerrilla

tactics in Kosovo with large-scale repression, that the West finally

ended its long courtship and took up arms against him. " (Brendan Simms,

'The butcher is dead,' Sunday Times, March 12, 2006)

 

Again, no genocide - the description cannot be compared to the picture

painted by the Sunday Times in 1999.

 

 

Conclusion - Safety In Numbers

 

In 1999, moving as an intellectual herd, almost all journalists

portrayed Serbian actions in Kosovo as `genocide' and supported military

action. The Blair government needed a black and white picture of the

world

to generate public support for the killing. A civil war was not enough,

" scattered killings " were not enough. The state needed atrocities,

Nazi-style horror - it needed a `genocide'. And the media obliged. How

ironic that politicians and journalists used comparisons with the Nazi

`Final Solution' to sell their war. In August 1939, one week before

invading Poland, Adolf Hitler declared:

 

" The wave of appalling terrorism against the [minority] inhabitants of

Poland, and the atrocities that have been taking place in that country

are terrible for the victims, but intolerable for a Great Power which

has been expected to remain a passive onlooker. We will not continue to

tolerate the persecution of the minority, the killing of many, and

their forcible removal under the most cruel conditions. " (Hitler, August

23, 1939, from letters sent to the UK and French governments, the

Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives Monitor, April 2003;

http://www.swt.org/share/ancientciv.htm)

 

In 2006, again moving as a herd, journalists have now silently rejected

their own fraudulent claims of `genocide' from 1999. Moreover, they

have rejected the need to examine how they got it wrong, why, what it

tells us about Clinton, Blair and Bush, and, above all, what it tells us

about the latest " humanitarian intervention " in Iraq.

 

 

SUGGESTED ACTION

 

The goal of Media Lens is to promote rationality, compassion and

respect for others. In writing letters to journalists, we strongly urge

readers to maintain a polite, non-aggressive and non-abusive tone.

 

Write to David Aaronovitch

Email: david.aaronovitch

 

Write to Timothy Garton Ash

Email: tga

 

Write to Jonathan Freedland

Email: freedland

 

Write to Peter Beaumont

Email: peter.beaumont

 

Write to Andrew Rawnsley

Email: andrew.rawnsley

 

Write to Alan Rusbridger, editor of the Guardian:

Email: alan.rusbridger

 

Write to Simon Kelner, editor of the Independent:

Email: s.kelner

 

Writ to Roger Alton, editor of the Observer

Email: roger.alton

 

 

Please also send copies of all emails to Media Lens:

Email: editor

 

Since its publication in January, the first Media Lens book, 'Guardians

of Power`, has not been mentioned in any mainstream national newspaper.

For further details, including reviews, interviews and extracts, please

 

 

http://www.medialens.org/bookshop/guardians_of_power.php

 

This is a free service. However, financial support is vital. Please

consider donating to Media Lens: www.medialens.org/donate

 

Visit the Media Lens website: http://www.medialens.org

 

If you wish to please below:

 

http://www.medialens.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/medialens/mailproc/register.cgi?unsubsc\

ribe=L9YsrCpmdiPY