 "Photo: N/A")
For most UA students today, the 1999 Kosovo War may be a distant memory. For David N. Gibbs, it’s all too relevant.
Gibbs, an associate professor of history and political science, has published a new book, “First Do No Wrong: Humanitarian Intervention and the Destruction of Yugoslavia,” which contends that the United States’ intervention into the Balkan wars of the 1990s was not only wrong, but actually made the situation worse.
For Gibbs, President Bill Clinton’s decision to intervene in Kosovo marked the beginning of a new era of “humanitarian intervention,” supported by leftists and conservatives alike.
Gibbs cites President George W. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq and President Barack Obama’s commitment to “winning the war” in Afghanistan as a continuation of that trend.
“To the political left, intervention had been seen as a predatory activity,” Gibbs said. That changed, he said, with the interventions of the 1990s, beginning with the 1991 Persian Gulf War and continuing under the Clinton administration. He found himself at odds with liberal friends who argued that military action was sometimes necessary to prevent genocide or liberate countries from dictatorships.
“A large number of people I know advocated more intervention,” Gibbs said. “They dropped their anti-militarism. Increasingly, you had liberals and even socialists supporting neoconservatives like (former U.S. deputy secretary of defense) Paul Wolfowitz.”
Gibbs said he found these pro-intervention arguments “naïve and misguided.” He contends in his book that the real motivation for intervention into the Kosovo conflict lay in the U.S. government’s wish to strengthen its sway over international affairs in the face of an “independent” European Union. He also argues that “a certain sense of regret” at the passing of the Cold War, and a desire to create new enemies to take the place of the Soviet threat, lay behind the intervention.
American foreign policy is “a self-sustaining machine,” Gibbs said. “Many liberal intellectuals foolishly sign up for the enterprise of justifying it.”
Gibbs describes himself as “a man of the left,” but his argument has found favor with many conservatives “despite this unfortunate deficiency,” as he jokingly put it. His book has received positive reviews in the right-leaning Washington Times from a former Reagan administration official, and from the World Socialist Web site.
Gibbs spent ten years working on the book, which marked a new direction for him after his first book, about the Congo crisis of the 1960s.
“It was a totally new field for me,” Gibbs said. “I was trying to gain an understanding of the basic change that had occurred with the end of the Cold War.
“I was trained as a political scientist during the Cold War. It took a while for me and others to get a handle on that.”
Despite his disdain for most military interventions, Gibbs is careful to disassociate himself from paleoconservatives like Pat Buchanan, who has gone so far as to allege that America’s entrance into World War II was unnecessary. Gibbs said he thinks that some of America’s past wars, such as World War II and the Civil War, have been justified.
He also said he “probably would not have opposed intervention” to stop the Rwanda genocide in 1994. But he added that even justified wars create a dangerous precedent.
“Each intervention increases the likelihood of further intervention,” Gibbs said.
The Serbs are just as much victims as other people of the former Yugoslavia in this game played by the major world powers. The reason that Serbs could kill larger numbers was because they had the most guns. This eventually changed when the West eventually started sending weapons to the Croats and later to the Bosnian Muslims (despite the UN sanctions that were in place at that time) and by supplying weapons and training to the KLA who were on the list of organised criminal organisations right up to the time that the West decided that they needed to put a base into the southern Balkans in order to facilitate their march east.
And supported to this day. every single Serb civilian and politician embraces what was created by sloban milosovic. It is called the Constitution of the republic of Serbia. as I mentioned previously... Milosovic attmpted to use the stolen federal representation on powers againts the rest of yugoslavia.... it obviously failed.
when yugoslavia began to break apart, and Milosovic then sat himself as president of yugoslavia and not just serbia... he then went a ahead and re-authored the yugoslavian constituion to Reflect What he did illegally and through force to Kosovo.Serbia and serbs in general did not make so much as a peep. And today, In as much as Serbia and serbs suddenly wish to disavow slobodan milosovic, The attitude and they way they continue to insist on approaching Kosovo is EXACTLY that as envisioned by slobodan Milosovic.... the so-called constitution of the suddenly democratic republic serbia waves around today, is as far kosovo is concerned...exactly what was authored by a madman.
And to be absolutely Clear.... where you say.... "many Serbs are well aware of the wrongdoings of Milosevic and in no way condone his contribution to the breakdown of the former Yugoslav Republic as well as countless crimes committed by this man."you are wrong. and you are being intentionally Deceptive and dishonest.
Every political action taken by milosovic especially in regards to kosovo, was Approved and Cheered by serbia and serbs. There was no dissent. None. It simply did not exist in any way shape or form. His actions were not a surprise, they were political promises.Yes... when the violence came to light, there was the immediate condemnation for it, as there was for bosnia, croatia etc.. But for the Political Actions wich is what i focused on, that wich precipitated the violence. No. there was nothing but support before, after and now. as i said, all you need to do is read serbias constituion as authored by the madman.---------------------------I find it interesting that you choose to reply to my comment by saying "You can all keep arguing yourselves about who killed how many but ultimately..."
I made it a POINT not to mention such a thing so as not to provide a serb apologist "a way out" of attempting to defend or explain milosovics political actions. It really seems to me, that despite all the cries of unfairness towards serbs regarding the violence that occurred. Who killed who is precisely what is preferred rather than admitting that milosovics political legacy is alive and well today. its much much easier to demonize everyone...including the victims... to equalize the madness. why that way, the political actions that caused it all is justified isnt it?but even that fails. Serbia is the ONLY COMMON DENOMINATOR throughout all of the violence the last few decades in the balkans, across ALL ethnic, racial, and religious lines. It is a difficult thing for serb apologists acknowledge let alone argue. but it is fact. And in as much as serbs today will admit that "it was war", it must also be said that Serbia proper itself saw NO violence whatsoever throughout it all. NONE. They happily exported their violence to their former neighbors until Nato came along.There are Seven New countries formed out of what yugoslavia was. Escape from Serbia is again, the only common denominator of them all.that is not a coincidence. Serbia and Serbs alone are directly responsible for the Destruction of Yugoslavia. -----------------------------also N. Jovanovic , you say " Not to mention that the book is not about America's role in the 'destruction of Yugoslavia', but rather that of the Kosovo war." I'm afraid you missed the second paragraph of the article above.
Believe it or not but some people actually have a brain and use it to research the war in Yugoslavia from more sources than CNN or BBC. Thank God for people who are brave enough to go against the accepted propaganda version of how things went then. Now that some pioneers have paved the way more people are doubting what they heard on CNN and read in mainstream media and are looking for the truth.
The war was more then justified.This is for the Jew (Abra) did you feel shame for what was talked about Hitler, he was not bad, killed women and children, what is wrong with that, "nothing" same happen in Yugoslavia but in different way and not as much as in Hitler time. thank you to god and USA some tirans get what they deserve.
Have you seen graves of the Serbs in Croatia, Kosovo and Bosnia? I can ask you the same question. Do you think that somehow Muslim lives are woth more? Many Serbs were massacred too and not all Muslims were killed by the Serbs. Some were killed by the Croatians and even their own Muslims who were not fighting on their side. Perhaps you should educate yourself a bit more on what happened there. It is not clear cut as you would like to portay it to be.
So, dorich and Co. realize that Kosova has been, is, and will always belong to Albanians. It's their land.
Log in to be able to post comments.