Saturday, October 9, 2010

5 October 2000--The Beginning of the End - by Mick Collins - for the Conference held by П О К Р Е Т З А С Р Б И Ј У [Movement for Serbia]

П О К Р Е Т З А С Р Б И Ј У


5 October 2000--The Beginning of the End - by Mick Collins - for the Conference held by П О К Р Е Т З А С Р Б И Ј У [Movement for Serbia]
[Yesterday, on 5 October 2010, I was in Belgrade before a Conference called by П О К Р Е Т З А С Р Б И Ј У [Movement for Serbia] to discuss the importance of this date, 10 years ago, on the present and the future of Serbia. As I tried to listen to all these speakers, almost all of them speaking Serb, but from the full spectrum of national politics, I realized that when your country is under attack from foreign invaders (i.e., being bombed and infilitrated and having the government subverted by the sworn enemies of your country) , there are really only two political positions you can hold: You're either a Nationalist (a patriot committed to the defense of your home and family and friends, at any cost) or you're a Collaborationist (willing to make a deal to save as much of your own ass as you can, and damn the 'cost of collateral damage' to the rest of your countrymen . . . and women and children--kind of a 'Pull up the ladder, Jack, I'm aboard!'-thing).

During the 1990s wars in Yugoslavia, I can remember the US media, especially CNN, dissing certain Serbian leaders, like Presidents Karadzic and Milosevic and the Radical Party leader, Dr Seselj, for being ‘Nationalists.’ Others, the ‘Collaborationists,’ were called 'moderates,' 'Liberals,' or even ‘Democrats.’ Now, say, you're watching a movie about WWII France: whom do you sympathize with? The Resistance (the partisan maquis)? Or the Petainists (the Nazi agents who executed orders from Berlin) in Vichy? The latter group, strangely enough, included future Socialist President François Mitterand, a small-time functionary in the Vichy government, who turned on his German colleague from back in the day, Klaus Barbie, when trying in the 1980s to distance himself and his Socialist Party from their ‘Collaborationist’ past.

So, anyway, it didn't take me long to know which side in the Balkan wars I was for—I should mention that I've never considered History a spectator sport, a big game you can impartially watch from some corporate-sponsored Olympian Skybox, but the sort of contest where you're either on one side or the other. And if you pretend to be neutral, it means you're betting the aggressors will win and give you a fat job in their new comprador administration. I always felt for the side being bombed, the side being betrayed in all the negotiations, the side finally being militarily occupied: and since the name 'Yugoslavia' had been stricken from the record at the onset of the illegal secessions of Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, that meant I was for the Serbs.

I learned all I could and wrote in defense of Yugoslavia and Serbia; I militated against the bombing of the Serbs (and not just the 78-day NATO terror-bombing of Serbia over Kosovo, but also the thousands of NATO sorties flown over the Bosnian Serb territories, and the NATO and MPRI-led onslaught against Serbs in the Krajina, that greatest of all ‘ethnic cleansings’ known as Operation Storm (all of which were fuzzed out in the media by all the chest pounding over the potted 'Genocide at Srebrenica’); and I got in on the founding of the International Committee to Defend Slobodan Milosevic back in October 2001.

Again, on 5 October 2010, I found myself before an audience of Serbs to defend the paper I am posting below—to tell these people the significance of what happened to THEM and the effects it would surely have on THEIR futures. Well, I've been an actor all my professional life, and I can't remember ever turning down a script. But this thing that I wrote—well, I just couldn't play it before this particular audience.

So, I apologized for my presumption (another thing, as an actor, I’ve learned never to do) in trying to present what I thought war very esoteric yet cogent information to people for whom it certainly was 'daily bread.' I told them how all the times I have come to Serbia in the past, I have been met by very kind and decent people who did everything they could to tell me about what happened to them. So, I would not presume to read them what, I imagined, in the West, would be very elucidating information about the coup that marked the beginning of the end of Serbian democracy.

I had asked my ten-year old son, Max, who accompanied me to Belgrade, to write a few words, as he'd also accompanied me, in March 2009, to the 10-year anniversary of the NATO bombing over Kosovo. When he read me what he’d written, in his little boy's voice, I was deeply moved, and my role in all that had gone on these last 10 years vis a vis the Serbs was brightly illuminated.

He read to me off this little piece of paper: ‘I want to thank all the people in this room for teaching me about Serbia and all that happened to it. About the terrible suffering of the people. And I want to wish all the people a very happy future.’

Well, when Max took the mike, the general feeling of militancy in the room changed the tenor of his words—but the sentiment of gratitude—of Max's gratitude for getting to know real heroes, like Duci Simonovic and Vlada Krjsljnen and Chris Black and so many others—was exactly what I felt, and I let him close out my presentation.

The Movement for Serbia will publish this article in Serb, I imagine, but I wanted all you non-Serbs (and especially you anti-Serbs) to read this so you might see that the real possibility for classical tragedy, for tragic heroism, still exists. And the Resistance in Serbia will continue until Serbia is free of its current economic, financial and military occupation; until all the UN and NATO political prisoners (in The Hague, in Arusha, and throughout the world) are freed; and until Truth brings about International Justice and Peace for all good men. –mc]

***********************************


5 October 2000: The Beginning of the End


The events of 5 October 2000, wherein the duly-elected government of Yugoslavia was violently overthrown, and its principal media outlet, RTS, and its Parliament building ransacked, looted and burned, have come, in the West (as I will refer to the domain of Globalized Waste Capital, e.g., the countries of Western Europe and North America), to be known and shamelessly promoted by the UN, the US, the EU, as well as by government sponsored NGOs, like the Campaign for Peace and Democracy or Freedom House or the National Endowment for Democracy or that den of spooks over at the OSCE[1], as one of the first successful examples of ‘a meta-electoral forced regime change.’ The same hustle was pulled later in Ukraine and Georgia, and has been attempted more recently, but with less success, in Zimbabwe and Iran.

The Yugoslav presidential elections of 25 September 2000, which were to choose, for the first time since Tito’s death in 1980, by popular vote, what was an appointed position, had gone pretty much as expected, with the leader of the ruling Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS), Slobodan Milosevic, receiving about 33% of the vote, while the other parties of the badly misnamed Democratic Opposition of Serbia (DOS) divvied up the rest, the lion’s share, around 48%, going to its putative leader, Maitre Vojislav Kostunica. Since no candidate polled 50%+1 vote, a constitutionally mandated second round was scheduled for the 8th of October 2000. But Yugoslav or Serbian democracy did not survive the violence of that 5th day of October 2000, and under threat of yet more bloody NATO aggression, as Belgrade was surrounded by armed gunmen, the presidency was illegally ceded to the DOS.

As, in May 1999, I watched a huge projection-TV image—live from Belgrade TV—of the 78-day (and night) NATO ‘terror bombing of Yugoslavia[2]’ on the wall of a little restaurant in the east of Paris, in Montreuil, called the Café Yougoslavie[3], I thought, ‘This is it. This is the end of civilization as I’ve known it. This is the moral nadir of Western militarism. How could NATO and the US and France go any lower than wantonly to attack an old friend like Yugoslavia, like Serbia, an ally who had stood with them victoriously in the two great wars of the 20th Century?’ Certainly, after destroying a significant part of its industrial and communications infrastructures and poisoning its environment with dioxin in the water and depleted uranium dust in the air, there was no more damage that NATO could inflict on Yugoslavia—or on Serbia and Montenegro, which was all that remained of it.

Of course, I was being fat headed. Those anti-democratic forces who had previously dropped the only two atomic bombs ever used in anger on a strictly defeated Japanese civilian population in 1945—who had even echoed the 1941 Nazi bombardment of Serbia with its own three-day aerial siege of Belgrade around Orthodox Easter in April 1944—and who had torpedoed every Balkan peace agreement, either by convincing its clients (Croatia and Bosnia) to renege or hold out for a fatter deal, or by arranging to have some terrorist attack splatter blood all over a Sarajevo marketplace or breadline, and have their media blame it on the Serbs: as old as I am, I should have known such inhuman forces would know no bounds.


After moving from Southern California to Paris in 1995, I was more and more amazed at how the lexicon used to describe events in the Balkans was being changed and how quickly its Western enemies (and even many of its putative friends) had abandoned the very name of this founding member of the UN, Yugoslavia[4]. This name for the ‘nation of Southern Slavs’ had, immediately on the outbreak of the illegal secessionist ‘civil wars,’ universally become ‘the ex-Yugoslavia’ or ‘the former-Yugoslavia’ or ‘l’ancienne Yougoslavie,’ and was often being conflated or confused with its principal Republic, Serbia. As they both shared the same capital, Belgrade, these two distinct political entities, with separate political powers and military responsibilities, became synonymous. Which greatly streamlined the process of demonizing all things Yugoslav or Serb: there was no distinction made between the presidency of Serbia and that of Yugoslavia—especially where it concerned President Milosevic. Since Yugoslavia came to be considered as the equivalent of the ancient nationalist dream of a ‘Greater Serbia,’ while president of ‘the lesser’ Serbia, Slobodan Milosevic was assumed to be in charge of the ‘aggression’—which became the Western code of ‘National Self-Defense’—by the Yugoslav Army (Susan Woodward called the JNA ‘the 7th Republic’ in her ‘Balkan Tragedy’) against the other secessionist territories. This expedient conceit, which allowed Yugoslavia to commit aggression and wage war against itself, would have much more dangerous and damaging consequences than just stirring up my petty confusion.

And the more I read: besides Susan Woodward, there were Lord Dr. David Owen’s ‘Balkan Odyssey’; Misha Glenny’s ‘The Fall of Yugoslavia’; Brian Hall’s ‘The Impossible Country: A Journey Through the Last Days of Yugoslavia’; then in French, Alexander Del Valle’s ‘Guerre contre l’Europe: Bosnie, Kosovo et Tchéchénie’; Dr. Gilles Troude’s first small book on Yugoslavia, ‘Un pari impossible?’; Michel Collon’s ‘Poker Menteur’ and ‘Monopoly’; then back to English for Diana Johnstone’s wonderful ‘Fools’ Crusade: Yugoslavia, NATO and Western Delusions’; and, finally, when I joined the editorial committee of ‘Balkans Infos,’ a little monthly sheet put out by Jean Paul Sartre’s former-secretary, and, at one time, my close friend and mentor, Louis Dalmas—in fact, it was comrade Dalmas who introduced me to two real French heroes and two of Serbia and Yugoslavia greatest friends, Me Jacque Vergès and General Pierre Marie Gallois (it is with the greatest sadness that I report the loss, in August of this year, of General Gallois, whose statement on the NATO bombing I had the honor of translating and presenting here in Belgrade in March 2009): the more I learned about the history of Yugoslavia, the more the fog of lies, manipulations and disinformation began to clear and the more apparent it became that the UN and military humanist NGOs everywhere had been covering for the West’s initial aggression against the last socialist federation in Europe, and were blaming the villainy that drove the dismemberment of Yugoslavia on its victims, the Yugoslavs/Serbs, themselves.

But Serbia remained at peace and became a refuge for all those, from every nationality and ethnic group, who sought to escape the wars in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo. Serbian President Milosevic had negotiated the Dayton Peace Agreement, which guaranteed that Serbia would have the primary authority in settling any and all problems within its southern province of Kosovo. And it was hard to see through the sheep’s clothing the US and EU had donned to hide their lupine venality and guarantee the profitable spread of misery throughout the Balkans.

However, the 1999 NATO terror bombing, which doubled as close air support for the invasion and faux insurgency by Western proxies, the Kosovo Liberation Army [KLA or UCK, in Albanian], racked focus on many aspects of this, by then, decade-long war. NATO’s bombing was a confession that this had not been a ‘civil war’ as it was so popularly billed, but that the initial foreign aggression that ignited the war, the crime against Peace, the mother of all war crimes and crimes against humanity, according to the Nuremberg principles, was NATO’s own. It also made clear that the ultimate goal in breaking up the Yugoslav Socialist Federation was to impose Western commercial and financial interests as intermediaries in the relations—one could rightfully say ‘privileged relations’—between Serbia and Russia. Just as Enron had interceded in the deregulated Croatian energy market, severely spiking the cost of living in Tudjman’s new ‘Free State’, and Richard Holbrook, from his broker’s chair at Credit-Suisse/First Boston, had interceded to reopen lines of Russian gaz between Hungary and Bosnia after they had been closed for non-payment: so now is Serbia to become the privatized domain of Western Waste Capital and its people the slaves of US and EU Business interests and the inordinate increases in cost of living brought about by Western-brokerage of formerly privileged Russian energy supplies.

NATO’s occupation of another former-Russian sphere of influence, foreshadowing the political-hijackings of Ukraine and Georgia and other former-Soviet territories, was further confirmed as the reason for the Balkan war(s) with the US’s establishment of strategic military bases in Bosnia (Eagle Air Base in Tuzla, the former Muslim hideout, from whence have been launched aerial raids against Iraq and Afghanistan and soon, perhaps, Iran), and in Kosovo (Camp Bondsteel, the largest foreign US military base build since Vietnam).

So, loss of sovereignty, loss of financial and commercial autonomy, degradation unto total elimination of essential public services like education and healthcare—is it yet another irony that NATO would inflict higher rates of fatal illness like cancer with its use of nuclear weapons on the Serbian people, and then privatize the healthcare system right out of reach of most Serbs?—and the mutilation, the disfigurement of Yugoslav/Serbian History beyond recognition: This is what lies down the Yellow Brick Road to Europe. And you don’t have to take my word for it; ask the Greeks or the Spanish or the Poles.

After the 1999 bombing greatly clarified the war for me, it also became clear that I had to get involved—that I had to do whatever I could to start to make things right. Street demonstrations (Paris allowed only one), Balkan Infos editorial pieces, and finally my blog, CirqueMinime/Paris, were the only ways I had to express solidarity with Serbia. This renewed involved in the struggle for Truth and Justice did, however, get me my only son, Maximilien.

Until 5 October and the arrest and imprisonment of President Milosevic in Belgrade’s central jail (where no charges were ever brought against him) and his eventual kidnapping for ransom by PM Zoran Djindjic—for what else can you call an illegal extradition for the promise of $17 million in ‘aid’ money?—to the illegitimate UN ad hoc Tribunal at The Hague.

After 5 October, I became chillingly aware that NATO and the West had not fully exhausted their capacity for evil. And that their anti-democratic urges, their neo-feudal longings—which for want of a better word I will call Fascist—had much more misery in store for Slobodan Milosevic and his people.

During the bombing, the visibly demented NATO commander, General Wesley Clark, clearly stated that the end purpose of bombing Yugoslavia over Kosovo was the removal of President Milosevic from political life—much as Richard Holbrook had removed Dr. Radovan Karadzic from the political life of the Republika Srpska with a bogus promise of immunity from prosecution by the UN court. But there were certain Americans who were much more concise in their explanations for this kind of murderous criminal aggression: Liberal LA Times syndicated columnist Willaim Pfaff wrote that the Serbian people had ‘asked for it,’ and needed to be bombed and bombed very hard to make them aware of their mistake in electing Slobodan Milosevic to three terms as their President.

So, if the bombing was about forcing regime change in Serbia, about ‘imposing democracy’ by removing a ‘Stalinist dictator,’ then the bombing failed. But NATO was not out of aggressions. Sufficient political pressure was brought to bear so that the regular legislative and municipal elections of 27 September 2000 would also, for the first time, bring the presidency of Yugoslavia to a vote of all the people. In July 1997, after serving two terms as president of Serbia, Milovevic was appointed to a four-year mandate as Yugoslav president by the National Parliament—while Serbia had a Western-style presidential system, Yugoslavia’s was more like the German system of an appointed Chancellor. Much to the chagrin of his associates and advisers, President Milosevic proposed cutting his presidential mandate short and standing for early election in 2000. This was very much an expression of his confidence in Yugoslav democratic principles, as well as a solid belief that the people approved of the stunning rehabilitation of the country his administration had brought about since the end of the bombing.

But the nearly $77 million the USAID invested in OTPOR & other such hired hooligans’ indoctrination in and equipping (not to say ‘arming’) for the hijacking of Yugoslavia’s first popular presidential election in the name of Democracy has paid significant dividends. The forces working against Independence, National Sovereignty and Democracy in Europe (including Russia), as embodied by the OSCE, which aided and abetted Wm Walker in his staging of the potted massacre at Raçak that begat the Rambouillet conference, which, with its Annex B, made the bombing a foregone catastrophe, have not rested in their efforts to militarily surround Russia and the CIS and leverage large commissions on all sales of their vast natural—especially energy—resources.

My favorite example of anti-democracy (i.e., Fascism) at work in Yugoslavia post 5 October, is, when the EU/NATO cabal just could not seem to get their compradors elected—even after neutralizing the two most powerful national parties, the SPS and SRS, by imprisoning their leaders as war criminals unto genocidaires—because in a sophisticated democracy like Serbia’s, any election that does not turn out 50%+1 of its eligible voters is considered null. So Javier Solano worked double shifts to have this principle, essential to the democratic ideal of majority rule, stricken from the rulebook. Sic transit the power of the None-of-the-Above vote.

And while Europe was plying Serbia with its commercial charms, that judicial arm of NATO’s military domination, the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia, continued or prolonged the Western aggression that dismembered that once proud country. And when, in 2001, President Milosevic was illegally transferred (if ‘kidnapped’ is just too strong for you) to the old Nazi lock-up in The Hague, Scheveningen, and his trial was being billed by CNN and their ilk as the Political Trial of the Century: it was then that I had a premonition of a tragedy in the making.

Just as the goal of the Western powers was not to see a free and fair election in Yugoslavia in 2000—for even if President Milosevic had lost in the first and second rounds, he still would have been a part of the Opposition and, needless to say, would have posed a major impediment to the NATO/EU plans for his country—it became quickly apparent that a fair trial (on what ever charges the Prosecution could finally agree upon) was not what awaited Slobodan Milosevic at The Hague, either.

As arguments for and against his defending himself were entertained, I was naïve enough—or creeped out enough by the theatrics of the ICTY—to advise him not to present a defense at all. I thought he should file a motion for dismissal on the grounds that the Prosecution had not proved its case—and that is only if one is charitable enough to credit the Prosecution with ever having a case.

F. Scott Fitzgerald said, “Show me a hero, and I’ll write you a tragedy.” But even a lifetime in the Theatre had not prepared, me to be a spectator at—even, perhaps, a participant in, as I was present at the founding of the ICDSM, right here in the Sava Center in October 2001, such a classic tragedy. President Milosevic could no more have stood mute than Timon of Athens or King Lear could have accepted their banishment from their lands and their people. It was Milosevic’s tragic heroism that drove him to rescue the History of the Serbian nation and all its varied peoples. The ICTY certainly did not deserve—nor seem very much to appreciate—the History class he held before them for four years. And today’s Serbian comprador government has even bowed a patient knee to the idolatries of false humanitarianism by attending the commemoration of that other UN cash-cow, the so-called genocide at Srebrenica, and even paid a polite call on its former executioners at the Atlantic Alliance’s home office in Brussels, seemingly in hopes of pledging that sadistic fraternity.

And it was the feckless incompetence and cynical irrationality of this grotesque Star Chamber, the ICTY—they had neither the evidence nor the skills to railroad President Milosevic into a conviction; and their institutional instinct for self-preservation made it impossible for them to acquit him without implicating themselves in the primal crime against the Peace that had been committed by the Western powers against Yugoslavia—and covered up by their UN godfathers.

They did the only thing they could do to eliminate this existential threat—an unspeakable and cowardly thing—they took the life of Slobodan Milosevic. By violently suppressing Serbia’s popular political tradition on 5 October 2000, they delivered his people into political servitude at the hands of their once and future tormentors. And they gave an important historical boost to the anti-democratic and immoral forces—the Forces of False Consciousness—that will exploit—then waste—the very last breath of powerless people everywhere.


Mick Collins.

Meulan, France
1 October 2010

End Notes:


[1] While serving as an independent monitor of the 2007 Dumas elections in Moscow, I tried to convince I tried to convince the election chairman, Mr. Cherov, that the OSCE, which had pulled all its monitors from this election, was no friend of Russia or any Slavic country. He got very angry with me.

[2] ‘Terror bombing’ was the term used by Newsweek magazine to describe this NATO aggression.

[3] Today it’s called ‘Il y a une fois la Yougoslavie’ [Once upon a time there was Yugoslavia]

[4] Though in 2000 the country was no longer referred to as the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia [SFRY] and Yugoslavia’s UN seat was being withheld, it was still being called the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia [FRY]. With its anti-democratic enemies having succeeded in effectively removing all references to Socialism [not to mention burying its former, more communist monikers, like ‘Democratic Federal Yugoslavia’ {1943} or ‘The Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia’ {1963}] and busily at work trying to make the same excision of Slavic references by prefixing Yugoslavia [meaning the nation of the Southern Slavs] with ‘ex-‘ or ‘Former-’ (some even stooped to underhandedly and ex-officiously changing the ‘F’-word from ‘Federal’ to ‘Former’), it was not until 2003 that the nation was officially renamed ‘Serbia and Montenegro.’

UN-Aid that Kills-[pt 2]: [from] Rwanda: The Taking of Kigali & the Hunting of Refugees by General Paul Kagame's Army. - by Faustin Ntilikina





The UN--Aid that Kills--#RC202: [excerpted from] Rwanda: The Taking of Kigali and the Hunting of Refugees by General Paul Kagame's Army. -- by Faustin Ntilikina
[As I contemplate the UN draft report recently leaked to Le Monde and consider the stark hypocrisy of it, the brazen betrayal of its former collaborator, Paul Kagame and his RPF government today renewed in Kigali, and the pathetic cowardice of this International snitch in calling attention to Rwanda’s crimes in Congo as a way to fuzz out its own—the punk’s way out when the truth is about to hit the warden’s desk and all hopes of a gay bar on D block vanish in the frenzied anticipation of his impending gang-sodomizing by the joint’s Great Powers: my imagination reeled in disgust and staggered back to a book that changed my whole outlook on Central Africa, in general, and the 1994 Rwandan genocide, in particular.

Fautin Ntilikina’s “Rwanda: The Taking of Kigali and the Hunting of Refugees by General Paul Kagame's Army” is still only in French and has only the dimmest hopes of ever getting the English translation it deserves. But this essential work (in cm/p’s humble translation below) will be the subject of the next two parts of our series, The UN—Aid that Kills.

Thinking of just how fey is the UN’s hippedy-hopping onto the Kagame-bashing band wagon—kind of like American Business, after bankrolling the reconstruction in the 1930s of the Third Reich with its myriad promises of destroying Judeo-Soviet Bolshevism, suddenly deciding in 1941 that they were, really, all along, anti-Fascist (with just a minor in anti-Communism)—and this on the split-ends of feckless attempts by some well-intention, though less well-informed, Arusha Defense lawyers to make the RPF’s double assassination of two popular (Hutu) African presidents on 6 April 1994 a civil matter in an Oklahoma City Federal court, rather than one of the more heinous crimes their employers (the UN, which created and supports the illegal ad hoc Tribunals in The Hague and Arusha) have spent the last nearly 20 years covering up; or the bootless protests of any number of Rwandan exile ‘Opposition’ groups, who continuously appeal to the UN for justice and succor, seeking to insinuate themselves into that tiny country’s electoral process (a process premised on the sanctity of the myth of the minority Tutsi genocide of 1994, and codified by Kagame and his legal talent in the Rwandan Constitution of June 2003, just to make any such ‘Opposition’ impossible or, at least, un-survivable), so as to, somehow, inherit the title to what is laughably called Rwandan democracy, but is really just a sort of Walmart for the natural riches ripped off from Congo—outta nowhere, I get an email about Garrison Keillor’s contemplating the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

How existentially absurd it is that all this oil is destroying the planet because of Mankind’s addiction to petroleum—and all this being observed from a seat in a kerosene-sucking airliner as he sips a cocktail from a plastic glass and records his feelings on a coltan-based computer. Yet with all the hair-pulling and chest-pounding over the wasting of the earth’s essential bodily fluid, very little attention is paid to how the life’s blood of several million African has been wantonly wasted, spilt in forests of eastern Congo.

Even in Obama’s offensively ignorant speech to the UN General Assembly, in which he singled out Iran and the DRC for scolding, he distracted the World body’s attention (all too easily and willfully distracted) from the truly horrendous implications of the US and its allies, and especially the World body, itself, in these crimes against humanity unto genocide, through the use of that hackneyed and hysterical old Vagina Monologues dodge, ‘rape as an weapon of war.’

What I wouldn’t give for brother Obama to read brother Ntilikina’s book and see the really grotesque absurdity of his comment about Congo!

So, why not start here?

These are excerpts from “Rwanda: The Taking of Kigali and the Hunting of Refugees by General Paul Kagame's Army.” I told the author, who was an officer with the Forces Armées Rwandaises (FAR) and has compared the battle for Kigali with the battles for Moscow or Stalingrad, of a vivid image I carried away from my first reading of his book a year and a half ago—like a nightmare I couldn’t shake:

—Sick and starving refugees were waiting for food and medicine to be dropped to them, when in the distance they saw a white plane with blue markings. Certain the UN was coming through on its humanitarian promises, the refugees ran to meet the plane. As this C130 Hercules was almost over them, the side doors slid open and machine guns open up, while what might have at first appeared to be food parcels turned out to be incendiary bombs. Thousand were killed outright, and thousands more were left to wait for death to deliver them from the pain and horror of their existence.—

I asked him if this was really from his book, or had I better watch what I eat after midnight. He sent me the following sections of his book.

I wonder how Garrison Keillor would compare these two existential absurdities? –mc]


1. Destruction of the camps at INERA, Kashusha and ADI-Kivu (South Kivu)

On 21 November 1996, many troops of the RPA [the Army of Paul Kagame’s RPF—cm/p] came from Numbi, a center located further north and connected to Masisi by a trail that would support vehicles. These were the same troops who had attacked and destroyed the camp at Mugunga a week before. They were reinforced by some Tutsi militias who were trained in Rwanda and turned back from the ranches of Ngungu and Matanda in a foreshadowing of the operation to attack the camps. Throughout the night they surrounded the village of Shanje by occupying the high ground overlooking the refugees’ installations.

In the morning, a small plane flew over the zone trailing red and white banners that seemed to announce the arrival of Humanitarian Organizations. The presence, higher in the sky, of a four-engined C130 {Hercules} confirmed the general feeling of relief.

The refugees, already envisioning food packages parachuting down, started to come out of their hiding places. It is at this moment that General Paul Kagame’s soldiers showed themselves and opened fire. Like sheep being attacked by a pack of wild beasts, the refugees spread out when the shooting started. But the place offered no protection; the walls of the few houses in the village would not stopped a tossed rock.

Reflexively, the refugees tried to get back to the foot of the hills, trying to find some blind spots. In this panicked scramble, they exposed themselves even more to the crossfire of machine guns and especially to the mortar fire that had earlier been trained on them.

Encouraged by the luck they seemed to have on their side, those who escaped the gun fire began to climb the hills. You had to get skinny, crawl on your belly, to move toward the summit, toward life.

When the first climbers had gotten half-way up the slope, the little plane came back, this time it was firing on them with an on-board machine gun.
According to witnesses, it dropped ‘these fiery packets’, the only way they were described. Those who did not die of their wounds continued to climb the hill, as if they were resolved to go to their meeting with death. At the approach of this enraged crowd moving in on them, the RPA troops deployed on the heights began to pull out, opening up breaches where those who were fleeing could be swallowed up.

So, after a long and anxious moment, several thousand refugees found their way out of the net, leaving behind them the hundreds of dead and wounded, who would either be finished off, or abandoned to await death alone.

And then, more than 5,000 survivors of the mass-killing were captured and forced, under heavy escort, to return to Bukavu and Rwanda. Along the way back, men and teenage boys were systematically cut out of the driven throng to be slaughtered in the brush, and usually with cold weapons. Others were killed openly in public places under the stunned gaze of the rest of the column. The reason often given for these public executions was attempted escape, a crime for which, it was well-known, the penalty was death. They were also gunned down in the open fields.


2. The Assault on the Sake Basin (Attack on the camps of North Kivu)

The morning of 15 November, I was somewhere down on this lava plain, without any kind of cover. As part of my close family, I have two nieces aged 10 and 12. They had miraculously arrived in Katale, without their parents, two weeks before, via the horrible road through the volcanoes. I saw in their innocent gaze a will and courage to face up to this test. I also saw in them the hope of survival, and from then on they were always with me. But I have never felt so responsible for anyone.

Heading off on the trails blazed by those who went before us, we ran full-out toward the front of the pack in hopes of reaching the foot of the mountain where there is a thick vegetation and where we might avoid being shot on sight.

The sky was clear when my group began to climb the mountain. At each open space, the fugitives’ only weapons against the enemy were their numbers, their cries and their breath. The first line of the fleeing refugees were felled by the bullets of individual guns. The second line were killed by grenades. The pressure from the lines of refugees that followed ended up forcing the gunners to give up their positions and retreat to the next clearing higher up the hill.

Encouraged by the luck that still seemed to be with them, the waves of refugees continued to take advantage of these openings and broaden the front by rushing into the small covered spaces inside the banana groves.

In a few hours, the whole base of the hill had become an enormous battlefield. For this battle, Paul Kagame’s troops were not short on means. The RPF soldiers had brought with them heavy weapons that they had had the time to place in strong positions.

Several witnesses, like Chistophe, a refugee who had remained in the camp and was subsequently repatriated by force, saw at least one small plane armed with machine guns and rockets to back up the ground troops by keeping the refugees from making it further up the hill.


3. The great abandonment

It had already been a month since the first attacks on the refugee camps. First, in South Kivu, then in North Kivu. The attackers had come from Rwanda, wearing their national uniforms, in order, once and for all, to defeat the Hutu refugees.

Camp after camp, they killed and littered their trail of death with the bodies of hundreds of their countrymen—and women and children.

And this extreme solution was not condemned, either by the HCR [the UN High Commissioner for Refugees], or by the UN Security Council, or by the powerful nations who were [or were not] members of this Council.

On the humanitarian scene, in the beginning of November, the UN decided to help these unfortunate refugees by launching a gigantic humanitarian intervention. The Staff Headquarters for this Intervention Force was set up in Kampala, Uganda.

The Force was commanded by Canadian Army General Maurice Baril, already well-known in UN administrative circles for his partiality [his loyal support of fellow Canadian and UN General Roméo Dallaire, with his self-admitted pro-RPF bent—cm/p] in the UNAMIR’s handling of the Rwandan problem during the war and the mass killings of 1994.

UN officials did not hide their real motives when they placed the operation’s headquarters in Uganda, the strong ally of Rwanda in the war against the refugees.

As for General Baril, his proposals left no doubt in the minds of those whose survival depended on his initiatives. Rather than working with officials in Zaire, the country where the refugees found themselves, Baril decided to go through Kigali to ask for authorization to put his troops on the ground.

And at the end of operations, despite regular over-flights by reconnaissance aircraft and the use of other state-of-the-art surveillance equipment, each report from the Humanitarian Force announced that the refugees could not be found.

After several weeks of ‘fruitless’ searching, the Humanitarian Force concluded that the refugees had all gone back home and that aid would be channeled through Rwanda.


4. Death in the shade

How many remained as prisoners in the forests in the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo? A quick accounting will give us an idea of the number of people who were chased like wild game into that equatorial forest from November 1996.

In the beginning, there were 200,000 refugees from Katale who left Rukwi on 18 November and subsequently suffered heavy losses at the Rushoga river. With any hopes of getting to the ‘free zone’ dashed, the survivors of these massacres resigned themselves to living, at once, among the local populations and their assailants.

Then there were the 500, to 600,000 refugees from Mugunga and Kibumba, half of whom had been effectively repatriated or killed by the Kigali regime during the attack on the Sake Basin. At least 200,000 survivors got to the Masisi region and tried to go on toward Walikale.

Finally, there were the 300,000 refugees from the Bukavu region who were nearly all led toward the West and got past the cross-country highway at Busurungi. Knowing that estimates from February 1997 of those who managed to get beyond Walikale and into the Tingi-Tingi region were about 200,000, the half million refugees who did not make this count continued to drag themselves through the forests of the Masisi and Walikale zones in the east of the DRC. They were condemned to wander there for the rest of their lives, terrorized and hunted day and night, and all this in a state of extreme deprivation.

Before the RPF launched its war of 1990, each one of these people had a family, a profession, personal possessions and prospects. From one day to the next they had to abandon all of this. They survived in a vegetative state imposed on them by two years in the refugee camps.

They only held on because they had hope and confidence that international arbitration would become interested in their situation and would one day return them to their country, their things, their activities, and their dignity.

After October 1996, the violent attacks on the camps, and on the refugees, made crystal clear the true intentions of the Rwandan regime. This government did not want their return; it wanted their annihilation.

After RPF troops took control of the Bukavu-Walikale road in mid-December 1996, there was no longer anything to hope for. They were resigned to living under persecution, in misery and chaos, and in despair.

For several weeks, they counted on the imminent arrival of the Humanitarian Aid Force created by the UN Security Council and commanded by General Maurice Baril. Hope was also nourished by the appearance of these airplanes that each day were flying over them as they trudged along the route connecting the many encampments, blue camps, white camps or green camps, extending from East to West, that took them several days walking to reach.

To the crushing disappointed of these wanderers, the daily radio reports claimed the refugees could not be found. How could such a long column of souls escape detection by modern military equipment so sensitive as to be able to read the license number on a car hidden in the underbrush?

And what if General Baril’s troops were on the side of the hunters or only pretending to play the old Humanitarian game?

I know the gravity of this accusation, but the facts are there.

Despite the technical means at its disposal, this International Force wound up admitting it was unable to fulfill its mission, leaving the field wide open for Paul Kagame’s forces to have their way with a defenseless people.

In this underbrush where there is neither a road, nor a telephone, these refugees became aware that they could no longer count on International Solidarity or Conventions for their survival. They concluded that they had been abandoned. They were alone to face their suffering, alone to face the physical, mental and moral degeneration that was stalking them. Many among them were already at their final resting place.

The UN--Aid that Kills (pt 1) - The RPF's Bloody Record & the History of UN Cover-ups - by Christopher Black

Intro to our Series: The UN--Aid that Kills--The Rwandan Patriotic Front's Bloody Record and the History of UN Cover-Ups--by Christopher Black

[Lately, Paul Kagame and his neofeudal-military dictatorship in Kigali have come in for a lot more heat than ever before—at least from friends and crimeys. Now the Princes of the Pentagon and the Secretaries at State are starting to question whether 'real democracy' [i.e., participatory democracy with majority rule—oops! Sounds like ‘Hutu Power’, huh?] can be developed in a thoroughly privatized, nearly ideal model of an MBA [Military/Business Authoritarian] state.

The Lords of Capital have once more shoved their gnarly fist up their argyle sock-puppet, the United Nations, to play yet another Guignol entitled “Humanitarianism R Us'. And for the second year running, the UN has singled out plucky little Rwanda to be bitch-slapped for running the most atrocious hustles in the Your-Resources-or-Your-Life racket—where, as will global terrorism, the take always winds up in the same pockets.

If the media ever starts giving out Philip Gourevitch Ignorance & Hypocrisy in Journalism awards, those pens men in the UN's International Experts department should win year in and year out. The illegal ad hocs alone, the ICTY in The Hague (for Yugoslavia, which the UN helped drive out of existence a full decade ago), and the ICTR in Arusha (for adjudicating crimes committed in Rwanda and the surrounding region between 1 Jan. and 31 Dec. 1994--except those committed by the UN and its favored-member states), have brought craven, conniving judicial villainy to sub-Caligulan levels.

Here's CM/P's Minadef, Chris Black, sharing some of his personal experiences in the Tanzanian Halls of Connivery. This piece will stand on its own as an introduction to our latest series on one of the greatest forces for the vile exploitation and expansion of human misery in the last 70 years: the UN.

Stay tuned to find out just how they ran their foul regime-changing game in the Age of Global Waste. --mc]

************************


The Rwandan Patriotic Front's Bloody Record and the History of UN Cover-Ups
by Christopher Black

On August 26, the French newspaper Le Monde revealed the existence of a draft UN report on the most serious violations of human rights in the Democratic Republic of Congo over an eleven-year period (1993-2003).[1] The massive draft report states that after the Rwandan Patriotic Front's takeover of Rwanda in 1994, it proceeded to carry out "systematic and widespread attacks" against Hutu refugees who had fled Rwanda to neighboring Zaire (now the DRC) as well as against the Hutu civilian population of the DRC, in general. Crucially, it concludes that the pattern of these attacks "reveal[s] a number of damning elements that, if they were proven before a competent court, could be classified as crimes of genocide."[2]

The draft report was leaked to Le Monde out of the plausible fear that its most damning facts and charges against the armed forces of the Rwandan Patriotic Front and President Paul Kagame would be expunged prior to its official release. Sure enough, one week later, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navanethem Pillay, announced that the official report's release would be delayed until October 1 "to give concerned states a further month to comment on the draft," and even "offered to publish any comments alongside the report itself."[3]

Such an unprecedented offer by the UNHCHR follows from a number of factors, including the role that Rwandan troops play in UN peacekeeping operations, and the fact that earlier this year, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon appointed Kagame to serve along with Spain's Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero as co-chairs of a new Millennium Development Goal Advisory Group. According to The New Yorker's Philip Gourevitch -- who, after Alison Des Forges, did as much as anyone to sell the official version of the 1994 "Rwanda genocide" to the West, and clearly remains on very friendly terms with the Kagame dictatorship -- "top Rwandan officials [have been speaking] freely and on the record about their efforts to have the draft report quashed." As Rwanda's Minister of Foreign Affairs Louise Mushikiwabo confided in Gourevitch, "If it is endorsed by the U.N. and it's ever published, . . . if the U.N. releases it as a U.N. report, the moment it's released, the next day all our troops are coming home. Not just Darfur, all the five countries where we have police."[4]

A third, no doubt more decisive factor is that the Kagame dictatorship is a client of the United States and "acts as a mercenary for U.S. interests in Africa," as Glen Ford observes; the current conflict between this dictatorship and the UN "threatens to reveal the United States' role as enabler in the deaths of as many as six million people while Washington's allies occupied and looted the eastern regions of the Democratic Republic of Congo."[5] It is Washington's ties to Kagame's RPF, ultimately, as well as those of London and Brussels, on which public discussions of the draft UN report should turn their spotlight.

But this is not the first such report to have been drafted by the UN -- nor is it the first one to be covered up. As early as October 11, 1994, Robert Gersony, an employee of the U.S. Agency for International Development, then attached to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, made an oral presentation to the UN Commission of Experts on Rwanda. Gersony had been dispatched to survey the situation inside Rwanda to determine if conditions were right for a return of the Hutu refugees who had fled the RPF. Instead, he found that the RPF had been committing systematic massacres of the Hutu population in Rwanda starting in April 1994 and continuing through the date of his presentation.

On page 4 of the UN record of Gersony's oral presentation, we read:

"Significant areas of Butare Prefecture, Kibungo Prefecture, and the southern and eastern areas of Kigali Prefecture have been -- and in some cases were reported to remain as early as September -- the scene of systematic and sustained killing and persecution of the civilian Hutu populations by the [Rwandan Patriotic Army]. These activities are reported to have begun, depending on location, between April and July 1994, immediately following the expulsion from each area of former Government military, militia and surrogate forces. These [Rwandan Patriotic Army] actions were consistently reported to be conducted in areas where opposition forces of any kind -- armed or unarmed -- or resistance of any kind -- other than attempts by the victims of these actions to escape -- were absent. Large scale indiscriminate killings of men, women and children, including the sick and elderly, were consistently reported."

And on page 6 we also learn that "an unmistakable pattern of systematic [Rwandan Patriotic Army] conduct of such actions is the unavoidable conclusion of the team's interviews."

The Gersony report is identified in a cover letter dated October 11, 1994, from one Francois Fouinat to Mrs. B. Molina-Abram, the Secretary to the Commission of Experts on Rwanda. In this brief letter, Fouinat explains:

"We refer to the UNHCR's briefing to the Commission of Experts on Monday, 11 October 1994.

"As requested by the Commission, we are forwarding herewith a written summary of Mr. Gersony's oral presentation and copies of some field reports sent to UNHCR Headquarters by UNHCR Field Offices.

"We are confident that as agreed by the President of the Commission of Experts, these documents will be treated as confidential and only be made available to the members of the Commission."

I possess copies of these two UN documents from October 1994 because they are part of the evidence-base at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, where I serve as the lead defense counsel for Hutu former General Augustin Ndindiliyimana, once the Chief of Staff of the Rwandan Gendarmerie. The documents were found by my legal assistant purely by chance while scanning the prosecution's Electronic Disclosure System, which contains hundreds of thousands of documents that are not indexed in any order. My assistant came across them as part of a package of material organized by Robert Gersony himself while he was assigned to the UNHCR. It must be assumed that Mr. Gersony thought the documents relevant, as they affected the fate of the Hutu refugees.

At the ICTR, the brief cover letter by Francois Fouinat bears the index number "R0002906." The next 14 pages of R0002906 contain the Gersony report and are numbered sequentially with an 'R' -- prefix number used by the ICTR for documents contained in its Rwanda files.

Because I possess the series of ICTR documents beginning with R0002906, I also have in my possession an even more astonishing document, the true historical significance of which has once again been underscored by the leaked UNHCHR report: Namely, the copy of a letter from Paul Kagame to his fellow Tutsi, Jean-Baptiste Bagaza of Burundi, dated August 10, 1994.

Let me share with you an exchange that took place on November 18, 2008, in the Military II trial at the ICTR.[6] What was said in court that particular day explains how these documents came to light. I was one of the speakers.

--Mr. Black:[7]

"Mr. President, before I do that -- that takes place, I have something which I would like to raise of great importance, I think.

"Yesterday my legal assistant found by accident, something, I think of grave importance for this Tribunal and for the world. It's a letter from General Paul Kagame, dated the 10th of August 1994, to Jean Baptiste Bagaza, . . . in Burundi. It's marked 'confidential'.

"I didn't have time to make copies, so I want to read it to you. It has an 'R'-number. R0002905. It's in French, so please bear with me to make a loose translation. It says -- it's only one page and it is short:

'Dear Brother Jean Baptiste Bagaza, we have the greatest honour to extend our sincere gratitude to you both for your financial and technical support in our struggle that has just ended with the taking of Kigali.

'Rest assured that our plan to continue shall be pursued as we agreed at our last meeting in Kampala. Last week I communicated with our big brother Yoweri Museveni and decided to make some modifications to the plan. Indeed, as you have noted, the taking of Kigali quickly provoked a panic among the Hutus who fled to Goma and Bukavu. We have found that the presence of a large number of Rwandan refugees at Goma and the international community can cause our plan for Zaire to fail. We cannot occupy ourselves with Zaire until after the return of these Hutus. All means are being used for their return as rapidly as possible. In any case, our external intelligence services continue to crisscross the east of Zaire and our Belgian, British and American collaborators, the rest of Zaire. The action reports are expected in the next few days.

'Concerning the Burundi plan, we are very content with your work to ensure the failure of the policies of FRODEBU. It is necessary to paralyze the power of FRODEBU until the total ruin of the situation in order to justify your action that must not miss its target. Our soldiers will be deployed, this time, not only in Bujumbura, but in the places you judge strategic. Our elements stationed at Bugesera are ready to intervene at any moment. The plan for Burundi must be executed as soon as possible before the Hutus of Rwanda can organize themselves.

'In the hope of seeing you next time at Kigali, we ask you to accept, dear brother, our most respectful greetings.'

'General Paul Kagame
'Minister of Defence (signed by his assistant Mr. Rwego[8])'

"The importance of this letter, if you have grasped it fully, cannot be overstated. It means the attack on Rwanda from 1990 was not the prime objective of Kagame and his collaborators. Zaire was always the prime objective. That their excuse for the attack on Rwanda, about establishing democracy and return of refugees, was completely false. That the invasion from Uganda had only one purpose: to clear the path through Rwanda to Zaire. That the return of refugees, as many witnesses have stated, was not for humanitarian reasons, but to clear the path for the invasion of Zaire. It means that the Americans, British, particularly with Kagame and Museveni, planned the invasion of Zaire [sic] in 1994, probably before that. It means that the excuse given for the invasions of Congo since this letter was written, to clear the 'Interahamwe' or 'genocidaires,' is completely false. No mention is made of 'Interahamwe.' No mention is made of 'genocide.' It means, since this was received, it looks like a date stamp of this tribunal, 8th December 1994, that the Prosecutor of this Tribunal has been hiding information indicating a conspiracy to commit a war of aggression against Congo-Zaire, Zaire and all of the war crimes have flowed from it since and the continuation of those wars in Congo, now begun 14 years ago, if not longer. And that the principal parties are the principal parties stated in this letter. It indicates that the prime target, Hutus in Rwanda and Burundi, that they want to suppress the Hutu population in order to carry out their plan. Democracy was never their concern. And it indicates that the Prosecutor was in -- had information in a territorial and temporal jurisdiction of this Tribunal under rule -- under Statute-Article 1. That they are also concerned with war crimes committed in neighboring states.

"So, here you have the smoking gun, the letter, planning the invasion of Zaire with the Americans and British. And it confirms our theory all the way through this trial that the Belgians were involved with those other countries. And again, there must be -- and this, as a colleague pointed out, is page 8 of 12. So where are the other eleven pages of -- what other letters do they have in their hands? And again, it indicates that these men have been stitched up, falsely accused, in order to clear them out of the way so this plan can take place. If this is published in The New York Times or Washington Post, the whole picture of the war in Rwanda and the wars in Congo would change.

"So I ask the Prosecutor, once again, where is that file? And, in fact, I would like them to produce the indictment against Kagame[9] because I want to see what he's been charged with, exactly what crimes and where. So, again, I ask for this file to be produced and I ask why they have not acted. Mr. Jallow and Louise Arbour and everybody else have been protecting the RPF which has now resulted in millions of deaths in the Congo and continues up till today and what is going on in Congo now.

"And I state openly that the Prosecution office is complicit in this invasion of Congo and is responsible, themselves, for all those murders in Congo, because they've hidden this for a long time and they could have exposed it many years ago and stopped the invasions.

"If the international community, that is, other than the United States and Britain, had been aware of what was going on, it would never have taken place. But they sit there and they accuse us, my client and the other officers here, of committing crimes; they knew what they were doing in Zaire. I don't think they can even shave and look in the mirror in the morning."

--Mr. President:[10]

"Counsel, having said all of that, why don't you send this to The New York Times?"

--Black:

"It will be sent . . . whether they publish it, I do not know."[11]

In the days after this letter was exposed, the prosecution accused the defence of having fabricated the letter and raised questions about its authenticity.

I replied, first, that the letter bears a sequential ICTR index number with an 'R'-prefix -- the prefix used for Rwanda documents.

Second, as mentioned above, this letter was found among the package of material organized by Robert Gersony while assigned to the UNHCR.

Third, the letter was date-stamped "December 8, 1994" by the ICTR. Presumably, this was its date of receipt by the ICTR.

Fourth, it is also noteworthy that the letter that we know was created no later than December 8th, 1994, speaks of moving the Hutus out of the way in Zaire, and this is exactly what happened. First, the UN tried to force them back into Rwanda and partly succeeded. But the mass of refugees refused to return, so, in 1996, the attacks on the Hutu refugee camps began, forcing them to flee into the Congo forest. There is a lot of testimony by Hutus who were either forced at gunpoint to return to Rwanda or experienced the manhunt against them conducted by the RPF and its allies.

Fifth, the letter is further authenticated by noting that the addressee (the Burundian Tutsi Jean Baptiste Bagaza) did, in fact, carry out a coup d'état in Burundi against a more moderate Tutsi and turned against the Hutu political group called Front pour la Démocratie au Burundi (FRODEBU, or Front for Democracy in Burundi). Unquestionably, Bagaza and Kagame were allies. According to the testimony of expert witness Dr. Helmut Strizek before the ICTR:

Q: "Very well, doctor, let's move toward the end. What clarification would you like to make on the relationship between Bagaza and Kagame when the president's aeroplane was shot down?"

Strizek: "If my memory serves me right, Bagaza had left the country, and I think returned after or before the assassination of Ndadaye. Bagaza was a hardliner, a Tutsi hardliner, so there was an alliance between the two of them, and they wanted to prevent a Hutu president from being in charge of Burundi."

. . . . . . . . . . . .

Strizek: "Jean-Baptiste Bagaza was a Hima or Tutsi president of Burundi who took power when he overthrew President Micombero, who had been responsible for anti-Hutu genocide in 1972. He was in power for some time. . . .

"In my opinion, it's quite clear that Bagaza and Kagame follow the same line."[12]


Sixth, the man whose signature appears on the letter on behalf of Paul Kagame, Mr. Rwego, confirmed to a member of the defence team that he did, in fact, sign it.

The accidental discovery of this August 10, 1994, letter from Paul Kagame to his "Dear Brother Jean Baptiste Bagaza" was met with an immediate reaction by the prosecution, who accused the defence of fabricating it, pointing out a typo in the letterhead. But this line of criticism failed, as it was shown that there are other letters in existence from the RPF on the same stationery, with the same typo in the letterhead, and these letters are regarded as authentic.

That someone regarded the letter as authentic and dangerous is highlighted by the fact that I was followed by a Tanzanian police officer the night after I produced it in court, and was forced to complain about this surveillance in court the next day. Yet, the prosecution continued its attacks on the letter's authenticity, even though the document came from the files of the prosecutor. And this important revelation during the Military II trial was never reported in the mass media -- though I did send it to many journalists, including The New York Times.

Now that the draft UN report on the atrocities committed by the RPF in Congo has been leaked, the findings of the very first UN report of RPF atrocities against the Hutus beginning in 1994 should also be recognized and addressed.

The UN must explain why the record of that 1994 presentation by Robert Gersony was marked "confidential" and why the latest draft UN report does not refer to it.

The prosecutors at the ICTR must explain why they hid these documents from the defence for nearly 15 years, and why, even though they have these documents in their possession, they have never once used these documents to bring charges against a single member of the RPF.

Last, Paul Kagame and his American, Belgian, and British collaborators must explain the meaning of the letter -- and, in particular, the meaning of the phrase, "plan for Zaire."



Endnotes

[1] Christophe Châtelot, "L'acte d'accusation de dix ans de crimes au Congo RDC," Le Monde, August 26, 2010. For some additional news reports, see: "UN Uncovers Possible Genocide in Congo: Report," Agence France Presse, August 26, 2010; David Lewis, "Rwandan Army May Have Committed Genocide -- UN Report," Reuters, August 26, 2010; Judi Rever, "UN Lawyer Says Congo Butchery Resembled Rwandan Genocide," Agence France Presse, August 27, 2010; Michelle Faul, "UN Draft Report: Rwandan Army Attacks on Refugees in Congo in the 1990s Could Be Genocide," Associated Press, August 27, 2010; "DR Congo Killings 'May Be Genocide' -- UN Draft Report," BBC, August 27, 2010; Max Delany, Rwanda Dismisses UN Report Detailing Possible Hutu Genocide in Congo Christian Science Monitor, August 27, 2010; Chris McGreal et al., "Leaked UN Report Accuses Rwanda of Possible Genocide in Congo," The Guardian, August 27, 2010; Xan Rice, "Returning Refugees: Lush Land the Prize That Could Reignite Ethnic Conflict in DRC," The Guardian, August 27, 2010; Howard French, "U.N. Report on Congo Offers New View of Genocide Era," New York Times, August 28, 2010; Colum Lynch, "U.N. Says Rwandan Troops Carried Out Mass Killings in '90s," Washington Post, August 29, 2010.

[2] See "Report of the Mapping Exercise documenting the most serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law committed within the territory of the Democratic Republic of Congo between March 1993 and June 2003," UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, draft report dated June, 2010, para. 517.

[3] "UN Report on Rights Violations in DR Congo to Be Released Next Month," UN News Center, September 2, 2010.

[4] Philip Gourevitch, "Rwanda Pushes Back Against UN Genocide Charges," New Yorker Blog, August 27, 2010.

[5] Glen Ford, "Rwanda Crisis Could Expose U.S. Role in Congo Genocide," Black Agenda Report, September 1, 2010.

[6] The Military II trial concerns the joint trial of General Augustin Bizimungu, Chief of Staff of the Rwandan Army, General Augustin Ndindiliyimana, Chief of Staff of the Rwandan Gendarmerie, Major Nzwonyemeye, Commander of the Reconnaissance Battalion, and Captain Sagahutu , Commander, Squadron A of the Reconnaissance Battalion.

[7] Let the record show that I have written here exactly what I said in court. The translation in the trial transcripts is a bit garbled, and I have corrected the text accordingly.

[8] Reference ICTR document number R0002905, letter dated August 10th, 1994, date stamped by the ICTR 8th December, 1994. Marked as page 8 of 12.

[9] Defence counsel had been informed by a member of the prosecution that an indictment exists against Paul Kagame for war crimes and is being held by the ICTR for the appropriate time. In order to determine whether this was correct information the defence counsel several times asked the prosecution to provide that indictment as it would affect the defense. The prosecution never denied its existence and the defence was advised to bring a motion to request it.

[10] Judge Asoka Da Silva of Sri Lanka, Presiding Judge, Trial Chamber III, ICTR.

[11] Transcript, Military II Trial, November 18th, 2008, pages 1-3.

[12] Transcript, Military II Trial, November 24th, 2008, page 62, lines 19-24; and page 63.

***************************

Christopher Black serves as Lead Counsel for the Hutu former General Augustin Ndindiliyimana, Chief of Staff, Rwandan Gendarmerie, in the Military II trial at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

OBSERVATIONS ON THE BOOK BY ANDRÉ GUICHAOUA, "Rwanda: from War to Genocide"--Open letter from General Augustin Ndindiliyimana (4 August 2010)





OBSERVATIONS ON THE BOOK BY ANDRÉ GUICHAOUA, "Rwanda: from War to Genocide"--Open letter from General Augustin Ndindiliyimana (4 August 2010)
[translated from the French by Christopher Black & Mick Collins]


[I first saw Guichaoua's fat purple tome, “Rwanda: de la guerre au genocide,” on the shelves at FNAC. I knew his name, but nothing distinguished him from the other professional Africa experts, the ICTR Prosecution's private faculty of contractors, who were kept on the UN payroll as long as they kept the Tutsi-Genocide-of-100-days-committed-by-'extremist'-elements-of-the-Rwandan-(Hutu)-governments-and-military out of the chiottes of Historical Waste where it belongs. As General Ndindiliyimana specifies below in this posted PDF, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) demanded the UN set up a Tribunal to try those who committed the crime of genocide on 12 April 1994, that is, six days into the so-called tribal killing spree. So experts like Guichaoua, Alison Des Forges, Colette Braeckman, Gérard Prunier, Samantha Power, Bernard Lugan and Filip Reyntjens, got their mission plan significantly before all the bodies had fallen, been sorted out and counted. And as more evidence has rolled in with each new trial at the ICTR, most of these 'experts'—some more than others—have continued to cling to the 'Genocide Fallacy' that is at the heart of this chapter in Central African history, just as it is the constitutional rationale for the current Rwandan military dictatorship.

Like the ‘Genetic Fallacy’ in logic, the 'Genocide Fallacy' invalidates all arguments or institutions premised on it because of its essential flaw, its original sin, its falsifying bias. But to experts, scholars like Guichaoua et al, the Rwandan Genocide of 800,000 to a million Tutsis and moderate Hutus between 6 April 1994 (the date of the assassinations by the RPF [and no one any longer seriously argues this fact, wetfe The New Yorker readership might think!] of the presidents of Rwanda and Burundi (Juvénal Habyarimana and Cyprien Ntaryamira, resp.), as well as the Chief of Staff of the Rwandan Army (as The General will point out, this position should not be confused or conflated, as it often is by these experts, with the Chief of Staff of the Rwandan Armed Forces [FAR], which was made up of the Army and the Natl. Gendarmerie, and commanded by the President or, in his absense, the Minister of Defense [both civilian positions]), and 16 July 1994, when the RPF had effectively seized power throughout the country, and claimed to have stopped the 100 days of Genocide (which they, in fact, date as far back as the Social Revolution of 1959-1962 that deposed the Tutsi monarchy and instituted, by majority vote and UN recognition, the Rwandan Republic).

But the evolution of the ‘Genocide Fallacy’ is interesting and should be noted here—because The General is far too erudite and refined, far too polite, and far too compassionate toward his torturers, to speak in such crude terms. Being able to take the low rhetorical road is one of the few indulgences allowed a retired Hollywood day-player whom no one need take seriously.

So . . . In the Beginning was the Word. And the Word was with the RPF, and the Word was Genocide. After years of playing with ethnic numbers (and in the final accounting, the real significance of ‘Hutu’ and ‘Tutsi,’ and the reason the current neo-feudal government in Kigali eschews ethnic distinctions, is that ‘Hutu’ means ‘majority’ and ‘Tutsi’ means ‘[tiny, elitist] minority’) and trying to bury all information relevant to the foreign aggression of 1 October 1990, or the four-year RPF reign of terrorist murder and mayhem that culminated with the multiple assassinations of 6 April 1994, a terrorist act in violation of the duly-signed Arusha Peace Accords of 4 August 1993, and the unilateral resumption, again by the RPF, of the war they had started in October 1990—though it had been in pre-production for more than a decade before with infiltration, the planting of mines and other explosives, and the agitation and propaganda for vile ethnic hatred that became the cover for this primal international crime against Peace—the genocide of the Tutsi minority was declared, by the victorious military leaders of that same Tutsi minority, to be over. The perpetrators of the mass killings, the ruthless prosecutors of the war against Rwanda, declared 16 July 1994 to be VG day. And this fallacy became the raison d'être, not only for the Rwandan military dictatorship, but also for a whole new system of International Justice. The Rwandan Genocide became a sort of Holocaust redux.

But, as should have been expected, with the Genocide victims’ actual vanquishing of the genocidaires and driving them all out of their country into neighboring Congo, the 'hapless victim' jacket would start to chafe under the coarse weight of the conquistador's armor. Former-RPF warriors, like Lt Abdul Ruzibiza, in his "Rwanda: L'Histoire secrète," started bragging about his RPF-mates’ mass killing of Rwandan civilians, the seizure of their lands with millions displaced, and the pillaging of their homes and the looting of the goods and livestock, all to be sent back and sold in Uganda.

As with Naser Oric's bragging on German TV about his killing and mutilation of Serb civilians around Srebrenica, Ruzibiza's blood-curdling confessions had little effect on the primary Genocide Fallacy. But with his testimony before the ICTR, as well as to the French anti-terrorist judge, Jean-Louis Bruguière, a sort of 'second genocide' was born: the 'Extremist Hutu' government had committed genocide against the Tutsi minority; but so had the Tutsi RPF committed genocide against the majority Hutu civilian population of Rwanda.

And Ruzibiza had the ICTR disinterred certain independent reports on RPF crimes: Gersony and Hourigan had their reports revived, though, unlike the private academic experts, they were under orders from their government patrons to dummy up and stay that way. Of course, being good guys, they didn’t.

Then Pierre Péan, the formidable French investigative journalist, came out with his "Noire fureurs, blancs menteurs" (a seminal work on Rwanda which, shamefully, is still not translated into English) and uncovered the RPF's vast propaganda network. Again, it became clear that the Genocide Fallacy was instrumental to the cover-up of the imperialist (US/UK) aggression and military occupation of Central Africa; it was the sentimental hook by which the international public was cajoled into accepting the forced conversion of Rwanda into a privatized loading dock for the stolen resources of Congo. After all, those Rwandan Defense Forces were over in Goma and Kivu hunting escaped Hutu genocidaires--and their genocidaire wives and kids. It was just ‘Never Again’ all over again.

But ours is pretty much a monotheistic (mono-genocidal) cosmology. Just as with the one true and living God, the Primal Genocide does not suffer competitors. Yet, there was too much evidence of RPF (Tutsi) mass crimes for the expert witnesses contracted by the ICTR Prosecutor just to continue pretending ignorance. So guys like Prunier and Guichaoua had to start talking about mass crimes on both sides. As they used to say in Yugoslavia: plenty of ethnic atrocities to go around. And though this compromise weakened the One True and Living Genocide theory, there was already too much invested to simply abandon it in favor or irrelevancies like evidence and justice.

And this brings me to the second and last time I saw Guichaoua’s massive volume: During a post-screening discussion of the documentary, “D’Arusha à Arusha,” I was doing my best to compliment the filmmaker, Christophe Gargot, and his well-heeled Human Rights sponsors, on the real effectiveness of their film. But it quickly became clear I was being somewhat less than sincere (you can check out my deconstruction of this doc elsewhere on CM/P at:
http://cirqueminimeparis.blogspot.com/2010/03/reconsideration-of-christophe-gargots.html
because the point I was praising them on was not exactly the point they had intended to make. They had wanted to show how the ICTR was working effectively to end impunity for governments who commit mass crimes like Genocide; I told them their choice of trials and the prominences they gave to the Defense (with great attorneys like Ramsey Clark and Raphael Constant featured), and certain cases, like the Military I trial of Bagosora et al, made a very strong case for the imperialists’ insturmentalization of the Genocide Fallacy—say what?! Their film had cast in doubt almost every premise the Prosecution had.

As if to shut me up by sticking it in my mouth, they whipped out Guichaoua’s book and started talking about how it could answer all the questions they couldn’t—had all the numbers, all the details to demonstrate beyond all doubt that the Tutsis (and ‘moderate’ Hutus) had been genocided by the ‘Extremist Hutus.’ But no one seemed aware of, or could, much less, explain, the outcome of their Star Trial: Military I had acquitted Bagosora et al of ‘conspiracy or planning to commit genocide.’ But, hey, as Don Rumsfeld once mused: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Just because OJ was acquitted doesn’t mean he didn’t decapitate his wife, while his kids slept nearby. Just because the Genocide is a Fallacy (or at least a paranoid fantasy) does not mean there was no genocide. Right?

But Military I and the almost contemporaneous Military II trial (the Prosecutor v Ndindiliyimana et al) were the straws that drove the last of the hired experts off the sinking USS Genocide—and out of their tiny, pathetically closed minds.

When the judgment was rendered in Military I on 28 December 2008, the Tribunal acquitted the defendants of 'planning or conspiracy to commit genocide'. As legal wonks were quick to point out, this only meant the Prosecution could not prove that Colonel Bagosora et al had planned or conspired to commit genocide—not that THERE WAS NO GENOCIDE! In fact, the same judgment convicted them of genocidal crimes committed by those in their charge, crimes like the killing of the 10 Belgian UN Blue Helmets (some say they saw as many as 13 bodies at the morgue) and the murder while under UN protection of Prime Minister Agathe Uwilingiyimana. But there is no more evidence of Bagosora et al having committed these 'genocidal crimes' than there is of their 'planning and conspiracy to commit genocide'. The strong evidence actually points to the RPF’s responsibility for these, like all the other, killings.

This Mil I conviction was based almost entirely on the 16 June 2006 order to the Trial Chamber in Arusha from the ICTR Appeals Chamber in The Hague (the ICTR and ICTY share a single Appeals Chamber—how conveeeeeeeeeeeenient!) to 'Take Judicial Notice' of the Rwandan Genocide. That is to say, that the Genocide Fallacy must be accepted without having to be proved under evidence—like the address of the Courthouse, or who's buried in Grant's Tomb. 

This patently anti-legal manipulation seems to have befuddled Guichaoua and the Genocide Fallacy claque of private scholastic contractors (whose chief concern has always been the demonization—or, at least, the trivialization—of the Rwandan majority [Hutu, MRND] governmental and military institutions), but it has increased their ranks to the tune of one ICTR Defense lawyers association—who saw in the Mil I judgment, and some of the reconsiderations and reversals of legal fortune that came in its wake, a perfect opportunity for a big payday, the kind of career bump that turns an ambulance chaser into Johnny Cochran (i.e., a rich ambulance chaser).

But when the racist and classist arrogance of these Euro-American scholar/shysters led them directly into the maw of the monster conceived by the Genocide Fallacy, and they started waving their well-researched bona fides around Kigali like Cal pennants at Stanford stadium, things went sideways. They wound up (like their ICTR clients, one might consider) in an African jail having to explain how their multi-genocide theory was not Genocide denial or even revision, high crimes in that nation whose very legal existence is based on this primal Genocide. So, then they went all soft-centered, bent over and grabbed their ankles and started singing every song the jailor requested: Of course there was a Genocide, and just One Genocide and, of course, it's existence is so far beyond doubt that it need not be proven. Just get me outta here! Genocide akbar!

But, I digress—comme d’hab. General Ndindiliyimana’s observations on Guichaoua’s massive pavé—which, for those gluttons who just can’t get enough disinformation, is backed up with a web site—makes it abundantly clear that many in the West have badly underestimated the sophistication of African social and political institutions. What was destroyed between October 1990 and April 1994 was nothing less than the Rwandan democratic socialist revolution. The counter-revolution led from Kigali and Kampala is on going, with millions and millions of victims in Rwanda and Congo, and the blood on the hands of these liberal academics, journalists and jurists, will not soon dry or ever be washed away. —mc ]

Sunday, June 13, 2010

Fascism & the Falsification of History - CPs of Greece & the Russian Federation

KPRF.svg
FASCISM & the Falsification of History--from our Comrades in Greece & the Russian Federation

[With the Fascist rampage against History as a way to terrorize the world public into accepting Exchange Value—in its most mindless, immaterial, and speculative form—which so obviously has sucked all the (Real) Life from anything that anymore resembles Use Value (concentrating the largest part of human [re]productive energies into the creation of pure, and even toxic, Waste, privileging exchanges of Nothing for Nothing, accompanied by unimaginably large brokerage fees, interest charges, back-end point on the distributor’s gross, penalties for early withdrawal and other such forms of financial racketeering, and completely corroding the whole process of life)—the Global Economy finds itself having been turned into a great Human History shredder (sorta, HIGO: human history in, garbage out)—with even its insensate production of destruction—the manufacture of war and needless suffering unto death—not being able to bring it to social and political equilibrium.

At this crucial time, in Europe and elsewhere, the Greek Communist Party (KKE) has sent us (and the CPUSA) a reminder that the illusion of advanced Waste Capitalist progress (the Waste stage developed directly from the Monopoly stage which Lenin described in his 1917 ‘Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism’) is just that, an illusion—or, perhaps, by now it is painful enough to be considered a delusion. The KKE also remind us that the only solution to our recurring agony lies with ‘the working class, the self-employed, the poor farmers, and the youth.’

Because back in 1914, global Monopoly Capitalism resorted to World War to keep itself ahead of the advancing demands of Human Need organized in the popular forces of socialism-communism. Since then, it has become essential to the continuity of this pathological system of false value to invert the historical roles of ‘Aggressor’ and ‘Aggressed,’ of ‘Villain’ and ‘Victim.’ False values falsify History.

At the end of the Monopoly stage, in Italy, was born a philosophical rationale for maintaining a moribund Capitalist production and circulation system (by then totally breathless, by now totally self-consumptive): Fascism. And it is Fascism that has inherited this desperately vile job of altering the Human Historical Record. The chief drive of this effete anti-intellectual intellectual movement (begun by Croce and Gentile, Italian educators, who longed for a return to the lovey courts of the Ceasars) was Anti-Communism. Simply: Fascism is Anti-Communism, hence Communism is Anti-Fascism.

This is from whence comes our preoccupation here at CM/P with Anti-Fascism in the defense of Peace, and Truth and Justice in History. –mc]

{{And as an extra treat, we have added a Communiqué from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation on these very crucial subjects: Fascism and the devaluation of Human History and Human Life. —mc}}

*************************

Communist Party of Greece - [13 May 2010] Message to the National Committee
of CP, USA

Communist Party USA,
National Committee,
New York
Athens, Thursday, 13 May 2010

Dear comrades,

We would like to thank you for the information regarding your 29th party convention and to extend our greetings to the delegates. Our parties have met in the past in common struggles for workers' rights, in the struggle against anti-communism, for the defense of socialism and the Soviet Union, for the unity of the communist movement on the basis of our revolutionary principles and traditions.

We are following as closely as we can the developments in the USA, the escalation of the aggression of US imperialism which lately has become quite obvious. The US is striving to respond to the trend of losing ground within the framework of the imperialist system by inciting regional tensions and conflicts, so that it can take advantage of its political and military supremacy in order to safeguard its interests and maintain its spheres of influence.

In Greece, the working class and the popular strata are facing a barbaric attack, on the pretext of the economic crisis; an attack which has been jointly unleashed by the social democratic PASOK government, the EU and the IMF, with the assistance of the conservative ND party and the open support of the nationalist LAOS party.

The remarkable resistance presented by the labor and popular movements is spearheaded by KKE which continually strives to reveal the real cause of the crisis, the sharpening of the basic contradictions of capitalism. Without the consistent exposure of the compromised and discredited in the eyes of the workers trade union leaderships of GSEE and ADEDY (the national confederations of the private and public sectors, respectively), without the decisive contribution of PAME (All Workers' Militant Front), the national trade union front comprised of class oriented Federations, trade unions,
labor centers and trade unionists, the labor movement in our country would have been disarmed, unprepared, and unable to fight back.

KKE calls upon the working class, the self-employed, the poor farmers, and the youth to engage in even stronger, more massive and organized actions in order to stave off the onslaught and pave the way for a different path ofdevelopment. There can be no way other than the nationalization of the monopolies. The working class must take possession of the concentrated means of production and mobilize them with central planning and popular participation. This presupposes a struggle aiming for people's power, for socialism-communism.

The fightback against anti-communism, the adamant defense of the historical contribution of the Soviet Union and socialist construction in the 20th
century, of the identity and revolutionary traditions of the communist movement, take on particular importance today.

As long as the crisis of the international communist movement persists, as long as the situation does not improve and retreats from ideological and
theoretical principles are not resolutely confronted, as long as the front against opportunist views that hinder the formation of a single revolutionary strategy against imperialism does not become strengthened, the situation will harbor the danger of an even greater backslide.

The existence of strong Communist Parties, steadfast to the principles of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism, with a revolutionary
program for the overthrow of the rule of monopolies, for building socialism-communism, is the foremost demand of our times.

We look forward to learning the conclusions and the resolutions of your convention.

With comradely greetings

The Central Committee of KKE

**************************

**The Communiqué from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation**


The International Scientific Conference "For historical truth and truthful reflection of the epoch" was held in Moscow.

The participants of the Conference are all convinced that the 65 years that have passed since the Victory Day over Nazi Germany have not dimmed the importance of feat of the world peoples, who managed to defend their freedom and independence, to rebuff the deadly threat to all humanity. Therefore, attempts to distort the history of the Second World War are simply disgusting.

Among manifestations of such efforts are the resolutions of the Council of Europe, of the OSCE, and of European Parliament, in which the socio-political systems of Hitler's Germany and the Soviet Union have been put in the same league. The regime that brought enslavement and death to the population of the planet is announced to be identical with the social system, which, under the historical conditions existing at the time, played main role in the victory over Nazi Germany and its allies. Fascism was born from capitalism and imperialism. This is the truth. School textbooks and manuals, pseudo-historical writings and mass media materials, in every way, exaggerate the importance of the Anglo-American troops in liberating Europe from fascism, and belittle, even deny, the liberative mission of the Red Army. The Resistance Movement is being deliberately forgotten, as is the important role of the communists and anti-fascists in the armed struggle against the occupation forces of the Hitler coalition.

Now, as before, the falsification of history is carried out by imperialism under the pretext of political considerations. Being concerned about the possible political and social consequences of the current economic crisis, the establishments of some countries tend to discredit the socialist alternative, to slander the Soviet Union and the communists around the world, in an attempt to erase the value of their decisive contribution to the victory over the mortal enemy of mankind - fascism.

Protesting against the falsification of history, the Conference participants call for an effective advocacy of the truth about the history of World War II, in schools and universities, in textbooks and other printed publications, in oral presentations in the media and materials that are distributed over the Internet. An intensification of such efforts is needed in order to clear the public consciousness, especially the consciousness of the younger generation, from the poison of false, anti-historical propaganda, to put the world’s people wise to the authentic causes and nature of the Second World War, of those, who were the true winners of the war.

Fifty scientists and politicians from 21 countries, as well as representatives from international organizations like the WPC, FIR and WIDF, took part in the Conference, which was organized and hosted by the CPRF.


International Department of the CPRF Central Committee