|
|
|
|
Conflict Update: Iraq, Kosovo, Ethiopia-Eritrea Shooting conflicts were underway in several parts of the world in mid-February, 1999, while prolonged efforts to negotiate a peaceful settlement in the Serb province of Kosovo reached a stalemate. By GSReport Start Date: 2/25/99 With little fanfare and limited press, American and British warplanes continue to attack military installations in the northern and southern no-fly zones of Iraq on an almost daily basis. The aerial pounding, ostensibly provoked by Saddam Hussein's stated intention to no longer submit to Allied overflights of Iraqi territory, has succeeded in inflicting far more military damage, with far fewer political repercussions, than was accomplished during the four days of intensive Allied bombing last December. In one instance, on February 24, American planes reportedly dropped bombs very close to the southern outskirts of Baghdad. Iraqi sources claimed the planes crossed north of the 33rd parallel which demarcates the boundary of the southern no-fly zone and fired "new guided projectiles" which reportedly hit a civilian site, killing and wounding several people. Iraq termed this incursion a "grave escalation" of hostilities. But General Henry Shelton, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the report was erroneous, adding that there were no plans "at this point" to cross the no-fly boundaries. The Iraqi leadership has berated its Arab neighbors and the international community for what they see as complicity in the continuing attacks. "It's a shame the escalation can occur in this war of Anglo-American aggression against Iraq without a move from international organizations and those which moan about international law," read an editorial in Babel, Iraq's most influential daily newspaper. "We ask those responsible in Arab countries -- Is it really possible to call what American and British planes are undertaking 'international monitoring'?" asked another editorial in the official Baath party newspaper al-Thawra. In recent days, Iraq has suffered the further humiliation of an actual ground invasion of Turkish military forces. The Turkish action was not aimed at the Iraqi regime but instead targeted revolutionary Kurdish elements active in the border area between the two nations. Turkey is cracking down hard on Kurdish militants following the capture of rebel leader Abdullah Ocalan on February 15. Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tareq Aziz, who was actually in Turkey on a state visit at the time of Ocalan's capture, has appealed without success for Turkey to withdraw its forces from Iraqi territory. In a letter to U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan on February 24, Aziz wrote, "The U.N. should shoulder its responsibility and prevent the continuous (Turkish) threat and aggression against Iraq... We urge you... to call on the Turkish government to withdraw its armed forces immediately from northern Iraq." There was no immediate reply from Annan. The incursion is especially irritating because Turkey's Incirlik air base is also the staging area for British and American air patrols over Iraq's northern no-fly zone. In the view of GSReport, the international community is tacitly signaling that the days of Saddam's regime are numbered. Daily U.S. and British bombings, Turkish ground incursions, and the pleadings and complaints of Iraqi officials are met with deafening silence in recent days, even from those nations which have traditionally given Iraq the benefit of the doubt, such as Russia and France. Meanwhile, after seventeen grueling days, including several extensions of a deadline for settlement, the Kosovo peace talks in Rambouillet, France were "suspended" on February 23 with only vague pledges to keep the fragile cease-fire in place and to reconvene on March 15 for another, hopefully final round. In the aftermath, participants worked bravely to put a positive spin on a decidely disappointing outcome. "This is the beginning of the successful end for solving the Kosovo issue," said Rame Buja, an Albanian delegate and member of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). Similar sentiments were heard all around, but they rang decidely hollow. Realistically, the suspension and call for renewed talks in March was the only alternative to NATO bombing of Serbian targets. NATO and U.S. President Clinton had repeatedly warned that continued stonewalling on the part of the Serb Yugoslav delegation would result in the use of force. But in the end, the Serbs did not yield, and NATO has not (yet) bombed. In some circles, this was seen as a sign that NATO does not have the will to carry through on its stated threats. And now, there is a very real fear the Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic will view this apparent lack of resolve as a sign that he can crack down hard on Kosovo's ethnic Albanian separatist elements in advance of the March 15 deadline for new talks. Within hours of the suspension at Rambouillet, rumors began that Serb troops were moving toward Kosovo. Scattered fighting was reported on February 25, despite assurances that the cease-fire remains in place. Milosevic has proven himself a brutal and untrustworthy opportunist in the past, and there is no reason to believe he will not take advantage of NATO's ambivalence if he thinks he can. He will risk his own troops and the ire of the international community -- he might even risk air strikes on Belgrade -- if he thinks he can inflict a fatal blow to the KLA now. NATO Secretary General Javier Solana on February 25 warned Milosevic against taking any such action. "I want to make very clear that if the Serbs take advantage of this opportunity that we are giving (and try) to destroy peace, we will not tolerate that," Solana said. Canadian Brig. General Michel Maisonneuve of the Kosovo Verification Mission said the situation on the ground was "extremely, extremely tense." While the world waits to see if fighting will again erupt in Kosovo, bombs and bullets keep flying in the disputed border region between Ethiopia and Eritrea. The four days ending February 25 saw the fiercest fighting since hostilities resumed on February 6. Aircraft on both sides have reportedly been shot down. Eritrea fought a 30-year civil war with Ethiopia before winning independence in 1993. Since then, there have been numerous skirmishes along the 620-mile border, parts of which were never clearly demarcated. Both countries are desperately impoverished, yet continue to spend tens of millions of dollars on high-tech weapons. A recent U.N. resolution called for an immediate cessation of hostilities and an international ban on weapons sales to the region. Remarkably, just last year, Ethiopia and Eritrea were hailed as leaders of an African renaissance for rebuilding their countries after decades of civil war. Now that enthusiastic picture seems like a mirage. Meanwhile, there are fears that the new round of fighting could spread into neighboring countries. Somalia, to the east of Ethiopia, barely qualifies as an organized nation after being devasted by civil war earlier in this decade. Now in the fragile first stages of reconstruction, Somalia remains vulnerable to the ambitions of powerful local warlords who can and do acquire weapons from both Ethiopian and Eritrean sources. And to Ethiopia's west, the nation of Sudan remains mired in a 15-year civil war. The central government in Khartoum apparently sees profit in the renewed fighting between Ethiopia and Eritrea. For the cost of some diplomatic sweet-talk, Khartoum can count on Ethiopia to provide much needed weapons reinforcements and other aid. "This is a windfall gain for the Khartoum government," says Moustapha Hassouna, a writer on African affairs. And while the bullets fly, there is concern that some 1.5 million people in the region face the prospect of starvation. Tens of thousands in Somalia, Sudan and Ethiopia have already met that drastic fate in recent years. The fighting continues.
Built by Frontier on a Macintosh on 6/17/00; 11:57:21 AM. Web Comments  -
Produced by Larry LoweServed 1449 times since 2/25/99. |
|
