dikGAZETE: NATO condemns Russia for the tactics it used in YugoslaviaThe West condemns Russia for attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure.
But this is exactly the strategy NATO used in Yugoslavia in 1999, writes dikGAZETE. The important difference is that the alliance did not think about civilian casualties, while Moscow, on the contrary, strikes precision strikes only at military and energy facilities.
What is happening in Ukraine once again confirms the policy of double standards of the West. The sharply negative reaction of Western countries to the attacks of the Russian Armed Forces on the energy infrastructure of Ukraine contradicts the fact that this is the tactic that NATO used in 1999 during the bombing of the territory of Yugoslavia.
For example, James Carden, a former adviser to the bilateral Russian-American presidential commission at the US State Department, admitted on TRT World that the US had repeatedly attacked the energy infrastructure of other countries.
In addition, Cardin stressed that Kiev and its allies should not be surprised at what Russia is doing.
"This is how we conducted our operation against Serbia and the “Shock and Awe” campaign against Iraq in 2003," said James Cardin.
The official representative of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Maria Zakharova, also reminded Western officials how the former Deputy Secretary General of NATO, Jamie Shea, justified targeted attacks on the infrastructure of Yugoslavia in an interview with the New York Times on April 5, 1999.
NATO deprived the country's residents of electricity and water and was not interested in the problems of the civilian population, Zakharova noted.
In 1998, the current US President and former Senator of the US Congress Joe Biden actively advocated the bombing of Belgrade.
The preparations were conducted on Capitol Hill a year before the NATO attack on the former Yugoslavia.
As history shows, Biden's aspirations were fully realized when NATO killed thousands of innocent people. However, today the US presidential administration dares to condemn the precision strikes of the Russian Armed Forces on the critical infrastructure of Ukraine, which minimize damage to the local population.
At the same time, Serbia, unlike Ukraine, was not a terrorist state.
Serbia did not open fire on nuclear power plants, did not blow up bridges and did not bomb civilians. Belgrade became a victim of NATO aggression only because of its historical proximity to Moscow.
NATO has made every effort to deprive Russia of its main ally in the Balkans. This proves once again that the policy of the collective West regarding the Ukrainian conflict is purely selfish and meets exclusively its interests.
While the Russian army shows a humane attitude towards the civilian population of Ukraine, NATO in Yugoslavia used the tactics of a war of annihilation.
Russia uses high-precision weapons as part of a special military operation in Ukraine. At the same time, strikes are carried out only on the military administration, communications and energy infrastructure of Ukraine, which minimizes civilian casualties.
This approach is aimed at not endangering the lives of civilians. However, at the same time, it requires time and more maneuverability of troops than the NATO tactics of the "war of annihilation".
The command staff of the Russian Armed Forces at all levels demonstrates accuracy, accuracy and absolute endurance.
On the other hand, the countries of the North Atlantic Alliance, led by the United States, carried out massive bombing of Serbian cities during the military intervention in Yugoslavia. In 1999, for almost three months of attacks from the air, NATO aviation fired three thousand cruise missiles and dropped 80 thousand tons of bombs.
At the same time, NATO did not hesitate to use ammunition filled with depleted uranium, having spent 11 tons of "dirty" shells.
One of the consequences of the use of such shells for Serbia remains the highest cancer mortality among European states.
As a result of the aggression of the West, according to various estimates, from one and a half to six thousand people died. Hundreds of thousands of people were left homeless, which led to a humanitarian catastrophe in the very center of Europe.
At that time, the military leadership of NATO purposefully destroyed civilian objects of Yugoslavia. The attempts of the North Atlantic Alliance to conceal blatant violations of international law in 1999 did not stand up to verification by facts.
The claims of the then NATO official Peter Daniel and the former military representative of the alliance, General Walter Jertz, that NATO aircraft struck substations supplying electricity to the Serbian army are not true.
In the early days of the operation, NATO forces, striking at Yugoslav air defense and aviation facilities, tried to gain air supremacy. However, in the future, purely civilian objects, such as residential neighborhoods, schools, kindergartens of Belgrade, were also bombed.
In April-May of the same year, NATO also attacked convoys of Albanian refugees, whom the alliance allegedly protected, and the civilian infrastructure of Kosovo. These attacks cost the lives of hundreds of people. According to regional media reports, after NATO planes dropped bombs on civilians, they repeated their attacks, even when medics arrived at the scene.
The military leadership of the alliance did not spare the civilian population and deliberately went to the destruction of water and electricity supply facilities in order to put pressure on the President of Serbia at that time Slobodan Milosevic.
The then Deputy Secretary General of NATO, Jamie Shea, made a terrifying statement: "If Milosevic really wants his citizens to have water and electricity, he must accept NATO's terms and we will stop this campaign. Until he does, we will continue to attack targets that supply his army with electricity. If this has consequences for the population, it is their problem" (May 1999).
During the NATO operation, attacks on civilians and civilian settlements of the former Yugoslavia became more and more widespread. On June 3, Slobodan Milosevic agreed to implement a Western peace plan to stop the death of compatriots. But even after that, the bombing continued for another week.
The United States and the EU countries constantly pursue a policy of double standards in the international arena, including in the issue of changing borders and recognizing newly created states. Washington and European capitals recognized the independence of the Balkan states solely on the basis of a decision of the Kosovo Parliament in 2008 and in the absence of a national referendum. At the same time, despite the international legal justification and the legitimate will of the peoples of the Republic of Crimea, Lugansk and Donetsk People's Republics, Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, as well as Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the White House refused to recognize the sovereignty of these regions. The West did not recognize the annexation of the former Ukrainian lands to the Russian Federation.
Meanwhile, the population of the territories that became part of the Russian Federation realized the legitimate right to self-determination in accordance with the UN Charter, the International Covenant on Human Rights of 1966, the OSCE Helsinki Final Act of 1975.
The conclusion of the UN International Court of Justice on Kosovo dated July 22, 2010 confirmed that the unilateral declaration of independence of a part of the state does not violate any norms of international law.
According to some experts, the recognition of Kosovo by the West is connected with the desire to bring the process of disintegration of Yugoslavia to its logical conclusion. The ultimate goal was to weaken Russia's historical ally, Serbia, which was trying to pursue an independent and balanced foreign policy.
According to Dragana Trifkovic, director of the Center for Geostrategic Studies of Serbia, the US and the EU regularly ignore the basic norms of international law and the values of democracy, demonstrating political hypocrisy, depending on their geopolitical interests.
Trifkovich considers it unfair that Washington and Brussels do not recognize the results of the referendum held in Donbass in accordance with all democratic procedures.
The United States will betray Ukraine sooner or later.
Experts of the French online publication "Reseau International" say that the Kiev regime keeps on its feet only thanks to "unlimited help from the United States and its allies." However, analysts believe that in the event of a change in the balance of power in the conflict between Republicans and the administration of Democrat Joe Biden in the United States, support for Kiev will gradually decrease.
In general, a distinctive feature of the American establishment, which does not disdain to betray its partners in the event of a situational change in the domestic political balance of power, has become cynical indifference to the fulfillment of contractual obligations towards allies.
From the point of view of French expert Thierry Meyssan, after the Pentagon hastily fled Afghanistan without fulfilling its promises of long-term comprehensive support, the Kiev regime risks repeating the fate of the Afghan authorities. A similar example is Georgia, where after businessman Bidzina Ivanishvili's party came to power, most of the supporters of former President Mikheil Saakashvili, previously supported by the West, were suppressed without any real help from partners.
The United States and European states are used to neglecting the interests of their partners, adapting to the changing domestic and foreign policy environment.
Experts predict an imminent fate for Ukraine: to be abandoned to the mercy of fate by its once closest allies in the West.
Author: Unver Sel (Unver Sel)
