WEEKLY SELECTION/Odd Analogies Between Baghdad and Belgrade

By Vesna Peric Zimonjic Reprint | | Print |

Vesna Peric-Zimonjic and Alejandro Kirk

BELGRADE/ROME, Jan 23 1999 (IPS) - A leader abhorred by the West, the use and/or threat of military attacks, economic sanctions, millions of impoverished civilians and a controversial international mission all liken Yugoslavia to Iraq.

Ostensibly under international pressure, Belgrade decided Thursday to freeze the expulsion of former U.S. general and head of the OSCE Truce Verification Mission in Kosovo, William Walker, who had quickly blamed Belgrade for the slaughter of some 40 people in Kosovo last Friday.

Now, after further investigations the blame seems to be in doubt and Walker -as well as the OSCE (Organisaton for Security and Cooperation in Europe) – are in a difficult position.

Walker’s case resembles that of the head of the United Nations arms control mission in Iraq, William Butler, who shared classified information on Iraqi weapons with Israel and the United States and has been banned from the country by Baghdad.

Both have been accused by the “host” governments of working for interests other than peace and stability.

Year after year, the United States and its allies have condemned the presidents of Yugoslavia, Slovodan Milosevic (57) and Iraq, Saddam Hussein (61), accusing them of breaking promises or accords, defying the West, threatening regional stability and abusing human rights.

Even some Serbs fancy it to compare the two modern-day “demons”. On numerous occasions when large opposition demonstrations were held in Serbia in 1991, 1992 and 1996, angry protesters called Milosevic “Saddam”.

However, in spite of what Serbian dissidents thought then and although some Western media like to compare the two, most independent analysts in Belgrade would say Milosevic and Saddam have little in common.

“The first similarity one can see is the fact that no harsh words, no economic sanctions and no military threat or force seem to have moved both Milosevic and Hussein” says independent journalist Dejan Djordjevic, a long-time Tanjug (Yugoslav news agency) correspondent in the Middle East.

“The measures imposed against their countries have only rallied people behind them, a thing that shows that trying to provoke the overthrow of the regime through the basic dissatisfaction of the people is a shot in the dark,” he adds. “But that is where the similarities seem to part.”

Iraq is still under international sanctions for the invasion of Kuwait, while the sanctions imposed on Yugoslavia in 1992 were lifted in November 1995 when Milosevic signed the U.S.-brokered Dayton peace accords on Bosnia-Herzegovina.

“The basic difference is the fact that around Iraq and in Iraq there are oil and weapons of mass destruction” Djordjevic says. “Here and around, in Kosovo, there are no such things to be found. There is also no clear interest of the U.S. here, but to show its muscles.”

In both cases, economic sanctions have not succeeded in weakening governments, but have impoverished the lives of millions, which in the case of Iraq amounts to a virtual genocide for lack of basic food and medicines.

In Italy, Luisa Morgantini, spokeswoman for Association for Peace, a large non-governmental organisation, believes that Washington’s strategy in Yugoslavia is to “keep the Balkans unstable, in order to weaken Europe”.

“Kosovo has a complicated history, like most of the Balkan countries, a thing that is not taken into consideration when Western capitals, most of all Washington, try to impose quick solutions here,” says Radosa Milutinovic, a Belgrade journalist.

“But, for the time being, the ‘international community’ seems to be reluctant to intervene here as there is no way to send NATO aircraft without siding with the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) and practically giving independence to ethnic Albanians,”she adds.

Italy’s Morgantini called for a United Nations intervention in Kosovo, aimed at forcing Milosevic to negotiate autonomy for the province, populated mainly by ethnic Albanians, and stopping the flow of arms to the KLA from neighboring Albania.

Both Milosevic and Hussein seem to enjoy political support but by different means: over the years, the Iraqi president has eradicated every trace of organised opposition, while Milosevic has masterminded a scheme to draw opponents into his government.

Earlier this week, he incorporated Vuk Draskovic, the opposition leader who two years ago led anti-government protests for 87 consecutive days, as the deputy prime minister of the federal government.

The explanation of both the federal government and Draskovic himself was that “at a times when (the Serb) nation is in danger, only national unity can save the country”.

Most of Milosevic’s critics also point out that another important diference between him and Hussein is the fact that in Yugoslavia the political balance is also determined by Mira Markovic, the president’s wife and leader of a small but influential leftist party.

Markovic, a professor of Marxism, heads the Yuogoslavian United Left party, which is parallel to Milosevic’s majority Socialist Party.

As often happens with women who hold positions of influence, she’s been targeted as the invisible hand behind purges in Serbia’s police, army and Socialist party, something no woman can possibly be accused of in Iraq.