Debate: how could the left back the Kosovars?
Labour Left Briefing, July 19991990sTranscribed by hand from the printed page.
Alan Thornett probes the effectiveness of the anti-war movement and the role of the left within it. He argues it was weaker because it did not embrace Kosovar national rights and unambiguously oppose ethnic cleansing.
In truth the mobilisations were small given the scale of the war, and were unable to exert an influence on its outcome. This reflected the success of NATO propaganda, the politics of the anti-war movement, and the role of the left. A section of the left, exemplified by Ken Livingstone, disgracefully supported the war. Of those on the left who opposed the war, most failed to understand that there were two wars taking place – the bombing of Serbia by NATO and the ethnic war against the Kosovar Albanians by Milosevic. Although this was intensified by the NATO bombing it was not started by it.
The nationally recognised campaign against the war was the Committee for Peace in the Balkans which had existed since the Bosnian war. Then it opposed the right of the Bosnians to independece, and even denied, or minimised, many of the atrocities committed by the Serbian military. Now it (rightly) opposed the bombing but set its face against the aspirations of Kosovan independence.
This stance shaped the politics of the anti-war movement, at least at national level. There was little mention of the rights of the Kosovars, even ethnic cleansing took a back seat. Yet most potential opponents of the war, beyond the ranks of the organised left, strongly opposed Milosevic's "ethnic cleansing", and stayed away once they perceived the pro-Serb bias of the movement – even those who did not see NATO as a solution. Consequently the demonstrations were comprised largely of the hard-left and sections of the Serb community including contingents of Serb nationalists who militantly opposed Kosovan self-determination.
This was compounded when the biggest far-left organisation, working within the campaign, the SWP, fell in behind the politics of the Committee. It led to the bizarre situations where Serb nationalists were happy to carry SWP placards (saying stop the bombing and NATO out) while chanting anti-Kosovan slogans. On one anti-war demonstration those carrying placards supporting self-determination for Kosova were subjected to the continuous chant of "Kosovo is Serbian" from Serb nationalists carrying SWP placards. It became normal for anyone defending the Kosovar Albanians to be intimidated by Serb nationalists. Even giving out a leaflet with the Albanian spelling of Kosova could invoke a challenge. Not that Serbs nationalists should have been excluded from the demonstrations, but to maximise them it was necessary to get the balance right between opposition to NATO and the rights of the Kosovars.
Of course the SWP cannot be responsible for who carries their placards. But they failed to distinguish themselves politically and publicly from Serb nationalism. Their opposition to Milosevic did not resolve the problem since the real divide was any mention of the rights of the Kosovars.
On the first national demonstrations Kosovar Albanians were barracked by most of those on them and treated as the enemy. These were the very people who have been ethnically cleansed by Milosevic! They were completely wrong to support the NATO intervention, as most of them did, but it was understandable after years of persecution by Milosevic.
Those rejecting self determination for the Kosovars also had no solution to the war since there was, and is, no answer to conflict in the Balkans without a solution to the national question. Consequently some resorted to a "UN solution", others to abstract appeals for "peace", a future socialist society, or to workers unity across the Balkans.
The anti-war movement did not take a position on the arming of the KLA of course, although this was an important debate. Many of us argued that they should have been armed. This did not imply any political support for them. Socialists should never support nationalism as an ideology. What we supported was the right of the Kosovars to defend themselves and pursue their choice of independence. In any case the KLA, with all its problems, does not have a single political character and can best be described as a national liberation movement in formation.
So what "solution" has now been reached? For Milosevic Kosova remains a part of Serbia, the multi-national force moving into Kosova is nominally under UN auspices, and the KLA is being disarmed. Previously unacceptable conditions, such as the right of NATO access to any part of Serbia, have been removed. NATO, on the other hand can claim victory – messy as it may have been – with some justification. NATO held together during the bombing, and has secured its new role as an offensive force. US imperialism and its main allies such as New Labour in Britain have been greatly strengthened. For Kosova, it is now under NATO occupation and yet another solution is to be tried which fails to resolve the underlying political problem.