The transformation of security

1.1 The transformation of security

1.1.1 Source: by Michael Renner, Worldwatch

For 50 years, sustained by the cold war, "security" has been defined primarily in military terms. Backed by doomsday nuclear arsenals, the cold war adversaries were locked in mortal competition.

But now that the cold war has faded away, a very different struggle for survival is emerging. After the slaying of the cold war dragon, James Woolsey, former head of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, compared the future to living in a jungle inhabited by a bewildering variety of poisonous snakes. There has been a shift from war between sovereign states to fighting within societies.

Since the end of World War II, there have been at least 130 wars, killing more than 23 million people directly and another 20 million through famine and other war-related disruptions. Whereas the number of major wars--killing at least 1,000 persons--stood at around a dozen in any given year during the fifties, and rose no higher than 20 a year during the sixties and seventies, it surged at the beginning of the eighties to more than 30, where it has remained ever since.

And as many countries may be bordering on war as are actually engaged in it. The post-cold war era is increasingly witnessing a phenomenon of what some have called "failed states"--the implosion of countries like Rwanda, Somalia, Yugoslavia, and others. Several other countries are among the ranks of what Professor James Rosenau of George Washington University calls "adrift nation-states"--countries that "have lost their moorings and may well be moving toward the edge of failure."

The outbreak of civil wars and the collapse of entire societies is being ascribed to the resurfacing of "ancient ethnic hatreds" revolving around seemingly irreconcilable religious and cultural differences. Professor Samuel Huntington of Harvard University went so far as to postulate a coming "clash of civilizations"--ethnically motivated communal violence. Some 40 percent of all countries have populations from five or more different "nations." Roughly half of the world's countries have experienced some kind of interethnic strife in recent years.

Bosnia, Rwanda, and Somalia have shown that the abundance and easy availability of arms can turn social and political upheaval into a violent disintegration of entire countries, triggering devastation on a massive scale. Although the public impression of the Rwandan conflict, for example, is mainly one of machete-wielding individuals on a rampage, the killing was in fact also conducted with machine guns, grenades, mortars, and land mines purchased from France, Egypt, South Africa, and another dozen or so arms suppliers that rushed in "like vultures to a carcass," as Stephen Goose and Frank Smyth of the Human Rights Watch Arms Project wrote in Foreign Affairs.

The twentieth century has seen the pursuit of "national security" elevated to near theological levels; modern military technology has dramatically increased the destructive power of weaponry, the range and speed of delivery vehicles, and the sophistication of targeting technologies. Yet arms ostensibly designed to enhance security increasingly imperil humanity's survival. We live in what is the most violent time in human history: the twentieth century accounts for 75 percent of all war deaths inflicted since the rise of the Roman Empire

1.2 Wars Rage in Third of World Nations

1.2.1 Source: Tom Raum, Associated Press

1.2.1.1 Date: January 1, 1999

WASHINGTON –– The century came to a close with a third of the world's 193 nations embroiled in conflict, nearly twice the Cold War level, a group that keeps track of battle zones reported Wednesday.

In its annual report, the National Defense Council Foundation blamed rising military coups and a backlash against democracy, a trend it suggested could continue for several years.

The foundation listed 65 conflicts in 1999, up from 60 the year before. It nominated Afghanistan as the world's most unstable state for 2000 – followed closely by Somalia, Iraq, Angola and the breakaway Chechnya region of Russia.

"It's going to be a very tough next 20 years," retired Army Maj. Andy Messing Jr., executive director of the Alexandria, Va.-based foundation, said in an interview. He said the growing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and an increasing world population add to the danger.

"The bipolar 'Cold War' system has disintegrated into a system of 'Warm Wars,' with randomized conflicts popping up in all corners of an interdependent world," the report said.

It cited a recent erosion of democratic advances, including military coups in Guinea-Bissau, Pakistan, Niger and Comoros and a slide back toward authoritarianism in Venezuela, Russia and Haiti. The list included cross-border wars, such as between Ethiopia and Eritrea; and civil wars such as those in Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo. It also included major insurgencies.

Russia made the list because of separatist wars in Chechnya and its neighbor to the east, Dagestan, terrorism and organized crime activity. China was included based on "political turmoil," the Beijing government's crackdown on religious dissidents and tensions over Taiwan and the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. Kosovo and East Timor, where international military intervention was used to end internal violence and human-rights violations, were among places added to the list.

1.3 War criminal or hero?

1.3.1 Source: By Charley Reese, The Orlando Sentinel

1.3.1.1 Date: December 1999

Atomic Blast It has been 54 years since the first atomic bomb fell from the belly of a B-29 and destroyed most of Hiroshima, a city in southwest Honshu, the most populous of Japan's islands.

The single bomb killed 118,661 people. It severely injured 30,524. It less severely injured 48,606. And that bomb, compared with today's hydrogen bombs lying about here and there, was a hand grenade.

I bring this up in part to put the current day's propaganda into some perspective. Serbia, for example, was accused of "genocide" at a time when only 2,000 people, both Serb and Albanian, had been killed in a little civil war during a two-year period in an obscure Balkan province. That's 2,000 in two years compared with 118,000 in a fraction of a minute. But guess who's getting called war criminals.

I'm opposed to so-called war crimes. Only the winners get to decide who is a war criminal, and the "criminals" are, of course, all on the losing side.

It is one of the more heinous perversions of language and morality to purport that killing unarmed civilians with rifles is a war crime but that killing the same unarmed civilians with a bomb or an artillery shell is just "collateral damage."

Nearly all of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki victims, not to mention all those who died in the Tokyo firestorm we started, were unarmed civilians--old men, women, children, babies. We knew that at the time we killed them. But because we won the war, we were not declared war criminals or terrorists.

So whether one is a war criminal or a war hero depends on whether one is on the winning or the losing side. War itself is a crime against humanity just like Ernest Hemingway said. If war comes, you have to fight it, but you don't have to lie about what you are doing.

I suspect that, given the low caliber of public officials and the apparent consensus that the American government should pursue an imperialistic foreign policy, there is another war waiting for us somewhere down the road. There is no use kidding ourselves that a U.S. attempt to dominate the world won't meet with resistance. This war won't be one of those easy muggings of a small country but a war that will teach a new generation of Americans what war really is.

1.4 100 million dead this centrury

1.4.1 Source: Awake!

1.4.1.1 Date: December 1999

At the Imperial War Museum in London, England, visitors are intrigued by a unique clock and digital counter. This clock does not keep time. Its purpose is to help people grasp the magnitude of a central feature of this century--war. As the hand of the clock rotates, the counter adds another number to its tally every 3.31 seconds. Each number represents a man, woman or child who has died as a result of war during the 20th century.

At midnight on December 31, 1999, the counting will end and it will register 100 million, a conservative estimate of the number of those who have died in war during the past 100 years.

Imagine, 100 million people! Yet that statistic reveals nothing about the terrors and pain experienced by the victims. Neither does it describe the suffering of the loved ones of those who died--the countless millions of mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers, widows and orphans. What the statistic does tell us is this: Ours has been by far the most destructive century in all human history; its savagery is unparalleled.

The history of the 20th century also shows to what extent humans have become expert in the craft of killing. Throughout history the development of new weapons went slowly until the 20th century, which has produced an avalanche of weapons. When the first world war began in 1914, the armies of Europe included men on horseback, armed with lances. Today, with the help of satellite sensors and computerized guidance systems, missiles can deliver death to any part of the Earth, with astonishing accuracy. The intervening years have seen the development and perfecting of guns, tanks, submarines, warplanes, biological and chemical weapons, and, of course, "the bomb."

When the Cold War ended in 1989, many expressed confidence in a peaceful world order. Still, war continued. During the next seven years, an estimated 101 conflicts raged in various places. Most were wars not between states but within states. They were fought by opposing groups with unsophisticated weapons. In Rwanda, for example, much of the killing was done with machetes.

Meanwhile, in the rich nations of the world, high-tech weapon development continues apace. Sensors--whether deployed in the air, in space, in the ocean, or on the ground--enable a modern army to see more quickly and clearly than ever before, even in difficult terrain such as jungles. As the new technologies are perfected and integrated, "distance warfare" moves toward reality, enabling an army to see everything, hit everything, and destroy much that an enemy has.

In considering the prospect of future war, we should not forget the menacing presence of nuclear weapons. The Futurist magazine predicts: "The continuing proliferation of atomic weapons makes it increasingly likely that we shall have one or more atomic wars within the next 30 years. In addition, atomic weapons may be used by terrorists."

What has frustrated efforts to achieve global peace? An obvious factor is that the human family is fragmented into nations and cultures that distrust, hate or fear one another. There are conflicting values, perceptions and goals. Furthermore, use of military power has for millenniums been seen as a legitimate way to pursue national interests. After acknowledging this situation, a report from the Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College stated: "To many, this implied that peace would only come with world government."

1.5 Russia warned that it can overwhelm any anti-ballistic missile system

1.5.1 Source: Yahoo!

1.5.1.1 Date: Oct 26,1999

Moscow warned the United States Monday that it has enough weapons to overwhelm any anti-ballistic missile system, and threatened to deploy more atomic warheads if Washington builds a national missile defense system, Reuters quoted the Washington Post report. Nikolai Mikhailov, first deputy defense minister, told the Post the technology was available and would be used if ``the United States pushes us toward it.'' His comments followed last week's meeting between Russian and U.S. officials to discuss possible amendments to the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM).

Russia's key method of trying to overcome any missile defenses would be to deploy more nuclear warheads atop its missiles, in the calculation that it could outnumber and penetrate any defensive shield, the Post said. Mikhailov gave few specifics, but said Russia could target any ABM facility with a nuclear warhead.

1.6 Is Russia planning Mideast attack?

1.6.1 Source: Joseph Farah, WorldNetDaily.com

1.6.1.1 Date: September 1, 1999

Joseph de Courcy, editor of the well-respected journal Intelligence Digest reports this week: "While NATO congratulates itself on bombing the Serbs into submission, Israel's Mossad and other Middle Eastern intelligence sources have discovered that Kosovo was one humiliation too many for Russia. Now Moscow has agreed to back Saddam's secret plan of revenge. With this all-important Russian backing, Saddam is joining with hated Iran and Syria to launch one final war against Israel. Amazingly, Saddam will allow Iranian troops to cross Iraqi territory to join the attack on Israel. And to keep America from interfering, Moscow has given Osama bin Laden and other terrorists the means to attack American population centers with weapons of mass destruction. The threat is real ... and the implications terrifying. ..."

These are not the rantings of some self-proclaimed geo-strategic analyst. Joseph de Courcy is one of the most well-respected intelligence journalists in the world.

His report is nothing short of shocking. Yet it confirms and supports the research being done by WorldNetDaily's J.R. Nyquist, author of "Origins of the Fourth World War." I believe, based on trends obvious to anyone capable of picking up a daily newspaper today (online or off) that there is an excellent chance Russia and/or China may embark on a major military adventure before 2001.

Why? There is almost no chance America will be weaker militarily than it is right now during the remainder of the Clinton administration. We've hit rock bottom -- deliberately, because of the conscious policies of a president who is un-American to the core and who would sell out the memory of his own dead mother if he thought there were an opportunity for even momentary political gain.

Unless some equally unpatriotic, characterless leader hell-bent on national suicide is selected to be commander in chief, the military is bound to at least recover some ground lost during the last seven years.

Yeah, if there were ever an opportunity to surprise the U.S. when its defenses are down, this is it. Not since Pearl Harbor has America been less prepared for existing threats.

The Russians and the Chinese are not stupid. They can clearly see that they may never have a better chance than they have right now to strike a decisive blow to the United States -- a knockout punch from which we may never recover.

Any such designs would almost certainly include an adventure into the Middle East so that the oil fields could be secured, thus effectively shoring up sagging industrial economies for the long term and depriving what remains of the West from any hope of recovery.

1.7 Deaths in wars

1.7.1 Source: AP, The Independent, State Department, Center for Defense Information, CIA, World Almanac

The conflagration in former Yugoslavia and the tide of refugees it has created has become the focus of international media attention. But, away from the cameras, there are dozens of wars going on around the world today, and 30 million displaced people living on aid handouts as a result. Following is a list of death tolls or estimates in a sampling of conflicts fought in the 1990s:

Afghanistan: 2 million, 1979–1992. Soviet-backed coup put pro-Moscow regime in power, backed by more than 100,000 Soviet soldiers. Rebel groups drove the Soviets out and seized power, turning against each other. Civil war continues between Taliban militia and alliance of opposition forces.

Algeria: 75,000, 1992–98: An insurgency touched off when the army canceled elections the Islamic Salvation Front was poised to win. Algeria is getting its first civilian chief of state since 1965, but the election brought charges of fraud.

Argentina: 9,000–30,000, 1976–83: Death squads tortured and killed political opponents, many of whom disappeared, in the "dirty war" sparked by a military coup.

Bosnia: 250,000, 1991–95: Military conflict and civilian massacres following the breakup of Yugoslavia, settled with a U.S.-brokered peace deal.

Burundi: 150,000–250,000: 1993–99: Tutsis and Hutus have been fighting since the 1993 assassination by Tutsis of the first democratically elected president--a Hutu--and a coup in 1996 that brought a Tutsi government to power.

Chechnya: 18,000–100,000, 1994–96: Fighting between Russian soldiers and Chechen rebels, ending with Chechnya running its own affairs but no country recognizing its independence claim.

Colombia: 1,200 civilians, 1998: Thousands die yearly in violence perpetrated by drug traffickers, leftist rebels, right-wing paramilitary squads and wayward army soldiers in a decades-long struggle. The country's ombudsman says civilian massacres rose 16 percent last year, to 1,200, and more than 300,000 people were displaced by violence.

Ethiopia-Eritrea: Unknown, 1998–99: A continuing border war, one of Africa's worst conflicts, with each country claiming to have killed tens of thousands of soldiers on the other side, but no reliable estimates.

Guatemala: 200,000, 1960–96: Civil war ended with peace agreement between leftist rebels and the government.

Israel-Palestinians: 125,000, 1948–1997: The Center for Defense Information's count since the establishment of Israel as a modern state.

Kosovo: 2,000, 1998: A death toll that has risen this year to unknown heights since Serbs intensified their ethnic purge of Kosovars and NATO started bombing to stop the repression. Mass graves have been reported in Kosovo. NATO has acknowledged bombing a passenger train and possibly a refugee convoy; Serbs said about 75 died as a result.

Liberia: 150,000, 1989–97: Civil war sparked by rebellion to oust ethnic dictatorship. Democratic government installed, but sporadic armed clashes have followed.

Northern Ireland: 3,250, 1968–1998: Street clashes between Catholic protesters and Protestant police, leading in 1970 to the start of bombings and shootings by the IRA and then random killings by Protestant groups.

Persian Gulf War: 4,500–350,000, 1991: The estimated civilian death toll from allied bombing has been put as low as 2,500 by U.S. officials and as high as 250,000 by Iraq. Estimates of Iraqi military deaths also vary widely, starting at about 1,500 and going up to 100,000. U.S. officials say 147 Americans died in action during Desert Storm bombing and ground campaign; 289 more died in accidents before and during the war and related Gulf operations since.

Rwanda: 500,000–1,000,000, 1994: A 90-day slaughter of Tutsis or moderate Hutus by soldiers, militia and others under the influence of the Hutu government, finally put down by Tutsi-led rebels.

Sierra Leone: 14,000, 1992–99: Continuing war between the Revolutionary United Front and the government, with the rebels backed by an ousted military junta and the government by a Nigerian-led intervention force.

Spain: 800, 1961–99: Basque separatists declared a truce six months ago in their armed campaign for independence, although it has come under strain following a police crackdown.

Sri Lanka: 57,000, 1983–99: Tamil rebels have been fighting the government for an independent homeland in the small island nation.

Sudan: 1.5 million, 1983–99. Rebels from the Christian and animist south have been fighting for autonomy from the Arab and Muslim north in a conflict marked by famine.

Turkey: 37,000, 1984–99: Kurdish rebels have been fighting for autonomy in southeast Turkey, using guerrilla bases in northern Iraq.

1.8 UK: Hackers seize military satellite

1.8.1 Source: Excite News

1.8.1.1 Date: Feb 28, 1999

Hackers have reportedly seized control of one of Britain's military communication satellites and issued blackmail threats, Reuters quoted The Sunday Business newspaper as reporting. The paper, quoting security sources, said the intruders altered the course of one of Britain's four satellites which are used by defense planners and military forces around the world.

"This is not just a case of computer nerds mucking about. This is very, very serious and the blackmail threat has made it even more serious," one security source said.

1.9 Making the world safe for hypocrisy

1.9.1 Source: Molly Ivins, Fort Worth Star-Telegram

This may be as good a time as any for a tour d'horizon of American hypocrisy about weapons around the world. During the Cold War, we became accustomed to the fact that America got in bed with what seemed to be every fascist kleptocrat on Earth. We were perennially arming monstrous dictators and backing tyrants who abused and stole from their own people.

All this was justified in the name of the great Realpolitik of stopping communism. Those of us who objected to arming nun-rapers and bishop-killers were patted on the head and told, tut-tut, it was all being done in the name of democracy, and the only dictator we needed to be upset about was Fidel Castro.

The Cold War has been over for almost nine years now. Some of the old dictators have died of natural causes: Mobutu Sese Seko, one of the most remarkable thieves we ever helped keep in power, is gone at last after three decades of raping his country.

But here we are with our knickers in a twist because India and Pakistan have just "joined the nuclear club" (such a curious euphemism). And who do you think helped get them there? We did, with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of arms sales. And now we're all concerned that India and Pakistan will go to war.

Ditto Cyprus, where peace talks are unraveling and the United States scrambles to sell jet fighters, tanks and missiles to both Turkey and Greece. Africa, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, Latin America, Central Asia, you name it--if there's a trouble spot in the world, we're busily profiting by selling arms to all sides.

According to Luke Warren of the Council for a Livable World, since the Cold War, the United States has become the world's largest arms dealer, selling, on average, $16.6 billion per year since 1991. And mind you, this trade is supported by taxpayer subsidies; last year, U.S. taxpayers provided $7.8 billion in corporate welfare to arms manufacturers to sell overseas.

William Hartung, an authority on global arms sales with the World Policy Institute and author of "And Weapons for All," has documented the presence of U.S.-supplied weapons in 39 of the world's 42 ongoing ethnic and territorial conflicts.

1.10 Weizman warns: Failed peace may result in war

1.10.1 Source: IsraelWire

1.10.1.1 Date: Dec 16, 1999

President Ezer Weizman stated that if the current initiative between Israel and Syrian fails, the area might become hostile, leading to war. The president indicated the issues at hand are a matter of “war and peace” and Israel must do its utmost to make it work. The president on Wednesday met with leader of the ultra-Orthodox Shas Party, Minister of Labor & Social Affairs, Eli Yishai, in an attempt to win over the party’s support for the current talks with Syria. Coalition members who oppose the talks are the National Religious Party and the Yisrael B’Aliyah Party, both having voted against the peace initiative in this week’s Knesset vote.

1.11 China developing new air defense system

1.11.1 Source: Reuters

1.11.1.1 Date: Nov 28, 1999

China is close to fielding a revolutionary new antiaircraft early-warning defense system that worries U.S. intelligence analysts because it could defeat current Air Force tactics against enemy air defenses, Newsweek reported Sunday.The technology, which could detect U.S. stealth aircraft, including the F-117 bomber and perhaps even the futuristic F-22 fighter, has so alarmed the defense community that top military and industry experts have been called to a secret meeting in December to discuss the strategic implications.

"Everyone is wondering about the cost of defending Taiwan" if U.S. air power was suddenly vulnerable, Newsweek quoted an intelligence source as saying. Current antiaircraft defenses are cued by radars that detect and track incoming aircraft. But the radars are vulnerable because their signals can be jammed or missiles can be launched to ride back down the radar beams and destroy the transmitters.

Newsweek said China's new Passive Coherent Location (PCL) system tracked the signals of civilian radio and television broadcasts and picked up aircraft by analyzing the minute turbulence their flight caused in the commercial wavelengths. Because PCL does not transmit, its receivers cannot be detected and jammed or destroyed. The magazine said Lockheed Martin had developed a similar Silent Sentry system that it was trying to sell for low-cost air defense or air traffic control.

1.12 Russia, China team up against U.S. with American technology

1.12.1 Source: By Charles Smith, WorldNetDaily.com

1.12.1.1 Date: November, 1999

Congressional officials are concerned that Russia and China are teaming up against the United States in a new arms race -- with missiles employing American technology and funding provided by the Clinton administration.

According to the China expert for Rep. Christopher Cox, R-Calif., Russia is selling the new Zvezda KH-31 missile to the Chinese military. Yet, against bi-partisan congressional opposition, the Clinton administration is financing the Russian military -- at the expense of American defense jobs -- by buying the same Russian missile to serve as a target drone for the U.S. Navy.

SCUD missile on mobile launcher erector. The SCUD threatened Israel and Saudi Arabia during the Persian Gulf war. The new Russian SS-27 mobile missile can hit America with H-bombs.

"The Russian KH-31 air-to-surface attack missile is being sold to China," said Richard Fisher, former member of the American Enterprise Institute, now working for Cox. "The Chinese appear to have backed down from a co-production deal on the KH-31," Fisher told WorldNetDaily. "They are making a flat-out buy (of missiles) from Zvezda."

"The KH-31P was designed by Russia to counter the radar of the Patriot surface-to-air missile, which Taiwan has already purchased, and the U.S. Aegis radar that Taipei would like to acquire," wrote Fisher in a recent defense report.

Fisher expressed his concern that the Russian Sukhoi SU-30 strike fighters newly acquired by the Chinese air force also will include weapons never before exported to Beijing. The new strike fighter is specifically designed to carry the KH-31 missile.

"The Sukhoi bureau hopes the SU-30 will become comparable to the U.S. Boeing F-15E Strike Eagle," wrote Fisher in the defense review. "It is likely that China will also buy from Russia a package of advanced laser and low-light targeting systems, plus a variety of bombs and missiles to equip its SU-30s. The KH-31P/KR-1 anti-radar missile will likely be a major weapon for the SU-30."

The Russian strike fighter sale to China also raised concerns of a new arms race in other defense analyst circles. Robert Karniol, Asia editor of Jane's Defense Weekly, said the Chinese SU-30 sale included spare parts, support and weapons systems. The deal will provide China "with a whole new range of air-launched missiles that the Russians previously refused to sell Beijing," Karniol said.

This month, the Russia Defense Ministry announced it will deploy 10 more mobile SS-27 TOPOL-M ballistic missiles, although it would not divulge where they would be deployed. The SS-27 will join the first batch of 10 TOPOL-M missiles that rolled into active service in 1998 for the Strategic Rocket Forces, replacing 10 older SS-19 missiles located at the Sarakov missile site 450 miles southeast of Moscow.

The SS-27 can carry up to 10 small nuclear warheads, or can be armed with a single massive H-bomb developed by the Russian Ministry of Atomics (MINATOM) Arzamas-16 site. According to Russian weapons engineers, the new Arzamas-designed warhead has an explosive force equal to over half a million tons of TNT.

In 1995 and 1996, Arzamas-16 illegally obtained U.S.-made IBM supercomputers exported with Clinton administration approval. The supercomputers were exported directly to the Russian weapons lab, using false commercial and non-military contracts. IBM pled guilty to the illegal export and paid a $8.5 million fine for their illegal sale.

SS-20 unique waffle fin system for mobile missiles. The Russian SS-27 is also equipped with similar fins for control during launch.

The SS-27 has a maximum range of 6,500 miles, is 74.5 feet in length, 6.06 feet in diameter and weighs in at just over 102,000 pounds. It is listed as a three-stage, solid propellant, "cold" gas-launched missile equipped with an Inertial/Stellar guidance system. The SS-27 is longer than the U.S.-built MX missile, but is one-half the weight. However, unlike the MX missile, the SS-27 is equipped with eight waffle-patterned folding fins for additional control during the first-stage firing.

Russian government officials recently threatened to deploy the SS-27 in larger numbers if the U.S. decides to field an anti-missile defense system to protect America. Russian State Duma Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Vladimir Lukin told Moskovsky Komsomolets that Russia's security would not be weakened if the U.S. develops an anti-ballistic missile system.

In a speech this month carried by Radio Liberty, Lukin said, "Russia will be able to compete with U.S. space defense systems or will begin installing multiple warheads on the TOPOL (SS-27)." Lukin commented that the Russians would simply "churn" out more missiles. Lukin also stated that such a build-up would be "expensive, but not that expensive."

1.13 Russia warned that it can overwhelm any anti-ballistic missile system

1.13.1 Source: Yahoo!

1.13.1.1 Date: Oct 26,1999

1.14 Russian Spy Network Exposed

1.14.1 Source: The London Telegraph

1.14.1.1 Date: October 31, 1999

Russian spies are rebuilding a vast espionage network in the Czech Republic at a time when the country is being integrated into Nato's command structure as one of its newest members. According to a confidential Czech government report, seen by The Telegraph, half of the 63 diplomats and 104 other staff at Russia's palatial Prague embassy are spies protected by diplomatic immunity - giving them a safe window on the West.

There are significantly more Russian diplomats in Prague than in the other Nato newcomers Poland and Hungary. In Britain, which has a population six times that of the Czech Republic, Moscow has only 47 diplomats at its London embassy. Prague's Social Democratic government, eager to foster warm relations with Moscow, has shown little apparent concern. Ministers also appear somewhat ambivalent towards Nato. When the Kosovo conflict erupted a month after the Czechs joined the Western military alliance, Prague worked with the Greeks to construct a peace deal acceptable to President Slobodan Milosevic of Yugoslavia. Prague has now become the regional centre of operations for Russia's military intelligence agency, the GRU.

1.15 Space Warfare Inevitable, Says Pentagon Director

1.15.1 Source: Drudge Report

1.15.1.1 Date: October 1999

The Pentagon's long-range thinker, Andrew Marshall, made a rare public appearance Thursday to discuss the future of warfare. Mr. Marshall, director of the nondescript but powerful Office of Net Assessment, said the nation's ability to project power over long distances will remain "the fundamental task." The drawback of America's long military reach is that it is driving more nations to seek nuclear weapons and long-range missiles capable of reaching U.S. soil. And Mr. Marshall believes they will succeed.

"The long-term trend is that nations are seeking new forms of strategic attack," Mr. Marshall told a small group of defense experts at the Brookings Institution. "More and more countries will have longer-range missiles that they can use to attack a capital or a society. We are going to live in a world where many more countries have the ability to attack from a distance." Information warfare - the capability of attacking computer networks from afar - will be part of it, he said. So will space warfare. Attacks against communications satellites and other space assets are "inevitable," Mr. Marshall said.

1.16 Is Russia planning Mideast attack?

1.16.1 Source: Joseph Farah, WorldNetDaily.com

1.16.1.1 Date: September 1, 1999

These are not the rantings of some self-proclaimed geo-strategic analyst. Joseph de Courcy is one of the most well-respected intelligence journalists in the world.

Yeah, if there were ever an opportunity to surprise the U.S. when its defenses are down, this is it. Not since Pearl Harbor has America been less prepared for existing threats.

1.17 China Tests Ground-To-Air Missiles On Plateau

1.17.1 Source: Reuters

1.17.1.1 Date: August 31, 1999

Parade in China BEIJING - China has successfully test-fired a ground-to-air anti-aircraft missile on a high plateau, the Liberation Army Daily reported Tuesday. It was the first time China had tested the mid-range missile on a plateau, the People's Liberation Army newspaper said without specifying where the test was conducted or identifying the missile.

The test was in line with the policy of the air force's Communist Party cell to "solidify combat readiness," the newspaper said in apparent reference to Taiwan. Beijing and Taipei have been locked in a war of words and military posturing following Taiwan President Lee Teng-hui's declaration last month that ties should be on a "special state-to-state" basis.

China, which has threatened to invade if Taiwan declares independence, saw Lee's move as a lurch toward statehood. Beijing regards Taiwan as a renegade province that must be reunified with the motherland. The newspaper said missiles downed several drone "enemy aircraft" from different angles and heights.

The anti-aircraft unit overcame transportation difficulties, bad weather and lack of oxygen, the newspaper said.

1.18 The revolution in Colombia

1.18.1 Source: J.R. Nyquist, WorldNetDaily

1.18.1.1 Date: August 1999

Columbian Rebels Not long ago the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, a Marxist insurgency, launched a major offensive. They attacked 26 rural towns and attempted to stage a major assault on Bogota. But according to General Charles Wilhelm, commander in chief of the U.S. Southern Command, the Colombian government smashed the Communist offensive, inflicting "triple digit" losses.

A few days after the fighting died down the Colombian government said it desperately needed half a billion dollars in order to modernize its military. Colombia is the third largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid after Israel and Egypt. But it's not enough. Given the difficulties of fighting a guerrilla war in a country of mountains and forests, and the fact that the guerrillas control nearly half the country, the situation is definitely not coming up roses.

The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia are estimated to have 17,000 troops. And these are not the only Communist guerrillas in the country. There is another Communist insurgency as well, smaller in size--the ELN. These forces also have government troops pinned down across a wide area. The main problem for the government is how to protect the small towns and villages. The other problem is how to cut off the guerrillas' main sources of supply.

And what is that source of supply? Money from good old American drug users.

The two Communist guerrilla armies in Colombia--the FARC and ELN--control most of the coca growing areas in the country, and nearly all the new growth in coca cultivation. In fact, Colombia is the largest cocaine producer on planet earth, and half of the heroin picked up on U.S. streets is said to originate in Colombia.

I recently interviewed Prof. Joseph D. Douglass Jr., a defense researcher and author of Red Cocaine: The Drugging of America. He gave me an interesting statistic. He said that Russia and the nations of the former Communist bloc, including Red China, now control 80 percent of the international drug trade.

If true, that is a staggering revelation. Douglass further revealed that Communist bloc control of international narcotics trafficking is not something haphazard or accidental, but has been part of a long-term plan to penetrate and employ the world's organized crime networks for political subversion. In this matter the Russians (who Douglass says control about half the world's narcotics trafficking) and the Chinese (who control about one third), are not merely taking hold of a momentary opportunity to make money. This was a well thought out strategic decision made in the 1950s. In other words, it was a move in the Cold War chess game. And it appears from Douglass' comments that the Communists may have won a stunning victory against us through strategic dominance of the global underworld.

As Douglass points out in his book, the Soviets realized in the 1950s that dominance of organized crime would give them access to blackmail information on Western politicians and government officials. This would allow them to penetrate key institutions using organized crime syndicates as fronts.

From all appearances, said Douglass, Moscow and Beijing have succeeded in conquering the lion's share of the global underworld, and through this process it is possible that they enjoy a degree of penetration--even control--of American institutions that call into question the very integrity of the United States government.

1.19 Selling War

1.19.1 Source: Jerome Zeifman, WorldNetDaily

1.19.1.1 Date: August 1999

On June 23, 1999, Oscar Arias, the former President of Costa Rica (who won the 1987 Nobel Peace Prize) published an article in the New York Times titled, "Stopping America's Most Lethal Export," stating,

"Americans have shown great concern about the reported loss of classified nuclear secrets to the Chinese. But they should be just as outraged that their country gives away many other military secrets voluntarily, in the form of high-tech arms exports. By selling advanced weaponry throughout the world, wealthy military contractors not only weaken national security and squeeze taxpayers at home but also strengthen dictators and worsen human misery abroad.

"After the cold war, arms manufacturers realized that their business would be threatened by falling demand. To protect their profits, they have lobbied to maintain high levels of spending in the United States while also promoting unprecedented levels of military exports.

"This two-pronged approach serves the manufacturers well: by shipping top-of-the-line arms overseas, they create greater dangers to surmount. They can then argue that continued American supremacy requires the development of even more sophisticated weapons systems--weapons that translate into lucrative defense contracts….

"While the arms industry profits, people throughout the world suffer. Overseas, American-made arms are often turned against civilians or used to strengthen dictators."

(Jerome Zeifman formerly served as chief counsel to the House Judiciary Committee.)

1.20 War's Litter: Cluster Bombs

1.20.1 Source: Virgil Wiebe and Titus Peachey, The Christian Science Monitor

1.20.1.1 Date: August 1999

Cluster Bomb On April 24, five Kosovar brothers and two cousins ranging in age from 3 to 14 were playing in a field outside Doganovic, Kosovo. They found a small yellow canister the size of a soda can. As two of the cousins went to tell adults, one of the brothers began to pry open the canister.

The explosion killed all the brothers and severely injured their two cousins. That canister was a cluster bomb dropped by NATO forces. Much like land mines, unexploded cluster bombs pose enduring threats to innocent people.

The international treaty to ban the manufacture and use of land mines, signed by 135 countries and ratified by 81 of the signatories, became law March 1. The United States has refused to sign. Some people in the U.S. military oppose signing because the treaty's definition of land mines is broad enough to cover cluster bombs.

Cluster munitions are containers that break open in midair, scattering smaller bombs the size of soda cans or lawn darts. They may be dropped from aircraft or shot from rocket launchers and artillery projectiles. These systems often carry hundreds of the cluster munitions, saturating an area with flying shards of steel.

Cluster Bomb The smaller bombs are designed to explode near the time of impact. But not all of them do. Instead, unexploded bombs litter the target area, silent and nondescript, until picked up by a child or kicked by a passerby.

Cluster munitions may also hide themselves if they land in weeds, soft soil, sand, or water. Alternatively, those on top of the ground may become buried by vegetation or soil erosion. In this way they become hidden killers, blending into their surroundings like land mines.

In use for decades, cluster munitions are among the most indiscriminate weapons in military arsenals. These munitions not only cause physical suffering and loss, but also hinder agricultural and economic development of the land years into the future. Villagers understandably are reluctant to work land they know to be littered with unexploded bombs.

A senior NATO commander recognized in April that at least 5 percent (ranging up to 30 percent) of NATO's cluster bombs fail to explode upon impact. Commenting on Yugoslavia, he noted that "the place is littered with thousands of these things."

Bomb disposal experts in Laos, where millions of these munitions still lie unexploded from the Vietnam War, have said repeatedly that cluster munitions become less stable and therefore more dangerous with each passing year. Use of cluster bombs, then, is tantamount to the creation of uncharted mine fields.

Tragically, we can be almost certain that a deadly "toy" deposited by Serb or NATO forces today in Kosovo will lie in wait to kill the grandchildren of returned refugees many tomorrows into the future.

1.21 Kashmir gets scarier

1.21.1 Source: New York Times News Service

1.21.1.1 Date: July 1999

Indian troops in Kashmir High in the forbidding Himalayan foothills, the half-century-old struggle for control of Kashmir is entering a new and unpredictable phase. Islamic fighters have crossed the line that divides the state between zones of Indian and Pakistani control, and the Indian army is waging a bloody campaign to drive them back.

It is the latest battle in a conflict that has taken tens of thousands of lives over the last decade, and the fact that both contending nations are armed with nuclear weapons lends it an apocalyptic urgency.

"We're facing a small war, but it can escalate," one of Kashmir's wise men, Sufi Ghulan Mohammed, editor of the Urdu-language Srinagar Times, said. "Escalation means devastation. It does not have to be planned. Anything can happen at any time."

The Kashmir conflict is perhaps even more complex than those that have shaken the Balkans. Kashmir is about 75 percent Muslim, but when India and Pakistan were created in 1947, the maharajah, a Hindu, chose to lead it into Hindu-dominated India rather than Islamic Pakistan.

Pakistan has never accepted Kashmir's accession to India, and has waged two wars to seize it. The last one, in 1971, ended with a cease-fire that left two-thirds of the state in India and the rest in Pakistan.

1.22 When disaster struck

1.22.1 Source: David Rieff, Los Angeles Times Service/ IHT

1.22.1.1 Date: July 1999

When the disaster struck, its effects were devastating. In a very short time thousands were killed and many more maimed, tortured or raped. Hundreds of thousands were forced to flee their homes.

Humanitarian agencies estimated that, all told, the conflict had produced from 700,000 to a million refugees, whose presence was deeply destabilizing to neighboring countries, and almost 500,000 internally displaced people, whose condition was, if anything, far worse.

Is that a description of Kosovo? It could be, but it is not. Those horrors come from another brutal internal war, the one going on in Sierra Leone.

The disasters now taking place in Sierra Leone, Angola, Burundi, Liberia and Afghanistan never get the kind of attention that the Kosovo crisis has received. The point is not that what happened in Kosovo is less awful than what is going on in Africa. But the Kosovars can count on the world's attention, whereas in sub-Saharan Africa it is almost a foregone conclusion that only a minimal effort will be made.

1.23 Peacekeepers have no peace

1.23.1 Source: Associated Press

1.23.1.1 Date: July, 1999

QANA, Lebanon -- Morning mist was still rising from the silvery leaves of a hillside olive grove when nine Shiite Muslim guerrillas set about their task: positioning a 106 mm recoilless cannon and preparing to fire a few quick rounds at an Israeli army outpost just across the ridge.

So the passing group of UN peacekeepers patrolling the rugged valleys of southern Lebanon did the only thing they could: They approached the guerrillas--bearded, edgy, brandishing AK-47 rifles--and very, very politely asked them to go away.

"I shook hands with each of them, and talked quietly and reasonably," recounted Maj. Jerry Tuikoro, gesturing toward the grove where he and his small contingent of peacekeepers from faraway Fiji had come across the guerrillas from the Iranian-backed Hezbollah a few days earlier. The UN troopers, who are allowed to use their weapons only in self-defense, must rely under such circumstances on persuasiveness. This time, it worked.

Since its creation in 1978, the nine-nation UN force has had the same mission: to verify an Israeli troop withdrawal, help the Lebanese government reassert sovereignty, and establish a secure area. The peacekeepers are the first to admit none of the goals has been achieved.

"We've been fighting for our own survival, sandwiched between the warring parties," said Timur Goksel, a senior UN adviser. "Peacekeeping? You have to have peace to keep it."

In the 390-square-mile UN-patrolled zone, Israeli troops and their allied Lebanese militia do daily battle with the guerrillas of Hezbollah, along with fighters from other Islamic groups. Over the years, 222 peacekeepers have died in the crossfire.

But the UN troops, who provide services to villagers ranging from medical care to generator power, are reaping a goodwill dividend after long years of service.

Strong bonds were forged during the Qana shellings, when blue-helmeted Fijian soldiers wept in the ruins as they tended the wounded. In the town's streets, the "tawareh"--the word for peacekeepers in the local Arabic dialect--are often trailed by a crowd of children.

"The ones who are fighters now knew other Fijians back when they were kids," said peacekeeper Semisi Kama. "So we can talk to them, try to cool them down."

1.24 Wherever that town is, someone will die for it

1.24.1 Source: New York Times News Service

1.24.1.1 Date: July, 1999

ADDIS ABABA, Ethiopia--It would seem like the simplest of questions, one that could be settled with a few good maps and maybe a cheap global positioning device: Where on Earth, quite literally, is the town of Badme?

Badme is a place of no particular consequence in the highlands between Ethiopia and its much smaller kin, Eritrea, two A deserted battle field nations of great promise on the Horn of Africa. But lying on the battlefields near this town are the corpses of perhaps 10,000 soldiers--maybe less, maybe more--who died over the last month because each nation claims Badme and the surrounding area as its own. (For comparison's sake, 3,200 people have died in Northern Ireland's sectarian conflict in the last 30 years, according to the U.S. State Department).

None of the Badme region has much value or historical or emotional resonance. It is merely undefined. And that tells the story of many conflicts in modern-day Africa: The colonists of a century ago, in this case Italy and Britain, buried a time bomb in the treaties that marked off their ambitions. The treaties are wildly complicated and laughably imprecise, using tribes and river junctions and obscure mountains as reference points.

"They did not think of the borders," said Professor Mesfin Wolde-Mariam, a retired geographer, of those who planned Eritrea's independence in 1993. "So, hurriedly, they were independent. Now we have no idea what on earth is happening. And mind you, these are the same people on both sides. They speak the same language, have the same culture. It's very depressing."

1.25 Why they say "nyet"

1.25.1 Source: Roy A. Medvedev: The Washington Post

1.25.1.1 Date: June, 1999

MOSCOW--No single event in the past 50 years has provoked such fierce emotions in Russia as NATO's bombing of Serbia. Polls here show that 95 percent of Russian citizens condemn the Western alliance's actions in the Balkans.

Hundreds of Russian volunteers are already in Serbia; thousands are en route; and several thousand more are prepared to follow them. Not only former paratroopers and officers, but also generals and commanders of military districts say they are prepared to defend Serbia. Col. Gen. Viktor Chechevatov, commander of Russia's largest military district, recently announced that he is ready to lead the expeditionary corps to Serbia if necessary. What has produced this howl of rage, supported both by opposition and pro-Western politicians?

Nobody here believes talk about the determination to prevent a "humanitarian catastrophe." The bombs and missiles have simply hastened and deepened the humanitarian tragedy and strengthened doubts about the advantages of Western civilization. If Western civilization proves itself by such methods, what can the Arab world, Africa, China or India think of it?

Some analysts here have tried to explain the conflict by arguing that the United States and NATO want to try out their new, precise weaponry under military conditions. Other more serious theories assert that NATO, having lost its purpose after the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union disintegrated, is simply looking for new ways to justify its existence. Geopoliticians argue that the war in the Balkans is intended to show the world that only one military superpower--the United States--remains.

The reasons for indignation on the part of ordinary Russians are various:

* The strong strike the weak. Nineteen powerful countries are striking targets in Serbia and even in Montenegro, which is not in conflict with anyone. This spectacle is unacceptable to the Russian understanding of justice.

* The armed strike the unarmed. The Serbs are practically defenseless against NATO's missiles and bombs. There are hundreds of dead and wounded on the Serbian side; Serbia's industry is destroyed. But there is not a single dead or wounded NATO soldier. From the point of view of Russian people, this unequal conflict isn't even a war, it's a massacre.

* A Slav, Orthodox country is being destroyed. It was Russia that helped Serbia attain its independence from the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century. In all the European wars of the past 300 years, Serbia has been Russia's ally. It was because of Serbia that Russia went to war against Austria-Hungary in 1914.

* Serbia is being beaten to humiliate and teach Russia a lesson. There is a strong conviction among Russians that the senseless destruction of Dresden by the Western allies in 1945 and the use of atomic bombs against Japan later that year were demonstrations of strength to Moscow above all. The campaign against Serbia is often seen from the same point of view. Many Russians believe that the destruction of Serbia was conceived as a demonstration of the West's strength and invincibility.

* The West deceived and robbed Russia. Our people were told over and over again about the benefits of democracy and the market economy that the rich Western countries would help Russia construct. That illusion has long since disappeared. In the minds of the impoverished, there is a conviction that the West not only deceived us, but that it robbed Russia. New wealthy Russians, stock market gamblers and financial speculators carried billions of dollars away to the West. Life in Russia became worse, and the country's debts to the West grew several times over.

Russian citizens are not impressed by NATO talk about the despotism of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic. Compared with our dictators, Milosevic seems a pragmatist. He was elected by the Serbian people.

No one in Russia defends ethnic cleansing, but it is obvious to all here that external aggression can only make the situation worse. In Russia itself, there are about 3 million refugees who have fled from the ethnic conflicts in Central Asia, Moldova, the Caucasus and Abkhazia. There are 1 million displaced people in Azerbaijan, 500,000 in Armenia, 300,000 in Georgia. But no one thinks that bombs are the best means of returning lost land to these people.

Although Russia is weakened, it is still strong both as a nation and as a state. Its army may not have enough food to feed its soldiers, but it is armed with modern weapons. If NATO ground forces and Serbia's neighboring countries are drawn into the war, Russia will certainly break the UN embargo against supplying arms to the Balkans.

Roy Medvedev, a Russian historian living in Moscow, is the author of "Let History Judge" (Columbia University Press) and "Khrushchev: The Years in Power" (Norton).

1.26 Bombing of Yugoslavia ignites anti-U.S. feeling around the world

1.26.1 Source: Washington Post Foreign Service

1.26.1.1 Date: June, 1999

BUENOS AIRES--It's thousands of miles from Belgrade, an d there's not a Serb in sight. But Gonzalo Etcheberry is passing a wall on a busy street here spray-painted with the words, "Yankee, out of the Balkans." He didn't write the slogan, but he couldn't agree more. "Your bombs in Yugoslavia are from the side of America that I can't stand," said Etcheberry, a 21-year-old medical student wearing a black Pearl Jam T-shirt. "I hate it when the U.S. plays judge and God."

Such feelings are common in Argentina--and in many other parts of the world far from the conflict over Kosovo. As the air war against Yugoslavia concludes its eighth week, and blunders like the bombing that reportedly killed nearly 90 ethnic Albanians at Korisa and the strike on the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade grab headlines worldwide, NATO's warplanes are inflicting collateral damage of another kind--on the alliance's international reputation. And Uncle Sam, NATO's dominant power, is bearing the brunt of people's anger.

Here in Argentina, one of Washington's closest Latin American allies, a poll last week showed that 64 percent of the public opposed the NATO air campaign against Yugoslavia. More respondents had a negative opinion of NATO than of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic.

In Latin America, Asia, Africa, the Middle East and other regions with little direct interest in the conflict, opposition is surfacing in statements by elected officials, newspaper editorials, opinion polls, public protests, Internet banter and street graffiti.

"NATO is blindly bombing Yugoslavia," Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee said in a fiery political speech in India. "There is a dance of destruction going on there. Thousands of people rendered homeless. And the United Nations is a mute witness to all this. Is NATO's work to prevent war or to fuel one?"

Protesters shout anti NATO slogans in Taipei While the plight of the Kosovo refugees has evoked widespread sympathy, with many countries offering financial and logistical support to the relief effort, there is also growing criticism that the allies were too quick to abandon diplomacy for war. The mistaken bombings of civilians and of the Chinese Embassy have intensified those feelings.

Taro Kono, a Japanese member of parliament, has said, "The United States and NATO have unilaterally decided that the Serbs are the bad guys. I'm not sure it's so easy to tell who's right and who's wrong."

For many Arabs, the NATO bombings have evoked disturbing parallels with the continuing U.S.-led air campaign against Iraq, whose sanctions-bound population is the object of widespread sympathy in the Arab world. Jordan Times columnist Rami Khouri wrote that the United States and Britain have now made the "perpetual bombing of a weak and defenseless target" something routine.

In Africa, "most ordinary people are too busy with the struggle of day-to-day life" to focus closely on Kosovo, "and there has been a feeling that it's white folks' business," said Babacar Toure, publisher of the Sud daily newspaper in Dakar, Senegal. But the regular accounts of errant bombs and dead civilians have raised debate, he said, notably on the way NATO has sidelined the United Nations.

In the Philippines, one of Washington's closest allies in Asia, protesters angered by the war have been marching daily against a plan for military exercises with the United States. Large anti-American protests denouncing the war are also being staged in Pakistan and India. Vietnam has condemned the NATO attacks, calling for the issue to be resolved peacefully.

The war is striking a particularly bitter note in Latin America, where Washington's support of repressive governments in decades past has left a legacy of suspicion about its motives. "I don't think Milosevic is a saint, but the United States is on an ego trip," said Etcheberry, the Argentine medical student.

1.27 If ethnic cleansing is wrong in the Balkans, it's wrong in the Mideast

1.27.1 Source: Charley Reese, The Orlando Sentinel

1.27.1.1 Date: June, 1999

Well, good news for Palestinians. President Clinton and other NATO heads of state have said repeatedly and explicitly that "ethnic cleansing shall not stand" and that refugees have a right to return to their homes.

Well, bless my pita bread, there's no group of people in the world who are more clearly victims of ethnic cleansing than the Palestinian refugees who have been rotting in refugee camps for 50 years. Palestinians were ethnically cleansed in 1948 and again in 1967. They were forced out and have been forbidden to return specifically because they are Palestinians.

Because we are all sure that Clinton and the other heads of state who lead the North Atlantic Treaty Organization are men of honor and wouldn't think of lying, we can be sure then that as soon as this Balkan business is completed that Israel will be presented with an ultimatum just like the one presented to Slobodan Milosevic.

Israel will be told to withdraw its forces from the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, to consent to occupation of those areas by an international military force, and shall allow all Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and to live there safely. Or else the bombs will fall on Tel Aviv.

I know that some of you are cynical. Some of you think that the Israeli lobby protects Israel not only from the United States but from enforcement of the more than 60 UN resolutions directed against Israeli abuses of Palestinians and neighboring countries.

Some of you probably think that Clinton and company are lying about ethnic cleansing just because they've done nothing about Tibet's occupation and 1 million killed; or the 2 million dead in the Sudanese civil war; or the 1 million dead in the Angola civil war; or the 65,000 dead in the Algerian civil conflict; or the 40,000 dead in the Nagorno-Karabakh civil conflict; or the 750,000 killed in Rwanda, and so on and so on. Shame on you for being a cynic.

It has been said that NATO is really in search of a mission (before Milosevic it was an army with neither enemy nor mission). Well, if the new mission is to stamp out ethnic cleansing and undo it, it will have enough wars to keep the arms manufacturers in billion-dollar clover for the next century. There are about 15 million ethnically cleansed refugees in the world.

If ethnic cleansing is wrong in the Balkans, it's wrong in the Middle East, and it's high time the U.S. Congress and the executive branch apply the same concern for ethnically cleansed Palestinians as they profess to have for the Albanians.

1.28 Deaths in wars

1.28.1 Source: AP, The Independent, State Department, Center for Defense Information, CIA, World Almanac