ON THE TERRITORY OF THE FORMER SFRY (90s of the 20th century - beginning of the 21st century)

Yugoslav crisis of the 90s of the XX century. was the result of a sharp aggravation of inter-republican and inter-ethnic contradictions in the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The SFRY was the largest state of the Balkan Peninsula, consisting of six republics: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, Serbia (with the autonomous regions of Vojvodina, Kosovo and Metohija), Slovenia, Croatia and Montenegro.

The most numerous people were the Serbs, in second place were the Croats, then came the Muslims (Slavs who converted to Islam), Slovenes, Macedonians, Montenegrins. More than 30% of the population of the former Yugoslavia were national minorities, among which 1 million 730 thousand people were Albanians.

The prerequisites for the crisis were the features of the Yugoslav state-political system. The principles of broad independence of the republics laid down in the constitution of 1974 contributed to the growth of separatist tendencies.

The collapse of the federation was the result and consequence of a purposeful strategy of individual ethno-political elites who aspired to absolute power in their republics in the face of a weakening of the central government. The military prerequisites for the start of an armed confrontation on ethnic grounds were laid down in the characteristics of the armed forces of the SFRY, which consisted of

the polar army and the territorial defense forces, which were formed according to the territorial production principle and were under the jurisdiction of the republican (territorial, local) authorities, which allowed the leadership of the republics to create their own armed forces.

The Western European NATO member states, interested in the dismantling of socialism in the Balkans, politically, economically and militarily supported the separatist forces in individual republics of Yugoslavia, who proclaimed themselves supporters of independence from the federal government in Belgrade.

The first stage of the Yugoslav crisis (late June 1991 - December 1995) This was a period of civil war and ethno-political conflict, which resulted in the collapse of the SFRY and the formation of new states on its territory - the Republic of Slovenia, the Republic of Croatia, the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Republic of Macedonia, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro).

On June 25, 1991, Slovenia and Croatia, by the decision of their parliaments, declared complete independence and secession from the SFRY. These actions did not receive recognition from the Yugoslav federal authorities. The civil war in Yugoslavia began with Slovenia. Units of the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) were introduced into its territory. This provoked armed clashes with the Slovenian paramilitaries, which lasted until July 3, 1991. As a result of negotiations in the autumn of 1991, the JNA troops left Slovenia.

In Croatia, due to the intransigence of the positions of Serbs and Croats regarding the state status of Serb-populated areas on the territory of the republic, from July 1991 to January 1992, large-scale hostilities were conducted, in which the JNA was involved on the side of the Serbs. As a result of hostilities, about 10 thousand people died, the number of refugees amounted to 700 thousand people. In December 1991, an independent state formation was created - the Republic of Serbian Krajina (RSK), whose leaders advocated its secession from Croatia and the preservation of the Yugoslav constitution.

In February 1992, by decision of the UN Security Council, a contingent of peacekeeping troops (UN peacekeeping operation - UNPROFOR) was sent to Croatia in the interests of settling the Serbian-Croatian conflict.

By the middle of 1992, the disintegration of Yugoslavia had become irreversible. The federal authorities have lost control over the development of the situation in the country. Following Slovenia and Croatia, Macedonia declared its independence in November 1991. Its secession from the SFRY, as well as the solution of emerging controversial problems, proceeded calmly, without armed incidents. By the end of April 1992, in accordance with an agreement between Macedonia and the JNA command, formations and units of the federal army were completely withdrawn from the territory of the republic.

The armed conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina (spring 1992 - December 1995) took extremely violent forms of interethnic clashes between Serbs, Croats and Muslims.

The Muslim leadership, in alliance with the leaders of the Croatian community, ignoring the position of the Serbian population, proclaimed the independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). After the recognition in April 1992 by the EU member countries of its sovereignty and the withdrawal in May of the same year of formations and units of the JNA, the situation in the republic was completely destabilized. Independent state-ethnic formations were formed on its territory - the Serbian Republic (SR) and the Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia (HRGB) - with their own armed formations. The Croatian-Muslim coalition group initiated hostilities against the Serbs. Subsequently, these actions took on a protracted and exceptionally acute character.

In this situation, on April 27, 1992, the creation of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) as part of Serbia and Montenegro was proclaimed, the leadership of which declared it the legal successor of the former SFRY.

In order to promote the settlement of the conflict in BiH, in accordance with the resolution of the UN Security Council of February 21, 1992, UN peacekeeping forces were sent to the territory of the republic. To cover the peacekeeping troops from the air, a large NATO OVVS grouping was created (more than 200 combat aircraft stationed at air bases in Italy and ships in the Adriatic Sea).

The policy of the West, primarily of the leading NATO countries, which provides for the application of forceful pressure only on the Serbian side with the actual support of the other two warring parties, has led to a dead end the negotiation process to resolve the crisis in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

In 1995, the military-political situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina sharply worsened. The Muslim side, despite the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement in force, resumed its offensive against the Bosnian Serbs. NATO combat aircraft carried out air strikes against Bosnian Serb targets. The Muslim side took them as support for their actions.

In response to NATO air strikes, the Bosnian Serbs continued to shell the security zones with artillery. In addition, the Serbs in the Sarajevo region blocked units from the Russian, Ukrainian and French contingents of peacekeeping forces.

In August-September of the same year, NATO aircraft launched a series of strikes on military and industrial facilities throughout the

Serbian Republic. This brought the SR troops to the brink of disaster and forced its leadership to start peace negotiations. Subsequently, using the results of massive NATO air strikes on Serbian targets, in the first half of September, Bosnian Muslims and Croats, in cooperation with units and subunits of the regular Croatian Armed Forces, launched an offensive in Western Bosnia.

In the context of intensifying efforts to resolve the armed conflict in BiH between the warring parties, on October 5, 1995, on the initiative of the United States, an agreement was signed on a ceasefire throughout the republic.

The domestic political situation in Croatia continued to be complex and controversial. Its leadership, taking a tough stance, sought to resolve the problem of the Serbian Krajina by any means.

In May-August 1995, the Croatian army carried out two military operations under the code names "Shine" and "Storm" to annex the Serbian Krajina to Croatia. Operation Storm brought the most catastrophic consequences for the Serbian population. The main city of the Serbian Krajina - Knin was completely destroyed. In total, as a result of the operations of the Croatian troops, several tens of thousands of civilians died, more than 250 thousand Serbs left Croatia. The Republic of Serbian Krajina ceased to exist. During the armed conflict in Croatia from 1991 to 1995, the number of refugees of all nationalities amounted to more than half a million people.

On November 1, 1995, negotiations began in Dayton (USA) with the participation of the Presidents of Croatia F. Tudjman and Serbia S. Milosevic (as head of the united Serbian delegation), as well as the leader of the Bosnian Muslims A. Izetbegovic. As a result of the negotiations, the Dayton Accords were adopted, the official signing of which took place on December 14 of the same year in Paris, which consolidated the process of disintegration of the Yugoslav federation. In place of the former SFRY, five sovereign states were formed - Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

The second stage (December 1995 - the turn of the XX-XXI centuries). This is a period of stabilization and implementation of the Dayton Accords under the leadership of the military-political structures of NATO and under the supervision of the UN, the formation of new Balkan states.

The package of agreements in Dayton provided for a peacekeeping operation, ensuring the territorial delimitation of the warring parties, cessation of hostilities, and the creation of a Multinational Military Force for the Implementation of the Agreement (IFOR - IFOR). The Agreement emphasized that IFOR would operate under the direction, direction and political control of NATO. A grouping was created, which included military contingents from 36 states, of which 15 were NATO members. The IFOR/SFOR operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, led and with the decisive role of NATO, was an important tool and way to test the new strategic concept of the alliance. NATO's peacekeeping activities in BiH showed a tendency to shift the emphasis from classical peacekeeping (peacekeeping operations) to the active implementation of comprehensive measures for the expanded use of military force.

The third stage of the crisis. This period is associated with Albanian extremism in the autonomous province of Serbia - Kosovo and Metohija, marked by the aggression of the NATO Armed Forces in 1998-1999. against a sovereign state under the pretext of protecting the Albanian population and international humanitarian law.

On the eve of the collapse of the SFRY, the actions of Albanian nationalists in Kosovo and Metohija provoked a harsh response from the authorities in Belgrade. In October 1990, an interim coalition government of the Republic of Kosovo was formed. From 1991 to 1995, neither Belgrade nor the Albanians found ways to reach a compromise solution to the Kosovo problem

In 1996, the Kosovo Liberation Army (OAK) was formed, which set out to provoke armed incidents with the Serbian police. In the spring of 1998, the OAK launched open terrorist activities against the Serbs. In turn, Belgrade has increased its military presence in Kosovo. Military operations began.

The settlement of the Kosovo crisis became the subject of a "great game" of the NATO countries, which launched a campaign to protect human rights in Kosovo. The actions of the Yugoslav troops of the NATO member states were regarded as genocide. The real genocide of the OAK was ignored.

The NATO military operation "Allied Force", in which 13 member countries of the alliance participated, lasted from March 24 to June 10, 1999. The purpose of this operation was to defeat the armed forces of the FRY, destroy its military and economic potential, undermine the political and moral authority of Yugoslavia .

According to the command of the Yugoslav army, during the operation of the alliance over 12 thousand air raids were carried out within 79 days, more than 3 thousand cruise missiles were fired, more than 10 thousand tons of explosives were dropped, which is five times the power of the atomic bomb exploded over Hiroshima . 995 objects on the territory of the FRY were subjected to strikes.

From a military point of view, the feature of Operation Allied Force was absolute superiority over the opposing side. It was provided not only by the quantitative parameters of the aviation and naval groups involved from NATO, but also due to the qualitative state of aviation, the use of high-precision weapons, including cruise missiles, space reconnaissance equipment, and weapon guidance

and navigation. At various stages of the operation, experimental testing of new electronic methods of warfare was carried out, which implied the use of the latest means of command, control, reconnaissance and guidance.

The NATO bloc actually waged a war on the side of the Albanian extremists, and its result was not the prevention of a humanitarian catastrophe and the protection of the civilian population, but an increase in the flow of refugees from Kosovo and casualties among civilians.

Based on the decision of the President of the Russian Federation and in accordance with the directive of the Chief of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces, from the second decade of June to the end of July 2003, Russian military contingents with a total number of 970 people were withdrawn from the Balkans, including 650 from Kosovo and Metohija, from Bosnia and Herzegovina -

An international peacekeeping force of almost 50 thousand people, of which about 40 thousand were part of the national military contingents of NATO countries, could not provide security for all citizens of Kosovo and Metohija, primarily Serbs and Montenegrins, as well as representatives of other non-Albanian population groups . These forces did not prevent ethnic cleansing and terror against the non-Albanian part of the region's population and did not prevent the expulsion of more than 300,000 non-Albanians from its territory.

Fourth stage. This is a period of escalation of the armed conflict in 2001 on the territory of the Republic of Macedonia, as well as a new surge of violence by Albanian extremists against the Serb population in Kosovo and Metohija in 2004.

By the beginning of 2001, the hotbed of tension moved directly to Macedonia, where there was a concentration of OAK militants. Since March 13, 2001, daily armed clashes between Albanian extremists and units of the Macedonian army began in the area of ​​the city of Tetovo, and later Kumanovo, the second largest city in the country. On March 17, the General Staff of the Macedonian Armed Forces decided to mobilize the reservists of the ground forces.

On March 19, a curfew was introduced in Tetovo, and the next day the Macedonian authorities presented the militants with an ultimatum: to stop hostilities within 24 hours and surrender or leave the territory of the republic. The militant leaders refused to obey the demands of the ultimatum and did not lay down their arms, saying that they would continue the fight until "until the Albanian people of Macedonia gain freedom."

During the subsequent offensive of the Macedonian army, Albanian militants were pushed back from all key positions. Another aggravation of the situation in Macedonia occurred in May 2001, when the militants resumed hostilities again.

Under pressure from the West, the Macedonian government was forced to sit down at the negotiating table with the extremists. On August 13, an agreement was signed in Skopje, which provided for a ceasefire. On April 1, 2003, the European Union launched the peacekeeping operation Concordia (Concord) in Macedonia.

The new outbreak of violence in Kosovo in March 2004 demonstrated how illusory were the efforts of international mediators and organizations, mainly represented by the EU and NATO, to stabilize the situation in the province.

In response to the anti-Serb pogroms in Kosovo and Metohija, anti-Albanian demonstrations began in Belgrade and other Serbian settlements.

An additional 2,000 NATO troops were sent to Kosovo and Metohija. The North Atlantic Alliance, led by the United States, has strengthened its presence and influence in the region, actually directing the conflict settlement process in a beneficial direction for itself.

Serbia was a complete loser after the war. This will affect the mentality of the Serbian people, who again, as at the beginning of the 20th century, found themselves divided between different states and are experiencing moral humiliation, including because of Kosovo, whose fate is also not determined. After the conclusion of an agreement on the new nature of relations between Serbia and Montenegro, since February 2003, the names "Yugoslavia" and "FRY" have disappeared from political life. The new state became known as the Community of Serbia and Montenegro (S&Ch). Bosnia and Herzegovina is a very fragile state entity: its unity is maintained by the military presence of peacekeeping forces, whose mandate is not limited to any specific term.

In the course of armed conflicts on the territory of the former SFRY, between 1991 and 1995 alone, 200,000 people died, more than 500,000 were injured, and the number of refugees and displaced persons exceeded 3 million.

The settlement of the Yugoslav crisis has not yet been completed.

Overview of the war in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

1. Goals and objectives of NATO/USA

“As for the Balkans, a very unpleasant situation has developed for Europe there. During my work in the Ministry of Defense, meeting with the European military and politicians, I felt the concern of the Europeans about the situation in the Balkans. There is a fierce rivalry going on there. In the early 90s, Germany did a lot to make events go according to its scenario - Slovenia, Croatia ... The French and the British were dissatisfied with this. And, of course, the Americans did not want to miss such a strategically important crossroads of all kinds of communications. So they intervened, and quite powerfully. What is happening today in the Balkans is fully in line with American interests. First, they have driven a wedge into the European continent, which will constantly cause instability and divert the political, economic and other resources of the EU to this region. With this, the Americans are also fighting against the competitor of the dollar - the euro. Second, by chaoticizing the Balkans, the United States has ensured that it will always be in demand there.”

Leonid IVASHOV
(Vice-President of the Academy of Geopolitics Colonel-General):

In 1997, General V. Filatov, an expert on military issues, the former editor-in-chief of the Military Historical Journal, during the period of unprecedented growth in the circulation of this publication (the general was removed from this position by orders of the well-known "democrats" from the army D. Volkogonov and E. Shaposhnikov), wrote on the pages of the Zavtra newspaper: “Yugoslavia was destroyed as a global competitor in the production and sale of weapons on the world market. Some ten years ago, there were three world centers for the production and sale of weapons on the planet: the USA (NATO), the USSR (the Warsaw Pact Organization) and Yugoslavia (the "third world"). Tito in the 50s put together the so-called "third world", which included a huge number of non-aligned countries.

And one day everyone discovered that the "third world" is a market for the sale of weapons of one country - Yugoslavia. Once it was discovered that Yugoslavia. one of the richest countries in Europe and the world ... "

2. Propaganda and how it really happened

In 1991, the collapse of the Soviet Union brought to the surface centuries-old ethnic tensions in the former Soviet republics and Yugoslavia. Only strong-willed tough actions on the part of the federal leadership of the country could extinguish the situation. This task had to be solved by the leader of the federation, Slobodan Milosevic. An experienced politician, he understood that it would be impossible to resolve the situation, heated up from the outside, without forceful intervention. By that time, the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army.

(UAC), actively sponsored by international non-governmental funds, has already dragged the region into an uncontrolled guerrilla war. In response to the extremist actions of the Albanians in Kosovo, a conflict flares up between Bosnian Serbs and Muslims. It was then that Milosevic ordered the federal forces and the Serbian police to take control of a number of regions of Croatia inhabited by Serbs, and also to begin resolving the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The war was bloody, but not unsuccessful, and in 1995 the Dayton Accords were signed, dividing Bosnia and Herzegovina into two political formations, and even allowing NATO to indirectly participate in the fate of the former Yugoslavia as a peacekeeping contingent. But peace in Yugoslavia was not part of the US plans. The war was built into the financial, economic and geopolitical plans of America, which is why it was inevitable.

In the fall of 1997, a conflict broke out in Kosovo, and Milosevic decided on the military intervention of the federal government. Peace negotiations, the purpose of which should be the final collapse of the country and the change of power, were not destined to end successfully. Milosevic refuses to give up power and divide the country under the control of the North Atlantic alliance. Clinton spoke of the "moral imperatives" of protecting the Kosovo population, violating its autonomy, and violating human rights. However, similar violations committed by, say, Turkey against the Kurds, Britain against Northern Ireland, Israel against the Palestinians, the US itself against its ethnic minorities, and so on. did not provoke such lofty rhetoric. Nevertheless, a powerful information war was launched, unleashed around the events in Kosovo, providing a springboard for the start of hostilities for unshakable democratic values.

The reason for the bombing of Yugoslavia was "ethnic cleansing", which led to the emergence of Kosovar refugees. The world knows that the "first blood" in Kosovo, which marked the beginning of the escalation of the confrontation, was the blood of Serbian policemen killed by Albanian terrorists. However, after the bombing of the concentration camp on the territory of the former Yugoslavia really were. But not Serbian, but for Serbs. Only during the collapse of Yugoslavia in the 90s, more than two million Serbs were expelled from the newly formed sovereignties. It must be remembered that the West, when it is not profitable for it, has never demanded the punishment of those responsible, not only in the event of their exodus, but also in the situation of the largest involuntary population movements in the world since the Second World War (on a national basis, from the newly formed sovereignties on the territory of the former USSR starting Since 1989, the total number of refugees who have rushed in an unorganized way into "where their eyes look" has reached 9 million people).

The pretext for war against Yugoslavia turned out to be a complete lie. After the CIA carried out a coup in Serbia and overthrew the legitimate President Slobodan Milosevic, Finnish scientists in an official report stated that the Serbs did not arrange any massacre in the village of Racak in southern Serbia on January 15, 1999. Having examined the corpses, the Finns confirmed what all Serbs had long known: the corpses were dragged from other places to the village by Albanian bandits and presented to the world community. The spectacle with corpses was necessary for NATO to launch a brutal, barbaric aggression against peaceful Yugoslavia.

There was not even a trace of hundreds of thousands of killed Albanian residents, - international experts testified during the opening of the graves. There weren't even a few hundred. And those who were buried, for the most part, took up arms against the authorities in the ranks of the separatist group KLA. Under the pressure of these sensational revelations, the “moral justifications” for the anti-Yugoslav war collapsed with a bang. Moreover, there was a deliberate campaign to demonize the Serbs, in many ways reminiscent of Hitler's propaganda campaign against the Jews.

It also turned out that the French secret services were involved in organizing the massacre in Srebrenica in 1995, which killed seven thousand Muslims. Serbs were blamed for what happened in Srebrenica.

In fact, American observers closely followed the clashes in Kosovo, and by March 1999 (that is, until the NATO invasion) they counted only 39 dead (!). Inspiring reasons to punish the "guilty": the explosion in the line for bread in Sarajevo (May 1992) led to the imposition of sanctions against the FRY; Explosions in the Sarajevo Markale market (February 1994 and August 1995) became one of the reasons for NATO air strikes. Later, however, it was proved that the Serbs were not involved in these actions, but this no longer interested anyone.

The Germans filmed a documentary called "Es began mit einer Luege" ("It started with a lie"), which allegedly exposed some of the fictitious crimes of Milosevic, with which NATO member countries tried to win over the people to their side. And, we must admit, they succeeded. Westerners have never shown much sympathy for the Slavs, so a couple of fake pictures did their job, and a crowd of angry burghers rushed to the streets of Europe demanding the destruction of this “remnant of Soviet totalitarianism” in Kosovo. What is striking is not the ease with which entire nations were fooled, but the primitive level at which anti-Serb propaganda was carried out.

It was said, for example, that the evil Serbs came up with a sophisticated way to kill freedom-loving Albanians: they opened gas in the basement of residential buildings, put a candle in the attic, and then they had enough time to leave the houses before the explosion. And the burghers stashed this nonsense, because. despite their vaunted Western education, the burghers do not know that the gas is heavier than air and could not reach the attic in any way. However, quite soon this type of murder disappeared from official NATO documents - they realized it.

Further, the controlled media began to spin the myth that supposedly the evil Serbs set up a real concentration camp for thousands of Albanians at the stadium in Pristina. The German Minister of Defense R. Scharping, with horror in his eyes, said that real fascist methods were used there, that teachers were shot in front of children, and so on. He went to such details as painted signs on the houses of the Serbs, so that they would not get hit during the “cleansing operations” in the surrounding areas. The German Foreign Minister shouted about this that the Serbs are the new fascists, and that a civilized society cannot allow such an outrage. Surveys of people living nearby showed that the stadium was empty, except for the fact that it was occasionally used as an airfield. But NATO bombed him anyway, just in case, "forgetting" about the poor prisoners. The dilapidated interior of the stadium is open to visitors, and there are no signs of prisoners being held there. There is nothing at all, not even doors.

According to the most secret sources, NATO allegedly received information about Milosevic's insidious plan called "Horseshoe". The plan called for the expulsion of the Albanians from their lands after an almost complete encirclement through an abandoned corridor. As evidence, the public was shown photos of burning cities and villages. Like, they are already expelled there.

True, there was a problem here: cities and villages, according to Sharping, were on fire even before the NATO aggression, and photographic evidence appeared only after the bombings carried out by Germany and others. In addition, the "evidence" was filmed on their own German film, and then they tried to pass it off as the atrocities of the "communist dictator." Polls in the village of Radubra showed that no one expelled the inhabitants from there, but they were forced to leave their homes due to NATO bombs. Another village, Sankhovichi, which was depicted in Sharping's photo, could not be found. There is no such village. True, in this area there is the village of Petershtika, but the Serbs did not expel the local residents either.

In 1992, American journalist Peter Brock processed 1,500 articles from newspapers and magazines published by various news agencies in the West and came to the conclusion that the ratio of publications against the Serbs and in favor of them is 40:1.

“Serbs have never lived in Serbia alone. Today, even more than in the past, people of other nationalities also inhabit it. And I firmly believe that this is our advantage. The national composition of almost all countries in today's world is changing in this direction. Citizens of different nationalities, religions and races are living together more and more successfully.” Who said that? Elie Wiesel? Madeline Albright? George Soros? Vojslav Kostunica, Zoran Djindjic or some other US protege in Belgrade? No. This was said by Slobodan Milosevic in Kosovo on June 28, 1989, in his speech, which allegedly gave a signal to the bloodthirsty nationalist hysteria of the Serbs. Milosevic is neither a "nationalist", nor a "dictator," nor a "demagogue." True, he was never one of those Eastern European communists who, in the blink of an eye, turned into Thatcher fans and became favorites of the US ruling circles. Milosevic did not become dearer to them, having received the votes of an overwhelming majority of his country's citizens in elections or becoming the head of mass demonstrations against the "recommendations" of the IMF, which destroyed the economy of Yugoslavia.

Walter Rockler, U.S. prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials, noted the striking similarity of the entire campaign around "Serbian atrocities" in Kosovo to that carried out by the Nazis in 1939 before the attack on Poland, referring to "Polish atrocities" against the German population in its western lands. Zeros are lost in the numbers of “brutally murdered civilians” .... But still they find the graves of civilian Serb refugees killed by allies with a NATO swastika and degenerates of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), who did not have time to leave the rebellious land ... their homeland .. .

In 1999, on behalf of the European Union, allegations against the Yugoslav army and police in the execution of 42 residents of the Albanian village of Racak in Kosovo were investigated. It was this incident that served as the "start button" for the start of the 78-day NATO bombing of Yugoslavia.

So, in an interview with the Berliner Zeitung newspaper, Helena Ranta (the head of the investigation) stated that the Albanians, who were portrayed as civilians shot point-blank by the Yugoslav police, actually died in battle. That is, they were not peaceful peasants, but members of terrorist gangs who attacked not only the Yugoslav army and police, but also their compatriots - Albanians who dared to cooperate with the authorities. It also became known that the Western press and politicians were completely silent before: in Racak on January 15, 1999, many soldiers of the Yugoslav army also died.

In fact, this was known before. Journalists from one of the French TV companies were in the village of Rachak that day. Referring to what they saw and the testimony of ordinary members of the OSCE mission, they said that around the village there was a heavy battle with the use of heavy machine guns. Neither journalists, nor an employee of the OSCE mission, nor (which is especially important!) Local residents spoke about any "massacre". There were plenty of such clashes in those days in Kosovo, because the Yugoslav army and police were seriously engaged in the elimination of terrorist gangs.

But then the head of the OSCE mission, American William Walker, intervened. this long-time CIA agent involved in cooperation with the "death squads" in Nicaragua, . began to impose on the world community a version of the "execution of the civilian population." Further, the version of W. Walker was imposed on the press. With total US control over the world's media, in a monstrous campaign of manipulation of public opinion, the West has managed to create the image of the Serbs as ruthless killers. After that, the humane Western public joyfully welcomed the bombing and missile attacks on schools, hospitals and orphanages in Yugoslavia. Helena Ranta directly accused the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, which is trying Slobodan Milosevic, of accepting the version of the events in Racak imposed by W. Walker and ignoring the data of the group of Finnish experts. In her opinion, “W. Walker's statement about the massacre in Racak had no legal basis.

The OSCE observers did not take the necessary measures for an objective investigation of the incident.” Helena Ranta stated that "a group of governments was interested in a version of the events in Racak that placed the blame for the incident solely on the Serbian side." To this day, the “tribunal” presents photographs from Racak taken by the OSCE mission, but refuses to use photographs taken by the Finns. Helena Ranta's interview is a sensational exposure of the falseness of the version of the "atrocities of the Serbs", which is quite comparable in possible consequences to the failure of the American version of the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

In Rwanda in 1994, approx. 800 thousand people. However, America did not rush to stop this massacre, because Rwanda is tight with oil. And they would also risk drawing the attention of the world community to the fact that CIA agent Jonas Savimbi is leading the genocide. After the groans of the West, led by America, about the 100,000 Albanians killed by Milosevic, it turned out that they were not there. Simply no. The few "victims" that were, all as one turned out to be in military uniforms.

3. Actions

Why didn't the US wait for Security Council approval? Russia and China, which have veto power in the Security Council, have spoken out against NATO attacks. US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright knew the council would not authorize air strikes. The UN may decide to use force against a threat to international peace. But Kosovo is located on the territory of Yugoslavia - a sovereign state. Consequently, the crisis is considered an internal Yugoslav conflict, and not the subject of intervention by UN forces.

The saddest thing is that the Yugoslav tragedy could have been avoided. In this case, however, political means have not been exhausted. At worst, there was also such an option - to help the Kosovo Albanians, who did not want to be Yugoslav citizens, to move to their historical homeland. Even a tenth of the astronomical funds spent on the war and needed to restore the country as a whole and Kosovo in particular, would be enough to literally make rich not only the Kosovars, but the whole of Albania.

Alone and in isolation, Yugoslavia resisted imperial domination, withstanding pro-Western separatism, sanctions, war and covert operations. Against all odds, it remained independent and maintained an economy dominated by public ownership. The most powerful forces of the planet were used against her, and yet she held out for ten years...

On the bombs of the British planes leaving to bomb Yugoslavia, the inscriptions were visible: "Happy Easter", "We hope you enjoy it", "Do you still want to be a Serb?"

During this US and NATO aggression, which lasted from March 24 to June 10, 1999, 35,000 combat air sorties were carried out against the FRY, in which about 1,000 aircraft and helicopters were involved, 79,000 tons of explosives were dropped (including 156 containers with 37,440 cluster bombs prohibited by international law).

As the American newspaper International Herald Tribune reported in 1999, during the bombing of Yugoslavia, Western leaders clearly demonstrated their undisguised cynicism. NATO planners presented Clinton, Blair, and Chirac with a document outlining the bombing of the Belgrade headquarters of the Serbian Socialist Party. It was planned in advance to kill 50-100 party and government officials of the country and about 250 civilians. The plan was immediately approved.

The continuous bombardment of civilian targets in FR Yugoslavia showed the true nature of the aggressors, they did not even stop at the bombing of refugees and humanitarian convoys. Trucks with Greek humanitarian aid were clearly marked, their movement was known, so this act cannot be a "mistake", it is only a new planned crime against the civilian population in FR Yugoslavia.

On the Belgrade train. Thessaloniki, the pilot of an American plane landed as many as two rockets, knowing for sure that this was a passenger train. About 50 factories and factories, 18 power plants, 34 bridges, 50 hospitals and polyclinics, 480 schools, technical schools and universities were bombed. All these crimes are recorded in the three volumes of the White Book "NATO's Crimes in Yugoslavia", published by the government of the FRY.

But the Serbs, like real Slavs, chivalrously defended their country from the new invaders, and NATO continued to commit dirty crimes. And with all this, so much chatter about American humanism, human rights! It should also be noted that the world news agencies received information only from the US military, and the opinion of the opposing side was simply ignored.

In 1999, NATO bandits lied that they had turned all the military equipment of the Serbian army into powder. But according to the “adjusted” NATO estimates of 2000, it turned out that during its bombing of peaceful Serbia, NATO destroyed not 120 Serbian tanks, as the Americans brazenly lied in 1999, but only 14, and not 220 infantry fighting vehicles, but 18. But the United States used up a large number of their missiles worth up to 1.3 million dollars apiece. How did the Serbs succeed? Instead of real tanks, they put $4,000 inflatable rubber tanks everywhere. From a height of 4500 m, they looked like real ones. And below, the cowardly American pilots did not dare to descend because of the effective air defense. Serbs transported inflatable tanks on bicycles and inflated them in a few minutes. NATO, moreover, bombed plastic bridges many times, and considered the real ones to be bombed because of their camouflage color. Empty milk cartons, folded in bricks, played the role of air defense batteries.

With all this, the Yugoslav military managed to effectively fight NATO. The FRY is armed with Russian S-125 anti-aircraft missile systems, mobile RTOs "Cube", "Buk", portable "Igla", "Strela", which, although they are partially obsolete, since the Serbs could not purchase weapons under the action of sanctions, but, nevertheless, quite combat-ready. Serbian MiG 21s are really outdated, however, even if they lose the duel in the end, they are able to shoot down a couple of the latest American fighters. With some pilot experience, these same aircraft can intercept enemy attack aircraft and helicopters, as well as strike at ground targets without much danger to themselves. and it already proves it. 70 MiGs are still able to "work". There is nothing to say about the MiG-29x: these aircraft. one of the best, only a couple of Western aircraft of their class can compete with them in the sky, these are the F-22 and F-117 (which, by the way, did not live up to the hopes of the American military. One plane was shot down, and according to one version, it was the MiG- 29), the most expensive and rare US Air Force fighters. The rest of the planes, no, no, yes, they are inferior to the unique fighter. All MiG 29s are well camouflaged and are waiting in the wings to send something significant nose down, such as an AWACS aircraft or sink a landing ship with marines. Ground forces (tanks t-72A, t-55 and a number of light models, armored personnel carriers based on the BTR-1 and other types of armored vehicles) are also quite deadly, although they are inferior in some characteristics to the latest NATO armies (all the same sanctions and the decline of our .. yes, one can say, the decline of our country: foreign trade, industry, etc. !!!).

June 12, 1999. The Russian battalion enters Pristina without any order from above to protect our Serbian brothers from American aggression. Only 70 people and several armored personnel carriers, of course, could not stop NATO and the Albanian bandits armed with them, but the help of the fraternal country greatly inspired the Serbian population. On the occasion of the arrival of our troops, the Serbs staged real festivities. People sang "Kalinka-Malinka", threw flowers at our cars, raised their hands to the defenders from the "democratizers". All this was very reminiscent of footage from the Second World War, when our liberating army marched across Europe. The army remained, but in 1999, the miserable Western puppet Yeltsin sat at the very top. The troops were evacuated, the Serbs were slaughtered. Of those people who welcomed the Russian liberators, almost no one is left alive today. They relied on the Russians and did not flee Kosovo. The Russians betrayed them, and the Albanians simply destroyed the civilians of our friendly country.

By the way, the Serbs were the only nation outside the USSR that seriously rebuffed fascism. they were able to liberate a third of their territory on their own. After the collapse of the USSR, when our liberal elite betrayed everything and everyone, the Serbs remained our last allies. Or you often see on TV how the inhabitants of some country wave Russian flags with such enthusiasm. Alas, the Yeltsin regime betrayed the Serbs as well. Our policy in the Balkans turned out to be so vague and “cautious” that as a result, the fraternal people were thrown at the bayonets of the New World Order and Islamic fundamentalism. Leaving for Cologne for a meeting of the G8, Boris Yeltsin expressed himself to the press in the spirit that "they had a fight. It's time to make peace."

If so... There was no fight, but there was a one-sided beating: physical. Yugoslavia and moral and political. Russia. And the Russian president went to Cologne not to put up, but to come to terms with a fait accompli for concessions from the West on loans, restructuring of external debt, and so on. Here is such a "brilliant line" on Yugoslavia ...

In the Balkans, once again, Moscow's foreign policy has suffered a crushing, perhaps already irreparable defeat. There can only be one thing worse than what happened. to deceive oneself and others, pass off a failure as a “brilliant” success, and thereby cut off for oneself the opportunity, at least partially, at least retroactively, to correct the situation.

For many, it is still fresh in their memory how shortly after President Yeltsin's public statement
(“We will not let Kosovo be offended”) bombardments began. As official Moscow, it sharply condemned NATO's undisguised aggression against a sovereign state and demanded an unconditional cessation of air raids. Against the backdrop of an unprecedented explosion of mass anti-American feelings, the debate in Russia was only about whether to provide the victim of aggression with direct military assistance, entering into an armed clash with NATO, or to provide political support, using all available levers of influence on the West, so that it stops the aggression and recognizes your mistake. But as the weeks went by, airstrikes escalated, destruction multiplied and hundreds of people died, hundreds of thousands of refugees fled Kosovo, where the war continued. and Moscow's political influence on NATO still did not manifest itself.

Moreover, after the appointment of Viktor Chernomyrdin as the president's special envoy to the negotiations on Kosovo (a man who confused Croatia with Bosnia and knew nothing about the UN Charter), Russia's mediation mission turned into a smokescreen. At first they said: an unconditional cessation of aggression and the deployment of peacekeepers from Russia and neutral countries in Kosovo with the consent of Belgrade. NATO, as a direct participant in the conflict, cannot carry out a peacekeeping operation, otherwise it will be an occupation. Then they "moved" a step and said: so be it, let the NATO countries participate in the operation, but only those that were not in the lead in air raids, and the main powers of the bloc would remain in Albania and Macedonia. Then they moved towards a “compromise” and agreed to the presence of US troops and their main allies in Kosovo. But at the same time, they guaranteed that the 10,000-strong Russian contingent would participate on an independent basis, that is, they would be subordinate only to Moscow and have their own sector of control. on equal terms with the USA, Germany, France, Britain and Italy. As a result, even the sector was not given. UNSC Resolution 1244 is based on Chapter VII; Russian peacekeepers will not have any of their own sector, and in the amount of 3.6 thousand (7% of all peacekeeping forces) will be deployed in four of the five sectors of NATO countries, where they are sent with a two-week delay. In addition to the zone in the American sector, the rest of the battalions are surrounded by NATO contingents in zones with a predominantly Albanian population. For agreeing to withdraw all military formations from Kosovo, Yugoslavia was deceived on all counts. Is it any wonder, after all this, that Chernomyrdin is so praised in the West and so cursed in Yugoslavia that they so enthusiastically greet "Russia's enormous peacekeeping role" and even send delegations to Moscow to tell us about our "great peace contribution."

Five multilingual military contingents (moreover, one of them, Russian, “zoneless”, wandering) are concentrated on a piece of land along with warlike Albanians who feel like winners, and deeply offended Serbs burning with a thirst for revenge. Such a form of "peaceful settlement" could not be dreamed of even in a terrible dream. However, it has become a reality. But the "peacekeepers" will not stay there forever, and the Serbs are not the kind of people to come to terms with the loss of their land. The situation in the Balkans is now much worse than it was before the war. Under the "powder magazine of Europe" the United States laid a mine of great power.

Did we need to participate in this agony of destruction of the FRY, and what should our peacekeepers do? To remain in Kosovo in a deliberately ineffective and costly undertaking and thereby legalize after the fact all the previous actions of NATO, to become an unwitting, albeit passive, accomplice in the further line towards the dismemberment of the FRY? Or defiantly leave, since it was not possible to achieve the organization of a peacekeeping operation properly? The second meant finally leaving the Serbs face to face with NATO, depriving them of all support and hope, pushing them to desperate suicidal resistance by all means and methods. The first is terrible, the second is even worse.

The fake NATO-paid trial of the ex-president lasted five long years. The witness for the prosecution was General Wesley Clark, a former NATO commander in Europe, who is directly responsible for the brigade perpetrated by the alliance in Yugoslavia in the spring of 1999. While the Hague "tribunal" was looking for (and did not find) the mythical "mass graves of the victims of the Serbs", Wesley Clark's atrocities are known to the whole world: read the White Book "NATO Crimes in Yugoslavia", published by the government of the FRY. Wesley Clark, sentenced in absentia by the Belgrade District Court to 20 years in prison, testified against the country's president. victims of his crimes. The Americans demanded that the court session be closed. But that is not all. The transcript of the meeting, at which W. Clark spoke, was published only 48 hours after the end of the meeting. Why? Yes, because the Americans demanded the right to edit it in order to remove everything from there that "affects US security interests." The US has something to hide. America hides, first of all, its own crimes during the aggression against Yugoslavia in the spring of 1999. The Hague court generally officially announced that it would imprison and bankrupt those who do not testify against Slobodan Milosevic.

So much for democracy... And George Chamueli said: “Free Milosevic! Eagleberger, Zimmermann and others like them in prison!” But the essence of the trial was to declare Slobodan Milosevic a war criminal. Since there is no reason to doubt the professional "qualification" of the Hague lawyers, it remains to be concluded that their verdict is dictated by political bias. It is impossible to imagine how a competent servant of Themis can declare the acting, legally elected head of state a criminal. Let us add that, having charged the Yugoslav president for his readiness to protect the integrity of his state by all means, he should have done the same with respect to Abraham Lincoln, who did not stop before a bloody civil war in order to preserve the integrity of the United States. And send a dozen or two of the current rulers to jail. If you think about it, what happened is not the crowning achievement of NATO legal proceedings. It opens unprecedented horizons for justice, legitimizing the procedure according to which it will be possible, on the basis of one's personal ambitions, to disregard the laws of any country and international law.

Almost daily during the NATO action, Javier Solana repeated that the purpose of the alliance. punish Milosevic. However, there was already a precedent: the Americans kept bombing Iraq, thus punishing Saddam Hussein. The farcical court could not find a single concrete fact over the long five years, confirming the version of the prosecution about the “terrible war crimes” of the defendant.

Nevertheless, Milosevic was not released on bail and bail, he was tried as a cruel enemy, but not of humanity, the crimes against which he was charged, but of a specific organization. NATO. To let him go free meant to admit the illegality of his actions in March 1999.

All this time, the professional lawyer Milosevic defended himself and accused his judges of crimes against the saint himself. unshakable principles of international law. Milosevic documented that the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army was in fact a provocative extremist group designed to destabilize the country, was created by the US intelligence services and financed from the George Soros Foundation. He publicly accused the Vatican of sponsoring various separatist movements in Yugoslavia, supplying them with millions of dollars to "fight against religious oppression." One of his most famous words, sounded in The Hague, was a quote from an appeal to the judges: “You, gentlemen, cannot even imagine what a privilege, even in these conditions imposed by you, to have truth and justice in allies.”

Milosevic also opened the world's eyes to the flagrant failure of the UN and the specialized Commission on Human Rights in matters of international settlement. These institutions have discredited themselves with a highly dependent on individual countries, a politicized approach to the problem of human rights violations. Today it is no longer a secret to anyone that the so-called double standards. are born in the bowels of this very organization, originally created to resolve conflicts and consolidate the participating countries.

After his statements, the very phrase that described the title of the indictment against Milosevic - "war crimes against humanity" - caused a lot of questions among people. Is it possible to put on the same scale the tough domestic policy of the authorities of an independent state in the conditions of the collapse of the world order that existed for more than one decade and the actual uncontrolled use of force against Yugoslavia by the NATO army led by the United States? Are the victims among the extremist-minded part of the country's population comparable with the death of thousands of civilians who died under carpet bombardments, completely destroyed communication systems, energy and life support of the state?

Slobodan Milosevic was able to make the world ask the question: "Who are the judges?" Wonder if it made sense to accuse him of crimes against humanity by bombarding Yugoslavia and then Iraq and Afghanistan with depleted uranium bombs. These very effective weapons caused serious damage not only to thousands of Serbs and Iraqis who were directly bombed, but also to the territories “liberated” from the aggression of Milosevic and Hussein, where civilians still die of leukemia and bury their children. By what strange coincidence is all this not a crime against humanity?

The chain of harsh and justified accusations could only be broken by the death of the Serbian leader. The irreconcilable fighter against American violent "democracy" died, died from the same "natural" causes as his country. With his death, Milosevic forced the world community to once again take a closer look at the figure of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and earlier the chief prosecutor of the International Court of Justice for the former Yugoslavia, Louise Arbor, who was appointed to this post on the recommendation of US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. It was Louise Arbor who issued the FIRST IN HISTORY warrant for the arrest of the leader of a sovereign state - President of Yugoslavia Slobodan Milosevic at the very time when NATO bombs were falling on Belgrade and Kosovo. It was from her hands that the dossier, telling about the genocide of Albanians and the criminal regime of Milosevic, got into the ICTY. A little earlier, the same “Madam Chief Prosecutor” successfully compiled the incident in Rwanda, thus earning the approval and trust of the US leadership.

Behind this activity is a multi-billion dollar budget, a huge staff of highly paid employees and no less staff of support staff. But for some reason, these important gentlemen do not care about the problems of the indigenous population of Iraq, Afghanistan or the Russian-speaking population of Latvia. But on the other hand, following the statements of the current US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, “non-democratic” processes in Belarus are very actively beginning to worry.

At the very least, the reaction of Russian politicians and the media to the death of the never-convicted Slobodan Milosevic looks strange. We are ready to intervene in the investigation of this fatal “target operation” against the recalcitrant President, but we are not ready to openly advocate the liquidation of the Hague Tribunal and declare that Russia will not allow a repeat of Kosovo either in Europe, or in the Middle East, or anywhere else in the world .

In March 2004 another massacre began in Kosovo. The West, led by America, as usual, did practically nothing to protect the Serbs from the Albanians. As an excuse for their behavior, a story was invented about how evil Serbs drowned three Albanian children. Belgrade TV managed to get a confidential report from the so-called. "peacekeeping forces" of the UN about those responsible for the drowning of Albanian children in the Ibar River on March 16, which caused ethnic cleansing in Kosovo. According to the report, there is no evidence that Serbs are in any way responsible for their deaths. American "peacekeepers" tried to hide the report, but it still got into the media.

Many political scientists are inclined to say that NATO's aggression against Yugoslavia was also a showcase for Russia. Small Eastern European country. a micromodel of Russia, a symbiosis of Eastern Slavic, Western and Islamic culture - Yugoslavia was completely disunited and destroyed in a few months, and its government was subjected to severe persecution. A new era has opened. the era of undivided dictate and arbitrariness of the United States, which, using military means, can interfere in the affairs of any country, destroy people, cities, buildings, enterprises, bridges, poison the land and rivers. The nickname "Pindos" officially entered the dictionaries.

The following is the shortest list of the authors of the Serbian genocide scenario: Billy "Cigar" Clinton, Javier "Peacemaker" Solana, Tommy "Honest Ben" Blair, MADlen "Puffy Brooch" Albright, Schroeder ... Baby killers? .. Yes! Yes! Yes! Assistants: Yeltsin, Chernomyrdin, min. in. del Ivanov (what tact, what veal tenderness with cruel, heartless monsters like Albright!! ..)

4. Review of civilian consequences and destruction

NATO is guilty of criminal aggression against Yugoslavia - such a verdict was issued by the European Tribunal in Berlin after a two-day trial and hearing horrific evidence.

The first act of this tragedy took place in Serbian Krajina, populated almost entirely by Serbs, but which became an integral part of Croatia. The conflict left behind destroyed cities, of which Vukovar made a particularly terrible impression. The second act, provoked by the West, is the events in Bosnia and Herzegovina, where over 4 years of civil war about 200 thousand people were killed and wounded and about 3 million turned into refugees, two thirds of residential buildings were destroyed or seriously damaged.

The bombing of the chemical and petrochemical industries has exposed millions of citizens to gas poisoning, contaminated water, soil and forests. All this may have long-term consequences for the health of the entire population and the environment, not only in Yugoslavia, but throughout the region.

The Americans used depleted uranium in Yugoslavia. This highly toxic substance, as you know, is actively used in the United States in the construction of shells: they get rid of debris and deal a double blow to enemies. People in the area bombed with the use of such weapons can no longer live, because. in 67% of cases, deformed children are born, there is a total extinction from leukemia and cancer, and the decay of this substance will end after many millions of years. The low radioactivity of the materials of such ammunition does not reduce their environmental threat associated with biological damage from an increase in the concentration of heavy metals. At the same time, this ensures a long-term, more than 100 years for sure, non-competitiveness of the affected territories in the food market.

The number of civilian casualties as a result of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia is only according to official data. 2.000, and the number of wounded. 6.000. 30% of those killed and almost 40% of the wounded and maimed are children!

In a country with a population of 10 million, there are now a total of one million refugees, 2.5 million citizens are left without any income or livelihood, the Serbian population is almost completely unemployed and powerless. NATO's actions against the FRY resulted not in the elimination, but in the escalation of human rights violations.

Currently, only 50,000 Serbs remain in Kosovo and Metohija. Since the arrival of KFOR forces, Albanian terrorists have expelled about 300,000 Serbs from the region. In virtually all areas of Kosovo and Metohija, Serbs are denied free access to health, education and social institutions, which have largely remained in the hands of ethnic Albanians. Whereas throughout the democratic world democracy is understood as rule by the majority with full respect for the rights of the minority, in Kosovo the Albanians are developing a special kind of “democracy”, which is in fact the terror of the majority against minorities and their legitimate interests.

And in Kosovo and Metohija. historical cradle of Serbian culture. there are about 1800 monasteries, churches and other monuments. Many of them are under the auspices of UNESCO. However, since the KFOR forces arrived, 50 monasteries have been burned down. This was done by Albanian terrorists under the direct cover of Western "peacekeepers".

Ancient churches and other historical monuments were bombed. According to the most conservative estimates, the total damage to the country's economy amounted to 200 billion dollars, i.e. the economy was thrown back to the level of 1945. On June 26, 2004, NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer informed the Commissioner for Human Rights in the territory of Kosovo and Metohija (Serbia and Montenegro) Antoni Novinsky that the alliance did not intend to pay compensation to the inhabitants of the region for damage caused them during the NATO bombings in 1999. The Secretary General emphasized that "this was done by the allied forces unintentionally."

Let's think about the irrefutable fact: 19 states destroyed Yugoslavia from the air, that is, they beat the practically defenseless, without risking, with rare exceptions, the lives of their soldiers. Even Hitler justified his "right to exterminate weak races" on the grounds that
sends the German guys into battle.

Even with humanitarian aid, how come... Their compassion is false and disgusting. Judge for yourself, the most aggressive European countries, namely England, France, Italy, paid ridiculous sums for the maintenance of refugees (in the range of $ 1-1.5 million), when even distant and uninvolved Japan did not regret tens of millions ... In these under conditions only, albeit not very big, the help of economically sick Russia was a real and sincere gesture of compassion.

But the boorish behavior of the “six countries” of NATO, the arrogant and open intervention of the aggressors in the process of the humanitarian mission proves once again. the gangster Alliance deliberately and confidently committed genocide, the destruction of the people on a national basis, where the target is a Serb. Why were the OAK militants not disarmed in their training camps in Albania? Why didn't they immediately close the border tightly to filter out terrorists and marauders? Why was there such a delay in organizing an interim civil administration and international police personnel? Why did they give three months (!) to demilitarize the OAK, allowing the militants to stay in concentration centers and walk around with weapons and uniforms, looking through their fingers at their seizure of power in secret order? Why didn't they react to signals about pogroms and murders, referring to the lack of forces? Previously, in peacetime, 12,000 Serbian policemen maintained law and order in Kosovo until the start of the mass armed uprising of the KLA, naturally fueled by the West. Why were Serbian refugees not protected and facilitated their return home?

The historically tested scenario of the Israeli “privatization” of Palestine is being used. Refugees from Kosovo became the Palestinians of Europe, and Kosovo. new Israel. Although according to all international documents, Kosovo is part of Yugoslavia. The United States, against the wishes of the European Union, is pushing Kosovo towards "independence". more precisely, to the transformation into a state absolutely dependent on the United States with American military bases.

With all this, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was cut to the limit and was subjected to the most severe economic and political blockade in the mid-90s: the country was blocked from the sea by the US and NATO fleets. Any supply of oil, gasoline, gas, medicines was cut off. All air, rail and road traffic was banned. All political, trade, cultural ties with the outside world were interrupted. The sky of the republic was controlled by American aviation formations. Hunger, cold, lack of basic medicines, the capture of foreign skies, the capture of the Adriatic, the continuous threats of bombing. here are the levers of the "peacemakers" of Clinton and company. The West imposed unbearable sanctions on the Serbs (the people most affected by the war!) in order to bend and bring to their knees a country that does not want to be a puppet in the hands of scoundrels. But Serbia survived.

The terror continues. Albanian Islamic terrorist fighters KLA. trained by the CIA. The Albanians, protected by the NATO, are expelling the Serbs from their ancestral territories with all their might. They are everywhere killed, burned, raped. From June 10, 1999 to June 10, 2003, Albanian extremists carried out 3688 terrorist attacks, 6391 attacks on civilians, as a result of which 1194 people were killed, 1305 injured and 1138 abducted. In 2005, in Kosovo alone, since 1999, 40,000 houses and 150 Serbian churches have been destroyed. At a joint press conference with Holbrooke, US Senator Joseph Biden described the KLA as "the force and people we came to Kosovo to help." For the first time since the Second World War, ghettos are being created - ghettos for Serbs!

Welcome to Yugoslavia, to a model new colony, a showcase for globalization, a warning to all the countries that the US is preparing to take over... "It's okay, we're doing fine," they say, although each of them has lost at least 10 kilograms. For lunch they eat a can of sardines for three, some sweet peppers and bread ... And they have already stopped counting the suicides of old people who cannot pay for medicines. Increase in mortality by 30% over the past 3 years. This applies to all age groups, including youth. There are no more places in the cemeteries, they have become small! In Yugoslavia, the time has come when to say the word. "Serb" became ashamed and even dangerous.

Having bombed Yugoslavia for $100 billion, NATO refuses to help rebuild the country as long as Milosevic's leadership remains in power. Naturally, the new leadership of the "outcast" must compensate for the losses of the aggressor. Anyone who boasted about the new "democracy" established in Belgrade should note that under Serbian law, a president cannot be elected unless a majority of the electorate has voted. But only 46% participated in the October elections. What was the reaction of the European Union? Demand to change the law! What if people don't want to change it? Change people.

The new "president" Vojislav Kostunica received congratulations, but it is the State Department man - Zoran Djindjic - who is the real power. Kostunica is a real mafia godfather of Serbia. That is why the United States "chose" him to the presidency of Yugoslavia.

Also, on his orders, investigator Momir Gavrilovich was killed. Moreover, he was killed immediately after a meeting with Kostunica, at which the investigator presented evidence to this puppet of the United States that they were members of the democratic "cabinet" of Yugoslavia. big criminals. Realizing that Gavrilovich "knows too much", Kostunica picked up the phone and gave the appropriate order. on the way home from the presidential palace, Gavrilovich was shot dead.

Djindjic was the "king of smugglers" of Serbia. His main occupation prior to this was large-scale smuggling of cigarettes into the country. First of all, he adopted a program of "economic reforms". in Newspeak of the new world order, this means the sale of state property at bargain prices to Western millionaires. But Djindjic was not limited to the sale of state property. He also sold Milosevic for the promised $100 million, though that meant kidnapping in violation of Yugoslav law, and sent him to a US-paid trial in The Hague. Djindjic's reforms have skyrocketed prices, unemployment has skyrocketed, real wages have plummeted, and more than two-thirds of Serbs now live below the poverty line. It ended with the fact that Djindjic, whose rating fell below 10%, was killed by unknown people. It looks like it was the mafia, and his connections to organized crime eventually got the better of him. But as harsh as it sounds, many in Serbia would be happy to pull the trigger in person.

According to the Western press, before the war in Iraq, the new Belgrade authorities willingly provided the Pentagon with some "important information" about Iraqi strategic facilities, in the construction of which Yugoslav specialists once participated.
In the 1990s, Yugoslav construction firms, as part of interstate agreements between Iraq and Yugoslavia, built the headquarters of the ruling Ba'ath Party in Baghdad and five special underground bunkers for Saddam Hussein and his inner circle. Naturally, the Yugoslav designers and builders had drawings, plans and diagrams of these structures. The “valuable information” provided by Belgrade was used in planning and delivering precision air and naval strikes against the “Saddam bunkers”, where the centers of state and military administration of the former Iraqi regime were located.

And what happened to the 2000 promises? What a difference with the election promises of pro-Western parties in October 2000! Believe them, prosperity awaited every Serb, as soon as he turned towards the West... Do these people live better today? The facts speak for themselves. It was they, the agents of the IMF, who started the privatization of self-managed enterprises, the last legacy of the Tito era. 22 companies sold under the hammer, 5 privatized, 26 rebuilt. Laws preventing workers from being laid off were suspended at the request of foreign investors. When ordinary people have nothing to live on, new bosses, multinational corporations and rich countries are inundated with gifts. Delic said the government would immediately "reimburse" 60 million euros to the WB, the European Investment Bank and the Paris Club. For the destruction of Yugoslavia, the West receives "compensation".

The consequences of the first three years of "democratic" rule were catastrophic. In 2003, unemployment in Serbia reached an outrageous level of half the working population. This was not close even in the most difficult times of the economic blockade. The ruling elite did not have any program for the development of the country. Everything was aimed at getting Western "help". But she never materialized."

The Serbs were simply deceived. All this could not pass without a trace. The discontent of the people sharply increased. First, the ruling coalition "Democratic Opposition of Serbia" collapsed. Then the pro-Western-controlled Serbian parliament was forced to resign in November. The last elections were early. The undisputed winner is the Serbian Radical Party. She is known for her devotion to national ideals, the desire to protect the Serbs in Bosnia and Kosovo, a reasonable economic program, anti-Western and pro-Russian sentiments. The Socialist Party of Serbia retained its positions in the parliament.

The election of Slobodan Milosevic and Vojislav Seselj to parliament is a powerful blow to the long-term campaign of lies and slander against the true Serbian leaders. Ten years of demonization. and suddenly, after that, the Serbian people elect the prisoners of the Hague Tribunal in the most democratic way to parliament. What are the US actions? Milosevic is killed. Everything is trivial and simple...

The murdered Zoran Djindjic is being exchanged for the new Serbian Prime Minister Zoran Zivkovic, who, in gratitude to his new masters, took the initiative to send 1,000 Serbian-Montenegrin troops to help US troops fighting "world terrorism" in Iraq or Afghanistan. Pragmatic “democracy defenders” from Washington and “Eurobureaucrats” from Brussels will always willingly take advantage of the helpfulness of such “new friends”, but if necessary, they will not hesitate to remember all their “old sins” and make new claims. In the lexicon of Western politicians, when they talk about the forced need to do business with an adversary or foe, there is such an expression. "in bed with the enemy." It seems that the current leadership of Serbia and Montenegro found itself in just such a situation, only it does not understand one thing, that in this case the role of the “enemy in bed” is assigned to it.

As we can see, the tragedy of the Serbian and Albanian population of Yugoslavia, the unparalleled cruelty of a well-fed and self-satisfied America and equally well-fed and self-satisfied Western Europe in carrying out a "humanitarian mission" in Kosovo, their sudden and demonstrative disregard for the UN institutions, brought to the fore the discussion of one of the most important aspects of NATO aggression: superprofits received by arms and drug dealers. For the first time in the post-war period, the basic principles on which the world has hitherto been held are called into question. Having arrogated to themselves the right to punish without the decisions of the Security Council, the NATO powers reduced the UN to the position of a "reserve player" called on the field only to save their prestige. And after all this, the country, already subjected to military aggression, is discriminated against at the political level in absolutely all areas.

Taken from the book "Stirlitz" "Colonial Russia"

The composition was as follows: 1. Bosnia and Herzegovina; 2. Croatia; 3. Macedonia; 4. Montenegro; 5. Serbia (5a - Autonomous Province of Kosovo; 5b - Autonomous Province of Vojvodina); 6. Slovenia

The factors for the collapse of the Yugoslav federation were the death of Tito and the fiasco of the national policy pursued by his successors, the collapse of the world socialist system, and the surge of nationalism. Economic problems led to problems between economically more developed Croatia and Slovenia and the rest of the republics.

During the civil war and disintegration, four of the six union republics (Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Macedonia) separated from Greater Yugoslavia at the end of the 20th century. United Nations peacekeeping forces led by the United States were sent to Bosnia and Herzegovina, and then to Kosovo. We carried out a military operation to seize and actually separate this autonomous region from Yugoslavia and Serbia. Yugoslavia, in which at the beginning of the 21st century there were two republics, turned into Lesser Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro). In 2006, the referendum in Montenegro is the end of Yugoslavia. Now everything is separate.

Conflicts:

ten day war(June 27 - July 6, 1990). Armed conflict between Yugoslavia and Slovenia, which declared independence in June 1991. They got it.

War in Croatia(March 1991 - November 1995) Military conflict on the territory of the former Socialist Republic of Croatia, caused by the secession of Croatia from Yugoslavia. A really cool war, with a bunch of operations. Result: the independence of Croatia within the borders that existed in the SFRY and the liquidation of the Republic of Serbian Krajina

Bosnian War(April 6, 1992 - December 14, 1995) inter-ethnic conflict on the territory of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (former SR Bosnia and Herzegovina within Yugoslavia). Separation of territories that put an end to the civil war in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina 1992-1995.

Kosovo war(February 28, 1998-June 10, 1999). the conflict that broke out due to the abolition of the autonomy of Kosovo and Metohija. Outcome UN Security Council Resolution. Everyone was taken apart and disarmed.

NATO war against Yugoslavia NATO military operation against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia from 24 March to 10 June 1999, during the Kosovo War. Victory of NATO troops Withdrawal of Yugoslav troops from Kosovo and Metohija. Establishment of an interim administration of the UN mission in Kosovo Territorial changes - De facto secession of Kosovo and Metohija

Conflict in the Presevo Valley, also the Conflict in Southern Serbia, the troops of the SR Yugoslavia (the Armed Forces and the police) and the illegal armed formation "Liberation Army of Presevo, Medvedzhi and Buyanovac". Liquidation of the "ground security zone", dissolution of the AOPMB, amnesty for voluntarily surrendered militants, creation of a multinational police force, integration of the local population into public structures, continuation of guerrilla struggle

Conflict in Macedonia- intense inter-ethnic clashes between Macedonians and Albanian separatist groups from January to November 2001. Ohrid agreement: the victory of the Macedonian forces, the transition to the establishment of a peaceful life, the continuation of the partisan struggle

Peace Agreements in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The collapse of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) in the early 1990s was accompanied by civil wars and ethnic conflicts with the intervention of foreign states. The fighting to varying degrees and at different times affected all six republics of the former Yugoslavia. The total number of victims of conflicts in the Balkans since the early 1990s exceeds 130 thousand people. The material damage amounts to tens of billions of dollars.

Conflict in Slovenia(June 27 - July 7, 1991) became the most transient. The armed conflict, known as the Ten-Day War or the Slovenian War of Independence, began after the declaration of independence by Slovenia on June 25, 1991.

Units of the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA), which launched an offensive, faced fierce resistance from local self-defense units. According to the data of the Slovenian side, the losses of the JNA amounted to 45 people killed and 146 wounded. About 5,000 servicemen and employees of federal services were taken prisoner. The losses of the Slovenian Self-Defense Forces amounted to 19 killed and 182 wounded. Also killed 12 citizens of foreign countries.

The war ended with the signing, mediated by the EU, of the Brioni Agreement on July 7, 1991, under which the JNA pledged to cease hostilities on the territory of Slovenia. Slovenia suspended for three months the entry into force of the declaration of independence.

Conflict in Croatia(1991-1995) is also associated with the declaration of independence by this republic on June 25, 1991. During the armed conflict, which in Croatia is called the Patriotic War, Croatian forces opposed the JNA and formations of local Serbs, supported by the authorities in Belgrade.

In December 1991, the independent Republic of Serbian Krajina was proclaimed with a population of 480 thousand people (91% - Serbs). Thus, Croatia lost a significant part of its territory. In the next three years, Croatia intensively strengthened its regular army, participated in the civil war in neighboring Bosnia and Herzegovina (1992-1995) and conducted limited military operations against Serbian Krajina.

In February 1992, the UN Security Council sent a UN Protection Force (UNPROFOR) to Croatia. Initially, UNPROFOR was seen as a temporary formation to create the conditions necessary for negotiations on a comprehensive settlement of the Yugoslav crisis. In June 1992, as the conflict intensified and spread to BiH, UNPROFOR's mandate and strength were expanded.

In August 1995, the Croatian army launched a large-scale operation "Storm" and broke through the defenses of the Krajina Serbs in a matter of days. The fall of Krajina resulted in the exodus from Croatia of almost the entire Serbian population, which was 12% before the war. Having achieved success on their territory, the Croatian troops entered Bosnia and Herzegovina and, together with the Bosnian Muslims, launched an offensive against the Bosnian Serbs.

The conflict in Croatia was accompanied by mutual ethnic cleansing of the Serbian and Croatian populations. During this conflict, according to estimates, 20-26 thousand people died (mostly Croats), about 550 thousand became refugees, with a population of about 4.7 million people in Croatia. The territorial integrity of Croatia was finally restored in 1998.

The largest and fiercest was war in Bosnia and Herzegovina(1992-1995) with the participation of Muslims (Boshnak), Serbs and Croats. The escalation of tension followed the independence referendum held in that republic on February 29-March 1, 1992, with a boycott by the majority of Bosnian Serbs. The conflict involved the JNA, the Croatian army, mercenaries from all sides, as well as NATO armed forces.

The Dayton Agreement, initialed on November 21, 1995 at the US military base in Dayton, Ohio, and signed on December 14, 1995 in Paris by Bosnian Muslim leader Aliya Izetbegovic, Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic and Croatian President Franjo Tudjman put an end to the conflict. The agreement determined the post-war structure of Bosnia and Herzegovina and provided for the entry of an international peacekeeping contingent under NATO command of 60,000 people.

Immediately prior to the development of the Dayton Agreement, in August-September 1995, NATO aircraft carried out the "Deliberate Force" air operation against the Bosnian Serbs. This operation played a role in changing the military situation in favor of the Muslim-Croat forces, who launched an offensive against the Bosnian Serbs.

The Bosnian war was accompanied by mass ethnic cleansing and reprisals against civilians. During this conflict, about 100 thousand people (mostly Muslims) died, another two million became refugees, out of the pre-war population of BiH of 4.4 million people. Before the war, Muslims made up 43.6% of the population, Serbs 31.4%, Croats 17.3%.

The damage from the war amounted to tens of billions of dollars. The economy and social sphere of BiH were almost completely destroyed.

Armed conflict in the southern province of Serbia Kosovo and Metohija(1998-1999) was associated with a sharp aggravation of contradictions between Belgrade and Kosovo Albanians (now 90-95% of the population of the province). Serbia launched a large-scale military operation against the militants of the Albanian Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), who were seeking independence from Belgrade. After the failure of the attempt to reach peace agreements in Rambouillet (France), in early 1999, NATO countries led by the United States began massive bombardments of the territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro). The NATO military operation, undertaken unilaterally, without the sanction of the UN Security Council, lasted from March 24 to June 10, 1999. Large-scale ethnic cleansing was cited as the reason for the intervention of NATO troops.

On June 10, 1999, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1244, which put an end to hostilities. The resolution provided for the entry of the UN administration and an international peacekeeping contingent under NATO command (at the initial stage, 49.5 thousand people). The document provided for the determination at a later stage of the final status of Kosovo.

During the Kosovo conflict and NATO bombing, an estimated 10,000 people (mostly Albanians) died. About a million people became refugees and displaced persons, out of a pre-war population of Kosovo of 2 million people. Most Albanian refugees, unlike Serb refugees, have returned to their homes.

On February 17, 2008, Kosovo's parliament unilaterally declared independence from Serbia. The self-proclaimed state was recognized by 71 countries out of 192 UN member countries.

In 2000-2001 there was a sharp aggravation of the situation in southern Serbia, in the communities of Presevo, Bujanovac and Medveja, the majority of whose population is Albanian. The clashes in southern Serbia are known as the Presevo Valley conflict.

Albanian fighters from the Liberation Army of Presevo, Medvedzhi and Buyanovac fought for the separation of these territories from Serbia. The escalation took place in a 5-kilometer "ground security zone" created in 1999 on the territory of Serbia following the results of the Kosovo conflict in accordance with the Kumanovo military-technical agreement. Under the agreement, the Yugoslav side did not have the right to keep army and security forces in the NZB, with the exception of the local police, who were allowed to carry only small arms.

The situation in southern Serbia stabilized after Belgrade and NATO reached an agreement in May 2001 on the return of the Yugoslav army contingent to the "ground security zone." Agreements were also reached on an amnesty for militants, the formation of a multinational police force, and the integration of the local population into public structures.

During the crisis in southern Serbia, several Serbian military personnel and civilians are estimated to have died, as well as several dozen Albanians.

In 2001 there was armed conflict in Macedonia with the participation of the Albanian National Liberation Army and the regular army of Macedonia.

In the winter of 2001, Albanian militants began military guerrilla operations, seeking the independence of the northwestern regions of the country, populated predominantly by Albanians.

The confrontation between the Macedonian authorities and the Albanian militants was put to an end by the active intervention of the European Union and NATO. The Ohrid Agreement was signed, which granted Albanians in Macedonia (20-30% of the population) limited legal and cultural autonomy (official status of the Albanian language, amnesty for militants, Albanian police in Albanian areas).

As a result of the conflict, according to various estimates, more than 70 Macedonian soldiers and 700 to 800 Albanians were killed.

The material was prepared on the basis of information from RIA Novosti

Lieutenant Colonel A. Bobrov

The period of the late XIX - early XX century passed under the sign of geopolitics, when the main emphasis in the seizure of foreign territories was placed on the military-political power of the state and the dominant role of geographical factors. The current stage can be described as the age of geo-economics, when the fate of countries largely depends on the level of labor productivity, resource flows, exchange and financial instruments. At the same time, according to a number of foreign experts, geoeconomics is being replaced by the age of geoculture. It is no longer separate countries, but different civilizations defend their meanings, values ​​and type of life arrangement. At the same time, the prospects of civilizations will be largely determined by how effectively they are ready for confrontation in the information and psychological sphere.

The main goal of war in this area is to influence the public consciousness in such a way as to control people, to force the opposite side to act contrary to their interests, or, in a broader sense, to provide themselves with the opportunity to control the behavior of the masses. In this case, the targeted use of the media is of particular importance.

The military conflict, during which for the first time printed means of influencing the enemy were widely used, was the First World War (1914-1918). Great Britain used these funds especially actively, which issued millions of leaflets that were scattered over the positions of German troops with the help of aircraft. The effect of the propaganda was so unexpected that London created a special body with the task of supplying the press of other countries with magazines and newsletters containing the British interpretation of the conduct of the war.

At the end of the war, the Entente countries created a special headquarters for the moral and psychological decomposition of German troops, which coordinated the efforts of Great Britain, the USA and France in the field of propaganda, which played a certain role in the defeat of Kaiser Germany and its allies. Writers, artists, journalists were involved in the process, who produced mass production of propaganda.

The information impact is directed not only at the external adversary, but can also be used to solve "internal problems". An example of this is the activities of the Ministry of Public Education and Propaganda of Nazi Germany, carried out under the leadership of J. Goebbels. Even before coming to power, Hitler viewed the media as one of the most powerful weapons in the fight to establish a Nazi dictatorship in the country. The press, broadcasting, cinematography, music and theater were placed under the strict control of the ministry. Particular attention was paid to the activities of foreign correspondents who worked in Berlin. In exchange for creating a favorable image of the Nazi regime in the foreign press, journalists were offered material and moral benefits: luxurious apartments, cars, lavish receptions, pleasure trips, etc. foreign press corps.

The Nazi concept of propaganda and methods of psychological influence in the upcoming World War II were developed long before it began. According to Hitler, "Even before the armies begin hostilities, the enemy will be psychologically disarmed by propaganda. It is similar to artillery preparation before a frontal infantry attack in a positional war. The hostile people must be demoralized, brought to the threshold of surrender, and only after that the armed struggle should begin." With the participation of German scientists, a theory of propaganda was developed, which was based on the principles formulated by Goebbels of mental simplification, limitation and filtering of material, "drilling repetition", and emotional injection.

Mass radiofication of the planet has opened up new opportunities for information propaganda. Radio as an effective means of influence was widely used during the Second World War. So, by 1943, from the territory of Germany in the shortwave range, for the purpose of information impact, round-the-clock foreign broadcasting was carried out in 53 languages, including Russian. Nevertheless, despite all the efforts of fascist radio propaganda, the Goebbels department faced a serious problem during the war. Many Germans, tired of endless lies, preferred to listen to Soviet or English radio in order to find out the true situation on the fronts. In this regard, listening to foreign radio stations in Germany was considered high treason and was severely punished, up to imprisonment or sent to a concentration camp.

The USSR also actively entered into information warfare with the use of radio propaganda, while achieving significant success. Soviet specialists developed a method for synchronous broadcasting on the frequencies used in Germany. This allowed intrusion into the broadcasts of Nazi radio stations. German radio listeners could suddenly hear an excited cry of "lie!" in the middle of the transmission, followed by a short "truth report" about this or that event. At the same time, the voice of Hitler or Goebbels was often imitated. This technique had a strong moral impact on the audience, led to failures in the transmission of programs, as the radio station staff was forced to interrupt them.

The United States has made the greatest advances in propaganda. In 1956, the Department of Psychological Warfare that existed in the US military during the Korean War was transformed into the Department of Special Warfare. Thus, information confrontation has become an integral part of special operations. The concept of special methods of war developed in the United States was tested in Vietnam.

The information-psychological warfare was conducted simultaneously with the military operations of the American armed forces. Its main goal was not to convince the enemy, but to cause uncertainty, doubt, fear and similar feelings and moods. In their radio programs and leaflets, the Americans used arguments mainly of a socio-psychological rather than political nature, constantly resorted to methods of emotional influence (shouts of horror, desperate women and children crying, Buddhist funeral music, cries of wild animals and birds, depicting the voices of forest spirits, demons, etc.). Sometimes the tactic of sound broadcasting from helicopters to a certain area throughout the night was used to psychologically exhaust the Viet Cong fighters. Sound broadcasting programs were prepared under the guise of appeals from "wandering souls" of the dead to their loved ones.

For radio propaganda, American and South Vietnamese radio stations were used, as well as some transmitters from Thailand, Taiwan, the Philippines and Australia, which worked under the direct control of the US intelligence services. The broadcasts were in Vietnamese and at the height of the hostilities covered 95% of the country's population with a total broadcast duration of 24 hours a day.

During the Vietnam War, television became an effective strategic propaganda tool. The American troops set up a studio and four transmitting stations, broadcasting 6 hours a day. The United States handed over 3,500 TV sets to the Vietnamese, developing programs for civilian and military audiences. Televisions were installed in public places (schools, reading rooms) in settlements within a radius of 60 km from Saigon. In 1971, already about 80% of the local population could watch television programs.

Despite the defeat of the United States in Vietnam, the concept of special warfare proved to be effective. So, during the period of hostilities, approximately 250 thousand Vietnamese voluntarily went over to the side of the enemy. Subsequent analysis of the results of the conflict showed that the United States was defeated at the moment when it lost the support of world public opinion and the population of its own country. Based on this, appropriate conclusions were drawn.

Information confrontation in the modern era. The speed of the spread of information and telecommunication technologies makes it possible to speak of a "digital revolution" that has spread to all spheres of public life. Thus, to reach 50 million people, it took radio 38 years, and television - 13. In just four years, the same number of people began to use the Internet. In 1998, 143 million people were connected to the global network, by 2001 the number of users increased to 700 million, and by the end of 2012 it reached 3.5 billion people, that is, almost half of the world's population.

In addition, satellite television and communications systems have become ubiquitous, and the process of
"absorption" by the Internet of conventional (print, radio and television) media. These trends have led to the erasure of information boundaries and the globalization of the information space.

Such impressive changes are forcing the leadership of the world's leading powers to reconsider their approaches to conducting domestic and foreign policy. In turn, this leads to the emergence of military concepts designed to ensure victory in the changed conditions, with a qualitatively updated arsenal of forces and means of combat.

For the first time, new information technologies as a means of warfare were used in the Gulf War in 1991, and the term "information warfare" (WW) officially began to be used in the directive of the US Secretary of Defense of December 21, 1992. In 1996, the Pentagon approved the doctrine of information warfare under the name "Doctrine of combating combat control systems."

Initially, the term "information war" meant actions aimed at disorganizing the control systems of the opposing side. The effect was achieved by solving the following tasks:

Fire suppression (in wartime) of infrastructure elements of state and military administration;

Conducting electronic warfare;

Obtaining intelligence information by intercepting and decoding information flows transmitted via communication channels, as well as by spurious emissions;

Implementation of unauthorized access to information resources with their subsequent distortion;

Formation and mass dissemination through information channels of the enemy or global networks of disinformation to influence decision makers;

Obtaining data of interest to the enemy by intercepting open sources of information.

As you can see, the term "information warfare" at that time was considered in a rather narrow sense and was more in line with the concept of "electronic warfare".

The preparation and justification of NATO aggression against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (1999) required a revision of the strategy and tactics of warfare. The main emphasis was placed not on destabilizing the operation of the state and military command and control systems of the FRY (which was relatively easily achieved by destroying communication centers, destroying television and radio centers, as well as disrupting computer networks), but on providing international support for NATO aggression.

The State Department, the US News Agency (USIA) with its subdivisions (international satellite television networks, the Voice of America, Liberty, and Free Europe radio stations), the Central Intelligence Agency and psychologists from the Pentagon were involved in the information propaganda. A free distribution of USIA recorded broadcasts to radio stations in many countries of the world was organized, various news bulletins of the agency were published in the foreign press. It should be especially noted that the distribution of USIA products within the United States was strictly prohibited.

After the destruction of television centers in Pristina and Belgrade, local residents found themselves in an information space formed only by the media of NATO countries.
In order to ensure control over the public opinion of the population of the FRY, the Voice of America radio station directed broadcasting to the territory of Yugoslavia was deployed. Aircraft of the forces of psychological operations (PSO) of the US Armed Forces broadcast their programs on the frequencies used by Serbian television.

During the same period, there was a series of bespoke programs on the television channel CNN, during which military experts and analysts literally filled most of the news and analytical broadcasts with active propaganda in favor of NATO actions. CNN's lead correspondent, who skillfully speculated on the feelings of Americans, was K. Amanpor, the wife of the official representative of the US State Department, J. Rubin. The use of a female correspondent to cover stories about Serb atrocities in Kosovo and Metohija, the suffering of Kosovar women and children, had a strong psychological impact on Western audiences.

Along with this, the NATO Allied Command did not forget the old, proven means of conducting an information war: the US PsyOp forces scattered over the territory of Yugoslavia more than 22 million leaflets calling on the Serbs to oppose President S. Milosevic and contribute to "the speedy completion of the operation."

Considering the role of the media in the information support of the hostilities in Yugoslavia, it can be argued that, thanks to the well-functioning mechanism of state control over the information policy, the mass media finally became an integral part of the overall scenario of operations with the use of the armed forces and played a significant role in achieving the military and political goals of the campaign.

Information and network war. Scientific and technological progress in the field of information technology, the development of the media and the success of psychology in the field of studying human behavior have erased national boundaries in the information space and created unprecedented opportunities for suppressing the enemy with the help of non-traditional means of destruction that do not cause physical destruction.

The realization of this fact led to the fact that in 1998 the US Department of Defense introduced a new "Joint Doctrine of Information Operations", in which the term "strategic information confrontation" (Strategic Information Warfare) appears. According to the document, this concept is explained as "the use by states of the global information space and infrastructure to conduct strategic military operations and reduce the impact on their own information resource." In fact, this meant the emergence of a new generation of confrontation, which in the future could lead to a complete renunciation of the use of military force, since the conduct of coordinated information campaigns would most likely make it possible to do without this extreme measure.

Vital objects of the opposite side, corresponding to the concept of "five rings", were chosen as the goals of the directed impact. Its essence is that the enemy is considered as a system consisting of five concentric circles (elements): in the center - the political and military leadership, followed by the life support system, infrastructure, population, and only in the last place the armed forces. The elements of the system are integrated into a certain complex through a set of information networks of various levels, forming a single information space. Since the information impact on the elements of the system is carried out through network technologies and methods, the confrontation of the new generation in some sources is called the information-network war.

The main goal of the information-network war is to achieve a change in the ruling regime through the destruction of the foundations of the state, not by destroying the military or economic potential of the country, but by massive information impact on the moral and psychological state of its leadership and population.

In this regard, it is planned to carry out a set of information and psychological measures aimed at solving the following tasks:

Creation of an atmosphere of lack of spirituality and immorality, a negative attitude towards the cultural heritage of the enemy;

Manipulation of public consciousness and political orientation of social groups of the country's population in the interests of creating an environment of political tension and chaos;

Destabilization of political relations between parties, associations and movements with the aim of provoking conflicts, inciting an atmosphere of distrust and suspicion;

Aggravation of the political struggle, provoking repressions against the opposition;

Unleashing a civil war in society;

Reducing the level of information support of authorities and administration in order to make it difficult to make important decisions;

Disinformation of the population about the work of state bodies, undermining their authority, discrediting government bodies;

Provoking social, political, national and religious clashes;

Initiating strikes, riots and other economic protests;

Causing damage to the vital interests of the state in the political, economic, defense and other spheres.

An analysis of the development of most conflicts and "color revolutions" of the last decade, in which the US armed forces or intelligence agencies were directly or indirectly involved, allows us to conclude that the world has already entered the era of information and network wars. At the same time, most countries were not ready not only to resist, but also to reveal the very fact of aggression. This state of affairs can be explained by the fact that the efficiency and quality of decisions made at all levels directly depend on the completeness and reliability of the initial information, the difficulty of access to which is the main task of the information and network war.

The next generation of information warfare is characterized by the following features:

1. The transfer of aggression from the military-geographical space to the information-network field. This clearly confirms the example of the "Arab Spring". The change of political regimes in Tunisia and Egypt was carried out without direct military contact between the parties concerned. Revolutionary changes were provoked by information attacks from social networks "Twitter" and "Facebook" by sending messages about upcoming rallies and protests to users' e-mail and mobile phones. This allowed provocateurs to gather a critical mass of people at the right time and in the right place. At the same time, the secret services of the Arab states were unable to prevent the distribution of inflammatory messages, since they did not have the opportunity to access the control servers of social networks located on the territory and under the control of the US special services.

Attempts to completely turn off mobile communications and Internet access were made too late, when the situation was already out of control. In addition, using the capabilities of modern technologies, the opposition forces, with the support of interested parties, quickly created autonomous mobile networks, distributed free computers and communications to the population, thereby contributing to filling the information vacuum.

A similar scenario of the development of the conflict was played out in Libya. However, to change the regime of M. Gaddafi, who enjoyed the support of a significant part of the population, "Twitter provocations" were not enough. To help the rebels in the region, a grouping of NATO multinational forces was deployed, the main methods of conducting combat operations of which were the establishment of a naval blockade and the application of high-precision missile (air) strikes from areas inaccessible to Gaddafi's troops, that is, in the absence of direct contact with the enemy.

Along with this, social networks are an ideal platform for blogging, publishing analytical notes and articles covering a particular event or expressing the author's point of view. Blogs, presented in a bright form and accompanied by numerous comments, instantly become available to a huge number of Internet users. An active discussion of "hot issues" causes a wide public outcry, warms up the public and thereby contributes to the formation of the "necessary" public opinion. Thus, self-organization of thematic Internet communities takes place, which are managed through all the same social networks.

2. A sharp increase in the role of television channels in initiating conflicts. An important role in overthrowing the objectionable regimes of the countries of North Africa was given to the traditional mass media. Edited and retouched in special laboratories, reports from the "scene" about the atrocities of government troops, countless civilian casualties, as well as numerous transitions of members of the military-political leadership to the side of the rebels, heated up the atmosphere of mass psychosis and contributed to further destabilization of the situation. In addition, the bias and bias of media coverage is successfully used to shape the relevant world public opinion in order to justify the sanctions of the UN Security Council and, if necessary, justify military intervention.

Manipulation of public opinion is possible only where it is impossible or difficult for people to access reliable information. To do this, modern media use the following methods:

Outright lies with the aim of misinforming the population of their country and the foreign public;

Concealment of critical information: not stating a few facts or making a few minor deviations can distort the real picture of the event beyond recognition;

Immersion of valuable information in an array of information garbage: information about the event is reported, but overlapped by an abundance of unnecessary messages;

Simplification, affirmation and repetition: this allows you to express an idea in a vivid and memorable way, and sometimes even inspire the necessary information;
- terminology substitution: the use of concepts and terms whose meaning is not clear or has undergone qualitative changes, which makes it difficult to form a real picture of the event;

Introduction of taboos on certain types of information and news sections: the purpose of this is to prevent a wide public discussion of critical issues and topics;

Image recognition: well-known figures in show business can participate in custom-made political actions, thereby exerting a certain influence on the worldview of their fans;

Providing negative information that is better perceived by the audience compared to positive news.

The method of transmitting materials on the air is also of no small importance. It is known what impact the reports of the American news channel CNN have on the viewer. Equipped with compact satellite transceiver equipment, mobile reporting teams usually transmit a television "picture" from several cameras from the scene, which allows one to form the impression of a complete display of the dramatic processes unfolding there. The manner of reporting events used by CNN reporters creates for the viewer the effect of a special reliability of the report: what is happening is almost not commented on, there are no generalizations, and a detailed account of what is happening in the field of view of the cameras prevails.

Al-Jazeera, a pan-Arab television channel, has achieved the greatest success in the field of information propaganda. Created in 1996 with the money of the Emir of Qatar Hamad bin Khalifa at-Thani, thanks to the high professionalism of the team of journalists, he quickly gained worldwide fame. The channel, broadcasting in Arabic and English, not only informs the population, but also deliberately misinforms, propagandizes and manipulates public opinion. The channel's reports, which played an almost decisive role in shaping the wave of the "Arab spring", are currently focusing their informational impact on the population of Syria in order to encourage them to participate in protests against the incumbent President Bashar al-Assad.

3. Strengthening the influence of Western ideology on traditional societies. Depending on the specific tasks of influencing the enemy and the national specifics of the country, one or another sphere of public life becomes a priority object of aggression. The intensity and duration of the impact, which are closely related to the cultural, historical, spiritual level of development of the population, as well as the economic potential of the state, can vary from several weeks to several years.

Thus, in relation to the population of Muslim countries, information aggression can be directed at the religious component of public life. For example, in September 2012, the American amateur film "Innocence of Muslims" circulated on network resources caused a wide resonance. A low-budget video depicts the suffering of Coptic Christians in Egypt, and the Prophet Mohammed is presented in a very obscene way in it. The film, shot in English, most likely would have remained unnoticed if it had not appeared on the Internet on the eve of a significant date - September 11 - its version in Arabic translation, which stirred up the entire Islamic world.

Interest in the film was fueled every minute by the world's leading media, as a result of which its rating for two weeks firmly occupied a leading position. The wider the discussion of the "Innocence of Muslims" in the media, the more active mass unrest became in the countries of the East. The events that followed cost the lives of the American ambassador to Libya and three embassy employees.

It is noteworthy that the film was promoted by the infamous pastor Terry Jones from Florida. The American religious leader also became famous for promising to arrange a public burning of the Koran, and later actually burned one copy in his church, thereby causing bloody riots in Afghanistan.

These facts indicate the extremely high importance of the ideological and religious component in the information confrontation of the new generation. According to the American military researcher R. Peters, one of the authors of the "Greater Middle East" project (which provides for the reconfiguration of the states of the Middle East to suit the geopolitical interests of the United States), "the occupation of foreign states begins with Hollywood and McDonald's, and ends with the installation of the American flag."

4. The absence of clearly identifiable signs of the destructive impact characteristic of conventional wars. The vast majority of the population of the victim country does not even suspect that it is being subjected to an information attack, as a result of which the society does not use its protective mechanisms to resist aggression. This, in turn, leads to a paradoxical phenomenon - the aggressor achieves his military-political goals with the active support of the population of the country on which the impact is directed. The transfer of control over the strategically important resources of the state occurs voluntarily, since it is perceived not as aggression, but as a progressive development on the path to democracy and freedom.

5. Irreversibility of the consequences of the information-network war. This is explained by the fact that as a result of the influence directed on the mental space of the nation, the traditional basic values ​​of society are replaced by the moral and psychological attitudes of the aggressor. The defeated nation loses the ability to self-identify and gradually becomes part of a civilization alien to it. Japan can serve as an illustrative example of this: a society practically isolated from Anglo-Saxon influence until 1945 is now guided by Western liberalism in matters of domestic and foreign policy.

Similar processes can be observed in the republics of the former Yugoslavia. Its peoples, having gone through the stage of the painful disintegration of a single country that occurred with the participation and under the control of the United States and its allies, have long considered themselves an integral part of the Western world and voluntarily participate in Euro-Atlantic integration processes.

Thus, the forms and methods of conducting IW have undergone qualitative changes in a relatively short period of time. The role of information technologies and the mass media has increased many times over - they have become a key means of achieving the military-political goals of states. The destructive power of the information and psychological impact in modern conditions is so great that it calls into question not only the independence of the defeated state, but also the very existence of its peoples as a national community.

Foreign military review 2013 No. 1 p. 20-27