Ernestly ?!Ernestly ?!By ERNIE NEUFELD, Weyburn Review Associate Publisher
Many readers of this column probably find themselves trying, as I am trying, to cope with conflicting emotions, beliefs and hopes, as they see unfolding before their eyes on television screens and in the daily press, the destruction being visited on a faraway land by forces with which our country - and we - are allied.
These forces are not attempting to conquer a land to acquire it out of imperialistic ambitions. Nor are they doing battle with an extreme ideology, such as Communism or Fascism. They are acting out a self-appointed role as an international police force to prevent further bloodshed, based on ethnic and/or religious hatred and intolerance, in a European land that managed for many years to exist with at least an outward appearance of harmony despite diverse constituent parts.
From all reports that have reached us from that unfortunate corner of Europe, there seems to be little doubt but that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which is taking the police action, is "on the side of the angels," if the term may be used to describe this sort of bloody adventure.
There obviously is representative resolve within NATO that this drastic action is necessary. In fact, one gets the impression that our collective integrity depends on this unusual initiative. Canada's political parties, which have difficulty agreeing on the time of day, seem to be cautiously united in backing Canada's participation in the international action, although amazingly without parliamentary approval. A handful of Canadian aircraft have already participated in the bombing raids.
So as seen from here, thousands of miles removed from the centuries-old hatreds, jealousies and rivalries that have contributed to the Balkan crisis, there is compelling evidence something had to be done that could be undertaken only through joint action, under the aegis of either the United Nations or NATO. And the UN effectively excludes itself by granting veto powers which would surely prevent the sanctioning of any united action.
Not once but a number of times, over the past four decades, I have used the corner or corners allotted me on this page to advocate potent international intervention in armed conflicts. A world government, with an international army to control and contain hostilities between states and peoples, I opined, was the only way to go. So what am I fretting about, now that we are seeing at least a beginning?
For one thing, I cannot help thinking that if the Soviet empire had not collapsed about a decade ago; if the cold war still lived, the United States - the key player in NATO- would not have dared write the script that is now being acted out, in the face of Soviet opposition and threats of military opposition. Even now, Russia has voiced harsh criticism, but aside from rattling some rusty and broken sabres, Russian leaders have settled down to some discontented grumbling from the sidelines, and are even involving themselves in a political solution.
Additionally, I see signs that we may be taking the position that the status quo ante bellum - in relation to control and authority in Kosovo - must be the fair final solution to peace and stability in that section of Yugoslavia, ignoring centuries-old claims of the Serbs to this real estate.
I have some problems nowadays too with the proposition that the theoretical impartiality of an international organization necessarily assures fairness in solving regional differences. Even in Canada, with its relatively peaceful past and a population of only 30 million, we look with distrust whenever our central government makes decisions we feel disregard, ignore or set aside local judgment and preference.
I am also filled with uneasiness, somehow, when I see U.S. warplanes that look like something out of Buck Rogers (or Revelations), and listen to proud announcements that these machines with no other purpose than to deal death and destruction, cost $2 billion apiece. Who, perhaps (I ask myself), wants to see these implements of wars tested?
I have some trouble as well with the priorities.
If the international community as represented by NATO, takes seriously its assumed policing role of forcefully staying the massacre, pillage, persecution and brutality being perpetrated, we are told, by the Serbian army, is there not at least an implied obligation to address the fate of tens, perhaps hundreds, of thousands of refugees fleeing Kosovo for the friendlier but impoverished neighbouring countries, and the rescue of those still in danger?
An apt analogy fails me, but try this: suppose your children were in your yard and being attacked by the savage dogs of a neighbour gleefully looking on, would you not look to the security and comfort of the kids, and banishment of the beasts from the yard, before you started throwing stones at the neighbors' windows to visit vengeance and perhaps to serve as a deterrent?
Yes I know, they are thinking about it.
My address (also listed on the Review's Website) is ernestly@pathcom.com.
Box 400, 904 East Avenue
Weyburn, SK
S4H 2K4
Phone: (306) 842-7487
Fax: (306) 842-0282
E-mail: production@weyburnreview.com
This web page and its contents are copyright of the Weyburn
Review (1987) Ltd.
