Clever
manipulation of the way news is presented and wily methods of orchestrating its
release into the public domain are among techniques known as ‘spin’. Clearly,
some kind of deal was struck between the makers of the documentary ‘Moral [sic] Combat: Nato at War’, and the
authors of the Sunday Times article ‘CIA
aided Kosovo guerrilla army’, appearing as they did on the same day, 12
March 2000; indeed confirmation comes from the following ‘plug’ for the TV
programme in Tom Walker and Aidan Laverty’s article:
“Several Americans who were directly involved in CIA
activities or close to them have spoken to the makers of a documentary to be
broadcast on BBC2 tonight, and to The Sunday Times about their clandestine
roles.”
Eyebrows
however should not be left unraised by this cartelisation of news reporting. It
usually takes quite a long time to make a television documentary, and ‘Moral [sic] Combat’ was no exception:
“I was part of a BBC team that spent seven months trying to pin down what
really took place at Račak.”
(my emphasis)
By contrast of course, a newspaper article can be
produced in a matter of a few hours or even less. So one’s automatic assumption
is that the article is intended to publicise the documentary and whet the
appetite of prospective viewers. However, there is a discordance or rather
disconnectedness between the two pieces of reportage, and a bit of analysis of the
documentary transcript reveals what has happened. While the Sunday Times piece
touts revelations of CIA complicity in the events leading up to Nato action as
the essence, the headline-generating marrow
of the story (hence “CIA aided Kosovo guerrilla army”), the hour-long BBC
documentary is devoid of all reference to
the CIA! The story’s raciest and most marketable element has apparently
been surgically removed and off-loaded onto the Sunday Times. In this way, the article’s
great scoop goes completely uncorroborated by the big-budget, access-all-areas
TV production; a situation subliminally reinforced because every educated UK
viewer knows that the Sunday Times falls somewhere short of the BBC’s
reputation for objectivity and journalistic rigour. The following excerpts show
again the types of thing found only in the Sunday Times coverage, having
apparently as it were been ‘retrieved from the cutting room floor’ of the BBC:
“European diplomats then working for the OSCE claim
it was betrayed by an American policy that made airstrikes inevitable. Some
have questioned the motives and loyalties of William Walker, the American OSCE
head of mission.
“[…] Walker, who was nominated by Madeleine
Albright, the American secretary of state, was intensely disliked by Belgrade.
He had worked briefly for the United Nations in Croatia. Ten years earlier he
was the American ambassador to El Salvador when Washington was helping the
government there to suppress leftist rebels while supporting the contra
guerrillas against the Sandinista government in Nicaragua.
“Some European diplomats in Pristina, Kosovo's
capital, concluded from Walker's background that he was inextricably linked
with the CIA. The picture was muddied by the continued separation of American
"diplomatic observers" from the mission. The CIA sources who have now
broken their silence say the diplomatic observers were more closely connected
to the agency.
“"It was a CIA front, gathering intelligence on
the KLA's arms and leadership," said one.
“Another agent, who said he felt he had been “suckered
in” by an organisation that has run amok in post-war Kosovo, said: “I'd tell
them which hill to avoid, which wood to go behind, that sort of thing.””
This latter
agent’s admission that he felt “suckered” into helping the KLA probably
explains why his testimony and others like it wasn’t simply suppressed
altogether. Allan Little and co must have realised that had they done so, restive
CIA staffers would only have found other ways to air their grievances, over
which the BBC would have no control. One of the things to avoid if possible
would be a need to acknowledge publicly that in spite of systematic
vilification by the western mainstream media, what Serb government sources had
been saying all along was essentially true:
“Yesterday it was the turn of Vojislav Seselj, a
radical Serbian nationalist recently brought into the government as a deputy prime minister. All the
"terrorists" in Kosovo, he said, were under the control of America,
which armed, directed and financed the Kosovo Liberation Army, he said. Mr
Seselj accused the guerrillas of "butchering dead people", leaving
open the question of who had killed them.”
Seselj’s
last point alludes to the carefully orchestrated “massacre” in the village of
Račak, “discovered” by the Kosovo VerifiCIAtion Mission on 16 January 1999. Once
validated by William Walker it was eagerly embraced by a gullible media and
used to ensnare Serbia in the bestial trap laid by Nato at Rambouillet.
Allan Little’s description of Račak as having “galvanised the west to go to
war” is echoed in his documentary by then US Secretary of State Madeleine
Albright:
“It clearly was a galvanising event, and the
President really felt that we could then move forward, make clear that the US
was going to be a part of an implementing force.”
This is confirmed by Clinton himself at the White
House press conference he gave on 19 March, when the Rambouillet talks had
broken down and the Kosovo VerifiCIAtion Mission was being withdrawn:
"We should remember what happened in the
village of Račak back in January -- innocent men, women, and children taken
from their homes to a gully, forced to kneel in the dirt, sprayed with gunfire,
not because of anything they had done, but because of who they were."
As if the point needed to be further underlined, the
following quotes are from an address to Nato’s North Atlantic Council on 28
January by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan – the man entrusted above all others
with responsibility for facilitating ‘jaw-jaw’ rather than ‘war-war’:
“We must build on the remarkable cooperation between
the UN and SFOR in Bosnia to further refine the combination of force and
diplomacy that is the key to peace in the Balkans…”
“The bloody wars of the last decade have left us
with no illusions… about the need to use force, when all other means have
failed. We may be reaching that limit, once again...
“[…] Alas, horror… is present, in the lives of
hundreds of thousands of the people of Kosovo... And now, Račak has been added to the list of crimes against humanity
committed in the former Yugoslavia.” (my emphasis)
Hence Račak’s
importance to events in 1999 equates roughly to Sarajevo’s in 1914. However,
just as the CIA’s machinations were airbrushed from Allan Little’s documentary,
so Račak is a ‘spin of omission’ from “CIA
aided Kosovo’s guerrilla army”. This is all the more curious since Tom
Walker reported from the scene in January 1999
– though to be fair to him, he did put the record at least fairly straight in
an article he wrote for the Spectator in 2004:
“…after lots of ‘monitoring’ (insertion of
spies/target identifiers) and a few dubious massacres and then a very dubious one (Račak) [my emphasis] we moved into peace
conference mode. At Rambouillet the Serb delegation (minus Milosevic, who
doesn’t travel well) was told that Nato must have access to all its territory,
and not just Kosovo. Oddly, they didn’t sign up, and the Nato bombers warmed
their engines.”
“[…] Any of this sound familiar? For Slobodan
Milosevic, read Saddam Hussein. For mass graves, read WMDs. In this age of
instant reckoning, of the television clip and the soundbite, war is cheaply
sold in the right package.”