Why did the United States fight Yugoslavia a few years ago?

Since the end of February 1998, the former returned to Kosovo, where Serbia and Albania had a bloody conflict for nearly half a century, and became a new hot spot on the Bayu Peninsula after the succession, attracting worldwide attention. On March 24, 2009, the NATO group led by the United States used a large number of the latest and most advanced air strike weapons under the pretext of safeguarding human rights. Ignoring the strong opposition of people all over the world, bypassing the United Nations, and flagrantly carrying out a large-scale air strike operation code-named "Liantian Force" against Yugoslavia, the Kosovo war broke out. This high-tech local war, with air raid and air raid prevention as the main fighting styles, lasted for 78 days. This is another large-scale high-tech local war after the Gulf War. Beimen Group concentrates on the use of high-tech weapons. Taking air strikes as the main combat style, the initiative in the war was restored from the beginning to the signing of the contract. NATO has participated in the war with 1200 aircraft, 55 ships and 3 aircraft carriers. With the support of more than 50 space satellites and tens of thousands of ground troops, 32,000 planes were dispatched, 23 million bombs of various types were dropped, and 2,000 military and civilian targets throughout the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia were indiscriminately bombed. It has caused great material losses to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. In the case of great disparity in military strength and extremely unfavorable operational situation, the Yugoslav army fought stubbornly against the 78-nation war and achieved certain results. The internal affairs of a sovereign country, originally characterized by ethnic contradictions after the Cold War, have become international disputes with priority given by western powers, which have brought profound disasters to Yugoslavia and the world. Air strikes caused 1800 deaths and 6000 injuries. As a result, the 12 railway was destroyed, 50 bridges were bombed, 20 hospitals were destroyed, 40% oil depots and 30% radio and television stations were damaged, and the total economic losses amounted to 200 billion US dollars. In nature, the Kosovo war is a typical aggressive war of bullying the weak with more and fighting less, and in style, it is a typical "asymmetric war" of high technology against low technology. At the same time, it is also a people's war that widely mobilizes the people, flexibly uses tactics, and attacks the enemy with superior equipment with inferior equipment, which deserves our serious study.

First, the causes of the Kosovo war crisis.

As we all know, Yugoslavia was once the most powerful national unity country in the Balkans, namely "Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia". In the early 1990s, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was divided into five parts: Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Macedonia, against the background of drastic changes in Eastern Europe, the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the surging tide of world nationalism. 1On April 27th, 1992, the former Yugoslav Republic of Serbia and Montenegro united to form the present Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

Kosovo is an autonomous province of Serbia, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, bordering Albania and Macedonia, with an area of 10000 square kilometers, and the population of Pristina, the capital, is about 2 million. 90% of them are Albanians, and the rest are Serbs and Montenegrins. Historically, Kosovo was under the rule of the Ottoman Empire, and it was not incorporated into the territory of Serbia until the end of the Balkan War in 19 12. After World War II, Kosovo joined the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia together with Serbia.

During and at the beginning of World War II, Kosovo Albanians tried to establish "Greater Albania" with the help of external forces, and Kosovo Albanian students held a large-scale demonstration in 1968. After Tito's death 198 1 year, Albanians in Kosovo demanded the establishment of an independent republic in Yugoslavia. 1988, more than 6,000 Serbs and Montenegrins accused Albanians of harassing them and held large-scale protests. 1In July 1990, Albanian parliamentarians in Kosovo announced the establishment of Kosovo.

The National Assembly dissolved the Parliament of corvo and restored autonomy. 199 1 year, Kosovo Albanians held a "referendum" and decided to establish the "Republic of Kosovo". Subsequently, they established their own government and parliament, and refused to recognize the legal authorities appointed by the Serbian government. 1In May 1992, Rugova was elected. 1994, radical ethnic separatists also established the so-called "Kosovo Liberation Army" in an attempt to achieve independence through violent activities. Since then, the conflict between Serbs and Albanians has never stopped until it turned into a large-scale bloody conflict since 1998. For a long time, Kosovo has been in the contradiction of ethnic opposition, which is the result of the interaction of many factors.

(A) domestic reasons

First, there are historical reasons, mainly in the ownership of Kosovo. Serbs and Albanians have their own opinions. Serbs believe that Kosovo is the political and cultural center of the Kingdom of Serbia and the cradle of their history and culture in the12nd century. 1389- 19 12 For more than 500 years, the Ottoman Turkish Empire occupied Kosovo and imposed Islam. Albanians, on the other hand, converted to Islam and moved one after another. Albanians, on the other hand, insist that Iliriye, a primitive tribe living in Kosovo in the 4th-5th century BC, is the ancestor of Albanians, so Kosovo has been the territory of Albanians since ancient times.

Second, policy mistakes are an important reason for the deterioration of contradictions. Although historical reasons are the root of ethnic contradictions in Serbia and Albania, policy factors are the important reasons for the deterioration of ethnic contradictions in Kosovo. First, Tito's ethnic policy. After the end of World War II, Tito, a Croatian, pursued the policy of "all ethnic groups are equal regardless of size" in the former Yugoslavia. It has been hailed as a model for Europe to successfully solve ethnic problems in multi-ethnic countries. However, in order to eliminate the influence of great Serbian doctrine in history, Tito's ethnic policy obviously tends to contain and weaken Serbia. A popular slogan at that time was "Weak Serbia, Strong South". This policy is particularly evident in dealing with the Kosovo issue. 1963, the former yugoslavia established two autonomous provinces in Serbia, namely, ethnic minority areas. The Constitution promulgated in 1974 further expanded the rights of autonomous provinces, making their status almost equal to that of the six republics of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. According to the principle of "equal opportunities" (that is, all countries and autonomous provinces, big or small, participate in the federal leading bodies with the same number of representatives) and "taking office by turns" (that the chairmen of all political parties, countries, governments and mass organizations are held by the state and autonomous provinces in turn), the autonomous provinces of Kosovo can send the same number of representatives to the federal and central institutions, with veto power, even though their population proportion in the Federation is small. It even has a special right: if Serbia wants to amend the constitution, it must obtain the consent of the Ministry, but the Ministry does not need to cancel the consent. This practice of "equal rights but unequal obligations" has led to the intensification of racial opposition, which Serbia has been worried about for many years. Economically, in order to narrow the gap, Tito also put forward a guiding principle, that is, "the political equality of the people of all ethnic groups in South Africa must be supplemented by economic equality." To this end, South Korea established the "Federal Fund for Aid to Underdeveloped Areas" in the 1960s, stipulating that developed areas must give about 1.6% of GDP each year to aid underdeveloped areas free of charge or in the form of low-interest loans, with provinces receiving the largest proportion. In order to level the level of economic development, South Africa provides Keke with an average of US$ 654.38+US$ 200,000 in aid every day. Instead of trying to get rid of its underdeveloped status with this money, Keke tried its best to keep this status, and at the same time spent huge sums of money to build luxury hotels, spectacular banks and libraries. The "Fund" has been established for more than 30 years, and Keke has always been the poorest area in the former South. The blind emphasis on "free aid" without linking the establishment of "fund" with economic mechanism and market rules has long caused dissatisfaction among other federal countries, which is one of the economic reasons why Slovenia and Croatia, the two most developed countries, took the lead in leaving the former Yugoslavia. In addition, according to the regulations at the beginning of the founding of Yugoslavia, only the so-called major ethnic groups that have not established a country outside Yugoslavia can establish a * * * Republic. Therefore, Montenegro with a population of only 600,000 can establish a * * Republic, while Kosovo with 2 million Albanians cannot, because Albania has established a * * Republic outside Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia has not provided enough arguments to explain this theory. The second is Milosevic's policy. The Serbs were deeply dissatisfied with the policies of Tito's era, but due to Tito's absolute authority, Serbia could still fully obey when he was alive. However, with the disappearance of Tito, a historical figure, and the deepening of the political and economic crisis in South Slavonia, the conflict between the Serbian and Albanian communities has further intensified. Serbian leader Milosevic believes that the Federal Constitution of 1974 and the Serbian Constitution actually divide Serbia into three parts, and Serbia's major decision-making autonomous provinces cannot operate without approval, resulting in Serbia losing its sovereignty and being in an unequal position with other republics. After 1989, Milosevic regained most of Kosovo's autonomy by amending the Constitution twice, and finally even Kosovo Albanians were deprived of the right to cultural equality. This behavior is too extreme, which objectively stimulates the deterioration of contradictions.

The third factor is population growth. According to the data, in 1929, Albanians only accounted for 40% of Kosovo's population, while in 196 1 year, Kosovo Serbs accounted for 25% of Kosovo's population, but now it is less than 10%. The main reasons are as follows: on the one hand, after the 1974 Constitution expanded the right of autonomy in Kosovo, Serbs felt excluded and kept moving out, while foreign Albanians kept moving out; On the other hand, because Albanians never control population growth, the birth rate has risen sharply. The natural population growth rate in Kosovo is the highest in Europe, reaching 24.6%. The serious imbalance in the population ratio has led to the fact that most parts of the province have almost become purely Albanian areas, which has objectively become an important basis for the province to seek autonomy or even independence. As early as1970s, Yugoslavia realized the seriousness of this consequence. Serbian President Milosevic planned to arrange Serbian immigrants to Kosovo in a planned way (including later trying to resettle Serbs who fled Croatia during the civil war), but all failed.

(2) The fundamental motive of the Kosovo War is to fully implement the long-simmering "global strategy" with Eurasia as the main body, and to build a global strategic system dominated by the United States in 2 1 century.

The global strategy of the United States was put forward as early as after the Second World War. During the Cold War, the global strategy of the United States was embodied in competing with the former Soviet Union for world hegemony. Because the United States and the Soviet Union have generally formed a strategic balance of power, it is difficult for the United States to realize its dream of dominating the world. After the end of the Cold War, the United States became "the only last supreme global superpower" in world history, which provided a rare historical opportunity for the United States to realize its long-cherished wish of leading the world, and its dream of dominating the world began to revive. Especially after the mid-1990s, as the economy maintained a strong growth momentum, the comprehensive national strength was further enhanced, and the status of "one superpower" was further consolidated, the ambition of the United States to dominate the world expanded rapidly. American policymakers believe that before 20 15, it is difficult for other strategic forces in the world to challenge the United States, which is the "war opportunity period" for the United States to build a global strategy. Therefore, the United States should make full use of this strategic gap and deploy a global strategy as soon as possible to ensure its long-term hegemony.

"Whoever controls Eurasia will control the whole world", which is the creed of the old hegemonists. Although the world has changed, the geopolitical plate has not changed, and it is difficult for the new hegemonism of the United States to jump out of its nest. Controlling Eurasia is also the core of American new global strategy. For the United States, North America is its base, Latin America is its backyard, Africa is still a "broken continent" that cannot be lifted, and only Eurasia on the left and right wings is its threat to dominate the world. The new global strategic deployment of the United States mainly revolves around "one center and two basic points", that is, taking the dominant position of world hegemony as the center and controlling the Euro-Atlantic and Asia-Pacific directions as the two basic points to seize the "world island" of Eurasia. In this way, preventing the emergence of forces in Eurasia that challenge its "one-superpower" status has become the main content of America's global strategic concept. Brzezinski, the national security adviser of the former president of the United States, pointed out in his book The Grand Pattern that the ultimate goal of American policy is to build a truly cooperative global family according to the long-term trend and the fundamental interests of mankind. But at the same time, there is no challenger in Eurasia to rule Eurasia and challenge the United States. "This fully exposes the strategic intention of the US global strategic concept. Among the countries that can challenge the hegemony of the United States in Eurasia in the future, the United States believes that the most threatening countries in Europe are still Russia, the successor of the old enemy Soviet Union, and China, which is rising in Asia. To this end, the United States has determined the strategic guiding principle of "controlling the two oceans and attacking from both sides." "In Asia, based on the US-Japan military alliance, push the US-Japan treaty' westward'; In Europe, it relies on NATO military groups to promote NATO's "eastward expansion" and "globalization of NATO's mission". The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, located in the hinterland of the Balkans in Europe, is a traditional ally of Russia and refuses to integrate into the western system, thus becoming a geographical obstacle for the United States to suppress Russia and control Europe, which is related to the global strategic deployment of the United States and naturally becomes the first "thorn in the side" for the United States to pull out in Europe. In this way, the Kosovo war became a breakthrough for the United States to start its global strategic concept and the first shot for the United States to build a leading system in the 2 1 century. It sends a strong signal to the world that the global strategic concept of the United States dominating the world has been fully implemented.

(3) Striving for and controlling global resources on a larger scale is the root cause of the Kosovo war.

War is the continuation of politics, and politics is the concentrated expression of economy. Engels once said that violence is not only a means, on the contrary, economic interests are an end. The history of conflicts and wars in human society since ancient times is a history full of competing for resources and the right to exist. From the occupation of slaves by slave society to the Crusades in the Middle Ages, from Hitler's "blitzkrieg" against Europe to the struggle for spheres of influence between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War, it was all for the possession of resources and greater living space. At present, the ultimate goal of American world domination strategy and NATO's new strategy is to compete for global resources and occupy and control them to the maximum extent. According to the statistics of the United Nations, the natural resources on the earth can maintain a relatively rich life for 654.38 billion people. This figure is called "gold 65.438+0 billion", but at present, the world population is close to 7 billion, and it will exceed 8 billion at the beginning of 265.438+0 century. The large population makes the earth's resources scarce and the distribution of limited resources is extremely unbalanced. The regions with the richest resources are Asia, Africa and Latin America, while the regions with the highest resource consumption are North America and Western Europe. The United States, in particular, consumes far more resources every day than other countries. For developed countries, driven by bourgeois nature, they are not concerned about how to make the world enjoy the resources of the earth fairly and evenly, but how to make their own countries compete for and occupy more resources, so as to occupy the resources of the world to the maximum extent and support their huge resource consumption for a long time. Therefore, some people say that America's huge virtual economy and huge energy consumption, as well as its heavy dependence on the world market, are the profound roots of its establishment of global hegemony to control the flow of world funds, resources and energy and ensure the monopoly interests of the United States. In the final analysis, the United States actively plans and promotes NATO's eastward expansion, which is a larger-scale competition for resources after the Cold War. The goal of this campaign is to point to the areas where the United States and Western allies failed to succeed or master the dominant position under the restriction of the bipolar system: Central Europe, the former Soviet Union, the Middle East and Africa, and the Asia-Pacific region, and the Kosovo war is the key battle for this new resource.

If the Kosovo war is successful, Russia can be driven out of the Balu region, and the United States and NATO countries can easily occupy the economic, trade and arms markets in this region. The arms market in Central and Eastern Europe is very attractive to the United States. After World War II, this region has been the focus of Russian arms sales. After the end of the Cold War, Central and Eastern European countries demanded to join NATO one after another, and began to reform their armies according to the standards of NATO alliance, which led to the rapid expansion of the arms market in Central and Eastern Europe. It is estimated that Poland, Hungary and Czech Republic, the first three countries to join NATO, will spend $654.38 million just to replace their fighters. The Kosovo war will not only clear the obstacles to NATO's eastward expansion, but also hand over a large number of arms orders to the West, mainly the United States. After the war, the share of the United States in the arms market in this region will increase by 10% ~ 20%, occupying a monopoly position in the arms market in this region. The ultimate goal of the United States-led West to suppress Russia is to plot Russia's rich natural resources. Russia is a resource-rich country. Its natural resources account for about 1/2 of the world total reserves. Modern western military theorists believe that in order to make use of Russia's rich natural resources, we must first weaken Russia and dismember it into several countries. The goal of the United States in plotting Russia is to continuously expand the market share of American consumer goods and agricultural products in Russia, so that Russia can serve as an exporter of raw materials, especially energy, in the United States and western countries. In addition, through the Kosovo war, the economic goal that the west wants to achieve is to curb Russia's eastward entry into the Mediterranean from the Black Sea, thus protecting the oil interests of the United States in the Black Sea; To the south, we can strengthen the southern wing of NATO, nuclearize the unruly oil-producing countries in the Middle East and North Africa, and ensure the smooth oil passage in the Middle East. In Kosovo, the United States actively waged war. Through this war, the United States can not only consolidate the hegemony of the US dollar in the world financial system, but also lay a foundation for the United States to continue to gain greater and longer-term global monopoly economic benefits. It can also open the market for American arms products and bring huge war profits, thus stimulating US domestic demand and creating employment opportunities. It is said that the Kosovo war can bring tens of billions of dollars in arms exports and tens of thousands of jobs to American arms dealers. In addition, through the Kosovo war, the United States can increase its control over the European economy, highlight the dominant position of the American economy, consolidate the world monetary system with the dollar as its core, and establish its "economic hegemony." The Kosovo war once again proved an eternal truth: economic interests are the fundamental motive of the war.