Skip to content

The Kosovo Peace Talks in crisis Natos New Lies

Marxist Theory · 1999-05-13

Core Argument

The central thesis is that NATO's war over Kosovo was never a humanitarian intervention but an imperialist campaign that failed militarily and diplomatically. Alan Woods argues that NATO could not achieve its objectives through air power alone, that its original war aims—effectively the occupation of all Yugoslavia under the Rambouillet agreement—had to be abandoned, and that the eventual peace deal represented a compromise forced on NATO by its own strategic impasse. The article claims that NATO's propaganda apparatus manufactured a narrative of victory to cover a fumbling, unnecessary war whose principal consequence was the devastation of Yugoslavia and the deepening of instability across the Balkans. The breakdown of the Kumanovo talks is presented not as a tactical setback but as the logical outcome of NATO's arrogance, its refusal to treat the Serbs as anything other than a defeated force, and its determination to marginalise Russia and the UN.

Theoretical Grounding

The analysis is grounded in the Marxist theory of imperialism, understood not as a foreign policy error but as the necessary expression of capitalist competition on a world scale. Woods treats NATO not as a defensive alliance but as the military instrument of the major imperialist powers, principally the United States, with Britain playing a subordinate but aggressive junior role. The article draws on the classical Marxist position on the national question, particularly the insistence that the working class must oppose all forms of national oppression while refusing to support any imperialist power's claim to be defending human rights. There is an implicit reliance on Lenin's analysis of the inter-imperialist rivalries that produce war, and on Trotsky's writings on the Balkans as a region where unresolved national questions and imperialist competition combine to produce permanent instability. The critique of reformist leaders who outbid the imperialists in bellicosity—here, Tony Blair and Robin Cook—is a settled position of the tradition: reformists in power do not moderate capitalism but become its most zealous executors.

Conjunctural Relevance

The article was written in June 1999, at the precise moment when the Kosovo war appeared to be unravelling. The conjuncture is defined by several concrete factors:

  • Military failure: NATO's air campaign had not destroyed the Yugoslav army, a fact admitted by The Economist and other serious observers. The option of a ground war was politically toxic in every NATO country except Britain.
  • Diplomatic breakdown: The Kumanovo talks collapsed because NATO unilaterally changed the terms of the Chernomyrdin-Ahtisaari agreement, demanding a 25-kilometre buffer zone inside Serbia proper, insisting on NATO command of all peacekeeping forces, and excluding Russia and the UN.
  • Russian opposition: The Russian government, under Yeltsin, was forced by domestic pressure—from the Duma, the military, and nationalist opinion—to resist NATO's terms. The article notes that any Russian politician who placed troops under NATO command would commit political suicide.
  • Cracks within NATO: France and Germany wanted a way out; the US Congress was opposed to ground troops; Greece refused to allow US marines to land. Only Blair's Britain pushed for escalation.
  • The KLA as a problem: The Kosovo Liberation Army, built up by the West, was now a force that could not be controlled. It rejected any deal that kept Kosovo within Yugoslavia and threatened a terrorist campaign.
  • Regional instability: The war had destabilised Albania, Macedonia, and Montenegro, and created a refugee crisis of one million people.

The article's predictive claims—that the KLA would become an uncontrollable force, that the Balkans would remain unstable, that Milosevic would not be removed by NATO bombs, and that the working class would pay the costs of reconstruction—have been borne out by subsequent events.

Where the Argument Continues

This article is part of a sustained body of analysis by Alan Woods and In Defence of Marxism on the Yugoslav wars and the Balkans. The argument continues in several directions:

  • Earlier IDOM articles from the same period: "NATO looks for the nearest exit" (13 May 1999) and "One month into the bombing campaign" (1 May 1999) are directly referenced and provide the predictions that this article confirms.
  • The broader Marxist analysis of the Balkans: Woods's writings on the national question in the Balkans, collected in The Balkan Tragedy and other works, develop the theoretical framework applied here.
  • Against the Stream episodes: The RCI's weekly programme has returned repeatedly to the Balkans, particularly during the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence and the 2022-2023 tensions in Kosovo and Bosnia.
  • The Marxist position on imperialism and war: This article sits within a larger corpus that includes analyses of the Gulf War, the Iraq War, the Libya intervention, and the Ukraine war, all of which apply the same method: expose the gap between humanitarian rhetoric and imperialist reality, identify the class forces at play, and argue for socialist revolution as the only solution.

The article leaves open the question of how the Russian bourgeoisie would resolve its contradictions—Yeltsin's position was unstable, but a coup or a shift to the left were both possible. It also does not develop the strategic perspective for the Balkan working class beyond the general call for socialist revolution, which is addressed in other texts.

Connections

  • Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism: The theoretical foundation for understanding NATO's war as an expression of inter-imperialist rivalry.
  • Trotsky, The Balkan Wars: The classic Marxist analysis of the region, which Woods explicitly draws on in his broader work.
  • Alan Woods, The Balkan Tragedy: A collection of writings that provides the historical and theoretical context for the Kosovo analysis.
  • In Defence of Marxism, "NATO looks for the nearest exit" and "One month into the bombing campaign": The immediate precursors to this article, referenced in the text.
  • Against the Stream, episodes on the Balkans (various): The RCI's ongoing coverage of the region, including interviews with Balkan Marxists and analysis of current developments.

Key Quotes

  1. "From the beginning of this war we have consistently explained that NATO could not achieve its objectives by air power alone, and that, in the end, some kind of compromise would have to be stitched up, with the aid of Russia."

  2. "NATO's original war aims were spelled out in the infamous Rambouillet agreement. As we have explained in previous documents, this amounted to the occupation, not of Kosovo, but of all Yugoslavia by NATO forces under the most humiliating terms. This aim has now had to be abandoned."

  3. "The conclusion is inescapable. The Kosovars will have to be sacrificed. These, in any case, were always expendable from the standpoint of imperialism."

  4. "All the talk about defeating the Serb army and 'saving the Kosovars' was just so much hypocritical demagogy. So long as a ground war was ruled out, such a solution was impossible."

  5. "Puffed up with his success in the polls, Tony Blair now seems to be suffering from a severe attack of megalomania. He evidently sees himself as a new Churchill, leading the Nation to Victory."

  6. "There will never be peace or stability in the Balkans until the working people take power into their own hands and carry out the socialist transformation of society."