Release  EMBARGO, 12.00 mid day, Saturday 24 February 2001

Remarks by former Nuremberg prosecutor, Walter Rockler, to be presented in a video address to the conference on Yugoslavia at Friends’ House, Euston Road, London on Saturday 24 February 2001. 10am to 4.30pm

Mark Littman QC will be available at the conference to discuss any points that the media may like to raise.

"BOMBING IN THE SERVICE OF HUMANITARIANISM"

"The bombing was an act in flagrant contempt of international law and criminal under that law." "I cannot be persuaded that random destruction and killing in Yugoslavia by strong powers against the week, was anything less than killing in the service of arrogance."

Extracts from Walter Rockler’s speech. At Rambouillet NATO delivered a non negotiable ultimatum to the effect that Kosovo must be turned over to NATO rule with a view to ultimate Albanian independence of the province. The ultimatum was backed by the threat to pound Yugoslavia into submission. The Yugoslav Government rejected the proposal with the result that NATO had allegedly for "humanitarian reasons" to carry out its bombing threat. This resulted in ceaseless day and night bombing . . . over almost three months. The bombing was an act in flagrant contempt of international law and criminal under that law. As a primary source of international law the judgement of the Nuremberg Tribunal in the 1945/1946 cases of the major Nazi war criminals is plain and clear. American and British Leaders often rhetorically invoke and praise that judgement. "To initiate a war of aggression is therefore not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the cumulative evil of the whole." Supreme Court Justice ( US), Robert Jackson, the head of the American prosecution staff, asserted that "launching a war of aggression is a crime and that no political or economic situation can justify it." The UN Charter views aggression similarly. Articles 2, 4, and 7 prohibit the threat of force or the use of force by one state against another and interventions in the domestic jurisdiction of any country. Putting a NATO label on aggressive policy and conduct does not lend it any sanctity. This is simply a perversion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, formed originally as a defensive alliance under the United Nations Charter. The North Atlantic Treaty, at its outset, pledged its signatories to refrain from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations, and it explicitly recognises the primary responsibility of the Security Council of the United Nations for the maintenance of international peace and security. Obviously, in bypassing the Security Council and avoiding the risk of a Chinese or Russian veto for the bombing, NATO ignored and violated its basic obligation. From another standpoint of international law . . . unrestricted bombing of civilian locations is barred under international law. Bombing the so-called infrastructure of a country . . . is not an attack limited to legitimate military objectives. Pretending the effect of the bombing was its cause, NATO apologists have pointed to the mass exodus of Albanians from Kosovo as an international crime. In my view it may well be. However, the hypocrisy involved in this pretext for murder from the skies would be shameful were such hypocrisy not so commonplace. Currently, with Kosovo under benign NATO occupation, some 100,000 or more Kosovo Serbs have been forced into other parts of Yugoslavia under threat of murder by the KLA. Who condemns or prevents this exodus? The KLA has initiated attacks and killings in areas of Yugoslavia beyond the border of Kosovo province. NATO, which has a duty as Kosovo occupier to maintain law and order, and to preserve existing rights of citizenry, and at a minimum to keep the peace, appears to be helpless. If so, what is NATO doing in Kosovo? When I was a young prosecutor of Nazis at Nuremberg I read the court addresses of Justice Robert Jackson who at one time stated, "If certain acts in violation of treaties are crimes they are crimes whether the United states does them, or whether Germany does them. And we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us. Today, I cannot be persuaded that random destruction and killing in Yugoslavia by strong powers against the week, was anything less than killing in the service of arrogance, and I repudiate the shabby pretext for this criminal conduct.

END OF EXTRACTS FROM WALTER ROCKLER’S SPEECH

From conference organisers Campaign for Justice for the Peoples of Yugoslavia and Christians Against NATO Aggression. contact David Roberts 01444 232 356 or William Spring 020 8802 2144

David Roberts,
dave@saxonbooks.co.uk