Defending the West… Against Itselfrnby Srdja TrifkovicrnIn his article “A Just and Necessan’ War,” published in thernNew York Times on May 25, President William JeffersonrnClinton summarized the case for his war against the Serbs. Hernelaborated on his “vision,” arguing that the bombing of Serbiarnwas the response to “the greatest remaining threat to that vision;rninstability in the Balkans fueled by a vicious campaign of ethnicrncleansing.”rnClinton’s piece, predictably, teemed with the lies and distortionsrnthat are by now his hallmark; the article’s misstatementsrnbegan with the very first words: “We are in Kosovo with our alliesrn. . . ” We were also told that he is defending Kosovo againstrnMilosevic’s “Creater Serbia” and that, before the bombing, “wernexhausted every diplomatic avenue for a settlement,” but whenrnthe Serbs’ premeditated offensive began, “we had to act.” ThernPresident concluded that, had it not bombed Serbia, “NATO itselfrnwould have been discredited for failing to defend the veryrnvalues that give it meaning.”rnWhile Clinton’s various assertions about the background tornhis war were long ago discredited, he should be commended forrnhis overdue admission —contained in the title of his p i e c e -rnthat it is indeed a “war” that he is waging. That war is both unjustrnand unnecessary, of course, but Clinton’s claim that NATOrn(read; America) is defending its “values” in this war thereforernmerits special attention. What values? NATO is attacking notrnonly Serbian buses, hospitals, trains, and TV stations, but alsornthe “ver}’ values” that have given the West its meaning for centuries.rnIt is attacking the very concept of the nation-state and thernnotion of the rule of law.rnThe War of Clinton’s Legacy is the defining moment of ourrncivilization and the supreme test of its chances for survival inrnthe coming century. If Clinton wins, we all lose. If SerbiarnSrdja Trifkovic is the executive director of The Lord ByronrnFoundation for Balkan Studies.rn”wins” (i.e., keeps Kosovo and is not occupied by NATO), therernis hope for America, too. The Serbs are the allies of the realrnAmerica in this war; the attack against Serbia is a leftist-internationalistrnconspiracy to destroy the nation-state and thereby to demolishrnthe ver’ concept of the nation as we know it. It is beingrnwaged by the most corrupt administration in American history,rnby a group of people who are anti-Serb because they are fundamentallyrnanti-American.rnThe concept of national sovereignty within an internationalrnsystem based on a balance of power among the major actors hasrnformed the basis of Western polihcs, liberalism, and the rule ofrnlaw ever since the Peace of Westphalia (1648). All of this is beingrnreplaced by the emerging Clinton Doctrine, a carbon copyrnof the so-called Brezhnev Doctrine, which was used as a pretextrnfor the Soviet occupation of Czechoslovakia in 1968.rnThe Brezhnev Doctrine introduced the concept of “limitedrnsovereignty”: that, by virhie of its membership in the “socialistrncommunit)’,” a nation surrendered its sovereignty, which couldrnbe violated because the preservation of the monolithic unit- ofrnthe communist block was the greatest good. In the same way,rnClinton is using an abstract and ideologically loaded notion ofrnuniversal “human rights ” as the pretext to violate the law, tradition,rnand all established procedures of international relations.rnBoth doctrines have the same objective: to negate the nationstate,rnto subvert the law, and to provide an ever-present alibi forrnthe interventionists if and when they decide to march intornPrague or bomb Belgrade.rnThis doctrine was applied by the Soviets in Berlin in 1953rnand in Hungar’ in 1956, but only over Czechoslovakia in 1968rnwas it defined. The Soviets claimed that those who had enteredrnthe “socialist community of nations” accepted that thernU.S.S.R. —”the leader of the socialist camp”—was not only thernsole enforcer of the rules but also the sole judge of whether andrnwhen an intervention was warranted.rnAUGUST 1999/23rnrnrn