• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

Paragraph 88 of the May 22, 1999 indictment of Slobodan Milosevic and
his four aides by the Hague Court predicates their prosecution on the
principle that, “A superior is responsible for the acts of his
subordinate(s) if he knew or had reason to know that his subordinate(s)
was/were about to commit such acts or had done so and the superior
failed to take the necessary and reasonable measures to prevent such
acts or to punish the perpetrators thereof.”

On May 28, 1999 a New York Times editorial supported the indictment
stating, “Though it may complicate peace negotiations, [it] is just and
consonant with the bedrock principles of a civilized international
order.”

The paragraph 88 principles of the Milosevic indictment are also
enshrined in our Constitution’s requirement that our president “take
care” to enforce our laws. Yet ever since the beginning of the Cold War
our leaders have attempted to replace such principles with the concept
of “plausible deniability.”

In T.S. Eliot’s famous play, “Murder in the Cathedral,” an aide
asked, “Does Your Majesty want the Archbishop of Canterbury to be
assassinated?” Henry replied that a truly devoted aide should not ask
that question — but should simply report, “Becket is dead.” Currently,
most if not all reputable theologians agree with Eliot — who preached
that the do-it-but-keep-it-from-me principle spawns cancers on the
world’s morality.

However, during last year’s Senate impeachment trial neither the New
York Times or the “new” Democrats were willing to apply the moral and
legal principles of paragraph 88 to our president and his aides Betty
Curry, Vernon Jordan, Sydney Blumenthal, and Madeline Albright, and
others — whom he knew or had reason to know would repeat his lies to
help him cover up the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

Another question is: Did the president or his top aides have reason
to know and fail to prevent the fund raising from Chinese sources of his
long time friends Charlie Trie, John Huang, and Johnny Chung, and
others? There is extensive credible evidence that the answer is
“yes.” But it is ignored by Attorney General Janet Reno and the
president’s other defenders.

The recently declassified sections of the unanimous Cox Committee
report raises the following question: Did the president and his top
aides have reason to know and fail to prevent dangers to national
security from Chinese espionage and the transfer of classified nuclear
technology to communist China by such companies as Loral and Hughes –
which made six-figure contributions to the Clinton campaign? The
president, Secretary of State Albright, Attorney General Reno and
National Security Advisor Sandy Berger all deny any personal
culpability. Yet their defense of plausible deniability would dissolve
under the principles of paragraph 88 of the Milosevic indictment.

And now the most chilling current question is, Did the President,
Secretary of State Albright, Secretary of Defense Cohen, National
Security Advisor Berger, and others “know or have reason to know” that
the bombing of Yugoslavia would increase rather than decrease the
murders and deportation of Kosovars?” In a New York Times article of May
27, 1999 former President Jimmy Carter has suggested that the answer is
clearly “Yes.”

If Hague prosecutor Louise Arbour Court were to indict President
Clinton and his top aides (which is not likely), she could make a
credible case. One of many persuasive witnesses would be Bishop
Artemious of Kosovo. In a Holy Friday letter to our government’s top
officials Artemious pointed out that his Serbian Orthodox Church had
participated in an organized political resistance against Milosevic.

Bishop Artemious stated that he and other representatives of a
growing anti-Milosevic movement had visited government officials in the
United States five times from February 1998 to February 1999. In his
letter, which was largely ignored by our mainstream media, he wrote,

    We specifically stressed to Mrs. Albright in person and in
    writing what would happen if NATO intervened militarily. … [It] would
    only strengthen the Mr. Milosevic’s regime … be a big blow to the
    democratic opposition in Serbia … postpone the necessary process of
    democratization … provoke Mr. Milosevic to undertake drastic measures
    against those who think differently in Serbia … cause a radicalization
    of certain factions of the KLA, which would in turn cause the
    radicalization amongst the Serbs in Kosovo and Serbs in general. …

    In addition, I would like to emphasize something else. The greatest
    victim of your bombing is Democracy! Before your bombs democratic forces
    existed here, however embryonic. Destroying those forces is the
    greatest crime of your bombs. …

    Therefore we pray for you … “forgive them father, for they know
    what they do.”

In his prayer Bishop Artemious was more forgiving of Clinton,
Albright, Cohen, Berger, and others than is paragraph 88 of the
Milosevic indictment — which prosecutes the Serbian leader and his
aides for what they had “reason to know.”

Currently, there are millions of persons throughout the world who
have reason to believe that if the Hague Tribunal were committed to even
handed justice it would also indict President Clinton as well a number
of Third World war criminals.

As former President Carter has recently noted:

    While the war in Kosovo rages and dominates the world’s
    headlines, even more destructive conflicts in developing nations are
    systematically ignored by the United States and other powerful nations.

    Fifty thousand people have recently perished in the war between
    Eritrea and Ethiopia, and almost two million have died during the
    16-year conflict in neighboring Sudan. That war has now spilled into
    northern Uganda, whose troops have joined those from Rwanda to fight in
    the Democratic Republic of Congo (formerly Zaire). The other Congo
    (Brazzaville) is also ravaged by civil war, and all attempts to bring
    peace to Angola have failed.

    Although formidable commitments are being made in the Balkans, where
    white Europeans are involved, no such concerted efforts are being made
    by leaders outside of Africa to resolve the disputes. This gives the
    strong impression of racism.

Sadly, the defense of our president against impeachment and the
support for the war against Yugoslavia is also giving more and more
peoples of the world the impression that our commander in chief is
mentally deranged or morally flawed — and in league with the
manufacturers of bombs and missiles.

At home we are also engaged in a Clinton-inspired “culture war.” The
White House, the New Democratic Council, and the Congressional Black
Caucus are polarizing us by denouncing (as “right wing religious
extremists”) all white conservatives who disagree with them and the
Clintons on domestic affairs.

The final question that I, for one, now ask myself is: How long can
our Constitutional republic endure in a culture that is at war with
itself — while trying to use military force to de-Balkanize the
Balkans? My answer is: “God only knows!”


Jerome Zeifman is the author of “Without Honor: The Impeachment of
President Clinton and the Crimes of Camelot.” Email him at
jzeifman@yahoo.com.

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.