Excerpts from a Debate Between Sonja Licht, President of Open Society Foundation (Belgrade) and Srdjan Dizdarevic, President of Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Bosnia-Herzegovina (Sarajevo). Provided by HCA Prague (26 May 1999) via Courier des Balkans (5 June 1999).

RFE: In Serbia almost everyone is speaking about civilian victims and about the destruction of the country by NATO. At the same time NGOs from BiH, Croatia and Slovenia stress the tragedy of Kosovo Albanians. How do you see it:

SL: First of all I want to say is that in the beginning of April, 17 NGOs from Serbia issued a statement which pointed out the suffering of Kosovo Albanians as well as citizens of Serbia and Montenegro because of the NATO bombing. I also want to mention the statement signed by 27 individuals ( I am one of them) who strongly criticised both the NATO bombing and the ethnic cleansing. So, I cannot agree with the remark that independent intellectuals in Serbia are focused only on NATO intervention. But, among NGOs and representatives of the "other Serbia" an attitude is spreading that the bombing exceptionally increased the suffering of all citizens of the FRY. Finally, ethnic cleansing on such a large scale started after the beginning of the bombing.

SD: For me it is clear that the current suffering of Albanians, as the final act of a seven year long tragedy whose author and instigator is Slobodan Milosevic, brought the West to the conclusion that bombing is the only possible solution for putting a "full stop" to the tragedy of the territories of former Yugoslavia. I think that the NATO intervention is directed against Milosevic and his regime, not against the citizens of FRY. As a citizen of Sarajevo, I want to send a message to my friends in FRY that I think that we were in the worse situation. To be a target of Karadzic and Mladic was more difficult that to be, to use that cynical expression, a collateral victim.

RFE: Mrs. Licht, do you agree that Milosevic is the main target of NATO?

SL: No, it is not true. Milosevic and his regime have not been bombed, the whole country and its infrastructure have been bombed. Kosovo has been under the most intensive bombing, some towns like Pristina, Kosovska Mitrovica and Pec are completely destroyed. The trains and buses have been bombed. I do not agree with Mr. Dizdarevic that it was the only solution for putting a full stop to all the tragic events which have happened. I do not believe that this bombing will put a full stop on anything. On the contrary, several hundred thousand Albanians have left Kosovo, the towns have been destroyed, the villages were destroyed prior to the bombing. It is a big question where refugees could return to. Beside this, there is a strong homogenisation of the people in Serbia, not in support of the regime, but to resist the NATO aggression. Bill Clinton expected a Blitzkrieg, but this Blitzkrieg has been changed in the continuous destruction. I do understand the feeling of Sarajevans when they say that it is easier to be a target of NATO, than others. I have not been a target in Sarajevo, but I know that a dead man is a dead man, a dead child is a dead child. Sarajevo was under a different kind of siege, there were snipers, and it lasted for a long period. But, believe me, what is happening in Serbia is also very big suffering.

SD: I still think that this action is directed against Milosevic. NATO leaders are repeating from day-to-day that Milosevic can just ring them up and the bombing will end. It is up to him to accept the conditions of NATO and end the suffering of the people of FRY. I disagree with Mrs Licht on the interpretation of what is happening in Kosovo. In my opinion, this horrible exodus of Albanians is not connected with the air- strikes. It is more the result of the actions of Milosevic's forces whose aim is to cleanse the territory of Albanians.

SL: According to the phone call, mentioned by Mr Dizdarevic, I think that, after first few days of bombing, even to the NATO leaders, it was clear that Milosevic will not ring them up. The first interest of this regime is to stay in power, they estimated that such a phone call could be politically very risky so they have not rung up. With this bombing the whole country and its citizens are equalised with President Milosevic. Is it correct that the International Community, which is calling for humanitarian principles, democracy, which does not accept the principle of collective guilty are now resorting to the collective punishment of the whole population. Beside this, the intervention which has not solved anything, brings a lot of problems. The UN is by-passed, in the name of universal humanitarian principles the principles on which the international order has been built up since 1945 has been endangered. I could accept this universalism if it was implemented everywhere. But, in Rwanda one million people died and there was no intervention. Is it because it is Africa, so the local people are worth less? In the last few years in Turkey more than 35.000 Kurds were killed. Villages were burnt down, chemical weapons was used against Kurds. The 30 million Kurds are attacked. But, there is no intervention, on the contrary it was openly said that any intervention could not be implemented because of geopolitical reasons, Turkey is an important state in this part of world. There was no intervention in Algeria, where, up to now, 60.000 people have been killed. If one principle is implemented only when the powerful decide to implement it, than it cannot be a universal principle. This principle is used only when it is suitable for someone and it is extremely concerning. It does not lead to the world order it leads to the world disorder.