Andre Gunder Frank: Possibilities for Peace


Jan Slakov

Dear RN list,        May 7

Andre Gunder Frank is an economist who has been living in Canada, and whose
A Three Act Play Written  for Immediate Performance on the World Stage, has
been getting rave reviews. Examples:

from Sandy Greenberg (of Razzmatazz for Kids, based in Halifax) writes:

"The email you forwarded to me on Canada saving the world in a three-act
play is brilliant!  Can you tell me where it came from?  I'd like to
forward it to the PM, MP's, etc., but I want some background on it."

Monique Lavoie: " Special thanks for the message from the Women in Black and
for the 3-act play by Andre Gunder-Frank.  I am glad that this great
economist now lives in Canada."

I wrote to Andre Gunder Frank to let him know of this support and he replied
that he was travelling in the US just now and has not had time to get his
idea (see below) promoted much, especially with the media. I'm hoping we can
help with some of this work.

all the best, Jan

PS As you will see, in the second message below, Andre Gunder Frank's home
page is a handy source for some of the very best articles analyzing the
Yugoslavia situation.
Date:   Mon, 26 Apr 1999 14:34:24 -0400
From: Eric Fawcett <•••@••.•••>

From:               ANDRE GUNDER FRANK
250 Kensington Ave - Apt 608     Tel: 1-514-933 2539    
Westmount/Montreal PQ/QC         Fax: 1-514-933 6445 
Canada H3Z 2G8              e-mail:•••@••.••• 

My Personal/Professional Home Page>
My NATO/Kosovo Page>       
My professional/personal conclusion is the same as Pogo's - 
            We have met the enemy, and it is US 

A Three Act Play Written  for Immediate Performance on the World Stage .

As a non-Canadian non-resident in Montreal, I offer a modest proposal to
resolve the present NATO/Kosovo crisis that only Canada is in a position
to implement, but the implementation of which is also of vital interest
and benefit for Canada.:


Canada should take the initiative to convene an Emergency Session of the
United Nations General Assembly to deal with the present serious crisis in
the UN system, the Balkans and the world. For the Security Council is
paralyzed by the split down the middle vetoes of its permanent members,
three of which have therefore made an end run around the SC and replaced
the UN by NATO. This move sets a most serious precedent to set aside the
UN and its security and peace keeping institutions and mechanism
altogether and threatens to spell the deathknell of the UN as Manchuria in
1931 and Abessinya in 1936 did to its League of Nations predecessor before
WW II. And now NATO seems unable to do anything better than to expand its
illegal war more and more and perhaps to provoke WW III.

The important and relevant Canadian counter-move precedent was set by
Prime Minister Lester Pearson when in face of a similar threat in 1956 he
convoked the UN General Assembly to deal with the Suez Crisis, in which
Britain and France were the aggressors and also paralyzed the Security
Council by their veto power. Moreover, Pearson elaborated, presented and
got approval and implementation of a United Nations Emergency Intervention
Force [UNEIF], whose military planning and then overall command were in
the hands of a Canadian general. British and French aggression forces were
replaced by and naturally excluded from this UNIEF. The establishment of
such a UNIEF is foreseen by the UN Charter, under whose Articles 41 and
42. such a UN military force can be used within the scope of exiting
international law, which is decidedly NOT the case of any and all
allegedly 'UN sanctioned' interventions, such as that assembed by the US
under its own command in the 1991 Gulf War against Iraq.That violated more
than a half dozen sections of the UN Charter, including some in Articles
41 and 42. The NATO action, of course, virtually abrogates the entire UN
Charter, organization and peace keeping provisions and mechanisms. It was
Lester Pearson's concern and merit to preempt that. Today it should and
can be Canada's role again to lead the General Assembly to demand an
immediate stop to the bombing and ethnic cleansing and to establish a new
multinational UNEIF to go in on the ground to clean up, and avoid
spreading further, the mess NATO has made in Yugoslavia, Macedonia,
Albania, etc. That would also offer NATO a way out.

Prime Minister Jean Chretien has said several times that as a member of
NATO, Canada had the obligation to go along with the other member's
decisions. Actually, that is not so, as Charles De Gaulle proved to the
extent of NATO moving its headquarters out of France.  It can be
forcefully argued however that Mr. Chretien has far more mandate,
obligation, and precedent to 'go along with' - and indeed to exercise a
leadership role in - the United Nations for peace, as Canada more than any
other country has done in the UN over the past half century, and NOT for
war, which he is unwilling even to declare or to let Parliament debate. In
a word, history has placed Canada in a privileged position to initiate and
take steps to save the world and the United Nations in this period of
crisis.  As it happens, Canada now also has a seat on the Security
Council, but to what avail? One would be to call the SC into emergency
session as well if only to dramatize the paralysis and ineffectiveness of
the SC - and of its titular head, the UN Secretary General, who maintained
a thunderous silence during this past month of war, the prevention of
which is the primary duty of his office under the UN Charter. If Canada
cannot move the SG to act, then perhaps it and others can make the SG move
out, that is to resign in protest against those on the SC who are making
it impossible for him to carry out even minimally the duties of his
office. Little would be lost, and much gained; since that would be a
political impulse now to reform the SC, which is long overdue anyway.


A second motion that Canada - and others - should bring in this Emergency
Session of the UN General Assembly is to move the United Nations out of
the United States. Under present circumstances, such a Canadian motion may
be considered with favor by many member state delegations, and all the
more so if Canada garners prestige and shows some independence of
        initiative and action [especially within North America] through its
in Act One.  An additional factor that may incline some delegations to
move the UN out of the United States is that , after repeated requests and
agreements, the United States remains in arrears in its payment of dues to
the UN. Yet the US wishes to use the UN it in its own interests whenever
it is convenient , but to disregard it whenever it is not.

A third motion that Canada could and should then bring before the General
Assembly is to invite and welcome the UN to move to Canada in general and
to Montreal in particular. Canada and Montreal can offer the United
Nations a whose series of advantages that would be difficult for others to

- close to where it is now and still to Washington DC, yet in a country
  that is independent [if it has shown itself to so be in Act I!]

-the only North  American infrastructure  cities outside of the US

- in Montreal a truly bi-lingual city speaking two of the major UN
  languages [attractive for francophone delegations!], and immigrants who
  speak many other languages
- centrally located already metro accessible available and/or
  constructable office and meeting space on Ilse St. Helene

- abundant housing at low costs relative to any other major city that
  could harbor the UN

- relatively economical, given its present price level and the exchange
 rate of the Canadian dollar

- voted the best country in the world to live in!


What's in it for Canada? Plenty

- The prestige of reviving its traditional role of doing something useful
  in and for the UN and the world.

- The need of taking an independent line on this UN issue will not only
  garner further international prestige per se, but it could serve as an
  impulse for greater Canadian independence  and bargaining power in other
  matters as well.

- Bringing, constructing, running the UN site in Canada brings hundreds
  of millions of dollars into Canada

The UN in Canada offers extra employment to the people of Quebec and ROC
Canadians , both highly and less skilled .

Bringing the UN to Montreal is likely de facto to settle the Quebec
in-or-out of the Federation issue in one fell swoop: With the UN in
Montreal, Quebec could not afford to and would not wish to secede from
Canada any more. Moreover, the Province of Quebec and the City of Montreal
[like New York City now] and the UN could make bi-lateral 'administrative'
arrangments for their co-habitation, so that these and the UN itself could
serve as a institutional and moral guarantors of Quebec as a distinct
society. Of course, Canada still could and should accommodate the
Quebecois, but it would not need to fall and drown in any more Meech Lake
like swamp. And with Quebec finally safe and sound in the Confederation of
Canada , so would be the Maritimes, Alberta, and BC. That is, Canada
itself would be saved.


In three simple acts building on Canadian precedent and prestige at the
United Nations, Canada today has the golden opportunity to not only to
save the United Nations itself, but The World, Quebec, and Canada itself
into the bargain. All we [I wish I could say 'we' ] need is a little bit
of the political will and leadership in the tradition of Dief and Lester.

JUST SAY YES!  LET'S DO IT!!        [Applause]

Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 04:11:20 -0500
From: Mark Douglas Whitaker <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Gunder Frank's New NATO/KOSOV web page (fwd)
                   ANDRE GUNDER FRANK
250 Kensington Ave - Apt 608     Tel: 1-514-933 2539    
Westmount/Montreal PQ/QC         Fax: 1-514-933 6445 
Canada H3Z 2G8              e-mail:•••@••.••• 

My Personal/Professional Home Page>
My NATO/Kosovo Page>       
My professional/personal conclusion is the same as Pogo's - 
            We have met the enemy, and it is US 

Please establish hot-links to this page if you have a Kosovo page
or section and/or post this announcement on your discussion or
other related e-mail net regarding: 

This is Gunder Frank's new NATO/KOSOVO web page with dates of my postings,

  - ESSAYS BY GUNDER FRANK  [titles in capitals,1-4 thousand words]
  - ESSAYS BY OTHERS [titles in capitals, authors in lower case]
  - excerpted items of news and documents
      [tiles in lower case, length 200-400 words]   

                   ANDRE GUNDER FRANK
250 Kensington Ave - Apt 608     Tel: 1-514-933 2539    
Westmount/Montreal PQ/QC         Fax: 1-514-933 6445 
Canada H3Z 2G8              e-mail:•••@••.••• 

My Personal/Professional Home Page>
My NATO/Kosovo Page>       
My professional/personal conclusion is the same as Pogo's - 
            We have met the enemy, and it is US 

Gunder Frank's Essays and Selections on NATO/Kosovo

LINKS TO: Gunder Frank home page| Z Magazine on NATO/Kosovo |
Jay's Leftist Resources |
19 April 1999 
        Long analytic essay by Gunder Frank first posted March 26


     NATO AGAINST THE LAW & YUGOSLAVIA Essay by Gunder Frank


     CANADA CAN MAKE PEACE IN KOSOVO Essay by Joanna Santa Barbara in
                TORONTO STAR 
     YUGOSLAVIA THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY Essay by Diana Johnstone 
     THE CLINTON DOCTRINE by Boris Kagarlitsky Essay by Moscow 

     WHY NATO EXPANSION Essay by Douglas Roche, MP and former Canadian
        Ambassador to the UN  for Disarmament 

     IMPACT OF NATO BOMBING [till April 11] Essay by M. Chossudovsky

     FATAL STRATEGY FLAWS Essay by Gen.Satish Nabiar [recently commander
        of UN mission forces in Yugoslavia]
     (Vienna) in German 
     CURRENT BOMBING Essay by Noam Chomsky

    DISMANTLING YUGOSLAVIA Essay  by M .Chossudovsky

Excerpts from  News and Documentary Items

    Freedom of the Press from the Horses Mouth - Excrpt
    Kosovo Crisis Points to Global Realignment Excerpt
     The Path to Crisis: How the United States and Its Allies Went to War

     same and more chemicals again Excerpt 

     which side are you on? Excerpt 

     more 'collateral' chemicals in the sky Excerpt 

     Voices from the Serbian opposition to Milosevic Excerpt 

     France splits NATO for fear of Russia Excerpt 

     one journalist begs to differ Excerpt 

     more 'collateral' [non civilian? non?] damage Excerpt 
     Nuremberg & personal resposibility Excerpt 

18 April 1999 

     MIGHT[&]TWO WRONGS MAKE A RIGHT? Essay by Gunder Frank 

     more 'collateral' chemicals in the sky Excerpt 

17 April 1999 

     genocide definition Excerpt 

     on AGF on NATO Excerpt 

     Nuremberg principles [for the record] Excerpt 

16 April 1999 

     Clinton with Serbian-Americans and in re NATO Excerpt 

     A MODEST LEGAL/UN PROPOSAL TO ACT! Essay by Gunder Frank 

     no civilian collateral damage? Excerpt 

     freedom of the press Excerpt 

     church appeal Excerpt 

     The Blue Danube Excerpt 

     forward planning - but not for Albanians Excerpt 

     humanitarian pretexts and precedents Excerpt 

     YU ground invasion alternatives Excerpt 

     russian volunteers and consequences Excerpt 

     proliferation Excerpt 

     profits Excerpt 

     depleted uranium warheads Excerpt 
     rambouillet Excerpt 
     CIA & other warnings Excerpt 
     Kosovo mining wealth Excerpt 
     KLA Excerpt 
     Fatal Flaws in NAto mission Excerpt 
     Hague Court appeal by Russia Excerpt 
     Kosovo genocide? Excerpt 
     OSCE Pan European/North Am alternative to NATO Excerpt 
     NATO war dividends Excerpt 
     The cost of war in Kosovo Excerpt