On May 8 three Chinese language newspapers, all with key bureaus in the Bay Area and circulated widely in the United States, ran editorials on the NATO bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade. Two use the same expression -- "long nights and a lot of dreams" -- to convey their fears of more troubled times to come. The Sing Tao Daily, headquartered in Hong Kong, condemns the NATO decision to opt for a military solution in Kosovo and calls for a major U.N. role in resolving the crisis. But the World Journal, headquartered in Taiwan, argues that NATO had no choice and worries that a U.N. role will "shove NATO aside." They explain, however, that China's opposition to the NATO bombing reflects its fear that Yugoslavia could become a model eventually used by Western powers against China itself. The New York based China Press runs a long excerpt from a Beijing based Journal arguing that the U.S. is implementing a globally hegemonic "Two Ocean Strategy," one in the Euro-Atlantic and the other in the Asia Pacific.

SING TAO DAILY

The bombing of the Chinese Consulate in Belgrade has inflicted a serious wound. This shows once again how urgent it is to achieve a political resolution of the Kosovo crisis if we are to avoid "long nights and lots of dreams" -- in short, lots of trouble...

Though NATO initially launched military actions for moral reasons, it did so in a dishonest way by going around the U.N. NATO thought that air strikes would force Milosevic to surrender. But as the great philosopher of war Sun Tzu argued, using troops is the worst way to deal with an enemy -- troops should be used only when everything else fails....Unless NATO shows flexibility there is no way its military alone can solve the problem.

...We at the Sing Tao first thought that as soon as Milosevic realized he was really being hurt by the bombing he would look for a diplomatic way out. But NATO didn't follow this scenario. They stubbornly took the position that they wouldn't stop bombing until Milosevic had accepted all the NATO conditions.

From a purely military perspective it at first seemed NATO had a powerful advantage with its troops and warships. They could strike from a safe distance far away -- Milosevic had no way of striking back. All he could do was resist the blows while NATO suffered no casualties. With zero casualties, NATO did not have to fear negative political reactions at home.

But NATO forgot that the Kosovo issue could not be resolved militarily. When NATO attacked, Milosevic simply intensified his repression of the Albanians. Of the 1.8 million Albanians once living in Kosovo, two thirds have now fled.

This is an unspeakable tragedy, even more so because NATO is unable to protect the Albanians. If the bombing goes on much longer, the Serbs will have accomplished their goal of total ethnic cleansing of Albanians in Kosovo. Even if the Albanians should try to return, they will suffer heavy casualties.

This being the case, NATO had no option but to escalate the bombing, trying to weaken Serbian military capability and the country's infrastructure in the hope of forcing Milosevic to capitulate.

NATO missiles have no eyes -- even if they are state of the art technology they can make mistakes. That means more and more civilians are going to be killed. The bombing of the Chinese embassy was only the most sensational of these happenings.

After seven weeks of bombing NATO commander Gen. Welsey Clark says "Yugoslavia's security forces and logistical structures are close to breaking down entirely." Yet Milosevic, despite this, will not surrender. And if there are more incidents like the Chinese embassy bombing, the crisis will spread throughout the Balkans.

It's not too late for NATO to stop bombing and start looking for a solution through diplomacy. If both NATO and Yugoslavia could give ground a bit on the issue of stationing troops in Kosovo it wouldn't be hard to reach an agreement. The 8 point plan adopted by the G-7 plus Russia group did not explicitly call for sending NATO troops to Kosovo -- it said only that such a force would include "international civilian and security forces recognized by the U.N."

The best solution is U.N. intervention and sending in lightly armed peace keeping forces.

WORLD JOURNAL

...After NATO started bombing on March 25, Yugoslavia broke diplomatic relations with the United States. A Yugoslav interests section was moved to the Chinese Embassy in Washington. China and Russia are in agreement on the resolution of the Yugoslav crisis. They are against the NATO bombing.

The international media have noted that what bothers the Chinese leadership is that NATO bombing could become a kind of "model" for the Western powers to use the human rights or Tibet issues as an excuse to turn China into a second Yugoslavia. China's support for Yugoslavia doesn't just derive from compassion for a "brother socialist country" but from concern about its own situation.

The Yugoslav crisis wasn't caused by NATO or any of the Western countries... After much negotiation with Milosevic, NATO had no choice but to resort to military approaches -- "to press for peace through bombs." NATO's conditions are: 1) Yugoslavia must cease oppressing Albanians and allow all refugees to return; 2) Yugoslavia must withdraw all its military and police forces from Kosovo; and 3) to insure the safety of the refugees, NATO will send armed forces to keep the peace.

On the question of withdrawing and stationing of forces in Kosovo, the two sides are diametrically opposed. The issue of foreign peace-keeping forces is also contentious. But after the meeting of the G-7 plus Russia group, a shift took place. The Yugoslavs agreed on the return of the refugees but demanded that NATO first stop its bombing.

...The most difficult issue is the stationing of foreign peace keeping troops in Kosovo. The Yugoslavs are adamantly against any forces from the main NATO countries. And if American, British, German and French troops come in they want them lightly armed, symbolic and sent in by the U.N., not NATO. They also want Russian troops included. It's obvious that it's going to take a long time before any agreement can be reached.

It was just at this phase of the talks that the bombing of the embassy occurred. Aside from Chinese protests a lot of doubt had been emerging in international public opinion on the morality of NATO military conduct. In the May 8 Brussels press conference, a lot of journalists kept asking what went wrong? ... Who was responsible? Was the map outdated? Some asked whether it was done "deliberately?"

China asked the Security Council to undertake a full investigation...

Yugoslavia is playing its part in the diplomatic process. That will help the cause of peace. But if the U.N. gets involved in the Yugoslav conflict, that will mean NATO will be shoved out of the picture. That's going to make for what we Chinese call "long nights and a lot of dreams," in short lots of trouble.

That so many thousands of people have been driven out of their homes deserves compassion, but of even greater concern to us all is whether in the end the "Balkan powder keg" could once again explode.

THE CHINA PRESS (QIAOBAO)

( The China Press's views in general -- but not always -- are in sync with the Chinese government and party. The New York-based paper has no editorials but publishes daily analyses and excerpts of other publications. On May 8 it summarized an article from the Beijing-based journal Liaowang ("Looking Ahead")).

As the new century approaches people everywhere are hoping for a peaceful and safe world. Yet American strategists have been planning and working hard to make it "America's century."

NATO recently released two new strategy documents -- New Strategic Concepts (NSC) and "Guidelines" for the revised U.S.-JAPAN Security Treaty. Both are the products of long-term American strategic planning and actions.

The NSC, honed in the U.S., has made major revisions in NATO's traditional guidelines. The new concept holds that NATO's mission is to defend "democratic values." If those values are being violated in some European country, NATO has a mandate to intervene without going through the U.N.

This means NATO has been transformed from a defensive organization to an offensive one whose aim is exporting democratic values to other countries. Not only is it transforming Europe but expanding globally. Where once it relied on the U.N. for forces now it operates on its own. It can do whatever it wishes. NATO has become America's tool for advancing its European strategies.

The core of the guidelines for U.S. Japan defensive cooperation is "the Perimeter Situation Bill," presented to the Japanese Diet and now passed. It says U.S.-Japan defensive cooperation ranges from "incidents involving Japan" to intervention into "perimeter situations." If incidents occur not only will American forces in the region be alerted by Japanese Self Defense Forces as well.

The Guidelines state explicitly that America alone determines which perimeter situations are serious enough to merit involvement... This means that under the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty, Japan has simply turned into America's helper for advancing its Pacific strategy.

Together these two new American strategies are called "the Two Oceans strategy." In the East the U.S.-Japan alliance is the most important force. It is using a variety of tools to spread elsewhere in Asia. In Europe its key force is NATO. This one is relentlessly moving eastwards so as to control all of Europe.

Both of these thrusts have one aim in mind: both are a global strategy serving America's hegemonic domination of the world.