In Bosnia, Clinton Could Make a Giant Stride for the Rule of Law

By Paul Findley

President Bill Clinton's faltering response to the rape of Bosnia is a misfortune for world order, not to mention its negative effect on U.S. influence in international affairs and on the personal political fortunes of our chief executive.

The problem is not just indecision. Still worse is waffling—shifting from one decision to another and back again with a rapidity that the morning headlines and the nightly television news reports have difficulty tracking. The spectacle is reminiscent of the darkest days of the administration of President Jimmy Carter, when his decisions literally sent the U.S. military shuttling back and forth in response to Iran's seizure of U.S. diplomats in Tehran. First, Carter was speeding aircraft carriers and other warships to the Gulf in a massive military threat to Iranian authorities, then the vessels were pulled back, then sent forward, then pulled back.

A Series of Contradictions

Clinton has indulged in a long series of conflicting and contradictory forecasts, predictions and declarations of U.S. policies. He has publicly discussed options without first reaching a decision, always a hazardous approach to public policy. Washington Post columnist km Hoagland writes: "American influence on the continent now risks being wobbled away as Europeans conclude that the United States is unsure about what it wants and even less certain about how to get it."

Early on, Clinton urged air strikes against Serb positions and arming the Muslims. Then he backed away from both positions. A week later he urged "tougher measures" in Bosnia. He urged lifting the embargo against arms shipments to the beleaguered Muslims but never insisted. Then he decided to send U.S. troops to Macedonia as "peacekeepers," but he has accepted a policy that lets Serbs keep territorial gains in Bosnia. In the plan, U.S. aircraft would help protect several "safe havens" for Muslims.

Serb leaders, with U.S. acquiescence, have successfully employed a series of ruses, the latest being the delays to permit a vote by their parliament on accepting a peace plan offered by the United Nations and then a plebiscite on the same question by citizens themselves. These schemes won the Serb forces weeks in which to extend and consolidate their conquests.

The choices are admittedly tough. If I were in Clinton's shoes, I would not send U.S. military forces to the former Yugoslavia unless they were a part of a major U.N. or NATO military operation that is determined to force Serbia to retreat from territory it has illegally taken. In my view, anything short of that goal is unworthy of the risk our military personnel would face.

The scene, dark as it is, leaves open an opportunity for Clinton leadership. It should inspire Clinton to take the lead in creating a better system for world policing.

The Balkan disaster demonstrates dramatically the need for a standing police force under the command of the United Nations Security Council, one that includes air squadrons and rapid deployment ground units. Such a force was contemplated when the U.N. Charter was ratified. Winston Churchill called for it. Present U.N. secretary-general Boutros Boutros-Ghali has repeatedly urged it. The force should have been created in the aftermath of the Gulf war. Sadly, it still does not exist.

It should be plain to everyone that the world must be policed, but that no single nation—not even the United States—can fill that role or should be expected to do so. It should also be obvious that the United Nations Security Council is the logical institution to create, possess and direct a military force able to act promptly as world policeman.

And it should also be self-evident that the chief executive of the world's only superpower is the logical person to set the creative process in motion.

Under Clinton prodding, the members of the Security Council should endow the council with a police force that can respond immediately when trouble occurs. Even if it comes too late for Bosnia, it is urgently needed. Other crises are inevitable down the road and the very existence of a U. N. police force will tend to moderate any eruption.

This is Bill Clinton's opportunity. He can make a giant stride for the rule of law in the settlement of international disputes and, in the process, shed his personal albatross of weakness and indecision.

If he grasps the challenge, a silver lining will emerge from the black, ugly cloud of Serbian barbarity. If not, humankind is likely condemned to other dreadful calamities, and these may be just over the horizon.

Former Illinois Congressman Paul Findley is chairman of the Council for the National Interest, a membership organization located at 1511 K St. NW, Suite 1043, Washington, DC 20005.