September/October 1993, Page 8

Words to Remember

Applying History's Lessons to Bosnia

The administration of President Bill Clinton wavered too long between decision and irresolution on Bosnia, preparing to follow its own instincts but tortured by divided counsel from international allies with separate agendas of their own. Chief among the distractions were attempts to apply historical parallels to the situation.

Americans with long memories cited Japan's invasions of China in the 1930s, Italy's conquest of Ethiopia in 1935, and Germany's incursions into Czechoslovakia, starting in 1938. None of the world outrage they generated galvanized the League of Nations into concerted military action to halt the aggression.

Had there been such action, historians speculate, World War II might have been avoided. Instead, after France and Britain finally moved to halt Germany's invasion of Poland in 1939, Italy and Japan supported Germany, and gradually the whole world, belatedly including the United States, was drawn in.

The result was 55 million dead, and only brief emergence from World War II before the world entered 40 years of Cold War. The analogy is obvious.

An equally appropriate example is that of Korea, where the U. S. mustered an international coalition under the U.N. flag to resist a massive incursion from North Korea into South Korea in 1950. Boundaries were restored to approximately those that had existed before the invasion.

Those counseling against bold U.S. action, however, cite a different analogy— the "quagmire" of Vietnam. The U.S. started by providing air support to South Vietnamese forces against Soviet- and China-supported North Vietnam. From air forces the U.S. effort extended to air bases, then to "perimeter defense" and, eventually, full-scale intervention on the ground. But South Vietnam lost the war.

The Vietnam parallel is less applicable to Bosnia because there no longer is a Soviet superpower prepared to counter every U.S.-led move. About "quagmires," however, there remains a lesson to be learned.

It is a lesson the U.S. already has applied in the Gulf war. Saddam Hussain's Iraqi forces in Kuwait apparently believed the U.S. would limit ground action to landing on Kuwait's heavily mined beaches, and forcing its way across major entrenchments along Kuwait's desert borders. French, Syrian and other members of the coalition refused in advance to participate in any action in or over Iraq. The bulk of the U.S.-led international coalition nevertheless sent ground troops into Iraq, and within 100 hours had trapped Iraq's invasion forces. The entire operation, from first air strike to 100-hour ground war, lasted less than seven weeks. Kuwait was no quagmire.

The lessons that should be drawn are three. Bosnia could be a turning point in the history of post-Cold War collective action in the face of massive violations of international and humanitarian law. After a warning strike or two, military action cannot be limited to bombing concealed artillery pieces and tanks. If Serb aggression continues, Serbian military concentrations should be destroyed, wherever they are, and the bridges over which they move into Bosnia severed.

The Bosnians themselves are willing to provide the ground troops. All they ask are heavy weapons to match those of their opponents, and the air support required to rectify more than a year of Western indifference and neglect.

Bosnia can be a defining moment for whether or not the 21st century is going to see progress in collective action for peace and justice, or a further escalation of racial and religious bigotry, persecution and slaughter. That challenge can be met, without descent into another "quagmire," if the right lessons are drawn from U.S. participation in four previous wars in the past half-century.

The Agony of Bosnia, June 22 to August 13, 1993

Compiled by Donna Bourne

"The sudden death of a peace plan formulated by U.N. and EC mediators and the prospect of Bosnia's partition has again forced Community leaders to confront an intractable conflict on their doorstep that has come to symbolize Europe's political weakness and unfulfilled ambitions... [Cyrus] Vance said, 'I'm very saddened by what I think is a tragic mistake in moving to a new plan. It will end up rewarding those involved in [ethnic cleansing]'. . . The Clinton administration has urged its European allies to allow weapons deliveries to the Bosnian government so it would have the means to defend its people and lessen the advantage held by the Bosnian Serbs, whose patrons in neighboring Serbia have been supplying them with heavy armaments and other strategic materiel ... Only Germany has shown any sign it would go along with the United States in responding favorably to Bosnia's appeal to lift the embargo."

—Correspondent William Drozdiak, Washington Post, June 22, 1993

"The EC says its role will be to lend diplomatic support to the Muslims to ensure they get what Lord Owen describes as 'a viable mini-state'. . The Europeans still insist in public that Bosnia should retain its territorial integrity. But some officials acknowledge it will be hard to prevent Serbia and Croatia from annexing some parts ... But the Europeans firmly rule out the option being urged on them by the Bosnian Muslims themselves, to lift the arms embargo."

—Peter Gumbel, Wall Street Journal, June 22, 1993

"Two weeks ago, President Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia and President Franjo Tudjman of Croatia presented a plan for dividing Bosnia into Serbian, Croatian and Muslim republics joined in a loose confederation. The move bolstered reports that the two presidents plotted the carving up of Bosnia at a secret meeting more than two years ago.

—Correspondent Chuck Sudetic, New York Times, June 28, 1993

"The Security Council this evening decided not to exempt Bosnia and Herzegovina from its arms embargo on all parties to the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. It took that action by a show-of-hands vote of 6 in favor (Cape Verde, Djibouti, Morocco, Pakistan, United States and Venezuela) to none against, with 9 abstentions (Brazil, China, France, Hungary, Japan, New Zealand, Russian Federation, Spain and United Kingdom), rejecting a draft resolution sponsored by non-aligned members of the council. By the draft, the council, acting under Chapter VII of the charter, would have demanded the cessation of all hostilities and the reversal of the consequences of those hostilities in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It would have also reaffirmed the country's sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence."

—United Nations Press Release, June 29, 1993

"United Nations officials said today that they had strong evidence of close military cooperation between Serbian and Croatian militias against the mostly Muslim army of the Bosnian government. 'We're getting it from so many different sources, including our own observers,' said a spokeswoman for the United Nations ... Adding to the pressure on the army and on the Muslim population, Serbian nationalists have blocked aid convoys to regions loyal to the government. At the Bosnian-Serbian border today, Bosnian Serb militiamen turned back a United Nations convoy bound for Sarajevo after demanding thousands of dollars in 'road tolls,' a U.N. spokesman said. "

—Correspondent Chuck Sudetic, New York Times, July 2, 1993

"With his country carved into bits, his besieged people thirsting for water and his ragtag defense force confronted by better-armed Serb and Croat nationalists, Bosnian Presdient Alija Izetbegovic said today that he sees no 'rational' way out for his beleaguered government and the Slavic Muslim community it chiefly represents... When Bosnia's Muslims and Croats joined in March 1992 to vote for secession from the old Yugoslav federation, much of the republic's 31 percent Serb minority protested and prepared for war. Izetbegovic misread the situation and told his people that peace would prevail. Fifteen months of war later, his means of dealing with the current chaos appears to be to trust in fate. "

—Correspondent John Pomfret, Washington Post, July 6, 1993

"Hyper-inflation in Serbia and Montenegro has soared above any recording and beyond economists' ability to measure it, though at last guess the annual rate was 63 million percent ... Vesna Pesic, leader of the (Serbian) pro-democracy movement Citizens Union, offers no predictions of when Serbs will break out of the nationalist spell. Like Panic and Markovic, she is outraged by the West's handling of the Bosnian crisis and expressed anger at democratic leaders to which Serbia's fledgling opposition looked for moral guidance. 'I don't think that, after the decision by Lord Owen to divide Bosnia to satisfy its predators, that the real opposition here has any chance,' she said. 'Whatever we had to say about democracy and the need to punish (ethnic cleansing] is defeated. The extreme nationalists are celebrating their victory over Western values. "'

—Correspondent Carol J. Williams, Los Angeles Times, July 7, 1993

"The fuel shortage has caused growing chaos in the city (Sarajevo]. United Nations food distribution has ceased, for lack of fuel to power the trucks that deliver the food to neighborhoods. The city's only working bakery has halted production, because it has no diesel to fuel its ovens ... Even more worrying to United Nations officials is the collapse of the water system. With summer temperatures here rising to nearly 100 degrees, the city is getting less than 2 percent of its normal water supply, and there are fears of water-borne epidemics as people resort to drawing water from polluted rivers, wells and springs."

—Correspondent John F. Bums, New York Times, July 8,1993

"Serb and Croat factional leaders have stepped up demands that the government accept partition. Today, Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic issued an ultimatum giving the government 20 days to begin negotiating dissection of the republic."

—Correspondent John Pomfret, Washington Post, July 8, 1993

"If the Muslims are for war, we have to totally defeat them. If they are for peace, we are ready to assure them safe territory in a confederated state.

—Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic, July 8, 1993

"NATO agreed yesterday to start deploying bombers and ground attack aircraft to bases in Italy this weekend, in preparation for a mission to protect U.N. forces in Bosnia, including troops sent to Muslim 'safe areas.' The United States has offered more than 20 planes to NATO for the operation, which will also include between 50 and 60 aircraft from Britain, France and the Netherlands... NATO sources said British, Dutch and French planes would be involved in the initial phase of the mission, with U. S. aircraft probably joining later. "

—Reuters correspondent Nicholas Doughty, Washington Times, July 8, 1993

"The failure of the United States to offer military support to Bosnia's Muslims is being used by Arab countries as a yardstick against which to measure Washington's actions in the Middle East ... When senior officials from Egypt and Turkey, both important allies of the United States, were asked for their reaction to the U. S. raids against Iraq, they chose instead to call for equally tough action by Washington against Bosnia's Serbs. "

—Correspondent Gordon Robison, Washington Times , July 8, 1993

"Egypt faces a lot of criticism from other Arab and Muslim countries: 'What did you do for Bosnia And, really, the only thing they [the Egyptians] can do is to put pressure on their Western allies. "

—Egyptian diplomat Tahsin Bashir, July 8, 1993

"Serbs now control 70 percent of Bosnia, the capital of Sarajevo is suffering appallingly under siege, and Serbia and its sometime ally, sometime enemy Croatia demand a division of the country that would leave Bosnia's Muslims huddling in two indefensible enclaves. The Serbs, who quickly saw the lack of seriousness in last year's stem G-7 warning, are not going to be impressed by this year's finger-wagging.

—Los Angeles Times editorial, July 9, 1993

"The outside world's inability to prevent or halt aggression in Bosnia is likely to whet other appetites for pressing old territorial claims. Macedonia is the most likely arena, with Bulgaria, Greece, Serbia and maybe even Albania potentially involved."

—Diplomat-historian George F. Kennan, quoted in Los Angeles Times, July 9, 1993

"Serb and Croat leaders believe the West is tired and bored with Bosnia. When mediator Lord Owen agreed to back the Serb-Croat partition plan and declared the U. N. Vance-Owen plan dead, it said as much. Now the West has no plan and is in the odd position of backing the plan of Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic, charged with war crimes ... There is still a face-saving answer: Call it the Somalia strategy. With mass starvation ahead, President Clinton and Western leaders can resolve to deliver food by all necessary means. If U.N. convoys are stopped, force should be used to deliver the aid. Can the West do the minimum it promised?"

—Christian Science Monitor editorial, July 9, 1993

"The great foreign-policy failure of Mr. Clinton's first six months is not in doubt. After much buffing and puffing about the need for stronger measures to stop Serbian aggression in Bosnia, Mr. Clinton did nothing that mattered. To this day the horror continues. In Sarajevo water and electricity supplies have failed. The World Health Organization warns of 'catastrophe' on a scale unseen in Europe since World War II."

—Anthony Lewis, New York Times, July 12, 1993

"The partition of Bosnia into three ethnic areas could require the resettlement of 1.5 million to 2 million people, a classified State Department report says ... Another problem, one senior State Department official said, is that partition could disrupt most of the Bosnian families with mixed ethnic backgrounds ... Warren Zimmerman, director of the Bureau for Refugee Programs and the last United States ambassador to Yugoslavia, called Bosnia 'a humanitarian crisis on a scale we have not seen in Europe' since World War II. The State Department ... estimates that with partition, 600,000 Muslims would have to move, half of them from areas of Bosnia that would no longer be controlled by the government, the other half expelled from Croatia ... Half a million Serbs would be expected to move, about 350,000 from Serbia back home to newly Serb-controlled territory, the rest from places that would come under Muslim or Croatian control. "

—Correspondent Elaine Sciolino, New York Times, July 13, 1993

"The bottom has fallen out of the Yugoslav economy over the last two weeks, sending mind-boggling hyper-inflation into an unchartable upward spiral and launching the stoic and longsuffering Serbs on an unusual spree of panic buying ... In just one hour last week, between noon and 1 p.m. Wednesday, the German mark-the only monetary frame of reference here (in Belgrade) soared against the virtually worthless dinar from 2.5 million to 3.5 million ... The economy has been stretched and battered by Belgrade's bankrolling of two years of war and by the harsh U.N. sanctions imposed 14 months ago to pressure the nationalist leadership to stop fomenting conflict in the Balkans. But only in the past few weeks has the inflation last calculated at more than 10 billion percent a year shaken the foundation of what is left of the national economy."

—Correspondent Carol J. Williams, Los Angeles Times, July 13, 1993

"There can be no more fairy tales about democracy or help from the West. I'm a foreigner now wherever I go. "

—Croat refugee from northern Bosnia Ante Komuskic, quoted by David Ottaway, Washington Post, July 14, 1993

"About a quarter of Bosnia's pre-war population of 4.3 million has fled that land, spreading out across the world from Pakistan to the United States, from South Africa to Finland, in search of new homes, jobs and direction for their shattered lives. The neighboring countries of Croatia and Serbia have had to absorb a massive influx of more than 500,000 refugees from the Bosnian battlefields. But more than 670,000 victim of the Yugoslav wars-the vast majority of them casualties of 'ethnic cleansing' in Bosnia-have found refuge in Western Europe, which is gripped by ethnic tensions, serious unemployment, a surfeit of African and Eastern European workers, housing shortages and social welfare bankruptcy. "

—Correspondent David B. Ottaway, Washington Post, July 14, 1993

"Officials insisted that President Clinton was deeply disturbed by dramatic television footage from Sarajevo, as well as a report Friday from State Department officials in the field who have urged Washington to take immediate action. During his visit to Tokyo last week, Mr. Clinton told Mr. Christopher to develop a strategy for helping Sarajevo, officials said. The result was an informal paper prepared by the State Department European bureau that laid out six options, from continuing the current policy of diplomatic complaints and economic pressure to mounting a Somalia-style military operation that could involve air strikes and even some United States ground troops."

—Correspondent Elaine Sciolino, New York Times, July 14, 1993

Six Muslim nations and the Palestine Liberation Organization offered today to send 18,000 soldiers to protect U.N.-designated 'safe areas' in Bosnia—Herzegovina. Two-thirds of the troops were offered by entities whose participation probably would be rejected by U.N. Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali-Iran, which offered 10,000 soldiers, because of ties to radical Muslim groups; Turkey, several hundred, because it borders the Balkans and once ruled the region; and the PLO, 1,000, because of U. S. objections. The other proposed contingents would nearly meet the U.N. goal of sending 7,600 peace keepers to guard civilians in Sarajevo and five other Bosnian areas. Pakistan offered 3,000 soldiers; Malaysia, 1,500; Bangladesh, 1,200; and Tunisia, 1,000."

—Associated Press, July 14, 1993

"So far, only verbal support for Bosnia's Muslims is strong. The recent Tokyo Declaration of the world's leading economic nations said any partition plan imposed on the Muslims would be unacceptable. U.S. State Department spokesman Michael McCurry insisted this week that there must be no reward for 'ethnic cleansing' and that any accord must be acceptable to all three warring factions."

—Lucia Mouat, Christian Science Monitor, July 15, 1993

"Serbs eased a two-week fuel blockade of Sarajevo yesterday, allowing the crippled hospital and bakery to resume operations.... Running water was restored Wednesday in some western neighborhoods, home to about 20 percent of the city's 380,000 residents. But restoration of electricity and more water hinges on delicate talks between the Muslim-led government and Bosnian Serb leaders."

—Correspondent David Crary, Washington Times, July 16, 1993

"Life remains a daily torture. People are living through hell."

—U.N. relief spokesman Peter Kessler, July 16, 1993

"A report by a State Department disaster relief team from Croatia on July 9 concluded that 'Sarajevo is on the verge of collapse. 'The report added, 'This is an urgent call for action'. . . One illustration of the administration's disengagement is that a senior White House official said Mr. Clinton was awaiting a recommendation from his senior national security advisers before he would consider any new aid initiative, saying the president believed the crisis in Sarajevo had eased somewhat in recent days."

—Correspondent Elaine Sciolino, New York Times, July 22, 1993

"At Mostar, 85 miles southwest of Sarajevo, Spanish troops of the United Nations force were ordered to abandon their garrison more than a month ago. Commanders of the Croatian force in Bosnia told the Spaniards they would be attacked if they stayed. Since they moved to a new headquarters near the Roman Catholic shrine at Medjugorje, Croatian troops have launched what United Nations officials described as one of the most blatant exercises in 'ethnic cleansing' in months, driving at least 30,000 Muslims from their homes at gunpoint and herding many of them into detention camps ... In the black humor with which many United Nations officers deal with the frustrations, Sarajevo, Gorazde and the other four 'safe areas' are referred to as 'safe hells."'

—Correspondent John F. Burns, New York Times, July 22, 1993

"Chistopher actually has been pressing within the administration for limited military action to relieve Sarajevo and silence the Serb artillery in commanding positions around the city, official sources said. Last week at a 'principals meeting' of top foreign policy advisers, Adm. David E. Jeremiah, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, responded by offering a scheme that would require a massive commitment of allied troops on the scale of the 1991 Persian Gulf war, the sources said. Administration officials consider the costs and disruptions of such a mobilization prohibitive, and some State Department officials suspect Pentagon leaders of presenting an action they knew full well would be rejected.

—Correspondent Daniel Williams, Washington Post, July 22, 1993

"President Clinton said yesterday that his administration has not ,given up on' Bosnia, and strongly endorsed controversial peace talks—scheduled to begin in Geneva Sunday—that the Muslim-led Bosnian government has resisted attending ... Clinton was responding to an uproar over remarks made Wednesday by Secretary of State Warren Christopher, who said the United States was 'doing all it can' in Bosnia, even as Serb and Croat forces tighten their siege on the Bosnian capital of Sarajevo, driving back Muslim defenders and hindering relief and fuel shipments. 'That is not true that we have given up on it,' Clinton told reporters."

—Correspondent Daniel Williams, Washington Post , July 23, 1993

Here is one of the great set pieces of political tragedy of the late 20th century: the world's virtual abandonment of a whole country to Serbs and Croats flouting civilized standards and organized appeals alike. The collapse of Bosnia, epitomized by the siege eating away at the capital of Sarajevo, brings with it terrible losses and alarming implications. The same is underlined by the fact that it is going on in full public view. Yet the president and secretary of state, commenting on the event, manage to convey that its keenest edge is the criticism of the United States for not doing more to avert it. In their seeming desire that Bosnia hurry up and go away, they reveal a measure of self-preoccupation that trivializes the horror."

—Washington Post editorial, July 23, 1993

"Serbian artillery batteries pounded wide areas of Sarajevo today in a sustained offensive that raised concerns that Serbian commanders may be trying to seize the strategic western districts of the city ... The severity of the Serbian attacks was reflected in a count by United Nations military observers of Serbian artillery shells that hit Sarajevo on Thursday. The count, made available today, showed that 3,777 Serbian shells hit the city in a 16-hour period from midnight on Wednesday, one of the highest counts recorded by the United Nations observers in the year that they have been monitoring artillery firing in Sarajevo."

—Correspondent John F. Burns, New York Times, July 24, 1993

"The perception of America as the last best hope of Bosnia, and of America's likely actions, was not limited to Bosnia's Muslims, or to the Serbs, Croats, Jews and others who fight together in the Bosnian trenches and work alongside each other in the operating theaters of Sarajevo's hospitals ... The result, throughout the war, has been an almost arithmetical correlation between American leaders' statements on the conflict and the behavior of the Serbian forces.

—Correspondent John F. Burns, New York Times, July 25, 1993

"Nearly 70 tank and mortar rounds slammed into a base for U.N. troops in Sarajevo yesterday, shattering the latest attempt to bring peace to Bosnia. The base commander said it was a Serbian attack, and U.N. officials were trying to contact the Bosnian Serb commander to protest and demand an explanation ... Bosnia's Muslim president, Alija Izetbegovic, has said he will attend peace talks scheduled to start tomorrow in Geneva if the no-offensive accord holds. The talks have been postponed twice because of fighting...Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic said ... Mr. Izetbegovic must accept the partition of Bosnia into three ethnic states or Serbian forces will settle the question on the battlefield. Serbs control about 70 percent of Bosnia, and Croats hold much of the rest. "

—AP correspondent David Crary, Washington Times, July 26, 1993

"A cynic may contend that anything that brings an end to the war, even if Bosnia's largest ethnic group, or what's left of it, would have to live in ghettos, is preferable to its continuation. Yet, ending the war on anything close to Serbian terms will only conclude the first act of a greater and more violent drama. Western cowardice has allowed malignant nationalism and religious intolerance to run amok on a scale not seen in Europe since the Nazi menace... Emboldened by their success, the nationalists currently running Belgrade are likely to turn to other ethnic groups on their 'cleansing' list ... Slobodan Milosevic and the warlords running Serbia know that any letup in the war hysteria would promptly result in their political, and perhaps physical, demise ... A second troubling outcome of the Bosnian nightmare is the galvanizing effect it will have on Islamic zealotry. It would not be an exaggeration to say that the only true beneficiaries of the carnage are the militant Islamic fundamentalists, who passionately hate the West and its liberal values. It is ironic that the Bosnians, a secular and well-educated European people, may become a rallying cry for the Islamic hatemongers ... And so it is that at the end of the 20th century, Western indifference and cowardice seem to have set the stage for a relapse into the violent politics of tribalism, religious intolerance and militant nationalism that many thought had come to an end with the demise of communism and the triumph of democracy. History will not judge us lightly."

—Alex Alexiev, Los Angeles Times, July 26, 1993

"Unless a commitment is made by Europe and the United States to save Sarajevo, it is clear that the city will fall, with unspeakable consequences for the desperate 380,000 people trapped there. Sarajevo will take its place with European capitals like Warsaw, Budapest and Prague, and, of course, Nazi Germany, as a place where Europe and the United States stood by and watched a people, neighbors really, be crushed or systematically destroyed."

—Washington Times editorial, July 27, 1993

"Bosnia's Muslims ... with 44 percent of the republic's prewar population and no patron state to fall back on, have sought to maintain a united Bosnia that reflects its centuries-old heritage as home to Muslims, Croats, Serbs and other peoples. Alone among the factions, the Muslim-led government and the Muslim community it chiefly represents have fought for the ideal of a multicultural society, reflecting the fact that 27 percent of all Bosnian marriages are mixed.

—Correspondent David B. Ottaway, Washington Post, July 27, 1993

"Russia's Foreign Minister, Andrei Kozyrev, has admitted that Moscow's sympathy for the Serbs is to a degree influenced by the pressure nationalists in Orthodox Russia have placed on President Yeltsin. President Clinton's attempt to lift the U.N. arms embargo on the Bosnian government was informed partly by the perception that Turkey has become crucial to American strategic interest in the Near East, surrounded as it is by an oil-rich Azerbaijan, Iran and Iraq."

—Misha Glenny, New York Times, July 29, 1993

"The Clinton administration tentatively has decided to use limited airstrikes to break the siege of Sarajevo, according to U.S. officials and diplomats ... President Clinton has moved close to ordering limited military action in Bosnia before, only to back away because of strong opposition from the Pentagon and the European allies. But the U. S. president and his top advisers have become increasingly fearful that Sarajevo could fall to Serbian forces, unleashing what one official called 'the ultimate humanitarian nightmare' and an avalanche of blame for Mr. Clinton."

—Carla Anne Robbins, Wall Street Journal, July 29, 1993

"We're discussing with our allies how best to support the peace negotiations that are under way in Geneva and how to alleviate the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Sarajevo and other major population centers in Bosnia. As you look at the situation in Sarajevo and see that things are deteriorating there, I think it does suggest that additional steps need to be taken."

—State Department spokesman Michael McCurry, July 30, 1993

"It's the right moment to be reminded by the human rights nags at Helsinki Watch that the United Nations has dithered on its pledge to set up an international tribunal to investigate and prosecute war crimes in the old Yugoslavia ... Read the stomach-churning details of eight cases that Helsinki Watch researched in order to show up the U.N.'s evasion of the murder, rape, torture and destruction of the Yugoslav wars. Reflecting what many people take to be a rough but fair distribution of group offense, the eight cases include five perpetrated by Serbs, two by Croats and one by Muslims. These crimes cannot be left unexamined without mocking justice in the places where they were committed and without inviting a repetition of such violations elsewhere. Moreover, a cave-in on war crimes, added to the U. N.'s failure in Yugoslavia to keep the peace and to provide sufficient humanitarian aid, would tear even further at the standing of the world organization."

—Columnist Stephen S. Rosenfeld, Washington Post, July 30,1993

"Unease is now acute among the estimated 80,000 Serbs and 31,000 Croats who still five in Sarajevo, the largest Muslim enclave left in Bosnia-Herzegovina. In breaking with their nationalist brethren, they placed their hope in building a multiethnic democracy. But many Serbs and Croats here say that dream is rapidly fading ... Most Muslim, Serb and Croat leaders in Sarajevo say partition will never be accepted. They still cling to that hope, no matter now remote, of winning a unified, multiethnic Bosnia."

—Correspondent Jonathan S. Landay, Christian Science Monitor, July 30, 1993

"The Serbs fear only America. U.S. military power must now be used to save Sarajevo ... At the optimum, an American effort can change the evil chemistry of the holocaust in Bosnia; at the minimum it can save a city. Both are worth doing; either goal morally justifies the use of U.S. military power."

—Los Angeles Times editorial, July 30, 1993

"As NATO prepared to provide air cover for United Nations peacekeeping forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina, leaders of the three warring factions ordered another cease-fire ... The agreement on the new cease-fire plan coincided with an earlier-than-expected announcement in Brussels that NATO warplanes are now ready to provide air cover for the United Nations peacekeeping forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina, attacking any faction firing on them if the United Nations requests such help."

—Correspondent Paul Lewis, New York Times, July 30, 1993

"The U.S. is determined to act, but based on the conversations we've had, we certainly feel that it's possible we will act within the NATO framework. "

—State Department spokesman Mike McCurry, Aug. 2, 1993

"Over the weekend, in an attack that U.N. officials confirmed Tuesday was supported by helicopters violating the 'no-fly' zone, Serb forces grabbed Bjelasnica Mountain, a 6,817-foot peak... When U.N. military observers were allowed to visit on Tuesday, Frewer said, they found Mladic 'standing there with his hands crossed in front of the TV transmitter and a Serb flag flapping on the top.

—Correspondent John Pomfret, Washington Post, Aug. 5, 1993

"Izetbegovic appears content to await the outcome of this week's NATO threat to launch airstrikes on Bosnian Serb forces if they do not relax their 16-month-old 'stranglehold' on Sarajevo and its 380,000 beleaguered civilians. Thus, he is insisting Karadzic fulfill a commitment made here to withdraw his forces from Mount Bjelasnica—a 2,800-meter bluff south of the city that was seized Sunday in violation of a cease-fire accord—and halt their offensive on adjacent Mount Igman, the last high ground held by Muslim forces around the capital."

—Correspondent David B. Ottaway, Washington Post , Aug. 5, 1993

"Serbian control of Mount Igman would choke off the flow of arms and other supplies by land into Sarajevo and leave Serbs in a strong position to dictate the future of the Bosnian capital. It also could lead to U.S. -led air raids, which NATO has threatened as a way to break the siege of the city. Opinions very on whether the Serbs could take the whole city. Brig. Gen. Vere Hayes of Britain, a senior U. N. peacekeeper, said yesterday the Serbs don't have the infantry strength to take the city ... It is not clear whether Gen. Mladic's offensive has the blessing of Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic. But the general's power has increased with his battlefield successes, and he is thought to have defied Mr. Karadzic in the past.

—AP correspondent Maud S. Beehnan, Washington Times, August 5, 1993

"All the mediators can do is sweeten the bitter pill by insuring that the Muslims get a viable state, with 30 percent of the land, the best industry and access to the sea. The mediators may be able to achieve this largely because, with 72 percent of the country, the Serbs have more land than they need. Mr. Karadzic knows the Serbs have achieved an ethnic division of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and his aim now is to assure Serbs a big slice of Sarajevo... Hard-liners still resist, mourning the tolerant, multi-ethnic Bosnia they are leaving. Bosnian Serbs and Croats who threw in their lots with this vision wonder where they will go now. So do the members of mixed families, by some estimates 20 percent of the population."

—Correspondent Paul Lewis, New York Times, Aug. 8, 1993

"After 16 months of a fratricidal war that has left up to 200,000 people dead or missing in the former Yugoslav republic of Bosnia Herzegovina, the United States and its allies appeared poised over the weekend to carry out bombing missions in an effort to save Sarajevo and force a final settlement at the stalled peace talks in Geneva ... If the bombing raids are ordered, it will mark the first time that NATO has carried out a military operation in its 44-year history, and could set a precedent for future actions outside Western Europe ... History conspired to divide the EC's two leading members in the Yugoslav crisis. For reasons dating back to World War H, the Germans at first supported the Croats and Slovenes, with the French strongly backing the Serbs. Both have since recognized their mistakes, but in the meantime the differences kept the Community from taking action at a time when it most needed to prove that it had found a common, independent voice."

—Correspondent Eduardo Cue, Christian Science Monitor, Aug. 9, 1993

"United States officials said today that Washington would not press for an immediate decision to authorize military action. With the Serbs promising to pull back from some key positions in the mountains around Sarajevo, with peace talks among the warring sides in Bosnia set to resume on Monday and with some European nations still reluctant to take military action, the United States wants to see what happens next before pushing for air strikes. The developments over the past week fit a year-long pattern in which the United States and its allies have threatened military action against the Bosnian Serbs only to watch the Serbs step back just enough to reinforce doubts among the more reluctant members of the alliance that force is needed."

—Correspondent Michael R. Gordon, New York Times, Aug. 9, 1993

"Why did the Clinton administration wait until it was nearly over before urging air strikes? I presume and hope it was because Clinton could not bear to contemplate the consequences of inaction as those consequences became wholly clear. I hope it was not a cynical move ... This is not the way to deliver on the U. N. Charter's promise to save mankind from the age-old scourge of war. "

—Columnist Jeane Kirkpatrick, Los Angeles Times, Aug. 9, 1993

"Last week, U.S. officials were promoting attacks as inevitable if Serbs did not pull back. The continued confusion over exactly when attacks might occur, or if they will occur at all, appears to have muddied the political message U.S. officials have been trying to send to Bosnian Serbs, Muslims and Croats ... Meanwhile, U. N. peacekeepers already in place in the former Yugoslavia were voicing doubts about the whole U.S. approach. Some say that the Clinton administration's tough talk is designed not so much to save Sarajevo as to mollify U.S. public opinion, or satisfy complaints from Islamic nations that the West won't intervene to save Muslims.

—Correspondent Peter Grier, Christian Science Monitor, Aug. 9, 1993

"Serbian forces claimed Sunday to be pulling back from heights above Sarajevo, but a U.N. spokesman, Barry Frewer, said their maneuvers might be mere 'stage management'. . . In Washington, meanwhile, a third State Department official resigned over differences with the Clinton administration over its Bosnia policies, U.S. officials announced Sunday. Jon Western, an analyst investigating war crimes accusations against Serbs in Bosnia, notified his superiors Friday that he is quitting in disagreement with a policy that he concluded was not tough enough, the officials said. Western's resignation follows the departure last week of desk officer Marshall Freeman Harris and the resignation last August of deputy officer George Kenney. "

—Correspondent John-Thor Dahlburg, Los Angeles Times, Aug. 9, 1993

"One single air strike, it does not have to be big, would change the whole situation because it would prove to the Serbs that Americans mean business."

—Bosnian President Alija hetbegovic, Aug. 9, 1993

"NATO is ready to act. It is essential that the Bosnian Serbs lift without delay the siege of Sarajevo and that the heights around the city and the means of access are placed under the control of UNPROFOR ... Let no one doubt this alliance's political will. "

—NATO Secretary-General Manfred Woerner, Aug. 9, 1993

"Now it is up to the Serbs whether the air strikes will occur. We are ready to act. "

—U.S. Asst. Secretary of State for European and Canadian Affairs Stephen Oxman, Aug. 9, 1993

"The only indication that the Serbs might be anticipating a pullback was the sight of burning buildings. Between the Veliko PoIje and Malo Po1je, about five miles, almost all of the buildings have been torched. One, the Hotel Igman, was the finest ski hotel in the region. Serbian commanders could have been destroying properties that they knew they would have to give up in a withdrawal. But scorched-earth tactics have been a signature of the Serbian forces since the start of the Bosnian war 16 months ago, usually in areas that they have had no intention of leaving. As part of the policy known as 'ethnic cleansing,' Serbian units have been ordered to destroy all buildings belonging to Muslims, so as to discourage their return.

—Correspondent John F. Burns, New York Times, Aug. 10, 1993

"With little dissent, the ambassadors adopted a proposal drafted this weekend by NATO's military committee that sets forth the sorts of targets to be struck if the 'strangulation' of Sarajevo and other Muslim enclaves in Bosnia-Herzegovina persists. In a concession to reluctant NATO members, however, the execution of such strikes would require approval by U.N. Secretary—General Boutros Boutros-Ghali and another meeting of NATO ambassadors ... This graduated approach is at odds with the U.S. view that a devastating blow at the outset would be more effective. U. S. envoys last week failed to persuade the alliance to support early use of 'decisive' strikes against a wide range of Serb targets ... Yesterday's decision does not affect an earlier, narrower NATO agreement to provide airstrikes ... in direct retaliation for attacks on U.N. troops. NATO has been prepared since July 22 to launch such strikes ... Among questions still to he resolved after yesterday's session is whether any strikes after the initial bombing raid would require U.N. authorization. 'If there's a first strike and it doesn't produce a desired effect, the council will have to meet to decide what to do then,' a senior NATO official said. "

—Correspondents Rick Atkinson and Barton Gellman, Washington Post , Aug. 10, 1993

"Diplomats frequently point to creative ambiguity as an important tool in their trade. But in Bosnia Western governments are practicing destructive ambiguity. Trying to halt the killing now, America and its allies have adopted a diplomatic strategy of getting Bosnia to surrender without the West having to accept the responsibility for that outcome ... If it is not bluff, the Clinton administration and its European allies should immediately and publicly disown the carving up of Sarajevo."

—Columnist Jim Hoagland, Washington Post, Aug. 10, 1993

"There is continuing agitation over who win fire what shots under whose authority. This is a phony issue-soluble in an afternoon if the will were there. The real issue is to interrupt the Serb and Croat rending of Muslim Bosnia—and the will is not apparent. It requires enough of an assertion of NATO power to send the simple message that Bosnia is not being entirely abandoned. Or is President Clinton prepared to face the moment when all consultations have been completed and everyone is on board—NATO, the U.N., Britain and France, Russia, Muslims, Serbs and Croats—and Bosnia is gone?"

—Washington Post editorial, Aug. 10, 1993

"These talks have nothing to do with negotiations. This is David Owen's surrender table. But it's the victims who are being brought to the table and forced to sign rather than the aggressors."

—Former State Department Bosnia specialist Marshall Freeman Harris, Aug. 10, 1993

"Indirectly endorsing Bosnian Muslim demands, the international mediators on Bosnia and Herzegovina said today they will not reconvene peace talks until Serbian forces withdraw from two strategic mountains overlooking Sarajevo."

—Correspondent Alan Riding, New York Times , Aug. 13,1993

"The United States warned the Bosnian Serbs on Wednesday that their continued occupation of Mounts Igman and Bjelasnica and squeezing of Sarajevo could prompt NATO air strikes."

—Correspondent John Pomfret, Washington Post, Aug. 13, 1993

"Serbian forces besieging Sarajevo allowed a mid-morning deadline set by United Nations peace negotiations to pass without complying with demands that Serbian troops be withdrawn from two strategic mountains overlooking Sarajevo. But negotiators in Geneva said the Serbs had agreed to binding arbitration on the issue on Friday, and the threat of NATO air strikes against the Serbs was not fulfilled."

—Correspondent John Burns, New York Times, Aug. 13, 1993