To Fail Bosnia is to Fail America

By Rep. Louise M. Slaughter

Recently, Congressman Steny Hoyer (D-MD), co-chair of the Helsinki Commission whose mission is to monitor compliance with the Helsinki Final Act, pointed out a striking similarity between the infamous case of Kitty Genovese, almost 30 years ago, and the moral failings of Western policy with regard to Bosnia. Just as some 38 fellow New Yorkers watched and listened and did nothing as Ms. Genovese was brutally slain, we have witnessed the slow strangulation and near-annihilation of the Bosnian nation and its people through a policy that can only be called genocide.

While those who stood by in the Genovese incident violated no law, the community of nations which has stood by while Bosnia was being dismembered can take no such refuge. Mr. Hoyer reminds us that the Convention on the Prevention of the Crime of Genocide makes it "a legal obligation for states, including the United States, both to prevent and to punish acts of genocide."

To put an end to that genocide, over the past year I have joined my congressional colleagues in calling for such policies as an end to the Bosnian arms embargo; a multinational force to enforce the "no-fly" zone; and, finally, the imposition of a 72-hour deadline for Serb irregulars to cease fire, withdraw from the hills around Sarajevo and remove the blockades around that beleaguered city. I also cosponsored legislation urging the U.N. to convene a War Crimes Tribunal to prosecute the individual perpetrators of rape, torture and genocide in Bosnia. Recently, U.N. Ambassador Madeleine Albright made clear our determination to see the war crime prosecutions go forward.

In July, as a member of the United States delegation to the CSCE Parliamentary Assembly meeting of the Helsinki signatory states, I introduced and secured unanimous passage of an amendment strongly reaffirming that systematic rape of women or children is indeed a war crime. I took that step after comparing notes with other delegates, both men and women, and discovering they shared my outrage that the original draft resolution merely "deplored" the practice. If there were ever any question among the 53 signatory nations who must adhere to the terms of the Helsinki Final Act, a group that includes Serbia and Montenegro, there can be no doubt now that using rape as an instrument of war is not only morally reprehensible, but is in fact criminal conduct which requires vigorous prosecution and severe punishment.

Although we must acknowledge that the president inherited a policy of neglect from the previous administration, and that principled leadership has been noticeably lacking among our European allies—realities which seriously undermined prospects for deterring Serbian aggression—more recent American policy has still been far short of what it should be. The impact of our silence and inaction has been devastating. On Sept. 2, the Helsinki Commission chair, Sen. Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ), once again made the strong case for a more interventionist policy, including the credible threat of NATO air strikes to end the murderous shelling of Sarajevo.

"Peacemaking from the air," he said, would have been "more effective, more serving of our national interests and safer for the American forces involved as part of a large, international contingent, than any peacekeeping on the ground."

Sadly, however, we may soon be confronted with the worst of alternatives which many of us have warned against. To avoid further Serbian aggression and Croatian opportunism, as well as the perils of another winter of suffering, there is great pressure on the Bosnians to accept a terribly unfair partition. This partition flies in the face of the express provisions of the U.N. Charter and the Helsinki Final Act. Changing borders and acquiring territory by unprovoked aggression can never be acceptable.

Whether or not some version of the U.N.-sponsored plan, drawn up by Lord David Owen and Thorvald Stoltenberg, will eventually be agreed to remains in doubt. On Sept. 29, the Muslim-led Bosnian parliament decisively rejected the most recent plan, demanding instead the return of more land seized by the Serbs, and insisting that the agreement itself contain international guarantees against further Serb and Croatian land grabs.

These are reasonable requests and I commend the bravery of the Bosnians and their determination to preserve their homeland. Unfortunately, instead of supporting their principled stand, our administration has pressed the Bosnians to accept the peace plan as first presented, stating that to reject it will be very costly.

No friend of Bosnia can casually sanction the partition of that country—the brutal result of the despicable practice of "ethnic cleansing." I personally will never do so.

If President Alija Izetbegovic and the Bosnian parliament themselves decide they are ready to accept a revised peace plan, there will be time enough then to consider whether or not to approve a NATO peacekeeping force. If the borders under such agreement are truly defensible, if the agreement mandates international protection of the civilian population, and if the rules of engagement enable American troops to protect themselves, perhaps a case can be made for our participation. But I remain skeptical. Can we possibly justify sending 25,000 troops, half of the NATO force, to patrol between Serbs who have shown no mercy for all these months, and embittered Bosnians?

In the end, what happens in Bosnia will still depend in large part on United States policy. With strong presidential leadership, however, and some courageous support from the Congress, we may finally be able to persuade our Western European allies to respond positively, and with honor.

We must not fail the Bosnian people, nor our own heritage. The time for real leadership, and forceful action with our European allies, is at hand.