Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, April 20, 1993 TAG: 9304200408
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-5 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: FRANO JELINCIC
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
To his credit, during the summit President Clinton did raise the problem of continuing Russian military activity in the Balkans. But Clinton's policy toward the former Yugoslavian republics remains so nebulous and variable that Yeltsin can easily continue to ignore U.S. questions. The United States could make a difference in the Balkans, if it would take a clear position and stand by it.
During the 1992 presidential campaign, it appeared that the Clinton-Gore team had a well-defined Balkan policy. I wrote to candidates on both tickets before the election. On Jan. 8, 1992, I received a response from future Vice President Gore. Permit me to quote from his response:
"A Europe whole and at peace is crucial to our hopes for a better future. That prospect is now endangered by violent nationalism, which is burning white hot in Yugoslavia due to the petty local ambitions of Serbia's leaders. If Belgrade is allowed to create a greater Serbia, it would represent a gross violation of the principle that borders should not be changed by force. It would also represent the defeat of the democratic expression of a free people by the forces of aggressive, retrograde communism.
"America must not remain passive when these principles are menaced. I assure you that I will continue to alert the Congress and the administration to the need for action."
The future Democratic leadership spoke plainly. They displayed an awareness of the issues, knew what to do, and this clarity brought results. During the campaign, the Serbs anticipated strong action if Clinton was elected. There was a lull in their aggression. But since the election, President Clinton has wavered and every blink has had its cost.
The barbaric actions of Serbia have been documented frequently and extensively. What has received less publicity has been the continuing role of Russia. There are Russian volunteers fighting against Bosnia. Russia has and continues to arm Serbia. Yet we do not criticize the Russian role, while we castigate Croatians every time they shoot at invaders on their land.
And while President Clinton offers aid to President Yeltsin, the government of Croatia, destitute from dealing with its own internal problems, has spent a staggering $1.3 billion to care for the nearly 1 million refugees from Bosnia. Last year, the Congress approved an almost trivial $55 million in financial aid for Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia. To this point, Croatia has received nothing.
Despite Russia's collusion with Serbia and its foot-dragging on increased United Nations involvement, it is clearly in the best interests of the United States and the world community to help the Russian democracy movement. Yet this should not come at the cost of selling out the infant democracies of the Balkans. The Clinton administration needs to push hard for meaningful and decisive action.
On Sunday March 27, Vice President Gore appeared on David Brinkley's television program. Sam Donaldson asked what would happen if the Serbs did not sign the peace agreement that had been signed by Croatia and Bosnia. (Serbia has not signed and, indeed, has resumed its aggression with increased bravado.)
Vice President Gore answered, "Then we'll assess the situation."
As Gore's letter shows, the Clinton administration knows the situation only too well. It is concern with shifts in the domestic and international political climates that brings about weekly reassessment.
It is almost too late for President Clinton to stop hiding behind the shields of unnecessary reassessment and do what he knows is right in the Balkans.
Frano Jelincic is an artist in residence at Radford University.\ Dr. William Hrezo, with the political science department at Radford University, contributed to this column.
by CNB