Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, April 29, 1993 TAG: 9304290048
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-7 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: BERNARD D. KAPLAN HEARST NEWSPAPERS
DATELINE: PARIS LENGTH: Medium
The pressure that has built up in the United States to use force to stop the fighting has little counterpart in Europe. On the contrary, the prevailing fear is that America, led by an inexperienced president, may drag the Europeans into a war they want desperately to avoid.
It's clear that the initiative in dealing with the crisis has passed to Washington, although it remains uncertain how far the Clinton administration is prepared to go militarily.
This is a reversal that has surprised and discomfited European leaders like British Prime Minister John Major and France's President Francois Mitterrand who, until a few weeks ago, felt reasonably sure they would be able to avert large-scale military involvement, restricting their armed forces to operations to protect food shipments and help refugees.
Far from resisting demands from their own voters to intervene more resolutely in Bosnia, European politicians fear that if America plunges into the war and they follow, they could face strong popular opposition at home.
Major, for one, is worried by growing anti-interventionist sentiment among his own Conservative Party followers. British sources emphasize that former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who has repeatedly urged military action against the Bosnian Serbs and the Serbian government in Belgrade, is virtually isolated on this issue. Only a handful of her fellow Tories have backed her.
French reluctance to take on a direct military role was reinforced by last month's election of a government dominated by the right-wing Gaullist party. The Gaullists traditionally oppose any policy that gives the impression that France is following America's lead.
American officials privately accuse European governments of timidity and irresolution in tackling Bosnia. They point out that when Yugoslavia broke apart nearly two years ago, the Bush administration deliberately stood aside, declaring that U.S. policy in the post-Cold War era was to let Europe resolve crises erupting in its own area.
A senior U.S. diplomat in Paris categorized the European record on the Yugoslav crisis as "one part confusion to two parts cowardice, making for a very murky mixture."
The official, who asked not to be named, added that "it was only when the United States realized nothing would induce the Europeans to take firm action, either through their own European Community or by way of the United Nations, that [the American government] decided it had to reassess the question of taking the lead in this situation. By any criteria, the Europeans miserably failed their first real test."
But to many Europeans, the Clinton administration's increasingly activist stance over Bosnia is TV-driven rather than based on tangible and achievable aims.
According to French political analyst Michel Seidman, the American government is reacting to horrific scenes of carnage and suffering in Bosnia as shown on the nightly television news, just as it did earlier in Somalia.
by CNB