
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: TUESDAY, June 1, 1993                   TAG: 9306010214
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: F-2   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

IN BOSNIA, CAUTION IS THE BEST GUIDELINE

THE PRESSURE on President Clinton to intervene militarily in Bosnia is misguided and dangerous. The feelings of outrage, powerlessness and guilt over the savage war in that region are justified, but not good reasons to intensify the fighting. Although lifting the arms embargo for the Bosnian Muslims would seem to level the playing field, the escalation of violence will lead to an even greater slaughter and prolong this already protracted civil war. Air strikes on selected Serbian targets are not guaranteed to reduce the military power of the Serbs and would align the United States with one faction. The introduction of an external enemy would solidify the factions and stiffen their resolve to continue fighting.

As parties within the area of conflict, as well as the international community, struggle with means to de-escalate the violence and work on resolution of the centuries-old conflicts, caution should not be confused with indecisiveness. The processes of negotiation can seem excruciatingly slow, especially when slaughter continues. Acting "decisively" with a military option may satisfy the need to do something and "demonstrate leadership," but can lead to far more deadly consequences than moving cautiously.

The tragedy in Bosnia and the complexities that defy simple solutions offer a paradigm that is being played out now in other parts of the world. The war in Angola and internal strife in Zaire, Cambodia and Guatemala come readily to mind. Such wars will continue to flare as long as political, social and economic factors that cause them are not addressed. It is a great tragedy that festering conditions are ignored by most of the world until they break out into a full-scale war. Even more unconscionable is emphasis on military aid rather than development aid to unstable areas. The industrialized nations, including the United States, bear grave responsibility for the abundance of weapons that contributes to the carnage. At the very least, the heavy arming of tribal and ethnic factions must stop. Unless the flow of weapons to unstable areas is controlled, we will continue to be confronted with situations that confound our abilities to deal with them. The cost to all will greatly outweigh the profits in arms sales. ELIZABETH FETTER ROANOKE

by CNB