THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, July 30, 1995 TAG: 9507280533
SECTION: COMMENTARY PAGE: J1 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Opinion
SOURCE: BY DANIEL N. NELSON
LENGTH: Medium: 80 lines
With each new victim in Bosnia, the strength and purpose of Western democracies hemorrhage. As Radovan Karadzic, Ratko Mladic and their benefactors across the Drina kill and rape with impunity, Americans and Europeans watch the ebbing of the West's capacity to prevent wars of conquest.
Our despicable inaction has raised cynicism to the level of policy. To Bosnia's agony, Americans respond with the pseudo-realism of what ``is,'' or the quasi-idealism of what ``ought'' to be. The former position emphasizes the Balkans' intractable disputes and image of ``quagmire.'' The code words here are ``avoiding entanglement'' and ``containing conflict.''
As for the idealists, moral responsibility lies at the core of their demand for forceful Western intervention to roll back Serb aggression. Yet this demand often lacks understanding of Balkan conditions or military feasibility.
Still, diminished options have closed the gap between ``is'' and ``ought.'' Three years after fighting began in Bosnia, and four years after large segments of Croatia were occupied, Serbs are consolidating their hold in eastern Bosnia by conquering U.N. ``safe areas.'' Although Serbs now confront stronger resistance from a professional Bosnian army and a well-armed Croatia, Serbia's leader, Slobodan Milosevic, prolongs the suffering by providing money, material and leadership to Croatian and Bosnian Serb armies.
The failure to separate Croatian and Bosnian Serbs from their Belgrade sponsors, coupled with the limited rules of engagement and minimal armament of U.N. ``protection'' forces, has clarified Western options. Indeed, there are no alternatives if we truly want to avoid NATO's collapse in the throes of a wider Balkan war.
During its more than three-year history, the U.N.'s presence in Bosnia and Croatia has cleaned up carnage and fed victims. Despite heroic efforts, it could not implement the peacekeeping mandate, since neither peace nor political will to enforce that peace has been present. U.N. forces have become targets for capture and humiliation.
Withdrawal of U.N. forces should be commenced now. The presence of blue helmets is doing more for Serbian aggression than for Bosnian or Croatian efforts to defend people or regain territory. French President Jacques Chirac's challenge to the United States and NATO to defend the Muslim enclave of Gorazde on the ground is emotionally welcome, but belated and misplaced.
More important than a costly ``stand'' at one location is a wider strategy of heightening Western engagement while denying further advantage to the Serbs due to fears for U.N. units. During a NATO-engineered withdrawal of U.N. forces, a vigorous and sustained application of punitive air power should be begun. Imposing a significant and widespread cost on Bosnian Serb military units, depots and transport should have first priority. Targets in Serbia itself should be attacked as well, unless Belgrade fully complies with border closures and supply interdictions.
The NATO forces sent to extract U.N. units also must be ready to eliminate any resistance. The Bosnian Serb headquarters at Pale ought to be a prime neutralization target during U.N. withdrawal.
Thereafter, American and West European forces must not stand back, should Serbs continue their violations of U.N. resolutions. Further use of punitive and systematic airstrikes, used against any militarily relevant targets, should follow the violation of any ultimatum.
Sending arms to the Bosnian government, long advocated by many in the United States, will not alter the military situation for some time. Once U.N. forces are removed, European objections to lifting the arms embargo will be moot, but an ``even playing field'' will not occur within the next year.
Political and military realities in the former Yugoslavia mean that avoiding entanglement and containing the conflict now require far more military effort against aggression. Removing U.N. troops, while extracting substantial cost from Bosnian Serbs, is the only plausible course of action.
Without such wider engagement, the risks for the United States and its European allies are enormous. Only through NATO's exercise of force will its own future and the potential for collective security be preserved. ILLUSTRATION: Color photo
Daniel N. Nelson is a professor of international studies at Old
Dominion University.
by CNB