By Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON, Nov 1 1995 (IPS)

Stung by Congressional attempts to limit its foreign policy authority, the administration of President Bill Clinton is stepping up efforts to create a public consensus in favour of deploying U.S. troops to help police a ceasefire in Bosnia.

Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott used the opening day of peace talks in Ohio between the leaders of Bosnia, Croatia, and Serbia to warn of a “third Balkan war” that could “all too easily spread” elsewhere unless Washington took a leading role to stop it.

He said such a war could “jeopardise our efforts to promote stability and security in Europe,” undermine “moderate, pro- Western leaders” in the Islamic world, and “put increasing strains on relations between the United States and Russia.”

“Ending the war in Bosnia is unquestionably in the national interest of the United States,” he told a foreign policy ‘town meeting’ at the State Department, adding that Bosnia was “one test of where we stand…in the historic debate about America’s role in the world.”

Talbott spoke two days after the Republican-led House of Representatives voted 315 to 103 to approve a non-binding resolution urging that Clinton seek Congressional permission before deploying U.S. troops to Bosnia as part of any peace accord.

The overwhelming result was achieved despite warnings by Secretary of State Warren Christopher that the resolution would undermine prospects for a successful outcome. Christopher Wednesday formally opened what are expected to be difficult and protracted peace talks between the leaders of Bosnia, Serbia and Croatia.

Clinton himself denied Tuesday that the vote would affect the talks between Bosnian President Alija Izetbegovic, Serbican leader Slobodan Milosevic, Croatian chief Franjo Tudjman, but senior officials disagree.

So do leading Democrats who warned the White House to take the vote and its impact on the Balkan leaders seriously.

“It raises questions in the minds of the key parties about the will of the United States to enforce a peace agreement,” said Representative Lee Hamilton, the party’s senior foreign policy spokesman in the lower house.

Despite recent foreign policy successes, including a cease-fire in Bosnia, Clinton is finding his ability to act abroad increasingly constrained by the Republican-led Congress which he has accused, from time to time, of isolationism.

In the last month, for example, Congress slashed his 1996 foreign aid request by almost 20 percent, bringing U.S. assistance abroad to its lowest level in memory. Right-wingers in the House have vowed not to go along with even these levels unless strict anti-abortion provisions are attached to the legislation. Funds to multilateral agencies, like the United Nations and the World Bank, were hit especially hard.

Elsewhere, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman, Jesse Helms, is refusing to act on almost two dozen ambassadorial appointments and several key disarmament treaties until the administration compromises on a major State Department re- organisation plan.

Congress is also complicating some bilateral relationships. The extension of badly needed aid to the Palestine Authority is being held up, while House Speaker Newt Gingrich, in an unprecedented action, is using his powers to force the administration to undertake an aggressive covert programme to overthrow the government of Iran.

On Bosnia, the administration finds itself somewhat trapped by its own history. After charging during the 1992 campaign that former President George Bush had been too passive in Bosnia, Clinton tried and failed to persuade Washington’s NATO allies to use air power against Bosnian Serb targets and lift the arms embargo to the Muslim-led government in Sarajevo.

U.S. policy then lapsed into its earlier role, with Clinton and other senior officials claiming there was little they could do given the “ancient hatreds” that animated the civil war in Bosnia. At the same time, the administration pledged that it would provide up to 30,000 U.S. troops to any peacekeeping operation once a permanent ceasefire and peace agreement was reached.

That seemed a remote possibility until last summer, when the disastrous fall of U.N.-protected “safe areas” to Bosnian Serb forces, stirred Clinton once again into taking the initiative. Washington orchestrated a NATO bombing campaign and winked at an offensive by Croatian forces that routed Serb forces and Serb civilians alike from the Krajina region east of Bosnia.

The sudden Serb reversals brought all parties to the negotiating table where, in September, a U.S.-brokered accord on basic principles was reached for a settlement under which Bosnia would be preserved as one nation with substantial autonomy for the Serb minority. A ceasefire was reached last month after Bosnian and Croat forces captured large areas of eastern Bosnia.

The talks which got underway Wednesday at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base are designed to flesh out the September accord. If successful, it will require the deployment of a 60,000 NATO force, a third of which is to be made up of U.S. troops.

But, with the 1993 Somalia debacle fresh in their minds, many lawmakers here — both Democrats and Republicans — are reluctant to pledge troops to a volatile region overseas, deemed by the administration itself until quite recently not to be a vital U.S. interest.

“This is Afghanistan with trees,” said one California Republican during Monday’s debate. Other lawmakers argued that the administration, which in the past week has insisted that the deployment would not exceed a year, had not consulted with Congress enough.

“Don’t believe that you can manipulate us into having to say ‘yes’ because you give your word in secret without having first educated the American people,” Gingrich warned in a speech Monday night.

That appears to be what the administration now intends. Speaking last week, Clinton warned that “if we fail to secure this peace, the conflict in the former Yugoslavia could spread to other nations and involve our sons and daughters in a conflict in Europe.”

Talbott Wednesday elaborated on that theme, arguing that the stakes were too high in Bosnia not to act. He recalled Washington’s previous interventions in European wars during this century.

Citing a new “domino theory” which — like the Truman Doctrine almost 50 years ago — sees Europe, allied governments in the Middle East and Central Asia at risk, Talbott acknowledged that the administration faces an “uphill struggle” for public opinion.

“Our hope is that the argument is strong enough and that the fundamental international instincts of the American people are strong enough that this view will prevail,” he said.

Excerpt:

By Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON, Nov 1 1995 (IPS)

Stung by Congressional attempts to limit its foreign policy authority, the administration of President Bill Clinton is stepping up efforts to create a public consensus in favour of deploying U.S. troops to help police a ceasefire in Bosnia.

Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott used the opening day of peace talks in Ohio between the leaders of Bosnia, Croatia, and Serbia to warn of a “third Balkan war” that could “all too easily spread” elsewhere unless Washington took a leading role to stop it.

He said such a war could “jeopardise our efforts to promote stability and security in Europe,” undermine “moderate, pro- Western leaders” in the Islamic world, and “put increasing strains on relations between the United States and Russia.”

“Ending the war in Bosnia is unquestionably in the national interest of the United States,” he told a foreign policy ‘town meeting’ at the State Department, adding that Bosnia was “one test of where we stand…in the historic debate about America’s role in the world.”

Talbott spoke two days after the Republican-led House of Representatives voted 315 to 103 to approve a non-binding resolution urging that Clinton seek Congressional permission before deploying U.S. troops to Bosnia as part of any peace accord.

The overwhelming result was achieved despite warnings by Secretary of State Warren Christopher that the resolution would undermine prospects for a successful outcome. Christopher Wednesday formally opened what are expected to be difficult and protracted peace talks between the leaders of Bosnia, Serbia and Croatia.

Clinton himself denied Tuesday that the vote would affect the talks between Bosnian President Alija Izetbegovic, Serbican leader Slobodan Milosevic, Croatian chief Franjo Tudjman, but senior officials disagree.

So do leading Democrats who warned the White House to take the vote and its impact on the Balkan leaders seriously.

“It raises questions in the minds of the key parties about the will of the United States to enforce a peace agreement,” said Representative Lee Hamilton, the party’s senior foreign policy spokesman in the lower house.

Despite recent foreign policy successes, including a cease-fire in Bosnia, Clinton is finding his ability to act abroad increasingly constrained by the Republican-led Congress which he has accused, from time to time, of isolationism.

In the last month, for example, Congress slashed his 1996 foreign aid request by almost 20 percent, bringing U.S. assistance abroad to its lowest level in memory. Right-wingers in the House have vowed not to go along with even these levels unless strict anti-abortion provisions are attached to the legislation. Funds to multilateral agencies, like the United Nations and the World Bank, were hit especially hard.

Elsewhere, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman, Jesse Helms, is refusing to act on almost two dozen ambassadorial appointments and several key disarmament treaties until the administration compromises on a major State Department re- organisation plan.

Congress is also complicating some bilateral relationships. The extension of badly needed aid to the Palestine Authority is being held up, while House Speaker Newt Gingrich, in an unprecedented action, is using his powers to force the administration to undertake an aggressive covert programme to overthrow the government of Iran.

On Bosnia, the administration finds itself somewhat trapped by its own history. After charging during the 1992 campaign that former President George Bush had been too passive in Bosnia, Clinton tried and failed to persuade Washington’s NATO allies to use air power against Bosnian Serb targets and lift the arms embargo to the Muslim-led government in Sarajevo.

U.S. policy then lapsed into its earlier role, with Clinton and other senior officials claiming there was little they could do given the “ancient hatreds” that animated the civil war in Bosnia. At the same time, the administration pledged that it would provide up to 30,000 U.S. troops to any peacekeeping operation once a permanent ceasefire and peace agreement was reached.

That seemed a remote possibility until last summer, when the disastrous fall of U.N.-protected “safe areas” to Bosnian Serb forces, stirred Clinton once again into taking the initiative. Washington orchestrated a NATO bombing campaign and winked at an offensive by Croatian forces that routed Serb forces and Serb civilians alike from the Krajina region east of Bosnia.

The sudden Serb reversals brought all parties to the negotiating table where, in September, a U.S.-brokered accord on basic principles was reached for a settlement under which Bosnia would be preserved as one nation with substantial autonomy for the Serb minority. A ceasefire was reached last month after Bosnian and Croat forces captured large areas of eastern Bosnia.

The talks which got underway Wednesday at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base are designed to flesh out the September accord. If successful, it will require the deployment of a 60,000 NATO force, a third of which is to be made up of U.S. troops.

But, with the 1993 Somalia debacle fresh in their minds, many lawmakers here — both Democrats and Republicans — are reluctant to pledge troops to a volatile region overseas, deemed by the administration itself until quite recently not to be a vital U.S. interest.

“This is Afghanistan with trees,” said one California Republican during Monday’s debate. Other lawmakers argued that the administration, which in the past week has insisted that the deployment would not exceed a year, had not consulted with Congress enough.

“Don’t believe that you can manipulate us into having to say ‘yes’ because you give your word in secret without having first educated the American people,” Gingrich warned in a speech Monday night.

That appears to be what the administration now intends. Speaking last week, Clinton warned that “if we fail to secure this peace, the conflict in the former Yugoslavia could spread to other nations and involve our sons and daughters in a conflict in Europe.”

Talbott Wednesday elaborated on that theme, arguing that the stakes were too high in Bosnia not to act. He recalled Washington’s previous interventions in European wars during this century.

Citing a new “domino theory” which — like the Truman Doctrine almost 50 years ago — sees Europe, allied governments in the Middle East and Central Asia at risk, Talbott acknowledged that the administration faces an “uphill struggle” for public opinion.

“Our hope is that the argument is strong enough and that the fundamental international instincts of the American people are strong enough that this view will prevail,” he said.

Excerpt: