home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1995
/
TIME Almanac 1995.iso
/
time
/
031593
/
03159930.000
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-03-25
|
9KB
|
174 lines
<text id=93TT1190>
<title>
Mar. 15, 1993: More Harm than Good
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1993
Mar. 15, 1993 In the Name of God
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
COVER STORIES, Page 40
More Harm than Good
</hdr>
<body>
<p>Bosnia's brutal tragedy grows worse while the U.S. and its allies
resolve to remain spectators
</p>
<p>By BRUCE W. NELAN--With reporting by James L. Graff/Gorazde and
J.F.O. McAllister and Bruce van Voorst/Washington
</p>
<p> The agony of Yugoslavia keeps replaying itself with new
bombardments, massacres, rapes and "ethnic cleansings." At each
horrifying recurrence, world opinion is outraged and opinion
leaders call for an end to the barbarism. And each time the
West, led by the U.S., shows itself unwilling to intervene with
force. Last week it happened again. While the Clinton
Administration was preoccupied with its airdrops of food and
medicine into eastern Bosnia, rebel Serbs mounted a furious
artillery-and-tank offensive against the same Muslim enclaves
the U.S. Air Force was trying to hit with parachuted supplies.
</p>
<p> The Serbs have shown exquisite calibration in cranking up
the carnage to just below the point where the West will react.
The war is about religious differences as well as territory and
politics; it involves Serbian Orthodox, Bosnian Muslims and
Croat Catholics. Serb militias now occupy 70% of Bosnia and
Herzegovina, leaving only Sarajevo and isolated pockets in the
hands of Bosnia's mainly Muslim government. Among the most
desperate are the besieged Muslim towns in eastern Bosnia, near
the frontier with Serbia. It was their plight that prompted
Clinton to order the airdrops over the snow-covered town of
Cerska.
</p>
<p> Just hours after the first three U.S. C-130s dumped their
cargo from 10,000 ft., Serb guns went into action. Artillery
and mortars pounded dozens of small villages in the area, then
followed up with tanks that blasted and set fire to the ruined
houses and mosques. Thousands of civilians fled into the frozen
countryside.
</p>
<p> The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees informed the
Security Council that Serb forces were attacking the
settlements around Cerska and Srebrenica and driving out the
villagers. "Civilians, women, children and old people are being
killed, usually by having their throats cut," reported the High
Commissioner, Sadako Ogata. In fact Ogata, like other U.N.
officials and foreign journalists, had no firsthand knowledge of
what was happening. The world was relying on what ham-radio
operators in the Muslim towns were broadcasting. But, she said,
"if only 10% of the information is true, we are witnessing a
massacre."
</p>
<p> A local Serb commander in Bosnia responded that such
reports were "wrong and malicious," and offered safe passage
out of the region for the thousands of refugees, many of them
camped in the open. But amateur-radio broadcasters continued to
report heavy artillery fire falling on dozens of blazing
hamlets. One Bosnian army officer in Cerska appealed for
international help at least to "save 2,500 wounded, if nobody
cares about the genocide of 52,000 people in this area."
</p>
<p> Serbs often offer safe passage out of areas they are
attacking, but Bosnian and U.N. officials regard the ploy as
part of the Serb campaign to rid the area of non-Serbs. Serb
officials seemed to confirm that with a statement that Muslims
and Serbs "will not live together ever again." In spite of the
U.N.'s reluctance to assist in the "cleansing," General
Philippe Morillon, head of the peacekeeping force in Bosnia,
went to Cerska on Friday to try, apparently unsuccessfully, to
negotiate an evacuation.
</p>
<p> Surprised by the Serb onslaught and its timing, officials
in Washington insisted that the U.S. airdrops had not triggered
the attack. Pentagon and State Department spokesmen argued that
the Serbs were carrying out battle plans made long before. But
another Administration expert on Yugoslavia sees it differently.
"Of course there's a connection," he says. "From the Serb
viewpoint, the best way to stop the airdrops is to `cleanse' the
area." The delivery of food may have encouraged Serb fighters,
who had been trying to starve the Muslims out of territory Serbs
wish to occupy, to mount a more aggressive assault. If the
Muslims are evacuated to escape the bloodshed, the Serbs will
have gained their objective.
</p>
<p> Defense Secretary Les Aspin had explained the drops as a
way to demonstrate the West's determination to get relief
supplies into the Muslim enclaves by any means possible, so the
Serb forces might as well unblock the roads and allow the U.N.
truck convoys to pass. Though a considerable part of each U.S.
drop fell on or near Serb positions, the Serbs apparently
decided to cut off entirely the resupply of their enemies by
seizing the enclaves.
</p>
<p> Despite the questionable impact of the operation, the U.S.
intends to continue it. Aspin appeared to announce a pause last
week, but Clinton quickly corrected him, saying the missions
would go on. The hope, says Reginald Bartholomew, U.S. envoy to
the Bosnian negotiations, is that the drops will "contribute
toward achieving a diplomatic solution."
</p>
<p> Part of the diplomacy involves keeping Russia on the West's
team. President Boris Yeltsin is under heavy pressure from
parliament to join forces with Russia's traditional Slav allies,
the Serbs. A way to strengthen the existing bond, Washington has
decided, is to bring the Russians into the airlift. Moscow has
agreed, and five U.S. Air Force officers are to fly there this
week to plan Russian participation, which will include flying
cargo missions to Bosnia from NATO bases in Germany and Italy--the first U.S.-Russian joint operations since World War II.
</p>
<p> But the larger diplomatic effort last week was at the U.N.,
where negotiators Cyrus Vance and Lord Owen continued to push
their plan to carve Bosnia into 10 ethnically determined,
semiautonomous provinces. The mediators are never certain from
day to day which leaders of the three factions will show up,
much less what their stance will be. The talks were apparently
making progress when the Bosnian Muslims agreed to the military
disengagement portion of the agreement in return for a promise
that U.N. peacekeepers would take control of Serb artillery and
heavy weapons. A day later, the Bosnian Serb leader, Radovan
Karadzic, said his forces would never hand over their big guns
to the U.N.
</p>
<p> The largest stumbling block to a negotiated settlement
remains the map of the 10 ethnic enclaves that Vance and Owen
propose. Even if Bosnian President Alia Izetbegovic were to
accept it, as he hinted last week, Karadzic says he will not.
The patchwork state as now drawn would require the Serbs to cut
back their territorial holdings from 70% to 42% and leave
almost a third of all Bosnian Serbs in provinces controlled by
Muslims or Croats. Karadzic vows not to surrender a single Serb
village, and his militias have shown their ability to turn other
villages into Serbian strongholds almost at will.
</p>
<p> With its chances of success so dim, the Vance-Owen peace
process would not receive so much attention if it were not the
only visible way out--not for Bosnia, but for the West.
Washington is talking about tightening sanctions on Belgrade,
but Bosnia is beyond the point where such leverage can make a
difference. Although Clinton campaigned with a call for more
help to the Muslims, he has found no backing for military
intervention. Lee Hamilton, chairman of the House Foreign
Affairs Committee, says flatly, "There is no support in the
international community for armed intervention, and nothing
that has happened in the past few days changes that."
</p>
<p> No voices are being raised inside the Administration
demanding action. No initiatives are circulating at State or at
the Pentagon and the National Security Council, where the
center of gravity on Yugoslavia policy has moved. There is no
ground swell for intervention in Congress. In fact, Congress
would vote against sending troops to Bosnia and might do so even
if the troops were to be used only to monitor an agreement
accepted by all the warring parties. Bosnia is effectively
finished, and the best its leaders can hope for is a Vance-Owen
settlement--and the thousands of American and European
soldiers that would be required to police it.
</p>
</body>
</article>
</text>