[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 12 (Wednesday, February 9, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: February 9, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
        THREAT OF AIR STRIKES IS NO SOLUTION TO BOSNIA CONFLICT

  Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. President, I rise today to challenge the 
widespread assertion that air strikes, or more specifically the threat 
of air strikes are a real solution to the deep-seated hatred that is 
the true cause of the current conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
  All Americans find repellent the brutal slaughter of civilians that 
occurred this weekend in Sarajevo. There can be no--repeat, no--
justification for the killing of 68 innocent people in Sarajevo's 
marketplace. Indeed, there can be no justification for any of the 
needless bloodshed that has occurred in this prolonged conflict.
  Our prayers today are with the victims of this most recent atrocity, 
and with the families of those victims. And we are all greatly 
concerned about the plight of every person--Moslem, Croat, and Serb--
caught in this conflict.
  It is ironic that this week marks the 10th anniversary of the Olympic 
Winter Games in Sarajevo. Those were happier times. One of the areas 
used for athletic contests during the 1984 Winter Olympics is now a 
graveyard.
  The gravity of the events--the most recent of which we have read 
about in the newspapers this week--make us all want to take decisive 
action to bring an immediate resolution to this situation.
  We all struggle with the desire to strike back--to make the aggressor 
pay for what has been done, and to teach the Serbs a lesson by 
unleashing retaliatory air strikes against the artillery positions 
located in the hills around Sarajevo or against other Serbian 
positions.
  However, this is not the time to give in to the emotions of hatred 
and revenge. Instead, this is a time for leadership. A time for 
policies that will lead to a lasting and peaceful resolution of the 
present conflict.
  Unfortunately, we are not getting this leadership from the White 
House. The President has threatened the Serbians on numerous occasions 
with air strikes--if they obstructed the United Nations peacekeeping 
forces, if they did not stop interfering with humanitarian efforts, and 
if they did not bargain in good faith to resolve the conflict.
  These threats have fallen on deaf ears. The Serbs have not stopped 
their genocidal policies in response to these threats.
  The administration's resort to threats of air strikes is not an 
effective policy. It will not lead to peace, because it is flawed in at 
least two fundamental ways.
  First, in each instance in which we have threatened air strikes 
against the Serbians, we have not been ready to make good on the 
threat.
  Second, air strikes are a limited tool. They cannot resolve the 
underlying issues that divide the combatants. And air strikes, even 
from a military viewpoint, cannot alone win a victory on the ground.
  To give one example, the air strike against Libya during the Reagan 
administration did grave damage to various targets within that country. 
And it did provide some temporary relief from terrorist activities 
originating in that country. The air strike did not change Libya into a 
law-abiding and respected member of the international community.
  Another example, In Operation Desert Storm, U.S. air power performed 
magnificently. Iraq's command and control system was destroyed, along 
with many elements of its basic infrastructure. However, it was not 
until United States ground forces routed the Iraqi army that the war 
was brought to a rapid termination.
  Are we ready to commit ground troops to fight in Bosnia and 
Herzegovina? The answer to that question is a resounding no.
  Are we ready to suffer casualties as a result of air strikes against 
the Serbs? Are we ready for the collateral damage--such as the 
destruction of schools or hospitals--that is the inevitable fallout 
from even precision bombing?
  We should never threaten what we cannot and do not intend to deliver. 
Idle threats weaken our credibility in the community of nations.
  The United States and other nations now have serious difference with 
North Korea on the issue of nuclear proliferation. Where is our 
credibility on that issue, if the North Koreans believe that we will 
simply not follow through on our commitment to back the International 
Atomic Energy Agency? How could the North Koreans possibly let us 
inspect their nuclear sites, if we are seen as an empty and blustering 
power in a conflict much less dangerous to U.S. forces?
  I agree with the statement of the British Foreign Minister that 
appeared in the Washington Post on February 7. He warned that air 
strikes would result in--and I quote: ``simply 1 day of satisfaction   
*  *  * followed not by the lifting of the siege but by 
intensification.''
  I believe that air strikes will provide only temporary relief, and 
would actually lead to an escalation of the conflict.
  What we need now is leadership, and a policy that will bring a 
permanent peace to the Balkans. To this end, the United States should 
pursue an initiative to bring the parties back to the peace 
negotiations. And the United States should take an active role in 
brokering a peaceful resolution.
  Peace can only come when the combatants firmly believe that continued 
fighting is futile and unproductive. We all hope the warring factions 
will come to this realization quickly. And that is the process we 
should be helping--not merely engaging in toothless bluster that brings 
discredit in our country.

                          ____________________