[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 120 (Monday, July 24, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10537-S10538]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          BOSNIAN ARMS EMBARGO

  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, the opposition to lifting the United States 
arms embargo in Bosnia and Herzegovina has been an elaborate exercise 
in buying time.
  It has been more than 11 months since the Senate last voted to lift 
the arms embargo in Bosnia. Following that vote, the administration 
worked with the distinguished Senator from Georgia on a compromise--the 
Nunn-Mitchell provision--which ultimately was adopted.
  The Nunn-Mitchell compromise essentially provided time, time for the 
Bosnian Serbs to sign the contact group plan; time for UNPROFOR to 
improve its performance; and time for the administration to work out a 
multilateral lift of the arms embargo.
  That is what it was supposed to do. Any one of these things have 
occurred not because of the lack of good intentions on the part of the 
Senator from Georgia, Senator Nunn, I might add, because he certainly 
expected these things to happen.
  Mr. President, 11 months later the situation is far worse than when 
the Senate last voted 58 to 42 to unilaterally lift the arms embargo in 
Bosnia. Thousands have died, tens of thousands have been forced from 
their homes, homes which were in the U.N. safe havens.
 Tens of thousands more are facing the same fate in Bihac, Sarajevo, 
and Gorazde. Furthermore, NATO is 

[[Page S10538]]
dangerously close to losing what credibility it still has, and the 
United States is no closer to exercising leadership in a new direction.
  President Clinton called me last week to ask for more time--he asked 
me to delay the vote on the Dole-Lieberman legislation until after the 
London meeting. And certainly we were pleased to oblige the President. 
Wherever we can, we want to work with the President of the United 
States, particularly in foreign policy areas.
  But now the London meeting has come and gone and there is no change 
on the ground in Bosnia. The London conference did not result in a 
reaffirmation of the U.N. obligation to defend the U.N. safe havens. 
The conferees wrote off Srebrenica and Zepa, vowed to protect Gorazde--
at some point, that point not being clear--and declined to respond to 
the dramatically worsening situation in Bihac and Sarajevo.
  So I guess what they have said, in effect, is if there are six safe 
havens we may be willing to protect one--one out of the six.
  Yes, there were modifications to the dual key arrangement, but the 
dual key remains. The bottom line is that the London meeting did not 
result in significant change in approach. It did not result in a new 
policy. It essentially reaffirmed business as usual with the 
possibility of a few displays of force sometime in the future.
  So the commander of the Bosnian Serbs, General Mladic--who, 
interestingly enough, was delivered the London conferees' ultimatum in 
Belgrade--is probably not shaking in his boots, but more likely 
laughing all the way to Bihac.
  Today there are reports of more NATO military planning. But planning 
was never the problem. Executing those plans was and still is the 
problem. This debate has never been about policy options, but about 
political will.
  It is high time the Clinton administration abandon its flimsy excuses 
for the United Nations' pitiful performance, shed the false mantle of 
humanitarianism, and face the reality of the U.N. failure in Bosnia.
  I intend to take up the Dole-Lieberman legislation tomorrow and hope 
we can vote tomorrow and have a clear-cut vote. It is not a partisan 
vote. It is supported strongly by colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle. This is the Senate of the United States speaking, not Bob Dole, 
not Joe Lieberman, not a Democrat, not a Republican--but the U.S. 
Senate. The clock has run out and now is the time for the United States 
to fulfill its role as the leader of the free world, do what is right 
and what is smart. Now is the time to pass the Dole-Lieberman 
legislation.
  We have an obligation to the Bosnian people and to our principles, to 
allow a U.N. member state, the victim of aggression, to defend itself. 
I listened to George Stephanopoulos at the White House yesterday on 
television, saying if we lifted the arms embargo, as proposed by myself 
and Senator Lieberman and other Republicans and Democrats, we were 
going to Americanize the war. How? All we are suggesting is to give 
these people the right to defend themselves as they have under article 
51 of the U.N. Charter. We are not asking American ground troops, not 
suggesting American ground troops, not suggesting American involvement. 
But the spin machine at the White House is saying, ``Oh, this is going 
to Americanize the war.'' Nothing can be further from the truth.
  Let me again reiterate, this is a Senate effort--not a Republican 
effort, not a Democratic effort, but a bipartisan, nonpartisan effort--
to protect the rights of innocent people, an independent nation, a 
member of the United Nations, which under article 51 of the U.N. 
Charter has the right to self-defense. In 1991, we imposed an illegal 
embargo on Yugoslavia. There is not a Yugoslavia anymore. It is gone. 
It is now Bosnia, it is now Serbia, now Slovenia, now Croatia--it is no 
longer Yugoslavia. The embargo has been illegal from the start. We 
have, in effect, tied the hands of one side and said, OK, you cannot 
have any heavy weapons, but you go out and fight the aggressors, and, 
if you lose, we will provide humanitarian aid.
  I just suggest we have gone on long enough. I have great respect for 
the U.N. protection forces who are there. Two members of the French 
force lost their lives over the weekend; one was seriously wounded. 
Others have lost their lives in this effort--British, Dutch, 
Pakistanis--a number have lost their lives. But it has been a failed 
policy, and I believe it is time that the world recognize the policy 
has failed and time to give these people, the Bosnians, an opportunity 
to defend themselves.
  Several Senators addressed the Chair.
  Mr. DORGAN. I wonder if the majority leader might yield for a brief 
question?
  Mr. DOLE. Sure.
  Mr. DORGAN. I appreciate the majority leader's yielding. I have been 
struggling with the question of the resolution. I have not decided 
whether to support the resolution this week or not, but I ask the 
question: If the will of the Senate were to agree to this resolution, 
which would then result in a changed course with respect to Bosnia and 
potentially a rearming of the Bosnian Moslems, does the Senator from 
Kansas, the majority leader, feel that ultimately American troops would 
be required to help extricate the U.N. forces at some point?
  Mr. DOLE. Of course none of this would take effect--we would not lift 
the embargo--until they were gone. But I would be willing to support 
the President to extricate the U.N. protection forces. It seems to me, 
as a member of NATO we have that obligation. I know the views of the 
American people are very mixed, as I saw in the polls. But in my view, 
after they have been removed--if we have to help extricate them, I 
think we should. We should support the President in that effort.
  Second, when it comes to training the Bosnians, we helped the 
Afghans. We did not send anybody to Afghanistan. We helped train. We 
provided weapons. The same in El Salvador. I believe that can be done 
without Americanizing anything. Plus, what they want, as the Senator 
from North Dakota knows, are Russian weapons. They are familiar with 
Russian weapons, and they are readily available. So I am not certain 
they would need a great deal of training.
  But it just seems to me--and it is not just because I watch 
television, it is not just because I visited there 5 years ago when all 
this was just beginning to ferment--I think anybody, any objective 
observer, would say no, no U.S. ground troops. We could even question 
airstrikes, but certainly no Americanization. But, finally, let us give 
these innocent people a chance to defend themselves. That is all they 
are asking.
  I thank my colleague from North Dakota.

                          ____________________